Politics

[Rayvin 5186]

2 minutes ago, Renton said:

 

Oh ffs. I can see your point of view on most things, but if you are adopting the line it was the labour party internally that did it in for Corbyn, I'm giving up. Corbyn fought against the leadership of the labour party all his career. Oh fuck it, not getting into this. 

 

I'm simply saying that the party judged him and tried to have him removed before he had a chance to prove himself at a GE. It's just a fact, not a debate.

[Renton 21364]

Just now, ewerk said:

 

I think you've underestimated just how far down Johnson has dragged the Tories. When Corbyn left it was to the relief of most Labour MPs. Johnson has largely purged the Tory party of moderate voices to the point where Theresa May is seen as being a bit soft. The damage he has inflicted will take a decade to repair imo.

 

Absolutely this. Johnson was a short term fix for the tories but a long-term death sentence. Purging your party of talent and integrity and replacing them with talentless sycophants was not a good move for anyone else but Johnson. Nadine Dorries ffs!  We are literally watching the results unfold right now. Key casualty historically will be the split of the union, that's what will be in the history books. 

[ewerk 30295]

So Starmer organised a Christmas party and then cancelled it when it became illegal. Scandalous!

 

 

[Alex 34876]

2 minutes ago, ewerk said:

So Starmer organised a Christmas party and then cancelled it when it became illegal. Scandalous!

 

 

How’s that even a story?  

[Alex 34876]

45 minutes ago, Renton said:

 

Absolutely this. Johnson was a short term fix for the tories but a long-term death sentence. Purging your party of talent and integrity and replacing them with talentless sycophants was not a good move for anyone else but Johnson. Nadine Dorries ffs!  We are literally watching the results unfold right now. Key casualty historically will be the split of the union, that's what will be in the history books. 

I think, in basic terms, Johnson fucked the economy by chasing the bigot vote. It did work in terms of winning the last election but it’ll finish him in the longer term. He’s not going to be going up against Corbyn again either. 

[Gemmill 44422]

6 minutes ago, Alex said:

How’s that even a story?  

 

Alex Wickham used to work for Guido, I believe. Which means he's probably a little cunt. 

[ewerk 30295]

3 minutes ago, Gemmill said:

 

Alex Wickham used to work for Guido, I believe. Which means he's probably a little cunt. 

 

He's also godfather to Johnson and Carrie's child.

[Alex 34876]

Well I think that makes the ‘probably’ superfluous 

[Gemmill 44422]

He now works for Politico and writes their morning briefing note which goes out to thousands.

 

 

[spongebob toonpants 3954]

1 hour ago, Rayvin said:

 

Not sure about this one - Corbyn (Miliband too come to think of it) never had this luxury.

That's pretty much my point

[Rayvin 5186]

Apologies, so you're saying it never should have happened to any of them. Fair, I'll accept the consistency of that position.

 

I'm not sure where I fall on it. I understand that the centrists within Labour felt moved to tear down Corbyn early on in order to avoid catastrophe, but then I also think they have to accept others doing it to their own sacred cows, especially after years of terrible judgement in this respect. Although to be clear, I'm not trying to tear Starmer down - I just think he's probably the least relevant leader that Labour have had in (my) living memory. The fact that they may win even with this is testament to how badly things are going for the Tories. But on that basis, I don't see how losing him would be a big blow.

 

As Ewerk has just posted, the Tories are now going to attempt to drag him into the muck with them. Most people aren't going to pick up the nuance in that story, they'll just see the double standard - which as we all know, is why it's running. The water will be successfully muddied, future revelations about Johnson will lose their impact, and the polls will reflect this and will narrow. People will become disillusioned and start parroting "they're all the same" style schtick, and Labour has a harder job getting them out to vote. I feel that he needs more than what he's showing, but maybe as Renton says, he'll light the stage up in the run in.

[Gemmill 44422]

The boss at Scottish Power wants the government to act on the energy bills crisis. The cheeky cunt wants something similar to the £200 "loan" thing where low income customers will be given £1k off their bills this year and then ALL CUSTOMERS will have £40 a year added to their bills for the next decade. 

 

I'm all for helping out those in need but this cheeky bastard should be looking a bit closer to home for who should be providing the help. 

[Rayvin 5186]

 

 

[Gemmill 44422]

3 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

 

 

 

Aye just seen this. Played for and got by the Tory press. The public now put Starmer in the same bracket as Johnson on this. 

 

Situation might be irredeemable now. 

[Rayvin 5186]

4 minutes ago, Gemmill said:

 

Aye just seen this. Played for and got by the Tory press. The public now put Starmer in the same bracket as Johnson on this. 

 

Situation might be irredeemable now. 

 

That is exactly my feeling on it. And why I'm keen to express that losing Starmer here, to this, isn't as big a deal as we might think. Starmer resigning would be a body blow to Johnson, and it's not like the guy is irreplaceable.

[Renton 21364]

16 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

Apologies, so you're saying it never should have happened to any of them. Fair, I'll accept the consistency of that position.

 

I'm not sure where I fall on it. I understand that the centrists within Labour felt moved to tear down Corbyn early on in order to avoid catastrophe, but then I also think they have to accept others doing it to their own sacred cows, especially after years of terrible judgement in this respect. Although to be clear, I'm not trying to tear Starmer down - I just think he's probably the least relevant leader that Labour have had in (my) living memory. The fact that they may win even with this is testament to how badly things are going for the Tories. But on that basis, I don't see how losing him would be a big blow.

 

As Ewerk has just posted, the Tories are now going to attempt to drag him into the muck with them. Most people aren't going to pick up the nuance in that story, they'll just see the double standard - which as we all know, is why it's running. The water will be successfully muddied, future revelations about Johnson will lose their impact, and the polls will reflect this and will narrow. People will become disillusioned and start parroting "they're all the same" style schtick, and Labour has a harder job getting them out to vote. I feel that he needs more than what he's showing, but maybe as Renton says, he'll light the stage up in the run in.

 

I just don't get this antipathy about Starmer but there we are.

 

I agree "Beergate" will muddy the waters and is intended to tar all politicians with the same brush, and it will. But it'll not help Johnson that much as I've been saying for months now. Two reason. Firstly, because it's impossible to service his voters in both the red and blue walls, always has been since "he got Brexit done". Secondly, "It's the economy, stupid". Everybody is feeling poorer and its going to get much worse (according to the BoE). Not survivable. I could add thirdly that more scandals are fairly inevitable under this clown shoe. 

[Rayvin 5186]

I'm going to stress incidentally that in my view, even if Starmer has broken the rules (which as far as I can tell he has not), it still wouldn't be as bad as the man who wrote and signed off on the damn rules breaching them.

 

That's not how it'll play out though.

[Renton 21364]

2 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

 

That is exactly my feeling on it. And why I'm keen to express that losing Starmer here, to this, isn't as big a deal as we might think. Starmer resigning would be a body blow to Johnson, and it's not like the guy is irreplaceable.

 

Nobody is irreplaceable, although this would take down Rayner too. Unfortunately I don't have that much faith in the labour front bench. Better than the tories certainly but by and large powder puff. You're not getting what you want regardless. 

[Gemmill 44422]

Just now, Rayvin said:

 

That is exactly my feeling on it. And why I'm keen to express that losing Starmer here, to this, isn't as big a deal as we might think. Starmer resigning would be a body blow to Johnson, and it's not like the guy is irreplaceable.

 

If Starmer goes I think it gives Labour the moral leg-up, and it might force the pathetic Tories into submitting their letters to try and redress the balance. 

 

I just struggle with who Labour replace him with. 

[Gemmill 44422]

1 minute ago, Rayvin said:

I'm going to stress incidentally that in my view, even if Starmer has broken the rules (which as far as I can tell he has not), it still wouldn't be as bad as the man who wrote and signed off on the damn rules breaching them.

 

That's not how it'll play out though.

 

Aye impossible to argue nuance when the headlines are screaming the base argument at people. 

 

I reckon Durham Police will come out with some very vague conclusion to their investigations which allows both sides to pursue their own agenda, and they probably both stay in their respective jobs as a result. 

 

Which would be tragic because it saves Johnson and affords this completely false moral equivalence. But that is exactly their game plan here. It fucking reeks. 

[ewerk 30295]

Starmer reportedly to announce that he’ll resign if fined.

[Renton 21364]

1 minute ago, Gemmill said:

 

If Starmer goes I think it gives Labour the moral leg-up, and it might force the pathetic Tories into submitting their letters to try and redress the balance. 

 

I just struggle with who Labour replace him with. 

 

And its the same with the tories, maybe moreso. Wonder if we could see a GE sooner than anticipated. Holding off isn't helping the tories imo. 

Thinking about Starmer though, presuming he doesn't receive a FPN, and I don't see how he will, I think it would neutralise his partygate attacks somewhat but surely Johnson couldn't weaponise it against him either. People will just move on with general distrust of politicians. 

 

[Rayvin 5186]

Just now, Renton said:

 

Nobody is irreplaceable, although this would take down Rayner too. Unfortunately I don't have that much faith in the labour front bench. Better than the tories certainly but by and large powder puff. You're not getting what you want regardless. 

 

Do you mean me specifically? I know I'm not getting what I want, I said as much several posts back. This discussion isn't about Europe on my end, Labour aren't ready to tackle that issue because they still believe that they can create a broad church between racist halfwits and urban intellectuals. 

 

The labour front bench is indeed bereft but I'm far more confident that the centre left has a higher number of credible up and comers than the Tories do. And I think mentoring them in could be something Cooper, or someone like her, could achieve.

[Renton 21364]

Just now, ewerk said:

Starmer reportedly to announce that he’ll resign if fined.

 

Good, don't know why he didn't say that from the off. So now he has some moral high ground if he escapes a FPN. 

[Rayvin 5186]

2 minutes ago, Gemmill said:

 

Aye impossible to argue nuance when the headlines are screaming the base argument at people. 

 

I reckon Durham Police will come out with some very vague conclusion to their investigations which allows both sides to pursue their own agenda, and they probably both stay in their respective jobs as a result. 

 

Which would be tragic because it saves Johnson and affords this completely false moral equivalence. But that is exactly their game plan here. It fucking reeks. 

 

I think that's a fair assessment. And yes, it's a truly dismal state of affairs.