Keir starmer is dead in the water

[Bertiebiscuit]

The UK cannot have a prime minister who gave a plum job to a man when all the time he knew that Mandelson was still close friends with an ex-con who was convicted for trafficking children for sexual abuse. Starmer is destroying the reputation of the UK, he is an embarrassment and shoukd resign, if not the Labour party should demand his resignation.

Hopefully with the release of the Government files will mean we can understand what the answers were to Starmers questions:

1. Why has he continued contact with Epstein after he was convicted?
2. Why was he reported to have stayed in one of Epstein's homes while the financier was in prison?

I think what answer was given to those that made Starmer think- this is the man for me will be very telling.

Aren't we all hoping for honesty in our PM though? Like complete honesty. Not a sniff of venal behaviour. It needs to be someone 100% straightforward and honest.

I think the legal obligation is wide ranging on this, as long as they are not redacted too much for whatever reason.

Well America has a literal convicted felon as president so things like this seem to matter very little in world leadership

Genuine question, is Keir possibly on the autistic spectrum?

I’ve thought that too

I hadn't ever considered it, but I can see why you might think that. It's an interesting question.

I agree.

So, following logic. At best, let’s say Rayner is found guilty of tax avoidance and/or poor tax planning. At best. Worse case, she was wilfully deceitful, and guilty of evasion.

She’s duly annointed as Starmer’s successor, and then in some weeks or months, perhaps because someone somewhere is sitting on it, it comes to light she has other, ahem, outstanding housekeeping, which she elected to keep hidden. Housekeeping which would have disbarred her from becoming PM.

You see my point I hope. If we are not confident in the honesty of certain politicians, or in the competence of civil servants tasked with vetting etc., then you simply don’t take the risk.

Rayner, to me, represents a wholly unacceptable risk.

Without diminishing ND, please let’s not give him any ideas….

With respect and love to those who are ND.

You reckon 🤣😂🤣

I'll eat my hat if he not. It's common in lawyers.

So, talking about 'some bullshit deflection', are you going to admit that you've not managed to understand any of my posts...
Have a read of my posts again and see if you can figure it out, once and for all.

I don’t think he answers in a straight forward manner and is too slippery for this.

I think Starmer will limp on til after the May elections (the few they are allowing).

Exactly.

Labour need someone who hasn't got form. Someone without a sniff of impropriety in their finances.
Someone not tainted by New Labour as thats where the corruption set in with Blairs "sofa government" and spin.

But also someone who is not overtly left wing and so would breach manifesto commitments. Or have a general election to get a mandate for going leftwards.

I dont know the Labour Party well enough to know if they have a John Smith lurking in the wings. Unfortunately it doesnt look like it.

Right.

I think they’re in hock to the unions and their back benches - perpertual left wing student types.

There is no hope of a grown-up.

I am still waiting for you to show me where I have been a paedophile apologist.

All am getting is made up statements, you telling me (incorrectly) what I am and have written and no proof that I have been an apologist.

Sod being politer, just learn some comprehension skills and learn to read, yeah?

Is it? I had no idea. Interesting. As I said, I personally rather like him but this morning press engagement was entirely awful. He has probably not slept in days.

Yes, I think it's one of the many careers where the hyper focus and attention to detail and ability to behave entirely dispassionately are a positive advantage. My ASD husband is an engineer, that's another profession, and many of my acquaintances are research chemists, which is a third.

i wish they did have a John Smith. Some of the biggest changes in my lifetime were brought in by the Blair government. First and last time I voted Labour. He was so convincing about looking after the middle of the road, aspiring working people, that I and many others fell for it. Now we have many younger people who have been to university, with the privilege of ever increasing debt, and qualifications that don’t mean much, doing basic level jobs they could have started straight from school.

PFI has left the NHS and other public services with expensive debt, and the changes to GPs’ contracts have not benefited the public. Health services have never been so overstretched. He was also responsible for a housing crisis. I won’t even mention Iraq. In parts of society, there seems to be much greater entitlement for less effort now, people are generally less considerate. I think we’ve been staggering along ever since, Covid didn’t help.

I might take religious orders to avoid hearing those vowels daily.

Totally. Lawyers see in shades of grey and are taught to see both sides and be able to advocate for either.

You in fact asked "Can you please name anything this government has done that has been to the benefit of multinational corporations and billionaires?" and i answered it, at length. Did you disagree with or not understand any of it? You can ask questions about any of it if you want.

You now refer to "policies" which is a slightly different question, but in substance similar issues apply. There are no current policies which counteract what I wrote about and there should be - and there won't be without public opinion and so the more you share the problems with others and discuss the better.

Did you read upthread the post about the MOD contract with Palentir?

Question changed but I have answered this one as well as the first one ^^
HTH!

This too

If you walk up and down high streets in every town and talk to small business owners, you will find desperate people who are on their knees about to fold because of the policies.

I don't believe they made those changes to destroy small businesses in favour of big ones or at the behest of big business...
I think res ipsa loquitar would apply here
The thing speaks for itself. You will note that big business are taxed a tiny proportion

Talking of which I think a petition about the problem policies would be a good idea, unless there is one already