Time for a new PM and Chancellor?

[Whenwillitgetwarm]

I wrote this on another thread but feel it should have its own thread.

Although I voted Labour (the current Tory’s are too insane), I think it may be time to swap out Starmer and Reeves. If this is done early, there’s enough parliament time left to bed a new PM and Chancellor in.

They both lack ideas, seem confused, no vision etc. They had 14 years to think up workable plans. Coming in and throwing their hands up saying there’s no money so they can’t do anything is very poor. They want to continue austerity on the sly. They indulge in stupid culture wars like VAT to rob Peter to pay Paul (and Paul won’t see a penny anyway). They have bad advisors and are arrogant. It looks like they are just excited to have the job titles and don’t know what to do.

Get a top two who will come up with a bold plan. We’re in the gutter so there’s opportunities to deliver quick wins. They don’t always need funding, simple policy changes can make big and quick differences. If they gave each department a target to deliver one quick legislative win by Christmas, we’d start 2025 differently.

Unfortunately we’re stuck with two people who can’t believe their luck, and who are afraid of the Daily Mail, Murdoch, some loud Redwall types and bots on X who wish our country economic harm. They are weak.

If Labour were a football team, there would be fans screaming for Starmer to be sacked now.

This is not about getting rid of Labour. I believe there is talent in the wider party, much more than in the Conservatives who hollowed out their party under Johnson. Nevertheless I just don’t think Starmer and Reeves should have their roles.

Did you read my last paragraph?🫣

I didn’t copy and paste. I screenshotted. Try opening it. You said that ‘Ms Reeves’ said she resented pensi9ners. Go on. Click on the image. Then explain why you lied, then said we were all opposing you for the sake of it.

If you click on the 'copy and paste' it will expand and reveal all - then you'll be able to answer and oppose everything for no good reason

Starmer just now on BBC:

''It is a great privilege to change people's lives and make a difference..........and make lives better.''

How has be made lives better?

He got rid of the Tories. That is a solid start. I don't think you can expect massive change in 100 days.

Starmer didn’t get rid of them the media and partygate did more than he did, plus general length of time and people thinking this lot would be like last time they were in

Hence his personal ratings not making it past 100 days

They have plummeted in that time

Workers rights ring a bell with you at all? And of course we're back to the fact that they have only had 100 days in office, much of which has been taken up with summer recess and conference season, and therefore everyone expecting miracles is being ridiculously and childishly impatient.

Talking of worker's rights, did you notice around about the time the WFP was withdrawn he said something to the effect that he was improving the NHS and making it a priority for the working man?

What do you suppose he meant by that? Is it possible that he compounded the felony of taking from the poor to give to the rich by saying the pensioners won't be getting free NHS?

It could have the benefit of ensuring that the elderly don't hog up beds and prevent the working man to have one.

Go on making excuses for them, as long as you like. Sooner or later you will realise that they are incompetent.

Are you seriously suggesting that pensioners are going to be denied medical care?

Oh don’t be silly.
Also he’s never said ‘working man’. ‘Working people’ maybe. Only someone with an agenda would jump from that to ‘no NHS for anyone not working’

Or maybe you will realise they are not.
None of us can tell just yet.

Let's see some evidence for the existence of that as any kind of policy, shall we? If none is forthcoming, I'm going to take is as the product of a fevered imagination.

Your posts are rapidly descending into parody.

I'm also still waiting for your evidence that Rachel Reeves said she resented pensioners. But I'm not holding my beath.

What a rich and extravagant fantasy life you enjoy

This thread truly has been the gift which keeps on giving

Exactly. Back to my point about making up answers. Adding things up and coming to conclusions that are non sequiturs.

Interesting to see what goes on in some people's minds, isn't it?

Oh my days, this thread is very odd!
I have no idea how we are looking at wanting to get rid of such a new government without giving them any chance. They were elected in July, dealt with racist riots, in recess and then conference season. They haven't had a chance.
Re the WFP that a particular poster on here is very concerned about- I get the threshold is too low but not all pensioners will struggle.
I am yet to seethe same outrage re UC standard allowance . 38% of claimants are in work.
The standard allowance for under 25 year olds is £311 per month. Once you hit 25 it is £393
Why do work harder and deserve more once you have a birthday that has 2 and 5 ?
The £3 a week over pension credit is nothing compared to the difference in those rates.
Thanks for that age discrimination from... IDS

Over the time of an hour yesterday I was bullied by five other posters. I had to defend myself 36 times in that hour. I said nothing wrong, nothing illegal, no bad language, but I had to defend myself 36 times against five posters who laid into me.

From page 35 to page 38 it was me against five bullies.

He did not. Voters got rid of the Tories. Starmer did not get the most votes, just won the most seats and was so surprised he couldn't believe it.

Now he is fighting to stay in post just 100 days later.

I am suggesting nothing of the kind, and I think you know it.

It was Starmer who said that, on the news. They were his words. As you are obviously members if the labour party, and are supporting him, I assumed that you would know what he meant.

I asked posters what they think he meant by it. Can I not post anything without you bullying me?

Starmer absolutely did say 'working man'. I thought it silly, because we all work. He also said the labour party was the 'party of the working man' just about the time he gave the train drivers their pay rise bringing it to £69,000.and promised the trade unions he would do more for them.

This thread asked us if we thought the PM and Chancellor should go. Just because you think they should stay and I think they should go, doesn't give you and your four friends the right to collective bullying.

Do you mean you and your four friends cannot tell yet, or everyone posting on here except me?

On this thread I have been taunted and bullied over four pages by just FIVE PEOPLE for an hour. I have had to defend myself 36 times.

The same thing happened two days ago, by the same five people, who while they were bullying me, were sending posts among themselves, referring to ne as 'she',

You didn't even have good cases for disagreeing with me. It seemed you were determined to just disagree. The thread invited people to say if they thought the PM and Chancellor needed to be replaced. I said I did think so and gave my reasons why. You argued against them: Why? This may be a discussion, but there is no need to argue so vehemently against one poster's opinion. You five have set yourselves to put down anyone who disagrees with you. I didn't even do that. I posted my thoughts, independently and gave reasons. You disagreed. You have that right. You do NOT have the right to bully, for five people to gang up against one person over four pages of thread.

On this thread I have been taunted and bullied over four pages by just FIVE PEOPLE for an hour. I have had to defend myself 36 times.

@llizzie I'm not sure you understand how discussion threads work. You haven't been bullied by anyone. You've had various people disagree with you and point out holes, mistakes, falsehoods and non sequiturs in your posts. That's discussion.

You haven't had to defend yourself at all against bullies. You have chosen to try and argue back. Your choice. Sometimes I choose to argue back if people disagree with me. Sometimes I just really can't be bothered, especially if there's so much wrong in their posts. I would never claim it was bullying.

You haven't been bullied llizzie. Your have been called out on your anti-immigrant and Islamophobic rhetoric. And your incorrect information about pensions etc.

If you think you have been bullied report the bullying posts to MNHQ.