How long can Starmer survive? Getting popcorn ready 🍿🍿

Galaxy

If squeaky clean now means appointing people who have friendships with prolific paedophiles and traffickers, then my definition of clean is out of date.

Absolutely!

I also agree with Allira. Starmer has no accent that I recognise. His voice is just monotonous.

“After Keir Starmer apologised to the victims of Jeffrey Epstein for believing Mandelson’s “lies” and appointing him as the UK’s ambassador to the US, one survivor gave her reaction.
Speaking last night, Marina Lacerda told BBC’s Newsnight, “I have to commend him for going on national television and admitting he was wrong and apologising to us. I think that’s a huge step, right.

You have also people here in America that have not even tried to apologise to us. So I have to commend him for that”
Just read this on another forum. But I guess some people regard Keir’s ability to apologise as a sign of weakness .

MayBee70

You won’t find a more squeaky clean MP than Starmer. Which is why the media have been desperate to find something to knock him down with What experience does Mahmoud have of dealing with international leaders? Or Trump? I think there’s always been a snobbery about Starmers accent. He’s never professed to being a great orator. Is that all that matters in politics these days? I wish he would walk away from politics to be honest because I think the workload he’s been under since taking office has been unprecedented.

Of course- people have been attacking him since he was elected. I'm not his biggest fan but the last thing we need is more political upheaval.

People crying for his resignation should be thinkibng about what the consequenes of his resignation would be.

I hope he stays and rides this out.

I think there’s always been a snobbery about Starmers accent.
Accent? He seems to be accentless (if that is a word).

DaisyAnneReturns

This feels much more like political theatre than analysis.

On the facts: Starmer has acknowledged that he knew Mandelson had some contact with Epstein after 2008, but has said he did not know the extent of that relationship. When further information came to light, Mandelson was removed from his role and there is now cross-party pressure to release relevant files through proper parliamentary processes. That’s not stonewalling; it’s corrective action under scrutiny.

As for “he has to release everything he knows”, no Prime Minister can unilaterally dump intelligence or diplomatic material without legal and security constraints. That applies regardless of party.

The idea that Badenoch “roasted” him or that ministers “couldn’t look at him” is subjective performance commentary, not evidence of political collapse. PMQs is designed to generate clips, not sober judgment. Leaders have looked far worse in that chamber and survived far longer.

On Angela Rayner, again, there’s a lot of mind-reading going on. She dealt with her tax issue by referring herself to the appropriate processes and stepping back from roles, which is precisely what critics usually demand. There’s no evidence she’s “waiting to stab him in the back” beyond forum fantasy.

If you can criticise Starmer’s judgment on Mandelson without turning it into a soap opera about imminent coups and personal betrayal it might be worth discussing. However, thd truth is that politics is messy, but not every controversy is a death spiral.

I agree and have decided to simply wait and see on this matter.

If squeaky clean now means appointing people who have friendships with prolific paedophiles and traffickers, then my definition of clean is out of date.

I so agree MayBee

You won’t find a more squeaky clean MP than Starmer. Which is why the media have been desperate to find something to knock him down with What experience does Mahmoud have of dealing with international leaders? Or Trump? I think there’s always been a snobbery about Starmers accent. He’s never professed to being a great orator. Is that all that matters in politics these days? I wish he would walk away from politics to be honest because I think the workload he’s been under since taking office has been unprecedented.

Quote MayBee70 Fri 06-Feb-26 11:57:29
Harriet Harman is the latest one to come down heavy on Starmer. Has she forgotten that she’s had a few scandals during her political career because I haven’t

Still angry about Burnham king of the north ,her words not mine, being refused his 3 attempt to be leader of Labour Party?

I sometimes can't get over how awful Starmer's delivery is, right up there with adenoidal Rachel, whose voice is bloody awful, overly defensive under pressure often veering into screechy Estuary, I find listening to her for any length of time such as when she was delivering the Budget quite painful, compared to Kemi's well modulated vowels. Starmer on the other hand sounds like an automaton, so much so, I can't help pondering is he actually real? or a digital manifestation. He's certainly no orator. However, better the automaton you know than one that could be worse.

My choice for an alternative leader would be Shahbeena Mahmood who appears to have some grit and isn't mired, as far as we know, from tax evasion or any other scandal.

It terrifies me…

Boz

I take it that thinking Politics has slipped back to the dark ages is a way of saying Socialism is dead.
If not dead it is "resting" because Politics is slipping towards the Right on a constantly scandal greased slope.

The two Party system seems doomed.

We all know who will benefit from all this.

As I said "Politics has slipped back to the dark ages" perhaps I can clarify Boz.

No, it was nothing to do with "Socialism". It was the death of democracy I was commenting on. I sorry that wasn't clear.

I take it that thinking Politics has slipped back to the dark ages is a way of saying Socialism is dead.
If not dead it is "resting" because Politics is slipping towards the Right on a constantly scandal greased slope.

The two Party system seems doomed.

We all know who will benefit from all this.

Harriet Harman is the latest one to come down heavy on Starmer. Has she forgotten that she’s had a few scandals during her political career because I haven’t.

If KS loses his role of PM it is nobody else’s fault, he should have questioned his advisors re the appointment of PM.

He also should have ensured that due diligence was done on the issues he has had to U turn on before they were announced and put to parliament.

Iam64

Thanks for the link Graphite, I picked it up on line earlier.
It’s important to remember, no one was talk8ng about Mandelson - Epstein when PM was made US Ambassador. I was concerned but could see an ace manipulator might be useful with Trump
To my shame, I’d forgotten Mandelson’s support for Epstein at the time of his first conviction. In my defence, had I been considering offering a job on my team, I’d have googled Mandelson. Then not appointed him

I posted about PM’s friendship with Epstein on the thread when he was appointed. As did other Gransnetters.

I also posted a photo of him shopping with Epstein trying on a belt.

Good post Graphite. Although we had all seen the ‘Madness of King Trump’ the first time around, I can’t think of any country that was truly prepared for the onslaught against those previously considered allies.

Starmer was buying time. Using Mandelson was a risky move, but he was advised it would be acceptable by those tasked with vetting him. They were wrong. Starmer should now be asking why, rather than expending energy fighting the power-hungry.

But perhaps this was inevitable. Sadly, politics has slipped so far back into the dark ages that it is not only slowing progress, many parts of the world are actively moving backwards.

Galaxy

And again that won't be the fault of the voters.

We have to take responsibility for our own decisions.

Iam64

Thanks for the link Graphite, I picked it up on line earlier.
It’s important to remember, no one was talk8ng about Mandelson - Epstein when PM was made US Ambassador. I was concerned but could see an ace manipulator might be useful with Trump
To my shame, I’d forgotten Mandelson’s support for Epstein at the time of his first conviction. In my defence, had I been considering offering a job on my team, I’d have googled Mandelson. Then not appointed him

To my shame, I’d forgotten Mandelson’s support for Epstein at the time of his first conviction. In my defence, had I been considering offering a job on my team, I’d have googled Mandelson. Then not appointed him

I had forgotten too, but I'm not the PM with all the resources available to find out everything about a prospective candidate for such a vitally important diplomatic post.

And again that won't be the fault of the voters.

Iam64

That’s right, Farage is not ‘in power ‘
Thank goodness for that small mercy

Yet 😲

Unless the other two main parties sort themselves out and stop the in-fighting, he well could be.

Then wait for the consequences!

The “News Agents” are rarely straightforwardly pro-Starmer. (Graphite Thu 05-Feb-26 22:50:22) Their coverage often reflects a broader tendency in political commentary which frames leadership in terms of conflict and failure rather than continuity and gradual progress.

At present, the situation feels almost Romanesque: authority is provisional, and leadership is treated as contingent on constant demonstrations of strength. The most plausible rationale for removing Starmer would be an inability to sustain or advance the progress already made. Yet much of the criticism appears detached from that criterion.

There is limited acknowledgement that a gradual reclamation of social-democratic norms may be underway. For some, incremental change is insufficiently visible to be valued; for others - particularly on the right - such a trajectory is actively undesirable. In that context, Starmer’s position is structurally precarious, regardless of performance, placing him in a situation where satisfying all sides is effectively impossible.

I just hope every recognises that the outcomes of this attitude may well be as depressing as the outcome of Brexit!

Graphite

Do please list them surfsup, right back to 5 July 2024.

No, sorry I’m not your secretary but I’ll start you off with Lord Ali’s generous gifts of designer clothing for KS and his wife; even expensive designer spectacles for KS. Conveniently “forgot” to declare these items.

Thanks for the link Graphite, I picked it up on line earlier.
It’s important to remember, no one was talk8ng about Mandelson - Epstein when PM was made US Ambassador. I was concerned but could see an ace manipulator might be useful with Trump
To my shame, I’d forgotten Mandelson’s support for Epstein at the time of his first conviction. In my defence, had I been considering offering a job on my team, I’d have googled Mandelson. Then not appointed him

Yes I think people lose any sense of their own morality when dealing with Trump, it is one of the reasons he won. But people won't listen they just carry on.