Thread 37 Starmer: pinko commie slimeball

[DuncinToffee]

To Blossomtoes

Political discussion and friendly chit chat.

Taxes most welcome

Previous thread
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/_chat/5435616-thread-36-starmer-triggered-by-ads-and-da-iawn-caerffili?page=40

.

From Sam Bright’s substack

The BBC has been forced to make 33 corrections to its coverage overall this year, compared with a whopping 114 from The Telegraph – despite its dramatically smaller headcount and output.

The cumulative picture is of a newsroom that gets things wrong, often and then quietly patches up the damage at the bottom of a heavily paywalled website.

Take this stinker: “The original standfirst, which appeared under the headline of this article – ‘Taxpayer-funded company helps foreign artists secure visas for £100’ – reported that 948,000 creatives had arrived in Britain on a ‘global talent visa’ by the end of 2024. This was inaccurate.”

Yet The Telegraph has the gall to lecture the BBC about journalistic integrity, proclaiming that the broadcaster has “signed its own death warrant”.

The Telegraph’s corrections page makes clear these are not random errors. They are by-products of an editorial culture that values ideological victory over empirical accuracy. It’s no coincidence that the newspaper repeatedly gets its facts wrong on immigration, crime, energy, and the environment – culture war issues of central importance to The Telegraph’s worldview.

Mic Wright gave the following quote for a DeSmog piece I wrote earlier, which nails the issue here:

“Looking to The Daily Telegraph as an arbiter of journalistic accuracy and ethics is like calling on the fox to give you advice on securing the hen house.

“The paper’s attacks on the BBC are not remotely done in good faith and are the result of the publisher’s ideological and commercial interests. There is no world in which The Telegraph’s output would survive the level of scrutiny applied to the BBC’s journalism.”

And yet, when the BBC makes an error – however small – The Telegraph devotes entire articles to incendiary, aghast outrage.

The difference, of course, is that the BBC has an ounce of contrition and self-respect. When things go wrong (as naturally they do at an institution with over 21,000 staff producing dozens of programmes every day), people are held to account.
By contrast, at The Telegraph, its falsehoods are buried in fine print and those spreading them are handed promotions.

So, when The Telegraph next demands that the BBC faces consequences for “misleading the public”, it should take a beat and read its own corrections page. It’s the most honest thing the paper publishes

Corrections should be in the same typeface on the same page as the erroneous article.

Job done.

I've always said this.

You've never had a pint or glass of Guinness in the West of Ireland.

well I say it’s an amazing day. Badenoch made Starmer look like a fool, Streeting looks glowing, and Starmer set himself on fire.

Is Morgan McSweeney worth his salary? I do wonder

I like Guinness

McSweeney? I think the consensus on here is that he should have been sacked ages ago.

But our influence doesn't reach very far

Yes. He is a persistent source of hysteria. Starmer looks really peaky. So would anyone if you had the political equivalent of a panic attack every five minutes. Who does this?

If I were Starmer I would go and pour myself a glass of something strong and wonder whether I was really in charge and if I had the right people. McSweeney is Mandelson’s protege. But Mandelson operated in a time of good economic fortunes. This focus of panic stations is self inflicted. There is plenty to worry about without this farce being started to run alongside.

Streeting played it perfectly. Whoever started this mess needs to stop

I agree with you both. Starmer needs to get a bloody grip of things.

Its too late for Starmer, he has become the joke.

..and once that happens, its curtains, he wont come back from this.

Shame really, he had a golden opportunity but appears to have put people around him who are clueless, coupled with his own aloofness & if he doesn't go quickly - next 6 months - he'll drag the party down with him.

It's all such a horrible mess - and on the face of it a huge mis-judgement to brief against Streeting like this

I think Starmer should do what Major did in 1995. He looked invincible in his party after that.

I just assumed Starmer has become paranoid. He goes on these international junkets and leaves McSweeney to manage No 10 and the UK domestic agenda is panic panic panic. Neither him nor Reeves seem inclined, despite their political survival depending on it, to cultivate their backbenches.

Reeves is the Queen of unforced errors. If Starmer plans on making her carry the can for the budget and then doing a reshuffle then today makes me wonder if he could without weakening himself. This is a ridiculous position to be in given a huge majority and a long time to an election.

He put it right back in the net with his “I’m a faithful” line. A zinger to remind everyone what a good comms man he is. And some very good coverage of him sticking it to the BMA about their hypocrisy on pay.

Starmer does a good job internationally. But never here Keir has problems. Britain needs an active leader at home, and one that is a lot more obviously engaged

Didn't Major then go on to lead his party to a huge GE defeat just 2 years later?

IF Starmer has any chance, its with a new team but i have to say, if you employ the likes of McSweeney, you probably deserve all you get.

Yes he did. But they’d been in government for 18 years at that point and with Blair at the helm a tired government that had run out of ideas was bound to lose. He certainly made the Tory pp behave itself for the rest of his premiership.

It’s rare that Labour get rid of their leaders that get elected. Let’s face it this is a Tory sport. But Starmer is biblically unpopular, and this government is directionless. There are a whole host of Labour MPs with narrow majorities. They would rather get rid of McSweeney and Starmer if they kept their jobs. That’s what they are thinking about

They are probably safeguarding themselves against any tax rises, "it wasn't my idea"

We shall see.

Progress on the Brexit reset

https://www.politico.eu/article/uk-scores-brexit-win-eu-fast-tracks-electricity-trading-talks/

I'm not absolutely sure where I stand on Starmer now. I think Labour's performance to date has been lacklustre, has had some stupid 'own- goals', is failing to mange its comms, and that the Government really feels a bit rudderless. The long run up to the budget is an illustration of all of this.
I don't like 'personality politics' (you only need to look at Johnson or Farage to see why), but I'm beginning to think that Starmer has become so toxic now that for the good of the party he should go. Not sure who would be up to the job though.

Apologies - spotted a few typos - too late to edit.

Has Labour ever got rid of an elected leader before?

if you employ the likes of McSweeney, you probably deserve all you get

Agree @Alexandra2001 . And then there is the Mandleson debacle. Another unforced, massive error.

I agree @Grumpyoldpersonwithcats But as you say, who could replace Starmer? Not Streeting. I can't bear him.

What a mess.

Labour tends to have “deals”. So a PM leaves at a time of his own choosing. Wilson, Blair. They don’t stab their leaders like the Tories do. You get to resign; tbh that’s an incredible humiliation for Starmer either way. It would look completely personal to him. Even I think that’s unfair. Reeves is the one who should go imo. You can actually plot the collapse in the Labour vote to her announcements. But the public don’t want Starmer, clear enough.

We'd need to see the numbers of MPs who would vote down Starmer.

Labour need to get a grip on the cost of living, all very well blaming the Tories but they came in saying they'd fix the roads, fix dentistry, lower energy bills.

3 things they've done pretty much nothing at all about.

Too many unforced errors too, WFA, Expenses - what on earth was Starmer doing taking gifts? even if no rules broken, it set the tone for his premiership and the actions of one or two ministers has been shocking, Haigh, Rayner & Ali...

Rayner was the most disappointing, imho it was no admin error.

If the Labour Party finds itself needing to elect a new leader I really hope it’s not Streeting. He looks far too pleased with himself for my liking and is favoured by the right for some reason. My pick would be Dan Jarvis, Security minister. He’s got a decent majority, is in his early 50s and is a former Army officer. He’s an anomaly as a Labour MP who would confuse the hell out of Tory voters.