Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

Keir Starmer


rb14
 Share

Recommended Posts

Any donation or series of donations from an individual or organisation that exceed £1000 are fully published. 
 

If any individual or organisation seeks an audience with a government minister/ministers either in person, by telephone, or online, the meeting is in official offices with at least two civil service personnel present and fully recorded and publicly available.

 

Similar for opposition parties with the exception of the civil servants - recorded and publicly available.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

Won't have the same aims?

Okay, whenever we've had some Champagne socialist pipe up in the recent past, the overwhelming consensus on here has been that being rich is no barrier to supporting socialism. In fact I can recall some very heated defences of people like Russell Brand when even the merest suggestion was made that their millionaire showbiz lifestyle was hardly in step with collectivist ideals.

 

Now, all of a sudden (and I'm sure in no way related to the fact that Labour has a different leader now), apparently rich supporters of the Labour Party almost certainly won't share the aims of the membership.

 

Which is it? You can't have it both ways. Either rich people can and do have a social conscience and can share the aims of the Labour Party, or they can't and don't.

They're very welcome to join the party as members and enjoy the same voting rights as everyone else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Jairzinho said:

You're right, it is because there is a new leader and direction of the party. 

 

That's, er, my point. 

 

"You can't have it both ways"

 

I can. Mainly because you've made up the "both ways". You've created the two positions while ignoring, well, everything really. 

 

It's a clinical dishonesty that makes debate impossible. 

 

There's no dishonesty. You just said that potential wealthy donors "almost certainly won't share the aims" of the membership. That's a direct quote from you.

 

I agree that debate is impossible, because you provided zero evidence to support your claim. There is literally nothing to debate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

There's no dishonesty. You just said that potential wealthy donors "almost certainly won't share the aims" of the membership. That's a direct quote from you.

 

I agree that debate is impossible, because you provided zero evidence to support your claim. There is literally nothing to debate.

Hahaha you have no right to talk about dishonesty. Don't take the piss. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

You need a bit of that

 

nandy.png

 

The crazy thing is though he's probably asking others to vote Tory to unseat 'The red Tory bastard'

 

The worlds fucked, burn it down and start again.

 

Edit: Actually looking at the numbers her seat is far from a given if we had an election soon, Wigan, fucking Wigan, could be voting Conservative, mad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

There's no dishonesty. You just said that potential wealthy donors "almost certainly won't share the aims" of the membership. That's a direct quote from you.

 

I agree that debate is impossible, because you provided zero evidence to support your claim. There is literally nothing to debate.

 

It's pretty evident that the labour membership is so fragmented that aims wouldnt be shared. It doesnt need a swathe of evidence, especially with the bin fire of a government that is currently in occupation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Arniepie said:

Burnham making a play today.

I think starmer has been an utter disaster.

He has let those cunts off the hook time and time again and instead of uniting the party, its possibly even more divided than before. 

Trouble is, the usual highly vocal suspects (who I imagine are greatly enjoying things as they are) will be stirred into the usual smears - gleefully amplified by the usual sections of the media.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

Bit early to be branding Starmer an utter disaster, maybe after he's lost two general elections.

Yeah, it's too early to compare him to Neil Kinnock.

 

He's threatening to have some policies in time for Conference. I'd like to think that they will have a bit of that 1945 poster about them: if they're just the old nonsense that Labour used to trot out to pander to the headline writers at the S*n and the Mail, then we're fucked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

Bit early to be branding Starmer an utter disaster, maybe after he's lost two general elections.

That's at least another 10 years of Tory rule. Now is precisely the right time.

 

He has failed to unite the party, failed to score in the many  open goals the blond buffoon has left him and seems to have failed in getting across any message he has to the public.

 

He needs to up his game before his leadership fails.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...