ListNook

AvailableCap4127 20 hr ago +36

Richard Tice just fraudulently claimed £98k or tax exemptions. His party continually puts candidates up with proven racist social media posts. Is he under any pressure to resign? Don’t think he’s been asked to resign once by the media, yet Starmer is a daily basis. Media is a joke. Reporters should be ashamed to call themselves that when they are just mouthpieces for the rich.

36

AppearanceDizzy7006 20 hr ago +57

He's not under pressure to resign. I dont know what nbc are smoking. How about you report on your own incompetent politics in the US nbc?

57

rnicoll 20 hr ago +35

They mean "The billionaires pulling our strings want him to resign", I believe.

35

AppearanceDizzy7006 20 hr ago +8

Ah yes, the billionaires backed by their billion dollar media empires

8

Several-Opposite-746 20 hr ago +6

If he didn't want trump's media lackeys to report this, he should have helped with the Strait of Hormuz. Let this be a warning to all. /s

6

AppearanceDizzy7006 20 hr ago +1

For sure. I think we all must know by now that trump runs the country like a mob boss

1

TheColourOfHeartache 19 hr ago +2

He is. His own MPs see their polling numbers, hear what the public say about him, and want him gone. Even if scandal hadn't turned public heads, the sheer incompetence around it has upset many MPs. There's only two reasons they haven't pushed him: One is some want to do it after the upcoming local elections so the taint of failure attaches to the old guy. And many are fearful that whomever replaces him will be worse, because it will be voted on by the party membership who are way out of touch with the voting public.

2

Phantomasas 20 hr ago

He is, technically, from the opposition, who don't want him or any other Labour politician being the Prime Minister.

0

TPCC159 18 hr ago -4

Tell BBC the same thing

-4

AppearanceDizzy7006 18 hr ago +6

The BBC headline names the person that wants him gone. Have to read 3/4 through this nbc article until the person is named.

6

[deleted] 21 hr ago +37

[deleted]

37

Gigi_Langostino 21 hr ago +4

We've watched the Tories split into the Reform and the Lib Dems, now we get to watch Labour split into the Greens and... the Lib Dems.

4

Oddball_bfi 20 hr ago +32

Oh, shut up. Good grief.

32

Sweet_Concept2211 19 hr ago +8

F*** off with this bullshit, NBC. American media keeps kneeling to Epstein's bestie, and this is the best y'all can do to smear European leaders?

8

CorganKnight 19 hr ago +3

if he is under pressure to resign, trump is under what?

3

Warm-Attempt7773 20 hr ago +1

Did the record skip?

1

strand_of_hair 20 hr ago

Can’t wait for Reform to f*** over the country like Trump.

0

gayphilantropist 20 hr ago +1

It's going to be worse.

1

spiceypickle2 19 hr ago +1

Is that even possible? I just can't imagine.

1

gayphilantropist 18 hr ago +1

I hope not, but, I wouldn't be surprised.

1

Weird_Personality150 20 hr ago

I don’t pretend to know much about British Politics. However, I do find it very telling that so many people seem to just say, Starmer is bad, followed by other people listing line after line of the good things he’s doing.

0

No_Foot 18 hr ago

Hasn't been perfect but tbf what politician is, done some good stuff that doesn't get mentioned by majority of the media for whatever reason and a few things I haven't agreed with. Personal opinion is they are the least worst option and least likely to f*** over and make life worse for majority of uk population, hence people conditioned to believe 'Starmer bad' but unable to explain why they hold this opinion.

0

Philo_Publius1776 21 hr ago -10

It's so frustrating for the UK to suffer the Tories for so long only for labor to turn around and put Starmer forward and say "yeah, this guy. He's our man." Between UK's labor and the US's DNC, I have a hard time believing they're not failing intentionally.

-10

AvailableCap4127 20 hr ago +7

Trumps fan base are delusional and accept he lies. Boris’s fan base accepted he lies. Farage’s fan base accept he lies. Richard Tice just avoided £98k in tax and nothing. Angela Raynor resigned for something not dissimilar. The left hold their leaders to a higher standard. Starmer is a far more honest and honourable man than Trump, Boris, Farage or Tice. Why should he resign when these cretins continue to spout their lies?

7

Philo_Publius1776 20 hr ago +2

>The left hold their leaders to a higher standard. I mean. You're clearly not.

2

AvailableCap4127 20 hr ago +2

I vote for whoever has the countries best interests at heart and I have switched my vote many times. If I ask myself is that Kemi, Farage, or Starmer, only one of them isn’t a complete sell out to the highest bidder. The fact you seem to want Starmer to resign so much suggests perhaps that Russian influence

2

Philo_Publius1776 19 hr ago -2

Putting leftists who disagree with you in neat little pre-conceptualized boxes you can dismiss is a great way to avoid the hard work of accountability and self-reflection. The "Russian influence" line is just a tool you reached for to avoid confronting the cognitive dissonance of claiming in one breath that the left holds its leaders to higher standards and then committing special pleading for why Starmer shouldn't be held to a higher standard in the next. I can see why that would be uncomfortable. I imagine you see Russian influence everywhere.

-2

AvailableCap4127 19 hr ago +3

Why should Starmer resign? The person who withheld the information should resign, and they have. Despite this, and despite justice being done, unlike with Farage and Tices lies, you think Starmer should resign. I therefore reached an obvious conclusion because British folk don’t tend to do the Pot Kettle Black thing as much as Russian bots.

3

Philo_Publius1776 19 hr ago

If you believe for one second that Starmer did not know about this, I have a bridge to sell you. Why should he resign? Because either he knew and did it anyways, indicating that he lacks good judgment. Or he didn't know and should have, indicating he's incompetent. In the working world, we'd call this "failure to supervise." Considering there are people saying he knew and forced through the appointment anyways, I'm disinclined to give him the benefit of the doubt.

0

AvailableCap4127 19 hr ago +4

Trump - “There are people saying he knew, I don’t know if he knew, maybe he knew, but that’s what people are saying”. Yes the PM should supervise every civil servant, all 550,000 of them. Good god.

4

twoworldman 15 hr ago +3

>Trump - “There are people saying he knew, I don’t know if he knew, maybe he knew, but that’s what people are saying”. To be fair to Trump, these are the same people...many many people...the best people in fact, who are saying he's the best. They went up to him, with tears in their eyes and said, 'Mr. President, you're the best.. Maybe even the greatest' ...and also that he has big hands.

3

Philo_Publius1776 19 hr ago +1

This is the ambassador to the US. Yes. He absolutely should supervise him. To compare the ambassador to the US to "every civil servant" proves you're not being serious.

1

AvailableCap4127 19 hr ago +4

The person who reviewed the ambassador gave advice to Starmer that he was fine. If you are saying that actually Starmer should have in fact done that civil servants job then perhaps you have never had a job. If you have had a job, you would know you certainly don’t want to also having to be doing someone else’s. That person who gave the wrong advice has effectively been sacked. I hope if you do have a job, you are not asked in future to resign for someone else’s mistake, that some people thought you should have caught, because you should have been doing their job too.

4

just-here-for--porn_ 21 hr ago -1

>It's so frustrating for the UK to suffer the Tories for so long only for labor to turn around and put Starmer forward and say "yeah, this guy. He's our man." It's so depressing. No only that he rose from a Labour civil war from which the winning side was incapable of taking any of the positives from the other side. So Corbyn's youth strategy turned into the "blue Labour", punch a hippy, f*** universities...old people and reform voters is where it's at. I mean I'm exaggerating...but only slightly. A similar thing happened in Germany. Merkel's unbelievably stupid leadership was followed by Olaf Schultz...who also under delivered massively. The CDU is back as the main party in power now. Underneath this I suspect is a population structure issue which forces politicians to favour the retired over the working age adults or youth.

-1

rburn79 20 hr ago +13

The depressing thing is that for the first time in 14 years we get a progressive government doing genuinely good things - nationalising rail, nuclear energy, renewables, renters rights, recognising the state of Palestine, ending strikes, workers rights, taking us closer to the EU alignment etc... ... and we're playing into the right wing propaganda by undermining said government as much as possible. Christ. You'd think Starmer had been the one who had gone to Epstein Island. We'll deserve what we get.

13

just-here-for--porn_ 20 hr ago -4

Na. He's chickened out of the big things. He's watered down much of his promises. He's fucked up loads of stuff...some of which I've seen up close. You can't be a technocrat who is not good at the technical aspects of change....it just doesn't work. His messaging is truly awful...almost like it's beneath him to lead a country with words. He was not on Epstein island, he's lost popularity because people think he's a shit leader. They've not been brainwashed by the right wing media....they are correct.

-4

[deleted] 20 hr ago +19

[deleted]

19

yabushido 20 hr ago +5

^^^ This. IMHO the main issue with current Labour government is perception like they don't have proper bloody PR team. Tell voters what are you doing - give your supporters something to rally around, and push against opposition propaganda. When you are in the spotlight you cannot afford to sit quiet - optics matter.

5

just-here-for--porn_ 20 hr ago

No the main issue with the current labour party is they can't fix the fiscal crisis they find themselves in because they are afraid to grasp the nettles that they have to. Tax more. End the triple lock. I agree though their messaging is truly awful. But that starts at the top...it always feels like Starmer thinks communication is beneath him.

0

Sweet_Concept2211 8 hr ago +1

It is always amusing to see people get ticked off at progressive governments because they cannot fix systemic problems faster than their conservative predecessors created them. Sabotage can get done quick and dirty. Fixing things properly takes time.

1

just-here-for--porn_ 8 hr ago +1

You've got to try to fix them. The issue is the Labour never sought a mandate to create create the conditions that would allow them to have a good go. Now they're kinda fucked. Say what you want about the main sabotage by the Tory party, austerity (and I have very many very bad things to say)... David Cameron spent the 18 months before his election seeking a mandate for it. When he got in he executed it...real change, hard change, bad change. Labour didn't bother...

1

just-here-for--porn_ 20 hr ago +3

This is a long list. Some genuinely really good things which the Tory's would never do. Some of it the Tory's actually have a better record on than you cite above for labour. You should remove these from your list. Some of it is just the way the wind is blowing and has been for quite time. You probably should also remove these. I agree that Labour inherited a very challenging fiscal situation. Although to be fair so did the Tory party in 2010. My main issue with the Labour party is not grasping the nettle and dealing with the fiscal situation. They need to tax and spend... there is no choice. Saying you'll not increase income tax when you can't borrow at pre truss rates is such a massive f*** up. You also need to end the triple lock. Until they create real fiscal head room to actually invest i think we're just going to plod along. I will vote Labour at the next election, but if Starmer's in charge I'll be holding my nose.

3

[deleted] 21 hr ago -4

[deleted]

-4

Philo_Publius1776 21 hr ago -4

F*** me, that song goes hard for being so silly.

-4

[deleted] 21 hr ago -2

[deleted]

-2

Philo_Publius1776 20 hr ago

I understood it. That's why I said I liked it so much. It was amazing.

0

PurpleAkisGhost 21 hr ago -12

He's fucked it for himself really. He was actually starting to recover a bit of dignity for standing up to Trump and not dragging us into another war in the ME. But then he's appointed Mandelson, seemingly aware of him failing his security vetting, and lied to Parliament about it. Lying to Parliament is considered grounds for immediate resignation for most prime ministers. The only one in recent memory to have been caught and not resigned was the Bastion of Morality and Integrity that is Boris Johnson.

-12

Historical_Owl_1635 21 hr ago +18

> seemingly aware of him failing his security vetting, and lied to Parliament about it. Did you even read the article? Maybe he did know, but there’s literally zero evidence to back that up other than hearsay by the opposition so for you to state this matter of factly is so disingenuous.

18

Mrc3mm3r 21 hr ago +5

Clearly not.

5

thereoncewasahat 20 hr ago +2

After McSweeney resigned, he would have ensured he knew exactly what the facts were to get his ducks in a row going forward. A basic fact to find out would be if he passed vetting. For starmer to say that he didn't know until yesterday that he failed vetting is therefore a lie. Or he's the most incompetent PM ever. This was RORY STEWART'S opinion. For him to be so aggressive says it all. That's the most GENEROUS outcome from all this. It's likely he had lied all the way through, and gave the nod to accept Mandelson despite him failing vetting.

2

Historical_Owl_1635 20 hr ago +1

I respect you’ve at least come with a valid reasoning compared to the other guy who just seems to follow whatever the headlines tell him.

1

thereoncewasahat 20 hr ago +1

The other guy is right. 'It's murky, the civil service are implying that they couldn't have told him that he failed. Which is absolutely nonsense they just can't disclose *why*.' That in particular is the crux of their defense; it is a doomed defense.

1

PurpleAkisGhost 20 hr ago +1

F****** THANK YOU. I've been trying to get through to this person how astronomically unlikely it is that a Blairite Labour leader doesn't inherently KNOW Mandelson is going to fail vetting, for any number of reasons. And that's not even going to the fact that the CS is being made a patsy publicly. There is no world in which the CS hasn't told Keir or even a senior minister "are you out of your f****** mind?" as soon as he announced Mandelson. The fact he announced him before the vetting was even complete tells you everything you need to know.

1

thereoncewasahat 20 hr ago +1

It's not even clever lying at this stage; and in that, it's the sheer brazenness with which Keir lies that gets me. The lawyer who holds truth and the rule of law to be sacrosanct. You couldn't paint a red face on him. You have to have spent your life lying and getting away with it to lie so badly and so confidently. Very much like Andrew Windsor.

1

PurpleAkisGhost 21 hr ago -5

It's murky, the civil service are implying that they couldn't have told him that he failed. Which is absolutely nonsense they just can't disclose *why*. As for it being overruled by the foreign office without his knowledge or approval, again, bollocks. Refuse to believe it.

-5

Historical_Owl_1635 21 hr ago +6

> It's murky, the civil service are implying that they couldn't have told him that he failed. So why are you talking so factually in your comment? > Which is absolutely nonsense they just can't disclose why. Again, it literally says in the article he plans to be fully transparent with parliament on Monday.

6

PurpleAkisGhost 21 hr ago -1

Because Politicians are notoriously trustworthy individuals and have never once lied or made omissions for practicalities or the safety of their positions? For fucks sakes Mandelson was literally called the Prince of Darkness in British Politics, of course they f****** knew he would fail it.

-1

Historical_Owl_1635 20 hr ago +3

So your whole comment that you’ve presented to everyone as fact is based purely on your vibes lmao.

3

PurpleAkisGhost 20 hr ago -3

Well, apparently, it's good enough for Keir to appoint the American Ambassador solely on vibes, I don't see why I'm being chastised. Let's be frank, it was immediately apparent to literally anyone with political nous in the UK that letting Mandelson anywhere near government was a disaster waiting to happen.

-3

Historical_Owl_1635 20 hr ago +5

It wasn’t on vibes at all, the articles quite clear he wasn’t aware at the time of appointing him and there’s zero evidence otherwise other than the literal opposition leader saying so.

5

PurpleAkisGhost 20 hr ago +1

And the only evidence YOU are presenting that Keir was completely in the dark about the decision was...Keir saying so. So it seems we've reached an impasse. I know, perhaps we should look to see what the senior civil servant he sacked has to say about it, surely he would corroborate Keir's story and agree that it was all a big missunder- oh, oh \*dear\*.

1

Historical_Owl_1635 20 hr ago +4

You’re the one making the accusation, the onus is on you to prove that accusation. Like hypothetically I accuse you of flying to Epstein island and then start demanding you supply evidence that says otherwise, it doesn’t make sense.

4

TheColourOfHeartache 19 hr ago -1

If he knew, he's complicit. If he didn't know, he's incompetent.

-1

Ultra_Metal 19 hr ago -2

Starmer lied to Parliament. He's in big trouble.

-2

Loose-Message8770 20 hr ago -3

Keir supports child abusers.

-3

Ultra_Metal 19 hr ago

And he lied to Parliament.

0

Loose_Skill6641 20 hr ago -7

starmer is goofy

-7

British PM Starmer under new pressure to resign over U.S. ambassador appointment

💬 Send a Message

67 Comments