nickc
Full Member

He is an extremely popular MP

So what? That he’s a popular campaigner in one constituency doesn’t translate to being a good leader of a political party

I said that Corbyn was imo, quote, a shite leader. The comment about him being an extremely popular MP was in response to Danny’s nonsense claim that he was “unelectable”.

When something isn’t working, we need to change it and try something else.

Isn’t that what Liz and Kwazi tried to do? That went well. Untested unfinanced dramatic changes to cause a shock to the system. Or throwing out of all the EU law with no scrutiny, or any versions of that. Yeah, no thanks. Every time a politician says that they have the answers and what we just need to do are these simple things…No thank you.

Isn’t that what Liz and Kwazi tried to do?

Sure. It’s also what Clement Attlee did, so I don’t think a failure means the principle is unsound.

Isn’t that what Liz and Kwazi tried to do? That went well.

Not really. They took the current approach and doubled down on it. So wouldnt really count that as really trying something new.

Isn’t that what Liz and Kwazi tried to do? That went well. Untested unfinanced dramatic changes to cause a shock to the system. Or throwing out of all the EU law with no scrutiny, or any versions of that. Yeah, no thanks. Every time a politician says that they have the answers and what we just need to do are these simple things…No thank you.

Like I keep saying there’s way more to that than meets the eye. BoE was about to perform Q/T a few days before the budget (moving in the opposite direction), Scamming Pension leverage gambling pricks and also Truss/Kwazi didn’t explain what they were going to do ahead of time. They actually should have been allowed to carry out their wishes really for lots of democratic reasons – which could hinder a future progressive government.

And it was totally sorted a few days later by the BoE.

Let’s not let this be the template for never trying something new.

And always remember the market shouldn’t overrule public good. If Truss and Kwazi were offering big spending plans that were good for us – then it wouldn’t be a proper thing that the markets dictated how the government should implement their spending plans.

Bigger picture.

There’s a huge amount of space between what we have now and revolution. I’m not a revolutionary by any measure, I’m actually an uber-pragmatist. When something isn’t working, we need to change it and try something else. What we have now isn’t working, and I have no time for politicians who tell us that they can’t do anything about it

This – the evidence is clear it’s not working but we have a sticky wicket in neoliberalism don’t we?

I believe this is a much to do with MPs/Advisors simply not having/knowing about better ideas as much as being scared off from a different approach – all because we’ve done this shit for way too long and learned to firefight a failing system.

No you made the claim that he was a “dogmatic dinosaur” which you can’t back up. It suggests that he stuck rigidly to outdated policies from a bygone era.

No. I. Did. Not.

His vulnerability to attack because of his age, his face, his mannerisms, probably even his dress sense made it easy for the Tory campaigning machine to PORTRAY him as a dogmatic dinosaur. And enough people were willing to swallow it. I can’t make it any plainer than that, but I’m sure you’ll twist it somehow.

How many pics were released via the RW media of Corbyn in 70s shirt/tie combo, looking a bit like a cross between Kenny Everett and Rolf Harris, shaking hands with someone from the PFLP? I can recall at least two.

Now, why don’t the Tories dredge up pics of Starmer in his former life as a QC? Well, presumably they show him looking professorial, competent, and in the act of prosecuting IRA terrorist or somesuch. So not a good attack line. Corbyn was a gift to the Brexit Tories with their love of three word slogans and childish messaging – something the Leave campaign made evident was a successful tactic with the British electorate (to our eternal shame). Cummings would have been laughing his tits off knowing he had Corbyn to do over. Child’s play for a machiavellian shit like him.

You can go back a bit and look at when Labour elected the wrong Milliband as leader. Again – Ed’s policies were more my cup of tea. But Ed looked a bit weird, and David didn’t. The Tory machine was waiting for a photo op and the poor sod looked a bit weird for a split second eating a bacon sarnie. Political wonks everywhere like to deceive themselves that enough of the electorate read manifestos and watch party political broadcasts. Campaign directors know that is not case, now more than ever. It is totally unfair and childish.

Anyway, this thread is clearly the chosen strutting ground of a few STW big hitting bantams. The mere presence of debate seems to be an issue. No need to occupy anyone further.

His vulnerability to attack because of his age, his face, his mannerisms, probably even his dress sense made it easy for the Tory campaigning machine to PORTRAY him as a dogmatic dinosaur.

Jesus – you could easily talking about Johnson there (bar is age.)

Now, why don’t the Tories dredge up pics of Starmer in his former life as a QC? Well, presumably they show him looking professorial, competent, and in the act of prosecuting IRA terrorist or somesuch. So not a good attack line.

It won’t stop them trying.

Actually, sorry, one last thing.

The Guardian opinion piece linked to up thread somewhere about how Labour and tory policies are becoming indistinguishable…

It is by Larry Elliott. Two things the uninitiated need to know about Larry.

1) He’s a **** idiot.

2) He is consistently the wrongest commentator across a range of topics. For sheer consistency of wrongness, he is unrivalled. Just don’t accept any racing tips from him. His hot tip for the 4 o’clock at Haydock Park will probably turn out to have been a runner in the previous night’s greyhound action action at Walthamstow.

Now that really is me done on this one.

It is by Larry Elliott. Two things the uninitiated need to know about Larry.

1) He’s a **** idiot.

If you say so Danny, it must be true.

The Guardian opinion piece linked to up thread somewhere about how Labour and tory policies are becoming indistinguishable

The Guardian are simply late to the party.

Both parties are fiscally very similar, and want to utilise the market as a *useful* tool for offering solutions – over the government paying.

That puts them close enough to not make much of a difference.

That puts them close enough to not make much of a difference.

“much” doing some heavy lifting there. Elsewhere on this thread we see that C who most not be named was actually proposing a mainstream euro social democratic policy programme at the last GE, which by the same token wouldn’t have made much of a difference. Hey ho. We just need to have a successful revolution to join all those other countries which have made it to the utopian sunlit socialist uplands…

“much” doing some heavy lifting there. Elsewhere on this thread we see that C who most not be named was actually proposing a mainstream euro social democratic policy programme at the last GE, which by the same token wouldn’t have made much of a difference. Hey ho. We just need to have a successful revolution to join all those other countries which have made it to the utopian sunlit socialist uplands…

And your supporting evidence is?

Corbyn was talking large swathes of Nationalisation just for a start. I just can’t see your comparison of Starmer and Reeves who have constantly supported a neoliberal / tip-toe austerity agenda.

It’s not even in the same ball-park.

Starmer:

“I set out the fiscal rules which will guide the next Labour government and from which we will not deviate. I declared then that debt will fall as a share of GDP and that day-to-day spending must be sustainably funded. Everything Labour does in government will be in keeping with those rules. ”

That’s depriving the country of money to spend. Simple economics means small deficit = no radical spending. Zilch.

Now, why don’t the Tories dredge up pics of Starmer in his former life as a QC?

Well I missed the pictures of “Corbyn in 70s shirt/tie combo” but photos certainly weren’t the main attack line by the right-wing press against Corbyn.

You are absolutely right that the Tory press are incomparably kinder to Starmer than they were towards Corbyn but it has nothing to do with Starmer being a suited former DPP which leaves them unable to attack him.

The reason there was an unprecedented vilification of Corbyn, and in comparison kid glove treatment of Starmer, is that Corbyn presented a massive unprecedented threat to neoliberalism and the 40 year experiment.

Keir Starmer poses no threat at all to neoliberalism and the power and wealth of the elite, for that reason they are perfectly happy for him to temporarily look after Number 10 until the Tories return.

But it wasn’t the right-wing press that was the main reason for Labour’s defeat under Corbyn.

A day or two before the 2017 general election the Daily Mail devoted 13 pages directly attacking Corbyn:

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/jun/07/daily-mail-devotes-13-pages-to-attack-on-labour-apologists-for-terror

A couple of days later the Labour Party saw the greatest increase in share of the vote since 1945 and had an extra 30 MPs.

The single most important reason for the 80 seat Tory majority last general election (apart from first-past-the-post) was the constant and relentless sabotage and attacks by the right-wing within the Labour Party. It caused far more damage than any amount of pages (or photos) in the Daily Mail.

Voters can and do often dismiss attacks from the right-wing press with the attitude “well it’s the Daily Mail, what do you expect”, but when it is from the Labour Party itself it’s a whole new ballgame.

https://labourlist.org/2017/02/mandelson-i-am-working-every-day-to-bring-down-corbyn/

Yeah, and Ian Austin shall forever be on my I’d love to tackle in real life list.

Vile, vile man.

My Dad had calming words with John Mann the other day too – in person – over the Corbyn savagery. He just smirked and walked off. But at least we discovered aren’t all right wingers around here.

@ernielynch have you noticed Paul Mason’s descent into USA type military madness recently?

What an interestingly bizarre turn of logic he’s taken.

I don’t generally get involved with political threads, I don’t study or follow politics generally speaking, but one thing I can’t get my head around is Starmer’s steadfast refusal to consider even looking at rejoining the EU. More and more of the public are asking questions about starting discussions about closer cooperation with the EU with a view to rejoining, yet Starmer just dismisses it out of hand. In doing so, he’s really not giving those considering actually voting for Labour as a real alternative to the Tories any real change; there’s no ‘clear water’ between them, that I can see. Well, apart from the likes of Braverman… 😖

one thing I can’t get my head around is Starmer’s steadfast refusal to consider even looking at rejoining the EU

I’m wondering (actually desperately hoping) it’s some sort of political long game and he knows that saying “yes we’ll look at rejoining” now would lead to the Tories crying about how Starmer is going against the will of the people and ignoring a democratic vote and “if he does this how can you trust him with anything?!” rhetoric and that if/when he’s PM, he’ll take a more open position on it.

Equally, I’m not remotely convinced by that, he could just be a red Tory.

Don’t forget that Corbyn was calling for Article 50 to be triggered more or less the day after the referendum result, he was just as much a Eurosceptic as many on the Tory benches.

Edit: I wonder if some of it is simply that the public are sick to death of hearing about bloody Brexit and he knows not to keep banging on about it – part of the reason Boris got elected with such a large majority was his promise to Get Brexit Done and move on.

Interesting analysis of Starmer’s actual position on Europe

one thing I can’t get my head around is Starmer’s steadfast refusal to consider even looking at rejoining the EU.

He already has the remainers on board. He’s targeting the disenfranchised red wall brexit-voting demographic.

Don’t forget that Corbyn was calling for Article 50 to be triggered more or less the day after the referendum result, he was just as much a Eurosceptic as many on the Tory benches.

It is probably also worth remembering that Corbyn agreeing with Keir Starmer in 2019 that there should a second referendum had a devastating affect on support for the Labour Party in the last general election.

And that the leader of the LibDems, who campaigned to remain in the EU without even bothering to have a second referendum, lost her seat.

I am guessing that Starmer hasn’t forgotten all that. Although I totally agree with your suggestion that whatever Starmer says now doesn’t in any way guarantee what he will be saying or doing in a couple of years time.

A fact which will be fully exploited by the Tories during the next general election campaign.

He already has the remainers on board.

Until he starts losing them to Libdem/SNP.

It is probably also worth remembering that Corbyn agreeing with Keir Starmer in 2019 that there should a second referendum had a devastating affect on support for the Labour Party in the last general election

I think it is stretching it a bit to suggest that any single policy, especially the 2nd ref, had any significant affect on the labour parties support at the GE. In fact as you said, the most significant impact was on the personal attacks on the leader from both within the party and supported by the wider media. Personally I think that in that environment Corbyn could have presented a near perfect policy based manifesto for the countries needs (within or outside the eu), and still the result would have been the same.

Personally I think that in that environment Corbyn could have presented a near perfect policy based manifesto for the countries needs (within or outside the eu), and still the result would have been the same.

Agree, people were swayed/fooled by good old Johnson and getting Brexit done. The more aware people are probably regretting that now!

Unfortunately Starmer is not even attempting a near perfect policy based manifesto for the countries needs so doesn’t offer anything other than not scaring the voters by coming across a bit socialist

Great quote from the Labourlist that Ernie links to above

“The idea of Jeremy Corbyn being prime minister and implementing policies that actually benefit the people terrifies the establishment, so it’s no surprise Peter Mandelson has found time in his busy schedule of spending time on oligarch’s yachts to attempt to undermine him,” a Labour source said.

He wants only the hardest of Tory brexits
Wants to trash the green belt.
Is against voting reforms.
Against supporting strikers.
Why the **** would I vote for him?
A massive chance for change is bring thrown away.
I expect Tories to be **** ,I had hoped for better from labour.

It is probably also worth remembering that Corbyn agreeing with Keir Starmer in 2019 that there should a second referendum had a devastating affect on support for the Labour Party in the last general election

I think it is stretching it a bit to suggest that any single policy, especially the 2nd ref, had any significant affect on the labour parties support at the GE.

The devastating effect of the Labour’s second referendum policy in the so-called red wall seats is widely accepted by all sides, including the blairites, hence the fact that it has been endlessly discussed.

It was consequently a huge factor in why the Tories ended up with an 80 seat majority. Some people seem to forget why they are called “red wall seats”

The devastating effect of the Labour’s second referendum policy in the so-called red wall seats is widely accepted by all sides

Most people put Corbyn’s leadership at the top of the reasons why 2019 was a disaster, A fact that has been endlessly discussed and widely accepted.

Most people put Corbyn’s leadership at the top of the reasons why 2019 was a disaster, A fact that has been endlessly discussed and widely accepted.

Absolutely. You can include me among those people. As I said yesterday on the previous page:

I agree that Corbyn was a shite leader. Amongst other things he was weak, as was seen by the way he pandered to Starmer despite Starmer doing all that he could to undermine him, including being part of a choreographed front bench resignation stunt.

You can also add Corbyn’s political correct nonsense as another thing that probably didn’t go down well in the ‘red wall’ seats.

Which is ironic as Corbyn’s stance on a second EU referendum and political correctness are the two things which probably go down rather well on STW 😉

Yep, I think you’re spot on there!

Anyway, Starmer, Brexit, another view:

On the face of it, it’s just another head-in-hands endorsement of Brexit by the Leader of the Opposition. Writing in the Express on Wednesday morning, Keir Starmer made the usual deadening promises: no return to the EU. No return to the single market. No return to the customs union. It’s repeated like a magic incantation, the secret code he must utter to gain access to the temple of the Brexit debate.

Whenever Starmer issues one of these statements, Remainers on Twitter slump into anger and despair. Even as the disastrous ill-effects of Brexit become clear, the Labour leader apparently refuses to accept the obvious. And there is ultimately something profoundly unhealthy about a political culture in which one of the main causes of the country’s economic malaise cannot be spoken about by either the Prime Minister or the Leader of the Opposition.

But read a little further and things become more interesting. In truth, Labour’s Brexit position is far more nuanced, and much more radical, than it first appears. It has been carefully couched in the language of Brexit defence, but the proposals themselves promise a return to a much closer relationship with the Continent. It is the start of a journey back to Europe.

from https://inews.co.uk/opinion/brexit-collapsing-britain-drifting-europe-2376482 (edited to highlight a bit)

^^^^

Anyone with any sense knows that any ‘improvement’ to Brexit means reversing part of it in some way. It is such a fundamentally stupid concept. 🤷‍♂️

But if he specifically rules out rejoining the SM & CU, he is going to spend a lot of time, money and political capital turd polishing.

I can’t vote for a former DPP and QC who is willing to trash his credibility by being forced to pretend Brexit is a good idea. It means he has been corrupted by Brexshit too.

Nah, Libdem or Green for me.

Anyway, Starmer, Brexit, another view

@twodog posted that up the page… was I the only one who followed their link?

I didn’t comment on it, as it’s sensible boring stuff that’s not really worth discussing with either the “tell the morons they were wrong and campaign on reversing Brexit” or the “Starmer isn’t saying the same thing in 2023 as he was in 2019, he’s a (B)liar” brigades that fill this thread.

^^^^

All of which is fine, so long as Starmer’s pollsters have got their maths right.

If my vote isn’t needed, then they’re on the right track.

https://www.bestforbritain.org/mrp_polling_new_boundaries_june_2023

Best for Britain MRP Polling analysis.

The full breakdown of our new polling is available now! https://t.co/7BOPeonGE4

— Best for Britain (@BestForBritain) June 7, 2023

I admit to not reading absolutely everything in that ^^ link (there’s a lot of stuff!) but based on what I saw it suggests a “Labour 140+ seat majority with 470 seats”, which when you consider that it is a MRP poll, so therefore will specifically take into consideration Labour’s current brexit stance, and commissioned by a pro-Remain organisation, it seems to very much undermine any argument that Labour’s brexit stance will have a significantly negative effect on their vote.

Whilst I appreciate that they might want to explore all possible scenarios this particular one really isn’t plausible:

New analysis assuming that Reform UK will stand aside in Conservative marginals, shows that Labour could drop to 401 seats and the Conservatives would rise to 201 seats.

It seems very certain that won’t be happening:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/jan/04/reform-uk-field-candidate-against-every-tory-next-election-richard-tice

I also found this assumption a tad bizarre:

We assumed that 100% of Reform UK’s vote would transfer to the Conservatives in marginal seats.

Plus I can’t work out what the percentages are without the ‘don’t knows’ that the seat predictions are based on – I’m pisspoor at maths! Obviously the Tories are going to poll more than the 23% shown and Labour more than 35%. And the LibDems more than 7%!

But the poll findings should please Starmer.

But the poll findings should please Starmer.

Yes. He’ll feel no hesitation about doubling down on his Tory tribute act now.

But the poll findings should please Starmer.

Yep, and prove (to him) that his Tory lite approach is great so no need to change it.

Saw a good one yesterday: Choosing previous governments by the lesser of two evils delivers the government of today.

Something like that.

Yep, and prove (to him) that his Tory lite approach is great so no need to change it.

And yet all the evidence in the world is we desperately need change. The upside down.

BREAKING: Shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves delays planned delivery of £28bn green prosperity fund as result of poor economic backdrop.

— Pippa Crerar (@PippaCrerar) June 9, 2023

Oh **** off you inept bunch of tired old economic cranks.

Labour will mismanage the economy.

It gets worse on a daily basis.

None of this is necessary – in fact – entirely the opposite; progressive voters are being penalised for wanting a Labour government that is simply not fit for purpose.

pic.twitter.com/MID1JFXsHi

— any other leader would be 20 points ahead (@anyotherleader) June 9, 2023

Imagine being a party where you’re based on the worst bits of wonky Conservatism?