Jump to content
rb14

Keir Starmer

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, sir roger said:

I blame myself to an extent for voting for him. I gave more weight to the ten pledges , his being a human rights lawyer and talk of him being a firebrand in his youth and not enough weight to what was right in front of my eyes , the knighthood / Trilateral stuff. I suppose I was hoping for a Miliband with gravitas , but ended up with a Gordon Brittas with a knack for getting every binary decision wrong. A mate of mine said that if Starmer was on Play Your Cards Right he would definitely go lower than a three.


There wasn’t much in the way of choice though, Rog. I reluctantly voted for RLB, knowing that she wasn’t gonna win. More of a protest vote than anything else. Even if she’d won, she’d probably have been shite and the press would have savaged her and forced her out within months. 
 

29 minutes ago, Mudface said:

Well this sounds like a load of shite.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/sep/23/keir-starmer-labour-road-ahead-centre-fabian-society

 

Think I'll be cancelling my membership, it's pointless and I feel like Starmer lied with his 'pledges'.

 

Our local candidate last time jacked it in and went to the greens as soon as he started reneging on the pledges. Said it loads on here but I’m only still in because I’ve got friends in the branch. One of them did me a boss Sunday dinner at the weekend. That’s worth the membership fee alone. 
 


Abandoning the pledges to stick with the popular parts of Corbyn’s policies is fucking disgraceful. As is this plan to do away with the one member, one vote system. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Mudface said:

Well this sounds like a load of shite.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/sep/23/keir-starmer-labour-road-ahead-centre-fabian-society

 

Think I'll be cancelling my membership, it's pointless and I feel like Starmer lied with his 'pledges'.

Really meek and banal. The last two years of state spending has made Corbyn's manifesto state intervention and spending pledges seem positively timid. Starmer appears to be stuck in the 1990's, small state, limited change, we can manage the economy better than the Tories, in fact we are the Tories just more competent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

Left Twitter today is like "Get rewarded for hard work? What kind of Tory cuntery is that?"

Is it, though? Are you quite sure you're not just a lying bellwhiff who's pulled some more tagnuts of fiction out of his stupid little ringpiece?

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

Is it, though? Are you quite sure you're not just a lying bellwhiff who's pulled some more tagnuts of fiction out of his stupid little ringpiece?

Maybe no left leaning labour voter does work hard?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

Is it, though? Are you quite sure you're not just a lying bellwhiff who's pulled some more tagnuts of fiction out of his stupid little ringpiece?

 

The post literally before yours is calling Starmer a Tory. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

The post literally before yours is calling Starmer a Tory. 

But, you said Twitter. The Liverpool Way isn't Twitter. Glad to help. 

 

On another general note, a 14,000 word essay just isn't exciting, is it? 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

The post literally before yours is calling Starmer a Tory. 

What's that got to do with your lie about Twitter and hard work?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

What's that got to do with your lie about Twitter and hard work?

 

Do try and join the dots. There are only two of them, after all.

 

1) Starmer has released a pamphlet saying "We will always put hard-working families and their priorities first" and "If you work hard and play by the rules, you should be rewarded fairly"

2) Starmer is being called a Tory because of the above pamphlet

 

Not sure which of these 100% undisputable statements is supposed to be a lie, but from experience on here I can't say I'm surprised to see these complete truths being turned on their head.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

Do try and join the dots. There are only two of them, after all.

 

1) Starmer has released a pamphlet saying "We will always put hard-working families and their priorities first" and "If you work hard and play by the rules, you should be rewarded fairly"

2) Starmer is being called a Tory because of the above pamphlet

 

Not sure which of these 100% undisputable statements is supposed to be a lie, but from experience on here I can't say I'm surprised to see these complete truths being turned on their head.

1. Starmer has released a long (about 12,000 words or something) pamphlet called "the road ahead", that says "the role of government is to be a partner to the private sector".

2. Nobody that I've seen on "Left Twitter" (or anywhere else) has criticised the idea that work should be rewarded; in fact, the lefties I've seen criticise Starmer because he doesn't demand strongly or consistently that work should be properly rewarded.

 

You really are a dishonest little shit.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

1. Starmer has released a long (about 12,000 words or something) pamphlet called "the road ahead", that says "the role of government is to be a partner to the private sector".

2. Nobody that I've seen on "Left Twitter" (or anywhere else) has criticised the idea that work should be rewarded; in fact, the lefties I've seen criticise Starmer because he doesn't demand strongly or consistently that work should be properly rewarded.

 

You really are a dishonest little shit.

 

Ah, okay, so Starmer is a Tory because of 13 words out of a 12,000 word pamphlet. Gotcha.

 

And you accuse me of dishonesty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

Ah, okay, so Starmer is a Tory because of 13 words out of a 12,000 word pamphlet. Gotcha.

 

And you accuse me of dishonesty.

Ah, okay, people are calling Starmer a Tory because of 5 words ("get rewarded for hard work") out of a 12,000 word pamphlet.

Gotcha.

 

I don't accuse you of dishonesty: I highlight your already-obvious dishonesty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

Ah, okay, people are calling Starmer a Tory because of 5 words ("get rewarded for hard work") out of a 12,000 word pamphlet.

Gotcha.

 

I don't accuse you of dishonesty: I highlight your already-obvious dishonesty.

 

Hey, at least you're not denying that people are calling Starmer a Tory now. Small steps.

 

So what's wrong with private enterprise and government partnering for the common good, then? Bearing in mind recent very high profile examples of them doing just that to, you know, end a devastating pandemic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

Hey, at least you're not denying that people are calling Starmer a Tory now. Small steps.

As you know, I never did deny that. You lying tit.

 

1 minute ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

So what's wrong with private enterprise and government partnering for the common good, then? Bearing in mind recent very high profile examples of them doing just that to, you know, end a devastating pandemic.

People are criticising the idea that the purpose of government is to support private businesses, rather than, y'know, support people.

But that's not the point here. The point is that you said that"Left Twitter" were criticising the idea of rewarding hard work. You lied.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

As you know, I never did deny that. You lying tit.

 

People are criticising the idea that the purpose of government is to support private businesses, rather than, y'know, support people.

But that's not the point here. The point is that you said that"Left Twitter" were criticising the idea of rewarding hard work. You lied.

 

Ah, okay, when you called me a liar multiple times for saying that people were calling Starmer a Tory, that was what confused me.

 

So what we have instead is a disagreement over why people are calling Starmer a Tory. You have decided, apropos of nothing, that it's because of one small portion of his essay, whereas I assert that it relates to the thing taken as a whole and/or a different bit, which I have specifically seen people refer to.

 

If you want to talk about lies, let's start with the claim that anyone has said that the purpose of government is to support private businesses rather than people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason people criticise phrases like ‘people should be rewarded if they work hard’ is because it implies people in low paid jobs are not working hard because they are receiving low pay, when mostly this is not the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

Ah, okay, when you called me a liar multiple times for saying that people were calling Starmer a Tory, that was what confused me.

No. I never did that once. You lying tit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

Incidentally, here are some of those Tweets that don't exist.

 

tweet1.png

 

tweet2.png

 

tweet3.png

 

tweet4.png

Finally, an attempt to provide evidence for your claim.

 

So now we know what "Left Twitter" is: it's these four people. (I've even heard of one of them.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Anubis said:

The reason people criticise phrases like ‘people should be rewarded if they work hard’ is because it implies people in low paid jobs are not working hard because they are receiving low pay, when mostly this is not the case.

I see it as Starmers way of saying "we'll keep taxes and inflation low"

 

If Labour want to win more votes its sensible

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

Finally, an attempt to provide evidence for your claim.

 

So now we know what "Left Twitter" is: it's these four people. (I've even heard of one of them.)

Dude, I think you will be on a sticky wicket if you are trying to argue that Twitter was not full of dickhead work here. That is what Twitter is, tryhards trying hard to out dickhead each other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its designed to be a catch all statement and is pretty meaningless if you think about it. Except for me and the likes of me for whom it is discriminatory, people who avoid responsibility and do the bare minimum. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Available Subscriptions

  • Latest Round Up

  • Popular Contributors

  • top casino sites
  • Posts

    • No it wasn't meant to be. If enough supermarkets stopped allowing unvaxxed to get food and there's people that are isolated with no contacts they could end up starving.   Maybe some older people that don't use the internet and decide to go to a food bank or something, until they get so depressed from it that they stop going as much because they no longer see the point in life when they're cut off from being able to go anywhere without being vaxxed. Depression starts getting worse, trips to the food bank get rarer, nobody is checking on them, it's not much of a step from there.   Are there several things the person could've done to avoid things getting that bad? Of course, but there's probably going to be some people that don't do those things for various reasons. Ill health, physically and/or mentally being one.   Cases like that could be extremely rare if they happened, but one person ending up seriously ill or dead because they're not allowed to use a supermarket is one too many. And no, "get vaxxed" isn't the answer to that scenario. There's still choice right? Because if the choice is gone then we have fascism.   I don't care how stupid you think this is, if food can't be bought from supermarkets then rare cases could happen.   I was also being extreme because I responding to you saying that people serving unvaxxed was fascism. I didn't start posting about the issue saying people were going to starve to death.
    • At 4, she’s likely not into Harry Potter yet, but were making death eater masks here from paper mache masks, some silver paint and a sharpie.   zombie girls (school girls, punk girls, etc. are the other option that’s been popular round here the last year or two).   mines always been happy being a witch every year, so long as we make the outfit ourselves. Face paint too.
    • I noticed it in the last 15 mins. I know it was likely an easy game to officiate, the game was won, there was barely a forceful tackle all game… he might have well got the Hamlet out and sparked up. I bet Kelleher ran further. 
        It felt there was a couple of tackles toward the end where we pinched it off them and it looked like he guessed and gave them the decision.   How old is Moss? He was Milner’s PE teacher. Milner is 36 so Moss must be at least 54, surely older. He’s garbage. 
    • 130,000 preventable deaths over a seven year period due to austerity, all before Brexit. Its important not to rewrite history as can inadvertently give the perpetrators an alibi for their mass murder.   https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/01/perfect-storm-austerity-behind-130000-deaths-uk-ippr-report?__twitter_impression=true    
    • Italian refs nearly as bad as English ones. Roma shafted there.  Football really is awful at the 'advantage' rule
  • new UK casino
  • Topics

×