Re: Starmer

It's certainly interesting to see a real time demonstration of the parallels between the two.

It’s very similar. They are now deep in another issue - gender lies.

I can’t see Starmer doing another clamp down after the antisemitism one so Labour stuck with believers

Totally agree. In a parallel universe I can just imagine all the TRA apologists swearing blind the Labour elite had zero responsibility for the bullying Rosie Duffield experiences, OR because that it came from non-Labour members it wasn't a Labour problem.

This. Honestly, shame on you @scaredoff .

Can we please leave this, or someone start a thread on the subject of Corbyn?

Shameful denial of the truth. The EHRC found a very different picture to the one you paint.

It's not a good look denying what went on. I don't know why you'd do that.

You see the problem is I CAN'T deny "statements" like "I saw a sudden influx of anti-Semitic crap in my Tritter feed". They're undeniable, because they're not based on any verifiable evidence. Like pretty much the entire sorry saga.

Margaret Hodge put in 200 complaints to the Labour party abour instances of antisemitism and then went public complaining about the lack of results. On further investigation, it was established that only 20 of those concerned Labour members. 😀 Apparently it was Jeremy Corbyn's responsibility to deal with EVERYBODY'S antisemitism! So pretty much like the Luciana Berger thing you're on about here.

Luciana Berger and Frank Field come to mind specifically on anti semitism. You know this.

You seem to have a real problem following a train of thought from one post to another. Let me recap:

A claim was made that Corbyn didn't expel Labour members, the way Starmer has done. You countered with a load of absolute bullshit that the members who had to hire bodyguards and install panic buttons because of him were effectively forced out. You gave Luciana Berger as an example.

When I pointed out that all the people convicted of antisemitic acts against Berger were not Labour members, most of them being known neo-nazis, and anyway none of what happened to her is evidence of a widespread problem causing MEMBERS to need bodyguards and panic buttons, you said you were talking about politicians (thus a complete non sequiter from the original question).

So, OK. The next installment: Apparently now Frank Field also needed to hire bodyguards and install panic buttons, until he was finally forced out in fear for his life, did he? Quite a scoop you've got there, considering he never even said anything to that effect himself.

You see, I never actually asked you to provide a list (of two) of "politicians who resigned from the Labout party under Corbyn because they didn't like him". But you don't seem to recognise the difference between people leaving because of the impact of bullying and antisemitism towards them (your original claim) and people leaving claiming the existence of bullying and antisemitism towards others as a reason why (like Field, or Chuka).

Most of the parliamentary party were not on board with Corbyn's project and a good number of them were willing to stoop to any lengths to destroy it, including colluding with a media-led frenzy about antisemitism consisting almost entirely of the kind of supposition, implication, hearsay, unproven or unprovable claims and outright lies that you've parrotted here, and that keep falling to pieces at the slightest examination. It's not like their opposition to him on ideological grounds was any kind of secret.

So please don't accuse me of denial until you have something meaningful that can actually be confirmed or denied (and the capacity to remember it from one post to the next). Hint: "Somebody who had a vested interest in doing so said lots of people were nasty to them, and some of them may even have been Labour members so it's definitely Jeremy Corbyn's fault" ain't it.

Luciana Berger and Frank Field come to mind specifically on anti semitism. You know this.

Margaret Hodge and Ruth Smeeth have talked about the vile abuse they got too. They stuck it out, but Hodge talked very recently about how she's a secular Jew - doesn't practice Judaism at all - but that was irrelevant. Just being a Jew made her a target. She went from getting no abuse to thousands of emails / tweets targeting her with anti-Semitic abuse. All when Corbyn became leader.

There were a bunch who left en masse (Chuka etc) also citing bullying and anti semitism, but Brexit toxicity in Labour might have had a lot to do with them going too.

I saw a sudden influx of anti-Semitic crap in my own Twitter feed. I learned tropes I didn't even know existed. And now it's gone.

It's not a good look denying what went on. I don't know why you'd do that.

The Labour die hards won't listen and will brush Labour's misogyny issue under the carpet like they do the anti-semitism. It's frankly bizarre.

So the link here is to pink 'news' but the video is Kier himself saying, about 18 months ago, that he wanted self-id. Not sure whether you'd consider this a public announcement, but if not, I'm not sure whether the nuance makes much difference.

www.thepinknews.com/2021/06/10/keir-starmer-labour-party-gender-recognition-act-self-id-trans-people-pride/

How do you know he's not listening? He has stated that he knows for 99.9% of women this issue is about biological sex. He has said equality for women must not be compromised

That’s sophistry. That means he is saying that for 0.1%, of 30 million, being a woman has nothing to do with biology. i.e it has to do with men who say they are women.

Equality for women will not just mean for women but also for those others who say they are women but are men. Say an all woman shortlist.

jgw1 · Today 21:17
Corbin, is apparently responsible for men being locked in prisons with women, or was it women being locked in men with prisons or prisons being locked in women with men?

Ha! Ha!
Its such a silly issue anyway.

Corbyn is apparently responsible for men being locked in prisons with women, or was it women being locked in men with prisons or prisons being locked in women with men?

I'm pretty sure they're not, although given what a garbled crock of shit this whole thing is it wouldn't surprise me if Corbyn was somehow being held personally responsible for the resignation of Tory MPs in fear of their lives.

I think they are referring to people like Dominic Grive, Rory Stewart and Ken Clarke.

Ok I take your other point although will say not everyone rates Labour, or other alternatives, so you’ll get some who always vote Tories and those who can’t stand Labour for whatever reason.

And if you were talking about politicians, rather than members (despite the original comment you were replying to clearly specifying members), then perhaps you could tell us which politicians "couldn't safely stay" and thus were "constructively dismissed"? ie, which ones DIDN'T stay?

@Abhannmor

Corbyn didn't expel members afaik. Not even obvious Tory warmongers like Blair or Mandelson. He was never leadership material. Too trusting. Many of his shadow cabinet 'colleagues' were unprincipled careerists. Like that ' fucking little wooden Thunderbird puppet '

(My bold)

@scratchedbymycat

Not outright, but those who had to install panic alarms and have bodyguards for protection couldn't really safely stay. That's a form of expulsion - 'constructive dismissal' perhaps.

I don’t know I’ve only ever seen threads on here from Labour posters saying how disappointed they’d be in their dc if they didn’t vote to the left / Labour.

That's not true though is it? I remember the thread you mean (I don't believe there is more than one), it's here:

www.mumsnet.com/talk/_chat/4705993-other-than-the-obvious-what-very-specific-things-would-cause-you-to-be-disappointed-in-dc-when-they-grew-up?reply=122569337

It's clear from the OP and later comments, that the potential disappointment is not in DC "not voting Labour", it's in them "voting Tory". It's perfectly possible to hate the Tories without being a trenchant Labour supporter (or a Labour supporter at all). God knows they do enough to deserve it.

Anyway my point was not to start an argument about which party has the greater number of unthinking automatic voters - although it's pretty obvious from following any kinds of political discussion over the last seven years that Corbyn and Starmer shared very few of the same ones. The point was simply that the number of of Tory ones is large, and people possibly underestimate their trenchantness and thus overestimate the likelihood of them voting this government out in 2024, no matter how bad it is.

That is, you suggested there was some general problem of ordinary Labour members having to install panic buttons and hire bodyguards

I was talking about Labour politicians.

Oh do leave it out I'm not part of any problem.

What happened to Luciana Berger was abominable. Six people were convicted of anti-semitic abuse against her, most of whom were known far-right neo-nazis and none of whom were Labour party members. The attack by the leftwing music guy in Liverpool that's always mentioned was in 2012, long before Corbyn had anything to do with anything.

Besides which, the original claim you raised this in answer to was about the supposed expulsion(s) (plural) of member(s) plural. That is, you suggested there was some general problem of ordinary Labour members having to install panic buttons and hire bodyguards to protect themselves from the terrible violence unleased by Corbyn's army of rabid Momentum thugs, which equated to a form of effective expulsion - a trope the media has touted ad infinitum despite the reality of internal Labour politics being the precise opposite.

No one will touch Lammy in Tottenham. He's from the area, he's a conviction politican and he'll stand by his principles against his party. Until the gender idiocy I was happy to vote for him despite not agreeing with all his or Labour's political ideas because I genuinely thought he was best for our area. But I can't vote to throw women under the gender ideology bus. I think he was suckered by the "wrong body, new gay rights" sob story and now has a fixed idea he won't let go of which makes him unable to listen to women's entirely valid concerns. Very sad.

I don’t know I’ve only ever seen threads on here from Labour posters saying how disappointed they’d be in their dc if they didn’t vote to the left / Labour.

Very entrenched, like a footy team.

Labour voters seem more likely to have a go that don’t vote how they do too imo

I definitely get the sense it happens with Labour too

Some, I suppose, but I get the impression not nearly as many as in previous generations. Up until the 1990s there was probably an equally trenchant section of the population, with roots in the trade union movement, who would just vote Labour every election more or less automatically. There doesn't seem many of those left though. Some were seduced by Thatcher, some by UKIP and Brexit. Some just lost faith in Labour under Blair and felt it no longer represented the interests of the working class. Some felt it wasn't socialist enough. Then under Corbyn, some felt it was too socialist.

By contrast, the automatic mindless Tory demographic - old people, social conservatives etc - seems to have held together better.

I should clarify I'm certainly not saying all Tory voters do so mindlessly or automatically. Some do so out of considered self interest. I'm referring more to those who do so despite it being so glaringly against their self interest.

Well his full name does explain why he is so good at identifying women.