Keir Starmer

[Mr Kobayashi]

Because there is a misconception that going to private school does actually open doors and does actually mean your kids will turn out better by default. This is mostly false though but it's usually too late to admit it once you've paid £100k and your kid ends up sat in the same university as everyone else.

It's not just about getting into top universities though is it? Just because they might end up at the same universities doesn't mean they don't have some privilege or networks to help them get a head start on their university peers.

 

[inbetween]

It's not just about getting into top universities though is it? Just because they might end up at the same universities doesn't mean they don't have some privilege or networks to help them get a head start on their university peers.

A head start on what though? I agree it sort of makes sense with entry into politics but where else? Big finance?

I'm not too sure what we're arguing to change because I work for a major UK PLC and only a handful I know were privately educated, none of them were legged up into management. I haven't seen or experienced this privilege beyond the envy that somebody had a much easier education than I did, but surely that's down to the failings of the state system?

We can speak about the toffs and that element of privilege and infiltration of public office but let's not forget that Jeremy Corbyn was privately educated and Diane Abbot quite famously sent her kids to private school..... If this is an argument from the left field of politics then it's a bit of a hypocritical one.

I just don't see the problem because people can and do send their kids to private school for many reasons. Going purely to get a leg up into the Bullingdon Club only really applies to a select few.

 

[Postman Pep]

Weird level of control freakery here .... cultish behaviour.

 

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

Weird level of control freakery here .... cultish behaviour.

I wonder if this is actually an attempt to stop Farage as they've absolutely no chance of winning there?

 

[bluethrunthru]

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

I’ve got very mixed feelings about him.

I think he’s a boring ****, and I wouldn’t be remotely inclined to know him socially if we worked together; and his incantation about being a barrister from working class roots is tedious. I know certain..ahem…counsel whose fathers are more demonstrably working class than his, who don’t drone on about it. I’ll also hazard the barrister I’m thinking of is a better advocate than Starmer was, or ever will be.

But I think he’s ultimately a decent person; in what is a complex and wicked world, and I think he’ll be more radical than many expect. And I think he’ll generally make the right decisions, which is ultimately the most important feature in a PM. Think he could be a really good PM.

So, I think he deserves a chance, because we don’t live in a perfect world. Sadly. But we don’t.

 

[The Future’s Blue!]

I’ve got very mixed feelings about him.

I think he’s a boring ****, and I wouldn’t be remotely inclined to know him socially if we worked together; and his incantation about being a barrister from working class roots is tedious. I know certain..ahem…counsel whose fathers are more demonstrably working class than his, who don’t drone on about it. I’ll also hazard the barrister I’m thinking of is a better advocate than Starmer was, or ever will be.

But I think he’s ultimately a decent person; in what is a complex and wicked world, and I think he’ll be more radical than many expect. And I think he’ll generally make the right decisions, which is ultimately the most important feature in a PM. Think he could be a really good PM.

So, I think he deserves a chance, because we don’t live in a perfect world. Sadly. But we don’t.

I like him.

 

[city2]

The labour can’t be as corrupt as the Tory party, because if they are reform will be the next party.

 

[Scottyboi]

I’ve got very mixed feelings about him.

I think he’s a boring ****, and I wouldn’t be remotely inclined to know him socially if we worked together; and his incantation about being a barrister from working class roots is tedious. I know certain..ahem…counsel whose fathers are more demonstrably working class than his, who don’t drone on about it. I’ll also hazard the barrister I’m thinking of is a better advocate than Starmer was, or ever will be.

But I think he’s ultimately a decent person; in what is a complex and wicked world, and I think he’ll be more radical than many expect. And I think he’ll generally make the right decisions, which is ultimately the most important feature in a PM. Think he could be a really good PM.

So, I think he deserves a chance, because we don’t live in a perfect world. Sadly. But we don’t.

His voice goes through me, but least he isn't ruining Sambas for middle aged men.

 

[BigJoe#1]

So all that effort to get to be a candidate and bets on himself to lose.

What the fuck is wrong with these people?

Thick as pigshit, just get a friend of a friend to put the bet on.

A nice little return on an investment id he loses his seat... or a cushdy little number if he wins it... jobs a good 'un. Winner all round.

 

[BigJoe#1]

The labour can’t be as corrupt as the Tory party, because if they are reform will be the next party.

See Wales for Labour corruption.

 

[urban genie]

I’ve got very mixed feelings about him.

I think he’s a boring ****, and I wouldn’t be remotely inclined to know him socially if we worked together; and his incantation about being a barrister from working class roots is tedious. I know certain..ahem…counsel whose fathers are more demonstrably working class than his, who don’t drone on about it. I’ll also hazard the barrister I’m thinking of is a better advocate than Starmer was, or ever will be.

But I think he’s ultimately a decent person; in what is a complex and wicked world, and I think he’ll be more radical than many expect. And I think he’ll generally make the right decisions, which is ultimately the most important feature in a PM. Think he could be a really good PM.

So, I think he deserves a chance, because we don’t live in a perfect world. Sadly. But we don’t.

I voted for him to be leader, I hoped he would continue the partys more spcially consious move to being for the people again , though with an electable restraint.

Then he brought mandelson back into the fold and I quit the party, local campaigning and leafleting (which I have dine since my teens) and won't vote nationally for them, allowing Akehurst to wield such power on the NEC also tipped my decision that Starmer isn't a leader I can trust.

My councilors amd Burnham get my vote but the PLP can fuck off.


Edit: also boundry changes means my Labour choice was forcefully changed from Azfal Khan who tbf I was strongly considering voting for despite starmer, but I have had Andrew Gwyne forced upon me and that fella isn't getting my vote

 

[metalblue]

I’ve got very mixed feelings about him.

I think he’s a boring ****, and I wouldn’t be remotely inclined to know him socially if we worked together; and his incantation about being a barrister from working class roots is tedious. I know certain..ahem…counsel whose fathers are more demonstrably working class than his, who don’t drone on about it. I’ll also hazard the barrister I’m thinking of is a better advocate than Starmer was, or ever will be.

But I think he’s ultimately a decent person; in what is a complex and wicked world, and I think he’ll be more radical than many expect. And I think he’ll generally make the right decisions, which is ultimately the most important feature in a PM. Think he could be a really good PM.

So, I think he deserves a chance, because we don’t live in a perfect world. Sadly. But we don’t.

Good post. I hope he’s got you signed up to write his epitaph, maybe use platitudinous rather than boring **** however. It’s less frowned upon.

 

[TinFoilHat]

Keith Stalin all over the bumph from Lillian Greenwood.

Fuck all about local issues just Keith on the front with change written on it and a couple of pledges on the back.

Be boring in the right way and we'll feel better in the next 5 years.

 

[Postman Pep]

Keith Stalin all over the bumph from Lillian Greenwood.

Fuck all about local issues just Keith on the front with change written on it and a couple of pledges on the back.

Be boring in the right way and we'll feel better in the next 5 years.

No flag?

Sick of the sight of the **** with the amount of bumph that has passed through our office over the last month. There was even a Tory one this week with his mugshot plastered all over it.

Some cracking independent material to make up for the dreariness ...... all sorts of oddballs.

 

[TinFoilHat]

No flag?

Sick of the sight of the **** with the amount of bumph that has passed through our office over the last month. There was even a Tory one this week with his mugshot plastered all over it.

Some cracking independent material to make up for the dreariness ...... all sorts of oddballs.

The workers party one also had Galloway plastered over it more than the candidate who comes across as very level headed in comparison. She's a lefty lawyer.

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

Keith Stalin all over the bumph from Lillian Greenwood.

Fuck all about local issues just Keith on the front with change written on it and a couple of pledges on the back.

Be boring in the right way and we'll feel better in the next 5 years.

She'll have been directed to stick with the non specific corporate branding because the only change in reality will be the suit in number 10. Are the pledges two of the 10 he made to blag the party leadership or new lies?

 

[Postman Pep]

The workers party one also had Galloway plastered over it more than the candidate who comes across as very level headed in comparison. She's a lefty lawyer.

Lefty lawyer you say .....

She'll have been directed to stick with the non specific corporate branding because the only change in reality will be the suit in number 10. Are the pledges two of the 10 he made to blag the party leadership or new lies?

Freshly pulled out of his arse ;-)

 

[Postman Pep]

"Yet the idea that Labour remains a progressive social democratic party hiding in plain sight is still in the air. While it is granted this is not obvious from its programme, it is held that deep down it is the party of change, of welfare, of state intervention; the party of labour rather than of capital, the party of international law, not war. It is held that in power, either circumstances or opportunity will make it more radical. That hope animates many.


Yet Labour is telling the world otherwise, and we should believe it."

Labour is telling Britain it is now a conservative party – and we should believe it | David Edgerton

Let’s take Starmer at its word that it is the party of wealth creation and growth, not redistribution and equality. What will this mean for our politics, asks David Edgerton, professor of modern British history at King’s College London

www.theguardian.com

 

[metalblue]

"Yet the idea that Labour remains a progressive social democratic party hiding in plain sight is still in the air. While it is granted this is not obvious from its programme, it is held that deep down it is the party of change, of welfare, of state intervention; the party of labour rather than of capital, the party of international law, not war. It is held that in power, either circumstances or opportunity will make it more radical. That hope animates many.


Yet Labour is telling the world otherwise, and we should believe it."

Labour is telling Britain it is now a conservative party – and we should believe it | David Edgerton

Let’s take Starmer at its word that it is the party of wealth creation and growth, not redistribution and equality. What will this mean for our politics, asks David Edgerton, professor of modern British history at King’s College London

www.theguardian.com

Its most telling feature is that the Labour party’s fundamental criticism of the Tories is their lack of competence, rather than their policies.