PMQ - Boris v Starmer - Spider And The Fly

[rogersix]

Not long now Roger, primary will open up soon and satisfy your boredom.

more dribble

 

[wellquickwoody]

Pointless debate because the Opposition parties are not irrelevant. Tides turn quickly in politics.

They were when Jeremy Corbyn was in charge!

 

[Gwylan]

Labour wants to keep ‘the working class’ in their place by hanging on to and fostering the idea that they are still being oppressed. Nothing is further from the truth - the working class were emancipated many years ago.

Yet, when a working class lad like Starmer betters himself and rises to high office, he's mocked for not knowing his place. Even buying a field for donkeys is seen as getting above himself.

 

[Grombleton]

he is just trying to open up a massive gash between people that will never heal over.
It's just not needed.

I don't think you can pin that on Starmer, considering that 'massive gash' has been there since the EU referendum back in 2016...

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Looking for solutions for the future would be helpful, looking at things that the government may or may not have done in the past, particularly in this situation It is just political point-scoring.

We all know that these things will be brought up later before the next election.

Starmer is just trying to gain some traction now but while doing that he is potentially putting lives at risk with anxiety and hatred, he is just trying to open up a massive gash between people that will never heal over.
It's just not needed.

I’m under no illusions here - I know I’m wasting my time, given the absolute nature of your bias, but I’ve got little better to do right now...

On your first point, you are plain wrong in your assessment of what is going on. Let’s take testing as a simple example. If the government were doing a terrible (and let’s face it, is was really, really terrible) job, of getting enough testing done, and the opposition rightly call them out on it - eventually the pressure, from the resulting negative press, results in them stepping up those efforts. Now, you can assess this as ‘unhelpful criticism, with no positive suggestions’ if you want. Or that they are suggesting ‘sort this out, and increase testing numbers’. Is that not a positive suggestion?

Would you like for me to repeat this evaluation, for protecting care homes? For provision of PPE to front line workers? For transparency / independence of the scientific thinking? For anything else?

Your second point is just complete drivel. Highlighting government weaknesses isn’t ‘trying to open up a gash between people’. It is highlighting government weaknesses. It’s is up to ‘people’ what they do with that.

 

[Lever]

I’m under no illusions here - I know I’m wasting my time, given the absolute nature of your bias, but I’ve got little better to do right now...

On your first point, you are plain wrong in your assessment of what is going on. Let’s take testing as a simple example. If the government were doing a terrible (and let’s face it, is was really, really terrible) job, of getting enough testing done, and the opposition rightly call them out on it - eventually the pressure, from the resulting negative press, results in them stepping up those efforts. Now, you can assess this as ‘unhelpful criticism, with no positive suggestions’ if you want. Or that they are suggesting ‘sort this out, and increase testing numbers’. Is that not a positive suggestion?

Would you like for me to repeat this evaluation, for protecting care homes? For provision of PPE to front line workers? For transparency / independence of the scientific thinking? For anything else?

Your second point is just complete drivel. Highlighting government weaknesses isn’t ‘trying to open up a gash between people’. It is highlighting government weaknesses. It’s is up to ‘people’ what they do with that.

Good attempt... but communicating logically and accurately won't make any difference; this is a visceral, not an intellectual matter for Mouldy; he cannot even describe what he means by 'common sense', let alone apply it....

 

[highflyer]

They were when Jeremy Corbyn was in charge!

Out of interest how far do you think the Overton Window has moved on economic policy in the UK over the last 4 years?
Why do you think that has happened?
What impact do you think that might have on current opposition positioning and government decision making going forward?

Jeremy Corbyn's time as leader of Labour may well come to be regarded as one of the most influential periods of opposition for decades, if not centuries. Bearing in mind that the 'extremist loony left' policy agenda that he and McDonnell developed has been largely adopted by 'Mr Centrist' Starmer, with very little dissent or criticism.

As hard as this may be (for you) to understand, not winning elections doesn't always make you irrelevant in politics.

 

[blue-shifted]

I’m under no illusions here - I know I’m wasting my time, given the absolute nature of your bias, but I’ve got little better to do right now...

On your first point, you are plain wrong in your assessment of what is going on. Let’s take testing as a simple example. If the government were doing a terrible (and let’s face it, is was really, really terrible) job, of getting enough testing done, and the opposition rightly call them out on it - eventually the pressure, from the resulting negative press, results in them stepping up those efforts. Now, you can assess this as ‘unhelpful criticism, with no positive suggestions’ if you want. Or that they are suggesting ‘sort this out, and increase testing numbers’. Is that not a positive suggestion?

Would you like for me to repeat this evaluation, for protecting care homes? For provision of PPE to front line workers? For transparency / independence of the scientific thinking? For anything else?

Your second point is just complete drivel. Highlighting government weaknesses isn’t ‘trying to open up a gash between people’. It is highlighting government weaknesses. It’s is up to ‘people’ what they do with that.

I think the Starmer has got quite a lot more ammo this week than he did last week. I'm quite looking forward to watching it ... in the same way that I quite enjoy watching that Brazil v Germany 2014 world cup semi.

 

[Gwylan]

Jeremy Corbyn's time as leader of Labour may well come to be regarded as one of the most influential periods of opposition for decades, if not centuries. Bearing in mind that the 'extremist loony left' policy agenda that he and McDonnell developed has been largely adopted by 'Mr Centrist' Starmer, with very little dissent or criticism.

As hard as this may be (for you) to understand, not winning elections doesn't always make you irrelevant in politics.

I don't think it's strictly accurate to describe Starmer as centrist (unless you're talking about the Labour party of 40 years ago) - he's well to the left of Blair, for example.

I think a more telling example of Corbyn's influence is the way that the Conservative government is splashing out - even before Covid, they were loosening the strings.

 

[highflyer]

I don't think it's strictly accurate to describe Starmer as centrist (unless you're talking about the Labour party of 40 years ago) - he's well to the left of Blair, for example.

I think a more telling example of Corbyn's influence is the way that the Conservative government is splashing out - even before Covid, they were loosening the strings.

Oh I agree about Starmer. People think he's centrist because he has nice hair, isn't Corbyn and wasn't keen on Brexit.

But he has said his economic policies will be largely continuity from Corbynism. So if you think Starmer is centrist then you must think that either:

a) Corbyn was centrist
or
b) Starmer is a liar

100% agree on your point about the way the Tories were backing away from austerity before Covid.

 

[Gwylan]

Oh I agree about Starmer. People think he's centrist because he has nice hair, isn't Corbyn and wasn't keen on Brexit.

But he has said his economic policies will be largely continuity from Corbynism. So if you think Starmer is centrist then you must think that either:

a) Corbyn was centrist
or
b) Starmer is a liar

100% agree on your point about the way the Tories were backing away from austerity before Covid.

I don't think Starmer is centrist, that's the point. I've argued on here many times that Corbyn was far from the extreme left - his economic policies would have fitted in with social democratic countries (and even centre-right ones like Germany). I do think Starmer is slightly to the right of Corbyn - if you can imagine such a granular scale - but he's not a Cooper or Kendall

 

[highflyer]

I don't think Starmer is centrist, that's the point. I've argued on here many times that Corbyn was far from the extreme left - his economic policies would have fitted in with social democratic countries (and even centre-right ones like Germany). I do think Starmer is slightly to the right of Corbyn - if you can imagine such a granular scale - but he's not a Cooper or Kendall

To be clear - we are in agreement.

I dont think Starmer is centrist either. I think he's centre left, similar, as you say, to Corbyn. But with nicer hair.

I am just trying to have a gentle dig at the very many people who seem to have convinced themselves that Starmer is taking Labour back to the mythical, sunny, uplands of the Blairite centre (right) ground from whence all elections (apart from most of them) are won. When actually he very explicitly promised to stick with the economic agenda of Corbynism.

 

[Machiavelli]

Oh I agree about Starmer. People think he's centrist because he has nice hair, isn't Corbyn and wasn't keen on Brexit.

But he has said his economic policies will be largely continuity from Corbynism. So if you think Starmer is centrist then you must think that either:

a) Corbyn was centrist
or
b) Starmer is a liar

100% agree on your point about the way the Tories were backing away from austerity before Covid.

Well, I hope you're right, but I take a slightly different view. Not that you're wrong, more it's too early to say, and Starmer has been remarkably adept at positioning himself such that many are projecting what they want onto him. He's done this largely by saying very little on policy, and not committing himself to anything. This might well show him to be strategic, too. What's for certain is that an activist policy will prove more popular in the years ahead and, at a certain point, he'll have to come off the fence, especially because I doubt this will prove to be a full-term parliament. When he does become clearer on policy, I hope you're right.

 

[clapham_gull]

The centre isn't where the centre was, it's where the centre is.

 

[*Gullsworth*]

The centre isn't where the centre was, it's where the centre is.

Centre left is the new centre. Hard left is the new centre left. Centre right it the new hard right. Centre does not exist.

 

[Billy the Fish]

b) Starmer is a liar

He's a politician, it's naive to think he's not going to bend the truth at any point.

 

[Machiavelli]

Centre left is the new centre. Hard left is the new centre left. Centre right it the new hard right. Centre does not exist.

Yup, the centre is just a construct that, I predict (well, hope, at least) is falling out of favour. It'll be interesting how the right regroup, for they will, they're far better organised and have the resources behind them, neither of which can be said for the left.

 

[wellquickwoody]

Out of interest how far do you think the Overton Window has moved on economic policy in the UK over the last 4 years?
Why do you think that has happened?
What impact do you think that might have on current opposition positioning and government decision making going forward?

Jeremy Corbyn's time as leader of Labour may well come to be regarded as one of the most influential periods of opposition for decades, if not centuries. Bearing in mind that the 'extremist loony left' policy agenda that he and McDonnell developed has been largely adopted by 'Mr Centrist' Starmer, with very little dissent or criticism.

As hard as this may be (for you) to understand, not winning elections doesn't always make you irrelevant in politics.

Oh boy, did you take that way too seriously? Still smarting from defeat I guess

 

[highflyer]

Well, I hope you're right, but I take a slightly different view. Not that you're wrong, more it's too early to say, and Starmer has been remarkably adept at positioning himself such that many are projecting what they want onto him. He's done this largely by saying very little on policy, and not committing himself to anything. This might well show him to be strategic, too. What's for certain is that an activist policy will prove more popular in the years ahead and, at a certain point, he'll have to come off the fence, especially because I doubt this will prove to be a full-term parliament. When he does become clearer on policy, I hope you're right.

I do agree nothing in politcs is ever certain. And probably shouldn't be (events dear boy...events)

But I am not sure this constitutes being on the fence: https://keirstarmer.com/plans/10-pledges/

 

[Pevenseagull]

It's shooting crabs in a barrel o'clock!!!