Keir Starmer/Curry and Beergate

[littleyellowbirdie 2,548]

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-61383091

What do people make of Starmer's promise to quit if he's fined for the work curry and beer at a constituency office? To what extent does this affect the discussion over Boris Johnson's future? 

Edited May 9, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[Yellow Fever 3,783]

As before, its turned out to be very very bad idea for the Tory and Mail to try and smear SKS like this. Duck and cover is the Tory cry. Incoming.

Like a boomerang, their smears are returning, sharpened, now honed to a razor sharp edge and winging its way back to them at supersonic speed. I'm expecting carnage as the next fines drop let alone Sue Gray.

[Herman 9,763]

It's the clearest example of how our unregulated press is a massive burden to this country and how it is harming us. It is not after facts or truth to power. It is simply there to help out its owners (all massive tax avoiders) and to prop up any government that will let it get away with this sort of thing.

Starmer is turning Labour around and is clearly a threat to the established, and very rotten, status quo and this is their way to get rid of him. The allegations against him and his team are spurious and very weak, everyone knows this, but this smear campaign is working and if it does force him out it will be of massive damage to this country. The Daily Mail shouldn't be allowed to win this war.

The positive is that Starmer has filled his team with a very competent group, unlike Johnson, so if the worst comes to the worst, there is someone to fill his boots.

His promise to quit, and why he is doing it, is a very good move. The ball is very much back in the other's court. You only had to look at the online meltdown from client journalists and the desperate moving of goalposts by the Daily Mail.

[cambridgeshire canary 6,717]

Strange how this story only broke as soon as the election results came in and as such they took all the headlines away from the huge tory loses and began a massive smear campeign against Labour and it's leader.. I'm sure it's just a coincidence 😉

[Herman 9,763]

When people mention our free press remind them of this debacle.

[cambridgeshire canary 6,717]

16 minutes ago, Herman said:

When people mention our free press remind them of this debacle.

Our press is free. It's just by free that means 'free to stick up and defend those in charge at all costs' 😉

[Daz Sparks 1,154]

19 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-61383091

What do people make of Starmer's promise to quit if he's fined for the work curry and beer at a constituency office? To what extent does this affect the discussion over Boris Johnson's future? 

I applaud his integrity, and I applaud the effort he and his deputy are making to distance themselves from the rotting corpse that is  Boris Johnson and the Tory Party. It is unequivocal proof that not all politicians "are the same".

If, and it is still just that, he is fined,  Boris Johnson's death throes will damage the Tory's re-election chances even more and Starmer and Rayner's legacy should give a huge leg up to their successors. 

 

[dylanisabaddog 4,921]

I'm surprised that the Tories have pushed this one. If Starmer resigns Johnson is likely to be up against Lisa Nandy. She will destroy Johnson or any other Tory that is put in front of her. 

[Icecream Snow 761]

15 hours ago, Herman said:

It's the clearest example of how our unregulated press is a massive burden to this country and how it is harming us. It is not after facts or truth to power. It is simply there to help out its owners (all massive tax avoiders) and to prop up any government that will let it get away with this sort of thing.

Starmer is turning Labour around and is clearly a threat to the established, and very rotten, status quo and this is their way to get rid of him. The allegations against him and his team are spurious and very weak, everyone knows this, but this smear campaign is working and if it does force him out it will be of massive damage to this country. The Daily Mail shouldn't be allowed to win this war.

Labour Policy April 25th - lets abolish non-dom status

https://news.sky.com/story/labour-pledges-to-reform-non-dom-rules-benefiting-privileged-few-12598589

Anyone would think that Daily Mail Chairman Jonathan Harmsworth, 4th Viscount Rothermere and non-dom might, just possibly, just maybe, have a vested interest in hurting Labour?

[littleyellowbirdie 2,548]

1 hour ago, dylanisabaddog said:

I'm surprised that the Tories have pushed this one. If Starmer resigns Johnson is likely to be up against Lisa Nandy. She will destroy Johnson or any other Tory that is put in front of her. 

I really think the Conservatives thought they were being very clever going on the attack with this, but I don't think they anticipated Starmer's reaction. If Starmer is fined and he steps down, that will make Boris Johnson's position untenable, and if Starmer isn't fined having put his own head on the chopping block then Starmer has the moral high ground to keep bashing Johnson over the head with it. 

[Creative Midfielder 1,996]

14 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

I really think the Conservatives thought they were being very clever going on the attack with this, but I don't think they anticipated Starmer's reaction. If Starmer is fined and he steps down, that will make Boris Johnson's position untenable, and if Starmer isn't fined having put his own head on the chopping block then Starmer has the moral high ground to keep bashing Johnson over the head with it. 

I don't 'think clever' is really the appropriate adjective here, seems to me that this is a pattern that we have seen many times from Johnson in recent years - pretty much every time he finds himself in trouble he lies instinctively and seemingly in a very off the cuff way and without really thinking through where those lies are going to lead.

Of course those lies often do get him through the immediate crisis but more often than not over time they start to unravel and just create bigger problems - the Downing Street 'parties' being a classic example.

I don't suppose in the early stages when he was lying his head off in the HoC Johnson ever thought that he would actually be found guilty of breaking the laws he had himself introduced but if he'd given it any serious thought, with the scale of the law breaking involved and the number of people who had knowledge\involvement in it he surely would have realised that it wasn't going to be smoothed over by a few very obvious lies. Clearly he didn't give any thought either to just how bad this would look to the huge number of people who had obyed those laws at a cost of not seeing friends/family passing away, getting married etc etc etc and all the other painful consequences of the restrictions.

Bottom line is Johnson (and his Cabinet of 3 & 4th rate sycophants) just isn't very bright and certainly appears to be too idle to actually learn the detail about anything, be it fact or fiction. So plenty more of the same to come I imagine unless a decent number of Tory MPs actually manage to grow a pair and finally do the right thing - based on the last three years that seems pretty unlikely.

[Worthy Nigelton 1,044]

4 hours ago, dylanisabaddog said:

I'm surprised that the Tories have pushed this one. If Starmer resigns Johnson is likely to be up against Lisa Nandy. She will destroy Johnson or any other Tory that is put in front of her. 

Nandy is great but I'd love to see Burnham in there.

[Herman 9,763]

The Daily Sturmer isn't running with this story today.🤔🤫😀

[dylanisabaddog 4,921]

4 hours ago, Worthy Nigelton said:

Nandy is great but I'd love to see Burnham in there.

Either of those 2 would be great for me. Not really keen on any of the others though. Perfectly nice people but not election winners 

[Herman 9,763]

Burnham isn't an MP so not sure if he is a possible leader. (There may be some rule allowing it.) Anyway it's Streeting.😉

[dylanisabaddog 4,921]

1 hour ago, Herman said:

Burnham isn't an MP so not sure if he is a possible leader. (There may be some rule allowing it.) Anyway it's Streeting.😉

We don't have a written constitution. The only requirement to be Prime Minister is that the Queen asks you to form a Government. In theory she could ask a dog to do it. 

It would be unusual for the role to go to Burnham but it would in any case be quite easy to find him a safe Labour seat. 

I saw Streeting on Question Time not so long ago. I'm sure the Tories would be very happy if he got the job 

[Creative Midfielder 1,996]

1 hour ago, Herman said:

Burnham isn't an MP so not sure if he is a possible leader. (There may be some rule allowing it.) Anyway it's Streeting.😉

He would certainly be my choice - not that I'll have a vote in that particular contest (😀), if there is a contest which I very much doubt.

Having said that if I was Starmer I would be rather concerned that it was Durham police conducting the investigation given the way they backed the Government position over Cummings without ever, as they subsequently admitted, conducting a proper investigation into those egregious breaches of the Covid laws.  

[Creative Midfielder 1,996]

49 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

We don't have a written constitution. The only requirement to be Prime Minister is that the Queen asks you to form a Government. In theory she could ask a dog to do it.

If Johnson asked her to do it, then she probably would 😀

Just one of the many reasons why we desperately need a written constitution and a proper Head of State (and a democracy of course).

[dylanisabaddog 4,921]

53 minutes ago, Creative Midfielder said:

If Johnson asked her to do it, then she probably would 😀

Just one of the many reasons why we desperately need a written constitution and a proper Head of State (and a democracy of course).

Precisely. I had a discussion with a Royalist the other day about the forthcoming celebrations. I politely said I was in a favour of having a non political President and she sneerinngly asked me who I would like to see in that role. "David Attenborough" I replied. She laughed and said he was too old. I suggested in that case we should go for David Attenborough's son. She laughed very loudly and told me I was being ridiculous........ 

Edited May 11, 2022 by dylanisabaddog

[BigFish 1,986]

3 hours ago, Herman said:

Burnham isn't an MP so not sure if he is a possible leader. (There may be some rule allowing it.) Anyway it's Streeting.😉

 

1 hour ago, dylanisabaddog said:

We don't have a written constitution. The only requirement to be Prime Minister is that the Queen asks you to form a Government. In theory she could ask a dog to do it. 

It would be unusual for the role to go to Burnham but it would in any case be quite easy to find him a safe Labour seat. 

I saw Streeting on Question Time not so long ago. I'm sure the Tories would be very happy if he got the job 

This is not a constituitional issue, Labour Party rules apply and they say only MPs can stand for leader

[dylanisabaddog 4,921]

58 minutes ago, BigFish said:

 

This is not a constituitional issue, Labour Party rules apply and they say only MPs can stand for leader

The easiest way to do it is to find him a safe seat. But if not, he needs to be a member of the Parliamentary Labour Party. I think that it's possible to be a shadow minister without being an MP which may be a way in for him. 

Strangely he is bookies favourite at the moment which suggests Bet365 and co are being very naughty if they're accepting bets on him. 

Edit - there may be money to be made here on a betting exchange as it appears people are prepared to gamble on Burnham 🙄

Edit 2( from The Week) 

"But Burnham currently faces a major stumbling block: if a leadership contest were called in the coming months, Burnham would be unable to stand since he is no longer an MP". 

https://www.theweek.co.uk/news/politics/952819/next-labour-leader-who-is-tipped-for-the-top-job

So the question remains, why are the bookies taking bets on him? 

Edited May 11, 2022 by dylanisabaddog

[Rock The Boat 1,331]

ẞtarmer should not quit over a fine that amounts to the same as a parking ticket. That would be out of all proportion to the seriousness (lack of) of the incident. 

To those whose retort is I couldn't hold the hand of my dieing spouse because of the rules, it was the rules that were wrong. 

[TheGunnShow 5,940]

17 hours ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

Our press is free. It's just by free that means 'free to stick up and defend those in charge at all costs' 😉

Well, defend the current set in charge by all costs. I'd actually say the BBC is similar - I find them a bit too hagiographical of the powers that be in their reporting on UK matters, but as this government in particular has shown, they're more than willing to threaten its funding just because the BBC is not completely fawning to them.

[BigFish 1,986]

50 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

So the question remains, why are the bookies taking bets on him? 

If I wanted to lay a bet on Elvis for next Labour leader I dear say they would accept it

[dylanisabaddog 4,921]

1 minute ago, BigFish said:

If I wanted to lay a bet on Elvis for next Labour leader I dear say they would accept it

I'm shocked! 

PS. UK is bookies third favourite to win Eurovision 😂

[Rock The Boat 1,331]

As a country we do tend to overdo the mass hysteria to levels of eye watering stupidity. 

In years to come people will look back to this time and be amazed and amused that the national conversation is about punishing our leaders for enjoying a curry and a slice of birthday cake. 

[Yellow Fever 3,783]

1 minute ago, Rock The Boat said:

As a country we do tend to overdo the mass hysteria to levels of eye watering stupidity. 

In years to come people will look back to this time and be amazed and amused that the national conversation is about punishing our leaders for enjoying a curry and a slice of birthday cake. 

No - We'll wonder in disbelief how we could of ever voted in somebody as dishonest and with zero integrity as Johnson and his acolytes. 

[Creative Midfielder 1,996]

1 hour ago, Yellow Fever said:

No - We'll wonder in disbelief how we could of ever voted in somebody as dishonest and with zero integrity as Johnson and his acolytes. 

Exactly, and we'll probably also wonder why a totally incompetent and consistently rule breaking rogue PM was allowed to continue in office for so long and why it took a 'birthday cake ambush' to wake much of the country up to the fact that the country has been run for the last three years by a bunch of total scumbags.

Seem bizarre (to me anyway) that it was the No 10 parties that seemed to cut through to the public consciousness, yet the thousands of unnecessary deaths caused by Johnson's incompetence and dithering, the rampant financial corruption and massive waste of public money that Johnson & Sunak were responsible for, and the appalling conduct of a substantial number of Tory MPs ( unpunished by Johnson or the Tory party) seems to have left many voters quite untroubled.

Makes no sense at all to me, but then very little does nowadays!

 

 

Edited May 11, 2022 by Creative Midfielder

[horsefly 4,300]

1 hour ago, Rock The Boat said:

As a country we do tend to overdo the mass hysteria to levels of eye watering stupidity. 

In years to come people will look back to this time and be amazed and amused that the national conversation is about punishing our leaders for enjoying a curry and a slice of birthday cake. 

Enjoying curry and birthday cake were two things not banned by Covid laws. Arranging mass social events/parties during a pandemic was. Are you really incapable of distinguishing between a law and the evidence cited in demonstrating the breaking of that law? Now that would be "eye-watering stupidity".

[Icecream Snow 761]

Shurely shome mishtake?