Oct 2023
10:32am, 19 Oct 2023
43,051 posts
|
SPR
Doesn't work when combined with Thornberry. At best, he didn't want to answer the question which is only slightly better.
|
Oct 2023
10:51am, 19 Oct 2023
20,781 posts
|
Chrisull
I've never liked Thornberry anyway. And yes my gut feeling is, he didn't want to answer the question and whenever pressed is running from it. Elsewhere Kevin Maguire/Mirror/New Statesman has an article on Labour suffering from Long Corbyn and still feeling the need to distance itself from his part time and the perceived stance on anti-semitism: newstatesman.com And whether we think there was an issue or not - I think there was one, although exaggerated, it remains true that Corbyn is the only mainstream politician with a greater unfavourability rating than Suella Braverman - source Ipsos. I'm not hopeful Starmer will make a difference, but the alternative is complete nihilism, there are still good politicians/mps in the Labour party. UNLIKE the Tories, who have no good mps. |
|
Oct 2023
10:53am, 19 Oct 2023
20,782 posts
|
Chrisull
(part time should read past time - referring to his time in the Corbyn shadow cabinet)
|
|
Oct 2023
10:59am, 19 Oct 2023
20,783 posts
|
Chrisull
Another thought is perhaps focus group polling on Israel/Palestine conflict isn't shedding much light either to guide Labour. One pundit asks the question "where is the median voter on Israel/Palestine" and apparently it really isn't clear. We know where there fringes are, but where does your average voter sit? Apparently they themselves are reluctant to voice opinions.
|
Oct 2023
11:14am, 19 Oct 2023
22,400 posts
|
larkim
Didn't the statement about the LBC clip basically say that if you look at every other interview he'd done that day he'd stressed the international law point firmly, but the only clip that got traction was the LBC one because it could be presented in a way which suggested he was not being robust on that? Starmer <> Thornberry. Hold him to account for what he said, and her to account for what she said (or didn't say). Agree that Israel / Palestine is a tough *electoral* issue for them to walk the tightrope around. It's a trite point of course, but I'd bet Starmer's electoral planning team are pretty peeved that this has become something they have to talk about. Presume this is now in Sue Gray's wheelhouse too? Has she started working for Labour yet? |
|
Oct 2023
11:37am, 19 Oct 2023
43,052 posts
|
SPR
Nope, Thornberry was holding the party line after Starmer spoke and that was clearly not to say withholding food, water, electricity was illegal. It's not exactly a surprise because it's a line pretty much all the world leaders were holding. Starmer has had ample time to clarify, and the briefings previously were against those that read the statements as a supporting the siege stance. All of this now is just part of the changing of the tone. |
|
Oct 2023
11:45am, 19 Oct 2023
22,401 posts
|
larkim
Agree, there was definitely a reluctance to say that they thought any of Israel's actions specifically were against international law. Nonetheless, even Thornberry started her entire conversation with Derbyshire by saying that everything had to be done in accordance with international law. It's not for a Labour spokesperson (especially when in opposition) to give authoritative statements on compliance with international law. I will agree though that I can see how both Starmers interview and Thornberry's can have been received as giving an impression that they were supportive of the blockade / seige if that's what you expect to hear from them. I would argue though it's possible to see a more nuanced view (which is the one that I am seeing). |
|
Oct 2023
11:55am, 19 Oct 2023
43,053 posts
|
SPR
I think the point is people didn't expect to hear that from them and that's why it got traction and caused issues in the party. Anyway tone change is obvious based on the statement by Starmer over the weekend. |
Oct 2023
12:08pm, 19 Oct 2023
3,462 posts
|
paulcook
Apparently the clincher comes on Friday when hundreds/thousands of councillors attend mosques. I suspect the Labour party will be doing everything it can this week to prevent many more councillors resigning.
|
|
Oct 2023
2:56pm, 19 Oct 2023
22,403 posts
|
larkim
I fully understand the sound reasons why people who are strongly supportive of the Palestinian cause, whether they are Muslim or not, would find it difficult to stick with the party line at the moment which is clearly more publicly supportive of the State of Israel than it has been at any time in recent history as they respond to the Hamas attacks. I wonder what difference, though, it would make - for the Labour voting, Palestinian supporting caucus to make a difference would they just disenfranchise themselves by not voting or there be enough support to coalesce around a different electoral identity in a way which doesn't instantly cause at least a few handful of Tory MPs to retain their seats due to lost Labour votes? |
Useful Links
FE accepts no responsibility for external links. Or anything, really.Related Threads
-
Fantasy General Election
Jul 2024
-
EU Referendum - In or Out? Vote here
Aug 2018
-
March to Parliament Against Brexit - Sat 2nd July
Jun 2016
-
EU Referendum
Feb 2016
-
Ads on Fetch - anyone else getting Leave and Remain?!
Feb 2017
-
The Environment Thread :-)
Nov 2024
-
Economics
Aug 2023
-
Dear Scottish Fetchies
Jan 2023
-
Any economists out there - question
Oct 2022
-
Power and exploitation - please check my sanity
Oct 2018