Do you want to discuss boring politics? (227 Viewers)

[clint van damme]

Not at all, Starmer is quite conceivably the next PM in waiting. He constantly contradicts himself, every time someone points it out you start banging on about Corbyn.
Corbyns gone, let it go.

 

---

[shmmeee]

Not at all, Starmer is quite conceivably the next PM in waiting. He constantly contradicts himself, every time someone points it out you start banging on about Corbyn.
Corbyns gone, let it go.

My issue was stated quite clearly last page. It’s about some on the left being so salty still that their immediate reaction to anything he says is “he’s a Tory/RW” even when his policies are identical to Corbyns. I bring up Corbyn because he was the last leader and who Starmer is being compared to.

My entire thesis is people need to learn what the soft left is and stop calling anyone outside the SCG right wing.

Claiming a Labour leader doesn’t want higher wages for the lower paid. Come on! You sound like this Tories calling Hunts budget socialist FFS. Get some perspective.

And if your big problem is contradicting himself I’ve shown example of other leaders who have done this that you haven’t complained about.

 

[SBT]

Fkn hell!!! I know you hate all things Tory and I know we've given you a rum bunch of leaders to choose from, but Brown? Really?

Possibly one of the nicer and I'd concede more trustworthy politicians we've seen but a complete car crash of a PM!

How was Gordon Brown a complete car crash as PM?

 

[PVA]

How was Gordon Brown a complete car crash as PM?

Cos he sold r gold!!!1!!

 

[clint van damme]

My issue was stated quite clearly last page. It’s about some on the left being so salty still that their immediate reaction to anything he says is “he’s a Tory/RW” even when his policies are identical to Corbyns. I bring up Corbyn because he was the last leader and who Starmer is being compared to.

My entire thesis is people need to learn what the soft left is and stop calling anyone outside the SCG right wing.

Claiming a Labour leader doesn’t want higher wages for the lower paid. Come on! You sound like this Tories calling Hunts budget socialist FFS. Get some perspective.

And if your big problem is contradicting himself I’ve shown example of other leaders who have done this that you haven’t complained about.

This thread has been going for an age and is full of people calling out politicians for lying, hypocrisy and reneging on previous commitments, I'm not sure why you think that's a left thing or why Starmer should be immune.

As for example of not calling others out, it may shock you, but I don't read every post or comment on every political utterance

 

[JAM See]

Let's be honest, most of us on here are going to hold our nose and vote with whoever we normally vote with.

I'll be voting Labour unless there's a possibility that tactical voting will remove my incumbent MP (there isn't).

For me, the policy I really don't want him to row back on is abolition of the HoL.

Get some sort of PR in for the second chamber and I'll forgive some of the chicanery used to get the Tories out.

Clergy and cronies involved in making the law? Madness.

 

[shmmeee]

This thread has been going for an age and is full of people calling out politicians for lying, hypocrisy and reneging on previous commitments, I'm not sure why you think that's a left thing or why Starmer should be immune.

As for example of not calling others out, it may shock you, but I don't read every post or comment on every political utterance

If it’s not you then it doesn’t apply and you don’t need to jump in. But it’s been a common thread that Grendel + bitter lefties go off every time he’s mentioned. Usually incorrectly or for absolutely nothing.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Blair and Brown in 13 years didn’t repeal a single anti union law when they had the chance. Since then a few more were whacked in, around 2016.

If Starmer puts that in his manifesto and actually does it then fair play.

 

[shmmeee]

Blair and Brown in 13 years didn’t repeal a single anti union law when they had the chance. Since then a few more were whacked in, around 2016.

If Starmer puts that in his manifesto and actually does it then fair play.

And they didn’t claim they were going to. But you think Sunak will?

 

[clint van damme]

If it’s not you then it doesn’t apply and you don’t need to jump in. But it’s been a common thread that Grendel + bitter lefties go off every time he’s mentioned. Usually incorrectly or for absolutely nothing.

I've hardly commented on not only Starmer but even any of the tories recently but I follow the thread and find your jumping to his defence on every issue and the labelling of his critics 'bitter lefties' bizarre.

You're his Nadinne Dorries!

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

And they didn’t claim they were going to. But you think Sunak will?

Last time I checked they were Labour PMs who at least in theory are meant to be on the side of workers rights and the union movement. It’s a pity they didn’t use the biggest Labour majorities in history to undo some of the Thatcher/Major attacks on those rights.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

I've hardly commented on not only Starmer but even any of the tories recently but I follow the thread and find your jumping to his defence on every issue and the labelling of his critics 'bitter lefties' bizarre.

You're his Nadinne Dorries!

I concluded some time ago that shmmee is Oliver Reader from The Thick Of It

 

[shmmeee]

I've hardly commented on not only Starmer but even any of the tories recently but I follow the thread and find your jumping to his defence on every issue and the labelling of his critics 'bitter lefties' bizarre.

You're his Nadinne Dorries!

I just point out where people are factually wrong or hypocritical. If you find a Labour supporter defending Labour policy in a politics thread and expressing his frustration with those who want the same things but are continually shooting the movement in the foot bizarre you must spend a lot of your day in a bemused state TBH.

 

[clint van damme]

I just point out where people are factually wrong or hypocritical. If you find a Labour supporter defending Labour policy in a politics thread and expressing his frustration with those who want the same things but are continually shooting the movement in the foot bizarre you must spend a lot of your day in a bemused state TBH.

He's the PM elect, he deserves scrutiny.
A Labour leader courting Murdoch or being praised by Farage, or being wishy washy in his support for striking public sector workers definitely needs discussing because I'm not sure that's what the party isa out.
You may conclude he needs to do these things to be elected but do you really expect people not to comment?

 

[shmmeee]

He's the PM elect, he deserves scrutiny.
A Labour leader courting Murdoch or being praised by Farage, or being wishy washy in his support for striking public sector workers definitely needs discussing because I'm not sure that's what the party isa out.
You may conclude he needs to do these things to be elected but do you really expect people not to comment?

So just to be clear, Corbyns support from the far right wasn’t worthy of comment because he was never PM elect?

Just trying to work out the rules here.

And what I expect if left wing people to grow up and realise how politics works and stop taking themselves out of the game on some bizarre concept of purity that they don’t even apply to themselves.

If your principle is if Farage supports it you won’t then you should have run a mile from Corbyn. But you didn’t. Because that’s not your principle. Your principle is “my guy didn’t win and now I’m grumpy so will make the absolute worst assumptions possible of the guy who replaced him, despite him sharing many of my ideals”

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

So just to be clear, Corbyns support from the far right wasn’t worthy of comment because he was never PM elect?

Just trying to work out the rules here.

And what I expect if left wing people to grow up and realise how politics works and stop taking themselves out of the game on some bizarre concept of purity that they don’t even apply to themselves.

If your principle is if Farage supports it you won’t then you should have run a mile from Corbyn. But you didn’t. Because that’s not your principle. Your principle is “my guy didn’t win and now I’m grumpy so will make the absolute worst assumptions possible of the guy who replaced him, despite him sharing many of my ideals”

He’ll still get my vote because we just desperately need a change of government. If we’re still not allowed to discuss his flaws, meh

 

[clint van damme]

So just to be clear, Corbyns support from the far right wasn’t worthy of comment because he was never PM elect?

Just trying to work out the rules here.

And what I expect if left wing people to grow up and realise how politics works and stop taking themselves out of the game on some bizarre concept of purity that they don’t even apply to themselves.

If your principle is if Farage supports it you won’t then you should have run a mile from Corbyn. But you didn’t. Because that’s not your principle. Your principle is “my guy didn’t win and now I’m grumpy so will make the absolute worst assumptions possible of the guy who replaced him, despite him sharing many of my ideals”

You're half a dozen 'but corbyns' away from joining the tory front bench

 

[shmmeee]

You're half a dozen 'but corbyns' away from joining the tory front bench

Says the man getting likes from Grendel and spending his time repeating right wing talking points.

And again my point isn’t “but Corbyn” it’s “pull your fucking head out your arse”

 

[shmmeee]

He’ll still get my vote because we just desperately need a change of government. If we’re still not allowed to discuss his flaws, meh

Discuss all you like. Though usually discussions consist of more than “LOL this man is a Tory” every time he says anything.

 

[clint van damme]

Says the man getting likes from Grendel and spending his time repeating right wing talking points.

And again my point isn’t “but Corbyn” it’s “pull your fucking head out your arse”

Any criticism of Starmer must be linked to Corbyn!
Do you know how ridiculous you sound?

As far as I'm concerned he had his chance, blew it in 2019, he's done.
I'd be glad not to hear his name again but it's his detractors who seem to mention him the most.

I'm happy to concentrate on the here and now and Sunak and his cabinet and Starmer and his shadow cabinet.

 

[shmmeee]

Any criticism of Starmer must be linked to Corbyn!
Do you know how ridiculous you sound?

As far as I'm concerned he had his chance, blew it in 2019, he's done.
I'd be glad not to hear his name again but it's his detractors who seem to mention him the most.

I'm happy to concentrate on the here and now and Sunak and his cabinet and Starmer and his shadow cabinet.

The contrast is made because it highlights the hypocrisy. I brought up Corbyn originally because he made the exact same point but in a more racist way to no comment. Yet suddenly Starmers comments are beyond the pale.

I’m not sure how I could make a point about double standards without comparing reactions but am all ears.

I also posted clear evidence that the idea Starmer has no plans for NMW or union reforms was wrong. But you got stuck on the Corbyn stuff because it allows you to wheel out a bunch of funny lines rather than actually engage with the point about how certain people on the left have a ridiculous reaction to everything Starmer says to the point of taking Nigel Farage and Grendel seriously.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

The contrast is made because it highlights the hypocrisy. I brought up Corbyn originally because he made the exact same point but in a more racist way to no comment. Yet suddenly Starmers comments are beyond the pale.

I’m not sure how I could make a point about double standards without comparing reactions but am all ears.

I also posted clear evidence that the idea Starmer has no plans for NMW or union reforms was wrong. But you got stuck on the Corbyn stuff because it allows you to wheel out a bunch of funny lines rather than actually engage with the point about how certain people on the left have a ridiculous reaction to everything Starmer says to the point of taking Nigel Farage and Grendel seriously.

And I said if he carries out the plans then fair dos.

 

[clint van damme]

The contrast is made because it highlights the hypocrisy. I brought up Corbyn originally because he made the exact same point but in a more racist way to no comment. Yet suddenly Starmers comments are beyond the pale.

I’m not sure how I could make a point about double standards without comparing reactions but am all ears.

I also posted clear evidence that the idea Starmer has no plans for NMW or union reforms was wrong. But you got stuck on the Corbyn stuff because it allows you to wheel out a bunch of funny lines rather than actually engage with the point about how certain people on the left have a ridiculous reaction to everything Starmer says to the point of taking Nigel Farage and Grendel seriously.

My take on Starmer is quite simple.
He came in, made 10 pledges which I could really get behind and then proceeded to renege on every one.
And since then he's continously contradicted himself on issue after issue.

But of course you won't be able to accept that, my dislike of Starmer must be down to some deep rooted Corbyn obsession.

As for farage, you may think hes not be worth taking seriously, (personally I think youre underestimating how dangerous he is) ,and his comments were more than likely designed to stoke up the war he's currently got going on with the tory party but even so, if you can dismiss a far right grifter endorsing the Labour leader then I'm not sure whats going on.

 

[shmmeee]

Fkn hell!!! I know you hate all things Tory and I know we've given you a rum bunch of leaders to choose from, but Brown? Really?

Possibly one of the nicer and I'd concede more trustworthy politicians we've seen but a complete car crash of a PM!

Brown
Blair
Major
May
Sunak (only cos he’s not had a chance to fuck up yet)
Cameron
Thatcher
Johnson

Brown lead the response to the GFC, and did great work around forgiving third world debt and wasn’t around long enough to do the stupid shit Blair did.

 

[shmmeee]

My take on Starmer is quite simple.
He came in, made 10 pledges which I could really get behind and then proceeded to renege on every one.
And since then he's continously contradicted himself on issue after issue.

But of course you won't be able to accept that, my dislike of Starmer must be down to some deep rooted Corbyn obsession.

As for farage, you may think hes not be worth taking seriously, (personally I think youre underestimating how dangerous he is) ,and his comments were more than likely designed to stoke up the war he's currently got going on with the tory party but even so, if you can dismiss a far right grifter endorsing the Labour leader then I'm not sure whats going on.

Farage also endorsed Corbyn. Farage endorsing Labour leaders to get at both parties isn’t new. a large chunk of his vote are former labour supporters. Corbyn also got Nick Griffin endorsing him which Starmer certainly hasn’t if that’s your metric.


And again, this isn’t “but Corbyn” it’s just pointing out that these principles of yours seem very flexible depending on who is leader.

Which pledges do you think he’s broken?

Apart from 6 and 10 they’re all promises for when we get into government. I’ll give you 6 based on the immigration comments. I’d find it hard to argue 10 though considering the polls.

 

[PVA]

As for farage, you may think hes not be worth taking seriously, (personally I think youre underestimating how dangerous he is) ,and his comments were more than likely designed to stoke up the war he's currently got going on with the tory party but even so, if you can dismiss a far right grifter endorsing the Labour leader then I'm not sure whats going on.

But he wasn't endorsing what Starmer said.

He was endorsing what he/his followers would want to hear. Not what Starmer actually said.

There is no way Labour are to the right of the Tories on immigration.

 

[shmmeee]

As I suspect people have just read headlines the speech is here: Keir Starmer speech to the Confederation of British Industry Conference 2022 - The Labour Party

And here’s the bit on immigration:

Take the current state of our labour market.

So much of this comes back to public services.

Yes, there are other factors but you can’t tell me the number of older people falling out of work has nothing to do with the millions stuck on NHS waiting lists, or that the growing number of people suffering with mental health isn’t a drag on our productivity.

No – the state of our public services is an economic crisis just as much as a social crisis.

So we will launch the biggest training programme since the creation of the NHS – increase capacity with more doctors, more nurses, more health visitors, reform the employment service to get more people back to work, give everyone who needs it access to mental health treatment within four weeks, and build a modern childcare system that supports parents – especially women – to flourish.

This is what the US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen calls: “modern supply-side economics”.

And that’s the philosophy that will drive us to do the hard yards on growth.

But we’ll also need to be pragmatic on the basic lack of people.

We won’t ignore the need for workers to come to this country. We can’t have a situation, as we did with HGV drivers, where temporary shortages threaten to cripple entire sectors of our economy. That would be anti-growth and anti-business.

But I want to be clear here – with my Labour Government, any movement in our points-based migration system – whether via the skilled worker route, or the shortage occupations list – will come alongside new conditions for business.

We will expect you to bring forward a clear plan to boost skills and more training, for better pay and conditions, for investment in new technology.

We can talk about how this is done – dialogue is at the heart of partnership but negotiation with trade unions will be part of it.

I said at the TUC conference: my Labour Party is unashamedly pro-business and I say here today – that trade unions must be a crucial part of our partnership.

But our common goal must be to help the British economy off its immigration dependency to start investing more in training workers who are already here.

Migration is part of our national story – always has been, always will be and the Labour Party will never diminish the contribution it makes to our economy, to public services, to your businesses and our communities.

But let me tell you – the days when low pay and cheap labour are part of the British way on growth must end.

This isn’t about Brexit.

All around the world, business is waking up to the fact we live in a new era for labour.

And while they’re adapting, our low-wage model is holding us back.

It’s why we’ve set out a New Deal for Working People that will deliver higher pay, stronger rights and better work – not just for social justice, but also for the new reality on growth.

Let me give you an example – technology.

Britain has fewer industrial robots than almost every comparable countries.

We’re behind Germany, France, Spain, Slovenia, Slovakia, Belgium – it’s a long list.

And in terms of competition over the long run, one that borders on a disaster.

Now, I know most businesses get this.

I’ve seen for myself how you invest in your people and their productivity.

At Vaillant in Derbyshire, I met the apprentices using their skills in conjunction with the new technologies of heat pumps.

That technology will continue to adapt and those apprentices will be at the forefront of that change. Working today, training for the opportunities of the future.

But when we look at the economy as a whole it can seem like we’re more comfortable hiring people to work in low paid, insecure, sometimes exploitative contracts, than we are investing in the new technology that delivers for workers, productivity and our country.

And we can’t compete like that.

Britain’s low pay model has to go.

It doesn’t serve working people.

It’s not compatible with grassroots growth

 

[Philosoraptor]

And people wonder why Labour was annihilated in Scotland.

 

[clint van damme]

But he wasn't endorsing what Starmer said.

He was endorsing what he/his followers would want to hear. Not what Starmer actually said.

There is no way Labour are to the right of the Tories on immigration.

To be honest, I never commented on farages comments.
I just said it was ridiculous not to expect people not to discuss them.

 

[chiefdave]

The contrast is made because it highlights the hypocrisy. I brought up Corbyn originally because he made the exact same point but in a more racist way to no comment. Yet suddenly Starmers comments are beyond the pale.

If we're saying Corbyn was a complete and utter disaster for Labour at the ballot box is Starmer does the same thing Corbyn did really a good argument?

 

[chiefdave]

As I suspect people have just read headlines the speech is here: Keir Starmer speech to the Confederation of British Industry Conference 2022 - The Labour Party

Problem is most voters will only read the headlines. How many voters actually pay attention to what is going on in parliament, watch PMQs, watch leaders give speeches etc?

I would have that a very small percentage. Most people will form their opinion from the headlines they see with little or no knowledge of the story behind those headlines.

It's been a problem for Labour in particular for a while and they'll need to come up with an effective solution. Not the Conservatives may be enough for one election win but I'm sure Labour supporters are hoping for them to be in power a bit longer than that.

 

[shmmeee]

If we're saying Corbyn was a complete and utter disaster for Labour at the ballot box is Starmer does the same thing Corbyn did really a good argument?

Missing the point again. And Starmer is something like 20 points ahead so this is very hypothetical anyway.

 

[shmmeee]

Problem is most voters will only read the headlines. How many voters actually pay attention to what is going on in parliament, watch PMQs, watch leaders give speeches etc?

I would have that a very small percentage. Most people will form their opinion from the headlines they see with little or no knowledge of the story behind those headlines.

It's been a problem for Labour in particular for a while and they'll need to come up with an effective solution. Not the Conservatives may be enough for one election win but I'm sure Labour supporters are hoping for them to be in power a bit longer than that.

Im not on about mos t people. I’m on about the very politically engaged left wing people on here who should know better than to parrot right wing talking points.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

If we're saying Corbyn was a complete and utter disaster for Labour at the ballot box is Starmer does the same thing Corbyn did really a good argument?

Well, he won't have the perception (perception) from some that he's an IRA sympathiser who wants us to become a Muslim state, and is an anti-semite.

That'll be a start(!)

 

[rob9872]

Cos he sold r gold!!!1!!

Nope, that was when he was an inept chancellor before he became a dithering indecisive PM. Nice attempt at gaining a few echo chamber backslaps although as usual missed the satirical with inaccuracies. Got a like from shmmeee though so we'll done for that