It’s a pitta that people can’t see though this.

I imagine it would be a rich Turkish doner?

Who when he saw Starmer apparently called out, “halal, is it meat you’re looking for?”.

More self inflicted drama for Sir Keir Shawarma

More self inflicted drama for Sir Keir Shawarma

I think that’s a strong contender for pune of the evening. Ok I’m scraping the barrel now. sorry. 😀

The Guardian: Why is Starmer peddling the Tory ‘magic money tree’ line on public spending? It’s just bad economics.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/aug/05/magic-money-tree-tory-line-labour-keir-starmer-tax

Some spot on hitting the nail on the head in that article….

The Labour party bringing up the topic of fiscal responsibility to fight the Tories is akin to a company putting their rival’s inferior products in their shop window. It’s just free advertising. Within days of Starmer making the “magic money tree” speech, a Tory MP was using the phrase on LBC. That the line is now being used in the context of Tory tax and spending plans does not mark progress. It simply shows how the right’s framing has been so successful that even the left has adopted it.

What’s particularly grating is that, when it comes to the magic money tree, it isn’t simply that Starmer is reinvigorating a Tory narrative – it’s that he’s breathing life into one that was already dead. The public’s concern about debt and borrowing was always era-specific to the aftermath of the 2008 financial crash, and the pandemic has well and truly eradicated it.

I wasn’t aware of this:

https://mobile.twitter.com/peoplesmomentum/status/1555514769477697544

Starmer really is every bit as dishonest and untrustworthy as Boris Johnson.

I doubt anyone is going to knock “Boris the Liar” from top ranking on that front for a long time. He really is in a league of his own. Literally every time he opens his mouth he’s lying, often to cover a previous lie.

Not joining in with the “all as bad as each other” narrative spekkie? Starmer declared football tickets a day late, hasn’t yet published a general election manifesto etc… he’s just as bad as Johnson. 🥱

The public’s concern about debt and borrowing was always era-specific to the aftermath of the 2008 financial crash, and the pandemic has well and truly eradicated it.

Well, that’s Guardian bubble living for you. The public’s concern about debt and borrowing predates 2008, and is very much still alive now. It tends to only apply to Labour though, which is what Starmer seems to be trying to change. Brown tried to do it defensively by hiding public debt in private debt via PFIs etc (not the way in my opinion, expensive and restrictive) and Starmer is trying to do it aggressively with over simplistic rhetoric of the type that has been so successful for the Vote Leave Tories in recent years (also not the way in my opinion, it’s time to re-build trust in politicians).

Labor are squandering their opportunities again. A mortally wounded Tory party unencumbered by leadership or any credibility in anyone’s eyes, facing an economy in freefall. Here we are with a labour party ripping itself to pieces. Momentum had their chance, well two in fact, and came up short. The party needs to figure out a way of coming together for the next ge which in real terms isn’t very far off.

They are definitely not all as bad as each other. But imo Starmer is every bit as dishonest and untrustworthy as Johnson – two career politicians who will say whatever they feel they need to say when standing for election, with complete disregard for honesty.

Probably the only significant difference is that in comparison Starmer doesn’t open his mouth much.

But to stand on a picket line with a microphone in his hand declaring that it is “really important for politicians to come out and support you and stand with you” and claim that as a member of the shadow cabinet he was proud to do so, and then a few months later (after winning the election he was trying to win) announce that shadow ministers must not go on picket lines, and threaten disciplinary action against those who do, is crass dishonesty of exactly the same magnitude as Johnson.

But imo Starmer is every bit as dishonest and untrustworthy as Johnson

We’d never have guessed that was you opinion. Well, unless we happen across any page of any political thread that is. Johnson can’t be matched. He’s in a league of his own. Starmer doesn’t come close to him in lies. Not falling into the government’s well placed booby traps as regards the rail unions doesn’t come close to Johnson’s litany of lies, both the everyday kind and the nation redefining kind. IMO.

We’d never have guessed that…..

Has “I” now been replaced by the royal “we” Kelvin? Or are you extending your self-appointed role as policeman of political threads and now feel that you are speaking on behalf of everyone?

Can I also expect IMO to be soon replaced with IOO?

Keep up the repetition of false equivalence as regards Starmer and Johnson. They’ll be plenty of others buying into it I have no doubt. But why you think I’m alone in noticing your posts I have no idea. Perhaps because others wisely just skip them or avoid commenting on them?

But why you think I’m alone in noticing your posts I have no idea.

You alone appear to be talking in behalf of other people. When I express an opinion I use the term “I” not “we”.

But I don’t know perhaps you are sitting in a room with a dozen people and you have all agreed that you don’t agree with my opinion.

Although more likely the reality is that you would rather keep political threads whistle clean echo chambers where there is a universal consensus which everyone agrees on. It seems to be the stw preference to be fair.

Ok, only I notice your posts, and your agenda as regards painting Starmer as just as bad as Johnson in all the political threads. Happy now?

There is no echo chamber here in this forum. And disagreeing with you isn’t part of an attempt to make the forum one.

There might however be a bit of a “consensus” in this thread about Starmer, and I might sometimes be foolish enough to go against the grain and post something not entirely negative about him here, but that consensus mostly comes from the fact that most people avoid this thread like the plague. What’s the point in engaging?

Actually, what is the point of engaging?!? I should have learnt my lesson by now.

I’ve noticed too!

Which clearly means at least two of us are wrong… 🤣

Ernie’s view is that Starmer is as bad as Johnson – I don’t agree but the chances of anyone persuading the master debater is about zero I suspect.

I will always see it that Starmer is worse as he’s meant to be the one that stands up for the rest of us.

Johnson, Truss etc just playing to their own crowd. Doing the Tory thing.

This is the problem with arguments built on competence rather than ideology.

The Guardian: Why is Starmer peddling the Tory ‘magic money tree’ line on public spending? It’s just bad economics.

Well he’s not only categorically wrong on how the system operates – there is a magic money tree, the BoE that issues money to the Treasury but he’s also not doing his voters any favours because his model of growth by balancing the books will deprive them of redistribution.

Ok, only I notice your posts, and your agenda as regards painting Starmer as just as bad as Johnson in all the political threads

I think they can be bad in different ways.

Starmer is meant to be the way out for us, and he’s not going there. That makes it so much worse – for me.

Ah, applying different standards. I’m guilty of that myself. I expect much more from Labour* politicians than Tory ones. That doesn’t make Starmer as bad Johnson. Or Reeves as bad as Zahawi. Or Lammy as bad as Truss. Or Rayner as bad as Raab.

[ *and politicians from the other parties as well ]

The false equivalence on “honesty” is still odd though. Take the standards commissioner’s reports… Starmer’s breaches “minor and/or inadvertent”, Johnson’s breaches “neither inadvertent nor minor”. Just the same… 🤷🏻‍♂️

Yes, I would rather Starmer was turning down free football tickets… never mind declaring them on time but… “the same” as Johnson… nah… get back to me when he’s slipping his security to meet ex-KGB agents in secret.

Actually, what is the point of engaging?!?

You ask the question but yet you can’t help yourself.

I will repeat – to stand on a picket line with a microphone in his hand declaring that it is “really important for politicians to come out and support you and stand with you” and claim that as a member of the shadow cabinet he was proud to do so, and then a few months later (after winning the election he was trying to win) announce that shadow ministers must not go on picket lines, and threaten disciplinary action against those who do, is crass dishonesty of exactly the same magnitude as Johnson.

That is my opinion. You might have a different opinion but it doesn’t mean that it is the “correct” opinion, as you seem to think it is.

Starmer was standing in the Labour leadership election when it went to a picket line and declared that it was important for politicians to support trade unions in disputes and that as a member of the shadow cabinet he was proud to do so.

A few months later having won that election and with his eye on another election he completely changes his stated principles and sacks a junior shadow minister for defying his ban on supporting trade unions at their picket lines.

That betrays his staggering level of dishonesty and untrustworthiness. Now you might well argue that you support his tactic and that he should lie, deceive, and mislead as necessary, to win elections.

But it is quite disingenuous to claim that it is a false comparison with Johnson. It has very clear and valid comparisons with Johnson imo

Just to be clear I don’t think that Starmer is currently a “as bad as Johnson”, he has the constraints placed on him as leader of the Labour Party, Johnson has no such constraints.

But when it comes to honesty and trustworthiness I see little to differentiate the two, sadly.

Btw some seem to think that there is nothing that Starmer can do to satisfy me. That is clearly nonsense, and he could start off by being honest.

To say Starmer is anywhere near as bad as Johnson is just ridiculous. We all know he’s the ultimate class traitor (according to the usual suspects on here) because he’s not rapidly left wing enough.

Once again confusing their own little echo Chambers with reality.

because he’s not rapidly left wing enough.

He is not even what he says he is.

Or at least what he said he was a few months ago.

Now it’s anyone’s guess what he is as he’s only offering “a clean slate”.

Just an excuse for dumping the 2019 manifesto and producing a new one when we finally get to a general election, no? It is true that beyond some commitments towards the tax and business regime that most voters won’t care about, and the valuable but already factored in green stuff, we don’t know what’ll be in that manifesto, and that is frustrating. But manifestos are published on the run up to elections… for now the opposition’s job is to scrutinise the government. I fully expect that manifesto to be no where near as close to my own politics as either the 2017 or 2019 manifestos… but not enough people voted with me in support of those… so we won’t be getting what was is them, sadly… oh, and, yes, the world and the UK have changed considerably since then, and will do over the next year or so, so that is more than just an excuse I suppose.

Actually, what is the point of engaging?

So you can tell us what to think, and back seat moderate anyone who disagrees with you.

We all know he’s the ultimate class traitor (according to the usual suspects on here) because he’s not rapidly left wing enough.

If you say so. My problem with him is that he’s fundamentally dishonest. I expect it from Johnson, but I trusted Starmer enough to vote for him, and feel badly let down.

So you can tell us what to think

You mean disagree? And post that dissent?

Isn’t that how we avoid the forum becoming an “echo chamber”?

You mean disagree? And post that dissent?

No.

But Tories have been lying for years on just about every facet of society.

Their whole ideology is built on a lie that the private sector knows best and state can’t generate wealth. Trickle-down etc. That efficiency is the reason things don’t work as well as they could.

It’s all a lie.

But with Johnson we got the melodrama and the script. And the character.

Nothing about Johnson suprised me.

Previous to Johnson the scathing lie of austerity. One huge lie. It’s always been there.

Starmer hasn’t done enough to push back against the Tories despite all this – as a Labour member (up until recently) this enrages me.

Yes Starmer has been dishonest with Labour members. It’s not close to Bojo levels though- come on! Even if you don’t include his private life he is well beyond Starmer. Number of lies, size of the lies whichever way you look at it Bojo is worse.

Also with the fiscal responsibility thing Labour could attack the Tories from so many angles without even mentioning the Magic Money Tree or any economic model.

Rishi Sunak writing off that money, all the dodgy PPE deals etc

Previous to Johnson the scathing lie of austerity. One huge lie. It’s always been there.

Saying that I would love to see this lie come out.

Number of lies, size of the lies…

Well Starmer says a lot less than Johnson so just on that count it should mean less lies. As for the size of the porkies I think claiming that politicians, especially shadow cabinet ministers, should show their support on picket lines, and then a few months later sack a junior shadow for doing precisely that, is as dishonest as anything you might expect from Johnson.

Although I’m not looking at this as some sort of competition between the two.

sack a junior shadow for doing precisely that

He didn’t.

Yes Starmer has been dishonest with Labour members. It’s not close to Bojo levels though- come on! Even if you don’t include his private life he is well beyond Starmer.

What is your measurement? Number of lies or lies as an affect on society

In some ways I saw Starmer at the height of covid and his lack of pushing back against government decisions as totally despicable. He simply didn’t do enough with his voice because he didn’t want to play politics. All of that set the landscape for Johnson doing what he wanted.

So yes of course Starmer wasn’t constantly telling lies like Johnson but he’s become part of an era where an acceptance of values that are to the detriment of society and particularly Labour voters has become normalised.

Because the establishment says so.

There’s just a big picture here about the way the right-wingers act that has been passed off as beneficial to society – that has ultimately turned out to be a massive fragmented corruption of our values.

Think things went wrong from Brexit – no, go back much much further

But as I said earlier what’s the difference between Starmer having a list of jettisoned values and ideas to become elected and what Truss is doing now?

Starmer is called a pragmatist by his supporters. They are Centrists supporting lies just to get their man.

And yet this could be invalidated by having a set of strong values, and selling them to a wide audience – especially in a COLC.

What is your measurement? Number of lies or lies as an affect on society

By either of those metrics Johnson is comfortably worse. Many leagues apart. The only measure they might comparable is as a ratio of lies to expected lies and even by this daft measure you need to put a lot of negative spin on Starmer words and actions (as seen above)

What is your measurement? Number of lies or lies as an affect on society

In some ways I saw Starmer at the height of covid and his lack of pushing back against government decisions as totally despicable. He simply didn’t do enough with his voice because he didn’t want to play politics. All of that set the landscape for Johnson doing what he wanted.

So yes of course Starmer wasn’t constantly telling lies like Johnson but he’s become part of an era where an acceptance of values that are to the detriment of society and particularly Labour voters has become normalised.

Because the establishment says so.

Yes he has been a shit leader, he is nowhere near where a Labour leader should be, he lied to get elected but Bojo is still another level.

I get the idea that SKS’s lie is a big one – he lied about who he is and who he stands for. But really Bojo did the same, he doesn’t give a **** about your average Brexit voter nor red wall voter the fact that WE knew it all along about Boris and that SKS pulled the wool over our eyes is the difference.

As the person who initially made the comparison between Starmer’s and Johnson’s dishonesty can I reemphasize that I am not referring to some sort of competition between the two.

Johnson’s lying is the stuff of legend, a point that I made back when he was London mayor. He was sacked from his first job for lying he was sacked from the Tory front bench for lying and he has never, and will never, stop lying – especially it would appear in his personal life. I doubt that many people could match that record.

What I am referring is the willingness to deliberately lie, deceive, and mislead, specifically to achieve political objectives. In that respect I see little to differentiate the two.

In fact I would go as far as to say that Johnson actually provided more information to give people a fair idea what sort of PM he be likely to make – eg, Tory economic policies, not strongly pro-austerity, pro-brexit, than Starmer has.

If there was a general election tomorrow people would have no real reason to know what sort of PM Starmer would make and the likely policies of his government – he simply isn’t that honest about what he believes in.

And when he does very unambiguously spell out his beliefs and principles, as he very clearly does in the picket line clip above, he will without the slightest hesitation completely reverse them if he feels that it is politically expedient to do so. How, ffs, is that fundamentally different to Johnson?

How does the betrayal that many Remainers feel towards Starmer make him more honest than Johnson?

On every major issue Starmer has deceived and misled. Goddamnit Starmer’s own website spells out with complete clarity where he stands on 10 major issues:

10 Pledges

It turns out that despite still being on his website he doesn’t believe any of it. In fact in many cases he believes the complete opposite.

How does that make him “more” honest than Johnson? And how has Johnson been comparably misleading about his beliefs?

The same people who are so quick to condemn Johnson for dishonesty appear to be extremely reluctant, if not blankly refuse, to condemn Starmer’s dishonesty.

It would appear that for some people the problem isn’t that Johnson is a liar but the wrong sort of liar.

My problem with him is that he’s fundamentally dishonest. I expect it from Johnson, but I trusted Starmer enough to vote for him, and feel badly let down.

Agree. Starmer is measurably not even close to Johnson but I don’t give a shit about Johnson as don’t expect anything better (how could anyone after seeing him fro last 20 years!)
Starmer has turned out to be someone you can never know what they actually stand for and what they do seem to stand for is always up for change. We are looking at another 5 years of tories with potentially the worse leader they have had and that is saying something.

If there was a general election tomorrow people would have no real reason to know what sort of PM Starmer would make and the likely policies of his government

Come a general election, there will be a published election manifesto. And as per other general elections in recent history, I would expect the Labour one to be more transparent and more detailed than the Conservative one. We’ll see when it’s published.

Come a general election, there will be an election manifesto.

This is a key point for me. There isn’t much point in a manifesto at this stage. In fact imo it would just be a stick to beat him with later. Yes, I’d like to see a little more but I’m willing to wait until a bit nearer the election. I’m pretty confident it won’t be exactly what I want but it will be way better than anything offered by Truss/Sunak