Keir Starmer Labour Leader

Maticmaker said:
Anyone arriving illegally put themselves outside the law, its that simple Paul.
Sailing across the channel, in unfit overcrowded boats, arriving unannounced, entering British waters unscheduled and without permission, is illegal, no matter whether someone is a genuine Asylum seeker or not.

I agree there should be better and safer routes and sooner or later the Government of the day will have to face that fact, as world wide mass immigration grows. However resorting to criminal activity is not exactly endearing someone to the authorities.

France is a big country plenty of room and as you continually tell us Paul is much better at doing things than the British, surely they can persuade asylum seekers to stay in France, at least until a proper and safe route to the UK is found?
Click to expand...

It's not illegal for someone to leave France or any other country. France take two or three times as many asylum seekers or refugees than the UK do. Germany much more as do almost all European countries.

Each country is set up to cope with the population. The UK has a similar population to France. How does France cope? How does Germany cope and all the others? It is just a poor excuse by the UK government. Apart from anything else the refugees/asylum seekers make up a small percentage of the immigrants so the argument of not enough services doesn't hold up. Furthermore the boat people have increased significantly since the UK left the EU and the Dublin agreement.

The people being transported by the criminal gangs aren't just sitting in Calais. They're being transported from elsewhere and packed straight onto boats. Some may have only spent an hour in France before being loaded onto a boat.

If the UK co-operated with the rest of Europe and set-up a system processing the applicants there wouldn't be a need to have people risking their lives in boats. The criminal gangs would go mainly out of business. 77% of asylum seekers are granted asylum.

Threatening to deport the refugees to Rwanda will not deter the criminal gangs, what do they care?

The UK advertise how great things are. They get put up in 4 star hotels according to Farage. Not one single person has been deported to Rwanda. If the UK leave the ECHR then their deal with the EU will be over. The economy will collapse even more.

The government are using the asylum seekers as a political football and it's so obvious. But it works. What appeals to British voters the most - nationalism and hatred of foreigners. Starmer's joined in with the fascists to try to gain some votes.
 
Frosty said:
I reckon there is a good chance Corbyn will win as an independent.
Click to expand...
I'd be fairly confident he will win as an independent. His constituency work is second to none. Hope he wins with a huge majority.
 
He's an arsehole Starmer, I've no time for the man at all. Banging on today about all the changes and strides forward Labour have achieved since Corbyn left as leader.

What achievements? He's done the square root of feck all. Any gains in the polls are simply down to Conservatives self inflicted damage, absolute nothing to do with this prat.

Seems to be a complete media blackout on the labour files which was released last year too which showed about fabricating allegations of antisemitism from within the labour party as well as members of the right of the party working against the party in elections too. And now he's out this morning saying those left of the party can all leave :D Just a tory wearing red. We're going to go from a right wing tory government to a right wing labour government. Politics is fecked in the uk.

Starmer doesn't give a feck about the party, if he did he wouldn't have been actively working against the last leader from the back benches. He's a fecking snake.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CassiusClaymore
ThehatchetMan said:
He's an arsehole Starmer, I've no time for the man at all. Banging on today about all the changes and strides forward Labour have achieved since Corbyn left as leader.

What achievements? He's done the square root of feck all. Any gains in the polls are simply down to Conservatives self inflicted damage, absolute nothing to do with this prat.

Seems to be a complete media blackout on the labour files which was released last year too which showed about fabricating allegations of antisemitism from within the labour party as well as members of the right of the party working against the party in elections too. And now he's out this morning saying those left of the party can all leave :D Just a tory wearing red. We're going to go from a right wing tory government to a right wing labour government. Politics is fecked in the uk.

Starmer doesn't give a feck about the party, if he did he wouldn't have been actively working against the last leader from the back benches. He's a fecking snake.
Click to expand...

He'll be a less corrupt and less offensive version of the Tory party basically. One who culturally fits the average centrists view e.g he's a white middle manager type. The fact he's a guy like them is enough (for them) even if he doesn't help others.
 
Fingeredmouse said:
Illegal people trafficking enabled by our Government making it almost impossible to apply for asylum legally. It's being made a political football, and exploited people are dying in boats in a freezing sea, because our country has actively and deliberately made it as difficult as possible to get here.
Click to expand...


Almost, but not totally impossible to apply legally.

Successive UK governments (even when part of the EU) going back to the later part of the 20th Century have failed to handle asylum seeker routes properly, that is becoming ever clearer. Hence the illegal routes, run by criminals have expanded.
The numbers using such routes have included large percentages of illegal migrants , who are not seeking asylum and many have no rights to enter the UK whatsoever, but now these numbers have been increased by genuine asylum seekers, unable or unwilling to seek legal asylum routes. Genuine asylum seekers do need help, but not from illegal/criminal gangs of 'people traffickers' whose activities lead on to many other forms of criminal behaviours.

No UK government of whatever party/coalition, is going to win public approval for setting up safer asylum routes whilst illegal 'people trafficking' not only survives but flourishes. However I would agree both actions should be taken in tandem, safer legal routes for genuine asylum seekers need to be established much more quickly, but also those who are simply attempting to 'jump the queue' by use of illegal people trafficking routes have to understand this will not be tolerated.
 
It's bonkers how Johnson has, rightly, been held over the coals for all his lies. Yet Starmer, a person always quick to point out the dishonesty in others, just gets away with breaking, pretty much, all the things he said to get him elected as Labour leader in the first place. Despite finding myself hoping he does well in PMQs, I increasingly cannot stand him. I totally understand that changes were required post-Corbyn, but the lengths this guy is going to are so needless. I didn't vote for him as a leader, but I wasn't upset to see him win. Since then I've gone from supporting him, to despising him. Die-hard Labour supporters insist he'll change when he gets into power, and that this is all but a rouse to win back "red wall voters", but I think it's a dangerous game to bank on the eventual good nature of an otherwise deceitful man.
 
Herman Toothrot said:
It's bonkers how Johnson has, rightly, been held over the coals for all his lies. Yet Starmer, a person always quick to point out the dishonesty in others, just gets away with breaking, pretty much, all the things he said to get him elected as Labour leader in the first place. Despite finding myself hoping he does well in PMQs, I increasingly cannot stand him. I totally understand that changes were required post-Corbyn, but the lengths this guy is going to are so needless. I didn't vote for him as a leader, but I wasn't upset to see him win. Since then I've gone from supporting him, to despising him. Die-hard Labour supporters insist he'll change when he gets into power, and that this is all but a rouse to win back "red wall voters", but I think it's a dangerous game to bank on the eventual good nature of an otherwise deceitful man.
Click to expand...
Very well said.
 
Well that's that, defo not voting Labour in the next election.
 
ThehatchetMan said:
He's an arsehole Starmer, I've no time for the man at all. Banging on today about all the changes and strides forward Labour have achieved since Corbyn left as leader.

What achievements? He's done the square root of feck all. Any gains in the polls are simply down to Conservatives self inflicted damage, absolute nothing to do with this prat.
Click to expand...

I dunno, getting rid of all the antisemites was a pretty good thing to do. But hardly surprising if the very people who couldn't see the problem, can't credit the achievement.

And ultimately, all any opposition leader can do is make the party look like it's ready for government, something Corbyn wasn't ever able to manage.

So two pretty solid achievements right there, achievements that were beyond the last leader.
 
Frosty said:
I reckon there is a good chance Corbyn will win as an independent.
Click to expand...
I expect he will, but given his titanic unpopularity with the voters Labour needs to win over, not having him in Labour has to count as a big win for Starmer. It's a tangible signal to those voters that Labour has changed.

It'll present Corbyn's allies in the party with a tricky decision as well - remain loyal to Corbyn or to Labour.

It's quite clear what Starmer is trying to do.
 
Last edited:
nickm said:
I dunno, getting rid of all the antisemites was a pretty good thing to do. But hardly surprising if the very people who couldn't see the problem, can't credit the achievement.

And ultimately, all any opposition leader can do is make the party look like it's ready for government, something Corbyn wasn't ever able to manage.

So two pretty solid achievements right there, achievements that were beyond the last leader.
Click to expand...

Can you expand on how Starmer got rid of the anti-semites with any level of specifics?
 
nickm said:
I expect he will, but given his titanic unpopularity with the voters Labour needs to win over, not having him in Labour has to count as a big win for Starmer. It's a tangible signal to those voters that Labour has changed.
Click to expand...

Not if it leads to people who otherwise would have voted for Labour not voting for Labour.
 
nimic said:
... okay?
Click to expand...
Why wouldn't he? His goal is to win power. Elections aren't won by appealing to die hards alone, they are won by appealing to swing voters. It's not great, I wish it were different, but that's the game. If he loses a handful of die hards but gains an avalanche of swing voters in return, which seems to be what you are saying, then good for him.
 
Can't stand the way he's weaponised anti-semitism against Corbyn but he's being pragmatic as the Tory press and right of the Labour Party manufactured it.

He's not ideal but at least he's not as corrupt as the Tories, yet.
 
Sweet Square said:
Shame Starmer didn't expel the guy who campaigned for the denier in chief to be PM in the last two elections.
Click to expand...

So what you are saying is he backed his leader? If only Corbyn had ever shown such loyalty to his leaders.
 
BeltUp said:
Can't stand the way he's weaponised anti-semitism against Corbyn but he's being pragmatic as the Tory press and right of the Labour Party manufactured it.

He's not ideal but at least he's not as corrupt as the Tories, yet.
Click to expand...
It’s unfortunate, but he’s got to play to the theatre. Tory’s are using Corbyn against him every week in Parliament. If he backed Corbyn he would be unelectable so he instead chooses to piss off the left of the party who he is counting on holding their noses and voting for him anyway. It’s a fact that if he backed Corbyn the centre of the country would hold their noses and vote Tory again.
 
Pexbo said:
It’s unfortunate, but he’s got to play to the theatre. Tory’s are using Corbyn against him every week in Parliament. If he backed Corbyn he would be unelectable so he instead chooses to piss off the left of the party who he is counting on holding their noses and voting for him anyway. It’s a fact that if he backed Corbyn the centre of the country would hold their noses and vote Tory again.
Click to expand...

Completely agree, unfortunately, it's all part of a ridiculous game.
 
Mogget said:
The Tories were only able to do so much damage because Corbyn allowed them to win such a large majority.

So when Labour get into power and do feck all to help anyone, it's actually Jeremy Corbyn's fault.
Click to expand...
Ha! And no mention of the self sabotage of Corbyns campaign by the Labour ranks.
 
nickm said:
They did all the EHRC stuff as asked.
They suspended the denier in chief & withdrew the whip.
They expelled a load of its members and proscribed groups that had campaigned agains the EHRC recommendations.

Good on him.
Click to expand...

That's not very specific is it though, even the EHRC report mentioned many of the improvements were already underway.

There's still a lot of complaints raised, over 65% of complaints are anti-semitism and it's only somewhere around 13% from memory that lead to expulsion.

Not much has changed apart from the factionalism and yes better processes. It says a lot that factionalist people li yourself think its suddenly solved though.
 
nickm said:
I dunno, getting rid of all the antisemites was a pretty good thing to do. But hardly surprising if the very people who couldn't see the problem, can't credit the achievement.

And ultimately, all any opposition leader can do is make the party look like it's ready for government, something Corbyn wasn't ever able to manage.

So two pretty solid achievements right there, achievements that were beyond the last leader.
Click to expand...
What antisemites did he get rid of? You say corbyn, what evidence is there of him being antisemite?

If antisemitism was rife under corbyns leadership and the only person to go is corbyn... Then how did he solve that issue?

If corbyn didn't make the party look ready for government then how did he manage to increase the vote share more than any other Labour leader since 1945? That suggests to me a lot of people thought he and his party was ready for government or why the sudden surge in votes?

Starmer has achieved as much as Mr Bobby could which is basically just doing nothing and allowing the opposition to self destruct.
 
Corbyn lost the 2019 election due to propoganda and media manipulation. If you're unable to see that and you geniuenly think that he lost because he's a raging antisemite who hated Jewish people then unfortunately all you did was fall for the propoganda @nickm

Why don't you read some of the news articles about what Jewish constituents in his area who have lived under him for 40 years think about him. You might be in for a shock.
 
Pexbo said:
It’s unfortunate, but he’s got to play to the theatre.
Click to expand...
BeltUp said:
Completely agree, unfortunately, it's all part of a ridiculous game.
Click to expand...
Isn't it more likely the guy is just right wing. The unfortunately having to play the game or Starmer is secretly left wing shtick is completely unfounded. It reminds me of when conservative voters think their candidate is against the ruling elite(Even though all the evidence shows the opposite).

The one thing Starmer does seem very good at, is letting people project their political ideas on to him(Very Obama like) and tbh it's working for him at the moment(Although means very little to changing the country).
 
Boris Johnson has a history of islamaohobia which is much worse than that of anything corbyn was accused of. Maybe if the BBC and Murdoch group put as much focus on the proven islamaohobia there then the 2019 election would have went differently.
 
nickm said:
Why wouldn't he? His goal is to win power. Elections aren't won by appealing to die hards alone, they are won by appealing to swing voters. It's not great, I wish it were different, but that's the game. If he loses a handful of die hards but gains an avalanche of swing voters in return, which seems to be what you are saying, then good for him.
Click to expand...

He might be, I'm just wondering if it's sustainable. I certainly don't think anything Starmer has actively done is the reason why they're probably going to win the next election. You could argue that it wouldn't have happened if Corbyn was still in charge, though I'm not sure I agree, but at some point the Tories are going to stabilize back to their old horrible selves, and Starmer might then regret losing the left to temporarily gain the centre-right. Particularly if losing the left didn't have anything to do with gaining the centre-right.
 
Sweet Square said:
Isn't it more likely the guy is just right wing. The unfortunately having to play the game or Starmer is secretly left wing shtick is completely unfounded. It reminds me of when conservative voters think their candidate is against the ruling elite(Even though all the evidence shows the opposite).

The one thing Starmer does seem very good at, is letting people project their political ideas on to him(Very Obama like) and tbh it's working for him at the moment(Although means very little to changing the country).
Click to expand...

Trump is going to pivot any day now.
 
ThehatchetMan said:
Boris Johnson has a history of islamaohobia which is much worse than that of anything corbyn was accused of. Maybe if the BBC and Murdoch group put as much focus on the proven islamaohobia there then the 2019 election would have went differently.
Click to expand...
I mean sure but this is pure whataboutery, the media quite clearly leans to the right so Corbyn couldn't expect a fair game in that regard.

Think the issue of anti-Semitism under Corbyn is over stated yes, but there was an issue. And where he failed, was a) stamping it out and nipping it in the bud and b) letting the media run rampant without much of a defence because in his head, he was going to dignify the allegations with an actual response.

Corbyn has no one but himself to blame. Don't think he's anti-Semitic but the way he handled it all in hindsight is terrible.
 
Sweet Square said:
Isn't it more likely the guy is just right wing. The unfortunately having to play the game or Starmer is secretly left wing shtick is completely unfounded. It reminds me of when conservative voters think their candidate is against the ruling elite(Even though all the evidence shows the opposite).

The one thing Starmer does seem very good at, is letting people project their political ideas on to him(Very Obama like) and tbh it's working for him at the moment(Although means very little to changing the country).
Click to expand...

I don't think there's much substance to him really, and he will do what is required to get the Labour Party into power. He will bring about a less corrupt culture than the Tories but there won't be anything revolutionary as he is constrained by a voter base that is centre-right. The only thing we can hope is that he brings about PR or it's going to be very much more of the same shit.
 
ThehatchetMan said:
Boris Johnson has a history of islamaohobia which is much worse than that of anything corbyn was accused of. Maybe if the BBC and Murdoch group put as much focus on the proven islamaohobia there then the 2019 election would have went differently.
Click to expand...
They did and were accused of campaigning for Boris.
 
nimic said:
Trump is going to pivot any day now.
Click to expand...
Pretty much. It does seem to be the same argument. I just don't get how people who can clearly see the likes of Boris and Trump are full of pure shit, are at the same time thinking a guy who backed track on every single leadership policy only pretending to be right wing. Maybe it just hope.

BeltUp said:
I don't think there's much substance to him really, and he will do what is required to get the Labour Party into power. He will bring about a less corrupt culture than the Tories but there won't be anything revolutionary as he is constrained by a voter base that is centre-right. The only thing we can hope is that he brings about PR or it's going to be very much more of the same shit.
Click to expand...
Imo I don't think he is constrained but just that he is a pretty standard conservative, similar to David Cameron. But tbh I'm always wrong, so who knows I guess.

BeltUp said:
The only thing we can hope is that he brings about PR or it's going to be very much more of the same shit.
Click to expand...
Already ruled out.

Keir Starmer has ruled out including any support for a change in the voting system in Labour’s election manifesto, as senior figures from across the party joined calls to back proportional representation (PR).
Labour’s annual conference, under way in Liverpool, is expected to back a motion calling for the party to drop its historical support for the first past the post system amid concerns that it has locked Labour out of power. Andy Burnham, the Greater Manchester mayor, and John McDonnell, the former shadow chancellor and ally of Jeremy Corbyn, are among those joining a growing campaign to replace it.
However, the Labour leader said in an interview with the Observer there would be no deal – before or after the election – that would see him back a change. Asked if Labour’s manifesto would include pledges on electoral reform, he said: “No, it’s not a priority for me.”

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...-changes-to-first-past-the-post-voting-system
Click to expand...
 
SalfordRed18 said:
I mean sure but this is pure whataboutery, the media quite clearly leans to the right so Corbyn couldn't expect a fair game in that regard.

Think the issue of anti-Semitism under Corbyn is over stated yes, but there was an issue. And where he failed, was a) stamping it out and nipping it in the bud and b) letting the media run rampant without much of a defence because in his head, he was going to dignify the allegations with an actual response.

Corbyn has no one but himself to blame. Don't think he's anti-Semitic but the way he handled it all in hindsight is terrible.
Click to expand...
Yes but a lot of the antisemitism he was accused of was over stuff which isn't antismetic in the slightest.

He was the only leader strong enough to stand up to Israel and call them out for the horrific crimes committed by the state on the daily. And he gets called antisemitic for this.

Whereas people can freely criticise countries such as Saudi Arabia, rightly so, but that's not islamaohobia.

I recommend reading this for an alternative view and analysis of the EHRC report - https://newleftreview.org/sidecar/posts/a-fabricated-crisis
 
You must log in or register to reply here.