Keir Starmer at it again..

[Elephant Pyjamas]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1920876912349474954

 

[leedswolf]

I didn't say it was, my issue is with the video you posted that said "Reform voters are never going to vote for you Keir Starmer" They have before in the north and he needs them to again.

It's just possible that the guy was referring to the die hard Reform/UKIP/EDL bigots and racists and not those who may be swayed to voting for Reform because of a perceived failure in Labour's delivery of their manifesto? Or you may be correct and he literally meant everybody who has voted for Reform.

 

[Tony Towner]

Then he should have said that then, but he didn't, he said Reform voters

 

[leedswolf]

Then he should have said that then, but he didn't, he said Reform voters

Ok.

 

[sycophantia]

In the GE I meant?

People voted GTTO in the GE, they've since switched to Reform in many cases. As Reform gather more support they'll be seen as genuine majority government option in the next GE. Starmer needs to be an opposition, not a watered down version of them, where will support for that come from? No one wants neither one or the other.

And I certainly voted Labour to GTTO, I won't again.

I've no idea who to vote for next time, always voted Labour as I thought they were the least worst (of parties that stood a chance). They've got a lot of work to do to get me to stay with them, yesterday's nonsense won't help.

 

[leedswolf]

A scathing attack on Starmer and Labour's inability to make a counter argument on anything and so are stuck trying to ape Farage, by Peter Foster, World Trade Editor of the Financial Times

"Labour's immigration announcement is a reflection of the paucity of honest debate by BOTH political parties over the last decade on this issue.
Labour has never made a counter-argument, or been honest about economic cost of immigration curbs, so it's stuck making Tory/Reform arguments.

Labour wants to curb immigration: but doesn't want to engage in social care reform

It wants to curb student visas and encourage more UK training: but won't fund universities or FE colleges.

It just tells voter they can have both.

Labour's exactly the same on the 'reset' with the EU. It tells voters they will 'tear down the barriers to trade' while sticking with the same barriers (no single market or customs union) that created Boris's barriers.

And made the UK poorer and harder to invest in - foreign or domestic

It says the same thing on tax as the Tories too -- that efficiency savings, sacking civil servants AI and cuts at the back end of the forecast can make the number add up.

And it won't hit frontline services. But flat-cash settlements will.

The reason Starmer's Labour is stuck in this loop is that it has never made the counter arguments. It moved tactically to remove Corbyn to take power and then stuck with the tactics that led to the 'ming vase' manifesto...which, in a gaslight to the entire nation..was entitle "Change".

It's not at all surprising, because Labour never dared make an alternative argument.
When the Blue team was trashing UK trade via Brexit, the Red team was too frightened to say anything.

It just acquiesced. And now it's trapped in its piddly 'reset' because it never socialised an alternative.

It's never dared to say that lower migration means more expensive social care -- higher taxes, in effect.

That its programmes -- the 1.5mn houses, a new grid -- require welders and engineers that UK Further Education colleges can't afford to train.

They ducked council tax reform. Ducked broad based tax increases. Duck social care reform.
Duck and cover at every opportunity because too frightened to launch a counter-argument...Despite Johnson, Truss..all the madness. But still.

Starmer and Badenoch will never out-farage Farage. Surely they've learned this by now. Because Farage is the only one telling a story.Might not be to your taste, but it's a story.
Merry old England, mustard cords, by jingo blah blah

But populists can't be the only ones telling compelling stories. There has to be a progressive narrative too, but you can't build credibility overnight.

Years of cravenness and timidity take their toll. A plague on all their houses."

 

[Templeton Peck]

Voted for both of them so very happy with this.

Apologies

 

[Elephant Pyjamas]

Voted for both of them so very happy with this.

As did I.

I've been mugged off in the same way as people who voted for Brexit hoping for change and improvement.

Starmer is no different to Farage in how he twists to gain power.

 

[Walshes Wolves]

A scathing attack on Starmer and Labour's inability to make a counter argument on anything and so are stuck trying to ape Farage, by Peter Foster, World Trade Editor of the Financial Times

"Labour's immigration announcement is a reflection of the paucity of honest debate by BOTH political parties over the last decade on this issue.
Labour has never made a counter-argument, or been honest about economic cost of immigration curbs, so it's stuck making Tory/Reform arguments.

Labour wants to curb immigration: but doesn't want to engage in social care reform

It wants to curb student visas and encourage more UK training: but won't fund universities or FE colleges.

It just tells voter they can have both.

Labour's exactly the same on the 'reset' with the EU. It tells voters they will 'tear down the barriers to trade' while sticking with the same barriers (no single market or customs union) that created Boris's barriers.

And made the UK poorer and harder to invest in - foreign or domestic

It says the same thing on tax as the Tories too -- that efficiency savings, sacking civil servants AI and cuts at the back end of the forecast can make the number add up.

And it won't hit frontline services. But flat-cash settlements will.

The reason Starmer's Labour is stuck in this loop is that it has never made the counter arguments. It moved tactically to remove Corbyn to take power and then stuck with the tactics that led to the 'ming vase' manifesto...which, in a gaslight to the entire nation..was entitle "Change".

It's not at all surprising, because Labour never dared make an alternative argument.
When the Blue team was trashing UK trade via Brexit, the Red team was too frightened to say anything.

It just acquiesced. And now it's trapped in its piddly 'reset' because it never socialised an alternative.

It's never dared to say that lower migration means more expensive social care -- higher taxes, in effect.

That its programmes -- the 1.5mn houses, a new grid -- require welders and engineers that UK Further Education colleges can't afford to train.

They ducked council tax reform. Ducked broad based tax increases. Duck social care reform.
Duck and cover at every opportunity because too frightened to launch a counter-argument...Despite Johnson, Truss..all the madness. But still.

Starmer and Badenoch will never out-farage Farage. Surely they've learned this by now. Because Farage is the only one telling a story.Might not be to your taste, but it's a story.
Merry old England, mustard cords, by jingo blah blah

But populists can't be the only ones telling compelling stories. There has to be a progressive narrative too, but you can't build credibility overnight.

Years of cravenness and timidity take their toll. A plague on all their houses."

Years of long doctors waiting lists, your kids can't get on the housing ladder and demand pushing up prices. It is not about compelling stories, but every day reality that matters.

 

[Templeton Peck]

As did I.

I've been mugged off in the same way as people who voted for Brexit hoping for change and improvement.

Starmer is no different to Farage in how he twists to gain power.

Yeah he's very comfortable with lying. Lied his nads off through the leadership campaign and I was daft enough to believe him.

 

[Templeton Peck]

Dunt has fallen.

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

Thing is that crap gives your argument instant zero credibility.

He clearly isn't 'just as bad' as Johnson, May or Truss. I will say that he isn't especially much better than Cameron or Sunak so far, and is some way behind Brown who at the time was seen as a massive failure (and Major too, for that matter).

 

[Dire Wolf]

Thing is that crap gives your argument instant zero credibility.

He clearly isn't 'just as bad' as Johnson, May or Truss. I will say that he isn't especially much better than Cameron or Sunak so far, and is some way behind Brown who at the time was seen as a massive failure (and Major too, for that matter).

You've set the bar so low that even a snake could get over it.

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

I didn't set the bar, Ian Dunt did.

Tommy Doyle isn't up to the level required for Wolves but if someone said 'he is no better than Darren Ferguson, Steve Corica or Darron Gibson' then clearly that would be total bollocks.

 

[pr0sl0]

I'm not fan of Theresa May at all, but I wouldn't put her in the same league as Johnson or Truss.

Admittedly I'm talking the Vanarama National versus Isthmian Leagues, but May's problem was that she was a continuity Cameroon playing an unconvincing role as a Brexiteer - couldn't convince her party she was sincere while still being hardline enough to alienate the other half of the country. (Plus, y'know, all her other racist baggage.) Whereas Johnson and Truss were both incompetent and had much more malicious intentions at the same time.

And tbh, I'm getting May deja vu a lot with Starmer. He reminds me of her more than any other PM of my lifetime (Thatcher onwards).

 

[Dire Wolf]

 

[Derby Wolf]

I'm not fan of Theresa May at all, but I wouldn't put her in the same league as Johnson or Truss.

Admittedly I'm talking the Vanarama National versus Isthmian Leagues, but May's problem was that she was a continuity Cameroon playing an unconvincing role as a Brexiteer - couldn't convince her party she was sincere while still being hardline enough to alienate the other half of the country. (Plus, y'know, all her other racist baggage.) Whereas Johnson and Truss were both incompetent and had much more malicious intentions at the same time.

And tbh, I'm getting May deja vu a lot with Starmer. He reminds me of her more than any other PM of my lifetime (Thatcher onwards).

Her stint as Home Sec introducing the hostile environment and what not puts her on a par with the aforementioned wankers for me. She was just as cruel and vindictive as the rest

 

[Kenny]

Her stint as Home Sec introducing the hostile environment and what not puts her on a par with the aforementioned wankers for me. She was just as cruel and vindictive as the rest

 

[Tony Towner]

Her stint as Home Sec introducing the hostile environment and what not puts her on a par with the aforementioned wankers for me. She was just as cruel and vindictive as the rest

And like Blair, played the god card for justification

 

[The Saturday Boy]

Her stint as Home Sec introducing the hostile environment and what not puts her on a par with the aforementioned wankers for me. She was just as cruel and vindictive as the rest

Liam Byrne 2007 used the term hostile environment when advocating policies around illegal immigration.