Jump to content

The Starmer Years - Can The New Broom Sweep Clean?

sadoldgit

By sadoldgit
in The Lounge

 Share

Recommended Posts

John B

John B

Posted
Posted

I may have lost my WFA under Starmer's Govt but I have received an email which should help me

 

I am Hendrick Bowen, a Solicitor here in London, United Kingdom. I have written you this email specifically because I have a financial offer for you worth US$8,500,000.00. Be rest assured this is legitimate and I will provide you with every required legal backing as a Solicitor. If you have interest in this, you can contact me on my personal email
( hendrickbowen.soli@gmail.com ) for more information.

Best Regards,
Hendrick Bowen

whelk

whelk

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

All a confected story with none of these freebies influencing government policy? 

 

Screenshot_20240924_105306_X.jpg

Aye - you think he is in someone’s pocket for a Glasto ticket and changed the parties tax policy? I just watched Starmer’s speech. Suggest you listen to it and tell me you think he is bent and corrupt?

  • Like 1
whelk

whelk

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, John B said:

I may have lost my WFA under Starmer's Govt but I have received an email which should help me

 

I am Hendrick Bowen, a Solicitor here in London, United Kingdom. I have written you this email specifically because I have a financial offer for you worth US$8,500,000.00. Be rest assured this is legitimate and I will provide you with every required legal backing as a Solicitor. If you have interest in this, you can contact me on my personal email
( hendrickbowen.soli@gmail.com ) for more information.

Best Regards,
Hendrick Bowen

Saying ‘Be rest assured’ would alarm me.

hypochondriac

hypochondriac

Posted
Posted
46 minutes ago, whelk said:

Aye - you think he is in someone’s pocket for a Glasto ticket and changed the parties tax policy? I just watched Starmer’s speech. Suggest you listen to it and tell me you think he is bent and corrupt?

I think that giving freebies is done to buy influence and potentially makes changes to policy. You don't believe that to be the case? 

hypochondriac

hypochondriac

Posted
Posted
58 minutes ago, whelk said:

Aye - you think he is in someone’s pocket for a Glasto ticket and changed the parties tax policy? I just watched Starmer’s speech. Suggest you listen to it and tell me you think he is bent and corrupt?

I was in full agreement with the speech. I also want the return of the sausages. I'm hopeful of a fry up tomorrow morning. 

whelk

whelk

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

I think that giving freebies is done to buy influence and potentially makes changes to policy. You don't believe that to be the case? 

So no political parties should have any donations?

hypochondriac

hypochondriac

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, whelk said:

So no political parties should have any donations?

I don't think you should be campaigning to end cronyism and then accept 70k for clothes for your wife. That's pretty obscene to me. There's probably a debate to be had about what level of donations are acceptable. I'd say that morally and given what labour have said in the past, they really should be looking to avoid the vast majority of handouts because of what it will inevitably be perceived as and the real risk of people buying undue influence. 

egg

egg

Posted
Posted
27 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I don't think you should be campaigning to end cronyism and then accept 70k for clothes for your wife. That's pretty obscene to me. There's probably a debate to be had about what level of donations are acceptable. I'd say that morally and given what labour have said in the past, they really should be looking to avoid the vast majority of handouts because of what it will inevitably be perceived as and the real risk of people buying undue influence. 

Perception, hypocrisy and poor judgement are issues here.  I'm not sure where the line should be drawn on donations, but on any assessment, £70k's worth of clothes is plainly concerning.

It's a poor show from labour, especially so early in their tenure. They've let themselves down imo. 

  • Like 1
whelk

whelk

Posted
Posted
37 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I don't think you should be campaigning to end cronyism and then accept 70k for clothes for your wife. That's pretty obscene to me. There's probably a debate to be had about what level of donations are acceptable. I'd say that morally and given what labour have said in the past, they really should be looking to avoid the vast majority of handouts because of what it will inevitably be perceived as and the real risk of people buying undue influence. 

Don’t disagree and should be seen as whiter than white but also I have no concerns that this is for back door favours. Everyone is entitled to have a differing opinion but thankfully the news cycle seems to have moved on despite the BBC’s desperation. Of course I want journalists to be free to delve to find out if anything dodgy going on but clearly they have hit nothing - I dismiss your Glastonbury ticket. Not defending them as seems foolish, what is annoying is BBC desperate to do the Daily Mail’s work of equivalence ‘they are all the same’

  • Like 1
hypochondriac

hypochondriac

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, whelk said:

Don’t disagree and should be seen as whiter than white but also I have no concerns that this is for back door favours. Everyone is entitled to have a differing opinion but thankfully the news cycle seems to have moved on despite the BBC’s desperation. Of course I want journalists to be free to delve to find out if anything dodgy going on but clearly they have hit nothing - I dismiss your Glastonbury ticket. Not defending them as seems foolish, what is annoying is BBC desperate to do the Daily Mail’s work of equivalence ‘they are all the same’

Labour stood on a platform of being better than what has gone before. In the eyes of the average member of the public, this sort of thing makes them look the same and encourages those who say that y are all the same. I don't think they are identical but I do think that when it comes down to it many politicians are self serving or at best try to help people but also want something to be in it for them in the process. Very rarely do you get truly selfless individuals who are in the game primarily to help others (in my experience selfless politicians are much more likely in local government which is why I'm much more likely to vote for individuals regardless of party affiliation on a local level.) 

The absolute worst thing about politics is having to play the game of politics with the rehearsed party lines that everyone trots out, the predictable opposition lines and the creation of narratives that are tested out in focus groups in advance. The older you get the more inauthentic it all becomes and the more weary you get of the same old tactics from all sides. 

Edited by hypochondriac
  • Like 5
Gloucester Saint

Gloucester Saint

Posted
Posted

They’ve fully deserved all of the criticism for the clothing gifts, not acceptable, but the stuff today about Starmer staying at the donor’s flat during the campaign for a short spell is now getting childish now. That’s quite reasonable that his kids have a decent revision environment without dozens of paps outside. 

  • Like 2
hypochondriac

hypochondriac

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Gloucester Saint said:

They’ve fully deserved all of the criticism for the clothing gifts, not acceptable, but the stuff today about Starmer staying at the donor’s flat during the campaign for a short spell is now getting childish now. That’s quite reasonable that his kids have a decent revision environment without dozens of paps outside. 

I don't personally care about things like that. Had he not done the clothes thing though then none of this would be being brought up. 

  • Like 1
Gloucester Saint

Gloucester Saint

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Did he do his GCSE’s after everyone else? 

Could have been mock exams perhaps then?

The clothing stuff with him and Rayner pisses me right off, and not appropriate rules met or not, but the stuff about the donor flat is the tabloids trying a bit too hard now.

Gloucester Saint

Gloucester Saint

Posted
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

Oh god. Lammy being the embarrassment he was always destined to be as foreign secretary. They just can't help themselves with the identity politics. 

https://x.com/MyLordBebo/status/1838826557135057044?t=E_se426dB5D3KjE4fK_9pw&s=19

I think we probably both agree and disagree with this one. I agree that the analogy seems odd in respect of Ukraine and USSR/Russia but Ukraine was subjugated as the Soviet bread basket during the Cold War and at in different points in that region’s history. It’s quite clunky as a comparison, and it jars slightly, but it’s not without some truth as well.

Lammy won’t be at the top table of Foreign Secs - Cook, Hague, Hurd - but I can’t accept that he could ever be a bigger embarrassment than Raab or worst of all, Boris.

If you want the inside track on how much of a 🤡 Boris was in that role, read Alan Duncan’s book who had to share the FCO with him 🤦‍♂️ 

That Twitter poster is also saying NATO should back off and let 🇺🇦 go back to 2014. That’s never going to happen with Putin or Russia, it’ll be a negotiated settlement next year with Russia getting Donbas (which they’ve smashed to pieces) and Crimea. But with Ukraine in NATO as deterrent. Russia can’t/wont pay reparations so there has to be a price and a deterrent.

 

Edited by Gloucester Saint
Holmes_and_Watson

Holmes_and_Watson

Posted
Posted
29 minutes ago, Gloucester Saint said:

I think we probably both agree and disagree with this one. I agree that the analogy seems odd in respect of Ukraine and USSR/Russia but Ukraine was subjugated as the Soviet bread basket during the Cold War and at in different points in that region’s history. It’s quite clunky as a comparison, and it jars slightly, but it’s not without some truth as well.

Lammy won’t be at the top table of Foreign Secs - Cook, Hague, Hurd - but I can’t accept that he could ever be a bigger embarrassment than Raab or worst of all, Boris.

If you want the inside track on how much of a 🤡 Boris was in that role, read Alan Duncan’s book who had to share the FCO with him 🤦‍♂️ 

 

Rolled my eyes at the image with the quote. Connected it up with his stuff last week about them having a budget for all the things given to them.

But he's having a go at the Russian guy who's on his phone. That and the other comments he made beyond the clunky analogy get lots of points.

  • Like 1
hypochondriac

hypochondriac

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 25/09/2024 at 18:00, Gloucester Saint said:

I think we probably both agree and disagree with this one. I agree that the analogy seems odd in respect of Ukraine and USSR/Russia but Ukraine was subjugated as the Soviet bread basket during the Cold War and at in different points in that region’s history. It’s quite clunky as a comparison, and it jars slightly, but it’s not without some truth as well.

Lammy won’t be at the top table of Foreign Secs - Cook, Hague, Hurd - but I can’t accept that he could ever be a bigger embarrassment than Raab or worst of all, Boris.

If you want the inside track on how much of a 🤡 Boris was in that role, read Alan Duncan’s book who had to share the FCO with him 🤦‍♂️ 

That Twitter poster is also saying NATO should back off and let 🇺🇦 go back to 2014. That’s never going to happen with Putin or Russia, it’ll be a negotiated settlement next year with Russia getting Donbas (which they’ve smashed to pieces) and Crimea. But with Ukraine in NATO as deterrent. Russia can’t/wont pay reparations so there has to be a price and a deterrent.

 

I wasn't really commenting on the comment from the twitter poster but lammy has proven time and again that he's unintelligent and frankly nothing but a race grifter who sees the world through a racial lens which is the type of politics I loath. You're most likely right on Russia by the way and that outcome is probably the best we can hope for. 

Edited by hypochondriac
  • Like 1
hypochondriac

hypochondriac

Posted
Posted

Paul embery posted this up on twitter earlier and I watched it again as I do every time it pops up on social media. Say what you like about him but he was a monumental politician. It makes you want to weep at the state of politics in this country now that we have no one even close to this nowadays. What a great man irrespective of the politics you follow. 

 

https://x.com/PaulEmbery/status/1839050541990637935?t=ziZ3OYCdqZgs6DAhWTDXLQ&s=19

  • Like 2
whelk

whelk

Posted
Posted
27 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Although he was a clear disaster for the country, it does rather highlight how these donations are political choices when you see things like this:

 

20240926_132555.jpg

Dennis Skinner refused a cup of coffee. These bloody principled lefties. 

hypochondriac

hypochondriac

Posted
Posted
51 minutes ago, whelk said:

Dennis Skinner refused a cup of coffee. These bloody principled lefties. 

I just think Corbyn doesn't really do anything. If you gave him £100 I doubt he'd have anything to spend it on. 

  • Haha 1
whelk

whelk

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, hypochondriac said:

I just think Corbyn doesn't really do anything. If you gave him £100 I doubt he'd have anything to spend it on. 

He’d donate it to Hamas

  • Like 4
badgerx16

badgerx16

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

I just think Corbyn doesn't really do anything. If you gave him £100 I doubt he'd have anything to spend it on. 

He is loaded anyway so £100 probably wouldn't register with him.

moonraker

moonraker

Posted
Posted
On 25/09/2024 at 22:35, hypochondriac said:

Paul embery posted this up on twitter earlier and I watched it again as I do every time it pops up on social media. Say what you like about him but he was a monumental politician. It makes you want to weep at the state of politics in this country now that we have no one even close to this nowadays. What a great man irrespective of the politics you follow. 

 

https://x.com/PaulEmbery/status/1839050541990637935?t=ziZ3OYCdqZgs6DAhWTDXLQ&s=19

Whole heatedly agree.  Disagreed with him on some key issues but a great parliamentarian.  Met him and his wife once in the Buffet on Bristol Temple Meads Station time enough for a beer for me and wife and a tea for Tony, a real gentleman and very engaging.

  • Like 1
hypochondriac

hypochondriac

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, moonraker said:

Whole heatedly agree.  Disagreed with him on some key issues but a great parliamentarian.  Met him and his wife once in the Buffet on Bristol Temple Meads Station time enough for a beer for me and wife and a tea for Tony, a real gentleman and very engaging.

Social media has been the very worst thing to happen to politics. It's led to dumbing down and lowest common denominator stuff. Benn was clearly a man of great substance who didn't dumb down for anyone. Lots to disagree with him about but you can absolutely respect his skill and oratory abilities. 

  • Like 2
whelk

whelk

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, rallyboy said:

Some people think they can make up any old shit and get away with it.

 

There’s plenty of fervent Tory boys with desperation that needs satisfying

hypochondriac

hypochondriac

Posted
Posted

Rumours abound of an affair as a possible explanation for why Starmer was in lord Alli's flat. I expect if there's any truth in the rumours it will most likely surface in the Sunday papers if they can justify it as newsworthy. 

hypochondriac

hypochondriac

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said:

No, no, that was Boris.

Sounds likely to me that she knows the details. Maybe the telegraph are keeping the details for Sunday. My guess is it's an historic affair or he's gay. 

 

Screenshot_20240927_224352_X.jpg

Gloucester Saint

Gloucester Saint

Posted
Posted
19 hours ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Oh dear, if only someone had warned them. 
 

https://amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/sep/25/labour-crackdown-on-non-doms-may-raise-no-money-officials-fear

If that turns out to be the case then time for a re-think. Pity previous governments didn’t do this when deciding on the poll tax and privatising water, utilities and railway when the advice was that it would not create the efficiencies their ideologies drove them to believe. 

Gloucester Saint

Gloucester Saint

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

Sounds likely to me that she knows the details. Maybe the telegraph are keeping the details for Sunday. My guess is it's an historic affair or he's gay. 

 

Screenshot_20240927_224352_X.jpg

I think the clothing was the gotcha, and quite a substantial one at that. There seems to be the creation of lots of smoke around Jenny Chapman but Tim Shipman could warn Oakeshott off that. The idea she’d ever stop on behalf of the party and non doms who pay her wages is risible - ask Matt Hancock. 

Sheaf Saint

Sheaf Saint

Posted
Posted
15 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

Talk amongst journalists of a secret regarding Starmer's love life apparently

 

It's a hell of a stretch to describe Isabel Oakeshott as a 'journalist'. 

  • Like 2

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...