FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > What's Starmer up to with strikes?
What's Starmer up to with strikes?
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Personally I think he won't openly support strikes, not sure any leader would.
If they did then they leave themselves open to being held to ransom should they then get into no10"
I think he's not supporting the strikes openly to avoid excoriating headlines in the right wing press. Then again, they'll give him awful headlines anyway. So maybe he might as well support the strikers?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Personally I think he won't openly support strikes, not sure any leader would.
If they did then they leave themselves open to being held to ransom should they then get into no10
I think he's not supporting the strikes openly to avoid excoriating headlines in the right wing press. Then again, they'll give him awful headlines anyway. So maybe he might as well support the strikers?
"
The left wing press done it to him just 3 months ago.
Starmer at this point is trying to stay neutral whilst saying its wrong. He's also trying to cosy up to big business (not the worst strategy).
Gotta say, I like his central stance in general |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Personally I think he won't openly support strikes, not sure any leader would.
If they did then they leave themselves open to being held to ransom should they then get into no10
I think he's not supporting the strikes openly to avoid excoriating headlines in the right wing press. Then again, they'll give him awful headlines anyway. So maybe he might as well support the strikers?
The left wing press done it to him just 3 months ago.
Starmer at this point is trying to stay neutral whilst saying its wrong. He's also trying to cosy up to big business (not the worst strategy).
Gotta say, I like his central stance in general"
It's risky, though. He risks alienating people over his stance.
Then again, I guess he risks alienating people whatever he does. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Personally I think he won't openly support strikes, not sure any leader would.
If they did then they leave themselves open to being held to ransom should they then get into no10
I think he's not supporting the strikes openly to avoid excoriating headlines in the right wing press. Then again, they'll give him awful headlines anyway. So maybe he might as well support the strikers?
The left wing press done it to him just 3 months ago.
Starmer at this point is trying to stay neutral whilst saying its wrong. He's also trying to cosy up to big business (not the worst strategy).
Gotta say, I like his central stance in general
It's risky, though. He risks alienating people over his stance.
Then again, I guess he risks alienating people whatever he does."
You can't please all of the people, all of the time.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *amantMan
over a year ago
Alnmouth |
I agree with him not supporting the strikes outright. I just wish he'd agree to a settlement with the unions, Wilson did that with the miners in the early 70s. Show an agreement can be made, and that the only thing holding up a deal is the government. Else it's just meaningless. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *eroy1000Man
over a year ago
milton keynes |
"Personally I think he won't openly support strikes, not sure any leader would.
If they did then they leave themselves open to being held to ransom should they then get into no10"
This is tricky for him, maybe more so than for the government. He can't create the impression of accepting high pay demands as he could very soon be PM and money will be tight. On the other hand he is supposed to be on the workers side and the union's contribute lots to Labour so can't upset them to much either |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Why is him supporting strikes such a big deal anyway?"
Starmer is not openly supporting strikes.
Labour is supposedly the party of the workers. Many workers have been striking lately over pay & conditions. Many would expect he'd be behind them 100%.
But he's got a tightrope to walk, I guess. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *uietbloke67Man
over a year ago
outside your bedroom window ;-) |
"Why is him supporting strikes such a big deal anyway?
Starmer is not openly supporting strikes.
Labour is supposedly the party of the workers. Many workers have been striking lately over pay & conditions. Many would expect he'd be behind them 100%.
But he's got a tightrope to walk, I guess."
Some the unions striking do not contribute or support the labour party though.
Tightrope I agree and tbf he is playing it well. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Why is him supporting strikes such a big deal anyway?
Starmer is not openly supporting strikes.
Labour is supposedly the party of the workers. Many workers have been striking lately over pay & conditions. Many would expect he'd be behind them 100%.
But he's got a tightrope to walk, I guess.
Some the unions striking do not contribute or support the labour party though.
Tightrope I agree and tbf he is playing it well."
Remains to be seen how it all plays out. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
He is playing the politics game with the next election in his sights.
Personally, I'd rather he stood up and publicly back the strikes. I'd also prefer to see him drop his stance on brexit and call it the disaster that it is. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *amantMan
over a year ago
Alnmouth |
Brexit has happened and Starmer ripping into it for what it is does not change it. Polling may indicate support for rejoining/major change but would people continue to support it when there are negotiations that last years again? And it's not just ordinary people that are sick of hearing about it, the Europeans are too. Do you think they'll just roll over and welcome us back with open arms? Why should we be given priority over Ukraine? Maybe you'd prefer something less drawn out and just want to rejoin the single market. The arguments for freedom of movement continue Do you really want that as a national argument again? Really? Have we learned nothing in the last 10 years? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Brexit has happened and Starmer ripping into it for what it is does not change it. Polling may indicate support for rejoining/major change but would people continue to support it when there are negotiations that last years again? And it's not just ordinary people that are sick of hearing about it, the Europeans are too. Do you think they'll just roll over and welcome us back with open arms? Why should we be given priority over Ukraine? Maybe you'd prefer something less drawn out and just want to rejoin the single market. The arguments for freedom of movement continue Do you really want that as a national argument again? Really? Have we learned nothing in the last 10 years? "
Starmer doesn't have to "rip into it". But a realistic view would be nice, instead of this bizarre situation we have now where the politicians are pretending it was a good idea to leave the EU.
We need to tackle the problems Brexit is causing, which won't happen while they're all too scared to be realistic about the situation, for fear of losing votes. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
He realises that the next election is currently looking like a bit of an open goal for him. He needs to be seen as the acceptable alternative for disenfranchised tory voters. This is a double edged sword as it can get him dropped by labour voters who see him as to far to the right. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"He realises that the next election is currently looking like a bit of an open goal for him. He needs to be seen as the acceptable alternative for disenfranchised tory voters. This is a double edged sword as it can get him dropped by labour voters who see him as to far to the right. "
For me, if Labour aren't offering any real alternative, other than a less self-serving, less-shit version of the Tories. I'm unlikely to consider voting for them.
But as you mentioned, he wants to get elected, which means maintaining the status quo. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"He realises that the next election is currently looking like a bit of an open goal for him. He needs to be seen as the acceptable alternative for disenfranchised tory voters. This is a double edged sword as it can get him dropped by labour voters who see him as to far to the right.
For me, if Labour aren't offering any real alternative, other than a less self-serving, less-shit version of the Tories. I'm unlikely to consider voting for them.
But as you mentioned, he wants to get elected, which means maintaining the status quo."
I understand your position on meaningful change but do the electorate as a whole want meaningful change? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"He realises that the next election is currently looking like a bit of an open goal for him. He needs to be seen as the acceptable alternative for disenfranchised tory voters. This is a double edged sword as it can get him dropped by labour voters who see him as to far to the right.
For me, if Labour aren't offering any real alternative, other than a less self-serving, less-shit version of the Tories. I'm unlikely to consider voting for them.
But as you mentioned, he wants to get elected, which means maintaining the status quo.
I understand your position on meaningful change but do the electorate as a whole want meaningful change?"
Who knows what they want.
But the establishment, the media, and those with all the power and money spent a lot of time and effort persuading people that they shouldn't want change. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *amantMan
over a year ago
Alnmouth |
"Brexit has happened and Starmer ripping into it for what it is does not change it. Polling may indicate support for rejoining/major change but would people continue to support it when there are negotiations that last years again? And it's not just ordinary people that are sick of hearing about it, the Europeans are too. Do you think they'll just roll over and welcome us back with open arms? Why should we be given priority over Ukraine? Maybe you'd prefer something less drawn out and just want to rejoin the single market. The arguments for freedom of movement continue Do you really want that as a national argument again? Really? Have we learned nothing in the last 10 years?
Starmer doesn't have to "rip into it". But a realistic view would be nice, instead of this bizarre situation we have now where the politicians are pretending it was a good idea to leave the EU.
We need to tackle the problems Brexit is causing, which won't happen while they're all too scared to be realistic about the situation, for fear of losing votes."
The realistic view is him admitting it's terrible but accept we can't change it without years of negotiations for which there is no hunger. Is that what you really want? We cannot return to the EU for decades, that is the cold hard reality of losing the 2016 referendum. We lost. All we can do is to make the best of a bad situation and that's what Starmer is doing. He boiled it down to that in his conference speech. He didn't want us out, like the last PM, but we are out. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Brexit has happened and Starmer ripping into it for what it is does not change it. Polling may indicate support for rejoining/major change but would people continue to support it when there are negotiations that last years again? And it's not just ordinary people that are sick of hearing about it, the Europeans are too. Do you think they'll just roll over and welcome us back with open arms? Why should we be given priority over Ukraine? Maybe you'd prefer something less drawn out and just want to rejoin the single market. The arguments for freedom of movement continue Do you really want that as a national argument again? Really? Have we learned nothing in the last 10 years?
Starmer doesn't have to "rip into it". But a realistic view would be nice, instead of this bizarre situation we have now where the politicians are pretending it was a good idea to leave the EU.
We need to tackle the problems Brexit is causing, which won't happen while they're all too scared to be realistic about the situation, for fear of losing votes.
The realistic view is him admitting it's terrible but accept we can't change it without years of negotiations for which there is no hunger. Is that what you really want? We cannot return to the EU for decades, that is the cold hard reality of losing the 2016 referendum. We lost. All we can do is to make the best of a bad situation and that's what Starmer is doing. He boiled it down to that in his conference speech. He didn't want us out, like the last PM, but we are out. "
Is what, what I really want?
How can we make the best of a bad situation when they can't even openly discuss that it's a bad situation?
I agree, much of the damage done by brexit is permanent, and much of it would not be undone by rejoining. I would suggest that it's insulting of the government to appointment Mogg as minister for Brexit Opportunities. What a fucking joke. And instead we need a minister for brexit damage limitation. There must be ways we can mitigate against all the problems it's creating.
However, I realise that if any potential PM said any of these things, it would render them unelectable. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *amantMan
over a year ago
Alnmouth |
"Brexit has happened and Starmer ripping into it for what it is does not change it. Polling may indicate support for rejoining/major change but would people continue to support it when there are negotiations that last years again? And it's not just ordinary people that are sick of hearing about it, the Europeans are too. Do you think they'll just roll over and welcome us back with open arms? Why should we be given priority over Ukraine? Maybe you'd prefer something less drawn out and just want to rejoin the single market. The arguments for freedom of movement continue Do you really want that as a national argument again? Really? Have we learned nothing in the last 10 years?
Starmer doesn't have to "rip into it". But a realistic view would be nice, instead of this bizarre situation we have now where the politicians are pretending it was a good idea to leave the EU.
We need to tackle the problems Brexit is causing, which won't happen while they're all too scared to be realistic about the situation, for fear of losing votes.
The realistic view is him admitting it's terrible but accept we can't change it without years of negotiations for which there is no hunger. Is that what you really want? We cannot return to the EU for decades, that is the cold hard reality of losing the 2016 referendum. We lost. All we can do is to make the best of a bad situation and that's what Starmer is doing. He boiled it down to that in his conference speech. He didn't want us out, like the last PM, but we are out.
Is what, what I really want?
How can we make the best of a bad situation when they can't even openly discuss that it's a bad situation?
I agree, much of the damage done by brexit is permanent, and much of it would not be undone by rejoining. I would suggest that it's insulting of the government to appointment Mogg as minister for Brexit Opportunities. What a fucking joke. And instead we need a minister for brexit damage limitation. There must be ways we can mitigate against all the problems it's creating.
However, I realise that if any potential PM said any of these things, it would render them unelectable."
You contend that: 'a realistic view (I assumed from Starmer) would be nice'
I'm saying you cannot expect him to put forward a realistic view for the reasons I have stated above. For him to be realistic would be him stating publicly brexit has been terrible but he can't do anything major, unless people accept years, possibly decades, of negotiations. Is that the realistic view you want? We don't have the political consensus to radically change what we have and you know as well as I do, if he went into the election saying that, he'd be wiped out. We have to manage our expectations accordingly and on that front, he's doing what he can. We can have movement on NI and on smaller issues. But anything major just isn't realistic. As for the ministry for brexit opportunities, that's just a meme and given the money involved, I'd be scrapping it all. In these difficult austere times, keeping a ministry like that so Starmer or whoever can have a spare ministry to give someone is an insult to people. If Labour don't scrap it, I'd be genuinely disappointed. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
