That Starmer fella...

Owen is a narcissist.

Starmer is good at electoral politics.

You are the one who said no matter what as though he's put forward some sort of controversial policy.

I get why someone might use those terms over his stance on the SNP ceasefire bill. But IMHO people seeing this as a negative need to step out of their echo chamber and have a bit of a think.

That is a genuine point, I'm not trying to have a pop.

Don’t be ridiculous.

“Man in democracy stops voting for party I like” is no reason for comments like that.

Can we actually have a Labour Government, not just a Labour Opposition, as we have now; before people start moaning?

I've a lot of time for Owen Jones, his move did feel self indulgent.

sure. it's not a massive thing by any stretch. hence my original post being fairly light hearted. but I think it does speak to Labour's pandering to absolute weapons tbh.

oddly enough the "no matter what" wasn't specifically and exclusively about this. Maybe "regardless" would have been a better choice of words, but it's just semantics at that point.

I've known him for 22 years 🤷🏻‍♂️

Owen is a narcissist.

I disagree with a man therefore he has a personality disorder? sure.

Starmer is good at electoral politics.

Is he though or have the Tories basically shat themselves to death?

nah, the opposition should be open to criticism. Especially when Labour tend to shift to the right when in government.

Genuinely think a Starmer government will end up at the very least occupying the same ground as Cameron's, if not to the right of it.

and fuck that tbqfh

Ha, okay then, that’s a little different.

He doesn’t strike me as a narcissist at all, having dealt with a few serious cases on multiple sides of my and my partner’s family.

“Man in democracy stops voting for party I like” is no reason for comments like that.

That's true. But Owen Jones' astonishing hypocrisy on this issue would certainly be a justification imo.

It's great that OJ is so pissed off about the bombings in Israel. Rightous fury. But when Andrew Murray and Seamus Milne were in charge of the Labour Party, and defended/minimised/denied Russia's war crimes in Syria, chemical attacks, indiscriminate bombings, easily the equal of what's happening in Israel - he didn't say a fucking word. Why? Because his ideological allies didn't want him to.

I've no problem with anyone not voting for anyone - no party owes them a vote. But for OJ to pose as though this is some kind of unique moral principle being breached by Starmer is hypocrisy and it's bullshit and he can fuck all the way off.

Agreed. I stopped listening to rampant self publicist Owen Jones a long time ago

he didn't say a fucking word. Why? Because his ideological allies didn't want him to.

Saying nothing is suspect, yes, but does not provide evidence of actively backing a state committing war crimes.

Starmer has, and that does sound more like breaching a unique moral principle to me, particularly when it’s coming from an elected representative.

Gotta have another 5 years of austerity but with a red tie before you're allowed to comment, everyone knows that

of course, how foolish of me.

So forgetting Owen Jones - do you think this is all smart politics and Starmer will unveil some progressive policies when he's in power?
I'm a (naive) optimist but no one I know seems as optimistic as me!

I want a Labour government, so as much as I think Starmer is imperfect, I'm not going to bitch and whine like some three year old because he isn't promising to deliver a socialist utopia.

People need to give Owen a break.

As Jenny said, everyone's got to make a living.

I called him a wet wipe pal. hardly bitching and whining is it

The Tories have absolutely fucked the country and the economy, in no small part due to Brexit. The next government is going to have a massive job on their hands to restore services, lift millions of people out of poverty and rebuild an economy that is going in rapid decline.

Starmer and his team want to win the election so, whether you agree with it or not, their tactics are built on letting the Tories demonstrate they are unfit to govern and promising very little in terms of policy because they know the government finances are fucked. It's dull, it's uninspring, but with a huge lead in the opinion polls, it's good enough to achieve the main goal.

What happens after the election we don't know, as any policy agenda has to be built on solid financial footings, but I don't for one second think we'll have a Cameron-like government.

Saying nothing is suspect, yes, but does not provide evidence of actively backing a state committing war crimes.

Milne and Murray's pro-Russian (or anti-west, if you prefer) tendencies are a matter of public record.

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2018/04/if-jeremy-corbyn-opposes-intervention-syria-he-should-have-more-say-about-russia
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/feb/07/syria-intervention-escalate-killing
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2002/sep/12/highereducation.historyandhistoryofart
https://www.workersliberty.org/story/2019-03-20/stalinists-under-siege

OJ is not stupid, nor is he callous - he didn't actively back Russia's war crimes in Syria. He wasn't part of that Milne/Murray/Stop The War aligned left denying the chemical attacks in Douma, referring to the Syrian rebels as 'terrorists' and backing up the Kremlin line. But those in charge of his Labour faction were, and did. And he knew this.

I'm not saying he approved of it. I'm sure he didn't. But he didn't say a fucking word about it, and he certainly didn't tear up his Labour membership card. He just kept cashing the cheques.

Should Starmer have ceded this football story to some Tory/Reform blowhard?
Sure, I would have preferred him to also make a statement abount football fans being milked by ever changing kits, but Starmer took the opportunty presented to him.
Politicians will say things 'you' don't like or agree with, that politician isn't you, and your vote alone won't despatch this failed Tory party, so expect a few things to be said that are not your view.
In the scheme of things, are football kits in the Top 10 issues you consider important?

The Right rallies around a single issue, 'lower taxes' and proclaims this even when raising taxes to the highest levels since 1947, and the rightwing press is prepared to support them.

Those not of the Left, the middle ground voters who will decide the next election, appear to be determined to find a single issue that is the breaking point,
'I couldn't possible vote for Kinnock/Smith/Blair/Brown/Milliband/Corbyn/Starmer because of X',
even when the other myriad of policies and statements are to their liking.

We have seen a Tory party of lightweight part-time politicians fail for the last 14 years.
We have a duty to vote them out, and hopefully see a destructive squabble as Reform/Farage/Marshall argue, in opposition with the few remaining One Nation Tories.

This Tory party has a proven track record of failure. They have no redeeming features. Hope might all we have left. And the Left deserves a chance to attempt to remedy the broken society they will inherit.

do you think this is all smart politics and Starmer will unveil some progressive policies when he's in power?

I think he already has, and people who can't tell the difference between Starmer's Labour and Sunak's Tories need their heads (or, at least, their media sources) examined.

I get that he's playing it safe, and that's frustrating. I'd prefer him to be braver too. But I also get why - he's like a man carrying a ming vase across a slippery floor. And ultimately getting into government is the number one priority of an opposition party - everything else is secondary.

The gap between left and right is not as large as I might want - but millions of people live and die in that gap.

Fuck sake, we've only had one Labour government in my lifetime and three other majorities since records began. Prior to Blair it was the 1970's.

What does that tell us about this country's politics?

I'll take any Labour Government at this point in time.

I think he already has

genuine question - would be interested in what these are that aren't just vibes

The Sun championing Starmer's take on something is interesting. They could have easily gone with the opposite. Not sure if they have done that before now?