Thank the Lord, Milliband is currently an also ran and Burnham isn't an MP. Too late for Cooper, too early for Mahmood. Rayner is in Zahawi- legal jeopardy which leaves Streeting.
I'd roll the dice on Rayner. It could go all Liz Truss, but it could work. Streeting is most likely continuity Sunak-Starmer.
I still favour Streeting as we speak but Rayner is in with a chance with me. Maybe it's time to bring the curtain down (and this time for good) on the Blair New Labour project. If that sort of politics, even well delivered, can't now beat Farage then we might have to look at something different.
That is my feeling. Mandelson has soiled New Labour to the point of extinction. He's Johnsoned the brand.
The problem for labour from Blair to Starmer is just how embedded into the party and his activities were well known, and yet they made him US Ambassador who upto a few weeks ago lived in our Washington Embassy and today is having the Met Police search his UK home
Starmer is done for. He bet the farm on someone he knew was risky. If it had worked out he would have looked like Billy Big B****cks. It didn't.
It is probably the only time Starmer has taken a risk in his entire life.
I don't blame Starmer for taking the risk in a World of Trump, a risk that Gove considered genius. But now that risk has gone South he has to fall on his sword. The buck stops with him. It is very like the dilemma Cameron found himself in after the EU Referendum.
EXCL: Gordon Brown says he deeply regrets bringing Peter Mandelson into his government, and that revelations about Jeffrey Epstein’s influence on UK politics had caused him revulsion.
Writing in the Guardian, the former PM said the news that Mandelson was passing information to Epstein while he was business secretary was “a betrayal of everything we stand for as a country”.
Thank the Lord, Milliband is currently an also ran and Burnham isn't an MP. Too late for Cooper, too early for Mahmood. Rayner is in Zahawi- legal jeopardy which leaves Streeting.
I'd roll the dice on Rayner. It could go all Liz Truss, but it could work. Streeting is most likely continuity Sunak-Starmer.
I still favour Streeting as we speak but Rayner is in with a chance with me. Maybe it's time to bring the curtain down (and this time for good) on the Blair New Labour project. If that sort of politics, even well delivered, can't now beat Farage then we might have to look at something different.
That is my feeling. Mandelson has soiled New Labour to the point of extinction. He's Johnsoned the brand.
Ratner would be a better comparison.
The problem with the Mandelson scandal is that it reveals an essential truth about the New Labour project which there was previously a polite refusal to confront.
So how does Labour detoxify it. Simply throwing Mandelson to the Wolves and making out it’s just him won’t work.
I was very specific. The long term toxicity is in the New Labour brand.
Of course in the medium term Mandelson trashes Labour but by jettisoning the entire project they have a chance of repatriating the lefty vote. A tall order but possible. Remember Mandelson's treachery was aimed as much at his own Labour Government in Office as discrediting the nation.
You were very specific, but what if you're wrong? What if it's the Labiur brand rather than the new Labour brand he's trashed? Ask 100 people in the street for thoughta about Mandelson, I bet it's no more than 10 who identify him specifically with 'new labour' rather than just 'labour'. I'm certainly not hearing anyone say 'that new labour lot, they're dodgy as fuck, but the rest of the party is mustard'.
The hypocrisy of the right wing media who thought the Mandelson appointment was worth the risk and now going into major hysteria .
Of course Starmer can’t say why he appointed Mandelson. Appoint a sleaze bag who will feel right at home with another sleaze bag.
Why can't he say that? Has the cat got his tongue?
No he can't. And you know that better than anyone else on here. He can't blurt out 'I put a lying **** in the Washington Embassy to help counteract the lying **** in the Whitehouse".
It's simple. He rolled the dice and he lost. No second chances. F*** off Keir.
The mistake of really really wanting to be PM while not standing as an MP when it would have been a walkover in 2024 and when you will be 60 in 2030 by which time a 12 year old will be Labour leader giving speeches about it being time for a clearout of the geriatrics who have failed Britain.....
'Keir Starmer would lose a head-to-head leadership contest against Angela Rayner, but win against Wes Streeting and Ed Miliband, polling for LabourList has revealed.
Polling conducted by Survation for LabourList found that the former deputy leader would defeat Starmer by a 11-point margin, but the Prime Minister would defeat the Energy Secretary by three points.
Should Angela Rayner challenge Keir Starmer to the leadership of the party, the poll suggested she would secure close to a majority (48%) of support among Labour members, with Starmer attracting just under four in ten members’ support (37%) and 15% undecided or unsure....Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham would also defeat Keir Starmer in a head-to-head leadership contest by 53% to 37%. However, Burnham would be ineligible to stand as party leader as he is not an MP.
Despite being one of the favourites to succeed Keir Starmer as the next Labour leader, should Starmer face-off against Streeting in a leadership contest, the Prime Minister would emerge triumphant, according to our poll.
The idea that Starmer would be on the ballot is far-fetched. Any ballot would be decide who replaces him, not Starmer versus whoever.
Not necessarily, unlike the Tories there is no mechanism to VONC a Labour leader.
You can only nominate a candidate to challenge the leader in a leadership election. So if Starmer refused to resign of course he would be on the ballot against any challenger and that challenger would have to have got 81 Labour MPs to nominate them too
That is fair comment but surely Starmer will do the right thing and resign
He would receive more credit by doing that then continuing an internal civil war with untold negative consequences
As much as we discuss this, the public know what Starmer should do and certainly not to continue to tear labour apart
Will he? Why would he? He is 63 and this is by far the most important job he will now do for the rest of his life and he returned Labour to power with a landslide win in 2024, he is also clearly stubborn. Corbyn refused to resign even when the vast majority of Labour MPs backed his opponent in 2016 and Corbyn was re elected as leader by the members.
There is also no guarantee a Labour candidate could get the 81 MPs they need to nominate them to stand against Starmer anyway, especially as all Labour candidates elected in 2024 were picked by the NEC as Starmer loyalists
The hypocrisy of the right wing media who thought the Mandelson appointment was worth the risk and now going into major hysteria .
Of course Starmer can’t say why he appointed Mandelson. Appoint a sleaze bag who will feel right at home with another sleaze bag.
Not only can he say that, but that's exactly what he should say.
How will Trump respond if Starmer confirms what many think ! Lewis Goodall has an excellent article about this very thing in terms of why Mandelson was appointed.
We're way past the point, surely, of thinking the way to deal with Trump is to blow smoke up his arse. As I noted yesterday, Carney won an election from nowhere and still leads in the polls by telling him to F off. We haven't heard about Greenland for a while since they and the Danes said the same. It's the only language he understands.
The Met won't be stealing the Spanish Inquisition's legend any time soon.
I presume that they act in the way that they do to reduce any police time that might be spent on incriminating evidence, and to ensure that the premises that they search are fully tooled up with good coffee and biscuits ahead of their arrival.
EXCL: Gordon Brown says he deeply regrets bringing Peter Mandelson into his government, and that revelations about Jeffrey Epstein’s influence on UK politics had caused him revulsion.
Writing in the Guardian, the former PM said the news that Mandelson was passing information to Epstein while he was business secretary was “a betrayal of everything we stand for as a country”.
But the reality is that Brown was close to a mental breakdown after his tax plans based on ever more financial services income collapsed. Decision making was paralysed and everything was piling up on his desk. For several months Mandelson was de facto our PM and he was rather good at it. It made the 2010 election much closer than it would have been,.
His behaviour with Epstein was shocking and he deserves all that is coming but he did a lot for the country in a very difficult time and I for one will not forget it.
Thank the Lord, Milliband is currently an also ran and Burnham isn't an MP. Too late for Cooper, too early for Mahmood. Rayner is in Zahawi- legal jeopardy which leaves Streeting.
I'd roll the dice on Rayner. It could go all Liz Truss, but it could work. Streeting is most likely continuity Sunak-Starmer.
I still favour Streeting as we speak but Rayner is in with a chance with me. Maybe it's time to bring the curtain down (and this time for good) on the Blair New Labour project. If that sort of politics, even well delivered, can't now beat Farage then we might have to look at something different.
That is my feeling. Mandelson has soiled New Labour to the point of extinction. He's Johnsoned the brand.
Ratner would be a better comparison.
The problem with the Mandelson scandal is that it reveals an essential truth about the New Labour project which there was previously a polite refusal to confront.
So how does Labour detoxify it. Simply throwing Mandelson to the Wolves and making out it’s just him won’t work.
I was very specific. The long term toxicity is in the New Labour brand.
Of course in the medium term Mandelson trashes Labour but by jettisoning the entire project they have a chance of repatriating the lefty vote. A tall order but possible. Remember Mandelson's treachery was aimed as much at his own Labour Government in Office as discrediting the nation.
You were very specific, but what if you're wrong? What if it's the Labiur brand rather than the new Labour brand he's trashed? Ask 100 people in the street for thoughta about Mandelson, I bet it's no more than 10 who identify him specifically with 'new labour' rather than just 'labour'. I'm certainly not hearing anyone say 'that new labour lot, they're dodgy as fuck, but the rest of the party is mustard'.
Some of you have your blue scarves tied so tightly around your necks it is cutting off the blood supply to your heads.
I have been remarkably circumspect. Of course Labour could be finished forever, a narrative which you are rooting for. I am suggesting that if they have any hope of survival they tack to the left.
Angela Rayner has told friends that she warned Sir Keir Starmer not to appoint Lord Mandelson as ambassador to the US because of his links to the paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.
The Times has been told that Rayner, the former deputy prime minister, privately warned Starmer that appointing Mandelson would be a mistake because of public evidence that the two men had retained a close relationship after Epstein’s conviction for child sex offences.
'Keir Starmer would lose a head-to-head leadership contest against Angela Rayner, but win against Wes Streeting and Ed Miliband, polling for LabourList has revealed.
Polling conducted by Survation for LabourList found that the former deputy leader would defeat Starmer by a 11-point margin, but the Prime Minister would defeat the Energy Secretary by three points.
Should Angela Rayner challenge Keir Starmer to the leadership of the party, the poll suggested she would secure close to a majority (48%) of support among Labour members, with Starmer attracting just under four in ten members’ support (37%) and 15% undecided or unsure....Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham would also defeat Keir Starmer in a head-to-head leadership contest by 53% to 37%. However, Burnham would be ineligible to stand as party leader as he is not an MP.
Despite being one of the favourites to succeed Keir Starmer as the next Labour leader, should Starmer face-off against Streeting in a leadership contest, the Prime Minister would emerge triumphant, according to our poll.
The idea that Starmer would be on the ballot is far-fetched. Any ballot would be decide who replaces him, not Starmer versus whoever.
Not necessarily, unlike the Tories there is no mechanism to VONC a Labour leader.
You can only nominate a candidate to challenge the leader in a leadership election. So if Starmer refused to resign of course he would be on the ballot against any challenger and that challenger would have to have got 81 Labour MPs to nominate them too
That is fair comment but surely Starmer will do the right thing and resign
He would receive more credit by doing that then continuing an internal civil war with untold negative consequences
As much as we discuss this, the public know what Starmer should do and certainly not to continue to tear labour apart
Will he? Why would he? He is 63 and this is by far the most important job he will now do for the rest of his life and he returned Labour to power with a landslide win in 2024, he is also clearly stubborn. Corbyn refused to resign even when the vast majority of Labour MPs backed his opponent in 2016 and Corbyn was re elected as leader by the members.
There is also no guarantee a Labour candidate could get the 81 MPs they need to nominate them to stand against Starmer anyway, especially as all Labour candidates elected in 2024 were picked by the NEC as Starmer loyalists
He pledged to clean up politics on his election
He has failed and as hard as it is he needs to practice what he preached when he got elected
Angela Rayner has told friends that she warned Sir Keir Starmer not to appoint Lord Mandelson as ambassador to the US because of his links to the paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.
The Times has been told that Rayner, the former deputy prime minister, privately warned Starmer that appointing Mandelson would be a mistake because of public evidence that the two men had retained a close relationship after Epstein’s conviction for child sex offences.
Is this the first of Dont look at me I didn't support the idea. Starmer will be isolated. The end is nigh...
'Rayner was also the subject of briefings by her former cabinet colleagues. “It would be a complete disaster because she wouldn’t be capable of doing the job [of prime minister],” one minister said. “She would be Labour’s Liz Truss.”
Rayner is said not to want to be the one who launches a leadership challenge against Starmer, and several senior government figures predict that he will “limp on” until after local elections in May. “Starmer’s premiership is in terminal decline but he is not in imminent danger,” one said. “The die is cast for May.”
So looks like May is judgement day for Kemi and Sir Keir, whichever one sees their party beaten by the other's and Reform in the local and devolved elections NEV will likely be gone by the summer
Angela Rayner has told friends that she warned Sir Keir Starmer not to appoint Lord Mandelson as ambassador to the US because of his links to the paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.
The Times has been told that Rayner, the former deputy prime minister, privately warned Starmer that appointing Mandelson would be a mistake because of public evidence that the two men had retained a close relationship after Epstein’s conviction for child sex offences.
The hypocrisy of the right wing media who thought the Mandelson appointment was worth the risk and now going into major hysteria .
Of course Starmer can’t say why he appointed Mandelson. Appoint a sleaze bag who will feel right at home with another sleaze bag.
I think he could. Someone called Keir must be steeped in politics. So far hes been a seven stone weakling. Time to take his spinach and show who he is.....
I’m guessing that Starmer has sent Mandy to be the govt rep at the opening ceremony. Cant believe Mandy lied to him about his experience on the four man bob.
I’m guessing that Starmer has sent Mandy to be the govt rep at the opening ceremony. Cant believe Mandy lied to him about his experience on the four man bob.
I'm impressed that the athletes are coming via Stargate.
The hypocrisy of the right wing media who thought the Mandelson appointment was worth the risk and now going into major hysteria .
Of course Starmer can’t say why he appointed Mandelson. Appoint a sleaze bag who will feel right at home with another sleaze bag.
Not only can he say that, but that's exactly what he should say.
The only problem is that he didn’t do due diligence on his pet sleeze bag.
Charles II managed that with Henry Morgan.
The next thing to come out will be who Mandy replaced Epstein with, as favoured correspondent and recipient of government information.
I am utterly certain that Mandy was doing to Keir what he did to Gordon Brown.
You're saying we needed a bit more 'Process State' on that appointment?
No, actual process.
Process State is “We compiled a 365,432 page report which failed to notice anything. But this relieves us of any responsibility for not doing anything.”
Actual process - “Here are 3 sides of A4 listing evidence of the crimes of the guilty bastard. Trial starts Tuesday.”
Thank the Lord, Milliband is currently an also ran and Burnham isn't an MP. Too late for Cooper, too early for Mahmood. Rayner is in Zahawi- legal jeopardy which leaves Streeting.
I'd roll the dice on Rayner. It could go all Liz Truss, but it could work. Streeting is most likely continuity Sunak-Starmer.
I still favour Streeting as we speak but Rayner is in with a chance with me. Maybe it's time to bring the curtain down (and this time for good) on the Blair New Labour project. If that sort of politics, even well delivered, can't now beat Farage then we might have to look at something different.
That is my feeling. Mandelson has soiled New Labour to the point of extinction. He's Johnsoned the brand.
Ratner would be a better comparison.
The problem with the Mandelson scandal is that it reveals an essential truth about the New Labour project which there was previously a polite refusal to confront.
So how does Labour detoxify it. Simply throwing Mandelson to the Wolves and making out it’s just him won’t work.
Mandleson is a Wolves supporter? It's worse than I thought. What was Starmer thinking?
Perhaps he thought that he might like it up the Arsenal?
@Steven_Swinford More broadly it feels really, really febrile tonight
From the very top of government people are on edge on multiple fronts
The message from Number 10 is that Starmer is upbeat and focused on the future
But some say he is in a dark place - angry with Mandelson, angry with himself, as @PippaCrerar picked up earlier
This is categorically rejected by those around him
There is genuine concern from some members of the Cabinet that Starmer could go. Again this is rejected as 'completely untrue' by Number 10
Then within Whitehall there is total turmoil over the scale of the disclosure to come with the Mandelson files
Tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of messages will have to be made public and the government has no control over what goes out
Lastly with Starmer at such a low ebb the battle to succeed him feels like it is full swing. Allies of Rayner and Streeting going hard against one another tonight
Is this the first of Dont look at me I didn't support the idea. Starmer will be isolated. The end is nigh...
'Rayner was also the subject of briefings by her former cabinet colleagues. “It would be a complete disaster because she wouldn’t be capable of doing the job [of prime minister],” one minister said. “She would be Labour’s Liz Truss.”
Rayner is said not to want to be the one who launches a leadership challenge against Starmer, and several senior government figures predict that he will “limp on” until after local elections in May. “Starmer’s premiership is in terminal decline but he is not in imminent danger,” one said. “The die is cast for May.”
So looks like May is judgement day for Kemi and Sir Keir, whichever one sees their party beaten by the other's and Reform in the local and devolved elections NEV will likely be gone by the summer
He will go on his own volition. Possibly this weekend.
Fat chance, Streeting and Rayner camps are already at war with each other tonight trashing the other as completely unacceptable to lead Labour. Starmer can just rise above it all and hope Labour holds second in the local and devolved elections to shift the pressure to Kemi from him
The hypocrisy of the right wing media who thought the Mandelson appointment was worth the risk and now going into major hysteria .
Of course Starmer can’t say why he appointed Mandelson. Appoint a sleaze bag who will feel right at home with another sleaze bag.
I think he could. Someone called Keir must be steeped in politics. So far hes been a seven stone weakling. Time to take his spinach and show who he is.....
Trump is such a thing skinned narcissist it's best not to upset the apple cart. If we hadn't voted to impose economic sanctions on ourselves back in 2016 we might have been in a stronger position to tell Trump to do one.
Thank the Lord, Milliband is currently an also ran and Burnham isn't an MP. Too late for Cooper, too early for Mahmood. Rayner is in Zahawi- legal jeopardy which leaves Streeting.
I'd roll the dice on Rayner. It could go all Liz Truss, but it could work. Streeting is most likely continuity Sunak-Starmer.
I still favour Streeting as we speak but Rayner is in with a chance with me. Maybe it's time to bring the curtain down (and this time for good) on the Blair New Labour project. If that sort of politics, even well delivered, can't now beat Farage then we might have to look at something different.
That is my feeling. Mandelson has soiled New Labour to the point of extinction. He's Johnsoned the brand.
Ratner would be a better comparison.
The problem with the Mandelson scandal is that it reveals an essential truth about the New Labour project which there was previously a polite refusal to confront.
So how does Labour detoxify it. Simply throwing Mandelson to the Wolves and making out it’s just him won’t work.
Mandleson is a Wolves supporter? It's worse than I thought. What was Starmer thinking?
Perhaps he thought that he might like it up the Arsenal?
'Keir Starmer would lose a head-to-head leadership contest against Angela Rayner, but win against Wes Streeting and Ed Miliband, polling for LabourList has revealed.
Polling conducted by Survation for LabourList found that the former deputy leader would defeat Starmer by a 11-point margin, but the Prime Minister would defeat the Energy Secretary by three points.
Should Angela Rayner challenge Keir Starmer to the leadership of the party, the poll suggested she would secure close to a majority (48%) of support among Labour members, with Starmer attracting just under four in ten members’ support (37%) and 15% undecided or unsure....Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham would also defeat Keir Starmer in a head-to-head leadership contest by 53% to 37%. However, Burnham would be ineligible to stand as party leader as he is not an MP.
Despite being one of the favourites to succeed Keir Starmer as the next Labour leader, should Starmer face-off against Streeting in a leadership contest, the Prime Minister would emerge triumphant, according to our poll.
The idea that Starmer would be on the ballot is far-fetched. Any ballot would be decide who replaces him, not Starmer versus whoever.
Not necessarily, unlike the Tories there is no mechanism to VONC a Labour leader.
You can only nominate a candidate to challenge the leader in a leadership election. So if Starmer refused to resign of course he would be on the ballot against any challenger and that challenger would have to have got 81 Labour MPs to nominate them too
That is fair comment but surely Starmer will do the right thing and resign
He would receive more credit by doing that then continuing an internal civil war with untold negative consequences
As much as we discuss this, the public know what Starmer should do and certainly not to continue to tear labour apart
Will he? Why would he? He is 63 and this is by far the most important job he will now do for the rest of his life and he returned Labour to power with a landslide win in 2024, he is also clearly stubborn. Corbyn refused to resign even when the vast majority of Labour MPs backed his opponent in 2016 and Corbyn was re elected as leader by the members.
There is also no guarantee a Labour candidate could get the 81 MPs they need to nominate them to stand against Starmer anyway, especially as all Labour candidates elected in 2024 were picked by the NEC as Starmer loyalists
Starmer did not return Labour to power with a landslide win in 2024.
The Tories did that. Starmer held a Ming vase and did fuck all else to deserve the massive win.
'Keir Starmer would lose a head-to-head leadership contest against Angela Rayner, but win against Wes Streeting and Ed Miliband, polling for LabourList has revealed.
Polling conducted by Survation for LabourList found that the former deputy leader would defeat Starmer by a 11-point margin, but the Prime Minister would defeat the Energy Secretary by three points.
Should Angela Rayner challenge Keir Starmer to the leadership of the party, the poll suggested she would secure close to a majority (48%) of support among Labour members, with Starmer attracting just under four in ten members’ support (37%) and 15% undecided or unsure....Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham would also defeat Keir Starmer in a head-to-head leadership contest by 53% to 37%. However, Burnham would be ineligible to stand as party leader as he is not an MP.
Despite being one of the favourites to succeed Keir Starmer as the next Labour leader, should Starmer face-off against Streeting in a leadership contest, the Prime Minister would emerge triumphant, according to our poll.
The idea that Starmer would be on the ballot is far-fetched. Any ballot would be decide who replaces him, not Starmer versus whoever.
Not necessarily, unlike the Tories there is no mechanism to VONC a Labour leader.
You can only nominate a candidate to challenge the leader in a leadership election. So if Starmer refused to resign of course he would be on the ballot against any challenger and that challenger would have to have got 81 Labour MPs to nominate them too
That is fair comment but surely Starmer will do the right thing and resign
He would receive more credit by doing that then continuing an internal civil war with untold negative consequences
As much as we discuss this, the public know what Starmer should do and certainly not to continue to tear labour apart
Will he? Why would he? He is 63 and this is by far the most important job he will now do for the rest of his life and he returned Labour to power with a landslide win in 2024, he is also clearly stubborn. Corbyn refused to resign even when the vast majority of Labour MPs backed his opponent in 2016 and Corbyn was re elected as leader by the members.
There is also no guarantee a Labour candidate could get the 81 MPs they need to nominate them to stand against Starmer anyway, especially as all Labour candidates elected in 2024 were picked by the NEC as Starmer loyalists
Starmer did not return Labour to power with a landslide win in 2024.
The Tories did that. Starmer held a Ming vase and did fuck all else to deserve the massive win.
As is now playing out.
Plenty of voters who voted for Labour in 2024 only did so as Starmer was leading them not Corbyn, in 2019 those voters had voted Tory or LD
The hypocrisy of the right wing media who thought the Mandelson appointment was worth the risk and now going into major hysteria .
Of course Starmer can’t say why he appointed Mandelson. Appoint a sleaze bag who will feel right at home with another sleaze bag.
I think he could. Someone called Keir must be steeped in politics. So far hes been a seven stone weakling. Time to take his spinach and show who he is.....
Trump is such a thing skinned narcissist it's best not to upset the apple cart. If we hadn't voted to impose economic sanctions on ourselves back in 2016 we might have been in a stronger position to tell Trump to do one.
For us bitter Remainers this does have an upside ! Once the Mandelson No 10 emails get released the alleged special relationship will finally be put out of its misery . Can you imagine what they would have said about the stain on humanity ?
With our transatlantic alliance in the dumpster the UK will have to get even closer to the EU .
Slagging Labour off for the defence budget Slagging Labour off for the flood defence budget Claiming Parliament is effectively closed nothing happening for weeks because of Mandelson
All bare faced lies Complete fabrication of the facts
All politians lie but she is world class In complete denial of the shit show up to mid 2024 she was in the midst if
Arrogant liar She's got a lot in common with Mandy
She's got better as Starmer has faltered. Mind you she dropped back to dreadful the outing before last. Even she couldn't fail this week. I suspect the quick witted Rayner could run rings 'round her. Streeting not so much.
"the quick witted Rayner"?
FWIW I don't think Kemi would come off second-best against either of those two.
The full secret notice Peter Mandelson just sent to all UK media
In it, Mandelson uses clauses of the Editor's Code most typically associated with grieving families or those suffering harassment from the press to urge journalists to stop scrutinising his links to the most world's most notorious paedophile.
'Keir Starmer would lose a head-to-head leadership contest against Angela Rayner, but win against Wes Streeting and Ed Miliband, polling for LabourList has revealed.
Polling conducted by Survation for LabourList found that the former deputy leader would defeat Starmer by a 11-point margin, but the Prime Minister would defeat the Energy Secretary by three points.
Should Angela Rayner challenge Keir Starmer to the leadership of the party, the poll suggested she would secure close to a majority (48%) of support among Labour members, with Starmer attracting just under four in ten members’ support (37%) and 15% undecided or unsure....Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham would also defeat Keir Starmer in a head-to-head leadership contest by 53% to 37%. However, Burnham would be ineligible to stand as party leader as he is not an MP.
Despite being one of the favourites to succeed Keir Starmer as the next Labour leader, should Starmer face-off against Streeting in a leadership contest, the Prime Minister would emerge triumphant, according to our poll.
The idea that Starmer would be on the ballot is far-fetched. Any ballot would be decide who replaces him, not Starmer versus whoever.
Not necessarily, unlike the Tories there is no mechanism to VONC a Labour leader.
You can only nominate a candidate to challenge the leader in a leadership election. So if Starmer refused to resign of course he would be on the ballot against any challenger and that challenger would have to have got 81 Labour MPs to nominate them too
That is fair comment but surely Starmer will do the right thing and resign
He would receive more credit by doing that then continuing an internal civil war with untold negative consequences
As much as we discuss this, the public know what Starmer should do and certainly not to continue to tear labour apart
Will he? Why would he? He is 63 and this is by far the most important job he will now do for the rest of his life and he returned Labour to power with a landslide win in 2024, he is also clearly stubborn. Corbyn refused to resign even when the vast majority of Labour MPs backed his opponent in 2016 and Corbyn was re elected as leader by the members.
There is also no guarantee a Labour candidate could get the 81 MPs they need to nominate them to stand against Starmer anyway, especially as all Labour candidates elected in 2024 were picked by the NEC as Starmer loyalists
Starmer did not return Labour to power with a landslide win in 2024.
The Tories did that. Starmer held a Ming vase and did fuck all else to deserve the massive win.
As is now playing out.
Plenty of voters who voted for Labour in 2024 only did so as Starmer was leading them not Corbyn
They got fewer votes than Corbyn did. It's more that he made them non-threatening enough to suppress the anti-Labour vote enough to win.
'Keir Starmer would lose a head-to-head leadership contest against Angela Rayner, but win against Wes Streeting and Ed Miliband, polling for LabourList has revealed.
Polling conducted by Survation for LabourList found that the former deputy leader would defeat Starmer by a 11-point margin, but the Prime Minister would defeat the Energy Secretary by three points.
Should Angela Rayner challenge Keir Starmer to the leadership of the party, the poll suggested she would secure close to a majority (48%) of support among Labour members, with Starmer attracting just under four in ten members’ support (37%) and 15% undecided or unsure....Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham would also defeat Keir Starmer in a head-to-head leadership contest by 53% to 37%. However, Burnham would be ineligible to stand as party leader as he is not an MP.
Despite being one of the favourites to succeed Keir Starmer as the next Labour leader, should Starmer face-off against Streeting in a leadership contest, the Prime Minister would emerge triumphant, according to our poll.
The idea that Starmer would be on the ballot is far-fetched. Any ballot would be decide who replaces him, not Starmer versus whoever.
Not necessarily, unlike the Tories there is no mechanism to VONC a Labour leader.
You can only nominate a candidate to challenge the leader in a leadership election. So if Starmer refused to resign of course he would be on the ballot against any challenger and that challenger would have to have got 81 Labour MPs to nominate them too
That is fair comment but surely Starmer will do the right thing and resign
He would receive more credit by doing that then continuing an internal civil war with untold negative consequences
As much as we discuss this, the public know what Starmer should do and certainly not to continue to tear labour apart
Will he? Why would he? He is 63 and this is by far the most important job he will now do for the rest of his life and he returned Labour to power with a landslide win in 2024, he is also clearly stubborn. Corbyn refused to resign even when the vast majority of Labour MPs backed his opponent in 2016 and Corbyn was re elected as leader by the members.
There is also no guarantee a Labour candidate could get the 81 MPs they need to nominate them to stand against Starmer anyway, especially as all Labour candidates elected in 2024 were picked by the NEC as Starmer loyalists
Starmer did not return Labour to power with a landslide win in 2024.
The Tories did that. Starmer held a Ming vase and did fuck all else to deserve the massive win.
As is now playing out.
Plenty of voters who voted for Labour in 2024 only did so as Starmer was leading them not Corbyn
They got fewer votes than Corbyn did. It's more that he made them non-threatening enough to suppress the anti-Labour vote enough to win.
But May got more votes than Corbyn did in 2017. Hence, she stayed PM.
He will go on his own volition. Possibly this weekend.
Fat chance, Streeting and Rayner camps are already at war with each other tonight trashing the other as completely unacceptable to lead Labour. Starmer can just rise above it all and hope Labour holds second in the local and devolved elections to shift the pressure to Kemi from him
He hasn't got until May. He probably hasn't got until PMQs.
Lady Victoria is going to have to hold him by the hand and sing "Time to say Goodbye".
When Cameron f***** up he did the right thing. It would be nice if we could return to that sort of "doing the right thing" narrative.
'Keir Starmer would lose a head-to-head leadership contest against Angela Rayner, but win against Wes Streeting and Ed Miliband, polling for LabourList has revealed.
Polling conducted by Survation for LabourList found that the former deputy leader would defeat Starmer by a 11-point margin, but the Prime Minister would defeat the Energy Secretary by three points.
Should Angela Rayner challenge Keir Starmer to the leadership of the party, the poll suggested she would secure close to a majority (48%) of support among Labour members, with Starmer attracting just under four in ten members’ support (37%) and 15% undecided or unsure....Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham would also defeat Keir Starmer in a head-to-head leadership contest by 53% to 37%. However, Burnham would be ineligible to stand as party leader as he is not an MP.
Despite being one of the favourites to succeed Keir Starmer as the next Labour leader, should Starmer face-off against Streeting in a leadership contest, the Prime Minister would emerge triumphant, according to our poll.
The idea that Starmer would be on the ballot is far-fetched. Any ballot would be decide who replaces him, not Starmer versus whoever.
Not necessarily, unlike the Tories there is no mechanism to VONC a Labour leader.
You can only nominate a candidate to challenge the leader in a leadership election. So if Starmer refused to resign of course he would be on the ballot against any challenger and that challenger would have to have got 81 Labour MPs to nominate them too
That is fair comment but surely Starmer will do the right thing and resign
He would receive more credit by doing that then continuing an internal civil war with untold negative consequences
As much as we discuss this, the public know what Starmer should do and certainly not to continue to tear labour apart
Will he? Why would he? He is 63 and this is by far the most important job he will now do for the rest of his life and he returned Labour to power with a landslide win in 2024, he is also clearly stubborn. Corbyn refused to resign even when the vast majority of Labour MPs backed his opponent in 2016 and Corbyn was re elected as leader by the members.
There is also no guarantee a Labour candidate could get the 81 MPs they need to nominate them to stand against Starmer anyway, especially as all Labour candidates elected in 2024 were picked by the NEC as Starmer loyalists
Starmer did not return Labour to power with a landslide win in 2024.
The Tories did that. Starmer held a Ming vase and did fuck all else to deserve the massive win.
As is now playing out.
Plenty of voters who voted for Labour in 2024 only did so as Starmer was leading them not Corbyn
They got fewer votes than Corbyn did. It's more that he made them non-threatening enough to suppress the anti-Labour vote enough to win.
They got a higher voteshare in 2024 than Corbyn did in 2019. Yes he also was able to get tactical votes from LDs to beat the Tories in Labour target seats which Corbyn couldn't
'Keir Starmer would lose a head-to-head leadership contest against Angela Rayner, but win against Wes Streeting and Ed Miliband, polling for LabourList has revealed.
Polling conducted by Survation for LabourList found that the former deputy leader would defeat Starmer by a 11-point margin, but the Prime Minister would defeat the Energy Secretary by three points.
Should Angela Rayner challenge Keir Starmer to the leadership of the party, the poll suggested she would secure close to a majority (48%) of support among Labour members, with Starmer attracting just under four in ten members’ support (37%) and 15% undecided or unsure....Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham would also defeat Keir Starmer in a head-to-head leadership contest by 53% to 37%. However, Burnham would be ineligible to stand as party leader as he is not an MP.
Despite being one of the favourites to succeed Keir Starmer as the next Labour leader, should Starmer face-off against Streeting in a leadership contest, the Prime Minister would emerge triumphant, according to our poll.
The idea that Starmer would be on the ballot is far-fetched. Any ballot would be decide who replaces him, not Starmer versus whoever.
Not necessarily, unlike the Tories there is no mechanism to VONC a Labour leader.
You can only nominate a candidate to challenge the leader in a leadership election. So if Starmer refused to resign of course he would be on the ballot against any challenger and that challenger would have to have got 81 Labour MPs to nominate them too
That is fair comment but surely Starmer will do the right thing and resign
He would receive more credit by doing that then continuing an internal civil war with untold negative consequences
As much as we discuss this, the public know what Starmer should do and certainly not to continue to tear labour apart
Will he? Why would he? He is 63 and this is by far the most important job he will now do for the rest of his life and he returned Labour to power with a landslide win in 2024, he is also clearly stubborn. Corbyn refused to resign even when the vast majority of Labour MPs backed his opponent in 2016 and Corbyn was re elected as leader by the members.
There is also no guarantee a Labour candidate could get the 81 MPs they need to nominate them to stand against Starmer anyway, especially as all Labour candidates elected in 2024 were picked by the NEC as Starmer loyalists
Starmer did not return Labour to power with a landslide win in 2024.
The Tories did that. Starmer held a Ming vase and did fuck all else to deserve the massive win.
As is now playing out.
Plenty of voters who voted for Labour in 2024 only did so as Starmer was leading them not Corbyn
They got fewer votes than Corbyn did. It's more that he made them non-threatening enough to suppress the anti-Labour vote enough to win.
But May got more votes than Corbyn did in 2017. Hence, she stayed PM.
I'm not talking about 2017. The Labour vote went down from 2019 to 2024.
Thank the Lord, Milliband is currently an also ran and Burnham isn't an MP. Too late for Cooper, too early for Mahmood. Rayner is in Zahawi- legal jeopardy which leaves Streeting.
I'd roll the dice on Rayner. It could go all Liz Truss, but it could work. Streeting is most likely continuity Sunak-Starmer.
I still favour Streeting as we speak but Rayner is in with a chance with me. Maybe it's time to bring the curtain down (and this time for good) on the Blair New Labour project. If that sort of politics, even well delivered, can't now beat Farage then we might have to look at something different.
That is my feeling. Mandelson has soiled New Labour to the point of extinction. He's Johnsoned the brand.
Ratner would be a better comparison.
The problem with the Mandelson scandal is that it reveals an essential truth about the New Labour project which there was previously a polite refusal to confront.
So how does Labour detoxify it. Simply throwing Mandelson to the Wolves and making out it’s just him won’t work.
Mandleson is a Wolves supporter? It's worse than I thought. What was Starmer thinking?
As I believe the only Wolves supporter posting on here I can take solace in the fact that he's definitely not. We're in deep enough shit already without having Mandelson to worry about.
Arsenal are welcome to both Starmer and Corbyn, they seem to have cornered the market in failed Labour leaders.
'Keir Starmer would lose a head-to-head leadership contest against Angela Rayner, but win against Wes Streeting and Ed Miliband, polling for LabourList has revealed.
Polling conducted by Survation for LabourList found that the former deputy leader would defeat Starmer by a 11-point margin, but the Prime Minister would defeat the Energy Secretary by three points.
Should Angela Rayner challenge Keir Starmer to the leadership of the party, the poll suggested she would secure close to a majority (48%) of support among Labour members, with Starmer attracting just under four in ten members’ support (37%) and 15% undecided or unsure....Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham would also defeat Keir Starmer in a head-to-head leadership contest by 53% to 37%. However, Burnham would be ineligible to stand as party leader as he is not an MP.
Despite being one of the favourites to succeed Keir Starmer as the next Labour leader, should Starmer face-off against Streeting in a leadership contest, the Prime Minister would emerge triumphant, according to our poll.
The idea that Starmer would be on the ballot is far-fetched. Any ballot would be decide who replaces him, not Starmer versus whoever.
Not necessarily, unlike the Tories there is no mechanism to VONC a Labour leader.
You can only nominate a candidate to challenge the leader in a leadership election. So if Starmer refused to resign of course he would be on the ballot against any challenger and that challenger would have to have got 81 Labour MPs to nominate them too
That is fair comment but surely Starmer will do the right thing and resign
He would receive more credit by doing that then continuing an internal civil war with untold negative consequences
As much as we discuss this, the public know what Starmer should do and certainly not to continue to tear labour apart
Will he? Why would he? He is 63 and this is by far the most important job he will now do for the rest of his life and he returned Labour to power with a landslide win in 2024, he is also clearly stubborn. Corbyn refused to resign even when the vast majority of Labour MPs backed his opponent in 2016 and Corbyn was re elected as leader by the members.
There is also no guarantee a Labour candidate could get the 81 MPs they need to nominate them to stand against Starmer anyway, especially as all Labour candidates elected in 2024 were picked by the NEC as Starmer loyalists
Starmer did not return Labour to power with a landslide win in 2024.
The Tories did that. Starmer held a Ming vase and did fuck all else to deserve the massive win.
As is now playing out.
Plenty of voters who voted for Labour in 2024 only did so as Starmer was leading them not Corbyn
They got fewer votes than Corbyn did. It's more that he made them non-threatening enough to suppress the anti-Labour vote enough to win.
But May got more votes than Corbyn did in 2017. Hence, she stayed PM.
I'm not talking about 2017. The Labour vote went down from 2019 to 2024.
Who cares? Corbyn was trounced by Boris in 2019. Starmer trounced Sunak in 2024.
The hypocrisy of the right wing media who thought the Mandelson appointment was worth the risk and now going into major hysteria .
Of course Starmer can’t say why he appointed Mandelson. Appoint a sleaze bag who will feel right at home with another sleaze bag.
Not only can he say that, but that's exactly what he should say.
How will Trump respond if Starmer confirms what many think ! Lewis Goodall has an excellent article about this very thing in terms of why Mandelson was appointed.
"Starmer held his nose because he thought the geopolitical gain was worth it". Mandelson was inside the Trump camp. But if the correspondence shows this was the reasoning, does that help justify Starmer's decision? Personally I think so. Dealing with Trump in the UK national interest is a dirty and degrading business.
What impact will this have on the UK's relationship with Trump? I think that is why Starmer is so desperate to keep it hidden. Will the Intelligence and Security Committee take the same view? Personally I would like it to come out, rupture the relationship with Trump so we can stop pretending, and then we can ditch the US/UK trade agreement and take the hit.
He will go on his own volition. Possibly this weekend.
Fat chance, Streeting and Rayner camps are already at war with each other tonight trashing the other as completely unacceptable to lead Labour. Starmer can just rise above it all and hope Labour holds second in the local and devolved elections to shift the pressure to Kemi from him
He hasn't got until May. He probably hasn't got until PMQs.
Lady Victoria is going to have to hold him by the hand and sing "Time to say Goodbye".
When Cameron f***** up he did the right thing. It would be nice if we could return to that sort of "doing the right thing" narrative.
No it isn't, Streeting supporters tonight are openly trashing Rayner as being Labour's Liz Truss, so she would lead to Labour civil war, if she can even get 81 Labour MPs to nominate her. Rayner supporters are meanhwhile trashing Streeting as too close to Mandy.
Cameron was pre Trump and pre Corbyn and pre Boris, now leaders will dig their heels in and absolutely refuse to budge from office no matter what and have to be dragged out of office unless they clearly lose a general election. Starmer is certainly going nowhere anytime soon
'Keir Starmer would lose a head-to-head leadership contest against Angela Rayner, but win against Wes Streeting and Ed Miliband, polling for LabourList has revealed.
Polling conducted by Survation for LabourList found that the former deputy leader would defeat Starmer by a 11-point margin, but the Prime Minister would defeat the Energy Secretary by three points.
Should Angela Rayner challenge Keir Starmer to the leadership of the party, the poll suggested she would secure close to a majority (48%) of support among Labour members, with Starmer attracting just under four in ten members’ support (37%) and 15% undecided or unsure....Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham would also defeat Keir Starmer in a head-to-head leadership contest by 53% to 37%. However, Burnham would be ineligible to stand as party leader as he is not an MP.
Despite being one of the favourites to succeed Keir Starmer as the next Labour leader, should Starmer face-off against Streeting in a leadership contest, the Prime Minister would emerge triumphant, according to our poll.
The idea that Starmer would be on the ballot is far-fetched. Any ballot would be decide who replaces him, not Starmer versus whoever.
Not necessarily, unlike the Tories there is no mechanism to VONC a Labour leader.
You can only nominate a candidate to challenge the leader in a leadership election. So if Starmer refused to resign of course he would be on the ballot against any challenger and that challenger would have to have got 81 Labour MPs to nominate them too
That is fair comment but surely Starmer will do the right thing and resign
He would receive more credit by doing that then continuing an internal civil war with untold negative consequences
As much as we discuss this, the public know what Starmer should do and certainly not to continue to tear labour apart
Will he? Why would he? He is 63 and this is by far the most important job he will now do for the rest of his life and he returned Labour to power with a landslide win in 2024, he is also clearly stubborn. Corbyn refused to resign even when the vast majority of Labour MPs backed his opponent in 2016 and Corbyn was re elected as leader by the members.
There is also no guarantee a Labour candidate could get the 81 MPs they need to nominate them to stand against Starmer anyway, especially as all Labour candidates elected in 2024 were picked by the NEC as Starmer loyalists
Starmer did not return Labour to power with a landslide win in 2024.
The Tories did that. Starmer held a Ming vase and did fuck all else to deserve the massive win.
As is now playing out.
Plenty of voters who voted for Labour in 2024 only did so as Starmer was leading them not Corbyn
They got fewer votes than Corbyn did. It's more that he made them non-threatening enough to suppress the anti-Labour vote enough to win.
You Cotbynistas don't seem to understand how first past the post works.
'Keir Starmer would lose a head-to-head leadership contest against Angela Rayner, but win against Wes Streeting and Ed Miliband, polling for LabourList has revealed.
Polling conducted by Survation for LabourList found that the former deputy leader would defeat Starmer by a 11-point margin, but the Prime Minister would defeat the Energy Secretary by three points.
Should Angela Rayner challenge Keir Starmer to the leadership of the party, the poll suggested she would secure close to a majority (48%) of support among Labour members, with Starmer attracting just under four in ten members’ support (37%) and 15% undecided or unsure....Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham would also defeat Keir Starmer in a head-to-head leadership contest by 53% to 37%. However, Burnham would be ineligible to stand as party leader as he is not an MP.
Despite being one of the favourites to succeed Keir Starmer as the next Labour leader, should Starmer face-off against Streeting in a leadership contest, the Prime Minister would emerge triumphant, according to our poll.
The idea that Starmer would be on the ballot is far-fetched. Any ballot would be decide who replaces him, not Starmer versus whoever.
Not necessarily, unlike the Tories there is no mechanism to VONC a Labour leader.
You can only nominate a candidate to challenge the leader in a leadership election. So if Starmer refused to resign of course he would be on the ballot against any challenger and that challenger would have to have got 81 Labour MPs to nominate them too
That is fair comment but surely Starmer will do the right thing and resign
He would receive more credit by doing that then continuing an internal civil war with untold negative consequences
As much as we discuss this, the public know what Starmer should do and certainly not to continue to tear labour apart
Will he? Why would he? He is 63 and this is by far the most important job he will now do for the rest of his life and he returned Labour to power with a landslide win in 2024, he is also clearly stubborn. Corbyn refused to resign even when the vast majority of Labour MPs backed his opponent in 2016 and Corbyn was re elected as leader by the members.
There is also no guarantee a Labour candidate could get the 81 MPs they need to nominate them to stand against Starmer anyway, especially as all Labour candidates elected in 2024 were picked by the NEC as Starmer loyalists
Starmer did not return Labour to power with a landslide win in 2024.
The Tories did that. Starmer held a Ming vase and did fuck all else to deserve the massive win.
As is now playing out.
Plenty of voters who voted for Labour in 2024 only did so as Starmer was leading them not Corbyn
They got fewer votes than Corbyn did. It's more that he made them non-threatening enough to suppress the anti-Labour vote enough to win.
But May got more votes than Corbyn did in 2017. Hence, she stayed PM.
I'm not talking about 2017. The Labour vote went down from 2019 to 2024.
The full secret notice Peter Mandelson just sent to all UK media
In it, Mandelson uses clauses of the Editor's Code most typically associated with grieving families or those suffering harassment from the press to urge journalists to stop scrutinising his links to the most world's most notorious paedophile.
'Keir Starmer would lose a head-to-head leadership contest against Angela Rayner, but win against Wes Streeting and Ed Miliband, polling for LabourList has revealed.
Polling conducted by Survation for LabourList found that the former deputy leader would defeat Starmer by a 11-point margin, but the Prime Minister would defeat the Energy Secretary by three points.
Should Angela Rayner challenge Keir Starmer to the leadership of the party, the poll suggested she would secure close to a majority (48%) of support among Labour members, with Starmer attracting just under four in ten members’ support (37%) and 15% undecided or unsure....Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham would also defeat Keir Starmer in a head-to-head leadership contest by 53% to 37%. However, Burnham would be ineligible to stand as party leader as he is not an MP.
Despite being one of the favourites to succeed Keir Starmer as the next Labour leader, should Starmer face-off against Streeting in a leadership contest, the Prime Minister would emerge triumphant, according to our poll.
The idea that Starmer would be on the ballot is far-fetched. Any ballot would be decide who replaces him, not Starmer versus whoever.
Not necessarily, unlike the Tories there is no mechanism to VONC a Labour leader.
You can only nominate a candidate to challenge the leader in a leadership election. So if Starmer refused to resign of course he would be on the ballot against any challenger and that challenger would have to have got 81 Labour MPs to nominate them too
That is fair comment but surely Starmer will do the right thing and resign
He would receive more credit by doing that then continuing an internal civil war with untold negative consequences
As much as we discuss this, the public know what Starmer should do and certainly not to continue to tear labour apart
Will he? Why would he? He is 63 and this is by far the most important job he will now do for the rest of his life and he returned Labour to power with a landslide win in 2024, he is also clearly stubborn. Corbyn refused to resign even when the vast majority of Labour MPs backed his opponent in 2016 and Corbyn was re elected as leader by the members.
There is also no guarantee a Labour candidate could get the 81 MPs they need to nominate them to stand against Starmer anyway, especially as all Labour candidates elected in 2024 were picked by the NEC as Starmer loyalists
Starmer did not return Labour to power with a landslide win in 2024.
The Tories did that. Starmer held a Ming vase and did fuck all else to deserve the massive win.
As is now playing out.
Plenty of voters who voted for Labour in 2024 only did so as Starmer was leading them not Corbyn
They got fewer votes than Corbyn did. It's more that he made them non-threatening enough to suppress the anti-Labour vote enough to win.
But May got more votes than Corbyn did in 2017. Hence, she stayed PM.
I'm not talking about 2017. The Labour vote went down from 2019 to 2024.
'Keir Starmer would lose a head-to-head leadership contest against Angela Rayner, but win against Wes Streeting and Ed Miliband, polling for LabourList has revealed.
Polling conducted by Survation for LabourList found that the former deputy leader would defeat Starmer by a 11-point margin, but the Prime Minister would defeat the Energy Secretary by three points.
Should Angela Rayner challenge Keir Starmer to the leadership of the party, the poll suggested she would secure close to a majority (48%) of support among Labour members, with Starmer attracting just under four in ten members’ support (37%) and 15% undecided or unsure....Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham would also defeat Keir Starmer in a head-to-head leadership contest by 53% to 37%. However, Burnham would be ineligible to stand as party leader as he is not an MP.
Despite being one of the favourites to succeed Keir Starmer as the next Labour leader, should Starmer face-off against Streeting in a leadership contest, the Prime Minister would emerge triumphant, according to our poll.
The idea that Starmer would be on the ballot is far-fetched. Any ballot would be decide who replaces him, not Starmer versus whoever.
Not necessarily, unlike the Tories there is no mechanism to VONC a Labour leader.
You can only nominate a candidate to challenge the leader in a leadership election. So if Starmer refused to resign of course he would be on the ballot against any challenger and that challenger would have to have got 81 Labour MPs to nominate them too
That is fair comment but surely Starmer will do the right thing and resign
He would receive more credit by doing that then continuing an internal civil war with untold negative consequences
As much as we discuss this, the public know what Starmer should do and certainly not to continue to tear labour apart
Will he? Why would he? He is 63 and this is by far the most important job he will now do for the rest of his life and he returned Labour to power with a landslide win in 2024, he is also clearly stubborn. Corbyn refused to resign even when the vast majority of Labour MPs backed his opponent in 2016 and Corbyn was re elected as leader by the members.
There is also no guarantee a Labour candidate could get the 81 MPs they need to nominate them to stand against Starmer anyway, especially as all Labour candidates elected in 2024 were picked by the NEC as Starmer loyalists
Starmer did not return Labour to power with a landslide win in 2024.
The Tories did that. Starmer held a Ming vase and did fuck all else to deserve the massive win.
As is now playing out.
Plenty of voters who voted for Labour in 2024 only did so as Starmer was leading them not Corbyn
They got fewer votes than Corbyn did. It's more that he made them non-threatening enough to suppress the anti-Labour vote enough to win.
But May got more votes than Corbyn did in 2017. Hence, she stayed PM.
I'm not talking about 2017. The Labour vote went down from 2019 to 2024.
Thank the Lord, Milliband is currently an also ran and Burnham isn't an MP. Too late for Cooper, too early for Mahmood. Rayner is in Zahawi- legal jeopardy which leaves Streeting.
I'd roll the dice on Rayner. It could go all Liz Truss, but it could work. Streeting is most likely continuity Sunak-Starmer.
I still favour Streeting as we speak but Rayner is in with a chance with me. Maybe it's time to bring the curtain down (and this time for good) on the Blair New Labour project. If that sort of politics, even well delivered, can't now beat Farage then we might have to look at something different.
That is my feeling. Mandelson has soiled New Labour to the point of extinction. He's Johnsoned the brand.
Ratner would be a better comparison.
The problem with the Mandelson scandal is that it reveals an essential truth about the New Labour project which there was previously a polite refusal to confront.
So how does Labour detoxify it. Simply throwing Mandelson to the Wolves and making out it’s just him won’t work.
I was very specific. The long term toxicity is in the New Labour brand.
Of course in the medium term Mandelson trashes Labour but by jettisoning the entire project they have a chance of repatriating the lefty vote. A tall order but possible. Remember Mandelson's treachery was aimed as much at his own Labour Government in Office as discrediting the nation.
You were very specific, but what if you're wrong? What if it's the Labiur brand rather than the new Labour brand he's trashed? Ask 100 people in the street for thoughta about Mandelson, I bet it's no more than 10 who identify him specifically with 'new labour' rather than just 'labour'. I'm certainly not hearing anyone say 'that new labour lot, they're dodgy as fuck, but the rest of the party is mustard'.
Some of you have your blue scarves tied so tightly around your necks it is cutting off the blood supply to your heads.
I have been remarkably circumspect. Of course Labour could be finished forever, a narrative which you are rooting for. I am suggesting that if they have any hope of survival they tack to the left.
Why do you assume anyone who doesn't support the Labour Party is a partisan Tory? Is it because you can't imagine any other reason for not being left wing but tribalism? I find this particularly strange for someone who I believe vites Lib Dem.
Angela Rayner has told friends that she warned Sir Keir Starmer not to appoint Lord Mandelson as ambassador to the US because of his links to the paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.
The Times has been told that Rayner, the former deputy prime minister, privately warned Starmer that appointing Mandelson would be a mistake because of public evidence that the two men had retained a close relationship after Epstein’s conviction for child sex offences.
And there it is guys. Contest incoming. The only question is whether it’s next week, post-Gorton or post-May.
The hypocrisy of the right wing media who thought the Mandelson appointment was worth the risk and now going into major hysteria .
Of course Starmer can’t say why he appointed Mandelson. Appoint a sleaze bag who will feel right at home with another sleaze bag.
Not only can he say that, but that's exactly what he should say.
How will Trump respond if Starmer confirms what many think ! Lewis Goodall has an excellent article about this very thing in terms of why Mandelson was appointed.
"Starmer held his nose because he thought the geopolitical gain was worth it". Mandelson was inside the Trump camp. But if the correspondence shows this was the reasoning, does that help justify Starmer's decision? Personally I think so. Dealing with Trump in the UK national interest is a dirty and degrading business.
What impact will this have on the UK's relationship with Trump? I think that is why Starmer is so desperate to keep it hidden. Will the Intelligence and Security Committee take the same view? Personally I would like it to come out, rupture the relationship with Trump so we can stop pretending, and then we can ditch the US/UK trade agreement and take the hit.
Starmer's strategy is in ruins.
I dont think it helps him. Mandelson doesnt have a Liam Neesonesque set of very particular skills. There are slimy arseholes who werent friends with the foremost nonce he could have sent
The full secret notice Peter Mandelson just sent to all UK media
In it, Mandelson uses clauses of the Editor's Code most typically associated with grieving families or those suffering harassment from the press to urge journalists to stop scrutinising his links to the most world's most notorious paedophile.
Thank the Lord, Milliband is currently an also ran and Burnham isn't an MP. Too late for Cooper, too early for Mahmood. Rayner is in Zahawi- legal jeopardy which leaves Streeting.
I'd roll the dice on Rayner. It could go all Liz Truss, but it could work. Streeting is most likely continuity Sunak-Starmer.
I still favour Streeting as we speak but Rayner is in with a chance with me. Maybe it's time to bring the curtain down (and this time for good) on the Blair New Labour project. If that sort of politics, even well delivered, can't now beat Farage then we might have to look at something different.
That is my feeling. Mandelson has soiled New Labour to the point of extinction. He's Johnsoned the brand.
Ratner would be a better comparison.
The problem with the Mandelson scandal is that it reveals an essential truth about the New Labour project which there was previously a polite refusal to confront.
So how does Labour detoxify it. Simply throwing Mandelson to the Wolves and making out it’s just him won’t work.
Mandleson is a Wolves supporter? It's worse than I thought. What was Starmer thinking?
As I believe the only Wolves supporter posting on here I can take solace in the fact that he's definitely not. We're in deep enough shit already without having Mandelson to worry about.
Arsenal are welcome to both Starmer and Corbyn, they seem to have cornered the market in failed Labour leaders.
Correction, Phil. You are the only poster on here who admits to being a Wolves supporter.
The hypocrisy of the right wing media who thought the Mandelson appointment was worth the risk and now going into major hysteria .
Of course Starmer can’t say why he appointed Mandelson. Appoint a sleaze bag who will feel right at home with another sleaze bag.
But what Starmer could say is that he made the wrong call. This is the issue. We all know that it was the wrong call now, we all know he took a risk and it backfired. He can’t go back in time and un-do it, so he should have owned it. Mea maxima culpa. It would still damage him, but it wouldn’t lead to this sorry spectacle of trying to justify it by saying he was misled.
"Benedict Cumberbatch reads a funny letter from a frustrated bank customer
Anyone who has ever attempted to deal with a bank will find comfort in the following letter, written by a frustrated account holder who had recently tried, and failed, to pay in a cheque."
Thank the Lord, Milliband is currently an also ran and Burnham isn't an MP. Too late for Cooper, too early for Mahmood. Rayner is in Zahawi- legal jeopardy which leaves Streeting.
I'd roll the dice on Rayner. It could go all Liz Truss, but it could work. Streeting is most likely continuity Sunak-Starmer.
I still favour Streeting as we speak but Rayner is in with a chance with me. Maybe it's time to bring the curtain down (and this time for good) on the Blair New Labour project. If that sort of politics, even well delivered, can't now beat Farage then we might have to look at something different.
That is my feeling. Mandelson has soiled New Labour to the point of extinction. He's Johnsoned the brand.
Ratner would be a better comparison.
The problem with the Mandelson scandal is that it reveals an essential truth about the New Labour project which there was previously a polite refusal to confront.
So how does Labour detoxify it. Simply throwing Mandelson to the Wolves and making out it’s just him won’t work.
I was very specific. The long term toxicity is in the New Labour brand.
Of course in the medium term Mandelson trashes Labour but by jettisoning the entire project they have a chance of repatriating the lefty vote. A tall order but possible. Remember Mandelson's treachery was aimed as much at his own Labour Government in Office as discrediting the nation.
You were very specific, but what if you're wrong? What if it's the Labiur brand rather than the new Labour brand he's trashed? Ask 100 people in the street for thoughta about Mandelson, I bet it's no more than 10 who identify him specifically with 'new labour' rather than just 'labour'. I'm certainly not hearing anyone say 'that new labour lot, they're dodgy as fuck, but the rest of the party is mustard'.
Some of you have your blue scarves tied so tightly around your necks it is cutting off the blood supply to your heads.
I have been remarkably circumspect. Of course Labour could be finished forever, a narrative which you are rooting for. I am suggesting that if they have any hope of survival they tack to the left.
Why do you assume anyone who doesn't support the Labour Party is a partisan Tory? Is it because you can't imagine any other reason for not being left wing but tribalism? I find this particularly strange for someone who I believe vites Lib Dem.
I only voted Lib Dem to mitigate Tory votes. Much the same as voting Labour, which I do here in the Vale. I will be voting Plaid in May to ensure Reform don't win in Wales. My scarf is anything but blue.
He will go on his own volition. Possibly this weekend.
Fat chance, Streeting and Rayner camps are already at war with each other tonight trashing the other as completely unacceptable to lead Labour. Starmer can just rise above it all and hope Labour holds second in the local and devolved elections to shift the pressure to Kemi from him
To paraphrase Yes, Minister, if Rayner gets the job the party will fall apart in three months. If it's Streeting, it will be three weeks.
In the Hackerverse, the solution was to put Jim in Number Ten, but the whole point is to replace a PM who resembles Jim Hacker more than most.
Maybe what we need is a quick bit of plastic surgery so that Sir Steer Calmer can take over.
The full secret notice Peter Mandelson just sent to all UK media
In it, Mandelson uses clauses of the Editor's Code most typically associated with grieving families or those suffering harassment from the press to urge journalists to stop scrutinising his links to the most world's most notorious paedophile.
Bloody hell, C4’s Frontline: Our Soldiers facing Putin on atm is a bit of Starship Troopers style propaganda. Apart from anything else the initial starting point of the insolubility of NATO is somewhat moot.
Bloody hell, C4’s Frontline: Our Soldiers facing Putin on atm is a bit of Starship Troopers style propaganda. Apart from anything else the initial starting point of the insolubility of NATO is somewhat moot.
He will go on his own volition. Possibly this weekend.
Fat chance, Streeting and Rayner camps are already at war with each other tonight trashing the other as completely unacceptable to lead Labour. Starmer can just rise above it all and hope Labour holds second in the local and devolved elections to shift the pressure to Kemi from him
To paraphrase Yes, Minister, if Rayner gets the job the party will fall apart in three months. If it's Streeting, it will be three weeks.
In the Hackerverse, the solution was to put Jim in Number Ten, but the whole point is to replace a PM who resembles Jim Hacker more than most.
Maybe what we need is a quick bit of plastic surgery so that Sir Steer Calmer can take over.
Yep. Whatever Starmers failings, he led them back to power from 14 years in the wilderness. Whomever succeeds did not and the opposing faction(s) will feel no obligation to play nice. The uneasy truce (already tested to its limit) expires with SKS premiership
Angela Rayner has told friends that she warned Sir Keir Starmer not to appoint Lord Mandelson as ambassador to the US because of his links to the paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.
The Times has been told that Rayner, the former deputy prime minister, privately warned Starmer that appointing Mandelson would be a mistake because of public evidence that the two men had retained a close relationship after Epstein’s conviction for child sex offences.
And there it is guys. Contest incoming. The only question is whether it’s next week, post-Gorton or post-May.
Nah, the Brits did, they looked like they were dressed on their way out for a night at a pub - wooly hats, Christmas jumpers, overcoats and crazy scarfs. No sportswear in sight.
Look at the headlines, or what’s dominating all the news bulletins. We’re talking about anything but the things that most need to be reckoned with. In the UK, we’re talking round the clock about Peter Mandelson, the one guy in this we at least know wasn’t making sexually abusive use of Epstein’s trafficked women and girls. Even if he did offer Epstein image rehab advice, which, as discussed here in depth on Tuesday, was a foray into the moral abyss. (Again.) But the frenzied and remorseless focus on political fallout – and not the male-on-female debasement that is the entire heart of this story, and always has been – is weird, isn’t it?
On the BBC I watched a documentary last night Lover, Liar, Predator. It is superb. Its the sort of video that should be shown in schools, possibly even more so than Adolescence. In my work I come across people all the time like the accused in LLP. Manipulative, controlling, abusive, dangerous. People, particularly young girls, need to be much more aware.
I think that there is more than enough quality on the BBC to justify £180 a year. That doesn't mean that I think the licence fee is defensible or that the current legal framework for it can survive but if the BBC went behind a paywall I'd probably pay it.
I thought the Channel 4 documentary about the Arthur's Seat murder (featuring some of your colleagues) was also very good for unpicking that kind of behaviour. The obsession with the engagement ring was particularly galling.
Yes. Alex Prentice is a pal. His use of the recording from the hospital was masterful.
It is a major topic that @Cyclefree mentions often. Too many men are misogynistic, self absorbed and dangerously selfish. I saw another video yesterday involving a talk by a psychologist from Australia talking about a friend of his who had murdered his wife and 3 kids. 2 observations really struck home. These men, (and it is nearly always men) talk about should and shouldn't. She should have done X, she shouldn't have done Y because it presses my buttons and she knows this. Victim blaming but the words are significant.
Secondly, he talked of a spectrum. Tolerating or worse sexist language and stereotyping puts a minority of men onto a path that leads to domestic violence, sexual violence and even murder. Don't tolerate it. Don't let others think it is ok. It just isn't.
I am glad someone has noticed what I have been saying for years. On here and elsewhere. The default assumption in too much of our society is that Women. Do. Not. Count. They exist only to support men or to be a resource for them, mainly a sexual one. They are not really entitled to any rights and such rights as they are granted are only done as favour by men and only insofar as they do not inconvenience men. If men want something women have, women should give this up because men's demands are more important. Women who either point any of this out or complain about it get and deserve a load of abuse.
If you want an example of this in action, read and listen to the Scottish government's arguments in the latest FWS case in the Scottish courts.
The Epstein affair is a sordid, vile, corrupt disgrace. There are some emails where men ask Epstein for the name of the gynaecologists he sent his victims too. Did those medical professionals ever ask themselves what was happening or whether they had any ethical obligations to speak up? Given the scale of abuse over many years, the type of men involved, other examples such as the Pelicot case in France (and that was only one of the many crimes promoted and recorded by a website which had thousands of users and was up for 6 years), the Joanne Young one here, the fact that the murder rate for women by men has not gone down and remains consistent year after year and so many other examples, I am at the stage of thinking that it is decent men who are the minority. Not the other way around.
And judging by conversations with many of my female friends in recent weeks and months, I am not the only one to think this.
If that bothers or upsets men on here, don't complain to me. Ask yourself about the sort of society we have, who has the power in it and how well it reflects and meets the needs of the female half of the population.
That would leave the Senate with 51 GOP seats. If Alaska is also a flip (and it could be) that leaves GOP with 50 seats and the casting vote of the VP. So a GOP hold.
The hypocrisy of the right wing media who thought the Mandelson appointment was worth the risk and now going into major hysteria .
Of course Starmer can’t say why he appointed Mandelson. Appoint a sleaze bag who will feel right at home with another sleaze bag.
I think he could. Someone called Keir must be steeped in politics. So far hes been a seven stone weakling. Time to take his spinach and show who he is.....
Trump is such a thing skinned narcissist it's best not to upset the apple cart. If we hadn't voted to impose economic sanctions on ourselves back in 2016 we might have been in a stronger position to tell Trump to do one.
For us bitter Remainers this does have an upside ! Once the Mandelson No 10 emails get released the alleged special relationship will finally be put out of its misery . Can you imagine what they would have said about the stain on humanity ?
With our transatlantic alliance in the dumpster the UK will have to get even closer to the EU .
If the UK loses its special relationship with the US the things Britain will lose (nuclear weapons cooperation, intelligence sharing, etc) are not things that the EU can help with, so Brexit is neither here nor there.
Slagging Labour off for the defence budget Slagging Labour off for the flood defence budget Claiming Parliament is effectively closed nothing happening for weeks because of Mandelson
All bare faced lies Complete fabrication of the facts
All politians lie but she is world class In complete denial of the shit show up to mid 2024 she was in the midst if
Arrogant liar She's got a lot in common with Mandy
Hats off to John Hunt commentating on the opening ceremony after the last couple of years he's suffered. Lesser mortals would have thrown in the towel.
Look at the headlines, or what’s dominating all the news bulletins. We’re talking about anything but the things that most need to be reckoned with. In the UK, we’re talking round the clock about Peter Mandelson, the one guy in this we at least know wasn’t making sexually abusive use of Epstein’s trafficked women and girls. Even if he did offer Epstein image rehab advice, which, as discussed here in depth on Tuesday, was a foray into the moral abyss. (Again.) But the frenzied and remorseless focus on political fallout – and not the male-on-female debasement that is the entire heart of this story, and always has been – is weird, isn’t it?
Is that not because the Govt have horribly poor comms, the opposition parties (except the Lib Dems, who don't exist to the media) have nothing to offer except froth, and our entire national media (except for a couple of outlets - maybe) prioritise sex, then gossip, then political hits, all above journalism, and have an attention span of 7 seconds on a good day?
You can get that from old butchers, but it's like bicarbonate of soda or sugar soap: people look at you strange if you ask for it. Nice with raisins or freshly-slaughtered haggi, provided the correct Scottish prayers are said first. Left-hand haggis, obviously.
He will go on his own volition. Possibly this weekend.
Fat chance, Streeting and Rayner camps are already at war with each other tonight trashing the other as completely unacceptable to lead Labour. Starmer can just rise above it all and hope Labour holds second in the local and devolved elections to shift the pressure to Kemi from him
He hasn't got until May. He probably hasn't got until PMQs.
Lady Victoria is going to have to hold him by the hand and sing "Time to say Goodbye".
When Cameron f***** up he did the right thing. It would be nice if we could return to that sort of "doing the right thing" narrative.
No it isn't, Streeting supporters tonight are openly trashing Rayner as being Labour's Liz Truss, so she would lead to Labour civil war, if she can even get 81 Labour MPs to nominate her. Rayner supporters are meanhwhile trashing Streeting as too close to Mandy.
Cameron was pre Trump and pre Corbyn and pre Boris, now leaders will dig their heels in and absolutely refuse to budge from office no matter what and have to be dragged out of office unless they clearly lose a general election. Starmer is certainly going nowhere anytime soon
Comments
It is probably the only time Starmer has taken a risk in his entire life.
I don't blame Starmer for taking the risk in a World of Trump, a risk that Gove considered genius. But now that risk has gone South he has to fall on his sword. The buck stops with him. It is very like the dilemma Cameron found himself in after the EU Referendum.
Charles II managed that with Henry Morgan.
The next thing to come out will be who Mandy replaced Epstein with, as favoured correspondent and recipient of government information.
I am utterly certain that Mandy was doing to Keir what he did to Gordon Brown.
EXCL: Gordon Brown says he deeply regrets bringing Peter Mandelson into his government, and that revelations about Jeffrey Epstein’s influence on UK politics had caused him revulsion.
Writing in the Guardian, the former PM said the news that Mandelson was passing information to Epstein while he was business secretary was “a betrayal of everything we stand for as a country”.
Number 11 will amaze you
https://x.com/joel_h5/status/2019813731035934735?s=61
It's simple. He rolled the dice and he lost. No second chances. F*** off Keir.
There is also no guarantee a Labour candidate could get the 81 MPs they need to nominate them to stand against Starmer anyway, especially as all Labour candidates elected in 2024 were picked by the NEC as Starmer loyalists
As I noted yesterday, Carney won an election from nowhere and still leads in the polls by telling him to F off.
We haven't heard about Greenland for a while since they and the Danes said the same.
It's the only language he understands.
I presume that they act in the way that they do to reduce any police time that might be spent on incriminating evidence, and to ensure that the premises that they search are fully tooled up with good coffee and biscuits ahead of their arrival.
His behaviour with Epstein was shocking and he deserves all that is coming but he did a lot for the country in a very difficult time and I for one will not forget it.
I have been remarkably circumspect. Of course Labour could be finished forever, a narrative which you are rooting for. I am suggesting that if they have any hope of survival they tack to the left.
Rayner told Starmer not to appoint Mandelson
Is this the first of Dont look at me I didn't support the idea. Starmer will be isolated. The end is nigh...
Brilliant
@AVMikhailova
scoop 👇🏻
Angela Rayner has told friends that she warned Sir Keir Starmer not to appoint Lord Mandelson as ambassador to the US because of his links to the paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.
The Times has been told that Rayner, the former deputy prime minister, privately warned Starmer that appointing Mandelson would be a mistake because of public evidence that the two men had retained a close relationship after Epstein’s conviction for child sex offences.
He has failed and as hard as it is he needs to practice what he preached when he got elected
Rayner is said not to want to be the one who launches a leadership challenge against Starmer, and several senior government figures predict that he will “limp on” until after local elections in May. “Starmer’s premiership is in terminal decline but he is not in imminent danger,” one said. “The die is cast for May.”
So looks like May is judgement day for Kemi and Sir Keir, whichever one sees their party beaten by the other's and Reform in the local and devolved elections NEV will likely be gone by the summer
I bet they do.
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=popeye+spinach#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:6f30562a,vid:gxO758l7JVM,st:0.
Process State is “We compiled a 365,432 page report which failed to notice anything. But this relieves us of any responsibility for not doing anything.”
Actual process - “Here are 3 sides of A4 listing evidence of the crimes of the guilty bastard. Trial starts Tuesday.”
He will go on his own volition. Possibly this weekend.
More broadly it feels really, really febrile tonight
From the very top of government people are on edge on multiple fronts
The message from Number 10 is that Starmer is upbeat and focused on the future
But some say he is in a dark place - angry with Mandelson, angry with himself, as
@PippaCrerar
picked up earlier
This is categorically rejected by those around him
There is genuine concern from some members of the Cabinet that Starmer could go. Again this is rejected as 'completely untrue' by Number 10
Then within Whitehall there is total turmoil over the scale of the disclosure to come with the Mandelson files
Tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of messages will have to be made public and the government has no control over what goes out
Lastly with Starmer at such a low ebb the battle to succeed him feels like it is full swing. Allies of Rayner and Streeting going hard against one another tonight
Very much everything, everywhere all at once...
LOL
Or more like, "The cast will die in May."
The Tories did that. Starmer held a Ming vase and did fuck all else to deserve the massive win.
As is now playing out.
With our transatlantic alliance in the dumpster the UK will have to get even closer to the EU .
FWIW I don't think Kemi would come off second-best against either of those two.
Time will tell (probably)
In it, Mandelson uses clauses of the Editor's Code most typically associated with grieving families or those suffering harassment from the press to urge journalists to stop scrutinising his links to the most world's most notorious paedophile.
https://www.thenational.scot/news/25834517.full-secret-notice-peter-mandelson-just-sent-uk-media/
Lady Victoria is going to have to hold him by the hand and sing "Time to say Goodbye".
When Cameron f***** up he did the right thing. It would be nice if we could return to that sort of "doing the right thing" narrative.
Or, as they call them, "Rayners".....
Arsenal are welcome to both Starmer and Corbyn, they seem to have cornered the market in failed Labour leaders.
Mandelson was inside the Trump camp.
But if the correspondence shows this was the reasoning, does that help justify Starmer's decision?
Personally I think so. Dealing with Trump in the UK national interest is a dirty and degrading business.
What impact will this have on the UK's relationship with Trump?
I think that is why Starmer is so desperate to keep it hidden.
Will the Intelligence and Security Committee take the same view?
Personally I would like it to come out, rupture the relationship with Trump so we can stop pretending, and then we can ditch the US/UK trade agreement and take the hit.
Starmer's strategy is in ruins.
Cameron was pre Trump and pre Corbyn and pre Boris, now leaders will dig their heels in and absolutely refuse to budge from office no matter what and have to be dragged out of office unless they clearly lose a general election. Starmer is certainly going nowhere anytime soon
https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/49978-how-britain-voted-in-the-2024-general-election
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNXnmDy4jmg
"Benedict Cumberbatch reads a funny letter from a frustrated bank customer
Anyone who has ever attempted to deal with a bank will find comfort in the following letter, written by a frustrated account holder who had recently tried, and failed, to pay in a cheque."
In the Hackerverse, the solution was to put Jim in Number Ten, but the whole point is to replace a PM who resembles Jim Hacker more than most.
Maybe what we need is a quick bit of plastic surgery so that Sir Steer Calmer can take over.
.
@Polymarket
- 2026 U.S. Senate (chance of winning)
NORTH CAROLINA
🟦 Democrat: 78% (flip)
🟥 Republican: 22%
—
MAINE
🟦 Democrat: 69% (flip)
🟥 Republican: 30%
—
GEORGIA
🟦 Democrat: 79%
🟥 Republican: 20%
—
MICHIGAN
🟦 Democrat: 77%
🟥 Republican: 16%
—
ALASKA
🟥 Dan Sullivan: 51%
🟦 Mary Peltola: 49%
—
OHIO
🟥 Republican: 61%
🟦 Democrat: 40%
—
IOWA
🟥 Republican: 61%
🟦 Democrat: 37%
—
TEXAS
🟥 Republican: 64%
🟦 Democrat: 36%
—
NEW HAMPSHIRE
🟦 Democrat: 82%
🟥 Republican: 18%
—
FLORIDA
🟥 Republican: 84%
🟦 Democrat: 15%
—
NEBRASKA
🟥 Republican: 75%
🟨 Ind/Other: 25%
MINNESOTA
🟦 Democrat: 84%
🟥 Republican: 16%
https://x.com/IAPolls2022/status/2019863922640392562?s=20
Whatever Starmers failings, he led them back to power from 14 years in the wilderness. Whomever succeeds did not and the opposing faction(s) will feel no obligation to play nice. The uneasy truce (already tested to its limit) expires with SKS premiership
If you want an example of this in action, read and listen to the Scottish government's arguments in the latest FWS case in the Scottish courts.
The Epstein affair is a sordid, vile, corrupt disgrace. There are some emails where men ask Epstein for the name of the gynaecologists he sent his victims too. Did those medical professionals ever ask themselves what was happening or whether they had any ethical obligations to speak up? Given the scale of abuse over many years, the type of men involved, other examples such as the Pelicot case in France (and that was only one of the many crimes promoted and recorded by a website which had thousands of users and was up for 6 years), the Joanne Young one here, the fact that the murder rate for women by men has not gone down and remains consistent year after year and so many other examples, I am at the stage of thinking that it is decent men who are the minority. Not the other way around.
And judging by conversations with many of my female friends in recent weeks and months, I am not the only one to think this.
If that bothers or upsets men on here, don't complain to me. Ask yourself about the sort of society we have, who has the power in it and how well it reflects and meets the needs of the female half of the population.
If Alaska is also a flip (and it could be) that leaves GOP with 50 seats and the casting vote of the VP.
So a GOP hold.
Fortunate that nothing much happened with SKS or Mandy in the last 10 days whilst i was locked out
(Spoilers: global climate change means there are major challenges.)
If i were a soft left hopeful i would let the Right Wing LFI lot own the worst ever GE result in 2029.
Let Streeting have it and fail miserably
Steven Swinford
@Steven_Swinford
More broadly it feels really, really febrile tonight
https://x.com/Steven_Swinford/status/2019869133790216309
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/feb/06/gordon-brown-deeply-regrets-bringing-peter-mandelson-into-his-government