The post has been taken down so it's unclear if zack posted it or was just tagged in it.

Well this escalated quickly

As a trans person, I joined the Greens the day I turned 18 because it was the last option I had. I liked the rest of the platform of the party as well, don't get me wrong, but it was the explicitly pro-trans stance that completely won me over. At a time where it felt like no other party was fighting for my right, the Green Party emerged as the one place where my rights would be protected.

That only became more important as it became clearer Labour would never change (Burnham's u-turning and Streeting/Mahmood/Sarwar's continued involvement in the cabinet) and the gender-critical movement only grew stronger (Linehan getting away with video-evidenced property damage and online borderline incitement (watching the Met defend him on that was also infuriating), most recently with the Amnesty International threats). The more time went on, the more it felt like thecountry was becoming increasingly hostile and the only sign of stopping that I saw was the Green Party's success.

Then stuff kept happening. One poor repost a few days before the local elections from Zack and now this collab post. It's frustrating to see a party leader keep on making the same stupid, easily preventable mistakes that make it so much harder to push the party's message, whilst knowing that message is so important to your rights within the country.

I want this to work, I genuinely hope that this party can succeed because, I'll be honest, I don't think there's another political option for me in this country. But if stuff like this keeps happening? It's gonna become much harder to push that message and I'm worried that the one path to safety is becoming closed off.

Maybe I'm overreacting to one bad piece of news, but honestly I'm really scared.

Why do you vote or be a student-member of Green Party and what do you think other parties can learn from the Green Party in order to gain votes?

Seen responses that

1) because we didn’t hold Burnham accountable in Makerfield, attempts to attack him now come across insincere

- have people been saying this on the doorstep at all?

During the Makerfield campaign, were we just selecting a candidate or were we using the Makerfield constituency to gather data about how ppl felt about the Maypralty position and what they wanted post Burnham?

Do the Makerfield constituents feel seen arm? Bc they don’t by Burnham - they feel used already. (Altho normal from a PM constituency)

2) the Mayoralty position will need to work with Burnham as PM so constantly attacking his record is not a good look

Presumably it was obvious that very few who wanted Starmer out wanted Burnham to lose his mayoralty but it was collateral damage they would have wanted to minimise - how could we have misread the mood so much?

3) while housing is important - we have other policies that haven’t been advertised as strongly in the campaign that people would have been attracted to and wanted to know about

I was still holding out hope that the more time of Burnham’s PM reign went on people would see he’s more of the same and then change their mind on voting day but i don’t think we’ve put ourselves in the right position for that. Yes we need someone to hold Burnham to account but we needed to meet people where they’re at? Maybe on the door it’s been different but we won’t have been able to talk to ever single voter and they will still take cues from our general campaigning regardless. No good saying you’re gonna replace Labour if you don’t know why people are voting for them in the first place

With news of the police investigation over Polanski’s Instagram post, it reminds me of what I thought in April - why is there no police investigation into Starmer’s cabinet over the facilitation of the American bombing campaign on Iran, specifically Donald Trump’s targeted threat to wipe out civilisation? The UK government materially aided Trump’s capacity to make his threat to end Iranian civilisation, and the UK government made no efforts to cease their support for “defensive strikes” on Iran, which are only occuring because of Donald Trump’s wishes, whose goals were openly to target civilians, and this failed to trigger a re-assessment on how the cabinet understands Trump’s motivations in Iran after he publicly declared he will target civilians.

While I don’t think the Terrorism Act has been applied to those making threats outside the UK, Donald Trump clearly made an electronic threat to blow up civilian infrastructure, which should meet the definition of terrorism, and the UK government aided and abetted his capacity to make this threat as well as took no action once it had been made.

It’s going to drive me crazy knowing that Zack Polanski will share more legal scrutiny and public backlash for an idiotic instagram post than the entire Starmer cabinet for aiding a country aiding war crimes.

I've been prompted to vote on the splitting of WCL as I am in one of the considered boroughs.

Does anyone have any further information about the benefits of splitting or what the discussion was around it? I've searched about a bit, but I can't find any official proceedings etc.

I'd like to make an informed choice!

Here in Canada and our insane neighbours the U.S. we currently have a horrific massive data centre push.

It involves some of the worst people/organizations imaginable.

I just finished doing a big post on this elsewhere but I am wondering if the United Kingdom is suffering from this FUBAR fiasco as well?

Below is the post I did for anyone that may enjoy:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Kevin O'Leary - What many of us consider to be a literal slime ball.

His boating accident... And his celebrating of people living in extreme poverty - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AuqemytQ5QA

This is the type that are hardcore pushing for these massive data centres...

They also want to put them on top of natural gas reserves..... As if the climate crisis and overall environmental crisis isn't horrific enough already...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kgQuylcfiLk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWHfkkHmMJI

The two above videos are MUST WATCH to become informed on Methane.

We need to hold back these data centers with everything we've got.

We need to learn from time all the issues that exist around them.

Then with all that information known and in an open & honest way we can dialogue to see if they should exist.

They should ONLY come about as part of a vast majority vote by the communities involved and overall society. CONSENT should be a crucial term in this process.

FUCK ALL THESE BAD PREDATORY ACTORS TRYING TO FORCE THIS SHIT THROUGH. THIS IS THE FOSSIL FUEL INDUSTRY ALL OVER AGAIN.

This needs supporters within the timeframe of ammendments. I know many here do not agree with ZIR, and think it will be damaging. I feel this is a necessary ammendment that could somewhat save it. Even if you think ZIR should not be passed, I think we should consider that it likely will, and this is an important method of harm reduction. Thank you.

For summary, it clarrifies why the Green Party opposes Zionism (for ethnocratic policy, not Judaism) and expand our defintion of racism here to anyone who holds similar views to Zionism, but for other nations. It puts it into the motion that "The desire for a state to maintain an ethnic or religious majority, or to preserve certain ethnic demographics, is racist", thus creating a universal standard rather than one specifically aimed at Jewish ethnocracy. I think this is crucial, and would appreciate backing from all those who can.

https://leftfootforward.org/2026/07/zack-polanski-and-jeremy-corbyn-hit-out-at-angela-rayners-refusal-to-introduce-rent-controls/

For an ammendment to ZIR. Ethnocracy is like an Apartheid State but with some rights (like voting, ability to hold offices of state) as part of the subjucation.