Congratualtions Keir Starmer

[SydneyRover]

Yep, the last 10 years was all labours fault Tyke 

As I often do I'll temper that comment a little by saying yes a lot of people didn't like JC but getting screwed over by the tories was better? and most of what I read here from the deep thinkers was purile rubbish about him being the friend of terrorists and being a russian and yet we now have a PM who's party was partly financed by the russians and not a f**king word from the same people. Where is that report by-the-way.

As you said we have to move on.

[tyke1962]

Yes, Labour supporters will be very impressed with Starmer. I can see him being the leader of the opposition for years.

God forbid an intelligent and credible bloke should lead a political party in this day and age .

Better stick with the bankrupt king and reality tv idiot across the pond or the shake hands with corvid-19 patients serial liar we have in the UK .

I'll give Johnson 18 months tops before his own party , media and donors turn on him .

With what's coming down the road he won't even be around to fight the next election .

Simple choice for the Tories , get rid of the idiot or Labour win with a landslide under Starmer .

You heard it here first .

Tyke, I totally agree with you about Starmer being intelligent and credible. He's also a very decent man. However, you must also not forget that he showed an astonishing lack of judgement on Brexit, when it came to Labour voters in the North, which contributed to the terrible pummeling the Party took last year.

When out on my walk today, I came across an old friend of mine, a guy who has been the staunchest Labour supporter I've ever known, all of his life. He's always hated the Tories with a passion, and still does.

When I asked him about Starmer, he said that in his opinion the guy would be a disaster for the Party, and that Labour are now interested in nothing but London and the South.

Whether he's right or wrong, Tyke, the thing is that there'll be millions thinking like him in the North of England. How does Starmer now get them all back on board? Because he's certainly going to have to if the Labour Party are going to turn an 80 seat Tory majority into the Labour landslide that you're predicting in 2024.

Steve

I'm aware of Starmer's stance on brexit and its catastrophic consequences in the heartlands .

The way I look at is that we need to move on now , the brexit argument is over and done with , we have left now and that's that .

We need to bury the hatchet come together behind the new leader , I'm an ardent leaver so I've figured if I can move on then we should all be able to .

Starmer as Wilts has pointed out is reaching out to the heartlands and asking the questions and no doubt he will take on board what's he's hearing .

He's intelligent enough to know things need to change and I fully believe he will get the party united and ready for government .

It won't be a quick fix solution and it doesn't need to be as there isn't an election for 4 years .

Step by step rather than knee jerk decisions .

I think he will shift the party more towards the centre ground as time goes on and the electorate will have a choice of right wing populist v centre ground credibility .

Four more years of this clown and what's coming down the road economically from the aftermath of this pandemic will I feel see a return to common sense and credibility .

Crisis government's never get re-elected historically , not even Churchill could manage that or Gordon Brown to a lesser extent .

I'm a left wing man myself but we have to compromise to get elected , I understand that .

A centre Labour Government is still a damn sight more preferable than a Tory one led by this buffoon that I do know .

Some great points in there Tyke. However, I can't see the Tories pursuing right wing populist policies during the economic hit that's coming with this virus. They've already had to take the railways into state control, and many economic pundits are saying the same thing will have to happen with the airline industry, and other industries as well.

If all this happens, the Tories will be taking the centre ground almost by default, and Labour will face an enormous task getting it back.

I don't envy Starmer's job at the moment, I really don't.

The thing is Steve becoming less Tory is going to set them on a collision course with the wealthy donors who back them to receive tax cuts and less regulation and not pursue social policies .

Becoming less Labour may have won 3 elections under Blair but it also came at a price and the start of the demise in the heartlands

You can hear the donors already blowing in the ears of ministers to get the economy moving again .

The majority of the Tory Party MP's are products of Thatcherism , less state involvement and they don't care too much for investing in it .

The Mail and The Times are already criticising the government robustly and I suspect a divide in the party is starting to emerge with Gove no doubt ready to make his move given half the chance .

The UK they started to work on in the mid 70's and what you see today neoliberalism isn't something many Tories and donors want to lose a grip on , even a pandemic would present an opportunity to shrink the state even more for some of this lot .

Johnson may have other ideas given his craving for adulation and with an eye on his ratings with the public , bear in mind Johnson is in this job for himself and believes in nowt other than to remain popular , he's not even a Brexiter in reality , that's just the ship he jumped on to get where he is , as a journalist and Mayor Of London he was pro EU .

If Johnson starts going away from the idealism he's heading for big trouble within the party and not even Thatcher won that battle when they turned on her .

Very interesting to see how this plays out .

[tyke1962]

Yep, the last 10 years was all labours fault Tyke 

As I often do I'll temper that comment a little by saying yes a lot of people didn't like JC but getting screwed over by the tories was better? and most of what I read here from the deep thinkers was purile rubbish about him being the friend of terrorists and being a russian and yet we now have a PM who's party was partly financed by the russians and not a f**king word from the same people. Where is that report by-the-way.

As you said we have to move on.

Corbyn's biggest mistake was to openly take the establishment on and attempt to wrestle the wealth from them .

Playing class politics requires rather more subtlety in my opinion .

Blair getting rid of the majority of hereditary peers in the Lords many of whom were Tories and came from privilege was an example of class politics but done with rather more brains attached to it .

Privately it was " get fecking rid of those rich privileged Tories in that place "

Publicly it was " a bit old fashioned for a modern country to be having them and we need a change "

A huge majority and actually in power generally helps too .

Got to gain the power first Sydney and then go to work as I'm sure you know only too well .

[SydneyRover]

Sure do the press and the politics are no different here

[BillyStubbsTears]

Some excellent posts Tyke. I'm fully on board with what you are saying.

Blair won elections but compromised far too many principles.

Corbyn would never compromise principles, but what good is that if you lose? [1]

There is a middle ground. Clem Attlee found it. In 1945, he was a dull, organised, principled QC, facing a mega-star popular hero immediately after an enormous national crisis that had wrecked the economy.

Go figure...

[SydneyRover]

That's what the world needs less personalities and more grafters but the population has to want it and demand it, unfortunately more and more people are tuned into wanting it now, whatever it is.

[wilts rover]

Yep, the last 10 years was all labours fault Tyke 

As I often do I'll temper that comment a little by saying yes a lot of people didn't like JC but getting screwed over by the tories was better? and most of what I read here from the deep thinkers was purile rubbish about him being the friend of terrorists and being a russian and yet we now have a PM who's party was partly financed by the russians and not a f**king word from the same people. Where is that report by-the-way.

As you said we have to move on.

Corbyn's biggest mistake was to openly take the establishment on and attempt to wrestle the wealth from them .

Playing class politics requires rather more subtlety in my opinion .

Blair getting rid of the majority of hereditary peers in the Lords many of whom were Tories and came from privilege was an example of class politics but done with rather more brains attached to it .

Privately it was " get fecking rid of those rich privileged Tories in that place "

Publicly it was " a bit old fashioned for a modern country to be having them and we need a change "

A huge majority and actually in power generally helps too .

Got to gain the power first Sydney and then go to work as I'm sure you know only too well .

I dont disagree with that tyke but in regard to your first point, Corbyn's main problem was that much of the establishment he tried to take on were in his own party.

I don't think people appreciate how close he came of being PM in 2017. 2227 votes in 7 seats. Those claims in the recent report look even more worrying if that is taken into consideration.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/corbyn-election-results-votes-away-prime-minister-theresa-may-hung-parliament-a7782581.html

What would the next GE have looked like in 2020 or 2022 if Brexit had been carried out (or indeed never happened) and this period rested soley on austerity? We will never know but it would certainly have been different.

It is also a bit generous of you Billy to say that Atlee won victory in the 'centre ground' by creating a free for use NHS, carrying out the nationalisation of most of the countries utilities, railways and major heavy industries. What would a radical left-wing programme have been in 1945 then?

Good luck to Starmer, as far as I can see he is doing as well as can be expected under the circumstances. Like a barrister building a case - whilst listening to those around him as to what he can do to improve that case.

[tyke1962]

That's what the world needs less personalities and more grafters but the population has to want it and demand it, unfortunately more and more people are tuned into wanting it now, whatever it is.

Both here and in the US the electorate need to be shifted away from celebrity leaders .

That is exactly what Johnson is  and that idiot over the pond .

You may as well have David Beckham running the country as Johnson .

[BillyStubbsTears]

Wilts.

1) Where did I say Attlee won in the centre ground? Attlee won by combining a radical vision of the future, with a belief in Britain as a strong bullwark of democracy.

The fringes of the Left like to recall the economic and social radicalism of Attlee's Govt. They don't often reflect on the fact that it was Attlee who initiated the British nuclear bomb. Or Bevan who begged Conference not to vote for unilateral disarmament. Or that it was Bevin who said "My foreign policy is to be able to go to Dover and buy a ticket to anywhere in the world I please."

I said in 2015 that Britain would never elect a Govt with a Corbyn/Milne foreign policy.

2) I agree that factionalism is a cancer on the Left. That's why the People's Front of Judea scene was such barbed humour. This "We would have won if it wasn't for..." line is the comfort blanket of the Labour party all my life. I used it myself, when in 2010, thousands of people on the left deserted Brown because...principles. When a similar couple of thousand votes in half a dozen seats could have spared us Austerity. It's a facile argument. It sounds good but it is nonsense. Because we weren't going to ONLY get those couple of thousand votes in ONLY those seats. We'd have needed a quarter to half a million spread over the country.

[tyke1962]

Yep, the last 10 years was all labours fault Tyke 

As I often do I'll temper that comment a little by saying yes a lot of people didn't like JC but getting screwed over by the tories was better? and most of what I read here from the deep thinkers was purile rubbish about him being the friend of terrorists and being a russian and yet we now have a PM who's party was partly financed by the russians and not a f**king word from the same people. Where is that report by-the-way.

As you said we have to move on.

Corbyn's biggest mistake was to openly take the establishment on and attempt to wrestle the wealth from them .

Playing class politics requires rather more subtlety in my opinion .

Blair getting rid of the majority of hereditary peers in the Lords many of whom were Tories and came from privilege was an example of class politics but done with rather more brains attached to it .

Privately it was " get fecking rid of those rich privileged Tories in that place "

Publicly it was " a bit old fashioned for a modern country to be having them and we need a change "

A huge majority and actually in power generally helps too .

Got to gain the power first Sydney and then go to work as I'm sure you know only too well .

I dont disagree with that tyke but in regard to your first point, Corbyn's main problem was that much of the establishment he tried to take on were in his own party.

I don't think people appreciate how close he came of being PM in 2017. 2227 votes in 7 seats. Those claims in the recent report look even more worrying if that is taken into consideration.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/corbyn-election-results-votes-away-prime-minister-theresa-may-hung-parliament-a7782581.html

What would the next GE have looked like in 2020 or 2022 if Brexit had been carried out (or indeed never happened) and this period rested soley on austerity? We will never know but it would certainly have been different.

It is also a bit generous of you Billy to say that Atlee won victory in the 'centre ground' by creating a free for use NHS, carrying out the nationalisation of most of the countries utilities, railways and major heavy industries. What would a radical left-wing programme have been in 1945 then?

Good luck to Starmer, as far as I can see he is doing as well as can be expected under the circumstances. Like a barrister building a case - whilst listening to those around him as to what he can do to improve that case.

Wilts , I don't disagree at all that Corbyn wasn't anything but a champion of the victims of neoliberalism and had a good heart .

He just didn't have the nous to go about it in a way that makes you electable .

Corbyn left himself wide open with his past , it was like shooting fish in a barrel for the tory media .

Corbyn did relatively well in the 2017 election mainly because the Tories rolled out a campaign that was the worst in their entire history , the dementia tax killed May .

They were overconfident too and Corbyn to be fair had a superb election campaign .

He still lost .

The Tories weren't going to make the same mistake again and Corbyn was routed last December.

The point is even at Corbyn's very best and the Tories at their very worst he still lost .

Unlucky and hard lines are about as much use as tyts on a fish in elections .

I sincerely wish he would have succeeded but he didn't and neither did Michael Foot in 83 despite millions on the dole under Thatcher .

The country does not want a left wing government and we have to accept that , far too much fire and brimstone and it scares the electorate to death .

In a predominantly Tory country like we have you need a bloke who talks like a Tory , looks like a Tory but inside his soul isn't a Tory as a Labour Leader .

Armed with a big majority he goes to work .

Even a centre Labour Government like Blair led , brought in ...

The Minimum Wage

Working Tax Credits

Built 3m affordable homes through housing associations .

Built new schools and hospitals .

Funded the NHS to an exceptional standard .

Took millions of kids out of poverty .

It weren't bad for an alleged Tory lite PM .

[Ldr]

Amen Tyke

[DonnyOsmond]

Yes, Labour supporters will be very impressed with Starmer. I can see him being the leader of the opposition for years.

God forbid an intelligent and credible bloke should lead a political party in this day and age .

Better stick with the bankrupt king and reality tv idiot across the pond or the shake hands with corvid-19 patients serial liar we have in the UK .

I'll give Johnson 18 months tops before his own party , media and donors turn on him .

With what's coming down the road he won't even be around to fight the next election .

Simple choice for the Tories , get rid of the idiot or Labour win with a landslide under Starmer .

You heard it here first .

Tyke, I totally agree with you about Starmer being intelligent and credible. He's also a very decent man. However, you must also not forget that he showed an astonishing lack of judgement on Brexit, when it came to Labour voters in the North, which contributed to the terrible pummeling the Party took last year.

When out on my walk today, I came across an old friend of mine, a guy who has been the staunchest Labour supporter I've ever known, all of his life. He's always hated the Tories with a passion, and still does.

When I asked him about Starmer, he said that in his opinion the guy would be a disaster for the Party, and that Labour are now interested in nothing but London and the South.

Whether he's right or wrong, Tyke, the thing is that there'll be millions thinking like him in the North of England. How does Starmer now get them all back on board? Because he's certainly going to have to if the Labour Party are going to turn an 80 seat Tory majority into the Labour landslide that you're predicting in 2024.

Steve

I'm aware of Starmer's stance on brexit and its catastrophic consequences in the heartlands .

The way I look at is that we need to move on now , the brexit argument is over and done with , we have left now and that's that .

We need to bury the hatchet come together behind the new leader , I'm an ardent leaver so I've figured if I can move on then we should all be able to .

Starmer as Wilts has pointed out is reaching out to the heartlands and asking the questions and no doubt he will take on board what's he's hearing .

He's intelligent enough to know things need to change and I fully believe he will get the party united and ready for government .

It won't be a quick fix solution and it doesn't need to be as there isn't an election for 4 years .

Step by step rather than knee jerk decisions .

I think he will shift the party more towards the centre ground as time goes on and the electorate will have a choice of right wing populist v centre ground credibility .

Four more years of this clown and what's coming down the road economically from the aftermath of this pandemic will I feel see a return to common sense and credibility .

Crisis government's never get re-elected historically , not even Churchill could manage that or Gordon Brown to a lesser extent .

I'm a left wing man myself but we have to compromise to get elected , I understand that .

A centre Labour Government is still a damn sight more preferable than a Tory one led by this buffoon that I do know .

Some great points in there Tyke. However, I can't see the Tories pursuing right wing populist policies during the economic hit that's coming with this virus. They've already had to take the railways into state control, and many economic pundits are saying the same thing will have to happen with the airline industry, and other industries as well.

If all this happens, the Tories will be taking the centre ground almost by default, and Labour will face an enormous task getting it back.

I don't envy Starmer's job at the moment, I really don't.

The thing is Steve becoming less Tory is going to set them on a collision course with the wealthy donors who back them to receive tax cuts and less regulation and not pursue social policies .

Becoming less Labour may have won 3 elections under Blair but it also came at a price and the start of the demise in the heartlands

You can hear the donors already blowing in the ears of ministers to get the economy moving again .

The majority of the Tory Party MP's are products of Thatcherism , less state involvement and they don't care too much for investing in it .

The Mail and The Times are already criticising the government robustly and I suspect a divide in the party is starting to emerge with Gove no doubt ready to make his move given half the chance .

The UK they started to work on in the mid 70's and what you see today neoliberalism isn't something many Tories and donors want to lose a grip on , even a pandemic would present an opportunity to shrink the state even more for some of this lot .

Johnson may have other ideas given his craving for adulation and with an eye on his ratings with the public , bear in mind Johnson is in this job for himself and believes in nowt other than to remain popular , he's not even a Brexiter in reality , that's just the ship he jumped on to get where he is , as a journalist and Mayor Of London he was pro EU .

If Johnson starts going away from the idealism he's heading for big trouble within the party and not even Thatcher won that battle when they turned on her .

Very interesting to see how this plays out .

Yeah, Boris has only ever been in it for Boris. He was completely for the EU before Brexit and staying on that side wouldn't have upped his image at that time as their was a lot more people with bigger names ahead of him. It was a smart personal career choice for him, shame it comes at a cost to the country though.

https://youtu.be/X7Mhokzv-jw

[DonnyOsmond]

The country does not want a left wing government and we have to accept that , far too much fire and brimstone and it scares the electorate to death .

Not sure I agree with that. The parties to the left of the center have usually collectively beaten the ones on the right of the center. One of the main issues is competition, there's more vying for you vote on the left than the right. Obviously FPTP is also a big one, change that to STV and it'll make the government a lot more representative of this country.

2019
Right leaning - Brexit Party, Conservatives - 14.6m
Left leaning - Labour, Green, SNP, Lib Dems - 16m

2017
Right leaning - Conservatives, UKIP - 14.2m
Left leaning - Labour, Green, SNP, Lib Dems - 16.75m


Note: I'm not saying these parties are extreme left or right and Lib Dems are more Centrists but I seem them swapping votes with parties on the left than the right.

[wilts rover]

There is a middle ground. Clem Attlee found it. In 1945, he was a dull, organised, principled QC, facing a mega-star popular hero immediately after an enormous national crisis that had wrecked the economy.

Apologies Billy I presumed when you said Attlee found the middle ground this was in the centre.

Presumably in your world the centre is some place other than in the middle?

Who knew.

[wilts rover]

I don't disagree with any of that tyke. We are where we are not where we would like to be - in many different ways.

Again as I said above I dont have a problem at all with how Starmer has conducted himself so far.

[BillyStubbsTears]

There is a middle ground. Clem Attlee found it. In 1945, he was a dull, organised, principled QC, facing a mega-star popular hero immediately after an enormous national crisis that had wrecked the economy.

Apologies Billy I presumed when you said Attlee found the middle ground this was in the centre.

Presumably in your world the centre is some place other than in the middle?

Who knew.

Please read my entire post and if you are going to quote me, please don't do so out of context. There's enough of that going on as it is.

I meant middle ground as in being able to square the circle of being left wing and winning elections. Not political middle ground.

You have this strange obsession with me being someone occupying the centre of the political spectrum.

[scawsby steve]

The country does not want a left wing government and we have to accept that , far too much fire and brimstone and it scares the electorate to death .

Not sure I agree with that. The parties to the left of the center have usually collectively beaten the ones on the right of the center. One of the main issues is competition, there's more vying for you vote on the left than the right. Obviously FPTP is also a big one, change that to STV and it'll make the government a lot more representative of this country.

2019
Right leaning - Brexit Party, Conservatives - 14.6m
Left leaning - Labour, Green, SNP, Lib Dems - 16m

2017
Right leaning - Conservatives, UKIP - 14.2m
Left leaning - Labour, Green, SNP, Lib Dems - 16.75m


Note: I'm not saying these parties are extreme left or right and Lib Dems are more Centrists but I seem them swapping votes with parties on the left than the right.

Totally agree. I've said for years PR should be the way to go. It's certainly the fairest way.

[wilts rover]

There is a middle ground. Clem Attlee found it. In 1945, he was a dull, organised, principled QC, facing a mega-star popular hero immediately after an enormous national crisis that had wrecked the economy.

Apologies Billy I presumed when you said Attlee found the middle ground this was in the centre.

Presumably in your world the centre is some place other than in the middle?

Who knew.

Please read my entire post and if you are going to quote me, please don't do so out of context. There's enough of that going on as it is.

I meant middle ground as in being able to square the circle of being left wing and winning elections. Not political middle ground.

You have this strange obsession with me being someone occupying the centre of the political spectrum.

And that is coming from someone who in an above post to me quoted 'the fringes of the left', and 'the People's Front of Judea'. If you have a problem with them - then go and speak to them.

By the way it was Bevan who said, 'Lying is a necessary part of a Tory’s political equipment' and 'How can wealth persuade poverty to use its political power to keep wealth in power? Here lies the whole art of Conservative politics in the twentieth century' - if you want to add these middle ground quotes to your list.

[selby]

  Blair's government sold one of the biggest lies ever sold to the British public and took us into a war that cost lives of our soldiers and is still playing out to this day,  impoverished millions in the middle east and empowered Iran.
  He also loaded up the NHS with millions of pounds of debt at extortionate interest rates which we are still paying for to build those hospitals.
  And the minimum wage became the norm for millions of workers for a generation even though it was below what a real living wage should have been.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Wilts.

I apologise for my poor phrasing earlier.

When I said, "I agree that factionalism is a cancer on the Left. That's why the People's Front of Judea scene was such barbed humour." I was meaning the entire spectrum of the Left. My apologies if that wasn't clear.

In fairness though, I have asked you and others in here who I'm sure would claim to be further to the Left than me if they voted and campaigned for Brown in 2010. Those who didn't are on thin ice criticising those who did that for both Brown and Corbyn.

[tyke1962]

  Blair's government sold one of the biggest lies ever sold to the British public and took us into a war that cost lives of our soldiers and is still playing out to this day,  impoverished millions in the middle east and empowered Iran.
  He also loaded up the NHS with millions of pounds of debt at extortionate interest rates which we are still paying for to build those hospitals.
  And the minimum wage became the norm for millions of workers for a generation even though it was below what a real living wage should have been.

They weren't perfect and they didn't get everything right but they delivered on practically everything they said they would do .

Now you might say well " big deal " and " so what "

You tell me the last time a Tory government delivered 95% of what they say they will do , you'd have to go back to Thatcher for that and she was binned 30 years ago .

New Labour nearly put the Tories out of business for good , so much so Cameron had to model himself on Blair .

Even after Iraq they won another term .

[BillyStubbsTears]

Iraq was a horrific mistake and I've never quite figured out what it was that drove Blair to it.

Two possibilities as far as I can see.

1) Blair's Govt had come to power promising an "ethical foreign policy". In the 6-7 years before Labour came to power, the West had sat on its hands when bestial war crimes were being committed in the Balkans and in Rwanda and Congo. And Robin Cook as Labour's Foreign Secretary was, I think, sincere in stating that we had an obligation in the post-Cold War world to do better than that. British forces had lived up to that in putting down the horrific civil war in Sierra Leone and then Blair & Bush did the right thing in intervening in Kosovo to stop another Bosnia from happening. One argument is that Blair just got too messianic and thought that we could roll that into a far more complex problem like improving Iraq by getting rid of Saddam.

2) Bush was going into Iraq whatever. And Blair saw Britain's role with America as McMillan did with Kennedy - to be the wise old head constraining and advising them. Which required us to stay on board.

The first doesn't stack up as a credible argument, because even a cursory look showed that invading Iraq was going to be a nightmare. There was no way the country was going to be stable without a hard man in charge.

The second - well if you are going to be a wiser, older friend, you do it like Wilson did with Johnson over Vietnam. By telling them frankly that they are wrong, practically and morally and that we are not going to join them.

However you look at it, it was an appalling decision.

[tyke1962]

Iraq was a horrific mistake and I've never quite figured out what it was that drove Blair to it.

Two possibilities as far as I can see.

1) Blair's Govt had come to power promising an "ethical foreign policy". In the 6-7 years before Labour came to power, the West had sat on its hands when bestial war crimes were being committed in the Balkans and in Rwanda and Congo. And Robin Cook as Labour's Foreign Secretary was, I think, sincere in stating that we had an obligation in the post-Cold War world to do better than that. British forces had lived up to that in putting down the horrific civil war in Sierra Leone and then Blair & Bush did the right thing in intervening in Kosovo to stop another Bosnia from happening. One argument is that Blair just got too messianic and thought that we could roll that into a far more complex problem like improving Iraq by getting rid of Saddam.

2) Bush was going into Iraq whatever. And Blair saw Britain's role with America as McMillan did with Kennedy - to be the wise old head constraining and advising them. Which required us to stay on board.

The first doesn't stack up as a credible argument, because even a cursory look showed that invading Iraq was going to be a nightmare. There was no way the country was going to be stable without a hard man in charge.

The second - well if you are going to be a wiser, older friend, you do it like Wilson did with Johnson over Vietnam. By telling them frankly that they are wrong, practically and morally and that we are not going to join them.

However you look at it, it was an appalling decision.

It was indeed Billy , whether Blair thought he was on a bit of a roll after he stepped up to the mark on Kosovo I don't know .

It was a catastrophe .

[SydneyRover]

Jenny Formby has resigned which will allow Starmer to have a closer supporter in that position.

[Bentley Bullet]

George?

[tyke1962]

Jenny Formby has resigned which will allow Starmer to have a closer supporter in that position.

Aye a change of direction for the party is beginning to happen under Keir .

Absolutely has to happen , whilst far too many in the party think holding power within the Labour Movement is a better choice for them personally than actually getting elected to government the majority of us don't and neither does Starmer by the looks of it .

Shut the door and bolt it tight on the Momentum fruit cakes and we can get ready for government .

A leader we have , now we need a strategy and a good team around it .

Over to you Keir .


https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/may/04/jennie-formby-resigns-as-labour-party-general-secretary

[wilts rover]

Iraq was a horrific mistake and I've never quite figured out what it was that drove Blair to it.

Two possibilities as far as I can see.

1) Blair's Govt had come to power promising an "ethical foreign policy". In the 6-7 years before Labour came to power, the West had sat on its hands when bestial war crimes were being committed in the Balkans and in Rwanda and Congo. And Robin Cook as Labour's Foreign Secretary was, I think, sincere in stating that we had an obligation in the post-Cold War world to do better than that. British forces had lived up to that in putting down the horrific civil war in Sierra Leone and then Blair & Bush did the right thing in intervening in Kosovo to stop another Bosnia from happening. One argument is that Blair just got too messianic and thought that we could roll that into a far more complex problem like improving Iraq by getting rid of Saddam.

2) Bush was going into Iraq whatever. And Blair saw Britain's role with America as McMillan did with Kennedy - to be the wise old head constraining and advising them. Which required us to stay on board.

The first doesn't stack up as a credible argument, because even a cursory look showed that invading Iraq was going to be a nightmare. There was no way the country was going to be stable without a hard man in charge.

The second - well if you are going to be a wiser, older friend, you do it like Wilson did with Johnson over Vietnam. By telling them frankly that they are wrong, practically and morally and that we are not going to join them.

However you look at it, it was an appalling decision.

Hve you read Andrew Rawnsley's the 'End of The Party', he goes into a lot of detail on this, quite naturally.

It was 1. Blair always believed it was the right thing to do to remove Sadam. If you hear him interviewed he still does to this day. It wasn't 2 because after they failed to get the 2nd UN resolution Bush phoned Blair to tell him the UK didnt have to support the US if they didn't want to. Bush knew who was in charge and so did Blair.

[wilts rover]

Wilts.

I apologise for my poor phrasing earlier.

When I said, "I agree that factionalism is a cancer on the Left. That's why the People's Front of Judea scene was such barbed humour." I was meaning the entire spectrum of the Left. My apologies if that wasn't clear.

In fairness though, I have asked you and others in here who I'm sure would claim to be further to the Left than me if they voted and campaigned for Brown in 2010. Those who didn't are on thin ice criticising those who did that for both Brown and Corbyn.

Billy, there is no need to apolgise, just take a minute to review your post before pressing send.

Please don't be offended as I mean this in all comradeship and friendship but you do have a tendency to preach and sermonise in your posts. The above being a perfect example of that.

This has begun in a debate over how left wing the policies of the Atlee government were. Why on earth have you mentioned Gordon Brown and people being on thin ice for critising you in a reply to it? take it up with them! This is a rhetorical question btw.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Wilts.

I apologise for my poor phrasing earlier.

When I said, "I agree that factionalism is a cancer on the Left. That's why the People's Front of Judea scene was such barbed humour." I was meaning the entire spectrum of the Left. My apologies if that wasn't clear.

In fairness though, I have asked you and others in here who I'm sure would claim to be further to the Left than me if they voted and campaigned for Brown in 2010. Those who didn't are on thin ice criticising those who did that for both Brown and Corbyn.

Billy, there is no need to apolgise, just take a minute to review your post before pressing send.

Please don't be offended as I mean this in all comradeship and friendship but you do have a tendency to preach and sermonise in your posts. The above being a perfect example of that.

This has begun in a debate over how left wing the policies of the Atlee government were. Why on earth have you mentioned Gordon Brown and people being on thin ice for critising you in a reply to it? take it up with them! This is a rhetorical question btw.

Wilts.

Thanks for you response. I agree that my tone isn't always the best, and yes, I should make sure I say clearly what I mean.

It does work both ways. Your (less regular these days to be fair) jibes that I am somehow a "centrist" are unnecessary and not supported by what I say and have jibbed with me for a while. I'll confess that I do tend to get a bit narky when I sense the discussion going that way - even if it isn't.

The comment about Brown was connected to the factionalism theme. I thought I recalled you carefully avoiding answering the question about whether you had supported Brown's Labour in 2010 when I'd asked that in the past. My unreserved apologies if my memory is wrong.

[Copps is Magic]

Just watched PMq's. I must say Starmer comes across very well.