Keir Starmer Labour Leader

Fluctuation0161 said:
.
Yep, unlike the Brexit deal which will be a three line whip for Labour to approve any Tory deal.
Click to expand...
I think he will abstain on that as well
Avoids labour being blamed for a no deal
Also allows him to say a no deal is a disaster but this deal is so bad we can't vote for it... basically ensures boris fully owns the deal and probably ends up with a lot of disgruntled brexiteers who farrage tries to pick off
I think if there was a possibility of the deal not getting through he would support it to avoid no deal but given the government majority I think he will abstain or offer a free vote (but probably abstain)

Could see him going back to the 6 tests he set out when shadow brexit secretary and using those to justify not voting for the deal
 
Last edited:
Smores said:
Isn't it funny how certain posters no longer care about this stuff.
Click to expand...
Is he even a member (I know he stopped donating in 2016 not sure if he remained a member) - if he is then get the independent body set up and allow it to investigate (as per the EHRC recommendations) ... you know rather than let him make some half assed faux apology and think thats going to fix stuff
if hes not a memner then options are limited I think to returning the one month direct debit?
Abrahams is the latest Blair-era donor drawn back to Labour by Starmer. He confirmed last month that he had set up a direct debit to the Labour party, having ceased donations in 2016.
Click to expand...
send back his one month donation - I mean if hes not a member thats literally all labour can do I think - and even then that's not a decision for the leader is it?
 
Last edited:
Smores said:
Isn't it funny how certain posters no longer care about this stuff.
Click to expand...
Amazing isn't it. Maybe because they only care about what they've been told to care about.

Barely any comment from the certain posters about the EHRC report into Windrush. Funny that. But that is for another thread.
 
Sweet Square said:
From early september

Click to expand...


Don't think they've even commented on it yet have they? Or the Mandelson comments.

Meanwhile they're suspending Jewish Socialist members for daring to also have a view on the Corbyn issues.

 
Smores said:
Don't think they've even commented on it yet have they? Or the Mandelson comments.

Meanwhile they're suspending Jewish Socialist members for daring to also have a view on the Corbyn issues.

Click to expand...

Disgraceful stuff.

Its gone back to a dog shit party.
 
Keir's Labour party ban CLPs from raising motions supporting Corbyn and suspend party members for doing so. It is the purge we were always told to expect from Corbyn, but he was too fair minded and wanted unity in the party. It seems Starmer is content with division.

Members are being banned for discussing the EHRC report, which is ridiculous considering any report needs to be discussed, assessed and have its key actions implemented. Actually, only left leaning members are being banned for discussing it, Peter Mandelson it seems, is speaking for the purgers when he says he doesn't want independent review processes.

https://www.newstatesman.com/politi...mutually-destructive-civil-war-should-end-now
 
Smores said:
Isn't it funny how certain posters no longer care about this stuff.
Click to expand...
Fluctuation0161 said:
Amazing isn't it. Maybe because they only care about what they've been told to care about.

Barely any comment from the certain posters about the EHRC report into Windrush. Funny that. But that is for another thread.
Click to expand...
Why don't you just spit it out and ask them then?
 
Jippy said:
Why don't you just spit it out and ask them then?
Click to expand...

Already tagged Sun tzu on the matter, the rest have gone back to brunch so not going to chase them back in here. Their guy is in charge so they're no longer interested in discussion hence their absence.

It's as equally applicable to the media to be fair but then we all said this would happen.
 
Smores said:
Already tagged Sun tzu on the matter, the rest have gone back to brunch so not going to chase them back in here. Their guy is in charge so they're no longer interested in discussion hence their absence.

It's as equally applicable to the media to be fair but then we all said this would happen.
Click to expand...
Fair enough, just seemed preferable to people griping. Sun is generally not shy in giving opinions:lol:
 
Smores said:
Don't think they've even commented on it yet have they? Or the Mandelson comments.

Meanwhile they're suspending Jewish Socialist members for daring to also have a view on the Corbyn issues.

Click to expand...


What is her view on the Corbyn issues? Because if it's the same as what Corbyn said, the line had been drawn...
 
Fluctuation0161 said:
Keir's Labour party ban CLPs from raising motions supporting Corbyn and suspend party members for doing so. It is the purge we were always told to expect from Corbyn, but he was too fair minded and wanted unity in the party. It seems Starmer is content with division.
Click to expand...
“Please note that individual disciplinary cases that are being dealt with through the NEC disputes processes are confidential. Motions on individual cases are therefore not competent business for discussion at CLPs and will not be discussed by the NEC or any associated bodies.”

– Jennie Formby, 2019
Click to expand...

Seems pretty consistent right?
 
better media than he had or produced during his time as leader. if he was a q leader he might have won.
 
sun_tzu said:
Seems pretty consistent right?
Click to expand...

Wrong.

How many MPs, after being found innocent by the NEC have then had the whip removed and been removed from the PLP while Corbyn was leader?

Starmer acting like he cares not about fighting the Tories, only keen on purging the Labour Party left. Just as the pressure was mounting with Rashfords campaign. Absolute own goal. Nothing more unelectable than a party fighting internal factions rather than looking outward and talking to the country.
 
Fluctuation0161 said:
Wrong.

How many MPs, after being found innocent by the NEC have then had the whip removed and been removed from the PLP while Corbyn was leader?

Starmer acting like he cares not about fighting the Tories, only keen on purging the Labour Party left. Just as the pressure was mounting with Rashfords campaign. Absolute own goal. Nothing more unelectable than a party fighting internal factions rather than looking outward and talking to the country.
Click to expand...

The report he doesn’t agree with states he broke the law... I don’t see how there can be an argument?

If Corbyn weren’t so self-serving, we wouldn’t have given the interview that got him suspended in the first place. There is absolutely no need for him to be giving those kinds of interviews now he isn’t Labour leader.
 
That'sHernandez said:
The report he doesn’t agree with states he broke the law... I don’t see how there can be an argument?

If Corbyn weren’t so self-serving, we wouldn’t have given the interview that got him suspended in the first place. There is absolutely no need for him to be giving those kinds of interviews now he isn’t Labour leader.
Click to expand...

Well the party he was in charge of rather than Corbyn himself of course, fairly big distinction. The party would have breached the rules prior to Corbyn and he actually instigated more positive governance/procedural changes than his predecessors.

I do think it was self-serving from him to give that interview but i have sympathy given the reporting wasn't at all balanced. They barely mentioned the actual rule breaches because it was too far removed from institutionally anti-semetic which they all wanted.

I missed your prior response though. She was suspended not because she repeated Corbyn's claim (which again isn't an issue for a member anyway) but because the CLPs have been banned from any discussion on Corbyn/EHRC/Anti-semtism.
Jewish members aren't allowed to voice their opinions about Anti-semtism in the Labour party because it might make other Jewish members uncomfortable. Labour have seemingly decided the Jewish community all think alike.
 
Smores said:
Well the party he was in charge of rather than Corbyn himself of course, fairly big distinction. The party would have breached the rules prior to Corbyn and he actually instigated more positive governance/procedural changes than his predecessors.

I do think it was self-serving from him to give that interview but i have sympathy given the reporting wasn't at all balanced. They barely mentioned the actual rule breaches because it was too far removed from institutionally anti-semetic which they all wanted.

I missed your prior response though. She was suspended not because she repeated Corbyn's claim (which again isn't an issue for a member anyway) but because the CLPs have been banned from any discussion on Corbyn/EHRC/Anti-semtism.
Jewish members aren't allowed to voice their opinions about Anti-semtism in the Labour party because it might make other Jewish members uncomfortable. Labour have seemingly decided the Jewish community all think alike.
Click to expand...

That’s a bit crap. You’d think having an open debate about the issue would be the way to go, not censorship.

Fundamentally I don’t disagree that the way the media report the whole issue was and is unbalanced but ultimately when the direction from Starmer was not to criticise the report, you can hardly have any complaints when you (Corbyn) are suspended for doing exactly that
 
That'sHernandez said:
That’s a bit crap. You’d think having an open debate about the issue would be the way to go, not censorship.

Fundamentally I don’t disagree that the way the media report the whole issue was and is unbalanced but ultimately when the direction from Starmer was not to criticise the report, you can hardly have any complaints when you (Corbyn) are suspended for doing exactly that
Click to expand...

Yeah I've said before I've got sympathy for both sides, Starmer had to do something given the press on the day. A public rebuke and suspension was probably the right call, i just don't agree with removing the whip as that to me was desperate stuff. If it was the Tories they'd have stood on the defensive and got away with it completely undamaged.

Corbyn could have absolutely given the same message without causing offence but as ever his messaging was hopeless. 'We had X in 2017, x in 2018, whilst those numbers represent a small majority of Labour membership the impacts nevertheless are very real and that's why it's important Labour commit to implementing EHRC findings in full".

Maybe some would still take offence at that i don't know but its a lot better than his tone deaf remarks.
 
That'sHernandez said:
The report he doesn’t agree with states he broke the law... I don’t see how there can be an argument?

If Corbyn weren’t so self-serving, we wouldn’t have given the interview that got him suspended in the first place. There is absolutely no need for him to be giving those kinds of interviews now he isn’t Labour leader.
Click to expand...
What law are you referring to?

According to the report, Corbyn asked for case of anti semitismto be expedited, which led to anti semites being kicked out of the party sooner. But the report says he shouldn't have interfered and made that request.

Re: Corbyns latest comments, he was reinstated by the NEC, back in the party, via the normal disciplinary process. Then Starmer interfered and has taken the whip from him, he is out of the PLP.

Starmer is ignoring the findings and recommendations of the report, after the fact, by interfering.
 
Smores said:
Well the party he was in charge of rather than Corbyn himself of course, fairly big distinction. The party would have breached the rules prior to Corbyn and he actually instigated more positive governance/procedural changes than his predecessors.

I do think it was self-serving from him to give that interview but i have sympathy given the reporting wasn't at all balanced. They barely mentioned the actual rule breaches because it was too far removed from institutionally anti-semetic which they all wanted.

I missed your prior response though. She was suspended not because she repeated Corbyn's claim (which again isn't an issue for a member anyway) but because the CLPs have been banned from any discussion on Corbyn/EHRC/Anti-semtism.
Jewish members aren't allowed to voice their opinions about Anti-semtism in the Labour party because it might make other Jewish members uncomfortable. Labour have seemingly decided the Jewish community all think alike.
Click to expand...
I can agree with some of this. Your last sentence pretty much sums up the absolute mess being created by Starmer.
 
Starmer's recent comments about winning back the 'red wall' voters don't bode well for the future, he's still referring to these voters as "having left Labour," where as they believe its the Labour Party that's left them to become a 'London centric' party of left leaning intellectuals.

Still talking to the back of people's heads!!!
 
Made an appearance on LBC this morning.



Failing to condemn white supremacy on a public platform, but the booing is bad.



The guy's a useless clown when it comes to anti-black racism, and it's incredibly telling just how normalised all this is.
 
That’s really bad, I get he is trying to be careful but calling a racist a racist is okay, really frustrating as I really want to like Starmer.
 
He should lose the whip for that! Platforming racists and letting their views go unchallenged is promoting racism right?
 
The problem is that Starmer is actually trying to win the racist vote. Not by changing their opinion, but hoping he won’t turn them off if he isn’t outspoken against racism himself (besides antisemitism). He won’t say as much, but that’s clearly why he is reluctant to speak out. It’s embarrassing.

Other than a few journalists on the left, he won’t get called out for it either because by and large, the media who pose as bastions of virtue when it suits them, don’t care about racism either... unless it can be used a stick to beat the left with. Transparent and pathetic.
 
ZupZup said:
The problem is that Starmer is actually trying to win the racist vote. Not by changing their opinion, but hoping he won’t turn them off if he isn’t outspoken against racism himself (besides antisemitism). He won’t say as much, but that’s clearly why he is reluctant to speak out. It’s embarrassing.

Other than a few journalists on the left, he won’t get called out for it either because by and large, the media who pose as bastions of virtue when it suits them, don’t care about racism either... unless it can be used a stick to beat the left with. Transparent and pathetic.
Click to expand...

He's trying to play both sides, and quite frankly it's condescending. Your last paragraph is the truth too.
Tbh, it's not even worth the energy getting worked up about stuff like this, because as a black person in society, it's expected to not feel like your values are aligned with a political leader.
 
villain said:
Made an appearance on LBC this morning.



Failing to condemn white supremacy on a public platform, but the booing is bad.



The guy's a useless clown when it comes to anti-black racism, and it's incredibly telling just how normalised all this is.
Click to expand...


Yeah I've just that clip here.



Not a good look. I'm afraid we'll get a lot more of this as he tries to win back a certain section of the electorate.
 
I bet Keir shat his pants when the racist caller mentioned Israel. Daily Mail island is already here!



:lol:
 
Last edited:
CassiusClaymore said:
Yeah I've just that clip here.



Not a good look. I'm afraid we'll get a lot more of this as he tries to win back a certain section of the electorate.
Click to expand...

I’d like to see him show some bottle and go on at 10 o clock with James O’Brien, but he wouldn’t give him an easy time.
 
villain said:
Made an appearance on LBC this morning.



Failing to condemn white supremacy on a public platform, but the booing is bad.



The guy's a useless clown when it comes to anti-black racism, and it's incredibly telling just how normalised all this is.
Click to expand...

Absolutely gutless leadership.

The "Tory lite" claims directed at Starmer seem to be coming to fruition.

Make racists vote Labour again, should've been his leadership pledge.
 
There's no place for racism in the Labour party BUT there's a place for Labour to appease racists apparently.

That's the main difference in the party right now, they don't want to be labelled negatively so members are censored to a ridiculous level but leave the party and they'll tolerate anything to win your vote.
 
His remit is to win an election. It is apparently general consensus that this is how you do so. The left died by conceding that actual left wing policies won't win the popular imagination and to alter policy to reflect and appease the right is the only path to victory. This is what people mean by pragmatic, centrist politics. I doff my cap to my feudal overlords and look forward to the possibility of the continuation of Daily Mail vetted policies being implemented by well dressed competent chaps with pleasant manners whilst my politics are vilified as extremist rather than the current less well mannered, incompetent brazen bastards. It'll be a refreshing change.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.