This Once Great Movement Of Ours

[CumbrianLefty]

If we want to accuse Starmer of inconsistency, then Steve Reed (who was allowed to keep his post on the front bench) is a better example to use than Sheerman anyway.

Though of course "zero tolerance" is the sort of tough sounding rhetoric that politicians like to use and is not actually meant to be applied literally in all cases, with regard to AS or anything else. And yes, it is correct to say RLB was booted for her reaction (or you might say lack of it) to being called out, rather than the offending tweet itself. I say that btw as somebody who was deeply unenthusiastic about her sacking, and will note that it hasn't transformed Labour's (or Keir's) poll standings in the way some centrist zoomers on Twitter confidently asserted it would at the time

[CumbrianLefty]

Its not the party that Starmer is worried about re trans rights (even though it is obviously divided on the issue, and not always on the "normal" factional lines either) but the media. Several influential and widely read female journalists, in particular, are uncompromising TERFs.

[CumbrianLefty]

My general impression is that what was being done was certainly unprofessional, but I don't think you can credibly make the accusation of sabotage. Labour were heavily behind in all the polls (and those polls that showed a closer contest were widely disbelieved by Corbyn's opponents) and in those circumstances there wasn't much of a case for offensive targeting beyond hope. Moreover, in 2015 Labour had lost seats due to refusing to play defence and the party (particularly the right of the party) was accordingly gun-shy. The extra resources make sense as an attempt to prepare for a 1983-style result. The specific seats picked were certainly picked on a factional basis (and there's the unquestionable unprofessionalism.) On the other hand, some of there were actually lost in 2019, so on an insurance basis I'm not sure it wouldn't have made sense as a strategy.

More generally, I'd suggest that arguing that something was a betrayal in 2017 is made more difficult when the absence of the same was a major contributor to bad results in both 2015 and 2019. As a general rule, we have not done a very good job of dealing with the inevitable optimism bias.

How dare you bring facts, logic and common sense to this. It was clearly a sabotage campaign by the Blairites so they could enact their plan of invading Iraq again and you're a Red Tory Blairite Scum if you disagree.

This straw-mannery does you no favours.

And whilst Blairites might not want to invade Iraq again, many *were* gung-ho for full scale war in Syria, indeed slandering Ed Miliband for his part in stopping it.

There is a strain of Blairism who *are* fanatical warmongers to their core.

[CumbrianLefty]

I think you could go back some time before 2005 tbh. The rot set in IMO when Blair started to appoint people to top positions (including the GS) who were narrow factionalists rather than bothered about the health of the party as a whole. Its why I mentioned Ed M in my previous post - one of the most telling indictments against certain senior party staff is that they didn't start behaving as per the leaked "report" in September 2015, they were hostile to Corbyn's predecessor in only a slightly diluted form.

[CumbrianLefty]

Its not the party that Starmer is worried about re trans rights (even though it is obviously divided on the issue, and not always on the "normal" factional lines either) but the media. Several influential and widely read female journalists, in particular, are uncompromising TERFs.

True. Starmer's fear of them is, if anything, even more pathetic.

Even when he can see what the media did to his two (highly arguably three) predecessors?

It doesn't help to reduce everything to personal moral cowardice as some Corbynistas are somewhat wont to do. Even "their" man was far more willing to compromise on stuff than many on both sides on Labour's - increasingly removed from actual reality - forever war will admit.

[CumbrianLefty]

The evidence is clear that they didn't like Corbyn or those associated with him.

It is somewhat more circumstantial of a full blown conspiracy.

[CumbrianLefty]

But the thing is, even if it *wasn't* a full scale conspiracy (something which barring some as yet still elusive "smoking gun" will be difficult to prove) the behaviour of several cited in those documents was still disgraceful and unacceptable - and sanctions are highly likely to be warranted.

[CumbrianLefty]

On a not dissimilar tangent (ie possible racism) Dawn Butler is back in the headlines.

[CumbrianLefty]

What does that mean?

Nice tweet I saw yesterday - on the lines of "lots of people out there who are totally not racist, but whose least favourite three politicians just happen to be Abbott/Butler/Lammy"

[CumbrianLefty]

What does that mean?

Nice tweet I saw yesterday - on the lines of "lots of people out there who are totally not racist, but whose least favourite three politicians just happen to be Abbott/Butler/Lammy"

All three also share the distinction of losing internal elections where a good chunk of people who you'd expect to vote for them didn't.

What was Lammy's "internal election"?

The other two maybe need to be unpacked a bit as well - Abbott was never ever going to win in 2010 and her "hard leftness" was beyond much doubt a bigger deterrent then than her race. Butler indeed did poorly in this year's deputy contest, but another non-white hopeful did much better than many had expected; at least something to do with the fact she ran a good campaign, and Butler - FWIW my own 2nd choice behind Rayner - by common consent did not.

Even if there is a bit of reluctance for Labour members to vote for black candidates underneath all that - and tbf there quite possibly is - it maybe shouldn't be conflated with the outright gammony racism I cited above.

[CumbrianLefty]

Ah, the 2015 mayoral selection contest had slipped my mind. Though of course the winner there is, again, a tell against a simple "racism" explanation - Tessa Jowell (RIP) was widely considered favourite before the result was announced as well.

[CumbrianLefty]

Regardless of that, retreating into full scale crankery and conspiracism is not a solution. Believe it or not, the "never Corbyn" diehards of the previous five years are a warning not an instruction manual.

[CumbrianLefty]

Beckett's defeat by Turner was both hilarious and rather encouraging, yes.

The thing is, at least the "never Corbyn" brigade had most of the media on their side - which might provide something of an excuse for them so often misreading things. The "hate Starmer" crowd have literally nothing outside their own self-reinforcing bubble.

[CumbrianLefty]

Only tweeting the worse polls for Starmer/Labour is a sure tell.

(and we've had a bit of that in the last 24 hours)

[CumbrianLefty]

Well all the signs are that he is someone who hugely overestimates his own appeal, so.....

[CumbrianLefty]

boots out the smaller left unions from the NEC

Excuse my ignorance, but what do you actually mean by this?

[CumbrianLefty]

Ah right, so its not just the leader deciding it on his own whim (though I also get what you mean)

[CumbrianLefty]

McDonnell has made some comments on Starmer that the Twitter zealots might not greatly like.

[CumbrianLefty]

Well it maybe makes "quite good" reading apart from the identifiable factual mistakes that have been identified already. And that "Vauxhall was going to go Tory" headline grabber is itself a massive red flag - that wasn't going to happen if Labour had been reduced to 50 seats a la 1931, never mind 150.

(Vauxhall falling to the *LibDems*, on the other hand.....)

[CumbrianLefty]

My god, that MRP. That makes the American political pundits look like they know what they're talking about.

Tories to win Rhondda - a better example of GIGO would be difficult to find.

[CumbrianLefty]

He is now being derided by certain VERY ONLINE people as a "Blairite" because he hasn't been totally condemnatory of Corbyn's successor.

In other Twitter news, Neil Coyle (someone who really should have been triggered/deselected before the last GE) has had one of his periodic late night pants soiling episodes on that medium again.

[CumbrianLefty]

Well indeed, that Coyle didn't get even a junior front bench post in April (whereas, of course, the likes of Streeting and Phillips did - despite their "colourful" pasts) certainly wasn't unnoticed by some of us.

[CumbrianLefty]

The fact that the book has a lot of on the record stuff about anti-semitism & Salisbury shows that there is a real push (as we've discussed many times) to cast these two as the actual demise of JC rather than Brexit

That may be so, but I am sceptical about how much (in particular) the Salisbury business *really* mattered with the mass of voters. Even for those who were aware and disapproved, it was likely a second order issue (I base this partly on, I think, *one* person mentioning it to me unprompted ever - AS came up rather more, it mattered most to Jews and their associates but did have a wider effect)

The grim reality IMO is that Brexit did to Corbyn what Iraq did to Blair - ie had an across the board toxifying resonance that, in many cases, turned what were previously positives into negatives.

Generally speaking, there's no coming back from that.

[CumbrianLefty]

The economic positioning does seem to be becoming a bit more sure footed recently - Dodds getting into her stride? Less sign of Reeves on the airwaves in the last month or so too (a good thing IMO)

[CumbrianLefty]

Leonard should go soon - but in the manner of his own choosing, not because of a half-cocked coup led by the utterly horrific and unrepentant transphobe that is Marra.