Forum menu
He is dull and unable to inspire voters, they will never warm to him.
He is uninspiring because he doesn't say anything.
He was able to inspire when he spoke of his 10 socialist principles, that was all proper 'fire in your belly' fighting talk. And as a consequence he easily won the Labour leadership election. No one accused him of being dull then.
Not that I was convinced by his eloquent rhetoric mind. His behaviour as a shadow cabinet minister was all I needed with regards to his trustworthiness
Simply not true. How many seats the SNP take have no bearing at all on the likelihood of a future labour government f0or two reasons – take all the scottish seats out of the equation for the last few elections – its very rare if ever that would change who has a majority and secondly the SNP will support a labour government and never a tory one
2015 - Labour could have won with Scotland
2017 - lost cause
2019 - could have won with Scotland and lib deal.
So they could have ousted the tories, potentially. But none of that matters, because the SNP can offer to work with who they like but the fact is Labour would rather support a Tory than let them get a seat. That's why they're a lost cause up here and always will be until they grow the **** up.
Not in Scotland its not – only westminster elections are FPTP
I'm not strictly talking about the electoral system here. We've had the same party in power for 14 years now. People are more interested in making a statement than electing people who will actually act in their constituents interests.
That’s why they’re a lost cause up here and always will be until they grow the **** up.
This.
Perfidious, had to google it!
I'd add most have snide agendas (from a place of bitterness) and pretend to love work (until they have a breakdown), more accurately love other people doing shit work below them "it's only fair" so they can elevate themselves. What a tragicomedy we live in.
Yes the tories could change their leader and it may be better or worse but remember that it is still a government full of tory MPs and we know what most of them are like - their thinking on issues, their voting, what they stand for, who they care about etc,.
While Labour MPs don't meet my definition of perfect they are a LOT closer to my beliefs and views than pretty much any tory MP and if those MPs were in a majority party I just know it would be better than tory MPs in a majority party.
I don't think that is blind faith at all and what I base the government being less shit than the current one one (key term here is less shit rather than good)
What I find interesting is how some people who profess to intensely hate the Tories, and I mean really hate them, should nevertheless be prepared to blur the distinction between Labour and the Tories.
It would make far more sense if the people who are willing to make Labour much more like the Tories didn't claim to hate the Tories so much.
It suggests that politics from them is some form of tribalism, like supporting a football team, nothing much more than a game.
What I find interesting is how some people who profess to intensely hate the Tories, and I mean really hate them, should nevertheless be prepared to blur the distinction between Labour and the Tories.
It would make far more sense if the people who are willing to make Labour much more like the Tories didn’t claim to hate the Tories so much.
It suggests that politics from them is some form of tribalism, like supporting a football team, nothing much more than a game.
I'm more concerned about what political parties do when in office. Everything else is a bit trivial frankly.
It would make far more sense if the people who are willing to make Labour much more like the Tories didn’t claim to hate the Tories so much.
Blah, blah, blah, bullshit.
Blah, blah, blah, bullshit.
'Wah wah wah I don't like what you're saying because it doesn't fit with MY world view! It's not FAIR!!'
It suggests that politics from them is some form of tribalism, like supporting a football team, nothing much more than a game.
And having picked a 'side', they feel a compulsion to stick with it through thick and thin. Which is fine in sport; not so good with politics. But it's pretty clear that several on here who profess to support Labour, are in reality just soft tories. Hence the abuse and vitriol spouted towards anyone vaguely of the 'left'...
And having picked a ‘side’, they feel a compulsion to stick with it through thick and thin. Which is fine in sport; not so good with politics. But it’s pretty clear that several on here who profess to support Labour, are in reality just soft tories. Hence the abuse and vitriol spouted towards anyone vaguely of the ‘left’…
Like picking the JC version of Labour and then sticking with it even though it failed to win two general elections?
I don't support Labour, I support the Green party. However, I would still rather have any realistic form of Labour party, along with the Labour MPs than any realistic form of a Tory party based on what I said above.
What I would want in a perfect world doesn't match with what can realistically happen within the UK and it's voters. Someday you may realise that
Like picking the JC version of Labour and then sticking with it even though it failed to win two general elections?
Is that aimed at me? Because I'm neither a Labour supporter nor voter.
Like picking the JC version of Labour and then sticking with it even though it failed to win two general elections?
Most Labour leaders fail to win general elections, so let's drop this fallacy that being more Tory is an automatic route to success.
I would have thought Starmer is really nailing the demonstration of that point, if nothing else.
‘Wah wah wah I don’t like what you’re saying because it doesn’t fit with MY world view! It’s not FAIR!!’
Blah, blah, blah, bullshit.
It's not about views, it's about the way some people use this forum as if they were training some kind of argumentative AI.
But it’s pretty clear that several on here who profess to support Labour, are in reality just soft tories
Name them.
Squirrelking - you need to look at the numbers more
Both 2015 and 2019 if all snp seats had been to labour it would not have made any difference. do some basic addition
May would not have been able to get a majority without the tory / labour anti snp pact that resulted in 10 tory scots seats
So blame labour not the SNP
There are a couple of ways to bring about change through opposition
One way is to build solidarity between different groups in a way that emphasises common belonging and making people feel good about themselves for supporting socially just causes.
Another is to make imperfect people feel guilt and shame for their moral ineptitude, for their failure to see the world through the right lens.
It's up to all of us to make a choice about how we want to bring about change.
It’s not about views, it’s about the way some people use this forum as if they were training some kind of argumentative AI.
Are you? How's that going?
Name them.
Why do you want me to do that? Why would you want to make it personal? Do you think you are included in that group?
Questions, questions... blah, blah, blah... time waster.
Questions, questions…
I did ask how you thought Starmer would be in any meaningful way, different to the tories. So far, you've failed to come up with any coherent answer, and neither has anyone else really.
Is it because you don't actually know?
Didn't he make some pledges? Abolish the House of Lards etc?
Can anyone explain the difference between paid consultancy and working in the interests of your sponsors?
Can anyone explain the difference between paid consultancy and working in the interests of your sponsors?
there is none. Its a bribe
Is it because you don’t actually know?
I think personally it's because you act like a sanctimonious **** 99% of the time, and most folks would prefer not to have to engage with you is why no-one answers your questions. Which let's be clear, anen't really asked in a spirit of honest enquiry, they're provocative posts to get a response.
^
Yep. Don't feed the troll
Why do you want me to do that?
It's usual practice for those making assertions to support them. If you're not able to just say so.
For anyone who's unclear what he stands for:
^^^
people are often misled by nonsense shown them on the internet.
Who made that meme? You've a perfect chance to show I know zero, but do you seriously think those words or anything like them were uttered by starmer?
He didn't say them but his party did, when discussing how to manage sacking 90 people.
So he didn’t say it? Normal jargon in product and IT development environments. So I’m going to guess at this being a message to staff about changing working practices, perhaps to deal with having fewer staff, rather than to the public about anything policy related. Who’s the quote from? Starmer doesn’t need people to make things up, or misattribute words, or swap contexts, to help him seem dry and dull… just quote/clip his real words and appearances. Leave out the fake news, it’s not needed.
So he didn’t say it?
I assumed it was satire.
presumed so as well. It's the sort of jargon filled nonsense that organisations adopt when they really don't want to offend anyone but would nevertheless really like to sack a bunch of folks...
I doesn't read like justification for sacking folks... more like methods (all those jargon words do actually mean something, sadly) to try and get things done with fewer people, or to get tangable results quicker.
I assumed it was satire.
Me too. Less certain that was BillMC's understanding. Either way, makes a change from monty python I guess, albeit for the worse.
I'm flattered that someone might think l made it up.
kelvin Full Member
Questions, questions… blah, blah, blah… time waster.Posted 6 hours ago
Jeezus.... I see going through one of your puerile periods. It's been a while. Is it hormonal?
I’m flattered that someone might think l made it up.
I'm saying you thought it was an actual quotation. Otherwise why did you post it?
Is it hormonal?
Someone else can take this one apart.
Someone else can take this one apart.
Why, because Kelvin's periodic puerile tauntings don't have all characteristics of a hormonal surly teenager?
Or because in the land of the perpetually offended middle-classes it must have been a sexist misogynist comment?
Is being middle class really an insult?
Interestingly Starmer gaining ground amongst lower-middle income groups
https://twitter.com/p_surridge/status/1457693500946923520?t=gYZ-Gtdie5WSl17KHui-gA&s=19
Starmers approval rating still well below johnsons (even tho Johnsons is falling)
Tho Well above where corbyns was
Still not enough come election, hung parliament time! But 2 years from now who knows where we could be..
Sorry, should have quoted the source so as not to confuse people
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-starmer-jobs-cut-election-b1904088.html
But 2 years from now who knows where we could be..
Johnson replaced, Starmer still there I expect. Labour are not great at leader stuff are they...
Sorry, should have quoted the source so as not to confuse people
That's not a link to the meme you posted, which attributes the management jargon to starmer. My guess is you posted it because you thought it was an actual quote, not something made up to undermine.
Yep, I'm sure you're right. That Evans fella is always going behind Sir's back and making sacking announcements that they haven't agreed on.
Kelvin’s periodic puerile tauntings don’t have all characteristics of a hormonal surly teenager?
"Is it your hormones love?" being something you say a lot to teenagers?
Or because in the land of the perpetually offended middle-classes it must have been a sexist misogynist comment?
Middle class? Clinging on in there. Not sure how my kids will manage to. Perpetually offended? I lack the energy to be more than occasionally miffed and have to ration that. No, just surprised that's a reach to insult when so many others which aren't misogynist are available.
"Is it your hormones love?” being something you say a lot to teenagers?
Ah yes John, the following comment is what you would typically associate with a premenstrual women, not a stroppy teenager :
"Questions, questions… blah, blah, blah… time waster."
And my reference to "puerile" clearly shows that I had a premenstrual women in mind not a teenager.
Yeah it's all so obvious. And what is even more shocking is that I don't give a monkeys.
Because I know that if you haven't been offended by something I've said it's only because you haven't looked hard enough.
Or because in the land of the perpetually offended middle-classes
This gave me a good laugh for some reason. I've always wondered why on the whole the middle classes find it so easy to be offended by stuff like racism, sexism, mysogyny, homophobia, gender stereotyping etc yet find it very difficult to feel the same offence about poverty. Seems to me the poor are the most significant, largest and most shat upon minority group of all and yet no one seems to bothered. In fact those who are are often derided as loony left sixth formers by the same people who get so upset about the other stuff.
This gave me a good laugh for some reason. I’ve always wondered why on the whole the middle classes find it so easy to be offended by stuff like racism, sexism, mysogyny, homophobia, gender stereotyping etc yet find it very difficult to feel the same offence about poverty. Seems to me the poor are the most significant, largest and most shat upon minority group of all and yet no one seems to bothered. In fact those who are are often derided as loony left sixth formers by the same people who get so upset about the other stuff.
Eh? There's loads of insults which relate to economic/social status (chav etc) which I've challenged people for using.
Eh?
Wasn't specifically directed at you was more of a general observation. I think it's a truism though that political rights and justice have replaced economic justice as a thing in our society. Which is a bit stupid as if we prioritised economic rights then the political rights would be less of an issue.
A lot of this right-onnery is another way for certain types to assert their moral and linguistic superiority and disparage their underlings. It also gets weaponised to defend the indefensible.
This has got to be the most point scoring thread of any on this forum, it really is pretty shitty isn't it.
Anyone know who is winning?
Tories, basically
Do Free Members get most irate and score most points? Asking for as friend.
Ahh… more valuable posts from Ernie. You and Bridges are the combination that reminds me that I waste too much time on this forum. There are lots of people who could make valuable contributions to this thread, but they wisely stay the hell away. Not always just from this thread. You are both just noise generators that make many threads a tiresome bore, and are just deeply unpleasant to engage with.
Engage?
This isn't engaging :
kelvin Full Member
It would make far more sense if the people who are willing to make Labour much more like the Tories didn’t claim to hate the Tories so much.
Blah, blah, blah, bullshit.
Posted 1 day ago
REPLY | REPORT
Nor is this :
kelvin Full Member
Questions, questions… blah, blah, blah… time waster.
No, it wasn’t engaging. There is no point.
Most people who don't agree with someone's comment but can't be arsed to engage simply ignore it.
There is no need to copy and paste someone's comment and then add "blah, blah, blah, bullshit".
It's pretty childish and certainly unnecessary.
Back on topic. The greatest own goal handed to any opposition in history and the leader of the labour can’t take full advantage as it turns out he himself isn’t much better.
https://twitter.com/alexnunns/status/1458456612398632961?s=21
Well, he is though isn’t he really?
Stuff like that makes it easy for people to say “all politicians are the same”
Yup. The ground is now so fertile for radical reforms and yet all the opportunities are being wasted.
The Independent: Keir Starmer abandons pledge to abolish House of Lords.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/keir-starmer-house-of-lords-b1953101.html
Tragic really.
^^^
So Corbyn's speechwriter gleefully sprays Corb told Starm not to tak a job, which he didn't take? What does Corb say he says?
Starm tells Marr the HoL needs major reform and G Brown's leading a commission that will report on how.
Again the actual content does not support the assertions made here. Anyway, ducking back out.
I’ve always wondered why on the whole the middle classes find it so easy to be offended by stuff like racism, sexism, mysogyny, homophobia, gender stereotyping etc yet find it very difficult to feel the same offence about poverty
So utterly ruthlessly true.
If only the same outrage existed for poverty that occured for Brexit.
Starm tells Marr the HoL needs major reform
Well that's the problem. He has no right to say that the House of Lords needs major reform.
He was elected as Labour leader on a clear and indisputable pledge of abolition of the House of Lords. And that is precisely what he should be pursuing, not finding ways of saving it.
That pledge remains on Starmer's own website :
https://keirstarmer.com/plans/10-pledges/
8. Radical devolution of power, wealth and opportunity
Push power, wealth and opportunity away from Whitehall. A federal system to devolve powers – including through regional investment banks and control over regional industrial strategy. Abolish the House of Lords – replace it with an elected chamber of regions and nations.
His responsibility is to pursue the policies he was elected to pursue, not whatever takes his fancy.
It’s absolutely not nearly enough at this point… but it is interesting to track how the public mood is reflected in polling…
https://twitter.com/hzeffman/status/1459226781752377346?s=21
…at this stage of the pandemic, I expected Johnson (and the Tories) to be riding high, I must admit. I was predicting a brief peak at close to 50% support due to vaccines and economic recovery. Not turning out that way is it. And arguably this new low mostly to do with Johnson’s unforced error to help the mate of a mate. Although Starmer isolating out of the way might have also helped.
This has got to be the most point scoring thread of any on this forum, it really is pretty shitty isn’t it.
Anyone know who is winning?
It is the forums reminder as to why an alternative approach to politics is still so far away. Too much sneering to be taken seriously.
The increase in Starmers approval rating is a shock tbh
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1459239095218192387?t=t0PtdJiYlCiCjlXYoaygPA&s=09
The “papers” have been on Johnson and his party’s back, repeatedly. And that gets propagated on Tv, radio and social media. The demise in the influence of the press has long been predicted, but we clearly aren’t anywhere near that yet. I think we’re seeing the shine taken off Johnson, rather than people taking to Starmer. Would love to be wrong and see some genuine enthusiasm for Starmer as PM though… but it feels like a forlorn hope.
I still think give it a few days and it will blow over.
This has pretty much been the pattern despite much worse antics from Johnson.
That said I'm a great believer in party fatigue and the Tories are very much at this point.
It all seems to be focused on Boris (of the cabinet members anyway). I think they might be gearing up to ditch him.
I think we’re seeing the shine taken off Johnson, rather than people taking to Starmer.
I did say a few months back on this thread I think that Labour will only win when people are completely fed up with Tory bullshit and it is for the Tories to lose rather than Labour to win. It takes a long time (almost 20 years last time) but it is starting to happen.
Nowhere near enough yet but by the next election even more people may have woken up a bit more to Brexit mess, Tory lies and corruption, not actually helping them as they hoped etc,. and want rid of them.
It all seems to be focused on Boris (of the cabinet members anyway). I think they might be gearing up to ditch him.
Truss' twitter feed is an endless stream of staged photo ops, which are obviously directed at the membership, she's ready
Truss’ twitter feed is an endless stream of staged photo ops
We can only hope. Liz Truss as PM would be the most hilarious and amazing thing. It won’t happen though.
I think they might be gearing up to ditch him.
Thats one thing that the Tories do with the same ruthless lack of sentimentality that they apply to everything. once Johnson starts to look like an electoral liability, he'll be gone. Its not as if he inspires any loyalty from anyone, being completely devoid of that particular sentiment himself.
The usual caveat applies though: be careful what you wish for. liz Truss would be absolutely nailed on to succeed him as the membership (who'll be doing the voting) absolutely love her.
Imagine her stupid gurning mug stood at the door to number ten. We think we're an international laughing stock now? (we are) Imagine what a Liz Truss premiership would look like. You can literally hear the cogs whirring when she's asked a question as the stuff slowly happens in the vacant space between her ears
Don’t know why the Liz truss thread has been closed. I can’t think of a better candidate for their own thread. She’s a comedy genius.
Well that ^^ clip shows how polite and compassionate a Tory audience is.
After her first gag falls completely flat the party faithful quickly clock on that they should be amused and applauding.
After a shaky start it ends with rousing approval from the audience as she declares what a disgrace it is that nine tenths of our pears are imported.
Had that been a Labour Party audience they probably would have heckled her, shouted out "what a load of rubbish", and told her to get off.
And they probably wouldn't have understood proper British measurements like nine tenths...with their foreign decimal points and percentages.
Looks like Starmer is now writing government policy.
Johnson has just nicked all his proposals, wholesale, on paid work for MPs while he was still announcing them
It’s going to be interesting to see how this goes down with the snouts-in-the-trough brigade on his own benches
Looks like Starmer is now writing government policy
Not Starmer. 2019 manifesto.
He'd probably have dropped that too if he'd had half a chance.
The good ideas came in 2017 and 2019. Starmer doesn't have any of his own.
Johnson is focusing on “hours” rather than money. As you would expect from someone who approves of doing as little work as possible for as much money as possible. So, politicians could still be bought/influenced by outside interests, just not record too many hours for them.
Labour’s proposals are quite different. And if they are pretty consistent with those from before Starmer’s shift to being leader, I don’t see anything wrong with that.
Labour’s proposals are quite different. And if they are pretty consistent with those from before Starmer’s shift to being leader, I don’t see anything wrong with that.
Other than the idea was born in the 2019 manifesto. Implementation is another thing.
Starmer himself recently referred to "our 2019 manifesto" about second jobs.
It ain't that hard to come up with something that's already in your previous manifesto and you're in opposition.
So no credit for Starmer as was suggested.
So, when he’s pushing long standing polices he gets no credit? But if he distances the party from them he gets derided? Well, looks like he can’t win in more ways than one then.
Johnson is focusing on “hours” rather than money. As you would expect from someone who approves of doing as little work as possible for as much money as possible. So, politicians could still be bought/influenced by outside interests, just not record too many hours for them.
A key point and would make it even more obvious, i.e. an MP getting paid £100,000 for 4 hours work a year. I wonder why anyone would pay that much for 4 hours work...