Keir Starmer

[Gnasher]

37 minutes ago, bossy said:

If we have any chance of recovering the NHS we have to get rid of the Tories.

In the real world, as it is now. I’m not expecting Starmer’s Labour to be the same so whatever the disappointment room is I won’t be in it. You’re a strange bloke.

 

Well you're the one who brought up the then and now. I'm now agreeing with you that your comparison was pointless and as such so was your post. Nothing strange about it really.

 

 

Anyway back on subject of Starmer, is Michael Crick also a "strange bloke'?

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Jairzinho]

41 minutes ago, Section_31 said:

 

Hating Tony Blair is proper trendy, always has been, but this was a good country to live in. We were respected in the EU, rule of law was a thing, and his cabinet wasn't filled with basket cases. 

 

I'd pay good money to see Blair debate with Truss, Raab, Johnson, Braverman, Patel, and any of the other cunts even for 10 minutes, it'd be like watching someone throw stones at a Panzer. 

 

1997 Blairism was basically Maoism compared to what Labour are putting forward now though. Obviously we need the Tories out, etc, etc, but Rachel Reeves is no Gordon Brown.

[bossy]

28 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

 

Well you're the one who brought up the then and now. I'm now agreeing with you that your comparison was pointless and as such so was your post. Nothing strange about it really.

 

 

Anyway back on subject of Starmer, is Michael Crick also a "strange bloke'?

 

 

 

 

 

 

You were the one who responded to my post sharing the Blair link.  I never said Blair and Starmer were the same, I’d just noticed Blair had been mentioned earlier in the thread. Crick might be a strange bloke, does he post hundreds of Twitter links on a f**ty forum?

[Babb'sBurstNad]

17 minutes ago, Jairzinho said:

 

1997 Blairism was basically Maoism compared to what Labour are putting forward now though. Obviously we need the Tories out, etc, etc, but Rachel Reeves is no Gordon Brown.

 

That's a fair point. But, playing Devil's Advocate, do you think Brown would've opened the purse strings in the same way if he was inheriting this bin fire of a post-Brexit economic landscape?

 

Labour got pretty lucky in '97. 

[Gnasher]

25 minutes ago, Babb'sBurstNad said:

 

That's a fair point. But, playing Devil's Advocate, do you think Brown would've opened the purse strings in the same way if he was inheriting this bin fire of a post-Brexit economic landscape?

 

Labour got pretty lucky in '97. 

 

Many economists believe it calls for them to be even more bold. Investing/Spending on infrastructure brings growth. The economic situation Labour inherited in 45 wasn't great either. Also if the purse strings are so tight why rule out a fairer more progressive tax system?  

 

 

 

 

[Captain Howdy]

38 minutes ago, Jairzinho said:

 

1997 Blairism was basically Maoism compared to what Labour are putting forward now though. Obviously we need the Tories out, etc, etc, but Rachel Reeves is no Gordon Brown.

There’s truth in this unfortunately, of course a Starmer led Govt would be better than this as it really couldn’t be any worse, he has to do more. I cut him some slack as I accept he has to walk on eggshells but he’s got to offer more. Starmer seems obsessed with banishing the left and I really don’t know why, the Left are an import part of Labour and always will be. Blair knew and accepted this but Starmer seems unable to. The constant u turns are not helping, he has much to do when he wins power. Hopefully with a big enough majority he’ll feel more comfortable and will start to integrate some progressive stuff. Time will tell. 

[Babb'sBurstNad]

8 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

 

Many economists believe it calls for them to be even more bold. Investing/Spending on infrastructure brings growth. The economic situation Labour inherited in 45 wasn't great either. Also if the purse strings are so tight why rule out a fairer more progressive tax system?  

 

 

 

 

 

All fair points. Atlee was bold, but he also had a population that accepted the continuation of rationing while we restructured, and oversaw immigration to help rebuild Britain.

 

We've got a population that voted for Brexit and sees immigration as the enemy.

[Jairzinho]

44 minutes ago, Babb'sBurstNad said:

 

That's a fair point. But, playing Devil's Advocate, do you think Brown would've opened the purse strings in the same way if he was inheriting this bin fire of a post-Brexit economic landscape?

 

Labour got pretty lucky in '97. 

 

Not to the same degree, probably, but he wouldn't have shifted to what amounts to basically centre right economics. I tended to trust Gordon Brown as a man of principle, I don't with the majority of the shadow cabinet.

[Gnasher]

25 minutes ago, Babb'sBurstNad said:

 

All fair points. Atlee was bold, but he also had a population that accepted the continuation of rationing while we restructured, and oversaw immigration to help rebuild Britain.

 

We've got a population that voted for Brexit and sees immigration as the enemy.

 

Fair enough. I don't think many expect miracles from Starmer/Reeves but a few little signs they are on our side and believe in social justice would be welcomed. 

[Jairzinho]

Was watching the news yesterday, can't even remember the exact news story (something about the government being shite), and it made me think we really need a better mechanism to recall/dissolve a government. We're in a position where the current government, one of the worst anywhere in Western Europe for several decades, is talking about policies they know they won't be enacting as they'll be rightly out on their arse within six months or whatever it is. 

 

It's slightly absurd that the current government gets to decide when an election takes place. These cunts have proven, conclusively, embarrassingly, that they're not fit to a run a fucking coffee morning. They need to fuck off today.

[skend04]

Seeing as Gnasher hasn't bumped this thread in 48hrs I'll try my hand.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/24/labour-promises-rail-nationalisation-within-five-years-of-coming-to-power

 

Labour promises rail nationalisation within five years of coming to power

Party pledges to bring all passenger rail – but not rolling stock – into public ownership as contracts with train operators expire

 

Bad Labour. Bad Kier.

[Gnasher]

As my name was mentioned,

 

 

 

 

 

 

[skend04]

23 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

As my name was mentioned,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Anyone died?

Nope, so it doesn't matter.

[Gnasher]

33 minutes ago, skend04 said:

 

Anyone died?

Nope, so it doesn't matter.

 

By the way im fully behind the Labour policy on Railway renationalisation. It at least shows daylight between the two main parties and it'll be beneficial to the country as a whole. 

[Bruce Spanner]

Just seen performative outrage called ‘recreational rage’.

 

I like it, might catch on.

[Anubis]

5 hours ago, skend04 said:

Seeing as Gnasher hasn't bumped this thread in 48hrs I'll try my hand.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/24/labour-promises-rail-nationalisation-within-five-years-of-coming-to-power

 

Labour promises rail nationalisation within five years of coming to power

Party pledges to bring all passenger rail – but not rolling stock – into public ownership as contracts with train operators expire

 

Bad Labour. Bad Kier.

 

Was very happy to see that. This is what they should be coming out with. Power as well please.
 

Fuck worrying about the Tories. They’re a busted flush.

[Anubis]

3 hours ago, Bruce Spanner said:

Just seen performative outrage called ‘recreational rage’.

 

I like it, might catch on.

Doesn’t work if I substitute it into the Performative Outrage Artist Formerly Known As Captain Willard. 
 

The only recreational rage he’s into relates to old ladies in his garden.

[Section_31]

Kill me now.

 

https://news.sky.com/story/politicians-mess-it-up-every-time-new-pre-election-pledges-may-not-be-enough-in-the-north-east-13122368

[Dicko]

On 25/04/2024 at 07:27, skend04 said:

Seeing as Gnasher hasn't bumped this thread in 48hrs I'll try my hand.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/24/labour-promises-rail-nationalisation-within-five-years-of-coming-to-power

 

Labour promises rail nationalisation within five years of coming to power

Party pledges to bring all passenger rail – but not rolling stock – into public ownership as contracts with train operators expire

 

Bad Labour. Bad Kier.

And what about the rolling stock?

If he's not nationalising that as well he's not nationalising at-all.

[Babb'sBurstNad]

3 hours ago, Section_31 said:

Kill me now.

 

https://news.sky.com/story/politicians-mess-it-up-every-time-new-pre-election-pledges-may-not-be-enough-in-the-north-east-13122368

 

Nuke Grimsby from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

[Arniepie]

8 hours ago, Section_31 said:

Kill me now.

 

https://news.sky.com/story/politicians-mess-it-up-every-time-new-pre-election-pledges-may-not-be-enough-in-the-north-east-13122368

I'm fed up of people who don't know how hard it is for working people..I'm off to vote for richard tice

[AngryOfTuebrook]

The shithouse clique in charge of the party are making it harder and harder to vote for them.

https://www.ft.com/content/fe1608d1-3a61-43a0-9c17-2868c40821c2

 

Happy International Workers Day, you pointless cunts.

[Gnasher]

11 minutes ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

The shithouse clique in charge of the party are making it harder and harder to vote for them.

https://www.ft.com/content/fe1608d1-3a61-43a0-9c17-2868c40821c2

 

Happy International Workers Day, you pointless cunts.

 

 

 

For some reason the FT let me read that article. Seems Mandelson and the business focus groups got their way. 

 

 

 

 

 

Don't worry they'll turn left when they're in power, it's just a clever game of political 4D chess. 

 

[Gnasher]

 

What does Rachel Reeves mean by this answer? All a bit surreal. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reeves sister Ellie is every bit as dreadful as her sister. She's fucking clueless. Probably doesn't know what political party she's in, although most of the country also has the same problem in distinguishing. 

 

 

 

 

 

[Dicko]

That was literally the last thing they had left differentiating themselves from the Sunak wing of the Tories.

Even the nationalisation of the rail is pointless without the rolling stock being included.

 

That was the last obstacle to Labour being accepted by their masters while the tory's get their shit together.

 

People are going to be horrifically disappointed in Starmer's vision of the Labour Party and the country.

The twat is backing freeport's for Christ's sake.