This I doubt - people devoid of morals and conscience simply DGAF, he’d just lie, lie some more, and blame Labour.
2 Likes
Farage was actually in favour of Mandelson’s appointment as US Ambassador. Awkward for him to be critical.
unless he was aware it was a ticking time bomb
1 Like
We all know politics is a dirty slimy horrible profession and treatable with the disdain it deserves but I thought it was a shrewd ambassadorial move at the time.
After all they had so much in common.
X.
1 Like
Labour haven’t done themselves any favours by one of their volunteer accounts publishing a photo of Epstein with Farage that was AI generated. It wasn’t posted directly by Labour but that won’t stop their opponents making a meal of it. Farage has gone on record as saying he never met Epstein and never went to the Island. As slippery as he is, I doubt he is lying about that.
I think Reform are keeping quiet because of their connection to Steve Bannon amongst others.
Me too; I went about this in an indirect manner; if only Farage would appear on a TV debate with members of the public!
That question needs to be asked; that is Steve Bannon.
If there’s mileage to be made at Farage’s expense, it’s that he’s too inconsequential for Epstein to pay him any attention. His vanity is so great that it would irk him deeply 
1 Like
Inadvertent failure? Yeah like fuck:
Reform incompetence is always a possibility given the derp fiesta around here.
And oh look, some of their troops have turned out in Warwick.
Along with many, many more people on the side of not being a knob.
And proof that every so often internet comments are worth the paper they are printed on.
3 Likes
Meanwhile in Kent.
2 Likes
McSweeney, il est du toast.
1 Like
good riddance to the odious cunt and may he never do a Mandelson and be allowed back in.
1 Like
It may not be enough to save Starmer.
Kwarteng resigning didn’t save Truss.
The catastrofuck that Truss unleashed was a bit more serious than Starmer’s u-turning on some stuff and appointing a liar to an ambassadorship.
2 Likes
Maybe, but don’t underestimate the factionalism and opportunism of the Labour Party and the power of the right wing press on public opinion. We also don’t know what might come out of the woodwork when the Mandelson papers are published.
That is far and away the most likely thing that will destroy the current government and, hence, Labour’s chances at the next election.
I’m not sure the right wing press will dissuade many voters who might otherwise have re-elected Labour in 2029.
True. But what’s the worst that could be revealed ? Could it be significantly worse than what we already know ? So he took a gamble with finding someone who could deal with Trump and a lot of people advised him not to. Did they have someone better in mind ? The latter is repeatedly the question that just never seems to occur to Labour. Like now, for example.
McSweeney was very good at getting Labour elected. He should then have been thanked profusely and elevated to the House of Lords, to be replaced as adviser by someone more attuned to actually running a country.
Ditto with Burnham. Should he be elected he should be welcomed effusively and given something very diffcult to do. Think Attlee and Bevan. Any politician with any ability will want to be PM.
By ‘right wing press’ I did of course mean ‘the press’ (and TV).
They are all carrrying polls saying 70% of voters say Starmer should go.
This just reinforces the position as does the endless cycle of interviews asking the same question.
Three and a half years is geological time in politics. I wonder seriously how many press barons might be left by 2029.
More than 50% of voters probably think Labour should go. I fear that whatever the number is it would go up, not down, if they declare a gang war.