I see lots of claims about this but exactly none that stack up. I don't think Starmer is radical enough and I think he is quite manipulative but I see him as a pragmatist and definitely not dishonest. I didn't vote Labour so have no ulterior motive in defending him. Just give me one example of where something dodgy is happening on Starmer's instruction.
For one example of dodgy goings-on under Starmer's instruction, I give you the candidate selection for Croydon East where former members were finding they had somehow voted for Starmer & Akehurst's preferred candidate
So, Two Tier Keir is going to try and crack down on benefit fraud to save around £7.3b, this might be the first worthwhile thing this farce of a government does. We all know somebody who takes the piss out of the system / fakes illness / claims mental issues etc, in order to trouser a free life on benefit, so it is not before time (I`ll believe it when I see it though) the bone idle and work shy were forced into jobs. Something has to pay for all the waste on foreign aid and illegal immigrants after all.
I know this won't be a popular opinion but I would prefer the bone idle to be paid to sit at home where they can do no damage rather than being forced to do a job which they will probably mess up and cause mayhem. Foreign aid pays back massively and immigrants are a net benefit that more than covers the costs of illegal ones.
And who has been taking the piss out of the benefit system for my lifetime? Mostly working and middle class white 'Brits'. So yes, I'd rather that money was spent on foreign aid, that might stabilise the economic situation in under-developed countries predominantly in Africa and Asia, so helping to stem the tide of migration. But when considering what positives are being achieved in Government since July, then also consider the following: Shaking up the Planning rules, moving ahead with re-nationalising the railways, giving workers many more rights at work, creating GB Energy, ridding the Education-system of one-word Ofsted judgements in England and removing Hereditary Peers in the HoL. You should also consider that Starmer and Lammy have already started to stabilise the UK's relationship with the EU and most indicators suggest that the UK's global reputation is improving. But yes, let's worry about Taylor Swift tickets!
Which is exactly like all the other claims so far. An outcome has occurred so Starmer is blamed with little evidence that anything wrong has happened at all and even less that Starmer was involved.
Is there evidence that Starmer was behind this electoral fraud? If so, I imagine his opponents will be taking the appropriate legal action against him!
And while we're on the subject of dodgy politicians...anyone like to condemn the absent MP for Clacton? https://twitter.com/GoodLawProject/status/1847615934141173977?t=U2sYs0x9A501AOzeAxCVtA&s=19
Sorry, but going Full Centrist doesn't cut it with this one, as there are only two people who could be responsible for this: Starmer or Akehurst, due to being party leader and in charge of candidate selection respectively Which is why the Met Police cyber crime unit had a look a what was going on late last year, as "somebody" was fiddling with member's data which is why former members were finding out they were voting for a candidate in spite never receiving a ballot "Not dishonest"? Please, I don't even have to mention his leadership pledges at this point...
And did the police find any evidence? Perhaps the former members were the dishonest ones. On the Leadership Pledges....I thought Labour Party policy was a matter for conference and the NEC, not the personal views of the Leader. The party may not have adopted his pledges as policy but that doesn't demonstrate that they were made dishonestly.
And I think implying that I am a Centrist probably breaches the forum rules on insults...but no worries on this occasion
Good point, well made! Bloody Germans, coming over here and abusing our Benefit System!! What was Brexit for, if not to stop that?
The police did find evidence that data had both been leaked and fiddled around with, yet somehow nobody has been found to be responsible for this after both an internal Labour investigation and one by the Metropolitan Police Now, when two investigations prove that something has happened but somehow between them cannot find so much as a single staffer to pin it on, that asks a whole bunch of questions - specifically how far up the ladder this goes (i.e., was it Starmer or Nukehurst pulling the strings?) and at which point does Starmer become complicit in the affair considering it's not like he restarted the ballot process form zero once the police investigation started? It's also worth noting that it's hardly the first time where the terms "Luke Akehurst" and "dodgy ballots" in the same sentence, given he somehow won two NEC elections with a massive share of the votes in spite his CLP not nominating him for the ballot in either...
A man with no right to vote in the US election is paying randoms $1m to vote for a candidate who he hopes will protect his interests. Election interference on a Putin-like scale, but nothing gets done. Mind you, if he offered me that money, I'd take it and vote Harris anyway!
