DaoDeMings

The tweet was specifically about an Israel lobby in British politics which does exist. If it was about a Jewish lobby or some such then of course that would be massively concerning.

I am surprised by Labour. They were pretty smooth up to this point. Would have thought they'd have it under control.

To some extent I agree, it's just interesting that racism and problematic behaviour only appears to be worth commenting on when it's someone with whom you don't politically align

Yeah, not sure if it's tacky just sort of odd and unnecessary.

That's the problem with Westminster politics really is that the 'political rules' often allow and excuse things that most find personally and morally indefensible. There shouldn't be such a gulf. Oh well, what can you do...

Again, it's not even about these candidates specifically. I don't think it was an extremely anti semitic tweet personally but that's a matter of opinion. If there was a process that found wrongdoing on her part then that's fine. The problem is more that Luke Akehurst, Neil Coyle and others have said or done just as many if not more problematic things than Faiza Shaheen, but they have not been deselected because they politically align with or are loyal to the leadership. The same standards are not being applied equally and that should be concerning whatever end of the political spectrum are on.

Am I confusing things or do we just have a different opinion? 'It doesn’t matter what the Tories or the LibDems or any other party do, it’s not relevant to how the Labour Party conducts itself.' - I agree with that. That was the point I was making. The post I was referring to was implying that factionalism/sketchy deselection is an issue with the left specifically, but clearly it's not. I accept that the second point was a false quivalence but what the original post was referring to was Faiza Shaheen liking a post by the Green Party celebrating their new candidate whom Faiza Shaheen is a personal friend of. The Labour Party used this as part of an arguement to deselect which is not legitimate imo. I suppose the broader point is the lengths they are going to to deselect left wing candidates while openly accepting ex-Tories is bizarre. It's not about Luke Akehurst and Rosie Duffield breaking rules. The concern is that they are hardly more competent or less controversial than candidates they are removing. The point is that it is clearly factional and not on. I think leadership deselecting candidates is wrong on either side. Decisions should be made democratically by local parties or by the wider membership. I don't really see what your point is and I don't really see why some will go to such effort to defend what the Labour Party are doing at the moment r.e. candidate selection

'It's the nature of Labour' - Do the Tories and other parties not do the same thing? 'It's not like it's hard to stay away from promoting other parties' - If this was a problem for Labour, why are they accepting so many deferring Tories? 'Some of the left candidates are making it a bit too easy' - What about Luke Akehurst, Rosie Duffield, Neil Coyle. Plenty of candidates on the right where there are arguably 'easy' grounds to deselect them. This shouldn't even be a left or right issue. It's antidemocratic and wrong whatever faction of the party is doing it. Making excuses for it because 'the left candidates are making it easy' is nonsense.

Plays a lot like Morgan Rogers

Any marketing people got insight on why they chose Friday morning for this? People more likely to spend on the weekend (if the kit is announced today too)?

Are there any requirements to be met (that we don't already meet)?

This is what I'm talking about, and I have no faith that this Labour government will resolve them. This iteration of the Labour Party is definitely more electable than Corbyn's. Corbyn was a crap leader. And I'm so glad that Starmer will get the Tories out. But this lot still offers me no hope for my future and the future of the rest of the planet. For the record, I don't think Starmer would have beaten Boris in 2019 either. And what he's doing to the party now is moving the political conversation to the right and making those long-term structural problems you mentioned even harder to change.

Clearly when I say 'nothing happening' I'm not being entirely literal. Obviously, I would rather Labour in than the Tories. By suggesting nothing will change I mean in a broad sense. Things will improve under Labour but I don't think they'll change fundamentally enough to solve the bigger problems of inequality and especially climate change. I personally find it hard to look past the fact that we're heading toward a massive destructive climate event and nobody is committed to doing anything about it. IMO, the only way we can deal with it is by changing the economic system fundamentally. Solar panels won't do it. And on Corbyn, he got 40-odd percent of the vote in 2017. I think he (or at least his policies) was more popular than the media would have you believe. The leanings have shifted right not because people think Corbyn's politics are mad but because the media dictates the political conversation and it benefits the media if the governments in charge are right wing.

It's shite when it happens from either side. This is my bias talking but with deselection under Corbyn it at least felt like there was a more democratic process to it. Starmer lied to get leadership of the party and then took power away from members. Corbyn could at least say he had a mandate for deselection from membership

Eternal status quo and apathy it is then. When governments pander to the political middle out of fear of saying anything remotely controversial you get a situation like now where nothing ever gets done, governments act in the extreme short-term and narratives and the direction of political travel are led by the media and corporations. The climate crisis is making this issue increasingly pressing. The 'mainstream' middle ground will continue to do nothing about it until it's too late (it probably already is).

Over the validity of the process to deselect her

Faiza Shaheen is now suing the Labour Party over her deselection...

Completely agree with you on not selling key players, not only for the emotional attachment but also because they are hard to replace. But others have different opinions and this is the place to have the discussion. Even if it is **** tragic that people would happily see the back of McGinn etc. for some random youngster from abroad!

It's all just opinions really. Some people just like hypothetical squad building and that inevitably includes sales. You're doing it yourself 'Can see the logic in shifting Digne too...' Some would find the idea of shifting Digne or Cash mad as some are sentimental about them! I'm definitely on the sentimental side and would always prefer to see us be loyal to players. I was relentlessly Smith In because of what he did for us - can safely say I was wrong on that one! . But if this thread isn't for discussing potential ins and outs then what is it for...?

That would make sense practically for them - this mess surrounding Abbott and Shaheen only highlights their hypocrisy when it comes to Coyle etc.

I like the angle grinder idea. It is intriguing what their plans are if it really can't be extended, considering they insist we're still on for the 50k capacity or whatever required for Euro '28

Just enough for a sandwich and a coffee on the train

...

Obviously I'd rather offload Duran etc. instead. It's just if someone really insists on buying Watkins we're getting £80m probably. With that money you can replace his contributions, no doubt.

Compared to Neil Coyle who actually racially abused somebody but is allowed to stand... Not that it will impact the election result, but Labour are at serious risk of alienating minority voters/members here. New party on the horizon?