Superb way of showing you've not bothered to read the posts properly I guess.
Keir Starmer Labour Leader
- Thread starter Damien
- Start date
Sorry, I'm not going to be a good little Tory.
Have you bothered to read any of my posts, on the Israel thread or any political thread on here?
Or you're just going to steam in like a bull in a China shop without bothering to actually read?
I have no idea who you are.
Great, then don't bother posting dumb comments to my posts. Thanks.
I didn't reply to your comment, you replied to mine. I did read your post, all of it, and didn't respond as the same point has been made, better, throughout this thread. I didn't agree with them either, but I did appreciate the more disciplined word count.
You initially did the more cowardly thing and made a comment directed at me, without actually quoting me. Then did reply to my reply, with an incredibly dumb comment, despite having no idea of my views, on this matter or others.
But yep, thats me. Tory enabler, Starmer fan and genocide denier.
Yep pretty much my view on it and one of the many reasons I won't be voting for labour in my constituency now.
Alright.
Has Starmer taken what many might feel is his first 'wrong foot' stumble in the run-up to the GE, i.e. with a public promise to Ms Ranzen to legalise assisted dying, if he becomes PM?
This is obviously a very emotive subject in many peoples eyes, in some cases simply because the state would be seen to be complicit in allowing someone, in advance, to participate in planning another persons death, which in other situations would the key factor in sanctioning state induced Murder.
A high risk strategy, to adopt at this time... why?
This is obviously a very emotive subject in many peoples eyes, in some cases simply because the state would be seen to be complicit in allowing someone, in advance, to participate in planning another persons death, which in other situations would the key factor in sanctioning state induced Murder.
A high risk strategy, to adopt at this time... why?
First?
It wouldn't be planning another person's death would it?
"seen by some people as..." and therefore akin to state sanctioned murder, by anyone deliberately helping someone else to take their own life... Its going to be very muddy waters, Solicitors, Barristers etc., will have a field day.
It just seems such a controversial thing to be bringing up now, just before an imminent GE ! If its intended as a vote-catcher, its likely to put off just as many, maybe even more?
Yes, first time he's actually come out on something very personal and definite, but it will give the Tories (if they are still interested) something to at least try to trip him up on, or to 'mis-step' him with... imagine the RW press headlines, " If he becomes PM Starmer will allow the state to sanction planning of death scenario's for those who wish to choose to end their lives when they feel its right for them... then why not bring back the death penalty for those convicted murders who face total life incarceration and want out...?
The mind boggles, at this decision, taken at this time?
Yeah, it's very light on substance, but still an improvement on this kind of thing.
There’s no difference imo. Both are meaningless rubbish.Yeah, it's very light on substance, but still an improvement on this kind of thing.
How on earth are 1 in 4 people still voting for the Tories after the last few years?
I'd move this over a bit in the spectrum to what I'd term well-meaningless rubbish.
Britain is/has always been conservative (with a small 'c'). The bulk of those who are likely to bother to vote, are mainly made up of those who only vote at a GE, and have no real interest in politics, although a few do understand, but choose not to participate in any discussion where their minds might be changed.
It's why our (effectively) two party, FPTP system has lasted so long and why on balance we get the politicians we deserve.
(*Sorry...I am just a grumpy old g*t! At GE's always get a feeling that the next time it will be different... but it never is.... I keep voting against the government, but they always get back in
)
It's a novel way to approach an election.
Usually the elected party u-turns after they're elected.
The only thing left is - "make Brexit work" - which we know isn't going to happen.
Isn't that what Starmer's planning, what if all the 'x' become '+' ?
Still sure about that Paul??
Doesn't matter what he's planning with Brexit, he has no idea what he's doing and never has regarding Brexit. He's still waving his veterinary certificate about.Isn't that what Starmer's planning, what if all the 'x' become '+' ?
Still sure about that Paul??
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
You think that exposure to the arts at a young age is ‘meaningless’?
Never mind the billions in revenue that the arts make for the country and the massive industries it entails, the non-monetary value that it creates is huge; empathy, emotional intelligence, appreciation of expression, emersion in storytelling are priceless in personal development and can impact all pathways in life.
It’s Starmer words that are meaningless rubbish.
So what’s the point of him saying anything then? Just give up, sit around silently, waiting for the GE.
You whinge that he’s not promising enough difference from the Tories and then whinge that it’s meaningless when he does.
What a pathetic outlook.
Work together, hand in glove with our creative industries isn’t a policy. When he gives no details then it’s just meaningless jargon.
Last edited:
Windfall tax
Non-dom
Just two policies Labour have come out with in the last 18 months that the Tories have stolen.
You’d be reticent of giving details too.
So you agree Starmer was saying meaningless jargon with no details when talking about the arts.
No, he was explaining his intentions without giving tactics away to the enemy.
No, I'd say the complete lack of substance to the plan - at this stage no more than a few words of platitude - is the issue. The sentiment is good.
That is exactly what Starmer is doing in a number of areas, he is indicating a direction of travel without specifiying when or how the travel arrangements will be enacted. Partly this is to avoid the Tories stealing his clothes and partly because he doesn't yet know how much s**te the Tories will leave behind. For example we do not yet know the real damage Covid, and the handling of it by the present government really did, and how much debt he can realistically pass on to future generations and how much pain we will all have to suffer.
Starmer can however ensure when in power (with a sizeable majority) that the pain is distributed fairly. It is this last item more than anything is scaring the Tories witless and why so many have already announced they are jumping ship.
The most fascinating subject for me is what their plan is to get this most sustained economic growth in the G7 they speak of without mentioning the B word. Presume it will be a highly guarded secret until Starmer's sitting in no.10 and then the revelation.... Presumably something nobody has ever thought of it.
Suspect unicorns and having the same benefits inside and outside the EU may have something to do with it.
Last edited:
Of course, just like the war, "we don't talk about it"!
As far as Starmer and any new Labour Government is concerned Brexit is over. It is true the costs will rise, but right now the billions spent/lost/wasted on Covid are the real threat that a new government faces and the debt that has been incurred cannot all be put on the shoulders of future generations.
In any case the EU would not want us back with all the current problems, they have enough of their own.
The first problem for Starmer to solve is making it clear there is no rabbit waiting to be pulled out of the hat, but that will only come when he is installed in No.10 with a large working majority.
A social contract is what is required between the public and the Government, that everyone agrees on and how the contract will be funded, enforced and delivered on. Big hill to climb, but it has to be done.... without unicorns!!
Last edited:
Yes I know. As I've said many times, and it is totally evident Starmer and his troops have no idea what they're doing regarding the B word. Covid will be minor in comparison.Of course, just like the war, "we don't talk about it"!
As far as Starmer and any new Labour Government is concerned Brexit is over. It is true the costs will rise, but right now the billions spent/lost/wasted on Covid are the real threat that a new government faces and the debt that has been incurred cannot all be put on the shoulders of future generations.
In any case the EU would not want us back with all the current problems, they have enough of their own.
The first problem for Starmer to solve is making it clear there is no rabbit waiting to be pulled out of the hat, but that will only come when he is installed in No.10 with a large working majority.
A social contract is what is required between the public and the Government, that everyone agrees on and how the contract will be funded, enforced and delivered on. Big hill to climb, but it has to be done.... without unicorns!!
Brexit hasn't even fully started yet, it's only just beginning. So not realising or pretending that is the case will be a major Labour mistake.
I'm not talking about rejoining (yet). But what happens over the next few years as the new measures are phased in - they can't ignore them. Where does the growth come from having snubbed your biggest customers and suppliers and pretend they don't exist. None of it makes any sense.
Why do you think the Tories are faffing about desperately trying to get Canada and Turkey to prolong their trade agreement (the old EU one) , also India for a new one - nobody's interested. They are interested in selling to the UK, not buying from them. The Tories also desperately want the CPTPP to be ratified before they leave office (it isn't yet, despite Brexiteer lies) - but it's also worthless. But the Tories hope to fool the gullibles, yet again.
So we await the plan (without unicorns) from Labour with bated breath.
Last edited:
Whatever issues longer term arrive from Brexit, it's the Covid debts that are for the here and now, they are massive and actually exist now and decisions on what to do about them are urgent for the new government post GE. It's not the priority worrying about what to do (or not do about Brexit) that is a long way down the road.
It's possible that some approach to the EU may be made, by the new government but if so it will be on a minor level and only in obvious situations where there is no danger of both parties returning to staring at one another over desks in Brussels.
As I said, I'm not talking about rejoining or even discussing this with the EU - just that they acknowledge the fact that Brexit is already , right now, having a large impact on the Uk and it will get considerably worse during the next government term, whether it's Labour or Tory.
That the budget and growth have to take these factors into account including investment. All countries in and outside of the EU have had Covid to deal with. The UK only has Brexit to deal with in any substantial way and the worst is yet to come and soon. Labour cannot pretend otherwise.
The Tories won't be that sorry to leave Labour in charge over the next five years. Ready to return at the subsequent GE.