Wonder where the clip was from?

Edit: here

Audrey White @RedRosa91940184 welcomed @Keir_Starmer to #Liverpool today & spoke for the many who are looking for a real alternative to the #ToryLiars rather than a Starmer mark 2 version of Tory #Austerity. #nhscrisis #CostOfLivingCrisis @UKLabour @bbcmerseyside #ItWasAScam pic.twitter.com/ZYrxjAGkM7

— Merseyside Pensioners Association (@MerseyPensioner) July 25, 2022

Just to be absolutely 100% crystal clear – this is the Labour Party position on the public ownership of rail. 👇🏻 https://t.co/DjF6vU5QYs

— Sam Tarry MP (@SamTarry) July 25, 2022

SKS is **** it up. The majority of the public are in favour of rail, mail, water & probably energybeing brought back in to public ownership, it was one of his ten pledges. WTF is he doing?

Don’t worry ctk, people will be along shortly to tell you how unpopular those things are and how they prefer the current messed up market based services that are great for us all.

Further to that they will then claim pragmatism over ideology but will not recognise the current failings of their chosen ideology – neoliberalism.

They will drivel on like puppets about being ideologically pure because they heard James o’Brien say it.

And yet ironically at this point being pragmatic would include nationalisation.

Starmer has wrecked the answer to society’s problems by avoiding the obvious counter-arguments to Conservatism, and instead aligning himself to their values.

And yet ironically at this point being pragmatic would include nationalisation

Yep 100% It’s crazy he is getting in such a tangle over these things. He is not thinking about winning over voters, he is thinking of city donors and the newspapers.

We want to Take Back Control of our water, rail, and mail 🤣 It’s a vote winner.

SKS is on BBC breakfast at the moment. Unfortunately he’s coming across (to me) like any other politician who doesn’t answer the question, uses too many words, avoids the point and answers different questions to the one being askedb and doesn’t commit to anything solid.

Asked about nationalisation and it’s all “pragmatic response”,”fix the problems” and on public sector pay its “there’s an established body round the table to sort that.”

I think undecided voters just want someone who gets straight to the point and answers the bloody question with a simple answer.

That’s because he hasn’t really got the answers. He’s not offering solutions.

How hard can it be to push back against the Tories? Pragmatism is the new empty buzzword.

It astonishes me how bad Starmer is becoming day by day.

At least Truss offers stuff up. People like to see a bit passion. He’s got none.

Mick Lynch has taught people that if you know your stuff and you can present a clear line you don’t need nebulous media training to get you through.

It astonishes me how bad Starmer is becoming day by day.

The strategy is pretty clear. He’s putting all his chips on not saying anything that will upset or offend the tory media or give them ammuninition to accuse him of being a lefty. I get it, and can ignore most of what he says (or doesn’t say) with that in mind. But it’s a huge gamble. At a time when the country is screaming out for solutions and politicians willing to do something about the struggles they’re experiencing, at best Starmer is coming across as someone with no answers, at worst someone who doesn’t care.

And what happens if labour doesn’t win the next election? They’ve tried the centrist approach with Miliband and failed. They tried the left wing approach with Corbyn and failed. Now they’re trying the right wing approach and are failing. What do they do after that?

The strategy is pretty clear. He’s putting all his chips on not saying anything that will upset or offend the tory media or give them ammuninition to accuse him of being a lefty. I get it, and can ignore most of what he says (or doesn’t say) with that in mind. But it’s a huge gamble.

Agree, he is going for the Blair approach. Clearly worked very well for Blair but we are in very different times and Starmer doesn’t have what Blair had.
Can’t see it working out well but an election against Truss will be a good test.

They tried the left wing approach with Corbyn and failed

Yeah but now more than ever maybe the timing is much better?

I’m not into the quiet approach I think it’s cowardice. Be sincere with your ideas and defend them.

Shouldn’t be difficult currently.

Agree, he is going for the Blair approach. Clearly worked very well for Blair but we are in very different times and Starmer doesn’t have what Blair had.
Can’t see it working out well but an election against Truss will be a good test.

Blair had ideas, and as you said was of his time.

I don’t think Truss is going to be the pushover everyone thinks.

I don’t think Truss is going to be the pushover everyone thinks.

Truss fancies herself as a the new iron lady. Trouble is she has no convictions, principles or beliefs beyond being in power. The reason thatcher carried it off is because she had the security of her beliefs to fall back on. At the first hint of trouble Truss will be thrashing around looking for quick PR fixes to intractable problems. She has all the worst traits of Thatcher (stubbornness and lack of empathy), May (incompetence) and Johnson (narcissism and dishonesty) combined and no redeeming features (that I can think of anyway). I’m pretty certain she’s going to be a disaster. Starmer must be thanking his lucky stars.

I’m not into the quiet approach I think it’s cowardice. Be sincere with your ideas and defend them.

Me too but it would seem that’s not what the media or voting public want in a leader. They want someone who ‘says the right things’ and doesn’t offend anyone. If that’s the persona that Starmer is playing then I can ignore that. All I’m interested in is what he’ll do once in power. I’ve been repeatedly assured by people here and IRL that labour/Starmer will be different in power to what they are now. I’ve seen no evidence to support this but will keep an open mind out of nothing but blind hope. Pretty sure I’ll be disappointed though.

Me too but it would seem that’s not what the media or voting public want in a leader. They want someone who ‘says the right things’ and doesn’t offend anyone. If that’s the persona that Starmer is playing then I can ignore that

At some point he absolutely has to upset the right wing media if he’s to implement anything progressive.

Otherwise he’s not doing his job for the rest of us.

I’ve seen no evidence to support this but will keep an open mind out of nothing but blind hope. Pretty sure I’ll be disappointed though.

That’s because you are correct. There’s isn’t anything else. All the evidence points towards him not having any actual ideas.

And we both know better than most that the country doesn’t need to afford things – and yet he’s peddling that currently like a single speed bike. He’s doing the rounds talking about rail nationalisation but pragmatism on others. What does any of it mean?

I’m not with you on Truss though. I don’t think she will be a gift for Starmer. She looks like a doer to me – something Starmer just ain’t.

Although I’m not invested in it so I couldn’t care less if I’m right or wrong on that.

I don’t think she will be a gift for Starmer. She looks like a doer to me – something Starmer just ain’t.

That’s because she’s so thick she thinks doing stuff is as easy as issuing a prime-ministerial decree and then stuff magically happens. Her record elsewhere shows she has never got anything done (reintroducing beavers doesn’t count). Starmer probably knows how difficult it is from his time as DPP, which is why he’s averse to making promises he can’t keep. Getting stuff done, especially stuff that helps working people, in this country requires a combination of intelligence, guile, courage and determination. I don’t think Truss or Starmer have many of those qualities.

Agreed. It’s a rough mix.

But I think both Presidents/Prime-minsters largely are dopey and don’t really do a whole lot other than open their mouths occasionally.

I know Dominic Cummings has questionable motives, but his description (below) of Truss was all you need to know to decide how effective a PM she’ll be. She thinks the job of a government minister is no more than the political manoevrings and PR required to generate positive headlines. Johnson was the same and look what happened to him. When she starts cocking up the establishment will move against her, just like they did with Johnson, and with an election looming there’ll be no honeymoon period.

Starmer on the other hand seems to think governing is simply managing the status quo and day-to-day operations. He’ll keep the establishment happy but piss off everyone else with his lack of action. TBH I don’t know which is worse.

Blog:
Why 🛒 supporting the human handgrenade?
Cos 🛒 knows she's mad & thinks she'll blow & he can make a comeback.
Why did I give her this nickname?
Cos she blows up all she toucheshttps://t.co/lYbYzyx5af pic.twitter.com/JleSeUbcjG

— Dominic Cummings (@Dominic2306) July 20, 2022

Starmer on the other hand seems to think governing is simply managing the status quo and day-to-day operations. He’ll keep the establishment happy but piss off everyone else with his lack of action. TBH I don’t know which is worse.

That’s easy for me – as a Labour supporter you can only shape(ish) the Labour party.

You don’t have a whole lot of control what goes on with the Tories.

So I’m always going to be disappointed with my own side more if they don’t push back.

(PS Cummings tweets are too cryptic for me generally. I mostly haven’t a clue what he’s talking about.)

I’m cutting Truss a tiny bit of slack because I believe Sunak is the worst possible kind of Tory.

All the good stuff for him and crumbs for everyone else.

Also Sunak – “the government doesn’t have money of its own.” I despite him for that line.

Truss could come in and sort energy bills properly and she’ll win the next election. There may be other easy wins for her.

SKS needs to come up with some positive reasons for people to vote for him. I may be misremembering but I think Blair ran a very positive campaign.

Starmerism, to the degree that it has been defined by anything, has been distinguished by the effort to distance Labour from Jeremy Corbyn, including his programme for public ownership, writes @meadwaj.

https://t.co/tdLlb1hyH8

— The New Statesman (@NewStatesman) July 26, 2022

I don’t mind James Meadway – he’s was John Mcdonnell’s economic advisor. He’s very keen to point out that the previous manifestos were fully costed so Starmer is not offering anything new here.

(I don’t agree with fully costed logic but for a level playing field.)

NEW from @IpsosUK – where is the political centre and what does this mean for current hot topics such as tax, strikes, public ownership etc? Quick thread:

1/ Public overall lean pro public ownership, right to strike but also strict limits on immigration / aid & tough on crime. pic.twitter.com/ruiWxo9gQq

— Keiran Pedley (@keiranpedley) July 27, 2022

Look at public ownership opinion data.

What an arse hole. Hope that sacking backfires big time for Starmer.

Keir Starmer sacks shadow transport minister who joined picket line; train drivers vote for fresh strike – live https://t.co/PjmtuNzJDv

— The Guardian (@guardian) July 27, 2022

I am lost now, if the Labour Party does not stand by ordinary working people asking for a cost of living pay rise/acceptable working conditions what the **** do they stand for?

FFS.

Is this because the RMT aren’t Labour affiliated? On the face of it is seems a crazy decision, and even if that’s the case and it’s because of that reason, that’s not really been well communicated to the public, and additionally that looks completely mercenary

Labour have lost their way on this

Are there any Starmer apologists still willing to defend this **** pathetic right wing nutjob. There was a few “centrists” quite willing to do some union bashing when the RMT announced the strikes (iirc the excuse was that the daily mail might say nasty things) maybe they would like to post some pictures from monty python and blame Corbyn for labour deserting working people, or maybe they are too busy calling anyone who wants to talk about policy instead of just bashing the political caricatures on “tory” threads communists.

Starmer has allowed the oligarchs complete control of labour, there is no opposition, just a pretence of choice.

MSP on fire there.

It really is a rotten state of affairs that we appear to have no way out.

And it’s getting worse.

Also I don’t want to hear any longer this is about electability. Starmer could’ve have been electable and progressive.

I’ve been reasonably supportive of Starmer for the most part, but I’m really disappointed with this move.

Reminds me of Corbyn’s pickle over Brexit tbh – hasn’t defined a clear position and looks lost as a result.

Sigh.

It’s going down like a cup of the proverbial cold sick locally with the party -across the board lefties, centerists and everything in-between. At least one of the most critical voices is mates with a shadow front-bencher so I hope this is getting fed back.

The bigger issue is that the labour party has become pathologically afraid of taking a stand on anything because it will be unpopular with someone – we aint going to win any elections like that – the Tories will Tory their way back once they have a new leader (even if it’s Truss)

Stupid and naive of Starmer. Although, he wasnt sacked for being on the picket liine, it’s being spun like that. Which was obviously going to happen.

As above, the Labour Party are trying too hard not upset anyone.
They wont call out Brexit for the disaster it is for fear of upsetting the Red Wall Brexiteers. – instead they should be emphasising that people were lied to and our long-term strategy should be with the EU – I accept it can’t happen overnight.

They won’t support the strikers because it’ll upset the Tories who think strikers are communist scum.

We need someone less timid.

Are there any Starmer apologists still willing to defend this

Not a Starmer apologist, but looking at this in more detail, the story is one of internal party arguing, It’s clear the RMT have been used as a prop to force the Labour leadership the result that occurred. neither Tarry or Starmer come out of this looking like grown ups IMO

Petty internal squabbling gets in the way of looking after the interests of people again.

Nah, it’s Starmer’s take on unions and industrial action. It’s now the Hard Labour Party.

Petty internal squabbling gets in the way of looking after the interests of people again

Nah – not even close. The issue is about supporting normal working people in a cost of living crisis and against the tide of increasingly poor employment practice. RMT is just the initial skirmishes – teachers and nurses (even the RCN!) are balloting for strike action. private sector employers like the airports have already met worker demands because of the threat of industrial action.

Is Labour seriously not going to support striking nurses?

Nah, it’s Starmer’s take on unions and industrial action.

Oh, don’t misunderstand me, I think Labour’s stance about not supporting the RMT (or unions in general) is unhinged. No arguments. But Tarry is no innocent either, he’s used the RMT for his own purposes here.

But Tarry is no innocent either, he’s used the RMT for his own purposes here.

Possibly especially with the talk about the deselection. However it was Starmer who created the scenario which could be used in his hope of making the daily heil like him.

Tarry is a former national officer for TSSA, which presumably played a part in his position as shadow transport minister. TSSA btw is currently in dispute with rail companies.

The idea that a Labour politician, and former full-time official of a transport trade union, would not openly and publicly lend their support to a transport union demanding a cost of living wage rise, in face of strong opposition from a Tory government which is determined that once again ordinary working people should make all the sacrifices, is frankly ridiculous.

I can’t see how Tarry even had a choice. Abstaining or keeping silent or prevaricate on important headline issues might seem like a reasonable choice for Starmer but many people expect far more from the official party of Opposition.

We spend a lot of time on here taking apart Starmer’s shitty right-wing twitching – when was the last time he did something good that we could applaud? …

And that’s the point.

Everything in this thread has been about the disintegration of the Labour party with Centrists queuing up to find the value of crumbs in Starmer and there isn’t any. The tiny positive crumbs have been stolen by the Tories.

The Centrists have left the thread because they can’t defend him any longer.

The concept of him upsetting the right wing does not wash. When he’s in power he’s going to be exactly the same for fear of losing an election. It will be this constant excuse from the Centrists.

Progressive polices will upset the establishment. You just need to defend them like Lynch does.

We seriously need this coward gone.

Hard to defend Starmer here.
It reminds me of when Corbyn sacked Owen Smith for suggesting a confirmatory referendum on Brexit would be a good idea. Sacked him for not towing the party line.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jul/28/post-corbyn-vision-labour-keir-starmer-leadership?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

There are lots of great points in that.

I think you could be a centrist and have bold, ambitious or at least practical ideas of how to improve the UK. SKS has nothing. It’s a real shame.

I actually remember him saying that they will have ambitious/radical policies before the next election.

I think you could be a centrist and have bold, ambitious or at least practical ideas of how to improve the UK

I don’t think you can, centrism is by definition sitting on the fence. It is the political philosophy equivalent of allowing climate scientists and a denier equal footing in a debate.

Centrism is an “Instagram picture of compassion” that hides the reality, it is engaging the right wing culture wars so you can be seen to be on the good side, without actually wanting the economic changes that would bring equality and greater wellbeing to society. It is accepting that climate change is an existential threat to life on earth, but not willing to commit to solution because the “markets” still want short term greed as a higher priority. Centrism is indecisiveness and fear of change masked as balance.