Turns out simply repeating what Starmer says and does is criticizing him.
You're just so dishonest or a lack of comprehension is possible. It looks like you lied while calling someone else a liar.
Keir Starmer Labour Leader
- Thread starter Damien
- Start date
You're just so dishonest or a lack of comprehension is possible. It looks like you lied while calling someone else a liar.
You posted a bunch of tweets, all of which were made while Owen was still telling people to vote Labour, where the 'criticism' was repeating what he'd said and how it was the complete opposite to what he stood for the leadership on. Again, all made whilst he was telling people they had to vote for him.
I would have to disagree with this bit. I was an active member of the Labour party at that time and for me it seemed that many involved in Trade Union politics, that the EC was seen (by the right in the party) as a 'piggy-back-ride' away from wildcat strikes and the like. There was never any real love (that I was aware of) in the Labour party at that time for the politics of 'ever closer political union'... that bit of the existing treaties was almost pooh-poohed by many including Tony Benn and later a certain J Corbyn. The fear (at that time) seem to be that the left would not be able to wield the same power in Brussels as it (had done) in Westminster.
Yes, I would agree with this. Farage proved with UKIP and later with the Brexit Party, that as far as Westminster is concerned with it's FPTP reality, you just need to apply pressure in the right places at the right time... of course ironically 'the place ' turned out to be the EU Parliament, for the Brexit Party push.
I don't necessarily feel people were conned, although some were, it was that the referendum was so loosely set up that everybody who had a grudge, real or imagined, found in Brexit a way of giving the Tory Government a good kicking. I was once told by a friend who for years was a prison visitor, that his experience of talking with violent offenders suggested that when someone is doling out a 'good kicking', at the time they usually have no thought of the repercussions.
Some Tory MPs and a number of Reforms leaders still believe that Brexit has never been done properly, so it cannot be a success as it is. However, making a success of post Brexit fallout is what most Labour leaders and others are putting forward. However, the masterplan has not been revealed as yet.... I personally don't believe there is such a plan, not yet, but there are ideas (along the line I suspect of a social contract) which will be announced piecemeal in a run up to the GE.
Since Tories seem to be on the road to defeat whatever they say or do, as things seem to just keep unraveling, then Starmer would be advised to keep his mouth shut until Rishi decides he's had enough and fires the GE starting pistol.
Starmer was tempted last week to start opening up on 'assisted dying' and it was reputedly said he had made promises to Esther Rantzen... that may well come back to haunt him from the Tory press once the GE run-in commences. Careful Sir Keir!
The contract will have to be aimed specifically at the majority of the public and focus on specific issues throughout three terms, its not going to be accomplished in one term and Labour have to be very careful in how they explain this, especially as minority interests are going to see themselves coming at the end of the queue anyway.
The economy will be front and centre, but it has to be linked to other issues, some of which from time to time will take precedence... that will be the hardest sell of all for Starmer.
I think he meant to say the worst terrorist attack on a Jewish population since WW2. Thats what I’ve heard other politicians say before.
Considering he was a lawyer Starmer is pretty shite when put under the smallest amount of pressure(Mostly due the insane amount of backtracking he’s done over the years).
But if you remember, firstly Farage rarely actually turned up to the EU parliament, he rarely if ever attended meetings and just stood up now and again to have a rant. Was a laughing stock in the EU. But he got a salary and a pension for doing very little work and like all the far-right parties in the EU was backed by Putin to sow as much trouble as they could in Europe. Putin was rather upset when his dream of ruling over the old Soviet countries disappeared before his eyes.
On to the referendum and all the cons from Farage and co have been forgotten like staying in the single market, having a Swiss deal, having a Norway deal, having your cake and eat it etc etc. Three years discussing which flavoured cake parliament wanted when there was only one outcome - the one they got.
There is only one Brexit - just a question of where the border with Ireland was (and the sea was probably the best place) - and there are no other countries left that the UK can arrange a trade deal with (that benefits them). That's it. This is as good as it gets.
In some ways, it may have been better not to have had a gradual divorce spread over nearly ten years because that way all three political parties wouldn't now be able to say they can do it better. There are still plenty of nasty surprises awaiting the Brexit voters. It was done gradually to help both sides' businesses to acclimatise but politically it has not helped at all in the UK. In five years time Brexit will be in full swing and the nonsense still being spouted by the UK politicians will be seen to be rubbish it is.
You don't think he has been right on Gaz over the last few months?
And as for the leaving labour over the past few years. There have been many traditionalist Labour voters who have had a crisis of counions over allowing the Tories to continue allowing the Thatcherites in the Labour shadow cabinet to destroy everything we believe in. The reliving the Thatcher Years is a kick in the bollocks, a punch in the gut, and a knife in the back to people who left school in the early eighties and struggled under the shite she forced on our country.
I have never voted anything but Labour but I'm not voting for a Thatcherite. Either something else will stand out for me on the ballot or I will spoil my vote.
Wouldn’t who you are voting for depend on your constituency? Just because one MP made a stupid comment about Thatcher; not every Labour MP will believe in that.
All hail the leader. We have to toe the party line.
Turns out simply repeating what Starmer says and does is criticizing him.
No. General elections are a vote for the party leader no matter who your candidate is.
"One MP"
Just the would be Foreign Secretary and the would be Chancellor of the Exchequer. They'll practically be tea boys in a Starmer government
Exactly, he seems far too dictatorial for my liking.
There is in the full 20+ minute version he's posted on Youtube. I'm not a huge fan of the guy, but I couldn't find fault in anything he said on that video - he's pretty much catalogued every reason I will also not be able to vote for Starmer's nightmarish version of the Labour party.
I have spent much of the last couple of years on the fence over whether to vote labour this time. Over the last months the decision has been made and every day I'm becoming more sure that a vote for labour would actively harm the UK.
Starmer is as dishonest as any of the tories. I don't say that lightly!
It's got to the point that even if the tories had a massive resurgence in the polls, I still couldn't vote for this labour party. Gaza would have been the final straw, but really, the camel's back was already crushed by the sheer weight of bullshit, incompetence and the sale of the party to monied interests.
This country is seriously screwed.
Starmer is as dishonest as any of the tories. I don't say that lightly!
It's got to the point that even if the tories had a massive resurgence in the polls, I still couldn't vote for this labour party. Gaza would have been the final straw, but really, the camel's back was already crushed by the sheer weight of bullshit, incompetence and the sale of the party to monied interests.
This country is seriously screwed.
Good to see him taking time off from this week's Thatcher love-in to go on SunTV.
I skimmed through but I didn't hear anything about the policies of those he's going to vote for at all. If he wants us to vote Green he should be talking about their actual policies so we can discuss them. Maybe he's done a longer video somewhere.
It's an ongoing thing that even people in this thread do. People saw starmer isn't doing anything for this and that policy, or that his policies aren't any change from tories.
Point blank ask them, what is the party youre voting for doing on these issues and it's radio silence.
Unless a compelling independent MP runs in my area, I will vote green for the signal that sends on climate change, as well as an anti war stance.
Hopefully they get quite a few MPs this time and can start to form a more viable party. I'd rather vote for labour with an actual leftist in charge, but here we are.
It's not quite how you put it, is it? It's basically choosing to vote for a party with socialist policies as opposed to Labour's slew of 2010 style tory austerity stuff. And as the other parties haven't released manifestos for this election, due to it not having been called yet, it's at this stage going to involve a lot of hoping the Greens haven't abandoned their core values like Labour have and that their manifesto looks like it did in 2019:
I haven't watched it, but for a guy that's been supporting Labour for his whole adult life, it makes sense for him to say why he's not voting for a party first.
Similar to Owen, I've voted Labour all of my adult life, and on these forums I've discussed why Keir's lost my vote, and I haven't talked about the virtues of another party (well I have but I've spent far more time talking about Keir losing my vote), which makes perfect sense.
That's just not true. I've read plenty talk about Green, Independents and I think I saw a poster saying he's voting for Lib Dem now instead of Labour.
Yes, those tweets were of Owen Jones attacking Keir Starmer. There were multiple tweets to cover the 'repeatedly' element of your claim. It's easy enough to find more in different mediums if you choose.
Let's assume you are just struggling with the concept that it is perfectly possible to criticise and attack an individual, while still supporting something they are a part of. That's preferable to the alternative
Let's keep it simple with a hypothetical example.
Bob is a Manchester United fan. Bob really doesn't like United's new captain, Keith. Bob considers that Keith is vain, arrogant, lazy etc etc. Bob wishes Keith wasn't the Manchester United captain. He believes United is worth more than that and has proud, worthwhile traditions. He believes Keith is a poor choice as captain. Bob certainly isn't afraid of expressing his opinions about Keith, in fact he posts frequently about Keith on his favourite Manchester United forum, criticising him, calling him lazy, unprofessional, etc. However, in these posts and when asked, Bob still wants Manchester United to win in spite of Keith being the captain. He's not a huge fan of the way the team has been playing and he wishes Keith wasn't captain, but he'd still rather United won things than the other guys and Bob encourages other supporters to get behind the team during big matches.
Bob, has in fact been able to "attack" Keith "repeatedly" while still supporting United.
Were another forum user to say to Bob ''You have never attacked Keith! In fact you have done the literal opposite by telling people you want the team to win.'' that person would be wrong.
If the Glazer family were to somehow legally get hold of the £250 mill odd Jim Ratcliffe invested and announced they were treating themselves to a nice dividend, Bob might say ''They have only gone and taken the money as dividends! They are money grabbing liars who are a blight on our club. Fans need to stand up and fight'' while also saying ''we need United to finish top 4 this season to ensure we have the funds to compete going forward. The sooner they are out the better but I want United to do well.'' Bob would have attacked the Glazer family, even if many would say he has only accurately described the Glazers actions. He has referred to them in a derogatory manner.
Some fans might think Bob doesn't go far enough, they might think that the best thing for United in the long term was for it all to burn down now and end up forcing the Glazers out. This may be a valid opinion, but if those fans told Bob he had done the literal opposite of attacking the Glazers, they would be wrong.
If Owen Jones calls Starmer 'a political conman' this constitutes an attack. It is polemical. Saying to people ''but still vote Labour as it is better than 5 more years of Conservative government'' does nothing that in any way could be described as "literally the opposite of an attack"
You called someone a liar. That was wrong of you, but there's no point wasting more time as it seems unlikely to get anywhere.
The main reason I'm wary of Owen Jones is because he didn't back Corbyn.
Rubbish analogy.
You wrote all this so you could call a poster on here a liar for simply defending Jones posting what you describe as 'an attack' on Kier Starmer, when all he's actually done is to post video evidence of Starmer repeatedly lying. Something which you apparently find an abhorrent characteristic. The irony is totally lost.
I wrote all of that because of a poster calling another poster a liar.
But a potential leader of the country who repeatedly lies is fine by you. We should vote for him and just trust he'll stop the lies once in power.
In the meantime, let's focus on the real issue - a poster on RedCafe has interpreted a journalist calling that politician to account differently to you.
If you really want to focus on it then sure.
Yeah, it was me that focused on that. Wrote a huge post about it with bad analogies and everything.
But you keep going on now. It's easy to just stop. Watch.
He’s not saying that though is he? Why do people instantly assume any critiecim of anyone on the left is then an automatic support for Starmer? We were told Jones hasn’t attacked Starmer but then evidence was presented that he has. According to Jones which is his point of view. Yes his view is different just like some of us who think Jones is insufferable is different to them.
It's not based solely on that post, it's the history of his other posts on here.
And there's something about Owen Jones I find irritating and annoying. But there's nothing he's said in that video I disagree with. It's a sad state of affairs when it's come to this, but there are too many examples of red lines Starmer has crossed and he will lose many more voters from the left.
It's not just the left or right who think that Starmer is useless.
Until Corbyn fractures off and creates his own party, the Owen Jones resignation will change very little
This is the simple fact of the matter. We need Corbyn to pull the finger out.
Hopefully
This was the great flaw, actually the disgruntled elements among remainers were to blame for this false extension period and all the rubbish that followed because they insulated the Brexit voters from reality of their vote by their rearguard actions, especially in the parliamentary fiasco that followed; in fact Boris would never have got anywhere near leading the Tories, but for this rearguard action.
It was the battles within the Tory Party over Europe, going back to Major/Portillo etc. that enabled such as Farage to get a foothold, then a strangle hold first over the referendum itself and hence over the Tory Party . Large elements of 'Tory DNA' were stolen by Farage, and repackage to attract the right leaning voters within the red wall areas as well, in particular the bits around immigration that are still now being threatened again and have led to the ludicrous Rwanda issue.
The point, my point is this, Brexit was never about trade, it was always about political supremacy, in the Tory Party and ultimately about whether the UK stayed in for the ride towards 'ever closer union', which had always been the destination for the EC's founding fathers, but never part of the UK's remit for a final destination.
It's history Paul, yes people were fooled, but not many, Starmer has to 'shake the dust' from our post Brexit Britain and push on where he can, he has no other choice.
He's got Joey's vote.
Weren't England trying to find ways to, understandably, show their support for LQBTQ+ communities during the Qatari world cup? Wasn't that pretty much met with unanimous support?
This whole thing is a joke and would almost have gone totally unnoticed had no-one kicked up a fuss.
But it would have killed the UK economy stone dead had there been an immediate fracture of the agreements. Immigration and brainwashing were the only issues and as was told at the time brexit will make immigration considerably higher, as turned out to be the case and will continue to be so. The outcome from brexit is exactly as was forecast and the worst parts are still to come. It's going to get a lot worse.
Farage is a useful idiot for Putin as are Le Pen and co. He's a parasite and like an annoying mosquito who won't go away until all the gullible fools stop believing all the tripe he comes out with. The UK economy has been damaged for decades to come and there's no obvious solution . Where the Uk are heading now, who knows, but in five years time, a lot more people will realise what a terrible mistake they made in 2016 because ' they might get too close to Europe?" makes no sense.