Forum menu
grimep
Free Member
Someone should ask Starmer if he thinks the Cerne Abbas Giant is potentially female and actually has a cervix.
not everyone is gullible enough to be perpetually outraged by confetced culture war nonsense
well that counts me out
There are people on Twitter who seem to be confused as to whether that’s a genuine LibDem graphic that’s been clipped for that Labour ad there. I wonder if Labour tried to target it at the over 60s…?
Dumb advertising campaign.
There are people on Twitter who seem to be confused as to whether that’s a genuine LibDem graphic that’s been clipped for that Labour ad there
I had to look at it a couple of times. I guess the LibDems will be happy that Labour are advertising on their behalf and that it's not coming out of their own funds.
Who is that photo of though?
Who is that photo of though?
Some geezer who claims to be the LibDem leader. No one knows much about him. I think he is eclipsed by Keir Starmer's huge charisma.
I guess it's aimed at people who voted Tory last time who can't support the Fat One but are more inclined to vote Liberal so Starmsky positions 'his party' to the right of them. Not sure if it's age-specific, there seems to be lots of hang 'em and nuke 'ems under 60.
I was having a discussion last night with a fellow socialist about who to vote for, it's not obvious.
The problem with that is that it's very easy indeed for potential LibDem voters to check what LibDem policies on drugs and nuclear weapons are.
By making false claims concerning LibDem policies Labour are just outing themselves as liars, which I would have thought would make potential LibDem voters even less likely to vote for them.
Yep, much better if they promoted their own policies rather than slag off a party that is not even in power. If they proposed liberalising drug laws like in Portugal and getting rid of nuclear bombs I'd be out there with Binners doing the leaflets, and I'd vote for them.
BillMC
Full Memberwell that counts me out
Funnily that ad only appears on a couple of Lib Dem councillors twitters and facebook, also weird it has none of the structure of all the other Labour Party posters or ads on facebook, you'd think it was planted by the Lib Dems to then use for some political gain, there isn't any elections coming up is there?
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-lib-dems-decriminalise-drugs-b2067487.html?amp
ernielynch
Free Member https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-lib-dems-decriminalise-drugs-b2067487.html?amp/blockquote >Note that there is no confirmation that these are Labour ads, the Indy went to the Lib Dems and Momentum for comment, but not the Labour party, it's a simple internet piece on their website that hasn't been substantiated.
If it's a Labour Party Facebook post, then please link me to the Labour Party picture or post relating to it.
I guess the LP could always deny it now a bit of the national press has taken it up.
Presumably they could also seek legal advice. It very clearly says "Paid for by the Labour Party".
I guess the LP could always deny it now a bit of the national press has taken it up.
It's an online article that went up a few hours ago, give them a little time!
Presumably they could also seek legal advice. It very clearly says “Paid for by the Labour Party”.
If it is a fake ad picture, then i dare say they might be able to add that in as well!
Again, i just don't believe the info in that, and a quick search of the Labour Party facebook page shows no signs of that picture, searching by the ad number gives you a couple of hits to Lib Deb commentators, so, until proven that it is a legitimate advert by labour, i won't add negative comments to something that quite possibly has been created just for negative comments against Labour.
Partygate, legsgate, porngate.
I Wonder what else is happening?
Given the bill that went through last night wonder if the anti-mask freaks will be shouldering up against proper freedoms?
Amazing how much time we devote to the little picture.
As far as i can tell, it's a faked campaign picture that appeared fully formed 22 hours ago on the @PoliticsJOE_UK twitter feed, and has been retweeted from there.
I see the Mail is busy drawing false equivalence between Starmer/Boris again on party/drink.
It will work and people will say - "they're all the same."
Because, Starmer should have spent more time attacking the Tories over policy and cost of living.
It will work and people will say – “they’re all the same.”
Yep,my True Blue parents were giving it large this morning, before declaring Liz Truss the least worst option for next prime minister.
We live in a universe where no one wants to admit perhaps they made bad political choices - which given the Tories steadfast outward attitude to personal responsibility...
The Tories are close to unsinkable.
The country has shifted so far to the right (along with the corruption) - plainly competent right!-leaning is seen as the defacto way of doing things.
Any other choice is absurd and unworkable, apparently.
This week will be interesting.
Bets?
Utterly depressing and might just stop the Tories (came up as "the tortures" on my mobile just then!)) having catastrophic losses in the elections.
Saving Johnson. Again.
Bets?
Both LibDems and Labour will do well in these local elections. But the Conservatives will still win the next General Election. And by "win" I mean have the most MPs and choose the PM.
I was thinking just next week Kelvin but I agree with you there.
However things can change fast!
Also, the denying and now subsequently admitting Rayner at lockdown 'event' is a massive PR screw-up makes them looks shifty as hell.
This was supposed to be a genuine error in the press statement at the time.
FFS.
What an absolute waste of time this lot are. They will lose ground on the competency stakes fast now.
Starmer is about to get a taste of what Corbyn dealt with day in day out.
Also, the denying and now subsequently admitting Rayner at lockdown ‘event’ is a massive PR screw-up makes them looks shifty as hell.
Aside from this "denying" seems to have been based around a single whatsapp in January/February of this year asking a press bod and them saying no.
So tad stupid but its not like Starmer or Rayner had stood up in the chamber and announced she hadnt been there.
Even by the hates standards its a weak story but guess they are a bit rattled by the suggestions from Labour that they might do something about nondom status. Not the sort of thing that great patriotic newspaper wants to hear given its owner.
This week will be interesting.
I think it will particularly interesting in London, but London appears currently to be at odds with the rest of the UK.
The latest London wide poll puts Labour 27 points ahead of the Tories, but in terms of share of the vote Labour and the LibDems are almost unchanged compared to 4 years ago. However the Tories share of the vote has fallen significantly and the Greens appear to have gained.
Where it starts getting particularly interesting imo is in Inner London, the old London County Council area. Here, where the UK government is based, Labour has a staggering 50 point lead over the Tories.
With a population of three and a half million, larger than the population of Wales, Inner London must surely have the greatest concentration of Labour votes in the UK.
But then it gets even more interesting when you look how well the Greens are doing in Inner London. The latest poll puts the Greens on 11%, two points behind the Tories on 13% .
I would expect pollsters to have a margin of error of about 2% so that imo puts the Tories and Greens pretty much neck and neck. I know it won't happen and the Greens won't beat the Tories in Inner London but it's nice to know that it is a vaguely realistic dream.
I personally won't be voting Labour next Thursday, not after what they have done in Croydon. But Labour will almost certainly retain control of Croydon Council, despite all the scandals surrounding their time in office, such is the level of anti-Tory feelings in London.
Instead I will be very reluctantly voting Green. And in the Croydon mayoral election I will be voting for an independent candidate who was expelled from the Labour Party for calling for resignations in connection to the Croydon Council fiasco.
It won't make any difference but it might perhaps reduce Labour's smugness. Maybe similarly the Greens will benefit from Labour's huge 50% lead in Inner London and overtaking the Tories won't be a totally crazy fantasy.
Edit:
Aside from this “denying” seems to have been based around a single whatsapp in January/February of this year asking a press bod and them saying no.
Irrespective of the detail look at how it's being framed though.
The damage is there.
Hang on... are the papers really trying to equate an April 2021 meeting where no rules were broken, with all the repeated law breaking that went on in number 10 in 2020, and was denied repeatedly in parliament and in interviews?
Just take a look. Is it really surprising? They're not just equating they are positioning to the "Labour are just as bad " part of the argument.
The key bit is timing. Whereas people were getting fed up of discussing Johnson's antics (just listen to the UKs most popular radio talk show) and now this with Rayner comes out this close to the elections
Irrespective of the detail. The weighting given by Newspapers against the left is criminal.
Either way the timing is terrible and even if it was a genuine mistake Labour have played into the Tories hands.
Hang on… are the papers really trying to equate an April 2021 meeting where no rules were broken,
Its mostly the mail but yes. I think this is about the fifth time it has been dusted off although admittedly this time it does have a bit of new information namely that Rayner was there with the revelation that some press officer said to a journalist in a whatsapp she wasnt a couple of months back.
No sign that the police were lied to and definitely no evidence of them lying to the house about it.
Good to see the careful spinning with the mail skirting around the truth as much as possible but then the activists etc removing the ambiguity and going straight for the lies.
Its mostly the mail but yes.
Ah. Making it clear that that policy of ending life-long non-dom status was still Labour policy has gone down as well as could be expected at the paper owned by a life-long non-dom then.
We will be full swing recession by then I reckon.
Can't see this being a good strategy.
But then again we are heading into a shit storm "let's pass it to Labour to try and fix."
Tories destroy - Labour have to fix, every time.
The 'right' don't do complex problems.
Earlier i discussed a little the Scottish dimension to all this
Sarwar has come out with a piece of self defeating nonsense. " no deals or coalitions with anyone" His problem is local elections in scotland do not produce majorities on councils. You have to deal with someone or sit on the sidelines.
This attitude is why labour collapsed in Scotland - they have spent the last 15 years sat on the back benches sulking instead of engaging. this absolutist position is nonsense and the voters can see thru it. All it means is a labour vote is going to be wasted
Labour won’t be doing anything, in parliaments in Scotland or the UK, without working with other parties. True across many councils all over England and Wales as well. This “winner takes all” attitude to representation and policy making might be simple to understand and “sell”, but so often evaporates when it hits reality. Time for some honesty.
Labour collapsed in Scotland because of the way the SNP shaped itself and its policies to the left, and on the back of the push, and overall failure of the independence vote. The SNP didn't have the baggage of an overarching party centred in London with policies affecting Scotland and had a real sweep after the independence/brexit votes, Labour were just naturally the ones who would lose votes to this, the unionists/right wingers in Scotland wouldn't vote SNP in a million years anyway.
As for the no deals talk, it makes sense, why would Labour, prior to the elections almost signal defeat before it's happened, the SNP and Labour aren't friends in Scotland, and you only start talking deals when it actually matters!
It'll be interesting to see how Scotland votes though, there is a bit of apathy for the SNP these days in certain areas, but there is still that chance of a second indy vote, and the SNP are putting in a real shift to keep what they have.
Labour collapsed because of the bain principle and sulking on the back benches and to say no deals just shows they are not serious. IOf course they will have to do deals - like the 5 coalitions they run councils with at the mom,ent. Are they just going to hand over control of those councils and sulk in opposition more?
Time for some honesty.
indeed - Sarwar is taking the scots electorate for fools
You guys do realise that its multi member constituencies in Scotland for councils and there is precisely zero chance of labour getting more than half the seats on any council - even the SNP with twice the vote do not
You guys do realise that its multi member constituencies in Scotland for councils and there is precisely zero chance of labour getting more than half the seats on any council – even the SNP with twice the vote do not
Yeah, i've had a few of the voting adverts come through from folk i know who are standing locally in my old place, weirdly all the Tory councillors haven't got the word conservative on their ads!
My first part was really aimed at the parliamentary standing, the local elections is going to be a test to see if Labour can bring back some of the SNP voters who switched, to be honest i just think of Glasgow with this, as i lived there when the whole Labour / SNP thing was getting heated, but to be fair there was a lot more politics than just politics going on with any vote there!
Did anyone else try and listen to Starmer on the Radio4 Today Programme this morning? I started nodding along agreeing with him... and then just mentally switched off. I have no idea what he said for most of the interview. He's like some kind of meditation facilitator. Probably his biggest chance (on the radio) to get people out to vote in the local elections, and he'd have been better off doing a Johnson and finding somewhere else to be.
It was terrible. He is terrible as an opposition leader.
I mean how many open goals have the Torys presented over the last year and not only did he miss but basically declined to even kick the ball.
Yes in an ideal world politics would be polite chit chat about this minor policy change and that slight funding gap but we have a hostile force in occupation here - they tore up the rule book years ago and we need a bit more than 30 minutes of waffle about energy bills and NI. If you are going to talk about energy bills, at least point the finger at Cameron and his lack of foresight on power, green energy and pretty much everything.
Where was the anger about the PPE scandal, test and trace,worst covid death toll in Europe, the destruction of the NHS, the exams fiasco, public services being decimated, HS2 balls up......and a squillion other things that are a direct result of the Torys failing to GAS that I've forgotton about because I'm so angry and disappointed in the labour party.
Should have put Angie up - at least she's got some balls
Where was the anger about the PPE scandal, test and trace,worst covid death toll in Europe,
He did a bit on the £6bn lost on dodgy contracts fwiw. This country is actually mid Euro distribution for death toll and Starmer has fallen foul of using this line:
https://fullfact.org/health/keir-starmer-angela-rayner-uk-covid-death-toll-europe/
...and he talked about cost of living, insanity of raising taxes to kill growth over the past decade etc etc. But it you've switched off you've switched off.
But it you’ve switched off you’ve switched off.
The problem is not entirely what he says, but how he says it. He comes across as a disinterested technocrat rather than a potential leader. Even when he does get angry or a bit animated he sounds pompous, a little bit desperate, and completely disengenous. Being a political party leader is a role you have to play, and Starmer is a terrible actor.
dazh - who would you have instead?
Yvette Cooper?
Wes Streeting?
Jess Phillips?