That Starmer fella...

Posted on
of 83
  • Sir Keir is being interviewed by everyone's least favourite phone hacker and Megan Markle stalker tonight.

  • He has been laying into hate Naomi Osaka for the past couple of days as well, can’t stop cringing at Sir Kier Starmer, he’s desperate.

  • Keith Rodney Starmer

    Strong name.

  • NEW Westminster voting intention:

    CON: 44% (+4)
    LAB: 35% (-2)
    GRN: 7% (+2)
    LDEM: 6% (-2)

    via @IpsosMORI, 28 May - 03 Jun
    Chgs. w/ 22 Apr

    — Ben Page, Ipsos MORI (@benatipsosmori) June 7, 2021

  • I know, I know, who gives a fuck about young people when it’s Sensible People who win you elections…

    but fucking hell

    1 Attachment

    • F8B89390-9BD4-4A07-ACEE-1355DC2B671C.jpeg
  • Wow.

  • “Guys, we’ve got all these new, enthusiastic voters, what shall we do with them?”
    “Alienate them?”
    “Genius, I love it. Give that guy a raise.”

  • Unfortunately the reality is:

    Not voting 53%
    LAB 16%
    GRN 13%
    CON 10%
    LD 6%
    SNP 1%
    REF 0%

  • Thats worse, isn't it, if they were previously tending towards Labour, then once Starmers taken over, they don't see the point in voting at all?

  • Well that 53% is based on the last election, i.e. with Corbyn in charge. For all the talk of a "youthquake" it didn't really seem to materialise and I can't think that Starmer has done much to change that

  • 18-24 category is quite funny if you put it in political terms office/ large events and what events shape their polling

    16-22 if you account for starmer

    14-20 year olds if you take into account corbynism

    12-18 year olds if you if you look at ed Miliband proposals

    all of the above years it's fair to say labour had little to know political influence, maybe slight discourse shifts, tone setting, but the setting of the policy is undoubtedly conservative.

    7-13 year olds if you contrast it against the last time labour was in power.

    if you remove brown and the economic crash, you're looking at 4-10 year olds,

    now i was busy focusing on other things at this point in my life, like football, and not getting bullied by the bigger kids, but from my understanding, it wasn't exactly a good time for labour? nor their power?

    and if you remove the iraq war fall out you're looking at 0-6 year olds

    and if you're discussing blairism / cool britania they were but a glimmer in their parents eye or still pooping themselves

    i cant even remember this, i imagine i was one of the ones pooping themselves or watching cbbc, possibly both at the same time

    i guess when you brake it down like this to say starmer has alienated the youth vote is giving the man too much credit, in the same way people gassing the "youthquake!!" look a bit OTT. we know young people dont vote, we know if they do they're likely to vote for a very specific policy or a person and and struggle to have much impact in more rural / older communities (free tuition, the hype around select labour members, or nick clegg!!, raising margins in urban seats, maybe contesting them but not winning in rural). but i think it will be good to watch how this shifts the liberal parties landscapes over the next decade or two.

    the uptick in greens is quite noticeable, always popular for the young, but with their council results they could possibly carve our a small European style green block around urban centres if they play their cards right with the increasingly polarised urban/rural divide. the lib dems could maybe erase their history and get a certain sort of grenbelt/ suburban technocratic liberal support base. maybe we see the rise of hyper local focused independents for the modern era, highly tapped into their local electorate and extremely tech savvy to reach their local voters in a way a bigger party cannot.

    where does labour sit in all this? maybe try to scoop up the gen xrs and geriatric millennials who remember and value that 2 party spirit and "get the tories out" mentality. may not be hyper progressive but not regressive, just value that slow march for change ideal. it's hard to see the party adopt a zoomer outlook with socdem approaches to crime, drug legalisation, social housing and radical environment policy which will become increasingly popular.

  • We're a long way from an election at the moment.

    Young people tend to be the most polarised in their ideological views as well as the least faithful in their party allegiances, so what you're more likely to see is those votes from the 62% being split tactically to whoever is most likely to stop the Tories.

  • Which also goes some way to explaining the 53% - I think young people are probably also among the most disillusioned with the fact that their vote probably won't make a blind bit of difference to the result in their constituency.

  • finally, a slogan we can all get behind

    1 Attachment

    • stonger.PNG
  • Stronger Together (Left need not apply)

  • Slogans are anti-Brexit unless three words. Another fail.

  • it's from planet of the fucking monkeys, isn't it?


  • sadly no longer reads "stonger" on website (or is it a joke that I didn't get)

  • stongs

    1 Attachment

    • b312d915-8834-40b1-9473-42a43373b619.jpg
  • Strangely they have not yet deleted the offending tweet:­us/1405280153949720579

  • lol this is exactly what I wanted

  • 622 people voted for Labour in the Chesham and Amersham by-election last night.

    10,240 in the 1997 landslide
    2,942 in 2010
    6,712 under Red Ed in 2015
    11,347 in 2017 under the unelectable Corbyn
    7,166 in the Worst Ever Election™ in 2019
    622 yesterday.

    There are a couple of mitigating circumstances for Starmer I suppose - this election sounded close where it had previously been a safe Tory seat, so there were no doubt a number of tactical votes.

    But Prime Ministers in waiting shouldn't be having candidates lose their deposits in by-elections.

  • I would like to issue a retraction on a previous post of mine

    1 Attachment

    • 8afd6d57-025d-40b0-aaf2-0fa40a89a559.jpg
  • I expect they’ll blame Long Corbyn?

  • The proposed 'Progressive Alliance' will mean that Labour essentially stands aside in seats where it has no likelihood of winning. Chesham & Amersham had been the seat of Cheryl Gillan for 29 years. The defeats you list show no indication there was a latent demand for a Labour MP.

    Losing a deposit is a small price to pay for one less Tory MP.

  • Post a reply
    • Bold
    • Italics
    • Link
    • Image
    • List
    • Quote
    • code
    • Preview

That Starmer fella...

Posted by Avatar for aggi @aggi