But in terms of best person for the job he might well be the answer - if he wanted it.
If we're gonna name random very long shots, how about Al Cairns? Seems a nice bloke.
This year would be too early, but if there's a big clearout of the Cabinet he might find himself rapidly promoted, and then be in a good position for the next contest.
I know intellectual snobbery is a very unappealing trait but Angela Raynor is someone of very limited education. Being Prime minister is a very demanding job. Would she handle it? Possibly. But she might also be found out very quickly.
A lot of Prime Ministers didn't go to University: John Major and Jim Callaghan, for example.
Two of the PMs with the most integrity imo.
The adulterer John Major?
Okay.
To be fair it's not an Olympic field, more a pub fun run
I know intellectual snobbery is a very unappealing trait but Angela Raynor is someone of very limited education. Being Prime minister is a very demanding job. Would she handle it? Possibly. But she might also be found out very quickly.
A lot of Prime Ministers didn't go to University: John Major and Jim Callaghan, for example.
And Winston Churchill. That's the second time you've forgotten him this thread. He's literally on the money FFS.
Starmer exit in 2026 now shortened to 1.54:1, which is the shortest I've seen it. That's easy money if you're convinced he's going this year. (I'm not. I think those odds are about right.)
I think they're too short personally and have added to my currently massively offside lay, and will take more if 1.35 trades (looking v possible). Still, squeaky bum.
This is a huge story in the political bubble but it doesn't feel to me to have as much cut through to the real world as Boris did.
There is also an amusing irony irony that some of the markets will atm be being driven by someone much like Mandelson leaking what's going on amongst MPs to traders...
Didn’t we hear news yesterday that it had severe cut through on focus groups?
The Epstein angle, which brought down Andrew, surely makes it quite high profile.
At a politically focussed focus group, sure.
But when Boris's various scandals were going on, it was a topic of conversation amongst normies in the office. Pub bores would make jokes about it. I'm just not feeling the same sense of the country at large carying atm.
Maybe I'm just talking my position, idk
It's being joked about by the not-very-politically-engaged where I work. I'd say people are even crosser about the arrogance and entitlement on display here than they were about Boris.
It’s the money that cuts through most. How can you get a free 75K gift and not remember anything about it? That’s what can cut through into actual votes. Provided we can connect Mandelson to the Labour government, not let them say he was rogue and it’s not their fault.
Scotland Yard confirms that it has warned Number 10 that the 'release of specific documents' could undermine its investigation
A government source said that these include the evidence that Keir Starmer is relying on to show that Mandelson lied - the peer's response to questions from Morgan McSweeney about his relationship with Epstein and whether he had stayed at his apartment in Manhattan
This feels tectonic. It's a big blow for Number 10 and Starmer
We could be in a position where the only thing that's published is evidence that Stamer knew Mandelson maintained his close friendship with Epstein after his conviction for child sex offences and appointed him anyway
Commander Ella Marriott, of the Metropolitan Police, said:
'As with any investigation, securing and preserving any potential evidence is vital. For this reason, when approached by the UK government today with their intent to publish material, we reviewed it immediately and advised that the release of specific documents could undermine our currrent investigation. We therefore asked them not to release certain documents at this time
'Going forward as material is made available to us, and if we identify further documents that we believe could prejudice our investigation, we will continue to ask the Government to pause their release until such time as the risk of prejudice no longer exists. The integrity of our investigation is paramount to securing justice. We are grateful for their cooperation'
I'm confused. The obvious thing to nick Mandy for is misconduct in a public office, and being an accessory to insider trading for leaking confidential information to Epstein back in the Brown era.
Unless the recent vetting turned up information relevant to that (which surely it didn't, or even Starmer wouldn't have been stupid enough to appoint him), how is releasing all the gory detail of what they did or didn't do about vetting him this time round going to make any difference to the police investigation and (hopefully) subsequent prosecution for what we has doing 15-20 years ago?
From previous thread (and off topic): Well, here I am, about to fill out my ballot for a local election, and no one has offered to bribe me, or tried to intimidate me. Millions of dollars are involved, so you would think someone would care enough to do one or the other -- or maybe even both.
Is it possible that observers in the UK are ignoring the possibility of vote fraud, and, unfashionable as this thought may be, over-estimating the amount of intimidation affecting votes in the US?
(For the record: In recent years, Republicans in the US often accuse Democrats of vote fraud; Democrats often accuse Republicans of intimidation. There is a little truth to both accusations, but far less than many commenters here, and elsewhere, seem to think.)
Starmer exit in 2026 now shortened to 1.54:1, which is the shortest I've seen it. That's easy money if you're convinced he's going this year. (I'm not. I think those odds are about right.)
I think they're too short personally and have added to my currently massively offside lay, and will take more if 1.35 trades (looking v possible). Still, squeaky bum.
This is a huge story in the political bubble but it doesn't feel to me to have as much cut through to the real world as Boris did.
There is also an amusing irony irony that some of the markets will atm be being driven by someone much like Mandelson leaking what's going on amongst MPs to traders...
Didn’t we hear news yesterday that it had severe cut through on focus groups?
The Epstein angle, which brought down Andrew, surely makes it quite high profile.
At a politically focussed focus group, sure.
But when Boris's various scandals were going on, it was a topic of conversation amongst normies in the office. Pub bores would make jokes about it. I'm just not feeling the same sense of the country at large carying atm.
Maybe I'm just talking my position, idk
It's being joked about by the not-very-politically-engaged where I work. I'd say people are even crosser about the arrogance and entitlement on display here than they were about Boris.
It’s the money that cuts through most. How can you get a free 75K gift and not remember anything about it? That’s what can cut through into actual votes. Provided we can connect Mandelson to the Labour government, not let them say he was rogue and it’s not their fault.
Especially when you consider that around 40% of adults in the UK have less than £1,000 in savings.
I know intellectual snobbery is a very unappealing trait but Angela Raynor is someone of very limited education. Being Prime minister is a very demanding job. Would she handle it? Possibly. But she might also be found out very quickly.
A lot of Prime Ministers didn't go to University: John Major and Jim Callaghan, for example.
I went to university, and they didn't teach me a thing about how to run a country. Should I ask for a refund?
My problem with Ange isn't her lack of higher education, it's that she just doesn't seem very bright.
She got to be deputy PM from a very humble background. She might not be very educated but she's very capable. Ruthless even, and with a smile. You ain't seen nothin' yet.
Starmer has two big problems. He vetoed Burnham and while that was still bubbling Mandy gave Starmer's enemies all the ammunition they needed........
I think he's in genuine peril and if there was an obvious alternative he'd be in trouble. I've got mixed feelings. He strikes me as pretty straight which is important and I would hate for anything that could give Farage an opening. If a good alternative appears I think he'll go.
Thoughts and prayers for Burnham. The boat missed again. Oh dear, how sad, never mind.
Yes Labour dodged a bullet. Pity starmer didn't let him stand so we could all see how lightweight he is.
Talking about Reform and austerity with the Tories.
Talking about supporting our country and the flag. After the revelations today !!!! Labour are no one to talk of patriotism or supporting the country. No one at all.
Polite about the greens.
Straight into the news and the headlines which are savage about Starmer 😀😀😀😂😂😂
Starmer has two big problems. He vetoed Burnham and while that was still bubbling Mandy gave Starmer's enemies all the ammunition they needed........
I think he's in genuine peril and if there was an obvious alternative he'd be in trouble. I've got mixed feelings. He strikes me as pretty straight which is important and I would hate for anything that could give Farage an opening. If a good alternative appears I think he'll go.
Thoughts and prayers for Burnham. The boat missed again. Oh dear, how sad, never mind.
Yes Labour dodged a bullet. Pity starmer didn't let him stand so we could all see how lightweight he is.
Hes useful to have around if you need a lookalike of Robert Lindsay playing Derek Hatton
Starmer exit in 2026 now shortened to 1.54:1, which is the shortest I've seen it. That's easy money if you're convinced he's going this year. (I'm not. I think those odds are about right.)
I think they're too short personally and have added to my currently massively offside lay, and will take more if 1.35 trades (looking v possible). Still, squeaky bum.
This is a huge story in the political bubble but it doesn't feel to me to have as much cut through to the real world as Boris did.
There is also an amusing irony irony that some of the markets will atm be being driven by someone much like Mandelson leaking what's going on amongst MPs to traders...
Didn’t we hear news yesterday that it had severe cut through on focus groups?
The Epstein angle, which brought down Andrew, surely makes it quite high profile.
At a politically focussed focus group, sure.
But when Boris's various scandals were going on, it was a topic of conversation amongst normies in the office. Pub bores would make jokes about it. I'm just not feeling the same sense of the country at large carying atm.
Maybe I'm just talking my position, idk
It's being joked about by the not-very-politically-engaged where I work. I'd say people are even crosser about the arrogance and entitlement on display here than they were about Boris.
It’s the money that cuts through most. How can you get a free 75K gift and not remember anything about it? That’s what can cut through into actual votes. Provided we can connect Mandelson to the Labour government, not let them say he was rogue and it’s not their fault.
Especially when you consider that around 40% of adults in the UK have less than £1,000 in savings.
Scotland Yard confirms that it has warned Number 10 that the 'release of specific documents' could undermine its investigation
A government source said that these include the evidence that Keir Starmer is relying on to show that Mandelson lied - the peer's response to questions from Morgan McSweeney about his relationship with Epstein and whether he had stayed at his apartment in Manhattan
This feels tectonic. It's a big blow for Number 10 and Starmer
We could be in a position where the only thing that's published is evidence that Stamer knew Mandelson maintained his close friendship with Epstein after his conviction for child sex offences and appointed him anyway
Commander Ella Marriott, of the Metropolitan Police, said:
'As with any investigation, securing and preserving any potential evidence is vital. For this reason, when approached by the UK government today with their intent to publish material, we reviewed it immediately and advised that the release of specific documents could undermine our currrent investigation. We therefore asked them not to release certain documents at this time
'Going forward as material is made available to us, and if we identify further documents that we believe could prejudice our investigation, we will continue to ask the Government to pause their release until such time as the risk of prejudice no longer exists. The integrity of our investigation is paramount to securing justice. We are grateful for their cooperation'
Starmer made this crystal clear in his opening remarks.
Badenoch completely misunderstood the legal ramifications ans screamed cover up.
And some see her as a PM
Clueless Uselessm Totally out of her depth.
She's happy to destroy evidence and the case to soothe her huge ego.
We were supposed to get dull competent leadership and no major scandals . That was one of Starmers alleged strong points .
Leave the Tory psychodramas behind . Instead we got dull , incompetent leadership with a PM who has zero political nous , who can’t tie his own shoelaces up without McSweeney being there to hold his hand .
I really wanted Starmer to do well but it’s over .
Scotland Yard confirms that it has warned Number 10 that the 'release of specific documents' could undermine its investigation
A government source said that these include the evidence that Keir Starmer is relying on to show that Mandelson lied - the peer's response to questions from Morgan McSweeney about his relationship with Epstein and whether he had stayed at his apartment in Manhattan
This feels tectonic. It's a big blow for Number 10 and Starmer
We could be in a position where the only thing that's published is evidence that Stamer knew Mandelson maintained his close friendship with Epstein after his conviction for child sex offences and appointed him anyway
Commander Ella Marriott, of the Metropolitan Police, said:
'As with any investigation, securing and preserving any potential evidence is vital. For this reason, when approached by the UK government today with their intent to publish material, we reviewed it immediately and advised that the release of specific documents could undermine our currrent investigation. We therefore asked them not to release certain documents at this time
'Going forward as material is made available to us, and if we identify further documents that we believe could prejudice our investigation, we will continue to ask the Government to pause their release until such time as the risk of prejudice no longer exists. The integrity of our investigation is paramount to securing justice. We are grateful for their cooperation'
Starmer made this crystal clear in his opening remarks.
Badenoch completely misunderstood the legal ramifications ans screamed cover up.
And some see her as a PM
Clueless Uselessm Totally out of her depth.
She's happy to destroy evidence and the case to soothe her huge ego.
I don't know if it's worth "biting" on this, but at no point at PMQs did Kemi try to refute any position that would be taken by the police.
I know intellectual snobbery is a very unappealing trait but Angela Raynor is someone of very limited education. Being Prime minister is a very demanding job. Would she handle it? Possibly. But she might also be found out very quickly.
She's got street smarts. That'll do for Labour
I think that's half right. It's not intelligence that is needed as a PM, or technical knowledge from education and experience, it's judgement.
I'm not certain that Rayner's judgement is great, and her short record as a minister is also not inspiring, but lack of education is certainly not her problem.
But would she be able to string together a government ? What if it falls in the House of Commons. If the King were savvy, which he isn't of course he would ask Kemi to form a government. I really can see a General Election now, probably June. The idea that out Ange could hold a goverment together for over a month is quite frankly absurd.
Yeah right
After the Tories had 4 Pm in 5 years.
The King is going to call Kemi whose Tory Party is close to electoral oblivion.
The party near oblivion is labour not the conservatives
On the available evidence, it's quite likely both.
If Starmer does go now, could Rayner realistically stand while still subject to an HMRC inquiry?
Might circumstances point to a more experienced, unity candidate - ie not Streeting or Rayner?
But who best fits that bill? Maybe Cooper?
I wondered about that. I'm not convinced the inquiry will necessarily be an impediment, but if it is I would think of Ed Miliband as the safe pair of hands, and emollient for the Labour soul.
Totally agree. If Starmer is brought down we will get Prime Minister Ed Milliband, lefty economics, and the wettest policies ever.
We were supposed to get dull competent leadership and no major scandals . That was one of Starmers alleged strong points .
Leave the Tory psychodramas behind . Instead we got dull , incompetent leadership with a PM who has zero political nous , who can’t tie his own shoelaces up without McSweeney being there to hold his hand .
I really wanted Starmer to do well but it’s over .
It is over. And yet, it remains to be seen whether Starmer or Cabinet will realise it is over first.
This is a test of how long both can exist in a state of political denial.
I know intellectual snobbery is a very unappealing trait but Angela Raynor is someone of very limited education. Being Prime minister is a very demanding job. Would she handle it? Possibly. But she might also be found out very quickly.
She left school at 16- pregnant -got a union job then went back later when she could. I'd take her native wit and guile over nearly all the other creeps trying to climb the greasy pole.
It is surprising to me how much people are putting on A Levels and university education. I don't doubt their value, I have them myself after all, but it's not as though they are so demanding (in most cases) that it would make or break whether someone could perform well at a senior government level - if you have that in you then you have it regardless of whether you have a degree or not.
Besides, she didn't finish school because she was pregnant, not because she lacked the ability to do more, so unless people have a hang up about teenage pregnancy I don't see how the lack of further education could be tied to ability at all in this case.
I am absolutely open to being proved wrong but I think that this is being substantially overplayed. I don't see this being fatal for Starmer. He showed poor judgment again. Well, there's a shocker. But I am not seeing anyone in Labour that is any better placed. I am comfortable with my answer in the competition that Starmer will be PM at the end of the year.
But maybe there is proper documentary out there somewhere?
Any recommendations?
The Crown must have covered the Profumo affair. I might join you in watching Scandal as the dvd is just over there. You could probably find something on YouTube of indeterminate quality.
I am absolutely open to being proved wrong but I think that this is being substantially overplayed. I don't see this being fatal for Starmer. He showed poor judgment again. Well, there's a shocker. But I am not seeing anyone in Labour that is any better placed. I am comfortable with my answer in the competition that Starmer will be PM at the end of the year.
Andy Burnham. At least he’s had experience in running a large city. Get him in. Somehow.
I know intellectual snobbery is a very unappealing trait but Angela Raynor is someone of very limited education. Being Prime minister is a very demanding job. Would she handle it? Possibly. But she might also be found out very quickly.
She's got street smarts. That'll do for Labour
I think that's half right. It's not intelligence that is needed as a PM, or technical knowledge from education and experience, it's judgement.
I'm not certain that Rayner's judgement is great, and her short record as a minister is also not inspiring, but lack of education is certainly not her problem.
But would she be able to string together a government ? What if it falls in the House of Commons. If the King were savvy, which he isn't of course he would ask Kemi to form a government. I really can see a General Election now, probably June. The idea that out Ange could hold a goverment together for over a month is quite frankly absurd.
Yeah right
After the Tories had 4 Pm in 5 years.
The King is going to call Kemi whose Tory Party is close to electoral oblivion.
The party near oblivion is labour not the conservatives
On the available evidence, it's quite likely both.
The Tory problems are more longstanding, so I think they are still at the most risk. If they don't turn it around in a year I think they are in serious trouble, whereas I think Labour can take a few more hits yet.
I know intellectual snobbery is a very unappealing trait but Angela Raynor is someone of very limited education. Being Prime minister is a very demanding job. Would she handle it? Possibly. But she might also be found out very quickly.
A lot of Prime Ministers didn't go to University: John Major and Jim Callaghan, for example.
I went to university, and they didn't teach me a thing about how to run a country. Should I ask for a refund?
My problem with Ange isn't her lack of higher education, it's that she just doesn't seem very bright.
She got to be deputy PM from a very humble background. She might not be very educated but she's very capable. Ruthless even, and with a smile. You ain't seen nothin' yet.
Ruthless <> bright. Or even capable.
And my view is she got to be DPM because of her humble background, not despite it. She's a middle class person's idea of what a working class person is like. (This isn't my original observation; I have pinched it and I'm not sure who from. But it rang true.) Once you strip away the back story she doesn't have much left to offer.
I know intellectual snobbery is a very unappealing trait but Angela Raynor is someone of very limited education. Being Prime minister is a very demanding job. Would she handle it? Possibly. But she might also be found out very quickly.
She's got street smarts. That'll do for Labour
I think that's half right. It's not intelligence that is needed as a PM, or technical knowledge from education and experience, it's judgement.
I'm not certain that Rayner's judgement is great, and her short record as a minister is also not inspiring, but lack of education is certainly not her problem.
But would she be able to string together a government ? What if it falls in the House of Commons. If the King were savvy, which he isn't of course he would ask Kemi to form a government. I really can see a General Election now, probably June. The idea that out Ange could hold a goverment together for over a month is quite frankly absurd.
Yeah right
After the Tories had 4 Pm in 5 years.
The King is going to call Kemi whose Tory Party is close to electoral oblivion.
The party near oblivion is labour not the conservatives
On the available evidence, it's quite likely both.
The Tory problems are more longstanding, so I think they are still at the most risk. If they don't turn it around in a year I think they are in serious trouble, whereas I think Labour can take a few more hits yet.
Sub contracting some of their garbage to Reform is a good start
I am absolutely open to being proved wrong but I think that this is being substantially overplayed. I don't see this being fatal for Starmer. He showed poor judgment again. Well, there's a shocker. But I am not seeing anyone in Labour that is any better placed. I am comfortable with my answer in the competition that Starmer will be PM at the end of the year.
Andy Burnham. At least he’s had experience in running a large city. Get him in. Somehow.
Or better yet. Andy Street from the Lords. I don’t care that he’s a Tory he did a great job in Birmingham.
I am absolutely open to being proved wrong but I think that this is being substantially overplayed. I don't see this being fatal for Starmer. He showed poor judgment again. Well, there's a shocker. But I am not seeing anyone in Labour that is any better placed. I am comfortable with my answer in the competition that Starmer will be PM at the end of the year.
The difference is in the reaction of Labour MPs. They are done with having to defend the continued poor decisions of Starmer. They've run out of patience.
Scotland Yard confirms that it has warned Number 10 that the 'release of specific documents' could undermine its investigation
A government source said that these include the evidence that Keir Starmer is relying on to show that Mandelson lied - the peer's response to questions from Morgan McSweeney about his relationship with Epstein and whether he had stayed at his apartment in Manhattan
This feels tectonic. It's a big blow for Number 10 and Starmer
We could be in a position where the only thing that's published is evidence that Stamer knew Mandelson maintained his close friendship with Epstein after his conviction for child sex offences and appointed him anyway
Commander Ella Marriott, of the Metropolitan Police, said:
'As with any investigation, securing and preserving any potential evidence is vital. For this reason, when approached by the UK government today with their intent to publish material, we reviewed it immediately and advised that the release of specific documents could undermine our currrent investigation. We therefore asked them not to release certain documents at this time
'Going forward as material is made available to us, and if we identify further documents that we believe could prejudice our investigation, we will continue to ask the Government to pause their release until such time as the risk of prejudice no longer exists. The integrity of our investigation is paramount to securing justice. We are grateful for their cooperation'
Starmer made this crystal clear in his opening remarks.
Badenoch completely misunderstood the legal ramifications ans screamed cover up.
And some see her as a PM
Clueless Uselessm Totally out of her depth.
She's happy to destroy evidence and the case to soothe her huge ego.
You see that kind of reaction a lot in politics - quite often I assume they know the nuance, but have calculated pretending there is none has more advantage, even with the risk of being called out.
Usually that's the right gamble, from a political stance at least.
I know intellectual snobbery is a very unappealing trait but Angela Raynor is someone of very limited education. Being Prime minister is a very demanding job. Would she handle it? Possibly. But she might also be found out very quickly.
A lot of Prime Ministers didn't go to University: John Major and Jim Callaghan, for example.
I went to university, and they didn't teach me a thing about how to run a country. Should I ask for a refund?
My problem with Ange isn't her lack of higher education, it's that she just doesn't seem very bright.
She got to be deputy PM from a very humble background. She might not be very educated but she's very capable. Ruthless even, and with a smile. You ain't seen nothin' yet.
Ruthless <> bright. Or even capable.
And my view is she got to be DPM because of her humble background, not despite it. Once you strip away the back story she doesn't have much left to offer.
Scotland Yard confirms that it has warned Number 10 that the 'release of specific documents' could undermine its investigation
A government source said that these include the evidence that Keir Starmer is relying on to show that Mandelson lied - the peer's response to questions from Morgan McSweeney about his relationship with Epstein and whether he had stayed at his apartment in Manhattan
This feels tectonic. It's a big blow for Number 10 and Starmer
We could be in a position where the only thing that's published is evidence that Stamer knew Mandelson maintained his close friendship with Epstein after his conviction for child sex offences and appointed him anyway
Commander Ella Marriott, of the Metropolitan Police, said:
'As with any investigation, securing and preserving any potential evidence is vital. For this reason, when approached by the UK government today with their intent to publish material, we reviewed it immediately and advised that the release of specific documents could undermine our currrent investigation. We therefore asked them not to release certain documents at this time
'Going forward as material is made available to us, and if we identify further documents that we believe could prejudice our investigation, we will continue to ask the Government to pause their release until such time as the risk of prejudice no longer exists. The integrity of our investigation is paramount to securing justice. We are grateful for their cooperation'
I'm confused. The obvious thing to nick Mandy for is misconduct in a public office, and being an accessory to insider trading for leaking confidential information to Epstein back in the Brown era.
Unless the recent vetting turned up information relevant to that (which surely it didn't, or even Starmer wouldn't have been stupid enough to appoint him), how is releasing all the gory detail of what they did or didn't do about vetting him this time round going to make any difference to the police investigation and (hopefully) subsequent prosecution for what we has doing 15-20 years ago?
It doesn't feel ideal that the commons have appointed a relatively independent committee to review what can be released and then the Met tells us that they may block various releases for an unspecified time. Surely there's a way around this given the historical and factual (as in they exist) nature of the documents.
I know intellectual snobbery is a very unappealing trait but Angela Raynor is someone of very limited education. Being Prime minister is a very demanding job. Would she handle it? Possibly. But she might also be found out very quickly.
She's got street smarts. That'll do for Labour
I think that's half right. It's not intelligence that is needed as a PM, or technical knowledge from education and experience, it's judgement.
I'm not certain that Rayner's judgement is great, and her short record as a minister is also not inspiring, but lack of education is certainly not her problem.
But would she be able to string together a government ? What if it falls in the House of Commons. If the King were savvy, which he isn't of course he would ask Kemi to form a government. I really can see a General Election now, probably June. The idea that out Ange could hold a goverment together for over a month is quite frankly absurd.
Yeah right
After the Tories had 4 Pm in 5 years.
The King is going to call Kemi whose Tory Party is close to electoral oblivion.
The party near oblivion is labour not the conservatives
On the available evidence, it's quite likely both.
The Tory problems are more longstanding, so I think they are still at the most risk. If they don't turn it around in a year I think they are in serious trouble, whereas I think Labour can take a few more hits yet.
Sub contracting some of their garbage to Reform is a good start
IDK, that only works if it stops further bleeding of support and in fact gains them some. With the locals coming up soon they'll probably still be a long way behind Reform, and people wavering between the two may feel there's not much point sticking with the Tories.
As a former senior advisor to Sir Keir* it pains me to say this, but I think at the present time, our country would be better served by placing the names of every Labour MP in a tombola and picking a new PM at random.
NEW - A Labour MP has become one of the first to break ranks on Morgan McSweeney.
Brian Leishman MP has told me that the position of the PM’s closest advisor is ‘surely untenable’.
He added: ‘I can understand why people are discussing the future of the Prime Minister’.
"My senior advisor advised me to overlook the security people's concerns and I just did what he said."
Yep. That should do it. No doubt at all.
Isn’t that what performative sacrifices are all about? If they don’t want to move against Starmer, Labour MPs need a down ramp, they grasp?
Just like when US empty a barracks, and Iran fire a missile into it. The sacrifice of Office Manager is down ramp for anyone not wanting Starmer out at this moment.
It’s not what they will tell you - they will say I’m happy action has been taken on what went wrong, let’s rally round and move forward now. How many times have we seen this before.
Starmer exit in 2026 now shortened to 1.54:1, which is the shortest I've seen it. That's easy money if you're convinced he's going this year. (I'm not. I think those odds are about right.)
I think they're too short personally and have added to my currently massively offside lay, and will take more if 1.35 trades (looking v possible). Still, squeaky bum.
This is a huge story in the political bubble but it doesn't feel to me to have as much cut through to the real world as Boris did.
There is also an amusing irony irony that some of the markets will atm be being driven by someone much like Mandelson leaking what's going on amongst MPs to traders...
Didn’t we hear news yesterday that it had severe cut through on focus groups?
The Epstein angle, which brought down Andrew, surely makes it quite high profile.
At a politically focussed focus group, sure.
But when Boris's various scandals were going on, it was a topic of conversation amongst normies in the office. Pub bores would make jokes about it. I'm just not feeling the same sense of the country at large carying atm.
Maybe I'm just talking my position, idk
It's being joked about by the not-very-politically-engaged where I work. I'd say people are even crosser about the arrogance and entitlement on display here than they were about Boris.
It’s the money that cuts through most. How can you get a free 75K gift and not remember anything about it? That’s what can cut through into actual votes. Provided we can connect Mandelson to the Labour government, not let them say he was rogue and it’s not their fault.
Especially when you consider that around 40% of adults in the UK have less than £1,000 in savings.
Scotland Yard confirms that it has warned Number 10 that the 'release of specific documents' could undermine its investigation
A government source said that these include the evidence that Keir Starmer is relying on to show that Mandelson lied - the peer's response to questions from Morgan McSweeney about his relationship with Epstein and whether he had stayed at his apartment in Manhattan
This feels tectonic. It's a big blow for Number 10 and Starmer
We could be in a position where the only thing that's published is evidence that Stamer knew Mandelson maintained his close friendship with Epstein after his conviction for child sex offences and appointed him anyway
Commander Ella Marriott, of the Metropolitan Police, said:
'As with any investigation, securing and preserving any potential evidence is vital. For this reason, when approached by the UK government today with their intent to publish material, we reviewed it immediately and advised that the release of specific documents could undermine our currrent investigation. We therefore asked them not to release certain documents at this time
'Going forward as material is made available to us, and if we identify further documents that we believe could prejudice our investigation, we will continue to ask the Government to pause their release until such time as the risk of prejudice no longer exists. The integrity of our investigation is paramount to securing justice. We are grateful for their cooperation'
Starmer made this crystal clear in his opening remarks.
Badenoch completely misunderstood the legal ramifications ans screamed cover up.
And some see her as a PM
Clueless Uselessm Totally out of her depth.
She's happy to destroy evidence and the case to soothe her huge ego.
You see that kind of reaction a lot in politics - quite often I assume they know the nuance, but have calculated pretending there is none has more advantage, even with the risk of being called out.
Usually that's the right gamble, from a political stance at least.
Sadly true Then you get a 2nd go at it when the CPS announce there'll be no prosecution as the case is prejudiced
Frontbench are absolutely drowning in the Commons right now.
Well the building is practically falling down and MPs keep kicking the can down the road making repair ever more expensive and unpopular, so I'm not surprised if the roof is leaking onto them.
I am absolutely open to being proved wrong but I think that this is being substantially overplayed. I don't see this being fatal for Starmer. He showed poor judgment again. Well, there's a shocker. But I am not seeing anyone in Labour that is any better placed. I am comfortable with my answer in the competition that Starmer will be PM at the end of the year.
The difference is in the reaction of Labour MPs. They are done with having to defend the continued poor decisions of Starmer. They've run out of patience.
Nobody likes him. He's not a likeable guy. But I don't see him falling because of this. McSweeney maybe.
I know intellectual snobbery is a very unappealing trait but Angela Raynor is someone of very limited education. Being Prime minister is a very demanding job. Would she handle it? Possibly. But she might also be found out very quickly.
She's got street smarts. That'll do for Labour
I think that's half right. It's not intelligence that is needed as a PM, or technical knowledge from education and experience, it's judgement.
I'm not certain that Rayner's judgement is great, and her short record as a minister is also not inspiring, but lack of education is certainly not her problem.
But would she be able to string together a government ? What if it falls in the House of Commons. If the King were savvy, which he isn't of course he would ask Kemi to form a government. I really can see a General Election now, probably June. The idea that out Ange could hold a goverment together for over a month is quite frankly absurd.
Yeah right
After the Tories had 4 Pm in 5 years.
The King is going to call Kemi whose Tory Party is close to electoral oblivion.
The party near oblivion is labour not the conservatives
On the available evidence, it's quite likely both.
The Tory problems are more longstanding, so I think they are still at the most risk. If they don't turn it around in a year I think they are in serious trouble, whereas I think Labour can take a few more hits yet.
Sub contracting some of their garbage to Reform is a good start
IDK, that only works if it stops further bleeding of support and in fact gains them some. With the locals coming up soon they'll probably still be a long way behind Reform, and people wavering between the two may feel there's not much point sticking with the Tories.
I think Reform will underwhelm in May (compared to May 25)
Michael Burry, the guy who bet against housing in 2008, says the fall of bitcoin could lead to cascading loss
Microstrategy is Michael Saylor.
They have over 72,000 Shitcoin. Oops.
Interesting piece in Telegraph today saying Quantum Computing will make bitcoin worthless.
I need to find this as I haven’t got a clue what this is.
If Quantum Computing can be made to work at a reasonable scale then all current encryption will be worthless as you will be able to try all the possible keys at once.
Unless I'm missing something we are nowhere near that yet.
I see the PB tricouteuse round the tumbril are scenting blood in the water - why you'd put a tumbril near water I don't know, I mean, do decapitated heads float? I suspect not.
That may be the least of Starmer's worries as even this hardened old political cynic sees he's in a spot of bother. The admission he ignored the concerns raised by the Security (apparently called Snoopy nowadays) Services over the appointment of Mandelson in favour of the political reality of choosing someone with close links to Trump's circle now makes him look like a man in a circle (a circular flying squad I presume).
Probably better for him to make the admission in the Commons than lie and be found out in any later investigation for allthe good it may do him.
In Stodge's political universe (NOT to be confused with the political universe of the Labour candidate for Gorton and Denton), resignation occurs when the story isn't you but you are the story. The story was Mandelson - the story is becoming Starmer's judgement (or lack of it).
Given how difficult it is for a Labour leader to be ousted, the question has to be whether Starmer has reached the end of the road psychologically or when, as the French say, "le jeu n'en vaut pas la chandelle" and he simply decides to walk away.
Could happen tonight I suppose....
Decapitated heads sink like stone. They have nothing in them to offer any buoyancy.
(Learnt from the Lucy Worsely programme about the Thames torso killer.)
I am absolutely open to being proved wrong but I think that this is being substantially overplayed. I don't see this being fatal for Starmer. He showed poor judgment again. Well, there's a shocker. But I am not seeing anyone in Labour that is any better placed. I am comfortable with my answer in the competition that Starmer will be PM at the end of the year.
Him going in '26 can be laid at 1.49 on Betfair Though that would be a gamble that he survives this debacle, May results, Reeves next budget and as-yet unknown debacles to come in '26. which might be pushing it.
Michael Burry, the guy who bet against housing in 2008, says the fall of bitcoin could lead to cascading loss
Microstrategy is Michael Saylor.
They have over 72,000 Shitcoin. Oops.
Interesting piece in Telegraph today saying Quantum Computing will make bitcoin worthless.
I need to find this as I haven’t got a clue what this is.
If Quantum Computing can be made to work at a reasonable scale then all current encryption will be worthless as you will be able to try all the possible keys at once.
I've heard this before, and am curious whether there are not other methods of encryption which are quantum-proof, as it were, given the possibility of breaching current methods has clearly been widely raised as a possibility, so surely people have thought about ways to beat it.
Scotland Yard confirms that it has warned Number 10 that the 'release of specific documents' could undermine its investigation
A government source said that these include the evidence that Keir Starmer is relying on to show that Mandelson lied - the peer's response to questions from Morgan McSweeney about his relationship with Epstein and whether he had stayed at his apartment in Manhattan
This feels tectonic. It's a big blow for Number 10 and Starmer
We could be in a position where the only thing that's published is evidence that Stamer knew Mandelson maintained his close friendship with Epstein after his conviction for child sex offences and appointed him anyway
Commander Ella Marriott, of the Metropolitan Police, said:
'As with any investigation, securing and preserving any potential evidence is vital. For this reason, when approached by the UK government today with their intent to publish material, we reviewed it immediately and advised that the release of specific documents could undermine our currrent investigation. We therefore asked them not to release certain documents at this time
'Going forward as material is made available to us, and if we identify further documents that we believe could prejudice our investigation, we will continue to ask the Government to pause their release until such time as the risk of prejudice no longer exists. The integrity of our investigation is paramount to securing justice. We are grateful for their cooperation'
Starmer made this crystal clear in his opening remarks.
Badenoch completely misunderstood the legal ramifications ans screamed cover up.
And some see her as a PM
Clueless Uselessm Totally out of her depth.
She's happy to destroy evidence and the case to soothe her huge ego.
I don't know if it's worth "biting" on this, but at no point at PMQs did Kemi try to refute any position that would be taken by the police.
Her response clearly accused a cover up.
Now whether she has any qualifications or not even she should understand, or the various lawyers sat around her every week trying to sop her putting her foot in her mouth that the minute the Police and CPS announce an investigation then any evidence has to be protected.
Her arrogance meant that her answer was cover up.
Go let her release any of it... She can go down with Mandy for perverting the course of justice.
That Starmer given his experience didn't say stop right there and explain basic law to her does him no favours either
I am absolutely open to being proved wrong but I think that this is being substantially overplayed. I don't see this being fatal for Starmer. He showed poor judgment again. Well, there's a shocker. But I am not seeing anyone in Labour that is any better placed. I am comfortable with my answer in the competition that Starmer will be PM at the end of the year.
Him going in '26 can be laid at 1.49 on Betfair Though that would be a gamble that he survives this debacle, May results, Reeves next budget and as-yet unknown debacles to come in '26. which might be pushing it.
I don't see him falling at this hurdle. Surviving 2026 remains a whole different story. I think the crunch time will come in May when about 200 Labour MPs realise they are going to become unemployed if things stay as they are.
Michael Burry, the guy who bet against housing in 2008, says the fall of bitcoin could lead to cascading loss
Microstrategy is Michael Saylor.
They have over 72,000 Shitcoin. Oops.
Interesting piece in Telegraph today saying Quantum Computing will make bitcoin worthless.
I need to find this as I haven’t got a clue what this is.
Quantum computing enables massively parallel processing so it makes it very easy to generate new bitcoins.
Bitcoin generation, known as mining, is the decentralized process of creating new bitcoins. Specialized computers solve complex cryptographic puzzles to add blocks to the blockchain, rewarding miners with new bitcoins.
This process is limited to a total supply of 21 million. Currently about 20 million have already been mined. The process gets increasingly difficult as you approach 21 million.
However if quantum computing suddenly dumps an extra million bitcoins it will have an effect on the market.
PS I've just made this up. I like sounding authoritative when I'm not, so DYOR. I haven't been able to read the Telegraph article.
I am absolutely open to being proved wrong but I think that this is being substantially overplayed. I don't see this being fatal for Starmer. He showed poor judgment again. Well, there's a shocker. But I am not seeing anyone in Labour that is any better placed. I am comfortable with my answer in the competition that Starmer will be PM at the end of the year.
Andy Burnham. At least he’s had experience in running a large city. Get him in. Somehow.
Or better yet. Andy Street from the Lords. I don’t care that he’s a Tory he did a great job in Birmingham.
Andy Street? If this is about poor judgement than he's got £100bn+++ of that in spades with HS2.
And there's a link to Mandelson. Mandelson set the hare running in 2009 but Street persuaded successive Conservative governments to carry on and on with it as the bills just kept rising out of control.
Sticking with the hapless Skyr through the next election isn't a runner.
So if t'were done, better it were done pretty damn soon.
Rayner looks to be frontrunner. She clearly wants the gig.
There is a risk that she is woeful, loses the markets and becomes Labour's very own Liz Truss. With all that entails for replacing her and the damage that does to the brand.
I know intellectual snobbery is a very unappealing trait but Angela Raynor is someone of very limited education. Being Prime minister is a very demanding job. Would she handle it? Possibly. But she might also be found out very quickly.
She's got street smarts. That'll do for Labour
I think that's half right. It's not intelligence that is needed as a PM, or technical knowledge from education and experience, it's judgement.
I'm not certain that Rayner's judgement is great, and her short record as a minister is also not inspiring, but lack of education is certainly not her problem.
But would she be able to string together a government ? What if it falls in the House of Commons. If the King were savvy, which he isn't of course he would ask Kemi to form a government. I really can see a General Election now, probably June. The idea that out Ange could hold a goverment together for over a month is quite frankly absurd.
Yeah right
After the Tories had 4 Pm in 5 years.
The King is going to call Kemi whose Tory Party is close to electoral oblivion.
The party near oblivion is labour not the conservatives
On the available evidence, it's quite likely both.
The Tory problems are more longstanding, so I think they are still at the most risk. If they don't turn it around in a year I think they are in serious trouble, whereas I think Labour can take a few more hits yet.
Sub contracting some of their garbage to Reform is a good start
IDK, that only works if it stops further bleeding of support and in fact gains them some. With the locals coming up soon they'll probably still be a long way behind Reform, and people wavering between the two may feel there's not much point sticking with the Tories.
I think Reform will underwhelm in May (compared to May 25)
Before the May 2025 elections Reform were at 24-29% in the polls and heading up. They're currently at 26-32% and heading down. So you could well be right.
I am absolutely open to being proved wrong but I think that this is being substantially overplayed. I don't see this being fatal for Starmer. He showed poor judgment again. Well, there's a shocker. But I am not seeing anyone in Labour that is any better placed. I am comfortable with my answer in the competition that Starmer will be PM at the end of the year.
We're very much at the "huffing and puffing" stage where people somehow think if they shout loud enough and long enough and repeat all the "Starmer is crap" sentiments ad infinitum somehow he will go.
The truth is Starmer goes under two circumstances - either through being sick and tired of the whole PM job or by recognising the damage the story is doing to Labour as it becomes about HIS appointment of Mandelson rather than Mandelson's own behaviour from which he can distance himself quite easily.
The problem is the admission he (Starmer) was told there were security issues but went ahead with the appointment of Mandelson to be the British Ambassador to the USA and that has been shown to be a significant error of judgement. That in itself wouldn't be a problem IF Labour MPs were four square behind him but if he has lost the confidence of the Parliamentary Party, that could be serious.
What finished Johnson was senior Ministers leading an exodus from the Government starting, if memory serves, with Rishi Sunak and Sajid Javid (whatever happened to them?). This left the country ungoverned effectively and IF we see Ministers starting to walk away from Starmer's Cabinet, the same will happen to him.
MInisterial resignations from Starmer's Cabinet will mean real trouble - if everyone stays, he's probably safe for now - a disastrous set of May elections may change that of course.
I am absolutely open to being proved wrong but I think that this is being substantially overplayed. I don't see this being fatal for Starmer. He showed poor judgment again. Well, there's a shocker. But I am not seeing anyone in Labour that is any better placed. I am comfortable with my answer in the competition that Starmer will be PM at the end of the year.
Him going in '26 can be laid at 1.49 on Betfair Though that would be a gamble that he survives this debacle, May results, Reeves next budget and as-yet unknown debacles to come in '26. which might be pushing it.
I don't see him falling at this hurdle. Surviving 2026 remains a whole different story. I think the crunch time will come in May when about 200 Labour MPs realise they are going to become unemployed if things stay as they are.
200 Labour MPs already know full well they are losing at the next election.
Sticking with the hapless Skyr through the next election isn't a runner.
So if t'were done, better it were done pretty damn soon.
Rayner looks to be frontrunner. She clearly wants the gig.
There is a risk that she is woeful, loses the markets and becomes Labour's very own Liz Truss. With all that entails for replacing her and the damage that does to the brand.
But it won't be dull.
SKS is Johnson Rayner will be Truss So which Labour leadership candidate will be Sunak.
Scotland Yard confirms that it has warned Number 10 that the 'release of specific documents' could undermine its investigation
A government source said that these include the evidence that Keir Starmer is relying on to show that Mandelson lied - the peer's response to questions from Morgan McSweeney about his relationship with Epstein and whether he had stayed at his apartment in Manhattan
This feels tectonic. It's a big blow for Number 10 and Starmer
We could be in a position where the only thing that's published is evidence that Stamer knew Mandelson maintained his close friendship with Epstein after his conviction for child sex offences and appointed him anyway
Commander Ella Marriott, of the Metropolitan Police, said:
'As with any investigation, securing and preserving any potential evidence is vital. For this reason, when approached by the UK government today with their intent to publish material, we reviewed it immediately and advised that the release of specific documents could undermine our currrent investigation. We therefore asked them not to release certain documents at this time
'Going forward as material is made available to us, and if we identify further documents that we believe could prejudice our investigation, we will continue to ask the Government to pause their release until such time as the risk of prejudice no longer exists. The integrity of our investigation is paramount to securing justice. We are grateful for their cooperation'
Starmer made this crystal clear in his opening remarks.
Badenoch completely misunderstood the legal ramifications ans screamed cover up.
And some see her as a PM
Clueless Uselessm Totally out of her depth.
She's happy to destroy evidence and the case to soothe her huge ego.
I don't know if it's worth "biting" on this, but at no point at PMQs did Kemi try to refute any position that would be taken by the police.
I agree, Kemi was good. A very good PMQs. Apart from calling civil service biased, that was awful.
It needs clarity, that if not published, can the ISC and other MP committee see the documents.
Michael Burry, the guy who bet against housing in 2008, says the fall of bitcoin could lead to cascading loss
Microstrategy is Michael Saylor.
They have over 72,000 Shitcoin. Oops.
Interesting piece in Telegraph today saying Quantum Computing will make bitcoin worthless.
I need to find this as I haven’t got a clue what this is.
If Quantum Computing can be made to work at a reasonable scale then all current encryption will be worthless as you will be able to try all the possible keys at once.
I've heard this before, and am curious whether there are not other methods of encryption which are quantum-proof, as it were, given the possibility of breaching current methods has clearly been widely raised as a possibility, so surely people have thought about ways to beat it.
Yes, people are developing 'quantum resistant' encryption
Michael Burry, the guy who bet against housing in 2008, says the fall of bitcoin could lead to cascading loss
Microstrategy is Michael Saylor.
They have over 72,000 Shitcoin. Oops.
Interesting piece in Telegraph today saying Quantum Computing will make bitcoin worthless.
I need to find this as I haven’t got a clue what this is.
Quantum computing enables massively parallel processing so it makes it very easy to generate new bitcoins.
Bitcoin generation, known as mining, is the decentralized process of creating new bitcoins. Specialized computers solve complex cryptographic puzzles to add blocks to the blockchain, rewarding miners with new bitcoins.
This process is limited to a total supply of 21 million. Currently about 20 million have already been mined. The process gets increasingly difficult as you approach 21 million.
However if quantum computing suddenly dumps an extra million bitcoins it will have an effect on the market.
PS I've just made this up. I like sounding authoritative when I'm not, so DYOR. I haven't been able to read the Telegraph article.
The issue is more about cracking the keys for existing dormant wallets (or indeed non dormant wallets). Basically makes it (more) useless. Although if you get there first, rational thing to do is pick the wallets to nick carefully and stay quiet about it as long as possible...
Sticking with the hapless Skyr through the next election isn't a runner.
So if t'were done, better it were done pretty damn soon.
Rayner looks to be frontrunner. She clearly wants the gig.
There is a risk that she is woeful, loses the markets and becomes Labour's very own Liz Truss. With all that entails for replacing her and the damage that does to the brand.
But it won't be dull.
If she puts someone credible into Number 11 and leaves them to get on with it then she can avoid that fate, but it depends how radical she wants to be.
Starmer exit in 2026 now shortened to 1.54:1, which is the shortest I've seen it. That's easy money if you're convinced he's going this year. (I'm not. I think those odds are about right.)
Michael Burry, the guy who bet against housing in 2008, says the fall of bitcoin could lead to cascading loss
Microstrategy is Michael Saylor.
They have over 72,000 Shitcoin. Oops.
Interesting piece in Telegraph today saying Quantum Computing will make bitcoin worthless.
I need to find this as I haven’t got a clue what this is.
Quantum computing enables massively parallel processing so it makes it very easy to generate new bitcoins.
Bitcoin generation, known as mining, is the decentralized process of creating new bitcoins. Specialized computers solve complex cryptographic puzzles to add blocks to the blockchain, rewarding miners with new bitcoins.
This process is limited to a total supply of 21 million. Currently about 20 million have already been mined. The process gets increasingly difficult as you approach 21 million.
However if quantum computing suddenly dumps an extra million bitcoins it will have an effect on the market.
PS I've just made this up. I like sounding authoritative when I'm not, so DYOR. I haven't been able to read the Telegraph article.
The issue is more about cracking the keys for existing dormant wallets (or indeed non dormant wallets). Basically makes it (more) useless. Although if you get there first, rational thing to do is pick the wallets to nick carefully and stay quiet about it as long as possible...
"As Wood, the head of equity strategy at the investment bank Jefferies, points out, deriving a public key from a private key is computationally simple. Bitcoin and other forms of crypto rely for their security on the assumption that the reverse operation would take trillions of years, even for a supercomputer.
“But this asymmetry collapses with the arrival of cryptographically relevant quantum computers, potentially reducing the time to derive a private key from a public key to mere hours or days,” Wood says.
Whilst I agree Starmer is in trouble, I am not sure the Pincher analogy holds water.
With Pincher, it wasn't simply a failure of vetting but a situation where Johnson lied about what he knew and had colleagues unwittingly sent onto the media to propogate that lie. This was also the latest in a series of incidents where Johnson had been utterly unreliable.
That may yet turn out to be the case for Starmer, but I don't think we are there - it was a foolish appointment given Mandelson's track record, but I don't think the anger towards Mandelson for having misled Starmer is synthetic.
For that reason, whilst there is definitely a competence issue there and it's increasingly hard to see a very long term future for Starmer, I don't really see it playing out as it did in the final days of Johnson.
I also find the Rayner surge a little odd. She has a lot going for her, but she isn't exactly Ms Clean, the candidate of unimpeachable personal integrity.
She's the furthest they've got from the old boy's club attitudes that led to where we are.
I don’t think Angela Rayner is a traitor. I DO believe that about Starmer and those around him - Hermer, Sands, Powell. They loathe Britain and seek to harm Britons
It’s that basic
Rayner might well be an economic disaster but fuck it, how does that change anything. I don’t think Rayner will deliberately enact policies that are solely designed to harm the country she governs because she despises it
It’s a pretty low bar but I reckon she’ll clear it
Oh God, not this from you again: "she couldn't we worse".
I am absolutely open to being proved wrong but I think that this is being substantially overplayed. I don't see this being fatal for Starmer. He showed poor judgment again. Well, there's a shocker. But I am not seeing anyone in Labour that is any better placed. I am comfortable with my answer in the competition that Starmer will be PM at the end of the year.
Him going in '26 can be laid at 1.49 on Betfair Though that would be a gamble that he survives this debacle, May results, Reeves next budget and as-yet unknown debacles to come in '26. which might be pushing it.
I don't see him falling at this hurdle. Surviving 2026 remains a whole different story. I think the crunch time will come in May when about 200 Labour MPs realise they are going to become unemployed if things stay as they are.
200 Labour MPs already know full well they are losing at the next election.
It may even be nearer to 300.
They have nothing to lose.
If they all sit tight and Starmer stays they have a full term at the trough.
Michael Burry, the guy who bet against housing in 2008, says the fall of bitcoin could lead to cascading loss
Microstrategy is Michael Saylor.
They have over 72,000 Shitcoin. Oops.
Interesting piece in Telegraph today saying Quantum Computing will make bitcoin worthless.
I need to find this as I haven’t got a clue what this is.
If Quantum Computing can be made to work at a reasonable scale then all current encryption will be worthless as you will be able to try all the possible keys at once.
I've heard this before, and am curious whether there are not other methods of encryption which are quantum-proof, as it were, given the possibility of breaching current methods has clearly been widely raised as a possibility, so surely people have thought about ways to beat it.
Yes, people are developing 'quantum resistant' encryption
So one of the primary amazing things it might be able to do is already being countered? Figures.
I'm sure there will be other great uses if they can make it scalable, but the tech industry is really searching for those trillion dollar bets, so who knows which one (if any) will work out.
Whilst I agree Starmer is in trouble, I am not sure the Pincher analogy holds water.
With Pincher, it wasn't simply a failure of vetting but a situation where Johnson lied about what he knew and had colleagues unwittingly sent onto the media to propogate that lie. This was also the latest in a series of incidents where Johnson had been utterly unreliable.
That may yet turn out to be the case for Starmer, but I don't think we are there - it was a foolish appointment given Mandelson's track record, but I don't think the anger towards Mandelson for having misled Starmer is synthetic.
For that reason, whilst there is definitely a competence issue there and it's increasingly hard to see a very long term future for Starmer, I don't really see it playing out as it did in the final days of Johnson.
I also find the Rayner surge a little odd. She has a lot going for her, but she isn't exactly Ms Clean, the candidate of unimpeachable personal integrity.
She's the furthest they've got from the old boy's club attitudes that led to where we are.
I don’t think Angela Rayner is a traitor. I DO believe that about Starmer and those around him - Hermer, Sands, Powell. They loathe Britain and seek to harm Britons
It’s that basic
Rayner might well be an economic disaster but fuck it, how does that change anything. I don’t think Rayner will deliberately enact policies that are solely designed to harm the country she governs because she despises it
It’s a pretty low bar but I reckon she’ll clear it
Oh God, not this from you again: "she couldn't we worse".
She absolutely could be fucking worse.
I'm terrified of Rayner becoming PM.
Eh, it'll probably be fine.
Then again, I said that about Truss, so I don't know shit.
I am absolutely open to being proved wrong but I think that this is being substantially overplayed. I don't see this being fatal for Starmer. He showed poor judgment again. Well, there's a shocker. But I am not seeing anyone in Labour that is any better placed. I am comfortable with my answer in the competition that Starmer will be PM at the end of the year.
The difference is in the reaction of Labour MPs. They are done with having to defend the continued poor decisions of Starmer. They've run out of patience.
If so, would you like to put a time frame on it, so we can measure if you are right?
From Shipman Most ministers, were they to resign, would be accused of self interest or promoting an ally. One name I hear from officials, is Hilary Benn. He is “disgusted”. l have no evidence he will quit, but it would be an earthquake. He’s the moral heart of Labour, no one’s outrider https://x.com/i/status/2019123934839595054
I know intellectual snobbery is a very unappealing trait but Angela Raynor is someone of very limited education. Being Prime minister is a very demanding job. Would she handle it? Possibly. But she might also be found out very quickly.
A lot of Prime Ministers didn't go to University: John Major and Jim Callaghan, for example.
Two of the PMs with the most integrity imo.
The adulterer John Major?
Okay.
These days the bar for integrity is much lower: it's not 'cheated on wife', it's 'had sex with trafficked underage girls'.
Whilst I agree Starmer is in trouble, I am not sure the Pincher analogy holds water.
With Pincher, it wasn't simply a failure of vetting but a situation where Johnson lied about what he knew and had colleagues unwittingly sent onto the media to propogate that lie. This was also the latest in a series of incidents where Johnson had been utterly unreliable.
That may yet turn out to be the case for Starmer, but I don't think we are there - it was a foolish appointment given Mandelson's track record, but I don't think the anger towards Mandelson for having misled Starmer is synthetic.
For that reason, whilst there is definitely a competence issue there and it's increasingly hard to see a very long term future for Starmer, I don't really see it playing out as it did in the final days of Johnson.
I also find the Rayner surge a little odd. She has a lot going for her, but she isn't exactly Ms Clean, the candidate of unimpeachable personal integrity.
She's the furthest they've got from the old boy's club attitudes that led to where we are.
I don’t think Angela Rayner is a traitor. I DO believe that about Starmer and those around him - Hermer, Sands, Powell. They loathe Britain and seek to harm Britons
It’s that basic
Rayner might well be an economic disaster but fuck it, how does that change anything. I don’t think Rayner will deliberately enact policies that are solely designed to harm the country she governs because she despises it
It’s a pretty low bar but I reckon she’ll clear it
Oh God, not this from you again: "she couldn't we worse".
Comments
Pretty basic common sense
Met Police tell Government not to release key documents that may impact investigation
Sky Breaking News
If one digs down, Cooper, Powell and Milliband are a joke and Burnham isn't even an MP. A bit early for Shabama and Streeting is too Starmer adjacent.
Can someone confirm if Ange is subject to a yellow card from HMRC?
Unless the recent vetting turned up information relevant to that (which surely it didn't, or even Starmer wouldn't have been stupid enough to appoint him), how is releasing all the gory detail of what they did or didn't do about vetting him this time round going to make any difference to the police investigation and (hopefully) subsequent prosecution for what we has doing 15-20 years ago?
Is it possible that observers in the UK are ignoring the possibility of vote fraud, and, unfashionable as this thought may be, over-estimating the amount of intimidation affecting votes in the US?
(For the record: In recent years, Republicans in the US often accuse Democrats of vote fraud; Democrats often accuse Republicans of intimidation. There is a little truth to both accusations, but far less than many commenters here, and elsewhere, seem to think.)
https://www.money.co.uk/savings-accounts/savings-statistics
Very impressive cv
Amongst Labour women
Emma Reynolds is a genuine dark horse
There's this:
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0098260/
and also a mini series.
But maybe there is proper documentary out there somewhere?
Any recommendations?
Resign!
She might not be very educated but she's very capable.
Ruthless even, and with a smile.
You ain't seen nothin' yet.
Both credible choices IMO, back to having a Scottish Labour PM
They have over 72,000 Shitcoin. Oops.
Yes Labour dodged a bullet. Pity starmer didn't let him stand so we could all see how lightweight he is.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15527893/That-photo-Andrew-arm-Virginia-Giuffres-waist-REAL-Ghislaine-Maxwell-admits-damning-emails.html
Talking about Reform and austerity with the Tories.
Talking about supporting our country and the flag. After the revelations today !!!! Labour are no one to talk of patriotism or supporting the country. No one at all.
Polite about the greens.
Straight into the news and the headlines which are savage about Starmer 😀😀😀😂😂😂
Badenoch completely misunderstood the legal ramifications ans screamed cover up.
And some see her as a PM
Clueless
Uselessm
Totally out of her depth.
She's happy to destroy evidence and the case to soothe her huge ego.
Leave the Tory psychodramas behind . Instead we got dull , incompetent leadership with a PM who has zero political nous , who can’t tie his own shoelaces up without McSweeney being there to hold his hand .
I really wanted Starmer to do well but it’s over .
McFadden 260
D Alexander 320
Incidentally Cooper is actually only 22 for next PM (21 for next Lab leader).
This is a test of how long both can exist in a state of political denial.
Besides, she didn't finish school because she was pregnant, not because she lacked the ability to do more, so unless people have a hang up about teenage pregnancy I don't see how the lack of further education could be tied to ability at all in this case.
And my view is she got to be DPM because of her humble background, not despite it.
She's a middle class person's idea of what a working class person is like. (This isn't my original observation; I have pinched it and I'm not sure who from. But it rang true.)
Once you strip away the back story she doesn't have much left to offer.
Usually that's the right gamble, from a political stance at least.
Bookmark this.
As a former senior advisor to Sir Keir* it pains me to say this, but I think at the present time, our country would be better served by placing the names of every Labour MP in a tombola and picking a new PM at random.
I tried it and got Yuan Yang.
*before he became unpopular
https://bsky.app/profile/generalboles.bsky.social/post/3me24dmqw7c2d
Just like when US empty a barracks, and Iran fire a missile into it. The sacrifice of Office Manager is down ramp for anyone not wanting Starmer out at this moment.
It’s not what they will tell you - they will say I’m happy action has been taken on what went wrong, let’s rally round and move forward now. How many times have we seen this before.
Then you get a 2nd go at it when the CPS announce there'll be no prosecution as the case is prejudiced
He'd be better employed sponsoring an inquiry into its dealings with Nicola Sturgeon and Alex Salmond.
Unless I'm missing something we are nowhere near that yet.
(Learnt from the Lucy Worsely programme about the Thames torso killer.)
Though that would be a gamble that he survives this debacle, May results, Reeves next budget and as-yet unknown debacles to come in '26. which might be pushing it.
Now whether she has any qualifications or not even she should understand, or the various lawyers sat around her every week trying to sop her putting her foot in her mouth that the minute the Police and CPS announce an investigation then any evidence has to be protected.
Her arrogance meant that her answer was cover up.
Go let her release any of it... She can go down with Mandy for perverting the course of justice.
That Starmer given his experience didn't say stop right there and explain basic law to her does him no favours either
Bitcoin generation, known as mining, is the decentralized process of creating new bitcoins. Specialized computers solve complex cryptographic puzzles to add blocks to the blockchain, rewarding miners with new bitcoins.
This process is limited to a total supply of 21 million. Currently about 20 million have already been mined. The process gets increasingly difficult as you approach 21 million.
However if quantum computing suddenly dumps an extra million bitcoins it will have an effect on the market.
PS I've just made this up. I like sounding authoritative when I'm not, so DYOR.
I haven't been able to read the Telegraph article.
PPS Flatlander at 6:47 has a better explanation.
And there's a link to Mandelson. Mandelson set the hare running in 2009 but Street persuaded successive Conservative governments to carry on and on with it as the bills just kept rising out of control.
So if t'were done, better it were done pretty damn soon.
Rayner looks to be frontrunner. She clearly wants the gig.
There is a risk that she is woeful, loses the markets and becomes Labour's very own Liz Truss. With all that entails for replacing her and the damage that does to the brand.
But it won't be dull.
The truth is Starmer goes under two circumstances - either through being sick and tired of the whole PM job or by recognising the damage the story is doing to Labour as it becomes about HIS appointment of Mandelson rather than Mandelson's own behaviour from which he can distance himself quite easily.
The problem is the admission he (Starmer) was told there were security issues but went ahead with the appointment of Mandelson to be the British Ambassador to the USA and that has been shown to be a significant error of judgement. That in itself wouldn't be a problem IF Labour MPs were four square behind him but if he has lost the confidence of the Parliamentary Party, that could be serious.
What finished Johnson was senior Ministers leading an exodus from the Government starting, if memory serves, with Rishi Sunak and Sajid Javid (whatever happened to them?). This left the country ungoverned effectively and IF we see Ministers starting to walk away from Starmer's Cabinet, the same will happen to him.
MInisterial resignations from Starmer's Cabinet will mean real trouble - if everyone stays, he's probably safe for now - a disastrous set of May elections may change that of course.
It may even be nearer to 300.
They have nothing to lose.
Rayner will be Truss
So which Labour leadership candidate will be Sunak.
It needs clarity, that if not published, can the ISC and other MP committee see the documents.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2026/02/04/the-quantum-existential-threat-to-crypto/
"As Wood, the head of equity strategy at the investment bank Jefferies, points out, deriving a public key from a private key is computationally simple. Bitcoin and other forms of crypto rely for their security on the assumption that the reverse operation would take trillions of years, even for a supercomputer.
“But this asymmetry collapses with the arrival of cryptographically relevant quantum computers, potentially reducing the time to derive a private key from a public key to mere hours or days,” Wood says.
She absolutely could be fucking worse.
I'm terrified of Rayner becoming PM.
While I accept the argument that anybody could be better that Skir, Lucy is the exception to that...
If he goes then that's not clear.
I'm sure there will be other great uses if they can make it scalable, but the tech industry is really searching for those trillion dollar bets, so who knows which one (if any) will work out.
Then again, I said that about Truss, so I don't know shit.
Most ministers, were they to resign, would be accused of self interest or promoting an ally. One name I hear from officials, is Hilary Benn. He is “disgusted”. l have no evidence he will quit, but it would be an earthquake. He’s the moral heart of Labour, no one’s outrider
https://x.com/i/status/2019123934839595054