Just dipping in for a quick reality check / straw poll. Won't be hanging around.
Hands up who thinks having Diane Abbott in the Labour Party makes them more electable?
Not the Diane Abbott of 1990, the Diane Abbott of 2023.
Nice to see the Starmerites on here minimising the issue of racism against black and asian people in order to have a go at the 'loony left'. The more I see people's responses the more I conclude that this new sensible grown up version of the labour party has a major problem with racism against black and asian people. Doesn't surprise me given the fact that Starmer is an obsessive football fan who dresses in football hooligan garb. It probably explains the 'Rishi is a peado' poster.
Everyone who thinks Diane Abbott is an electoral liability is definitely racist!
Absolutely! It’s the only possible explanation!
Ladies and gentlemen, the ‘logic’ of the not-even-remotely-looney left
Anyone who claims that Diane Abbott is an electoral liability because she has the temerity to stand up to anti-black racism is definitely suspect imo.
I am not interested in placating the Daily Mail and its readers.
You’re in no position to comment given your hatred of Gingers
You’re in no position to comment given your hatred of Gingers
And your hatred of Travellers?
"Plays the joker when things get tricky" is what someone said of you to me yesterday binners. Oh how they know you well.
The serious angry rants turn into "it's only a bit of banter mate", when your hypocrisy is exposed.
😃
It's also funny how a bunch of white blokes having a go at a black woman for being 'racist' against jewish people really can't see that they're engaging in exactly the same behaviour they accuse her of. It's all getting a bit 'all lives matter' isn't it?
Hey. The gangs all here. What a time to be alive...
And they accuse her of being an electoral liability despite the fact that she has changed her parliamentary seat into one of the safest Labour seats in Great Britain.
Hey. The gangs all here. What a time to be alive…
And what a time for you to return to the thread binners.
Just so that you can mock and ridicule a black woman who has spent all her life fighting racism and standing up for black and white working class people.
Since you have decided to re-emerge on the thread, no doubt temporary, have you got an opinion on Sir Keir Starmer that you might want to share?
Doesn’t surprise me given the fact that Starmer is an obsessive football fan who dresses in football hooligan garb.
Bloody love the footie, me. Head down the pub-a-lub, have a few jars of Ruddles with the lads, get some section 60 action in with the coppers, kick in a takeaway window, and then it’s back home for a Saturday night Chinese in front of Mr Blobby. I'm just an ordinary bloke like anyone else. Vote Labour.
I'd like to know if he's ever phoned up 606 on Five Live on a Sunday night towards the end of his stewardship, to demand the removal of Arsene Wenger?
Makes you think...
https://twitter.com/AaronBastani/status/1651553055685394434?t=G84r_tWBphXCo0_DgDtcVQ&s=19
More shite from Starmer Island.
ooh and with those gambling handouts too.
I do wonder what Labour has to offer the most ardent Centrist now? Unless hypocrisy is on the policy list.
Opposing proportional representation seems like a very wise move for Starmer.
For a long time now he has been focusing on attacking members of his own party, expelling them or otherwise silencing them.
The very last thing he wants to do now is to create the condition whereby if they form a separate political party they will be given a fair opportunity as a new party to get a foothold.
He wants the choice to be Tory or Labour and nothing more. He isn't going to make it easy for voters to have a greater choice.
What's "those gambling handouts" btw?
What’s “those gambling handouts” btw
Bet365 donations.
Owen Jones highlights Starmers u-turns, (my opinion - he's a shapeshifting lying dick, starmer that is)
arghhh…why can’t I copy link from YouTube to post here, I have to edit post on iPhone then paste YouTube link
More shite from Starmer Island.
Starmer is wrong on electoral reform (and on Bet365 money) but this is neither news and nor does his personal opposition matter much. As the article linked to says, PR is a hot topic for the National Policy Forum, and in the boring and bureaucratic world of Labour polict formation, its the NPF and NEC that form policy - not Starmer.
Starmer is wrong on electoral reform (and on Bet365 money) but this is neither news and nor does his personal opposition matter much. As the article linked to says, PR is a hot topic for the National Policy Forum, and in the boring and bureaucratic world of Labour polict formation, its the NPF and NEC that form policy – not Starmer
Simple fact - he never does anything remotely appealing or progressive, and nothing he previously said sticks with anything he says currently.
Dress it up how ever you want.
Your anger about Starmer will consume you
Not compared to the anger consumption of the Tory threads.
Starmer has simply stripped the hope out of politics.
I’m hopeful, despite reading this thread of doom. Try breaking out of the doom spiral, things can be turned around. Step one is kick the Tories out. Many more necessary steps after that, of course, but without the first one…
He makes lots of points.
its the NPF and NEC that form policy – not Starmer.
I wish that was true. The actual reality is that one man, and yes it is always a man, decides policy. The influence he exerts on the policy making institutions is massive. The NPF hardly meets and neither it nor the NEC is ever likely to publicly clash with the Labour Party Leader over a major policy decision.
They do provide a useful public relations exercise though so that the pretence that the Labour Party is a fully democratic organisation can be maintained.
The supreme authority within the Labour Party should be the annual Labour Party Conference as it is far more representative of the Labour Party than either the NPF or the NEC.
We know what the Labour Party's veiws on proportional representation are:
https://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/labour-party-conference-backs-proportional-representation/
Totally ignoring the wishes of Conference renders it a pointless public relations exercise. Much like the Tory Party Conference it is expected to do no more than provide rapturous applause for the the TV cameras when required, such as straight after the Party Leader's Conference speech when he parades among delegates with his adoring wife holding his hand.
This is the reality of UK politics today.
things can be turned around. Step one is kick the Tories out. Many more necessary steps after that, of course, but without the first one…
Agreed. Step two kick Starmer out and replace him with someone who has a commitment to fight for the interests of ordinary working people, not a self-serving careerist on a personal mission of self-fulfillment.
Who would you see him replaced by?
I mean, I agree*, but also, long ago, I and others suggested some successors… where as…
[ *that I would like to see him replaced, not with your character assassination ]
I seem to remember that you thought he should be replaced by another senior Labour politician, who did you suggest, I can't remember?
As I have previously said I don't think Starmer is the problem, it's the Labour Party that has a problem. Replacing Starmer with another self-serving careerist will achieve nothing significant, even if they have a tad more charisma than him.
But yeah, step one..... kick the Tories out. You can't turn things round without doing that. Step two, don't replace them with people who essentially are barely distinguishable from them.
And actually revelle in the fact that they are close to the Tories politically by claiming, among things, that they occupy "the centre". Although imo they are far too modest about how right-wing they are.
You said “step two” was to replace him. Who with?
I’d rather he was replaced before an election, have said that for three years now, but have always accepted Labour don’t do that to their leaders. And they won’t replace him (quickly) if they win the election either. So, it’s either him as PM for at least four years, or another term for the Tories. Everything else is noise.
nothing he previously said sticks with anything he says currently.
Not really true here, is it? Starmer's never been in favour of PR.
Neither was Corbyn - although tbf he wanted a constitutional convention that might have considered PR.
You said “step two” was to replace him. Who with?
I have just told you but you are not listening. I am not naming personalities, politics isn't about personalities for me - that's your game. For me it's about policies, priorities, and a commitment to fight for the interests of ordinary working people.
Once again I repeat that the Tories should not be replaced by someone who is a self-serving careerist with no ideological commitment to ordinary people.
The Labour Party has either got to change so it is no longer a vehicle for the self-fulfillment of careerists, and goes back to its founding principles, or it needs to be replaced by another people's party which ordinary people can confidently trust to represent their interests.
The only thing that has held the Labour Party together for the last 75 years is First Past The Post and fear. It's time to change that.
Two party politics is fairly unique to Britain among comparable countries, as is Britian's commitment to First Past The Post, go figure Sherlock.
Starmer’s never been in favour of PR.
Just always full of shit?
What's this all about then?
"I also think on electoral reform, we’ve got to address the fact that millions of people vote in safe seats and they feel their voice doesn’t count. That’s got to be addressed. We will never get full participation in our electoral system until we do that at every level.”
- Sir Keir Starmer
So he wants electoral reform but he also wants to keep First Past The Post? This man talking mealy-mouthed gobbledygook is very likely to be our next Prime Minister in a few month's time.
Obviously Starmer made that comment above a couple of months before he was elected party leader and he was desperate to say anything at all that might help him to win the election.
I am actually really looking forward to Starmer as PM, it is going to be such a wake-up call. Hopefully the Tories will be reduced to a demoralised and discredited rump which pose no serious threat. Without them as a distraction the serious debate can progress.
“I also think on electoral reform, we’ve got to address the fact that millions of people vote in safe seats and they feel their voice doesn’t count. That’s got to be addressed. We will never get full participation in our electoral system until we do that at every level.”
A second chamber elected using PR seems to be the most likely first term national level constitutional change, and would fit with that quote. Keeping (or rather bringing back) single transferable vote for mayoral elections as well.
Read the quote:
we’ve got to address the fact that millions of people vote in safe seats and they feel their voice doesn’t count.
How the hell is millions of votes in "safe seats" anything to do with the House of Lords ffs?
He was very clearly referring to the House of Commons. Millions of people have not been calling for proportional representation in the House of Lords.
In the quote he talks about "electoral reform", how the **** could he have meant the House of Lords when there are no elections there to "reform".
Plus the House of Lords cannot frustrate the will of the House of Commons, so proportional representation in the House of Commons without proportional representation in the House of Commons is meaningless.
But well done for attempting to be as disingenuous as Starmer Kelvin, that must be quite a challenge!
Because, if you get one vote for the representative for your seat, and one for the upper house… you can actually vote for your first preference party with your second vote, and have it count. If, for example, the Green Party had just 1 MP in the lower house, but 10%+ of representatives in the upper house… well… you’re a smart guy… you can work out how that’s different to what we currently have… and where it might take us in future.
you’re a smart guy… you can work out how that’s different to what we currently have… and where it might take us in future.
You are probably being too generous but I am not so daft to believe that it would make any significant difference whatsoever. My fourth paragraph deals with that.
What I am certain though is that it would still leave voters with two basic choices Conservative or Labour, it would maintain the status quo. Which of course is precisely Keir Starmer's intention.
Edit : And none of that is here or there as it is perfectly obvious to any reasonable person that Starmer was clearly referring to the MPs and the House of Commons in his comment about "save seats" and the need for electoral reform.
I’m hopeful, despite reading this thread of doom. Try breaking out of the doom spiral, things can be turned around. Step one is kick the Tories out. Many more necessary steps after that, of course, but without the first one
I've no idea where you get the optimism from.
This reminds me of the debate where he supported public ownership - then he didn't but then everyone rallied around to look for meaning in his words that he supported some kind of public ownership that wasn't nationalisation. Then he didn't ultimately support state ownership.
What's it gonna take for you to realise investing time with this charlatan is likely to lead to massive disappointment?
All that's going on is the Tories are so bad that people will accept anything especially in the Labour Party.
I mean the utter jerk is still talking about freezing council tax, and a windfall tax that will apparently pay for everything.
it would still leave voters with two basic choices Conservative or Labour, it would maintain the status quo
If we have a PR elected upper house, and people think that their PR vote is still a choice between Conservatives or Labour… well, that would suggest that far more than the voting system needs to change to increase plurality in our politics, doesn’t it.
I mean the utter jerk is still talking about freezing council tax, and a windfall tax that will apparently pay for everything.
You can keep pretending that taxes don’t matter, and Labour shouldn’t talk about them… but it’s bobbins.
What’s it gonna take for you to realise investing time with this charlatan is likely to lead to massive disappointment?
I no longer believe a word that comes out of his mouth, and I don't think I'm alone.
It's funny looking back on this thread. It's almost like Starmer has gone out of his way to piss off individuals or small groups of people. With every U-turn and every broken promise he just pisses of a few people at a time but now the tone seems overwhelmingly negative. The frog has been boiled.
Anyway, doesn't matter. The UK's election system is fundamentally broken so pissing off the majority has little influence on the outcome of elections.
He thinks so long as he panders to racists in a few key seats he'll win. And he's probably right.
now the tone seems overwhelmingly negative
It’s just the same few people saying the same things, in the same negative tone, looping around and around.
🔁
You can keep pretending that taxes don’t matter, and Labour shouldn’t talk about them… but it’s bobbins.
I'd like think my point is stronger than that rough interpretation.
The bobbins bit is pretending the same windfall is going to pay for everything.
You've got it back to front.
And no one ever said we shouldn't talk about taxes or they don't matter. Yet again I'm surprised you have joined the ranks of misunderstanding what MMT says about taxes.
It's the dismissive tone that gets me especially after loads of posts about the subject. Every time you don't push back against taxes paying for things you give the power for the government and the the opposition to say they can't afford things.
I can't see how a progressive can maintain that position with a straight face.
https://twitter.com/UKLabour/status/1650471252828536834?t=smoFNLWPogmYX9iqKKvJ0A&s=19
More rubbish
https://twitter.com/RachelReevesMP/status/1649014352693829634?t=T1px36aC0pXJYhijcprcdw&s=19
Ch4 found their stats to not add up for the energy windfall.
It's them who's talking bobbins.
It’s just the same few people saying the same things, in the same negative tone, looping around and around.
Only reacting to what's being offered up by Lord Starmer and co.
Talking about where the tax burden should be shifted to is basic politics. We all know that “paid for” is the wrong language for you, but for the vast majority of people, that’s how they understand things, it’s their over simplistic model of how things work. Labour need to win an election, not try teach the world MMT at every opportunity… that’s your job 😘. Hypothecated tax cuts/raising is bobbins for sure… so it doesn’t need to “add up”, just illustrate the choices to be made by government. Let the fossil fuel companies take the money… and raise costs for households instead… why are the government making those choices? And it’s local election time… local taxes being forced up by central government decisions is the way to link local and national politics, it makes sense to focus on that for the national level element of the local election campaigns.
Talking about where the tax burden should be shifted to is basic politics. We all know that “paid for” is the wrong language for you, but for the vast majority of people, that’s how they understand things, it’s their over simplistic model of how things work. Labour need to win an election, not try teach the world MMT at every opportunity… that’s your job 😘.
But but but - they will be undone on the concept of windfall paying for everything on its own terms.
We are not talking about Labour going full MMT just the constant knot tying of windfall paying for stuff. It will catch them out.
For the record tax the **** out of the rich.