Keir Starmer

[AngryOfTuebrook]

I don't think Starmer needed to go so far with this stuff about no Single Market and no Customs Union. I think he could - and should - have focused on the version of Brexit that was promised before the Referendum and that Labour (if not actually Starmer himself) ran the last two elections on versus the ruinous mess that Johnson and his gang of thieves are delivering.

[Numero Veinticinco]

Just now, AngryOfTuebrook said:

I don't think Starmer needed to go so far with this stuff about no Single Market and no Customs Union. I think he could - and should - have focused on the version of Brexit that was promised before the Referendum and that Labour (if not actually Starmer himself) ran the last two elections on versus the ruinous mess that Johnson and his gang of thieves are delivering.

I think those ships have long since sailed, mate. Seriously, if he left stuff like Single Market on the table, it would be serious stuff. The Sun *spit* are already going after him for going as far as he did.

 

I still think most of this is waffle. He is targeting a group of voters of a size that’s under 500,000. I think they know where they’re going to win, they will let LD have a crack where they’re not, then all focus in swing areas. That’s what all this is about. I think the number is closer to 300,000. 

[Barrington Womble]

1 hour ago, skend04 said:

Yeah, rejoining the EU isn't happening for a multitude of reasons. Most of them aren't even in the UK's gift to tackle. I'm just not sure why a speech had to be made to entrench the position of the party and country even further. I don't think there's been any targeting of Labour as wanting to rejoin. Maybe I've missed some news.

He's trying to win votes of traditional labour voters who defected to the Tories because of brexit. These people are cult like and will only give their vote back to Labour if they believe the brexit cult is safe. We'll be tied to a whole lot more than Johnson's brexit agreement if he doesn't win those votes back. We have to get them out at all costs and if that means pacifying all those brain-dead cunts who gave the Tories their vote because of brexit, that's what needs to be done.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

6 minutes ago, Barrington Womble said:

He's trying to win votes of traditional labour voters who defected to the Tories because of brexit. These people are cult like and will only give their vote back to Labour if they believe the brexit cult is safe. We'll be tied to a whole lot more than Johnson's brexit agreement if he doesn't win those votes back. We have to get them out at all costs and if that means pacifying all those brain-dead cunts who gave the Tories their vote because of brexit, that's what needs to be done.

The trouble is that those people will never trust him on Brexit. The news last night dug out footage from the 2019 General Election campaign of Starmer (and Thornberry) leading a rally in favour of stopping Brexit; nobody who wants Brexit is going to trust him to deliver it. 

 

(I could also go off on a tangent about the deeper problem being the way our parties and media "do politics", where it's all about the party leader, as if the Prime Minister is directly elected... but I've got stuff to do.)

[Bruce Spanner]

I think at this point what he says isn’t important, but where he’s getting eyes to look.

 

You now have the leader of the opposition calling out the failed experiment/implementation.

 

Thats what people are seeing and hearing, not Starmer talking about veterinary shortages.

 

People won’t remember in sixth months what he said apart from it’s not working, we had a plan to fix it, it’s on those cunts on the other side of the floor.

 

Customs is an easy on to get through, go after that first.

 

Freedom of movement and single market are harder sells, especially FoM, but start chipping away and seeding doubts. 
 

Long term you’ve got a potential coalition with the SNP, Labour North are already taking about fuller devolution and removal of the Lords and the Libs talking about rejoining. Use them as the leverage and compromise, fuller devolution and remove the incessant independence talk and PR implementation and they take the ‘blame’ for going back to Europe with a tail between our legs and begging bowl in hand.

 

 

[Barrington Womble]

13 minutes ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

The trouble is that those people will never trust him on Brexit. The news last night dug out footage from the 2019 General Election campaign of Starmer (and Thornberry) leading a rally in favour of stopping Brexit; nobody who wants Brexit is going to trust him to deliver it. 

 

(I could also go off on a tangent about the deeper problem being the way our parties and media "do politics", where it's all about the party leader, as if the Prime Minister is directly elected... but I've got stuff to do.)

That bit I have put in bold. I assume you mean deliver a successful brexit. Those brain-dead voters believe it's already delivered. All they want to be sure of is we don't row back. They don't care about all the issues. They don't even care about the NI protocol. They just wanted blue passports, no freedom of movement and for the British court to be supreme. Anything else is way out of their understanding. That's who he's messaging. You'll keep those 3 things, vote for me. 

[Gnasher]

Labour needs to be bold when trying to appeal to ordinary voters. Good idea this by McDonnell and Co.

 

Desperate time for many families so price controls make sense.

 

 

 

 

 

[Gnasher]

Interesting timing if true,

 

 

 

 

[skend04]

6 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

Interesting timing if true,

 

 

 

 

Do the CPS even deal with fixed penalty notices?

 

I smell BS with this tweet.

[Numero Veinticinco]

8 minutes ago, skend04 said:

Do the CPS even deal with fixed penalty notices?

 

I smell BS with this tweet.

They do, or they used to (link), But maybe they only deal with it if the person appeals it? 

[Numero Veinticinco]

This says

 

If you refuse to pay the fine within 28 days, you can be charged with breaching coronavirus regulations by the Crown Prosecution Service and summoned to court. There, you can mount a defence during criminal prosecution.

Alternatively, you can request a court appearance if you want to argue that a notice was wrongly issued.

[Bruce Spanner]

1 minute ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

This says

 

If you refuse to pay the fine within 28 days, you can be charged with breaching coronavirus regulations by the Crown Prosecution Service and summoned to court. There, you can mount a defence during criminal prosecution.

Alternatively, you can request a court appearance if you want to argue that a notice was wrongly issued.

 

Ivo Delingpole, son of Breitbart writer James Delingpole which isn't often mentioned, was all over the press this weekend telling all and sundry that he'd be willing to testify in court on the matter, so perhaps there is something in it.

 

For what it's worth the rumour a mate told me is Starmer will be fined, though treat everything with a pinch of salt because it's pretty much unknowable at this point and he admitted as such.

[Arniepie]

2 minutes ago, Bruce Spanner said:

 

Ivo Delingpole, son of Breitbart writer James Delingpole which isn't often mentioned, was all over the press this weekend telling all and sundry that he'd be willing to testify in court on the matter, so perhaps there is something in it.

 

For what it's worth the rumour a mate told me is Starmer will be fined, though treat everything with a pinch of salt because it's pretty much unknowable at this point and he admitted as such.

So if he gets fined,he walks?

[Bruce Spanner]

Just now, Arniepie said:

So if he gets fined,he walks?

 

Yes, and makes a huge fuss over honesty and integrity in politics etc.

 

He can appeal, but that could make him look shady, so the optics are really bad as he's not 'accepting the finding of the police' as Johnson did, though didn't resign.

 

So amazingly Johnson might get capitol out of it if Starmer goes against the judgement, ironically.

[Numero Veinticinco]

3 minutes ago, Bruce Spanner said:

 

Ivo Delingpole, son of Breitbart writer James Delingpole which isn't often mentioned, was all over the press this weekend telling all and sundry that he'd be willing to testify in court on the matter, so perhaps there is something in it.

 

For what it's worth the rumour a mate told me is Starmer will be fined, though treat everything with a pinch of salt because it's pretty much unknowable at this point and he admitted as such.

It’ll be so shit if this government take down the leader of the opposition using rules they introduced and then broke repeatedly, just for stopping to have a curry with the guys he was just working with. One time. 
 

My guess is they’d only meet with the CPS if they were thinking of finding him but wanted advice on whether or not the CPS would drop it or lose in court.

 

It’s entirely cunty. I do almost want it to happen though, so that there’s time for somebody else to settle in. I’m sick of hearing about Starmer being the worst thing ever when really he’s doing ‘okay’ for where we are in the cycle. I’d just sooner get whomever the left want, then listen to them tell ‘the right’ to give him a chance. And so spins the wheel. 

[Arniepie]

1 minute ago, Bruce Spanner said:

 

Yes, and makes a huge fuss over honesty and integrity in politics etc.

 

He can appeal, but that could make him look shady, so the optics are really bad as he's not 'accepting the finding of the police' as Johnson did, though didn't resign.

 

So amazingly Johnson might get capitol out of it if Starmer goes against the judgement, ironically.

If that happens you certainly can't fault his integrity, but surely he must have thought nothing would come off it?

There is obviously a huge irony there with his opposite number not knowing the meaning 0f the word responsibility,but I suppose it depends if it makes an impact when it comes to the election. 

[Bruce Spanner]

Just now, Numero Veinticinco said:

It’ll be so shit if this government take down the leader of the opposition using rules they introduced and then broke repeatedly, just for stopping to have a curry with the guys he was just working with. One time. 
 

My guess is they’d only meet with the CPS if they were thinking of finding him but wanted advice on whether or not the CPS would drop it or lose in court.

 

It’s entirely cunty. I do almost want it to happen though, so that there’s time for somebody else to settle in. I’m sick of hearing about Starmer being the worst thing ever when really he’s doing ‘okay’ for where we are in the cycle. I’d just sooner get whomever the left want, then listen to them tell ‘the right’ to give him a chance. And so spins the wheel. 

 

Even if that person is Wes Streeting?

[Numero Veinticinco]

Just now, Bruce Spanner said:

 

Even if that person is Wes Streeting?

That is NOT who the left want [that emoticon with the laughing tears here]

[Bruce Spanner]

7 minutes ago, Arniepie said:

If that happens you certainly can't fault his integrity, but surely he must have thought nothing would come off it?

There is obviously a huge irony there with his opposite number not knowing the meaning 0f the word responsibility,but I suppose it depends if it makes an impact when it comes to the election. 

 

Nothing should come of it as it was legal at the time, everything that happened in NO10 wasn't, that's the rub of it.

 

If he's found guilty it is because the police have shat their knickers so the don't look weak, or pressured, or had pressure externally put on them.

 

The Met investigation was a complete farce and should rightly be looked in to as a legitimate breach of public confidence in public life and potentially collusion. One of the real problems of The Met investigation, despite not actually investigating breaches fully, was not actually insisting surveys were filled out, chased up or collected, meaning lots just didn't bother filling them in, Johnson being one of them...

[Arniepie]

4 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

It’ll be so shit if this government take down the leader of the opposition using rules they introduced and then broke repeatedly, just for stopping to have a curry with the guys he was just working with. One time. 
 

My guess is they’d only meet with the CPS if they were thinking of finding him but wanted advice on whether or not the CPS would drop it or lose in court.

 

It’s entirely cunty. I do almost want it to happen though, so that there’s time for somebody else to settle in. I’m sick of hearing about Starmer being the worst thing ever when really he’s doing ‘okay’ for where we are in the cycle. I’d just sooner get whomever the left want, then listen to them tell ‘the right’ to give him a chance. And so spins the wheel. 

Whatever you think of him, he deserves a crack at an election. 

[Numero Veinticinco]

1 minute ago, Arniepie said:

Whatever you think of him, he deserves a crack at an election. 

I totally agree. I don’t think he has done much wrong, I think he is one of the few politicians with some actual integrity and honesty, and I think he would run government well. Whilst he may not be as left wing as I am, that consideration went out of the window a long time ago. The type of government and socialist policies I want aren’t going to happen, and I’m not sure they’re implementable in this capitalist world, so you’ve just got to go with what’s realistic. Starmer is realistically a decent PM even if he’s not uniting the party as LOTO. 

[Numero Veinticinco]

9 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

That is NOT who the left want [that emoticon with the laughing tears here]

I just noticed that I edited the part about ‘getting whichever leader the left want’ out of my post, so my post might be lacking just a wee bit of making sense. 
 

Edit. Fuck sakes, it’s in there. Time for one of Gnasher’s pills. 

[Arniepie]

6 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

I totally agree. I don’t think he has done much wrong, I think he is one of the few politicians with some actual integrity and honesty, and I think he would run government well. Whilst he may not be as left wing as I am, that consideration went out of the window a long time ago. The type of government and socialist policies I want aren’t going to happen, and I’m not sure they’re implementable in this capitalist world, so you’ve just got to go with what’s realistic. Starmer is realistically a decent PM even if he’s not uniting the party as LOTO. 

I also think he deserves to be judged on what type of manifesto he puts out there, as that's one of the big criticisms thrown his way.

If johnson does stay, I really can't see him getting anything like the 2019 result,though I still think some sort of coalition is the way forward. 

[Numero Veinticinco]

4 minutes ago, Arniepie said:

I also think he deserves to be judged on what type of manifesto he puts out there, as that's one of the big criticisms thrown his way.

If johnson does stay, I really can't see him getting anything like the 2019 result,though I still think some sort of coalition is the way forward. 

Totally with you. That’s what I’m going to judge him on, if he survives whatever bollocks this is. If it’s the neoliberal ‘deregulation, lower tax’ stuff that his poorly educated detractors suggest, then he can get fucked. It won’t be, of course. If it’s a mix of social justice, with support for business - especially SME sized businesses in emerging sectors - then I’m in. If he puts PR forward, I’ll rip my cock off. 
 

The smart plan would be this, say ‘no Single Market’ and don’t mention PR, then in any coalition make the LDs make it a condition. Bang. It’s their ‘fault’ we saved the country. 

[skend04]

Update from Diver.