Forum menu
It’s the other way around.
Who cares? Labour are now a party of proud racists and bigots. They can **** off.
Workers rights, I thought we were pretty well off in that area anyway?
Not as well off as we were pre-2010.
Remember when employers couldn't arbitrarily sack you for 2 years after hiring you?
When zero hours contracts were only used by those actually requiring them?
The apologists will be along to tell us it takes many terms to undo the damage and you have to start small. Seemingly this isn't true if you're breaking things as you can just wade in with a sledge hammer and do things within a single term. But rolling that back? Nope, too hard.
And Gordon Brown and Ed Miliband proved twice that after 13 years of “centrist” government the country didn’t want any more.
So the country didn't want want a ‘progressive’ socialist revolution and got bored with centrist politics, does that just leave us with fruit loop right wing conservatism for the foreseeable. What's the alternative, a 'progressive' socialist softly softly, can't see that gaining much traction with anyone.
A donkey with a red badge could win the next election.
Foot and Kinnock failed against Thatcher, Corbyn failed against Cameron. The Labour Party is absolutely capable of crashing this plane into the ground.
Foot and Kinnock failed against Thatcher, Corbyn failed against Cameron. The Labour Party is absolutely capable of crashing this plane into the ground.
Yup, it's theirs to lose and by God if there's something they're good at it's snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
Though this is a good opportunity to remind everyone that other parties exist that aren't offering more of the same with or without a wishful wink and a nudge.
People will only get what they fight for. Hoping for some sort of munificence from the parliamentary parties is ahistorical and naive in the extreme. When people were begging for a rent or mortgage break during the lockdown the LP was very quick to line up with the landlords and banks, don't expect any change there.
So the country didn’t want want a ‘progressive’ socialist revolution and got bored with centrist politics, does that just leave us with fruit loop right wing conservatism for the foreseeable.
If no one is making an argument against right wing dogma, then that is the only orthodoxy that people know.
Even the Starmer supporters club on here have little problems with the Corbyn era labour policies, it seams to be just him they hate . So why then reject those policies and turn towards neoliberal tory policies? Why not keep making the argument for policies that will actually help the majority of people? If labour aren't making those arguments how are people meant to choose a path that no one is offering to them?
The hatred of Corbyn might be something to do with his lifelong anti-racist stance and support for the Palestinians. His policies in European terms were very much middle-of-the-road. His opponents, including a majority of the shadow cabinet, preferred to have a Tory government that supported a foreign apartheid regime.
People's views change and I'm sure many in the 'red wall' now realise they'd been had.
Some of you might find a piece about actual policy interesting
Ignore me....going mad
@Twodogs - nah.
That piece is clearly written by centralist scum.
The mistake we all made was to not give Corbyn a third chance. Third time lucky and all that.
Ps - I don't hate Corbyn - quite the opposite actually and I voted for him twice (unlike the idealogical purists who now can't possibly bring themselves to vote for labour...). I just don't think he is capable of winning a GE. This is the fundamental point for me. And until labour actually get into power we can't change **** all.
And until labour actually get into power we can’t change **** all.
And when they get into power they will change **** all. It is not about being an ideological purist, it is expecting the Labour party to actually be a Labour party.
Foot and Kinnock failed against Thatcher, Corbyn failed against Cameron. The Labour Party is absolutely capable of crashing this plane into the ground.
That is a very selective history lesson. Brown and Miliband also both failed against Cameroon.
Despite his failure to win a general election Corbyn managed to get Labour a larger share of the vote than both Brown and Miliband did, and he did that twice.
How he managed it I'm not entirely sure as he had to do it fighting both the Tories and the Parliamentary Labour Party simultaneously.
As a woke leftie with a love for organic food and bicycles, and who tried to stop Brexit with his commitment to a second referendum, it is surprising that Corbyn isn't more popular on STW.
But I guess that perhaps like the Guardian newspaper STW likes to talk the talk but not necessarily walk the walk.
The other political thread has been quite a revelation in a similar vein. After literally years of reading how much ERG Tories are despised on STW it turns out that quite a few believe that they should be welcomed into the Labour Party.
As a woke leftie with a love for organic food and bicycles, and who tried to stop Brexit with his commitment to a second referendum, it is surprising that Corbyn isn’t more popular on STW
🤣
Poly Tonybee and Jonathan Freedland told them not to vote Corbyn and that the Tories would be better.
And when they get into power they will change **** all. It is not about being an ideological purist, it is expecting the Labour party to actually be a Labour party.
Exactly. Anything else is wishful thinking.
That is a very selective history lesson. Brown and Miliband also both failed against Cameroon.
I don't think it is tbh, Brown was the incumbent so there's that, Miliband wasn't really offering much different and the SNP destroyed them in Scotland, something they still haven't recovered from (and won't until they grow up and stop playing stupid games).
It is not about being an ideological purist, it is expecting the Labour party to actually be a Labour party.
Well exactly.
Nothing ever stopped the Tories from being ideological and successful did it?
Labour - lazy ripped off Neoliberal arguments supported by nothing.
It's worse than that - it's recycled failed Tory policy.
Change the narrative FFS.
How hard is it to point out the failures of market economics, natural monopolies, privatisation - as well as poor investment in the state. The body of evidence and doorstep conversation is one big gaping opportunity.
(PS all politics is ideological.)
the idealogical purists who now can’t possibly bring themselves to vote for labour…
Starmer is not the pragmatic one really his he? If he was he'd be offering pragmatic solutions and stop lying about things.
Ian Dunt has a track record of sweary shouty failed observations.
A liberal menace that did all he could to help the pile on for Corbyn.
Piss poor judge of character.
https://twitter.com/IanDunt/status/1239968681360121856?t=_1I4wqAxYo_uNxwTlReVRA&s=19
Thinks Kate Andrews is one of the good ones too.
How hard is it to point out the failures of market economics, natural monopolies, privatisation – as well as poor investment in the state. The body of evidence and doorstep conversation is one big gaping opportunity.
I thought, just for one second, that you were going to manage not mention MMT 🙄
Ian Dunt has a track record of sweary shouty failed observations
Maybe so, but at least he bothers to read and analyse what Starmer says, even if you disagree with his conclusions. 90% of posters on this and the other thread just keep banging on about how awful Starmer is, and are so naive they'd rather have another 5 years of the Tories than recognise that if you don't get elected, you can't do anything. Pragmatism seems to be a mortal sin to some.
I thought, just for one second, that you were going to manage not mention MMT 🙄
He didn't. I read the quote of his which you copied and pasted and cannot see any mention of MMT.
Which bit of the quote that you copied and pasted do you disagree with?
The hatred of Corbyn might be something to do with his lifelong anti-racist stance and support for the Palestinians.
It's not much of anti-racist stance if it includes obliviousness to bigotry against Jews (the anti-Semitic book, the anti-Semitic mural, his loyalty to Chris Williamson). His worldview is profoundly uncurious - it's a binary arrangement where everyone in his camp on the main issue gets a pass on the other topics eg Hizbollah and Israelis, SF-IRA on NI. It is mind-blowing that Corbynites are not only willing to forgive Corbyn for taking money from Iranian state TV for presenting a call in show, but actually deny there was ever anything wrong with working for one of the most reactionary governments in the world. And all of this while losing two elections and still smugly saying he won the argument - as if this were all some study group.
But Corbyn is in the dustbin of history now.
Yeah let's talk about Corbyn! At least it deflects any criticism of Starmer. And Starmer annoyingly keeps cropping up on this thread!
deny there was ever anything wrong with working for one of the most reactionary governments in the world.
I take it that you weren't talking about Labour centrists?
Tony Blair Institute continued taking money from Saudi Arabia after Khashoggi murder:
Ian Dunt has a track record of sweary shouty failed observations.
He reminds me of a self assured mouthy gobshite in the pub that won’t shut up until someone kicks him in the nuts and tells him to do one.
This thread is hilariously pointless. It's supposed to be about Starmer, but he did a major speech today about what a future Labour government's policy would be on small boats/asylum seekers....but there's not a single critique of it.
Everyone's too busy arguing about previous Labour leaders and trying to out do each other with pedantry. Utterly stupid.
90% of posters on this and the other thread just keep banging on about how awful Starmer is, and are so naive they’d rather have another 5 years of the Tories than recognise that if you don’t get elected, you can’t do anything.
Why vote for the same? We'd rather not have tory policies, that's our entire point!
This thread is hilariously pointless. It’s supposed to be about Starmer, but he did a major speech today about what a future Labour government’s policy would be on small boats/asylum seekers….but there’s not a single critique of it.
You're an odd one, see things where they aren't and can't see things where they are. The boats were discussed earlier, I didn't feel the need to comment as it underlines the "more of the same" point perfectly.
.The boats were discussed earlier, I didn’t feel the need to comment as it underlines the “more of the same” point perfectly.
Apologies if I've missed it, but i can't see any discussion of Starmer's speech today...which is absolutely not "more of the same"
Yep, his speech has hardly blipped on social media. Is Assaf Kaplan doing his job?
This thread is hilariously pointless. It’s supposed to be about Starmer, but he did a major speech today about what a future Labour government’s policy would be on small boats/asylum seekers….but there’s not a single critique of it.
You'll get used to it, folk who would never vote for Starmer ever, complaining about everything he says or does, even though he, and Labour, haven't even started their election campaign yet, or really provided details of their policies, but then again, it'll just be 'more of the same', as we have a lot of clairvoyants on here 😂
For the past few months I've been wondering why he hasn't just clearly stated that the whole Rwanda thing would be dismantled the moment Labour came into power. It's a blessing that he's now managed to come to the same conclusion. All he has to do now is repeat the exercise with a whole boatload of other Tory policies and legislation.
Hasn't he come to the conclusion, reluctantly, that they mostly have to be kept?
He would like to do things differently but apparently a lack of money is the problem.
I had a Labour leaflet in my window until I realised it didn't even mention Labour. I didn't want any neighbours to misinterpret a Union flag. We always vote Labour (whilst holding our noses).
For the past few months I’ve been wondering why he hasn’t just clearly stated that the whole Rwanda thing would be dismantled the moment Labour came into power.
Never interrupt your enemy when they're making a mistake.
complaining about everything he says or does, even though
Everything ? Where are the complaints about his pledge to stop the Rwanda flights?
And I am not sure why the next Labour government not pursuing the Tory Rwanda policy should be much of a talking point - what is there to talk about? Does anyone think it is a bad idea not to pursue the pointless and ridiculously expensive policy?
Could Labour even consider not scrapping a multi million pounds policy which no sensible person believes will achieve its stated aims?
Never interrupt your enemy when they’re making a mistake.
And Napoleon dealt so well with his enemies.
Everyone’s too busy arguing about previous Labour leaders and trying to out do each other with pedantry
Mostly down to one of Starmers cult members desperately trying to divert attention away from Starmer had accepted an ERG extremist who even the tories thought was borderline into the party.
Regarding his speech it was a bit of a damp squib. Not really worth the reputational damage to have the ERG extremist introduce it in my opinion.
Overall it was vague. I cant say I am a fan of his proposal of copying and pasting some of the counter terrorism laws for anti people smuggling. Those are laws which really need review not extending to other area.
I give up. One or two of you really need to take your heads out of your own fundaments and actually read stuff or listen to stuff.
I read stuff and listen to stuff but we must be hearing different things. What things has Starmer said so far that are really great for you? (You obviously can't count his half decent pledges from a few years back!)
As others has said the Rwanda policy should be a 100% given that Labour would immediately scrap it, just like they should state they would immediately scrap the recent hit the sick and disabled crap the tories were touting.
The problem is that he doesn't show any integrity in case he loses some points in the polls. Yes, politics is difficult as tories would just say he has no plan because he doesn't like their plan but as a potential PM he should be up to handling that while retaining integrity, i.e. my 'plan' for immigration would be to get the asylum process actually working to a point where there is pretty much no backlog with all claims dealt with in a month so no need for mass retention. The money to implement would come from the much lower current costs of holding people for 18 months. May be very difficult to implement but that is my plan as a response to knocking the Rwanda plan.
And so as we are about enter a new week the media coverage still keeps rumbling on, and not in a very positive way. From today's Guardian:
Labour MPs are wondering if they will have to clap Elphicke at the next meeting of the parliamentary party, as is usually the case with new arrivals. “Slow-clapped is more probable,” said one MP.
Nicely summed up here:
The Tories were milking Labour’s discomfort. One former cabinet minister said: “Natalie has earned her place in history by being the only defector ever to cause more embarrassment to the party she defected to than to the one she left.”
Rishi Sunak must be breathing sighs of relief that she didn't do serious damage to the Tories by joining Reform UK.
Why didn't she join Reform, would look like a much better fit than Labour - guess she wanted the attention where who low morals would be notable rather than just being pretty average in Reform.
Maybe sublime skullduggery at work here, she wanted to damage both parties. And did.
I suspect that although she is being touted as an "unpaid" housing advisor to Starmer personal financial reward was likely the driving factor.
All the evidence is that after the general election she will derive her income from that sector, having easy access to non-hostile government ministers will possibly prove rather useful. Before she became an MP she was doing work for the government, she is obviously aware that the next government will be a Labour government.
Funny how Robert Buckland suddenly remembers her trying to corrupt the judicial process four years ago. Must have been some kind of flashback induced by the trauma of seeing her cross the floor.
The spectacle of Labour having to issue a denial on behalf of the far-right MP for Dover for trying to influence a sex offences trial involving the previous Conservative MP for Dover is quite entertaining though.
I suspect it's now gone a little beyond the one-day PR victory SKS was envisaging. Perhaps if his next defector could have a little less dirty laundry to bring across, that would be nice.
As Grace Blakeley said on QT - literally letting the Tories in.