Keir Starmer

[Numero Veinticinco]

Just now, Duff Man said:

We both agreed the reaction was small. You think that's down to the fact he's an irrelevance, I think it's mostly because he's on the right of the party.

It was vocal from the left, trending etc, but I think the size was appropriate. It’s not a huge thing. Daft twat says daft thing. If a left winger had said it, it would likely be defended in the same way the left largely ignore Corbyn rejecting findings and shirking responsibility for his part of the problem. It’s because most don’t give a fuck about these issues, they care about scoring points. 

[Duff Man]

Just now, Numero said:

It was vocal from the left, trending etc, but I think the size was appropriate. It’s not a huge thing. Daft twat says daft thing. If a left winger had said it, it would likely be defended in the same way the left largely ignore Corbyn rejecting findings and shirking responsibility for his part of the problem. It’s because most don’t give a fuck about these issues, they care about scoring points. 

My point was simply that I don't think voices on the left of the party are treated the same as voices on the right of the party, especially by the press.

[Numero Veinticinco]

Just now, Duff Man said:

My point was simply that I don't think voices on the left of the party are treated the same as voices on the right of the party, especially by the press.

I get your point, I just think that it’s due to inherent bias. The left jump on anything the centre left say but calling them ‘the right’ and generally whipping up a frenzy. The centre and centre left are more in with the media types and are generally much more media savvy, then the actual right own shit. I think the left do get underrepresented in the media. The general uplroar is the same when it’s somebody relevant though. If it was Blair the world would stop on its axis. If it was, I dunno, Galloway, probably not. 

[Gnasher]

14 minutes ago, Numero said:

It was vocal from the left, trending etc, but I think the size was appropriate. It’s not a huge thing. Daft twat says daft thing. If a left winger had said it, it would likely be defended in the same way the left largely ignore Corbyn rejecting findings and shirking responsibility for his part of the problem. It’s because most don’t give a fuck about these issues, they care about scoring points. 

"Corbyn rejecting findings" Really? I must of missed that bit.

[Duff Man]

5 minutes ago, Numero said:

I get your point, I just think that it’s due to inherent bias. The left jump on anything the centre left say but calling them ‘the right’ and generally whipping up a frenzy. The centre and centre left are more in with the media types and are generally much more media savvy, then the actual right own shit. I think the left do get underrepresented in the media. The general uplroar is the same when it’s somebody relevant though. If it was Blair the world would stop on its axis. If it was, I dunno, Galloway, probably not. 

I disagree, and it doesn't just apply to Labour. You can open it up to the rest of the political spectrum; the same principle applies. It's why prominent Tory MPs can chuck around the cultural Marxism trope and make comments about Soros - actually in Parliament - and there's barely a shrug. There isn't one standard applied to all; not even close.

[Numero Veinticinco]

1 hour ago, Gnasher said:

"Corbyn rejecting findings" Really? I must of missed that bit.

Indeed, you must have. He mentioned it in his official statement and in his interviews after, both of which I've linked multiple times. 

[Numero Veinticinco]

1 hour ago, Duff Man said:

I disagree, and it doesn't just apply to Labour. You can open it up to the rest of the political spectrum; the same principle applies. It's why prominent Tory MPs can chuck around the cultural Marxism trope and make comments about Soros - actually in Parliament - and there's barely a shrug. There isn't one standard applied to all; not even close.

I didn't say there was, I spoke about the uproar. Not the media coverage. It's just from the other side. The right claim this shit too. 

[Duff Man]

30 minutes ago, Numero said:

I didn't say there was, I spoke about the uproar. Not the media coverage. It's just from the other side. The right claim this shit too. 

Oh, well, my point was mainly about the media coverage.

[Gnasher]

17 hours ago, Gnasher said:

This Labour purge enters the dark side of the moon

 

 

 

 

 

Rachael wades in by telling the BBC who it should have on the licence payers tv station. The sad thing is they will probably listen.

 

 

[Bjornebye]

9 hours ago, Gnasher said:

I suggest he stays clear of needless fights which take time and energy and create the wrong headlines.

 

Who did Starmer choose to introduce him at his Labour leadership unveiling? Ruth Smeeth. Why?  

 

Ricos right, the average Joe couldnt give a fuck about anti semitism, Palestinians or Israel. Smeeth managed to help lose Stoke nth to the tories by a whooping 6.000 votes. It's the first time the seat has had a tory mp. Its suggests Smeeths high profile anti semitism crusade didnt get the voters rushing through the isles. 

 

If Starmer continues to hang his hat on the Smeeth/Ryan/Lipman/Mann campaign then the country may give the same verdict as the people of Stoke.

 

Edit;  Struth Ruth:

 

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/election-2019-50772047

I think Stoke voted based on Brexit and fuck all to do with anti-semitism

[Bjornebye]

38 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

 

Rachael wades in by telling the BBC who it should have on the licence payers tv station. The sad thing is they will probably listen.

 

 

Cunt 

[Bruce Spanner]

Gary Neville land his giant intellect wading in on Ridge.

 

Starmer lacks leadership for not holding the government to account, not good enough etc. Scant mention of Alex and the gang apart from the obvious.

 

Nothing to do with your hotels haemorrhaging cash and your new found love of politics eh, Gaz? 

[Rico1304]

2 minutes ago, Bruce Spanner said:

Gary Neville land his giant intellect wading in on Ridge.

 

Starmer lacks leadership for not holding the government to account, not good enough etc. Scant mention of Alex and the gang apart from the obvious.

 

Nothing to do with your hotels haemorrhaging cash and your new found love of politics eh, Gaz? 

Our office is next door to his hotel. He’s spent a fortune on it, no wonder he’s interested.  

[Bruce Spanner]

4 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

Our office is next door to his hotel. He’s spent a fortune on it, no wonder he’s interested.  

Yeah, I get it, I’d be fucked off to, in a business sense and personally.

 

He actually spoke sense, in the way a twenty watt lightbulb will help you see in the dark.

 

I woke up like a bear with a sore head and he was the first thing I saw/heard, not a good place. 

Edited December 6, 2020 by Bruce Spanner

[Rico1304]

1 minute ago, Bruce Spanner said:

Yeah, I get it, I’d be fucked off to, but in a business sense and financially.

 

He actually spoke sense, in the way a twenty watt lightbulb will help you see in the dark.

 

I woke up like a bear with a sore head and he was the first thing I saw/heard, not a good place. 

On the top floor of the hotel there’s a self contained apartment. It’s something like £20k a week and screams as a place for newly signed footballers to stay whilst they find a house.  

[Bruce Spanner]

3 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

On the top floor of the hotel there’s a self contained apartment. It’s something like £20k a week and screams as a place for newly signed footballers to stay whilst they find a house.  

Madness, you could buy a house around the corner for about that ten years ago.

[Gnasher]

37 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

I think Stoke voted based on Brexit and fuck all to do with anti-semitism

Yeah I think you're right. Shows the anti semitism issue is not that big a deal with Joe Public otherwise a lot more people would have voted for people like Smeeth/Lucinda Berger etc to show concern.

[Gnasher]

Whichever way you try to dress this up the top brass in the Labour party, McNicol ? Starmer? have made a howler over the Corbyn suspension, especially if Starmers pledge to bring unity is taken at face value..

 

 

 

[Section_31]

Still don't see how you put it "on Starmer", given that Corbyn basically pissed in Starmer's pond and was disciplined accordingly.

 

If he hadn't, he'd still have the whip and wouldn't have been suspended from the party in the first place.

 

Former leaders usually have the good grace to keep their heads down, even Tory ones do, but Corbyn has made a career out of 'bucking', that's where he gets his juice from.

 

If Starmer backs down it's a green light for Corbyn to do and say what he wants, now backed by an army of loyalists, and labour will go into the next election with a reputation again for internal strife and civil war, and won't win again.

 

I suspect Corbyn doesn't care though, which is why he's starting to get on my tits. This is where I can't abide this fallacy that he somehow embodies the true soul of the labour party and it's somehow being stolen away from him, he clearly hates the version of the labour party that came before and after him, or at best  tolerates it, it's a flag of convenience for him at best and his greatest desire wasn't to win power, but to change the party into what he thought it should be.

[Gnasher]

2 hours ago, Section_31 said:

Still don't see how you put it "on Starmer", given that Corbyn basically pissed in Starmer's pond and was disciplined accordingly.

 

If he hadn't, he'd still have the whip and wouldn't have been suspended from the party in the first place.

 

Former leaders usually have the good grace to keep their heads down, even Tory ones do, but Corbyn has made a career out of 'bucking', that's where he gets his juice from.

 

If Starmer backs down it's a green light for Corbyn to do and say what he wants, now backed by an army of loyalists, and labour will go into the next election with a reputation again for internal strife and civil war, and won't win again.

 

I suspect Corbyn doesn't care though, which is why he's starting to get on my tits. This is where I can't abide this fallacy that he somehow embodies the true soul of the labour party and it's somehow being stolen away from him, he clearly hates the version of the labour party that came before and after him, or at best  tolerates it, it's a flag of convenience for him at best and his greatest desire wasn't to win power, but to change the party into what he thought it should be.

The problem arose imo when Starmer made the pond impossible not to piss in. This no mention of anything nonsense, plus the zero tolerance rhetoric, add in the threat not to discuss if the claims were exaggerated or politically motivated made Starmers pond very hard to sail.

 

Of course Corbyn was going to have his say and defend himself, why shouldn't he? Their was little in his initial statement that was controversial about the findings or derogatory to Starmer. Imo Starmer and the Cheif Exev should have let the dust settle, had a period of quiet reflection then moved on to more pressing matters.

[Numero Veinticinco]

The ‘let it go and hope it goes away’ doctrine. Horribly naive. 

[Gnasher]

6 minutes ago, Numero said:

The ‘let it go and hope it goes away’ doctrine. Horribly naive. 

Well it may prove to be less naive than setting unattainable rules and regulations to a party with approx 400.000 members. The keep your head down until goes away seems to work for the tories, not many talking about Priti Patel now and shes the first minister in history to break the ministerial code and keep her job.

[Numero Veinticinco]

5 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

Well it may prove to be less naive than setting unattainable rules and regulations to a party with approx 400.000 members. The keep your head down until goes away seems to work for the tories, not many talking about Priti Patel now and shes the first minister in history to break the ministerial code and keep her job.

Yep. Those pushing the antisemitism angle have been keen to just let it all blow over. You’re right. 
 

There’s no talking sense to you. You’re still pushing the same stuff as you were when it happened. He did stand on unity, he also stood on zero tolerance. He clearly chose the non-placation route. Unity seems like a fantasy at this point. Purge Corbynites and move on. 

[Gnasher]

6 minutes ago, Numero said:

Yep. Those pushing the antisemitism angle have been keen to just let it all blow over. You’re right. 
 

There’s no talking sense to you. You’re still pushing the same stuff as you were when it happened. He did stand on unity, he also stood on zero tolerance. He clearly chose the non-placation route. Unity seems like a fantasy at this point. Purge Corbynites and move on. 

 

You've sort of proved my point with your first sentence, you are 100% right their is a select band who will never be keen to let it blow over.  Starmer in going to ridiculous lengths to placate their thirst is imo making the same mistake Corbyn made. 

 

As for your last sentence of purge and move on I'm not sure it'll be that easy or that quick or have the desired outcome. The chart I gave earlier/below shows the scale up until now and sadly it looks like getting a lot worse in the near future. The 30 that nominated Starmer in 2020 is sore reading for Labours leader.

 

 

[Numero Veinticinco]

There’s 650 CLPs. Purge. Purge hard.