Read on Twitter
I write as someone from an extremely dysfunctional family.
I write as someone with no family of my own: a deliberate choice owing hugely to the point above.
I write as a Remainer who will always support freedom of movement.
I write as someone tired of political illiterates.
I write as someone with no family of my own: a deliberate choice owing hugely to the point above.
I write as a Remainer who will always support freedom of movement.
I write as someone tired of political illiterates.
Labour *should be* the party of 'family values' because Labour *should be* the party of community values.
Labour should accept Brexit because it's done. Over with. Finished. The end. Correctly, it voted for it.
Labour should accept Brexit because it's done. Over with. Finished. The end. Correctly, it voted for it.
Labour cannot win another election EVER unless it regains the trust of working class voters. As far as I can see, there's tons of people on here who demand Labour do this... while being every bit as liberal and left wing as ever, if not even more so.
Doesn't work that way.
Doesn't work that way.
Everything Starmer's doing in this area is essentially about symbolism. No more, no less. No massive changes in policy; no throwing minorities under the bus. It's merely a question of communication and language: Politics 101.
This is someone who, in his party conference speech, actually spoke of ending structural racial and economic inequality. But he can't do that or even try doing so unless we win first.
Continuing to argue for freedom of movement, meanwhile, is to commit political hari-kari.
Continuing to argue for freedom of movement, meanwhile, is to commit political hari-kari.
It's done. It's over. We have to change the environment completely before we can bring freedom of movement back... which happens with huge investment under a Labour government. It doesn't happen by shouting and screaming at "gammon" (which I'm guilty of too, very often).
And no, he can't make any economic promises right now either. That's because he's economically literate.
It is economically illiterate to make such promises when we have no idea whatsoever what state the economy will be in by 2024.
It is economically illiterate to make such promises when we have no idea whatsoever what state the economy will be in by 2024.
And if the voters don't trust us on the economy, WE LOSE.
The moment we become a government-in-waiting is when we pass the Tories on who the public trusts with the economy. His caution is quite correct on that.
The moment we become a government-in-waiting is when we pass the Tories on who the public trusts with the economy. His caution is quite correct on that.
Real change, enduring change, happens one step at a time. Ruth Bader Ginsburg understood that. It's actually true of anyone who wants real change in their own lives.
It's truly bizarre how this then disappears completely in our expectations of politicians and leaders.
It's truly bizarre how this then disappears completely in our expectations of politicians and leaders.
