We should remember Starmer is the greatest Leader of the Opposition since the end of World War II
We should remember Starmer is the greatest Leader of the Opposition since the end of World War II – politicalbetting.com
We shouldn’t forget the awful position Jeremy Corbyn bequeathed Sir Keir Starmer after the 2019 general election where Labour won just 202 seats in one of their worst performances since the end of WWII.
1
Comments
He’s been a pitifully poor pathetic PM.
He’s continuity Sunak but without the charisma Rishi has.
He was holed below the waterline the moment his backbenchers rebelled on slowing the rapid rate of growth of benefits and WFA.
Still. We’ve got David Brent in charge now.
Woo hoo
Which ultimately meant he was shite - and out the door in two years.
No stone unturned.
https://x.com/TerribleMaps/status/2078564480343245099
Reminds me of MBS and the FIA.
Speaking of which, baffled by Hamilton getting a penalty and Leclerc not.
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5605704#Comment_5605704
The last time we had five PMs in four or fewer years was 1865-68 - Palmerston (died) Russell (removed by the Commons) Derby (retired on health grounds) Disraeli (lost election) Gladstone (won election).
Both of those were before the advent of universal suffrage in 1928.
Are they not there still so as to have a high fence to hide behind?
The only option may be a mass exodus. We will not lead that because our perk of 4 teams in one country would be a tough one to maintain.
2015 9,347,324 Miliband
2017 12,877,918 Corbyn
2019 10,269,051 Corbyn
2024 9,708,716 Starmer
george
@StokeyyG2
‘I like a lot of them artists but I thought it was crap…’
Wayne Rooney on the half time show for the World Cup Final 👏🤣🤣🤣
https://x.com/StokeyyG2/status/2078939055933321260?s=20
It's crackers. Even Russell thought it was a racing incident.
Yesterday's Perun was about Ukrainian strikes in the Azov Sea, including what is important and consequences for others.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-LdSQFJNC0
https://x.com/nafovoyager/status/2079080699152523537
Followed by their convoluted decision-making over the unsafe release https://www.fia.com/system/files/decision-document/2026_belgian_grand_prix_-_infringement_-_ferrari_-_unsafe_release_of_car_44.pdf
And their even more convoluted reasoning for not giving Lerlerc a penalty for crowding out Piastri https://www.fia.com/system/files/decision-document/2026_belgian_grand_prix_-_decision_-_car_16_-_collision_with_car_81_in_turn_5.pdf
One knows working in petrochemicals at a time of war is dangerous. I am not sure an equivalent of Amazon was on the civilian danger list.
Military logistics, even when subcontracted, is a legitimate target, especially when the other side is still bombing hoses and schools. If ordinary Muscovites start to notice their stuff isn’t arriving, then all the better.
Dave is the best.
Where is your evidence that Wildberries were shipping arms?
The next time Moscow takes down a domestic housing complex in Kiev they have an answer why they think it was a legitimate target.
The sooner Putin comes out of the Kremlin feet first the better.
See the electricity grid, bridges and many other things.
We clearly need 4 World Cups.
Then the Yanks can have one of their own just like golf. Performed in Donald's padded cell with one contestant so he always wins.
Exclusion from the next World Cup.must be on the cards
https://x.com/gloooud/status/2078404688316076080
It’s everything you need to fight a war, apart from the explosives themselves.
Serhii Kuzan, chairman of the Ukrainian Security and Cooperation Centre, told the BBC that Wildberries was a "vital component" of Russian logistics, and that its website had been used by Russian volunteers to purchase military equipment including walkie-talkies, body armour and drone components.
"The primary rationale for striking Wildberries' warehouses is to disrupt Russian logistics and the supply of dual-use goods, critical electronics, sanctioned goods and the like to the Russian army and Russian arms manufacturers," he said.
"The collateral damage from such strikes could also have a serious impact on the Russian economy, as well as a psychological effect on Russian society and, likely, on continued support for the war."
Russia has targeted similar facilities in Ukraine since the start of the war, including its postal service and some electronics distributors.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/clyxlm877p2o
A new day is dawning is it not?
Or something like that...
Attacking Russian logistics is absolutely legitimate as part of that mission. If Russia does not want the logistics hit, they can pull back to their internationally recognised borders.
Just about the only thing that might influence FIFA to take action, is a serious threat of a UEFA boycott of the World Cup. The Argies behaved terribly for the whole tournament
We're seeing a repeat of 1944 play out before our eyes. Ukraine is strangling the Russian war economy by focusing on oil targets, just as the Allies did to Germany before them. (The Allies could have done that earlier but failed initially to realise that a shortage of oil was capable of bringing the German war machine and economy to its knees.) But once the Allies had focused their attacks away from area bombing, the other way they paralysed the German economy was by hitting the transport hub which brought together its parts. Ukraine going after Russian logistics hubs is not dissimilar, the difference is that 80 years on the logistics hubs are distribution warehouses rather than railway marshalling yards and so on.
What Ukraine is not doing is area bombing of cities as a whole, which is effectively Russia's approach in so far as it does not seem to be able to target attacks.
The Premier League and La Liga etc are what has spread the game to Asia and Africa, not FIFA.
What does it look like in a Bronze Age warship ?
I am sure there are good reasons to bomb civilian targets. I am sure sometimes bombing civilian targets is a bad idea.
(a) he and his team (i.e. McSweeney) were highly effective up to 2019 in the way they positioned Starmer to be able to persuade Labour members to ditch the Corbynites and elect Starmer as leader.
(b) Johnson, Truss and Sunak turned out to be crap, no thanks to Starmer, and after 14 years the country was crying out for change. So he got lucky.
No reason for such a figure to turn out to be a good PM.
Dual use targets are legitimate targets if proportionate under the Geneva Convention.
Hiding behind the Convention to prevent any self-defence does not make you right.
He writes that the no 1 way to gain more time to focus on your priorities is to have a foreign sec who can get on with the job and is already very well connected and respected across the international community and associated agencies. This frees up time the PM otherwise has to spend on international stuff.
Read like an argument for David M rather than Ed M to me.
Trump's economic war on Europe is far more effective than his war on Iran.
https://x.com/SStapczynski/status/2079025092139606420
The Hormuz closure is choking LNG supplies to Europe 🇪🇺⚠️
European imports are down 33% year-over-year (on a 30-day moving avg basis). That's because Asia is taking more US LNG to replace supply stuck in the Persian Gulf
Also, Europe imports at lowest seasonal level since 2021
Indeed all along, and from day one, Starmer's comms team were abysmal. The bitter irony is that the Starmer government actually was effective in some critical areas- especially foreign policy. However, the winter fuel fiasco undermined trust and Mandelson undermined respect. Starmer's epitaph will somewhat depend on how Burnham does, but I think it will certainly not have the same stink of abject failure as Johnson, Truss or even Sunak. We can only hope for the sake of the country that the mess of the last 11 years is finally put behind us. The pitiful Trump wannabes on the right seem to have finally been found out by the voters, so we may yet hope that a recovery in our economic and political well being is still possible.
So fuck them.
Get on your high horse and look at the moral highground from up there. You'll get a great view of the tens and tens and tens of thousands of Russian war crimes. I'm sure even you will be able to see missiles slamming into Ukrainian hopsitals, tower blocks, kindergartens, markets....
Get in a taxi anywhere in that region, and the first question when they hear a British accent will be about football. Liverpool, Mo Salah…
The argument of where the line between civilian and military is, is far more complicated than it at first seems.
To give a rarely mentioned example - in a number of countries, airlines are given a subsidy, for cargo aircraft. This is so that, in time of war, the planes are available for military logistics.
Does this mean that Fed Ex (for example) is a legitimate target?
I worked for a while in telecoms. The entire phone network, in most countries, is setup to be taken over for military purposes in time of war.
A great piece on Islmophobia in the Spectator, charting the decline of a once-respected institution.
If you are stupid enough to employ a man who has resigned in disgrace about money and influence, multiple times, you can either play The Three Monkeys or you can demand to see (and have created) the 500 page deep dive into his past.
You can either have leadership and taking responsibility. Or you can have plausible deniability, and kick subordinates off the boat.
Starmer chose the later.
Worth noting that, functionally, vetting of Top People is back to "He's a Good Chap. Good Chaps are good." - all that process sums to zero usefulness. just announce that there will be no vetting for the PMs appointments and save the paperwork.
I wonder... Are there any other countries that you think could avoid attack by pulling back to their internationally recognised borders? Like about 2000km south of western Russia.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cj63kngxpxpo
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c20d4j4v9g9o
The World Cup was a success and provided lots of good and highly watchable matches
It was only besmirched by Infantino and Trump who wanted it to be all about them and their tawdry influencing, and Argentina who managed to achieve the most disliked football team in the competition which is a shame for Messi, as he is one of the greatest ever footballers and displayed great dignity while his teammates shamed his team and country
But even he was dirty in the game, trying to get a Spanish player sent off.
Now the Argentinians are definitely the bad guys... the scenes after they lost were just unacceptable.
Nearly fell off my chair, I did.
On topic: Starmer really wasn't a great Leader of the Opposition. He just happened to be leader of the opposition at the time that Liz Truss became Prime Minister, and doomed the Tories to the worst election result in their history.
Sometimes life is about being in the right place at the right time, and Starmer certainly managed that. And then, if you judge the success of an election-winning Prime Minister by the length of their tenure, divided by the majority they won at the election, Starmer likely has one of the lowest days per MP ratios in history. He was not up to the job.
It’s off to an awful start with all this Nationalisation Of Water Companies nonsense.
Too Big To Fail is always a disaster. We need more bankruptcies in this country, not less.