Jump to content


The Labour Party - Part 2

Vaati

People who get personal with any further attacks in the thread will be suspended. As will any individuals using wording like Smarmer instead of Starmer etc.

Message added by Vaati

Recommended Posts

Just now, convert said:

Batley and Spen?

If he has ambitions to be leader then anywhere....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 13/05/2021 at 05:15, andyofborg said:

Not sure the Blair governments were particularly woke - though I guess it depends how you define woke - or neoliberal. 

On reflection you're right about Blair not being socially liberal.  Invading Iraq, and all that detention without trial stuff, were definitely not "woke".

 

On the other hand, the mania for privatisation/PPP, and being "intensely relaxed" about income and wealth inequality, were definitely neoliberal.  Though I'll grant that they had a certain amount of social conscience, unlike Cameron/Clegg/Osborne.

 

On 13/05/2021 at 05:15, andyofborg said:

China has embraced globalisation and I wouldn't paricularly call them neoliberal.

All neoliberals may be globalisers, but not all globalisers are necessarily neoliberal.  In any case China is sui generis and may be more interested in global domination than globalisation:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belt_and_Road_Initiative 

Edited by CaptainSwing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, convert said:

Wouldn’t Andy Burnham have to be elected an MP first...

Given that Prime Ministers aren't actually required to be MPs, it's only convention that they are, I doubt that party leaders are required to be.

9 minutes ago, andyofborg said:

If he has ambitions to be leader then anywhere....

I doubt he'll want to make a bid for party leader until the internal civil war has finished.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, tinfoilhat said:

What voters are left with is a pro-remain, pro-blm centrist dad with sharp haircut and precious few policies. I like to think I'm reasonably politically savvy and I can't name one. Is he carrying over corbyns? No idea. His main thing is that he seems fairly truthful and not Boris Johnson. Given the 18 months we've had, that should be enough but it isn't. Not for voters, not for half his party.

The only clear policy I've detected is the one of making himself more "electable", i.e. more "donatable-to", by purging the less corporate-friendly wing of the party.  Not working very well so far.

 

Biden got elected on a platform of not being Donald Trump.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, tinfoilhat said:

Apparently its because starmer is "woke". On another thread a poster spoke of an ex-miner who would rather vote for a party who ordered the police to hit him in the face with truncheons than for a party who supports black lives matter and that taking a knee is not popular "with that demographic", and that the chattering middle classes (whatever they are) are worse than a party who wants to take more action make protest harder to do.

 

You are as in the dark as I am. 

I've only known one or two people from ex-mining families, so this may be totally unrepresentative, but by 2016 they were convinced that it was the EU, not the Tories, who were responsible for the demise of the mining industry.

 

I don't think they're unsympathetic to BLM at all, I think it's more that Starmer gives the impression of being more concerned about that than he is about them.  Might be a false impression, but I think that is the impression.  Corbyn spoke to huge cheering crowds at the Miners' Gala, can't see Starmer doing that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, CaptainSwing said:

On reflection you're right about Blair not being socially liberal.  Invading Iraq, and all that detention without trial stuff, were definitely not "woke".

So Johnson is woke then, we have had lockdowns for months on end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, El Cid said:

So Johnson is woke then, we have had lockdowns for months on end.

not sure why you have linked the two?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, El Cid said:

But you only want to know what Starmer stands for so you can critisize him, if you really did want to find out, then you would Google.

No one knows what Johnson stands for, he is against Heathrow expansion and ID cards, but he COULD change his mind  :)

My bold. 

 

Oooooo!  I do apologise.  I didn't realise that Starmer wasn't open to criticism.  Thanks for putting me right but following you're train of thought we need to know what Starmer stands for BEFORE any criticism can be directed at him?   Similarly, any politicians who keep their mouths shut can NEVER be criticised?   Well if they only realised it was that simple, although PMQ's & 'Question Time' would be a bit boring, wouldn't it? 

 

Yes I could Google but the problem with that is I might be selective in what I choose to read & then paste on SF as part of an argument for or  against Starmer, so that's why I'm after the view of the average men & women who post of SF who usually have no problem providing facts. 

 

So once again, for the 3rd time, (think of me as the Jeremy Paxman of SF), I'll ask again;

 

What does Starmer ACTUALLY STAND FOR? 

 

Don't feel as though you need to reply personally, if you don't know, there are apparently tens of millions in the same boat who don't have a clue either. 

 

C'mon someone,  What does he stand for? 

Edited by Baron99

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Baron99 said:

My bold. 

 

Oooooo!  I do apologise.  I didn't realise that Starmer wasn't open to criticism.  Thanks for putting me right but following you're train of thought we need to know what Starmer stands for BEFORE any criticism can be directed at him?   Similarly, any politicians who keep their mouths shut can NEVER be criticised?   Well if they only realised it was that simple, although PMQ's & 'Question Time' would be a bit boring, wouldn't it? 

 

Yes I could Google but the problem with that is I might be selective in what I choose to read & then paste on SF as part of an argument for or  against Starmer, so that's why I'm after the view of the average men & women who post of SF who usually have no problem providing facts. 

 

So once again, for the 3rd time, (think of me as the Jeremy Paxman of SF), I'll ask again;

 

What does Starmer ACTUALLY STAND FOR? 

 

Don't feel as though you need to reply personally, if you don't know, there are apparently tens of millions in the same boat who don't have a clue either. 

 

C'mon someone,  What does he stand for? 

More like the Jeremy Kyle of SF.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
22 minutes ago, Mister Gee said:

More like the Jeremy Kyle of SF.

Well if I'm Jeremy Kyle & in charge, where does place you? 

 

Apparently Paxman famously asked his question 14 times.  Only another 10 shots at it then. 

 

Clearly you're another one who doesn't know the answer to what Starmer actually stands for or won't take a go at providing an answer.  Clearly Starmer is such a mysterious enigma that folk struggle to come up with an responses.  As I stated to El Cid, don't worry, you're with the millions who are having trouble knowing what he stands for, including Lab supporters.

 

There's no shame in not knowing.  

 

I might have to eventually rephrase the question if it's to difficult for some to answer? 

Edited by Baron99

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Baron99 said:

Well if I'm Jeremy Kyle & in charge, where does place you

 

Apparently Paxman famously asked his question 14 times.  Only another 10 shots at it then. 

 

Clearly you're another one who doesn't know the answer to what Starmer actually stands for or won't take a go at providing an answer.  Clearly Starmer is such a mysterious enigma that folk struggle to come up with an responses.  As I stated to El Cid, don't worry, you're with the millions who are having trouble knowing what he stands for, including Lab supporters.

 

There's no shame in not knowing.  

 

I might have to eventually rephrase the question if it's to difficult for some to answer? 

Is that a cryptic crossword clue?

Edited by Mister Gee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/05/2021 at 22:58, tinfoilhat said:

Thats a fair point. Hes excellent at the despatch box, but hes firing questions at a PM who will outright lie or just bumble out a bit of nonsense. A few will be drawn to that but most voters won't even sit through the highlights let alone a full PMQs. His main power is nullified.

Being excellent at the despatch box didn’t help Starmer win the  Hartlepool by-election. As you said in the, Israel-Palestinian Conflict topic, he’ll sort things out with his fancy foot work, personally I think the mans flat footed, so convince me otherwise.

 

I’m not faithful to any political party, so you tell me what his policies are for the future of this country then I will decide if he is worth supporting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.