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

17 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

You want to put a tin hat on for saying that on here. How dare you!

More strawmannery. 

 

Fair reasons to call out Starmer: Not performing well as leader of the opposition 

Unfair reasons to call out Starmer: Being a Sir, being secretly called Keith, not being Corbyn 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Section_31 said:

More strawmannery. 

 

Fair reasons to call out Starmer: Not performing well as leader of the opposition 

Unfair reasons to call out Starmer: Being a Sir, being secretly called Keith, not being Corbyn 

 

Er you brought Corbyn into this debate although he has pretty much zero to do with it. You just cant miss the chance for a free kick in the bollocks. Not a cult though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

Er you brought Corbyn into this debate although he has pretty much zero to do with it. You just cant miss the chance for a free kick in the bollocks. Not a cult though.

You'd have a point if I hadn't actually written different words in completely different sentences.

 

I said Starmer got grief for not being Corbyn or Corbyn's heir by the people who are loyal to him, I don't dislike Corbyn at all, I think there's a place for him in British politics, I just don't want anyone who follows him fucking with Labour's election chances, my views on it are really that simple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Rocky Sullivan said:

You're just so tiresome. You're all over politics threads being wrong in a very loud voice.

You forget to disclose in your own opinion ma, because it is your own opinion unless you now have alleviated yourself to some kind of pinnacle on this here forum, or are you one of these first class nut jobs who delve into and become their own persona? Want my opinion ma,  my opinion is I'm on top of the world ma. Fuck off and do one 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Gnasher said:

You forget to disclose in your own opinion ma, because it is your own opinion unless you now have alleviated yourself to some kind of pinnacle on this here forum, or are you one of these first class nut jobs who delve into and become their own persona? Want my opinion ma,  my opinion is I'm on top of the world ma. Fuck off and do one 

Are you Yvette Cooper by any chance? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Section_31 said:

You'd have a point if I hadn't actually written different words in completely different sentences.

 

I said Starmer got grief for not being Corbyn or Corbyn's heir by the people who are loyal to him, I don't dislike Corbyn at all, I think there's a place for him in British politics, I just don't want anyone who follows him fucking with Labour's election chances, my views on it are really that simple.

For some strange reason you brought  Jeremy Corbyn into a debate that wasnt about Jeremy Corbyn. It seemed the only reason you brought Jeremy Corbyn into a debate that had nothing at all to do with Jeremy Corbyn was because you may not be to fond of Jeremy Corbyn. It seems to the untrained eye that the reason you mention Jeremy Corbyn is because someone criticised Kier Starmer. I hope the above post shows how easy it is to mention/blame Jeremy Corbyn when Jeremy Corbyn has very little to do with a subject that doesn't concern Jeremy Corbyn and Jeremy Corbyn has not offered an opinion on.

 

Make of that what you will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Gnasher said:

For some strange reason you brought  Jeremy Corbyn into a debate that wasnt about Jeremy Corbyn. It seemed the only reason you brought Jeremy Corbyn into a debate that had nothing at all to do with Jeremy Corbyn was because you may not be to fond of Jeremy Corbyn. It seems to the untrained eye that the reason you mention Jeremy Corbyn is because someone criticised Kier Starmer. I hope the above post shows how easy it is to mention/blame Jeremy Corbyn when Jeremy Corbyn has very little to do with a subject that doesn't concern Jeremy Corbyn and Jeremy Corbyn has not offered an opinion on.

 

Make of that what you will.

tenor.gif?itemid=8846323

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Section_31 said:

You'd have a point if I hadn't actually written different words in completely different sentences.

 

I said Starmer got grief for not being Corbyn or Corbyn's heir by the people who are loyal to him, I don't dislike Corbyn at all, I think there's a place for him in British politics, I just don't want anyone who follows him fucking with Labour's election chances, my views on it are really that simple.

 

The one thing I don't understand is that it was largely the same membership that voted in Starmer that voted in Corbyn, so there must be a lot of members that voted for both? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, MegadriveMan said:

 

The one thing I don't understand is that it was largely the same membership that voted in Starmer that voted in Corbyn, so there must be a lot of members that voted for both? 

That's a fair point and I believe you are right and and awful lot of members who supported Corbyn voted and supported Starmer. 

 

I didn't have a vote as I'm not a member but I would probably have been one of these said people who supported Corbyn but voted Starmer. I still believe Starmer is our (when I say our i mean anti tory party, not something I'm going to subscribe to like a gratton catalogue) 

 

best chance of getting the tory incumbent out and as such I believe he deserves support although I believe his handling of the Corbyn situation has been a ridiculous over reaction which was neither warranted or needed. So there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aside from using his own private army to oust the government in a bloody coup there is nothing of any consequence that Starmer can say or do to change the current situation. 

 

There is actually no point in Labour MPs attending any commons sitting, such is the futility of fighting an 80 seat majority who also control the levers of national media.  

 

If anything, their presence in the commons gives an air of respectability to proceedings but sadly they offer themselves up as cheap targets for witless and clumsy Tory banter when Ministers are faced with an awkward situation.  

 

They need to not be there.  Let the public see the charade for what it is, and let the public be under no illusions as to who are to blame. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Colonel Bumcunt said:

Aside from using his own private army to oust the government in a bloody coup there is nothing of any consequence that Starmer can say or do to change the current situation. 

 

There is actually no point in Labour MPs attending any commons sitting, such is the futility of fighting an 80 seat majority who also control the levers of national media.  

 

If anything, their presence in the commons gives an air of respectability to proceedings but sadly they offer themselves up as cheap targets for witless and clumsy Tory banter when Ministers are faced with an awkward situation.  

 

They need to not be there.  Let the public see the charade for what it is, and let the public be under no illusions as to who are to blame. 

Yeah sad though init? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Numero said:

Well, that’s the latest thing they’ve jumped on, yes. It’ll be something else he hasn’t tweeted next week. They’re actively looking for things to pin on him and then they all jump on it. It’s a vendetta. If it was about policy and action then they’d try to get onside to influence him. Tweeting about Keith and posting pictures about fences, calling him a Tory might not be the best way to help teachers. 


They’re not just shitposting, they’re shouting as loud as they can at him to listen to the scientists and support the unions, and he’s made it clear he’s not listening. Even now with his call for a national lockdown he still isn’t saying schools should close. On this occasion I think their frustration spilling over into insults can be forgiven.

 

For a Labour leader to remain silent while public servants and their unions call for action to protect themselves and save thousands of lives is unforgivable. I’m struggling to think of a bigger fuck you from a Labour leader to a core part of the Labour coalition in my lifetime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, MegadriveMan said:

 

The one thing I don't understand is that it was largely the same membership that voted in Starmer that voted in Corbyn, so there must be a lot of members that voted for both? 


A lot of Corbyn supporters voted for Starmer because they thought he’d be more electable than RLB and believed he’d unite the party and stick to his ten pledges. The first looks as though it might hold water, the second not so much.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Neil G said:


A lot of Corbyn supporters voted for Starmer because they thought he’d be more electable than RLB and believed he’d unite the party and stick to his ten pledges. The first looks as though it might hold water, the second not so much.

Just about sums it up unfortunately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Neil G said:


They’re not just shitposting, they’re shouting as loud as they can at him to listen to the scientists and support the unions, and he’s made it clear he’s not listening. Even now with his call for a national lockdown he still isn’t saying schools should close. On this occasion I think their frustration spilling over into insults can be forgiven.

 

For a Labour leader to remain silent while public servants and their unions call for action to protect themselves and save thousands of lives is unforgivable. I’m struggling to think of a bigger fuck you from a Labour leader to a core part of the Labour coalition in my lifetime.

Hmm. Playing devils advocate here the threat to kids and teachers from the virus is slight (dont profess to be an expert on covid so sorry if wrong) The social impact on not sending kids back to school is massive. I can understand Starmers predicament here  

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...