Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Northern Ireland Westminster Election 2019 – Review And Insigh

SystemSystem Posts: 11,002
edited December 2019 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Northern Ireland Westminster Election 2019 – Review And Insight

First and foremost, congratulations to all 18 winning candidates and commiserations to all the losing ones.

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,184
    First.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,988
    I love the idea that these MPs are actually going to achieve something for their areas. They obviously do politics differently in NI. Personally, I think that these MPs will once again return to obscurity after the DUPs moment in the sun in the last Parliament. They really should have worked harder to ensure that happy state continued for as long as possible.
  • DavidL said:

    I love the idea that these MPs are actually going to achieve something for their areas. They obviously do politics differently in NI. Personally, I think that these MPs will once again return to obscurity after the DUPs moment in the sun in the last Parliament. They really should have worked harder to ensure that happy state continued for as long as possible.

    And as was pointed out yesterday a U.K. PM with lots of poorer Northern constituencies and MPs isn’t going to be hosing better off Ulstermen with dosh....the number of Turkeys that voted for Christmas grows longer by the day...
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,988

    DavidL said:

    I love the idea that these MPs are actually going to achieve something for their areas. They obviously do politics differently in NI. Personally, I think that these MPs will once again return to obscurity after the DUPs moment in the sun in the last Parliament. They really should have worked harder to ensure that happy state continued for as long as possible.

    And as was pointed out yesterday a U.K. PM with lots of poorer Northern constituencies and MPs isn’t going to be hosing better off Ulstermen with dosh....the number of Turkeys that voted for Christmas grows longer by the day...
    Christmas doesn’t come but once a year in NI, it comes every odd decade. I can’t help feeling that Arlene is going to pay a heavy price for her stupidity. Dodds already has and I won’t miss him much. I expect further legislation to bring NI into at least the 20th century if Stormont doesn’t get back to business. There is no reason to tolerate the DUPs intolerance now. Hopefully Ulster will benefit from the DUPs discomforture.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    Floater said:

    HYUFD said:
    There was a Labour mp on talk radio earlier- he also said RLB would equal destruction of Labour
    If they do install Corbyn Mk2 then they deserve destruction. But they won't get it.
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    I love the idea that these MPs are actually going to achieve something for their areas. They obviously do politics differently in NI. Personally, I think that these MPs will once again return to obscurity after the DUPs moment in the sun in the last Parliament. They really should have worked harder to ensure that happy state continued for as long as possible.

    And as was pointed out yesterday a U.K. PM with lots of poorer Northern constituencies and MPs isn’t going to be hosing better off Ulstermen with dosh....the number of Turkeys that voted for Christmas grows longer by the day...
    Christmas doesn’t come but once a year in NI, it comes every odd decade. I can’t help feeling that Arlene is going to pay a heavy price for her stupidity. Dodds already has and I won’t miss him much. I expect further legislation to bring NI into at least the 20th century if Stormont doesn’t get back to business. There is no reason to tolerate the DUPs intolerance now. Hopefully Ulster will benefit from the DUPs discomforture.
    A key consequence of Northern Ireland having a separate party political system to the rest of the country is, of course, that (except when NI MPs hold the balance of power in the Commons) there are no votes for the UK Government either to gain or lose in doing what it likes there. The main issue for Johnson is not getting bogged down in distracting local arguments - or having his handling of them used by his opponents in mainland Britain as a stick with which to attempt to beat him. In the latter respect, changing Northern Irish law on abortions and same sex marriage has already drawn most of the poison.

    Thus, there's a good argument to be made for taking more decisions over the heads of Northern Ireland's politicians, in the hope that removing as many contentious issues from play as possible will make it easier for them to agree to resume power-sharing. Item number one: the Irish Language Act.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540
    edited December 2019
    Worth a read
    https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1207550627334762496?s=21

    The fullest significance of these facts lies in what it says about the reasoning of voters who made that journey. It is common on the left simply to caricature the Tory party and its voters as either bigoted or deluded. Doing this absolves them from ever having to think carefully about what the Tories stand for, or why people vote for them. After a result like last week’s it might be wiser to experiment for a while by treating the Tory party as a rational organisation, and its voters as people making reasoned decisions.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,310
    FPT

    Does anyone know how Keir Starmer became a multi millionaire (if indeed he is)
  • Worth a read


    The fullest significance of these facts lies in what it says about the reasoning of voters who made that journey. It is common on the left simply to caricature the Tory party and its voters as either bigoted or deluded. Doing this absolves them from ever having to think carefully about what the Tories stand for, or why people vote for them. After a result like last week’s it might be wiser to experiment for a while by treating the Tory party as a rational organisation, and its voters as people making reasoned decisions.

    They’d rather die than do that.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540
    edited December 2019

    FPT

    Does anyone know how Keir Starmer became a multi millionaire (if indeed he is)

    Keir Starmer QC?

    No, no idea (in fairness some of that may be in property assets).

    Labour is accused of 'vile hypocrisy' for tax raid on buy-to-let landlords despite a quarter of their front bench owning second homes
    Emily Thornberry owns three properties in her multimillion-pound portfolio
    Keir Starmer owns a £1.75million house in London and a £600,000 Surrey home


    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7465599/Labour-accused-hypocrisy-raid-landlords-despite-quarter-bench-owning-second-homes.html

    And his Wiki entry has just been edited to remove "multi millionaire".

    Carried out from an IP address in Northwest London:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/12/18/sir-keir-starmers-wikipedia-page-edited-ahead-expected-labour/
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    Worth a read
    https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1207550627334762496?s=21

    The fullest significance of these facts lies in what it says about the reasoning of voters who made that journey. It is common on the left simply to caricature the Tory party and its voters as either bigoted or deluded. Doing this absolves them from ever having to think carefully about what the Tories stand for, or why people vote for them. After a result like last week’s it might be wiser to experiment for a while by treating the Tory party as a rational organisation, and its voters as people making reasoned decisions.

    This is not unique to the left. It is a feature of modern politics and afflicts the right just as much, who could not believe why anyone could vote for Labour under Corbyn.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,310

    FPT

    Does anyone know how Keir Starmer became a multi millionaire (if indeed he is)

    Keir Starmer QC?

    No, no idea (in fairness some of that may be in property assets).

    Labour is accused of 'vile hypocrisy' for tax raid on buy-to-let landlords despite a quarter of their front bench owning second homes
    Emily Thornberry owns three properties in her multimillion-pound portfolio
    Keir Starmer owns a £1.75million house in London and a £600,000 Surrey home


    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7465599/Labour-accused-hypocrisy-raid-landlords-despite-quarter-bench-owning-second-homes.html

    And his Wiki entry has just been edited to remove "multi millionaire".

    Carried out from an IP address in Northwest London:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/12/18/sir-keir-starmers-wikipedia-page-edited-ahead-expected-labour/
    Thanks

    Does he send his kids to the local comp one wonders. Amazing how the left enjoy wealth but try to airbrush it out.
  • I’ve Betfair greened-up on Starmer now at 4s.

    Trouble is I’m carrying £95 of bookie bets round my ankle for no-hopers, so i really need to be +£100 on Betfair to make a decent profit (except for RLB where I made a good £25 bet with bookies at 15).
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    FPT

    Does anyone know how Keir Starmer became a multi millionaire (if indeed he is)

    Keir Starmer QC?

    No, no idea (in fairness some of that may be in property assets).

    Labour is accused of 'vile hypocrisy' for tax raid on buy-to-let landlords despite a quarter of their front bench owning second homes
    Emily Thornberry owns three properties in her multimillion-pound portfolio
    Keir Starmer owns a £1.75million house in London and a £600,000 Surrey home


    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7465599/Labour-accused-hypocrisy-raid-landlords-despite-quarter-bench-owning-second-homes.html

    And his Wiki entry has just been edited to remove "multi millionaire".

    Carried out from an IP address in Northwest London:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/12/18/sir-keir-starmers-wikipedia-page-edited-ahead-expected-labour/
    Thanks

    Does he send his kids to the local comp one wonders. Amazing how the left enjoy wealth but try to airbrush it out.
    The Tory attack dogs.are on the hunt this morning.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540
    edited December 2019

    FPT

    Does anyone know how Keir Starmer became a multi millionaire (if indeed he is)

    Keir Starmer QC?

    No, no idea (in fairness some of that may be in property assets).

    Labour is accused of 'vile hypocrisy' for tax raid on buy-to-let landlords despite a quarter of their front bench owning second homes
    Emily Thornberry owns three properties in her multimillion-pound portfolio
    Keir Starmer owns a £1.75million house in London and a £600,000 Surrey home


    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7465599/Labour-accused-hypocrisy-raid-landlords-despite-quarter-bench-owning-second-homes.html

    And his Wiki entry has just been edited to remove "multi millionaire".

    Carried out from an IP address in Northwest London:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/12/18/sir-keir-starmers-wikipedia-page-edited-ahead-expected-labour/
    Thanks

    Does he send his kids to the local comp one wonders. Amazing how the left enjoy wealth but try to airbrush it out.
    State primary

    https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/856434684896710656?s=20

    Married 2007, 2 kids - so I guess they may be coming up to secondary education shortly...
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    FPT

    Does anyone know how Keir Starmer became a multi millionaire (if indeed he is)

    Keir Starmer QC?

    No, no idea (in fairness some of that may be in property assets).

    Labour is accused of 'vile hypocrisy' for tax raid on buy-to-let landlords despite a quarter of their front bench owning second homes
    Emily Thornberry owns three properties in her multimillion-pound portfolio
    Keir Starmer owns a £1.75million house in London and a £600,000 Surrey home


    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7465599/Labour-accused-hypocrisy-raid-landlords-despite-quarter-bench-owning-second-homes.html

    And his Wiki entry has just been edited to remove "multi millionaire".

    Carried out from an IP address in Northwest London:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/12/18/sir-keir-starmers-wikipedia-page-edited-ahead-expected-labour/
    Thanks

    Does he send his kids to the local comp one wonders. Amazing how the left enjoy wealth but try to airbrush it out.
    State primary

    https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/856434684896710656?s=20
    People are already raiding his bins. How long before they call him a Marxist?
  • Jonathan said:

    Worth a read
    https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1207550627334762496?s=21

    The fullest significance of these facts lies in what it says about the reasoning of voters who made that journey. It is common on the left simply to caricature the Tory party and its voters as either bigoted or deluded. Doing this absolves them from ever having to think carefully about what the Tories stand for, or why people vote for them. After a result like last week’s it might be wiser to experiment for a while by treating the Tory party as a rational organisation, and its voters as people making reasoned decisions.

    This is not unique to the left. It is a feature of modern politics and afflicts the right just as much, who could not believe why anyone could vote for Labour under Corbyn.
    Read on...

    It may also follow that it is wrong to place too much weight on the idea that those who swung from Labour to Conservative have merely “lent” their votes to Boris Johnson. Brexit is certainly a top priority for these voters, and Johnson’s early reaction to his victory included a recognition that these votes were conditional. But these swing voters do not seem to be Brexit obsessives to the exclusion of all other issues. They also have some confidence in Johnson himself (at least in comparison to Corbyn) and they think the Tories would run the economy better.

    If that is correct, then these newly won votes could prove to be on permanent loan, and any new Labour leader will have their work cut out to win them back. The Johnson government is focused on these voters. The Queen’s speech and the budget will be aimed at retaining them. Tony Blair predicted yesterday that, after Brexit, Johnson will try to define the Tories on the centre ground. Blair is probably right. Labour, meanwhile, will first have to regain the right to be heard and then have to set out its own measures to regain their trust. In this, precisely because they are the government, all the cards are in the Tories’ hand.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,310
    Jonathan said:

    FPT

    Does anyone know how Keir Starmer became a multi millionaire (if indeed he is)

    Keir Starmer QC?

    No, no idea (in fairness some of that may be in property assets).

    Labour is accused of 'vile hypocrisy' for tax raid on buy-to-let landlords despite a quarter of their front bench owning second homes
    Emily Thornberry owns three properties in her multimillion-pound portfolio
    Keir Starmer owns a £1.75million house in London and a £600,000 Surrey home


    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7465599/Labour-accused-hypocrisy-raid-landlords-despite-quarter-bench-owning-second-homes.html

    And his Wiki entry has just been edited to remove "multi millionaire".

    Carried out from an IP address in Northwest London:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/12/18/sir-keir-starmers-wikipedia-page-edited-ahead-expected-labour/
    Thanks

    Does he send his kids to the local comp one wonders. Amazing how the left enjoy wealth but try to airbrush it out.
    State primary

    https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/856434684896710656?s=20
    People are already raiding his bins. How long before they call him a Marxist?
    that's 2.5 yrs ago..
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    Jonathan said:

    Worth a read
    https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1207550627334762496?s=21

    The fullest significance of these facts lies in what it says about the reasoning of voters who made that journey. It is common on the left simply to caricature the Tory party and its voters as either bigoted or deluded. Doing this absolves them from ever having to think carefully about what the Tories stand for, or why people vote for them. After a result like last week’s it might be wiser to experiment for a while by treating the Tory party as a rational organisation, and its voters as people making reasoned decisions.

    This is not unique to the left. It is a feature of modern politics and afflicts the right just as much, who could not believe why anyone could vote for Labour under Corbyn.
    Read on...

    It may also follow that it is wrong to place too much weight on the idea that those who swung from Labour to Conservative have merely “lent” their votes to Boris Johnson. Brexit is certainly a top priority for these voters, and Johnson’s early reaction to his victory included a recognition that these votes were conditional. But these swing voters do not seem to be Brexit obsessives to the exclusion of all other issues. They also have some confidence in Johnson himself (at least in comparison to Corbyn) and they think the Tories would run the economy better.

    If that is correct, then these newly won votes could prove to be on permanent loan, and any new Labour leader will have their work cut out to win them back. The Johnson government is focused on these voters. The Queen’s speech and the budget will be aimed at retaining them. Tony Blair predicted yesterday that, after Brexit, Johnson will try to define the Tories on the centre ground. Blair is probably right. Labour, meanwhile, will first have to regain the right to be heard and then have to set out its own measures to regain their trust. In this, precisely because they are the government, all the cards are in the Tories’ hand.
    I read it, what’s your point?
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,310
    Jonathan said:

    FPT

    Does anyone know how Keir Starmer became a multi millionaire (if indeed he is)

    Keir Starmer QC?

    No, no idea (in fairness some of that may be in property assets).

    Labour is accused of 'vile hypocrisy' for tax raid on buy-to-let landlords despite a quarter of their front bench owning second homes
    Emily Thornberry owns three properties in her multimillion-pound portfolio
    Keir Starmer owns a £1.75million house in London and a £600,000 Surrey home


    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7465599/Labour-accused-hypocrisy-raid-landlords-despite-quarter-bench-owning-second-homes.html

    And his Wiki entry has just been edited to remove "multi millionaire".

    Carried out from an IP address in Northwest London:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/12/18/sir-keir-starmers-wikipedia-page-edited-ahead-expected-labour/
    Thanks

    Does he send his kids to the local comp one wonders. Amazing how the left enjoy wealth but try to airbrush it out.
    The Tory attack dogs.are on the hunt this morning.
    Attack dog . LOL. I just asked a simple question.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    edited December 2019

    Jonathan said:

    FPT

    Does anyone know how Keir Starmer became a multi millionaire (if indeed he is)

    Keir Starmer QC?

    No, no idea (in fairness some of that may be in property assets).

    Labour is accused of 'vile hypocrisy' for tax raid on buy-to-let landlords despite a quarter of their front bench owning second homes
    Emily Thornberry owns three properties in her multimillion-pound portfolio
    Keir Starmer owns a £1.75million house in London and a £600,000 Surrey home


    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7465599/Labour-accused-hypocrisy-raid-landlords-despite-quarter-bench-owning-second-homes.html

    And his Wiki entry has just been edited to remove "multi millionaire".

    Carried out from an IP address in Northwest London:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/12/18/sir-keir-starmers-wikipedia-page-edited-ahead-expected-labour/
    Thanks

    Does he send his kids to the local comp one wonders. Amazing how the left enjoy wealth but try to airbrush it out.
    The Tory attack dogs.are on the hunt this morning.
    Attack dog . LOL. I just asked a simple question.
    You were straight in there on his kids, classy. Meanwhile the Telegraph are raiding his digital bins to create a thin story. And so it begins, as a Labour leader you either get a labelled a Marxist or a champagne socialist, sometimes both.
  • Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Worth a read
    https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1207550627334762496?s=21

    The fullest significance of these facts lies in what it says about the reasoning of voters who made that journey. It is common on the left simply to caricature the Tory party and its voters as either bigoted or deluded. Doing this absolves them from ever having to think carefully about what the Tories stand for, or why people vote for them. After a result like last week’s it might be wiser to experiment for a while by treating the Tory party as a rational organisation, and its voters as people making reasoned decisions.

    This is not unique to the left. It is a feature of modern politics and afflicts the right just as much, who could not believe why anyone could vote for Labour under Corbyn.
    Read on...

    It may also follow that it is wrong to place too much weight on the idea that those who swung from Labour to Conservative have merely “lent” their votes to Boris Johnson. Brexit is certainly a top priority for these voters, and Johnson’s early reaction to his victory included a recognition that these votes were conditional. But these swing voters do not seem to be Brexit obsessives to the exclusion of all other issues. They also have some confidence in Johnson himself (at least in comparison to Corbyn) and they think the Tories would run the economy better.

    If that is correct, then these newly won votes could prove to be on permanent loan, and any new Labour leader will have their work cut out to win them back. The Johnson government is focused on these voters. The Queen’s speech and the budget will be aimed at retaining them. Tony Blair predicted yesterday that, after Brexit, Johnson will try to define the Tories on the centre ground. Blair is probably right. Labour, meanwhile, will first have to regain the right to be heard and then have to set out its own measures to regain their trust. In this, precisely because they are the government, all the cards are in the Tories’ hand.
    I read it, what’s your point?
    That Labour have a bigger problem than the Tories. It doesn't "afflict the right just as much".
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,988

    Jonathan said:

    Worth a read
    https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1207550627334762496?s=21

    The fullest significance of these facts lies in what it says about the reasoning of voters who made that journey. It is common on the left simply to caricature the Tory party and its voters as either bigoted or deluded. Doing this absolves them from ever having to think carefully about what the Tories stand for, or why people vote for them. After a result like last week’s it might be wiser to experiment for a while by treating the Tory party as a rational organisation, and its voters as people making reasoned decisions.

    This is not unique to the left. It is a feature of modern politics and afflicts the right just as much, who could not believe why anyone could vote for Labour under Corbyn.
    Read on...

    It may also follow that it is wrong to place too much weight on the idea that those who swung from Labour to Conservative have merely “lent” their votes to Boris Johnson. Brexit is certainly a top priority for these voters, and Johnson’s early reaction to his victory included a recognition that these votes were conditional. But these swing voters do not seem to be Brexit obsessives to the exclusion of all other issues. They also have some confidence in Johnson himself (at least in comparison to Corbyn) and they think the Tories would run the economy better.

    If that is correct, then these newly won votes could prove to be on permanent loan, and any new Labour leader will have their work cut out to win them back. The Johnson government is focused on these voters. The Queen’s speech and the budget will be aimed at retaining them. Tony Blair predicted yesterday that, after Brexit, Johnson will try to define the Tories on the centre ground. Blair is probably right. Labour, meanwhile, will first have to regain the right to be heard and then have to set out its own measures to regain their trust. In this, precisely because they are the government, all the cards are in the Tories’ hand.
    There is quite a lot of insight in that article. A lot of Tories have a much more sanguine, transactional relationship with politics. It is why they are quite happy to vote for Boris whilst recognising his many flaws. Being a Tory is not a moral crusade, it doesn't need a messiah, it allows you to accept that a lot of things will be done that are sub-optimal. It's just better than any of the alternatives. It seems to be catching on.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,310
    edited December 2019
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    FPT

    Does anyone know how Keir Starmer became a multi millionaire (if indeed he is)

    Keir Starmer QC?

    No, no idea (in fairness some of that may be in property assets).

    Labour is accused of 'vile hypocrisy' for tax raid on buy-to-let landlords despite a quarter of their front bench owning second homes
    Emily Thornberry owns three properties in her multimillion-pound portfolio
    Keir Starmer owns a £1.75million house in London and a £600,000 Surrey home


    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7465599/Labour-accused-hypocrisy-raid-landlords-despite-quarter-bench-owning-second-homes.html

    And his Wiki entry has just been edited to remove "multi millionaire".

    Carried out from an IP address in Northwest London:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/12/18/sir-keir-starmers-wikipedia-page-edited-ahead-expected-labour/
    Thanks

    Does he send his kids to the local comp one wonders. Amazing how the left enjoy wealth but try to airbrush it out.
    The Tory attack dogs.are on the hunt this morning.
    Attack dog . LOL. I just asked a simple question.
    You were straight in there on his kids, classy. Meanwhile the Telegraph are raiding his digital bins to create a thin story. And so it begins,
    Its perfectly reasonable to ask such questions about a prospective leader of the Labour party,, after all there are precedents for Labour politicians to say one thing and do another (Diane Abbott (cough) for one. It wasn't about his kids anyway it was about his political views about state schools and whether he sends his children to be educated privately.

    Of course its perfectly ok for the left to smear Boris about his private life ...
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518
    At what point are the markets going to cotton on to the reality of a Johnson government? Where’s the money coming from?
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Worth a read
    https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1207550627334762496?s=21

    The fullest significance of these facts lies in what it says about the reasoning of voters who made that journey. It is common on the left simply to caricature the Tory party and its voters as either bigoted or deluded. Doing this absolves them from ever having to think carefully about what the Tories stand for, or why people vote for them. After a result like last week’s it might be wiser to experiment for a while by treating the Tory party as a rational organisation, and its voters as people making reasoned decisions.

    This is not unique to the left. It is a feature of modern politics and afflicts the right just as much, who could not believe why anyone could vote for Labour under Corbyn.
    Read on...

    It may also follow that it is wrong to place too much weight on the idea that those who swung from Labour to Conservative have merely “lent” their votes to Boris Johnson. Brexit is certainly a top priority for these voters, and Johnson’s early reaction to his victory included a recognition that these votes were conditional. But these swing voters do not seem to be Brexit obsessives to the exclusion of all other issues. They also have some confidence in Johnson himself (at least in comparison to Corbyn) and they think the Tories would run the economy better.

    If that is correct, then these newly won votes could prove to be on permanent loan, and any new Labour leader will have their work cut out to win them back. The Johnson government is focused on these voters. The Queen’s speech and the budget will be aimed at retaining them. Tony Blair predicted yesterday that, after Brexit, Johnson will try to define the Tories on the centre ground. Blair is probably right. Labour, meanwhile, will first have to regain the right to be heard and then have to set out its own measures to regain their trust. In this, precisely because they are the government, all the cards are in the Tories’ hand.
    I read it, what’s your point?
    That Labour have a bigger problem than the Tories. It doesn't "afflict the right just as much".
    Clearly the Tories are self evidently in a stronger position. But that doesn’t alter the fact the Tories have spent the last few months condemning anyone who voted Labour. With some outriders making that point in very extreme terms.
  • The Tory attacks in Starmer show clearly he is the one they fear. It’s pretty transparent.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,903
    What odds do we reckon on whoever Labour choose in March actually fighting the next election in 2024?

    I know the media like to big this up, but in all honesty I think Labour can afford to make the wrong choice provided they are prepared to change if it isn't working out.

    In some ways, that's the more important issue at stake. We've no way of knowing who will be most effective against Boris. But whoever wins should commit to resigning if they aren't cutting through.
  • FPT

    Does anyone know how Keir Starmer became a multi millionaire (if indeed he is)

    Keir Starmer QC?

    No, no idea (in fairness some of that may be in property assets).

    Labour is accused of 'vile hypocrisy' for tax raid on buy-to-let landlords despite a quarter of their front bench owning second homes
    Emily Thornberry owns three properties in her multimillion-pound portfolio
    Keir Starmer owns a £1.75million house in London and a £600,000 Surrey home


    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7465599/Labour-accused-hypocrisy-raid-landlords-despite-quarter-bench-owning-second-homes.html

    And his Wiki entry has just been edited to remove "multi millionaire".

    Carried out from an IP address in Northwest London:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/12/18/sir-keir-starmers-wikipedia-page-edited-ahead-expected-labour/
    Thanks

    Does he send his kids to the local comp one wonders. Amazing how the left enjoy wealth but try to airbrush it out.
    State primary

    https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/856434684896710656?s=20

    Married 2007, 2 kids - so I guess they may be coming up to secondary education shortly...

    Yep - and they’ll go to the local state schools. Why wouldn’t they? London schools are excellent. There’s no reason to go private.

  • The Tory attacks in Starmer show clearly he is the one they fear. It’s pretty transparent.

    He's clearly one of the sharpest Labour front benchers - along with Thornberry - but what the Tories fear and what former Labour voters will vote for may be two entirely different things.
  • DavidL said:

    Jonathan said:

    Worth a read
    https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1207550627334762496?s=21

    The fullest significance of these facts lies in what it says about the reasoning of voters who made that journey. It is common on the left simply to caricature the Tory party and its voters as either bigoted or deluded. Doing this absolves them from ever having to think carefully about what the Tories stand for, or why people vote for them. After a result like last week’s it might be wiser to experiment for a while by treating the Tory party as a rational organisation, and its voters as people making reasoned decisions.

    This is not unique to the left. It is a feature of modern politics and afflicts the right just as much, who could not believe why anyone could vote for Labour under Corbyn.
    Read on...

    It may also follow that it is wrong to place too much weight on the idea that those who swung from Labour to Conservative have merely “lent” their votes to Boris Johnson. Brexit is certainly a top priority for these voters, and Johnson’s early reaction to his victory included a recognition that these votes were conditional. But these swing voters do not seem to be Brexit obsessives to the exclusion of all other issues. They also have some confidence in Johnson himself (at least in comparison to Corbyn) and they think the Tories would run the economy better.

    If that is correct, then these newly won votes could prove to be on permanent loan, and any new Labour leader will have their work cut out to win them back. The Johnson government is focused on these voters. The Queen’s speech and the budget will be aimed at retaining them. Tony Blair predicted yesterday that, after Brexit, Johnson will try to define the Tories on the centre ground. Blair is probably right. Labour, meanwhile, will first have to regain the right to be heard and then have to set out its own measures to regain their trust. In this, precisely because they are the government, all the cards are in the Tories’ hand.
    There is quite a lot of insight in that article. A lot of Tories have a much more sanguine, transactional relationship with politics. It is why they are quite happy to vote for Boris whilst recognising his many flaws. Being a Tory is not a moral crusade, it doesn't need a messiah, it allows you to accept that a lot of things will be done that are sub-optimal. It's just better than any of the alternatives. It seems to be catching on.
    It’s why the country is going backwards fast. Being less disastrous is still disastrous.
  • DavidL said:

    Jonathan said:

    This is not unique to the left. It is a feature of modern politics and afflicts the right just as much, who could not believe why anyone could vote for Labour under Corbyn.
    Read on...

    It may also follow that it is wrong to place too much weight on the idea that those who swung from Labour to Conservative have merely “lent” their votes to Boris Johnson. Brexit is certainly a top priority for these voters, and Johnson’s early reaction to his victory included a recognition that these votes were conditional. But these swing voters do not seem to be Brexit obsessives to the exclusion of all other issues. They also have some confidence in Johnson himself (at least in comparison to Corbyn) and they think the Tories would run the economy better.

    If that is correct, then these newly won votes could prove to be on permanent loan, and any new Labour leader will have their work cut out to win them back. The Johnson government is focused on these voters. The Queen’s speech and the budget will be aimed at retaining them. Tony Blair predicted yesterday that, after Brexit, Johnson will try to define the Tories on the centre ground. Blair is probably right. Labour, meanwhile, will first have to regain the right to be heard and then have to set out its own measures to regain their trust. In this, precisely because they are the government, all the cards are in the Tories’ hand.
    There is quite a lot of insight in that article. A lot of Tories have a much more sanguine, transactional relationship with politics. It is why they are quite happy to vote for Boris whilst recognising his many flaws. Being a Tory is not a moral crusade, it doesn't need a messiah, it allows you to accept that a lot of things will be done that are sub-optimal. It's just better than any of the alternatives. It seems to be catching on.
    People vote Conservative because they believe it will be best for themselves and their families. They don’t want an ideological Government that might threaten them.

    Terror of Corbyn was certainly a factor in driving millions of voters into the arms of the Tories last week.

    Whether that holds fast or not next time is something we simply do not know.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,310
    edited December 2019

    The Tory attacks in Starmer show clearly he is the one they fear. It’s pretty transparent.


    That's utter tosh too. The whole leadership of Labour is just a bit of entertainment which will be enjoyed immensely whist they politically stab each other in the back. Keir Starmer is a lightweight with little political backstory bar being given a sinecure of a seat in 2015. His backstory as DPP is hardly stellar.
  • rkrkrk said:

    What odds do we reckon on whoever Labour choose in March actually fighting the next election in 2024?

    I know the media like to big this up, but in all honesty I think Labour can afford to make the wrong choice provided they are prepared to change if it isn't working out.

    In some ways, that's the more important issue at stake. We've no way of knowing who will be most effective against Boris. But whoever wins should commit to resigning if they aren't cutting through.

    Why is everyone assuming the next election will be in 2024? If the Tories are doing well it’s much more likely to be in 2023.

  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    DavidL said:

    Jonathan said:

    This is not unique to the left. It is a feature of modern politics and afflicts the right just as much, who could not believe why anyone could vote for Labour under Corbyn.
    Read on...

    It may also follow that it is wrong to place too much weight on the idea that those who swung from Labour to Conservative have merely “lent” their votes to Boris Johnson. Brexit is certainly a top priority for these voters, and Johnson’s early reaction to his victory included a recognition that these votes were conditional. But these swing voters do not seem to be Brexit obsessives to the exclusion of all other issues. They also have some confidence in Johnson himself (at least in comparison to Corbyn) and they think the Tories would run the economy better.

    If that is correct, then these newly won votes could prove to be on permanent loan, and any new Labour leader will have their work cut out to win them back. The Johnson government is focused on these voters. The Queen’s speech and the budget will be aimed at retaining them. Tony Blair predicted yesterday that, after Brexit, Johnson will try to define the Tories on the centre ground. Blair is probably right. Labour, meanwhile, will first have to regain the right to be heard and then have to set out its own measures to regain their trust. In this, precisely because they are the government, all the cards are in the Tories’ hand.
    There is quite a lot of insight in that article. A lot of Tories have a much more sanguine, transactional relationship with politics. It is why they are quite happy to vote for Boris whilst recognising his many flaws. Being a Tory is not a moral crusade, it doesn't need a messiah, it allows you to accept that a lot of things will be done that are sub-optimal. It's just better than any of the alternatives. It seems to be catching on.
    People vote Conservative because they believe it will be best for themselves and their families. They don’t want an ideological Government that might threaten them
    Same applies to Labour voters.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,777
    DavidL said:

    Jonathan said:

    This is not unique to the left. It is a feature of modern politics and afflicts the right just as much, who could not believe why anyone could vote for Labour under Corbyn.
    Read on...

    It may also follow that it is wrong to place too much weight on the idea that those who swung from Labour to Conservative have merely “lent” their votes to Boris Johnson. Brexit is certainly a top priority for these voters, and Johnson’s early reaction to his victory included a recognition that these votes were conditional. But these swing voters do not seem to be Brexit obsessives to the exclusion of all other issues. They also have some confidence in Johnson himself (at least in comparison to Corbyn) and they think the Tories would run the economy better.

    If that is correct, then these newly won votes could prove to be on permanent loan, and any new Labour leader will have their work cut out to win them back. The Johnson government is focused on these voters. The Queen’s speech and the budget will be aimed at retaining them. Tony Blair predicted yesterday that, after Brexit, Johnson will try to define the Tories on the centre ground. Blair is probably right. Labour, meanwhile, will first have to regain the right to be heard and then have to set out its own measures to regain their trust. In this, precisely because they are the government, all the cards are in the Tories’ hand.
    There is quite a lot of insight in that article. A lot of Tories have a much more sanguine, transactional relationship with politics. It is why they are quite happy to vote for Boris whilst recognising his many flaws. Being a Tory is not a moral crusade, it doesn't need a messiah, it allows you to accept that a lot of things will be done that are sub-optimal. It's just better than any of the alternatives. It seems to be catching on.
    And at the point he becomes a personal liability, his party will happily throw him on the large pile of former leaders who became liabilities, and replace him with someone else. Theresa May, IDS, even Thatcher all outstayed their welcome and were unceremoniously dumped by the party.

    Something that Labour completely failed to do, being seemingly far more interested in internal party machinations than presenting themselves as a convincing alternative government. Even now, they're talking up complete lightweights like R L-B as leader - how's she doing to convince a single Tory to vote for her?
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    rkrkrk said:

    What odds do we reckon on whoever Labour choose in March actually fighting the next election in 2024?

    I know the media like to big this up, but in all honesty I think Labour can afford to make the wrong choice provided they are prepared to change if it isn't working out.

    In some ways, that's the more important issue at stake. We've no way of knowing who will be most effective against Boris. But whoever wins should commit to resigning if they aren't cutting through.

    Why is everyone assuming the next election will be in 2024? If the Tories are doing well it’s much more likely to be in 2023.

    Really? I doubt they will go for another winter poll and will want at least four years.
  • DavidL said:

    Jonathan said:

    Worth a read
    https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1207550627334762496?s=21

    The fullest significance of these facts lies in what it says about the reasoning of voters who made that journey. It is commonas people making reasoned decisions.

    This is not unique to the left. It is a feature of modern politics and afflicts the right just as much, who could not believe why anyone could vote for Labour under Corbyn.
    Read on...

    It may also follow that it is wrong to place too much weight on the idea that those who swung from Labour to Conservative have merely “lent” their votes to Boris Johnson. Brexit is certainly a top priority for these voters, and Johnson’s early reaction to his victory included a recognition that these votes were conditional. But these swing voters do not seem to be Brexit obsessives to the exclusion of all other issues. They also have some confidence in Johnson himself (at least in comparison to Corbyn) and they think the Tories would run the economy better.

    If that is correct, then these newly won votes could prove to be on permanent loan, and any new Labour leader will have their work cut out to win them back. The Johnson government is focused on these voters. The Queen’s speech and the budget will be aimed at retaining them. Tony Blair predicted yesterday that, after Brexit, Johnson will try to define the Tories on the centre ground. Blair is probably right. Labour, meanwhile, will first have to regain the right to be heard and then have to set out its own measures to regain their trust. In this, precisely because they are the government, all the cards are in the Tories’ hand.
    There is quite a lot of insight in that article. A lot of Tories have a much more sanguine, transactional relationship with politics. It is why they are quite happy to vote for Boris whilst recognising his many flaws. Being a Tory is not a moral crusade, it doesn't need a messiah, it allows you to accept that a lot of things will be done that are sub-optimal. It's just better than any of the alternatives. It seems to be catching on.

    The Tories have choices to make. You cannot simultaneously increase public spending, not raise taxes, disrupt the economy with a No Deal Brexit or Canada Minus FTA and balance the books. Something will have to give. My bet is on the book balancing. It will be interesting to see the extent to which the Conservatives that remain in the Johnson Tory party are prepared to let that go.

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,988

    The Tory attacks in Starmer show clearly he is the one they fear. It’s pretty transparent.

    Did you hear him on R4 yesterday? I mean, really. Absolutely nowhere near the required standard. Absolutely nothing to fear.

    Of course he is reasonably intelligent and articulate. Labour could well do worse. But fear? He's not as smart as Ed Miliband, his time at the DPP was a flop, his maneuverings on Brexit really didn't help the country or his party, the more he said he had passion the more it sounded like something that he needed to say. His attempts to suck up to the Corbynistas were cringeworthy and probably poorly judged. He might do as an interim leader for some of this Parliament but I can't see him running a successful election campaign.

  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    I continue to be utterly perplexed by what the DUP's goals and strategy was during the Brexit negotiation and votes.

    Did they... Did they actually believe Boris when he said no PM would ever put a border down the Irish Sea?

    Where they that thick?
  • DavidL said:

    The Tory attacks in Starmer show clearly he is the one they fear. It’s pretty transparent.

    Did you hear him on R4 yesterday? I mean, really. Absolutely nowhere near the required standard. Absolutely nothing to fear.

    Of course he is reasonably intelligent and articulate. Labour could well do worse. But fear? He's not as smart as Ed Miliband, his time at the DPP was a flop, his maneuverings on Brexit really didn't help the country or his party, the more he said he had passion the more it sounded like something that he needed to say. His attempts to suck up to the Corbynistas were cringeworthy and probably poorly judged. He might do as an interim leader for some of this Parliament but I can't see him running a successful election campaign.

    I am convinced, David!!! :-D

  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,777

    rkrkrk said:

    What odds do we reckon on whoever Labour choose in March actually fighting the next election in 2024?

    I know the media like to big this up, but in all honesty I think Labour can afford to make the wrong choice provided they are prepared to change if it isn't working out.

    In some ways, that's the more important issue at stake. We've no way of knowing who will be most effective against Boris. But whoever wins should commit to resigning if they aren't cutting through.

    Why is everyone assuming the next election will be in 2024? If the Tories are doing well it’s much more likely to be in 2023.

    Because the current law says the next election must take place on the first Thursday of May, 2024
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,064
    edited December 2019
    The Fink has a good article in today’s Times where he notes the leadership election will be decided before any ‘period of reflection’ - a term most often used to lull your opponents into not getting their acts together.
  • The Tory attacks in Starmer show clearly he is the one they fear. It’s pretty transparent.


    That's utter tosh too. The whole leadership of Labour is just a bit of entertainment which will be enjoyed immensely whist they politically stab each other in the back. Keir Starmer is a lightweight with little political backstory bar being given a sinecure of a seat in 2015. His backstory as DPP is hardly stellar.

    Can you talk me through Boris Johnson’s glittering achievements and compelling back story before he became Tory leader?

  • felixfelix Posts: 15,124
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    FPT

    Does anyone know how Keir Starmer became a multi millionaire (if indeed he is)

    Keir Starmer QC?

    No, no idea (in fairness some of that may be in property assets).

    Labour is accused of 'vile hypocrisy' for tax raid on buy-to-let landlords despite a quarter of their front bench owning second homes
    Emily Thornberry owns three properties in her multimillion-pound portfolio
    Keir Starmer owns a £1.75million house in London and a £600,000 Surrey home


    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7465599/Labour-accused-hypocrisy-raid-landlords-despite-quarter-bench-owning-second-homes.html

    And his Wiki entry has just been edited to remove "multi millionaire".

    Carried out from an IP address in Northwest London:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/12/18/sir-keir-starmers-wikipedia-page-edited-ahead-expected-labour/
    Thanks

    Does he send his kids to the local comp one wonders. Amazing how the left enjoy wealth but try to airbrush it out.
    The Tory attack dogs.are on the hunt this morning.
    Attack dog . LOL. I just asked a simple question.
    You were straight in there on his kids, classy. Meanwhile the Telegraph are raiding his digital bins to create a thin story. And so it begins, as a Labour leader you either get a labelled a Marxist or a champagne socialist, sometimes both.
    Truth hurts.
  • People have mentioned PB Tories fearing Sir Keir. I don’t, as I want the Labour Party to be electable, to have a leader who could be a competent PM. I am not as confident as some that Boris will be able to win again next time and I don’t want to end up with a PM who thinks that the only reason they didn’t win last time was a biased media.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,988

    DavidL said:

    Jonathan said:
    There is quite a lot of insight in that article. A lot of Tories have a much more sanguine, transactional relationship with politics. It is why they are quite happy to vote for Boris whilst recognising his many flaws. Being a Tory is not a moral crusade, it doesn't need a messiah, it allows you to accept that a lot of things will be done that are sub-optimal. It's just better than any of the alternatives. It seems to be catching on.

    The Tories have choices to make. You cannot simultaneously increase public spending, not raise taxes, disrupt the economy with a No Deal Brexit or Canada Minus FTA and balance the books. Something will have to give. My bet is on the book balancing. It will be interesting to see the extent to which the Conservatives that remain in the Johnson Tory party are prepared to let that go.

    I agree that deficit reduction/elimination is no longer going to be a priority. I think that we will see a lot more capex over the next few years, funded by fairly cheap borrowing. It will work for a while but the damage caused by the GFC was profound and we are much, much weaker than we were. If things turn bad I fear we will not be in a good place and will have less room for maneuver.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,168

    FPT

    Does anyone know how Keir Starmer became a multi millionaire (if indeed he is)

    Keir Starmer QC?

    No, no idea (in fairness some of that may be in property assets).

    Labour is accused of 'vile hypocrisy' for tax raid on buy-to-let landlords despite a quarter of their front bench owning second homes
    Emily Thornberry owns three properties in her multimillion-pound portfolio
    Keir Starmer owns a £1.75million house in London and a £600,000 Surrey home


    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7465599/Labour-accused-hypocrisy-raid-landlords-despite-quarter-bench-owning-second-homes.html

    And his Wiki entry has just been edited to remove "multi millionaire".

    Carried out from an IP address in Northwest London:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/12/18/sir-keir-starmers-wikipedia-page-edited-ahead-expected-labour/
    Actually it’s the other way around. Go back a week and there wasn’t any such reference on the page. Over recent days someone has been trying very hard to insert that he is allegedly a millionaire into the article. Sometimes multiple times. Such that the page now has partial protection against vandalism.
  • The Tory attacks in Starmer show clearly he is the one they fear. It’s pretty transparent.


    That's utter tosh too. The whole leadership of Labour is just a bit of entertainment which will be enjoyed immensely whist they politically stab each other in the back. Keir Starmer is a lightweight with little political backstory bar being given a sinecure of a seat in 2015. His backstory as DPP is hardly stellar.

    Can you talk me through Boris Johnson’s glittering achievements and compelling back story before he became Tory leader?

    First generation immigrant who made good?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,777

    The Tory attacks in Starmer show clearly he is the one they fear. It’s pretty transparent.

    I think "fear" is pushing it somewhat, but he's the best of the bad bunch that is the Labour front bench.

    The electoral system used is going to make this a difficult market to work out (hands up who got the 100/1 on Corbyn as nominations closed in 2015?), it depends much more on factional voting, union and shad cab endorsements, than strength of character or argument.
  • The Tory attacks in Starmer show clearly he is the one they fear. It’s pretty transparent.

    He's clearly one of the sharpest Labour front benchers - along with Thornberry - but what the Tories fear and what former Labour voters will vote for may be two entirely different things.

    Yes, that is fair. Labour needs a leader that voters feel is instinctively on their side even if they do not agree with him/her on everything. Without that it is impossible to win. See Corbyn and Miliband. I don’t know, but Starmer does not look like a frighten the horses person to me. Beyond that, the extent of any Labour recovery is largely in the hands of Boris Johnson. If he delivers on his promises, he wins again. If he doesn’t, it will get a lot more interesting. Under a Starmer or Nandy or Cooper or Phillips, Labour will be in a position to capitalise. Under a Long Bailey, they will not.

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,988
    Alistair said:

    I continue to be utterly perplexed by what the DUP's goals and strategy was during the Brexit negotiation and votes.

    Did they... Did they actually believe Boris when he said no PM would ever put a border down the Irish Sea?

    Where they that thick?

    I found their positioning with May just bewildering but they were not alone in that respect. Just really, really stupid.
  • Sandpit said:

    rkrkrk said:

    What odds do we reckon on whoever Labour choose in March actually fighting the next election in 2024?

    I know the media like to big this up, but in all honesty I think Labour can afford to make the wrong choice provided they are prepared to change if it isn't working out.

    In some ways, that's the more important issue at stake. We've no way of knowing who will be most effective against Boris. But whoever wins should commit to resigning if they aren't cutting through.

    Why is everyone assuming the next election will be in 2024? If the Tories are doing well it’s much more likely to be in 2023.

    Because the current law says the next election must take place on the first Thursday of May, 2024

    It will be repealed.

  • old_labourold_labour Posts: 3,238
    Alistair said:

    I continue to be utterly perplexed by what the DUP's goals and strategy was during the Brexit negotiation and votes.

    Did they... Did they actually believe Boris when he said no PM would ever put a border down the Irish Sea?

    Where they that thick?

    They were fish in a small pond who ventured into a shark infested sea.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,878
    Alistair said:

    I continue to be utterly perplexed by what the DUP's goals and strategy was during the Brexit negotiation and votes.

    Did they... Did they actually believe Boris when he said no PM would ever put a border down the Irish Sea?

    Where they that thick?

    Threw Mays deal which was pretty much directly tailored for them back in her face. Quite right that Boris ran over them in a huge red bus
  • Of course the other thing about Starmer is that everyone f**king hates lawyers.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518
    edited December 2019

    The Tory attacks in Starmer show clearly he is the one they fear. It’s pretty transparent.

    Of the currently touted names - maybe. Although I don’t really see it. I think if one looks beyond the Corbyn loyalists in the front page you would find people they would be far more worried about. Not just as individual personalities, but as people who are far more likely to view the world as it is, rather than as they would like it to be, will move beyond anti Tory sloganising as a primary vote winning tactic, and even more importantly will try to put in place back room staff and structures which are actually aimed at doing what is needed to win, rather than fighting internal battles.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,310

    The Tory attacks in Starmer show clearly he is the one they fear. It’s pretty transparent.


    That's utter tosh too. The whole leadership of Labour is just a bit of entertainment which will be enjoyed immensely whist they politically stab each other in the back. Keir Starmer is a lightweight with little political backstory bar being given a sinecure of a seat in 2015. His backstory as DPP is hardly stellar.

    Can you talk me through Boris Johnson’s glittering achievements and compelling back story before he became Tory leader?

    Labour have been smearing away throughout the GE. its a bit rich when reasonable questions are asked about a politicians views and then how they behave in practice.
  • IanB2 said:

    FPT

    Does anyone know how Keir Starmer became a multi millionaire (if indeed he is)

    Keir Starmer QC?

    No, no idea (in fairness some of that may be in property assets).

    Labour is accused of 'vile hypocrisy' for tax raid on buy-to-let landlords despite a quarter of their front bench owning second homes
    Emily Thornberry owns three properties in her multimillion-pound portfolio
    Keir Starmer owns a £1.75million house in London and a £600,000 Surrey home


    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7465599/Labour-accused-hypocrisy-raid-landlords-despite-quarter-bench-owning-second-homes.html

    And his Wiki entry has just been edited to remove "multi millionaire".

    Carried out from an IP address in Northwest London:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/12/18/sir-keir-starmers-wikipedia-page-edited-ahead-expected-labour/
    Actually it’s the other way around. Go back a week and there wasn’t any such reference on the page. Over recent days someone has been trying very hard to insert that he is allegedly a millionaire into the article. Sometimes multiple times. Such that the page now has partial protection against vandalism.
    Interesting, the 'millionaire' insertions have come from Dundee and Wood Green, to name but two. In fairness Starmer has been so-described in the UK press.
  • Sandpit said:

    The Tory attacks in Starmer show clearly he is the one they fear. It’s pretty transparent.

    I think "fear" is pushing it somewhat, but he's the best of the bad bunch that is the Labour front bench.

    The electoral system used is going to make this a difficult market to work out (hands up who got the 100/1 on Corbyn as nominations closed in 2015?), it depends much more on factional voting, union and shad cab endorsements, than strength of character or argument.

    I think Starmer has a chance, but he needs a big union to fully back him if he is to have a realistic shot because of the organisational boost it would bring. Long Bailey will have the Unite and Momentum machines fully behind her, so she must be favourite. My choice would be Nandy, just as it has been for the last three years. Sadly, though, I doubt she’ll make the contest.

  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    Sandpit said:

    The Tory attacks in Starmer show clearly he is the one they fear. It’s pretty transparent.

    I think "fear" is pushing it somewhat, but he's the best of the bad bunch that is the Labour front bench.

    The electoral system used is going to make this a difficult market to work out (hands up who got the 100/1 on Corbyn as nominations closed in 2015?), it depends much more on factional voting, union and shad cab endorsements, than strength of character or argument.

    I think Starmer has a chance, but he needs a big union to fully back him if he is to have a realistic shot because of the organisational boost it would bring. Long Bailey will have the Unite and Momentum machines fully behind her, so she must be favourite. My choice would be Nandy, just as it has been for the last three years. Sadly, though, I doubt she’ll make the contest.

    Why Nandy? Can’t see it.

    I am looking for either a Kinnock or John Smith figure.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518
    Pulpstar said:

    Alistair said:

    I continue to be utterly perplexed by what the DUP's goals and strategy was during the Brexit negotiation and votes.

    Did they... Did they actually believe Boris when he said no PM would ever put a border down the Irish Sea?

    Where they that thick?

    Threw Mays deal which was pretty much directly tailored for them back in her face. Quite right that Boris ran over them in a huge red bus
    Yep, after May’s deal went it was the only place left for him to go.
  • Alistair said:

    I continue to be utterly perplexed by what the DUP's goals and strategy was during the Brexit negotiation and votes.

    Did they... Did they actually believe Boris when he said no PM would ever put a border down the Irish Sea?

    Where they that thick?

    Their whole strategy about Brexit has been fundamentally misconceived. The idea that throwing all the pieces up in the air was something that a party whose raison d'etre was to preserve the union was bonkers.

    There are Scottish Tories who seem to think that Boris Johnson won't sell them out if it's expedient for him to do so. Hope springs eternal, it seems.
  • GideonWiseGideonWise Posts: 1,123

    The Tory attacks in Starmer show clearly he is the one they fear. It’s pretty transparent.


    That's utter tosh too. The whole leadership of Labour is just a bit of entertainment which will be enjoyed immensely whist they politically stab each other in the back. Keir Starmer is a lightweight with little political backstory bar being given a sinecure of a seat in 2015. His backstory as DPP is hardly stellar.

    Can you talk me through Boris Johnson’s glittering achievements and compelling back story before he became Tory leader?

    Err. He was Mayor of London for 8 years and was instrumental in winning the referendum. Apart from that, yes, just like Starmer.

    I mean, come on.
  • Jonathan said:

    Sandpit said:

    The Tory attacks in Starmer show clearly he is the one they fear. It’s pretty transparent.

    I think "fear" is pushing it somewhat, but he's the best of the bad bunch that is the Labour front bench.

    The electoral system used is going to make this a difficult market to work out (hands up who got the 100/1 on Corbyn as nominations closed in 2015?), it depends much more on factional voting, union and shad cab endorsements, than strength of character or argument.

    I think Starmer has a chance, but he needs a big union to fully back him if he is to have a realistic shot because of the organisational boost it would bring. Long Bailey will have the Unite and Momentum machines fully behind her, so she must be favourite. My choice would be Nandy, just as it has been for the last three years. Sadly, though, I doubt she’ll make the contest.

    Why Nandy? Can’t see it.

    I am looking for either a Kinnock or John Smith figure.
    Lisa Nandy is the only one of the potential candidates who is at least thinking about the problem. Unlike the rest of them, she's thinking about what, not who.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518

    Sandpit said:

    rkrkrk said:

    What odds do we reckon on whoever Labour choose in March actually fighting the next election in 2024?

    I know the media like to big this up, but in all honesty I think Labour can afford to make the wrong choice provided they are prepared to change if it isn't working out.

    In some ways, that's the more important issue at stake. We've no way of knowing who will be most effective against Boris. But whoever wins should commit to resigning if they aren't cutting through.

    Why is everyone assuming the next election will be in 2024? If the Tories are doing well it’s much more likely to be in 2023.

    Because the current law says the next election must take place on the first Thursday of May, 2024

    It will be repealed.

    I reckon the economy to go downhill pretty quickly (after an initial six months to a year when a lot of pent up investment might be released. He will go long.

    Johnson has no concept of money and is already splashing it about without the remotest indication of where it’s going to come from. Has anyone come up with any credible ideas yet? And there’s no law that says the markets always give a Tory PM the benefit of the doubt. Javid has his work cut out, and there’s little sign of him trying to reign Johnson in.
  • IanB2 said:

    FPT

    Does anyone know how Keir Starmer became a multi millionaire (if indeed he is)

    Keir Starmer QC?

    No, no idea (in fairness some of that may be in property assets).

    Labour is accused of 'vile hypocrisy' for tax raid on buy-to-let landlords despite a quarter of their front bench owning second homes
    Emily Thornberry owns three properties in her multimillion-pound portfolio
    Keir Starmer owns a £1.75million house in London and a £600,000 Surrey home


    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7465599/Labour-accused-hypocrisy-raid-landlords-despite-quarter-bench-owning-second-homes.html

    And his Wiki entry has just been edited to remove "multi millionaire".

    Carried out from an IP address in Northwest London:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/12/18/sir-keir-starmers-wikipedia-page-edited-ahead-expected-labour/
    Actually it’s the other way around. Go back a week and there wasn’t any such reference on the page. Over recent days someone has been trying very hard to insert that he is allegedly a millionaire into the article. Sometimes multiple times. Such that the page now has partial protection against vandalism.
    Interesting, the 'millionaire' insertions have come from Dundee and Wood Green, to name but two. In fairness Starmer has been so-described in the UK press.
    Being a millionaire is not nearly as difficult as it used to be, particularly when house prices in London and the value of pension pots is taken into account.
  • Of course the other thing about Starmer is that everyone f**king hates lawyers.

    Fake news.

    The country’s most electorally successful leader of recent times was a lawyer.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,777
    edited December 2019
    Jonathan said:

    Sandpit said:

    The Tory attacks in Starmer show clearly he is the one they fear. It’s pretty transparent.

    I think "fear" is pushing it somewhat, but he's the best of the bad bunch that is the Labour front bench.

    The electoral system used is going to make this a difficult market to work out (hands up who got the 100/1 on Corbyn as nominations closed in 2015?), it depends much more on factional voting, union and shad cab endorsements, than strength of character or argument.

    I think Starmer has a chance, but he needs a big union to fully back him if he is to have a realistic shot because of the organisational boost it would bring. Long Bailey will have the Unite and Momentum machines fully behind her, so she must be favourite. My choice would be Nandy, just as it has been for the last three years. Sadly, though, I doubt she’ll make the contest.

    Why Nandy? Can’t see it.

    I am looking for either a Kinnock or John Smith figure.
    Who do you think might have the strength of character, to do to the Momentum types today what Kinnock did to the Militant types back in the 1980s?
  • isamisam Posts: 40,851
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    FPT

    Does anyone know how Keir Starmer became a multi millionaire (if indeed he is)

    Keir Starmer QC?

    No, no idea (in fairness some of that may be in property assets).

    Labour is accused of 'vile hypocrisy' for tax raid on buy-to-let landlords despite a quarter of their front bench owning second homes
    Emily Thornberry owns three properties in her multimillion-pound portfolio
    Keir Starmer owns a £1.75million house in London and a £600,000 Surrey home


    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7465599/Labour-accused-hypocrisy-raid-landlords-despite-quarter-bench-owning-second-homes.html

    And his Wiki entry has just been edited to remove "multi millionaire".

    Carried out from an IP address in Northwest London:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/12/18/sir-keir-starmers-wikipedia-page-edited-ahead-expected-labour/
    Thanks

    Does he send his kids to the local comp one wonders. Amazing how the left enjoy wealth but try to airbrush it out.
    The Tory attack dogs.are on the hunt this morning.
    Attack dog . LOL. I just asked a simple question.
    You were straight in there on his kids, classy. Meanwhile the Telegraph are raiding his digital bins to create a thin story. And so it begins, as a Labour leader you either get a labelled a Marxist or a champagne socialist, sometimes both.
    "You were straight in there on his kids, classy."

    Implying square root is going in on Starmers kids has deliberately nasty undertones, really poor show. Asking which kind of school his kids go to is beyond legitimate
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,903
    For the Labour leadership, would welcome any insights on how unions are likely to go...

    Even in 2016, it seems Owen Smith got plenty of union support with unions such as GMB and USDAW backing him. The latter two are large enough to get a candidate over the 5% threshold.

    You'd imagine that any unions who were anti-Corbyn then, are likely to be anti-Corbynite this time...

    The worry for me as a member is that this system may reduce my choice quite a lot. Since we have AV, finest voting system known to humanity, we can afford to have more candidates on the ballot!
  • Worth a read. The myth of the Red Wall. It’s actually a bit better for Labour, but also a lot worse ...

    https://thecritic.co.uk/the-myth-of-the-red-wall/
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,777

    Sandpit said:

    rkrkrk said:

    What odds do we reckon on whoever Labour choose in March actually fighting the next election in 2024?

    I know the media like to big this up, but in all honesty I think Labour can afford to make the wrong choice provided they are prepared to change if it isn't working out.

    In some ways, that's the more important issue at stake. We've no way of knowing who will be most effective against Boris. But whoever wins should commit to resigning if they aren't cutting through.

    Why is everyone assuming the next election will be in 2024? If the Tories are doing well it’s much more likely to be in 2023.
    Because the current law says the next election must take place on the first Thursday of May, 2024
    It will be repealed.
    Let's hope so. FTPA can be added to the Dangerous Dogs Act and Firearms (Amendment) Act, as laws designed for a specific situation that ended up full of unintended consequences.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    Worth a read. The myth of the Red Wall. It’s actually a bit better for Labour, but also a lot worse ...

    https://thecritic.co.uk/the-myth-of-the-red-wall/

    There was little mention of the red wall before 2019. Curious that.
  • Of course the other thing about Starmer is that everyone f**king hates lawyers.

    Fake news.

    The country’s most electorally successful leader of recent times was a lawyer.
    ...who everyone now f**king hates....
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,456
    DavidL said:

    Alistair said:

    I continue to be utterly perplexed by what the DUP's goals and strategy was during the Brexit negotiation and votes.

    Did they... Did they actually believe Boris when he said no PM would ever put a border down the Irish Sea?

    Where they that thick?

    I found their positioning with May just bewildering but they were not alone in that respect. Just really, really stupid.
    They suffered the consequences, and IMHO these have only just started, of knowing what they did not want, and not knowing what they did. They have greatly increased the chance of a united Ireland.

    Could I thank the Green Machine for a fascinating analysis, which is far too rare my side of the water.

  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,184
    isam said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    FPT

    Does anyone know how Keir Starmer became a multi millionaire (if indeed he is)

    Keir Starmer QC?

    No, no idea (in fairness some of that may be in property assets).

    Labour is accused of 'vile hypocrisy' for tax raid on buy-to-let landlords despite a quarter of their front bench owning second homes
    Emily Thornberry owns three properties in her multimillion-pound portfolio
    Keir Starmer owns a £1.75million house in London and a £600,000 Surrey home


    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7465599/Labour-accused-hypocrisy-raid-landlords-despite-quarter-bench-owning-second-homes.html

    And his Wiki entry has just been edited to remove "multi millionaire".

    Carried out from an IP address in Northwest London:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/12/18/sir-keir-starmers-wikipedia-page-edited-ahead-expected-labour/
    Thanks

    Does he send his kids to the local comp one wonders. Amazing how the left enjoy wealth but try to airbrush it out.
    The Tory attack dogs.are on the hunt this morning.
    Attack dog . LOL. I just asked a simple question.
    You were straight in there on his kids, classy. Meanwhile the Telegraph are raiding his digital bins to create a thin story. And so it begins, as a Labour leader you either get a labelled a Marxist or a champagne socialist, sometimes both.
    "You were straight in there on his kids, classy."

    Implying square root is going in on Starmers kids has deliberately nasty undertones, really poor show. Asking which kind of school his kids go to is beyond legitimate
    Given Starmer is/was part of Corbyn's shadow cabinet, it will be reasonable to ask him for his views on a number of areas such as private schools. He needs to be clear about what he thinks and, where there are differences with Corbyn, why he thought it better to stay in the shadow cabinet.
  • Sandpit said:

    Jonathan said:

    Sandpit said:

    The Tory attacks in Starmer show clearly he is the one they fear. It’s pretty transparent.

    I think "fear" is pushing it somewhat, but he's the best of the bad bunch that is the Labour front bench.

    The electoral system used is going to make this a difficult market to work out (hands up who got the 100/1 on Corbyn as nominations closed in 2015?), it depends much more on factional voting, union and shad cab endorsements, than strength of character or argument.

    I think Starmer has a chance, but he needs a big union to fully back him if he is to have a realistic shot because of the organisational boost it would bring. Long Bailey will have the Unite and Momentum machines fully behind her, so she must be favourite. My choice would be Nandy, just as it has been for the last three years. Sadly, though, I doubt she’ll make the contest.

    Why Nandy? Can’t see it.

    I am looking for either a Kinnock or John Smith figure.
    Who do you think might have the strength of character, to do to the Momentum types today what Kinnock did to the Militant types back in the 1980s?

    Kinnock did what the majority of the party elected him to do. That’s why he succeeded. Labour is in a far worse position in 2019. No potential leader wanting to change things can say so before being elected. No-one wins any election by telling voters they are wrong.

  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,866
    Quite a lot of whistling in the dark going on. My expectation is that the FTPA will be repealed; it's got, as part of the original Act, to be re-examined next year anyway. I suspect that the worry is that we won't go back to the situation before; when the election HAD to be held no later than 5 years after it's predecessor and will be left in the gift of the PM, although I really can't see that getting through even this Parliament.

    What I wonder about is what happens when Boris presents his...... what was it 30+ pages Bill about withdrawal ...... and says 'Right, you've got two Parliamentary days to debate it'.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,777

    IanB2 said:

    FPT

    Does anyone know how Keir Starmer became a multi millionaire (if indeed he is)

    Keir Starmer QC?

    No, no idea (in fairness some of that may be in property assets).

    Labour is accused of 'vile hypocrisy' for tax raid on buy-to-let landlords despite a quarter of their front bench owning second homes
    Emily Thornberry owns three properties in her multimillion-pound portfolio
    Keir Starmer owns a £1.75million house in London and a £600,000 Surrey home


    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7465599/Labour-accused-hypocrisy-raid-landlords-despite-quarter-bench-owning-second-homes.html

    And his Wiki entry has just been edited to remove "multi millionaire".

    Carried out from an IP address in Northwest London:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/12/18/sir-keir-starmers-wikipedia-page-edited-ahead-expected-labour/
    Actually it’s the other way around. Go back a week and there wasn’t any such reference on the page. Over recent days someone has been trying very hard to insert that he is allegedly a millionaire into the article. Sometimes multiple times. Such that the page now has partial protection against vandalism.
    Interesting, the 'millionaire' insertions have come from Dundee and Wood Green, to name but two. In fairness Starmer has been so-described in the UK press.
    Being a millionaire is not nearly as difficult as it used to be, particularly when house prices in London and the value of pension pots is taken into account.
    Indeed so.

    But to anyone who doesn't live in London or have a massive pension pot - 90% of the country - it's still a clear indication that he is one of 'them' rather than one of 'us'.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    Sandpit said:

    Jonathan said:

    Sandpit said:

    The Tory attacks in Starmer show clearly he is the one they fear. It’s pretty transparent.

    I think "fear" is pushing it somewhat, but he's the best of the bad bunch that is the Labour front bench.

    The electoral system used is going to make this a difficult market to work out (hands up who got the 100/1 on Corbyn as nominations closed in 2015?), it depends much more on factional voting, union and shad cab endorsements, than strength of character or argument.

    I think Starmer has a chance, but he needs a big union to fully back him if he is to have a realistic shot because of the organisational boost it would bring. Long Bailey will have the Unite and Momentum machines fully behind her, so she must be favourite. My choice would be Nandy, just as it has been for the last three years. Sadly, though, I doubt she’ll make the contest.

    Why Nandy? Can’t see it.

    I am looking for either a Kinnock or John Smith figure.
    Who do you think might have the strength of character, to do to the Momentum types today what Kinnock did to the Militant types back in the 1980s?

    Kinnock did what the majority of the party elected him to do. That’s why he succeeded. Labour is in a far worse position in 2019. No potential leader wanting to change things can say so before being elected. No-one wins any election by telling voters they are wrong.

    In 1983 Kinnock was elected as the continuity left wing candidate.
  • The Tory attacks in Starmer show clearly he is the one they fear. It’s pretty transparent.


    That's utter tosh too. The whole leadership of Labour is just a bit of entertainment which will be enjoyed immensely whist they politically stab each other in the back. Keir Starmer is a lightweight with little political backstory bar being given a sinecure of a seat in 2015. His backstory as DPP is hardly stellar.

    Can you talk me through Boris Johnson’s glittering achievements and compelling back story before he became Tory leader?

    Err. He was Mayor of London for 8 years and was instrumental in winning the referendum. Apart from that, yes, just like Starmer.

    I mean, come on.

    I just don’t see beating Ken Livingstone as a major achievement.

  • Useful on Labour's top echelons (pre-GE):

    https://ig.ft.com/jeremy-corbyn-labour-inner-circles/
  • isamisam Posts: 40,851
    edited December 2019

    Worth a read. The myth of the Red Wall. It’s actually a bit better for Labour, but also a lot worse ...

    https://thecritic.co.uk/the-myth-of-the-red-wall/

    Good graphic. If you make paint some of the seats Labour lost to the Conservatives a different colour, it doesn't look so much like a 'red wall'



  • Anyhoo, I’ve watched The Rise Of Skywalker and I’m about to post a huge Star Wars spoiler.


  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    Anyhoo, I’ve watched The Rise Of Skywalker and I’m about to post a huge Star Wars spoiler.


    Worth going?
  • Anyhoo, I’ve watched The Rise Of Skywalker and I’m about to post a huge Star Wars spoiler.


    The reviews have not been good. Is it worth watching?
  • eekeek Posts: 24,875
    The Labour party have no money after the election - exactly how does Mr Reynolds think the labour party is going to get the money required to continue paying them?
  • eekeek Posts: 24,875

    Anyhoo, I’ve watched The Rise Of Skywalker and I’m about to post a huge Star Wars spoiler.


    Any good? Off to see it tonight and the only thing I care about is will I be disappointed?
  • isamisam Posts: 40,851
    edited December 2019

    The Tory attacks in Starmer show clearly he is the one they fear. It’s pretty transparent.


    That's utter tosh too. The whole leadership of Labour is just a bit of entertainment which will be enjoyed immensely whist they politically stab each other in the back. Keir Starmer is a lightweight with little political backstory bar being given a sinecure of a seat in 2015. His backstory as DPP is hardly stellar.

    Can you talk me through Boris Johnson’s glittering achievements and compelling back story before he became Tory leader?

    Err. He was Mayor of London for 8 years and was instrumental in winning the referendum. Apart from that, yes, just like Starmer.

    I mean, come on.

    I just don’t see beating Ken Livingstone as a major achievement.

    What about David Cameron?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,915
    edited December 2019
    Jonathan said:

    Anyhoo, I’ve watched The Rise Of Skywalker and I’m about to post a huge Star Wars spoiler.


    Worth going?
    I watched Knives Out last night with my partner which was brilliant and certainly has got better reviews than the final Star Wars instalment which seems to be worse than Last Jedi which I enjoyed.

    I will still go though to wrap up the saga and while it will be OK ignore the hype, there are better movies out there at the moment
  • Jonathan said:

    Sandpit said:

    Jonathan said:

    Sandpit said:

    The Tory attacks in Starmer show clearly he is the one they fear. It’s pretty transparent.

    I think "fear" is pushing it somewhat, but he's the best of the bad bunch that is the Labour front bench.

    The electoral system used is going to make this a difficult market to work out (hands up who got the 100/1 on Corbyn as nominations closed in 2015?), it depends much more on factional voting, union and shad cab endorsements, than strength of character or argument.

    I think Starmer has a chance, but he needs a big union to fully back him if he is to have a realistic shot because of the organisational boost it would bring. Long Bailey will have the Unite and Momentum machines fully behind her, so she must be favourite. My choice would be Nandy, just as it has been for the last three years. Sadly, though, I doubt she’ll make the contest.

    Why Nandy? Can’t see it.

    I am looking for either a Kinnock or John Smith figure.
    Who do you think might have the strength of character, to do to the Momentum types today what Kinnock did to the Militant types back in the 1980s?

    Kinnock did what the majority of the party elected him to do. That’s why he succeeded. Labour is in a far worse position in 2019. No potential leader wanting to change things can say so before being elected. No-one wins any election by telling voters they are wrong.

    In 1983 Kinnock was elected as the continuity left wing candidate.

    Indeed.

  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,777

    Sandpit said:

    Jonathan said:

    Sandpit said:

    The Tory attacks in Starmer show clearly he is the one they fear. It’s pretty transparent.

    I think "fear" is pushing it somewhat, but he's the best of the bad bunch that is the Labour front bench.

    The electoral system used is going to make this a difficult market to work out (hands up who got the 100/1 on Corbyn as nominations closed in 2015?), it depends much more on factional voting, union and shad cab endorsements, than strength of character or argument.

    I think Starmer has a chance, but he needs a big union to fully back him if he is to have a realistic shot because of the organisational boost it would bring. Long Bailey will have the Unite and Momentum machines fully behind her, so she must be favourite. My choice would be Nandy, just as it has been for the last three years. Sadly, though, I doubt she’ll make the contest.

    Why Nandy? Can’t see it.

    I am looking for either a Kinnock or John Smith figure.
    Who do you think might have the strength of character, to do to the Momentum types today what Kinnock did to the Militant types back in the 1980s?

    Kinnock did what the majority of the party elected him to do. That’s why he succeeded. Labour is in a far worse position in 2019. No potential leader wanting to change things can say so before being elected. No-one wins any election by telling voters they are wrong.

    The major question of this election therefore, is do the membership understand that the proposition of today's Labour party is the problem, or do they think it was Corbyn personally and the evil Tory media?

    If they decide it's one more heave under someone who's not Corbyn, then we get someone like R L-B, and if they decide that they need to tack towards the more centrist floating votes then they go for someone like Starmer.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,915
    So Trump impeached by the Democrat House of Representatives as expected, the Republican controlled Senate though still likely to vote against conviction
  • eekeek Posts: 24,875
    HYUFD said:

    Jonathan said:

    Anyhoo, I’ve watched The Rise Of Skywalker and I’m about to post a huge Star Wars spoiler.


    Worth going?
    I watched Knives Out last night with my partner which was brilliant and certainly has got better reviews than the final Star Wars instalment which seems to be worse than Last Jedi which I enjoyed.

    I will still go though to wrap up the saga and while it will be OK ignore the hype, there are better movies out there at the moment
    Probably not at most cinemas - which from Friday will mainly be showing Star Wars or Cats on most screens.

    And the reviews for Cats are not kind - the Telegraph review is worth reading for it's cattiness.
  • Sandpit said:

    IanB2 said:

    FPT

    Does anyone know how Keir Starmer became a multi millionaire (if indeed he is)

    Keir Starmer QC?

    No, no idea (in fairness some of that may be in property assets).

    Labour is accused of 'vile hypocrisy' for tax raid on buy-to-let landlords despite a quarter of their front bench owning second homes
    Emily Thornberry owns three properties in her multimillion-pound portfolio
    Keir Starmer owns a £1.75million house in London and a £600,000 Surrey home


    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7465599/Labour-accused-hypocrisy-raid-landlords-despite-quarter-bench-owning-second-homes.html

    And his Wiki entry has just been edited to remove "multi millionaire".

    Carried out from an IP address in Northwest London:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/12/18/sir-keir-starmers-wikipedia-page-edited-ahead-expected-labour/
    Actually it’s the other way around. Go back a week and there wasn’t any such reference on the page. Over recent days someone has been trying very hard to insert that he is allegedly a millionaire into the article. Sometimes multiple times. Such that the page now has partial protection against vandalism.
    Interesting, the 'millionaire' insertions have come from Dundee and Wood Green, to name but two. In fairness Starmer has been so-described in the UK press.
    Being a millionaire is not nearly as difficult as it used to be, particularly when house prices in London and the value of pension pots is taken into account.
    Indeed so.

    But to anyone who doesn't live in London or have a massive pension pot - 90% of the country - it's still a clear indication that he is one of 'them' rather than one of 'us'.

    He is not as rich as the Prime Minister and actually worked for everything he achieved. Working class aspiration and success are good things. It’s what Labour was established to enable. Sadly, too many in the party have forgotten that.

  • eekeek Posts: 24,875
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Jonathan said:

    Sandpit said:

    The Tory attacks in Starmer show clearly he is the one they fear. It’s pretty transparent.

    I think "fear" is pushing it somewhat, but he's the best of the bad bunch that is the Labour front bench.

    The electoral system used is going to make this a difficult market to work out (hands up who got the 100/1 on Corbyn as nominations closed in 2015?), it depends much more on factional voting, union and shad cab endorsements, than strength of character or argument.

    I think Starmer has a chance, but he needs a big union to fully back him if he is to have a realistic shot because of the organisational boost it would bring. Long Bailey will have the Unite and Momentum machines fully behind her, so she must be favourite. My choice would be Nandy, just as it has been for the last three years. Sadly, though, I doubt she’ll make the contest.

    Why Nandy? Can’t see it.

    I am looking for either a Kinnock or John Smith figure.
    Who do you think might have the strength of character, to do to the Momentum types today what Kinnock did to the Militant types back in the 1980s?

    Kinnock did what the majority of the party elected him to do. That’s why he succeeded. Labour is in a far worse position in 2019. No potential leader wanting to change things can say so before being elected. No-one wins any election by telling voters they are wrong.

    The major question of this election therefore, is do the membership understand that the proposition of today's Labour party is the problem, or do they think it was Corbyn personally and the evil Tory media?

    If they decide it's one more heave under someone who's not Corbyn, then we get someone like R L-B, and if they decide that they need to tack towards the more centrist floating votes then they go for someone like Starmer.
    Given what's left of the labout party membership - it's one more heave and another when that flops.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,395
    Thanks to The Green Machine for a very interesting header. Politics in Northern Ireland seems finally shifting a bit, though perhaps the more interesting bit will he the next Stormont elections. Watching the news of the NI NHS last night, there really does need to be a government soon. The current state is intolerable.
This discussion has been closed.