O/T:- ⚠️Impressed with the leadership [The UK Party Politics Thread]

[BigFatPie]

You republicans would love that. Boris is going no where. Look at the state of the opposition..leader with the charisma of a plank who would not prosecute Jimmy Saville or the Rotherham grooming gangs, voted for remain and Corbyn as PM and a deputy who is a behind the bike shed slag, Dianne Abbott, Lammy, Jesus Christ, don’t you morons get it, these imbeciles will never get near power. Anyone who wants to vote Labour needs urgent psychiatric help. Have a good day and R I PColin.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23355531

I love it when Soccerman pipes up on the political threads!

[BigFatPie]

Seriously though, even by his gutter low standards Johnson was a disgrace today.

[Elite_Pie]

I love it when Soccerman pipes up on the political threads!

Boris Johnson nationally, and Soccerman on here offer the best evidence you could ever wish for to vote Labour!

[JoePass]

Boris Johnson nationally, and Soccerman on here offer the best evidence you could ever wish for to vote Labour!

You Labour losers always bite, get over it fools, you will never be in power.

[i961pie]

You republicans would love that. Boris is going no where. Look at the state of the opposition..leader with the charisma of a plank who would not prosecute Jimmy Saville or the Rotherham grooming gangs, voted for remain and Corbyn as PM and a deputy who is a behind the bike shed slag, Dianne Abbott, Lammy, Jesus Christ, don’t you morons get it, these imbeciles will never get near power. Anyone who wants to vote Labour needs urgent psychiatric help. Have a good day and R I PColin.

😂😂

[jackal2]

Mrs Thatcher ... obviously didn't agree with him [Heath] on much as she ended up mounting a leadership challenge against him.

Actually she didn't really challenge him… she waited for him to call a leadership contest and then put her name forward. She could've openly challenged him before that and put her name forward to lead a no confidence vote, but she didn't, she waited for the most advantageous time - a leadership contest. Either you want me to believe that she only realised that very same day what her real intentions were, which frankly I can't, or we can agree that she knew before that but bided her time and waited for the right moment - played political games, as you might say.

Back in 1975 I was more interested in rusks than Tory leadership contests, but reading back I understand that many observers going into the leadership contest expected it to be an absolute walkover in Edward Heath’s favour … not least Edward Heath, who called it in order to re-assert his authority. Even when Margaret Thatcher announced she would stand, many still believed her support was minimal and that Heath would win easily, so the idea of Thatcher ‘waiting for the right moment’ isn’t necessarily accurate. She took a risk, put her beliefs and her neck on the line against the incumbent leader and won.

Apart from [Starmer] resigning from the Shadow cabinet in protest at Corbyn's leadership in 2016 you mean?

Thanks for reminding me of Starmer’s short spell as Shadow Minister for Immigration under Corbyn between 14th September 2015 and 27th June 2016. He resigned the position stating it was "simply untenable now to suggest we can offer an effective opposition without a change of leader". But just over three months later, on the 6th October 2016, Starmer accepted the role of Shadow Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union in the Shadow Cabinet of …. Jeremy Corbyn!

I could also point out the irony of Starmer accepting the Brexit job when he was a known Remainer, and Labour advocating Remain when Corbyn was a known Leaver, but there’s a risk of inconsistency overload!

Do you really think Starmer was waiting outside Shadow Cabinet meetings with his donkey jacket and burning brazier pretending to be a Momentum member to curry favour with Corbyn?

No, but it's an amusing image!

He would've been selected for the Shadow Cabinet on the basis that he represented the moderate side of the Labour party, which like it or not makes up a significant section of the party and its voters. He presumably would've spoken against some of Corbyn's more extreme policies in the meetings, but done his best not to sabotage them in public.

Well yes, Starmer certainly went very quiet on his previous line that it was 'untenable' for Labour to provide effective opposition under Corbyn’s leadership, but I suppose he had to, having just crawled back into the Shadow Cabinet of the self-same guy!

It's clear that you have a fairly intense dislike of Starmer personally, and of his political beliefs

I wouldn’t say I dislike Starmer personally. I tend to agree with BFP that he’s so dull and grey that it’s difficult to generate such a visceral reaction to him. I’d also say as a Conservative voter that Starmer’s politics are far closer to mine than Corbyn’s, even though I disagree with both.

My real dislike is for vacuous modern politicians who I believe are in politics primarily for the benefit of themselves and their careers, rather than a passionate vision and a desire to truly make a difference, whichever wing or party they come from. I would definitely describe Starmer as the vacuous, insincere type who is mainly in it for himself, but I’ll grant you there are many, many others.

[magpie_mania]

Back in 1975 I was more interested in rusks than Tory leadership contests, but reading back I understand that many observers going into the leadership contest expected it to be an absolute walkover in Edward Heath’s favour … not least Edward Heath, who called it in order to re-assert his authority. Even when Margaret Thatcher announced she would stand, many still believed her support was minimal and that Heath would win easily, so the idea of Thatcher ‘waiting for the right moment’ isn’t necessarily accurate. She took a risk, put her beliefs and her neck on the line against the incumbent leader and won.



Thanks for reminding me of Starmer’s short spell as Shadow Minister for Immigration under Corbyn between 14th September 2015 and 27th June 2016. He resigned the position stating it was "simply untenable now to suggest we can offer an effective opposition without a change of leader". But just over three months later, on the 6th October 2016, Starmer accepted the role of Shadow Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union in the Shadow Cabinet of …. Jeremy Corbyn!

I could also point out the irony of Starmer accepting the Brexit job when he was a known Remainer, and Labour advocating Remain when Corbyn was a known Leaver, but there’s a risk of inconsistency overload!



No, but it's an amusing image!



Well yes, Starmer certainly went very quiet on his previous line that it was 'untenable' for Labour to provide effective opposition under Corbyn’s leadership, but I suppose he had to, having just crawled back into the Shadow Cabinet of the self-same guy!



I wouldn’t say I dislike Starmer personally. I tend to agree with BFP that he’s so dull and grey that it’s difficult to generate such a visceral reaction to him. I’d also say as a Conservative voter that Starmer’s politics are far closer to mine than Corbyn’s, even though I disagree with both.

My real dislike is for vacuous modern politicians who I believe are in politics primarily for the benefit of themselves and their careers, rather than a passionate vision and a desire to truly make a difference, whichever wing or party they come from. I would definitely describe Starmer as the vacuous, insincere type who is mainly in it for himself, but I’ll grant you there are many, many others.

Where would you put Johnson on your scale? Is he in it to truly make a difference, or for his own benefit?

You say Starmer is insincere, where does Johnson fit in terms of integrity?

[jackal2]

Where would you put Johnson on your scale? Is he in it to truly make a difference, or for his own benefit? You say Starmer is insincere, where does Johnson fit in terms of integrity?

Low, where low ain't good.

I think Boris is an ambitious career politician who is in it primarily for his own benefit and ego, and as such he lacks a strong and consistent ideology which is the bedrock you need when things get tough. Boris is a good campaigner, but to coin a phrase of a friend of mine, a lot of national politicians these days are political cushions - they retain the shape of the last person who sat on them. In Boris' case it was Dominic Cummings first and latterly Carrie Johnson, and only one of them was an astute adviser.

[applepie2]

I love how you still try to stick up for the redundant Liebour party and your scum sucking pond life mate Sid. Keep trying mate, Boris is going no where, keep,trying, banging your head against a wall springs to mind.

I have to agree that Boris is going nowhere. Wouldn’t it be a good idea to have a PM who is actually going somewhere?

[BigFatPie]

I wouldn’t say I dislike Starmer personally. I tend to agree with BFP that he’s so dull and grey that it’s difficult to generate such a visceral reaction to him. I’d also say as a Conservative voter that Starmer’s politics are far closer to mine than Corbyn’s, even though I disagree with both.

.

I didn’t say that at all. What I said was that I could understand criticism of him for being boring and unadventurous in office, but saying he lacks integrity is ridiculous. (And disingenuous, but that’s nothing new) I never said I agreed with it.

Starmer’s response in Parliament yesterday was entirely appropriate and fitting for the occasion. Johnson’s slanderous smears about Savile and drug taking were befitting of him and demonstrated yet again why he’s entirely unfit for the office he miraculously holds.

You always talk about politics like it’s a soap opera the results of which don’t affect people and their everyday lives. I presume like many Tory voters you’re well insulated from the catastrophes Johnson and predecessors have inflicted upon the country. Trump said that he could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and people would still vote for him and that’s equally true of Johnson and his supporters.

[magpie_mania]

I didn’t say that at all. What I said was that I could understand criticism of him for being boring and unadventurous in office, but saying he lacks integrity is ridiculous. (And disingenuous, but that’s nothing new) I never said I agreed with it.

Starmer’s response in Parliament yesterday was entirely appropriate and fitting for the occasion. Johnson’s slanderous smears about Savile and drug taking were befitting of him and demonstrated yet again why he’s entirely unfit for the office he miraculously holds.

You always talk about politics like it’s a soap opera the results of which don’t affect people and their everyday lives. I presume like many Tory voters you’re well insulated from the catastrophes Johnson and predecessors have inflicted upon the country. Trump said that he could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and people would still vote for him and that’s equally true of Johnson and his supporters.

'Johnson’s slanderous smears about Savile and drug taking were befitting of him and demonstrated yet again why he’s entirely unfit for the office he miraculously holds.'

Absolutely agree. He came with a 'grovelling' apology then proceeded to say this and laugh and smirk with his head-shaking through all the questions.

I am getting fed up of the constant 'look what he did, he got all the big calls right'

Do they honestly believe that any other Conservative PM would have done anything different, and make wrong calls? If they do, it doesn't really say much for the others.

Make what you want to of Starmer, but which one is the better statesman?

[PedroTheFisherman66]

'Johnson’s slanderous smears about Savile and drug taking were befitting of him and demonstrated yet again why he’s entirely unfit for the office he miraculously holds.'

Absolutely agree. He came with a 'grovelling' apology then proceeded to say this and laugh and smirk with his head-shaking through all the questions.

I am getting fed up of the constant 'look what he did, he got all the big calls right'

Do they honestly believe that any other Conservative PM would have done anything different, and make wrong calls? If they do, it doesn't really say much for the others.

Make what you want to of Starmer, but which one is the better statesman?

Just shows how wrong the system is when BORIS can stand there and tell lie after lie without reproach yet you cant call a liar a liar without being admonished!

[BanjoPie]

'Johnson’s slanderous smears about Savile and drug taking were befitting of him and demonstrated yet again why he’s entirely unfit for the office he miraculously holds.'

Absolutely agree. He came with a 'grovelling' apology then proceeded to say this and laugh and smirk with his head-shaking through all the questions.

I am getting fed up of the constant 'look what he did, he got all the big calls right'

Do they honestly believe that any other Conservative PM would have done anything different, and make wrong calls? If they do, it doesn't really say much for the others.

Make what you want to of Starmer, but which one is the better statesman?

TBF his remarks regards drugs were in response to a Labour MP suggesting there was a drug culture in No 10! - both the PM and: the Labour MP totally out of order and both should have been made to withdraw the comments.

[magpie_mania]

TBF his remarks regards drugs were in response to a Labour MP suggesting there was a drug culture in No 10! - both the PM and: the Labour MP totally out of order and both should have been made to withdraw the comments.

The Labout MP asked if there is a drug culture (probablly suggesting there is) while Johnson inferred there's a problem on the Labour front bench.

Saville comments way out of order though.

[BanjoPie]

The Labout MP asked if there is a drug culture (probablly suggesting there is) while Johnson inferred there's a problem on the Labour front bench.

Saville comments way out of order though.

After watching that debacle, I feel the quality of our politicians (on both sides of the house) falls way short of the standard required to govern the UK successfully