The Starmer Years - Can The New Broom Sweep Clean?

[Farmer Saint]

6 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Thanks but this thread is about Starmer. Probably better to stick to discussions of the Labour party if you can.

 

Eh?

[AlexLaw76]

 

[tdmickey3]

13 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

Is your assertion that you want Labour in charge because everyone else is even worse? Hardly a ringing endorsement.

Well, it don't want Farage and his lunatic rubbish. 

Don't want the self serving tories. 

Lib dems don't seem to have a clue

Greens are never going to amount to anything.

Labour aren't good but better than the above..

We have to have someone, who should it be?

 

 

 

 

Edited 8 hours ago by tdmickey3

[hypochondriac]

17 minutes ago, tdmickey3 said:

Well, it don't want garage and his lunatic rubbish. 

Don't want the self serving tories. 

Lib dems don't seem to have a clue

Greens are never going to amount to anything.

Labour aren't good but better than the above..

We have to have someone, who should it be?

 

 

 

 

I don't see any evidence that they are better.

[Holmes_and_Watson]

2 hours ago, AlexLaw76 said:

 

I only got radio snippets throughout the afternoon on this.  What came across was :-

Surprise at an admission that Starmer knew that the relationship had continued. I had thought this was known, and was partly the reason for the poor extra 3 questions Mandelson was asked.

Badenoch telling the house that National Security was already built into humble addresses. Therefore, there had to be another reason why Starmer was looking to add an amendment. That reason could only be to prevent disclosure.

Starmer's "if only I knew then, what I know now" convincing nobody. There were a number of candidates. McSweeney convinced Starmer to go with Mandelson. For all Starmer's objections to Tory sleaze, he decided to agree, rather than take a view to distance his leadership from such people. But then, he and those around him were happy to trough up freebies right off the bat. 

One positive thing, is that backbenchers have held their own leadership to account. Their reasons may vary. From simply being on the other side of the party to being constantly ignored by the leadership group (see umpteen previous u-turns Starmer has been too stupid to learn from). Lots presumably just look at the polls and know how supporting this will go down.But there have been voices of genuine upset by MP's who really did want to move away from sleaze and want no part in their own party covering things up.

Apparently Angela Rayner, or at least her supporters, are working away in the background. No doubt, others are doing the same.

The levels of disquiet were bad enough around the Streeting rumours, then the Burnham blocking. This is much worse for Starmer politically. Will there finally be enough to remove him, even before his expected departure after May's results?

 

[Sir Ralph]

10 hours ago, tdmickey3 said:

Well, it don't want garage and his lunatic rubbish. 

Don't want the self serving tories. 

Lib dems don't seem to have a clue

Greens are never going to amount to anything.

Labour aren't good but better than the above..

We have to have someone, who should it be?

 

 

 

 

If you are saying they aren’t good, that must mean to the average man they are absolutely terrible!

[tdmickey3]

4 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

If you are saying they aren’t good, that must mean to the average man they are absolutely terrible!

Which party is the answer then.... don't post lot of the utter crap you have posted before, just answer who should it be?

[AlexLaw76]

Poll - is the new broom sweeping clean?

vote via the post reactions.

😂 No

💙 Yes

 

 

[tdmickey3]

35 minutes ago, tdmickey3 said:

Which party is the answer then.... don't post lot of the utter crap you have posted before, just answer who should it be?

So who then?

[Sir Ralph]

3 minutes ago, tdmickey3 said:

So who then?

A Tory led coalition with Reform. I don’t post crap, just comments you don’t agree with. 

Edited 7 hours ago by Sir Ralph

[tdmickey3]

1 minute ago, Sir Ralph said:

A Tory led coalition with Reform

Surely you mean a Tory failures led coalition with a joke collection of failed Tories and racists.

[sadoldgit]

14 hours ago, aintforever said:

It was common knowledge that he was friends with Epstein when he was hired as ambassador.

As just pointed out to me, Epstein died in 2019 so there was no way Mandelson was still friends with him when he was vetted for the US job in 2024.

Even if Starmer survives this, which looks very dodgy at the moment, he won’t make it full term. Labour quite rightly are crapping themselves over Reform getting in next time. It doesn’t matter what Starmer achieves from here on in. His days are over and it is just a matter of time.

As for hypo, anyone who believes that “socialism is dangerous” is always going to wet his pants when something like this occurs, despite the fact that it has nothing to do with socialism and everything to do with weakness and greed in certain individuals. God knows we have seen that enough under the Tories and there is plenty of it in Reform.

Least surprising post…Sir Ralph wants a Tory/Reform coalition 🤣

[trousers]

 

[tdmickey3]

39 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

A Tory led coalition with Reform. I don’t post crap, just comments you don’t agree with. 

Farmer and Gloucester made you look an utter fool and proved your do post crap...

[Sir Ralph]

8 minutes ago, tdmickey3 said:

Farmer and Gloucester made you look an utter fool and proved your do post crap...

They really didn’t but I’m not going to get into a childish playground spat with you about that. I responded to your question. You disagree but the polls say your view is the minority.

Edited 7 hours ago by Sir Ralph

[Sir Ralph]

11 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

As just pointed out to me, Epstein died in 2019 so there was no way Mandelson was still friends with him when he was vetted for the US job in 2024.

Even if Starmer survives this, which looks very dodgy at the moment, he won’t make it full term. Labour quite rightly are crapping themselves over Reform getting in next time. It doesn’t matter what Starmer achieves from here on in. His days are over and it is just a matter of time.

As for hypo, anyone who believes that “socialism is dangerous” is always going to wet his pants when something like this occurs, despite the fact that it has nothing to do with socialism and everything to do with weakness and greed in certain individuals. God knows we have seen that enough under the Tories and there is plenty of it in Reform.

Least surprising post…Sir Ralph wants a Tory/Reform coalition 🤣

Based on some the polls they are now looking as being the two parties with the greatest number of votes currently. My view isn’t really a shock is it.

[tdmickey3]

11 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

They really didn’t but I’m not going to get into a childish playground spat with you about that. I responded to your question. You disagree but the polls say your view is the minority.

In denial 🤡

[badgerx16]

[rallyboy]

While Starmer at the piano is AI I suspect Mandelson in the red dress is just another genuine image from Epstein's living room, that once seen can never be unseen.

And as for this thread, not sure Starmer even has a broom anymore.

[tdmickey3]

9 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

Based on some the polls they are now looking as being the two parties with the greatest number of votes currently. My view isn’t really a shock is it.

Wrong again

UK Opinion Polls | Ipsos

[Farmer Saint]

1 minute ago, tdmickey3 said:

Wrong again

UK Opinion Polls | Ipsos

It is absolutely flabbergasting, that even with our two main parties being utter clowns, that Reform could get this much of the vote. 

The world is a pretty fucked up place right now.

[Sir Ralph]

21 minutes ago, tdmickey3 said:

Wrong again

UK Opinion Polls | Ipsos

 Not wrong again. I used the word “some” polls. Reform are ahead and the Tories are polling at a similar level to Labour. Apology accepted though

[Gloucester Saint]

24 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

It is absolutely flabbergasting, that even with our two main parties being utter clowns, that Reform could get this much of the vote. 

The world is a pretty fucked up place right now.

Agree on both fronts although it doesn’t mean that will translate directly into seats. I suspect Reform will pile up some whopping majorities in some seats especially north, NE and Midlands but split the vote in others which will lead to Lib Dem, Green and some Labour victories. 

[badgerx16]

17 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

 Not wrong again. I used the word “some” polls. Reform are ahead and the Tories are polling at a similar level to Labour. Apology accepted though

So, based on "some" polls the Tories are second. However, based on "some" polls, Labour are.  

For the first 2 weeks of the year the Tories were generally ahead of Labour, for the last 2 Labour are generally ahead of the Tories.

Edited 6 hours ago by badgerx16

[tdmickey3]

17 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

 Not wrong again. I used the word “some” polls. Reform are ahead and the Tories are polling at a similar level to Labour. Apology accepted though

Yep, so utterly pointless really

[badgerx16]

Given the loonies are defecting from the Conservatives to Reform, what odds on a centrist coalition of "moderate" Labour and Tories with the LDs purely to keep Reform out ?

Edited 6 hours ago by badgerx16

[Farmer Saint]

Sir Ralph with his usual level of detail again I see 🤣

 

[Sir Ralph]

 

2 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

Sir Ralph with his usual level of detail again I see 🤣

 

Nowhere have I said anything factually incorrect. @tdmickey3 was factually incorrect in misquoting me. The point was that my view on a future government was scoffed at. My point was that the Tories and reform are both polling highly and therefore my view reflects a significant portion of the population. In “some” (I can provide you the dictionary definition of this word if you like) polls The Tories were second party. All factually correct. Apology accepted

[tdmickey3]

1 minute ago, Sir Ralph said:

 

Nowhere have I said anything factually incorrect. @tdmickey3 was factually incorrect in misquoting me. The point was that my view on a future government was scoffed at. My point was that the Tories and reform are both polling highly and therefore my view reflects a significant portion of the population. In “some” (I can provide you the dictionary definition of this word if you like) polls The Tories were second party. All factually correct. Apology accepted

The fact you wish for a tory/Retoryform coalition makes you an idiot, so no wonder few people take your posting seriously...

[Sir Ralph]

5 minutes ago, tdmickey3 said:

The fact you wish for a tory/Retoryform coalition makes you an idiot, so no wonder few people take your posting seriously...

The angry comrades are the best ones 😂
 

Have a wonderful morning

Edited 5 hours ago by Sir Ralph

[sadoldgit]

32 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

The angry comrades are the best ones 😂
 

Have a wonderful morning

Comrades? You think that is some kind of put down when you want racist and Trump/Putin apologists to run the country?

[trousers]

Starmer now back-pedalling on what he said in the Commons yesterday 

[tdmickey3]

35 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

The angry comrades are the best ones 😂
 

Have a wonderful morning

Far from angry Ralphy boy, just laughing at you and the nonsense you post

[Sir Ralph]

2 minutes ago, trousers said:

Starmer now back-pedalling on what he said in the Commons yesterday 

The worst thing about Starmer going is that left of the party will take charge. “Our Ange” give me strength 

Edited 4 hours ago by Sir Ralph

[tdmickey3]

2 minutes ago, trousers said:

Starmer now back-pedalling on what he said in the Commons yesterday 

Who cares now, he will be gone soon and hopefully we will get Streeting or someone as good

Edited 4 hours ago by tdmickey3

[sadoldgit]

Not sure he back peddled. It sound like he was clarifying. It was always clear that any information disclosed could compromise any police action and would need clearance from them.

I thought it was an excellent speech. If it is enough to save him we shall see.

[Broccoli Man]

1 hour ago, badgerx16 said:

The problem with this study, is that it includes arts, sociology and all those useless bullshit degrees, which hardly count as education and whose graduates generally end up unemployed or working at maccas. Take these out of the equation and things would look different.

[tdmickey3]

6 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

The worst thing about Starmer going is that left of the party will take charge. If that happens I might fancy my chances more in Venezuela 

Toddle off then

Why dont you take nutter nic with you and you can spout bollocks together

Edited 4 hours ago by tdmickey3

[Sir Ralph]

1 minute ago, Broccoli Man said:

The problem with this study, is that it includes arts, sociology and all those useless bullshit degrees, which hardly count as education and whose graduates generally end up unemployed or working at maccas. Take these out of the equation and things would look different.

And those educated by a education system riddled with left wing ideology 

[trousers]

5 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

Not sure he back peddled. It sound like he was clarifying 

I'm a big fan of different opinions, so that's a reasonable interpretation too 👍🏻

[Sir Ralph]

6 minutes ago, tdmickey3 said:

Who cares now, he will be gone soon and hopefully we will get Streeting or someone as good

We can agree on that - streeting would be best and for the long term chances of the Labour Party too. Rayner will kill their chances at the next election. 

[Gloucester Saint]

4 minutes ago, Broccoli Man said:

The problem with this study, is that it includes arts, sociology and all those useless bullshit degrees, which hardly count as education and whose graduates generally end up unemployed or working at maccas. Take these out of the equation and things would look different.

If you don’t know about something, try not to comment and wing it. https://www.art-k.co.uk/say-goodbye-to-starving-artists-arts-grads-are-thriving/

[Gloucester Saint]

5 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

And those educated by a education system riddled with left wing ideology 

I don’t think the two Conservative Councillors who taught me would agree with that. But those were the days when the Conservative movement was the preserve of the better educated and before populism infected it. 

[Farmer Saint]

1 hour ago, Sir Ralph said:

 

Nowhere have I said anything factually incorrect. @tdmickey3 was factually incorrect in misquoting me. The point was that my view on a future government was scoffed at. My point was that the Tories and reform are both polling highly and therefore my view reflects a significant portion of the population. In “some” (I can provide you the dictionary definition of this word if you like) polls The Tories were second party. All factually correct. Apology accepted

 

[Sir Ralph]

2 minutes ago, Gloucester Saint said:

I don’t think the two Conservative Councillors who taught me would agree with that. But those were the days when the Conservative movement was the preserve of the better educated and before populism infected it. 

When I went to Uni (25 years ago), a lot of the lecturers and students who ran the University were vocally left wing. Most people ignored them but there was certainly no visual counter on the right. From what I have seen this position has been exacerbated. I dont know your age but over the last 30 years at least, universities have been well known for being a bastion of left wing ideology. 

[Sir Ralph]

2 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

 

? 

Edited 4 hours ago by Sir Ralph

[sadoldgit]

18 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

The worst thing about Starmer going is that left of the party will take charge. If that happens I might fancy my chances more in Venezuela 

Or perhaps on the streets of Minneapolis wearing an ICE outfit?

[Farmer Saint]

16 minutes ago, Broccoli Man said:

The problem with this study, is that it includes arts, sociology and all those useless bullshit degrees, which hardly count as education and whose graduates generally end up unemployed or working at maccas. Take these out of the equation and things would look different.

Degrees for the most part are not used for their subject, it's to show you can learn, retain and apply knowledge. Obviously for some jobs you have specific routes.

[Farmer Saint]

4 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

When I went to Uni (25 years ago), a lot of the lecturers and students who ran the University were vocally left wing. Most people ignored them but there was certainly no visual counter on the right. From what I have seen this position has been exacerbated. I dont know your age but over the last 30 years at least, universities have been well known for being a bastion of left wing ideology. 

Bullshit you went to Uni 😂

[Gloucester Saint]

5 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

When I went to Uni (25 years ago), a lot of the lecturers and students who ran the University were vocally left wing. Most people ignored them but there was certainly no visual counter on the right. From what I have seen this position has been exacerbated. I dont know your age but over the last 30 years at least, universities have been well known for being a bastion of left wing ideology. 

Depends where you went - Sussex, Essex, possibly LSE of old (not now) known to be left wing. Exeter, Royal Holloway, Warwick - the biggest student societies were Conservatives and the academic payroll reflect this.

Edited 4 hours ago by Gloucester Saint