Best Of

...

Who honestly gives a fuck about Nigel’s mortgage in Clacton?

Fact is the nation needs him and want him as prime minister. We all love him on this site - which is quite striking given the disparate views of Pb

Let’s just have an election and put him into number 10. Get it done. And pipe down about all this mortgage stuff. NO ONE CARES

After Rayner going, it does put Farage in a difficult place doesn’t it - that much is clearly there between the lines of what you just posted.

looking at the heat gradually building on Farage over property dealings - someone posted on PB yesterday farage wife family super rich she could buy him the house, that was very wrong, the only place the house money could have come from is Nigel himself.

We don’t all love him on this site - Farage is an odious twat. I’m pleased Farage is going to get bit by bit dismantled long before the next election comes. The first bit is happening right now.

Remind us what you declared the Reform ceiling was?

Reform are about their ceiling now, 34% 18 months into a term where the first couple of years of a new government is difficult for them - was too for Lady Thatcher but strength then built from there - and the Conservative Party are rebuilding their credibility as government in waiting already last couple of months, the polling will soon reflect this largely at Reforms expense, I confidently predict.

I can easily explain the Achilles Heel that destroys Reform in the next couple of years - they are not different than the other parties. Reform does not have different policies than the other parties that look remotely credible or likely to work any better. Last nights immigration debate special, categorical proved this in my top drawer analysis. They got to 34% not as a differential in policy making, just a none of the above on a ballot paper. Without stronger, more credible policies coming from somewhere, Reform have reached their peak, and now can only deteriorate.

But what I have always posted on PB, and I stand by again tonight, Reform are in the weakest electoral position of all in first past the post General Elections. If they are as high as 34% and not low twenties at end of Parliament when swingback kicks in - Milliband was 15% ahead with just a year to go - then due to fear and loathing of Reform from the other 66% of voters, the vast majority of the 66% will vote whatever way they can to keep Reform out. Maybe not mid term, but definitely at the end of this parliament. If Reform get 25% PV, that’s whopping 75% of votes out to stop them getting seats.

Farage actually makes a very eloquent and concise tribute to Charlie Kirk here


https://youtu.be/fLA_tX_ejbw?si=Yl0OXgSf-4EDYCAy

Is it obvious that he’d be a worse PM than Starmer or Badenoch? I don’t see it. He looks more articulate and intelligent than either of them - and by a distance

The big mental block with Reform is that it remains a one man band. If Farage attracts great candidates as Chancellor and ForSec in waiting, I think he could be pushing towards 40%. That’s a really big if still.

Agreed. I think nigel could be a pretty good PM - far better than the dross we have been recently served, by both parties, BUT he desperately needs some capable lieutenants. Tice and Co don’t cut it

Braverman and even Boris might help. It’s time for all
Us Brits to unite around Nigel

Bozo of the wave is kryptonite . Reform would be mad to accept him .

Indeed. He needs previously apolitical figures, not failed Tory career politicians.

Elon Musk "The left is the party of murder"

Jesse Waters declares war on the left

Laura Loomer "It's time for the Trump administration to shut down, defund, & prosecute every single leftist organisation"

Can we have a quote from Leon?

See also Unherd/Freddie Sayer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwphU9Wh-BA&pp=ygUGdW5oZXJk (30 mins)

The mood on the right is scared and angry.

Wasn't it scared an angry before this too? Morerer scared and angry, possibly.

Yes, but it was disturbing. I was not as affected by the death, because he was an American and I'm British. So I regretted his death and pronounced my sympathies in a polite and sincere manner: he did not deserve to die in that way. But having watched that Unherd video I was disquieted at the visceral nature of it. Two observations about the Very Online Right is i) they feel things viscerally and are quick to anger/fear, and ii) there aren't any borders any more. Sayers is a Brit, but shared in the grief of the American interviewees as part of one tribe or family. I don't work like that so although I can analyse the emotion and empathise with it, I cannot share it in the same way. @Leon or his predecessor was correct: people live online these days.

I think I would fared badly in the studio. My instinct would be to say to wait for more info before taking precipitate action but that would not have gone down well. A better approach would have been to empathise with their loss, but would I have thought of it in time? I doubt it.

I hate the 2020s.

Kirk hated empathy. "New Age word which has done a lot of damage."
So to empathise would be performatively cruel.

Unempathetic PB Tories often wheel out the Darwin awards. For example, three young people from around here who crashed and died on the Brecon Beacons three days after the driver had passed his driving test were awarded Darwin awards from PBers. I was offended.

Well Mr Kirk's acknowledgement that a few people dying each day of gunshot wounds is a price worth paying to protect the second amendment is surely worthy of a Darwin award.

This isn't entirely surprising, but the numbers are stark.

"Do you think protecting the Second Amendment right to own guns is worth some gun deaths?"

All:
No: 47%
Yes: 30%

Yes Among:
GOP: 55%
IND: 26%
DEM: 10%

YouGov / Sept 11, 2025
https://x.com/USA_Polling/status/1966199569810862295

A lot of chat on the last thread on Farage’s other half buying the house in Clacton and “how could she afford the mortgage”/“how could her parents afford the mortgage”.

Slightly playing devil’s advocate it’s potentially very easy. She doesn’t have a mortgage.* this is all bollocks if he’s said she has a mortgage btw.

Funnily enough she doesn’t need a mortgage. I know loads of people who do private lending on property. If it’s someone who might be of use, good potential financially in the future or any other upside it’s very easy if you know the right companies and private lenders for her to have got a lump from her family (more on this later) and then taken out an interest only loan to buy the property without it being secured against the property if, for example Nige, guaranteed it, or another contact guaranteed it.

They likely have no concept of it being their “forever home” so it’s not like they want to buy so that they can retire in their home they have paid off in sunny Clacton, they just need to service it for the period they need it.

Once it’s served it’s use they sell it off and it’s effectively been a rental (possibly more expensive than a mortgage but no long term plans for it).

It allows them to demonstrate “commitment” to the constituency by “buying” but it’s not really a long term purchase.

So, back to her family, there is nothing to have stopped Nigel or a contact to gift her family some money. Then her family decide to give the “deposit” to her and so company x lends her 65/75% ltv and she’s just paying the interest. It doesn’t have to even be her because on a private mortgage or loan as long as the lender knows they will get the interest they aren’t going to care.

So technically she has bought a home in the constituency. Her family has helped her buy it with their money technically, there is likely nothing legally wrong with this and likely legally nothing that is tax avoidance.

It’s an expensive way of doing things but cheap if it allows Nigel to suggest to low IQ voters that he has a home in their community.

He doesn’t need to lie to a lender, he doesn’t have to juggle the first v second home issue, he’s going to make a fortune if not already over the period so very few lenders will see him failing with a guarantee.

It might not sit right with people but the point of this scenario is that he can do this without breaking any laws or rules regardless of his partner’s actual wealth/family wealth and on a technicality he can say “my partner bought this house with the help of family money”.

This is of course a made up situation that might be miles away from the truth but people seem to be trying to equate what Rayner did with his situation and there are so many alternative options that I don’t think that Farage and his background/contacts wouldn’t have the planning help and savvy to make it work.

Rayner failed to take expert legal advice and found herself liable for tax that she could have morally and legally avoided, then tried to cover up her mistake.

What you're outlining is a complicated, and probably entirely unnecessary, arrangement that would be likely to set off money-laundering sirens at all the law firms involved.

You clearly have a higher opinion of expensive law firms than I do.

No you're right, ordinary people who need a mortgage have to account for every penny of their deposit and get any relative who'd gifted them money towards the deposit to put in writing that they don't have a claim on the property. While people buying for cash just leave it up to the law firms' as to whether they're asked to prove source of funds, though Nige is a PEP so they'd be a bit reckless if they didn't ask him*.
Law Society guidance on lack of curiosity
https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/Topics/Anti-money-laundering/Guides/source-of-funds-clean-or-consistent-with-risk

*hence a PEP might prefer someone else to make the purchase

This isn't entirely surprising, but the numbers are stark.

"Do you think protecting the Second Amendment right to own guns is worth some gun deaths?"

All:
No: 47%
Yes: 30%

Yes Among:
GOP: 55%
IND: 26%
DEM: 10%

YouGov / Sept 11, 2025
https://x.com/USA_Polling/status/1966199569810862295

A lot of chat on the last thread on Farage’s other half buying the house in Clacton and “how could she afford the mortgage”/“how could her parents afford the mortgage”.

Slightly playing devil’s advocate it’s potentially very easy. She doesn’t have a mortgage.* this is all bollocks if he’s said she has a mortgage btw.

Funnily enough she doesn’t need a mortgage. I know loads of people who do private lending on property. If it’s someone who might be of use, good potential financially in the future or any other upside it’s very easy if you know the right companies and private lenders for her to have got a lump from her family (more on this later) and then taken out an interest only loan to buy the property without it being secured against the property if, for example Nige, guaranteed it, or another contact guaranteed it.

They likely have no concept of it being their “forever home” so it’s not like they want to buy so that they can retire in their home they have paid off in sunny Clacton, they just need to service it for the period they need it.

Once it’s served it’s use they sell it off and it’s effectively been a rental (possibly more expensive than a mortgage but no long term plans for it).

It allows them to demonstrate “commitment” to the constituency by “buying” but it’s not really a long term purchase.

So, back to her family, there is nothing to have stopped Nigel or a contact to gift her family some money. Then her family decide to give the “deposit” to her and so company x lends her 65/75% ltv and she’s just paying the interest. It doesn’t have to even be her because on a private mortgage or loan as long as the lender knows they will get the interest they aren’t going to care.

So technically she has bought a home in the constituency. Her family has helped her buy it with their money technically, there is likely nothing legally wrong with this and likely legally nothing that is tax avoidance.

It’s an expensive way of doing things but cheap if it allows Nigel to suggest to low IQ voters that he has a home in their community.

He doesn’t need to lie to a lender, he doesn’t have to juggle the first v second home issue, he’s going to make a fortune if not already over the period so very few lenders will see him failing with a guarantee.

It might not sit right with people but the point of this scenario is that he can do this without breaking any laws or rules regardless of his partner’s actual wealth/family wealth and on a technicality he can say “my partner bought this house with the help of family money”.

This is of course a made up situation that might be miles away from the truth but people seem to be trying to equate what Rayner did with his situation and there are so many alternative options that I don’t think that Farage and his background/contacts wouldn’t have the planning help and savvy to make it work.

Rayner failed to take expert legal advice and found herself liable for tax that she could have morally and legally avoided, then tried to cover up her mistake.

What you're outlining is a complicated, and probably entirely unnecessary, arrangement that would be likely to set off money-laundering sirens at all the law firms involved.

You clearly have a higher opinion of expensive law firms than I do.

No you're right, ordinary people who need a mortgage have to account for every penny of their deposit and get any relative who'd gifted them money towards the deposit to put in writing that they don't have a claim on the property. While people buying for cash just leave it up to the law firms' as to whether they're asked to prove source of funds, though Nige is a PEP so they'd be a bit reckless if they didn't ask him*.
Law Society guidance on lack of curiosity
https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/Topics/Anti-money-laundering/Guides/source-of-funds-clean-or-consistent-with-risk

*hence a PEP might prefer someone else to make the purchase

I think you are on to something here.

Farage may have not been avoiding Stamp Duty but rather avoiding scrutiny as to the source of his funds.

I don’t know why he needed to spend so much on a house in his constituency. He could have bought one for well under £100,000 in Jaywick, and would probably have supporters as neighbours.

For as bad a week Starmer is having, is actually the two most loosest cannons he has lost.

Mandelson is down beyond a low lying fruit, the type of fruit that just drops off without need for picking. Certainly not a scalp for anyone. He’s basically scalped himself. Again.

Also Rayners resignation comes with side benefits - where Starmer has dodged a bullet not having to have Rayner behind desk of a big ministry in his cabinet, trying to deliver key promise of 1.5M homes, that’s just not her political Forte, and she was failing it big time, over a third short. There’s a question how much lasting damage has been done to Starmer and Labour with Mandleson gone so quickly. And how much further both resignation story’s can run as media story.

In fact, I can’t 100% rule out Rayner was actually done by Number 10. Can you?