Forum menu
Most? I count about five of you 😁
There is life outside STW. Shockingly.
"People" does not necessarily mean STWers.
So add one more person who believes that he is staunchly following the Tory agenda, Sir Keir Starmer himself:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/keir-starmer-labour-government-spending-b2376121.html
Starmer says he’s happy to be branded a ‘fiscal conservative’ as he refuses to commit to greater public spending
IMO you are only accepting his rhetoric while ignoring the reality of action.
I had no idea that Boris Johnson had ever claimed that he had moved the Tory Party to the left. When did he do that?
The tories moved to the left in in some ways economically, by screwing the economy to such an extent that they had no choice but to spend massively even while trying to slash spending - the bills went up and the tax receipts went down even as the tax rates increased, roughly speaking. But they also moved to the far right socially.
There is life outside STW. Shockingly.
I reckon the main reason Boris Johnson is so hated on here is that he was so popular with normal people. The sort of people many on this forum sneer at and look down on. Obviously you won't find those people on here, because they can't afford 5k bikes, campervans or expensive watches, so it reinforces the elitist prejudice that is openly on display on this forum.
Feeling a bit chippy this morning daz?
No just amazed at the pro-austerity consensus on here. I guess it's easy to be ambivalent about it when it doesn't affect you. 🤷♂️
I think what we've learned from this thread is that the most important thing is that the right team wins.
What this team does once it's running the country is irrelevant.
think what we’ve learned from this thread is that the most important thing is that the right team wins.
What this team does once it’s running the country is irrelevant.
You keep repeating this, so I acknowledge that it is your opinion. But Labour will run the country differently to the Tories. It's really not irrelevant and nothing to do with supporting a team, as other have said.
Pro-austerity consensus?
If, by that, you refer to the majority on STW and generally who don't understand or don't believe in MMT I think that's a wrong assessment.
If that isn't what you're referring to, some explanation would be helpful.
The majority of the population, inc STW, have been affected to varying degrees by austerity.
I think what we’ve learned is that the most important thing is that the Uniparty doesn't win.
"I reckon the main reason Boris Johnson is so hated on here is that he was so popular with normal people"
As far as I'm concerned,you could not be more wrong on this.
I detest Boris because of who he is, the opportunities he had and the way he abused and debased those opportunities to the detriment of my country.
I would absolutely love to have had a charismatic young(ish) leader with a ready wit who was adored by his public with a genuine desire to help the poorest in our society, whilst also believing in actually levelling up the whole country and promoting us as a shining example of a working democracy for the whole world - who ******* wouldn't?
If, by that, you refer to the majority on STW and generally who don’t understand or don’t believe in MMT I think that’s a wrong assessment.
No I'm talking mostly about the fact that the majority on here support establishment politicians like Starmer and Sunak who spend all their time telling us that the UK govt cannot afford to do things that would benefit normal people. When someone like Johnson* or Corbyn comes along they're derided as fantasists or dangerous (see almost all of Binners' posts for example). Part of this is a non-understanding (or wilful ignorance) of how govt finances work which is related to the MMT thing but mostly it's just people swallowing the lie that the UK govt is powerless to change things for the better.
* I'm not arguing that Johnson would have done all the things he claimed BTW, it was clearly just PR to make himself popular, but at the very least he didn't promote the lie that there was no money, and that's quite unusual for a modern day politician.
Since 2016 the public have been promised the earth by politicians, and been made to eat dirt.
If Starmer makes promises for the first few years of a possible Labour government that are undeliverable in that timescale, then at best any Labour government will find the following election much tougher to fight, at worst he won’t be believed and support for Labour will collapse before this upcoming election, and the Tories might sneak it again and a desperate period of unbroken Tory led rule continues for the UK.
MMT is relevant when it comes to running the country. If you think it’s hugely relevant to winning a General Election, well…
As is pointed out time and time again, governments already use MMT, but it doesn’t remove the need to address taxation, revenue, trade, currency issues when looking at spending. This is more true for Labour than the Tories, because of how the media (and the public) have historically treated the two parties… frustrating as that is, it needs to be addressed when it comes to campaigning and messaging.
Daz, there are no viable alternatives to 'establishment politicians' as you refer to them.
Corbyn may have been but his past in the form of voting history, policy statements and overt support for various causes made him an unmissable target for the tories, murdoch and rothermere/dacre.
I can't think of a single MP outside of minority parties who has even hinted at doing politics differently.
Neither labour nor tories in their present guises tolerate dissent - and that won't change anytime soon.
I reckon the main reason Boris Johnson is so hated on here is that he was so popular with normal people. The sort of people many on this forum sneer at and look down on.
Not at all, I can spot a lazy, narcissistic bully and that's what he was. If he had delivered more for 'the man on the Clapham Omnibus' rather conducting a smash and grab on the public purse for his mates I may have felt better disposed to him.
From the moment he won Cameron's Opinion poll we were boned due to his lazy venality.
I assume you include the SNP in"minority parties"?
the SNP who as the scottish government with extremely limited tax raising powers that on their fixed budget have managed to do things that are according to Starmer are unaffordable for a government that has borrowing opportunities and tax raising powers
Things such as ameliorating the 2 child benefit limit and many more examples
tj - as I'm sure you understand, my use of the term 'minority parties' refers to those who will never lead a UK government.
Before anyone refers to the LDs in coalition they were the very junior partner and could, in no way, be described as having led that government.
The future Labour government will unequivocally not take any policy leads from the SNP - unless Starmer is an STW member and has been converted by any posts on the forum.
And there is a u-turn on right to roam.
I’ve been a Labour voter, sometime member and candidate all my adult life, but this u turn on right to roam is pretty much the last straw. I’m strongly considering going for the Greens. I just cannot see the point of voting Labour again if all they’re promising is to maintain the status quo because they’re afraid of rich people and landowners.
I’m strongly considering going for the Greens. I just cannot see the point of voting Labour again if all they’re promising is to maintain the status quo because they’re afraid of rich people and landowners.
That is what I did after Corbyn went as I imagined it being more like it is now but have to admit to not thinking Starmer would be this pointless. The Green Party are much closer aligned to what Labour should be like but unfortunately they will never have more than 1 MP so a wasted vote other than when showing overall voting numbers.
Still looks like he will get elected so so will have at least got a semblance of a Labour Party into power which through gritted teeth I would take over the tory party.
unfortunately they will never have more than 1 MP so a wasted vote
UKIP votes weren't wasted. They dragged the Tories (and by extension Labour) so far to the right that old UKIP and current Tories are indistinguishable.
A wasted vote would be a vote for a party whose policies you disagree with. Once they have your vote there is no reason for them to chase you by adopting your issues.
Vote Green and let Labour come chasing after your vote.
Vote Green and let Labour come chasing after your vote.
That is exactly what I do. Doesn't seem to be working well though does it...
Voting green is just wasting votes, they are a party that will never gain power, so can promise the world without ever having to do anything, the Lib Dems learnt that the hard way in their brief partnership with the tories, they found out there's a world of difference between pledging and implementing.
Next election i'll vote Lib Dems, only due to them being the credible opposition down here to the tory MP in situ, as for Labour pledges and so on, we're a long way off them being in any shape to start implementing, and we've been in a centre right / right government for a while now, you don't just sharply move over, most governments need 2 to 3 terms to actually make real change.
That is exactly what I do. Doesn’t seem to be working well though does it…
And me. But it never will while we have FTTP and Labour as ToryLite™.
That is exactly what I do. Doesn’t seem to be working well though does it…
I think smart people need to start voting like stupid people.
Only stupid people voted for UKIP because they were never going to get any seats and votes for them were simply thrown away. Stupid people were too stupid to understand FPTP so they didn't care. They were voting for what they believed in.
Smart people don't waste their votes. They put their vote where it is most likely to make a difference because otherwise the Tories will get in. They understand FPTP because they are so smart.
The result of this is that Labour and the Tories have been chasing the Stupid Vote for years now. And here we are.
Maybe if more smart people took a look at why the Stupid Vote has been so important they'll start to realise that the most important thing isn't that the Tories don't get in but that Labour (and by extension the Tories) are dragged to the Left.
. I just cannot see the point of voting Labour again if all they’re promising is to maintain the status quo because they’re afraid of rich people and landowners.
You are probably misunderstanding Starmer, I very much doubt that he is afraid of rich people and landowners.
With a persistent and now long-established huge Labour lead over the Tories, and two by-elections last week yet again confirming a massive collapse in Tory support, Labour isn't so desperate that Starmer has to court the Countryside Alliance.
And yet that is exactly what Starmer is doing. Despite the fact that he is obviously smart enough to know that the 100,000 members of the Countryside Alliance, plus their supporters, will always demographically represent some of the most committed Tory voters in the UK. He really doesn't need them to become PM.
For Keir Starmer the Labour Party is merely a vehicle for his personal quest to become Prime Minister, not a vehicle for radical change. The significance of him securing the highest office in the land will no doubt be similar to him, as a radical left-wing barrister, becoming DDP.
Starmer is fairly unique in breaking promises and preforming u-turns before even winning a general election, that always invariably happens after an election victory. But IMO he knows too well that winning the general election will signal the beginning of his problems, the shit will really hit the fan when he fails to deliver. This is expectation management.
Remember all these u-turns concern promises which he made when it was less certain that Labour would win the next general election. As it becomes more and more likely that Labour will win the next general election he is ditching them because he no longer feels that they are necessary, not, imo, the reverse.
Edit: I think there is probably a strong case for voting Labour at the next general election.
A tiny Labour majority will let Starmer off the hook, he would be able to claim that his hands were tied, that he would have to tread very carefully, and that he didn't have a strong mandate for radical change.
A huge Labour majority, of say two hundred plus, would be an absolute nightmare for the Tories as not only would it take them at least two general elections to recover, but they would lose many of their big guns. It was also imo increase the likelihood of them squabbling and possibly splitting with one faction gravitating towards a Nigel Farage leadership.
A huge labour majority would also be a nightmare for Starmer. Expectations on delivering change would also be obviously much higher, as would be maintaining tight discipline.
Expectations on delivering change would also be obviously much higher, as would be maintaining tight discipline.
Thats why they are doing their best to control candidate selection. Its a lot easier to maintain discipline if the people are already are inclined to agree with you.
His mandate for radical change is already undermined by the fact he has backed off on anything which was even a
mild change.
Its hard to claim you have a mandate if you didnt campaign for it.
Smart people don’t waste their votes. They put their vote where it is most likely to make a difference because otherwise the Tories will get in. They understand FPTP because they are so smart.
Whether smart or stupid makes no difference in my constituency.
Tory 64%
LibDem 15%
Labour 13%
Green 8%
I vote Green so am in that 8% and voting like a stupid person in your terms but as you can see even if the 3 tory alternatives all joined together they would still lose by a significant amount.
voting like a stupid person in your terms
I'm not sure it's my terms, it's closer to the terms of people who like to say things like, 'If you vote for anyone other than Labour you're voting Tory.'
The implication is always that if you live in a marginal constituency and you don't vote to get the Tories out you are a wasted vote. People who live in marginal constituencies are pretty much the only ones who can influence Labour policy. Withhold your vote until they give you something to actually vote for.
But yes, smart people don't think that way so that is why Starmer can safely ignore them because he knows he has their vote already.
And just to emphasis that Starmer's stances are not necessarily motivated by the need to chase votes:
There are nearly 4 million Muslims in England and Wales and 79% (iirc) vote Labour, pissing them off if you believe that the next general election is on an knife edge is not a smart move.
Sure Starmer is now desperately trying to backtrack because weirdly he didn't expect the current backlash to his claim that Israel had the right to cut off water, a war crime, as he now lies and pretends that he meant something else.
But that seems to be because of the crisis within the Labour Party caused by so many Labour councillors resigning, rather than because he attaches a great deal of value to the Muslim vote.
Presumably he feels that he can well afford to lose some support from the Muslim community.
Sure Starmer is now desperately trying to backtrack because weirdly he didn’t expect the current backlash to his claim that Israel had the right to cut off water, a war crime, as he now lies and pretends that he meant something else.
Careful. You mentioned the I word.
Oh I think you are allowed to mention Israel, it is just opinions concerning the current Israeli-Palestinian conflict that aren't allowed.
I just make observations and reference news articles without criticising either side.
it is just opinions concerning the current Israeli-Palestinian conflict that aren’t allowed.
Yeah. All part of the omerta. If someone doesn't like what you think or say, they just ensure you can't be heard. It's really quite pathetic and not what I expect of this place. 🤐
Well I have said previously there might be some commercial considerations at stake, although political diversity isn't hugely welcomed here.
Also the Palestine Solidarity Campaign in the UK has been under continuous cyber attack recently, it was a nightmare trying to load events pages yesterday. And it was hacked last week, which has been reported to the police.
I can understand the fear of being hacked might be an issue for stw, for obvious reasons.
The implication is always that if you live in a marginal constituency and you don’t vote to get the Tories out you are a wasted vote. People who live in marginal constituencies are pretty much the only ones who can influence Labour policy. Withhold your vote until they give you something to actually vote for.
You mean keep those constituencies voting in Tory governments? To move politics leftwards? How's that been working out?
But yes, smart people don’t think that way so that is why Starmer can safely ignore them because he knows he has their vote already.
Fair. I'm smart and he does indeed have my vote. I think you're going to have to do a bit more work on your case for stupidity as the way forward.
(And yeah crazy not to be able to discuss the biggest news story of the day, on which feeling may be high but I doubt opinions can be all that divergent.)
You mean keep those constituencies voting in Tory governments? To move politics leftwards? How’s that been working out?
Well we tried for voting for a right leaning labour party. Hows that been working out?
I think you are going to have to do more work to justify voting for someone who has been steadfastly purging the left and courting the tories as being a good idea.
Its a shame really. I think he would have made a good tory leader to pull them back from the hard right but sadly his plan seems to be after the right handed over their party to the loonies to give them labour in compensation.
You mean keep those constituencies voting in Tory governments? To move politics leftwards? How’s that been working out?
It's been working very well to keep the country moving rightwards and evermore populist. In the recent by elections, Reform got a lot more votes than the Greens. In both by elections the Reform vote would have been enough to overturn the Labour majority.
Which way do you think that is going to drag Tory policy (and by extension Labour policy)?
By unconditionally voting Labour you are condemning the country to drift ever rightward and towards more and more extreme populism.
Or someone who shares your view needs to start a more left leaning party to pull politics to the left. The labour party that fought the last two general elections were either too far left, too undisciplined/too broad a church, or a combination of both. Labour could have tried the same approach at the next election but there is a saying about repeating experiments.
Political parties will go where the votes are.
It sounds too simple for our world of FPTP, marginal seats, 4d chess policy decisions, and Schrodinger's announcements but I think people would be best served by just looking at the manifestos and decide which party's policies most closely resemble their own opinions. Or better yet, the party whose views are more extreme than yours, given that no party can ever deliver everything it promises.
It doesn't require everyone to do this but the numbers are probably lower than you think. The absolute peak UKIP vote was 12.5% and that was enough to get a referendum called to stem the flow of voters from the Tories and you know the rest.
Starmer well knows that anything perceived to be anti-semetic will be leapt upon, you only have to look at the mess corbyn got Labour into at the last GE to see what that can do to your popularity
Accusations of anti-semitism may have been used as a stick to beat Corbyn with but I haven't seen any evidence that anti-semitism is an issue at all for the vast majority of voters.
Anti-semitism was only made a high profile issue because Corbyn is critical of Israel and the right-wing of the Labour Party, who were more concerned about his radical policies which would have benefited ordinary working people, wanted an excuse to publicly criticise and attack him.
Starmer would have no problem at all if he was critical of Israel. Firstly the Parliamentary Labour Party aren't looking for an excuse to attack him.
Secondly the vast majority of voters couldn't give a monkeys about anti-semitism, they quite rightly don't see it as a huge problem in the UK, certainly not when compared to racism against Black and Asian people (Diane Abbott had the Labour whip removed for making that point)
And thirdly there would be zero possibility of Starmer being accused of being anti-semitic if he condemned Israel's behaviour and called for an immediate ceasefire - his wife is Jewish and he has agreed to have his children brought up as Jews.
It helped the a lot of the tory MPs and the tory voters wanted Brexit anyway. So taking your theory, once Labour are in power votes for Green Party will lead to Starmers Labour Party going towards the Green policies. Likewise he could go further right to ensure he keeps the votes of mild tories.
Not sure your theory really flies...
Or someone who shares your view needs to start a more left leaning party to pull politics to the left
And here we hit FPTP and why the centrists love it. Even if they then whine about the consequences of it and blame everyone but themselves.
Labour could have tried the same approach at the next election but there is a saying about repeating experiments.
Yes and we tried following the tories rightwards and look how ****ed our country is now. Care to explain how being tories but competent will work better this time round.
Likewise he could go further right to ensure he keeps the votes of mild tories
If he goes much more right it wont be the "mild" tories he is courting.
There also arent enough of them if people on the left stop voting for him.
Hence the increasing vocal accusations about "if you dont vote for starmer then you are voting tory". Which doesnt work too well given his courting of the tories but thats centrist logic for you.
Not sure your theory really flies…
I'm open to other suggestions on how to get Labour (and by extension the Tories) to move Left again.
Unless you don't want them to?
I sometimes forget that 10 years ago this place was probably 50/50 Labour and Tory. Many of the same people are still here but very few would ever admit to being a Tory. Did these voters leave the Tories or did the Tories leave these voters?
I guess for many former Tory voters Labour must look pretty good right about now.
According to the polls Labour are looking good to a lot of people right now. The same was true of Theresa May's Tories. How did that pan out?
I’m open to other suggestions on how to get Labour (and by extension the Tories) to move Left again.
I wouldn't waste your time. Most people don't know whether a policy is left or right wing.
How did that pan out?
Young people came out and voted because they finally felt they had something to vote for. In the aftermath the Tories were dragged to the left with promises of increased spending and support because Labour had successfully moved left.
I wouldn’t waste your time.
It's very lazy of me, but I tend to use Left to mean policies not dreamt up by sociopathic entitled scumbags. There may be a better shorthand term I could use.
I wouldn’t waste your time. Most people don’t know whether a policy is left or right wing.
Of course most people don't know, because most people are pretty stupid and more so when dealing with politics which is why populism works.
It doesn't really matter to me whether a policy or approach is considered right or left wing - I just pick the ones I think are right which coincidentally tend to be left wing policies.
If the tory party ever come up with a policy I agree with I will happily admit I agree with it.
According to the polls Labour are looking good to a lot of people right now. The same was true of Theresa May’s Tories.
Not just right now, for the last couple of years. And for the last year Labour's lead over the Tories has been absolutely huge, at least comparable to 1997.
The only reason that Rishi Sunak didn't call a general election and seek a fresh 5 year mandate is precisely because he knows that margin of error for opinion polls aren't that great.
The opinion polls in 2017 weren't wrong (beyond the accepted margin of error) they were correct at the time they taken. It is just that voters in the final weeks of campaigning changed their minds, one opinion poll even put Labour in front.
It is widely accepted that this sudden change in voting intentions was the result of Labour's election manifesto.
It is of course possible that the Tories will at the last minute pull a rabbit out of the hat and confound 2 years of opinion polls. But how feasible do you think that is?
What do you think that their vote-winning election manifesto might contain? The Tories are spent. They have nothing left to save them. Even their desperate attempts to ignite a culture war has been nothing more than a damp squib.
Short of fabricating a dangerous confrontation with Russia they stand no chance of winning the next general election. Although I do believe that realistically the Labour lead over the Tories on election day will closer than the polls are currently showing.
I don't believe for a minute that the whole country will have a sudden brain fart and decide to continue 13 or 14 years of Tory rape and pillage consciously but there's likely a long way to go to an election, ge results have more to do with the leader's popularity than the party's, and as Bruce points out it doesn't actually take a great number to swing things. People can piss and moan about Labour not being Labour enough, but plenty of people held their noses and voted for Labour under Corbyn. Anyone looking for the perfect match in a political party before they vote for it and expect that party to achieve power is going to be disappointed, again.
The next general election really isn't a long way away, in all likelihood less than a year away.
For it to swing in the Tories favour would need something dramatic to happen with the economy. Which is both beyond the control of Rishi Sunak and very unlikely to happen.
Actually the current Israeli-Palestinian conflict will very likely have negative global economic consequences. Sunak might yet regret not calling for a ceasefire.
Anyone looking for the perfect match in a political party before they vote for it and expect that party to achieve power is going to be disappointed, again.
I was wondering when the accusations of ideological purity would be trotted out.
The problem with Starmers relentless chasing of the centre right vote is he is looking a pretty perfect match for them and hence a crap choice for anyone who is centre left to left.
Voting is like choosing bike tyres, whatever decision you make will involve compromise.
It doesn't however mean that fit for purpose isn't a consideration.
I wouldn't necessarily choose a bulletproof commute tyre for my club run road bike. And vice versa.
No accusation, just an observation. The left of Labour tried in recent history, twice, and failed. I did also suggest that if it is considered that Labour wasn't left enough someone one should start a party with the purpose of pulling them, and the discourse in general that way as Bruce reflected that ukip did for the right.
It should also be pointed out that since the last Labour government, the right of labour have also failed twice.
And here we hit FPTP and why the centrists love it. Even if they then whine about the consequences of it and blame everyone but themselves.
Centrists introduced PR in Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and London. It has resulted in continuous centrist government in all of those places except NI, where a cross-aisle coalition was in power until it all fell apart. That's probably more of a reflection of NI politics than the voting system.
Why do the biggest critics of FPTP and Westminster politics want to ignore the non-Westminster governmemts and the PR that is already widely used in the UK?
The left of Labour tried in recent history, twice, and failed.
I have long argued of the total futility of the Left trying to use the modern-day Labour Party as a vehicle for change.
For a moment in 2015-18 I thought that I might possibly be proven wrong. But even I could not have predicted stuff like this:
The Left's single greatest enemy is the Tory Party's Fifth Column.
Centrists introduced PR in Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and London. It has resulted in continuous centrist government in all of those places except NI
Giving all the credit to the centrists is a bit special. That was when labour was still a broad church and not the Starmer ideological pure approach. The centrists though did remove the Jenkins review from play.
It is also notable how much more to the left the policies, as far as allowed by the restrictions, the policies of both the SNP and Welsh Labour are compared to whats being offered by Starmer.
Why do the biggest critics of FPTP and Westminster politics want to ignore the non-Westminster governmemts and the PR that is already widely used in the UK?
If you think really, really hard I am sure it will come to you.
It should also be pointed out that since the last Labour government, the right of labour have also failed twice
Fair! 😀
I reckon the main reason Boris Johnson is so hated on here is that he was so popular with normal people. The sort of people many on this forum sneer at and look down on. Obviously you won’t find those people on here, because they can’t afford 5k bikes, campervans or expensive watches, so it reinforces the elitist prejudice that is openly on display on this forum.<br /><br />
What, people like me, brought up working class in a council house, failed the 11+ so went to a secondary modern, never went to college or Uni, except as part of job training. All my cars have been second hand and cheap, except my current one, and it took until I was in my 60’s to afford that.
And I think BoJo was a posh snob, a bully, who thought that using Latin made the little people doff their cloth caps in deference.
He’s an asshole. Have I poked enough holes in your stupid classicist theory?
If you think really, really hard I am sure it will come to you
Admittedly I'm being disingenuous by phrasing it as a question when we all know the answer: it's because they live in provincial England and don't care to know about how the rest of the country works, or because they just ignore inconvenient facts because it doesn't fit with their worldview.
or because they just ignore inconvenient facts because it doesn’t fit with their worldview.
And wrong as usual. I suspect you are, as usual, projecting your failings onto others. You might want to get out of London and speak to people in those areas and see how, deliberately, limited they are and how FPTP still really, really matters/
If we are going for rhetorical questions. Why if variants of PR was good enough for the new parliaments and assemblies did Straw and co kill a heavily watered down variant for Westminster.
Been stewing on that for a while have you?
Why if variants of PR was good enough for the new parliaments and assemblies did Straw and co kill a heavily watered down variant for Westminster.
Because it was a con that was never supposed to concentrate enough power on to one party to allow a working majority government. Labour expected to be constantly in government in some form or another and didnt anticipate being annihilated by the SNP (aided by their own hubris).
It was never supposed to have teeth. But as Jeff said, nature finds a way.
Sure Starmer is now desperately trying to backtrack because weirdly he didn’t expect the current backlash to his claim that Israel had the right to cut off water, a war crime, as he now lies and pretends that he meant something else.
This makes me ashamed to be British, almost expected from the tories, but very disapointed in Labour and Starmer..............
This makes me ashamed to be British, almost expected from the tories, but very disapointed in Labour and Starmer…………..
Careful, that sort of post will get you banned. We're not allowed to talk about the murder of civilians. At least not in that part of the world. Fill your boots on the Ukraine thread though.
No one is talking about the murder of civilians. What was mentioned is that Sir Keir Starmer, King's Counsel, and former DDP, publicly declared support for breaking international law and now, unconvincingly to many people, claims that he meant something different to what he actually said.
Whether a country should or should not abide with international law is not a controversial issue. Even Israel claims to only act within international law.
I could've sworn Sheepy Lammy claimed that international law was a latter of opinion.
I could’ve sworn Sheepy Lammy claimed that international law was a latter of opinion.
Bit like his second job.
Rachel Reeves getting ticked off for her new book pillaging Wikipedia articles ... just like her effing economic ideas.
I can definitely sense a tonal change in Labour's distance from the Tories as competent Leaders - ebbing away.
When you're committing genocide is a 'humanitarian pause' a bit like a fag break?
Keir Starmer needs to apologise, retract his comments and stop the gaslighting of Muslims
A pro-Starmer NEC member waved “good riddance” to a Muslim Oxford councillor, also an NHS doctor who worked through the pandemic, describing her as “barely Labour” and a “hack”.
And an unnamed party official allegedly responded to Muslims resigning by telling Jewish News political editor Lee Harpin that Labour was “shaking off the fleas”.
What a dehumanising way to talk about Muslim members!
Keir Starmer is doing his best to lose the next election
A pro-Starmer NEC member waved “good riddance” to a Muslim Oxford councillor, also an NHS doctor who worked through the pandemic, describing her as “barely Labour” and a “hack”.
Called six people that. That one was Muslim is only the key point if you’re picking anything to fit your story (not you somafunk, the writer of that piece). I’ll dig out the tweet/x…
https://twitter.com/lukeakehurst/status/1715452353904550364?s=20
I was gutted about brilliant Oxford Labour councillors Shaista and Amar resigning last week. But good riddance to these 6 ineffective Momentum hacks. They were never Labour, always Momentum.
Shoddy shitty stuff, but it isn’t an attack aimed at just a Muslim councillor.
Can’t comment on the fleas nonsense, as no real details, but again if it was referring to “Muslims” rather than a number of candidates of many faiths and none, I’d be surprised (and disgusted).
Keir Starmer is doing his best to lose the next election
That sort of stuff should matter but can't see it making a massive difference to how people vote as 99% of probably not even aware of it.
Starmer commissioned Martin Forde KC to investigate sexism and racism within the Labour Party. The conclusion Forde came to was that islamophobia, as well as racism, is widespread within the Labour Party:
You might want to get out of London
lol!
how FPTP still really, really matters/
Because it's been such a magic bullet in Scotland, Northern Ireland, Wales and London?
Starmer is looking pretty isolated on this. Would be highly ironic if his unwavering support for Israeli war crimes was his undoing.
unwavering support for Israeli war crimes
Jesus.
His line on Israeli action is out of step with much of his party, and he’s clearly trying (and failing) to show a cross party UK, USA and EU consensus on Israeli action (urging restraint, not declaring anything and everything done to go after Hamas as a war crime).