Party Like It’s 1992

So we are not the only ones who have picked up on parallels.

 could be heading for a repeat of its infamous 1992 general election defeat, party insiders fear, with Lord Kinnock admitting voters “don’t love Sir Keir Starmer” yet.

There is nothing to like. The man is a vacuous entity who will prostitute himself for a hint of power. He kneeled during the BLM fiasco, thereby putting his name to a group of violent fraudsters, he vacillates when faced with sectarian voting. He is a despicable piece of human flotsam, floating on the sewer of Westminster politics. So, no, people don’t like him and rightly so.

He added: “‘97 was exceptional in many ways. This one is too. And frankly I actually think that Keir’s sobriety, his maturity, his steadiness, his dependability are really useful and essential features of the political landscape now.”

Fuck off already. He’s an empty suit with nothing original or insightful to say.


  1. …and yet think of all those QUANGOs, charities, think tanks, NGOs and lobbyists that would benefit from an empty suit ‘at the helm’.

    Punish the Conservatives (yes!) but reward the Blob? (No!) The best we could hope for is a hung parliament with no overall majority and a reluctance of the minor parties to form any coalition. Parliament would not be able to get much done, and that’s probably a good thing considering the Fantasy Political Ideas being considered.

  2. Didn’t Belgium set the record for something like 18 months without a government and nobody noticed?

    The tories are absolute and unmitigated gutless, lying, treasonous amoral scum and they deserve everything they get (the mindless drones who lose their seats might suffer some inconvenience but, alas, the scum-master barnacles as usual will just find another slave ship to adhere to).

    But there is no real enthusiasm at all for liebore – other than that manufactured in the lame stream media.

    This is what der sturmer is too sMtupid to realise.

    • “…The tories are absolute and unmitigated gutless, lying, treasonous amoral scum…”

      So, the incentive to vote for Labour, who are pretty much similar only worse, is what exactly?

  3. “…admitting voters “don’t love Sir Keir Starmer” yet.”

    And never will. What the hell, it’s not a popularity contest, it’s politics. Get some policies, not personalities.

  4. There’s an article on Unherd “The personal has consumed the political”

    “Politics, in other words, is turning into a form of self-expression. It is no longer an arena to which we all bring our conflicting visions of how the world should be, and try to persuade others to join us in working towards ours — or even, in which we might listen to other people’s ideas and change our minds.”

    How much of the current Conservative and Labour (and the smaller parties too) is about histrionic self-blame for confected categories of victimhood rather than the drive to resolve real problems?

    And is Sir IKEA a charismatic leader to reverse this decay? (That’s a rhetorical question and the answer is nope.)

  5. “…admitting voters “don’t love Sir Keir Starmer” yet.”

    What does he mean, “yet”?

    • and have been for some time. Not just us though it is the political class all being almost exactly the same with different colour badges.

    • Quite, for decades people have been voting for who they are told is the least dangerous of two factions, neither of which are fit to govern a charity shop let alone the country.

      I remember hearing from some demented female how much younger that nice Mr Cameron looked than Blair hence whey we should vote for him, Jesus wept what a bloody choice Blair/Cameron.

  6. I still think the odds are on a hung parliament. I can’t see a repeat of ’92 (although as I said before, I noticed the similarities months ago) because the Tories are just that bad. And although I disagree, there is something to be said for Sir Kneels-a-Lot’s “sobriety”. In some ways, he’s John Major to Sunak’s Kinnock here.

    The point, and where it really feels like ’92, is that it isn’t going to be the walkover Labour and the media thought it would be.

  7. It may be a hung parliament but sadly they are all in agreement with so much that unlike 92 it probably won’t make that much of a difference for us.

  8. Just seen Labours plan for leveling up workers rights. Starting with the care sector. I’m with them so far on that, the terms and conditions of staff are pretty non existent and most on little more than min wage with no form of progression for experience, exams or longevity of service. But, and here’s the big but, they say it will be funded out of tax payers money, possibly pushing up council tax bills. Why, these companies that run these homes make a fortune, there are two pots of income for them, the care element which everyone is stingy with and then the board and lodging side. The company I work for does bare minimum repairs, they paid off the mortgage of the large house in two years just from one lads funding. So most goes in pot called profit. They won’t tell the managers what the food budget is so the management scrimp and save with food bills, which means the owners could be making profit out of that. Needless to say a couple of years ago the three houses made a total profit of over 3 million. Now don’t ask tax payers to pay more, look at where tax payers money is already going.

    I think this election will be won or lost on the debates in the studios. It will be the only time people can actually get them to say what they plan to do and what they believe in. Debates aren’t my favourite but so many people undecided it could tip the balance.

Comments are closed.