Keir Starmer

Mr Kobayashi said:
Both promised things they had no intention of delivering didn't they?
Click to expand...

It's not exactly Boris Johnson level bullshit though really is it?

Starmer became leader just weeks before Covid. That was one of the biggest economic events in the last 100 years. Since then we've had the Truss crash, the war in Ukraine, and all three contributing to the cost of living crisis.

For many of the economic promises, the world is a different place to when he was trying to become leader.

I'll give you that there were plenty of words to placate Labour members, and he's not followed through with that. The only defence I'd give is that for years we've laughed at the Tory members because they want a leader that reflects what they want - and most of think that means someone who is batshit crazy. While we might say that our own views are correct (and I am certain my own left wing utopia would be much better than anything Labour have said they'll do), it's useful to look in the mirror sometimes, and ask if we really are the best people to pick a leader who will win elections.
 
bluenova said:
It's not exactly Boris Johnson level bullshit though really is it?

Starmer became leader just weeks before Covid. That was one of the biggest economic events in the last 100 years. Since then we've had the Truss crash, the war in Ukraine, and all three contributing to the cost of living crisis.

For many of the economic promises, the world is a different place to when he was trying to become leader.

I'll give you that there were plenty of worse to placate Labour members, and he's not followed through with that. The only defence I'd give is that for years we've laughed at the Tory members because they want a leader that reflects what they want - and most of think that means someone who is batshit crazy. While we might say that our own views are correct (and I am certain my own left wing utopia would be much better than anything Labour have said they'll do), it's useful to look in the mirror sometimes, and ask if we really are the best people to pick a leader who will win elections.
Click to expand...
Some of his '10 pledges' don't cost money. He lied and will say pretty much anything to gain power.
 
bluenova said:
It's not exactly Boris Johnson level bullshit though really is it?
Click to expand...

Benefit of hindsight. How many people has Boris proclaimed his friend only to say they never were his friend only a few months later?

bluenova said:
Starmer became leader just weeks before Covid. That was one of the biggest economic events in the last 100 years. Since then we've had the Truss crash, the war in Ukraine, and all three contributing to the cost of living crisis.
Click to expand...

The Tories have been pretty blatant in blaming all those events (apart from Truss) for being shite haven't they?

bluenova said:
For many of the economic promises, the world is a different place to when he was trying to become leader.

I'll give you that there were plenty of worse to placate Labour members, and he's not followed through with that. The only defence I'd give is that for years we've laughed at the Tory members because they want a leader that reflects what they want - and most of think that means someone who is batshit crazy. While we might say that our own views are correct (and I am certain my own left wing utopia would be much better than anything Labour have said they'll do), it's useful to look in the mirror sometimes, and ask if we really are the best people to pick a leader who will win elections.
Click to expand...

Is that all that matters? Wouldn't it be better to have someone who didn't win as convincingly but was able to offer meaningful change with a smaller majority or coalition partners?
 
Pedestrian said:
I’m not defending the stance but for some reason politicians seem to be able to promise things that they know will not happen. I think they should be held accountable to the standard a doctor would but that’s not happening soon. To actually think Starmer is at all like Johnson is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Are you Paul Mason in disguise? :)
 
Pedestrian said:
I’m not defending the stance but for some reason politicians seem to be able to promise things that they know will not happen. I think they should be held accountable to the standard a doctor would but that’s not happening soon. To actually think Starmer is at all like Johnson is ridiculous.
Click to expand...
Lies are lies.
 
Mr Kobayashi said:
Starmer is as bland as Major, as dishonest as Johnson and going to get as many seats as Blair. Is that a good combination?
Click to expand...
Think he’s even more dull than Major, and I think he could get more seats than Blair, but there is no way he is as dishonest as Johnson. Not saying he isn’t somewhat dishonest, but it’s not even close.
 
Mr Kobayashi said:
Benefit of hindsight. How many people has Boris proclaimed his friend only to say they never were his friend only a few months later?



The Tories have been pretty blatant in blaming all those events (apart from Truss) for being shite haven't they?



Is that all that matters? Wouldn't it be better to have someone who didn't win as convincingly but was able to offer meaningful change with a smaller majority or coalition partners?
Click to expand...

The Tories are right that those issues have affected the economy. They've also done plenty of other stuff that was entirely their fault, Truss is a Tory, and arguably the "cutting the green crap" made us more vulnerable when energy prices went up.

The assumption in your last point is that he's guaranteed to win whatever he said. Remember that he came in as leader 20pts behind in the polls, and at various times since the Tories have had leads. How do we know that his original pledges would have got him anywhere near where he is today?

And surely any coalition is likely to end up with a blander offer than his pitch to members? It's unlikely that the Lib Dems or SNP are going to be dragging a Labour govt further to the left.
 
bluenova said:
The Tories are right that those issues have affected the economy. They've also done plenty of other stuff that was entirely their fault, Truss is a Tory, and arguably the "cutting the green crap" made us more vulnerable when energy prices went up.

The assumption in your last point is that he's guaranteed to win whatever he said. Remember that he came in as leader 20pts behind in the polls, and at various times since the Tories have had leads. How do we know that his original pledges would have got him anywhere near where he is today?

And surely any coalition is likely to end up with a blander offer than his pitch to members? It's unlikely that the Lib Dems or SNP are going to be dragging a Labour govt further to the left.
Click to expand...

So he had to junk everything because if he had to compromise with a coalition partner he would only get some of what he promised rather than nothing at all?

Sound logic.
 
Mr Kobayashi said:
So he had to junk everything because if he had to compromise with a coalition partner he would only get some of what he promised rather than nothing at all?

Sound logic.
Click to expand...

No.

Three days before Truss became leader, there was a poll putting Labour just 4 points ahead. Given the absolute shit show of party gate, and the various Tory scandals, the fact that they were still that close was scary. At the time in the betting, Labour weren't predicted to get a majority.

Given how volatile the polling has been over the past parliament it's crazy to have assumed that Labour could say what they wanted and still guarantee that they'd get into power.

Why would any party think, let's do the minimum and hope we can get into a coalition so we can ditch just a few of our policies? Do you think they might have been thinking about the Ed Milliband coalition of 2015-2020? The one Ed went to sleep the night before the election convinced it would happen?
 
Last edited:
Pedestrian said:
Are you pretending to be a cock but really you’re a secret ****?
Click to expand...

I'm asking the questions here buddy.

Qt7kQG.gif
 
bluenova said:
No.

Three days before Truss became leader, there was a poll putting Labour just 4 points ahead. Given the absolute shit show of party gate, and the various Tory scandals, the fact that they were still that close was scary. At the time in the betting, Labour weren't predicted to get a majority.

Given how volatile the polling has been over the past parliament it's crazy to have assumed that Labour could say what they wanted and still guarantee that they'd get into power.

Why would any party think, let's do the minimum and hope we can get into a coalition so we can ditch just a few of our policies?
Click to expand...

That would be a convincing post if they hadn't already set in motion abandoning the policies before that.

Redirect Notice

www.google.com
 
bluenova said:
From December: "The levels of death and destruction over the past weeks has been intolerable. Far too many innocent Palestinians, including women and children, have been killed as part of military operations. There must be full accountability for all actions."

Stopping foreigners? He said they'll reduce net migration. Given that it's been the highest level recorded in modern times, by some distance, and that increase is mostly students making up for not being able to come and study during Covid, it's a no brainer that it will go down. Is that really something we should be horrified about?

Luke Akehurst. You can have that one.
Click to expand...

So the levels of death have been unacceptable

I don't have a problem with reducing immigration the point is posters supporting Labour have thrown shit at anyone saying it and now captain creosote is saying it, where is there wrath? Yeah but err...... pmsl

No one can defend luke well maybe Bob and West
 
Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese said:
Some of his '10 pledges' don't cost money. He lied and will say pretty much anything to gain power.
Click to expand...
The only thing that counts is getting into No 10, anything else is a failure. Doing it with a majority will be the icing on the cake for Labour as they will be able to act without having to cozy up to anybody else.

Changing the plan and being pragmatic when needed is all part of good business, sitting on your laurels thinking you’ve made it, is not.
 
Mr Kobayashi said:
That would be a convincing post if they hadn't already set in motion abandoning the policies before that.

Redirect Notice

www.google.com
Click to expand...

I'm pleased you're convinced, as that was the point I was making. Prior to Truss, Labour couldn't take any kind of win for granted.

Even after Truss, a huge part of the lead has been down to Reform surging, and ex-Tory voters saying they didn't know if they'd vote. Labour were polling around 40% before Truss, and have settled to around 44% over the past year.

Plenty of polling experts have been arguing the lead was still relatively fragile until relatively recently, and there was still an expectation that it might drop considerably as we got closer to an election. If you remember, after 2019, it was argued that Labour needed something like a 12% lead just to get a majority of 1 - that's a lead that could never have been guaranteed. The current strategy of targeting the centre, means that Labour have spread out the vote, and are likely to get a majority with a much smaller vote.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top