Re: Starmer

[EpicChaos]

I hope that starmer, having possibly wetted his finger and stuck it in the air to see which way the wind is blowing,following Sturgeons resignation, doesn't think, that if he starts to be a bit GC, that women will be keen to vote for him!
The man has already planted his flag and just like Sturgeon, he chose to plant it on the north face of the Eiger. More fool him! imo.

I've already seen the colours that he wears and they aren't green, purple and white!
Women don't owe him a damned thing!

I agree - people can get excited if they so choose but it's far too early to say. Anyone who remembers the '92 Sheffield rally will know that.

Thank you, I will

A good example of never voting anything but Conservative would be North Shropshire which is deeply conservative. Can't think why they elected a Lib Dem MP.

just stick their X in the box like automatons.

This must apply to some Labour voters too.

Shelagh Fogarty referred to precisely this from conversations she had with Luciana Berger earlier this week, live on air. The precautions she had to take went far beyond bodyguards, and the police believed the threats against her were credible.

If you deny this, you are part of the problem, FFS.

Clearly! Jeepers, even after the EHRC report, still it's all lies and propaganda . Starmer was bang on correct to get rid of Corbyn if this is still prevalent in the party. God forbid they get someone to rally behind again and do immeasurable harm.

In the meantime, the fact that we live under an effectively dictatorial system where two parties both promote the economic interests of the establishment and ensure there is no mechanism to challenge it is not my fault.

You don't live in a dictatorship. Not even remotely. I grew up in one, and this level of self indulgent hyperbole is so insulting to those of us who actually know what a dictatorship is.

Go eat a kitten.

donquixotedelamancha · Today 17:43

Boris Johnson won an election as Prime Minister; Boris Johnson!

Please dignify him with his full and proper name:

Boris Fucking Johnson.

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

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

@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.

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?

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.

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

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.

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?

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.

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.

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/

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.