O/T Boris moved to intensive care

[KerrAvon]

You are the "nut job", and someone who is uncritical of the Tory party and who will not voting Labour anyway. Rather obsessed for a "neutral", don't you think?

I have voted in every General Election since 1983 and have never voted Tory in one. I've not counted, but think that I have voted Labour more times than for any other party. I understand that you find this hard to grasp.

I simply don’t buy into the ‘I tweeted it without reading it’ mantras that are trotted out and swallowed up by eager Labour Party acolytes. I’m fed up of reading posts one here and elsewhere in which those same party activists ‘explain’ what Labour politicians ‘actually’ meant when they said various things. The Corbyn era has turned Labour into a nasty, bigoted outfit that is filled with class warriors and obsessed with identity politics. That's the point, I'm making - I want Labour to become a realistic voting option again. You might be able to excuse or turn a blind eye to the unpalatable nature of the truth, but I can’t and won’t. December 12th demonstrated – for those who need it to be demonstrated - that this country needs and deserves better than the choice that was on offer.

As for me being neutral, I offered you a challenge yesterday; show me where I have claimed to be neutral and I won’t post again. All you have to do is is apologise if you can’t find me making such a comment.

[Exiletyke]

I have voted in every General Election since 1983 and have never voted Tory in one. I've not counted, but think that I have voted Labour more times than for any other party. I understand that you find this hard to grasp.

I simply don’t buy into the ‘I tweeted it without reading it’ mantras that are trotted out and swallowed up by eager Labour Party acolytes. I’m fed up of reading posts one here and elsewhere in which those same party activists ‘explain’ what Labour politicians ‘actually’ meant when they said various things. The Corbyn era has turned Labour into a nasty, bigoted outfit that is filled with class warriors and obsessed with identity politics. That's the point, I'm making - I want Labour to become a realistic voting option again. You might be able to excuse or turn a blind eye to the unpalatable nature of the truth, but I can’t and won’t. December 12th demonstrated – for those who need it to be demonstrated - that this country needs and deserves better than the choice that was on offer.

As for me being neutral, I offered you a challenge yesterday; show me where I have claimed to be neutral and I won’t post again. All you have to do is is apologise if you can’t find me making such a comment.

I have voted in every General Election since 1983 and have never voted Tory in one. I've not counted, but think that I have voted Labour more times than for any other party. I understand that you find this hard to grasp. [/quote]

Wrong terminology there Kerr
Should read "I understand that you find this hard to believe"

[animallittle3]

I don't buy that. When a new manager moves into a club, he will be largely stuck with the squad that he inherits as it takes time to move contracted players out. Starmer had a clean piece of paper when he started to assemble his shadow cabinet; he didn't have to appoint Naz Sha, Afzal Khan or any other member of the 'I didn't read it before I tweeted it' brigade.

Starmer had the opportunity to end the nonsense, draw a line under the insanity of the last few years and return the Labour Party to a point where it is functioning opposition and fit for government. It’s clear that his desire for ‘unity’ has trumped that. I wonder how many people would have voted for him if he had been clear that he included anti-Semites and nut jobs amongst those he wanted unity with?

Naz Sha and Afzal Kahn are poor appointments and I wouldn't argue about that .

Unifying the party surely has to be top of the list because if it isn't together in opposition then it's unlikely it will be effective and win an election .

Whether you like it or not the left have a place in the party just as much as the centre does .

Your left wing nut jobs are my EU worshippers in the party and are led by a man who did quite a lot of damage in the Heartlands whilst Shadow Brexit Secretary .

My point is there has to be a coming together and compromises made or this party will be done for and likely to split .

That would be my understanding of a clean slate at this point in Starmer's tenure .

[great_fire]

Cabinets and shadow cabinets have to be diverse these days which leads to some unsuitable appointments like Naz Shah, Diane Abbott and Baroness Warsi.

[WanChaiMiller]

Cabinets and shadow cabinets have to be diverse these days which leads to some unsuitable appointments like Naz Shah, Diane Abbott and Baroness Warsi.

Not forgetting Priti Patel.

[great_fire]

Not forgetting Priti Patel.

That could be the case but I think it remains to be seen.

[rolymiller]

I have voted in every General Election since 1983 and have never voted Tory in one. I've not counted, but think that I have voted Labour more times than for any other party. I understand that you find this hard to grasp.

I simply don’t buy into the ‘I tweeted it without reading it’ mantras that are trotted out and swallowed up by eager Labour Party acolytes. I’m fed up of reading posts one here and elsewhere in which those same party activists ‘explain’ what Labour politicians ‘actually’ meant when they said various things. The Corbyn era has turned Labour into a nasty, bigoted outfit that is filled with class warriors and obsessed with identity politics. That's the point, I'm making - I want Labour to become a realistic voting option again. You might be able to excuse or turn a blind eye to the unpalatable nature of the truth, but I can’t and won’t. December 12th demonstrated – for those who need it to be demonstrated - that this country needs and deserves better than the choice that was on offer.

Behave yourself Kerr you are talking to your uncle Roly now! Voted Labour more times than etc...!!

By the way Labour has always been for minority groups they aint changed under Corbyn...they have always been class warriors as well as long as I can remember over 60 odd years and one of the reasons why they are attractive to the working class. Why wunt you vote for someone who was fighting your corner...so IF it is true you have voted Labour loads of times before on what premise is it if it is not for some of those reasons?

It dunt stack up as usual my dearest..

You are a rogue...xx

[mikemiller]

Kerr seems to have little understanding of politics. The Labour party was set up to give representation to workers /trades unionists in parliament. It was called the LABOUR party because it was representing the LABOURING classes - it could have hardly been made clearer, even to a dimwit, that it was a classed based party. The clue was in the name - what was he expecting? Whether they have successfully delivered much is another matter.
As for "tokenism" - probably more associated with Tony Blair and the Blairite cronies than anybody

Of course the whole "Kerr" thing is probably a wind up anyway

[ragingpup]

Cabinets and shadow cabinets have to be diverse these days which leads to some unsuitable appointments like Naz Shah, Diane Abbott and Baroness Warsi.

There will be unsuitable appointments from all races that make up the parliament of a diverse population. Some will be bigoted and found out, some will be incompetent and found out, white, black, Asian, christian, Muslim, Jew. The question is which ones do we choose to highlight and why. The Brexit party had by far the highest number of controversial representatives making dubious bigoted comments but this seems to bypass many on here as they focus on the Labour Party. As already said, the Conservative leader has referred to picaninnies, bum boys and letter boxes and he is the leader of the whole life for backed by many on here. So why do you choose to focus just on these three, and of ethnic minorities, when talking about controversial mps?

As already said, the in disappointed in the appointment of Shah but will keep an open mind on Kahn. His comments on Israel were 12 years ago and don't appear to represent his current views as far as I can see. Whatever party you are from I don't think you should be damned for your isolated comments that are not repeated and apologised for and I would hope that Starmer knows him well enough in his career to make this appointment knowing full well his previous comments. I'm willing to give them time and show what they can do. There are 30 appointments in the Shadow cabinet and whilst the extreme centrist minority such as Kerr will want any trace of the left excluded, thankfully Starmer is showing to want to encourage a genuine broad church in the Labour Party, the very thing the centrist plp mps said that Corbyn was not doing. I'm pleased that we are not swinging from one extreme (such as Corbyn was an extreme) to the other. I wish Khan and Shah well if they have truly learned and changed their views, and I wish them quickly exposed and dismissed of not.

[howdydoo]

Ask yourselves why the people who actually do work in this country have turned their backs on the labour party? They should have rebranded 10 years ago.

Why don’t we make anything in this country?

Keep going on about people being dimwits and the like. You seem like a right intelligent individual.

What are you doing for society exactly? Not enough handouts come your way. Is that the problem.

The amount of people who expect their ar$es to be wiped for them is staggering.

Keep safe