Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Keir Starmer's time is up

Humberto said:
People say that. I don't get it. The implication being I'm sub U75 in terms of intelligence and acuman for anyalytical writing and arguments.


I stand by what I said in 12,480.
Click to expand...
No not at all. It's just that you're just throwing insults with no actual evidence to back them up. This is your 12,480 post.

Humberto said:
I have.

He's shit and was therefore way out of his depth. His record is easy meat to the London establishment/he's a fool. He's a wanker with shit politics and no poltical skills.
Click to expand...

Your argument just seems to be that he's shit because you think he is but that's impossible to argue against.
How was he out of his depth? Why was his record any easier meat to the London establishment than any other labour leader when all of them get taken apart? How were his politics shit? If he had no political skills how could he get his policies on the agenda after they'd been rejected by Labour since Blair and before?

Of course Corbyn can be criticized for example - particularly with hindsight - for not getting rid of all the backstabbing right wingers like Starmer has now got rid of the left wingers. But then the headlines every day would have been worse than Stalin, bloodletting, Stasi, fascist, Night of the Long Knives etc etc ...

His democratic socialist policies always meant he was going to be taken apart by the right wing press because they realized he was serious about implementing them. You're just echoing that rather than adding anything of substance.

Although this should go to the Corbyn thread.
 
two sheds said:
No not at all. It's just that you're just throwing insults with no actual evidence to back them up. This is your 12,480 post.



Your argument just seems to be that he's shit because you think he is but that's impossible to argue against.
How was he out of his depth? Why was his record any easier meat to the London establishment than any other labour leader when all of them get taken apart? How were his politics shit? If he had no political skills how could he get his policies on the agenda after they'd been rejected by Labour since Blair and before?

Of course Corbyn can be criticized for example - particularly with hindsight - for not getting rid of all the backstabbing right wingers like Starmer has now got rid of the left wingers. But then the headlines every day would have been worse than Stalin, bloodletting, Stasi, fascist, Night of the Long Knives etc etc ...

His democratic socialist policies always meant he was going to be taken apart by the right wing press because they realized he was serious about implementing them. You're just echoing that rather than adding anything of substance.

Although this should go to the Corbyn thread.
Click to expand...
Night of the long knives was Hitler and macmillan. And corbyn's social democracy was of the slightest pink and tepid version possible
 
Karl Masks said:
what is that?
Click to expand...
It's a word that I've copyrighted as I couldn't think of something less cumbersome than 'to create experienced and trained layers of the party membership with politics, ideology, organisational and communication skills , tactics etc to fight a battle inside the Labour Party structures to win hearts and minds and occupy key positions within the party machinery
 
two sheds said:
No not at all. It's just that you're just throwing insults with no actual evidence to back them up. This is your 12,480 post.



Your argument just seems to be that he's shit because you think he is but that's impossible to argue against.
How was he out of his depth? Why was his record any easier meat to the London establishment than any other labour leader when all of them get taken apart? How were his politics shit? If he had no political skills how could he get his policies on the agenda after they'd been rejected by Labour since Blair and before?

Of course Corbyn can be criticized for example - particularly with hindsight - for not getting rid of all the backstabbing right wingers like Starmer has now got rid of the left wingers. But then the headlines every day would have been worse than Stalin, bloodletting, Stasi, fascist, Night of the Long Knives etc etc ...

His democratic socialist policies always meant he was going to be taken apart by the right wing press because they realized he was serious about implementing them. You're just echoing that rather than adding anything of substance.

Although this should go to the Corbyn thread.
Click to expand...
And he nearly won in 2017. A Corbyn labour party would walk the election this year. Frustrating.
 
littlebabyjesus said:
And he nearly won in 2017. A Corbyn labour party would walk the election this year. Frustrating.
Click to expand...

to the centrists, the narrative is 2017 was a disastrous result. asking 'what, after the great triumphs of 2010 and 2015?' tends not to go down well.

if 'the party machine' and more of the parliamentary party had made an effort, then a labour win could probably have happened.
 
I find the notion that all he needed to do was purge the right wing and 2019 would his laughable. He struggled to overcome Theresa May. There was not a hope in hell against Johnson. Much as I think Boris is a joke of a grifter, the public didn't see it that way. He'd have annihilated Starmer too.

As to whether he was out of his depth... I'm afraid that one of the requirements of leadership is managing both the press and your own party. He did not show any sort of ability for either of those. I liked his policies, for the most part, but that's only a small part of the job of leader.
 
Chz said:
I find the notion that all he needed to do was purge the right wing and 2019 would his laughable. He struggled to overcome Theresa May. There was not a hope in hell against Johnson. Much as I think Boris is a joke of a grifter, the public didn't see it that way. He'd have annihilated Starmer too.

As to whether he was out of his depth... I'm afraid that one of the requirements of leadership is managing both the press and your own party. He did not show any sort of ability for either of those. I liked his policies, for the most part, but that's only a small part of the job of leader.
Click to expand...
I agree with the first sentence as there would be no quick fix due to the internal battles . Labour would also be hamstrung by their second referendum policy and a media sympathetic with the Blairite/ Brown rump .
However having weathered the storm I think there would be enthusiasm for a Labour Party with the policies of 2017-2019 than there is for the luke warm jizz that passes for Labour policy under Starmer.
 
teqniq said:
But there was a Labour party candidate Keith, so this is a lie. The fact that he no longer had your support is neither here nor there:

Click to expand...


I see he completely ignores that some voters saw Gaza as an issue. Enough did to give Galloway an unexpected win.

Secondly the local businessman who stood as an independent came a good second.

All the establishment parties and the right wing parties did very poorly.

As Aroon Bastini said on Novara media last night this points to an ongoing disillusionment with mainstream politics.

I'm glad Bastini pointed out the fact that the independent did so well. It's been forgotten in news about Galloway win.

Will this sway the coming election? I doubt it. But it does show that electorate do make choices that should not be just dismissed in way Starmer does.

The other thing. I thought way back when Starmer come to leadership he was going to go out and listen to people. Why they did not vote Labour etc. Where has all that gone? Or is it on certain issues like Palestine that he is not going to listen to part of the supposed broad church that votes Labour? Seems to me no. One thing Starmer has done is to ditch the broad church. Go back to you have no where else to go line.

And how is a "unifier" candidate supposed to work?

I get this from my local Labour Council in Lambeth. That Lambeth is a multicultural borough ( yes it is) so those in local area campaigning for a ceasefire and Palestinian rights are somehow "divisive" is their line of approach to this.
 
Last edited:
Chz said:
I find the notion that all he needed to do was purge the right wing and 2019 would his laughable. He struggled to overcome Theresa May. There was not a hope in hell against Johnson. Much as I think Boris is a joke of a grifter, the public didn't see it that way. He'd have annihilated Starmer too.

As to whether he was out of his depth... I'm afraid that one of the requirements of leadership is managing both the press and your own party. He did not show any sort of ability for either of those. I liked his policies, for the most part, but that's only a small part of the job of leader.
Click to expand...


He'd be a good president, a figure you role out for a few speeches and to rally the troops, it's clear he likes and can work a crowd but he's an awful leader/PM. Indecisive, to tied to some people it would be better to cut out and terrible at rejoinders
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
Kemi Badenoch’s time is up!
2 3 4 5
Replies
143
Views
4K
Petcha
P
krtek a houby
King William’s time is up
Replies
7
Views
593
PR1Berske
PR1Berske
tim
Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby's time is up.
2 3 4
Replies
90
Views
2K
stavros
S
Kid_Eternity
David Lammy’s time is up
Replies
11
Views
679
Whagwan
Whagwan
Larry O'Hara
Chancellor Rachel Reeves: Her Time Is Up!
7 8 9 10 11
Replies
318
Views
12K
Larry O'Hara
Larry O'Hara
Back
Top Bottom