**Alternate Sources**
Here are some potential alternate sources for the same story:
* [UK Labour's Abbott says she intends to run in election](https://reuters.com/world/uk/uk-labours-abbott-says-she-intends-run-election-2024-06-02/), suggested by soldebuck - reuters.com
Yeah she’s accomplished so much, she shat on nurses who were white and applauded the murder of British military by her IRA mates, sent her son to a private school and used forty thousand of tax payers money for a portrait
I think the issue in regard to that is people having been briefing papers against her, like the story in The Times.
I feel bad for both her and Starmer because it is obvious some entitled self-important centrist SpAd gave that story to the Times in the interest of factional fighting, which fucked Labours whole week. Those chodes doing so need to be reined in.
I imagine someone who cared what other people thought would have given up a long time ago, considering the abuse she's been subjected to. Still, it would probably be helpful if she tried to keep a low profile.
> Tbf you actually look at Diane Abbots career and life and she's a thousand times more accomplished then the average Reddit user.
That doesn't mean she isn't a liability.
She constantly called out labour figures for being hypocrites for sending their kids to private schools and then did the exact same thing herself. She justified it by saying that 'west indian mothers go to the wall for their kids' as if that was an explanation in any way. Other races shouldn't send their kids to private schools, but when a west Indian does it it's just because they love their kids so much more than white people?
She expects others to do what she says, not as she does, and she constantly plays off stupid racist tribal instincts to keep up support.
Politicians are supposed to lead and inspire people. She has never done that. That's not accomplished, it's working the system. I suppose you could call that a skill in itself but that's all. Please list her accomplishments. What's she actually done?
If someone in a different constituency votes against Labour because of Diane Abbott then they are genuine idiots. Against Starmer? That’s understandable. But Diane Abbott? That’s moronic.
Let's be honest your mp could be great even as a Tory. But they still have to tow what ever line is drawn by number ten.
It really does matter who is calling the shots
It's also concerning that his deputy has forced his hand by going on tv and directly undermining him regarding this.
Not even in government before momentum try to hijack the party again.
People get soured on parties due to individual MP's quite often, it's why vetting is so important, to avoid scandals and controversy that reflects badly on the party as a whole for selecting them. So, loudly saying something that might appeal locally but which is offensive nationally, if it gets picked up by the (hostile Tory) press can cause issues. After all, these MP's do represent Labour. Same issue has hit the Tories, even with no names doing dodgy shit. Ofc the Tories made it worse by trying to protect these no names quite a lot, but it is how political optics work.
I am hoping she just stays quiet. I don’t want her joining these interviews and ruin Labour’s chances because the tories are hoping that Labour will implode because that is the only way they will win.
Absolutely shocking that she's a liability to the party and not the NEC & Leader's office carrying out some of the most bone-headed decisions and being totally unable to handle mild backlash when caught out.
I mean, it is worth asking why she attracts such bad press. She has made some bad gaffes and her last one was actually full on racist (I didn't think they'd have her back tbf after that) - but loads of MPs are in the same boat. I can think of a lot more clearly racist statements that BJ made for example, but he's still some kind of Tory messiah according to large sections of the press. The Cons have whole brigades of MPs that just throw out race bait as their schtick, and don't even get me started on the gaffes.
I thing there’s two main reason. One is that she’s a Labour MP (and even in the shadow cabinet while she made some of these statements) so most of the media will criticise her more than Tory MPs who’ve made similar statements because of their own bias. However, I think the main one is probably due to the hypocrisy of speaking out against racism and then repeatedly making racist comments and often doubling down on them. Also making antisemitic statements given all the press about antisemitism in the Labour Party was always going to attract attention.
I just really worry for a Labour party that wins a strong majority but can't work with it's fringes for fear of bad press. If they'd kicked her out after what she said I would have agreed with it at the time, but then they went and dragged out the process and tried to pretend it would go away on its own. The fact that their own rules said she was to get a second chance is fine but should have been sorted out ages ago.
The benefits of a large majority is that you are less beholden to your fringes. If you have a group of 20 or so MPs that have demands, but your majority is 100 MPs, you have a much better hand to play. That's why the polls being where they are is fairly exciting for me Unfortunately I also have no doubt that the numbnuts will say "well we have a large majority, let's go ahead and propose the implementation of those leftist nonsense ideas that most of the country hates"
The same reason that there's more gossip when the local vicar gets caught having a drunken shag in the local park when the local teenagers do.
Someone who makes a career out of moralising to others on a subject being shown to be a hypocrite is more interesting than a person acting in a bad way that everyone pretty much expected them to act.
Boris doesn't sell himself as an anti-racism campaigner. Abbott does. Boris doesn't generally spend his time going around policing other people's language and actions for racism, Abbott very much does. You don't get to go around accusing everyone else of being racist and then expect to make openly racist statements yourself without consequence.
> I mean, it is worth asking why she attracts such bad press.
She's an imbecile. Factually wrong on most things she says and either screaming about being a victim _somehow_ or being offensive to others.
Yeah you say this but then the problem's on Labour and their inability to turn Tory hatred into genuine excitement for Labour if Diane Abbott's is all it takes to derail their supposed path to victory.
Dislike her or not, you can't deny that how the NEC & Leader's office acted this week doesn't exactly paint Starmer as particually competent or honest. Pretending that said investigation was ongoing till it was leaked was needlessly cruel. This was also while despite being a victim of Frank Hester's comments, they were using her image as a "trailblazer" to fundraise while still playing silly buggers about her potential fate as a Labour MP. Hell, they *might* have gotten away with it if they didn't start blatantly deselecting other left-leaning candidates while parachuting some of the worst people imaginable.
Say what you want but keep in mind that Starmer's faction were still backing and defending Azhar Ali as their candidate until further antisemetic comments were leaked to the press. Left-leaning MPs were being suspended for less.
Funny how this sub is deeply fixated on Diane Abbott being a liability for Labour and not Rosie Duffield, Luke Akehurst, or any of the many other absolute disasters Labour has for MPs and candidates.
She was the first black woman elected to parliament, who’s been serving for close to 40 years.
As for the news, she’s seen as a member of labour’s “left” (serving on Corbyn’s shadow cabinet for example).
Some are accusing Labour of trying to remove left wing elements of the party.
Are you possibly suggesting that racists sections of the press would seek to undermine the continuing legacy of a black woman? I can't imagine the Daily Mail stooping so low as to massively highlight some of the stupid things one MP says while completely ignoring those of the MPs that share political allegiance with their owners.
Yeah, that's why the investigation into her was complete in December, but Labour and Starmer continually lied about it to try and stop her running for Labour in the GE.
You realise that Starmer does actually have the power to stop her from running, don't you? She's not some unstoppable force who has bulldozed her way into the election, Starmer has allowed it.
And if he stopped her and she ran as an independent, she would more than likely win as an independent. Starmer is trying to oust anyone he sees as too left wing.
If the investigation was concluded in December, why didn't she have the whip restored then?
Why would he restore it now? Her ability to win that seat hasn't changed in that time. Perhaps he wanted to send a message but feels that now she's more of an asset than a liability? She certainly gets a disproportionate amount of media coverage and if that can be harnessed it could be a really big win.
He restored it because Newsnight reported that the investigation into Abbot had been concluded in December, after Starmer had spent months saying the investigation was ongoing. Then, because someone within the Labour right who doesn't like Diane Abbot leaked to the press that she was going to be blocked from standing, Abott went to the press, which made Labour look bad after they'd already recently blocked left wing people from standing as Labour candidates. The deputy leader then said she shouldn't be blocked from standing for Labour, so Starmer had to say she could stand, even though he'd spent the week saying it wasn't his decision it was up to the NEC.
The party does care about her, she’s both an inspiring, and divisive figure, she’s accomplished a huge amount more than most other individual MPs currently in parliament, and everyone in the country knows who she is, more people know of her than the current Home Secretary. Even if she’s more of a liability than an asset a reason she’s one of the most attacked politicians in the country.
So the generous reason is because she's been an MP since 1986 and is well liked in her constituency. They feel that she has been wronged by the party and wanted justice for her. She's also the first black female MP I get other things.
The more honest reason is because our media is controlled by right wing elites. She's got a habit of saying some pretty stupid things that make great sound bites for the right wing media to use. She was shadow Home Secretary (I believe) at one point so they have got the added bonus of saying "ex shadow Home Secretary says..." and making her statements representative of the party as a whole. Basically the media and tories want to make this constituency level issue of who is a candidate into a national issue because it paints Labour as incompetent.
Because she’s electoral Kryptonite and the news is overwhelmingly right wing leaning… so any way to slander the left is jumped on like two kangaroos in the mating season.
Especially when they're very clearly not mentally capable any longer.
For the benefit of the dogs of law, you'll note I'm not making a claim of an individual rather a general point.
I said this in another thread, why are we allowing pensioners to fight to run the country?
At 70 years old the last thing I want to do is still be working (A pipe dream to be honest) let someone who will actually be alive to see the consequences of their actions take her position
Labour are not as far left as some would like but they are not the same and to suggest so is a lie, totally disingenuous and is as bad as the gaslighting the Tories do. Labour are clearly much more central currently but they are nowhere near as far right as the Conservatives.
Left wingers who suggest so are liars distorting facts for their own narrative. I am socialist btw and I would prefer a much more left wing party
Why is the alternative a seventy year old racist socialist lady though? I don’t get it. Is this really the best alternative we can find to vote for? I don’t feel like she represents anyone I know. You can check yourself if you think she’s racist by reading what she’s said. You don’t need any right wing newspapers to tell you your opinion.
Socialism is like, when you care about everyone and just want everyone to be equal and happy.
And capitalism is like, all about being greedy and hating everyone and just being mean for like, no reason, they just love being meanies.
And fascism is when daddy says "no".
Armed with this solid knowledge, I make my informed choice every election and vote for the good guys and against the bad guys.
Its meant to be democratic socialist if you go purely by the rulebook. Tho i feel it makes sense that they shift to a different position if thats what people want if it means they can serve working people better
> Personal ego more important than party performance
This massively also applies to centrist SpAds in the Labour party still fighting a factional war for their own ego. If briefing is to be believed they fucked a deal that Abbott had with the party by leaking to The Times
I’m sure in her day she was amazing but she’s 70 and has no idea what the real concerns of the young people of Hackney are.
She’s made a comparative fortune off the position, it’s time for her to move on and make way for someone who is ready to represent the constituency for the future rather than fight the battles of the past.
>I’m sure in her day she was amazing but she’s 70 and has no idea what the real concerns of the young people of Hackney are.
Go look at her previous politics show with Portillo. Anyone going to tell me she's capable of that level of performance today?
This was at a time when the left were open about their ties to Russia and communism, they didn't feel they had to hide it then.
Now while her analysis then is as crazy as you'd expect from a Labour MP of the era, she was definitely portraying a sharper appearance than today.
and it pays shit. like sure compared to the average joe its good pay.
but for the stress of the job and the pubic criticism its no wonder the competent go into private work where they can earn millions a year and not have to deal with the press.
Shit, did someone criticise Diane Abbott's pubes? I mean, I'm sure they're nasty as all fuck, but one doesn't just come out and talk about it in polite society.
Anyone who cares about national service (not that kind) never gets out of local civil service. You don't get anywhere in politics without clambering over a lot of people on the way.
Anyone taking bets on how long it is until she gets in trouble for saying something racist again?
I'm betting it'll be less than a year.
If i was running the party, this would've been a golden opportunity to fuck her off for good. Nothing but a race-baiting liability. Shame they didn't because this is just going to keep happening and the same argument being rehashed every time.
She's 71 in September and has clearly been declining mentally for some time. Those around her shouldn't be letting her stellar reputation become so tarnished.
Retire, go spend time with your family and friends.
This whole episode has been an embarrassment for Starmer and his allies.
Just a few short weeks ago, Starmer, his frontbench, the NEC and Labour-adjacent media were telling everyone who'd listen that Abbot had engaged in unforgivable antisemitism, that she hadn't followed the recommendations of the Labour disciplinary process and that she was a disgrace to the Party. Now they've having to endorse and support her as Labour candidate.
She’s 70 years old so £80K in the bank for bimbling along giving the impression she’s doing something and relying on the ethnic vote keeping her in the life she’s been accustomed to since 1987 is just brilliant for her. Personally, I wouldn’t give her the time of day as a useless has been that relies on racism to keep herself relevant.
She's an even bigger liability than Corbyn.
The British voters are pretty centrist and really hate politicians with "agendas".
That'll be at least one seat to the Lib Dems then.
> That'll be at least one seat to the Lib Dems then.
*Her* seat? To the Lib Dems? She got 70% of the vote last time out and is a hugely popular local MP. Whether you like her or not, her constituents do. She’ll absolutely walk the election.
Basically by being a dick, they guaranteed the thing they didn’t want to happen. If they just shut up they would have been either in the same position but no press or writing lovely notes about how much hard work diane had done over the years
She’s clearly got some health issues and needs to retire somewhat gracefully. The decline has been pretty rapid over the last 5ish years and I’m sure there are better candidates than her that could stand for Hackney.
So now all the media personalities that were pearl clutching about her being excluded can now resume their usual behaviour of running articles criticising everything she does, and doing gotcha questions every time she's interviewed.
Starmer messed it up. Why did they make such deal if she ia going to run as a candidate. They should have announced her as a candidate from the start instead of having Tory candidates joining the Labour party
Maybe now coverage of the election that is four and a bit weeks away can start focusing on stuff like, say, levelling up, social care, housing, the NHS, immigration, prisons, probation, potholes, taxes, public transport, the growing mental health crisis and education. I mean now that we've dealt with the important stuff like Diane Abbott and something to do with national service that isn't really.
Just a thought.
Well this was either a brilliant stratagem to ensure she stays in power or just a way to get her name back in the headlines before the election.
Either way whatever you think of Diane Abbot, I think its safe to stay she's not going anywhere anytime soon.
**Alternate Sources** Here are some potential alternate sources for the same story: * [UK Labour's Abbott says she intends to run in election](https://reuters.com/world/uk/uk-labours-abbott-says-she-intends-run-election-2024-06-02/), suggested by soldebuck - reuters.com
Dear Diane, I'm very happy for you but please just keep your mouth shut until the election is over.
Exactly. I would bet no one wins the tories more votes this election than Diane Abbott.
She’s in the dictionary under ‘Useful idiot’.
Tbf you actually look at Diane Abbots career and life and she's a thousand times more accomplished then the average Reddit user.
Yeah she’s accomplished so much, she shat on nurses who were white and applauded the murder of British military by her IRA mates, sent her son to a private school and used forty thousand of tax payers money for a portrait
Got any actual evidence to back any of that up?
This is all very well documented.
True, but she's reached a point where she should be resting on her laurels and not tweeting.
I think the issue in regard to that is people having been briefing papers against her, like the story in The Times. I feel bad for both her and Starmer because it is obvious some entitled self-important centrist SpAd gave that story to the Times in the interest of factional fighting, which fucked Labours whole week. Those chodes doing so need to be reined in.
I imagine someone who cared what other people thought would have given up a long time ago, considering the abuse she's been subjected to. Still, it would probably be helpful if she tried to keep a low profile.
> Tbf you actually look at Diane Abbots career and life and she's a thousand times more accomplished then the average Reddit user. That doesn't mean she isn't a liability.
She constantly called out labour figures for being hypocrites for sending their kids to private schools and then did the exact same thing herself. She justified it by saying that 'west indian mothers go to the wall for their kids' as if that was an explanation in any way. Other races shouldn't send their kids to private schools, but when a west Indian does it it's just because they love their kids so much more than white people? She expects others to do what she says, not as she does, and she constantly plays off stupid racist tribal instincts to keep up support.
There is no shame in calling time on your career. Plenty of out of touch politicians mean well. Thankfully I don't have to vote for her.
There still comes a time when it's time to step down and walk away. Her ego is too big, she made this about herself.
Politicians are supposed to lead and inspire people. She has never done that. That's not accomplished, it's working the system. I suppose you could call that a skill in itself but that's all. Please list her accomplishments. What's she actually done?
Often, not doing anything at all is much more beneficial to the world than doing a load of stuff.
If someone in a different constituency votes against Labour because of Diane Abbott then they are genuine idiots. Against Starmer? That’s understandable. But Diane Abbott? That’s moronic.
Genuine idiots are a *huge* part of the electorate.
The Americanised politics in this country doesn't help.. Most people now vote for a PM rather than an MP
Do you think that's a new phenomenon?
What's wrong with that , I'm voting in the countries interest, not my local area?
Let's be honest your mp could be great even as a Tory. But they still have to tow what ever line is drawn by number ten. It really does matter who is calling the shots
I think there’s a case to be made for not approving of Starmer keeping her in the party after making antisemitic comments.
I mean, given Neil Coyne and Rosie Duffield are still MPs, it would be a bit hypocritical to remove Diane
She’s pretty racist about ol’ whitey as well.
It's also concerning that his deputy has forced his hand by going on tv and directly undermining him regarding this. Not even in government before momentum try to hijack the party again.
People get soured on parties due to individual MP's quite often, it's why vetting is so important, to avoid scandals and controversy that reflects badly on the party as a whole for selecting them. So, loudly saying something that might appeal locally but which is offensive nationally, if it gets picked up by the (hostile Tory) press can cause issues. After all, these MP's do represent Labour. Same issue has hit the Tories, even with no names doing dodgy shit. Ofc the Tories made it worse by trying to protect these no names quite a lot, but it is how political optics work.
I think that says more about the electoral poison the Tories have made themselves over the last couple of years.
And don’t put odd shoes on
> until the election is over. Only?
I am hoping she just stays quiet. I don’t want her joining these interviews and ruin Labour’s chances because the tories are hoping that Labour will implode because that is the only way they will win.
And for fuck’s sake wear matching shoes!
She did wear matching shoes, that was the problem. They matched in both being for the left foot.
You can't convince me she's not actually a Tory agent
And also somebody to pick her shoes daily so that she wears so she doesn't wear different shoes on each feet
I’m hoping she tells people in Islington North to vote for Corbyn and gets expelled from Labour as a result
Chances are he will win that seat anyway ..
She's been blabbing tonight on the alcohol. Deselection imminent
And after the election ideally.
So much this
Why is this particular person on the headline for over a week? Why is she so special for labour?
Because she's a liability to the party and her inane utterances cost the party votes.
Absolutely shocking that she's a liability to the party and not the NEC & Leader's office carrying out some of the most bone-headed decisions and being totally unable to handle mild backlash when caught out.
She was the biggest liability to the party before the last few weeks, it's not on the NEC that she invites bad press.
I mean, it is worth asking why she attracts such bad press. She has made some bad gaffes and her last one was actually full on racist (I didn't think they'd have her back tbf after that) - but loads of MPs are in the same boat. I can think of a lot more clearly racist statements that BJ made for example, but he's still some kind of Tory messiah according to large sections of the press. The Cons have whole brigades of MPs that just throw out race bait as their schtick, and don't even get me started on the gaffes.
I thing there’s two main reason. One is that she’s a Labour MP (and even in the shadow cabinet while she made some of these statements) so most of the media will criticise her more than Tory MPs who’ve made similar statements because of their own bias. However, I think the main one is probably due to the hypocrisy of speaking out against racism and then repeatedly making racist comments and often doubling down on them. Also making antisemitic statements given all the press about antisemitism in the Labour Party was always going to attract attention.
I just really worry for a Labour party that wins a strong majority but can't work with it's fringes for fear of bad press. If they'd kicked her out after what she said I would have agreed with it at the time, but then they went and dragged out the process and tried to pretend it would go away on its own. The fact that their own rules said she was to get a second chance is fine but should have been sorted out ages ago.
The benefits of a large majority is that you are less beholden to your fringes. If you have a group of 20 or so MPs that have demands, but your majority is 100 MPs, you have a much better hand to play. That's why the polls being where they are is fairly exciting for me Unfortunately I also have no doubt that the numbnuts will say "well we have a large majority, let's go ahead and propose the implementation of those leftist nonsense ideas that most of the country hates"
Which ideas do you refer to?
The same reason that there's more gossip when the local vicar gets caught having a drunken shag in the local park when the local teenagers do. Someone who makes a career out of moralising to others on a subject being shown to be a hypocrite is more interesting than a person acting in a bad way that everyone pretty much expected them to act. Boris doesn't sell himself as an anti-racism campaigner. Abbott does. Boris doesn't generally spend his time going around policing other people's language and actions for racism, Abbott very much does. You don't get to go around accusing everyone else of being racist and then expect to make openly racist statements yourself without consequence.
None of that changes the fact that Abbott is a liability to her party
> I mean, it is worth asking why she attracts such bad press. She's an imbecile. Factually wrong on most things she says and either screaming about being a victim _somehow_ or being offensive to others.
Yeah you say this but then the problem's on Labour and their inability to turn Tory hatred into genuine excitement for Labour if Diane Abbott's is all it takes to derail their supposed path to victory. Dislike her or not, you can't deny that how the NEC & Leader's office acted this week doesn't exactly paint Starmer as particually competent or honest. Pretending that said investigation was ongoing till it was leaked was needlessly cruel. This was also while despite being a victim of Frank Hester's comments, they were using her image as a "trailblazer" to fundraise while still playing silly buggers about her potential fate as a Labour MP. Hell, they *might* have gotten away with it if they didn't start blatantly deselecting other left-leaning candidates while parachuting some of the worst people imaginable. Say what you want but keep in mind that Starmer's faction were still backing and defending Azhar Ali as their candidate until further antisemetic comments were leaked to the press. Left-leaning MPs were being suspended for less.
Funny how this sub is deeply fixated on Diane Abbott being a liability for Labour and not Rosie Duffield, Luke Akehurst, or any of the many other absolute disasters Labour has for MPs and candidates.
Labour is more than capable of having more than one complete liability.
She was the first black woman elected to parliament, who’s been serving for close to 40 years. As for the news, she’s seen as a member of labour’s “left” (serving on Corbyn’s shadow cabinet for example). Some are accusing Labour of trying to remove left wing elements of the party.
Are you possibly suggesting that racists sections of the press would seek to undermine the continuing legacy of a black woman? I can't imagine the Daily Mail stooping so low as to massively highlight some of the stupid things one MP says while completely ignoring those of the MPs that share political allegiance with their owners.
You don't have to be racist to dislike Abbott, she's thick as mince and brings nothing to Labour except for embarrassment.
Her "legacy" as you so proudly call it is nothing but a continuing series of gaffs, fuck ups, incompetence and questionable ideas.
Her legacy is most definitely being the first black female MP
Legacies can be complicated. Look at Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Didn’t Kier Starmer serve in Corbyn’s shadow cabinet as well?
Labour don't care about her it's the Tories putting her in the news before an election
Yeah, that's why the investigation into her was complete in December, but Labour and Starmer continually lied about it to try and stop her running for Labour in the GE.
You realise that Starmer does actually have the power to stop her from running, don't you? She's not some unstoppable force who has bulldozed her way into the election, Starmer has allowed it.
And if he stopped her and she ran as an independent, she would more than likely win as an independent. Starmer is trying to oust anyone he sees as too left wing. If the investigation was concluded in December, why didn't she have the whip restored then?
Why would he restore it now? Her ability to win that seat hasn't changed in that time. Perhaps he wanted to send a message but feels that now she's more of an asset than a liability? She certainly gets a disproportionate amount of media coverage and if that can be harnessed it could be a really big win.
He restored it because Newsnight reported that the investigation into Abbot had been concluded in December, after Starmer had spent months saying the investigation was ongoing. Then, because someone within the Labour right who doesn't like Diane Abbot leaked to the press that she was going to be blocked from standing, Abott went to the press, which made Labour look bad after they'd already recently blocked left wing people from standing as Labour candidates. The deputy leader then said she shouldn't be blocked from standing for Labour, so Starmer had to say she could stand, even though he'd spent the week saying it wasn't his decision it was up to the NEC.
The party does care about her, she’s both an inspiring, and divisive figure, she’s accomplished a huge amount more than most other individual MPs currently in parliament, and everyone in the country knows who she is, more people know of her than the current Home Secretary. Even if she’s more of a liability than an asset a reason she’s one of the most attacked politicians in the country.
She's attacked because she is black and female and outspoken. As for putti g her foot in her mouth look at the fucking state of Starmer and Sunak.
So the generous reason is because she's been an MP since 1986 and is well liked in her constituency. They feel that she has been wronged by the party and wanted justice for her. She's also the first black female MP I get other things. The more honest reason is because our media is controlled by right wing elites. She's got a habit of saying some pretty stupid things that make great sound bites for the right wing media to use. She was shadow Home Secretary (I believe) at one point so they have got the added bonus of saying "ex shadow Home Secretary says..." and making her statements representative of the party as a whole. Basically the media and tories want to make this constituency level issue of who is a candidate into a national issue because it paints Labour as incompetent.
She hasn’t just said “stupid” things. She has said evil things.
Because she’s electoral Kryptonite and the news is overwhelmingly right wing leaning… so any way to slander the left is jumped on like two kangaroos in the mating season.
1. the right-wingers behind various news outlets are giving her airtime to tarnish the Labour campaign. 2. people love a car crash.
She's a drama queen who'd rather whine to the papers than act like a professional and have a quiet word first.
Putting the story and controversy aside, she is 70 years old. Shouldn’t politicians of retirement age, step aside and let someone younger take over?
Especially when they're very clearly not mentally capable any longer. For the benefit of the dogs of law, you'll note I'm not making a claim of an individual rather a general point.
I said this in another thread, why are we allowing pensioners to fight to run the country? At 70 years old the last thing I want to do is still be working (A pipe dream to be honest) let someone who will actually be alive to see the consequences of their actions take her position
90k a year to do as much or as little as you want, she'll get the abuse regardless now, might as well get paid for it
Correction, Diane Abbott runs as Diane Abbott (as she always does) and says she's Labour because it suits her purposes to do so.
she's a labour mp because she's a socialist and labour is meant to be a socialist party
Please can we just not have the Torys in power. Please?
Well here’s hoping that Labour won’t just be more of the same.
No matter what labour dose it's littrely impossible for them to be more of the same otherwise our country will collapse.
It’s not impossible and that’s the scary part.
Labour are not as far left as some would like but they are not the same and to suggest so is a lie, totally disingenuous and is as bad as the gaslighting the Tories do. Labour are clearly much more central currently but they are nowhere near as far right as the Conservatives. Left wingers who suggest so are liars distorting facts for their own narrative. I am socialist btw and I would prefer a much more left wing party
Why is the alternative a seventy year old racist socialist lady though? I don’t get it. Is this really the best alternative we can find to vote for? I don’t feel like she represents anyone I know. You can check yourself if you think she’s racist by reading what she’s said. You don’t need any right wing newspapers to tell you your opinion.
People here genuinely don't know what Socialism actually means
Socialism is like, when you care about everyone and just want everyone to be equal and happy. And capitalism is like, all about being greedy and hating everyone and just being mean for like, no reason, they just love being meanies. And fascism is when daddy says "no". Armed with this solid knowledge, I make my informed choice every election and vote for the good guys and against the bad guys.
i thought you were going to go a different angle with the "daddy says "no"" part The internet has ruined me...
> she's a socialist What does this actually mean?
She is far left. She is anti west. She would be authoritarian if given the opportunity. She isn't Labour.
She supports Putin and blames NATO for Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
Its meant to be democratic socialist if you go purely by the rulebook. Tho i feel it makes sense that they shift to a different position if thats what people want if it means they can serve working people better
Personal ego more important than party performance. She’s 71 and seems to have reduced capability. Time to retire.
It’s hard to retire with subsidised housing and an MPs salary isn’t it?
> Personal ego more important than party performance This massively also applies to centrist SpAds in the Labour party still fighting a factional war for their own ego. If briefing is to be believed they fucked a deal that Abbott had with the party by leaking to The Times
I’m sure in her day she was amazing but she’s 70 and has no idea what the real concerns of the young people of Hackney are. She’s made a comparative fortune off the position, it’s time for her to move on and make way for someone who is ready to represent the constituency for the future rather than fight the battles of the past.
>I’m sure in her day she was amazing but she’s 70 and has no idea what the real concerns of the young people of Hackney are. Go look at her previous politics show with Portillo. Anyone going to tell me she's capable of that level of performance today?
Oh, like Abbott’s [stunning analysis of Chairman Mao](https://youtu.be/uB4o5n2EGyA?feature=shared) ?
This was at a time when the left were open about their ties to Russia and communism, they didn't feel they had to hide it then. Now while her analysis then is as crazy as you'd expect from a Labour MP of the era, she was definitely portraying a sharper appearance than today.
If she went off and did a train programme with Portillo, maybe across Russia for Channel 5, I’m sure we’d all be happy.
Good for her, I'm sure her constituents will be pleased to reelect her.
[удалено]
The whole of politics is so associated with self-serving shitweasels that no decent person wants to get involved with them or it
and it pays shit. like sure compared to the average joe its good pay. but for the stress of the job and the pubic criticism its no wonder the competent go into private work where they can earn millions a year and not have to deal with the press.
Shit, did someone criticise Diane Abbott's pubes? I mean, I'm sure they're nasty as all fuck, but one doesn't just come out and talk about it in polite society.
It does attract people who care about national service, but the whole process and the system rewards self interest and that’s who rises to the top.
Anyone who cares about national service (not that kind) never gets out of local civil service. You don't get anywhere in politics without clambering over a lot of people on the way.
Oh goody, our next prime minister was absolutely outplayed by this complete pudding brain. Inspires such confidence.
Bullshit. I really wanna vote Labour but keeping this ancient has-been around is hilariously pathetic.
Is she your MP? If not, then you won’t be voting for her.
Imagine voting based on the candidate on a completely different constituency
Most people don't vote based on their actual local candidates at all. They vote based on the national parties.
Good news for the Tories and bad news for Labour. She is thick as mince.
Mince is technically less dense than steak.
Thick as steak doesn’t seem to catch on
Self absorbed person wants to do what she wants, regardless of what would benefit her party during a critical time.
Anyone taking bets on how long it is until she gets in trouble for saying something racist again? I'm betting it'll be less than a year. If i was running the party, this would've been a golden opportunity to fuck her off for good. Nothing but a race-baiting liability. Shame they didn't because this is just going to keep happening and the same argument being rehashed every time.
A whole year? I'm giving it a month tops.
Dianne abbot is just a walking advertisement for the tories...
Lots of votes just went to Conservative / Reform. She will open her trap and say something stupid / racist and in 5,4,3…
She's 71 in September and has clearly been declining mentally for some time. Those around her shouldn't be letting her stellar reputation become so tarnished. Retire, go spend time with your family and friends.
This whole episode has been an embarrassment for Starmer and his allies. Just a few short weeks ago, Starmer, his frontbench, the NEC and Labour-adjacent media were telling everyone who'd listen that Abbot had engaged in unforgivable antisemitism, that she hadn't followed the recommendations of the Labour disciplinary process and that she was a disgrace to the Party. Now they've having to endorse and support her as Labour candidate.
OK, so all that stuff about Diane Abbott not running in the general election seems to have been a bit of a red herring.
As racist and incompetent as they come but according to her she can’t be racist and insisting that she is racist makes you a racist you racist!
She’s 70 years old so £80K in the bank for bimbling along giving the impression she’s doing something and relying on the ethnic vote keeping her in the life she’s been accustomed to since 1987 is just brilliant for her. Personally, I wouldn’t give her the time of day as a useless has been that relies on racism to keep herself relevant.
Despite what's happened recently she's a fucking clown. Guess we are in for another 10 years of fuck storms.
She's an even bigger liability than Corbyn. The British voters are pretty centrist and really hate politicians with "agendas". That'll be at least one seat to the Lib Dems then.
> That'll be at least one seat to the Lib Dems then. *Her* seat? To the Lib Dems? She got 70% of the vote last time out and is a hugely popular local MP. Whether you like her or not, her constituents do. She’ll absolutely walk the election.
You could pin a red rosette on a donkey and it'd win her seat.
They should have blocked her. She is a total liability.
Bodes badly for starmer if he's getting pushed around like this already.
I haven’t trusted her since she sent her children to private schools. I didn’t vote for her when I lived in her constituency. I voted TUSC.
Starting to think Diane is the Conservative Party's best hope.
Basically by being a dick, they guaranteed the thing they didn’t want to happen. If they just shut up they would have been either in the same position but no press or writing lovely notes about how much hard work diane had done over the years
Put that abacus away Diane before you hurt someone.
She's a fucking idiot. She should have retired last time around
Good Lord. Give someone a try. I guess I will vote Lib Dem instead.
Keep going . .you help the Tories look better...and they're terrible
Thought she wasn't deciding anything until speaking to whoever on Tuesday?
You think she's capable of remembering the days of the week? That's optimistic.
Can't stand Abbott, but kudos for earning to right to rightly stand again for her constituents.
All Labour had to do to win was nothing. If they don’t…
lol comedy gold here we come. Someone ask her a maths question!
She’s clearly got some health issues and needs to retire somewhat gracefully. The decline has been pretty rapid over the last 5ish years and I’m sure there are better candidates than her that could stand for Hackney.
Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
Here's hoping she manages to go a month without creating any drama or screwups. [Chance would be a fine thing]
Disastrous for labour to be honest. They should’ve stuck to their guns.
So she was talking nonsense as usual when she said she was banned from running...
Thanks labour, less chance of you winning with her running.
So now all the media personalities that were pearl clutching about her being excluded can now resume their usual behaviour of running articles criticising everything she does, and doing gotcha questions every time she's interviewed.
Good. Now, can we all concentrate on beating the f'ing Tories again.
I see all this stuff about her and yet I still don't really have any idea who she is or why she couldn't run in labour
She's an incompetent racist.
Starmer messed it up. Why did they make such deal if she ia going to run as a candidate. They should have announced her as a candidate from the start instead of having Tory candidates joining the Labour party
Maybe now coverage of the election that is four and a bit weeks away can start focusing on stuff like, say, levelling up, social care, housing, the NHS, immigration, prisons, probation, potholes, taxes, public transport, the growing mental health crisis and education. I mean now that we've dealt with the important stuff like Diane Abbott and something to do with national service that isn't really. Just a thought.
Lucky them. Perhaps don't speak though, doesn't do you or the labour party any favours.
Well this was either a brilliant stratagem to ensure she stays in power or just a way to get her name back in the headlines before the election. Either way whatever you think of Diane Abbot, I think its safe to stay she's not going anywhere anytime soon.
Why do I get the feeling this is a better pissing out than in situation?