Forum menu
Meh whatever, the point is there's a large number of ignorant voters out there which kinda blows your argument out of the water regarding compelling arguments, they arent listening full stop. The other fact is there's more votes to the right of Labour than to the left. FWIW I wasnt suggesting Labour move further to the right, more that shift back to the left before the election would be suicidal. As a despised centrist I'm quite happy with Labour's current placement, ironic really as given my background and current income levels which should make me a solid Tory supporter but I wouldn't piss on them if they were on fire. But then I've paid attention to the appalling policies and behaviour of the current Tory regime, shame a few more haven't.
The most mental thing he said was all Labour politicians are corrupt and looking out for themselves, bit rich given his (probable) tax avoidance status, but eff me given the behaviour of the Tories over the last 10 years he still levelled that accusation at Labour MPs
I keep hearing stuff like this and it's insane. Maybe there are some bad apples in Labour but **** me, how the hell can you prefer to stick with the Tories after their proven track record of greed and corruption.
I tend to start my response with "lying g to tne Queen" as it seems to make them pay attention.
I wasnt suggesting Labour move further to the right
Yes you did. "To bump up their vote share though Labour need to move further right" is what you said.
I love the way you dismiss the suggestion that Labour need to come up with compelling arguments for their policies btw,.
Do you understand how politics works, not just in the UK but throughout the world? No it doesn't simply rely on stealing your political opponents clothes.
The other fact is there’s more votes to the right of Labour than to the left.
Those votes aren't automatic.
If the main parties keep telling people how amazing all these conservative policies are - and given no choice - who the hell are they going to vote for?
You appear to be falling into the trap of hating the Tories but if done properly conservatism could be good for us.
The policy is the problem. And left wing policies are popular.
Maybe it would, that's the point of proper politics, people have different opinikns on how to get to a better society. Unfortunatrly we have the reality TV version of politics the Tories champion. Not everybody believes the chuck money approach would actually work or give us the desired outcome of a more equitable society.
But to be honest I can't be bothered discussing this further as there will be the inevitable pile on from the usual suspects as an actually debate isn't allowed and anyone right of Corbyn is selfish scum.
Yes you did. “To bump up their vote share though Labour need to move further right” is what you said.
Well yes apart from that minor detail.
I do also like how they announce that despite being a natural tory they are now happy with labour without thinking hmmmm is there a problem there?
Its the depressing thing about the right wingers. After ****ing up the country and their party they now want labour as a consolation prize rather than putting the work into getting a sensible tory party back.
And there we go...
First I'm not Tory and haven't voted Tory for a very long time, hell I voted for Corbyn's Labour. The point I was trying to make is that the current Tory party has lost its core vote by moving into batshit mental territory, this is good for Labour.
Second I don't consider myself to be right wing, I believe, actually you know what I can't be bothered, you won't bother reading what I write, you'll just be insulting and misconstrued what I say.
Politics doesn't need to be so confrontational and tribal, Corbyn actually had that right. My views have changed since being a member of this forum, my views have definitely moved leftward, shame the dullards in this thread arent able to discuss different view points without being so closed and confrontational to any idea that doesn't fit their narrative.
the dullards in this thread arent able to discuss different view points without being so closed and confrontational
The problem with lack of awareness is that people aren't aware of their lack of awareness.
I point out that a YouGov poll out today has Labour's share of the vote at exactly the same level as they got in the 2017 general election, which is slightly worrying not least because if the Tories draw back some of the support they have lost to Reform UK on election day it might rob Starmer of a majority..
Your immediate response, from the person who talks of usual suspects, is to very predictably claim that Labour need to move further right. When this is challenged, you, also very predictably, accuse others of being confrontational, after calling them dullards.
I do agree with you that politics doesn't have to be "confrontational and tribal". So that's at least one thing.
And there we go…
Did I miss something the mods deleted? I saw some mild discussion where a couple of people offered a different opinion, is that what a ‘pile-on’ is now?
Always amused that the lefties on here are always accused of being abusive or argumentative when in reality they’re always on the receiving end. Classic social media cancellation. If someone disagrees, accuse them of being abusive. Or in the case of this place, bang on about thread derailment. 🙄
@dazh it's nothing to do with left vs right, it's a combination of people's inability to write, peoples inability to read and the tendency of some people to just plain make shit up to suit or cause an argument. On both sides.
@stumpyjon to be fair that wasn't how you came across in your posts, I certainly read it the same as others did. Now you've cleared that up I'd like to think people will act on that but frankly, for the reasons above, I doubt it.
I think that brings the total to approximately one hundred councillors who have resigned from the Labour Party in the last six months.
That is a lot of councillors for a party which is clearly on an electoral winning streak to lose.
Luckily for Labour because Starmer is of little threat to the establishment, and the Tory press don't have much of a problem with him, it doesn't produce much in the way of negative headlines.
1.5% not a staggeringly large percentage and all on basically the same (whilst globally important) side issue for UK politics. I doubt Starmer is that worried either, saves him having to purge a load more outliers and hopefully avoids another Rochdale type cock up. The latest 20 are from Pendle which is not very representative of Labour areas as a whole, bit like Rochdale isn't. It's a single issue protest, and one that's not that direcrly relevant to the daily lives of most people in this country.
Starmer doesn't have to be worried but it's a gift to the opposition. No matter the reason they don't want to hold power in his party. That will be spun for all it's worth. Labour are not great at timing their implosions.
Yeah, I doubt that, the Tories haven't made a big deal out of the other councillor resignations. The reason for their resignation does not fit well with Tory ideology either so can't see them wanting to be seen to be supporting the Pendle councillors over this, it's not exactly on Tory brand. It's not even on the BBC website front page, it's hidden in the Lancashire section.
saves him having to purge a load more outliers
You say that like it's a good thing. Personally I find the authoritarianism purging of progressive voices from labor rather disturbing, the fabrication of "evidence" to be used against labour members and activists does not bode well for the direction a Starmer government would take.
Starmer might not need to be worried, but we should be.
Er yes, anything that stops Labour having an internal implosion as onehundredthidiot puts it makes them more likely to actually get into power, which is as we keep having to remind people on this thread is a good thing. Anyway it's not like purging the dissenters is a Starmer thing, Corbyn had a pretty good go but mucked it up like everything else he did. It's also a big leap from a few councillors resigning over a non core side issue to authoritarianism purging of progressive voices. I'm pretty sure the councillors involved were not the parties most progressive visionaries.
I'm a lot less worried about purging of the fringes of the Labour party to the wholesale purging of anyone with half a grip on reality from the government. Let's get things in proportion and remember why we're in this mess.
Let’s get things in proportion and remember why we’re in this mess
We're in this damn mess because of failed Conservative policies - the like of which Starmer and co are showing no signs of moving away from.
Centrists are only adding more pain to the long term discourse with this ridiculous pathway of election vibes at all cost.
I think that brings the total to approximately one hundred councillors
Labour have currently nearly 6500 councillors in the UK, and I'd bet money that more than 100 hand in their notice, or don't stand again each time there's elections for any number of reasons, that will go from pretty mundane - too much work, not enough time, etc etc all the way to folks who've been side-lined for offences or disagreements or sacked. 20 in one council seems like a lot, but in the grand scheme of things, probably doesn't shift the dial much.
this ridiculous pathway of election vibes at all cost.
You're so right it's the taking part that counts.
which is as we keep having to remind people on this thread is a good thing.
As we keep having to remind you its not so simple as that. Where do you draw the line at getting power?
Anyway it’s not like purging the dissenters is a Starmer thing, Corbyn had a pretty good go but mucked it up like everything else he did
Did he? I am sure you can provide the evidence showing Corbyn supporting this claim?
It’s also a big leap from a few councillors resigning over a non core side issue to authoritarianism purging of progressive voices.
Uh huh and yet compass and other centre left organisations have been targeted by Starmers team and dont have the same confidence you have in the glorious leader.
Uh huh and yet compass and other centre left organisations have been targeted by Starmers team
Neal Lawson (head of Compass) was told off by Labour for publishing support for another party (The Greens) last summer in a tweet, that's basic Labour party rules. While you might support pluralism, and tactical voting, the official party line is that you don't. So y'know, make a choice, accept the party line and support only Labour candidates, or don't, and risk expulsion. But to make it look like you're being "targeted" by Starmer's team, certainly makes it sound much more Machiavellian and exciting
You’re so right it’s the taking part that counts.
Said no-one. Though some of us care about what happens on day two.
A little reminder that Neal Lawson in this case wasn't promoting tactical voting to get Tories out, he was voicing support for Green party candidates to replace Labour councillors with the help of LibDems candidates stepping aside. Yes, that's tactical voting... but when you're supporting its use against the party you're a member of... it's not going to go down so well. Even if it's ignored or welcomed when the same tactics are used against sitting Conservatives.
There's plenty more examples, Google Corbyn sackings.
As we keep having to remind you its not so simple as that.
Ok you're right, better to be politically nuanced and powerless.
Where do you draw the line at getting power, well at the moment let's start with not doing anything illegal and not demonizing parts of society for cheap votes. I think that would put the country in a much better place than it is today.
Sacking people from the front bench isn't the same as purging them from the party.
Yes, that’s tactical voting… but when you’re supporting its use against the party you’re a member of… it’s not going to go down so well.
A little reminder that as with most things with Starmer, including antisemitism, the willingness to enforce things does seem rather dependant on how other political views align with Starmers own.
There’s plenty more examples, Google Corbyn sackings.
Errr yes. You do understand the difference between not being in the shadow cabinet and being expelled from the party, right?
So your examples are getting off to a bad start. Especially when you consider the fact that in order to sack them Corbyn gave them the job to begin with. Not something which would happen under Starmers narrow church. Well aside from when he tried it with Rayner and failed since he wasnt able to rig the system quite that far, yet.
Ok you’re right, better to be politically nuanced and powerless.
As ever your strawmanning is only matched by your whining when people treat you like you treat others.
I see you admit there should be some nuance so perhaps thats progress. Of course you might want to think about why the tories are going for those options and the problems of labour following them rightwards.
If anything, I would say that Corbyn didn't do enough to shape the party in his image. You could make the (pretty convincing) argument that politically he couldn't, but aside from that; there's no way that you can compare the Labour leadership's view on dissent in the ranks then and now. Starmer is much more active in this area.
Starmer is much more active in this area.
Somewhat of an understatement but there lies the problem. Its a party and not a one man organisation.
As all the right wingers were keen on during Corbyns time but soon binned off the "broad church" as soon as it ended.
The leader does need to be able to represent and give all sides of the party some input.
Otherwise how can he do so for the country as a whole as PM?
Its a party and not a one man organisation.
But as Corbyn's (and Sunak's for that matter) time has showed if nothing else, unless you've got your hands firmly on the steering wheel, some-one else is going to grab it and take it where they want it. Labour has always (right from the get go) been a divided organisation, and beholden to it's factionalism to a greater or lesser extent, right now it's being driven by the centre and right of the party, and no wonder. It won't last forever, it never has.
20 in one council seems like a lot, but in the grand scheme of things, probably doesn’t shift the dial much.
It seems a lot because 20 councillors all resigning at the same time from one council is a lot.
And it isn't the only mass resignation of councillors to have occurred recently. Labour has now lost control of four or five councils due to councillors resigning from the Labour Party.
However much you might dismiss it as inconsequential it is certainly not normal. And with the mass resignations of those councillors will be ordinary party members, including the foot soldiers that do much of the hard work at election time, so they are taking effective electoral expertise with them.
I certainly would not want to overstate the significance of this recent development but it could indeed prove quite significant. At the moment they are just "independent" on councils but we also have a few Labour Party MPs without the party whip, and former Labour mayor Jamie Driscoll is standing with RMT backing as an independent in the North East.
There is a lot of talk throughout the country of former Labour Party members standing as independents with support from other former Labour Party members. Eventually it will make sense for them to coordinate their activities and get themselves a name beyond just independents.
Personally I think they are jumping the gun and now is not the time to form a new party, if for no other reason than that the electorate has not imo reached the conclusion that another political party is necessary. The Labour vote might be very soft but there still appears to be this belief that a Labour government will deliver something significantly better.
It’s no surprise that starmer is loosing councillors, I imagine he’s going to lose a helluva lot more as well as mp’s willing to stand under Labour with this mealy mouthed response. William Dalrymple nails him below
I was at a local community iftar yesterday evening to raise money for Medical Aid for Palestine. There were three speakers (all British) two of them surgeons, one has recently been working treating the injured at the Nasser hospital in Gaza - the stories he told, such as the children having limbs amputated without an aesthetic, were challenging to listen to.
But the most interesting was the one he told of how one morning the IDF refused to let him travel from their safe house (it was safe because it was isolated from any other building in the middle of nowhere and therefore could not be accidentally hit - the IDF knew in contained medical staff) later on that same day it was targeted by an Israeli F-16 and very seriously damaged. This was the event:
https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/israel-bombed-british-doctors-deconflicted-site-gaza-mps-hear
Last night's speaker was one of the four British doctors mentioned in that article.
I have to say to say that I have recently become impressed my Alice Kearns apparent determination to hold Israel accountable for war crimes.
The third speaker was Mike Cushman whose grandparents fled the Russian pogroms and is chairman of Jewish Voice for Labour. He has actually been expelled from the Labour Party for anti-semitism. Although "for criticising Israel" would be more precise.
Had some visitors at work today
I did not push Rache on MMT
Bounce....bounce....bounce....bounce....all the way to the bottom.
That was a play on words in relation to their polices btw
Had some visitors at work today
I did not push Rache on MMT
🤣🤣🤣
But must be making progress 'cos even the old Guardian was coming around at the weekend .
https://twitter.com/StuartKells/status/1774936215449694271?t=q2D-kjCZQIO6WHkk0xWvbA&s=19
As with money created through bank lending, money created through government spending does not persist and circulate indefinitely through the economy. The slightly shocking and dispiriting reality is that, when you pay your taxes, the money doesn’t go into an account or a vault. It is vaporised. The tax payments cancel out the money that was created at the time of the original government spending.
is it/thre
This seems at odds with The Daily Mail's usual stance on Labour. Have I missed a change of editor, or are the rats leaving the sinking ship?
No change in the DM editorial team. They will have wanted the Starmer article about Trident, as they know it appeals to their readership and the DM's first priority - ahead of party politics - is to tell their readers what they want to hear. They also need to cosy up to Labour, as it is a bad look for them to be seen as backing a losing horse (the Tories). It works for Starmer too, as it is the most read paper. His contribution will have been conditional on final approval of the article and headline.
Starmer has found the magic money tree for defense spending!
Excellent - he can now find some cash for other things then the absolute Conservative showman.
Always the damn same. Our leaders are dismal.
(Not saying we shouldn't spend on defence but like the USA the lack of money arguments tends to go away for military spending )
With Starmer's and Reeves's much vaunted commitment to fiscal prudence I can't imagine them shaking the money tree, the money must come from elsewhere surely?
To be fair the UK's WMDs are obviously very expensive but I am surprised that the Tories haven't attached as much importance to them as Starmer apparently does.
Although presumably there will be a U-turn on this policy in a couple of months time?
Although presumably there will be a U-turn on this policy in a couple of months time?
Given his 100% record I think that is a given.
Wonder who he is going to choose as his new deputy. I thought Rayner had an appeal that Starmer didn't so will be bad to lose here but I think she will go as it seems pretty clear that she did not actually live at her primary residence. A pretty stupid thing to go for but as alway Labour seem to need to be angels whereas the tories would just brush it off and carry on.
Pretty much a non-story, Trident is a deal that the UK and US are signed up to for a long time, same with the Dreadnought class submarines, they have been allotted funding, so all SKS is saying is the usual political speech to get votes.
One thing i do think could help Labour over their term if they win will be defence, it could be a way for us to slip back into the EU with the current climate in Europe, and the world, especially if Trump gets in and the US start reducing support to Ukraine.
Pretty much a non-story
I don't think Keir Starmer announcing that the next Labour government will increase military spending to 2.5% of GDP, whilst simultaneously saying that the next Labour government won't be able to do stuff it wants to do because of lack of money, is "a non-story".
Which presumably is why it has been widely reported.