Politics
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Starmer got a bruising in parliament today, The language used went as far as calling him "A bare faced liar" (For which the MP got expelled from parliament)
He's on the edge of losing his job over Epstein.
Tomorrow (Tues) the ex head (sacked) of the foreign office gives his version to parliament.
Make or break time, the markets give him a 33% chance of lasting the year.
Anyone punting on this ?
He's on the edge of losing his job over Epstein.
Tomorrow (Tues) the ex head (sacked) of the foreign office gives his version to parliament.
Make or break time, the markets give him a 33% chance of lasting the year.
Anyone punting on this ?
| UK - Party Leaders -- Month Keir Starmer replaced as Labour Leader |
| 4 Runners £52,472 Matched |
| 105.4% | 93.8% | |||||||
| April-June 2026 | 4.6 | 4.8 | 4.9 | 7.2 | 8.6 | 9 | £10,809 | |
| £10 | £11 | £4 | £8 | £3 | £3 | |||
| July-September 2026 | 2.38 | 2.6 | 2.62 | 2.8 | 2.82 | 2.92 | £8,280 | |
| £5 | £74 | £18 | £8 | £100 | £9 | |||
| October-December 2026 | 5.4 | 6.6 | 7.4 | 8 | 8.2 | 9 | £1,697 | |
| £5 | £56 | £19 | £11 | £1 | £2 | |||
| 2027 or later | 2.88 | 2.92 | 3 | 3.15 | 3.2 | 3.25 | £31,686 | |
| £8 | £5 | £2 | £17 | £14 | £8 |
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 62
|
By:
You can lay him at 1.49 to leave this year
Or back at 1.48 if you think he's replaced this year. Party conference could be dangerous. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
The people manipulating the markets could do better.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
or, This could be the moment he is mortally wounded and the local election losses are tied to him and he is thrown overboard with them in the summer.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
But realistically it's not the same as Boris, unless
somebody has some evidence he lied. We all knew Johnson was lying because the story was out So he deliberately lied to Parliament. Starmer set him up at PMQs and he had to go. Starmer has misled parliament because he failed to find out the truth, but it was hidden from him. So its unintentional and he has to correct parliamentary record, which he has done, (but should have done last wednesday as that was his earliest opportunity.) (probably frantically checking correspondence in case he had missed something!!!) He now faces the locals, and the papers portraying him in bad light will undoubtedly cost even more seats than might have been lost given his approval of handling of Iran and trump | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Conference will be good time for an election or coronation
of a new leader Conference is 27-30 of September which is a bugga for month betting above | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
I bet Starmer wishes he could threaten his backbenchers with a general election as a penalty for disloyalty, but if memory serves a prime minister now needs parliamentary approval after a rule change a few years ago?
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
A) Starmer Told parliament the he only found out mandy failed his vetting a few days ago.
Yeah apparently starmer was told mandelson failed vetting last Tuesday. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
B) A seemingly respected journalist has published a screen shot of him raising mandy's failure
with Starmers director of communications on whatsapp 25th Sept last year. Yeah again this is happening. Starmer sacked Mandelson as UK ambassador to the US hours after the Independent asked No 10 whether Mandelson was actually cleared by vetting. A spokesperson replied: “Vetting done by FCDO in normal way.” | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Starmer is selling the line that he didn't know and we have to believe is top spin doctor didn't tell him.... and that he didn't ask if mandy passed his vetting until last week despite the scandal breaking months ago.
It's a hard line to buy into. Exactly this, but no paper trail, or electronic that anybody actually told starmer. Doubtless there will be more questions asked by committees in parliament, who will call in those involved to answer under oath, as Johnson was. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Starmer apologised to victims of epstein for appointment
of mandelson.... But... Mandelson was not sacked for that.. he was sacked for passing privileged info to epstein in the past. Vetting mandelson failed was apparently for owning shares in Chinese company... (this is not 100% confirmed only reason, and further questions should find truth of exactly why he failed and all of concerns raised) If this was only reason he could have been told to sell them or place them in blind trust for duration of his time as ambassador. Indeed seemingly he was not asked to do so even after gaining vetting clearance. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/apr/20/peter-mandelson-a-timeline-of-his-appointment-as-uk-ambassadorto-the-us
Guardian timeline as to what happened when, as reported Lots of stuff on twitter too. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
.@johnmcdonnellMP: "Isn't the reality this, that when he sought to realise his ambition to become leader of the Labour party with very little base in the party, he became dependent on McSweeney and Mandelson and Labour Together to organise, fund his election.."
^^^ indeed, probably? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Will Starmer lead Labour into the next GE? It seems absurd to even ask the Q, but KS isn't naturally of the Labour right & doesn't have a political base in Labour - instead he's been used by the right of the party (and willingly so), and when they decide he needs to go, hes gone.
Saul Staniforth, April 2024 @SaulStaniforth twitter, a decent commentary on all of this if you are on twitter. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Robbins is a very clever diplomat,but I THINK he is trying to bring down Starmer without it being really obvious.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
New Market a couple of days old, not much action yet.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Robbins is very good.
He hasn't answered everything, but has been clear about what he says, and about what he hasn't. Starmer has got rid of a good man. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
He's coming across as having integrity, giving considered replies whilst maintaining an air of candidness.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
One of the key questions which needs to be asked and hasn't AFAIK is
"Why and Who is responsible for omitting to tell Thornbury that Mandy failed his vetting in written replies from the FO?" This action is/was part of the ongoing cover up and will lead to the real movers and shakers. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
'Was there anything in Peter Mandelson's developed vetting that wasn't already in the public realm?' - Dame Emily Thornberry
'I may no longer be an official, but I can't open that box' - Sir Olly Robbins | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
PMQ's in an hour is going to grab the evening headlines after yesterdays testimony by Robbins.
Unlikely to be a fawning "Let's praise Starmer" fest. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
He has to do really well or it's curtains within two months at the most.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Will Starmer answer any questions today?
I reckon he will keep banging on about 'due process', apologise to the Epstein victims, and accuse Kemi of wanting to go to war 'without thinking through the consequences' | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Davey nailed him on yet another lie.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Quite a polished performance from Starmer, matter of fact and plausible. Badenoch is way out of her depth.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Looks like Starmer is holding on.
There's a distinct lack of someone like ian blackford at PMQ's, no one is able to directly hit the nail on the head with brevity and clarity. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Nice one lala
 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Starmer doesn't answer questions in PMQs, as everyone obviously knows. So to give him his due, his is capable of reading out sentences prepared by somebody else. Even if they aren't correlated to the questions.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
You were one of Boris's biggest acolytes Cider,you are losing the run of yourself lately.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
My thoughts on Boris years ago are not relevant to your analysis of Starmer now. I wouldn't say polished, but the only time he is coherent is when he is reading out sentences that have been written by someone else, and had plenty of time to prepare. The majority of the public could manage that.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Okay,i don't blame you for putting a bit of distance there as many others have as well.
Badenoch came out like a screeching banshee with a big 'gotcha' head on her, 3 times she was sent back to her box with her tail between her legs. As polished as it gets. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
I'm not interested in debating Boris, it is completely irrelevant.
Badenoch a 'screeching banshee'? Er, no. She is obviously trying to get him to lie again. It turned out that Davey nailed him on another lie, as per my first post on the thread. Starmer told the house that he didn't try to make any other crony appointments. He obviously did, as was revealed yesterday. And coincidentally it was another pal of a convicted paedophile. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Badenoch has been doing better recently ( not hard ) but was back to awful today.
Starmer safe until the elections next month unless something else comes out. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
There must be loads of other stuff that could come out. It remains hidden until the newspapers find out, then we get the worthless apologies and the taking of culpability, as if it is the 'honourable' thing to be seen doing. No mate, you are only apologising because you have been caught out and it's all over the front pages.
Look at Rayner and her tax dodging, much has been of the fact that she 'referred herself' to the ethics advisor. Every time her name was brought up, Starmer would say that she made an honest mistake, he has full confidence in her, and that she referred herself. as if referring herself is some get out of jail free card. She only referred herself (she would have been investigated anyway, so the same thing) because the Telegraph had made her tax dodging public knowledge | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
...and Tice obviously
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
We have the Arson Trial to come yet , George Galloway wants to know why there has been a practical Media blackout regarding that , what does George and others Know ?
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
RENT BOYZ
|