Forum menu
Seeing as he was -26 points down to the blond buffoon by the time grandad finally, belatedly ****ed off, I think that’s a hypothetical that we needn’t concern ourselves with eh, comrade?
QED.
Still talking about Corbyn. It’s hard letting go isn’t it?
Maybe we should think of his departure as ‘Year Zero’?
I'm finding it difficult to keep up: you were flouncing from the thread, then refusing to talk about Corbyn. An impressive number of u-turns that would serve you well in the Tory government.
It’s not that difficult, surely?
6 months ago the Labour Party was dead in the water.
Now it isn’t
Which bit are you struggling with?
You, again, do seem determined to prove my point.
Eh?
There’s a point?
You still here? I thought you were leaving.
Get a room.
Are you not enjoying the homoerotic tension?
I try not too, but it’s quite flattering
You never know. One day he might actually address the subject of the thread instead of just flirting with me 😃
Still here, then. Until the next flounce.
You can message me, you know? You don’t have to do this publicly? It’d spare everyone else having to read it.
The attention/obsession is awfully sweet of you, but I’m happily married and not that way inclined.
“Sisters and brothers
What have we done
We're fighting each other
Instead of the Front
Better get it together
Big trouble to come
And the odds are against us
About twenty to one
But we ain't gonna take it
Ain't gonna take it
They're keeping us under
But we ain't gonna take it no more”
“I don't think I could stand another ten years of this fighting
All this stabbing and wounding - only getting my own back”
- now that’s a tune
Is any one of the usual suspects going to admit that Starmer has already made Labour more electable?
He patently has.
Any attempt to deny this is just wilful sophistry and doublethink.
We need to distinguish between making yourself 'more electable' and having a set of socialist policies to campaign for and deliver.
Considering who is being lined up to take charge of the BBC and Ofcom I’m more concerned about the left being even more stitched up than it is already before worrying about specific policies you want to give the Torys to beat you Over the head with for the next 4 years.
We need to distinguish between making yourself ‘more electable’ and having a set of socialist policies to campaign for and deliver
Why exactly do ‘we’ need to do that?
The Tories won a huge majority at the last election on a ‘manifesto’ that consisted of 3 words.
The Labour Party went into the election manifesto of ‘socialist policies’ as thick as a phone book and suffered its worst election result since 1935
I’d suggest that it’s rather important that ‘we’ might actually learn a few lessons from that. At the moment it looks like ‘we’ have, and the polls are reflecting that
Because making yourself more acceptable to the establishment just means proving that you pose no threat. Sir has moved so far to the right even some centrists are beginning to look radical. He states his 'unconditional support' for zionist apartheid, once elected he reversed Labour policy to back the landlords and not the renters and the bankers against the mortgagees. Do we really want to elect another tory party? Do you really think this man represents your interests?
I’m sorry, but that’s utter cobblers
The left need to get away from this ridiculous idea, once and for all, that making yourself electable means becoming the Tory party, as:
1. It’s complete nonsense
2. It will only lead to the electoral wilderness. The one Grandad marched the party into
Do we really want to elect another tory party?
Sadly, at this point I'd be over the moon with a 'traditional Tory' government of people like Ken Clarke and John Major.
Zionist apartheid?
Christ on a bendybus! Have you heard yourself?
Yeah... that’s right up there with most voters concerns at the moment? People are talking of little else
Banging on about stuff like that may appeal to Red Labour twitter groups, but everyone else simply hears it, thinks immediately of the Daily Mail caricature of the ‘loony’ left, rolls their eyes then votes Tory
As they did in huge numbers in December
Do you really think this man represents your interests?
considerbly more so than the present occupant of number ten, yes
A good analysis, as ever, on Starmers speech, by Andrew Rawnsley in this mornings Observer
Keir Starmer’s praise for Labour’s winners reveals a leader serious about power
Voters' concerns? That was one of his first statements. It clearly is one of his major concerns.
A good analysis, as ever, on Starmers speech, by Andrew Rawnsley in this mornings Observer
An analysis which directly contradicts your repeated assertion that there's no evidence of Starmer softening on his pledges to maintain the radical policy agenda. This is exactly my concern. A labour PM who refuses to enact policy which returns power to the people isn't really a labour PM. I see little evidence so far that Starmer intends to do that. It doesn't mean I won't prefer him to the tories, but it will be another missed opportunity. Labour's traditional problem is not that they don't want to win, it's that they don't have the ruthless amibition to press home their advantage when they do.
"Some backers from the left voted for him because they thought he would put a more competent face on Corbynism, a belief that he encouraged by issuing “10 pledges”, committing himself to a lot of the Corbynite policy platform. Soft leftists and centrists voted for him in the contrary hope that he would extinguish Corbynism. At the time, I suggested that he would not be able to please these very different groups forever. Someone was going to be disappointed. Someone was going to feel betrayed.
We now know who. He is not going to be Corbynism dressed in a smarter suit."
Meanwhile, back in the real world...
David Lammy has been on Marr this morning and how refreshing it is to see a competent minister ripping into the government on an issue that most voters are actually concerned about.
The middle classes, who's votes the Labour party needs if it is ever to gain power, have sent their darling sons and daughters back to university and are now watching the latest government fiasco unfold on the countries campuses, in the continued absence of an effective track and trace system
https://twitter.com/DavidLammy/status/1310142449801744385
I suspect the illegal occupation of the West Bank is somewhat lower down their list of priorities
A labour PM who refuses to enact policy which returns power to the people isn’t really a labour PM.
The trouble is that we've read the script here, and would rather not repeat the mistakes of the last two elections
If a labour leader, as Corbyn did, stands up and makes the statement ' we want to return power to the people' everyone immediately and cynically thinks "when you say 'the people', who exactly do you mean?"
And, correctly or incorrectly (and you can rail against it all you like), the right wing press and the Tories are more than happy to point out that a lot on the left, when they say 'the people' theymean...
So making the statement, in itself, provides your enemies with an open goal. And god knows, the labour party has spent the last five years gift-wrapping enough of them!
I think that already one of the massive advantages of Starmers leadership is that those types of clowns, after a brief hissy fit, have been put well and truly back in their box
And that can only be a massively positive thing in ensuring the electability of the Labour Party, because nothing scares the middle England horse like Red Len and his comrades
'Returning power to the people' is a long way down peoples wish lists right now. At the moment, in the middle of a global pandemic, the economy collapsing, test and trace in chaos, and a no-deal Brexit looming, most people will prioritise having a government that actually looks like it knows what it's doing, isn't headed by a total buffoon and isn't completely and utterly corrupt
There's time for the nice fluffy things once that lot's out of the way.
Don't hold your breath. It might take a while. Can you not put the revolution on hold for a bit?
returns power to the people
Labour has never given power to the people, it's always wanted to control society, the Left of the party more so.
Your little experiment in going back to seventies failed and had disastrous consequences for everyone else. A moderate Tory government or centrists Labour administration is the best we can hope for and don't think the former is on the cards.
Sod your left wing group think ideology, this country is in crisis, stability is what we need not ideological purity comrade.
Sadly, at this point I’d be over the moon with a ‘traditional Tory’ government of people like Ken Clarke and John Major.
Yep. Not a choice between a pantomime alcoholic Poundshop Trump who hides in a fridge to avoid scrutiny and a faded Michael Foot tribute act.
A moderate Tory government or centrists Labour administration is the best we can hope for and don’t think the former is on the cards.
And it is probably what most people want (Brexit seemed to create a temporary chaos with people voting for that above all else)
Those that want a "real" socialist state need to look around them and see what the UK has wanted for the last 60 years and it is not a socialist state (as much as I would like to try the experiment)
Starmer may turn off the hard core socialists but so what - I would rather have a Starmer government that any of the governments we have had in my lifetime.
You can message me, you know? You don’t have to do this publicly? It’d spare everyone else having to read it.
You could take your own advice, as you don't have to respond to my posts.
Anyway, do you have another journalist to cite who's making the opposite point to you?
Is any one of the usual suspects going to admit that Starmer has already made Labour more electable?
He absolutely has, in the same way that Kinnock did.
What Kerley said. That.
Those that want a “real” socialist state need to look around them and see what the UK has wanted for the last 60 years and it is not a socialist state (as much as I would like to try the experiment)
Who wants a 'real' socialist state? It's 2020 not 1920. Almost no one I know from a left wing persuasion wants to go back to the of days mass nationalisation, flying pickets or singing the red flag. Everyone I know on 'the left', myself included, only wants us to do the things that have never been tried and avoid the things that have proven to have failed in the fight against inequality and environmental destruction. There's no real driving ideology other than solving these modern day problems with novel solutions, and taking an evidence based approach with full democratic accountability. Call it what you like but its not 'socialism' as most people would understand it.
Nice to see Comrade Len isn't letting Jeremy's departure distract him from his lifelong mission to ensure permanent Tory government.
Len McCluskey warns Starmer as Unite moves to cut Labour funding
What a total **** that man is. He truly is the greatest gift the Tory party could possibly have wished for
Yep, cut Labour funding as they don't represent the working people (of which half of those working people probably voted Tory last year) and ensure that the Tory party get in even more easily.
It's not entirely surprising to see who was the first to uncritically swallow the Guardian headline.
If you actually bother to read it, he said this: "But I don’t see at the moment any dramatic move to disaffiliate from the Labour party. The Labour party is our party.”
Yep, uncle len truly is a tit; the sooner he goes - to count all the money he's taken under the false pretence of 'leading' a union - the better.
It’s not entirely surprising to see who was the first to uncritically swallow the Guardian headline.
Its also not surprising to see who was first to sneer condescendingly at the poster in question
Its also not surprising to see who was first to sneer condescendingly at the poster in question
It's even less surprising to see that you, like the poster in question, are choosing to ignore the substance of an issue.
I’m not
I am however tired of your petty sniping
Morning Comrade! Taking a well earned break from tweeting #Starmerout?
Always great to hear opinions from the frontline.
I take it you approve of Lens latest move to get Boris out of a hole?
petty sniping
It's become the story of the Labour Party, hasn't it...?
I’m not
I am however tired of your petty sniping
I see you're still ignoring the issue. And as for petty sniping: see above.
Morning Comrade! Taking a well earned break from tweeting #Starmerout?
Always great to hear opinions from the frontline.
I take it you approve of Lens latest move to get Boris out of a hole?
I must commend your commitment to recycling.
I see you’re still ignoring the issue. And as for petty sniping: see above.
No I’m not ignoring it. Just because discussing didn’t form part of the post doesn’t mean it’s something I’m ignoring.
No I’m not ignoring it. Just because discussing didn’t form part of the post doesn’t mean it’s something I’m ignoring.
Ok. In which case, I thank you for your contribution.
This will only help Labour win voters over to them. And if Unite the Unite leader cuts 10% at a time, it gives Labour a chance to wean themselves of the Unite funds. No idea where the money will come from though. With a few huge unions now dominating union membership, the party has to find a way to secure more independence from them. Again, I have no idea how… that’s for people at the heart of the party to work out… but they can’t ignore the issue now… he’s done them a favour, in a way.
Here's a question for you comrade? Its a multiple choice one, so easy enough.
You'll know this as like most on the left you're an expert on democratic mandates.
What percentage of Unite members voted for Voice of the People, Len McClusky at the last Unite leadership election
a) 100%
b) 55%
c) 5.5%
Simply state your answer in your next post, without any reference to any other contributor to the thread
GO!!!
I'm going to have to rush you for an answer....
No?
Then allow me to enlighten you, comrade...
'Red' Len McClusky was elected as the General Secretary of the Unite union with the thumping great mandate afforded to him by 5.5% of the union membership
So heres another question for you: Again we'll go for multiple choice answers...
Do you think that Len is in any fit position to be lecturing anyone, least of all the leader voted for overwhelmingly by the labour party membership, about democracy, accountability and mandates?
a) Yes
b) No
c) Jeremy Corbyn
"government in hindsight"
Subtle but smart line (as a retort to the Tories attempt to label him). Which sums him up, really, for good or for ill... subtle but smart.. smart but subtle.
"for the benefit of the Prime Minister, let me take things slowly for him"
"if the Prime Minister listened to the question, we might get on better"
Drip, drip reminder that the PM's disdain for PMQs is also disdain for parliament, and disdain for the position he holds and the duties he continually fails to fulfil. It chimes with the idea growing amongst those that voted Conservative at the last election that the PM just isn't bothering to do his job... or worse, simply not up to doing it. The 'long game' (remember that term) seems to be for Starmer to look like he's ready to step across the chamber and take up the position that Johnson fails to fully fill... even if that annoys those that would rather see him out on marches.
Agree with what your saying a few posts back Kimbers
Also, 5.5%, WTF, how does that happen? Is it just apathy (as in hardly any of the membership actually voted) or something else?
Boris sounds even glummer than ever. Its like he's totally resigned to having his arse handed to him for yet another week.
He can't even be arsed with the bluster any more. He's gradually becoming Gavin Williamson
Also, 5.5%, WTF, how does that happen? Is it just apathy (as in hardly any of the membership actually voted) or something else?
70's Marxist dinosaurs like Len and his ilk know that nobody ever bothers to vote in Union elections, which is exactly why they target them. They know its the only conceivable way they can get themselves in disproportionately influential positions. Despite this pathetic share of the vote, there were achieved only after all sorts of dirty tricks pulled by Lens campaign team.
Some mandate, eh?
Can you imagine if the likes of him tried to get elected as an MP? Or even a local councillor? He'd end up as a sort of Marxist Farage.
Starmer schools johnson - again; humiliates and insults him too.
Excellent.
The former has mastered the facts and prepared thoroughly; the latter hasn't - he is disinterested.
The contrast is both stark and embarrassing.
It does seem more and more that Johnson can't be arsed with PMQ's. Unless of course one of his "right honourable friends" is blowing smoke up his arse. Liked Blackford's comment about the PM ever answering a question.
It does seem more and more that Johnson can’t be arsed with PMQ’s
He is struggling without the braying yobs behind him to drown out questions and to laugh at his hilarious statements.
The few allowed in are trying hard bless them but its just not the same as a big crowd. I am surprised they havent figured out how to order them all back in but maybe even cummings figures that wont go down well.
Also, 5.5%, WTF, how does that happen? Is it just apathy (as in hardly any of the membership actually voted) or something else?
The former, in my experience.
My union general secretary had less than 5% of the membership, but he supports Starmer so it doesn't matter.
Did he spend the last 4 years issuing threats, on behalf of you all, to Jeremy Corbyn that he'd withdraw his Unions funding of the party because he didn't like him?
I presume so, yeah?
did he spend the last 4 years issuing threats, on behalf of you all, to Jeremy Corbyn to withdraw his Unions funding of the party because he didn’t like him?
I presume so, yeah?
No idea what you're on about. Unions can vote to disaffiliate from the Labour Party, and indeed the RMT and FBU did exactly that. For affiliated unions, members can choose whether or not their subscriptions are used to support the Labour party. I guess this is all a bit too democratic for your liking.
Yes, the activities of union dinosaurs like Len McClusky. having a hissy fit and throwing threats about because their mate got booted out, are the living embodiment of the word 'democracy' comrade.
Maybe you could nip round to his central London flat, the one he bought with union members subs, to discuss the matter further?
Mind you, he'll probably be at his usual table in the Ivy at this time, won't he?
Power to the people!!!
We must throw off our chains and rise up against our capitalist oppressors.
... right after I've finished this chateauneuf du pape
Yes, the activities of union dinosaurs like Len McClusky. having a hissy fit and throwing threats about because their mate got booted out, are the living embodiment of the word ‘democracy’ comrade.
Maybe you could nip round to his central London flat, the one he bought with union members subs, to discuss the matter further?
If you're that bothered, join Unite and exercise your vote accordingly.
It's actually a bit of a shame that Starmer has turned out to be a complete non entity.
I kind of hoped he would actually provide a meaningful opposition but all he really does is bleat about everything the Tory party does without giving any meaningful thought out alternatives.
And as far as I can tell he's changed nothing in the labour party of any importance.
As for Unite, I've been a union member for 35 yrs and I'm glad they will be giving less to the Labour party. That's always stuck in my craw anyway.
Oh dear expect to be accused of being a comrade accompanied by some hilarious images.
Brads doesn’t like “lefties”, so I doubt it.
If you’re that bothered, join Unite and exercise your vote accordingly
And subsidise Lens expense account?
No thanks
what the point in putting effort and resources into bleating on about alternatives.
They cant actually do anything and the tories wil just nick anything worth nicking and rebrand it as their own idea come the next election.
I'm sure they've got some ideas but are keeping their powder dry until it needed and actualy make a difference.
Corbyn was a bellend, I can get behind Kier
Brads doesn’t like “lefties”, so I doubt it.
It's actually intolerant, cancelers I can't be arsed with.
Have a view, just don't ram it down others throats with a dogmatic attitude.
But yeh, lefties are tits.
People still supporting Starmer as he lurches forward to rich donors?
Mr "I support the government" is heading for a double disaster. The Tories will out right-wing him on all the Red Wall related issues and the left are being made homeless.
He actually said - "things were getting ridiculous" at PMQs - getting ridiculous. Schools back-firing? Mr "I support the government."
A party afloat with no rudder, no alternative and no sense of purpose.
But competent like.
But keep on talking down Marxism Binners. That's the centrist spirit.
Centrists such as Freedland are culpable too for where we are for the constant baying of personality to its readership. These columnist idiots (Rawnsley, Toynbee) certainly helped Boris in his mission. And yet take no responsibility for where we are now.
But yeh, lefties are tits.
Then be stuck with the direction of the country.
what the point in putting effort and resources into bleating on about alternatives
We were told we had a functioning opposition by the left's greatest supporter George Osborne. I mean when you have endorsements from failed right-wing chancellors who needs the electorate.
What bloody resources? You mean the whole purpose of holding the government to account and starting the narrative to give the electorate an alternative?
Is he still playing the long game?
You're right though the opposition is clearly there to support the government in its shambolic existence. Because that's exactly what its doing.
In uncle Keirs own words - "I support the Government."
Wears a nice suit though.
There are times when the opposition needs to show support of the government, in non partisan issues like say a global pandemic for example to help try and get a unified message out that the majority of people could have a chance at understanding without conflicting stuff going on making it even harder for them.
There are times when the opposition needs to show support of the government, in non partisan issues like say a global pandemic
Even if that government is doing a terrible job? Even if their mishandling results in thousands of excess deaths? Even when they show utter contempt for the poor?
Even when they are awarding millions of pounds of business to associates without due process or putting them to tender?
Ok, I can agree that some support in the messaging of things would be a role of an opposition, but they are there to hold the government of the day to account and should be highlighting and opposing poor decision making and corruption as well.
With his government, I see providing support to good decisions as being really quite difficult. They seem intent on not making many good decisions.
There’s a thin line between directly objecting to the government and giving people the belief to abandon things likes mask wearing and social distancing.
And subsidise Lens expense account?
No thanks
So it's sniping from the sidelines. A tactic you employed for many years for Labour.
Even if that government is doing a terrible job?
I think the opposition have been continually making it very clear that the government are doing a terrible job. They have supporting social distancing measures, so as not to to muddy the messaging there, but have been highly critical of endless government failures.
What was it that Starmer accused the government of yesterday…? Oh yes…
“intergalactic incompetence”
…not exactly praise, is it?