The Starmer Years - Can The New Broom Sweep Clean?

[Holmes_and_Watson]

5 hours ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Starmer’s position of “sharing your anger” about his mate is a bit much.

Also, what is the point of security vetting if a pretty blatant lie can make any findings irrelevant 

Agreed. I don't think there was much he could do to get out of this. Nevertheless, watching him deflect and squirm just loses him more points.

They sent out close ally, and sock puppet, Reed to front up for Starmer and take the headlines away from the anger. I can only conclude, that despite being giving amazing filing by SOG, Starmer was useless at the CPS. It seems that he shows no curiosity when given lies. CPS prosecutions must have been zero in his tenure. "Hang on teams. All the accused say they've done nothing wrong! Stop the cases!"

Mandelson wasn't on the initial candidate list under Sue Gray. As soon as she got bumped after internal warfare, McSweeney puts mentor, and close colleague in previous positions, Mandelson on the list.

They get the flags. Yet, are now blaming what they consider to be an established process, they just couldn't get out of, that from their 3 email questions. Not a chat. Not a moment to think of the implications. Reed says they might have to look at the vetting process. Duh. Perhaps not glossing over findings to appoint pals, over victims, would have been the better approach.

Just a formality. No doubt Mandelson didn't incriminate himself in the answers. Why would he do that, with McSweeney ushering him into post, and asking if could get another one to go with it.

The three questions were:

    Why has he continued contact with Epstein after he was convicted?
    Why was he reported to have stayed in one of Epstein's homes while the financier was in prison?
    And was he associated with a charity founded by Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell that the financier had backed? 

Since I'm sure we all stay at the luxury residences of convicted people we barely know, nothing Mandelson replied with raised any concerns.

Mandelson got the job because he was close to McSweeney. He got the job as a reward for working to undermine the left of his own party. He got the job due to his shared position in the party with McSweeney and his front man, Starmer. His final qualification was that they wanted a sleazy manipulator to get on well with Trump's regime. It was a plus point.

We'll see if he survives to the by-election. He's toast if that goes badly. And certainly come May, unless polls are very wrong.

[AlexLaw76]

6 minutes ago, Holmes_and_Watson said:

Agreed. I don't think there was much he could do to get out of this. Nevertheless, watching him deflect and squirm just loses him more points.

They sent out close ally, and sock puppet, Reed to front up for Starmer and take the headlines away from the anger. I can only conclude, that despite being giving amazing filing by SOG, Starmer was useless at the CPS. It seems that he shows no curiosity when given lies. CPS prosecutions must have been zero in his tenure. "Hang on teams. All the accused say they've done nothing wrong! Stop the cases!"

Mandelson wasn't on the initial candidate list under Sue Gray. As soon as she got bumped after internal warfare, McSweeney puts mentor, and close colleague in previous positions, Mandelson on the list.

They get the flags. Yet, are now blaming what they consider to be an established process, they just couldn't get out of, that from their 3 email questions. Not a chat. Not a moment to think of the implications. Reed says they might have to look at the vetting process. Duh. Perhaps not glossing over findings to appoint pals, over victims, would have been the better approach.

Just a formality. No doubt Mandelson didn't incriminate himself in the answers. Why would he do that, with McSweeney ushering him into post, and asking if could get another one to go with it.

The three questions were:

    Why has he continued contact with Epstein after he was convicted?
    Why was he reported to have stayed in one of Epstein's homes while the financier was in prison?
    And was he associated with a charity founded by Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell that the financier had backed? 

Since I'm sure we all stay at the luxury residences of convicted people we barely know, nothing Mandelson replied with raised any concerns.

Mandelson got the job because he was close to McSweeney. He got the job as a reward for working to undermine the left of his own party. He got the job due to his shared position in the party with McSweeney and his front man, Starmer. His final qualification was that they wanted a sleazy manipulator to get on well with Trump's regime. It was a plus point.

We'll see if he survives to the by-election. He's toast if that goes badly. And certainly come May, unless polls are very wrong.

In the meantime, old Pete Mandy has been going through his old records to make things disappear left right and centre.

[Holmes_and_Watson]

3 hours ago, AlexLaw76 said:

In the meantime, old Pete Mandy has been going through his old records to make things disappear left right and centre.

His diary is going to need some hasty revisions, if he can bring himself to do it. His  book The Third Man partly used diary notes. Funnily enough titled after a man who betrayed the interests of his country, facilitating untold harm indirectly on young victims. I'd be warning him not to go into the sewers, as it doesn't end well. But he's a politician, and sewers are where he's been spending a lot of his time.

[AlexLaw76]

7 minutes ago, Holmes_and_Watson said:

His diary is going to need some hasty revisions, if he can bring himself to do it. His  book The Third Man partly used diary notes. Funnily enough titled after a man who betrayed the interests of his country, facilitating untold harm indirectly on young victims. I'd be warning him not to go into the sewers, as it doesn't end well. But he's a politician, and sewers are where he's been spending a lot of his time.

Could have been worse for Starmer, he could have eaten some cake with people he spent all day with.

[Holmes_and_Watson]

1 minute ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Could have been worse for Starmer, he could have eaten some cake with people he spent all day with.

I dug out my Rainbow Laces for his Pride in Place programme, only to find it was for something else entirely. Starmer Out!

[sadoldgit]

8 hours ago, iansums said:

It's pathetic really isn't it. TDMickey getting all upset when Ralph simply answers his question telling him how he'd vote. Some (not all) of you on here need to show a bit more respect for people with a different opinion.

The Tories are the reason the country is in the state it is in. Reform UK would be even more of a nightmare. He wants both of them in power. Why respect that? We are currently living through the nightmare of Brexit that people like him and I expect you thought was a good idea. We really don’t need more of this shit. Do you think we should respect those who support MAGA? Perhaps you think some of that would be good here? 

[Turkish]

With the adults in the room at least we’ve gone back to the grey, boring politics the OP wanted, right everyone?

[Weston Super Saint]

24 minutes ago, Turkish said:

With the adults in the room at least we’ve gone back to the grey, boring politics the OP wanted, right everyone?

Some of the posts on the first couple of pages of this thread are an absolute delight!  Full of joy and hope, sunshine, rainbows and the prospect of integrity!

Some people just don't understand politicians!

[iansums]

8 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

The Tories are the reason the country is in the state it is in. Reform UK would be even more of a nightmare. He wants both of them in power. Why respect that? We are currently living through the nightmare of Brexit that people like him and I expect you thought was a good idea. We really don’t need more of this shit. Do you think we should respect those who support MAGA? Perhaps you think some of that would be good here? 

Most of that is your opinion which I disagree with, however there is one fact I should give you, I voted remain.

Edited 3 hours ago by iansums

[Farmer Saint]

2 minutes ago, iansums said:

Most of that is your opinion which I disagree with, however there is one fact I should give you, I voted remain.

Just a quick question - would you vote remain now?

[Weston Super Saint]

6 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

Just a quick question - would you vote remain now?

Remain out of the EU?  

[Farmer Saint]

11 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Remain out of the EU?  

Yeah, I did think should I rephrase that!

[iansums]

28 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

Yeah, I did think should I rephrase that!

Agreed, your question doesn't make any sense. Would I vote to rejoin now, the answer would be no.

Edited 2 hours ago by iansums

[sadoldgit]

47 minutes ago, iansums said:

Most of that is your opinion which I disagree with, however there is one fact I should give you, I voted remain.

After 14 years of austerity brought to us by the Tory party you disagree that the country is in the state it is for other reasons? Ok.

Whether you voted to remain or not, if you think Farage is the answer you are asking the wrong questions.

[Winnersaint]

51 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

Just a quick question - would you vote remain now?

I'm not so sure now. I suppose that ship has long sailed and on a personal level I still have EU citizenship so in my bubble I think its become less important. 

Edited 2 hours ago by Winnersaint

[badgerx16]

Just now, Winnersaint said:

On sovereignty grounds or economic grounds, or other?

On a planet suffering global problems, sovereignty is not the most important factor.

[iansums]

2 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

After 14 years of austerity brought to us by the Tory party you disagree that the country is in the state it is for other reasons? Ok.

Whether you voted to remain or not, if you think Farage is the answer you are asking the wrong questions.

There are many reasons for the current state of the country, not all the fault of the Tory governments. I don't think I've ever said Farage is the answer, I'll wait until the next election to make that decision. I do though think that the Tories were too centrist with their policies.

[Farmer Saint]

6 minutes ago, iansums said:

Agreed, your question doesn't make any sense. Would I vote to rejoin now, the answer would be no.

That's interesting - what's changed your mind? What have you seen from us leaving that has advantaged us as a country?

[iansums]

3 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

That's interesting - what's changed your mind? What have you seen from us leaving that has advantaged us as a country?

Not sure I have changed my mind. I thought the act of leaving the EU would damage us in the short term and it did just that with all the Tory infighting for several years. Now, I don't see any benefit in reversing that decision. We are where we are, let's get on with it.

[egg]

1 minute ago, iansums said:

Not sure I have changed my mind. I thought the act of leaving the EU would damage us in the short term and it did just that with all the Tory infighting for several years. Now, I don't see any benefit in reversing that decision. We are where we are, let's get on with it.

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. 

[badgerx16]

11 minutes ago, iansums said:

Not sure I have changed my mind. I thought the act of leaving the EU would damage us in the short term and it did just that with all the Tory infighting for several years. Now, I don't see any benefit in reversing that decision. We are where we are, let's get on with it.

 

5 minutes ago, egg said:

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. 

Rejoining would not return us to where we were. No more of Thatcher's rebates, new members must adopt the Euro, etc.

Leaving was a colossal mistake, but we cannot undo it.

[iansums]

2 hours ago, Turkish said:

With the adults in the room at least we’ve gone back to the grey, boring politics the OP wanted, right everyone?

Yes, it is nice to have a sensible discussion about politics without being told you shouldn't be allowed to vote.

[trousers]

23 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

 

Rejoining would not return us to where we were. No more of Thatcher's rebates, new members must adopt the Euro, etc.

Leaving was a colossal mistake, but we cannot undo it.

# Devil's advocate klaxon #

Given the EU is a such good organisation to be part of, surely it would be better to return as a fully-fledged member rather than the watered down membership we had before...?

 

 

[Farmer Saint]

35 minutes ago, egg said:

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. 

Bloody hell Egg! I won't ask, but bloody hell.

[Farmer Saint]

19 minutes ago, iansums said:

Yes, it is nice to have a sensible discussion about politics without being told you shouldn't be allowed to vote.

Who said that? Not sure anyone should be saying people shouldn't be allowed to vote, especially people from the left!

[Turkish]

Just now, Farmer Saint said:

Who said that? Not sure anyone should be saying people shouldn't be allowed to vote, especially people from the left!

Do you really need to ask?

[Farmer Saint]

3 minutes ago, trousers said:

# Devil's advocate klaxon #

Given the EU is a such good organisation to be part of, surely it would be better to return as a fully-fledged member rather than the watered down membership we had before...?

 

 

Financially if has harmed us significantly, of that there is no doubt. I would still vote to rejoin, dependant on what that relationship looked like, because I think we're stronger fiscally in the EU.

[east-stand-nic]

20 hours ago, Farmer Saint said:

It's the constant lying, deflection and unwillingness to answer questions honestly.

Oh, and the fact that he supports and defends grifters, racists, paedophiles and rapists that irks.

Like you supporting Starmer? Proven to have a pedo on his team knowingly and helping to NOT prosecute Savile. Good god you have no awareness. 

[trousers]

11 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

Financially if has harmed us significantly, of that there is no doubt. I would still vote to rejoin, dependant on what that relationship looked like, because I think we're stronger fiscally in the EU.

I reckon in c.20 years, once we've rejoined the EU, us Europhiles will look back at this last few decades and thank the thickos who voted Brexit for indirectly opening the door to full membership. 🇪🇺💶

[hypochondriac]

One thing I will say is that every time nic posts as he does I start to like Starmer a little more. A couple more months of this and you may see me pinning on a red rosette and campaigning for Kier.

[hypochondriac]

Brexit never made sense financially. I thought that was always just generally accepted.

[Holmes_and_Watson]

10 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

The Tories are the reason the country is in the state it is in. Reform UK would be even more of a nightmare. He wants both of them in power. Why respect that? We are currently living through the nightmare of Brexit that people like him and I expect you thought was a good idea. We really don’t need more of this shit. Do you think we should respect those who support MAGA? Perhaps you think some of that would be good here? 

 

2 hours ago, iansums said:

Most of that is your opinion which I disagree with, however there is one fact I should give you, I voted remain.

A little shout out to @iansums for batting away a post talking about not respecting those who hold a different view, and keeping the discussion an interesting look at the opinions.

 

[Farmer Saint]

27 minutes ago, east-stand-nic said:

Like you supporting Starmer? Proven to have a pedo on his team knowingly and helping to NOT prosecute Savile. Good god you have no awareness. 

Where am I supporting Starmer? I've said he's got to go.

Edited 1 hour ago by Farmer Saint

[whelk]

37 minutes ago, east-stand-nic said:

Like you supporting Starmer? Proven to have a pedo on his team knowingly and helping to NOT prosecute Savile. Good god you have no awareness. 

Obsessed with paedos. No one else seems to mention as much as you

[hypochondriac]

A really well written article here analysing Starmer. I'd be interested in the thoughts of @whelk if he has the time. 

https://www.thetimes.com/article/720af3a9-dd66-473f-a13f-f57afa1c95fe?shareToken=135911bb847f3d3b5e966cf2cac2f6f5

[Gloucester Saint]

19 minutes ago, whelk said:

Obsessed with paedos. No one else seems to mention as much as you

Niccy is only there for the beaches and spicy food remember.

[egg]

1 hour ago, Farmer Saint said:

Bloody hell Egg! I won't ask, but bloody hell.

I know...repent at leisure etc. 

[whelk]

14 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

A really well written article here analysing Starmer. I'd be interested in the thoughts of @whelk if he has the time. 

https://www.thetimes.com/article/720af3a9-dd66-473f-a13f-f57afa1c95fe?shareToken=135911bb847f3d3b5e966cf2cac2f6f5

I will look later but am actually away this weekend so probably won’t be soon 

[Sir Ralph]

11 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

The Tories are the reason the country is in the state it is in. Reform UK would be even more of a nightmare. He wants both of them in power. Why respect that? We are currently living through the nightmare of Brexit that people like him and I expect you thought was a good idea. We really don’t need more of this shit. Do you think we should respect those who support MAGA? Perhaps you think some of that would be good here? 

I voted remain. My personal view is from a business perspective a renewed conservative government, with a reform party (fewer MPs than the Tories) would be the best outcome in terms of business and keeping the tories truer to their original values. People are entitled to who they vote for whether reform, maga, labour, the Green Party. You should respect it even if you don’t agree. Dont want to break it to you but you are not the owner of the truth

Edited 36 minutes ago by Sir Ralph

[egg]

1 minute ago, Sir Ralph said:

I voted remain and wished we had stayed in. My personal view is from a business perspective a renewed conservative government, with a reform party (fewer MPs than the Tories) would be the best outcome in terms of business and keeping the tories truer to their original values. People are entitled to who they vote for whether reform, maga, labour, the Green Party. You should respect it even if you don’t agree. Dont want to break it to you but you are not the owner of the truth

We should respect people's right to choose, but we're not obliged to respect their choice. 

Sure, people can vote reform if they wish, but many people can't explain why beyond "we need change and less brown people", so it's perfectly reasonable to question their choice. 

[Sir Ralph]

11 minutes ago, egg said:

We should respect people's right to choose, but we're not obliged to respect their choice. 

Sure, people can vote reform if they wish, but many people can't explain why beyond "we need change and less brown people", so it's perfectly reasonable to question their choice. 

When I mean respect a starting point would be not calling them names and be abusive. Personally I think you should respect someone's choice to vote for a legitimate political party. Some people who are often not as educated or experienced as they perceive themselves to be, seem to have an air of superiority that voting Reform  or supporting MAGA is for scumbags. What this has done has encouraged more people to vote for those parties.  My experience of people that would vote reform is not the reason you gave. I think they feel let down by the Tories and believe that many of the values that the Tories had, are, of all the parties, best reflected in Reform. They are rationale, well educated people.

Edited 24 minutes ago by Sir Ralph