Keir Starmer Labour Leader

The Corinthian said:
Click to expand...

As I said at the start of the current crisis, public opinion will change as the situation progresses, the more Palestinians the Israelis kill then the more the Palestinians will be seen as victims.

As public opinion changes I suspect Starmer's line will change too. He, and of course his advisors, should have been bright enough to predict this, it's quite depressing.

He should of course be doing the right thing in the first place, but if he is just into ruthless vote chasing at least he should get that right.
 
Last edited:
I feel sorry for the Israelis, I feel sorry for the Palestinians and the people in Gaza. Who I don’t feel sorry for is keir Starmer and anyone in his twisted cabinet. I would rather vote for the slugs crawling up the side of my house than for anyone in that party. Labour is as dead as the conservatives and this country has no leader.
 
Dobba said:
The state of this.

Click to expand...


It doesn’t matter what he says or pledges now. The fact is that his first statement shows what he really thinks and how he views this (or how he wishes to be perceived as viewing this) so I can’t see how he can go back on that, or how the Muslim population of the UK can think that everything is okay now because he has said something else.
 
Keir Starmer first and foremost wants to win the election. I am sure he made the decision to come out with that statement in line with the voting data he has. If it wasn't beneficial to his election chances I doubt he would have made that statement.
 
Dr. StrangeHate said:
Keir Starmer first and foremost wants to win the election. I am sure he made the decision to come out with that statement in line with the voting data he has. If it wasn't beneficial to his election chances I doubt he would have made that statement.
Click to expand...
He believed that the Muslim population of the UK had nowhere else to go. That they would vote Labour whatever he said. He's wrong. This was the obvious result of his stance.
 
Fully Fledged said:
He believed that the Muslim population of the UK had nowhere else to go. That they would vote Labour whatever he said. He's wrong. This was the obvious result of his stance.
Click to expand...
Deffo. There’s a UK Muslim Census that’s doing the rounds (around 17,000 people have completed it so far). The overriding message is that the majority of them voted for Labour in 2019, and won’t be voting for him next year. The damage has been done.

The issue is that there is no one that speaks for the UK Muslim population now. We’re essentially a one party democracy with this version of Labour. He’s a Tory in Labour clothing.
 
The Corinthian said:
Deffo. There’s a UK Muslim Census that’s doing the rounds (around 17,000 people have completed it so far). The overriding message is that the majority of them voted for Labour in 2019, and won’t be voting for him next year. The damage has been done.

The issue is that there is no one that speaks for the UK Muslim population now. We’re essentially a one party democracy with this version of Labour. He’s a Tory in Labour clothing.
Click to expand...
I know it's truly sad.
 
Funny how Starmer only agrees with focus groups when its supportive of right wing policy.
 
Yeah I've found myself politically homeless thanks to Starmer. Which is a bummer considering I live in a Con-Lab battleground constituency with a horribly insufferable Tory MP.
 
Kaos said:
Yeah I've found myself politically homeless thanks to Starmer. Which is a bummer considering I live in a Con-Lab battleground constituency with a horribly insufferable Tory MP.
Click to expand...
I always find this an interesting term, because politics has always been about compromise when talking about power. It's very unlikely you'll have a party where you agree with everything they do, but you have to, on balance compare it to the incumbent or challenger.
 
Lash said:
I always find this an interesting term, because politics has always been about compromise when talking about power. It's very unlikely you'll have a party where you agree with everything they do, but you have to, on balance compare it to the incumbent or challenger.
Click to expand...

Exactly this, people want utopia where they get everything they want and none of what they don't want, it's not that easy to do and gain enough votes to take power, for all Blairs faults and there are enough of them he understood this more than anyone
 
This time 2 years ago, the Tories looked well on track to win the next GE, and Labour looked to be crisis. What has happened since then (it appeared that the Owen Patterson scandal, even before Partygate, ignited things, has been seismic).

Ultimately Starmer has been a hugely successful leader of the opposition so far, as he when he took over the party had 202 seats in the commons (7 fewer than when Kinnock took over for perspective) and many people were saying that realistically all they could achieve at the next GE was making solid gains and reducing the deficit as much as possible. But now they look well on track to win a majority. Far more importantly, I hope he will a successful PM. I don't want the highlight to be the Tories being booted out the next GM, and to be underwhelmed after then.

Blair was both a successful leader of the opposition (Labour were already going to win a comfortable majority in 1997 without him, but he increased the size of the majority to 'super landslide proportions), and IMO was a very successful PM until he passionately supported the illegal invasion of Iraq.
 
Gavinb33 said:
Exactly this, people want utopia where they get everything they want and none of what they don't want, it's not that easy to do and gain enough votes to take power, for all Blairs faults and there are enough of them he understood this more than anyone
Click to expand...
Exactly, I get there will be red lines for people, but I think I've always had to vote on the lines of least worst option (apart from when I voted lib dem as a hopeful teen).
 
GuybrushThreepwood said:
This time 2 years ago, the Tories looked well on track to win the next GE, and Labour looked to be crisis. What has happened since then (it appeared that the Owen Patterson scandal, even before Partygate, ignited things, has been seismic).

Ultimately Starmer has been a hugely successful leader of the opposition so far, as he when he took over the party had 202 seats in the commons (7 fewer than when Kinnock took over for perspective) and many people were saying that realistically all they could achieve at the next GE was making solid gains and reducing the deficit as much as possible. But now they look well on track to win a majority. Far more importantly, I hope he will a successful PM. I don't want the highlight to be the Tories being booted out the next GM, and to be underwhelmed after then.

Blair was both a successful leader of the opposition (Labour were already going to win a comfortable majority in 1997 without him, but he increased the size of the majority to 'super landslide proportions), and IMO was a very successful PM until he passionately supported the illegal invasion of Iraq.
Click to expand...

Starmer has been chipping away at the foundation of the Tory government through PMQs throughout, but it has been more of an implosion of their side rather than a surge towards Labour.

He's just managed to be a viable, if bland, alternative while their arrogance, deception and incompetence caught up with them.
 
GuybrushThreepwood said:
This time 2 years ago, the Tories looked well on track to win the next GE, and Labour looked to be crisis. What has happened since then (it appeared that the Owen Patterson scandal, even before Partygate, ignited things, has been seismic).

Ultimately Starmer has been a hugely successful leader of the opposition so far, as he when he took over the party had 202 seats in the commons (7 fewer than when Kinnock took over for perspective) and many people were saying that realistically all they could achieve at the next GE was making solid gains and reducing the deficit as much as possible. But now they look well on track to win a majority. Far more importantly, I hope he will a successful PM. I don't want the highlight to be the Tories being booted out the next GM, and to be underwhelmed after then.

Blair was both a successful leader of the opposition (Labour were already going to win a comfortable majority in 1997 without him, but he increased the size of the majority to 'super landslide proportions), and IMO was a very successful PM until he passionately supported the illegal invasion of Iraq.
Click to expand...

2019 was a single issue Brexit election for the vast majority of the voting population. As it wasn't a direct referendum it showed up what the first past the post voting system really came down to. Tories got a massive majority on the back of a single issue. Claiming how they smashed the Red Wall ffs.

Thats gone now and those Labour voters that voted Tory because they wanted Brexit are now returning to Labour and the Tories are losing votes everywhere else becuase they are a disaster.

Timmy Mallet would win an landlide against these clowns after the last 3 years.
 
Badunk said:


Row, row, row your boat, gently down the stream,
Merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily, life is but a dream.
Click to expand...


How are you supposed to 'trust' (I know that word is doing a lot of heavy lifting there with regards to a politician) your prime minister when he gives an interview saying that he was not saying something that he quite literally is recorded on video saying.
 
Its rather interesting Starmer waits for like 10 days before coming out and claiming his words were misinterpreted. The video in question was widely spread on 11th October.

You would think someone who truly believed his words were misinterpreted would come out right away and clarify his remarks rather than waiting this long.
 
Kaos said:
Yeah I've found myself politically homeless thanks to Starmer. Which is a bummer considering I live in a Con-Lab battleground constituency with a horribly insufferable Tory MP.
Click to expand...
So you are not politically homeless. You vote for whoever has the best chance of beating the Tory.
 
Sweet Square said:
Click to expand...


I thought Nandy had genuine convications and wanted to do good in this world. The in person focus groups had her as the best Labour candidate for leaders, well over Starmer. Mostly due to all of them thinking Starmer is a generic lying polition tbf.

Starmers crew didn't like that potential leadership threat from her and offered her the Shadow Foreign Sec job to keep her quite.

Dissapoiting to see how she's now resorting to party lines to keep in favour. Thought she had more fight than that.
 
Bert_ said:
I thought Nandy had genuine convications and wanted to do good in this world. The in person focus groups had her as the best Labour candidate for leaders, well over Starmer. Mostly due to all of them thinking Starmer is a generic lying polition tbf.

Starmers crew didn't like that potential leadership threat from her and offered her the Shadow Foreign Sec job to keep her quite.

Dissapoiting to see how she's now resorting to party lines to keep in favour. Thought she had more fight than that.
Click to expand...
Apparently Nandy is a former chair of the Labour friends of Palestine.

:lol:
 
Sweet Square said:
Apparently Nandy is a former chair of the Labour friends of Palestine.

:lol:
Click to expand...

Remember Clare Short? Convinced by Blair not to resign over the Iraq War (that could have made a difference), promised a key role in Government, then after the vote sidelined and eventually resigned with hardly a murmur.

I bet all the Shadow Cabinet have been told "just repeat the party line for now, and you will have a key role in shaping the future of Britain after the election..."

Nandy will be sacked within 12 months of the election I bet.
 
Sweet Square said:
Apparently Nandy is a former chair of the Labour friends of Palestine.

:lol:
Click to expand...

I know :(

Gave it up when she was made Shadow Foreign Secetery, along with her endorsement of an arms embargo on Israel. After that she was quietly demoted a couple of times. Like all potential dissenters or leadership challengers, he wanted them out of public sight.
 
Bert_ said:
I thought Nandy had genuine convications and wanted to do good in this world. The in person focus groups had her as the best Labour candidate for leaders, well over Starmer. Mostly due to all of them thinking Starmer is a generic lying polition tbf.

Starmers crew didn't like that potential leadership threat from her and offered her the Shadow Foreign Sec job to keep her quite.

Dissapoiting to see how she's now resorting to party lines to keep in favour. Thought she had more fight than that.
Click to expand...
Nandy is not an activist, she is a member of the shadow cabinet, I would expect her to toe the line in public, that is her job FFS.

I like Nandy a lot, she is a very good communicator but now's the time to be a pro.
 
nickm said:
Nandy is not an activist, she is a member of the shadow cabinet, I would expect her to toe the line in public, that is her job FFS.

I like Nandy a lot, she is a very good communicator but now's the time to be a pro.
Click to expand...

Done her career a world of good. She might make it to tea lady in the next re-shuffle!
 
Actually this is a good thing. It shows he's so committed to winning that he's willing to lie despite there being very clear and obvious evidence otherwise. That's who Labour need in charge. A winner. The only thing that matters is a Labour win.

/stw2022
 
Mogget said:
Actually this is a good thing. It shows he's so committed to winning that he's willing to lie despite there being very clear and obvious evidence otherwise. That's who Labour need in charge. A winner. The only thing that matters is a Labour win.

/stw2022
Click to expand...
He's worse than Gerry Adams. In a few years, he'll deny he was ever in the Labour Party.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.