To think we don’t know how lucky we are under Starmer.

Sorry missed this! No I don’t agree at all.

You are entirely deluded.

To be very kind in my phrasing...that's a very simplistic take.

On the base rate:

• Truss was in office for about 7 weeks, and oversaw an increase in the base interest rate 1.75% to 2.25%

• When Starmer took office, the rate was 5.25%. As of today, it is 3.75%.

For the record, Starmer cannot reasonably take much credit for the base rate drop, which was largely due to global factors. The Truss spike, though, was unique to the UK and Truss-driven.

On the commercial prime rates, which is where the damage of Truss's mini budget was most apparent:

• in her brief tenure, Truss oversaw an increase from 3.35% to 5.25% (with some lenders pulling certain products completely, as a result of Truss's policies);

• the rate was 5.45% when Starmer took office, and is 6.10% now. It had, in fact, dropped to 4.85% as of late last year - but the US/Iran war and resulting volatility had caused an increase over the last couple of months.

On bond yields, 10 year gilts:

• increased from ~3% to ~4.5% under Truss, because of negative investor reaction to her policies;

• have increased under Starmer. There was a modest increase from ~4.1% to ~4.5% (similar to other nations in wake ot Trump's tarrifs).

They have since risen to ~5.1%, in part because of US/Iran and, in part, because the markets are concerned at the prospect of Starmer being ousted.

It's a bit like complaining that you had wet hair on two separate days under two separate PMs. On the day Starmer was in office, it was raining. On the day Truss was in office, it was sunny but she pissed on your head.

Neither of these tyings are true, and I question the mindset of someone who indulges in fantasies of this nature, as you appear to be.

Liz Truss was hounded out because the financial money markets increased interest rates on debt. Interest rate is now higher under Starmer than it was under Truss, so on that same basis, he needs to go.

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

They reduced net immigration - by driving all the successful people out of the country

Most problems related to immigration were caused by the conservative government. Did you not hear about the post Brexit surge in immigration known as the Boris wave? Labour on the other hand have had some success in reducing it.

Ah phew. 72% of us can continue being quietly relieved and hoping World Politics calm down soon. The other 28% of you can continue foaming at the mouth / painting roundabouts/ whatever the Greens do (angry macrame?)

I’m just so glad there are others out there like me!

Plods off to make a cuppa

Because it wouldn’t matter what he did, there are factions within the party who have been waiting for the opportunity to oust him. It also wouldn’t matter what he did, the media onslaught, highlighting every misdemeanour and never talking about his achievements has him in a position where he can only fail now. It was all designed to create instability so the right wing press could point and say “ooh, look, they shouted about the Tory leader revolving door, look at them now”

All the while, glossing over Farage and his Thai billionaire funded party. Wonder why that is?

FFS, it isn't NORMAL to replace a leader every two minutes. it wasn't normal when the Tories did it and it isn't normal now.

And if you don't think the media wield HUGE power over politics and are right leaning, you know nothing about politics. It's a very basic understanding. The pro-Truss / anti-Sunak racism. The vitriol thrown at Corbyn. It's all there in front of your eyes. They have more power than they should over our political system.

He was the one in Question time who said the majority of people coming across the channel in small boats were mainly women and children. The audience soon showed their derision by laughing!

I like Darren Jones , but he seems loyal to the PM whenever he is interviewed. He seems competent and a good speaker. I don’t know that much about him though.

yes it’s always some sort of conspiracy rather people being able to accurately diagnose labour as a bit shit.

I debunked the first one in a post at 8.53 today. Misleading doesn’t begin to describe it.

This is what the Liberal party in Canada did when Mark Carney was made leader, then elected PM.

Do you have a source for those quite bold claims?

I’m genuinely worried labour will lead us into a full blown financial crisis. Bond yields are now at a ten years high.

I just consulted AI which suggested any new leader should be in place in advance of the party conference season (typically September/October) before the prospective election year. Makes sense.

I think if they are there too soon, there’s time for the fickle public to get disaffected again.

Yes, absolutely this. Even if you accept Starmer should go (and I don’t) the time for it is say 6-9 months before the election as then there’s more likely to be a honeymoon bounce. That is needed to give a chance of a second term which is necessary as the improvements already being implemented take time.

Yes and these things take TIME! You don’t just walk into a failing business / school and turn it around overnight. You need a couple of years to start seeing green shoots (the evidence is there if only the media would shine a light on it / No. 10 comms was Alistair Campbell) and about 4-5 years to solidify your progress and have begun making a meaningful difference people actually notice. So let’s give him the term. If, 6 months prior to the GE they want to change leader then fine. But now is not the time.

Lets not forget, if he goes now then Reform and Conservatives will say the new leader has no mandate and call for a GE, and then we will get Nigel Farage. Labour / anyone on the centre or centre left needs to think ahead instead of being so reactionary.

Well I care about Mandelson etc AND GP waiting lists , crime etc. But Im realistic and understand no Government can do it all at once and everything needs paying for.

However, I need a good understanding of how and when . That’s what is lacking here with the current Labour government.And yes, selfishly, I do want to feel a bit better off too.Or at least not continually worse off.

IMO the media is mainly very right-wing biased and regardless of what a Labour leader did, they wouldn't be able to win.

As a result, the media want to whip the populace up to demanding a new leader, to drag Labour down to the ridiculous levels the Tories were at during their recent term.

I think Starmer, and those of use who hated the Tory chaos, need to ignore the media and the bots that try to further that chaos. We need stability. And regardless of how you feel about the bloke, he's definitely stable.

Either: ego or self protection or thick as mince. Pick one. Likely the first two.

The vote shifted from Labour to Reform… It wasn’t Greens picking up all those votes. Moving further left will not save them.

Hopefully the backbenchers saying nows not the time will win out.