Oh no Rosie

[InandOutlander]

I'm so sad to see her go, she was the shining light within the Labour camp.

The most important part of her letter for me was the critique of Starmer's political experience. His accelerated promotion, his ignoring the experience of other Labour MP's. His failure to learn or to apologise.

They also may be pleased, if they're fucked off with Labour. I bet loads are exceptionally unhappy about the WFA being taken away.

I doubt she made this decision in a vacuum, without considering what her constituents were saying to her. Yeah, of course, some will be pissed off, but I'm pretty sure there will be many who aren't.

There’s been quite a good effort from some to put RD in the wrong but her words and others like them are getting cut through so good on her

-30 in opinion polls today. Oof what a fall from grace

Given 27,700 constituents (58.6%) voted for other parties, they might be rather pleased not to have a Labour MP any more…

I'm far more interested in talking about you and your motivation for dominating this thread.

What were the votes proportionally and was it Lib Dems, Tories, Greens or Reform in second place on 7 July?

4/5 July I mean

Rosie Duffield Labour 48.3%
Conservatives 45.2%
Lib Dems 5.7%
Independent 0.8%

Non-lawyers often assume that barristers, and particularly KCs, are geniuses. Barristers, who are often a wee bit egocentric, don't discourage the idea. We know that's not always true, especially when they get out of their specialist area (hi Jolyon). I can't count the number of times I've seen people talk about Starmer's brilliant legal mind. Even if it's true, it doesn't necessarily translate to anything else.

People who play football with Starmer says he takes the game very seriously and puts in lots of energy, but he doesn't really have any instinctive flair for it. I think that might be a metaphor for his political skills.

No shame in that - few politicians have the talents of a Margaret Thatcher or Tony Blair - but in that case he should have developed his listening and learning skills. I think he feels he doesn't have anything to learn from anyone.

Well, as you’ve posted above, it was only a 3% point difference in July, so maybe Noble thinks the Conservatives could win a Canterbury by-election….

That was the previous election. For 2024 it was;

That was 2019

And the July result was with a large minority of the CLP, having failed to oust Rosie as the candidate, voting Green as a spoiler. The Corbynites and TRAs at the university would rather have a Conservative MP in Canterbury than Rosie Duffield.

😂 you are getting desperate now if you think I would be interested in the Conservatives winning a by-election.

I'm one of her constituents and I have to say that I am slightly miffed off. I'm a member of the Labour Party and I donated to her crowd funder in the election. She was a strong voice within the party for women's rights and we've lost that now.

However. as a constituency MP, she has helped me personally and I am very grateful for what her/her office did. So I'm feeling a bit torn.

For years in Canterbury, I was trying to get 'Lazier Brazier' (Tory) out and trying to guess who'd be the best candidate to vote for to achieve that (before all these 'vote suggestion' websites sprung up to oust the Tories). By leaving the party I fear that her 'personal pull' will not be enough to stop Canterbury turning blue again - and for that I'm very disappointed and miffed off.

Thank you to @Pluvia and others for the breakdown

No, she doesn't have to trigger a by-election even though it looks like she was elected under false pretences. The rules say that she doesn't have to.

In which case Starmer also was fine to accept the donations, the rules say that they were allowed.

Or are following the rules and doing the right thing not necessarily the same thing?

It is astonishing how cynical some are around politicians until it's a politician that they like, then it's perfectly justifiable to e.g. delay quitting the party that you obviously hate until they've got you a job.

I'm one of her constituents and I have to say that I am slightly miffed off.

I can understand that and I say that as an admirer of Rosie Duffield. I think the Labour party have been awful to her and I'm glad, for her sake, that she's left. But I do still have misgivings about how some of her constituents might view it and nothing I've read on this thread has shaken off that feeling.

It won't stop me supporting her in the future. People are complicated.

OK, PC thread police!

'Dominating'? Do you know that this is a discussion forum? You come on, write stuff, people interact with what you've written, you then interact with what they've written? It's not like Facebook where you just broadcast your thoughts for likes and admiration.

Anyway, my view of Rosie Duffield tended towards the positive, so when I heard she'd resigned, I went to read her letter with interest. I thought she made some good points although it came across as a bit whiny about how Starmer never listened to his elders and betters. Then I got to the bit at the end where she could have addressed the fact that she quit the party that she had just been elected on the manifesto of a few weeks prior, and that this could be seen badly by her constituents, that they might feel let down, or betrayed or whatever, and how this might deserve some explanation. Instead she gaily announced that they'd be totally happy with the situation, preferred her to Labour anyway and NOTHING TO SEE THERE.

And then I wondered why, when she clearly intended on quitting the Labour Party, she didn't do it before the election.

And then I realised that she didn't want to risk her job. Self-interest over principles. Just like she had been moralising about in her letter.

So I came to the thread to discuss that.

Article in The Guardian seems very fair.https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/sep/29/rosie-duffield-keir-starmer-women-problem-labour

Over on LabourList they're running lots of quotes from deep thinkers like Jess Barnard and Nadia Whittome saying the party is better off without her.

Gotta say, that reminds me of the current US situation where the Democrats have said "the GOP can have Bobby Kennedy and we'll take Dick Cheney" and they think they've got the better end of the deal.

It is astonishing how cynical some are around politicians until it's a politician that they like, then it's perfectly justifiable to e.g. delay quitting the party that you obviously hate until they've got you a job.

You're assuming that we would feel differently about this if it was a politician we didn't like, but that isn't necessarily the case. I tend to think that if a politician changes party, then there isn't a moral obligation on them to resign and have a by-election. Apart from anything else, by-elections cost time and money and most people find them annoying.

I'm sure, yes, it's much easier and more comfortable to be batshit without a voice of sanity banging on at you and trying to drag you back to reality. Poor little sausages.

I'm sure they do, apparently some are very happy indeed due to their gender ideology beliefs

On the flip side the public will see RD's words and polling will show what they think