Did you vote for Starmer?

[Proper Tidy]

Just to add it hasn't even got anything specifically to do with the left. Which govt in modern UK has been most transformative, thatcher, how did they achieve that, via conflict

 

[A380]

We're talking about labour under corbyn and you think that was a revolutionary movement, fucks sake. Nothing I have said has had anything to do with socialism let alone revolution. Its about whether a labour party that brings itself into conflict with the consensus has greater potential to bring about change than one that tries to be the consensus. I've been quite polite and restrained tbh cos I mostly like you but you can do one with this dribbling straw man bollocks

I'll put you down as a no then.

 

[fakeplasticgirl]

And who the fuck were you before you were previously banned?

You get banned for voting for starmer?
Maybe he eats red meat and doesn’t necessarily think money or keir starmer are necessarily a bad thing. But if there isn’t room for people here who stand against everything you believe in, then what sort of hippie free for all is this? (Peep show)

 

[mauvais]

How many of the yes voters will admit to voting for Owen 'Who?' Smith when that was a thing?

I don't know why anyone at all voted for Starmer tbh. You might have wanted him to win, I can get that, but voting is still a bit strong. You can just wait for him to happen by default. He's the human version of a screensaver.

 

[The39thStep]

Because I'd quite like to see a government in England and Wales that isn't Tory in my lifetime and I watched my parents give about 25 years or their lives (and my childhood) to working for a revolution that never came. Why do you want to keep the Torys in power so much, just to stay pure, or do you still genuinely believe we could see any other kind of alternative ?

Putting aside the completely irrelevant and abstract reform or revolution discussion what steps do you think that Starmer led Labour Party could/ would take to realise your wish?

 

[Spymaster]

Putting aside the completely irrelevant and abstract reform or revolution discussion ...

Why is it irrelevant though? Is it irrelevant that many people want a Labour party that's a genuinely electable alternative to the Tories? It's not the Labour party that perhaps you, Squirrel, Tidy, and a handful of others want though. Maybe you lot wouldn't even call it socialist, in which case voters don't seem to want your version of socialism which only really exists on internet forums and in dingy back rooms of pubs where the comrades have been banging tables and organising for the last 50 years to no effect. The furthest left leaning Labour Party in terms of leadership that the country's had in its modern history has just been absolutely obliterated by the most venal Tory Party since Thatcher's. Many people don't want right wing politics but don't want hard-left politics either. They believe, not unreasonably, that there will never be a Labour government of the type redsquirrel et al want. Many others don't want that party anyway and feel that a soft or centre left party is more aligned with them or simply the only way to get the Tories out. Squirrel can shout them down as 'non-socialists', Liberals, Tories, cunts, or whatever but at the end of the day those are just different terms for 'not what I want'. The poll on here is also unrepresentative of views as it tells us little. A lot of people won't have voted for Starmer because they wanted a woman party leader or for other reasons, not because he's not left-leaning enough. The other candidates were hardly raving Commies.

 

[The39thStep]

Why is it irrelevant though? Is it irrelevant that many people want a Labour party that's a genuinely electable alternative to the Tories? It's not the Labour party that perhaps you, Squirrel, Tidy, and a handful of others want though. Maybe you lot wouldn't even call it socialist in which case voters don't seem to want your version of socialism which only really exists on internet forums and in dingy back rooms of pubs where the comrades have been organising for the last 50 years to no effect. The furthest left leaning Labour Party that the country's had in its modern history has just been absolutely obliterated by the most venal Tory Party since Thatcher's. Many people don't want hard left politics but don't want right wing politics either. They believe, not unreasonably, that there will never be a Labour government of the type redsquirrel et al want. Many others don't want that party anyway and feel that a soft or centre left party is more aligned with them or simply the only way to get the Tories out. Squirrel can shout them down as 'non-socialists', Tories, cunts, or whatever but at the end of the day those are just different terms for 'not what I want'. The poll on here is also unrepresentative of views as it tells us little. A lot of people won't have voted for Starmer because they wanted a woman party leader or for other reasons, not because he's not left-leaning enough. The other candidates were hardly raving Commies.

Thanks for taking the time to jump in with both feet. To answer your question it is irrelevant imo as the latter ie revolution isnt going to happen hence my question , which incidentially you are free to have a go at answering as you are in full swing.

 

[Spymaster]

Thanks for taking the time to jump in with both feet. To answer your question it is irrelevant imo as the latter ie revolution isnt going to happen hence my question , which incidentially you are free to have a go at answering as you are in full swing.

Well I didn't vote for Starmer because I'm not a member of the Labour Party but the answer to your question is right there in my post. In the eyes of many he will make the party more electable than it was under Corbyn and that is the step they've taken to realising their wish to oust the Tories.

 

[The39thStep]

Well I didn't vote for Starmer because I'm not a member of the Labour Party but the answer to your question is right there in my post. In the eyes of many he will make the party more electable than it was under Corbyn and that is the step they've taken to realising their wishes.

Looking more electable though, which is terribly subjective , isn't going to be enough to get a Labour Government elected though is it? In order to be elected what does the Starmer led , more electable Party have to do, in concrete terms or baby steps?

 

[Spymaster]

Looking more electable though, which is terribly subjective , isn't going to be enough to get a Labour Government elected though is it? In order to be elected what does the Starmer led , more electable Party have to do, in concrete terms or baby steps?

People who voted for him will have their own ideas of what he should/will do. A fair few will likely have voted for him because they think he's unlikely to side with a foreign government over the advice of our own security services. Others may simply have the opinion that he's politically to the right of Corbyn and that will do for them. I'm sure his voters on here will give help you out later though.

 

[The39thStep]

People who voted for him will have their own ideas of what he should do. A fair few will likely have voted for him because they think he's unlikely to side with a foreign government over the advice of our own security services. Others may simply have the opinion that he's politically to the right of Corbyn and that will do for them. I'm sure his voters on here will give help you out later though.

Thats a bit get out clause though Spy. You replied to my original post with an opinion then speculate why Starmer voters may have voted for him.and now when pressed try and defer to other posters who may have voted for him in the Labour elections

If you think he makes Labour are more electable then what do you think Labour would have to do to be elected rather than just 'look' more electable.?

 

[Spymaster]

Thats a bit get out clause though Spy. You replied to my original post with an opinion then speculate why Starmer voters may have voted for him.and now when pressed try and defer to other posters who may have voted for him in the Labour elections

No, I disagree. My initial response was suggestive as to why people may want a softer left Labour party than that which they perceived under JC or that which appeals to harder left politicos such as some on here. You may disagree with it but my own views are immaterial since I didn't vote for him anyway. You'd need to ask those who did, why they did. I don't see how that's a get out clause!

 

[The39thStep]

Ok despite your view that your own views are immaterial have you anything to say on how the Labour Party could move on from 'looking' more electable to actually being elected ?

 

[Spymaster]

Ok despite your view that your own views are immaterial have you anything to say on how the Labour Party could move on from 'looking' more electable to actually being elected ?

They didn't lose because of left wing policies. They had their best chance ever to beat the Tories at the last GE and they fucked it because people voted against Corbyn specifically. Rightly or wrongly he was perceived by many to be anti-British/The West (see attitude to the IRA/Salisbury, position taken towards Chavez ... etc etc), and his position, or lack thereof, on exiting the union was an absolutely disastrous fucking mess. Avoid that kind of shit and the party becomes more mainstream electable.

 

[Mr Moose]

Why is it irrelevant though? Is it irrelevant that many people want a Labour party that's a genuinely electable alternative to the Tories? It's not the Labour party that perhaps you, Squirrel, Tidy, and a handful of others want though. Maybe you lot wouldn't even call it socialist, in which case voters don't seem to want your version of socialism which only really exists on internet forums and in dingy back rooms of pubs where the comrades have been banging tables and organising for the last 50 years to no effect. The furthest left leaning Labour Party in terms of leadership that the country's had in its modern history has just been absolutely obliterated by the most venal Tory Party since Thatcher's. Many people don't want right wing politics but don't want hard-left politics either. They believe, not unreasonably, that there will never be a Labour government of the type redsquirrel et al want. Many others don't want that party anyway and feel that a soft or centre left party is more aligned with them or simply the only way to get the Tories out. Squirrel can shout them down as 'non-socialists', Liberals, Tories, cunts, or whatever but at the end of the day those are just different terms for 'not what I want'. The poll on here is also unrepresentative of views as it tells us little. A lot of people won't have voted for Starmer because they wanted a woman party leader or for other reasons, not because he's not left-leaning enough. The other candidates were hardly raving Commies.

I think those who voted for Starmer did so largely on his promise ‘not to oversteer’. Most Labour Party members seem willing to make a compromise between idealism and electability (though many will consider it an ultimately flawed compromise). People dream of hitting the mythical sweet spot.

What they didn’t vote for is Macron by the back door. Starmer didn’t run on being a liberal, though his manner often suggests it. If he now dishonestly steers towards a completely market based approach he will split the Party and probably lose to Johnson, shamefully so, because the Tory will likely be offering ordinary people more.

So early signals are going to be seized upon and the shadow cabinet is a bit disappointing in that respect.

 

[Jeff Robinson]

It depresses me the way the Left turn on each other. Sometimes I think we are more prepared to understand fascists and others who deviate from what we would ideologically like than we are prepared to understand and forgive each other.

I get that impression too. The same people who are always finger wagging at me on here for my contempt for Trump/Le Pen/Boris/Farage supporters tend to be the very same people who denounce, in the strongest terms, anybody who supports soft-left or centrist candidates or movements. It's an interesting mindset to say the least.

 

[Smokeandsteam]

I get that impression too. The same people who are always finger wagging at me on here for my contempt for Trump/Le Pen/Boris/Farage supporters tend to be the very same people who denounce, in the strongest terms, anybody who supports soft-left or centrist candidates or movements. It's an interesting mindset to say the least.

can you deduce any dialectic connection between the rise of the former and the actions of the latter Jeff?

 

[Jeff Robinson]

can you deduce any dialectic connection between the rise of the former and the actions of the latter Jeff?

I think my expressions of contempt on this board for Trump supporters and other wankstains are pretty much casually inert when it comes to people's voting habits.

 

[belboid]

Fuck me, what an awful line up:

Keir Starmer, Leader of the Opposition

· Angela Rayner, Deputy Leader and Chair of the Labour Party

· Anneliese Dodds, Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer

· Lisa Nandy, Shadow Foreign Secretary

· Nick Thomas-Symonds, Shadow Home Secretary

· Rachel Reeves, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster

· David Lammy, Shadow Justice Secretary

· John Healey, Shadow Defence Secretary

· Ed Miliband, Shadow Business, Energy and Industrial Secretary

· Emily Thornberry, Shadow International Trade Secretary

· Jonathan Reynolds, Shadow Work and Pensions Secretary

· Jonathan Ashworth, Shadow Secretary of State for Health and Social Care

· Rebecca Long-Bailey, Shadow Education Secretary

· Jo Stevens, Shadow Digital, Culture, Media and Sport

· Bridget Philipson, Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury

· Luke Pollard, Shadow Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Secretary

· Steve Reed, Shadow Communities and Local Government Secretary

· Thangam Debbonaire, Shadow Housing Secretary

· Jim McMahon, Shadow Transport Secretary

· Preet Kaur Gill, Shadow International Development Secretary

· Louise Haigh, Shadow Northern Ireland Secretary (interim)

· Ian Murray, Shadow Scotland Secretary

· Nia Griffith, Shadow Wales Secretary

· Marsha de Cordova, Shadow Women and Equalities Secretary

· Andy McDonald, Shadow Employment Rights and Protections Secretary

· Rosena Allin-Khan, Shadow Minister for Mental Health

· Cat Smith, Shadow Minister for Young People and Voter Engagement

· Lord Falconer, Shadow Attorney General

· Valerie Vaz, Shadow Leader of the House

· Nick Brown, Opposition Chief Whip

· Baroness Smith, Shadow Leader of the Lords

· Lord McAvoy, Lords’ Opposition Chief Whip

 

[Jeff Robinson]

Glad to see that Red Ed is back!

 

[Jeff Robinson]

Jess Philips nowhere to be seen. I consider that a victory.

 

[killer b]

Jess Philips nowhere to be seen. I consider that a victory.

ha I was just thinking this.

 

[belboid]

It is the one small mercy. Even she must knows she's blown it after her awful debate performances.

 

[belboid]

Luke Pollard in Environment. Pretty clear indication Starmer knows/understands nothing about climate change.

 

[killer b]

RLB & Rayner can more or less just swap in-trays in the home office and crack on.

 

[Smokeandsteam]

RLB & Rayner can more or less just swap in-trays in the home office and crack on.

Pardon?

 

[killer b]

Pardon?

they're flatmates, and RLB has just been given Rayner's old job. Doesn't add up totally the other direction, but I'm not sure jokes have to be completely consistent to make sense.

 

[fakeplasticgirl]

Well I think it’s an excellent shadow cabinet. Would have put RLB in work & pensions and Reynolds in education though...

 

[Smokeandsteam]

Well I think it’s an excellent shadow cabinet. Would have put RLB in work & pensions and Reynolds in education though...

Excellent at what? For what? To do what?

 

[fakeplasticgirl]

Excellent at what? For what? To do what?

Take on the tories.