Starmer insults women’s intelligence to blame Sunak for judicial failures when it was Starmer’s CPS that failed to prosecute rapists

Labour seem not to be in agreement on lots of things at the top of the party. This ad was one and now GB News has this on their LGBT wing and ideas for the GRA, and disagreements on TDOV tweets:

twitter.com/tomhfh/status/1646399870234705922?s=46&t=WHoOZ_3Kv5G6-FyQuvE0LQ

www.gbnews.com/opinion/keir-starmer-labour-party-trans-rights-gb-news-tom-harwood

And Rayner seemed to go against Reeves on capital gains this morning:

"Angela Rayner today risked reigniting a Labour row over the party's policy on capital gains tax as she said she wanted the tax system to be "fairer for working people".
The deputy leader of the Labour Party signalled in March that she was in favour of increasing capital gains tax but Rachel Reeves, the shadow chancellor, then insisted she had "no plans" to put up the current rate.
Ms Rayner was asked this morning during an interview on the BBC Radio 4 Today programme if she would like to see capital gains tax changed and she said: "I’d like to see our tax system at the moment fairer for working people which is what Rachel has committed to."
The comments appear to suggest that Labour may still be considering a hike in capital gains tax.
Ms Rayner would not be drawn on the specifics of Labour's tax policy intentions as she said "we are far out from a general election" and the party will reveal its hand at a later date.
She added: "We will set out those proposals at a general election. We are not just piecemealing doing it.""

www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/04/13/rishi-sunak-news-latest-joe-biden-dup-live/

Rayner was just as ill prepared for that Sunday Times interview with Decca Aitkenhead when she seemed genuinely surprised to be asked about gender self-ID, even though Isla Bryson was still all over the front pages. At the time I thought poor briefing from her advisers must be at least partly to blame, but it looks like that was far too charitable of me.

Here is a report of a real life “cunt cult”. It’s a pretty weird article

https://nypost.com/2020/10/01/california-police-bust-cult-party-with-4-foot-model-vagina/

Why bother to go on Sky to be interviewed, when you look duplicitous at the very first question?

She was asked the same question three times that if she is so behind these adverts, why didn't she retweet them. And she gave stupid answers that made her look shifty.

There is clearly no conviction. She does not feel the conviction that she is maintaining she has. If I felt strongly about something, certainly as strongly as she says she feels, I would bloody retweet the arse out of it.

Her main excuse was that she'd been away, and hasn't tweeted as much, although of course she has tweeted a bit, as was pointed out. So is she going to retweet them now? Because that will be a proof of the pudding, won't it?

I find her main skill is talking without taking a breath. But she just repeats herself. There is no depth of opinion about what she's saying.

Cunt is fine I think - cult apparently not! 😂
I still believe that both of my points are accurate and deleting my words won't change my mind or that of anyone else who realises what is going on with transactivism.

I get really confused about the c-word rules on here and have often misread the banned one for "cunt" and found myself wondering what posters are going on about

Plus the tweets are basically correct, the Tories have presided over child abusers not going to jail, 4000 of them, at anytime over the last 13years they could have changed this but chose not too.

Then why didn't the posters say the Tories? The campaign is a deliberate attempt to smear Rishi Sunak rather than criticise the Conservative party. It's the personal element I find distasteful. I also think it's an own goal for Labour but that's their business.

Raynor who called Tories scum at a party conference speech, and the next day someone decided to attack a Tory MP because they were ‘scum’?

Excellent post.

Plus the tweets are basically correct

You agree that Rishi Sunak does not want to lock up child rapists? Because THAT is what the tweet said. It was an attack on the man and the wording strategically placed next to his pic so I would also say there is a racist element to it.

Rayner did badly on Sky today on this:

twitter.com/kayburley/status/1646416142536155136?s=46&t=WHoOZ_3Kv5G6-FyQuvE0LQ

Hasn't retweeted it because she's been away. But has been on SM. Can she not hear the message she's sending?

I just find this, amongst other things that the Labour Party do or don't do, so disappointing.

I want to hear about what THEY will do to make positive changes, I'm not interested in their smears.

We all already know the failings of the Tories. We've lived through them. It smacks of an uncertain opposition if the best you can do is attempt to smear Sunak. Are they that scared of him? He does come across as a reasonable bloke. He seems to understand that identity politics offend a large part of the electorate.

In the meantime the LP is pissing everyone off. Left leaning women are disenfranchised and the TRAs think they are transphobic. That's where fence sitting gets you. The LP need to realise that smearing Sunak doesn't solve this problem. They need to have clear policies, not only on women's rights but on other issues.

They should have an open goal after the last few years, if they fail to win an overwhelming majority it is on them. Just like it was when they were certain that Corbyn would win after his tour of rock concerts.

Where has this so called moral authority got Labour? no where.

Sunak himself said he would have a new style of politics and then promptly accused Starmer of being a leftie lawyer on the side of uncontrolled immigration, another minister than said Starmer (as DPP) refused to jail the worst of the UK 's sex offenders!

Plus the tweets are basically correct, the Tories have presided over child abusers not going to jail, 4000 of them, at anytime over the last 13years they could have changed this but chose not too.

Your faux outrage would be more genuine if you equally condemned the Tories... once again, right wing hypocrisy.

If you can't take, don't dish it.....

So you are a fan of juvenile gutter politics? Good to know. At least the Left is not pretending to have any moral authority any longer and that it is somehow 'better' than the right.

Worked out where the literal violence is really coming from, have they?

The TeRArists.

Weirdly, i cannot find your other thread criticising Sunak for calling Starmer a "Lefty Lawyer who wants uncontrolled immigration" or Johnson, backed by Sunak for stating under Parliamentary privilege, that Starmer failed to prosecute Saville.

As far as i can tell, Labour are doing what the Tories have been doing to them for years.... Kinnock, Brown, Milliband, Corbyn (no one called Corbyn a Terrorist sympathiser until Cameron did in 2015)

If you can't take, don't dish it.....

Plus all your arguments fall down because the Tories have been in power for 13 years and have had all that time to put right Labour errors made during their 13 years in power.

Cuts to the Justice System inc the Police, are the direct cause of 3 yr waits for rape cases and the CPS only go for open and shut cases because they have no resource to risk scarce funds on less sure fire cases.

LGBT Labour are reconsidering marching at Pride events due to safety concerns. The report makes it quite clear that the threats come from within the LGBT (read that as TQ+) community and have arisen in response to KS flip flopping over self ID.

At least they are exposing the truth; you can piss women off without being threatened with violence but the TRA's - not so much. How can they do this and still not acknowledge the trans rights movement is a violent men's rights movement?

Semicolon, that was essentially my point. I was not suggesting that the Tories have a problem with Rishi’s background. The party, arguably, has a good record in promoting women and ethnic minorities. The problem is for Labour. As you say, any attack campaign especially one focussed on Rishi himself, runs the risk of looking racist.

(I suspect Rishi’s problem within the Tory party is more about him being centrist an insufficiently low tax Thatcherite.)

I'm not sure that him not being white and Christian, nominally or not, will be a real issue for the Tories. I don't think many Conservative voters care, for some the fact that he might have a more practicing faith might be a plus - plenty of religious people feel they have more in common with people from other religions than people of no religion.

But it may be kind of a problem for Labour which likes to be able to give an underlying sense that Tories and anyone who votes for them are against non-white, non-Christian people. Which is difficult to claim with RS without looking overtly stupid.

So now instead Starmer appears to have gone batshit attack dog

😆

I think that Starmer is worried as Sunak is coming over as reasonable and thoughtful which was Starmer's angle. So now instead Starmer appears to have gone batshit attack dog and I suspect has done permanent harm to his image.