Anyone think Reeves should go after seemingly not sharing with us what she been told by the OBR?
Off Topic The politics thread - Starmer/Reeves/Farage etc.
- Thread starter Blond Bombshell
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
I dont think she will go but it does appear that she has been economical with the truth. Surprising that for a politician
I have to say, takeaway the fact that politicians lie to get elected, which sadly they all do, I seem to be one of the few really positive about the child poverty decision and the principle that people should pay more for good services. My criticism of the budget is that those much higher up haven’t been hit harder instead. I honestly think no one stands a chance until that happens. The moaning from the mansion brigade is frankly embarrassing.
x 10 my feelings for that witch, destroyed mining communities forever
They would have got away with it too, if it wasn't for them pesky kids
Am I right in thinking that the monied who own the system are going after Reeves because she’s dared taxed the wealthy, tax dodging landowners and corporations in the last two budgets?
She should have gone all in on them and taxed excess wealth? It says to me that they need sorting out and controlling so they are less powerful than the government
She should have gone all in on them and taxed excess wealth? It says to me that they need sorting out and controlling so they are less powerful than the government
Misleading the public is one thing. This clearly happened, and can be seen by the timeline of events now known.
There is a good reason why all chancellors used to go into " purdah" in the weeks before a budget. Every nod and wink, every hint, every statement and u turn costs money. So you stay quiet .
Misleading the markets is another. That is actually an offence in law, if proven, never mind the huge cost of spiking gilt yeilds it has caused.
Behaviour like that would normally result in the PM sacking the minister concerned. But in this case, Starmer is complicit, saying he knew what was happening.
Few PMs survive a chancellor's departure, so he'll not sack her. But the trust of the markets has been lost, and that will cost a great deal of money in higher borrowing costs.
Is be very surprised if either were still in post at the next GE. I doubt they will see next year out .
No lectures from me but whether you like it or not our club is built on miners, teachers and shipbuilders and our stadium is built on Monkwrarmouth pit, I’m in tune with that fantastic heritage not the right who did their best to destroy many a community in the NE.
Enjoy your day too.
You have to laugh, they didn’t get the Brexit they wanted
I read Theresa May at Ten book recently (the author is very balanced in his writing on all the previous PMs) and basically May (though a remainer) went a lot further than most of the brexiteers expected after the referendum
Laughable now that brexiteers are saying it wasn’t Brexitee enough.
Recod immigration and a stalled economy is the legacy. Well done Nigel.
I suspect it is more to do with it being a shambolic budget that will bring more financial challenge to our country personally. And maybe because she wasnt honest enough.
I find it mind boggling she can be so certain she has done nothing wrong. Either she is utterly clueless, or deceitful.
It is one thing after another with her it seems right now. Starmer needs better around him. I am convinced the way Cooper and he went into a huddle with Reeves as Badenoch attacked was to try and prevent more public tears. She looked completely lost. Whilst I hate the sort of attacks Badenoch did, Starmer and Reeves have made a habit of it so maybe what comes around goes around. I just think se looks horribly out of her depth.
The question of the thread asks who will be last standing. It wont be Reeves at this rate. She is currently a drag.
Politicians eh.
I am not prepared to takeaway the fact all politicians lie to get elected mate. Sorry, but that is to ignore the core problem in our country. These people can get away with blue murder.
Until we have honesty, based on scrutible evidence, we will continue to get governments like this one, the last, the one before etc etc. In othet words a small number of politicians who value personal station and their future CV over the people who are working their arses off to keep the country moving and their family rising above the misery of what is a country ran by folk who have not got a clue.
There are no easy answers, but exploding the benefits bill is the opposite of the right direction. So is leaving entirely untouched the public sector in all it's forms. Not even a tiny hint of any reform or increase in efficiency, just here are a few billion, more to come.
But "lying" to the public, or exaggerating, goes back to Cicero. The problem Reeves has is that she clearly lied to the public, implicitly lied to the HOC and did the same to the markets. As long as she is in post she is a stuttering weak link, but as I think I said earlier, a PM and a chancellor are difficult to separate and in this case, Starmer is just as guilty as Reeves as he agreed to the deception.
Whatever anyone else thinks about it, the markets do not like it and they will extract their price.
This could be the end for both of them, the Times is reporting they both misled the cabinet about the budget finances
You often criticise quangos and the public sector. I often ask you to name what you mean and what you would cut but you never do
Reforms new enemy is special needs kids
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DRfmBL1jHaE/?igsh=ZjRxZWd1dWw4OTlr
How dare they need extra help
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DRfmBL1jHaE/?igsh=ZjRxZWd1dWw4OTlr
How dare they need extra help
Last edited: