Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Off Topic => Topic started by: wilts rover on April 04, 2020, 11:27:05 am
-
I would have preferred Lisa Nandy myself but congratulations to Sir Keir for winning decisively, nice speech too.
https://labourlist.org/2020/04/keir-starmer-elected-to-succeed-jeremy-corbyn-as-labour-leader/
-
I would have preferred Lisa Nandy myself but congratulations to Sir Keir for winning decisively, nice speech too.
https://labourlist.org/2020/04/keir-starmer-elected-to-succeed-jeremy-corbyn-as-labour-leader/
He's a big Arsenal fan, likes his football.
I invited him to a game at the Keepmoat recently when we had a conversation, he said he'd love to come.
-
I could given the right circumstances, vote for a party lead by him
-
It's a good decision, Corbyn had his chances it's time for a new team and a fresh outlook for the party and hopefully the UK .................. in time.
-
I could given the right circumstances, vote for a party lead by him
So could I and many more - but my fear as I recorded here straight after the Johnson landlide is that by the time the next Election comes he will have probably have nothing left after 5 years in opposition (hope Im wrong)
I personally think he is great and will be a boon to the Party and hopefully he will lead Labour to a win and I will be here to vote for them (under his Leadership) as opposed to voting for him as it is not a Presidency
-
Two things against him, his personality and his record of standing against Brexit, that starts him off at odds with many Labour voters and will remember his stance, they are not the Labour member luvie duvies.
Better than Long Bailey but who would not be? Nandy could become the face of the party on TV.
-
Selby.
You have a personality for PM now. He was telling folk it was OK to shake hands on a CV-19 ward and have the family round for Mother's Day.
I prefer politicians to be competent and have policies that benefit the country, rather than go on Have I Got News For You.
You DO know Starmer is a working class kid don't you?
-
IMO Starmer is the best choice for leader of the Labour Party.
He speaks well and will probably give them a chance at the next GE.
-
Two things against him, his personality and his record of standing against Brexit, that starts him off at odds with many Labour voters and will remember his stance, they are not the Labour member luvie duvies.
Better than Long Bailey but who would not be? Nandy could become the face of the party on TV.
How many times do you need to be told, Brexit is done, finished, over with! It will happen! Starmer is the correct choice for leader, a working class kid with an education, a QC that will tie BJ in knots, and he won’t fall for BJ’s childish performances in the commons
-
Careful Filo. You're elbowing in on BB's job. He's the one who has told us for years we need to move on from Brexit.
I'm sure he'll have a word with Selby when he gets a minute.
-
Selby wouldn't do what I say, he is his own bloke. We are not a clique!
-
Careful Filo. You're elbowing in on BB's job. He's the one who has told us for years we need to move on from Brexit.
I'm sure he'll have a word with Selby when he gets a minute.
Don’t hold your breath 😀
-
Selby wouldn't do what I say, he is his own bloke. We are not a clique!
And there you go 😂😂😂😂
-
I could given the right circumstances, vote for a party lead by him
So could I and many more - but my fear as I recorded here straight after the Johnson landlide is that by the time the next Election comes he will have probably have nothing left after 5 years in opposition (hope Im wrong)
I personally think he is great and will be a boon to the Party and hopefully he will lead Labour to a win and I will be here to vote for them (under his Leadership) as opposed to voting for him as it is not a Presidency
A boon to the party? What, like Michael Elphic? :lol:
-
If he does not move the Party away from the South East London concentration he will be no more successful than Corbyn, and with the boundary changes will start off even further behind in the rest of the country.
His back up team and their projection on radio and TV will be just as important as himself, and if the left of the party are not brought into line and momentum quashed he may have trouble keeping the party together as one entity.
The extreme left have been undermining and gradually building within the party for a generation, and very nearly succeeded with Corbyn to take over the party. If they had won the election against May they would have done.
They now are back to square one, in the background but pushing to get back as they were under Blair.
With the young in education leaning to the left faction, will they be prepared to be subservient within the party? or could they break away? the extremists attached to the party have had a kicking, there will be a reaction.
-
I would have preferred Lisa Nandy myself but congratulations to Sir Keir for winning decisively, nice speech too.
https://labourlist.org/2020/04/keir-starmer-elected-to-succeed-jeremy-corbyn-as-labour-leader/
He's a big Arsenal fan, likes his football.
I invited him to a game at the Keepmoat recently when we had a conversation, he said he'd love to come.
A friend of mine is friends with him. He’s meant to be quite a good player as well.
-
With the health disaster going to take the best part of a year to 18 months to get the on top of and the financial disaster years more when B..... kicks in and it compounds the losses people may take a different view.
-
Selby wouldn't do what I say, he is his own bloke. We are not a clique!
More like a cult :lol:
-
Whatever will the Tory rags be thinking now ?
As far as I can see he's got to the very top of the Labour Party without making a single enemy .
Crown and public prosecutions top man and knighted for his services .
Working class kid whose rose to the top through study and hard work .
The classic pull yourself up by your bootstraps that the Tories are so fond of telling the electorate .
Well here he is .
The significant factor for me is that the Tory attack dog rags are going to have to play the ball on policy and not the man .
Little point in the heartlands pointing at the knighthood when they vote for a silver spoon fecker with Eton and Oxford on his cv and become lick spittles for the likes of Mogg and his hedge fund shenanigans .
I've never been under the illusion that the left could win on that ticket since Michael Foot was routed in 1983 despite my left wing stance , a New Labour relaunch will not work either .
Somewhere between the two and a very credible man leading is just about for me personally a compromise I'm more than willing to accept .
So much so I'll rejoin the party and do my bit .
Congratulations to Keir .
Game on now Johnson and deep down I suspect you know that .
-
If he does not move the Party away from the South East London concentration he will be no more successful than Corbyn, and with the boundary changes will start off even further behind in the rest of the country.
His back up team and their projection on radio and TV will be just as important as himself, and if the left of the party are not brought into line and momentum quashed he may have trouble keeping the party together as one entity.
The extreme left have been undermining and gradually building within the party for a generation, and very nearly succeeded with Corbyn to take over the party. If they had won the election against May they would have done.
They now are back to square one, in the background but pushing to get back as they were under Blair.
With the young in education leaning to the left faction, will they be prepared to be subservient within the party? or could they break away? the extremists attached to the party have had a kicking, there will be a reaction.
I suspect Selby the left are far more willing to compromise under Starmer than some kind of New Labour reboot leader .
I think it's worth pointing out that Starmer was willing to work under Corbyn and not plot behind his back to remove him even though I suspect they didn't always agree on everything .
It's no longer about taking over the party in my opinion because that simply does not work at the ballot box .
14 years out of power should wake the feck up everyone .
-
I just heard Starmer on the news apologising for the anti Semitic stuff emanating from the Labour Party.
People on here were suggesting that there was no anti sematism going on.
He also said that he wanted to work with the government to help defeat the virus, without the need for petty point scoring.
Readers take note.
-
he got top marks for his involvement in this David versus McGoliath case.
1994
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/mcdonalds-fights-anarchist-couple-costs-of-libel-hearing-on-damaging-leaflet-set-to-top-pounds-1m-1425782.html
and did pro bono (free) work here
2005
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2005/feb/16/foodanddrink1
BUT
some of his decisions "not to prosecute" when DPP didn't go down well with the public ........ time will tell ........... .
-
I just heard Starmer on the news apologising for the anti Semitic stuff emanating from the Labour Party.
People on here were suggesting that there was no anti sematism going on.
He also said that he wanted to work with the government to help defeat the virus, without the need for petty point scoring.
Readers take note.
I think for the most part people were saying Corbyn isn't anti-Semitic but may make anti Israel government comments. There is/was members here and there that are anti-Semitic and have other prejudices, the same as the Conservative party (such as their leader) and other parties.
-
And so the attacks begin from The Sun.
Sun Politics
'Millionaire Sir Kier Starmer set to crowned the new Labour leader'
The Sun will always hate Starmer because he opened the second phone hacking investigation that closed the News of the World. The Sun is still paying out millions in court for its own phone hacking and other privacy intrusions.
The Sun isn't a newspaper. It is and always will be a political campaigning tool for a morally bankrupt billionaire and his family, hell bent on subverting democracy for its own gain.
-
Hang on, you start a thread entitled "Alexander Boris De Pfeffel Johnson" to draw subconscious attention to a social status and now you cry because a rag has done the same? Hypocritical much?
-
And Momentum sticks their irrelevant oar in
In this new era Momentum will play a new role. We’ll hold Keir to account and make sure he keeps his promises, champion big ideas like the Green New Deal, build the power of Labour members and do everything we can to get a Labour government elected. 7/8
-
Excellent choice in my opinion. I would have liked Dr Rosena Allin-Khan to have won the deputy leadership position, however second-placed finish is a very good showing from her. Surely a significant shadow cabinet position awaits...
-
They're gone Filo, couple of years ppl wont even remember them. Labour has turned a corner now and will present a credible alternative to the electorate
-
Tyke, look back at my post and then take in Filo's latest post. Then ask yourself, if Labour do not split or momentum is and the attached Eco warriors are chucked out, how long it will take before either Starmer is gone or the party is less electable even more than they are now.
-
Selby.
I've never managed to cotton onto what you actually want. All you ever do is criticise the Labour party, but you never say what you DO want.
-
Perhaps we should wait and see what actually happens with Labour over the next couple of years before passing judgement.?
-
Tyke, look back at my post and then take in Filo's latest post. Then ask yourself, if Labour do not split or momentum is and the attached Eco warriors are chucked out, how long it will take before either Starmer is gone or the party is less electable even more than they are now.
Selby , there isn't a Labour leader in history who has been able to square ALL the circles within the movement , not Atlee , not Wilson , certainly not Blair or Corbyn .
Disagreements don't necessarily lead to splits and I think the Starmer victory will be comprehensive evidence of that .
The party was more likely to split if RLB had won .
In tragic circumstances and definitely not what I would have chosen comes very fertile political ground over the next four years .
The argument over who picks up the coronavirus bill will be where the next election is fought .
Starmer needs to win that argument and I suspect with the sheer amount of people affected by this tragedy its an argument the tories will do well to win .
I take it as read that their donors and captains of free market capitalism won't be expected to go out and bat for the country if tory history is anything to go by .
-
Hypocrasy ?
dePfeffel Johnson is a ( born to rule ) Eton toff
Keir Starmer was born in Southwark, London, on 2 September 1962.[
] He was one of five children of Josephine , a nurse, and Rodney Starmer, a toolmaker.
Keir was named after the first Labour Party MP, Keir Hardie. He passed the 11-plus examination and gained entry to Reigate Grammar School.
maybe I'm not so keen on 'knowing my place'
but the question is ' Who do you think is best likely to represent your interest ? '
-
For me, Starmer, no shadow of doubt, as you know though, that's not what I was pulling you up on
-
First of all, congratulations to the bloke for his leadership victory, and I'll be the first to congratulate him if he becomes Prime Minister in 2024, because that's what I do.
However, he has a massive job in getting back on board all the Northern voters who deserted the Party last December, because of his stance on Brexit, and the perceived image of the Labour Party becoming the party of the London Metropolitan elite.
If Labour are to win in 2024, they desperately need those voters back.
-
didn't take long for Brexit to rear it's ugly head
Keir Starmer former Labour Brexit Secretary.
Everybody should note we are very short of nurses and doctors and agricultural workers..these were self inflicted by Boris and Gove. We must extend the transition period to review the wisdom of Brexit .
-
First of all, congratulations to the bloke for his leadership victory, and I'll be the first to congratulate him if he becomes Prime Minister in 2024, because that's what I do.
However, he has a massive job in getting back on board all the Northern voters who deserted the Party last December, because of his stance on Brexit, and the perceived image of the Labour Party becoming the party of the London Metropolitan elite.
If Labour are to win in 2024, they desperately need those voters back.
SS.
Hang on.
Starmer, the son of a nurse and a toolmaker is a member of the elite?
Johnson, the Eton educated son of a father who went to Rugby school and who is the direct descendant of Turkish and German nobility is a man of the people?
Could you just run by me how that logic works? Only it seems to me that "Elite" has become one of the those really lazy words that is just chucked out as an insult against anyone that folk don't like.
-
Tyke, look back at my post and then take in Filo's latest post. Then ask yourself, if Labour do not split or momentum is and the attached Eco warriors are chucked out, how long it will take before either Starmer is gone or the party is less electable even more than they are now.
Selby , there isn't a Labour leader in history who has been able to square ALL the circles within the movement , not Atlee , not Wilson , certainly not Blair or Corbyn .
Disagreements don't necessarily lead to splits and I think the Starmer victory will be comprehensive evidence of that .
The party was more likely to split if RLB had won .
In tragic circumstances and definitely not what I would have chosen comes very fertile political ground over the next four years .
The argument over who picks up the coronavirus bill will be where the next election is fought .
Starmer needs to win that argument and I suspect with the sheer amount of people affected by this tragedy its an argument the tories will do well to win .
I take it as read that their donors and captains of free market capitalism won't be expected to go out and bat for the country if tory history is anything to go by .
What I find bizarre and I had better post the :chair: :chair: :chair: now is that whether or not the Labour Party is split in one direction or another one or even into 5 factions, we are (on average) as a nation all working class. I certainly am *
So what I have NEVER got is why (split or not) the working class people of this Country / Union dont just vote against the Conservative Party every single election there is.
Its a simplistic view from asimple bloke but ffs how many people around Donny (to name just one Northern town) are really Conservatives *
* Its still Barons (with the money and power) and Serfs (myself included) doing their bidding and enduring their ideals rules and philosophies
Better chuck in my last Chair :chair:
-
I would have preferred Lisa Nandy myself but congratulations to Sir Keir for winning decisively, nice speech too.
https://labourlist.org/2020/04/keir-starmer-elected-to-succeed-jeremy-corbyn-as-labour-leader/
He's a big Arsenal fan, likes his football.
I invited him to a game at the Keepmoat recently when we had a conversation, he said he'd love to come.
A friend of mine is friends with him. He’s meant to be quite a good player as well.
He certainly moves in football circles. I was sat next to him at a PFA dinner and we talked about safe standing and other fan topics for most of the night. He knows his stuff.
-
First of all, congratulations to the bloke for his leadership victory, and I'll be the first to congratulate him if he becomes Prime Minister in 2024, because that's what I do.
However, he has a massive job in getting back on board all the Northern voters who deserted the Party last December, because of his stance on Brexit, and the perceived image of the Labour Party becoming the party of the London Metropolitan elite.
If Labour are to win in 2024, they desperately need those voters back.
SS.
Hang on.
Starmer, the son of a nurse and a toolmaker is a member of the elite?
Johnson, the Eton educated son of a father who went to Rugby school and who is the direct descendant of Turkish and German nobility is a man of the people?
Could you just run by me how that logic works? Only it seems to me that "Elite" has become one of the those really lazy words that is just chucked out as an insult against anyone that folk don't like.
I was waiting for someone to pull me up on that, but I didn't expect it to be you, because I thought your understanding of semantics was better than that.
Read my post carefully. I said "the perceived image" of the Labour Party becoming the party of the London Metropolitan elite.
That was the view being banded about by many Northern voters during the Election campaign. Take it up with them.
-
So go on. What is your take? Do you think he and his party are part of the Elite?
-
I think Starmer has a few key battles ahead including managing the antisemetic issues without caving in to the BoD. That's a tough one where if he stands up and deals with the processes reasonably and the BoD continiue with their cushy media position, he'll get labelled as AS. If he goes 100% with them as so far he has suggested, he'll lose a lot of support in the party.
I used to think his dull and awkward media performances would be his biggest battle, but I'm thinking the public's thirst for the populist Johnson/Trump/Farage style might wane and save him on that score - we'll see.
-
I'll be raising a glass tonight.
Thank heavens the Corbyn nightmare is finally coming to an end.
Agent Corbyn, the man who did more to put the tories in power than any tory politician could ever do.
-
So go on. What is your take? Do you think he and his party are part of the Elite?
Personally, I'm not keen on the word "Elite", because it can mean lots of different things. For example, lots of political pundits use the term "the Liberalist Elite" to describe liberalists who take the moral high ground on everything. The Lib Dems are full of them.
However, Greater London seems to be more of a Labour stronghold than the North of England at the moment. Surely that situation needs to be addressed if Labour are to have a chance in 2024.
-
Let's be honest.
This thread is a microcosm about how politics is still driven by a cult of personality.
If I asked you to describe Keir Starmer's politics would you be able to (without googling)? Be honest.
-
SS
Those people who "take the moral high ground"?
What exactly do you mean by that?
-
SS-you have congratulated him and Selby? do you want KS to do well, the labour party to win? I'm with DW could never ever vote on the right I don't understand where you're coming from, one an ex minier and both of you spend you're time putting the boot into labour.
-
The right choice personality wis, let's see how he goes policy wise.
-
Right choice on many fronts a man that has moved in lots of circles, well educated with a good grounding and a champion of human rights, bingo
-
Right choice on many fronts a man that has moved in lots of circles, well educated with a good grounding and a champion of human rights, bingo
Glad the cult myth has been taken out of play and democracy delivered the credible leader .
Needs a good team around him mind !! .
-
SS-you have congratulated him and Selby? do you want KS to do well, the labour party to win? I'm with DW could never ever vote on the right I don't understand where you're coming from, one an ex minier and both of you spend you're time putting the boot into labour.
Sydney, the thing is, not everyone thinks the same way.
Surely you can understand that?
Have you also considered that it might have been the a Labour policies that people have been putting the boot into, not necessarily the Party.
-
Of course I understand that hound i just thought if they were labour supporters as they keep maintaining they may post something positive about them even if only occasionaly especially under he circumstances where the tories have reduced the average person's wealth, access to good health care, workers rights ..............
-
SS-you have congratulated him and Selby? do you want KS to do well, the labour party to win? I'm with DW could never ever vote on the right I don't understand where you're coming from, one an ex minier and both of you spend you're time putting the boot into labour.
Sydney, the thing is, not everyone thinks the same way.
Surely you can understand that?
Have you also considered that it might have been the a Labour policies that people have been putting the boot into, not necessarily the Party.
Majority of their policies were supported. On most polls afterwards the two things people didn't like about Labour were Corbyn and their stance on Brexit.
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Au9__iFYVpk/Xdv7Ta2zHWI/AAAAAAAADdQ/tGsjtlBvRLMZF_9YWHrG_GXXo18JNNH6gCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/Policies.png)
(https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2019/12/13/16/22208138-7789965-image-a-22_1576253604801.jpg)
-
Unfortunately, the two were inextricably linked.
A congenital ditherer as leader who promoted a dithery policy.
-
I said this about Corbyn 4 years ago, and it turned out right.
Corbyn was never up to the job. Because he is steeped in the kind of left-ist politics that I despaired of in the 1980s. Where being seen to be "ideologically sound" is more important than convincing the people who disagree with you.
And as a result, he's been shambolic from the off. The ridiculous issue about whether he would kneel before the Queen. There were two bleeding obvious answer to that question: "Yes of course I will; she's our Head of State and kneeling is the convention" or "No I won't as a matter of principle". Corbyn knew he couldn't say the latter without making himself unelectable. But he couldn't bring himself to say the former. So instead he ducked the issue for a week. It dominated the headlines. And then he grudgingly said that he would. Leaving the unmistakable impression that he didn't want to, but didn't have the backbone to say so. Utterly amateurish. Allowing the story to be written on him, instead of controlling the agenda.
He compounded it by his absolutely stupid handling of the Salisbury affair. There is no way on earth that the British electorate would elect a LotO who stands up in Parliament and says, in effect, I trust the leader of a hostile power over the word of the British security services. But that was an entirely expected redoo se from a man who has spent his life in bubbles where that IS the standard belief. Who has spent his life surrounded by people like Seumas Milne who said we mustn't publicly criticise Putin flattening Aleppo because it "distracts attention" from the crimes of Britain and America.
It was that side of Corbyn that made him unelectable. Self-indulgent undergraduate level historical and foreign policy critique that made them feel of being Britain-haters.
-
I firmly believe that if you don't win a GE then you should step down as leader .
Corbyn didn't win the 2017 GE and he should have gone there and then .
Instead he looked upon it as some kind of victory because he didn't get routed as was expected a few weeks before .
I never understood why he stayed on .
-
SS
Those people who "take the moral high ground"?
What exactly do you mean by that?
I can't believe someone as intelligent as you is even asking that question. There are countless examples of it, far too many to mention them all on here, but I'll give you a couple of examples.
After her humiliating defeat in the Election, that clown Jo Swinson got on her soapbox and practically accused the nation of being full of racists and xenophobes. Who the f*cking hell does she think she is?
A similar thing was going on with this forum during the last 3 years, with people being accused of being racist and xenophobic because they voted for Brexit. I've never been racist and xenophobic in my entire life, so what right have people who don't even know me to accuse me of those things?
That's what's known as taking the moral high ground, but I think you already knew that.
-
SS-you have congratulated him and Selby? do you want KS to do well, the labour party to win? I'm with DW could never ever vote on the right I don't understand where you're coming from, one an ex minier and both of you spend you're time putting the boot into labour.
Well done Sydney, you've just confirmed how confused you are about certain things. First of all, there's only one thing I've ever accused Labour of, and that's their stance on Brexit, which I always maintained would lose them the Election, and was proved right.
As regards the other thing, have you heard of the word "magnanimous"? I always congratulate people on achieving things, whether or not I like them or agree with them, because to do otherwise is acting like a sore loser or a petulant child.
I think you know exactly what I mean.
-
SS
Those people who "take the moral high ground"?
What exactly do you mean by that?
I can't believe someone as intelligent as you is even asking that question. There are countless examples of it, far too many to mention them all on here, but I'll give you a couple of examples.
After her humiliating defeat in the Election, that clown Jo Swinson got on her soapbox and practically accused the nation of being full of racists and xenophobes. Who the f*cking hell does she think she is?
A similar thing was going on with this forum during the last 3 years, with people being accused of being racist and xenophobic because they voted for Brexit. I've never been racist and xenophobic in my entire life, so what right have people who don't even know me to accuse me of those things?
That's what's known as taking the moral high ground, but I think you already knew that.
You've hardly backed up your opinion in a credible way there.
1) You used the word 'practically'.
2) Your own opinion of what others may or may not think of you.
1/10. Must do better.
-
Steve, you have done well there, one out of ten from a no mark. Miss Beal and Mr Dixon would have been proud of you.
-
There's no answer to your wisdom and wit.😆😆
-
SS
Those people who "take the moral high ground"?
What exactly do you mean by that?
I can't believe someone as intelligent as you is even asking that question. There are countless examples of it, far too many to mention them all on here, but I'll give you a couple of examples.
After her humiliating defeat in the Election, that clown Jo Swinson got on her soapbox and practically accused the nation of being full of racists and xenophobes. Who the f*cking hell does she think she is?
A similar thing was going on with this forum during the last 3 years, with people being accused of being racist and xenophobic because they voted for Brexit. I've never been racist and xenophobic in my entire life, so what right have people who don't even know me to accuse me of those things?
That's what's known as taking the moral high ground, but I think you already knew that.
You've hardly backed up your opinion in a credible way there.
1) You used the word 'practically'.
2) Your own opinion of what others may or may not think of you.
1/10. Must do better.
What a pathetic post. Are you seriously saying that someone who doesn't know me can accuse me of being a racist, and what I then think of that is nothing other than an opinion?
I hope your understanding of the semantics of Spanish is better than your understanding of the semantics of English.
-
Steve, you have done well there, one out of ten from a no mark. Miss Beal and Mr Dixon would have been proud of you.
You'll not believe this Brian, but I actually was never taught by Miss Beal (Aunty B) or Mr Dixon (Deadshot). For geography I had Bob Oliver, and for science Mr Groom.
As regards Iberian Red, well at least he got out of this sh*t country, I'll give him that. The trouble is, just like Sydney, he can't keep away from our politics.
It baffles me as to why.
-
Interesting Shadow Cabinet shaping up.
Dodds at Shadow Chancellor is a big move. She is one of the intellectual rising stars of the party and has a chance to make the case for the very different economics we will need post-virus.
This editorial today from the Financial Times (The FINANCIAL TIMES!) shows what a different world we are going to be in after the virus.
https://mobile.twitter.com/rcbregman/status/1246371782698905600
Starmer is sending a pretty uncompromising message to the Corbynistas too. No place for them in the very highest levels of the Shadow Cabinet. Interesting thing now will be to see if and at what level he makes room for Long-Bailey.
-
SS-you have congratulated him and Selby? do you want KS to do well, the labour party to win? I'm with DW could never ever vote on the right I don't understand where you're coming from, one an ex minier and both of you spend you're time putting the boot into labour.
Well done Sydney, you've just confirmed how confused you are about certain things. First of all, there's only one thing I've ever accused Labour of, and that's their stance on Brexit, which I always maintained would lose them the Election, and was proved right.
As regards the other thing, have you heard of the word "magnanimous"? I always congratulate people on achieving things, whether or not I like them or agree with them, because to do otherwise is acting like a sore loser or a petulant child.
I think you know exactly what I mean.
Mmm sore loser or petulant ............... difficult choice ................... at least I didn't pick brexit :lol:
-
Steve, you have done well there, one out of ten from a no mark. Miss Beal and Mr Dixon would have been proud of you.
You'll not believe this Brian, but I actually was never taught by Miss Beal (Aunty B) or Mr Dixon (Deadshot). For geography I had Bob Oliver, and for science Mr Groom.
As regards Iberian Red, well at least he got out of this sh*t country, I'll give him that. The trouble is, just like Sydney, he can't keep away from our politics.
It baffles me as to why.
Not sure I'd want to be taught by Mr Groom :)
-
Interesting Shadow Cabinet shaping up.
Dodds at Shadow Chancellor is a big move. She is one of the intellectual rising stars of the party and has a chance to make the case for the very different economics we will need post-virus.
This editorial today from the Financial Times (The FINANCIAL TIMES!) shows what a different world we are going to be in after the virus.
https://mobile.twitter.com/rcbregman/status/1246371782698905600
Starmer is sending a pretty uncompromising message to the Corbynistas too. No place for them in the very highest levels of the Shadow Cabinet. Interesting thing now will be to see if and at what level he makes room for Long-Bailey.
The Tories will be hyperventilating on reading that , the final solution and the Singapore On Thames wet dream up in smoke , oh dear .
-
Interesting Shadow Cabinet shaping up.
Dodds at Shadow Chancellor is a big move. She is one of the intellectual rising stars of the party and has a chance to make the case for the very different economics we will need post-virus.
This editorial today from the Financial Times (The FINANCIAL TIMES!) shows what a different world we are going to be in after the virus.
https://mobile.twitter.com/rcbregman/status/1246371782698905600
Starmer is sending a pretty uncompromising message to the Corbynistas too. No place for them in the very highest levels of the Shadow Cabinet. Interesting thing now will be to see if and at what level he makes room for Long-Bailey.
Over half the new Shadow Cabinet were in Corbyn's final one - including the leader, deputy leader, shadow chancellor. and home secretary. They are all Corbynistas now - get over it.
-
Wilts.
I think we are on different definition lines here.
-
Anneliese Jane Dodds is a British Labour and Co-operative Party politician currently serving as Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer since 2020, and has served as Member of Parliament for Oxford East since 2017.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Co-operative_Party
-
Interesting Shadow Cabinet shaping up.
Dodds at Shadow Chancellor is a big move. She is one of the intellectual rising stars of the party and has a chance to make the case for the very different economics we will need post-virus.
This editorial today from the Financial Times (The FINANCIAL TIMES!) shows what a different world we are going to be in after the virus.
https://mobile.twitter.com/rcbregman/status/1246371782698905600
Starmer is sending a pretty uncompromising message to the Corbynistas too. No place for them in the very highest levels of the Shadow Cabinet. Interesting thing now will be to see if and at what level he makes room for Long-Bailey.
BST, what do the think they mean by saying they will question the privileges of the elderly.
-
Hound.
The elderly have been the one and only demographic group that has been protected by Austerity. There has been a huge inter-generational shift in wealth from the youngest to the oldest over the past 30 years but in particular over the past decade.
The baby boomer generation (not all but many of them) have had generous occupational pensions and have profited from crazy increases in house prices. Millennials have had all that taken away from them. Millions of boomers had society subsidise their improvement by paying them to go to free Universities. They then voted for parties that ripped that away from the younger generation and told them if they wanted the same benefit, they would have to rack up £50k+ debt.
I've said for years that there was a reckoning coming. It's here now. This cannot continue and it won't continue after the virus. There will have to be policies that redistribute wealth between the generations. Higher taxes for high earners and policies that water down the value of houses, whether taxes on wealth or policies that grind down house prices through higher inflation over the decades.
It won't be popular among those who have benefitted, but it is coming because the alternative is not tenable.
By the way, I'm saying that as someone who isn't officially in the baby boomer generation, but has had many of the benefits they had. I am one of the ones who will need to be paying more.
-
BST, the older people haven’t had it all good though have they.
There are lots of older people who are living on a pittance and a 3.9% increase on a weekly pension adds a couple of quid to their wealth.
Some people have been savvy and disciplined enough to save money for their futures, possibly by investing in private pensions, rather than blowing everything they had and expecting the state to look after them later on.
Is it fair to hit the savers now?
Some of the older people have also had to pay for their kids to go through the a University system too.
Those same kids will, or have already, benefited from inheriting those houses that soared in value.
Higher taxes for higher earners is the norm isn’t it but to penalise the older generation for building a pot to keep them comfortable in old age isn’t right.
-
And that's why I said "not all but many of them".
Question for you. When did you buy your first house?
-
Hound if you don't tax those that earn more where are you going to get the revenue from?
-
BST, the older people haven’t had it all good though have they.
There are lots of older people who are living on a pittance and a 3.9% increase on a weekly pension adds a couple of quid to their wealth.
Some people have been savvy and disciplined enough to save money for their futures, possibly by investing in private pensions, rather than blowing everything they had and expecting the state to look after them later on.
Is it fair to hit the savers now?
Some of the older people have also had to pay for their kids to go through the a University system too.
Those same kids will, or have already, benefited from inheriting those houses that soared in value.
Higher taxes for higher earners is the norm isn’t it but to penalise the older generation for building a pot to keep them comfortable in old age isn’t right.
Hound.
1) State pensions are not fantastic of course. But they have been protected against Austerity cuts while working age benefits have been savaged over the past ten years. That is one generational inequality.
2) Your comments about people putting by for their families is precisely where the issue is. That has led to grossly unfair outcomes because of grossly unequal differences in the growth of assets in different parts of the country. House "values" (I use the word advisedly because they are not real values, just a result of a screwed up economic system) have risen far faster in Guildford than in Denaby. So someone who "invested" £1000 in property in those two places in 1970 has seen a very different outcome in wealth today.
That is manifestly unfair and it is a market failure. It needs to be addressed for the good of society as a whole. Why should a grandkid in Guildford inherit a share in a £1m house while the kid in Denaby gets a share in a £50k house? And that's assuming the parents were ever able to get on the housing ladder.
3) Why should a person's ability to get an education depend on their grandparent's success on the house price lottery?
There is a very well established field of economic theory, backed up by lots of real-world evidence which clearly shows that societies in which wealth is allowed to pass through families see higher and hiher concentrations of wealth in fewer and fewer hands, and a long term decline in the economic health of the society. We've lived through two generations of saying that the ideal is to be selfish (that's not a perjorative term, I mean it in the most basic sense) but that is now coming to an end. If we are sensible. Like that FT editorial says, we will need far more Govt intervention in how society is run and how wealth is spread in future.
-
Hound.
The elderly have been the one and only demographic group that has been protected by Austerity. There has been a huge inter-generational shift in wealth from the youngest to the oldest over the past 30 years but in particular over the past decade.
The baby boomer generation (not all but many of them) have had generous occupational pensions and have profited from crazy increases in house prices. Millennials have had all that taken away from them. Millions of boomers had society subsidise their improvement by paying them to go to free Universities. They then voted for parties that ripped that away from the younger generation and told them if they wanted the same benefit, they would have to rack up £50k+ debt.
I've said for years that there was a reckoning coming. It's here now. This cannot continue and it won't continue after the virus. There will have to be policies that redistribute wealth between the generations. Higher taxes for high earners and policies that water down the value of houses, whether taxes on wealth or policies that grind down house prices through higher inflation over the decades.
It won't be popular among those who have benefitted, but it is coming because the alternative is not tenable.
By the way, I'm saying that as someone who isn't officially in the baby boomer generation, but has had many of the benefits they had. I am one of the ones who will need to be paying more.
Whilst I wouldn't argue with your reasoning Billy with the points you have made you also have to factor in how that plays out politically .
The Mail , Express and The Telegraph who have a huge readership amongst the boomers are going to have a field day and pull in the public sympathy .
Political suicide in my opinion .
-
Tyke
It doesn't really make any difference. The FT has it nailed. The issue is that the economics don't add up any other way. There's effectively nothing more to wring out of Austerity. The debt we will have at the end of this can only be dealt with in the way we did after WWII. There's a term for it which I can't remember off the top of my head, but effectively it means inflating away the debt.
Here's an example of how that works.
My parents bought their house in 1965. It cost £2200. Their mortgage payments were £15/month fixed over 30 years. That was a crippling debt to a young couple. We had very little spare cash when I was young. But that was an age of high inflation and high wage rises. So, by the time they made their last payment in 1995, it was barely loose change. That is effectively what the entire global economy will have to do over the next generation.
That will mean keeping interest rates low while encouraging inflation to take off up to 4-5-6%. That will erode the value of savings and property, but so be it. There's no other way out. We cannot afford to let people sit on hoarded wealth (non-productive savings, property etc), however unfair that might seem to those it hits. That is precisely what we did after the War, whilst also investing in things like mass higher education to build the next generation of wealth creators.
If you run inflation at 6%, a debt of £200bn today is effectively worth only £100bn in 12 years time, £50bn in 25 years time and £10bn in 50 years time, without paying a penny of it off. Unfortunately the same thing applies to savings; their value goes down even if you don't spend any of it. But as I say, we are going to be moving into an era where the key thing is driving down the effect of debt, not looking after savers.
-
I knew the term would come back to me.
Financial Repression. That's going to be the term of the 2020s. I'll guarantee that this becomes a key plank of Labour's economic response to the virus. And the Tories will have to do it too, although it goes against every one of their principles. Just like the Churchill and Macmillan Govts had to do it in the 1950s and 60s.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_repression
-
Hound if you don't tax those that earn more where are you going to get the revenue from?
Where did I say that higher earners shouldn’t pay more tax.
-
You didn't but it's obvious to most that when the flannel has been wrung as it has for 10 years and more there is nothing left so you have to spread your net wider and ask those with more money to pay more, no?
-
And that's why I said "not all but many of them".
Question for you. When did you buy your first house?
I bought my first house in 1974 for £4215.
My take home pay at that time was £72 per month.
The mortgage repayment was £44 per month.
My wife worked too as a teacher so her income helped of course.
-
You didn't but it's obvious to most that when the flannel has been wrung as it has for 10 years and more there is nothing left so you have to spread your net wider and ask those with more money to pay more, no?
So if I didn’t say anything about it, why did you address the question to me.
-
BST, the older people haven’t had it all good though have they.
There are lots of older people who are living on a pittance and a 3.9% increase on a weekly pension adds a couple of quid to their wealth.
Some people have been savvy and disciplined enough to save money for their futures, possibly by investing in private pensions, rather than blowing everything they had and expecting the state to look after them later on.
Is it fair to hit the savers now?
Some of the older people have also had to pay for their kids to go through the a University system too.
Those same kids will, or have already, benefited from inheriting those houses that soared in value.
Higher taxes for higher earners is the norm isn’t it but to penalise the older generation for building a pot to keep them comfortable in old age isn’t right.
Hound.
1) State pensions are not fantastic of course. But they have been protected against Austerity cuts while working age benefits have been savaged over the past ten years. That is one generational inequality.
2) Your comments about people putting by for their families is precisely where the issue is. That has led to grossly unfair outcomes because of grossly unequal differences in the growth of assets in different parts of the country. House "values" (I use the word advisedly because they are not real values, just a result of a screwed up economic system) have risen far faster in Guildford than in Denaby. So someone who "invested" £1000 in property in those two places in 1970 has seen a very different outcome in wealth today.
That is manifestly unfair and it is a market failure. It needs to be addressed for the good of society as a whole. Why should a grandkid in Guildford inherit a share in a £1m house while the kid in Denaby gets a share in a £50k house? And that's assuming the parents were ever able to get on the housing ladder.
3) Why should a person's ability to get an education depend on their grandparent's success on the house price lottery?
There is a very well established field of economic theory, backed up by lots of real-world evidence which clearly shows that societies in which wealth is allowed to pass through families see higher and hiher concentrations of wealth in fewer and fewer hands, and a long term decline in the economic health of the society. We've lived through two generations of saying that the ideal is to be selfish (that's not a perjorative term, I mean it in the most basic sense) but that is now coming to an end. If we are sensible. Like that FT editorial says, we will need far more Govt intervention in how society is run and how wealth is spread in future.
Of course state pensions aren’t good, that is why I mentioned£ that a 3.9% increase adds all of a couple of quid a week to the receivers wealth.
Also, I didn’t say anything about people putting money by for their kids.
The money they have saved is to get themselves by in their old age, to supplement the low state pensions that they get.
There are too many people living beyond their means, projecting an image of having money, when they have no savings for the future.
They are the ones who will expect the state to look after them in the future.
The savers have done without some of the luxuries earlier in life so that they can live comfortably later on.
As for the house price inequality, yes it does seem unfair in the example you give but we all know that prices in Guildford will naturally be higher than up here because of the ability of people to commute into London more easily from Guildford than from Denaby.
It is no surprise to me.
It is and always has been, that there will be differences in peoples worth and and opportunities open to their children, as the saying goes, not all animals are equal.
-
Hound, because although you may think you're doing it tough or you did your share, you are in a better position than the majority of the younger generation that are following through that can't afford a house, can't get a full time job etc
-
Sydney, how I am doing is irrelevant.
When I was a young man I always thought that there were people who were older than me who were better off than me.
Why should the younger people today think they are different.
-
:facepalm:
-
Tyke
It doesn't really make any difference. The FT has it nailed. The issue is that the economics don't add up any other way. There's effectively nothing more to wring out of Austerity. The debt we will have at the end of this can only be dealt with in the way we did after WWII. There's a term for it which I can't remember off the top of my head, but effectively it means inflating away the debt.
Here's an example of how that works.
My parents bought their house in 1965. It cost £2200. Their mortgage payments were £15/month fixed over 30 years. That was a crippling debt to a young couple. We had very little spare cash when I was young. But that was an age of high inflation and high wage rises. So, by the time they made their last payment in 1995, it was barely loose change. That is effectively what the entire global economy will have to do over the next generation.
That will mean keeping interest rates low while encouraging inflation to take off up to 4-5-6%. That will erode the value of savings and property, but so be it. There's no other way out. We cannot afford to let people sit on hoarded wealth (non-productive savings, property etc), however unfair that might seem to those it hits. That is precisely what we did after the War, whilst also investing in things like mass higher education to build the next generation of wealth creators.
If you run inflation at 6%, a debt of £200bn today is effectively worth only £100bn in 12 years time, £50bn in 25 years time and £10bn in 50 years time, without paying a penny of it off. Unfortunately the same thing applies to savings; their value goes down even if you don't spend any of it. But as I say, we are going to be moving into an era where the key thing is driving down the effect of debt, not looking after savers.
I don't disagree with any of that Billy but what's right and what's political acceptable whilst in opposition is very often two different things .
Making that politically acceptable is one hell of a challenge for the Labour Party .
The older people will simply point to mobile phone contracts , two weeks in Ibiza , £200 for a night out and two or three takeaways every week , something they never had or did with the Tory rags standing up for them .
Personally I'd leave it well alone and try and find easier politically acceptable low hanging fruit .
-
:facepalm:
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
-
Hound, how old were you in 1974 when you got a loan to buy your house? and are most people the same age now able to do the same? It is for most people the biggest purchase they will ever make and if they can't get on the ladder when they are younger chances are it won't happen. And I also agree with bst's point there is massive inequity between areas of the country.
-
And that's why I said "not all but many of them".
Question for you. When did you buy your first house?
I bought my first house in 1974 for £4215.
My take home pay at that time was £72 per month.
The mortgage repayment was £44 per month.
My wife worked too as a teacher so her income helped of course.
Hound.
Thanks for that. I agree that the mortgage payments as a proportion of take home income were eyewatering then. It is similar now for a first time buyer. The median top-line salary is about £30,000, so take home on that is likely to be about £2000 (assuming no student loan...)
Average house prices today are currently about £240,000.
Let's assume you have managed to scrape together a £20,000 deposit (good if you can find that...let's assume). The very best deal you can currently get, fixed for 5 years would have repayments over £1000 per month.
So, as a percentage, not so far off your situation in 1974.
I'd note the following then.
1) You'd have benefitted from MIRAS. You were actually subsidised by Govt who allowed you to claim tax back on your interest payments. That went more than 25 years ago.
2) Most importantly, you were buying that in a period over very high inflation and (associated) very high wage growth. taking ONS figures for wage growth, a salary of £72/month in 1974 would have gone up to £450/month by 1990. But your mortgage costs would not have increased. So they mortgage costs become a small fraction of your salary. You take the hit early on, then it becomes easier. That does not happen to people today. A salary of £1000/month in 2008 would perhaps have grown to £1200/month today. The mortgage costs are still very big as a percentage of income.
I know older people don't like to hear this, but we seriously did have the best of everything. And we have left the younger generations with none of those benefits. There's a reckoning coming.
-
And that's why I said "not all but many of them".
Question for you. When did you buy your first house?
I bought my first house in 1974 for £4215.
My take home pay at that time was £72 per month.
The mortgage repayment was £44 per month.
My wife worked too as a teacher so her income helped of course.
Hound.
Thanks for that. I agree that the mortgage payments as a proportion of take home income were eyewatering then. It is similar now for a first time buyer. The median top-line salary is about £30,000, so take home on that is likely to be about £2000 (assuming no student loan...)
Average house prices today are currently about £240,000.
Let's assume you have managed to scrape together a £20,000 deposit (good if you can find that...let's assume). The very best deal you can currently get, fixed for 5 years would have repayments over £1000 per month.
So, as a percentage, not so far off your situation in 1974.
I'd note the following then.
1) You'd have benefitted from MIRAS. You were actually subsidised by Govt who allowed you to claim tax back on your interest payments. That went more than 25 years ago.
2) Most importantly, you were buying that in a period over very high inflation and (associated) very high wage growth. taking ONS figures for wage growth, a salary of £72/month in 1974 would have gone up to £450/month by 1990. But your mortgage costs would not have increased. So they mortgage costs become a small fraction of your salary. You take the hit early on, then it becomes easier. That does not happen to people today. A salary of £1000/month in 2008 would perhaps have grown to £1200/month today. The mortgage costs are still very big as a percentage of income.
I know older people don't like to hear this, but we seriously did have the best of everything. And we have left the younger generations with none of those benefits. There's a reckoning coming.
There's also the matter of the high mortality rate amongst the elderly to consider Billy with the pandemic .
It's going to be one hell of a strategy from Labour to pull this one off .
-
Hound, how old were you in 1974 when you got a loan to buy your house? and are most people the same age now able to do the same? It is for most people the biggest purchase they will ever make and if they can't get on the ladder when they are younger chances are it won't happen. And I also agree with bst's point there is massive inequity between areas of the country.
I also agree that there is massive inequality between areas of the country ...... but I included my thoughts on the reasons why that could be so .....just to add balance. 🙂
-
Hound
Yes, of course there are massive differences between the money people make on the housing lottery.
And that is entirely unfair. So you deal with it by a Wealth Tax. Tax people on the amount their house increases in value.
That would not only reduce that gross inequality. It would also incentivise companies to move away from London and the South East, to areas of the country where house "values" were lower and staff more willing to go and live.
Just needs the political imperative. And that is precisely what our economic troubles after CV-19 will provide.
-
Tyke.
Do you just argue for arguing's sake,
You complain about us not being socialist enough. I'm giving you textbook socialist policies and you say we can't do that.
-
Anyway, congratulations to Keir :)
-
Tyke.
Do you just argue for arguing's sake,
You complain about us not being socialist enough. I'm giving you textbook socialist policies and you say we can't do that.
No I don't do arguing for the sake of it .
Your going down the wrong route with this , attacking the wealth , the politics of envy , the very thing that gets you routed at elections .
Now you are looking to attack the oldest members of our society , the ones locked down for 12 weeks and the ones most vulnerable to the virus .
Does that seem a reasonable strategy to you ?
I'm from a left wing background but I ain't an idiot either .
You cannot attack the wealth of any demographic and expect to see power , surely we've learned that by now .
The Labour strategy for me over the next four years is to place in play Keynesian economics .
Kick start the economy , get the population spending again .
Tax cuts for minimum wage earners .
Cut VAT .
Get business moving again , corporation tax cuts and get people back in to work .
The argument is that any kind of austerity leaves our society vulnerable and unprepared , the evidence of this pandemic is all you need to win that argument .
Leave the top end as they are , they do pay the majority of taxation after all in this country .
Let's get the bloody show back on the road .
Yes we are borrowing again but what can this lot in government say about that these days .
They haven't a leg to stand on .
-
Steve, you have done well there, one out of ten from a no mark. Miss Beal and Mr Dixon would have been proud of you.
You'll not believe this Brian, but I actually was never taught by Miss Beal (Aunty B) or Mr Dixon (Deadshot). For geography I had Bob Oliver, and for science Mr Groom.
As regards Iberian Red, well at least he got out of this sh*t country, I'll give him that. The trouble is, just like Sydney, he can't keep away from our politics.
It baffles me as to why.
Not sure I'd want to be taught by Mr Groom :)
Nice one Sydney, I p*ssed myself at that one.
-
So we are all to trust a new leader that has laid in bed with the lefties in the party and headed their stance on Brexit for three and a half years, against a large proportion of the parties traditional voters, then has shown his true colours and stabbed them in the back and chucked them on a pile like a used Johnny.
Not one to turn your back on is our Keir, if he can pleasantly run along with the crowd for three and a half years for his own good, then jump ship and hang the officers, he wants watching.
-
So we are all to trust a new leader that has laid in bed with the lefties in the party and headed their stance on Brexit for three and a half years, against a large proportion of the parties traditional voters, then has shown his true colours and stabbed them in the back and chucked them on a pile like a used Johnny.
For a minute I thought you were talking about Boris Johnson!
Sorry, had to re-read it.
-
So we are all to trust a new leader that has laid in bed with the lefties in the party and headed their stance on Brexit for three and a half years, against a large proportion of the parties traditional voters, then has shown his true colours and stabbed them in the back and chucked them on a pile like a used Johnny.
For a minute I thought you were talking about Boris Johnson!
Sorry, had to re-read it.
I spilt half a cup of tea reading it - a Boris Johnson fanboy attempting to slag-off a political rival for changing their mind!
Bugger, there goes the other half still laughing at it...
-
SS
Those people who "take the moral high ground"?
What exactly do you mean by that?
I can't believe someone as intelligent as you is even asking that question. There are countless examples of it, far too many to mention them all on here, but I'll give you a couple of examples.
After her humiliating defeat in the Election, that clown Jo Swinson got on her soapbox and practically accused the nation of being full of racists and xenophobes. Who the f*cking hell does she think she is?
A similar thing was going on with this forum during the last 3 years, with people being accused of being racist and xenophobic because they voted for Brexit. I've never been racist and xenophobic in my entire life, so what right have people who don't even know me to accuse me of those things?
That's what's known as taking the moral high ground, but I think you already knew that.
You've hardly backed up your opinion in a credible way there.
1) You used the word 'practically'.
2) Your own opinion of what others may or may not think of you.
1/10. Must do better.
I hope your understanding of the semantics of Spanish is better than your understanding of the semantics of English.
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
-
Steve, you have done well there, one out of ten from a no mark. Miss Beal and Mr Dixon would have been proud of you.
As regards Iberian Red, well at least he got out of this sh*t country, I'll give him that. The trouble is, just like Sydney, he can't keep away from our politics.
It baffles me as to why.
The irony! I take it you are an pensioner, but still feel you are entitled to an opinion.
Anyway,I see it as a moral duty to the vulnerable. Those incapable of forming reasoned opinions for themselves. You should thank me.
I await the tag team reply of Statler and Waldorf.
-
Steve, you have done well there, one out of ten from a no mark. Miss Beal and Mr Dixon would have been proud of you.
As regards Iberian Red, well at least he got out of this sh*t country, I'll give him that. The trouble is, just like Sydney, he can't keep away from our politics.
It baffles me as to why.
The irony! I take it you are an pensioner, but still feel you are entitled to an opinion.
Anyway,I see it as a moral duty to the vulnerable. Those incapable of forming reasoned opinions for themselves. You should thank me.
I await the tag team reply of Statler and Waldorf.
No problem Kermit. By the way, do your fingers still stink of pork?
-
So we are all to trust a new leader that has laid in bed with the lefties in the party and headed their stance on Brexit for three and a half years, against a large proportion of the parties traditional voters, then has shown his true colours and stabbed them in the back and chucked them on a pile like a used Johnny.
Not one to turn your back on is our Keir, if he can pleasantly run along with the crowd for three and a half years for his own good, then jump ship and hang the officers, he wants watching.
What's wrong with being left wing? The party itself is center-left, if that's a problem for you then I'd suggest the party isn't for you.
-
Stabber Starmer, it has a ring to it, ask poor old Jeremy's mates.
-
funny he says nice things about you selby, except of course that you betrayed labour by becoming a tory :)
-
Stabber Starmer, it has a ring to it, ask poor old Jeremy's mates.
Your a strange one, you call Corbyn everything derogatory you can think of, and then call Starmer for trying to have him removed for the good of the Labour Party
-
Stabber Starmer, it has a ring to it, ask poor old Jeremy's mates.
Politics is a brutal business Selby and the thickest of skin is required .
From what I read Keir hasn't a single enemy in the party even though they probably don't agree with him from time to time .
The strength of his victory suggests he's a decent shot at uniting the party .
A party that was massively in need of credible and common sense leadership .
I personally didn't care too much for his brexit stance but we move on .
A new era and I'm happy enough to support the new leader and the party because no matter what within the Labour Movement you are never going to square every circle , it's impossible because nobody yet has ever achieved that as a Labour leader , not even Wilson or Blair .
-
I would rather deal with Keir Starmer than Gove or Farage.
They really down at the bottom of the barrel. How can anybody respect either of that pair or the parties that they represent?
-
farage and gove leaked out of the barrel and are in the gutter
-
Don't turn your back on STABBER STARMER
-
second time you've posted that selby, suffering from attention deficit?
-
At least it was short and direct. Normally I struggle to read other posts that have paragraphs with hundreds of commas!😁
-
Steve, you have done well there, one out of ten from a no mark. Miss Beal and Mr Dixon would have been proud of you.
As regards Iberian Red, well at least he got out of this sh*t country, I'll give him that. The trouble is, just like Sydney, he can't keep away from our politics.
It baffles me as to why.
The irony! I take it you are an pensioner, but still feel you are entitled to an opinion.
Anyway,I see it as a moral duty to the vulnerable. Those incapable of forming reasoned opinions for themselves. You should thank me.
I await the tag team reply of Statler and Waldorf.
No problem Kermit. By the way, do your fingers still stink of pork?
That's ok SS. Yes they do. Its maybe better than Statler and Waldorf that get a fist up their backsides!
-
I can just imagine what Iberian Red said when he climbed the Pyrenees...
"A Muppet"
-
Don't turn your back on STABBER STARMER
Did you hear that on the radio?
-
I can just imagine what Iberian Red said when he climbed the Pyrenees...
"A Muppet"
Get back to what you do best. No not humour. Arguing in an empty room
-
Steve, you have done well there, one out of ten from a no mark. Miss Beal and Mr Dixon would have been proud of you.
As regards Iberian Red, well at least he got out of this sh*t country, I'll give him that. The trouble is, just like Sydney, he can't keep away from our politics.
It baffles me as to why.
The irony! I take it you are an pensioner, but still feel you are entitled to an opinion.
Anyway,I see it as a moral duty to the vulnerable. Those incapable of forming reasoned opinions for themselves. You should thank me.
I await the tag team reply of Statler and Waldorf.
No problem Kermit. By the way, do your fingers still stink of pork?
Did you two go to Percy's an all?
-
I can just imagine what Iberian Red said when he climbed the Pyrenees...
"A Muppet"
Get back to what you do best. No not humour. Arguing in an empty room
I know my humour's shite, but I'm kermitted to improving it.
-
Starmer promises to continue 'Corbynism' whilst making the Labour Party more respectful, inclusive and engaging;
https://labourlist.org/2020/02/starmer-unveils-eight-key-reforms-to-make-labour-open-respectful-creative-and-engaging/
-
Starmer promises to continue 'Corbynism' whilst making the Labour Party more respectful, inclusive and engaging;
https://labourlist.org/2020/02/starmer-unveils-eight-key-reforms-to-make-labour-open-respectful-creative-and-engaging/
Does he really say that.
-
Nope.
I've read that several times and I can't find any evidence of a Year 10 standard essay about NATO, full of Noam Chomsky quotes, tetchy mumbling about kneeling before the Queen or implied suggestions that we should ask Putin if he sent the Novachok poisoners.
-
Nope.
I've read that several times and I can't find any evidence of a Year 10 standard essay about NATO, full of Noam Chomsky quotes, tetchy mumbling about kneeling before the Queen or implied suggestions that we should ask Putin if he sent the Novachok poisoners.
Thought so (I think).
-
Announcing his package of reforms, Starmer said: “I am immensely proud of the size and energy of the party. People were inspired in their thousands by Jeremy Corbyn to join Labour, and we must not lose that idealism and radicalism.
inspiration, idealism and radicalism anyone...
They are all Corbynistas now - get over it.
https://labourlist.org/2020/02/starmer-unveils-eight-key-reforms-to-make-labour-open-respectful-creative-and-engaging/
-
Announcing his package of reforms, Starmer said: “I am immensely proud of the size and energy of the party. People were inspired in their thousands by Jeremy Corbyn to join Labour, and we must not lose that idealism and radicalism.
inspiration, idealism and radicalism anyone...
They are all Corbynistas now - get over it.
https://labourlist.org/2020/02/starmer-unveils-eight-key-reforms-to-make-labour-open-respectful-creative-and-engaging/
Yeah, then he says “we can channel it more effectively”, meaning not doing things the way Jezza did.
-
Announcing his package of reforms, Starmer said: “I am immensely proud of the size and energy of the party. People were inspired in their thousands by Jeremy Corbyn to join Labour, and we must not lose that idealism and radicalism.
inspiration, idealism and radicalism anyone...
They are all Corbynistas now - get over it.
https://labourlist.org/2020/02/starmer-unveils-eight-key-reforms-to-make-labour-open-respectful-creative-and-engaging/
Absolutely nothing to get over. You are welcome to go back to 2015/16 and read me saying how much I supported Corbyn's domestic policies.
And how no-one with his view of foreign affairs would ever cross the threshold of No. 10.
-
Correct me if I'm wrong here but didn't Tories by the boatloads join the Labour party just to vote Corbyn in, so as to strengthen Tory support?
-
First of all, congratulations to the bloke for his leadership victory, and I'll be the first to congratulate him if he becomes Prime Minister in 2024, because that's what I do.
However, he has a massive job in getting back on board all the Northern voters who deserted the Party last December, because of his stance on Brexit, and the perceived image of the Labour Party becoming the party of the London Metropolitan elite.
If Labour are to win in 2024, they desperately need those voters back.
SS.
Hang on.
Starmer, the son of a nurse and a toolmaker is a member of the elite?
Johnson, the Eton educated son of a father who went to Rugby school and who is the direct descendant of Turkish and German nobility is a man of the people?
Could you just run by me how that logic works? Only it seems to me that "Elite" has become one of the those really lazy words that is just chucked out as an insult against anyone that folk don't like.
Boris has got no Bragging rights his Great Grandad was Haci Ahmet RIZA an effendi 'educated gentleman' his 'wife' was a Circassian slave.from the village of Kalfat in Cankiri Turkey.not very Aristocratic,on the Pfeffel side his ancestors include Johannesburg Pfeffel. 1580 to 1634 the town watchman of Newburgh an der Donau, his son Conrad Pfeffel was a Tailor.
A bit later Christian Pfeffel Pops up who was very intelligent and served as the Envoy of The kingdom of Bavaria to England, he was later promoted to Frieherr. A bit like a Mp promoted to the House of Lords.
-
think i read one of his relatives got assasinated
-
Interestingly slavery did not end in Turkey until 1933. Circassian women were the prized possession and were acquired as Sex slaves. So Boris Ohnsons great great grandma was a Sex slave!
-
Interestingly slavery did not end in Turkey until 1933. Circassian women were the prized possession and were acquired as Sex slaves. So Boris Ohnsons great great grandma was a Sex slave!
if Johnson gets married he will have "scored" an equaliser in his "Beddings" sorry "Weddings" contest with Corbyn to make the scoreS 3 all
it seems he got divorced in February 2020.
Johnson 2 and counting
Spouse: Marina Wheeler (m. 1993–2020), Allegra Mostyn-Owen (m. 1987–1993)
Corbyn 3
Spouse: Laura Alvarez (m. 2013), Claudia Bracchitta (m. 1987–1999), Jane Chapman (m. 1974–1979)
-
A bloke I used to work with had a very unusual record when it came to marriages.
He actually had more weddings than wedding anniversaries.
Married three times but only had two anniversaries.
-
Starmer promises to continue 'Corbynism' whilst making the Labour Party more respectful, inclusive and engaging;
https://labourlist.org/2020/02/starmer-unveils-eight-key-reforms-to-make-labour-open-respectful-creative-and-engaging/
Does he b*llocks.
-
Announcing his package of reforms, Starmer said: “I am immensely proud of the size and energy of the party. People were inspired in their thousands by Jeremy Corbyn to join Labour, and we must not lose that idealism and radicalism.
inspiration, idealism and radicalism anyone...
They are all Corbynistas now - get over it.
https://labourlist.org/2020/02/starmer-unveils-eight-key-reforms-to-make-labour-open-respectful-creative-and-engaging/
You ever been to Beijing?
Tiannanmen Square is breathtaking. There's a 50 foot high picture of Mao looking down austerely from the walls of the Forbidden Palace. He's effectively been elevated to God-like status.
Then you go round the corner and there's Beijing's Oxford Street. Versace, Armani, Jimmy Choo...that sort of thing.
And in the middle of the street is a statue of Deng Xiao Ping. The man who picked up the shattered pieces of China after Mao's death and set them on the road to their current economic success. All the while telling the masses who had been brainwashed by the Cult of Mao that he was a Maoist and he venerated the Great Leader.
That's kind of how you have to do it when you are dealing with a cult.
-
Here's the first step on the Financial Repression road by the way.
https://www.ft.com/content/664c575b-0f54-44e5-ab78-2fd30ef213cb
This actually IS the BoE printing money to allow the Govt to keep spending.
This is what the Right told you that McDonnell would do. And they told you it would turn us into Venezuela.
It's here. Now.
Happening under a Tory Govt.
-
Those that voted for this rabble are too embarrassed to reply bst
-
Here's the first step on the Financial Repression road by the way.
https://www.ft.com/content/664c575b-0f54-44e5-ab78-2fd30ef213cb
This actually IS the BoE printing money to allow the Govt to keep spending.
This is what the Right told you that McDonnell would do. And they told you it would turn us into Venezuela.
It's here. Now.
Happening under a Tory Govt.
“Brown bankrupt the Country”
They can never ever use that phrase again after this
-
it wasn't a legitimate call before but they still used it Filo
-
Here's the first step on the Financial Repression road by the way.
https://www.ft.com/content/664c575b-0f54-44e5-ab78-2fd30ef213cb
This actually IS the BoE printing money to allow the Govt to keep spending.
This is what the Right told you that McDonnell would do. And they told you it would turn us into Venezuela.
It's here. Now.
Happening under a Tory Govt.
So you should be turning cartwheels BST, you get what you want fiscally and we all avoided Corbyn 🤣
-
Can you cut and paste it Ldr there's a paywall?
-
This is what I've been talking about on the subject of integrity.
The Right have looked grave and serious and stroked their chins for years and said, "Good Lord! No you can't do that! It will destroy the country" when the Left has suggested textbook economic policies to get us out of the perma-slump that we have been in for a decade.
The Right KNEW that Austerity would be catastrophic for the economy. But they did it anyway, because it gave them a stick to beat Labour with. ("Labour are irresponsible spenders. We are serious people and we'll do the hard stuff to make the country stronger." Utter b*llocks, but it win the argument and kept the Tories in power.)
Now the game has changed. Stuff that the Tories were calling Marxist 4 months ago is now centre ground. And Labour could be making hay with this. But they are not, because it is in the national interest to get this right.
Just like it was in the national interest to bail out the economy 12 years ago, when the Tories screamed that Labour was irresponsible to do it.
-
Can you cut and paste it Ldr there's a paywall?
Sorry Syd, cut and paste what?
-
I posted that Sydney. You can access it by signing up for a free account.
-
Ldr.
Yes of course.
I'm cock-a-hoop that we have a deadly virus that is killing tens of thousands of us and has led to us losing 30% of the economy. This is what I've prayed for every morning.
-
Announcing his package of reforms, Starmer said: “I am immensely proud of the size and energy of the party. People were inspired in their thousands by Jeremy Corbyn to join Labour, and we must not lose that idealism and radicalism.
inspiration, idealism and radicalism anyone...
They are all Corbynistas now - get over it.
https://labourlist.org/2020/02/starmer-unveils-eight-key-reforms-to-make-labour-open-respectful-creative-and-engaging/
You ever been to Beijing?
Tiannanmen Square is breathtaking. There's a 50 foot high picture of Mao looking down austerely from the walls of the Forbidden Palace. He's effectively been elevated to God-like status.
Then you go round the corner and there's Beijing's Oxford Street. Versace, Armani, Jimmy Choo...that sort of thing.
And in the middle of the street is a statue of Deng Xiao Ping. The man who picked up the shattered pieces of China after Mao's death and set them on the road to their current economic success. All the while telling the masses who had been brainwashed by the Cult of Mao that he was a Maoist and he venerated the Great Leader.
That's kind of how you have to do it when you are dealing with a cult.
And his tomb directly opposite and the Govt buildings to the left as you look at the picture. In amongst all the designer shops though Billy there are lots of markets selling lots of rip off clothing shoes jewelry and electronics all fake but if you barter hard with them you can get some real bargains
-
Here's the first step on the Financial Repression road by the way.
https://www.ft.com/content/664c575b-0f54-44e5-ab78-2fd30ef213cb
This actually IS the BoE printing money to allow the Govt to keep spending.
This is what the Right told you that McDonnell would do. And they told you it would turn us into Venezuela.
It's here. Now.
Happening under a Tory Govt.
Genuine question BST, what is the alternative?
If the BoE didn’t back the government with this action, what would happen?
-
Hound.
There isn't an alternative.
It is the correct thing to do.
And it won't turn us into Venezuela.
I'm not criticising the economics. The economics is textbook stuff.
I'm criticising the hypocrisy.
-
Here's the first step on the Financial Repression road by the way.
https://www.ft.com/content/664c575b-0f54-44e5-ab78-2fd30ef213cb
This actually IS the BoE printing money to allow the Govt to keep spending.
This is what the Right told you that McDonnell would do. And they told you it would turn us into Venezuela.
It's here. Now.
Happening under a Tory Govt.
So you should be turning cartwheels BST, you get what you want fiscally and we all avoided Corbyn 🤣
Didn't you reply to this Ldr? I assume you read the link.
-
Here's the first step on the Financial Repression road by the way.
https://www.ft.com/content/664c575b-0f54-44e5-ab78-2fd30ef213cb
This actually IS the BoE printing money to allow the Govt to keep spending.
This is what the Right told you that McDonnell would do. And they told you it would turn us into Venezuela.
It's here. Now.
Happening under a Tory Govt.
So you should be turning cartwheels BST, you get what you want fiscally and we all avoided Corbyn 🤣
Didn't you reply to this Ldr? I assume you read the link.
Nah mate, just responding to BST
-
Hound.
There isn't an alternative.
It is the correct thing to do.
And it won't turn us into Venezuela.
I'm not criticising the economics. The economics is textbook stuff.
I'm criticising the hypocrisy.
I knew that really BST, but because they have no choice then surely hypocrisy doesn’t come into it under the circumstances.
If they had done this off their own back if the Coronavirus hadn’t happened then I could see your point.
-
Hound.
There isn't an alternative.
It is the correct thing to do.
And it won't turn us into Venezuela.
I'm not criticising the economics. The economics is textbook stuff.
I'm criticising the hypocrisy.
I knew that really BST, but because they have no choice then surely hypocrisy doesn’t come into it under the circumstances.
If they had done this off their own back if the Coronavirus hadn’t happened then I could see your point.
Do you think Brown had no choice in 2008 hound?
-
Hound.
It's not a question of choice. The Tories have said consistently that these policies are not acceptable IN ANY CIRCUMSTANCES.
Like Filo says, the Tories insisted in 2008-10 that running a big deficit was economic lunacy, when in fact it was the textbook response to the GFC.
That is what I mean by hypocrisy.
-
Hound.
It's not a question of choice. The Tories have said consistently that these policies are not acceptable IN ANY CIRCUMSTANCES.
Like Filo says, the Tories insisted in 2008-10 that running a big deficit was economic lunacy, when in fact it was the textbook response to the GFC.
That is what I mean by hypocrisy.
Times change, if these measures were not taken would that have made you happier as then it wouldnt be hypocritical? Course not, I'm not sure why you feel the need to keep on at this?
-
If something is unsustainable or impossible then surely if you later implement it then you have to admit that your previous stance was incorrect or you didn't allow for all eventualities.
This is surely the case whoever is in charge?
-
Exam Question.
Imagine you are in a parallel universe where Corbyn and McDonnell won the election in December.
Then CV-19 hit.
And the economy shrank by 30%.
And the BoE announced it was going to print money to fund the Govt defecit.
Do you think there would have been support from the Right for this?
Revision tip. Have a look at how the Right responded all round the world to centre-left Govts running large deficits in response to the GFC in 2008-10.
-
Sure a wise man said not so long back that this wasnt the time for politicking, wonder what happened to him?
-
I'm not politicking.
I'm entirely supporting the Govt's actions.
It's a great shame that the same thing didn't happen from the Opposition during the last national crisis.
There is a huge difference between politicking and pointing out inconsistencies in political stances.
At the very time that D-Day was happening, there were political differences being aired about the post-War Welfare State.
You can absolutely support Govt action in a crisis while still debating differences in overall philosophy.
-
Like I say, times (and things change) talking of politicking, I have an idea for a seperate thread and your input will be welcomed on it, give me 5 mins
-
Like I say, times (and things change) talking of politicking, I have an idea for a seperate thread and your input will be welcomed on it, give me 5 mins
Did times not change in 2008?
-
Announcing his package of reforms, Starmer said: “I am immensely proud of the size and energy of the party. People were inspired in their thousands by Jeremy Corbyn to join Labour, and we must not lose that idealism and radicalism.
inspiration, idealism and radicalism anyone...
They are all Corbynistas now - get over it.
https://labourlist.org/2020/02/starmer-unveils-eight-key-reforms-to-make-labour-open-respectful-creative-and-engaging/
You ever been to Beijing?
Tiannanmen Square is breathtaking. There's a 50 foot high picture of Mao looking down austerely from the walls of the Forbidden Palace. He's effectively been elevated to God-like status.
Then you go round the corner and there's Beijing's Oxford Street. Versace, Armani, Jimmy Choo...that sort of thing.
And in the middle of the street is a statue of Deng Xiao Ping. The man who picked up the shattered pieces of China after Mao's death and set them on the road to their current economic success. All the while telling the masses who had been brainwashed by the Cult of Mao that he was a Maoist and he venerated the Great Leader.
That's kind of how you have to do it when you are dealing with a cult.
And his tomb directly opposite and the Govt buildings to the left as you look at the picture. In amongst all the designer shops though Billy there are lots of markets selling lots of rip off clothing shoes jewelry and electronics all fake but if you barter hard with them you can get some real bargains
No never been to China. I should have gone in 2008 but it was when the Buddhist monks were campaigning over human rights abuses prior to the Olympics and they closed the border.
Never been to Russia either. I applied for a visa in the 1980's (when it was the USSR) but they turned me down for a visa - I think it was the campaigning I did for Amnesty International.
I have been to Cambodia though. I was taken to Choeung Ek memorial and then the Phnom Pen Killing Fields Museum by this guide who stopped at a particular memorial who pointed to two portraits and said - those are my parents.
Been to Israel as well - worked there in fact for a few months alongside some Arab workers. It was just after an intafada and things were very twitchy - they kept shutting the border and stopping them coming to work. The Jewish chap I was working for insisted on paying his workers even though they weren't working, one of the few people in the village to do so.
All the sort of things that Corbyn campaigned for throughout his career.
Inspiration, idealism and radicalism - Tom Paine, Fergus O'Connor, Keir Hardie, Nye Bevan - now Keir Starmer is promising to go on that list
whats your point?
-
I'm not politicking.
I'm entirely supporting the Govt's actions.
It's a great shame that the same thing didn't happen from the Opposition during the last national crisis.
There is a huge difference between politicking and pointing out inconsistencies in political stances.
Is this correct? My memory is that the opposition supported Brown bailing out the banks - and his G20 leadership - it was the fallout afterwards when they began 'politcking'.
As I am sure will this opposition.
Like - why has the government given £10k to each MP already on £80k to work from home - whilst refusing to raise SSP or UC for unemployed workers and leaving nurses to fight a deadly virus wearing bin bags?
There will be time for that afterwards.
-
Not quite as you put it Wilts
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-52231592
-
Wilts.
I'm genuinely impressed by your efforts. Honestly.
But it doesn't really have anything to do with what I was talking about.
My point was, don't pay attention to Starmer's words on Corbyn and Corbynism. Pay attention to what he does.
Like clearing out almost the entire Project Corbyn team from the Shadow Cabinet, and replacing them with what looks like a much more dynamic, competent and broadly based left wing set.
-
I'm not politicking.
I'm entirely supporting the Govt's actions.
It's a great shame that the same thing didn't happen from the Opposition during the last national crisis.
There is a huge difference between politicking and pointing out inconsistencies in political stances.
Is this correct? My memory is that the opposition supported Brown bailing out the banks - and his G20 leadership - it was the fallout afterwards when they began 'politcking'.
As I am sure will this opposition.
Like - why has the government given £10k to each MP already on £80k to work from home - whilst refusing to raise SSP or UC for unemployed workers and leaving nurses to fight a deadly virus wearing bin bags?
There will be time for that afterwards.
I wasn't talking about bailing out the banks. I meant running very large deficits as a textbook counter-cyclical macroeconomic response to a severe recession.
That is what economics students are taught on Day 1 of Macroeconomics 101 at University. Cameron got a first in PPE from Oxford and he will have known that. But it didn't stop him calling Brown a Defecit Denier and spouting that bullshit about the nation maxing out its credit card.
THAT is the hypocrisy I'm talking about and it has no equivalent in the Left in the current crisis.
-
BST what you hoping to achieve by obsessing on this?
-
Yes, it was a shame to see Angela Rayner, Annalise Dodds and Rebecca Long-Bailey not being given senior positions - but there you go.
I would have liked to have seen Lisa Nandy as HS & Hilary Benn in it, but I have no issues with the SC.
My point is that Corbyn has changed the Labour Party and I fully expect Starmer to keep those changes - based on what he says as he hasn't been in position long enough to judge on what he does.
He will do things in his own way and in his own style - and face the same hostility form the right-wing press - just because he is the leader of the Labour Party.
-
The supporters of the two major parties will always look for something to attack each other with, as will the MPs of either side.
It is what they do and always will do.
Not really surprising to me.
-
Wilts
Long-Bailey I will give you.
The other two...I think you are confusing "being in a Corbyn Cabinet" with "Being a supporter of Corbyn".
I'm thinking of the central team which has been jettisoned. McDonnell, Abbott, Burgon, Lavery, McDonald.
And I doubt we'll be seeing the 4Ms in Starmer's circle of advisers, thank the Lord. Hopefully, Starmer will surround himself with people whose first aim is trying to win the next election, rather than enforcing ideological purity.
-
If something is unsustainable or impossible then surely if you later implement it then you have to admit that your previous stance was incorrect or you didn't allow for all eventualities.
This is surely the case whoever is in charge?
This.
Because if you just "meh" when this sort of thing happens, you are effectively giving up on holding political parties to account for their actions.
Democracy works by people taking note of what politicians say they believe in, comparing it to what they do and deciding whether they can trust them. Break that chain and democracy is dead.
-
By the way, when I was talking about Corbyn Cult members earlier, this is the sort of person I had in mind.
https://twitter.com/BenJolly9/status/1247920885845110785
Starmer eh? Worra turncoat t**t. Actually going and talking to people who didn't vote Labour last year!
And someone else down the thread says (despairingly) that Starmer will be Blair No.2. Worra f**king disaster eh, if he actually wins an election!
-
Wilts.
I'm genuinely impressed by your efforts. Honestly.
But it doesn't really have anything to do with what I was talking about.
My point was, don't pay attention to Starmer's words on Corbyn and Corbynism. Pay attention to what he does.
Like clearing out almost the entire Project Corbyn team from the Shadow Cabinet, and replacing them with what looks like a much more dynamic, competent and broadly based left wing set.
And that petrifying tw*t Milne has gone too.
It's happening.
-
Those that voted for this rabble are too embarrassed to reply bst
Sydders have you got a right to vote in Uk Elections.
-
Those that voted for this rabble are too embarrassed to reply bst
Sydders have you got a right to vote in Uk Elections.
Sprot, you replied, does that make you rabble?
-
Those that voted for this rabble are too embarrassed to reply bst
Sydders have you got a right to vote in Uk Elections.
Sprot, you replied, does that make you rabble?
You never answered the question? Have you got a Uk vote?
-
Is this going to be one of those elegiblity questions Sprot where forum members have to say if they can see the keepmoat from their kitchen window, where their parents were born, how long they have been fans, if they stand for the queen etc, do I need a lawyer, can I make a phone call? :)
-
A British citizen can register as an overseas voter
-
Those that voted for this rabble are too embarrassed to reply bst
Sydders have you got a right to vote in Uk Elections.
Are you suggesting that means he can't have an opinion on the matter?
-
I just wonder why he comes on here trolling Politics when he lives in OZ and told peeps at the back of the South stand that he was fed up of the country, I don't mind him having a say on the team but as he bogged off for a better life over a decade ago He needs to find an Aussie Forum to spout his Political views on!
-
So Sproty we'd better not discuss politics in the USA or anywhere else then
-
So Sproty we'd better not discuss politics in the USA or anywhere else then
Hounslow if you want to join a Sports forum in the US and then start Trolling it's members on Political issues, my advice is see your Doctor!
-
It's only trolling if you disagree apparently, anyway I'm trying to improve things for when I get back, I'm looking at a couple of places on Melton rd but I prefer to be a bit closer to shops and stuff so Cromwell Dr may suit me better :)
-
I just wonder why he comes on here trolling Politics when he lives in OZ and told peeps at the back of the South stand that he was fed up of the country, I don't mind him having a say on the team but as he bogged off for a better life over a decade ago He needs to find an Aussie Forum to spout his Political views on!
Congratulations!
You've won "Little Englander 2020".
It's a title you thoroughly deserve.
-
It's only trolling if you disagree apparently, anyway I'm trying to improve things for when I get back, I'm looking at a couple of places on Melton rd but I prefer to be a bit closer to shops and stuff so Cromwell Dr may suit me better :)
Hey Sproty, he could be your neighbour,
(He probably only picked those locations to wind you up).
-
It's only trolling if you disagree apparently, anyway I'm trying to improve things for when I get back, I'm looking at a couple of places on Melton rd but I prefer to be a bit closer to shops and stuff so Cromwell Dr may suit me better :)
If he wants to be my neighbour on Melton road I haven't got a Problem, as most houses are at least 25 yards apart and very rarely come onto the Market.
Hey Sproty, he could be your neighbour,
(He probably only picked those locations to wind you up).
-
I just wonder why he comes on here trolling Politics when he lives in OZ and told peeps at the back of the South stand that he was fed up of the country, I don't mind him having a say on the team but as he bogged off for a better life over a decade ago He needs to find an Aussie Forum to spout his Political views on!
Congratulations!
You've won "Little Englander 2020".
It's a title you thoroughly deserve.
Kindly explain yourself?
-
It is notable that in his recent meeting with the "Jewish Community" Starmer excluded Jewish Voice for Labour. I understand that JVL may have upset the precarious apple cart he's pushing re the antisemitism moves, but excluding them is not in any way wholesome, it's appeasement to a certain sector, brushing the dirt under the carpet, half a job Bob. Politics eh!
https://labourlist.org/2020/04/starmer-apologises-to-jewish-community-in-video-meeting/
-
It's only trolling if you disagree apparently, anyway I'm trying to improve things for when I get back, I'm looking at a couple of places on Melton rd but I prefer to be a bit closer to shops and stuff so Cromwell Dr may suit me better :)
There goes the neighbourhood Sproty - please stick to Cromwell etc lol
-
This is interesting.
"The 860-page report, seen by Sky News, concluded factional hostility towards Jeremy Corbyn amongst former senior officials contributed to "a litany of mistakes" that hindered the effective handling of the issue."
Nothing on the BBC about it, no surprise there. And so far no comment from Starmer, or even Margaret fncking Hodges.
https://news.sky.com/story/labour-antisemitism-investigation-will-not-be-sent-to-equality-commission-11972071
-
Starmer's taken to PMQ like a duck to water.
In the previous exchange, Starmer had given a criticism of the Govt handling of CV-19 and asked if the Govt would consider inviting Labour to the table when policy was being discussed. Raab then laid into him for having had the temerity to criticise the Govt.
Here was the result.
https://mobile.twitter.com/jude5456/status/1255457611933196288
Doesn't mean anything of course. Hague used to run rings round Blair at PMQs. But in the current era, a clinical, well-prepared LotO holding the Govt to account is exactly what is required.
-
Yes, Labour supporters will be very impressed with Starmer. I can see him being the leader of the opposition for years.
-
Starmer's taken to PMQ like a duck to water.
In the previous exchange, Starmer had given a criticism of the Govt handling of CV-19 and asked if the Govt would consider inviting Labour to the table when policy was being discussed. Raab then laid into him for having had the temerity to criticise the Govt.
Here was the result.
https://mobile.twitter.com/jude5456/status/1255457611933196288
Doesn't mean anything of course. Hague used to run rings round Blair at PMQs. But in the current era, a clinical, well-prepared LotO holding the Govt to account is exactly what is required.
A top class Barrister v A second rate Solicitor, there is no contest, wait until the failed journalist turns up 😂😂😂😂😂
-
Starmer's taken to PMQ like a duck to water.
In the previous exchange, Starmer had given a criticism of the Govt handling of CV-19 and asked if the Govt would consider inviting Labour to the table when policy was being discussed. Raab then laid into him for having had the temerity to criticise the Govt.
Here was the result.
https://mobile.twitter.com/jude5456/status/1255457611933196288
Doesn't mean anything of course. Hague used to run rings round Blair at PMQs. But in the current era, a clinical, well-prepared LotO holding the Govt to account is exactly what is required.
A top class Barrister v A second rate Solicitor, there is no contest, wait until the failed journalist turns up 😂😂😂😂😂
Remember Buster Douglas?
-
His big problem are not the Tories, they are in his own party.
-
Starmer's taken to PMQ like a duck to water.
In the previous exchange, Starmer had given a criticism of the Govt handling of CV-19 and asked if the Govt would consider inviting Labour to the table when policy was being discussed. Raab then laid into him for having had the temerity to criticise the Govt.
Here was the result.
https://mobile.twitter.com/jude5456/status/1255457611933196288
Doesn't mean anything of course. Hague used to run rings round Blair at PMQs. But in the current era, a clinical, well-prepared LotO holding the Govt to account is exactly what is required.
A top class Barrister v A second rate Solicitor, there is no contest, wait until the failed journalist turns up 😂😂😂😂😂
Remember Buster Douglas?
Yes he lost his next fight against a cruiserweight, and spent the rest of his career fighting bums
-
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 .
-
Starmer's taken to PMQ like a duck to water.
In the previous exchange, Starmer had given a criticism of the Govt handling of CV-19 and asked if the Govt would consider inviting Labour to the table when policy was being discussed. Raab then laid into him for having had the temerity to criticise the Govt.
Here was the result.
https://mobile.twitter.com/jude5456/status/1255457611933196288
Doesn't mean anything of course. Hague used to run rings round Blair at PMQs. But in the current era, a clinical, well-prepared LotO holding the Govt to account is exactly what is required.
A top class Barrister v A second rate Solicitor, there is no contest, wait until the failed journalist turns up 😂😂😂😂😂
Raab looked close to a meltdown before Starmer even got to his feet .
As the great John Crace said in The Guardian yesterday " the calmer and nice here is to you with his style the more he's actually taking you apart "
-
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.
-
If you see your friend in the near future SS then maybe you could mention to him that Starmer is asking people like him to contact him and speak about why Labour has lost his trust and what he can do to win it back. He was planning on doing sessions all around the country but events overtook him.
Nice interview with him here. He comes over just as nice, dull, boring, intelligent and extremely competent as in every other interview I have read on him - time will tell if that is what people want in a leader.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/keir-starmer-i-won-t-be-defined-by-our-past-leaders-a4429356.html
-
If you see your friend in the near future SS then maybe you could mention to him that Starmer is asking people like him to contact him and speak about why Labour has lost his trust and what he can do to win it back. He was planning on doing sessions all around the country but events overtook him.
Nice interview with him here. He comes over just as nice, dull, boring, intelligent and extremely competent as in every other interview I have read on him - time will tell if that is what people want in a leader.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/keir-starmer-i-won-t-be-defined-by-our-past-leaders-a4429356.html
Like I said Wilts, I like the guy, but by God, he's got a mammoth task on his hands.
-
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 .
-
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, there's a rich seam of traditional labour voters for Starmer to go at who, unlike your friend, clearly weren't thinking for themselves at the last election.
-
Whatever Starmer has done to the people of the North it can't posiibly compare to what the tories have done to the North surely, as Tyke says get over it move on.
-
Whatever Starmer has done to the people of the North it can't posiibly compare to what the tories have done to the North surely, as Tyke says get over it move on.
And after Brexit has wreaked it's havoc on the north, I very much doubt the north will see any further than those who bleated 'get it done' for someone to blame for it.
-
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.
-
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.
Just out of interest SS, by that last part would your friend be then voting for the Tories or didn't they allude to that? If it sounds like they'd vote Tory then how come Boris is seen as someone who cares more about Northern folk than Starmer?
-
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.
Just out of interest SS, by that last part would your friend be then voting for the Tories or didn't they allude to that? If it sounds like they'd vote Tory then how come Boris is seen as someone who cares more about Northern folk than Starmer?
You didn't read the post properly, DO. I said my friend hates the Tories with a passion, so obviously he won't be voting for them, as I never would, being an ex-miner.
As regards those in the North that did vote Tory, it was nothing to do with Boris caring about them, it was about him honouring the Referendum result, which Labour didn't.
Simple as; and now Starmer has got to get them all back on board.
-
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.
Just out of interest SS, by that last part would your friend be then voting for the Tories or didn't they allude to that? If it sounds like they'd vote Tory then how come Boris is seen as someone who cares more about Northern folk than Starmer?
You didn't read the post properly, DO. I said my friend hates the Tories with a passion, so obviously he won't be voting for them, as I never would, being an ex-miner.
As regards those in the North that did vote Tory, it was nothing to do with Boris caring about them, it was about him honouring the Referendum result, which Labour didn't.
Simple as; and now Starmer has got to get them all back on board.
Apologies and cheers.
Hopefully we can put Brexit behind us and the next election will be purely on how this Government has done and if someone else could do better based on their manifestos.
I do think Starmers Brexit position was purely because he doesn't think the country and the people in it will be as well off out of the EU. Thus doing what was best for us, which no one can really blame him for.
-
Just a point if labour were punished for not honouring the ref result what did the tories offer people of the North for the last 10 years which they must have honoured to win successive elections, vote for us and we'll trash the economy, reduce your personal wealth, f**k over the NHS, make employment insecure, starve councils of funds and the best of all 'we'll get Austerity done' :)
-
Just a point if labour were punished for not honouring the ref result what did the tories offer people of the North for the last 10 years which they must have honoured to win successive elections, vote for us and we'll trash the economy, reduce your personal wealth, f**k over the NHS, make employment insecure, starve councils of funds and the best of all 'we'll get Austerity done' :)
The unpopularity of Corbyn was also a massive factor Sydney .
Absolutely loathed in the heartlands .
-
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.
-
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 .
-
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 .
-
Sure do the press and the politics are no different here
-
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...
-
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.
-
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.
-
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 .
-
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.
-
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 .
-
Amen Tyke
-
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
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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 .
-
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.
-
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 .
-
Jenny Formby has resigned which will allow Starmer to have a closer supporter in that position.
-
George?
-
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
-
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.
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.
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.
-
Just watched PMq's. I must say Starmer comes across very well.
-
Just watched PMq's. I must say Starmer comes across very well.
Bullshitter v Barrister
No contest, Bullshitter was constantly looking around for his baying mobs support, but they’re not there, also when the Camera panned to Hancock he had a face like a smacked arse
-
Just watched PMq's. I must say Starmer comes across very well.
Bullshitter v Barrister
.....the Camera panned to Hancock he had a face like a smacked arse
He’s a Tory minister.. he probably paid for that ;)
-
I think it was just after Boris threw the 200k figure testing out for the end of May, Hancock was just thinking FFS! More figures to fiddle
-
It's alright, they'll just mail out some cotton buds on the day and call it good enough.
-
Wasn’t happy was he?
-
Just watched PMq's. I must say Starmer comes across very well.
Starmer: "On 30 April, the government claimed success in meeting its 100,000 tests a day target. Since then, as the prime minister knows, the number has fallen back. On Monday, there were just 84,000 tests and that meant 24,000 available tests were not used. What does the prime minister think was so special about 30 April that meant that testing that day was so high?"
Johnson: "Yes, he's right that capacity currently exceeds demand, we're working on that, we're running at about 100,000 a day."
Four observations:
1) This shows the problem with PMQs. Starmer, the QC asks a pointed and very precise question. Johnson simply ignores it and there's no comeback. At least not while ever voters don't care about politicians being evasive.
2) Johnson says capacity exceeds demand. That is clearly wrong. For two reasons. Firstly, Govt is suppressing demand by limiting who can be tested. If they opened up testing to everyone, I'd have all my staff tested every day and get my company working again. Secondly, a key reason why there is unused capacity is that people cannot get to it. There was an example on R4 this morning of a key worker in Liverpool being offered a test appointment on the other side of Manchester. If the country has demand for 1000 haggis a day and there are 1100 made in a factory in Inverness but you can only pick them up by driving there, does supply of haggis exceed demand?
3) Even taking the Govt's own ridiculous figures on tests "carried out" (i.e. including the ones simply sent out in the mail and not yet processed or even used and returned) over the past four days, there have been an average of 87,000 tests per day. If you actually include the number of tests done and processed, it is about 70,000 per day. If that is "about 100,000", I've been right all these years in telling Mrs S-T that my knob is "about 9 inches long".
4) The actual question of Starmer's remains unanswered. What WAS so special about 30 April that they manged to get 50% more tests "carried out" than were "carried out" this Monday? What COULD it be...?
-
Another exchange where Boris is sent packing
Starmer: Mr Speaker, when the Prime Minister returned to work a week ago Monday, he said that many were looking at the Governments “apparent success” of the Governments approach. But yesterday we learnt tragically that at least 29472 people in the UK have now lost their lives to this dreadful virus. Thats now the highest number in Europe and the second highest in the World. Thats not success or “apparent success” So can the Prime Minister tell us how on earth did it come to this?
Johnson: At this stage I don’t think the International comparisons and the data is yet there to draw the conclusions that we want.
Starmer: Mr Speaker, the argument that the international comparisons can’t really be made when the Governments been using slides like this for weeks (holds up copy of Government slide) to do International comparisons, just doesn’t really hold water I’m afraid
I think Boris was hoisted by his own petard there
-
without his pack of braying Tory public schoolboys to cheer his evasive waffle and bits of Latin cr@p ,dePfeffel Johnson completely exposed as the inflated pig's bladder waving clown puppet he is, put in place by the tax dodging millionaires, to protect their interests.
-
Starmer seems to have a procedure here. Allow his opponent to contradict or make a fool of himself. Precisely how a QC would operate in court. Ask a question that you have a fair idea how the opponent will respond, then hit them with the follow up.
He kebabed Raab last week. He asked a question that included harsh criticism of the Govt on PPE. Raab immediately responded by chiding Starmer for claiming that there was a problem. Starmer said, calmly that he is trying very hard not to play party politics, and that the words Raab took offence at were not his, but actually a quote from the President of the Royal College of Physicians.
Raab looked like he'd taken a haymaker.
I have to say, it makes a refreshing change from "Doreen from Dudley wants me to ask when the No17 bus is coming" approach that we've had for the past 5 years.
-
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.
Sorry Billy I didn't answer that question because I didn't think it is relevant - still don't. You may have talking about factionalism - I have been discussing if the reforms put in place by Atlee's 1945 Labour government were left-wing or not?
I have no idea if you have previously asked me that question about Brown. I do remember being asked something similar and replying with the answer that I live in the 2nd safest Tory seat in the country, unless I campaign for them whoever I campaign for wont win.
-
No problem Wilts. We all miss stuff.
Regarding the theme of our discussion, the issue of factionalism was absolutely brought up by you. You raised the issue that the Corbynite Left is fulminating about at the moment, and is building up to be the next generation's Great Betrayal Myth. I responded by pointing out that precisely the same argument could be made about Brown's defeat in 2010, and that both arguments are equally flawed.
Your contribution on the 1945 Govt was provoked by a misunderstanding of what I'd written. I apologise if it wasn't crystal clear, but having gone back and re-read it, I fail to see how anyone reads me saying "there is a middle ground" (in the context of what I wrote about the failings of the Blair and Corbyn approaches) and equates it with me saying "Attlee's Govt was centrist". Unless that reader starts from the assumption that I'm pushing a centrist agenda...
For the record (I find it odd that I'm needing to do this, but there we go) of course the domestic policies of the Attlee Govt were left wing. Their foreign policies however, would have elicited howls of outrage from the Corbynite Left today.
As for your final sentence, I think that's what I was meaning by careful avoidance. I'd asked about campaigning AND voting. But as far as campaigning is concerned, there's no law that stops you from campaigning outside your constituency. I live in a rock solid Labour seat so I went on 50-60 mile round trips to other constituencies to campaign and canvass in December.
Didn't Labour lose Swindon South in 2010?
-
Very well done SKS - I hope this approach continues and he grows the disillusioned support for Labour back up to a place where he can challenge
My fear is he will lose his "new broom" bounce by the time the next Election come around and by then of course we will be ex EU (no further comment there from me)
-
No problem Wilts. We all miss stuff.
Regarding the theme of our discussion, the issue of factionalism was absolutely brought up by you. You raised the issue that the Corbynite Left is fulminating about at the moment, and is building up to be the next generation's Great Betrayal Myth. I responded by pointing out that precisely the same argument could be made about Brown's defeat in 2010, and that both arguments are equally flawed.
Your contribution on the 1945 Govt was provoked by a misunderstanding of what I'd written. I apologise if it wasn't crystal clear, but having gone back and re-read it, I fail to see how anyone reads me saying "there is a middle ground" (in the context of what I wrote about the failings of the Blair and Corbyn approaches) and equates it with me saying "Attlee's Govt was centrist". Unless that reader starts from the assumption that I'm pushing a centrist agenda...
For the record (I find it odd that I'm needing to do this, but there we go) of course the domestic policies of the Attlee Govt were left wing. Their foreign policies however, would have elicited howls of outrage from the Corbynite Left today.
As for your final sentence, I think that's what I was meaning by careful avoidance. I'd asked about campaigning AND voting. But as far as campaigning is concerned, there's no law that stops you from campaigning outside your constituency. I live in a rock solid Labour seat so I went on 50-60 mile round trips to other constituencies to campaign and canvass in December.
Didn't Labour lose Swindon South in 2010?
Nope.
My first post 244 - I ask why the centre wasn't the middle?
My second post 247 - I am reply to you using 'fringes' of the left & people's front of Judea
I live 40 miles from Swindon, why would I campaign there? The past 2 elections I have campaigned in North Bristol, where the future Mrs Wilts Rover lives. A seat Labour took and held - with an increased majority in 2019.
-
Wilts.
https://www.drfc-vsc.co.uk/index.php?topic=276622.msg963376#msg963376
The first part of that post. Before you misconstrued what I was talking about regarding the Attlee Govt
As I say, YOU introduced the subject of factionalism. My next post was a response to that.
Anyway, I trust that now my position on the Attlee Govt is clear?
And North Bristol? I take it you mean Bristol North West? The seat that swung from Lab -->Con in 2010? I assume you were campaigning there in that Election?
-
We've got a leader now we need a strategy and a team to build it .
We don't want New Labour , it's 2020 not 1997 and the UK is a far different place .
We don't want Corbynism either because ermm we lose elections .
We need Starmerism , people tell me you can't overturn an 80 seat majority in five years , I say bullshyte .
Johnson gained power with no other method than a three worded topical slogan and a brexit weary electorate against the worst Labour election campaign and most disliked leader I've ever seen .
Johnson if he's around that is won't have so much fertile ground to work with again , not a fecking chance given what's coming down the road .
Starmer has the ability to nail Johnson to the floor in parliament but alas that's not nearly enough .
We need a strategy , a strategy that the electorate can buy in to , not free stuff and class politics .
Now you'd be forgiven for thinking that's difficult , actually it's not .
Let me take you on a little journey in to history and I actually invite debate from any tory voters on this board .
When was the last time the Tory Party actually had any ideas delivered through policy that they can stand behind and changed the UK for the better of everyone .
The merit of the policies isn't my point because ill tell you the last time they had anything new and changed the UK , it was the mid 1970's , 45 years ago .
They spent the 1980's putting their ideas in to practice but they were born in the mid 70's .
Since Thatcher left in 1990 , they've had ...
John Major
Michael Howard
William Hague
Ian Duncan Smith
David Cameron
Teresa May
And now Boris Johnson .
Name me one idea from the above that you can even think of never mind enjoy delivered in policy ?
You can't have Brexit by the way because that was always a cross party thing .
-
without his pack of braying Tory public schoolboys to cheer his evasive waffle and bits of Latin cr@p ,dePfeffel Johnson completely exposed as the inflated pig's bladder waving clown puppet he is, put in place by the tax dodging millionaires, to protect their interests.
Tax dodging millionaires didn't put him in place, Northern working class voters did.
That's the paradox Keir Starmer needs to sort out.
-
To be fair Tyke, the Cones Hotline was up there with the Great Leap Forward as a nation-changing policy.
Seriously, you are right though. We are close to the end of a 40-50 year period where we have been defined by a right-leaning political philosophy. Individualism. Belief in the markets. Small state. There are no new ideas on the Right and there haven't been for a long time. Not on the democratic right anyway. There are plenty on the anti democratic authoritarian Right. All the bright thinking on the future of society is on the Left.
The previous period it was the other way round. Left-leaning policies had dominated from the early 40s. Collectivism, a belief in the need for state intervention, strong unions, nationalisation. By the 60s-70s, there were no new ideas on the Left. All the game changing fresh thinking was on the Right.
It goes in cycles. We are coming to the end of this one. The GFC gave it a body blow. The consequences of CV-19 ought to finish it off.
-
without his pack of braying Tory public schoolboys to cheer his evasive waffle and bits of Latin cr@p ,dePfeffel Johnson completely exposed as the inflated pig's bladder waving clown puppet he is, put in place by the tax dodging millionaires, to protect their interests.
Tax dodging millionaires didn't put him in place, Northern working class voters did.
That's the paradox Keir Starmer needs to sort out.
That's the challenge indeed Steve .
Dismantling the Tories is actually pretty easy for a man of Starmer' intellect and background .
The real issue is to define you are the better alternative to the Tories .
The project has to be huge , positive and ambitious but more importantly it has to be credible and costed .
It requires some brains and some balls and a ruthless approach in the pursuit of power .
The type of strategy that says come with us we WILL make it better , here is our strategy .
Get some confidence back in this country , rejuvenate it .
Telling the country how shyte the tories are isn't enough .
-
To be fair Tyke, the Cones Hotline was up there with the Great Leap Forward as a nation-changing policy.
Seriously, you are right though. We are close to the end of a 40-50 year period where we have been defined by a right-leaning political philosophy. Individualism. Belief in the markets. Small state. There are no new ideas on the Right and there haven't been for a long time. Not on the democratic right anyway. There are plenty on the anti democratic authoritarian Right. All the bright thinking on the future of society is on the Left.
The previous period it was the other way round. Left-leaning policies had dominated from the early 40s. Collectivism, a belief in the need for state intervention, strong unions, nationalisation. By the 60s-70s, there were no new ideas on the Left. All the game changing fresh thinking was on the Right.
It goes in cycles. We are coming to the end of this one. The GFC gave it a body blow. The consequences of CV-19 ought to finish it off.
Nothing to say for 45 years Billy , you couldn't make it up could you .
They've even gone backwards from the Grantham shop keepers daughter to the tried and not so trusted Eton , Bullingdon Club and Oxford University .
Cameron , Osborne , JRM and now Johnson .
Don't get me wrong I was on the wrong side of Thatcher as many of us were in Barnsley , Doncaster , Rotherham and Sheffield but I'll at least the women had a vision and changed the UK .
Just how fecking long can you dine out on her ?
-
I agree with every word of that Tyke.
What Thatcher brought wasn't something I wanted, but it was at least an ideological vision of the sort of country she wanted us to be, based on a political and economic theory that had been developed on the Right since the early 60s.
There is a perfectly reasonable argument that the social democratic model had run aground by the 70s. That was based on answering the problems of the first half of the century: poor health, housing, education and social mobility, obscene imbalances of wealth and of course the debt from the War. That required huge Govt intervention, high taxes and running inflation a little hot to inflate away the debt. Every Western country bought into that, even when nominally right wing Govts were in power. Under the Republican Eisenhower, the top rate of tax was 90%! And their economy flourished. Rich people were still rich but much more of the proceeds of growth went to ordinary people on both sides of the Atlantic.
But by the 70s, inflation was out of control. Ironically, in great part because of the policies of Right wing Govts - Nixon collapsing the Bretton Woods agreement and here, the disastrous Barber Boom. So there was a logic to what Thatcher and Reagan brought and the left had no answers. They had to a great extent done the job they set out to do in 1945 and they had no new ideas for the next generation.
Switch it round in the current times. The democratic Right has no grounding philosophy other than wanting power. Austerity here wasn't a vision. It was a tactic to unseat Labour. Similarly with Brexit. There's no ideological underpinning to it, it was simply a tool for Johnson to get power. The deep thinking is on the Left, with people like Piketty doing what Milton Friedman did for the Right in the 60s and 70s - setting out the case for a new economics to answer the problems that this cycle has run into.
It's up to Labour to forge that into an election winning strategy, as Attlee did in 45 and Thatcher did in 79. After this crisis has passed, the need for a new direction, with more role for Govt and less freedom for the richest to do as they please will only be stronger. Inequality, a multi-power world with huge threats to democracy, climate change and dealing with the huge debt we will have through sustainable growth, not mindless cuts is the answer. That needs to be presented as a positive, exciting vision for the future, not, as you say, just shouting that the Tories are shit.
-
I agree with every word of that Tyke.
What Thatcher brought wasn't something I wanted, but it was at least an ideological vision of the sort of country she wanted us to be, based on a political and economic theory that had been developed on the Right since the early 60s.
There is a perfectly reasonable argument that the social democratic model had run aground by the 70s. That was based on answering the problems of the first half of the century: poor health, housing, education and social mobility, obscene imbalances of wealth and of course the debt from the War. That required huge Govt intervention, high taxes and running inflation a little hot to inflate away the debt. Every Western country bought into that, even when nominally right wing Govts were in power. Under the Republican Eisenhower, the top rate of tax was 90%! And their economy flourished. Rich people were still rich but much more of the proceeds of growth went to ordinary people on both sides of the Atlantic.
But by the 70s, inflation was out of control. Ironically, in great part because of the policies of Right wing Govts - Nixon collapsing the Bretton Woods agreement and here, the disastrous Barber Boom. So there was a logic to what Thatcher and Reagan brought and the left had no answers. They had to a great extent done the job they set out to do in 1945 and they had no new ideas for the next generation.
Switch it round in the current times. The democratic Right has no grounding philosophy other than wanting power. Austerity here wasn't a vision. It was a tactic to unseat Labour. Similarly with Brexit. There's no ideological underpinning to it, it was simply a tool for Johnson to get power. The deep thinking is on the Left, with people like Piketty doing what Milton Friedman did for the Right in the 60s and 70s - setting out the case for a new economics to answer the problems that this cycle has run into.
It's up to Labour to forge that into an election winning strategy, as Attlee did in 45 and Thatcher did in 79. After this crisis has passed, the need for a new direction, with more role for Govt and less freedom for the richest to do as they please will only be stronger. Inequality, a multi-power world with huge threats to democracy, climate change and dealing with the huge debt we will have through sustainable growth, not mindless cuts is the answer. That needs to be presented as a positive, exciting vision for the future, not, as you say, just shouting that the Tories are shit.
Blair very nearly put the Tories out of business for good .
Now in all honesty I wouldn't want that because every government needs an opposition who hold them to account .
What I want is a Labour government that forces the Tories to have to change .
That to me is as bigger endorsement as you can possibly have when you hold power .
New Labour allowed the Tories to wriggle off the hook and we are where we are as a consequence .
Iraq they were warned about in no uncertain terms and they were also warned about the financial industry well in advance of the 2008 crash .
They chose not to listen because they believed they were invincible and absolutely nobody is invincible in UK politics , not even Thatcher was .
The brains who saw the catastrophic Iraq venture were people like George Galloway and Jeremy Corbyn from the left .
It's important that we remember history and don't simply close the door because we have won elections and riding the crest of a wave .
It's a massive broad church , we need to remember that at ALL TIMES .
-
Tyke.
I have a slightly different take. In the mid 1990s, we were at the very peak of the neo-liberal success. The Thatcher-Reagan axis had won the Cold War. Their economic model (for all the carnage it left behind it, and the problems it stored up for the future) was in the ascendant. We were in the middle of an almost unprecendented period of low inflation and steady, stable growth.
No Labour Govt could have been elected at that time that didn't take those two massive factors into account. So something like Blair was inevitable if Labour was going to win elections. If Labour had gone into the mid 90s saying "It's all b*llocks! It needs a new socio-economic revolution!" they would have been hammered, even by Major.
My feeling at the time (and it caused some friction in my Labour-supporting family, ahl tell thi) was that, even taking that into account, Blair went way too far in distancing himself from left-wing principles in 1997. But by 2001, Brown had pulled him further to the left on Govt spending on education, health, on stopping the relentless increase in inequality, and on structural investment. And even though that wasn't left wing enough for me, it was a better compromise than 97-01.
I agree about Iraq and the one and only time in my life I've not voted Labour in a General Election was in 2005, because I couldn't vote for a PM who had done that. But I'll admit, I did it knowing damn well that Labour would win anyway. I wanted to be part of the numbers telling Blair that his time was up, but I wouldn't have done it if there had been a chance of putting Michael f**king Howard into Downing Street. Because Blair, for all his manifest faults was better for the poorest and the weakest in society than Major in 97, better than Hague in 01 and better than Howard in 05.
Just like Brown in 2010 was better than Cameron. And I cannot bear to listen to those who claim to be socialists but didn't see that obvious point because...principles.
Your final sentence. Yes. In spades. And that is the mistake that the Corbynistas made. They saw anyone to the right of them as part of the problem. And some of them are still there on social media today accusing Starmer of being a Blairite, a centrist, a Red Tory. It makes my f**king blood boil. Your final sentence should be branded on the wrist of anyone who joins the Labour party.
-
Wilts.
https://www.drfc-vsc.co.uk/index.php?topic=276622.msg963376#msg963376
The first part of that post. Before you misconstrued what I was talking about regarding the Attlee Govt
As I say, YOU introduced the subject of factionalism. My next post was a response to that.
Anyway, I trust that now my position on the Attlee Govt is clear?
And North Bristol? I take it you mean Bristol North West? The seat that swung from Lab -->Con in 2010? I assume you were campaigning there in that Election?
No I didn't know the future Mrs Wilts Rover in 2010
Again that is in answer to your description of the policies of the 1945 Atlee government. Wrongly. If you want to describe it as factionalism thats your problem and inaccurate.
-
Wilts.
I'm sure this is as dull for everyone else as it is for me, but I don't see how you can write "Corbyn's main problem was that much of the establishment he tried to take on were in his own party" (in response to a post by Tyke, actually, not me) and then say you didn't raise the topic of factionalism. To which I responded.
And if this were a court, I'm sure the jury would have concluded that you DIDN'T campaign for Brown in 2010. Odd that you won't just say so. It's entirely your prerogative to support and campaign for (or not) whomsoever you want.
Just as it is mine to believe that people on the Left who didn't support Brown in 2010 bear a great deal.of the responsibility for Austerity and ought to reflect on that.
-
Wilts.
I'm sure this is as dull for everyone else as it is for me, but I don't see how you can write "Corbyn's main problem was that much of the establishment he tried to take on were in his own party" (in response to a post by Tyke, actually, not me) and then say you didn't raise the topic of factionalism. To which I responded.
And if this were a court, I'm sure the jury would have concluded that you DIDN'T campaign for Brown in 2010. Odd that you won't just say so. It's entirely your prerogative to support and campaign for (or not) whomsoever you want.
Just as it is mine to believe that people on the Left who didn't support Brown in 2010 bear a great deal.of the responsibility for Austerity and ought to reflect on that.
Apologies for my mistake Billy
When I thought we were discussing factionalism with regard to the Atlee government I had presumed we were following that thread.
I had no idea you were replying to tykes bit of it. Seeing as how that bit was a addressed to him and something completely different addressed to you.
I would have though that the responsibility for austerity was down to the people who carried it out rather than any campaigners in 2010. That's like saying that Corbyn lost in 2017 & 2019 due to people from his own party attacking him as LOTO. On a functionalist point if you will.
-
Wilts.
You'd make a brilliant politician...
But I'll clarify, just for the record.
1) Your reply to Tyke raised the issue of factionalism. I responded to that. So that's that one sorted.
2) You were wrong to interpret my post as implying that Attlee's Govt occupied the centre ground. And how you could possibly have come to that conclusion frankly baffles me.
3) If I stand by and don't help someone who is trying to disarm a gunman because I don't believe in violent struggle, they fail and the gunman then shoots an innocent bystander, should I congratulate myself on upholding my principles? I guess I could just console myself that I personally didn't pull the trigger.
4) You appear to equate "criticism" with "lack of support when it matters". But that always WAS the take of the extreme left of the Labour party. Always so convinced of their correctness that criticism, by definition, is treachery.
For the avoidance of doubt, anyone in the Labour party who went out of their way to sabotage the campaigns in 17 and 19 is a disgrace and should be kicked out.
But if criticism of a Labour leader is not accepted, Corbyn would have been booted out if the Labour party decades ago.
-
Talking of factionalism, Bastani seems determined to be Starmer's biggest critic.
https://mobile.twitter.com/AaronBastani/status/1259067007527419904
Where the f**k is his evidence for this?
-
Talking of factionalism, Bastani seems determined to be Starmer's biggest critic.
https://mobile.twitter.com/AaronBastani/status/1259067007527419904
Where the f**k is his evidence for this?
Probably best if you ask him rather than people on a football forum I reckon.
If I had to guess it would be based on the current row relating to the shadow cabinet only asking a Landlords Association rather than both landlords and tenants before drafting their Rentiers policy - but that's just a guess. I don't follow Bastani and am a bit surprised you do.
-
I don't follow Bastani, but he has a habit of wading into discussions that I do follow. And he is, by all accounts, very influential in the Left new media. I'm guessing we also shouldn't question the motives of anyone else in posts in here then?
-
No problem Wilts. We all miss stuff.
Regarding the theme of our discussion, the issue of factionalism was absolutely brought up by you. You raised the issue that the Corbynite Left is fulminating about at the moment, and is building up to be the next generation's Great Betrayal Myth. I responded by pointing out that precisely the same argument could be made about Brown's defeat in 2010, and that both arguments are equally flawed.
Your contribution on the 1945 Govt was provoked by a misunderstanding of what I'd written. I apologise if it wasn't crystal clear, but having gone back and re-read it, I fail to see how anyone reads me saying "there is a middle ground" (in the context of what I wrote about the failings of the Blair and Corbyn approaches) and equates it with me saying "Attlee's Govt was centrist". Unless that reader starts from the assumption that I'm pushing a centrist agenda...
For the record (I find it odd that I'm needing to do this, but there we go) of course the domestic policies of the Attlee Govt were left wing. Their foreign policies however, would have elicited howls of outrage from the Corbynite Left today.
As for your final sentence, I think that's what I was meaning by careful avoidance. I'd asked about campaigning AND voting. But as far as campaigning is concerned, there's no law that stops you from campaigning outside your constituency. I live in a rock solid Labour seat so I went on 50-60 mile round trips to other constituencies to campaign and canvass in December.
Didn't Labour lose Swindon South in 2010?
Sheffield, I recall
-
Meanwhile, back onto Starmer, here's one that's been doing the rounds, showing just how unprincipled he is.
https://mobile.twitter.com/freddiehickman_/status/1258475914071093250
Checking that the cameraman has "got what he needs" of him clapping for the NHS.
-
Worra t**t eh?
The Mail ran with it. "Fury" they cried.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8298331/amp/Fury-Sir-Keir-Starmer-asks-got-need-applauding-NHS.html
The Express ran with it.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.express.co.uk/videos/6155090981001/Keir-Starmer-asks-cameraman-have-you-got-what-you-need/amp&ved=2ahUKEwjUjP3J86npAhUwVBUIHc_PC6wQFjAAegQIARAB&usg=AOvVaw3RYmTItzBL7n1PxerR7gKZ&cf=1
Oh. Except.
https://mobile.twitter.com/MarcStevenPhoto/status/1258500439357734915
And so it goes on.
But both sides are the same, right?
-
I thought the George Galloway tweet further down was of more significance to the problems of the UK.
-
I thought the George Galloway tweet further down was of more significance to the problems of the UK.
Sorry BB am I reading that correctly? Are you really quoting George Galloway?
Sorry but I can't be bothered to read what he wrote as I am pretty sure it will be of absolutely no consequence whatsoever.
-
I thought the George Galloway tweet further down was of more significance to the problems of the UK.
Sorry BB am I reading that correctly? Are you really quoting George Galloway?
Sorry but I can't be bothered to read what he wrote as I am pretty sure it will be of absolutely no consequence whatsoever.
Love this Wilts
-
Normally, I would probably agree with you Wilts, but on this occasion, I think he is bang on.
-
I couldn't help myself. I went to have a look for what Galloway said. But despite a long time scrolling down both Twitter message threads, I couldn't find owt by him. Which means I haven't got a clue what BB is talking about.
No change there then.
However, I DID find this gem.
-
I couldn't help myself. I went to have a look for what Galloway said. But despite a long time scrolling down both Twitter message threads, I couldn't find owt by him. Which means I haven't got a clue what BB is talking about.
No change there then.
However, I DID find this gem.
Don’t keep it a secret.
-
And this one. The Mail is so far divorced from the concept of objective reality, they no seem to be offering readers an a la carte choice of which truth they want to believe.
https://mobile.twitter.com/docrussjackson/status/1259482596431585282
-
And this one. The Mail is so far divorced from the concept of objective reality, they no seem to be offering readers an a la carte choice of which truth they want to believe.
https://mobile.twitter.com/docrussjackson/status/1259482596431585282
Nothing to see here........
-
I couldn't help myself. I went to have a look for what Galloway said. But despite a long time scrolling down I couldn't help myself. I went to have a look for what Galloway said. But despite a long time scrolling down both Twitter message threads, I couldn't find owt by him. Which means I haven't got a clue what BB is talking about.
No change there then.
However, I DID find this gem.
Don’t keep it a secret.
both Twitter message threads, I couldn't find owt by him. Which means I haven't got a clue what BB is talking about.
No change there then.
However, I DID find this gem.
Don’t keep it a secret.
Yeah. It does work better with the link!
https://mobile.twitter.com/Bez78829056/status/1258784083926278146
-
It had moved for some reason, but It was this .... link.....https://mobile.twitter.com/georgegalloway/status/1258886331968741376
-
Go on then. What evidence did Galloway give of "the Left" sneering at us having defeated Hitler?
-
He didn't give any in that caption, but that doesn't mean he's wrong. I think he's dead right regarding how it is today.
-
Right. So no evidence then but you know it's right because...
Off we go again.
-
Er, I think he's right because I believe what he says is right! Comprendo?
-
Classic derailment of the subject topic
-
Classic lack of self respect.
"I generally don't agree with him, but he offered an opinion with zero supporting evidence that chimes with my prejudices, so I think he's right."
-
BST, I didn't intend to change the direction of the argument. I was merely pointing out that having checked out the Starmer film that there was a post of more significance to the countries problems than that further down the page, the George Galloway article. I don't normally like the bloke but I think, from my personal experiences that he is bang on the money there.
Ther is massive evidence of his point even on this forum, what with the sneering at everything English and the bigging up almost every other country in comparison, especially Germany in your case.
-
Please can someone summarise what Galloway has actually said.?
BB where is this evidence on the forum of “sneering at everything English”.? And bigging up the other countries.?
Do you mean comparing the respective responses to coronavirus.? Is that all, because Germany has dealt with it better than our country.
Please tell me where else other than coronavirus this has happened.?
-
You'd have to go through every political thread over the last 4 or 5 years or so since this off-topic page became mainly political to check it out for yourself. It's not just Germany, either.
-
I think someone might have been on the pop.
-
You'd have to go through every political thread over the last 4 or 5 years or so since this off-topic page became mainly political to check it out for yourself. It's not just Germany, either.
But I didn’t raise the point as a source of evidence, you did, so you must have some point of reference.?
-
If you believe me, take my word for it. If you call me a liar, go check for yourself.
-
Please can someone summarise what Galloway has actually said.?
BB where is this evidence on the forum of “sneering at everything English”.? And bigging up the other countries.?
Do you mean comparing the respective responses to coronavirus.? Is that all, because Germany has dealt with it better than our country.
Please tell me where else other than coronavirus this has happened.?
Forget Germany. Check out how South Korea has dealt with the virus.
Population 50mill+
Infected 10,793
Recovered 9,183
Deaths 250.
And that done whilst being next door to China.
And done with no lockdown at all.
They've even managed to hold an election with 30mill people voting in person without an outbreak.
But presumably just giving these figures for comparison means I'm bigging up South Korea and sneering at Britain. :silly:
-
If you believe me, take my word for it. If you call me a liar, go check for yourself.
I didn’t call you a liar, I asked you to put up your references.
You can’t, or can’t be arsed. So your opinion - at the moment - doesn’t have any clear reasoning.
Classic avoidance and twisting.. you arguments really don’t hold any weight if you don’t back them up..
You made the claim so it’s down to you to prove it, not for others to disprove it..
And you didn’t answer the question about Galloway..
-
So, that means Europe is pretty shit in comparison too, even Germany!
-
I think BB is doing his usual thing of confusing "Not wanting Britain to get a shit outcome" with "Hating Britain". Easy mistake to make if you don't engage with what people actually say and instead assume that you know what they are thinking without even listening to them.
-
So, that means Europe is pretty shit in comparison too, even Germany!
Now who's sneering, eh?
Don't you want to know why Boris didn't handle things in the way South Korea did instead of cocking things up?
-
Also, IF it's about Brexit then not wanting Britain to be torn apart from Scotland and NI leaving isn't anti-British. It's the opposite.
-
If you believe me, take my word for it. If you call me a liar, go check for yourself.
I didn’t call you a liar, I asked you to put up your references.
You can’t, or can’t be arsed. So your opinion - at the moment - doesn’t have any clear reasoning.
Classic avoidance and twisting.. you arguments really don’t hold any weight if you don’t back them up..
You made the claim so it’s down to you to prove it, not for others to disprove it..
And you didn’t answer the question about Galloway..
IDM, I assume you've been on this forum long enough to have witnessed anti-English/British stuff probably as much as I have, and if you didn't pick up on it first hand then I doubt you'll pick up on it now even if it's pointed out to you. A couple of years ago it was even pointed out that waving an English flag was moronic and racist or summet of the sorts. I kid you not, go and have a look. That's just the tip of the iceberg.
-
So, something that you can't really remember that might be from a couple of years ago that was posted by someone you can't name is evidence of mass sneering by this forum, is it? Underwhelming to say the least.
-
I’ve been on the forum long enough to recognise hyperbole and exaggeration where I see it, and to ignore those excesses especially where there is no realistic backing argument.
A few posts by individuals with extreme views do not represent the forum as a whole..
-
I’ve been on the forum long enough to recognise hyperbole and exaggeration where I see it, and to ignore those excesses especially where there is no realistic backing argument.
A few posts by individuals with extreme views do not represent the forum as a whole..
IDM, why don't you search Off Topic forum for the word 'moronic'? It should take you straight to whatever BB is talking about.
-
Also, IF it's about Brexit then not wanting Britain to be torn apart from Scotland and NI leaving isn't anti-British. It's the opposite.
What?
-
I’ve been on the forum long enough to recognise hyperbole and exaggeration where I see it, and to ignore those excesses especially where there is no realistic backing argument.
A few posts by individuals with extreme views do not represent the forum as a whole..
IDM, why don't you search Off Topic forum for the word 'moronic'? It should take you straight to whatever BB is talking about.
Eh, the cliques out in force tonight! A full handful! Mr Wiggerly, I don't think you encouraging people to check back on this forum would do you a lot of good, owd lad. Your general insignificance has on occasions been overshadowed by posts full of monumental bullshit.
-
I followed BB's advice and I think I found the thread he's talking about. I'm only guessing because nothing like what BB suggested was said in the thread (quelle surprise). The funny thing is, the first person to mention the English flag and the word racist in not only the same post but in the same sentence...was BB.
-
I’ve been on the forum long enough to recognise hyperbole and exaggeration where I see it, and to ignore those excesses especially where there is no realistic backing argument.
A few posts by individuals with extreme views do not represent the forum as a whole..
IDM, why don't you search Off Topic forum for the word 'moronic'? It should take you straight to whatever BB is talking about.
Eh, the cliques out in force tonight! A full handful! Mr Wiggerly, I don't think you encouraging people to check back on this forum would do you a lot of good, owd lad. Your general insignificance has on occasions been overshadowed by posts of
monumental bullshit.
Well, you encouraging people to check back hasn't worked in your favour. And given that your statement of what was said in the past is monumental bullshit in it's own right, I really don't think you're in any position to lecture anyone else.
Still, flinging out personal insults when you've shown yourself up is the BB desperation style we've all come to know and expect.
-
I see you can't resist the comfort blanket of the use of the word 'We', can you!
How many of 'we' have actually checked back? just you? Wow, no wonder it hasn't worked in my favour! Some arbitrator you are!
-
I see you can't resist the comfort blanket of the use of the word 'We', can you!
How many of 'we' have actually checked back? just you? Wow, no wonder it hasn't worked in my favour! Some arbitrator you are!
Well, you certainly didn't check back, did you? Otherwise not even you would have come out with the crap you have. Or maybe you still would, it's hard to tell with you.
-
Crap? I'm wounded! I'm not really! Like I've said umpteen times in the past, if you ever agreed with me I'd seriously have to consider changing my opinion!
Oh, and no, I haven't checked back. I've already said I don't need to!
-
Given that no-one said that waving the flag was moronic (or anything similar), nor did anyone say that it was racist either, yes you really do need to. "I kid you not, go and have a look." Especially given that that was the only feeble example given by you that there is endemic sneering at this country in this forum.
-
I did say "summet of the sorts", Mr Wiggerly, I can't remember the exact words, but I do remember the gist of it, and it did come across to me as being anti-English/British.
-
I did say "summet of the sorts", Mr Wiggerly, I can't remember the exact words, but I do remember the gist of it, and it did come across to me as being anti-English/British.
That's funny, I've read it and there isn't even the gist of it anywhere.
So now we've gone from the forum being full of anti-English/British sneering down to it 'just coming across' to just you.
-
If you believe me, take my word for it. If you call me a liar, go check for yourself.
That's not quite how things work. If someone calls you a liar you need to prove otherwise. Or people will think...
-
I did say "summet of the sorts", Mr Wiggerly, I can't remember the exact words, but I do remember the gist of it, and it did come across to me as being anti-English/British.
That's funny, I've read it and there isn't even the gist of it anywhere.
So now we've gone from the forum being full of anti-English/British sneering down to it 'just coming across' to just you.
No, Mr We We Wiggerley. There you go again! We haven't got a forum full of anti-English/British people, just a handful.
-
If you believe me, take my word for it. If you call me a liar, go check for yourself.
That's not quite how things work. If someone calls you a liar you need to prove otherwise. Or people will think...
Wilts, is Stanley Johnson's main home in London?
-
I did say "summet of the sorts", Mr Wiggerly, I can't remember the exact words, but I do remember the gist of it, and it did come across to me as being anti-English/British.
That's funny, I've read it and there isn't even the gist of it anywhere.
So now we've gone from the forum being full of anti-English/British sneering down to it 'just coming across' to just you.
No, Mr We We Wiggerley. There you go again! We haven't got a forum full of anti-English/British people, just a handful.
Name names and prove it, gobshite.
-
We We. I don't have to name them. Those that doth protest too much at my accusation will name themselves.
-
Ah, the Donald Trump approach. I expected no less.
Thanks for the prime example of monumental bullshit though.
-
Just flying the flag for England, We We, that's all.
-
BB, I had taken a step back from this as it was pointless to carry on seen as you don’t answer others’ questions properly.
However, when you address another poster without the courtesy of using their screen name (or a simple abbreviation like BB or BST) then that comes across as quite childish and belittles the arguments you are trying to get across..
The same applies to others, obviously..
-
IDM, there you go again! I really do suggest that when you go back over the last 4 or 5 years or so of the forum you check out the things I've been called.
-
IDM, there you go again! I really do suggest that when you go back over the last 4 or 5 years or so of the forum you check out the things I've been called.
"I kid you not, go and have a look."
-
IDM, there you go again! I really do suggest that when you go back over the last 4 or 5 years or so of the forum you check out the things I've been called.
BB, I had taken a step back from this as it was pointless to carry on seen as you don’t answer others’ questions properly.
However, when you address another poster without the courtesy of using their screen name (or a simple abbreviation like BB or BST) then that comes across as quite childish and belittles the arguments you are trying to get across..
The same applies to others, obviously..
You missed that bit, clearly.
-
IDM, you know my post regarding those that doth protest too much? There's a clue in that to make your search easier!
-
Which bit of
“ BB, I had taken a step back from this as it was pointless to carry on seen as you don’t answer others’ questions properly”
didn’t make sense to you?
-
Apparently Shakespeare's to blame :)
-
Apparently Shakespeare's to blame :)
Which one, William or Luella.? ;)
-
Which bit of
“ BB, I had taken a step back from this as it was pointless to carry on seen as you don’t answer others’ questions properly”
didn’t make sense to you?
IDM. It made sense in the sense that I understood what you said, but it was untrue!
-
IDM, there you go again! I really do suggest that when you go back over the last 4 or 5 years or so of the forum you check out the things I've been called.
Crikey, I only had to look back to post 317 on this thread to find the first one.
-
The whole issue of nationalism has become so toxic of late.
Yes, there are people on the Left who want to belittle and bring down Britain. Just as there are people on the Right who bathe in an unjustified tub of British Exceptionalism and see us as unquestionably better than other peoples.
Those people are idiots and should be ignored.
Among the rest of us, it wold be helpful if "criticism of the policies and practices of the people who govern Britain" wasn't conflated with "Trying to bring down Britain". Pointing out where we have achieved poorer outcomes than other countries is NOT denigrating Britain. Quite the contrary. Those who ignore that and see criticism as a threat are the ones who are really doing Britain a disservice, because they are implicitly accepting less than we should demand.
Start from that premise and the whole debate would be more civil.
-
BST, perhaps the opinion some people have of others "trying to bring down the government" could be because of the amount of blame the government gets compared to the lack of consideration of other factors that could at least to some extent defend the country's situation. That's my opinion anyway. For instance, why hasn't there been much emphasis on the fact that making international comparisons on Coronavirus deaths is difficult, and so therefore unreliable? Doesn't it, therefore, suggest that using those figures to make a league table quite unfair to any country deemed to have the most casualties, and quite shocking if it is used to show how bad in comparison YOUR OWN country is doing?
Seems like a political agenda to me.
-
Our country is doing badly in comparison to itself, never mind compared to anywhere else.
Badly may be a bit harsh - perhaps I should say not as well as we should have been doing, had we acted sooner and had more clarity in the message.
For clarity on here - that is not me trying to bring down our government, nor be party political - it’s my honest opinion of where we are at as a country..
-
IDM, so you don't agree with me?
-
I mean ignoring Exercise Cygnus probably wasn't a good start.
-
Ignoring the experience South Korea has of fighting virus outbreaks and not copying them doesn't look great either. And you have to compare the results, you can't ignore them. Otherwise how will we know what an overwhelming success Boris has been?
-
BB.
It's very simple.
Some people are "meh" when it is pointed out that we have something like 60,000 deaths, a figure that looks to be the worst in Europe and is FAR worse than some European countries, despite us having had the benefit of starting late and seeing which way the wind was blowing. Those people get cross when other people question whether some of our Govt's policies might be responsible for that.
Other people are rather upset that we seem to have managed this so relatively badly, and would like the country to ask why so that lessons can be learned. Because we are a long, long way from the end, and if the same people make the same mistakes again, we will have a damn sight higher total number of deaths before we get out of this.
You, apparently, are happy that this situation is acceptable. There is no other conclusion to be drawn from your contributions in here.
As I've said before, YOU would have been criticising those who brought down Chamberlain after the Norway fiasco, because it's unpatriotic to ask critical questions of a Govt in a national emergency. You would have hated Churchill in early 1940. You would have questioned his patriotism and claimed he had ulterior motives.
Because your intolerance of the criticism is not based in whether the criticism is accurate. It is based on the fact that criticism is happening at all. And you want to shut down discussion through ad hominems, not through addressing the issues.
-
BST, I'm not suggesting the country has done well! I'm suggesting there are political agendas.
-
Of COURSE there's a political agenda.
We are where we are because politicians made decisions on how to (or how not to) address the crisis. And the evidence is mounting that their decisions have resulted in outcomes which are somewhere on the spectrum of bad to very bad by international comparisons.
What do you suggest we do as a country in that case? Shrug our shoulders, say, "Mustn't grumble" and leave the same politicians to crack on?
And before you do you knee-jerk response, look at what I have said consistently about Sunak in this crisis. Lift your head up and loo beyond your prejudicial obsessions. It is NOT about criticising for the sake of criticising.
-
IDM, so you don't agree with me?
Yes, I don’t agree. I don’t think that criticising the Government, whether a practical or political criticism, means that people want to bring the government down.
-
IDM, so you don't agree with me?
Yes, I don’t agree. I don’t think that criticising the Government, whether a practical or political criticism, means that people want to bring the government down.
Even if it's unfounded and inaccurate criticism?
-
Such as.?
-
IDM
You and I should both know better. There's no talking to him. He is utterly convinced that there's bad faith here.
-
Such as.?
Such as the death figures showing the UK at the top, and people use it as a stick to hit the government with even though there is no evidence that all countries are using the same counting methods?
-
Whether we compare with other countries or not is largely irrelevant - we could have done much better compared to our own figures..
-
If the comparisons are largely irrelevant why do we consistently mention them?
-
And so it goes on.
It's pointless IDM. You're not going to get him to engage. He's utterly certain that you, I and everyone else on "this side" has an agenda.
I pointed out earlier in the CV thread that both Spain and France have published excess death figures up to the end of April and we are higher than both of them. That's a directly comparable set of numbers.
But BB won't engage with that. Instead he repeats a standard Govt line that you can't do comparisons because the numbers are collated differently. A standard Govt line, note. But he's not making this party political.
-
Ok maybe if I put it another way - we don’t need to look at other countries’ data, to form an opinion that our government could have performed better.
-
As Starmer pointed out at PMQ’s, if you can’t make comparisons, why have the Government been producing daily comparison charts for weeks?
-
What does it matter if counties collate death figures slightly differently anyway.?
Regardless of the precise numbers, you can compare how each country dealt with the virus by looking at their data over a period of time - what the effects of lockdowns and relaxations were, by analysing trends over time irrespective of the actual total number of deaths.
So it is relevant to compare the uk to other countries in some respects, but it makes no difference when analysing the UK in its own right.
-
You absolutely can make comparisons. You just have to be careful that you are comparing like with like, or, if not, only draw the very broadest of conclusions.
Given that as a principle, there are a few things that you absolutely can say.
1) At the very best, we are in a group of very, very badly performing countries. UK, Spain, Italy, France, Sweden, Belgium.
2) It's likely that us or Belgium will turn out to have the worst overall outcome.
3) Whether or not 2 is correct, all that group have much, much worse outcomes than countries which appear to have managed the crisis better, including Germany, Denmark, Norway, Portugal, Austria, Switzerland, Greece and others.
There's nothing controversial, party political or unpatriotic in saying that. Or in saying that a mature, confident country would now be looking very hard at the reasons why we are in the 1) group, not the 3) group.
-
As Starmer pointed out at PMQ’s, if you can’t make comparisons, why have the Government been producing daily comparison charts for weeks?
You can make comparisons in respect of the rate of increase/decline in deaths with other countries even if they are calculated differently, as long as they have not changed the method of obtaining the calculations. This will give an indication of how the virus is developing.
-
You can also make broad comparisons on total death numbers, as long as you know what you are comparing.
On the simple, CV-19 death certicate numbers, we have roughly 5 times as many deaths per head and 4 times as many total deaths as Germany.
No conceivable difference in the accounting method is going to change the fact that Germany has managed this crisis far better than we have.
I'll repeat. Stating that and saying we have lessons to learn is not unpatriotic. Quite the opposite.
-
Wasn't it Turkey (Ottoman Empire) once labelled the sick man of europe?
How times have changed
-
BST, my point is why aren't charts showing the UK in a less negative table position shown, if only to give some perspective? Like this one...
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1111779/coronavirus-death-rate-europe-by-country/
-
Because that table is very misleading.
1) Belgium appears to have the most rigorous accounting system for deaths in Europe. They have been including more categories than any other country since the start.
2) It doesn't take into account where each country is in its epidemic timescale. We are at least a couple of weeks behind Spain and Italy. Their weekly recorded deaths are now down to around 1000, whereas ours are still above 3000. Simply tabulating them like that is like, in a time trial race, simply listing how long each competitor has been out on the course, and ignoring how far they are into their race.
3) Regardless of the fine detail, that table still shows precisely what I said earlier. That we are one of a group of countries who have done very badly.
-
I'm really not sure now what you are trying to prove BB, so if you'll forgive me, I'm going to stop indulging you and get on with this mountain of work.
I suggest you have a quiet think about whether this attitude of yours is justified.
-
A quiet think about whether MY attitude is justified? You're kidding yourself, Billy, not me.
-
BST, my point is why aren't charts showing the UK in a less negative table position shown, if only to give some perspective? Like this one...
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1111779/coronavirus-death-rate-europe-by-country/
Deaths per capita is a reasonable statistic to use. But even if that graph is less negative than other methods of showing data, being 4th in a table of 31 countries is still horrendous.
The very first thing that ought to come to anybody's mind is 'would we have had fewer deaths per capita if we had handled things in the way that those countries with fewer deaths per capita than the UK did?'. And if the answer to that is 'yes', the very next question that should be asked is 'why didn't we as a country do what those other countries did?'.
-
A quiet think about whether MY attitude is justified? You're kidding yourself, Billy, not me.
No. I'm very serious.
No one is lifting your shirt here. Yet you are obsessively convinced that people are trying to deceive.
You REALLY need to reflect on that because it is a very corrosive attitude.
-
If you believe me, take my word for it. If you call me a liar, go check for yourself.
That's not quite how things work. If someone calls you a liar you need to prove otherwise. Or people will think...
Wilts, is Stanley Johnson's main home in London?
Dunno. He appears to give different answers to that question whenever asked. If you had a £12mill house in Camden would that be your main home? Or a farm on Dartmoor?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/property/uk/inside-boris-johnsons-huge-family-home-market-1125m/
Where was he when he broke lockdown rules again last week do you reckon?
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/boris-johnson-stanley-coronavirus-worry-prime-minister-a4435661.html
-
BST, perhaps the opinion some people have of others "trying to bring down the government" could be because of the amount of blame the government gets compared to the lack of consideration of other factors that could at least to some extent defend the country's situation. That's my opinion anyway. For instance, why hasn't there been much emphasis on the fact that making international comparisons on Coronavirus deaths is difficult, and so therefore unreliable? Doesn't it, therefore, suggest that using those figures to make a league table quite unfair to any country deemed to have the most casualties, and quite shocking if it is used to show how bad in comparison YOUR OWN country is doing?
Seems like a political agenda to me.
You mean like the official charts the official government has been using in their press conferences?
From figures that are being kept and compiled worldwide by the Johns Hopkins University.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
But the British public should not be allowed to see because it makes the government response look bad - because it has been bad. Welcome to North Korea!
-
BST, my point is why aren't charts showing the UK in a less negative table position shown, if only to give some perspective? Like this one...
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1111779/coronavirus-death-rate-europe-by-country/
Actually the figures have been massaged down.
The true figure is more like this graph here as produced by the leftie rag - The Financial Times:
https://twitter.com/ChrisGiles_/status/1259894747663122437
-
BST, my point is why aren't charts showing the UK in a less negative table position shown, if only to give some perspective? Like this one...
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1111779/coronavirus-death-rate-europe-by-country/
Actually the figures have been massaged down.
The true figure is more like this graph here as produced by the leftie rag - The Financial Times:
https://twitter.com/ChrisGiles_/status/1259894747663122437
They haven't been massaged down. They are just numbers produced by different approaches. It doesn't help the tone of the discussion to say things like that.
-
A quiet think about whether MY attitude is justified? You're kidding yourself, Billy, not me.
No. I'm very serious.
No one is lifting your shirt here. Yet you are obsessively convinced that people are trying to deceive.
You REALLY need to reflect on that because it is a very corrosive attitude.
I honestly think you are trying to kid yourself.
-
If you believe me, take my word for it. If you call me a liar, go check for yourself.
That's not quite how things work. If someone calls you a liar you need to prove otherwise. Or people will think...
Wilts, is Stanley Johnson's main home in London?
Dunno. He appears to give different answers to that question whenever asked. If you had a £12mill house in Camden would that be your main home? Or a farm on Dartmoor?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/property/uk/inside-boris-johnsons-huge-family-home-market-1125m/
Where was he when he broke lockdown rules again last week do you reckon?
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/boris-johnson-stanley-coronavirus-worry-prime-minister-a4435661.html
What do you mean dunno? You seemed to know when you said it was in London the other week.
-
A quiet think about whether MY attitude is justified? You're kidding yourself, Billy, not me.
No. I'm very serious.
No one is lifting your shirt here. Yet you are obsessively convinced that people are trying to deceive.
You REALLY need to reflect on that because it is a very corrosive attitude.
I honestly think you are trying to kid yourself.
Big deep breath.
Go on then. What part of the exchange on this specific theme do you take exception to today? Specifically, where is anyone trying to deceive you in how the data is being presented? Do you accept the shortcomings of the presentation that you put forward as a preferred one?
-
BB.
It's very simple.
Some people are "meh" when it is pointed out that we have something like 60,000 deaths, a figure that looks to be the worst in Europe and is FAR worse than some European countries, despite us having had the benefit of starting late and seeing which way the wind was blowing. Those people get cross when other people question whether some of our Govt's policies might be responsible for that.
Other people are rather upset that we seem to have managed this so relatively badly, and would like the country to ask why so that lessons can be learned. Because we are a long, long way from the end, and if the same people make the same mistakes again, we will have a damn sight higher total number of deaths before we get out of this.
You, apparently, are happy that this situation is acceptable. There is no other conclusion to be drawn from your contributions in here.
As I've said before, YOU would have been criticising those who brought down Chamberlain after the Norway fiasco, because it's unpatriotic to ask critical questions of a Govt in a national emergency. You would have hated Churchill in early 1940. You would have questioned his patriotism and claimed he had ulterior motives.
Because your intolerance of the criticism is not based in whether the criticism is accurate. It is based on the fact that criticism is happening at all. And you want to shut down discussion through ad hominems, not through addressing the issues.
BST, I know I shouldn’t but I have to ask.......why are you saying we have 60,000 deaths (in the UK I assume) when the official numbers are much lower.
-
A quiet think about whether MY attitude is justified? You're kidding yourself, Billy, not me.
No. I'm very serious.
No one is lifting your shirt here. Yet you are obsessively convinced that people are trying to deceive.
You REALLY need to reflect on that because it is a very corrosive attitude.
I honestly think you are trying to kid yourself.
Big deep breath.
Go on then. What part of the exchange on this specific theme do you take exception to today? Specifically, where is anyone trying to deceive you in how the data is being presented? Do you accept the shortcomings of the presentation that you put forward as a preferred one?
Sigh. There's no fear of you deceiving me. My fear is you deceiving others. Do you accept the shortcomings in your data, of which there is no consideration of population size, no consideration of density of population, and no consideration of country size in the figures?
-
If you believe me, take my word for it. If you call me a liar, go check for yourself.
That's not quite how things work. If someone calls you a liar you need to prove otherwise. Or people will think...
Wilts, is Stanley Johnson's main home in London?
Dunno. He appears to give different answers to that question whenever asked. If you had a £12mill house in Camden would that be your main home? Or a farm on Dartmoor?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/property/uk/inside-boris-johnsons-huge-family-home-market-1125m/
Where was he when he broke lockdown rules again last week do you reckon?
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/boris-johnson-stanley-coronavirus-worry-prime-minister-a4435661.html
What do you mean dunno? You seemed to know when you said it was in London the other week.
And as I said the other week. How do you know it isn't?
(the farm is on Exmoor btw, No wonder I always get lost when I am out that way)
-
That's not quite how things work. If someone calls you a liar you need to prove otherwise. Or people will think...
-
Asking someone to evidence their claim isn’t calling them a liar.
-
BB.
It's very simple.
Some people are "meh" when it is pointed out that we have something like 60,000 deaths, a figure that looks to be the worst in Europe and is FAR worse than some European countries, despite us having had the benefit of starting late and seeing which way the wind was blowing. Those people get cross when other people question whether some of our Govt's policies might be responsible for that.
Other people are rather upset that we seem to have managed this so relatively badly, and would like the country to ask why so that lessons can be learned. Because we are a long, long way from the end, and if the same people make the same mistakes again, we will have a damn sight higher total number of deaths before we get out of this.
You, apparently, are happy that this situation is acceptable. There is no other conclusion to be drawn from your contributions in here.
As I've said before, YOU would have been criticising those who brought down Chamberlain after the Norway fiasco, because it's unpatriotic to ask critical questions of a Govt in a national emergency. You would have hated Churchill in early 1940. You would have questioned his patriotism and claimed he had ulterior motives.
Because your intolerance of the criticism is not based in whether the criticism is accurate. It is based on the fact that criticism is happening at all. And you want to shut down discussion through ad hominems, not through addressing the issues.
BST, I know I shouldn’t but I have to ask.......why are you saying we have 60,000 deaths (in the UK I assume) when the official numbers are much lower.
Hound.
It's because ALL the official data sets are several days behind the time. And the Official Govt figures only include those deaths where someone had already tested positive for CV-19. So the figures you see presented every day are doubly underestimating the true death toll as of today.
It is generally accepted that a better measure is total excess deaths over and above what you'd normally accept at this time of year. The ONS publish those figures every week, but they are about 10-12 days behind (because it's a hell of a job to collate them accurately).
Chris Giles of the FT has a model which uses various data sources to try to predict where we are in terms on numbers on this day.
Specifically, he uses the ONS data on total excess deaths and calibrates his model against that. But because the ONS data is several days old, Giles uses various other data sources to try to predict from that 10-12 days old data to where we are today. It's a prediction rather than a fact, but he's been very close to date.. And he updates his model every time new ONS data comes out. So it gets better over time.
At the moment, the ONS data released today says that as of the start of this month, there had been 46,000 excess deaths. That's actually a bit higher than Giles's model which was predicting yesterday that the ONS data released today would have said about 44,000 for the start of the month. He's not generally been out by much, but when he has, it's always been because the actual figures are HIGHER than his prediction. Which suggests that he is being cautious i his predictions. As it currently stands, projecting through from the start of the month to today, Giles is predicting we are at about 58,000 deaths as of today.
-
A quiet think about whether MY attitude is justified? You're kidding yourself, Billy, not me.
No. I'm very serious.
No one is lifting your shirt here. Yet you are obsessively convinced that people are trying to deceive.
You REALLY need to reflect on that because it is a very corrosive attitude.
I honestly think you are trying to kid yourself.
Big deep breath.
Go on then. What part of the exchange on this specific theme do you take exception to today? Specifically, where is anyone trying to deceive you in how the data is being presented? Do you accept the shortcomings of the presentation that you put forward as a preferred one?
Sigh. There's no fear of you deceiving me. My fear is you deceiving others. Do you accept the shortcomings in your data, of which there is no consideration of population size, no consideration of density of population, and no consideration of country size in the figures?
Do you know how many times I have posted thoughts on everyone of those issues? Either get some respect and join in these discussions seriously or just belt up will you?
But I know you'll do neither. As I keep saying, you have zero interest in dealing with content. All you want to do is provoke arguments. And then you get arsey when people snap.
Utterly bizarre behaviour for a grown man. It's like dealing with a stroppy 13 year old.
-
BST, you asked me if I accepted the shortcomings of the presentation that I put forward as a preferred one? I do accept there are shortcomings in it. For instance, it doesn't provide figures regarding the density of populations and the size of the countries in the chart. But in my amateur opinion, the deaths per 100,000 population statistics is a fairer account of the death rates than simply death numbers.
-
So you totally ignore the really big picture and focus on a detail to pick at.
But go on. I'm a f**king idiot but I'll humour you again.
1) The figures you posted DID allow for country size. They ARE deaths per 100k. None of that changes in any way the criticisms of that dataset that I gave and which you have studiously ignored.
2 There is no correlation whatsoever between deaths per capita and population density.
Sweden (population density 24/sq.km) has a pretty much exactly the same death rate (32-33 per 100,000) as the Netherlands with 20 times the population density.
Japan has a higher population density than the UK. But we have 47 deaths per 100,000. They have 0.5.
Germany has only a slightly lower population density than us (233 - 259 per sq.km). But they have one fifth the deaths per capita that we have.
Like I say, I really don't know what you think you're trying to establish here. This has all been gone over times many in this very thread. I'm assuming you've not bothered reading that because you assume that people are just deceitful.
Grow up, start acting responsibly and either contribute sensibly or belt up.
-
No I'm not ignoring the big picture at all. I'm merely looking at a more detailed one that presents a different angle to the consequences of the virus in the UK.
The figure I posted did not allow for country size. For instance, France is more than twice the size of the UK but has fewer people. Eighty-three per cent of Britons live in densely populated towns or cities, which drives up the risk of the virus spreading.
What I'm trying to establish is the reason why the UK is top of the death league. That does not mean I am ignoring it.
Now, if you don't think showing a different account of things is contributing responsibly I suggest it's you who should grow up.
-
Well done BB
You're actually engaging with the subject matter.
And yes, it is clear that urban populations are more vulnerable than non urban ones.
Precisely what I was saying to you 5 weeks ago.
https://www.drfc-vsc.co.uk/index.php?topic=275849.msg959043#msg959043
And the fact is that there aren't such big differences between western European countries in terms of urban population percentages.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_countries_by_percentage_of_urban_population
Certainly not enough to explain differences in death rates between UK and Italy and Sweden Vs Norway, Germany and Denmark.
-
BST, don't patronise me. I'm always engaged in the subject matters, albeit much of the time in condemnation of the way you and others approach them.
Do you accept that the high UK death figures are, or could be as a result of 83% of Britons living in densely populated areas?
Of course, you're going to come back and blame it on our late entry into lockdown, but could most of the population living in close proximity to each other be a major factor?
-
BB.
It's very simple.
Some people are "meh" when it is pointed out that we have something like 60,000 deaths, a figure that looks to be the worst in Europe and is FAR worse than some European countries, despite us having had the benefit of starting late and seeing which way the wind was blowing. Those people get cross when other people question whether some of our Govt's policies might be responsible for that.
Other people are rather upset that we seem to have managed this so relatively badly, and would like the country to ask why so that lessons can be learned. Because we are a long, long way from the end, and if the same people make the same mistakes again, we will have a damn sight higher total number of deaths before we get out of this.
You, apparently, are happy that this situation is acceptable. There is no other conclusion to be drawn from your contributions in here.
As I've said before, YOU would have been criticising those who brought down Chamberlain after the Norway fiasco, because it's unpatriotic to ask critical questions of a Govt in a national emergency. You would have hated Churchill in early 1940. You would have questioned his patriotism and claimed he had ulterior motives.
Because your intolerance of the criticism is not based in whether the criticism is accurate. It is based on the fact that criticism is happening at all. And you want to shut down discussion through ad hominems, not through addressing the issues.
BST, I know I shouldn’t but I have to ask.......why are you saying we have 60,000 deaths (in the UK I assume) when the official numbers are much lower.
Hound.
It's because ALL the official data sets are several days behind the time. And the Official Govt figures only include those deaths where someone had already tested positive for CV-19. So the figures you see presented every day are doubly underestimating the true death toll as of today.
It is generally accepted that a better measure is total excess deaths over and above what you'd normally accept at this time of year. The ONS publish those figures every week, but they are about 10-12 days behind (because it's a hell of a job to collate them accurately).
Chris Giles of the FT has a model which uses various data sources to try to predict where we are in terms on numbers on this day.
Specifically, he uses the ONS data on total excess deaths and calibrates his model against that. But because the ONS data is several days old, Giles uses various other data sources to try to predict from that 10-12 days old data to where we are today. It's a prediction rather than a fact, but he's been very close to date.. And he updates his model every time new ONS data comes out. So it gets better over time.
At the moment, the ONS data released today says that as of the start of this month, there had been 46,000 excess deaths. That's actually a bit higher than Giles's model which was predicting yesterday that the ONS data released today would have said about 44,000 for the start of the month. He's not generally been out by much, but when he has, it's always been because the actual figures are HIGHER than his prediction. Which suggests that he is being cautious i his predictions. As it currently stands, projecting through from the start of the month to today, Giles is predicting we are at about 58,000 deaths as of today.
BST, Thanks for explaining that.
I would imagine then that other countries must have to follow the same methods so with that in mind their death figures must be behind what the death totals actually are.
-
No I'm not ignoring the big picture at all. I'm merely looking at a more detailed one that presents a different angle to the consequences of the virus in the UK.
The figure I posted did not allow for country size. For instance, France is more than twice the size of the UK but has fewer people. Eighty-three per cent of Britons live in densely populated towns or cities, which drives up the risk of the virus spreading.
What I'm trying to establish is the reason why the UK is top of the death league. That does not mean I am ignoring it.
Now, if you don't think showing a different account of things is contributing responsibly I suggest it's you who should grow up.
The UK is the 32nd most densely populated country in the world. It has 226000 case with 32692 deaths (gov figures)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_dependencies_by_population_density
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
Vietnam is the 30th most densely populated country in the world. With a population a third larger than the UK and a 900 mile long land border with China. They have had a total of 226 cases and 0 deaths.
What evidence do you have that population density has any correlation to death rate from covid-19? As opposed to say - how quickly and effectively a government acted to keep its citizens safe?
-
The evidence I go on is social distancing being of major importance. Those Vietnam figures shine a poor light on every other European country. Why single out The UK?
-
That's not quite how things work. If someone calls you a liar you need to prove otherwise. Or people will think...
He was calling from Somerset his second home.
https://www.entertainmentdaily.co.uk/news/stanley-johnson-criticised-coronavirus-boris/
What evidence do you have it isn't?
-
The evidence I go on is social distancing being of major importance. Those Vietnam figures shine a poor light on every other European country. Why single out The UK?
First you mention population density. Now you mention social distancing. This was the question.
What evidence do you have that population density has any correlation to death rate from covid-19? As opposed to say - how quickly and effectively a government acted to keep its citizens safe?
Shall we say - none?
-
BB.
I've said precisely that urban living affects the virulence if the disease. But we are not that much different from other western European countries. So that cannot explain the differences.
In fact I said that in my very last post, so why the f**k are you asking that question.
As for why I'm "singling out" the UK, God help us.
I live here you bloody idiot. I want the best for us.
-
That's not quite how things work. If someone calls you a liar you need to prove otherwise. Or people will think...
He was calling from Somerset his second home.
https://www.entertainmentdaily.co.uk/news/stanley-johnson-criticised-coronavirus-boris/
What evidence do you have it isn't?
Itching for an argument again are we! Stan Johnson's main home is in Somerset.https://www.somersetlive.co.uk/news/somerset-news/stanley-johnson-boris-pub-coronavirus-3958541
-
The evidence I go on is social distancing being of major importance. Those Vietnam figures shine a poor light on every other European country. Why single out The UK?
First you mention population density. Now you mention social distancing. This was the question.
What evidence do you have that population density has any correlation to death rate from covid-19? As opposed to say - how quickly and effectively a government acted to keep its citizens safe?
Shall we say - none?
Itching for an argument again are we! Social distancing becomes more difficult in a more densely populated area.
-
BB.
I've said precisely that urban living affects the virulence if the disease. But we are not that much different from other western European countries. So that cannot explain the differences.
In fact I said that in my very last post, so why the f**k are you asking that question.
As for why I'm "singling out" the UK, God help us.
I live here you bloody idiot. I want the best for us.
BST, had a bit of a drink, have we? First of all, where did I say you was singling out the UK? Just check that out and see who's the bloody idiot who got it wrong.
We might not be much different from other Western countries but there is a difference in the figures if you go by the number of deaths per % of people.
-
Haven't touched a drop BB although talking with you has a similar effect.
Forgive me. When you said "Why single out The UK?" I assumed you were meaning that people were singling out the UK.
Easy mistake to make.
Regarding presenting the numbers as a percentage of population, you seem to be doing your age old thing of going round in circles.
Find some self respect and reflect on how this discussion has gone and what it has covered.
-
Apology accepted. You might call it going round in circles, I call it putting a point across. You seem to agree with my point but feel the need to argue the toss about it.
-
Go and read the previous exchange. It's not difficult.
I'll make it easy for you in fact. Here was my response.
https://www.drfc-vsc.co.uk/index.php?topic=276622.msg965023#msg965023
What do you take issue with in that post?
By the way, for the record, Belgium (who have managed this epidemic very badly) have right from the start included in their daily figures all cases where CV-19 was included on the death certificate, whether or not the deceased had tested positive. That inevitably means that they have recorded more deaths relatively than our headline figures which are released every day. The ONS does release figures (seriously backdated) for us which are equivalent. Going on the numbers released by the ONS today, on 1 May, we had just over 40,000 deaths in which CV-19 was included on the death certificate, so that would be about 63 deaths per 100,000 population, compared with Belgium's 76 in the link you posted. So yes, possibly Belgium is having a marginally worse outcome than us. We'll know in a couple of weeks time when our data has caught up.
None of that changes the main thrust of my point. Which was that, whichever way you look at it, we are in a group of countries that are at the worst end of outcomes in Europe. And since I'm a patriot and I love this country, I'd like to know why and and like us to learn the lessons that we got wrong and that Germany, Denmark, Switzerland, Portugal, Greece and Norway have done much, much better on. had we managed this epidemic like they have, we'd currently have 40-50,000 people alive today who are now dead. And we'd have a hell of a lot less economic damage.
I truly do not understand why anyone wouldn't want to face up to that and learn from it. Unless they don't want to know the reasons because it might make them have to re-evaluate their political beliefs.
-
It's funny, whenever I read a thread where bb is involved it always reminds me of the show about nothing ............ now what was it's name :)
-
BST. Of course I want to know why those countries have done much better than us. I'm questioning the league table that shows EVERY country doing better than us.
Regarding the chart I posted, I've already conceded that the table showing deaths per 1000 population has shortcomings. Do you concede that the chart we use as the default one showing the UK at the top of the death list table is also flawed, in respect of the different methods of calculation that the countries use?
-
Question. At PMQs, Starmer asked Johnson about the government advice that states people in care homes are unlikely to be infected. Johnson flat out lied and said that was never the advice. But, on the government website:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EX5LrwiXYAAkHki?format=png&name=900x900)
Is Johnson not now on the hook for lying to the Commons? Of course nothing will happen, but is flatly lying at PMQs really the new normal?
-
Question. At PMQs, Starmer asked Johnson about the government advice that states people in care homes are unlikely to be infected. Johnson flat out lied and said that was never the advice. But, on the government website:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EX5LrwiXYAAkHki?format=png&name=900x900)
Is Johnson not now on the hook for lying to the Commons? Of course nothing will happen, but is flatly lying at PMQs really the new normal?
Cue a "why is everybody trying to bring down the country?" whinge in reply! :silly:
-
Question. At PMQs, Starmer asked Johnson about the government advice that states people in care homes are unlikely to be infected. Johnson flat out lied and said that was never the advice. But, on the government website:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EX5LrwiXYAAkHki?format=png&name=900x900)
Is Johnson not now on the hook for lying to the Commons? Of course nothing will happen, but is flatly lying at PMQs really the new normal?
Of course it is the new normal. No-one gives a f**k about it any more. Just look at some of the attitudes to lying in here.
-
another masterclass from Kier Starner. dePfeffel piffwaffle exposed again as the pantomime clown with no real idea what's happening. As has been pointed out Tory voters keep trying to insist he is doing a good job , because he says he is, in true Trump style.
This Government needs bringing down.
-
another masterclass from Kier Starner. dePfeffel piffwaffle exposed again as the pantomime clown with no real idea what's happening. As has been pointed out Tory voters keep trying to insist he is doing a good job , because he says he is, in true Trump style.
This Government needs bringing down.
Piece by piece and bit by bit SKS exposes the Johnson government's handling of the pandemic .
There is no one question hit for the newspaper headline the following morning and soon forgotten about .
SKS is merely building his case , every question asked is based on the governments own handling of the pandemic and their own words and when that question is attempted to be brushed away SKS produces the hardcopy evidence .
SKS is strangling Johnson with his own government's words .
There is no route out of this other than to ignore the question , answer about something entirely different from the original question raised or lie , he could tell the truth of course but let's be realistic .
Johnson appears to do all three and therefore exposes himself to the public .
There is no raised voices , emotional rants or even soundbites , just calm and calculating questions sourced from the government's own words .
Johnson isn't at PMQ's he's in the witness stand defending himself and his government , there is no counter attack from Johnson towards SKS , he's all on to get out of this cross examination in one piece .
He told Raab the other week he was on notice to produce some figures regarding deaths in care homes and he's told Johnson he wants answers to one question he failed to answer at all .
Psychologically Starmer is assuming control whilst the Tories are scampering for the facts SKS has asked for .
It's a remarkable spectacle to witness , Starmer's got a government with an 80 seat majority scared shyteless .
If PMQ's decided elections the Tories would be dead in the water already .
Alas they don't but it's a real confident start from SKS .
-
From the Evening Standard
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/pmqs-keir-starmer-boris-johnson-interrogation-coronavirus-a4439686.html
-
"Johnson isn't at PMQ's he's in the witness stand defending himself and his government"
And THAT is precisely how PMQs is supposed to work in a properly functioning system. It's about a skilled and able Opposition holding the Govt to account, and about giving the public the chance to see, on a week-by-week basis, which of the choice of leaders seems the more intelligent, incisive, honest and competent.
The problem is that it has become like a chimps' tea party over the past 20-odd years. But then we never had a crisis like this to deal with in those times. Maybe one thing we'll learn from this crisis is just how important intelligence, incisiveness, honesty and competency are in our leaders. We can but hope.
-
How many times did he look around for the baying mob to back him up today, only to see Hancock sat there nodding like a dashboard toy
-
From the Evening Standard
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/pmqs-keir-starmer-boris-johnson-interrogation-coronavirus-a4439686.html
Interesting article. I think this sums up the new Parliamentary face-off.
"Starmer is not looking for quick victories to lead the Six o’clock News each Wednesday but is far more dangerous. Instead he is going to spend weeks building up a case against the Government and forcing the PM to comment on every decision.
"Johnson’s technique is to admit freely to the awfulness of the coronavirus death toll without ever confessing to culpability, then move the conversation on with a n announcement or a bon mot. It is clever and strong politics which works brilliantly on an emotional level with punters who see him acknowledging the horror of coronavirus with apparent candour. Which is why these mild questions about detail posed by Sir Keir are so potentially deadly because when the daily emotion dies down, people will be asking how did this happen and who is to blame."
Personally, I'm finding the empty HoC far more conducive to seeing serious discussion take place. You don't have 600 people cheering on their side in a court. Why should you in the HoC? As that article says:
"In a chamber where gurning and pantomime emotions are the traditional currency of Opposition, the former Director of Public Prosecutions is as different as the socially-distanced chamber itself. A Kinnock or a Corbyn would, in a packed chamber, have shrieked and shouted and ultimately rallied the Tory mob behind their leader. But Starmer served his killer soundbite ice cold, leaving it hanging in the near silent chamber."
-
From my favourite columnist the brilliant John Crace from The Guardian .
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/may/13/boris-johnson-resorts-to-bluster-under-keir-starmer-cross-examination
-
I'll guarantee you that when the HoC is full again for PMQs, the Tory backbenchers will be briefed to raise hell every time Starmer speaks. They know that they cannot afford to allow this calm, dispassionate, clinical unpicking of Govt policy every week. They will have to try to unsettle Starmer and male him raise his voice to be heard. That will demonstrate just what a sorry state our politics is in.
-
BST. Of course I want to know why those countries have done much better than us. I'm questioning the league table that shows EVERY country doing better than us.
Regarding the chart I posted, I've already conceded that the table showing deaths per 1000 population has shortcomings. Do you concede that the chart we use as the default one showing the UK at the top of the death list table is also flawed, in respect of the different methods of calculation that the countries use?
BB. Totally the wrong thread for this, but I'm going to have one, final, tired go at trying to explain.
It doesn't really matter whether we are top, 2nd or 3rd in the list. That is obsessing about second order things. What matters is whether we have done a relatively good job or a relatively bad job at managing this crisis.
Dispassionately, looking at the data whichever way you wish, we have unquestionably done a very bad job by international comparisons. We are not on our own but that is irrelevant. We have done far, far worse than some similar countries.
But. Since you have a fixation who is top of the list and with the deaths per 100k population, I'll come back to those now. I explained, patiently yesterday why simply looking at a list or a graph of where each country was on a given day is badly flawed if you are trying to draw international comparisons. Because a) it depends on where each country is in the development of its epidemic and b) countries which went into the epidemic late should be expected to do better than countries which went in early (because they had prior warning to get their shit in their socks).
This is how it turns out if you allow for the epidemics getting up to speed at different times in different countries.
As i say, we are in a group of badly performing countries. And now you can see that it is silly to look at the data you posted yesterday and conclude that Italy has handled things worse than we have. They went into the crisis well before us, but they have a slightly better outcome trend. Chances are, I'd say, looking at that graph, it's a toss up whether we end up worse than Spain or not. But it doesn't really matter.
The big take home is that Germany had 3 weeks notice and they crushed the epidemic.
We had 2.5 weeks notice and we failed.
We have huge lessons to learn and we need to make damn sure that the people responsible for the failures in Feb and March are stopped from making them again in June and July. And eventually held to account at a Royal Inquiry.
No arguments on that.
-
I'll guarantee you that when the HoC is full again for PMQs, the Tory backbenchers will be briefed to raise hell every time Starmer speaks. They know that they cannot afford to allow this calm, dispassionate, clinical unpicking of Govt policy every week. They will have to try to unsettle Starmer and male him raise his voice to be heard. That will demonstrate just what a sorry state our politics is in.
Couldn't agree more Billy but just consider this .
How long will it be before social distancing is something of the past ?
A bloody long time away .
By the time these restrictions are lifted if they ever leave us that is this clown will already suffered even more humiliations .
This is far from the way I wanted things let me be clear on that but I wouldn't be honest if I didn't say the ducks are starting to move in to line since that humiliation last December .
An almost empty HOC , a PM totally out of his depth up against probably the sharpest mind that Labour have had in modern times with a depression coming our way that nobody but someone aged in their 90's have ever seen .
The Telegraph and Times already breaking rank .
Personally I don't think Johnson will even make it to the next election and by that time the damage has already been done by definition .
SKS is coming across as smart , credible with no political skeletons in the cupboard , the Sun and Mail have no ammunition .
The country will be ripe for a serious politician to take over from the bullshyte operators .
-
Tyke
Except the Leader of the House wants all MPs back in the HoC from the start of June...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-52606982
I'd be tempted to let the Tories fill their benches cheek by jowl if they want and boycott the House on safety grounds if I were LotO. You might lose a bit of air time at first, but the natural outcome would be a fair few lopped off the 85 seat majority if you give it a month or two.
-
Tyke
Except the Leader of the House wants all MPs back in the HoC from the start of June...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-52606982
I'd be tempted to let the Tories fill their benches cheek by jowl if they want and boycott the House on safety grounds if I were LotO. You might lose a bit of air time at first, but the natural outcome would be a fair few lopped off the 85 seat majority if you give it a month or two.
He's a cunning operator is JRM , many underestimate him but he'd even give Starmer a run for his money in a debate or PMQ's .
Mind you I'm saying that but Starmer wiped the floor with him on the Brexit exchanges but none the less you have to watch him closely .
I watch and read a lot of Tory content and I have done for years .
There clever bstrds I'll give em that , to be able to protect and represent about 2% of the people of this country and con the rest in to voting for em is remarkable to say the least .
You can never underestimate em , that I do know .
I've always found the best way to deal with Tory voters is to ditch the standard slagging em off for simply committing the crime of being Tories .
What have they done for you in government is a good one for the more recent Tory voters , they've held office for 10 years btw , give me one thing that's massively helped you ?
Older voters are fertile ground too , when you voted for Thatcher and you bought your council house does it bother you your kids haven't the same opportunity and are actually poorer than you ? , now those feckers do squirm .
The standard answer is well they are at Uni so they have every chance .
Aye and who made that possible ? ...... more squirm .
The thing is Billy if everyone who voted was politically aware the Tories would never win which is how they pull it off because they are bloody good at what they do .
-
Afraid that won't work either Tyke we've repeatedly asked the tory defenders club here to name something positive about brexit or to defend Austerity ............. blank
-
Afraid that won't work either Tyke we've repeatedly asked the tory defenders club here to name something positive about brexit or to defend Austerity ............. blank
There's more to it than that Sydney in my humble opinion .
We still have this thing in this country that says man who went to Eton and Oxford University is the man for the job of running the country based on that with a confident approach .
It's my opinion it breeds confident idiots , I give you Cameron , Osborne and Johnson .
You get an authentic women like Jess Philips who probably represents a far bigger proportion of society in the UK , not without flaws don't get me wrong but working class women with a platform and yet ......
This country is fundamentally flawed by class , it's not like it was with top hats in your face , no it's actually worse because it's subtle now but it exists just as much as it ever did .
We've actually had to elect a bloke who looks like a tory , speaks like a tory but with a heart n soul labour DNA just to get back in the game .
It's not a poor choice by any means don't get me wrong but hey ho he's been knighted , the Telegraph and Times can hang a hat on it ...... for now .
The same questioning and competence from Jess Philips today in the HOC would have seen a different perspective , I can almost guarantee it .
Blair recognised it only too well and its a tragedy for this country that we've gone back to the subtle top hats .
At least Thatcher and Major came from different stock , I'll give em that .
The question of the EU is a proper old left argument Sydney just to put my personal touch to your post .
And no I don't want to open up old wounds again , we move on .
-
Sydney
If I could see a willingness from the EU to be flexible and some of the present hierarchy with rather more credibility i could be talked around .
I'm a pragmatic voter and from a Union background post NUM I might add with a compromising mindset .
I've personally seen no evidence that it's the case and they have a mindset that they have a project to complete and that is that .
You can't even negotiate with these people , I can't have that because this country put an enormous amount of taxpayers money in to this thing and we should be heard .
I recognise its not without consequences , I always did .
But fuq em anyway if that's the case , I don't do personally guns to my head as a proven point of being right .
I had one vote and I used it based on not the likes of Johnson but what I thought for myself .
We move on .
-
Afraid that won't work either Tyke we've repeatedly asked the tory defenders club here to name something positive about brexit or to defend Austerity ............. blank
There's more to it than that Sydney in my humble opinion .
We still have this thing in this country that says man who went to Eton and Oxford University is the man for the job of running the country based on that with a confident approach .
It's my opinion it breeds confident idiots , I give you Cameron , Osborne and Johnson .
You get an authentic women like Jess Philips who probably represents a far bigger proportion of society in the UK , not without flaws don't get me wrong but working class women with a platform and yet ......
This country is fundamentally flawed by class , it's not like it was with top hats in your face , no it's actually worse because it's subtle now but it exists just as much as it ever did .
We've actually had to elect a bloke who looks like a tory , speaks like a tory but with a heart n soul labour DNA just to get back in the game .
It's not a poor choice by any means don't get me wrong but hey ho he's been knighted , the Telegraph and Times can hang a hat on it ...... for now .
The same questioning and competence from Jess Philips today in the HOC would have seen a different perspective , I can almost guarantee it .
Blair recognised it only too well and its a tragedy for this country that we've gone back to the subtle top hats .
At least Thatcher and Major came from different stock , I'll give em that .
The question of the EU is a proper old left argument Sydney just to put my personal touch to your post .
And no I don't want to open up old wounds again , we move on .
Yes agreed the public school shit does breed idiots and the networking ensures they are overly represented in the top of the public service and any area where public money is spent. Further the propaganda that the tories are better managers of the economy is founded on this idea that they are better educated therefore better able to ......... you name it ...........
-
If I could see a willingness from the EU to be flexible
I'm a pragmatic voter and from a Union background post NUM I might add with a compromising mindset .
If someone went to the NUM and wanted all the benefits of NUM membership but without having to pay any subs, how flexible and compromising would you have been with them?
-
If I could see a willingness from the EU to be flexible
I'm a pragmatic voter and from a Union background post NUM I might add with a compromising mindset .
If someone went to the NUM and wanted all the benefits of NUM membership but without having to pay any subs, how flexible and compromising would you have been with them?
It's an interesting comparison Glyn , I could see it as a bit of straw from your good self but I'll take it on none the less .
I was a much younger man back then and I was only ever a member , I actually left the industry well before the curtain finally came down , my choice .
Looking back at the age I am today I can see the NUM had some significant flaws , whilst I agree we were right to defend our jobs and communities , I was out on strike for the duration we also lacked a significant democratic element .
A democratic element that proved to be our downfall and marked the end of the industry as a consequence .
There was no attempt by the leadership of the NUM to compromise what so ever and as I say the decision not to ballot proved to be a fatal error .
The rest as they say is history and the Nottingham miners left the NUM and paddled their own canoe .
There are comparisons to be made with the European Union and how it's panned out here in the UK and we've decided to follow our own path too .
It's on the record what the likes of Junker thought about democracy .
I'm going to leave it at that because we will only end up opening old wounds and this thing has done enough damage within the Labour Movement .
-
Peter Walker Guardian live:
Labour has expressed alarm after a series of Conservative MPs, including a minister, shared a video tweeted by a hard-right Twitter account which falsely claimed Sir Keir Starmer obstructed the targeting of grooming gang victims when he led the Crown Prosecution Service.
The tweeted video was shared by Nadine Dorries, who is now a junior health minister, as well as Telford MP Lucy Allan and Maria Caulfield, who represents Lewes. All expressed alarm at what the video purported to show, with Dorries calling it “revealing”.
The 22-second clip from 2013 shows Starmer apparently recounting reasons why victims of grooming gangs might not be credible, talking about “the assumption that a victim of child sexual abuse will swiftly report what’s happened to them to the police; will be able to give a coherent, consistent account, first time; that they will not themselves have engaged in any offending or other behaviour; and that they will not have misused drugs or alcohol at any stage”.
The original tweeter, who also regularly posts anti-Islam messages and other hard-right content, titled the clip, “Keir Starmer explains why he didn’t prosecute grooming gangs when he was head if the Crown Prosecution Service”.
However, a fuller version of the video shows this is completely misleading. Starmer is in fact explaining why he had changed the prosecution guidelines, to move away from “a number of assumptions, which didn’t withstand scrutiny”.
-
To be fair, most of them have now deleted their tweets. Although it doesn't take a genius to realise that libelling a QC isn't the best idea.
-
So keen to drag Starmer down they haven't got time to think.
-
Tyke.
I don't think Glyn was asking for a critique of the NUM.
There's a simpler question. If you paid your subs to an organisation and some asked for all the benefits of that organisation but refused to pay stubs, what would you say to them?
-
To be fair, most of them have now deleted their tweets. Although it doesn't take a genius to realise that libelling a QC isn't the best idea.
A nicely worded letter asking them to apologise publicly would be enough for their arses to drop out and the added bonus of embarrassing them should do the trick
-
If I could see a willingness from the EU to be flexible
I'm a pragmatic voter and from a Union background post NUM I might add with a compromising mindset .
If someone went to the NUM and wanted all the benefits of NUM membership but without having to pay any subs, how flexible and compromising would you have been with them?
It's an interesting comparison Glyn , I could see it as a bit of straw from your good self but I'll take it on none the less .
I was a much younger man back then and I was only ever a member , I actually left the industry well before the curtain finally came down , my choice .
Looking back at the age I am today I can see the NUM had some significant flaws , whilst I agree we were right to defend our jobs and communities , I was out on strike for the duration we also lacked a significant democratic element .
A democratic element that proved to be our downfall and marked the end of the industry as a consequence .
There was no attempt by the leadership of the NUM to compromise what so ever and as I say the decision not to ballot proved to be a fatal error .
The rest as they say is history and the Nottingham miners left the NUM and paddled their own canoe .
There are comparisons to be made with the European Union and how it's panned out here in the UK and we've decided to follow our own path too .
It's on the record what the likes of Junker thought about democracy .
I'm going to leave it at that because we will only end up opening old wounds and this thing has done enough damage within the Labour Movement .
You've taken what I said completely the wrong way. I'm not talking about any internal NUM politics, I just used them as an organisation you're familiar with.
Perhaps if I put it this way instead: If someone went to an organisation you're a member of (that benefits those who are it's paying members) and wanted some or all the benefits of that organisation, but without having to pay any membership subs, how flexible and compromising would you have been with them?
-
The attempts by the Tories to rake the muck on SKS has started, prepare for more attempts after the way he keeps skewering Boris
-
Health Minister Nadine Dorries has deleted her re-tweeting if a far right disinformation campaign.
But the internet doesn't forget.
https://mobile.twitter.com/AlansiPhone/status/1260898051985637377
She will, of course, publicly and unreservedly apologies for this libellous and grave error of judgement, don't you think?
Maybe not, eh?
After all she never apologised for castigating the Mayor of London over Asian gang paedophilia in Rotherham. (No, *I* can't think why Khan should be responsible either. Anybody?)
-
Yesterdays PMQ’s obviously hurt 😂😂
-
Just look again at what Dorries, a Govt minister re-tweeted.
And look at what the video actually said.
https://mobile.twitter.com/_WilliamCole/status/1260863677101735937
As I keep saying. There IS a massive problem with deliberate deception and misinformation in politics these days. And overwhelmingly it does not come from the Left.
This little story is on a par with the disgusting video that Leave.EU pumped out, purporting to show EU Brexit negotiators admitting that they were trying to trap the British. In fact, the footage was from a documentary, where the negotiators were discussing how they had to be fair and transparent so they wouldn't run the risk of the British getting the feeling they had been trapped. The Leave.EU video cut out that context. Then editted the visuals to make it look as though this was a secret recording.
Absolutely disgusting and it really ought to be a criminal offence. At the very least, it ought to give people in that side of politics concern about the veracity of the lines they are fed day after day after day. Instead, there appears to be no questioning from the Right at all. Just onto the next lie.
-
Health Minister Nadine Dorries has deleted her re-tweeting if a far right disinformation campaign.
But the internet doesn't forget.
https://mobile.twitter.com/AlansiPhone/status/1260898051985637377
She will, of course, publicly and unreservedly apologies for this libellous and grave error of judgement, don't you think?
Maybe not, eh?
After all she never apologised for castigating the Mayor of London over Asian gang paedophilia in Rotherham. (No, *I* can't think why Khan should be responsible either. Anybody?)
Think that's exactly the point BST. The internet doesn't forget. The people who they want to have seen that video will have already seen it, but they can say they did the right thing and deleted it. Best of both worlds. Get the message out, poison the discourse, then pretend they haven't done anything and delete it. Textbook tactics from the new Right. And it'll work, too. Just like how Corbyn was a Jew-hater, and Brown bankrupted the country, and Miliband was from a family of communist extremists, Starmer will be the bloke who let Savile get away with it. Mark my words.
-
Just look again at what Dorries, a Govt minister re-tweeted.
And look at what the video actually said.
https://mobile.twitter.com/_WilliamCole/status/1260863677101735937
As I keep saying. There IS a massive problem with deliberate deception and misinformation in politics these days. And overwhelmingly it does not come from the Left.
This little story is on a par with the disgusting video that Leave.EU pumped out, purporting to show EU Brexit negotiators admitting that they were trying to trap the British. In fact, the footage was from a documentary, where the negotiators were discussing how they had to be fair and transparent so they wouldn't run the risk of the British getting the feeling they had been trapped. The Leave.EU video cut out that context. Then editted the visuals to make it look as though this was a secret recording.
Absolutely disgusting and it really ought to be a criminal offence. At the very least, it ought to give people in that side of politics concern about the veracity of the lines they are fed day after day after day. Instead, there appears to be no questioning from the Right at all. Just onto the next lie.
Isn't re-editing it a breach of the copyright of the original filmmaker? That might have to be the way into holding the distorters to account. Those who retweet would be guilty of distributing copyright material too.
-
Isn’t claiming that someone said something which they didn’t actually say, a libel offence.?
As for being able to claim they never did something after having taken the offending tweets down, don’t they think that some people won’t have taken screenshots.? Or that twitter itself cannot retrieve deleted tweets.?
Things can be removed, but not unsaid.
-
Isn’t claiming that someone said something which they didn’t actually say, a libel offence.?
As for being able to claim they never did something after having taken the offending tweets down, don’t they think that some people won’t have taken screenshots.? Or that twitter itself cannot retrieve deleted tweets.?
Things can be removed, but not unsaid.
If it's film of them saying it that wouldn't work though. It's all about the re-editing and misrepresentation.
-
You say that, Glyn, but if someone perfects Deepfake technology then we're in for a rough time.
-
If I could see a willingness from the EU to be flexible
I'm a pragmatic voter and from a Union background post NUM I might add with a compromising mindset .
If someone went to the NUM and wanted all the benefits of NUM membership but without having to pay any subs, how flexible and compromising would you have been with them?
I worked at a firm called A E Turbines in Leeds in the 1980s. It was a closed union shop. The only way you could not pay union subs was to give the equivalent amount to charity. It was still annoying that they were willing to accept shorter hours, pay rises, holidays and a sick scheme all negotiated by the union.
I left after eighteen and a half years and the work force had dropped massively from the 2,500 or so in 1985 when I joined. I think that there is about 250 now plus some agency workers. The union has lost all of it’s power.
-
You say that, Glyn, but if someone perfects Deepfake technology then we're in for a rough time.
That is the nightmare scenario, definitely. Democracy is out the window when that happens. You can't have a functioning democracy when there is no concept of objective truth with which to use as a basis for making rational decisions.
-
If I could see a willingness from the EU to be flexible
I'm a pragmatic voter and from a Union background post NUM I might add with a compromising mindset .
If someone went to the NUM and wanted all the benefits of NUM membership but without having to pay any subs, how flexible and compromising would you have been with them?
It's an interesting comparison Glyn , I could see it as a bit of straw from your good self but I'll take it on none the less .
I was a much younger man back then and I was only ever a member , I actually left the industry well before the curtain finally came down , my choice .
Looking back at the age I am today I can see the NUM had some significant flaws , whilst I agree we were right to defend our jobs and communities , I was out on strike for the duration we also lacked a significant democratic element .
A democratic element that proved to be our downfall and marked the end of the industry as a consequence .
There was no attempt by the leadership of the NUM to compromise what so ever and as I say the decision not to ballot proved to be a fatal error .
The rest as they say is history and the Nottingham miners left the NUM and paddled their own canoe .
There are comparisons to be made with the European Union and how it's panned out here in the UK and we've decided to follow our own path too .
It's on the record what the likes of Junker thought about democracy .
I'm going to leave it at that because we will only end up opening old wounds and this thing has done enough damage within the Labour Movement .
You've taken what I said completely the wrong way. I'm not talking about any internal NUM politics, I just used them as an organisation you're familiar with.
Perhaps if I put it this way instead: If someone went to an organisation you're a member of (that benefits those who are it's paying members) and wanted some or all the benefits of that organisation, but without having to pay any membership subs, how flexible and compromising would you have been with them?
When I became a shop steward after leaving the mining industry we had a couple of lads in the office who wouldn't join the union , mind you one of em did have a picture of Thatcher on his desk .
I didn't particularly like it that they automatically got what we negotiated for them but I didn't take it any further than that , I talked to them and didn't hold it against them but at the same time it didn't sit right with me either .
I'd heard enough about workplace , family and friends relationships breaking down during and after the strike to go down that route .
-
You say that, Glyn, but if someone perfects Deepfake technology then we're in for a rough time.
That is the nightmare scenario, definitely. Democracy is out the window when that happens. You can't have a functioning democracy when there is no concept of objective truth with which to use as a basis for making rational decisions.
Just read about this , Tory government refusing to condemn it with a no comment .
I was led to believe the case fell apart because three of the girls wouldn't take the stand .
No case is going to trial if there's a good chance it will collapse due to lack of evidence and waste taxpayers money in the process .
Mind you the Tories have always had their own ideas about justice when the cap fits , Orgreave and Hillsborough jump off the page .
-
If I could see a willingness from the EU to be flexible
I'm a pragmatic voter and from a Union background post NUM I might add with a compromising mindset .
If someone went to the NUM and wanted all the benefits of NUM membership but without having to pay any subs, how flexible and compromising would you have been with them?
It's an interesting comparison Glyn , I could see it as a bit of straw from your good self but I'll take it on none the less .
I was a much younger man back then and I was only ever a member , I actually left the industry well before the curtain finally came down , my choice .
Looking back at the age I am today I can see the NUM had some significant flaws , whilst I agree we were right to defend our jobs and communities , I was out on strike for the duration we also lacked a significant democratic element .
A democratic element that proved to be our downfall and marked the end of the industry as a consequence .
There was no attempt by the leadership of the NUM to compromise what so ever and as I say the decision not to ballot proved to be a fatal error .
The rest as they say is history and the Nottingham miners left the NUM and paddled their own canoe .
There are comparisons to be made with the European Union and how it's panned out here in the UK and we've decided to follow our own path too .
It's on the record what the likes of Junker thought about democracy .
I'm going to leave it at that because we will only end up opening old wounds and this thing has done enough damage within the Labour Movement .
You've taken what I said completely the wrong way. I'm not talking about any internal NUM politics, I just used them as an organisation you're familiar with.
Perhaps if I put it this way instead: If someone went to an organisation you're a member of (that benefits those who are it's paying members) and wanted some or all the benefits of that organisation, but without having to pay any membership subs, how flexible and compromising would you have been with them?
When I became a shop steward after leaving the mining industry we had a couple of lads in the office who wouldn't join the union , mind you one of em did have a picture of Thatcher on his desk .
I didn't particularly like it that they automatically got what we negotiated for them but I didn't take it any further than that , I talked to them and didn't hold it against them but at the same time it didn't sit right with me either .
I'd heard enough about workplace , family and friends relationships breaking down during and after the strike to go down that route .
Any chance of telling us what you'd do?
-
Apparently the MPs who tweeted that video have been reprimanded by the Tory whips. Must have been awkward considering one of them actually is a Tory whip.
-
Just for a bit of balance. Don't forget that the current Prime Minister when asked about his opinion of the investigation of child abuse said, live on LBC radio, this was 'spaffing money up the wall'.
-
If I could see a willingness from the EU to be flexible
I'm a pragmatic voter and from a Union background post NUM I might add with a compromising mindset .
If someone went to the NUM and wanted all the benefits of NUM membership but without having to pay any subs, how flexible and compromising would you have been with them?
It's an interesting comparison Glyn , I could see it as a bit of straw from your good self but I'll take it on none the less .
I was a much younger man back then and I was only ever a member , I actually left the industry well before the curtain finally came down , my choice .
Looking back at the age I am today I can see the NUM had some significant flaws , whilst I agree we were right to defend our jobs and communities , I was out on strike for the duration we also lacked a significant democratic element .
A democratic element that proved to be our downfall and marked the end of the industry as a consequence .
There was no attempt by the leadership of the NUM to compromise what so ever and as I say the decision not to ballot proved to be a fatal error .
The rest as they say is history and the Nottingham miners left the NUM and paddled their own canoe .
There are comparisons to be made with the European Union and how it's panned out here in the UK and we've decided to follow our own path too .
It's on the record what the likes of Junker thought about democracy .
I'm going to leave it at that because we will only end up opening old wounds and this thing has done enough damage within the Labour Movement .
You've taken what I said completely the wrong way. I'm not talking about any internal NUM politics, I just used them as an organisation you're familiar with.
Perhaps if I put it this way instead: If someone went to an organisation you're a member of (that benefits those who are it's paying members) and wanted some or all the benefits of that organisation, but without having to pay any membership subs, how flexible and compromising would you have been with them?
When I became a shop steward after leaving the mining industry we had a couple of lads in the office who wouldn't join the union , mind you one of em did have a picture of Thatcher on his desk .
I didn't particularly like it that they automatically got what we negotiated for them but I didn't take it any further than that , I talked to them and didn't hold it against them but at the same time it didn't sit right with me either .
I'd heard enough about workplace , family and friends relationships breaking down during and after the strike to go down that route .
Any chance of telling us what you'd do?
There aren't any solutions Glyn , the time for flexibility was when we were members of the EU but they never really believed we'd leave so we were rebuffed .
What's emerged since is punishment politics from them for us having the audacity to leave and a total meltdown of the political system here .
There are no workable solutions under those conditions and I expect we will leave without a trade deal at the end of the year .
This , that and what if doesn't come in to it so there's little point in pressing me further .
-
If I could see a willingness from the EU to be flexible
I'm a pragmatic voter and from a Union background post NUM I might add with a compromising mindset .
If someone went to the NUM and wanted all the benefits of NUM membership but without having to pay any subs, how flexible and compromising would you have been with them?
It's an interesting comparison Glyn , I could see it as a bit of straw from your good self but I'll take it on none the less .
I was a much younger man back then and I was only ever a member , I actually left the industry well before the curtain finally came down , my choice .
Looking back at the age I am today I can see the NUM had some significant flaws , whilst I agree we were right to defend our jobs and communities , I was out on strike for the duration we also lacked a significant democratic element .
A democratic element that proved to be our downfall and marked the end of the industry as a consequence .
There was no attempt by the leadership of the NUM to compromise what so ever and as I say the decision not to ballot proved to be a fatal error .
The rest as they say is history and the Nottingham miners left the NUM and paddled their own canoe .
There are comparisons to be made with the European Union and how it's panned out here in the UK and we've decided to follow our own path too .
It's on the record what the likes of Junker thought about democracy .
I'm going to leave it at that because we will only end up opening old wounds and this thing has done enough damage within the Labour Movement .
You've taken what I said completely the wrong way. I'm not talking about any internal NUM politics, I just used them as an organisation you're familiar with.
Perhaps if I put it this way instead: If someone went to an organisation you're a member of (that benefits those who are it's paying members) and wanted some or all the benefits of that organisation, but without having to pay any membership subs, how flexible and compromising would you have been with them?
When I became a shop steward after leaving the mining industry we had a couple of lads in the office who wouldn't join the union , mind you one of em did have a picture of Thatcher on his desk .
I didn't particularly like it that they automatically got what we negotiated for them but I didn't take it any further than that , I talked to them and didn't hold it against them but at the same time it didn't sit right with me either .
I'd heard enough about workplace , family and friends relationships breaking down during and after the strike to go down that route .
Any chance of telling us what you'd do?
There aren't any solutions Glyn , the time for flexibility was when we were members of the EU but they never really believed we'd leave so we were rebuffed .
What's emerged since is punishment politics from them for us having the audacity to leave and a total meltdown of the political system here .
There are no workable solutions under those conditions and I expect we will leave without a trade deal at the end of the year .
This , that and what if doesn't come in to it so there's little point in pressing me further .
What I don't get is what you're expecting them to be flexible about?
-
Tyke.
We opted out of Schengen, the Euro and much of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and the Working Time Directive.
For a dictatorial, centralised bureaucracy, the EU didn't half allow us a lot of flexibility. I've never understood what these great losses of liberty are that we ceded to the EU that required us to choose to lose 5-9% of GDP by leaving the SM and CU.
-
Tyke.
We opted out of Schengen, the Euro and much of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and the Working Time Directive.
For a doctorial, centralised bureaucracy, the EU didn't half allow us a lot of flexibility. I've never understood what these great losses of liberty are that we ceded to the EU that required us to choose to lose 5-9% of GDP by leaving the SM and CU.
Billy
I don't think we as a nation ever really embraced the European Union from start to finish , certainly not like many other european nations did .
We hadn't been in it two minutes before there was a referendum on the future of whether we remained .
The Left and the Right were joined at the hip on it , anytime that happens something definitely isn't right .
We've tolerated it at best and I think it's fair to say that .
We are different from those over the channel , there's no getting away from it , we are an island race with a huge colonial history and its in our DNA .
We ain't a problem with partnerships just as long as we are calling the shots or some bugger bails us out of the shyte such as the Americans in WW2 .
Most of the country love the Royals and all that pageantry and when the country goes to war with another country over some islands no bugger had ever heard of before we rejoice and wave the union jack when we reclaim em and then go back to forgetting they ever existed .
We don't understand what Spain's problem is with Gibraltar but wouldn't tolerate the Spanish if they governed the Isle Of Wight .
Don't get me started on Northern Ireland .
A bit of wriggle room on free movement may have seen Remain home and dry in my opinion Billy .
The worst thing about this whole bloody mess was Remainers getting on their soap box and telling the leavers they were racist , xenophobic , thick , stupid and ignorant .
The amount of personal abuse directed was a disgrace and it only led to Leavers sticking to their guns and sticking two fingers up which played out in the last election .
The Leave campaign knew which buttons to press , crudely and in many cases falsely too , I know that but here's the thing they understood the target audience and the Remain campaign never did connect , or didn't connect enough because they were only trying to sell us a product that was tolerable at best .
And there lies the problem today , there's many in the country not ready for this liberal integration and getting told they are this , that and the other if they don't .
You can't make people be what you want them to be because if they get an opportunity to bury your mandate they will take it all day long and what's more if you try and snatch it away they will fight you with their teeth if they have to .
-
The Tory machine rolls on. 1% of those who saw the accusation will see the apology/redaction when it comes. Mission accomplished for them.
So many can't see through it.
-
Tyke mate.
I suggest you are selectively re-writing history.
1) There is nothing philosophically wrong with Right and Left being United on major matters. See: 1939...
2) Right and left weren't only united for membership of the EEC in 1975. Benn and Powell were united on not staying in. Go figure...
3) We had a referendum in 1975 for one reason - because the Labour party was hopelessly split on the matter. Nothing else. The Bennite Left never accepted that defeat and that led to the disastrous split of the Labour party in 1981.
4) There is ample evidence that the British people changed attitudes to become far more "European" in the last quarter of the 20th century, before the fringes of the Right started changing opinions on the topic.
-
Tyke mate.
I suggest you are selectively re-writing history.
1) There is nothing philosophically wrong with Right and Left being United on major matters. See: 1939...
2) Right and left weren't only united for membership of the EEC in 1975. Benn and Powell were united on not staying in. Go figure...
3) We had a referendum in 1975 for one reason - because the Labour party was hopelessly split on the matter. Nothing else. The Bennite Left never accepted that defeat and that led to the disastrous split of the Labour party in 1981.
4) There is ample evidence that the British people changed attitudes to become far more "European" in the last quarter of the 20th century, before the fringes of the Right started changing opinions on the topic.
Billy , the whole bloody trade union movement were anti Common Market in the 70's , the size and power they had back then would make the ERG today look like a cub scout movement .
We went kicking and bloody screaming in to this thing , watch the debates on YouTube from back then , they are seriously a good watch .
This thing had a lid on it for the most part but it was always simmering away and eventually the lid blew off and it was exposed .
If this country was comfortable within the EU then the result would have been a formality for Remain and that's despite Leaves attempts to play on prejudice .
70 % v 30% was the result you would have got if this country was comfortable within the EU in Remains favour .
Billy you only had 48% , Leave had 52% which to be honest wasn't great either in all honesty but I didn't decide what was the winning outcome and neither did I have any control over those tasked with delivering the dam thing .
I didn't vote for this clown or his ERG lick spittles or for Cameron and May .
If our party had actually anything good to offer the electorate it may have greatly helped your cause .
You know nobody looks towards Brussels with Remain eyes on and ever calls em out because it's far from beyond criticism and I'm being kind at that and what's more your intelligent and politically aware enough to know it isn't .
-
Tyke
I said you were re-writing history. I stand by that.
The LEADERSHIP of unions was steadfastly against the EEC in the mid 70s. That's because it had, for the most part been taken over by the far-Left and was unrepresentative of the members (most of whom didn't vote in union leadership elections - a bit like today, where McCluskey has had a dominant position in the Labour movement despite being voted for by fewer than 6% of his members in the last leadership election).
The MEMBERSHIP was mostly pro-EEC.
I don't really want to get into the issues around the 2016 vote. We've thrashed through them for 4 years on here.
Regarding criticism of issues associated with the EU, you weren't here in 2010-13 when I was volcanic in my criticism of the German-led approach to the debt crisis. None of that has anything to do with the relative pros and cons of our membership.
My position is simple and can be summarised in 2 questions which I've repeated many times and I've never once had a decent answer:
1) What are the economic benefits that we get from leaving the EU that will balance the long-term loss of 5-9% of GDP that all credible economists predict?
2) What are the political benefits that we get from leaving the EU that will balance the weakening of a body that has been crucial in cementing peace, stability and democracy in the most dangerous region on Earth?
Give me simple, crisp answers to those questions and you will have done more than any Leave supporter has ever done before or since 2016.
-
Billy
I ain't ever going to say leaving the EU is the road to economic utopia , I'm a realist .
But I see all sorts of figures quoted for this that and the other for leaving the EU and to be honest I say to myself so what ?
The EU deliver austerity packages to those who don't fall in to line within the membership , who do these people think they are ?
Ask the working class of Greece , Ireland , Portugal , Italy and The Netherlands how that works out .
An austerity programme decided by people they've never voted for and what's more never even seen , it's one thing to have to accept austerity from your own government and quite another from an organisation outside of your borders .
So I'm afraid in my opinion there particular version of economic well being passes me by and I've yet to see the Armageddon predictions post Brexit actually play out in reality .
And post pandemic you don't need to guess what's coming for the Eurozone , the thing is there's nowt they can do either .
I'll tell you now they won't have it in the Eurozone even that idiot Veroffstadt was throwing his arms up the other day wanting the Commission otherwise known as The Syndicate to actually come up with some solutions .
They've gone too far with this shyte , trading deal no problem all the other cr@p well you got your answer four years ago in the UK .
As far as the mid 70's goes we will just have to agree to disagree Billy but British jobs for British workers carried some massive clout back then and they'd the power to make the argument .
-
You know nobody looks towards Brussels with Remain eyes on and ever calls em out because it's far from beyond criticism and I'm being kind at that and what's more your intelligent and politically aware enough to know it isn't .
Well this Remainer will always criticise CAP until it's reformed in a way that doesn't kill competition. It makes producers of certain goods set a price without any incentive to modernise production of be more efficient.
-
Billy
I ain't ever going to say leaving the EU is the road to economic utopia , I'm a realist .
But I see all sorts of figures quoted for this that and the other for leaving the EU and to be honest I say to myself so what ?
The EU deliver austerity packages to those who don't fall in to line within the membership , who do these people think they are ?
Ask the working class of Greece , Ireland , Portugal , Italy and The Netherlands how that works out .
An austerity programme decided by people they've never voted for and what's more never even seen , it's one thing to have to accept austerity from your own government and quite another from an organisation outside of your borders .
So I'm afraid in my opinion there particular version of economic well being passes me by and I've yet to see the Armageddon predictions post Brexit actually play out in reality .
And post pandemic you don't need to guess what's coming for the Eurozone , the thing is there's nowt they can do either .
I'll tell you now they won't have it in the Eurozone even that idiot Veroffstadt was throwing his arms up the other day wanting the Commission otherwise known as The Syndicate to actually come up with some solutions .
They've gone too far with this shyte , trading deal no problem all the other cr@p well you got your answer four years ago in the UK .
As far as the mid 70's goes we will just have to agree to disagree Billy but British jobs for British workers carried some massive clout back then and they'd the power to make the argument .
We've have of course had most of this conversation before Tyke, Greece voted for the fiscal remedies proposed by the EU (or at least the coutries offerering loans) over reverting back to the Drachma and later the lenders relieved the terms of repayment.
-
So no answers to either of those questions Tyke? Just machine gun bluster.
-
Billy
I ain't ever going to say leaving the EU is the road to economic utopia , I'm a realist .
But I see all sorts of figures quoted for this that and the other for leaving the EU and to be honest I say to myself so what ?
The EU deliver austerity packages to those who don't fall in to line within the membership , who do these people think they are ?
Ask the working class of Greece , Ireland , Portugal , Italy and The Netherlands how that works out .
An austerity programme decided by people they've never voted for and what's more never even seen , it's one thing to have to accept austerity from your own government and quite another from an organisation outside of your borders .
So I'm afraid in my opinion there particular version of economic well being passes me by and I've yet to see the Armageddon predictions post Brexit actually play out in reality .
And post pandemic you don't need to guess what's coming for the Eurozone , the thing is there's nowt they can do either .
I'll tell you now they won't have it in the Eurozone even that idiot Veroffstadt was throwing his arms up the other day wanting the Commission otherwise known as The Syndicate to actually come up with some solutions .
They've gone too far with this shyte , trading deal no problem all the other cr@p well you got your answer four years ago in the UK .
As far as the mid 70's goes we will just have to agree to disagree Billy but British jobs for British workers carried some massive clout back then and they'd the power to make the argument .
tyke, this reads like something out of the Daily Mail mate.
The EU don't deliver austerity packages, full stop. And whilst I cant speak for Italy or Portugal I have friends in the ROI and The Netherlands and the message they give me is that there is overall support there for being in the EU. The ROI has seen massive economic growth since joining the EU, they are a well off nation far from any form of austerity! Oh, and Greece paid the penalty for many internal failures, though they did actually vote in favour of the measures the EU proposed - the alternative was a return to their previous problems and financial issues.
It's rather clear you don't actually understand how either the EU works, but hey, the Daily Mail again eh?
As for your post Brexit 'Armageddon' - we haven't left yet, even if Daily Mail readers believe we have!
In the end, it's quite clear from what you write that you don't care if we're going to be worse off once we actually leave the EU, and that is a really worrying concept!
-
The huge first order thing for me has been to look at who, in world politics, wants us out of the EU.
Only two people.
Trump
Putin
Join the dots and ask yourself why.
-
There is of course all those other countries that would give an arm to be in the EU.
-
Well, having lived in Portugal (a bit) and The Netherlands I can comment on those two countries. In Portugal, the EU is one of the reasons democracy was introduced back into the country at the end of the Estado Novo authoritarian regime. Economically, I am told Portugal used to be almost a basket case, unrecognisable from what it is today (which is my only reference point). Alot of that economic turn around was directly becasue of the EU membership and funding.
The Netherlands has (I believe) gone from a net reciever of EU funding to a net provider. They followed brexit closely and every single person I spoke to agreed it was a car-crash and 'put them off' even contemplating it. There is still a massive pan-european ethos among employers nd businesses here, and the people infact. In terms of the working class, well that's a complex one but generally its a much more homogeneous society with, I would say, generally better living conditions than the UK.
I did search on google, out of interest, to see what public opinion was. And this was the first article that came up. Support for the EU highest in....... Portugal, The Netherlands and Ireland. GO figure.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/brexit-eu-survey-italy-ireland-portugal-eurosceptic-poll-a8888126.html
-
Not wanting to start a flame war but maybe some of our brexiteers would like to explain.
-
CiM
Your first sentence trumps EVERY anti-EU argument I've ever heard. I've made this point many times and never had a coherent response from anyone who is against the EU. I'll make it again here.
In living memory, before joining the EU there were civil wars in:
Spain
Croatia
Slovenia
UK
Ireland
There were military dictatorships in:
Spain
Portugal
Greece
Bulgaria
Croatia
Slovenia
Austria
Romania
Portugal
Czechia
Slovakia
Hungary
Estonia
Lithuania
Latvia
Germany
France
Italy
The following countries were invaded by land or attacked by air by other nations.
UK
Greece
Bulgaria
Croatia
Slovenia
Austria
Romania
Portugal
Czechia
Slovakia
Hungary
Estonia
Lithuania
Latvia
Germany
France
Italy
Denmark
Finland
Netherlands
Luxembourg
Belgium
Every single one of those countries has enjoyed unbroken democracy since joining the EU. Not a single one has had an invasion or a civil war start.
It is simply madness to undermine the structure that has played such a role in securing this unprecedented era of European stability. And anyone who rubs their hands at the EU being weakened has no comprehension whatsoever of the massive dangers that history warns us of.
Like I say, over and over again, why do you think Putin wants the EU weakened?
-
How well is Stabber Starmer doing? The Conservatives have increased their popularity and the Labour Party have polled lower than when led by poor old Corbyn.
Poor old Stabber.
-
How well is Stabber Starmer doing? The Conservatives have increased their popularity and the Labour Party have polled lower than when led by poor old Corbyn.
Poor old Stabber.
Polled lower where.
If you’re going to make that claim, please post a link.?
At least explain why you conclude that.?
When others post about Johnson and the government lying, there is some evidence posted to back it up.
-
How well is Stabber Starmer doing?
Poor old Stabber.
This is starting to sound quite childish selby.
-
How well is Stabber Starmer doing?
Poor old Stabber.
This is starting to sound quite childish selby.
It's another right wing sound-bite, designed to appeal to the unimaginative. It appears to have worked in selby's case.
-
It’s about the level of intellect you’d expect.
-
It’s about the level of intellect you’d expect.
And completely ignores the number of times his hero Boris repeatedly plunged a dagger up to the hilt into May's back. In public.
-
How well is Stabber Starmer doing? The Conservatives have increased their popularity and the Labour Party have polled lower than when led by poor old Corbyn.
Poor old Stabber.
That's not what this poll from Wednesday says.
But don't let facts get in the way...
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/keir-starmer-boris-johnson-approval-rating-yougov-opinion-poll-survey-a9511611.html
-
obviously the Poll selby was referring to was one taken of people coming out of conservative central office.
-
obviously the Poll selby was referring to was one taken of people coming out of conservative central office.
With their 3 testing kits in hand
-
Interesting.
https://mobile.twitter.com/MoS_Politics/status/1261765197737361408
The Tory attack dogs are getting their teeth stuck in much earlier than I'd have thought.
This one is devastating. It appears that, through Watergate-standard investigative research, they have found out that Kier Starmer own a field.
Well that's him f**ked then.
Regarding the value of the field, I'm chuffed to bits now because my 30 foot long back garden is presumably worth up to several billion quid if the law is changed to make my garden worth several billion quid.
-
'Led By Donkeys' fits the bill for that one.
-
Why on earth do people read newspapers, (I use that word very loosely), like that. Do they actually get turned on by lies and misinformation? I can't see any other reason! The Brain Dead of Britain get exactly what they deserve!
-
He owns a field which he bought for his elderly parents to fulfil their dreams of rescuing donkeys, what a bas**rd.
-
I was directed to that piece in the Mail by Simon Wren-Lewis. He's been musing on how, over the last decade, parts of the right wing press (and it IS only on the right) have moved from have a political affiliation which colurs their stories (ALL newspapers do that) to out and out direct propaganda.
This is a perfect example. It is a non-story with a headline screaming a line that is pretty much totally fabricated.
It's from the same paper that ran that piece on how Ed Milliband's father, a left wing academic "hated Britain." Of course there was zero evidence for that. What Ralph Milliband railed against was the obscene imbalances of wealth and power in Britain. He loved Britain itself. And the piece of course glossed over the fact that Ralph Milliband had in the 1940s, as an immigrant, enlisted in the Royal Navy and fought for Britain against the very regime that the Kitsons who owned the Mail had supported throughout the 1930s.
But it works. People read that sort of dogshit and repeat it.
-
Love this series of tweets by David Osland:
Why do Tories love grouse moors but hate donkey sanctuaries? Could this have anything to do with the fact that you don't get to shoot the donkeys?
Corbyn had an allotment, Starmer owns ten acres of Surrey. Like it or not, Labour is now the party of the landed interests.
Never forget that in 1649, Gerrard Winstanley and the Diggers began to cultivate the fields of Surrey. That Sir Keir Starmer QC upholds their spirit nearly four centuries later is immensely to his credit.
https://twitter.com/David__Osland/status/1261991983192694789
I mean really. Who looks stupid here, Keir Starmer or the Daily Heil for uncovering that the worst thing he has done in his life is buy a field for his mum to keep donkeys!
-
Excellent tweet from Osland here.
https://mobile.twitter.com/David__Osland/status/1261940236856279040
-
Interesting.
https://mobile.twitter.com/MoS_Politics/status/1261765197737361408
The Tory attack dogs are getting their teeth stuck in much earlier than I'd have thought.
This one is devastating. It appears that, through Watergate-standard investigative research, they have found out that Kier Starmer own a field.
Well that's him f**ked then.
Regarding the value of the field, I'm chuffed to bits now because my 30 foot long back garden is presumably worth up to several billion quid if the law is changed to make my garden worth several billion quid.
Apparently some random bloke has said that if a copy of today's Mail On Sunday just happened to be printed on a copy of the Magna Carta , it would potentially also be worth £10mill.
-
I saw someone else say they have a lottery ticket which is worth up to £50,000,000. I wonder why the Mail isn't reporting THAT?
-
I saw someone else say they have a lottery ticket which is worth up to £50,000,000. I wonder why the Mail isn't reporting THAT?
They would if they knew Starmer had one as well. Just imagine the 'fury' they could pretend was happening if he had more than one!
-
I’m a working class home owner, maybe I’m above my station and should be in a Council House instead
No disrespect to Council House tenants intended*
-
I’m a working class home owner, maybe I’m above my station and should be in a Council House instead
No disrespect to Council House tenants intended*
Then the Mail would say that because there's such a shortage of Council Houses, they're 'potentially' worth millions!
-
Did you know that the owner of the Heil & Heil on Sunday, Viscount Rothermere, owns 4700 acres of land in Wiltshire & Dorset. Some of it held by companies based in off-shore tax havens.
No statistics are available as to how many donkeys the Viscount keeps on this land:
https://twitter.com/guyshrubsole/status/1261958909755080704
-
I’m a working class home owner, maybe I’m above my station and should be in a Council House instead
No disrespect to Council House tenants intended*
No you are the realisation of a thatcherite dream
-
I’m a working class home owner, maybe I’m above my station and should be in a Council House instead
No disrespect to Council House tenants intended*
No you are the realisation of a thatcherite dream
Only if the house he owns used to be a council house.
-
I’m a working class home owner, maybe I’m above my station and should be in a Council House instead
No disrespect to Council House tenants intended*
No you are the realisation of a thatcherite dream
Only if the house he owns used to be a council house.
Fair point
-
I’m a working class home owner, maybe I’m above my station and should be in a Council House instead
No disrespect to Council House tenants intended*
No you are the realisation of a thatcherite dream
It’s already been said, but I’ve clicked reply now, my house has never been a Council House, I also like bacon sandwiches, but don’t let the Mail know 🤪🤪🤪
-
There's a rumour going around that KS is going to offer agistment to johnson's ministry :)
-
How well is Stabber Starmer doing? The Conservatives have increased their popularity and the Labour Party have polled lower than when led by poor old Corbyn.
Poor old Stabber.
Latest polling numbers.
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1262378323105263629
In comparison, at March-April time it was around 54-28. Starmers cut down the gap by 14. All aboard the Starmer Express.
-
How well is Stabber Starmer doing? The Conservatives have increased their popularity and the Labour Party have polled lower than when led by poor old Corbyn.
Poor old Stabber.
Latest polling numbers.
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1262378323105263629
In comparison, at March-April time it was around 54-28. Starmers cut down the gap by 14. All aboard the Starmer Express.
just have to wait 5 years to have another vote
-
How well is Stabber Starmer doing? The Conservatives have increased their popularity and the Labour Party have polled lower than when led by poor old Corbyn.
Poor old Stabber.
Latest polling numbers.
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1262378323105263629
In comparison, at March-April time it was around 54-28. Starmers cut down the gap by 14. All aboard the Starmer Express.
just have to wait 5 years to have another vote
Less than 4 years.
-
How well is Stabber Starmer doing? The Conservatives have increased their popularity and the Labour Party have polled lower than when led by poor old Corbyn.
Poor old Stabber.
Latest polling numbers.
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1262378323105263629
In comparison, at March-April time it was around 54-28. Starmers cut down the gap by 14. All aboard the Starmer Express.
just have to wait 5 years to have another vote
Less than 4 years.
If Parliament runs the full 5 years, it's 4 years 7 months.
-
How well is Stabber Starmer doing? The Conservatives have increased their popularity and the Labour Party have polled lower than when led by poor old Corbyn.
Poor old Stabber.
Latest polling numbers.
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1262378323105263629
In comparison, at March-April time it was around 54-28. Starmers cut down the gap by 14. All aboard the Starmer Express.
just have to wait 5 years to have another vote
Less than 4 years.
If Parliament runs the full 5 years, it's 4 years 7 months.
Plenty of time for loads more incompetence followed by the transparent tissue of lies that ensue, and also plenty of time for the inevitable simmering resentment of the electorate to come to the boil.
-
How well is Stabber Starmer doing? The Conservatives have increased their popularity and the Labour Party have polled lower than when led by poor old Corbyn.
Poor old Stabber.
Latest polling numbers.
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1262378323105263629
In comparison, at March-April time it was around 54-28. Starmers cut down the gap by 14. All aboard the Starmer Express.
just have to wait 5 years to have another vote
Less than 4 years.
If Parliament runs the full 5 years, it's 4 years 7 months.
Plenty of time for loads more incompetence followed by the transparent tissue of lies that ensue, and also plenty of time for the inevitable simmering resentment of the electorate to come to the boil.
you might be right but people were saying that before the last election and the one before that
-
So you think the government and the PM has done well, since the election.?
The coronavirus outbreak would have been difficult for any government - but I would rather see a PM make strong decisions, even if proven later to be wrong, but on the basis of honesty.
-
How well is Stabber Starmer doing? The Conservatives have increased their popularity and the Labour Party have polled lower than when led by poor old Corbyn.
Poor old Stabber.
Latest polling numbers.
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1262378323105263629
In comparison, at March-April time it was around 54-28. Starmers cut down the gap by 14. All aboard the Starmer Express.
just have to wait 5 years to have another vote
Less than 4 years.
If Parliament runs the full 5 years, it's 4 years 7 months.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/inews.co.uk/news/politics/general-election-when-next-uk-date-after-2019-fixed-term-parliament-snap-vote-explained-1338779%3famp
2nd May 2024.
-
How well is Stabber Starmer doing? The Conservatives have increased their popularity and the Labour Party have polled lower than when led by poor old Corbyn.
Poor old Stabber.
Latest polling numbers.
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1262378323105263629
In comparison, at March-April time it was around 54-28. Starmers cut down the gap by 14. All aboard the Starmer Express.
just have to wait 5 years to have another vote
Less than 4 years.
If Parliament runs the full 5 years, it's 4 years 7 months.
Plenty of time for loads more incompetence followed by the transparent tissue of lies that ensue, and also plenty of time for the inevitable simmering resentment of the electorate to come to the boil.
What can the electorate do? There can't be a vote of no confidence to bring about a snap election, because the Tories have an 80 seat majority.
Nothing's going to happen until 2024.
-
It seems to me Rishi Sunak is a shoe-in for next Tory leader. Did some good things with the recovery package, appeals to the tory faux-modern image. It will be after Bojo's next major bluster.
-
Says something though doesn't it.
Sunak correctly implements textbook economic policy as Chancellor and suddenly he's elevated to Next Great Hope of the Tory party.
-
Says something though doesn't it.
Sunak correctly implements textbook economic policy as Chancellor and suddenly he's elevated to Next Great Hope of the Tory party.
Considering the people he's in the midst of, I believe that they're right to think that. No-one else fits the bill.
-
I'm certainly not a Tory or supporter of the Conservative Party but we're stuck with them for the next four years so I'd rather have Sunak running the show than Mr. Johnson.
I'm quietly hoping that Sir Keir's measured, fact and logic based approach has a twofold effect on the governance of the country:
Firstly that the primary purpose of the opposition i.e. holding the incumbent government to account for their actions is fulfilled to a strong enough degree that some of their unscrupulous behaviours are curtailed .
Secondly that some of the more moderate members of the Conservative Party are so keen to distance themselves from the excesses of the Bullingdon Boys that they defect to other parties.
For full disclosure I'm a LD member. In times of crisis I wouldn't expect a minority party to have much influence or coverage but I'm very impressed with Ed Davey so far. I'll also hold my hands up and say I made the wrong call in supporting Jo Swinson over him in the leadership election having not looked into her pretty appalling voting record!
-
Says something though doesn't it.
Sunak correctly implements textbook economic policy as Chancellor and suddenly he's elevated to Next Great Hope of the Tory party.
Considering the people he's in the midst of, I believe that they're right to think that. No-one else fits the bill.
Precisely my point.
Getting the fundamentals right ought to be the most basic of prerequisites to be considered as PM material. Sunak has done that and it has elevated him way above the field. Says all you need to know about the current generation of senior Tory politicians.
Gove
Raab
Patel
Jesus: Those are the best of the rest of the field.
-
I think that if the Lib Dem’s had forged an alliance with Gordon Brown the country would have fared much better and they could have also been more of a political force than they are now.
Nick Clegg has a lot to answer for. He threw away all of the hard work that they put in to get where they were to hold a balance of power.
-
I'm certainly not a Tory or supporter of the Conservative Party but we're stuck with them for the next four years so I'd rather have Sunak running the show than Mr. Johnson.
I'm quietly hoping that Sir Keir's measured, fact and logic based approach has a twofold effect on the governance of the country:
Firstly that the primary purpose of the opposition i.e. holding the incumbent government to account for their actions is fulfilled to a strong enough degree that some of their unscrupulous behaviours are curtailed .
Secondly that some of the more moderate members of the Conservative Party are so keen to distance themselves from the excesses of the Bullingdon Boys that they defect to other parties.
For full disclosure I'm a LD member. In times of crisis I wouldn't expect a minority party to have much influence or coverage but I'm very impressed with Ed Davey so far. I'll also hold my hands up and say I made the wrong call in supporting Jo Swinson over him in the leadership election having not looked into her pretty appalling voting record!
Are you impressed with Ed Davey manipulating the leadership election date to favour himself?
-
For what it's worth I wouldn't have gone into coalition at all. Holding the balance of power on an issue-by-issue basis could have openly curtailed the worst behaviours of the Tories without the need for behind-closed-doors horse trading.
-
Are you impressed with Ed Davey manipulating the leadership election date to favour himself?
Are you insinuating that by delaying until next year with the full backing of the federal board he's favouring himself?
-
For what it's worth I wouldn't have gone into coalition at all. Holding the balance of power on an issue-by-issue basis could have openly curtailed the worst behaviours of the Tories without the need for behind-closed-doors horse trading.
I think that Nick Clegg wanted a presence in the government rather than to just influence policy.
-
Unfortunately I think you're right and for his vanity he sacrificed thirty years' progress.
-
Are you impressed with Ed Davey manipulating the leadership election date to favour himself?
Are you insinuating that by delaying until next year with the full backing of the federal board he's favouring himself?
"Remember the Liberal Democrats? The party has been leaderless ever since Jo Swinson lost her seat last December, less than five months after taking charge - but a bizarre power grab has been under way. A curious pair has assumed the role of "joint acting leader". as half of this duumvirate Sir Edward Davey MP, soundly defeated by Swinson in the last leadership contest, has now actually been in post for longer than she was. Davey shares power with Dr Mark Pack.
As president of the Lib Dems, Pack's role is to uphold the constitution and to chair the party's federal board, on which Davey also sits. Curiously, two weeks after Pack assumed office in January, the board came out for the longest possible timetable for a leadership election, pushing it back until June- even though the party's rulebook envisions a contest lasting 9-13 weeks.
Then the election was delayed again, due to the Covid-19 crisis - fair enough. But Lib Dem members were furious to learn that it had been pushed back over a year: it wouldn't even begin until May 2021, thus extending the Davey-Pack junta from six months to more than 18 months! There was widespread suspicion that Sir Edward was lining himself up to be a shoo-in for the vote, becoming the well-entrenched incumbent with Pack's support.
Things grew even more bizarre when a dissenting member of the federal board, Jo Hayes, complained about the farce. Opposing this, in a long submission on behalf of the board, was...Mark Pack. The result was a formal ruling from barrister Alan Masters (who chairs the party's federal appeals panel) which makes sober reading for Davey and Pack.
While recognising that Covid-19 justified a further delay, Masters concludes: "To suspend the elections to May 2021 cannot be justified. I see no reason why once restrictions cease and it becomes safe to do so, an election cannot be conducted as soon as practical thereafter." Alternately, the party could just quietly drop the 'Democrats' from its name..."
From the current issue of Private Eye.
-
It's a no-lose as far as I'm concerned. A delay due to the pandemic is, as PE states entirely justified. Ok it's a long old delay and I take the point that they're making but one of two things will happen:
Davey in his current "acting" role will do a great job and therefore be a firm favourite to get the post permanently
or
He won't be up to much as an interim and will give himself enough rope to be hanged with
-
It's a no-lose as far as I'm concerned. A delay due to the pandemic is, as PE states entirely justified. Ok it's a long old delay and I take the point that they're making but one of two things will happen:
Davey in his current "acting" role will do a great job and therefore be a firm favourite to get the post permanently
or
He won't be up to much as an interim and will give himself enough rope to be hanged with
So why is Davey prolonging it as much as possible then?
(a) for the good of the party
or
(b) in his own self-interest?
-
Dunno. He's on twitter, why don't you ask him?
-
Dunno. He's on twitter, why don't you ask him?
I don't use twitter. Never will.
-
Lovely. Then your guess is as good as mine.
-
So you think the government and the PM has done well, since the election.?
The coronavirus outbreak would have been difficult for any government - but I would rather see a PM make strong decisions, even if proven later to be wrong, but on the basis of honesty.
on the economic plans the put in place yes I think they have done as well as could be expected, on keeping enough space in hospitals I think they have done pretty well, I think they should have locked down earlier but don’t no exactly what advice they were given, you will always find things they can improve on thou
-
The blame game has begun, this from a Government minister
https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-minister-says-wrong-advice-at-start-of-covid-19-outbreak-could-have-led-to-mistakes-11990896
-
Lovely. Then your guess is as good as mine.
And Private Eye's is better than both of ours.
-
The blame game has begun, this from a Government minister
https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-minister-says-wrong-advice-at-start-of-covid-19-outbreak-could-have-led-to-mistakes-11990896
Completely ignoring that it's the government's responsibility to get all the advise they can and then make the decisions.
And no-one is going to tell me that South Korea's pandemic experience and knowledge of how to manage one properly were kept state secrets and not available to our government.
-
The blame game has begun, this from a Government minister
https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-minister-says-wrong-advice-at-start-of-covid-19-outbreak-could-have-led-to-mistakes-11990896
is it correct or not thou?
-
thou
-
The blame game has begun, this from a Government minister
https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-minister-says-wrong-advice-at-start-of-covid-19-outbreak-could-have-led-to-mistakes-11990896
is it correct or not thou?
Is "it's the government's responsibility to get all the advice they can and then make the decisions." wrong?
-
The blame game has begun, this from a Government minister
https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-minister-says-wrong-advice-at-start-of-covid-19-outbreak-could-have-led-to-mistakes-11990896
is it correct or not thou?
Well it’s from a Government Ministers mouth, so probably no
-
So you think the government and the PM has done well, since the election.?
The coronavirus outbreak would have been difficult for any government - but I would rather see a PM make strong decisions, even if proven later to be wrong, but on the basis of honesty.
on the economic plans the put in place yes I think they have done as well as could be expected, on keeping enough space in hospitals I think they have done pretty well, I think they should have locked down earlier but don’t no exactly what advice they were given, you will always find things they can improve on thou
Bpool.
They kept hospitals below capacity by outsourcing the problem to the care home sector. Where something like 25,000 excess deaths have occurred.
Doesn't that give you, as a pensioner, some concern?
-
The blame game has begun, this from a Government minister
https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-minister-says-wrong-advice-at-start-of-covid-19-outbreak-could-have-led-to-mistakes-11990896
is it correct or not thou?
No. It's not correct. Full stop.
I knew from listening to the radio in early February that without a hard lockdown, we were looking at 250-500,000 deaths by early summer.
It is shocking re-writing of history for a Govt minister to suggest that they weren't advised that that scenario was coming.
She's doing it to con the gullible. It is you choice whether you choose to be gullible enough to be conned.
-
The wriggling has started
-
The blame game has begun, this from a Government minister
https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-minister-says-wrong-advice-at-start-of-covid-19-outbreak-could-have-led-to-mistakes-11990896
is it correct or not thou?
No. It's not correct. Full stop.
I knew from listening to the radio in early February that without a hard lockdown, we were looking at 250-500,000 deaths by early summer.
It is shocking re-writing of history for a Govt minister to suggest that they weren't advised that that scenario was coming.
She's doing it to con the gullible. It is you choice whether you choose to be gullible enough to be conned.
what we need to do is wait until the time is right to have a enquiry and find out exactly what they were advised and by who and then make our minds up rather than just guessing surly that would be the right thing to do
-
Bpool
So you are happy for the people who made the collosal mistakes in Feb that have led to 60,000 deaths continuing to take the decisions on how we come out of lockdown? With no oversight?
-
Are you impressed with Ed Davey manipulating the leadership election date to favour himself?
Are you insinuating that by delaying until next year with the full backing of the federal board he's favouring himself?
"Remember the Liberal Democrats? The party has been leaderless ever since Jo Swinson lost her seat last December, less than five months after taking charge - but a bizarre power grab has been under way. A curious pair has assumed the role of "joint acting leader". as half of this duumvirate Sir Edward Davey MP, soundly defeated by Swinson in the last leadership contest, has now actually been in post for longer than she was. Davey shares power with Dr Mark Pack.
As president of the Lib Dems, Pack's role is to uphold the constitution and to chair the party's federal board, on which Davey also sits. Curiously, two weeks after Pack assumed office in January, the board came out for the longest possible timetable for a leadership election, pushing it back until June- even though the party's rulebook envisions a contest lasting 9-13 weeks.
Then the election was delayed again, due to the Covid-19 crisis - fair enough. But Lib Dem members were furious to learn that it had been pushed back over a year: it wouldn't even begin until May 2021, thus extending the Davey-Pack junta from six months to more than 18 months! There was widespread suspicion that Sir Edward was lining himself up to be a shoo-in for the vote, becoming the well-entrenched incumbent with Pack's support.
Things grew even more bizarre when a dissenting member of the federal board, Jo Hayes, complained about the farce. Opposing this, in a long submission on behalf of the board, was...Mark Pack. The result was a formal ruling from barrister Alan Masters (who chairs the party's federal appeals panel) which makes sober reading for Davey and Pack.
While recognising that Covid-19 justified a further delay, Masters concludes: "To suspend the elections to May 2021 cannot be justified. I see no reason why once restrictions cease and it becomes safe to do so, an election cannot be conducted as soon as practical thereafter." Alternately, the party could just quietly drop the 'Democrats' from its name..."
From the current issue of Private Eye.
“But Lib Dem members were furious”.
Well obviously not all of them because MikeF isn’t furious.
-
Bpool
So you are happy for the people who made the collosal mistakes in Feb that have led to 60,000 deaths continuing to take the decisions on how we come out of lockdown? With no oversight?
no matter what you think bst the government are going to be making the decisions with advice of science and medical experts so if makes no difference who is happy with that really, when they have a inquiry and find out what went wrong and who made what choice and why then I will judge not off bits of information I choose to believe
-
Are you impressed with Ed Davey manipulating the leadership election date to favour himself?
Are you insinuating that by delaying until next year with the full backing of the federal board he's favouring himself?
"Remember the Liberal Democrats? The party has been leaderless ever since Jo Swinson lost her seat last December, less than five months after taking charge - but a bizarre power grab has been under way. A curious pair has assumed the role of "joint acting leader". as half of this duumvirate Sir Edward Davey MP, soundly defeated by Swinson in the last leadership contest, has now actually been in post for longer than she was. Davey shares power with Dr Mark Pack.
As president of the Lib Dems, Pack's role is to uphold the constitution and to chair the party's federal board, on which Davey also sits. Curiously, two weeks after Pack assumed office in January, the board came out for the longest possible timetable for a leadership election, pushing it back until June- even though the party's rulebook envisions a contest lasting 9-13 weeks.
Then the election was delayed again, due to the Covid-19 crisis - fair enough. But Lib Dem members were furious to learn that it had been pushed back over a year: it wouldn't even begin until May 2021, thus extending the Davey-Pack junta from six months to more than 18 months! There was widespread suspicion that Sir Edward was lining himself up to be a shoo-in for the vote, becoming the well-entrenched incumbent with Pack's support.
Things grew even more bizarre when a dissenting member of the federal board, Jo Hayes, complained about the farce. Opposing this, in a long submission on behalf of the board, was...Mark Pack. The result was a formal ruling from barrister Alan Masters (who chairs the party's federal appeals panel) which makes sober reading for Davey and Pack.
While recognising that Covid-19 justified a further delay, Masters concludes: "To suspend the elections to May 2021 cannot be justified. I see no reason why once restrictions cease and it becomes safe to do so, an election cannot be conducted as soon as practical thereafter." Alternately, the party could just quietly drop the 'Democrats' from its name..."
From the current issue of Private Eye.
“But Lib Dem members were furious”.
Well obviously not all of them because MikeF isn’t furious.
It doesn't say all of them.
-
Are you impressed with Ed Davey manipulating the leadership election date to favour himself?
Are you insinuating that by delaying until next year with the full backing of the federal board he's favouring himself?
"Remember the Liberal Democrats? The party has been leaderless ever since Jo Swinson lost her seat last December, less than five months after taking charge - but a bizarre power grab has been under way. A curious pair has assumed the role of "joint acting leader". as half of this duumvirate Sir Edward Davey MP, soundly defeated by Swinson in the last leadership contest, has now actually been in post for longer than she was. Davey shares power with Dr Mark Pack.
As president of the Lib Dems, Pack's role is to uphold the constitution and to chair the party's federal board, on which Davey also sits. Curiously, two weeks after Pack assumed office in January, the board came out for the longest possible timetable for a leadership election, pushing it back until June- even though the party's rulebook envisions a contest lasting 9-13 weeks.
Then the election was delayed again, due to the Covid-19 crisis - fair enough. But Lib Dem members were furious to learn that it had been pushed back over a year: it wouldn't even begin until May 2021, thus extending the Davey-Pack junta from six months to more than 18 months! There was widespread suspicion that Sir Edward was lining himself up to be a shoo-in for the vote, becoming the well-entrenched incumbent with Pack's support.
Things grew even more bizarre when a dissenting member of the federal board, Jo Hayes, complained about the farce. Opposing this, in a long submission on behalf of the board, was...Mark Pack. The result was a formal ruling from barrister Alan Masters (who chairs the party's federal appeals panel) which makes sober reading for Davey and Pack.
While recognising that Covid-19 justified a further delay, Masters concludes: "To suspend the elections to May 2021 cannot be justified. I see no reason why once restrictions cease and it becomes safe to do so, an election cannot be conducted as soon as practical thereafter." Alternately, the party could just quietly drop the 'Democrats' from its name..."
From the current issue of Private Eye.
“But Lib Dem members were furious”.
Well obviously not all of them because MikeF isn’t furious.
It doesn't say all of them.
It doesn’t say some of them either.
-
Are you impressed with Ed Davey manipulating the leadership election date to favour himself?
Are you insinuating that by delaying until next year with the full backing of the federal board he's favouring himself?
"Remember the Liberal Democrats? The party has been leaderless ever since Jo Swinson lost her seat last December, less than five months after taking charge - but a bizarre power grab has been under way. A curious pair has assumed the role of "joint acting leader". as half of this duumvirate Sir Edward Davey MP, soundly defeated by Swinson in the last leadership contest, has now actually been in post for longer than she was. Davey shares power with Dr Mark Pack.
As president of the Lib Dems, Pack's role is to uphold the constitution and to chair the party's federal board, on which Davey also sits. Curiously, two weeks after Pack assumed office in January, the board came out for the longest possible timetable for a leadership election, pushing it back until June- even though the party's rulebook envisions a contest lasting 9-13 weeks.
Then the election was delayed again, due to the Covid-19 crisis - fair enough. But Lib Dem members were furious to learn that it had been pushed back over a year: it wouldn't even begin until May 2021, thus extending the Davey-Pack junta from six months to more than 18 months! There was widespread suspicion that Sir Edward was lining himself up to be a shoo-in for the vote, becoming the well-entrenched incumbent with Pack's support.
Things grew even more bizarre when a dissenting member of the federal board, Jo Hayes, complained about the farce. Opposing this, in a long submission on behalf of the board, was...Mark Pack. The result was a formal ruling from barrister Alan Masters (who chairs the party's federal appeals panel) which makes sober reading for Davey and Pack.
While recognising that Covid-19 justified a further delay, Masters concludes: "To suspend the elections to May 2021 cannot be justified. I see no reason why once restrictions cease and it becomes safe to do so, an election cannot be conducted as soon as practical thereafter." Alternately, the party could just quietly drop the 'Democrats' from its name..."
From the current issue of Private Eye.
“But Lib Dem members were furious”.
Well obviously not all of them because MikeF isn’t furious.
It doesn't say all of them.
It doesn’t say some of them either.
It didn't need to use the word 'some' when it used the words it did.
-
Bpool
So you are happy for the people who made the collosal mistakes in Feb that have led to 60,000 deaths continuing to take the decisions on how we come out of lockdown? With no oversight?
no matter what you think bst the government are going to be making the decisions with advice of science and medical experts so if makes no difference who is happy with that really, when they have a inquiry and find out what went wrong and who made what choice and why then I will judge not off bits of information I choose to believe
What will you do when that enquiry never happens? Just shrug your shoulders and say 'oh well'?
-
It will depend on the outcome of course
-
It will depend on the outcome of course
#
If there's no enquiry, how can there be an outcome?
-
What will you say if it clears the goverment? Say it’s all rubbish and all there fault anyway?
-
Sorry I misread your reply, I’m sure there will be a enquiry afterwards if not it would be a disgrace and I would not vote for them again
-
What will you say if it clears the goverment? Say it’s all rubbish and all there fault anyway?
How can an enquiry that won't happen clear the government?
-
Are you impressed with Ed Davey manipulating the leadership election date to favour himself?
Are you insinuating that by delaying until next year with the full backing of the federal board he's favouring himself?
"Remember the Liberal Democrats? The party has been leaderless ever since Jo Swinson lost her seat last December, less than five months after taking charge - but a bizarre power grab has been under way. A curious pair has assumed the role of "joint acting leader". as half of this duumvirate Sir Edward Davey MP, soundly defeated by Swinson in the last leadership contest, has now actually been in post for longer than she was. Davey shares power with Dr Mark Pack.
As president of the Lib Dems, Pack's role is to uphold the constitution and to chair the party's federal board, on which Davey also sits. Curiously, two weeks after Pack assumed office in January, the board came out for the longest possible timetable for a leadership election, pushing it back until June- even though the party's rulebook envisions a contest lasting 9-13 weeks.
Then the election was delayed again, due to the Covid-19 crisis - fair enough. But Lib Dem members were furious to learn that it had been pushed back over a year: it wouldn't even begin until May 2021, thus extending the Davey-Pack junta from six months to more than 18 months! There was widespread suspicion that Sir Edward was lining himself up to be a shoo-in for the vote, becoming the well-entrenched incumbent with Pack's support.
Things grew even more bizarre when a dissenting member of the federal board, Jo Hayes, complained about the farce. Opposing this, in a long submission on behalf of the board, was...Mark Pack. The result was a formal ruling from barrister Alan Masters (who chairs the party's federal appeals panel) which makes sober reading for Davey and Pack.
While recognising that Covid-19 justified a further delay, Masters concludes: "To suspend the elections to May 2021 cannot be justified. I see no reason why once restrictions cease and it becomes safe to do so, an election cannot be conducted as soon as practical thereafter." Alternately, the party could just quietly drop the 'Democrats' from its name..."
From the current issue of Private Eye.
“But Lib Dem members were furious”.
Well obviously not all of them because MikeF isn’t furious.
It doesn't say all of them.
It doesn’t say some of them either.
It didn't need to use the word 'some' when it used the words it did.
......and as I said, not all the LD members were furious were they.
-
Are you impressed with Ed Davey manipulating the leadership election date to favour himself?
Are you insinuating that by delaying until next year with the full backing of the federal board he's favouring himself?
"Remember the Liberal Democrats? The party has been leaderless ever since Jo Swinson lost her seat last December, less than five months after taking charge - but a bizarre power grab has been under way. A curious pair has assumed the role of "joint acting leader". as half of this duumvirate Sir Edward Davey MP, soundly defeated by Swinson in the last leadership contest, has now actually been in post for longer than she was. Davey shares power with Dr Mark Pack.
As president of the Lib Dems, Pack's role is to uphold the constitution and to chair the party's federal board, on which Davey also sits. Curiously, two weeks after Pack assumed office in January, the board came out for the longest possible timetable for a leadership election, pushing it back until June- even though the party's rulebook envisions a contest lasting 9-13 weeks.
Then the election was delayed again, due to the Covid-19 crisis - fair enough. But Lib Dem members were furious to learn that it had been pushed back over a year: it wouldn't even begin until May 2021, thus extending the Davey-Pack junta from six months to more than 18 months! There was widespread suspicion that Sir Edward was lining himself up to be a shoo-in for the vote, becoming the well-entrenched incumbent with Pack's support.
Things grew even more bizarre when a dissenting member of the federal board, Jo Hayes, complained about the farce. Opposing this, in a long submission on behalf of the board, was...Mark Pack. The result was a formal ruling from barrister Alan Masters (who chairs the party's federal appeals panel) which makes sober reading for Davey and Pack.
While recognising that Covid-19 justified a further delay, Masters concludes: "To suspend the elections to May 2021 cannot be justified. I see no reason why once restrictions cease and it becomes safe to do so, an election cannot be conducted as soon as practical thereafter." Alternately, the party could just quietly drop the 'Democrats' from its name..."
From the current issue of Private Eye.
“But Lib Dem members were furious”.
Well obviously not all of them because MikeF isn’t furious.
It doesn't say all of them.
It doesn’t say some of them either.
It didn't need to use the word 'some' when it used the words it did.
......and as I said, not all the LD members were furious were they.
As the article never said so, and I've never said so either...so what? What difference does your saying that make whatsoever?
-
Are you impressed with Ed Davey manipulating the leadership election date to favour himself?
Are you insinuating that by delaying until next year with the full backing of the federal board he's favouring himself?
"Remember the Liberal Democrats? The party has been leaderless ever since Jo Swinson lost her seat last December, less than five months after taking charge - but a bizarre power grab has been under way. A curious pair has assumed the role of "joint acting leader". as half of this duumvirate Sir Edward Davey MP, soundly defeated by Swinson in the last leadership contest, has now actually been in post for longer than she was. Davey shares power with Dr Mark Pack.
As president of the Lib Dems, Pack's role is to uphold the constitution and to chair the party's federal board, on which Davey also sits. Curiously, two weeks after Pack assumed office in January, the board came out for the longest possible timetable for a leadership election, pushing it back until June- even though the party's rulebook envisions a contest lasting 9-13 weeks.
Then the election was delayed again, due to the Covid-19 crisis - fair enough. But Lib Dem members were furious to learn that it had been pushed back over a year: it wouldn't even begin until May 2021, thus extending the Davey-Pack junta from six months to more than 18 months! There was widespread suspicion that Sir Edward was lining himself up to be a shoo-in for the vote, becoming the well-entrenched incumbent with Pack's support.
Things grew even more bizarre when a dissenting member of the federal board, Jo Hayes, complained about the farce. Opposing this, in a long submission on behalf of the board, was...Mark Pack. The result was a formal ruling from barrister Alan Masters (who chairs the party's federal appeals panel) which makes sober reading for Davey and Pack.
While recognising that Covid-19 justified a further delay, Masters concludes: "To suspend the elections to May 2021 cannot be justified. I see no reason why once restrictions cease and it becomes safe to do so, an election cannot be conducted as soon as practical thereafter." Alternately, the party could just quietly drop the 'Democrats' from its name..."
From the current issue of Private Eye.
“But Lib Dem members were furious”.
Well obviously not all of them because MikeF isn’t furious.
It doesn't say all of them.
It doesn’t say some of them either.
It didn't need to use the word 'some' when it used the words it did.
......and as I said, not all the LD members were furious were they.
As the article never said so, and I've never said so either...so what? What difference does your saying that make whatsoever?
It makes some difference as not all LDs were furious.
Anyway, after your next comment on this you can be declared the winner if you like.
-
Are you impressed with Ed Davey manipulating the leadership election date to favour himself?
Are you insinuating that by delaying until next year with the full backing of the federal board he's favouring himself?
"Remember the Liberal Democrats? The party has been leaderless ever since Jo Swinson lost her seat last December, less than five months after taking charge - but a bizarre power grab has been under way. A curious pair has assumed the role of "joint acting leader". as half of this duumvirate Sir Edward Davey MP, soundly defeated by Swinson in the last leadership contest, has now actually been in post for longer than she was. Davey shares power with Dr Mark Pack.
As president of the Lib Dems, Pack's role is to uphold the constitution and to chair the party's federal board, on which Davey also sits. Curiously, two weeks after Pack assumed office in January, the board came out for the longest possible timetable for a leadership election, pushing it back until June- even though the party's rulebook envisions a contest lasting 9-13 weeks.
Then the election was delayed again, due to the Covid-19 crisis - fair enough. But Lib Dem members were furious to learn that it had been pushed back over a year: it wouldn't even begin until May 2021, thus extending the Davey-Pack junta from six months to more than 18 months! There was widespread suspicion that Sir Edward was lining himself up to be a shoo-in for the vote, becoming the well-entrenched incumbent with Pack's support.
Things grew even more bizarre when a dissenting member of the federal board, Jo Hayes, complained about the farce. Opposing this, in a long submission on behalf of the board, was...Mark Pack. The result was a formal ruling from barrister Alan Masters (who chairs the party's federal appeals panel) which makes sober reading for Davey and Pack.
While recognising that Covid-19 justified a further delay, Masters concludes: "To suspend the elections to May 2021 cannot be justified. I see no reason why once restrictions cease and it becomes safe to do so, an election cannot be conducted as soon as practical thereafter." Alternately, the party could just quietly drop the 'Democrats' from its name..."
From the current issue of Private Eye.
“But Lib Dem members were furious”.
Well obviously not all of them because MikeF isn’t furious.
It doesn't say all of them.
It doesn’t say some of them either.
It didn't need to use the word 'some' when it used the words it did.
......and as I said, not all the LD members were furious were they.
As the article never said so, and I've never said so either...so what? What difference does your saying that make whatsoever?
It makes some difference as not all LDs were furious.
Anyway, after your next comment on this you can be declared the winner if you like.
I genuinely don't know what you're getting at. When the articles says “But Lib Dem members were furious”, does that mean to you:
(a) "No Lib Dem members were furious”
(b) “Some, but not all Lib Dem members were furious”
(c) "All Lib Dem members were furious”
If you don't think it's (a) or (b), then you are in complete agreement with the article and there's no difference at all and I have no idea what point you're trying to make.
-
Bpool
So you are happy for the people who made the collosal mistakes in Feb that have led to 60,000 deaths continuing to take the decisions on how we come out of lockdown? With no oversight?
no matter what you think bst the government are going to be making the decisions with advice of science and medical experts so if makes no difference who is happy with that really, when they have a inquiry and find out what went wrong and who made what choice and why then I will judge not off bits of information I choose to believe
That's absolutely NOT how democratic societies operate. A Government isn't some sort of unassailable Emperor between elections.
We have both the right and a duty to hold them to account. But that doesn't happen if people just shrug their shoulders and ignore mistakes.
-
Bpool
So you are happy for the people who made the collosal mistakes in Feb that have led to 60,000 deaths continuing to take the decisions on how we come out of lockdown? With no oversight?
no matter what you think bst the government are going to be making the decisions with advice of science and medical experts so if makes no difference who is happy with that really, when they have a inquiry and find out what went wrong and who made what choice and why then I will judge not off bits of information I choose to believe
Here's a start for you bkpool.
We know from the released minutes that on 3rd March SAGE believed that covid-19 was in community transmission in the UK and if not halted 250000 to 500000 people could die.
We know that same day Boris Johnson went on tv and said it was OK to keep shaking hands - and he personally had just shaken hands with people that possibly had it.
We know that a full lockdown did not occur until 23rd March.
Those are all facts. Written down (or videoed) and recorded. Johnson and his government chose not to act for 3 weeks.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/29/revealed-the-inside-story-of-uk-covid-19-coronavirus-crisis
https://appeasement.org/
The most worrying bit for me is of course - they are still in place to get the next bit wrong too.
-
What will you say if it clears the goverment? Say it’s all rubbish and all there fault anyway?
Yes. Just like 3 Hillsborough Inquiries cleared the police and football authorities.
Or the Iraq Inquiry cleared Blair.
-
Yes wilts thanks for that, what we need to know is what advice the goverment were given and how why they chose to go down the path they did, did the science people tell the government to lock down earlier or not?
-
Yes wilts thanks for that, what we need to know is what advice the goverment were given and how why they chose to go down the path they did, did the science people tell the government to lock down earlier or not?
It sounds like you think they were only given one lot of advice.
-
No Glynn I have no idea what advice they were given that’s why I will wait and see before judging
-
Bpool
How many times.
SAGE's role was NOT to tell the Govt what lockdown policy to implement. If you don't get that, you will get this wrong permanently.
-
No Glynn I have no idea what advice they were given that’s why I will wait and see before judging
So if the enquiry never happens you're never going to have an opinion.
In the meantime, how many people have to die before you think that it hasn't been handled very well?
-
I answered this one above mate I said if there is not a enquiry it will be a disgrace and will not vote for them again
-
But if the goverment is cleared labour I hope will accept the outcome somehow I very much doubt it thou
-
What could they be “cleared”’of.?
At best, the judgement may read “could and should have done better” and at worst they will be seen as negligent - criminal or not.
But still, the lies, and decisions like no longer comparing deaths internationally as soon as ours became the worst in Europe, won’t have gone away will they.?
You don’t need an enquiry to see those things, do you.?
-
Yes wilts thanks for that, what we need to know is what advice the goverment were given and how why they chose to go down the path they did, did the science people tell the government to lock down earlier or not?
No one can tell the government what to do. They are the government - they are in charge. They decide what to do.
People advise them what the consequences of their actions will be. They do modelling - if you do this, that will happen, if you don't do this that will happen. Thats all SAGE does - provide advice.
COBRA decides. The group that Johnson didn't go to.
But yes you have the right questions. Who made the decisions? Why? And on what evidence?
Sorry I made a slight error on my first post btw. It was not 3rd March that SAGE (and thus the government) first knew about 500000 deaths. It was 11th February.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/why-didn-t-boris-act-sooner-against-coronavirus-
-
The findings of an inquiry may not be particularly good news for the Tory Government and it's possible it may not be for Labour either .
If an subsequent Inquiry does a root and branch it may reveal that in this day and age the NHS is something no government should have to support through taxpayers money and expect it to be fit for purpose .
The Social Care system may also come under scrutiny .
I say this as someone who totally believes in the role of the state and it wouldn't sit right with me but we may also have to prepare for some truths we may not particularly like .
I'm not saying this will be the case but I wouldn't rule it out either .
-
Tyke, we can pay for the NHS from our savings from EU membership. There are no excuses for this government 👍
-
I am sure he will remember this as well at PMQs
Everybody jumped on Govt for promising 100000 tests a day (they havent delivered on that yet) so why did Johnson feel the need to double that by the end of the Month (of May)
Come on SKS - tear him a new one providing a) he turns up and b) answers the questions
Prime Ministers Questions - the most appropriately named part of Parliamentary procedure.
If it were called Prime Ministers Answers (and I mean any PM past or present) it would be a misnomer
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/coronavirus-boris-johnson-test-keir-starmer-downing-street-a9501691.html
-
Tyke, we can pay for the NHS from our savings from EU membership. There are no excuses for this government 👍
£350m a week wasn’t it.? Or was that slogan on the bus a figment of my imagination.?
-
No it was a figment of somebody else's imagination IDM. Or creative accounting.☹️
-
.... yes IDM - you did not imaging the Bus or the amount quoted on it
However as Piers Morgan said yesterday the trouble is B****t resulted in tribalism and that has merely carried forward into this CVirus thing. If you voted Leave to get B****t done you are far more likely to allow lies and subterfuge slide by and if you voted Remain you are likely to be outraged by every word uttered by (what you see as a lying opportunist set of Bs) the Govt
Apart from the last bit in brackets they were all his words - and he personally voted Remain but then supported Leave because he wanted democracy delivered . What he found strange is that people here and in the US are still largely in those 2 camp - so much so that in the US the people wearing Masks are largely split on one side of the Trump debate and those who dont are on the opposite side
Personally if it were left to me I would wear one whether it made me look for or against Trump and thats what he couldnt get - why it had become sectarian. Your life is your life
-
Tyke, we can pay for the NHS from our savings from EU membership. There are no excuses for this government 👍
All I'm saying is that if everything regarding the pandemic is put on the table some of the recommendations that emerge from an Inquiry could be real game changes in how the NHS and Social Care are funded .
Just look at the findings from the Taylor Report and how that changed the way we watch football today as an example .
The expected flogging of the Tory Government may not be quite what you think it maybe .
-
The problem is though that politicians will now tell an outright lie without blinking and then when called to account dodge the issue with no shame.
It is becoming the norm and unfortunately things spread like wildfire now on social media. We are in a world where repeated soundbites and slogans become the gospel to some.
-
Up until a couple of weeks ago I would have barely noticed when PMQs was happening, let alone watched or listened.
However these days it’s a must-watch.
-
Up until a couple of weeks ago I would have barely noticed when PMQs was happening, let alone watched or listened.
However these days it’s a must-watch.
It will be a week today since the PM has been seen or heard from, that was when he’d just been handed his arse on a plate by Starmer
-
I too think Johnson has been conspicuous by his absence. He lit the metaphorical blue touch paper with the clusterf**k broadcast a week last Sunday on easing lockdown, then lied in PMQs on Wednesday.
Giving him some benefit of doubt he is recovering from having the virus, and he has a new born child, so may be limiting what he does.
But this is a national (and global) crisis. Where the f**k is he.?
-
I too think Johnson has been conspicuous by his absence. He lit the metaphorical blue touch paper with the clusterf**k broadcast a week last Sunday on easing lockdown, then lied in PMQs on Wednesday.
Giving him some benefit of doubt he is recovering from having the virus, and he has a new born child, so may be limiting what he does.
But this is a national (and global) crisis. Where the f**k is he.?
And Parliament goes into recess on Thursday for two weeks, if he fails to turn up for PMQ’s today it could be possible he won’t be seen or heard from until June
-
Apparently he IS skipping PMQs today.
It's starting to feel like Moscow c.1983 when they just used to wheel out the President to stand on the ramparts above Red Square for the annual Victory Parade, then you wouldn't see him again for a year.
Yes, I know Johnson has been seriously ill and yes I know he's just become a father for the 5th or 8th time (choose your number - Johnson has led us into an era where objective truth is what you make it) but this has been going on from well before those events.
I wonder if anyone has a record of just how many days he's been seen in public since the Election? It's been five months since then. I bet Johnson's not been seen on more than 50 of those days.
He fancies himself as Churchill. Imagine in 1940 if Churchill had just said to the nation, "I have nothing to offer you."
-
I'd like to know how many PMQs have taken place since Boris became PM, and how many he's actually turned up for.
-
I’d like to know how many answers he has given honestly!
-
Apparently he IS skipping PMQs today.
It's starting to feel like Moscow c.1983 when they just used to wheel out the President to stand on the ramparts above Red Square for the annual Victory Parade, then you wouldn't see him again for a year.
Yes, I know Johnson has been seriously ill and yes I know he's just become a father for the 5th or 8th time (choose your number - Johnson has led us into an era where objective truth is what you make it) but this has been going on from well before those events.
I wonder if anyone has a record of just how many days he's been seen in public since the Election? It's been five months since then. I bet Johnson's not been seen on more than 50 of those days.
He fancies himself as Churchill. Imagine in 1940 if Churchill had just said to the nation, "I have nothing to offer you."
If he’s skipping them it’s a disgrace
I wonder who the lamb to the slaughter will be, Raab? And I bet he’s shitting himself right now
-
As much as I would like to know where he is, maybe he has genuine reasons other than cowardice.?
Remember the outcry when Billy Sharp was missing from our line up on a Saturday and no one knew why at the time.?
Now I am not saying that this is the same now, and I 100% wouldn’t want to use anything associated with a new born baby as a political football, but let’s see what the reason is.?
-
As much as I would like to know where he is, maybe he has genuine reasons other than cowardice.?
Remember the outcry when Billy Sharp was missing from our line up on a Saturday and no one knew why at the time.?
Now I am not saying that this is the same now, and I 100% wouldn’t want to use anything associated with a new born baby as a political football, but let’s see what the reason is.?
my wife having had the virus but now tested negative 2 weeks ago is still quite poorly
Even thou you test negative many people are taking weeks to get back to full fitness
-
Ok so the paper that said Johnson wasn't doing PMQ was wrong.
-
As much as I would like to know where he is, maybe he has genuine reasons other than cowardice.?
Remember the outcry when Billy Sharp was missing from our line up on a Saturday and no one knew why at the time.?
Now I am not saying that this is the same now, and I 100% wouldn’t want to use anything associated with a new born baby as a political football, but let’s see what the reason is.?
my wife having had the virus but now tested negative 2 weeks ago is still quite poorly
Even thou you test negative many people are taking weeks to get back to full fitness
I hope your wife’s recovery continue bpool.
Clearly we have different views on things, but there’s no malice.
-
As much as I would like to know where he is, maybe he has genuine reasons other than cowardice.?
Remember the outcry when Billy Sharp was missing from our line up on a Saturday and no one knew why at the time.?
Now I am not saying that this is the same now, and I 100% wouldn’t want to use anything associated with a new born baby as a political football, but let’s see what the reason is.?
my wife having had the virus but now tested negative 2 weeks ago is still quite poorly
Even thou you test negative many people are taking weeks to get back to full fitness
I hope your wife’s recovery continue bpool.
Clearly we have different views on things, but there’s no malice.
Seconded. Thoughts are with you Bpool.
-
I hope your wife recovers soon and fully bp.
-
Another drubbing for the PM today, and also I think Matt Hancock should watch his tone after being nearly ejected by the speaker
Best wishes for your wifes full recovery bpool
-
yes Hancock certainly got a kick in the nuts from the speaker.
-
I'd like to add my best wishes BP. That's what I like about this forum. We rip shreds off each other but for the main, no one loses sight of the fact we are all human
-
Thank you all for you wishes, I had the virus myself but was lucky only had mild symptoms
-
No Glynn I have no idea what advice they were given that’s why I will wait and see before judging
So if the enquiry never happens you're never going to have an opinion.
In the meantime, how many people have to die before you think that it hasn't been handled very well?
*Inquiry
-
No Glynn I have no idea what advice they were given that’s why I will wait and see before judging
So if the enquiry never happens you're never going to have an opinion.
In the meantime, how many people have to die before you think that it hasn't been handled very well?
*Inquiry
*If you're a Yank.
-
Enquiry: A question or request for information.
Inquiry: A formal investigation.
Edited to correct a typo
-
It looks increasingly bleak for Boris in PMQs. He'll desperately want to avoid them as much as possible, or get his cheerleaders back into parliament.
He made a comment about Stermer today - words to the effect of "his usual clinical dissection of the issue" ... I was waiting for the punch line... but no, he generally meant that as an insult! Imagine that, skills to understand and appropriate an issue are a negative trait in our times!
-
Thank you all for you wishes, I had the virus myself but was lucky only had mild symptoms
All the best to you and your Mrs bkpool
-
It looks increasingly bleak for Boris in PMQs. He'll desperately want to avoid them as much as possible, or get his cheerleaders back into parliament.
He made a comment about Stermer today - words to the effect of "his usual clinical dissection of the issue" ... I was waiting for the punch line... but no, he generally meant that as an insult! Imagine that, skills to understand and appropriate an issue are a negative trait in our times!
Well if Starmer will be 'a girly swot'
-
There was obviously clear instruction to the Tory mob to make some noise and heckle today, even nodding dog Hancock had a go before he had his naughty arse slapped by the speaker, then he just sat there like a 5 year old who had been told he can’t have an ice cream 😀😀
-
Another car crash of a performance from the buffoon , if only he could hide away most of the time and only appear for the good news ........ too bad .
If the Tories thought Corbyn was a gift to them then Johnson under SKS is proving a gift for Labour , unfortunately that's coming via nearly 35k deaths and no doubt thousands more not on figures .
Not what I would have wanted but we are where we are .
Another target for Hancock not to meet in the exchanges I see .
The Tories and their lick spittles are rattled , no doubt about it , SKS is really getting under their skin .
-
There was obviously clear instruction to the Tory mob to make some noise and heckle today, even nodding dog Hancock had a go before he had his naughty arse slapped by the speaker, then he just sat there like a 5 year old who had been told he can’t have an ice cream 😀😀
Have you seen what it was Hancock was supposed to have said? The bloke leading the country's response to coronavirus whose judgement and err, honesty, have been called into questions these past couple of weeks.
What comment did he shout out to help his boss to show how seriously the pair of them are taking their responsibilities and to show the world they are up to the job?
What did Matt Hancock thing was so important the world had to know at PMQ's:
“and you bought your mum a £10m donkey sanctuary, so there”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/may/20/this-time-boris-is-better-prepared-but-the-qc-still-gets-under-his-skin-pmqs-john-crace
How could we have ever doubted a government with this much talent on the front bench eh...
-
From todays PMQ’s
-
And Rees Mogg on the charge to get the braying hordes back into the chamber to support Boris
-
There was obviously clear instruction to the Tory mob to make some noise and heckle today, even nodding dog Hancock had a go before he had his naughty arse slapped by the speaker, then he just sat there like a 5 year old who had been told he can’t have an ice cream 😀😀
Have you seen what it was Hancock was supposed to have said? The bloke leading the country's response to coronavirus whose judgement and err, honesty, have been called into questions these past couple of weeks.
What comment did he shout out to help his boss to show how seriously the pair of them are taking their responsibilities and to show the world they are up to the job?
What did Matt Hancock thing was so important the world had to know at PMQ's:
“and you bought your mum a £10m donkey sanctuary, so there”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/may/20/this-time-boris-is-better-prepared-but-the-qc-still-gets-under-his-skin-pmqs-john-crace
How could we have ever doubted a government with this much talent on the front bench eh...
Lovely man isn't he?
-
Rees-Mogg's big idea to get MPs back? Put each one behind a perspex shield, like the ones in supermarkets. On every side. Including the top. Have a think and see if you can figure out the (literally) fatal flaw in that idea!
And this is the party championing British common sense. Quite literally breathtaking.
https://www.indy100.com/article/jacob-rees-mogg-boris-johnson-parliament-coronavirus-screens-9524276
-
I heard a senior Tory MP on R4 this evening absolutely incandescent about Rees-Mogg's plans.
Apparently, this MP is in a vulnerable group and has to self-isolate. He's been told there are no plans to allow MPs like him who cannot attend a packed chamber, to participate in debates or vote when MPs return after the Whit break.
Regarding the perspex boxes, it doesn't really surprise me. Rees-Mogg is as thick as mince but is one of these toffs who convinces the gullible that he is an intellectual powerhouse, on the basis of his patrician accent and general air of confident superiority. When you actually look at the CONTENT of what he says, as opposed to the STYLE it's almost always stupidly at odds with real world facts.
There's a video of him on YT in which he debates tax policy with an audience of students. In the very first 30 seconds of his oration, he claims that the majority of tax is paid by high rate tax payers (WRONG) and claims as an established fact the Laffer Curve argument (that reducing tax rates results in Govt getting more tax income) which has been comprehensively proven to be untrue over and over again. But he says it SO convincingly. And the comments section has literally thousands of contributions claiming "JRM smacks down uppity lefty students", "JRM demolishes lefty arguments". it is so depressing as we move into the middle part of the 21st century that a no mark with a posh accent can still have parts of the working class doffing their caps and looking at him admiringly.
-
As much as I would like to know where he is, maybe he has genuine reasons other than cowardice.?
Remember the outcry when Billy Sharp was missing from our line up on a Saturday and no one knew why at the time.?
Now I am not saying that this is the same now, and I 100% wouldn’t want to use anything associated with a new born baby as a political football, but let’s see what the reason is.?
my wife having had the virus but now tested negative 2 weeks ago is still quite poorly
Even thou you test negative many people are taking weeks to get back to full fitness
All the best to you and the missus bpoolrover. Hopefully before too long things are back to normal for both of you.
-
As much as I would like to know where he is, maybe he has genuine reasons other than cowardice.?
Remember the outcry when Billy Sharp was missing from our line up on a Saturday and no one knew why at the time.?
Now I am not saying that this is the same now, and I 100% wouldn’t want to use anything associated with a new born baby as a political football, but let’s see what the reason is.?
my wife having had the virus but now tested negative 2 weeks ago is still quite poorly
Even thou you test negative many people are taking weeks to get back to full fitness
Sorry to hear this bpr, hope she's fully recovered soon. Stay safe.
-
From todays PMQ’s
I dont kmow that bloke personally but by god I would not trust him as far as I could throw and egg with the insides removed
Somene said on Twitter he is "exposed" FFS he is more than that.
Totally out of his depth and again as I have said before it is a common trait that most of Johnsons Cabinet share. Rewarded for being yes men and able ONLY to remember 3 word phrases
So heres one for them "Get f****d off"
-
From todays PMQ’s
I dont kmow that bloke personally but by god I would not trust him as far as I could throw and egg with the insides removed
Somene said on Twitter he is "exposed" FFS he is more than that.
Totally out of his depth and again as I have said before it is a common trait that most of Johnsons Cabinet share. Rewarded for being yes men and able ONLY to remember 3 word phrases
So heres one for them "Get f****d off"
I’m not sure if thats a gaze of pure love for his leader, or a look of the lights are on but no ones at home 😂😂😂
-
Starmer certainly has a way at PMQs.
Johnson was in full on bluster mode yesterday saying "By 1 June we will have the world leading track and trace system in place."
Starmer gave him a withering look and said "Nevermind the superlatives. An 'effective' one will do thank you."
It's precisely the response that is required against Johnson's bombastic vacuity. Just keep coming across as the grown up alternative.
-
Must admit Starmer does come across as a grown-up alternative. Corbyn seemed to never grow-up politically wise, what with his 50-year-old ideas that he'd had since he was 20.
-
And now Johnson has caved in (Kier or not) on the fees paid by NHS workers from overseas when / if they need NHS themselves
Common sense - but keep charging those who DONT work for the NHS and just come as health tourists I say
-
Starmer certainly has a way at PMQs.
Johnson was in full on bluster mode yesterday saying "By 1 June we will have the world leading track and trace system in place."
Starmer gave him a withering look and said "Nevermind the superlatives. An 'effective' one will do thank you."
It's precisely the response that is required against Johnson's bombastic vacuity. Just keep coming across as the grown up alternative.
Starmer is very good at pmqs the downside is I’m not sure how many votes it will win labour as at a guess and it is a guess the people who watch pmqs normally no who they will vote for
-
Starmer certainly has a way at PMQs.
Johnson was in full on bluster mode yesterday saying "By 1 June we will have the world leading track and trace system in place."
Starmer gave him a withering look and said "Nevermind the superlatives. An 'effective' one will do thank you."
It's precisely the response that is required against Johnson's bombastic vacuity. Just keep coming across as the grown up alternative.
Starmer is very good at pmqs the downside is I’m not sure how many votes it will win labour as at a guess and it is a guess the people who watch pmqs normally no who they will vote for
Yeah, they'll vote for whoever Murdoch and co feels gonna give them the easiest ride.
-
I think Starmer will have an affect way beyond PMQs - and don’t forget we are not due an election for years. The only way we will have an early election is if enough Tories rebel against the government and it collapses in on itself. This would naturally create plenty of notice and interest in the population as a whole, and Starmer would almost certainly make great use of that.
PMQs now are just the start.
-
Starmer certainly has a way at PMQs.
Johnson was in full on bluster mode yesterday saying "By 1 June we will have the world leading track and trace system in place."
Starmer gave him a withering look and said "Nevermind the superlatives. An 'effective' one will do thank you."
It's precisely the response that is required against Johnson's bombastic vacuity. Just keep coming across as the grown up alternative.
Starmer is very good at pmqs the downside is I’m not sure how many votes it will win labour as at a guess and it is a guess the people who watch pmqs normally no who they will vote for
Yeah, they'll vote for whoever Murdoch and co feels gonna give them the easiest ride.
quite possibly I remember the sun backing labour for many a year and doing the same things to tories as they do labour
-
Starmer certainly has a way at PMQs.
Johnson was in full on bluster mode yesterday saying "By 1 June we will have the world leading track and trace system in place."
Starmer gave him a withering look and said "Nevermind the superlatives. An 'effective' one will do thank you."
It's precisely the response that is required against Johnson's bombastic vacuity. Just keep coming across as the grown up alternative.
Starmer is very good at pmqs the downside is I’m not sure how many votes it will win labour as at a guess and it is a guess the people who watch pmqs normally no who they will vote for
Yeah, they'll vote for whoever Murdoch and co feels gonna give them the easiest ride.
quite possibly I remember the sun backing labour for many a year and doing the same things to tories as they do labour
When they got Blair elected? I'll love the day when newspapers die out. We shouldn't let billionaires decide what happens to our country.
-
Yes, this is what an effective Leader of the Opposition can achieve
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-52761052
-
They backed them since the nineties for around 12 years and slated and made ridiculous claims against the tories and not once did I hear a labour voter moan, so things change no doubt when labour get in or look like they will they will prob turn back to labour
-
Starmer is very good at pmqs the downside is I’m not sure how many votes it will win labour as at a guess and it is a guess the people who watch pmqs normally no who they will vote for
Yes, but do the no how to spell thou though?
Come on bpool, you clearly can spell but you choose consistently to write those two words deliberately wrong. Show a bit of consideration for those who take the trouble to read your posts and stop being bloody lazy.
-
Is that all you have to worry about at the minute?
-
is that your best answer?
-
It's an urban myth that the Sun won it for Blair. Blair was going to win in 97 even if The Sun had "found" pictures of him impaling babies on sticks. What the Syn did was make sure it was allied with the winner.
-
is that your best answer?
its my only answer as not getting into a row over spelling and grammar, might as week go back to the old site and ban people who are not upto a certain standard
-
Performance at PMQs is probably overplayed a bit. The value is in what it can achieve in probing government policy and holding the government to account. This is where Starmer really has excelled. The tone at PMQs has shone the spotlight on the care home failure, brought it into focus, forced promises on testing and tracing that the government is now under pressure to deliver. And now it has has helped to bring about a u-turn in policy that was desperately needed in the interests of fairness and decency. And the pressure to make that specific change now reflects a significant step on the ladder towards changing the whole narrative on immigration.
Well played sir.
-
Hopefully the new speaker will keep the braying masses in check when parliament fully resumes.
-
The Speaker dealt with Hancock brilliantly yesterday. None of Bercow's over the top acting. Just a blunt Lancashire accent, smacking him down, "Do you want to leave the Chamber? We're in maximum numbers and I'd be only too happy."
That's how to deal with stroppy kids.
-
yep I watched it, it's a good sign and hopefully he'll keep the whole lot in check to allow important detail to be debated.
-
Performance at PMQs is probably overplayed a bit. The value is in what it can achieve in probing government policy and holding the government to account. This is where Starmer really has excelled. The tone at PMQs has shone the spotlight on the care home failure, brought it into focus, forced promises on testing and tracing that the government is now under pressure to deliver. And now it has has helped to bring about a u-turn in policy that was desperately needed in the interests of fairness and decency. And the pressure to make that specific change now reflects a significant step on the ladder towards changing the whole narrative on immigration.
Well played sir.
Those two words, Jonathan explain why this government could so easily trip itself up in a way that would have most in the country scratching their heads at its incompetence.
-
Performance at PMQs is probably overplayed a bit. The value is in what it can achieve in probing government policy and holding the government to account. This is where Starmer really has excelled. The tone at PMQs has shone the spotlight on the care home failure, brought it into focus, forced promises on testing and tracing that the government is now under pressure to deliver. And now it has has helped to bring about a u-turn in policy that was desperately needed in the interests of fairness and decency. And the pressure to make that specific change now reflects a significant step on the ladder towards changing the whole narrative on immigration.
Well played sir.
Those two words, Jonathan explain why this government could so easily trip itself up in a way that would have most in the country scratching their heads at its incompetence.
Given that Prime Minister has built his apparent success on standing up as a vociferous force against the principles of fairness and decency, it’s easy to see why they were (to use Michael Gove’s term) a little off beam in the first place.
-
The Speaker dealt with Hancock brilliantly yesterday. None of Bercow's over the top acting. Just a blunt Lancashire accent, smacking him down, "Do you want to leave the Chamber? We're in maximum numbers and I'd be only too happy."
That's how to deal with stroppy kids.
You mean the new speaker who you hope is going to be to the Labour Party what Mike Russell was to Portsmouth FC?
-
Just wondering how the opinion polls for Starmer are going. Anyone know?
https://twitter.com/georgeeaton/status/1264285856677888006
-
Just wondering how the opinion polls for Starmer are going. Anyone know?
https://twitter.com/georgeeaton/status/1264285856677888006
Goodness. That's a remarkable turnaround.
Not only is Starmer mike's ahead in net approval, he's overtaken Johnson on the simple approval score.
Johnson has always been Marmite - high approval AND disapproval. For a brand new leader to overtake him on approval score after just a month in the job is way beyond anything Labour would have dreamed of.
-
Just wondering how the opinion polls for Starmer are going. Anyone know?
https://twitter.com/georgeeaton/status/1264285856677888006
Goodness. That's a remarkable turnaround.
Not only is Starmer mike's ahead in net approval, he's overtaken Johnson on the simple approval score.
Johnson has always been Marmite - high approval AND disapproval. For a brand new leader to overtake him on approval score after just a month in the job is way beyond anything Labour would have dreamed of.
And that was done last week before this current fiasco.
Lets hope the government get this tracking app working soon - then they can use it to find Johnson.
-
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1264297104966586374?s=19
-
Keir Starmer opens up 20 point lead over Johnson in public approval. Including 26% of 2019 Tory voters.
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2020/05/keir-starmer-boris-johnson-approval-pandemic-response
26 points in this poll
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1266419588784406529
-
While good for labour we have been here before in different polls the only result that matters is in the general election, so many times on this forum before the last election we were told the gal is closing and it’s a hung parliament
-
While good for labour we have been here before in different polls the only result that matters is in the general election, so many times on this forum before the last election we were told the gal is closing and it’s a hung parliament
You are totally correct. Feel free to reveal in Cummings & Johnson's victory and tell us how well they are doing any time you like.
I posted a couple of polls because I thought they they were interesting and I was interested.
-
While good for labour we have been here before in different polls the only result that matters is in the general election, so many times on this forum before the last election we were told the gal is closing and it’s a hung parliament
Even the pollsters got a few results spectacularly WRONG recently and they spend millions when in truth as you point out there is just one Poll that matters - the real one
The only one I attach any creedance to are exit Polls which seem to be spectacularly accurate and so at 10.02 on December the 12th I went to bed gutted that Liar Johnson had won a comprehensive victory
-
While good for labour we have been here before in different polls the only result that matters is in the general election, so many times on this forum before the last election we were told the gal is losing and it’s a hung parliament
Generally when labels get stuck on government's they generally stay stuck on .
Remember the early 90's and the sleaze surrounding the Tories , David Mellor and co :lol:
Starmer is playing a cunning strategy , he's not attacking them with opinion he's strangling them with their own words and exposing them as the liars they are .
He's coming across as the credible man in a crisis , calm , assured , intelligent and controlled .
The very type of man who should be leading a country whether that be Tory or Labour .
The electorate are moving towards him by Starmer just being himself .
Exactly the type of man middle England look towards .
The Cummings affair has seriously damaged Johnson amongst first time Tory voters , I was always of the opinion they would be sacrificed anyway and had served their purpose getting him elected .
The Great Brexit Betrayal will finish them off .
My money is on a Labour victory in four years time with a majority of 30 .
-
While good for labour we have been here before in different polls the only result that matters is in the general election, so many times on this forum before the last election we were told the gal is closing and it’s a hung parliament
While many would have taken it as a loss that that johnson put his personal need for cummings over the country's need for integrity the poll above is the real win because if johnson would have fired cummings immediately and there was no change in the polls nothing would have changed, however it has and the opposition and supporters are revitalised.
-
While good for labour we have been here before in different polls the only result that matters is in the general election, so many times on this forum before the last election we were told the gal is closing and it’s a hung parliament
While many would have taken it as a loss that that johnson put his personal need for cummings over the country's need for integrity the poll above is the real win because if johnson would have fired cummings immediately and there was no change in the polls nothing would have changed, however it has and the opposition and supporters are revitalised.
they were revitalised on Election Day and look what happened! So Sydney should corbyn be kicked out of the Labour Party for his actions! Yes or no?
-
What has Corbyn said when asked or interviewed by the police?
-
The mail and the sun did get his side of the story right bp?
-
So iyou and bb have been carrying on like two bob watches and you haven't even got the full story yet?
-
Yes or no Sydney?
-
no until you get the whole story, the photo and statement has to be confirmed by Corbyn and the police, that's only fair, what time is it? :) :)
-
While good for labour we have been here before in different polls the only result that matters is in the general election, so many times on this forum before the last election we were told the gal is closing and it’s a hung parliament
While many would have taken it as a loss that that johnson put his personal need for cummings over the country's need for integrity the poll above is the real win because if johnson would have fired cummings immediately and there was no change in the polls nothing would have changed, however it has and the opposition and supporters are revitalised.
they were revitalised on Election Day and look what happened! So Sydney should corbyn be kicked out of the Labour Party for his actions! Yes or no?
The thing is bpoolrover that since the election the government has been a car crash. They have been arrogant towards the electorate and seem to be making policy up on the hoof.
Labour in contrast now have a leader that looks calm and confident.
How many Tory voters can honestly say that the government led by Boris Johnson have done a good job so far?
His cabinet must also be the worst in the history of parliament. They are a bunch of sycophants and flat track bullies. I would also say this if it was a Labour Party that was so inept.
It is only my opinion of course but it seems to be shared by a growing number of voters. The sad thing is that our country is suffering badly due to their failings. I am no die hard Labour supporter either as I haven't voted for them in the last 20 years.
-
What Starmer has done is to be the grown up since he won the leadership .
Corbyn would have been sucked in by Johnson and gone down the insult route .....
" Part Time PM "
" A government in name only "
" Not fit for purpose "
It all ends in chaos and Johnson gets off the hook .
Starmer is exactly the right leader to oppose Johnson , you couldn't have picked a better man .
The strategy is coming across as the serious politician and the party have recognised the country is sick of the shenanigans in Parliament and general behaviour of politicians today .
The key to keeping this going is to get the rest of the party to behave in a credible and professional manner so the electorate can see for themselves the party is credible and ready for government .
We don't need Jess Philips and her emotional rants or Thornbury making a tyt of herself on QT arguing rather than debating .
There's only one party who own Brexit now , who own the massive recession coming .
If anyone can make a solid case on how this government can steer this ship to calmer waters in the next four years given it's leadership , cabinet , Cummings and what's coming down the road I'd be interested to hear about it .
14 years in power and a shyte show , enough will be enough .
The electorate aren't as stupid as Johnson and Cummings think they are .
-
Starmer comes across as an excellent replacement for Corbyn. It seems that he might be the saviour of the Labour party, and lead it to great unprecedented heights in the not too distant future.
Mind you, when Donny Rovers appointed George Rayner, one of the most successful international football managers ever, who's achievements included taking Sweden to the World Cup final, I thought exactly the same. It was not long after when I realised that no matter how great a newly appointed person is, he will only improve things if he can completely get rid of the people who were still there holding progress back.
-
What Starmer has done is to be the grown up since he won the leadership .
Corbyn would have been sucked in by Johnson and gone down the insult route .....
" Part Time PM "
" A government in name only "
" Not fit for purpose "
It all ends in chaos and Johnson gets off the hook .
Starmer is exactly the right leader to oppose Johnson , you couldn't have picked a better man .
The strategy is coming across as the serious politician and the party have recognised the country is sick of the shenanigans in Parliament and general behaviour of politicians today .
The key to keeping this going is to get the rest of the party to behave in a credible and professional manner so the electorate can see for themselves the party is credible and ready for government .
We don't need Jess Philips and her emotional rants or Thornbury making a tyt of herself on QT arguing rather than debating .
There's only one party who own Brexit now , who own the massive recession coming .
If anyone can make a solid case on how this government can steer this ship to calmer waters in the next four years given it's leadership , cabinet , Cummings and what's coming down the road I'd be interested to hear about it .
14 years in power and a shyte show , enough will be enough .
The electorate aren't as stupid as Johnson and Cummings think they are .
Excellently argued - but I would still have voted for Lisa Nandy. I just think she has that bit more of an emotional cut-through when you hear her speak as against SKS general manager style.
Its good that he put her in a top job in the shadow cabinet. It shows he doesn't fear a potential leadership rival and she can demonstrate to the public if she actually has that leadership potential.
The way things are going I do think people ought to seriously start considering a split in the Tories under this 'leadership'. There is the continually unfolding disaster on their handling of covid-19 and very shortly the choices they have to make regarding Brexit.
The far-right are going to hold him to his promise of a no-deal and the moderates won't be keen on economic disaster.
If SKS can plot his way to a sensible alternative path - who knows where we will be in 6 months.
-
Well Sprotty has said a couple of agreeable political things recently and what with bbs comment above who knows?
-
Average of the last 5 opinion polls before Starmer was elected Labour leader had the Tories 24% ahead.
Four weeks later, the average lead was just under 20%.
Now, four weeks later still, the average lead is 5%.
This sort of movement has never happened in polling history, so soon after an big election victory.
-
There is another striking thing in the polls.
Over the past 8 weeks, the LD+SNP+Green+PC combined share has stayed rock solid at 15-17%.
Labour has gone up from 28% to 38%.
Tories have gone down from 53% to 43%.
The change does not look like voters moving to and from the centre/fringe parties. It looks like support going straight from Con to Lab.
It'd be fascinating to see regional breakdowns. I wonder if the Red Wall voters have had the blinkers taken from their eyes?
-
There is so long till the next election thou,so polls mean much at this stage?
-
As I've been saying for a few days, this is starting to feel like 1992 and Black Wednesday.
When a Govt is suddenly seen as chaotic and incompetent, it's a huge job to change that impression.
Back then, there was a similar collapse in support for the Govt, a bit later after winning an election. And they never got that support back.
When people see their intelligence insulted like Cummings did to them last week, they remember it, if they have any self-respect.
-
This is how things went after the 1992 election.
(http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/images/1997graph2.jpg)
This is what is happening now. And bear in mind that the whole of the graph below would fit into a bit more than half of the first grey block at the left hand side of the graph above.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/27/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election_after_2019_%28LOESS%29.svg/640px-Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election_after_2019_%28LOESS%29.svg.png)
-
There is so long till the next election thou,so polls mean much at this stage?
In normal times they don't but we aren't living in normal times .
Crisis like this affect everyone and the pandemic itself is only half the story , the financial pain hasn't arrived as yet for the majority but it's only a few months away .
Everything is playing out right in front of the electorates eyes , what goes on in parliament hasn't even begun yet .
When the electorate are angry , frustrated and getting sold short it's difficult to change the narrative .
We aren't actually dealing here with world class politicians , far from it .
What we have is a little bald man who thinks he can get the electorate to believe tap water is wine .
He's pulled it off twice but he ain't ever going to be third time lucky .
The electorate know the game now and many I dare say no they've been had , many wouldn't even have known of Cummings , well now they do .
You don't come back from that .
Starmer's landed a couple of punches at best the loss of a 26% lead is totally down to the Tories alone .
Absolutely no way is this Tory government ever going to turn this around with what's coming down the road .
They could even be shades of 97 in four years time , I kid you not and I'm generally a realist .
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/may/30/tory-poll-lead-collapses-as-voters-say-cummings-should-go
-
We will wait and see tyke, many things will happen in the next 5 years there will be many more scandals, if there was a year to go till the election I would agree with you
-
We will wait and see tyke, many things will happen in the next 5 years there will be many more scandals, if there was a year to go till the election I would agree with you
Spot on bp and you are supporting 'scandals R us' we're still awaiting the gov't to release the findings of the russian report and the Acuri investigation has to be completed, you'll be able to ski down johnson's popularity graphs very shortly methinks :)
-
There is so long till the next election thou,so polls mean much at this stage?
Polls might not mean much at this stage but are you telling me that if Labour had lost those percentage points the Conservative party and media wouldn't have trumpeted that it showed a ringing endorsement for government policy?
The power brokers in the Tory party won't stand for this situation for too long.
-
There is so long till the next election thou,so polls mean much at this stage?
People will not forget what an utter shambles this has been.
-
There are a few people who have been highlighted to be connected in the Cummings saga as being outright liars and have been identified as being in the rabble outside his residence causing bother who may find useful employment more difficult to get in future than it has been in their past.
They will be added to the junior minister and quite a few at the BBC and The BBC future funding.
-
What are you talking about Selby.? You need to explain what you mean better..
-
There are a few people who have been highlighted to be connected in the Cummings saga as being outright liars and have been identified as being in the rabble outside his residence causing bother who may find useful employment more difficult to get in future than it has been in their past.
They will be added to the junior minister and quite a few at the BBC and The BBC future funding.
Where have they been highlighted? It must be very public if they've been highlighted as you say.
-
It's quite right to point those polls out, also quite right that it remains to be seen how much will continue to change. Given a lot of things will happen before 2024 a lot will move.
If labour can't do better than last time they should give up though. I like Keir Starmer's approach, if he gets policies right he has a real chance as Boris will struggle to win another election imo, though I doubt he will make it that far.
-
Starmer comes across as an excellent replacement for Corbyn. It seems that he might be the saviour of the Labour party, and lead it to great unprecedented heights in the not too distant future.
Mind you, when Donny Rovers appointed George Rayner, one of the most successful international football managers ever, who's achievements included taking Sweden to the World Cup final, I thought exactly the same. It was not long after when I realised that no matter how great a newly appointed person is, he will only improve things if he can completely get rid of the people who were still there holding progress back.
An interesting take BB and you're entitled to your opinion. There are others on this forum who have taken a different view. In the interests of balance:
From Dutch Uncle on October 24, 2014
It seems George's pattern of non-recognition for his work continued at Rovers since he was the one that put together the side that won the Division 4 title under Laurie McMenemy, who got most of the credit. George was the one I believe who was manager when Rovers made IMHO the best transfer deal of their entire history - the Wilcockson, Clish, Rabjohn + cash exchange for youngsters Leigh and Watson (who returned to Rovers for very little the next season).
An unrecognised true Rovers legend
From AlonzoDrake
I remember 1967/68 vividly Dutch, and I agree that Raynor was not given enough credit for the team he built -- the team that McMenemy inherited and toughened up the following season to take the D4 title.
In 67/68 Raynor had to rebuild a devastated Rovers team. He brought in goalie Gordon Morrit, and put John Flowers in midfield. As well as bartering the deal of the century with Docherty at Rotherham Raynor also signed John Haselden from Rotherham, and brought the skilful Rod Johnson to BV from Leeds. The following season Raynor went to the Fowls and swapped Warboys for Brian Usher, and signed Big John Regan from Crewe. He also brought young Stuart Gray into the Rovers line up -- After Rovers fired McMenemy, he took Gray with him to Grimsby.
Raynor's team made a late push for promotion in 67/68, and then stormed to the top of the table in early 68/69, but Mcmenemy replaced Raynor as manager in November, 1968. George Raynor produced some scintillating Rovers performances, and I particularly recall a 4-3 win over Scunny at BV when 3-1 down, with two cracking goals from King Alick -- who produced some fine performances under Raynor's tutelage.
Many years ago I interviewed Bob Gilfillan for a piece in the Rovers programme, and he stated back then what a great tactician and manager Raynor was. Most have forgotten him, but I never have.
-
Big H, where is there evidence of a different view to mine there? I agree entirely with both posts.
-
Sorry BB. I detected - wrongly it would seem - an inference from your comment that, for all his pedigree, Rayner ultimately failed in his time at Rovers. Which, as others have noted, wasn't the case.
But re-reading your post, if, in essence, you're saying that Starmer will only be as good as the team that he picks to support him then I couldn't agree more. The same could be said of any political leader.
Starmer is rebuilding Labour and his core team. Like Rayner it may well take him a couple of years to come up with a group that can be regarded as an improvement on what went before and a credible force.
-
We can do without Mandelson sticking New Labour labels on SKS thank you very much as I've read this morning .
Mandelson might want to remind himself that New Labour is a fairly toxic brand around certain parts of the country and fell in to Tories hands last December .
I might also like to remind him New Labour are also a two time election loser .
As my old man used to say " non bowlers stay off the green please " .
This is the Labour Party led by Keir Starmer , nothing more and nothing less .
-
I would have preferred Lisa Nandy myself but congratulations to Sir Keir for winning decisively, nice speech too.
https://labourlist.org/2020/04/keir-starmer-elected-to-succeed-jeremy-corbyn-as-labour-leader/
He's a big Arsenal fan, likes his football.
I invited him to a game at the Keepmoat recently when we had a conversation, he said he'd love to come.
SM will you please invite Amanda Staveley to the Keepmoat "after" her case against Barclays .... I am sure with her football interest and the "Doncaster connection" her family would love to "be part of the club" in the future
https://www.drfc-vsc.co.uk/index.php?topic=276676.msg959988#msg959988
-
Sorry BB. I detected - wrongly it would seem - an inference from your comment that, for all his pedigree, Rayner ultimately failed in his time at Rovers. Which, as others have noted, wasn't the case.
But re-reading your post, if, in essence, you're saying that Starmer will only be as good as the team that he picks to support him then I couldn't agree more. The same could be said of any political leader.
Starmer is rebuilding Labour and his core team. Like Rayner it may well take him a couple of years to come up with a group that can be regarded as an improvement on what went before and a credible force.
No prob BigH. Of course, don't forget George Raynor was a well-known coach of high repute for years before he became Rovers manager, whereas 6 months ago many people thought Kier Starmer was a South Korean motor car.
-
when i first saw his name it made me think of "koo stark"
-
when i first saw his name it made me think of "koo stark"
Yeah, she got royally rogered didn’t she.
-
Probably wise if any Tory supporters who are wondering what the current state of the polls are don't click on this link, you might have a shock:
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1269327287452864513
Master strategist Dominic Cummings eh
-
If Starmer keeps going as he is and if labour come up with a good manifesto I’ll be happy to vote labour,Brexit will be done one way or the other and corbyn has gone so happy days
-
As far as the polls go a lot changed since the Cummings saga, since these protests started Cummings has been forget and the anger towards the protesters(who don’t social distance) is growing, many things will change how people say the will vote in the coming years
-
Cummings hasn’t been forgotten. Might not be in the headlines but if you think the issue of how he influences government policy and the lies etc, then you’re mistaken.
-
Only going off social media all the ones who were angry at Cummings are now even more angry at these protests, every post is about them if he is not forgotten the anger has changed
-
Only going off social media all the ones who were angry at Cummings are now even more angry at these protests, every post is about them if he is not forgotten the anger has changed
I'd probably say it's the other way. People who blamed the media for Cummings and said to leave him alone are now the ones who are angry about the protests.
-
Only going off social media all the ones who were angry at Cummings are now even more angry at these protests, every post is about them if he is not forgotten the anger has changed
I'd probably say it's the other way. People who blamed the media for Cummings and said to leave him alone are now the ones who are angry about the protests.
the ones I have seen are the ones who blamed Cummings have now switched there anger to the protests
-
If Starmer keeps going as he is and if labour come up with a good manifesto I’ll be happy to vote labour,Brexit will be done one way or the other and corbyn has gone so happy days
I think you probably speak for a great many people bpool.
There's a lot of Brexit bashing going on in other threads. But it's easy to forget that Corbyn, through his gross incompetence and negligence, did as much as anyone to clear the path for Brexit and the cretins who are running the show now.
-
Only going off social media all the ones who were angry at Cummings are now even more angry at these protests, every post is about them if he is not forgotten the anger has changed
I'd probably say it's the other way. People who blamed the media for Cummings and said to leave him alone are now the ones who are angry about the protests.
the ones I have seen are the ones who blamed Cummings have now switched there anger to the protests
Why do they need to mention Cummings again? They've already said what they feel, posting about something new doesn't alter those feelings - unless they themselves post that they feel differently. Do you think a new post nullifies the previous one?
-
Don’t no on this forum we have around 10 pages on him so keep repeating it must have some effect, and there are another 150plus pages slagging the goverment off so again?
-
If Starmer keeps going as he is and if labour come up with a good manifesto I’ll be happy to vote labour,Brexit will be done one way or the other and corbyn has gone so happy days
I think you probably speak for a great many people bpool.
There's a lot of Brexit bashing going on in other threads. But it's easy to forget that Corbyn, through his gross incompetence and negligence, did as much as anyone to clear the path for Brexit and the cretins who are running the show now.
True - and the irony is he wanted us out while Theresa May (strong and stable Govt) wanted us to stay in
I think that is true and as such neither to my knowledge divulged which way they voted
Still we are out but I dont doubt we will be back at some point in the future - certainly before Rovers make the Prem ;)
-
Don’t no on this forum we have around 10 pages on him so keep repeating it must have some effect, and there are another 150plus pages slagging the goverment off so again?
Both understandable though, aren't they? We live in a time where the government is in charge of our response to a world wide pandemic and we see our country as having one of the highest death/infection rates in the world. If we had a reaction similar to New Zealands and very low death/infection rate then anyone on the opposite side of politics wouldn't have much to say, they'd maybe even praise the response, but unfortunately we have over 60,000 dead. Also, if it was Labour in charge with the same numbers then Labour supporters would struggle to defend that government and you'd get Tory supporters slagging off their response.
The thing with Cummings too is there is MP's and advisors from all parties seem to now have broken lockdown at some point or another, but for me and I assume others, it's a lot worse for someone in the cabinet or one of their advisors, who are all helping to create the rules, to then break said rules. Him being potentially infected with coronavirus at the time obviously play a part as do other conditions but it's a lot of hypocrisy and one rule for them and another for us mentality. It's not to do with him being a Tory, Tory backbenchers have also broken lockdown but they're not the ones at the front of the response being hypocrites.
-
Don’t no on this forum we have around 10 pages on him so keep repeating it must have some effect, and there are another 150plus pages slagging the goverment off so again?
OK, I'll ask it another way. Do you think you posting about one subject on here makes all the posts you've made before about other subjects null and void or would your opinions in those earlier posts still stand?
-
Of course they still stand but you can tell there anger has gone onto something else, it happens all the the time in life
-
Of course they still stand but you can tell there anger has gone onto something else, it happens all the the time in life
You don't know that in the slightest.
-
No glyn it’s a opinion as unless I ask them all that’s all it can be, do you never have opinions or you looking to argue again just like every other time
-
No glyn it’s a opinion as unless I ask them all that’s all it can be, do you never have opinions or you looking to argue again just like every other time
Only with stupid opinions.
PS The use of the description 'stupid' is just in my opinion, of course.
-
13
Off Topic / Re: Coronavirus
« on: June 04, 2020, 02:22:12 PM »
The planning application has been copied all over the place. I saw it a couple of weeks ago, copied and posted. It ain't going to go away. You can’t possibly no that
I saw it with my own eyes, tweeted and retweeted again and again. So I know that. You presumably haven't seen it, so you don't know that.
-
13
Off Topic / Re: Coronavirus
« on: June 04, 2020, 02:22:12 PM »
The planning application has been copied all over the place. I saw it a couple of weeks ago, copied and posted. It ain't going to go away. You can’t possibly no that
Bpool.
You are misinterpreting Glyn's comment. I'd just said that the planning application had been taken off line. Glyn replied that that didn't mean it had been made to go away. He meant the DOCUMENT, not the ISSUE.
-
Thanks bst I only picked the 1st thing I saw
-
9am: Sir Keir Starmer hosts his new LBC phone-in.
Added
He sends his regards to ''all my friends at the forum'' :)
-
13
Off Topic / Re: Coronavirus
« on: June 04, 2020, 02:22:12 PM »
The planning application has been copied all over the place. I saw it a couple of weeks ago, copied and posted. It ain't going to go away. You can’t possibly no that
Bpool.
You are misinterpreting Glyn's comment. I'd just said that the planning application had been taken off line. Glyn replied that that didn't mean it had been made to go away. He meant the DOCUMENT, not the ISSUE.
Indeed. I have the documents downloaded. Be interesting t see if they suddenly get changed once they're officially available again.
-
13
Off Topic / Re: Coronavirus
« on: June 04, 2020, 02:22:12 PM »
The planning application has been copied all over the place. I saw it a couple of weeks ago, copied and posted. It ain't going to go away. You can’t possibly no that
Bpool.
You are misinterpreting Glyn's comment. I'd just said that the planning application had been taken off line. Glyn replied that that didn't mean it had been made to go away. He meant the DOCUMENT, not the ISSUE.
Indeed. I have the documents downloaded. Be interesting t see if they suddenly get changed once they're officially available again.
You don't think they could possibly be given the 'Dom's Blog' treatment?? :ohmy: :ohmy:
-
13
Off Topic / Re: Coronavirus
« on: June 04, 2020, 02:22:12 PM »
The planning application has been copied all over the place. I saw it a couple of weeks ago, copied and posted. It ain't going to go away. You can’t possibly no that
Bpool.
You are misinterpreting Glyn's comment. I'd just said that the planning application had been taken off line. Glyn replied that that didn't mean it had been made to go away. He meant the DOCUMENT, not the ISSUE.
Indeed. I have the documents downloaded. Be interesting t see if they suddenly get changed once they're officially available again.
You don't think they could possibly be given the 'Dom's Blog' treatment?? :ohmy: :ohmy:
Would I suggest such a thing? ;)
-
Well done Keir, I see that much of the Labour defeat was down to your leading the stance on Brexit, and was largely responsible for the defeat in the general election report your party has gone into.
Most of the result can be down to your policies and the fact that Jeremy Corbyn was the party leader.
Well done keep it up
-
meh
-
Well done Keir, I see that much of the Labour defeat was down to your leading the stance on Brexit, and was largely responsible for the defeat in the general election report your party has gone into.
Most of the result can be down to your policies and the fact that Jeremy Corbyn was the party leader.
Well done keep it up
I don't think he posts on here mate.
-
Well done to Starmer for getting rid of long bailey
-
Cumming's has given notice to the Civil Service the day of reckoning is about to come upon them.
The lesson that you have to get rid of your adversary when putting your head above the defences looks as though it is still true in big business. If you fail there will be repercussions.
Hard rain is going to fall.
-
Well done to Starmer for getting rid of long bailey
Quite right, I actually read that article this morning by chance elsewhere and it was ridiculous, I can't believe she's so stupid.
-
He got rid of her within hours, with Jenrick the matter is closed according to No 10, despite the evidence appearing. Quite a difference in approach.
-
because it would cost the Labour Party votes not to get rid of her and now just about all the far left has gone
-
He got rid because she did something wrong, not as as a way to get votes in 4 years time.
-
Ok mate
-
"Corbyn didn't address anti-Semitism because he was weak."
"Starmer only addressed anti-Semitism because it would be popular."
You can just imagine if Starmer was PM and negotiated a peace as we were sliding towards nuclear war. "Well he only did it because he lives in London and they'd be the first to get hit."
-
"Corbyn didn't address anti-Semitism because he was weak."
"Starmer only addressed anti-Semitism because it would be popular."
You can just imagine if Starmer was PM and negotiated a peace as we were sliding towards nuclear war. "Well he only did it because he lives in London and they'd be the first to get hit."
I think and is only think it was a good opportunity to get rid of her and you can’t blame him for that
-
BPool, most of the far left are still there mate, they have gone nowhere and will be regrouping.
-
Been coming for a while now.
Labour ahead in the latest poll.
https://mobile.twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1309930873068945408
They were 25% behind in April when Starmer was elected.
-
If they ever get back in power they should immediately put PR into being in the most democratic "no one can argue with the result type of way"
Then we should have no more extremism on either side
However I feel my opening word "if" is a very big "IF" and I dont think Labour will be elected again unless / until there is a popular "uprising"
-
I'd argue with any form of PR that meant the electorate couldn't vote a particular politician out of Parliament.
-
Been coming for a while now.
Labour ahead in the latest poll.
https://mobile.twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1309930873068945408
They were 25% behind in April when Starmer was elected.
Huge progress under Starmer so well done for that .
The worry is that the gains are purely based on Johnson's failings , a change of Tory leader nullifies the Labour progress .
Some policies anytime soon would give the surge in the polls legs .
In your own time Keir .
-
Tyke.
This absolutely is not the time in the political cycle for detailed policies. It's the time for mood music and setting out broad principles.
That's what Starmer was doing at the Conference. It was obvious to anyone out campaigning and canvassing in the election, or to anyone who has a discussion with people around here that Labour's economic policies were very popular. But people hated Corbyn because he came across as anti-British. I had that said to me time and time again on the doorstep in Stockbridge and Kiveton.
That's precisely why Starmer was making the point in his Conference speech that never again will Labour go into a General Election with the opponent's being able to make the easy accusation that Labour is anti-British.
That approach will upset some on the metropolitan Left but it is vital to winning back the Red Wall seats.
That doesn't need policies though. Not at this stage. It needs the principles to be emphasised.
-
I'd broadly agree with that, BST, but my concern is that it leads them wide open to "Captain Hindsight" jibes. That sort of thing can stick, as the "deficit denier" jibe did with Brown and the bacon sandwich thing (ugh) did with Miliband. I see no reason why Starmer can't stand up for his manifesto promises AND show himself as a safe pair of hands with strong principles. Granted there is only so much media bandwidth he can use, but some reassurance to those on the left who voted for him in droves wouldn't go amiss.
-
Captain Hindsight? It was only the other day that Starmer said there will be more colds and flu over the coming months due to the colder weather. That's not hindsight, that's Nostradamus meets Michael Fish.
-
Been coming for a while now.
Labour ahead in the latest poll.
https://mobile.twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1309930873068945408
They were 25% behind in April when Starmer was elected.
Huge progress under Starmer so well done for that .
The worry is that the gains are purely based on Johnson's failings , a change of Tory leader nullifies the Labour progress .
Some policies anytime soon would give the surge in the polls legs .
In your own time Keir .
He is playing it right at the moment imho
Sit back and let your opponent make all the mistakes - which lets face it they are doing almost daily and "let everyone notice them for themselves"
If he came out and blasted everybody and everything the Tories would be saying " playing Party Politics" with this issue or that proposal - hell they are doing it already and the narrrative (as people always say nowadays) would become the "row" between Johnson and Starmer and NOT the latest failure or U Turn itself
Only snag with my theory is that the current Students and ther parents and those outraged WILL remember how things have panned out and will hold an electoral grudge but 43% of the Electorate voting Tory will like as not produce another comfortable majority of 80 Seats and another 5 more years for them
I
-
It's impossible to tell, polls will change as policies are announced. We should be past covid as a health issue come the next election, Brexit will be a minimal issue and I expect the Tories will look very different. I don't think Boris will fancy a second term either.
On your point DW the shadow health ministers comments on not letting the opportunity go to waste don't help them at the moment (even if politically she is correct). Kier Starmer's biggest issue will be keeping his party together I think.
-
Been coming for a while now.
Labour ahead in the latest poll.
https://mobile.twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1309930873068945408
They were 25% behind in April when Starmer was elected.
Huge progress under Starmer so well done for that .
The worry is that the gains are purely based on Johnson's failings , a change of Tory leader nullifies the Labour progress .
Some policies anytime soon would give the surge in the polls legs .
In your own time Keir .
He is playing it right at the moment imho
Sit back and let your opponent make all the mistakes - which lets face it they are doing almost daily and "let everyone notice them for themselves"
If he came out and blasted everybody and everything the Tories would be saying " playing Party Politics" with this issue or that proposal - hell they are doing it already and the narrrative (as people always say nowadays) would become the "row" between Johnson and Starmer and NOT the latest failure or U Turn itself
Only snag with my theory is that the current Students and ther parents and those outraged WILL remember how things have panned out and will hold an electoral grudge but 43% of the Electorate voting Tory will like as not produce another comfortable majority of 80 Seats and another 5 more years for them
I
Never Interrupt your enemy when he's making a mistake ............... Napoleon
-
That's the one I couldnt have come up with and went with what I had lol
-
Starmer is not letting the grass grow ............
''With Johnson's power ebbing, Labour is right to turn the spotlight on Sunak''
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/oct/01/with-johnsons-power-ebbing-labour-is-right-to-turn-the-spotlight-on-sunak
-
He is costing the movement money from the Unite union, well done some of the Labour movement really are behind you.
-
So you think he should change course and placate them when the polls are improving?
-
He is costing the movement money from the Unite union, well done some of the Labour movement really are behind you.
Maybe he is trying to nick some of Boris' Russian oligarchs? Apparently he has plenty to go round...
-
He needs them on board or to get rid of them out of the party, or they will do for him in the end.
-
Congratulations SKS for yet again failing to get one single , straight, insult free answer during Prime Ministers Question times
I DO wonder what any non UK individuals abroad (or here of course) think to this complete waste of time and energy. The PM whoever it is hardly ever EVER give a straight answer to any question unless it is
a) a plant for him/her to promote the latest buzzwords Build back better now in vogue or
b) a question from as an example today the syncophantic MP for Southend who had a book to plug
c) any question from any other person is ignored - anwered with an insult - and without a straight answer to the question.
So example of b) By Tory MP of Southend
Next month, a book that I have written, called “Ayes and Ears: a Survivor’s Guide to Westminster”, will be published. Part of it covers Brexit—and, yes, by inference, everyone will be in the book. Does my right hon. Friend agree that the last general election was not fought on how political parties might handle the coronavirus pandemic, but was categorically about ensuring that the result of the 2016 referendum is implemented in full? Will he confirm that he intends to see that happen?
Plugging a book and a real chance for Johnson to blow trumpet and in reality for the ordinary man in the street its a nothing answer to a NOTHING question
Johnsons reply
I can indeed. I congratulate my hon. Friend on his new book. I assure him that this country has not only left the European Union, but that on 1 January we will take back full control of our money, our borders and our laws.
Sir Kier Starmer pointing out how unfair some of the lockdowns are and who obviously knew of the Times article I posted somewhere yesterday (it accuses Johnson Sunak and Hancock of NOT enforcing lockdowns in their constituencies when they are worse off statistically than when other places almost all Labour went into lockdown) and I contend WOULD be of interest to the general poulation especially those in Lockdowns everywhere
Question There is a further cause of anger—[Interruption.] Prime Minister, if you actually listen to the question, we might get on better—which is the lack of clarity about why particular restrictions have been introduced. For example, in the Prime Minister’s own local authority of Hillingdon, today there are 62 cases per 100,000, yet no local restrictions, but in 20 local areas across England, restrictions were imposed when infection rates were much lower. In Kirklees, it was just 29 per 100,000. Local communities genuinely do not understand these differences. Can he please explain for them?
Johnsons non answer ? The right hon. and learned Gentleman has heard from me and heard repeatedly from the Government why we are bringing in differentiated local restrictions. I have just given the figures for the north-east and the north-west. I wish I could pretend that everything is going to be rosy in the midlands or, indeed, in London, where alas we are also seeing infections rise, but that is why we need a concerted national effort. We need to follow the guidance. We need “Hands, face, space” and people to get a test if they have symptoms and to obey the rule of six. I think it quite extraordinary that the right hon. and learned Gentleman just said that he personally supports the rule of six while allowing his entire party to abstain.
At least he got Hands Face Space and the Rule of 6 in despite failing to answer the very serious question.
Kirklees 29 cases per 100000 straight into lockdown
Hillingdon today 62 cases per 100000 somehow avoids lockdown as indeed Liar Johnson avoids the question
SO Is there ANY point in this laughing stock of a "set piece" and as I stated at the outset it is ALWAYS like this whicher PM is at the Dispatch Box
-
and don't forget the waste of space speaker. For what use he is we might as well borrow one of the cardboard cutouts from The Emirates stadium and put that in the speakers chair.
-
SKS will be judged on what he does and not the PM. It appears he is laying the ground to vote against the 10pm pub closure which is a really interesting one. Does it work? Probably not. But does voting it down set a precedent and attitude to the population at large that restrictions aren't required? Of course the alternative is to close them completely isn't it? Which is probably what should happen if we are still going with health first, economy second.
-
He needs them on board or to get rid of them out of the party, or they will do for him in the end.
He absolutely doesn't need them on board and neither did Blair if you know Labour's recent history .
McCluskey can go and give his money to some left wing looney tune party if he wants and spend the rest of his days protesting behind the red flag .
As a former trade union man do I like it ?
No I don't but I tell you what I like even less Selby , getting trounced at GE's .
The less the likes of McCluskey are around the Labour Party the more the chance of winning .
Crack on Len .
-
I agree Tyke, he needs to get rid of them before they burrow away and get rid of him, but it will be at a monetary cost and not as easy as people think, and there are more members in the labour party and MP's aligned to McClusky and Co. than people think
-
McCluskey, popular? He can't even win his own union election without nobbling his opponent.
-
So popular, a collosal 5% of Unite members voted for his as leader.
-
But it was a very low turnout.
I guess no one could be bothered to vote against him either.
-
That's kind of the point Hound.
Union leadership elections are stultifyingly boring. But frequently the far Left are very good at organising and winning on tiny turnouts, then getting massively disproportionate leverage over the Labour party. McCluskey spent much of the past 3 years telling Corbyn what policies were and were not acceptable to Unite. After getting elected by 5% of Unite members.
-
Well, if you don’t vote you can’t really complain, don’t you agree?
-
Hound. It's not about whether any individual complains or not. It is the deeply undemocratic nature of the power that is vested in someone who gains their position through such a flawed process. Most union members don't ever even think about their leadership. They aren't interested in the political consequences. They just want the insurance of an organisation on their if the bosses mistreat them. So McCluskey gets huge national power because his people can mobilise a tiny number of members to vote for him. It is manifestly wrong but I don't know how you solve it.
-
In the late 60s I worked at a firm in Donny where one lad became very interested in Union matters. He became a shop steward and was always consulting his rule book. He decided to stand for position at a higher level and asked about eight of us to go to the trades club to support him. His opponent was an old chap that probably expected to get in unopposed. The eight of us were enough to get our lad in and he was a disaster, eventually resigning from his job and the union. That's the danger of low turn outs.
-
CiM
Your first sentence trumps EVERY anti-EU argument I've ever heard. I've made this point many times and never had a coherent response from anyone who is against the EU. I'll make it again here.
In living memory, before joining the EU there were civil wars in:
Spain
Croatia
Slovenia
UK
Ireland
There were military dictatorships in:
Spain
Portugal
Greece
Bulgaria
Croatia
Slovenia
Austria
Romania
Portugal
Czechia
Slovakia
Hungary
Estonia
Lithuania
Latvia
Germany
France
Italy
The following countries were invaded by land or attacked by air by other nations.
UK
Greece
Bulgaria
Croatia
Slovenia
Austria
Romania
Portugal
Czechia
Slovakia
Hungary
Estonia
Lithuania
Latvia
Germany
France
Italy
Denmark
Finland
Netherlands
Luxembourg
Belgium
Every single one of those countries has enjoyed unbroken democracy since joining the EU. Not a single one has had an invasion or a civil war start.
It is simply madness to undermine the structure that has played such a role in securing this unprecedented era of European stability. And anyone who rubs their hands at the EU being weakened has no comprehension whatsoever of the massive dangers that history warns us of.
Like I say, over and over again, why do you think Putin wants the EU weakened?
I've still never heard a sensible answer from a Leave supporter to this argument on the vital importance of the EU.
Go east from the EU. First country you come to is Belarus.
This is what is happening right now to ordinary people in Belarus who have had the gall to protest against the dictator Lukashenko.
https://mobile.twitter.com/nexta_tv/status/1315346386586656769
That is how political protestors against dictators were dealt with in countries throughout Europe within living memory. The EU has been a vital part of making that unthinkable.
Leave supporters say it wouldn't happen anyway these days because times have changed. But that's demonstrably wrong. It IS happening. In Europe. Today. In the first country you get to when you cross the boundary out if the EU.
-
It will be interesting to see how the EU fairs if and when the door is opened to the likes of Albania, Serbia, North Macedonia, Montenegro and (last but not least) Turkey......
-
It will be interesting to see how the EU fairs if and when the door is opened to the likes of Albania, Serbia, North Macedonia, Montenegro and (last but not least) Turkey......
It won't be in my lifetime.
-
It will be interesting to see how the EU fairs if and when the door is opened to the likes of Albania, Serbia, North Macedonia, Montenegro and (last but not least) Turkey......
It won't be in my lifetime.
That's a rather selfish statement! What about our poor kids and Grandkids?
-
It will be interesting to see how the EU fairs if and when the door is opened to the likes of Albania, Serbia, North Macedonia, Montenegro and (last but not least) Turkey......
It won't be in my lifetime.
Although all are 'candidate countries' they and are enjoying billions in funding from the EU in pre-accession funding - as well as other financial assistance direct from the EU purse.
I also know that all 5 of these countries are receiving millions from the EU to support the Covid-19 crisis.
Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosovo are also in the pipeline and already get millions from the in EU in funding and support..
-
It will be interesting to see how the EU fairs if and when the door is opened to the likes of Albania, Serbia, North Macedonia, Montenegro and (last but not least) Turkey......
It won't be in my lifetime.
Although all are 'candidate countries' they and are enjoying billions in funding from the EU in pre-accession funding - as well as other financial assistance direct from the EU purse.
I also know that all 5 of these countries are receiving millions from the EU to support the Covid-19 crisis.
Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosovo are also in the pipeline and already get millions from the in EU in funding and support..
But don't forget our NHS are getting £350m a week when we come out of the EU. I wonder when that will start?
-
He has enough on his plate watching his back with his own pack of wolves in his own back yard at the.
There is nothing wrong with the Labour movement, but a lot wrong with the people in it.
-
Diane Abbott having a pop at old Stabber Starmer, turning the knife around on him. The far left is his big problem.
-
I wouldn't think that many supporters of either party take much notice of her.
She always came across as arrogant and condescending to me.
-
Let's face it nobody takes Abbott seriously. Her and Corbyn were two of the reasons many former traditional Labour voters didn't vote Labour at the last election.
-
It will be interesting to see how the EU fairs if and when the door is opened to the likes of Albania, Serbia, North Macedonia, Montenegro and (last but not least) Turkey......
It won't be in my lifetime.
Although all are 'candidate countries' they and are enjoying billions in funding from the EU in pre-accession funding - as well as other financial assistance direct from the EU purse.
I also know that all 5 of these countries are receiving millions from the EU to support the Covid-19 crisis.
Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosovo are also in the pipeline and already get millions from the in EU in funding and support..
But don't forget our NHS are getting £350m a week when we come out of the EU. I wonder when that will start?
I think the NHS is getting plenty of money considering you can't get to see a doctor, have blood test, dental check up, cancer treatment etc. They should call it the NCS as that seems to be all they are interested in.
-
Rang up last week, same day appt video call to doc and physical visit to nurse - they did say follow up will take a while but not urgent do no complaints
-
Rang up last week, same day appt video call to doc and physical visit to nurse - they did say follow up will take a while but not urgent do no complaints
I would say most people over fifty do not have the facility or now how to do a video call. I wouldn't have a clue where to begin also I have no iPhone or internet at home.
-
Rang up last week, same day appt video call to doc and physical visit to nurse - they did say follow up will take a while but not urgent do no complaints
I would say most people over fifty do not have the facility or now how to do a video call. I wouldn't have a clue where to begin also I have no iPhone or internet at home.
You clearly underestimate lots of people over fifty.
-
Our doctors ate shocking, they’ve even stopped taking prescription requests over the phone, you have to email them in now
-
Let's face it nobody takes Abbott seriously. Her and Corbyn were two of the reasons many former traditional Labour voters didn't vote Labour at the last election.
-
Let's face it nobody takes Abbott seriously. Her and Corbyn were two of the reasons many former traditional Labour voters didn't vote Labour at the last election.
-
Our doctors ate shocking, they’ve even stopped taking prescription requests over the phone, you have to email them in now
You literally cannot get repeat prescriptions from the GP in Wiltshire. It is all done centrally through a prescription ordering service, either online or a long wait on a 0800 number. All part of the privatisation of services - you will get it soon.
-
Rang up last week, same day appt video call to doc and physical visit to nurse - they did say follow up will take a while but not urgent do no complaints
I would say most people over fifty do not have the facility or now how to do a video call. I wouldn't have a clue where to begin also I have no iPhone or internet at home.
Have you got electricity?
-
Wow how much of a coincidence is that. EfD and Janso writing exactly the same quote 30 seconds apart. They must be psychic.
-
Wow how much of a coincidence is that. EfD and Janso writing exactly the same quote 30 seconds apart. They must be psychic.
I thought it a bit weird too. Although the site is playing up a bit on my phone lately.
-
Wow how much of a coincidence is that. EfD and Janso writing exactly the same quote 30 seconds apart. They must be psychic.
I thought it a bit weird too. Although the site is playing up a bit on my phone lately.
I was just being a knob because I'd seen you'd already posted an identical post earlier. :laugh:
-
Our doctors ate shocking, they’ve even stopped taking prescription requests over the phone, you have to email them in now
It's modernisation isn't it? You'd call it shocking I call it brilliant. I press a button on app, a day or so later it notifies me the prescription is done and I collect the medication. It's superb and saves so much time.
-
Our doctors ate shocking, they’ve even stopped taking prescription requests over the phone, you have to email them in now
It's modernisation isn't it? You'd call it shocking I call it brilliant. I press a button on app, a day or so later it notifies me the prescription is done and I collect the medication. It's superb and saves so much time.
But what about the elderly, some don’t have a mobile phone, let alone a smart phone, never sent an email or used the internet
-
Our doctors ate shocking, they’ve even stopped taking prescription requests over the phone, you have to email them in now
It's modernisation isn't it? You'd call it shocking I call it brilliant. I press a button on app, a day or so later it notifies me the prescription is done and I collect the medication. It's superb and saves so much time.
Same here but I don't have to collect my prescriptions. Order them online through the Well app and they take care of the rest including delivery. All free.
-
Our doctors ate shocking, they’ve even stopped taking prescription requests over the phone, you have to email them in now
It's modernisation isn't it? You'd call it shocking I call it brilliant. I press a button on app, a day or so later it notifies me the prescription is done and I collect the medication. It's superb and saves so much time.
But what about the elderly, some don’t have a mobile phone, let alone a smart phone, never sent an email or used the internet
Most if not all pharmacies around Doncaster deliver prescriptions free to older people.
-
Our doctors ate shocking, they’ve even stopped taking prescription requests over the phone, you have to email them in now
It's modernisation isn't it? You'd call it shocking I call it brilliant. I press a button on app, a day or so later it notifies me the prescription is done and I collect the medication. It's superb and saves so much time.
But what about the elderly, some don’t have a mobile phone, let alone a smart phone, never sent an email or used the internet
Everyone has to move with the times no matter what age. My nearly 90 year old grandfather manages. Equally my grandmother also on her own doesn't. What we as a society need to do is find ways to make it work for the elderly. It will not work for all but most can and would be able to manage it.
What I'm sure most offer is the sensible service for the elderly. Mine certainly does and my grandmother has no issues either being able to do it in the old manual way. Modernising for the high % of the population that can actually frees up that resource for those that cannot, which is sensible management of the demand.
-
I'd be sounding Andy Burnham out before too long if this doesn't improve .
https://mobile.twitter.com/SavantaComRes/status/1318936490357948416
-
I'd be sounding Andy Burnham out before too long if this doesn't improve .
https://mobile.twitter.com/SavantaComRes/status/1318936490357948416
Totally agree Tyke. Andy Burnham would be a great Labour leader.
He'd be a man of the people.
-
Will be interesting to see how he deals with this https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54730425
-
Well he's already made a start by suspending Corbyn from the party and withdrawing the whip. What more were you wanting from him?
-
I’ve not said I wanted him to do anything I said it will be interesting to see what he does do, and it’s not just about corbyn it’s about lots of people in the Labour Party, many who post on here denied there was anti semitism in the Labour Party and it was just people inside the Labour Party with a axe to grind, I wonder if there views have changed now?
-
Wow a political leader with a pair of balls. Take note Conservative party members and followers.
-
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-suspended-labour-party-antisemitism-keir-starmer-update-b1422940.html?amp Some uses should take note of kier’s words” anyone dismissing the problem of anti semitism as exaggerated should be nowhere near the Labour Party”
-
If Labour had won the GE and Corbyn was PM would this action have taken place?
-
If Labour had won the GE and Corbyn was PM would this action have taken place?
If Boris Johnson had won the GE would we have a 100% corrupt government? Oh wait a minute. He did and we have.
-
If Labour had won the GE and Corbyn was PM would this action have taken place?
Cant really say - I suspect not but thats just my hunch
Hypothesising has become another tactic with the Virus where Tory Ministers and MPs are now forever saying - well if Corbyn had won god help us he would have done x,y or z and in truth they have no idea whatsoever
I too have no desire for them to speak for me - as in what people are wanting now is an end to this / or that situation when in truth I have not even thought about it - except for thinking what a s**t idea that is
-
If Labour had won the GE and Corbyn was PM would this action have taken place?
If Boris Johnson had won the GE would we have a 100% corrupt government? Oh wait a minute. He did and we have.
It was a reasonable question.
-
If Labour had won the GE and Corbyn was PM would this action have taken place?
If Boris Johnson had won the GE would we have a 100% corrupt government? Oh wait a minute. He did and we have.
It was a reasonable question.
Wasn't it a reasonable answer?
-
If Labour had won the GE and Corbyn was PM would this action have taken place?
Cant really say - I suspect not but thats just my hunch
Hypothesising has become another tactic with the Virus where Tory Ministers and MPs are now forever saying - well if Corbyn had won god help us he would have done x,y or z and in truth they have no idea whatsoever
I too have no desire for them to speak for me - as in what people are wanting now is an end to this / or that situation when in truth I have not even thought about it - except for thinking what a s**t idea that is
I agree Wolfie, probably not.
I guess it would have meant getting rid of the PM.
Should it have been done though under those circumstances?
-
If Labour had won the GE and Corbyn was PM would this action have taken place?
If Boris Johnson had won the GE would we have a 100% corrupt government? Oh wait a minute. He did and we have.
It was a reasonable question.
Wasn't it a reasonable answer?
No because it wasn't an answer to the question I asked.
-
If Labour had won the GE and Corbyn was PM would this action have taken place?
If Boris Johnson had won the GE would we have a 100% corrupt government? Oh wait a minute. He did and we have.
It was a reasonable question.
Wasn't it a reasonable answer?
No because it wasn't an answer to the question I asked.
But the question you asked couldn't have an answer. It was hypothetical. I answered your question the same way the PM answers questions at PMQs
-
If Labour had won the GE and Corbyn was PM would this action have taken place?
If Boris Johnson had won the GE would we have a 100% corrupt government? Oh wait a minute. He did and we have.
It was a reasonable question.
Wasn't it a reasonable answer?
No because it wasn't an answer to the question I asked.
But the question you asked couldn't have an answer. It was hypothetical. I answered your question the same way the PM answers questions at PMQs
Well done.
-
If Labour had won the GE and Corbyn was PM would this action have taken place?
If Boris Johnson had won the GE would we have a 100% corrupt government? Oh wait a minute. He did and we have.
It was a reasonable question.
Wasn't it a reasonable answer?
No because it wasn't an answer to the question I asked.
But the question you asked couldn't have an answer. It was hypothetical. I answered your question the same way the PM answers questions at PMQs
Well done.
I guess we can call that a draw then?
-
If Labour had won the GE and Corbyn was PM would this action have taken place?
If Boris Johnson had won the GE would we have a 100% corrupt government? Oh wait a minute. He did and we have.
It was a reasonable question.
Wasn't it a reasonable answer?
No because it wasn't an answer to the question I asked.
But the question you asked couldn't have an answer. It was hypothetical. I answered your question the same way the PM answers questions at PMQs
Well done.
I guess we can call that a draw then?
If you want to.
I hadn’t realised it was a competition.
-
It's amazing what PMs can ride out once they are PM.
The current one spent a year blocking the publication of a report that accuses his Govt of wilfully turning a blind eye to Russian meddling in our democratic processes.
After he'd broken all security protocols by going on a weekend-long bender at the mansion of an ex-KGB Colonel, while he was Foreign Secretary.
And after all that, he gave a peerage to the ex-KGB colonel's son.
I suspect, if Johnson can ride that out without anyone batting an eyelid, PM Corbyn would have seen this one off.
-
It’s surprising how people are not outraged by what has happened and would rather have a pop at the tories rather than sort there own party out or at least speak out!
-
The statement from Corbyn that led to suspension;
https://twitter.com/michaeljswalker/status/1321806659589689344/photo/1
What's wrong with that?
-
If Labour had won the GE and Corbyn was PM would this action have taken place?
If Boris Johnson had won the GE would we have a 100% corrupt government? Oh wait a minute. He did and we have.
It was a reasonable question.
Wasn't it a reasonable answer?
No because it wasn't an answer to the question I asked.
But the question you asked couldn't have an answer. It was hypothetical. I answered your question the same way the PM answers questions at PMQs
Well done.
I guess we can call that a draw then?
If you want to.
I hadn’t realised it was a competition.
Chill
-
I think the problem albie with corbyn like many of the posters on here is he won’t accept there a problem with anti semitism throughout the Labour Party
-
I think the problem albie with corbyn like many of the posters on here is he won’t accept there a problem with anti semitism throughout the Labour Party
I dislike Corbyn but am at a loss to see how you come to that conclusion based on the above quote Blackpool
-
It’s surprising how people are not outraged by what has happened and would rather have a pop at the tories rather than sort there own party out or at least speak out!
It's also suprising how people will complain about the Labour Party but have nothing to say about Johnson refusing to undertake an inquiry into racisim within the Tory Party that he promised he would.
Or comment about the legal action that has just begun into Johnson refusing to look into Russian interference into the Brexit referendum.
Then again maybe it isn't.
-
I don't think I've seen Bpool ever post so much. You'd almost think he doesn't actually care about Jewish people at all and is happy to use them to bash the lefties.
-
Your probably right Dennis I should have said he won’t accept the level of anti semitism in the Labour Party
-
I think the problem albie with corbyn like many of the posters on here is he won’t accept there a problem with anti semitism throughout the Labour Party
That's twice you have made that claim. You got any evidence to back it up?
-
I don't think I've seen Bpool ever post so much. You'd almost think he doesn't actually care about Jewish people at all and is happy to use them to bash the lefties.
What, the Minister for Whatabouttery? Nah, I doubt it.
-
I don't think I've seen Bpool ever post so much. You'd almost think he doesn't actually care about Jewish people at all and is happy to use them to bash the lefties.
I care about all people so you obviously don’t know me
-
I think the problem albie with corbyn like many of the posters on here is he won’t accept there a problem with anti semitism throughout the Labour Party
That's twice you have made that claim. You got any evidence to back it up?
see above post I amended it
-
The statement from Corbyn that led to suspension;
https://twitter.com/michaeljswalker/status/1321806659589689344/photo/1
What's wrong with that?
It's him doing what he's always done. Giving ammunition to Labour's enemies to fire at Labour, accusing them of downplaying the issue. It's Corbyn through and through. Cocooned in the certainty that he is right, because no-one in his coterie ever tells him he's wrong. And utterly oblivious to how he is seen by the world outside.
-
I think the problem albie with corbyn like many of the posters on here is he won’t accept there a problem with anti semitism throughout the Labour Party
It literally says in his statement "Anyone claiming there is no antisemitism in the Labour Party is wrong. Of course there is"
-
The statement from Corbyn that led to suspension;
https://twitter.com/michaeljswalker/status/1321806659589689344/photo/1
What's wrong with that?
It's him doing what he's always done. Giving ammunition to Labour's enemies to fire at Labour, accusing them of downplaying the issue. It's Corbyn through and through. Cocooned in the certainty that he is right, because no-one in his coterie ever tells him he's wrong. And utterly oblivious to how he is seen by the world outside.
If at work when its been proven to have occurred on your watch you can disagree privately all you want but a bit of public contrition wouldnt go amiss for the good of the firm , if your still brazening it out then somethings got to give , and that will be you !
-
I think the problem albie with corbyn like many of the posters on here is he won’t accept there a problem with anti semitism throughout the Labour Party
It literally says in his statement "Anyone claiming there is no antisemitism in the Labour Party is wrong. Of course there is"
be he also that they are overstated dramatically
-
I don't think I've seen Bpool ever post so much. You'd almost think he doesn't actually care about Jewish people at all and is happy to use them to bash the lefties.
and going off your way of thinking anyone who has a go at the tories for the way they have handled Covid can’t actually care about the people with Covid there just using it to bash the goverment!
-
When Corbyn was the leader Tom Watson wrote an open letter on the subject and organised a meeting in support of MP's outside the House of Commons in support of the Jewish members of the Labour Party.
Only one member of the Labour Party front bench attended the protest, Tom Watson himself, Stabber was nowhere to be seen, probably on a trip to Brussels to see his conniving mates, but certainly keeping his head down so Jeremy didn't see him.
Now front and centre, making a show of false tears.
-
You can’t say that selby bang out of order using the Jewish community to bash the lefties
-
You can’t say that selby bang out of order using the Jewish community to bash the lefties
He'll be really angry when he hears about the politician who called people "bum boys", "letterboxes", and "picaninnies with watermelon smiles".
-
Anyway as kier says it’s a shameful day for the Labour Party
-
Anyway as kier says it’s a shameful day for the Labour Party
Thought you'd move on quick from my post.
-
I don't think I've seen Bpool ever post so much. You'd almost think he doesn't actually care about Jewish people at all and is happy to use them to bash the lefties.
and going off your way of thinking anyone who has a go at the tories for the way they have handled Covid can’t actually care about the people with Covid there just using it to bash the goverment!
Not really. I don't think anyone on here is gleeful about 60,000 dead people. You seem delighted that anti-Semitism exists because it gives you a chance to bash the left. It's not even subtle with you.
Yeah, the left has a problem with anti-Semitism, and a larger problem with people who don't see it (which is probably the category Corbyn falls into), or who don't think it's a problem. That's a sad thing, not something to jump up and down with joy about. I don't take pleasure in the fact that the Tory party has a problem with islamophobia and racism in general, because it makes us all worse off. Interestingly though, I never see you comment on those issues. Must have missed it. After all, you do care about "all people".
-
I'm not sure bringing up how had the other party have acted on things excuses a pretty bad failing does it?
Starmer's actions today are strong as are his words but where was he 12 months ago? Pretty silent. He seems to have a knack of changing tune to suit the way the wind is blowing.
It's a taint on Corbyn. I genuinely doubt he's anti semetic he's just naive and I do to some extent think that he indirectly caused anti semitism in his party to increase and that's sad.
-
I don't think I've seen Bpool ever post so much. You'd almost think he doesn't actually care about Jewish people at all and is happy to use them to bash the lefties.
and going off your way of thinking anyone who has a go at the tories for the way they have handled Covid can’t actually care about the people with Covid there just using it to bash the goverment!
Probably something to do with the fact that they're the government, that people are having a go at them for how they've handled the virus...
-
I'm not sure bringing up how had the other party have acted on things excuses a pretty bad failing does it?
Starmer's actions today are strong as are his words but where was he 12 months ago? Pretty silent. He seems to have a knack of changing tune to suit the way the wind is blowing.
It's a taint on Corbyn. I genuinely doubt he's anti semetic he's just naive and I do to some extent think that he indirectly caused anti semitism in his party to increase and that's sad.
No one's excusing it. We're just highlighting people like Blackpool's hypocrisy.
-
I'm not sure bringing up how had the other party have acted on things excuses a pretty bad failing does it?
Starmer's actions today are strong as are his words but where was he 12 months ago? Pretty silent. He seems to have a knack of changing tune to suit the way the wind is blowing.
It's a taint on Corbyn. I genuinely doubt he's anti semetic he's just naive and I do to some extent think that he indirectly caused anti semitism in his party to increase and that's sad.
No one's excusing it. We're just highlighting people like Blackpool's hypocrisy.
f**k me sideways!
-
I'm not sure bringing up how had the other party have acted on things excuses a pretty bad failing does it?
Starmer's actions today are strong as are his words but where was he 12 months ago? Pretty silent. He seems to have a knack of changing tune to suit the way the wind is blowing.
It's a taint on Corbyn. I genuinely doubt he's anti semetic he's just naive and I do to some extent think that he indirectly caused anti semitism in his party to increase and that's sad.
Waiting for the inquiry to bring down it's findings bfyp, not inreasonable?
-
I'm not sure bringing up how had the other party have acted on things excuses a pretty bad failing does it?
Starmer's actions today are strong as are his words but where was he 12 months ago? Pretty silent. He seems to have a knack of changing tune to suit the way the wind is blowing.
It's a taint on Corbyn. I genuinely doubt he's anti semetic he's just naive and I do to some extent think that he indirectly caused anti semitism in his party to increase and that's sad.
No one's excusing it. We're just highlighting people like Blackpool's hypocrisy.
f**k me sideways!
What's your problem?
-
I try not to get involved in the shite that spouted on this forum much these days, but now and again when the bullshit goes over the scale of tolerance I feel obliged to react. Until I raise my tolerance level even more I guess you can say that's my problem.
-
I try not to get involved in the shite that spouted on this forum much these days, but now and again when the bullshit goes over the scale of tolerance I feel obliged to react. Until I raise my tolerance level even more I guess you can say that's my problem.
So what's the issue with my post please? I'm saying there's an issue with anti-semitism but there also is in other parties and I want Blackpool to accept that as he's the one spouting off the most.
-
The problem is there are half a dozen posters on this forum who have spent the last few years posting link after link of anything anti-government they can find and if anyone puts a link on decrying the Labour party someone claims it is hypocrisy!
-
I suppose it depend on the case some people will argue till the cows come home and never say anything about the tories
-
f**k me sideways!
-
I'm not sure bringing up how had the other party have acted on things excuses a pretty bad failing does it?
Starmer's actions today are strong as are his words but where was he 12 months ago? Pretty silent. He seems to have a knack of changing tune to suit the way the wind is blowing.
It's a taint on Corbyn. I genuinely doubt he's anti semetic he's just naive and I do to some extent think that he indirectly caused anti semitism in his party to increase and that's sad.
Waiting for the inquiry to bring down it's findings bfyp, not inreasonable?
My point is not what he's done since being elected leader but what he did aa a frontbench member under Corbyn which wasn't that much. I'm probably being a bit harsh, had he said more he'd have been out (hello Tom watson).
-
I'm not sure bringing up how had the other party have acted on things excuses a pretty bad failing does it?
Starmer's actions today are strong as are his words but where was he 12 months ago? Pretty silent. He seems to have a knack of changing tune to suit the way the wind is blowing.
It's a taint on Corbyn. I genuinely doubt he's anti semetic he's just naive and I do to some extent think that he indirectly caused anti semitism in his party to increase and that's sad.
Ever heard of the concept of keeping your powder dry?.
What could Starter possibly have done to help eradicate the anti-Semitism problem for Labour, when the party was so tightly controlled by Corbyn and the 4Ms?
What he COULD have done, had he provoked a slanging match with Corbyn, is to have made himself unelectable in the eyes of the Labour membership.
-
Starmer could have been true to himself and voiced an opinion.
If it is as bad as has been suggested then perhaps he would have been supported by others who were against it.
Did Starmer put his ambitions ahead of anything else.
-
I'm not sure bringing up how had the other party have acted on things excuses a pretty bad failing does it?
Starmer's actions today are strong as are his words but where was he 12 months ago? Pretty silent. He seems to have a knack of changing tune to suit the way the wind is blowing.
It's a taint on Corbyn. I genuinely doubt he's anti semetic he's just naive and I do to some extent think that he indirectly caused anti semitism in his party to increase and that's sad.
Ever heard of the concept of keeping your powder dry?.
What could Starter possibly have done to help eradicate the anti-Semitism problem for Labour, when the party was so tightly controlled by Corbyn and the 4Ms?
What he COULD have done, had he provoked a slanging match with Corbyn, is to have made himself unelectable in the eyes of the Labour membership.
I take it you didn't read my other post?
-
Today was classic Corbyn. Hey, there's this really big issue out there but let's ignore that and talk about me. He knows that he let antisemitism loose in the Labour Party through his inept leadership. He just can't face up to the consequences.
In some ways Corbyn has an ego as big as Trump. But in those press interviews he looked like what he is; a pathetic, sad old man who's had his day. The pile on by McCluskey and McDonnell was pathetic too. Like a bunch of grouches in an old folks home.
As far as I'm concerned it should be good riddance and farewell to someone that has singlehandedly done more to keep the Conservatives in power over the past five years than any other politician in the land.
-
Starmer could have been true to himself and voiced an opinion.
If it is as bad as has been suggested then perhaps he would have been supported by others who were against it.
Did Starmer put his ambitions ahead of anything else.
Or his ambition to sort out the unelectable shambles that the Labour party had become by 2019?
If Starmer were in it for Starmer, he could have had a far less stressful and richer life as a QC.
But yeah. I know. They are all in it for what they can get.
-
I'm not sure bringing up how had the other party have acted on things excuses a pretty bad failing does it?
Starmer's actions today are strong as are his words but where was he 12 months ago? Pretty silent. He seems to have a knack of changing tune to suit the way the wind is blowing.
It's a taint on Corbyn. I genuinely doubt he's anti semetic he's just naive and I do to some extent think that he indirectly caused anti semitism in his party to increase and that's sad.
Ever heard of the concept of keeping your powder dry?.
What could Starter possibly have done to help eradicate the anti-Semitism problem for Labour, when the party was so tightly controlled by Corbyn and the 4Ms?
What he COULD have done, had he provoked a slanging match with Corbyn, is to have made himself unelectable in the eyes of the Labour membership.
Starmer could have been true to himself and voiced an opinion.
If it is as bad as has been suggested then perhaps he would have been supported by others who were against it.
Did Starmer put his ambitions ahead of anything else.
Or his ambition to sort out the unelectable shambles that the Labour party had become by 2019?
If Starmer were in it for Starmer, he could have had a far less stressful and richer life as a QC.
But yeah. I know. They are all in it for what they can get.
That is exactly what I keep reading on this forum.
-
No BFYP, I hadn't seen your later post when I replied to you. Agreed.
-
Hound. Not from me you don't.
-
Starmer could have been true to himself and voiced an opinion.
If it is as bad as has been suggested then perhaps he would have been supported by others who were against it.
Did Starmer put his ambitions ahead of anything else.
Or his ambition to sort out the unelectable shambles that the Labour party had become by 2019?
If Starmer were in it for Starmer, he could have had a far less stressful and richer life as a QC.
But yeah. I know. They are all in it for what they can get.
This is a very valid and important point that applies also to other politicians eg rishi sunak. The one it doesn't apply to is the one who has the top job...
-
Oh I dunno BFYP. The current PM used to have a job with the Telegraph which paid him a quarter of a million quid a year for writing the odd article while he was being paid £80k per year as an MP. So clearly they thought he had some worth to them...
Course, he obviously needs that. He's complained recently that the PM's salary isn't enough to get by on.
-
Stabber wouldn't have had time to defend the MP's who were hounded out of the party, in fact one stated today he still has not made any contact with her.
So it's a front damage limitation, probably didn't have time before being in Brussels plotting a couple of back stabbings with his mates.
-
Starmer could have been true to himself and voiced an opinion.
If it is as bad as has been suggested then perhaps he would have been supported by others who were against it.
Did Starmer put his ambitions ahead of anything else.
Its an acceptable rt of Politics these days. Skeletons in everyones cupboard.
Here we have SKS being pilloried for what he didnt do when he had chance. Now he could have been pragmatic / keeping his powder dry until he hopefully in the future COULD do something - which he has now done
Then you could look at Johnson and all the things he did in and out of politics while heading towards his chosen career which included conspiring to beat up a Journo
Its a fact we have to live with here and especially in the USA where potential Presidents will have to watch what they do from Kindergarden right up to the top job in case they ever say or do anything that can and will be held against them in these days of everybody recording everything they hear or see nd they might have pulled somebody elses hair when they were 3
-
Yes Hound the one thing Stabber is true to is Stabber, especially when he sees a chink of light behind someones back.
Definitely a first class diamond face not to be trusted at all.
-
Takes one to know one, eh Selby.?
-
Yes Hound the one thing Stabber is true to is Stabber, especially when he sees a chink of light behind someones back.
Definitely a first class diamond face not to be trusted at all.
When we have the biggest liar ever attempting to run the country (and failing miserably) I don't know how you have the nerve to call KS
-
Always worth considering the input from Tory commentator Peter Oborne;
https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/ehrc-labour-antisemitism-starmer-corbyn-soul
Sometimes you have to look a little further than the news reports!
-
Always worth considering the input from Tory commentator Peter Oborne;
https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/ehrc-labour-antisemitism-starmer-corbyn-soul
Sometimes you have to look a little further than the news reports!
Good old Peter Oborne, slightly to the right of Genghis Khan.
-
EFD,
And what is your comment on the article?
That is the point of posting a link.
-
Albie, you'll be lucky to get anything apart from "but, but the tories...."
-
EFD,
And what is your comment on the article?
That is the point of posting a link.
I haven't read the link therefore I cannot make a comment on its contents. I can comment about Peter Oborne the contributor to the Daily Fail as being extremely right wing however if I wish to.
-
Albie, you'll be lucky to get anything apart from "but, but the tories...."
Ha ha as opposed to "What would Corbyn have done" or "Could Labour have done any better?"
-
Definitely more than a hint of draining the left Labour swamp .
Starmer's had his clause lV opportunity to him handed on a plate and he's taken it .
McCluskey can stamp and scream all he wants , Jon Lansman too but Starmer has now positioned Labour five points ahead of the Tories in the latest polls so you can make of that what you will .
If some left Labour people are collateral damage along the way to rid us of these psychopath's in government then so be it I guess .
Not like we haven't been here before in the mid 90's either and Labour were in sight of putting the Tories out of business altogether .
I'll hold my nose of course at the next election and vote for Starmer , only because I've no fecking choice mind other than put up with this vermin for the rest of my days .
No thanks .
-
Always worth considering the input from Tory commentator Peter Oborne;
https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/ehrc-labour-antisemitism-starmer-corbyn-soul
Sometimes you have to look a little further than the news reports!
Good old Peter Oborne, slightly to the right of Genghis Khan.
It is actually written by Richard Sanders (a Daily Telegraph columnist) and Peter Oborne - so not two people you think would be at all sympathetic to Corbyn. So if they can defend him - then its probably worth the time reading it find out why.
-
Some of the opinions on the news channels last night suggested that Labour could be heading towards an internal civil war.
What a situation. Here we have one of the worst governments for years, making a complete shambles of the pandemic, and yet could still get re-elected in 2024 because of Labour imploding again.
-
Some of the opinions on the news channels last night suggested that Labour could be heading towards an internal civil war.
What a situation. Here we have one of the worst governments for years, making a complete shambles of the pandemic, and yet could still get re-elected in 2024 because of Labour imploding again.
Starmer is caught between a rock and a hard place, if he does nothing, people like Selby will use that as a stick to beat him with, and now he’s taken action people like Selby will use it as a stick to beat him with. Then you have Momentum who’s actions have led to the last two Tory Governments, it’s almost like the far left want a far right Government, happy to make lots of noise without the responsibility
-
I'm not sure why you are scared of Starmer selby, is it his potential success?
-
Some of the opinions on the news channels last night suggested that Labour could be heading towards an internal civil war.
What a situation. Here we have one of the worst governments for years, making a complete shambles of the pandemic, and yet could still get re-elected in 2024 because of Labour imploding again.
I could be wrong but my gut instinct tells me it will blow over in a month .
The left of the Labour Party have very little chips to play with these days .
The party is now firmly in the grip of the centre and it's unlikely anyone will emerge from the left to topple Starmer .
McCluskey can withdraw funding if he wishes but he might like to remind himself that union money comes from the members and not him and they may well support Starmer for all he knows .
The Tory rags will no doubt try and throw fat on the flames but so far as I can see it's over for the left in the Labour Party and the quicker they realise it or feck off to join George Galloway's mob the better the chance we have of defeating this lot in four years time .
-
I'm not sure why you are scared of Starmer selby, is it his potential success?
If Starmer had been leader at the last election I would have voted labour
-
Some of the opinions on the news channels last night suggested that Labour could be heading towards an internal civil war.
What a situation. Here we have one of the worst governments for years, making a complete shambles of the pandemic, and yet could still get re-elected in 2024 because of Labour imploding again.
You have to remember that the vast majority of the media in this country support the Tory party. So any chance to have a go at Labour they will jump at it.
-
Some of the opinions on the news channels last night suggested that Labour could be heading towards an internal civil war.
What a situation. Here we have one of the worst governments for years, making a complete shambles of the pandemic, and yet could still get re-elected in 2024 because of Labour imploding again.
You have to remember that the vast majority of the media in this country support the Tory party. So any chance to have a go at Labour they will jump at it.
All the political discussions I watch on the news channels are well balanced. That's why I watch them.
Then again, it's easy for me to watch them, because having no political leanings means I'm not blinkered.
-
I'm not sure why you are scared of Starmer selby, is it his potential success?
If Starmer had been leader at the last election I would have voted labour
I'm suggesting that's what scares selby
-
Some of the opinions on the news channels last night suggested that Labour could be heading towards an internal civil war.
What a situation. Here we have one of the worst governments for years, making a complete shambles of the pandemic, and yet could still get re-elected in 2024 because of Labour imploding again.
You have to remember that the vast majority of the media in this country support the Tory party. So any chance to have a go at Labour they will jump at it.
I'm onside as long as the polls suggest in Starmer we have a winner .
That's about the total extent of my allegiance to be honest .
The Tory rags can fan the flames all they want , the truth is if they go to work on Starmer its because they are genuinely concerned the Tories won't win the next election .
They won't find the dirt that will stick with Starmer as they found readily available with Corbyn .
Not a fecking chance .
-
I know that other people have more time to watch the news channels (other sources are available) than I have - but am I missing something? Who is it exactly saying there is going to be a 'civil war' in the Labour Party?
I saw Channel 4 News tonight, Kier Starmer was interviewed, he said he doesn't want one. There was a short clip of Len McCluskey, he said he doesn't want one. They said they asked Corbyn and 10 MP's from the socialist group to come on but nobody would - so they clearly don't want one.
This is what John McDonnell has said:
When I stood down as Shadow Chancellor I said I’d try being an “elder statesman.” Well here goes. My advice is that with a bit of explanation over what was meant in various statements we could all save ourselves a lot of unnecessary grief & get on with tackling Covid & job cuts.
https://twitter.com/johnmcdonnellMP/status/1322145199066406914
From what I can see, the only people who want a civil war in the Labour Party are people who are not in the Labour Party.
-
Neville Chamberlain didn’t want one either.
-
Am I right in saying Starmer didn't actually make the decision to suspend JC but agrees with it?
-
That's what he said in the Channel 4 interview raven.
-
Am I right in saying Starmer didn't actually make the decision to suspend JC but agrees with it?
He didn't make the decision on the record , I'll say no more other than he's done very well out of this , probably more than the media realise .
The feckin media never understand Labour politics at the best of times .
Starmer's practically buried the left wing in the Labour Party without having to look for a fight .
Everything is falling his way , from this position as I see it he's the next PM .
And I do mean everything which is under tragic circumstances I have to say .
We aren't talking about a 97 type election by any means but he'll win in four years time .
I'll be ecstatic ....... :thumbsup:
Better than the Tories of course ..... :headbang:
Just about .
-
Even the Adder party lead by S. Baldrick, MP for Dunny on the Wold, would do better than Johnson and his circus clowns..
-
Always worth considering the input from Tory commentator Peter Oborne;
https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/ehrc-labour-antisemitism-starmer-corbyn-soul
Sometimes you have to look a little further than the news reports!
Good old Peter Oborne, slightly to the right of Genghis Khan.
It is actually written by Richard Sanders (a Daily Telegraph columnist) and Peter Oborne - so not two people you think would be at all sympathetic to Corbyn. So if they can defend him - then its probably worth the time reading it find out why.
We don't need to read it to find out why, wilts. They aren't the least bit interested in defending Corbyn, only getting their poison darts into whoever is the current Labour leader.
-
Not sure I agree with that Pies. I have a lot of respect for Oborne as a journalist. And he has written supportively of Corbyn before.
Both authors are very supportive of Corbyn as a campaigner against the Iraq invasion. And I suspect they are instinctively, and genuinely on his side on this issue.
But this is all missing the point. This is about whether Labour are ever going to become electable again. I personally know several people who refused to vote Labour in 2019 because of the anti-Semitism issue and it is a boil that has to be lanced.
Starmer gave Corbyn advance sight of the report before publication and explained how he was going to run the official Labour response. Before he even got a chance to do so, Corbyn rushed out and filmed his own interview, where the take home message was "This is a massively over exaggerated problem used by our enemies to undermine me."
Stupid, petulant, indulgent and pretty well designed to undermine Starmer's action.
And THAT it why it was correct to suspend him.
-
I wonder what our moral guardians in here think about this. Michael Gove playing politics with an issue as serious as anti-Semitism.
https://mobile.twitter.com/michaelgove/status/1321871058568359945
-
I wonder what our moral guardians in here think about this. Michael Gove playing politics with an issue as serious as anti-Semitism.
https://mobile.twitter.com/michaelgove/status/1321871058568359945
Just mention Windrush and Teresa May , they tend to go remarkably quiet do that lot when you do .
-
I wonder what our moral guardians in here think about this. Michael Gove playing politics with an issue as serious as anti-Semitism.
https://mobile.twitter.com/michaelgove/status/1321871058568359945
Saw that the other day, really don't like it. Sums Gove up. A highly intelligent man but who is he playing to with that...
-
If I were Starmer I'd write back telling him to Foxtrot Oscar.
-
I wonder what our moral guardians in here think about this. Michael Gove playing politics with an issue as serious as anti-Semitism.
https://mobile.twitter.com/michaelgove/status/1321871058568359945
Saw that the other day, really don't like it. Sums Gove up. A highly intelligent man but who is he playing to with that...
He did tell the truth once when he said "Johnson is not the right man for the Prime Ministers job"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfWYhJyGsPU
4 minutes of self promotion but just cut to 35 seconds onwards
-
Just watched SKS wipe the floor with the totally useless Andrew Marr. Those passing the the infection on most at the moment are secondary school pupils so why aren't we testing them regularly whilst keeping the schools open.
Did Marr ask the equally useless Gove about Test, Track and Trace? I think you can guess the answer.
-
I actually watched the Marr programme this morning.
As much as I like the way Starmer speaks he did the classic avoid answering questions thing that ALL politicians do.
Yes he did bang on about TT and keeping schools open but he was far too evasive on answering some of the stuff that Marr put to him.
-
Hound.
I'm not sure which questions you think he avoided. I've just watched and it seemed to me he answered everything asked.
On TTTI, yes, of course he was "banging on" about it. Because, as every expert has been saying for months, getting that right is crucial. And we have failed shambolically so far.
There are three ways forward from here.
1) Let the virus rip. See 150k deaths minimum over the winter.
2) Have stop-start lockdown-reopenung cycles. Minimise the deaths but create a lot of economic havoc.
3) Get TTTI working so we can properly control the spread without locking down the entire country.
Option 3 is the no brained. But given the shocking track record to date of the Govt on that, an Opposition would be failing in its duty to the nation if it didn't focus attention relentlessly in that issue now.
-
I actually watched the Marr programme this morning.
As much as I like the way Starmer speaks he did the classic avoid answering questions thing that ALL politicians do.
Yes he did bang on about TT and keeping schools open but he was far too evasive on answering some of the stuff that Marr put to him.
You must have seen something different to me. Tell me one question he avoided?
-
Starmer appeared on Marr today supporting Boris to keep schools (and colleges) open.
This is directly against the evidence of the education sector as a route vector for the virus.
So yeah...lets have a belated lockdown after the event, but keep a primary transmission route wide open!
At least Burnham has had the nads to call this out today.
-
I actually watched the Marr programme this morning.
As much as I like the way Starmer speaks he did the classic avoid answering questions thing that ALL politicians do.
Yes he did bang on about TT and keeping schools open but he was far too evasive on answering some of the stuff that Marr put to him.
I haven't yet seen it, going to watch the repeat at 7.00pm (please don't give the ending away) - which questions do you not think he answers please hound? I will then watch out for them.
-
Starmer appeared on Marr today supporting Boris to keep schools (and colleges) open.
This is directly against the evidence of the education sector as a route vector for the virus.
So yeah...lets have a belated lockdown after the event, but keep a primary transmission route wide open!
At least Burnham has had the nads to call this out today.
I think most parents would prefer their kids to be at school getting an education and vital skills at the right time or life. It's hugely dangerous for society in the long term to stop this.
-
Absolutely with you on that BFYP. And the kids who will suffer most from school closures are the very poorest. It's the thing that most worries me about the first lockdown.
-
I agree most parents want the kids at school, and that it is the best thing long term.
Unfortunately, the data does not support that position.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/923668/Weekly_COVID19_Surveillance_Report_week_40.pdf
Check p.16 to 19 inclusive.
It shows that education is much more important than bars/hospitality, for example.
-
What seems to have been missed is that Starmer also said that every school pupil should be tested weekly.
Because that is how you keep places open, get fans back in stadiums etc. Find out who has the virus and tell them to stay at home.
The question (both for Starmer and the government) is that if the government is unable to test pupils weekly - should schools stay open?
-
Absolutely with you on that BFYP. And the kids who will suffer most from school closures are the very poorest. It's the thing that most worries me about the first lockdown.
Maybe the promise of Laptops will be brought up again - and statements saying 200.000 a day - thats how many we are distributing
-
Wilts,
Trouble is T+T is a complete disaster.
See the piece from the Sunday Times I posted in the T+T thread.
Starmer said that the lockdown this time should mean the Gov got on top of this, but we know that this is in the hands of Dido and Serco.
Now unless they sack the above incompetents, and re-purpose funds to local agencies, I can't see how this improvement will come about.
If the purpose of a lockdown is to drive down the R number to the max, you simply cannot ignore the sector that contributes over 30% to the cluster outbreaks.
That is just how it is, despite everyone wanting kids to get the best education possible.
-
Difficult decisions to make.
-
No not test and trace Albie.
A completely new programme to test EVERY schoolchild weekly and those who are positive stay at home.
The purpose of lockdown should be to drive R below 1 - and set up the systems required to keep it below 1 - or it will go straight back above 1 once lockdown is relaxed.
-
Sorry Wilts, bur Starmer did say Test and Trace to be ramped up.
I agree with that, but how and by whom?
He also said weekly testing should be in schools, but who is supposed to be doing this?
The problem is Gov are trapped inside the defence of their own mistakes.
They believe in the use of private providers who have shown themselves not up to the job.
Pride will get in the way of an effective policy change.
What about Further Education and Universities?
I agree with the National Education Union;
https://actionnetwork.org/forms/close-schools-and-colleges-now
-
Albie
I believe Tobias Ellwood (a Tory MP) has been giving interviews today saying the government should be put on a 'warfooting' to tackle covid-19. We were saying that right at the beginning of this crises - because that is how you deal with major crises.
People who know what they are doing should be doing this. Not outsouring and managment consultancy companies in programmes led by people whose only qualification is who they are married to or went to school with.
The Army. Leading scientists. Local NHS & Public Health teams. The millions of people who are on furlough or have losts their jobs.
People who know what they are doing.
All Starmer can do is point out these things need doing. It's up to the government to get them done - but I think there is more chance of me and you doing them than that happening.
-
Sorry Wilts, bur Starmer did say Test and Trace to be ramped up.
I agree with that, but how and by whom?
He also said weekly testing should be in schools, but who is supposed to be doing this?
The problem is Gov are trapped inside the defence of their own mistakes.
They believe in the use of private providers who have shown themselves not up to the job.
Pride will get in the way of an effective policy change.
What about Further Education and Universities?
I agree with the National Education Union;
https://actionnetwork.org/forms/close-schools-and-colleges-now
There is little alternative to what we have. Even if there was it's still the same people doing the same tests in a different uniform.
-
Not sure about there being no alternative, BFYP.
Local networks have a much better record at this stuff, but the resources have been given to Serco.
The point about testing at schools is that it would need to be integrated with T+T.
The info needs to be interconnected so any pupil with a positive is followed up with family and contacts.
The worst thing would be set up parallel processes that do not speak to each other.
So any school system relies upon T+T being fit for purpose.
No-one thinks it is at present.
-
BFYP.
It's not about who does the tests.
It's about what happens afterwards.
We have a genuinely world class system of tracing and isolation devolved down to local authorities. It worked superbly in Salisbury after the Novichok attack. Why we haven't built on that, choosing instead to develop a private sector national dystem from scratch, is anyone's guess. Even Tory backbenchers have been vocal in saying we MUST scale up the local system. We now have a month to get our shit together, having pissed away most of the last 6.
-
BFYP.
It's not about who does the tests.
It's about what happens afterwards.
We have a genuinely world class system of tracing and isolation devolved down to local authorities. It worked superbly in Salisbury after the Novichok attack. Why we haven't built on that, choosing instead to develop a private sector national dystem from scratch, is anyone's guess. Even Tory backbenchers have been vocal in saying we MUST scale up the local system. We now have a month to get our shit together, having pissed away most of the last 6.
Oh come on BST its not like you to be coy. Track and Trace was given to Tory donors and various mp's relatives. That is why we didn't go for the most efficient t&t
-
While we've all been looking over the pond...
https://mobile.twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1324642792027676672
Just over 6 months ago, when Starmer was elected Labour leader, the Tories were 26% ahead in a poll.
-
The polls are not too reliable though are they.
-
The polls are not too reliable though are they.
No they aren't but to lose a 26% lead in less than 12 months is pretty unprecedented .
It's pretty clear Johnson has lost an healthy lead even factoring in the flaws in the opinion polls .
The flaws could also reveal that Labour have a more significant lead too let's not forget .
When a government is almost entirely on the defensive it tends not to help them too much when election time comes around and with what's coming down the road its high likely the defensive position isn't going to change .
He's playing a canny game is Starmer and a decent manifesto and campaign should see him home and dry in 2024 .
He ain't the Tories so it's about as good as you can realistically aspire to .
-
Not sure what you mean Hound.
They were correct to within a fraction of a percent here last December.
And I assume you don't think a 32% move in 6 months isn't a polling error?
-
And another one.
https://mobile.twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1325167976073490432
The polling average had been stuck since June on Con 40-42, Lab 37-39.
Something has changed in the last month or so, and it seems to be bedding in.
-
Actually, correct that. I'm wrong. According to this graph from Wiki, there's been a long term,slow increase in Lab support and decrease in Con support throughout the late summer and autumn.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/27/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election_after_2019_%28LOESS%29.svg/1800px-Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election_after_2019_%28LOESS%29.svg.png)
-
We may be seeing a few more U-turns then?
-
Shows just how much of a mistake corbyn was
-
Not sure what you mean Hound.
They were correct to within a fraction of a percent here last December.
And I assume you don't think a 32% move in 6 months isn't a polling error?
I just watched the Clock tick to 10 and "Bong" exit polls show Tories will have a large majority
I think it had the range that included 80 - and I supped mi Tes up and went to bed "gutted"
-
The average of the last 10 GB-wide polls before the Dec 2019 election were.
Con 43.4
Lab 33.6
LD 11.7
SNP 3.9
Green 2.8
BP 3.1
The actual GB results were.:
Con 44.7
Lab 33.0
LD 11.8
SNP 4.0
Green 2.8
BP 2.1
That is astonishing accuracy. The only minor glitch was they slightly underestimated how many votes Johnson pulled back off Farage.
-
Actually, correct that. I'm wrong. According to this graph from Wiki, there's been a long term,slow increase in Lab support and decrease in Con support throughout the late summer and autumn.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/27/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election_after_2019_%28LOESS%29.svg/1800px-Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election_after_2019_%28LOESS%29.svg.png)
more lockdowns more restrictions are probably why, I think you will only get a true picture once the pandemic has reduced and things are back to some sort of normal
-
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2020/11/06/voting-intention-con-35-lab-40-4-5-nov Even the brexit party has gained 2 points, which if was a election I doubt would happen
-
It's obvious that the polls, like in the USA, are reflecting the present pandemic situation. That's why Trump lost in the USA. Had news of a vaccine come last week instead of this Trump most probably would have won.
-
If it was due to "the pandemic situation" then you'd expect governing parties around the world to be hit hard in the polls.
But they aren't.
In Germany, Merkel's CDU party was 22% ahead of the next highest party in the polls in April. Currently it is 21% ahead.
In Denmark, the ruling Social Democrats were 13% ahead of the next party in April. Today they are 11% ahead.
In New Zealand, Jacinda Ahern's party was 25-26% ahead in the polls in April. They polled 24.4% higher than the 2nd placed party in their General Election three weeks back.
So it's clearly NOT a simple as ruling parties' support being hit hard by the pandemic. It appears that in countries where the ruling party has handled the pandemic well, their support has barely been scratched.
-
Let's hope I'm wrong then, just for your sake.
-
It's fortunate that we have an election coming soon - the country can right itself!! .................. oh wait :facepalm:
-
It's obvious that the polls, like in the USA, are reflecting the present pandemic situation. That's why Trump lost in the USA. Had news of a vaccine come last week instead of this Trump most probably would have won.
I agree. And I think New Zealand is the best example. They coped well with the pandemic and won a landslide. Countries that coped badly such as the US - well. France's elections next year should be interesting.
I don't think that is the full story of Johnson's recent loss of support though. The refusal to support Marcus Rashford's campaign and the refusal to support workers in the north - and then u-turning on those positions. People are beginning to see that they are the same old nasty party, just led by a bloke who rather than pretending to play the clown - really is one.
And then there is the EU Brexit deal. Around 12-15% of Johnson's support are the former UKIP/Brexit Party supporters. How many of these will stick with him if he agrees a deal? And how many of the remaining Tories will stick with him if he doesn't?
-
It's fortunate that we have an election coming soon - the country can right itself!! .................. oh wait :facepalm:
Point is that, sometimes in politics, a Government gets such a reputation for incompetence that it sticks, and there's nothing it can do to pull itself out of the mire.
It happened with Major's Govt after Black Wednesday. It happened with Brown's Govt after the GFC. Both those Govts lost control years ahead of an election, and never pulled it round. Johnson's Govt has all the jigsaw pieces lined up to be another one of those cases.
Ruling party in power for ages and running out of new ideas
Massive external shock that drapes the Govt with the sense of not being in control.
A PM who had seemed like a breath of fresh air to many people not long before, looking like they are being knocked from pillar to post.
A new Opposition leader making rapid advances in the polls, and looking sharp and prime ministerial by comparison.
Not saying that Johnson's Govt can't recover of course. But the headwinds are massively against them. And that is before the huge self-inflicted wound of the economic cost of Brexit finally becomes clear to people.
-
Now becomes the invisible man in charge of a fast becoming invisible political party
-
That party that is currently polling at 40%?
That leader that currently has a +10% satisfaction rating in the polls?
The state of the shite that TalkRadio pumps into your head Selby...
-
Let's see how it changes in 42 months..... It's a long slog and labour need policies first then we can judge them.
-
I'm not saying anything about 42 months time BFYP. I'm just foolishly replying to Selby's drivel.
-
Aye Billy, that much a centre of discussion even you haven't posted anything about him since November 10th, thought I would just remind you about your flag carrier and wake you up you must go to sleep dreaming of him on a white charger.
The Charisma of a Sloth.
-
I would rather be defended in Court by someone with the charisma of a sloth than a proven liar with the persona of a buffoon & with the dress sense of Worzel Gummage
Ask Nazanin Zaghari Ratcliffe - who I am sure would agree with me too
-
Selby won't give a shyte about her, John, she's 'a foreigner'.
-
How would I know that? with a surname like that she is just as likely to live in Leyton or Peckham. Are you 100% certain she is not a spy? if she was she must have known the risks.
Like Anne Sacoolas is to the USA she is important to Iran, a pawn just like the Lockerbie bomber was to us until he had served his purpose.
Lesson to be learned you will be told the side of the story the relevant governments want you to know, which one you believe is probably down to the country you are born in and whose side you are on and you can do very little about it.
Do I lay awake at night thinking about her no, Whether Fej can get a goal at Hull is of much more interest to me.
-
How would I know that? with a surname like that she is just as likely to live in Leyton or Peckham. Are you 100% certain she is not a spy? if she was she must have known the risks.
Like Anne Sacoolas is to the USA she is important to Iran, a pawn just like the Lockerbie bomber was to us until he had served his purpose.
Lesson to be learned you will be told the side of the story the relevant governments want you to know, which one you believe is probably down to the country you are born in and whose side you are on and you can do very little about it.
Do I lay awake at night thinking about her no, Whether Fej can get a goal at Hull is of much more interest to me.
All we are fed is West= Good, Iran=Bad. The truth is probably very complex and somewhere between the two.
-
Must be a record, so well done Kier having a vote of no confidence in him as a leader by the Camberwell Green branch of the Labour Party.
Watch yer back Stabber.
-
Must be a record, so well done Kier having a vote of no confidence in him as a leader by the Camberwell Green branch of the Labour Party.
Watch yer back Stabber.
Your a very selective sad old Kitson aren't you? If my retirement looks like yours, I want putting down now.
-
Must be a record, so well done Kier having a vote of no confidence in him as a leader by the Camberwell Green branch of the Labour Party.
Watch yer back Stabber.
Doesn't worry about British nationals held illegally in jail by foreign governments - but follows the minor details of obscure Labour Party branches - strange priorities don't you think?
-
Must be a record, so well done Kier having a vote of no confidence in him as a leader by the Camberwell Green branch of the Labour Party.
Watch yer back Stabber.
Doesn't worry about British nationals held illegally in jail by foreign governments - but follows the minor details of obscure Labour Party branches - strange priorities don't you think?
It's not about his priorities, it's the whiff of desperation that I can smell in his post.
-
Ah Glyn forgot about you, what do you think to the taxes the Dutch bicycle spares firm have to pay at source?
-
Ah Glyn forgot about you, what do you think to the taxes the Dutch bicycle spares firm have to pay at source?
Ah, bikes....
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-55530721
https://www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2021/01/02/brexit-halts-sales-of-brooks-bicycle-saddles-made-in-england/?sh=468875b5bbd7
-
We'll just have to all Raleigh round I suppose.
-
We'll just have to all Raleigh round I suppose.
You could have a Carrera making puns.
-
I had a BSA (Bentley) Bullet push bike once.
-
Ah Glyn forgot about you, what do you think to the taxes the Dutch bicycle spares firm have to pay at source?
Give me a link to the details and I'll have a look for you.
-
Are you better Belton?
-
We'll just have to all Raleigh round I suppose.
You could have a Carrera making puns.
Yeah and I for one am Board man !
-
We'll just have to all Raleigh round I suppose.
You could have a Carrera making puns.
Yeah and I for one am Board man !
Maybe you should go on a Trek?
-
We'll just have to all Raleigh round I suppose.
You could have a Carrera making puns.
Yeah and I for one am Board man !
Wolfie, you really should Apollo gise for that one.
-
I prefer a specialized response to these things
-
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9220259/Labour-leader-Keir-Starmer-boasted-supporting-abolition-monarchy.html
Well in fairness to him he now says he has changed his mind, and thinks the monarchy is now great and he supports it.
They say you get wiser as you get older, no doubt it won't be long before he votes for Boris and becomes a Tory if he carries on getting more intelligent at the rate he is.
I thought I would give him a boot up, seeing as how he seems to becoming something of yesterdays hero on here.
At least Jeremy kept you in the news, this guy is proving a right barrel of fun, on a par with the unknown Liberal leader whoever that is.
-
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9220259/Labour-leader-Keir-Starmer-boasted-supporting-abolition-monarchy.html
Well in fairness to him he now says he has changed his mind, and thinks the monarchy is now great and he supports it.
They say you get wiser as you get older, no doubt it won't be long before he votes for Boris and becomes a Tory if he carries on getting more intelligent at the rate he is.
I thought I would give him a boot up, seeing as how he seems to becoming something of yesterdays hero on here.
At least Jeremy kept you in the news, this guy is proving a right barrel of fun, on a par with the unknown Liberal leader whoever that is.
I'm patriotic and also support the abolition of the monarchy. Despite the Mail's desperate attempts to make the two mean the same thing, they aren't mutually exclusive by any means.
-
how come you missed out on the wiser-older thingy selby
-
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9220259/Labour-leader-Keir-Starmer-boasted-supporting-abolition-monarchy.html
Well in fairness to him he now says he has changed his mind, and thinks the monarchy is now great and he supports it.
They say you get wiser as you get older, no doubt it won't be long before he votes for Boris and becomes a Tory if he carries on getting more intelligent at the rate he is.
I thought I would give him a boot up, seeing as how he seems to becoming something of yesterdays hero on here.
At least Jeremy kept you in the news, this guy is proving a right barrel of fun, on a par with the unknown Liberal leader whoever that is.
I'm patriotic and also support the abolition of the monarchy. Despite the Mail's desperate attempts to make the two mean the same thing, they aren't mutually exclusive by any means.
YOU patriotic? You come across about as patriotic as I do in my admiration for Rotherham United.
-
Amazing how many people conflate "patriotic" with "uncritically supportive of everything the Government does".
As I've said before, there are people in here who would have called Churchill "unpatriotic" in the late 30s.
-
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9220259/Labour-leader-Keir-Starmer-boasted-supporting-abolition-monarchy.html
Well in fairness to him he now says he has changed his mind, and thinks the monarchy is now great and he supports it.
They say you get wiser as you get older, no doubt it won't be long before he votes for Boris and becomes a Tory if he carries on getting more intelligent at the rate he is.
I thought I would give him a boot up, seeing as how he seems to becoming something of yesterdays hero on here.
At least Jeremy kept you in the news, this guy is proving a right barrel of fun, on a par with the unknown Liberal leader whoever that is.
I'm patriotic and also support the abolition of the monarchy. Despite the Mail's desperate attempts to make the two mean the same thing, they aren't mutually exclusive by any means.
YOU patriotic? You come across about as patriotic as I do in my admiration for Rotherham United.
I want to make the country better. How is that not patriotic?
-
I have always thought myself I am not the brightest Syd, but you and a few others make me feel things are not quite that bad.
-
He is very good at changing his mind though isn't he?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-55924153
He made himself look stupid yesterday, quite disappointing as he started off quite well with his formal approach. Bit of work for Labour to do on some of this as their (lack of) policy on these things isn't helping. It works well saying something is a mistake when it becomes problematic, but when it's not it doesn't work.
-
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9220259/Labour-leader-Keir-Starmer-boasted-supporting-abolition-monarchy.html
Well in fairness to him he now says he has changed his mind, and thinks the monarchy is now great and he supports it.
They say you get wiser as you get older, no doubt it won't be long before he votes for Boris and becomes a Tory if he carries on getting more intelligent at the rate he is.
I thought I would give him a boot up, seeing as how he seems to becoming something of yesterdays hero on here.
At least Jeremy kept you in the news, this guy is proving a right barrel of fun, on a par with the unknown Liberal leader whoever that is.
I'm patriotic and also support the abolition of the monarchy. Despite the Mail's desperate attempts to make the two mean the same thing, they aren't mutually exclusive by any means.
YOU patriotic? You come across about as patriotic as I do in my admiration for Rotherham United.
I want to make the country better. How is that not patriotic?
Patriotism means showing love for your country and being proud of it. You show no signs of either.
-
So let me get this straight.
True Japanese patriots would have been proud of their country during the Rape of Nanking?
True German patriots would have been proud of their country when they were gassing the Untermensch?
True American patriots would have been proud of their country during slavery and the Jim Crow era that followed it?
True Argentinian and Chilean and Brazillian patriots would have been proud of their countries when they were taken over by fascist military dictators?
True South African patriots would have been proud of their country running the Apartheid system?
-
Are you going to add true English patriots would have been proud of their country overruling the result of a diplomatic vote, to that?
-
No BB. I'll leave it at having established the self-evident truth that true patriotism is not consistent with being proud of your country full stop.
-
It's evident that true patriotism of any description is not consistent with the views of people who want to demolish democracy in order to get their own way.
-
The problem Starmer and the party have is the legacy they've inherited , Corbyn was seen as unpatriotic with his links to the IRA , Brown calling that women in Rochdale a bigot when the microphone was still turned on , Thornbury poking fun at white van man and his St Georges flag in Rochester on social media .
Starmer as a staunch remainer and architect of Labour's second referendum policy seems a bit fake suddenly putting the Union Jack around his shoulders .
Trying to out patriotic Johnson and the Tories by using the Union Jack seems a bit desperate to me and actually lacking real depth .
Then again it could be argued he can't win , by attempting to promote a more patriotic view he's getting pelters from the likes of Clive Lewis who seems to view the Union Jack in the same terms the swastika is seen .
The usual suspects on The Guardian topic message boards are all ready to cancel their memberships should this approach be adopted if they haven't already due to Starmer voting with the government's trade deal with the EU .
The divisions within the party seems to grow ever more wider by the week .
From having regained some optimism when he was elected after the 2019 election debacle I'm becoming ever more disillusioned by the current state of affairs .
If the party was up against one of the Tory heavyweights like Thatcher you could at least understand the difficulties but the fact remains he's facing off against a buffoon who's decisions have led to thousands upon thousands of unnecessary deaths and gives contracts out to people whose only credibility is to donate to the Tory Party or have connections to them .
The truth is the Labour Party should be 20 points ahead of the government in the polls but they aren't although to be fair he's at least pulled them level from the position he inherited so all may not be lost yet .
There's far more questions than answers right now with regards to Starmer and it's not beyond comprehension that a change before the next election maybe needed , it's still 3 years away after all .
As I've said before I'm willing to give him more time but I have to say he'd certainly be made aware of the need to be doing better if it was left to me .
-
Tyke.
What policies do you think Labour could have that would result in them being 20% ahead?
-
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9220259/Labour-leader-Keir-Starmer-boasted-supporting-abolition-monarchy.html
Well in fairness to him he now says he has changed his mind, and thinks the monarchy is now great and he supports it.
They say you get wiser as you get older, no doubt it won't be long before he votes for Boris and becomes a Tory if he carries on getting more intelligent at the rate he is.
I thought I would give him a boot up, seeing as how he seems to becoming something of yesterdays hero on here.
At least Jeremy kept you in the news, this guy is proving a right barrel of fun, on a par with the unknown Liberal leader whoever that is.
I'm patriotic and also support the abolition of the monarchy. Despite the Mail's desperate attempts to make the two mean the same thing, they aren't mutually exclusive by any means.
YOU patriotic? You come across about as patriotic as I do in my admiration for Rotherham United.
I want to make the country better. How is that not patriotic?
Patriotism means showing love for your country and being proud of it. You show no signs of either.
Patriotism needs to be acknowledged as different to nationalism. You show no signs of that at all.
-
Tyke.
What policies do you think Labour could have that would result in them being 20% ahead?
Tory ones! :chair:
-
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9220259/Labour-leader-Keir-Starmer-boasted-supporting-abolition-monarchy.html
Well in fairness to him he now says he has changed his mind, and thinks the monarchy is now great and he supports it.
They say you get wiser as you get older, no doubt it won't be long before he votes for Boris and becomes a Tory if he carries on getting more intelligent at the rate he is.
I thought I would give him a boot up, seeing as how he seems to becoming something of yesterdays hero on here.
At least Jeremy kept you in the news, this guy is proving a right barrel of fun, on a par with the unknown Liberal leader whoever that is.
I'm patriotic and also support the abolition of the monarchy. Despite the Mail's desperate attempts to make the two mean the same thing, they aren't mutually exclusive by any means.
YOU patriotic? You come across about as patriotic as I do in my admiration for Rotherham United.
I want to make the country better. How is that not patriotic?
Patriotism means showing love for your country and being proud of it. You show no signs of either.
Patriotism needs to be acknowledged as different to nationalism. You show no signs of that at all.
Do you mean like I'm patriotic in support for my country, whereas the EU is nationalist in its approach to the vaccine?
-
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9220259/Labour-leader-Keir-Starmer-boasted-supporting-abolition-monarchy.html
Well in fairness to him he now says he has changed his mind, and thinks the monarchy is now great and he supports it.
They say you get wiser as you get older, no doubt it won't be long before he votes for Boris and becomes a Tory if he carries on getting more intelligent at the rate he is.
I thought I would give him a boot up, seeing as how he seems to becoming something of yesterdays hero on here.
At least Jeremy kept you in the news, this guy is proving a right barrel of fun, on a par with the unknown Liberal leader whoever that is.
I'm patriotic and also support the abolition of the monarchy. Despite the Mail's desperate attempts to make the two mean the same thing, they aren't mutually exclusive by any means.
YOU patriotic? You come across about as patriotic as I do in my admiration for Rotherham United.
I want to make the country better. How is that not patriotic?
Patriotism means showing love for your country and being proud of it. You show no signs of either.
Patriotism needs to be acknowledged as different to nationalism. You show no signs of that at all.
Do you mean like I'm patriotic in support for my country, whereas the EU is nationalist in its approach to the vaccine?
No.
-
Thought not!
-
Which is a perfect example of you not understanding the difference.
-
Some might not like this .....
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/feb/03/labour-defends-new-strategy-to-focus-on-patriotism-and-union-flag
-
Some might not like this .....
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/feb/03/labour-defends-new-strategy-to-focus-on-patriotism-and-union-flag
You?
-
Some might not like this .....
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/feb/03/labour-defends-new-strategy-to-focus-on-patriotism-and-union-flag
You?
I've always flown the flag for the UK, and England. Are you gonna start now?
-
Tyke.
What policies do you think Labour could have that would result in them being 20% ahead?
It's possible Billy it's simply a case of personality and death by association with his brexit policy under Corbyn rather than any policies cutting through
He's not likely to reinvent himself with the type of charisma Blair had and you can't change history on his second referendum stance under Corbyn's leadership .
Concerning that his past caught up with him yesterday on his 2017 comments about staying in the European Medicine Agency although respect for him that he later admitted he did say that when he initially denied it .
I maybe overreacting and he will prove to be electable but I have to say my gut feeling at the moment is telling me different .
Within weeks of Blair getting the gig I knew he'd tank Major at the 97 election and I had the feeling that Cameron would get the better of Labour when he was elected Tory leader .
Just something about them , Starmer hasn't got that and I feel Labour have to tick far more boxes than the Tories do to form a government , it's just the way it is .
I'm probably wrong to say Labour should have a 20 point lead right now and overreacting .
Maybe it's high time we gave a woman a go Billy , whilst Nandy isn't exactly untarnished by brexit but she wasn't the Shadow Brexit Secretary either , she's authentic , from the north and represents a vote leaving town in the former red wall .
A seat she held on to pretty comfortably , if you combined the tory and brexit party vote in Wigan central in 2019 she still wins , no mean feat given the circumstances .
There's broader appeal because she wasn't a full on leaver which should satisfy the metropolitan lot .
She seems naturally well placed through actual political experience to understand why we are so dived rather than someone who is forced to do so and appears to be out of his comfort zone in knowing how to go about it .
Just my personal thoughts , I could be right , I could be wrong .
-
Some might not like this .....
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/feb/03/labour-defends-new-strategy-to-focus-on-patriotism-and-union-flag
You?
I've always flown the flag for the UK, and England. Are you gonna start now?
Some might not like this .....
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/feb/03/labour-defends-new-strategy-to-focus-on-patriotism-and-union-flag
You?
I've always flown the flag for the UK, and England. Are you gonna start now?
I always have.
-
I think a lot of the criticism for starmer is harsh and unwarranted. He's making some mistakes but he's got a good approach. Being the opposition when the government have problems (eg test and trace initially) is much easier than a time where they've actually made some big decisions on vaccines that work. Where does he go as an opposition with that? Actually aswell the Tories have stepped up a little of late and started to get their own wins with a different approach. There are though 3.5 years until the next election and that should be labours aim.
-
I think a lot of the criticism for starmer is harsh and unwarranted. He's making some mistakes but he's got a good approach. Being the opposition when the government have problems (eg test and trace initially) is much easier than a time where they've actually made some big decisions on vaccines that work. Where does he go as an opposition with that? Actually aswell the Tories have stepped up a little of late and started to get their own wins with a different approach. There are though 3.5 years until the next election and that should be labours aim.
It's the fact the divides within the party show little sign of going away bfyp , in fact they seem to be widening .
That's my concern , is Starmer capable of pulling everyone together ? , does he really understand it ? .
The union jack approach suggests not , Clive Lewis and the metropolitan set going nuts whilst the red wall can see the fakeness a mile away , the result is lose - lose and once again " out of touch " is ringing in their ears .
It's an unenviable task I couldn't say otherwise but we are where we are and when Starmer does something right I say so .
-
I think a lot of the criticism for starmer is harsh and unwarranted. He's making some mistakes but he's got a good approach. Being the opposition when the government have problems (eg test and trace initially) is much easier than a time where they've actually made some big decisions on vaccines that work. Where does he go as an opposition with that? Actually aswell the Tories have stepped up a little of late and started to get their own wins with a different approach. There are though 3.5 years until the next election and that should be labours aim.
It's the fact the divides within the party show little sign of going away bfyp , in fact they seem to be widening .
That's my concern , is Starmer capable of pulling everyone together ? , does he really understand it ? .
The union jack approach suggests not , Clive Lewis and the metropolitan set going nuts whilst the red wall can see the fakeness a mile away , the result is lose - lose and once again " out of touch " is ringing in their ears .
It's an unenviable task I couldn't say otherwise but we are where we are and when Starmer does something right I say so .
Perhaps the members ought to respect the result of an election?
-
I think a lot of the criticism for starmer is harsh and unwarranted. He's making some mistakes but he's got a good approach. Being the opposition when the government have problems (eg test and trace initially) is much easier than a time where they've actually made some big decisions on vaccines that work. Where does he go as an opposition with that? Actually aswell the Tories have stepped up a little of late and started to get their own wins with a different approach. There are though 3.5 years until the next election and that should be labours aim.
It's the fact the divides within the party show little sign of going away bfyp , in fact they seem to be widening .
That's my concern , is Starmer capable of pulling everyone together ? , does he really understand it ? .
The union jack approach suggests not , Clive Lewis and the metropolitan set going nuts whilst the red wall can see the fakeness a mile away , the result is lose - lose and once again " out of touch " is ringing in their ears .
It's an unenviable task I couldn't say otherwise but we are where we are and when Starmer does something right I say so .
Perhaps the members ought to respect the result of an election?
They may well do but it's not their decision , it takes 20% of Labour MP's to force a leadership challenge .
-
I think a lot of the criticism for starmer is harsh and unwarranted. He's making some mistakes but he's got a good approach. Being the opposition when the government have problems (eg test and trace initially) is much easier than a time where they've actually made some big decisions on vaccines that work. Where does he go as an opposition with that? Actually aswell the Tories have stepped up a little of late and started to get their own wins with a different approach. There are though 3.5 years until the next election and that should be labours aim.
It's the fact the divides within the party show little sign of going away bfyp , in fact they seem to be widening .
That's my concern , is Starmer capable of pulling everyone together ? , does he really understand it ? .
The union jack approach suggests not , Clive Lewis and the metropolitan set going nuts whilst the red wall can see the fakeness a mile away , the result is lose - lose and once again " out of touch " is ringing in their ears .
It's an unenviable task I couldn't say otherwise but we are where we are and when Starmer does something right I say so .
Perhaps the members ought to respect the result of an election?
They may well do but it's not their decision , it takes 20% of Labour MP's to force a leadership challenge .
I was talking about the last leadership election.
-
The problem Starmer and the party have is the legacy they've inherited , Corbyn was seen as unpatriotic with his links to the IRA , Brown calling that women in Rochdale a bigot when the microphone was still turned on , Thornbury poking fun at white van man and his St Georges flag in Rochester on social media .
Starmer as a staunch remainer and architect of Labour's second referendum policy seems a bit fake suddenly putting the Union Jack around his shoulders .
Trying to out patriotic Johnson and the Tories by using the Union Jack seems a bit desperate to me and actually lacking real depth .
Then again it could be argued he can't win , by attempting to promote a more patriotic view he's getting pelters from the likes of Clive Lewis who seems to view the Union Jack in the same terms the swastika is seen .
The usual suspects on The Guardian topic message boards are all ready to cancel their memberships should this approach be adopted if they haven't already due to Starmer voting with the government's trade deal with the EU .
The divisions within the party seems to grow ever more wider by the week .
From having regained some optimism when he was elected after the 2019 election debacle I'm becoming ever more disillusioned by the current state of affairs .
If the party was up against one of the Tory heavyweights like Thatcher you could at least understand the difficulties but the fact remains he's facing off against a buffoon who's decisions have led to thousands upon thousands of unnecessary deaths and gives contracts out to people whose only credibility is to donate to the Tory Party or have connections to them .
The truth is the Labour Party should be 20 points ahead of the government in the polls but they aren't although to be fair he's at least pulled them level from the position he inherited so all may not be lost yet .
There's far more questions than answers right now with regards to Starmer and it's not beyond comprehension that a change before the next election maybe needed , it's still 3 years away after all .
As I've said before I'm willing to give him more time but I have to say he'd certainly be made aware of the need to be doing better if it was left to me .
Another brilliant post, Tyke. I too was impressed by Starmer when he first took over. He distanced himself from the mistakes he'd made in pushing for a second referendum, by telling everyone it was time to move on from the Brexit vote; something a few on here look incapable of doing.
His big problem, as I've said on here before, is the raging problems in the Labour Party between the liberalists and the left. I honestly don't know if he can ever sort that out.
I would love Andy Burnham to be given the chance at some point, but that's just my personal preference.
-
Any Labour leader will face the same issues.
And they will all have to come up with the same solution - set down the values and vision you want to implement if you run the country.
That's the main complaint against Starmer - what does he stand for, no-one knows.
I personally don't have a problem with that at the moment, in the middle of a global pandemic when most of the country wants to see politicians working together to sort it out, but he will have to it at some point.
Nature abhors a vacuum - so does politics.
-
The problem Starmer and the party have is the legacy they've inherited , Corbyn was seen as unpatriotic with his links to the IRA , Brown calling that women in Rochdale a bigot when the microphone was still turned on , Thornbury poking fun at white van man and his St Georges flag in Rochester on social media .
Starmer as a staunch remainer and architect of Labour's second referendum policy seems a bit fake suddenly putting the Union Jack around his shoulders .
Trying to out patriotic Johnson and the Tories by using the Union Jack seems a bit desperate to me and actually lacking real depth .
Then again it could be argued he can't win , by attempting to promote a more patriotic view he's getting pelters from the likes of Clive Lewis who seems to view the Union Jack in the same terms the swastika is seen .
The usual suspects on The Guardian topic message boards are all ready to cancel their memberships should this approach be adopted if they haven't already due to Starmer voting with the government's trade deal with the EU .
The divisions within the party seems to grow ever more wider by the week .
From having regained some optimism when he was elected after the 2019 election debacle I'm becoming ever more disillusioned by the current state of affairs .
If the party was up against one of the Tory heavyweights like Thatcher you could at least understand the difficulties but the fact remains he's facing off against a buffoon who's decisions have led to thousands upon thousands of unnecessary deaths and gives contracts out to people whose only credibility is to donate to the Tory Party or have connections to them .
The truth is the Labour Party should be 20 points ahead of the government in the polls but they aren't although to be fair he's at least pulled them level from the position he inherited so all may not be lost yet .
There's far more questions than answers right now with regards to Starmer and it's not beyond comprehension that a change before the next election maybe needed , it's still 3 years away after all .
As I've said before I'm willing to give him more time but I have to say he'd certainly be made aware of the need to be doing better if it was left to me .
Another brilliant post, Tyke. I too was impressed by Starmer when he first took over. He distanced himself from the mistakes he'd made in pushing for a second referendum, by telling everyone it was time to move on from the Brexit vote; something a few on here look incapable of doing.
His big problem, as I've said on here before, is the raging problems in the Labour Party between the liberalists and the left. I honestly don't know if he can ever sort that out.
I would love Andy Burnham to be given the chance at some point, but that's just my personal preference.
The party's had problems before even Starmer and Corbyn's time coming up with a vision and fresh ideas or at least in the sense that sits right with enough voters to form a government .
It's got to the point where it's defined by what it is rather than what its for .
As tragic as the pandemic has been and most certainly not something I'd have wanted it does offer opportunity as WW2 did to Atlee .
I can see the buffoon riding a wave in the summer on the back of his vaccination success which naturally I wouldn't deny him , warm days , pubs open and all this behind us whilst Labour are continuing to knife one another in the back .
Starmer may well go on the attack at that point , the death toll , the cuts to the NHS , the small businesses that have been lost , the unemployment figures , the low paid key workers who carried on throughout , the list is endless .
All that falls in to insignificance if he can't also convince the electorate that they could have done better and what's more they are the party to put the country back together .
That requires a vision , be the party of the smaller businesses , be the party of the low paid key worker , make the NHS the service it should be , be tough on crime , find a solution to creating affordable housing and so forth but more importantly be brave .
Tell the electorate how much of their tax has found there way in to the hands of tory donors on the back of the pandemic , how much was wasted on track , trace and isolate and make that mud stick on these fecking charlatans , win the argument you'll spend taxpayers money and return it to them the electorate in services , job creation and infrastructure , things that benefit us all not the 1% .
There's so much to go with here , that's patriotism not the fecking union jack hung behind you when making speeches .
Biden buried Trump over his handling of covid and I'd suggest it's a route map that will bear fruit but you have to be cut from that cloth and be brave to succeed in the UK .
-
Really Tyke, tell us what is brave about johnson's crew and those that voted for him?
-
Really Tyke, tell us what is brave about johnson's crew and those that voted for him?
Sydney with all due respect I think you need to read my post again .
There's not a hint of advocating that Johnson is brave or his minions .
-
Tyke I will read it again if you can explain how your idyll of a little britain or world for that matter won't result in a another giant leap backwards for the average wage earner if that is possible with zero hours contracts and conditions as they are, have you any proof that being small will develop into a workers utopia as some new unknown force steps up as a champion for the downtrodden.
-
Labour and the left of of centre need to throw ideas and money into controlling the narrative otherwise it will be wash rinse and repeat. It doesn't matter how distorted truth is if it's drip fed into the brains of enough people it appears they are happy enough to vote for just about anything.
The massive frauds commited by vested interests will continue unless people feel there is value in making smarter decisions. Look at the bame vote in the US and how that has turned around the fortunes of the democrats, Biden may have used the appalling response to covid over there to his advantage but if all the hard work at ground level had not been done to ensure that more people were able and wanted to vote it would not have happened, this work has been going on well before covid was a thing.
-
It is truly frightening to think that, were it not for COVID, Trump and the Republicans would almost certainly still be in power. Scary in that a President would be able to do what he did to protect himself from the Mueller inquiry (have close contacts take the fall for him, like a Mafia Don would) and still be protected by the party because they are shit scared of having his radicalised base turn on them.
-
Tyke I will read it again if you can explain how your idyll of a little britain or world for that matter won't result in a another giant leap backwards for the average wage earner if that is possible with zero hours contracts and conditions as they are, have you any proof that being small will develop into a workers utopia as some new unknown force steps up as a champion for the downtrodden.
Little Britain and a workers utopia ...... wow !!! .
I'm far from the socialist you have me down for Sydney .
History tells us socialism doesn't work so let's clear that up straight away , every economy needs capital and wealthy people .
My basic politics are this , that wealth created by using capital are distributed far more robustly than we see today , what we have today is capital creating more capital for the benefit of those with capital which then buys political influence and creates a system that's difficult to oppose .
I'm not a socialist , I'm anti neoliberal .
The less neoliberal groups that exist the more of a fighting chance you have .
I've always seen the EU as a neoliberal group who serve the interests of capital under the guise of globalisation .
Globalisation in my experience is simply the neoliberal vehicle that seeks to drive down labour costs , the more cheap labour you create the less likely that labour cost will rise so that more and more profits can be funneled to boardrooms and shareholders and the more capital you create the more influence you can buy through lobbying , donations etc to keep the system working for you and you alone .
Which isn't to say migration should ever be ended , not at all , the skill shortages we need but areas such as south yorkshire needed an abundance of cheap eastern european labour in an already economically challenged area like it needed an hole in the head .
Now I understand the economics show that migration has economic value but that's not felt in areas like this , if it did they'd have voted to remain wouldn't they ?
Blair's government estimated 30k would come over from eastern europe in 2004 , it was actually nearer 3 million .
That's a big change to have to accept both culturally , job seeking , housing and schools in depressed areas in such a short space of time hence my agreement in the thread that globalisation was going at a pace people found hard to accept .
The Japanese and Australian governments aren't seen as little Japanese or little Aussies with their immigration controls and in all honesty I'm at a loss as to why the little Britain card is waved at people such as myself .
I'm also at a loss as to why such views are considered bigoted by the liberal left .
There's a reason you don't find many liberals in poor economic areas and its more a professional and metropolitan class thing and that's because they have probably had a benefit from it , have jobs that can land opportunities in europe through freedom of movement , have kids in nice schools , have private healthcare and live in nice areas , it's not envy by any means good luck to em I'm just painting the picture as I see it .
It's also not particularly helpful that the party who were historically supposed to represent them decided it's political interests were best served by becoming the party of the professional and metropolitan class first and foremost and south yorkshire had to lump it .
So Sydney if my world view doesn't reconcile with yours there's a good reason and absolutely nothing to do with little Britain or a workers utopia .
Your welcome .
-
Blimey tyke.
That response is a bit like some of the essay responses I have had on here.........
But without the graphs.
-
Tyke I will read it again if you can explain how your idyll of a little britain or world for that matter won't result in a another giant leap backwards for the average wage earner if that is possible with zero hours contracts and conditions as they are, have you any proof that being small will develop into a workers utopia as some new unknown force steps up as a champion for the downtrodden.
Little Britain and a workers utopia ...... wow !!! .
I'm far from the socialist you have me down for Sydney .
History tells us socialism doesn't work so let's clear that up straight away , every economy needs capital and wealthy people .
My basic politics are this , that wealth created by using capital are distributed far more robustly than we see today , what we have today is capital creating more capital for the benefit of those with capital which then buys political influence and creates a system that's difficult to oppose .
I'm not a socialist , I'm anti neoliberal .
The less neoliberal groups that exist the more of a fighting chance you have .
I've always seen the EU as a neoliberal group who serve the interests of capital under the guise of globalisation .
Globalisation in my experience is simply the neoliberal vehicle that seeks to drive down labour costs , the more cheap labour you create the less likely that labour cost will rise so that more and more profits can be funneled to boardrooms and shareholders and the more capital you create the more influence you can buy through lobbying , donations etc to keep the system working for you and you alone .
Which isn't to say migration should ever be ended , not at all , the skill shortages we need but areas such as south yorkshire needed an abundance of cheap eastern european labour in an already economically challenged area like it needed an hole in the head .
Now I understand the economics show that migration has economic value but that's not felt in areas like this , if it did they'd have voted to remain wouldn't they ?
Blair's government estimated 30k would come over from eastern europe in 2004 , it was actually nearer 3 million .
That's a big change to have to accept both culturally , job seeking , housing and schools in depressed areas in such a short space of time hence my agreement in the thread that globalisation was going at a pace people found hard to accept .
The Japanese and Australian governments aren't seen as little Japanese or little Aussies with their immigration controls and in all honesty I'm at a loss as to why the little Britain card is waved at people such as myself .
I'm also at a loss as to why such views are considered bigoted by the liberal left .
There's a reason you don't find many liberals in poor economic areas and its more a professional and metropolitan class thing and that's because they have probably had a benefit from it , have jobs that can land opportunities in europe through freedom of movement , have kids in nice schools , have private healthcare and live in nice areas , it's not envy by any means good luck to em I'm just painting the picture as I see it .
It's also not particularly helpful that the party who were historically supposed to represent them decided it's political interests were best served by becoming the party of the professional and metropolitan class first and foremost and south yorkshire had to lump it .
So Sydney if my world view doesn't reconcile with yours there's a good reason and absolutely nothing to do with little Britain or a workers utopia .
Your welcome .
I don't believe I mentioned socialism Tyke, maybe you are feeling a bit over sensitive, I mean the little britain as in a shrunken position in world affairs and a smaller gdp inevitable when one opts out of the richest market in the world or make it tougher to access. When you can explain advantages of that maybe you'll be along the way to convincing me you have the answers. Voting to allow tories to hold the reins will never be an answer to anything but misery for the working classes and the working poor and I feel that only those that can sit back and enjoy the hard won riches of previous generations such as a home and a generous pensions can afford such largesse.
Maybe you'd have been better off trying to make changes you wanted from within because from without I don;t believe that you can.
apologies for the delay I was shunted down the queue for the laptop.
-
Sanitise it before you pass it on again Syd
-
Tyke I will read it again if you can explain how your idyll of a little britain or world for that matter won't result in a another giant leap backwards for the average wage earner if that is possible with zero hours contracts and conditions as they are, have you any proof that being small will develop into a workers utopia as some new unknown force steps up as a champion for the downtrodden.
Little Britain and a workers utopia ...... wow !!! .
I'm far from the socialist you have me down for Sydney .
History tells us socialism doesn't work so let's clear that up straight away , every economy needs capital and wealthy people .
My basic politics are this , that wealth created by using capital are distributed far more robustly than we see today , what we have today is capital creating more capital for the benefit of those with capital which then buys political influence and creates a system that's difficult to oppose .
I'm not a socialist , I'm anti neoliberal .
The less neoliberal groups that exist the more of a fighting chance you have .
I've always seen the EU as a neoliberal group who serve the interests of capital under the guise of globalisation .
Globalisation in my experience is simply the neoliberal vehicle that seeks to drive down labour costs , the more cheap labour you create the less likely that labour cost will rise so that more and more profits can be funneled to boardrooms and shareholders and the more capital you create the more influence you can buy through lobbying , donations etc to keep the system working for you and you alone .
Which isn't to say migration should ever be ended , not at all , the skill shortages we need but areas such as south yorkshire needed an abundance of cheap eastern european labour in an already economically challenged area like it needed an hole in the head .
Now I understand the economics show that migration has economic value but that's not felt in areas like this , if it did they'd have voted to remain wouldn't they ?
Blair's government estimated 30k would come over from eastern europe in 2004 , it was actually nearer 3 million .
That's a big change to have to accept both culturally , job seeking , housing and schools in depressed areas in such a short space of time hence my agreement in the thread that globalisation was going at a pace people found hard to accept .
The Japanese and Australian governments aren't seen as little Japanese or little Aussies with their immigration controls and in all honesty I'm at a loss as to why the little Britain card is waved at people such as myself .
I'm also at a loss as to why such views are considered bigoted by the liberal left .
There's a reason you don't find many liberals in poor economic areas and its more a professional and metropolitan class thing and that's because they have probably had a benefit from it , have jobs that can land opportunities in europe through freedom of movement , have kids in nice schools , have private healthcare and live in nice areas , it's not envy by any means good luck to em I'm just painting the picture as I see it .
It's also not particularly helpful that the party who were historically supposed to represent them decided it's political interests were best served by becoming the party of the professional and metropolitan class first and foremost and south yorkshire had to lump it .
So Sydney if my world view doesn't reconcile with yours there's a good reason and absolutely nothing to do with little Britain or a workers utopia .
Your welcome .
I don't believe I mentioned socialism Tyke, maybe you are feeling a bit over sensitive, I mean the little britain as in a shrunken position in world affairs and a smaller gdp inevitable when one opts out of the richest market in the world or make it tougher to access. When you can explain advantages of that maybe you'll be along the way to convincing me you have the answers. Voting to allow tories to hold the reins will never be an answer to anything but misery for the working classes and the working poor and I feel that only those that can sit back and enjoy the hard won riches of previous generations such as a home and a generous pensions can afford such largesse.
Maybe you'd have been better off trying to make changes you wanted from within because from without I don;t believe that you can.
apologies for the delay I was shunted down the queue for the laptop.
@ Sydney .
Voting leave in the EU referendum wasn't a supporting the Tories exercise , the question of the EU was always a cross party argument , there are a good number of casualties in the Tory ranks on this issue .
I've said before on this board my leave vote was ready to be cast anytime in the 80's and intensified under Major in the early 90's all that was missing was a referendum to act on that which finally arrived in 2016 .
One of the things Remainers seem to overlook when they play the single market card is to fail to acknowledge the freedom of movement that's built in to it , free movement of people is an entirely different thing altogether to free movement of capital , goods and services .
Free movement of people comes with pressures on the jobs market , housing , schools and healthcare , to place it in the same terms as capital , services and goods is simply ridiculous .
The net result is that when freedom of movement starts to shape communities who are economically challenged already then they look to see where the benefit to themselves is , In most cases there isn't a benefit .
Of course this directly challenges those who do receive the benefit , generally the ones who have had a better education that's enabled them to secure higher paid jobs , jobs that aren't necessarily challenged by the abundance of cheap labour , they maybe business owners too who can take advantage of a low cost Labour market .
The truth is freedom of movement is successful only to a percentage of the population to say there is an overall benefit is entirely wrong .
So I understand the remain argument but it seems the leave argument is often not understood by the remain voter and especially by those who aren't quite as economically challenged .
The point about remaining in the EU and reforming from the inside seems particularly flawed to me , Cameron came back from Brussels with a hand full of nothing even though the EU knew it would trigger a UK referendum , how high do the stakes have to be before reform is on the table ? , there can't be more higher stakes than that and yet ......... ?
The EU doesn't want to reform , it's happy the way it is it seems to me .
How long it holds together without reform is probably the question Sydney .
-
Tyke.
The failure to respond to freedom of movement with investment in the required infrastructure and services is not a failing of the EU though. It is a failing of national Govt.
I've given my two pennorth on this many times. The root cause of the justified anger in the communities that you highlight is not the immigration. It is the lack of investment. Austerity is to blame.
If we had properly managed the exit from the Great Recession from 2010 onwards, we'd have had rising wages and rising investment in schools, hospitals, housing etc. Instead, we went into the economically illiterate mess of Austerity which reduced the investment and killed off the recovery, leading to the longest spell of falling real wages since the Napoleonic Wars. That was nothing whatsoever to do with immigration. But immigration is an easy thing to blame when people are struggling. Farage is enough of an opportunist to grab that chance to shape the political agenda. And then, Cameron was shitting himself that UKIP would take enough votes off the Tories to lose him the 2015 Election. So Cameron had to spike the threat of Farage. And for that reason and that reason alone, Cameron agreed to a referendum in the 2015 manifesto.
Ironic thing is that the man who had the power to prevent Austerity was Clegg. He had the chance to insist that Austerity was dropped when he negotiated with the Tories in 2010. Instead, he chucked out the very economic policies he'd campaigned on, and went all-in on Austerity. A shallow, out of his depth failure of a politician. Now working as the public face of Facebook, defending it against accusations of it fomenting genocidal hatred. Special circle of hell reserved for that t**t.
-
Tyke.
The failure to respond to freedom of movement with investment in the required infrastructure and services is not a failing of the EU though. It is a failing of national Govt.
I've given my two pennorth on this many times. The root cause of the justified anger in the communities that you highlight is not the immigration. It is the lack of investment. Austerity is to blame.
If we had properly managed the exit from the Great Recession from 2010 onwards, we'd have had rising wages and rising investment in schools, hospitals, housing etc. Instead, we went into the economically illiterate mess of Austerity which reduced the investment and killed off the recovery, leading to the longest spell of falling real wages since the Napoleonic Wars. That was nothing whatsoever to do with immigration. But immigration is an easy thing to blame when people are struggling. Farage is enough of an opportunist to grab that chance to shape the political agenda. And then, Cameron was shitting himself that UKIP would take enough votes off the Tories to lose him the 2015 Election. So Cameron had to spike the threat of Farage. And for that reason and that reason alone, Cameron agreed to a referendum in the 2015 manifesto.
Ironic thing is that the man who had the power to prevent Austerity was Clegg. He had the chance to insist that Austerity was dropped when he negotiated with the Tories in 2010. Instead, he chucked out the very economic policies he'd campaigned on, and went all-in on Austerity. A shallow, out of his depth failure of a politician. Now working as the public face of Facebook, defending it against accusations of it fomenting genocidal hatred. Special circle of hell reserved for that t**t.
I'd partly agree with that Billy but not entirely .
We had a good number of years prior to the 2008 crash when the amount of cheap European labour was flooding in to the country .
More came than Blair thought , his projections were out by 2 million and 970 thousand .
South Yorkshire was still struggling in my opinion even though Labour had been in power for 7 years , there was no economic benefit before the 2008 financial crash or when the coalition came to power in 2010 to South Yorkshire .
Just a load of cheap money available to borrow which is an entirely different thing to economic prosperity altogether and one that came home to roost in 2008 / 09 / 10 .
Saw it with my own eyes , nobody on lower wages in South Yorkshire has had a benefit due to freedom of movement , absolutely nobody .
-
Making public at the start of the pandemic that it was an opportunity to degrade and get at the government,didn't sit well with me and I think a lot of others, but they ran with it nobody more than BST.
Unfortunately unlike BST whose criticism was consistent, the labour front bench showed how shallow they were and constantly came over as what they are opportunists and vindictive and with an ulterior motive other than solving the problems of the pandemic which became all inclusive to life in the country, the same attitude they showed over Brexit, just using it to gain power.
Gradually they have, and the leader have faded, and are now a side show again.
-
Tyke
Which non-neoliberal country outside of the EU do you see as a model for the type of society you would like to see?
You say socialism doesn't work. Are you including Scandanavian Socialism in that?
https://www.lifeinnorway.net/scandinavian-socialism/
-
Making public at the start of the pandemic that it was an opportunity to degrade and get at the government,didn't sit well with me and I think a lot of others, but they ran with it nobody more than BST.
Unfortunately unlike BST whose criticism was consistent, the labour front bench showed how shallow they were and constantly came over as what they are opportunists and vindictive and with an ulterior motive other than solving the problems of the pandemic which became all inclusive to life in the country, the same attitude they showed over Brexit, just using it to gain power.
Gradually they have, and the leader have faded, and are now a side show again.
Do you have examples of this please selby?
One of the main complaints of the Labour front bench is that they did not criticise the government enough at the start of the pandemic.
-
Fascinating poll just out
If there were an election tomorrow, of people who voted LD in 2019, more would vote Labour than LD again. How many seats would that swing?
https://twitter.com/SavantaComRes/status/1357727043161645056
-
Tyke
Which non-neoliberal country outside of the EU do you see as a model for the type of society you would like to see?
You say socialism doesn't work. Are you including Scandanavian Socialism in that?
https://www.lifeinnorway.net/scandinavian-socialism/
I think when I speak of socialism what I'm referring to is pure socialism as in the case of Venezuela Wilts .
I've absolutely no problem with a mixed economy what's so ever just as long as it's returning the profits made back to the taxpayer and spent by the government across the land where needed and isn't a drain on the economy and has to be propped up .
I was always far from convinced that simply privatising something was the only solution to creating efficiency and value to the customer , the railway industry is a classic example of this .
The Scandinavian countries are something I could hang my hat on but I'm always fairly sceptical about these things , what works in one part of the world is then bound to work in another , not necessarily because people are so culturally different .
The Norwegians were of course greatly helped by the oil revenue and it's profits put in to the wealth fund that supports a good welfare system and pensions .
Thatcher on the other hand used our oil revenue to prop the country up whilst she carried on decimating our industries .
I'll probably be long gone before things come to a head in this country although I hope not obviously .
I'm of the opinion that great change comes from the people and I'm afraid until that happens the two major parties will continue to pull the people's pants down to attain power or keep themselves in power .
I'm more than convinced that the 2016 EU referendum wouldn't have happened if the powers that be had known in advance how that result would turn out so out of touch were they .
Not even Johnson , the ERG or Farage deep down thought they'd win and when they did they shyte themselves , Farage couldn't get away quick enough and he'd campaigned all his political life for it .
In fact the whole political system shyte themselves .
Ain't one of em had a clue where to go from there because the truth is they never thought they'd win as I say .
-
All very interesting but you are deviating from the point again.
You know what you don't want and don't like - but what is it you do want? What direction and policies should the Labour Party take?
As regards the Norwegian oil revenue - its Finland that often comes out top of surveys where people are the happiest in the world. I don't believe they have a great deal of oil?
-
All very interesting but you are deviating from the point again.
You know what you don't want and don't like - but what is it you do want? What direction and policies should the Labour Party take?
As regards the Norwegian oil revenue - its Finland that often comes out top of surveys where people are the happiest in the world. I don't believe they have a great deal of oil?
Deviating ?
Tha put Scandinavia in to the debate .
Anyway , lets drill down to what I want to see Labour do , I swear to god I've done this before maybe even on this thread !!!
ffs ditch the identity politics please .
Concentrate on what's important to people , it ain't BLM , trust me it isn't .
Clean the streets up and be tough on drug dealing and anti social behaviour , be proper tough , these lowlifes destroy communities .
Make work pay , other than disabilities benefits should never match or better a days work and I don't give a feck how many kids you have , you produced em .... you feed em ....not me or anybody else .
Purchase through councils or housing associations stocks of housing , the council with its maintenance programmes are the best landlords you can have .
Stop back door privatisation of the NHS , fund it fit for purpose at the levels Blair did , minus the back door privatisation .
I want to see the workplace improved for workers , times have changed so ill scrub the trade union angle , I want to see an accreditation given out that stands companies out from the rest on the basis of worker - management consultation on pay , health n safety , share ownership and pensions , similar to what you see with environmental standards or best practices , a bit of a big project I admit but necessary .
I want consumers or company to company trade to see that as a company do business with , a badge of honour , if you ain't got the accreditation it impacts on you .
Change the fecking culture in the workplace .
There's two types of contracts by law available to offer , full time or part time agreed at the point of appointment , there are no ZHC's anymore , they are unlawful , make it happen .
Can we not have a good look at the high street , is it really all over in the online era , , vinyl records have enjoyed a renaissance and books still stand strong , high streets are the heartbeat of communities along with pubs , its only all over if you don't fight back .
Strong communities with services , affordable housing , decent workplaces and healthcare attract and sustain Labour votes .
-
Tyke.
BLM matters to many black people.
I entirely agree with much of your take. What I don't understand is why that necessarily precludes also dealing with systemic racism where it exists. Why can't left politics include improving the lot of post-Industrial working class towns AND people who currently have to live with systemic racism?
-
Tyke.
BLM matters to many black people.
I entirely agree with much of your take. What I don't understand is why that necessarily precludes also dealing with systemic racism where it exists. Why can't left politics include improving the lot of post-Industrial working class towns AND people who currently have to live with systemic racism?
Ok Billy ditch the identity politics is perhaps a bit strong and of course these things are important to build a better society and should be addressed robustly .
The problem is the Labour Party comes across as totally consumed by identity politics , that's the problem mate .
In an ideal world we wouldn't but having this exchange on this subject .
I'm comfortable in saying this but the UK isn't the US Billy and personally I find BLM a bit of an import to tell the truth .
The progress I've seen in this country certainly since I was a younger man in the late 70's and 80's is monumental and nobody seems to acknowledge that in this country .
What we are getting now is this tweet , that comment on instagram or Facebook magnified as though nothing has ever changed .
The country's changed monumentally in the last 40 years in that respect .
That's my point .
We all get discriminated against in one form or another don't we ? , I've six fingers and shag my sister apparently and you live in a caravan and make your living tarmacing people's drives for instance .
Let's at least put this in some kind of order and not be consumed by it is where I'm at .
-
Tyke
Which non-neoliberal country outside of the EU do you see as a model for the type of society you would like to see?
You say socialism doesn't work. Are you including Scandanavian Socialism in that?
https://www.lifeinnorway.net/scandinavian-socialism/
Social Democracy is the name. ;)
-
I thought I'd bump this as poor old Stabber seems to be yesterdays man already.
Where's his fans gone to?
-
Congratulations to Boris Johnson, his Charisma, Integrity and good looks have really overshadowed Mr personality Stabber Starmer ans MR nobody knows me ED Davis in no time at all.
-
I thought the two policies he announced yesterday were good and what he said was pretty strong.
Again the problem Labour have though is I liked a lot of it. Shouldn't be a problem you'd say but if I liked it you'd imagine the very left of the part wouldn't - and we saw that with momentum not being happy with it. If he can surge past that very left wing part of the party, they have every chance of a win next time round. But we all know it's a big ask for him to do it.
No doubt politically they would have been expecting a real opportunity to criticise the vaccine programme, they set up for that but it's gone so well they don't have that option and I suspect many will move on from Covid very quickly once a lot of things are eased. I like the approach to think forwards not backwards. I suspect I'll change my view when they start mooting higher taxes mind.
-
Congratulations to Boris Johnson, his Charisma, Integrity and good looks have really overshadowed Mr personality Stabber Starmer ans MR nobody knows me ED Davis in no time at all.
Conservative European Forum
THE TRADE AND COOPERATION AGREEMENT: THE JUSTICE AND SECURITY CHALLENGES AHEAD
By Lord Sandhurst QC February 2021
https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/conservativegroupforeurope/pages/330/attachments/original/1613563135/The_Trade_and_Cooperation_Agreement_-_The_Justice_and_Security_challenges_ahead_by_Lord_Guy_Sandhurst_QC.pdf
Losses
1. SIS II: centralised EU database of stolen identity documents and wanted people. The UK will lose all access to the EU's Schengen Information System II (SIS II), which is a database of alerts and instructions if a person of interest - under which anyone circulated as wanted or missing is automatically visible to 27 EU Member States. That covers the range of missing persons or someone involved in terrorism-related activities, or objects connected to terrorism - which are found as they enter or leave the UK. This will be damaging.
It will not be the same to send requests to Interpol. There are differences between how SIS II and Interpol operate, albeit the NCA believe that both sides will strive to have a system which is efficient. Potentially, EU states lose similarly in respect of UK information. There is a significant loss of access to data on a real time basis to all parties’ disadvantage. Reliability and completeness will depend on the efficiency of input by Member States.
2. VIS: loss of access to this centralised EU database storing fingerprints and digital photographs of applicants for Schengen visas.
There are no correlative benefits to balance against these losses of SIS II and VIS.
3. Eurodac: This is significant as the absence of information about those who seek asylum in the UK who have already become known to a third EU member state will be material in whether or not their claims in the UK will be regarded as "inadmissible" under the new asylum procedures instituted by the Home Office from the beginning of January 2021 (that any person who travelled to the UK through a safe country will have their asylum case declared inadmissible) which supplant the Dublin III procedures of which the UK is no longer a part since its departure from the EU.
Further, in the absence of bilateral return mechanism agreements with third countries it will be hard, if not impossible to return those whose claims are ruled as inadmissible.
4. Europol: loss of real time information searches and full participation and influence. These are losses with no benefits.
5. Data access conditions: in some cases, access to data might only be made available under stricter conditions than previously. It is to be hoped that a favourable decision on data adequacy is granted.
6. European Arrest Warrant: the UK is no longer a member of the European Arrest Warrant regime. Surrender (extradition) will in practice no longer be automatic.
a) EU Member States may refuse to extradite their own citizens, which is not the case under the EAW process. Germany, Austria and Slovenia have already indicated they will not extradite their own nationals37. In all, there will be serious obstacles to the extradition of nationals from potentially sixteen Member States. In respect of these, the best that will be achieved will be a trial of the wanted individual in that state where he or she is a citizen.
b) For non-terrorist offences, the ‘political’ exception makes a come-back. That has benefits but they are not all one way. At some time in the future, it is not difficult to see certain member states turning that against the UK.
c) The ‘double criminality’ requirement returns unless the relevant states have opted for it not to.
d) By reason of the above, the process will be more complex and uncertain.
Oh, and in 2019 the UK conducted a mere 603 million searches through SIS II. Of course, this will now no longer be possible.
Congratulations Boris!
-
I thought I'd bump this as poor old Stabber seems to be yesterdays man already.
Where's his fans gone to?
An empty taxi cab pulled up outside the Labour Party HQ and Keir Starmer got out .
:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
-
I thought I'd bump this as poor old Stabber seems to be yesterdays man already.
Where's his fans gone to?
Do you mean Labour fanboys mate.
-
He doesn't have fanboys because he's a bit crap. I say this as someone who voted for him, I've now left the party because of him.
-
He doesn't have fanboys because he's a bit crap. I say this as someone who voted for him, I've now left the party because of him.
As have I, as well as removing my Union political levy and I'll withhold my vote in the upcoming local and Mayoral election.
Not for me.
-
MM & WB who would your picks for leader be and how would they be better?
-
There is a critical moment coming up as we start to look post-virus.
Sunak has said multiple times that he is shaping up for more Austerity. he is playing a very elegant political game in this week's Budget by arguing that we need to start balancing the books.
The issue for anyone, and especially anyone on the Left should be that balancing the books is NOT the priority at the moment. Growing the economy as fast as we can should be the priority for years to come. That requires the Govt to spend more than it brings in to keep the economy growing. Allow Sunak to win the argument that we should balance the books, and you have effectively given the Tories the green light to cut Govt spending, just as they have done for the past decade.
But Sunak is a VERY skillful politician and he's going to throw a hand grenade into Labour's ranks in the Budget. He is going to say that the first people to pay should be big business and we should increase Corporation Tax. The Corbynite Left like the sound of this and they want Labout to support it. But if Labour does, they have effectively agreed that we should prioritise balancing the books. So Starmer has said Labour will not support this. And, predictably, the Corbynistas have been out in force this week saying that proves Starmer is a Blairite, on the side of big business rather than the public. When in fact, what Starmer is doing is PRECISELY what the textbook economics that Corbyn and McDonnell were (correctly) advocating previously says we should do to get us out of the COVID slump.
The Left are blundering straight into Sunak's trap. Seeing what they want to see in Starmer instead of seeing the bigger picture. They have decided that Starmer is a sell-out and that blinds them to the facts when, like here, he is actually doing the correct thing.
-
MM & WB who would your picks for leader be and how would they be better?
Thats not my problem, thats the Labour party's. However my recommendation to them is that when they realise Starmer isn't the answer that they find an actual unity candidate.
I've not always been a Labour voter nor would I wish to ever be that foolish to eternally tick a box regardless of what policies they stand on.
-
There is a critical moment coming up as we start to look post-virus.
Sunak has said multiple times that he is shaping up for more Austerity. he is playing a very elegant political game in this week's Budget by arguing that we need to start balancing the books.
The issue for anyone, and especially anyone on the Left should be that balancing the books is NOT the priority at the moment. Growing the economy as fast as we can should be the priority for years to come. That requires the Govt to spend more than it brings in to keep the economy growing. Allow Sunak to win the argument that we should balance the books, and you have effectively given the Tories the green light to cut Govt spending, just as they have done for the past decade.
But Sunak is a VERY skillful politician and he's going to throw a hand grenade into Labour's ranks in the Budget. He is going to say that the first people to pay should be big business and we should increase Corporation Tax. The Corbynite Left like the sound of this and they want Labout to support it. But if Labour does, they have effectively agreed that we should prioritise balancing the books. So Starmer has said Labour will not support this. And, predictably, the Corbynistas have been out in force this week saying that proves Starmer is a Blairite, on the side of big business rather than the public. When in fact, what Starmer is doing is PRECISELY what the textbook economics that Corbyn and McDonnell were (correctly) advocating previously says we should do to get us out of the COVID slump.
The Left are blundering straight into Sunak's trap. Seeing what they want to see in Starmer instead of seeing the bigger picture. They have decided that Starmer is a sell-out and that blinds them to the facts when, like here, he is actually doing the correct thing.
It would be nice if someone in Labour were to actually make this argument to the public. Of the few times the shadow chancellor has appeared, she's echoed similar language to Sunak with regards to "responsibility". The argument that Starmer is simply too clever for the immature left isn't one I buy considering he's stumbling in the polls, especially with regard to BAME voters.
Sunak is going to implement austerity regardless. That much is clear. It's what Tories do. And he will have compliant media to help spin the message, too. To pin it on the left wanting higher corporation tax in this specific instance is a massive, MASSIVE reach.
-
MM.
I didn't pin it on the Left. I said the Left are stumbling exactly into his trap of using this as a stick to beat Starmer with.
Sunak's ideal position is freedom to implement Austerity and Labour at each other's throats. The Left are unwittingly playing ball on this, by putting their hatred of Starmer and obsession on intra-party politics above their understanding of economics and inter-party politics.
-
In keeping the housing bubble going and not raising the tax on fuel, Sunak is keeping some stimulus there BST. Its not all austerity.
-
In keeping the housing bubble going and not raising the tax on fuel, Sunak is keeping some stimulus there BST. Its not all austerity.
No, but he will be making the case that we will need to balance the books by "hard decisions". And we absolutely do not need to do that for a good while yet.
-
There is a critical moment coming up as we start to look post-virus.
Sunak has said multiple times that he is shaping up for more Austerity. he is playing a very elegant political game in this week's Budget by arguing that we need to start balancing the books.
The issue for anyone, and especially anyone on the Left should be that balancing the books is NOT the priority at the moment. Growing the economy as fast as we can should be the priority for years to come. That requires the Govt to spend more than it brings in to keep the economy growing. Allow Sunak to win the argument that we should balance the books, and you have effectively given the Tories the green light to cut Govt spending, just as they have done for the past decade.
But Sunak is a VERY skillful politician and he's going to throw a hand grenade into Labour's ranks in the Budget. He is going to say that the first people to pay should be big business and we should increase Corporation Tax. The Corbynite Left like the sound of this and they want Labout to support it. But if Labour does, they have effectively agreed that we should prioritise balancing the books. So Starmer has said Labour will not support this. And, predictably, the Corbynistas have been out in force this week saying that proves Starmer is a Blairite, on the side of big business rather than the public. When in fact, what Starmer is doing is PRECISELY what the textbook economics that Corbyn and McDonnell were (correctly) advocating previously says we should do to get us out of the COVID slump.
The Left are blundering straight into Sunak's trap. Seeing what they want to see in Starmer instead of seeing the bigger picture. They have decided that Starmer is a sell-out and that blinds them to the facts when, like here, he is actually doing the correct thing.
It would be nice if someone in Labour were to actually make this argument to the public. Of the few times the shadow chancellor has appeared, she's echoed similar language to Sunak with regards to "responsibility". The argument that Starmer is simply too clever for the immature left isn't one I buy considering he's stumbling in the polls, especially with regard to BAME voters.
Sunak is going to implement austerity regardless. That much is clear. It's what Tories do. And he will have compliant media to help spin the message, too. To pin it on the left wanting higher corporation tax in this specific instance is a massive, MASSIVE reach.
MM.
By the way, the Labour front bench ARE making this case to the public. See here just today.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/uk.finance.yahoo.com/amphtml/news/budget-2021-labour-shadow-chancellor-anneliese-dodds-speech-114029166.html
Problem is, the Left has decided it doesn't want to listen to it.
-
They're making these comments in livestreams that have 20-30 people watching, BST. Dodds had one last week that they didn't announce until 30 minutes after it started. It's a joke. I seem to remember you attacking Corbyn during the Brexit campaign for this exact thing, and this is far worse! I don't particularly buy their messaging in that article, either - it seems like a transparent attempt to talk about tax hikes on families to go along with their woolly "standing up for families" messaging that's been rolled out recently. Even though tax hikes on families isn't really something that's on the agenda. It's just vague and nakedly transparent at a time when people are crying out for an alternative. Just look at Dodds' personal polling. Their economic argument just isn't landing, and that's nothing to do with Corbynistas.
By the by, I fully accept Corbyn and McDonnell's economic arguments didn't land either. Their polling was dogshit by 2019 which proves that.
Starmer was elected under a year ago with a massive mandate, which surely included a decent chunk of the party's left. Myself included. If the left are discovering they don't want to listen to Starmer anymore, maybe he should stop standing in front of flags and start saying something worth listening to? At the minute, Starmer seems to have Swinson syndrome - the more people see of him, the less they like him. Is calling that out, the way you called Corbyn out many times, really just left wing infighting?
-
There is a critical moment coming up as we start to look post-virus.
Sunak has said multiple times that he is shaping up for more Austerity. he is playing a very elegant political game in this week's Budget by arguing that we need to start balancing the books.
The issue for anyone, and especially anyone on the Left should be that balancing the books is NOT the priority at the moment. Growing the economy as fast as we can should be the priority for years to come. That requires the Govt to spend more than it brings in to keep the economy growing. Allow Sunak to win the argument that we should balance the books, and you have effectively given the Tories the green light to cut Govt spending, just as they have done for the past decade.
But Sunak is a VERY skillful politician and he's going to throw a hand grenade into Labour's ranks in the Budget. He is going to say that the first people to pay should be big business and we should increase Corporation Tax. The Corbynite Left like the sound of this and they want Labout to support it. But if Labour does, they have effectively agreed that we should prioritise balancing the books. So Starmer has said Labour will not support this. And, predictably, the Corbynistas have been out in force this week saying that proves Starmer is a Blairite, on the side of big business rather than the public. When in fact, what Starmer is doing is PRECISELY what the textbook economics that Corbyn and McDonnell were (correctly) advocating previously says we should do to get us out of the COVID slump.
The Left are blundering straight into Sunak's trap. Seeing what they want to see in Starmer instead of seeing the bigger picture. They have decided that Starmer is a sell-out and that blinds them to the facts when, like here, he is actually doing the correct thing.
I heard a news report this morning suggesting that Sunak would be increasing taxes, including Corporation Tax, for larger businesses.
As for Austerity, well I suppose it depends on what steps he will want to impose initially and from when.
Every journey has to start with one step.
-
MM
The issue is, as I said before, if you accept NOW that the books have to be balanced quickly, and you accept the Corporation Tax increase as the first step, you are opening the door for more Austerity later on.
As for communication, this isn't remotely like Corbyn and Brexit. Back then, he could have had a platform to shout out support for Remain, but he chose to debate Benn's attitude to the EU on an obscure American socialist group webchat 24 hours before the polls closed. The current circumstances are nothing like that. It is about putting markers down, this far out from a vote. Positioning. Having a stance you can refer to when the Election comes along in 45 months time.
-
It's a clever political move though as you say. Labour policy is to increase CT and thus it's nigh on impossible for them to object to something they've called for.
I'm not a big believer in CT rises myself, but there comes a time where that is required and it is now. It shouldn't be forgotten that tax take on CT will decrease this year and next given the pandemic anyway as many less businesses will fall in to the bracket to pay it. Still minimal signs of an online sales tax, disappointing if that is not forthcoming.
-
BFYP. It's about timing. It is Economics101 that you don't even think about Govt balancing the books when the economy is on its knees. If Sunak puts up Corporation tax tomorrow, he either doesn't understand the economics, or he is choosing to prioritise playng politics.
-
BFYP. It's about timing. It is Economics101 that you don't even think about Govt balancing the books when the economy is on its knees. If Sunak puts up Corporation tax tomorrow, he either doesn't understand the economics, or he is choosing to prioritise playng politics.
It's not about that though is it? It's a redistribution from those who've been hugely successful in a crisis. If you make no/minimal profit it's mostly irrelevant anyway.
-
Worth pointing out that just 9% of the population oppose the idea of a windfall tax on large companies like Amazon. 70% support it. (source: Survation https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Evd1ZZfWgAUv7KT?format=png&name=900x900 ) If Labour is making the argument that BST says they are, they aren't doing a very good job of it. Making companies pay their fair share is a separate issue from balancing the books in my view. If the grown ups are back in charge at Labour it shouldn't be particularly hard to delineate the two. You can support making the megarich pay their share in tax while still also making a strong case for a Keynesian economic platform, surely?
-
Dealing with the Amazons and Googles avoiding tax is an entirely different issue. Sunak isn't going to address that by putting up CT.
-
Latest polls have tories 13 points ahead which is a massive turn around from a few months ago, will it be possible for starmer to turn it back round?
-
Latest polls have tories 13 points ahead which is a massive turn around from a few months ago, will it be possible for starmer to turn it back round?
Polls? Or do you mean poll?
-
You know what Polls are Glyn, they are the things you were jumping up and down about with glee when this thread started.
Poor old Stabber Starmer Yesterdays man before yesterday has come really it's been so quick.
-
You know what Polls are Glyn, they are the things you were jumping up and down about with glee when this thread started.
Poor old Stabber Starmer Yesterdays man before yesterday has come really it's been so quick.
Polls (plural) like these?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#2021
-
By-election in Hartlepool inbound. The Labour MP there used expenses to fight a sexual assault case and is stepping down. f**k him, frankly. To be fair it does seem that Starmer has been pushing him to quit for a while. First real electoral test for him.
-
Just imagine how many posts there would have been had that not been a Labour MP.
-
If labour lose Hartlepool god help Stabber and the party.
-
Heavy Brexit vote. Massively reduced Labour majority last time, with no Brexit party to split the vote this time I'd be surprised if it didn't flip, especially given the behaviour of the last guy!
-
First I've heard of this but it sounds like appalling behaviour. Good riddance to him.
-
I went off the you gov one that most seemed quite happy to use when it published labour had reduced the lead till basically nil
Latest polls have tories 13 points ahead which is a massive turn around from a few months ago, will it be possible for starmer to turn it back round?
Polls? Or do you mean poll?
-
Must have been on a good day to bury bad news Billy,not like you to miss a chance for a dig.
OHHHH ERRRRRRRRRRRRRR Wrong party.
-
Heavy Brexit vote. Massively reduced Labour majority last time, with no Brexit party to split the vote this time I'd be surprised if it didn't flip, especially given the behaviour of the last guy!
Same here, its Brexit central up there, big right-wing presence on local councils and a local Tory mayor. That's why Richard Tice stood there in the 2019 election with expectations to win.
I am sure whoever they pick will continue on with upholding the values that make that will make the country great again:
'Smash you ex in the face for a steak' just the message we want our community promoting and our politicians supporting
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/tory-mayor-holds-event-landlord-23716279
https://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/19160641.row-breaks-tory-mayors-meeting-pub-owner-previously-slammed-punch-ex-ad/
-
I went off the you gov one that most seemed quite happy to use when it published labour had reduced the lead till basically nil
Latest polls have tories 13 points ahead which is a massive turn around from a few months ago, will it be possible for starmer to turn it back round?
Polls? Or do you mean poll?
Why did you say 'polls' when you only used one?
-
I went off the you gov one that most seemed quite happy to use when it published labour had reduced the lead till basically nil
Latest polls have tories 13 points ahead which is a massive turn around from a few months ago, will it be possible for starmer to turn it back round?
Polls? Or do you mean poll?
Why did you say 'polls' when you only used one?
there was 2 actually so polls but I only posted the results of the one people have used on here before, is that ok glyn
-
I went off the you gov one that most seemed quite happy to use when it published labour had reduced the lead till basically nil
Latest polls have tories 13 points ahead which is a massive turn around from a few months ago, will it be possible for starmer to turn it back round?
Polls? Or do you mean poll?
Why did you say 'polls' when you only used one?
there was 2 actually so polls but I only posted the results of the one people have used on here before, is that ok glyn
No because by omitting the inconvenient poll result you're lying, aren't you? Which was the other one you so conveniently ignored?
-
https://www.statista.com/statistics/985764/voting-intention-in-the-uk/
-
And the other was the you gov poll but as I’ve never heard of the one above I didn’t bother with it as not sure how accurate but yes I’m obviously lying, you really are a horrible man glyn
-
I wonder if the football club mascot will be standing?
-
Last post March the 17th and now a month later the poor guy after waiting so long for a pint has gone and got himself chucked out of the pub in Bath Somerset.
Boy he is having a bad time of it, you ra ra boys look like you have ditched him on here after a start that promised much with a blast of trumpets, and in no time at all you have cast him aside like a used condom.
I bet Boris is laughing his socks off.
-
Last post March the 17th and now a month later the poor guy after waiting so long for a pint has gone and got himself chucked out of the pub in Bath Somerset.
Boy he is having a bad time of it, you ra ra boys look like you have ditched him on here after a start that promised much with a blast of trumpets, and in no time at all you have cast him aside like a used condom.
I bet Boris is laughing his socks off.
Seems you haven't followed the story very well selby! The landlord is a complete self centred buffoon who clearly puts personal profit above peoples lives based on his comments. But then what else could be expected of you when you obviously believe that it is perfectly in order for a government to lie to its people, lie to the Queen, apply cronyism liberally, and to break the law.
Are you a Covid 19 denier too by any chance?
-
I have been a bit disillusioned with Starmer's lack of personality, but this is a very good response.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1384157340123811853
-
Selby taking the side of a barking mad anti-masker - who knew!
-
Ah the backing group are back and awake, no doubt stabber will nod off to sleep for another month and I will have to post on here to wake you all up again.
The thread set off so promising for you lot until he ran out of steam after about a fortnight. and his personality came to the fore.
I'll prod you all again in another month to wake you all up, unless miracles of miracles stabber does something himself to wake you all up, getting slung out of a pub is going a bit far though and so uncouth, doesn't match the hair style and suit at all.
-
Selby taking the side of a barking mad anti-masker - who knew!
It actually sounds like selby ranting at a world he's never really understood
-
Selby taking the side of a barking mad anti-masker - who knew!
It actually sounds like selby ranting at a world he's never really understood
He's just a WUM. There's literally nothing he wouldn't support if it meant he got bites on here. Makes me miss the days of Madmick, now there was a WUM who put the effort in.
-
Very poor by the pub landlord no need for it what so ever, I think security should have checked if ok to go in first but it’s still no excuse
-
I actually felt sorry for Keir Starmer. No one should be subjected to that kind of abuse and the landlord should be ashamed of himself. Starmer handled the situation very well.
-
I actually felt sorry for Keir Starmer. No one should be subjected to that kind of abuse and the landlord should be ashamed of himself. Starmer handled the situation very well.
Quite right. I despise this attitude that politicians are fair game for verbal abuse. Whatever the opinion of the politician, nobody should be subjected to that.
-
I suspect that when a few people are reading the papers over their rice crispies later this morning they’ll be outraged that the Tory party can compete with the Labour Party more than handsomely when it comes to bitter in fighting.
It begs the question, what else does Cummings have in his armoury about Johnson? Personally, I’m keen to read about that bird he shagged in return for public money to ‘support her business venture’! Or maybe he’ll go way back and dig out the time in 2016 when Johnson claimed that the EU was in the process of bringing in legislation to introduce one size fits all coffins? (Which he incorrectly claimed just in time for the EU referendum?. Coincidentally of course).
Alternatively, I suspect that in actual fact people have got so used to his lying that no body really cares anymore? Depressing.
-
I actually felt sorry for Keir Starmer. No one should be subjected to that kind of abuse and the landlord should be ashamed of himself. Starmer handled the situation very well.
Quite right. I despise this attitude that politicians are fair game for verbal abuse. Whatever the opinion of the politician, nobody should be subjected to that.
And politicians should not give out the same to non members of the tory party. (there is another list)
-
I actually felt sorry for Keir Starmer. No one should be subjected to that kind of abuse and the landlord should be ashamed of himself. Starmer handled the situation very well.
Quite right. I despise this attitude that politicians are fair game for verbal abuse. Whatever the opinion of the politician, nobody should be subjected to that.
HA, should they also have to take written abuse too.
Just asking.
-
Can johnson actually write?
-
I actually felt sorry for Keir Starmer. No one should be subjected to that kind of abuse and the landlord should be ashamed of himself. Starmer handled the situation very well.
Quite right. I despise this attitude that politicians are fair game for verbal abuse. Whatever the opinion of the politician, nobody should be subjected to that.
HA, should they also have to take written abuse too.
Just asking.
No
-
I actually felt sorry for Keir Starmer. No one should be subjected to that kind of abuse and the landlord should be ashamed of himself. Starmer handled the situation very well.
Quite right. I despise this attitude that politicians are fair game for verbal abuse. Whatever the opinion of the politician, nobody should be subjected to that.
HA, should they also have to take written abuse too.
Just asking.
They should have to answer for their comments and policies. It is perfectly acceptbale I actually felt sorry for Keir Starmer. No one should be subjected to that kind of abuse and the landlord should be ashamed of himself. Starmer handled the situation very well.
Quite right. I despise this attitude that politicians are fair game for verbal abuse. Whatever the opinion of the politician, nobody should be subjected to that.
HA, should they also have to take written abuse too.
Just asking.
No
Should they be expected to be held to account in a reasoned and calm way for their actions, comments and policies?
-
I actually felt sorry for Keir Starmer. No one should be subjected to that kind of abuse and the landlord should be ashamed of himself. Starmer handled the situation very well.
Quite right. I despise this attitude that politicians are fair game for verbal abuse. Whatever the opinion of the politician, nobody should be subjected to that.
HA, should they also have to take written abuse too.
Just asking.
They should have to answer for their comments and policies. It is perfectly acceptbale I actually felt sorry for Keir Starmer. No one should be subjected to that kind of abuse and the landlord should be ashamed of himself. Starmer handled the situation very well.
Quite right. I despise this attitude that politicians are fair game for verbal abuse. Whatever the opinion of the politician, nobody should be subjected to that.
HA, should they also have to take written abuse too.
Just asking.
No
Should they be expected to be held to account in a reasoned and calm way for their actions, comments and policies?
Does criticism equal abuse?
Just asking for a friend...
-
I actually felt sorry for Keir Starmer. No one should be subjected to that kind of abuse and the landlord should be ashamed of himself. Starmer handled the situation very well.
Quite right. I despise this attitude that politicians are fair game for verbal abuse. Whatever the opinion of the politician, nobody should be subjected to that.
HA, should they also have to take written abuse too.
Just asking.
They should have to answer for their comments and policies. It is perfectly acceptbale I actually felt sorry for Keir Starmer. No one should be subjected to that kind of abuse and the landlord should be ashamed of himself. Starmer handled the situation very well.
Quite right. I despise this attitude that politicians are fair game for verbal abuse. Whatever the opinion of the politician, nobody should be subjected to that.
HA, should they also have to take written abuse too.
Just asking.
No
Should they be expected to be held to account in a reasoned and calm way for their actions, comments and policies?
Does criticism equal abuse?
Just asking for a friend...
You can tell your friend that IMO criticism doesn’t equal abuse.
Calling people idiots etc or suggesting they can’t write, when very obviously they can, isn’t acceptable.
-
you need to get a life hound if that's all you have
-
I have a great life, don’t worry yourself about me.
-
Over the years I’ve found that those people who do think that abuse is justified are the first to cry foul when abuse is metered out in their direction.
Back in the 80’s certain sections of the Labour Party were more than happy to shout ‘Tory Scum’ at anyone in disagreement with them (even other Labour Party members). Yet when similar abuse was given back it was confirmation of the oppression of the workers by the rich paymasters. Crazy really.
-
I totally agree with you HA, have a look at hounds back catalogue
-
Kettle Pot Black.
-
Actually not hound you have been abusing me for yonks because at present I live beyond the imagino line, you and others that is, but when I return the favour ...................
-
Actually not hound you have been abusing me for yonks because at present I live beyond the imagino line, you and others that is, but when I return the favour ...................
You are making that up SR.
I have never abused you because you live in Australia, which is what I think you mean.
I have asked stuff like why does things like Brexit matter to you or objected when you have suggested I am a Tory voter et al and sometimes admitted that I have laughed at some of your blinkered (IMO) points of view.
What is the imagino line by the way.
-
What the f**k should it matter to you where I live, I'm on the forum is all, when you've answered that ...................
-
What the f**k should it matter to you where I live, I'm on the forum is all, when you've answered that ...................
You haven’t answered my question though.
-
Tough shit hound, grow up
-
I totally agree with you HA, have a look at hounds back catalogue
For the record, my comment wasn’t aimed either directly or subliminally at any poster on here. It was a general reference in relation to human nature and attitudes.
-
Tough shit hound, grow up
Don’t forget to pick the toys up later.
Bye, got things to do now.
Imagino..........
-
You can tell your friend that IMO criticism doesn’t equal abuse.
Calling people idiots etc or suggesting they can’t write, when very obviously they can, isn’t acceptable.
Calling people idiots when they do something idiotic - as per the fouls for the penalties on Tuesday eve or the police action at the Sarah Everard vigil is imho acceptable.
However used as a form of abuse against fellow posters on the forum, fully agreed.
-
I totally agree with you HA, have a look at hounds back catalogue
For the record, my comment wasn’t aimed either directly or subliminally at any poster on here. It was a general reference in relation to human nature and attitudes.
Apologies HA for using your comment as a pivot, I shouldn't react when the child of the forum shouts nasty things because he doesn't like my politics but I do occasionally.
-
Last post March the 17th and now a month later the poor guy after waiting so long for a pint has gone and got himself chucked out of the pub in Bath Somerset.
Boy he is having a bad time of it, you ra ra boys look like you have ditched him on here after a start that promised much with a blast of trumpets, and in no time at all you have cast him aside like a used condom.
I bet Boris is laughing his socks off.
I suppose it goes to ones own integrity of where your support goes, does one support a person that qualified at the bar and almost exclusively dealt with human rights issues and gained a knighthood for services for his work as director of public prosecution services (not for donating to the tory party) or to a dilettante with absolutely nothing of note to his name except plenty of question marks and who more than likely spends too much time in the bar.
-
No qualifications in life, or praise of any kind, or awards including a knighthood make someone exempt from lies or deceit.
Take Keir Starmer for instance.
-
Anyone who could publically stand in front of the cameras on a station platform leading a bunch of nobody's on a trek to meet EU leaders on the Eurostar train to help to overturn a democratic vote by the UK population and think that he and his kind could overturn the vote should be now spending time reflecting his actions in prison, and in past times would still be on show hanging on the gibbet for treason.
That was a show of complete distrust and ignorance and disdain of the UK citizens that took part in the referendum and the result.
He is and will always be a Quisling.
-
Anyone who could publically stand in front of the cameras on a station platform leading a bunch of nobody's on a trek to meet EU leaders on the Eurostar train to help to overturn a democratic vote by the UK population and think that he and his kind could overturn the vote should be now spending time reflecting his actions in prison, and in past times would still be on show hanging on the gibbet for treason.
That was a show of complete distrust and ignorance and disdain of the UK citizens that took part in the referendum and the result.
He is and will always be a Quisling.
In spite of all that he is a far better man and person than Boris though.
-
Even if that was a matter of fact instead of opinion it wouldn't necessarily qualify him as a better Prime Minister.
-
Even if that was a matter of fact instead of opinion it wouldn't necessarily qualify him as a better Prime Minister.
True, but surely it helps if the PM is a good man? Given his catalogue of lies, does anyone still believe that Johnson is a good man?
-
We'll find out at the next election.
-
Were I to choose a reliable friend or someone to Marry my daughter there is only one choice and that certainly isn’t Boris. He would also be behind Keir Starmer if I needed defending in court.
Boris being PM doesn’t automatically make him the best candidate or right for the job. I find the current options for voters of all persuasions very depressing and I can’t see it changing in the near future.
-
No qualifications in life, or praise of any kind, or awards including a knighthood make someone exempt from lies or deceit.
Take Keir Starmer for instance.
You've told us about one compared to the hundred johnson has made, nothing stopping you from completing the list except you don't have anything aye bb.
-
No qualifications in life, or praise of any kind, or awards including a knighthood make someone exempt from lies or deceit.
Take Keir Starmer for instance.
then you don't know what goes on in the office public prosecutions.
-
No qualifications in life, or praise of any kind, or awards including a knighthood make someone exempt from lies or deceit.
Take Keir Starmer for instance.
You've told us about one compared to the hundred johnson has made, nothing stopping you from completing the list except you don't have anything aye bb.
That's because I don't go looking, Syderney. If I did, I'd be as bad as you. No doubt there has been more, and certainly will be more especially if he ever gets into power.
-
No qualifications in life, or praise of any kind, or awards including a knighthood make someone exempt from lies or deceit.
Take Keir Starmer for instance.
then you don't know what goes on in the office public prosecutions.
What?
-
No qualifications in life, or praise of any kind, or awards including a knighthood make someone exempt from lies or deceit.
Take Keir Starmer for instance.
You've told us about one compared to the hundred johnson has made, nothing stopping you from completing the list except you don't have anything aye bb.
That's because I don't go looking, Syderney. If I did, I'd be as bad as you. No doubt there has been more, and certainly will be more especially if he ever gets into power.
Keeping your powder dry before it blows up in your face?
You have zero.
£50 bet to the food bank says you can't come up with 10 in 2 days, time to put up again. You pike out last time.
-
It's beyond belief isn't it.
On the one hand you have an ex-journalist who made a career out of telling demonstrably false stories about the EU, who was twice sacked for lying to his boss and who won't even publicly admit how many kids he has fathered.
On the other, you have a QC who built his career on defending people who had been prosecuted by the state and corporations, did piles of pro bono work and ended up as the head of the CPS, with no sign of him ever being a persistent cheat and liar.
But BB is convinced that they are as bad as each other.
-
I would rather pay £100 into a charity than childishly search for scandals to gain political smarty points like you do Skippy.
Instead, I'll just wait for the whoppers to come out straight from the horse's mouth into the ears of the public like the one Starmer did regarding the EU vaccine. I don't and won't use a one-sided rag to prove a point. Besides, the rags I'd find such info in aren't accepted as the truth on this forum unless they suit lefty opinion, of course.
-
It's beyond belief isn't it.
On the one hand you have an ex-journalist who made a career out of telling demonstrably false stories about the EU, who was twice sacked for lying to his boss and who won't even publicly admit how many kids he has fathered.
On the other, you have a QC who built his career on defending people who had been prosecuted by the state and corporations, did piles of pro bono work and ended up as the head of the CPS, with no sign of him ever being a persistent cheat and liar.
But BB is convinced that they are as bad as each other.
When did I say that BST? In my opinion, a liar is a liar, whether he's lied once or a hundred times, NOT whether he is Tory or Labour.
-
Anyone who could publically stand in front of the cameras on a station platform leading a bunch of nobody's on a trek to meet EU leaders on the Eurostar train to help to overturn a democratic vote by the UK population and think that he and his kind could overturn the vote should be now spending time reflecting his actions in prison, and in past times would still be on show hanging on the gibbet for treason.
That was a show of complete distrust and ignorance and disdain of the UK citizens that took part in the referendum and the result.
He is and will always be a Quisling.
Did he, when did he do that Selby? Somewhere in Brexit unicorn land was it?
Jeremy Corbyn has met the EU's chief Brexit negotiator in Brussels for what the Labour leader described as an "interesting, useful discussion".
Afterwards, Mr Corbyn said he was not negotiating with Michel Barnier, who he said had offered "no opinion" about Labour's vision for Brexit.
Labour has said it will oppose any deal Theresa May brings to Parliament if it fails to meet its "six tests".
Mr Barnier said he was "continuing to listen to all views on Brexit".
Mr Corbyn was joined by shadow Brexit secretary Sir Keir Starmer for the talks, which come after Mr Corbyn told his party conference that he would back Theresa May if she proposed a "sensible" deal that kept the UK in a customs union with the EU.
The PM has repeatedly ruled this out.
Speaking after the meeting with Mr Barnier, Mr Corbyn said: "We've had an interesting, useful discussion with Mr Barnier. We have set out the views of the Labour Party surrounding Brexit following the conference speeches made by Keir Starmer and myself.
"We are obviously not negotiating. We are not in government, we are the opposition.
"But he was interested to know what our views are and the six tests we have laid down by which we will hold our government in future."
Asked if Mr Barnier had offered views on Labour's Brexit plan, Mr Corbyn said: "He made no opinion on this. It's not a negotiation, it's us informing him of what our views are and he telling us what the state of play was on the negotiations."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45660640
-
It's beyond belief isn't it.
On the one hand you have an ex-journalist who made a career out of telling demonstrably false stories about the EU, who was twice sacked for lying to his boss and who won't even publicly admit how many kids he has fathered.
On the other, you have a QC who built his career on defending people who had been prosecuted by the state and corporations, did piles of pro bono work and ended up as the head of the CPS, with no sign of him ever being a persistent cheat and liar.
But BB is convinced that they are as bad as each other.
When did I say that BST? In my opinion, a liar is a liar, whether he's lied once or a hundred times, NOT whether he is Tory or Labour.
Is Boris Johnson a liar BB?
-
Boris Johnson has lied in the past yes.
Is Keir Starmer a liar Wilts?
-
BB
You don't have to search for anything on Johnson's lying. It's a matter of public record that he's been sacked twice for lying.
-
Boris Johnson has lied in the past yes.
Is Keir Starmer a liar Wilts?
recent past, just a bit further back than that and most of the rest of his life I would think, you don't suddenly start lying in your middle age.
-
BST, who said I'd searched for Johnson's lying? I haven't searched for any lying on any side of the political spectrum, and most certainly not only one side! That would be really not very grown-up politics, would'nt it Billy?
I am guilty of redressing the balance in answer to such behaviour though.
-
I would rather pay £100 into a charity than childishly search for scandals to gain political smarty points like you do Skippy.
Instead, I'll just wait for the whoppers to come out straight from the horse's mouth into the ears of the public like the one Starmer did regarding the EU vaccine. I don't and won't use a one-sided rag to prove a point. Besides, the rags I'd find such info in aren't accepted as the truth on this forum unless they suit lefty opinion, of course.
johnson is second only to trump put up or shut up, you have nothing
-
Grow up or shut up, Skippy.
-
Yawn
-
Even johnson's old man is a liar. like father ...............
-
Well don't f**king vote for him then!
-
johnson's father won't be standing
-
So why mention him then?
-
BST, who said I'd searched for Johnson's lying? I haven't searched for any lying on any side of the political spectrum, and most certainly not only one side! That would be really not very grown-up politics, would it Billy?
I am guilty of redressing the balance in answer to such behaviour though.
BB. I was responding to you saying to SR that you "don't go looking" for evidence of Starmer lying because if you did "I'd be as bad as you".
My point is that no-one NEEDS to go looking for evidence of Johnson lying. You have to make a conscious effort NOT to see that evidence.
-
So, obviously if you saw lies from Boris or any other Tory on live TV you'd mention it on this forum. Would you do the same if it was a Labour MP?
-
If Labour had a leader who had a career-long record of lying, and had been sacked twice for lying, I'd be appalled. I would leave the party and would not vote for a party led by someone with that record.
If Labour had a senior figure who flagrantly lied on a regular basis, of course I would point it out.
There's a common theme with your take on several of the things that we disagree about BB. You have a very fundamentalist black and white approach. People are either saints or devils. You did it over the EU referendum, where you equated flat out lies on issues of objective truth from one side with questionable predictions from the other side. In this case, you want to equate the occasional stumble or dissemble from one person with a career-long record of consistent, deliberate and egregious lying from someone else
I don't accept that premise. I think there is a spectrum. There are very few of us who have a perfectly unblemished record of always telling the raw truth. That doesn't make every one of us a compulsive liar.
-
Good god, I have been out all day and it looks like everyone admits that old Stabber is a treacherous B*****d as Jeremy found out, not one to turn your back on, but don't seem bothered or can't defend him.
I was expecting just a little bit more than changing the subject slightly to try and defend the Quisling among us.
He should be in the tower and a few more along with him from both parties. Old Henry would have sorted them out, although perhaps not, they all give me the idea they would lick backsides to keep their positions in life on expenses so would have thrown themselves at his feet.
-
Come on lads what do you think to your latest rising star Jess Phillips. Now she is trying gone from an ordinary bog standard bird you would pass in the street without a second look, or had the charisma of the mate of the best looking bird at the dance you wnted your mate to get rid of, to polished teeth, new hair style and lost a few pounds to boot.
Pity about the gob though still spouting tripe.
-
And what about the old Coronavirus thread, after a year and over 360 posts on the thread down to No 9 in the popular stakes after 359 posts slating Boris and the Tories 340 by Syd, Wilts and Billy aided by Kato.
Is it that Boris and the Tories are doing fairly well on the subject compared with some of our illustrious EU states that the subject is now Taboo and they can move on to sticking the boot into him on something else, Just asking?
-
What did Horace say?
-
And what about the old Coronavirus thread, after a year and over 360 posts on the thread down to No 9 in the popular stakes after 359 posts slating Boris and the Tories 340 by Syd, Wilts and Billy aided by Kato.
Is it that Boris and the Tories are doing fairly well on the subject compared with some of our illustrious EU states that the subject is now Taboo and they can move on to sticking the boot into him on something else, Just asking?
That’s a fair point actually. The success of the vaccine roll out beats everything else at the moment. Johnson can get away with anything right now in some peoples eyes. In all seriousness, nobody can genuinely deny that Johnson lies pretty much consistently, but the point is do people care enough not to vote for him because of it? I’d say not right now, simply because of the huge sense of relief felt across the country because of the vaccine.
Johnson will ride high in the local elections, because of this. As I’ve said on a previous post, the best thing Labour can do is knuckle down for a bad election night and play the long game. Johnson’s bubble will burst when the bills for Covid begin to arrive and that’s when Labour should begin to make string gains in the build up to the next General Election.
-
I don't think the issue for labour is Boris and vaccine success. The issue is we know nothing about labour right now and that will take time. They appear so far to have a strategy of not being the government and not much else. In time that will change, but right now we don't know what they'd do in government.
-
Boris Johnson has lied in the past yes.
Is Keir Starmer a liar Wilts?
Only in the past BB?
Is Boris Johnson a liar BB?
-
Don't know about the lies Wilts although he is a common politician. I Do know he is a treacherous back stabbing B*****D though, and doesn't hold the common mans opinion in this country very high and vocally doesn't need lecturing in that regard.
By the way has anybody come up with the reason why he entered that pub when it is illegal to do so, especially when not a customer, and the landlord has the legal right to eject him.
Or was he going to the toilet to p**s up someone else's back.
-
Boris Johnson has lied in the past yes.
Is Keir Starmer a liar Wilts?
Only in the past BB?
Is Boris Johnson a liar BB?
Wilts, of course he's only lied in the past! Do you want me to say he's lied in the future? Are you for real?
Now then, I know this will probably go on the ever increasing list of questions you haven't answered but IS KEIR STARMER A LIAR?
-
BB
That capitalised rant is a spectacularly pointless question.
EVERYONE has lied at some point. So by an absolute assessment EVERYONE is a liar.
The question, obviously, is how often someone lies, and over what matters.
Here's one for you. Do you think Keir Starmer lies as frequently, instinctively and over matters of such importance as Boris Johnson?
-
If Labour had a leader who had a career-long record of lying, and had been sacked twice for lying, I'd be appalled. I would leave the party and would not vote for a party led by someone with that record.
But it's alright to vote for a Labour leader if he's an antisemitic, communist, terrorist sympathiser!
If Labour had a senior figure who flagrantly lied on a regular basis, of course I would point it out.
But you'd let him off without even a mention if it was just a one-off, even if it was a whopper! I wonder how many more whoppers he would come out with if his job was to lead the country instead of just protesting against those who do?
There's a common theme with your take on several of the things that we disagree about BB. You have a very fundamentalist black and white approach. People are either saints or devils. You did it over the EU referendum, where you equated flat out lies on issues of objective truth from one side with questionable predictions from the other side. In this case, you want to equate the occasional stumble or dissemble from one person with a career-long record of consistent, deliberate and egregious lying from someone else
Osborne's promise of a punishment budget wasn't a questionable prediction, it was a promise. Cameron never predicted he would resign. He said that he wouldn't.
I don't accept that premise. I think there is a spectrum. There are very few of us who have a perfectly unblemished record of always telling the raw truth. That doesn't make every one of us a compulsive liar.
There are very few of us on this forum who have a perfectly unblemished record of always telling the raw truth regarding all political parties in equal measures.
True, including you, yet you insist on grown-up politics!
-
BB
That capitalised rant is a spectacularly pointless question.
EVERYONE has lied at some point. So by an absolute assessment EVERYONE is a liar.
The question, obviously, is how often someone lies, and over what matters.
Here's one for you. Do you think Keir Starmer lies as frequently, instinctively and over matters of such importance as Boris Johnson?
No, I don't think he does, but if his job was to lead the country instead of just protesting against those who do I believe he would lie far more frequently than he does now.
-
BB.
Do you think PM Starmer would lie as often and as egregiously over matters where the objective truth is known as Johnson does. And do you think ANY previous PM has lied as blatantly and blithely as Johnson does?
-
I don't know. Previous PM's didn't have social media to deal with as much as Johnson has. It seems nowadays that the PM is followed everywhere he goes and everything he says is on the record. Media lies will also make sure that things he doesn't say will go on record also.
I think it was bad enough when Gordon brown's off the cuff "bigoted woman" remark was picked up and used by the press in a below the belt attack, but it is much, MUCH worse nowadays.
-
BB
I'm not talking about off the cuff remarks seized on by obsessives.
Have you ever known a PM repeatedly and obstinately lie about an easily checked matter of objective truth, like for example whether the Withdrawal Agreement with the EU required customs checks between NI and GB.
I AM a political obsessive and I cannot think of anything that comes remotely close.
-
Strange that BST. You seem to spend half of your life obsessing either on here or searching Twitter for anti-government stories to put on here irrespective of whether they're off the cuff or not.
Have you devoted as much time in your life scathing any other Prime Minister before Boris Johnson in that way?
-
And off we go into making it personal again BB. I never learn.
-
It is only personal because I am asking YOU a question, just like you have personally asked me questions!
Have you devoted as much time in your life on Twitter searching for anti-government stories on any other Prime Minister before Boris Johnson?
-
BB.
I don't search for anti Govt stories. I read about news and current affairs. From a wide range of sources. From the left, centre and right. If they all regularly throw up stories of Johnson's lies, I think there's a conclusion which shouldn't be too hard for you to put together.
I'm laughing out loud at the thought that you genuinely think I subscribe to Dig_up_some_shit_on_Boris.com, you daft t**t.
-
If I didn't think it was strange that someone as politically honest and upstanding as you in your belief that there should be no lies in politics, and yet you failed to make a song and dance of Keir Starmer's whopper about the EU vaccine programme, I would consider myself a daft t**t also.
-
Stabber is a Quisling.
-
BB
You'll recall that Starmer apologised and withdrew his comment.
I'll repeat. Until very recently, politicians who lied egregiously and stuck to that despite evidence were pretty much unknown.
If you can point out to me where Johnson has apologised and withdrawn each time he's been shown to lie, I'll accept that nothing has changed.
-
Who's saying nothing has changed? I'm saying the absolute opposite!
-
Did he stab his leader in the back when she did a deal with the EU, take her job then sign a worse one?
-
Who's saying nothing has changed? I'm saying the absolute opposite!
Good. So we are agreed.
We have a PM who lies consistently and instinctively and rarely if ever corrects that. And we have a LotO who has once got a recollection wrong and corrected it immediately.
-
Give over, recollection wrong! If a future Prime Minister fails to recollect his own beliefs then he doesn't deserve to be a future Prime Minister.
-
Do you know BST, I often want to call a truce to our arguments because, despite me being older and therefore obviously wiser than you I often empathize with your views, seeing as I was similar before I matured politically. Then, usually just before I'm about to call a truce, you come out with a post like your last one that makes me think f**k him, let him learn the hard way, like I did.
-
love your jokes bb
-
Give over, recollection wrong! If a future Prime Minister fails to recollect his own beliefs then he doesn't deserve to be a future Prime Minister.
Whereas the current PM who has a string of lies to his name that can be seen from space does deserve to be PM. Given that he IS PM and he won the last election. Odd logic.
-
There is no logic to popularity because popularity is not a quality, it is just something or someone that is liked. Like a Harley Davidson motorbike. Like Big Daddy the wrestler. Like Liam Gallagher the 'singer.'
Popularity is the state or condition of being liked, admired, or supported by many people.
Keir ain't.
-
BB
I'm not talking about off the cuff remarks seized on by obsessives.
Have you ever known a PM repeatedly and obstinately lie about an easily checked matter of objective truth, like for example whether the Withdrawal Agreement with the EU required customs checks between NI and GB.
I AM a political obsessive and I cannot think of anything that comes remotely close.
Has Tony Blair been erased from.history all of a sudden?
-
And which issue of easily checkable objective truth did Blair lie about?
-
There's plenty with a quick Google online. He's seen by ironically mostly labour backers as a historically bad figure. Indeed the only pm to oversee the invasion of another country in most of our lifetimes. I don't think we can preach that all other prime minister's are perfect at all.
Fwiw I liked Tony Blair mostly and thought he did a reasonably good job.
-
I liked Blair too. A lot.
But, thinking about BB’s point about social media then and now, if Blair was prime minister now, I suspect the lies would be stacking up, Johnson-esque.
-
social media doesn't produce the lies johnson does
-
I liked Blair too. A lot.
But, thinking about BB’s point about social media then and now, if Blair was prime minister now, I suspect the lies would be stacking up, Johnson-esque.
Haven't they stacked up yet then?
-
social media doesn't produce the lies johnson does
Absolutely true. The platform is just that a platform. What is true is those platforms give much less hiding place on these things and much more visibility.
-
Cheers Belton. It's good to see The Voice Of Reason getting credit now and again for a very valid, truthful point that's been ignored by the lefties.
If there is one good thing about a Labour party getting into power it is the karma of them getting a kicking every minute of every day on social media and news outlets. I wonder how the handful of lefties would handle the abuse their leader would get on here every day?
Whether that'll be Karma Starmer I don't know, in fact, I'm not sure if I'll see another Labour government in my lifetime.
-
I liked Blair too. A lot.
But, thinking about BB’s point about social media then and now, if Blair was prime minister now, I suspect the lies would be stacking up, Johnson-esque.
Haven't they stacked up yet then?
I don’t know what you mean, Glyn.
-
social media doesn't produce the lies johnson does
Absolutely true. The platform is just that a platform. What is true is those platforms give much less hiding place on these things and much more visibility.
Imagine what Johnson would have got away with in the days before social media! But no doubt there'd have been some who'd still try and argue that Johnson's actions were somebody else's fault and not Johnson's, just like they do today.
-
Cheers Belton. It's good to see The Voice Of Reason getting credit now and again for a very valid, truthful point that's been ignored by the lefties.
If there is one good thing about a Labour party getting into power it is the karma of them getting a kicking every minute of every day on social media and news outlets. I wonder how the handful of lefties will handle the abuse their leader would get on here every day?
Whether that'll be Karma Starmer I don't know, in fact, I'm not sure if I'll see another Labour government in power in my lifetime.
blah blah, look at yourself first bb someone that has worked to improve society and you slag him off and try to compare him to johnson
-
I liked Blair too. A lot.
But, thinking about BB’s point about social media then and now, if Blair was prime minister now, I suspect the lies would be stacking up, Johnson-esque.
Haven't they stacked up yet then?
I don’t know what you mean, Glyn.
Social media was there when Blair was in office. And it's been 14 years of ever-increasing social media since he left office. Where's the stack?
-
That’s the whole point, Glyn. He would have got away with many things. Just like Blair probably did.
-
probably?
-
I liked Blair too. A lot.
But, thinking about BB’s point about social media then and now, if Blair was prime minister now, I suspect the lies would be stacking up, Johnson-esque.
Haven't they stacked up yet then?
I don’t know what you mean, Glyn.
Social media was there when Blair was in office. And it's been 14 years of ever-increasing social media since he left office. Where's the stack?
There is absolutely no comparison to social media then and now. Take this forum for example...
-
probably?
Of course probably. Just like Johnson would probably have been able to lie and get away with lots of it back then.
-
Again social media does not invent the lies. Scandals were exposed well before social media it's just and easier way to tell ones story ........... or lies.
-
I liked Blair too. A lot.
But, thinking about BB’s point about social media then and now, if Blair was prime minister now, I suspect the lies would be stacking up, Johnson-esque.
Haven't they stacked up yet then?
I don’t know what you mean, Glyn.
Social media was there when Blair was in office. And it's been 14 years of ever-increasing social media since he left office. Where's the stack?
There is absolutely no comparison to social media then and now. Take this forum for example...
But social media has scrutinised Blair for a lot longer than they have Johnson. Are you really trying to say that social media stopped scrutinising and listing Blair's actions the second he left office, because if you are saying that you're going to look a bit silly. Where's the stack? If you can't point one out, just tell us.
-
Again social media does not invent the lies. Scandals were exposed well before social media it's just and easier way to tell ones story ........... or lies.
I don’tthink anyone has suggested it does, Sydney.
-
That’s the whole point, Glyn. He would have got away with many things. Just like Blair probably did.
what does this mean then?
-
That’s the whole point, Glyn. He would have got away with many things. Just like Blair probably did.
'Probably'? It's had twenty years to come out, so where's the stuff he 'got away with' at the time that social media has had twenty years to show everybody? If it's not out now, it couldn't possibly have come out then, so using lack of social media as an excuse falls flat on it's face.
-
I liked Blair too. A lot.
But, thinking about BB’s point about social media then and now, if Blair was prime minister now, I suspect the lies would be stacking up, Johnson-esque.
Haven't they stacked up yet then?
I don’t know what you mean, Glyn.
Social media was there when Blair was in office. And it's been 14 years of ever-increasing social media since he left office. Where's the stack?
There is absolutely no comparison to social media then and now. Take this forum for example...
But social media has scrutinised Blair for a lot longer than they have Johnson. Are you really trying to say that social media stopped scrutinising and listing Blair's actions the second he left office, because if you are saying that you're going to look a bit silly. Where's the stack? If you can't point one out, just tell us.
Glyn. A few months back there was a lot of talk on here about misrepresenting posters’ words. You seem to be single handedly bringing that back into the spotlight. Try to be a bit more mature about things.
Social media scrutiny was incomparable 20-30 years ago to today. Of course, over the years, the power of social media has increased, and similarly, the past moves further and further into the past.
In the grand scheme of things, no one really cares about what Blair did in the 90s. Just like Johnson won’t be the topic of conversation in 20 years time. That will probably be another Tory government still in charge because there’s no better alternative.
But none of that is really the point. The point is that today, social media is used to whip up a frenzy of accusations, some valid, some not. It has been a huge platform for many, many voices, otherwise relatively unheard before, to share information and give opinion. This now filters down to you and I like never before.
This has gained incredible momentum in very recent years, despite how long ‘social media’ may have existed previously.
My point about Blair is actually more about Johnson. I know you and others THINK I believe he does no wrong and doesn’t lie, but that’s because of the black or white, with us or agin us attitude many people seem to have.
Let me try and clear this up for you once again: Johnson lies. He is a liar. If the very recent accusations, which are being whipped up via frenzied social media sources, are proved to be true, then he should resign in absolute disgrace.
But I also think that if Johnson was PM when Blair was, he would have got away with much more than he is doing now.
I hope I’ve made it a bit clearer.
-
That’s the whole point, Glyn. He would have got away with many things. Just like Blair probably did.
what does this mean then?
See post above.
-
Belton.
For the record, the current "frenzy" was initiated by the time-old idea of newspaper journalists doing their job and investigating, and an ex-aide shining a spotlight on where the skeletons are.
PMs have faced those potential issues for generations. It is absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with social media.
-
That’s nonsense, Billy.
How many times was your point of view printed in the media, with links to ‘evidence’.
How many times was a piece in The Times, The Guardian, The Sun, The Telegraph, The Mirror etc, etc, etc, followed by repost, after repost, after repost, after repost?
How many times, before social media could you pick up a newspaper and be instantly inundated with an absolute plethora of information which, eventually, could not be ignored?
-
That’s the whole point, Glyn. He would have got away with many things. Just like Blair probably did.
what does this mean then?
See post above.
this forum and reading links on it from twitter is the only social media I use.
''no one really cares about what Blair did in the 90s. Just like Johnson won’t be the topic of conversation in 20 years time''
I wouldn't bet on that ............ Profumo, Chamberlain ........................
-
How many other politicians do you think would have been caught out shagging prostitutes had social media been a thing during Profumo’s time?
-
I think Belton has a point - but it is not the point he is trying to make.
In the age od social media ANYONE can make allegations - and have a big audience for them, true or otherwise.
In the age before social media, only journalists, or other radio, print or tv commentators, could make allegations and have that audience.
The best example is the events that led to Edward VIII's abdication. Notice of which were published all around the world, but the British press at the time were so hand-in-hand with the government and royal family - they refused to let the British people know. That could never happen today.
So really what you are exposing is the lack of scrutiny, or holding to account, there was before social media.
It hasn't made things better or worse, lies still get out there, but it has given a lot more people the access to them.
-
Thanks for the back handed compliment wilts, though I’m not sure that’s what it was. You are right, of course, about social media giving more people access. That in itself accentuates whatever claim is being made.
But, that’s different to my point, which I still stand by. If anyone thinks it wasn’t easier to lie, and get away with it, before social media, then they are completely deluded. That applies to the PM and to any body else.
-
this is a clearer explanation, thank you
-
Thanks for the back handed compliment wilts, though I’m not sure that’s what it was. You are right, of course, about social media giving more people access. That in itself accentuates whatever claim is being made.
But, that’s different to my point, which I still stand by. If anyone thinks it wasn’t easier to lie, and get away with it, before social media, then they are completely deluded. That applies to the PM and to any body else.
Good points and well made Belton.
However it seemed very obvious to me what you were alluding to without the long ( and probably necessary for some ) explanation.
-
Belton.
Was social media invented in July 2019?
Point being, how come there weren't huge frenzies over, say Theresa May repeatedly lying and being involved in personal aggrandisement?
-
Also, are there any examples of previous PMs twice having been sacked from senior jobs for lying before becoming PM?
-
What were May’s repeated lies?
-
Also, are there any examples of previous PMs twice having been sacked from senior jobs for lying before becoming PM?
What’s that got to do with the social media/lies debate?
-
What were May’s repeated lies?
Precisely.
Johnson isn't being outed for being a liar because of social media. He is outed for being a liar because he is a habitual, lifelong liar. He is qualitatively different from any previous senior politician, before or during the social media age.
-
May wasn’t ‘outed’ by social media as a liar because she wasn’t one. She was just a crap PM.
Johnson is constantly ‘outed’ through social media because he is one, and there is nowhere for him to hide.
I believe that Blair is a dishonest person who hid behind a wonderful smile. If social media had then the power it has today, I think we would have been far more aware of examples of his dishonesty, other than the great big fat one he couldn’t hide.
-
Sir Keir was impressive at PMQ’s today. He’s clearly able to manoeuvre Johnson in a particular direction of his choosing without him realising it. Johnson got seriously riled and then refused to answer Starmers question about who paid the initial invoice. I got the impression that Starmer knows more than he’s letting on.
-
I've been a big critic but Starmer was superb at PMQs today. He got Johnson to deny the "let the bodies pile high" comment, then reminded him that lying to the house is a resignation matter. He clearly knows something we don't, or has a hell of a poker face. Attacking the Tories on stuff like this is a bit of an open goal, true, and needs to be combined with an actual positive vision for Britain which has been lacking for now, but he really exposed Johnson as a shifty liar today.
-
I'll ask again. Do you agree that Johnson is qualitatively different, in being a lifelong habitual liar, outed as such way before the era of social media? That's the key point.
-
Starmer gave the impression that there is evidence to come of Johnson's "bodies piled high" comment. He has him on record at the dispatch box denying that he said that. If Cummings DOES have a recording, that is the end of Johnson.
Whether there is a recording or not, Starmer's closing comment "We'll see. There is a lot more to come" is likely to be causing some panic in Johnson's team.
It was a masterly performance.
-
I'll ask again. Do you agree that Johnson is qualitatively different, in being a lifelong habitual liar, outed as such way before the era of social media? That's the key point.
You haven’t asked me that question before Billy, so I don’t know why you are ‘asking me again’.
All you’ve said is that he was sacked twice for lying before he became Prime Minister.
Does lying twice make someone a habitual, lifelong liar? Absolutely not.
That doesn’t mean he isn’t one, mind.
-
You could argue that Starmer’s speech was masterly, but not his performance. He trips over his tongue and corrects himself like someone who has no confidence in what he is saying.
He’s a poor orator, and that will cost him votes.
-
Starmer gave the impression that there is evidence to come of Johnson's "bodies piled high" comment. He has him on record at the dispatch box denying that he said that. If Cummings DOES have a recording, that is the end of Johnson.
Whether there is a recording or not, Starmer's closing comment "We'll see. There is a lot more to come" is likely to be causing some panic in Johnson's team.
It was a masterly performance.
Do you mean a masterly performance in the true sense of the word or in your own world like Rovers' performance at Lincoln last January?
-
Caught on camera, Carrie Symonds shopping for the no 10 flat!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUnvgKhWZdI
-
Thanks for the back handed compliment wilts, though I’m not sure that’s what it was. You are right, of course, about social media giving more people access. That in itself accentuates whatever claim is being made.
But, that’s different to my point, which I still stand by. If anyone thinks it wasn’t easier to lie, and get away with it, before social media, then they are completely deluded. That applies to the PM and to any body else.
I would say it was an acknowledgement as much as a complement that the premise of your argument, social media has changed the landscape, is very peritent and valid.
I think the biggest change is that is has taken away the 'cosiness' between the media, public figurres, politicians whereas you are arguing something slightly different.
Doesn't mean either of us are righter or wronger than the other, nor does it matter, but clearly we both think social media has had a major impact on how the public read - and now for the first time create their own 'news'. I can't think anyone would disagree. Is this a good or a bad thing? Wellll....
There is a reason Johnson's Downing Street created their own Social Media Unit (led by Chloe Wesley from the TA).
-
Thanks for the back handed compliment wilts, though I’m not sure that’s what it was. You are right, of course, about social media giving more people access. That in itself accentuates whatever claim is being made.
But, that’s different to my point, which I still stand by. If anyone thinks it wasn’t easier to lie, and get away with it, before social media, then they are completely deluded. That applies to the PM and to any body else.
I would say it was an acknowledgement as much as a complement that the premise of your argument, social media has changed the landscape, is very peritent and valid.
I think the biggest change is that is has taken away the 'cosiness' between the media, public figurres, politicians whereas you are arguing something slightly different.
Doesn't mean either of us are righter or wronger than the other, nor does it matter, but clearly we both think social media has had a major impact on how the public read - and now for the first time create their own 'news'. I can't think anyone would disagree. Is this a good or a bad thing? Wellll....
There is a reason Johnson's Downing Street created their own Social Media Unit (led by Chloe Wesley from the TA).
Common sense prevails.
-
You could argue that Starmer’s speech was masterly, but not his performance. He trips over his tongue and corrects himself like someone who has no confidence in what he is saying.
He’s a poor orator, and that will cost him votes.
I’m old enough to remember when Michael Foot was leader of the Labour Party. You’d struggle to find any better parliamentary orator than him and yet he took the party to one of its worst ever election defeats.
-
I completely agree, Herbert. Though it’s no good speaking like Winston when you’re dressed like Wurzel.
-
I completely agree, Herbert. Though it’s no good speaking like Winston when you’re dressed like Wurzel.
Aye, that’s true. I don’t think the anorak at the cenotaph helped much.
-
Boris hit on Stabbers weakness when asking him to name the informants, stopped him dead.
-
Don't knock Michael Foot, he was a leg end.
-
I see Arlene Foster is the latest person to fall foul of Johnson's lies.
-
Starmer was in his element today and given his legal background so he should be .
Starmer was the prosecuting lawyer with Johnson in the dock fighting for his liberty .
All well and good .
Unfortunately it's about presenting to the electorate as opposition leader that you have the vision and policies to form the next government .
A busman's holiday once a week in the house is one thing but winning a GE is quite another .
-
Boris hit on Stabbers weakness when asking him to name the informants, stopped him dead.
Just keeping his powder dry, timing is everything
-
You could argue that Starmer’s speech was masterly, but not his performance. He trips over his tongue and corrects himself like someone who has no confidence in what he is saying.
He’s a poor orator, and that will cost him votes.
Didn't seem to harm Joe Biden.
Mind you, he was running against someone incompetent, corrupt and divisive...
-
And a well known liar Glyn. You missed that bit.
-
That’s it then. Starmer can’t possibly lose the next election. Can he?
-
Losing an election is easy, anybody can do it.
-
Starmer was in his element today and given his legal background so he should be .
Starmer was the prosecuting lawyer with Johnson in the dock fighting for his liberty .
All well and good .
Unfortunately it's about presenting to the electorate as opposition leader that you have the vision and policies to form the next government .
A busman's holiday once a week in the house is one thing but winning a GE is quite another .
True. However is now the right time to be launching visions and policies to win a General Election that’s almost 4 years away? Nobody is interested in a vote winning housing policy for example, with everyone’s focus on covid. I think it’s better for Labour to keep their powder dry for now.
-
It's alright keeping your powder dry if you've got something to ignite it with, otherwise there's no point.
-
Major Sleaze, not a bad moniker from Starmer.
-
Major Sleaze, not a bad moniker from Starmer.
well yes, he does seem to thrive on it.
-
I thought johnson sounded very familiar in question time, have you been coaching him bb?
-
I have been known to give him a bit of advice on how to address numpties.
-
Starmer was in his element today and given his legal background so he should be .
Starmer was the prosecuting lawyer with Johnson in the dock fighting for his liberty .
All well and good .
Unfortunately it's about presenting to the electorate as opposition leader that you have the vision and policies to form the next government .
A busman's holiday once a week in the house is one thing but winning a GE is quite another .
True. However is now the right time to be launching visions and policies to win a General Election that’s almost 4 years away? Nobody is interested in a vote winning housing policy for example, with everyone’s focus on covid. I think it’s better for Labour to keep their powder dry for now.
Absolutely. Oldest truism in politics. Oppositions don't win elections. Governments lose them.
Thatcher didn't win in 1979 because she proclaimed that she was going to double VAT and interest rates and triple unemployment. Callaghan lost the election because of the Winter of Discontent.
Cameron wasn't screaming out for Austerity 4 years before the 2010 election. Labour lost in 2010 because they were blamed for the Great Recession.
Setting out detailed policies in opposition 4 years before an election is a mug's game.
-
There's never been more of a case for that now, especially when we haven't got an opposition party with any policies whatsoever.
-
I have been known to give him a bit of advice on how to address numpties.
It's strange then that he fell straight into the bear trap
-
I thought Starmer was hardly a bear trap. A bear grills far more convincingly than that.
-
look up flailing bb
-
Yes, I've noticed Starmer does that, especially when he's out of his depth, like when he's in the House of Commons.
-
''Inside Keir Starmer’s office, jubilant aides described Boris Johnson’s rant at prime minister’s questions as his “Kevin Keegan moment” – when the drip-drip of sleaze stories seemed to have finally rattled him''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/apr/28/how-much-trouble-is-boris-johnson-in-maybe-quite-a-lot
-
Johnson had totally lost control by the end of PMQs. His final answer was a barely coherent scattergun rant in which (and I shit you not) he went off on one saying that Brexit had helped him stop the European Super League. Not a good sign to show that your opponent has got under your skin.
-
‘Inside Kier Starmer’s office...’
Sounds like. 70s’ gay porn film. But that’s not how you spell orifice.
-
The question is whether Johnson was flustered because he knows he's in trouble or he's angry because he thinks he's not. Equally he may genuinely think it's a non issue. Either way the optics for him are not good.
It was an open goal for starmer and perfect for him as that questioning is his strength undoubtedly and he stepped up to it.
Whether he has enough about him to succeed in a long campaign is questionable but his questioning yesterday was spot on.
-
I heard Starmer is applying for the Rovers managers job and is building up a dossier of sleaze on fellow applicants for his CV as we speak.
-
I heard Starmer is applying for the Rovers managers job and is building up a dossier of sleaze on fellow applicants for his CV as we speak.
There's £50 for the food bank going begging if you are brave enough to back yourself in bb
-
Christ, there's no wonder Johnson was in such a foul mood yesterday. Imagine your missus insisting on spending money you haven't got, to make THIS monstrosity!
https://mobile.twitter.com/Number10cat/status/1387329276555448326
-
You have no style, Billy. It’gorgeous.
-
Very tasteful.
-
https://apple.news/ArOSyDcXJQSiLJI18L2YufA while if he has done anything wrong it should have consequences do people actually care?
-
Christ, there's no wonder Johnson was in such a foul mood yesterday. Imagine your missus insisting on spending money you haven't got, to make THIS monstrosity!
https://mobile.twitter.com/Number10cat/status/1387329276555448326
That's not actually what she created but it is the work of her favourite interior designer.
£850 a roll, gold leaf wallpaper though. It sounds very much like the sort of thing your typical Saudi royal would go for or Donald Trump and his missus.
Apparently she could not live in a John Lewis hell... At least JL advisors will apply some simple design principles to their work.
-
‘Inside Kier Starmer’s office...’
Sounds like. 70s’ gay porn film. But that’s not how you spell orifice.
Oh how the staff giggled amongst themselves.
Such fun.
-
Christ, there's no wonder Johnson was in such a foul mood yesterday. Imagine your missus insisting on spending money you haven't got, to make THIS monstrosity!
https://mobile.twitter.com/Number10cat/status/1387329276555448326
That's not actually what she created but it is the work of her favourite interior designer.
£850 a roll, gold leaf wallpaper though. It sounds very much like the sort of thing your typical Saudi royal would go for or Donald Trump and his missus.
Apparently she could not live in a John Lewis hell... At least JL advisors will apply some simple design principles to their work.
Wait until Johnson jnr gets his crayons out
-
Christ, there's no wonder Johnson was in such a foul mood yesterday. Imagine your missus insisting on spending money you haven't got, to make THIS monstrosity!
https://mobile.twitter.com/Number10cat/status/1387329276555448326
That's not actually what she created but it is the work of her favourite interior designer.
£850 a roll, gold leaf wallpaper though. It sounds very much like the sort of thing your typical Saudi royal would go for or Donald Trump and his missus.
Apparently she could not live in a John Lewis hell... At least JL advisors will apply some simple design principles to their work.
Have we been misled again?
-
Christ, there's no wonder Johnson was in such a foul mood yesterday. Imagine your missus insisting on spending money you haven't got, to make THIS monstrosity!
https://mobile.twitter.com/Number10cat/status/1387329276555448326
That's not actually what she created but it is the work of her favourite interior designer.
£850 a roll, gold leaf wallpaper though. It sounds very much like the sort of thing your typical Saudi royal would go for or Donald Trump and his missus.
Apparently she could not live in a John Lewis hell... At least JL advisors will apply some simple design principles to their work.
Have we been misled again?
Perhaps by the Daily Mail who published the picture in an article about the Downing St refurb but didn't make it clear enough that it wasn't the actual job.
-
Christ, there's no wonder Johnson was in such a foul mood yesterday. Imagine your missus insisting on spending money you haven't got, to make THIS monstrosity!
https://mobile.twitter.com/Number10cat/status/1387329276555448326
That's not actually what she created but it is the work of her favourite interior designer.
£850 a roll, gold leaf wallpaper though. It sounds very much like the sort of thing your typical Saudi royal would go for or Donald Trump and his missus.
Apparently she could not live in a John Lewis hell... At least JL advisors will apply some simple design principles to their work.
Wait until Johnson jnr gets his crayons out
If he needs any there's a few on here that can help out
-
‘Inside Kier Starmer’s office...’
Sounds like. 70s’ gay porn film. But that’s not how you spell orifice.
Strange how autosuggestion works in some folks' heads...
-
‘Inside Kier Starmer’s office...’
Sounds like. 70s’ gay porn film. But that’s not how you spell orifice.
Strange how autosuggestion works in some folks' heads...
Not nearly as strange as how some folk cannot, not even subconsciously, read a light hearted quip using a play on words without then using it as a personal dig.
I’ll lend you my Vic and Bob DVDs if you like. I’m sure that’s where I first heard the office/orifice (snigger) quip.
-
It was a light hearted response Belton, not a personal dig.
-
Christ, there's no wonder Johnson was in such a foul mood yesterday. Imagine your missus insisting on spending money you haven't got, to make THIS monstrosity!
https://mobile.twitter.com/Number10cat/status/1387329276555448326
That's not actually what she created but it is the work of her favourite interior designer.
£850 a roll, gold leaf wallpaper though. It sounds very much like the sort of thing your typical Saudi royal would go for or Donald Trump and his missus.
Apparently she could not live in a John Lewis hell... At least JL advisors will apply some simple design principles to their work.
Wait until Johnson jnr gets his crayons out
If he needs any there's a few on here that can help out
I drew his curtains once during a coaching session.
-
Accepted, Billy. My mistake.
You need to work on your light hearted quips though.
Even when I read it in Joe Pasquale’s voice, it sounds like an unfunny dig.
-
There are currently 32 cases against Labour Lord mayors and councillors ongoing that the main stream media are unable to talk about and give publicity to due to the on coming local elections and bye election, most due to inappropriate miss use of funds.
-
There are currently 32 cases against Labour Lord mayors and councillors ongoing that the main stream media are unable to talk about and give publicity to due to the on coming local elections and bye election, most due to inappropriate miss use of funds.
So how do you know about them then selby? Oh, it must have happened in a dream.
-
Accepted, Billy. My mistake.
You need to work on your light hearted quips though.
Even when I read it in Joe Pasquale’s voice, it sounds like an unfunny dig.
Everything sounds unfunny in Joe Pasquale's voice.
Try Stuart Lee's next time you're thinking of me.
-
Now you’ve got me using autosuggestion again. I’ll keep this one to myself though.
-
Somebody phoned up about them on the radio, and was instantly told that yes they know about them and normally they would be news worthy but under broadcasting rights it is illegal for a period before elections to discuss.
There you go get with it.
-
Doesn't seem to bother the BBC (Brussels Broadcasting Corporation) though.
-
That's because it's b*llocks. Or more likely because the caller was either talking b*llocks or the cases are sub judice (nothing to do with any election) and they used that excuse to get him off the air.
-
Lol I have actually heard this. The source is some guy on Twitter. It's done the rounds among right wing twitter so of course it was lapped up by the talk radio audience of bitter old men with rice pudding for brains.
-
There are currently 32 cases against Labour Lord mayors and councillors ongoing that the main stream media are unable to talk about and give publicity to due to the on coming local elections and bye election, most due to inappropriate miss use of funds.
Did the caller mention when the Tory Party were going to conclude their report into racism and racists in the Tory Party that Johnson promised in the pre-election debates?
As exposed by this chap:
https://twitter.com/matesjacob?lang=en
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/12/revealed-conservative-councillors-islamophobic-social-media
Nah, thought not. Racists welcome here, no questions asked:
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=cases+against+conservative+copuncillors
-
According to the rules of Ofcom Glyn there is only one B****** around here and your on the end of the hook again
-
According to the rules of Ofcom Glyn there is only one B****** around here and your on the end of the hook again
Oh do please show us these Ofcom rules you're talking about. You know, the ones that apply to legal cases and not just to impartial covering of election campaigning. Go on, I dare you.
Hint: don't bother showing us Section 6, that only applies to impartial covering of campaigning.
-
Starmer not exactly covering himself in glory here....... gloating not the best way to win over the electorate IMO
(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/12882/production/_118260957_mediaitem118257593.jpg)
-
I thought it was funny. He's not winning over anyone at present anyway, might as well have a laugh with it. It can hardly hurt him.
-
Just a little limp IMO.
If he was flying in the polls I could perhaps understand it - but this is tacky and he just comes across as a smarmy prick....... or should that be Starmy prick.....
-
Just a little limp IMO.
If he was flying in the polls I could perhaps understand it - but this is tacky and he just comes across as a smarmy prick....... or should that be Starmy prick.....
Very well put MM.
The people in his office can snigger about that too.
-
Just a little limp IMO.
If he was flying in the polls I could perhaps understand it - but this is tacky and he just comes across as a smarmy prick....... or should that be Starmy prick.....
Starter is an absolute Twit!
Very well put MM.
The people in his office can snigger about that too.
-
is it warm and fuzzy on planet selby or weird and disconnected?
-
its in the uk Syderney
-
....they will attack the people exposing the sleaze rather than the ones committing it...
-
''Boris Johnson’s refurbishment of his Downing Street residence could be investigated by parliament’s sleaze watchdog, a move that would mean the prime minister could be personally sanctioned if found to have breached conduct rules''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/apr/29/standards-commissioner-could-investigate-boris-johnson-flat-refurb
-
Pricks in his orifice - there I go again
Yak yak yak
-
Starmer not exactly covering himself in glory here....... gloating not the best way to win over the electorate IMO
(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/12882/production/_118260957_mediaitem118257593.jpg)
Not the brightest of moves by Starmer to be honest. To paraphrase Napoleon....
Never interrupt your enemy while he's making serious cockups.
This only detracts from the seriousness of Johnson latest gaff.
-
This is what happens when someone without a personality tries to engage the public with humour, but instead ends up embarrassing himself, his party and his supporters.
-
Latest you gov poll https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2021/04/29/voting-intention-con-44-lab-33-27-28-apr
-
Latest you gov poll https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2021/04/29/voting-intention-con-44-lab-33-27-28-apr
Hilarious isn't it. Boris would say he's gonna poison the water supply and he'd get a +5.
-
Latest you gov poll https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2021/04/29/voting-intention-con-44-lab-33-27-28-apr
Hilarious isn't it. Boris would say he's gonna poison the water supply and he'd get a +5. Why is that thou there must be a reason?
-
Well done Stabber
-
Latest you gov poll https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2021/04/29/voting-intention-con-44-lab-33-27-28-apr
Hilarious isn't it. Boris would say he's gonna poison the water supply and he'd get a +5.
Why is that thou there must be a reason?
You might be better asking someone who voted Conservative. They're the only ones who understand why BJ is without blame for anything he does wrong.
-
I think any disillusioned Tory voters would look at the alternatives and think ‘Oh. Shit’.
-
tripe n chips sounds nice
-
I think any disillusioned Tory voters would look at the alternatives and think ‘Oh. Shit’.
Do you mean it would be a bit like a disillusioned Bristol City fan changing allegiance to Bristol Rovers?
-
I think any disillusioned Tory voters would look at the alternatives and think ‘Oh. Shit’.
Do you mean it would be a bit like a disillusioned Bristol City fan changing allegiance to Bristol Rovers?
Times up on the bet bb, squibbed again.
-
Well done Stabber
It's still not catching on Selby
-
I think any disillusioned Tory voters would look at the alternatives and think ‘Oh. Shit’.
It has to be that Belton.
What else could it be.
-
As DO said ask tory voters why they vote for a disreputable moron.
-
What is it about Starmer that Tory voters don’t like? What has he actually done (or not) that they object to? Let’s face it, we could create some list detailing Johnson’s failings (and some on here seem to forgive him anything) but what is it about Starmer that’s objectionable?
-
What is it about Starmer that Tory voters don’t like? What has actually done (or not) that they object to? Let’s face it, we could create some list detailing Johnson’s failings (and some on here seem to forgive him anything) but what is it about Starmer that’s objectionable?
A pointless expertise, on this forum anyway, Herbert.
Without a doubt.
-
What is it about Starmer that Tory voters don’t like? What has actually done (or not) that they object to? Let’s face it, we could create some list detailing Johnson’s failings (and some on here seem to forgive him anything) but what is it about Starmer that’s objectionable?
They don't like him because he's a threat, they won't tell you why they vote for johnson & the carpetbaggers so they use Starmer/labor as a proxy, easy they don't have to explain
-
For me Starmer just doesn't stand out as an inspirational character......... people might decide to follow him - but I can only imagine it's out of curiosity...
-
What is it about Starmer that Tory voters don’t like? What has actually done (or not) that they object to? Let’s face it, we could create some list detailing Johnson’s failings (and some on here seem to forgive him anything) but what is it about Starmer that’s objectionable?
A pointless expertise, on this forum anyway, Herbert.
Without a doubt.
Perhaps it's the type of disciples he attracts such as some of those on this forum!
-
What is it about Starmer that Tory voters don’t like? What has actually done (or not) that they object to? Let’s face it, we could create some list detailing Johnson’s failings (and some on here seem to forgive him anything) but what is it about Starmer that’s objectionable?
A pointless expertise, on this forum anyway, Herbert.
Without a doubt.
I’d hope not Hound, because I’m genuinely curious to understand why.
-
What is it about Starmer that Tory voters don’t like? What has actually done (or not) that they object to? Let’s face it, we could create some list detailing Johnson’s failings (and some on here seem to forgive him anything) but what is it about Starmer that’s objectionable?
A pointless expertise, on this forum anyway, Herbert.
Without a doubt.
Perhaps it's the type of disciples he attracts such as some of those on this forum!
Without a doubt BB.
I wouldn’t want to be part of any Party who included some of the leftie types on this forum.
They have certainly put me off even considering voting Labour.......ever.
-
For me Starmer just doesn't stand out as an inspirational character......... people might decide to follow him - but I can only imagine it's out of curiosity...
TBH mate I think that some Labour supporters would vote the same way if a Chimp was the leader.
-
What is it about Starmer that Tory voters don’t like? What has actually done (or not) that they object to? Let’s face it, we could create some list detailing Johnson’s failings (and some on here seem to forgive him anything) but what is it about Starmer that’s objectionable?
A pointless expertise, on this forum anyway, Herbert.
Without a doubt.
Perhaps it's the type of disciples he attracts such as some of those on this forum!
Surely it should be about making the choice of who's the best party and what are the best policies for the country?
We all support Rovers on here but there's obviously some knob stains in the support, I'm not and I'd hope other wouldn't stop supporting the club because of who else supports them.
-
Latest you gov poll https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2021/04/29/voting-intention-con-44-lab-33-27-28-apr
Hilarious isn't it. Boris would say he's gonna poison the water supply and he'd get a +5.
Why is that thou there must be a reason?
You might be better asking someone who voted Conservative. They're the only ones who understand why BJ is without blame for anything he does wrong.
there lies the problem it’s not about the tories, its people not voting for the Labour Party that is the problem, labour have spent the last week going on and on about boris flat and the vast majority of people don’t actually give a toss about it, yes if there is wrong doings it needs sorting but surley they should be trying to sell themselves to the voters and the voters they have lost about issues that people care about?
-
What is it about Starmer that Tory voters don’t like? What has actually done (or not) that they object to? Let’s face it, we could create some list detailing Johnson’s failings (and some on here seem to forgive him anything) but what is it about Starmer that’s objectionable?
A pointless expertise, on this forum anyway, Herbert.
Without a doubt.
Perhaps it's the type of disciples he attracts such as some of those on this forum!
Without a doubt BB.
I wouldn’t want to be part of any Party who included some of the leftie types on this forum.
They have certainly put me off even considering voting Labour.......ever.
You should vote for the party that most aligns to your beliefs. If you believe in pro-business, privatisation, etc then you should vote Conservatives. Then to use another football related example... If your beliefs are Tory beliefs and you weren't keen on the current leader, you shouldn't go for the party that supports the opposite in what you believe in, the same as if Rovers were playing crap and you wanted the manager gone, you wouldn't suddenly start going to watch Leeds, as that's selling out all your beliefs.
If you're a conservative. Then fair enough vote Conservative.
-
Then the result would always be exactly the same.
-
Latest you gov poll https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2021/04/29/voting-intention-con-44-lab-33-27-28-apr
Hilarious isn't it. Boris would say he's gonna poison the water supply and he'd get a +5.
Why is that thou there must be a reason?
You might be better asking someone who voted Conservative. They're the only ones who understand why BJ is without blame for anything he does wrong.
there lies the problem it’s not about the tories, its people not voting for the Labour Party that is the problem, labour have spent the last week going on and on about boris flat and the vast majority of people don’t actually give a toss about it, yes if there is wrong doings it needs sorting but surley they should be trying to sell themselves to the voters and the voters they have lost about issues that people care about?
But Labour are the opposition. They're opposing them and pointing out any wrong doing and making sure they're held to account for it. It's not an election year for 3 more years so obviously Labour don't have a manifesto currently to attract people with. What would you specifically expect them to do currently?
I don't see how it's not about the Tories though... They shouldn't be gaining support when they cock up. If they're doing well then fair enough but when they're blatantly breaking the law, giving public money to their mates, etc then that support shouldn't grow.
-
Latest you gov poll https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2021/04/29/voting-intention-con-44-lab-33-27-28-apr
Hilarious isn't it. Boris would say he's gonna poison the water supply and he'd get a +5.
Why is that thou there must be a reason?
You might be better asking someone who voted Conservative. They're the only ones who understand why BJ is without blame for anything he does wrong.
there lies the problem it’s not about the tories, its people not voting for the Labour Party that is the problem, labour have spent the last week going on and on about boris flat and the vast majority of people don’t actually give a toss about it, yes if there is wrong doings it needs sorting but surley they should be trying to sell themselves to the voters and the voters they have lost about issues that people care about?
But Labour are the opposition. They're opposing them and pointing out any wrong doing and making sure they're held to account for it. It's not an election year for 3 more years so obviously Labour don't have a manifesto currently to attract people with. What would you specifically expect them to do currently?
I don't see how it's not about the Tories though... They shouldn't be gaining support when they cock up. If they're doing well then fair enough but when they're blatantly breaking the law, giving public money to their mates, etc then that support shouldn't grow.
because your average joe bloggs does not follow politics every day, they are not interested that boris might not have followed procedure with his flat, raise concerns on housing education poverty, put it out there what they will do to change things if they were in power, maybe stop slagging people off for voting Tory or brexit and post positive things about the Labour Party that might change peoples way of thinking
-
Ok, I got this.
The Labour Party being in power would mean less homeless people in the Town Centre.
-
What is it about Starmer that Tory voters don’t like? What has actually done (or not) that they object to? Let’s face it, we could create some list detailing Johnson’s failings (and some on here seem to forgive him anything) but what is it about Starmer that’s objectionable?
A pointless expertise, on this forum anyway, Herbert.
Without a doubt.
Perhaps it's the type of disciples he attracts such as some of those on this forum!
Without a doubt BB.
I wouldn’t want to be part of any Party who included some of the leftie types on this forum.
They have certainly put me off even considering voting Labour.......ever.
Absof**kinglutely.
-
Latest you gov poll https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2021/04/29/voting-intention-con-44-lab-33-27-28-apr
Hilarious isn't it. Boris would say he's gonna poison the water supply and he'd get a +5.
Why is that thou there must be a reason?
You might be better asking someone who voted Conservative. They're the only ones who understand why BJ is without blame for anything he does wrong.
there lies the problem it’s not about the tories, its people not voting for the Labour Party that is the problem, labour have spent the last week going on and on about boris flat and the vast majority of people don’t actually give a toss about it, yes if there is wrong doings it needs sorting but surley they should be trying to sell themselves to the voters and the voters they have lost about issues that people care about?
But Labour are the opposition. They're opposing them and pointing out any wrong doing and making sure they're held to account for it. It's not an election year for 3 more years so obviously Labour don't have a manifesto currently to attract people with. What would you specifically expect them to do currently?
I don't see how it's not about the Tories though... They shouldn't be gaining support when they cock up. If they're doing well then fair enough but when they're blatantly breaking the law, giving public money to their mates, etc then that support shouldn't grow.
because your average joe bloggs does not follow politics every day, they are not interested that boris might not have followed procedure with his flat, raise concerns on housing education poverty, put it out there what they will do to change things if they were in power, maybe stop slagging people off for voting Tory or brexit and post positive things about the Labour Party that might change peoples way of thinking
So you think the government shouldn't be held to account because of some people who aren't interested in politics. That's an interesting constitutional theory.
-
Wasn't Starmer at the CPS when they said nothing to see here about Jimmy Saville?
-
Wasn't Starmer at the CPS when they said nothing to see here about Jimmy Saville?
https://fullfact.org/online/keir-starmer-prosecute-jimmy-savile/
-
What is it about Starmer that Tory voters don’t like? What has he actually done (or not) that they object to? Let’s face it, we could create some list detailing Johnson’s failings (and some on here seem to forgive him anything) but what is it about Starmer that’s objectionable?
So, unless I’ve missed anything, Non Labour supporters don’t like Starmer because:
A) He lacks an inspirational personality
B) The actions/comments of Labour supporters
-
Wasn't Starmer at the CPS when they said nothing to see here about Jimmy Saville?
I think that’s long been consigned to the bullshit barrel along with Corbyns supposed support of the IRA.
-
Latest you gov poll https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2021/04/29/voting-intention-con-44-lab-33-27-28-apr
Hilarious isn't it. Boris would say he's gonna poison the water supply and he'd get a +5.
Why is that thou there must be a reason?
You might be better asking someone who voted Conservative. They're the only ones who understand why BJ is without blame for anything he does wrong.
there lies the problem it’s not about the tories, its people not voting for the Labour Party that is the problem, labour have spent the last week going on and on about boris flat and the vast majority of people don’t actually give a toss about it, yes if there is wrong doings it needs sorting but surley they should be trying to sell themselves to the voters and the voters they have lost about issues that people care about?
But Labour are the opposition. They're opposing them and pointing out any wrong doing and making sure they're held to account for it. It's not an election year for 3 more years so obviously Labour don't have a manifesto currently to attract people with. What would you specifically expect them to do currently?
I don't see how it's not about the Tories though... They shouldn't be gaining support when they cock up. If they're doing well then fair enough but when they're blatantly breaking the law, giving public money to their mates, etc then that support shouldn't grow.
because your average joe bloggs does not follow politics every day, they are not interested that boris might not have followed procedure with his flat, raise concerns on housing education poverty, put it out there what they will do to change things if they were in power, maybe stop slagging people off for voting Tory or brexit and post positive things about the Labour Party that might change peoples way of thinking
So you think the government shouldn't be held to account because of some people who aren't interested in politics. That's an interesting constitutional theory.
could you show me where I said that please?
-
What is it about Starmer that Tory voters don’t like? What has actually done (or not) that they object to? Let’s face it, we could create some list detailing Johnson’s failings (and some on here seem to forgive him anything) but what is it about Starmer that’s objectionable?
A pointless expertise, on this forum anyway, Herbert.
Without a doubt.
Perhaps it's the type of disciples he attracts such as some of those on this forum!
Without a doubt BB.
I wouldn’t want to be part of any Party who included some of the leftie types on this forum.
They have certainly put me off even considering voting Labour.......ever.
You should vote for the party that most aligns to your beliefs. If you believe in pro-business, privatisation, etc then you should vote Conservatives. Then to use another football related example... If your beliefs are Tory beliefs and you weren't keen on the current leader, you shouldn't go for the party that supports the opposite in what you believe in, the same as if Rovers were playing crap and you wanted the manager gone, you wouldn't suddenly start going to watch Leeds, as that's selling out all your beliefs.
If you're a conservative. Then fair enough vote Conservative.
People also have the option to vote for other Party’s of course.
-
What is it about Starmer that Tory voters don’t like? What has he actually done (or not) that they object to? Let’s face it, we could create some list detailing Johnson’s failings (and some on here seem to forgive him anything) but what is it about Starmer that’s objectionable?
So, unless I’ve missed anything, Non Labour supporters don’t like Starmer because:
A) He lacks an inspirational personality
B) The actions/comments of Labour supporters
to be fair enough people on here mocked may for having no personality
-
What is it about Starmer that Tory voters don’t like? What has actually done (or not) that they object to? Let’s face it, we could create some list detailing Johnson’s failings (and some on here seem to forgive him anything) but what is it about Starmer that’s objectionable?
A pointless expertise, on this forum anyway, Herbert.
Without a doubt.
Perhaps it's the type of disciples he attracts such as some of those on this forum!
Without a doubt BB.
I wouldn’t want to be part of any Party who included some of the leftie types on this forum.
They have certainly put me off even considering voting Labour.......ever.
You should vote for the party that most aligns to your beliefs. If you believe in pro-business, privatisation, etc then you should vote Conservatives. Then to use another football related example... If your beliefs are Tory beliefs and you weren't keen on the current leader, you shouldn't go for the party that supports the opposite in what you believe in, the same as if Rovers were playing crap and you wanted the manager gone, you wouldn't suddenly start going to watch Leeds, as that's selling out all your beliefs.
If you're a conservative. Then fair enough vote Conservative.
People also have the option to vote for other Party’s of course.
Yeah, that align with their beliefs.
-
What is it about Starmer that Tory voters don’t like? What has he actually done (or not) that they object to? Let’s face it, we could create some list detailing Johnson’s failings (and some on here seem to forgive him anything) but what is it about Starmer that’s objectionable?
So, unless I’ve missed anything, Non Labour supporters don’t like Starmer because:
A) He lacks an inspirational personality
B) The actions/comments of Labour supporters
Herbert, you're missing one huge reason. As former Shadow Brexit Secretary, Starmer masterminded Labour's push for a second referendum. In other words, he was telling Labour voters in the North of England that they'd voted the wrong way, so they could all f*ck off, because him and his cronies were insisting that they'd all have to vote again.
That was the reason Labour got slaughtered in the North East at the GE, and will probably get pumped again in Hartlepool, despite Johnson's sleaze.
-
What is it about Starmer that Tory voters don’t like? What has he actually done (or not) that they object to? Let’s face it, we could create some list detailing Johnson’s failings (and some on here seem to forgive him anything) but what is it about Starmer that’s objectionable?
So, unless I’ve missed anything, Non Labour supporters don’t like Starmer because:
A) He lacks an inspirational personality
B) The actions/comments of Labour supporters
Herbert, you're missing one huge reason. As former Shadow Brexit Secretary, Starmer masterminded Labour's push for a second referendum. In other words, he was telling Labour voters in the North of England that they'd voted the wrong way, so they could all f*ck off, because him and his cronies were insisting that they'd all have to vote again.
That was the reason Labour got slaughtered in the North East at the GE, and will probably get pumped again in Hartlepool, despite Johnson's sleaze.
Point taken Steve, though I was only repeating what others had said rather than my own opinion.
-
It baffles my brain that in a week millions of people will walk into voting booths and say, yes, I want more of this.
Ignoring the deaths, lies, corruption. All in the name of some abstract notion that Labour is bad with the economy while it haemorrhages from a Tory Brexit.
-
TBH mate I think that some Labour supporters would vote the same way if a Chimp was the leader.
That’s a very old, tired and lazy line.
Please do better.
-
What is it about Starmer that Tory voters don’t like? What has he actually done (or not) that they object to? Let’s face it, we could create some list detailing Johnson’s failings (and some on here seem to forgive him anything) but what is it about Starmer that’s objectionable?
So, unless I’ve missed anything, Non Labour supporters don’t like Starmer because:
A) He lacks an inspirational personality
B) The actions/comments of Labour supporters
You have missed something, Herbert: I’m not a non Labour supporter but I think he has no personality.
-
TBH mate I think that some Labour supporters would vote the same way if a Chimp was the leader.
That’s a very old, tired and lazy line.
Please do better.
Yep, so it might be but it is still true.
-
It's the same as saying Bojo is a bumbling oaf then.
-
It's thesame as saying Bojo is a bubbling oaf then.
No mate, that saying hasn’t been around for anywhere as near as long.
Thinking about that though, it may well be if Labour continue to drive people away.
-
For me Starmer just doesn't stand out as an inspirational character......... people might decide to follow him - but I can only imagine it's out of curiosity...
Have you ever voted labour Hound?
TBH mate I think that some Labour supporters would vote the same way if a Chimp was the leader.
-
TBH mate I think that some Labour supporters would vote the same way if a Chimp was the leader.
That’s a very old, tired and lazy line.
Please do better.
Isn't that what the Tory supporters have done with the present incumbent?
-
TBH mate I think that some Labour supporters would vote the same way if a Chimp was the leader.
That’s a very old, tired and lazy line.
Please do better.
Isn't that what the Tory supporters have done with the present incumbent?
It may well be the case mate.
-
I know it's the Express....... but some rumblings?
https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1431954/ker-starmer-latest-hartlepool-byelection-results-poll-labour-party-leader-resign
-
Exclusive:
Career-long boat rockers rock the boat.
-
Exclusive:
Career-long boat rockers rock the boat.
Hilarious BST (not).
Unlike you to poo poo something that doesn’t suit your narrative.
-
There's not really a great deal to poo-poo Hound. I'm just stating it as it is. The Corbynistas have always been boat-rockers. They hate the idea of any leader who is to the left of Corbyn. This dicking about is both meaningless (in that they won't unseat Starmer) and ridiculous (in that he has inherited a party that was electorally annihilated 18 months ago and they are complaining that he hasn't reversed a trend that has been building for 20 years).
The Corbynistas actively do not want Starmer to succeed. It was ever thus with the Left.
-
Not like BST to only blame the left for Labours struggles.
-
The Right of the Labour party would never rock the boat were a left-wing leader ever in place, of course.
-
The Right of the Labour party would never rock the boat were a left-wing leader ever in place, of course.
Yeah, there definitely wasn't a report on boat rocking this time last year from the centrists.
-
It’s like a Hues Corporation fan club in here.
-
The Right of the Labour party would never rock the boat were a left-wing leader ever in place, of course.
Yeah, there definitely wasn't a report on boat rocking this time last year from the centrists.
And your point is?
-
The Right of the Labour party would never rock the boat were a left-wing leader ever in place, of course.
Yeah, there definitely wasn't a report on boat rocking this time last year from the centrists.
And your point is?
The moderates inside the party actively tried to sabotage Labours chances of succeeding under Corbyn. The worst I've seen the left do so far is say Kiers been uninspiring and Corbyn did better, which the latter is probably too early to tell. The only way Labour can win is if both sides are united which I'm sure you agree on. To do that isn't to constantly blame the left, but perhaps the party need to listen to their frustrations and act on them. If Kier can hold, quite frankly the shittest government ever, to account then he'll start to win back people on the left.
-
DO
You have that article quoting two Labour MPs saying Starmer should go. He's barely been in the job a year and he has lifted Labour's poll ratings by 10-15%.
You have the Left positively itching for Labour to lose Hartlepool badly, so they can say "See! 2019 wasn't Corbyn's fault! Starmer is the problem!" So they can airbrush from history the absolute calamity if a situation that Corbyn tipped the party into in early 2019 when hebled us to the worst polling position since the 1920s.
-
Ahh blaming the left again, pointing out poor 2019 performances and not accepting Labour centrists sabotaging part in it.
-
BST,
You are aware that the Labour vote rose under Corbyn, from the low point under Prudence Broon(2010) and then Miliband in 2015.
Yes, the outcome in terms of seats was very disappointing in 2019.
Clearly if Broon had introduced reform to the voting system when in power, a better overall position would now be in place.
With the loss of members, and income, resulting from the strategy followed by the extreme centre, there will be little left of the current Labour Party to fight the next GE.
-
Yeah, in Hartlepool Corbyn gained in 2017 from their 2015 value. They went down in 2019 due to their Brexit plan which is to compromise with people like Starmer, and now they've actually gone and lost the place with Corbyn and the lefts finger prints nowhere to be seen.
-
I’d like to re visit the OP from over a year ago. Yes well done Kier, you’ve done a great job. No one has a clue what your party stands for anymore.
-
It's strange that plenty expect miracles but no one wants to help
-
Albie/Donny.
Yes of course I know the Labour vote rose in 2017. That, and the fact that the vote went down in 2019 needs some serious analysis. This is my two pennorth.
2017 was a very particular election, when the Culture War took a back seat and Corbyn brilliantly steered a path that told Leavers and Remainers he was on both their sides. He was able to focus on the economic issues, where his Labour were popular. And he did that extremely well, although he was aided by the most incompetent election campaign by a sitting PM in living memory, and the much lauded increase in the vote was greatly aided by the collapse of UKIP - May also greatly increased the Tory vote in that election and I don't think many people thought she did a stellar job.
I said at that time that that gave Labour temporary breathing space, but that it could not last. Sooner or later, Brexit was going to dominate the political debate again, and at some point, Corbyn was going to have to come down on one side or the other. And without a strategy to deal with it, that was going to serious piss off one or other faction in the Labour party. So Labour needed to accept the fragility of it's 2017 success and set about securing that. Instead, the Left trumpeted it as confimration that the public loved Corbyn and were utterly dismissive of any attempt to broaden the electoral appeal. Albie's still doing it now with the pointing to the 2017 result while ignoring the context.
That lasted until early 2019, when Corbyn finally came out as the Leave supporter we always knew he was. And it was a catastophe. Labour's poll ratings collapsed to below 20% from 40%. In the space of 4 months, 4-5million people who had identified as Labour voters were saying they would vote LD or Green instead. There was a real and present danger that Labour was going to be badly displaced into third place at the inevitable election. There was only one path out of that catastrophe and that was to reach out to those who Labour had so rapidly lost, with a policy that went for a second Brexit referendum. That pulled many of them back, but at the cost of what we have seen in the Red Wall.
The finger pointing at Starmer for being the cause of the pit that Labour is in comes from a mindset that has erased everything that happened between May 2017 and August 2019, when Corbyn and the left misunderstood their "success" in the 2017 election and lost the chance to build on it.
-
How do you get Stabber has lifted the vote 16% when he lost a majority gained in 2019 and lost it in 2021 by over 6000 votes.
I know you think I am thick Billy , but..............
-
Great title to the OP by the way Wilts, very novel, April 4th 2020, pity the veneer couldn't have lasted longer really.
-
Sorry BST, but you are missing the point.
Your post says that Corbyn was a leaver, and that was a problem for the party..."catastrophe" you reckon.
Exactly the opposite has been shown to be true.
Labour, by playing both sides on the brexit issue, was seen as standing for nothing, and not reflecting the views of their voters in the red wall seats.
Starmer has doubled down on the no commitment approach, preferring to stand back and hoping Coco will soil himself.
Look at the approach to Covid.....support the government by default, with a light touch criticism from time to time.
If Labour wants to differentiate from the Tories, then he should have nailed Johnson on his appalling record in the pandemic. Voters saying that they voted for the Tories because of the vaccine rollout is the end game in the prevarication strategy.
Wherever you stand, Labour is at a pivotal moment.
Fail to recognise the problem and wilt into irrelevance, or set out your stall.
To hear the disgraced Peter Mandelson on as a media front trying to say it is the fault of Corbyn and the left is the height of delusion.
-
How do you get Stabber has lifted the vote 16% when he lost a majority gained in 2019 and lost it in 2021 by over 6000 votes.
I know you think I am thick Billy , but..............
Nationwide Selby, nationwide. D'oh.
-
There is only one thing Labour can do now Billy.
We all know what they want to do because for five or six years they have been telling us the electorate what they think of us, what we should and how to think and if we don't we are racial and Nazi's so whats left, only to change completely and do the things the electorate want them to do, which will require the majority of the Westminster MP's to lie.
And Doh Billy you might not have noticed but nationwide Billy they are taking a Hammering and becoming irrelevant like the Liberals did.
-
Sorry BST, but you are missing the point.
Your post says that Corbyn was a leaver, and that was a problem for the party..."catastrophe" you reckon.
Exactly the opposite has been shown to be true.
Labour, by playing both sides on the brexit issue, was seen as standing for nothing, and not reflecting the views of their voters in the red wall seats.
Starmer has doubled down on the no commitment approach, preferring to stand back and hoping Coco will soil himself.
Look at the approach to Covid.....support the government by default, with a light touch criticism from time to time.
If Labour wants to differentiate from the Tories, then he should have nailed Johnson on his appalling record in the pandemic. Voters saying that they voted for the Tories because of the vaccine rollout is the end game in the prevarication strategy.
Wherever you stand, Labour is at a pivotal moment.
Fail to recognise the problem and wilt into irrelevance, or set out your stall.
To hear the disgraced Peter Mandelson on as a media front trying to say it is the fault of Corbyn and the left is the height of delusion.
Albie.
You have really invented an alternative reality there.
Labour was at 40% in the polls at Xmas 2018. Corbyn then made a big announcement that he would lead Labour into the next election supporting Brexit.
Labour's poll rating collapsed over the next 3-4 months, to a low of 18%, the vast majority of defectors switching to the LDs and Greens.
Those are established facts. Ignored consistently by the Left. Because here's the inconvenient truth. Had Labour stuck with a Red Wall, pro-Brexit strategy in 2019, which is where Corbyn and the 4Ms were taking Labour, they'd have been lucky to get 70 seats in 2019's election.
-
Labour lost heavily in 2019 with a left wing leader
Labour lost heavily in 2021 with a centre left leader
That leads me to suspect that nobody outside the Labour Party gives a shit about the internal squabbles within the party. What they want to understand is how the party is relevant to them! It’s not a difficult concept to grasp. Speak to the people who you’re wanting to attract, understand their concerns and priorities and build policies and manifestos around this. The party spends too much time naval gazing and trying to score points in internal battles rather then out on the streets discovering what the hell is going on!
-
Billy that is because the Labour heartlands is now centred around London and the South East of England, and the Tories will make inroads into that with the next round of constituency boundary changes before the next general election.
-
It looked to me in my far from qualified view that Corbyn refused to nail his colours to the mast of either side of Leave or remain and supported neither. As a result, both Remainers and Leavers reciprocated likewise.
-
It looked to me in my far from qualified view that Corbyn refused to nail his colours to the mast of either side of Leave or remain and as a result supported neither.
I think you’re right
-
A comment made in The Guardian resonated with me personally , that maybe a first but none the less it's true .
The biggest argument in the Labour Party today is who made the biggest feck up of it ? , the left or the centre .
The answer is probably the both of em .
Whilst I expected Labour to lose Hartlepool , they would have lost it in 2019 if the Brexit Party hadn't split the vote with the Tories I'm shocked none the less at the size of the Tory victory .
The party has to accept the uncomfortable truth that it's unelectable in it's present guise , whatever that maybe , I don't know what it is anymore , what it stands for or who it represents .
The party is now a failed project and unfortunately in politics facing off against the most successful political opponent in the world it's unlikely to be successful ever again .
The only thing it can do to oppose the Tories with any teeth is to come together with the Greens , Lib Dems SNP ( who will want another independence referendum for their trouble ) and other minor parties under one umbrella .
This new arrangement would probably require a new name and a total re-brand , the whole works .
It isn't something I'd sign up to personally but I simply point the way forward if the Tories are ever to be voted out of government .
In my opinion Scotland could be brought back under this new arrangement , tory remainer voters in the south and of course the metropolitan vote the Labour Party still enjoy .
The thing that connects this arrangement is the pro EU stance which is why It wouldn't interest me although I've never voted tory in my life and I never will .
I simply point the way forward with many Labour people having to face up to the catastrophe the party has become today .
-
Point is there is a lot of thick people about in politics, mainly the ones who have been calling other people that for the last five years.
-
Point is there is a lot of thick people about in politics, mainly the ones who have been calling other people that for the last five years.
You'd imagine with one of their own as leader of the Labour Party , metropolitan and pro EU they'd be a place for some self assessment .
That's not to say I'm pinning all this on Starmer by any means and I didn't personally place all the ills within Labour on Corbyn's tenure either .
In my opinion this started with Blair and they've paid a huge price for 13 years of power in the former Red Wall .
The failure to act positively in the old industrial heartlands post Thatcher has come back to bite spectacularly .
In Mandelson's own words , " they have no where else to go " , as arrogant a sentence you'll ever read by a man who is on the record as saying " he loved the company of filthy rich people " .
Even with the best intentions it isn't a great look .
Only somebody so clearly out of touch would have brought him back .
Blair , I could hold my nose and vote Labour , just about .
Bring that feckwit Mandelson back and it was a step too far for me , it's bad enough tolerating the likes of Thornberry and co without that idiot .
There comes a point when you've had enough and the chips fall where they fall .
The policy to place a massive pro EU Labour candidate in such a huge leave area as Hartlepool just showed how much they actually respected the Hartlepool electorate .
I could go on but I'll leave it there .
-
Point is there is a lot of thick people about in politics, mainly the ones who have been calling other people that for the last five years.
There you go again selby, 5 years is nothing tories have been doing it for a whole lot longer and the link below doesn't even include johnson, why you ever want to be their number one fan escapes me, don't you know it's terribly non-pc to talk about money and they would have def have non-U stamped on your application.
British workers 'among worst idlers', suggest Tory MPs
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-19300051
-
Syd 10 out of 10 for loyalty and trying, don't read links buddy they are always one sided and not a view on reality especially the guardian and bbc. they have an agenda, looks like one you pander to.
Have you ever posted a link to an article criticizing the Labour Party? there are thousands of them kicking about at the moment, some actually by Labour supporters.
They are becoming irrelevant, something I told you months ago, old hat, old fashioned, and have not moved or recognised the different times we are now living in and are about with Al going to change even quicker than at any time in the past.
Lots of the professions will become automated, teaching and universities have probably unknowingly opened the door with remote learning and to a point doctors and Dentists, much of the legal work is repetitive, They will still need fitters plumbers and electricians though.
-
It looked to me in my far from qualified view that Corbyn refused to nail his colours to the mast of either side of Leave or remain and supported neither. As a result, both Remainers and Leavers reciprocated likewise.
Wales - South Wales in particular - voted strongly to Leave.
Labour increased its vote share in Wales - South Wales in particular.
Corbyn was replaced by Starmer over a year ago. Starmer was seen, rightly or wrongly as a strong Remainer. Labour's vote share in England went down.
The Lib Dem's were seen as a strong Remain party. The Lib Dem vote has gone down everywhere.
The Greens were seen as a strong Remain party. The Green vote has gone up everywhere.
Yes Brexit is important - but only for the Tories. As a right-wing project they are seen to have achieved it successfully and thus coalesced all those votes together. There were no other right-wing parties that had any meaniningfull effect as there have been for all of this century. They are now the party of the right and far-right.
Whilst Remain has splintered - and most likely stayed at home as they don't seen anyone representing them. The left has splintered and especially in England don't see any one party representing them.
Brilliant tactical achievement by Cameron and Johnson.
-
Syd 10 out of 10 for loyalty and trying, don't read links buddy they are always one sided and not a view on reality especially the guardian and bbc. they have an agenda, looks like one you pander to.
Have you ever posted a link to an article criticizing the Labour Party? there are thousands of them kicking about at the moment, some actually by Labour supporters.
They are becoming irrelevant, something I told you months ago, old hat, old fashioned, and have not moved or recognised the different times we are now living in and are about with Al going to change even quicker than at any time in the past.
Lots of the professions will become automated, teaching and universities have probably unknowingly opened the door wing and to a point doctors and Dentists, much of the legal work is repetitive, They will still need fitters plumbers and electricians though.
Just keepin' it real selby following your comments that showed less the half of the story and the truth, remembering of course it's the candidates you are voting for not anyone else, whoever they are.
-
It looked to me in my far from qualified view that Corbyn refused to nail his colours to the mast of either side of Leave or remain and supported neither. As a result, both Remainers and Leavers reciprocated likewise.
Wales - South Wales in particular - voted strongly to Leave.
Labour increased its vote share in Wales - South Wales in particular.
Corbyn was replaced by Starmer over a year ago. Starmer was seen, rightly or wrongly as a strong Remainer. Labour's vote share in England went down.
The Lib Dem's were seen as a strong Remain party. The Lib Dem vote has gone down everywhere.
The Greens were seen as a strong Remain party. The Green vote has gone up everywhere.
Yes Brexit is important - but only for the Tories. As a right-wing project they are seen to have achieved it successfully and thus coalesced all those votes together. There were no other right-wing parties that had any meaniningfull effect as there have been for all of this century. They are now the party of the right and far-right.
Whilst Remain has splintered - and most likely stayed at home as they don't seen anyone representing them. The left has splintered and especially in England don't see any one party representing them.
Brilliant tactical achievement by Cameron and Johnson.
Wilts.
“Starmer was seen RIGHTLY OR WRONGLY as as a strong remainer”.
Didn’t he lean towards a second referendum?
-
Syd 10 out of 10 for loyalty and trying, don't read links buddy they are always one sided and not a view on reality especially the guardian and bbc. they have an agenda, looks like one you pander to.
Have you ever posted a link to an article criticizing the Labour Party? there are thousands of them kicking about at the moment, some actually by Labour supporters.
They are becoming irrelevant, something I told you months ago, old hat, old fashioned, and have not moved or recognised the different times we are now living in and are about with Al going to change even quicker than at any time in the past.
Lots of the professions will become automated, teaching and universities have probably unknowingly opened the door wing and to a point doctors and Dentists, much of the legal work is repetitive, They will still need fitters plumbers and electricians though.
Just keepin' it real selby following your comments that showed less the half of the story and the truth, remembering of course it's the candidates you are voting for not anyone else, whoever they are.
When interviewed on tv all of the Hartlepool public spoke about Starmer or Johnson.
I didn’t hear anyone speak about the local candidates.
-
Did you see johnson up there before the poll?
-
Syd 10 out of 10 for loyalty and trying, don't read links buddy they are always one sided and not a view on reality especially the guardian and bbc. they have an agenda, looks like one you pander to.
Have you ever posted a link to an article criticizing the Labour Party? there are thousands of them kicking about at the moment, some actually by Labour supporters.
They are becoming irrelevant, something I told you months ago, old hat, old fashioned, and have not moved or recognised the different times we are now living in and are about with Al going to change even quicker than at any time in the past.
Lots of the professions will become automated, teaching and universities have probably unknowingly opened the door with remote learning and to a point doctors and Dentists, much of the legal work is repetitive, They will still need fitters plumbers and electricians though.
Does far right radio station TalkRadio not have an agenda?
-
Did you see johnson up there before the poll?
How does that have a bearing on what I wrote.
-
And? just a question is all, no tricks, plain question
-
Have you seen Starmer in Hartlepool since the disaster.
-
No but he was up there a few times campaigning, someone said they saw life size windbag that looked remarkably like johnson :)
-
Well that campaigning went well for him didnt it.
-
well spotted hound, remind me why you voted for brexit?
-
well spotted hound, remind me why you voted for brexit?
I didn’t and I explained that to you less than half an hour ago on the Hartlepool thread.
Keep up.
-
Syd 10 out of 10 for loyalty and trying, don't read links buddy they are always one sided and not a view on reality especially the guardian and bbc. they have an agenda, looks like one you pander to.
Have you ever posted a link to an article criticizing the Labour Party? there are thousands of them kicking about at the moment, some actually by Labour supporters.
They are becoming irrelevant, something I told you months ago, old hat, old fashioned, and have not moved or recognised the different times we are now living in and are about with Al going to change even quicker than at any time in the past.
Lots of the professions will become automated, teaching and universities have probably unknowingly opened the door wing and to a point doctors and Dentists, much of the legal work is repetitive, They will still need fitters plumbers and electricians though.
Just keepin' it real selby following your comments that showed less the half of the story and the truth, remembering of course it's the candidates you are voting for not anyone else, whoever they are.
When interviewed on tv all of the Hartlepool public spoke about Starmer or Johnson.
I didn’t hear anyone speak about the local candidates.
And, the information in the article is true/fact, what does it matter where it comes from the conservative included their disdain for working classes and arrogantly put it in a book, johnson has been doing it forever.
Tell me I'm wrong?
-
Starmer's approval rating is now -48. For reference, that's more than 20 points lower than Corbyn's was at the time of the 2019 election.
-
That will no doubt be discredited Macho before too long.
-
You got a link for that MM? Latest data I've seen put Starmer at -7.
-
Is there still anyone who are still wondering about the nick name Stabber, if there is just get in touch with Angela Raynor she will be able to enlighten you.
Not someone to let put his arm around your shoulder or be behind you, more sharp edges than a diamond.
-
Latest Yougov numbers, BST.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/trackers/keir-starmer-approval-rating
Edit: i should point out that this is still slightly better than Corbyn's lowest point, which was in the mid 50s. But it took Corbyn years and a muddled brexit policy to get there.
-
They're shockers MM, early election?
-
Starmer's assistant Harris has had to resign, having been caught spreading lies about Angela Rayner;
https://labourlist.org/2021/05/carolyn-harris-resigns-as-keir-starmers-parliamentary-private-secretary/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+LabourListLatestPosts+%28LabourList%29
Forensic!
-
Latest Yougov numbers, BST.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/trackers/keir-starmer-approval-rating
Edit: i should point out that this is still slightly better than Corbyn's lowest point, which was in the mid 50s. But it took Corbyn years and a muddled brexit policy to get there.
Strange, that. The YG figures are wildly out if sync with all the other pollsters. See here.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leadership_approval_opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election
-
I think one of labours problem now is getting people to vote, under corbyn he galvanised the younger voters and I can’t see starmer doing that( I could be wrong and only a opinion lol)
-
Stabber went to Hartlepool three times Syd, every time the gap widened towards Bojo.
The Tories were that pleased with his efforts on their behalf they kept inviting him.
-
Latest Yougov numbers, BST.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/trackers/keir-starmer-approval-rating
Edit: i should point out that this is still slightly better than Corbyn's lowest point, which was in the mid 50s. But it took Corbyn years and a muddled brexit policy to get there.
Strange, that. The YG figures are wildly out if sync with all the other pollsters. See here.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leadership_approval_opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election
BST, are you saying that the Yougov figures are wrong?
Do you seriously think Keir Starmer is a popular Labour leader, and is the man that could lead Labour to a victory over the Tories in 2024, or even before then?
-
SS.
No. I'm saying the YG figures are vastly different from every other polling organisation.
Either YG are wrong or all the others are wrong. I've no idea which. I was simply pointing out that fact in response to MM's eager post.
-
Believe me BST, there's nothing eager about my post. It brings me no joy to see Labour in the doldrums for yet another year when we desperately need them functioning. I voted for Starmer. It doesn't do me any favours to see him struggling.
-
Stabber went to Hartlepool three times Syd, every time the gap widened towards Bojo.
The Tories were that pleased with his efforts on their behalf they kept inviting him.
Another one trying to get me to suck eggs, yes I know, the question was, did the lying toerag go up there? and the follow up question was to be, and why not?
-
Stabber went to Hartlepool three times Syd, every time the gap widened towards Bojo.
The Tories were that pleased with his efforts on their behalf they kept inviting him.
Another one trying to get me to suck eggs, yes I know, the question was, did the lying toerag go up there? and the follow up question was to be, and why not?
He did....
Not sure what your point is?
https://www.itv.com/news/tyne-tees/2021-05-03/elbow-bumps-and-thumbs-up-as-prime-minister-johnson-visits-hartlepool
-
didn't see that pud, thanks for the correction, but then neither did selby.
-
Apologies MM. I shouldn't have said that.
-
No problem bst. I don't doubt there are a fair few on the left of the party who are enjoying all this (although I doubt they hold much sway within the party these days myself), so I see why you said it. I'm not one of them though.
-
Stabber went to Hartlepool three times Syd, every time the gap widened towards Bojo.
The Tories were that pleased with his efforts on their behalf they kept inviting him.
Another one trying to get me to suck eggs, yes I know, the question was, did the lying toerag go up there? and the follow up question was to be, and why not?
He did....
Not sure what your point is?
https://www.itv.com/news/tyne-tees/2021-05-03/elbow-bumps-and-thumbs-up-as-prime-minister-johnson-visits-hartlepool
I suppose my main point pud, is that although I hear about it and read about the new conservative evangelism for love of the working family the tories have for close to 200 hundred years been killing, enslaving, suppressing, jailing, starving, ignoring, deporting and disenfranchising anyone Non-U, so that may help you understand where my scepticism and cynicism comes from.
The above doesn't include having johnson in the mix either.
-
For the Tories to suddenly become the party of the working class, they’re going to need to rewrite the fundamentals of Conservatism that the party has been built on. The clue is in the name.
Psychologists have a phrase ‘the best way to predict future behaviour is to look at past behaviour’. History tells us that Tory Governments consistently cut public services any time the country faces financial challenges and there’s absolutely no reason to expect them to do anything differently. Given so many people in the North East (and other regions) are heavily reliant on public services this will be a problem.
-
It was reported in the Mail Syd and by Mike Graham on talk radio of course I knew
-
Stabber went to Hartlepool three times Syd, every time the gap widened towards Bojo.
The Tories were that pleased with his efforts on their behalf they kept inviting him.
Another one trying to get me to suck eggs, yes I know, the question was, did the lying toerag go up there? and the follow up question was to be, and why not?
He did....
Not sure what your point is?
https://www.itv.com/news/tyne-tees/2021-05-03/elbow-bumps-and-thumbs-up-as-prime-minister-johnson-visits-hartlepool
Bump
-
Stabber went to Hartlepool three times Syd, every time the gap widened towards Bojo.
The Tories were that pleased with his efforts on their behalf they kept inviting him.
'Invitations' doesn't say visits, does it selby, you didn't actually say he had visited?
-
Stabber went to Hartlepool three times Syd, every time the gap widened towards Bojo.
The Tories were that pleased with his efforts on their behalf they kept inviting him.
'Invitations' doesn't say visits, does it selby, you didn't actually say he had visited?
Selby was talking about Starmers visits.
-
who said, Gary Player, the carpenter from East Shields?
-
It’s ok to be wrong.
You could have just said sorry for misunderstanding what selby had meant.
-
It’s ok to be wrong.
You could have just said sorry for misunderstanding what selby had meant.
Yeah I know
''I’m a Great Believer in Luck. The Harder I Work, the More Luck I Have''
https://quoteinvestigator.com/2012/07/21/luck-hard-work/
-
I thought it interesting from a yougov poll.
The points about wallpaper and supposed Tory sleaze had an impact but only on those politically engaged (not a large number). That really adds weight to the point that it's not really something the average person is too concerned about and the wrong direction for labour to focus on.
-
Pud are you suggesting that the opposition should not put pressure on the government because a large percentage of the ppl can't be arsed to vote?
-
Pud are you suggesting that the opposition should not put pressure on the government because a large percentage of the ppl can't be arsed to vote?
Syd, I think it means the majority of voters think there are more important things than wallpaper. A great majority of voters would not be as politically engaged as posters on here. Voters want to know what affects their lives, downing Street wallpaper doesnt
-
Not at all and that's not what the analysis says. The analysis said that general voters who did vote didn't see it as affecting how they voted.
That doesn't mean the opposition shouldn't raise it, it means it shouldn't be their sole focus and main campaigning point.
-
yes I see that now, but as the quote goes governments are voted out, not in, and this has been the modus operandi of oppositions since the first parliament opened and it's not going to change.
Oppositions don't get a lot of media unless they stuff up as just seen so they have to convince voters the government is not doing what it's paid to do. That this government is in that category is not in question, but the labour party needs to get it's shit together so that the voters will listen to them.
-
Ldr I agree that on the whole the electorate is not tuned to politics, part of the process should be education and getting kids to believe they can make a change if they have knowledge and organise.
-
yes I see that now, but as the quote goes governments are voted out, not in, and this has been the modus operandi of oppositions since the first parliament opened and it's not going to change.
Oppositions don't get a lot of media unless they stuff up as just seen so they have to convince voters the government is not doing what it's paid to do. That this government is in that category is not in question, but the labour party needs to get it's shit together so that the voters will listen to them.
Spot on Syd, the majority of the electorate are not bothered about causes such as BLM, trans rights, gender identity, cancel culture etc. They care about money in their pocket, access to health care, education for their kids. Parties need to have the publics attention on things that matter to them, not whatever cause makes the most noise.
-
Ldr I agree that on the whole the electorate is not tuned to politics, part of the process should be education and getting kids to believe they can make a change if they have knowledge and organise.
Agreed, politics and managing finances should be mandatory in schools. Real World skills need to be taught
-
I must admit that I voted for the Dales not London for the school week trip, I always knew I'd spend lots of time in London. But I don't remember ever the local council being discussed or a suggestion of visiting to see how it worked.
-
yes I see that now, but as the quote goes governments are voted out, not in, and this has been the modus operandi of oppositions since the first parliament opened and it's not going to change.
Oppositions don't get a lot of media unless they stuff up as just seen so they have to convince voters the government is not doing what it's paid to do. That this government is in that category is not in question, but the labour party needs to get it's shit together so that the voters will listen to them.
That's fine, but if labour want to win they'll have to consider not doing what you say. Whatever you believe the feedback from the voters is thus. Ignore that and they get nowhere.
-
But it will always be part of the mix pud and the government does the same to the opposition.
Added
But, and it's a big but incumbency is always a favourable position with many of it's control levers and here there have been three state elections and government has not changed 2 labor, I coalition. Covid has given sitting governments such a strong position, oppositions are starved of media.
-
Slowly now Syderney, the conservatives invited Stabber to Hartlepool because in the three visits he is said to have made the gap between the votes Boris got widened from the votes Stabber got so they were happy for him to visit Hartlepool and invited him up there. Get it now eh.
-
It's still struggling to catch on Selby
-
selby will never catch on
-
You do though regular Syd and never need any bait on the hook.
-
no brains brian?
-
I’ve just listened to an old (1969) episode of ‘I’m Sorry, I’ll Read That Again’, pre Python and Goodies, on Radio 4 Extra.
Some jokes never age:
John Cleese: Now follows a party political broadcast from the Labour party.
Tim Brooke-Taylor: (in a squeaky voice) Help!
-
I’ve just listened to an old (1969) episode of ‘I’m Sorry, I’ll Read That Again’, pre Python and Goodies, on Radio 4 Extra.
Some jokes never age:
John Cleese: Now follows a party political broadcast from the Labour party.
Tim Brooke-Taylor: (in a squeaky voice) Help!
Was it as good as when you heard it first time Belton... (the old ones are the best)
-
I’ve just listened to an old (1969) episode of ‘I’m Sorry, I’ll Read That Again’, pre Python and Goodies, on Radio 4 Extra.
Some jokes never age:
John Cleese: Now follows a party political broadcast from the Labour party.
Tim Brooke-Taylor: (in a squeaky voice) Help!
Was it as good as when you heard it first time Belton... (the old ones are the best)
Harsh.
-
You don't need brains on here Syd, just a hook, some tiddlers on here swim about with their gob open all the time, especially those from the southern seas.
-
I’ve just listened to an old (1969) episode of ‘I’m Sorry, I’ll Read That Again’, pre Python and Goodies, on Radio 4 Extra.
Some jokes never age:
John Cleese: Now follows a party political broadcast from the Labour party.
Tim Brooke-Taylor: (in a squeaky voice) Help!
Was it as good as when you heard it first time Belton... (the old ones are the best)
Harsh.
My other reply was going to be 'It's easy to laugh at the Labour Party' and well that's it really...
-
You don't need brains on here Syd, just a hook, some tiddlers on here swim about with their gob open all the time, especially those from the southern seas.
leaving yourself open to ridicule there a bit selby
-
Lot's know I am as thick as plank on here Syd who know me personally, I am happy to just get by.
-
I don't think that at all, but you are a WUM
-
I’ve just listened to an old (1969) episode of ‘I’m Sorry, I’ll Read That Again’, pre Python and Goodies, on Radio 4 Extra.
Some jokes never age:
John Cleese: Now follows a party political broadcast from the Labour party.
Tim Brooke-Taylor: (in a squeaky voice) Help!
It’s a good one that and not outside reality. For as long as I can remember, sections of the Labour Party have been more concerned with beating each other rather than the Tories. Me included at one time.
-
Whats a WUM?
-
Whats a WUM?
I thought you knew it's a brian
-
Whats a WUM?
Wum is the third biggest town in the North West Region of Cameroon...
-
I’ve just listened to an old (1969) episode of ‘I’m Sorry, I’ll Read That Again’, pre Python and Goodies, on Radio 4 Extra.
Some jokes never age:
John Cleese: Now follows a party political broadcast from the Labour party.
Tim Brooke-Taylor: (in a squeaky voice) Help!
It’s a good one that and not outside reality. For as long as I can remember, sections of the Labour Party have been more concerned with beating each other rather than the Tories. Me included at one time.
But that joke was about the problems the Labour Government were having.
-
I’ve just listened to an old (1969) episode of ‘I’m Sorry, I’ll Read That Again’, pre Python and Goodies, on Radio 4 Extra.
Some jokes never age:
John Cleese: Now follows a party political broadcast from the Labour party.
Tim Brooke-Taylor: (in a squeaky voice) Help!
It’s a good one that and not outside reality. For as long as I can remember, sections of the Labour Party have been more concerned with beating each other rather than the Tories. Me included at one time.
But that joke was about the problems the Labour Government were having.
And today it’s a joke about the problems the Labour shadow government are having.
-
https://apple.news/AIo1GuoKZRA2EY1dtPDwP8A
-
I’ve just listened to an old (1969) episode of ‘I’m Sorry, I’ll Read That Again’, pre Python and Goodies, on Radio 4 Extra.
Some jokes never age:
John Cleese: Now follows a party political broadcast from the Labour party.
Tim Brooke-Taylor: (in a squeaky voice) Help!
It’s a good one that and not outside reality. For as long as I can remember, sections of the Labour Party have been more concerned with beating each other rather than the Tories. Me included at one time.
But that joke was about the problems the Labour Government were having.
And today it’s a joke about the problems the Labour shadow government are having.
Yvette Cooper on the Marr show just now, clearly isn’t backing Starmer.
-
https://apple.news/AIo1GuoKZRA2EY1dtPDwP8A
But...but....but.....that poll can’t be right mate.
-
No complaints if rates have to increase then
''Local authorities could have to issue up to 3.5m identity cards as part of the government’s plan for mandatory voter ID, it has emerged, prompting warnings over potential high costs and disruption for councils.
Ministers have yet to set out how the scheme, announced in the Queen’s speech, will work in practice, or when it will begin. But it has pledged that would-be voters who do not possess the necessary photo ID can apply to their council for a free “voter card”
No plans? sounds like it has been announced to distract from Johnson and the Cronies
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/may/12/councils-could-have-to-issue-up-to-35m-id-cards-for-voters-under-new-bill
-
That’s it syd blame the tories, its nothing to do with the Labour Party or himself why his ratings are falling
-
That’s it syd blame the tories, its nothing to do with the Labour Party or himself why his ratings are falling
If you told me what the blame is for I could maybe give you an answer, I suppose you have noticed that the tories are in power?
That's why there is all the news about cronyism which is difficult to do from opposition and now we can include Patel
-
That’s it syd blame the tories, its nothing to do with the Labour Party or himself why his ratings are falling
If you told me what the blame is for I could maybe give you an answer, I suppose you have noticed that the tories are in power?
That's why there is all the news about cronyism which is difficult to do from opposition and now we can include Patel
oh sorry my shoelace has become loose,have to go
-
Don't trip yourself up bp
-
That’s it syd blame the tories, its nothing to do with the Labour Party or himself why his ratings are falling
If you told me what the blame is for I could maybe give you an answer, I suppose you have noticed that the tories are in power?
That's why there is all the news about cronyism which is difficult to do from opposition and now we can include Patel
oh sorry my shoelace has become loose,have to go
Touché then mate.
Your shoelace wasn’t in knots then I take it, unlike Starmers political career.
-
https://apple.news/AIo1GuoKZRA2EY1dtPDwP8A
High ratings there for Andy Burnham as future leader as well.
I've been saying on here for a long time that Burnham would be a good Labour leader. Straight talking Northern lad. Would appeal to a lot of lost Labour voters.
-
It might just upset them in their heartlands in London and the South East though Steve, it is easy to give things to someone who does not have a lot, not so easy to take it away though once they have had it, and down south they have had a lot more spent on them per person from central government than in the north and midlands.
-
https://apple.news/AIo1GuoKZRA2EY1dtPDwP8A
High ratings there for Andy Burnham as future leader as well.
I've been saying on here for a long time that Burnham would be a good Labour leader. Straight talking Northern lad. Would appeal to a lot of lost Labour voters.
You are probably right there Steve and I keep hearing people suggesting that very thing on news articles.
Starmer appears to be going nowhere just now and his popularity is waning.
I just had a glance back at the early pages of this thread and it seems that many of us have been wrong in our early assessment of his potential leadership qualities.
-
https://apple.news/AIo1GuoKZRA2EY1dtPDwP8A
High ratings there for Andy Burnham as future leader as well.
I've been saying on here for a long time that Burnham would be a good Labour leader. Straight talking Northern lad. Would appeal to a lot of lost Labour voters.
Yet he has lost the election for leader how many times? As a member of Blair's government and I'm not so sure he's likely to win the labour leadership ever.
-
Interestingly slavery did not end in Turkey until 1933. Circassian women were the prized possession and were acquired as Sex slaves. So Boris Ohnsons great great grandma was a Sex slave!
if Johnson gets married he will have "scored" an equaliser in his "Beddings" sorry "Weddings" contest with Corbyn to make the scoreS 3 all
it seems he got divorced in February 2020.
Johnson 2 and counting
Spouse: Marina Wheeler (m. 1993–2020), Allegra Mostyn-Owen (m. 1987–1993)
Corbyn 3
Spouse: Laura Alvarez (m. 2013), Claudia Bracchitta (m. 1987–1999), Jane Chapman (m. 1974–1979)
so Johnson finally "scores" the "late equaliser" which is more than Man City did today "as they played away" to make the "wedding score" Johnson 3 Corbyn 3
Time will tell if anyone can make it 4-3
"one can only wonder if that hand made wallpaper in No.10 is "so thick" to be sound proof "
lest we forget ....
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/21/police-called-to-loud-altercation-at-boris-johnsons-home
-
https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1445949/Labour-Party-news-batley-and-spen-by-election-candidate-Laurence-fox-reclaim-breaking-news
Thought I would give the thread a bump for the faithful.
-
https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1445949/Labour-Party-news-batley-and-spen-by-election-candidate-Laurence-fox-reclaim-breaking-news
Thought I would give the thread a bump for the faithful.
He got less than 2% in the London mayoral election. He wouldn't affect how that election went either, if the Tories win it'll be nothing to do with some anti mask crackhead.
-
https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1445949/Labour-Party-news-batley-and-spen-by-election-candidate-Laurence-fox-reclaim-breaking-news
Thought I would give the thread a bump for the faithful.
Another election and another defeat .
The only question is who apart from themselves they will pin the blame on .
Choose from the following
A , The vaccine boost .
B , Our core voters stayed at home .
C , George Galloway split the vote
D , Jeremy Corbyn
E , Angela Rayner
-
https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1445949/Labour-Party-news-batley-and-spen-by-election-candidate-Laurence-fox-reclaim-breaking-news
Thought I would give the thread a bump for the faithful.
Another election and another defeat .
The only question is who apart from themselves they will pin the blame on .
Choose from the following
A , The vaccine boost .
B , Our core voters stayed at home .
C , George Galloway split the vote
D , Jeremy Corbyn
E , Angela Rayner
You have the floor Tyke, use your 'learning' and explain to others how you're going to get the tories out.
-
https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1445949/Labour-Party-news-batley-and-spen-by-election-candidate-Laurence-fox-reclaim-breaking-news
Thought I would give the thread a bump for the faithful.
Another election and another defeat .
The only question is who apart from themselves they will pin the blame on .
Choose from the following
A , The vaccine boost .
B , Our core voters stayed at home .
C , George Galloway split the vote
D , Jeremy Corbyn
E , Angela Rayner
You have the floor Tyke, use your 'learning' and explain to others how you're going to get the tories out.
What makes you so sure I want the tories out given the alternative ?
-
https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1445949/Labour-Party-news-batley-and-spen-by-election-candidate-Laurence-fox-reclaim-breaking-news
Thought I would give the thread a bump for the faithful.
Another election and another defeat .
The only question is who apart from themselves they will pin the blame on .
Choose from the following
A , The vaccine boost .
B , Our core voters stayed at home .
C , George Galloway split the vote
D , Jeremy Corbyn
E , Angela Rayner
You have the floor Tyke, use your 'learning' and explain to others how you're going to get the tories out.
What makes you so sure I want the tories out given the alternative ?
That's entirely up to you and your conscience Tyke, you're very much in danger of sounding more like a jilted lover rather than a rational political commentator. You have fought tooth and nail to deny that your stance helps the tories but now it appears you are even abandoning that position.
Added
However Tyke, if after everything you do find yourself wavering, ignore the promises of 20,000 coppers, 50,000 nurses and 40 new hospitals but do watch this it's less than 3 minute of your life but may mean something to the families of the tens of thousands of those that died unnecessarily:
2 March 2020
https://www.bbc.com/news/av/uk-51706391
-
https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1445949/Labour-Party-news-batley-and-spen-by-election-candidate-Laurence-fox-reclaim-breaking-news
Thought I would give the thread a bump for the faithful.
Another election and another defeat .
The only question is who apart from themselves they will pin the blame on .
Choose from the following
A , The vaccine boost .
B , Our core voters stayed at home .
C , George Galloway split the vote
D , Jeremy Corbyn
E , Angela Rayner
You have the floor Tyke, use your 'learning' and explain to others how you're going to get the tories out.
What makes you so sure I want the tories out given the alternative ?
That's entirely up to you and your conscience Tyke, you're very much in danger of sounding more like a jilted lover rather than a rational political commentator. You have fought tooth and nail to deny that your stance helps the tories but now it appears you are even abandoning that position.
Added
However Tyke, if after everything you do find yourself wavering, ignore the promises of 20,000 coppers, 50,000 nurses and 40 new hospitals but do watch this it's less than 3 minute of your life but may mean something to the families of the tens of thousands of those that died unnecessarily:
2 March 2020
https://www.bbc.com/news/av/uk-51706391
Your playing the same game as the tories do Sydney , I suspect inadvertently to be fair but none the less .
To take the heat and scrutiny away from the failings of the Labour Party you focus on what the tories are doing .
I've fought the tories on the ground since 1984 , miners strike , Wapping , Poll Tax , Hillsborough disaster and austerity it's a bit rich taking lessons from someone on the other side of the world who limits himself to posting links from The Guardian on a football forum .
The guilt tripping doesn't wash with me Sydney .
The last straw with me was the decision to bring Mandelson back to the forefront , I can't think of a more despicable man and there's plenty of competition inside the Labour Movement to say the least .
As despicable a figure as all the Bullingdon club put together in my opinion .
The way I see it the former Labour heartlands may as well vote Tory , to keep these gains the tories may well level up up here .
They may well not either but neither did the Labour Party despite 13 years in power and founded to look after the interests of working people .
Yes its got to that unfortunately .
-
So you don't think that quite a few held their noses to vote in 2017?
-
Tyke.
You repeatedly complain about the last Labour Govt. You drop into this intellectually bone idle stance from the Left that Labour 1997-2010 might as well have been Tories.
Look at school spending.
Look at NHS spending.
Look at infrastructure spending.
Look at the introduction of working tax credits to put more money in the pockets of the lower paid.
And biggest of all, look at the massive support the Labour Govt gave to the economy in 2008 when it was facing a Second Great Depression, and the Tories were screaming for Austerity.
Look at those achievements and then look yourself in the mirror and tell me you truly think that Labour Govt was effectively Tory.
-
So you don't think that quite a few held their noses to vote in 2017?
Well I don't think the younger people who Corbyn attracted to become members of the Labour Party did Sydney .
To be fair the angle Corbyn came in from was pretty impressive policy wise .
Unfortunately he was a weak leader with some disturbing relationships with many questionable people which worked against him in a huge number of areas such as South Yorkshire where they are a significant amount of families who have served their country in the military .
What finished him off was his decision aided by Starmer to move away from their manifesto pledge on brexit and put their name to a second referendum .
That was basically why the red wall crumbled and many unwilling to hold their noses anymore .
Johnson delivered what they voted for in the 2016 referendum .
Starmer was elected as Leader of the Labour Party to build on Corbyn's work post brexit and be the credible face of a socially democratic Labour Party .
It's turned out to be anything but , he's purged the left , brought Mandelson back to the fold and now he's picking fights with the trade unions .
The unification of the Labour Party seems to be to follow Blair's path , take it or leave it .
He's completely fecked himself right over in the former heartlands , a shift towards New Labour which started the party's demise around here and the architect of Labour's brexit postion going in to the 2019 election .
The electorate have concluded they may as well stick with the Tories and some level up money coming rather than Starmer who seems to have difficulty understanding a democratic vote , manifesto pledges and honouring his own leadership election promises .
The party is heading for oblivion unless someone can be found to rescue it , it's not looking like that man is Starmer in all honesty .
A good start would be to recognise the electorate aren't as stupid as the Labour Party take them for .
It's one thing to be fecked over by Johnson and his mob and quite another by a party who were historically founded to represent you .
Nobody seems to see that angle .
-
I agree with you 100% Tyke. Too many ppl close to Labour (I.e. ‘activists’ and members) seem to be convinced it’s weakness of presentation and media conspiracies rather than flawed policy and more importantly flawed culture of the party
-
''It's one thing to be fecked over by Johnson and his mob and quite another by a party who were historically founded to represent you
Nobody seems to see that angle''
Because it's contrary? what in effect you are saying is, no matter how bad the tories feck (sic) you over you won't vote em' out because you feel slighted by your own party.
Must be a good salesperson that sold that one to the rank and file.
-
"What finished him off was his decision aided by Starmer to move away from their manifesto pledge on brexit and put their name to a second referendum ."
Utter and absolute b*llocks. This has become the Left's next Great Betrayal Myth to pass down the generations.
Here's the real story.
Labour supporters were split roughly 3:1 Remain:Leave. That's been shown in dozens of opinion polls.
From 2017 until early 2019, Corbyn managed to neutralise the Brexit question, mainly by ignoring it. The Corbynistas clapped themselves on the back at the success of this strategy as Labour stayed above 40% in the polls.
Some of us, while impressed by the efficacy of that strategy, warned that it couldn't last. By the next election, Brexit would have come to a head and Labour would have had to come down on one side or the other.
Corbyn did. He came out for Leave in early 2019. And it had a catastrophic effect. Going on opinion poll numbers, that led to a collapse in Labour support on an unprecedented scale. In four months, Labour lost 5 million supporters to the Greens and LDs. They fell to their lowest polling figures in a century.
Anyone on the Left who chucks about this idle accusation that Starmer destroyed Corbyn by pushing for a Ref2 stance is deliberately or ignorantly sidestepping the actual context of early 2019. But hey, as long as it gives them a reason to insist they were right all along...
-
"What finished him off was his decision aided by Starmer to move away from their manifesto pledge on brexit and put their name to a second referendum ."
Utter and absolute b*llocks. This has become the Left's next Great Betrayal Myth to pass down the generations.
Here's the real story.
Labour supporters were split roughly 3:1 Remain:Leave. That's been shown in dozens of opinion polls.
From 2017 until early 2019, Corbyn managed to neutralise the Brexit question, mainly by ignoring it. The Corbynistas clapped themselves on the back at the success of this strategy as Labour stayed above 40% in the polls.
Some of us, while impressed by the efficacy of that strategy, warned that it couldn't last. By the next election, Brexit would have come to a head and Labour would have had to come down on one side or the other.
Corbyn did. He came out for Leave in early 2019. And it had a catastrophic effect. Going on opinion poll numbers, that led to a collapse in Labour support on an unprecedented scale. In four months, Labour lost 5 million supporters to the Greens and LDs. They fell to their lowest polling figures in a century.
Anyone on the Left who chucks about this idle accusation that Starmer destroyed Corbyn by pushing for a Ref2 stance is deliberately or ignorantly sidestepping the actual context of early 2019. But hey, as long as it gives them a reason to insist they were right all along...
60% of Labour constituencies voted leave Billy , that's a clear mandate from their voters as to what their Brexit position should have been .
Starmer's second referendum shenanigans led to the biggest election hiding since the 1930's .
https://fullfact.org/europe/did-majority-conservative-and-labour-constituencies-vote-leave-eu-referendum/
-
So you don't think that quite a few held their noses to vote in 2017?
Well I don't think the younger people who Corbyn attracted to become members of the Labour Party did Sydney .
To be fair the angle Corbyn came in from was pretty impressive policy wise .
Unfortunately he was a weak leader with some disturbing relationships with many questionable people which worked against him in a huge number of areas such as South Yorkshire where they are a significant amount of families who have served their country in the military .
What finished him off was his decision aided by Starmer to move away from their manifesto pledge on brexit and put their name to a second referendum .
That was basically why the red wall crumbled and many unwilling to hold their noses anymore .
Johnson delivered what they voted for in the 2016 referendum .
Starmer was elected as Leader of the Labour Party to build on Corbyn's work post brexit and be the credible face of a socially democratic Labour Party .
It's turned out to be anything but , he's purged the left , brought Mandelson back to the fold and now he's picking fights with the trade unions .
The unification of the Labour Party seems to be to follow Blair's path , take it or leave it .
He's completely fecked himself right over in the former heartlands , a shift towards New Labour which started the party's demise around here and the architect of Labour's brexit postion going in to the 2019 election .
The electorate have concluded they may as well stick with the Tories and some level up money coming rather than Starmer who seems to have difficulty understanding a democratic vote , manifesto pledges and honouring his own leadership election promises .
The party is heading for oblivion unless someone can be found to rescue it , it's not looking like that man is Starmer in all honesty .
A good start would be to recognise the electorate aren't as stupid as the Labour Party take them for .
It's one thing to be fecked over by Johnson and his mob and quite another by a party who were historically founded to represent you .
Nobody seems to see that angle .
"What finished him off was his decision aided by Starmer to move away from their manifesto pledge on brexit and put their name to a second referendum ."
Utter and absolute b*llocks. This has become the Left's next Great Betrayal Myth to pass down the generations.
Here's the real story.
Labour supporters were split roughly 3:1 Remain:Leave. That's been shown in dozens of opinion polls.
From 2017 until early 2019, Corbyn managed to neutralise the Brexit question, mainly by ignoring it. The Corbynistas clapped themselves on the back at the success of this strategy as Labour stayed above 40% in the polls.
Some of us, while impressed by the efficacy of that strategy, warned that it couldn't last. By the next election, Brexit would have come to a head and Labour would have had to come down on one side or the other.
Corbyn did. He came out for Leave in early 2019. And it had a catastrophic effect. Going on opinion poll numbers, that led to a collapse in Labour support on an unprecedented scale. In four months, Labour lost 5 million supporters to the Greens and LDs. They fell to their lowest polling figures in a century.
Anyone on the Left who chucks about this idle accusation that Starmer destroyed Corbyn by pushing for a Ref2 stance is deliberately or ignorantly sidestepping the actual context of early 2019. But hey, as long as it gives them a reason to insist they were right all along...
60% of Labour constituencies voted leave Billy , that's a clear mandate from their voters as to what their Brexit position should have been .
Starmer's second referendum shenanigans led to the biggest election hiding since the 1930's .
https://fullfact.org/europe/did-majority-conservative-and-labour-constituencies-vote-leave-eu-referendum/
That is a pretty damning report Tyke and an interesting link that you posted but will be ridiculed and discredited without doubt.
I have noticed though that quite a few posters who would have been on here in a flash to join in against you have been absent.
Perhaps not too many of them disagree with you.
-
Tyke.
You repeatedly complain about the last Labour Govt. You drop into this intellectually bone idle stance from the Left that Labour 1997-2010 might as well have been Tories.
Look at school spending.
Look at NHS spending.
Look at infrastructure spending.
Look at the introduction of working tax credits to put more money in the pockets of the lower paid.
And biggest of all, look at the massive support the Labour Govt gave to the economy in 2008 when it was facing a Second Great Depression, and the Tories were screaming for Austerity.
Look at those achievements and then look yourself in the mirror and tell me you truly think that Labour Govt was effectively Tory.
Nothing particularly new about low wage top ups Billy , they've been around for decades so nothing revolutionary going on here .
This policy was rolled out with the best intentions by Brown and took many families out of poverty so I'm not going to criticise the intent .
However let's be clear , working tax credits were only available to a percentage of the population , those with young children .
There's more than a hint of welfare dependency with this policy .
Once the benefit is removed the low pay still remains which offers little incentive to invest in creating skilled and better paid work .
There's more meat on the bones in my opinion to eliminate in work poverty by bargaining agreements and skilling up .
That's more a root and branch approach although as I say the intentions were honourable with WTC .
-
Tyke.
Yes, but in very few of those constituencies did a majority of Labour voters support Leave. That is the point.
And there you go again saying that it was the move towards Ref2 that wrecked Labour.
Utter b*llocks.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/07/Uk2022polling15average.png/1280px-Uk2022polling15average.png)
Labour's policy under Corbyn for the first half of 2019 was to support Leave.
Only from Summer 2019, under Starmer's influence, did policy embrace Ref 2.
Look at that polling graph and tell me Starmer was responsible for Labour's disaster in 2019.
You are like a man who sets fire to his house, then blames the fire brigade for the water damage.
-
Tyke.
You repeatedly complain about the last Labour Govt. You drop into this intellectually bone idle stance from the Left that Labour 1997-2010 might as well have been Tories.
Look at school spending.
Look at NHS spending.
Look at infrastructure spending.
Look at the introduction of working tax credits to put more money in the pockets of the lower paid.
And biggest of all, look at the massive support the Labour Govt gave to the economy in 2008 when it was facing a Second Great Depression, and the Tories were screaming for Austerity.
Look at those achievements and then look yourself in the mirror and tell me you truly think that Labour Govt was effectively Tory.
Nothing particularly new about low wage top ups Billy , they've been around for decades so nothing revolutionary going on here .
This policy was rolled out with the best intentions by Brown and took many families out of poverty so I'm not going to criticise the intent .
However let's be clear , working tax credits were only available to a percentage of the population , those with young children .
There's more than a hint of welfare dependency with this policy .
Once the benefit is removed the low pay still remains which offers little incentive to invest in creating skilled and better paid work .
There's more meat on the bones in my opinion to eliminate in work poverty by bargaining agreements and skilling up .
That's more a root and branch approach although as I say the intentions were honourable with WTC .
If you are going to argue over this, at least get your facts right. WTC was NOT only available to families with young kids.
And I agree about upskilling. Which is why Labour poured money into state education which the Tories had starved of funding before 1997 and did so again after 2010. With the result that more working class kids than in the whole of our history before got higher education and enhanced prospects.
-
So you don't think that quite a few held their noses to vote in 2017?
Well I don't think the younger people who Corbyn attracted to become members of the Labour Party did Sydney .
To be fair the angle Corbyn came in from was pretty impressive policy wise .
Unfortunately he was a weak leader with some disturbing relationships with many questionable people which worked against him in a huge number of areas such as South Yorkshire where they are a significant amount of families who have served their country in the military .
What finished him off was his decision aided by Starmer to move away from their manifesto pledge on brexit and put their name to a second referendum .
That was basically why the red wall crumbled and many unwilling to hold their noses anymore .
Johnson delivered what they voted for in the 2016 referendum .
Starmer was elected as Leader of the Labour Party to build on Corbyn's work post brexit and be the credible face of a socially democratic Labour Party .
It's turned out to be anything but , he's purged the left , brought Mandelson back to the fold and now he's picking fights with the trade unions .
The unification of the Labour Party seems to be to follow Blair's path , take it or leave it .
He's completely fecked himself right over in the former heartlands , a shift towards New Labour which started the party's demise around here and the architect of Labour's brexit postion going in to the 2019 election .
The electorate have concluded they may as well stick with the Tories and some level up money coming rather than Starmer who seems to have difficulty understanding a democratic vote , manifesto pledges and honouring his own leadership election promises .
The party is heading for oblivion unless someone can be found to rescue it , it's not looking like that man is Starmer in all honesty .
A good start would be to recognise the electorate aren't as stupid as the Labour Party take them for .
It's one thing to be fecked over by Johnson and his mob and quite another by a party who were historically founded to represent you .
Nobody seems to see that angle .
"What finished him off was his decision aided by Starmer to move away from their manifesto pledge on brexit and put their name to a second referendum ."
Utter and absolute b*llocks. This has become the Left's next Great Betrayal Myth to pass down the generations.
Here's the real story.
Labour supporters were split roughly 3:1 Remain:Leave. That's been shown in dozens of opinion polls.
From 2017 until early 2019, Corbyn managed to neutralise the Brexit question, mainly by ignoring it. The Corbynistas clapped themselves on the back at the success of this strategy as Labour stayed above 40% in the polls.
Some of us, while impressed by the efficacy of that strategy, warned that it couldn't last. By the next election, Brexit would have come to a head and Labour would have had to come down on one side or the other.
Corbyn did. He came out for Leave in early 2019. And it had a catastrophic effect. Going on opinion poll numbers, that led to a collapse in Labour support on an unprecedented scale. In four months, Labour lost 5 million supporters to the Greens and LDs. They fell to their lowest polling figures in a century.
Anyone on the Left who chucks about this idle accusation that Starmer destroyed Corbyn by pushing for a Ref2 stance is deliberately or ignorantly sidestepping the actual context of early 2019. But hey, as long as it gives them a reason to insist they were right all along...
60% of Labour constituencies voted leave Billy , that's a clear mandate from their voters as to what their Brexit position should have been .
Starmer's second referendum shenanigans led to the biggest election hiding since the 1930's .
https://fullfact.org/europe/did-majority-conservative-and-labour-constituencies-vote-leave-eu-referendum/
That is a pretty damning report Tyke and an interesting link that you posted but will be ridiculed and discredited without doubt.
I have noticed though that quite a few posters who would have been on here in a flash to join in against you have been absent.
Perhaps not too many of them disagree with you.
You don't post and you get criticised.
You post and you get accused of joining in.
You point out that this report has been mentioned quite a number of times in other threads and...
-
So you don't think that quite a few held their noses to vote in 2017?
Well I don't think the younger people who Corbyn attracted to become members of the Labour Party did Sydney .
To be fair the angle Corbyn came in from was pretty impressive policy wise .
Unfortunately he was a weak leader with some disturbing relationships with many questionable people which worked against him in a huge number of areas such as South Yorkshire where they are a significant amount of families who have served their country in the military .
What finished him off was his decision aided by Starmer to move away from their manifesto pledge on brexit and put their name to a second referendum .
That was basically why the red wall crumbled and many unwilling to hold their noses anymore .
Johnson delivered what they voted for in the 2016 referendum .
Starmer was elected as Leader of the Labour Party to build on Corbyn's work post brexit and be the credible face of a socially democratic Labour Party .
It's turned out to be anything but , he's purged the left , brought Mandelson back to the fold and now he's picking fights with the trade unions .
The unification of the Labour Party seems to be to follow Blair's path , take it or leave it .
He's completely fecked himself right over in the former heartlands , a shift towards New Labour which started the party's demise around here and the architect of Labour's brexit postion going in to the 2019 election .
The electorate have concluded they may as well stick with the Tories and some level up money coming rather than Starmer who seems to have difficulty understanding a democratic vote , manifesto pledges and honouring his own leadership election promises .
The party is heading for oblivion unless someone can be found to rescue it , it's not looking like that man is Starmer in all honesty .
A good start would be to recognise the electorate aren't as stupid as the Labour Party take them for .
It's one thing to be fecked over by Johnson and his mob and quite another by a party who were historically founded to represent you .
Nobody seems to see that angle .
This is exactly the post and opinions that Tory strategists want you to have.
Clearly you have missed/don't wish to see that opinion.
-
Tyke.
Yes, but in very few of those constituencies did a majority of Labour voters support Leave. That is the point.
And there you go again saying that it was the move towards Ref2 that wrecked Labour.
Utter b*llocks.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/07/Uk2022polling15average.png/1280px-Uk2022polling15average.png)
Labour's policy under Corbyn for the first half of 2019 was to support Leave.
Only from Summer 2019, under Starmer's influence, did policy embrace Ref 2.
Look at that polling graph and tell me Starmer was responsible for Labour's disaster in 2019.
You are like a man who sets fire to his house, then blames the fire brigade for the water damage.
The problem is buried in there BST. You don’t need to appeal to Labour supporters, you need to appeal to Non Labour voters
-
Ldr.
Given the split of votes on the centre-Left, Labour ALWAYS needs to appeal to a broad church to have a chance of winning.
-
Tyke.
This from the British Election Survey by the way
"in Labour seats where there was a Leave majority, 60% of Labour voters voted to Remain in 2016."
https://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-findings/labours-electoral-dilemma/#.YLznqlPTVPx
Labour Leave supporters are, and always were a minority, even in the Red Wall. The problem for Labour is that there are enough of them prepared, like you, to desert Labour, to hand the Tories the seats.
Your choice.
-
Ldr.
Given the split of votes on the centre-Left, Labour ALWAYS needs to appeal to a broad church to have a chance of winning.
So what Tyke said is right, if Labour had focussed more on what all constituents wanted in those seats rather than just what the Labour supports wanted they would have likely done better. It’s a hard thing to hear but there is no need for Labour to appeal to you, Wilts or Filo (apologies for using you as examples) as for your own reasons you would vote Labour regardless. They need to attract support from the wider voter base
-
Ldr.
Given the split of votes on the centre-Left, Labour ALWAYS needs to appeal to a broad church to have a chance of winning.
So what Tyke said is right, if Labour had focussed more on what all constituents wanted in those seats rather than just what the Labour supports wanted they would have likely done better. It’s a hard thing to hear but there is no need for Labour to appeal to you, Wilts or Filo (apologies for using you as examples) as for your own reasons you would vote Labour regardless. They need to attract support from the wider voter base
Precisely ldr.
Their problem is though that Labour are unable to be attractive to the wider voter base.
Proven.
-
Ldr
In 2019, a majority of voters across the entire country voted for parties that were against the Brexit that was being lined up.
You are focussing on a minority and saying Labour should have pandered to them. A bit of inconsistent logic going on there.
-
Ldr
In 2019, a majority of voters across the entire country voted for parties that were against the Brexit that was being lined up.
You are focussing on a minority and saying Labour should have pandered to them. A bit of inconsistent logic going on there.
And how many of them to use your phrase held their nose. Don’t make the assumption they voted for the party policies 100%
-
Time is running out for the Party and Stabber.
-
Ldr
In 2019, a majority of voters across the entire country voted for parties that were against the Brexit that was being lined up.
You are focussing on a minority and saying Labour should have pandered to them. A bit of inconsistent logic going on there.
And how many of them to use your phrase held their nose. Don’t make the assumption they voted for the party policies 100%
Then take opinion polls on that precise topic. There was a large and consistent majority against Brexit throughout 2019.
-
Ldr
In 2019, a majority of voters across the entire country voted for parties that were against the Brexit that was being lined up.
You are focussing on a minority and saying Labour should have pandered to them. A bit of inconsistent logic going on there.
And how many of them to use your phrase held their nose. Don’t make the assumption they voted for the party policies 100%
Then take opinion polls on that precise topic. There was a large and consistent majority against Brexit throughout 2019.
Say for a second we agree, and the humiliating defeat wasn’t to do with Brexit. It would indicate Labour has an even more worrying issue around culture and engagement.
-
Ldr.
Labour has a massive problem on that score, as I've said repeatedly.
The people who broadly support left wing economic policies should be Labour's constituency. But they split into two diametrically opposed cultural groups.
25-30% are nationalist, socially conservatives. Mostly older. Mostly living in small, post Industrial towns.
70-75% are socially liberal internationalists. Mostly younger. Many living in cities.
Labour can only win if it appeals to both. But both sides appear determined to fight with each other. And of course, the Tories will pour petrol on those flames by stoking up Culture War issues.
By the way, I don't know if I misunderstood your post, but I'm certainly not arguing that Labour's disaster in 2019 wasn't greatly due to Brexit. Of course it was. But not for the reasons that you and Tyke seem to think.
-
Ldr.
Labour has a massive problem on that score, as I've said repeatedly.
The people who broadly support left wing economic policies should be Labour's constituency. But they split into two diametrically opposed cultural groups.
25-30% are nationalist, socially conservatives. Mostly older. Mostly living in small, post Industrial towns.
70-75% are socially liberal internationalists. Mostly younger. Many living in cities.
Labour can only win if it appeals to both. But both sides appear determined to fight with each other. And of course, the Tories will pour petrol on those flames by stoking up Culture War issues.
By the way, I don't know if I misunderstood your post, but I'm certainly not arguing that Labour's disaster in 2019 wasn't greatly due to Brexit. Of course it was. But not for the reasons that you and Tyke seem to think.
Well what I saw when the decision was made to go down the road of a second referendum was the Labour party exposed on trust with the shadow brexit secretary's finger prints all over it .
They weren't trusted to honour the result of the 2016 referendum by the electorate , introducing a second referendum 3 years later tends to suggest this .
If a party can't be trusted by the electorate it tends not to play out too well at the ballot box .
It's massively understated just how important it was to those who voted Leave in 2016 to have this delivered and their vote respected .
The reason it was so important is because it was the first time for many many people that their vote was worth something and nothing like GE's .
That's why the turnout was high because people knew their vote carried weight and real change in the making .
To insult the Leave vote by putting another referendum on the table was election suicide .
The result of the 2019 GE tends to suggest that to be the case .
It takes something extremely significant to flip historically strong labour seats to the tories .
-
Tyke.
You are focussing completely on a fraction of a fraction of the electorate.
25% of 40%. The number of Labour Leave supporters in early 2019.
Go and look at that graph. See what happened in early 2019 when Corbyn tried doing exactly what you say.
Go on. Go and look.
Then come back and tell me how Labour were supposed to win an Election, or in fact, even survive, with that policy.
Your self indulgence on this topic is just staggering.
-
Again BST you focus on Labour supporters, the focus needs to be elsewhere not on those who vote for you anyway
-
Tyke.
You are focussing completely on a fraction of a fraction of the electorate.
25% of 40%. The number of Labour Leave supporters in early 2019.
Go and look at that graph. See what happened in early 2019 when Corbyn tried doing exactly what you say.
Go on. Go and look.
Then come back and tell me how Labour were supposed to win an Election, or in fact, even survive, with that policy.
Your self indulgence on this topic is just staggering.
Billy
My minority mindset that you speak off actually equates to Labour losing 60 seats in the 2019 GE of which 52 seats were constituencies which voted to leave the EU by over 50% .
I'm not disrespecting your graphs by the way I'm merely highlighting how it played out in reality .
https://labourlist.org/2019/12/the-60-seats-labour-lost-in-the-2019-general-election/
-
Again BST you focus on Labour supporters, the focus needs to be elsewhere not on those who vote for you anyway
Picked up by this publication about a month before the 2019 GE .
https://www.cityam.com/general-election-2019-most-brits-are-confused-by-labours-brexit-stance/
-
Tyke.
When Labour adopted the policy that you suggest, they dropped to 18% in the polls.
How many seats do you think they would have lost then?
-
BST; why do you think that Labour got utterly humiliated in the North and North-East, the most left wing and Tory hating areas in the country?
I'll give you my reason. It was because of the outrageous decision to push for a second referendum; and I'll back that up by saying that if Starmer is still the Labour leader in 2024, they'll get mullered again in those areas, because people have long memories.
-
Tyke.
When Labour adopted the policy that you suggest, they dropped to 18% in the polls.
How many seats do you think they would have lost then?
I don't know how many they'd have lost , but I do know how many they did lose , why they lost them and which party picked them up .
-
Tyke.
You have the evidence in front of you as to what would have happened.
Ignoring that and insisting you are right is willfully blind and deaf indulgence. "I'm right and if I ignore any evidence to the contrary, I don't have to challenge my opinion."
-
SS
I'm permanently bemused by the anger of people about the suggestion that we should have had a vote to find out what the population wanted. In the context that we ended up with a Brexit that we were told by the Leave campaign in 2016 would never happen. And that vote is sacrosanct.
Never yet heard a sensible defence of that position.
-
SS
I'm permanently bemused by the anger of people about the suggestion that we should have had a vote to find out what the population wanted. In the context that we ended up with a Brexit that we were told by the Leave campaign in 2016 would never happen. And that vote is sacrosanct.
Never yet heard a sensible defence of that position.
With the greatest respect, BST, that's not the question I asked; which was if the second referendum wasn't the cause of the drubbing, then what was?
-
SS
I've given my two pennorth in detail.
Yes Labour were hammered because of the Ref stance. They would have been totally destroyed without that stance.
The problem is far more complicated than a simple right/wrong.
-
Tyke.
You have the evidence in front of you as to what would have happened.
Ignoring that and insisting you are right is willfully blind and deaf indulgence. "I'm right and if I ignore any evidence to the contrary, I don't have to challenge my opinion."
I'm not ignoring anything , my point is your findings don't tell me how many seats Labour would have lost or who would have picked them up .
Who picked them up is perhaps a key point .
With both Labour and the Tories respecting the referendum result and the Lib Dems standing on a ticket to overturn it that changes the 2019 GE election campaign massively .
With that on offer that's absolutely not a shoe in for the Tories by any means and there's absolutely no way standing on a overturning the referendum result ticket are the Lib Dems forming a government either .
So in my opinion your graphs convert to not very much amongst a percentage of the Labour voters who took part in the polls .
-
Just found it .................... 'vote tory for payback'
Lynton Crosby
-
Tyke.
It's not hard to predict what the outcome would have been in an Election with Labour on 23%, the LDs on 20% and the Greens on 10%, and the Tories tacking towards a hard Brexit and sweeping up the Brexit Party vote, which is roughly where we were in Summer 2019. Labour would have struggled to get 80 seats. The Lads maybe 50. The Greens 1 and the Tories 430+
-
SS
I've given my two pennorth in detail.
Yes Labour were hammered because of the Ref stance. They would have been totally destroyed without that stance.
The problem is far more complicated than a simple right/wrong.
SS.
On top of that, as I've said for years, there was a massive principle at issue and it is something that Leave supporters never, ever address.
The Brexit we ended up facing by late 2019 was nothing like the Brexit promised by the Leave side in 2016.
Farage repeatedly urged a Norway type outcome in 2016.
Hannan repeatedly said there was no way we were leaving the Single Market.
Anyone who pointed out the Irish problem was accused of playing with peace. Johnson said it could all be sorted with some magic technology.
All that was thrown under the bus by mid 2019. People advocating a Norway deal (which I would have supported after 2016 as the least bad outcome) were told that wasn't The Will of The People.
But here's the thing.
How did anyone know what The Will of The People was? Because they had never been asked if they supported the Hard Brexit we ended up with. They had repeatedly been told in 2016 that we wouldn't have a Hard Brexit. The EU would fall over themselves to give us exactly what we wanted.
In that context, I'm genuinely amazed at the insistence of Leave supporters that a second vote to see if the British people REALLY wanted the Brexit we ended up with should be seen as an outrage against Democracy.
What the REAL outrage was, was the Leave side being systematically lied to in 2016.
-
Keir is ready to 'sweat blood'
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-57848266
-
Keir is ready to 'sweat blood'
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-57848266
If he wants to become more popular, he'd be better off being on 'The Masked Singer' or better still, presenting ITV's ever popular quiz, 'The Chase'.
(Thinking about it though, sweating blood would probably get him into the Final of 'Britain's Got Talent'. To win it, he'd have to find a dog that could dance. And also sweat blood).