Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Why should Starmer resign? I don’t get it

210 replies

working9 · 05/02/2026 13:18

I’m not a big fan, but I don’t understand why people believe he should go. Yes he appointed Mandelson as US ambassador when he knew about Epstein’s conviction and that Mandelson was still friends with him - which was wrong IMO.

BUT - people have known that was the case for over a year haven’t they? And Starmer got rid of him as ambassador as soon as he was first mentioned in the Epstein files last year.

Now all this extra stuff has come to light about Mandelson’s relationship with Epstein in the last few days and of course it is dreadful, but how is that Starmer’s fault? Aren’t these disclosures (due to the release of further documents from the Epstein files) as much news to him as they are to everyone else? I don’t think anyone knew the extent of Epstein’s depravity until recently apart from those involved - I don’t see how Starmer could have been expected to know.

Can someone with more understanding of the situation please enlighten me?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
Ablondiebutagoody · 05/02/2026 13:34

Because its a question of judgement. Mandleson has always been dodgy has fuck. Why not simply appoint someone respectable as ambassador? Starmer is a clown.

plentyofsunshine · 05/02/2026 13:32

I agree with you OP - the person who lied is Mandelson, not Starmer.

Having said that - of all the people that he could have appointed to be the UK Ambassadar to the USA he chose Mandelson and you really do have to ask why?

Catchycatchytune · 05/02/2026 13:31

His judgment is absolutely shite. Not a great look for a prime minister.

PrizedPickledPopcorn · 05/02/2026 13:31

It’s very interesting when perception of information shifts from gossip to conspiracy theory to fact.

There have been a lot of ‘person x in photo with Epstein, heads must roll’, headlines, and ‘person x may have been introduced to Epstein’.
That means absolutely nothing, it’s just mud slinging.

Andrew Windsor Whatsit may well be a pedophile, but there hasn’t been evidence until possibly recently. Just mud slinging based on US laws.

Now stuff is being released that looks much more concrete and much more damning.
And now everyone is supposed to have known all along.

I’m confused about who should have known better- apart from the series of rich men who were flying sex workers around for sex. Some of those sex workers were groomed and vulnerable, it would seem. Were they all? Is sex ever work or is it always abuse? Lots of mixed messages.

Original poster
working9 · 05/02/2026 13:30

BIossomtoes · 05/02/2026 13:21

I can’t because I see it exactly as you do. But I do think he’s too tarnished by a whole succession of missteps to continue.

Edited

It just doesn’t seem fair when he hasn’t (as far as I can see) done anything wrong? Would MI5/MI6 have known the extent of Mandelson’s relationship with Epstein and what Epstein was really like at the time Starmer appointed Mandelson as ambassador?

OP posts:
Toddlerteaplease · 05/02/2026 13:28

I am sick to back teeth if hearing about bloody Epstein.

tiredlazydoesntmatter · 05/02/2026 13:27

I agree OP .

BlueJuniper94 · 05/02/2026 13:23

Alex Jones could have told you the extent of Epsteins depravity. So could a lot of maligned conspiracy theorists

BlueJuniper94 · 05/02/2026 13:22

He's either a liar or incompetent

But you're right, where's Trumps heat?

BIossomtoes · 05/02/2026 13:21

I can’t because I see it exactly as you do. But I do think he’s too tarnished by a whole succession of missteps to continue.

Swipe left for the next trending thread