"Sol-id-arity with lord sains-bury"
People trust Starmer, not the Labour brand. It's gonna be a hell of a job for him to turn things around in 4 years. I think he's got what it takes though.
Starmer has opponents in his own party just as Corbyn did.
Starmer's opponents, though are the ones who are scared of winning an election.
Starmer’s opponents, though are the ones who are scared of winning an election.
I’m starting to get a feel for ‘tropes’ now. Is this another? Because, I’ve heard this mentioned several times, but never seen any evidence for it.
I’m starting to get a feel for ‘tropes’ now. Is this another? Because, I’ve heard this mentioned several times, but never seen any evidence for it.
Momentum's underlying policy was "keep ideological purity until the tories make so much of a mess of it the revolution delivers the populace into our laps and the revolution happens". It is a total misreading of modern life where people are forced to be so busy trying to keep their jobs and their families fed that they never get a chance to look around them. Combine that with the sneaking message that if you don't kill yourself working we will find someone who will (coz we can) and you get a populace that is run off its feet with work and locked in a rats in a sack struggle with everyone else.
Momentum are basically all about holding the ideological line until the revolution comes to them. For the reasons above, it ain't gonna happen. Childlike obstinacy.
Momentum should do that!
Its for the leadership to keep the base and gain floating voters.
Momentum should do that!
Yes but they're a visible embarrassment that can be used to discredit sensible leadership.
Much easier to have sensible leadership that can skilfully leave enough room for manoeuvre later by keeping promises vague and 'three-wordy'. It is not as if they are up against detailed and fully worked out policies here!
They are up against a shape-shifting, lying rabble.
In marked contrast to RLBs tinfoil-helmet conspiracy theory nonsense, Lisa Nandy is leading the call for sanctions on Israel
Binners you're so transparently partisan. Had anyone from the left said this you'd be howling about how theyre all rabid anti-semites. You constantly go on about Monty Python and the PFJ and you're the worst example. That whole joke was aimed at the labour party and how they spend all their time abusing each other rather than the real enemy, and that's what you do in every single post.
Seems she really is as politically clueless as her Bearded, allotment-dwelling cheerleader.
I rest my case. For christ's sake move on. Try going a week without mentionaing beards, allotments and cabals. You'll feel better for it.
beards, allotments and cabals
A great name for the inevitable book documenting the Corbyn era of the Labour Party!
Good article by Andrew Rawnsley in this mornings Observer with a synopsis of RLBs sacking
Starmer’s sacking of Long-Bailey was vital to show that Labour is changing
A great name for the inevitable book documenting the Corbyn era of the Labour Party!
I think Binners should design a book jacket for it.
That’s a great idea! 😃
Momentum’s underlying policy was “keep ideological purity until the tories make so much of a mess of it the revolution delivers the populace into our laps and the revolution happens”.
Is this a written policy, or something you’ve ascertained? It sounds to me like a different approach to obtaining power. No indication of the fear of power. Since we are yet to see the sort of society that many on the left desire, it is uncertain whether their or your approach is more likely to succeed.
Good article by Andrew Rawnsley in this mornings Observer with a synopsis of RLBs sacking
Lmao. Andrew Rawnsley last week was tearing into Uncle Starmer for his lack of vision and policy. This week he's okay because he sacked a left winger. PMSL.
RLB was sacked because of her sympathy with the Teachers/Unions. Everything else is piss and wind.
The shockingly formatted independent even ran a piece - supporting Starmer after publishing the article that RLB retweeted that got her fired. If they were so bothered by the so-called AS in the piece they didn't have to publish it in the first place.
The whole thing's a mess. You don't regress the damage of the right with more right wing suited competency.
Starmer supporters might end up with a competent manager but there will be a fag packet between the Tories and Labour. The country will be the same downward spiral. Centrists can't see this. They are so desperate to win they just want a line-manager approach to leadership.
Also - Anneliese Dodds - talking about Tax and Spend, same old trappings. They need to spend time with Richard Murphy or Stephanie Kelton to understand how to fix the economy.
Boris is about to go on a spending spree (and we damn well need it) - Labour will have nowhere to turn unless they put something new forward instead of being a party of beige vision.
Lmao. Andrew Rawnsley last week was tearing into Uncle Starmer for his lack of vision and policy. This week he’s okay because he sacked a left winger. PMSL
That’s a somewhat bizarre take on a balanced, objective piece of largely positive analysis
Keir Starmer's first steps are promising, but the road ahead is long and steep
Sky news are Just reporting that their latest polling has Starmers approval ratings going up again as Borises (somewhat unsurpring) plummet.
RLB was sacked because of her sympathy with the Teachers/Unions. Everything else is piss and wind.
What utter twoddle
Can I suggest that Labour copy whatever position the tories have on Israel and just getting ****ing over it.
Israel is so far down the list of things that I give a shit about and even if I did give a shit there's nothing that I can do about it.
The tories are the enemy save all your energy to getting those bastards out of power.
That’s a somewhat bizarre take on a balanced, objective piece of largely positive analysis
This is an opinion Vs fact thing.
That’s a somewhat bizarre take on a balanced, objective piece of largely positive analysis
Rawnsley balanced and objective? That's a joke right? Everything he's written since 2016 has had one purpose, which is to return the blairites to power and neuter the labour party as a transformative force in politics. He's the very epitomy of an establishment hack.
Labour will have nowhere to turn unless they put something new forward instead of being a party of beige vision.
+1. The age-old tax & spend approach won't work this time. They're going to need something else, and that should be the radical green new deal as Starmer has previously promised, along with some novel policies around wealth taxes, universal income, and workplace democracy. I dont hold out much hope with Dodds as shadow chancellor. From what I've seen so far she seems to be completely bereft of any new ideas or ambition.
transformative force in politics
Does this means a party of protest, not governance?
I think the current polling is because the public see someone who they think would make a competent PM, with a genuine social consciousness, leading a party of placard wavers and moaners. The Party needs to start looking like the next government ASAP.
Does this means a party of protest, not governance?
I think you know exactly what it means. As I've said many times, I've no interest in labour gaining power if they don't intend to do anything with it.
leading a party of placard wavers and moaners
Would you prefer it if he led a party of apathetic, selfish, grasping ****s?
I want Labour to gain power, and fully understand that they won’t then get to do everything I want, because there is not a big enough public mandate for my personal left wing leaning policy preferences. Your attitude is permanent Tory rule. When/if Labour get into power, they will have to be a government for the majority, not just those of us that who are happy to be labelled left wing.
Since we are yet to see the sort of society that many on the left desire, it is uncertain whether their or your approach is more likely to succeed.
Who won a General Election?
Foot, Corbyn, Kinnock?
Or Blair?
Rawnsley is a liberal democrat and wants the labour party to be a right of centre party.
workplace democracy
That would be the final nail in the coffin of the economy. In my experience of the workforce getting involved in decision making it's a power/ money grab and let someone else deal with consequences.
Would you prefer it if he led a party of apathetic, selfish, grasping ****s?
Hey, the placard wavers are my people… but vote count still matters more than the number of people on a march. And anyway, public protest is more successful when it occurs outside of, or across, political parties, I suspect. Labour now needs to be show the voters it is the obvious choice to be the next government, not just the home of protestors. If it can so while keeping a broadly left wing prospectus, that’ll do me.
That would be the final nail in the coffin of the economy.
Said like any executive who is worried their unjustifiable salary and share options are at threat. When you talk about the economy, what you reallly mean is the tiny few people at the top who really benefit from it. That's the thing that needs to change.
When you talk about the economy, what you reallly mean is the tiny few people at the top who really benefit from it.
No he doesn't.
That’s the thing that needs to change.
Agreed, but it can't change if the Labour Party make themselves unelectable.
But anyway....
Would anyone care to answer or address my question above?
Here it is again.
Who won a General Election?
Foot, Corbyn, Kinnock?
Or Blair?
Rawnsley is a liberal democrat and wants the labour party to be a right of centre party.
Rawnsley has more than two brain cells to rub together and is nowadays, therefore, anti-Tory before everything else. Pretty much like anyone else with more than two brain cells (unless they stand to benefit personally from a No Deal Brexit and the ensuing chaotic sell off of public services).
This is an opinion Vs fact thing.
given that Rawnsley’s pieces are printed under a bold 48 pt header titled OPINION, I’d say they’ve nailed their colours pretty firmly to the mast there to avoid any confusion
But anyway….
Would anyone care to answer or address my question above?
Here it is again.
Who won a General Election?
Foot, Corbyn, Kinnock?
Or Blair?
I think the problem with that assertion is that under a Blair-like government, nobody on the left could foresee any real change happening, ever. Under Foot and Corbyn there was hope.
Blair wqas elected on a fairly radical programme
Its only after he took total control of the party he moved it to the right which was after he ws elected
IIRC when he was elected the cabinet and the manifesto were under control of the party conference
Who won a General Election?
Foot, Corbyn, Kinnock?
Or Blair?
I am not good on recent history but I am going to go with Kinnock. Was I right?
Blair wqas elected on a fairly radical programme
Its only after he took total control of the party he moved it to the right which was after he ws elected
IIRC when he was elected the cabinet and the manifesto were under control of the party conference
That’s not the way I remember it (although, I do have a terrible memory). When Blair got rid of Clause 4, the writing was on the wall.
Clause 4 was before the election yes. But the initial cabinet and programme were conferences to form not his.
Clause 4 was before the election yes. But the initial cabinet and programme were conferences to form not his.
I think I see. Are you saying that Blair was elected on a fairly radical programme, not of his design, that he abandoned as soon as he could. And, that Starmer will not have to worry himself with a radical programme, right from the start? You’re not reassuring me!
Blair inherited a winning position from John Smith.
Not at all My only comment was about Blair and his move to the right
IIRC ( and I am not really sure) did Corbyn not get a role for conference in deciding policy again?
I fully expect Starmer to have a left of centre manifesto that he is comfortable with, that is properly costed and that is practical
But I do not care that much as I fully expect an independent scotland to be close after next may ( holyrood elections) and Labour are now irrelevant in scotland. Basically I have had enough of being dragged down by england with its overt corruption, its biased press and its dysfunctional parliament
Foot, Corbyn, (Kinnock)
Blair, Brown, Milliband
Corbz got a shit load of new members and loads of people voted for him. Labour was massively in debt til he revitalised the party. But he couldn't beat May who was imo even worse than the low hanging fruit Blair picked off. He turned as many voters away as he turned on (unfortunately)
Imo Labour do need a massive reinvention. Hopefully Starmer is coming up with a plan that isn't akin to "2 cheeks of the same backside"
I think the problem with that assertion is that under a Blair-like government, nobody on the left could foresee any real change happening, ever.
And all that that proves is that they’re either as thick as mince or in wilful denial due to idealogical blindness
If you think that the 13 years of a Blair government would have been even remotely similar to a further 13 years of Tory rule then you’re a delusional half-wit.
It really is that simple
loum
MemberBlair inherited a winning position from John Smith.
...and John Major. I've said it more times than I can count in threads like this but one of Labour's biggest problems is their own fake history. So many people totally accept "Blair made Labour electable", when it's just untrue, and that leads to so many other mistakes. And the anti-Blair people routinely make the same mistake, and attack Blair's record instead of attacking the mythmaking. So we talk about leaders as Blairs or Browns or Corbyns, and the party's mostly forgotten Smith and his legacy and his lesson. (well, apart from the "don't drink yourself into an early grave" one)
The best answer to every Labour leadership challenge since has been to try and find another Smith. You don't get many of those for a pound, which is a problem, but equally nobody's really looking- it's all seen through the lens of Blair, just as the Tories can't stop obsessing about Mummy.
If you think that the 13 years of a Blair government would have been even remotely similar to a further 13 years of Tory rule then you’re a delusional half-wit.
It really is that simple
Well thank you very much, I always wondered.
Well said northwind - there is a huge amount of mythmaking about Blair
Anyway, seeing as he appears to be the sage of our age nowadays, this should be interesting
https://twitter.com/piersmorgan/status/1277260212420915200?s=21
