Best Of

"Corbyn most popular politician" - Has Starmer thought this through?

No. He never thinks anything through

Also Big Nigel is right in that vid. Reform are ALREADY in 2nd place with the kids. If Reform focus on those voters they could easily come first - Farage has more TikTok followers than all other UK pols combined. Starmer is such a fucking hapless stupid dork

FPT I said this:

Starmer is horribly bad at every single aspect of politics. Strategic, tactical, retail. He cannot orate and he has zero ideas, he doesn't understand party management and he is a terrlble negotiator, his charisma is negative and he's awful on TV

Setting aside Liz Truss (as being sui generis) he is without question the worst prime minister of my lifetime - in terms of the skillset he brings to the job. He has NO skillset

Quite extraordinary then, that he became leader of his party, and then Prime Minister, having persuaded you to vote for his party.

I simply cannot account for how this complete nullity, a politician of such outstanding awfulness that he makes even Liz Truss almost look good, had you fooled.

Recall the alternatives

Also, I agree with @SeanT, the brilliant Spectator writer, when he wrote on this subject. There were tentative reasons for some timid hope that Starmer might be OK, at first

Are we allowed to link to the Spec? Not sure. If we are then I shall

I think every single one of us has been disappointed by Starmer. Whatever our expectations - whether we thought he'd be great, good, ok-ish, perhaps not that bad, bad, terrible, the worst prime minister ever - he's managed to undershoot everyone's expectations.

Disappointed specifically by Starmer's lack of leadership, given he almost unique amongst recent prime ministers had a track record of running a major operation before becoming PM, apparently quite successfully.

Nevertheless he is factors better than:
Johnson
Truss
Badenoch
Farage
Corbyn

And somewhat better than Sunak, albeit with some worrying similarities.

I'm mainly disappointed that people are disappointed. Although we can differentiate between healthy and unhealthy disappointment.

The healthy type comes from having high standards for our political leaders. The unhealthy type from having delusional expectations of what is realistically possible.

It's only the unhealthy disappointment I find disappointing. As for "worst PM ever!" that's just a silly thing to say.

There is not an endless number of Prime Ministers. It's quite logical that there must be a worst one.

Yes. I wonder who she is.

Your disappointment is of the unhealthy variety btw (since I suppose you were wondering).

She is Theresa May.

While Truss is the shortest-serving one.

David Cameron was our worst Prime Minister since Lord North, as I may have mentioned before. But then, well, Boris was sui generis, and then Liz Truss was sui generis in a different way, and with Starmer it is too early, and if you are not careful there are so many caveats and footnotes that the whole thing is meaningless.

But the answer is David Cameron.

"Corbyn most popular politician" - Has Starmer thought this through?

No. He never thinks anything through

Also Big Nigel is right in that vid. Reform are ALREADY in 2nd place with the kids. If Reform focus on those voters they could easily come first - Farage has more TikTok followers than all other UK pols combined. Starmer is such a fucking hapless stupid dork

FPT I said this:

Starmer is horribly bad at every single aspect of politics. Strategic, tactical, retail. He cannot orate and he has zero ideas, he doesn't understand party management and he is a terrlble negotiator, his charisma is negative and he's awful on TV

Setting aside Liz Truss (as being sui generis) he is without question the worst prime minister of my lifetime - in terms of the skillset he brings to the job. He has NO skillset

Quite extraordinary then, that he became leader of his party, and then Prime Minister, having persuaded you to vote for his party.

I simply cannot account for how this complete nullity, a politician of such outstanding awfulness that he makes even Liz Truss almost look good, had you fooled.

Recall the alternatives

Also, I agree with @SeanT, the brilliant Spectator writer, when he wrote on this subject. There were tentative reasons for some timid hope that Starmer might be OK, at first

Are we allowed to link to the Spec? Not sure. If we are then I shall

I think every single one of us has been disappointed by Starmer. Whatever our expectations - whether we thought he'd be great, good, ok-ish, perhaps not that bad, bad, terrible, the worst prime minister ever - he's managed to undershoot everyone's expectations.

Disappointed specifically by Starmer's lack of leadership, given he almost unique amongst recent prime ministers had a track record of running a major operation before becoming PM, apparently quite successfully.

Nevertheless he is factors better than:
Johnson
Truss
Badenoch
Farage
Corbyn

And somewhat better than Sunak, albeit with some worrying similarities.

Is he really better than Johnson?

Starmer is definitely better than Johnson in his personal life, especially in his marriage. However Johnson did achieve most of what he set out to do, being only defeated by his large personal defects. Starmer's only triumph to date is the Assisted Dying Bill, and there's no sense of a coherent thrust to his Government, being instead a collection of eyecatching policies.

In fairness to Starmer he will probably last a full term and may still win 2028/9, whereas Johnson self-destructed early. But in a head-to-head, Starmer isn't in the lead at T+1yr.

I find that assertion to be baseless. Boris' private travails were a constant source of media copy. Starmer's (should there be any) have been kept out of the media completely.

Boris's marriages and affairs

• 1987 married Allegra Mostyn-Owen
  
• 1992 started affair with Marina Wheeler
  
• 1993 divorced Allegra Mostyn-Owen
  
• 1993 married Marina Wheeler
  
• 2000 started affair with Petronella Wyatt
  
• 2004 ended affair with Petronella Wyatt
  
• 2006 may have had affair with Anna Fazackerley (unconfirmed)
  
• 2008/9 had affair with Helen Macintyre
  
• 2009 may have had affair with unknown person (unconfirmed)
  
• 2012 started affair with Jennifer Arcuri
  
• 2016 ended affair with Jennifer Arcuri
  
• 2018 started affair with Carrie Symonds
  
• 2018 Marina Wheeler initiated divorce proceedings
  
• 2020 divorced Marina Wheeler
  
• 2021 married Carrie Symonds
  

I would be very surprised if Starmer was worse.

Frankly, I think Marina Wheeler should have cut Boris's nuts off. At least four, possibly six, mistresses during his marriage to Wheeler is really not on.

"I have not had an affair with Petronella. It is complete balderdash. It is an inverted pyramid of piffle. It is all completely untrue and ludicrous conjecture. I am amazed people can write this drivel." - Boris, 2004.

A lying shit as well as a cheating shit.

A total shit.

Abbott suspended (again)

She has a point though that there’s a difference given a black person is easily identifiable , she was stating the obvious . And she wasn’t being anti-Semitic. I’m not a fan of hers but really the pearl clutching over her comments by some in the media and Labour is ridiculous.

Jews are identifiable too, especially if they're wearing a kippah.

To imply that's somehow not a real form of racism is disgraceful.

Even if that’s a reasonable point that doesn’t equate to anti -Semitism. At this rate saying you don’t like knishes will have you accused of being anti-Semitic .

She denied Jews are subjected to racism.

Saying that Jews aren't subject to racism absolutely is antisemitic.

She didn’t say that . She said it’s different for black people, not that Jews didn’t suffer .

She said Jews aren't subject to racism.

She said in her BBC interview that racism re skin colour isn’t the same as other forms of racism . You can disagree with her comments but where did she say Jews didn’t suffer .

"they are not all their lives subject to racism"

Bullshit, yes they are. She never recognised racism against Jews as racism, merely "similar to" racism, which she linked solely to skin colour.

Skin colour is not something you can miss. I think that’s the point she’s making . I don’t believe she’s anti-Semitic and I wish there was the same hysteria over the actions of Netenyahu and his bunch of genocidal maniacs .

So people beaten up because they're Jewish aren't subject to racism because they're white?

She absolutely is antisemitic and should be expelled from the Party. The fact that you can't criticise an antisemite without trying to link it to Netanyahu is alarming too. You should take a good look in the mirror.

It is obvious what Diane means and equally obvious it is a stupid thing to say in today's climate but to take your rhetorical question about Jews being beaten up, note that there are two different words available, antisemitism and racism. And to continue Diane's analogy, we can tell from a distance that she is Black but not that Graham Norton is Irish. Hearing them on the radio, it is the other way round. After that it is just a question of semantics and having the political common sense to STFU.

Just as Starmer should have laughed this off as Diane being Diane and not allowed the anti-Abbott forces at Labour HQ to have another go at ousting her, like they did a few years ago.

Abbott suspended (again)

She has a point though that there’s a difference given a black person is easily identifiable , she was stating the obvious . And she wasn’t being anti-Semitic. I’m not a fan of hers but really the pearl clutching over her comments by some in the media and Labour is ridiculous.

Jews are identifiable too, especially if they're wearing a kippah.

To imply that's somehow not a real form of racism is disgraceful.

Even if that’s a reasonable point that doesn’t equate to anti -Semitism. At this rate saying you don’t like knishes will have you accused of being anti-Semitic .

She denied Jews are subjected to racism.

Saying that Jews aren't subject to racism absolutely is antisemitic.

She didn’t say that . She said it’s different for black people, not that Jews didn’t suffer .

She said Jews aren't subject to racism.

She said in her BBC interview that racism re skin colour isn’t the same as other forms of racism . You can disagree with her comments but where did she say Jews didn’t suffer .

"they are not all their lives subject to racism"

Bullshit, yes they are. She never recognised racism against Jews as racism, merely "similar to" racism, which she linked solely to skin colour.

Skin colour is not something you can miss. I think that’s the point she’s making . I don’t believe she’s anti-Semitic and I wish there was the same hysteria over the actions of Netenyahu and his bunch of genocidal maniacs .

So people beaten up because they're Jewish aren't subject to racism because they're white?

She absolutely is antisemitic and should be expelled from the Party. The fact that you can't criticise an antisemite without trying to link it to Netanyahu is alarming too. You should take a good look in the mirror.

Until Jews distance themselves from Netanyahu they can’t complain if they are the victims of anti-Israeli racism. A reminder. Being anti Netanyahu and anti his behaviour towards Palestinians, whether In Gaza or the West Bank is not being antisemitic, anymore than being anti Hitler was being anti all Germans, or being anti Trump is being anti all Americans.

Should british muslims spend their whole lives performatively distancing themselves from ISIS?

Labour looking into Abbott's comments about racism

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwye24vjnn8o

"She added: "Clearly, there must be a difference between racism which is about colour and other types of racism because you can see a Traveller or a Jewish person walking down the street, you don't know.

"You don't know unless you stop to speak to them or you're in a meeting with them.

"But if you see a black person walking down the street, you see straight away that they're black. They are different types of racism."

Asked if she believed she had done anything wrong or had said something in her Observer letter that she did not believe in, she said: "I just think that it's silly to try and claim that racism which is about skin colour is the same as other types of racism.

"I just... I don't know why people would say that.""

I think she is making a fair point.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/jul/17/wes-streeting-considers-writing-off-part-of-doctors-student-debts-to-avert-strike

Wes Streeting considers writing off part of doctors’ student debts to avert strike

Labour should have stood their ground here and let the BMA shoot themselves in the foot . The public are more likely to give the strikers the middle finger this time rather than tooting their horns in support . I supported the first strikes but now they just look delusional and greedy .

I think that's correct - this time they do not have public support.

They are not a very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very special case.

Abbott suspended (again)

She has a point though that there’s a difference given a black person is easily identifiable , she was stating the obvious . And she wasn’t being anti-Semitic. I’m not a fan of hers but really the pearl clutching over her comments by some in the media and Labour is ridiculous.

Jews are identifiable too, especially if they're wearing a kippah.

To imply that's somehow not a real form of racism is disgraceful.

Even if that’s a reasonable point that doesn’t equate to anti -Semitism. At this rate saying you don’t like knishes will have you accused of being anti-Semitic .

She denied Jews are subjected to racism.

Saying that Jews aren't subject to racism absolutely is antisemitic.

She didn’t say that . She said it’s different for black people, not that Jews didn’t suffer .

She said Jews aren't subject to racism.

She said in her BBC interview that racism re skin colour isn’t the same as other forms of racism . You can disagree with her comments but where did she say Jews didn’t suffer .

There are obviously different perceived forms of racism. I’ve even seen victimy types on here say that being called an English **** in a Glasgow pub is racist against the English, and I’m pretty sure that wasn’t because of the gammony hue of their faces.

Labour looking into Abbott's comments about racism

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwye24vjnn8o

"She added: "Clearly, there must be a difference between racism which is about colour and other types of racism because you can see a Traveller or a Jewish person walking down the street, you don't know.

"You don't know unless you stop to speak to them or you're in a meeting with them.

"But if you see a black person walking down the street, you see straight away that they're black. They are different types of racism."

Asked if she believed she had done anything wrong or had said something in her Observer letter that she did not believe in, she said: "I just think that it's silly to try and claim that racism which is about skin colour is the same as other types of racism.

"I just... I don't know why people would say that.""

I think she is making a fair point.

I don't, for the reasons I give below.