Labour sacks shadow transport minister who backed strikes.

Wow Maizie!

The RMT certainly got all that wrong!

Here you are, Maybee. Judge for yourself whether or not they were misled/misguided.

www.rmt.org.uk/news/rmt-sets-out-six-key-reasons-for-leaving-the-eu/

I’ve been told on Facebook that Lynch was a leave supporter but wasn’t leader of the union at the time. But, given that the union supported leave and so did he I’m pretty sure, had he been leader the advice would have been the same. So I have to question his judgement. And, much as I understand why the feel the need to strike I don’t think they’re explaining the reasons behind it because it isn’t just about pay.

MayBee70

DaisyAnne

Don't expect an answer MayBee.

I am still waiting for Grany to tell me who or what she is supporting. I have a feeling I could be waiting some time.

I’m not going to drop this. I only found out about it yesterday and I’m furious about it.

If you want to know if the RMT advised its members to vote for Brexit, I can confirm that it did.

Some of the reasons it gave were based on untruths being promoted by the Leave campaigners.

I think it's come back to bite them as it enabled this truly appalling current government.

There is nothing dubious, slanderous, libellous or doubtful about the things Starmer has said and done.

That is not what I said Glorianny, but it is correct.

Maybe the political landscape has changed since he became leader? Maybe he’s learned how not to do things that will give the gutter press front page news that will stop people voting Labour? And just maybe he’s a lot tougher and driven than many people realise which, when you look at the way this government behaves, might not be a bad thing.

DaisyAnne

There have been those who refer to dubious sites. There have been those who post published, bylined content as their own. Also, there have been those who make accusations that were, long ago, shown to be slanderous/libellous lies attacking the current, elected Labour leader.

It would be interesting to know who those members who attack the Labour party and its leader in this way support. Perhaps they don't belong to or relate to any party. On the other hand, it would be intriguing to know what they are positively in favour of rather than all the negatives. Which part of politics do they expect to carry their views forward? What do they want all their negativity to achieve?

This continuous bitter attack gives us no hint of a way forward. It would be good to know what they expect that to be.

DaisyAnne I'm still looking for another leader for the LP I don't expect Starmer to last.
There is nothing dubious, slanderous, libellous or doubtful about the things Starmer has said and done.
1. These were Starmer's 10 pledges. Most of them are now doubtful. 5,7 and 10 are completely disregarded keirstarmer.com/plans/10-pledges/
2 He promised to unite the party and yet he has expelled a number of members, because they were left wing. That isn't uniting anything.
3 He hasn't supported the strikes but he had previously insisted he would.
Given the degree of change he seems to have undergone since becoming leader how on earth can anyone support or believe him? You simply have no idea what he would be willing to abandon if he was given any position of power.

DaisyAnne

Don't expect an answer MayBee.

I am still waiting for Grany to tell me who or what she is supporting. I have a feeling I could be waiting some time.

I’m not going to drop this. I only found out about it yesterday and I’m furious about it.

There have been those who refer to dubious sites. There have been those who post published, bylined content as their own. Also, there have been those who make accusations that were, long ago, shown to be slanderous/libellous lies attacking the current, elected Labour leader.

It would be interesting to know who those members who attack the Labour party and its leader in this way support. Perhaps they don't belong to or relate to any party. On the other hand, it would be intriguing to know what they are positively in favour of rather than all the negatives. Which part of politics do they expect to carry their views forward? What do they want all their negativity to achieve?

This continuous bitter attack gives us no hint of a way forward. It would be good to know what they expect that to be.

Casdon

nightowl

I think that’s unfair Iam. Posters on here have given reasons why they have little faith in Starmer with no distortion of facts. Your prerogative to ignore those facts and give other reasons why you like him. But some of the personal remarks on here towards people who think otherwise are offensive, and reminiscent of the reasons I stopped posting on political threads some time ago.

I don’t think Iam64 is being unreasonable to be frustrated when the same posters repeatedly post links to dubious sites which give false information or distort the facts. Even worse when posters quote but don’t reference, pass off other people’s comments as their own, or post slurs which have no basis in fact.

Please can you post any example of slurs which have no basis in fact. It's fine to disagree but really no one criticising Starmer has done so from the viewpoint of simply disliking him (which many considered OK to do with Corbyn). They have stated things he has said and the actions he has taken, which time and time again have been entirely opposed to each other. How can this be "slurs".

Don't expect an answer MayBee.

I am still waiting for Grany to tell me who or what she is supporting. I have a feeling I could be waiting some time.

Grany

Mick Lynch on Double Down News.

On trade unions labour and Tory.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=MwTD4fH31-I

Talks a lot of sense

So, can you tell me if Mick Lynch advised his workers to vote for brexit?

nightowl

I think that’s unfair Iam. Posters on here have given reasons why they have little faith in Starmer with no distortion of facts. Your prerogative to ignore those facts and give other reasons why you like him. But some of the personal remarks on here towards people who think otherwise are offensive, and reminiscent of the reasons I stopped posting on political threads some time ago.

I don’t think Iam64 is being unreasonable to be frustrated when the same posters repeatedly post links to dubious sites which give false information or distort the facts. Even worse when posters quote but don’t reference, pass off other people’s comments as their own, or post slurs which have no basis in fact.

I think that’s unfair Iam. Posters on here have given reasons why they have little faith in Starmer with no distortion of facts. Your prerogative to ignore those facts and give other reasons why you like him. But some of the personal remarks on here towards people who think otherwise are offensive, and reminiscent of the reasons I stopped posting on political threads some time ago.

It’s like banging the head on the brick wall. I’ve no problem with people not liking Starmer, entirely their choice. Distorting facts in support of personal feelings is so tedious

I didn’t realise that the RMT advised it’s workers to vote for brexit. Unlike Keir who opposed it.

DaisyAnne

Grany who or what are you supporting? Or is your general aim simply to destroy the chances of anyone and everyone left of centre? Is it that you would prefer a right-wing government rather than a left-wing one that doesn't suit you 100%?

Do you realise those supporting the far-left are about 10% of the country? How are they ever going to form a government?

If you don't understand that it isn't a question of left or far left it's a question of honesty and trust then you really need to look more carefully. Starmer has broken so many promises it is impossible to believe anything he says. There are only two possibilities, either he lied about his intentions or he has no ideals or principles and simply shifts when the wind blows. Both of those make him unacceptable as a party leader or PM. Honestly haven't we had enough of duplicitous men running the country?

Having banned his front bench standing on the picket lines, a ruling which has been ignored, a video has emerged of #Starmer saying during #Labour’s leadership election that he would do just that?

Grany who or what are you supporting? Or is your general aim simply to destroy the chances of anyone and everyone left of centre? Is it that you would prefer a right-wing government rather than a left-wing one that doesn't suit you 100%?

Do you realise those supporting the far-left are about 10% of the country? How are they ever going to form a government?

Starmer isn’t stopping anyone supporting strikers, or going on picket lines. With your eye for truth, I’d have thought that would be clear

'I'm very proud to support you, both as the local MP for here, but also in the shadow cabinet and running as leader of the Labour party because my leadership, if I win it, will be standing with you and other campaigns like you'

Diametrically opposed to what Keir says now in every detail, and this was only 2020.

“It’s very important you get politicians to come out and support you and stand with you” he said, speaking as a member of the shadow cabinet. Video I will support Campaigns like your and others like you.

twitter.com/alexnunns/status/1555508592555556865?s=20&t=6FO-uolOS8wmd7nz4Vc1lQ

Can you believe anything Starmer says?

Grany

Mick Lynch on Double Down News.

On trade unions labour and Tory.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=MwTD4fH31-I

Talks a lot of sense

Valhalla here we come.

Mick Lynch on Double Down News.

On trade unions labour and Tory.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=MwTD4fH31-I

Talks a lot of sense

Unless the left wing of the Labour Party really have a go at Keir in which case the Conservatives might call an early election?