Page 1 of 89

Labour, generally.

Posted: Fri May 07, 2021 4:03 pm
by Boiler
Another thread worth resurrecting.

I have half an ear on the tellybox as I type this, and I could have sworn I heard suggestion of Starmer having a reshuffle and moving Anneliese Dodds out of post.

Why?

Starmer's on the box now.

Re: Labour, generally.

Posted: Fri May 07, 2021 4:05 pm
by Malcolm Armsteen
Possibly because Labour just took a beating?

Just a thought.

Re: Labour, generally.

Posted: Fri May 07, 2021 4:15 pm
by Samanfur
Based on how evasive Starmer was when he was just asked repeatedly about it by the BBC, he's thinking about it.

Re: Labour, generally.

Posted: Fri May 07, 2021 4:21 pm
by Malcolm Armsteen
Perhaps we need a very public purge of the toxic left. And I'd include the unutterably stupid Ed Miliband in that, as the author of a series of defeats that have hurt the most vulnerable in our society, have threatened civilised institutions and made us an international laughing stock.

Because the left unions supported him and not his successful brother...

Re: Labour, generally.

Posted: Fri May 07, 2021 4:25 pm
by Boiler
At which point it'll be "Ersatz Tories or Real Tories? I'll pick the genuine article, ta."

Perhaps Labour has had its day.

Re: Labour, generally.

Posted: Fri May 07, 2021 4:28 pm
by Malcolm Armsteen
It has if we all give up.

Re: Labour, generally.

Posted: Fri May 07, 2021 4:33 pm
by Boiler
I know that I'm not in a good headspace at the moment since I stopped taking my little helpers, but I am finding it very difficult to be optimistic about Labour's future right now and more to the point, what sort of society we are headed towards.

Re: Labour, generally.

Posted: Fri May 07, 2021 4:35 pm
by Arrowhead
Boiler wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 4:03 pm Another thread worth resurrecting.
The equivalent thread on the old forum was started around 2006, and therefore probably initially consisted of chat regarding, for example, the merits of James Purnell, Ruth Kelly and Hazel Blears (each named of potential part leaders in a Guardian article around that time!).

Oh for a return to those simpler times :(

Re: Labour, generally.

Posted: Fri May 07, 2021 4:36 pm
by Samanfur
When I've seen Ed Miliband speak at conference, he always comes across very well. He's grown in confidence since his leadership, and the impression I get is that he was badly advised when it came to PR and image - if he'd been allowed to just be himself, he'd probably've come across a lot better.

That speech of Starmer's that he delivered when laying into Johnson earlier this year showed what he can do when he gets the bit between his teeth.

Unfortunately, it's probably academic now.

Re: Labour, generally.

Posted: Fri May 07, 2021 5:15 pm
by Bones McCoy
Boiler wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 4:33 pm I know that I'm not in a good headspace at the moment since I stopped taking my little helpers, but I am finding it very difficult to be optimistic about Labour's future right now and more to the point, what sort of society we are headed towards.
To put it in video game terms.
I think the Tories are camping on Labour's spawn point.

Re: Labour, generally.

Posted: Fri May 07, 2021 5:27 pm
by Malcolm Armsteen
Samanfur wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 4:36 pm When I've seen Ed Miliband speak at conference, he always comes across very well. He's grown in confidence since his leadership, and the impression I get is that he was badly advised when it came to PR and image - if he'd been allowed to just be himself, he'd probably've come across a lot better.
I don't think 'himself' was very impressive.
On the £3 Trots, when he mooted that we (the London Labour Party) were very against it - for the reasons which later came true - my pal Charlie spoke directly against him but he wasn't having anything of it. Of course not, Creepy Uncle Len wanted it, and he was pulling Ed's strings. Unprincipled, weak and foolish.

Defenestrate.

Re: Labour, generally.

Posted: Fri May 07, 2021 7:05 pm
by Boiler

Re: Labour, generally.

Posted: Fri May 07, 2021 7:07 pm
by Malcolm Armsteen
Not really.

Re: Labour, generally.

Posted: Fri May 07, 2021 7:15 pm
by Tubby Isaacs
Boiler wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 7:05 pm This from a former shadow defence minister:

A London-based bourgeoisie, with the support of brigades of woke social media warriors, has effectively captured the party.

Harsh, but fair?
Think that's rubbish. He's a reactionary probably getting some local heat. Hard to see Starmer is woke left.

Re: Labour, generally.

Posted: Fri May 07, 2021 7:20 pm
by Nigredo
Allotment Jesus on C4 news now saying Labour should have stuck to his failed manifestos of 2017 and 2019 :roll:

The lack of self awareness is actually excruciating.

Re: Labour, generally.

Posted: Fri May 07, 2021 7:30 pm
by Youngian
Sounds like Dominic Cummings. I’ve heard Khalid come out with Lexit populist stuff before. He’s talking about closed procurement contracts which I have no ideological objections to but can’t be bothered to list why this is a bad and moth eaten idea on so many levels. Bipartisan Peronism isn’t something I saw coming.
obsessed with identity, division and even tech utopianism – have more in common with those of Californian high society than the kind of people who voted in Hartlepool yesterday.

Re: Labour, generally.

Posted: Fri May 07, 2021 7:33 pm
by Tubby Isaacs
Oblomov wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 7:20 pm Allotment Jesus on C4 news now saying Labour should have stuck to his failed manifestos of 2017 and 2019 :roll:

The lack of self awareness is actually excruciating.
He's not trying is, he?

Funnily enough Johnson didn't run on kicking out EU neighbours, cutting cops and making granny sell her house (not that this policy was all bad).

Re: Labour, generally.

Posted: Fri May 07, 2021 7:37 pm
by Tubby Isaacs
Youngian wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 7:30 pm Sounds like Dominic Cummings. I’ve heard Khalid come out with Lexit populist stuff before. He’s talking about closed procurement contracts which I have no ideological objections to but can’t be bothered to list why this is a bad and moth eaten idea on so many levels. Bipartisan Peronism isn’t something I saw coming.
obsessed with identity, division and even tech utopianism – have more in common with those of Californian high society than the kind of people who voted in Hartlepool yesterday.
See how clever the Peronism looks in 3 years time.

You can spaff your way out of some of the problems in the short term. But you can't move the Treasury everywhere you've done over with Brexit bollocks.

Re: Labour, generally.

Posted: Fri May 07, 2021 7:47 pm
by Tubby Isaacs
Jeremy Corbyn has suggested Sir Keir Starmer’s Labour Party was “offering nothing” to voters.
Asked if Sir Keir should quit, the former Labour leader told Channel 4 News: “It’s up to him what he decides to do. “But the important thing is that this party represents a real, radical alternative to inspire people. “Offering nothing, offering insipid support for the government causes people either to vote for somebody else or simply to stay home and disappear.”
From the election winning expert.

He's a zero Covid man. Would you want Labour running now on closing schools and locking back up?

Re: Labour, generally.

Posted: Fri May 07, 2021 8:50 pm
by Crabcakes
Boiler wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 4:33 pm I know that I'm not in a good headspace at the moment since I stopped taking my little helpers, but I am finding it very difficult to be optimistic about Labour's future right now and more to the point, what sort of society we are headed towards.
Things change, and in the grand scheme of things quite quickly. It’s just hard to see it now, or where that comes from. 15 years ago Michael Howard was in charge of a ruined Tory party we thought would never come back together. 10 years ago we had the first coalition this country had seen for decades. Who knows where we’ll be 5 or 10 years from now?