Page 23 of 29
Re: Starmer
Posted: Mon Jun 27, 2022 4:43 pm
by TopBadger
monkey wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 3:06 pm
Labour would not win an election campaigning for a 2nd referendum. Brexit split the Party and their voters. It's why many in the red wall voted for Johnson. Starmer would be sensible not to try and repeat that.
Oh, I'm not suggesting to campaign on it... just get in then do it.
Re: Starmer
Posted: Mon Jun 27, 2022 6:17 pm
by monkey
TopBadger wrote: ↑Mon Jun 27, 2022 4:43 pm
monkey wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 3:06 pm
Labour would not win an election campaigning for a 2nd referendum. Brexit split the Party and their voters. It's why many in the red wall voted for Johnson. Starmer would be sensible not to try and repeat that.
Oh, I'm not suggesting to campaign on it... just get in then do it.
So go into an election saying they'll not do much, then do a lot? That sort of thing gets noticed. (Most) People aren't stupid and don't like being lied to.
Re: Starmer
Posted: Mon Jun 27, 2022 7:15 pm
by El Pollo Diablo
Most people don't pay attention and don't notice being lied to
Re: Starmer
Posted: Mon Jun 27, 2022 8:32 pm
by WFJ
monkey wrote: ↑Mon Jun 27, 2022 6:17 pm
(Most) People aren't stupid and don't like being lied to.
El Pollo Diablo wrote: ↑Mon Jun 27, 2022 7:15 pm
Most people don't pay attention and don't notice being lied to
Cue B-roll footage of Boris Johnson waving with the caption "80 seat majority".
Re: Starmer
Posted: Mon Jun 27, 2022 9:51 pm
by dyqik
monkey wrote: ↑Mon Jun 27, 2022 6:17 pm
TopBadger wrote: ↑Mon Jun 27, 2022 4:43 pm
monkey wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 3:06 pm
Labour would not win an election campaigning for a 2nd referendum. Brexit split the Party and their voters. It's why many in the red wall voted for Johnson. Starmer would be sensible not to try and repeat that.
Oh, I'm not suggesting to campaign on it... just get in then do it.
So go into an election saying they'll not do much, then do a lot? That sort of thing gets noticed. (Most) People aren't stupid
[citation needed] and don't like being lied to
[citation needed].
Re: Starmer
Posted: Tue Jun 28, 2022 10:12 am
by nekomatic
monkey wrote: ↑Mon Jun 27, 2022 6:17 pm
So go into an election saying they'll not do much, then do a lot? That sort of thing gets noticed.
No, I just think Labour’s strategy is to be led by public opinion rather than try to lead it. I’m sure most of the leadership know that Brexit is sh.t and the only way to improve it is to start undoing it, but they judge that trying to campaign for that at the moment is still too hazardous, so they’re going to sit and wait for the mood to turn against it to the point where starting to undo it is overwhelmingly popular.
I think it’s sh.t that that’s where we find ourselves and I honestly don’t know whether they’re right about the toxicity of daring to stand up and say so, but I’m pretty sure that it’s easy to take a 60:40 poll lead for ‘it was a bad idea’ and wishfully think it into a mass desire for reopening the whole hideous debate - the other side can still call up some heavy artillery if they want to, and I wouldn’t be sure how well our defences would cope. I do think the mood might see a step change once the Conservatives finally get kicked out though.
Re: Starmer
Posted: Thu Jul 28, 2022 6:23 pm
by Grumble
So, odds on Starmer being replaced by Andy Burnham before the next election?
Re: Starmer
Posted: Thu Jul 28, 2022 6:47 pm
by discovolante
Well Burnham has previously said he has no plans to return to Westminster. He might change his mind I guess but if I was him I'd probably just want to stick to what I was doing, without having to travel to London all the time if nothing else. But then I'm just a lazy person and not a weird politician.
Re: Starmer
Posted: Thu Jul 28, 2022 8:47 pm
by Bird on a Fire
Starmer is polling extremely well with 2029 Tory voters who are now thinking about Labour -he outperforms either Tory candidate.
He might be the perfect candidate for the specific swing voters Labour needs.
Re: Starmer
Posted: Thu Jul 28, 2022 9:45 pm
by WFJ
If the Tories pick Truss as expected, or even if they pick Sunak, Starmer is going to suddenly appear like Mr Charisma in comparison.
Re: Starmer
Posted: Thu Jul 28, 2022 9:45 pm
by nekomatic
Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑Thu Jul 28, 2022 8:47 pm
Starmer is polling extremely well with 2029 Tory voters
So he’s looking good for a win in 2034 then?
Seriously though, I find it as depressing as anyone that he can’t tell me what I want to hear, but pragmatically the only way to really steer politics in this country in the right direction remains to persuade Labour to endorse PR then get Labour into power. After that you can all do what the f.ck you want.
Re: Starmer
Posted: Thu Jul 28, 2022 10:47 pm
by jimbob
https://youtu.be/fUlzIKruFkw
Interesting take on Starmer by James O'Brien
Re: Starmer
Posted: Fri Sep 30, 2022 10:00 am
by discovolante
Yes, Starmer is a lawyer who highly values due process and procedure, which is also why he rarely called for tory ministers to resign when they did dodgy stuff.
Re: Starmer
Posted: Fri Sep 30, 2022 10:56 am
by snoozeofreason
discovolante wrote: ↑Fri Sep 30, 2022 10:00 am
Yes, Starmer is a lawyer who highly values due process and procedure, which is also why he rarely called for tory ministers to resign when they did dodgy stuff.
At the risk of giving one of my hobby horses another trot round the paddock, his past as a lawyer - and particularly as former head of the DPP - does make it all the more frustrating that he has so little of substance to say about the crisis in the criminal justice system.
Re: Starmer
Posted: Wed Dec 14, 2022 5:57 pm
by monkey
An MRP poll is giving Labour a 314 seat majority -
clicky. The percentages are in line with traditional polling.
Re: Starmer
Posted: Sun Mar 26, 2023 3:30 pm
by discovolante
Re: Starmer
Posted: Sun Mar 26, 2023 3:33 pm
by Gfamily
Re: Starmer
Posted: Sun Mar 26, 2023 5:04 pm
by headshot
Gotta make old people vote for them again.
Re: Starmer
Posted: Sun Mar 26, 2023 5:10 pm
by Grumble
What’s so hard about accepting expert suggestions?
Re: Starmer
Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2023 12:00 am
by Martin_B
Grumble wrote: ↑Sun Mar 26, 2023 5:10 pm
What’s so hard about accepting expert suggestions?
Because people who know what they're talking about rarely agree with bigoted prejudices?
Re: Starmer
Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2023 12:23 am
by Gfamily
headshot wrote: ↑Sun Mar 26, 2023 5:04 pm
Gotta make old people vote for them again.
But why the f.ck isn't Labour calling this out as a blatant case of Tories being a "clanging bell" - signifying nothing.
Better that than...
Labour backed the plans to ban the sale of nitrous oxide. Shadow culture secretary Lucy Powell said its use "causes a huge amount of littering disruption and anti-social behaviour".
If 'litter; is a driver, we would be better cracking down on people who leave little bags of dogshit all over the place.
Re: Starmer
Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2023 6:18 pm
by TimW
Gfamily wrote: ↑Mon Mar 27, 2023 12:23 am
If 'litter; is a driver, we would be better cracking down on people who leave little bags of dogshit all over the place.
How do you know it's dogshit?
Re: Starmer
Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2023 6:45 pm
by jdc
Gfamily wrote: ↑Mon Mar 27, 2023 12:23 am
If 'litter; is a driver, we would be better cracking down on people who leave little bags of dogshit all over the place.
Steve Rolles has been pointing out on Twitter that sale for consumption is illegal, littering is illegal, and driving under the influence is illegal; all the concerns that people are raising can already be dealt with under existing legislation. His suggestion was "Maybe deploy existing laws more effectively (as the ACMD have suggested) rather than just doubling the max prison sentence under the MDA?"
It's just performative "tough on crime" b.llsh.t innit. Or dogshit. One of the two.
Re: Starmer
Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2023 8:44 pm
by headshot
jdc wrote: ↑Mon Mar 27, 2023 6:45 pm
It's just performative "tough on crime" b.llsh.t innit. Or dogshit. One of the two.
It’s both, until you open the bag to find out. Schrödinger’s dogshit.
Re: Starmer
Posted: Tue Mar 28, 2023 7:11 pm
by jimbob
Gfamily wrote: ↑Sun Mar 26, 2023 3:33 pm
NOx-ious policy setting.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... dApp_Other
A minister who has admitted to using cocaine being sent out to announce a clampdown on laughing gas. Totally normal. A home secretary who can’t be trusted to stay on message. Totally normal. A government prepared to break international law by deporting refugees. Totally normal. An environment secretary permanently at war with herself and the farming community. Totally normal. A chancellor unbothered by a 4% hit to GDP from Brexit. Totally normal. A prime minister who finds all the above totally normal. Totally normal.
The rest is worth reading too