Hurrah, I’m a modern republican according to Lord Ashcroft.
PS - I think it is Prince Andrew who has damaged the Royals more than Harry.
Write off the monarchy at your peril. The devil you know and all that....
I have become a Brexiteer and I want to get rid of our unelected rulers.
My previous comment refers. Just look what a shithouse the USA has become with its presidency. The Monarchy has a lot going for it.
Still undemocratic and anti-meritocratic.
It's what works that matters. Imagine Tony Blair as President and weep.
Why would Tony Blair be president? Imagine Prince Andrew as King.
If we became a republic I’m pretty sure it would be of the Irish / German variety: a ceremonial presidency. So we’d be looking at president Mary Berry, David Attenborough or Judy Dench.
I'd rather a president with powers than without. I know there are places it works, as you list, but if the president is ceremonial I don't see why the need to shift as we've got a ceremonial arrangement already, which comes with silly rituals we can laugh about and has some unique characteristics. If I elect someone I want them to be expected to at least try to do things.
If there's a change it should be meaningful, not some 21st century style Lord Protector replicating what was there before (only without the power this time).
It's the scale and tone of it though. I lived in Vienna for a while and I remember being struck by how disproportionately grand and pretentious it seemed as the capital of what was now a small central European country rather than the seat of the Habsburgs. Similar with our OTT Monarchy. A bloated hangover from Empire. Embarrassing now. And inappropriate. That's how I feel anyway.
Yes, Vienna is strange, isn't it. To me it felt beautiful, but incredibly self-important. Almost as if it lives in a quite cultured, but slightly different world, or timezone.
But it was a major European capital until 1918, when it became the oversized capital of a rump state. Indeed by this process and not getting bombed in WW2 it is remarkably well preserved.
There is a melancholy of post imperial decline about its palaces and churches, beautifully described by Stefan Zweig in his "The World of Yesterday".
I thought Vienna was heavily damaged in the battle to take it in April 1945 - not as devastated as Berlin perhaps.
Hurrah, I’m a modern republican according to Lord Ashcroft.
PS - I think it is Prince Andrew who has damaged the Royals more than Harry.
Write off the monarchy at your peril. The devil you know and all that....
I have become a Brexiteer and I want to get rid of our unelected rulers.
My previous comment refers. Just look what a shithouse the USA has become with its presidency. The Monarchy has a lot going for it.
Still undemocratic and anti-meritocratic.
It's what works that matters. Imagine Tony Blair as President and weep.
Why would Tony Blair be president? Imagine Prince Andrew as King.
If we became a republic I’m pretty sure it would be of the Irish / German variety: a ceremonial presidency. So we’d be looking at president Mary Berry, David Attenborough or Judy Dench.
I'd rather a president with powers than without. I know there are places it works, as you list, but if the president is ceremonial I don't see why the need to shift as we've got a ceremonial arrangement already, which comes with silly rituals we can laugh about and has some unique characteristics. If I elect someone I want them to be expected to at least try to do things.
If there's a change it should be meaningful, not some 21st century style Lord Protector replicating what was there before (only without the power this time).
It's the scale and tone of it though. I lived in Vienna for a while and I remember being struck by how disproportionately grand and pretentious it seemed as the capital of what was now a small central European country rather than the seat of the Habsburgs. Similar with our OTT Monarchy. A bloated hangover from Empire. Embarrassing now. And inappropriate. That's how I feel anyway.
Yes, Vienna is strange, isn't it. To me it felt beautiful, but incredibly self-important. Almost as if it lives in a quite cultured, but slightly different world, or timezone.
But it was a major European capital until 1918, when it became the oversized capital of a rump state. Indeed by this process and not getting bombed in WW2
Vienna did get severely damaged by the Soviets before and during their capture of the city in April 1945.
Hurrah, I’m a modern republican according to Lord Ashcroft.
PS - I think it is Prince Andrew who has damaged the Royals more than Harry.
Write off the monarchy at your peril. The devil you know and all that....
I have become a Brexiteer and I want to get rid of our unelected rulers.
My previous comment refers. Just look what a shithouse the USA has become with its presidency. The Monarchy has a lot going for it.
Still undemocratic and anti-meritocratic.
It's what works that matters. Imagine Tony Blair as President and weep.
Why would Tony Blair be president? Imagine Prince Andrew as King.
If we became a republic I’m pretty sure it would be of the Irish / German variety: a ceremonial presidency. So we’d be looking at president Mary Berry, David Attenborough or Judy Dench.
I'd rather a president with powers than without. I know there are places it works, as you list, but if the president is ceremonial I don't see why the need to shift as we've got a ceremonial arrangement already, which comes with silly rituals we can laugh about and has some unique characteristics. If I elect someone I want them to be expected to at least try to do things.
If there's a change it should be meaningful, not some 21st century style Lord Protector replicating what was there before (only without the power this time).
It's the scale and tone of it though. I lived in Vienna for a while and I remember being struck by how disproportionately grand and pretentious it seemed as the capital of what was now a small central European country rather than the seat of the Habsburgs. Similar with our OTT Monarchy. A bloated hangover from Empire. Embarrassing now. And inappropriate. That's how I feel anyway.
Yes, Vienna is strange, isn't it. To me it felt beautiful, but incredibly self-important. Almost as if it lives in a quite cultured, but slightly different world, or timezone.
But it was a major European capital until 1918, when it became the oversized capital of a rump state. Indeed by this process and not getting bombed in WW2
Hurrah, I’m a modern republican according to Lord Ashcroft.
PS - I think it is Prince Andrew who has damaged the Royals more than Harry.
Write off the monarchy at your peril. The devil you know and all that....
I have become a Brexiteer and I want to get rid of our unelected rulers.
My previous comment refers. Just look what a shithouse the USA has become with its presidency. The Monarchy has a lot going for it.
Still undemocratic and anti-meritocratic.
It's what works that matters. Imagine Tony Blair as President and weep.
Why would Tony Blair be president? Imagine Prince Andrew as King.
If we became a republic I’m pretty sure it would be of the Irish / German variety: a ceremonial presidency. So we’d be looking at president Mary Berry, David Attenborough or Judy Dench.
I'd rather a president with powers than without. I know there are places it works, as you list, but if the president is ceremonial I don't see why the need to shift as we've got a ceremonial arrangement already, which comes with silly rituals we can laugh about and has some unique characteristics. If I elect someone I want them to be expected to at least try to do things.
If there's a change it should be meaningful, not some 21st century style Lord Protector replicating what was there before (only without the power this time).
It's the scale and tone of it though. I lived in Vienna for a while and I remember being struck by how disproportionately grand and pretentious it seemed as the capital of what was now a small central European country rather than the seat of the Habsburgs. Similar with our OTT Monarchy. A bloated hangover from Empire. Embarrassing now. And inappropriate. That's how I feel anyway.
Yes, Vienna is strange, isn't it. To me it felt beautiful, but incredibly self-important. Almost as if it lives in a quite cultured, but slightly different world, or timezone.
But it was a major European capital until 1918, when it became the oversized capital of a rump state. Indeed by this process and not getting bombed in WW2 it is remarkably well preserved.
There is a melancholy of post imperial decline about its palaces and churches, beautifully described by Stefan Zweig in his "The World of Yesterday".
I thought Vienna was heavily damaged in the battle to take it in April 1945 - not as devastated as Berlin perhaps.
Hurrah, I’m a modern republican according to Lord Ashcroft.
PS - I think it is Prince Andrew who has damaged the Royals more than Harry.
Write off the monarchy at your peril. The devil you know and all that....
I have become a Brexiteer and I want to get rid of our unelected rulers.
My previous comment refers. Just look what a shithouse the USA has become with its presidency. The Monarchy has a lot going for it.
Still undemocratic and anti-meritocratic.
It's what works that matters. Imagine Tony Blair as President and weep.
Why would Tony Blair be president? Imagine Prince Andrew as King.
If we became a republic I’m pretty sure it would be of the Irish / German variety: a ceremonial presidency. So we’d be looking at president Mary Berry, David Attenborough or Judy Dench.
I'd rather a president with powers than without. I know there are places it works, as you list, but if the president is ceremonial I don't see why the need to shift as we've got a ceremonial arrangement already, which comes with silly rituals we can laugh about and has some unique characteristics. If I elect someone I want them to be expected to at least try to do things.
If there's a change it should be meaningful, not some 21st century style Lord Protector replicating what was there before (only without the power this time).
It's the scale and tone of it though. I lived in Vienna for a while and I remember being struck by how disproportionately grand and pretentious it seemed as the capital of what was now a small central European country rather than the seat of the Habsburgs. Similar with our OTT Monarchy. A bloated hangover from Empire. Embarrassing now. And inappropriate. That's how I feel anyway.
Well as leftwingers like you are generally embarassed about being British anyway, except in terms of the NHS, why should we care that you feel the same about our monarchy?
The USA is a left-wing country?
The only thing most leftwingers like about the USA is it is a republic
But is the USA a leftwing country (being a republic)?
Anti-monarchists receive ‘intimidatory’ Home Office letter on new protest laws
Home Office claims timing of new powers, taking effect days before king’s coronation, is coincidental
Official warning letters have been sent to anti-monarchists planning peaceful protests at King Charles III’s coronation saying that new criminal offences to prevent disruption have been rushed into law.
Using tactics described by lawyers as “intimidatory”, the Home Office’s Police Powers Unit wrote to the campaign group Republic saying new powers had been brought forward to prevent “disruption at major sporting and cultural events”.
The new law, given royal assent by Charles on Tuesday, means that from Wednesday:
Protesters who block roads, airports and railways could face 12 months behind bars.
Anyone locking on to others, objects or buildings could go to prison for six months and face an unlimited fine.
Police will be able to head off disruption by stopping and searching protesters if they suspect they are setting out to cause chaos.
“I would be grateful if you could publicise and forward this letter to your members who are likely to be affected by these legislative changes,” says the Home Office letter, which lists the creation of a number of new criminal offences under the government’s much criticised public order bill.
The Home Office claims that the timing of the laws is coincidental. But lawyers have told Republic that the letter could be viewed as intimidatory, days before planned demonstrations in central London around the coronation.
Graham Smith, the campaign group’s chief executive, described the letter as “very odd” and said the group was seeking assurances from the police that nothing had changed in relation to its plans to protest on coronation day.
“We have been in direct contact with liaison officers and have met with senior commanders, who we have been very clear with about what we intend to do. Their response is that they are happy for us to proceed. But this letter has come out of the blue,” Smith said.
“Lawyers who we have been in touch with agree it sounds like intimidation and we are currently waiting for assurances from police nothing has changed.”
“Shut up and bow to the king” seems to be the message.
On the day, I’m tempted to lay flowers at Althorp estate. But tbh, i’m old enough to be beyond such passive aggressive virtue signalling. It would also be somewhat insincere on my part.
I’ll just tune out and hope this is the tories last hurrah.
I think it is.
The country is crying out for new direction. Why do Tory administrations always end this way? I did my best to nudge them in the right direction, back in 2019. It worked to an extent. And then they go and spoil it all by doing stupid shit like a) Boris Johnson b) Liz Truss and c) repressive shit like this.
If you think the Archbishop of Canterbury and KCIII are Tories I'm sure it'd come as big news to them.
Projection, on your part.
This is Tory onanism. The party deserves to die.
Shoulda happened in 2017/19, but they limp on, ever more desperate, ever more repressive. The only thing left that united them was tax cuts, until truss destroyed that.
Now they’re left scraping the barrel, trying to whip the nation into a nationalist fervour.
Hurrah, I’m a modern republican according to Lord Ashcroft.
PS - I think it is Prince Andrew who has damaged the Royals more than Harry.
Write off the monarchy at your peril. The devil you know and all that....
I have become a Brexiteer and I want to get rid of our unelected rulers.
My previous comment refers. Just look what a shithouse the USA has become with its presidency. The Monarchy has a lot going for it.
Still undemocratic and anti-meritocratic.
It's what works that matters. Imagine Tony Blair as President and weep.
Why would Tony Blair be president? Imagine Prince Andrew as King.
If we became a republic I’m pretty sure it would be of the Irish / German variety: a ceremonial presidency. So we’d be looking at president Mary Berry, David Attenborough or Judy Dench.
I'd rather a president with powers than without. I know there are places it works, as you list, but if the president is ceremonial I don't see why the need to shift as we've got a ceremonial arrangement already, which comes with silly rituals we can laugh about and has some unique characteristics. If I elect someone I want them to be expected to at least try to do things.
If there's a change it should be meaningful, not some 21st century style Lord Protector replicating what was there before (only without the power this time).
It's the scale and tone of it though. I lived in Vienna for a while and I remember being struck by how disproportionately grand and pretentious it seemed as the capital of what was now a small central European country rather than the seat of the Habsburgs. Similar with our OTT Monarchy. A bloated hangover from Empire. Embarrassing now. And inappropriate. That's how I feel anyway.
Yes, Vienna is strange, isn't it. To me it felt beautiful, but incredibly self-important. Almost as if it lives in a quite cultured, but slightly different world, or timezone.
But it was a major European capital until 1918, when it became the oversized capital of a rump state. Indeed by this process and not getting bombed in WW2
Vienna did get severely damaged by the Soviets before and during their capture of the city in April 1945.
Salmond, who is a member of the King’s Privy Council, told LBC he would have “put a ring of policemen around Edinburgh Castle” were he still first minister to prevent the Stone of Destiny – on which King Charles will sit when he is crowned – from being taken down south.
Hurrah, I’m a modern republican according to Lord Ashcroft.
PS - I think it is Prince Andrew who has damaged the Royals more than Harry.
Write off the monarchy at your peril. The devil you know and all that....
I have become a Brexiteer and I want to get rid of our unelected rulers.
My previous comment refers. Just look what a shithouse the USA has become with its presidency. The Monarchy has a lot going for it.
Still undemocratic and anti-meritocratic.
It's what works that matters. Imagine Tony Blair as President and weep.
Why would Tony Blair be president? Imagine Prince Andrew as King.
If we became a republic I’m pretty sure it would be of the Irish / German variety: a ceremonial presidency. So we’d be looking at president Mary Berry, David Attenborough or Judy Dench.
I'd rather a president with powers than without. I know there are places it works, as you list, but if the president is ceremonial I don't see why the need to shift as we've got a ceremonial arrangement already, which comes with silly rituals we can laugh about and has some unique characteristics. If I elect someone I want them to be expected to at least try to do things.
If there's a change it should be meaningful, not some 21st century style Lord Protector replicating what was there before (only without the power this time).
It's the scale and tone of it though. I lived in Vienna for a while and I remember being struck by how disproportionately grand and pretentious it seemed as the capital of what was now a small central European country rather than the seat of the Habsburgs. Similar with our OTT Monarchy. A bloated hangover from Empire. Embarrassing now. And inappropriate. That's how I feel anyway.
Yes, Vienna is strange, isn't it. Beautiful ,but incredibly self-important. Almost as if it lives in a quite cultured, but different world.
I recall Bill Bryson's description essentially being it's the most grand and imperial city possible. Sounds nice for a visit, though I can see the point it might see a little out of place now.
Budapest cheaper, and nicer. Even infested by Viktor Orban.
I agree. i visited Budapest in the '90s, on a trip up while living in Greece, and I thought it was one of the most beautiful cities I've ever been to. Those vistas, onto the city, from across those bridges traversing the Danube ! Almost as spectacular as Istanbul.
Hurrah, I’m a modern republican according to Lord Ashcroft.
PS - I think it is Prince Andrew who has damaged the Royals more than Harry.
Write off the monarchy at your peril. The devil you know and all that....
I have become a Brexiteer and I want to get rid of our unelected rulers.
My previous comment refers. Just look what a shithouse the USA has become with its presidency. The Monarchy has a lot going for it.
Still undemocratic and anti-meritocratic.
It's what works that matters. Imagine Tony Blair as President and weep.
Why would Tony Blair be president? Imagine Prince Andrew as King.
If we became a republic I’m pretty sure it would be of the Irish / German variety: a ceremonial presidency. So we’d be looking at president Mary Berry, David Attenborough or Judy Dench.
I'd rather a president with powers than without. I know there are places it works, as you list, but if the president is ceremonial I don't see why the need to shift as we've got a ceremonial arrangement already, which comes with silly rituals we can laugh about and has some unique characteristics. If I elect someone I want them to be expected to at least try to do things.
If there's a change it should be meaningful, not some 21st century style Lord Protector replicating what was there before (only without the power this time).
It's the scale and tone of it though. I lived in Vienna for a while and I remember being struck by how disproportionately grand and pretentious it seemed as the capital of what was now a small central European country rather than the seat of the Habsburgs. Similar with our OTT Monarchy. A bloated hangover from Empire. Embarrassing now. And inappropriate. That's how I feel anyway.
Yes, Vienna is strange, isn't it. To me it felt beautiful, but incredibly self-important. Almost as if it lives in a quite cultured, but slightly different world, or timezone.
But it was a major European capital until 1918, when it became the oversized capital of a rump state. Indeed by this process and not getting bombed in WW2 it is remarkably well preserved.
There is a melancholy of post imperial decline about its palaces and churches, beautifully described by Stefan Zweig in his "The World of Yesterday".
To be fair to Vienna it was bombed to a fair extent, but nothing like the cities of industrial Germany.
Indeed it was in decline in every sense from the 1910s until roughly the 1990s - a record that is hard to beat in the region. Population, economy, the lot. Then came the nineties, neoliberalism, EU membership and mass migration from the Balkans. Result: a provincial town in imperial clothes forced to modernise at speed. The famous Vienna social housing miracle was largely a function of population collapse; housing a growing population has meant low rents for the older generation and the better-connected kids of the old Viennese, and the standard Western high-rent outcome for everyone else.
Anti-monarchists receive ‘intimidatory’ Home Office letter on new protest laws
Home Office claims timing of new powers, taking effect days before king’s coronation, is coincidental
Official warning letters have been sent to anti-monarchists planning peaceful protests at King Charles III’s coronation saying that new criminal offences to prevent disruption have been rushed into law.
Using tactics described by lawyers as “intimidatory”, the Home Office’s Police Powers Unit wrote to the campaign group Republic saying new powers had been brought forward to prevent “disruption at major sporting and cultural events”.
The new law, given royal assent by Charles on Tuesday, means that from Wednesday:
Protesters who block roads, airports and railways could face 12 months behind bars.
Anyone locking on to others, objects or buildings could go to prison for six months and face an unlimited fine.
Police will be able to head off disruption by stopping and searching protesters if they suspect they are setting out to cause chaos.
“I would be grateful if you could publicise and forward this letter to your members who are likely to be affected by these legislative changes,” says the Home Office letter, which lists the creation of a number of new criminal offences under the government’s much criticised public order bill.
The Home Office claims that the timing of the laws is coincidental. But lawyers have told Republic that the letter could be viewed as intimidatory, days before planned demonstrations in central London around the coronation.
Graham Smith, the campaign group’s chief executive, described the letter as “very odd” and said the group was seeking assurances from the police that nothing had changed in relation to its plans to protest on coronation day.
“We have been in direct contact with liaison officers and have met with senior commanders, who we have been very clear with about what we intend to do. Their response is that they are happy for us to proceed. But this letter has come out of the blue,” Smith said.
“Lawyers who we have been in touch with agree it sounds like intimidation and we are currently waiting for assurances from police nothing has changed.”
“Shut up and bow to the king” seems to be the message.
On the day, I’m tempted to lay flowers at Althorp estate. But tbh, i’m old enough to be beyond such passive aggressive virtue signalling. It would also be somewhat insincere on my part.
I’ll just tune out and hope this is the tories last hurrah.
I think it is.
The country is crying out for new direction. Why do Tory administrations always end this way? I did my best to nudge them in the right direction, back in 2019. It worked to an extent. And then they go and spoil it all by doing stupid shit like a) Boris Johnson b) Liz Truss and c) repressive shit like this.
If you think the Archbishop of Canterbury and KCIII are Tories I'm sure it'd come as big news to them.
Projection, on your part.
This is Tory onanism. The party deserves to die.
Shoulda happened in 2017/19, but they limp on, ever more desperate, ever more repressive. The only thing left that united them was tax cuts, until truss destroyed that.
Now they’re left scraping the barrel, trying to whip the nation into a nationalist fervour.
Personally I’ve always had a soft spot for the Beatles “all you need is love” as the national anthem, especially as it rips off the French anthem at the start. You can belt it out. The lyrics are spot on.
Personally I’ve always had a soft spot for the Beatles “all you need is love” as the national anthem, especially as it rips off the French anthem at the start. You can belt it out. The lyrics are spot on.
Dreamt up actually to represent Britain as its "entry" in the first ever global satellite link-up, and as a result in the end probably the peak of Britain's global cultural influence for the last 60 years.
Switching to Land of Hope and Glory would probably be a smart move for the monarchy. Infinitely better tune and easy to sing loudly (which is basically synonymous with patrioticly and proudly).
God save the King on the other hand sounds like a dirge, and doesn't exactly speak to an increasingly unreligious population.
Salmond, who is a member of the King’s Privy Council, told LBC he would have “put a ring of policemen around Edinburgh Castle” were he still first minister to prevent the Stone of Destiny – on which King Charles will sit when he is crowned – from being taken down south.
Personally I’ve always had a soft spot for the Beatles “all you need is love” as the national anthem, especially as it rips off the French anthem at the start. You can belt it out. The lyrics are spot on.
Sadly we need a lot more than just love to fix our nation's problems.
Salmond, who is a member of the King’s Privy Council, told LBC he would have “put a ring of policemen around Edinburgh Castle” were he still first minister to prevent the Stone of Destiny – on which King Charles will sit when he is crowned – from being taken down south.
Personally I’ve always had a soft spot for the Beatles “all you need is love” as the national anthem, especially as it rips off the French anthem at the start. You can belt it out. The lyrics are spot on.
Sadly we need a lot more than just love to fix our nation's problems.
There's nothing you can do that can't be done Nothing you can sing that can't be sung Nothing you can say, but you can learn how to play the game It's easy
Nothing you can make that can't be made No one you can save that can't be saved Nothing you can do, but you can learn how to be you in time It's easy
On SueGrayGate, despite Dan Hodges' and others' tumescence about the imminent publication of the government inquiry into Starmer poaching her, it's been pulled - as we know. It looks to me, though, as if they've backed off due to the formidable Gray refusing to respond to the inquiry and, I suspect, threatening Case and whoever else with lawyers. Whatever else Gray may be, she's pretty smart. The inquiry had no formal status and was outside the normal process for civil servants getting new jobs.
Just a hunch. But why else would they back off when they'd trailed the dynamite findings to their media friends as another nail in Starmer's coffin (along with currygate, donkeygate and Savilegate)? It's all a bit embarrassing for the government/Tory Party.
Personally I’ve always had a soft spot for the Beatles “all you need is love” as the national anthem, especially as it rips off the French anthem at the start. You can belt it out. The lyrics are spot on.
Apparently the last Prime Minister had the same idea before she fell, but wanted a minor tweak. All you need is Truss.
Hurrah, I’m a modern republican according to Lord Ashcroft.
PS - I think it is Prince Andrew who has damaged the Royals more than Harry.
Write off the monarchy at your peril. The devil you know and all that....
I have become a Brexiteer and I want to get rid of our unelected rulers.
My previous comment refers. Just look what a shithouse the USA has become with its presidency. The Monarchy has a lot going for it.
Still undemocratic and anti-meritocratic.
It's what works that matters. Imagine Tony Blair as President and weep.
Why would Tony Blair be president? Imagine Prince Andrew as King.
If we became a republic I’m pretty sure it would be of the Irish / German variety: a ceremonial presidency. So we’d be looking at president Mary Berry, David Attenborough or Judy Dench.
I'd rather a president with powers than without. I know there are places it works, as you list, but if the president is ceremonial I don't see why the need to shift as we've got a ceremonial arrangement already, which comes with silly rituals we can laugh about and has some unique characteristics. If I elect someone I want them to be expected to at least try to do things.
If there's a change it should be meaningful, not some 21st century style Lord Protector replicating what was there before (only without the power this time).
It's the scale and tone of it though. I lived in Vienna for a while and I remember being struck by how disproportionately grand and pretentious it seemed as the capital of what was now a small central European country rather than the seat of the Habsburgs. Similar with our OTT Monarchy. A bloated hangover from Empire. Embarrassing now. And inappropriate. That's how I feel anyway.
Yes, Vienna is strange, isn't it. To me it felt beautiful, but incredibly self-important. Almost as if it lives in a quite cultured, but slightly different world, or timezone.
But it was a major European capital until 1918, when it became the oversized capital of a rump state. Indeed by this process and not getting bombed in WW2
Vienna did get severely damaged by the Soviets before and during their capture of the city in April 1945.
On SueGrayGate, despite Dan Hodges' and others' tumescence about the imminent publication of the government inquiry into Starmer poaching her, it's been pulled - as we know. It looks to me, though, as if they've backed off due to the formidable Gray refusing to respond to the inquiry and, I suspect, threatening Case and whoever else with lawyers. Whatever else Gray may be, she's pretty smart. The inquiry had no formal status and was outside the normal process for civil servants getting new jobs.
Just a hunch. But why else would they back off when they'd trailed the dynamite findings to their media friends as another nail in Starmer's coffin (along with currygate, donkeygate and Savilegate)? It's all a bit embarrassing for the government/Tory Party.
Just a hunch as you said.
It looks like, from the front of tomorrows papers, the Conservative Party wanted to go further but Simon Case has blocked them. A decision has been made of the report findings, but not released.
nothing has been released today to prove “Gray in PartyGate team as Starmer Talks Began” headline in yesterdays telegraph which now looks exaggerated even libellous and leaves the paper open to being sued - would that be what both the Tories and the telegraph want, or leave the paper angry the Tories let them down with a poor briefing?
If there is nothing that can support that newspaper headline, there’s no grounds for an unusually long period of gardening leave. Sue will be working for Starmer before the end of the year, having been seen to have won this tussle.
Simon Case battle with the politicians about what they could and couldn’t say today, does seem to be the only interesting focus left.
IMO Case has been packing for weeks anyway, his departure isn’t particularly because he took hard civil service line against Tories on Graygate.
On SueGrayGate, despite Dan Hodges' and others' tumescence about the imminent publication of the government inquiry into Starmer poaching her, it's been pulled - as we know. It looks to me, though, as if they've backed off due to the formidable Gray refusing to respond to the inquiry and, I suspect, threatening Case and whoever else with lawyers. Whatever else Gray may be, she's pretty smart. The inquiry had no formal status and was outside the normal process for civil servants getting new jobs…
And whatever else Case might be, he’s pretty dumb.
Just working out a fantasy "do fuck all for the rest of my life" strategy:
(1) Buy a 2 or 3 bed semi/flat in Sunderland (or similar) for £100k, cash. No mortgage. Most who cash out down South in their early 40s can probably do this. (2) Core expenses council tax/water/gas/electricity/broadband/TV licence etc. £450 pcm? (3) Transport/fuel - let's say £150 pcm (4) Food, drink, purchases and "fun" say £400 pcm
Basically, if you can derive £1,000pcm+ and you're mortgage free you can do whatever you like for the rest of your life, I think.
You'd probably need £400-450k of investments to draw on to generate it. Or you could do 'any' min wage job 4 days a week.
But, you do have to live in Sunderland. And it's not like you can go on adventure holidays.
Sunderland is by no means the cheapest place to live in the north-east. Somewhere like Easington probably would be. You could buy a 4 bedroom detached house there for the same price as a one bedroom flat in London.
On SueGrayGate, despite Dan Hodges' and others' tumescence about the imminent publication of the government inquiry into Starmer poaching her, it's been pulled - as we know. It looks to me, though, as if they've backed off due to the formidable Gray refusing to respond to the inquiry and, I suspect, threatening Case and whoever else with lawyers. Whatever else Gray may be, she's pretty smart. The inquiry had no formal status and was outside the normal process for civil servants getting new jobs.
Just a hunch. But why else would they back off when they'd trailed the dynamite findings to their media friends as another nail in Starmer's coffin (along with currygate, donkeygate and Savilegate)? It's all a bit embarrassing for the government/Tory Party.
Very foolish of the government to be making an issue out of this. It's well known to advertisers that generic advertising disproportionately helps the market leader. When it comes to sleazy behaviour the Tories are not only market leaders they are setting standards previously unknown.
On SueGrayGate, despite Dan Hodges' and others' tumescence about the imminent publication of the government inquiry into Starmer poaching her, it's been pulled - as we know. It looks to me, though, as if they've backed off due to the formidable Gray refusing to respond to the inquiry and, I suspect, threatening Case and whoever else with lawyers. Whatever else Gray may be, she's pretty smart. The inquiry had no formal status and was outside the normal process for civil servants getting new jobs.
Just a hunch. But why else would they back off when they'd trailed the dynamite findings to their media friends as another nail in Starmer's coffin (along with currygate, donkeygate and Savilegate)? It's all a bit embarrassing for the government/Tory Party.
Just a hunch as you said.
It looks like, from the front of tomorrows papers, the Conservative Party wanted to go further but Simon Case has blocked them. A decision has been made of the report findings, but not released.
nothing has been released today to prove “Gray in PartyGate team as Starmer Talks Began” headline in yesterdays telegraph which now looks exaggerated even libellous and leaves the paper open to being sued - would that be what both the Tories and the telegraph want, or leave the paper angry the Tories let them down with a poor briefing?
If there is nothing that can support that newspaper headline, there’s no grounds for an unusually long period of gardening leave. Sue will be working for Starmer before the end of the year, having been seen to have won this tussle.
Simon Case battle with the politicians about what they could and couldn’t say today, does seem to be the only interesting focus left.
IMO Case has been packing for weeks anyway, his departure isn’t particularly because he took hard civil service line against Tories on Graygate.
The Telegraph has banged Starmer to rights. Appointing Gray they claim is proof of Sir Softie's poor judgement. Poor judgement? Is this the same Daily Telegraph that used to be the Boris Johnson fanzine?
Looks like the weather is going to be rubbish on Saturday for the Coronation which, perversely, will probably increase viewer numbers as people will be stuck inside. I’ll be engaged in fixing stuff around the house but in the absence of any other option might even stick it on the telly until the football comes on at noon.
If they need a sponsor fine, but wouldn't a 'large scale event to replace the fireworks' also need a sponsor? Bit strange. Whiff of woke? Are fireworks alledged to have been involved in the transatlantic slave trade?
In other news, had a ride today on the UK's newest "railway", the Luton Airport DART, which opened on 27th March. It's really a people-mover operated by a pulley system, almost exactly like that at Birmingham Airport, but I thought why not.
In other news, had a ride today on the UK's newest "railway", the Luton Airport DART, which opened on 27th March. It's really a people-mover operated by a pulley system, almost exactly like that at Birmingham Airport, but I thought why not.
I miss bhx’s MAGLEV. A happy memory from my youth. Well, when it was working. Out of action, most of the time, iirc.
On SueGrayGate, despite Dan Hodges' and others' tumescence about the imminent publication of the government inquiry into Starmer poaching her, it's been pulled - as we know. It looks to me, though, as if they've backed off due to the formidable Gray refusing to respond to the inquiry and, I suspect, threatening Case and whoever else with lawyers. Whatever else Gray may be, she's pretty smart. The inquiry had no formal status and was outside the normal process for civil servants getting new jobs.
Just a hunch. But why else would they back off when they'd trailed the dynamite findings to their media friends as another nail in Starmer's coffin (along with currygate, donkeygate and Savilegate)? It's all a bit embarrassing for the government/Tory Party.
Suspect that the government stopped being embarrassable some time ago. The interesting thing is that, after all the hype (as recently as The World at One), the government stepped back. I bet Boris wouldn't have done that, on a "go big or go home" basis. One of Rishi's challenges is that he's seen how BoJo operated, seems to think that is what Prime Ministers do... but he's not quite evil enough.
On SueGrayGate, despite Dan Hodges' and others' tumescence about the imminent publication of the government inquiry into Starmer poaching her, it's been pulled - as we know. It looks to me, though, as if they've backed off due to the formidable Gray refusing to respond to the inquiry and, I suspect, threatening Case and whoever else with lawyers. Whatever else Gray may be, she's pretty smart. The inquiry had no formal status and was outside the normal process for civil servants getting new jobs.
Just a hunch. But why else would they back off when they'd trailed the dynamite findings to their media friends as another nail in Starmer's coffin (along with currygate, donkeygate and Savilegate)? It's all a bit embarrassing for the government/Tory Party.
Just a hunch as you said.
It looks like, from the front of tomorrows papers, the Conservative Party wanted to go further but Simon Case has blocked them. A decision has been made of the report findings, but not released.
nothing has been released today to prove “Gray in PartyGate team as Starmer Talks Began” headline in yesterdays telegraph which now looks exaggerated even libellous and leaves the paper open to being sued - would that be what both the Tories and the telegraph want, or leave the paper angry the Tories let them down with a poor briefing?
If there is nothing that can support that newspaper headline, there’s no grounds for an unusually long period of gardening leave. Sue will be working for Starmer before the end of the year, having been seen to have won this tussle.
Simon Case battle with the politicians about what they could and couldn’t say today, does seem to be the only interesting focus left.
IMO Case has been packing for weeks anyway, his departure isn’t particularly because he took hard civil service line against Tories on Graygate.
The times front page article, for you to decide for yourself what their take is
In other news, had a ride today on the UK's newest "railway", the Luton Airport DART, which opened on 27th March. It's really a people-mover operated by a pulley system, almost exactly like that at Birmingham Airport, but I thought why not.
I miss Bhx’s MAGLEV. A happy memory from my youth. Well, when it was working. Out of action, most of the time, iirc.
Did you ever ride it?
No, I first visited BHX in 2014, long after it went.
Personally I’ve always had a soft spot for the Beatles “all you need is love” as the national anthem, especially as it rips off the French anthem at the start. You can belt it out. The lyrics are spot on.
Getting Away With It by Electronic would be a great national anthem.
In other news, had a ride today on the UK's newest "railway", the Luton Airport DART, which opened on 27th March. It's really a people-mover operated by a pulley system, almost exactly like that at Birmingham Airport, but I thought why not.
Looks interesting. A shame the Birmingham one isn't the world's only MagLev these days, like it was from 1984 to 1995.
On SueGrayGate, despite Dan Hodges' and others' tumescence about the imminent publication of the government inquiry into Starmer poaching her, it's been pulled - as we know. It looks to me, though, as if they've backed off due to the formidable Gray refusing to respond to the inquiry and, I suspect, threatening Case and whoever else with lawyers. Whatever else Gray may be, she's pretty smart. The inquiry had no formal status and was outside the normal process for civil servants getting new jobs.
Just a hunch. But why else would they back off when they'd trailed the dynamite findings to their media friends as another nail in Starmer's coffin (along with currygate, donkeygate and Savilegate)? It's all a bit embarrassing for the government/Tory Party.
On SueGrayGate, despite Dan Hodges' and others' tumescence about the imminent publication of the government inquiry into Starmer poaching her, it's been pulled - as we know. It looks to me, though, as if they've backed off due to the formidable Gray refusing to respond to the inquiry and, I suspect, threatening Case and whoever else with lawyers. Whatever else Gray may be, she's pretty smart. The inquiry had no formal status and was outside the normal process for civil servants getting new jobs.
Just a hunch. But why else would they back off when they'd trailed the dynamite findings to their media friends as another nail in Starmer's coffin (along with currygate, donkeygate and Savilegate)? It's all a bit embarrassing for the government/Tory Party.
I think simpler than that. They have no evidence of Sue Gray breaking the civil service code. Publishing any suggestion she did could land them in legal hot water and she is the kind of person who would fight them all the way.
On SueGrayGate, despite Dan Hodges' and others' tumescence about the imminent publication of the government inquiry into Starmer poaching her, it's been pulled - as we know. It looks to me, though, as if they've backed off due to the formidable Gray refusing to respond to the inquiry and, I suspect, threatening Case and whoever else with lawyers. Whatever else Gray may be, she's pretty smart. The inquiry had no formal status and was outside the normal process for civil servants getting new jobs…
And whatever else Case might be, he’s pretty dumb.
If they need a sponsor fine, but wouldn't a 'large scale event to replace the fireworks' also need a sponsor? Bit strange. Whiff of woke? Are fireworks alledged to have been involved in the transatlantic slave trade?
Fireworks are eye watering.expensive for an extended display.
On SueGrayGate, despite Dan Hodges' and others' tumescence about the imminent publication of the government inquiry into Starmer poaching her, it's been pulled - as we know. It looks to me, though, as if they've backed off due to the formidable Gray refusing to respond to the inquiry and, I suspect, threatening Case and whoever else with lawyers. Whatever else Gray may be, she's pretty smart. The inquiry had no formal status and was outside the normal process for civil servants getting new jobs.
Just a hunch. But why else would they back off when they'd trailed the dynamite findings to their media friends as another nail in Starmer's coffin (along with currygate, donkeygate and Savilegate)? It's all a bit embarrassing for the government/Tory Party.
Suspect that the government stopped being embarrassable some time ago. The interesting thing is that, after all the hype (as recently as The World at One), the government stepped back. I bet Boris wouldn't have done that, on a "go big or go home" basis. One of Rishi's challenges is that he's seen how BoJo operated, seems to think that is what Prime Ministers do... but he's not quite evil enough.
I think that’s rather harsh. 😠 I think it’s more like the Times assessment, the Tory Party push upon the levers of the civil service was “flimsy and lacked evidence” so it’s actually quite sensible to stop pushing those levers when warned of “significant legal issues” - not a lack of evilness.
To push it further and lose, just hands over a bigger win doesn’t it?
If TSE was writing a header on this latest development I’m sure he’d use the phrase, despite the promising build up it was “all piss and wind”
In other news, had a ride today on the UK's newest "railway", the Luton Airport DART, which opened on 27th March. It's really a people-mover operated by a pulley system, almost exactly like that at Birmingham Airport, but I thought why not.
Looks interesting. A shame the Birmingham one isn't the world's only MagLev these days, like it was from 1984 to 1995.
First thought when I saw pics, without noticing poster, was this - Is BlancheL doing a "Rosie Ruiz"?
On SueGrayGate, despite Dan Hodges' and others' tumescence about the imminent publication of the government inquiry into Starmer poaching her, it's been pulled - as we know. It looks to me, though, as if they've backed off due to the formidable Gray refusing to respond to the inquiry and, I suspect, threatening Case and whoever else with lawyers. Whatever else Gray may be, she's pretty smart. The inquiry had no formal status and was outside the normal process for civil servants getting new jobs…
And whatever else Case might be, he’s pretty dumb.
Case closed on Graygate
Next it will be case closed on Case.
But that has to be after the locals because it will fill the media with partygate pictures.
On SueGrayGate, despite Dan Hodges' and others' tumescence about the imminent publication of the government inquiry into Starmer poaching her, it's been pulled - as we know. It looks to me, though, as if they've backed off due to the formidable Gray refusing to respond to the inquiry and, I suspect, threatening Case and whoever else with lawyers. Whatever else Gray may be, she's pretty smart. The inquiry had no formal status and was outside the normal process for civil servants getting new jobs.
Just a hunch. But why else would they back off when they'd trailed the dynamite findings to their media friends as another nail in Starmer's coffin (along with currygate, donkeygate and Savilegate)? It's all a bit embarrassing for the government/Tory Party.
WTF was Donkeygate? I don’t remember that one.
It's alleged that starmer left a gate open on a walk in the countryside?
On SueGrayGate, despite Dan Hodges' and others' tumescence about the imminent publication of the government inquiry into Starmer poaching her, it's been pulled - as we know. It looks to me, though, as if they've backed off due to the formidable Gray refusing to respond to the inquiry and, I suspect, threatening Case and whoever else with lawyers. Whatever else Gray may be, she's pretty smart. The inquiry had no formal status and was outside the normal process for civil servants getting new jobs.
Just a hunch. But why else would they back off when they'd trailed the dynamite findings to their media friends as another nail in Starmer's coffin (along with currygate, donkeygate and Savilegate)? It's all a bit embarrassing for the government/Tory Party.
WTF was Donkeygate? I don’t remember that one.
It's alleged that starmer left a gate open on a walk in the countryside? :openmouth:
Was it not the dodgy dealing on buying land for his wife’s donkey collection? He had some sort of parliamentary instrument that allowed him to purchase the land for 1p.
I assumed Northern Al had thrown in Donkeygate as a deliberate red herring to see if anyone would spot the imposter. But hilariously it does appear to have been a thing at some stage.
The story goes that Keir Starmer’s mum owns a donkey sanctuary that doesn’t have planning permission. The law is an ass etc etc
On SueGrayGate, despite Dan Hodges' and others' tumescence about the imminent publication of the government inquiry into Starmer poaching her, it's been pulled - as we know. It looks to me, though, as if they've backed off due to the formidable Gray refusing to respond to the inquiry and, I suspect, threatening Case and whoever else with lawyers. Whatever else Gray may be, she's pretty smart. The inquiry had no formal status and was outside the normal process for civil servants getting new jobs.
Just a hunch. But why else would they back off when they'd trailed the dynamite findings to their media friends as another nail in Starmer's coffin (along with currygate, donkeygate and Savilegate)? It's all a bit embarrassing for the government/Tory Party.
WTF was Donkeygate? I don’t remember that one.
It's alleged that starmer left a gate open on a walk in the countryside? :openmouth:
Was it not the dodgy dealing on buying land for his wife’s donkey collection? He had some sort of parliamentary instrument that allowed him to purchase the land for 1p.
On SueGrayGate, despite Dan Hodges' and others' tumescence about the imminent publication of the government inquiry into Starmer poaching her, it's been pulled - as we know. It looks to me, though, as if they've backed off due to the formidable Gray refusing to respond to the inquiry and, I suspect, threatening Case and whoever else with lawyers. Whatever else Gray may be, she's pretty smart. The inquiry had no formal status and was outside the normal process for civil servants getting new jobs.
Just a hunch. But why else would they back off when they'd trailed the dynamite findings to their media friends as another nail in Starmer's coffin (along with currygate, donkeygate and Savilegate)? It's all a bit embarrassing for the government/Tory Party.
WTF was Donkeygate? I don’t remember that one.
It's alleged that starmer left a gate open on a walk in the countryside? :openmouth:
Was it not the dodgy dealing on buying land for his wife’s donkey collection? He had some sort of parliamentary instrument that allowed him to purchase the land for 1p.
It was his mum’s donkeys according to the ‘story’ I read. I guess the truth might never come out…
Just working out a fantasy "do fuck all for the rest of my life" strategy:
(1) Buy a 2 or 3 bed semi/flat in Sunderland (or similar) for £100k, cash. No mortgage. Most who cash out down South in their early 40s can probably do this. (2) Core expenses council tax/water/gas/electricity/broadband/TV licence etc. £450 pcm? (3) Transport/fuel - let's say £150 pcm (4) Food, drink, purchases and "fun" say £400 pcm
Basically, if you can derive £1,000pcm+ and you're mortgage free you can do whatever you like for the rest of your life, I think.
You'd probably need £400-450k of investments to draw on to generate it. Or you could do 'any' min wage job 4 days a week.
But, you do have to live in Sunderland. And it's not like you can go on adventure holidays.
Sunderland is by no means the cheapest place to live in the north-east. Somewhere like Easington probably would be. You could buy a 4 bedroom detached house there for the same price as a one bedroom flat in London.
On SueGrayGate, despite Dan Hodges' and others' tumescence about the imminent publication of the government inquiry into Starmer poaching her, it's been pulled - as we know. It looks to me, though, as if they've backed off due to the formidable Gray refusing to respond to the inquiry and, I suspect, threatening Case and whoever else with lawyers. Whatever else Gray may be, she's pretty smart. The inquiry had no formal status and was outside the normal process for civil servants getting new jobs.
Just a hunch. But why else would they back off when they'd trailed the dynamite findings to their media friends as another nail in Starmer's coffin (along with currygate, donkeygate and Savilegate)? It's all a bit embarrassing for the government/Tory Party.
WTF was Donkeygate? I don’t remember that one.
It's alleged that starmer left a gate open on a walk in the countryside? :openmouth:
Was it not the dodgy dealing on buying land for his wife’s donkey collection? He had some sort of parliamentary instrument that allowed him to purchase the land for 1p.
It was his mum’s donkeys according to the ‘story’ I read. I guess the truth might never come out…
I am sure you are right Anabob, on basis I made mine up. Though my made up one was still a more credible line of attack than the real one 😆
In terms of the council elections I expect the big story to be Lib Dem gains in the so called Blue Wall . Greens to do well and the Tories regardless of their desperate spin to do poorly . Labour to do okay but nothing earth shattering.
In terms of the council elections I expect the big story to be Lib Dem gains in the so called Blue Wall . Greens to do well and the Tories regardless of their desperate spin to do poorly . Labour to do okay but nothing earth shattering.
The reverse, I expect the LD advance to fall flat in the blue wall, indeed on current polls the Tories under Rishi are making net gains from the LDs relative to 2019 and the LDs are also leaking heavily to Labour. Labour however I expect to make significant gains from the Tories, especially in the redwall and Leave areas relative to 2019
Is someone proposing Ultravox Vienna as the new national anthem? Wires might be crossed.
This means nothing to me.
I've No Regrets - perhaps I'll be Dancing With Tears In My Eyes on Saturday and next week everything will just Fade to Grey.
I would have bet cash money that Midge Ure had left Visage for Ultravox when "Fade to Gray" came out in 1980. But according to Wiki you are right. Well done you.
On SueGrayGate, despite Dan Hodges' and others' tumescence about the imminent publication of the government inquiry into Starmer poaching her, it's been pulled - as we know. It looks to me, though, as if they've backed off due to the formidable Gray refusing to respond to the inquiry and, I suspect, threatening Case and whoever else with lawyers. Whatever else Gray may be, she's pretty smart. The inquiry had no formal status and was outside the normal process for civil servants getting new jobs.
Just a hunch. But why else would they back off when they'd trailed the dynamite findings to their media friends as another nail in Starmer's coffin (along with currygate, donkeygate and Savilegate)? It's all a bit embarrassing for the government/Tory Party.
WTF was Donkeygate? I don’t remember that one.
It's alleged that starmer left a gate open on a walk in the countryside? :openmouth:
Was it not the dodgy dealing on buying land for his wife’s donkey collection? He had some sort of parliamentary instrument that allowed him to purchase the land for 1p.
It was his mum’s donkeys according to the ‘story’ I read. I guess the truth might never come out…
I am sure you are right Anabob, on basis I made mine up. Though my made up one was still a more credible line of attack than the real one 😆
On SueGrayGate, despite Dan Hodges' and others' tumescence about the imminent publication of the government inquiry into Starmer poaching her, it's been pulled - as we know. It looks to me, though, as if they've backed off due to the formidable Gray refusing to respond to the inquiry and, I suspect, threatening Case and whoever else with lawyers. Whatever else Gray may be, she's pretty smart. The inquiry had no formal status and was outside the normal process for civil servants getting new jobs.
Just a hunch. But why else would they back off when they'd trailed the dynamite findings to their media friends as another nail in Starmer's coffin (along with currygate, donkeygate and Savilegate)? It's all a bit embarrassing for the government/Tory Party.
WTF was Donkeygate? I don’t remember that one.
It's alleged that starmer left a gate open on a walk in the countryside? :openmouth:
Was it not the dodgy dealing on buying land for his wife’s donkey collection? He had some sort of parliamentary instrument that allowed him to purchase the land for 1p.
It was his mum’s donkeys according to the ‘story’ I read. I guess the truth might never come out…
I am sure you are right Anabob, on basis I made mine up. Though my made up one was still a more credible line of attack than the real one 😆
Personally I’ve always had a soft spot for the Beatles “all you need is love” as the national anthem, especially as it rips off the French anthem at the start. You can belt it out. The lyrics are spot on.
In terms of the council elections I expect the big story to be Lib Dem gains in the so called Blue Wall . Greens to do well and the Tories regardless of their desperate spin to do poorly . Labour to do okay but nothing earth shattering.
The reverse, I expect the LD advance to fall flat in the blue wall, indeed on current polls the Tories under Rishi are making net gains from the LDs relative to 2019 and the LDs are also leaking heavily to Labour. Labour however I expect to make significant gains from the Tories, especially in the redwall and Leave areas relative to 2019
I expect a PNE of Labour 40% Con 23% Lib Dem 17% and Tory losses of 814.
The Lib Dem’s are not leaking heavily to Labour, in National polls they are going up, almost a surge, and this is at Labours expense, and in the locals the Lib Dem share and seats will be boosted by Labour votes.
I’ve got a busy couple of days, but will be back Thursday and Friday for the result and how my prediction is holding up.
In terms of the council elections I expect the big story to be Lib Dem gains in the so called Blue Wall . Greens to do well and the Tories regardless of their desperate spin to do poorly . Labour to do okay but nothing earth shattering.
The reverse, I expect the LD advance to fall flat in the blue wall, indeed on current polls the Tories under Rishi are making net gains from the LDs relative to 2019 and the LDs are also leaking heavily to Labour. Labour however I expect to make significant gains from the Tories, especially in the redwall and Leave areas relative to 2019
I expect a PNE of Labour 40% Con 23% Lib Dem 17% and Tory losses of 814.
The Lib Dem’s are not leaking heavily to Labour, in National polls they are going up, almost a surge, and this is at Labours expense, and in the locals the Lib Dem share and seats will be boosted by Labour votes.
I’ve got a busy couple of days, but will be back Thursday and Friday for the result and how my prediction is holding up.
No way will the Tories fall as low as 23%, especially as RefUK aren't standing in most council wards.
The latest Yougov has the LDs losing 37% of their 2019 voters to Starmer Labour and 9% of their 2019 voters to Sunak's Tories.
On SueGrayGate, despite Dan Hodges' and others' tumescence about the imminent publication of the government inquiry into Starmer poaching her, it's been pulled - as we know. It looks to me, though, as if they've backed off due to the formidable Gray refusing to respond to the inquiry and, I suspect, threatening Case and whoever else with lawyers. Whatever else Gray may be, she's pretty smart. The inquiry had no formal status and was outside the normal process for civil servants getting new jobs.
Just a hunch. But why else would they back off when they'd trailed the dynamite findings to their media friends as another nail in Starmer's coffin (along with currygate, donkeygate and Savilegate)? It's all a bit embarrassing for the government/Tory Party.
WTF was Donkeygate? I don’t remember that one.
Didn’t Starmer inherit a field or something? I believe there was a donkey sanctuary involved somehow!
In terms of the council elections I expect the big story to be Lib Dem gains in the so called Blue Wall . Greens to do well and the Tories regardless of their desperate spin to do poorly . Labour to do okay but nothing earth shattering.
The reverse, I expect the LD advance to fall flat in the blue wall, indeed on current polls the Tories under Rishi are making net gains from the LDs relative to 2019 and the LDs are also leaking heavily to Labour. Labour however I expect to make significant gains from the Tories, especially in the redwall and Leave areas relative to 2019
I expect a PNE of Labour 40% Con 23% Lib Dem 17% and Tory losses of 814.
The Lib Dem’s are not leaking heavily to Labour, in National polls they are going up, almost a surge, and this is at Labours expense, and in the locals the Lib Dem share and seats will be boosted by Labour votes.
I’ve got a busy couple of days, but will be back Thursday and Friday for the result and how my prediction is holding up.
No way will the Tories fall as low as 23%, especially as RefUK aren't standing in most council wards.
The latest Yougov has the LDs losing 37% of their 2019 voters to Starmer Labour and 9% of their 2019 voters to Sunak's Tories.
“No way will the Tories fall as low as 23%” Why not? Unprecedented cost of living crisis, unprecedented 3rd PM in same parliament, why not unprecedented outcome in local polls due to hard to get your vote out? Maybe you are counting on too many reform voters to make the effort to vote Tory this week? My prediction is 23% Tory PNE not on great switching to other parties, but unenthusiastic Tory voters this week.
In terms of the council elections I expect the big story to be Lib Dem gains in the so called Blue Wall . Greens to do well and the Tories regardless of their desperate spin to do poorly . Labour to do okay but nothing earth shattering.
The reverse, I expect the LD advance to fall flat in the blue wall, indeed on current polls the Tories under Rishi are making net gains from the LDs relative to 2019 and the LDs are also leaking heavily to Labour. Labour however I expect to make significant gains from the Tories, especially in the redwall and Leave areas relative to 2019
I expect a PNE of Labour 40% Con 23% Lib Dem 17% and Tory losses of 814.
The Lib Dem’s are not leaking heavily to Labour, in National polls they are going up, almost a surge, and this is at Labours expense, and in the locals the Lib Dem share and seats will be boosted by Labour votes.
I’ve got a busy couple of days, but will be back Thursday and Friday for the result and how my prediction is holding up.
No way will the Tories fall as low as 23%, especially as RefUK aren't standing in most council wards.
The latest Yougov has the LDs losing 37% of their 2019 voters to Starmer Labour and 9% of their 2019 voters to Sunak's Tories.
“No way will the Tories fall as low as 23%” Why not? Unprecedented cost of living crisis, unprecedented 3rd PM in same parliament, why not unprecedented outcome in local polls due to hard to get your vote out? Maybe you are counting on too many reform voters to make the effort to vote Tory this week? My prediction is 23% Tory PNE not on great switching to other parties, but unenthusiastic Tory voters this week.
On the latest Yougov the Tory voteshare alone is 28%, the Tory + RefUK voteshare is 35%
In terms of the council elections I expect the big story to be Lib Dem gains in the so called Blue Wall . Greens to do well and the Tories regardless of their desperate spin to do poorly . Labour to do okay but nothing earth shattering.
The reverse, I expect the LD advance to fall flat in the blue wall, indeed on current polls the Tories under Rishi are making net gains from the LDs relative to 2019 and the LDs are also leaking heavily to Labour. Labour however I expect to make significant gains from the Tories, especially in the redwall and Leave areas relative to 2019
I expect a PNE of Labour 40% Con 23% Lib Dem 17% and Tory losses of 814.
The Lib Dem’s are not leaking heavily to Labour, in National polls they are going up, almost a surge, and this is at Labours expense, and in the locals the Lib Dem share and seats will be boosted by Labour votes.
I’ve got a busy couple of days, but will be back Thursday and Friday for the result and how my prediction is holding up.
I'm encountering a few LD voters who mutter that the party "isn't doing much" and Labour might be better in principle, but the tactical argument masks that. Overall I expect them to broadly stand still, but to make some blue wall gains.
They do need a compelling theme, though. Starmer gets by with "We'll replace the Tories in Government", but as a third party they need to stand out. Embracing Rejoin is the obvious one - support for it on paper is three times their size, and nobody else is going anywhere near it.
In terms of the council elections I expect the big story to be Lib Dem gains in the so called Blue Wall . Greens to do well and the Tories regardless of their desperate spin to do poorly . Labour to do okay but nothing earth shattering.
The reverse, I expect the LD advance to fall flat in the blue wall, indeed on current polls the Tories under Rishi are making net gains from the LDs relative to 2019 and the LDs are also leaking heavily to Labour. Labour however I expect to make significant gains from the Tories, especially in the redwall and Leave areas relative to 2019
I expect a PNE of Labour 40% Con 23% Lib Dem 17% and Tory losses of 814.
The Lib Dem’s are not leaking heavily to Labour, in National polls they are going up, almost a surge, and this is at Labours expense, and in the locals the Lib Dem share and seats will be boosted by Labour votes.
I’ve got a busy couple of days, but will be back Thursday and Friday for the result and how my prediction is holding up.
No way will the Tories fall as low as 23%, especially as RefUK aren't standing in most council wards.
The latest Yougov has the LDs losing 37% of their 2019 voters to Starmer Labour and 9% of their 2019 voters to Sunak's Tories.
“No way will the Tories fall as low as 23%” Why not? Unprecedented cost of living crisis, unprecedented 3rd PM in same parliament, why not unprecedented outcome in local polls due to hard to get your vote out? Maybe you are counting on too many reform voters to make the effort to vote Tory this week? My prediction is 23% Tory PNE not on great switching to other parties, but unenthusiastic Tory voters this week.
If a Tory supporter was predicting 23% I might take it seriously, but it's too convenient for non-Tories to be forecasting such a low number for them. But I'll acknowledge my mistake if they do get 23% on Friday.
On SueGrayGate, despite Dan Hodges' and others' tumescence about the imminent publication of the government inquiry into Starmer poaching her, it's been pulled - as we know. It looks to me, though, as if they've backed off due to the formidable Gray refusing to respond to the inquiry and, I suspect, threatening Case and whoever else with lawyers. Whatever else Gray may be, she's pretty smart. The inquiry had no formal status and was outside the normal process for civil servants getting new jobs.
Just a hunch. But why else would they back off when they'd trailed the dynamite findings to their media friends as another nail in Starmer's coffin (along with currygate, donkeygate and Savilegate)? It's all a bit embarrassing for the government/Tory Party.
Just a hunch as you said.
It looks like, from the front of tomorrows papers, the Conservative Party wanted to go further but Simon Case has blocked them. A decision has been made of the report findings, but not released.
nothing has been released today to prove “Gray in PartyGate team as Starmer Talks Began” headline in yesterdays telegraph which now looks exaggerated even libellous and leaves the paper open to being sued - would that be what both the Tories and the telegraph want, or leave the paper angry the Tories let them down with a poor briefing?
If there is nothing that can support that newspaper headline, there’s no grounds for an unusually long period of gardening leave. Sue will be working for Starmer before the end of the year, having been seen to have won this tussle.
Simon Case battle with the politicians about what they could and couldn’t say today, does seem to be the only interesting focus left.
IMO Case has been packing for weeks anyway, his departure isn’t particularly because he took hard civil service line against Tories on Graygate.
The Telegraph has banged Starmer to rights. Appointing Gray they claim is proof of Sir Softie's poor judgement. Poor judgement? Is this the same Daily Telegraph that used to be the Boris Johnson fanzine?
The last couple of months has seen the Telegraph revert to full Tory fanboy mode. Not sure why: same old editor sfaict; same old proprietors.
On SueGrayGate, despite Dan Hodges' and others' tumescence about the imminent publication of the government inquiry into Starmer poaching her, it's been pulled - as we know. It looks to me, though, as if they've backed off due to the formidable Gray refusing to respond to the inquiry and, I suspect, threatening Case and whoever else with lawyers. Whatever else Gray may be, she's pretty smart. The inquiry had no formal status and was outside the normal process for civil servants getting new jobs.
Just a hunch. But why else would they back off when they'd trailed the dynamite findings to their media friends as another nail in Starmer's coffin (along with currygate, donkeygate and Savilegate)? It's all a bit embarrassing for the government/Tory Party.
Just a hunch as you said.
It looks like, from the front of tomorrows papers, the Conservative Party wanted to go further but Simon Case has blocked them. A decision has been made of the report findings, but not released.
nothing has been released today to prove “Gray in PartyGate team as Starmer Talks Began” headline in yesterdays telegraph which now looks exaggerated even libellous and leaves the paper open to being sued - would that be what both the Tories and the telegraph want, or leave the paper angry the Tories let them down with a poor briefing?
If there is nothing that can support that newspaper headline, there’s no grounds for an unusually long period of gardening leave. Sue will be working for Starmer before the end of the year, having been seen to have won this tussle.
Simon Case battle with the politicians about what they could and couldn’t say today, does seem to be the only interesting focus left.
IMO Case has been packing for weeks anyway, his departure isn’t particularly because he took hard civil service line against Tories on Graygate.
The Telegraph has banged Starmer to rights. Appointing Gray they claim is proof of Sir Softie's poor judgement. Poor judgement? Is this the same Daily Telegraph that used to be the Boris Johnson fanzine?
The last couple of months has seen the Telegraph revert to full Tory fanboy mode. Not sure why: same old editor sfaict; same old proprietors.
From that article it looks as if it was Stella Creasy who went to the police complaining about the trolls, rather than vice versa. There are important questions about campaigning, free speech and hate speech but it's not clear the Spectator raises them. The article reads as if it was written, or at least planned, some time back and kept till Creasy provided the hook on which to hang it, but I'm not sure it really fits.
Nor do I see the video as "toe-curling" like some of Matt Hancock's, as the article suggests. It is witty and, to my amateur eye at least, well edited. Stella Creasy might once have been a contender for Labour leadership but she apparently chose a different course and sits on the back benches despite being more engaging than some of Labour's shadow ministers.
We were assured that Gray had acted improperly in interviewing with Starmer, but what seems to have happened is that Case went all in against Gray in an act of malice; that the proceedings of the supposedly independent inquiry was shared with the Tory attack dogs to smear Keir, and that now Case has got cold feet because the charges don’t stick.
Case should never have been appointed. Sunak’s shameless attack dogs are only damaging themselves. Sunak has learned nothing.
And Big G needs to stop believing everything he reads in the Daily Mail, and regurgitating it breathlessly on here.
On SueGrayGate, despite Dan Hodges' and others' tumescence about the imminent publication of the government inquiry into Starmer poaching her, it's been pulled - as we know. It looks to me, though, as if they've backed off due to the formidable Gray refusing to respond to the inquiry and, I suspect, threatening Case and whoever else with lawyers. Whatever else Gray may be, she's pretty smart. The inquiry had no formal status and was outside the normal process for civil servants getting new jobs.
Just a hunch. But why else would they back off when they'd trailed the dynamite findings to their media friends as another nail in Starmer's coffin (along with currygate, donkeygate and Savilegate)? It's all a bit embarrassing for the government/Tory Party.
Just a hunch as you said.
It looks like, from the front of tomorrows papers, the Conservative Party wanted to go further but Simon Case has blocked them. A decision has been made of the report findings, but not released.
nothing has been released today to prove “Gray in PartyGate team as Starmer Talks Began” headline in yesterdays telegraph which now looks exaggerated even libellous and leaves the paper open to being sued - would that be what both the Tories and the telegraph want, or leave the paper angry the Tories let them down with a poor briefing?
If there is nothing that can support that newspaper headline, there’s no grounds for an unusually long period of gardening leave. Sue will be working for Starmer before the end of the year, having been seen to have won this tussle.
Simon Case battle with the politicians about what they could and couldn’t say today, does seem to be the only interesting focus left.
IMO Case has been packing for weeks anyway, his departure isn’t particularly because he took hard civil service line against Tories on Graygate.
The Telegraph has banged Starmer to rights. Appointing Gray they claim is proof of Sir Softie's poor judgement. Poor judgement? Is this the same Daily Telegraph that used to be the Boris Johnson fanzine?
The last couple of months has seen the Telegraph revert to full Tory fanboy mode. Not sure why: same old editor sfaict; same old proprietors.
Blue fear of Keir is rampant there as here.
I salute your ability to maintain a clear-eyed view of British politics from several time zones away.
Comments
Broad, sunlight uplands where together can royally frolic, in amity if not harmony, the Wack & the Woke.
Your transitory principles are making the rest of us dizzy…
https://www.thenational.scot/news/23495913.alex-salmond-confirms-wont-go-kings-coronation/
Indeed it was in decline in every sense from the 1910s until roughly the 1990s - a record that is hard to beat in the region. Population, economy, the lot. Then came the nineties, neoliberalism, EU membership and mass migration from the Balkans. Result: a provincial town in imperial clothes forced to modernise at speed. The famous Vienna social housing miracle was largely a function of population collapse; housing a growing population has meant low rents for the older generation and the better-connected kids of the old Viennese, and the standard Western high-rent outcome for everyone else.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12035697/Bud-Light-sales-26-PERCENT-compared-year-ago-amid-Dylan-Mulvaney-backlash.html
It is only getting worse.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-65399515
God save the King on the other hand sounds like a dirge, and doesn't exactly speak to an increasingly unreligious population.
mamim-milla! Sound the Boob Alert! Breaking News >>> Tits! coming up a big update
Nothing you can sing that can't be sung
Nothing you can say, but you can learn how to play the game
It's easy
Nothing you can make that can't be made
No one you can save that can't be saved
Nothing you can do, but you can learn how to be you in time
It's easy
Just a hunch. But why else would they back off when they'd trailed the dynamite findings to their media friends as another nail in Starmer's coffin (along with currygate, donkeygate and Savilegate)? It's all a bit embarrassing for the government/Tory Party.
It looks like, from the front of tomorrows papers, the Conservative Party wanted to go further but Simon Case has blocked them. A decision has been made of the report findings, but not released.
nothing has been released today to prove “Gray in PartyGate team as Starmer Talks Began” headline in yesterdays telegraph which now looks exaggerated even libellous and leaves the paper open to being sued - would that be what both the Tories and the telegraph want, or leave the paper angry the Tories let them down with a poor briefing?
If there is nothing that can support that newspaper headline, there’s no grounds for an unusually long period of gardening leave. Sue will be working for Starmer before the end of the year, having been seen to have won this tussle.
Simon Case battle with the politicians about what they could and couldn’t say today, does seem to be the only interesting focus left.
IMO Case has been packing for weeks anyway, his departure isn’t particularly because he took hard civil service line against Tories on Graygate.
The golden age for own goals
Did you ever ride it?
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/george-osborne-it-s-time-to-ban-smoking-in-the-uk-times-health-commission-f3d8k0xxt
God Save the Queen/King/Prince Harry is rubbish.
"Mooooooooooooo(n)!" indeed.
"I'm 'Enery the Eighth, I Am!"
To push it further and lose, just hands over a bigger win doesn’t it?
If TSE was writing a header on this latest development I’m sure he’d use the phrase, despite the promising build up it was “all piss and wind”
But that has to be after the locals because it will fill the media with partygate pictures.
The story goes that Keir Starmer’s mum owns a donkey sanctuary that doesn’t have planning permission. The law is an ass etc etc
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11550035/Sir-Keir-Starmer-rakes-selling-green-belt-land-400k.html
The Lib Dem’s are not leaking heavily to Labour, in National polls they are going up, almost a surge, and this is at Labours expense, and in the locals the Lib Dem share and seats will be boosted by Labour votes.
I’ve got a busy couple of days, but will be back Thursday and Friday for the result and how my prediction is holding up.
The latest Yougov has the LDs losing 37% of their 2019 voters to Starmer Labour and 9% of their 2019 voters to Sunak's Tories.
Only 4% of 2019 Labour voters and 4% of 2019 Tory voters are voting LD now though
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/xgvcs0jjcc/TheTimes_VI_AdHoc_230419_W_.pdf
There you have it. Interior Minister, who apparently speaks very often these days to fill Erdoğan's absence, says May 14 Elections ''is a coup attempt by the West''
*
if Erdoğan loses the elections you know it is the coup.
https://twitter.com/WashingtonPoint/status/1651897102509694976?cxt=HHwWgICzibTq2-wtAAAA
Trump 57% (+4)
DeSantis 22% (-6)
Pence 6% (+1)
Haley 4% (-1)
Cruz 3% (+1)
Cheney 2%
Ramaswamy 1% (+1)
T. Scott 1% (-1)
Christie 0%
Pompeo 0% (-1)
.
Head-2-Head:
Trump 60% (+3)
DeSantis 31% (-4)
.
@premisedata
, 583 RV
https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1653538926752145414?s=20
They do need a compelling theme, though. Starmer gets by with "We'll replace the Tories in Government", but as a third party they need to stand out. Embracing Rejoin is the obvious one - support for it on paper is three times their size, and nobody else is going anywhere near it.
"Joanna Williams
Where was Stella Creasy when other mums were being harassed?" (£)
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/where-was-stella-creasy-when-other-mums-were-being-harassed-for-their-views/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIA4ogChCcA
Nor do I see the video as "toe-curling" like some of Matt Hancock's, as the article suggests. It is witty and, to my amateur eye at least, well edited. Stella Creasy might once have been a contender for Labour leadership but she apparently chose a different course and sits on the back benches despite being more engaging than some of Labour's shadow ministers.
We were assured that Gray had acted improperly in interviewing with Starmer, but what seems to have happened is that Case went all in against Gray in an act of malice; that the proceedings of the supposedly independent inquiry was shared with the Tory attack dogs to smear Keir, and that now Case has got cold feet because the charges don’t stick.
Case should never have been appointed.
Sunak’s shameless attack dogs are only damaging themselves.
Sunak has learned nothing.
And Big G needs to stop believing everything he reads in the Daily Mail, and regurgitating it breathlessly on here.
An inspiration to the rest of us!