Can Sir Keir Starmer revive the Labour Party? (Vol. 2)

[hidetheelephants]

I watched a bit of a News Agents podcast on some independent standing in Birmingham Ladywood; apart from his distinctly simplistic ideas about Gaza he just seems like a standard issue Tiktok bellend with added Andrew Tate. It will be interesting to see what the result will be, the polls are saying the incumbent doesn't need to worry but tiktok man does have a surprising amount of name recognition.

[Camoradi]

bhstewie said:

They shouldn't be attacking a man for saying he'll have dinner with his family once a week because it's important to him and them.

I really didn't think it needed explaining but here we are once again.

It's a huge mistake by SKS which won't win any votes up North. Any self respecting son of a toolmaker should surely refer to it as "tea"

[Oliver Hardy]

bhstewie said:

They shouldn't be attacking a man for saying he'll have dinner with his family once a week because it's important to him and them.

I really didn't think it needed explaining but here we are once again.

No they shouldn't, but a man who wants that sort of life shouldn't be in the type of job that requites him to be available 24/7

Edited by Oliver Hardy on Wednesday 3rd July 14:47

[Oliver Hardy]

Camoradi said:

bhstewie said:

They shouldn't be attacking a man for saying he'll have dinner with his family once a week because it's important to him and them.

I really didn't think it needed explaining but here we are once again.

It's a huge mistake by SKS which won't win any votes up North. Any self respecting son of a toolmaker should surely refer to it as "tea"

I always thought dinner/lunch was in the afternoon and tea/supper was in the evening?

Learn something new every day

[iphonedyou]

Oliver Hardy said:

No they shouldn't, but a man who wants that sort of life shouldn't be in the type of job that requites him to be available 24/7

Is so much of the electorate really so reductive in its reasoning? He can both have dinner with his family and be available if a threat comes to light.

He won't, one presumes, barricade the door and throw his phone out of the window in order he can't be contacted. He will - again, one presumes - arrange his diary such that the day-to-day work is shifted to the 23 hours available either side of his dinner.

In much the same fashion as the vast majority of people, at either end of the indispensability scale and all points in between, do.

As an aside and apropos of nothing, I posit that the more indispensable an individual contends themselves to be, the less indispensable they are. And it's likely the case that the constant machinations of state which surround the prime minister of the day conspire to ensure the prime minister taking an hour off for dinner once a week is basically inconsequential.

Edited by iphonedyou on Wednesday 3rd July 15:38

[bitchstewie]

I suspect some of it is lazy media reporting rather than people reading all of what he actually said.

[iphonedyou]

bhstewie said:

I suspect some of it is lazy media reporting rather than people reading all of what he actually said.

Well, quite, and I suppose t'was ever thus.

[JagLover]

Rivenink said:

That's the point being made, isn't it.

Starmer has said he'll carve out a bit of time every week for his family, and delusional as they are, the Tories think that'll play badly to the millions of men and women who have families ( and are paying £100's more on their mortgages thanks to the Tories)

Desperation from the condemned men and women.

[Oliver Hardy]

iphonedyou said:

Is so much of the electorate really so reductive in its reasoning? He can both have dinner with his family and be available if a threat comes to light.

bhstewie said:

I suspect some of it is lazy media reporting rather than people reading all of what he actually said.

"I will not do a work-related thing after six o’clock, pretty well come what may."


He won't, one presumes, barricade the door and throw his phone out of the window in order he can't be contacted. He will - again, one presumes - arrange his diary such that the day-to-day work is shifted to the 23 hours available either side of his dinner.

In much the same fashion as the vast majority of people, at either end of the indispensability scale and all points in between, do.

As an aside and apropos of nothing, I posit that the more indispensable an individual contends themselves to be, the less indispensable they are. And it's likely the case that the constant machinations of state which surround the prime minister of the day conspire to ensure the prime minister taking an hour off for dinner once a week is basically inconsequential.

Edited by iphonedyou on Wednesday 3rd July 15:38

Phone on voice mail?

If he wants a job were he can arrange his diary to be home by 6 on Friday he shouldn't be running for PM.

Obviously not been in jobs were things happen or you just need to be in a place and your diary fails you.

[bitchstewie]

Yeah I'm pretty sure Director of Public Prosecutions is a strictly 9-5 job.

Have you read the full interview where he spoke about it?

[Sway]

Oliver Hardy said:

iphonedyou said:

Is so much of the electorate really so reductive in its reasoning? He can both have dinner with his family and be available if a threat comes to light.

bhstewie said:

I suspect some of it is lazy media reporting rather than people reading all of what he actually said.

"I will not do a work-related thing after six o’clock, pretty well come what may."


He won't, one presumes, barricade the door and throw his phone out of the window in order he can't be contacted. He will - again, one presumes - arrange his diary such that the day-to-day work is shifted to the 23 hours available either side of his dinner.

In much the same fashion as the vast majority of people, at either end of the indispensability scale and all points in between, do.

As an aside and apropos of nothing, I posit that the more indispensable an individual contends themselves to be, the less indispensable they are. And it's likely the case that the constant machinations of state which surround the prime minister of the day conspire to ensure the prime minister taking an hour off for dinner once a week is basically inconsequential.

Edited by iphonedyou on Wednesday 3rd July 15:38

Phone on voice mail?

If he wants a job were he can arrange his diary to be home by 6 on Friday he shouldn't be running for PM.

Obviously not been in jobs were things happen or you just need to be in a place and your diary fails you.

Utter nonsense. I've had roles I would be absolutely required at short notice to cover my area across businesses covering the majority of the available time shifts.

I've never not been able to organise regular 'family time' events, nor has anyone found it an issue.

Let's not forget he'll be living at the office.

[119]

bhstewie said:

Yeah I'm pretty sure Director of Public Prosecutions is a strictly 9-5 job.

Have you read the full interview where he spoke about it?

For those that haven’t, can you post a link?

[bitchstewie]

Here you go.

It was a radio interview but I think the full quotes and context are there.

‘Really desperate’: Starmer hits back at Tory attacks on his work hours

Wes Streeting vows to clean up Tory 'vomit' after false claims about Keir Starmer's work ethic

[borcy]

Oliver Hardy said:

iphonedyou said:

Is so much of the electorate really so reductive in its reasoning? He can both have dinner with his family and be available if a threat comes to light.

bhstewie said:

I suspect some of it is lazy media reporting rather than people reading all of what he actually said.

"I will not do a work-related thing after six o’clock, pretty well come what may."


He won't, one presumes, barricade the door and throw his phone out of the window in order he can't be contacted. He will - again, one presumes - arrange his diary such that the day-to-day work is shifted to the 23 hours available either side of his dinner.

In much the same fashion as the vast majority of people, at either end of the indispensability scale and all points in between, do.

As an aside and apropos of nothing, I posit that the more indispensable an individual contends themselves to be, the less indispensable they are. And it's likely the case that the constant machinations of state which surround the prime minister of the day conspire to ensure the prime minister taking an hour off for dinner once a week is basically inconsequential.

Edited by iphonedyou on Wednesday 3rd July 15:38

Phone on voice mail?

If he wants a job were he can arrange his diary to be home by 6 on Friday he shouldn't be running for PM.

Obviously not been in jobs were things happen or you just need to be in a place and your diary fails you.

If his family move into the flat, he won't have far to walk to the office.

[Legacywr]

[hidetheelephants]

Big uptick in duplicate threads filled with evidence-free pant-wetting and pearl-clutching about how Keir is going to house migrants in their spare room, Rachel is going to steal their pensions and Bridget is going to kidnap their children and brainwash them into revolutionary committees who will put their parents in camps. I guess the polls are bad.

[turbobloke]

hidetheelephants said:

Big uptick in duplicate threads filled with evidence-free pant-wetting and pearl-clutching about how Keir is going to house migrants in their spare room, Rachel is going to steal their pensions and Bridget is going to kidnap their children and brainwash them into revolutionary committees who will put their parents in camps. I guess the polls are bad.

Which site is that? Polls have been what they are for many weeks. This particular type of repeat post must be fashionable somewhere.

[98elise]

Oliver Hardy said:

bhstewie said:

They shouldn't be attacking a man for saying he'll have dinner with his family once a week because it's important to him and them.

I really didn't think it needed explaining but here we are once again.

No they shouldn't, but a man who wants that sort of life shouldn't be in the type of job that requites him to be available 24/7

Edited by Oliver Hardy on Wednesday 3rd July 14:47

It's a perfectly reasonable aspiration though, and in any given normal week quite possible. I'm not a Labour supporter and I can't see the problem.

If we have some sort of massive crisis on a Friday afternoon I doubt he will be walking out of no10 at 6pm.

[chrispmartha]

Oliver Hardy said:

bhstewie said:

They shouldn't be attacking a man for saying he'll have dinner with his family once a week because it's important to him and them.

I really didn't think it needed explaining but here we are once again.

No they shouldn't, but a man who wants that sort of life shouldn't be in the type of job that requites him to be available 24/7

Edited by Oliver Hardy on Wednesday 3rd July 14:47

Deary me, desperate much?

When did he say he wouldn't be available.

Do you think Prime Ministers sit at their desk 24/7 just incase something happens?

[anonymoususer]

Can and has and is on his way to a massive majority.
Corbyn would never have been able to achieve this