Can Sir Keir Starmer revive the Labour Party?

[Sway]

bhstewie said:

Jinx said:

He wasn't ranting and raving when there were outside of the pub. If Sir Keir feels supporting the government in this is the correct thing to do he should be able to explain why (I thought he was supposed to be an eloquent lawyer in command of his facts?). From what I could tell there were no wife and children present? He chose to ignore the publican's points and then attempt to continue his photo op in the public house.
He lost control of the situation and did nothing to diffuse it - not exactly statesmanlike.

I didn't mean Starmer's wife or child I meant if it was the Queen or Prince William and a member of the public starts acting like that.

What would you have their protection do?

Fully agree he didn't handle it well.

Have you ever heard or seen a scenario where the Queen or PW have gotten themselves into that situation? Where they've not sought to defuse, but instead activley antagonised?

After the first (fairly calm) interaction, they would have walked away, whilst their staff/protection stepped in calmly to figure out what on earth is going on.

Meanwhile, we have journalists and respected commentators using language like "bonkers", etc. - which is fking disgraceful.


Oh, and there's no way on earth Royal Protection Officers wouldn't have known exactly who were the licensees/landlords/staff of the pub, or had prepped the ground beforehand.

[markyb_lcy]

Sway said:

There was zero need for Starmer to go in after the initial row. The claim is he wanted to check inside cause he didn't believe the guy was the landlord (and that's fair enough) - send one of the staffers in, that's the defusing action.

Here’s me thinking we are not allowed indoors in pubs except to use bathrooms.

I’ll have to try that next time I’m in a beer garden ... “I must go inside your pub mr landlord to check that you are indeed the registered landlord and that you have the relevant authority to refuse me entry to a pub I’m legally not allowed to enter anyway, except to be able to piss”.

[Skyrocket21]

Here's the video in full:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGuLJvY9ApE

Goodbye to Keir Starmer's political career, "I don't need a lecture from you" as he trespasses onto the guys pub and then the security guy assaults the landlord by throwing him around, you couldn't make this up, what an arrogant prick Kier really is. The people defending that behaviour is shameful.

[JagLover]

Skyrocket21 said:

Here's the video in full:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGuLJvY9ApE

Goodbye to Keir Starmer's political career, "I don't need a lecture from you" as he trespasses onto the guys pub and then the security guy assaults the landlord by throwing him around, you couldn't make this up, what an arrogant prick Kier really is. The people defending that behaviour is shameful.

This could have happened to any member of our political class but Starmer made it far worse for himself with that comment. Untouchable arrogance personified.

[bitchstewie]

Sway said:

Have you ever heard or seen a scenario where the Queen or PW have gotten themselves into that situation? Where they've not sought to defuse, but instead activley antagonised?

After the first (fairly calm) interaction, they would have walked away, whilst their staff/protection stepped in calmly to figure out what on earth is going on.

Meanwhile, we have journalists and respected commentators using language like "bonkers", etc. - which is fking disgraceful.


Oh, and there's no way on earth Royal Protection Officers wouldn't have known exactly who were the licensees/landlords/staff of the pub, or had prepped the ground beforehand.

Take your pick of "important people".

I remember a former MP man-handling a lady out of some official dinner type event when she got too close to Philip Hammond (I think) and a lot of people on here said that was absolutely fine because "she could have had a bomb" and all sorts.

Like I said I expect there's a bit of a political tint to how a lot of people see this.

It doesn't look good and Starmer handled it badly but I wouldn't expect to see assault charges bought any time soon.

[Touring442]

Starmer's political career down the stter.

What useless prick. Corbyn must be laughing like a drain, never mind Boris.

[HappyClappy]

The pub landlord spoke on behalf of what I believe is the silent majority who look on at these last 13 months in complete dismay at what has happened to our country all over a slightly worse than usual cold virus.

I hold the government responsible but the complete lack of any opposition makes SirKneel complicit.

I would do the same or worse if I came across Boris, Hancock, Gove etc as this landlord did as quite frankly I consider them all total scum.

We so desperately need a viable opposition to these globalist lackeys.

[markyb_lcy]

bhstewie said:

It doesn't look good and Starmer handled it badly but I wouldn't expect to see assault charges bought any time soon.

Indeed, that would be highly unlikely if (as suggested by someone who appears to know his apples from oranges) the “bodyguard” was a member of the diplomatic protection service.

[InitialDave]

While I think Starmer has been, if not stitched up, at least put in an awkward situation by being invited by one person who runs the business while another really doesn't want him around (which I assume they weren't warned about), it's very much resulted in one of those "the optics aren't great" scenarios through how they handled it.

Should probably have just walked away and gone to whatever his next engagement was.

Also lol at "they're not goons! They're publicly funded, official goons!"
That's... not better.

[markyb_lcy]

HappyClappy said:

The pub landlord spoke on behalf of what I believe is the silent majority who look on at these last 13 months in complete dismay at what has happened to our country all over a slightly worse than usual cold virus.

I hold the government responsible but the complete lack of any opposition makes SirKneel complicit.

I would do the same or worse if I came across Boris, Hancock, Gove etc as this landlord did as quite frankly I consider them all total scum.

We so desperately need a viable opposition to these globalist lackeys.

Spot on

[Sway]

bhstewie said:

Sway said:

Have you ever heard or seen a scenario where the Queen or PW have gotten themselves into that situation? Where they've not sought to defuse, but instead activley antagonised?

After the first (fairly calm) interaction, they would have walked away, whilst their staff/protection stepped in calmly to figure out what on earth is going on.

Meanwhile, we have journalists and respected commentators using language like "bonkers", etc. - which is fking disgraceful.


Oh, and there's no way on earth Royal Protection Officers wouldn't have known exactly who were the licensees/landlords/staff of the pub, or had prepped the ground beforehand.

Take your pick of "important people".

I remember a former MP man-handling a lady out of some official dinner type event when she got too close to Philip Hammond (I think) and a lot of people on here said that was absolutely fine because "she could have had a bomb" and all sorts.

Like I said I expect there's a bit of a political tint to how a lot of people see this.

It doesn't look good and Starmer handled it badly but I wouldn't expect to see assault charges bought any time soon.

Did I say that about that incident?

I don't expect assault charges either, especially with the framing by many that the bloke was "bonkers" or a "nutter".

[Dr Doofenshmirtz]

Skyrocket21 said:

Here's the video in full:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGuLJvY9ApE

Goodbye to Keir Starmer's political career, "I don't need a lecture from you" as he trespasses onto the guys pub and then the security guy assaults the landlord by throwing him around, you couldn't make this up, what an arrogant prick Kier really is. The people defending that behaviour is shameful.

The chap is asking perfectly reasonable questions. How anyone can call him mad or a loon is shameful. He's surely asking what we are all wondering? Especially the kids wearing masks in school bit. And then for Starmer to enter the pub when we all know the rules, he's perfectly entitled to get him to leave.
How anyone can think this is anything other than a PR disaster for Labour and the useless waste of space that is Starmer is beyond me.
Starmer is supposed to be questioning all these policies that's what a good opposition does. Not just flop around like a puppy having it's tummy tickled.

[bitchstewie]

Sway said:

Did I say that about that incident?

I don't expect assault charges either, especially with the framing by many that the bloke was "bonkers" or a "nutter".

I didn't say that you did.

The example of the event with spreadsheet Phil was just to highlight how fickle people (not you before you get all defensive again) can be depending who's doing the shoving.

[gizlaroc]

bhstewie said:

I do wonder what people would have had him do and what they'd do if they found themselves in a similar situation with someone ranting and raving at their wife or child or partner like that.

It looks awful but I suspect there's a tiny bit of political blinkers going on with some of the reactions here.

As a shadow leader I wouldn't say "Don't lecture me."

Lecture him?

He was throwing some facts at him and asking why he was not questioning the actions that were ruining people's businesses the country over.



Wife or child? Where did you get that from? If Kier's child had spoke to him do you honestly think the landlord would have done the same to him? You're political blinkers on there old chap.

If it had been Boris he would have done the same, these guys are need to be asked these questions, he asked the questions many of us are asking.



Edit: saw your later replies, well backtracked. just kidding.



You must also take into account, Kier came away from this and lied about the bloke. Labour press and Kier called him a Covid denier.
Really, really poor show and sums up the contempt the the elected take for the public at the moment.

Those replies show me that they think the British public are completely and utterly stupid and can be told anything and we will take it.

Some serious damage done there and it will make a few people wake up to the nonsense happening.

Edited by gizlaroc on Tuesday 20th April 08:58

[Sway]

bhstewie said:

Sway said:

Did I say that about that incident?

I don't expect assault charges either, especially with the framing by many that the bloke was "bonkers" or a "nutter".

I didn't say that you did.

The example of the event with spreadsheet Phil was just to highlight how fickle people (not you before you get all defensive again) can be depending who's doing the shoving.

Yup, people are partisan.

We've got a few here who are defending Starmer and the goon, and joining in with the assertions of mental illness of a pub landlord based on nothing more than 90s of video where he's been patronised, his pub entered against his will (and the law), and shoved down stairs - all whilst being very clear he's angry, not violent.

I'm sure you've told me many times language matters yet I'm not sure you're being entirely consistent here chap. Your opprobrium is somewhat more muted than I've come to expect - and you're still focusing way more on posters that aren't here that you disagree with rather than the ones showing disgusting mindsets that are closer to your 'side'...

[spikyone]

bhstewie said:

Take your pick of "important people".

I remember a former MP man-handling a lady out of some official dinner type event when she got too close to Philip Hammond (I think) and a lot of people on here said that was absolutely fine because "she could have had a bomb" and all sorts.

Like I said I expect there's a bit of a political tint to how a lot of people see this.

It doesn't look good and Starmer handled it badly but I wouldn't expect to see assault charges bought any time soon.

In the Hammond case, the woman was one of many Greenpeace protesters that arrived uninvited and an invited MP was trying to restrain her. In Starmer's case, Starmer himself was seemingly uninvited and his team tried to restrain the landlord that uninvited him. There's nothing political in pointing out that those two situations are basically complete opposites.

[98elise]

InitialDave said:

While I think Starmer has been, if not stitched up, at least put in an awkward situation by being invited by one person who runs the business while another really doesn't want him around (which I assume they weren't warned about), it's very much resulted in one of those "the optics aren't great" scenarios through how they handled it.

Should probably have just walked away and gone to whatever his next engagement was.

Also lol at "they're not goons! They're publicly funded, official goons!"
That's... not better.

If Labour were in power the Landlord would be in a Gulag camp by now

[bitchstewie]

Sway said:

Yup, people are partisan.

We've got a few here who are defending Starmer and the goon, and joining in with the assertions of mental illness of a pub landlord based on nothing more than 90s of video where he's been patronised, his pub entered against his will (and the law), and shoved down stairs - all whilst being very clear he's angry, not violent.

I'm sure you've told me many times language matters yet I'm not sure you're being entirely consistent here chap. Your opprobrium is somewhat more muted than I've come to expect - and you're still focusing way more on posters that aren't here that you disagree with rather than the ones showing disgusting mindsets that are closer to your 'side'...

We can all point to examples of people flipping from angry to violent very quickly.

Would you take that chance if you were charged with protecting a senior politician and that happened to you?

Personally I think there's a little bit of going after the "goon" because of who he's with but that's just my opinion.

I'm sure we've all called people "loons" and "nutters" before and a bit like laughing at Donald Trump and saying "he's nuts" it's a fine line between figures of speech and poor taste which is why I've tried to stop doing it especially this last 12 months or so.

[Boringvolvodriver]

markyb_lcy said:

HappyClappy said:

The pub landlord spoke on behalf of what I believe is the silent majority who look on at these last 13 months in complete dismay at what has happened to our country all over a slightly worse than usual cold virus.

I hold the government responsible but the complete lack of any opposition makes SirKneel complicit.

I would do the same or worse if I came across Boris, Hancock, Gove etc as this landlord did as quite frankly I consider them all total scum.

We so desperately need a viable opposition to these globalist lackeys.

Spot on

Agree - what makes it worse is how Labour are attempting to smear the guy by saying he was using “misinformation” - no he wasn’t. However, many intellectually challenged people won’t bother to look at the actual footage and will go along believing it all.

[Sway]

bhstewie said:

Sway said:

Yup, people are partisan.

We've got a few here who are defending Starmer and the goon, and joining in with the assertions of mental illness of a pub landlord based on nothing more than 90s of video where he's been patronised, his pub entered against his will (and the law), and shoved down stairs - all whilst being very clear he's angry, not violent.

I'm sure you've told me many times language matters yet I'm not sure you're being entirely consistent here chap. Your opprobrium is somewhat more muted than I've come to expect - and you're still focusing way more on posters that aren't here that you disagree with rather than the ones showing disgusting mindsets that are closer to your 'side'...

We can all point to examples of people flipping from angry to violent very quickly.

Would you take that chance if you were charged with protecting a senior politician and that happened to you?

Personally I think there's a little bit of going after the "goon" because of who he's with but that's just my opinion.

I'm sure we've all called people "loons" and "nutters" before and a bit like laughing at Donald Trump and saying "he's nuts" it's a fine line between figures of speech and poor taste which is why I've tried to stop doing it especially this last 12 months or so.

If I were really so interested in 'protecting my principle' (yeah, I know the colour of the boathouse doors in Hereford... ) - I'd have intervened to stop him going into the pub when there's clearly heightened emotions and confusion about exactly who is who and what the bloody hell is going on!

I've been clear my criticism of his intervention - he didn't separate sufficiently, and he didn't take the direct route on level ground. He threw down stairs. That could have ended very, very differently and protection officer or not could have been facing a manslaughter charge very easily - backwards down stairs rarely ends well, especially what appear to be old wooden ones.

I'm aware you don't use that language - I've also come to the same conclusion. My point is that I've seen you regularly and directly pull others up for their language, but not this time...