[Politics] Natalie Elphic defects to labour

[Thunder Bolt]

Bizarre. Not sure how you can join the conservative party, work very hard to become an MP of that party and then take the completely opposite view of life on so many things and move to Labour. I could completely understand a move away from the Tories to become an independent as a protest against the way the Tories have been run but this makes no sense. Has she just thrown her core beliefs away?

I’m not sure she has any core beliefs. When her husband was accused of sexual assaults by several women, she swore blind she would stand by him. Then when he was tried, convicted and jailed, she was going to divorce him.
She was one of a trio of Tory MPs who circulated a doctored video of Keir Starmer, only taking it down when threatened with legal action.
She decided to take her husband’s seat at the by election using his name (by changing her mind on the divorc) so was elected by ranting about boat people, but not backing the P&O workers.

I am astonished that Keir Starmer has allowed her to cross the floor, as I wouldn’t trust her one iota.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

hearing Starmer, that seems to be the calculation, look how centerist Labour is. at what cost of votes on the left though?

Judging from a rather small sample (one of my brothers, who has been up on London on the 'stop the invasion of Palestine' marches, and has hated Starmer from day 1), the 'left' (as in red in tooth and claw, "O, Jeremy Corbyn" left) had no plans to vote Labour anyway.

 

[deletebeepbeepbeep]

What a vile women, said about her husband's assualt that he was being punished for being attractive.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I’m not sure she has any core beliefs. When her husband was accused of sexual assaults by several women, she swore blind she would stand by him. Then when he was tried, convicted and jailed, she was going to divorce him.
She was one of a trio of Tory MPs who circulated a doctored video of Keir Starmer, only taking it down when threatened with legal action.
She decided to take her husband’s seat at the by election using his name (by changing her mind on the divorc) so was elected by ranting about boat people, but not backing the P&O workers.

I am astonished that Keir Starmer has allowed her to cross the floor, as I wouldn’t trust her one iota.

Assuming Starmer isn't a fool, the five minute wonder of a floor crossing, which will be followed in a few months time by her standing down as an MP (which she has stated she will be doing) is a fairly easy hit.

As a Labour member (still - was touch and go earlier today - ), I trust Starmer to handle this.

Remember, he clean-staled a load of Corbynistas when he became leader, only to drop-kick them into oblivion the nanosecond they stepped over the mark. Corbyn himself, Wrong-Bailey....others whose names I have forgotten.

I like the notion of redemption. However I share your disquiet in the present case, and look forward to a full and frank and plausible narrative from herself on how the Pauline conversion came about.

That is, if I haven't forgotten all about it by this time next week. Which is likely, and which is, I suspect, what Starmer expects.

 

[KZNSeagull]

She wants the Tories out.

Forming her own party won't advance that cause.

Especially considering she is standing down at the next election.

This really is a Pauline conversion.

She wants Sunak out which is different. She doesn't have to form her own party - she could just not align to any. Allowing her into the Labour party shows weakness by Starmer imo - he shouldn't need her, or anyone like her, to convince swing voters to vote Labour. Core Tory voters are not going to vote Labour just because she has joined them.

 

[Machiavelli]

But do we want her? Hmmmmm.....

Well, I'm not part of the (soon-to-be) royal 'we', but I can say:
-- as others have pointed out, she and her views are loathsome ...
-- ... despite this you can see why Starmer would welcome her crossing the House because it causes discomfort to the incumbents and cranks even further up the impression that the end is nigh/er
-- there is the question of the status of where Dover LP are in the process of appointing a candidate to challenge at the next election and what Elphicke's arrival does to this
-- also be interesting to see what the electorate in Dover make of this and how they respond at the next election
-- Steve Baker has tweeted and JRM has been quoted as saying 'she's well to the right of me', which raises the question of what they all mean by 'the right' and how she outflanks those two.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

She wants Sunak out which is different. She doesn't have to form her own party - she could just not align to any. Allowing her into the Labour party shows weakness by Starmer imo - he shouldn't need her, or anyone like her, to convince swing voters to vote Labour. Core Tory voters are not going to vote Labour just because she has joined them.

No indeed. And core Corbynista former labour supporters wouldn't shift back to labour had Starmer told her to do one.

This is aimed at the floating voter slightly on the right.

Baroness Chakrabarty has just been asked by Nihal about this switch.

"Democratic politics is about trying to persuade people to change their mind....we need to build a big tent...I'm sure she's got a story to tell...she has voted with her feet in a dramatic way....you need to build big coalitions if you want to take on the powerful".

So, ner.

I think the jury will be out for a while and, as I said, we will have lost interest by the time of the verdict.

Now tell me. Were you all set to vote Labour and are not thinking about supporting a different party?

 

[Machiavelli]

Bizarre. Not sure how you can join the conservative party, work very hard to become an MP of that party and then take the completely opposite view of life on so many things and move to Labour. I could completely understand a move away from the Tories to become an independent as a protest against the way the Tories have been run but this makes no sense. Has she just thrown her core beliefs away?

Labour and the Tories are opposites. Now that's a claim.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Well, I'm not part of the (soon-to-be) royal 'we', but I can say:
-- as others have pointed out, she and her views are loathsome ...
-- ... despite this you can see why Starmer would welcome her crossing the House because it causes discomfort to the incumbents and cranks even further up the impression that the end is nigh/er
-- there is the question of the status of where Dover LP are in the process of appointing a candidate to challenge at the next election and what Elphicke's arrival does to this
-- also be interesting to see what the electorate in Dover make of this and how they respond at the next election
-- Steve Baker has tweeted and JRM has been quoted as saying 'she's well to the right of me', which raises the question of what they all mean by 'the right' and how she outflanks those two.

Labour have a candidate. She is standing down at the next election. There is no question of the labour candidate being undermined. I expect to see her canvassing on his behalf. Although I'm not sure how I'd greet her on my doorstep, to be fait

Steve Baker knows f*** all about f*** anything. In other words, f*** nothing

 

[jcdenton08]

Rats leaving the sinking ship. Do Labour want people like this charlatan associated with them?

 

[Dibdab]

Do you think that is a good or bad thing?

Well I've never been a Tory because for the most part they are nasty, and represented the interests of the rich at the expense of the middle classes and poor for almost all my working life when they've been in power, Therefore the prospect of a Labour being a shade more aligned to Camerons lib dem coallition version really that isnt that appealing.

 

[macbeth]

horrible politician defects to horrible party

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Labour and the Tories are opposites. Now that's a claim.

Of course they aren't opposites.

Here are some views that neither of them share:

Tax: we need much more
Kiddy fiddling: just a phase we all go through
Murder: often justified
Being collegiate: f*** that
War: Yes! It's WAR
Religion: Anyone not C of E is going directly to hell
Hand outs: give them to everyone
Borders: Open, and open now
The Boats: Nothing should be done about the boats. They are lovely
Upskirting: Laurence Fox is absolutely right
The exchanger rate mechanism: Erm......

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Well I've never been a Tory because for the most part they are nasty, and represented the interests of the rich at the expense of the middle classes and poor for almost all my working life when they've been in power, Therefore the prospect of a Labour being a shade more aligned to Camerons lib dem coallition version really that isnt that appealing.

Fair enough. I'm inclined to agree.
Right now, however, I'd gladly embrace it if it helps defenestrate the current shower.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

horrible politician defects to horrible party

Ah, so you have decided to reveal your hand.

Nasty party? Care to explain?

Feel free to make reference to the Tories and their plan to ditch 70+ year old human rights legislation created by Churchill after the travesties of WWII.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Leaves one centrist party for another (faux) centrist, all the same mish-mash.
I still feel Starmer will show his true colours once in the seat, and the hardcore boys and girls come on out of the woodwork.

Fingers crossed.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Care to elaborate?

My point is there is little, or no, reasoning behind your constant sniping at the Labour Party. You make a snide comment then disappear when challenged about it. It's boring, really boring. I have no issue with different opinions per se, none at all. But opinions without any reasoning or explanation count for little.

 

[studio150]

At this rate of defections it won't be long before Rishi is leading a minority Government.

 

[Machiavelli]

Fingers crossed.

Well, precisely. The default on here is that you can either have the right or the centre. The left are utterly verboten, to even conceive of it just illustrates that you haven't understood ...
... meanwhile, one of the two most impactful administrations of the 20C was of the left -- they had to go through a decade of depression and WW2 to get there though.

 

[Is it PotG?]

My point is there is little, or no, reasoning behind your constant sniping at the Labour Party. You make a snide comment then disappear when challenged about it. It's boring, really boring. I have no issue with different opinions per se, none at all. But opinions without any reasoning or explanation count for little.

I have a solid explanation for the post, I am certainly of the opinion that Starmer is a faux centrist, and can back that view up.
Whilst enjoying the great play 'Nye' last evening, a quote attributed to Churchill (no idea if he actually said it or was for dramatic effect solely) in the drama caught my attention.
Something on the lines of that politics is about saying whatever gets you in to power, then once there it matters not because power means you can call the shots.
It's been the case since year dot.

Have a relaxed and chilled afternoon