Page 127 of 152

Re: Keir Starmer

Posted: Sat Feb 10, 2024 8:18 pm
by davidjay
I preferred that lot when they sold papers outside tube stations.

Re: Keir Starmer

Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2024 4:37 am
by Oboogie
Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Sat Feb 10, 2024 7:04 pm Co-founder of Extinction Rebellion here, with "Keir Starmer is Eichmann ".

If The Mail or Telegraph ever see that, we'll never hear the end of it. That's exactly how they like to portray everyone Left of Jacob Rees-Mogg.

Re: Keir Starmer

Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2024 2:48 pm
by Bones McCoy
Why is old Neil Kinnock in the dock?

Re: Keir Starmer

Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2024 3:18 pm
by Tubby Isaacs
There's a lot of "where will the growth come from now?" bollocks about Labour. The total amount to be spent hasn't changed. So I don't see why growth should be any lower over the next 5 years. The better question is "how much decarbonisation do we need, and is this enough to get there?"

Re: Keir Starmer

Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2024 3:29 pm
by Tubby Isaacs
Nicely framed here by The Independent guy I've called out before. I thought they were likely to drop this because America doesn't like it at all.


Re: Keir Starmer

Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2024 3:51 pm
by Tubby Isaacs
If you haven't come across Iain Darcy before, you have now.


Re: Keir Starmer

Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2024 4:03 pm
by Abernathy
Who the fuck is Andrew Feinstein?

Re: Keir Starmer

Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2024 4:46 pm
by Tubby Isaacs
He's a Stop The War bloke who's written a book on the arms industry. This apparently is a bigger accomplishment than being DPP.

The Jo Swinson analogy is mad. She lost to the SNP, her closest challenger, because their vote rose by 8.1% on the last time from the very poor 2017 performance.

Re: Keir Starmer

Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2024 4:49 pm
by Malcolm Armsteen
They're fucking bonkers.

Re: Keir Starmer

Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2024 4:52 pm
by Youngian
Have the comrades cleared this candidature with Tommy Scripps?

Re: Keir Starmer

Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2024 6:34 pm
by Tubby Isaacs
Here's more from Iain Darcy. He's a David Miller fan. Who could have guessed?


Re: Keir Starmer

Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2024 7:05 pm
by davidjay
As my nan would say, "If he had a brain he'd be dangerous "

Re: Keir Starmer

Posted: Mon Feb 12, 2024 1:45 am
by mattomac
Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Sun Feb 11, 2024 3:29 pm Nicely framed here by The Independent guy I've called out before. I thought they were likely to drop this because America doesn't like it at all.

I’m sure it was Hugo Gye who Sunak attended his wedding.

Re: Keir Starmer

Posted: Wed Feb 14, 2024 1:04 pm
by Tubby Isaacs
Ha ha ha. Yeah, I mean it's not like we just had Trump supporters, is it?


Re: Keir Starmer

Posted: Wed Feb 14, 2024 1:48 pm
by Andy McDandy
Just looked him up. Seems a bit of a one trick pony and preacher to the converted.

As for his insights into the global arms industry, there's nothing that hadn't been covered by Mark Thomas in "As Used on the Famous Nelson Mandela". Which was also funny.

Re: Keir Starmer

Posted: Wed Feb 14, 2024 2:38 pm
by Abernathy
I was going to ask how it can be that Keir Starmer is "the most dangerous potential PM ever", but you know what ? He isn't, so i won't bother my arse.

Re: Keir Starmer

Posted: Wed Feb 14, 2024 3:05 pm
by Tubby Isaacs
Something about the security services and the CIA, apparently. The source of this is Grayzone.

Re: Keir Starmer

Posted: Wed Feb 14, 2024 3:15 pm
by davidjay
How do these people think that Starmer's spurious links to MI5 and his opinion of Julian Assange are more important to the electorate than feeding your family and keeping a roof over their heads? I wonder if they ever talk to anyone even vaguely normal.

Re: Keir Starmer

Posted: Wed Feb 14, 2024 3:19 pm
by Tubby Isaacs
I'm learning the rules of online twitter leftism.

1) Labour have cut their green programme. This is a disgrace, no time to wait at all.
2) I'm going to vote for a no hope independent. Because actually we can wait.

Re: Keir Starmer

Posted: Wed Feb 14, 2024 3:23 pm
by Tubby Isaacs
davidjay wrote: ↑Wed Feb 14, 2024 3:15 pm How do these people think that Starmer's spurious links to MI5 and his opinion of Julian Assange are more important to the electorate than feeding your family and keeping a roof over their heads? I wonder if they ever talk to anyone even vaguely normal.
They do the economy as well, in fairness. Ending "neoliberalism", whatever that means. Certainly there are some very poor bits of outsourced state they could point to, but I think your average hard-nosed Victorian mill owner might have noticed a few unneoliberal things, like the level of taxation. The same people who were cheering Corbyn for 26% Corporation Tax think Rachel Reeves going for 25% is an outrage of rightwingery.