Starmer

Discussions about serious topics, for serious people
tom p
After Pie
Posts: 1861
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:14 pm
Location: the low countries

Re: Starmer

Post by tom p » Mon Nov 29, 2021 7:10 pm

monkey wrote:
Mon Nov 29, 2021 4:25 pm
tom p wrote:
Mon Nov 29, 2021 3:52 pm
headshot wrote:
Mon Nov 29, 2021 1:34 pm


Oh FFS.

Well, looks like Ange is about to lose her job.
She can't. Deputy leader is an elected position and not the gift of the leader. Do you think Corbyn would have kept Watson on? Or Blair Prezza?
True, but she doesn't have to be given anything to do either.
Like Watson & Prezza.
Anyway, there's nothing in the story to suggest that that's gonna happen. It's more that Starmer is a f.ckwit who didn't think to plan when he would do this so that it didn't clash with Rayner's big media day about tory corruption. It also suggests he's a f.ckwit who thinks that provoking an internal squabble (which is all a reshuffle really does) is a great way to capitalise on the current tory shitshow.
I thought he would be competent. It turns out he just looks like someone who should be competent.

User avatar
Bird on a Fire
Princess POW
Posts: 9306
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
Location: Portugal

Re: Starmer

Post by Bird on a Fire » Mon Nov 29, 2021 8:09 pm

Bring back Labour leaders who look incompetent, I say. At least you know what you're getting ;)
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.

User avatar
El Pollo Diablo
Stummy Beige
Posts: 2762
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:41 pm
Location: FBPE

Re: Starmer

Post by El Pollo Diablo » Mon Nov 29, 2021 8:19 pm

Apparently Starmer gave Rayner the heads-up well in advance, despite the briefing.
They loved each other and believed they loved mankind, they fought each other and believed they fought the world.

User avatar
headshot
Dorkwood
Posts: 1026
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 9:40 am

Re: Starmer

Post by headshot » Mon Nov 29, 2021 8:29 pm

tom p wrote:
Mon Nov 29, 2021 3:52 pm
She can't. Deputy leader is an elected position and not the gift of the leader. Do you think Corbyn would have kept Watson on? Or Blair Prezza?
Ah. Didn’t realise that.

Yvette Cooper shadow Home Secretary. David Lammy shadow Foreign Secretary. That’s fab.

User avatar
El Pollo Diablo
Stummy Beige
Posts: 2762
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:41 pm
Location: FBPE

Re: Starmer

Post by El Pollo Diablo » Mon Nov 29, 2021 9:12 pm

Brilliant to see Cooper back in the big time, and Lisa & Andy will do well in the Levelling Up job.
They loved each other and believed they loved mankind, they fought each other and believed they fought the world.

User avatar
Grumble
Stummy Beige
Posts: 3409
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:03 pm

Re: Starmer

Post by Grumble » Mon Nov 29, 2021 10:17 pm

El Pollo Diablo wrote:
Mon Nov 29, 2021 8:19 pm
Apparently Starmer gave Rayner the heads-up well in advance, despite the briefing.
Probably could have timed it so the announcement didn’t clash with her press call though
A bit churlish

tom p
After Pie
Posts: 1861
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:14 pm
Location: the low countries

Re: Starmer

Post by tom p » Tue Nov 30, 2021 12:01 pm

El Pollo Diablo wrote:
Mon Nov 29, 2021 8:19 pm
Apparently Starmer gave Rayner the heads-up well in advance, despite the briefing.
Rayner says it was mentioned that morning, but without any details of people or timing in the day. Who knows which of them is telling the truth? Not a great look, and it was still really f.cking stupid to do it on a day when the deputy leader is hitting the media to talk about tory corruption.

Starmer should make great use of Rayner. She's sharp, passionate, connects with the left of the party (something Blair realised was a really helpful attribute that Prezza had & he made full use of), comes across as genuine and is really genuinely good looking (and thus drop-dead gorgeous for a politician). This last part shouldn't be a consideration; but it is in our sexist society*, and if labour want to win an election, they should have her fronting up to the media a lot, as it will help.

*I remember back in the early 90s, when I was a porter in a hospital, learning that some people consider physical attractiveness as part of the equation. Some of the nurses had voted tory at the '92 election because they thought John Major was better-looking than Neil Kinnock. Nurses who had suffered through 13 years of tory cuts at that point still voted against their own interests 'cos one guy was slightly less ugly than another.

User avatar
El Pollo Diablo
Stummy Beige
Posts: 2762
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:41 pm
Location: FBPE

Re: Starmer

Post by El Pollo Diablo » Tue Nov 30, 2021 12:32 pm

tom p wrote:
Tue Nov 30, 2021 12:01 pm
El Pollo Diablo wrote:
Mon Nov 29, 2021 8:19 pm
Apparently Starmer gave Rayner the heads-up well in advance, despite the briefing.
Rayner says it was mentioned that morning, but without any details of people or timing in the day. Who knows which of them is telling the truth? Not a great look, and it was still really f.cking stupid to do it on a day when the deputy leader is hitting the media to talk about tory corruption.

Starmer should make great use of Rayner. She's sharp, passionate, connects with the left of the party (something Blair realised was a really helpful attribute that Prezza had & he made full use of), comes across as genuine and is really genuinely good looking (and thus drop-dead gorgeous for a politician). This last part shouldn't be a consideration; but it is in our sexist society*, and if labour want to win an election, they should have her fronting up to the media a lot, as it will help.

*I remember back in the early 90s, when I was a porter in a hospital, learning that some people consider physical attractiveness as part of the equation. Some of the nurses had voted tory at the '92 election because they thought John Major was better-looking than Neil Kinnock. Nurses who had suffered through 13 years of tory cuts at that point still voted against their own interests 'cos one guy was slightly less ugly than another.
I agree with you, and probably it was a daft thing to do to have it clashing (why not just do it over the weekend?). I think Rayner is generally a good egg and should be an asset if employed in the right way.

I think on the attractiveness point, there's probably research out there, but I do wonder how helpful it is, electorally, for women to be attractive in politics, simply because I can imagine people using that against them - only there because they look good, shagging the leader, some sh.t like that. The most recently former leader of the lib dems (genuinely forgotten who she is) was quite attractive and was made the centre of their campaign but it really didn't help them. Mind you, it is the lib dems.

Papers like this seem to have looked into it, though I can only see a preview. It's a discussion to take some care over, as it can get grimy pretty quickly.
They loved each other and believed they loved mankind, they fought each other and believed they fought the world.

plodder
After Pie
Posts: 2581
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:50 pm

Re: Starmer

Post by plodder » Tue Nov 30, 2021 12:44 pm

I agree Rayner is an underused asset and it’s one of the things that worries me most about Starmer. She doesn’t look that hard to manage, but she doesn’t seem to be invested in Starmer’s project. They’re both being childish IMO, just f.cking button it up and present a united front.

Labour rules are crazy that the deputy isn’t appointed by the leader. They don’t have any power so what’s the point?

User avatar
El Pollo Diablo
Stummy Beige
Posts: 2762
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:41 pm
Location: FBPE

Re: Starmer

Post by El Pollo Diablo » Tue Nov 30, 2021 12:51 pm

Bit of fun innit
They loved each other and believed they loved mankind, they fought each other and believed they fought the world.

plodder
After Pie
Posts: 2581
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:50 pm

Re: Starmer

Post by plodder » Tue Nov 30, 2021 1:00 pm

El Pollo Diablo wrote:
Tue Nov 30, 2021 12:51 pm
Bit of fun innit
Well yeah, if beating yourself round the head with a lump hammer is your idea of fun. It is traditional for them to shoot themselves in the foot I suppose.

User avatar
El Pollo Diablo
Stummy Beige
Posts: 2762
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:41 pm
Location: FBPE

Re: Starmer

Post by El Pollo Diablo » Tue Nov 30, 2021 1:04 pm

Exactly. Bet they haven't changed the constitution yet either, about what happens if the MPs do a vote of no confidence.

That said, I think in some ways it's good to have a separately elected deputy, though I can't be arsed at this point to verbalise them.
They loved each other and believed they loved mankind, they fought each other and believed they fought the world.

plodder
After Pie
Posts: 2581
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:50 pm

Re: Starmer

Post by plodder » Tue Nov 30, 2021 1:07 pm

El Pollo Diablo wrote:
Tue Nov 30, 2021 1:04 pm
Exactly. Bet they haven't changed the constitution yet either, about what happens if the MPs do a vote of no confidence.

That said, I think in some ways it's good to have a separately elected deputy, though I can't be arsed at this point to verbalise them.
I don’t agree, leaders should be in charge. Otherwise they limp on, blaming internal disloyalty or some such bollocks. At work my boss reports to their boss and so on. I bet everyone else’s does too.

monkey
Dorkwood
Posts: 1350
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2019 5:10 pm

Re: Starmer

Post by monkey » Tue Nov 30, 2021 1:33 pm

plodder wrote:
Tue Nov 30, 2021 12:44 pm
Labour rules are crazy that the deputy isn’t appointed by the leader. They don’t have any power so what’s the point?
Not that crazy, if in opposition, something happens to the leader the deputy is leader until the new one is chosen*. That's potentially a position with all the power, for a few months at least, so it's not that unreasonable that they are elected. It's only the day to day deputing that isn't defined.


*If in power, the cabinet and NEC pick the new leader/PM until a new one is elected.

User avatar
dyqik
Light of Blast
Posts: 5560
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:19 pm
Location: Masshole
Contact:

Re: Starmer

Post by dyqik » Tue Nov 30, 2021 1:54 pm

monkey wrote:
Tue Nov 30, 2021 1:33 pm
plodder wrote:
Tue Nov 30, 2021 12:44 pm
Labour rules are crazy that the deputy isn’t appointed by the leader. They don’t have any power so what’s the point?
Not that crazy, if in opposition, something happens to the leader the deputy is leader until the new one is chosen*. That's potentially a position with all the power, for a few months at least, so it's not that unreasonable that they are elected. It's only the day to day deputing that isn't defined.


*If in power, the cabinet and NEC pick the new leader/PM until a new one is elected.
Although that's not even a policy that the US presidency uses any more, and where the VP might be in the presidency for three and half a years.

plodder
After Pie
Posts: 2581
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:50 pm

Re: Starmer

Post by plodder » Tue Nov 30, 2021 2:10 pm

Always hamstring the leader in case something occasionally happens to the leader. Cool.

tom p
After Pie
Posts: 1861
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:14 pm
Location: the low countries

Re: Starmer

Post by tom p » Tue Nov 30, 2021 2:35 pm

plodder wrote:
Tue Nov 30, 2021 2:10 pm
Always hamstring the leader in case something occasionally happens to the leader. Cool.
It's not always a hamstringing.
An intelligent labour leader will use their deputy wisely. If they are of the same wing of the party, then it's a piece of piss to work together - natural allies and all that. If they are from a different wing, bring them close into the tent, have them act as the interface between the different wings: to the leader: warning them about disgruntlement from the other wing. to the other wing: being a friendly & trusted voice who will get a fair hearing from their comrades-in-arms. A bit like how a good football manager uses the captain - the executive's voice to the ones who are needed to buy into the project
It also allows the members to vote for someone they think will do best in the next general election for leader & someone they really want as deputy leader, thus it means things are less rancorous at leadership election time.

plodder
After Pie
Posts: 2581
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:50 pm

Re: Starmer

Post by plodder » Tue Nov 30, 2021 3:21 pm

this thing about forcing the leader to manage different wings without a choice in who they have to work with is f.cking silly. It's up to them to manage the party and if they get it wrong they're out on their ear. It's a really stupid way of turning dynamic and decisive leadership into committee dithering and it's a really unusual set-up for this very reason. Most successful organisations don't work this way and the Labour party is, by and large, an unsuccessful organisation.

Imagine if you were in charge and sheldrake, or me, was your deputy. Lol.

User avatar
Trinucleus
Catbabel
Posts: 809
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 6:45 pm

Re: Starmer

Post by Trinucleus » Tue Nov 30, 2021 4:32 pm

El Pollo Diablo wrote:
Tue Nov 30, 2021 12:32 pm
tom p wrote:
Tue Nov 30, 2021 12:01 pm
El Pollo Diablo wrote:
Mon Nov 29, 2021 8:19 pm
Apparently Starmer gave Rayner the heads-up well in advance, despite the briefing.
Rayner says it was mentioned that morning, but without any details of people or timing in the day. Who knows which of them is telling the truth? Not a great look, and it was still really f.cking stupid to do it on a day when the deputy leader is hitting the media to talk about tory corruption.

Starmer should make great use of Rayner. She's sharp, passionate, connects with the left of the party (something Blair realised was a really helpful attribute that Prezza had & he made full use of), comes across as genuine and is really genuinely good looking (and thus drop-dead gorgeous for a politician). This last part shouldn't be a consideration; but it is in our sexist society*, and if labour want to win an election, they should have her fronting up to the media a lot, as it will help.

*I remember back in the early 90s, when I was a porter in a hospital, learning that some people consider physical attractiveness as part of the equation. Some of the nurses had voted tory at the '92 election because they thought John Major was better-looking than Neil Kinnock. Nurses who had suffered through 13 years of tory cuts at that point still voted against their own interests 'cos one guy was slightly less ugly than another.
I agree with you, and probably it was a daft thing to do to have it clashing (why not just do it over the weekend?). I think Rayner is generally a good egg and should be an asset if employed in the right way.

I think on the attractiveness point, there's probably research out there, but I do wonder how helpful it is, electorally, for women to be attractive in politics, simply because I can imagine people using that against them - only there because they look good, shagging the leader, some sh.t like that. The most recently former leader of the lib dems (genuinely forgotten who she is) was quite attractive and was made the centre of their campaign but it really didn't help them. Mind you, it is the lib dems.

Papers like this seem to have looked into it, though I can only see a preview. It's a discussion to take some care over, as it can get grimy pretty quickly.
Apparently over the last 100 years the taller US presidential candidate has the advantage

https://fisher.osu.edu/blogs/leadreadto ... -greatness

User avatar
dyqik
Light of Blast
Posts: 5560
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:19 pm
Location: Masshole
Contact:

Re: Starmer

Post by dyqik » Tue Nov 30, 2021 8:17 pm

Trinucleus wrote:
Tue Nov 30, 2021 4:32 pm
El Pollo Diablo wrote:
Tue Nov 30, 2021 12:32 pm


Papers like this seem to have looked into it, though I can only see a preview. It's a discussion to take some care over, as it can get grimy pretty quickly.
Apparently over the last 100 years the taller US presidential candidate has the advantage

https://fisher.osu.edu/blogs/leadreadto ... -greatness
There's also an effect that you can see in politics, and which I think is studied more widely in business leadership, about it being taller men with a full head of hair that are viewed as better leaders (I guess that's "among male leaders", to avoid the misogyny question in this particular bit of the discussion). IIRC, having all-white hair is OK (hi Joe Biden), and possibly even advantageous, but greying less so.

monkey
Dorkwood
Posts: 1350
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2019 5:10 pm

Re: Starmer

Post by monkey » Fri Jan 14, 2022 10:30 pm

(from the Party thread, but here to stop derails)
El Pollo Diablo wrote:
Thu Jan 13, 2022 8:42 am
monkey wrote:
Wed Jan 12, 2022 11:27 pm
just so long as Labour can get there arses in gear and make it at least seem like they have a vision, rather than just waffling a bit in front of a flag.
I dunno, this seems like a ruddy difficult thing to ask for
Looks like he's giving it a go. Doesn't sound too silly either, but I wish he wouldn't say 'forensic' anymore. clicky

I imagine there'll be some internal fight to distract us all from it by next Tuesday.

User avatar
Bird on a Fire
Princess POW
Posts: 9306
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
Location: Portugal

Re: Starmer

Post by Bird on a Fire » Wed May 25, 2022 9:54 pm

The Express, of all people, praise Starmer.

In fact, this Paul Baldwin (head of comment) piece takes aim at Tory policy (specifically on the cost of living), but frames Starmer as the man to solve the problem, more in touch with the people of the UK, prime ministerial and possibly even able to pass the crucial pint test.
Today Boris looked very much like a man on the side of the easy money shareholders and the company fat-cats

Conversely, and whisper it quietly, Sir Keir looked far more like a man who might actually represent the people. Perhaps even in No10.

He might even be a man you could have a pint with.

You know, next time you're in Durham I mean.
I'm not joking - despite the dig in the last line to sugarcoat the rest of the piece.

https://www.express.co.uk/comment/expre ... -questions

Maybe being good forensic at PMQs is gonna pay off?
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.

monkey
Dorkwood
Posts: 1350
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2019 5:10 pm

Re: Starmer

Post by monkey » Tue Jun 14, 2022 5:54 pm

Stop calling me boring, says Starmer - clicky

'Several of those around the table then echoed their leader’s calls for unity and discretion, in a lengthy exchange described by one shadow frontbencher as “ironically very boring”.'

User avatar
Woodchopper
Light of Blast
Posts: 5434
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am

Re: Starmer

Post by Woodchopper » Fri Jun 24, 2022 10:00 am

A 12% swing to Labour in Wakefield resulting in a majority of almost 5000.

Obviously a bigger swing for the Lib Dems in Tiverton and Honiton, but Labour was an unlikely contender in a seat like that, and it looks like the anti-Tory vote coalesced around the Lib Dem candidate.

Current polling would probably lead to a general election that could leave Labour with a little under a majority, but close enough that a government could be formed with the support of the Lib Dems or the SNP.

User avatar
TopBadger
Snowbonk
Posts: 383
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 6:33 pm
Location: Halfway up

Re: Starmer

Post by TopBadger » Fri Jun 24, 2022 10:09 am

If Labour and LibDems were able to go into a coalition - perhaps that government might do what Blair promised and put PR in place. It seems to me that the only way to get the Tories out for the long haul is for them to work together to achieve that aim.
You can't polish a turd...
unless its Lion or Osterich poo... http://dsc.discovery.com/videos/mythbus ... -turd.html

Post Reply