|
Gonzo McFee posted:https://twitter.com/ChukaUmunna/status/1246387957575168001 Looking forward to seeing the new leader of the Labour Party fruitfully working together with *checks notes* uh, a failed former Liberal Democrat, now a blogger.
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2020 14:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 08:14 |
|
|
Complete change of subject: Does anyone know of a free or nearly-free transcription tool for a video? Downloaded (legitimately) a film in Spanish (which I don't know) and so was wanting to get a transcription of it then turn that to English. I haven't been able to find a subtitles file anywhere on line for it. This is the film in case anyone has any secret sources of subtitles! El Enigma Agustina: https://vimeo.com/398888489
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2020 14:30
|
|
|
EmptyVessel posted:Demonstrable fact or merely presumption? well it was either a cynical ploy to appeal to terfs or he just personally doesn't give a gently caress so I don't think it matters one way or another
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2020 14:30
|
|
|
EmptyVessel posted:Demonstrable fact or merely presumption? I'm not really sure how else to look at it? If you support it why not sign it? If you don't sign it, does it not raise questions as to whether you support it?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2020 14:30
|
|
|
sinky posted:
Impressive one handed reporting there.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2020 14:33
|
|
|
ThomasPaine posted:well it was either a cynical ploy to appeal to terfs or he just personally doesn't give a gently caress so I don't think it matters one way or another So him explicitly saying that trans rights are human rights was also a cynical ploy to appeal to the pro trans movement? Slippery fucker. E: OwlFancier posted:I'm not really sure how else to look at it? If you support it why not sign it? If you don't sign it, does it not raise questions as to whether you support it? EmptyVessel fucked around with this message at 14:37 on Apr 4, 2020 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2020 14:35
|
|
|
https://mobile.twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1227878854183792642 Wow what a transphobe
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2020 14:39
|
|
|
he should probably have signed the pledge then tbqh
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2020 14:40
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/immolations/status/1246207479337410573
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2020 14:41
|
|
|
EmptyVessel posted:This, and only this, is the only acceptable form of support? Think you'd have to ask him the answer to that. No, but it makes me skeptical? I don't really have a reason to trust the man at all, he's got an enormous amount of work to do before I will grant him that given his past history of working against my welfare and the kinds of people who support him. As far as I'm concerned right now he's a liberal democrat, and I do not trust him further than I could throw him. Frankly I'm not sure I ever will but he's got a long way to go before he even gets to the point where I'd be prepared to extend him the benefit of the doubt.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2020 14:42
|
|
|
Cerv posted:you’re probably right. I don’t have Sky to check the actual interview. PJ is almost certainly right that it would come from the interviewer rather than Philips, so it's [probably not another example of her me-first policy. Although it's not entirely outside the realms of possibilty that she or her staff informally raised the topic pre-interview. What's more telling I think is the Guardian treating this answer like it's interesting or informative news in any capacity. I suspect it's just cosy signal boosting for Philips and I'd be surprised if they were as quick to report the same comments even from someone broadly similar like Stella Creasey.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2020 14:43
|
|
|
I didn't vote for Starmer (or Rayner, in fact) and I'm far from happy he won but abandoning the party because of it just seems completely counter-productive, at least right now we're not going to achieve a socialist government by leaving en masse the only party with a prayer of forming one, and every election we lose because we don't turn out for Labour is going to let the Tories continue with their slash and burn policies and yeah people keep saying "there's no parliamentary route to socialism" but guess what, there isn't a non-parliamentary one either right now
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2020 14:50
|
|
|
ThomasPaine posted:he should probably have signed the pledge then tbqh Assuming you have a magical pledge that does not allow cynical signatures. OwlFancier posted:No, but it makes me skeptical? I don't really have a reason to trust the man at all, he's got an enormous amount of work to do before I will grant him that given his past history of working against my welfare and the kinds of people who support him. As far as I'm concerned right now he's a liberal democrat, and I do not trust him further than I could throw him. Frankly I'm not sure I ever will but he's got a long way to go before he even gets to the point where I'd be prepared to extend him the benefit of the doubt. Tbf you don't really have a reason to trust anyone in politics, how many of them have you actually met? Don't trust him, I don't trust him, but ignoring what he's actually said and demanding a signature that would be trivially easy to provide in bad faith goes a bit beyond benefit of the doubt.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2020 14:51
|
|
|
I would dispute that voting for labour is always bad for the tories given Blair.EmptyVessel posted:Tbf you don't really have a reason to trust anyone in politics, how many of them have you actually met? Don't trust him, I don't trust him, but ignoring what he's actually said and demanding a signature that would be trivially easy to provide in bad faith goes a bit beyond benefit of the doubt. The main thing I like about corbyn, now and when I first voted for him, is that he's trustworthy, or rather he's better than trustworthy, he's predictable. He has a long and established history of basically being right about everything. Starmer does not, his history is decidedly dodgy so if I'm going to try to predict him he's not going to come out in a favourable light. And he does not personally inspire trust in me, which is the thing you do before you're able to predict people. So I do not predict he is likely to act favourably, and I do not find anything about him personally to inspire trust or good faith in me. If he wants that he's basically going to have to have an impeccable record for a while. Words don't count for much but words are the only thing he has going for him against an extremely suspect record of action. If he can't get those right then my position's definitely not gonna change. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 14:57 on Apr 4, 2020 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2020 14:51
|
|
|
EmptyVessel posted:Assuming you have a magical pledge that does not allow cynical signatures. Why do you think he didn't sign it?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2020 14:56
|
|
|
EmptyVessel posted:Assuming you have a magical pledge that does not allow cynical signatures. Precisely why his not signing it is clearly a meaningful strategic decision.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2020 14:59
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:No, but it makes me skeptical? I don't really have a reason to trust the man at all, he's got an enormous amount of work to do before I will grant him that given his past history of working against my welfare and the kinds of people who support him. As far as I'm concerned right now he's a liberal democrat, and I do not trust him further than I could throw him. Frankly I'm not sure I ever will but he's got a long way to go before he even gets to the point where I'd be prepared to extend him the benefit of the doubt. Out of interest what is Starmer's past history of working against your welfare?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2020 15:00
|
|
|
How about that, hope was a lie after all
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2020 15:03
|
|
|
1. Lawyer, untrustworthy. 2. Sir, double untrustworthy. 3. Worked to undermine labour in 2016, entirely unforgivable IMO given the harm that could have been spared if we'd won in 2017. Basically I just don't think he's anything but a windsock and probably a liberal too.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2020 15:04
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:So you're saying that the SNP internal fighting has leaked over to the High Court? That's what salmond is suggesting not me. Either way doesn't look great for the SNP lol
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2020 15:06
|
|
|
Also definitely do not trust the former head of CPS at all. Probably wants to put everyone in jail.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2020 15:09
|
|
|
ronya posted:They do not need Starmer to corral Labour MPs Agree completely - I find it exremely discouraging that as his first major act Starmer has completely accepted the premise of the tory argument - criticism of the government at this difficult (because of us) time is "political point scoring". This doesn't bode well.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2020 15:10
|
|
|
endlessmonotony posted:Getting? Man I agree with you? The only hope Labour has to survive the next years of intense turmoil is to turn into a Party in every sense of the word. Leftwingers don't hold power through the ballot, we hold it with popular backing. I was having a joke with the NASTY thing lol
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2020 15:10
|
|
|
Julio Cruz posted:I didn't vote for Starmer (or Rayner, in fact) and I'm far from happy he won Yeah I agree with this, at least inasmuch as I think there's no point in purging ourselves lol. But I certainly won't vote for a right-economic party ever, so I don't think people should vote red no matter who. E and I will also leave if they become pro austerity. No point materially supporting my political enemies by giving them fees
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2020 15:12
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:1. Lawyer, untrustworthy. It's funny how lots of people think this until they're being told anything they do say will be given in evidence, and then they have a quite miraculous Damascene conversion
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2020 15:13
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:1. Lawyer, untrustworthy. Ehh. You could be right, but I can't class him as a wrecker like Watson despite 2016. He resigned in the coup, but pretty much everybody who wasn't ideological married to Corbyn did. Since then he genuinely seems to have avoided undermining him, even more so than people like Thornberry. To me he's just hard to get a read on. I don't know if he's going to try and appeal to the centre so he can deliver left-wing policies, or if he's going to appeal to the centre so he can be a centrist. A lot will depend on how much of Labour's manifesto he decides to chuck out. I could stand losing things like free broadband, but if he tries to walk back free tuition or nationalised rail/water/energy then he'll basically be dead to me.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2020 15:14
|
|
|
Trin Tragula posted:It's funny how lots of people think this until they're being told anything they do say will be given in evidence, and then they have a quite miraculous Damascene conversion Funny how people say capitalism is bad until they have to go to work at which point being subjected to it makes them purchase goods with money which is the same thing as endorsing it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2020 15:15
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I'm not really sure how else to look at it? If you support it why not sign it? If you don't sign it, does it not raise questions as to whether you support it? politicians have been capable of setting out their positions without signing up to these sort of third party pledge cards before sign one and not only do you invite an endless stream of every other campaign demanding you sign yours too, but you’re holding yourself hostage to interpretations of the text that might be a lot stricter than what you intended. I think we know that for all his faults, Starmer isn’t going to do an Orban in the unlikely event Labour take absolute power. pledge card or no pledge card e: no that sounded too glib. obviously there’s a wide ability to be poo poo on trans rights without being as bad as Orban. sorry. Cerv fucked around with this message at 15:18 on Apr 4, 2020 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2020 15:15
|
|
|
Oh poo poo, looks like my crap memory was right and I had a reason not to trust Kier. I hope all the smug posters will apologise now.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2020 15:16
|
|
|
jabby posted:Ehh. You could be right, but I can't class him as a wrecker like Watson despite 2016. He resigned in the coup, but pretty much everybody who wasn't ideological married to Corbyn did. Since then he genuinely seems to have avoided undermining him, even more so than people like Thornberry. I think as, again, a lawyer and former head of CPS and massive wet rag politically the biggest likelihood is he tries to do stupid national unity poo poo with the government and ends up just further legitimizing him, while all the loving liberals wank themselves raw about it, while actual policy just gets ignored.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2020 15:17
|
|
|
When Starmer starts issuing pledge cards, then I'll be worried.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2020 15:17
|
|
|
I don't think kier was much of a wrecker, he's just thoroughly shite. His big wheeze was the Brexit compromise and remain leaning poo poo that hosed us the hardest and I've actually never seen him say anything that wasn't gormless pablum. Both Kier and RLB are dream opponents for bojo just in different ways. Kier represents the London elite bojo ran against and also he looks either sorry or stupid every time he appears on TV.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2020 15:17
|
|
|
Cerv posted:politicians have been capable of setting out their positions without signing up to these sort of third party pledge cards before Well yes, that's the point, I want politicians to be held strictly to their words, because as noted, they are untrustworthy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2020 15:18
|
|
|
God the lib media is gonna be diabolical lol Gonna be a Biden style swap from furiously loathing Corbyn to bigging up everything an imaginary Kier in their head does. Then when he loses they will be sad and learn nothing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2020 15:20
|
|
|
Communist Thoughts posted:God the lib media is gonna be diabolical lol E gently caress that wasn't edit at all!
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2020 15:20
|
|
|
Mugsbaloney posted:Agree completely - I find it exremely discouraging that as his first major act Starmer has completely accepted the premise of the tory argument - criticism of the government at this difficult (because of us) time is "political point scoring". This doesn't bode well. Saying you won't engage in party-political point-scoring doesn't mean you don't do it. At the moment, it's the right thing to say. It doesn't preclude actually holding the government to account. A political cynic would even say it's better to allow the situation to get worse before you go on the attack. OwlFancier posted:Well yes, that's the point, I want politicians to be held strictly to their words, because as noted, they are untrustworthy. Signing a pledge doesn't mean they'll stick to it, any more than not signing one means they won't.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2020 15:21
|
|
|
I ain't going anywhere. It's not my preferred outcome, but I only joined in 2017. I don't want to be a fair weather supporter, I don't personally think that's ethical, and besides a Labour membership is good for my chosen career. I don't blame anyone for leaving, though - I don't find that all that productive in the abstract anyway. This was kind of locked in by December. Is what it is.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2020 15:22
|
|
|
Tarnop posted:Why do you think he didn't sign it? ThomasPaine posted:Precisely why his not signing it is clearly a meaningful strategic decision. Trin Tragula posted:It's funny how lots of people think this until they're being told anything they do say will be given in evidence, and then they have a quite miraculous Damascene conversion Stormgale posted:Oh poo poo, looks like my crap memory was right and I had a reason not to trust Kier. I hope all the smug posters will apologise now.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2020 15:23
|
|
|
EmptyVessel posted:And signing it is magically only sincere and not strategic? I mean if signing it meant so little in commitment then yes, not signing it means something. Also Yeah, Not signing it is likely cosying up to terfs, sorry.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2020 15:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 08:14 |
|
|
Politicians are untrustworthy, so unless they sign pledges I don't trust them. Politicians are untrustworthy, so when they sign pledges I don't trust them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2020 15:28
|
|
