General British politics discussion thread

It's her Who'se Who entry on academic publications that did it for me. For that to be a mistake requires someone so devoid of understanding of detail they are patently unsuitable to be in charge of anything.

As posted above by Timber,, its obviously not Starmer's fault but another week the main story will be Labour **** up.

Sorry but how is this a Labour fùck up?

He's been an MP for that area since 2017, as soon as he did this Labour suspended him and are now calling for a by-election m.

I believe Rjd was speaking of the Reeves CV kerfuffle, rather than the Mr Punchy incident.
Mind you, even the Reeves matter isn't really a labour f*ck up. That whole thing is just another bullsh*t story hyped up by the right wing press.

So Labour should have known in 2017 that 7 years later he would get pìssed and punch someone to the ground?

He was elected in 2017 by his constituents, he was re-elected in 2019 and again in 2024 but yeah, please explain in detail how they "selected a psycho".

He's a psycho. They selected him. How is this hard to grasp?

Look, I'm not saying that it's necessarily fair or reasonable that Labour get blowback from this; I'm just saying that it's inevitable that they will.

One of the features of the UK's pretty crapulous electoral system is that it gives party committees far more say over exactly who gets into Parliament than it gives to voters. Voters in Runcorn and Helsby who want a Labour MP have zero say in who that Labour MP will be. Consequently if the Labour MP turns out to have, um, individual personal characteristics that are less than ideal for an MP, that's largely on the party, not the voters. The voters weren't given the option of voting for a Labour MP with more suitable characteristics.

You can't have, and take advantage of, the kind of control that UK political parties are given and then expect people to accept that you have no responsiblity for the outcome of the way you exercise that control. The fact that it's not an outcome we wanted, or even foresaw, is neither here nor there. As grown-ups we should be well used to the notion that we have some accountability for the outcome of our actions even if it's not an outcome that we expected or desired.

So, yeah, "MP knocks down man in the street and continues punching him" is the kind of headline that creates a problem for the party the MP represents that it doesn't create for other parties.

I'm using the term "psycho" broadly to describe the kind of guy who will knock somebody down in the street and continue to punch him as he lies there. I get that a clinical psychiatrist might want to know a bit more before making a diagnosis, but it's a colloquial usage that I'm happy to stand by.

No anti-Labour bias at work at all — quite the reverse. I would accept that Labour are probably unfortunate in having selected a guy who turns out to be a psycho.

If it were the Tories or Reform, then you'd see my bias at work. I'd be saying "Of course he turned out to be psycho! If he wasn't, he would hardly have offered himself as a Tory/Reform candidate!" 😉

The trimming out of undesirable physiological traits from politics will devoid us of many of the entertaining characters. Just look at Liz Truss.

For the sheer couch & popcorn enjoyment-factor an element of these types should be retained. Otherwise what would we be reading about?

I'de say Joe Bloggs knows nothing about this event.

Is it water cooler talk ? Nope but it was one of the main stories in the UK news here.

I agree that Labour shouldn't get much blowback for this, but that's not how politics works sadly.

Just the latest in a long line of "this is disastrous for Labour" from the RW press in the UK. I must say, I expected them to start monstering the LP as soon as they got into government, but I'm surprised at the vehemence.

Timberrrr, you're completely missing the point.

In the UK system, the voters choose the party that will represent them. The party chooses the individual. If the individual chosen turns out to be a bad choice, who are the voters going to blame? Themselves, or the party?

Don't ask yourself who they should blame. Don't ask who it is reasonable to blame. Ask who they will, in fact, blame. That after, all, is the only thing that determines whether the party is damaged by this.

(Hint: They're not going to blame themselves.)

In a country where someone can be in the Bullingdon club and become PM politicians getting in a single fight and someone telling a small lie really isn't all that shocking.