Keir Starmer

[Numero Veinticinco]

You are so incredibly stupid. I can't understand it for you, and I don't think me trying again is going to change anything.  

[Gnasher]

Unity,

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/may/15/wakefield-labour-party-walks-out-of-final-vote-on-bylection-candidate

 

https://labourlist.org/2022/05/exclusive-labour-accused-of-breaching-rules-in-wakefield-candidate-selection/

 

 

[Numero Veinticinco]

12 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

Unity,

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/may/15/wakefield-labour-party-walks-out-of-final-vote-on-bylection-candidate

 

https://labourlist.org/2022/05/exclusive-labour-accused-of-breaching-rules-in-wakefield-candidate-selection/

 

 

I’d probably need a better source than a right wing, Thatcher loving, ‘ship them all to Rwanda’ spouting Twitter user before I’d be sure about this ID card equivalence. Not saying it’s not true, but fool me once with Twitter lies, shame on you, fool me twice… 

 

ya can’t get fooled again. 

[Gnasher]

 

[Gnasher]

Feel sorry for the people of Wakefield... from a nonce to a hard place..

 

 

[Numero Veinticinco]

44 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

Feel sorry for the people of Wakefield... from a nonce to a hard place..

 

 

Why is he a ‘hard place’? NHS worker backed by @SocialistNHS. I won’t expect a response, it’s clear your views are paper thin and you can’t answer questions about your Twitter aggregation posts, but I genuinely wondered why he’s the hard place?

[Strontium]

2 hours ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

Why is he a ‘hard place’? NHS worker backed by @SocialistNHS. I won’t expect a response, it’s clear your views are paper thin and you can’t answer questions about your Twitter aggregation posts, but I genuinely wondered why he’s the hard place?

 

Here's the victorious candidate's promo vid. I must say, I'm interested in Gnasher's response to your question. He (Lightwood) doesn't come across as some kind of horror.

 

 

[Numero Veinticinco]

8 minutes ago, Strontium said:

 

Here's the victorious candidate's promo vid. I must say, I'm interested in Gnasher's response to your question. He (Lightwood) doesn't come across as some kind of horror.

 

 

He is quite disgusting, it seems. But I’m sure Gnasher will answer an honest question with an honest answer, and tell us what has been missed with this ‘hard place’ choice. After all, Gnasher wouldn’t just have spewed some bollocks from Twitter without having some real grounding for his criticism. 

[Gnasher]

13 minutes ago, Strontium said:

 

Here's the victorious candidate's promo vid. I must say, I'm interested in Gnasher's response to your question. He (Lightwood) doesn't come across as some kind of horror.

 

 

Why wasn't he chosen by the method agreed then? The answer is the Labour members/voters have been put in a hard place because they've been denied the right to vote for the candidate they wanted. Instead they were left with a choice which they couldn't abide, 72% didn't vote at the hustings. What is it about grass roots democracy that so scares our politicians?

 

Edit; also if the reports of voter identity being enforced on some members are true then Labour need to have a look at themselves.

[Gnasher]

4 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

He is quite disgusting, it seems. But I’m sure Gnasher will answer an honest question with an honest answer, and tell us what has been missed with this ‘hard place’ choice. After all, Gnasher wouldn’t just have spewed some bollocks from Twitter without having some real grounding for his criticism. 

 

It's odd you go on and on about the people I link on twitter yet you can't find one example of me linking my so called guru Rachael Swinton.. you can't because you made it up.

 

More importantly you could address the subject matter at hand instead of shooting the messenger. 

[Gnasher]

Anyway it worked for them in Hartlepool so who am I to throw I'm my tuppence?

[Numero Veinticinco]

16 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

 

It's odd you go on and on about the people I link on twitter yet you can't find one example of me linking my so called guru Rachael Swinton.. you can't because you made it up.

 

More importantly you could address the subject matter at hand instead of shooting the messenger. 

Except for the fact that I didn't say you linked Rachel Swindon. I'm happy for you to show me where I did say that (I'll donate any figure you deem acceptable to charity and apologise to you in full) or you can retract what you just said about me making things up and apologise. I didn't shoot the messenger, I wondered why you referred to Lightwood as 'hard place' (vs the 'nonce'). You still haven't actually answered that. It was obvious you were referring to the man as you said 'from a nonce to a hard place'. It doesn't matter, you won't actually answer. I literally was just wondering what was wrong with him, if anything. 

[Strontium]

35 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

Why wasn't he chosen by the method agreed then? The answer is the Labour members/voters have been put in a hard place because they've been denied the right to vote for the candidate they wanted. Instead they were left with a choice which they couldn't abide, 72% didn't vote at the hustings. What is it about grass roots democracy that so scares our politicians?

 

Edit; also if the reports of voter identity being enforced on some members are true then Labour need to have a look at themselves.

 

Okay, so your issue is not with the candidate, but Labour's rather arcane selection rules apparently not being properly followed. That's something I suppose.

 

If it's true that they were demanding voter ID to vote in the contest after opposing voter ID for public elections, I agree that would seem a little on the hypocritical side. Although I think I'll wait for credible confirmation on that from a less... biased source.

[Gnasher]

15 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

Except for the fact that I didn't say you linked Rachel Swindon. I'm happy for you to show me where I did say that (I'll donate any figure you deem acceptable to charity and apologise to you in full) or you can retract what you just said about me making things up and apologise. I didn't shoot the messenger, I wondered why you referred to Lightwood as 'hard place' (vs the 'nonce'). You still haven't actually answered that. It was obvious you were referring to the man as you said 'from a nonce to a hard place'. It doesn't matter, you won't actually answer. I literally was just wondering what was wrong with him, if anything. 

The Swindon thing is trivial, you misjudged me there as I try to stay away from the Owen Jones type political commentators as they are all a bit Meh, but anyway.

 

As for the 'hard place' then where are the members to go? They are stuck with what's given, so in a hard place, hence my comment. As for Stronts comment on the quality of candidate, not for us to say, should be up those in Wakefield. You were hinting I only express veiws off twitter earlier, I can't win.

 

Heres a Guardian journo on the subject. Mandatory kicking of Corbyn by Labour bigwigs at end of article. 

 

 

[Gnasher]

11 minutes ago, Strontium said:

 

Okay, so your issue is not with the candidate, but Labour's rather arcane selection rules apparently not being properly followed. That's something I suppose.

 

If it's true that they were demanding voter ID to vote in the contest after opposing voter ID for public elections, I agree that would seem a little on the hypocritical side. Although I think I'll wait for credible confirmation on that from a less... biased source.

Yeah basically that Stronts. 

[Numero Veinticinco]

48 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

The Swindon thing is trivial, you misjudged me there as I try to stay away from the Owen Jones type political commentators as they are all a bit Meh, but anyway.

Ha! Okay. So you call me out for making something up, then when I ask you to back it up you just call it trivial because, well, you made it up. Great times had by all. Anyway, moving on...

 

I don't know the veracity of the claims made about voter ID. I certainly don't know the scale of it, the policies behind it, or if there's any legitimate reason for it (if there is any at all). I also don't know what rules were broken - if any - or by whom, so it's hard to actually comment. It seems to me like they were playing politics and wanted to get somebody else chosen, probably unpalatable to some upstairs. I think I've made it clear that I want them to do what it takes to win, if they were trying to get some unelectable candidate who only cares about shit nobody else does... then, well... meh. Especially if the 'rule breach' was he wasn't from the area after living there 10 years.

[Gnasher]

24 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

Ha! Okay. So you call me out for making something up, then when I ask you to back it up you just call it trivial because, well, you made it up. Great times had by all. Anyway, moving on...

 

I don't know the veracity of the claims made about voter ID. I certainly don't know the scale of it, the policies behind it, or if there's any legitimate reason for it (if there is any at all). I also don't know what rules were broken - if any - or by whom, so it's hard to actually comment. It seems to me like they were playing politics and wanted to get somebody else chosen, probably unpalatable to some upstairs. I think I've made it clear that I want them to do what it takes to win, if they were trying to get some unelectable candidate who only cares about shit nobody else does... then, well... meh. Especially if the 'rule breach' was he wasn't from the area after living there 10 years.

 

I don't know the inner workings of Wakefield Labour party but it seems in trying to keep a tight ship and not be left with a complete duffer the Lab top table have made unnecessary controversy, it's once again  rebounded on themselves.

 

In more general terms it's just a constant tiresome battle with the left and a fixation with all things Corbyn. Look at the end of Guardian article linked above as an example, why the fuck mention him?

 

Starmer needs to bin a few of his advisors imo and loosen the rhetoric against those in his own party which is causing alienation with activists on the ground. Looking at Labours so so showing throughout England in the recent council elections I believe its now costing him votes. Just my opinion.

[Numero Veinticinco]

5 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

 

I don't know the inner workings of Wakefield Labour party but it seems in trying to keep a tight ship and not be left with a complete duffer the Lab top table have made unnecessary controversy, it's once again  rebounded on themselves.

 

In more general terms it's just a constant tiresome battle with the left and a fixation with all things Corbyn. Look at the end of Guardian article linked above as an example, why the fuck mention him?

 

Starmer needs to bin a few of his advisors imo and loosen the rhetoric against those in his own party which is causing alienation with activists on the ground. Looking at Labours so so showing throughout England in the recent council elections I believe its now costing him votes. Just my opinion.

I think the obsession goes both ways, I think it has for a very long time. As to what really happened and why... all I'm seeing in that link is the objection to local ties, which seems strange for somebody who has lived and worked there - in the NHS - for so long. 

[YorkshireRed]

6 hours ago, Gnasher said:

Feel sorry for the people of Wakefield... from a nonce to a hard place..

 

 

You should try living here.

 

Although, on the upside, we rule the world in the production of Rhubarb. 

[Gnasher]

4 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

I think the obsession goes both ways, I think it has for a very long time. As to what really happened and why... all I'm seeing in that link is the objection to local ties, which seems strange for somebody who has lived and worked there - in the NHS - for so long. 

The end of the link the Labour source brings up Corbyn, they seem to do it all the time, I think it's  mistake and its up to them to change the narrative. Looks like the right wing media are going to try thumping Labour by their apparent embarrassment of Corbyn, saw it with the Andrea Neil interveiw and Hodges and Co have also picked up the scent, Reeves fell in the trap in Yorkshire recently. Imo the answer is easy, disagree with Corbs on foreign policy, Nato/ Russia etc but agree and admire his efforts on trying to create a fairer society, but I'm not a politician so I may be looking at it simplistically 

[Gnasher]

16 minutes ago, YorkshireRed said:

You should try living here.

 

Although, on the upside, we rule the world in the production of Rhubarb. 

I used to love Rhubarb, haven't eaten it in years. Surely Labour will take that seat?

[YorkshireRed]

5 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

I used to love Rhubarb, haven't eaten it in years. Surely Labour will take that seat?

If they don’t then Labour might as well give up and go home. Despite the selection issues they should win comfortably but who knows in the current climate. 
 

A rhubarb crumble with custard is a pudding from the gods. 

[Numero Veinticinco]

19 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

The end of the link the Labour source brings up Corbyn, they seem to do it all the time, I think it's  mistake and its up to them to change the narrative. Looks like the right wing media are going to try thumping Labour by their apparent embarrassment of Corbyn, saw it with the Andrea Neil interveiw and Hodges and Co have also picked up the scent, Reeves fell in the trap in Yorkshire recently. Imo the answer is easy, disagree with Corbs on foreign policy, Nato/ Russia etc but agree and admire his efforts on trying to create a fairer society, but I'm not a politician so I may be looking at it simplistically 

It's only simplistic insofar as it only counts one half of the equation. I would personally like to remove Corbyn from the discussion. It's gross that somebody who offered so little, achieved so little, and has absolutely nothing politically unique about him is spoken about so much. Unfortunately you have pockets of sycophants or demagogues on both sides continually drilling on about him, in CLPs people bringing up motions about him, walkouts over him, etc. I wish he'd just fucking vanish, no matter if it's fair or not because I honestly don't give a fuck about him, I care about getting rid of the Tories not about Jeremy fucking Corbyn. I'm sick of hearing his name. That's as valid about when somebody from the Labour leadership mentions him as it is when one of his acolytes mentions him. That said, if whatever this Wakefield bollocks is about is his acolytes trying to get a 'Corbynite' in to cause a rift, then I'm not shocked that others mentioned him. I'm sick of the bollocks. It looks to me on the face of it that it actually is a group of people trying to stick it to Starmer because they're Corbyn faithful. If that's the case, they can get all the way fucked. 

[Gnasher]

If the Labour hierarchy want Corbyn and his era to vanish I'd think a good idea would be to stop going on about him. Giving the enemy ammo, and they will not miss the target, here we go..

 

 

And the amount of fucks given by the public remains nil.

[Numero Veinticinco]

1 minute ago, Gnasher said:

If the Labour hierarchy want Corbyn and his era to vanish I'd think a good idea would be to stop going on about him. Giving the enemy ammo, and they will not miss the target, here we go..

 

 

And the amount of fucks given by the public remains nil.

That’s not the Labour hierarchy and he is quoting something two years old.