Keir Starmer

[west didsblue]

It was the beginning of the end of the Labour Party. The party became a centre right party akin to the American Democrats in that it was comfortable with capitalist excess. A Labour Party that put the owners of capital before the workers is no Labour Party and the party wonders why the Working class no longer see the Labour Party as its natural home.

Constant drip drip drip of negative stories and outright lies from some of the more popular media outlets is what has done for Labour. Same culprits that led to Brexit.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

"Stronger Together" is the Starmer version of Build back better.

Ironic as he's purging anyone left of him from the party.

The cull would be front page news had another leader done it.

I'm sure I am not the first person to say it, but I find it quite strange that Kier Starmer became the automatic first choice when he had only been an MP for five years.

Talented and experienced in politics (of a different kind) and decision making during his career as a barrister and DPP. But having not been a politician for very long, does he have the right political instincts to make the best decisions for the Labour Party?

Is he a bit of a plonker as his middle name suggests? :)

And Likely to rely too heavily on the advice of people like David Evans.

 

[johnnytapia]

Constant drip drip drip of negative stories and outright lies from some of the more popular media outlets is what has done for Labour. Same culprits that led to Brexit.

Are these the same outlets that drip drip dripped positive stories between 95-2007 that saw Labour smash the Tories? What has done for Labour is having two clowns in Ed Milliband and Jeremy fucking corbyn lead the party. Utterly unelectable the pair of them but hey, they were the “members” choice, so who can possibly argue? (The Tories won’t be that’s for sure).

 

[west didsblue]

Are these the same outlets that drip drip dripped positive stories between 95-2007 that saw Labour smash the Tories? What has done for Labour is having two clowns in Ed Milliband and Jeremy fucking corbyn lead the party. Utterly unelectable the pair of them but hey, they were the “members” choice, so who can possibly argue? (The Tories won’t be that’s for sure).

Miliband was the union’s choice. The members chose his brother. In retrospect Ed would have been ok. Can’t say the same for Corbyn even though he couldn’t possibly be worse than Johnson.

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

I'm sure I am not the first person to say it, but I find it quite strange that Kier Starmer became the automatic first choice when he had only been an MP for five years.

Talented and experienced in politics (of a different kind) and decision making during his career as a barrister and DPP. But having not been a politician for very long, does he have the right political instincts to make the best decisions for the Labour Party?

Is he a bit of a plonker as his middle name suggests? :)

And Likely to rely too heavily on the advice of people like David Evans.

Oh well, at least he didn't decide to let Jimmy Savile off the hook when he was in charge of the cps

 

[johnnytapia]

Miliband was the union’s choice. The members chose his brother. In retrospect Ed would have been ok. Can’t say the same for Corbyn even though he couldn’t possibly be worse than Johnson.

Ed was the unions’ choice, ergo, he was never electable. Corbyn only ever wanted to promote the injustices of the underpaid bean growers of Guatemala.

 

[Vic]

Miliband was the union’s choice. The members chose his brother. In retrospect Ed would have been ok. Can’t say the same for Corbyn even though he couldn’t possibly be worse than Johnson.

Most of the members chose his brother. 45% chose Ed, and so did most union members.

I voted for Burnham but Ed was my second preference, having heard David Milliband at a campaign meeting, and realising he was to the right of Tony Blair. (I'm not decrying what Blair did - things did only get better, till Iraq.)

 

[west didsblue]

Most of the members chose his brother. 45% chose Ed, and so did most union members.

I voted for Burnham but Ed was my second preference, having heard David Milliband at a campaign meeting, and realising he was to the right of Tony Blair. (I'm not decrying what Blair did - things did only get better, till Iraq.)

Most union members didn’t vote. The union bloc vote was based on a relatively small turnout from union members which was fairly standard for union votes. If I remember correctly this meant that each individual union vote effectively counted the same as about 10 member votes in terms of influencing the overall outcome.

Edit: Remembered it wrong. Although I was right about union members mostly not voting (9% turnout), the ones that did outnumbered members votes and were individually counted.

 

[Rascal]

Ed was the unions’ choice, ergo, he was never electable. Corbyn only ever wanted to promote the injustices of the underpaid bean growers of Guatemala.

See the post on media manipulation.

Its you in a nutshell.

The Murdoch media backed Blair, why? Because Blair was no threat to Capitalist excess, he was actually comfortable with millionaires, he accepted the Thatcherite reforms and as Thatcher said herself, he was her greatest achievement.

Foot was a threat so they did him up like a kipper with the donkey jacket story.

We have a media that is heavily skewed to the right of the population and they convince you the likes of Ed is unelectable because of the Unions and Corbyn is unelectable because of bean growers and you bought it.

This is despite poll after poll proving some of the Labour manifesto was very popular, it is popular because we are not a right wing country, we are a Socially conservative country that is comfortable with the ideals of Socialism that have been introduced in the country. The nation loves the welfare state, it loves the NHS, but it has allowed through media manipulation these great institutions to be debased, run down, poorly funded. A Conservative government could not get away with saying it would privatise the NHS , so it does it by stealth with the help of its media friends who produce anti NHS stories, the country would be aghast at the dismantling of the Welfare state, but its being done on the sly with the help of media manipulation, characterised by stories of people having 24 ft wide TV sets and there being a mountain of welfare scroungers.

See, you concentrate on bean growers whilst the Tories dismantle the institutions of the state, you deride its defenders as unelectable, but when they are gone who is going to fight your corner?

 

[Rascal]

So full employment wasn't good for the working class?

Full employment is great for the working class, but when was the last time it was even close to being achieved.