Do you want to discuss boring politics? (54 Viewers)

[fernandopartridge]

Looking forward to seeing that ‘soft left’ manifesto containing such gems as:

GPS tagging asylum seekers
Responsible stationery ordering

You're going to become a magistrate in all that spare time you have according to this

'Community courts' on Labour's justice agenda

Shadow justice secretary promises 50% increase in Crown prosecution staff and also hints at reviving idea of levy on City firms to fund access to justice.

www.lawgazette.co.uk

 

---

[fernandopartridge]

Im telling you what the polling shows us. Johnson wasn’t particularly popular but Corbyn was an anathema to a lot of voters. Only 20% of switchers said Brexit was the reason:

View attachment 28433

But you live in an absolute fantasy land for this stuff and can’t see outside your bubble so I’m not surprised you’re taking the Corbynista line hook line and sinker.

Those numbers I assume are actual voters not a percentage? The sample is quite small isn't it? Is it representative of a broad range of seats?

 

[Ian1779]

You're going to become a magistrate in all that spare time you have according to this

'Community courts' on Labour's justice agenda

Shadow justice secretary promises 50% increase in Crown prosecution staff and also hints at reviving idea of levy on City firms to fund access to justice.

www.lawgazette.co.uk

Great way to approach the teaching recruitment crisis, give them more inane shit to do.

 

[Astute]

I mean you start getting emotionally invested in defending Starmer and slating Allen in response to moderate criticism of the former and moderate defence of the latter.

Quite why I as a teacher and union rep would want constant Tory governments is baffling. But you keep trotting out the line that we like being in opposition.

Would you still prefer Corbyn as leader than Starmer?

The problem we have is we normally go for a leader that either comes with baggage or someone who speaks without thinking. We need someone the voters can trust. Last time Corbyn was supposed to win easily. Well at least the left as far as you can go did. And anyone who could see the truth was branded a Tory. Starmer has the best chance of winning us the next election since Bliar. And he was nothing but a Tory in disguise.

Who would you prefer to Starmer?

 

[duffer]

Fundamentally it seems that the Labour party will always get the leader that the right wing press find the most acceptable.

As a Labour party member, I voted for Corbyn, because I could never in good conscience vote for anyone who sat on their hands whilst the Tories pushed through their hideous welfare bill. Not a perfect man by any means, but a fucking lot better than the Tory apologists who were scared of their own shadows at the time and allowed a remarkably cruel and unnecessary austerity regime to flourish unchallenged.

For all of his faults, Corbyn actually provided a genuine voice of opposition for a while, and showed the Tories for what they were.

I then voted for Starmer, because he seemed a relatively honest man with less baggage for the press to dig up, and whose pledges seemed like a decent compromise between the right and left of the party.

Keir Starmer - MP for Holborn and St Pancras and Labour Leader

Keir Starmer is a husband, father, and former lawyer who has fought for fairness his whole working life. He is now Labour Party leader.

keirstarmer.com

Turns out though that he's not a honest man, and he's been more focussed on purging the party of anyone who ever supported Corbyn or who remains awkwardly left-wing. Awkward in the sense that they'd like him to stick to his original pledges, which he himself has seemingly abandoned.

I'm not a member of the Labour Party any more. I'll vote for Labour in the next election because they will obviously be better for the country than the Tories, but that's about all they will be. Slightly better, but still far too scared of the Daily Mail to do anything transformative or that might energise people (especially young people) into taking an interest in politics.

 

[Ian1779]

Would you still prefer Corbyn as leader than Starmer?

The problem we have is we normally go for a leader that either comes with baggage or someone who speaks without thinking. We need someone the voters can trust. Last time Corbyn was supposed to win easily. Well at least the left as far as you can go did. And anyone who could see the truth was branded a Tory. Starmer has the best chance of winning us the next election since Bliar. And he was nothing but a Tory in disguise.

Who would you prefer to Starmer?

You have a world class talent at revising history I’ll give you that.

Even I, a most ardent Corbyn supporter said that the absolute best Labour could hope for was being largest party, and having to rely on a coalition/confidence agreement with the SNP to govern.

You however did what you always do, telling us how you know everything, sat on both sides of the fence (mostly arguing with yourself) yet somehow decided that you still couldn’t vote for Corbyn - meaning you were essentially a Tory enabler - basically one of those FBPE types that now gets angry because people don’t fall into line with Starmer even though he’s a duplicitous arsehole.

Starmer will in all likelihood be the next PM - unless he somehow managed to fuck it up. Either way you’ll be there telling us how he’s got to make ‘difficult decisions’ when offering absolutely nothing transformative to the people of this country, or if he somehow bollocksed it up… how it was Corbyn’s legacy that was really at fault.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

You have a world class talent at revising history I’ll give you that.

Even I, a most ardent Corbyn supporter said that the absolute best Labour could hope for was being largest party, and having to rely on a coalition/confidence agreement with the SNP to govern.

You however did what you always do, telling us how you know everything, sat on both sides of the fence (mostly arguing with yourself) yet somehow decided that you still couldn’t vote for Corbyn - meaning you were essentially a Tory enabler - basically one of those FBPE types that now gets angry because people don’t fall into line with Starmer even though he’s a duplicitous arsehole.

Starmer will in all likelihood be the next PM - unless he somehow managed to fuck it up. Either way you’ll be there telling us how he’s got to make ‘difficult decisions’ when offering absolutely nothing transformative to the people of this country, or if he somehow bollocksed it up… how it was Corbyn’s legacy that was really at fault.

Blair and Brown had 13 years in charge of this country, with enormous majorities. They didn't revoke any anti union laws, they brought in academisation, invaded another country for no good reason, and allowed Thatcherite deregulation of financial services to carry on.

Not much good winning the elections if you govern like diet Tories anyway. Starmer won't get the same size majority as them, and he certainly has nothing like the charisma or the gravitas. The country now is in a weaker state than it was in 1997. The best we can hope is he's the Doug King to the country's Joy Seppalla.

 

[chiefdave]

Starmer is objectively likely to be the next PM

you could make a pretty strong argument that is more down to the Conservatives being unbelievably shit and in total disarray rather than any brilliance on Starmers part

 

[shmmeee]

you could make a pretty strong argument that is more down to the Conservatives being unbelievably shit and in total disarray rather than any brilliance on Starmers part

You could, but then again the Conservatives have been unbelievably shit for a while, arguably since 2016. And it didn’t stop them beating Corbyn. Ultimately when a government fails you still have to look more credible.

 

[shmmeee]

Blair and Brown had 13 years in charge of this country, with enormous majorities. They didn't revoke any anti union laws, they brought in academisation, invaded another country for no good reason, and allowed Thatcherite deregulation of financial services to carry on.

Not much good winning the elections if you govern like diet Tories anyway. Starmer won't get the same size majority as them, and he certainly has nothing like the charisma or the gravitas. The country now is in a weaker state than it was in 1997. The best we can hope is he's the Doug King to the country's Joy Seppalla.

Any Labour government is better than any Tory government. Of course we’d all like a supersocialist radical government that implements all out pet policies and never fucks up. Problem is the left is generally too busy sniffing their own farts and crying into their beer to try and win. It’s not hard, get a leader who isn’t mental, make a few attempts to meet the voters half way.

Pratchett PBUH said it best “And so the children of the revolution were faced with the age-old problem: it wasn't that you had the wrong kind of government, which was obvious, but that you had the wrong kind of people.”

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Any Labour government is better than any Tory government. Of course we’d all like a supersocialist radical government that implements all out pet policies and never fucks up. Problem is the left is generally too busy sniffing their own farts and crying into their beer to try and win. It’s not hard, get a leader who isn’t mental, make a few attempts to meet the voters half way.

Pratchett PBUH said it best “And so the children of the revolution were faced with the age-old problem: it wasn't that you had the wrong kind of government, which was obvious, but that you had the wrong kind of people.”

I’m generally too busy doing my job, to be honest. Would just be nice for the leader of the Labour Party not to laugh at the profession while I’m doing it

 

[PVA]

Any Labour government is better than any Tory government. Of course we’d all like a supersocialist radical government that implements all out pet policies and never fucks up. Problem is the left is generally too busy sniffing their own farts and crying into their beer to try and win. It’s not hard, get a leader who isn’t mental, make a few attempts to meet the voters half way.

 

[fernandopartridge]

Any Labour government is better than any Tory government. Of course we’d all like a supersocialist radical government that implements all out pet policies and never fucks up. Problem is the left is generally too busy sniffing their own farts and crying into their beer to try and win. It’s not hard, get a leader who isn’t mental, make a few attempts to meet the voters half way.

Pratchett PBUH said it best “And so the children of the revolution were faced with the age-old problem: it wasn't that you had the wrong kind of government, which was obvious, but that you had the wrong kind of people.”

What do you keep going on about the left for? It's pointed out to you that 13 years of labour achieved very little long term benefit and you start rattling on about the left again.

 

[shmmeee]

I’m generally too busy doing my job, to be honest. Would just be nice for the leader of the Labour Party not to laugh at the profession while I’m doing it

He’s not though is he? I mean come on. There’s plenty to be upset at Starmer for: weak drug policy despite polling changes, god awful “lol look governments spend money” messaging right now, generally being a bit of a wet lettuce. Making shit up about how he’s really a Tory is just not credible.

 

[Grendel]

He’s not though is he? I mean come on. There’s plenty to be upset at Starmer for: weak drug policy despite polling changes, god awful “lol look governments spend money” messaging right now, generally being a bit of a wet lettuce. Making shit up about how he’s really a Tory is just not credible.

Look what you’ve become

 

[shmmeee]

Look what you’ve become

Do you even know what insult you’re trying to make here?

Few too many sherries tonight I fear G.

 

[Astute]

You have a world class talent at revising history I’ll give you that.

Even I, a most ardent Corbyn supporter said that the absolute best Labour could hope for was being largest party, and having to rely on a coalition/confidence agreement with the SNP to govern.

You however did what you always do, telling us how you know everything, sat on both sides of the fence (mostly arguing with yourself) yet somehow decided that you still couldn’t vote for Corbyn - meaning you were essentially a Tory enabler - basically one of those FBPE types that now gets angry because people don’t fall into line with Starmer even though he’s a duplicitous arsehole.

Starmer will in all likelihood be the next PM - unless he somehow managed to fuck it up. Either way you’ll be there telling us how he’s got to make ‘difficult decisions’ when offering absolutely nothing transformative to the people of this country, or if he somehow bollocksed it up… how it was Corbyn’s legacy that was really at fault.

Would you like to explain how you think I sit on the fence? Os it I hardly ever trust any politician?

If Starmer keeps it steady he should win. What's wrong with that? Or would you prefer it if he promised too much or started insulting everyone?

Know it all? I have lived through countless PM's. You get to see what wins elections. Or would you like to make a list of all the predictions I have got wrong? I even got a lot of stick (as usual) for hoping Boris would stay on as he was a total liability for the Tories.

 

[Astute]

You could, but then again the Conservatives have been unbelievably shit for a while, arguably since 2016. And it didn’t stop them beating Corbyn. Ultimately when a government fails you still have to look more credible.

For me a big point is not to give the gutter press ammunition.

For too many years we have been giving an endless supply of opportunities to attack. These days it is all about pulling the Tories apart. Just keep it as it is and come out with a decent way of taking the UK forward. We need a manifesto which puts more money in the pockets of those who need it. Get rid of the so called management and replace them with doctors, nurses, teachers and so on. Pay for our own power generating facilities instead of letting foreign investment rip us off. This would then give more money to correct what is wrong. Have a major home building program instead of paying billions each year to private landlords. Stop the right to buy. Take control of the rail companies as each contract comes to an end. There is a very long list of what the British public would vote for.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

He’s not though is he? I mean come on. There’s plenty to be upset at Starmer for: weak drug policy despite polling changes, god awful “lol look governments spend money” messaging right now, generally being a bit of a wet lettuce. Making shit up about how he’s really a Tory is just not credible.

That isn’t what I said he was. In fact I was more on about the last time we had Labour in charge with a bigger majority, more charismatic leadership and the country generally being less fucked.

Not one anti union law repealed in that time despite unions providing considerable funding to the party.

 

[clint van damme]

He’s not though is he? I mean come on. There’s plenty to be upset at Starmer for: weak drug policy despite polling changes, god awful “lol look governments spend money” messaging right now, generally being a bit of a wet lettuce. Making shit up about how he’s really a Tory is just not credible.

He's thoroughly dishonest, I'm talking Johnson levels of dishonesty.
And he'll prove to be just as corrupt.
Bookmark mark this for 3 or 4 years into his first term and I'll happily admit to talking bollocks if I'm wrong.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

And he'll prove to be just as corrupt.

!

 

[PVA]

He's thoroughly dishonest, I'm talking Johnson levels of dishonesty.
And he'll prove to be just as corrupt.
Bookmark mark this for 3 or 4 years into his first term and I'll happily admit to talking bollocks if I'm wrong.

You are of course entitled to your opinion, but this is just nuts!

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

He's thoroughly dishonest, I'm talking Johnson levels of dishonesty.
And he'll prove to be just as corrupt.
Bookmark mark this for 3 or 4 years into his first term and I'll happily admit to talking bollocks if I'm wrong.

I find this disturbing knowing people involved in roles as his. Was he dishonest as a lawyer and director of public prosecutions too?

 

[clint van damme]

You are of course entitled to your opinion, but this is just nuts!

Why? Him being dishonest isn't an opinion it's fact.
Him ending up being proven corrupt is an opinion, but it can be neither proved or disproved at the moment.

 

[clint van damme]

I find this disturbing knowing people involved in roles as his. Was he dishonest as a lawyer and director of public prosecutions too?

He's now a politician, what he does as a politician is all that counts.

 

[Deleted member 9744]

Why? Him being dishonest isn't an opinion it's fact.
Him ending up being proven corrupt is an opinion, but it can be neither proved or disproved at the moment.

What's the evidence for him being corrupt?

 

[clint van damme]

What's the evidence for him being corrupt?

Try reading my post again.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

He's now a politician, what he does as a politician is all that counts.

Ok

 

[Deleted member 5849]

There's no evidence to prove I'm not a Ted Bundy tribute act apart from my lack of brutal murdering.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

There's no evidence to prove I'm not a Ted Bundy tribute act apart from my lack of brutal murdering.

Yep

 

[Deleted member 9744]

Try reading my post again.

What's the evidence of Johnson levels of dishonesty?

 

[clint van damme]

What's the evidence of Johnson levels of dishonesty?

Google it, there's loads.

 

[clint van damme]

There's no evidence to prove I'm not a Ted Bundy tribute act apart from my lack of brutal murdering.

But if you'd employed John Wayne Gacy and had Jeffrey Dahmer advising you it might be a cause for concern.

 

[Sick Boy]

I’m not really a fan of Starmer but he’s no way comparable to De Pfeffel.

 

[skybluetony176]

He's now a politician, what he does as a politician is all that counts.

I agree with that but Boris levels of lying? He’d have to have been thoroughly dishonest in all aspects of his life before being a politician to reach those levels and there’s no evidence of that.

He’s a politician and they all have an uncomfortable relationship with being honest. Corbyn pretended he was a remainer when suited and pretended he was dealing with antisemitism for instance but he was no where near Boris levels of lying and neither is Starmer. He could well prove to be in time but at this moment in time he’s not even in the ballpark compared to Boris.