…and brings up ‘my dad was a toolmaker’ yet again
Keir Starmer was mocked and laughed at by the audience at the televised general election debate tonight, after he short-circuited when asked by an audience member why he should trust someone so robotic – and answered just like a robot that hadn’t had an answer for that question added to his programming.
Starmer was forced to reboot as the audience laughed – and then had to default to a non-relevant answer about being the (awful) head of the Crown Prosecution Service:
Then the audience hooted again as Starmer rolled out another script about his father (a Corbyn fan, before his death, by the way) being a toolmaker and claimed this meant they hadn’t been able to make ends meet, even though his dad reportedly owned the factory:
For a supposedly high-powered barrister, the clueless and out of touch Starmer is astonishingly awful at thinking on his feet and regularly looks hopeless as soon as a question isn’t friendly and scripted or he faces the slightest scrutiny. Robotic, in fact.
SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you’d like to help it keep revealing the news as it is and not what the Establishment wants you to hear – and can afford to without hardship – please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thanks for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep doing its job.
If you wish to republish this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.
Grampa Starmer lived in a castle. Was a game keeper for the record.
Petit bourgeois Roboprick…
Every time I hear CPS, I think of Ian Tomlinson. RIP fella
Keir Starmer’s childhood home
https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2019/02/10/01/9611442-0-image-a-11_1549763127244.jpg
Jeremy Corbyn’s childhood home
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTM75ROo09dGJ_SMMjFo4PJtq9nVH0lnTbmnNFmSHTNwNU7rCeaO3q_A4QkTQbZdR5wDvc&usqp=CAU
With regards to Ian Tomlinson the CPS initially refused to prosecute his police assailant because there was insufficient evidence to secure a conviction. When more evidence emerged they brought a prosecution against the policeman who struck him. What was the Jury’s verdict?
Ooops – I got those those the wrong way round
Your point being…?
It was obviously a response to NVLA’s comment at the head of this comments section, do you have a point.
Yes. Stop digging! If you really did get the pictures the wrong way round, why admit to it? We wouldn’t know any different.
Incompetent prick.
Indeed, Tim. With incompetence on that level, I’d be inclined to think he’s after a safe seat off keef.
Anyway, @wee gobshite, instead of showing us the childhood homes (in the wrong order) how about you show us the respective property portfolios of the freeloading keef and the incorruptible Corbyn, as they stand today?
⚠️⚠️⚠️⚠️⚠️⚠️⚠️⚠️⚠️⚠️⚠️
“Every time I hear CPS, I think of Ian Tomlinson. RIP”.
Every time, Sir Keith Starmer trumpets: “i ran the Crown Prosecution Service”, think of Hillsborough victims, Lawrence murdered by racists, Dead nan in pub carpark with axe in his head.
Remember the many other victims of DEADLY brutal, “institutionally corrupt” & “institutionally racist” police; victims who NEVER got justice while Sir Tool claims he “was prosecuting criminals”.
An obscene number of OBVIOUS Establishment criminals were NEVER even prosecuted, JIMMY SAVILLE roamed free while Sir Keith Tool arranged a special pension for himself.
⚠️🩸🥏⚠️🩸🥏⚠️🩸🥏
… dead MAN in carpark… was private investigator DANIEL MORGAN. In 1987 Daniel was murdered. The axe was still in his head when found in a Sydenham pub carpark.
The long running collapsed POLICE special investigations and inquiries are DEFINITELY worth studying. The HORROR spanned the ENTIRE Sir Keith Tool’s CURIOUS rise to DPP. The horror continued AFTER plain old Keith Tool was rewarded with the bauble and trinkets of KNIGHTHOOD for SERVICES to the Establishment.
Unsurprising that while the long suffering Morgan family have to date had ZERO justice, Sir Keith already with his self arranged special pension in his bag, can call himself SIR with glee. Yet the most recent inquiry (2022) added to the Police already declared institutional RACISM. They were found to be institutionally CORUPT as well.
Relevant files which the police claimed LOST, were found in Cressida Dick’s office cupboard or drawer.
No wonder Keith can “rise” curiously and be swiftly rewarded by the CORRUPT and RACIST Establishment that LOVED one Jimmy Saville, whom they ALSO made a SIR… just like their TOOL Sir Keith⚠️🔧⚠️🔧⚠️🔧 ⚠️🔧⚠️🔧 ⚠️🔧⚠️🔧
Starmer has chosen Davos over Westminster. His reasoning is because;
“You actually engage with people you can see yourself working with in the future. Westminster is just a shouting place”
The labour party. We need you more than you need us!
“Sir Keir Starmer performed best overall in the Sky News leaders’ event, a snap YouGov poll suggests.”
“The question was: leaving aside your own party preference, who do you think performed best overall in tonight’s televised leaders’ event?”
“Almost two thirds – 64% – of those questioned said the Labour leader came out on top, compared to 36% who thought Prime Minister Rishi Sunak did better.”
https://news.sky.com/story/keir-starmer-performed-best-overall-in-sky-news-leaders-event-poll-suggests-13152218
That observation Billy, is akin to and a rehash of the old joke about two hunters who have the tables turned on them when they come across a a cheetah.
One of them turns to run. The other says to him ‘don’t be silly you’ll never outrun a cheetah’. To which the reply was ‘I don’t have to out run the cheetah, I only have to outrun you’.
A poll on which was the “best” performer of two totally inept, incompetent, corrupt and useless wassocks is as meaningless as you can possibly get.
What is your actual substantive point beyond a zero-sum binary?
Oh! Of course. ‘My man won! My man won! My man won!’
How pathetic.
Fantastic joke Dave. Outrunning the leader of the opponent party is what FPTP reduces representational democracy to. Marvellous explanation Dave.
Thanks for confirming that you have nothing tangible to offer the electorate.
When you can substantiate that statement with actual evidence Billy let us know.
Until then best you adhere to the advice given here by Mark Twain:
https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/mark_twain_103535
……Particularly when the sacred Manifesto just alienated and shit on 51% of the voting populace:
https://x.com/WomensRightsNet/status/1801235641746784700
Dave
Haven’t heard Wassocks for Yonks
Doug: My understanding – based on observation of the majority (but not necessarily all) – is that the collective noun is a Parliament of Wassock’s.
“Every time I hear CPS, I think of Ian Tomlinson. RIP”.
Every time, Sir Keith Starmer trumpets: “i ran the Crown Prosecution Service”, think of Hillsborough victims, Lawrence murdered by racists, Dead nan in pub carpark with axe in his head.
Remember the many other victims of DEADLY brutal, “institutionally corrupt” & “institutionally racist” police; victims who NEVER got justice while Sir Tool claims he “was prosecuting criminals”.
An obscene number of OBVIOUS Establishment criminals were NEVER even prosecuted, JIMMY SAVILLE roamed free while Sir Keith Tool arranged a special pension for himself.
⚠️🩸🥏⚠️🩸🥏⚠️🩸🥏
Seen excerpts of that interview on newsnight earlier.
It was ALL he could do to prevent himself mentioning that he was DPP,, instead harping on about the public sector jobs hed previously done….I’m actually certain he did a max headroom style repetitive stutter., and almost blew a fuse when the program had to be altered.
And lookit….The freeloading automaton keef’s had the piss rightly ripped out of him ..So who’s here to compare the childhood homes of keef & Corbyn….because keefs total lack of personality is ALL to do with Corbyn’s childhood home, iznit?
Well guess what, wee noncecase? I reckon the reason keef’s phone was cut off….The young keef ran up a massive bill phoning those mucky, recorded 0898 numbers; the type seen in the Sunday sport …Except keef was a subscriber to westminster tory pervert, or some such unheard of, underground publication. (Perhaps owned by grant “the spiv” shafts, with fellow subscriber damien grope a regular contributor, which is why keef never prosecuted toerags and harbours wrong uns in his own clique)
Hear what naughty things maggie carries in her handbag…0898..”I sniffed maggies ministerial seat”…0898…harvey proctor and the chief whip…0898
Didn’t bother to check the (premium) rate. But it didn’t matter about keef’s daddy not being able to contact his works, seeing as he owned his works.
And he wants us to trust him to run the nations finances? Thinks we should allow him to write our laws?
No bleedin’ chance.
Toffee – Here is the link to the Labour Party Manifesto that I promised to send you.
https://labour.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Labour-Party-manifesto-2024.pdf
………and here is the web based version
https://labour.org.uk/change/
You could play Buzzword Bingo using the interchangeable with previous Tory Government Powerpoint level bullet points across this Manifesto and still not find any seam between them.
For example:
– Deliver economic stability with tough spending rules
– A new partnership with business to boost growth everywhere
– A National Wealth Fund to invest in jobs.
– Planning reform to build 1.5 million new homes
– Devolution of power across England
– A New Deal for Working People
The words may be slightly different and in a different order but they all mean and point to more of the same failed neo-liberal economic gibberish.
“Business”; “Wealth creators”; “Financial Services” etc etc etc. More of the economically illiterate trickle down economics we have had for the past half century based on feeding all the corn for the chickens to the horse first on the assumption that the chickens will pick up so crumbs of corn in the horse shit.
This is not difficult stuff to deconstruct:
The baked in paradigm running through this Manifesto of the primacy of the FIRE Sector dominating the economy offers no “Change” – as the Manifesto is so inaccurately named.
Over the past half century the economy has been transformed into an economy in which the primary way, the best way, the fastest way to make money – what is referred to by all the political class, Labour as well as Tory as “Wealth Creation” “Growth”* – is by essentially speculating, not by investing in the production of goods and services that ordinary people need, but by inflating the value of goods and services already produced.
The key problematic being that already produced goods and services contain the dead labor that has gone, it is now dead, it is no longer living, that has gone into producing it and you are inflating the value of that.
Whereas, as you do that, you are dis-valuing the living labor, much of which may remain underemployed, and all of which is necessary to produce the new goods and services which every year, in every period, ordinary people need. We need more food, we need more clothing, we need more transportation, we need more housing, etc., etc. And these are the things that are strangulated. Living labor is strangulated while dead labor goes up.
Much of our national debt is as a result of this nonsense in which most of it has been incurred to speculate, to inflate the value of already existing assets.
Imagine a house that goes up in price by 30%, 40%, 50%. Nothing in it may have changed, but it goes up in price anyway. Nothing is produced, but it goes up in price.
This is the kind of economy that has been created. Industry which actually produces real goods and value has been offshored for years in favour of the speculative rentier FIRE sector which is touted as a “success story” which, in itself, is sufficient evidence of the economic illiteracy of what passes for a anifesto”.
And with that offshoring of actual productive value has gone the experience, knowledge, expertise and competence necessary to recover that position.
We can’t even keep up with anyone in weapons production. The necessary industrial and competence base no longer exists here.
Consequently we are reduced to this (from the Sacred Manifesto):
“Financial services are one of Britain’s greatest success stories. Labour will create the conditions to support innovation and growth in the sector, through supporting new technology, including Open Banking and Open Finance”
Translation: We will continue to feed the rentier parasite sector and starve any real value producing remains of the economy of the necessary resources.
I would not hang my hat on this Billy. In a few years time you are going to have egg on your face if this is all you have to offer the electorate.
*You can find these buzz words – “Wealth Creation”; “Growth” – all over the manifestos of political parties going back donkey’s years.
They are never ever defined for a good reason.
Dave – Where’s the left’s credible alternative, do you have one?
Short answer. Yes, Billy, there are alternatives paradigms to the failed unworkable and collapsing neo-liberal model.
And they will be adopted by necessity when the appropriate critical point occurs. As has been the historical case in all such instances.
Dave – I said credible alternatives not the wet dream of one of Putin’s useless idiots. 😞
1.5 million houses. That’s 822 a day, every day for 5 years.
There’s more chance of SteveH becoming wanted around here lol
Christ, now he’s dragging Putin into it. The last refuge of the failed neo-liberal argument.
I think we’ve got the chatbot SteveH today, people!
Who said anything about Putin, Billy?
Your obsession of reducing everything down to one individual which no one but you has brought up in order to avoid and deflect from the subject suggests a serious case of PDS (Putin Derangement Syndrome).
I take it they don’t have facilities equivalent to Belle Vue where you are.
“I think we’ve got the chatbot SteveH today, people!”
I take it, timfrom, that you are referring to the latest generation state of the art DI (Dumb intelligence)?
……the kind of DI which defines the proverb ‘out of site. out of mind’ as “Invisible Idiot.”
Which conveniently also acts as what Billy self-identifies as every time he posts on this site.
Dave – Oh dear, did someone rattle your cage?
Is there an echo in here or did a dead parrot just get dumped in the room?
Ta Toffee. First show of thanks to my Max Headroom comparison made many moons ago as Wobbly. All the best to Everton and promotion for the Lions next season. Cheers 🍻.
Oh, and did I mention keef’s ma was a nurse?
No? Oh well, keef’ll make sure you’re aware of it, soon enough.
Didn’t he clean septic tanks with his tongue before he was born, or something.
Ah! Hadn’t looked at the videos skwawky provided. (Beeb showed the before I got into politics part)
So he DID mention he was head of the CPS.
AND…And this one’s for YOU, wee noncecase…” Effectively bringing EVERY prosecution in England & Wales
EVERY prosecution…straight from the horse’s arse itself.
NO ifs, buts, OR equivocation.
EVERY prosecution in England & Wales.
Now then, now then (SWIDT, Nonsense?),
you were saying regards savile, shapps and green – to name but three?
😙🎶
I can’t wait till he waltzes into Downing Street. It might be a ‘landslide’ – but on probably the lowest voter-turnout for a UK GE EVER!
Sure, It took Tony Blair 2 GEs to cause 5 – 7m voters to NOT vote, but Starmer’s vile nature and repulsiveness (on top of Gaza, nato militarism in Ukraine and the Covid deception) will cause millions to – wrongly – answer the question ‘what is the point?’ with a non-vote.
Tell as many people as you can that 4 July can be INDEPENDENTS DAY. Be sure to vote,.
VoteIndependent, Green, WPGB, Plaid, Alba. et al.
Or, where appropriate, NOTA.
With regards to Ian Tomlinson the CPS initially refused to prosecute his police assailant because there was insufficient evidence to secure a conviction.
Ah, I see.
There was insufficient (i.e. NO) evidence against Milne, Murphy and the rest of the defendants, but keef – legal genius that he is – decided to press ahead with a civil case** against them, costing £2.4MILLION in your party’s funds.
All that moolah, spaffed against the wall, and keef unashamedly attmepts to mug us all off when he says he: “puts the country ahead of party politics”.
What a lying, arrogant ponce. Unfit to be trusted with a slummy jar, nevermind the nation’s finances
**Decided on the balance of probabilities, rather than beyond reasonable doubt
Rodney Snr was a better toolmaker than his son frequently admits: One child with sound hearing and vision who becomes adept at turning a deaf ear and blind eye to
– racially-motivated genocide and infanticide in the middle-east’s only supposed-democracy;
– a systemic paedophile industry beloved of Thatcher called “Jimmy Saville”.
No-wonder they call Sir Keir a tool of the secret services.
Rodney Snr. done good!
AND….Not only did keef spunk that £2.4MILLION, but he’s also rewarded, by shoehorning into a candidacy, the complete fookin blert who he chose to continue to oversee and pursue the non-existent case.
“The best quality candidates available” keef tells us.
Christ on a bike, those they’ve knocked back must be so dense that light bends around them.
Did Keef bother reminding us ???
– That he’s been several years a member of America’s Trilateral Commission … The international arm of American foreign policy for running the world
Other members – Mandelson and the wretched Jeffery Epstein
– That he is “a Zionist without qualification”
I thought I didn’t hear it.
I wonder why.
Both major parties are doing everything possible to avoid speaking about their complicity in the genocide in Gaza.
They are utterly lacking in humanity.
Bought and paid for by US and Zionist money !
To support Palestine and Gaza, voters should support George Galloway’s Workers Party or credible Left Independents.
Keir Starmer knows that Genocide is occurring in Gaza, and for the same reason, Israeli expansionism and ethnic cleansing.
The now Sir Keir Starmer Prosecutor at the International Court of Justice in 1999 argued thus…
“In a lengthy presentation, Starmer stressed that the goal of the joint criminal enterprise set up by the Serbian leadership was to ‘establish control over one third of the Croatian territory to transform it into a state under the Serb domination’. The twin motives of the Serbian leadership were to annex the territory that belonged to the other state and to create an ethnically pure Greater Serbia, Starmer said. The scope of the crimes, including widespread killings, torture, sexual violence and deportations, showed the ‘clear intent’ of the Serbian leadership, the JNA and the forces under its control to ‘destroy the majority of the Croatian population living in that territory’, Starmer argued”. https://archive.sensecentar.org/vijesti.php?aid=15764
How things change, various Israeli leaders have said they intend to commit genocide in Gaza, in fact the Israeli Defence Minister Yoav Gallant said on 9th Oct 2023 “I have ordered a complete siege on the Gaza strip, there will be no electricity, no food, no fuel, everything is closed” He also said “we are fighting human animals” This statement was introduced as evidence at the recent ICJ case by South Africa.
Sir Keir Starmer when answering a question from Nick Ferarri [LBC News] on 11th Oct 2023 said he agreed with the Israeli Defence Minister. Which implies, it is not what was done [genocide] but who did it, a committed Zionist ‘without qualification’ as Starmer is, there is only one answer
Starmer and Jabba the Hut. How did you manage to watch it? Glad you did though, you’re tougher than me.
As we move nearer towards nuclear war, it is vitally important that voices for peace are heard loud and clear by the election candidates. Please contact them using the facility below.
Thank you.
https://cnduk.org/cnd-general-election-campaign-2024/
Sorry Tony, but all the will in the world isn’t going to stop the bankers having their reset.
The question to ask is why haven’t these agitating bankers had a visit from a cruise missile yet?
This election, otherwise the least consequential in living memory, has to give pause to the reflex lurch toward the official opposition as the only way of addressing the failings of the party in power. Labour will press ahead unopposed with a manifesto that changes nothing, perpetuating the discontent necessary to trigger a turn back to the Tories who will pick up the baton and safeguard the status quo.
Kick out Tories
Keep our Labour
July 4 – Independents Day
Jeremy is desperately seeking more volunteers
https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/jeremy-corbyn-supporters-turn-back-islington-north-3089383
Corbyn plotting to defeat Labour with army of 400 left-wing activists a day
Jeremy Corbyn is pushing to recruit more volunteers for his campaign to defeat Labour in his Islington North constituency, i can reveal.
The former Labour leader believes he is “neck and neck” with his old party and thinks he can win the seat if he mobilises 400 activists a day across the north London seat…………………
………………..There have been no formal surveys of the constituency, making it difficult to predict whether he will successfully leverage his high profile to surpass Labour despite the party’s strong position in national opinion polls.
A source on the Corbyn campaign said: “Our early canvass returns show it’s pretty much neck and neck here between Jeremy as the independent candidate and the Labour candidate. The other parties are miles behind.
“According to our data and projections, if enough supporters of Jeremy and his politics join the campaign and knock on doors, we will win. But there is a real risk of the Labour candidate sneaking a victory if supporters stay at home on the assumption that Jeremy can win without them.
“While we’ve had good numbers so far, we need more volunteer power to compete with Labour’s resources.”
It is understood that last Sunday around 200 volunteers were working on the campaign, canvassing voters to drum up support for Mr Corbyn. He wants to double that to 400 a day on weekdays and more than that on the weekends. 🤔
Now that “Labour’s Slippery Manifesto” has landed and “Offers No End to Austerity” (James Meadway, NovaraMedia), Jeremy could fly-out to Lanzarote for 19 days tomorrow and still beat the perpetual austerity Labour candidate in 20 days time.
“Labour is grubbing about in the pretty cash tin, and even then doing it badly. Worse, the three tables it published are the clearest possible indication that Rachel Reeves will be intent on micro-management and has not a clue how to imagine the tasks that will face her in government…
Labour is planning to change taxation by less than 1% of the current total raised. Can a party with less ambition have ever been heading for a landslide?
Worse, it then does not plan to spend all of that sum, because it thinks it prudent to hold some back.
As for the Green Plan, that provides evidence that £28bn can apparently be shrunk to £4.7 billion whilst utterly missing our net zero-goals.
And as for the last table, whilst I do not doubt the relevance of some of the issues raised, if spending of £5 million has to be mentioned in a manifesto then the Shadow Chancellor is most definitely demonstrating she really does not understand the macroeconomic significance of the role she is about to take on.”
https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2024/06/13/labours-fiscal-plans-small-minded-totally-unambitious-and-intellectually-bankrupt/
——————————————————
Assuming the open secret which is the planned baton change takes place perhaps the most pertinent question this pile of poo of a manifesto raises is whether the Loyal Second eleven will actually last a full term?
Particularly given the present rapidly evolving wider geo-political and geo-economic context.
qwertboi – ” Jeremy could fly-out to Lanzarote for 19 days tomorrow and still beat the perpetual austerity Labour candidate in 20 days time.”
That’s not what Jeremy’s campaign staff are saying. 😔
@Dave Hansell
Reeves couldn’t even manage her parliamentary credit card…
qwertboi – ” Jeremy could fly-out to Lanzarote for 19 days tomorrow and still beat the perpetual austerity Labour candidate in 20 days time.”
SteveH That’s not what Jeremy’s campaign staff are saying. 😔
The iNews link you posted is pure, undisguised PSYOP – and you’d be horrified at how extensively that is recognised by regular people.
qwertboi – If you do a search you will find that there are plenty of other news outlets covering this story.
eg
https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/campaigners-call-for-more-volunteers-to-help-corbyn-general-election-bid
Which set of supporters are more likely to stay at home, its neck and neck between Red and Blue Tories
Latest odd are Corbyn 5 to 1. 18.25
Meanwhile, this may be of interest to our self appointed resident ‘political philosopher’:
https://www.politicalcompass.org/uk2024
“Labour, by contrast, is these days looking like the at-least-not-quite-the-tory-party, exciting neither new voters nor the old guard. Its leader, Sir Keir Starmer, is a Marxist. Not of the Karl school, but in the tradition of Groucho Marx, who famously quipped These are my principles. If you don’t like them, I have others….
….Starmer has torn up many of his initial pledges, and ruthlessly shifted the party well to the right. His positions on some key issues are barely distinguishable from the Conservatives, most notably on Gaza.”
————————————
And that Manifesto certainly confirms it.
As one wag put it: “The English Parties are both right wing and authoritarian.”
Dave – “As one wag put it: “The English Parties are both right wing and authoritarian.”
A description that most people would also apply to the regimes in Russia, China and Iran.
Whose definition is being applied Billy? And for what purposes?
What’s the criteria for ‘most people’? Are we talking only about the minority of the planet that resides in Jungle Joe Borrell’s ‘garden’ or are the opinion’s of the majority of the planets peoples also to be counted in this number?
In context it would be best if you did not go way out of your depth in the way you are about subjects and issues of which you are clearly clueless.
They would! You concede that Starmer’s Davos/WEF re-set is fundamentally authoritarian, anti-people and anti-democratic? Well done!
From the 2024 manifesto:
Our fiscal rules are that:
• The current budget moves into balance, so that day-to-day costs are met by revenues
• Debt must be falling as a share of the economy by the fifth year of the forecast.
This from Grace Blakely in Tribune on 28th May:
The fiscal rule commits the party to balancing the books over the course of its first five-year term, and Reeves has also pledged not to raise taxes on big businesses or the wealthy.
Together, this means that Labour will not be able to increase public spending when it enters office. Barring a dramatic increase in economic growth — an extraordinarily unlikely scenario given the global economic context and Labour’s refusal to increase public investment — this means there will be no more money for public services without cuts to other areas of spending.
Even the arch fiscal hawks at the IFS have questioned Reeves’ approach. The IFS has warned both parties that balancing the books by the end of the next parliament is likely to require an astonishing £20 billion worth of cuts per year. It called on both parties to ‘level with’ voters about the trade-offs that would come alongside a commitment to balancing the books.
In other words, we are not getting the whole truth from the Labour Party. If they abide by their existing fiscal rules, then the next government will have to commit to re-imposing austerity.
https://tribunemag.co.uk/2024/05/reeves-fiscal-technocracy-will-lock-in-austerity
James Meadway writes in Novara Media:
This manifesto does not end austerity. A total increase in public service spending of £4.5bn is dwarfed by the £20bn of annual cuts currently scheduled for the next parliament. If implemented those £20bn of cuts will be easily equivalent to the austerity horrors inflicted by George Osborne and the Coalition government in the early 2010s. Worse, they will be cuts imposed on services already broken by the austerity years.
…Not only is Labour promising less spending than the party did in 2019 and 2017, it is promising less new spending than the Conservative party. Handwaving about “growth” doesn’t change those blunt figures.
…The problem here is not the sacred “fiscal rules”. The problem is the failure to seriously address the funding challenges for our public services. This could be done through taxation on the richest, as everyone from the pro-austerity Institute for Fiscal Studies to Tax Justice UK are insisting should be done. VAT on private schools is to be welcomed, but it’s insubstantial. Most of the small amount of revenue raised in the manifesto comes from closing tax loopholes – same as the Conservatives. And none of this programme implies a shift in the balance of power in workplaces or the wider economy: if it is “pro-business and pro-worker”, “business” is underlined in heavy black ink. The “New Deal for Workers” has been watered down. There are “reviews” and “strategies” promised on almost every other page, but strikingly little on how to actually bring about any conclusions they might reach. An extra £2.5bn is earmarked for the NHS and healthcare: to put this in context, the repair bill alone for the NHS comes to £12bn.
…Britain’s problems are fundamentally institutional, and won’t be solved by rotating personnel: investment was too low under the Tories, and too concentrated in London, but the same can be said about Labour when it was in government last time. Yet the shadow chancellor wants to hand more power to those same institutions, including a bigger role for the Treasury. Labour’s leadership is motivated by the belief that if only the smart and sensible people are in charge, everything will work out fine. Perhaps the people running Labour are smarter and more sensible than those running the Tory party, but you can put a smart person in charge of a stupid institution if you want: you will still get stupid results. If the party cannot or will not address those institutional failings, even the large majority it is expected to win will not protect it.
https://novaramedia.com/2024/06/13/labours-slippery-manifesto-offers-no-end-to-austerity/
The other major problem, PW, is structural.
The assumptions of the model used by these kinds of institution and those within it are fundamentally flawed.
Take the underlying assumption – evident in both manifestos of the uni-party – that “growth” will provide the means to deal with debt levels and being “fiscally responsible” and therefore “credible” by either balancing the books or getting closer to balancing the books.
The ignorance of basic arithmetic here is simply staggering.
Why?
Leaving aside the issue of counting into the GDP figures economic activity from the dominant FIRE sector upon which Western economies are now based as something which has actual value in the real world when, as previously explained, this is unproductive “growth” of no value to society as compared to the oligarch class:
Simply because, arithmetically, interest on debt rises exponentially while, on the same arithmetical basis, wealth production – from which debt is paid – can at best rise logarithmically. The inexorable arithmetical logic – from the historical record since the year dot – is therefore for power and wealth to accrue to a creditor oligarchy.
This is what sunk the Roman Republic – as detailed in Michael Hudson’s “the Collapse of Antiquity”. Because the Roman Republic placed creditor interests above the interests of society by removing the power of of the State in the form of the King to enforce debt forgiveness which earlier ancient societies further to the East had long worked out was the only way to avoid the consequences of this basic arithmetical fact of life.
The forgiveness of debt derailed this tendency, but the new king had to be powerful enough to force it through. To put this in today’s terms, he had to be the very thing liberals (labouring under the delusion that ours is a democracy rather than a creditor oligarchy) condemn in a Vladimir Putin or Xi Jinping.
He had to be An Authoritarian. How else could any new king break the destructive – and ultimately self destructive – power of the oligarchs?
An effective democracy worth the name would start with ensuring that it meets the basic needs of its populace. A good starting point would be Marlow’s hierarchy of needs.
What Western so called “democracies” have done is invert that hierarchy by relegating the basic physiological needs like food, water, and safety – which must be met first before higher needs can be fulfilled – below the highest level of self actualisation. Which has been elevated as the only worthwhile criteria for a society to be classed as a “democracy”.
Those States which put the needs of its populace above those of the Oligarchy are falsely labelled as “Authoritarian” by the keepers of the sacred Official Narrative and its wannabe troll useless idiot shills/cheerleaders who are clueless as to the basic definitions of the terms they throw about (as we witness on this site daily).
Thus, places which the World Bank concede have lifted 800 million out of poverty – meeting Marlow’s basic needs – are considered and portrayed as undemocratic, authoritarian and beyond the pale because they place the needs of their populace above the needs of the creditor Oligarchy and its useless idiot paid political and media mouthpieces. Such examples must be destroyed in favour of a pseudo -democratic liberal order which impoverishes not only populations outside its own borders but large swathes of its own populations.
A system succinctly described in the following anecdote:
“Person A, Person B, Person C and Bill Gates walk into a diner, and their total wealth is tabulated to be around 135 billion USD. What a rich country!!!”
However, good luck with finding any “smart people”, PW, in a context in which everyone with any intelligence and competence has been managed out of the system in favour of people chosed in the image of the numpties running this shit show.
PW – ” The IFS has warned both parties that balancing the books by the end of the next parliament is likely to require an astonishing £20 billion worth of cuts per year. “
BUT Labour haven’t said they will do this, according to your quote what they have said is that “debt must be falling as a share of the economy by the fifth year of the forecast.” which is very different from “balancing the books”
So what you are saying in your selective quote Billy is that the words of the 2024 LP manifesto….
“Our fiscal rules are that:
• The current budget moves into balance, so that day-to-day costs are met by revenues”
…does not mean “balancing the books” as the IFS have interpreted it to mean.
Your rationale? (Assuming you have one). Come on. We are all ears. Don’t be shy.
And while you are at it you can tell us all why it is you have failed to pick up the most glaringly obvious omission from this manifesto (spoiler: the other manifesto’s have the same omission).
If you can.
Dave – The quotes were selected by PW not me, I’ve simply highlighted the obvious that stating that the “debt must be falling as a share of the economy by the fifth year of the forecast.” is not the same as “balancing the books by the end of the next parliament.
If you want to waste your time arguing that they mean the same, then please feel free to treat us to another of your essays. I’ve got better things to do.
No one is buying this deliberate obtuse act of your Billy.
You know very well that you missed the first part of that quote from your original response.
So I’ll ask again Billy:
The first part of the quote is
“Our fiscal rules are that:
• The current budget moves into balance, so that day-to-day costs are met by revenues”
Your argument is that this part of the quote from the manifesto does not mean “balancing the books” as the IFS have interpreted it to mean.
So what is you your rationale for this interpretation of yours which contradicts the IFS? (Assuming you have one). Come on. We are all ears. Don’t be shy Billy.
It would also seem reasonable from your response that you have not yet worked out the glaring omission from this Manifesto.
Seeing as I like you today, because I might not like you tomorrow, I’ll give you a clue:
Try imagining, Billy, that this manifesto was produced by a Labour Party with a left wing Corbyn leadership. What single aspect of the manifesto would expect the right wing corporate media – as well as yourself – to home in on?
Dave – Although I don’t think it has much if any relevance to my central point that the phrase the “debt must be falling as a share of the economy by the fifth year of the forecast.” does not mean the same as “balancing the books by the end of the next parliament” I would argue that the phrase moves into balance allows for a considerable amount of wriggle room.
“Try imagining, Billy, that this manifesto was produced by a Labour Party with a left wing Corbyn leadership. What single aspect of the manifesto would expect the right wing corporate media – as well as yourself – to home in on?”
I don’t know, do you?
If you’ve got something to say then please say it clearly and concisely instead of playing silly games.
Billy,
The five year time scale for balancing the books – which is at the very top of the Fiscal Rule commitment from the manifesto is not “wriggle room’.
Which bit of the Institute for Fiscal Studies conclusion in regard to this commitment from both wings of the Uni-party which PW has provided for you…..
“The IFS has warned both parties that balancing the books by the end of the next parliament is likely to require an astonishing £20 billion worth of cuts per year.”
……are you not comprehending?
No one is saying they are going to do this from day one. That is, yet again, another misrepresentation fiction which has not been claimed by anyone.
£20 billion of cuts every year for five years on top of the years of cuts and austerity will further pauperise large swathes of the populace and the services we depend on.
Which leads us to the omission which would be banner headlines for weeks and the only subject discussed ad infinitum in the broadcast media if this was a manifesto under a left/Corbyn leadership:
Where are the costings. The working out made explicit to demonstrate that the commitments and self-imposed restraints actually add up and cost out?
Why is Herr Starmer getting virtually a free ride from the media on this compared to what would be the case if such an uncosted manifesto had been presented by a left led LP?
We are left with the IFS to point out the scale of cuts required to meet these self-imposed restrictions.
And you, Billy, have nothing to say on those realities. All you’ve got is deflection, projection and playing the man rather than the ball.
What a lightweight you are excusing the consequences of these cuts for the subjects of this regime from the safety of your (alleged) bolt hole thousands of miles away where they do not affect you.
Dave – Oooo whoopee, another essay 😪
Whoopeee! Another pathetic excuse to avoid the issue.
Dave – What issue would that be, do you have one?
https://skwawkbox.org/2024/06/12/video-audience-laughs-at-starmer-as-he-answers-robot-question-like-a-robot/#comment-255993
If you can’t see the issues raised here Billy it is because you don’t want to see them.
Dave – I made my issue quite clear many hours ago. If you have other issues then they are yours, not mine.
https://skwawkbox.org/2024/06/12/video-audience-laughs-at-starmer-as-he-answers-robot-question-like-a-robot/#comment-255959
See also here Billy:
https://skwawkbox.org/2024/06/12/video-audience-laughs-at-starmer-as-he-answers-robot-question-like-a-robot/#comment-256003
Dave – ………..and do what?
Toffee – Why would I waste my time. Unlike you, I have better things to do.
And that position is factually inaccurate Billy – ie wrong in every respect – because, as has already been pointed out to you, you have self selected only one part of the quote and ignored the other part to suit yourself.
Here it is again for you Billy:
“Our fiscal rules are that:
• The current budget moves into balance, so that day-to-day costs are met by revenues”
That means and is a written commitment quote in the manifesto to balancing the books by at least the end of a five year term.
The IFS and everyone else who knows their arse from a hole in the ground understands this.
The only person in denial is yourself Billy.
Bottom line, your claim is at best incorrect and factually wrong; at worst it is a further example of a deliberate lie and misrepresentation of the facts on your part.
That is the substantive issue and you being called out on it. Defend your position if you can. Provide a credible argument with substantiating evidence that the quote you have ignored….
“Our fiscal rules are that:
• The current budget moves into balance, so that day-to-day costs are met by revenues”
….does not mean balancing the books or concede the point gracefully.
“Dave – ………..and do what?”
Substantiate your inaccurate claims and arguments with credible evidence like normal people are already doing.
Crispin from Not the Nine O’clock news is doing good work on Labour dirty tricks, the splitting of the Independent vote
They are effectively fielding two candidates in certain seats, one Red Tory and one a spoiler
When it comes to a GE ffs just follow the money, what do they propose to spend every penny on and who gets the contract
How the cake is divided, will they make it bigger or shrink it
How much is diverted to vested interests
Start with Trident and work your way up to the NHS
fwiw Doug, Dave H provided a feed to a Richard Murphy taxresearch.org discussion above that is pretty-much exactly your thesis.
Ironically, Labour needs to be in power before its lies and deception will be obvious to most people.
qwertboi
14 years of feeding their vested interests out of the public purse is a shed load of money
Richard Murphy as far as I know never questions what the money has been spent on
Modern Monetary Theory, money creation, to me is just more debt by any other name, Magic Money Tree is disaster delayed
At some stage the shit is going to hit the fan and make 1929 look like a Tea party
The manifesto does not even offer the pretence of promoting disarmament of any kind.
And then it says: “…and protecting UK nationals.”
So what was Labour’s response to the recent murder of three UK aid workers by the Israeli authorities?
Business as usual, of course.
Doug …. Re your comment:
“Crispin from Not the Nine O’clock news”
It’s actually – “Not the Andrew Marr Show”
Sunday morning 10.30am.
johnsco
Thanks for that
It’s a big thing in the Fuhrers seat and Blackburn, have no clue how legal it is
On another matter
The Ceasefire deal needs to be enforced through the UN Security Council, the fear is Israel and the Yanks will walk away from the deal once the hostages are released
Which is why UN Peacekeeping forces have to move into Gaza from day one of the Ceasefire
What is problematic about this “deal” is its postmodernist construction in which something the Israeli Government has already rejected is redefined as an “Israeli Deal.”
In essence it is little different from the deal that the American’s put together a few weeks ago behind the Israeli Government’s back which enraged the Israeli Government and which they had no intention of ever agreeing to.
That deal has been repackaged and relabeled as “An Israeli deal” when it is nothing of the sort. There is no way the present Israeli Government is going to put itself behind a deal which is essentially one in which they have to admit defeat. Recall that the objective was to destroy Hamas. Moreover, as Alistair Crooke observed only a few days ago, the majority society in Israeli wants to occupy Gaza.
Withdrawing from Gaza with Hamas intact against the majority view of the Israeli populace is an admission of defeat. Israel is not going to agree to that.
What’s going on is all smoke and mirrors designed to try and present an Official Narrative that when the deal fails because of the Israeli Government are not going to agree to it that it is Hamas which is portrayed as the party which rejected the deal. Which is why the Russians abstained at the UN because the fundamentals of the US proposal is one they know the Israeli’s have previously rejected.
https://www.rokfin.com/post/180127/Blinken-ceasefire-confusion-Gantz-out-UNSC-Russia-abstains
According to the UN press release these are the reasons that Russia gave for abstaining
https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/06/1150886
Russian Ambassador and Permanent Representative Vassily Nebenzia said his country had abstained due to several outstanding concerns.
Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia of the Russian Federation addresses the UN Security Council meeting on the situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question.
UN Photo/Eskinder Debebe
“From the very outset of the military escalation, we have consistently and unwaveringly advocated for the imperative for a permanent ceasefire regime, including in order to release the hostages and remedy the humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip,” he said.
“We have a whole of host of questions about the American draft resolution, whereby the Council welcomes some deal – the ultimate outlines of which are not known to anyone perhaps except the mediators,” he said.
Although the resolution calls on Hamas to accept the “so called deal” there is no clarity on the official agreement of Israel “as it is written in the resolution.”
Noting the public statements of Israeli leaders indicating that the war would continue until Hamas is completely defeated, he asked “what specifically has Israel agreed to?”
The parameters of this “deal” are “vague” and the Council should not be signing up to it, he added.
A statement which is line with the analysis presented of that Russian position.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
“Maturity comes with experience, not age.”
Ziad K. Abdelnour
Dave – All I have done is present the official Russian position at the UN to help people reach an informed view. Is there a reason why you are being so defensive on Putin’s behalf?
And all I’ve done Billy is comment on your childish post of 03:54am, 15/6/24.
Nothing more, nothing less.
Trying to deflect this by reference to your PDS obsession and once again misrepresenting me is not going to convince anyone.
But we understand this is the only way you can cope in order to keep reality at bay.
Dave – ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
………and I should care what a gullible idiot who supports Putin thinks because……?
ps – What is PDS an abbreviation for?
PDS, as made explicit only two days ago for you….
https://skwawkbox.org/2024/06/12/video-audience-laughs-at-starmer-as-he-answers-robot-question-like-a-robot/#comment-255976
….. is Putin Derangement Syndrome:
Who only you bring up to deflect from your total absence of credible argument for your fantasy based claims.
So I’ll ask once again. Substantiate your misrepresentation that anywhere I have “supported Putin” as you so childishly keep claiming:
“You keep saying this Billy but what evidence do you have that any facts and evidence I have presented – much of it sourced from within the West and by Western politicians – is “propaganda”?
Where’s the beef? Present your case. Give us your evidence.
– The OSCE (Organisation for Security Cooperation in Europe) data on the shelling of the Russian speaking civilian population of the Donbass and subsequent numbers of civilian deaths is “Putin Propaganda”? And by definition the OSCE and anyone who quotes those objective figures are “Putin Propagandists/supportors”?
Really?
– That Merkal and Hollande are “Putin Propagandist’s for publicly stating that they and the Collective West entered the Minsk Agreements in bad faith; had no intention of implementing those agreements; and the agreements were only entered into to prepare the Ukrainian military to enter into conflict with the Russian Federation by proxy on behalf of the US. And by definition their pubic statements to that effect are “Putin Propaganda” and anyone who refers to that objective and verifiable fact is a “Putin Supporter”?
Seriously?
– The Myrotvorets site with the list of individuals it contains is a “Putin Propaganda” site. And the Ukrainian’s who administer it and the CIA who control it are “Putin Propagandists”? And anyone who refers to this objective and verifiable fact is a “Putin Supporter”?
Come again?
– That the public statement by the head of NATO Jan Stoltenburg that the conflict in Ukraine began in 2014 not 2024 is “Putin Propaganda”. And therefore the head of NATO is a “Putin Propagandist” and anyone who brings up this objective and verifiable fact is a “Putin Supporter”?
Yeah! Right! Okay!
– That arguing for the consistent application of universal principles to apply evenly to everyone – including Russian speakers, Palestinians, and other Countries outside the Collective West – such as the right to security, the right to self defence and the right to ask for assistance under the UN R2P (Right to Protect) provisions is “supporting Putin”?.
On what planet Billy?
If you had any evidence to support this unsubstantiated and childish smear and slander you would have presented it by now.
Repeating complete unsubstantiated and un-evidenced bollocks over and over again is simply the meaningless drivel of the school playground or the football terraces.
What it is not is grown up adult discourse.
Are you capable of adult discourse Billy?
Not a single person here on this site considers that you are.
Dave – “Putin Derangement Syndrome”
…..but you’re the one who is making up acronyms about Putin, how obsessive and sad is that
A reasonable description of your obsession of bringing Putin up as the only answer to every difficult question you cannot deal with when no one else ever mentions him Billy.
After all, the most effective way to treat such cognitive dissonance problems is to identify the cause of the effect. In the reality based community of objective based science that methodology is a tried and tested way of eventually arriving at an appropriate treatment for your symptoms.
It was probably not a good idea on your part to become a de facto member of the John Birch Society:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U5Xn9YOKPcQ
Keep taking the tablets lad.
I’m simply…
I’m merely…
All I have done is…
Doesn’t excuse or exempt you from expanding on your bullshit when required to. And you’re required to with just about every post you make.
You’re the one dismissing everyone else’s argument(s) without fail, but also, and crucially, without doing people you dismiss the courtesy of explanation; setting out your own view on why we are wrong, choosing instead to excuse/recuse yourself when push comes to shove and you are put on the spot.
This I’m right because I support keef and he’s the party leader bollocks is exactly that.
Bollocks. Pontification of the gobshite order. Borderline deification of someone who can’t tell what defines a woman, nevermind what defines the working class.
And proves beyond doubt you are incapable of critical thought.
Your attempts at the indoctrination of the rest of us is borderline pitiful. Though you yourself deserve no pity. Nobody that has such a laissez-faire attitude towards the harming of children merits any sort of leniency.
So continue with your I’m only… because we know otherwise.
We KNOW what you are.
Why would I waste my time. unlike you, I have better things to do. 😘
And yet you’ve done so. Wasting both your time by your own definition, and reinforcing the the main point I made about you.
Unlucky, wrong’un. You gonna tell us the month and year you left blighty? Or still think you got something you can keep hidden from us?
We both know why I’m asking, don’t we?😙🎶
Toffee – “We both know why I’m asking, don’t we?😙🎶”
On the contrary, like you, I have absolutely no idea what you are prattling on about. .
Like being “helpful” to Allan Howard?
Pull the other one Billy, it hath got bells on.
https://skwawkbox.org/2024/06/15/unite-asks-members-should-we-take-a-very-pro-israel-position/
It will be interesting to see the results of this survey, will you be publishing them
Does anyone have a link to the full survey?
In the present context of a murderous criminal genocide by Israel, aided and abetted by the entire political and media class across the Collective West, asking the question “should we take a very pro-Israeli position” is akin to asking people to actively agree with mass murder.
The survey results will certainly reveal just how many rabid racists come out of the woodwork.
Indeed. They have been galvanised and feel safe on these minor news channels to vent their spleen.
It’s nice to see Farage & Co exacerbating the Tory’s problems
MRP Update: First MRP Since Farage’s Return
In the first MRP analysis since Nigel Farage announced he would stand for election and resume the position of party leader, Reform UK are leading in seven seats and are currently placed second within 10 points of the leading candidate in six more.
Labour are on track for a 262-seat majority, with the party currently leading in 456 seats while the Conservatives remain far behind on 72 seats. The Liberal Democrats are currently leading in 56 seats – just one fewer than their 2010 result. The SNP are currently ahead in 37 of the 57 seats in Scotland, while Reform are current favourites in seven, Plaid in two and the Greens are likely to hold Brighton Pavilion.
Our analysis on behalf of Best for Britain is based on 42,269 online and telephone interviews, conducted between the 31st of May and the 13th of June.
https://www.survation.com/mrp-update-first-mrp-since-farages-return/
On the contrary, like you, I have absolutely no idea what you are prattling on about/I>
Again, feigning ignorance as a contingency, naught but further demonstration of the obvious absence of innocence.
Won’t stop me from asking. Won’t stop you from lying.
You know damned well that furnishing me with a timeline greatly enhances the prospect of me proving you lie through your teeth once I get the approximate date of your UK absquatulation.
Nothing to hide, nothing to fear. Out with it.
Found this just now, while looking for something else…
https://skwawkbox.org/2017/12/02/non-corbynite-labour-member-exposes-haringey-takeover-smears/#comment-51771
SteveH02/12/2017 AT 5:06 AM
Their (sic)is a similar clique in the Tory party desperately trying to cling onto power using the Blairite tactics of centralising power and disenfranchising their members. The similarities are quite striking.
This article on Conservative Home along with the 2 accompanying documents make for fascinating reading
Except it’s quite ok when keef employs those tactics, then, as evidenced on a multitude of occasions by skwawkbox, isn’t it,wee gobshite?
fascinating reading indeed. Obviously a shithouse trick keef’s learned from, and you now endorse.
Toffee – Oh dear, how sad are you? That was 6½yrs ago and a lot has changed for the better since then.
You should perhaps consider exercising some caution, your obsessive behaviour is very unlikely to be good for your mental health. 😟
“a lot has changed for the better since then.”
Really Billy? And your evidence for this claim/conclusion is?
Oh! We forgot. You don’t do evidence do you Billy. You simply pontificate and when challenged with actual substantive evidence resort to childish memes, shouting “Putinbot”, or bellyaching about ‘essays’.
A vacuum is full by comparison.
Dave – Why would I bother, have you not seen the polls?
I’m looking forward to seeing the results of these changes to the Labour Party on July 5th, are you?
ps: You repeatedly support Russia on these pages so why are you ashamed of being known to be one of Putin’s useless idiots?
SteveH – As I recall it Jeremy Corbyn’s administration enthusiastically expelled many high profile activists from the party. At the beginning of 2019 they even bragged about how much more efficient they’d made the process
6.5 years ago? (Were you still in the UK then?)
So bastard WHAT? Hasn’t stopped keef expelling people for tweets they might’ve liked back then (and even further). You’ve happily mitigated for those expulsions, so you can have NO complaints when the tables are turned.
It doesn’t exempt you from your overt hypocrisy, nor absolve you of your nonsenseism. Far from it. It only demonstrates it.
Nothing to hide, nothing to fear, noncecase. I’m not after the reason you pissed off to the Caribbean, I’m just after the date.
But you refuse to provide it as you have something else you don’t wish to be exposed (and no, I’m not talking about that other foul habit of yours).
Toffee – see my response above at 9:21pm
Billy – What have the polls got to do with the continuing issue of the LP adopting (quote) “Blairite tactics of centralising power and disenfranchising their members”(unquote)?
In fact the only change which has occurred is that it has got a whole lot worse since then with even right wing Councillors quitting the party over its Stalinist authoritarianism and forming their own Independent groups.
You confuse projected seat allocations from polls with popularity. Ignoring the mood of the country over the lack of engineered meaningful choice and the impact this will have on aggregate turnout levels.
Indeed, the amount of effort you expand avoiding the issues and questions would make Charles Ponzi green with envy at the sheer level of dishonesty on display.
Moving on, this is not a game of football. Once again you deliberately misrepresent. Cowering behind anonymity. The facts of your misrepresentation are laid out here:
https://skwawkbox.org/2024/06/12/video-audience-laughs-at-starmer-as-he-answers-robot-question-like-a-robot/#comment-256023
The inability on your part to counter those facts and provide evidence for your misrepresentation by resorting to what is little more than repeated playground level slanders demonstrates you have no credible or valid arguments to substantiate these misrepresentations.
Repeated misrepresentations which reveal not only your disdain for the facts but your implicit support for the racist and imperialist actions detailed over many posts on these related issues.
What’s it like being on the wrong side of history to the extent that you have nothing to offer but this repeated childish nonsense Billy?
Dave – “What have the polls got to do with the continuing issue of the LP adopting (quote) “Blairite tactics of centralising power and disenfranchising their members”(unquote)?”
You, not me, are one claiming that this applies to the current Labour Party.
Whatever the Labour Party is doing or not doing they are undeniably doing better in the polls than they were 4½yrs ago.
On the contrary, Billy, it is the facts which make the claim not myself.
I merely draw attention to those facts. Many of which are recorded on this site, among others, in article after article.
If, as you clearly do, have a problem with those facts we await with bated breath your attempt to refute them with actual substantive and credible evidence without your usual obsessive reference to the hobgoblin which dominates your simplistic and increasingly desperate zero sum narrative.
Preferably with some context which is actually relevant. Which the red herring about projected polls is not.
Dave – Do you feel better now?😘
I’m looking forward to hearing the results come in on Fri 5th. Who’s fault is it that you and your comrades have SFA that is credible to offer the electorate.
Make your mind up Billy, which is it?
Have the Labour Party changed from your previous quoted assessment by Toffee or have they expunged all non-rabid neo liberals from contesting seats under Herr Starmer – effectively removing any realistic choices given the systemic costs involved for anyone outside the uni-party:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_mrQreN1Us
You’re not having it both ways.
Either way, there’s still £1,000 on the table that more people refuse to vote or spoil their ballots than vote Labour over the lack of allowed choice of nothing beyond the uni-party.
Question is, have you got the bottle to put your money where your mouth is?
Yes or no Billy?