That Starmer fella...

Posted on
Page
of 44
  • That includes lapsed members, who have stopped paying but are still counted as members for six months.

  • There's a lot of legitimate criticism you can make of me but having a poor grasp of the arguments around labour antisemitism is not, I would suggest, one of them.

  • That link confirms my view. It suggests that you have misunderstood the issue and that you have formed a conclusion and then gone looking for evidence to contort in support of it, some of which you have either misunderstood or deliberately misrepresented. And some of what you say in that post is potentially libelous.

    However, I'm not going to get into this any further as I am tired of rehashing the same arguments and it is off topic.

  • You keep mentioning that figure every few days. But why is Labour's vote share at the last election even relevant?

    When Corbyn loyalists are saying that Starmer is doing a bad job, it's absolutely relevant to mention how much better Starmer is doing by every available metric (not vote share, btw, Starmer doesn't have a metric on that yet) than the guy they'd prefer to run the party. It's also a counter to people using that tired old 'any decent party would be 20 points ahead' meme; we ARE 20 points ahead compared to where we started. Any time someone says 'Kieth should be 20 points ahead lol' I will point this out.

    Given we want to win an election, not lose one, surely the relevant comparison to make is not with Corbyn but with Blair.

    I think that's partially reasonable - but it's more often used as a rhetorical device to set Starmer up to fail. Blair is the only Labour leader in the last 45 years to have won one election, let alone three of them. Every other leader is doing badly vs Blair.

    As far as I'm concerned Starmer is doing OK. No better, no worse. I think this speech today is overdue, but I understand why he's been reticent to put it out there. I also think he deserves a fair crack of the whip, and many Corbyn loyalists aren't prepared to give him that.

  • What rubbish. None of what he says is libelous, misrepresentation and he has a very good grasp on the vile antisemitism that was unfortunately prevalent in Corbyns left that tore the party apart. In fact he hits the nail on the head.

    You are right on one thing though. It's best to leave it and stop rehashing it because it just sounds like you are digging a hole for yourself. Best leave it alone.

  • Thanks for the feedback! It doesn't look like you have a great grasp of the issue either.
    However I am not going to be drawn in to discussing it.

  • One more round of passive aggressive digs each and we all move on for a week, OK guys?

  • That one counted as Frank's^^

  • It's fucking tiring, isn't it? Who knew the people most obsessed with Corbyn would be the people who loathed him most. But I would say that as a leftist, and therefore antisemite, I suppose.

    Starmer's been pretty useless, but Will's link about the speech gives hope.

  • Everyone knows that Corbyn ultimately failed, so surely it's the wrong benchmark. And as you point out, Blair is the only one who has won, so why is that not the relevant bar?

    The '20 points ahead thing' was started by Blair. It was a daft thing to say as (even) he was never 20 points ahead.

    Starmer was given the benefit of the doubt. That was why he won. 40% of the people who voted for Corbyn both times voted for him. It's his performance over the last year which has turned a signifcant proportion of those people against him.

    Let's hope the criticism of the last couple of weeks has stung him into upping his game. I hope today's speech goes down well.

  • Can't beat gaslighting the jews for morning sport can we. Dickhead

    Move. The. Fuck. On. Corbyn. Was. A. Racist. Get. Over. It.

  • Fucking hell, we're back to wanking on about antisemitism on the left, whilst the current Tory cabinet is pack full of antisemites and lets not forget the massive antisemites currently in Downing street.

  • Think there's a lot of truth in this. That's why starmer has to tread carefully and slowly chip away at the idea that 'Boris is just doing his best, he's a good bloke who delivered brexit'.
    Gonna take a long time to break that down with alot of people, especially when most people only really pay attention to politics during election time

  • Not "leftists" tho, so y'know...

    the inference that subscribing to socialist / leftist ideals makes you an anti-semite is fucking atrocious.

  • Yeah noones actually said that have they. It was prevalent within the last lot though.

    Of course it doesn't just go away if you stop talking about it as everyone desperately wants to happen. It's also relevant to the current discussion about starmer as he's being criticised for being too harsh on some of his opponents on the left and that was mainly due to him being intolerant of their unapologetic antisemitism.

  • It's interesting comparing this/the Corbyn thread to the Black Lives Matter thread.

  • Yeah noones actually said that have they.

    Except bleakrefs did a page or two ago.

  • Not your secretary, Ben, but:

    In response to someone saying Starmer's pointlessly picking fights with the left of the party he wrote:

    All the left needed to do was not be antisemitic.

    And then fails to really explain how the left is antisemitic, but instead brings up RLB retweeting the interview with Maxine Peake and Corbyn's comment after the release of the report on antisemitism. Neither of which I would really accept as evidence for the claim that the left is antisemitic, but there we are.

  • And then fails to really explain how the left is antisemitic, but instead brings up RLB retweeting the interview with Maxine Peake and Corbyn's comment after the release of the report on antisemitism. Neither of which I would really accept as evidence for the claim, but there we are.

    As I said on the previous page, we can disagree on opinions but let's not disagree on facts, eh?

    We were talking about how Starmer had 'picked a needless civil war with the left'. The only example I've seen of such a thing is when he excluded two MPs (one from the whip, one from the shadow cabinet) for unapologetically applauding antisemitic conspiracy theories on the one hand, and minimising antisemitism on the other. And I referred to both of those things directly, because I don't think it's an example of what's being talked about. If he has started a war, it's a war on antisemitism, and frankly one that's overdue.

    If @frank9755 was talking about something else there -or if you're talking about something else there - then I suggest you tell me what it is. I'm not a mindreader.

    On another note, this Starmer speech is great. Holding the tories to account - which is great - but also, crucially, providing a credible alternative. The economic stuff is very much like what John McDonnell was doing last year before we torpedoed our credibility - talking about working hand in hand with business to improve society. It's what we need more of.

  • On the secretary thing, all I'm doing here is mimicking the tiresome requests for 'proof' whenever this conversation comes up with left wing people.

    I don't read that as saying that the entire left is antisemitic so no I would still say that noone is saying that the entire left is antisemitic. If you take it completely out of the context of the discussion then maybe. So where is it being said in this thread?

    This is all being mentioned in the context of Starmer being ruthless against the left wing of the party as it is currently hysterically perceived by that wing.

    The argument is that Starmers main public actions against the leftwing of the party, sidelining RBL (because of her unapologetic antisemitic statements) and kicking corbyn out of the party (because of his unapologetic minimising of racism in the party) has got nothing to do with their socialism and everything to do with their racism. That statement is clearly referring to this and he illustrates that with the RBL and Corbyn points.

    The way I see it, the only people currently conflating antisemitism and 'all socialists are somehow inherently antisemitic' are portions of the left of the party who cannot accept that the old regime was run by people who were racist towards jews and therefore being censured because of it.

    This isn't 'banging on about antisemitism, it's just ensuring that the narrative of 'centrist kieth hates the left and good socialist Jeremy because he's a tory' isn't seen as the only reason why the previous regime have been sidelined.

  • As I said on the previous page, we can disagree on opinions but let's not disagree on facts, eh?

    Is it a fact that you wrote "All the left needed to do was not be antisemitic." I think it is.

    If you wanted to say "There is no war on the left, but instead, there have been specific attacks on two individuals for these antisemitic things..." it would be different. But you didn't say that. Instead you seemed to accept the premise of the point (that there is an attack) and approve of it by labelling an entire wing of a party as antisemitic (which, as a side note, is profoundly unhelpful in the current situation). I think those are facts, but I guess I (and clearly other people reading this thread) misunderstood them. Maybe because:

    I'm not a mindreader.

  • On the secretary thing, all I'm doing here is mimicking the tiresome requests for 'proof' whenever this conversation comes up with left wing people.

    And I provided that proof.

    I don't read that as saying that the entire left is antisemitic so no I would still say that noone is saying that the entire left is antisemitic.

    He said it. I quoted it. Who's gaslighting who now? If there is a misunderstanding of his meaning (which he's claiming there is), fine. But multiple people read it the same way I did.

    The way I see it, the only people currently conflating antisemitism and 'all socialists are somehow inherently antisemitic' are portions of the left of the party who cannot accept that the old regime was run by people who were racist towards jews and therefore being censured because of it.

    Are you saying that if you can't see that the "old regime" (whatever that means) was antisemitic you are therefore an antisemite? Because if so, we're back to the claim that left is antisemitic.

    This isn't 'banging on about antisemitism, it's just ensuring that the narrative of 'centrist kieth hates the left and good socialist Jeremy because he's a tory' isn't seen as the only reason why the previous regime have been sidelined.

    Now it's you're turn to show me where someone's said something. On the whole people have been really open to Starmer, if disappointed. As I read it (and I could be wrong), it's the constant "but he's better than Corbyn!" that's causing arguments. It's pointless and unhelpful.

    It's impossible to have real discussions on this thread. We've talked about this so many times, Ben, but the internet turns people into idiots (myself included, obvs).

  • That whole Mandelson story is going to undermine starmer's 'pro business' vision that he just presented. Would like to know more about British Recovery Bond.

    Genuine question; why did the businesses think corbyn/mcdonnell were anti-business?

    Also if this was a speech for budget why did the shadow chancellor not present it?

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

That Starmer fella...

Posted by Avatar for aggi @aggi

Actions