I feel like apologising on behalf of Durham Police as well as myself. Small comfort at this point, but half the Shadow Cabinet feels the same way...
Keir Starmer Labour Leader
- Thread starter Damien
- Start date
I think now he needs to come up with some actual policies. Because not being Boris won't work for much longer.
Delighted to see him leading the way on the austerity apologist 'Magic Money Tree' language on his media round today.
So exciting to have two parties parroting this absolute bollocks.
So exciting to have two parties parroting this absolute bollocks.
I still have absolutely no idea what he stands for.
So basically, Starmer may end up steering the Labour party to power but he's not going to be only a slight difference to the Tory party, a more boring version with similar policies?
He'll be the PM that Jo Swinson could have been. But with a slightly more recent record of voting with the Tories on appalling legislation.
I thought Jo Swinson was a hero (ine).. ffs
I'm not convinced he'll get Labour to victory at the next GE unless he actually proposes some better policies that will stick with the general public.
His strategy so far seems to be let Boris be Boris and highlight all these negatives as well as from the Tories in general. The first part of this strategy won't have much traction after September.
His strategy so far seems to be let Boris be Boris and highlight all these negatives as well as from the Tories in general. The first part of this strategy won't have much traction after September.
Brilliant. Labour austerity. Its worked so well over the last 12 years!
The economy needs investment in public assets. Not corporation tax cuts and/or more austerity.
The economy needs investment in public assets. Not corporation tax cuts and/or more austerity.
It's really amazing how they are trying anything in their power to not offer an alternative to voters.
Austerity is not the same as making £50bn of unfunded tax cuts. There's so little detail in the guardian article it's hard to know what the policy does entail though.
Having little detail is more down to Starmers strategy than the article.
Point is Labour should be offering an alternative, invest in the country (not in corporate tax cuts) to drive the economy.
Trickle down economics is a myth that leads to more and more poverty for the poor and massive gains for those who already have alot of capital.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Yeah I think labour have got themselves in such a bind over their positioning that they daren't criticise corporation tax cuts for fear of being seen as anti-business, but clearly it's to the point now where no-one knows what the hell Starmer does stand for.
I do think it's prudent not to embark on major spending plans without proper costings though- our debt pile is getting crazy.
Yes, the Tories have spent billions on wasted PPE and failed track and trace projects (£34 billion was it?), mainly to companies owned by friends of the Conservative party. So we have a bog debt to pay back. Its a shame they saw the pandemic as a big opportunity to line their own pockets rather than invest on the country.
As for Labour and Keir's policies, or lack thereof, I've got no faith they will be any better than the Tories other than maybe not being corrupt. That's not enough to make me vote for them without some clear policy direction.
We could make a fortune if we clamped down on tax havens in the Caribbean and elsewhere that are all UK territories and colonies. Strange how no one goes near that one.
From The Mirror: "It’s understood Labour didn’t tell its peers to back the amendment amid concerns it was too widely drawn and because the party is working on a similar campaign through other means."
I don't have any details about a similar campaign. Apparently Labour would only vote for the motion if the Tories did.
It is an explanation. Not a good one though.
Cheers.
True.
Yet any sniff of 0.01% of benefit claimants making a false claim and that is headline news. Always blame the powerless and poor.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
called it.
a more aggressive and intelligent version of marr's questioning sustained over an electoral campaign will be highly effective because starmer has demonstrated that he has no principles.
Getting mauled by Marr is the political 'journalism' equivalent of being beaten into a coma by a Furby.
You should never be seen in public again.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
There it is ... 'Make Brexit Work' ... the slogan for the next Labour GE campaign.
Just when the Tories are there for the taking, Labour has Starmer. He was always a Brexiter despite false appearances. See-through.
Thick as mince. Still thinks he's ordering from a Chinese takeaway menu. The proposals he's suggesting there will make it even more harmful.
Thick as mince. Still thinks he's ordering from a Chinese takeaway menu. The proposals he's suggesting there will make it even more harmful.
Last edited:
don't care about his messaging on brexit. it was voted for and no one wants to rehash the past eight years. the reason why "get brexit done" worked was because the public was sick and tired of hearing about brexit day in and day out. they wanted to draw a line under it. it would be suicidal for starmer or any labour leader to not back some version of the UK outside the EU. anything else leaves the door open for attacks along the lines of "treason". starmer is fecking useless but that is the smart move given the landscape of england currently.
what he needs are coherent domestic policies. an actual vision for the next five to ten years. how does labour make brexit work? what does it look like in terms of social services and business? until he addresses that he's spouting empty rhetoric designed to keep from losing points in the polls. closer it gets to an actual election the more problems will arise. he'll have to endorse some version of the principles he abandoned when running for leader even if he only retains one or two of them and in slightly different form. anything else will be taken as open warfare on the left of the party and most people on the left of labour already perceive a state of open war.
everyone knows how shit blair's legacy turned out in the end mostly because it accelerated neoliberalism of the thatcher years and the obvious case of the iraq war. but to his credit he might be the last pm who left a positive legacy. im talking about "education, education, education" and increased funding for the nhs and housing. none of it was without problems, for a start they just pumped money into the educational system and so created diploma mills. but what has any government done since, domestically, that has been positive? i can't think of anything. also, on blair, he successfully captured the aspirational intersection between labour and the conservatives. that's the kind of thing labour needs to win. they should highlight the fact that all the tories have really done is asset strip the british economy and impose austerity as well as hold the country to ransom as the result of public school rivalries between cameron, osbourne, johnson and the rest. not sure starmer can sell it because again despite him being an enormous cnut blair was a gifted politician.
what he needs are coherent domestic policies. an actual vision for the next five to ten years. how does labour make brexit work? what does it look like in terms of social services and business? until he addresses that he's spouting empty rhetoric designed to keep from losing points in the polls. closer it gets to an actual election the more problems will arise. he'll have to endorse some version of the principles he abandoned when running for leader even if he only retains one or two of them and in slightly different form. anything else will be taken as open warfare on the left of the party and most people on the left of labour already perceive a state of open war.
everyone knows how shit blair's legacy turned out in the end mostly because it accelerated neoliberalism of the thatcher years and the obvious case of the iraq war. but to his credit he might be the last pm who left a positive legacy. im talking about "education, education, education" and increased funding for the nhs and housing. none of it was without problems, for a start they just pumped money into the educational system and so created diploma mills. but what has any government done since, domestically, that has been positive? i can't think of anything. also, on blair, he successfully captured the aspirational intersection between labour and the conservatives. that's the kind of thing labour needs to win. they should highlight the fact that all the tories have really done is asset strip the british economy and impose austerity as well as hold the country to ransom as the result of public school rivalries between cameron, osbourne, johnson and the rest. not sure starmer can sell it because again despite him being an enormous cnut blair was a gifted politician.
Last edited:
Only if everyone is as daft as people here and can’t actually wrap their brains around what he’s actually said.
He has principles. He backs unions. He wants the NHS and Public Utilities in public hands. Unequivocally. No ifs, but or coconuts.
You’re all mad if you think he can answer on principle and get elected. Not happening. He can’t say the NHS doesn’t need private investment. It does. It needs to wean itself off the corporate tit. He can’t say he’ll remove private capital immediately. That would leave a multi billion pound hole.
I’m pretty biased as I’ve met the fella away from the hatchet job cameras and he speaks frankly and openly about what he actually gives a damn about. Most of his long form interviews see him stand firmly on principles.
It’s cool if you think he’s a brexiteer fraud who has no principles. But that’s every bit as nutty as Tories who think Rishi is a centre right type.
Every single person on the left just needs to stop being a fanny. Vote anti-Tory in their constituency. That’s it. If they don’t, they’re Tory Enablers. Just choose.
As a closer… you know that you can just go and meet and talk to him, right? Ask whatever you like? I mean, scream nonsense into the wind if that’s your bag, but you actually have myriad ways of talking face to face with him (some virtually of course).
Really? The Labour left blame him for his pro-second referendum stance which in their eyes cost the 2019 election.
Even with the shitshow the Tories are putting on, KS still wont win a GE.
Nearly seven years Brexit has been going on and from day one I was convinced he was a Brexiter or at worse he was so thick he has actually zero idea what leaving the EU means.
I'm not on the left and the other policies you can argue among yourselves.
How the f*ck are the UK going to be more successful economically by diverging even further from EU regulations and destroying the City. The Uk haven't implemented most of the things they're supposed to do yet so the "red tape" comes from the EU because the UK have diverged from EU standards and if they diverge even more there'll be a hell of a lot more.
Having some sort of vet agreement isn't really going to solve a lot. Most of the NI so called problems can be dealt with in an instant by the Uk following what they're supposed to be doing.
NI will be the very least of the Uk's problems if they deregulate even further.
Brexit may be done but the consequences are years and years from being done.
Starmer's comments this past week, especially the brexit stuff is a real red flag for me.
I was always a little sceptical that he's not in the right party, but he seems to be showing more and more of his true blue colours.
I'd like to know why the sudden change though. I mean has he been bought and paid for to carry on the work that the Tory's were doing and given the state they are in, starmer has been promised a large sum of money to take the UK in the direction some very wealthy business types want?
All politicians ultimately are in it for themselves and I really now have lost faith about labour under starmer.
I was always a little sceptical that he's not in the right party, but he seems to be showing more and more of his true blue colours.
I'd like to know why the sudden change though. I mean has he been bought and paid for to carry on the work that the Tory's were doing and given the state they are in, starmer has been promised a large sum of money to take the UK in the direction some very wealthy business types want?
All politicians ultimately are in it for themselves and I really now have lost faith about labour under starmer.
This pro second referendum thing was ridiculous as was the claim that Labour would renegotiate another deal within six months.
Either the Uk left the EU or it didn't.
If Labour from the beginning and maintained the stance of being pro- staying in the EU, they couldn't have done any worse than they did.
Labour will not get elected if they campaign on reversing Brexit.
They may get re-elected on moving closer to the EU.
There are just far too many votes on the table for Starmer to declare Brexit is shit. Millions of votes in a FPTP system simply can’t be sacrificed. The system is broken.
Everyone that’s anti Tory needs to get real.
fecking hell. Go meet him. Talk to him. You’re mental. ‘Bought and paid for’.
What’s funny? You can. Wide open human.
I’ve met him three times. I’m not his mate, we don’t have common friends.
You can just meet MP’s very easily. Would you like me take you?
Brexit can't be reversed. They may get a chance to rejoin after a minimum of twenty years down the line.
The system is definitely broken.
But as the new requirements per the withdrawal agreement over the next few years have to be implemented by the UK, the insanity of Brexit will become more and more apparent to the electorate, even possibly by the time of the next GE.
Now if Starmer wants to make that even worse by wanting to diverge even more, then the possibility of the UK rejoining in the future gets further and further away.
I would be very interested to see from Starmer how by diverging further it will reduce red tape and make it easier to sell to the EU. Or with which countries the UK will be dealing with in the future. There are thousands of other things to take into consideration, which I don't think he has, but that will be another enormous discussion. Or how much Starmer is prepared to pay for access to the EU institutions he has his eyes on.