Mailwatch(ed) Forum

Didn’t expect it, but it throws a massive spanner in the works of the anti-Starmer mob.

To be honest, I think this and the blocking of a couple of other candidates is a combination of a big rush from the snap election meaning things are hurried, and (regrettably) a few people with axes to grind taking an opportunity. Which is regrettable, but it’s good to see the Labour top team briefing back on it rather than just staying silent.

I also suspect there’s a lot of media amplification because the Tories and allies will take literally any opportunity.

I'm not sure Starmer has sanctioned Rayner's intervention.

Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Thu May 30, 2024 2:36 pm I'm not sure Starmer has sanctioned Rayner's intervention.

Given he’s said the same thing, even if he hasn’t I can’t see it being an issue.

I took him as meaning as "she'll be barred next week". But I might be wrong.

I'm actually - genuinely - a bit concerned about Diane. She is clearly unwell.

I just saw an extended clip on the news of her having to be led by two helpers, one on each side, forward to speak to her supporters at Hackney town hall.

When she spoke using a hand held microphone, her hands were shaking like crazy. Her voice too was wobbling.

Now I have no medical expertise, but goodness, it's a concern.

I now think she should just be allowed to run if she really wants to.

Neither Starmer nor Rayner have said Abbott should be barred from standing, the only person who has is Abbott herself. Seems to be a lot of fuss over very little

I think The Times said she was banned, didn't they? We don't know who told them (if anyone). But party sources have some considerable recent previous, so I can see why they're not exactly getting the benefit of the doubt.

Think it's unlikely Abbott is barred now.

Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Thu May 30, 2024 8:37 pm I think The Times said she was banned, didn't they? We don't know who told them (if anyone). But party sources have some considerable recent previous, so I can see why they're not exactly getting the benefit of the doubt.

Think it's unlikely Abbott is barred now.

Doesn't matter as long as the "banning" has taken root in the public consciousness. Then it's Ban Row MP, Controversial Ban Row Drags On, How Many More Fear Banning?, Starmer Flip-Flops on Candidate Bans, Just Who Is Now Banned?, Labour in MP Ban Denial, and No Bans On My Watch Says Boris.

One of the people really winding this up is Beth Rigby on Sky News. Like a small dog with an even smaller bone.

Shit stirring is cheap, and you don't have to leave the studio.

Andy McDandy wrote: ↑Fri May 31, 2024 10:40 am
Doesn't matter as long as the "banning" has taken root in the public consciousness. Then it's Ban Row MP, Controversial Ban Row Drags On, How Many More Fear Banning?, Starmer Flip-Flops on Candidate Bans, Just Who Is Now Banned?, Labour in MP Ban Denial, and No Bans On My Watch Says Boris.

I think if she's not banned, lots of this stuff goes away. Nobody's really mention Lloyd Russell-Moyle. It's a personal thing with Abbott's fame.

It's totally overshadowed the Great British Energy stuff.

Pundit on LBC claimed Tory MPs have been sympathetic to Diane Abbot because if this is how ruthless Starmer is to own side, what’s he got in store for us?
That view has brightened up a very miserable day.

LBC are quoting Starmer saying "Diane is free to stand as a Labour MP"

https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/diane-abbott ... n-starmer/

No she isn't - she's 'free to go forward'. The NEC can still veto her.

Which is what he's been saying all along.

So LBC have made up the quote? I wonder if they have a recording?

Oboogie wrote: ↑Fri May 31, 2024 3:21 pm So LBC have made up the quote? I wonder if they have a recording?

Sky and the Guardian are also using the same quote.
Where did you get the "free to go foreword" quote from, Malc?

Unlikely the NEC vetoes, I’d have thought. Though judging by the administrative incompetence so far in this matter, I can’t rule it out.

Oboogie wrote: ↑Fri May 31, 2024 3:21 pm So LBC have made up the quote? I wonder if they have a recording?

That's what they quoted in the text.

Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Fri May 31, 2024 3:31 pm Unlikely the NEC vetoes, I’d have thought. Though judging by the administrative incompetence so far in this matter, I can’t rule it out.

There hasn't been any incompetence, the party rules have been followed.

SCG briefings to the Times and Abbot's mendacity, aided by press looking for a good story to pin on Starmer, have led to a shitstorm.

I think a long suspension was perfectly in order, but there was no need for this to still be going on in the actual election campaign. That's incompetence.