Viewing 40 posts - 20,081 through 20,120 (of 21,139 total)
  • Sir! Keir! Starmer!
  • argee
    Full Member

    Ah, so it is perfectly normal for a political party to loose control of three completely unrelated local councils over a period of a month, without even any elections taking place?

    Pretty much, there are way more metrics involved with local elections than national elections, that’s just a simple understanding, especially when you get defections running on populism campaigns.

    When you stop crying with laughter over your joke which references the over 5 thousand dead children in Gaza, you might ponder that Starmer’s problems reach beyond this thread. 

    I find it distasteful that people on this thread politicise issue like the Gaza conflict to try and make out that Starmer is against it as he hates muslims or some other crap, a month ago he was pushing for pauses in the conflict to allow aid and so on in, but that was roundly ignored by politics pushing this whole political ceasefire vote in parliament, as if Netanyahu would even care, or the international community aren’t already working on trying to push this through in some form, through appropriate delegates.

    The only thing i laugh about on this thread is the constant bitching about Starmer at every opportunity, without any solutions being offered on how to improve the chances of beating the tories at the next election, always reminds me of times at work where you can tell the people you want to avoid by how they tend to focus on finding who to blame when something goes wrong, rather than fixing the issue. 

    ernielynch
    Full Member

    I find it distasteful that people on this thread politicise issue like the Gaza conflict to……

    You think that your joke concerning Starmer and “killing babies” was tasteful? No one mentioned the conflict in Gaza until you decided to for the purpose of a cheap shot.

    I merely drew attention that the Greens did well at the expense of Labour in Starmer’s own consistency yesterday. There was no mention of Palestine.

    There is clearly a growing malaise within the Labour Party which you have decided to dismiss as inconsequential, presumably to suit your preferred agenda.

    A third of the Parliamentary Labour Party rebelled against Starmer’s three-line whip recently and approximately 60 Labour Councillors have resigned from the Labour Party resulting in Labour losing control of 3 councils, but you want to pretend that the only problem is a thread on some random cycling forum.

    Btw I have no idea why you appear to believe that everyone posting on STW should be a Labour Party supporter.

    [Mod] please stay on topic. Thanks.

    billabong987
    Full Member

    Is Israel/Gaza off limits here? I did wonder why there wasn’t a thread

    MoreCashThanDash
    Full Member

    Is Israel/Gaza off limits here? I did wonder why there wasn’t a thread

    It got closed after some folk couldn’t play nicely.

    billabong987
    Full Member

    Fair. People should be able to disagree without being dicks about it but this is the internet so probably a fools hope.

    ernielynch
    Full Member

    It got closed after some folk couldn’t play nicely.

    I don’t think that is strictly true. The last thread which was closed because the subjective was being discussed was perfectly polite and civilised when it was closed:

    The Far Right

    It is the subject which appears to be the problem.

    billabong987
    Full Member

    If that’s true I guess it’s a wider internet censorship issue which probably deserves its own thread.

    politecameraaction
    Free Member

    Many things amaze me about UK politics but No.1 is how labour consistently manage to miss open goals

    It’s a nurtured talent to be sure. Leadership needs to realise that it is possible to be popular without being populist. Membership needs to realise that the point is not merely to critique the world, but change it.

    rone
    Full Member

    Leadership needs to realise that it is possible to be popular without being populist

    I agree.

    Labour’s lazy arse approach to not changing the narrative is putting them in a corner with what they can offer, and articulate they can offer.

    It really isn’t hard to construct an argument for state owned water is it?

    People want stuff to be better but they’ve given up the expectation.  If we can get over the ‘communist’ framing of any public benefit (which is frankly ridiculous and set in motion by the right) we can all benefit here (apart monetarists who will scream about private investments being needed to prop the state up – go home.)

    argee
    Full Member

    If Starmer wanted to be a populist he’d have been banging on about ceasefires in interviews to gain the popular opinion at the time, same with sticking with the rules for finances instead of just coming out with a populist statement like ‘tax the rich to pay for whatever’, i’d say labour just now suffer from not following the populist route.

    BillMC
    Full Member

    ‘not merely to critique the world, but change it’ (Theses on Feuerbach!)

    ransos
    Free Member

    i’d say labour just now suffer from not following the populist route.

    I’d say their primary concern is to avoid taking a strong position on anything.

    squirrelking
    Free Member

    You’re confusing populist with popular.

    The former tends to be a load of unattainable nonsense (or comes with a heavy debt), the latter is attainable.

    Populism is sticking with the Tories policies and rhetoric to chase votes, being popular would be the result of actually offering a decent alternative.

    BillMC
    Full Member

    They seem to be taking a strong position on continuing with the neoliberal agenda. Reeves is governed by ‘rules’ so austerity is not up for debate, it’s what we’re going to get.

    ernielynch
    Full Member

    If Starmer wanted to be a populist he’d have been banging on about ceasefires in interviews to gain the popular opinion at the time

    You are not following events very closely.

    “The levels of death and destruction over the past weeks has been intolerable. Far too many innocent Palestinians, including women and children, have been killed as part of military operations. There must be full accountability for all actions.

    As fighting sadly resumes, Israel must not besiege or blockade Gaza. They must comply with international law by protecting innocent lives and civilian infrastructure like schools and hospitals.” – Keir Starmer

    So Starmer has shifted from 100% unqualified support for Netanyahu and his far-right government to a position where he now criticises blockades and talks about the need to comply with international law.

    Although to be fair this changing position is no doubt more connected to the crisis within the Labour Party (which you claim doesn’t exist) than a need to chase votes – Labour’s huge lead over the Tories remains totally solid.

    ransos
    Free Member

    They seem to be taking a strong position on continuing with the neoliberal agenda.

    I meant not taking a strong position on anything challenging the status quo. You’re right of course, but it won’t be seen that way. Overton window…

    kelvin
    Full Member

    100% unqualified support for Netanyahu and his far-right government

    Only in your head.

    talks about the need to comply with international law

    The Labour Party forced a debate in parliament to say that international law should be applied to Israeli actions. The government did not back it, and ministers spoke against it. Current UK and a series of USA governments continue to block ICC investigations where Israel is concerned.

    wbo
    Free Member

    Never had these problems with Jeremy Corbyn …. (unless you’re jewish)

    Didn’t work out so well in UK elections though, but no point learning from the past it seems in some quarters

    Edit – that’s prettty mean, but you can pin a lot of the entire sihtshow from Brext -> Boris -> Liz Truss -> Rishi Sunak on Corbuyn and his inability to take a firm position on Brexit (well he e did, he supported it ), then failing to provide an electable , effective opposition. But don’t let that bother you

    ernielynch
    Full Member

    Only in your head.

    Yes of course….. Starmer has been criticising Israel from the very start of the current conflict!

    That’s why the Labour Party is in a crisis!!

    https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/sir-keir-starmer-hamas-terrorism-israel-defend-itself/

    argee
    Full Member

    Starmer has been calling for humanitarian pauses since the start of the conflict, an actual ceasefire is almost unworkable, hence why that wording was not used for the last pause, there are a lot of countries and people pushing for further pauses, withdrawals, etc as we speak, the UK may be involved in those one way or another, one of those is the push for UN peacekeeping forces to be deployed to Gaza, and also provision of aid.

    dissonance
    Full Member

    Edit – that’s prettty mean, but you can pin a lot of the entire sihtshow from Brext -> Boris -> Liz Truss -> Rishi Sunak on Corbuyn

    You could but you would be wrong and, frankly, dodging that the lunatic “moderates” with their hatred of the left did far more to enable the hard right. I can see why those “moderates” are unwilling to accept the outcome of their actions though and, copying the hard right, seek to blame anyone but themselves.
    As for learn from previous elections. Perhaps you could do so yourself and particularly brexit. Sadly though I expect we will just get “wahhhh Corbyn” and “who else can you vote for” as democracy gets further screwed.

    tjagain
    Full Member

    Very much so – the rightwing of labour deliberately sabotaged Corbyn ( tho an easy target) and in Scotland we had a labour / tory pact that gave the tories 10 seats which saved Mays government.  without that labour / tory pact in Scotland the tories would have fallen and we would never have had brexit.  It was orchestrated by a right wing labour MP and his team

    rone
    Full Member

    I love how Corbyn alway gets dug up to remind us how good Starmer is at being a conservative. Yeah we all know you can win elections on shifting to the right. The Tories are evidence of everything you hate including being successful.

    But that’s not really what we all want is it?

    Excuses are made for Starmer every step of the way – I remember the days of debating the semantics of state-owned utilities when he was backing off from that.  The excuse was flat-out nationalisation was a bad idea – blah blah, and Starmer is probably looking at partial state ownership. An absolute terribly  unpragmatic position actually.  You know – people with not much cash looking for solutions to failed private ownership.

    He was conning you too – as a moderate, to convince you he was a pragmatic progressive (he’s the exact opposite). Make no mistake Labour aren’t interested in fixing much at all unless it features the word ‘reform’ – because state house building apparently will simply ‘happen’ with reform.

    Bullshit. All of it.

    Time to admit the days of defending Starmer’s positioning on policy is a shill. And Centrists will use the word unworkable because they like doing the heavy lifting for the right-wing because like the right they’re not interested in solution. Just whinging about Tories.

    The sad fact about all of this is Starmer could fix a whole load of things – but he’s busy taking bad advice about macro-economics whilst making sure his short term positions are secured

    Sad times.

    argee
    Full Member

    Don’t think anyone makes excuses for Starmer, just defends against daft accusations on here, as for your points, as the opposition party, they can’t make promises like nationalisation when there’s pretty much zero chance of being able to do it, financially and commercially, your accusations around centrists are that they stay within the realms of reality, where there is no magic money tree, sorry, MMT, or the ability for the opposition to make promises they have no chance of keeping.

    The problem i see with the labour party is the far left believing that they are the majority, and that they can just state a policy and it will happen, same with the tories and the far right, the extremes on either side think they have more sway and public backing than they actually have.

    tjagain
    Full Member

    The lefties in labour sit around the social democrats inmost of europe – ie a bit left of centre.  Starmers position is centre to centre right – like the CDU in Germany
    Nationalisation is of course possible and affordable – take railways – as franchises end take them into state ownership – zero cost.  Or water – we all know the privitised water companies are taking huge sums out in profits while not meeting basic standards – so ramp up the standards and use huge fines to deal with the pollution and leakage issues.  Thus water becomes unprofitable and the private owners simply give up .  Zero cost.

    there of course are other state owned models that are not traditional privitisation – mutuals, not for profits, companies limited by something or other.

    See Scottish water or lothian transport for two such things

    BillMC
    Full Member

    ‘Most Britons believe that trains, water and energy should sit within the public sector’  YouGov

    politecameraaction
    Free Member

    the rightwing of labour deliberately sabotaged Corbyn

    I remember the day when Emily Thornberry said she’d slaughter six kittens for every day that Corbyn didn’t present a phone-in show for Iranian state TV. Awful. And then when Ed Miliband said he’d put LSD in Middlesbrough’s water supply if Corbyn didn’t write a gushing foreword for an anti-Semitic book on economics!

    tjagain
    Full Member

    How about the constant anti Corbyn briefings from the labour right? It happened – don’t pretend it did not. did it make a difference? IMO yes as the labour right were feeding attack lines to the right wing press.

    Its also true that the labour / tory pact in Scotland led to 10 tory MPs getting elected and that saved Mays government.

    argee
    Full Member

    ‘Most Britons believe that trains, water and energy should sit within the public sector’  YouGov

    Yep, i do as well, but the actual cost for the country is horrific if it were to happen, privatisation was built with the foresight of making it too complex and too expensive to backtrack on, the only way of it working effectively would be to be like Russia, and just take back the utilities, maybe jail those who fight it, but i think the UK are a long way off this type of government.

    tjagain
    Full Member

    argee – very simple and cheap to do with the political will for water and transport. See my post above. Energy would be harder but still not impossible

    ernielynch
    Full Member

    Don’t think anyone makes excuses for Starmer, just defends against daft accusations on here

    Yeah you make excuses for Starmer everyday of the week. It is frankly staggering that you should even deny it.

    And what are these “daft” accusations you speak of?

    As far as I can see all the criticism levelled at Starmer centres on the fact that he has abandoned all ten pledges which he made to win the leadership election.

    Is it really “daft” to insist that politicians don’t lie when they stand for elections?

    politecameraaction
    Free Member

    Its also true that the labour / tory pact in Scotland led to 10 tory MPs getting elected and that saved Mays government.

    Get out of the echo chamber…
    https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/general-election-is-there-really-a-torylabour-pact-in-scottish-seats-1448328

    ransos
    Free Member

    As far as I can see all the criticism levelled at Starmer centres on the fact that he has abandoned all ten pledges which he made to win the leadership election.

    That’s it for me: he lied to secure my vote, and the votes of thousands of people like me. We haven’t forgotten.

    squirrelking
    Free Member

    Yep, i do as well, but the actual cost for the country is horrific if it were to happen, privatisation was built with the foresight of making it too complex and too expensive to backtrack on

    Yeah, true, only the fictional nation of Scotland, once again, could do any of that.

    Sorry but is there a **** joke I’m not getting here? Are there folk out there that think Scotland is akin to Finland and doesn’t exist?

    We have nationalised water, always have.
    We have nationalised rail.
    We have nationalised ferries.

    The only thing we don’t have is energy and you know what? I bet a penny to a pound that most operators would welcome someone else stepping in to hold the liability whilst they run it on a contract or provide tech support once it’s eventually built. It’s not like we didn’t have nationalised nuclear within the last 20 years.

    It’s not too hard or too expensive to do at all. Contracts run out and where they don’t new infra can be built which is underwritten by the state, same as we did for 40odd years. It just needs the political will.

    tjagain
    Full Member

    Politecameractuion – I saw the posts on the facebook page of Ian Murray asking folk to vote tory in some seats. We all saw the lack of campaigning in some seats where labour and tory both gave the other a free shot at the SNP.

    We saw labour activists and elected reps cheering on tory wins at the count.

    the Scotsman is hardly an unbiased source

    tjagain
    Full Member

    Also pca that quotes a senior Tory as saying that both labour and tory only put up paoer candidate in some seats to give the other an easy run.

    dissonance
    Full Member

    The problem i see with the labour party is the far left believing that they are the majority, and that they can just state a policy and it will happen, same with the tories and the far right, the extremes on either side think they have more sway and public backing than they actually have.

    Odd since the problem seems more the right wingers buy into the hard right line about anything left of Thatcher as being “far left” as well as the idea that the “centrists” are the majority as opposed to just swing voters. Secretly most seem to accept this is false hence the cry of “who else will you vote for.
    They are also often confused about believing that they are not as ideological as anyone else and often bleat out crap about “pragmatism” (something deployed by fans of Kissinger in the last few days).

    dissonance
    Full Member

    Is it really “daft” to insist that politicians don’t lie when they stand for elections?

    Its odd how they dont tend to extend the same courtesy to Johnson and the brexiteers.

    politecameraaction
    Free Member

    I saw the posts on the facebook page of Ian Murray asking folk to vote tory in some seats. 

    This is totally nuts. You are taking posts on an MP’s Facebook page and adding them to the fact that not every seat is winnable by every party, and concluding there was a Tory-Labour pact. It’s completely untrue.

    Only in Scotland would the party that’s been completely dominant in government and parliament feel like the victim of a conspiracy!

    Northwind
    Full Member

    politecameraaction
    Free Member

    Get out of the echo chamber…

    In my seat Labour campaigned solely and aggressively against the SNP in 2017 and 2019 in the full knowledge they were going to be a distant third, with the tories first or second. It was demented- there was no “vote for us”, it was entirely “get the SNP out” even though that could only mean Tories. In 2017 they declared their campaign a success because while they’d lost votes, the SNP lost more. The gap between the Tories and SNP narrowed to only a thousand votes and we could easily have flipped blue for the first time in the seat’s history (a 13% tory surge, with Labour’s dedicated help)

    Having said that, I don’t think this was a “pact”, they just genuinely wanted the Tories to win the seat. No collusion! We did it all ourselves! I mean, that’s worse but hey.

Viewing 40 posts - 20,081 through 20,120 (of 21,139 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.