Beware the liar Starmer

[Thomas]

.
Moved on or moved back? Fuel shortages, energy price rises in time for winter, looming unemployment, and warnings of shortages by supermarket bosses seems less like moving on than reverting back to austerity.

No matter how many times you try and spin it , there is no fuel shortage. There is panic buying that normal supply can't keep up with , which was deliberately started by the BP CEO and an  ex bbc journalist for reasons we have already went over.

Energy price rises are something that is a long term issue in the uk  , where we are paying and have paid now for decades the highest prices in europe due to short term  short sighted political policy  by both red and blue tories. Starmer has already said he wont address this in the fashion needed.

Looming unemployment in the face of an extraordianry two years of hysteria over covid is not unexpected . I say as someone who isnt a tory supporter the uk government wont get the blame , they have been applauded for the help they have given business and employess over the last two years , there is only so much the gov can do.

Finally the warnings by "some " supermarket bosses on shortages seem to change day by day , when you consider aldis CEO said only last week he doesnt expect any problems on the run up to christmas this year.

Looking for johnson and the tories to take a fall over things which are mostly beyond their control or blame is nothing more than wishefull thinkig on your part , while you tip toe around brexit or issues like scot indy in the hope some "centrist " party can get into power and return the world to where you want it.

If Starmer can stay leader long enough to kick the Far Left factions — that are currently sabotaging the Labour Party's chances of regaining voter support — far enough into touch to appear irrelevant, he may rebuild Labour as a serious contender for government...

This is laughable. Starmers problem isnt the far left as you put it .

I can't speak for england , but there are millions in scotland like me who are going out at each and every election with two things in mind , voting for scot indy and a party to further it , and voting to keep labour out of power.

[Sheepy]

.
Moved on or moved back? Fuel shortages, energy price rises in time for winter, looming unemployment, and warnings of shortages by supermarket bosses seems less like moving on than reverting back to austerity. Compared to now, Blair's ten years in power were a time of optimism and upbeat outlook. And they're exactly the qualities Boris copied to become London mayor, win leadership of the Tory party and get his hefty majority in December 2019.


If Starmer can stay leader long enough to kick the Far Left factions — that are currently sabotaging the Labour Party's chances of regaining voter support — far enough into touch to appear irrelevant, he may rebuild Labour as a serious contender for government...

Anybody would think it was the Conservative conference and it was time to gather the troops. they won't win another election because they will never come up with enough votes whatever you want the party faithful thinking, so you had better find a better stick than Labour.

[patman post]

I think Starmer made it amply clear when he asked Conference ' Do you want power or unity?' He wants power and the only way he can see to get it is to emulate Blair, but we have moved on and seen the results of Blair's 'success'.

.
Moved on or moved back? Fuel shortages, energy price rises in time for winter, looming unemployment, and warnings of shortages by supermarket bosses seems less like moving on than reverting back to austerity. Compared to now, Blair's ten years in power were a time of optimism and upbeat outlook. And they're exactly the qualities Boris copied to become London mayor, win leadership of the Tory party and get his hefty majority in December 2019.


If Starmer can stay leader long enough to kick the Far Left factions — that are currently sabotaging the Labour Party's chances of regaining voter support — far enough into touch to appear irrelevant, he may rebuild Labour as a serious contender for government...

[Thomas]

Media were saying the same thing earlier this year , that all the old certainties that these delusional people stand by no longer apply.

Fast forward , and the same people are parroting the same guff over and over .

Hartlepool by-election: Old certainties no longer apply

Old maxims do not seem to count for much now though, and Labour is worried that it could lose in Hartlepool - a seat the party has held since the current constituency was formed in 1974.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-56859750

[Thomas]

I think Starmer made it amply clear when he asked Conference ' Do you want power or unity?' He wants power and the only way he can see to get it is to emulate Blair, but we have moved on and seen the results of Blair's 'success'.

Exactly toots. This isnt 1997.

You cant turn back the clock to some perceived halycon age from years gone by , no matter how much you re write history to justify it.

You need to grapple with the current issues head on , which labour are clearly incapable of doing.

All im reading regarding labour and some of their delusional supporters is that their main hope is the tories crashing and burning as in 1997 , and then them walking into power as the only other alternative no matter how bad they and starmer are.

That thinking was fine a quarter of a century ago  , not now.
No scot indy supporter is going to touch labour with a barge pole , and no brexiter will forgive a man who spent years trying to overturn democracy post 2016.

So labour are fighting for a share of half the scottish and half the english electorate , and corbyn has gone so starmer cant keep bleating about how labours woes are all corbyns fault. Where do they get the votes to find the seats needed for a majority?

I cant see it.

They are seens as fiscally cluelless , they are seen as anti democratic , and their leader is seen as a wet blanket with all the charisma of a dead rat.

Still , as i said up the thread , heres hoping they keep taking that rope....

[T00ts]

Starmer can't be trusted , as srb steve says , which is why he will lose the next general election .

I really can't believe a so called major political party is seriously trying to tip toe past major issues like scot indy and brexit , while trying to revive the hated  blairism as the way forward.

Its incredible watching it , and reading comments talking about starmers great conference and speech. Some people are just so feckin delusional.

I think Starmer made it amply clear when he asked Conference ' Do you want power or unity?' He wants power and the only way he can see to get it is to emulate Blair, but we have moved on and seen the results of Blair's 'success'.

[Thomas]

[Thomas]

Starmer cant be trusted , as srb steve says , which is why he will lose the next general election .

I really cant believe a so called major political party is seriously trying to tip toe past major issues like scot indy and brexit , while trying to revive the hated  blairism as the way forward.

Its incredible watching it , and reading comments talking about starmers great conference and speech. Some people are just so feckin delusional.

[Thomas]

Scottish Parliament constituency ballot:
SNP 48%
Conservatives 22%
Labour 20%
Liberal Democrats 7%

Scottish Parliament regional list ballot:

SNP 36%
Conservatives 23%
Labour 18%
Greens 13%
Liberal Democrats 7%
Alba 2%

Comres poll has starmers red tories in third place .

[Thomas]

The point is there isnt one which leaves us with an un challenged  Tory party .
The lib dims are the Europe party , Labour have missed the boat with that one , UKIP have done what they set out to do and are irrelevant which leaves a Tory party with a free hand .
Nobody even a week after their conference know what Labour stand for apart from that they will seek closer ties with the EU which their own electorate rejected in 2016, They are a joke .

yep 60 % of labour constituencies voted brexit , which starmer tried to piss all over , time and again , and they cant understand why labour are hated in the north of england  never mind elsewhere.?

I said time and again how starmer masterminded the tactical remain blunder of labours in the 2019 general election , much to corbyns dismay as an old eurosceptic himself , yet the revisionists tried to blame it all on corbyn.

We saw starmers cluelessness in action at the by election in hartlepool , where starmer championed an out and out europhile in saudi paul in a north  of england leave seat with predictable results.

They are a joke mate , and hated  , and probably the worst political opposition i can think of in europe.

[patman post]

Attlee got Labour into power too. Gladstone got the Liberals into power. Does that mean Labour needs to do the same as those? You see, times change. The circumstances today are very different to those of 1997, the electorate likewise. Starmer and those around him are like a bunch of French World War 2 generals looking to fight with the same aims and tactics as 25 years previously because it worked back then. They are stuck in a time warp. And they will be defeated by others who have moved with the times.

And no one says Labour should keep repeating what it did in 17 and 19. But what it ought to do is recognise what was liked and what was not liked, change the latter and offer the former in a more credible way. Instead, they are ditching the only things people liked about them.

And you still have not addressed the fundamental question of this thread. How can a man demonstrably proven to have lied to get elected, be trusted to run the country. And you haven't answered my other question. Would you trust someone so willing to brazenly lie to get elected with maintaining Brexit? When every fibre of his being and of those around him is pro EU? He is just as capable of lying to you as he did party members.

.
Attlee won because the country was tired of War, and Attlee offered something different. Once refreshed after a few years, voters threw Labour out.   


Gladstone's an interesting part of political history, but hardly relevant to today's context of getting a credible opposition with a chance of being elected into power without a lot of convoluted reasoning.


Whether or not it matters if Starmer has lied or not will be up to Labour members and, ultimately, the electorate (frankly, at the moment I don't care — either about Johnson or Starmer). But if Labour turfs Starmer out, who is there in Parliament able to appeal to enough voters over a max of two years to win enough seats in the next general election to improve on Labour's present position?


If you're Labour and you want influence and power in a reasonable time frame, you can only work with the tools you've got — and that includes the current FPTP system as you've got to gain enough influence and power to alter it...

[Streetwalker]

So what party other than Labour has enough voters to even be considered able to form the basis of a credible opposition?   


Few people want the LibDems. Even fewer voters want BNP-lite Ukip, Brexit, Britain First, Reclaim, etc. Which leaves Left of centre voters little hope of influencing anything much other than by direct action and disrupting the daily life of the public...

The point is there isnt one which leaves us with an un challenged  Tory party .
The lib dims are the Europe party , Labour have missed the boat with that one , UKIP have done what they set out to do and are irrelevant which leaves a Tory party with a free hand .
Nobody even a week after their conference know what Labour stand for apart from that they will seek closer ties with the EU which their own electorate rejected in 2016, They are a joke .

[Thomas]

So what party other than Labour has enough voters to even be considered able to form the basis of a credible opposition?   

When voters are railroaded down a dead end alley , and given the choice of voting for two parties by the out of date and dysfunctional election system that is the uks FPTP disaster , how can any other party form a credible opposition?

You are offering up a false dichotomy based on an unfair political stitch up.

Clearly though , the voters dont want red tories in power , as evidenced by the fact blairite labour havent won anything since 2005 , and corbyns left wing labour won more votes than any of tony blairs red tory victories with the exception of 1997 .

[patman post]

Well I did want Brexit and I do see how it benefits the UK  . I too believe in private enterprise and limited state intervention which it no way fits with supporting the move to a European super state  .
I dont know what prejudices you are thinking of posty but not taking UKIP policies is why the conservatives have made a hash of leaving the EU

But yes we do need a strong opposition  , that the labour party have now confessed to (what we knew all along ) their pro EU stance they may as well be lib dims . Speaking of which the liberals may as well be the opposition , they couldn't make a worse job of it than a labour party led by the wet blanket that is Kier Starmer

So what party other than Labour has enough voters to even be considered able to form the basis of a credible opposition?   


Few people want the LibDems. Even fewer voters want BNP-lite Ukip, Brexit, Britain First, Reclaim, etc. Which leaves Left of centre voters little hope of influencing anything much other than by direct action and disrupting the daily life of the public...

[Thomas]

Attlee got Labour into power too. Gladstone got the Liberals into power. Does that mean Labour needs to do the same as those? You see, times change. The circumstances today are very different to those of 1997, the electorate likewise. Starmer and those around him are like a bunch of French World War 2 generals looking to fight with the same aims and tactics as 25 years previously because it worked back then. They are stuck in a time warp. And they will be defeated by others who have moved with the times.

And no one says Labour should keep repeating what it did in 17 and 19. But what it ought to do is recognise what was liked and what was not liked, change the latter and offer the former in a more credible way. Instead, they are ditching the only things people liked about them.

And you still have not addressed the fundamental question of this thread. How can a man demonstrably proven to have lied to get elected, be trusted to run the country. And you haven't answered my other question. Would you trust someone so willing to brazenly lie to get elected with maintaining Brexit? When every fibre of his being and of those around him is pro EU? He is just as capable of lying to you as he did party members.

Ignore pat steve.

Pat thinks blair was some political genius who masterminded labours three general election victories because thats what he has been told to believe.

No matter how many times the subject turns up on this forum and blairs legacy is torn to shreds , sometimes you just cant tell some people who are blind to the truth.

The mans record in power , and his election is a sham like everything else about the guy.

Blairs 1997 victory wasnt some "victory against all the odds " as some revisionists like to suggest. All he had to do was turn up on election day , not kill anyone on live tv , and walk into power so tired were the public of 17 years of tory rule under thatcher and major.

Kinnock and smith as we said did all the donkey work that made labour electable , blair did feck all except reap what those two former leaders had sowed over many years , as well as facing a completely burnt out tory party that were to take years and many leaders before they got their act together again.

It been well documented how he lost millions of labour voters  , many who never returned to the party like myself , set in motion labours car crash in scotland  , which blairites like murphy and milliband finished off , and is generally seen as the orchestrator of the mess the labour find themselves in today.

You cant tell some people though. Im fecked if i know why anyone thinks it a good idea to have two parties vying in a two horse race who are essentially a fag papers width in terms of policy between them.......red and blue tory , with the exception of europe , which is why the red tories will not get back into power.

Keep handing them the rope is what i say.