Starmer

[i_ateallthepies]

Keith can blow as much smoke up Tory voters backsides all he wants but I doubt many of them will be taken in by this fool .

Three options open for Tory voters , stick with the Tories , vote for Reform or stay at home on election day .

I've lived long enough to know you can never write the Tories off and the election campaign will be brutal and they will pin something on Labour or Keith that will have legs , I'm certain of it .

They may already be in possession of it and are waiting for the perfect time to play it .

Blair in 97 would probably have still won whatever the Tories through at him through sheer weight of personality .

Keith doesn't have that and despite what many might say personality is important .

So, which of those three have you decided to do, Tyke?

If you're suggesting by that snide remark that Tyke is a Tory voter, then you either don't read his posts, or you have a poor understanding of semantics.

SS, I have read a great many of Tyke's posts and I know very well that at his core he is a socialist but a great many of his posts reveal that his political leanings are a little more nuanced than that.

[Bristol Red Rover]

Remind me what your position on welfare is 91?

I believe there needs to be a balance obviously between what can be deemed between a lifestyle choice and it being absolute necessary to get benefits I.e. disabled, vulnerable, elderly etc.

However it is a tough and divisive subject I believe it isn't what the beneift claimants receive that is the issue it is their expenditure and it all stems from privatisation which has been a complete disaster and where possible should be reversed.

However it is wrong for the poorest to prop up the richest when they're making billions of pounds and the government are very clever with trying to turn everyone against each other. Especially benefit claimants I.e. your benefits Britain.

It is all deisnged to make people think, oh they're greedy when the majority aren't.

And people are even claiming benefits whilst they're working as well which some people don't realise and the government are clever with their psychology.

However, children and elderly, vulnerable people shouldn't be required in some cases choosing between eating and heating plus having their heating on rare cases at 10°.

And there's the case of food banks compared to when Labour was in power.

There's that many structural issues that have to be dealt with obviously each person or family is complex in some areas.

And how they are now trying to control us. Covid? It was the period they realised we could be controlled by the millions and we would comply.

Essentially if you make the poorer more and more productive for less it makes the richer richer.

We are going back to victorian times.

A starting point for Labour is to give a referendum on the EU or the very least the deal initially but it was all a pack of lies.

And why should we have hundreds of MPs in a population of millions be making decisions for us?

Universal Basic Income solves much of the above.

[tyke1962]

Keith can blow as much smoke up Tory voters backsides all he wants but I doubt many of them will be taken in by this fool .

Three options open for Tory voters , stick with the Tories , vote for Reform or stay at home on election day .

I've lived long enough to know you can never write the Tories off and the election campaign will be brutal and they will pin something on Labour or Keith that will have legs , I'm certain of it .

They may already be in possession of it and are waiting for the perfect time to play it .

Blair in 97 would probably have still won whatever the Tories through at him through sheer weight of personality .

Keith doesn't have that and despite what many might say personality is important .

So, which of those three have you decided to do, Tyke?

If you're suggesting by that snide remark that Tyke is a Tory voter, then you either don't read his posts, or you have a poor understanding of semantics.

SS, I have read a great many of Tyke's posts and I know very well that at his core he is a socialist but a great many of his posts reveal that his political leanings are a little more nuanced than that.

I don't really follow a political tribe as such .

I believe there are things that socialism does very well but I also believe there's some things the market does better .

I'll sit the left's holocaust denial of October 7th but in real time out thanks very much .

I always knew they were sympathetic of the Palestinian struggle but little did I realise just how joyous some of them would be on October 7th and that's a different thing altogether .

The left is finished in my opinion , the left I'm from died years ago post Thatcher with only Mick Lynch keeping the fire burning .

At one time young lads would be in trade unions fighting the fight on the left  , today they are increasingly on the right and pushing even further right .

[ncRover]

I’d say I’m centre-right. I would vote for Starmer before a Braverman / Farage type Tory  leader.

If it was a far-left v far right I would vote Lib Dem.

[scawsby steve]

I’d say I’m centre-right. I would vote for Starmer before a Braverman / Farage type Tory  leader.

If it was a far-left v far right I would vote Lib Dem.

The trouble with the Lib Dems, NC, is that they're full of snake oil salesman. They'll be hedging their bets for next year right now, hoping for a hung parliament.

Just watch the horse trading if that happens.

[SydneyRover]

Keith can blow as much smoke up Tory voters backsides all he wants but I doubt many of them will be taken in by this fool .

Three options open for Tory voters , stick with the Tories , vote for Reform or stay at home on election day .

I've lived long enough to know you can never write the Tories off and the election campaign will be brutal and they will pin something on Labour or Keith that will have legs , I'm certain of it .

They may already be in possession of it and are waiting for the perfect time to play it .

Blair in 97 would probably have still won whatever the Tories through at him through sheer weight of personality .

Keith doesn't have that and despite what many might say personality is important .

some voters are easily led, think brexit

Whoa, whoa, whoa, Mr Syd. An article today in your beloved paragon of truth, "the Guardian", is saying that Brexit is not the disaster that some predicted, and that the EU economy over the last few years has been "woeful".

Care to comment?

ask the shadow board if it's on topic and if allowed post a link SS

[scawsby steve]

Keith can blow as much smoke up Tory voters backsides all he wants but I doubt many of them will be taken in by this fool .

Three options open for Tory voters , stick with the Tories , vote for Reform or stay at home on election day .

I've lived long enough to know you can never write the Tories off and the election campaign will be brutal and they will pin something on Labour or Keith that will have legs , I'm certain of it .

They may already be in possession of it and are waiting for the perfect time to play it .

Blair in 97 would probably have still won whatever the Tories through at him through sheer weight of personality .

Keith doesn't have that and despite what many might say personality is important .

some voters are easily led, think brexit

Whoa, whoa, whoa, Mr Syd. An article today in your beloved paragon of truth, "the Guardian", is saying that Brexit is not the disaster that some predicted, and that the EU economy over the last few years has been "woeful".

Care to comment?

ask the shadow board if it's on topic and if allowed post a link SS

You should know by now, Syd, that I don't do links. Especially when I've got an article from MSN headlines.

If it helps, the article is written by the Guardian's economics editor, Larry Elliott.

[SydneyRover]

I'm shocked that you read a guardian article with all the rhetoric about it SS even if it was quoted by another broad brush media outlet

[DonnyOsmond]

To be fair the EU redistributed funds to the least funded areas of the UK, with South Yorkshire being one of them so as a local area we're worse off.

[BillyStubbsTears]

To be fair the EU redistributed funds to the least funded areas of the UK, with South Yorkshire being one of them so as a local area we're worse off.

If we hadn't told them we didn't want their help, the tax payers of Munich, Stockholm, Milan, Paris and Barcelona would have given South Yorkshire €3bn over the last few years, to repair some of the damage the withdrawal of funding by the London government has done over the past 13 years.

But we voted to tell them to keep their money. Under the wrongheaded idea that they took money off us.

I don't think the people of South Yorkshire quite realise how poor we have become under the Tories. Or what the "We" meant in "We took back control."

[roverstillidie91]

Globalist number  4 - https://youtu.be/mWcaEX_2x34?si=iXUPwnuw9ryipVnq

[SydneyRover]

Globalist number  4 - https://youtu.be/mWcaEX_2x34?si=iXUPwnuw9ryipVnq

The opening statement just about says it all 91.

[roverstillidie91]

Globalist number  4 - https://youtu.be/mWcaEX_2x34?si=iXUPwnuw9ryipVnq

The opening statement just about says it all 91.

he represents the rich and the privileged, a multi millionaire.

There's no difference between him and Sunak.

The general public are too gullible to realise it.

I wonder if Labour lord's will vote against the motion for anti strike laws tomorrow?

[SydneyRover]

Globalist number  4 - https://youtu.be/mWcaEX_2x34?si=iXUPwnuw9ryipVnq

The opening statement just about says it all 91.

he represents the rich and the privileged, a multi millionaire.

There's no difference between him and Sunak.

The general public are too gullible to realise it.

I wonder if Labour lord's will vote against the motion for anti strike laws tomorrow?

Who does? I only had time to watch the first minute?

[ncRover]

Globalist number  4 - https://youtu.be/mWcaEX_2x34?si=iXUPwnuw9ryipVnq

The opening statement just about says it all 91.

he represents the rich and the privileged, a multi millionaire.

There's no difference between him and Sunak.

The general public are too gullible to realise it.

I wonder if Labour lord's will vote against the motion for anti strike laws tomorrow?

What’s wrong with a man being smart, successful and becoming a multi-millionaire?

[drfchound]

Globalist number  4 - https://youtu.be/mWcaEX_2x34?si=iXUPwnuw9ryipVnq

The opening statement just about says it all 91.

he represents the rich and the privileged, a multi millionaire.

There's no difference between him and Sunak.

The general public are too gullible to realise it.

I wonder if Labour lord's will vote against the motion for anti strike laws tomorrow?

Who does? I only had time to watch the first minute?

It is very obvious who 91 is talking about.

[roverstillidie91]

Globalist number  4 - https://youtu.be/mWcaEX_2x34?si=iXUPwnuw9ryipVnq

The opening statement just about says it all 91.

he represents the rich and the privileged, a multi millionaire.

There's no difference between him and Sunak.

The general public are too gullible to realise it.

I wonder if Labour lord's will vote against the motion for anti strike laws tomorrow?

What’s wrong with a man being smart, successful and becoming a multi-millionaire?

being part of the establishment is the main issue, not to be trusted

[Bristol Red Rover]

Globalist number  4 - https://youtu.be/mWcaEX_2x34?si=iXUPwnuw9ryipVnq

The opening statement just about says it all 91.

he represents the rich and the privileged, a multi millionaire.

There's no difference between him and Sunak.

The general public are too gullible to realise it.

I wonder if Labour lord's will vote against the motion for anti strike laws tomorrow?

What’s wrong with a man being smart, successful and becoming a multi-millionaire?

In saying that you're missing the point or being two faced. What do you think is wrong with the likes of Thatcher, Blair, Sunak, Johnson, Starmer being in the power seat? How can people embedded in the establishment, making heaps of dosh from keeping the status quo be a problem? Or are you simply seeing Starmer, and the others, as nice respectable folks with just the interests of the disadvantaged upper most in their hearts?

[ncRover]

Ah yes we just need a socialist in charge and we’ll all be rich.

Meanwhile the one in charge of affluent Venezuela is threatening to invade ally to the west Guyana over oil. I’m sure you’ll be their cheerleader soon enough.

[albie]

Austerity Keith has sat on his hands and failed to back the "Fatal Motion" brought by the Greens in the House of Lords.
So the Tory assault on Trade Unions and workers rights is allowed to proceed, despite the Tories not having a majority in the Lords.

The issue is summarised in this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-5cxSDUZb4

At least no-one can argue the wetwipe has the interests of working people at heart.
Fully fledged member of the ruling class.

[SydneyRover]

Austerity Keith has sat on his hands and failed to back the "Fatal Motion" brought by the Greens in the House of Lords.
So the Tory assault on Trade Unions and workers rights is allowed to proceed, despite the Tories not having a majority in the Lords.

The issue is summarised in this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-5cxSDUZb4

At least no-one can argue the wetwipe has the interests of working people at heart.
Fully fledged member of the ruling class.

Maybe you should have looked to the future when electing a party leader representing a small section of society wanting to run the country, a valiant attempt but doomed long term.

[Bristol Red Rover]

Ah yes we just need a socialist in charge and we’ll all be rich.

Meanwhile the one in charge of affluent Venezuela is threatening to invade ally to the west Guyana over oil. I’m sure you’ll be their cheerleader soon enough.

It's not about all being rich. Not sure how you get to that comment without being dismissive of fairness, or being someone who celebrates abusive elites. Educate me, take me through your process.

[ncRover]

Ah yes we just need a socialist in charge and we’ll all be rich.

Meanwhile the one in charge of affluent Venezuela is threatening to invade ally to the west Guyana over oil. I’m sure you’ll be their cheerleader soon enough.

It's not about all being rich. Not sure how you get to that comment without being dismissive of fairness, or being someone who celebrates abusive elites. Educate me, take me through your process.

Was being tongue in cheek.

If you could explain how Starmer is an abusive elite who actively wants the people of this country to not be prosperous that would be a good starting point please.

Maybe also contrast that with someone more to your liking.

[Bristol Red Rover]

Nc,  tongue in cheek involves a process based on the point you were trying to make. Otherwise it would be pointless, and that's not you.

[albie]

Labour should ditch the economic framework responsible for the state we’re in – Labour Hub
https://labourhub.org.uk/2023/12/06/labour-should-ditch-the-economic-framework-responsible-for-the-state-were-in/

Nothing controversial there, but Keith and Reeves are drunk on their own propaganda.

[Bristol Red Rover]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/dec/12/nick-brown-resigns-labour-complete-farce-disciplinary-process

Nick Brown MP resigned from the Labour Party following the Pqrty's disciplinary process about an incident 25 years ago. Quite a serious step. Apparently the Party leader has some experience with law, and you'd think would be cncerned with fairness - obviously not.

How many more will go this way? What kind of person is being attracted to joining such a party? What kind of person will be working towards being an MP of such a party? Where is this party going?

[SydneyRover]

Labour should ditch the economic framework responsible for the state we’re in – Labour Hub
https://labourhub.org.uk/2023/12/06/labour-should-ditch-the-economic-framework-responsible-for-the-state-were-in/

Nothing controversial there, but Keith and Reeves are drunk on their own propaganda.

Need to get truss back, she knows how to spend money

[albie]

Nothing whatsoever to do with Truss, the issue is how you intend to raise revenue.

Saying that you will rule out revenue raising possibilities at the outset, means you will have to backtrack later, and take a caning for deliberate deception of voters.

Best avoided.

[SydneyRover]

Nothing whatsoever to do with Truss, the issue is how you intend to raise revenue.

Saying that you will rule out revenue raising possibilities at the outset, means you will have to backtrack later, and take a caning for deliberate deception of voters.

Best avoided.

l have to wait to see all of your policies before I can make a judgement Albie








































i judge them as a package before

[selby]

Starmer is a Quisling Syd, he will stab people like you in the back buddy, he is a first class traitor, and smooth with it.
  Don't for one minute trust anything he says, if he says anything at all that is.