Topic: Keir Starmer: your views?

[Kenny's Jacket]

Enjoyed the instant denial of the actual proof from the tight T-shirt c*nt and former Tory/Lib Dem Bastani.

Bastani is ex Tory?

how do Sarkar and Walker reconcile with that

[Andy @ Allerton!]

https://twitter.com/theousherwood/status/1442174518215299075?s=20

Well this isn't good...

I might be being thick, but what actually happened there?

[TSC]

Starmer reforms approved by Labour members; 53.67% to 46.33%.

[Welshred]

I might be being thick, but what actually happened there?

A journalist for LBC was forcibly removed and assaulted at a Labour fringe meeting by someone who has been suspended by the party for anti-semitism

Starmer reforms approved by Labour members; 53.67% to 46.33%.

To immediate shouts of rigging from Bastani and co

Bastani is ex Tory?

how do Sarkar and Walker reconcile with that

Probably from the cash they earn from it

[TepidT2O]

A huge win for the future of the Labour Party.

If Starmer achieves nothing apart from this and kicking out the antisemites, his reign will have been a success.

[TheShanklyGates]

So the headlines out of conference so far are internal squabbling over the party rulebook, the deputy leader ranting about Tory scum and some culture war bullshit.

And then they wonder why they never win elections. Absolutely fucking useless from top to bottom, the lot of them.

[Wild Romany Boy]

Bastani is ex Tory?

how do Sarkar and Walker reconcile with that

He's not and has never been. I knocked on doors with him, for Labour, in 2010. This is the time people say he voted Lib Dem.

You can call him many things, but he's not a Tory, and has never been. He's got some questionable conduct on Twitter definitely, but he's no Tory.

Circa is talking out the back of his neck.

[Zeb]

He wrote an article praising IDS in 2009. As a conservative and under the name Aaron Peters. He claims his words, which were printed in the UCL student conservative society's rag, were edited.

[Jiminy Cricket]

He's not and has never been. I knocked on doors with him, for Labour, in 2010. This is the time people say he voted Lib Dem.

You can call him many things, but he's not a Tory, and has never been. He's got some questionable conduct on Twitter definitely, but he's no Tory.

Circa is talking out the back of his neck.

He wrote an article praising IDS in 2009. As a conservative and under the name Aaron Peters. He claims his words, which were printed in the UCL student conservative society's rag, were edited.

Oh.

[Zeb]

Oh.

To be fair, it's before the student demos Bastani joined in with (which have raised questions about the validity of his postgraduate qualification - you're not meant to study yourself after all...) and so likely before his move into left wing politics with his new friends. I don't think moving into and out of parties should be a bad thing, but if you've praised 'workfare' in the past then maybe a bit of honesty about it is helpful all round.

[Nobby Reserve]

I think it will be interesting, Labour can turn this on it's head if they handle it properly by making the right arguments to defend themselves while attacking the Torys hypocrisy.
So Raynor is being accused of calling all Tory voters scum when she calls Johnson Scum, so are all Labour voters traitors and communists as that's the insults they threw at Corbyn, we have to be fair here, those accusations were thrown at Corbyn and not all Labour voters, the same reasoning should be applied to Raynors comments, she accused Johnson of being scum not Tory voters.

Great post.

Meanwhile Starmer alienates way more 'former red wall voter' with that bollocks about people shouldn't say anything about women and cervixes.

It's idiotic, fact-contorting shite like this that causes the most damage to Labour's electoral chances.

[Welshred]

How is saying the statement "only women have cervixes" isnt right bollocks? He probably should have gone more into the question criticising what Duffield has said but I don't get how he's wrong with what he's said...

[Yorkykopite]

Happy with the constitutional changes. Bad news for the nutcases who'd like to follow Corbyn's example and parade their skeletons before the labour movement.

Was it worth the hassle though? I really don't know.

[Zeb]

Happy with the constitutional changes. Bad news for the nutcases who'd like to follow Corbyn's example and parade their skeletons before the labour movement.

Was it worth the hassle though? I really don't know.

I think it's achieved its goals and will accelerate some things by demonstrating where the power to pass things through conference now sits. The EHRC stuff obviously, as the unions recognised, had to be passed today. Some of the other bunfights I'm less sure about, the argument that an election isn't close cuts both ways, but it's on Starmer to now do something with it, isn't it? He's enthused the activist base which was organising to support him, and has receipts to show (the bulk of) the PLP, but that's a very niche audience.

[Zeb]

Paula Surridge pointing out one of the problems Labour has to find a way to navigate. Today's polling from Opinium:



Get involved in the Brexit or pandemic debates and that'll dominate. So it's whether Labour can get people agreeing with, "Doesn't matter which caused it, this government has screwed it up."

[oldfordie]

Paula Surridge pointing out one of the problems Labour has to find a way to navigate. Today's polling from Opinium:



Get involved in the Brexit or pandemic debates and that'll dominate. So it's whether Labour can get people agreeing with, "Doesn't matter which caused it, this government has screwed it up."

I think Labour MPs all need to be ready with good answers to obvious questions when Labour lays all the blame for the Chaos on this government.
The Torys will say first you lay the blame on Brexit now you're blaming this government, make your mind up blah blah blah.
Both claims are correct, the problems were caused by Brexit but this incompetent government decided to pass all responsibility for solving all the Brexit problems  they created onto the private sector.
IDS is kicking off telling everyone not to blame Brexit, am not 100% certain but am pretty sure it was him who told us we shouldn't be worrying about all these problems before we left the EU as they will all sort themselves out in time. that says it all. it led to where we are today, the government put all the responsibility on solving Brexit problems onto the Private sector, the supply chain problems etc etc had to be solved by the industries themselves, the Torys were still taking this attitude up to a few weeks ago.  Tory Minister says shortage of Drivers? then just hire or train up some more.  yeah that attitude went well when they asked people to pick for Britain as UK Farming collapsed.


 

[Zeb]

I think Labour MPs all need to be ready with good answers to obvious questions when Labour lays all the blame for the Chaos on this government.
The Torys will say first you lay the blame on Brexit now you're blaming this government, make your mind up blah blah blah.
Both claims are correct, the problems were caused by Brexit but this incompetent government decided to pass all responsibility for solving all the Brexit problems  they created onto the private sector.
IDS is kicking off telling everyone not to blame Brexit, am not 100% certain but am pretty sure it was him who told us we shouldn't be worrying about all these problems before we left the EU as they will all sort themselves out in time. that says it all. it led to where we are today, the government put all the responsibility on solving Brexit problems onto the Private sector, the supply chain problems etc etc had to be solved by the industries themselves, the Torys were still taking this attitude up to a few weeks ago.  Tory Minister says shortage of Drivers? then just hire or train up some more.  yeah that attitude went well when they asked people to pick for Britain as UK Farming collapsed.

Aye, you're right, the framing is oversimplistic. Although I suppose it's that Labour need a simple story of their own to tell. Was having a chat with someone about it over the weekend. Thatcher went with Labour economic failure to contrast with Tory competence and moderation. Blair on Tory weakness/corruption and division to contrast against Labour's optimism for the future and the party having changed. Cameron went with Labour economic failure and his party having changed. You can kind of see the framework of what Starmer is trying to do but actually doing it effectively is the hard part.

(NB not saying the election messages were actually true heh Thatcher quoting St.Francis as she went into Downing Street not related to what she did in office either...)

[oldfordie]

Aye, you're right, the framing is oversimplistic. Although I suppose it's that Labour need a simple story of their own to tell. Was having a chat with someone about it over the weekend. Thatcher went with Labour economic failure to contrast with Tory competence and moderation. Blair on Tory weakness/corruption and division to contrast against Labour's optimism for the future and the party having changed. Cameron went with Labour economic failure and his party having changed. You can kind of see the framework of what Starmer is trying to do but actually doing it effectively is the hard part.

(NB not saying the election messages were actually true heh Thatcher quoting St.Francis as she went into Downing Street not related to what she did in office either...)

Yeah, it does have to be a simple comparison the public can nod along with. it's what the Torys have always done in my life time, try to absolve themselves from as much responsibility as possible. pointing out the serious impact this has on running the country and debt is a bit much to get over.
 
Hillary Benn thinks Starmer should make Brexit a election issue, I agree with him but no need for any announcement, I thought that would happen naturally when the effects of Brexit started to hit, WTO will have something to say about the Torys Brexit by the next election as well but the point is the Torys awful attitude made the problems of Brexit, Pandemic, NHS  etc far worse as the attitude is to let these problems sort themselves out by themselves. they only act when the s,, starts hitting the fan forcing them to do something,  it's down to incompetence, they are not fit to govern.

[Zeb]

Yeah, it does have to be a simple comparison the public can nod along with. it's what the Torys have always done in my life time, try to absolve themselves from as much responsibility as possible. pointing out the serious impact this has on running the country and debt is a bit much to get over.
 
Hillary Benn thinks Starmer should make Brexit a election issue, I agree with him but no need for any announcement, I thought that would happen naturally when the effects of Brexit started to hit, WTO will have something to say about the Torys Brexit by the next election as well but the point is the Torys awful attitude made the problems of Brexit, Pandemic, NHS  etc far worse as the attitude is to let these problems sort themselves out by themselves. they only act when the s,, starts hitting the fan forcing them to do something,  it's down to incompetence, they are not fit to govern.

I was surprised when the person I was chatting too told me about the 79 election. I had no idea what the Tories actually ran on in their messaging until they pointed me to some sources. Like you say, absolve themselves of responsibility and present themselves as something different to what they end up doing. That idea of 'competence' especially key to it. Other thing which made me take a second was only two changes in governing party in 42 years since. Mad country.

Saw that from Benn. I'm not convinced it's a great idea as a national message but I only saw the headline to be fair to him. Closer to what you say that there's no need for an announcement. I really do get the desire to shout "We told you so you utter turnips" but I also listened carefully to those who've done the research and reckon it's about the worst possible way to give people a way to move from past beliefs. That said, there's a chunk of the electorate who blame the last Labour government for it all so I guess expectations do need to be reasonable for what can be achieved...

[killer-heels]

Good to see Starmer rebuke the no income tax rise point by Reeves. You have to be careful with Reeves, she is probably the most right MP you could have put as the shadow Chancellor.

[Jiminy Cricket]

To be fair, it's before the student demos Bastani joined in with (which have raised questions about the validity of his postgraduate qualification - you're not meant to study yourself after all...) and so likely before his move into left wing politics with his new friends. I don't think moving into and out of parties should be a bad thing, but if you've praised 'workfare' in the past then maybe a bit of honesty about it is helpful all round.

Yeah - I do not generally have a problems with people moving their political beliefs over time (so long as it is in the correct direction . It was just the contrast of your followup post with the categorical statement from Wild Romany Boy that "[Bastani]'s not and has never been [a Tory]" which amused me.

I did not know that about Bastani's postgraduate studies/qualifications - it does seem odd. But irrespective of where Bastani politically aligns himself now (or in the past), he seems like a thoroughly despicable character.

[Kenny's Jacket]

GMB, had a feature on Angela Rayner and the Vine show is about to do the same

no discussion on James Gray wanting to bomb the Labour confrence

This is the shit KS needs to concentrate on - Control the narrative   

[Kenny's Jacket]

.

[Nobby Reserve]

GMB, had a feature on Angela Rayner and the Vine show is about to do the same

no discussion on James Gray wanting to bomb the Labour confrence

This is the shit KS needs to concentrate on - Control the narrative   

Rayner actually said:

“We cannot get any worse than a bunch of scum, homophobic, racist, misogynistic, absolute vile … banana republic, vile, nasty, Etonian … piece of scum,”

It's telling that the Tories only dispute the phrase 'scum'. They must know they're bang to rights on the others.

 

[thaddeus]

A very good speech ongoing from Rachel Reeves.  A bit of tub-thumping but also plenty of policies.

Some will rightly think this is a good thing but one thing she's not doing is repeating a catchy slogan.  The Tories have shown that is an effective tactic ("Build back better", for example) and no doubt we'll see the same thing happening again at their conference.

[Zeb]

This is soft left catnip from Reeves. It's also pretty clever. "Tories' Brexit mess". Simple and open to the reading you want to put on it so long as it's the Tories at fault. Promise on reversing outsourcing from public services might help reassure some too. Looks like building on the work for local economies, Preston and nationally in Wales the examples the press will need to look to, as an answer to reversing high street decline - and that's a key point for many of the people Labour need to reach. Needs to be joined up with transport too, and local public services, which I imagine will also come at some point. But she's clearly going to publicly play 'prudence'.

[Nobby Reserve]

GMB, had a feature on Angela Rayner and the Vine show is about to do the same

no discussion on James Gray wanting to bomb the Labour confrence

This is the shit KS needs to concentrate on - Control the narrative   

Imagine the reaction of the predominantly right-wing media if a Labour MP (especially one on the left of the party) would have made a joke about a bomb blowing up Tories? 

[Dr. Beaker]

Rayner actually said:

It's telling that the Tories only dispute the phrase 'scum'. They must know they're bang to rights on the others.

 

And how can it possibly be aimed at Tory voters? Did they all go to Eton?

[Nobby Reserve]

How is saying the statement "only women have cervixes" isnt right bollocks? He probably should have gone more into the question criticising what Duffield has said but I don't get how he's wrong with what he's said...

Because it's red meat to the Tories wanting to portray Labour as being home for extreme 'social justice warrior' shite.

Duffield's position is way more nuanced than the SJW's like to portray. I also think it's a position broadly taken by the vast majority of people in the UK, and eminently sensible.

She's also (like Joanne Rowling and others) been the subject of hate campaigns and threats from the SJW extremist twats. So for Starmer to effectively hang her out to dry even more is disgraceful.

[B0151?]

Who is James Gray

He's been an MP since 1997 and I've never heard of him

Of course what one of the most prominent Labour politicians says is going to get more heat than a no mark Tory MP. And it seems like she's more than welcoming the publicity given she's going on the attack further in today newspaper

That's her right of course and I'm not even criticising it but the whole what about the Tories, it's unfair thing that we have a tendency to do doesn't help anything unfortunately

[Kenny's Jacket]

Who is James Gray

He's been an MP since 1997 and I've never heard of him

Of course what one of the most prominent Labour politicians says is going to get more heat than a no mark Tory MP. And it seems like she's more than welcoming the publicity given she's going on the attack further in today newspaper

That's her right of course and I'm not even criticising it but the whole what about the Tories, it's unfair thing that we have a tendency to do doesn't help anything unfortunately

it shows a media bias that only one gets the headlines

[Yorkykopite]

Rayner actually said:

It's telling that the Tories only dispute the phrase 'scum'. They must know they're bang to rights on the others.

 

I'm not sure you're right Nobby.

The other charges are legitimate. It doesn't necessarily mean they are true (though I personally think they are). But politics wouldn't be worth anything if you couldn't point out that your opponent is a racist or a misogynist.

But 'scum' is beyond the pale. Like 'vermin' is. In politics it's the language of totalitarianism. Stalin could not open his mouth, for example, without such words tumbling out.

[Zeb]

Point of contrast worth picking up on. R4's Westminster Hour had Dodds (whose name my autocorrect insists is actually 'Dobbs' for some reason) and a Tory MP. Dodds didn't want to talk about any of it - 'he said, she said, they're all the same, it's not what people want from their politicians'. The Tory MP on the programme was at great pains to insist that Gray apologised after a lot of internal criticism from other Tory MPs. Apologise and move on. Dig in on it and it's still the story as the Tories run round clutching their pearls.

I mentioned this the other day, but Chris Curtis (ran polling for Yougov, now does it for Opinium) who does a lot of work on the electorates attitudes towards Labour, and vice versa, was in The Times today on a similar theme.

Spoiler

There is obviously no shortage of reasons why Labour finds it so difficult to win elections. But I have always believed the biggest inherent issue for the party is that they hate their political opponents too much.

We saw this in action with Angela Rayner’s comments at the weekend, where she described Tory ministers as “a bunch of scum”. Whatever your view on whether the comments were acceptable, it illustrates a mindset within Labour and the wider left that is incredibly unhelpful.

Opinium polling has shown just how widespread views like this are. Forty-six per cent of Labour voters say they would feel negatively about a friend or family member who voted Conservative. By contrast, 15 per cent of Conservative voters said the same thing about a friend or family member voting Labour.

Previous polling has shown that 34 per cent of Labour voters would even be upset if their son or daughter married a Conservative, compared with just 13 per cent of Conservative voters who would be upset with their child marrying a Labour voter.

But why should this be such a problem?

First, and most obviously, comments like the ones Rayner made do not go down well with voters. Labour will not win the next election without gaining the support of a substantial number of people who voted Tory in 2019. Many of them will see these comments as a personal attack on their voting decisions as much as an attack on the target politicians.

Second, hating your opponents stops you from thinking rationally about how to criticise them. It is rare in politics for the most effective attack line to be one that is about personality, rather than their policies or capabilities, and yet many within Labour are often blinded to this fact.

But most important of all, it stops Labour from working out what policy and narratives it needs to win back these voters. Labour needs to address the concerns that Tory voters have about the Labour party, and that is inevitably going to involve some level of compromise on policy and messaging. But when you have such a low opinion of the voters you need to win over, you are less willing to make those compromises.

Labour voters also hold stronger political positions. Our polling for the Social Market Foundation asked people for their opinions on 15 different political issues. While Labour voters were clearly more likely to pick the left-wing options, most interesting was that 60 per cent put themselves at the “extreme” end of the scale on at least half of the questions. That was true of only 38 per cent of Conservative voters.

When you mix these two things together it means that Labour has a voter coalition that is harder to hold together and less open to doing the things necessary to win at the ballot box.

Ultimately, Labour needs to start seeing Tory voters as potential Labour voters.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/angela-rayner-calling-tory-ministers-scum-reflects-a-problem-for-the-left-0lcvp2qxj

[close]

Still, it is all storms in teacups. Osborne made the headlines at Cameron's first conference as leader for calling Brown 'autistic' as an insult. Oh how it ruined the next election for them...

[Nobby Reserve]

Who is James Gray

He's been an MP since 1997 and I've never heard of him

Of course what one of the most prominent Labour politicians says is going to get more heat than a no mark Tory MP. And it seems like she's more than welcoming the publicity given she's going on the attack further in today newspaper

That's her right of course and I'm not even criticising it but the whole what about the Tories, it's unfair thing that we have a tendency to do doesn't help anything unfortunately

It's not 'whataboutery', it's comparing two comments - one an innocuous insult, the other advocating murdering a Labour MP - in recent days, and the media reaction to each.

Like I said, even a relatively anonymous, minor Labour MP makes a joke about blowing Tories up with a bomb, and there'd be front-page outrage in the right-wing media and BBC coverage before you could say 'Grand Hotel, Brighton'.

[Kenny's Jacket]

I'm not sure you're right Nobby.

The other charges are legitimate. It doesn't necessarily mean they are true (though I personally think they are). But politics wouldn't be worth anything if you couldn't point out that your opponent is a racist or a misogynist.

But 'scum' is beyond the pale. Like 'vermin' is. In politics it's the language of totalitarianism. Stalin could not open his mouth, for example, without such words tumbling out.

it may do more harm than good, who knows - but Im fully behind her use of words

[Yorkykopite]

it may do more harm than good, who knows - but Im fully behind her use of words

Plenty are for sure. But none of the people Labour needs.

[B0151?]

It's not 'whataboutery', it's comparing two comments - one an innocuous insult, the other advocating murdering a Labour MP - in recent days, and the media reaction to each.

Like I said, even a relatively anonymous, minor Labour MP makes a joke about blowing Tories up with a bomb, and there'd be front-page outrage in the right-wing media and BBC coverage before you could say 'Grand Hotel, Brighton'.

It's not whataboutery but crying about it is pretty pointless in my opinion. Labour have a lot more to prove than the Tories. We can moan about media coverage but I know that my dad as someone who voted for the Tories last election but has always been a floating voter is much more likely to care about and be bothered by what Rayner said than what the Tory guy said. Without putting too much importance on my dad, that's the only thing that matters.

[Kenny's Jacket]

Plenty are for sure. But none of the people Labour needs.

labour isnt in a position to pick n choose who it needs

if I was poorly stuck in bed on GE day and it was pissing down, those comments would spur me on to get out and vote

[Dr. Beaker]

Pretty pointless worrying about the moral high ground in a country that voted for Johnson.

[JerseyKloppite]

I rarely dip into the politics threads as I don't tend to enjoy the vitriol that often accompanies the discussion.

But I think it's very hard to judge the current Labour leadership objectively. Jeremy Corbyn was very, very clear on what he stood for, and what Labour as a party stood for under his leadership. It was a return to a more left-wing, socialist Labour party. One of the reasons everyone knew what Corbyn stood for was because the media amplified into to the nth degree, either positively (to some extent, in the Guardian) or negatively (pretty much everyone else). It presented a stark political choice between the Tory right and the Labour left. This energised the young, left leaning vote in a way I've never seen in my lifetime, which was wonderful to see.

But they were always fighting an uphill battle against a right-wing media and a nation who are, ultimately, conservative leaning. Broadly speaking. The loss of Scotland to the SNP is a big blow to Labour - a party with left-wing political views of course, but still a load of seats Labour can't win, which will be exacerbated if they leave the union. Then you add Brexit to the bonfire, a one-off political issue which was so ruthlessly divisive. And you never quite felt that you knew where Corbyn's Labour stood on the issue, or by the time he'd made his position clearer it was all over bar the shouting. Boris had "delivered Brexit"; he was perceived as a success to that end, whether you agree with that or not.

The difficulty lies in splitting the politics from the politician in Corbyn. He was vilified by the right wing press to the extent he was never going to be seen by the middle ground as a credible prime-minister. But the resurgent left-wing politics he has left behind are still associated with him, to their detriment. And so Labour elect a "safe pair of hands", someone far more palatable to those whose votes Labour need to sway to actually win an election. But with him comes a policy shift, also presumably to set about winning back some of that middle ground, or those lost northern stronghold.

And now Labour are left horribly split as a party between the left and the centre-left, between those who want to pick up and run with what Corbyn left behind, and those who fear his legacy could taint Labour's electoral chances for years. It's an absolute fucking nightmare and the perception of Boris as a "success" for the government's delivery of a vaccine roll out at pace, whilst other countries struggle to catch-up, is another bitter pill to swallow.

So I have no idea what to think of Starmer. The last 18 months has presented a political landscape unlike any other. This has presented some opportunities in opposition but also created a thin-ice of not wanting to overly politicise a health crisis, and has ended up with the Government somehow in credit with the population despite many miss-steps in the response to the pandemic which have cost many lives. Things that would have brought a government down 15-20 years ago are just run roughshod over now; the legacy of Trump politics.

I just don't think that the general public are very interested in what Labour are putting out there at the moment. If he tried to do something eye-catching and dramatic, the conservative, reactionary public would be suspicious. If he tries to do something solid and competent, it's not sufficiently newsworthy to be interesting. As it is Labour are muddling along, trying to maintain the kind of delicate balance in their politics which the Tories struggled for years with as regards Europe.

For me the only kind of leader who could potentially deliver a Labour government at this time would be someone who could pursue something closer to the policy approach of the last Labour election programme with the broad appeal of being likeable, fairly young, competent and trustworthy. I have no idea who that is and would welcome their appearance on the political stage right now.