I don't think the Rwanda stuff matters any more, whatever happens. Everybody's bored rigid with it, even those in favour. So even if a few flights take off, I don't expect it to shift the dial. It's a sign of Sunak's hopelessness that he's invested so heavily in it.
The purpose of Rwanda was to be seen to have a muscular "plan" for illegal immigration and to allow them to taunt those opposed to the idea with "what would you do?" £200 million to an African despot with a carefully crafted PR image was an acceptable price for that narrative and political advantage. It worked as intended, as we saw from comments by some on this board.
Rwanda was never meant to solve anything, which suggests those proposing it weren't serious about implementation. But somehow the Sunak government ended up fully invested. A smarter politician would have quietly let the proposal lapse once the political goodness had been extracted from it. Rwanda is now just an albatross.
The problem is, as someone pointed out in a different context recently, accusation is confession. All the Tory taunting of Labour for not having an alternative plan to Rwanda, also showed that they didn't have an alternative plan to Rwanda. So how were they ever going to move on from it to some other way of dealing with the issue?
I hate to interrupt this glorious debate between two people who completely agree with each other, but Rwanda doesn't need to take people at the rate they're currently arriving in a sustained fashion, because the minute it starts taking people, they will stop arriving. Nobody wants to go to Rwanda. They're coming to the UK because they have a ludicrously high chance of making a successful asylum claim here vs. anywhere else in Europe. If that becomes a ludicrously high chance of getting sent to Rwanda, the flow stops.
Furthermore, when people are taken to Rwanda, they won't stay there; they will abscond. That means even more space.
Keep taking the pills…
If you think people are going to be motivated to cross to the UK by dinghy if they're going to be sent to Rwanda for their efforts, perhaps you should seek out some stronger medication.
How many are you sending to Rwanda?
What’s your math on the % chance of one of them actually getting sent to Rwanda, which would be the key element of any deterrent?
Maths.
... and yours is?
I'm not confident that any planes will leave the ground. My point was that if they did, it wouldn't take long for the policy to prove effective. I'd say an initial 1000 in quick succession would be enough to slow boat crossings to a dribble of the insane.
People who willing to risk their lives crossing the channel in a small inflatable will pay zero attention to the prospect of being flown to Rwanda. Their actions are not guided by logic or risk.
They're not motivated by fleeing certain death though are they, or they'd be claiming asylum in France, and successfully so. Let's not bullshit here.
I didn't say they were. I have no doubt most are economic migrants. That still doesn't mean Rwanda will dissuade them. What's your point?
Presumably you accept that if 100% of boat people were instantly flown to Rwanda that would stop the boats overnight. Because of course it would
In which case you accept the principle - so all we are talking about is the percentage required so as to constitute a deterrent
However this is all a massive distraction by both sides. Far more important than illegal migration is legal migration. 1.4m people in two years. A truly stupefying statistic and a situation - if it endures - which will culturally transform the country in a way no one ever requested
The Tories deserve to die for this failure alone
Maybe voters know the country is full, which is why we pay £1Trillion but they can’t see a dentist or doctor and the schools and hospitals have fallen apart, but don’t actually see 1.2M people, other than a statistic on papers and news every six months. But they do see people of colour from far away, who could be of any persuasion and intention, so also a security issue, pulling up on beaches - and it then reminds the voters the country is full, which is why we pay £1Trillion but they can’t see a dentist or doctor and the schools and hospitals have fallen apart, so they want those boat crossings stopped. Which is the reason why the government have a policy and podium with STOP THE BOATS on it - because like you said, it’s irrational otherwise to have STOP THE BOATS slogan, and not STOP THE 1.4M LEGAL MIGRANTS WE HAVE LET IN THE LAST TWO YEARS slogan
^ This. And the fact STOP THE 1.4M LEGAL MIGRANTS WE HAVE LET IN THE LAST TWO YEARS won’t actually fit on the podium.
On the subject of the housing predicament in London - I spent time with some friends (brothers) recently who are both earning around £30-£40k and living in London. They are hitting their early 40's and still in houseshares, so living the same life as when I knew them 20 years ago. Their parents are artists and have lived in London for their entire life owning a large townhouse which, whilst in a state of being run down, is worth well over a million, plus several other properties that they have gained through inheritance around the country. However they appear not to have made any effort at all to help their sons get a stable long term housing situation. I am not sure any of them understand about mortgages and interest rates, but I think if my friend is going to buy a flat, it has to be now, on a 25 year mortgage. I guess they will be ok in the end and their situation is better than most but as an outsider looking in it seems infuriating.
When their parents die they can inherit enough to buy outright a house mortgage free, so why bother with a mortgage now they may as well just keep house sharing and cheaper rent
Hopefully. Although a lot of people with wealth tied up in the house they live in will borrow against it to maintain their lifestyle in retirement (or their care requirements)
Average residential care costs are £4k a month. Given their parents estate is over £1 million in one townhouse plus other properties both parents would need residential care for at least 20 years for them not to inherit enough to buy at least an average priced house outright each
Assuming they own all those properties outright and aren't leveraged to the hilt.
It says they own the £1 million townhouse plus inherited other properties too.
So no need for either to get a mortgage, just rent and then buy a house outright each once they inherit
What, 20, 30, 40 years of pissing rent money down the drain?
Yeah, there is that. But also I just think by the age of 40 it would be good idea to buy a property. He can't stay in houseshares until he is 60 whilst waiting for an inheritance, that isn't a good plan.
Waiting for an inheritance isn't a good plan for anyone at all. Its absolutely crazy.
You can easily be 70+ and still have living parents nowadays.
Everyone should be able to support themselves and buy their own home via working themselves. Inheritance should never be a priority for anyone.
My 73 yo father-in-law was carer for his 95 yo mother till just before Christmas. The only reason he isn't any more is because he just died. He never got a quarter share of that bungalow in North Shields.
I don't think the Rwanda stuff matters any more, whatever happens. Everybody's bored rigid with it, even those in favour. So even if a few flights take off, I don't expect it to shift the dial. It's a sign of Sunak's hopelessness that he's invested so heavily in it.
The purpose of Rwanda was to be seen to have a muscular "plan" for illegal immigration and to allow them to taunt those opposed to the idea with "what would you do?" £200 million to an African despot with a carefully crafted PR image was an acceptable price for that narrative and political advantage. It worked as intended, as we saw from comments by some on this board.
Rwanda was never meant to solve anything, which suggests those proposing it weren't serious about implementation. But somehow the Sunak government ended up fully invested. A smarter politician would have quietly let the proposal lapse once the political goodness had been extracted from it. Rwanda is now just an albatross.
The problem is, as someone pointed out in a different context recently, accusation is confession. All the Tory taunting of Labour for not having an alternative plan to Rwanda, also showed that they didn't have an alternative plan to Rwanda. So how were they ever going to move on from it to some other way of dealing with the issue?
I hate to interrupt this glorious debate between two people who completely agree with each other, but Rwanda doesn't need to take people at the rate they're currently arriving in a sustained fashion, because the minute it starts taking people, they will stop arriving. Nobody wants to go to Rwanda. They're coming to the UK because they have a ludicrously high chance of making a successful asylum claim here vs. anywhere else in Europe. If that becomes a ludicrously high chance of getting sent to Rwanda, the flow stops.
Furthermore, when people are taken to Rwanda, they won't stay there; they will abscond. That means even more space.
Keep taking the pills…
If you think people are going to be motivated to cross to the UK by dinghy if they're going to be sent to Rwanda for their efforts, perhaps you should seek out some stronger medication.
How many are you sending to Rwanda?
What’s your math on the % chance of one of them actually getting sent to Rwanda, which would be the key element of any deterrent?
Maths.
... and yours is?
I'm not confident that any planes will leave the ground. My point was that if they did, it wouldn't take long for the policy to prove effective. I'd say an initial 1000 in quick succession would be enough to slow boat crossings to a dribble of the insane.
People who willing to risk their lives crossing the channel in a small inflatable will pay zero attention to the prospect of being flown to Rwanda. Their actions are not guided by logic or risk.
They're not motivated by fleeing certain death though are they, or they'd be claiming asylum in France, and successfully so. Let's not bullshit here.
I didn't say they were. I have no doubt most are economic migrants. That still doesn't mean Rwanda will dissuade them. What's your point?
Presumably you accept that if 100% of boat people were instantly flown to Rwanda that would stop the boats overnight. Because of course it would
In which case you accept the principle - so all we are talking about is the percentage required so as to constitute a deterrent
However this is all a massive distraction by both sides. Far more important than illegal migration is legal migration. 1.4m people in two years. A truly stupefying statistic and a situation - if it endures - which will culturally transform the country in a way no one ever requested
The Tories deserve to die for this failure alone
Maybe voters know the country is full, which is why we pay £1Trillion but they can’t see a dentist or doctor and the schools and hospitals have fallen apart, but don’t actually see 1.2M people, other than a statistic on papers and news every six months. But they do see people of colour from far away, who could be of any persuasion and intention, so also a security issue, pulling up on beaches - and it then reminds the voters the country is full, which is why we pay £1Trillion but they can’t see a dentist or doctor and the schools and hospitals have fallen apart, so they want those boat crossings stopped. Which is the reason why the government have a policy and podium with STOP THE BOATS on it - because like you said, it’s irrational otherwise to have STOP THE BOATS slogan, and not STOP THE 1.4M LEGAL MIGRANTS WE HAVE LET IN THE LAST TWO YEARS slogan
^ This. And the fact STOP THE 1.4M LEGAL MIGRANTS WE HAVE LET IN THE LAST TWO YEARS won’t actually fit on the podium.
Hope this helps.
I have a cunning plan to solve the country’s capacity problem. Send 1.4 million pensioners to Rwanda.
Still 130 short of the 180+ Tory MPs they need to oust Sunak in a VONC
Both May and Johnson won their VONCs, but were gone within a couple of months as I recall.
Any VONC is career ending.
True. And see also the overthrow of IDS in 2003. Many Tory MPs were swearing blind he had their full support (including Michael Howard, if memory serves), but whaddayaknow, he lost the vote. That's what's likely to happen this time too. If there's a VONC, Sunak will get crushed in it. That's if he doesn't resign when the Old Lady visits him. The only issue that will be settled by whether it's 52 letters or a much higher number will be whether he even bothers staying on for the vote. Then Penny will call a GE for 2 May and the leftwing figure that the Tory campaign demonises the most won't be Keir Starmer or George Galloway - it will be Sadiq Khan. In short, they will play the London card. And they will probably keep their majority. I have placed stakes accordingly.
If ever there was a post that started well before rapidly spiralling into insanity, this is it.
The Tories will "play the London card."? It's quite possible they don't have any cards but they certainly don't have a 'London card' to play.
I'm sure voters around here are dying to say "yes my rent/mortgage has shot up so I was going to vote against the government, but Sadiq Khan ..."
Its the most insane argument I've ever read. I've never heard a single person IRL, of any particular stripe or none ever bring up Sadiq Khan. Why would they?
You’ve not been paying any attention at all.
Khan cost Labour Uxbridge. And so the government realised Khan could cost Labour the whole General Election. From that moment on the Tories have bet the house on Khan costing Labour the election, from war on cars to Hamas rallies destroying British democracy, Khan is at the centre of every reason not to vote Labour.
Have you not heard Tory MPs in northern seats more than happy to use the “k” word? Why are they doing that do you think, if it’s pointless.
Either they have it wrong, or you.
Where in the Red Wall is Uxbridge?
I've driven regularly all over the Northwest but I've never seen Uxbridge. Is it off the M6, the M56, the M63? I khan't find it on my map.
🙄 “ Have you not heard Tory MPs in northern seats more than happy to use the “k” word? Why are they doing that do you think, if it’s pointless.”
No I haven't. Cos nobody would know who they were talking about.
YES YOU HAVE!
Sorry for shouting, but the 30 pennies havn’t dropped yet.
Dixiedean and I are both from the Red Wall, from different sides of the political spectrum, and we're both telling you the same thing.
Not sure where you're from, maybe London or cloud cuckoo land, if you think voters here give a shit about Khan.
That’s not the point we are making here. You said Tories up North don’t mention Khan, but we know they do, and we know the reason why.
They don't.
By coincidence, I've got a leaflet from the Tories through my door today. I haven't recycled it yet, so I can tell you what it does actually mention.
Does mention (and I'm quoting here, not agreeing with them): Local representation Cleaning up local area Schools Police United Utilities Road Safety ASB Road Signage Pot Holes Getting information out, where its needed Repairs to steps, paths and bridges Supporting local business Charity Events Working for residents.
Oh. You're talking about the Southern MP who has been suspended from the Tory Party? Well. The Conservative Party is not short of folk talking absolute mince about all kinds of crap that has no relevance to the voter. I repeat. I doubt one in twenty up here, to be generous, would know who the Mayor of London is. I dispute 1 in 100 would give much of a fuck about it.
Look at what I said.
Khan cost Labour Uxbridge. And so the government realised Khan could cost Labour the whole General Election. From that moment on the Tories have bet the house on Khan costing Labour the election, from war on cars to Hamas rallies destroying British democracy, Khan is at the centre of every reason not to vote Labour.
Look at what you are saying.
The MPs and election team and advisors around Sunak, and all the money they are on, have got it wrong. And you know better than them?
This weeks big policy announcement has those intimating marches in London at the heart of it. Can you not see this?
For those too young to remember the 1997 election, hopefully this year will be your chance to experience the same joy as us old farts did back when we knew that things could only get better.
And of course, we will then get the buzz for a second time.
I hope.
No, you won’t
The country is too fucked for that haze of optimistic elation a la 1997. And Starmer is not Blair
It will be more like a painful puking after way too much vodka. Some fairly instant relief as the poison is purged - but you’ve still got the hangover to come
It isn't us winning that gives me a buzz. It is the Tories being defeated that matters.
Quite frankly I'll be mildly disappointed by a Tory defeat. I want to see them obliterated.
If you look at the polling before the 1997 general election there were frequently polls that put Tory support above 30%. The last such poll now, was in June 2023.
The Tories are on course to be obliterated. Things are so much worse for them now than they were in 1997.
They didn’t have Reform to squeeze back then though. The referendum party only ever managed pitiful polling scores. Even if only half of the current 12-13% Ref vote returns hold come the election that gets them back comfortably into 1997+ numbers.
Trouble is. The polling evidence isn't that anywhere near a half are planning to do that. And a non trivial number are suggesting that they are more likely to vote Labour or Lib Dem (i.e., anti-Tory). Which needs to be subtracted from the one's who do. I was always convinced the Tories would get 32-33% at a minimum. I'm beginning to wonder if they'll break the Brown record for lowest percentage for a sitting government. They simply don't seem capable of anything other than repeating patterns of poor choices of behaviour.
I don't think the Rwanda stuff matters any more, whatever happens. Everybody's bored rigid with it, even those in favour. So even if a few flights take off, I don't expect it to shift the dial. It's a sign of Sunak's hopelessness that he's invested so heavily in it.
The purpose of Rwanda was to be seen to have a muscular "plan" for illegal immigration and to allow them to taunt those opposed to the idea with "what would you do?" £200 million to an African despot with a carefully crafted PR image was an acceptable price for that narrative and political advantage. It worked as intended, as we saw from comments by some on this board.
Rwanda was never meant to solve anything, which suggests those proposing it weren't serious about implementation. But somehow the Sunak government ended up fully invested. A smarter politician would have quietly let the proposal lapse once the political goodness had been extracted from it. Rwanda is now just an albatross.
The problem is, as someone pointed out in a different context recently, accusation is confession. All the Tory taunting of Labour for not having an alternative plan to Rwanda, also showed that they didn't have an alternative plan to Rwanda. So how were they ever going to move on from it to some other way of dealing with the issue?
I hate to interrupt this glorious debate between two people who completely agree with each other, but Rwanda doesn't need to take people at the rate they're currently arriving in a sustained fashion, because the minute it starts taking people, they will stop arriving. Nobody wants to go to Rwanda. They're coming to the UK because they have a ludicrously high chance of making a successful asylum claim here vs. anywhere else in Europe. If that becomes a ludicrously high chance of getting sent to Rwanda, the flow stops.
Furthermore, when people are taken to Rwanda, they won't stay there; they will abscond. That means even more space.
Keep taking the pills…
If you think people are going to be motivated to cross to the UK by dinghy if they're going to be sent to Rwanda for their efforts, perhaps you should seek out some stronger medication.
How many are you sending to Rwanda?
What’s your math on the % chance of one of them actually getting sent to Rwanda, which would be the key element of any deterrent?
Maths.
... and yours is?
I'm not confident that any planes will leave the ground. My point was that if they did, it wouldn't take long for the policy to prove effective. I'd say an initial 1000 in quick succession would be enough to slow boat crossings to a dribble of the insane.
People who willing to risk their lives crossing the channel in a small inflatable will pay zero attention to the prospect of being flown to Rwanda. Their actions are not guided by logic or risk.
They're not motivated by fleeing certain death though are they, or they'd be claiming asylum in France, and successfully so. Let's not bullshit here.
I didn't say they were. I have no doubt most are economic migrants. That still doesn't mean Rwanda will dissuade them. What's your point?
Presumably you accept that if 100% of boat people were instantly flown to Rwanda that would stop the boats overnight. Because of course it would
In which case you accept the principle - so all we are talking about is the percentage required so as to constitute a deterrent
However this is all a massive distraction by both sides. Far more important than illegal migration is legal migration. 1.4m people in two years. A truly stupefying statistic and a situation - if it endures - which will culturally transform the country in a way no one ever requested
The Tories deserve to die for this failure alone
Maybe voters know the country is full, which is why we pay £1Trillion but they can’t see a dentist or doctor and the schools and hospitals have fallen apart, but don’t actually see 1.2M people, other than a statistic on papers and news every six months. But they do see people of colour from far away, who could be of any persuasion and intention, so also a security issue, pulling up on beaches - and it then reminds the voters the country is full, which is why we pay £1Trillion but they can’t see a dentist or doctor and the schools and hospitals have fallen apart, so they want those boat crossings stopped. Which is the reason why the government have a policy and podium with STOP THE BOATS on it - because like you said, it’s irrational otherwise to have STOP THE BOATS slogan, and not STOP THE 1.4M LEGAL MIGRANTS WE HAVE LET IN THE LAST TWO YEARS slogan
^ This. And the fact STOP THE 1.4M LEGAL MIGRANTS WE HAVE LET IN THE LAST TWO YEARS won’t actually fit on the podium.
Hope this helps.
When are they to announce the 2nd of May again?
Tomorrow or Tuesday. At 1038 in the morning.
This is going to be a looooong week.
Not Wednesday? Before PMQs? 😈
I hope so - I'll be at PMQs in the public gallery this Wednesday!
I am not sure if you're allowed to take popcorn in though.
For those too young to remember the 1997 election, hopefully this year will be your chance to experience the same joy as us old farts did back when we knew that things could only get better.
And of course, we will then get the buzz for a second time.
I hope.
No, you won’t
The country is too fucked for that haze of optimistic elation a la 1997. And Starmer is not Blair
It will be more like a painful puking after way too much vodka. Some fairly instant relief as the poison is purged - but you’ve still got the hangover to come
It isn't us winning that gives me a buzz. It is the Tories being defeated that matters.
Quite frankly I'll be mildly disappointed by a Tory defeat. I want to see them obliterated.
If you look at the polling before the 1997 general election there were frequently polls that put Tory support above 30%. The last such poll now, was in June 2023.
The Tories are on course to be obliterated. Things are so much worse for them now than they were in 1997.
They didn’t have Reform to squeeze back then though. The referendum party only ever managed pitiful polling scores. Even if only half of the current 12-13% Ref vote returns hold come the election that gets them back comfortably into 1997+ numbers.
I think, on average, half the Reform share added to the Tory share still leaves the Tories below 30%.
For those too young to remember the 1997 election, hopefully this year will be your chance to experience the same joy as us old farts did back when we knew that things could only get better.
And of course, we will then get the buzz for a second time.
I hope.
No, you won’t
The country is too fucked for that haze of optimistic elation a la 1997. And Starmer is not Blair
It will be more like a painful puking after way too much vodka. Some fairly instant relief as the poison is purged - but you’ve still got the hangover to come
It isn't us winning that gives me a buzz. It is the Tories being defeated that matters.
Quite frankly I'll be mildly disappointed by a Tory defeat. I want to see them obliterated.
If you look at the polling before the 1997 general election there were frequently polls that put Tory support above 30%. The last such poll now, was in June 2023.
The Tories are on course to be obliterated. Things are so much worse for them now than they were in 1997.
They didn’t have Reform to squeeze back then though. The referendum party only ever managed pitiful polling scores. Even if only half of the current 12-13% Ref vote returns hold come the election that gets them back comfortably into 1997+ numbers.
I totally agree. Yours is post of the day for me. The Tories are not in enough polling trouble to cancel the plan for May 2nd. They are not in as much voter trouble people are brainwashing themselves and each other into thinking.
On the subject of the housing predicament in London - I spent time with some friends (brothers) recently who are both earning around £30-£40k and living in London. They are hitting their early 40's and still in houseshares, so living the same life as when I knew them 20 years ago. Their parents are artists and have lived in London for their entire life owning a large townhouse which, whilst in a state of being run down, is worth well over a million, plus several other properties that they have gained through inheritance around the country. However they appear not to have made any effort at all to help their sons get a stable long term housing situation. I am not sure any of them understand about mortgages and interest rates, but I think if my friend is going to buy a flat, it has to be now, on a 25 year mortgage. I guess they will be ok in the end and their situation is better than most but as an outsider looking in it seems infuriating.
When their parents die they can inherit enough to buy outright a house mortgage free, so why bother with a mortgage now they may as well just keep house sharing and cheaper rent
Hopefully. Although a lot of people with wealth tied up in the house they live in will borrow against it to maintain their lifestyle in retirement (or their care requirements)
Average residential care costs are £4k a month. Given their parents estate is over £1 million in one townhouse plus other properties both parents would need residential care for at least 20 years for them not to inherit enough to buy at least an average priced house outright each
Assuming they own all those properties outright and aren't leveraged to the hilt.
It says they own the £1 million townhouse plus inherited other properties too.
So no need for either to get a mortgage, just rent and then buy a house outright each once they inherit
What, 20, 30, 40 years of pissing rent money down the drain?
Yeah, there is that. But also I just think by the age of 40 it would be good idea to buy a property. He can't stay in houseshares until he is 60 whilst waiting for an inheritance, that isn't a good plan.
Waiting for an inheritance isn't a good plan for anyone at all. Its absolutely crazy.
You can easily be 70+ and still have living parents nowadays.
Everyone should be able to support themselves and buy their own home via working themselves. Inheritance should never be a priority for anyone.
My 73 yo father-in-law was carer for his 95 yo mother till just before Christmas. The only reason he isn't any more is because he just died. He never got a quarter share of that bungalow in North Shields.
King Charles inherited when his mother died. By the time she died, he was already 73.
What normal person should wait until they're 73 for their parents to die before their own life begins.
Its utterly preposterous.
Just get a job.
They aren't normal people, their parents have well over £1 million of assets.
They also have jobs on average salaries
Jobs on average salaries should be sufficient to buy an average house from your own salary, in a timely fashion without an inheritance.
If its not, we need to build more houses.
They aren't and likely never will be in London even if we concrete over every park and green space there. As it is a global city to rival NYC or Paris with global demand except in a few Outer areas like Dagenham or Bexley.
If Londoners on average salary want to buy property then they need to move out of London where it is cheaper
For those too young to remember the 1997 election, hopefully this year will be your chance to experience the same joy as us old farts did back when we knew that things could only get better.
And of course, we will then get the buzz for a second time.
I hope.
No, you won’t
The country is too fucked for that haze of optimistic elation a la 1997. And Starmer is not Blair
It will be more like a painful puking after way too much vodka. Some fairly instant relief as the poison is purged - but you’ve still got the hangover to come
It isn't us winning that gives me a buzz. It is the Tories being defeated that matters.
Quite frankly I'll be mildly disappointed by a Tory defeat. I want to see them obliterated.
If you look at the polling before the 1997 general election there were frequently polls that put Tory support above 30%. The last such poll now, was in June 2023.
The Tories are on course to be obliterated. Things are so much worse for them now than they were in 1997.
They didn’t have Reform to squeeze back then though. The referendum party only ever managed pitiful polling scores. Even if only half of the current 12-13% Ref vote returns hold come the election that gets them back comfortably into 1997+ numbers.
Trouble is. The polling evidence isn't that anywhere near a half are planning to do that. And a non trivial number are suggesting that they are more likely to vote Labour or Lib Dem (i.e., anti-Tory). Which needs to be subtracted from the one's who do. I was always convinced the Tories would get 32-33% at a minimum. I'm beginning to wonder if they'll break the Brown record for lowest percentage for a sitting government. They simply don't seem capable of anything other than repeating patterns of poor choices of behaviour.
Looks like 27% max now after they abandoned their traditional supporters at the Budget
I don't think the Rwanda stuff matters any more, whatever happens. Everybody's bored rigid with it, even those in favour. So even if a few flights take off, I don't expect it to shift the dial. It's a sign of Sunak's hopelessness that he's invested so heavily in it.
The purpose of Rwanda was to be seen to have a muscular "plan" for illegal immigration and to allow them to taunt those opposed to the idea with "what would you do?" £200 million to an African despot with a carefully crafted PR image was an acceptable price for that narrative and political advantage. It worked as intended, as we saw from comments by some on this board.
Rwanda was never meant to solve anything, which suggests those proposing it weren't serious about implementation. But somehow the Sunak government ended up fully invested. A smarter politician would have quietly let the proposal lapse once the political goodness had been extracted from it. Rwanda is now just an albatross.
The problem is, as someone pointed out in a different context recently, accusation is confession. All the Tory taunting of Labour for not having an alternative plan to Rwanda, also showed that they didn't have an alternative plan to Rwanda. So how were they ever going to move on from it to some other way of dealing with the issue?
I hate to interrupt this glorious debate between two people who completely agree with each other, but Rwanda doesn't need to take people at the rate they're currently arriving in a sustained fashion, because the minute it starts taking people, they will stop arriving. Nobody wants to go to Rwanda. They're coming to the UK because they have a ludicrously high chance of making a successful asylum claim here vs. anywhere else in Europe. If that becomes a ludicrously high chance of getting sent to Rwanda, the flow stops.
Furthermore, when people are taken to Rwanda, they won't stay there; they will abscond. That means even more space.
Keep taking the pills…
If you think people are going to be motivated to cross to the UK by dinghy if they're going to be sent to Rwanda for their efforts, perhaps you should seek out some stronger medication.
How many are you sending to Rwanda?
What’s your math on the % chance of one of them actually getting sent to Rwanda, which would be the key element of any deterrent?
Maths.
... and yours is?
I'm not confident that any planes will leave the ground. My point was that if they did, it wouldn't take long for the policy to prove effective. I'd say an initial 1000 in quick succession would be enough to slow boat crossings to a dribble of the insane.
People who willing to risk their lives crossing the channel in a small inflatable will pay zero attention to the prospect of being flown to Rwanda. Their actions are not guided by logic or risk.
They're not motivated by fleeing certain death though are they, or they'd be claiming asylum in France, and successfully so. Let's not bullshit here.
I didn't say they were. I have no doubt most are economic migrants. That still doesn't mean Rwanda will dissuade them. What's your point?
Presumably you accept that if 100% of boat people were instantly flown to Rwanda that would stop the boats overnight. Because of course it would
In which case you accept the principle - so all we are talking about is the percentage required so as to constitute a deterrent
However this is all a massive distraction by both sides. Far more important than illegal migration is legal migration. 1.4m people in two years. A truly stupefying statistic and a situation - if it endures - which will culturally transform the country in a way no one ever requested
The Tories deserve to die for this failure alone
Maybe voters know the country is full, which is why we pay £1Trillion but they can’t see a dentist or doctor and the schools and hospitals have fallen apart, but don’t actually see 1.2M people, other than a statistic on papers and news every six months. But they do see people of colour from far away, who could be of any persuasion and intention, so also a security issue, pulling up on beaches - and it then reminds the voters the country is full, which is why we pay £1Trillion but they can’t see a dentist or doctor and the schools and hospitals have fallen apart, so they want those boat crossings stopped. Which is the reason why the government have a policy and podium with STOP THE BOATS on it - because like you said, it’s irrational otherwise to have STOP THE BOATS slogan, and not STOP THE 1.4M LEGAL MIGRANTS WE HAVE LET IN THE LAST TWO YEARS slogan
^ This. And the fact STOP THE 1.4M LEGAL MIGRANTS WE HAVE LET IN THE LAST TWO YEARS won’t actually fit on the podium.
Hope this helps.
When are they to announce the 2nd of May again?
Tomorrow or Tuesday. At 1038 in the morning.
This is going to be a looooong week.
Not Wednesday? Before PMQs? 😈
PMQs becoming unwatchable, with all those Labour “abattoir chic” haircuts.
Still 130 short of the 180+ Tory MPs they need to oust Sunak in a VONC
Both May and Johnson won their VONCs, but were gone within a couple of months as I recall.
Any VONC is career ending.
True. And see also the overthrow of IDS in 2003. Many Tory MPs were swearing blind he had their full support (including Michael Howard, if memory serves), but whaddayaknow, he lost the vote. That's what's likely to happen this time too. If there's a VONC, Sunak will get crushed in it. That's if he doesn't resign when the Old Lady visits him. The only issue that will be settled by whether it's 52 letters or a much higher number will be whether he even bothers staying on for the vote. Then Penny will call a GE for 2 May and the leftwing figure that the Tory campaign demonises the most won't be Keir Starmer or George Galloway - it will be Sadiq Khan. In short, they will play the London card. And they will probably keep their majority. I have placed stakes accordingly.
If ever there was a post that started well before rapidly spiralling into insanity, this is it.
The Tories will "play the London card."? It's quite possible they don't have any cards but they certainly don't have a 'London card' to play.
I'm sure voters around here are dying to say "yes my rent/mortgage has shot up so I was going to vote against the government, but Sadiq Khan ..."
Its the most insane argument I've ever read. I've never heard a single person IRL, of any particular stripe or none ever bring up Sadiq Khan. Why would they?
You’ve not been paying any attention at all.
Khan cost Labour Uxbridge. And so the government realised Khan could cost Labour the whole General Election. From that moment on the Tories have bet the house on Khan costing Labour the election, from war on cars to Hamas rallies destroying British democracy, Khan is at the centre of every reason not to vote Labour.
Have you not heard Tory MPs in northern seats more than happy to use the “k” word? Why are they doing that do you think, if it’s pointless.
Either they have it wrong, or you.
Where in the Red Wall is Uxbridge?
I've driven regularly all over the Northwest but I've never seen Uxbridge. Is it off the M6, the M56, the M63? I khan't find it on my map.
🙄 “ Have you not heard Tory MPs in northern seats more than happy to use the “k” word? Why are they doing that do you think, if it’s pointless.”
No I haven't. Cos nobody would know who they were talking about.
YES YOU HAVE!
Sorry for shouting, but the 30 pennies havn’t dropped yet.
Dixiedean and I are both from the Red Wall, from different sides of the political spectrum, and we're both telling you the same thing.
Not sure where you're from, maybe London or cloud cuckoo land, if you think voters here give a shit about Khan.
That’s not the point we are making here. You said Tories up North don’t mention Khan, but we know they do, and we know the reason why.
They don't.
By coincidence, I've got a leaflet from the Tories through my door today. I haven't recycled it yet, so I can tell you what it does actually mention.
Does mention (and I'm quoting here, not agreeing with them): Local representation Cleaning up local area Schools Police United Utilities Road Safety ASB Road Signage Pot Holes Getting information out, where its needed Repairs to steps, paths and bridges Supporting local business Charity Events Working for residents.
Oh. You're talking about the Southern MP who has been suspended from the Tory Party? Well. The Conservative Party is not short of folk talking absolute mince about all kinds of crap that has no relevance to the voter. I repeat. I doubt one in twenty up here, to be generous, would know who the Mayor of London is. I dispute 1 in 100 would give much of a fuck about it.
Look at what I said.
Khan cost Labour Uxbridge. And so the government realised Khan could cost Labour the whole General Election. From that moment on the Tories have bet the house on Khan costing Labour the election, from war on cars to Hamas rallies destroying British democracy, Khan is at the centre of every reason not to vote Labour.
Look at what you are saying.
The MPs and election team and advisors around Sunak, and all the money they are on, have got it wrong. And you know better than them?
This weeks big policy announcement has those intimating marches in London at the heart of it. Can you not see this?
Almost everyone I meet. Including most of my SEN students know better than them. Of what relevance is a march in London on a subject a good proportion have at least some ambivalence about to Northumberland? It's playing to the fears of an elderly core vote in the Home Counties. London is a faraway land.
On the subject of the housing predicament in London - I spent time with some friends (brothers) recently who are both earning around £30-£40k and living in London. They are hitting their early 40's and still in houseshares, so living the same life as when I knew them 20 years ago. Their parents are artists and have lived in London for their entire life owning a large townhouse which, whilst in a state of being run down, is worth well over a million, plus several other properties that they have gained through inheritance around the country. However they appear not to have made any effort at all to help their sons get a stable long term housing situation. I am not sure any of them understand about mortgages and interest rates, but I think if my friend is going to buy a flat, it has to be now, on a 25 year mortgage. I guess they will be ok in the end and their situation is better than most but as an outsider looking in it seems infuriating.
When their parents die they can inherit enough to buy outright a house mortgage free, so why bother with a mortgage now they may as well just keep house sharing and cheaper rent
Hopefully. Although a lot of people with wealth tied up in the house they live in will borrow against it to maintain their lifestyle in retirement (or their care requirements)
Average residential care costs are £4k a month. Given their parents estate is over £1 million in one townhouse plus other properties both parents would need residential care for at least 20 years for them not to inherit enough to buy at least an average priced house outright each
Assuming they own all those properties outright and aren't leveraged to the hilt.
It says they own the £1 million townhouse plus inherited other properties too.
So no need for either to get a mortgage, just rent and then buy a house outright each once they inherit
What, 20, 30, 40 years of pissing rent money down the drain?
Yeah, there is that. But also I just think by the age of 40 it would be good idea to buy a property. He can't stay in houseshares until he is 60 whilst waiting for an inheritance, that isn't a good plan.
Waiting for an inheritance isn't a good plan for anyone at all. Its absolutely crazy.
You can easily be 70+ and still have living parents nowadays.
Everyone should be able to support themselves and buy their own home via working themselves. Inheritance should never be a priority for anyone.
My 73 yo father-in-law was carer for his 95 yo mother till just before Christmas. The only reason he isn't any more is because he just died. He never got a quarter share of that bungalow in North Shields.
I'd like that if it weren't so sad.
In Trollope's day a young man in expectation of a sizeable inheritance would borrow against his extant father's estate to support a lifestyle of wine, women, song, huntin', shootin' and fishin'. When the old man dies it turns out he's gambled away every penny. This is when the creditors start getting restive. Not a metaphor for modern Britain, of course. Not at all.
For those too young to remember the 1997 election, hopefully this year will be your chance to experience the same joy as us old farts did back when we knew that things could only get better.
And of course, we will then get the buzz for a second time.
I hope.
No, you won’t
The country is too fucked for that haze of optimistic elation a la 1997. And Starmer is not Blair
It will be more like a painful puking after way too much vodka. Some fairly instant relief as the poison is purged - but you’ve still got the hangover to come
It isn't us winning that gives me a buzz. It is the Tories being defeated that matters.
Quite frankly I'll be mildly disappointed by a Tory defeat. I want to see them obliterated.
If you look at the polling before the 1997 general election there were frequently polls that put Tory support above 30%. The last such poll now, was in June 2023.
The Tories are on course to be obliterated. Things are so much worse for them now than they were in 1997.
They didn’t have Reform to squeeze back then though. The referendum party only ever managed pitiful polling scores. Even if only half of the current 12-13% Ref vote returns hold come the election that gets them back comfortably into 1997+ numbers.
I think, on average, half the Reform share added to the Tory share still leaves the Tories below 30%.
I suspect for every 2 votes the Tories get from Reform, the Tories will lose 1 vote towards Labour / Lib Dems / Greens (pick you centre ground protest vote here based on the constituency).
Still 130 short of the 180+ Tory MPs they need to oust Sunak in a VONC
Both May and Johnson won their VONCs, but were gone within a couple of months as I recall.
Any VONC is career ending.
True. And see also the overthrow of IDS in 2003. Many Tory MPs were swearing blind he had their full support (including Michael Howard, if memory serves), but whaddayaknow, he lost the vote. That's what's likely to happen this time too. If there's a VONC, Sunak will get crushed in it. That's if he doesn't resign when the Old Lady visits him. The only issue that will be settled by whether it's 52 letters or a much higher number will be whether he even bothers staying on for the vote. Then Penny will call a GE for 2 May and the leftwing figure that the Tory campaign demonises the most won't be Keir Starmer or George Galloway - it will be Sadiq Khan. In short, they will play the London card. And they will probably keep their majority. I have placed stakes accordingly.
If ever there was a post that started well before rapidly spiralling into insanity, this is it.
The Tories will "play the London card."? It's quite possible they don't have any cards but they certainly don't have a 'London card' to play.
I'm sure voters around here are dying to say "yes my rent/mortgage has shot up so I was going to vote against the government, but Sadiq Khan ..."
Its the most insane argument I've ever read. I've never heard a single person IRL, of any particular stripe or none ever bring up Sadiq Khan. Why would they?
You’ve not been paying any attention at all.
Khan cost Labour Uxbridge. And so the government realised Khan could cost Labour the whole General Election. From that moment on the Tories have bet the house on Khan costing Labour the election, from war on cars to Hamas rallies destroying British democracy, Khan is at the centre of every reason not to vote Labour.
Have you not heard Tory MPs in northern seats more than happy to use the “k” word? Why are they doing that do you think, if it’s pointless.
Either they have it wrong, or you.
Where in the Red Wall is Uxbridge?
I've driven regularly all over the Northwest but I've never seen Uxbridge. Is it off the M6, the M56, the M63? I khan't find it on my map.
🙄 “ Have you not heard Tory MPs in northern seats more than happy to use the “k” word? Why are they doing that do you think, if it’s pointless.”
No I haven't. Cos nobody would know who they were talking about.
YES YOU HAVE!
Sorry for shouting, but the 30 pennies havn’t dropped yet.
Dixiedean and I are both from the Red Wall, from different sides of the political spectrum, and we're both telling you the same thing.
Not sure where you're from, maybe London or cloud cuckoo land, if you think voters here give a shit about Khan.
That’s not the point we are making here. You said Tories up North don’t mention Khan, but we know they do, and we know the reason why.
They don't.
By coincidence, I've got a leaflet from the Tories through my door today. I haven't recycled it yet, so I can tell you what it does actually mention.
Does mention (and I'm quoting here, not agreeing with them): Local representation Cleaning up local area Schools Police United Utilities Road Safety ASB Road Signage Pot Holes Getting information out, where its needed Repairs to steps, paths and bridges Supporting local business Charity Events Working for residents.
Oh. You're talking about the Southern MP who has been suspended from the Tory Party? Well. The Conservative Party is not short of folk talking absolute mince about all kinds of crap that has no relevance to the voter. I repeat. I doubt one in twenty up here, to be generous, would know who the Mayor of London is. I dispute 1 in 100 would give much of a fuck about it.
Look at what you are saying.
The MPs and election team and advisors around Sunak, and all the money they are on, have got it wrong. And you know better than them?
This team has managed to crater the parties polling to the nadir under Truss, so yes it does look as if they have got it wrong.
There comes a point where it becomes necessary to acknowledge the emperor has no clothes.
For those too young to remember the 1997 election, hopefully this year will be your chance to experience the same joy as us old farts did back when we knew that things could only get better.
And of course, we will then get the buzz for a second time.
I hope.
No, you won’t
The country is too fucked for that haze of optimistic elation a la 1997. And Starmer is not Blair
It will be more like a painful puking after way too much vodka. Some fairly instant relief as the poison is purged - but you’ve still got the hangover to come
It isn't us winning that gives me a buzz. It is the Tories being defeated that matters.
Quite frankly I'll be mildly disappointed by a Tory defeat. I want to see them obliterated.
If you look at the polling before the 1997 general election there were frequently polls that put Tory support above 30%. The last such poll now, was in June 2023.
The Tories are on course to be obliterated. Things are so much worse for them now than they were in 1997.
They didn’t have Reform to squeeze back then though. The referendum party only ever managed pitiful polling scores. Even if only half of the current 12-13% Ref vote returns hold come the election that gets them back comfortably into 1997+ numbers.
Trouble is. The polling evidence isn't that anywhere near a half are planning to do that. And a non trivial number are suggesting that they are more likely to vote Labour or Lib Dem (i.e., anti-Tory). Which needs to be subtracted from the one's who do. I was always convinced the Tories would get 32-33% at a minimum. I'm beginning to wonder if they'll break the Brown record for lowest percentage for a sitting government. They simply don't seem capable of anything other than repeating patterns of poor choices of behaviour.
I think there’s a difference between what they say and what they’ll do come election time. We’ve repeatedly seen third party surges in recent decades which have then unwound closer to a real GE. Lib Dems in 2010 and again in 2019, UKIP in 2015, BXP in 2019, Greens every single time.
It’ll require Sunak to do a bit of fearmongering about woke Labour and lefty lawyers but I’m confident many will come back. Ref has surged too quickly - it’s a bubble. And they’ve moved up in almost perfect inverse correlation to Conservative VI. The old weather saying is relevant here: “long foretold, long last; short notice, soon past”.
Since many of them in their Scotch manifestations have bellowed incessantly about the waste of money of road signs in a dead language for the last few years that would make them look a tad hypocritical. Not that that would stop them.
Well here’s one English right winger that would HATE to see the disappearance of Scottish Gaelic
Whenever I (rarely) hear it in Scotland it’s spine tingling. A vision of the distant past somehow come to life
I’ve heard it a few times mainly in Skye or the outer Hebrides. The best was a tiny Kirk in Harris where they did that incredible a Capella line singing - all these old ladies nasally ululating. One of the most foreign and exotic things I’ve ever encountered - and it was in the UK!
Gaelic must be saved
Aig Oilthigh Obar Dheathain, chaidh mi dhan Chomann Cheilteach agus dh'ionnsaich mi beagan Gàidhlig, bha seo mar bu trice airson 's gum b' urrainn dhomh na seann òrain a sheinn. 'S e cànan àlainn a th' innte, ach de na sia cànanan as urrainn dhomh a chleachdadh, tha i air aon den fheadhainn as duilghe, agus fiù 's an nàiseantach as cinntiche a' tighinn gu crìch a' leigeil seachad, mura h-eil iad air a' Ghàidhealtachd.
Since many of them in their Scotch manifestations have bellowed incessantly about the waste of money of road signs in a dead language for the last few years that would make them look a tad hypocritical. Not that that would stop them.
Well here’s one English right winger that would HATE to see the disappearance of Scottish Gaelic
Whenever I (rarely) hear it in Scotland it’s spine tingling. A vision of the distant past somehow come to life
I’ve heard it a few times mainly in Skye or the outer Hebrides. The best was a tiny Kirk in Harris where they did that incredible a Capella line singing - all these old ladies nasally ululating. One of the most foreign and exotic things I’ve ever encountered - and it was in the UK!
Gaelic must be saved
Aig Oilthigh Obar Dheathain, chaidh mi dhan Chomann Cheilteach agus dh'ionnsaich mi beagan Gàidhlig, bha seo mar bu trice airson 's gum b' urrainn dhomh na seann òrain a sheinn. 'S e cànan àlainn a th' innte, ach de na sia cànanan as urrainn dhomh a chleachdadh, tha i air aon den fheadhainn as duilghe, agus fiù 's an nàiseantach as cinntiche a' tighinn gu crìch a' leigeil seachad, mura h-eil iad air a' Ghàidhealtachd.
Still 130 short of the 180+ Tory MPs they need to oust Sunak in a VONC
Both May and Johnson won their VONCs, but were gone within a couple of months as I recall.
Any VONC is career ending.
True. And see also the overthrow of IDS in 2003. Many Tory MPs were swearing blind he had their full support (including Michael Howard, if memory serves), but whaddayaknow, he lost the vote. That's what's likely to happen this time too. If there's a VONC, Sunak will get crushed in it. That's if he doesn't resign when the Old Lady visits him. The only issue that will be settled by whether it's 52 letters or a much higher number will be whether he even bothers staying on for the vote. Then Penny will call a GE for 2 May and the leftwing figure that the Tory campaign demonises the most won't be Keir Starmer or George Galloway - it will be Sadiq Khan. In short, they will play the London card. And they will probably keep their majority. I have placed stakes accordingly.
If ever there was a post that started well before rapidly spiralling into insanity, this is it.
The Tories will "play the London card."? It's quite possible they don't have any cards but they certainly don't have a 'London card' to play.
I'm sure voters around here are dying to say "yes my rent/mortgage has shot up so I was going to vote against the government, but Sadiq Khan ..."
Its the most insane argument I've ever read. I've never heard a single person IRL, of any particular stripe or none ever bring up Sadiq Khan. Why would they?
You’ve not been paying any attention at all.
Khan cost Labour Uxbridge. And so the government realised Khan could cost Labour the whole General Election. From that moment on the Tories have bet the house on Khan costing Labour the election, from war on cars to Hamas rallies destroying British democracy, Khan is at the centre of every reason not to vote Labour.
Have you not heard Tory MPs in northern seats more than happy to use the “k” word? Why are they doing that do you think, if it’s pointless.
Either they have it wrong, or you.
Where in the Red Wall is Uxbridge?
I've driven regularly all over the Northwest but I've never seen Uxbridge. Is it off the M6, the M56, the M63? I khan't find it on my map.
🙄 “ Have you not heard Tory MPs in northern seats more than happy to use the “k” word? Why are they doing that do you think, if it’s pointless.”
No I haven't. Cos nobody would know who they were talking about.
YES YOU HAVE!
Sorry for shouting, but the 30 pennies havn’t dropped yet.
Dixiedean and I are both from the Red Wall, from different sides of the political spectrum, and we're both telling you the same thing.
Not sure where you're from, maybe London or cloud cuckoo land, if you think voters here give a shit about Khan.
That’s not the point we are making here. You said Tories up North don’t mention Khan, but we know they do, and we know the reason why.
They don't.
By coincidence, I've got a leaflet from the Tories through my door today. I haven't recycled it yet, so I can tell you what it does actually mention.
Does mention (and I'm quoting here, not agreeing with them): Local representation Cleaning up local area Schools Police United Utilities Road Safety ASB Road Signage Pot Holes Getting information out, where its needed Repairs to steps, paths and bridges Supporting local business Charity Events Working for residents.
Oh. You're talking about the Southern MP who has been suspended from the Tory Party? Well. The Conservative Party is not short of folk talking absolute mince about all kinds of crap that has no relevance to the voter. I repeat. I doubt one in twenty up here, to be generous, would know who the Mayor of London is. I dispute 1 in 100 would give much of a fuck about it.
Look at what I said.
Khan cost Labour Uxbridge. And so the government realised Khan could cost Labour the whole General Election. From that moment on the Tories have bet the house on Khan costing Labour the election, from war on cars to Hamas rallies destroying British democracy, Khan is at the centre of every reason not to vote Labour.
Look at what you are saying.
The MPs and election team and advisors around Sunak, and all the money they are on, have got it wrong. And you know better than them?
This weeks big policy announcement has those intimating marches in London at the heart of it. Can you not see this?
Almost everyone I meet. Including most of my SEN students know better than them. Of what relevance is a march in London on a subject a good proportion have at least some ambivalence about to Northumberland?
Simples. Just spin that around.
Scotland invade and take Northumberland, you are implying everyone in London and environs wouldn’t care less?
HY would be leading a column of tanks up the M1 quicker than the jocks could pack their neeps into their sporrans and climb back over the wall.
We are all in this together. Invasions. Attacks on our democracy and way of life. Attacks on our individual freedom like Labours anti car campaign and abolishing zero hours.
This has been fun. Made more so by the fact so many of you don’t pay attention or listen. 🙂 I have to get up at North Yorkshire dawn. But, if election isn’t called tommorow, I will be back on Tuesday morning with Racing Tips 🐎
For those too young to remember the 1997 election, hopefully this year will be your chance to experience the same joy as us old farts did back when we knew that things could only get better.
And of course, we will then get the buzz for a second time.
I hope.
No, you won’t
The country is too fucked for that haze of optimistic elation a la 1997. And Starmer is not Blair
It will be more like a painful puking after way too much vodka. Some fairly instant relief as the poison is purged - but you’ve still got the hangover to come
It isn't us winning that gives me a buzz. It is the Tories being defeated that matters.
Quite frankly I'll be mildly disappointed by a Tory defeat. I want to see them obliterated.
If you look at the polling before the 1997 general election there were frequently polls that put Tory support above 30%. The last such poll now, was in June 2023.
The Tories are on course to be obliterated. Things are so much worse for them now than they were in 1997.
They didn’t have Reform to squeeze back then though. The referendum party only ever managed pitiful polling scores. Even if only half of the current 12-13% Ref vote returns hold come the election that gets them back comfortably into 1997+ numbers.
I think, on average, half the Reform share added to the Tory share still leaves the Tories below 30%.
I suspect for every 2 votes the Tories get from Reform, the Tories will lose 1 vote towards Labour / Lib Dems / Greens (pick you centre ground protest vote here based on the constituency).
I think they’ve lost pretty much all centre ground voters already. And whilst they’ve gone quiet recently, the middle class remainers haven’t forgotten: they’ll be looking forward to their quiet and overdue revenge now the scary Corbyn is out of the picture.
Still 130 short of the 180+ Tory MPs they need to oust Sunak in a VONC
Both May and Johnson won their VONCs, but were gone within a couple of months as I recall.
Any VONC is career ending.
True. And see also the overthrow of IDS in 2003. Many Tory MPs were swearing blind he had their full support (including Michael Howard, if memory serves), but whaddayaknow, he lost the vote. That's what's likely to happen this time too. If there's a VONC, Sunak will get crushed in it. That's if he doesn't resign when the Old Lady visits him. The only issue that will be settled by whether it's 52 letters or a much higher number will be whether he even bothers staying on for the vote. Then Penny will call a GE for 2 May and the leftwing figure that the Tory campaign demonises the most won't be Keir Starmer or George Galloway - it will be Sadiq Khan. In short, they will play the London card. And they will probably keep their majority. I have placed stakes accordingly.
If ever there was a post that started well before rapidly spiralling into insanity, this is it.
The Tories will "play the London card."? It's quite possible they don't have any cards but they certainly don't have a 'London card' to play.
I'm sure voters around here are dying to say "yes my rent/mortgage has shot up so I was going to vote against the government, but Sadiq Khan ..."
Its the most insane argument I've ever read. I've never heard a single person IRL, of any particular stripe or none ever bring up Sadiq Khan. Why would they?
You’ve not been paying any attention at all.
Khan cost Labour Uxbridge. And so the government realised Khan could cost Labour the whole General Election. From that moment on the Tories have bet the house on Khan costing Labour the election, from war on cars to Hamas rallies destroying British democracy, Khan is at the centre of every reason not to vote Labour.
Have you not heard Tory MPs in northern seats more than happy to use the “k” word? Why are they doing that do you think, if it’s pointless.
Either they have it wrong, or you.
Where in the Red Wall is Uxbridge?
I've driven regularly all over the Northwest but I've never seen Uxbridge. Is it off the M6, the M56, the M63? I khan't find it on my map.
🙄 “ Have you not heard Tory MPs in northern seats more than happy to use the “k” word? Why are they doing that do you think, if it’s pointless.”
No I haven't. Cos nobody would know who they were talking about.
YES YOU HAVE!
Sorry for shouting, but the 30 pennies havn’t dropped yet.
Dixiedean and I are both from the Red Wall, from different sides of the political spectrum, and we're both telling you the same thing.
Not sure where you're from, maybe London or cloud cuckoo land, if you think voters here give a shit about Khan.
That’s not the point we are making here. You said Tories up North don’t mention Khan, but we know they do, and we know the reason why.
They don't.
By coincidence, I've got a leaflet from the Tories through my door today. I haven't recycled it yet, so I can tell you what it does actually mention.
Does mention (and I'm quoting here, not agreeing with them): Local representation Cleaning up local area Schools Police United Utilities Road Safety ASB Road Signage Pot Holes Getting information out, where its needed Repairs to steps, paths and bridges Supporting local business Charity Events Working for residents.
Oh. You're talking about the Southern MP who has been suspended from the Tory Party? Well. The Conservative Party is not short of folk talking absolute mince about all kinds of crap that has no relevance to the voter. I repeat. I doubt one in twenty up here, to be generous, would know who the Mayor of London is. I dispute 1 in 100 would give much of a fuck about it.
Look at what I said.
Khan cost Labour Uxbridge. And so the government realised Khan could cost Labour the whole General Election. From that moment on the Tories have bet the house on Khan costing Labour the election, from war on cars to Hamas rallies destroying British democracy, Khan is at the centre of every reason not to vote Labour.
Look at what you are saying.
The MPs and election team and advisors around Sunak, and all the money they are on, have got it wrong. And you know better than them?
This weeks big policy announcement has those intimating marches in London at the heart of it. Can you not see this?
Well, the lesson all the big brains with big price tags took from Uxbridge was that becoming the Motorists' Friend would save the Conservative Party.
I can probably guess the voting intention of maybe 50 people I know (my extended family and my wider friendship group)
At the last election I reckon at least 20 of them voted Tory (possibly quite a lot more but let’s be strict)
This time? Maybe 2. Literally 2 people. At the very most, 4 or 5, if Sunak gets lucky
That’s a total collapse
Say what you like about Rishi but he has stopped many of the oiks who voted Tory last time doing so again…
Even if he leads the Tories to record defeat he has made voting Tory something to aspire to again not for the common herd….
Quoted without comment (lost for words)…
One could imagine the Tory advert now 'Forget gold card, flying first class, dinner at the Savoy, holidays in the Maldives, kids at Eton, box at Ascot, playing polo, wife shops at Harrods? For true class and to stand out from the crowd this time vote Rishi.'
Whereas in 2019 it was 'Butlins, holiday in Blackpool or Benidorm, dinner at Wimpey, wife in the nailbar, love playing five a side or bowls or darts down the pub? Then Boris is the man for you!'
I don't think the Rwanda stuff matters any more, whatever happens. Everybody's bored rigid with it, even those in favour. So even if a few flights take off, I don't expect it to shift the dial. It's a sign of Sunak's hopelessness that he's invested so heavily in it.
The purpose of Rwanda was to be seen to have a muscular "plan" for illegal immigration and to allow them to taunt those opposed to the idea with "what would you do?" £200 million to an African despot with a carefully crafted PR image was an acceptable price for that narrative and political advantage. It worked as intended, as we saw from comments by some on this board.
Rwanda was never meant to solve anything, which suggests those proposing it weren't serious about implementation. But somehow the Sunak government ended up fully invested. A smarter politician would have quietly let the proposal lapse once the political goodness had been extracted from it. Rwanda is now just an albatross.
The problem is, as someone pointed out in a different context recently, accusation is confession. All the Tory taunting of Labour for not having an alternative plan to Rwanda, also showed that they didn't have an alternative plan to Rwanda. So how were they ever going to move on from it to some other way of dealing with the issue?
I hate to interrupt this glorious debate between two people who completely agree with each other, but Rwanda doesn't need to take people at the rate they're currently arriving in a sustained fashion, because the minute it starts taking people, they will stop arriving. Nobody wants to go to Rwanda. They're coming to the UK because they have a ludicrously high chance of making a successful asylum claim here vs. anywhere else in Europe. If that becomes a ludicrously high chance of getting sent to Rwanda, the flow stops.
Furthermore, when people are taken to Rwanda, they won't stay there; they will abscond. That means even more space.
You're utterly missing the point of the Rwanda wheeze, as I was saying. To be fair Sunak also missed the point of Rwanda, as I was also saying. Hence the mess he's got into.
Still 130 short of the 180+ Tory MPs they need to oust Sunak in a VONC
Both May and Johnson won their VONCs, but were gone within a couple of months as I recall.
Any VONC is career ending.
True. And see also the overthrow of IDS in 2003. Many Tory MPs were swearing blind he had their full support (including Michael Howard, if memory serves), but whaddayaknow, he lost the vote. That's what's likely to happen this time too. If there's a VONC, Sunak will get crushed in it. That's if he doesn't resign when the Old Lady visits him. The only issue that will be settled by whether it's 52 letters or a much higher number will be whether he even bothers staying on for the vote. Then Penny will call a GE for 2 May and the leftwing figure that the Tory campaign demonises the most won't be Keir Starmer or George Galloway - it will be Sadiq Khan. In short, they will play the London card. And they will probably keep their majority. I have placed stakes accordingly.
If ever there was a post that started well before rapidly spiralling into insanity, this is it.
The Tories will "play the London card."? It's quite possible they don't have any cards but they certainly don't have a 'London card' to play.
I'm sure voters around here are dying to say "yes my rent/mortgage has shot up so I was going to vote against the government, but Sadiq Khan ..."
Its the most insane argument I've ever read. I've never heard a single person IRL, of any particular stripe or none ever bring up Sadiq Khan. Why would they?
You’ve not been paying any attention at all.
Khan cost Labour Uxbridge. And so the government realised Khan could cost Labour the whole General Election. From that moment on the Tories have bet the house on Khan costing Labour the election, from war on cars to Hamas rallies destroying British democracy, Khan is at the centre of every reason not to vote Labour.
Have you not heard Tory MPs in northern seats more than happy to use the “k” word? Why are they doing that do you think, if it’s pointless.
Either they have it wrong, or you.
Where in the Red Wall is Uxbridge?
I've driven regularly all over the Northwest but I've never seen Uxbridge. Is it off the M6, the M56, the M63? I khan't find it on my map.
🙄 “ Have you not heard Tory MPs in northern seats more than happy to use the “k” word? Why are they doing that do you think, if it’s pointless.”
No I haven't. Cos nobody would know who they were talking about.
YES YOU HAVE!
Sorry for shouting, but the 30 pennies havn’t dropped yet.
Dixiedean and I are both from the Red Wall, from different sides of the political spectrum, and we're both telling you the same thing.
Not sure where you're from, maybe London or cloud cuckoo land, if you think voters here give a shit about Khan.
That’s not the point we are making here. You said Tories up North don’t mention Khan, but we know they do, and we know the reason why.
They don't.
By coincidence, I've got a leaflet from the Tories through my door today. I haven't recycled it yet, so I can tell you what it does actually mention.
Does mention (and I'm quoting here, not agreeing with them): Local representation Cleaning up local area Schools Police United Utilities Road Safety ASB Road Signage Pot Holes Getting information out, where its needed Repairs to steps, paths and bridges Supporting local business Charity Events Working for residents.
Oh. You're talking about the Southern MP who has been suspended from the Tory Party? Well. The Conservative Party is not short of folk talking absolute mince about all kinds of crap that has no relevance to the voter. I repeat. I doubt one in twenty up here, to be generous, would know who the Mayor of London is. I dispute 1 in 100 would give much of a fuck about it.
Look at what I said.
Khan cost Labour Uxbridge. And so the government realised Khan could cost Labour the whole General Election. From that moment on the Tories have bet the house on Khan costing Labour the election, from war on cars to Hamas rallies destroying British democracy, Khan is at the centre of every reason not to vote Labour.
Look at what you are saying.
The MPs and election team and advisors around Sunak, and all the money they are on, have got it wrong. And you know better than them?
This weeks big policy announcement has those intimating marches in London at the heart of it. Can you not see this?
Almost everyone I meet. Including most of my SEN students know better than them. Of what relevance is a march in London on a subject a good proportion have at least some ambivalence about to Northumberland?
Simples. Just spin that around.
Scotland invade and take Northumberland, you are implying everyone in London and environs wouldn’t care less?
HY would be leading a column of tanks up the M1 quicker than the jocks could pack their neeps into their sporrans and climb back over the wall.
We are all in this together. Invasions. Attacks on our democracy and way of life. Attacks on our individual freedom like Labours anti car campaign and abolishing zero hours.
This has been fun. Made more so by the fact so many of you don’t pay attention or listen. 🙂 I have to get up at North Yorkshire dawn. But, if election isn’t called tommorow, I will be back on Tuesday morning with Racing Tips 🐎
But nobody has invaded anybody. Attacks on our democracy and way of life? The right to protest is part of my democracy and way of life. I'd like to keep it that way thank you.
Still 130 short of the 180+ Tory MPs they need to oust Sunak in a VONC
Both May and Johnson won their VONCs, but were gone within a couple of months as I recall.
Any VONC is career ending.
True. And see also the overthrow of IDS in 2003. Many Tory MPs were swearing blind he had their full support (including Michael Howard, if memory serves), but whaddayaknow, he lost the vote. That's what's likely to happen this time too. If there's a VONC, Sunak will get crushed in it. That's if he doesn't resign when the Old Lady visits him. The only issue that will be settled by whether it's 52 letters or a much higher number will be whether he even bothers staying on for the vote. Then Penny will call a GE for 2 May and the leftwing figure that the Tory campaign demonises the most won't be Keir Starmer or George Galloway - it will be Sadiq Khan. In short, they will play the London card. And they will probably keep their majority. I have placed stakes accordingly.
If ever there was a post that started well before rapidly spiralling into insanity, this is it.
The Tories will "play the London card."? It's quite possible they don't have any cards but they certainly don't have a 'London card' to play.
I'm sure voters around here are dying to say "yes my rent/mortgage has shot up so I was going to vote against the government, but Sadiq Khan ..."
Its the most insane argument I've ever read. I've never heard a single person IRL, of any particular stripe or none ever bring up Sadiq Khan. Why would they?
You’ve not been paying any attention at all.
Khan cost Labour Uxbridge. And so the government realised Khan could cost Labour the whole General Election. From that moment on the Tories have bet the house on Khan costing Labour the election, from war on cars to Hamas rallies destroying British democracy, Khan is at the centre of every reason not to vote Labour.
Have you not heard Tory MPs in northern seats more than happy to use the “k” word? Why are they doing that do you think, if it’s pointless.
Either they have it wrong, or you.
Where in the Red Wall is Uxbridge?
I've driven regularly all over the Northwest but I've never seen Uxbridge. Is it off the M6, the M56, the M63? I khan't find it on my map.
🙄 “ Have you not heard Tory MPs in northern seats more than happy to use the “k” word? Why are they doing that do you think, if it’s pointless.”
No I haven't. Cos nobody would know who they were talking about.
YES YOU HAVE!
Sorry for shouting, but the 30 pennies havn’t dropped yet.
Dixiedean and I are both from the Red Wall, from different sides of the political spectrum, and we're both telling you the same thing.
Not sure where you're from, maybe London or cloud cuckoo land, if you think voters here give a shit about Khan.
That’s not the point we are making here. You said Tories up North don’t mention Khan, but we know they do, and we know the reason why.
They don't.
By coincidence, I've got a leaflet from the Tories through my door today. I haven't recycled it yet, so I can tell you what it does actually mention.
Does mention (and I'm quoting here, not agreeing with them): Local representation Cleaning up local area Schools Police United Utilities Road Safety ASB Road Signage Pot Holes Getting information out, where its needed Repairs to steps, paths and bridges Supporting local business Charity Events Working for residents.
I can probably guess the voting intention of maybe 50 people I know (my extended family and my wider friendship group)
At the last election I reckon at least 20 of them voted Tory (possibly quite a lot more but let’s be strict)
This time? Maybe 2. Literally 2 people. At the very most, 4 or 5, if Sunak gets lucky
That’s a total collapse
Say what you like about Rishi but he has stopped many of the oiks who voted Tory last time doing so again…
Even if he leads the Tories to record defeat he has made voting Tory something to aspire to again not for the common herd….
Quoted without comment (lost for words)…
One could imagine the Tory advert now 'Forget gold card, flying first class, dinner at the Savoy, holidays in the Maldives, kids at Eton, box at Ascot, for true class and to stand out from the crowd this time vote Rishi.'
Whereas in 2019 it was 'Butlins, holiday in Blackpool or Benidorm, dinner at Wimpey, wife in the nailbar, love playing five a side? Then Boris is the man for you!'
I can probably guess the voting intention of maybe 50 people I know (my extended family and my wider friendship group)
At the last election I reckon at least 20 of them voted Tory (possibly quite a lot more but let’s be strict)
This time? Maybe 2. Literally 2 people. At the very most, 4 or 5, if Sunak gets lucky
That’s a total collapse
Say what you like about Rishi but he has stopped many of the oiks who voted Tory last time doing so again…
Even if he leads the Tories to record defeat he has made voting Tory something to aspire to again not for the common herd….
Quoted without comment (lost for words)…
One could imagine the Tory advert now 'Forget gold card, flying first class, dinner at the Savoy, holidays in the Maldives, kids at Eton, box at Ascot, for true class and to stand out from the crowd this time vote Rishi.'
Whereas in 2019 it was 'Butlins, holiday in Blackpool or Benidorm, dinner at Wimpey, wife in the nailbar, love playing five a side? Then Boris is the man for you!'
It's great when your dry sense of humour comes out to play.
I can probably guess the voting intention of maybe 50 people I know (my extended family and my wider friendship group)
At the last election I reckon at least 20 of them voted Tory (possibly quite a lot more but let’s be strict)
This time? Maybe 2. Literally 2 people. At the very most, 4 or 5, if Sunak gets lucky
That’s a total collapse
Say what you like about Rishi but he has stopped many of the oiks who voted Tory last time doing so again…
Even if he leads the Tories to record defeat he has made voting Tory something to aspire to again not for the common herd….
Quoted without comment (lost for words)…
One could imagine the Tory advert now 'Forget gold card, flying first class, dinner at the Savoy, holidays in the Maldives, kids at Eton, box at Ascot, playing polo, wife shops at Harrods? For true class and to stand out from the crowd this time vote Rishi.'
Whereas in 2019 it was 'Butlins, holiday in Blackpool or Benidorm, dinner at Wimpey, wife in the nailbar, love playing five a side or bowls or darts down the pub? Then Boris is the man for you!'
Chris Ship @chrisshipitv · 19m No comment from Kensington Palace tonight after at least 3 international pictures agencies refuse to distribute this morning’s photo of Kate and her children. Some of them ( @AP ) have claimed “the source [the palace] has manipulated the image”.
Still 130 short of the 180+ Tory MPs they need to oust Sunak in a VONC
Both May and Johnson won their VONCs, but were gone within a couple of months as I recall.
Any VONC is career ending.
True. And see also the overthrow of IDS in 2003. Many Tory MPs were swearing blind he had their full support (including Michael Howard, if memory serves), but whaddayaknow, he lost the vote. That's what's likely to happen this time too. If there's a VONC, Sunak will get crushed in it. That's if he doesn't resign when the Old Lady visits him. The only issue that will be settled by whether it's 52 letters or a much higher number will be whether he even bothers staying on for the vote. Then Penny will call a GE for 2 May and the leftwing figure that the Tory campaign demonises the most won't be Keir Starmer or George Galloway - it will be Sadiq Khan. In short, they will play the London card. And they will probably keep their majority. I have placed stakes accordingly.
If ever there was a post that started well before rapidly spiralling into insanity, this is it.
The Tories will "play the London card."? It's quite possible they don't have any cards but they certainly don't have a 'London card' to play.
I'm sure voters around here are dying to say "yes my rent/mortgage has shot up so I was going to vote against the government, but Sadiq Khan ..."
Its the most insane argument I've ever read. I've never heard a single person IRL, of any particular stripe or none ever bring up Sadiq Khan. Why would they?
You’ve not been paying any attention at all.
Khan cost Labour Uxbridge. And so the government realised Khan could cost Labour the whole General Election. From that moment on the Tories have bet the house on Khan costing Labour the election, from war on cars to Hamas rallies destroying British democracy, Khan is at the centre of every reason not to vote Labour.
Have you not heard Tory MPs in northern seats more than happy to use the “k” word? Why are they doing that do you think, if it’s pointless.
Either they have it wrong, or you.
Where in the Red Wall is Uxbridge?
I've driven regularly all over the Northwest but I've never seen Uxbridge. Is it off the M6, the M56, the M63? I khan't find it on my map.
🙄 “ Have you not heard Tory MPs in northern seats more than happy to use the “k” word? Why are they doing that do you think, if it’s pointless.”
No I haven't. Cos nobody would know who they were talking about.
YES YOU HAVE!
Sorry for shouting, but the 30 pennies havn’t dropped yet.
Dixiedean and I are both from the Red Wall, from different sides of the political spectrum, and we're both telling you the same thing.
Not sure where you're from, maybe London or cloud cuckoo land, if you think voters here give a shit about Khan.
That’s not the point we are making here. You said Tories up North don’t mention Khan, but we know they do, and we know the reason why.
They don't.
By coincidence, I've got a leaflet from the Tories through my door today. I haven't recycled it yet, so I can tell you what it does actually mention.
Does mention (and I'm quoting here, not agreeing with them): Local representation Cleaning up local area Schools Police United Utilities Road Safety ASB Road Signage Pot Holes Getting information out, where its needed Repairs to steps, paths and bridges Supporting local business Charity Events Working for residents.
Oh. You're talking about the Southern MP who has been suspended from the Tory Party? Well. The Conservative Party is not short of folk talking absolute mince about all kinds of crap that has no relevance to the voter. I repeat. I doubt one in twenty up here, to be generous, would know who the Mayor of London is. I dispute 1 in 100 would give much of a fuck about it.
Look at what I said.
Khan cost Labour Uxbridge. And so the government realised Khan could cost Labour the whole General Election. From that moment on the Tories have bet the house on Khan costing Labour the election, from war on cars to Hamas rallies destroying British democracy, Khan is at the centre of every reason not to vote Labour.
Look at what you are saying.
The MPs and election team and advisors around Sunak, and all the money they are on, have got it wrong. And you know better than them?
This weeks big policy announcement has those intimating marches in London at the heart of it. Can you not see this?
Almost everyone I meet. Including most of my SEN students know better than them. Of what relevance is a march in London on a subject a good proportion have at least some ambivalence about to Northumberland?
Simples. Just spin that around.
Scotland invade and take Northumberland, you are implying everyone in London and environs wouldn’t care less?
HY would be leading a column of tanks up the M1 quicker than the jocks could pack their neeps into their sporrans and climb back over the wall.
We are all in this together. Invasions. Attacks on our democracy and way of life. Attacks on our individual freedom like Labours anti car campaign and abolishing zero hours.
This has been fun. Made more so by the fact so many of you don’t pay attention or listen. 🙂 I have to get up at North Yorkshire dawn. But, if election isn’t called tommorow, I will be back on Tuesday morning with Racing Tips 🐎
But nobody has invaded anybody. Attacks on our democracy and way of life? The right to protest is part of my democracy and way of life. I'd like to keep it that way thank you.
My Dad does the books and we have people on zero hours. And I asked them about it, and they said they love it, and don’t want that individual freedom taken away by Starmer, the piper playing tune of union money masters, which is why they have switched vote from Labour to Conservative.
So, what’s with the very clear north-south divide in the voting? One of those fascinating political maps.
But what’s it about? Residue of caliphate vs Catholic? Serfs vs Yeoman farmers?
Sporting v Benfica?
Some poetic old bloke on Reddit, who describes himself as an “Electroconvulsive therapist” (I must check out his LinkedIn page) explains it thus:
Portugal was the old county of Portuscale, with capital in the city of the same name (the Port of Cale, modern day Oporto). It was a small county in the mountainous regions of northern Iberia, land of the Celts, occupied by germanic tribes after the fall of the Roman Empire, and liberated from Islam by Christian knights from France and Germany.
Portugal expanded to the Southern plains, lands of the Cartaginese, occupied by the Romans and later by Islam.
Today, Portugal still bears the same difference: the North, with its mountains, warm people, of northern european influence, and the flat South with spanish and african influences. You can admire the mountains in the north with the same awe as the beautiful and colourful plains in the south. Food is diferent but always tasty.
People in the North are generous but sometimes rude; in the south they seem aloof but brave. In the North everything is fast, in the South they linger. Long strands of sandy beach everywhere, of cold and violent Atlantic waves in the North to the warm and soft waves of the South. Pine trees and eucaliptuses, olives and cork. Hawks and seagulls, storks and crows. Two faces of the same coin, of rare beauty.
Still 130 short of the 180+ Tory MPs they need to oust Sunak in a VONC
Both May and Johnson won their VONCs, but were gone within a couple of months as I recall.
Any VONC is career ending.
True. And see also the overthrow of IDS in 2003. Many Tory MPs were swearing blind he had their full support (including Michael Howard, if memory serves), but whaddayaknow, he lost the vote. That's what's likely to happen this time too. If there's a VONC, Sunak will get crushed in it. That's if he doesn't resign when the Old Lady visits him. The only issue that will be settled by whether it's 52 letters or a much higher number will be whether he even bothers staying on for the vote. Then Penny will call a GE for 2 May and the leftwing figure that the Tory campaign demonises the most won't be Keir Starmer or George Galloway - it will be Sadiq Khan. In short, they will play the London card. And they will probably keep their majority. I have placed stakes accordingly.
If ever there was a post that started well before rapidly spiralling into insanity, this is it.
The Tories will "play the London card."? It's quite possible they don't have any cards but they certainly don't have a 'London card' to play.
I'm sure voters around here are dying to say "yes my rent/mortgage has shot up so I was going to vote against the government, but Sadiq Khan ..."
Its the most insane argument I've ever read. I've never heard a single person IRL, of any particular stripe or none ever bring up Sadiq Khan. Why would they?
You’ve not been paying any attention at all.
Khan cost Labour Uxbridge. And so the government realised Khan could cost Labour the whole General Election. From that moment on the Tories have bet the house on Khan costing Labour the election, from war on cars to Hamas rallies destroying British democracy, Khan is at the centre of every reason not to vote Labour.
Have you not heard Tory MPs in northern seats more than happy to use the “k” word? Why are they doing that do you think, if it’s pointless.
Either they have it wrong, or you.
Where in the Red Wall is Uxbridge?
I've driven regularly all over the Northwest but I've never seen Uxbridge. Is it off the M6, the M56, the M63? I khan't find it on my map.
🙄 “ Have you not heard Tory MPs in northern seats more than happy to use the “k” word? Why are they doing that do you think, if it’s pointless.”
No I haven't. Cos nobody would know who they were talking about.
YES YOU HAVE!
Sorry for shouting, but the 30 pennies havn’t dropped yet.
Dixiedean and I are both from the Red Wall, from different sides of the political spectrum, and we're both telling you the same thing.
Not sure where you're from, maybe London or cloud cuckoo land, if you think voters here give a shit about Khan.
That’s not the point we are making here. You said Tories up North don’t mention Khan, but we know they do, and we know the reason why.
They don't.
By coincidence, I've got a leaflet from the Tories through my door today. I haven't recycled it yet, so I can tell you what it does actually mention.
Does mention (and I'm quoting here, not agreeing with them): Local representation Cleaning up local area Schools Police United Utilities Road Safety ASB Road Signage Pot Holes Getting information out, where its needed Repairs to steps, paths and bridges Supporting local business Charity Events Working for residents.
Oh. You're talking about the Southern MP who has been suspended from the Tory Party? Well. The Conservative Party is not short of folk talking absolute mince about all kinds of crap that has no relevance to the voter. I repeat. I doubt one in twenty up here, to be generous, would know who the Mayor of London is. I dispute 1 in 100 would give much of a fuck about it.
Look at what I said.
Khan cost Labour Uxbridge. And so the government realised Khan could cost Labour the whole General Election. From that moment on the Tories have bet the house on Khan costing Labour the election, from war on cars to Hamas rallies destroying British democracy, Khan is at the centre of every reason not to vote Labour.
Look at what you are saying.
The MPs and election team and advisors around Sunak, and all the money they are on, have got it wrong. And you know better than them?
This weeks big policy announcement has those intimating marches in London at the heart of it. Can you not see this?
Almost everyone I meet. Including most of my SEN students know better than them. Of what relevance is a march in London on a subject a good proportion have at least some ambivalence about to Northumberland?
Simples. Just spin that around.
Scotland invade and take Northumberland, you are implying everyone in London and environs wouldn’t care less?
HY would be leading a column of tanks up the M1 quicker than the jocks could pack their neeps into their sporrans and climb back over the wall.
We are all in this together. Invasions. Attacks on our democracy and way of life. Attacks on our individual freedom like Labours anti car campaign and abolishing zero hours.
This has been fun. Made more so by the fact so many of you don’t pay attention or listen. 🙂 I have to get up at North Yorkshire dawn. But, if election isn’t called tommorow, I will be back on Tuesday morning with Racing Tips 🐎
But nobody has invaded anybody. Attacks on our democracy and way of life? The right to protest is part of my democracy and way of life. I'd like to keep it that way thank you.
My Dad does the books and we have people on zero hours. And I asked them about it, and they said they love it, and don’t want that individual freedom taken away by Starmer, the piper playing tune of union money masters, which is why they have switched vote from Labour to Conservative.
Still 130 short of the 180+ Tory MPs they need to oust Sunak in a VONC
Both May and Johnson won their VONCs, but were gone within a couple of months as I recall.
Any VONC is career ending.
True. And see also the overthrow of IDS in 2003. Many Tory MPs were swearing blind he had their full support (including Michael Howard, if memory serves), but whaddayaknow, he lost the vote. That's what's likely to happen this time too. If there's a VONC, Sunak will get crushed in it. That's if he doesn't resign when the Old Lady visits him. The only issue that will be settled by whether it's 52 letters or a much higher number will be whether he even bothers staying on for the vote. Then Penny will call a GE for 2 May and the leftwing figure that the Tory campaign demonises the most won't be Keir Starmer or George Galloway - it will be Sadiq Khan. In short, they will play the London card. And they will probably keep their majority. I have placed stakes accordingly.
If ever there was a post that started well before rapidly spiralling into insanity, this is it.
The Tories will "play the London card."? It's quite possible they don't have any cards but they certainly don't have a 'London card' to play.
I'm sure voters around here are dying to say "yes my rent/mortgage has shot up so I was going to vote against the government, but Sadiq Khan ..."
Its the most insane argument I've ever read. I've never heard a single person IRL, of any particular stripe or none ever bring up Sadiq Khan. Why would they?
You’ve not been paying any attention at all.
Khan cost Labour Uxbridge. And so the government realised Khan could cost Labour the whole General Election. From that moment on the Tories have bet the house on Khan costing Labour the election, from war on cars to Hamas rallies destroying British democracy, Khan is at the centre of every reason not to vote Labour.
Have you not heard Tory MPs in northern seats more than happy to use the “k” word? Why are they doing that do you think, if it’s pointless.
Either they have it wrong, or you.
Where in the Red Wall is Uxbridge?
I've driven regularly all over the Northwest but I've never seen Uxbridge. Is it off the M6, the M56, the M63? I khan't find it on my map.
🙄 “ Have you not heard Tory MPs in northern seats more than happy to use the “k” word? Why are they doing that do you think, if it’s pointless.”
No I haven't. Cos nobody would know who they were talking about.
YES YOU HAVE!
Sorry for shouting, but the 30 pennies havn’t dropped yet.
Dixiedean and I are both from the Red Wall, from different sides of the political spectrum, and we're both telling you the same thing.
Not sure where you're from, maybe London or cloud cuckoo land, if you think voters here give a shit about Khan.
That’s not the point we are making here. You said Tories up North don’t mention Khan, but we know they do, and we know the reason why.
They don't.
By coincidence, I've got a leaflet from the Tories through my door today. I haven't recycled it yet, so I can tell you what it does actually mention.
Does mention (and I'm quoting here, not agreeing with them): Local representation Cleaning up local area Schools Police United Utilities Road Safety ASB Road Signage Pot Holes Getting information out, where its needed Repairs to steps, paths and bridges Supporting local business Charity Events Working for residents.
It’s like they are trying to tell us something but not allowed to.
It makes me very very worried.
"No comment from Kensington Palace tonight after at least 3 international pictures agencies refuse to distribute this morning’s photo of Kate and her children. Some of them (@AP ) have claimed “the source [the palace] has manipulated the image”."
It’s like they are trying to tell us something but not allowed to.
It makes me very very worried.
"No comment from Kensington Palace tonight after at least 3 international pictures agencies refuse to distribute this morning’s photo of Kate and her children. Some of them (@AP ) have claimed “the source [the palace] has manipulated the image”."
Still 130 short of the 180+ Tory MPs they need to oust Sunak in a VONC
Both May and Johnson won their VONCs, but were gone within a couple of months as I recall.
Any VONC is career ending.
True. And see also the overthrow of IDS in 2003. Many Tory MPs were swearing blind he had their full support (including Michael Howard, if memory serves), but whaddayaknow, he lost the vote. That's what's likely to happen this time too. If there's a VONC, Sunak will get crushed in it. That's if he doesn't resign when the Old Lady visits him. The only issue that will be settled by whether it's 52 letters or a much higher number will be whether he even bothers staying on for the vote. Then Penny will call a GE for 2 May and the leftwing figure that the Tory campaign demonises the most won't be Keir Starmer or George Galloway - it will be Sadiq Khan. In short, they will play the London card. And they will probably keep their majority. I have placed stakes accordingly.
If ever there was a post that started well before rapidly spiralling into insanity, this is it.
The Tories will "play the London card."? It's quite possible they don't have any cards but they certainly don't have a 'London card' to play.
I'm sure voters around here are dying to say "yes my rent/mortgage has shot up so I was going to vote against the government, but Sadiq Khan ..."
Its the most insane argument I've ever read. I've never heard a single person IRL, of any particular stripe or none ever bring up Sadiq Khan. Why would they?
You’ve not been paying any attention at all.
Khan cost Labour Uxbridge. And so the government realised Khan could cost Labour the whole General Election. From that moment on the Tories have bet the house on Khan costing Labour the election, from war on cars to Hamas rallies destroying British democracy, Khan is at the centre of every reason not to vote Labour.
Have you not heard Tory MPs in northern seats more than happy to use the “k” word? Why are they doing that do you think, if it’s pointless.
Either they have it wrong, or you.
Where in the Red Wall is Uxbridge?
I've driven regularly all over the Northwest but I've never seen Uxbridge. Is it off the M6, the M56, the M63? I khan't find it on my map.
🙄 “ Have you not heard Tory MPs in northern seats more than happy to use the “k” word? Why are they doing that do you think, if it’s pointless.”
No I haven't. Cos nobody would know who they were talking about.
YES YOU HAVE!
Sorry for shouting, but the 30 pennies havn’t dropped yet.
Dixiedean and I are both from the Red Wall, from different sides of the political spectrum, and we're both telling you the same thing.
Not sure where you're from, maybe London or cloud cuckoo land, if you think voters here give a shit about Khan.
That’s not the point we are making here. You said Tories up North don’t mention Khan, but we know they do, and we know the reason why.
They don't.
By coincidence, I've got a leaflet from the Tories through my door today. I haven't recycled it yet, so I can tell you what it does actually mention.
Does mention (and I'm quoting here, not agreeing with them): Local representation Cleaning up local area Schools Police United Utilities Road Safety ASB Road Signage Pot Holes Getting information out, where its needed Repairs to steps, paths and bridges Supporting local business Charity Events Working for residents.
So far you've used Uxbridge and Nottingham as examples of Red Wall seats it seems. I think we might be zeroing in upon your confusion.
If you didn’t know Red Wall applies as well to East and West, and bit in the middle, Midlands, you might as well just close your account and give up.
The red wall originally referred to the pronounced line of red constituencies across Lancashire and Yorkshire (and Northern Notts, Staffs and Derbyshire). Obviously the meaning has stretched somewhat since then.
It’s like they are trying to tell us something but not allowed to.
It makes me very very worried.
"No comment from Kensington Palace tonight after at least 3 international pictures agencies refuse to distribute this morning’s photo of Kate and her children. Some of them (@AP ) have claimed “the source [the palace] has manipulated the image”."
Still 130 short of the 180+ Tory MPs they need to oust Sunak in a VONC
Both May and Johnson won their VONCs, but were gone within a couple of months as I recall.
Any VONC is career ending.
True. And see also the overthrow of IDS in 2003. Many Tory MPs were swearing blind he had their full support (including Michael Howard, if memory serves), but whaddayaknow, he lost the vote. That's what's likely to happen this time too. If there's a VONC, Sunak will get crushed in it. That's if he doesn't resign when the Old Lady visits him. The only issue that will be settled by whether it's 52 letters or a much higher number will be whether he even bothers staying on for the vote. Then Penny will call a GE for 2 May and the leftwing figure that the Tory campaign demonises the most won't be Keir Starmer or George Galloway - it will be Sadiq Khan. In short, they will play the London card. And they will probably keep their majority. I have placed stakes accordingly.
If ever there was a post that started well before rapidly spiralling into insanity, this is it.
The Tories will "play the London card."? It's quite possible they don't have any cards but they certainly don't have a 'London card' to play.
I'm sure voters around here are dying to say "yes my rent/mortgage has shot up so I was going to vote against the government, but Sadiq Khan ..."
Its the most insane argument I've ever read. I've never heard a single person IRL, of any particular stripe or none ever bring up Sadiq Khan. Why would they?
You’ve not been paying any attention at all.
Khan cost Labour Uxbridge. And so the government realised Khan could cost Labour the whole General Election. From that moment on the Tories have bet the house on Khan costing Labour the election, from war on cars to Hamas rallies destroying British democracy, Khan is at the centre of every reason not to vote Labour.
Have you not heard Tory MPs in northern seats more than happy to use the “k” word? Why are they doing that do you think, if it’s pointless.
Either they have it wrong, or you.
Where in the Red Wall is Uxbridge?
I've driven regularly all over the Northwest but I've never seen Uxbridge. Is it off the M6, the M56, the M63? I khan't find it on my map.
🙄 “ Have you not heard Tory MPs in northern seats more than happy to use the “k” word? Why are they doing that do you think, if it’s pointless.”
No I haven't. Cos nobody would know who they were talking about.
YES YOU HAVE!
Sorry for shouting, but the 30 pennies havn’t dropped yet.
Dixiedean and I are both from the Red Wall, from different sides of the political spectrum, and we're both telling you the same thing.
Not sure where you're from, maybe London or cloud cuckoo land, if you think voters here give a shit about Khan.
That’s not the point we are making here. You said Tories up North don’t mention Khan, but we know they do, and we know the reason why.
They don't.
By coincidence, I've got a leaflet from the Tories through my door today. I haven't recycled it yet, so I can tell you what it does actually mention.
Does mention (and I'm quoting here, not agreeing with them): Local representation Cleaning up local area Schools Police United Utilities Road Safety ASB Road Signage Pot Holes Getting information out, where its needed Repairs to steps, paths and bridges Supporting local business Charity Events Working for residents.
Oh. You're talking about the Southern MP who has been suspended from the Tory Party? Well. The Conservative Party is not short of folk talking absolute mince about all kinds of crap that has no relevance to the voter. I repeat. I doubt one in twenty up here, to be generous, would know who the Mayor of London is. I dispute 1 in 100 would give much of a fuck about it.
Look at what I said.
Khan cost Labour Uxbridge. And so the government realised Khan could cost Labour the whole General Election. From that moment on the Tories have bet the house on Khan costing Labour the election, from war on cars to Hamas rallies destroying British democracy, Khan is at the centre of every reason not to vote Labour.
Look at what you are saying.
The MPs and election team and advisors around Sunak, and all the money they are on, have got it wrong. And you know better than them?
This weeks big policy announcement has those intimating marches in London at the heart of it. Can you not see this?
Almost everyone I meet. Including most of my SEN students know better than them. Of what relevance is a march in London on a subject a good proportion have at least some ambivalence about to Northumberland?
Simples. Just spin that around.
Scotland invade and take Northumberland, you are implying everyone in London and environs wouldn’t care less?
HY would be leading a column of tanks up the M1 quicker than the jocks could pack their neeps into their sporrans and climb back over the wall.
We are all in this together. Invasions. Attacks on our democracy and way of life. Attacks on our individual freedom like Labours anti car campaign and abolishing zero hours.
This has been fun. Made more so by the fact so many of you don’t pay attention or listen. 🙂 I have to get up at North Yorkshire dawn. But, if election isn’t called tommorow, I will be back on Tuesday morning with Racing Tips 🐎
But nobody has invaded anybody. Attacks on our democracy and way of life? The right to protest is part of my democracy and way of life. I'd like to keep it that way thank you.
My Dad does the books and we have people on zero hours. And I asked them about it, and they said they love it, and don’t want that individual freedom taken away by Starmer, the piper playing tune of union money masters, which is why they have switched vote from Labour to Conservative.
The key is to put the choice in the hands of the employee. If they want a substantive contract, they get one. If not then they can carry on ZHC.
Still 130 short of the 180+ Tory MPs they need to oust Sunak in a VONC
Both May and Johnson won their VONCs, but were gone within a couple of months as I recall.
Any VONC is career ending.
True. And see also the overthrow of IDS in 2003. Many Tory MPs were swearing blind he had their full support (including Michael Howard, if memory serves), but whaddayaknow, he lost the vote. That's what's likely to happen this time too. If there's a VONC, Sunak will get crushed in it. That's if he doesn't resign when the Old Lady visits him. The only issue that will be settled by whether it's 52 letters or a much higher number will be whether he even bothers staying on for the vote. Then Penny will call a GE for 2 May and the leftwing figure that the Tory campaign demonises the most won't be Keir Starmer or George Galloway - it will be Sadiq Khan. In short, they will play the London card. And they will probably keep their majority. I have placed stakes accordingly.
If ever there was a post that started well before rapidly spiralling into insanity, this is it.
The Tories will "play the London card."? It's quite possible they don't have any cards but they certainly don't have a 'London card' to play.
I'm sure voters around here are dying to say "yes my rent/mortgage has shot up so I was going to vote against the government, but Sadiq Khan ..."
Its the most insane argument I've ever read. I've never heard a single person IRL, of any particular stripe or none ever bring up Sadiq Khan. Why would they?
You’ve not been paying any attention at all.
Khan cost Labour Uxbridge. And so the government realised Khan could cost Labour the whole General Election. From that moment on the Tories have bet the house on Khan costing Labour the election, from war on cars to Hamas rallies destroying British democracy, Khan is at the centre of every reason not to vote Labour.
Have you not heard Tory MPs in northern seats more than happy to use the “k” word? Why are they doing that do you think, if it’s pointless.
Either they have it wrong, or you.
Where in the Red Wall is Uxbridge?
I've driven regularly all over the Northwest but I've never seen Uxbridge. Is it off the M6, the M56, the M63? I khan't find it on my map.
🙄 “ Have you not heard Tory MPs in northern seats more than happy to use the “k” word? Why are they doing that do you think, if it’s pointless.”
No I haven't. Cos nobody would know who they were talking about.
YES YOU HAVE!
Sorry for shouting, but the 30 pennies havn’t dropped yet.
Dixiedean and I are both from the Red Wall, from different sides of the political spectrum, and we're both telling you the same thing.
Not sure where you're from, maybe London or cloud cuckoo land, if you think voters here give a shit about Khan.
That’s not the point we are making here. You said Tories up North don’t mention Khan, but we know they do, and we know the reason why.
They don't.
By coincidence, I've got a leaflet from the Tories through my door today. I haven't recycled it yet, so I can tell you what it does actually mention.
Does mention (and I'm quoting here, not agreeing with them): Local representation Cleaning up local area Schools Police United Utilities Road Safety ASB Road Signage Pot Holes Getting information out, where its needed Repairs to steps, paths and bridges Supporting local business Charity Events Working for residents.
Oh. You're talking about the Southern MP who has been suspended from the Tory Party? Well. The Conservative Party is not short of folk talking absolute mince about all kinds of crap that has no relevance to the voter. I repeat. I doubt one in twenty up here, to be generous, would know who the Mayor of London is. I dispute 1 in 100 would give much of a fuck about it.
Look at what I said.
Khan cost Labour Uxbridge. And so the government realised Khan could cost Labour the whole General Election. From that moment on the Tories have bet the house on Khan costing Labour the election, from war on cars to Hamas rallies destroying British democracy, Khan is at the centre of every reason not to vote Labour.
Look at what you are saying.
The MPs and election team and advisors around Sunak, and all the money they are on, have got it wrong. And you know better than them?
This weeks big policy announcement has those intimating marches in London at the heart of it. Can you not see this?
Almost everyone I meet. Including most of my SEN students know better than them. Of what relevance is a march in London on a subject a good proportion have at least some ambivalence about to Northumberland?
Simples. Just spin that around.
Scotland invade and take Northumberland, you are implying everyone in London and environs wouldn’t care less?
HY would be leading a column of tanks up the M1 quicker than the jocks could pack their neeps into their sporrans and climb back over the wall.
We are all in this together. Invasions. Attacks on our democracy and way of life. Attacks on our individual freedom like Labours anti car campaign and abolishing zero hours.
This has been fun. Made more so by the fact so many of you don’t pay attention or listen. 🙂 I have to get up at North Yorkshire dawn. But, if election isn’t called tommorow, I will be back on Tuesday morning with Racing Tips 🐎
But nobody has invaded anybody. Attacks on our democracy and way of life? The right to protest is part of my democracy and way of life. I'd like to keep it that way thank you.
My Dad does the books and we have people on zero hours. And I asked them about it, and they said they love it, and don’t want that individual freedom taken away by Starmer, the piper playing tune of union money masters, which is why they have switched vote from Labour to Conservative.
Still 130 short of the 180+ Tory MPs they need to oust Sunak in a VONC
Both May and Johnson won their VONCs, but were gone within a couple of months as I recall.
Any VONC is career ending.
True. And see also the overthrow of IDS in 2003. Many Tory MPs were swearing blind he had their full support (including Michael Howard, if memory serves), but whaddayaknow, he lost the vote. That's what's likely to happen this time too. If there's a VONC, Sunak will get crushed in it. That's if he doesn't resign when the Old Lady visits him. The only issue that will be settled by whether it's 52 letters or a much higher number will be whether he even bothers staying on for the vote. Then Penny will call a GE for 2 May and the leftwing figure that the Tory campaign demonises the most won't be Keir Starmer or George Galloway - it will be Sadiq Khan. In short, they will play the London card. And they will probably keep their majority. I have placed stakes accordingly.
If ever there was a post that started well before rapidly spiralling into insanity, this is it.
The Tories will "play the London card."? It's quite possible they don't have any cards but they certainly don't have a 'London card' to play.
I'm sure voters around here are dying to say "yes my rent/mortgage has shot up so I was going to vote against the government, but Sadiq Khan ..."
Its the most insane argument I've ever read. I've never heard a single person IRL, of any particular stripe or none ever bring up Sadiq Khan. Why would they?
You’ve not been paying any attention at all.
Khan cost Labour Uxbridge. And so the government realised Khan could cost Labour the whole General Election. From that moment on the Tories have bet the house on Khan costing Labour the election, from war on cars to Hamas rallies destroying British democracy, Khan is at the centre of every reason not to vote Labour.
Have you not heard Tory MPs in northern seats more than happy to use the “k” word? Why are they doing that do you think, if it’s pointless.
Either they have it wrong, or you.
Where in the Red Wall is Uxbridge?
I've driven regularly all over the Northwest but I've never seen Uxbridge. Is it off the M6, the M56, the M63? I khan't find it on my map.
🙄 “ Have you not heard Tory MPs in northern seats more than happy to use the “k” word? Why are they doing that do you think, if it’s pointless.”
No I haven't. Cos nobody would know who they were talking about.
YES YOU HAVE!
Sorry for shouting, but the 30 pennies havn’t dropped yet.
Dixiedean and I are both from the Red Wall, from different sides of the political spectrum, and we're both telling you the same thing.
Not sure where you're from, maybe London or cloud cuckoo land, if you think voters here give a shit about Khan.
That’s not the point we are making here. You said Tories up North don’t mention Khan, but we know they do, and we know the reason why.
They don't.
By coincidence, I've got a leaflet from the Tories through my door today. I haven't recycled it yet, so I can tell you what it does actually mention.
Does mention (and I'm quoting here, not agreeing with them): Local representation Cleaning up local area Schools Police United Utilities Road Safety ASB Road Signage Pot Holes Getting information out, where its needed Repairs to steps, paths and bridges Supporting local business Charity Events Working for residents.
Oh. You're talking about the Southern MP who has been suspended from the Tory Party? Well. The Conservative Party is not short of folk talking absolute mince about all kinds of crap that has no relevance to the voter. I repeat. I doubt one in twenty up here, to be generous, would know who the Mayor of London is. I dispute 1 in 100 would give much of a fuck about it.
Look at what I said.
Khan cost Labour Uxbridge. And so the government realised Khan could cost Labour the whole General Election. From that moment on the Tories have bet the house on Khan costing Labour the election, from war on cars to Hamas rallies destroying British democracy, Khan is at the centre of every reason not to vote Labour.
Look at what you are saying.
The MPs and election team and advisors around Sunak, and all the money they are on, have got it wrong. And you know better than them?
This weeks big policy announcement has those intimating marches in London at the heart of it. Can you not see this?
Almost everyone I meet. Including most of my SEN students know better than them. Of what relevance is a march in London on a subject a good proportion have at least some ambivalence about to Northumberland?
Simples. Just spin that around.
Scotland invade and take Northumberland, you are implying everyone in London and environs wouldn’t care less?
HY would be leading a column of tanks up the M1 quicker than the jocks could pack their neeps into their sporrans and climb back over the wall.
We are all in this together. Invasions. Attacks on our democracy and way of life. Attacks on our individual freedom like Labours anti car campaign and abolishing zero hours.
This has been fun. Made more so by the fact so many of you don’t pay attention or listen. 🙂 I have to get up at North Yorkshire dawn. But, if election isn’t called tommorow, I will be back on Tuesday morning with Racing Tips 🐎
But nobody has invaded anybody. Attacks on our democracy and way of life? The right to protest is part of my democracy and way of life. I'd like to keep it that way thank you.
My Dad does the books and we have people on zero hours. And I asked them about it, and they said they love it, and don’t want that individual freedom taken away by Starmer, the piper playing tune of union money masters, which is why they have switched vote from Labour to Conservative.
We've segued pretty swiftly from invasion and attacks on democracy to some people who are on zero hours contracts. Keep up that transition of attack and there'll be a Tory majority of 500 by May.
One excellent reason to hope for a May 2nd election is that it would force the parties to issue their manifestos sharpish, so we can all see what they're actually proposing to do.
One excellent reason to hope for a May 2nd election is that it would force the parties to issue their manifestos sharpish, so we can all see what they're actually proposing to do.
Still 130 short of the 180+ Tory MPs they need to oust Sunak in a VONC
Both May and Johnson won their VONCs, but were gone within a couple of months as I recall.
Any VONC is career ending.
True. And see also the overthrow of IDS in 2003. Many Tory MPs were swearing blind he had their full support (including Michael Howard, if memory serves), but whaddayaknow, he lost the vote. That's what's likely to happen this time too. If there's a VONC, Sunak will get crushed in it. That's if he doesn't resign when the Old Lady visits him. The only issue that will be settled by whether it's 52 letters or a much higher number will be whether he even bothers staying on for the vote. Then Penny will call a GE for 2 May and the leftwing figure that the Tory campaign demonises the most won't be Keir Starmer or George Galloway - it will be Sadiq Khan. In short, they will play the London card. And they will probably keep their majority. I have placed stakes accordingly.
If ever there was a post that started well before rapidly spiralling into insanity, this is it.
The Tories will "play the London card."? It's quite possible they don't have any cards but they certainly don't have a 'London card' to play.
I'm sure voters around here are dying to say "yes my rent/mortgage has shot up so I was going to vote against the government, but Sadiq Khan ..."
Its the most insane argument I've ever read. I've never heard a single person IRL, of any particular stripe or none ever bring up Sadiq Khan. Why would they?
You’ve not been paying any attention at all.
Khan cost Labour Uxbridge. And so the government realised Khan could cost Labour the whole General Election. From that moment on the Tories have bet the house on Khan costing Labour the election, from war on cars to Hamas rallies destroying British democracy, Khan is at the centre of every reason not to vote Labour.
Have you not heard Tory MPs in northern seats more than happy to use the “k” word? Why are they doing that do you think, if it’s pointless.
Either they have it wrong, or you.
Where in the Red Wall is Uxbridge?
I've driven regularly all over the Northwest but I've never seen Uxbridge. Is it off the M6, the M56, the M63? I khan't find it on my map.
🙄 “ Have you not heard Tory MPs in northern seats more than happy to use the “k” word? Why are they doing that do you think, if it’s pointless.”
No I haven't. Cos nobody would know who they were talking about.
YES YOU HAVE!
Sorry for shouting, but the 30 pennies havn’t dropped yet.
Dixiedean and I are both from the Red Wall, from different sides of the political spectrum, and we're both telling you the same thing.
Not sure where you're from, maybe London or cloud cuckoo land, if you think voters here give a shit about Khan.
That’s not the point we are making here. You said Tories up North don’t mention Khan, but we know they do, and we know the reason why.
They don't.
By coincidence, I've got a leaflet from the Tories through my door today. I haven't recycled it yet, so I can tell you what it does actually mention.
Does mention (and I'm quoting here, not agreeing with them): Local representation Cleaning up local area Schools Police United Utilities Road Safety ASB Road Signage Pot Holes Getting information out, where its needed Repairs to steps, paths and bridges Supporting local business Charity Events Working for residents.
Oh. You're talking about the Southern MP who has been suspended from the Tory Party? Well. The Conservative Party is not short of folk talking absolute mince about all kinds of crap that has no relevance to the voter. I repeat. I doubt one in twenty up here, to be generous, would know who the Mayor of London is. I dispute 1 in 100 would give much of a fuck about it.
Look at what I said.
Khan cost Labour Uxbridge. And so the government realised Khan could cost Labour the whole General Election. From that moment on the Tories have bet the house on Khan costing Labour the election, from war on cars to Hamas rallies destroying British democracy, Khan is at the centre of every reason not to vote Labour.
Look at what you are saying.
The MPs and election team and advisors around Sunak, and all the money they are on, have got it wrong. And you know better than them?
This weeks big policy announcement has those intimating marches in London at the heart of it. Can you not see this?
Almost everyone I meet. Including most of my SEN students know better than them. Of what relevance is a march in London on a subject a good proportion have at least some ambivalence about to Northumberland?
Simples. Just spin that around.
Scotland invade and take Northumberland, you are implying everyone in London and environs wouldn’t care less?
HY would be leading a column of tanks up the M1 quicker than the jocks could pack their neeps into their sporrans and climb back over the wall.
We are all in this together. Invasions. Attacks on our democracy and way of life. Attacks on our individual freedom like Labours anti car campaign and abolishing zero hours.
This has been fun. Made more so by the fact so many of you don’t pay attention or listen. 🙂 I have to get up at North Yorkshire dawn. But, if election isn’t called tommorow, I will be back on Tuesday morning with Racing Tips 🐎
But nobody has invaded anybody. Attacks on our democracy and way of life? The right to protest is part of my democracy and way of life. I'd like to keep it that way thank you.
My Dad does the books and we have people on zero hours. And I asked them about it, and they said they love it, and don’t want that individual freedom taken away by Starmer, the piper playing tune of union money masters, which is why they have switched vote from Labour to Conservative.
The key is to put the choice in the hands of the employee. If they want a substantive contract, they get one. If not then they can carry on ZHC.
That sounds suspiciously like a Socialist State to me. How about carrying on on ZHC with no possibility of a contract? That's true freedom of choice.
I can probably guess the voting intention of maybe 50 people I know (my extended family and my wider friendship group)
At the last election I reckon at least 20 of them voted Tory (possibly quite a lot more but let’s be strict)
This time? Maybe 2. Literally 2 people. At the very most, 4 or 5, if Sunak gets lucky
That’s a total collapse
Say what you like about Rishi but he has stopped many of the oiks who voted Tory last time doing so again…
Even if he leads the Tories to record defeat he has made voting Tory something to aspire to again not for the common herd….
Quoted without comment (lost for words)…
One could imagine the Tory advert now 'Forget gold card, flying first class, dinner at the Savoy, holidays in the Maldives, kids at Eton, box at Ascot, playing polo, wife shops at Harrods? For true class and to stand out from the crowd this time vote Rishi.'
Whereas in 2019 it was 'Butlins, holiday in Blackpool or Benidorm, dinner at Wimpey, wife in the nailbar, love playing five a side or bowls or darts down the pub? Then Boris is the man for you!'
“Dinner at the Savoy” is quite a weird one, there
Dinner at a Wimpey is a pretty weird, niche activity nowadays as well. We scum might as well plump for a British Restaurant.
So basically, Kate is probably dead or very ill and the Palace have lied.
If we're speculating I think what's likelier is that she and William have had very profound differences and have separated. Even without the supposed dodgyness of the photo, the 'the photo was taken by the Prince of Wales' as a reason for him not being in it seemed odd and hamfisted.
I hope everything turns out OK for everyone. Goodness knows the family deserves some luck. And someone on the Kensington Palace staff should be getting their marching orders.
Biden has built a massive war chest. He's running a more traditional campaign schedule. He's running on hope, optimism, and the American spirit. He's got the momentum and he's just getting started.
Biden has built a massive war chest. He's running a more traditional campaign schedule. He's running on hope, optimism, and the American spirit. He's got the momentum and he's just getting started.
So basically, Kate is probably dead or very ill and the Palace have lied.
If we're speculating I think what's likelier is that she and William have had very profound differences and have separated. Even without the supposed dodgyness of the photo, the 'the photo was taken by the Prince of Wales' as a reason for him not being in it seemed odd and hamfisted.
I hope everything turns out OK for everyone. Goodness knows the family deserves some luck. And someone on the Kensington Palace staff should be getting their marching orders.
Perhaps the profound differences are political. It might explain the odd statement that William issued about Gaza.
It’s like they are trying to tell us something but not allowed to.
It makes me very very worried.
"No comment from Kensington Palace tonight after at least 3 international pictures agencies refuse to distribute this morning’s photo of Kate and her children. Some of them (@AP ) have claimed “the source [the palace] has manipulated the image”."
This is the ITV Royal editor, so not one of the usual suspects.
The foliage in the background looks late summer/early autumn to me.
It is a weird photo. If you Photoshop an image you do so for a purpose. It's hard to work out the intention behind this manipulation. It seems to have something to do with Kate's hands rather than her main presence.
One excellent reason to hope for a May 2nd election is that it would force the parties to issue their manifestos sharpish, so we can all see what they're actually proposing to do.
This phoney war is getting boring.
We just need to tories to issue theirs. Then labour can reprint it in a different and oh-so-focus-grouped font.
It’s like they are trying to tell us something but not allowed to.
It makes me very very worried.
"No comment from Kensington Palace tonight after at least 3 international pictures agencies refuse to distribute this morning’s photo of Kate and her children. Some of them (@AP ) have claimed “the source [the palace] has manipulated the image”."
This is the ITV Royal editor, so not one of the usual suspects.
The foliage in the background looks late summer/early autumn to me.
It is a weird photo. If you Photoshop an image you do so for a purpose. It's hard to work out the intention behind this manipulation. It seems to have something to do with Kate's hands rather than her main presence.
If it’s just a marital spat it’s easily fixed. Kate has no reason to exploit or use her children in this maladroit way. She wouid pose for a real photo and put the rumours to bed, even if she’s about to divorce William
I am worried she is indeed very sick. Ugh. I hope I am wrong. I can’t think of any other explanation for this mad photo
It’s like they are trying to tell us something but not allowed to.
It makes me very very worried.
"No comment from Kensington Palace tonight after at least 3 international pictures agencies refuse to distribute this morning’s photo of Kate and her children. Some of them (@AP ) have claimed “the source [the palace] has manipulated the image”."
This is the ITV Royal editor, so not one of the usual suspects.
The foliage in the background looks late summer/early autumn to me.
It is a weird photo. If you Photoshop an image you do so for a purpose. It's hard to work out the intention behind this manipulation. It seems to have something to do with Kate's hands rather than her main presence.
If it’s just a marital spat it’s easily fixed. Kate has no reason to exploit or use her children in this maladroit way. She wouid pose for a real photo and put the rumours to bed, even if she’s about to divorce William
I am worried she is indeed very sick. Ugh. I hope I am wrong. I can’t think of any other explanation for this mad photo
This may be tosh, but it's plausible enough to get to sleep tonight;
My guess is that the photo comes from a Google Pixel 8 and whoever took it used the Best Take feature which extracts the best facial expression for each individual from a series of photos taken in rapid succession. That can create similar artifacts to those seen in this shot.
So basically, Kate is probably dead or very ill and the Palace have lied.
If we're speculating I think what's likelier is that she and William have had very profound differences and have separated. Even without the supposed dodgyness of the photo, the 'the photo was taken by the Prince of Wales' as a reason for him not being in it seemed odd and hamfisted.
I hope everything turns out OK for everyone. Goodness knows the family deserves some luck. And someone on the Kensington Palace staff should be getting their marching orders.
No she is recuperating from significant surgery is what we know and won't be seen in public again until Easter. She was seen in a car with her mother last week by foreign press, this rather rushed out photo was just to shut up social media speculation until then
It’s like they are trying to tell us something but not allowed to.
It makes me very very worried.
"No comment from Kensington Palace tonight after at least 3 international pictures agencies refuse to distribute this morning’s photo of Kate and her children. Some of them (@AP ) have claimed “the source [the palace] has manipulated the image”."
This is the ITV Royal editor, so not one of the usual suspects.
The foliage in the background looks late summer/early autumn to me.
It is a weird photo. If you Photoshop an image you do so for a purpose. It's hard to work out the intention behind this manipulation. It seems to have something to do with Kate's hands rather than her main presence.
If it’s just a marital spat it’s easily fixed. Kate has no reason to exploit or use her children in this maladroit way. She wouid pose for a real photo and put the rumours to bed, even if she’s about to divorce William
I am worried she is indeed very sick. Ugh. I hope I am wrong. I can’t think of any other explanation for this mad photo
If you look at the cuff on the daughters left sleeve, the picture is all distorted. Bit odd
Biden has built a massive war chest. He's running a more traditional campaign schedule. He's running on hope, optimism, and the American spirit. He's got the momentum and he's just getting started.
So basically, Kate is probably dead or very ill and the Palace have lied.
If we're speculating I think what's likelier is that she and William have had very profound differences and have separated. Even without the supposed dodgyness of the photo, the 'the photo was taken by the Prince of Wales' as a reason for him not being in it seemed odd and hamfisted.
I hope everything turns out OK for everyone. Goodness knows the family deserves some luck. And someone on the Kensington Palace staff should be getting their marching orders.
No she is recuperating from significant surgery is what we know and won't be seen in public again until Easter. She was seen in a car with her mother last week by foreign press, this rather rushed out photo was just to shut up social media speculation until then
So basically, Kate is probably dead or very ill and the Palace have lied.
If we're speculating I think what's likelier is that she and William have had very profound differences and have separated. Even without the supposed dodgyness of the photo, the 'the photo was taken by the Prince of Wales' as a reason for him not being in it seemed odd and hamfisted.
I hope everything turns out OK for everyone. Goodness knows the family deserves some luck. And someone on the Kensington Palace staff should be getting their marching orders.
No she is recuperating from significant surgery is what we know and won't be seen in public again until Easter. She was seen in a car with her mother last week by foreign press, this rather rushed out photo was just to shut up social media speculation until then
It doesn't seem to have stopped speculation.
Tight jeans after complex abdominal surgery?
They could well be maternity jeans, more or less like leggings at the waist
The photo has a tree in almost full foliage in the background. Its early march
They must have been desperate to release something to actually go with this badly badly manufactured image. This is deeply concerning
The trees are starting to come out in green quite widely here in SW Ireland. A tree in a warm spot by a wall might easily be a week or so further ahead.
It's all quite odd. If they hadn't issued a photo no-one would have batted an eyelid. Everyone knows Kate is convalescing, and that her husband is wary of media exposure. So why issue a faked photo?
Is anyone confident in what way the photo has been altered? A tweet says it's an old head of hers on the body of a stand-in, but I can't tell.
It’s like they are trying to tell us something but not allowed to.
It makes me very very worried.
"No comment from Kensington Palace tonight after at least 3 international pictures agencies refuse to distribute this morning’s photo of Kate and her children. Some of them (@AP ) have claimed “the source [the palace] has manipulated the image”."
This is the ITV Royal editor, so not one of the usual suspects.
The foliage in the background looks late summer/early autumn to me.
It is a weird photo. If you Photoshop an image you do so for a purpose. It's hard to work out the intention behind this manipulation. It seems to have something to do with Kate's hands rather than her main presence.
If it’s just a marital spat it’s easily fixed. Kate has no reason to exploit or use her children in this maladroit way. She wouid pose for a real photo and put the rumours to bed, even if she’s about to divorce William
I am worried she is indeed very sick. Ugh. I hope I am wrong. I can’t think of any other explanation for this mad photo
If you look at the cuff on the daughters left sleeve, the picture is all distorted. Bit odd
It’s like they are trying to tell us something but not allowed to.
It makes me very very worried.
"No comment from Kensington Palace tonight after at least 3 international pictures agencies refuse to distribute this morning’s photo of Kate and her children. Some of them (@AP ) have claimed “the source [the palace] has manipulated the image”."
This is the ITV Royal editor, so not one of the usual suspects.
The foliage in the background looks late summer/early autumn to me.
It is a weird photo. If you Photoshop an image you do so for a purpose. It's hard to work out the intention behind this manipulation. It seems to have something to do with Kate's hands rather than her main presence.
If it’s just a marital spat it’s easily fixed. Kate has no reason to exploit or use her children in this maladroit way. She wouid pose for a real photo and put the rumours to bed, even if she’s about to divorce William
I am worried she is indeed very sick. Ugh. I hope I am wrong. I can’t think of any other explanation for this mad photo
If you look at the cuff on the daughters left sleeve, the picture is all distorted. Bit odd
There’s actually part of the girl’s cuff missing. There seems to be several errors. Oh my!
It’s like they are trying to tell us something but not allowed to.
It makes me very very worried.
"No comment from Kensington Palace tonight after at least 3 international pictures agencies refuse to distribute this morning’s photo of Kate and her children. Some of them (@AP ) have claimed “the source [the palace] has manipulated the image”."
This is the ITV Royal editor, so not one of the usual suspects.
The foliage in the background looks late summer/early autumn to me.
It is a weird photo. If you Photoshop an image you do so for a purpose. It's hard to work out the intention behind this manipulation. It seems to have something to do with Kate's hands rather than her main presence.
If it’s just a marital spat it’s easily fixed. Kate has no reason to exploit or use her children in this maladroit way. She wouid pose for a real photo and put the rumours to bed, even if she’s about to divorce William
I am worried she is indeed very sick. Ugh. I hope I am wrong. I can’t think of any other explanation for this mad photo
If you look at the cuff on the daughters left sleeve, the picture is all distorted. Bit odd
The boy on the left's right hand looks odd too.
Is there a proper theory, or is it just that the stand-in for the usual photo-fiddler was a bit wet behind the ears, i.e. a non-story?
It’s like they are trying to tell us something but not allowed to.
It makes me very very worried.
"No comment from Kensington Palace tonight after at least 3 international pictures agencies refuse to distribute this morning’s photo of Kate and her children. Some of them (@AP ) have claimed “the source [the palace] has manipulated the image”."
This is the ITV Royal editor, so not one of the usual suspects.
The foliage in the background looks late summer/early autumn to me.
It is a weird photo. If you Photoshop an image you do so for a purpose. It's hard to work out the intention behind this manipulation. It seems to have something to do with Kate's hands rather than her main presence.
If it’s just a marital spat it’s easily fixed. Kate has no reason to exploit or use her children in this maladroit way. She wouid pose for a real photo and put the rumours to bed, even if she’s about to divorce William
I am worried she is indeed very sick. Ugh. I hope I am wrong. I can’t think of any other explanation for this mad photo
If you look at the cuff on the daughters left sleeve, the picture is all distorted. Bit odd
There’s actually part of the girl’s cuff missing. There seems to be several errors. Oh my!
So basically, Kate is probably dead or very ill and the Palace have lied.
If we're speculating I think what's likelier is that she and William have had very profound differences and have separated. Even without the supposed dodgyness of the photo, the 'the photo was taken by the Prince of Wales' as a reason for him not being in it seemed odd and hamfisted.
I hope everything turns out OK for everyone. Goodness knows the family deserves some luck. And someone on the Kensington Palace staff should be getting their marching orders.
No she is recuperating from significant surgery is what we know and won't be seen in public again until Easter. She was seen in a car with her mother last week by foreign press, this rather rushed out photo was just to shut up social media speculation until then
It’s like they are trying to tell us something but not allowed to.
It makes me very very worried.
"No comment from Kensington Palace tonight after at least 3 international pictures agencies refuse to distribute this morning’s photo of Kate and her children. Some of them (@AP ) have claimed “the source [the palace] has manipulated the image”."
This is the ITV Royal editor, so not one of the usual suspects.
The foliage in the background looks late summer/early autumn to me.
It is a weird photo. If you Photoshop an image you do so for a purpose. It's hard to work out the intention behind this manipulation. It seems to have something to do with Kate's hands rather than her main presence.
If it’s just a marital spat it’s easily fixed. Kate has no reason to exploit or use her children in this maladroit way. She wouid pose for a real photo and put the rumours to bed, even if she’s about to divorce William
I am worried she is indeed very sick. Ugh. I hope I am wrong. I can’t think of any other explanation for this mad photo
If you look at the cuff on the daughters left sleeve, the picture is all distorted. Bit odd
There’s actually part of the girl’s cuff missing. There seems to be several errors. Oh my!
Comments
Khan cost Labour Uxbridge. And so the government realised Khan could cost Labour the whole General Election. From that moment on the Tories have bet the house on Khan costing Labour the election, from war on cars to Hamas rallies destroying British democracy, Khan is at the centre of every reason not to vote Labour.
Look at what you are saying.
The MPs and election team and advisors around Sunak, and all the money they are on, have got it wrong. And you know better than them?
This weeks big policy announcement has those intimating marches in London at the heart of it. Can you not see this?
I was always convinced the Tories would get 32-33% at a minimum.
I'm beginning to wonder if they'll break the Brown record for lowest percentage for a sitting government.
They simply don't seem capable of anything other than repeating patterns of poor choices of behaviour.
I am not sure if you're allowed to take popcorn in though.
If Londoners on average salary want to buy property then they need to move out of London where it is cheaper
Of what relevance is a march in London on a subject a good proportion have at least some ambivalence about to Northumberland?
It's playing to the fears of an elderly core vote in the Home Counties.
London is a faraway land.
Time for the judging...
There comes a point where it becomes necessary to acknowledge the emperor has no clothes.
It’ll require Sunak to do a bit of fearmongering about woke Labour and lefty lawyers but I’m confident many will come back. Ref has surged too quickly - it’s a bubble. And they’ve moved up in almost perfect inverse correlation to Conservative VI. The old weather saying is relevant here: “long foretold, long last; short notice, soon past”.
Scotland invade and take Northumberland, you are implying everyone in London and environs wouldn’t care less?
HY would be leading a column of tanks up the M1 quicker than the jocks could pack their neeps into their sporrans and climb back over the wall.
We are all in this together. Invasions. Attacks on our democracy and way of life. Attacks on our individual freedom like Labours anti car campaign and abolishing zero hours.
This has been fun. Made more so by the fact so many of you don’t pay attention or listen. 🙂 I have to get up at North Yorkshire dawn. But, if election isn’t called tommorow, I will be back on Tuesday morning with Racing Tips 🐎
Which hasn't worked.
Whereas in 2019 it was
'Butlins, holiday in Blackpool
or Benidorm, dinner at
Wimpey, wife in the nailbar,
love playing five a side or bowls or darts down the pub? Then Boris is the man for you!'
Attacks on our democracy and way of life?
The right to protest is part of my democracy and way of life.
I'd like to keep it that way thank you.
So far you've used Uxbridge and Nottingham as examples of Red Wall seats it seems. I think we might be zeroing in upon your confusion.
But what’s it about? Residue of caliphate vs Catholic? Serfs vs Yeoman farmers?
“Dinner at the Savoy” is quite a weird one, there
Chris Ship
@chrisshipitv
·
19m
No comment from Kensington Palace tonight after at least 3 international pictures agencies refuse to distribute this morning’s photo of Kate and her children. Some of them (
@AP
) have claimed “the source [the palace] has manipulated the image”.
https://twitter.com/chrisshipitv/status/1766944328847364201
https://news.sky.com/story/picture-agencies-pull-kate-photo-amid-manipulation-concerns-13092352
But BBC website hasn't had the memo (yet).
(Edit: I see this story has already been mentioned).
Election results and maps...
Portugal was the old county of Portuscale, with capital in the city of the same name (the Port of Cale, modern day Oporto). It was a small county in the mountainous regions of northern Iberia, land of the Celts, occupied by germanic tribes after the fall of the Roman Empire, and liberated from Islam by Christian knights from France and Germany.
Portugal expanded to the Southern plains, lands of the Cartaginese, occupied by the Romans and later by Islam.
Today, Portugal still bears the same difference: the North, with its mountains, warm people, of northern european influence, and the flat South with spanish and african influences. You can admire the mountains in the north with the same awe as the beautiful and colourful plains in the south. Food is diferent but always tasty.
People in the North are generous but sometimes rude; in the south they seem aloof but brave. In the North everything is fast, in the South they linger. Long strands of sandy beach everywhere, of cold and violent Atlantic waves in the North to the warm and soft waves of the South. Pine trees and eucaliptuses, olives and cork. Hawks and seagulls, storks and crows. Two faces of the same coin, of rare beauty.
So there you have it.
It makes me very very worried.
Love to the sheep, btw.
https://twitter.com/chrisshipitv/status/1766944328847364201?t=3UTomjd9AjS17uGJs7trkA&s=19
This is the ITV Royal editor, so not one of the usual suspects.
The foliage in the background looks late summer/early autumn to me.
It's always the coverup that gets you, and Royal advisers have been around enough to know that.
Haven't they?
Keep up that transition of attack and there'll be a Tory majority of 500 by May.
This phoney war is getting boring.
How about carrying on on ZHC with no possibility of a contract?
That's true freedom of choice.
No more rows over decisions in cabinet, as cabinet no longer make decisions. I quite like that idea.
I hope everything turns out OK for everyone. Goodness knows the family deserves some luck. And someone on the Kensington Palace staff should be getting their marching orders.
Brett Meiselas
@BMeiselas
Trump peaked early. He's overexposed. He's angry. He's bitter. He's broke. He's mired in legal cases and bills. He's declining.
Biden has built a massive war chest. He's running a more traditional campaign schedule. He's running on hope, optimism, and the American spirit. He's got the momentum and he's just getting started.
Republicans aren't gonna know what hit 'em.
https://twitter.com/BMeiselas/status/1766827606765187222
I’m now at the stage where I’m HOPING this is just a separation
The photo, on examination, is obviously and badly faked
Trump knows he can’t win, but has to fight anyway. It’s one of those situations.
Is MAGA a coherent and consistent set of principles and idea’s to live on without Trump?
And thus - all problems fade to gray.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKx665Y-CDo
"Tim Curry singing 'Mother' - Dennis Potter's Schmoedipus - 1974"
They must have been desperate to release something to actually go with this badly badly manufactured image. This is deeply concerning
I am worried she is indeed very sick. Ugh. I hope I am wrong. I can’t think of any other explanation for this mad photo
What on Earth is going on?
My guess is that the photo comes from a Google Pixel 8 and whoever took it used the Best Take feature which extracts the best facial expression for each individual from a series of photos taken in rapid succession. That can create similar artifacts to those seen in this shot.
https://x.com/dhothersall/status/1766960227004432799
Still poor show if true. Can't trust anything these days.
Nice one.
Tight jeans after complex abdominal surgery?
It's all quite odd. If they hadn't issued a photo no-one would have batted an eyelid. Everyone knows Kate is convalescing, and that her husband is wary of media exposure. So why issue a faked photo?
Is anyone confident in what way the photo has been altered? A tweet says it's an old head of hers on the body of a stand-in, but I can't tell.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_TgqnzU1ZQk
Born in Odessa.
Chapeau
Is there a proper theory, or is it just that the stand-in for the usual photo-fiddler was a bit wet behind the ears, i.e. a non-story?
That’s mad. That’s also really bad
George's lower teeth are wrong too.