Starmer’s challenge: LAB starts in an almost impossible position – politicalbetting.com

Getting a bit boring now...

Stocky said:

The crime section could be a Conservative speech couldn't it?

A dull conservative speech

He’s gone from rather good to notably dreary in 5 minutes

He's going big on planning.

So why didn't they use the word in the back drop slogan?

"Where's Mandelson?" yells a cult loon.

About to have you thrown out of the party mate.

The lefty cultists really are running out of steam with these heckles aren’t they..

Richard_Tyndall said:

Bit disingenuous there. Claiming he was shocked when he found out 98% of rape cases don't end in a criminal conviction.

What was he doing all that time he was DPP and head of the CPS?

These have been the same numbers for years. Did he not know what was going on when he was the man responsible for prosecutions?

Does he actually mean "complaints" rather than cases?

“NHS waiting lists are at a record’

Yeah, mate, we’ve just had a fucking global plague

Mexicanpete said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Slackbladder said:

I don't think anyone can say that Starmer is not an honest decent man.

But is he a good politician?

I say that he's not an honest decent man.

He stood shoulder-to-shoulder with Corbyn for years.

Johnson was in May's Cabinet before he stabbed her in the front, but that's different?

May was atrocious but she was no Corbyn.

Starmer stayed shoulder-to-should with Corbyn through the whole antisemitism drama and stuck with him to the bitter end. He stood on the platform of being in Corbyn's Cabinet and making Corbyn PM even after all the antisemitism stuff was public knowledge.

He put his career first. He's a careerist not principled and he has no honesty.

Razedabode said:

The lefty cultists really are running out of steam with these heckles aren’t they..

Raging at the dying of the light. There were rumours they are planning to start yet another new socialist party. Let's hope they sod off and do just that.

Slackbladder said:

Stocky said:

The crime section could be a Conservative speech couldn't it?

It's not very 'labour' is it...

It's what Labour needs to be.

MattW said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

MattW said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

MattW said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

DavidL said:

Philip_Thompson said:

DavidL said:

Yet another front that Labour is now facing is the threat to their dominance amongst ethnic minorities. This government is by far the most racially diverse we have ever had and it is not even close. The modern Conservative party has excellent role models for many ethnic minorities and has shown that there is no glass ceiling for them either.

There are some interesting numbers in this site re the number of seats held by the respective parties and the percentage of the population that is non white: https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/ge2019-how-did-demographics-affect-the-result/
Other than 1 extreme outlier the Tories have traditionally done very badly in such seats. If that starts to change Labour are in deep trouble. And I think it will, especially with those of an Indian background. If Rishi replaces Boris those risks will be all the greater.

Especially since the Tories don't talk down to minorities like Labour can tend to do so.

The modern Tories are extremely comfortable with people of all races without needing to divide people against each other.

There are of course still some not so modern Tories but they are increasingly far away from the power centre of the party. Its a very good thing.

I think you are deluded. Mild racism and overt homophobia was rife in the Conservative Party among the more right wing of the activists when I was involved over 10 years ago. Those are the people that are still members and activists today. Most of the more liberally minded individuals have left. There is diversity in the upper echelons of the party and that is a good thing, but there is still plenty of prejudice, and while some wish to deny it the anti-EU rhetoric is essentially xenophobic in not all, but most.

Is there research less than a decade old on this?

Genuine question.

It would need to be very recent research as Conservative Party membership has trebled in the last couple of years.

Quite interested - do you have a source for Tory membership going down to 70k? I have seen speculative numbers but nothing more.

Currently it is around 200-220k, and I'd agree with "nearly doubled".

As to who they all are, I don't know.

The numbers that would really interest me are 1 - Age profile, and 2 - Has there been a tilt to the Midlands / North.

Since the Conservatives do not publish annual figures like the other parties, there can only be what you call speculation but are probably leaks from CCHQ. 60 or 70,000 was widely reported. Note that even now after the recent trebling of membership, they are really only back to where they were during the Labour years.

A quick google finds this, for instance:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/tories-party-membership-boris-johnson-b1823310.html

Anyway, the point is that the recent influx of new members (not entryists because that only happens to Labour!) means any research on party members' attitudes or beliefs is probably unreliable if more than 2 or 3 years old.

Exactly. I'm aware of that, and the Indy is not exactly a reliable source.

That's likely based on a bit of speculation from here, where the actual number never goes below 100k.
https://copov.blogspot.com/search?q=membership

iirc the party's accounts showed a huge fall in income from membership fees, and a subsequent rise. You will notice in your link that party chair Brandon Lewis does not deny the 60 or 70,000 figures, he fudges over them and announces the rise.

What does that actually mean? Prevention better than cure and all that yes.

https://twitter.com/GuidoFawkes/status/1443180241585950724

Labour is two different parties isn't it...

God it’s dull now

There’s a robot on a ward

Lol

SandyRentool said:

Nigelb said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Sandpit said:

CarlottaVance said:

The "future of aviation".....in a 36 year old aircraft:

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/winners-of-3-million-zero-emission-flight-aviation-competition-announced

It's a Dornier Aurigny sold them earlier this year....

15 projects given a total of £700,000. Can’t see that going too far, when trying to do anything involving aeroplanes.

It needs something like the X Prize. A $10mn prize for a jumbo jet design that is purely electric...

Simply not feasible.
Electric will be short/medium haul, and single aisle aircraft.

The big jets will need synthetic fuel manufactured using renewable electric, which is a decade off at least, but is entirely feasible given the cash being thrown at developing more efficient processes (and the early results from that).

Biomass gasification followed by Fischer Tropsch Synthesis gives you very good 'drop in' synthetic Jet-A1. Then you get to pretend that the CO2 coming out of the back end of the jet engines isn't really there.

That's quite likely the stopgap solution.

Richard_Nabavi said:

Really smart move by Starmer's team to hire these actors and get them to heckle so ludicrously.

A masterstroke. Pity they couldn't get Hatton out of retirement.

Starmer is on about the white heat of the technological revolution.

londonpubman said:

Getting a bit boring now...

As of 12:48 in my google doc, where the speech is cut and paste, we are currently on page 12 of 25

https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1443180885835231236

It's ok but ...

We remember Kinnock's speech from 1985. We won't remember this one for long.

rottenborough said:

(((Dan Hodges)))
@DPJHodges
·
8m
My main takeaway from this is Keir Starmer is a decent guy and his party is still a bit of a rabble.

He IS a decent guy and is intelligent and strategic. He is positioning as New Labour did but without the charisma. Blair was easy to like - much more so than Starmer, who comes over as being overly earnest, droning, chiding and somewhat flat, monotone and a little insincere yet overly sentimental (though I don't think he actually does lack sincerity).

He is totally focused on gaining power ahead of holding (or at least revealing) specific policy or an underpinning ideology. To get Red Wall voters back this is what he has to do.

If you can stomach the cynicism I still think he was Labour's best choice at the time.

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Starmer is on about the white heat of the technological revolution.

If he follows that up with some more Wilsonian and less Mandelsonian party management skills and tactics, he could yet be Prime Minister.

Stocky said:

rottenborough said:

(((Dan Hodges)))
@DPJHodges
·
8m
My main takeaway from this is Keir Starmer is a decent guy and his party is still a bit of a rabble.

He IS a decent guy and is intelligent and strategic. He is positioning as New Labour did but without the charisma. Blair was easy to like - much more so than Starmer, who comes over as being overly earnest, droning, chiding and somewhat flat, monotone and a little insincere yet overly sentimental (though I don't think he actually does lack sincerity).

He is totally focused on gaining power ahead of holding (or at least revealing) specific policy or an underpinning ideology. To get Red Wall voters back this is what he has to do.

If you can stomach the cynicism I still think he was Labour's best choice at the time.

The difference is that New labour was united (mostly) and firing on all cyclinders with many people working together.

Starmer feels like he's trying to herd cats.

WhisperingOracle said:

rottenborough said:

Razedabode said:

The lefty cultists really are running out of steam with these heckles aren’t they..

Raging at the dying of the light. There were rumours they are planning to start yet another new socialist party. Let's hope they sod off and do just that.

If I were Starmer, I would hope not.

It won't take any voters with it, just like Change didn't from the other wing. Except maybe BJO.

Stocky said:

rottenborough said:

(((Dan Hodges)))
@DPJHodges
·
8m
My main takeaway from this is Keir Starmer is a decent guy and his party is still a bit of a rabble.

He IS a decent guy and is intelligent and strategic. He is positioning as New Labour did but without the charisma. Blair was easy to like - much more so than Starmer, who comes over as being overly earnest, droning, chiding and somewhat flat, monotone and a little insincere yet overly sentimental (though I don't think he actually does lack sincerity).

He is totally focused on gaining power ahead of holding (or at least revealing) specific policy or an underpinning ideology. To get Red Wall voters back this is what he has to do.

If you can stomach the cynicism I still think he was Labour's best choice at the time.

If he was so decent why was he prepared to stand with the far left and stand against those who were opposing antisemitism in 2019? Why did he put his career before saying that antisemitism is wrong?

If he'd have had the courage to stab Corbyn in the front then maybe he'd be decent. But then maybe he'd have not become Labour Leader and his career came first.

Starmers a bit of a traditional Tory isn't he....3r's and all that.

"Curriculum for the future" is a good line tbh.
This is pure our 'arold.

Apparently this speech is 7,286 words long

Starmer's speech generally good overall in terms of targeting swing voters, apart from that bit he just did where he attacked Boris for reintroducing Latin in state schools which was a bit philistine

Artificial intelligence will fix special needs education ... Hmm.

Has he said anything on Independent Schools, yet?

Mexicanpete said:

WhisperingOracle said:

rottenborough said:

Razedabode said:

The lefty cultists really are running out of steam with these heckles aren’t they..

Raging at the dying of the light. There were rumours they are planning to start yet another new socialist party. Let's hope they sod off and do just that.

If I were Starmer, I would hope not.

It won't take any voters with it, just like Change didn't from the other wing. Except maybe BJO.

Hecklers have nodded off.

Someone is heckling by… cheerful whistling?

Leon said:

This is seriously trite now

Totally forgettable. The only really memorable bit (to date) is his excellent put-down of the hecklers - ‘changing nations, not changing slogans’

That’s what people will take-away. Might be rather good for Labour

He is becoming boring because his speech is too long

bigjohnowls said:

Mexicanpete said:

WhisperingOracle said:

rottenborough said:

Razedabode said:

The lefty cultists really are running out of steam with these heckles aren’t they..

Raging at the dying of the light. There were rumours they are planning to start yet another new socialist party. Let's hope they sod off and do just that.

If I were Starmer, I would hope not.

It won't take any voters with it, just like Change didn't from the other wing. Except maybe BJO.

Hecklers have nodded off.

Just woke up with "£15 an hour"

An hour in, and half way through. Really?

Needs to be 45 minutes total, unless he wants half the room to be asleep by the end.

Here he comes, £15 per hour

CorrectHorseBattery said:

I think this is a very good speech - but what do I know

I think, on a lot of it if not necessarily all, you're right. ;.)

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Apparently this speech is 7,286 words long

It seems longer and I only tuned in 5 mins ago

Get Boris on lets have some razzmatazz with our Tory policies

That 150/170 stat is shocking. I hope someone's checked it. (Actually, for the sake of the country, I hope it is wrong.)

bigjohnowls said:

bigjohnowls said:

Mexicanpete said:

WhisperingOracle said:

rottenborough said:

Razedabode said:

The lefty cultists really are running out of steam with these heckles aren’t they..

Raging at the dying of the light. There were rumours they are planning to start yet another new socialist party. Let's hope they sod off and do just that.

If I were Starmer, I would hope not.

It won't take any voters with it, just like Change didn't from the other wing. Except maybe BJO.

Hecklers have nodded off.

Just woke up with "£15 an hour"

Starmer's big plan for the youth is £15 an hour retooling a mill in Yorkshire ?

DecrepiterJohnL said:

That 150/170 stat is shocking. I hope someone's checked it. (Actually, for the sake of the country, I hope it is wrong.)

For those not watching it, what was the stat?

I haven't seen anything in this speech which you can actually identify as 'left wing'.

Why is that guy recording it on his phone? Doesn't he know it will be on telly?

DecrepiterJohnL said:

HYUFD said:

Starmer's speech generally good overall in terms of targeting swing voters, apart from that bit he just did where he attacked Boris for reintroducing Latin in state schools which was a bit philistine

Perhaps. In the long term, both parties need to recognise that introducing or increasing modern work skills to the national curriculum will mean squeezing out old stuff whether that be Latin or oxbow lakes or the unification of Italy.

I don't see why. Education should be precisely that, broad, at least until 14 certainly.

After that and certainly after GCSEs comes the time more can specialise in modern work skills/vocational courses or more intellectual A levels as they wish

An hour in and he tells us

‘We have to build a strong economy’

Ffs

RobD said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

That 150/170 stat is shocking. I hope someone's checked it. (Actually, for the sake of the country, I hope it is wrong.)

For those not watching it, what was the stat?

150th out of 170 countries in investment.

DecrepiterJohnL said:

RobD said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

That 150/170 stat is shocking. I hope someone's checked it. (Actually, for the sake of the country, I hope it is wrong.)

For those not watching it, what was the stat?

150th out of 170 countries in investment.

Seems shockingly low.

A fly, apparently driven crazy by boredom, just attacked him