Can Sir Keir Starmer revive the Labour Party? (Vol. 2)
Discussion
Wombat3 said:
That's very questionable given some of the things that have gone on under his leadership of both the CPS and the Labour.
Does anyone think that know what he really believes ? About anything?
As to who he can appoint as ministers, its the one place I have some sympathy with him. He is surrounded by a very uninspiring lot indeed.
I don't care what he believes. These people have near zero freedom to act, he'll do what the circumstances dictate.Does anyone think that know what he really believes ? About anything?
As to who he can appoint as ministers, its the one place I have some sympathy with him. He is surrounded by a very uninspiring lot indeed.
The one thing they could all do is sort out productivity but if they did the things they need to do that they'd never get elected again.
As for ministers, with a landslide he'll have plenty to choose from and the Socialist Campaign Group will be totally sidelined.
BikeBikeBIke said:
I don't care what he believes. These people have near zero freedom to act, he'll do what the circumstances dictate.
The one thing they could all do is sort out productivity but if they did the things they need to do that they'd never get elected again.
As for ministers, with a landslide he'll have plenty to choose from and the Socialist Campaign Group will be totally sidelined.
I think I do care what he really thinks. If "these people have nearly zero freedom to act" then by extension the Tories must be blameless for the current situation.The one thing they could all do is sort out productivity but if they did the things they need to do that they'd never get elected again.
As for ministers, with a landslide he'll have plenty to choose from and the Socialist Campaign Group will be totally sidelined.
Which is plainly not entirely true.
The fact is they can all do stuff that makes things worse in the long term.
I can think of no organisation less likely to fix productivity (and it is a core and central problem) than Labour
As to the idea of fresh faced ministers who don't even know their way around the building let alone the macine of government, that's not exactly a reassuring idea.
Wombat3 said:
BikeBikeBIke said:
119 said:
Turning this around if I may, what qualities do you think he has that makes him so electable?
He's a competent administrator who will broadly make good decisions and appoint good ministers as far as he is able.Does anyone think that they know what he really believes ? About anything?
As to who he can appoint as ministers, its the one place I have some sympathy with him. He is surrounded by a very uninspiring lot indeed.
Some of the words that have been used to describe him in the last few posts do nor make for encouraging reading in the context of the next leader of the country..
Shopping trolley
Unsure
Evasive
Bland
Vanilla
Etc etc
Then there is the suggestion that it's good news that he's managed to keep a lid on the Labour party so that people won't realise what it's really about!
Edited by Wombat3 on Wednesday 8th May 08:20
It’s good news that he’s kept a lid on the Labour Party because it shows he is capable of running a half decent ship.
If somebody is intending to run a country, being able to have some disciplinary control over their own party - well, that’s surely a plus, no?
Wombat's default positions are unchanging, amounting to a sniper's dream. I cannot help but chuckle at the repeated assertion that Labour is merely a swirling pot of chippy factions just waiting to get their hands on the keys to No.10. Quite how that analysis propels anyone into the arms of the sinking ship currently home to the Nat Cons, New Cons, Five families (lol) ERG, Common sense group (lol again) Northern research group, Bruges Group etc. etc. suggests a blind spot the size of which would have DVLA hoisting your licence permanently.
Wombat3 said:
I think I do care what he really thinks. If "these people have nearly zero freedom to act" then by extension the Tories must be blameless for the current situation.
Yup, that's exactly what I think.Truss tried to do something "different that she believed in" and reality bit hard.
Productivity is what matters and if they fix that they'd never get elected again.
Edited by BikeBikeBIke on Wednesday 8th May 09:42
Wombat3 said:
BikeBikeBIke said:
I don't care what he believes. These people have near zero freedom to act, he'll do what the circumstances dictate.
The one thing they could all do is sort out productivity but if they did the things they need to do that they'd never get elected again.
As for ministers, with a landslide he'll have plenty to choose from and the Socialist Campaign Group will be totally sidelined.
I think I do care what he really thinks. If "these people have nearly zero freedom to act" then by extension the Tories must be blameless for the current situation.The one thing they could all do is sort out productivity but if they did the things they need to do that they'd never get elected again.
As for ministers, with a landslide he'll have plenty to choose from and the Socialist Campaign Group will be totally sidelined.
Which is plainly not entirely true.
The fact is they can all do stuff that makes things worse in the long term.
I can think of no organisation less likely to fix productivity (and it is a core and central problem) than Labour
As to the idea of fresh faced ministers who don't even know their way around the building let alone the macine of government, that's not exactly a reassuring idea.
Labour might be able to change some, but not many of our problems.
MC Bodge said:
Wombat3 said:
As to the idea of fresh faced ministers who don't even know their way around the building let alone the macine of government, that's not exactly a reassuring idea.
Given the quality of ministers since 2016 or so, It is unlikely that they could be as bad.One other thing about Starmer is that he is lucky. He has shown great leadership in sorting out Labour after the disaster of the Corbyn years, but he is also lucky that he is leader at a time when the Cons are essentially unelectable now and the SNP has imploded. Be good to have a PM who is lucky.
BikeBikeBIke said:
I don't care what he believes. These people have near zero freedom to act, he'll do what the circumstances dictate.
The one thing they could all do is sort out productivity but if they did the things they need to do that they'd never get elected again.
As for ministers, with a landslide he'll have plenty to choose from and the Socialist Campaign Group will be totally sidelined.
Anyone standing to be Labour leader needs 20% of MPs to nominate. The SCG have 31 members now so if Labour end up with less than 310 MPs and none of the new ones are SCG, they can send one of their members to the membership to vote. Let's just hope that the nutty and antisemitic left stay in the Greens and don't rejoin Labour.The one thing they could all do is sort out productivity but if they did the things they need to do that they'd never get elected again.
As for ministers, with a landslide he'll have plenty to choose from and the Socialist Campaign Group will be totally sidelined.
President Merkin said:
Wombat's default positions are unchanging, amounting to a sniper's dream. I cannot help but chuckle at the repeated assertion that Labour is merely a swirling pot of chippy factions just waiting to get their hands on the keys to No.10. Quite how that analysis propels anyone into the arms of the sinking ship currently home to the Nat Cons, New Cons, Five families (lol) ERG, Common sense group (lol again) Northern research group, Bruges Group etc. etc. suggests a blind spot the size of which would have DVLA hoisting your licence permanently.
Speaking of "blind spots" 
Your description of Labour as a "swirling pot of chippy factions" is about bang on - IMO.
But for clarity, not once, anywhere, have you seen me write that the current lot are any good either.
(This thread is about Starmer though, so in that context the "whataboutery" is not really that relevant).
MC Bodge said:
Wombat3 said:
As to the idea of fresh faced ministers who don't even know their way around the building let alone the macine of government, that's not exactly a reassuring idea.
Given the quality of ministers since 2016 or so, It is unlikely that they could be as bad.President Merkin said:
Um, that's clearly my interpretation of your line of thought. Do keep up Womble. And do try to see the flaw in your argument, there's a good soldier.
Ah, you are in one of your special condescending moods this morning. Relax, its a car forum! 
Doesn't alter the fact that evidence is there a-plenty that your description is about bob-on. Thanks for that.
For every ERG loon theres a Momentum loon to balance them out.
Legacywr said:
Wombat3 said:
BikeBikeBIke said:
I don't care what he believes. These people have near zero freedom to act, he'll do what the circumstances dictate.
The one thing they could all do is sort out productivity but if they did the things they need to do that they'd never get elected again.
As for ministers, with a landslide he'll have plenty to choose from and the Socialist Campaign Group will be totally sidelined.
I think I do care what he really thinks. If "these people have nearly zero freedom to act" then by extension the Tories must be blameless for the current situation.The one thing they could all do is sort out productivity but if they did the things they need to do that they'd never get elected again.
As for ministers, with a landslide he'll have plenty to choose from and the Socialist Campaign Group will be totally sidelined.
Which is plainly not entirely true.
The fact is they can all do stuff that makes things worse in the long term.
I can think of no organisation less likely to fix productivity (and it is a core and central problem) than Labour
As to the idea of fresh faced ministers who don't even know their way around the building let alone the macine of government, that's not exactly a reassuring idea.
Labour might be able to change some, but not many of our problems.
Wombat3 said:
MC Bodge said:
Wombat3 said:
As to the idea of fresh faced ministers who don't even know their way around the building let alone the macine of government, that's not exactly a reassuring idea.
Given the quality of ministers since 2016 or so, It is unlikely that they could be as bad.Why are you still banging this drum?
MC Bodge said:
Wombat3 said:
MC Bodge said:
Wombat3 said:
As to the idea of fresh faced ministers who don't even know their way around the building let alone the macine of government, that's not exactly a reassuring idea.
Given the quality of ministers since 2016 or so, It is unlikely that they could be as bad.Why are you still banging this drum?
The jury is out on Reeves though anyone that resorts to copying & pasting from Wikipedia is questionable.
The only ones that stand out as being of any quality are Cooper and Benn (but they are also very very partisan about lots of things, not least the EU situation) and Wes Streeting who has been known to talk some sense and seems the most balanced and realistic of the lot of them.
Miliband is, well, less said the better.
All headed up by Mr Flip-flop himself of course......
Its simply not very encouraging!
(And then you have the Burgon's of this world hiding on the back benches)
Edited by Wombat3 on Wednesday 8th May 12:29
Wombat3 said:
Because I look at the likes of Lammy, Rayner, Dodds, Thornberry & Ashworth & co & I just think they are rubbish!
The jury is out on Reeves though anyone that resorts to copying & pasting from Wikipedia is questionable.
The only ones that stand out as being of any quality are Cooper and Benn (but they are also very very partisan about lots of things, not least the EU situation) and Wes Streeting who has been known to talk some sense and seems the most balanced and realistic of the lot of them.
Miliband is, well, less said the better.
All headed up by Mr Flip-flop himself of course......
Its simply not very encouraging!
(And then you have the Burgon's of this world hiding on the back benches)
You ok?The jury is out on Reeves though anyone that resorts to copying & pasting from Wikipedia is questionable.
The only ones that stand out as being of any quality are Cooper and Benn (but they are also very very partisan about lots of things, not least the EU situation) and Wes Streeting who has been known to talk some sense and seems the most balanced and realistic of the lot of them.
Miliband is, well, less said the better.
All headed up by Mr Flip-flop himself of course......
Its simply not very encouraging!
(And then you have the Burgon's of this world hiding on the back benches)
Edited by Wombat3 on Wednesday 8th May 12:29
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff