- Oct 17, 2008
- 14,419
NSC certainly isn’t all tolerance and light in politics threads! Big difference between being fanatical about a political party and just plain racism though…
Well, except the appointment of Sue Gray as his "Chief of Staff" (whatever that may be). Not only was that giving the Tories ammunition, but the gun to fire the ammunition as well, then shooting himself in the foot with it.At the moment Labour have all the power by virtue of staying quiet and not giving failing Tories any ammunition. The hustings and debates after manifesto is released don’t give Conservative strategists time to play the long PR game of slagging off Labour ideas for years before an election.
This is sensible to me.
I found Neil on the whole impartial and a good host.You do wonder how Andrew Neil got away with being a political anchor on the Beeb for all those years whilst simultaneously being Chair of the Spectator magazine. Food for thought....
As I said earlier in the thread, it’s very poor optics. If it were the other away around it’d be “Tories manipulated Gray, typical sleaze” etc. But you’ll notice I don’t do political sniping or point scoring. I hate this government but wouldn’t be averse to voting Tory one day in the future if they were the right option for the country, on a constituency level or to keep others out.Well, except the appointment of Sue Gray as his "Chief of Staff" (whatever that may be). Not only was that giving the Tories ammunition, but the gun to fire the ammunition as well, then shooting himself in the foot with it.
That shows a total lack of political judgement on Starmer's part. It was daft. Wait until the GE is done and dusted and THEN appoint her. His refusal to say when he first contacted Gray to offer her the job also stinks. If you having neither to hide Sir Starmer, why are you going to such lengths to hide it?
Manifestos mean SFA anyway. Lots of promises which are never kept. I recall the last GE Labour manifesto gave a commitment to "respect the result of the Brexit referendum". They didn't. They argued and bickered and then came up with no policy whatsoever.Only days before?
Im sure there will be many others with the same view as you on both sides of politics- voting for their party regardless of what is in the manifesto
Of course. Me too. But he really didn't need all the bad press from "Graygate", which was of his own making, which has certainly diverted media attention away from more important and pressing issues.As I said earlier in the thread, it’s very poor optics. If it were the other away around it’d be “Tories manipulated Gray, typical sleaze” etc. But you’ll notice I don’t do political sniping or point scoring. I hate this government but wouldn’t be averse to voting Tory one day in the future if they were the right option for the country, on a constituency level or to keep others out.
Starmer could frankly be in the throes of a passionate sexual affair with Sue Gray right now for all I care and I’ll still vote Labour to get the Tories out.
This confuses me.Manifestos mean SFA anyway. Lots of promises which are never kept. I recall the last GE Labour manifesto gave a commitment to "respect the result of the Brexit referendum". They didn't. They argued and bickered and then came up with no policy whatsoever.
Manifestos are just pages of empty, hollow "promises". That is the way they have always been.
A manifesto sets out what a party will do in government. Labour published their manifesto stating they would "respect the Brexit referendum result. When it came to the hustings, there was no coherent policy supported by all members of the party, or indeed the MPs / candidates. Ask a Labour MP or candidate "what is your policy on Europe / Brexit?" and you got a different answer every timeThis confuses me.
A manifesto is a commitment to what a party will do in Government. If the party loses a general election the manifesto is ripped up and not acted on - for the simple reason it the party isn't in Government, and in any case the manifesto was rejected by the electorate. So who sticks to a manifesto after losing an election....?
Well yes, but the entire campaign was a clusterfuck. You had moderates, remnants of New Labour and Momentum all with very different ideas on what Labour even represented.A manifesto sets out what a party will do in government. Labour published their manifesto stating they would "respect the Brexit referendum result. When it came to the hustings, there was no coherent policy supported by all members of the party, or indeed the MPs / candidates. Ask a Labour MP or candidate "what is your policy on Europe / Brexit?" and you got a different answer every time
I actually think Neil on very good at his job and impartial on the Beeb, but not elsewhere. Yet Lineker is chastised for a comment on a private twitter account and he doesn't host a political programme.I found Neil on the whole impartial and a good host.
I don’t think Lineker has done anything wrong either. It’s a non-story. Nobody is completely unbiased in their views and he hasn’t said anything inflammatory.I actually think Neil on very good at his job and impartial on the Beeb, but not elsewhere. Yet Lineker is chastised for a comment on a private twitter account and he doesn't host a political programme.
Seems the government want to make the rules up when it suits them
True, and making millions doing it. Power, greed and money are their motivations.But I really don't think they care if the net result is self harm to the UK, their only concern is popularity and holding onto power.
I am not a Party member, nor have I voted for Labour for many years, but this is quite easy to find.Question for Labour Party member friends here. What are new new Labour’s views on defence? Namely Ukraine/Russia then also on Trident?
Thanks, but struggling to find anything on Trident. Will wait for the manifesto!True, and making millions doing it. Power, greed and money are their motivations.
I am not a Party member, nor have I voted for Labour for many years, but this is quite easy to find.
Starmer visits Ukraine to pledge continued commitment to Kyiv if he becomes PM
The Labour leader visited suburbs of Kyiv which saw heavy fighting and alleged war crimes in the opening months of the Russian invasionwww.standard.co.uk
I'm a member of a different party to Labour and, probably, you. My suggestion is that you look up the Labour Party's website, and follow the utterances of David Lammy in order to get the answer to your question.Question for Labour Party member friends here. What are new new Labour’s views on defence? Namely Ukraine/Russia then also on Trident?
Oh I’m not a member of any political party - in fact I’ve not voted for the same one twice in a row, but thanks for the tip.I'm a member of a different party to Labour and, probably, you. My suggestion is that you look up the Labour Party's website, and follow the utterances of David Lammy in order to get the answer to your question.