**If you love LabourUK, why not help run it?** We’re looking for mods. [Find out more from our recruitment message post here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/LabourUK/comments/18ntol6/this_year_give_yourself_the_gift_of_christmas/)
[While you’re at it, come say hello on the Discord?](https://discord.gg/ZXZCdy4Kz4)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LabourUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It was a good answer to a rather tasteless question. It's amazing how difficult Tories find it to believe that somebody might put principle above self-interest.
It’s got nothing to do with hate. He is just clearly without principles. It’s well documented. Why don’t you engage with my argument rather than just saying I’m an idiot.
You didn't offer an argument to engage with. You just said you didn't think Starmer was very principled, and then when given an example of something he did that many do consider principled you made a snarky comment about pledges that had nothing to do with the point made.
What part of that is anyone supposed to engage with?
Ok. Fair enough looking back you’re right.
However, the comment I replied to suggested he was principled. Starmer has time and time again shown that what he says cannot be trusted. He makes pledges then reneges on them. He makes statements on television and then says he didn’t say what he said. These demonstrate a lack of principles. So when he says he’s committed to the NHS why should I believe it? Nothing I’ve said here is hateful. Also, the argument is not about whether I agree with Kier Starmer, it about whether he’s principled.
This: “Autohate, engage! Because nobody you disagree with can ever be right about anything, ever. Love the quality of the electorate.” Has nothing to do with the argument about whether he’s principled.
Firstly, who are ‘you guys’? Second, every post? Really? And last I still don’t see any hate in what I said. He is demonstrably unprincipled. He has lied, he has gaslighted and he has reneged on pledges. Facts, not hate.
Apologies, I was in bed, but the other chap said it well enough. I don't think you made a proper argument, and you're clearly already convinced he's a liar, and there's no way to change someone's mind in an online row.
Lumping leaders slurs into EVERY post is tiresome though, and not everyone agrees with you.
The Streeting private sector comments have been assumed to mean more privatisation. But GPs are (and always have been) private operators as are pharmacists, so there’s always been models of the NHS using the private sector. The key question is if it will remain free at the point of need or if corporate exploitation and profits will explode as a result of changes. I don’t think we’ve seen evidence on that point either way.
You know I've always wondered where his wife works, and the size of the hospital that she works at too, so it's good of Starmer to fit that into this totally original answer.
Now if only we knew what his dad did...
> Now if only we knew what his dad did...
Only 27% of people know Starmers dad is a toolmaker despite him saying it every other time he exhales in the middle of an election campaign with wall to wall coverage.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GP5cW2QWoAAma5n?format=jpg&name=large
Politicans really dont have that much reach with the public even right in the middle of an election campaign.
It's almost like the statements are for people who tune into politics once every 4 years and don't regularly comment in the labour subreddit.
What an absolutely bizarre campaign strategy huh?!
In one debate two people laughed when he said "toolmaker", then he instantly brought it back to his point and got the audience on side. Considering Sunak got booed that's a pretty big win.
If you genuinely think the average person on the street knows what Starmer's father did for a living, I honestly don't know what to say to you. You're seriously overestimating how engaged in politics the average person in the UK is.
I'm not saying that at all, I'm saying that it's tired and boring to so obviously come out with canned responses every time you have an opportunity to speak to the electorate.
Yes everybody does it, but Starmer does it so badly. Most people think that Starmer is boring - that's not a good thing, nor is it improved by repeating cynical lines that don't have an ounce of humanity in them.
This is absolutely correct. Starmer sucks at the patter. Blair (love or loath him) could say the _exact same story_ time and time again and you’d never even notice
… it’s on the tip of my tongue … stoolraker? droolhater? fuelsaver? ghoulbreaker? no it’s just no good … whatever his message it is simply _not_ cutting through
Oh god, you've just made me imagine his social media team leaning into this with a tiktok mash up of all the times he's said it using Heartbreaker by Pat Benatar
"Tory plant" seems like an odd reach. It was, AFAIK, an audience specifically of Sun readers, it was always gonna be right leaning.
Also tbh he kinda did say that, or at least that's what I understood in the debate. Maybe it's not what he meant but she wasn't entirely off base.
> Also tbh he kinda did say that, or at least that's what I understood in the debate. Maybe it's not what he meant but she wasn't entirely off base.
You could see how she understood it as that, maybe, but I think Starmer's response shows why it wasn't what he said. Not skipping a waiting list is different from 'let them die'. As he points out critical healthcare is done on the NHS, even if someone enters that state in private care.
His answer to the question made me think he meant it originally. During the debate, I thought it was stupid to say and he was pandering. His answer this time seemed genuine, passionate and drawn from the experience of his family having critical care. He seemed positive about the ability of the NHS to do emergency healthcare and disdainful of the private sector for depending on the NHS in those situations.
Far be it for me - a Liverpudlian - to defend the Sun, but is that particularly weird for their own event? I didn't watch it obviously, idk if they were claiming to be randomly selected members of the public.
I don't know, that's what I'm saying; if they were meant to be random/representative of the political spectrum a la Question Time then yeah that quite dodgy. But otherwise idk, its an event ran by the Sun, having Sun journalists in the audience strikes me as regular.
They've supported Labour multiple times I believe, and there's a lot of hearsay that they will again. They're not necessarily anti Labour, and tbh I'm pretty sure they just like to predict the winner.
Yeah I agree. It’s part of the polarisation / gotcha culture of politics these days sadly. Anyone who has a contrary view must be a bot / arguing in bad faith. Although in this case her shit eating grin as she asked the question was annoying I admit.
**If you love LabourUK, why not help run it?** We’re looking for mods. [Find out more from our recruitment message post here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/LabourUK/comments/18ntol6/this_year_give_yourself_the_gift_of_christmas/) [While you’re at it, come say hello on the Discord?](https://discord.gg/ZXZCdy4Kz4) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LabourUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It was a good answer to a rather tasteless question. It's amazing how difficult Tories find it to believe that somebody might put principle above self-interest.
Keir Starmer principled? Are we talking about the same guy?
Well... if the story he gives about damaging his knee is true then it suggests he is pretty serious about his commitment to using the NHS.
Actually pretty sure it is true. My mate plays football with him and I've heard him tell me that before.
As long as he doesn’t pledge to do it then it might have a chance of happening.
Autohate, engage! Because nobody you disagree with can ever be right about anything, ever. Love the quality of the electorate.
It’s got nothing to do with hate. He is just clearly without principles. It’s well documented. Why don’t you engage with my argument rather than just saying I’m an idiot.
You didn't offer an argument to engage with. You just said you didn't think Starmer was very principled, and then when given an example of something he did that many do consider principled you made a snarky comment about pledges that had nothing to do with the point made. What part of that is anyone supposed to engage with?
Ok. Fair enough looking back you’re right. However, the comment I replied to suggested he was principled. Starmer has time and time again shown that what he says cannot be trusted. He makes pledges then reneges on them. He makes statements on television and then says he didn’t say what he said. These demonstrate a lack of principles. So when he says he’s committed to the NHS why should I believe it? Nothing I’ve said here is hateful. Also, the argument is not about whether I agree with Kier Starmer, it about whether he’s principled. This: “Autohate, engage! Because nobody you disagree with can ever be right about anything, ever. Love the quality of the electorate.” Has nothing to do with the argument about whether he’s principled.
It's because you guys shoehorn your Starmer hate into every post and some of us are fed up with it
Firstly, who are ‘you guys’? Second, every post? Really? And last I still don’t see any hate in what I said. He is demonstrably unprincipled. He has lied, he has gaslighted and he has reneged on pledges. Facts, not hate.
Apologies, I was in bed, but the other chap said it well enough. I don't think you made a proper argument, and you're clearly already convinced he's a liar, and there's no way to change someone's mind in an online row. Lumping leaders slurs into EVERY post is tiresome though, and not everyone agrees with you.
[удалено]
The Streeting private sector comments have been assumed to mean more privatisation. But GPs are (and always have been) private operators as are pharmacists, so there’s always been models of the NHS using the private sector. The key question is if it will remain free at the point of need or if corporate exploitation and profits will explode as a result of changes. I don’t think we’ve seen evidence on that point either way.
You know I've always wondered where his wife works, and the size of the hospital that she works at too, so it's good of Starmer to fit that into this totally original answer. Now if only we knew what his dad did...
> Now if only we knew what his dad did... Only 27% of people know Starmers dad is a toolmaker despite him saying it every other time he exhales in the middle of an election campaign with wall to wall coverage. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GP5cW2QWoAAma5n?format=jpg&name=large Politicans really dont have that much reach with the public even right in the middle of an election campaign.
It's almost like the statements are for people who tune into politics once every 4 years and don't regularly comment in the labour subreddit. What an absolutely bizarre campaign strategy huh?!
Now that I know his Dad was a tool maker, I’ll be sure to vote for him!
When it's eliciting groans from the audience during nationally televised debates, it might be time to rethink that strategy
In one debate two people laughed when he said "toolmaker", then he instantly brought it back to his point and got the audience on side. Considering Sunak got booed that's a pretty big win.
If you genuinely think the average person on the street knows what Starmer's father did for a living, I honestly don't know what to say to you. You're seriously overestimating how engaged in politics the average person in the UK is.
I'm not saying that at all, I'm saying that it's tired and boring to so obviously come out with canned responses every time you have an opportunity to speak to the electorate. Yes everybody does it, but Starmer does it so badly. Most people think that Starmer is boring - that's not a good thing, nor is it improved by repeating cynical lines that don't have an ounce of humanity in them.
This is absolutely correct. Starmer sucks at the patter. Blair (love or loath him) could say the _exact same story_ time and time again and you’d never even notice
… it’s on the tip of my tongue … stoolraker? droolhater? fuelsaver? ghoulbreaker? no it’s just no good … whatever his message it is simply _not_ cutting through
Oh god, you've just made me imagine his social media team leaning into this with a tiktok mash up of all the times he's said it using Heartbreaker by Pat Benatar
"Tory plant" seems like an odd reach. It was, AFAIK, an audience specifically of Sun readers, it was always gonna be right leaning. Also tbh he kinda did say that, or at least that's what I understood in the debate. Maybe it's not what he meant but she wasn't entirely off base.
> Also tbh he kinda did say that, or at least that's what I understood in the debate. Maybe it's not what he meant but she wasn't entirely off base. You could see how she understood it as that, maybe, but I think Starmer's response shows why it wasn't what he said. Not skipping a waiting list is different from 'let them die'. As he points out critical healthcare is done on the NHS, even if someone enters that state in private care. His answer to the question made me think he meant it originally. During the debate, I thought it was stupid to say and he was pandering. His answer this time seemed genuine, passionate and drawn from the experience of his family having critical care. He seemed positive about the ability of the NHS to do emergency healthcare and disdainful of the private sector for depending on the NHS in those situations.
apparently she's a journalist for the sun
Far be it for me - a Liverpudlian - to defend the Sun, but is that particularly weird for their own event? I didn't watch it obviously, idk if they were claiming to be randomly selected members of the public.
literally every member of that audience could have qualified as a tory plant and the interviewer too for that matter
The interviewer worked for Guido Fawkes.
Wasn't it meant to be members of the public?;
I don't know, that's what I'm saying; if they were meant to be random/representative of the political spectrum a la Question Time then yeah that quite dodgy. But otherwise idk, its an event ran by the Sun, having Sun journalists in the audience strikes me as regular.
I remember a time when The Sun supported Labour.
They've supported Labour multiple times I believe, and there's a lot of hearsay that they will again. They're not necessarily anti Labour, and tbh I'm pretty sure they just like to predict the winner.
"It's The Sun wot won it"
No. It's just a silly question. Starmer did well on it but people have bad takes sometimes, they're not doing so in bad faith.
Yeah I agree. It’s part of the polarisation / gotcha culture of politics these days sadly. Anyone who has a contrary view must be a bot / arguing in bad faith. Although in this case her shit eating grin as she asked the question was annoying I admit.
Did you bother looking up the interviewers background? Of course it was a stitch up.