 | Back to forum list |
| Back to The Lounge |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Well he’s still our prime minister how much more dirt , lies , corruption will it take before he’s sacked ? " Actually it’s more those around him that seem corrupted…. He’s as non-stick as Teflon. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Well, what's the alternative in the Labour Party?" They are set to get a kicking in May and no-one would be stupid enough to make a move until those elections are over and it seems the only possible contender with no baggage is Miliband, Rayner still has the tax issue hanging over her head and Streeting is too far to the right and has links to Mandelson. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"How much more must we endure of this useless lying fool, and his equally useless government 🙄" I love that this exact statement could be made of any government going back decades Surely the next one will be different...  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I knew someone would start this thread today. Which is weird because as far as I could see no one started a thread pointing out the absolute screaming u turns by both badenouch and farage over joining the Iran conflict when it became obvious that the majority of the country agreed with starmers actions. " Maybe because he's the leader of the country and not in opposition | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I knew someone would start this thread today. Which is weird because as far as I could see no one started a thread pointing out the absolute screaming u turns by both badenouch and farage over joining the Iran conflict when it became obvious that the majority of the country agreed with starmers actions. Maybe because he's the leader of the country and not in opposition " Totally agree. And regards the post that made you respond, the op didn't constrain to just Iran. They will get a kicking in may, but sadly I see starmer as the best of a bad lot. The alternatives within labour give me the shivers. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Well he’s still our prime minister how much more dirt , lies , corruption will it take before he’s sacked ? " How much more? It seems the public is asking the same question! Starmer's judgement is clearly lacking, from Mandelson's appointment to his handling of key issues. Starmer is out of his depth as PM! He approaches situations like a lawyer, not a leader. He must take responsibility and step aside. He's incapable of getting his act together – there's no hope for him now! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I knew someone would start this thread today. Which is weird because as far as I could see no one started a thread pointing out the absolute screaming u turns by both badenouch and farage over joining the Iran conflict when it became obvious that the majority of the country agreed with starmers actions. " You are free to start another thread(s) about Kemi's and Nigel's U-turns. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Well he’s still our prime minister how much more dirt , lies , corruption will it take before he’s sacked ? " Doubt anybody in the party wants to take that poisoned chalice. There is still a lot of infighting, massive intractable divisions on several policy positions. e.g. Israel, green agenda/energy policy, grape gangs, economics, immigration. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I knew someone would start this thread today. Which is weird because as far as I could see no one started a thread pointing out the absolute screaming u turns by both badenouch and farage over joining the Iran conflict when it became obvious that the majority of the country agreed with starmers actions. You are free to start another thread(s) about Kemi's and Nigel's U-turns. " To be fair opposition party's have the luxury of being able to change their minds on issues, especially this far away from a General Election, a government that continually U turns is a weak government. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Lacking in charisma and good judgement he may be, but compared to the incompetence of Cameron and May, the absolute corrupt mendacity of Johnson, the utterly average uselessness of Sunak and the sheer raving bonkers of Truss, he still looks pretty Prime Ministerial to me. I can only assume the haters are all really bunkered down in Moscow or St Petersburg and doing the bidding of their mischiefmaker-in-chief because I find it hard to believe supposedly intelligent English people can hold such irrational and visceral dislike of a fairly bland, moderately competent PM who's walking a very delicate balancing act between not rolling over for Trump like Blair did with GW, and totally pissing him off. Or it may just be a case of the emptiest (cranial) vessels making the loudest noise, which is believable I guess." Attempting to deflect criticism by comparing Starmer to his predecessors is a desperate and transparent defence that won't wash when his own failures are so glaring. Dismissing public anger over Starmer's inept performance as 'Moscow-funded mischief' is a pitiful attempt to silence legitimate concerns. It's an insult to voters who see through his shallow rhetoric – from Mandelson's blatant cronyism to his crumbling performances on the world stage. His fumbling handling of Trump and others exposes him as a leader hopelessly out of his depth. A leader inspires; a lawyer looks for loopholes. If Starmer's 'moderately competent' is the best we can expect, the bar has sunk lower than expected. He's not leading – he's overseeing the country's decline, with no plan and no vision, and he's clearly heading towards further disaster! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"How much more must we endure of this useless lying fool, and his equally useless government 🙄" Till a general election is usually the way. Especially considering the 14 years of shit that went before. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I’m no politician, but did Starmer really need to read through a report on the suitability of Mandelson to be an envoy, or ask (& stupidly believe him) about his links to Epstein…….? His past history shows that he’s a slimy snake that shouldn’t be allowed anywhere near politics. Unbelievable. And my vote for Starmer’s replacement would be Jess Phillips……If nothing else, she has a rather nice ‘frontage’ to ogle, every time she’s on telly!🤣 " Jesus, Philips is more of a fish wife than the knicker flasher Rayner | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"How much more must we endure of this useless lying fool, and his equally useless government 🙄 Till a general election is usually the way. Especially considering the 14 years of shit that went before. " Indeed a general election is typically how democracy works, is it not? Such a shame your analysis didn't fare as well. '14 years of sh*t' How simply rustically charming! After a decade of preparation, I'd expect something more polished than bog-wall graffiti. I guess your beloved leader's soundbites have become the official Labour party slogan – or maybe that's the extent of your vocabulary, although I can hardly think that would be so! 😅 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"How much more must we endure of this useless lying fool, and his equally useless government 🙄 Till a general election is usually the way. Especially considering the 14 years of shit that went before. " Not the case, at least over the past 50 years & last 10 PMs. 6 resigned & the 4 who didn’t were ousted after losing elections. Starmer has to buck the trend just to stay in post & has zero chance of winning the next election come 2029 based on above. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"How much more must we endure of this useless lying fool, and his equally useless government 🙄 Till a general election is usually the way. Especially considering the 14 years of shit that went before. Not the case, at least over the past 50 years & last 10 PMs. 6 resigned & the 4 who didn’t were ousted after losing elections. Starmer has to buck the trend just to stay in post & has zero chance of winning the next election come 2029 based on above." Since 1970, the numbers are actually almost exactly the opposite:- of the 13 Prime Ministers who have left office, 8 resigned mid-term (Wilson, Thatcher, Blair, Cameron, May, Johnson, Truss and Major – who resigned as party leader in 1995 but stayed as PM), while only 5 were ousted after losing a general election (Heath, Callaghan, Major, Brown, and Sunak). As for Starmer, his weak and indecisive performance is under strict scrutiny, with a tough road ahead. He's facing tough challenges, including a recent embarrassing election defeat in a Labour stronghold and low approval ratings, with a general consensus that he's the most unpopular PM since records began in 1977. His chances of surviving as PM until 2029 seem slim! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Can't understand why the foreign press have not outed his secrets " Maybe there are no secrets? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"He will keep going untill May, they will be slaughtered in the local elections and then he will go. Then we will get Raynor and then we really are f..ked! " Starmer has shown how thick skinned he is and is likely to cling onto power until the bitter end when he will be cornered with resignation as his only option. Hopefully, Labour MPs are wise enough to realise that Angela Rayner isn't suited for high office as PM. Her 2025 stamp duty resignation raised questions about her judgement - she's a loudmouth protest politician, not a stateswoman. Andy Burnham seems more capable, but Labour's options look very limited and rather uninspiring. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Can't understand why the foreign press have not outed his secrets " The 'Starmer's Ukrainian Sausages' story has been reported abroad. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Can't understand why the foreign press have not outed his secrets The 'Starmer's Ukrainian Sausages' story has been reported abroad. " The 'sausages' gaffe (where Starmer called for the return of sausages in Gaza instead of hostages) was mocked globally! It now seems to have also merged in people's minds with his constant focus on Ukraine, but the fact that he's an international laughing stock is unfortunately very real for us in the UK! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Can't understand why the foreign press have not outed his secrets The 'Starmer's Ukrainian Sausages' story has been reported abroad. The 'sausages' gaffe (where Starmer called for the return of sausages in Gaza instead of hostages) was mocked globally! It now seems to have also merged in people's minds with his constant focus on Ukraine, but the fact that he's an international laughing stock is unfortunately very real for us in the UK! " Erm, how many "gaffes" has trump made in speeches? Now that, is an international laughing stock, sadly he's in charge of a huge military force. I'm so glad we have a serious pm, not someone like badenoch or farage. Like it or lump it, he's made the right decision at a tough time. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Can't understand why the foreign press have not outed his secrets The 'Starmer's Ukrainian Sausages' story has been reported abroad. The 'sausages' gaffe (where Starmer called for the return of sausages in Gaza instead of hostages) was mocked globally! It now seems to have also merged in people's minds with his constant focus on Ukraine, but the fact that he's an international laughing stock is unfortunately very real for us in the UK! Erm, how many "gaffes" has trump made in speeches? Now that, is an international laughing stock, sadly he's in charge of a huge military force. I'm so glad we have a serious pm, not someone like badenoch or farage. Like it or lump it, he's made the right decision at a tough time. " Comparing gaffes is one thing, but let's not rewrite history. Starmer's 'sausages in Gaza' isn't just a gaffe, it's a widespread global joke. And 'serious PM' is subjective - being serious doesn't mean being right or effective. Trump's got plenty of skeletons, but Starmer's got sausages! Guess which one's more memorable? 😅 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Can't understand why the foreign press have not outed his secrets The 'Starmer's Ukrainian Sausages' story has been reported abroad. The 'sausages' gaffe (where Starmer called for the return of sausages in Gaza instead of hostages) was mocked globally! It now seems to have also merged in people's minds with his constant focus on Ukraine, but the fact that he's an international laughing stock is unfortunately very real for us in the UK! Erm, how many "gaffes" has trump made in speeches? Now that, is an international laughing stock, sadly he's in charge of a huge military force. I'm so glad we have a serious pm, not someone like badenoch or farage. Like it or lump it, he's made the right decision at a tough time. Comparing gaffes is one thing, but let's not rewrite history. Starmer's 'sausages in Gaza' isn't just a gaffe, it's a widespread global joke. And 'serious PM' is subjective - being serious doesn't mean being right or effective. Trump's got plenty of skeletons, but Starmer's got sausages! Guess which one's more memorable? 😅 " Erm, the one that thinks he rules the world who thinks you can be finishing and be just starting a war at the same time, replaces the names of one country with another, thinks Europe calls him king. Seriously get a grip. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"He won’t go until after they get fucked at the local elections in May. Nobody wants the job before then, it’s a poisoned chalice. " Poisoned chalice or not if Starmer did announce he was standing down a dozen potential candidates would leap forward and start canvassing to be his successor. All convinced of their own ability to turn things around and all ambitious to find their slot in history. Happens with all parties. At the moment not one of the major parties has a viable alternative waiting in the wings. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"He won’t go until after they get fucked at the local elections in May. Nobody wants the job before then, it’s a poisoned chalice. Poisoned chalice or not if Starmer did announce he was standing down a dozen potential candidates would leap forward and start canvassing to be his successor. All convinced of their own ability to turn things around and all ambitious to find their slot in history. Happens with all parties. At the moment not one of the major parties has a viable alternative waiting in the wings." I totally agree. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Well he’s still our prime minister how much more dirt , lies , corruption will it take before he’s sacked ? " He has a strange hold over his party and he won’t go anywhere. Myself I believe he is committing many crimes against the British people | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Well he’s still our prime minister how much more dirt , lies , corruption will it take before he’s sacked ? " What lies? Corruption? Just because you lost and your leaders were a backstabbing bunch doesn't mean that the winners of the last election should resign because of other people's failure | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Only last night I had a dream that Starmer had resigned over some scandal but can't remember what. Worse to follow was that Lammy had been asked to form an interim government. The usual nutters--Farage and co--were demanding a general election but the King issued a statement saying he would not dissolve parliament without parliament's consent. All a bit surreal but then dreams often are." Touch grass | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The Starmer/Ukrainian Rent-Boy trial must be coming up soon "High on hopeium | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"If Blair, Farage or Kemi Bad enough were our PM we would be at war today along side Israel and the USA, rather stick with Starmer and then see what the choice is in the next general election probably in 2029 . " Holla!! Man called it right | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Who in the Labour party would you replace him with though? " Angela Rayner! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I knew someone would start this thread today. Which is weird because as far as I could see no one started a thread pointing out the absolute screaming u turns by both badenouch and farage over joining the Iran conflict when it became obvious that the majority of the country agreed with starmers actions. You are free to start another thread(s) about Kemi's and Nigel's U-turns. To be fair opposition party's have the luxury of being able to change their minds on issues, especially this far away from a General Election, a government that continually U turns is a weak government. " Yes, but they'd have hopped on that war train with trump and embroiled in another mess. Luckily this prime minister saw what was coming and said no. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Lacking in charisma and good judgement he may be, but compared to the incompetence of Cameron and May, the absolute corrupt mendacity of Johnson, the utterly average uselessness of Sunak and the sheer raving bonkers of Truss, he still looks pretty Prime Ministerial to me. I can only assume the haters are all really bunkered down in Moscow or St Petersburg and doing the bidding of their mischiefmaker-in-chief because I find it hard to believe supposedly intelligent English people can hold such irrational and visceral dislike of a fairly bland, moderately competent PM who's walking a very delicate balancing act between not rolling over for Trump like Blair did with GW, and totally pissing him off. Or it may just be a case of the emptiest (cranial) vessels making the loudest noise, which is believable I guess. Attempting to deflect criticism by comparing Starmer to his predecessors is a desperate and transparent defence that won't wash when his own failures are so glaring. Dismissing public anger over Starmer's inept performance as 'Moscow-funded mischief' is a pitiful attempt to silence legitimate concerns. It's an insult to voters who see through his shallow rhetoric – from Mandelson's blatant cronyism to his crumbling performances on the world stage. His fumbling handling of Trump and others exposes him as a leader hopelessly out of his depth. A leader inspires; a lawyer looks for loopholes. If Starmer's 'moderately competent' is the best we can expect, the bar has sunk lower than expected. He's not leading – he's overseeing the country's decline, with no plan and no vision, and he's clearly heading towards further disaster! " Blimey what shades of glasses do you wear? If Starmer is good at anything he's good on the world stage he's actually put Britain back on the map. Not the isolation of the Boris years and the nut of truss saying France is an foe! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Starmer is the putrid turd that just won't flush. There is zero chance of him doing the decent thing and stepping down, and his party is too cowardly to do anything that endangers their own self-interests. Our country is held hostage by the most corrupt government in living history. Unfortunately, they make the laws, they control the police force, they own the judges, they print the money, and they have the guns. " Seems happy and content | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"He will keep going untill May, they will be slaughtered in the local elections and then he will go. Then we will get Raynor and then we really are f..ked! " Are we how? She'll be great! Still the same challenges but from an unapologetic working class point of view | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"He won’t go until after they get fucked at the local elections in May. Nobody wants the job before then, it’s a poisoned chalice. Poisoned chalice or not if Starmer did announce he was standing down a dozen potential candidates would leap forward and start canvassing to be his successor. All convinced of their own ability to turn things around and all ambitious to find their slot in history. Happens with all parties. At the moment not one of the major parties has a viable alternative waiting in the wings." Angela Rayner | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Well he’s still our prime minister how much more dirt , lies , corruption will it take before he’s sacked ? He has a strange hold over his party and he won’t go anywhere. Myself I believe he is committing many crimes against the British people " Lol | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" He's not leading – he's overseeing the country's decline, with no plan and no vision, and he's clearly heading towards further disaster! *************************************** Blimey what shades of glasses do you wear? If Starmer is good at anything he's good on the world stage he's actually put Britain back on the map. Not the isolation of the Boris years and the nut of truss saying France is an foe!" Nice to know he still has one fan. He's certainly put us back on the world stage as a bit of a dithering, indecisive joke. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" He's not leading – he's overseeing the country's decline, with no plan and no vision, and he's clearly heading towards further disaster! *************************************** Blimey what shades of glasses do you wear? If Starmer is good at anything he's good on the world stage he's actually put Britain back on the map. Not the isolation of the Boris years and the nut of truss saying France is an foe! Nice to know he still has one fan. He's certainly put us back on the world stage as a bit of a dithering, indecisive joke." How, when? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"He's got that lunatic in the white house in a right state so that will do for me" For correctly refusing our bases on an illegal attack on Iran. Once Iran retaliated he gave the go ahead for defensive use. Both correct decisions. And the right are loosing their minds because last week they were wanking over killing Muslims. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" He's not leading – he's overseeing the country's decline, with no plan and no vision, and he's clearly heading towards further disaster! *************************************** Blimey what shades of glasses do you wear? If Starmer is good at anything he's good on the world stage he's actually put Britain back on the map. Not the isolation of the Boris years and the nut of truss saying France is an foe! Nice to know he still has one fan. He's certainly put us back on the world stage as a bit of a dithering, indecisive joke. How, when?" He's hardly made any impact at home or abroad. You Labour lovers were quick off the mark to codemn this country as a laughing stock when the Conservatives were in power but now you have the ultimate 'grey man' at the helm you can see no faults. I believe he was right not to enter the Iran war as his mentor Blair would have done, but he did not handle the situation very diplomatically. He seems to like jetting around the world but I honestly don't think anyone takes much notice of the bland ditherer. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I keep seeing this thread as "Is Starmer Undouchable"" We can only speculate, for now. All will be revealed when the ukranian rent-boys spill the beans to the Sun or Lord Alli writes his memoirs. allegedly. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"He's not untouchable when it comes to his Ukrainian boy "acquaintances" 😉" Depends who is top and who is bottom. We assume the Ukrainian boys would all be bottoms but think Lord Alli might be a top. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Ah the most non-stories of non-stories. Sounds like some of you desperate for sex have been listening to the illicit version of "You'll never guess who I had in the back of my cab the other day"" Not sure any of us really believe any of these sordid stories about your hero. However after enduring Labouroids dishing the dirt on Conservatives, whether true or false, for years, it makes a welcome change. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" He's not leading – he's overseeing the country's decline, with no plan and no vision, and he's clearly heading towards further disaster! *************************************** Blimey what shades of glasses do you wear? If Starmer is good at anything he's good on the world stage he's actually put Britain back on the map. Not the isolation of the Boris years and the nut of truss saying France is an foe! Nice to know he still has one fan. He's certainly put us back on the world stage as a bit of a dithering, indecisive joke. How, when? He's hardly made any impact at home or abroad. You Labour lovers were quick off the mark to codemn this country as a laughing stock when the Conservatives were in power but now you have the ultimate 'grey man' at the helm you can see no faults. I believe he was right not to enter the Iran war as his mentor Blair would have done, but he did not handle the situation very diplomatically. He seems to like jetting around the world but I honestly don't think anyone takes much notice of the bland ditherer." You wouldn't your scarfs too blue | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Well, what's the alternative in the Labour Party?" For that matter... what's the alternative too the Labour Party?  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Ah the most non-stories of non-stories. Sounds like some of you desperate for sex have been listening to the illicit version of "You'll never guess who I had in the back of my cab the other day" Not sure any of us really believe any of these sordid stories about your hero. However after enduring Labouroids dishing the dirt on Conservatives, whether true or false, for years, it makes a welcome change." The only hero I've ever had was the NHS surgeon who saved my life. Nice to know you don't base your opinions on facts then but tittle-tattle. And I thought you were one of the brighter ones on here | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Nothing till 2029 but it’s a very interesting question I’m sure the most intelligent person on this sex site will have a answer "Are you implying that people who frequent a gay sex sight are not worthy or intelligent enough to have, or voice a political opinion?  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The Starmer/Ukrainian Rent-Boy trial must be coming up soon "The 'rent boy' part of this being only in the heads of whoever made it up first, and the gullible fools who repeat it. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"He's not untouchable when it comes to his Ukrainian boy "acquaintances" 😉 Depends who is top and who is bottom. We assume the Ukrainian boys would all be bottoms but think Lord Alli might be a top. "Why do you believe and repeat this 'Ukranian rent boy' nonsense? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I knew someone would start this thread today. Which is weird because as far as I could see no one started a thread pointing out the absolute screaming u turns by both badenouch and farage over joining the Iran conflict when it became obvious that the majority of the country agreed with starmers actions. " What facts do you have to support that last statement? If the religious fanatics in Iran had accumulated enough Isotope U-235 to make a thermo nuclear device, the odds were on that they would have used it on a neighboring state! That alone was reason enough to go in and make sure they couldn't do it! You can't do logic deals with religious fanatics, they are driven by ideology! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I like cock too 😋 Sorry, thought I was on fabguys "Can't you like c@ck and have a political opinion? Perhaps you can't walk and chew bubble gum at the same time too? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Well he’s still our prime minister how much more dirt , lies , corruption will it take before he’s sacked ? How much more? It seems the public is asking the same question! Starmer's judgement is clearly lacking, from Mandelson's appointment to his handling of key issues. Starmer is out of his depth as PM! He approaches situations like a lawyer, not a leader. He must take responsibility and step aside. He's incapable of getting his act together – there's no hope for him now! " Nail hit firmly on head...  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" He's not leading – he's overseeing the country's decline, with no plan and no vision, and he's clearly heading towards further disaster! *************************************** Blimey what shades of glasses do you wear? If Starmer is good at anything he's good on the world stage he's actually put Britain back on the map. Not the isolation of the Boris years and the nut of truss saying France is an foe! Nice to know he still has one fan. He's certainly put us back on the world stage as a bit of a dithering, indecisive joke. How, when? He's hardly made any impact at home or abroad. You Labour lovers were quick off the mark to codemn this country as a laughing stock when the Conservatives were in power but now you have the ultimate 'grey man' at the helm you can see no faults. I believe he was right not to enter the Iran war as his mentor Blair would have done, but he did not handle the situation very diplomatically. He seems to like jetting around the world but I honestly don't think anyone takes much notice of the bland ditherer. You wouldn't your scarfs too blue " I do actually have a blue scarf. It was a gift but rarely wear it. Guess you wear your red scarf permanently. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Ah the most non-stories of non-stories. Sounds like some of you desperate for sex have been listening to the illicit version of "You'll never guess who I had in the back of my cab the other day" Not sure any of us really believe any of these sordid stories about your hero. However after enduring Labouroids dishing the dirt on Conservatives, whether true or false, for years, it makes a welcome change. The only hero I've ever had was the NHS surgeon who saved my life. Nice to know you don't base your opinions on facts then but tittle-tattle. And I thought you were one of the brighter ones on here" Tis known as irony. I don't profess to be the brightest star in the galaxy but bright enough to wind a few up on here. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"He's not untouchable when it comes to his Ukrainian boy "acquaintances" 😉 Depends who is top and who is bottom. We assume the Ukrainian boys would all be bottoms but think Lord Alli might be a top.
Why do you believe and repeat this 'Ukrainian rent boy' nonsense?"In truth I don't really believe a word of it but it is such fun winding the Starmerites up. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I knew someone would start this thread today. Which is weird because as far as I could see no one started a thread pointing out the absolute screaming u turns by both badenouch and farage over joining the Iran conflict when it became obvious that the majority of the country agreed with starmers actions. What facts do you have to support that last statement? If the religious fanatics in Iran had accumulated enough Isotope U-235 to make a thermo nuclear device, the odds were on that they would have used it on a neighboring state! That alone was reason enough to go in and make sure they couldn't do it! You can't do logic deals with religious fanatics, they are driven by ideology! "Not sure if we're talking about Iran or the US, can you clarify? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"He's not untouchable when it comes to his Ukrainian boy "acquaintances" 😉 Depends who is top and who is bottom. We assume the Ukrainian boys would all be bottoms but think Lord Alli might be a top.
Why do you believe and repeat this 'Ukrainian rent boy' nonsense?
In truth I don't really believe a word of it but it is such fun winding the Starmerites up."Remember that other crazy conspiracy theory about a network of the wealthy and influential that were meeting in secret locations to..xxx with yyy?. A consenting paid twink party is tame in comparison. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"He's not untouchable when it comes to his Ukrainian boy "acquaintances" 😉 Depends who is top and who is bottom. We assume the Ukrainian boys would all be bottoms but think Lord Alli might be a top.
Why do you believe and repeat this 'Ukrainian rent boy' nonsense?
In truth I don't really believe a word of it but it is such fun winding the Starmerites up.
Remember that other crazy conspiracy theory about a network of the wealthy and influential that were meeting in secret locations to..xxx with yyy?. A consenting paid twink party is tame in comparison. "You mean Epstein? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"He's not untouchable when it comes to his Ukrainian boy "acquaintances" 😉 Depends who is top and who is bottom. We assume the Ukrainian boys would all be bottoms but think Lord Alli might be a top.
Why do you believe and repeat this 'Ukrainian rent boy' nonsense?
In truth I don't really believe a word of it but it is such fun winding the Starmerites up.
Remember that other crazy conspiracy theory about a network of the wealthy and influential that were meeting in secret locations to..xxx with yyy?. A consenting paid twink party is tame in comparison. "It's something I predicted would happen and in a perverse way I am enjoying. The press--especially the gutter press--and media love dishing the dirt on anyone in the public eye. And if you are in power all the better. Pick up on gaffes [e.g. Starmer's 'sausages'] take things out of context [e.g. Cameron's 'hug a hoodie]. It sells paper. Causes conversation and gossip. I'd hate to be in public life. As far as I know Starmer is a happily married family man. Unfounded gossip about him makes him less bland and boring. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"He's not untouchable when it comes to his Ukrainian boy "acquaintances" 😉 Depends who is top and who is bottom. We assume the Ukrainian boys would all be bottoms but think Lord Alli might be a top.
Why do you believe and repeat this 'Ukrainian rent boy' nonsense?
In truth I don't really believe a word of it but it is such fun winding the Starmerites up.
Remember that other crazy conspiracy theory about a network of the wealthy and influential that were meeting in secret locations to..xxx with yyy?. A consenting paid twink party is tame in comparison.
It's something I predicted would happen and in a perverse way I am enjoying. The press--especially the gutter press--and media love dishing the dirt on anyone in the public eye. And if you are in power all the better. Pick up on gaffes [e.g. Starmer's 'sausages'] take things out of context [e.g. Cameron's 'hug a hoodie]. It sells paper. Causes conversation and gossip. I'd hate to be in public life.
As far as I know Starmer is a happily married family man. Unfounded gossip about him makes him less bland and boring."With a hint of lavender. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"He's not untouchable when it comes to his Ukrainian boy "acquaintances" 😉 Depends who is top and who is bottom. We assume the Ukrainian boys would all be bottoms but think Lord Alli might be a top.
Why do you believe and repeat this 'Ukrainian rent boy' nonsense?
In truth I don't really believe a word of it but it is such fun winding the Starmerites up.
Remember that other crazy conspiracy theory about a network of the wealthy and influential that were meeting in secret locations to..xxx with yyy?. A consenting paid twink party is tame in comparison.
It's something I predicted would happen and in a perverse way I am enjoying. The press--especially the gutter press--and media love dishing the dirt on anyone in the public eye. And if you are in power all the better. Pick up on gaffes [e.g. Starmer's 'sausages'] take things out of context [e.g. Cameron's 'hug a hoodie]. It sells paper. Causes conversation and gossip. I'd hate to be in public life.
As far as I know Starmer is a happily married family man. Unfounded gossip about him makes him less bland and boring."Starmer's forever trying to present himself as a man of 'process', 'duty', and 'technocratic stability', but with the polls tanking and the government's struggling to find direction, maybe it's time to listen to someone else. Billy Connolly put it brilliantly:- "The desire to be a politician should bar you for life from ever becoming one". There's a type of person who spends years perfecting their image, ticking every box, and smoothing out every rough edge to get to Number 10. And what do we get? A leadership that feels more like a corporate climb to the top than a genuine drive to serve the country. Whether it's bringing back old chums like Mandelson or defending unpopular policies with all the warmth of a corporate lawyer, Starmer embodies the 'professional politician' to a tee. Connolly's point hits home:- the more someone's geared up to rule, the less they're actually fit to lead. If wanting the job that badly is a red flag, then Starmer's rise is less of a qualification and more of a warning sign! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"How much more must we endure of this useless lying fool, and his equally useless government 🙄" As long as it takes retarded voters to imagine there is an alternative Tory or Reform government | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I keep seeing this thread as "Is Starmer Undouchable"" | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"How much more must we endure of this useless lying fool, and his equally useless government 🙄 As long as it takes retarded voters to imagine there is an alternative Tory or Reform government " It’s a weak strategy to blame the 'intelligence' of the voters for a government’s falling approval ratings. Usually, when a product doesn't work, you blame the manufacturer, not the customer! If the only defence of Starmer is 'the other guys might be worse,' then you've already admitted his government has no positive merit of its own! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The English working class are the most oppressed and discriminated against group in the country, their country! " Shouldn't we be looking at the systemic neglect facing the working class across the whole UK? Whether it’s the post-industrial Valleys of South Wales, the lignored communities of North Wales, the hollowed-out towns of Scotland’s Central Belt, or the extreme fuel poverty in the Highlands, the material struggle is the same. When you add the economic isolation of Northern Ireland, it’s clear that the 'oppression' you’re describing is a feature of a system that fails workers across all four nations. If Starmer’s project only focuses on the English 'Red Wall,' it risks abandoning millions who are fighting the exact same fight for dignity! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The contrast between the 'change' rhetoric of 2024 and the reality of 2026 is stark. We were promised a different approach, but instead we have a Prime Minister seemingly more focused on global diplomacy than domestic leadership. The Iran situation highlights this - initially refusing US use of UK bases, then doing a U-turn to allow 'defensive' strikes. It annoyed allies and looked weak at home. It wasn't diplomacy; it was the dithering of a weak leader! Whilst he's busy 'resetting' relations in China and Ireland, Brits are dealing with broken manifesto pledges. Leadership's about keeping promises when things get tough, not breaking them. I'll believe the 'country first' ethic when policies match the manifesto. You can't lead a country by constantly shifting stance, the 'laughing stock' label hasn't simply gone away - it's just changed into another bespoke suit! " That's not what happened. The first decision was made because America were not under immediate threat from Iran. So he deemed the original strike from America on Iran as illegal. So he refused the use of British bases in an illegal act. Once the strike had happened and Iran retaliated including striking British bases, then for defensive strikes he allowed it because it was no longer illegal. It's two different worlds. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The contrast between the 'change' rhetoric of 2024 and the reality of 2026 is stark. We were promised a different approach, but instead we have a Prime Minister seemingly more focused on global diplomacy than domestic leadership. The Iran situation highlights this - initially refusing US use of UK bases, then doing a U-turn to allow 'defensive' strikes. It annoyed allies and looked weak at home. It wasn't diplomacy; it was the dithering of a weak leader! Whilst he's busy 'resetting' relations in China and Ireland, Brits are dealing with broken manifesto pledges. Leadership's about keeping promises when things get tough, not breaking them. I'll believe the 'country first' ethic when policies match the manifesto. You can't lead a country by constantly shifting stance, the 'laughing stock' label hasn't simply gone away - it's just changed into another bespoke suit! That's not what happened. The first decision was made because America were not under immediate threat from Iran. So he deemed the original strike from America on Iran as illegal. So he refused the use of British bases in an illegal act. Once the strike had happened and Iran retaliated including striking British bases, then for defensive strikes he allowed it because it was no longer illegal. It's two different worlds." You are attempting to hide a strategic retreat behind a technicality. The initial refusal on 28 February was a miscalculation that left the UK isolated from its closest allies. By the time Starmer performed his U-turn on 1st March, the damage was already done. Relying on an Attorney General’s note to justify waiting until our allies were actually under fire is a panic response, not a defensive strategy! ?The public clearly agrees. In the Gorton and Denton by-election on 26th February, Labour was pushed into a humiliating third place in a seat it held for a century, losing by over 5,600 votes to the winning Green Party. Nationally, YouGov now places Labour at a record low of 17 per cent, trailing in fourth place behind Reform, the Conservatives, and the Greens. ?True leadership is about deterring conflict through strength, not hiding behind legal definitions until a situation is unavoidable. This delay emboldened Tehran and alienated Washington. If Starmer truly put the country first, he would have stood with our closest allies to prevent escalation, rather than dithering until he had no choice! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The contrast between the 'change' rhetoric of 2024 and the reality of 2026 is stark. We were promised a different approach, but instead we have a Prime Minister seemingly more focused on global diplomacy than domestic leadership. The Iran situation highlights this - initially refusing US use of UK bases, then doing a U-turn to allow 'defensive' strikes. It annoyed allies and looked weak at home. It wasn't diplomacy; it was the dithering of a weak leader! Whilst he's busy 'resetting' relations in China and Ireland, Brits are dealing with broken manifesto pledges. Leadership's about keeping promises when things get tough, not breaking them. I'll believe the 'country first' ethic when policies match the manifesto. You can't lead a country by constantly shifting stance, the 'laughing stock' label hasn't simply gone away - it's just changed into another bespoke suit! That's not what happened. The first decision was made because America were not under immediate threat from Iran. So he deemed the original strike from America on Iran as illegal. So he refused the use of British bases in an illegal act. Once the strike had happened and Iran retaliated including striking British bases, then for defensive strikes he allowed it because it was no longer illegal. It's two different worlds. You are attempting to hide a strategic retreat behind a technicality. The initial refusal on 28 February was a miscalculation that left the UK isolated from its closest allies. By the time Starmer performed his U-turn on 1st March, the damage was already done. Relying on an Attorney General’s note to justify waiting until our allies were actually under fire is a panic response, not a defensive strategy! ?The public clearly agrees. In the Gorton and Denton by-election on 26th February, Labour was pushed into a humiliating third place in a seat it held for a century, losing by over 5,600 votes to the winning Green Party. Nationally, YouGov now places Labour at a record low of 17 per cent, trailing in fourth place behind Reform, the Conservatives, and the Greens. ?True leadership is about deterring conflict through strength, not hiding behind legal definitions until a situation is unavoidable. This delay emboldened Tehran and alienated Washington. If Starmer truly put the country first, he would have stood with our closest allies to prevent escalation, rather than dithering until he had no choice! " That's not what happened at all. Polling consistently shows that for once Starmer is exactly where the public are | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The contrast between the 'change' rhetoric of 2024 and the reality of 2026 is stark. We were promised a different approach, but instead we have a Prime Minister seemingly more focused on global diplomacy than domestic leadership. The Iran situation highlights this - initially refusing US use of UK bases, then doing a U-turn to allow 'defensive' strikes. It annoyed allies and looked weak at home. It wasn't diplomacy; it was the dithering of a weak leader! Whilst he's busy 'resetting' relations in China and Ireland, Brits are dealing with broken manifesto pledges. Leadership's about keeping promises when things get tough, not breaking them. I'll believe the 'country first' ethic when policies match the manifesto. You can't lead a country by constantly shifting stance, the 'laughing stock' label hasn't simply gone away - it's just changed into another bespoke suit! That's not what happened. The first decision was made because America were not under immediate threat from Iran. So he deemed the original strike from America on Iran as illegal. So he refused the use of British bases in an illegal act. Once the strike had happened and Iran retaliated including striking British bases, then for defensive strikes he allowed it because it was no longer illegal. It's two different worlds. You are attempting to hide a strategic retreat behind a technicality. The initial refusal on 28 February was a miscalculation that left the UK isolated from its closest allies. By the time Starmer performed his U-turn on 1st March, the damage was already done. Relying on an Attorney General’s note to justify waiting until our allies were actually under fire is a panic response, not a defensive strategy! ?The public clearly agrees. In the Gorton and Denton by-election on 26th February, Labour was pushed into a humiliating third place in a seat it held for a century, losing by over 5,600 votes to the winning Green Party. Nationally, YouGov now places Labour at a record low of 17 per cent, trailing in fourth place behind Reform, the Conservatives, and the Greens. ?True leadership is about deterring conflict through strength, not hiding behind legal definitions until a situation is unavoidable. This delay emboldened Tehran and alienated Washington. If Starmer truly put the country first, he would have stood with our closest allies to prevent escalation, rather than dithering until he had no choice! That's not what happened at all. Polling consistently shows that for once Starmer is exactly where the public are " Claiming Starmer is aligned with the public doesn't hold up against the actual numbers. YouGov figures from this week show Labour at a record low of 17 per cent, trailing behind Reform, the Conservatives, and the Greens. ?This disconnect was clear on 26th February, 2026 in the Gorton and Denton by-election, where Labour lost a century-old stronghold to the Green Party and was pushed into third place. When a sitting Prime Minister is trailing in fourth place in the national polls and losing heartland seats by over 4,400 votes, the idea of public support is more of a hope than a reality. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The contrast between the 'change' rhetoric of 2024 and the reality of 2026 is stark. We were promised a different approach, but instead we have a Prime Minister seemingly more focused on global diplomacy than domestic leadership. The Iran situation highlights this - initially refusing US use of UK bases, then doing a U-turn to allow 'defensive' strikes. It annoyed allies and looked weak at home. It wasn't diplomacy; it was the dithering of a weak leader! Whilst he's busy 'resetting' relations in China and Ireland, Brits are dealing with broken manifesto pledges. Leadership's about keeping promises when things get tough, not breaking them. I'll believe the 'country first' ethic when policies match the manifesto. You can't lead a country by constantly shifting stance, the 'laughing stock' label hasn't simply gone away - it's just changed into another bespoke suit! That's not what happened. The first decision was made because America were not under immediate threat from Iran. So he deemed the original strike from America on Iran as illegal. So he refused the use of British bases in an illegal act. Once the strike had happened and Iran retaliated including striking British bases, then for defensive strikes he allowed it because it was no longer illegal. It's two different worlds. You are attempting to hide a strategic retreat behind a technicality. The initial refusal on 28 February was a miscalculation that left the UK isolated from its closest allies. By the time Starmer performed his U-turn on 1st March, the damage was already done. Relying on an Attorney General’s note to justify waiting until our allies were actually under fire is a panic response, not a defensive strategy! ?The public clearly agrees. In the Gorton and Denton by-election on 26th February, Labour was pushed into a humiliating third place in a seat it held for a century, losing by over 5,600 votes to the winning Green Party. Nationally, YouGov now places Labour at a record low of 17 per cent, trailing in fourth place behind Reform, the Conservatives, and the Greens. ?True leadership is about deterring conflict through strength, not hiding behind legal definitions until a situation is unavoidable. This delay emboldened Tehran and alienated Washington. If Starmer truly put the country first, he would have stood with our closest allies to prevent escalation, rather than dithering until he had no choice! That's not what happened at all. Polling consistently shows that for once Starmer is exactly where the public are Claiming Starmer is aligned with the public doesn't hold up against the actual numbers. YouGov figures from this week show Labour at a record low of 17 per cent, trailing behind Reform, the Conservatives, and the Greens. ?This disconnect was clear on 26th February, 2026 in the Gorton and Denton by-election, where Labour lost a century-old stronghold to the Green Party and was pushed into third place. When a sitting Prime Minister is trailing in fourth place in the national polls and losing heartland seats by over 4,400 votes, the idea of public support is more of a hope than a reality. " You are totally ignoring the fact that 70% of the public agree with starmers position on the Iran war. Like it or not, he is right in that one. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The contrast between the 'change' rhetoric of 2024 and the reality of 2026 is stark. We were promised a different approach, but instead we have a Prime Minister seemingly more focused on global diplomacy than domestic leadership. The Iran situation highlights this - initially refusing US use of UK bases, then doing a U-turn to allow 'defensive' strikes. It annoyed allies and looked weak at home. It wasn't diplomacy; it was the dithering of a weak leader! Whilst he's busy 'resetting' relations in China and Ireland, Brits are dealing with broken manifesto pledges. Leadership's about keeping promises when things get tough, not breaking them. I'll believe the 'country first' ethic when policies match the manifesto. You can't lead a country by constantly shifting stance, the 'laughing stock' label hasn't simply gone away - it's just changed into another bespoke suit! That's not what happened. The first decision was made because America were not under immediate threat from Iran. So he deemed the original strike from America on Iran as illegal. So he refused the use of British bases in an illegal act. Once the strike had happened and Iran retaliated including striking British bases, then for defensive strikes he allowed it because it was no longer illegal. It's two different worlds. You are attempting to hide a strategic retreat behind a technicality. The initial refusal on 28 February was a miscalculation that left the UK isolated from its closest allies. By the time Starmer performed his U-turn on 1st March, the damage was already done. Relying on an Attorney General’s note to justify waiting until our allies were actually under fire is a panic response, not a defensive strategy! ?The public clearly agrees. In the Gorton and Denton by-election on 26th February, Labour was pushed into a humiliating third place in a seat it held for a century, losing by over 5,600 votes to the winning Green Party. Nationally, YouGov now places Labour at a record low of 17 per cent, trailing in fourth place behind Reform, the Conservatives, and the Greens. ?True leadership is about deterring conflict through strength, not hiding behind legal definitions until a situation is unavoidable. This delay emboldened Tehran and alienated Washington. If Starmer truly put the country first, he would have stood with our closest allies to prevent escalation, rather than dithering until he had no choice! " Who do you see as our closest allies? As it is no longer trump. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The world is full of crashing bores " Like you.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Can anyone name anything that Itchy Tunic (Rishi Sunak) did that benefited any of us ? " Eat out to help out, fuckin great it was | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Can anyone name anything that Itchy Tunic (Rishi Sunak) did that benefited any of us ? " Gave us all a good laugh standing out in the pouring rain ruining his expensive suit calling an election, didn't even have the sense to use an umbrella ella ella. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I knew someone would start this thread today. Which is weird because as far as I could see no one started a thread pointing out the absolute screaming u turns by both badenouch and farage over joining the Iran conflict when it became obvious that the majority of the country agreed with starmers actions. What facts do you have to support that last statement? If the religious fanatics in Iran had accumulated enough Isotope U-235 to make a thermo nuclear device, the odds were on that they would have used it on a neighboring state! That alone was reason enough to go in and make sure they couldn't do it! You can't do logic deals with religious fanatics, they are driven by ideology!
Not sure if we're talking about Iran or the US, can you clarify?"With regard to you're last comment; re Starmers reluctance to join with the allies to neutrilise the Iranian threat! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As if Mandelson's reputation wasn't hit hard enough, now he's being associated with Starmer."  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Can anyone name anything that Itchy Tunic (Rishi Sunak) did that benefited any of us ? Eat out to help out, fuckin great it was" Please don't bring debased sexual practices into this Starmer forum chat! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I knew someone would start this thread today. Which is weird because as far as I could see no one started a thread pointing out the absolute screaming u turns by both badenouch and farage over joining the Iran conflict when it became obvious that the majority of the country agreed with starmers actions. What facts do you have to support that last statement? If the religious fanatics in Iran had accumulated enough Isotope U-235 to make a thermo nuclear device, the odds were on that they would have used it on a neighboring state! That alone was reason enough to go in and make sure they couldn't do it! You can't do logic deals with religious fanatics, they are driven by ideology!
Not sure if we're talking about Iran or the US, can you clarify?
With regard to you're last comment; re Starmers reluctance to join with the allies to neutrilise the Iranian threat!"You mean join trump and Netanyahu in an illegal attack. All our other allies didn't join in either. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" You are totally ignoring the fact that 70% of the public agree with starmers position on the Iran war. Like it or not, he is right in that one. " Even a broken clock is right twice a day. However I think Starmer might be a broken 24 hour clock | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" You are totally ignoring the fact that 70% of the public agree with starmers position on the Iran war. Like it or not, he is right in that one. Even a broken clock is right twice a day. However I think Starmer might be a broken 24 hour clock" That 70% figure mooted earlier is inaccurate. While Keir Starmer’s purely defensive stance is the most popular single option, it does not command 70% of the public. Recent data from March 2026 clarifies that only 46% of Britons support his focus on defensive measures, such as intercepting missiles. Public sentiment is largely against the war itself, with 60% of the public explicitly opposing the UK joining the US in offensive strikes. The 70% confusion likely stems from specific sub-groups; for example, 70% of Green Party voters oppose the strikes, and 74% of the general public say they are concerned about the conflict's impact on their personal finances. Starmer is politically aligned with the majority who want to avoid escalation, but only 34% of the public think he is managing the response well. This suggests that while voters prefer his policy over the alternatives, they remain skeptical of his leadership. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" You are totally ignoring the fact that 70% of the public agree with starmers position on the Iran war. Like it or not, he is right in that one. Even a broken clock is right twice a day. However I think Starmer might be a broken 24 hour clock That 70% figure mooted earlier is inaccurate. While Keir Starmer’s purely defensive stance is the most popular single option, it does not command 70% of the public. Recent data from March 2026 clarifies that only 46% of Britons support his focus on defensive measures, such as intercepting missiles. Public sentiment is largely against the war itself, with 60% of the public explicitly opposing the UK joining the US in offensive strikes. The 70% confusion likely stems from specific sub-groups; for example, 70% of Green Party voters oppose the strikes, and 74% of the general public say they are concerned about the conflict's impact on their personal finances. Starmer is politically aligned with the majority who want to avoid escalation, but only 34% of the public think he is managing the response well. This suggests that while voters prefer his policy over the alternatives, they remain skeptical of his leadership. " Exactly. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Gorton and Denton by election was the 26th of February American strike on Iran the 28th of February. Unless the voters of Gorton and Denton have mystic powers the reason labour came third and polling at 17% is not Starmers decisions on Iran. On his decisions not to join the nutter without a plan is in line with the public opinion according to yougov " The timeline confirms a leadership crisis rather than dismissing it. You are overlooking critical context. The refusal to join and the resulting diplomatic friction were reported in the days leading up to the 28th February strike. Voters in Gorton and Denton went to the polls on 26th February amidst a backdrop of a government already seen as indecisive and isolated. That third place finish was a verdict on a Prime Minister who looked out of his depth before the first missile was even fired. ?Furthermore, the 17% YouGov data was collected between 9th and 10th March, well after the Iran strikes and the 1st March U-turn. If the public truly supported Starmer's plan, his numbers would have recovered instead of plummeting to a historic fourth place low. There is a massive difference between the public being wary of conflict and the public losing confidence in a leader's ability to navigate a crisis. The Gorton and Denton result was the warning shot; the 17% poll is the confirmation that this strategic retreat has failed! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hands up who thinks the epstien war was a good idea....?" Do a 'hands up' in Ireland | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hands up who thinks the epstien war was a good idea....? Do a 'hands up' in Ireland " ...are you afraid of the outcome...? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hands up who thinks the epstien war was a good idea....?" Has someone invaded Epstein Island? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hands up who thinks the epstien war was a good idea....? Has someone invaded Epstein Island?" ...don't be silly...there's no oil there... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hands up who thinks the epstien war was a good idea....? Do a 'hands up' in Ireland ...are you afraid of the outcome...?" Why would I be afraid? There's no such thing as an 'Epstein War' Is that what they are calling it in Iran & Ireland then? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hands up who thinks the epstien war was a good idea....? Do a 'hands up' in Ireland ...are you afraid of the outcome...? Why would I be afraid? There's no such thing as an 'Epstein War' Is that what they are calling it in Iran & Ireland then? " ...its a bit weird that operation Epic Fury...has the same initials as Epstein Files....don't you agree....? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hands up who thinks the epstien war was a good idea....? Do a 'hands up' in Ireland ...are you afraid of the outcome...? Why would I be afraid? There's no such thing as an 'Epstein War' Is that what they are calling it in Iran & Ireland then? " | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hands up who thinks the epstien war was a good idea....? Has someone invaded Epstein Island?...don't be silly...there's no oil there..." Not half as silly as the person who mentioned it  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hands up who thinks the epstien war was a good idea....? Do a 'hands up' in Ireland ...are you afraid of the outcome...? Why would I be afraid? There's no such thing as an 'Epstein War' Is that what they are calling it in Iran & Ireland then? ...its a bit weird that operation Epic Fury...has the same initials as Epstein Files....don't you agree....?" Not especially ... But it'll keep the basement dwellers convinced that their strange suspicions are correct. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Who in the Labour party would you replace him with though? " Andy Burnham - if Starmer hadn’t chosen self-interest over the good of the nation | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hands up who thinks the epstien war was a good idea....? Do a 'hands up' in Ireland " Hey! Now! There's an idea....a very good idea 💡 Plenty of empty space on the old Emerald Isle, good port access for imports too! 🤭 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Who in the Labour party would you replace him with though? Andy Burnham - if Starmer hadn’t chosen self-interest over the good of the nation " Daft Ed Silliband and Yvette Cooper are being touted as favourites now. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Who in the Labour party would you replace him with though? Andy Burnham - if Starmer hadn’t chosen self-interest over the good of the nation " It looks like he's already been replaced .... By Ed Milleband. Starmer isn't calling the shots, ... He remains in place, as a token front-man .... but not in charge of the cabinet, his party ... or the country. Starmer is a Potemkin PM. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hands up who thinks the epstien war was a good idea....? Has someone invaded Epstein Island?...don't be silly...there's no oil there... Not half as silly as the person who mentioned it "...wasn't it you who mentioned epstien island....? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hands up who thinks the epstien war was a good idea....? Do a 'hands up' in Ireland Hey! Now! There's an idea....a very good idea 💡 Plenty of empty space on the old Emerald Isle, good port access for imports too! 🤭" ....plenty of room in Ireland....?....you've been watching Darby o Gill again...haven't you...? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hands up who thinks the epstien war was a good idea....? Has someone invaded Epstein Island?...don't be silly...there's no oil there... Not half as silly as the person who mentioned it ...wasn't it you who mentioned epstien island....?"Yes it was but only as a follow up to you mentioning the 'Epstein War'. A non-event from your furtive imagination | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hands up who thinks the epstien war was a good idea....? Do a 'hands up' in Ireland ...are you afraid of the outcome...? Why would I be afraid? There's no such thing as an 'Epstein War' Is that what they are calling it in Iran & Ireland then? ...its a bit weird that operation Epic Fury...has the same initials as Epstein Files....don't you agree....? Not especially ... But it'll keep the basement dwellers convinced that their strange suspicions are correct." The total stupidity of Trump and his gang is only what one could could expect, and the Zionists could never resist the opportunity to get slaughtering Arab civilians. These idiots can never win this ridiculous war, best we can hope for is that they accept that and withdraw as soon as possible. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hands up who thinks the epstien war was a good idea....? Has someone invaded Epstein Island?...don't be silly...there's no oil there... Not half as silly as the person who mentioned it ...wasn't it you who mentioned epstien island....?
Yes it was but only as a follow up to you mentioning the 'Epstein War'. A non-event from your furtive imagination "...so you admit it..?...hahaha | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hands up who thinks the epstien war was a good idea....? Has someone invaded Epstein Island?...don't be silly...there's no oil there... Not half as silly as the person who mentioned it ...wasn't it you who mentioned epstien island....?
Yes it was but only as a follow up to you mentioning the 'Epstein War'. A non-event from your furtive imagination ...so you admit it..?...hahaha "But you won't will you | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hands up who thinks the epstien war was a good idea....? Has someone invaded Epstein Island?...don't be silly...there's no oil there... Not half as silly as the person who mentioned it ...wasn't it you who mentioned epstien island....?
Yes it was but only as a follow up to you mentioning the 'Epstein War'. A non-event from your furtive imagination ...so you admit it..?...hahaha
But you won't will you "...no...because I'm not the silly person who mentioned it...hahaha | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The Starmer/Ukrainian Rent-Boy trial must be coming up soon "Trial is set for 27th April- just as local elections are about to start the following weeks | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I keep seeing this thread as "Is Starmer Undouchable"" It'd be a big job ....He's full of shit | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hands up who thinks the epstien war was a good idea....? Has someone invaded Epstein Island?...don't be silly...there's no oil there... Not half as silly as the person who mentioned it ...wasn't it you who mentioned epstien island....?
Yes it was but only as a follow up to you mentioning the 'Epstein War'. A non-event from your furtive imagination ...so you admit it..?...hahaha
But you won't will you ...no...because I'm not the silly person who mentioned it...hahaha "You are the very silly boy who mentioned the non-existent Epstein War. So stop trying to wriggle out of it! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hands up who thinks the epstien war was a good idea....? Has someone invaded Epstein Island?...don't be silly...there's no oil there... Not half as silly as the person who mentioned it ...wasn't it you who mentioned epstien island....?
Yes it was but only as a follow up to you mentioning the 'Epstein War'. A non-event from your furtive imagination ...so you admit it..?...hahaha
But you won't will you ...no...because I'm not the silly person who mentioned it...hahaha
You are the very silly boy who mentioned the non-existent Epstein War. So stop trying to wriggle out of it!"Here we go again 🥱🥱🥱 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hands up who thinks the epstien war was a good idea....? Has someone invaded Epstein Island?...don't be silly...there's no oil there... Not half as silly as the person who mentioned it ...wasn't it you who mentioned epstien island....?
Yes it was but only as a follow up to you mentioning the 'Epstein War'. A non-event from your furtive imagination ...so you admit it..?...hahaha
But you won't will you ...no...because I'm not the silly person who mentioned it...hahaha
You are the very silly boy who mentioned the non-existent Epstein War. So stop trying to wriggle out of it!"Jimmy can wriggle and wriggle and wriggle again but, alas, bejaysus there's no way out! Cos it's as clear as the raindrops on the old Blarney Stone who the soft lad is who invented the Epstein War!!😂🍀 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hands up who thinks the epstien war was a good idea....? Has someone invaded Epstein Island?...don't be silly...there's no oil there... Not half as silly as the person who mentioned it ...wasn't it you who mentioned epstien island....?
Yes it was but only as a follow up to you mentioning the 'Epstein War'. A non-event from your furtive imagination ...so you admit it..?...hahaha
But you won't will you ...no...because I'm not the silly person who mentioned it...hahaha
You are the very silly boy who mentioned the non-existent Epstein War. So stop trying to wriggle out of it!"He just won't put his hands up to it ... Which is a bit ironic. He must think that the rest of us can't scroll up and see his post. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Agreed.. he has to be our worst PM ever. " I'd say Truss and Johnson were worse, he's about the same as May and Sunak. A disappointment for sure but not the worse | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hands up who thinks the epstien war was a good idea....? Has someone invaded Epstein Island?...don't be silly...there's no oil there... Not half as silly as the person who mentioned it ...wasn't it you who mentioned epstien island....?
Yes it was but only as a follow up to you mentioning the 'Epstein War'. A non-event from your furtive imagination ...so you admit it..?...hahaha
But you won't will you ...no...because I'm not the silly person who mentioned it...hahaha
You are the very silly boy who mentioned the non-existent Epstein War. So stop trying to wriggle out of it!"...its there in black and white...cut the bullshit | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hands up who thinks the epstien war was a good idea....? Has someone invaded Epstein Island?...don't be silly...there's no oil there... Not half as silly as the person who mentioned it ...wasn't it you who mentioned epstien island....?
Yes it was but only as a follow up to you mentioning the 'Epstein War'. A non-event from your furtive imagination ...so you admit it..?...hahaha
But you won't will you ...no...because I'm not the silly person who mentioned it...hahaha
You are the very silly boy who mentioned the non-existent Epstein War. So stop trying to wriggle out of it!
He just won't put his hands up to it ... Which is a bit ironic.
He must think that the rest of us can't scroll up and see his post. "...you can't read either..? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hands up who thinks the epstien war was a good idea....? Has someone invaded Epstein Island?...don't be silly...there's no oil there... Not half as silly as the person who mentioned it ...wasn't it you who mentioned epstien island....?
Yes it was but only as a follow up to you mentioning the 'Epstein War'. A non-event from your furtive imagination ...so you admit it..?...hahaha
But you won't will you ...no...because I'm not the silly person who mentioned it...hahaha
You are the very silly boy who mentioned the non-existent Epstein War. So stop trying to wriggle out of it!
He just won't put his hands up to it ... Which is a bit ironic.
He must think that the rest of us can't scroll up and see his post. ...you can't read either..?"We all know that the notion of "The Epstein War" came from your mind James Can! The evidence is irrefutable! So gain at least some respect for yourself and admit it, otherwise the "Silly boy!" label will stick! Hands up 🙌 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hands up who thinks the epstien war was a good idea....? Has someone invaded Epstein Island?...don't be silly...there's no oil there... Not half as silly as the person who mentioned it ...wasn't it you who mentioned epstien island....?
Yes it was but only as a follow up to you mentioning the 'Epstein War'. A non-event from your furtive imagination ...so you admit it..?...hahaha
But you won't will you ...no...because I'm not the silly person who mentioned it...hahaha
You are the very silly boy who mentioned the non-existent Epstein War. So stop trying to wriggle out of it!
He just won't put his hands up to it ... Which is a bit ironic.
He must think that the rest of us can't scroll up and see his post. ...you can't read either..?"Keep wriggling lad | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hands up who thinks the epstien war was a good idea....? Has someone invaded Epstein Island?...don't be silly...there's no oil there... Not half as silly as the person who mentioned it ...wasn't it you who mentioned epstien island....?
Yes it was but only as a follow up to you mentioning the 'Epstein War'. A non-event from your furtive imagination ...so you admit it..?...hahaha
But you won't will you ...no...because I'm not the silly person who mentioned it...hahaha
You are the very silly boy who mentioned the non-existent Epstein War. So stop trying to wriggle out of it!
He just won't put his hands up to it ... Which is a bit ironic.
He must think that the rest of us can't scroll up and see his post. ...you can't read either..?
Keep wriggling lad"Wriggling is no antidote for guilt! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"But who in their right mind would want to take over and try to sort out the cesspit that we are in ?" I don't think any rationally minded person these days would opt for a political career! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hands up who thinks the epstien war was a good idea....? Has someone invaded Epstein Island?...don't be silly...there's no oil there... Not half as silly as the person who mentioned it ...wasn't it you who mentioned epstien island....?
Yes it was but only as a follow up to you mentioning the 'Epstein War'. A non-event from your furtive imagination ...so you admit it..?...hahaha
But you won't will you ...no...because I'm not the silly person who mentioned it...hahaha
You are the very silly boy who mentioned the non-existent Epstein War. So stop trying to wriggle out of it!
He just won't put his hands up to it ... Which is a bit ironic.
He must think that the rest of us can't scroll up and see his post. ...you can't read either..?
Keep wriggling lad
Wriggling is no antidote for guilt! "Hoist by their own petard | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Only last night I had a dream that Starmer had resigned over some scandal but can't remember what. Worse to follow was that Lammy had been asked to form an interim government. The usual nutters--Farage and co--were demanding a general election but the King issued a statement saying he would not dissolve parliament without parliament's consent. All a bit surreal but then dreams often are." ….and yet still strangely plausible, are you a betting man? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"He is the worst PM ever how he survives god only knows but the Labour Party are an absolute disgrace. The economy is tanking. The Uk is finished. Uk population is 81 million." Where do you get your facts? The UK economy is not tanking. It's not great, it's stagnant but far better than where it was with Truss. And the UK population is 70 million | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"He is the worst PM ever how he survives god only knows but the Labour Party are an absolute disgrace. The economy is tanking. The Uk is finished. Uk population is 81 million. Where do you get your facts? The UK economy is not tanking. It's not great, it's stagnant but far better than where it was with Truss. And the UK population is 70 million " Starmer’s biggest crime is keeping the UK complicit in the genocide being visited on the Palestinian civilian people, I will always hold that against him. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| back to top |  |
