….I actually thought Starmer handled PMQs really well.
Current Affairs The Labour Party
- Thread starter Number_25
- Start date
- Status
davek
Player Valuation: £150m
He opposed a ceasefire to a conflict that's already claimed 6,000 lives.
Do you call that handling matters "really well"...
….I don’t think he‘s ever said he’s ‘opposed’ to a ceasefire. if he’s said that, I’d be interested in seeing the quote. Defending Israel‘s right to go after Hamas is not the same as saying he ‘opposes a ceasefire’.
I thought his questions were statesmanlike, reasoned, balanced and appreciative of the delicate situation at play. He’s looking more Prime Ministerial than the Prime Minister. Well done Starmer.
davek
Player Valuation: £150m
There's something very sinister about Starmer and his connections.
ADAM RAMSAY: How big business took over the Labour Party
Corporate lobbyists have successfully pushed Keir Starmer’s party to ditch its progressive policies
www.opendemocracy.net
Yes and keep the Tories in while youre at it, bravo Dave. Take a bow. This was a "Party Political broadcast for the Conservative party" by Rishi Davek.
davek
Player Valuation: £150m
The Tories won't do any worse than Starmer's lot will. There'll be no difference.
Better to crush'Labour' and start again with a new party of the left funded by the unions.
We've needed an alternative to 'Labour' for decades now, and Corbyn's time in office underlined why it's not possible to have progress inside the LP.
Yes and thoroughly deserves it mate he's earned it.
So Starmer has listened to his Muslim Councillors and again backed International law and now he's a hypocrite...seems Starmer can not win with you Dave, stinks of an agenda maybe Dave.
davek
Player Valuation: £150m
No, he hasn't listened to them. They are calling for a ceasefire and no more atrocities in Gaza; Starmer is saying that Israel must be allowed to do that in order to "defend" itself.
They are diametrically opposed and it wasn't a pacification it was a reinforcement of his original hamfisted assertions.
BTW he also won't let any LP member attend pro-Palestinian demonstrations this weekend, that's how much he's listening.
Don't make any excuses for the Manchurian Candidate.
….the only reason the loony lefties want to take over Labour is because they have absolutely no chance of ever forming a Government in this country if they started their own party.
I’d be all for them breaking away and keeping their agenda to themselves. The Labour Party would lose votes but I think mainly in its heartlands and not enough for it to lose seats.
To win elections Labour needs to attract conservative and floating voters, which is exactly what Blair did and exactly what Starmer is trying to do. Good luck to Starmer, let the lefties go and do their own thing.
Are you happy for the left not to have any sort of say in the labour party anymore?
There's plenty of moderate left wing voices who aren't being heard in the labour party. This is different to Blair who saw the need to modernise the labour party, but had people in the party still making sure he kept to certain labour traditions of supporting the working classes.
…I like a mixed church but not warring divisions. When you have people like Dave who permanently undermine the Labour Party then those people need to find their own place otherwise it’s too divisive.
So let Margaret Starmer in for a turn at the trough? Out of even handedness' sake?
Well, hold on there. It's "the Left" (in the guise of one particularly insistent poster) who are vociferously complaining and imploring others to leave the party. The context of them 'breaking away' in the post you're replying to is because that's what they apparently want to do.
I would be happy to have anybody choosing to lose their voice not having any sort of say.
I would be happier still to have as wide as possible a coalition of left-leaning voters involved to lock the Tories out of power forever, but that's not how democracy works - no voting coalition stays stable as society evolves.
Last edited:
- Status