Starmer's vision quest

[Pblakeney]

Then what was the point in all that 'return to the 70s' nonsense ? Boredom ? A need to be noticed ? Getting a buzz from appearing to be a fool ?

It’s Labour so it will be a return to the 70s.
That’s the start and end of the logic.

 

[icowden]

your opinion

No. We have it as a matter of record. The defence rests. You have been asked to provide evidence of your allegation and have failed to do so.

 

[spen666]

No. We have it as a matter of record. The defence rests. You have been asked to provide evidence of your allegation and have failed to do so.

How to show you do not understand the difference between opinion and fact

 

[secretsqirrel]

How to show you do not understand the difference between opinion and fact

With reference to Burnham taking us back to the 70s, do explain.

Keep it short.

 

[spen666]

With reference to Burnham taking us back to the 70s, do explain.

Keep it short.

read what I posted.
It was I who raised the issue as to whether he had been quoted correctly

But don't let that get in the way of your love in

 

[secretsqirrel]

read what I posted.
It was I who raised the issue as to whether he had been quoted correctly

But don't let that get in the way of your love in

I know you raised it, my acknowledgment of it kicked this off in the first place. So read what I posted.

I’ll answer the question of opinion and fact for you. In your opinion Burnham wants to take us back to the 70s. However, it is a fact that he did not say this in his speeches.

 

[spen666]

I know you raised it, my acknowledgment of it kicked this off in the first place. So read what I posted.

I’ll answer the question of opinion and fact for you. In your opinion Burnham wants to take us back to the 70s. However, it is a fact that he did not say this in his speeches.

I do not know what Burnham wants to do. I do not have an opinion on this as I do not possess sufficient information to reach an opinion on his intentions


if you are interested in what he wants to do, then ask him.

 

[secretsqirrel]

I do not know what Burnham wants to do. I do not have an opinion on this as I do not possess sufficient information to reach an opinion on his intentions


if you are interested in what he wants to do, then ask him.

Case closed. Audit trail available.

 

[briantrumpet]

Case closed. Audit trail available.

We've got someone on the case.

 

[spen666]

Case closed. Audit trail available.

Didn't know there was a case

No idea what your case is

 

[monkers]

This Guardian graphic gives a snapshot of how Keir Starmer destroyed Labour’s Broad Church from 2020-25
https://kmflett.blog/2026/07/19/how-starmer-destroyed-labours-broad-church/

The effort was not even subtle, but perhaps not as unsubtle as the Johnson mass clearance of 'grandees'.

 

[monkers]

Now that Starmer is no longer leader of the Labour Party and will imminently cease to be PM, can anyone answer the question as to what Starmer's Vision quest was?


for a leading lawyer he has completely failed to get over his vision to the public at large.

Starmer seemed to me to surround himself with LabourFirst and ThinkLabour (formerly LabourTogether) members. I don't know as a fact that he was a member himself, but I think we might say he was ''under the influence''.

https://www.labourfirst.org

https://thinklabour.co.uk

 

[briantrumpet]

Finding it more and more amusing seeing the loyal Starmerphiles try to fight back each time Burnham just does something sensible and politically astute, as if Starmer had been riding high in the polls never having put a foot wrong. It's as delusional as the Johnson fan club who thought he'd been terribly wronged by all his ministers forcing him to resign, and that his record was unblemished.

 

[briantrumpet]

Sadly, I think there is some truth in this. Was Starmer

Is this a very naughty thought? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Being_There

It's a pity that Sellers is dead, as I think he'd do a spectacularly accurate Starmer.