Forum menu
The context is… increased use of food banks. We all agree this has happened, yes?
My view (and that of the person using that graph) is that this is the result of government policy where the incomes (wages and benefits) of less well off people has not kept up with the cost of living (that has increased faster for that group than for those that are better off).
Your view is that the increase is is due to the “success” of groups like the Trussell Trust in meeting a need which you claim was already there, and need isn’t really increasing… the increase in use is due to increased “supply”, it’s not supply being increased to try and meet increased demand.
I think that is summarised fairly. Is it not? Trussell Group also say it’s the former. Rees-Moog agrees with you. Nothing to do with buses.
No, i was pointing at the actual data points, and towards the actual real data that has been correlated over the same period (like https://www.jrf.org.uk/data), to provide a better understanding, rather than the usual facebook/twitter poster using some data point fit their agenda.
If you read the previous stuff, it all points to increased usage of things like food banks, credit facilities, etc, etc by those already trapped in poverty, with noted irregular increases becoming more regular with COVID, Inflation and so on.
I'm just tired of seeing daft twitter rants using one data point to try and sum up an entire argument, then wonder why the right then use phrases like 'fake news'.
I would also note i use the Trussell Trust as a success in the way that they have been able to actually show some positives within this country, where they have so many people volunteering their time, companies and organisations providing goods and services and that there are positives when it comes to fighting for things across the political spectrum.
Bit quiet in here seeing as it's been quite a week for Starmer. I see he's adopted the Corbyn press strategy of preparing PMQs soundbites for posting on social media. Binners will be happy.
https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1516765823905550337?s=20&t=0p4eoyIZcYCPlko3Z4TySg
Pfft!
No ranting there, and he actually looked up from his notes.
The Tweet is also seriously short of creepy cult-like replies telling him that he's the greatest human being ever to walk the earth, if not actually technically a God
A poor effort
If course it’s quiet here, the thread is toxic. I’ve done a leaflet drop for a very good Labour councillor that’s standing for re-election. Met lots of friendly people on doorsteps, all in all a far more worthwhile experience. Fingers crossed people get onboard and vote in the local elections, for whoever they prefer, rather than chewing on their own bile with like minded malcontents on the internet.
The reason it's quiet is there is very little be enthusiastic about.
Also, why is it actually toxic - that just appears to be a way of yet again limiting debate or perhaps just a reflection of the state of Labour.
There is little to lose sleep about in an internet discussion
Although Post-pandemic (not really post) my world has changed - lack of general enthusiasm and positivity is hard to come by. Maybe a product of turning 50 and the push against the inner Tory! (Never 😃)
why is it actually toxic
Toxic? Just like the brexit and Boris Johnson threads this thread is clearly tolerant and massively respectful of people's diverse opinions. Here's a wonderful example:
The Tweet is also seriously short of creepy cult-like replies telling him that he’s the greatest human being ever to walk the earth, if not actually technically a God
With posts like that warmly embracing people with a different point of view how could this thread be seen as toxic?
Also, why is it actually toxic
I assume because its not filled with hilarious comments asking how his allotment is since he hasnt been seen. Then again maybe not. The standards of "toxic" seem rather flexible.
With posts like that warmly embracing people with a different point of view how could this thread be seen as toxic?
Perhaps it's a reflection of your prose style which lends itself to be read as sneering condescension?
This thread is like watching expert tennis players hitting perfectly executed winning shots, but playing on entirely different courts to each other.
Johnson today saying he’ll be fighting the next election. That’s the best indicator we have of Starmer’s effectiveness. Time for Streeting??
Johnson today saying he’ll be fighting the next election.
It doesnt say much really. Whether he will be allowed to depends on the press barons and the tory MPs and not his personal opinion.
which lends itself to be read as sneering condescension?
Maybe. I won't deny a certain feeling of contempt towards the hypocrisy of middle-class liberalism which is filled with so much hatred and distain towards those with different political opinions, and the wider electorate.
Their arrogant self-righteous sense of moral and intellectual superiority over the great unwashed is a source of personal fascination though.
Johnson today saying he’ll be fighting the next election.
I can say that I'm going to fight the next election. You could say that you're going to if you like. It doesn't make it a fact. The decision isn't his to make. We're not living in a dictatorship just yet, despite what he thinks.
I see Labour are 11 points ahead in the latest polls as we approach the local elections
Is this yet more proof of what a terrible job Starmer is doing?
11 points? Surely it should be 20?
Whether he will be allowed to depends on the press barons and the tory MPs and not his personal opinion.
According to an article in the FT yesterday Johnson's position as Tory leader is currently not at risk as although Labour are leading in the polls ATM Tory MPs don't see Labour as a serious threat should a GE be called.
A fair analysis imo although that could obviously change if Labour start to consistently get double digit leads in the polls or the Tory vote collapses in the local elections.
11 points? Surely it should be 20?
We don't know what it'll be yet. But everything appears, thankfully, to be heading in the right direction
Hopefully the Tories will lose over 1000 council seats, nationally, in a couple of weeks
Like Kelvin, I'm doing something other than moan about it on the internet, and going out delivering letters and leaflets from Labour to postal voters we think are of a sympathetic persuasion to make sure that they use their vote. We're trying to get our great labour councillors re-elected and maybe get a couple more in. And the Tories out, obviously
I see Labour are 11 points ahead in the latest polls as we approach the local elections
The latest opinion poll gives Labour an 8 point lead. There have been only two opinion polls since the first week of February which have given Labour a double digit lead.
Despite the Tories shooting themselves on the foot on a daily basis the opinion polls of the last couple of months suggest that if a general election was held under the current situation Labour would fall well short of a majority.
It would appear that leaving it to the Tories to score own goals isn't enough
I’m doing something other than moan about it on the internet, and going out delivering letters and leaflets from Labour to postal voters we think are of a sympathetic persuasion to make sure that they use their vote.
Sounds like a plan but FFS don't talk to them.
Ernie - they're not daft enough to have me actually talk to people! 🤣
Shoving things through letterboxes only
This thread is like watching expert tennis players hitting perfectly executed winning shots, but playing on entirely different courts to each other.
I saw this earlier, @nickc, and thought it particularly apposite - I just realised you have defined the entirety of Twitter for Twitter users (me included). 🙂
FFS why can't the Labour Party inspire voters with an alternative vision which they can believe in?
The latest opinion poll (conducted April 20-21) gives Labour just a 6% lead.
https://www.techneuk.com/tracker/
If that's the best Starmer can achieve under the current circumstances, ie highly negative headlines for the Tories on daily basis, what chance is there for him to win the next general election in two years time?
I'm reminded of a comment I heard Frankie Boyle make last night on the telly......."Starmer has all the authority of a 'do not tumble dry' label".
Ernie - who would you rather have as leader? It seems to me nothing Starmer does satisfies you
It seems to me nothing Starmer does satisfies you
What is he doing?
The Tories are shooting themselves in the foot on a daily basis and scoring spectacular own goals, never mind the 'midterm blues', and Labour seem to struggle to achieve a double digit lead.
Are you satisfied with that?
Do you look at the situation and think, "job well done Starmer"?
For someone who claims to hate the Tories so much you seem strangely satisfied with a best case scenario which leaves Labour well short of a majority.
FFS why can’t the Labour Party inspire voters with an alternative vision which they can believe in?
I think folks are too concerned about what's happening to them right now, they haven't the bandwidth to look ahead with any thing like hope for two years time. I don't think Starmer is ever going to "inspire" He's just not that politician, the best he's he's got is "safe pair of hands/boring technocrat" I don't think that's going to change.
Ernie - I think Starmer is the best they have that is electable. I like Lammy but he is the wrong skin colour to be elected IMO. There appears to be a real lack of talent throughout the parliament ( and this seems to be an issue worldwide)
Now who would you rather have as leader? If you are going to criticise Starmer it might be useful to put forward who you think is better suited to be labour leader.
I have repeatedly said that if Labour has a problem Starmer is the symptom rather than the cause.
Something which is reflected by the fact that the PLP appears to be hugely satisfied by his leadership.
And something which you apparently also subscribe to with your comment: "There appears to be a real lack of talent throughout the parliament". Although I have no idea why you think it is a "worldwide" issue. Sounds like defeatism in the extreme. It is perfectly feasible to imagine dynamic political parties led by inspiring leaders.
TINA (there is no alternative) is a thatcherite concept designed to destroy hope and maintain the status quo.
TINA (there is no alternative) is a thatcherite concept designed to destroy hope and maintain the status quo.
So who do you think should be leader?
TINA (there is no alternative) is a thatcherite concept designed to destroy hope and maintain the status quo.
Who or what is your alternative then?
Although I have no idea why you think it is a “worldwide” issue
from discussions with friends in other countries who also bemoan te lack of talent in their political system
Now who would you prefer? If you think Starmer is so poor?
i am actually genuinely interested as there may be some talent I do not know of
I don't think Lammy's lack of PM prospects are anything to do with his skin colour - more that he's a complete hypocrite (MPs can't have two jobs - yet he presents on LBC), his lack of common sense (thought Henry VII succeeded Henry VIII), his willingness to use identity politics in order to avoid answering a question and his sneering sermons to anyone who has a different opinion (ref: the teacher who recently called his radio show).
I think it would be great to have a Black (or Asian) PM - but Lammy is not that person.
Which bit of "I have repeatedly said that if Labour has a problem Starmer is the symptom rather than the cause" don't people understand?
I understand that but who is the alternative?
Its easy to be negative ( Starmer is poor) but much harder to be positive ( X would be a good leader)
Oh, we understand. What's your alternative, if there really is no one on the Labour benches who you would want to be PM? Is it "vote for no one"? Stay at home and let the Conservatives carry on?
I get the impression that you don't think Labour has a problem at all TJ. Do you vote Labour?
Replacing Starmer is pointless, the problem is much deeper than that. Otherwise the PLP wouldn't be so satisfied with his leadership, which they very clearly are.
But then perhaps there isn't a problem and replacing this current shower of shit with Starmer leading a minority government, best case scenario, will be perfectly fine?
Is there really not a single Labour MP you would prefer to Starmer? Or is there a reason why you're ducking and diving around such a simple question? I'd prefer Lammy or Lewis (or even, if he couldn't so easily be painted as "the past", Miliband). While Starmer is leader, I'll be hoping he becomes PM. I'd still be surprised if he does though. And a Labour majority government still looks many elections way to me, whoever is leader. A Labour PM of a minority or coalition government really is the best we can hope for at the next election... there's a mountain to climb for Labour outside London and the other big English cities that might not be totally apparent if you live in one of them.
Ernie - I am in Scotland where we have proportional systems except for Westminster elections. I stopped voting labour a decade ago because of purely scottish issues. I have given up on Westminster. I didn't even vote the last westminster election. My seat is a safe SNP seat with a vile carpetbagger liar as MP
I tend to vote tactically anti tory and pro green
I think Labour have enormous issues and are unfit as a 21st century party. Too timid and too beholden to special interests and far too right wing and ungreen. But in the current westminster party I see no one better than Starmer
Actually I think a minority government might not be a bad thing. SNP to provide support of confidence and supply
What labour should be doing and I have said this for more than a decade is a one election electoral pact with all other opposition parties on a platform of "closer contact with the EU, tax raise and increase NHS and education spending and proper constitutional reform. dissolve after 2 years when the new electoral system is in place which must be unicameral PR. We would never have a tory government again and they might just spike te SNP with a proper federal UK
so once again Ernie - who would you prefer as labour leader?
Kelvin - on current polling labour would be the biggest party but short of a majority
This thread really should be named "Ten Things I Hate About Keir Starmer". I used to come here for interest but it has become a bit of an alternative reality. But then I am one of the ideologically impure. I haven't voted Labour for years because of YKW. I was a Starmer fan back when he was in Head of CPS and was interviewed on Radio 4 - always made sense to me. I may even vote labour again, but I appreciate in this thread reality I need to report for a self criticism session at my local miners club for a couple of weeks for some thought reform!
Why keep asking for a name? That is just playing personality politics.
I want a leader who strengthens working rights, really tackles the cost of living crisis (that isn't just corporate welfare in disguise) changes political funding so that "we" get to vote on policies before they have been filtered by the mega rich, changes the voting system so 1 person 1 vote actually means something, and implements a "green new deal".
I want a leader who has those as principles, rather than a dull version of Boris who is without any conviction other than a belief that he is better and deserves to be leader.
There is a leader shaped hole in the labour party and I don't care what the name of the person who fills it is, I am more concerned with their convictions and principles (although I agree that the problem runs deep in the PLP).
hels - You haven't voted Labour for years and aren't sure if you would vote Labour again but don't like any perceived criticism of Starmer?
so once again Ernie – who would you prefer as labour leader?
I keep telling you, but you're not listening, I don't think Starmer being Labour leader is the problem. After all we had a vaguely leftie leader of the Labour Party before him and the PLP did a better job of attacking him than the Tories did.
So finding soemeone who meets my approval clearly isn't the solution, I don't know why you appear to think it might be, and nor, apparently, is finding someone who meets the PLP's approval.
What would Labour have to do to win your vote TJ, since despite apparently approving of Starmer you never vote for them?
Edit: For hels : Here's "Ten Things I Love About Keir Starmer", all ten are on his website:
https://keirstarmer.com/plans/10-pledges/
There's no need for Starmer to be replaced by anyone imo, just for him to argue in favour of what he believes.
...and on what you believe ernie, just to nip back to what you said on the last page:
I won’t deny a certain feeling of contempt towards the hypocrisy of middle-class liberalism
I'm not sure how many of us that includes (me no doubt) but it's a bit like US republicans flinging 'liberal' as an insult. It really isn't. And neither is 'middle class'. It was probably said, I dunno, sardonically maybe? But does reflect a very particular and niche world view.
What would Labour have to do to win your vote TJ, since despite apparently approving of Starmer you never vote for them?
Constructively engage at holyrood. Divorce the scots party from the English party. Develop some decent scottish policies. Get rid of the corrupt idiot who stands for labour in my costituency
Starmer is the best of a bad bunch IMO
I am fascinated why you are so down on Starmer but refuse to say who you would prefer.
And I'm fascinating how people who never vote Labour approve of him so much.
Mind you I'm sure the Tories love him.
The latest opinion poll (conducted April 20-21) gives Labour just a 6% lead.
If that’s the best Starmer can achieve under the current circumstances, ie highly negative headlines for the Tories on daily basis, what chance is there for him to win the next general election in two years time?
What are you actually expecting, there's been about a 12 point shift in the last year, you have a country that have a high level tory majority government, a 6 point lead is a huge thing, by your logic, why haven't the Lib Dems seen a rise, they're around the same percentage they were a year ago, surely they should be much higher if people are moving away from the tories?
And I’m fascinating how people who never vote Labour approve of him so much.
TJ stated he voted for them in the past, but as he's in Scotland he's backing the SNP, which have a lot of principles in line with labour.
I'm similar, when in Falkirk i actually voted Labour as the MP was decent (at the time!), but when in Perth i voted SNP, as the tories were the main threat. Down where i am (Yate & Thornbury) i vote Lib Dem, they are the only threat this time round, Labour are a distant third, it's called tactical voting for a reason, plus the Lib Dems actually do a lot around this area, unlike the tories.
It's the same reason why Labour contest seats harder in some areas than others, FPTP means areas like we're in are just wasted effort compared to other areas.
TJ stated he voted for them in the past, but as he’s in Scotland he’s backing the SNP, which have a lot of principles in line with labour.
Labour stand candidates in Scotland, TJ chooses not to vote for them. Which suggests that the satisfaction factor with Labour could be higher, from TJ's perspective.
Like me TJ doesn't see the leader of the Labour Party as the problem.
Although bizarrely he doesn't approve of me suggesting that Labour should perhaps have a significantly greater lead than 6% when the Tories are staggering from one negative headline to the next on a daily basis.
Is is really too much to expect Labour to have a double digit lead which would suggest a Labour majority government under the present circumstances?
And when was the bar dropped so low? When Starmer became leader?
Labour haven't had a double digit lead in the last decade, the tories have had way bigger leads, like 22 points when Starmer started as leader, that to me points to there being a lot more core tory voters, hence why i keep saying Starmer has to preach to a broader church to have a hope of winning the next election.
And when was the bar dropped so low?
When the SNP took Scotland.
Did anyone vote Labour at the last few elections thinking they could get an overall majority? I'd have loved Labour as the biggest party, and yes that was the best that anyone could realistically have hoped for. And still is in the short and medium turn. Only Labour can give us a PM that is not a Conservative, yet they can't hope to get more seats than all the other parties put together anytime soon. They'll need the votes (or abstentions) of the MPs of other parties to get anything done if they do "win" the next election... and that's not new, it's been the case for several general elections now. One of the reasons I like Clive Lewis, he can see this reality and wants to act accordingly.
When the SNP took Scotland.
Often stated with certainty but not actually supported by the evidence.
Okay, to be more clear then, since 2015 when the SNP overwhelming took Scotland as regards UK parliamentary seats. Labour have had (and still have) little to no chance of getting 50%+ of seats across the UK since then. The Tory support in England will have to completely impload for it to happen… and that won’t happen ‘till they are in opposition and have their hands taken off some of the levers… so several elections are needed.
As for your “boring details” that report is about what would happen if there were no UK MPs for Scotland. We have 50+ that can’t simply be ignored.
TJ stated he voted for them in the past, but as he’s in Scotland he’s backing the SNP,
Never voted SNP in my life - never said I have. I find them too centralizing and controlling and their actions over wildlife crime are deplorable. ( although now they have got rid of F Ewing there might be a shift)
Scottish labour is a different set of issues to english labour. Its the Bain principle and their only policy being SNP baaaaaaad along with an absurd absolutist position on the constitution ( although Sarwar has made a few tentative moves away from this; Scottish labour are also significantly to the right of English labour IMO. there is plenty to attack the SNP on but they constantly pick the wrong issues. their line should be not "SNP baaaaad" on everything but " SNP policy good but does not go far enough" and they need to engage constructively at holyrood rather than sulk on the back benches
SNP would happily do a supply and confidence deal with labour and will allways vote down a tory government so the idea that SNP taking scots seats means no labour government is just not in accordence with the electoral calculus
BTW - polls vary - last one I saw was an 11 pt lead for labour
As for your “boring details” that report is about what would happen if there were no UK MPs for Scotland
It shows rather more than that and was just the simplest way of showing what votes what where but hey ho.
Another point on scottish labour - at the last but one GE they ran a pact with the tories against the SNP which resulted in the tories gaining enough seats that May was able to form a government. without that pact May would not have been able to form a government and Brexit would never have happened
There is a Scottish diimension to allthis that to me is more important than what happens at Westminster and the tories are a poor third in my constituency for westminster.
the simplest way of showing what votes what where but hey ho
Before 2015.
BTW – polls vary – last one I saw was an 11 pt lead for labour
Yes they do. Since the first week of February there have been 2 polls giving Labour a double digit lead, one 10% and one 11%, all the others, dozens of them, give Labour single digit leads. The last two both give Labour a 6% lead, which is probably higher than the average for the last couple of months.
In contrast to the national situation Labour have about a 30% lead over the Tories in London, which it has to be remembered is not automatically always Labour territory - Johnson was twice elected mayor in London-wide polls.
In Croydon, which has mostly been under Tory control, Labour is expected to actually increase its vote as it is swept along a tide of London-wide anti-Tory feelings. Despite Croydon's Labour group bankrupting the council with harebrained policies, dodgy missing £millions which is being investigated by the Met Police, and a scandal which hit the national media when Croydon council were found to have council tenants living in conditions which a farmer could expect to be prosecuted if he kept pigs living in the same conditions.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-60291877
I love how the BBC have used a photo of Freddie Mercury to illustrate an article about corruption in Croydon Council
#SpuriousLinks
I don't claim to speak for all Labour voters - and I have voted Labour in the past, I moved to the UK in 1995 and generally voted Labour - mostly because I only ever voted for women back then, and if there was only one woman on the voting paper, she was never a Tory. (I accidently voted for Tommy Sheridan once in the early days of MMP up here - the ballot paper had no women so I voted for the smaller parties to encourage them. Oops). Things are much better up in Scotland now with a very gender balanced parliament.
I couldn't vote for Labour under Corbyn I just didn't agree with him, and not high-jacking this thread on that. I may vote for Labour under Starmer but that is two years away. Local elections are very "local" around here and the local lib dem guy is big on cycling so he will definitely get my vote.
I understand the connection implied that Starmer supporters are not "real Labour voters" and again I don't claim to speak for all, but it is not true in my case. I will never understand not wanting Labour to win unless it it your guy - is that Trumpism? I should probably stay out of this thread I know when I am outgunned, just my reflections....
Replacing Starmer is pointless, the problem is much deeper than that. Otherwise the PLP wouldn’t be so satisfied with his leadership, which they very clearly are.
I do agree with this. The westminster labour party is dysfunctional and has forgotton its purpose and roots. Not as badly as the scottish party but its not great. Its only the absence of anything at all realistic as a alternative that gets them votes
The solution for the Labour Party is the same for the country. More transparency, greater devolution of power and influence, and a functioning democracy. The Labour Party has all the structures already to make this happen, but it won’t because labour MPs and staffers despise the membership. The PLP thinks less democracy, not more, is the answer. The result is an out of touch PLP and leadership who listen more to lobbyists and establishment influencers than the people they seek to represent. It’s little wonder they struggle to get people to vote for them.
Yes they do. Since the first week of February there have been,,,,,,,,,,,
Interesting - I had not known that stuff about London
You mean that you didn't know about this TJ?
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/labour-conservatives-keir-starmer_uk_622f178de4b0d1329e879ff3
The Labour lead in London has actually been higher than that, a few months ago Labour had a 32% lead in London.
And bear in mind that not long ago huge chunks of London were LibDem territory, until Nick Clegg swung the party to the right and screwed them.
Agree dazh. Labour PLP are happy with the status quo.
I think greater devolution of power should be Labour's number 1 policy.
Lots of Green and Plaid posters in windows in my area. More than Tory or Labour!
Yeah Opinium improved their methodology over 2 months ago to provide a more accurate picture. As your link points out :
"many Conservative voters are moving to undecided (and being excluded from the headline vote share figure), which is a big part of the reason for the recent Labour leads"
They have done quite a few polls in the last couple of months so any percentage changes now is no longer because of a "new" methodology.
I think other pollsters tweaked their methodology too. Tory voters going undecided reflects the fact that Labour isn't winning them over, they are being alienated by Johnson.
Pollsters are reasonably assuming that they will simply return back to the Tories when the general election comes, as they appear uninspired by Labour.
On the one hand none of this is a suprise to me but it must be to Starmer who thought that if he just eradicated Corbyn and removed actual left-wing 'policies' - he would romp home.
All that said I am surprised that the Tory vote has been so robust. I suppose many world events make it too complex for the average Tory voter to simply move across to Labour. After all they knew in their heart of hearts Johnson isn't particularly skillful.
And let's face it another more ruthless Tory leader is just waiting in the wings. Johnson is simply a fall guy.
Remainiacs podcast won't know how to react to this.
Maybe soon Labour can offer an actual way out for people to get behind?
Too many eggs in the Sue Gray basket.
Starmer should know there's a whole desperate world out there that isn't affected by Partygate that sorely needs help - and not PMQ exchanges as solutions to current issues.
I think you are expecting far too much from Starmer and the PLP. Their goal isn't to change the world, they would rather not win elections than embrace radical policies which are significantly different to the Tories.
IMO you are more likely to see the Tories going off-piste because they aren't burden by the fear of being accused of being radical, in fact they are likely to relish it.
The PLP on the other hand prefer the reassuring safety that the status quo provides.
I think you are expecting far too much from Starmer and the PLP. Their goal isn’t to change the world, they would rather not win elections than embrace radical policies which are significantly different to the Tories.
Other than - they do believe what they do is a path to victory.
I think you are expecting far too much from Starmer and the PLP. Their goal isn’t to change the world, they would rather not win elections than embrace radical policies which are significantly different to the Tories.
He has clearly announced his 10 pledges https://keirstarmer.com/plans/10-pledges/, with pretty much all of the key policies in the 2019 manifesto being kept, we're over 2 years from an election, so i wouldn't expect any meat on the bones for these yet, so what other radical policies do you expect him to embrace?
Also, again regarding the opinion poll, talking about how Starmer isn't endearing himself to those unsure tories, not many tories switch to voting labour, i'd expect a jump in Lib Dem numbers, which there isn't, so it's just re-polling a couple of points of those uncertain tories back into the tory camp.
so i wouldn’t expect any meat on the bones for these yet, so what other radical policies do you expect him to embrace?
There's no consistency between those pledges and interviews when Starmer avoids anything requiring state funding or ownership.
In fact those pledges are so loose they could mean anything.
I got confused by the 'illegal wars' bit. 'Legal wars' are ok are they? What about journalists who expose war crimes? 'Push power away'...clearly not written by a bot.
I got confused by the ‘illegal wars’ bit. ‘Legal wars’ are ok are they?
Think this focuses on the Iraq invasion, and the process against the UN Resolution that covered this.
In fact those pledges are so loose they could mean anything.
For single paragraphs, those pledges seem to contain a good amount of information, you also need to differentiate between what he is saying now, against the current backdrop, and these pledges. If Labour come into power under Starmer, then he will be held against these pledges, which are on his website, and clearly worded in the main, with descriptive examples for each.
If Labour come into power under Starmer, then he will be held against these pledges, which are on his website, and clearly worded in the main, with descriptive examples for each.
Given the current state of politics I don't think anyone holding anyone to account runs these days.
Support common ownership of rail, mail, energy and water
And yet this one, this really big one -- has masses of ambiguity attached to it.
Nothing clearly worded about it.
You want to have a crack at what it means because Starmer ducks and dives the issue of nationalisation.
These pledges are simply lazy marketing.
If Labour come into power under Starmer, then he will be held against these pledges,
No he won't, he will just use the centrist mantra "now is not the time" and find an excuse to kick them into them long grass.
'Starmer: I’m ready to break pledges to make Labour electable' (Independent)
No he won’t, he will just use the centrist mantra “now is not the time” and find an excuse to kick them into them long grass.
In one.
Starmer: I’m ready to break pledges to make Labour electable’ (Independent)
Oh yeah that too!
I'm ready to break pledges to be 2 clicks ahead.