egg

Newspapers can't be dinlos. Journalists can. Neither of those headlines accord with Trump's actual words. Don't confuse spin and BS with facts.

There's something in that. I voted leave, don't ask, and made the wrong choice. Acknowledging that we should have remained is different to wanting to rejoin though. I'd need to understand how rejoining would look compared to how we could remodel our relationship with the EU. It needn't be a binary choice between going back as we were, or staying as we are.

It's subtle enough to make some dinlos think that he supports the deal. It's clearly a head shaking post, with at least a modicum of criticism of Starmer and the deal. I read the conclusion as being "it's all a bit stupid, but we ain't going anywhere, and if those idiots want to pay for what's now our island, crack on".

The knives are out for Starmer, so I think it's a kind of last straw thing. If he'd been performing well, I think the reaction wouldn't have been as extreme.

It's the "biggest scandal since Profumo" which tickled me. Feck me.

It's a judgement thing for me, and that leads to trust & confidence.

One of his MP's saying his position is untenable. Hard to disagree. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/czx3lq460n6t?post=asset%3Af788cad8-ca7a-4ec9-bd6b-3f1ab037579e#post

We were discussing this the other day and came to the same conclusion. If only fools ended after series 1, would it have had the same impact as fawlty towers? I doubt it.

We've had to endure unsolicited overreaction and thread spamming from you, so I'll post as I wish. Genuinely though, you're getting a tad hot under the collar.

It's a darn sight more logical than the masses wanting reform because everyone else is shit.

I'd recommend a lie down @hypochondriac.

I'm not sure who you're debating with here. Starmer has fucked up. Accept that people accept that. And trying to convince people how other people may, hypothetically, have reacted is absolutely pointless.

Yep. I can't see where he can go from here. If he'd done reasonable due diligence and nothing was disclosed, fine, but having done so only to ignore something highly relevant, his judgement cannot be at the level needed of a PM.

Adderley's approach, and others, is that the Russian links is the line being fed, seemingly based on one pic of him wearing a cossack hat, but not the reality. There's a lot of conjecture, but I do find it very odd that a nobody burst into the scene as this fella did, became unfathomably rich without any clear source of wealth, and became so well connected. Let's see what comes out.

Whilst correct, people who devour all or mostly MSM, are dangerously ill informed.