Labour: The Keir Starmer years

[gggggg]

people must stop deluding themselves. if the Tories are finally going to get the boot, we need a government that will be held to account and we need to know for sure what they stand for. five years of diet coke Tory will not only not cut it, it will just give the actual Tories a clear path back into power.

Alright, so what do we need then?

Is it a Labour government in the centre ground, reforming labour markets and improving quality of life? Or left wing populism? You seem to be advocating the latter.

 

[ZenGiraffe]

Alright, so what do we need then?

As has been said before, a hung parliament leading to voting reform.

Or Scottish Independence so I can be free of YOU LOT

 

[funky]

I’d rather all this energy was saved for the Tories if I’m honest.

I understand if people don’t want to vote for Labour. This push to centre has spilled over into some unnecessary ugliness for sure. But I just hope there’s enough people left to push the Tories out.

Every time Labour pisses me off I just picture Suella smiling in front of a Rwandan campsite, or Boris lurking behind a lampshade pretending not to be at a lockdown party.

Fuck Labour, but fuck the Tories more.

 

[Jark]

Alright, so what do we need then?

Is it a Labour government in the centre ground, reforming labour markets and improving quality of life? Or left wing populism? You seem to be advocating the latter.

judging by your posts elsewhere you're pretty happy to write off anything vaguely rational as "left wing populism" but at this point I'd be fine with a lab/lib dem coalition and I'll probably vote lib dem myself. Starmer is too authoritarian, the labour party is being run as a dictatorship and has forgotten what (and who) it stands for.

what we need is voting reform, obviously. but in the coming six months what's probably best for the country is enough people voting with their feet (instead of accepting not Tory in name as good enough) to make a real case for PR and reform, give Starmer a delicate, much slimmer than anticipated majority, and keep the pressure on for Labour policy to be shaped according to what the country actually needs right now.

 

[funky]

Voting reform isn’t going to happen folks. Liberal idealism is how we got Corbyn, which is how we got Johnson, which is how we got Truss. Politics is literally the lesser of two evils, not trying to create the perfect party. If you stand waiting for that bus you ain’t making it home in time for Corrie

 

[GNL]

I’d rather all this energy was saved for the Tories if I’m honest.

They're polling at like 3% and it gets worse every time Rishi Sunak goes in public and looks LOST and AFRAID at having to mingle with THE POORS.

A bunch of queens on the internet arguing that Sir Keir should have an environmental policy isn't going to turn this around!

 

[gggggg]

Voting reform isn’t going to happen folks. Liberal idealism is how we got Corbyn, which is how we got Johnson, which is how we got Truss. Politics is literally the lesser of two evils, not trying to create the perfect party. If you stand waiting for that bus you ain’t making it home in time for Corrie

Agreed. Although I do think proportional representation (probably STV) is the best voting system.

It’ll be a hard sell for the the UK, entrenched as it is. A Labour government of any stripe is better than a Conservative one. I voted for Corbyn’s Labour twice out of that revolve, despite my deep reservations.

 

[ZenGiraffe]

Voting reform isn’t going to happen folks. Liberal idealism is how we got Corbyn, which is how we got Johnson, which is how we got Truss. Politics is literally the lesser of two evils, not trying to create the perfect party. If you stand waiting for that bus you ain’t making it home in time for Corrie

It almost happened in 2010 where Labour offered it to the Lib Dems without a referendum. That's the reason why I said a hung parliament is needed. Neither Labour or Conservatives are doing it with a majority.

 

[AlgoAlex]

I've decided I won't be voting Labour

Well yes I have heard that the Liberal Democrats are WINNING THERE.

 

[funky]

They're polling at like 3% and it gets worse every time Rishi Sunak goes in public and looks LOST and AFRAID at having to mingle with THE POORS.

A bunch of queens on the internet arguing that Sir Keir should have an environmental policy isn't going to turn this around!

FAIR but there’s a difference between “I’m not voting Tory” and next year “I can’t be arsed voting at all, I don’t like Labour and the Tories are fucked anyway.”

Young people are more likely to do the latter. Old people would still vote if the world was on fire.

 

[gggggg]

judging by your posts elsewhere you're pretty happy to write off anything vaguely rational as "left wing populism" but at this point I'd be fine with a lab/lib dem coalition and I'll probably vote lib dem myself. Starmer is too authoritarian, the labour party is being run as a dictatorship and has forgotten what (and who) it stands for.

what we need is voting reform, obviously. but in the coming six months what's probably best for the country is enough people voting with their feet (instead of accepting not Tory in name as good enough) to make a real case for PR and reform, give Starmer a delicate, much slimmer than anticipated majority, and keep the pressure on for Labour policy to be shaped according to what the country actually needs right now.

At the moment what’s best for the country is a government acting in its interests.

Convincing yourself Starmer is somehow to the right of Pol Pot is a choice I suppose, but it ain’t helping.

 

[Jark]

Voting reform isn’t going to happen folks. Liberal idealism is how we got Corbyn, which is how we got Johnson, which is how we got Truss.

putting aside the fairly bizarre leaps of logic here... anything can happen if people don't just sit at home sighing about everything being shit. there's realism and then there's defeatism. if this was a hot button issue in France they'd be setting half of Paris on fire every night for weeks. Brits are so uniquely WEIRD about NOT doing anything to help themselves. voting reform is advantageous to 90% of the population. there's no reason at all it can never happen.

 

[funky]

It almost happened in 2010 where Labour offered it to the Lib Dems without a referendum. That's the reason why I said a hung parliament is needed. Neither Labour or Conservatives are doing it with a majority.

…you mean when Clegg picked Cameron?

The beacon of political decision making! WHAT COULD POSSIBLY GO WRONG

 

[funky]

putting aside the fairly bizarre leaps of logic here... anything can happen if people don't just sit at home sighing about everything being shit. there's realism and then there's defeatism. if this was a hot button issue in France they'd be setting half of Paris on fire every night for weeks. Brits are so uniquely WEIRD about NOT doing anything to help themselves. voting reform is advantageous to 90% of the population. there's no reason at all it can never happen.

Good luck educating the rest of the country of that!

If anyone wants to question my cynicism I’m fair game, but I defer you to the LAST FIFTEEN YEARS.

 

[gggggg]

It almost happened in 2010 where Labour offered it to the Lib Dems without a referendum. That's the reason why I said a hung parliament is needed. Neither Labour or Conservatives are doing it with a majority.

Not really tho, AV+ was a gesture, not proper reform.

 

[ZenGiraffe]

…you mean when Clegg picked Cameron?

The beacon of political decision making! WHAT COULD POSSIBLY GO WRONG

Your point? I was saying it's been close once, and I'm confident that the next hung parliament will result in some form of voting reform since every party supports it but the big two (and even then, Labour members do!)

 

[COB]

Wasn't Pol Pot quite famously a communist? Surely most other leaders are/were to his right.

 

[COB]

I might be confusing him with Paul Potts, whose political leanings I don't know.

 

[ZenGiraffe]

Your point? I was saying it's been close once, and I'm confident that the next hung parliament will result in some form of voting reform since every party supports it but the big two (and even then, Labour members do!)

*Apologies if this isn't true for the Northern Irish parties

 

[AGinAg (37)]

I will criticise Labour when needed, particularly Kier, but if I had to vote Tory if it meant getting the Tories out I would. My political stance is basically NOT THE TORIES and anyone to the left is a better option in lieu of a viable left wing option.

We can all argue until we're red/blue in the face, but the reality is we have very little say on how the main political parties operate and even less say with regards to dictating who our options are.

I would hope you all think bigger picture and vote sensibly to get these cunts out. I'd love to vote Green, but look where that got left wingers in the US in 2016.

 

[gggggg]

Wasn't Pol Pot quite famously a communist? Surely most other leaders are/were to his right.

Economically? Sure, why not. Socially? Oh no no no no no no no no.

 

[gggggg]

I might be confusing him with Paul Potts, whose political leanings I don't know.

Robert Kilroy-Silk’s Veritas party

 

[octophone]

I would hope you all think bigger picture and vote sensibly to get these cunts out.

Easy when the "bigger picture" doesn't affect your basic human rights. Or affect whether a family member can live in the country with their spouse and child. It's a luxury to be able to zoom out. Starmer is a feckless rat who is too scared of upsetting the racists and the billionaires. Labour's response to Cleverly's actions of the last couple of days has been pathetic. The only thing they have in their favour is the potential for avoiding Austerity V2 which Hunt snuck in last month.

If Starmer issues a manifesto that actually stands up to the Tories' bullshit and start walking it, fine, I'll consider voting for him - the Tories can't win when I live anyway.

 

[AGinAg (37)]

If Starmer issues a manifesto that actually stands up to the Tories' bullshit and start walking it, fine, I'll consider voting for him - the Tories can't win when I live anyway.

Well we'll see.

A government is not entirely it's Prime Minister. We've seen that. 380 Labour MPs could easily provide some degree of positive social reform, better than the 380 current Tory MPs. Way more positive.

The legalisation of homosexual acts was a private members bill and never in a manifesto, for example.

We don't vote for a PM, they are of course a consequence. I'm aware that's very easy to say, but a Labour majority is worth fighting for way more than the other options which could let the Tories in through voter apathy/ anger with Starmer.

That being said Labour are winning next year, whatever we say or do and you can vote for whoever you like.

 

[Bypass]

what we need is voting reform, obviously. but in the coming six months what's probably best for the country is enough people voting with their feet (instead of accepting not Tory in name as good enough) to make a real case for PR and reform, give Starmer a delicate, much slimmer than anticipated majority, and keep the pressure on for Labour policy to be shaped according to what the country actually needs right now.

I've always hated goverments(of any political persuasion left or right) winning huge majorities. It takes any talk of PR off the table, because why on earth would you implement it, if it meant reducing your influence?

 

[ZenGiraffe]

 

[big ron]

Burn

 

[COB]

Someone confronted The Worm on a train:

 

[ZenGiraffe]

Someone confronted The Worm on a train:

He has the same voice as Anas Sarwar!

 

[GNL]

 

[Bypass]

I'm sure Netanyahu is sat by the phone waiting for a call from the opposition leader of the UK.

 

[COB]

Public and vocal opposition to a humanitarian catastrophe is the absolute BARE MINIMUM we should expect from anybody, let alone the leader of a supposedly progressive political party. He doesn't deserve a moment's peace.

 

[octophone]

It's interesting how much heat Starmer is getting compared to Sunak. Is that because we just expect this level of psychopathic cuntery from the Tories now? Or are we just being shown more of it?

 

[ZenGiraffe]

Public and vocal opposition to a humanitarian catastrophe is the absolute BARE MINIMUM we should expect from anybody, let alone the leader of a supposedly progressive political party. He doesn't deserve a moment's peace.

ESPECIALLY since he's in Scotland where our First Minister is providing that public and vocal opposition (as is, to be fair, the Scottish Labour leader).

 

[COB]

It's interesting how much heat Starmer is getting compared to Sunak. Is that because we just expect this level of psychopathic cuntery from the Tories now? Or are we just being shown more of it?

I think that's it - we know the Tories are the nasty party, but we're supposed to expect better of the opposition.

ESPECIALLY since he's in Scotland where our First Minister is providing that public and vocal opposition (as is, to be fair, the Scottish Labour leader).

That's a fair point, and Anas Sarwar does deserve credit for breaking with the national party on this issue.

 

[octophone]

Yeah, it's not often Sarwar comes over as anything other than an embattled regional manager and he will be putting his position at risk by speaking out so I do respect him for that.

 

[GNL]

It's interesting how much heat Starmer is getting compared to Sunak. Is that because we just expect this level of psychopathic cuntery from the Tories now? Or are we just being shown more of it?

I think, broadly speaking, people who would typically support Labour are more likely to be passionate about this issue.

And also Rishi Sunak gets his private jet to and from PR opportunities, so there's not much chance for him to cross paths with people who a) aren't party members or b) aren't in a professional environment.

 

[Bypass]

Public and vocal opposition to a humanitarian catastrophe is the absolute BARE MINIMUM we should expect from anybody, let alone the leader of a supposedly progressive political party. He doesn't deserve a moment's peace.

Ok. So when have these questions been directed at the actual Prime Minister? And the actual government - the one that is on the verge of stripping human rights away from 65 approx million people?

 

[ZenGiraffe]

Ok. So when have these questions been directed at the actual Prime Minister? And the actual government - the one that is on the verge of stripping human rights away from 65 approx million people?

If only the LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION who gets six questions at PMQs could ask him...

 

[VoR]

I think it is just that we expect the ostensibly left-wing parties to actually give a shit about humanitarian crises like this. The amount of Tory base voters who are sympathetic to the Palestinians and care deeply enough about it for it to be a vote-defining issue are probably depressingly small. Ergo it's a PR disaster for Starmer but barely a blip on the radar for Sunak.

It's the same in America. Biden's (actually much more measured and defensible) approach is causing the various wings of the Democratic party to tear themselves in knots, while the Republicans are in a rare position of having a fairly unified position on it, in that most of them unambiguously support Israel and are vocally resistant to spending US money on foreign aid for the Palestinians.