Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

Last time I checked, my mum's cat licks it's own arse clean.

Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

when starmer was giving his speech i could hear music in the background sounded like one of those Hitler youth bands or something similar:scratch:

Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

Don't knock it until you've . . . .

Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

The feline sounds like a builder in the litter box bang bang bang

Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

It's my intellectual levels. You might get dizzy at these heights. :LOL:

Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

Today has been a good day, now we need Rachael from accounts gone as well.

Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

So he resigns and proves himself to be a hypocrite, just like any other leader who prior to becoming leader demanded the opposition to resign and call an election.

Do I think the Conservatives, Reform or the Greens would be any better? No I don't but it's the age old problem, without them being in power we cannot know for sure.

All I know is, Labour have made damn sure I would never vote for them, not that I would whilst they had Corbyn in the party, or Charlotte Nichols, both of which are traitorous ****!

Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

I'm sure Burnham won't keep her.

---------- Post added at 18:06 ---------- Previous post was at 17:59 ----------

I don't mind the PM changing mid-term for the simple reason that I don't want the country facing an election every two years and the instability that comes with this. Plus we don't have a US-style constiution which elects a President. Though perhaps it should be capped at a maximum of two PMs per term.

But if an MP or councillor changes parties then they need to resign and face re-election - they are clearly now signed up to to a different manifesto than the one which they were elected on.

Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

Somebody has to hold that mirror while he practices the smile . . .

Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

I don’t mind either, as long as they keep to the mandate.

But I disagree in part with your stance that if an MP or councillor changes parties they should automatically submit themselves to a re-election. If they have pledged to achieve things which have proved difficult or impossible to achieve with the party to which they belonged and have changed to a party that will help them better to achieve it, then that’s acceptable in my book.

However, if they’ve decided they no longer wish to go for what they set out in their manifesto, then I agree they should submit themselves for re-election.

I know that many people vote for parties, but our electoral system does not work like that. We vote for candidates, not for political parties or Prime Ministers.

Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

The country facing an election every two years might actually force parties to reckon with the issues that they refuse to touch, which arguably debilitate the country for even longer.

Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

The problem is with "must stick to manifesto" is that none of the parties ever stick to their manifesto's and in terms of this current Labour government they were not elected to do 90% of what they have done but seem to think that because of an "Anti-Conservative" vote that they had a "mandate" to do what ever they want without any question, including all the stuff being talked about in other threads.


As I say I do not fully believe any other MP would be better but there would and is far worse and the 2 that are currently looking at fighting it out for Starmers spot are far worse!

Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

I am prepared to wait and see how he performs rather than condemn him before he starts.

Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

The last coalition wasn't chaos, quite the opposite when compared to the last 10 years of tory shithousery, who wished for that, you? Yeah you probably did actually with all your premonition of brexit being a success, bozo being a success, Truss being a success, sunak being a success etc etc etc

30% of the vote for 100% of the power stinks