Westminster Politics

[Frosty]

Thread from Tom Clark on how and why the local election results were better than anticipated for Labour:

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Not sure how much of this still holds less than a week on though!

 

[Maticmaker]

Christ, that is quite the conflation you are making there.

Yes it is, but there is just enough in there for the right wing press to pile-in on the basis that Starmer's former job allowed him to make such assessments.
This is especially true since the Police apparently were not going to take it further, their reason being because it was retrospective, and like with Cummings they felt it was not appropriate to take it further... Oh wait a minute will they use this as an excuse to re-open the Cummings case??

Bet Boris and his misses are bouncing up and down in No.10 thinking "its Christmas already" Two for the price of one, barrel one... Starmer goes down, barrel two.... Cummings gets his comeuppance!

 

[Shinjch]

Yes it is, but there is just enough in there for the right wing press to pile-in on the basis that Starmer's former job allowed him to make such assessments.
This is especially true since the Police apparently were not going to take it further, their reason being because it was retrospective, and like with Cummings they felt it was not appropriate to take it further... Oh wait a minute will they use this as an excuse to re-open the Cummings case??

Bet Boris and his misses are bouncing up and down in No.10 thinking "its Christmas already" Two for the price of one, barrel one... Starmer goes down, barrel two.... Cummings gets his comeuppance!

I'm just struggling to follow your logic on this now, I'm afraid. Or are you just saying that the actual facts of any of it don't matter, because of the power of right wing media?

 

[nickm]

I think it probably is...if Starmer and his legal buddies are all rock solidly certain he has no case to answer, why make the stepping down, promise statement... to gain political advantage perhaps?
Would the use of this legal 'insider knowledge' be seen as the equivalent of profiting from 'insider trading' on the stock market, i.e. gambling on something you already know the outcome??

The right wing press will have a field day with that outcome!

I'm genuinely can't understand what you are on about.

What else could Starmer do?

 

[Maticmaker]

I'm just struggling to follow your logic on this now, I'm afraid. Or are you just saying that the actual facts of any of it don't matter, because of the power of right wing media?

The press maxim " never let the facts get in the way of a good story".

STOP PRESS
Right wing press gazumps Labour once again

Starmer overplaying his hand has let them in, they smell blood in the water.
All he had to do was sit back wait for the Police outcome of its review ....and then... let the truth set him free

Then he could go after Boris as a 'Knight in shining Armour'!

 

[nickm]

Yes it is, but there is just enough in there for the right wing press to pile-in on the basis that Starmer's former job allowed him to make such assessments.

You mean he's guilty of using his expertise to calculate a risk? Only in a country run by bullshitters, amateurs and chancers would this be viewed as a cause for concern.

 

[Shinjch]

The press maxim " never let the facts get in the way of a good story".

STOP PRESS
Right wing press gazumps Labour once again

Starmer overplaying his hand has let them in, they smell blood in the water.
All he had to do was sit back wait for the Police outcome of its review ....and then... let the truth set him free

Then he could go after Boris as a 'Knight in shining Armour'!

Is his stock as a "Knight in Shining Armour" not enhanced by saying he would fall on his sword should he be found to have broken the rules, only to then be informed he broke no rules?
That is surely his calculation.

 

[nickm]

The press maxim " never let the facts get in the way of a good story".

STOP PRESS
Right wing press gazumps Labour once again

Starmer overplaying his hand has let them in, they smell blood in the water.
All he had to do was sit back wait for the Police outcome of its review ....and then... let the truth set him free

Then he could go after Boris as a 'Knight in shining Armour'!

The right wing press have been smearing Starmer as a hypocrite. Truth is, the Mail has overplayed its hand and given Starmer the chance to make the PM look really bad. Which is his job.

How does the Mail spin the Police finding Starmer acted within the rules (for a second time). They will dredge up some distraction shite no doubt (they are already doing their best) but the central point, that Starmer didn't break the law, and the PM did, and the PM should resign - over something which Starmer himself was prepared to quit - will remain. Good luck to him.

 

[nickm]

Is his stock as a "Knight in Shining Armour" not enhanced by saying he would fall on his sword should he be found to have broken the rules, only to then be informed he broke no rules?
That is surely his calculation.

Imagine using your personal, first hand knowledge of an event you attended, to assert whether something you did there was right or wrong. The fecking audacity of it.

 

[Maticmaker]

I'm genuinely can't understand what you are on about.

What else could Starmer do?

No, I can understand that... I am simply speculating about the how the right wing press might well react, especially if no further action is to be taken

Starmer didn't have 'to do' anything, that is the whole point! Just sit back wait for (metaphorically) for the 'chains to be cut from his wrists'.
Starmer's threatening to resign on an outcome he knew was certain (because of his previous experiences) to fall in his favour, was in fact and attempt at getting into Boris's 'chancers' play pen!
However Starmer is not a 'chancer' that's the whole point, its what makes him standout against Boris, it was 'his edge.'

 

[nickm]

No, I can understand that... I am simply speculating about the how the right wing press might well react, especially if no further action is to be taken

Starmer didn't have 'to do' anything, that is the whole point! Just sit back wait for (metaphorically) for the 'chains to be cut from his wrists'.
Starmer's threatening to resign on an outcome he knew was certain (because of his previous experiences) to fall in his favour, was in fact and attempt at getting into Boris's 'chancers' play pen!
However Starmer is not a 'chancer' that's the whole point, its what makes him standout against Boris, it was 'his edge.'

There is nothing that Starmer can do, that will stop the Mail from going for him. Doing nothing was not tenable. He will get roasted anyway. He might as well get roasted but get something useful from it.

He's the one getting the kicking here, in his mind unfairly. Taking a small risk to illustrate the difference between himself and the PM is hardly being a Johnson type "chancer" - whatever you mean by that.

 

[Maticmaker]

Is his stock as a "Knight in Shining Armour" not enhanced by saying he would fall on his sword should he be found to have broken the rules, only to then be informed he broke no rules?
That is surely his calculation.

You can only 'fall on your sword' when there is a sword to fall on, he knew there was no sword because his past experiences told him that, so it was a 'false call'/bluff, threatening to do something he knew all along he would not have to do, why....because Sir Keir knows the law!

Threatening to do something when you know (beforehand) that you won't have to do it is hardly bravado, just a cheap shot...right out of Boris's own playbook!
Sir Keir was supposed to be so different to Boris, he was a serious person, would never mislead, etc., etc.

 

[Pexbo]

And the award for the tenth year running for most over use of quotation marks goes to….

 

[Shinjch]

You can only 'fall on your sword' when there is a sword to fall on, he knew there was no sword because his past experiences told him that, so it was a 'false call'/bluff, threatening to do something he knew all along he would not have to do, why....because Sir Keir knows the law!

Threatening to do something when you know (beforehand) that you won't have to do it is hardly bravado, just a cheap shot...right out of Boris's own playbook!
Sir Keir was supposed to be so different to Boris, he was a serious person, would never mislead, etc., etc.

Surely this is the exact opposite of the Boris playbook.
Boris did the exact opposite in his situation. He knew that he had attended actual parties/events and claimed that all rules were followed, tried to make number 10 staff the scapegoats instead of him, kicked the can down the road with a civil service report (which was then kicked further by the met wading in) and then just hoped the whole thing would go away when a war abroad started.

What Starmer has done is out of a completely different playbook from what I am seeing. He has addressed at it at the behest of right wing media and has let everyone know what will happen should he have broken the rules.

 

[nickm]

Threatening to do something when you know (beforehand) that you won't have to do it is hardly bravado, just a cheap shot...right out of Boris's own playbook!
Sir Keir was supposed to be so different to Boris, he was a serious person, would never mislead, etc., etc.

Strange use of the word 'threatening' there. To who?

Well yes that might well look cheap if he hadn't already said the PM should resign for the same thing (and who HAS been found to have broken the law). It's hardly a cheap shot to apply the same logic to his own situation, even if he believes that he is 100% not going to have to.

I have to say, I find your argument completely irrational.

 

[Maticmaker]

There is nothing that Starmer can do, that will stop the Mail from going for him.

Yes there is...do nothing, especially when you are in the right, and you know it will emerge, the truth defends itself...reacting is what they want, then they can react to your reaction, etc, etc.
Labour politicians for years have been falling for this claptrap from the media, and every time they seem to hand the press an even bigger stick to beat them with.
Its beyond parody now.

 

[Shinjch]

Yes there is...do nothing, especially when you are in the right, and you know it will emerge, the truth defends itself...reacting is what they want, then they can react to your reaction, etc, etc.
Labour politicians for years have been falling for this claptrap from the media, and every time they seem to hand the press an even bigger stick to beat them with.
Its beyond parody now.

If anything politics has taught us over the last 7 years it is that that truth that does not defend itself. That comes off as incredibly naive.

 

[nickm]

Surely this is the exact opposite of the Boris playbook.
Boris did the exact opposite in his situation. He knew attended actual parties/events and claimed that all rules were followed, tried to make number 10 staff the scapegoats instead of him, kicked the can down the road with a civil service report (which was then kicked further by the met wading in) and then just hoped the whole thing would go away when a war abroad started.

What Starmer has done is out of a completely different playbook from what I am seeing. He has addressed at it at the behest of right wing media and has let everyone know what will happen should he have broken the rules.

It's odd that the right wing press attack Starmer for qualities they would normally advocate as being admirable. I think there is genuine fear there. Corbyn's lunacy spoke for itself, they didn't have to hype him up to their readers. But Starmer, the former DPP? They are desperately manufacturing whatever they can come up with, but it's pretty thin stuff. He's a bit wooden for sure and you can't do much with that by itself.

 

[Maticmaker]

You mean he's guilty of using his expertise to calculate a risk?

There was no risk because he knew from past experience what the outcome would be... he may still be saying his prayers though!!

 

[nickm]

Yes there is...do nothing, especially when you are in the right, and you know it will emerge, the truth defends itself...reacting is what they want, then they can react to your reaction, etc, etc.

Starmer's integrity was under question. You can't just sit around and do nothing or you look weak. You have to try to get on the front foot.

 

[Maticmaker]

If anything politics has taught us over the last 7 years it is that that truth that does not defend itself. That comes off as incredibly naive.

If anything over my last 70+ years life (including politics) has taught me that the truth will out... providing its the version of the truth, you recognise and accept..... now that is naivety!
(PS only I still don't know the truth of who shot JFK in Dallas 1962)

 

[nickm]

There was no risk because he knew from past experience what the outcome would be... he may still be saying his prayers though!!

This is nuts. Don't you think someone from the Mail (or worse, the BBC if the story went wide) was going to ask him the obvious 'will you resign' question if he hadn't said it himself first? Then what? He either "admits" "he'll need to quit" under "pressure" and gets murdered for it. Or he tries to deflect it (headlines the next full of words like 'refuses, running scared, "what is he trying to hide", "just give us a straight answer: etc).

The story was ALWAYS going to be about whether he needed to quit, given what he's told the PM.

Your strategy would be disastrous.

 

[Maticmaker]

Starmer's integrity was under question.

By who?.... oh yes that will be the right wing press, that bastion of integrity

 

[Maticmaker]

Don't you think someone was going to ask him the obvious 'will you resign' question

Yes of course, Labour (by now) should have media specialists who can teach their politicians how to answer the 'have you stopped beating your wife' type of question, but alas it seems they haven't !

 

[nickm]

If anything over my last 70+ years life (including politics) has taught me that the truth will out... providing its the version of the truth, you recognise and accept..... now that is naivety!

How you manage the emergence of a fact, can often be as important as the fact itself.

 

[Berbasbullet]

And the award for the tenth year running for most over use of quotation marks goes to….

You forgot italics too.

 

[nickm]

By who?.... oh yes that will be the right wing press, that bastion of integrity

Yes, the people who talk to a large audience, some of whom Starmer needs on his side.

 

[Maticmaker]

How you manage the emergence of a fact, can often be as important as the fact itself.

The end justifies the means???

That is very similar to what the editors of the right wing press tell themselves/detractors

 

[Maticmaker]

And the award for the tenth year running for most over use of quotation marks goes to….

Thank you... thank you...!!

You forgot italics too.

Sorry try to do better (next time)

OK, guys
("running out of arguments are we' ?)

 

[Shinjch]

I am struggling to work out if you are just playing as fantasy Daily Mail editor, or if you genuinely believe that Starmer is in trouble?

 

[Mr Pigeon]

I am struggling to work out if you are just playing as fantasy Daily Mail editor, or if you genuinely believe that Starmer is in trouble?

Dead cat.

 

[Rams]

I really think it’s irresponsible how the Daily Mail are distracting the Prime Minister from fighting the Russians in the Ukraine with all this Starmer beetgate nonsense. Surely the Mail would be better off spending their efforts on advocating even more deportations of immigrants.

 

[Simbo]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Fluctuation0161]

calm down lad dont strain yourself trying something new

and are guido and the DM saying hes played it well and probably has high confidence he's done nothing wrong?

I know the canary seemed to be implying he should be sacked though

https://www.thecanary.co/uk/news/20...drinking-at-work-doesnt-show-breach-of-rules/

Alright tetchy, I suppose it could be from the Spectator also.

It's due to you bringing up the timing of old tweets trying to skew the situation against Starmer, even if you say he must have high confidence he has done nothing wrong.

 

[TheGame]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

It's a race to the bottom with some of the journalists around this Starmer story. Tom Harwood, Dan Hodges and Harry Cole to name a few. Making themselves look like plonkers.

 

[TheGame]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[The Corinthian]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Very good.

 

[Desert Eagle]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

What a plonker

 

[Jericholyte2]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Looks like he’s had another hit of primo Colombian snow!

 

[esmufc07]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date