Keir Starmer

[Mr Kobayashi]

Seriously though, she shouldn't have labelled the Conservatives as “homophobic, racist, misogynistic … scum”, because in so doing she was in effect calling conservative voters 'homophobic, racist, misogynistic … scum' too.

Except she said it about the government not the party. Anybody listening to it would have known that, she wasn't talking about backbenchers.

There is no link between the comments and the death of David Amess, there is however a link between the anti-immigrant rhetoric in the referendum and the murder of Jo Cox. It didn't radicalise the murderer, he was already a white supremacist nutter but it was most likely the match that lit the fuse.

Did anybody apologise for that?

Nigel Farage for his poster? Boris and vote leave for the leaflet with countries full of muslim hordes ready to join the EU and invade this green and pleasant land.

 

[Jasonrobards83]

Except she said it about the government not the party. Anybody listening to it would have known that, she wasn't talking about backbenchers.

There is no link between the comments and the death of David Amess, there is however a link between the anti-immigrant rhetoric in the referendum and the murder of Jo Cox. It didn't radicalise the murderer, he was already a white supremacist nutter but it was most likely the match that lit the fuse.

Did anybody apologise for that?

Nigel Farage for his poster? Boris and vote leave for the leaflet with countries full of muslim hordes ready to join the EU and invade this green and pleasant land.

Well, yes, a fair point, but regarding her comments being directed at the government, not the party - in 2023/24 do you think the average voter will make the distinction?

So my original point stands: I'm feeling sorry for KS because he will never achieve what he is going to spend the next 3 years of his life, trying to do, because of the toxicity of his deputy.

Thinking about it, may I ask about this part of your post: 'There is no link between the comments and the death of David Amess', how do you know? How can anyone know, with 100% certainty?

Furthermore, it is interesting you mention Farage (and his poster) because most people agree it was egregious. We are all aware the 'Leave' campaign tried to keep NF in the background and in the main they were successful and then they won. If Farage had been the voice of the 'Leave' campaign, I bet Remain would have won 55-45, easily. Which is exactly the point I'm trying to make, Farage was (is!) toxic and in 2016 he was pretty much kept in his box, apart from a trip on the Thames and that awful poster. The Labour Party should have learnt from that re: Angela Rayner and I can't understand anyone who doesn't see it. The hard left, who are behind her, continue to put their principles ahead of winning and considering how much suffering we are experiencing - which is only going to get worse - that is pretty sad.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

Well, yes, a fair point, but regarding her comments being directed at the government, not the party - in 2023/24 do you think the average voter will make the distinction?

The speech wasn't directed at the average voter, it was made at a private invitation only event for Labour party activists.

So my original point stands: I'm feeling sorry for KS because he will never achieve what he is going to spend the next 3 years of his life, trying to do, because of the toxicity of his deputy.

Thinking about it, may I ask about this part of your post: 'There is no link between the comments and the death of David Amess', how do you know? How can anyone know, with 100% certainty?

Because he was murdered by a Somali heritage Muslim who is reported to have been consuming extremist material. Not a disaffected socialist.

I'm not sure Angie issued a fatwa, unless there is a longer version of the speech I haven't heard.

Furthermore, it is interesting you mention Farage (and his poster) because most people agree it was egregious. We are all aware the 'Leave' campaign tried to keep NF in the background and in the main they were successful and then they won. If Farage had been the voice of the 'Leave' campaign, I bet Remain would have won 55-45, easily. Which is exactly the point I'm trying to make, Farage was (is!) toxic and in 2016 he was pretty much kept in his box, apart from a trip on the Thames and that awful poster.

So apart from the most vile acts he was kept in his box?

Except he wasn't kept in his box, he had coverage on news and political channels before the referendum which UKIP didn't deserve because of their size and lack of any MPs (without flipping Tory lunatics) and used it to develop his brand.

The Labour Party should have learnt from that re: Angela Rayner and I can't understand anyone who doesn't see it. They hard left, who are behind her, continue to put their principles ahead of winning and considering how much suffering we are experiencing - which is only going to get worse - that is pretty sad.

She isn't part of the hard-left, she just has a big gob, and she hasn't ever been a member of the socialist campaign group as far as I can work out and she has proclaimed herself as not a corbynite.

 

[Jasonrobards83]

The speech wasn't directed at the average voter, it was made at a private invitation only event for Labour party activists.

In 2021 nothing is 'private'.

But I concede to you on the other points.

At the end of the day, we will see how things pan out in the next few years.

 

[west didsblue]

Well, yes, a fair point, but regarding her comments being directed at the government, not the party - in 2023/24 do you think the average voter will make the distinction?

So my original point stands: I'm feeling sorry for KS because he will never achieve what he is going to spend the next 3 years of his life, trying to do, because of the toxicity of his deputy.

Thinking about it, may I ask about this part of your post: 'There is no link between the comments and the death of David Amess', how do you know? How can anyone know, with 100% certainty?

Furthermore, it is interesting you mention Farage (and his poster) because most people agree it was egregious. We are all aware the 'Leave' campaign tried to keep NF in the background and in the main they were successful and then they won. If Farage had been the voice of the 'Leave' campaign, I bet Remain would have won 55-45, easily. Which is exactly the point I'm trying to make, Farage was (is!) toxic and in 2016 he was pretty much kept in his box, apart from a trip on the Thames and that awful poster. The Labour Party should have learnt from that re: Angela Rayner and I can't understand anyone who doesn't see it. The hard left, who are behind her, continue to put their principles ahead of winning and considering how much suffering we are experiencing - which is only going to get worse - that is pretty sad.

Unfortunately the average Conservative voter won’t know about the fact that it was directed at the government not the party, was leaked from a private event and they won’t work out that it’s actually true because the sections of the media with the biggest influence will propagate the fiction that she’s some sort of thick foul mouthed communist that can’t be anywhere near government because she’s a bit common. That’s what Labour is up against so you’re probably correct that she needs to be moved out of the limelight for the duration of any election campaign. It’s unfortunate that the media have so much influence but they do.

 

[mat]

Unfortunately (and I've put it into this thread because I actually feel sorry for Keir Starmer) not enough people will, whilst Angela Rayner is on the scene. She is just too toxic to your average voter.

If Labour and I mean proper Labour ever want to get into power again this is what needs to happen: the left of the party needs to become almost invisible, let Keir do his thing and maybe win as a sort-of 2020s Tony Blair (without the foreign wars, hopefully) then when he is Prime Minister they can come out of the background and fight for what they believe in.

To do so whilst in opposition is just never going to work. That Labour are not streets ahead in the polls after the crap and corruption and mistakes and bumbling and clown-like leadership from the tories, these last two years, is proof of that and of my earlier comment about Angela Rayner.

He should have sacked her after she made that 'scum' comment and then he might have had a chance of winning in 2023 (or 2024). Now she is going to be front and centre in the run-up to the next general election and that will make the Labour Party unelectable, in so many peoples' eyes.

Why is Raynor toxic?

Oh yeah must be she's a strong Northern woman who's proud of her routes and not afraid to say what she thinks. Insecure men don't like that.

The "scum" argument is the go to for any right wing politico (This is not an attack on you. I have no idea of your political leanings) who are obsessed with that whilst giving their mates a free pass to fuck the country up.

Labour I hare to say it won't be re-elected regardless. People want a positive alternative to the Tories not a sad and tired Blair tribute act that Starmer is trying to create.

The Tories had their thatcherite obsession and that continues with their leaders until the savvy pig fucker cane along and used his PR experience to make electorate forget that she ever ran the country.

We have have a Tory government which are Blue UKIP more than traditional conservative and no credible opposition.

Corbyn scared them shitless and he was undone by blarites shit scared he was about to destroy St Tony's legacy.

So we're gonna get years of greater inequality blamed on invisible enemies whilst this government continues to be the reverse Robin Hood because Sir Keir can't bear to pull down his Tony Blair posters whilst chanting things can only get better.

 

[west didsblue]

Why is Raynor toxic?

Oh yeah must be she's a strong Northern woman who's proud of her routes and not afraid to say what she thinks. Insecure men don't like that.

The "scum" argument is the go to for any right wing politico (This is not an attack on you. I have no idea of your political leanings) who are obsessed with that whilst giving their mates a free pass to fuck the country up.

Labour I hare to say it won't be re-elected regardless. People want a positive alternative to the Tories not a sad and tired Blair tribute act that Starmer is trying to create.

The Tories had their thatcherite obsession and that continues with their leaders until the savvy pig fucker cane along and used his PR experience to make electorate forget that she ever ran the country.

We have have a Tory government which are Blue UKIP more than traditional conservative and no credible opposition.

Corbyn scared them shitless and he was undone by blarites shit scared he was about to destroy St Tony's legacy.

So we're gonna get years of greater inequality blamed on invisible enemies whilst this government continues to be the reverse Robin Hood because Sir Keir can't bear to pull down his Tony Blair posters whilst chanting things can only get better.

I disagree that Corbyn scared them shitless. He was a Michael Foot tribute act without the intelligence. Foot got slaughtered for being "a bit of a lefty" and the Tories and RW media love it when there's someone like that in opposition that they can demonise. The fact that 95% of Corbyn's manifesto in 2017 made perfect sense was irrelevant because the vast majority don't read it, and prefer to believe nonsense scare stories about magic money trees at the same time as their preferred government are wasting unprecedented amounts of money enriching themselves.

Blair, Brown, Campbell and Mandelson understood exactly what needed to be done in the 90s to get elected, and whilst the left of the party were disgruntled, they appealed to the centre ground including people who would normally vote Tory but would never vote for someone deemed to be a puppet of the TU leadership (whether true or not). The key thing they achieved was managing to convince the influential media that they were a safe pair of hands, because like it or not the likes of the Sun and Mail have a hugely disproportionate amount of influence. The Sun headline in 1992 was absolutely correct when they claimed credit for Major's win against Kinnock and they have exactly the same influence today.

Starmer is doing exactly the right thing in positioning himself in the political centre because anything else would consign Labour to permanent opposition however much the Tories screw up the country.

 

[blueinsa]

I disagree that Corbyn scared them shitless. He was a Michael Foot tribute act without the intelligence. Foot got slaughtered for being "a bit of a lefty" and the Tories and RW media love it when there's someone like that in opposition that they can demonise. The fact that 95% of Corbyn's manifesto in 2017 made perfect sense was irrelevant because the vast majority don't read it, and prefer to believe nonsense scare stories about magic money trees at the same time as their preferred government are wasting unprecedented amounts of money enriching themselves.

Blair, Brown, Campbell and Mandelson understood exactly what needed to be done in the 90s to get elected, and whilst the left of the party were disgruntled, they appealed to the centre ground including people who would normally vote Tory but would never vote for someone deemed to be a puppet of the TU leadership (whether true or not). The key thing they achieved was managing to convince the influential media that they were a safe pair of hands, because like it or not the likes of the Sun and Mail have a hugely disproportionate amount of influence. The Sun headline in 1992 was absolutely correct when they claimed credit for Major's win against Kinnock and they have exactly the same influence today.

Starmer is doing exactly the right thing in positioning himself in the political centre because anything else would consign Labour to permanent opposition however much the Tories screw up the country.

An excellent read of the situation imo.

 

[The perfect fumble]

Starmer is doing exactly the right thing in positioning himself in the political centre because anything else would consign Labour to permanent opposition however much the Tories screw up the country.

Errr? No




Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.

 

[Oldham Exile]

Errr? No




Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.

Good to emphasise that

Brilliant piece of Electoral campaigning - at the time all the strongly traditional Labour voters and those 'harder left' were going to vote Labour anyway.

What this campaign did was give confidence to so many swing voters and even a lot of previously Tory voters that Labour were an attractive option and could be trusted - New Labour.

In essence the campaign made it possible for Labour to be elected again - what's not to like?

Johnson is an utter charlatan - but unless those centre and left of centre voters are presented with an option that does not have echoes of Foot or Corbyn - the Tories will likely win again.

IMO - all anti-Johnson posters on here should commend what Starmer is doing - it is a winning ticket and - if he sees it through - he will succeed in getting rid of Johnson

And there is no downside - the only ones who are going to really object and the 'purist harder-left' and they are largely irrelevant, because:

a) They, even whilst moaning, are still going to vote Labour anyway - so in terms of increasing vote share - not relevant or

b) Some might do some form of mini-protest and vote for some purist hard-left option - but they will be so few in numbers - they also are not relevant

Not hard to understand is it - for Starmer to succeed - he needs to attract those that would not vote for Corbyn (despite that his manifesto was 'not that extreme') - pandering to the hard-left - just because they are vocal on social-media forums would be a huge fuck-up