Will Starmer be "fine" or "fined" ?

[SydneyRover]

So why did they call him out for saying it? just answer that bit if you can

[SydneyRover]

That's the thing with theories Albie, no matter how many times you can prove it, it only take one bit that doesn't fit to disprove it.

[Bentley Bullet]

Syd,

The head of a service such as the CPS is always responsible for decisions made under his watch, whether or not he was personally involved.

To be clear, I was NOT saying that one one individual decision is crucial, look at the whole record.

The Tories do not want rid of Starmer...they want to keep him in place, because he is unlikely to break the consensus of the Overton window in relation to policy.

Keith is the best electoral asset for them, once they get rid of Bozo and wipe the slate clean with a new leader. He has no profile among the voting public, and his beige personality is a gift to the rebranding of the Tories under a new team.

Quite correct. Putting the record straight doesn't mean you want to get rid of someone. Even if you want to keep someone as poor as Starmer in opposition you can't let him get away with such hypocrisy. Such hypocrisy as his reasoning that Boris, as the leader, should show responsibility and resign irrespective of his involvement with the parties at number 10, yet at the same time claim HIS role as leader of the DPP didn't render him responsible for the Savile case.

[wilts rover]

Margaret Thatcher's FIVE attempts to get a knighthood for Savile.

Just for balance:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2366576/Revealed-Lady-Thatchers-FIVE-attempts-secure-knighthood-Jimmy-Savile.html

[scawsby steve]

Is there a interpreter in the house?

What, to decipher your gobbledegook?

Even a professor of linguistics couldn't manage that.

[SydneyRover]

That's the thing with theories Albie, no matter how many times you can prove it, it only take one bit that doesn't fit to disprove it.

And it is at this point that a scientist, in this case a political one I guess would accept that the theory is dead and go back to the drawing board, of course it brings into question all other theories constructed from the same foundations, sorry about that guys you lose. It's why all discoveries and theories are subject to peer review.

[SydneyRover]

Syd,

The head of a service such as the CPS is always responsible for decisions made under his watch, whether or not he was personally involved.

To be clear, I was NOT saying that one one individual decision is crucial, look at the whole record.

The Tories do not want rid of Starmer...they want to keep him in place, because he is unlikely to break the consensus of the Overton window in relation to policy.

Keith is the best electoral asset for them, once they get rid of Bozo and wipe the slate clean with a new leader. He has no profile among the voting public, and his beige personality is a gift to the rebranding of the Tories under a new team.

Quite correct. Putting the record straight doesn't mean you want to get rid of someone. Even if you want to keep someone as poor as Starmer in opposition you can't let him get away with such hypocrisy. Such hypocrisy as his reasoning that Boris, as the leader, should show responsibility and resign irrespective of his involvement with the parties at number 10, yet at the same time claim HIS role as leader of the DPP didn't render him responsible for the Savile case.

From the bloke that's been trying to prove a negative most of his forum life, and that's the thing about backing far right wing conspiracy theories in, they are rubbery, can grow and change to suit the argument .............. and if you don't like that one there'll be others it's like a lucky dip I guess.

[albie]

It seems Keith has ruled out a deal with the LibDems, as well as the SNP;
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/keir-starmer-labour-lib-dem-supply-confidence-b2125698.html

Somewhat premature, I would say.
Following on from his interview where he said electoral reform was not a priority, one or two are going to feel let down.

Not surprised myself, mind!

[scawsby steve]

It seems Keith has ruled out a deal with the LibDems, as well as the SNP;
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/keir-starmer-labour-lib-dem-supply-confidence-b2125698.html

Somewhat premature, I would say.
Following on from his interview where he said electoral reform was not a priority, one or two are going to feel let down.

Not surprised myself, mind!

I think, Albie, that the present sh*tshow from the Tories probably convinces him that he can win on his own, without help from others, and he might be right.

He needs to be careful though. Sooner or later he's going to have to tell us all exactly what he's going to do about this terrible cost of living crisis. If he doesn't convince us enough, and it's a hung parliament, he may have to renege on his promises of not coalescing with another party.

If that happened, he'd look completely bereft of truth or morals.

[drfchound]

It seems Keith has ruled out a deal with the LibDems, as well as the SNP;
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/keir-starmer-labour-lib-dem-supply-confidence-b2125698.html

Somewhat premature, I would say.
Following on from his interview where he said electoral reform was not a priority, one or two are going to feel let down.

Not surprised myself, mind!

I think, Albie, that the present sh*tshow from the Tories probably convinces him that he can win on his own, without help from others, and he might be right.

He needs to be careful though. Sooner or later he's going to have to tell us all exactly what he's going to do about this terrible cost of living crisis. If he doesn't convince us enough, and it's a hung parliament, he may have to renege on his promises of not coalescing with another party.

If that happened, he'd look completely bereft of truth or morals.

TBH mate it would just be another broken promise by him.

[BillyStubbsTears]

In some alternative universe, Starmer has just announced that he'll enter into a coalition with the LDs after the next Election.

Albie is posting: "See! I told you Keith couldn't win a majority!"

[i_ateallthepies]

Neither of the two main parties declares ahead of an election that they are willing to go into coalition, if asked the question and forced into answering they always say they won't.
Then when neither party wins an outright majority and enters into a coalition nobody bats an eyelid or calls them liars but of course if that situation were to arise with Keir Starmer then of course the usual suspects would be screaming LIAR, LIAR, LIAR!!!

[Glyn_Wigley]

Did Cameron go into the 2010 election saying he'd go into coalition?

[Ldr]

Did Cameron go into the 2010 election saying he'd go into coalition?

Did Cameron go into the 2010 election saying he Wouldn’t go into a coalition?

[BillyStubbsTears]

Was Cameron asked in the run up to 2010 if he would go into coalition?

[Ldr]

Am not going to comment on the Forde enquiry itself but this comment made me chuckle. Reminds me so much of a poster on here

"The report also criticises a "culture of intellectual smugness which exists at the extremes of the political spectrum" of Labour opinion."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62226042

[drfchound]

Am not going to comment on the Forde enquiry itself but this comment made me chuckle. Reminds me so much of a poster on here

"The report also criticises a "culture of intellectual smugness which exists at the extremes of the political spectrum" of Labour opinion."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62226042

You are so right ldr.

[SydneyRover]

Am not going to comment on the Forde enquiry itself but this comment made me chuckle. Reminds me so much of a poster on here

"The report also criticises a "culture of intellectual smugness which exists at the extremes of the political spectrum" of Labour opinion."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62226042

Why not? it's an open forum, if it was the tory party there either wouldn't be one or you wouldn't be allowed to read it unless it was leaked.

[danumdon]

Am not going to comment on the Forde enquiry itself but this comment made me chuckle. Reminds me so much of a poster on here

"The report also criticises a "culture of intellectual smugness which exists at the extremes of the political spectrum" of Labour opinion."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62226042

Take your pick, i can think of a couple on here who would take great offence if you didn't mean them!!

[SydneyRover]

Neither of the two main parties declares ahead of an election that they are willing to go into coalition, if asked the question and forced into answering they always say they won't.
Then when neither party wins an outright majority and enters into a coalition nobody bats an eyelid or calls them liars but of course if that situation were to arise with Keir Starmer then of course the usual suspects would be screaming LIAR, LIAR, LIAR!!!

how did you get hold of the immunity idol pies?

[SydneyRover]

Irony aye, a report that seeks to find the causes and root out disunity within the labour party and finds the problem, instead of being sorted was weaponised and used by both sides. Which differs from the normal run of the mill issues in politics general where the cover-up becomes bigger than the problem. 

And the first couple of commenters use side issues from within the report to attack others on the forum, which sort of mirrors what the report was getting at.

Please note the first was by someone that couldn't bring himself to vote for the past leader that refused to take part in the report, and now hates the current leader that commissioned the report, the second can't make his mind up where to put the X.

There is a third commenter yet to join the fun and I dare say will of course remain true and name/shame the leader at the time because he/she is solely responsible and therefore pin the tail right on the donkey.

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

There were many posts on this forumsaying the problem wasn't there but a means to use as a weapon. The report makes it clear that nobody in labour took the issue seriously but tried to use at an advantage.

But not all politicians are the same eh?

[SydneyRover]

There were many posts on this forumsaying the problem wasn't there but a means to use as a weapon. The report makes it clear that nobody in labour took the issue seriously but tried to use at an advantage.

But not all politicians are the same eh?

I guess you're correct pud, as one didn't do anything but his successor did.

[wilts rover]

There were many posts on this forumsaying the problem wasn't there but a means to use as a weapon. The report makes it clear that nobody in labour took the issue seriously but tried to use at an advantage.

But not all politicians are the same eh?

It's referring to the office staff

[Colemans Left Hook]

wilts i checked the best odds for a labour victory at the next general election and the very best was 11/10    - I have money on "Burnham Beeches" at very big odds   to succeed Stamen as leader so need to keep him in power til Burnham gets a seat

[SydneyRover]

Does that mean almost 'evens' CLH?

[Colemans Left Hook]

Does that mean almost 'evens' CLH?

yes with the ripoff bookmakers

[BillyStubbsTears]

wilts i checked the best odds for a labour victory at the next general election and the very best was 11/10    - I have money on "Burnham Beeches" at very big odds   to succeed Stamen as leader so need to keep him in power til Burnham gets a seat

That's miles out. 11/10 is the price you can get against Lab having the most seats next time round.
https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/next-uk-general-election/most-seats

The question is, what price is a Labour-led Govt?

You can get 11/4 against a Lab Minority Govt and 10/3 against a Lab Majority, 7/1 against a Lab/LD coalition, and 9/1 against each of a Lab/SNP and a Lab/LD/SNP coalition. If you covered all those options of a Lab-headed Govt, the odds come out to be ~ 1/4 - 1/5 on.

The equivalent odds for a Tory-led Govt, assuming no-one would go into coalition with them, are roughly Evens.

[Bentley Bullet]

Starmer will win the next GE and lead the country to greatness.

[wilts rover]

wilts i checked the best odds for a labour victory at the next general election and the very best was 11/10    - I have money on "Burnham Beeches" at very big odds   to succeed Stamen as leader so need to keep him in power til Burnham gets a seat

I would go for Streeting or Nandy if I were you.