Forum menu
Not a tiny majority but a big one
You have a short memory TJ. It was only 6 weeks ago that despite having a huge majority Johnson needed to rely on support from Labour to pass covid legislation which he deemed to be crucially important.
The negative aspect for the ruling party of having huge majority is that backbench discipline is much harder to maintain, with a very slim majority the backbenchers of a ruling party are far less likely to rebel. Generally it is expected that the Opposition fully exploits these divisions within the ruling party.
Furthermore if Marcus Rashford can force a prime minister with a huge majority to very reluctantly preform U-turns then it shouldn't be completely beyond the capabilities of the leader of the Opposition to have a similar significant effect.
The deathly silence from Starmer on many issues hardly provides Johnson with any incentives to justify his policies or perform U-turns.
Although I am sure that Starmer would very much welcome you blaming Johnson's huge majority rather than his very obvious ineptitude.
It’s ridiculous to say oppositions have no power.
You and TJ seem to be discussing two different things.
Can the opposition force the party in charge to adopt or at least claim to adopt certain politics in the run up to elections.
vs
Midterm how much power does the opposition really have against a majority in cases where the majority party is onside.
So for publishing the report I am with TJ but that the opposition can force the party in charge to respond in the mid/long term I would be with you.
I'm ambivalent towards Starmer but like him or loath him he is the Labour leader and to attempt to get rid of him anytime soon just gifts the Tories what they want.
just gifts the Tories what they want.
Why on earth would the Tories like to see him replaced?
Do they honestly think that someone else would do a worse job?
All the current Tory woes are down to self-inflicted damage and own goals and absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with effective opposition.
Edit : Btw replacing Starmer is a non-issue, there is absolutely no chance of that happening. He has consolidated his position as leader and there isn't even the slightest murmurings of replacing him. The majority of the Parliamentary Labour Party is more than happy with the job he is doing/not doing.
The majority of the Parliamentary Labour Party is more than happy with the job he is doing/not doing.
Of course they are the vast majority of them don’t have to worry about losing their 80k salary and generous expenses. Pity the labour staffers don’t have the same security, although I find it hard to have much sympathy for them given the events of 2017.
Starmer's role is the same as that of Neil Kinnock, to de-toxify the Labour Party in the eyes of the electorate in order to make it electable in future.
I don't get the thinking that because Starmer isn't teaming up with Marcus Rashford voters are thinking, "you know what? I think I'll vote Conservative instead."
The Labour voters who switched to Tory at the last election will come back to Labour out of disillusionmen with the government and not because of a particular policy initiative. Politically there is no point in Labour chasing that vote.
Labour won't win with policy, their only chance of winning will be through projecting competence and not scaring the horses.
there was actually some recent research that showed people hardly changed their views as they got older
There is hope yet then. In another 20 years time the current 60+ will mostly be dead although you need to go down to current 30-39 group before Labour are ahead of Conservatives so will still be very tight especially if the turnout remains higher with the older voters.
(I know this is 2019 but note the Brexit party vote which majority would probably go back to Tory making it even worse)
I don’t get the thinking that because Starmer isn’t teaming up with Marcus Rashford voters are thinking, “you know what? I think I’ll vote Conservative instead.”
You don't get that Starmer isn't providing effective opposition to the Tories and on most issues is silent (which according to TJ is because he doesn't want to upset the right-wing press)? Try harder.
I'm loving your claim that "policy" is of no importance btw, your honesty is a breath of fresh air, if only all Starmer supporters were as honesty as that.
Starmer still maintains on his website his 10 policy driven pledges
https://keirstarmer.com/plans/10-pledges/
Labour won’t win with policy, their only chance of winning will be through projecting competence and not scaring the horses.
Baloney.
Competence (which I don't see Starmer's Labour as particular competent - they're just silent on most issues) will get you so far but the rest needs invigorating that's why you've got such low expectations.
Besides what is there to be competent about if you've not decided the actual direction of your policy?
Have you noticed how over the last few years whenever Labour comes up with a good policy the Tory party nicks it?
How about they don't scare the horses, don't give up their policy ideas to the opposition, get elected, then implement as progressive an agenda as they can get away with?
If it's a good policy then what's the harm in someone else implementing it?
Yup, it's called setting the agenda.
It's not something which Labour does very much of these days, they prefer to leave it to the Daily Mail to do that.
"If it’s a good policy then what’s the harm in someone else implementing it?"
That seems to be the status quo. I think that's what many on here see as effective opposition. Never mind forming a government, if you can provoke the incumbent administration to occasionally implement one of your policy ideas then there's no need to take the responsibility of actually running the country, you can just luxuriate on the moral high ground. Principals intact...
It is the primary role of the Opposition to provide an alternative argument, agreeing with the government renders it pretty pointless and inconsequential.
It is widely accepted that the purpose of arguing your case, whether in a court of law, parliament, etc, is to win.
Putting your case and winning the argument shouldn't be seen in some sort of negative light, it is supposed to be the goal.
It's interesting to note that those who accuse the Tory leadership of pinching Labour policies tend not to refer to it as Starmer-lite but in fact Corbyn-lite.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-44621076
Of course it could be argued that the Chair of the Conservative Policy Forum used the term Corbyn-lite rather than Starmer-lite for dramatic effect and to make his point more strongly.
But firstly Starmer doesn't seem to have many policies that a Tory government could pinch. And secondly if he did have I very much doubt that the Chair of the Conservative Policy Forum would feel that strongly about them.
It is the primary role of the Opposition to provide an alternative argument
Depends entirely on the policy. It's not a game.
Same sex marriage legislation required the government and opposition to come together.
The pandemic response required the government and opposition to come together, even if disagreements were and are left hanging.
There will be no way to resolve the social care for the elderly problem we face without government and opposition working together.
"Punch and Judy politics" is good for political commentators, less so for the rest of us.
Oh, and George Freeman's comments aren't gospel.
It is the primary role of the Opposition to provide an alternative argument,
You thought that meant I was saying all government policies should be opposed by the Opposition Kelvin? That's really quite weird!
Starmer’s role is the same as that of Neil Kinnock, to de-toxify the Labour Party in the eyes of the electorate in order to make it electable in future.
I don't know why people keep saying that about Kinnock. 1992 was there for the taking but he completely screwed it up.
You thought that meant I was saying all government policies should be opposed by the Opposition Kelvin?
TBH, I could see (when I first read it) that it could be taken that way. The rest of your response clarifies it though.
"I don’t know why people keep saying that about Kinnock. 1992 was there for the taking but he completely screwed it up."
Didn't he just, but the fact that Kinnock got carried away and went all X- Factor when presented with an open goal does not change the fact that both had the job of de-toxifying the party in the eyes of the electorate.
Should he still be leader at the next GE I somehow doubt that Starmer will repeat Kinnocks mistake.
Deary me, you need to realise that Parliament is not where any significant changes come from. Don't be cowed.
Didn’t he just, but the fact that Kinnock got carried away and went all X- Factor when presented with an open goal does not change the fact that both had the job of de-toxifying the party in the eyes of the electorate.
And the evidence he did that is what exactly? All I'm seeing is an election lost that should've been won. John Smith was the leader who put Labour in a strong position.
Yeah, I saw that and thought the same Dazh…
https://twitter.com/spittingcat/status/1487806942915571716?s=21
ransos, I'm talking about this rally just before the 1992 election. Unfortunately I'm old enough that i remember it at the time. If you watch it I don't think you'll find my X-Factor jibe misplaced...
For people who remember those times, it became a meme for over- confidence, (before memes were a thing). We'll never know about John Smith as he never got to test himself at a GE, just like we can't write the script for Starmer yet.
There's another famous clip of Kinnock kicking militant tendency out of the Labour conference as well, It's his (other) most famous moment, the one where he de-toxified the Labour Party in the eyes of the electorate, (the grounds for my comparison to Starmer.)
He lost it because 'he lost it' (as the video clearly demonstrates)
There’s another famous clip of Kinnock kicking militant tendency out of the Labour conference as well, It’s his (other) most famous moment, the one where he de-toxified the Labour Party in the eyes of the electorate, (the grounds for my comparison to Starmer.)
I know the history, thanks. Ultimately the electorate didn't see him as PM material, which doesn't seem much like detoxification to me.
Starmer starting to pick up don't knows now in decent numbers
This was pre his well delivered & excoriatong speech yesterday too
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1488527308172533766?t=_uI2B9N5u6qhqvNuGneUAw&s=19
This was pre his well delivered & excoriatong speech yesterday too
This is the latest opinion poll taken yesterday :
Labour 40% (-1)
Conservative 33% (-1)
Liberal Democrat 11% (–)
Green 6% (+1)
Scottish National Party 4% (-1)
Reform UK 3% (–)
Plaid Cymru 1% (+1)
Other 1% (–)
https://redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/latest-gb-voting-intention-31-january-2022/
So under Starmer, Labour are still 7 points ahead of the Conservatives, and 11% in the poll taken the previous day.
How can that be spun as anything other than a success for Labour under his leadership?
Are you new here?
Starmer must be given absolutely no credit for anything, EVER, under any circumstances.
The high point of Labour politics was some beardy Marxist bloke not losing an election quite as badly as everyone expected in 2017
It’s all been downhill since then and we won’t have this bloke besmirching the golden legacy of St Jeremy’s Great Triumph by doing silly things like actually being ahead in the polls and looking like a Labour government could finally be a realistic possibility!
Remember the last bloke who did that? Exactly! We don’t want any of that 13 years in power and 3 election victories nonsense!
Are you mad? That was all just awful!
Now go and have a think about what it is you’ve said and sing The Red Flag three times as penance, in front of a shrine to Tony Benn while begging Richard Burgon for forgiveness!
We shall never speak of this again
Are you new here?
Think he’s probably missed your posts from pre-2019 where you said labour should be 20 points ahead of the worst government in history.
The high point of Labour politics was some beardy Marxist bloke not losing an election quite as badly as everyone expected in 2017
No we have a new high point. Labour doing currently ok in the polls against one of the most monumentally terrible and corrupt governments in our history (but getting utterly trounced at the last by-election they actually contested).
What a time to be alive.
Let's wait until Labour actually win something before we get all triumphalist eh.
How can that be spun as anything other than a success for Labour under his leadership?
No spinning required, just some basic questions;
What has Starmer done over the last two years that has brought success - nothing
What has Johnson done to **** it up (especially over the last few months) - shit loads
Labour only win when the Tory government starts to really **** it up and even the idiots that vote for them get fed up with them. That point has temporarily been reached but they could still recover once the idiots forget all about the last 2 months but the cost of living could impact it for longer but again that would be nothing to do with Starmer.
The high point of Labour politics was some beardy Marxist bloke not losing an election quite as badly as everyone expected in 2017
Interesting that you should mention 2017 binners, because coincidentally the latest opinion poll puts Labour on 40% which is exactly the same level of support that they received in the 2017 GE - Labour are no more popular according to the latest poll than they were then.
The Tories however are considerably less popular now than they were in 2017. I'm not sure who you want to give credit for that - Johnson or Starmer? I get the impression that you want to give Starmer all the credit.
And I can't see anywhere, where anyone, at any time, has been critical of Labour leading in an opinion poll. Can you point out where you think this might have happened? TBF I might have missed it.
Of course, as already pointed out, there has been in the past one extraordinary exception - you. You are the only person I can ever recall describing opinion polls showing Labour leading as a disaster for Labour.
The majority of the Parliamentary Labour Party is more than happy with the job he is doing/not doing.
The majority of the PLP are completely anonymous, most of the rest just virtue signal on social media, then you have Richard Burgon.
OK might be unfair here but most of his frontbench are non entities, his pool of talent in the PLP woeful. In the conservatives there are clearly more in numbers ignoring the Desmond Dwayne's more that are capable of putting a coherent view persuasively forward.
The virtue signalling of things like the Bloody Sunday tweet (undoubtedly a awful event) is playing to the converted, one wonders if he's going to tweet on the Warrington bomb anniversary?
The recent report looking at action on CSE is also awful, many labour led local authorities still are playing the three monkeys. He needs to come out swinging on this
> compares front benches <
Easy choice! Point me to one shadow cabinet member who isn't head and shoulders above the current person supposedly handing the brief in government. Just one.
As for what has Starmer done? Well, judging by the upset in this thread, repositioned Labour's image to be more inviting to voters who don't consider themselves left wing, or who place too much importance on the nation and loyalty to it, upsetting many on the left in the process who feel that's a betrayal. Labour is now further from my own politics, but closer to being considered the next government by many people who don't share my political outlook, but aren't really wedded to this current lot of Conservatives either.
As for what has Starmer done? Well, judging by the upset in this thread, repositioned Labour’s image to be more inviting to voters who don’t consider themselves left wing,
Agree and like you while that is not really what I want I would still rather have a Starmer Labour government than any Tory government. And that is probably the best we can hope for in a countries that seems to love the tory party.
(but getting utterly trounced at the last by-election they actually contested).
Indeed the last couple have had catastrophic drops in support but remember its polls that count now and not election results. I know its confusing keeping up with what binners thinks is important but just think of it as junior johnson choosing whatever is suitable at this moment in time.
As for what has Starmer done? Well, judging by the upset in this thread, repositioned Labour’s image to be more inviting to voters who don’t consider themselves left wing
That's democracy for you.
That’s democracy for you.
Not really. Its a symptom of a badly flawed fptp approach which fails to represent many voters.
It also relies on the notion that those traditional labour voters will remain voting for a party which doesnt really represent them any longer but is slightly better than the alternative.
Whilst I can see why it would appeal to the minority who suddenly get treated as a majority even for those I would have thought they should be capable of looking at the growth of populism and the voting for brexit with comments about "needing change", "all the same" with a certain amount of concern.
Opinion polls show that lead drops significantly with Rishi Sunak replacing Johnson btw. Which is astonishing when you look at this government's record of corruption and chaos.
Would be squeaky bum time going in to an election against Sunak when no doubt most of the media would rally round.
Its a symptom of a badly flawed fptp approach which fails to represent many voters.
Agreed. But we have FPTP. And we're getting more FPTP as well, as this government are enforcing it on local elections. The longer the stay in, the more "flawed" our democracy will become. Get. Them. Out.
Kier Starmer, like Jeremy Corbyn before him, has done a sterling job in providing the one thing that Labour supporters appear to want above all else: Lots of opportunities to fight bitterly amongst themselves.
Get. Them. Out.
And replace them with what and how? What is being offered as the replacement?
After all if the replacement just carries on a slightly watered down version of the same politics then that approach gets normalised and next time round it can be pushed even further.
We have been here before so what is being offered that is different this time?
replace them with what and how? What is being offered as the replacement?
You prefer these Tories to a less than perfect in your view Labour government? Or think there's no difference, they're all the same? Really? Really really? Deep deep down really really? Really?
You prefer these Tories to a less than perfect in your view Labour government?
You've heard what this lot have got to say about the last labour government, right?
Apparently it was the very worst thing that has ever happened EVER!
Really? Really really? Deep deep down really really? Really?
Yes, really
Idealogical purity at all costs. Even if that means permanent opposition and permanent Tory government.
I'd obviously prefer a Starmer government to the current one but how much do they need to compromise to be allowed to have a shot at power? What do they have to do to get the press barons on side, for example?
If they were absolutely hammering the Tories in the polls (the fabled 20 point lead) they might have a chance at a decent majority and a strong mandate - does anyone really feel confident that's going to happen?
Reality is if Starmer wins we will all get to feel a bit better about stuff for a while but the system rolls along just the same. Meanwhile if Labour achieve then sustain success then all the grifters and dodgy russian money will find their way over to their side.
Really? Really really? Deep deep down really really? Really?
sigh. That isnt what I said.
Have you not paid attention to the past not just in the UK but particularly in the US as well. Are you not familiar with the overton window and how to shift expectations?
Have you not noticed when the tactic is to be slightly less than something else that something else shifts further and further and so does the slightly less position?
Have you not looked at the frequent complaints about them all being the same as each other and hence how people pretending to offer a change do well?
So what exactly is Starmer offering? How will he prevent it being a repeat of the triangulation/third way approach which shifted everything hard right?
Why should a traditional labour voter vote for someone targeting the centre? Why not look for someone who actually represents their views.
Indeed why should a centre voter vote labour vs the traditional lib dems?
Are you new here?
Lomg time lurker on this thread as it continuously entertains. Felt I had to chip in when people are trying to find the lowest opinion poll for the opposition party that they support. Utterly nuts.
Objectively, SKS's response to BJ on Monday was an immense performance. If people choose to ignore that, and the shift in attitudes it will have created, then good luck to them.
In the meantime, I'll split my time between parody and this thread 😉
Objectively, SKS’s response to BJ on Monday was an immense performance.
I have to agree. It shifted my assessment of him by quite a few notches.
I think its telling that it's now clearly official party policy to try and smear Starmer in the worst way imaginable.
I'll just repeat what I put no the Boris Johnson thread:
Lia Nici, the Tory MP for Grimsby is presently on the MP’s panel on Five Live
She has just made a statement that when Keir Starmer visited her constituency last week, before Boris’s statement in parliament, that her constituents didn’t mention parties at all, but did all mention the failure of Keir Starmer to prosecute Jimmy Saville.
Yeah, right. Totally believable.
When asked to repeat the actual accusation that Johnson made herself, she did the Nadine Dorries defence “well I don’t know all the facts…”.
So there you have it. It looks like this nonsense is now a clear party tactic, probably briefed directly from central office, being repeated by Tory MPs to smear Starmer.
Thats the level to which they’ve now sunk to. It’s not even gutter level. Its way, way below that. The depressing thing is that I suspect it’ll work with his thick-as-mince Brexity base, which is exactly why they’re doing it
I’ll split my time between parody and this thread
Wait, what, this isn't a parody thread?
Wait, what, this isn’t a parody thread?
Ah, maybe I misread the vibe... 😉
I think its telling that it’s now clearly official party policy to try and smear Starmer in the worst way imaginable.
Wow who thought the tories would go in for smearing the opposition leader?
They have never done that before have they.
I am shocked, shocked.
Still on the plus side whilst there are plenty of the left who arent impressed by Starmer there doesnt seem to be any right now busy amplifying the tories attack lines so thats an improvement.
busy amplifying the tories attack lines
Avoid Social Media. It's absolutely awash with people who claim to be "of the left" amplifying the Savile stuff. Including some that used to be Labour MPs. And I don't just mean Galloway (but of course, he is doing it as well).
Easy choice! Point me to one shadow cabinet member who isn’t head and shoulders above the current person supposedly handing the brief in government. Just one.
Easy, name the portfolio, no search engines allowed
Bridget Phillipson
Nick Thomas-Symonds
John Healey
Jonathan Reynolds
Steve Reed
Louise Haigh
All big portfolios, all seen their opposite number on the telly lots, all have been nearly invisible
Go on, list their opposite numbers then... tell me which one you think is doing a better job than their Labour shadow would do. Of the ones you list, I've seen Jonathan Reynolds on TV the most this week, and I agree he comes across as a bit of nobody. And I agree about Nick Thomas-Symonds... glad he was replaced as Shadow Home Secretary, I was calling for him to be pushed aside the whole time he was in that post. His replacement didn't go down well in this thread though... (huge improvement IMHO).
When asked to repeat the actual accusation that Johnson made herself, she did the Nadine Dorries defence “well I don’t know all the facts…”.
So there you have it. It looks like this nonsense is now a clear party tactic, probably briefed directly from central office, being repeated by Tory MPs to smear Starmer.
Thats the level to which they’ve now sunk to. It’s not even gutter level. Its way, way below that. The depressing thing is that I suspect it’ll work with his thick-as-mince Brexity base, which is exactly why they’re doing it
Conservative MPs have jumped the shark, well some have, I don't think it will help them. They are looking stupid. The media need to do their job now and make them look really stupid
Starmer needs to take the Savile stuff head on and use the just released CSE report to highlight the scale of a important issue that the government has failed to tackle. The leveling up joke funding, the lack of pandemic preparedness, the blatant treatment of the population as fools in Downing St. Take the piss about Boris needing to wait for a police report before he can confirm he was in his own home etc etc
Every time they
Didn't Johnson day he was going to get advice from Lynton Crosby again? This is a classic dead cat isn't it.
Weird cognitive dissonance for people who claim to be outraged by this who also hold Margaret Thatcher up as a hero.
If people choose to ignore that, and the shift in attitudes it will have created, then good luck to them.
So we are saying Starmer has 'won the argument'. Job done then.
This does indeed seem to have Lynton Crosby's grubby fingerprints all over it
Unfortunately, I suspect this is only the beginning and we're going to head downhill from here
PMQ's is going to be interesting. I fully expect Johnson to repeat that accusation and probably worse, under the cover of parliamentary privilege as he continues to drag the entire party even further into the gutter. Somewhere, it has to be said, they seem quite happy to go
Straight in on the Savile slur. Starmer not holding back.
Johnson sticking with it. One for the sane Tory MPs to ponder.
Where did this leader of the opposition come from! Going in hard on corruption as regards PPE. More of this please.
The reply... "captain hindsight" ... Johnson has nothing new. He's a spent force.
"Tax rises for working people"
"Tax cuts for oil companies and banks"
Linking Sunak and Johnson together with every question.
Aiming at both. Much needed.
As for what has Starmer done? Well, judging by the upset in this thread, repositioned Labour’s image ....
Is that what it's all about now - image? The full Americanisation of British politics?
The new electoral strategy.... balloons, campaign hats, rousing anthems, loads of flags, and meaningless slogans that everyone can eaily repeat, MGBGA.
Thankfully, despite the contemptuous attitude many on here hold, I believe the British public are a tad more sophisticated than to be so driven by image.
"Image"... as in the picture the voter has in their head when asked "would/could you vote Labour". It has nothing to do with the fripperies you've brought up.
Is that what it’s all about now – image?
It's always been about image!
Kier Starmer, like Jeremy Corbyn before him, has done a sterling job in providing the one thing that Labour supporters appear to want above all else: Lots of opportunities to fight bitterly amongst themselves.
Yep, it's what Labour is all about.
Both left and right factions - united in their devotion to yabbering on about themselves.
An English-centric party that's devoted to fighting an illusory enemy that shares their core British nationalism: military, monarchy and freemarkets.
Thankfully, despite the contemptuous attitude many on here hold, I believe the British public are a tad more sophisticated than to be so driven by image.
Absolutely, comrade!
They're not about to be suckered in by populist slogans and daft stunts...
https://twitter.com/spittingcat/status/1415986065014468610?s=20&t=a3HaYGZu0C1SF1LQZ6oKYw
Let's hope Starmer stays well away from such japes. Or tablets of stone.
inkster
Free MemberDidn’t he just, but the fact that Kinnock got carried away and went all X- Factor when presented with an open goal does not change the fact that both had the job of de-toxifying the party in the eyes of the electorate.
This is a myth, though. The drop in the polls that foreshadowed the election loss occurred before the Sheffield rally. It only seemed to align neatly because of the lag in reporting and delivery (because polls took longer to collect, back then). And the whole "Kinnock blows it at the rally" meme didn't really get going til after the election when, as usual, Labour were looking for a simple explanation that they could get angry about rather than a real one that they could learn from.
“Image”… as in the picture the voter has in their head when asked “would/could you vote Labour”. It has nothing to do with the fripperies you’ve brought up.
Well that hasn't changed much has it? As binners very helpfully reminded us earlier of the situation in 2017 when Labour's share of the vote in the general election was 40%, five years later according to the latest poll Labour support now stands at 40%
Obviously it's better than 2019 when Labour were calling for a second referendum but I think it's fair to say that if Labour were still pursuing that disastrous policy today, which of course was championed by Keir Starmer, the situation would be quite different.
Btw binners you still haven't provided any examples of criticism of Labour leading in the polls, are you accepting that the only person who has ranted that leading in the polls isn't good enough if it isn't by 20 points is you?
Have a day off.
A year may be better
Have a day off.
A year may be better
Get over yourselves. Just because you don't like what Ernie says doesn't mean he shouldn't say it.
Happy to hear what Ernie has to say about Starmer... much of it is often spot on. Whatever he's chasing Binners about, in a "response" to my comment, reads to me as just impenetrable self-referential forum navel gazing. What's the point? Is there a point? Who knows. Perhaps I've just had too many coffees. Sorry Ernie... carry on....
reads to me as just impenetrable self-referential forum navel gazing. What’s the point? Is there a point?
Point? You think there should be a point to this thread? When it finally closes all the issues surrounding Keir Starmer's leadership will have been finally resolved?
No wonder you spend an inordinate amount of time on here Kelvin.... important business to sort out!
Whatever he’s chasing Binners about, in a “response” to my comment, reads to me as just impenetrable self-referential forum navel gazing.
Heaven forbid someone is asked to back up their claims with evidence. Binners should have the same rights as Johnson to just lie repeatedly and smear anyone who disagrees.
Ernie is just a little insecure and constantly seeks my validation when he's unsure on matters. Many people do. Most of them are actually on this thread
So I'm happy to pop into the thread from time to time with reassurance. Bless 'em.
It's a valuable public service. I'm a bit like the BBC in that respect, in fact, in may respects. I pay Adrian Chiles many hundreds of thousands of pounds a year for a start
I think its telling that it’s now clearly official party policy to try and smear Starmer in the worst way imaginable.
Smear - a Labour leader? How on earth did that happen.
Centrist frustration - needs more Polly Toynbee lubrication.
Ernie is just a little insecure and constantly seeks my validation when he’s unsure on matters.
Well yes, I'm never sure what your position is on anything binners, although to be fair I have no doubt that you aren't either.
At the start of the Corbyn thread according to you everything that was wrong with the Labour Party was the fault of Tony Blair and Corbyn was a breath of fresh air, by the end of the thread Corbyn he was a beardy Marxist**
At the start of this thread you were wetting yourself with excitement over Starmer then you went all silent apart from the occasional criticism, such as a couple of weeks ago when according to you he wasn't working-class like Angela Raynor. Now this week he you have almost elevated him to sainthood because Johnson screwed up so badly.
On the Corbyn thread anything less than a 20% lead for Labour in the opinions polls was an utter disgrace, on this thread a 5% Labour lead is fantastic news and everyone should be celebrating.
On this thread losing by-elections is okay because, you know, these things happen, and it's not all just about winning. On the Corbyn thread it's only about winning and nothing else.
You are more slippery than a Tory cabinet minister binners, expect to be asked to clarify the positions which you announce with so much passion.
** Why this obvious disdain for beards? Did you once have an unpleasant experience involving a beard? Would you like to to talk about it?
Smear – a Labour leader? How on earth did that happen.
Funny that everyone's up in arms when Johnson accuses Starmer of being a bit shit at his previous job, but no one batted an eyelid at his predecessor being called an anti-semite and a 'f***** racist' by members of his own party. The labour party might want to look closer to home when they're getting all outraged about baseless offensive smears.