The Labour Government

Brewster's millions said:
I would certainly agree with you on that, although we can live in hope that the gilt market would act to prevent the worst of outcomes should Starmer be on his way in the not too distant.

You only have to look at how yields reacted to Reeves’ little episode in the Commons a few weeks ago to see how fearful the market is about some of the potential successors to Starmer, although these risks have arguably subsided a little now with Rayner being out of the picture.

I think the market broadly tolerates Starmer and Reeves, albeit at a price, because the pair of them are so confused and muddled in their thinking that it’s doubtful how much serious damage they can really inflict before they get booted out in a few years. They’re unlikely to ever come up with a truly radical plan that would break the current orthodoxy and stick to it, because they ultimately they lack the necessary skills and conviction to do so.

If however they were replaced with someone possessing a clear view of what they want to achieve, and the willingness to push it through, then that could be a different proposition and a different reaction from the market would probably be forthcoming.

I have to say though that if Mandelson really did fail his vetting by MI6 as is being speculated, and Starmer still chose to appoint him, then I would think that Starmer is in some considerable trouble. Also, you wouldn’t really want a vengeful Peter Mandelson working against you. Could be an interesting few months ahead.
Click to expand...
Agreed on all fronts.
 
Gray said:
If you go overboard on diversity within your party then you run the risk of not getting the best people for the job in hand.
Click to expand...
Come up then with your list of preferred white male "big beasts" who've been sidelined because of "diversity". No such policy for the Tories but (even allowing for Johnson's cull of sensible Tories) it'd be between Cleverly and the corruption-tinged Jenrick.
 
Last edited:
Chippy_boy said:
This whole Mandelson affair sounds similar to the Louise Haigh situation... Starmer fully aware of someone's dodgy past, uses his consistently piss poor judgement and gives them a senior role anyway. Only to have to sack them later when there's a media shit storm.

As a reminder, Louise Haigh disclosed her historic conviction for fraud during her vetting process, so it was deemed OK until the media found out about it.
Click to expand...
This is it exactly. He’s got poor judgement which seems astonishing after his last job. In the last election, after the mismanagement of the Conservatives, people voted overwhelmingly for ‘Change’ meaning ‘CHANGE’. I think people wanted an end to ‘sleaze’ ‘nepotism’ ‘dodgy deals’ ‘lies’ ‘backhanders’ ‘excessive expenses’ basically a complete reset in politics. The Labour Party, with the current mob of talentless MPs, have been so eager to climb the greasy pole to the top, have shown themselves up for what they are and let the country down badly. Where we go from here who knows, but we will end up with Farage and that’s no better,
 
hihosilva said:
Even if Starmer wasn't aware of Mandleson's relationship with Epstein, why would you employ him after being sacked twice from the government. He obviously had a reputation for being lets say dodgy.
Click to expand...
Mandleson could well be into Epstein levels of skullduggery.

I wouldn't be surprised if he has receipts of wrongdoings and perversions of a lot of politicians hence their eagerness to placate him.

Corbyn triggered the true Prince of Darkness on many occasions. Mandy is an angry narcissistic man. He will take Starmer down with him.
 
Jimmieblue said:
This is it exactly. He’s got poor judgement which seems astonishing after his last job. In the last election, after the mismanagement of the Conservatives, people voted overwhelmingly for ‘Change’ meaning ‘CHANGE’. I think people wanted an end to ‘sleaze’ ‘nepotism’ ‘dodgy deals’ ‘lies’ ‘backhanders’ ‘excessive expenses’ basically a complete reset in politics. The Labour Party, with the current mob of talentless MPs, have been so eager to climb the greasy pole to the top, have shown themselves up for what they are and let the country down badly. Where we go from here who knows, but we will end up with Farage and that’s no better,
Click to expand...
... And whilst several of them have already had their comeuppance, Jonathan "I was a solicitor" Reynolds is still in a job, despite it being a criminal offence to say so when you are not.
 
TinFoilHat said:
Mandleson could well be into Epstein levels of skullduggery.

I wouldn't be surprised if he has receipts of wrongdoings and perversions of a lot of politicians hence their eagerness to placate him.

Corbyn triggered the true Prince of Darkness on many occasions. Mandy is an angry narcissistic man. He will take Starmer down with him.
Click to expand...
Much like Trump, although i'm not convinced he will take Starmer down.
 
Chippy_boy said:
What about her? Sent an email from the wrong email address? Hardly the same as laying that you used to be a solicitor is it. And so what. What if what she does was in fact worse? It doesn't excuse Reynolds, does it.
Click to expand...
She was sacked twice, and not for using a wrong email address. At least get your whataboutery right.
 
Vic said:
She was sacked twice, and not for using a wrong email address. At least get your whataboutery right.
Click to expand...
I was talking about Reynolds. The whataboutery was from TinFoilHat saying "Braverman?" I am not interested nor talking about Braverman. What she may/may not have done, has fuck all to do with (a) The Labour Government thread, nor (b) the wrong-doinds of Reynolds.
 
Lowtower said:
It does seem to be quite the impossible task to gather 650 decent law abiding folk at one time.
Click to expand...
That made me laugh:) maybe we could ask prospective applicants a series of questions beginning with a personal section on their CV and previous employment history ? Namely do you have any outstanding tax bills.

If found to have broken this agreement you will be required to refund the taxpayer
 
Dazzle84 said:
At which point does Starmer's position come under threat? He's presided over calamity after calamity. I know myself that if this was a Tory PM I'd be jumping up and down wanting him out
Click to expand...
The only thing that will make Starmers position untenable is if he and Lammy are found complicit over what has happened in Gaza.?
It might be difficult to prove by Corbyn, I recon he’s squeaky clean in his private life.
 
Vic said:
Come up then with your list of preferred white male "big beasts" who've been sidelined because of "diversity". No such policy for the Tories but (even allowing for Johnson's cull of sensible Tories) it'd be between Cleverly and the corruption-tinged Jenrick.
Click to expand...
For starters - why does the deputy leader have to be a woman?
 
Blue and true said:
Hasn't been a good 24hrs for him, has it? Welcoming a genocidal head of state into his office and his meek dismissal of a known associate of a sex criminal. Needs a massive turnaround or he's finished.

Wouldn't mind seeing Burnham take the helm.
Click to expand...
More conviction that Starmer - do not like or trust the slimy fecker ..........
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top