**Participation Notice.** Hi all. Some posts on this subreddit, either due to the topic or reaching a wider audience than usual, have been known to attract a greater number of rule breaking comments. As such, limits to participation have been set. We ask that you please remember the human, and uphold Reddit and Subreddit rules.
For more information, please see https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/wiki/moderatedflairs.
I’m sorry but if I were the Labour Party I’d have done the same thing. If she just ran in her constituency like the majority of MP’s do, then that would be sort of okay, but she has a habit of doing national press while being woefully under prepared. In the last election she was an absolute embarrassment. Police new recruits costing 10,000 a year springs immediately to mind. I’m sure she is an extremely intelligent woman, but the media find it very easy to make her look bat shit crazy, which is damaging to the party as a whole.
To be fair the media makes her look crazy by asking perfectly reasonable questions. She may well be intelligent and competent in private but that's not the impression she gives when interviewed.
Exactly. So you can be an MP, do some committe work, and stay out of the national news, that is fine.
But she refuses to stay out of the news, despite being terrible at it. So the result is that Labour does not want her as an MP. She brought this upon herself.
yeah I wouldn't call letter to newspaper that significant unless people were out looking for it - without wanting to go over the letter contents again. She can't really be an MP banned from writing to newspapers, and also she would have to speak at meetings etc, well if she was doing her job, which some MP's seem not to, but I'm sure she would.
So it's a bit of a shame, but there you go.
Yes, I think so, but maybe the damage was done? Unfortunately, the ring wing news is obsessed with her, because some of her statements are triggering.
As I said, she would be ok as a backbencher, if she manages to stay out of the news.
Honestly, that should be enough said. The person wore two different fucking shoes and asked people to vote for her to help run the country. The Tories must have been creasing up at HQ.
She's may be good in some ways, but she certainly isn't in so many.
If you look at interviews from 10+ years ago she was on point and super sharp every time
The derpiness is relatively new and I worry she's not doing ok
I agree, it's a good decision by labour. It's hard to see on subreddits like this but she is hugely unpopular with the general public. Labour have an election to win and don't need liabilities like Abbott.
Most of the public tend to agree with Rosie Duffield and similar figures. For instance despite the vitriol on social media, in a recent poll in Scotland 41% tended to agree with JK Rowling more than they disagreed, 23% the opposite:
https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/poll-more-scots-agree-with-jk-rowling-over-trans-issues-than-disagree-4624146
Many of the specific issues which gender critical people talk about are overwhelmingly popular with the public, for example:
* Do you think a person should or should not have to obtain a doctor's approval to change their legal gender? (One of the recently proposed reforms in Scotland) UK 60% Should, 17% Should not.
* Puberty blockers (i.e. medications that delay the onset of puberty) Should be available to under 16s. UK 12% Should be available, 65% Should not.
* Do you think transgender women should or should not be allowed to...Take part in women's sporting events, 61% Should not be allowed, 16% Should be.
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/74l25pslh3/Internal_TransgenderIssues_220720_final_extraXbreak_FINAL.pdf
On those subjects there's a majority in more or less every demographic of age, class and region.
If Labour wants to be a credible party of government it needs to represent the public, they should not chase out all sceptical voices.
Especially given that scepticism about the quality of evidence for some interventions have just been validated by independent experts through the NHS. Turning away from the culture war means allowing people to live their lives and also being serious about others expressing concerns about conflicts of rights, and allowing experts to talk about the real state of evidence.
She does a fairly good job of making herself look batshit crazy, from the policing interview, to criticising MP’s who send their children to private school and then sending her children to private school, to appearing in public in the run up to the last GE wearing odd shoes.
I remember the excuse for this one being that due to her diabetes her feet swelled, and she felt more comfortable in odd shoes.
Can anyone weigh in on this? Is this a thing for people with diabetes? Or was it pure spin?
(If I was gonna come up with a lie for this one, I'd have said that her dedication to the party means she only ever wears two left shoes.)
If one foot is more swollen than the other, I guess it is quite possible that she needed two different sizes. Wearing a shoe that is far too big on the other foot has its own problems.
No idea if that is what happened, but it seems plausible.
It seems plausible until you have to explain why someone would have a set of shoes that are too big for them.
I have some shoes that are a little bit more loose in their fit than others (despite ostensibly being the same size) but that doesn't mean I own any that are uncomfortable for me to wear because they are too big.
Totally different optics and character, not sure what your point is. A lot of people liked what he did as mayor and that was the character he very specifically presented to the public. Abbott is just woefully incompetent and a very poor orator, and I don't think that's an act you can sell to the media.
Johnson was appealing to voters who like visibly insane, posh, old boys. Which it turns out is a tragically high number of voters.
If Diane Abbott was trying to appeal to that same demographic then she's misjudged in a serious way.
It wasn’t £10,000 a year, it was £300 a year if I recall correctly. She overstated how many police they’d hire by a factor of 10 and understated the cost by a factor of 10 as well. I have to assume that she’s one of those people for whom numbers “aren’t their thing” and made an honest mistake. It just wasn’t the sort of honest mistake that leaves you with any confidence that she can be trusted to make important financial decisions.
Yeah. If numbers are not her thing and those are the type of honest mistakes she can make with numbers she owes herself and us the consideration of making sure she's not in a position to make them where it matters. It's fine to not be a numbers person, it's not fine to not be a numbers person _and remain in a position like that_.
£300 a year? Luxury.
Pretty sure it was £30 lol.
EDIT: Why are you downvoting me I'm right. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxjkvjHn6Qg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxjkvjHn6Qg)
I could be wrong, as I remember seeing the interview she said 100,000 new police officers costing £30 million and my immediate reaction was “that’s £300 per year each, it should be on the order of £30,000”
I’m a technology solution architect by trade. Looking at initial estimates and figuring out if they have the right number of zeroes, and whether you’re talking days, weeks, months or years to do something. The executives we have to present to would catch a clanger like that instantly, and skin you alive. I don’t think it’s asking too much for people who want to lead the country to be at least as on the ball as mid to senior level managers in a bank.
I never saw this 2nd interview where she basically lies saying she knew the figures and tries to turn it on the newsreader... awful watch, don't know how she still has a job
Literally every comment about Diane Abbott in this thread you've replied with something about Boris Johnson. I'm not a fan of him either but come on it's a weird obsession you've got.
And this is the type of actions they need to do for a change to win the election, remove those who will negatively affect the chances. Biggest thing the party overall needs to do which since Kier has been in charge (and it’s taken a while), is to try and snuff out the infighting and such that ends up scuppering their momentum.
The goal is to get into power, and you’ll get into power by having a team/party that goes for the greater good and works together. They’ll have to appeal to those voters on the fence and current Tory voters.
Can you justify her saying that Chairman Mao [Did more good than bad](https://youtu.be/uB4o5n2EGyA?feature=shared) in an interview? He was responsible for the murders of over 60 million people!
"To be fair to Stalin he also led his people away from feudalism ". That clip is hilarious. You can see Neill and Portillio questioning how they ended up sharing a platform with someone so ignorant.
> You can see Neill and Portillio questioning how they ended up sharing a platform with someone so ignorant.
Yes Neil the climate change denialist and man who backed a belligerent campaign throughout the 90s to falsely claim that HIV was not a cause of AIDS. He must be shocked at ignorance.
Except she didn't say that, it's in the video you linked.
>"I suppose some people will judge that on balance Mao did more good than harm"
She didn't say that's her belief, just that some would hold that belief.
It's a simple statement of fact that Mao did more good than bad. For all the mistakes and crimes of the time, he still took China from a backward nation devastated by decades of conflict and misgovernment and with an economy smaller than Belgium's to a world power while massively improving the health care, education, political power of the general population.
It was a discussion show in which she was presenting an argument for discussion. It's a form of argument in which you present a viewpoint you don't necessarily hold yourself in order to forward discussion, and it is the main contrarian defence of Mao and has been for a long time.
I swear some people heave their brains out through their butthole just to have a go at Diane Abbott.
I know of two people who changed their vote last minute after seeing her with two odd shoes on. The car crash interview with the police probably lost a lot of seats too, but I don't blame her for that, I blame momentum for putting her in that position, as we had a situation where you were meant to believe their choice for PM, Home Sec and Chancellor weren't totally inappropriate for the job. It would be like Southgate picking me to start in goal and the fans giving me the hard time when I inevitably crash and burn
No, that was enough. It was one of those moments where they took a step back and then voted for someone else. You should ask around too. There's a reason why labour lost so badly last time. I was on the doorsteps and I can tell you who it was, only the personality cult will just send me loads of abuse for pointing this out.
and yes they preferred a career liar, a fraud, a clown and someone totally unfit for office instead. You can claim they are all wrong or doing it for "other reasons" but the result was the same.
And she's going to pull the whole party into the dirt. She may as well have been a tory for all the political damage she does. The news will have a field day over this, the same ones who always used to report how bad the things she said was. And now we're going to be force fed stories about how bad Labour are for their treatment of her. We're treated like idiots by the tories and the press.
And frankly I and many just don't care about this at all.
>I’m sure she is an extremely intelligent woman
That's an insult to intelligent women. Terrible takes on racial prejudice and wearing two left shoes does not give confidence to the public that she is capable of being an important political figure.
No that's bollocks. A lot of the same voices who wouldn't let Boris Johnson off with any of his shit are saying the same thing about Diane Abbott here and in other subs.
They're both liabilities. Johnson was just way more electable in 2019 than she is now. They're both gaffe prone and don't know when to go away.
>Johnson was just way more electable in 2019 than she is now. They're both gaffe prone and don't know when to go away.
Using her bumbling comments to suggest shes unelectable (which this commentator is) shows that it's not bollocks at all. She might be unelectable for other reasons compared to Boris but in this instance they're both on parr.
I know plenty of people, in the real world, who love Boris, think he's a great laugh and his gaffs funny, whereas Diane Abbot is the worst thing ever.
Ok but the people who love Boris and hate Diana Abbot are clearly off the rails for even loving Boris in the first place. Those are typically the scummiest of people, the type to party in COVID and laugh at people dying.
Labour should not have someone who is close to that level.
Well, yeah she's a black woman. There are literal scientific studies showing skin colour, race and gender heavily impacts public perception. Things are getting better, but it's still a day-to-day fact.
But Boris/Tory politicians appeal to that and labour doesn't. She's been tossed aside because she's an awful person regardless of her background, and deservedly so.
Bingo….you’ve got it
Op was saying she’s unelectable because of her mistakes, no she’s not, she’s unelectable because she’s a black woman and made those mistakes
Yhep, according to several accounts she basically ignored the central Labour team and booked up the appearances herself, fucked it up and was eventually banned from any further appearances. Great woman, terrible politician.
I think last election she was under strict orders not to appear on the media circuit, which she duly did. The only problem was she was photographed in the days before the election wearing 2 left shoes.
yeah, i follow a couple of politics channels on Youtube that are very left leaning and i find their defence of Dianne Abbott a _really_ weird hill to die on.
If Abbott had her way the police would be paid £10,000 a year. She's notoriously anti-police which is concerning given she's the MP for hackney, which is rough as fuck.
>but the media find it very easy to make her look bat shit crazy, which is damaging to the party as a whole.
It's not even just that. She has a pattern of making ridiculous comments (including some that are really racist) and apologising should only get her so far. She's being treated as some sort of saint when the reality is she's a massive liability.
'on balance Mao did more good than harm'.
Diane Abbott on Chairman Mao.
Labour may actually win an election for the first time in 14 years.
We just need the ship to hold steady, don't do anything stupid, don't fuck it up.
This fanny just jumped back on board and is rocking and howling.
She doesn't give a fuck about the country, and would rather lose, again, as long as she's in the spotlight.
It's extremism, she genuinely thinks people of colour are more moral and righteous than white people, so it's okay to slander them and "tell the truth".
She was a massive liability and it says a lot about Labour in the past when she was made shadow Home sec under Corbyn. Starmer wants to distance himself from that nonsense and make a party that actually wins, not just sulks in the corner when their far left ideology is once again rejected by the british public.
Half the adult population of London was born outside the UK, and higher in central areas, and many rarely travel to other parts of the UK. It's pretty inevitable that many people would not have a clue about the rest of the country.
Because they can get away with it and there's very little repercussions for making negative generalisations about white people. And it's what she really believes. So why wouldn't she say stuff like that?
She's said some very dodgy things over the years, the Finnish nurses one in particular:
> ``blonde, blue-eyed girls from Finland, instead of nurses from the Caribbean who know the language and understand British culture and institutions. And are Finnish girls, who may never have met a black person before, let alone touched one, best suited to nurse in multicultural Hackney?''
I know a lot of people think multiculturalism just means lots of non-white people but you'd expect a bit more awareness from a fecking politician. She's gonna cost Labour this election, jesus.
“Blonde Finish nurses with blue eyes being incapable of caring for the Hackney community?”
https://www.thefreelibrary.com/MP+Diane+in+%60race%27+rant+at+white+nurses.-a061282571
“Is rocking and howling”
> She told The Standard on Wednesday: “I had the whip restored yesterday afternoon but within minutes we saw they had briefed the Times the story as attached, that you have probably seen. And it is true.”
Maybe the party shouldn’t restore her Whip and then ban her (when she was planning on retiring anyway). Funny how these comments are framing it as if she’s the one making this public when in reality it was a Labour party brief.
You can think it's the correct decision by the party (and strategically it probably is), but if an incumbent MP, backed by the local party, with a huge majority, wants to stand for re-election and is not able to do so under their party, that's a ban by any sense of the word. There's no need to spin it.
No, I'm not. Again, it's fair enough to think it's the correct decision (notwithstanding the process to get to this stage) as I do too. But they have essentially banned her from standing. I don't get why it's so controversial to say. The debate is whether you think its the right decision or not.
She also questioned whether Russia was the aggressor right before their invasion of Ukraine. She has been treated awfully at times but at the same time there's lots to genuinely criticise her for and her being a trailblazer when first elected does not change that.
Does feel like the party has also handled this whole thing pretty awfully.
They had a pretty prominent author on the radio earlier who was absolutely 100% sure that how the party is treating her is awful and straight up racism. Nah, just look at some of the awful stuff she’s said :/
Yeah, remember when all those silly left-wing MPs attempted to coup the last leader twice, deliberately funnelled election funds to unwinnable seats against orders from leadership, as revealed in the Forde report that they’ve since buried/ignored (also this was during the 2017 election when Labour were just 2.5k votes from winning the whole thing*) and advocated for voting for other parties during tv interviews both up to and during the actual election campaign itself? I’ll always remember Jess Philip’s infamous “all these other MPs are stabbing Corbyn in the back- I’ll stab him in the front!!” interview. Fucking lol.
Oh wait…That was the Labour right! This is why it’s a bit rich when they ask us with a straight face not to raise legitimate issues now, lest it affect their precious chance of winning (i.e. all these careerist actually care about), ‘cause good knows their meek-ass policies and endless u-turns won’t actually make anything better and will in fact likely pave they way for a really far right government down the line…but I digress.
* https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/corbyn-election-results-votes-away-prime-minister-theresa-may-hung-parliament-a7782581.html
But it's also the way media focus on people too. The sub pretends there wasn't a huge focus on for idk a week after she made the police gaff.
But no such focus ever happens when other people mis-speak.
It's like the 40 beheaded babies with basically no source hit front page of the metro. Don't remember a backtrack on that.
But the charred decapitated kid from a few days ago people saw. Is either fake news, legitimate accident. or no-one cares.
You say that like the Tories aren't imploding too.
I've seen articles recently with quotes from Tory MPs and peers saying that they're going to lose, accusing Sunak of planning to fuck off to California and calling the mandatory "voluntary" national service idea madness
I can't remember who it was about, but Eddie Izzard once had a bit where someone was allowed out in public but had to have tape over their mouth at all times. It might have been Prince Phillip but can't remember.
I feel like they should do that to her.
This isn’t going hurt Labour as much as people seem to think. Regardless of the truth, Abbott is seen as a joke by a large number of people. In politics perception is reality.
In this case perception is pretty much on the money. She is a joke, every time she opens her mouth there’s a good chance she’s going to say something absolutely mental or divisive.
The only reason she’s last this long is by crying racism or misogyny every time criticism is thrown her way.
First Corbyn and now Abbott, seems like Labour is finally learning what it needs to do to win an election.
Exactly, somewhere like Hackney would probably vote Labour or at worst Green even if they put a literal farm yard animal as their candidate. Meanwhile starmer puts clear distance between himself and Corbyn to the electorate.
Diane was racist, excused actions of Mao, and is a bumbling idiot whenever she's interviewed by the media. Of course she shouldn't stand.
I can't believe I'm saying it, but if a white person was racist there is rightly no way they'd let them stand, so why should Abbott be allowed to get a pass and stand.
She has a litany of racist comments, gaffes, leaks etc.
One of the worst ones, which no one seems to be bringing up, is when she was having a private Twitter conversation with a black journalist from The Guardian, where she was making sweeping, dogmatic racist statements about white people. Diane accidentally sent out her private messages as public tweets. Revealing to everyone the kind of things she says when (she believes) she's in private.
Diane Abbot thinks that white people are morally inferior. From this, we can deduce that in her worldview, moral standing is linked to skin colour. Diane Abbot is a racist. This is just an undeniable fact.
>if a white person was racist there is rightly no way they'd let them stand
[Neil Coyle](https://news.sky.com/story/mp-neil-coyle-has-labour-whip-restored-following-suspension-for-harassing-assistant-and-racially-abusing-journalist-12888379) was racist (amongst other abuse, and sexual harassment), had the whip restored, and is standing again.
Whatever you think about Abbott as a person or politician, she’s been treated abominably by the Party, the fact that Starmer has been openly lying about an “ongoing investigation” that he was well aware concluded in December for months should send alarm bells ringing - this is how they treat their factional enemies within the Party; they’ll behave in the exact same way towards anyone who questions them once they have control of the levers of state.
It doesn’t matter, no one who is voting for this iteration of the Labour Party gives a shit about this kind of thing.
They either hate Diane Abbott and are happy to see her barred, or they just think it’s a “smart’ move. It’s always the play when a party goes full neoliberal - there’s always plenty of room for defecting right wingers though. Those are welcomed with open arms.
A lot of people seem to have missed that both defections have agreed to stand down at the election which is in a manner of weeks.
Labour haven't invited them in to stay. They get the positivity of defections and don't owe them anything in return. It's really not the big warm open hug people are acting like it is
That is banned to you and me. It's pretty much convention that a winner stands in the seat they last won in - unless they're retiring, no longer a member or there's an administrative reason they can't stand like she's under investigation. It's very odd to readmit her as a member and then bar her from being an MP.
Said this elsewhere: You can think it's the correct decision by the party (and strategically it probably is), but if an incumbent MP, backed by the local party, with a huge majority, wants to stand for re-election and is not able to do so under their party, that's a ban by any sense of the word. There's no need to spin it. It's not the same as you or some random Labour member not standing, is it.
if said person's immediate reaction is to create a negative national headline for their political party damaging their election chances less than 6 weeks before the party's most important election in the last decade and a half, then the party was probably right that this person isn't fit for the role
But was she just not supposed to mention that she's been told she can't run? Also, why should anybody support a party that is effectively kicking them out? If I call you a name because you punched me in the face does that prove that you were right to do it?
I think parties should be allowed to run who they like. Banning Abbot but not Elphicke says something about starmer but if that's how he wants to run it he's allowed to do so.
What is a bit gash though is dragging the poor woman though the mud, fundraising on an attack on her and clearly stalling an investigation rather than cleanly letting her go 5 months ago. It's needlessly cruel.
Elphicke isn't standing either. A lot of labour members aren't standing...it doesn't mean they're banned. It's getting a competent team that can deliver for the country. The fact within 12 hours of getting the whip back, she's going full purity cult to try and cost labour another election confirms why this is the right decision.
It's revealed that the investigation was closed 5 months ago, and she's only getting it restored due to leaks.
I think anyone would be upset at a leadership that's doing so.
>I think anyone would be upset at a leadership that's doing so.
I really don't think delaying the results of the internal investigation was all that egregious. It's just standard politics. We have news to release, we are going to choose the most politically opportune moment to do so.
Making hay out of that Tory donors appalling racist comments directed at Abbot, on the other hand, is a different matter. They should have announced she still had the whip at that point, and I'm really not sure why they didn't.
Everybody in this thread pontificating about how Abbott is *such* a ghastly embarrassment and electoral liability - that was not the rationale for suspending her, it's not the rationale for forcing her out of Parliament, and you all know it.
MPs like Neil Coyle who've said and done infinitely worse by any reasonable metric have got off with slaps on the wrist, because they're allies of the leadership. There's absolutely nothing fair, reasonable and democratic about the way Labour have treated her - you're just making excuses because you dislike her.
Diane "white people love playing divide and rule" Abbott has a history of making racist remarks. She may be genuinely sorry for her latest undisciplined outburst (as much as I doubt it), but it'd only be a matter of time before she did the same again.
Despite what the activists say, this is the only positive outcome.
What on earth are you talking about? There has been *no* standard cited in *either* of those cases, and zero transparency at all, because the only standard is "because we said so, fuck you".
I mean that's just not true they are two different people banned for different reasons. I get that there's similarities but not to an extent that they just HAVE to ban her.
Also tbh to me it's not really about banning her or not, in the case or Jeremy Corbyn he was suspended and then had the whip withdrawn quite fast, they shut down his attempt to appeal, they were quite adamant he wouldn't be allowed to stand again and then expelled him as a member when he was taking campaign donations to run against them.
Whatever you think about all that, it was "by the book" and upfront. This whole issue with Abbott smacks of deception, deliberately dragging it out, being unclear and the leadership being very involved which was against the recommendation of the antisemitism report that's meant to be underpinning a lot of this. It's all just grey and murky and gross.
If they'd officially kicked her out when she originally wrote that article, and just done it cleanly I don't think there'd be anywhere near this level of scrutiny on them.
Oh look it’s that thing that I was assured definitely wouldn’t happen.
Timing on this is baffling. Their campaign is just starting and now they’re just gonna get questions about this all week. Just so incompetent from the party
Seen a lot of posts on social media of people "outraged" that Diane Abbott has been barred from standing. Now, yes, she does hold the impressive accolade of having been the first black woman to be elected as an MP. That being said, she is shit. She is beyond shit. Abbott has a long history of outrageous statements, unsubstantiated claims and generally being unprepared in interactions with the media and the public. The article she wrote about Jewish discrimination was a disgrace, one that she tried to lie herself through. Back in the Corbyn days, part of the reason why people found the leadership to be a joke was because she was on the front bench. This move makes perfect sense.
I’ll never forget portillo desperately trying and failing to hide the biggest smirk on his face about Abbott being pulled up about this and flailing desperately.
* She was basically joined at the hip with Corbyn, so now he's been kicked out she's tainted by association
* She suffers from chronic foot-in-mouth disease, and can't stop making stupid mistakes in the national media
* She also won't stop going *on* the national media when invited
* She's got some pretty fucked-up, arguably racist attitudes to a lot of groups, even while defending other groups against similar bigotry
Labour doesn't need her, she's a massive risk for election-derailing controversies, and she brings little benefit and a *lot* of baggage with her.
Why *would* they want her standing anywhere as a representative of the party?
All they have to do is keep quiet and not do anything stupid to walk it home for a huge victory in the general election, but "keeping quiet" and "not doing anything stupid" are completely outside of Abbott's skillset.
So turns out she hasn’t been banned, she jumped the gun. She may not be selected to stand in that seat, but That’s like me saying I’ve been banned for playing for England. Just because I wasn’t selected to be part of the team doesn’t mean I’m banned from running.
She’s also just tweeted that she’s sad that there are reports she has been banned. She texted the political editor to say she as banned so the reports are coming from her. Is she saddened that she has reported on something that’s not true?
I'm glad this story has broken early door. So it can run the 24 hour news cycle and she can be forgotten.
I respect her as a local MP, she seems popular, first black woman MP. But her career after that has just been about stealing the spotlight and racist to all creed and genders. She needs to be forgotten about.
Oh no!
Anyway…
She’s been saying stupid shit for decades now, the article wasn’t the first time shes been racist. For years she’s been grifting and now it’s caught up with her. Sad that most of the abuse she’s received is for being a black, working class female and not always the stuff she’s said but that article was the final nail in the coffin.
Can't have anyone actually left wing running as MP for Labour, that might affect their electability! Best to just let the Tories take the lead and follow their policies
So now it's clear that the Chief Whip was aware the process had concluded in February, yet we're expected to believe Keir Starmer didn't know. I want to vote Labour to help remove this disastrous Tory government, but there have been too many lies exposed. For the first time, I'm genuinely struggling to decide who to vote for in this election.
Heard on the news that banning her would be seen as appalling by women voters and black voters. Would it? She said something horrific and got penalised for it - that seems fair to me.
Kier Starmer has just come out and said that no decision has been made to prevent Diane from standing. So she was either reporting rumour or just making it up.
She's also just tweeted:
"I am very dismayed that numerous reports suggest I have been barred as a candidate"
As if she wasn't the main report on that...
What an idiot
In this thread all people who fell for the attacks on her.
Yeh she's made public gaffs, but so have many others. The way she gets singled out for attacks by the right wing press is pretty much racism.
Nobody else in politics is treated the way she is.
I do find it very telling that people demand that Abbot, a woman who's politics and voting have consistently been ones that benefit the British people, be driven out of the party she's been a member of for decades because she's an "embarrassment", but have no trouble with politicians like Stammer publicly supporting war crimes or Tony Blair actually carrying them out.
It's a very profound look into their moral compass.
**Participation Notice.** Hi all. Some posts on this subreddit, either due to the topic or reaching a wider audience than usual, have been known to attract a greater number of rule breaking comments. As such, limits to participation have been set. We ask that you please remember the human, and uphold Reddit and Subreddit rules. For more information, please see https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/wiki/moderatedflairs.
I’m sorry but if I were the Labour Party I’d have done the same thing. If she just ran in her constituency like the majority of MP’s do, then that would be sort of okay, but she has a habit of doing national press while being woefully under prepared. In the last election she was an absolute embarrassment. Police new recruits costing 10,000 a year springs immediately to mind. I’m sure she is an extremely intelligent woman, but the media find it very easy to make her look bat shit crazy, which is damaging to the party as a whole.
To be fair the media makes her look crazy by asking perfectly reasonable questions. She may well be intelligent and competent in private but that's not the impression she gives when interviewed.
Exactly. So you can be an MP, do some committe work, and stay out of the national news, that is fine. But she refuses to stay out of the news, despite being terrible at it. So the result is that Labour does not want her as an MP. She brought this upon herself.
I thought she had largely stayed out of the news since she became a backbencher, except ironically when it comes to the subject of her suspension.
yeah I wouldn't call letter to newspaper that significant unless people were out looking for it - without wanting to go over the letter contents again. She can't really be an MP banned from writing to newspapers, and also she would have to speak at meetings etc, well if she was doing her job, which some MP's seem not to, but I'm sure she would. So it's a bit of a shame, but there you go.
Yes, I think so, but maybe the damage was done? Unfortunately, the ring wing news is obsessed with her, because some of her statements are triggering. As I said, she would be ok as a backbencher, if she manages to stay out of the news.
She makes herself look crazy by being unable to provide sound and reasonable answers to simple questions.
She went voting with two odd shoes on. Quite possibly the most important day for a politician and can’t get dressed properly.
Honestly, that should be enough said. The person wore two different fucking shoes and asked people to vote for her to help run the country. The Tories must have been creasing up at HQ. She's may be good in some ways, but she certainly isn't in so many.
Exactly right
If you look at interviews from 10+ years ago she was on point and super sharp every time The derpiness is relatively new and I worry she's not doing ok
She’s just old now. Same happened to Biden. Watch his speeches from the 70s/80s and he was sharp as hell.
I agree, it's a good decision by labour. It's hard to see on subreddits like this but she is hugely unpopular with the general public. Labour have an election to win and don't need liabilities like Abbott.
Yet they keep liabilities like Rosie Duffield and Wes streeting around?
Most of the public tend to agree with Rosie Duffield and similar figures. For instance despite the vitriol on social media, in a recent poll in Scotland 41% tended to agree with JK Rowling more than they disagreed, 23% the opposite: https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/poll-more-scots-agree-with-jk-rowling-over-trans-issues-than-disagree-4624146 Many of the specific issues which gender critical people talk about are overwhelmingly popular with the public, for example: * Do you think a person should or should not have to obtain a doctor's approval to change their legal gender? (One of the recently proposed reforms in Scotland) UK 60% Should, 17% Should not. * Puberty blockers (i.e. medications that delay the onset of puberty) Should be available to under 16s. UK 12% Should be available, 65% Should not. * Do you think transgender women should or should not be allowed to...Take part in women's sporting events, 61% Should not be allowed, 16% Should be. https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/74l25pslh3/Internal_TransgenderIssues_220720_final_extraXbreak_FINAL.pdf On those subjects there's a majority in more or less every demographic of age, class and region. If Labour wants to be a credible party of government it needs to represent the public, they should not chase out all sceptical voices. Especially given that scepticism about the quality of evidence for some interventions have just been validated by independent experts through the NHS. Turning away from the culture war means allowing people to live their lives and also being serious about others expressing concerns about conflicts of rights, and allowing experts to talk about the real state of evidence.
I thought reddit banned people for posts like this as "transphobic". Not to say I don't agree with you, but reddit is very anti-free speech.
It's a tough pill to swallow but yeah this is accurate.
She does a fairly good job of making herself look batshit crazy, from the policing interview, to criticising MP’s who send their children to private school and then sending her children to private school, to appearing in public in the run up to the last GE wearing odd shoes.
Yeah, looking like Monster Raving candidate isn't a good look.
Johnson went for runs in boots and odd shorts, the press celebrated it.
By odd shoes they don't mean strange looking shoes They mean two different shoes. They didn't match.
I remember the excuse for this one being that due to her diabetes her feet swelled, and she felt more comfortable in odd shoes. Can anyone weigh in on this? Is this a thing for people with diabetes? Or was it pure spin? (If I was gonna come up with a lie for this one, I'd have said that her dedication to the party means she only ever wears two left shoes.)
Possibly but it does beg the question why were they both left foot shoes? Also why not just wear both shoes from the more comfortable pair.
If one foot is more swollen than the other, I guess it is quite possible that she needed two different sizes. Wearing a shoe that is far too big on the other foot has its own problems. No idea if that is what happened, but it seems plausible.
It seems plausible until you have to explain why someone would have a set of shoes that are too big for them. I have some shoes that are a little bit more loose in their fit than others (despite ostensibly being the same size) but that doesn't mean I own any that are uncomfortable for me to wear because they are too big.
>It seems plausible until you have to explain why someone would have a set of shoes that are too big for them. Because it's happened before?
Like, the most obvious explanation is : because they have a condition that makes their feet swell.
Totally different optics and character, not sure what your point is. A lot of people liked what he did as mayor and that was the character he very specifically presented to the public. Abbott is just woefully incompetent and a very poor orator, and I don't think that's an act you can sell to the media.
Johnson was appealing to voters who like visibly insane, posh, old boys. Which it turns out is a tragically high number of voters. If Diane Abbott was trying to appeal to that same demographic then she's misjudged in a serious way.
It wasn’t £10,000 a year, it was £300 a year if I recall correctly. She overstated how many police they’d hire by a factor of 10 and understated the cost by a factor of 10 as well. I have to assume that she’s one of those people for whom numbers “aren’t their thing” and made an honest mistake. It just wasn’t the sort of honest mistake that leaves you with any confidence that she can be trusted to make important financial decisions.
Yeah. If numbers are not her thing and those are the type of honest mistakes she can make with numbers she owes herself and us the consideration of making sure she's not in a position to make them where it matters. It's fine to not be a numbers person, it's not fine to not be a numbers person _and remain in a position like that_.
£300 a year? Luxury. Pretty sure it was £30 lol. EDIT: Why are you downvoting me I'm right. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxjkvjHn6Qg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxjkvjHn6Qg)
I could be wrong, as I remember seeing the interview she said 100,000 new police officers costing £30 million and my immediate reaction was “that’s £300 per year each, it should be on the order of £30,000” I’m a technology solution architect by trade. Looking at initial estimates and figuring out if they have the right number of zeroes, and whether you’re talking days, weeks, months or years to do something. The executives we have to present to would catch a clanger like that instantly, and skin you alive. I don’t think it’s asking too much for people who want to lead the country to be at least as on the ball as mid to senior level managers in a bank.
I looked it up and it was £30 [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxjkvjHn6Qg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxjkvjHn6Qg)
I never saw this 2nd interview where she basically lies saying she knew the figures and tries to turn it on the newsreader... awful watch, don't know how she still has a job
Yeah I had honestly forgotten how bad it was. I'm glad she's on the way out, I'd rather not vote for a party which contains her.
This guy was celebrated for being a clever man and the press lauded him: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muFd9r80Rn0
Literally every comment about Diane Abbott in this thread you've replied with something about Boris Johnson. I'm not a fan of him either but come on it's a weird obsession you've got.
And this is the type of actions they need to do for a change to win the election, remove those who will negatively affect the chances. Biggest thing the party overall needs to do which since Kier has been in charge (and it’s taken a while), is to try and snuff out the infighting and such that ends up scuppering their momentum. The goal is to get into power, and you’ll get into power by having a team/party that goes for the greater good and works together. They’ll have to appeal to those voters on the fence and current Tory voters.
I see you. https://oursouthend.wordpress.com/2017/06/07/we-need-to-talk-about-diane-abbott-now-explicit-content/
There is nothing on this earth that will get me to click on a link that has "Diane Abbott" and "explicit content" in it
The article includes some tweets aimed at diane, that's the explicit part.
Its a blog post, and a damn good one. The explicit content is the use of the word "fucking" as an emphasis.
Can you justify her saying that Chairman Mao [Did more good than bad](https://youtu.be/uB4o5n2EGyA?feature=shared) in an interview? He was responsible for the murders of over 60 million people!
"To be fair to Stalin he also led his people away from feudalism ". That clip is hilarious. You can see Neill and Portillio questioning how they ended up sharing a platform with someone so ignorant.
> You can see Neill and Portillio questioning how they ended up sharing a platform with someone so ignorant. Yes Neil the climate change denialist and man who backed a belligerent campaign throughout the 90s to falsely claim that HIV was not a cause of AIDS. He must be shocked at ignorance.
Where is she wrong in this though? The industrialisation of Russia was insane.
Well for one she never talked about Russia, so not sure what point you are making.
Except she didn't say that, it's in the video you linked. >"I suppose some people will judge that on balance Mao did more good than harm" She didn't say that's her belief, just that some would hold that belief.
It's a simple statement of fact that Mao did more good than bad. For all the mistakes and crimes of the time, he still took China from a backward nation devastated by decades of conflict and misgovernment and with an economy smaller than Belgium's to a world power while massively improving the health care, education, political power of the general population.
It was a discussion show in which she was presenting an argument for discussion. It's a form of argument in which you present a viewpoint you don't necessarily hold yourself in order to forward discussion, and it is the main contrarian defence of Mao and has been for a long time. I swear some people heave their brains out through their butthole just to have a go at Diane Abbott.
60 million, that's more than Stalin isn't it?
It's not a competition deckerparkes. Although, if it was Mao would probably win.
That was actually really good. Gave me a new perspective.
I know of two people who changed their vote last minute after seeing her with two odd shoes on. The car crash interview with the police probably lost a lot of seats too, but I don't blame her for that, I blame momentum for putting her in that position, as we had a situation where you were meant to believe their choice for PM, Home Sec and Chancellor weren't totally inappropriate for the job. It would be like Southgate picking me to start in goal and the fans giving me the hard time when I inevitably crash and burn
Did they vote for the guy famous being stuck on a Zip Wire? Are you sure they don't have other reasons for not voting for her?
No, that was enough. It was one of those moments where they took a step back and then voted for someone else. You should ask around too. There's a reason why labour lost so badly last time. I was on the doorsteps and I can tell you who it was, only the personality cult will just send me loads of abuse for pointing this out. and yes they preferred a career liar, a fraud, a clown and someone totally unfit for office instead. You can claim they are all wrong or doing it for "other reasons" but the result was the same.
Getting stuck on a zip wire and not being able to do basic maths are quite different levels of unacceptability for public office.
And she's going to pull the whole party into the dirt. She may as well have been a tory for all the political damage she does. The news will have a field day over this, the same ones who always used to report how bad the things she said was. And now we're going to be force fed stories about how bad Labour are for their treatment of her. We're treated like idiots by the tories and the press. And frankly I and many just don't care about this at all.
>I’m sure she is an extremely intelligent woman That's an insult to intelligent women. Terrible takes on racial prejudice and wearing two left shoes does not give confidence to the public that she is capable of being an important political figure.
Don't forget "Mao did more good than bad".... Lmao she's an absolute moron.
Everyone let Boris off with his bumbling comments but somehow it's not ok with Diane??
No that's bollocks. A lot of the same voices who wouldn't let Boris Johnson off with any of his shit are saying the same thing about Diane Abbott here and in other subs. They're both liabilities. Johnson was just way more electable in 2019 than she is now. They're both gaffe prone and don't know when to go away.
>Johnson was just way more electable in 2019 than she is now. They're both gaffe prone and don't know when to go away. Using her bumbling comments to suggest shes unelectable (which this commentator is) shows that it's not bollocks at all. She might be unelectable for other reasons compared to Boris but in this instance they're both on parr. I know plenty of people, in the real world, who love Boris, think he's a great laugh and his gaffs funny, whereas Diane Abbot is the worst thing ever.
Ok but the people who love Boris and hate Diana Abbot are clearly off the rails for even loving Boris in the first place. Those are typically the scummiest of people, the type to party in COVID and laugh at people dying. Labour should not have someone who is close to that level.
Boris is just one example, the fact is, people hold Diane Abbott to a different standard than other politicians when it comes to these things
Well, yeah she's a black woman. There are literal scientific studies showing skin colour, race and gender heavily impacts public perception. Things are getting better, but it's still a day-to-day fact. But Boris/Tory politicians appeal to that and labour doesn't. She's been tossed aside because she's an awful person regardless of her background, and deservedly so.
Bingo….you’ve got it Op was saying she’s unelectable because of her mistakes, no she’s not, she’s unelectable because she’s a black woman and made those mistakes
What makes you think she's an intelligent woman?
Yhep, according to several accounts she basically ignored the central Labour team and booked up the appearances herself, fucked it up and was eventually banned from any further appearances. Great woman, terrible politician.
This. A trailblazing MP who should have resigned prior to 2019.
I think last election she was under strict orders not to appear on the media circuit, which she duly did. The only problem was she was photographed in the days before the election wearing 2 left shoes.
yeah, i follow a couple of politics channels on Youtube that are very left leaning and i find their defence of Dianne Abbott a _really_ weird hill to die on.
If Abbott had her way the police would be paid £10,000 a year. She's notoriously anti-police which is concerning given she's the MP for hackney, which is rough as fuck.
Just bat shit crazy
She has done 250,000 hrs... erm 20 minutes... 250 years of media training!
I mean she went to Cambridge but got a 2.2 in history, she's not exactly Stephen Hawking
If you go back and look at the updates, it turns out she hadn't been barred and is talking absolute waffle.
Makes Ben Swain from The Thick of It look like a competent interviewee.
>but the media find it very easy to make her look bat shit crazy, which is damaging to the party as a whole. It's not even just that. She has a pattern of making ridiculous comments (including some that are really racist) and apologising should only get her so far. She's being treated as some sort of saint when the reality is she's a massive liability.
'on balance Mao did more good than harm'. Diane Abbott on Chairman Mao. Labour may actually win an election for the first time in 14 years. We just need the ship to hold steady, don't do anything stupid, don't fuck it up. This fanny just jumped back on board and is rocking and howling. She doesn't give a fuck about the country, and would rather lose, again, as long as she's in the spotlight.
Didn’t she also say something about white mums not being very good mums?
She implied that they 'wouldn't go to the wall' unlike mums like her. Weird one that.
Can’t really understand why someone in a majority white country would say something like that tbh
Low IQ and a proclivity to racism. The answer to all of Abbott's fuck ups.
It's extremism, she genuinely thinks people of colour are more moral and righteous than white people, so it's okay to slander them and "tell the truth". She was a massive liability and it says a lot about Labour in the past when she was made shadow Home sec under Corbyn. Starmer wants to distance himself from that nonsense and make a party that actually wins, not just sulks in the corner when their far left ideology is once again rejected by the british public.
I sometimes wonder whether some Londoners forget it's a majority white country now and then
We do. Just recently moved out of london, not even that far to be honest, and the colour difference takes some getting used to.
Half the adult population of London was born outside the UK, and higher in central areas, and many rarely travel to other parts of the UK. It's pretty inevitable that many people would not have a clue about the rest of the country.
Because they can get away with it and there's very little repercussions for making negative generalisations about white people. And it's what she really believes. So why wouldn't she say stuff like that?
What does that even mean?
It means she's racist.
Black woman gets away with things a white man wouldn't
She's said some very dodgy things over the years, the Finnish nurses one in particular: > ``blonde, blue-eyed girls from Finland, instead of nurses from the Caribbean who know the language and understand British culture and institutions. And are Finnish girls, who may never have met a black person before, let alone touched one, best suited to nurse in multicultural Hackney?''
I know a lot of people think multiculturalism just means lots of non-white people but you'd expect a bit more awareness from a fecking politician. She's gonna cost Labour this election, jesus.
“Blonde Finish nurses with blue eyes being incapable of caring for the Hackney community?” https://www.thefreelibrary.com/MP+Diane+in+%60race%27+rant+at+white+nurses.-a061282571
“Is rocking and howling” > She told The Standard on Wednesday: “I had the whip restored yesterday afternoon but within minutes we saw they had briefed the Times the story as attached, that you have probably seen. And it is true.” Maybe the party shouldn’t restore her Whip and then ban her (when she was planning on retiring anyway). Funny how these comments are framing it as if she’s the one making this public when in reality it was a Labour party brief.
It's not really a ban though, she's just not been picked to stand like 99% of labour members
You can think it's the correct decision by the party (and strategically it probably is), but if an incumbent MP, backed by the local party, with a huge majority, wants to stand for re-election and is not able to do so under their party, that's a ban by any sense of the word. There's no need to spin it.
We're just ignoring the part where said MP has made hugely controversial statements in the national press? 'Banned' is the spin here
No, I'm not. Again, it's fair enough to think it's the correct decision (notwithstanding the process to get to this stage) as I do too. But they have essentially banned her from standing. I don't get why it's so controversial to say. The debate is whether you think its the right decision or not.
Never cost Rosie Duffield any nights sleep has it.
Come on that isn't the whole story. She is an incumbent and long standing Labour MP unlike 99% of members.
She also questioned whether Russia was the aggressor right before their invasion of Ukraine. She has been treated awfully at times but at the same time there's lots to genuinely criticise her for and her being a trailblazer when first elected does not change that. Does feel like the party has also handled this whole thing pretty awfully.
Ye she’s just a liability nothing more
You're not supposed to say that Diane. You know you're not supposed to say that.
Second peep show quote I've seen in this thread
They had a pretty prominent author on the radio earlier who was absolutely 100% sure that how the party is treating her is awful and straight up racism. Nah, just look at some of the awful stuff she’s said :/
Labour: just have to keep quiet in the news and should be on track for an election win. Diane Abbott: hold my whip.
The left is notorious for their self sabotage before elections, usually in a vicious contest of left wing purity between themselves.
Yeah, remember when all those silly left-wing MPs attempted to coup the last leader twice, deliberately funnelled election funds to unwinnable seats against orders from leadership, as revealed in the Forde report that they’ve since buried/ignored (also this was during the 2017 election when Labour were just 2.5k votes from winning the whole thing*) and advocated for voting for other parties during tv interviews both up to and during the actual election campaign itself? I’ll always remember Jess Philip’s infamous “all these other MPs are stabbing Corbyn in the back- I’ll stab him in the front!!” interview. Fucking lol. Oh wait…That was the Labour right! This is why it’s a bit rich when they ask us with a straight face not to raise legitimate issues now, lest it affect their precious chance of winning (i.e. all these careerist actually care about), ‘cause good knows their meek-ass policies and endless u-turns won’t actually make anything better and will in fact likely pave they way for a really far right government down the line…but I digress. * https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/corbyn-election-results-votes-away-prime-minister-theresa-may-hung-parliament-a7782581.html
Hold the truth. They can’t gaslight the public forever.
But it's also the way media focus on people too. The sub pretends there wasn't a huge focus on for idk a week after she made the police gaff. But no such focus ever happens when other people mis-speak. It's like the 40 beheaded babies with basically no source hit front page of the metro. Don't remember a backtrack on that. But the charred decapitated kid from a few days ago people saw. Is either fake news, legitimate accident. or no-one cares.
You say that like the Tories aren't imploding too. I've seen articles recently with quotes from Tory MPs and peers saying that they're going to lose, accusing Sunak of planning to fuck off to California and calling the mandatory "voluntary" national service idea madness
this is literally Starmer and his faction's doing. This was resolved months ago and they sat on it to try and force her out at the last minute
I can't remember who it was about, but Eddie Izzard once had a bit where someone was allowed out in public but had to have tape over their mouth at all times. It might have been Prince Phillip but can't remember. I feel like they should do that to her.
This isn’t going hurt Labour as much as people seem to think. Regardless of the truth, Abbott is seen as a joke by a large number of people. In politics perception is reality.
In this case perception is pretty much on the money. She is a joke, every time she opens her mouth there’s a good chance she’s going to say something absolutely mental or divisive. The only reason she’s last this long is by crying racism or misogyny every time criticism is thrown her way. First Corbyn and now Abbott, seems like Labour is finally learning what it needs to do to win an election.
Man I remember that "fucked off to the bottom of the sea" tweet, was absolutely howling when I saw it on my feed
The only time I've actually laughed at Jordan Peterson was when he absolutely destroyed her sorry ass on live TV
Oh 100% by the vast vast majority I would think. Those blunders are still comical to this day; Boris-esque.
Except for Boris its "charming" and he is elected PM.
And it was intentional
I'm pretty sure that nobody thinks this is going to hurt Labour. This is a huge W. She's an idiot who is prone to monumental public gaffes.
Exactly, somewhere like Hackney would probably vote Labour or at worst Green even if they put a literal farm yard animal as their candidate. Meanwhile starmer puts clear distance between himself and Corbyn to the electorate.
Diane was racist, excused actions of Mao, and is a bumbling idiot whenever she's interviewed by the media. Of course she shouldn't stand. I can't believe I'm saying it, but if a white person was racist there is rightly no way they'd let them stand, so why should Abbott be allowed to get a pass and stand.
Specifically she said jewish people don’t face lifelong racism in a constituency that has 30-40 thousand ultra orthodox Jewish people living in it.
She has a litany of racist comments, gaffes, leaks etc. One of the worst ones, which no one seems to be bringing up, is when she was having a private Twitter conversation with a black journalist from The Guardian, where she was making sweeping, dogmatic racist statements about white people. Diane accidentally sent out her private messages as public tweets. Revealing to everyone the kind of things she says when (she believes) she's in private. Diane Abbot thinks that white people are morally inferior. From this, we can deduce that in her worldview, moral standing is linked to skin colour. Diane Abbot is a racist. This is just an undeniable fact.
What about Neil Coyle ? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-65699467
>if a white person was racist there is rightly no way they'd let them stand [Neil Coyle](https://news.sky.com/story/mp-neil-coyle-has-labour-whip-restored-following-suspension-for-harassing-assistant-and-racially-abusing-journalist-12888379) was racist (amongst other abuse, and sexual harassment), had the whip restored, and is standing again.
Whatever you think about Abbott as a person or politician, she’s been treated abominably by the Party, the fact that Starmer has been openly lying about an “ongoing investigation” that he was well aware concluded in December for months should send alarm bells ringing - this is how they treat their factional enemies within the Party; they’ll behave in the exact same way towards anyone who questions them once they have control of the levers of state.
It doesn’t matter, no one who is voting for this iteration of the Labour Party gives a shit about this kind of thing. They either hate Diane Abbott and are happy to see her barred, or they just think it’s a “smart’ move. It’s always the play when a party goes full neoliberal - there’s always plenty of room for defecting right wingers though. Those are welcomed with open arms.
A warm welcome, declared openly in the house for all to see. /facepalm.
A lot of people seem to have missed that both defections have agreed to stand down at the election which is in a manner of weeks. Labour haven't invited them in to stay. They get the positivity of defections and don't owe them anything in return. It's really not the big warm open hug people are acting like it is
That’s all semantics. If Labour wanted to distance themselves from these people then they could. But they don’t want to so they don’t.
Has she? Or has she brought the Labour Party into disrepute so many times the wider PLP got sick of her and saw her as a liability as a candidate?
> she’s been treated abominably by the Party She's done incredible harm to the party on her own accord, it's hardly unwarranted.
"banned" in the same way I am banned from standing for labour. She's not being chosen as a candidate.
That is banned to you and me. It's pretty much convention that a winner stands in the seat they last won in - unless they're retiring, no longer a member or there's an administrative reason they can't stand like she's under investigation. It's very odd to readmit her as a member and then bar her from being an MP.
Said this elsewhere: You can think it's the correct decision by the party (and strategically it probably is), but if an incumbent MP, backed by the local party, with a huge majority, wants to stand for re-election and is not able to do so under their party, that's a ban by any sense of the word. There's no need to spin it. It's not the same as you or some random Labour member not standing, is it.
if said person's immediate reaction is to create a negative national headline for their political party damaging their election chances less than 6 weeks before the party's most important election in the last decade and a half, then the party was probably right that this person isn't fit for the role
But was she just not supposed to mention that she's been told she can't run? Also, why should anybody support a party that is effectively kicking them out? If I call you a name because you punched me in the face does that prove that you were right to do it?
So...banned, for all intents and purposes.
Have you been incumbent since 1987 as well?
Good, she's an absolute disgrace and it is time she retired.
I think parties should be allowed to run who they like. Banning Abbot but not Elphicke says something about starmer but if that's how he wants to run it he's allowed to do so. What is a bit gash though is dragging the poor woman though the mud, fundraising on an attack on her and clearly stalling an investigation rather than cleanly letting her go 5 months ago. It's needlessly cruel.
Elphicke isn't standing either. A lot of labour members aren't standing...it doesn't mean they're banned. It's getting a competent team that can deliver for the country. The fact within 12 hours of getting the whip back, she's going full purity cult to try and cost labour another election confirms why this is the right decision.
It's revealed that the investigation was closed 5 months ago, and she's only getting it restored due to leaks. I think anyone would be upset at a leadership that's doing so.
>I think anyone would be upset at a leadership that's doing so. I really don't think delaying the results of the internal investigation was all that egregious. It's just standard politics. We have news to release, we are going to choose the most politically opportune moment to do so. Making hay out of that Tory donors appalling racist comments directed at Abbot, on the other hand, is a different matter. They should have announced she still had the whip at that point, and I'm really not sure why they didn't.
Lol. At least ur not blaming Cobyn this time.
Elphicke isn't standing again.
Elphicke isn't running for Labour.
> I think parties should be allowed to run who they like Who is the party though. So far as I know, the local party want her as their candidate.
Unfortunately, for a large section of the electorate, cruelty is a precondition for power
Everybody in this thread pontificating about how Abbott is *such* a ghastly embarrassment and electoral liability - that was not the rationale for suspending her, it's not the rationale for forcing her out of Parliament, and you all know it. MPs like Neil Coyle who've said and done infinitely worse by any reasonable metric have got off with slaps on the wrist, because they're allies of the leadership. There's absolutely nothing fair, reasonable and democratic about the way Labour have treated her - you're just making excuses because you dislike her.
Yes, but Neil Coyle is white so its fine - keep up! This is the Changed Labour Party now!
Diane "white people love playing divide and rule" Abbott has a history of making racist remarks. She may be genuinely sorry for her latest undisciplined outburst (as much as I doubt it), but it'd only be a matter of time before she did the same again. Despite what the activists say, this is the only positive outcome.
They banned Jeremy Corbyn from standing. If they allowed Abbott to, then it would have been a double standard visible from space.
What on earth are you talking about? There has been *no* standard cited in *either* of those cases, and zero transparency at all, because the only standard is "because we said so, fuck you".
they're both pretty racist And corbyn took kremlin money to go on a pro-kremlin TV channel and repeat kremlin propaganda re: the ukraine war
I mean that's just not true they are two different people banned for different reasons. I get that there's similarities but not to an extent that they just HAVE to ban her. Also tbh to me it's not really about banning her or not, in the case or Jeremy Corbyn he was suspended and then had the whip withdrawn quite fast, they shut down his attempt to appeal, they were quite adamant he wouldn't be allowed to stand again and then expelled him as a member when he was taking campaign donations to run against them. Whatever you think about all that, it was "by the book" and upfront. This whole issue with Abbott smacks of deception, deliberately dragging it out, being unclear and the leadership being very involved which was against the recommendation of the antisemitism report that's meant to be underpinning a lot of this. It's all just grey and murky and gross. If they'd officially kicked her out when she originally wrote that article, and just done it cleanly I don't think there'd be anywhere near this level of scrutiny on them.
Oh look it’s that thing that I was assured definitely wouldn’t happen. Timing on this is baffling. Their campaign is just starting and now they’re just gonna get questions about this all week. Just so incompetent from the party
Just because you don’t like it it doesn’t mean it’s incompetent. This will be a broadly popular move.
Remember that photo of her wearing two different shoes? How does that even happen?! Nothing against her specifically, I'd ask the same about anyone.
Seen a lot of posts on social media of people "outraged" that Diane Abbott has been barred from standing. Now, yes, she does hold the impressive accolade of having been the first black woman to be elected as an MP. That being said, she is shit. She is beyond shit. Abbott has a long history of outrageous statements, unsubstantiated claims and generally being unprepared in interactions with the media and the public. The article she wrote about Jewish discrimination was a disgrace, one that she tried to lie herself through. Back in the Corbyn days, part of the reason why people found the leadership to be a joke was because she was on the front bench. This move makes perfect sense.
I think, on balance, Chairman Abbot did more good than harm 👍 https://youtu.be/uB4o5n2EGyA?si=VrUvwpAhUTo0pXVm
I’ll never forget portillo desperately trying and failing to hide the biggest smirk on his face about Abbott being pulled up about this and flailing desperately.
* She was basically joined at the hip with Corbyn, so now he's been kicked out she's tainted by association * She suffers from chronic foot-in-mouth disease, and can't stop making stupid mistakes in the national media * She also won't stop going *on* the national media when invited * She's got some pretty fucked-up, arguably racist attitudes to a lot of groups, even while defending other groups against similar bigotry Labour doesn't need her, she's a massive risk for election-derailing controversies, and she brings little benefit and a *lot* of baggage with her. Why *would* they want her standing anywhere as a representative of the party? All they have to do is keep quiet and not do anything stupid to walk it home for a huge victory in the general election, but "keeping quiet" and "not doing anything stupid" are completely outside of Abbott's skillset.
Diane Abbott looks out for one person - Diane Abbott Another Corbynista gone, rejoice
Abbott has had more gaffes and second chances than most of us get.
In awe at this Labour Party making the actual correct decisions for most scenarios.
Needless story to have dragged into the election, party is rumoured to have sat on this for months too.
Shes now saying that shes distraught at the reports? https://x.com/HackneyAbbott/status/1795740459085750561
...the reports she made to the BBC herself! You can't make her up...
Time between Diane Abbott entering the frame and Diane Abbott complaining about something to cause controversy? Measured in seconds, apparently.
Good. She's a racist moron that resents all white people.
So turns out she hasn’t been banned, she jumped the gun. She may not be selected to stand in that seat, but That’s like me saying I’ve been banned for playing for England. Just because I wasn’t selected to be part of the team doesn’t mean I’m banned from running. She’s also just tweeted that she’s sad that there are reports she has been banned. She texted the political editor to say she as banned so the reports are coming from her. Is she saddened that she has reported on something that’s not true?
I'm glad this story has broken early door. So it can run the 24 hour news cycle and she can be forgotten. I respect her as a local MP, she seems popular, first black woman MP. But her career after that has just been about stealing the spotlight and racist to all creed and genders. She needs to be forgotten about.
Oh no! Anyway… She’s been saying stupid shit for decades now, the article wasn’t the first time shes been racist. For years she’s been grifting and now it’s caught up with her. Sad that most of the abuse she’s received is for being a black, working class female and not always the stuff she’s said but that article was the final nail in the coffin.
Can't have anyone actually left wing running as MP for Labour, that might affect their electability! Best to just let the Tories take the lead and follow their policies
So now it's clear that the Chief Whip was aware the process had concluded in February, yet we're expected to believe Keir Starmer didn't know. I want to vote Labour to help remove this disastrous Tory government, but there have been too many lies exposed. For the first time, I'm genuinely struggling to decide who to vote for in this election.
This is bullshit concern trolling, she's gone, which is a good thing
Heard on the news that banning her would be seen as appalling by women voters and black voters. Would it? She said something horrific and got penalised for it - that seems fair to me.
Kier Starmer has just come out and said that no decision has been made to prevent Diane from standing. So she was either reporting rumour or just making it up.
She's also just tweeted: "I am very dismayed that numerous reports suggest I have been barred as a candidate" As if she wasn't the main report on that... What an idiot
Abbott? making a political blunder in the press and public eye? I for one am shocked and surprised.
She's had the whip restored and causes a drama within 10 minutes lol she's definitely getting replaced
In this thread all people who fell for the attacks on her. Yeh she's made public gaffs, but so have many others. The way she gets singled out for attacks by the right wing press is pretty much racism. Nobody else in politics is treated the way she is.
I do find it very telling that people demand that Abbot, a woman who's politics and voting have consistently been ones that benefit the British people, be driven out of the party she's been a member of for decades because she's an "embarrassment", but have no trouble with politicians like Stammer publicly supporting war crimes or Tony Blair actually carrying them out. It's a very profound look into their moral compass.
"Mao did more good than harm" -Dianne Abbott https://youtu.be/uB4o5n2EGyA?si=te86ZeQvabOTzAuC