It's not a change, really. It's a return to normalcy. I am 30 years old and The Labour Party has very rarely represented my views. I have spent most of my adult life on benefits, due to health problems, and The Labour Party has generally not given a shit about people in my position. We are necessary collateral in the 'being serious and electable' thing.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Pretty much.
I guess one man's cogent argument is another's supposition. It's not as if May's Tories were all pulling in the same direction.
Bang goes that cogent argument about him winning as the goalposts shift...
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
What do you think Labour ‘winning’ under Starmer would look like? If you think Labour in 2024 is going to be able to govern without an alliance, you’re living on a different planet. So yes, Corbyn ‘winning’ in 2017 obviously meant having a chance to govern in an alliance, not a Labour majority in its own right, just as the same will apply to Starmer.
Funny how in the various political threads on here you never post about racism, anti semitic or Islamophobia in the Conservative Party, of which there are many examples. It is almost like Guido isn't giving you the full picture.
You really aren't grasping what the Labour party was founded for are you?
Gold.The problem is that you want a party that claims to represent the interests of labour but does not actually do so? Centrism in a nutshell
If the EHRC find enough evidence about any party I want it fully investigated and the findings of the report enacted plus any prosecutions that are required - given so far that only covers the BNP and Labour and only one of those is active - and certainly only one of those relates to issues facing starmers leadership of the labour party which is the focus of this thread then I trust my condemnation of all forms of racisim in any party is sufficient for here... I hope you will agree with that and that the EHRC report should be respected and acted upon when it is published
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I really don't think it matters what it was founded for or what it's called. It's just 'the alternative' to the natural position of Tory rule. As I've said suggested in prior posts, I think it's silly to suggest it should be anything else, at this point. The fight for workers rights is best served by non-electoral means and the electoral side of it needs to find a new home. The Green Party could make a play for it but I'd be surprised, as a Green Party member myself, I get the feeling I'm very unusual in being poor and that the vast majority are middle class. My personal view is the best bet is to create a new party that focuses on the concerns of people under the age of 40 who aren't financially secure.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
55% of Tory voters think that the Labour party are doing a bad job of holding the Government to account over Covid? If they wanted an accountable Government they shouldn't have voted Boris for PM.
Do you clarify everyone's wage and financial interests before listening to their opinions?
did labour endorse anybody in the last US election? (I dont think they did - but would be interested to see if they did?)
I'm more interested in why Starmer view has changed over the last few months than what Corbyn said in 2016 tbh. Even if Trump wins this year and Starmer wins in 2024 they will only be in office at the same time for a few months.
Maybe he’s looking ahead and doesn’t want to be bound to Biden?
I'm not sure continuing the line anyone but Trump is bounding himself to Biden. If Biden did something Starmer was against(Although I'm struggling to think of any examples)then he could just simply oppose it. Bernie Sanders is literally campaigning for Biden and I don't think many would say he's bound himself to a future Biden presidency.
I don't get how this is hard to understand. Starmer explains it himself.
Glad to know he wasn't running to be the future PM during the leadership race.
It's desperate stuff Sweet. Give twitter up, seriously, it will do you good.
Cheers dad.
I'm sure his views havent changed, but isnt it just standard practice that PM and leader of the opposition dont comment on US elections?
I’m confused. Which one of them is wearing the hat?
I see the JC after paying out for false allegations of anti-semtism in relation to Dame Ellman have now had to pay out again in relation to false allegations of abuse against Berger.
shouldnt this be in the jeremy corbyn antisemetic looser thread (or whatever zeitgeisty name the thread has today)
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
This is the defacto Labour thread, better than bumping old ones. I'm guessing the anti-semtism discussion is still relevant to the Labour party under Starmer, oddly don't hear too much these days.
suspect you will hear a lot about it when the EHRC report finally comes out ... hopefully soon
There's that, and the fact that even if he won an election there might not even be either Presidential candidate in the seat come 2024. Bit of a non-story.
