Thread 43 Starmer : il ritorno della luce e la semina del Lathyrus odoratus

[DuncinToffee]

Welcome to our long running thread for political discussion, general chit chat, a friendly hug and taxes in kind

Previous thread
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/_chat/5481109-thread-42-starmer-du-drikker-en-kop-te-og-sa-taenker-du-lidt-over-alting?page=40&reply=150354520

The infighting is notorious in every party and so far the worst for that is Reform and Conservatives @tobee

As any ful knows.

Well, it's all happening. Beth Rugby sounds positively gleeful that KS 'might be in freefall'

Just worth remembering that when Thatcher went, we got Major and another Tory election win.

Yes that's very true @placemats .

However, I am a Labour supporter so am more invested in them not tearing themselves apart.

Although it wouldn’t be the first time that someone has implied that I’m a fool 😬

There's lots of infighting across all the parties based on individual power plays and ambition. I do think "purity spiralling" is definitely more of a thing on the left. The right tends to close ranks a bit more (in the Conservatives case up until the point they ruthlessly depose a failing leader.) .

But there's a time when "purity spiralling" (or in other words holding those on your side to any standards at all) is really important. Including where child sex abuse and cosying up to child rapists is concerned. Which is why it's heartening Labour backbenchers seem genuinely angry. Especially compared to the weasels in Reform. Or hardcore MAGA who could literally see Trump murder a child in front of them and would still make excuses..of rather infighting than that.

Beth RIGBY, sorry. (I always somehow picture her & Kay Burley knitting next to a guillotine)
I certainly want KS to remain. He is far from perfect but I think he's built up really good international relations (& is repairing things with Europe hopefully) & is doing some good work at home (but a poor communicator & shoots himself in the foot at times so who knows) Anything anything but Reform.

In fairness to all the journos (not often I say this!) politics has been a rich seam of copy for the last decade. Particularly since the merry-go-round of Brexit.

Plus we have more political commentators and far fewer journos with a deeper understanding of their sectors (be that education, science, health or business) or even with knowledge of Parliament so we end up with what is in effect highly excitable gossipmongers!

It's been very noticeable from Johnson onwards. Lots of chat, very little interest in policies.

Starmer appoints new acting chiefs of staff

An email has just gone round No 10 staff confirming that the prime minister has asked Jill Cuthbertson and Vidhya Alakeson to be acting chiefs of staff, with immediate effect.

Agree with this. The Tories have generally been much more willing to close ranks right up until they depose.

McS should have been gone some months ago. The backbenchers are in the right.

Supposedly it was that the left were debating or disagreeing or whatever you like to call it over the minutiae of policy.

Where the right were about getting into/keeping power at all costs to protect their interests. And so ruthless about jettisoning a leader who threatened that.

Although neither is entirely correct. Plenty of right wing politicians have hung on for grim death rather than resign or be sacked.

Me too.

Labour/Keir Starmer can be bullied by the general public. That's how it's meant to be. Yes there have been some massive blinders and then UTurns. It would be so much better if they were competent enough to not make the blinder in the the first place. But it's miles away from "strong man" Trump in the Whitehouse who just doesn't give a shit. Politicians are meant to be afraid of their electorate. Even if in the short term it looks like weakness.

I’m home from London - exhausted, achey and very much aware of my years…
Now focussing on the Olympics.
Glad MMcS has gone. Hope it can be put to bed now.

I always thought the Tories were expert at hiding their divisions - hence their stay in power.

Maybe the Cameron-May-May-Johnson-Johnson-Truss-Sunak put paid to that

I'm a member of the Labour party and was voted as a councillor back in the day. Sometimes I call myself a ful, but I can say that I never voted for Corbyn as leader. I did and have always campaigned and vote locally in support of the party I love.

As a councillor, I was asked by the Tories and the Lib Dems to join their party. The answer was no. Both parties were full of gossip, some nasty, but of course I refused.

They like the money and the status. Hence the recent defections. Always hopeful for a place in the HOL. Same in every party elected. Except Sinn Fein.

Quite possibly, having learnt the idea from children whose parents claim live with their grandparents to be a local resident when school places are allocated. Or who 'rediscover' their faith which they lose about one day after their child starts secondary school.

He was on TV this morning complaining about being ‘smeared’ by the opposition about his house in Bath. He has a property portfolio doncha know. So that’s ok then.

Odd.

Report that Starmer was going to address the UK on Monday 9th.

Then not

https://nitter.net/PolitlcsUK/status/2020629388732301766#m

The first thing McSweeney should have known in his job was that the government would be viciously and crazily attacked by the right wing press from the moment they were elected (and obviously before they were the government).

The second thing McSweeney should have known was they would also be viciously and crazily attacked by the Corbyn era MPs and their cabal.

Basic stuff that, say, Alastair Campbell would have had known instinctively.

Of course the government has complicated things further by u-turning frequently and not shouting from the rooftops the things they have improved.

I also think it was a major mistake to lead with an unashamedly "it's going to get worse before it gets better" narrative from day 1.

Still, it's taken the spotlight off Rachel Reeves for a bit all this.

One of the interesting things about the Mandelson scandal (make that all of them) is I've not heard any speculation of his motivation being to betray the country. It all seems to be taken for granted he was just motivated by self aggrandisement.

But then maybe that's what all treacherous people are motivated by?

Do you mean he was motivated to betray the country out of specific Ill will towards the country rather than say betraying it for money? (I do think that some of the dealings he did do amount to betrayal for money).

I actually think that happens but I would associate it with more ideological people. Eg a spy for Communist Russia who had grown disillusioned with the West/Capitalism/disliked the UK. (Or there was that famous aristocrat gun running for the IRA on his yacht because he objected to the UKs actions in Ireland. He was hung for treason I think). I don't think Mandleson is principled enough to be motivated by those reasons so I would assume money/influence/personal ambition would be more likely.

I think it was the free holidays etc that Peter Mandelson was motivated by.

It couldn’t have been money, surely? Although the amounts involved are a lot of money to most people £75k is trifling to the Mandelsons and Epsteins of this world.

IDK the £75k is what's known about [and he claims not to remember] maybe there were many other unknown sums plus payment in kind - luxury holidays/travel/meals/ clothes whatever

Top of the scale ambassador pay is only £200k so just an average mumsnetters salary

Epstein OTOH was worth over $500 million