Keir Starmer

[Numero 6,925]

2 minutes ago, Bobby Hundreds said:

I see no problem in calling the massive political donors like the Koch brothers, Barclay brothers, big corporations the big media barons "puppet masters" or anybody you feel politicians try to please far more than they do the wider public

Of course there's no real issue with calling out those who are puppet masters. The problem is that it's politically stupid to do if it falls into the trope, especially at a time when it's a subject that's very raw. It's just daft to touch it. RBL was daft to touch it. Reed was daft to touch it. He was right to apologise, in my view. If he didn't and Starmer didn't sack him, Starmer would have been totally in the wrong and the spurious claims about getting rid of the left would have merit. Fortunately, there seems to be some consistency there. If you make a mistake, apologise and remove it. If you don't, you'll get sacked. 

[Antynwa 23]

17 minutes ago, Bobby Hundreds said:

I see no problem in calling the massive political donors like the Koch brothers, Barclay brothers, big corporations the big media barons "puppet masters" or anybody you feel politicians try to please far more than they do the wider public. Saying politicians are in thrall to big money and act like puppets to their paymasters isn't about religion, race or culture. If you specifically only label Jewish donors as such then fair enough you have an agenda, there are people who do believe that conspiracy and it is harmful but their motivations would become apparent soon enough, you'd hope.

 

The way I see it a cunts a cunt and should be called out as such. Peoples motivations are their own. There's a bloke I know who is gay and I can't stand him! he is a horrible person, I don't like him because he is a horrible person, there will be people who don't like him just because he is gay. We both don't like him, it doesn't mean our dislike comes from the same place. The difference is my dislike is retained for the individual and stays with the individual, he represents himself and nobody else. 

 

I've gone round the world just to say I find it scary how people can try to destroy others lives by creating their own motivations behind what someone else has said. People can say things without fully taking on board the implications or historical meaning behind it or without even thinking how it could be twisted or framed, it shouldn't start a vendetta and an apology should sometimes be enough if it's needed. A white kid with dreadlocks isn't thinking about his hair once being a symbol of defiance for black people, the kid just likes dreadlocks even if he looks like a tit. Our every word shouldn't carry the baggage of history it should be taken in context with what we are saying and our character, who we are. We can't create a fear of dialogue because we haven't researched our every thought and played out the many ways it can be interpreted.

 

Surely most people have the basic sense to see what a person means and whether what they are saying comes from a good place or not. Like Evertonians saying Justice for the 39, that doesn't come from a good place, it isn't said in genuine sympathy for those lives lost, it's a means to attack a rival. You can see through the veneer it's so thinly made. 

 

So yeah. I just wish people would calm down take a step back and I don't know may be fuck off a little bit.

 

 

 

We live in a society where judgement is instant, severe with very little understanding for nuance 

[Jairzinho 22,768]

Twitterification.

 

Or something.

[Bjornebye 24,887]

If a Jewish person happens to run a big corporation and is a puppet master to those below him are we allowed to call him a puppet master or not? Because obviously we can call anyone who isn't Jewish a puppet master if they act like one. 

[aRdja 2,659]

30 minutes ago, Antynwa said:

We live in a society where judgement is instant, severe with very little understanding for nuance 

I agree with the sentiment but in this particular instance it’s misguided IMHO.

[mattyq 1,980]

If a Jewish person has loads of puppets and likes to put on shows and is really excellent at it are we allowed to call him/her a Puppet Master?

[skend04 2,161]

Well, what about Sandy Shaw? She did that Eurovision about Puppet on a String. Anti-Semite!

[Anubis 17,231]

On 07/07/2020 at 14:34, aRdja said:

 

There are loads of calls (mostly from ‘left’ Twitter) for Starmer to sack this guy. 

Strange that you’re not calling for him to be sacked the way you have with previous allegations.

[aRdja 2,659]

40 minutes ago, Anubis said:

Strange that you’re not calling for him to be sacked the way you have with previous allegations.

Eh? I am.

[aRdja 2,659]

*scratches head*

[Anubis 17,231]

CCHQ seem to have conveniently missed out these tweets which form part of the thread. Context.

 

 

 

 

 

[Numero 6,925]

Competent, likeable, decisive: Keir Starmer beating Boris Johnson on all counts

 

An Observer poll finds voters now believe that the Labour leader is outperforming the prime minister

 

Half of UK voters say they have formed a more favourable view of the Labour party since Keir Starmer became its leader in April, according to the latest Opinium poll for the Observer.

On Monday Starmer will mark his first 100 days since succeeding Jeremy Corbyn, and he has made a far greater positive impact with the electorate than his predecessor did in his early days in charge.

 

The findings will encourage Labour MPs, members and activists, many of whom believed the party would face a minimum period of 10 years of rebuilding after their disastrous general election last December, and that Starmer would struggle to make an impact in the midst of the coronavirus crisis.

 

But the reverse seems to be true according to Opinium’s findings. Significantly, 52% of voters now say they could imagine Starmer inside No 10. Two weeks ago, Opinium found more people cited Starmer as their preferred choice as prime minister (37%) than Boris Johnson (35%).

The poll also shows Starmer is now strongly favoured by voters over Johnson when people are asked about the two leaders’ qualities – such as their competence, their ability to take decisions and get things done, and their ability to represent this country abroad.

 

 

The main downside for Labour, however, is that Starmer and his shadow chancellor Anneliese Dodds are still well behind the Tory leadership team of Johnson and the chancellor, Rishi Sunak, when it comes to economic competence and people’s faith in Labour’s ability to run the economy: 42% said they favoured Johnson and Sunak against 26% for Starmer and Dodds.

 

Labour now stands four points behind the Conservatives overall, with the Tories on 42%, Labour on 38% and the Liberal Democrats on 6%. But this represents a remarkable turnaround from the end of March, just after Johnson announced a full lockdown and days before Starmer took charge, when the Tories were on 54%, 26 points ahead of Labour on 28%.

 

Laura Parker, the former national coordinator of Momentum, the grassroots group set up to support Corbyn’s leadership, said that while there had been aspects of Starmer’s early leadership with which some party members had been very unhappy, including his response to the Black Lives Matter movement and the sacking of Rebecca Long-Bailey, there was now a willingness across the party to work with him. That would continue, she said, unless he backed away from the radical manifesto on which he fought the leadership election.

 

“We are going to have to build a broad coalition to beat this lot [the Tories] and after four election defeats the party left, centre and right have understood that,” she said.

The extent to which Starmer has struck a chord with voters is underlined by responses when people are asked about the leaders’ abilities and qualities in specific areas.

 

When asked about competence, Starmer scores a net positive result of +28 against -4 for Johnson. (These are the scores when the percentage of those who believe they are not competent are subtracted from the percentages who say they are.)

 

On the question of whether they are strong leaders, Johnson scores -2 while Starmer is on +21.

Starmer even does better than Johnson when people are asked who would be better at negotiating with the EU with Johnson scoring +2 and Starmer +4.

[Jose Jones 2,622]

14 minutes ago, Numero said:

Competent, likeable, decisive: Keir Starmer beating Boris Johnson on all counts

 

An Observer poll finds voters now believe that the Labour leader is outperforming the prime minister

 

Half of UK voters say they have formed a more favourable view of the Labour party since Keir Starmer became its leader in April, according to the latest Opinium poll for the Observer.

On Monday Starmer will mark his first 100 days since succeeding Jeremy Corbyn, and he has made a far greater positive impact with the electorate than his predecessor did in his early days in charge.

 

The findings will encourage Labour MPs, members and activists, many of whom believed the party would face a minimum period of 10 years of rebuilding after their disastrous general election last December, and that Starmer would struggle to make an impact in the midst of the coronavirus crisis.

 

But the reverse seems to be true according to Opinium’s findings. Significantly, 52% of voters now say they could imagine Starmer inside No 10. Two weeks ago, Opinium found more people cited Starmer as their preferred choice as prime minister (37%) than Boris Johnson (35%).

The poll also shows Starmer is now strongly favoured by voters over Johnson when people are asked about the two leaders’ qualities – such as their competence, their ability to take decisions and get things done, and their ability to represent this country abroad.

 

 

The main downside for Labour, however, is that Starmer and his shadow chancellor Anneliese Dodds are still well behind the Tory leadership team of Johnson and the chancellor, Rishi Sunak, when it comes to economic competence and people’s faith in Labour’s ability to run the economy: 42% said they favoured Johnson and Sunak against 26% for Starmer and Dodds.

 

Labour now stands four points behind the Conservatives overall, with the Tories on 42%, Labour on 38% and the Liberal Democrats on 6%. But this represents a remarkable turnaround from the end of March, just after Johnson announced a full lockdown and days before Starmer took charge, when the Tories were on 54%, 26 points ahead of Labour on 28%.

 

Laura Parker, the former national coordinator of Momentum, the grassroots group set up to support Corbyn’s leadership, said that while there had been aspects of Starmer’s early leadership with which some party members had been very unhappy, including his response to the Black Lives Matter movement and the sacking of Rebecca Long-Bailey, there was now a willingness across the party to work with him. That would continue, she said, unless he backed away from the radical manifesto on which he fought the leadership election.

 

“We are going to have to build a broad coalition to beat this lot [the Tories] and after four election defeats the party left, centre and right have understood that,” she said.

The extent to which Starmer has struck a chord with voters is underlined by responses when people are asked about the leaders’ abilities and qualities in specific areas.

 

When asked about competence, Starmer scores a net positive result of +28 against -4 for Johnson. (These are the scores when the percentage of those who believe they are not competent are subtracted from the percentages who say they are.)

 

On the question of whether they are strong leaders, Johnson scores -2 while Starmer is on +21.

Starmer even does better than Johnson when people are asked who would be better at negotiating with the EU with Johnson scoring +2 and Starmer +4.

How many times did the Observer call you up for that one?

[Numero 6,925]

9 minutes ago, Jose Jones said:

How many times did the Observer call you up for that one?

'Opinium interviewed 2,002 adults on 9 and 10 July'. 

 

No times. I'm not an adult.

[sir roger 5,698]

No mention of forensic ? He should sue.

[Numero 6,925]

10 minutes ago, sir roger said:

No mention of forensic ? He should sue.

Positive that he is making some sort of inroad into the massive Tory numbers from when he took over though, right? 

[Rotpeter 1,073]

The times has been painting him as a charmless, leaden footed, though competent, technocrat.  He'll be getting the Miliband treatment before long.

[sir roger 5,698]

1 hour ago, Numero said:

Positive that he is making some sort of inroad into the massive Tory numbers from when he took over though, right? 

Yes , brilliant,  its almost like he isn't up against a pm who along with his chums has been complicit in the deaths of nearly 50,000 of our citizens since he took over, and is still behind.

[Numero 6,925]

2 minutes ago, sir roger said:

Yes , brilliant,  its almost like he isn't up against a pm who along with his chums has been complicit in the deaths of nearly 50,000 of our citizens since he took over, and is still behind.

Righto. 

[Gnasher 1,687]

 

[Gnasher 1,687]

 

 

 

[Gnasher 1,687]

Maybe the message the above polls prove is to not be suckered in by shrills on internet forums. 

[Bruce Spanner 2,479]

Was ‘speaking’ to what I’d describe as a privileged social justice warrior, you get a lot in London, surprisingly.

 

Voted for Clegg, joined labour to support Corbyn etc Will go whichever way the ‘righteous’ wind blows.

 

Anyhow’s she described Starmer as a stooge! When pressed obviously she didn’t have answers as she’s told her opinion through twitter and can’t quite remember why the hive mind has already turned against him, but something about BLM and not attacking enough was enough to cast aside and ‘demand’ change.

 

Now these people are numerous, not a huge number, but they’re very fucking vocal. They are the clowns in momentum who jumped down everyone’s throat for trying to have an opinion which slightly contradicted ‘their message’, obviously not all momentum, but personally I saw in several big cities it being co-opted to shout down dissenting voices. They are the people who know somebody who can get them on newsnight, or published. They are the people who shout the loudest and longest even though their message is subject to constant change.
 

We don’t stand a chance if democracy is fed to people in a 140 character form for them to regurgitate without understanding as passionately as if they were blood and bones the victims of oppression.

[Anubis 17,231]

Yes, I’m sure Momentum and Corbyn supporters are responsible for a 2% rise in Conservative voting intention.

 

I think you’re looking for your culprits in the wrong place, Bruce. 

[Numero 6,925]

Interesting that weeks and weeks of favourable polling was handwaved away as meaningless, yet the first negative one is suddenly solid proof of his shitness. 
 

Increased polling is a positive, decreased is negative, but only if your objective is to get the Tories out. Not so much if you’re only interested with the infighting.