Local Elections.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/may/11/britain-labour-railways-water-nhs-keir-starmer

 

Tactical voters don’t need a Lib-Lab pact to punish the Tories (thetimes.co.uk)

 

First paragraph:

What sort of Labour is Keir Starmer’s government now promising? Before previous elections, the party’s promise has been the same. It is the expectation of a change for the better, whether or not fulfilled.

You do realise Labour lost previous elections? So why would any competent leader follow the policies which haven't ousted the Tories time and again.

 

Delaying it for a year would mean a trafficked and sexually exploited women would be safe for a year. May not matter to Labour or you but does to many.

 

funny way of saying he’s my liar so I don’t care if he lies. A fiat economy can make pretty much any economic you want.

 

Except that you missed the point where I disagree he is a liar! Your guy had his chance and screwed up. (Screwed the party up as well, it seems to me.) Not sure what difference it makes to you though - you're supposed to be a green now aren't you?

 

Bogging it down with amendments offers the possibility of delaying it beyond year. Possibly beyond the next election. Not difficult!

 

I wasn't going to post again on this thread because I've stated my point of view. You clearly have your own opinions which are different to mine. However, I'm posting because I think you're being somewhat patronising to JV in this post and indeed in the next one you posted. If you want me to clarify then I'll do so but I suggest you read your posts back and think about how they sound. (btw I hope I dont come across as patronising at all)

 

no offence we have different ideas of opportunity yours is that they wave through Govt Policy in some mistaken belief that they can slow it down later mine (held by the other decision makers in the Lords) is that is the avenue to slow it down.

 

amusing that I’ve worked as a political researcher for both Labour and trade unions. Have represented TUs on the ETUC and have years worth of experience both educational and practical but someone who won’t admit that lying has no place in politics. That a fiat economy can fund anything it chooses to and that not opposing racism is wrong. Because they think Starmer is playing some 5D chess game is pretty funny. Talking to cultists. Is always difficult the StarmerStans are nearly as bad as the ukippers.

 

“my Guy”. Are you 7.

For reference I didn’t vote for Corbyn but did vote for Starmer in the leadership election. I went to the hustings. He lied systematically and openly. That you don’t accept reality is irrelevant. StarmerStans like Johnson ones will always excuse his lies

I’m the perfect floating voter. I’ve voter LIbDem / LibDem/ Green / Green/ Labour in the last 5 elections. I am willing to vote for any progressive party that opposes the conservatives. At the moment that would be Green/LD/Plaid/ SNP. It would not be Labour / Tories as they basically promote the same policies and will result in the same outcomes with a little less corruption if Labour wins

what seems likely to sink Starmer is the sexual corruption stuff. Employing a known sex pest didn’t end well for Johnson and it won’t for Keir.

 

I'd take that seriously but for the fact that you seem to share many of JV's views. (And have a look at his use of the phrase "Starmer Stans" if you want to see patronising!)

 

Doesn't really bother me one way or another what peoples' views are mate as long as there is some rationale there. What I find distasteful at times on here is when debate becomes sterile and starts veering off into personal insult territory. The fact that people stick to their preconceptions about issues isn't a big issue for me as long as everyone ( including me) is able to bend a little when faced with uncomfortable truths. So, as regards the Starmer 'lying to become leader' arguments, even if one thinks Starmer is the bees knees I think its perfectly clear that he DID indeed lie as I tried to explain. He's since lied to Laura Kuensberg by stating that he never pledged to do some of the things he clearly said he would do. He IS therefore in my book a liar and simply because he's Labour leader is irrelevant. If Corbyn lied I'd have agreed with anybody calling him out on it. Starmer's lies are just as obnoxious as Johnson's in my book simply because they are lies and I would much rather not have any of our political leaders lying to us. That's my view and I dont expect to be patronised or insulted for it as sometimes happens in these type of threads.

 

The fact that I share a lot of JV's views on this thread is irrelevant I think. If I do, so be it. As to 'Starmer Stans' I genuinely dont know what that means. May be ny naivety. If its a patronising point he shouldn't say it...What is a 'Starmer Stan?'

 

a supporter of Keir starmer who is prepared to ignore/ deny his lies. That’s my definition.

 

That's okay then, because I don't consider he has told lies. And I'm not called Stan either!

 

just on this point. Does this female only become exploited when she’s trafficked. Because obviously there’s no chance of it happening already this is a really poor argument point.

 

she could quite well have been trafficked and you are then sending her back to the traffickers. There’s plenty of data on it if you want to look

 

that’s not an answer though. Nor does it back up the point you were making