Forum menu
Mate, politicians don’t get anywhere by arguing things rationally. They get votes by manipulating sentiment.
Ain't it the truth. I just wish there was a "Green-lite" party. Same overall progressive policies but without the PETA style anti-nuclear hysteria.
Having said that, Labour's announcement yesterday that they'll restore lifetime limits on pensions while adding a special exemption for doctors and teachers is hardly endearing me to them. It's nice to know that there's an official, formalised pecking order of "usefulness to society" and that those deemed pointless are taxed more heavily.
meanwhile (whilet watering down green pledge that was well telegraphed)
https://twitter.com/lara_spirit/status/1755859473392894317?t=dciR4c_gOR5Yalgf6FP4qg&s=19
electoral calculus has this as a 390 seat lab majority
Ain’t it the truth. I just wish there was a “Green-lite” party. Same overall progressive policies but without the PETA style anti-nuclear hysteria.
If you want more green policies then vote Green. I promise you they won't win, so you won't have to worry about policies you don't like becoming a reality. A reasonable shift to the Greens will however give the new Labour government something to think about. Look at the influence UKIP had on the Tories. All this Tory rubbish will be forgotten in five years time and Labour will be chasing votes from every angle.
You know 28bn is nothing. It is literally nothing. It will make not a jot of difference to your taxes or borrowing. And even if 28bn goes on the national debt they could just talk up Q/E.
This. Plus he didn't even need to put a number on it. It didn't need a figure and the general public can't understand "billions" anyway.
All it needed was some commitment to investing in the energy sector. That would have given some confidence to manufacturers of heat pumps, solar panels etc, would have spelt out the way forward and started to embed the idea in people's minds.
Energy security, less reliance on expensive imported gas and by the way, fewer emissions too. Win win win.
He really is a dithery old mop. Flip flopping around, tiptoeing gently around policies. 🙄
Because it too hard for Starmer to argue that the Tories haven’t managed the economy well.
That comment might not have been intended to be taken too seriously.
After failed attempts to score open goals Starmer invariably seems to score own goals by agreeing that the Tories were right all along.
I am afraid that some of their policies are so radical and untested
Funniest thing ever posted on this thread. 😂
It's not so funny when it leads to the government we have now... it's also a sentiment shared by many voters... but hopefully now far fewer voters than a few years ago. Understanding that this sentiment is the one Labour needed to overcome to avoid another term in opposition is what's often missed by those saying Starmer can't hit an open goal. He's a boring goal keeper, not an exciting striker. But he's only part of the team... something that'll be more apparent if/when Labour get to form or be part of a government with him still in his post. Although much of that team is scarily quiet right now... "shut up and let the Tories lose" is unlikely to survive contact with an election campaign once we have a date.
Where is Miliband?
Does anyone see this is as a good move?
I'm seeing some weird hoops being jumped through. Surely the argument would be don't annouce it in the first place!
After all, government spending 'constrains' are exactly the same now as they were before Truss and when the Tories came to power. The same system is in place - nothing changed.
I mean, not once did Reeves or Starmer say we can't do this project becuase of the lack of resources. Which would be the only logical truth involved.
So why say it in the first place? Or was u-turning part of the plan.Is this 6D Chesss?
Or as I've heard is the plan to look more credible now because Labour look like going into a General Election they won't just spend money which talks to the 'Labour-spend-too-much-voter.'
It's a mess of logic.
we might repeat Truss’s impact on the country.
Yeah there was no real lasting impact. GDP as the main metric has been flat since about 2019.
It says a lot about people's understanding of finances that this is repeated over and over without thought.
Fact: your interest rates were on the way up, as were a lot of other countries at the same time by similar amounts due to BoE's damaging policy. Not Liz Truss.
We have also reached an era where when the £ drops a bit (then gets bought back up and totally recovers) that people see this as tanking the economy. Welcome to FIAT markets. It's by design.
Tanking the economy has been underway for years; and the Liz Truss situation really only shows how fragile and under-prepared the market place is to deal with 'bad-news.' Lucky for us the BoE stepped in and sorted the process out.
The larger economy however is in mess and has little to do with the Truss 'era'.
(I'm not defending Truss - she's an extreme but we need a bit more analysis because as I said at the time - it's likely to be used an illogical reason progressives can't spend because Oh - the Truss budget.)
Yeah there was no real lasting impact.
Yes there is.
See also Brexit.
Pretending otherwise because OTHER decisions (internal and external to the UK) also have an impact (collectively bigger than either) needs to stop.
No one thinks that everything we're going through is down to Truss. But she has damaged the economy and deeply worsened the financial situation many households find themselves in. Many people who otherwise would support the Conservatives are lost to them in the short term because of her term in office, how she went about things, and because Conservative MPs and members allowed her to be "our" Prime Minister at all.
So why say it in the first place? Or was u-turning part of the plan.Is this 6D Chesss?
Think they were sincere when they first announced it. Then Truss came along and presented them with the gold-plated opportunity to destroy the tories reputation for economic competence, but they couldn't hammer that home whilst also wanting to spend billions raised from borrowing (especially on 'green stuff'). Essentially they have sacrificed good policy for political advantage, which ironically damages their claim to competence and responsible governance.
Where is Miliband?
I read a report the other day saying he's been kept away from the media because - according to a Starmer insider - the thing that Miiband is best at is destroying poll leads.
I expect he has been told to be quiet.
I suspect so as well. I had thought that was directly linked to this green transition policy adjustment... but thinking about Dazh's comment... it could be as much to do with him being at the helm during a campaign that led to a general election loss, couldn't it.
which ironically damages their claim to competence and responsible governance
Well, it does with you, me, and the rest of us chattering away... how it actually goes down with voters more generally remains to be seen.
Well then.
https://twitter.com/wethinkpolling/status/1755977564932194668?t=JVRR0sRq-JgAhRjENAWoKQ&s=19
Yes there is.
What specifically are you talking about?
You do realise lots of people think she is responsible for the interest rate hikes?
(She wasn't around long enough to enact anything.)
Brexit is in no way comparable btw.
I'd be mostly happy just to lump all Tory policy together. Like I said GDP , their favourite metric has been flat for years. But to keep saying Truss tanked the economy is just ridiculous.
I've told you many times it says more about the state of pension fund investments and their wobbly methods than Liz Truss.
The economy should be able to survive shocks and the market should not be able to dictate the direction of government.
This is not an endorsement of Truss more a finger wave at the generalisation of economics - as what is determined by the markets.
"It’s a comforting story to tell, particularly for those who always opposed Truss and her attempts to shake up the economic status quo. The problem is, it’s not actually what happened. In fact, the collapse in the bond market that spelt doom for Truss and Kwarteng was down to a hitherto unnoticed beast lurking within the pensions industry: the leveraged Liability-Driven Investment (LDI) fund."
https://capx.co/did-liz-truss-really-cause-the-bond-market-rout
This is what really happened late last September. While it’s politically convenient and conventional to blame the whole thing on Liz Truss, we should really be pointing the finger at foolish regulators and the Bank of England, both of whom failed to stop the industry’s leveraging short/long practice at the start, and to notice that the whole edifice had been tottering for some time. The Truss government had no reason to know of this emerging problem, and had not been warned by the Bank of England. What was bound to happen – mini budget or no mini budget – did happen
(apologies for the bad formatting. Copy and paste seems to do some odd things.)
How about you don’t copy and paste, and embrace brevity?
Miliband appeared on Channel 4 News. Not sure what to make of the interview, the questions were as you’d expect, and he was quite unapologetic. Advise watching it though, rather than reading my take on it.
How about you don’t copy and paste, and embrace brevity?
Sometimes Kelvin! But brevity gets us to bad sound bites doesn't it!
(That's also a bit cheeky isn't it I bet I post on average much less than the full timers around here. )
Daniela Gabor on some really solid info with regards to BoE/QT/QE/Truss
https://twitter.com/DanielaGabor/status/1755941577778725158?t=SIJ7VARITb6GUsasvYQbrA&s=19
https://twitter.com/DanielaGabor/status/1755943506256830509?t=Ts-kM5zkMLDgiq4l5xHRaQ&s=19
Back in 2020 when Starmer was correct.
https://twitter.com/TweetForTheMany/status/1756124886450192752?t=lRhD6cs5Q2-zfdZnrkkOVg&s=19
Newsnight is fun tonight. Seems like Starmer is every bit as useless as some of us have always suspected. I presume Margaret Hodge will be calling him ‘a f****** racist’ in the coming days?
Yep, have said it for a while that he looks like he will fall apart very quickly come the election race. He just never comes across as confident or sure of what he is saying. That is something the tories are born with even when they are completely lying (most of the time) they are still confident and sure of themselves.
Maybe Starmer is just not pyscho enough to be a leader?
An IKEA politician.
Convinces lots of people to buy it but underneath you know it's flimsy and just made of junk.
He's hardly got much of a long political backstory either - despite his toolmaker schtick.
It's desperately sad knowing what we are leaving behind and what could be.
An absolute new start is primed. And it's going to be sold this way for all the wrong reasons.
Bit harsh on IKEA, at least if I buy a bookcase I know it will actually be a bookcase.
I imagine Labour will be vetting a lot of candidates right now for antisemitic conspiracy theories
its a weakness and the Tories will fully exploit it
the mails timing.was perfect in releasing it too, Labour unable to remove the candidate
Starmer should have ditched him straight away
Got to laugh at the "oh god what now crew" - saying should we love u-turns?
FFS Centrists are the ultimate factionalists.
the thing that Miiband is best at
Is chaos and I would embrace that fervently just now!
Yep, have said it for a while that he looks like he will fall apart very quickly come the election race. He just never comes across as confident or sure of what he is saying. That is something the tories are born with even when they are completely lying (most of the time) they are still confident and sure of themselves.
So who you voting for, the bloke that conned you last time or the bloke trying to do that right thing?
So who you voting for, the bloke that conned you last time or the bloke trying to do that right thing?
It is not about who I am voting for (which is not Starmer as he is not in my constituency anyway) , it is a point about the leader of the Labour party and whether people will vote for Labour or will his lack of confidence in what he is saying comes across badly with the voters when they see more and more of it during election campaign and get put off by it.
Bit like the opposite of that over confident full of shit Johnson bloke they seemed to like
I imagine Labour will be vetting a lot of candidates right now for antisemitic conspiracy theories
The word "conspiracy" has now taken a new meaning.
I imagine Labour will be vetting a lot of candidates right now for antisemitic conspiracy theories
I'm expecting to be banned from STW from having suggested the same thing.
Without going down that rabbit hole again, criticising the Israeli government is not, of itself, antisemitic.
So who you voting for, the bloke that conned you last time or the bloke trying to do that right thing?
Who's trying to do the right thing? All I'm seeing is someone dithering and finally making decisions based on RW media headlines. Green investment was the same.
Even if you think the final decisons were right, it's terrible politics.
He just never comes across as confident or sure of what he is saying.
Maybe true. But he wasn't on Newsnight last night at all, was he? What I saw was just people of no consequence talking about when the candidate should have been dropped... based on not knowing what the extra stuff the papers were about to release was.
That is something the tories are born with even when they are completely lying (most of the time) they are still confident and sure of themselves.
Have you seen Sunak in action this week? The confidence is all gone.
Have you seen Sunak in action this week? The confidence is all gone.
Hey *outrage* - this is the Starmer thread how very dare you.
The biggest open goal in UK political history, and Labour are going to sky it into row Z.
Have you seen Sunak in action this week? The confidence is all gone.
Which is why the party will be keen to get rid of him, or would do if the timing around election is so bad but they may do anyway. But even at his worst he is still better at it than Starmer.
Starmer is ultimately a good person (compared to any tory) but is getting caught out by politics and personality.
An IKEA politician.
Convinces lots of people to buy it but underneath you know it’s flimsy and just made of junk.
🤣
Bit harsh on IKEA, at least if I buy a bookcase I know it will actually <em style="box-sizing: border-box; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; caret-color: #000000; color: #000000; font-family: Roboto, 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, 'Noto Sans', sans-serif, -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Noto Color Emoji';">be a bookcase.
Oof.
MFI?
The biggest open goal in UK political history, and Labour are going to sky it into row Z.
Amazing isn't it? Not only have they shown themselves to be completely incompetent and indecisive, but they've also exposed themselves as raging hypocrites. It completely vindicates those of us who all along have said that the AS issue was a factional strategy employed by the right wing of the party to prevent a left wing labour govt and then purge any left wingers following Starmer's leadership victory. Ironic that it might now also prevent a right wing labour govt. Karma is a bitch.
Whole Rochdale situation is shambolic (not helped by utter chancers like Galloway and Danzcuk running), but the candidate selection thing was utterly avoidable, as they’d parachuted in someone from Lancashire county council when there were local candidates who wouldn’t be quite so inept/naive. I bet they’re regretting not selecting Paul Waugh.
There was a bit of signposting when they refused to commit to letting Ali stand again come the GE.
Massive own goal, especially with two winnable by elections this week.
https://twitter.com/LeftieStats/status/1757398661657420194?t=Uo3x8NBDsIoGN7SBXlw_cw&s=19
After the Green chaos but before Rochdale swivel.
The lid dems can gtf out of my region (Galloway), they’re utterly pointless
It completely vindicates those of us who all along have said that the AS issue was a factional strategy employed by the right wing of the party to prevent a left wing labour govt and then purge any left wingers following Starmer’s leadership victory
On the subject of conspiracy theories....
Seriously, it's too close to an election for either party to be looking to change leaders. Labour supporters need to hold their noses and get their shit together behind Starmer, and start hammering the Tories on all their actual failings, rather than getting distracted sabotaging themselves.
Labour are at real risk of not winning this next election, and the country needs all of us to act like grownups to avoid a Tory victory.
After the Green chaos but before Rochdale swivel.
as were all of these?
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1757082260119965956
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1756421313260851607
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1755883184582008992
at the moment that poll is quite the outlier, but it does take a while for these things to filter through to polling
Labour are at real risk of not winning this next election, and the country needs all of us to act like grownups to avoid a Tory victory.
It's always the lefties who have to be grownups in order to get rid of the tories isn't it? I don't recall many on the right of the party acting like grownups in 2017 and 2019. No they were running around calling people 'f** racists' and saying they didn't want labour to win. They can f off. If labour don't win this election it'll have bollocks all to do with anyone on the left.
Here's me thinking what would be a good example of 'grown-up' politics - because the Tories we have now are simply extentions of the mindset.
You guys got what you asked for. Failed Neoliberalism that needs to move further rightwards to justify its existence.
. Labour supporters need to hold their noses and get their shit together behind Starmer, and start hammering the Tories on all their actual failings, rather than getting distracted sabotaging themselves.
**** that.
I've not been sold anything by Labour to get behind. Labour and Starmer need to do a better job and earn my vote.
at the moment that poll is quite the outlier, but it does take a while for these things to filter through to polling
Of course. Let's see shall we?
I wouldn't worry MCTD, the folk on this thread will never vote labour, it always reminds me of the 'parable of the drowning man' when you see them complain about tories and so on, then they save the real anger for Starmer 😂
I wouldn’t worry MCTD, the folk on this thread will never vote labour,
Damn right, no point voting Labour if you want Scottish independence 🙂
wouldn’t worry MCTD, the folk on this thread will never vote labour, it always reminds me of the ‘parable of the drowning man’ when you see them complain about tories and so on, then they save the real anger for Starmer
I would say it's Labour that's changed towards Conservatism that's brought about that one.
It's easy to be critical of the Tories.
But I wouldn't expect the political confusion of the Centrist mind to see the long term damage they're encouraging either.
I’ve not been sold anything by Labour to get behinD
This is the problem, isn’t is? Not clear what they stand for, constant U-turns and abandoning popular policies. Compare and contrast with ‘97…
but FPTP means we can’t all stick to our principles.
And yet the centrists are wanting just that.
Perhaps rather than purging the left they should try and work with them?
Seems like Starmer is every bit as useless as some of us have always suspected. I presume Margaret Hodge will be calling him ‘a f****** racist’ in the coming days?
Is that the same Margaret Hodge who called for 'indigenous people' to have priority for housing, and received a bouquet of flowers from the racist BNP for her efforts?
Labour and Starmer need to do a better job and earn my vote.
I wouldnt worry, I really doubt they want your vote or need it, Starmer has been working hard to purge the more extreme elements in the party and judging by current polls it's either worked or at the very least hasn't hurt their electoral chances.
All those centrists you seem to irrationally hate so much are more than enough to make them electable, the far left are too small a group and too divisive to really matter.
All those centrists you seem to irrationally hate so much are more than enough to make them electable, the far left are too small a group and too divisive to really matter.
What do you mean by the 'far left' though? Because that only really refers to proper hardcore communists and a few fringe groups. A few thousand, couple of tens of thousands in the UK at most. If you mean 'people who want a fairer and more just society', then that's probably quite a few more than you think it is. Starmer is all about the centre-right, appealing to neoliberals and capitalists. In fact, is you apply historical political metrics, Starmer's Labour now occupy a political region somewhere to the right of John Major. So what you might think of as 'far left' might actually only be 'moderate left'.
If labour don’t win this election it’ll have bollocks all to do with anyone on the left.
This is pretty much fact. Was the case at the last election too.
What do you mean by the ‘far left’ though?
Generally the people who keep banging on about Starmer being centre right. What you might think of as ‘centre right’ might actually only be ‘moderate left’.
Looking at polling above I dont see anyone to the left of Labour other than the Greens and they are around 7%.
It would appear certain postersmon here have an absolute scale of what left to right is. For the rest of us right and left are relative to the population as a whole not some arbitary scale of political belief. That puts those moaning Starmer is too right wing pretty far to the left of the population.
Generally the people who keep banging on about Starmer being centre right. What you might think of as ‘centre right’ might actually only be ‘moderate left’.
As I said; if you apply a historical metric to current politics, then Starmer really isn't 'moderate left'. He's far too authoritarian and dictatorial for that. The people 'banging on about Starmer being centre right' are from a broad spectrum across the left. The vast majority definitely aren't 'far left' at all.
It would appear certain postersmon here have an absolute scale of what left to right is. For the rest of us right and left are relative to the population as a whole not some arbitary scale of political belief. That puts those moaning Starmer is too right wing pretty far to the left of the population.
That's just you creating a scale according to your own chosen political position. Moving the goalposts to suit your own game. But if you look more towards academics and political analysts who consider politics in a historical as well as contemporary context, then you soon see a consensus appear which defines politics according to left and right. You can't just make up your own scale that nobody else knows about nor agrees upon.
Looking at polling above I dont see anyone to the left of Labour other than the Greens and they are around 7%.
You seem to be suggesting that strong support for Labour means that voters are not left-wing, why? Do you think that Tories would be enjoying greater support if voters wanted a left-wing government?
You also seem to be suggesting that Starmer is simply following public opinion on policies. And yet on many very important issues that is simply not the case - he is doing the opposite.
Don't confuse supporting watered down versions of Tory policies with what voters want.
A recent example is last week's U-turn on the green pledge. The policy was popular with voters but not with the Tory Party/Daily Mail, Starmer decided to go with what was popular with the Tory Party/Daily Mail rather than what was popular with voters, especially Labour voters.
Another example is this :
Around two-thirds of Tory voters also back calls for renationalisation, as the UK's key services remain in disarray.
Starmer is very clearly at odds with public opinion on renationalisation, but in line with Tory Party policy.
Yet another topical issue is the current situation in Palestine - Starmer strongly opposes calling a ceasefire and yet according to YouGov only 8% of voters agree with him, 75% want an immediate ceasefire.
Your claim that Starmer is embracing right-wing policies because that is what the electorate want is on very flimsy ground. The Tories will lose the coming general election because of their right-wing policies, arguing that Labour should therefore be more like the Tories doesn't really make a lot of sense.
I wouldn’t worry MCTD, the folk on this thread will never vote labour, it always reminds me of the ‘parable of the drowning man’ when you see them complain about tories and so on, then they save the real anger for Starmer 😂
Why do you centrists insist on perpetuating this obvious nonsense? Those of us on the left compromised when we voted for Starmer as leader.
Ooo… should we do the “I’m more left than you” dance… or the “everyone else is a centrist” one… paired with “now I’ve called you a centrist, I really mean right wing”… or we could save a lot of time and bring back the “Red Tory” fun jibes…
Labour need to be a party for the people of the UK to oust the Tories. The plan is working, but it absolute could still fail. But whether it does or not, some of the regular posters here can be self satisfied in being proved correct, some how, no matter who wins the next election… that’s the only thing that’s guaranteed.
Labour need to be a party for the people of the UK to oust the Tories
What does that even mean? Their current plan seems to be to have no plan for anything, and hope they get voted in because everyone's fed up with the Tories. It may well work, but some of us are interested in what happens on day two.
What does that even mean?
It means that “full throated support” from those of us on the left is not enough to win an election… listening to, and tailoring your offering to, the voters (remember them) is essential.
And, yes, individual policies which most of us here support (eg nationalisation of water) poll very well. That isn’t the same as people voting with that in mind once they’re in the ballet box. Maddening though that is. Moderating policies left right and centre is demoralising to motivated supporters of Labour (and those outside it who want the UK to move to the left fast, or at least be much more progressive)… but most people in the UK aren’t like us. And they vote as well.
Labour need to be a party for the people of the UK to oust the Tories
But not one with good ideas or policies.
I like how you've distilled them to this whilst constantly defending all the ideas that have now gone or have been modified.
You must be slightly disappointed?
That what this thread is. And it's not on our backs - it's on his.
It means that “full throated support” from those of us on the left is not enough to win an election… listening to, and tailoring your offering to, the voters (remember them) is essential.
I see. So they should offer policies that are popular with the electorate? I completely agree. Perhaps you should tell Mr Starmer.
I think Starmer has a very good idea what platform he needs to stand on to win, from the work his team did after he became leader (boo, hiss… focus groups and listening exercises)… better than any one posting here.
Day two? Yes, that’s the biggy, isn’t it. But you need to win on day one first.
As it happens, I don’t expect anything much to cheer about ‘till after year two. I’m very pessimistic about the speed any useful results will appear, sadly. I don’t see any fast fixes. A parliament of hard boring slog is ahead for the next government.
I think Starmer has a very good idea what platform he needs to stand on to win, from the work his team did after he became leader (boo, hiss… focus groups and listening exercises)… better than any one posting here.
Does that include reneging on everything he promised when he stood for leader? How about multiple u-turns on a flagship policy that was very popular with voters? Or an anti-semitism row over his hand picked candidate?
I'm afraid there's very little evidence to support your view, beyond dissatisfaction with the Tories.
Does that include reneging on everything he promised when he stood for leader?
I think much of what he stood for as leader evaporated when they made the effort to find out how the voters, not the members, reacted to them. Getting members to go along with where he has moved to (and moved Labour to) in the years since is going to be hard for him… he’ll need more along the lines of the publicly owned energy company he announced at conference if he wants members to put the graft in come the election. Let’s see what’s in the manifesto; it will need to offer far more to members than what the party is currently presenting to the public.
I think Starmer has a very good idea what platform he needs to stand on to win, from the work his team did after he became leader (boo, hiss… focus groups and listening exercises)… better than any one posting here
Starmer's wobbly platform is one of Conservatism. So yeah I'd agree.
It's easy to be a Conservative and win.
This is so depressingly obvious.
I think much of what he stood for as leader evaporated when they made the effort to find out how the voters, not the members, reacted to them
So you agree that he lied to the membership to win the leadership election. A pity then, that he followed up with absolutely nothing except public dithering.
Starmer’s wobbly platform is one of Conservatism. So yeah I’d agree.
I agree his instincts are small c conservative but beyond that I don't think there's any kind of vision or platform.
It’s easy to be a Conservative and win.
Label it how you see fit.
Getting people who have voted Conservative before to now vote Labour is part of his job. In my opinion they can be reached without being a carbon copy of the Conservative Party (and I don’t think that Labour is, we’re not going to agree on that kind of “Red Tory” line I’m afraid… no matter how much you repeat it).
So you agree that he lied to the membership to win the leadership election.
I agree that we he said in 2019 does not match what he says now. As it happens, my opinion is that he probably knew he would have to shift position before a general election. Did he know for sure how, and by how much? I don’t know. How much is movement based on listening to the voters, how much is movement based on circumstances (there have been many “events” hitting us in that period) and how much was expected and planned before he stood to be leader… I don’t know… I think I’d have to know to decide whether he was lying. He has ditched many things he said back in 2019, that’s for sure. But do we really want a 2024 election fought on 2019 positions?
I agree that we he said in 2019 does not match what he says now.
He also says he took decisive action over Azhar Ali.
I would say it’s Labour that’s changed towards Conservatism that’s brought about that one.
We can agree on that being a problem.
But I wouldn’t expect the political confusion of the Centrist mind to see the long term damage they’re encouraging either.
I don’t care if you are left or right, that kind of arrogant condescension ain't going to win any support or votes.
Starmer has little interest in what the voters actually want; this is patently obvious with his refusal to back calls for a ceasefire in Gaza. Or for nationalisation of stuff like transport, energy, water etc. Or for protecting the NHS. Starmer is only interested in what gets him into power. He'll have it all mapped out; his rise to become PM, then whatever he can achieve for corporate interests, then to line his own nest once he retires from politics. Just like Blair.
I suspect he could be more Brown than Blair post government… if he ever gets to that point… we’ll see…
I suspect he could be more Brown than Blair post government
He certainly doesn't have Blair's political instincts.
I think Starmer has a very good idea what platform he needs to stand on to win
LOL I can't believe that someone actually posted that comment! 🤣
Sir Kier Starmer's U-turns has become the stuff of legends!
27 U-turns so far:
https://www.politico.eu/article/keir-starmer-labour-party-uk-election-u-turns/
Where he stands next week might be completely different to where he stands today.
U-turns have always been associated with governing parties, not opposition parties. A U-turn is generally the result of a failed government policy since opposition parties don't have the opportunity to implement their policies they are not normally expected to perform U-turns.
Starmer has managed to change that and people now seem to expect it from a Labour opposition.
And let's be clear what a U-turn is - it is doing the opposite to what was previously intended, a U-turn is maneuvering to go in the opposite direction. It isn't about simply adjusting or tweaking your policy.
I don’t care if you are left or right, that kind of arrogant condescension ain’t going to win any support or votes.
I think Kelvin set the tone this evening:
Ooo… should we do the “I’m more left than you” dance… or the “everyone else is a centrist” one… paired with “now I’ve called you a centrist, I really mean right wing”…