Starmer's vision quest

[CXRAndy]

Another bitter whiny Corbynite.

Nickname was 'Squealer'

 

[multitool]

Sorry, been out on bike.

Where are we up to? Are we still berating the Labour leadership for winning? Or are we still all humpty because nasty Mr Starmer won't commit to the sort of spending plans that we'd all love even though we can't explain how they will be funded because we think there is an endless supply of money with no consequences on inflation or sterling?

Are we still skewering ourself on the awkward conundrum that Starmer hasn't got enough personality, whilst Johnson had too much? Perhaps we are still harrumphing that Starmer has no "radical", "bold" plans, even though we haven't quite managed to describe what those radical, bold plans might be, beyond taxing the wealthy.

Talking of which...have we even done our sums yet on whether "taxing the rich" rather than everyone will deliver the sums of money we need for our bold and radical plans?

Maybe we are still hooked on this notion that an opposition leader can single-handedly change the media by being obstructive, whilst still needing the media to be onside.

Or are we just contemplating our bizarre use of the word "technocrat" to describe Starmer even though he didn't go from a PPE degree straight into the party machine. Maybe we are trying to reconcile his experience as a barrister and Director of CPS with our use of the word "technocrat" and still working out how to make it fit.

Maybe we are thinking of re-heating the "forensic" gag for the n-th time, hoping that the readership has forgotten that it was a series of "forensic" questions at PMQs that forced Johnson into lying to the House, which later caused him to resign.

Perhaps, really, all we want is Magic Grandpa back. The career protestor who told us we could have everything we wanted, and somebody else apart from us would pay for it.

Of course, MG's biggest achievement was to deliver the biggest loss to the Tories for nearly a century.

Way to go, my MG.

His apparent failing was to not stand up to the media in the way Mick Lynch modelled. Had he done so he would have won and everything would have been perfect.

 

[cookiemonster]

Or are we still all humpty because nasty Mr Starmer won't commit to the sort of spending plans that we'd all love even though we can't explain how they will be funded because we think there is an endless supply of money with no consequences on inflation or sterling?

How about comitting to, at least, rejoining the SM and CU as it'll be the quickest way to give the economy a much needed kick. Staying aout is costing the UK an average GDP loss of 4%. Poll after poll have said that the majority of people want to rejoin, even the Express and GB News polls came up with the same result, with much embarrassment to them. Why are they not committing to this? I'm sure their economic advisers must be telling them this. It'll create jobs and, in turn, increase tax revenues. Also, get the billions back spent on dodgy PPE contracts.

Talking of which...have we even done our sums yet on whether "taxing the rich" rather than everyone will deliver the sums of money we need for our bold and radical plans?

Taxing the rich can be seen as the politics of envy but close the loopholes that the rich use to evade tax. When a CEO pays less tax than the office cleaner, there's a serious issue that needs dealing with.

Are we still skewering ourself on the awkward conundrum that Starmer hasn't got enough personality, whilst Johnson had too much? Perhaps we are still harrumphing that Starmer has no "radical", "bold" plans, even though we haven't quite managed to describe what those radical, bold plans might be, beyond taxing the wealthy.

He has no vision except to carry on the managed decline of the UK. There is no vision. There is no plan. When he does come up with a plan/vision, all it takes is someone to shout at him and the plan is dropped, sometimes within days of it being announced. I can understand, in light of the current sh^tstorm that passes for the UK economy, that plans may need to be shelved/ammended but he's dropped every single one. All of them. In four years, every one has been dropped. That's not what the UK needs right now. Johnson's a traitor and I really don't care about personality, as long as they do the job properly and as expected but we don't need cowards either who are scared to make any decision in case they get shouted at.

Maybe we are still hooked on this notion that an opposition leader can single-handedly change the media by being obstructive, whilst still needing the media to be onside.

Funny you should mention that as he had a plan to reign in the worst excesses of the media, and they do need reigning in, but, after a nice dinner with the Murdochs, the plan was ditched just a few days after Prince Harry's success in the High Court.

Maybe we are trying to reconcile his experience as a barrister and Director of CPS with our use of the word "technocrat" and still working out how to make it fit.

Maybe he can try and reconcile the fact that, as a human rights lawyer, he still refuses to call out war crimes committed by the IDF. That's a shocker for me personally. Maybe because a guy called Luke Akehurst, who heads a crowd called 'We Believe in Israel?' won the most votes in the 2022 NEC Election? That's possiby why Starmer is in such a bind.

You need to loosen the Kier Starmer FC scarf from your neck as it's cutting off the blood supply to the thinking part of your brain. Starmer's going to win, that's for sure, but he's relying on people voting for Labour because they're not Tories. That's not going to fly for too long and will bite him in the ass soon.

 

[multitool]

There's nothing in that post

 

[cookiemonster]

There's nothing in that post

Did you not read it? Too many big words?

 

[multitool]

Did you not read it? Too many big words?

I read most of it. Not a challenging read, but clearly you think it was.

It's more that there is nothing substantive it in there. As a piece of critical prose, it's the equivalent of reaching into one's nappy grabbing a handful of whatever is in there, and throwing it at a wall in the hope that it might have some impact. Although you managed to miss the wall.

 

[cookiemonster]

I read most of it. Not a challenging read, but clearly you think it was.

It's more that there is nothing substantive it in there. As a piece of critical prose, it's the equivalent of reaching into one's nappy grabbing a handful of whatever is in there, and throwing it at a wall in the hope that it might have some impact. Although you managed to miss the wall.

Ah. Now I understand Sensei.

You just don't like anyone saying anything nasty about your hero, so you throw a little tantrum in response instead of actually debating the points raised, which are based on checkable facts. Instead of reading most of it, why not read all of it then comment.

 

[multitool]

Ah. Now I understand Sensei.

You just don't like anyone saying anything nasty about your hero, so you throw a little tantrum in response instead of actually debating the points raised, which are based on checkable facts

It's not so much that as just not being arsêd with somebody who writes this sort of puerile crap.

There are no points in your post. It's merely a series of random heavily slanted opinions relying on wilful ignorance of wider context. You are AndyCXR, but on the opposite side of the socio-political spectrum.

I'm going out on a club run in a bit. I'll be back at about 1pm (GMT). That gives you plenty of time to assemble something thoughtful, interesting and cogent. If you are able so to do, I'll read it. Otherwise not.

 

[BoldonLad]

Or are we still all humpty because nasty Mr Starmer won't commit to the sort of spending plans that we'd all love even though we can't explain how they will be funded because we think there is an endless supply of money with no consequences on inflation or sterling?

How about comitting to, at least, rejoining the SM and CU as it'll be the quickest way to give the economy a much needed kick. Staying aout is costing the UK an average GDP loss of 4%. Poll after poll have said that the majority of people want to rejoin, even the Express and GB News polls came up with the same result, with much embarrassment to them. Why are they not committing to this? I'm sure their economic advisers must be telling them this. It'll create jobs and, in turn, increase tax revenues. Also, get the billions back spent on dodgy PPE contracts.

Talking of which...have we even done our sums yet on whether "taxing the rich" rather than everyone will deliver the sums of money we need for our bold and radical plans?

Taxing the rich can be seen as the politics of envy but close the loopholes that the rich use to evade tax. When a CEO pays less tax than the office cleaner, there's a serious issue that needs dealing with.

Are we still skewering ourself on the awkward conundrum that Starmer hasn't got enough personality, whilst Johnson had too much? Perhaps we are still harrumphing that Starmer has no "radical", "bold" plans, even though we haven't quite managed to describe what those radical, bold plans might be, beyond taxing the wealthy.

He has no vision except to carry on the managed decline of the UK. There is no vision. There is no plan. When he does come up with a plan/vision, all it takes is someone to shout at him and the plan is dropped, sometimes within days of it being announced. I can understand, in light of the current sh^tstorm that passes for the UK economy, that plans may need to be shelved/ammended but he's dropped every single one. All of them. In four years, every one has been dropped. That's not what the UK needs right now. Johnson's a traitor and I really don't care about personality, as long as they do the job properly and as expected but we don't need cowards either who are scared to make any decision in case they get shouted at.

Maybe we are still hooked on this notion that an opposition leader can single-handedly change the media by being obstructive, whilst still needing the media to be onside.

Funny you should mention that as he had a plan to reign in the worst excesses of the media, and they do need reigning in, but, after a nice dinner with the Murdochs, the plan was ditched just a few days after Prince Harry's success in the High Court.

Maybe we are trying to reconcile his experience as a barrister and Director of CPS with our use of the word "technocrat" and still working out how to make it fit.

Maybe he can try and reconcile the fact that, as a human rights lawyer, he still refuses to call out war crimes committed by the IDF. That's a shocker for me personally. Maybe because a guy called Luke Akehurst, who heads a crowd called 'We Believe in Israel?' won the most votes in the 2022 NEC Election? That's possiby why Starmer is in such a bind.

You need to loosen the Kier Starmer FC scarf from your neck as it's cutting off the blood supply to the thinking part of your brain. Starmer's going to win, that's for sure, but he's relying on people voting for Labour because they're not Tories. That's not going to fly for too long and will bite him in the ass soon.

IMHO, the “flaw” in your arguement is that he (Starmer) is going to have such a massive majority, that he will have 5 years to “do things”. That is if the loons in his own party can resist knocking him down.

 

[multitool]

IMHO, the “flaw” in your arguement is that he (Starmer) is going to have such a massive majority, that he will have 5 years to “do things”. That is if the loons in his own party can resist knocking him down.

He's been admirably successful at expunging a fair number of them

 

[BoldonLad]

He's been admirably successful at expunging a fair number of them

Yes, I would agree, but, we are talking about politicians here, even the trustworthy have the daggers at the ready. 😀

 

[cookiemonster]

He's been admirably successful at expunging a fair number of them

When? Where? How?

 

[multitool]

When? Where? How?

Yes, I did anticipate you might struggle with the word "expunging".

 

[cookiemonster]

Yes, I did anticipate you might struggle with the word "expunging".

Are you actually going to deal with the points I made, in the post that you didn’t read, like an adult, or are you just going to throw pathetic childish insults around?

My primary school debate team members can do better than this and English is a second/third language for them.

Do grow up.

 

[multitool]

Are you actually going to deal with the points I made, in the post that you didn’t read, like an adult, or are you just going to throw pathetic childish insults around?

That's weird, because this morning you said this...

Did you not read it? Too many big words?

Besides, I've already dealt with your post. You've had all morning to craft something worth reading rather than the utter blather you posted earlier, and you've failed.