The Chairman Mao resembling, Monarchy hating, threat to Britain, Labour Party thread

[Jareth]

Just now, bickster said:

Despite it all being on Labour's website and the comprehensive links I provided to them up thread, you apparently are none the wiser. Maybe its because you didn't read them

Repeating bollocks is bollocks to the power of bollocks

Is this also bollocks? 

The lawyer echoed his previous comments that complaints made by black and Asian members were not being treated as seriously as those related to anti-Semitism.

[bickster]

Just now, Jareth said:

Is this also bollocks? 

The lawyer echoed his previous comments that complaints made by black and Asian members were not being treated as seriously as those related to anti-Semitism.

It's an opinion, that is literally all it is.

[Jareth]

Saturday - 

Asked on Saturday whether Starmer had approved the graphic or knew about it in advance, a Labour source said the leader had not been aware of it and stressed Starmer would not usually be expected to sign off individual campaign materials.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/apr/08/yvette-cooper-was-not-told-about-labours-sunak-attack-ad-in-advance

Today - 

Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer has doubled down on a controversial attack on Rishi Sunak's record on crime, saying "I stand by every word".

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65228859

[Jareth]

2 minutes ago, bickster said:

It's an opinion, that is literally all it is.

Of a qualified KC employed by Starmer to investigate Labour's factional problems. But hell what does he know that we don't eh. 

[blandy]

1 hour ago, Jareth said:

nobody is any the wiser, including the man who wrote the report

Exactly. Thus claims he (or anyone else makes) about how they're currently dealing with complaints are from a position of ignorance. Therefore his claim that there's a hierarchy of racism as you put it, is speculation and rumour, not fact.

[blandy]

1 hour ago, Jareth said:

Of a qualified KC employed by Starmer to investigate Labour's factional problems. But hell what does he know that we don't eh. 

And no longer involved in the process. That's the point. He isn't involved any more, by his own admission, so he can only provide an opinion based on being on the outside, not from being a paid investigator into recent historical events.

[cyrusr]

Reading this thread, you can understand why the Tories keep on getting voted in. So much infighting that it genuinely feels that some would cut off their nose to spite their face. 

The sooner there’s Proportional Representation the better. 

[Jareth]

44 minutes ago, blandy said:

And no longer involved in the process. That's the point. He isn't involved any more, by his own admission, so he can only provide an opinion based on being on the outside, not from being a paid investigator into recent historical events.

The faction to which the hierarchy of racism applied, is now the dominant faction of the party. If anything this group are emboldened. And the original point was that this lot are making dog whistle attack ads on Sunak. It is no surprise at all. 

[blandy]

19 hours ago, Jareth said:

The faction to which the hierarchy of racism applied, is now the dominant faction of the party. If anything this group are emboldened. And the original point was that this lot are making dog whistle attack ads on Sunak.

I think that's a leap too far. Someone's opinion that there is a difference between the way some complaints are treated than others (AS ones), even their use of the term "hierarchy" is from the information available to us just speculation. To then add to that speculation by claiming it (this alleged hierarchy, if it exists at all) applies only to one "faction" of the party is further conjecture. The use of "emboldened" is very pejorative, too. You're implying that the more right (centre left) is full of people now given confidence to be racist. You also say they're making dog whistle attacks on Sunak. I don't think that's true either (in terms of racism).

I don't like the framing of the twitter advert thing, I think it's daft. I think it's daft because it's clearly (to my mind) untrue - I don't for a moment believe Sunak kind of doesn't want Rapists or paedos to go to jail. So it's daft and pretty "gutter" to claim he does. Further to that, Politicians don't sentence criminals, Judges do. If judges are not sentencing sex offenders "properly" then that's on them in the first instance - they hear the evidence in each case, the PM doesn't. However, the Tory government does set the overall courts and sentencing policy, and fairly recently they instructed judges to give shorter sentences because of prison overcrowding, for example - that's a fair target for an attack ad. as an example.

I personally think the whole criminal justice system is a mess from top to bottom. Policing (obviously) we know about the Met, for example. We know how some crimes are ignored, or arrests are very low and stats are manipulated. Then there's the courts - massive backlogs, seriously underpaid barristers. Then there's prisons - they're dens of further offending and of embedding criminal behaviour - there's little effort put into rehabilitation. So high rates of re-offending. And so on and so forth. None of the parties seems to have a serious plan or policy on how to fix things, or even start to fix them. It's just debate about "being soft" on criminals. It's pathetic.

[Jareth]

15 hours ago, blandy said:

I think that's a leap too far. Someone's opinion that there is a difference between the way some complaints are treated than others (AS ones), even their use of the term "hierarchy" is from the information available to us just speculation. To then add to that speculation by claiming it (this alleged hierarchy, if it exists at all) applies only to one "faction" of the party is further conjecture. The use of "emboldened" is very pejorative, too. You're implying that the more right (centre left) is full of people now given confidence to be racist. You also say they're making dog whistle attacks on Sunak. I don't think that's true either (in terms of racism).

I don't like the framing of the twitter advert thing, I think it's daft. I think it's daft because it's clearly (to my mind) untrue - I don't for a moment believe Sunak kind of doesn't want Rapists or pardons to go to jail. So it's daft and pretty "gutter" to claim he does. Further to that, Politicians don't sentence criminals, Judges do. If judges are not sentencing sex offenders "properly" then that's on them in the first instance - they hear the evidence in each case, the PM doesn't. However, the Tory government does set the overall courts and sentencing policy, and fairly recently they instructed judges to give shorter sentences because of prison overcrowding, for example - that's a fair target for an attack ad. as an example.

I personally think the whole criminal justice system is a mess from top to bottom. Policing (obviously) we know about the Met, for example. We know how some crimes are ignored, or arrests are very low and stats are manipulated. Then there's the courts - massive backlogs, seriously underpaid barristers. Then there's prisons - they're dens of further offending and of embedding criminal behaviour - there's little effort put into rehabilitation. So high rates of re-offending. And so on and so forth. None of the parties seems to have a serious plan or policy on how to fix things, or even start to fix them. It's just debate about "being soft" on criminals. It's pathetic.

Yeah I've overdone my point now so if you don't mind I won't just shout the opposite about Forde and the attack ads - I'll save yer all from that at least. Agreed on the system being very broken, Starmer sees this as his territory so we're currently getting an awful lot of Labour comms about his past job. My general beef is that Labour are throwing this away - I believe one poll over the weekend had the gap at 11-15 points and Sunak with higher approval ratings. They still need to offer us something substantial and enthusiastic, the current strategy paints Starmer who wants to be the arbiter of good and decency - well as any other politician, using the same old political tricks employed by the other side. Local elections soon so we'll see - hopefully they don't mirror things like the below

 

[bickster]

40 minutes ago, Jareth said:

hopefully they don't mirror things like the below

Mirror what exactly? The last time Labour won Norfolk South West was in 1959. In 2019 the percentages were 69% Tory / 18% Labour or 35.5K vs 9.3K

Liz Truss' seat has never once featured in the seats the Tories might lose list, If Truss lost that seat the number of Tory MPs would be in single digits

 

[ml1dch]

54 minutes ago, Jareth said:

They still need to offer us something substantial and enthusiastic, the current strategy paints Starmer who wants to be the arbiter of good and decency - well as any other politician, using the same old political tricks employed by the other side. Local elections soon so we'll see - hopefully they don't mirror things like the below

 

 

The Tories down sixteen points in their safe areas and Labour up fourteen points, while also eating into the Lib Dem vote share? I imagine Starmer would bite your hand off for that sort of result. 

Edited April 11, 2023 by ml1dch

[Jareth]

1 hour ago, ml1dch said:

 

The Tories down sixteen points in their safe areas and Labour up fourteen points, while also eating into the Lib Dem vote share? I imagine Starmer would bite your hand off for that sort of result. 

I'd have thought Starmer would be hoping the Lib Dems to be faring better against the tories in these places - Truss was a disaster yet the locals still back her, Lib Dems nowhere. The poll in my opinion appears to show enough tory voters sticking with their side, that's not good news for Labour. They'll have to get more right wing with their attack ads now. 

[blandy]

1 minute ago, Jareth said:

I'd have thought Starmer would be hoping the Lib Dems to be faring better against the tories in these places - Truss was a disaster yet the locals still back her, Lib Dems nowhere. The poll in my opinion appears to show enough tory voters sticking with their side, that's not good news for Labour. They'll have to get more right wing with their attack ads now. 

I agree to a point about Labour needing the LDs too take seats from the tories. That’s spot on. But we have to consider each constituency on its own characteristics. Some places are just dyed in the wool Tory, and the only question is who comes second. Truss’s seat is one such. Where I live is another. It’s not just that the voters here or there are overwhelmingly Tory, it’s also fact that Labour and other parties don’t have a strong local team, they don’t resource these places much, because their chances of winning them are next to nil. They spend their time and effort where they think they have more of a chance.

The current attack ads are personal against Sunak because of 2 things IMO. Firstly he’s new as PM and they want to knock him down in the eyes of voters who see him as “ooh, look, a new one, I wonder what he’s like, he doesn’t seem to be as bad as Truss and Bunter”. If they let him set the narrative about “competence and getting stuff done”, then that’s bad for Labour. The second reason is the upcoming local elections which are in places where the things they are attacking him on are the same as they think voters where the elections are care about.

[bickster]

26 minutes ago, blandy said:

The current attack ads are personal against Sunak because of 2 things IMO. Firstly he’s new as PM and they want to knock him down in the eyes of voters who see him as “ooh, look, a new one, I wonder what he’s like, he doesn’t seem to be as bad as Truss and Bunter”. If they let him set the narrative about “competence and getting stuff done”, then that’s bad for Labour. The second reason is the upcoming local elections which are in places where the things they are attacking him on are the same as they think voters where the elections are care about.

I think there is another reason too. Labour fully expect the Tories to attack Starmer especially in the direction of his time as DPP, as is the RW narrative re Saville etc

Now, it's a case of getting their retaliation in first and Tory MPs are faux outraged, They'd be possibly seen as a bit hypocritical if they then produced said attack ads against Starmer

It's a warning shot across their bows that Labour are perfectly willing to do what General Krulak wouldn't

My personal opinion: They shouldn't have done it (Just you know because it seems to matter to someone)

[ml1dch]

45 minutes ago, Jareth said:

I'd have thought Starmer would be hoping the Lib Dems to be faring better against the tories in these places - Truss was a disaster yet the locals still back her, Lib Dems nowhere. The poll in my opinion appears to show enough tory voters sticking with their side, that's not good news for Labour. They'll have to get more right wing with their attack ads now. 

That's a problem if they're not voting Lib Dem but are voting Tory - but (a couple of outliers aside) they're not, they're seeing Labour as the more likely option.

I've said before, that a big headache in 2024 could easily be that the usual "Labour candidates don't try too hard in the places that the Lib Dems are well placed to beat the Tories" strategy is no longer applicable because Labour have jumped over the Lib Dems in lots of those areas.

In a world where Labour's support isn't so strong, that South West Norfolk chart shows the Tories down 16, the Lib Dems up 14 - and I imagine Labour wouldn't be upset by that. But I can tell you for certain that they're happier with the Tories down 16 and Labour up 14 instead. That forecast suggesting a thirty point swing from 2019 in Labour's favour is unequivocally good for them, whether they win the seat or not. And there's no chance they are winning Truss's seat. It's like saying that Johnson should have been worried in 2019 because the Tories weren't going to take Islington.

[blandy]

31 minutes ago, bickster said:

Labour fully expect the Tories to attack Starmer especially in the direction of his time as DPP, as is the RW narrative re Saville etc

I dunno. I mean Bunter did as a kind of lash out don’t answer the question, spread shit everywhere thing when he got skewered by Starmer in some PMQs, but I’m less sure that Sunak will do the same kind of stunt. Some the other baby eaters have gone on about lefty lawyers and stuff, mostly the maddest throbbiest ones, so I guess you could be right. I think whichever side does it, it’s wrong.

[juanpabloangel18]

23 hours ago, bickster said:

It's an opinion, that is literally all it is.

How bizarrely reductive. It's an 860 page report by a legal expert commissioned by Starmer himself. It's not exactly a vox pop from Steve in Shirley.

[bickster]

1 minute ago, juanpabloangel18 said:

How bizarrely reductive. It's an 860 page report by a legal expert commissioned by Starmer himself. It's not exactly a vox pop from Steve in Shirley.

Not what we were talking about wasn't. What we were talking about was recent quotes by Forde on the current situation at Labour which he knows about as much as you and I on

[blandy]

13 minutes ago, bickster said:

Not what we were talking about wasn't. What we were talking about was recent quotes by Forde on the current situation at Labour which he knows about as much as you and I on

Yeah, though to be completely fair, he may likely  know more than I do. For example individuals may have been in touch with him to express their disagreement with their cases being handled or whatever, but you’re right. He’s on the outside now, same as us.