Keir Starmer

Didn’t want Truss as PM and I certainly didn’t vote for her, not least because I’m not a member of the Conservative Party, or any other political party for that matter.

Going to be fun watching Abbott give Rodney the runaround over the next few weeks.

They will change the leadership not long after the election, install someone who likes waving a red book and they will get dry humped out of office next time around.
 
Didn’t want Truss as PM and I certainly didn’t vote for her, not least because I’m not a member of the Conservative Party, or any other political party for that matter.

Going to be fun watching Abbott give Rodney the runaround over the next few weeks.
Are you a shareholder of Reform UK Party Ltd though?
 
None of the above.

Certainly not Reeves. She’s genuinely terrible.
Yep, having a chancellor that has experience of being an economist working for the Bank of England and other banks would never work, although it would a marked change from the succession of chancellors we’ve had in recent years who have had no background at all in economics and have presided over 14 years of anaemic growth, high tax and low investment.

Bring back Kwarteng I say. He knows how to make the markets react to policy decisions, and he was on University Challenge when he was a student studying Classics and History. Obviously much more qualified especially as he’s an old Etonian.
 
They will change the leadership not long after the election, install someone who likes waving a red book and they will get dry humped out of office next time around.

This is an odd thread in many ways. Most on here think Starmer is purging the party of the left and putting in loyal candidates, and some think the party will fall to a coup by the left after the election.

I mean, which is it?
 
It is actually much harder for rebels to sack a Labour Leader/PM than it is for the Tories to do the same to their guy. This is because of Party rules.

This is a fact. And going on about Labour putting Trotsky in charge in November is a bit of a joke considering how many times recently the Tories have changed their top guy/woman. It's like complaining about the drunk next door when you're permanently pissed 24/7.
 
This is an odd thread in many ways. Most on here think Starmer is purging the party of the left and putting in loyal candidates, and some think the party will fall to a coup by the left after the election.

I mean, which is it?
When some of his detractors think it’s the height of wit and repartee to call him by his middle name, I doubt you’ll get a sensible response. It’s not even like his middle name has any comedic value like de Pfeffel. It’s almost as odd as calling him Keith.
 
It is actually much harder for rebels to sack a Labour Leader/PM than it is for the Tories to do the same to their guy. This is because of Party rules.

This is a fact. And going on about Labour putting Trotsky in charge in November is a bit of a joke considering how many times recently the Tories have changed their top guy/woman. It's like complaining about the drunk next door when you're permanently pissed 24/7.

He will become ill or something else will happen maybe a scandal (the labour party love a good roasting) and then the red book will come out.

I'm going to vote Labour because they have to be better than the Tories, every far left activist he throws out imho is for the benefit of the country.
 
Ah, you have a crystal ball, or are Starmer's personal physician.

Alternatively, a meteorite could hit him as he walks into 10 Downing Street, and all those Trotskyites in the PLP, like Rachael Reeves and that guy who lobbies for Israel - can't be arsed looking him up - will put Wolfie from the Tooting Popular Front in charge. Makes sense to me.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.