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

[IwantToRetire]

I am so fed up with politicians and their seedy bully boy tactics.

So Starmer having failed to get personal approval from voters who rate Sunak higher than him, doesn't think maybe I should try harder to be more relevant to voters.

No he decides to roll in the gutter and use personal attacks. https://www.jackfm.co.uk/news/politics/labour-takes-inspiration-from-australia-with-sunak-attack-ads-but-they-need-more-to-pull-off-a-proper-ousting/

I'm not saying the Tories are blameless, but lets face it, it was/is the CPS who continued/s to fail to prosecute rapists even when the police present evidence, because the CPS only want to take on sure fire winning court cases to up their stats.

So not only has Labour tried to make out Sunak (who became as MP the same year as Starmer) personally doesn't want child abusers to go to prison, but now has plagerised women campaign's slogan about how rape has been decriminalised. https://rapecrisis.org.uk/get-informed/the-decriminalisation-of-rape/

And yet Labour still doesn't know what a woman is, nor have they re-admitted women expelled from Labour for saying women are biological females. But think our tiny emotional brains will be overwhelmed by their crass statements about women's issues.

Labour seem to think that because this sort of politcal sloganeering used by the vote leave party were sucessful during the Brexit campaign, that this is how they will win the next election.

Which is worse? That our politicians think voters are such dimwits. Or that they might be right. https://labourlist.org/2023/04/labour-attack-ad-rishi-sunak-crime-twitter-controversial-advert/

Have just found this - which would have been a better OP!

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/listen-emily-thornberrys-car-crash-interview-on-sunak-smear/

The attack ads remind me of the worst aspects of American politics. I don't know why Labour have decided its what UK politics needs. I don't get as well trying to frame it like Labour will be a tough on crime party.

It would be really simple for someone to make a similar one with "Keir Starmer doesn't know what a woman is"

I've been trying to remember the name, but there is a well known Australian political media campaigner who helped run the Boris(?) campaign, and he introduced these tactics.

And unfortunately they seem to work. ie most people just read the slogan. £££££££££££s to the NHS on the side of a bus etc..

Its hard enough to get the media to talk about women's issues and rights as it is, now they are all getting caught up not just in the sloganeering, but in talking about running the slogans.

Is this going to be how the results of the next GE are settled.

how after Sir Keir Starmer went to 21 meetings of the Sentencing Council, it decided not all child sex offenders should go to prison

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11958253/Keir-Starmer-present-meetings-decided-not-sex-offenders-prison.html

Maybe this should have been the title of this thread.

The sheer hypocrasy of the man.

And to play cheap sloganeering with the very real and groteque crime of child abuse.

@IwantToRetire its Isaac Levido you're thinking of https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/dec/16/isaac-levido-the-australian-political-strategist-credited-with-boris-johnsons-victory

This has to be the wrong approach.

Labour’s problem surely, is not that the Tories are popular, but that people don’t know what they stand for. If they can’t gather together some policies that appeal, the risk is that people will decide on “the devil they know”. Especially if Rishi starts delivering some good news on the economy.

The attack around sex offenders is particularly weird. Rishi knows what a woman is. His government are slowly trying to roll back some of the major safeguarding concerns around the use of gender rather than sex. It is Labour that have got this wrong and who are putting our children and young people (and vulnerable women) at risk.

I think as well if you're attacking this far out from a general election its a bad strategy like are they planning on doing this constantly until the next election because you water down your attack if you are. Its like they're giving away their election strategy early

As well I think it might if anything engender sympathy towards Rishi and also questions about what are Labour going to do to solve this when they get in power? Are Labour going to be tougher on sex offenders?

Skwawkbox reports...
" And further hypocrisy in Labour's current stance has come to light thanks to Gil O'Teane, who pointed out that - as a barrister acting on behalf of a convicted paedophile - Starmer asked a judge to keep secret both the offender's identity and the leniency of the sentence he had received: "

" There is no suggestion that Starmer was acting improperly in representing his client in 2002 - but there is every suggestion that a man who understood the nuances of sentencing in 2002 is profoundly hypocritical and reckless to disregard his own history in order to make a vile, misleading and inflammatory smear against a political opponent. "

Full report here...Skwawkbox

I haven’t seen any pushback from the tories on this. Have I missed it, or have they (sensibly it seems!) decided to rise above it?

I’m a natural labour voter, horrified at their support for an ideology which supports individual fetish over community safety. I might not support his politics, but I think Sunak is trying to do a good job. He has 2 daughters. The suggestion that he would support child abuse is abhorrent. Labour need to be better than this

Life-long Labour voter here. Won't be voting for them at the next election. Starmer has no moral compass & can't be trusted -he'll do/ say anything for power.

Meh, this is just bog standard politicking. Sometimes lately it feels like MN FWRhas been invaded by Tory Central Office sock puppets.

Perhaps. But what is the appeal? What is the point?

Is Sunak particularly weak on child abusers? He seems pretty good on gender, which is a major threat to child safeguarding. Noticeably better than Starmer.

Attack politics may be inevitable. I wish it weren’t. It would be good to see some debate on policies. Even then Starmer has hit on the wrong issue. People in glasshouses etc.

I don’t like this new approach and neither do most people and expect they will drop it after the May elections.
I don’t want the Tory’s to win again. Labour need to clarify that 100% of women do not have a penis and then win the next election.

Keir may be 'leader' but surely he would have said 'erm, we can't say that as I was in the acutal meeting that approved the very policy that you are putting on Sunak'? Surely he remembers that meeting? So we can only surmise they think the whole country is thick, or unable to do basic research?

Or he isn't, in any way, in charge and someone wants him out and is doing that from inside the party.

Starmer is showing how nasty he is, he still has not said what a woman is. He would make a terrible PM. I would never vote for him

It's a risky approach from Labour which might backfire badly.

Cooper wasn't in the loop. And she's supposedly shadow Home Secretary

www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/apr/08/yvette-cooper-was-not-told-about-labours-sunak-attack-ad-in-advance

I've been trying to remember the name, but there is a well known Australian political media campaigner who helped run the Boris(?) campaign, and he introduced these tactics.

@IwantToRetire Lynton Crosby?

Hasn't tape always sufferer with low prosecution and conviction?

Haven't those rates now reached an historic low ?

So things getting worse under this government

It goes back longer than that. Saatchi is laying claim. I hope Sunak keeps his own counsel.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11958579/MAURICE-SAATCHI-says-Tories-hit-against-Sir-Keir-Starmer-like-did-Maggie.html

Rape convictions were at their highest rates under Starmer's CPS. They plummeted adultery he left.

Starmer as DPP had no ability to change sentencing of child abuse- that's a government decision.

I don't like Starmer and don't like the ad but let's stick to facts; he was a very good DPP.

Criticising bad strategies and bad policies from Labour, doesn’t equal ‘Tory sock puppet’ and it’s that kind of juvenile behaviour from people on the left and within labour that meant I haven’t been voting in some time. I’m a former Labour and Greens voter with high standards. I’m not just voting labour as a default. I have a brain and principles. This board is full of intelligent women who criticise any side of politics where they see fit. It’s poor form to come here and insult because we dare to criticise labour. This was a very poor decision by them, they can’t keep calling the tories the nasty party and then do this crap too. The fact Starmer himself was so involved makes it even worse because now they look incompetent and stupid as well. More so than they already did supporting self ID and TWAW.

Desperate tactics aren't exactly new but surely they're normally the preserve of the losing party. I'm reminded of some of the Conservative campaigning before the 1997 election which got increasingly wild, culminating in that picture of Tony Blair with satanic red eyes. But the Tories were always behind in that campaign so you could kind of understand how they ended up throwing all kinds of random shit at them.

Labour has big lead in the polls and they shouldn't need to do this. They're making themselves look like the desperate party.

I say this as someone who has no plans to vote Tory and indeed might still vote Labour, but this is definitely not what I need to win me back.

That was his literal job. Any barrister would have done exactly the same. He is required to act in the interests of his client. It does not reveal his personal viewpoint. I'm sure if we were able to have access to all decisions made or advice given by Rishi Sunak as a hedge fund manager or investment banker there could be grounds for thinking negatively about him if we took that as to reflect his personal values rather than him just doing his job.

And this!