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

[darrenm]

11 minutes ago, bickster said:

Not fake, it's been out there quite a while and never been denied

You know that bloke everyone wants to be the next Labour leader... The one that did a lot for the Hilsborough campaign...

There's plenty of evidence of this one. He's been called out for it loads of times. Absolutely nothing about Diane Abbott. I've searched far and wide and not only is there no direct evidence of it being real, there's no evidence of anyone ever knowing anything about it until yesterday. I'm still sure it's fake. Unless you remember it yourself or have a paper copy?

[bickster]

10 minutes ago, darrenm said:

There's plenty of evidence of this one. He's been called out for it loads of times. Absolutely nothing about Diane Abbott. I've searched far and wide and not only is there no direct evidence of it being real, there's no evidence of anyone ever knowing anything about it until yesterday. I'm still sure it's fake. Unless you remember it yourself or have a paper copy?

seen it a number of times over the years

[dAVe80]

1 hour ago, ml1dch said:

How did the left of the party feel about this?

I mean...no excuses, right?

What do you want me to say? Yes, there are no excuses. Point scoring over me making a very serious point is a bit shitty mind. But yeah nice one mate. 

[Amsterdam_Neil_D]

11 hours ago, bickster said:

From a personal perspective, anyone doing anything with the Scum isreprehensible

Black mark for Starmer

Trying to extract Votes from Sun readers is a bit like looking for food in bins when you have got 5 pound in your hand and there is a McDonald's behind you.  What's the best possible outcome he can hope for in extra votes or anything else ?  How many are going to read it (at all) ,  sit back and say "He's changed my mind ?"

I don't know for sure but I doubt their readership are big voters anyway.  Looks a desperate to get in the news,  somehow. 

[bickster]

The point here, as well as the one about Starmer writing for the Scum, is that Abbott has specifically called him out on it. Those on the left think this is the right thing to do and they'd have a very good point except....

The Scum has retaliated by pointing out the obvious problem with this.

If you lay down with dogs, you will get fleas

[blandy]

14 hours ago, darrenm said:

There's plenty of evidence of this one. He's been called out for it loads of times. Absolutely nothing about Diane Abbott. I've searched far and wide and not only is there no direct evidence of it being real, there's no evidence of anyone ever knowing anything about it until yesterday. I'm still sure it's fake. Unless you remember it yourself or have a paper copy?

The Sun Monday May 31, 2010: Article Titled "Labour's Lost Sun Readers" (Sub Title "We cannot win without them" By Dianne Abbott)

"Labour Leadership hopeful Dianne Abbott says they must win over Sun readers if they are to regain power"

and then an article written by her and a bit written by the Sun commenting on the leadership hopefuls.

[HanoiVillan]

3 minutes ago, blandy said:

The Sun Monday May 31, 2010: Article Titled "Labour's Lost Sun Readers" (Sub Title "We cannot win without them" By Dianne Abbott)

"Labour Leadership hopeful Dianne Abbott says they must win over Sun readers if they are to regain power"

and then an article written by her and a bit written by the Sun commenting on the leadership hopefuls.

Thanks.

I think it's worth saying here that the stigma around the Sun has probably increased a fair amount over the last ten years; obviously the boycott was already in place in Liverpool, but I think the wider left solidarity with that boycott has increased significantly since then. Which is a good thing, clearly.

(Doesn't mean Abbott 'gets away with it', she should know that if she's done the thing she's criticising, people will call her out for it, so she should be addressing her own history on it)

[bickster]

Just now, HanoiVillan said:

Thanks.

I think it's worth saying here that the stigma around the Sun has probably increased a fair amount over the last ten years; obviously the boycott was already in place in Liverpool, but I think the wider left solidarity with that boycott has increased significantly since then. Which is a good thing, clearly.

(Doesn't mean Abbott 'gets away with it', she should know that if she's done the thing she's criticising, people will call her out for it, so she should be addressing her own history on it)

Sorry, I think that's utterly wrong. 2010 was probably peak for Anti-Scum campaigns, this was 2 years before it gave it's "apology" which was obviously a direct result of the pressure applied by the campaign.

 

 

[blandy]

2 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

Thanks.

I think it's worth saying here that the stigma around the Sun has probably increased a fair amount over the last ten years; obviously the boycott was already in place in Liverpool, but I think the wider left solidarity with that boycott has increased significantly since then. Which is a good thing, clearly.

(Doesn't mean Abbott 'gets away with it', she should know that if she's done the thing she's criticising, people will call her out for it, so she should be addressing her own history on it)

Agree with that, apart perhaps from the minor deviation that I'd say the stigma around the Sun has probably increased a fair amount over the last ten years - nationally no, but amongst Corbyn types, understandably so, yes. It'sspecific to the attacks by the Sun on the "left" and personal stuff around Corbyn et al - whereas previously it was more around Murdoch & Hillsborough.

Either way, it's a reprehensible rag, but politicians being politicians will from time to time "talk" to it in their own or their party interests in order to try and engage/get a hearing from its readers.

[HanoiVillan]

33 minutes ago, bickster said:

Sorry, I think that's utterly wrong. 2010 was probably peak for Anti-Scum campaigns, this was 2 years before it gave it's "apology" which was obviously a direct result of the pressure applied by the campaign.

 

 

2010 was the dog days of New Labour though; inside the party, the idea that you had to at least have a passable relationship with Murdoch was still pretty strong. That's why it was such a big deal when Miliband (initially at least) went hard after News Int over phone-hacking - because it was turning against the previous conventional wisdom.

[bickster]

18 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

2010 was the dog days of New Labour though; inside the party, the idea that you had to at least have a passable relationship with Murdoch was still pretty strong. That's why it was such a big deal when Miliband (initially at least) went hard after News Int over phone-hacking - because it was turning against the previous conventional wisdom.

Abbott was never New Labour and much like all the other Campaign Group of MPs has never really been one for toeing the party line. She also has a bit of history for do as I say not do what I do

[darrenm]

When do we short circuit to the point where the people who put and keep Starmer in charge recognise that it hasn't worked so they need to give up and do whatever it takes to get the Tories out?

 

[ml1dch]

43 minutes ago, darrenm said:

When do we short circuit to the point where the people who put and keep Starmer in charge recognise that it hasn't worked so they need to give up and do whatever it takes to get the Tories out?

 

Presumably when the city mayoralty terms end?

I can't imagine there is much enthusiasm to do this all again for the sake of putting Nandy or Rayner in charge for a couple of years.

[bickster]

If we had a poll ban list much like the speculation source blacklist, YouGov would be right at the top of that list. Their polls swing more than Stormy Daniels G-String

They had Labour ahead by 2 points 2 or so weeks ago. A shift of ten points in 2 weeks says a lot about their poll accuracy

 

[bickster]

1 minute ago, ml1dch said:

Presumably when the city mayoralty terms end?

I can't imagine there is much enthusiasm to do this all again for the sake of putting Nandy or Rayner in charge for a couple of years.

Outside bet on Barry the Gardener

[ml1dch]

26 minutes ago, bickster said:

Outside bet on Barry the Gardener

Would he likely have enough support under the new rules?

[blandy]

1 hour ago, darrenm said:

When do we short circuit to the point where the people who put and keep Starmer in charge recognise that it hasn't worked so they need to give up and do whatever it takes to get the Tories out?

When do we short circuit to the point where the people who keep undermining the leader recognise that it hasn't worked so they need to give up and do whatever it takes to get the Tories out?

(note: this applied equally during Corbyn's time as leader. Whatever individuals like you or I think of these people, looking from the outside in, Labour continually arguing amongst itself instead of focusing on being the next government is letting the tories off the hook - whether it's Owen Smith. Len McLuskey, Johm McDonnell, Diane Abbott or whoever).

Either that or just **** leave the party. 

[darrenm]

1 minute ago, blandy said:

When do we short circuit to the point where the people who keep undermining the leader recognise that it hasn't worked so they need to give up and do whatever it takes to get the Tories out?

(note: this applied equally during Corbyn's time as leader. Whatever individuals like you or I think of these people, looking from the outside in, Labour continually arguing amongst itself instead of focusing on being the next government is letting the tories off the hook - whether it's Owen Smith. Len McLuskey, Johm McDonnell, Diane Abbott or whoever).

Either that or just **** leave the party. 

Nobody's undermined Starmer. He's had justified criticism in the hope of getting him to do better. But he's nothing like the previous guy had with literally his own MPs campaigning for the Tories.

This time, he's floundered all by himself and his own uselessness.

But I agree, it's 2 parties in 1 that just need to split. That's what I meant with 'whatever it takes to get the Tories out'. I don't mean give the party back to the left. I mean hurry up and do the inevitable split up and create a PR pact and coalition.

[bickster]

8 minutes ago, ml1dch said:

Would he likely have enough support under the new rules?

Probably not right now but a week is a long time....

34 minutes ago, ml1dch said:

Presumably when the city mayoralty terms end?

It would be some going even then for Burnham. He can't be Leader of the Labour Party until he's an MP and he can't be an MP and Mayor of GM (because part of his role is Police and Crime Commissioner and the holder of that role is specifically excluded from holding other positions). His current tenure is until mid-2024

[HanoiVillan]

oh no