Keir Starmer

[Anubis]

21 minutes ago, Section_31 said:

The nuclear thing is interesting in that it brings different aspects of the party into play. There'll be the more Liberal types that want rid, but then defence is a huge employer often with unionised workforces, how do you reconcile that?

Lose the nukes, put the former employees to work picking Cornish daffodils.

 

God I’m good. I’m very, very good. 

[Gnasher]

16 minutes ago, Section_31 said:

The nuclear thing is interesting in that it brings different aspects of the party into play. There'll be the more Liberal types that want rid, but then defence is a huge employer often with unionised workforces, how do you reconcile that?

It is a catch 22 issue. Anyone with an ounce of sense should really dismiss Trident as a waste of money. It's odd how the debate has turned.  Glastonbury used to be a festival for CND, now it's full of middle class punters and mps like Jess Phillips who'd think Greenham Common were an Indie band on the alternative stage. The debate on British Nuclear weapons seems to hardly exist anymore. It's even more odd with the end of the cold war which used to be given as the main reason for them to be kept.

 

I'd guess if you took a poll and asked the public the question Trident or Health service Id say most would choose to fund the health service but if a Labour leader ever put getting rid of Nukes in the manifesto he might as well turn up at the polling booth dressed as a clown and with a flower that squirts water tied to his lapel.

[Gnasher]

6 minutes ago, Anubis said:

Lose the nukes, put the former employees to work picking Cornish daffodils.

 

God I’m good. I’m very, very good. 

You've started me now...

 

https://www.cornwalllive.com/news/cornwall-news/modern-slavery-farm-family-hits-1193152

[Section_31]

21 minutes ago, Anubis said:

Lose the nukes, put the former employees to work picking Cornish daffodils.

 

God I’m good. I’m very, very good. 

 

There's deffo scope there for redeployment of workers to the green sector.

[Scooby Dudek]

2 hours ago, Gnasher said:

It is a catch 22 issue. Anyone with an ounce of sense should really dismiss Trident as a waste of money. It's odd how the debate has turned.  Glastonbury used to be a festival for CND, now it's full of middle class punters and mps like Jess Phillips who'd think Greenham Common were an Indie band on the alternative stage. The debate on British Nuclear weapons seems to hardly exist anymore. It's even more odd with the end of the cold war which used to be given as the main reason for them to be kept.

 

I'd guess if you took a poll and asked the public the question Trident or Health service Id say most would choose to fund the health service but if a Labour leader ever put getting rid of Nukes in the manifesto he might as well turn up at the polling booth dressed as a clown and with a flower that squirts water tied to his lapel.

It is media setting the narrative again. Queen and country, patriotism bollocks. The polls are irrelevant, it is the perception, keep our country safe. 

You try and swim against that and are called out as some sort of nutcase. It was the way Corbyn was asked if he would push the button and saying no was wrong, repeatedly and repeatedly.

It is similar to the Union Jack in the back ground, you can fuck up and cause deaths due to ideology but as long as you "luv" our country all fine.

 

The reason I said they shouldn't be called out is the optics. The party is officially pro, it was in 2019 manifesto so nothing gained by slagging leadership off publically. Just say, party policy and in a democratic party you support the majority decision.

 

It goes back to everyone in government in the States with their flag pin, everyone here wearing bigger poppies for longer periods, it is all deflect from the cunts at the top robbing us. 

[Gnasher]

1 minute ago, Scooby Dudek said:

It is media setting the narrative again. Queen and country, patriotism bollocks. The polls are irrelevant, it is the perception, keep our country safe. 

You try and swim against that and are called out as some sort of nutcase. It was the way Corbyn was asked if he would push the button and saying no was wrong, repeatedly and repeatedly.

It is similar to the Union Jack in the back ground, you can fuck up and cause deaths due to ideology but as long as you "luv" our country all fine.

 

The reason I said they shouldn't be called out is the optics. The party is officially pro, it was in 2019 manifesto so nothing gained by slagging leadership off publically. Just say, party policy and in a democratic party you support the majority decision.

 

It goes back to everyone in government in the States with their flag pin, everyone here wearing bigger poppies for longer periods, it is all deflect from the cunts at the top robbing us. 

 

I agree with all that but I've got some sympathy for Starmer, like other Labour leaders he's in a catch 22 situation.

 

The answer is to tell a load of lies and make plenty of promises then break em when gaining power. Like the other lot.

[Scooby Dudek]

16 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

 

I agree with all that but I've got some sympathy for Starmer, like other Labour leaders he's in a catch 22 situation.

 

The answer is to tell a load of lies and make plenty of promises then break em when gaining power. Like the other lot.

That is why I said he shouldn't be called out, as it achieves nothing apart from the narrative that Labour is in fighting again. As you say catch 22.

 

[Gnasher]

5 minutes ago, Scooby Dudek said:

That is why I said he shouldn't be called out, as it achieves nothing apart from the narrative that Labour is in fighting again. As you say catch 22.

 

Yeah I think some of the criticism of Starmer is unjust. Its reminding me a little of some of the shit Corbyn used to face (Jess Phillips saying free broadband is a bad idea during a general election campaign springs to mind) but the other way round  

[Rushies tash]

11 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

Yeah I think some of the criticism of Starmer is unjust. Its reminding me a little of some of the shit Corbyn used to face (Jess Phillips saying free broadband is a bad idea during a general election campaign springs to mind) but the other way round  

You're right, but I think (as you have pointed out) the difference is that Corbyn was constantly and very publicly undermined by members of his own party. Members that seem strangely quiet now. I've only seen McDonell tweet something critical, and certainly no one rushing to appear on TV to criticise him.

[Vincent Vega]

21 hours ago, Vincent Vega said:

 

Made me chuckle.

 

[Captain Howdy]

6 hours ago, Scooby Dudek said:

That is why I said he shouldn't be called out, as it achieves nothing apart from the narrative that Labour is in fighting again. As you say catch 22.

 

In fairness it’s a pretty accurate narrative

[Mudface]

Meh- https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/feb/27/anas-sarwar-wins-scottish-labour-leadership-election

 

I voted for Lennon, but I don't think either are going to make a blind bit of difference.

[Bruce Spanner]

The court cases are even more fucked up than has been let on, as the constant delays attest to.

 

The pressure from the unions on Ashworths wife is just the tip of the iceberg, but it’s the first to be fought, so here we are.

 

So, speaking to a mate tonight who knows what’s happening and it’s even more batshit.

 

Ashworths wife was dropped in to the unions to sort finances, after doing a good job with Labour, Millband era. So they took her on to help Unison get its house in order financially, but she’s been an absolute disaster from day one and ruined a lot of, forward thinking, projects and been a really divisive character to the point where she has very few friends internally, especially with the new boss, who is struggling to find her feet.

 

The rub is that Len is supporting the defence of the Corbynites financially through his Union, this might not be completely official policy but money is available. Labour obviously have to pay their own cost,  but there is a push for Unison, where she works, with little support, to pony up for her costs from slush funds, much to the disgust of the rank and file. She’s suing Labour at this point still, but it’s effectively, if she gets her way, a proxy union vs union fight, which is going to cost a fucking fortune, over a name being released so she can ‘win’ and clear her name. Literally prepared to watch the world burn to prove a point.
 

She’s, and the rest,  so ingrained that she’ll not give up on the case until a name is in the public domain. So until a name is given for her to sue she’ll/they’ll continue this. Once the name is given she’ll give up the case against Labour and fight the personal case, as will all the others...

 

This is remarkably silly, but could be a complete disaster in the grand scheme of things. 

Don’t shoot the messenger.

 

 

[sir roger]

27 minutes ago, Bruce Spanner said:

She’s, and the rest,  so ingrained that she’ll not give up on the case until a name is in the public domain. So until a name is given for her to sue she’ll/they’ll continue this. Once the name is given she’ll give up the case against Labour and fight the personal case, as will all the others...

 

 

 

 

I'm not sure that would work if we presume the leaker involved was a Labour employee and came in contact with the information as a result of that role. I am thinking of the EHRC ruling on Livingstone and the Lancashire councillor stating that Labour takes the blame for their actions because they counted as Labour representatives at the time.

[Bruce Spanner]

12 minutes ago, sir roger said:

I'm not sure that would work if we presume the leaker involved was a Labour employee and came in contact with the information as a result of that role. I am thinking of the EHRC ruling on Livingstone and the Lancashire councillor stating that Labour takes the blame for their actions because they counted as Labour representatives at the time.

There are loads of different variations on a theme, this one, as Neil G pointed out before, is more nuanced, but the crux of the matter is nobody else wants this, most are actively against it both personally and professionally, but is being forced through because of egos and not principle. 

[sir roger]

I think Oldroyd is especially pissed off as I believe she looked a shoo-in as Gen Sec originally.

[Section_31]

Anyone ever seen Rotheram and Bolsonaro in the same room?

[AngryOfTuebrook]

Empty suit standing for Mayor.

 

 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

On 26/02/2021 at 07:11, Section_31 said:

 

There's deffo scope there for redeployment of workers to the green sector.

This.

We've got a desperate need for large-scale investment in green industries and we have billions of pounds plus a skilled engineering/manufacturing workforce being squandered on dangerous and anachronistic dick compensators. It's pretty obvious what needs to be done.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

On 27/02/2021 at 20:11, Bruce Spanner said:

The court cases are even more fucked up than has been let on, as the constant delays attest to.

 

The pressure from the unions on Ashworths wife is just the tip of the iceberg, but it’s the first to be fought, so here we are.

 

So, speaking to a mate tonight who knows what’s happening and it’s even more batshit.

 

Ashworths wife was dropped in to the unions to sort finances, after doing a good job with Labour, Millband era. So they took her on to help Unison get its house in order financially, but she’s been an absolute disaster from day one and ruined a lot of, forward thinking, projects and been a really divisive character to the point where she has very few friends internally, especially with the new boss, who is struggling to find her feet.

 

The rub is that Len is supporting the defence of the Corbynites financially through his Union, this might not be completely official policy but money is available. Labour obviously have to pay their own cost,  but there is a push for Unison, where she works, with little support, to pony up for her costs from slush funds, much to the disgust of the rank and file. She’s suing Labour at this point still, but it’s effectively, if she gets her way, a proxy union vs union fight, which is going to cost a fucking fortune, over a name being released so she can ‘win’ and clear her name. Literally prepared to watch the world burn to prove a point.
 

She’s, and the rest,  so ingrained that she’ll not give up on the case until a name is in the public domain. So until a name is given for her to sue she’ll/they’ll continue this. Once the name is given she’ll give up the case against Labour and fight the personal case, as will all the others...

 

This is remarkably silly, but could be a complete disaster in the grand scheme of things. 

Don’t shoot the messenger.

 

 

If she manages to clear her name, can we start using it in posts, or is she doomed to be nothing more than "Ashworth's wife" forever?

[Bruce Spanner]

51 minutes ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

If she manages to clear her name, can we start using it in posts, or is she doomed to be nothing more than "Ashworth's wife" forever?

 

Two reasons for that, firstly I was quite drunk when I wrote it and was fighting both autocorrect and my better jusdgements. Oldknow, no matter what you try and do will go to two words. Secondly, thought it added context, in my DIPA addled mind that seemed important.

[Bruce Spanner]

Leakers names will not be released, Labour are seeking costs from the claimant!

 

This will go down well...

 

So, they now can only sue the party directly.

[sir roger]

4 hours ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

Empty suit standing for Mayor.

 

 

Thank god he is doing it to give Labour members a choice , I had an awful thought that he might be a centrist , opportunistic chancer. Phew.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

4 hours ago, Bruce Spanner said:

 

Two reasons for that, firstly I was quite drunk when I wrote it and was fighting both autocorrect and my better jusdgements. Oldknow, no matter what you try and do will go to two words. Secondly, thought it added context, in my DIPA addled mind that seemed important.

It reminded me a bit of one of my mates who used to work on a local newspaper.  His job was to get stories from Reuters, or whatever, and summarise them for the "News In Brief" section.  One day, he got a story about an elephant escaping from a zoo and causing chaos on the Interstate. That got his creative juices flowing, with phrases like "the potty pachyderm" and "the dumbo jumbo" and so on.

 

His editor threw it back at him, because he hadn't used the word "elephant".

[AngryOfTuebrook]

2 hours ago, Bruce Spanner said:

Leakers names will not be released, Labour are seeking costs from the claimant!

 

This will go down well...

 

So, they now can only sue the party directly.

Has the phrase "clown car crash" ever been more appropriate?