AIBU to think the Prime Minister cannot stay in post?

Boris Johnson was known to be a liar, years before he ever got into Parliament, you knew if you voted for him what you were getting. Trouble was the alternatives were either Jeremy Corbyn who appeased anti-semitism, or the Lib Dems who would have cancelled Brexit without a referendum.

Keir Starmer's biggest mistake was appointing Peter Mandelson to be ambassador. His reasons for resigning twice were known about, and that was enough not to do so to begin with. Even though all about his friendship with the paedophile Epstein and the treasonous betrayal of state matters was unknown at the time.

The reason that the Mandelson appointment is such a big issue is that it's not the first time that Starmer has blamed / sacked his officials or advisors. His protestations that he is more upset than anyone are rather unconvincing.

There are other Labour figures with their eye on the top job but none are going to put themselves forward before the local election results on May 7th. I think Starmer is politically quite centrist and the general tone of this thread is that most people can tolerate his politics, even if they find him unlikeable.

With that in mind, the main candidates to replace him don't look good. Angela Rayner has the potential to be the new Liz Truss IMO, just not bright enough to run the country. Ed Miliband's enthusiasm for green policies would leave the UK dependent in the short-term on purchasing energy at a record-high cost. Wes Streeting might be the least worst in that he would be a different face for the same policies, perhaps a bit more connected to the average voter, but he's relatively untested.

14 years to implode

what the hell are you talking about have you forgotten Cameron running off from his responsibilities, May called a snap election to strengthen her party and it backfired in a spectacular way

and May was a far far better politician than the two who followed, both pushed out one not lasting two months and the third who just was never up to the job

you obviously not a supporter of Starmer but when making a point do a little research beforehand

"News" is 24/7 so there's a constant desire from news broadcasters to fill lots of empty spaces with new news, as a result they just end up generating content themselves and working everyone up into a frenzy of also wanting something new and different every five minutes.

Bring back a time when we got the news at 6, 9 and 10 plus an early edition of the next day's paper.

Trump is the President of another country.

Boris did lie to parliament all the time.

Labour and Starmer were supposed to be better.

For all the people who criticise people who say "politicians are all as bad as each other".

There's not much argument against that at the moment, is there?

Yes, that is exactly what he should do, this wasn’t some junior civil servant, this was a senior position in the government and the person was already known as the dark prince and had previously been sacked….twice.

He absolutely should have asked questions at the very least.

He has been inept at everything since before government when Sunak called him out saying he would raise our taxes and he stood and smirked, sadly the right got split and it let this lot in, whom I assume you support given your defence of the indefensible.

The worry is if he goes, who the hell comes in. Tax dodge raynor? Mad Ed? Women can have a penis Burnham (if elected)? 0 points mastermind Lammy? I wont put up your tax Rachel Thieves, I will do it twice instead?

It’s one train wreck after another and this muppet is the best they have to offer.

people mock the tories but it took them 14 years to implode, this lot haven’t done two years yet.

I'm only here to see if the poster who seems to regard me as their personal bête noire appears. 👋

Sorry what has happened to Trump the actual sex offender. Nothing?

why are you trying to destabilise the country this with nonsense.

boris lied to parliament ALL THE TIME

get a memory love

The problem is that politics nowadays is full of low-quality people. On both (all) sides.

@HRTQueenAbsolutely spot on! 👏 I'm surprised and pleased the op "is being unreasonable" is in the lead too as I write. Thank goodness there's still sense out there

I absolutely agree.

Even if I were not to support the party who are in government I recognise the importance of stability for the role of PM. We have had years of constant changes and dramas around the PM (from incompetence or in party fighting) this needs to stop it only benefits the press and those in politics that are agitators and have no real interest in improving the lives of the public

It seems to me the the country and the press have got used to a constant churn of new prime ministers every few years: it gives the media something to fill their socials and 24 hour news channels with and the people something to focus on instead of the real issues. I just wish that it would stop. This is the first government we have had that actually has an interest in trying to fix some of our chronic problems and all the noise is distracting.

So juvenile. The world is in a serious place right now and you think it's funny.

As far as I know Mandelson wasn’t made PM.

By handling it, you mean it was fine to make him PM?

Johnson didn't fail the vetting as foreign secretary.

This is such a strange lie to post - it's very easy to check.

agreed 💯 does the PM think we are all a village of idiots not to see he wasn’t fully briefed.

sounds like Rach & Wes must be on here trying to rally support their own human shield 😂
@gamerchick and @NancyBellaDonna

But today is not about someone failing the vetting, it’s about the handling of it.

Johnson failed the vetting as Foreign Secretary - but the media are so bloody pro Tory, it didn't even get a mention yet alone cause May's or Johnson's downfall. Get some balance please.

ultimately, I think I reluctantly want Starmer to make an exit at some point over the next year or so.

I think Labour would be sensible to free up Andy Burnham when the Mayoral election comes round in 2028, or have him go for a by election seat in 2027, bringing forward the Mayoral election if that's possible.

I just can't see anyone else in Labour being capable enough to either bring people back to Labour or fend off Reform.

I'm not a Labour supporter but think Burnham's done a decent job, and has gained good experience in Gtr Manchester.

Tbh everyone is missing decent quality politicians. What's happened to them all?

Assuming Chris Wormald's testimony tomorrow doesn't contradict Starmer's, I really don't see that Starmer has done anything that would require him to step down.

Is he a good PM? Ehhh...

• on world affairs, he's been very good.

• domestically, I think his instincts are fine for the most part but he hasn't been able to persuade his own party of that, leaving the UK's direction pretty unclear.

• if part of the PM's job is to maintain popularity in order to get reelected, he has been an abject failure. Yes, he's up against a hostile press and is trying to be the sensible centrist in an age where voters seem to be increasingly polarized, and you'd have to be an amazing communicator to overcome that...but he's a terrible one.

Given the other options, I'm happy with him as PM in the short-term - unfortunately, it is near impossible to see anything but a brutal loss at the next GE for Labour if there isn't a change in leader. Badenoch and Farage would each be an absolute disaster so, ultimately, I think I reluctantly want Starmer to make an exit at some point over the next year or so.

In answer to your question, of course he can stay in post...

Why?

Would that be the David Lammy who thinks transwomen, aka men, can grow a cervix?

The only things they want to save are their own wallets...