Next GE

[Borg Refinery]

Why bother? You ignore any and all evidence when presented, when and if it goes against your beliefs, as you've just adequately demonstrated.

I guess the grauniad criticising Stammer for the same things doesn't count and is not 'evidence'.

[papasmurf]

Good luck with your man Stammer who presided over the colossal Rotherham feck up

Can you please explain that with evidence. (I do mean evidence.)

[Borg Refinery]

Btw, good points were raised about Stammer being in the pocket of Bibi, it's true.

[Borg Refinery]

Unbelievable, GO.

Good luck with your man Stammer who presided over the colossal Rotherham feck up while the electorate pisses on you from a great height.

I'm not going to bother answering your loaded question, you can have it back and swallow your own propaganda yourself, no one else appears interested in the slightest.

[Good old]

Yes I agree every negative will come his way, but how much it will effect the situation at any given time will be determined by the all round conditions that are guiding opinion at that time..
If he starts to look as if he is really getting underTory skin,I think  the left will give him the benefit of the doubt.
Brexit has to appear to be a success, I have said that before. An awful lot of Brexit people I have come across were in fact extremely flakey , and if things are not working out for them in four years time  their ideas can go into reverse.
The general public are consumed with Covid, at this time , I doubt general policy from Starmer ,is going to get much notice from the average character until things have moved on a bit. I have said it before he should be all about timing. And the time isn't yet.
Of course you are hearing things about Starmer,.  I hear things about Boris, but  he is in No 10  .
The Tories and their weapons , what's new. ?
Starmer ,or any other Labour leader has a mountain to climb that can not be denied, it is probably more realistic that a coalition  is the best bet. But it is not  a totally secure situation for the Tories.

Some of this i agree with  , some i do not.

Tony blair was a man who i voted for in 1997.

although i came to absolutely despise the man like many , no one can doubt he had his skills as well as flaws.

He was an orator , had flair , inventiveness and brought something new. He certainly was no political coward.

Starmer has none of the former , and appears to be the latter.

All politicians rely on events to a degree happening to get them into power ,but also use thier talents . Starmer is relying wholly on the tories and brexit imploding to even get a sniff of power.

He hid behind many remainers in parliament to a degree over the years to try and stop brexit instead of taking a firm lead of the remain faction..........then he hid behind corbyn and macdonnell last december despite clearly formulating labour chaotic and pathetic remain "sit on the fence" stance which lost corbyn by and large the general election.

During his leadership campaign , and largely since , his stance has been an excercise in hiding.

The few empty pledges he has made have been weak , vague and contradictory at best......he promises not to move away from corbyns left wing radicalism........but also pledges to curb the excess of the left wing.

He lacks any flair and levity the odd occassion he sticks his head on tv , and appears mundane , and fearfull of saying anything out of the ordinary. In a way , he reminds me a bit of theresa may. Put in place by the tory factions as the best of a bad bunch who the differing factions could tolerate for a while at least.

I dont think the uk wants another blair clone. I know scotland doesnt , and im pretty sure england doesnt either.

Still we will see what happens.

Thomas this has rarely happened in our correspondence. But I have to say that , although I can not agree with all of that some could prove true  much of it I feel will not.
That is a measured assessment in any case in particular to Blair. Must be something I have eaten.

[Thomas]

Not exactly unbiased comment.

No such thing as unbiased comment. You know that fine well , we have discussed this many a time.

[Nick]

I can't understand anyone promoting it unless it's their only way of getting their foot inside No10, albeit only to shove their feet under the cabinet table. Committees are bad enough when everyone is of the same mind, radical differences in ideology would reduce Government to an ineffectual mess. A really backward step.

I am for PR because it would stop the sheep of a majority government voting for nasty policies.

The only problem I would have to put up with would be people like Nigel Farage becoming an MP.

Well yes that is a very good point. All sorts of radicals would be drinking No 10 coffee. It doesn't bear thinking about.

When Brexit is a success and the economy has recovered from the flu there will still only 1 party to vote for.

[srb7677]

Before the next GE they need to exterminate the Fixed Term Parliaments Act and repeal the legislation that empowers Labour to solicit the votes of children and immigrants who have not acquired British Citizenship in wales. Because if you let that tosser starmer in, he will fix it so every f**ker in a RIB will be handed a ballot paper for the next election along with his NINO

Well I am sure you'll be delighted but unsurprised to learn that I think it reasonable for anyone who lives, works, and pays their taxes here to have a vote here. I also approve of lowering the voting age to 16. You see, I believe in widening democracy, not restricting it. Seems I might agree with Starmer on something.

[Thomas]

Yes I agree every negative will come his way, but how much it will effect the situation at any given time will be determined by the all round conditions that are guiding opinion at that time..
If he starts to look as if he is really getting underTory skin,I think  the left will give him the benefit of the doubt.
Brexit has to appear to be a success, I have said that before. An awful lot of Brexit people I have come across were in fact extremely flakey , and if things are not working out for them in four years time  their ideas can go into reverse.
The general public are consumed with Covid, at this time , I doubt general policy from Starmer ,is going to get much notice from the average character until things have moved on a bit. I have said it before he should be all about timing. And the time isn't yet.
Of course you are hearing things about Starmer,.  I hear things about Boris, but  he is in No 10  .
The Tories and their weapons , what's new. ?
Starmer ,or any other Labour leader has a mountain to climb that can not be denied, it is probably more realistic that a coalition  is the best bet. But it is not  a totally secure situation for the Tories.

Some of this i agree with  , some i do not.

Tony blair was a man who i voted for in 1997.

although i came to absolutely despise the man like many , no one can doubt he had his skills as well as flaws.

He was an orator , had flair , inventiveness and brought something new. He certainly was no political coward.

Starmer has none of the former , and appears to be the latter.

All politicians rely on events to a degree happening to get them into power ,but also use thier talents . Starmer is relying wholly on the tories and brexit imploding to even get a sniff of power.

He hid behind many remainers in parliament to a degree over the years to try and stop brexit instead of taking a firm lead of the remain faction..........then he hid behind corbyn and macdonnell last december despite clearly formulating labour chaotic and pathetic remain "sit on the fence" stance which lost corbyn by and large the general election.

During his leadership campaign , and largely since , his stance has been an excercise in hiding.

The few empty pledges he has made have been weak , vague and contradictory at best......he promises not to move away from corbyns left wing radicalism........but also pledges to curb the excess of the left wing.

He lacks any flair and levity the odd occassion he sticks his head on tv , and appears mundane , and fearfull of saying anything out of the ordinary. In a way , he reminds me a bit of theresa may. Put in place by the tory factions as the best of a bad bunch who the differing factions could tolerate for a while at least.

I dont think the uk wants another blair clone. I know scotland doesnt , and im pretty sure england doesnt either.

Still we will see what happens.

[Good old]

Starmer is wowing the sheep with his smooth talking and snake oil salesman shit.

It's depressing that people who are older than me, and who ought to be wiser than me are falling for it. I hope I'm proven wrong and Stammer falls flat on his face but... it looks just as foregone a conclusion as Trump winning in 'murica.

Fair enough  but if Starmer falls flat on his face. What do you get.?  Where does the wisdom lie  in this?

Yes, defend Lab at all costs.. I get it. Unfortunately, men described as 'the enemy of women' for letting lots of rapists go unprosecuted, are not getting my vote.

That's not a factual statement. You meant lots of accused rapists.
You are setting the bar extremely high, as rape is an extremely hard crime to prosecute , no body in that job has ever found it any easier than Starmer did .  Where it has been prosecuted the failure rate is very high. In real terms that represents an enormous amount of wasted tax payers money.  And part of the job is to not waste money.
Any way who is the great herald of moral and virtuous perfection you are going to be lead by if Starmer fails.?

Unbelievable. So I and Thomas are making up all the stuff about him?

Let me guess, the Iraq war was legal and Saddam had WMD too?

No of course you don't make it up , you just swallow every word , because it fits into what  you want  to fit Neatly into whatever point of view you have. What's unbelievable is your ability to concentrate on Starmers faults. As if he was the only man on the scene that isn't perfect.
You might guess that was the case , I certainly do not have a black and white view of either of those issues. And I have no Idea whether Starmer would be any different.. 
Let me ask again who do you want to defeat Starmer.?

[johnofgwent]

Before the next GE they need to exterminate the Fixed Term Parliaments Act and repeal the legislation that empowers Labour to solicit the votes of children and immigrants who have not acquired British Citizenship in wales. Because if you let that tosser starmer in, he will fix it so every fucker in a RIB will be handed a ballot paper for the next election along with his NINO

[Good old]

Starmer is wowing the sheep with his smooth talking and snake oil salesman shit.

It's depressing that people who are older than me, and who ought to be wiser than me are falling for it. I hope I'm proven wrong and Stammer falls flat on his face but... it looks just as foregone a conclusion as Trump winning in 'murica.

Fair enough  but if Starmer falls flat on his face. What do you get.?  Where does the wisdom lie  in this?

Yes, defend Lab at all costs.. I get it. Unfortunately, men described as 'the enemy of women' for letting lots of rapists go unprosecuted, are not getting my vote.

What's that about? Are you talking about Starmer?

Indeed.

I got my ref a bit mixed up, the CPS under him was described 'an enemy to women', but I posted this on here before.

https://medium.com/@lucynevitt/starmers-shambolic-cps-affabd38bb6d

Also;

http://camdennewjournal.com/article/we-take-issue-over-sir-keirs-record-as-dpp

He reportedly met with 'women against rape' in 2010 and just dismissed their concerns.

He pledged to increase police heavy handedness against lefty protesters, and has a poor record as Thomas demonstrated.

All totally unbiased .  Reportedly!  What the hell does that mean . ? Why don't you try and answer my very clear question.
If Starmer fails what will you get?

[Borg Refinery]

Has Javert hijacked your account?

[papasmurf]

Ok, but the Rotherham stuff is a matter of public record, he is liable for that failing too, partly.

What "Rotherham" stuff? Do you mean the "doctored," stuff to totally misrepresent him?

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-starmer-grooming-victims/false-claim-uk-labour-leader-keir-starmer-says-in-interview-that-grooming-victims-shouldnt-be-believed-if-they-have-misued-drugs-or-alcohol-or-have-a-criminal-record-idUSKBN22Q30F

[Borg Refinery]

I got my ref a bit mixed up, the CPS under him was described 'an enemy to women', but I posted this on here before.

https://medium.com/@lucynevitt/starmers-shambolic-cps-affabd38bb6d

Also;

http://camdennewjournal.com/article/we-take-issue-over-sir-keirs-record-as-dpp

Not exactly unbiased comment.

Ok, but the Rotherham stuff is a matter of public record, he is liable for that failing too, partly.

It's not acceptable in my eyes.

Anyway, most just pick and choose what to believe these days, like people believe Bojo didn't make these comments for example..

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=U_FSqfXyUFk

So it's alright, we live in post factual England now.