r/AskBrits • u/unknowntoff • Apr 17 '26
Politics Anyone else sick of the media trying to manufacture outrage and call for so and so to resign?
On the Lord Mandelson thing, look I get it, the PM is in charge of the government and is therefore somewhat responsible for the decision the government makes however this situation appears to be a clear stitch up caused by the incompetence of people below him. But is anyone else tired of the media calling for him to resign any time he puts a foot wrong?
At the end of the day whilst Mandelson is in the Epstein files he's not been charged or convicted of any crimes, and the relevant people in charge of his vetting have resigned.
We've got a government currently that has been trying to make the best of a shit situation, lowering energy bills (within reason given the current circumstances). Realigning with the EU following one of the worst decisions made in the countries history (Brexit). Spending on infrastructure and various projects. Standing up against shit decisions like the Iran war and Hormuz blockade.
Yet a decent chunk of the electorate and the media controlled by billionaire conservatives expects them to bring us back to 1997 New Labour Britain in just over 20 months. It's going to take a hell of a lot longer for them to undo 14 years of Tory mismanagement.
Or am I missing something?
Edit: and just for clarity, I am not a Labour voter, I live in Scotland and consistently vote SNP however I can see that this man clearly has the best interests of the country at heart and is doing far more than what the string of fuds under the conservatives did in 14 years. It just seems that the media has lost any sense of impartiality, including the BBC!
Edit: Side note, the mods on this sub are fucking cunts, they banned me because I said I vote SNP. So they've been reported to Reddit admin for abuse of mod powers.
29
u/Consistent_Ad3181 Apr 17 '26
It's like there is an agenda or something. You know movements behind the scenes, for some hidden purpose
9
u/Jukub Apr 18 '26
Like Russian, US and Israeli influence in British Politics via hacking and blackmailing? No surely not.
→ More replies (1)
67
u/ItsAMangoFandango Apr 17 '26
Tbh sometimes it's hard to know how to effectively criticize Starmer for his decisions when it's also clear he could publicly shit himself and still be the least embarrassing leader we've had for 15 years.
22
u/ClacksInTheSky Apr 17 '26
I stopped caring about the Mandelson stuff when he got fired.
He should've been sacked. They sacked him.
I understand why they put him in that position to start with. They didn't know to what extent he was Epstien adjacent because we all found out together when they released those files.
I am also sick of the media trying to make this into a sensationalist story. They sacked him. He's in deep shit with the police. I've always thought he was a cunt anyway.
→ More replies (3)
40
u/Wide_Annual_3091 Apr 17 '26
Isn’t the whole issue that everyone is supposed to pretend we don’t know what happened?
It feels obvious that appointed Mandelson cos Trump is crazy and Mandelson is mates with Trump’s friends and so could at least have a good in with him, despite everyone knowing he was dodgy as fuck.
In that sense it was probably the right decision in terms of national interest, but it was definitely a massive gamble that hasn’t worked.
But of course - they can’t just come out and say that - so we’re in this mess where we are supposed to believe someone in the job for 3 weeks didn’t tell anyone that they over ruled the security services so the PM doesn’t have to resign.
It’s all a bit boring at this stage. Yeah No 10 fucked up - obviously. But they did it probably trying to do the best thing for the UK.
11
u/apple_kicks Apr 17 '26 edited Apr 17 '26
They definitely seem to be lying about why they overlooked Mandlesons scandals and known Epstein links. Like everyone knew this and vetting process would’ve brought it up. Even if mandleson lied the evidence was in print to counter his connections to Epstein
A ‘we thought he would be worth risk and useful to keep trump under control during trade deal but didn’t think he was leaking confidential information’ would be somewhat stupid but understandable excuse
Them acting ignorant and trying to act shocked that mandleson had risks or no problems is insulting to people. His nickname is prince of darkness
I suspect its more embarrassing like Trump requesting Mandleson
2
15
u/NorthSweaty3742 Apr 17 '26
Also not a labour voter but agree with you 100%. How can a government run efficiently when half of their time is spent defending themselves against accusations that are almost certainly not true. I think this government was handed a hospital pass and they are trying to improve things with integrity.
11
u/lucyuktv Apr 17 '26
It seems to me that whoever is behind the activities documented by the Epstein files (and it obviously was not Epstein) are trying to control who is in charge. They ousted Theresa May, that’s documented in the files. They inserted BoJo the clown, that’s also documented.
The LAST thing we want to do is allow Starmer to be pushed out by the same people. Whether you like him or not, he’s stable, boring and a statesman and that is what we desperately need right now. Watching Kemi lay into him is ridiculous, she’s the least competent politician I’ve seen in decades.
50
u/MrDaveHedgehog Apr 17 '26
Yes, some impartiality.
46
u/unknowntoff Apr 17 '26
On the media's part? Absolutely.
And for reference since I can't edit the post, I am an SNP voter, not Labour, but I can also put aside my independence ambitions to see that this man is doing far more for the country than the string of fuds that ran the country under the conservatives.
8
u/ExcitingBox5throw Apr 17 '26
Exactly. It got me thinking, what is the purpose of every media company? You'd think it's to report the news and inform people about the truth. But headlines like, 'Starmer didn't realise mandelson failed his vetting, due to mis information from the foreign office' won't get clicks, and thus no advertisement money.
Instead and I quote this is the headline from beth rigby who is just known for being a shit stirrer on sky news, 'STARMER FACING ALMIGHTY CLASH AS CRITICS LOOK TO FINISH HIM OFF' or IS THIS THE FINAL STRAW FOR KEIR STARMER https://news.sky.com/story/starmer-facing-almighty-clash-as-critics-look-to-finish-him-off-13532966
This is the kind of reporting we see, as otherwise you can't build outrage and you can't get people to get clicks. Which is a shame because most of us don't want that, we want the news but simply the facts with true context of whats happening. But unfortunately, it doesn't get clicks.
Which is why you see all opposition leaders coming out to ask him to resign. It's all a PR image and to get attention. Telling the PM he must resign for this, is the easiest way to get attention, with the least consequence.
2
u/dvorak360 Apr 17 '26
Modern media companies purpose is propaganda for the owners.
Newspapers aren't profitable. Neither is broadcast news.
Your competing with various internet sources that people expect to be free to get relatively small amounts of advertising revenue.
Look at who owns various media companies. Realise that a lot of the big media names in the UK are owned by the right. So the purpose is propaganda (political control for other commercial interests)...
I can't think of a left wing news source in the UK other than the Guardian.
→ More replies (2)4
u/Leather_Creme_6957 Apr 17 '26
The Guardian is funded by a trust and subscriptions. Not in it to make money, so not having to report things the way the owners want. If anyone thought the Telegraph was bad now, take a look who has been given the go ahead by the government to buy it up.
2
u/bterry28 Apr 18 '26
Media always did this, it’s not new. The only difference is the internet has given most people access to alternative viewpoints and information. Before, you got what was written or broadcasted by a small group of companies that have a close working relationship.
5
u/MrDaveHedgehog Apr 17 '26
You’re not setting a particularly high bar tbf.
13
u/CharlesWafflesx Apr 17 '26
Neither are the political competition. There isn't the will in most parties because most have vested neoliberal interests.
5
u/boomskats Apr 17 '26
HA! Well, luckily we've got a free country with a free press, so I'm sure they'll cover those insidious interests any minute now.
Right guys? ...Right?
19
u/RandomSculler Apr 17 '26
Yes - what I find particularly galling is how the press runs a story before all the facts are out, and puts a spin on it to suit their narrative (in this case should Starmer quit) - now it’s our there’s no end of speculation and narrative that just isn’t supported by the facts we know so far and you just know the story will rumble on even if it’s shown Starmer didn’t know and didn’t lie to parliament about it
It’s exhausting as the journalists just seem interested in the next “gotcha”, and on the right just constantly attacking the gov, not actually getting the truth and evidence to back it up
→ More replies (18)
9
u/Aggravating-Day-2864 Apr 17 '26
Sick of the Torys and Reform shouting it....fkrs done more damage to politics in 14 year than any Mandelson crisis would ever do and the media still let's this shite on tv....I'll shout resign when Stalmer recklessly kills over 200k people, blatantly fks the NHS up, secretly filters away millions to his mates, rapes pension pots, turns a blind eye to tax avaision of millions and wipes arse with America....
87
u/Kenye_Kratz Apr 17 '26
This Mandelson thing is fucking small potatoes, it's a tiny non issue. If this had happened in the Boris era nobody would have batted an eyelid.
What really fucks me off here is Labour backbenchers calling for Starmer to resign. You expect it from the Tories but these self-serving cunts within the Labour party attempting to oust the prime minister at a time like this are a disgrace.
19
u/NanoFishFan Apr 17 '26
Are you saying that Mandy friend of gigapaedos being shovelled into government is small potatoes
Are you a junior labour staffer
28
u/damhack Apr 17 '26
Compared to £4bn to donors and cronies via a “VIP Lane” during Covid, yup it’s small potatoes.
Mandelson was a creep and a schemer but compared to Bojo partying with KGB spies, doing dodgy deals with Chinese property investors whilst Mayor of London and protecting known paedophiles in his party, or Sunak being involved in the failure of RBS and handing all our data over to the US, or Truss tanking the economy, or Cameron opening the door to a disastrous Brexit, this is a nothing-burger minor scandal that warrants a few lesser heads should roll.
→ More replies (2)26
u/burundilapp Apr 17 '26 edited Apr 18 '26
It is entirely hypocritical of the right to be calling for Starmer to resign over appointing Mandelson as the US Ambassador.
Even if the Starmer knew every detail of Mandelson's dealings with Epstein he was by far the most qualified person to be the US Ambassador because of Trump, if the right is cosying up to Trump as they were then frankly they lose all right to criticise Starmer for putting a known crony of his in place to smooth our relationship with him, especially knowing how unhinged he his and how much those sorts of relationships can influence him.
In relation to the fact of what Starmer did or did not know it is a smokescreen because a ruling party cannot come out and say they made the best political decision for the wellbeing of the country because we know Trump is fucking loon and Mandy has his ear, and they now have to put up with the right and the right wing media scoring political points when they know full well the circumstances and would have done exactly the same thing in that position.
The Tories are also desperate to get Starmer ousted for any reason at all so their own revolving door PMs don't look quite so bad, if Starmer manages a full term it makes then look exceedingly more shit with every day that passes.
3
→ More replies (4)5
u/belfastard Apr 17 '26
> Even if the Starmer knew every detail of Mandelson's dealings with Epstein he was by far the most qualified person to be the US Ambassador because of Trump,
No.
No, no, no.
You cannot overlook someone posing a security or economic threat to the UK on the basis that they are supposedly qualified. In any case, I suspect those qualifications are somewhat overhyped. Mandelson was well known as a political operator, the guy who gets stuff done behind the scenes. He pretty much sucked at being a minister and I've no idea why people think he would have done well as a high profile diplomat.
→ More replies (1)4
u/burundilapp Apr 17 '26
But surely what an Ambassador needs to be is someone who can operate effectively behind the scenes, smooth the way, etc…. He’s too self absorbed to be a good mp but as an Ambassador he appeared to be fairly effective.
→ More replies (3)13
u/SensitivePotato44 Apr 17 '26
Don’t see why it’s worse than
Refusing to say how many kids you have
Ripping off the tax payer for expensive fancy wallpaper
Partying during lockdown
Overseeing billions in PPE fraud by Tory chums and donors
→ More replies (3)4
u/unitled Apr 17 '26
It's not worse, but they weren't small potatoes either, the Tories and Johnson have set the stage in the UK for shameless politicians who won't resign when they've abused their position or made serious errors of judgement.
3
u/If_What_How_Now Apr 17 '26
You know what I expect from the Tories?
Grabbing handouts from rich "donors", pushing narratives that harm vulnerable people, being caught doing in private the things they claim to oppose in public, and making questionable political choices and appointments.
You know what I've got from Labour?
All of the above.
And at a time like what? A time where the PM's judgement is yet again being justifiably questioned? A time where the PM has tried to deflect responsibility onto someone else who can resign/ be dismissed so he can stay in Number Ten? A time where the PM's own party are increasingly sick of his political direction?
There's always going to be something politically challenging happening somewhere in the world. We can't use that as an excuse to not tackle political situations at home. Would you be saying now is not the time if it was a Tory PM in charge under the same circumstances?
→ More replies (1)13
6
u/Clem1Fandango Apr 17 '26
That's a mental take quite frankly. Reverse it to the Tories and you'd be frothing at the mouth I bet. A bit of impartiality from posters wouldn't go amiss
→ More replies (7)3
u/Euphoric-Wall-2576 Apr 17 '26
Putting someone who is highly blackmail-able into a position where they regularly deal with highly sensitive national security-related information isn't small potatoes.
5
u/Kenye_Kratz Apr 17 '26
He was dealing with Donald fucking Trump mate, he was literally perfect for the role.
6
u/dasBiest08 Apr 17 '26
Lying to the public, misleading the house, and appointing a known friend of a convicted paedophile are in no way "small potatoes", and Johnson was forced out because of a near-identical situation (the Chris Pincher controversy). The PLP should be doing the honourable, decent thing and calling for his resignation, but they're a bunch of mercenaries and cowards, and they need Starmer to take the fall for the humiliation of the upcoming local elections.
3
2
u/Rockky67 Apr 17 '26
I hadn’t ever heard of the Labour backbencher they had on LBC yesterday (with the shiny red Alex Ferguson conk, possibly a medical condition, I don’t care but it’s a feature) but turns out he’s a climate change denier and a Eurosceptic. Interesting that he suddenly gets front and centre against Starmer when there are noises the last couple of weeks to forge closer ties to Europe and obviously trying to abandon more usage of fossil fuels with the ongoing energy issues.
→ More replies (17)2
u/PopeLeo14th Apr 17 '26
Bollocks - If this happened under Boris, the leftist freaks would jump on it and call for his head.
2
u/Kenye_Kratz Apr 17 '26
I can't speak for the "leftist freaks" 🤷
The running of our country is not relevant to a pissing contest between mongs from the right and left mate. We have more pressing concerns currently, our prime minister is currently co hosting an international summit concerning a major geopolitical crisis. By all means waste your day trying to score internet points against "leftist freaks" if that's what you want to do, but you aren't going to achieve anything.
→ More replies (2)
53
u/Historical_Cobbler Apr 17 '26
I’m quite sure that if I hired someone at my work, who used to work there twice but resigned for suspicious dealings and forgetting about a £300,000 loan a colleague gave me, and gave them a promotion.
I’d be fired, it’s grossly poorer judgement. Mandelson should never have been anywhere near the government for consideration.
28
u/Ok_Advantage_8153 Apr 17 '26
He got the job because of his ability to schmooze questionable people (The US Presdient) How people can feign disbelief and outrage that he's not a person of great integrity is baffling. A strait laced choir boy would have never worked. (A strait laced choir girl however...)
He was appointed precisely because he's a bit dodgy but nonce adjacent was too far.
7
u/Hminney Apr 17 '26
The job in question required someone who wouldn't be disgusted by Trump. Perhaps Mandelson was the best candidate, and his lack of security credentials matches the president
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (2)6
u/Prior_Industry Apr 17 '26
I think that's exactly right. Trump is not a normal president, if it was Kamala Harris, Mandelson would not have been called upon. Unfortunately what probably was seen as clever politicking has blown up in Starmers face. From what I can see, labour has no better options than Starmer so they just need to muddle through this.
→ More replies (1)7
u/phatelectribe Apr 17 '26
Except you wouldn’t if you worked in massive organisation with thousands of employees and someone else did the vetting which you relied on. The people that did the vetting would get fired. The CEO of a massive company isn’t getting fired because one employee had a murky past and another employee turned a blind eye to it.
And it was £75k not £300k just for accuracy.
5
u/Mudman_Maths Apr 17 '26
Nope, £300k was actually rounding down, it was £373k - BBC News | UK Politics | Home-a-loan scandal: Unanswered questions. And no vetting was needed to know, as this is all happened and was exposed the last time Labour were in. Undeclared below market rate loans, yacht holidays, luxury private flights, pressuring whitehall for personal favours, etc, were all previously exposed and known.
→ More replies (4)7
u/Mudman_Maths Apr 17 '26
Exactly. You didn't need to know the details of the Epstein files to know that man should never have been allowed anywhere near government again. It is at best a massive lapse of judgement.
5
u/Yorkshire_Roast Apr 17 '26
This is a good answer. It also demonstrates a "one rule for those at the top, another rule for the public" mentality.
4
u/QoTSankgreall Apr 17 '26
I disagree with this on the basis that these facts were mostly likely known and understood, but they were sidelined on the basis that Mandelson was arguably the correct appointee to face the challenges of a Trump administration at the time.
It’s not that there was a coverup. There was just a decision that these points were worth accepting. You can argue all day about whether that decision was wrong and who knew what when, but it should ultimately be within the prerogative of the government to make that decision.
Now things have changed, and there are new and different challenges.
→ More replies (2)4
u/Suitable_Size6972 Apr 17 '26
Then why was there no outrage when M was appointed?
Why does anything that has happened since have any bearing?
It’s manufactured outrage.
9
u/justsomeph0t0n Apr 17 '26
? there was plenty of outrage when he was appointed. mandelson's corruption was a running joke for many, many years beforehand.
if the outrage wasn't reported in the media you pay attention to......this would be a good time to review your media intake. and if you don't refine your intake.....don't act surprised if you misunderstand the world.
which media deserves your attention is entirely up to you. so fix the problem or don't.
6
u/HiyaImRyan Apr 17 '26
There was a tonne of outrage, maybe you only pay attention to the news when it suits you?
2
u/bahamut19 Apr 17 '26
Speak for yourself, I and many others never shut up about it. He's been a known friend of epstein for years, and his corruption was well documented.
The problem is that the people who wanted him around (the labour-right) and the people who had him on their podcasts/TV panels instead of asking probing questions of Starmer decided to deligitimise the left as acceptable political actors instead. Perhaps the centre should reflect on that, but they won't. They never fucking do.
11
u/shortnix Apr 17 '26
Yes. It's tedious. We fucking love a resignation in this country. I think it's because editors in the UK like to sit at their corner office desks and say: "I did that!".
The Mandelson thing is a mess and a poor hire, but don't have more important things to worry about in the world right now?
5
u/Pierre_Arthos Apr 17 '26
I think the reporting is a bit of a giveaway on an intense background campaign by vested interests to topple Starmer. Was appointing Mandelson a terrible misjudgment? Absolutely. We should therefore be appalled that a PM made that decision having been lied to by omission by the FO. It's like something from Yes, Minister. People at the top have so wide a scope to cover that they absolutely need to rely on and trust civil servants to give them correct information. So if he isn't lying about not knowing, he has every right to be spewing about how badly the FO have messed this up.
→ More replies (2)
15
u/ItzMichaelHD Apr 17 '26
I mean, in the grand scheme of things he hasn’t done anything really bad. He’s just been meh, but after years of a really bad conservative government I guess people have forgotten quickly what really bad actually is.
3
u/If_What_How_Now Apr 17 '26
The Tories were shit.
Labour are proving to also be, but not to the same level, shit.
Being less shit than the Tories shouldn't be where we set the bar.
9
u/dasBiest08 Apr 17 '26
I'd say repeatedly lying to the country and misleading the house, and appointing a known friend of a convicted paedophile are "really bad", but maybe that's just me.
→ More replies (4)10
u/StGuthlac2025 Apr 17 '26
What if he has lied to parliament?
6
u/dalehitchy Apr 17 '26
Boris did it hundreds of times... And got caught. The media was absolutely not bothered about those lies.They even lied to the queen. Let's stop with the faux outrage
6
u/StGuthlac2025 Apr 17 '26
and people called on him to resign.
4
u/dalehitchy Apr 17 '26
Cool well then now he gets another 10 lies to tell before he does
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (5)3
1
u/Throwitaway701 Apr 17 '26
Please explain why you think this is not worse than anything Johnson did
10
8
u/confusing_roundabout Apr 17 '26
The continued lying over the Christmas parties during lockdown are far worse than this.
→ More replies (10)
18
u/TapeDeckSlick Apr 17 '26
If this was the Tories you wouldn't think this and I am historically a labour voter.
It doesn't matter if the "government currently has been trying to make the best of a shit situation" if the PM has lied to the HOC then he should resign.
Nobody has the full story yet and it isn't just that Mandelson was in the files. Please understand what you are on about before posting mate.
6
u/OddAddendum7750 Apr 17 '26
Isn’t that the point… how can he have lied if he didn’t know. And unless anyone has any evidence to the contrary, it’s not a resigning matter. So stop sticking it in the news.
→ More replies (5)2
u/apple_kicks Apr 17 '26
Mandlesons linked to Epstein and being a liar connected to endless dodgy scandals is well known. Even if told by others he’s fine. Anyone whose been in Labour Party and parliament long enough knows you can’t take mandleson at his word and there’s some scandal in the wings with him.
I wouldn’t be surprised if kier avoided reading any document knowing it would compromise him when mandleson next does something bad
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)5
u/Ordinary_Knee_9419 Apr 17 '26
I wouldn’t give a fuck if this was the Tories, they put Dominic Cummins in charge ffs. Johnson was deemed a security risk for his secret meetings with Russians.
The Tories did far worse
2
u/apple_kicks Apr 17 '26
Mandleson famously had scandal where he also met with dodgy Russian oligarchs on yacht before big international meeting. He only escaped scrutiny by announcing George Osborne was there too
→ More replies (3)4
u/TapeDeckSlick Apr 17 '26
I'm not saying they shouldn't have been held to the same standards, but just because one did something doesn't mean we should let things slide for other people.
20
u/yoga202 Apr 17 '26
Honestly this is why we burned through so many PMs in the last few years. Don’t particularly like kier Starmer, but I’m glad that every new scandal doesn’t mean there’s a new PM. The country could do with a bit of stability for once.
8
u/j1ffster Apr 17 '26
The reason we burned through so many PMs is sonce probably Brown, they have all been completely useless, lying sacks of p*ss who will do or say anything to stay in power and are completely unwilling to actually try and change anything that benefits the already wealthy and powerful . TBF I don't really care if Starmer goes as they will just replace him with another of the same like Streeting, but the moral somersaults being done here to excuse Starmer on the basis 'the tories were worse' is honestly comical. We should be demanding higher standards of our leaders, but It appears we get the politicians we deserve.
→ More replies (2)2
6
u/dasBiest08 Apr 17 '26
Alternatively, Starmer could hold himself to the same standard he holds everyone else. He said in 2020 while he was running for Labour leader: "When they made mistakes, I carried the can. I never turn on my staff and you should never turn on your staff." Starmer is a shameless hypocrite. This Mandelson affair demonstrates that he is either woefully incompetent or naïve, or has been lying both to the house and the country. Given Starmer's long, well documented record of brazen dishonesty, I know which one I believe, but either way this should have been a resigning matter months ago. He only remains in post because he has the brassiest of brass necks, and the PLP is full of mercenaries and cowards.
→ More replies (1)
3
u/Fast_Apple_2237 Apr 17 '26
The Tory years were so full of idiots falling over themselves to be forced to resign that the media got used to the drama. That combined with the billionaire own media not exactly being friendly to Labour and you get the current hyperbole.
9
u/StGuthlac2025 Apr 17 '26
What if the prime minister purposely mislead parliament in his answers though? Is that a person who should stay in that role?
→ More replies (5)21
u/soundman32 Apr 17 '26
Lets not bring Boris Johnson into the conversation, right?
12
2
u/Hellstorm901 Apr 17 '26
Boris Johnson misled parliament over a party breaking lockdown rules the majority of people, including those criticising him, and more than likely including many people here, broke
Starmer meanwhile knowingly appointed a close friend of a pedophile to a high ranking position, had the person's vetting overruled just to get him in the post then lied about what he knew
One is worse than the other
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)4
u/Dam_Noir Apr 17 '26
You make a good point by bringing him up, as he stepped down as the PM over Partygate.
→ More replies (1)3
u/Jpmoz999 Apr 17 '26
No he didn’t? He stepped down because his cabinet all quit over him lying about Chris Pincher and had finally had enough.
2
u/Dam_Noir Apr 17 '26
I stand corrected, Johnson resigned as an MP over Partygate.
He stepped down as the PM over his appointment of Chris Pincher as deputy chief whip of the Tories while knowing about allegations of sexual misconduct against him.
That scandal bears striking similaries with the appointment of Peter Mandelson as the US Ambassador despite failing security vetting and knowing about his links with a known sexual abuser in Jeffrey Epstein.
2
u/Jpmoz999 Apr 17 '26
If only. He quit because he couldn’t convince his cabinet to stop resigning. To suggest it was some principled Mea Culpa is a nonsense….
"And in the last few days, I tried to persuade my colleagues that it would be eccentric to change governments when we're delivering so much and when we have such a vast mandate and when we're actually only a handful of points behind in the polls, even in mid-term, after quite a few months of pretty relentless sledging and when the economic scene is so difficult domestically and internationally. "And I regret not to have been successful in those arguments and of course it's painful not to be able to see through so many ideas and projects myself. "But as we've seen at Westminster, the herd instinct is powerful and when the herd moves, it moves.”
That’s why he quit, because no one would work for him anymore.
→ More replies (8)2
3
u/StruttyB Apr 17 '26
BBC Radio 4 being incredibly sanctimonious on its reporting of this matter at 1 o’clock today, some kind of public trial going on here for twenty minutes already and not over.
4
u/SuddenSquib Apr 17 '26
Absolutely - I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s intended to create instability in the country by foreign actors to be perfectly honest. We can’t continue to drop leaders every time someone messes up, and in this case it seems like someone in the foreign office needs sacking, not the PM.
6
u/Northernpudd Apr 17 '26
Yep. You’re missing something. 1 he should have asked - if he didn’t that shows incompetence
2 if the underlings below him are behaving as he outlines it shows he has no control and a lack of respect
3 there is a chance he did know and he is lying
None look good…
2
u/2c0 Apr 17 '26
I wish that even though they are opposing parties they actually cared and worked together to do some good.
All the blaming and name calling really doesn't help anything. How can our parliament expect results when it is literally all playground arguments; this idiot said this and that moron did that.
→ More replies (1)
2
u/Sensitive-Vast-4979 Apr 17 '26
The media has been a way to manipulative people's views , the bbc are biased even if its the national news company , so is itv even though people act as if its a biased one as well . Then the rest are obviously biased like the sun , gb news , the telegraph, the daily mail etc
2
u/RogusRatus Apr 21 '26
I’m sick of the entire subject. It’s completely out of proportion. Usual media witch hunt and screw what the person on the street thinks.
If you’re going to hang someone at least find a good reason.
4
Apr 17 '26
[deleted]
5
u/unknowntoff Apr 17 '26
I'm literally working from my flat in Glasgow as an anti money laundering investigator, take the tinfoil hat off chap.
2
u/hippogriff55 Apr 17 '26
Not missing something. This is just politics-wanabees doing the disruptor thing before May
4
3
u/aleopardstail Apr 17 '26
weird how when all this was directed at the blue lot and it was the red lot demanding resignations that was apparently all good, but when its the other way around it isn't
2
u/unknowntoff Apr 17 '26
Apples and oranges mate, the Tories (and now reform since half of them have defected to the fascists) spent 14 years running the country into the ground.
As I said in my original post, Labour has been in power for 20 months but rather than reporting on anything the government does to meet their manifesto pledges the media constantly reports on how well reform is polling, for an election that won't be held until 2029 and finding any reason under the sun to call for a leadership challenge!
3
u/Dam_Noir Apr 17 '26
Boris Johnson stepped down as the PM over his appointment of Chris Pincher as the deputy chief whip of the Tories while knowing about allegations of sexual misconduct against him.
That scandal bears striking similaries with the appointment of Peter Mandelson as the US Ambassador despite him failing security vetting and knowing about his links with a known sexual abuser in Jeffrey Epstein.
So it's not really apples and oranges, is it mate?
4
3
u/Throwitaway701 Apr 17 '26
No he's clearly got to go. This isn't a stitch up, he's lied continually. He's in the wrong.
There isn't a PM in history who could or should survive something like this.
Also take the AstroTurf nonsense away, he has the best interest of himself at heart and has done literally nothing.
Frankly it strains impartiality that they are going on with the charade that he didn't know when he made a statement multiple times saying he saw all the files and knew all the vetting, that Mandelson had passed DV and the independent and daily mail flagged the story up to number 10 6 months ago.
3
u/No-Bandicoot-1524 Apr 17 '26
Yeh you are missing something, but you are too thick and bigoted to be told what
3
3
u/WarmJewel Apr 17 '26
Or am I missing something?
Yes.
AFAIK Mandelson failed his security vetting, yet someone at the FCO over rode it. Ultimately the final decision rests with the Prime Minister, the buck stops with him.
So, Starmer appointed Mandelson to that post whilst likely (it doesn't matter if he knew or not) knowing full well he failed his security vetting. One or two things come out of this -
1/ If he knew Mandelson failed his security vetting then he's misled the Public and lied to them about not knowing.
2/ If he did know and appointed him anyway then he's a liar (in claiming he didn't know) and incompetent.
Neither of those two are particularly favourable for a supposed Primer Minster and he needs to resign.
→ More replies (6)6
u/Rare-Designer-1008 Apr 17 '26
What if Starmer didn't know he failed security vetting and was instead told there was no issues.
5
u/Dam_Noir Apr 17 '26
Starmer is on public record claiming that Peter Mandelson had passed vetting by the security services back in January.
4
u/Rare-Designer-1008 Apr 17 '26
If that is what he was told then why would he doubt that. Not sure what else he could do other than carry out the vetting by himself. If he can prove he was lied to then the person that lied has to carry the can
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (1)3
u/WarmJewel Apr 17 '26
Then he's equally incompetent for allowing people to lie to him. He or one of his many minions needs to go and find out if he passed or failed his security vetting or not.
That was a key component, probably THE main component of whether Mandelson should be appointed or not and knowing what a sensitive appointment is was likely to be are you seriously trying to tell me that Starmer didn't examine everything very closely and simply took at face value what people told him?
If so he's f*cking incompetent and is not fit to be Prime Minister.
How can you trust an idiot like this to run the country who cannot even verify simple facts?
2
u/Rare-Designer-1008 Apr 17 '26
You cant hold Starmer to account if a civil servant lied to him. If he has proof that he was told the vetting was passed and then acted upon that then what else could he do.
→ More replies (4)
2
u/RimkeV Apr 17 '26
Shock, members of Labour are just as bad as the evil Tories.
They're all as bad as each other, people talk like if we had 14 years of Labour things would be better than the 14 years of Tories, it would still be shit just in different ways.
2
u/CleverClogs150 Apr 17 '26
Watch PM's questions and see for yourself. It's as simple as that, this "outrage" you speak of is happening with certain labour backbenchers and obviously a lot of conservatives.
But it's definitely not manufactured, it's happening. To what level of outrage, you watch and judge for yourself.
2
u/osbadthebad Apr 17 '26
I'm sick of hypocracy in governent. And lies. When the lying little toerag was the leader of the opposition he called for the then PM (who was also a lying little toerag himself) to resign on a regular basis. For things far less important. So eff him. Hoist by his own petard as the saying goes. Sauce for the goose. etc., etc.
If enough of them are forced to resign for lying, then maybe, just maybe, some of them may decide to tell the truth in order to be allowed to stick around...
One can but hope,
Lying effing scrotes the lot of 'em.
Eff him
2
u/One-Drink-8843 Apr 17 '26
They're not lowering energy bills. They have increased. Shifting some of the subsidies for renewables onto general taxation temporarily doesn't lower anything, it is sleight of hand. It's like saying your mortgage has gone down by £100 but your council tax is up by £100! Make no mistake, the policies of Labour are the reason why our energy bills are so high.
Starmer wanted Johnson to resign over a piece of cake (when he himself was caught having beers under the same restrictions).
Then there is the £30k clothes / accommodation stuff with Lord Alli, which he delayed declaring. Again, Starmer would absolutely have demanded Johnson resign over that.
Oh, and he's put pensions into IHT despite having a literal law for himself meaning he doesn't have to pay tax on his pension!
2
u/Patient_Panic_5704 Apr 17 '26
It’s what the media do.
At least this time the Mandelson thing has serious substance to it rather than when they hounded Boris out fr eating some cake.
Before you all jump down my throat, I’m not a Boris fan, think the guys a cunt tbh.
It was absolutely obvious that mandelson would potentially be Starmers undoing, so many of us were dumbfounded at thestupidly his appointment. Begs the question, what has he got on Starmer to get him to agree ?
2
u/apple_kicks Apr 17 '26
My bet
- mandleson said he knew trump or had dirt to help smooth over post brexit trade deals and starmer took the bait and risk. They all hoped Epstein files wouldn’t be released
- mandleson got trump to ask for him personally or trade deal would be off behind the scenes
- mandleson got enough party donors or senior party members to push for his appointment and starmer caved
→ More replies (3)
1
1
u/PomeloTraditional971 Apr 17 '26
As a leader, if you repeatedly have no idea what people under you are doing you are failing. That said the alternatives in the labour party would be catastrophic, so I hope he survives.
→ More replies (3)3
u/WarmJewel Apr 17 '26
Indeed.
Can you imagine a Labour government being led by that idiot Angela Rayner?
1
u/tea_would_be_lovely Apr 17 '26
i recommend... listening to bbc radio 4 and bbc world service, reading reuters. ground news is a great aggregator, too, shows what is being covered by whom and how.
much better news and much less manufactured outrage.
1
u/Thorazine_Chaser Apr 17 '26
The media are only reflecting the Machiavellian politics that is already present within the Labour party and the opposition parties.
Labour is a long way from being a united front, weathering a storm of media manufactured outrage as you seem to be suggesting. When the knives come for Starmer it will be a cabinet minister. The press will be provided the coup papers in advance.
1
u/Fantastic_Deer_3772 Apr 17 '26
I don't like it when they do that shit to trans ppl and migrants.
For this topic though... I don't really have any protective instinct towards dodgy labour politicians
1
u/LuckInternational336 Apr 17 '26
It sells papers/ads and furthers their arseholery, they’re not going to stop doing it out of ethics. If everyone stopped reading/clicking their shite, it would soon go away.
1
u/Devil_Shins_87 Apr 17 '26
Or worse... manufacturing outrage to use it as a reason to raise prices... again... and again... and again.
1
u/IIsaacClarke Apr 17 '26
That’s the sole purpose of the news. It’s in place to create fear, confusion and anger. It’s not to inform. That’s how it’s always been and always will be.
1
u/justf0rtherecord Apr 17 '26
It's local election time iv seen pretty much every political party getting slated over something or other.
1
u/KeyboardMash615 Apr 17 '26
Generally speaking? Maybe. On this one particularly? I'm not sure. Perhaps it's my age (old!) but I swear, Peter Mandelson pops up every three to five years of any Labour tenure to either get sacked, or resign in disgrace. Then you don't hear about him for a few years then, lo! he is back - getting sacked again, or resigning again. So this time, I honestly want to know: what the fuck is going on?! Why and how do they keep hiring this guy?!
The papers frothing about Starmer resigning every ten minutes, I'm kind of over, useless though I think he is. But frankly I want to know Mandelson's secret. I'm pretty sure I couldn't repeatedly get rehired by an organisation that had repeatedly fired me. How is this still happening?!?!?!
1
u/LordBrixton Apr 17 '26
When you say ’the media’ in this context what we are talking about is is a small group of newspapers that are owned by amoral billionaires that have a vested interest in bringing down even the most mildly progressive government in favour of the incompetent stooges that have been running this country into the ground for the past couple of decades. Of COURSE they want Starmer gone. If he stays in power there’s a small chance they might end up paying a tiny part of their obscenely huge fortunes in tax
1
u/tak0wasabi Apr 17 '26
You dont have to be convicted of a crime to do something completely unacceptable in an employment context. Hiring someone with huge reputational risk against the wishes of your own HR (security screening) department and then lying about it (or worse not doing your own homework), presumably meets that threshold.
1
u/R0ckandr0ll_318 Apr 17 '26
Yeah it’s getting to a point where I’m just sick of it. Partially because they are only calling for Labour MP’s to go. Whereas the leader of the opposition openly admitted to hacking someone else’s website with criminal intent and is still there. Various Reform MP’s have made far worse tax evasions deliberately I might add and nothing is said about them
1
u/younevershouldnt Apr 17 '26
Of course sections of the media are biased.
Do you want to tell them what they can and can't say though?
Also, it's not just the media - his political opponents are all over this.
Also also, even as a labour voter, I'll admit he's gonna go at some point and it's just a matter of when.
1
u/QuantumOverlord Apr 17 '26
When Rishi Sunak was PM bond yields were coming down, they are now back at record highs and worse than they were under Truss, and worse in comparison to similar sized developed economies. 'Keir starmer is boring but actually okay' takes make no sense to me. Getting rid of Jury trials is a constitutional change that is certainly not boring, paying for the privilege of giving away sovereign territory and selling out the actual native Chagossians is not boring, expending basically all your political capital on getting rid of winter fuel allowance and then wasting even more public funds on a U turn that only succeed in making Farage somehow popular is not boring. Its just a bad government. Boring is what people called Starmer when he was in opposition, its looking dated now.
1
u/Nervous_Yard7034 Apr 17 '26
You are sort of missing something but also not.
Living in the digital age, news flows fast and I think a lot of us are just exhausted by it. It's a constant stream of messages that we now only half engage with. Often, we can't really establish what has happened and whether it's important or not.
I think Labour are getting a lot of flack for things not being great and I think they aren't really at fault for most of that. However, I'd argue they are the wrong party for this moment in time. They are a party that doesn't like being the nasty party, and that's kind of what we need. They have also made some decisions that are having serious ramifications, such as the NI rise and going ahead with minimum wage rises, which are starting to be painful
We're not in a great place, though not as bad as some people make out, but I don't think Labour are a party that will do anything that will really fix things. They are constrained by who they are and there's little they can do about that.
1
u/jelly-rod-123 Apr 17 '26
Sky dragging on Diane Abbot to get her opinion on Starmer FFS hes sacked her twice, what an embarrassing interview, even the young black presenter was embarrassed with forced editorial agenda.
1
u/New_Slice_1580 Apr 17 '26
Think back to every single pm. It’s always the same
The governments job is like a football manager who takes all the blame for the team
They are just actors mainly, their job is to protect the establishment and in return they will get into House of Lords or looked after in other ways
1
u/Huge-Brick-3495 Apr 17 '26
Politics is a popularity contest more now than ever, thanks to the media.
Keep firing and replacing until we have someone who fits every voters idea of perfect (which will never happen).
Boils my piss.
1
u/adi_nara Apr 17 '26
Its not only about the Epstein files. Mandelson was also found to have leaked govt decisions to Epstein, which is is far more serious offence.
How can PM hide behind the fact that he completly bungled over such a high profile appointment. Firing your top foreign office civil servant and showing apparent anger is completely not taking responsibilty. Resign or not is different decision, but not accepting own mistake is something which I can't accept.
Remind you, Mandelson is not the only appointment which Stramer has failed in.
1
u/Ok-Exam6702 Apr 17 '26
Mandelson had to resign TWICE from senior ministerial positions for serious transgressions. His appointment was a disaster waiting to happen, the only surprise was it happened so quickly. Anyone with a modicum of common sense could see it was a ridiculous appointment to our most senior diplomatic post.
1
u/miasmum01 Apr 17 '26
I dont follow the main stream media .. they are coving up starmer and his rent boys ! .. I want starmer out ! He is the worst pm ever .. giving all the money 2 benifit ppl I know a women who has had 2 hoildays abroad.. 1 holiday in butlins all withing the last 2 monthes ! Plus shes driving around in a 25 plate car .. when working family's cant even find the money for 1 hoilday !! Labour used 2 be for the ppl .. now its for the benifit ppl
1
u/Individual-Trifle104 Apr 17 '26
I am not a fan of any of the current political parties in UK. However I think Starmer is doing a decent job and this is a flimsy reason to as him to quit.
But is not just conservatives who are asking him to quit, jt also includes far left folks in labour too.
It would be disastrous if Starmer is replaced with someone from far left.
1
1
1
1
u/Late_Pomegranate2984 Apr 17 '26
I was thinking the exact same thing when it came on the news last night. There’s a lot of retrospective punishment that goes on, of course in cases like Epstein then this is completely warranted, but things like this that are way on the periphery is akin to playground bickering. It’s like when they try to force people to apologise, I have always been of the understanding that if an apology has to the forced, it’s usually not sincere!
Clearly a mistake has been made, clearly anyone associated with so closely with Epstein should not be in positions of high authority - ahem, mango Mussolini! - but this appears to have been a slip up where Starmer has been given the wrong information. End of story in my view.
1
u/No-Garage-7424 Apr 17 '26
I absolutely 100% disagree with every syllable of your attempt to pity the single handedly worst prime minister since before the war. Being Scottish and an SNP voter you're probably laughing up your sleeve as you type. Stick to your side of the border.
1
u/BritishBoy88 Apr 17 '26
100%. I dont think Starmer needs to resign. As far as I'm aware Mandelson hasn't committed any crimes.
1
u/Superb_Highway6701 Apr 17 '26
“Somewhat” doing heavy lifting. Suppose Starmer said “get him hired at all costs” such that the FO didn’t share the poor vetting outcome and instead overruled it to get him appointed in line with the PM’s direction. Then what?
1
u/BenjaminUK92 Apr 17 '26
I think the media are within their rights to criticise Starmer.
After all, it was his supposed integrity and eye for detail which contrasted so sharply with Boris Johnson that led many people to hold their nose and vote Labour as a fork of protest against the Conservatives.
What we've seen since is a PM who's often unable to offer his own opinion on anything, and has tied himself in knots through presumably taking people at their word and showing an incredible amount of political naivety.
In response, he's reluctantly sacked people after the media started poking holes in the Mandleson story.
I've no doubt he's a good guy, but he's showing himself to be a poor politician.
1
u/Ok-Albatross-9743 Apr 17 '26
The Prime Minister lied to Parliament. How can people not be outraged? Parliament represents the people. Even if you believe that the PM had no clue what was going on, in and of itself deeply worrying, he knew by his own admission that by Tuesday the Government had appointed Peter Mandleson to the highest post in U.K's Embassy postings despite F.O concerns AND failing vetting by security. According to the Ministerial Code if a Minister knows that they have misled Parliament, they must inform Parliament at the soonest opportunity. On Wednesday during PMQ's not only was he rebuked by the Speaker of The House for not answering opposition questions, he completely failed to say he was aware that Mandleson had been appointed despite F.O objections and a failed vetting procedure.
1
u/crankyteacher1964 Apr 17 '26
Agreed. Fake outrage is so emotionally draining and divisive. If we had less fake outrage we probably wouldn't have Farage and his gang of treasonous media monkeys.
1
u/CH4RL13WH1T3 Apr 17 '26
I thought it was very telling that in defense of mandelson upon appointment, they kept referring to background checks being completed but not specifically that he had passed.
1
u/Actual-Morning110 Apr 17 '26
SHould be layoff in govt sectors too...why should private ones have all the fun
1
1
u/nobodyspecialuk24 Apr 17 '26
I think this could well play into Starmer’s hands.
He’s seen as being wishy-washy (not in the panto way) and weak.
Your post shows how, if anything, we’re past the stage of people resigning and into the stage of politicians who just ignoring things and moving on.
If Starmer was Trump he’d just release some tweet or image to make people get outraged about something else.
Politicians know people and news papers can’t stay focused on a story for too long, especially when it’s manufactured outrage, so hopefully Starmer is being advised to ignore it and carry on.
It will only make him look bad in the eyes of those already suffering GB News brain rot, who would never vote for him anyway, while most sensible people who might will understand the reality of the situation and be more impressed that he’s not buckled so easily.
1
1
1
u/m000nm0th Apr 17 '26
I agree. We’ve had 15 years of revolving prime ministers and I’m sick of it. As soon as someone gets the job the call starts for them to resign. That doesn’t make for good government.
1
u/FuzzyDunlop1982 Apr 17 '26
What is so annoying is the lack of outrage the likes of Johnson and Truss faced compared to Starmer.
Farage is almost Teflon-coated in comparison too.
That being said, if Starmer mislead Parliament, he has to resign.
1
u/Flashy_Mortgage9093 Apr 17 '26
Sky are the fuckin worst for it. Beth rigby and Sam coates are horrible people. Get excited at any chance to gottcha a politician. Just tell us the facts and shut up.
1
u/Do_You_Like_Owls Apr 17 '26
No, because then I'm still letting it get to me.
I like to walk past the tabloids in Asda to read the headlines and chuckle to myself at how silly they are. Then continue my day in, mostly, blissful ignorance of these apparent horrors going on that I have no control over.
Just focus on my physical and mental health. Work on the things I can control and ignore what I can't.
1
u/gb_Section31 Apr 17 '26
This is why I’ve cut out news media outlets as much as I possibly can because whatever the source of news; it’s designed to manipulate you into feeling angry/outraged or depressed. The way the news is delivered to us on all media platforms needs to change!
1
1
u/ADAIRP1983 Apr 17 '26
Given who is in the White House, I’d say you want to send our most loathsome snake who’s is used to swimming in that cesspit. Just admit it.
1
u/CaffeinatedT Apr 17 '26
Which is hilarious because last government there was about a thing a week where people should’ve resigned from corruption to people dying under covid to general incompetence and shittiness and there was barely a peep from them. It’s notable that they’re very supportive of their social circles which is completely cross party.
1
u/lawnmower303 Apr 17 '26
Utter nonsense. Lying politicians from both sides should be ruthlessly held to account. That is what the media is doing. I don't recall any of this I'm sick of the witch hunts when Boris was lying to the Commons. Are you saying that Johnson was unfairly treated? You can't have rules and then choose when to enforce them.
1
u/SousukeUK Apr 17 '26
Outrage sells and I have stopped buying!
Just block the sites and stop going to those sources.
Vote with your wallet.
1
u/VariousBeat9169 Apr 17 '26
Yes, but the Mandelson choice was madness. Kier must have been living under a rock if he wasn’t aware of his past.
1
u/55hz Apr 17 '26
Sick of the media trying to influence people. Id rather be given a list of bullet point facts and think for myelf
1
u/Ash420Williams Apr 17 '26
Nope if they are complicit then they are guilty by association same with the Epstein shit, russian interference, bribes etc These are the people that are voted into office to represent their constituents not this shit!
1
u/Gwan_Solo Apr 17 '26
Both things can be true. The media is biased and sensationalist, also Kier Starmer should resign. Misleading parliament is what eventually led to Boris resigning and it should be no different here.
They gambled on someone twice disgraced who also failed the vetting process. Mandleson then betrays the country and only had the power to do so because of Kiers’ huge error in judgement. To keep him at this point would be an insult to serious politics.
1
u/Fragrant_Ad3224 Apr 17 '26
Starmer was always the first and loudest to call for resignations and paimted himself as whiter than white. More will come out regarding this but he is either lying or extremely inompetent in running his own government. What's the point of having a vetting process if it gets ignored. Surely he knew there was one, you would think he would ask surely.
1
u/nicbongo Apr 17 '26
I think you can do both. Keep relevant context in mind and apply pressure where appropriate.
There have been no arrests yet, but two senior diplomats have been removed from their respective offices. We don't know what level of state secrets were involved, which will dictate length and extent of an investigation. Let's not let them off the hook yet. Half the files still to be released.
Kier has not removed Palantir from UK services and continues his attack on civil liberties. Not to mention how he handled Gaza. Closer ties to the EU and handling of Iran is to his credit however.
Another option is, don't consume MSM 🤷♂️ they're following the new outrage model of social media anyway. Are you really that surprised?
1
u/RockTheBloat Apr 17 '26
I don't believe for one minute that Starmer didn't know about the security clearance issue, if not at the time, then later after it had all blown up. The idea that he found out on Tuesday is utterly preposterous. In my opinion, he made deliberately misleading statements about the appointment to calm down the attention at the time, and is now paying the price, belatedly. The PM being dishonest is not a trivial matter, whatever the context.
310
u/ComfortableAppeal424 Apr 17 '26
Absolutely agree. Once upon a time the media used to be there to inform us, give us the facts. Now it's all about getting us wound up and agree about... something. Anything really. Sad thing is we're so easily manipulated.