An election looms, so I think it is time to look at all the success over the 13 years that we have witnessed from the government.

So you want an "absence" of the leader of the Labour Party, Glorianny. I don't actually care why you want that but you really need to tell the rest of us ...

Then what?

Just stop talking about the hole you want to create and tell us how the absence of someone who is being seen, to quote Marr (New Statesman) "as effectively the candidate Prime Minister" is going to help the country or, what I presume is your party, Labour.

Or do you despise democracy so much, are you so far to the left, that you expect to be one of the selectorate of the leader of what would then be the beginnings of a Marxist-Leninist party?

It would be really great if you stopped just destroying or attempting to destroy, and for once said something positive backed by a reasonable suggestion of a programme about how your ideas for policies could be carried out.

Grany

Agree Glorianny
Could be Starmer is being avasive he's good at that. We are talking about the Conservative government being no good, but Labour are following same polices under Starmer so no change.

So you would actually, as a result of the above opinion-

either vote Conservative = Tories in power

or

abstain = same result?

Do vote tactically if it makes any sense in your Constituency. I certainly will. But otherwise- sabotaging Starmer = Tories again. Bravo - NOT!

Of course could try and get a new Leader from far left of party- which would fit in better with your wishes. Fine, I'd get that. And yet, Corbyn or Foot, or any from Momentum = Tories again. Really what you would prefer?

DAR if Starmer could keep the promises he made in order to be elected as leader of the LP that would be a start.
But find it increasingly strange that I am castigated for not trusting Starmer, when no one has posted any policies or ideas he is firmly committed to.
The idea seems to be that any government is better than this one, so everyone must support Starmer.

It's generally not about winning elections, it's about being politically pure. Gets us nowhere of course but for the people who play purity politics it wont generally impact their lives, they dont need a labour government.

Fleurpepper

Grany

Agree Glorianny
Could be Starmer is being avasive he's good at that. We are talking about the Conservative government being no good, but Labour are following same polices under Starmer so no change.

So you would actually, as a result of the above opinion-

either vote Conservative = Tories in power

or

abstain = same result?

Do vote tactically if it makes any sense in your Constituency. I certainly will. But otherwise- sabotaging Starmer = Tories again. Bravo - NOT!

Of course could try and get a new Leader from far left of party- which would fit in better with your wishes. Fine, I'd get that. And yet, Corbyn or Foot, or any from Momentum = Tories again. Really what you would prefer?

I'll probably vote Green if we have a candidate.

I'd like someone who is able to keep their word. Who reunites the party inviting back into it all the Jews and left wingers Starmer threw out.

The papers may be forecasting a victory for Starmer, but I don't think it will be necessarily a triumph, and seats we should have won will be lost.

Glorianny

DAR if Starmer could keep the promises he made in order to be elected as leader of the LP that would be a start.
But find it increasingly strange that I am castigated for not trusting Starmer, when no one has posted any policies or ideas he is firmly committed to.
The idea seems to be that any government is better than this one, so everyone must support Starmer.

I don’t think anybody is under any illusion about you not trusting Starmer Glorianny. Why do you keep trying to ram your beliefs down everybody else’s throats though, even on threads where it’s irrelevant to the question posed in the thread? You know what Labour’s missions are, you know that he (rightly in my opinion) has learned a lot about what the electorate want in his time as leader and has recognised that for Labour to be elected some of his original promises have to be tempered with a dose of reality. You know why he isn’t making firm policies yet - he is not stupid. You also know that if for whatever reason he wasn’t in post, that the party will continue in like vein. The left aren’t going to gain the ascendancy because painful though it is for you, what’s being done now is working. You can vote Green, leave the party, or remain griping on the sidelines, the choice is yours.

I’m sick to death of posters telling those of us who dare to criticise Starmer that we are playing into the hands of the Tories or implying that we are just frustrated lefties. Or indeed, that we will be responsible if Labour do not win the next election. You have no idea how we will vote, indeed some of us have said repeatedly we will vote for Labour because of course we want to get rid of this Tory government, but that is ignored.

I am not playing ‘purity politics’, believe it or not I’m as pragmatic as the next person, but I have very real concerns about Starmer’s actions (couldn’t really care less about his motives, or how ‘left’ he is, the actions speak for themselves) and I care enough about the Labour Party to want integrity and fairness to be central to its future. And if we are not allowed to make valid criticisms of a leader or the direction we feel a party is taking then we are not living in a democracy.

And in the words of Forrest Gump, that’s all I have to say about that.

nightowl

I’m sick to death of posters telling those of us who dare to criticise Starmer that we are playing into the hands of the Tories or implying that we are just frustrated lefties. Or indeed, that we will be responsible if Labour do not win the next election. You have no idea how we will vote, indeed some of us have said repeatedly we will vote for Labour because of course we want to get rid of this Tory government, but that is ignored.

I am not playing ‘purity politics’, believe it or not I’m as pragmatic as the next person, but I have very real concerns about Starmer’s actions (couldn’t really care less about his motives, or how ‘left’ he is, the actions speak for themselves) and I care enough about the Labour Party to want integrity and fairness to be central to its future. And if we are not allowed to make valid criticisms of a leader or the direction we feel a party is taking then we are not living in a democracy.

And in the words of Forrest Gump, that’s all I have to say about that.

We are never going to agree, but it’s always the left who start this anti Starmer rhetoric nightowl, in fact 9 times out of 10 it’s one of two posters, whether it’s not it has any relevance to the thread. I’m sick to death of it too, although from the opposite perspective to you. I suspect we aren’t the only ones either.

Oh I have criticisms of Starmer, I also have criticisms of the Tories, There are posters on this thread whose only purpose for being on here seems to be to undermine the Labour Party. I absolutely am going to keep pointing that out.

Glorianny

DAR if Starmer could keep the promises he made in order to be elected as leader of the LP that would be a start.
But find it increasingly strange that I am castigated for not trusting Starmer, when no one has posted any policies or ideas he is firmly committed to.
The idea seems to be that any government is better than this one, so everyone must support Starmer.

Everything you write is both angry and negative. People get fed up with other people's ire. You do not put forward anything positive or even answer others' questions. You seem to want to be angry, tell others what they are thinking and then tell them they are wrong.

We know the current team in Labour is committed to winning. We know the Conservatives want to win as many seats as possible and, if they could find any way of doing it, would aim to win outright whatever it took.

If this seems, in both cases, to be holding back policy announcements and undermining some moral concerns, this is not the fault of our politicians; it is how our political campaigns work. They have little transparency or openness and no manifesto until about six weeks before voting in a GE. Even then, they will both be extremely vague.

After all this, governments often don't follow manifestos. This, in a two-party system with FPTP, is inevitable. Has it got worse? Probably not if we look back at Rotten Boroughs and the buying of votes.

What has been put forward by Labour are policies that do not cost a lot of money. They know that if they are to win, the leadership must be seen as fiscally trustworthy outside natural Labour voters. So they have promised planning reform leading to more house building, education reforms, and labour market reforms, including the scrapping of zero-hour contracts and sector-wide bargaining. All cost little and can have a dramatic effect. This is much like the Wilson government did in the '60s and New Labour when they took over. Labour changes at this point for little cost.

We all know that beyond this level, there may have to be a rethink fiscally. The Conservatives are already set to break their own fiscal rules if they get back in. There is every chance many will feel worse before we feel better under either party. It is inevitable, because of where we are now, that whatever government we get, they will have to raise taxes, increase borrowing or cut spending.

All you can bet on is the direction a party would take in doing that.

Galaxy

Oh I have criticisms of Starmer, I also have criticisms of the Tories, There are posters on this thread whose only purpose for being on here seems to be to undermine the Labour Party. I absolutely am going to keep pointing that out.

Anyone who does not fully understand the realities of First Past the Post here?

How can anyone say 'it is not about being elected'? How is any PM + Governement going to make any changes to the dire situation the UK finds itself in currently- without being elected.

Undermining the LP via attacks against Starmer could have dire consequences. If people abstain, or vote for a party which has not chance due to FPTP - the real risk is to let Tories in again. Can anyone say that would be preferable to KS?

I give up

Don’t give up nightowl or that means you’ve been pushed off a thread.
There’s room for left wing views as well as very left wing, centre or to the right on here.Critics of Starmer too can post opinions, why ever not?
Nobody has to vote a certain way or even vote at all.

Thanks Oreo I appreciate your post, but I try to avoid political threads these days anyway. I supported Jeremy Corbyn and we all know what that means .

I was called hard left, a communist (which is laughable to those who know me) and ‘morally bankrupt’ (which I have to admit still stings, as integrity is everything to me). None of it actually bothers me now, and I'm certainly not afraid to state my opinions but I mostly can’t be bothered to be honest. I think people are so entrenched in their own opinions that there’s little room for actual debate on these threads, so I’m happy to let them be. And it looks to me as though the lefties get more of a bashing than the other way around, but I would say that wouldn’t I?

nightowl

I give up

Don't give up nightowl
We need all viewpoints on here or it becomes an echo chamber.

I liked Starmer but am becoming rather uncertain about him lately.

Another Forrest Gump phrase:
'life is like a box of chocolates, you never know what you're going to get' - until after the election!

Forrest Gump was a great guide to life Callistemon

Urmstongran

You’d surely all have to agree that a democratic vote (by those who could be bothered) such as the referendum was, needed to be honoured?

Yes, I did, although I didn't vote for it. I'm with Thatcher in the view that referendums are more the last resort of desperate politicians or despots, but once we'd had it, we needed to abide by it.

However, it seems many have wised up to the lies told by Johnson, Farage, et al, and regret things.

www.whatukthinks.org/eu/opinion-polls/poll-of-polls-uk-eu/

I think my world will be destroyed if anything ever comes out about Tom Hanks.

nightowl

I give up

I am sorry, but give up on what?

The First Past the Post is almost unique, and it has to be taken into account when voting in the UK. Abstaining, or voting for a minor party that has NO chance whatsoever of getting FPTP - mean that the opposition disappears, and the Tories are likely to get in again.

I also would like KS to be more 'left wing' and radical, and decisive. But what is the alternative here, due to FPTP.

He's disappointedly indecisive.

nightowl

Thanks Oreo I appreciate your post, but I try to avoid political threads these days anyway. I supported Jeremy Corbyn and we all know what that means .

I was called hard left, a communist (which is laughable to those who know me) and ‘morally bankrupt’ (which I have to admit still stings, as integrity is everything to me). None of it actually bothers me now, and I'm certainly not afraid to state my opinions but I mostly can’t be bothered to be honest. I think people are so entrenched in their own opinions that there’s little room for actual debate on these threads, so I’m happy to let them be. And it looks to me as though the lefties get more of a bashing than the other way around, but I would say that wouldn’t I?

I supported Corbyn. As I've mentioned in the past I joined the LP in order to vote for him. No one, but no one, has called me any of the names you mentioned in your second paragraph above.

As regards leftie bashing, I think most of us on here who are left of centre would call ourselves lefties. It is the easiest description to use. That does not make Marxist, Leninist, Momentum or anything else. We are just left wing and not particularly extreme

I’m glad you haven’t had the same experience I have Dinahmo but I can assure you I am telling the truth. I could name the poster who said I was morally bankrupt but I have no intention of doing so. It was a long time ago now, and it was the final straw that made me decide to avoid the political threads. The poster is still very active.

Starmer has taken more freebies than all Labour leaders since 1997 combined
Labour leader’s 28 junkets include Spurs hospitality, two Coldplay concerts and a £380 dinner from Google at Davos

While the Labour leader spent his first year and a half in the role under lockdown, he has quickly made up for it, accepting gifts from donors including multi-millionaires, gambling giants, the online shopping app GETIR and the construction giant Mulalley & Co on 28 separate occasions. The gifts include days at the races, hospitality at Chelsea and Tottenham Hotspur matches, an Adele gig, and two separate Coldplay concerts. In total, they are worth nearly £30,000.

In his five years as Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn only accepted one such freebie: tickets to Glastonbury, where he spoke on the pyramid stage in 2017. Former Corbyn adviser Andrew Fisher told openDemocracy the Islington North MP had made a point of turning down corporate hospitality.

“Politicians at any level shouldn’t be beholden to corporate interests,” he said. “They’re elected to represent the people, and are well paid for it.”

www.opendemocracy.net/en/keir-starmer-freebies-junkets-tottenham-hotspur-chelsea-coldplay-adele-google/?utm_source=social&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=rss

When DPP he also put a lot on expenses. Read Matt Kennard investigative journalist 5 stories about Starmer very revealing

Callistemon21

He's disappointedly indecisive.

What I am sure you meant to say is that you find him (who?), etc., etc. It is just your opinion after all. No person is anything just because you believe it to be the case.

It really is amazing how those who think their opinions matter soooo much really don't do facts or, in many cases, don't recognise what they are saying is not a fact so of little use to any one else.

For those who want to know more about "him", you might find this interesting www.youtube.com/watch?v=ra0QsG6EihY

Ok, I'll amend that and say that, in the opinion of many, including me, Starmer is disappointedly indecisive.