Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

Ipsos MRP has the Tories on 115 seats – politicalbetting.com

1246789

Comments

  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 78,346
    Ohhhh now we have a game.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 48,356
    Great goal by the Czechs there
  • Options
    StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 15,418

    Have we done this?

    "Re-elect Rehman in Rainham" is in trouble...

    Gillingham & Rainham voting intention (+/- 5%, changes vs 2019 notional)

    LAB: 55% (+27)
    CON: 23% (-39)
    REF: 15% (+15)
    LDEM: 5% (=)
    GRN: 2% (=)

    @wethinkpolling/@TheEconomist, 5th-16th June. N=376


    https://twitter.com/OwenWntr/status/1803116579397177578

    I am going through my stats and I think that would be the biggest swing at a general election against either the Tories or Labour since 1945.
    Then again, if the average swing is in the high teens, and the local swings are more proportional than uniform, the top end has to come out here or hereabouts.

    What is the record GE swing? (If I had to guess, somewhere with a New Town).
    Turns out I'm wrong;

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election_records

    39.3% in Glasgow NE, 2015

    In England, 29% in Brent East, 2005.

    Several Brent seats in the subsidiary records. Is there something in the air?
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 78,346
    edited June 18
    HYUFD said:

    Sir Jim Ratcliffe backs Labour and says Britons have ‘had enough’ of the Tories

    Billionaire Man Utd goes on to criticise ‘not terribly successful’ recent prime ministers


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/06/18/sir-jim-ratcliffe-manchester-united-backs-labour-election/

    Mind you his comments will not I imagine win over many Tories to Labour but might have a few leftwingers spitting out their herbal tea and going Green.

    'Mr Caudwell said he had donated to the Conservatives in 2019 “because I couldn’t possibly stand a Corbyn government, and I am still of exactly the same view there.”

    He praised Sir Keir's attempts to get rid of what he called "the loony Left" which he claimed had focused on "extreme socialist policies", instead of "creating a wealthy Britain".

    "We can't tax rich people in order to help the poor because they'll go off to Monaco and other places, we have to create real genuine wealth.”

    He added that “I hope to goodness I am right in my judgement and they make Britain great again.”'
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cw00rgq24xvo
    Seems an uncomfortable fit, somebody who is pro-Brexit, anti "green nonsense" and anti high tax on the wealthy.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 118,523
    Leon said:

    FPT

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Leon said:

    An absolutely terrifying thread about what an actual Labour government will be like


    https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/1803104439697313995

    "In November, long before #zeroseats, even as the media was reporting politics as usual, I wrote a thread on why the Tories were heading for an epochal defeat. Now that this is received wisdom, it's time for a new thread, forecasting how Labour will govern. Be very afraid."


    I pray that this dude is wrong; I fear in my vittals that he is bang on

    A lot of this talk about Labour seeking to stop any future government going in a right wing direction seems like scaremongering to me.

    No Parliament can bind it's successor. The Tories could have thrown out most or all of the 1997-2010 reforms in the past 14 years if they'd wished but the fact is they chose not to.
    But the Equality Act did exactly that, without anyone realising, until very recently

    And he makes that point
    As did the European Communities Act Solution to the Equality act preventing reform is same as European Communities Act & Human Rights preventing reform. Repeal or Heavily Amend it.

    Tories have been torn apart because they thought Brexit was enough. It wasn't Brexit was just the enabling measure that enabled the rest to be done. They were not done and as a result reforms that the public wanted could not be enacted and they regard the Tories as having betrayed them.
    Exactly right

    I blame Boris. He had the majority to do all this, but he was too frit of his posh lefty friends, fam and neighbz

    For this to change, it will take a firmly rightwing leader of a firmly rightwing party that doesn't give a tinker's wank about fashionable opinion

    OMG Georgia!!!
    Sadly, Fair comment.

    I fear Boris had two fatal flaws (possibly 3).

    1) Weakness - so he didn't have the balls to stick with essentially the same policy as Sweden and more unforgivably, didn't end the lockdown nonsense after six weeks when it was obvious that Covid was a disease of the very elderly, very ill with something else and very unlucky (he clearly thought it was nonsense as illustrated by his behaviour).

    2) Needing to be liked (which let his posh lefty friends have a veto).

    3) I suspect (pure spectulation) he got some policy ideas from domestic sources. That would account for his U turn on Eagle Slicers and the like, when the M'Learned former Mrs Boris was swapped for the current incumbent.

    It is the firm bit rather than particularly right wing bit that is needed. Someone willing to do what Thatcher did when losing a judicial review. Pass an act overthrowing the judgement.
    Did Boris have any lefty friends while Prime Minister? Based on the friend he married and the friends who gave him freebies and those friends who advised him on getting Paterson and/or Pincher off the hook, Boris's entire social circle is well-heeled Tory poshos.
    Well-heeled Tory poshos are generally left of Corbyn. That's the problem

    And twas ever thus. Wasn't it Wodehouse who observed that his dukes voted Labour and Jeeves was a Tory?
    Genuine poshos might go Liberal rather than Tory or at a push Green if really bohemian but Labour has far too working class a heritage for most poshos to vote for
  • Options
    FarooqFarooq Posts: 12,329
    Leon said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    FPT

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Leon said:

    An absolutely terrifying thread about what an actual Labour government will be like


    https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/1803104439697313995

    "In November, long before #zeroseats, even as the media was reporting politics as usual, I wrote a thread on why the Tories were heading for an epochal defeat. Now that this is received wisdom, it's time for a new thread, forecasting how Labour will govern. Be very afraid."


    I pray that this dude is wrong; I fear in my vittals that he is bang on

    A lot of this talk about Labour seeking to stop any future government going in a right wing direction seems like scaremongering to me.

    No Parliament can bind it's successor. The Tories could have thrown out most or all of the 1997-2010 reforms in the past 14 years if they'd wished but the fact is they chose not to.
    But the Equality Act did exactly that, without anyone realising, until very recently

    And he makes that point
    As did the European Communities Act Solution to the Equality act preventing reform is same as European Communities Act & Human Rights preventing reform. Repeal or Heavily Amend it.

    Tories have been torn apart because they thought Brexit was enough. It wasn't Brexit was just the enabling measure that enabled the rest to be done. They were not done and as a result reforms that the public wanted could not be enacted and they regard the Tories as having betrayed them.
    Exactly right

    I blame Boris. He had the majority to do all this, but he was too frit of his posh lefty friends, fam and neighbz

    For this to change, it will take a firmly rightwing leader of a firmly rightwing party that doesn't give a tinker's wank about fashionable opinion

    OMG Georgia!!!
    Sadly, Fair comment.

    I fear Boris had two fatal flaws (possibly 3).

    1) Weakness - so he didn't have the balls to stick with essentially the same policy as Sweden and more unforgivably, didn't end the lockdown nonsense after six weeks when it was obvious that Covid was a disease of the very elderly, very ill with something else and very unlucky (he clearly thought it was nonsense as illustrated by his behaviour).

    2) Needing to be liked (which let his posh lefty friends have a veto).

    3) I suspect (pure spectulation) he got some policy ideas from domestic sources. That would account for his U turn on Eagle Slicers and the like, when the M'Learned former Mrs Boris was swapped for the current incumbent.

    It is the firm bit rather than particularly right wing bit that is needed. Someone willing to do what Thatcher did when losing a judicial review. Pass an act overthrowing the judgement.
    Did Boris have any lefty friends while Prime Minister? Based on the friend he married and the friends who gave him freebies and those friends who advised him on getting Paterson and/or Pincher off the hook, Boris's entire social circle is well-heeled Tory poshos.
    Well-heeled Tory poshos are generally left of Corbyn. That's the problem

    And twas ever thus. Wasn't it Wodehouse who observed that his dukes voted Labour and Jeeves was a Tory?
    Tories to the left of Corbyn must be a pretty select group. Johnson is just a standard issue boarding school libertarian with a side order of little Englander prejudices and his social circle would I imagine be in tune with that. If he has any left wing friends he has certainly kept them well hidden. The "rich upper class lefty" trope is well loved by chippy rightists on here but I have never encountered one in the wild.
    That just proves how irredeemably lower middle class you are

    No, seriously, the posh are left wing. It's not a joke. The gags about Guardian journalists' backgrounds are not a spoof

    Marina Hyde has been mentioned on this thread:

    "Hyde is the daughter of Sir Alastair Edgcumbe James Dudley-Williams, 2nd Baronet, and his wife, the former Diana Elizabeth Jane Duncan. Through her father, she is the granddaughter of aviation pioneer and Conservative politician Sir Rolf Dudley-Williams, 1st Baronet. She attended Downe House School, near Newbury in Berkshire,[1] and read English at Christ Church, Oxford.["

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marina_Hyde

    She's not just posh she's absurdly rich, I know this personally
    I'm sure these people exist, but the point is that you can name them because there are so few of them. They probably all work for the Guardian. I've never met any of them. But I've met a never ending line of posh right wingers, because there are so many more of them (maybe you should get a job in finance).
    One thing you need to bear in mind is that you are extremely right wing. So people you think of as lefties (despite them eg working for the Tory party) are not lefties on any reasonable definition of the word. It's the same mindset that sees Corbynites call Labour moderate red Tories etc.
    In what way am I "extreme rightwing"? Genuinely curious
    Dude are you serious?
    How many actual "hard" right posters do we have on here? Plenty of disgruntled conservatives, some sitting this one out, a few voting Labour to send a message, a few reluctantly voting Conservative for fear of worse (Farage, or a massive Labour majority).

    But I'm struggling to think of anyone who's actually declared for Reform. Including Leon.

    With Reform at ~18% in the polls, it's a sign of how detached PB demographics are from reality. Either that, or there are a lot of 'shy reformers' out there.
    I'll fess up. I might vote Reform. It's either Starmer for laughs or Reform to kill the Tories

    But in what universe is Reform "far right"? They aren't even "hard right" by mainland European standards. Indeed they sometimes struggle to be rightwing, so far has the Overton Window shifted

    Their big thing is immigration, Are they going to shoot the boats and drown people (as has been happening off the EU shores)? No. They want to "tow boats back to France". That may be a dream, but it ain't the Shoah. As for overall immigration, they want "net zero" - in a recent interview Farage admitted that might still mean "600,000 immigrants" but they want to keep the incomings and outgoings balanced and the population stable, for a while, as our infrastructure cannot sustain explosive growth (and looking at our rivers, they have a point)

    That's it. That's Britain's "Nazi party" - gently towing boats and trying not to destroy rivers. Wow. Practically Treblinka
    You do know that net zero migration is completely mental, yes? We'd be better off with Truss and PM and Corbyn as Chancellor. You want runaway inflation and the collapse of half the public and private services in the country? That's what Farage is offering.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 41,275
    edited June 18
    MikeL said:

    Sir Jim Ratcliffe backs Labour and says Britons have ‘had enough’ of the Tories

    Billionaire Man Utd goes on to criticise ‘not terribly successful’ recent prime ministers


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/06/18/sir-jim-ratcliffe-manchester-united-backs-labour-election/

    So let's think this through.

    The Football Governance Bill ran out of time and was therefore dropped before the GE.

    Labour will shortly reintroduce the Bill. But the Labour Culture Secretary has said it will not be a "cut and paste" job - she will review the Tracey Crouch report again and see how the Bill can be strengthened.

    In particular she will consider a proposal to introduce a 10% levy on PL transfer fees.

    She will also consider expanding the Bill to regulate ticket prices.

    And who knows maybe expand into other areas as well?

    Again this background it may seem surprising that Jim Ratcliffe is supporting the party whose victory will undoubtedly have the most adverse consequences for his Man Utd investment.

    Or maybe he knows Labour is going to win and he is about to start a massive lobbying campaign? And he is starting by buttering them up?
    You - and others here - had possibly better sit down before reading on.

    But: there is more to life than football. And Mr Ratcliffe may well have a wider view, even considering his investments, than the netting in the goal.
  • Options
    HeathenerHeathener Posts: 6,781
    Another fantastic goal
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 28,966
    edited June 18
    biggles said:

    Cookie said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    That's the best football match I've seen since Argentina v France at the last World Cup Final

    Sensational! Sat in my garden with it on the laptop with the lovely evening sun blazing down. Perfick!
    Best goal yet, best save yet, best match yet, best everything. Scintillating

    When football is THAT good....
    As much as I love my cricket and rugby, sometimes football is very hard to beat
    Bad cricket and rugby is worse than bad football. But good cricket and rugby is better than good football.
    Not sure about that. Will ponder
    it's a REALLY good question, one I've considered myself

    Fuck, I dunno

    How do you rate the last Ashes series or the 2005 Ashes, against France V Argentina? And how does that match the insane madness of the best rugby, say England v the All Blacks, the Boks v Ireland, with both teams on fire?

    International rugby at the top level produces more reliable compelling entertainment through the whole match

    But the very best football beats that but it is rarer

    And the very best Test series beats even that but it is even RARER

    That's the best I can do

    And all American sports are shite
    Good rugby beats anything for pure spectacle - though good cricket is more exciting if you care who wins. Both beat football, for me. Football can be quite entertaining but for me ranks below rugby (both codes) or cricket (of any format) - faced with a screen showing England playing football in the world cup final and another showing a rugby or cricket match - even one I didn't particularly care about - my attention would be drawn to the latter.
    Though obviously if it's between a football match my daughter is playing in and any other sport, football wins!

    I'd also rank the other footballs - Gaelic, American, Australian rules - above association football.
    Football's a uniquely good game to play, because you need so little for a game. But for me, other team sports are more enjoyable watches.
    I will always go with Test cricket because the climax comes after up to five days of ups and downs. It’s tantric sport.
    True, and I've just booked a ticket for the final day at Lords to see the GOAT for one last time. Just hope the Windies don't collapse inside 3 or 4 days. £25. Buy one while tickets are still available.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 49,952
    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    FPT

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Leon said:

    An absolutely terrifying thread about what an actual Labour government will be like


    https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/1803104439697313995

    "In November, long before #zeroseats, even as the media was reporting politics as usual, I wrote a thread on why the Tories were heading for an epochal defeat. Now that this is received wisdom, it's time for a new thread, forecasting how Labour will govern. Be very afraid."


    I pray that this dude is wrong; I fear in my vittals that he is bang on

    A lot of this talk about Labour seeking to stop any future government going in a right wing direction seems like scaremongering to me.

    No Parliament can bind it's successor. The Tories could have thrown out most or all of the 1997-2010 reforms in the past 14 years if they'd wished but the fact is they chose not to.
    But the Equality Act did exactly that, without anyone realising, until very recently

    And he makes that point
    As did the European Communities Act Solution to the Equality act preventing reform is same as European Communities Act & Human Rights preventing reform. Repeal or Heavily Amend it.

    Tories have been torn apart because they thought Brexit was enough. It wasn't Brexit was just the enabling measure that enabled the rest to be done. They were not done and as a result reforms that the public wanted could not be enacted and they regard the Tories as having betrayed them.
    Exactly right

    I blame Boris. He had the majority to do all this, but he was too frit of his posh lefty friends, fam and neighbz

    For this to change, it will take a firmly rightwing leader of a firmly rightwing party that doesn't give a tinker's wank about fashionable opinion

    OMG Georgia!!!
    Sadly, Fair comment.

    I fear Boris had two fatal flaws (possibly 3).

    1) Weakness - so he didn't have the balls to stick with essentially the same policy as Sweden and more unforgivably, didn't end the lockdown nonsense after six weeks when it was obvious that Covid was a disease of the very elderly, very ill with something else and very unlucky (he clearly thought it was nonsense as illustrated by his behaviour).

    2) Needing to be liked (which let his posh lefty friends have a veto).

    3) I suspect (pure spectulation) he got some policy ideas from domestic sources. That would account for his U turn on Eagle Slicers and the like, when the M'Learned former Mrs Boris was swapped for the current incumbent.

    It is the firm bit rather than particularly right wing bit that is needed. Someone willing to do what Thatcher did when losing a judicial review. Pass an act overthrowing the judgement.
    Did Boris have any lefty friends while Prime Minister? Based on the friend he married and the friends who gave him freebies and those friends who advised him on getting Paterson and/or Pincher off the hook, Boris's entire social circle is well-heeled Tory poshos.
    Well-heeled Tory poshos are generally left of Corbyn. That's the problem

    And twas ever thus. Wasn't it Wodehouse who observed that his dukes voted Labour and Jeeves was a Tory?
    Tories to the left of Corbyn must be a pretty select group. Johnson is just a standard issue boarding school libertarian with a side order of little Englander prejudices and his social circle would I imagine be in tune with that. If he has any left wing friends he has certainly kept them well hidden. The "rich upper class lefty" trope is well loved by chippy rightists on here but I have never encountered one in the wild.
    That just proves how irredeemably lower middle class you are

    No, seriously, the posh are left wing. It's not a joke. The gags about Guardian journalists' backgrounds are not a spoof

    Marina Hyde has been mentioned on this thread:

    "Hyde is the daughter of Sir Alastair Edgcumbe James Dudley-Williams, 2nd Baronet, and his wife, the former Diana Elizabeth Jane Duncan. Through her father, she is the granddaughter of aviation pioneer and Conservative politician Sir Rolf Dudley-Williams, 1st Baronet. She attended Downe House School, near Newbury in Berkshire,[1] and read English at Christ Church, Oxford.["

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marina_Hyde

    She's not just posh she's absurdly rich, I know this personally
    I'm sure these people exist, but the point is that you can name them because there are so few of them. They probably all work for the Guardian. I've never met any of them. But I've met a never ending line of posh right wingers, because there are so many more of them (maybe you should get a job in finance).
    One thing you need to bear in mind is that you are extremely right wing. So people you think of as lefties (despite them eg working for the Tory party) are not lefties on any reasonable definition of the word. It's the same mindset that sees Corbynites call Labour moderate red Tories etc.
    In what way am I "extreme rightwing"? Genuinely curious
    Dude are you serious?
    How many actual "hard" right posters do we have on here? Plenty of disgruntled conservatives, some sitting this one out, a few voting Labour to send a message, a few reluctantly voting Conservative for fear of worse (Farage, or a massive Labour majority).

    But I'm struggling to think of anyone who's actually declared for Reform. Including Leon.

    With Reform at ~18% in the polls, it's a sign of how detached PB demographics are from reality. Either that, or there are a lot of 'shy reformers' out there.
    I'll fess up. I might vote Reform. It's either Starmer for laughs or Reform to kill the Tories

    But in what universe is Reform "far right"? They aren't even "hard right" by mainland European standards. Indeed they sometimes struggle to be rightwing, so far has the Overton Window shifted

    Their big thing is immigration, Are they going to shoot the boats and drown people (as has been happening off the EU shores)? No. They want to "tow boats back to France". That may be a dream, but it ain't the Shoah. As for overall immigration, they want "net zero" - in a recent interview Farage admitted that might still mean "600,000 immigrants" but they want to keep the incomings and outgoings balanced and the population stable, for a while, as our infrastructure cannot sustain explosive growth (and looking at our rivers, they have a point)

    That's it. That's Britain's "Nazi party" - gently towing boats and trying not to destroy rivers. Wow. Practically Treblinka
    You do know that net zero migration is completely mental, yes? We'd be better off with Truss and PM and Corbyn as Chancellor. You want runaway inflation and the collapse of half the public and private services in the country? That's what Farage is offering.
    Zero NET migration
  • Options
    GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,613
    Belting goal. Plenty of shots of C. Ronaldo looking sad and/or frustrated please.
  • Options
    Andy_JS said:

    Just switched on the football and Ronaldo seems to look almost the same as he did 15 years ago.

    Like a cocky, irredeemable little shit?
  • Options
    algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 11,371
    IanB2 said:

    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    rcs1000 said:

    biggles said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Omnium said:

    rcs1000 said:

    On topic, but also a little bit of a rant.

    The Conservative Party has, for so long, been a successful political party because it has been able to tie together disparate groups, who don't all share exactly the same ideology.

    And it's done this by being pragmatic and remembering that there are going to be people who believe homosexuality is a sin, and there are going to be people are publicly gay, but they might share common views about - say - the size of the state.

    I'm reminded of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, who was caught on tape saying that the US was in a (culture) war, and there would only be one winner.

    No, Justice Alito, there is no winner. You cannot silence the voices of the 50% of people who disagree with you without actual war. And that actual war (see the Thirty Years War for an example) will end with everyone grudgingly agreeing that actually they can't agree and they can't force other people to agree with them.

    The Conservative Party cannot just be the party of people left behind by globalisation. Nor can it just be the party of pensioners. Nor can it just be the party of wealthy plutocrats. It needs to be a big tent. If you choose to silence - or make unwelcome - the voices that disagree with you, then you are consigning yourself to electoral oblivion.

    This is why "we didn't win because we weren't centrist enough" and "we didn't win because we weren't right wing enough" are both bullshit arguments. You didn't win because you were unable to make the tent big enough.

    Where was the voting market behind monetarism when MT made that her guiding theme? There wasn't one. She decided that that was the right thing for Britain, and set about winning the arguments. That's how you get positive change. Crafting your platform out of a mishmash of what voters have found acceptable up until now is not a plan to get into (or stay in) government; it's a way to go around in circles achieving very little.

    And I also don't think the issue is that Tories 'haven't been right wing enough', it's that they have sold themselves as the right wing alternative, benefitted from doing so, and changed their minds completely when it comes to actually doing anything right wing. That's a question of trust, rather than a question of politics. Those who feel that they haven't been centrist enough should vote for parties that espouse social democracy, of which there are two in the political mainstream. Why do they need a third? It smacks of reducing the alternatives available to voters because they aren't actually that confident in the attractiveness of their centrist prospectus.
    Every time the Tories get into power they're lured into nanny-statism. Thatcher had enough about her to push against that for several years. Imperfect though such direction might prove I think it is beneficial. Reducing the size of the state should be top of the list for any government.
    OK.

    The number of people of pensionable age is rising every year: we have promised them (repeatedly) that there is no circumstance where their pensions will grow less than 2% or wages or inflation. In addition, the proportion of people who are pensioners will grow every year. And a pensioner costs approximately 15x as much in social and health care as someone in their 20s.

    So: interest payments, healthcare and pension cost increases are nailed on. And they are half the budget.

    We need to spend more on defence.
    Policing and the administration of justice have been cut to the bone.

    I want to cut the size of the state too. But we all need to be realistic about the challenges facing us with a greying population.
    Plus everyone wants more transport projects and everyone wants increasingly improving schools. Add on people always having a pet regulation….
    The problem is that most expect the state can do more than it can do. It could only do what it did in the first place due to the revenue of empire and tbe legacy assets and soft power in the post empire world which have slowly inevitably decayed

    Also, as life becomes more complex the state can do less. EM Forsters "The Machine Stops" was a boring book foisted on us at school but a very prohetic one.

    The choice is collapse with authoritarianism on the way or a wholesale deregulation, a very limited state based on a principle of Caveat Emptor and an acceptance that people will make bad or inept decisions and suffer as a result and it is not the states job to prevent or mitigate this, other than to set some core, simple to understand rules (which is basically what Common Law is).

    I think the die was cast though when Cameron beat Davis in 2005, or perhaps even when Wilson won in 1964.
    What bollocks. Countries like Denmark and Finland didn’t have an empire, but work fine today through the simple measure of people being OK to pay a bit more tax.
    Nothing to do with Denmark having a far lower population (and population density) and fertile land enabling them to produce three times as much food as they need for self sufficiency and export the difference.

    Similar arguments apply with Finland.

    UK. Not so much.
    This is laughable.

    Much of Finland is uninhabitable tundra. It suggests that the UK's problems would be solved by merger with Greenland. Or, indeed, made much worse by Scottish independence.

    And if population size is all, we can constantly get richer by cutting the country in half.
    None of Finland is uninhabitable tundra - it's nothing like Greenland in the slightest. Agriculture extends right up into the north of the country
    This is reasonably amusing since the word "tundra" comes from Finnish
    Not quite - it came into English from Russian via one of the Sami languages. Too many different consonants in a row to be Finnish!
    Sami, you're quite correct, clumsy from me conflating the two. Still, in the right ballpark. Northern Finland is certainly tundra. What constitutes "uninhabitable" is perhaps trickier. I don't think it'd be easy to survive there without external inputs. Global markets make some primitively uninhabitable places inhabitable. I don't know whether northern Finland falls into that category.
    The Sámi don’t really grow anything; they fish and herd reindeer. How they get their five a day, I’m not sure. They once populated regions further south - how much so is still debated - but were marginalised to the far north by the spread of the Norse peoples.
    Your five a day comes from Lidl in Sodankyla.
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 28,697
    Nigelb said:

    AlsoLei said:

    biggles said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Omnium said:

    rcs1000 said:

    On topic, but also a little bit of a rant.

    The Conservative Party has, for so long, been a successful political party because it has been able to tie together disparate groups, who don't all share exactly the same ideology.

    And it's done this by being pragmatic and remembering that there are going to be people who believe homosexuality is a sin, and there are going to be people are publicly gay, but they might share common views about - say - the size of the state.

    I'm reminded of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, who was caught on tape saying that the US was in a (culture) war, and there would only be one winner.

    No, Justice Alito, there is no winner. You cannot silence the voices of the 50% of people who disagree with you without actual war. And that actual war (see the Thirty Years War for an example) will end with everyone grudgingly agreeing that actually they can't agree and they can't force other people to agree with them.

    The Conservative Party cannot just be the party of people left behind by globalisation. Nor can it just be the party of pensioners. Nor can it just be the party of wealthy plutocrats. It needs to be a big tent. If you choose to silence - or make unwelcome - the voices that disagree with you, then you are consigning yourself to electoral oblivion.

    This is why "we didn't win because we weren't centrist enough" and "we didn't win because we weren't right wing enough" are both bullshit arguments. You didn't win because you were unable to make the tent big enough.

    Where was the voting market behind monetarism when MT made that her guiding theme? There wasn't one. She decided that that was the right thing for Britain, and set about winning the arguments. That's how you get positive change. Crafting your platform out of a mishmash of what voters have found acceptable up until now is not a plan to get into (or stay in) government; it's a way to go around in circles achieving very little.

    And I also don't think the issue is that Tories 'haven't been right wing enough', it's that they have sold themselves as the right wing alternative, benefitted from doing so, and changed their minds completely when it comes to actually doing anything right wing. That's a question of trust, rather than a question of politics. Those who feel that they haven't been centrist enough should vote for parties that espouse social democracy, of which there are two in the political mainstream. Why do they need a third? It smacks of reducing the alternatives available to voters because they aren't actually that confident in the attractiveness of their centrist prospectus.
    Every time the Tories get into power they're lured into nanny-statism. Thatcher had enough about her to push against that for several years. Imperfect though such direction might prove I think it is beneficial. Reducing the size of the state should be top of the list for any government.
    OK.

    The number of people of pensionable age is rising every year: we have promised them (repeatedly) that there is no circumstance where their pensions will grow less than 2% or wages or inflation. In addition, the proportion of people who are pensioners will grow every year. And a pensioner costs approximately 15x as much in social and health care as someone in their 20s.

    So: interest payments, healthcare and pension cost increases are nailed on. And they are half the budget.

    We need to spend more on defence.
    Policing and the administration of justice have been cut to the bone.

    I want to cut the size of the state too. But we all need to be realistic about the challenges facing us with a greying population.
    Plus everyone wants more transport projects and everyone wants increasingly improving schools. Add on people always having a pet regulation….
    The problem is that most expect the state can do more than it can do. It could only do what it did in the first place due to the revenue of empire and tbe legacy assets and soft power in the post empire world which have slowly inevitably decayed

    Also, as life becomes more complex the state can do less. EM Forsters "The Machine Stops" was a boring book foisted on us at school but a very prohetic one.

    The choice is collapse with authoritarianism on the way or a wholesale deregulation, a very limited state based on a principle of Caveat Emptor and an acceptance that people will make bad or inept decisions and suffer as a result and it is not the states job to prevent or mitigate this, other than to set some core, simple to understand rules (which is basically what Common Law is).

    I think the die was cast though when Cameron beat Davis in 2005, or perhaps even when Wilson won in 1964.
    You're overstating the "revenue of empire" here, as costs matched benefits from the 1870s onwards even if you look at it from a pure revenue perspective.

    On a wider economic basis it produced a clear loss, especially when you factor in the downsides of it fucking our trade and monetary policy over and over and over again until we finally began to cut our losses in 1957.
    Direct revenue is one thing. Indirect (a captive market for UK manufacturers) is another, this has lingered on to a certain extent even now (e.g MK will have good sales in Singapore, Ireland, Cyprus, Hong Kong and half the middle East and Africa as a legacy of empire is that they use BS1363 plugs and sockets.

    Plenty more such trade was kicked in the nuts in 1973 when joined customs union with rival industrial countries and put trade barriers up with such countries as a result.

    The root cause of empire is need, a country not having enough land and resources to support it's population sustainably. See Rome, Japan and us (not to mention Russia invading Ukraine, both now and in aftermath of the Russian Revolution)

    It dosen't help that we are making it worse by unsustainable population increase and shunning the Oil, Gas and Coal resources (the latter of which is still abundant) so are therefore making our industry uncompetitive compared with those that do exploit such resources unreserved.

    And yet S Korea - and postwar Japan - achieved great prosperity without significant natural resources, or captive markets.
    Taiwan also managed it. Whilst being ostracised and obstructed by its gigantic neighbour.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 78,346
    edited June 18

    MikeL said:

    Sir Jim Ratcliffe backs Labour and says Britons have ‘had enough’ of the Tories

    Billionaire Man Utd goes on to criticise ‘not terribly successful’ recent prime ministers


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/06/18/sir-jim-ratcliffe-manchester-united-backs-labour-election/

    So let's think this through.

    The Football Governance Bill ran out of time and was therefore dropped before the GE.

    Labour will shortly reintroduce the Bill. But the Labour Culture Secretary has said it will not be a "cut and paste" job - she will review the Tracey Crouch report again and see how the Bill can be strengthened.

    In particular she will consider a proposal to introduce a 10% levy on PL transfer fees.

    She will also consider expanding the Bill to regulate ticket prices.

    And who knows maybe expand into other areas as well?

    Again this background it may seem surprising that Jim Ratcliffe is supporting the party whose victory will undoubtedly have the most adverse consequences for his Man Utd investment.

    Or maybe he knows Labour is going to win and he is about to start a massive lobbying campaign? And he is starting by buttering them up?
    It is all about getting the government to pay for the new Manchester United stadium/Old Trafford upgrade.
    The football bill, the anti-smoking and energy drink ban, all absolutely stupid policies.
  • Options
    GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,613

    HYUFD said:

    Sir Jim Ratcliffe backs Labour and says Britons have ‘had enough’ of the Tories

    Billionaire Man Utd goes on to criticise ‘not terribly successful’ recent prime ministers


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/06/18/sir-jim-ratcliffe-manchester-united-backs-labour-election/

    Mind you his comments will not I imagine win over many Tories to Labour but might have a few leftwingers spitting out their herbal tea and going Green.

    'Mr Caudwell said he had donated to the Conservatives in 2019 “because I couldn’t possibly stand a Corbyn government, and I am still of exactly the same view there.”

    He praised Sir Keir's attempts to get rid of what he called "the loony Left" which he claimed had focused on "extreme socialist policies", instead of "creating a wealthy Britain".

    "We can't tax rich people in order to help the poor because they'll go off to Monaco and other places, we have to create real genuine wealth.”

    He added that “I hope to goodness I am right in my judgement and they make Britain great again.”'
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cw00rgq24xvo
    Seems an uncomfortable fit, somebody who is pro-Brexit, anti "green nonsense" and anti high tax on the wealthy.
    I think it just underlines the extent to which the Conservatives are unfit to govern.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 41,275
    Leon said:

    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    FPT

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Leon said:

    An absolutely terrifying thread about what an actual Labour government will be like


    https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/1803104439697313995

    "In November, long before #zeroseats, even as the media was reporting politics as usual, I wrote a thread on why the Tories were heading for an epochal defeat. Now that this is received wisdom, it's time for a new thread, forecasting how Labour will govern. Be very afraid."


    I pray that this dude is wrong; I fear in my vittals that he is bang on

    A lot of this talk about Labour seeking to stop any future government going in a right wing direction seems like scaremongering to me.

    No Parliament can bind it's successor. The Tories could have thrown out most or all of the 1997-2010 reforms in the past 14 years if they'd wished but the fact is they chose not to.
    But the Equality Act did exactly that, without anyone realising, until very recently

    And he makes that point
    As did the European Communities Act Solution to the Equality act preventing reform is same as European Communities Act & Human Rights preventing reform. Repeal or Heavily Amend it.

    Tories have been torn apart because they thought Brexit was enough. It wasn't Brexit was just the enabling measure that enabled the rest to be done. They were not done and as a result reforms that the public wanted could not be enacted and they regard the Tories as having betrayed them.
    Exactly right

    I blame Boris. He had the majority to do all this, but he was too frit of his posh lefty friends, fam and neighbz

    For this to change, it will take a firmly rightwing leader of a firmly rightwing party that doesn't give a tinker's wank about fashionable opinion

    OMG Georgia!!!
    Sadly, Fair comment.

    I fear Boris had two fatal flaws (possibly 3).

    1) Weakness - so he didn't have the balls to stick with essentially the same policy as Sweden and more unforgivably, didn't end the lockdown nonsense after six weeks when it was obvious that Covid was a disease of the very elderly, very ill with something else and very unlucky (he clearly thought it was nonsense as illustrated by his behaviour).

    2) Needing to be liked (which let his posh lefty friends have a veto).

    3) I suspect (pure spectulation) he got some policy ideas from domestic sources. That would account for his U turn on Eagle Slicers and the like, when the M'Learned former Mrs Boris was swapped for the current incumbent.

    It is the firm bit rather than particularly right wing bit that is needed. Someone willing to do what Thatcher did when losing a judicial review. Pass an act overthrowing the judgement.
    Did Boris have any lefty friends while Prime Minister? Based on the friend he married and the friends who gave him freebies and those friends who advised him on getting Paterson and/or Pincher off the hook, Boris's entire social circle is well-heeled Tory poshos.
    Well-heeled Tory poshos are generally left of Corbyn. That's the problem

    And twas ever thus. Wasn't it Wodehouse who observed that his dukes voted Labour and Jeeves was a Tory?
    Tories to the left of Corbyn must be a pretty select group. Johnson is just a standard issue boarding school libertarian with a side order of little Englander prejudices and his social circle would I imagine be in tune with that. If he has any left wing friends he has certainly kept them well hidden. The "rich upper class lefty" trope is well loved by chippy rightists on here but I have never encountered one in the wild.
    That just proves how irredeemably lower middle class you are

    No, seriously, the posh are left wing. It's not a joke. The gags about Guardian journalists' backgrounds are not a spoof

    Marina Hyde has been mentioned on this thread:

    "Hyde is the daughter of Sir Alastair Edgcumbe James Dudley-Williams, 2nd Baronet, and his wife, the former Diana Elizabeth Jane Duncan. Through her father, she is the granddaughter of aviation pioneer and Conservative politician Sir Rolf Dudley-Williams, 1st Baronet. She attended Downe House School, near Newbury in Berkshire,[1] and read English at Christ Church, Oxford.["

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marina_Hyde

    She's not just posh she's absurdly rich, I know this personally
    I'm sure these people exist, but the point is that you can name them because there are so few of them. They probably all work for the Guardian. I've never met any of them. But I've met a never ending line of posh right wingers, because there are so many more of them (maybe you should get a job in finance).
    One thing you need to bear in mind is that you are extremely right wing. So people you think of as lefties (despite them eg working for the Tory party) are not lefties on any reasonable definition of the word. It's the same mindset that sees Corbynites call Labour moderate red Tories etc.
    In what way am I "extreme rightwing"? Genuinely curious
    Dude are you serious?
    How many actual "hard" right posters do we have on here? Plenty of disgruntled conservatives, some sitting this one out, a few voting Labour to send a message, a few reluctantly voting Conservative for fear of worse (Farage, or a massive Labour majority).

    But I'm struggling to think of anyone who's actually declared for Reform. Including Leon.

    With Reform at ~18% in the polls, it's a sign of how detached PB demographics are from reality. Either that, or there are a lot of 'shy reformers' out there.
    I'll fess up. I might vote Reform. It's either Starmer for laughs or Reform to kill the Tories

    But in what universe is Reform "far right"? They aren't even "hard right" by mainland European standards. Indeed they sometimes struggle to be rightwing, so far has the Overton Window shifted

    Their big thing is immigration, Are they going to shoot the boats and drown people (as has been happening off the EU shores)? No. They want to "tow boats back to France". That may be a dream, but it ain't the Shoah. As for overall immigration, they want "net zero" - in a recent interview Farage admitted that might still mean "600,000 immigrants" but they want to keep the incomings and outgoings balanced and the population stable, for a while, as our infrastructure cannot sustain explosive growth (and looking at our rivers, they have a point)

    That's it. That's Britain's "Nazi party" - gently towing boats and trying not to destroy rivers. Wow. Practically Treblinka
    You do know that net zero migration is completely mental, yes? We'd be better off with Truss and PM and Corbyn as Chancellor. You want runaway inflation and the collapse of half the public and private services in the country? That's what Farage is offering.
    Zero NET migration
    He did say that ...
  • Options
    FarooqFarooq Posts: 12,329
    Leon said:

    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    FPT

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Leon said:

    An absolutely terrifying thread about what an actual Labour government will be like


    https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/1803104439697313995

    "In November, long before #zeroseats, even as the media was reporting politics as usual, I wrote a thread on why the Tories were heading for an epochal defeat. Now that this is received wisdom, it's time for a new thread, forecasting how Labour will govern. Be very afraid."


    I pray that this dude is wrong; I fear in my vittals that he is bang on

    A lot of this talk about Labour seeking to stop any future government going in a right wing direction seems like scaremongering to me.

    No Parliament can bind it's successor. The Tories could have thrown out most or all of the 1997-2010 reforms in the past 14 years if they'd wished but the fact is they chose not to.
    But the Equality Act did exactly that, without anyone realising, until very recently

    And he makes that point
    As did the European Communities Act Solution to the Equality act preventing reform is same as European Communities Act & Human Rights preventing reform. Repeal or Heavily Amend it.

    Tories have been torn apart because they thought Brexit was enough. It wasn't Brexit was just the enabling measure that enabled the rest to be done. They were not done and as a result reforms that the public wanted could not be enacted and they regard the Tories as having betrayed them.
    Exactly right

    I blame Boris. He had the majority to do all this, but he was too frit of his posh lefty friends, fam and neighbz

    For this to change, it will take a firmly rightwing leader of a firmly rightwing party that doesn't give a tinker's wank about fashionable opinion

    OMG Georgia!!!
    Sadly, Fair comment.

    I fear Boris had two fatal flaws (possibly 3).

    1) Weakness - so he didn't have the balls to stick with essentially the same policy as Sweden and more unforgivably, didn't end the lockdown nonsense after six weeks when it was obvious that Covid was a disease of the very elderly, very ill with something else and very unlucky (he clearly thought it was nonsense as illustrated by his behaviour).

    2) Needing to be liked (which let his posh lefty friends have a veto).

    3) I suspect (pure spectulation) he got some policy ideas from domestic sources. That would account for his U turn on Eagle Slicers and the like, when the M'Learned former Mrs Boris was swapped for the current incumbent.

    It is the firm bit rather than particularly right wing bit that is needed. Someone willing to do what Thatcher did when losing a judicial review. Pass an act overthrowing the judgement.
    Did Boris have any lefty friends while Prime Minister? Based on the friend he married and the friends who gave him freebies and those friends who advised him on getting Paterson and/or Pincher off the hook, Boris's entire social circle is well-heeled Tory poshos.
    Well-heeled Tory poshos are generally left of Corbyn. That's the problem

    And twas ever thus. Wasn't it Wodehouse who observed that his dukes voted Labour and Jeeves was a Tory?
    Tories to the left of Corbyn must be a pretty select group. Johnson is just a standard issue boarding school libertarian with a side order of little Englander prejudices and his social circle would I imagine be in tune with that. If he has any left wing friends he has certainly kept them well hidden. The "rich upper class lefty" trope is well loved by chippy rightists on here but I have never encountered one in the wild.
    That just proves how irredeemably lower middle class you are

    No, seriously, the posh are left wing. It's not a joke. The gags about Guardian journalists' backgrounds are not a spoof

    Marina Hyde has been mentioned on this thread:

    "Hyde is the daughter of Sir Alastair Edgcumbe James Dudley-Williams, 2nd Baronet, and his wife, the former Diana Elizabeth Jane Duncan. Through her father, she is the granddaughter of aviation pioneer and Conservative politician Sir Rolf Dudley-Williams, 1st Baronet. She attended Downe House School, near Newbury in Berkshire,[1] and read English at Christ Church, Oxford.["

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marina_Hyde

    She's not just posh she's absurdly rich, I know this personally
    I'm sure these people exist, but the point is that you can name them because there are so few of them. They probably all work for the Guardian. I've never met any of them. But I've met a never ending line of posh right wingers, because there are so many more of them (maybe you should get a job in finance).
    One thing you need to bear in mind is that you are extremely right wing. So people you think of as lefties (despite them eg working for the Tory party) are not lefties on any reasonable definition of the word. It's the same mindset that sees Corbynites call Labour moderate red Tories etc.
    In what way am I "extreme rightwing"? Genuinely curious
    Dude are you serious?
    How many actual "hard" right posters do we have on here? Plenty of disgruntled conservatives, some sitting this one out, a few voting Labour to send a message, a few reluctantly voting Conservative for fear of worse (Farage, or a massive Labour majority).

    But I'm struggling to think of anyone who's actually declared for Reform. Including Leon.

    With Reform at ~18% in the polls, it's a sign of how detached PB demographics are from reality. Either that, or there are a lot of 'shy reformers' out there.
    I'll fess up. I might vote Reform. It's either Starmer for laughs or Reform to kill the Tories

    But in what universe is Reform "far right"? They aren't even "hard right" by mainland European standards. Indeed they sometimes struggle to be rightwing, so far has the Overton Window shifted

    Their big thing is immigration, Are they going to shoot the boats and drown people (as has been happening off the EU shores)? No. They want to "tow boats back to France". That may be a dream, but it ain't the Shoah. As for overall immigration, they want "net zero" - in a recent interview Farage admitted that might still mean "600,000 immigrants" but they want to keep the incomings and outgoings balanced and the population stable, for a while, as our infrastructure cannot sustain explosive growth (and looking at our rivers, they have a point)

    That's it. That's Britain's "Nazi party" - gently towing boats and trying not to destroy rivers. Wow. Practically Treblinka
    You do know that net zero migration is completely mental, yes? We'd be better off with Truss and PM and Corbyn as Chancellor. You want runaway inflation and the collapse of half the public and private services in the country? That's what Farage is offering.
    Zero NET migration
    Zero net migration, net zero migration, you can be picky over word order but we're talking about the same thing.
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 31,478
    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    FPT

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Leon said:

    An absolutely terrifying thread about what an actual Labour government will be like


    https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/1803104439697313995

    "In November, long before #zeroseats, even as the media was reporting politics as usual, I wrote a thread on why the Tories were heading for an epochal defeat. Now that this is received wisdom, it's time for a new thread, forecasting how Labour will govern. Be very afraid."


    I pray that this dude is wrong; I fear in my vittals that he is bang on

    A lot of this talk about Labour seeking to stop any future government going in a right wing direction seems like scaremongering to me.

    No Parliament can bind it's successor. The Tories could have thrown out most or all of the 1997-2010 reforms in the past 14 years if they'd wished but the fact is they chose not to.
    But the Equality Act did exactly that, without anyone realising, until very recently

    And he makes that point
    As did the European Communities Act Solution to the Equality act preventing reform is same as European Communities Act & Human Rights preventing reform. Repeal or Heavily Amend it.

    Tories have been torn apart because they thought Brexit was enough. It wasn't Brexit was just the enabling measure that enabled the rest to be done. They were not done and as a result reforms that the public wanted could not be enacted and they regard the Tories as having betrayed them.
    Exactly right

    I blame Boris. He had the majority to do all this, but he was too frit of his posh lefty friends, fam and neighbz

    For this to change, it will take a firmly rightwing leader of a firmly rightwing party that doesn't give a tinker's wank about fashionable opinion

    OMG Georgia!!!
    Sadly, Fair comment.

    I fear Boris had two fatal flaws (possibly 3).

    1) Weakness - so he didn't have the balls to stick with essentially the same policy as Sweden and more unforgivably, didn't end the lockdown nonsense after six weeks when it was obvious that Covid was a disease of the very elderly, very ill with something else and very unlucky (he clearly thought it was nonsense as illustrated by his behaviour).

    2) Needing to be liked (which let his posh lefty friends have a veto).

    3) I suspect (pure spectulation) he got some policy ideas from domestic sources. That would account for his U turn on Eagle Slicers and the like, when the M'Learned former Mrs Boris was swapped for the current incumbent.

    It is the firm bit rather than particularly right wing bit that is needed. Someone willing to do what Thatcher did when losing a judicial review. Pass an act overthrowing the judgement.
    Did Boris have any lefty friends while Prime Minister? Based on the friend he married and the friends who gave him freebies and those friends who advised him on getting Paterson and/or Pincher off the hook, Boris's entire social circle is well-heeled Tory poshos.
    Well-heeled Tory poshos are generally left of Corbyn. That's the problem

    And twas ever thus. Wasn't it Wodehouse who observed that his dukes voted Labour and Jeeves was a Tory?
    Tories to the left of Corbyn must be a pretty select group. Johnson is just a standard issue boarding school libertarian with a side order of little Englander prejudices and his social circle would I imagine be in tune with that. If he has any left wing friends he has certainly kept them well hidden. The "rich upper class lefty" trope is well loved by chippy rightists on here but I have never encountered one in the wild.
    That just proves how irredeemably lower middle class you are

    No, seriously, the posh are left wing. It's not a joke. The gags about Guardian journalists' backgrounds are not a spoof

    Marina Hyde has been mentioned on this thread:

    "Hyde is the daughter of Sir Alastair Edgcumbe James Dudley-Williams, 2nd Baronet, and his wife, the former Diana Elizabeth Jane Duncan. Through her father, she is the granddaughter of aviation pioneer and Conservative politician Sir Rolf Dudley-Williams, 1st Baronet. She attended Downe House School, near Newbury in Berkshire,[1] and read English at Christ Church, Oxford.["

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marina_Hyde

    She's not just posh she's absurdly rich, I know this personally
    I'm sure these people exist, but the point is that you can name them because there are so few of them. They probably all work for the Guardian. I've never met any of them. But I've met a never ending line of posh right wingers, because there are so many more of them (maybe you should get a job in finance).
    One thing you need to bear in mind is that you are extremely right wing. So people you think of as lefties (despite them eg working for the Tory party) are not lefties on any reasonable definition of the word. It's the same mindset that sees Corbynites call Labour moderate red Tories etc.
    In what way am I "extreme rightwing"? Genuinely curious
    Dude are you serious?
    How many actual "hard" right posters do we have on here? Plenty of disgruntled conservatives, some sitting this one out, a few voting Labour to send a message, a few reluctantly voting Conservative for fear of worse (Farage, or a massive Labour majority).

    But I'm struggling to think of anyone who's actually declared for Reform. Including Leon.

    With Reform at ~18% in the polls, it's a sign of how detached PB demographics are from reality. Either that, or there are a lot of 'shy reformers' out there.
    I'll fess up. I might vote Reform. It's either Starmer for laughs or Reform to kill the Tories

    But in what universe is Reform "far right"? They aren't even "hard right" by mainland European standards. Indeed they sometimes struggle to be rightwing, so far has the Overton Window shifted

    Their big thing is immigration, Are they going to shoot the boats and drown people (as has been happening off the EU shores)? No. They want to "tow boats back to France". That may be a dream, but it ain't the Shoah. As for overall immigration, they want "net zero" - in a recent interview Farage admitted that might still mean "600,000 immigrants" but they want to keep the incomings and outgoings balanced and the population stable, for a while, as our infrastructure cannot sustain explosive growth (and looking at our rivers, they have a point)

    That's it. That's Britain's "Nazi party" - gently towing boats and trying not to destroy rivers. Wow. Practically Treblinka
    You do know that net zero migration is completely mental, yes? We'd be better off with Truss and PM and Corbyn as Chancellor. You want runaway inflation and the collapse of half the public and private services in the country? That's what Farage is offering.
    To be fair being 'completely mental' is not necessarily the same as being far right. Some of Corbyn's ideas, plenty of the Green ideas and even some of the main party ideas can be considerd 'completely mental' but they would not be considered right wing.

    You are conflating two completely separate, although not always exclusive, arguments.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 48,356
    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    FPT

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Leon said:

    An absolutely terrifying thread about what an actual Labour government will be like


    https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/1803104439697313995

    "In November, long before #zeroseats, even as the media was reporting politics as usual, I wrote a thread on why the Tories were heading for an epochal defeat. Now that this is received wisdom, it's time for a new thread, forecasting how Labour will govern. Be very afraid."


    I pray that this dude is wrong; I fear in my vittals that he is bang on

    A lot of this talk about Labour seeking to stop any future government going in a right wing direction seems like scaremongering to me.

    No Parliament can bind it's successor. The Tories could have thrown out most or all of the 1997-2010 reforms in the past 14 years if they'd wished but the fact is they chose not to.
    But the Equality Act did exactly that, without anyone realising, until very recently

    And he makes that point
    As did the European Communities Act Solution to the Equality act preventing reform is same as European Communities Act & Human Rights preventing reform. Repeal or Heavily Amend it.

    Tories have been torn apart because they thought Brexit was enough. It wasn't Brexit was just the enabling measure that enabled the rest to be done. They were not done and as a result reforms that the public wanted could not be enacted and they regard the Tories as having betrayed them.
    Exactly right

    I blame Boris. He had the majority to do all this, but he was too frit of his posh lefty friends, fam and neighbz

    For this to change, it will take a firmly rightwing leader of a firmly rightwing party that doesn't give a tinker's wank about fashionable opinion

    OMG Georgia!!!
    Sadly, Fair comment.

    I fear Boris had two fatal flaws (possibly 3).

    1) Weakness - so he didn't have the balls to stick with essentially the same policy as Sweden and more unforgivably, didn't end the lockdown nonsense after six weeks when it was obvious that Covid was a disease of the very elderly, very ill with something else and very unlucky (he clearly thought it was nonsense as illustrated by his behaviour).

    2) Needing to be liked (which let his posh lefty friends have a veto).

    3) I suspect (pure spectulation) he got some policy ideas from domestic sources. That would account for his U turn on Eagle Slicers and the like, when the M'Learned former Mrs Boris was swapped for the current incumbent.

    It is the firm bit rather than particularly right wing bit that is needed. Someone willing to do what Thatcher did when losing a judicial review. Pass an act overthrowing the judgement.
    Did Boris have any lefty friends while Prime Minister? Based on the friend he married and the friends who gave him freebies and those friends who advised him on getting Paterson and/or Pincher off the hook, Boris's entire social circle is well-heeled Tory poshos.
    Well-heeled Tory poshos are generally left of Corbyn. That's the problem

    And twas ever thus. Wasn't it Wodehouse who observed that his dukes voted Labour and Jeeves was a Tory?
    Tories to the left of Corbyn must be a pretty select group. Johnson is just a standard issue boarding school libertarian with a side order of little Englander prejudices and his social circle would I imagine be in tune with that. If he has any left wing friends he has certainly kept them well hidden. The "rich upper class lefty" trope is well loved by chippy rightists on here but I have never encountered one in the wild.
    That just proves how irredeemably lower middle class you are

    No, seriously, the posh are left wing. It's not a joke. The gags about Guardian journalists' backgrounds are not a spoof

    Marina Hyde has been mentioned on this thread:

    "Hyde is the daughter of Sir Alastair Edgcumbe James Dudley-Williams, 2nd Baronet, and his wife, the former Diana Elizabeth Jane Duncan. Through her father, she is the granddaughter of aviation pioneer and Conservative politician Sir Rolf Dudley-Williams, 1st Baronet. She attended Downe House School, near Newbury in Berkshire,[1] and read English at Christ Church, Oxford.["

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marina_Hyde

    She's not just posh she's absurdly rich, I know this personally
    I'm sure these people exist, but the point is that you can name them because there are so few of them. They probably all work for the Guardian. I've never met any of them. But I've met a never ending line of posh right wingers, because there are so many more of them (maybe you should get a job in finance).
    One thing you need to bear in mind is that you are extremely right wing. So people you think of as lefties (despite them eg working for the Tory party) are not lefties on any reasonable definition of the word. It's the same mindset that sees Corbynites call Labour moderate red Tories etc.
    In what way am I "extreme rightwing"? Genuinely curious
    Dude are you serious?
    How many actual "hard" right posters do we have on here? Plenty of disgruntled conservatives, some sitting this one out, a few voting Labour to send a message, a few reluctantly voting Conservative for fear of worse (Farage, or a massive Labour majority).

    But I'm struggling to think of anyone who's actually declared for Reform. Including Leon.

    With Reform at ~18% in the polls, it's a sign of how detached PB demographics are from reality. Either that, or there are a lot of 'shy reformers' out there.
    I'll fess up. I might vote Reform. It's either Starmer for laughs or Reform to kill the Tories

    But in what universe is Reform "far right"? They aren't even "hard right" by mainland European standards. Indeed they sometimes struggle to be rightwing, so far has the Overton Window shifted

    Their big thing is immigration, Are they going to shoot the boats and drown people (as has been happening off the EU shores)? No. They want to "tow boats back to France". That may be a dream, but it ain't the Shoah. As for overall immigration, they want "net zero" - in a recent interview Farage admitted that might still mean "600,000 immigrants" but they want to keep the incomings and outgoings balanced and the population stable, for a while, as our infrastructure cannot sustain explosive growth (and looking at our rivers, they have a point)

    That's it. That's Britain's "Nazi party" - gently towing boats and trying not to destroy rivers. Wow. Practically Treblinka
    You do know that net zero migration is completely mental, yes? We'd be better off with Truss and PM and Corbyn as Chancellor. You want runaway inflation and the collapse of half the public and private services in the country? That's what Farage is offering.
    I don’t think Leon does rational thinking
  • Options
    No_Offence_AlanNo_Offence_Alan Posts: 4,095
    dixiedean said:

    Nigelb said:

    AlsoLei said:

    biggles said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Omnium said:

    rcs1000 said:

    On topic, but also a little bit of a rant.

    The Conservative Party has, for so long, been a successful political party because it has been able to tie together disparate groups, who don't all share exactly the same ideology.

    And it's done this by being pragmatic and remembering that there are going to be people who believe homosexuality is a sin, and there are going to be people are publicly gay, but they might share common views about - say - the size of the state.

    I'm reminded of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, who was caught on tape saying that the US was in a (culture) war, and there would only be one winner.

    No, Justice Alito, there is no winner. You cannot silence the voices of the 50% of people who disagree with you without actual war. And that actual war (see the Thirty Years War for an example) will end with everyone grudgingly agreeing that actually they can't agree and they can't force other people to agree with them.

    The Conservative Party cannot just be the party of people left behind by globalisation. Nor can it just be the party of pensioners. Nor can it just be the party of wealthy plutocrats. It needs to be a big tent. If you choose to silence - or make unwelcome - the voices that disagree with you, then you are consigning yourself to electoral oblivion.

    This is why "we didn't win because we weren't centrist enough" and "we didn't win because we weren't right wing enough" are both bullshit arguments. You didn't win because you were unable to make the tent big enough.

    Where was the voting market behind monetarism when MT made that her guiding theme? There wasn't one. She decided that that was the right thing for Britain, and set about winning the arguments. That's how you get positive change. Crafting your platform out of a mishmash of what voters have found acceptable up until now is not a plan to get into (or stay in) government; it's a way to go around in circles achieving very little.

    And I also don't think the issue is that Tories 'haven't been right wing enough', it's that they have sold themselves as the right wing alternative, benefitted from doing so, and changed their minds completely when it comes to actually doing anything right wing. That's a question of trust, rather than a question of politics. Those who feel that they haven't been centrist enough should vote for parties that espouse social democracy, of which there are two in the political mainstream. Why do they need a third? It smacks of reducing the alternatives available to voters because they aren't actually that confident in the attractiveness of their centrist prospectus.
    Every time the Tories get into power they're lured into nanny-statism. Thatcher had enough about her to push against that for several years. Imperfect though such direction might prove I think it is beneficial. Reducing the size of the state should be top of the list for any government.
    OK.

    The number of people of pensionable age is rising every year: we have promised them (repeatedly) that there is no circumstance where their pensions will grow less than 2% or wages or inflation. In addition, the proportion of people who are pensioners will grow every year. And a pensioner costs approximately 15x as much in social and health care as someone in their 20s.

    So: interest payments, healthcare and pension cost increases are nailed on. And they are half the budget.

    We need to spend more on defence.
    Policing and the administration of justice have been cut to the bone.

    I want to cut the size of the state too. But we all need to be realistic about the challenges facing us with a greying population.
    Plus everyone wants more transport projects and everyone wants increasingly improving schools. Add on people always having a pet regulation….
    The problem is that most expect the state can do more than it can do. It could only do what it did in the first place due to the revenue of empire and tbe legacy assets and soft power in the post empire world which have slowly inevitably decayed

    Also, as life becomes more complex the state can do less. EM Forsters "The Machine Stops" was a boring book foisted on us at school but a very prohetic one.

    The choice is collapse with authoritarianism on the way or a wholesale deregulation, a very limited state based on a principle of Caveat Emptor and an acceptance that people will make bad or inept decisions and suffer as a result and it is not the states job to prevent or mitigate this, other than to set some core, simple to understand rules (which is basically what Common Law is).

    I think the die was cast though when Cameron beat Davis in 2005, or perhaps even when Wilson won in 1964.
    You're overstating the "revenue of empire" here, as costs matched benefits from the 1870s onwards even if you look at it from a pure revenue perspective.

    On a wider economic basis it produced a clear loss, especially when you factor in the downsides of it fucking our trade and monetary policy over and over and over again until we finally began to cut our losses in 1957.
    Direct revenue is one thing. Indirect (a captive market for UK manufacturers) is another, this has lingered on to a certain extent even now (e.g MK will have good sales in Singapore, Ireland, Cyprus, Hong Kong and half the middle East and Africa as a legacy of empire is that they use BS1363 plugs and sockets.

    Plenty more such trade was kicked in the nuts in 1973 when joined customs union with rival industrial countries and put trade barriers up with such countries as a result.

    The root cause of empire is need, a country not having enough land and resources to support it's population sustainably. See Rome, Japan and us (not to mention Russia invading Ukraine, both now and in aftermath of the Russian Revolution)

    It dosen't help that we are making it worse by unsustainable population increase and shunning the Oil, Gas and Coal resources (the latter of which is still abundant) so are therefore making our industry uncompetitive compared with those that do exploit such resources unreserved.

    And yet S Korea - and postwar Japan - achieved great prosperity without significant natural resources, or captive markets.
    Taiwan also managed it. Whilst being ostracised and obstructed by its gigantic neighbour.
    Also Singapore. No inherited wealth, everyone had to work for it.
  • Options
    kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 4,415
    Leon said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    FPT

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Leon said:

    An absolutely terrifying thread about what an actual Labour government will be like


    https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/1803104439697313995

    "In November, long before #zeroseats, even as the media was reporting politics as usual, I wrote a thread on why the Tories were heading for an epochal defeat. Now that this is received wisdom, it's time for a new thread, forecasting how Labour will govern. Be very afraid."


    I pray that this dude is wrong; I fear in my vittals that he is bang on

    A lot of this talk about Labour seeking to stop any future government going in a right wing direction seems like scaremongering to me.

    No Parliament can bind it's successor. The Tories could have thrown out most or all of the 1997-2010 reforms in the past 14 years if they'd wished but the fact is they chose not to.
    But the Equality Act did exactly that, without anyone realising, until very recently

    And he makes that point
    As did the European Communities Act Solution to the Equality act preventing reform is same as European Communities Act & Human Rights preventing reform. Repeal or Heavily Amend it.

    Tories have been torn apart because they thought Brexit was enough. It wasn't Brexit was just the enabling measure that enabled the rest to be done. They were not done and as a result reforms that the public wanted could not be enacted and they regard the Tories as having betrayed them.
    Exactly right

    I blame Boris. He had the majority to do all this, but he was too frit of his posh lefty friends, fam and neighbz

    For this to change, it will take a firmly rightwing leader of a firmly rightwing party that doesn't give a tinker's wank about fashionable opinion

    OMG Georgia!!!
    Sadly, Fair comment.

    I fear Boris had two fatal flaws (possibly 3).

    1) Weakness - so he didn't have the balls to stick with essentially the same policy as Sweden and more unforgivably, didn't end the lockdown nonsense after six weeks when it was obvious that Covid was a disease of the very elderly, very ill with something else and very unlucky (he clearly thought it was nonsense as illustrated by his behaviour).

    2) Needing to be liked (which let his posh lefty friends have a veto).

    3) I suspect (pure spectulation) he got some policy ideas from domestic sources. That would account for his U turn on Eagle Slicers and the like, when the M'Learned former Mrs Boris was swapped for the current incumbent.

    It is the firm bit rather than particularly right wing bit that is needed. Someone willing to do what Thatcher did when losing a judicial review. Pass an act overthrowing the judgement.
    Did Boris have any lefty friends while Prime Minister? Based on the friend he married and the friends who gave him freebies and those friends who advised him on getting Paterson and/or Pincher off the hook, Boris's entire social circle is well-heeled Tory poshos.
    Well-heeled Tory poshos are generally left of Corbyn. That's the problem

    And twas ever thus. Wasn't it Wodehouse who observed that his dukes voted Labour and Jeeves was a Tory?
    Tories to the left of Corbyn must be a pretty select group. Johnson is just a standard issue boarding school libertarian with a side order of little Englander prejudices and his social circle would I imagine be in tune with that. If he has any left wing friends he has certainly kept them well hidden. The "rich upper class lefty" trope is well loved by chippy rightists on here but I have never encountered one in the wild.
    That just proves how irredeemably lower middle class you are

    No, seriously, the posh are left wing. It's not a joke. The gags about Guardian journalists' backgrounds are not a spoof

    Marina Hyde has been mentioned on this thread:

    "Hyde is the daughter of Sir Alastair Edgcumbe James Dudley-Williams, 2nd Baronet, and his wife, the former Diana Elizabeth Jane Duncan. Through her father, she is the granddaughter of aviation pioneer and Conservative politician Sir Rolf Dudley-Williams, 1st Baronet. She attended Downe House School, near Newbury in Berkshire,[1] and read English at Christ Church, Oxford.["

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marina_Hyde

    She's not just posh she's absurdly rich, I know this personally
    I'm sure these people exist, but the point is that you can name them because there are so few of them. They probably all work for the Guardian. I've never met any of them. But I've met a never ending line of posh right wingers, because there are so many more of them (maybe you should get a job in finance).
    One thing you need to bear in mind is that you are extremely right wing. So people you think of as lefties (despite them eg working for the Tory party) are not lefties on any reasonable definition of the word. It's the same mindset that sees Corbynites call Labour moderate red Tories etc.
    In what way am I "extreme rightwing"? Genuinely curious
    Dude are you serious?
    How many actual "hard" right posters do we have on here? Plenty of disgruntled conservatives, some sitting this one out, a few voting Labour to send a message, a few reluctantly voting Conservative for fear of worse (Farage, or a massive Labour majority).

    But I'm struggling to think of anyone who's actually declared for Reform. Including Leon.

    With Reform at ~18% in the polls, it's a sign of how detached PB demographics are from reality. Either that, or there are a lot of 'shy reformers' out there.
    I'll fess up. I might vote Reform. It's either Starmer for laughs or Reform to kill the Tories

    But in what universe is Reform "far right"? They aren't even "hard right" by mainland European standards. Indeed they sometimes struggle to be rightwing, so far has the Overton Window shifted

    Their big thing is immigration, Are they going to shoot the boats and drown people (as has been happening off the EU shores)? No. They want to "tow boats back to France". That may be a dream, but it ain't the Shoah. As for overall immigration, they want "net zero" - in a recent interview Farage admitted that might still mean "600,000 immigrants" but they want to keep the incomings and outgoings balanced and the population stable, for a while, as our infrastructure cannot sustain explosive growth (and looking at our rivers, they have a point)

    That's it. That's Britain's "Nazi party" - gently towing boats and trying not to destroy rivers. Wow. Practically Treblinka
    Which is why I'd define Reform as "hard right" rather than "far right". Although some of the individual candidates - thinking Hitler was right, being Facebook friends with the leader of an actual fascist party - make me wonder. A bit like during lockdown, when people started reporting their neighbours - made me realise how quickly some people would love it if we turned into a fascist (or communist) police state, if only the conditions were there. And many of them were probably ardent Labour voters...

    But as you say, the big thing that's driving the Reform vote is immigration. I reckon the Tories would be on 30% now if their manifesto said "we promise to cap immigration at 100,000 per year for the next 5 years, and here's how" even if the sums were made up. The sums in the Reform and Labour manifesto are all back of napkin stuff anyway. But amazing the Tories haven't tried it.

    Of course, the Tories are the party with the biggest credibility gap, having promised lower immigration for 14 years now and delivered higher and higher with each passing year...
  • Options
    bigglesbiggles Posts: 5,400
    In the same way you shouldn’t judge a Test Match until both sides have batted? Maybe you shouldn’t judge a Euros until all teams have played. England look reasonable.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 78,346
    edited June 18
    Andy_JS said:

    biggles said:

    Cookie said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    That's the best football match I've seen since Argentina v France at the last World Cup Final

    Sensational! Sat in my garden with it on the laptop with the lovely evening sun blazing down. Perfick!
    Best goal yet, best save yet, best match yet, best everything. Scintillating

    When football is THAT good....
    As much as I love my cricket and rugby, sometimes football is very hard to beat
    Bad cricket and rugby is worse than bad football. But good cricket and rugby is better than good football.
    Not sure about that. Will ponder
    it's a REALLY good question, one I've considered myself

    Fuck, I dunno

    How do you rate the last Ashes series or the 2005 Ashes, against France V Argentina? And how does that match the insane madness of the best rugby, say England v the All Blacks, the Boks v Ireland, with both teams on fire?

    International rugby at the top level produces more reliable compelling entertainment through the whole match

    But the very best football beats that but it is rarer

    And the very best Test series beats even that but it is even RARER

    That's the best I can do

    And all American sports are shite
    Good rugby beats anything for pure spectacle - though good cricket is more exciting if you care who wins. Both beat football, for me. Football can be quite entertaining but for me ranks below rugby (both codes) or cricket (of any format) - faced with a screen showing England playing football in the world cup final and another showing a rugby or cricket match - even one I didn't particularly care about - my attention would be drawn to the latter.
    Though obviously if it's between a football match my daughter is playing in and any other sport, football wins!

    I'd also rank the other footballs - Gaelic, American, Australian rules - above association football.
    Football's a uniquely good game to play, because you need so little for a game. But for me, other team sports are more enjoyable watches.
    I will always go with Test cricket because the climax comes after up to five days of ups and downs. It’s tantric sport.
    True, and I've just booked a ticket for the final day at Lords to see the GOAT for one last time. Just hope the Windies don't collapse inside 3 or 4 days. £25. Buy one while tickets are still available.
    With Bazball, thats extremely optimistic. More chance of the Tories getting 200 seats.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 49,952
    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    FPT

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Leon said:

    An absolutely terrifying thread about what an actual Labour government will be like


    https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/1803104439697313995

    "In November, long before #zeroseats, even as the media was reporting politics as usual, I wrote a thread on why the Tories were heading for an epochal defeat. Now that this is received wisdom, it's time for a new thread, forecasting how Labour will govern. Be very afraid."


    I pray that this dude is wrong; I fear in my vittals that he is bang on

    A lot of this talk about Labour seeking to stop any future government going in a right wing direction seems like scaremongering to me.

    No Parliament can bind it's successor. The Tories could have thrown out most or all of the 1997-2010 reforms in the past 14 years if they'd wished but the fact is they chose not to.
    But the Equality Act did exactly that, without anyone realising, until very recently

    And he makes that point
    As did the European Communities Act Solution to the Equality act preventing reform is same as European Communities Act & Human Rights preventing reform. Repeal or Heavily Amend it.

    Tories have been torn apart because they thought Brexit was enough. It wasn't Brexit was just the enabling measure that enabled the rest to be done. They were not done and as a result reforms that the public wanted could not be enacted and they regard the Tories as having betrayed them.
    Exactly right

    I blame Boris. He had the majority to do all this, but he was too frit of his posh lefty friends, fam and neighbz

    For this to change, it will take a firmly rightwing leader of a firmly rightwing party that doesn't give a tinker's wank about fashionable opinion

    OMG Georgia!!!
    Sadly, Fair comment.

    I fear Boris had two fatal flaws (possibly 3).

    1) Weakness - so he didn't have the balls to stick with essentially the same policy as Sweden and more unforgivably, didn't end the lockdown nonsense after six weeks when it was obvious that Covid was a disease of the very elderly, very ill with something else and very unlucky (he clearly thought it was nonsense as illustrated by his behaviour).

    2) Needing to be liked (which let his posh lefty friends have a veto).

    3) I suspect (pure spectulation) he got some policy ideas from domestic sources. That would account for his U turn on Eagle Slicers and the like, when the M'Learned former Mrs Boris was swapped for the current incumbent.

    It is the firm bit rather than particularly right wing bit that is needed. Someone willing to do what Thatcher did when losing a judicial review. Pass an act overthrowing the judgement.
    Did Boris have any lefty friends while Prime Minister? Based on the friend he married and the friends who gave him freebies and those friends who advised him on getting Paterson and/or Pincher off the hook, Boris's entire social circle is well-heeled Tory poshos.
    Well-heeled Tory poshos are generally left of Corbyn. That's the problem

    And twas ever thus. Wasn't it Wodehouse who observed that his dukes voted Labour and Jeeves was a Tory?
    Tories to the left of Corbyn must be a pretty select group. Johnson is just a standard issue boarding school libertarian with a side order of little Englander prejudices and his social circle would I imagine be in tune with that. If he has any left wing friends he has certainly kept them well hidden. The "rich upper class lefty" trope is well loved by chippy rightists on here but I have never encountered one in the wild.
    That just proves how irredeemably lower middle class you are

    No, seriously, the posh are left wing. It's not a joke. The gags about Guardian journalists' backgrounds are not a spoof

    Marina Hyde has been mentioned on this thread:

    "Hyde is the daughter of Sir Alastair Edgcumbe James Dudley-Williams, 2nd Baronet, and his wife, the former Diana Elizabeth Jane Duncan. Through her father, she is the granddaughter of aviation pioneer and Conservative politician Sir Rolf Dudley-Williams, 1st Baronet. She attended Downe House School, near Newbury in Berkshire,[1] and read English at Christ Church, Oxford.["

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marina_Hyde

    She's not just posh she's absurdly rich, I know this personally
    I'm sure these people exist, but the point is that you can name them because there are so few of them. They probably all work for the Guardian. I've never met any of them. But I've met a never ending line of posh right wingers, because there are so many more of them (maybe you should get a job in finance).
    One thing you need to bear in mind is that you are extremely right wing. So people you think of as lefties (despite them eg working for the Tory party) are not lefties on any reasonable definition of the word. It's the same mindset that sees Corbynites call Labour moderate red Tories etc.
    In what way am I "extreme rightwing"? Genuinely curious
    Dude are you serious?
    How many actual "hard" right posters do we have on here? Plenty of disgruntled conservatives, some sitting this one out, a few voting Labour to send a message, a few reluctantly voting Conservative for fear of worse (Farage, or a massive Labour majority).

    But I'm struggling to think of anyone who's actually declared for Reform. Including Leon.

    With Reform at ~18% in the polls, it's a sign of how detached PB demographics are from reality. Either that, or there are a lot of 'shy reformers' out there.
    I'll fess up. I might vote Reform. It's either Starmer for laughs or Reform to kill the Tories

    But in what universe is Reform "far right"? They aren't even "hard right" by mainland European standards. Indeed they sometimes struggle to be rightwing, so far has the Overton Window shifted

    Their big thing is immigration, Are they going to shoot the boats and drown people (as has been happening off the EU shores)? No. They want to "tow boats back to France". That may be a dream, but it ain't the Shoah. As for overall immigration, they want "net zero" - in a recent interview Farage admitted that might still mean "600,000 immigrants" but they want to keep the incomings and outgoings balanced and the population stable, for a while, as our infrastructure cannot sustain explosive growth (and looking at our rivers, they have a point)

    That's it. That's Britain's "Nazi party" - gently towing boats and trying not to destroy rivers. Wow. Practically Treblinka
    You do know that net zero migration is completely mental, yes? We'd be better off with Truss and PM and Corbyn as Chancellor. You want runaway inflation and the collapse of half the public and private services in the country? That's what Farage is offering.
    Zero NET migration
    Zero net migration, net zero migration, you can be picky over word order but we're talking about the same thing.
    It means you try and balance emigration and immigration because we cannot sustain present net migration of 700,000 a year, when we can barely build 200,000 houses a year plus the NHS, schools, social care, sewage, transport, are all under intense pressure because our population is surging due to this unprecedented influx. And it is historically unprecedened. 2.4 MILLION in 3 years

    Are you saying that trying to stop that, to rein in a crazy and ahistorical growth in population, driven entirely by inwards migration, is "Nazi"?
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 93,792
    It's true, but I'm surprised to see such a direct statement on the BBC

    Voters are being taken for fools on the economy:

    Towering over the many hundreds of pages of promises, plans, strategies and spreadsheet costings in these general election manifestos is a single word: credibility.

    One of the big areas where the credibility question has been raised is over taxes. There is an uneasy consensus among the two main parties that the next chancellor will not raise the main rates of income tax, national insurance, VAT or corporation tax.

    But these promises rely on a perception that voters only care about their tax rates and, frankly, are blissfully ignorant about increases in their actual bills. Voters are being taken for fools. Even if the letter of manifesto promises not to raise tax rates from 2019 has been specifically adhered to, workers know that their taxes have shot up.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crgg4ze1edpo
  • Options
    FarooqFarooq Posts: 12,329

    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    FPT

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Leon said:

    An absolutely terrifying thread about what an actual Labour government will be like


    https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/1803104439697313995

    "In November, long before #zeroseats, even as the media was reporting politics as usual, I wrote a thread on why the Tories were heading for an epochal defeat. Now that this is received wisdom, it's time for a new thread, forecasting how Labour will govern. Be very afraid."


    I pray that this dude is wrong; I fear in my vittals that he is bang on

    A lot of this talk about Labour seeking to stop any future government going in a right wing direction seems like scaremongering to me.

    No Parliament can bind it's successor. The Tories could have thrown out most or all of the 1997-2010 reforms in the past 14 years if they'd wished but the fact is they chose not to.
    But the Equality Act did exactly that, without anyone realising, until very recently

    And he makes that point
    As did the European Communities Act Solution to the Equality act preventing reform is same as European Communities Act & Human Rights preventing reform. Repeal or Heavily Amend it.

    Tories have been torn apart because they thought Brexit was enough. It wasn't Brexit was just the enabling measure that enabled the rest to be done. They were not done and as a result reforms that the public wanted could not be enacted and they regard the Tories as having betrayed them.
    Exactly right

    I blame Boris. He had the majority to do all this, but he was too frit of his posh lefty friends, fam and neighbz

    For this to change, it will take a firmly rightwing leader of a firmly rightwing party that doesn't give a tinker's wank about fashionable opinion

    OMG Georgia!!!
    Sadly, Fair comment.

    I fear Boris had two fatal flaws (possibly 3).

    1) Weakness - so he didn't have the balls to stick with essentially the same policy as Sweden and more unforgivably, didn't end the lockdown nonsense after six weeks when it was obvious that Covid was a disease of the very elderly, very ill with something else and very unlucky (he clearly thought it was nonsense as illustrated by his behaviour).

    2) Needing to be liked (which let his posh lefty friends have a veto).

    3) I suspect (pure spectulation) he got some policy ideas from domestic sources. That would account for his U turn on Eagle Slicers and the like, when the M'Learned former Mrs Boris was swapped for the current incumbent.

    It is the firm bit rather than particularly right wing bit that is needed. Someone willing to do what Thatcher did when losing a judicial review. Pass an act overthrowing the judgement.
    Did Boris have any lefty friends while Prime Minister? Based on the friend he married and the friends who gave him freebies and those friends who advised him on getting Paterson and/or Pincher off the hook, Boris's entire social circle is well-heeled Tory poshos.
    Well-heeled Tory poshos are generally left of Corbyn. That's the problem

    And twas ever thus. Wasn't it Wodehouse who observed that his dukes voted Labour and Jeeves was a Tory?
    Tories to the left of Corbyn must be a pretty select group. Johnson is just a standard issue boarding school libertarian with a side order of little Englander prejudices and his social circle would I imagine be in tune with that. If he has any left wing friends he has certainly kept them well hidden. The "rich upper class lefty" trope is well loved by chippy rightists on here but I have never encountered one in the wild.
    That just proves how irredeemably lower middle class you are

    No, seriously, the posh are left wing. It's not a joke. The gags about Guardian journalists' backgrounds are not a spoof

    Marina Hyde has been mentioned on this thread:

    "Hyde is the daughter of Sir Alastair Edgcumbe James Dudley-Williams, 2nd Baronet, and his wife, the former Diana Elizabeth Jane Duncan. Through her father, she is the granddaughter of aviation pioneer and Conservative politician Sir Rolf Dudley-Williams, 1st Baronet. She attended Downe House School, near Newbury in Berkshire,[1] and read English at Christ Church, Oxford.["

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marina_Hyde

    She's not just posh she's absurdly rich, I know this personally
    I'm sure these people exist, but the point is that you can name them because there are so few of them. They probably all work for the Guardian. I've never met any of them. But I've met a never ending line of posh right wingers, because there are so many more of them (maybe you should get a job in finance).
    One thing you need to bear in mind is that you are extremely right wing. So people you think of as lefties (despite them eg working for the Tory party) are not lefties on any reasonable definition of the word. It's the same mindset that sees Corbynites call Labour moderate red Tories etc.
    In what way am I "extreme rightwing"? Genuinely curious
    Dude are you serious?
    How many actual "hard" right posters do we have on here? Plenty of disgruntled conservatives, some sitting this one out, a few voting Labour to send a message, a few reluctantly voting Conservative for fear of worse (Farage, or a massive Labour majority).

    But I'm struggling to think of anyone who's actually declared for Reform. Including Leon.

    With Reform at ~18% in the polls, it's a sign of how detached PB demographics are from reality. Either that, or there are a lot of 'shy reformers' out there.
    I'll fess up. I might vote Reform. It's either Starmer for laughs or Reform to kill the Tories

    But in what universe is Reform "far right"? They aren't even "hard right" by mainland European standards. Indeed they sometimes struggle to be rightwing, so far has the Overton Window shifted

    Their big thing is immigration, Are they going to shoot the boats and drown people (as has been happening off the EU shores)? No. They want to "tow boats back to France". That may be a dream, but it ain't the Shoah. As for overall immigration, they want "net zero" - in a recent interview Farage admitted that might still mean "600,000 immigrants" but they want to keep the incomings and outgoings balanced and the population stable, for a while, as our infrastructure cannot sustain explosive growth (and looking at our rivers, they have a point)

    That's it. That's Britain's "Nazi party" - gently towing boats and trying not to destroy rivers. Wow. Practically Treblinka
    You do know that net zero migration is completely mental, yes? We'd be better off with Truss and PM and Corbyn as Chancellor. You want runaway inflation and the collapse of half the public and private services in the country? That's what Farage is offering.
    To be fair being 'completely mental' is not necessarily the same as being far right. Some of Corbyn's ideas, plenty of the Green ideas and even some of the main party ideas can be considerd 'completely mental' but they would not be considered right wing.

    You are conflating two completely separate, although not always exclusive, arguments.
    No argument from me. There's a problem with identifying racist authoritarians as right wing and identifying hardcore liberals as left wing. My only point here is zero NET migration is completely loopy.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 48,356
    1:1 OG
  • Options
    ChameleonChameleon Posts: 4,205
    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    FPT

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Leon said:

    An absolutely terrifying thread about what an actual Labour government will be like


    https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/1803104439697313995

    "In November, long before #zeroseats, even as the media was reporting politics as usual, I wrote a thread on why the Tories were heading for an epochal defeat. Now that this is received wisdom, it's time for a new thread, forecasting how Labour will govern. Be very afraid."


    I pray that this dude is wrong; I fear in my vittals that he is bang on

    A lot of this talk about Labour seeking to stop any future government going in a right wing direction seems like scaremongering to me.

    No Parliament can bind it's successor. The Tories could have thrown out most or all of the 1997-2010 reforms in the past 14 years if they'd wished but the fact is they chose not to.
    But the Equality Act did exactly that, without anyone realising, until very recently

    And he makes that point
    As did the European Communities Act Solution to the Equality act preventing reform is same as European Communities Act & Human Rights preventing reform. Repeal or Heavily Amend it.

    Tories have been torn apart because they thought Brexit was enough. It wasn't Brexit was just the enabling measure that enabled the rest to be done. They were not done and as a result reforms that the public wanted could not be enacted and they regard the Tories as having betrayed them.
    Exactly right

    I blame Boris. He had the majority to do all this, but he was too frit of his posh lefty friends, fam and neighbz

    For this to change, it will take a firmly rightwing leader of a firmly rightwing party that doesn't give a tinker's wank about fashionable opinion

    OMG Georgia!!!
    Sadly, Fair comment.

    I fear Boris had two fatal flaws (possibly 3).

    1) Weakness - so he didn't have the balls to stick with essentially the same policy as Sweden and more unforgivably, didn't end the lockdown nonsense after six weeks when it was obvious that Covid was a disease of the very elderly, very ill with something else and very unlucky (he clearly thought it was nonsense as illustrated by his behaviour).

    2) Needing to be liked (which let his posh lefty friends have a veto).

    3) I suspect (pure spectulation) he got some policy ideas from domestic sources. That would account for his U turn on Eagle Slicers and the like, when the M'Learned former Mrs Boris was swapped for the current incumbent.

    It is the firm bit rather than particularly right wing bit that is needed. Someone willing to do what Thatcher did when losing a judicial review. Pass an act overthrowing the judgement.
    Did Boris have any lefty friends while Prime Minister? Based on the friend he married and the friends who gave him freebies and those friends who advised him on getting Paterson and/or Pincher off the hook, Boris's entire social circle is well-heeled Tory poshos.
    Well-heeled Tory poshos are generally left of Corbyn. That's the problem

    And twas ever thus. Wasn't it Wodehouse who observed that his dukes voted Labour and Jeeves was a Tory?
    Tories to the left of Corbyn must be a pretty select group. Johnson is just a standard issue boarding school libertarian with a side order of little Englander prejudices and his social circle would I imagine be in tune with that. If he has any left wing friends he has certainly kept them well hidden. The "rich upper class lefty" trope is well loved by chippy rightists on here but I have never encountered one in the wild.
    That just proves how irredeemably lower middle class you are

    No, seriously, the posh are left wing. It's not a joke. The gags about Guardian journalists' backgrounds are not a spoof

    Marina Hyde has been mentioned on this thread:

    "Hyde is the daughter of Sir Alastair Edgcumbe James Dudley-Williams, 2nd Baronet, and his wife, the former Diana Elizabeth Jane Duncan. Through her father, she is the granddaughter of aviation pioneer and Conservative politician Sir Rolf Dudley-Williams, 1st Baronet. She attended Downe House School, near Newbury in Berkshire,[1] and read English at Christ Church, Oxford.["

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marina_Hyde

    She's not just posh she's absurdly rich, I know this personally
    I'm sure these people exist, but the point is that you can name them because there are so few of them. They probably all work for the Guardian. I've never met any of them. But I've met a never ending line of posh right wingers, because there are so many more of them (maybe you should get a job in finance).
    One thing you need to bear in mind is that you are extremely right wing. So people you think of as lefties (despite them eg working for the Tory party) are not lefties on any reasonable definition of the word. It's the same mindset that sees Corbynites call Labour moderate red Tories etc.
    In what way am I "extreme rightwing"? Genuinely curious
    Dude are you serious?
    How many actual "hard" right posters do we have on here? Plenty of disgruntled conservatives, some sitting this one out, a few voting Labour to send a message, a few reluctantly voting Conservative for fear of worse (Farage, or a massive Labour majority).

    But I'm struggling to think of anyone who's actually declared for Reform. Including Leon.

    With Reform at ~18% in the polls, it's a sign of how detached PB demographics are from reality. Either that, or there are a lot of 'shy reformers' out there.
    I'll fess up. I might vote Reform. It's either Starmer for laughs or Reform to kill the Tories

    But in what universe is Reform "far right"? They aren't even "hard right" by mainland European standards. Indeed they sometimes struggle to be rightwing, so far has the Overton Window shifted

    Their big thing is immigration, Are they going to shoot the boats and drown people (as has been happening off the EU shores)? No. They want to "tow boats back to France". That may be a dream, but it ain't the Shoah. As for overall immigration, they want "net zero" - in a recent interview Farage admitted that might still mean "600,000 immigrants" but they want to keep the incomings and outgoings balanced and the population stable, for a while, as our infrastructure cannot sustain explosive growth (and looking at our rivers, they have a point)

    That's it. That's Britain's "Nazi party" - gently towing boats and trying not to destroy rivers. Wow. Practically Treblinka
    You do know that net zero migration is completely mental, yes? We'd be better off with Truss and PM and Corbyn as Chancellor. You want runaway inflation and the collapse of half the public and private services in the country? That's what Farage is offering.
    Net zero migration would be very workable with a remigration policy - offer every non-UK citizen earning less than £30k (for all of the past 5 years) £15k to leave and never return - win for the treasury and opens up a spot for a skilled worker.
  • Options
    TweedledeeTweedledee Posts: 486
    IanB2 said:

    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    rcs1000 said:

    biggles said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Omnium said:

    rcs1000 said:

    On topic, but also a little bit of a rant.

    The Conservative Party has, for so long, been a successful political party because it has been able to tie together disparate groups, who don't all share exactly the same ideology.

    And it's done this by being pragmatic and remembering that there are going to be people who believe homosexuality is a sin, and there are going to be people are publicly gay, but they might share common views about - say - the size of the state.

    I'm reminded of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, who was caught on tape saying that the US was in a (culture) war, and there would only be one winner.

    No, Justice Alito, there is no winner. You cannot silence the voices of the 50% of people who disagree with you without actual war. And that actual war (see the Thirty Years War for an example) will end with everyone grudgingly agreeing that actually they can't agree and they can't force other people to agree with them.

    The Conservative Party cannot just be the party of people left behind by globalisation. Nor can it just be the party of pensioners. Nor can it just be the party of wealthy plutocrats. It needs to be a big tent. If you choose to silence - or make unwelcome - the voices that disagree with you, then you are consigning yourself to electoral oblivion.

    This is why "we didn't win because we weren't centrist enough" and "we didn't win because we weren't right wing enough" are both bullshit arguments. You didn't win because you were unable to make the tent big enough.

    Where was the voting market behind monetarism when MT made that her guiding theme? There wasn't one. She decided that that was the right thing for Britain, and set about winning the arguments. That's how you get positive change. Crafting your platform out of a mishmash of what voters have found acceptable up until now is not a plan to get into (or stay in) government; it's a way to go around in circles achieving very little.

    And I also don't think the issue is that Tories 'haven't been right wing enough', it's that they have sold themselves as the right wing alternative, benefitted from doing so, and changed their minds completely when it comes to actually doing anything right wing. That's a question of trust, rather than a question of politics. Those who feel that they haven't been centrist enough should vote for parties that espouse social democracy, of which there are two in the political mainstream. Why do they need a third? It smacks of reducing the alternatives available to voters because they aren't actually that confident in the attractiveness of their centrist prospectus.
    Every time the Tories get into power they're lured into nanny-statism. Thatcher had enough about her to push against that for several years. Imperfect though such direction might prove I think it is beneficial. Reducing the size of the state should be top of the list for any government.
    OK.

    The number of people of pensionable age is rising every year: we have promised them (repeatedly) that there is no circumstance where their pensions will grow less than 2% or wages or inflation. In addition, the proportion of people who are pensioners will grow every year. And a pensioner costs approximately 15x as much in social and health care as someone in their 20s.

    So: interest payments, healthcare and pension cost increases are nailed on. And they are half the budget.

    We need to spend more on defence.
    Policing and the administration of justice have been cut to the bone.

    I want to cut the size of the state too. But we all need to be realistic about the challenges facing us with a greying population.
    Plus everyone wants more transport projects and everyone wants increasingly improving schools. Add on people always having a pet regulation….
    The problem is that most expect the state can do more than it can do. It could only do what it did in the first place due to the revenue of empire and tbe legacy assets and soft power in the post empire world which have slowly inevitably decayed

    Also, as life becomes more complex the state can do less. EM Forsters "The Machine Stops" was a boring book foisted on us at school but a very prohetic one.

    The choice is collapse with authoritarianism on the way or a wholesale deregulation, a very limited state based on a principle of Caveat Emptor and an acceptance that people will make bad or inept decisions and suffer as a result and it is not the states job to prevent or mitigate this, other than to set some core, simple to understand rules (which is basically what Common Law is).

    I think the die was cast though when Cameron beat Davis in 2005, or perhaps even when Wilson won in 1964.
    What bollocks. Countries like Denmark and Finland didn’t have an empire, but work fine today through the simple measure of people being OK to pay a bit more tax.
    Nothing to do with Denmark having a far lower population (and population density) and fertile land enabling them to produce three times as much food as they need for self sufficiency and export the difference.

    Similar arguments apply with Finland.

    UK. Not so much.
    This is laughable.

    Much of Finland is uninhabitable tundra. It suggests that the UK's problems would be solved by merger with Greenland. Or, indeed, made much worse by Scottish independence.

    And if population size is all, we can constantly get richer by cutting the country in half.
    None of Finland is uninhabitable tundra - it's nothing like Greenland in the slightest. Agriculture extends right up into the north of the country
    This is reasonably amusing since the word "tundra" comes from Finnish
    Not quite - it came into English from Russian via one of the Sami languages. Too many different consonants in a row to be Finnish!
    Sami, you're quite correct, clumsy from me conflating the two. Still, in the right ballpark. Northern Finland is certainly tundra. What constitutes "uninhabitable" is perhaps trickier. I don't think it'd be easy to survive there without external inputs. Global markets make some primitively uninhabitable places inhabitable. I don't know whether northern Finland falls into that category.
    The Sámi don’t really grow anything; they fish and herd reindeer. How they get their five a day, I’m not sure. They once populated regions further south - how much so is still debated - but were marginalised to the far north by the spread of the Norse peoples.
    Vitamins are largely a myth the Inuit got by fine on salmon and seal meat until the white man introduced firewater into the equation. Fun fact, all mammals can synthesize vitamin C except primates, guinea pigs and fruit bats. This is why Amundsen got on fine living on freshly shot seal while that arse Scott got scurvy because he relied on tinned beef (vit c don't last for ever).
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 28,966

    Have we done this?

    "Re-elect Rehman in Rainham" is in trouble...

    Gillingham & Rainham voting intention (+/- 5%, changes vs 2019 notional)

    LAB: 55% (+27)
    CON: 23% (-39)
    REF: 15% (+15)
    LDEM: 5% (=)
    GRN: 2% (=)

    @wethinkpolling/@TheEconomist, 5th-16th June. N=376


    https://twitter.com/OwenWntr/status/1803116579397177578

    The problem with the Economist's forecast is they haven't taken nominations into account. In Epping Forest, for instance, they're still allocating 11% to Reform even though they aren't standing.
  • Options
    Maybe England do have a chance after all
  • Options
    HeathenerHeathener Posts: 6,781
    MikeL said:

    Sir Jim Ratcliffe backs Labour and says Britons have ‘had enough’ of the Tories

    Billionaire Man Utd goes on to criticise ‘not terribly successful’ recent prime ministers


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/06/18/sir-jim-ratcliffe-manchester-united-backs-labour-election/

    So let's think this through.

    The Football Governance Bill ran out of time and was therefore dropped before the GE.

    Labour will shortly reintroduce the Bill. But the Labour Culture Secretary has said it will not be a "cut and paste" job - she will review the Tracey Crouch report again and see how the Bill can be strengthened.

    In particular she will consider a proposal to introduce a 10% levy on PL transfer fees.

    She will also consider expanding the Bill to regulate ticket prices.

    And who knows maybe expand into other areas as well?

    Again this background it may seem surprising that Jim Ratcliffe is supporting the party whose victory will undoubtedly have the most adverse consequences for his Man Utd investment.

    Or maybe he knows Labour is going to win and he is about to start a massive lobbying campaign? And he is starting by buttering them up?
    Anyone interested in that now-redundant Football Governing Bill, it’s worth reading Women in Football’s letter to the then HoC Committee

    https://www.womeninfootball.co.uk/news/2024/05/14/our-submission-to-parliament-on-the-football-governance-bill/

  • Options
    GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,613
    Shame about the equaliser. Always had a soft spot for the Czechs. A hard-drinking, underdog nation with overbearing neighbours and a great literary tradition.

    Not unlike the Irish, come to think of it.
  • Options
    FarooqFarooq Posts: 12,329
    Leon said:

    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    FPT

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Leon said:

    An absolutely terrifying thread about what an actual Labour government will be like


    https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/1803104439697313995

    "In November, long before #zeroseats, even as the media was reporting politics as usual, I wrote a thread on why the Tories were heading for an epochal defeat. Now that this is received wisdom, it's time for a new thread, forecasting how Labour will govern. Be very afraid."


    I pray that this dude is wrong; I fear in my vittals that he is bang on

    A lot of this talk about Labour seeking to stop any future government going in a right wing direction seems like scaremongering to me.

    No Parliament can bind it's successor. The Tories could have thrown out most or all of the 1997-2010 reforms in the past 14 years if they'd wished but the fact is they chose not to.
    But the Equality Act did exactly that, without anyone realising, until very recently

    And he makes that point
    As did the European Communities Act Solution to the Equality act preventing reform is same as European Communities Act & Human Rights preventing reform. Repeal or Heavily Amend it.

    Tories have been torn apart because they thought Brexit was enough. It wasn't Brexit was just the enabling measure that enabled the rest to be done. They were not done and as a result reforms that the public wanted could not be enacted and they regard the Tories as having betrayed them.
    Exactly right

    I blame Boris. He had the majority to do all this, but he was too frit of his posh lefty friends, fam and neighbz

    For this to change, it will take a firmly rightwing leader of a firmly rightwing party that doesn't give a tinker's wank about fashionable opinion

    OMG Georgia!!!
    Sadly, Fair comment.

    I fear Boris had two fatal flaws (possibly 3).

    1) Weakness - so he didn't have the balls to stick with essentially the same policy as Sweden and more unforgivably, didn't end the lockdown nonsense after six weeks when it was obvious that Covid was a disease of the very elderly, very ill with something else and very unlucky (he clearly thought it was nonsense as illustrated by his behaviour).

    2) Needing to be liked (which let his posh lefty friends have a veto).

    3) I suspect (pure spectulation) he got some policy ideas from domestic sources. That would account for his U turn on Eagle Slicers and the like, when the M'Learned former Mrs Boris was swapped for the current incumbent.

    It is the firm bit rather than particularly right wing bit that is needed. Someone willing to do what Thatcher did when losing a judicial review. Pass an act overthrowing the judgement.
    Did Boris have any lefty friends while Prime Minister? Based on the friend he married and the friends who gave him freebies and those friends who advised him on getting Paterson and/or Pincher off the hook, Boris's entire social circle is well-heeled Tory poshos.
    Well-heeled Tory poshos are generally left of Corbyn. That's the problem

    And twas ever thus. Wasn't it Wodehouse who observed that his dukes voted Labour and Jeeves was a Tory?
    Tories to the left of Corbyn must be a pretty select group. Johnson is just a standard issue boarding school libertarian with a side order of little Englander prejudices and his social circle would I imagine be in tune with that. If he has any left wing friends he has certainly kept them well hidden. The "rich upper class lefty" trope is well loved by chippy rightists on here but I have never encountered one in the wild.
    That just proves how irredeemably lower middle class you are

    No, seriously, the posh are left wing. It's not a joke. The gags about Guardian journalists' backgrounds are not a spoof

    Marina Hyde has been mentioned on this thread:

    "Hyde is the daughter of Sir Alastair Edgcumbe James Dudley-Williams, 2nd Baronet, and his wife, the former Diana Elizabeth Jane Duncan. Through her father, she is the granddaughter of aviation pioneer and Conservative politician Sir Rolf Dudley-Williams, 1st Baronet. She attended Downe House School, near Newbury in Berkshire,[1] and read English at Christ Church, Oxford.["

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marina_Hyde

    She's not just posh she's absurdly rich, I know this personally
    I'm sure these people exist, but the point is that you can name them because there are so few of them. They probably all work for the Guardian. I've never met any of them. But I've met a never ending line of posh right wingers, because there are so many more of them (maybe you should get a job in finance).
    One thing you need to bear in mind is that you are extremely right wing. So people you think of as lefties (despite them eg working for the Tory party) are not lefties on any reasonable definition of the word. It's the same mindset that sees Corbynites call Labour moderate red Tories etc.
    In what way am I "extreme rightwing"? Genuinely curious
    Dude are you serious?
    How many actual "hard" right posters do we have on here? Plenty of disgruntled conservatives, some sitting this one out, a few voting Labour to send a message, a few reluctantly voting Conservative for fear of worse (Farage, or a massive Labour majority).

    But I'm struggling to think of anyone who's actually declared for Reform. Including Leon.

    With Reform at ~18% in the polls, it's a sign of how detached PB demographics are from reality. Either that, or there are a lot of 'shy reformers' out there.
    I'll fess up. I might vote Reform. It's either Starmer for laughs or Reform to kill the Tories

    But in what universe is Reform "far right"? They aren't even "hard right" by mainland European standards. Indeed they sometimes struggle to be rightwing, so far has the Overton Window shifted

    Their big thing is immigration, Are they going to shoot the boats and drown people (as has been happening off the EU shores)? No. They want to "tow boats back to France". That may be a dream, but it ain't the Shoah. As for overall immigration, they want "net zero" - in a recent interview Farage admitted that might still mean "600,000 immigrants" but they want to keep the incomings and outgoings balanced and the population stable, for a while, as our infrastructure cannot sustain explosive growth (and looking at our rivers, they have a point)

    That's it. That's Britain's "Nazi party" - gently towing boats and trying not to destroy rivers. Wow. Practically Treblinka
    You do know that net zero migration is completely mental, yes? We'd be better off with Truss and PM and Corbyn as Chancellor. You want runaway inflation and the collapse of half the public and private services in the country? That's what Farage is offering.
    Zero NET migration
    Zero net migration, net zero migration, you can be picky over word order but we're talking about the same thing.
    It means you try and balance emigration and immigration because we cannot sustain present net migration of 700,000 a year, when we can barely build 200,000 houses a year plus the NHS, schools, social care, sewage, transport, are all under intense pressure because our population is surging due to this unprecedented influx. And it is historically unprecedened. 2.4 MILLION in 3 years

    Are you saying that trying to stop that, to rein in a crazy and ahistorical growth in population, driven entirely by inwards migration, is "Nazi"?
    No, I am not saying that policy is Nazi. I'm saying it's stupid.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 49,952
    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    FPT

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Leon said:

    An absolutely terrifying thread about what an actual Labour government will be like


    https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/1803104439697313995

    "In November, long before #zeroseats, even as the media was reporting politics as usual, I wrote a thread on why the Tories were heading for an epochal defeat. Now that this is received wisdom, it's time for a new thread, forecasting how Labour will govern. Be very afraid."


    I pray that this dude is wrong; I fear in my vittals that he is bang on

    A lot of this talk about Labour seeking to stop any future government going in a right wing direction seems like scaremongering to me.

    No Parliament can bind it's successor. The Tories could have thrown out most or all of the 1997-2010 reforms in the past 14 years if they'd wished but the fact is they chose not to.
    But the Equality Act did exactly that, without anyone realising, until very recently

    And he makes that point
    As did the European Communities Act Solution to the Equality act preventing reform is same as European Communities Act & Human Rights preventing reform. Repeal or Heavily Amend it.

    Tories have been torn apart because they thought Brexit was enough. It wasn't Brexit was just the enabling measure that enabled the rest to be done. They were not done and as a result reforms that the public wanted could not be enacted and they regard the Tories as having betrayed them.
    Exactly right

    I blame Boris. He had the majority to do all this, but he was too frit of his posh lefty friends, fam and neighbz

    For this to change, it will take a firmly rightwing leader of a firmly rightwing party that doesn't give a tinker's wank about fashionable opinion

    OMG Georgia!!!
    Sadly, Fair comment.

    I fear Boris had two fatal flaws (possibly 3).

    1) Weakness - so he didn't have the balls to stick with essentially the same policy as Sweden and more unforgivably, didn't end the lockdown nonsense after six weeks when it was obvious that Covid was a disease of the very elderly, very ill with something else and very unlucky (he clearly thought it was nonsense as illustrated by his behaviour).

    2) Needing to be liked (which let his posh lefty friends have a veto).

    3) I suspect (pure spectulation) he got some policy ideas from domestic sources. That would account for his U turn on Eagle Slicers and the like, when the M'Learned former Mrs Boris was swapped for the current incumbent.

    It is the firm bit rather than particularly right wing bit that is needed. Someone willing to do what Thatcher did when losing a judicial review. Pass an act overthrowing the judgement.
    Did Boris have any lefty friends while Prime Minister? Based on the friend he married and the friends who gave him freebies and those friends who advised him on getting Paterson and/or Pincher off the hook, Boris's entire social circle is well-heeled Tory poshos.
    Well-heeled Tory poshos are generally left of Corbyn. That's the problem

    And twas ever thus. Wasn't it Wodehouse who observed that his dukes voted Labour and Jeeves was a Tory?
    Tories to the left of Corbyn must be a pretty select group. Johnson is just a standard issue boarding school libertarian with a side order of little Englander prejudices and his social circle would I imagine be in tune with that. If he has any left wing friends he has certainly kept them well hidden. The "rich upper class lefty" trope is well loved by chippy rightists on here but I have never encountered one in the wild.
    That just proves how irredeemably lower middle class you are

    No, seriously, the posh are left wing. It's not a joke. The gags about Guardian journalists' backgrounds are not a spoof

    Marina Hyde has been mentioned on this thread:

    "Hyde is the daughter of Sir Alastair Edgcumbe James Dudley-Williams, 2nd Baronet, and his wife, the former Diana Elizabeth Jane Duncan. Through her father, she is the granddaughter of aviation pioneer and Conservative politician Sir Rolf Dudley-Williams, 1st Baronet. She attended Downe House School, near Newbury in Berkshire,[1] and read English at Christ Church, Oxford.["

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marina_Hyde

    She's not just posh she's absurdly rich, I know this personally
    I'm sure these people exist, but the point is that you can name them because there are so few of them. They probably all work for the Guardian. I've never met any of them. But I've met a never ending line of posh right wingers, because there are so many more of them (maybe you should get a job in finance).
    One thing you need to bear in mind is that you are extremely right wing. So people you think of as lefties (despite them eg working for the Tory party) are not lefties on any reasonable definition of the word. It's the same mindset that sees Corbynites call Labour moderate red Tories etc.
    In what way am I "extreme rightwing"? Genuinely curious
    Dude are you serious?
    How many actual "hard" right posters do we have on here? Plenty of disgruntled conservatives, some sitting this one out, a few voting Labour to send a message, a few reluctantly voting Conservative for fear of worse (Farage, or a massive Labour majority).

    But I'm struggling to think of anyone who's actually declared for Reform. Including Leon.

    With Reform at ~18% in the polls, it's a sign of how detached PB demographics are from reality. Either that, or there are a lot of 'shy reformers' out there.
    I'll fess up. I might vote Reform. It's either Starmer for laughs or Reform to kill the Tories

    But in what universe is Reform "far right"? They aren't even "hard right" by mainland European standards. Indeed they sometimes struggle to be rightwing, so far has the Overton Window shifted

    Their big thing is immigration, Are they going to shoot the boats and drown people (as has been happening off the EU shores)? No. They want to "tow boats back to France". That may be a dream, but it ain't the Shoah. As for overall immigration, they want "net zero" - in a recent interview Farage admitted that might still mean "600,000 immigrants" but they want to keep the incomings and outgoings balanced and the population stable, for a while, as our infrastructure cannot sustain explosive growth (and looking at our rivers, they have a point)

    That's it. That's Britain's "Nazi party" - gently towing boats and trying not to destroy rivers. Wow. Practically Treblinka
    You do know that net zero migration is completely mental, yes? We'd be better off with Truss and PM and Corbyn as Chancellor. You want runaway inflation and the collapse of half the public and private services in the country? That's what Farage is offering.
    To be fair being 'completely mental' is not necessarily the same as being far right. Some of Corbyn's ideas, plenty of the Green ideas and even some of the main party ideas can be considerd 'completely mental' but they would not be considered right wing.

    You are conflating two completely separate, although not always exclusive, arguments.
    No argument from me. There's a problem with identifying racist authoritarians as right wing and identifying hardcore liberals as left wing. My only point here is zero NET migration is completely loopy.
    So what is YOUR target for net migration, or do you have no target at all? Do you let everyone in? Let no one in? What is it? Come on, try and answer, if you come up with something coherent and articulate and sensible you might even get a column on "The National" paying £15 per 1000 words
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 59,550
    Noam Chomsky has died.

  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 31,478

    Cookie said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Omnium said:

    rcs1000 said:

    On topic, but also a little bit of a rant.

    The Conservative Party has, for so long, been a successful political party because it has been able to tie together disparate groups, who don't all share exactly the same ideology.

    And it's done this by being pragmatic and remembering that there are going to be people who believe homosexuality is a sin, and there are going to be people are publicly gay, but they might share common views about - say - the size of the state.

    I'm reminded of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, who was caught on tape saying that the US was in a (culture) war, and there would only be one winner.

    No, Justice Alito, there is no winner. You cannot silence the voices of the 50% of people who disagree with you without actual war. And that actual war (see the Thirty Years War for an example) will end with everyone grudgingly agreeing that actually they can't agree and they can't force other people to agree with them.

    The Conservative Party cannot just be the party of people left behind by globalisation. Nor can it just be the party of pensioners. Nor can it just be the party of wealthy plutocrats. It needs to be a big tent. If you choose to silence - or make unwelcome - the voices that disagree with you, then you are consigning yourself to electoral oblivion.

    This is why "we didn't win because we weren't centrist enough" and "we didn't win because we weren't right wing enough" are both bullshit arguments. You didn't win because you were unable to make the tent big enough.

    Where was the voting market behind monetarism when MT made that her guiding theme? There wasn't one. She decided that that was the right thing for Britain, and set about winning the arguments. That's how you get positive change. Crafting your platform out of a mishmash of what voters have found acceptable up until now is not a plan to get into (or stay in) government; it's a way to go around in circles achieving very little.

    And I also don't think the issue is that Tories 'haven't been right wing enough', it's that they have sold themselves as the right wing alternative, benefitted from doing so, and changed their minds completely when it comes to actually doing anything right wing. That's a question of trust, rather than a question of politics. Those who feel that they haven't been centrist enough should vote for parties that espouse social democracy, of which there are two in the political mainstream. Why do they need a third? It smacks of reducing the alternatives available to voters because they aren't actually that confident in the attractiveness of their centrist prospectus.
    Every time the Tories get into power they're lured into nanny-statism. Thatcher had enough about her to push against that for several years. Imperfect though such direction might prove I think it is beneficial. Reducing the size of the state should be top of the list for any government.
    OK.

    The number of people of pensionable age is rising every year: we have promised them (repeatedly) that there is no circumstance where their pensions will grow less than 2% or wages or inflation. In addition, the proportion of people who are pensioners will grow every year. And a pensioner costs approximately 15x as much in social and health care as someone in their 20s.

    So: interest payments, healthcare and pension cost increases are nailed on. And they are half the budget.

    We need to spend more on defence.
    Policing and the administration of justice have been cut to the bone.

    I want to cut the size of the state too. But we all need to be realistic about the challenges facing us with a greying population.
    Live longer, work longer, and save more.

    Simple as that.
    It's actually even easier. Just work longer. We should be pleased. Working to 75 with a life expectancy of 85 is better than working to 65 with a life expectancy of 75.
    I'm not sure about that - it depends very much on the state of your health in retirement.

    A lot of people are living longer but are not able to do much with it.
    Yes, the work forever advocates are either bed-blocking cushy upper middle class desk jobs on inflated salaries, or have never met manual workers or realised that the 20 years at the end of your life are not the same as your middle two decades. Not many footballers are still playing at 75, or refuse collectors.
    True but it is undeniably the case that since WW2 it is both life expectancy and healthy life expectancy that has increased. The small increases in retirement age are dwarfed by the increase in healthy life expectancy.
    But that's less fab than it sounds because it entails unhealthy life expectancy also increasing. Say your life expectancy increases from 75 to 80 and your healthy life expectancy from 60 to 64 you have gained a year of unhealthy life. From what I have seen of the unhealthy elderly, it seems entirely possible to me that an extra year of pain and dementia easily cancels out the good health of 60 to 64
    But that is an argument in favour of euthanasia (which I am not advocating) rather than against increasing working age. Other countries have realised this all long ago. When I worked in Norway in the 90s the penion age was already 67
  • Options
    KeglinKeglin Posts: 4
    Selebian said:

    Keglin said:

    Damn you new thread...
    Long time listener, first time caller etc etc.
    As a public service announcement I can reveal that my postal ballot arrived today in Southampton Itchen so the election is now on.

    What's the picture in Itchen nowadays? When I lived there it was Lab, but it came close to flipping in 2010 to Con (I voted LD) and IIRC it then did in 2015.
    Pretty much guaranteed Labour gain. We have had leaflets from Lab & Lib but heard nothing from the Conservative candidate. If they somehow defended it then the polls are record breakingly wrong!!!
  • Options
    MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,418

    MikeL said:

    Sir Jim Ratcliffe backs Labour and says Britons have ‘had enough’ of the Tories

    Billionaire Man Utd goes on to criticise ‘not terribly successful’ recent prime ministers


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/06/18/sir-jim-ratcliffe-manchester-united-backs-labour-election/

    So let's think this through.

    The Football Governance Bill ran out of time and was therefore dropped before the GE.

    Labour will shortly reintroduce the Bill. But the Labour Culture Secretary has said it will not be a "cut and paste" job - she will review the Tracey Crouch report again and see how the Bill can be strengthened.

    In particular she will consider a proposal to introduce a 10% levy on PL transfer fees.

    She will also consider expanding the Bill to regulate ticket prices.

    And who knows maybe expand into other areas as well?

    Again this background it may seem surprising that Jim Ratcliffe is supporting the party whose victory will undoubtedly have the most adverse consequences for his Man Utd investment.

    Or maybe he knows Labour is going to win and he is about to start a massive lobbying campaign? And he is starting by buttering them up?
    It is all about getting the government to pay for the new Manchester United stadium/Old Trafford upgrade.
    Yep that as well!
  • Options
    bigglesbiggles Posts: 5,400
    Andy_JS said:

    Just switched on the football and Ronaldo seems to look almost the same as he did 15 years ago.

    You just have a lot more time to watch him as jobs along (for him).
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 78,346
    edited June 18

    Noam Chomsky has died.

    I can't imagine the last 4 years of his life have been very enjoyable. He became so scared of COVID he never left his basement, then he apparently he had a massive stroke in 2023. Never really recovered and was in hospital in Brazil until his death.
  • Options
    OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,446
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    FPT

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Leon said:

    An absolutely terrifying thread about what an actual Labour government will be like


    https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/1803104439697313995

    "In November, long before #zeroseats, even as the media was reporting politics as usual, I wrote a thread on why the Tories were heading for an epochal defeat. Now that this is received wisdom, it's time for a new thread, forecasting how Labour will govern. Be very afraid."


    I pray that this dude is wrong; I fear in my vittals that he is bang on

    A lot of this talk about Labour seeking to stop any future government going in a right wing direction seems like scaremongering to me.

    No Parliament can bind it's successor. The Tories could have thrown out most or all of the 1997-2010 reforms in the past 14 years if they'd wished but the fact is they chose not to.
    But the Equality Act did exactly that, without anyone realising, until very recently

    And he makes that point
    As did the European Communities Act Solution to the Equality act preventing reform is same as European Communities Act & Human Rights preventing reform. Repeal or Heavily Amend it.

    Tories have been torn apart because they thought Brexit was enough. It wasn't Brexit was just the enabling measure that enabled the rest to be done. They were not done and as a result reforms that the public wanted could not be enacted and they regard the Tories as having betrayed them.
    Exactly right

    I blame Boris. He had the majority to do all this, but he was too frit of his posh lefty friends, fam and neighbz

    For this to change, it will take a firmly rightwing leader of a firmly rightwing party that doesn't give a tinker's wank about fashionable opinion

    OMG Georgia!!!
    Sadly, Fair comment.

    I fear Boris had two fatal flaws (possibly 3).

    1) Weakness - so he didn't have the balls to stick with essentially the same policy as Sweden and more unforgivably, didn't end the lockdown nonsense after six weeks when it was obvious that Covid was a disease of the very elderly, very ill with something else and very unlucky (he clearly thought it was nonsense as illustrated by his behaviour).

    2) Needing to be liked (which let his posh lefty friends have a veto).

    3) I suspect (pure spectulation) he got some policy ideas from domestic sources. That would account for his U turn on Eagle Slicers and the like, when the M'Learned former Mrs Boris was swapped for the current incumbent.

    It is the firm bit rather than particularly right wing bit that is needed. Someone willing to do what Thatcher did when losing a judicial review. Pass an act overthrowing the judgement.
    Did Boris have any lefty friends while Prime Minister? Based on the friend he married and the friends who gave him freebies and those friends who advised him on getting Paterson and/or Pincher off the hook, Boris's entire social circle is well-heeled Tory poshos.
    Well-heeled Tory poshos are generally left of Corbyn. That's the problem

    And twas ever thus. Wasn't it Wodehouse who observed that his dukes voted Labour and Jeeves was a Tory?
    Tories to the left of Corbyn must be a pretty select group. Johnson is just a standard issue boarding school libertarian with a side order of little Englander prejudices and his social circle would I imagine be in tune with that. If he has any left wing friends he has certainly kept them well hidden. The "rich upper class lefty" trope is well loved by chippy rightists on here but I have never encountered one in the wild.
    That just proves how irredeemably lower middle class you are

    No, seriously, the posh are left wing. It's not a joke. The gags about Guardian journalists' backgrounds are not a spoof

    Marina Hyde has been mentioned on this thread:

    "Hyde is the daughter of Sir Alastair Edgcumbe James Dudley-Williams, 2nd Baronet, and his wife, the former Diana Elizabeth Jane Duncan. Through her father, she is the granddaughter of aviation pioneer and Conservative politician Sir Rolf Dudley-Williams, 1st Baronet. She attended Downe House School, near Newbury in Berkshire,[1] and read English at Christ Church, Oxford.["

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marina_Hyde

    She's not just posh she's absurdly rich, I know this personally
    I'm sure these people exist, but the point is that you can name them because there are so few of them. They probably all work for the Guardian. I've never met any of them. But I've met a never ending line of posh right wingers, because there are so many more of them (maybe you should get a job in finance).
    One thing you need to bear in mind is that you are extremely right wing. So people you think of as lefties (despite them eg working for the Tory party) are not lefties on any reasonable definition of the word. It's the same mindset that sees Corbynites call Labour moderate red Tories etc.
    In what way am I "extreme rightwing"? Genuinely curious
    Dude are you serious?
    Yes, serious and curious. That's quite a label to put on me. "Extreme rightwing". It means I am the same as Hitler

    You need to justify it. I am unaware that I have advocated gassing Jews, but maybe I have?
    I'm somewhat lothe to indulge your narcissism but I guess I owe you a response. I said you were extremely right wing, not that you were "extreme rightwing". That's just the impression I get from your posts, eg on "Muslim rape gangs", admiration for Putinist positions on gender and love of post fascist politicians like Giorgia Meloni, espousal of zero immigration, your war on woke, the fact you see a Thatcherite Brexiteer like Rishi Sunak as a wet, that you think people who work for the Tory party are lefties, your dislike of paying tax... I could go in but I won't as I don't find you quite as interesting as you do.
    Why don't you do one of those political compass tests and see what it says? I am fairly sure it won't identify you as a libertarian socialist as it did for me. None of this is a value judgement BTW, you are welcome to your views, I simply struggle to see how you can be so unaware of where your opinions place you on the political scale.
  • Options
    ChameleonChameleon Posts: 4,205

    Noam Chomsky has died.

    And the world is a far better place than it was a few hours ago.
  • Options
    TimSTimS Posts: 11,001

    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    FPT

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Leon said:

    An absolutely terrifying thread about what an actual Labour government will be like


    https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/1803104439697313995

    "In November, long before #zeroseats, even as the media was reporting politics as usual, I wrote a thread on why the Tories were heading for an epochal defeat. Now that this is received wisdom, it's time for a new thread, forecasting how Labour will govern. Be very afraid."


    I pray that this dude is wrong; I fear in my vittals that he is bang on

    A lot of this talk about Labour seeking to stop any future government going in a right wing direction seems like scaremongering to me.

    No Parliament can bind it's successor. The Tories could have thrown out most or all of the 1997-2010 reforms in the past 14 years if they'd wished but the fact is they chose not to.
    But the Equality Act did exactly that, without anyone realising, until very recently

    And he makes that point
    As did the European Communities Act Solution to the Equality act preventing reform is same as European Communities Act & Human Rights preventing reform. Repeal or Heavily Amend it.

    Tories have been torn apart because they thought Brexit was enough. It wasn't Brexit was just the enabling measure that enabled the rest to be done. They were not done and as a result reforms that the public wanted could not be enacted and they regard the Tories as having betrayed them.
    Exactly right

    I blame Boris. He had the majority to do all this, but he was too frit of his posh lefty friends, fam and neighbz

    For this to change, it will take a firmly rightwing leader of a firmly rightwing party that doesn't give a tinker's wank about fashionable opinion

    OMG Georgia!!!
    Sadly, Fair comment.

    I fear Boris had two fatal flaws (possibly 3).

    1) Weakness - so he didn't have the balls to stick with essentially the same policy as Sweden and more unforgivably, didn't end the lockdown nonsense after six weeks when it was obvious that Covid was a disease of the very elderly, very ill with something else and very unlucky (he clearly thought it was nonsense as illustrated by his behaviour).

    2) Needing to be liked (which let his posh lefty friends have a veto).

    3) I suspect (pure spectulation) he got some policy ideas from domestic sources. That would account for his U turn on Eagle Slicers and the like, when the M'Learned former Mrs Boris was swapped for the current incumbent.

    It is the firm bit rather than particularly right wing bit that is needed. Someone willing to do what Thatcher did when losing a judicial review. Pass an act overthrowing the judgement.
    Did Boris have any lefty friends while Prime Minister? Based on the friend he married and the friends who gave him freebies and those friends who advised him on getting Paterson and/or Pincher off the hook, Boris's entire social circle is well-heeled Tory poshos.
    Well-heeled Tory poshos are generally left of Corbyn. That's the problem

    And twas ever thus. Wasn't it Wodehouse who observed that his dukes voted Labour and Jeeves was a Tory?
    Tories to the left of Corbyn must be a pretty select group. Johnson is just a standard issue boarding school libertarian with a side order of little Englander prejudices and his social circle would I imagine be in tune with that. If he has any left wing friends he has certainly kept them well hidden. The "rich upper class lefty" trope is well loved by chippy rightists on here but I have never encountered one in the wild.
    That just proves how irredeemably lower middle class you are

    No, seriously, the posh are left wing. It's not a joke. The gags about Guardian journalists' backgrounds are not a spoof

    Marina Hyde has been mentioned on this thread:

    "Hyde is the daughter of Sir Alastair Edgcumbe James Dudley-Williams, 2nd Baronet, and his wife, the former Diana Elizabeth Jane Duncan. Through her father, she is the granddaughter of aviation pioneer and Conservative politician Sir Rolf Dudley-Williams, 1st Baronet. She attended Downe House School, near Newbury in Berkshire,[1] and read English at Christ Church, Oxford.["

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marina_Hyde

    She's not just posh she's absurdly rich, I know this personally
    I'm sure these people exist, but the point is that you can name them because there are so few of them. They probably all work for the Guardian. I've never met any of them. But I've met a never ending line of posh right wingers, because there are so many more of them (maybe you should get a job in finance).
    One thing you need to bear in mind is that you are extremely right wing. So people you think of as lefties (despite them eg working for the Tory party) are not lefties on any reasonable definition of the word. It's the same mindset that sees Corbynites call Labour moderate red Tories etc.
    In what way am I "extreme rightwing"? Genuinely curious
    Dude are you serious?
    How many actual "hard" right posters do we have on here? Plenty of disgruntled conservatives, some sitting this one out, a few voting Labour to send a message, a few reluctantly voting Conservative for fear of worse (Farage, or a massive Labour majority).

    But I'm struggling to think of anyone who's actually declared for Reform. Including Leon.

    With Reform at ~18% in the polls, it's a sign of how detached PB demographics are from reality. Either that, or there are a lot of 'shy reformers' out there.
    I'll fess up. I might vote Reform. It's either Starmer for laughs or Reform to kill the Tories

    But in what universe is Reform "far right"? They aren't even "hard right" by mainland European standards. Indeed they sometimes struggle to be rightwing, so far has the Overton Window shifted

    Their big thing is immigration, Are they going to shoot the boats and drown people (as has been happening off the EU shores)? No. They want to "tow boats back to France". That may be a dream, but it ain't the Shoah. As for overall immigration, they want "net zero" - in a recent interview Farage admitted that might still mean "600,000 immigrants" but they want to keep the incomings and outgoings balanced and the population stable, for a while, as our infrastructure cannot sustain explosive growth (and looking at our rivers, they have a point)

    That's it. That's Britain's "Nazi party" - gently towing boats and trying not to destroy rivers. Wow. Practically Treblinka
    You do know that net zero migration is completely mental, yes? We'd be better off with Truss and PM and Corbyn as Chancellor. You want runaway inflation and the collapse of half the public and private services in the country? That's what Farage is offering.
    To be fair being 'completely mental' is not necessarily the same as being far right. Some of Corbyn's ideas, plenty of the Green ideas and even some of the main party ideas can be considerd 'completely mental' but they would not be considered right wing.

    You are conflating two completely separate, although not always exclusive, arguments.
    The complete mentality of the Reform manifesto is partly of the unicorn variety.

    For example the two Liz Trusses worth of unfunded tax cuts and spending increases.

    The other mad stuff is in the small print and is mainly just classic old man down the pub stuff.
  • Options
    FarooqFarooq Posts: 12,329
    Leon said:

    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    FPT

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Leon said:

    An absolutely terrifying thread about what an actual Labour government will be like


    https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/1803104439697313995

    "In November, long before #zeroseats, even as the media was reporting politics as usual, I wrote a thread on why the Tories were heading for an epochal defeat. Now that this is received wisdom, it's time for a new thread, forecasting how Labour will govern. Be very afraid."


    I pray that this dude is wrong; I fear in my vittals that he is bang on

    A lot of this talk about Labour seeking to stop any future government going in a right wing direction seems like scaremongering to me.

    No Parliament can bind it's successor. The Tories could have thrown out most or all of the 1997-2010 reforms in the past 14 years if they'd wished but the fact is they chose not to.
    But the Equality Act did exactly that, without anyone realising, until very recently

    And he makes that point
    As did the European Communities Act Solution to the Equality act preventing reform is same as European Communities Act & Human Rights preventing reform. Repeal or Heavily Amend it.

    Tories have been torn apart because they thought Brexit was enough. It wasn't Brexit was just the enabling measure that enabled the rest to be done. They were not done and as a result reforms that the public wanted could not be enacted and they regard the Tories as having betrayed them.
    Exactly right

    I blame Boris. He had the majority to do all this, but he was too frit of his posh lefty friends, fam and neighbz

    For this to change, it will take a firmly rightwing leader of a firmly rightwing party that doesn't give a tinker's wank about fashionable opinion

    OMG Georgia!!!
    Sadly, Fair comment.

    I fear Boris had two fatal flaws (possibly 3).

    1) Weakness - so he didn't have the balls to stick with essentially the same policy as Sweden and more unforgivably, didn't end the lockdown nonsense after six weeks when it was obvious that Covid was a disease of the very elderly, very ill with something else and very unlucky (he clearly thought it was nonsense as illustrated by his behaviour).

    2) Needing to be liked (which let his posh lefty friends have a veto).

    3) I suspect (pure spectulation) he got some policy ideas from domestic sources. That would account for his U turn on Eagle Slicers and the like, when the M'Learned former Mrs Boris was swapped for the current incumbent.

    It is the firm bit rather than particularly right wing bit that is needed. Someone willing to do what Thatcher did when losing a judicial review. Pass an act overthrowing the judgement.
    Did Boris have any lefty friends while Prime Minister? Based on the friend he married and the friends who gave him freebies and those friends who advised him on getting Paterson and/or Pincher off the hook, Boris's entire social circle is well-heeled Tory poshos.
    Well-heeled Tory poshos are generally left of Corbyn. That's the problem

    And twas ever thus. Wasn't it Wodehouse who observed that his dukes voted Labour and Jeeves was a Tory?
    Tories to the left of Corbyn must be a pretty select group. Johnson is just a standard issue boarding school libertarian with a side order of little Englander prejudices and his social circle would I imagine be in tune with that. If he has any left wing friends he has certainly kept them well hidden. The "rich upper class lefty" trope is well loved by chippy rightists on here but I have never encountered one in the wild.
    That just proves how irredeemably lower middle class you are

    No, seriously, the posh are left wing. It's not a joke. The gags about Guardian journalists' backgrounds are not a spoof

    Marina Hyde has been mentioned on this thread:

    "Hyde is the daughter of Sir Alastair Edgcumbe James Dudley-Williams, 2nd Baronet, and his wife, the former Diana Elizabeth Jane Duncan. Through her father, she is the granddaughter of aviation pioneer and Conservative politician Sir Rolf Dudley-Williams, 1st Baronet. She attended Downe House School, near Newbury in Berkshire,[1] and read English at Christ Church, Oxford.["

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marina_Hyde

    She's not just posh she's absurdly rich, I know this personally
    I'm sure these people exist, but the point is that you can name them because there are so few of them. They probably all work for the Guardian. I've never met any of them. But I've met a never ending line of posh right wingers, because there are so many more of them (maybe you should get a job in finance).
    One thing you need to bear in mind is that you are extremely right wing. So people you think of as lefties (despite them eg working for the Tory party) are not lefties on any reasonable definition of the word. It's the same mindset that sees Corbynites call Labour moderate red Tories etc.
    In what way am I "extreme rightwing"? Genuinely curious
    Dude are you serious?
    How many actual "hard" right posters do we have on here? Plenty of disgruntled conservatives, some sitting this one out, a few voting Labour to send a message, a few reluctantly voting Conservative for fear of worse (Farage, or a massive Labour majority).

    But I'm struggling to think of anyone who's actually declared for Reform. Including Leon.

    With Reform at ~18% in the polls, it's a sign of how detached PB demographics are from reality. Either that, or there are a lot of 'shy reformers' out there.
    I'll fess up. I might vote Reform. It's either Starmer for laughs or Reform to kill the Tories

    But in what universe is Reform "far right"? They aren't even "hard right" by mainland European standards. Indeed they sometimes struggle to be rightwing, so far has the Overton Window shifted

    Their big thing is immigration, Are they going to shoot the boats and drown people (as has been happening off the EU shores)? No. They want to "tow boats back to France". That may be a dream, but it ain't the Shoah. As for overall immigration, they want "net zero" - in a recent interview Farage admitted that might still mean "600,000 immigrants" but they want to keep the incomings and outgoings balanced and the population stable, for a while, as our infrastructure cannot sustain explosive growth (and looking at our rivers, they have a point)

    That's it. That's Britain's "Nazi party" - gently towing boats and trying not to destroy rivers. Wow. Practically Treblinka
    You do know that net zero migration is completely mental, yes? We'd be better off with Truss and PM and Corbyn as Chancellor. You want runaway inflation and the collapse of half the public and private services in the country? That's what Farage is offering.
    To be fair being 'completely mental' is not necessarily the same as being far right. Some of Corbyn's ideas, plenty of the Green ideas and even some of the main party ideas can be considerd 'completely mental' but they would not be considered right wing.

    You are conflating two completely separate, although not always exclusive, arguments.
    No argument from me. There's a problem with identifying racist authoritarians as right wing and identifying hardcore liberals as left wing. My only point here is zero NET migration is completely loopy.
    So what is YOUR target for net migration, or do you have no target at all? Do you let everyone in? Let no one in? What is it? Come on, try and answer, if you come up with something coherent and articulate and sensible you might even get a column on "The National" paying £15 per 1000 words
    Rejoin EU, freedom of movement.

    5 words, that'll be 7.5 pence, please.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 49,952
    Oh god, you are all morons
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 28,966
    edited June 18

    Have we done this?

    "Re-elect Rehman in Rainham" is in trouble...

    Gillingham & Rainham voting intention (+/- 5%, changes vs 2019 notional)

    LAB: 55% (+27)
    CON: 23% (-39)
    REF: 15% (+15)
    LDEM: 5% (=)
    GRN: 2% (=)

    @wethinkpolling/@TheEconomist, 5th-16th June. N=376


    https://twitter.com/OwenWntr/status/1803116579397177578

    Today's MRP from Ipsos/MORI has these figures:

    Gillingham & Rainham

    Lab 41%
    Con 32%
    Ref 18%
    LD 5%
    Grn 4%

    So quite a lot of variation between the various different models.

    https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/uk-opinion-polls/ipsos-election-mrp
  • Options
    ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,072
    Ghedebrav said:

    Shame about the equaliser. Always had a soft spot for the Czechs. A hard-drinking, underdog nation with overbearing neighbours and a great literary tradition.

    Not unlike the Irish, come to think of it.

    Even better in terms of music: Dvorak, Janacek, Smetana, Martinu ..
  • Options
    DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 25,506
    Andy_JS said:

    Just switched on the football and Ronaldo seems to look almost the same as he did 15 years ago.

    Someone or other wrote years ago, comparing the two GOATs, that Ronaldo looked like a Roman God whereas Messi someone who'd turned up to fix the photocopier.
  • Options
    HeathenerHeathener Posts: 6,781
    Leon said:

    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    FPT

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Leon said:

    An absolutely terrifying thread about what an actual Labour government will be like


    https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/1803104439697313995

    "In November, long before #zeroseats, even as the media was reporting politics as usual, I wrote a thread on why the Tories were heading for an epochal defeat. Now that this is received wisdom, it's time for a new thread, forecasting how Labour will govern. Be very afraid."


    I pray that this dude is wrong; I fear in my vittals that he is bang on

    A lot of this talk about Labour seeking to stop any future government going in a right wing direction seems like scaremongering to me.

    No Parliament can bind it's successor. The Tories could have thrown out most or all of the 1997-2010 reforms in the past 14 years if they'd wished but the fact is they chose not to.
    But the Equality Act did exactly that, without anyone realising, until very recently

    And he makes that point
    As did the European Communities Act Solution to the Equality act preventing reform is same as European Communities Act & Human Rights preventing reform. Repeal or Heavily Amend it.

    Tories have been torn apart because they thought Brexit was enough. It wasn't Brexit was just the enabling measure that enabled the rest to be done. They were not done and as a result reforms that the public wanted could not be enacted and they regard the Tories as having betrayed them.
    Exactly right

    I blame Boris. He had the majority to do all this, but he was too frit of his posh lefty friends, fam and neighbz

    For this to change, it will take a firmly rightwing leader of a firmly rightwing party that doesn't give a tinker's wank about fashionable opinion

    OMG Georgia!!!
    Sadly, Fair comment.

    I fear Boris had two fatal flaws (possibly 3).

    1) Weakness - so he didn't have the balls to stick with essentially the same policy as Sweden and more unforgivably, didn't end the lockdown nonsense after six weeks when it was obvious that Covid was a disease of the very elderly, very ill with something else and very unlucky (he clearly thought it was nonsense as illustrated by his behaviour).

    2) Needing to be liked (which let his posh lefty friends have a veto).

    3) I suspect (pure spectulation) he got some policy ideas from domestic sources. That would account for his U turn on Eagle Slicers and the like, when the M'Learned former Mrs Boris was swapped for the current incumbent.

    It is the firm bit rather than particularly right wing bit that is needed. Someone willing to do what Thatcher did when losing a judicial review. Pass an act overthrowing the judgement.
    Did Boris have any lefty friends while Prime Minister? Based on the friend he married and the friends who gave him freebies and those friends who advised him on getting Paterson and/or Pincher off the hook, Boris's entire social circle is well-heeled Tory poshos.
    Well-heeled Tory poshos are generally left of Corbyn. That's the problem

    And twas ever thus. Wasn't it Wodehouse who observed that his dukes voted Labour and Jeeves was a Tory?
    Tories to the left of Corbyn must be a pretty select group. Johnson is just a standard issue boarding school libertarian with a side order of little Englander prejudices and his social circle would I imagine be in tune with that. If he has any left wing friends he has certainly kept them well hidden. The "rich upper class lefty" trope is well loved by chippy rightists on here but I have never encountered one in the wild.
    That just proves how irredeemably lower middle class you are

    No, seriously, the posh are left wing. It's not a joke. The gags about Guardian journalists' backgrounds are not a spoof

    Marina Hyde has been mentioned on this thread:

    "Hyde is the daughter of Sir Alastair Edgcumbe James Dudley-Williams, 2nd Baronet, and his wife, the former Diana Elizabeth Jane Duncan. Through her father, she is the granddaughter of aviation pioneer and Conservative politician Sir Rolf Dudley-Williams, 1st Baronet. She attended Downe House School, near Newbury in Berkshire,[1] and read English at Christ Church, Oxford.["

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marina_Hyde

    She's not just posh she's absurdly rich, I know this personally
    I'm sure these people exist, but the point is that you can name them because there are so few of them. They probably all work for the Guardian. I've never met any of them. But I've met a never ending line of posh right wingers, because there are so many more of them (maybe you should get a job in finance).
    One thing you need to bear in mind is that you are extremely right wing. So people you think of as lefties (despite them eg working for the Tory party) are not lefties on any reasonable definition of the word. It's the same mindset that sees Corbynites call Labour moderate red Tories etc.
    In what way am I "extreme rightwing"? Genuinely curious
    Dude are you serious?
    How many actual "hard" right posters do we have on here? Plenty of disgruntled conservatives, some sitting this one out, a few voting Labour to send a message, a few reluctantly voting Conservative for fear of worse (Farage, or a massive Labour majority).

    But I'm struggling to think of anyone who's actually declared for Reform. Including Leon.

    With Reform at ~18% in the polls, it's a sign of how detached PB demographics are from reality. Either that, or there are a lot of 'shy reformers' out there.
    I'll fess up. I might vote Reform. It's either Starmer for laughs or Reform to kill the Tories

    But in what universe is Reform "far right"? They aren't even "hard right" by mainland European standards. Indeed they sometimes struggle to be rightwing, so far has the Overton Window shifted

    Their big thing is immigration, Are they going to shoot the boats and drown people (as has been happening off the EU shores)? No. They want to "tow boats back to France". That may be a dream, but it ain't the Shoah. As for overall immigration, they want "net zero" - in a recent interview Farage admitted that might still mean "600,000 immigrants" but they want to keep the incomings and outgoings balanced and the population stable, for a while, as our infrastructure cannot sustain explosive growth (and looking at our rivers, they have a point)

    That's it. That's Britain's "Nazi party" - gently towing boats and trying not to destroy rivers. Wow. Practically Treblinka
    You do know that net zero migration is completely mental, yes? We'd be better off with Truss and PM and Corbyn as Chancellor. You want runaway inflation and the collapse of half the public and private services in the country? That's what Farage is offering.
    To be fair being 'completely mental' is not necessarily the same as being far right. Some of Corbyn's ideas, plenty of the Green ideas and even some of the main party ideas can be considerd 'completely mental' but they would not be considered right wing.

    You are conflating two completely separate, although not always exclusive, arguments.
    No argument from me. There's a problem with identifying racist authoritarians as right wing and identifying hardcore liberals as left wing. My only point here is zero NET migration is completely loopy.
    you might even get a column on "The National" paying £15 per 1000 words
    Lol! ;)

    When I write for the nationals I’m on £1 to £2 a word, which isn’t a massive amount for the effort. You?
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 93,792
    Leon said:

    Oh god, you are all morons

    No, some of us are idiots.
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 31,478
    kle4 said:

    It's true, but I'm surprised to see such a direct statement on the BBC

    Voters are being taken for fools on the economy:

    Towering over the many hundreds of pages of promises, plans, strategies and spreadsheet costings in these general election manifestos is a single word: credibility.

    One of the big areas where the credibility question has been raised is over taxes. There is an uneasy consensus among the two main parties that the next chancellor will not raise the main rates of income tax, national insurance, VAT or corporation tax.

    But these promises rely on a perception that voters only care about their tax rates and, frankly, are blissfully ignorant about increases in their actual bills. Voters are being taken for fools. Even if the letter of manifesto promises not to raise tax rates from 2019 has been specifically adhered to, workers know that their taxes have shot up.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crgg4ze1edpo

    It's a kind of 'plague on all your houses' statement so I think they can get away with it in terms of balance.
  • Options
    bobbobbobbob Posts: 51
    edited June 18

    What contributes to my feeling that 'Britain is broken' is that so many things seem not to work properly anymore. The level of tax I pay is frankly a very minor point compared to roads full of potholes, trains not running whenever it rains hard, the difficulty of getting a GP or hospital appointment, the fact that we have to put 1000s of asylum seekers in hotels because we aren't able to process them quickly (or at all), that dangerous prisoners are released due to lack of prison places, no one ever answers the phone at HMRC, or the council, or DWP, or DVLA, probate now takes months to obtain, planning is a nightmare...

    A govt needs to go back to “back to basics” imo on key qs.

    Why can’t people get gp appts ?

    Why is building homes so slow and difficult ? Why aren’t schools and doctors etc being built for new estates ? Why aren’t we knocking down more stuff and building more new stuff ?

    Why is building Crossrail/hs2 so expensive and takes so long ?

    Why are buses so crap outside the capital ?

    Why are there not enough nurses for hospitals and social care ?

    Why are cars so expensive to run ? Why are roads crap ? Why are there constant rosdworks ?

    Why is broadband so expensive ?

    Why isn’t OpenAI nvidia novo nordisk tesla etc British ?

    Doesn’t have to about ideology !! Not always about “red tape” or bureaucracy etc. answer should not always be money nor cuts or privatization or regulation. Need to be willing to ask with open mind and kill sacred cows

    Problem is politicians are now campaigning 24/7/365 and everything is political !!
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 49,952

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    FPT

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Leon said:

    An absolutely terrifying thread about what an actual Labour government will be like


    https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/1803104439697313995

    "In November, long before #zeroseats, even as the media was reporting politics as usual, I wrote a thread on why the Tories were heading for an epochal defeat. Now that this is received wisdom, it's time for a new thread, forecasting how Labour will govern. Be very afraid."


    I pray that this dude is wrong; I fear in my vittals that he is bang on

    A lot of this talk about Labour seeking to stop any future government going in a right wing direction seems like scaremongering to me.

    No Parliament can bind it's successor. The Tories could have thrown out most or all of the 1997-2010 reforms in the past 14 years if they'd wished but the fact is they chose not to.
    But the Equality Act did exactly that, without anyone realising, until very recently

    And he makes that point
    As did the European Communities Act Solution to the Equality act preventing reform is same as European Communities Act & Human Rights preventing reform. Repeal or Heavily Amend it.

    Tories have been torn apart because they thought Brexit was enough. It wasn't Brexit was just the enabling measure that enabled the rest to be done. They were not done and as a result reforms that the public wanted could not be enacted and they regard the Tories as having betrayed them.
    Exactly right

    I blame Boris. He had the majority to do all this, but he was too frit of his posh lefty friends, fam and neighbz

    For this to change, it will take a firmly rightwing leader of a firmly rightwing party that doesn't give a tinker's wank about fashionable opinion

    OMG Georgia!!!
    Sadly, Fair comment.

    I fear Boris had two fatal flaws (possibly 3).

    1) Weakness - so he didn't have the balls to stick with essentially the same policy as Sweden and more unforgivably, didn't end the lockdown nonsense after six weeks when it was obvious that Covid was a disease of the very elderly, very ill with something else and very unlucky (he clearly thought it was nonsense as illustrated by his behaviour).

    2) Needing to be liked (which let his posh lefty friends have a veto).

    3) I suspect (pure spectulation) he got some policy ideas from domestic sources. That would account for his U turn on Eagle Slicers and the like, when the M'Learned former Mrs Boris was swapped for the current incumbent.

    It is the firm bit rather than particularly right wing bit that is needed. Someone willing to do what Thatcher did when losing a judicial review. Pass an act overthrowing the judgement.
    Did Boris have any lefty friends while Prime Minister? Based on the friend he married and the friends who gave him freebies and those friends who advised him on getting Paterson and/or Pincher off the hook, Boris's entire social circle is well-heeled Tory poshos.
    Well-heeled Tory poshos are generally left of Corbyn. That's the problem

    And twas ever thus. Wasn't it Wodehouse who observed that his dukes voted Labour and Jeeves was a Tory?
    Tories to the left of Corbyn must be a pretty select group. Johnson is just a standard issue boarding school libertarian with a side order of little Englander prejudices and his social circle would I imagine be in tune with that. If he has any left wing friends he has certainly kept them well hidden. The "rich upper class lefty" trope is well loved by chippy rightists on here but I have never encountered one in the wild.
    That just proves how irredeemably lower middle class you are

    No, seriously, the posh are left wing. It's not a joke. The gags about Guardian journalists' backgrounds are not a spoof

    Marina Hyde has been mentioned on this thread:

    "Hyde is the daughter of Sir Alastair Edgcumbe James Dudley-Williams, 2nd Baronet, and his wife, the former Diana Elizabeth Jane Duncan. Through her father, she is the granddaughter of aviation pioneer and Conservative politician Sir Rolf Dudley-Williams, 1st Baronet. She attended Downe House School, near Newbury in Berkshire,[1] and read English at Christ Church, Oxford.["

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marina_Hyde

    She's not just posh she's absurdly rich, I know this personally
    I'm sure these people exist, but the point is that you can name them because there are so few of them. They probably all work for the Guardian. I've never met any of them. But I've met a never ending line of posh right wingers, because there are so many more of them (maybe you should get a job in finance).
    One thing you need to bear in mind is that you are extremely right wing. So people you think of as lefties (despite them eg working for the Tory party) are not lefties on any reasonable definition of the word. It's the same mindset that sees Corbynites call Labour moderate red Tories etc.
    In what way am I "extreme rightwing"? Genuinely curious
    Dude are you serious?
    Yes, serious and curious. That's quite a label to put on me. "Extreme rightwing". It means I am the same as Hitler

    You need to justify it. I am unaware that I have advocated gassing Jews, but maybe I have?
    I'm somewhat lothe to indulge your narcissism but I guess I owe you a response. I said you were extremely right wing, not that you were "extreme rightwing". That's just the impression I get from your posts, eg on "Muslim rape gangs", admiration for Putinist positions on gender and love of post fascist politicians like Giorgia Meloni, espousal of zero immigration, your war on woke, the fact you see a Thatcherite Brexiteer like Rishi Sunak as a wet, that you think people who work for the Tory party are lefties, your dislike of paying tax... I could go in but I won't as I don't find you quite as interesting as you do.
    Why don't you do one of those political compass tests and see what it says? I am fairly sure it won't identify you as a libertarian socialist as it did for me. None of this is a value judgement BTW, you are welcome to your views, I simply struggle to see how you can be so unaware of where your opinions place you on the political scale.
    In this slew of desperate gibberish one gem stands out: you accuse me of "disliking paying tax" as proof that I am a Nazi

    I dunno, but I've got a weird feeling that makes Britain 98.94% Nazi
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 31,478
    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    FPT

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Leon said:

    An absolutely terrifying thread about what an actual Labour government will be like


    https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/1803104439697313995

    "In November, long before #zeroseats, even as the media was reporting politics as usual, I wrote a thread on why the Tories were heading for an epochal defeat. Now that this is received wisdom, it's time for a new thread, forecasting how Labour will govern. Be very afraid."


    I pray that this dude is wrong; I fear in my vittals that he is bang on

    A lot of this talk about Labour seeking to stop any future government going in a right wing direction seems like scaremongering to me.

    No Parliament can bind it's successor. The Tories could have thrown out most or all of the 1997-2010 reforms in the past 14 years if they'd wished but the fact is they chose not to.
    But the Equality Act did exactly that, without anyone realising, until very recently

    And he makes that point
    As did the European Communities Act Solution to the Equality act preventing reform is same as European Communities Act & Human Rights preventing reform. Repeal or Heavily Amend it.

    Tories have been torn apart because they thought Brexit was enough. It wasn't Brexit was just the enabling measure that enabled the rest to be done. They were not done and as a result reforms that the public wanted could not be enacted and they regard the Tories as having betrayed them.
    Exactly right

    I blame Boris. He had the majority to do all this, but he was too frit of his posh lefty friends, fam and neighbz

    For this to change, it will take a firmly rightwing leader of a firmly rightwing party that doesn't give a tinker's wank about fashionable opinion

    OMG Georgia!!!
    Sadly, Fair comment.

    I fear Boris had two fatal flaws (possibly 3).

    1) Weakness - so he didn't have the balls to stick with essentially the same policy as Sweden and more unforgivably, didn't end the lockdown nonsense after six weeks when it was obvious that Covid was a disease of the very elderly, very ill with something else and very unlucky (he clearly thought it was nonsense as illustrated by his behaviour).

    2) Needing to be liked (which let his posh lefty friends have a veto).

    3) I suspect (pure spectulation) he got some policy ideas from domestic sources. That would account for his U turn on Eagle Slicers and the like, when the M'Learned former Mrs Boris was swapped for the current incumbent.

    It is the firm bit rather than particularly right wing bit that is needed. Someone willing to do what Thatcher did when losing a judicial review. Pass an act overthrowing the judgement.
    Did Boris have any lefty friends while Prime Minister? Based on the friend he married and the friends who gave him freebies and those friends who advised him on getting Paterson and/or Pincher off the hook, Boris's entire social circle is well-heeled Tory poshos.
    Well-heeled Tory poshos are generally left of Corbyn. That's the problem

    And twas ever thus. Wasn't it Wodehouse who observed that his dukes voted Labour and Jeeves was a Tory?
    Tories to the left of Corbyn must be a pretty select group. Johnson is just a standard issue boarding school libertarian with a side order of little Englander prejudices and his social circle would I imagine be in tune with that. If he has any left wing friends he has certainly kept them well hidden. The "rich upper class lefty" trope is well loved by chippy rightists on here but I have never encountered one in the wild.
    That just proves how irredeemably lower middle class you are

    No, seriously, the posh are left wing. It's not a joke. The gags about Guardian journalists' backgrounds are not a spoof

    Marina Hyde has been mentioned on this thread:

    "Hyde is the daughter of Sir Alastair Edgcumbe James Dudley-Williams, 2nd Baronet, and his wife, the former Diana Elizabeth Jane Duncan. Through her father, she is the granddaughter of aviation pioneer and Conservative politician Sir Rolf Dudley-Williams, 1st Baronet. She attended Downe House School, near Newbury in Berkshire,[1] and read English at Christ Church, Oxford.["

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marina_Hyde

    She's not just posh she's absurdly rich, I know this personally
    I'm sure these people exist, but the point is that you can name them because there are so few of them. They probably all work for the Guardian. I've never met any of them. But I've met a never ending line of posh right wingers, because there are so many more of them (maybe you should get a job in finance).
    One thing you need to bear in mind is that you are extremely right wing. So people you think of as lefties (despite them eg working for the Tory party) are not lefties on any reasonable definition of the word. It's the same mindset that sees Corbynites call Labour moderate red Tories etc.
    In what way am I "extreme rightwing"? Genuinely curious
    Dude are you serious?
    How many actual "hard" right posters do we have on here? Plenty of disgruntled conservatives, some sitting this one out, a few voting Labour to send a message, a few reluctantly voting Conservative for fear of worse (Farage, or a massive Labour majority).

    But I'm struggling to think of anyone who's actually declared for Reform. Including Leon.

    With Reform at ~18% in the polls, it's a sign of how detached PB demographics are from reality. Either that, or there are a lot of 'shy reformers' out there.
    I'll fess up. I might vote Reform. It's either Starmer for laughs or Reform to kill the Tories

    But in what universe is Reform "far right"? They aren't even "hard right" by mainland European standards. Indeed they sometimes struggle to be rightwing, so far has the Overton Window shifted

    Their big thing is immigration, Are they going to shoot the boats and drown people (as has been happening off the EU shores)? No. They want to "tow boats back to France". That may be a dream, but it ain't the Shoah. As for overall immigration, they want "net zero" - in a recent interview Farage admitted that might still mean "600,000 immigrants" but they want to keep the incomings and outgoings balanced and the population stable, for a while, as our infrastructure cannot sustain explosive growth (and looking at our rivers, they have a point)

    That's it. That's Britain's "Nazi party" - gently towing boats and trying not to destroy rivers. Wow. Practically Treblinka
    You do know that net zero migration is completely mental, yes? We'd be better off with Truss and PM and Corbyn as Chancellor. You want runaway inflation and the collapse of half the public and private services in the country? That's what Farage is offering.
    To be fair being 'completely mental' is not necessarily the same as being far right. Some of Corbyn's ideas, plenty of the Green ideas and even some of the main party ideas can be considerd 'completely mental' but they would not be considered right wing.

    You are conflating two completely separate, although not always exclusive, arguments.
    No argument from me. There's a problem with identifying racist authoritarians as right wing and identifying hardcore liberals as left wing. My only point here is zero NET migration is completely loopy.
    So what is YOUR target for net migration, or do you have no target at all? Do you let everyone in? Let no one in? What is it? Come on, try and answer, if you come up with something coherent and articulate and sensible you might even get a column on "The National" paying £15 per 1000 words
    Rejoin EU, freedom of movement.

    5 words, that'll be 7.5 pence, please.
    But only for nice white Europeans?
  • Options
    AlsoLeiAlsoLei Posts: 1,221
    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    biggles said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Omnium said:

    rcs1000 said:

    On topic, but also a little bit of a rant.

    The Conservative Party has, for so long, been a successful political party because it has been able to tie together disparate groups, who don't all share exactly the same ideology.

    And it's done this by being pragmatic and remembering that there are going to be people who believe homosexuality is a sin, and there are going to be people are publicly gay, but they might share common views about - say - the size of the state.

    I'm reminded of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, who was caught on tape saying that the US was in a (culture) war, and there would only be one winner.

    No, Justice Alito, there is no winner. You cannot silence the voices of the 50% of people who disagree with you without actual war. And that actual war (see the Thirty Years War for an example) will end with everyone grudgingly agreeing that actually they can't agree and they can't force other people to agree with them.

    The Conservative Party cannot just be the party of people left behind by globalisation. Nor can it just be the party of pensioners. Nor can it just be the party of wealthy plutocrats. It needs to be a big tent. If you choose to silence - or make unwelcome - the voices that disagree with you, then you are consigning yourself to electoral oblivion.

    This is why "we didn't win because we weren't centrist enough" and "we didn't win because we weren't right wing enough" are both bullshit arguments. You didn't win because you were unable to make the tent big enough.

    Where was the voting market behind monetarism when MT made that her guiding theme? There wasn't one. She decided that that was the right thing for Britain, and set about winning the arguments. That's how you get positive change. Crafting your platform out of a mishmash of what voters have found acceptable up until now is not a plan to get into (or stay in) government; it's a way to go around in circles achieving very little.

    And I also don't think the issue is that Tories 'haven't been right wing enough', it's that they have sold themselves as the right wing alternative, benefitted from doing so, and changed their minds completely when it comes to actually doing anything right wing. That's a question of trust, rather than a question of politics. Those who feel that they haven't been centrist enough should vote for parties that espouse social democracy, of which there are two in the political mainstream. Why do they need a third? It smacks of reducing the alternatives available to voters because they aren't actually that confident in the attractiveness of their centrist prospectus.
    Every time the Tories get into power they're lured into nanny-statism. Thatcher had enough about her to push against that for several years. Imperfect though such direction might prove I think it is beneficial. Reducing the size of the state should be top of the list for any government.
    OK.

    The number of people of pensionable age is rising every year: we have promised them (repeatedly) that there is no circumstance where their pensions will grow less than 2% or wages or inflation. In addition, the proportion of people who are pensioners will grow every year. And a pensioner costs approximately 15x as much in social and health care as someone in their 20s.

    So: interest payments, healthcare and pension cost increases are nailed on. And they are half the budget.

    We need to spend more on defence.
    Policing and the administration of justice have been cut to the bone.

    I want to cut the size of the state too. But we all need to be realistic about the challenges facing us with a greying population.
    Plus everyone wants more transport projects and everyone wants increasingly improving schools. Add on people always having a pet regulation….
    The problem is that most expect the state can do more than it can do. It could only do what it did in the first place due to the revenue of empire and tbe legacy assets and soft power in the post empire world which have slowly inevitably decayed

    Also, as life becomes more complex the state can do less. EM Forsters "The Machine Stops" was a boring book foisted on us at school but a very prohetic one.

    The choice is collapse with authoritarianism on the way or a wholesale deregulation, a very limited state based on a principle of Caveat Emptor and an acceptance that people will make bad or inept decisions and suffer as a result and it is not the states job to prevent or mitigate this, other than to set some core, simple to understand rules (which is basically what Common Law is).

    I think the die was cast though when Cameron beat Davis in 2005, or perhaps even when Wilson won in 1964.
    What bollocks. Countries like Denmark and Finland didn’t have an empire, but work fine today through the simple measure of people being OK to pay a bit more tax.
    Nothing to do with Denmark having a far lower population (and population density) and fertile land enabling them to produce three times as much food as they need for self sufficiency and export the difference.

    Similar arguments apply with Finland.

    UK. Not so much.
    This is laughable.

    Much of Finland is uninhabitable tundra. It suggests that the UK's problems would be solved by merger with Greenland. Or, indeed, made much worse by Scottish independence.

    And if population size is all, we can constantly get richer by cutting the country in half.
    None of Finland is uninhabitable tundra - it's nothing like Greenland in the slightest. Agriculture extends right up into the north of the country
    This is genuinely news to me.
    It depends whether you count "forestry" as "agriculture". Because that's pretty much all there is, a few km north of Helsinki
    Forestry is usually counted as resource extraction rather than agriculture, isn't it?

    What agricultural land there is in Finland is concentrated in the south, and along the western coast as far north as Oulu - but they do get very high production per hectare.

    The huge contrast between Finnish and British agricultural productivity figures are mostly a result of the different attitudes towards land use - our previously forested lands are used for marginal hill farms and grouse moors etc.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 49,952
    Heathener said:

    Leon said:

    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    FPT

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Leon said:

    An absolutely terrifying thread about what an actual Labour government will be like


    https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/1803104439697313995

    "In November, long before #zeroseats, even as the media was reporting politics as usual, I wrote a thread on why the Tories were heading for an epochal defeat. Now that this is received wisdom, it's time for a new thread, forecasting how Labour will govern. Be very afraid."


    I pray that this dude is wrong; I fear in my vittals that he is bang on

    A lot of this talk about Labour seeking to stop any future government going in a right wing direction seems like scaremongering to me.

    No Parliament can bind it's successor. The Tories could have thrown out most or all of the 1997-2010 reforms in the past 14 years if they'd wished but the fact is they chose not to.
    But the Equality Act did exactly that, without anyone realising, until very recently

    And he makes that point
    As did the European Communities Act Solution to the Equality act preventing reform is same as European Communities Act & Human Rights preventing reform. Repeal or Heavily Amend it.

    Tories have been torn apart because they thought Brexit was enough. It wasn't Brexit was just the enabling measure that enabled the rest to be done. They were not done and as a result reforms that the public wanted could not be enacted and they regard the Tories as having betrayed them.
    Exactly right

    I blame Boris. He had the majority to do all this, but he was too frit of his posh lefty friends, fam and neighbz

    For this to change, it will take a firmly rightwing leader of a firmly rightwing party that doesn't give a tinker's wank about fashionable opinion

    OMG Georgia!!!
    Sadly, Fair comment.

    I fear Boris had two fatal flaws (possibly 3).

    1) Weakness - so he didn't have the balls to stick with essentially the same policy as Sweden and more unforgivably, didn't end the lockdown nonsense after six weeks when it was obvious that Covid was a disease of the very elderly, very ill with something else and very unlucky (he clearly thought it was nonsense as illustrated by his behaviour).

    2) Needing to be liked (which let his posh lefty friends have a veto).

    3) I suspect (pure spectulation) he got some policy ideas from domestic sources. That would account for his U turn on Eagle Slicers and the like, when the M'Learned former Mrs Boris was swapped for the current incumbent.

    It is the firm bit rather than particularly right wing bit that is needed. Someone willing to do what Thatcher did when losing a judicial review. Pass an act overthrowing the judgement.
    Did Boris have any lefty friends while Prime Minister? Based on the friend he married and the friends who gave him freebies and those friends who advised him on getting Paterson and/or Pincher off the hook, Boris's entire social circle is well-heeled Tory poshos.
    Well-heeled Tory poshos are generally left of Corbyn. That's the problem

    And twas ever thus. Wasn't it Wodehouse who observed that his dukes voted Labour and Jeeves was a Tory?
    Tories to the left of Corbyn must be a pretty select group. Johnson is just a standard issue boarding school libertarian with a side order of little Englander prejudices and his social circle would I imagine be in tune with that. If he has any left wing friends he has certainly kept them well hidden. The "rich upper class lefty" trope is well loved by chippy rightists on here but I have never encountered one in the wild.
    That just proves how irredeemably lower middle class you are

    No, seriously, the posh are left wing. It's not a joke. The gags about Guardian journalists' backgrounds are not a spoof

    Marina Hyde has been mentioned on this thread:

    "Hyde is the daughter of Sir Alastair Edgcumbe James Dudley-Williams, 2nd Baronet, and his wife, the former Diana Elizabeth Jane Duncan. Through her father, she is the granddaughter of aviation pioneer and Conservative politician Sir Rolf Dudley-Williams, 1st Baronet. She attended Downe House School, near Newbury in Berkshire,[1] and read English at Christ Church, Oxford.["

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marina_Hyde

    She's not just posh she's absurdly rich, I know this personally
    I'm sure these people exist, but the point is that you can name them because there are so few of them. They probably all work for the Guardian. I've never met any of them. But I've met a never ending line of posh right wingers, because there are so many more of them (maybe you should get a job in finance).
    One thing you need to bear in mind is that you are extremely right wing. So people you think of as lefties (despite them eg working for the Tory party) are not lefties on any reasonable definition of the word. It's the same mindset that sees Corbynites call Labour moderate red Tories etc.
    In what way am I "extreme rightwing"? Genuinely curious
    Dude are you serious?
    How many actual "hard" right posters do we have on here? Plenty of disgruntled conservatives, some sitting this one out, a few voting Labour to send a message, a few reluctantly voting Conservative for fear of worse (Farage, or a massive Labour majority).

    But I'm struggling to think of anyone who's actually declared for Reform. Including Leon.

    With Reform at ~18% in the polls, it's a sign of how detached PB demographics are from reality. Either that, or there are a lot of 'shy reformers' out there.
    I'll fess up. I might vote Reform. It's either Starmer for laughs or Reform to kill the Tories

    But in what universe is Reform "far right"? They aren't even "hard right" by mainland European standards. Indeed they sometimes struggle to be rightwing, so far has the Overton Window shifted

    Their big thing is immigration, Are they going to shoot the boats and drown people (as has been happening off the EU shores)? No. They want to "tow boats back to France". That may be a dream, but it ain't the Shoah. As for overall immigration, they want "net zero" - in a recent interview Farage admitted that might still mean "600,000 immigrants" but they want to keep the incomings and outgoings balanced and the population stable, for a while, as our infrastructure cannot sustain explosive growth (and looking at our rivers, they have a point)

    That's it. That's Britain's "Nazi party" - gently towing boats and trying not to destroy rivers. Wow. Practically Treblinka
    You do know that net zero migration is completely mental, yes? We'd be better off with Truss and PM and Corbyn as Chancellor. You want runaway inflation and the collapse of half the public and private services in the country? That's what Farage is offering.
    To be fair being 'completely mental' is not necessarily the same as being far right. Some of Corbyn's ideas, plenty of the Green ideas and even some of the main party ideas can be considerd 'completely mental' but they would not be considered right wing.

    You are conflating two completely separate, although not always exclusive, arguments.
    No argument from me. There's a problem with identifying racist authoritarians as right wing and identifying hardcore liberals as left wing. My only point here is zero NET migration is completely loopy.
    you might even get a column on "The National" paying £15 per 1000 words
    Lol! ;)

    When I write for the nationals I’m on £1 to £2 a word, which isn’t a massive amount for the effort. You?
    £7
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 49,300
    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    FPT

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Leon said:

    An absolutely terrifying thread about what an actual Labour government will be like


    https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/1803104439697313995

    "In November, long before #zeroseats, even as the media was reporting politics as usual, I wrote a thread on why the Tories were heading for an epochal defeat. Now that this is received wisdom, it's time for a new thread, forecasting how Labour will govern. Be very afraid."


    I pray that this dude is wrong; I fear in my vittals that he is bang on

    A lot of this talk about Labour seeking to stop any future government going in a right wing direction seems like scaremongering to me.

    No Parliament can bind it's successor. The Tories could have thrown out most or all of the 1997-2010 reforms in the past 14 years if they'd wished but the fact is they chose not to.
    But the Equality Act did exactly that, without anyone realising, until very recently

    And he makes that point
    As did the European Communities Act Solution to the Equality act preventing reform is same as European Communities Act & Human Rights preventing reform. Repeal or Heavily Amend it.

    Tories have been torn apart because they thought Brexit was enough. It wasn't Brexit was just the enabling measure that enabled the rest to be done. They were not done and as a result reforms that the public wanted could not be enacted and they regard the Tories as having betrayed them.
    Exactly right

    I blame Boris. He had the majority to do all this, but he was too frit of his posh lefty friends, fam and neighbz

    For this to change, it will take a firmly rightwing leader of a firmly rightwing party that doesn't give a tinker's wank about fashionable opinion

    OMG Georgia!!!
    Sadly, Fair comment.

    I fear Boris had two fatal flaws (possibly 3).

    1) Weakness - so he didn't have the balls to stick with essentially the same policy as Sweden and more unforgivably, didn't end the lockdown nonsense after six weeks when it was obvious that Covid was a disease of the very elderly, very ill with something else and very unlucky (he clearly thought it was nonsense as illustrated by his behaviour).

    2) Needing to be liked (which let his posh lefty friends have a veto).

    3) I suspect (pure spectulation) he got some policy ideas from domestic sources. That would account for his U turn on Eagle Slicers and the like, when the M'Learned former Mrs Boris was swapped for the current incumbent.

    It is the firm bit rather than particularly right wing bit that is needed. Someone willing to do what Thatcher did when losing a judicial review. Pass an act overthrowing the judgement.
    Did Boris have any lefty friends while Prime Minister? Based on the friend he married and the friends who gave him freebies and those friends who advised him on getting Paterson and/or Pincher off the hook, Boris's entire social circle is well-heeled Tory poshos.
    Well-heeled Tory poshos are generally left of Corbyn. That's the problem

    And twas ever thus. Wasn't it Wodehouse who observed that his dukes voted Labour and Jeeves was a Tory?
    Tories to the left of Corbyn must be a pretty select group. Johnson is just a standard issue boarding school libertarian with a side order of little Englander prejudices and his social circle would I imagine be in tune with that. If he has any left wing friends he has certainly kept them well hidden. The "rich upper class lefty" trope is well loved by chippy rightists on here but I have never encountered one in the wild.
    That just proves how irredeemably lower middle class you are

    No, seriously, the posh are left wing. It's not a joke. The gags about Guardian journalists' backgrounds are not a spoof

    Marina Hyde has been mentioned on this thread:

    "Hyde is the daughter of Sir Alastair Edgcumbe James Dudley-Williams, 2nd Baronet, and his wife, the former Diana Elizabeth Jane Duncan. Through her father, she is the granddaughter of aviation pioneer and Conservative politician Sir Rolf Dudley-Williams, 1st Baronet. She attended Downe House School, near Newbury in Berkshire,[1] and read English at Christ Church, Oxford.["

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marina_Hyde

    She's not just posh she's absurdly rich, I know this personally
    I'm sure these people exist, but the point is that you can name them because there are so few of them. They probably all work for the Guardian. I've never met any of them. But I've met a never ending line of posh right wingers, because there are so many more of them (maybe you should get a job in finance).
    One thing you need to bear in mind is that you are extremely right wing. So people you think of as lefties (despite them eg working for the Tory party) are not lefties on any reasonable definition of the word. It's the same mindset that sees Corbynites call Labour moderate red Tories etc.
    In what way am I "extreme rightwing"? Genuinely curious
    Dude are you serious?
    How many actual "hard" right posters do we have on here? Plenty of disgruntled conservatives, some sitting this one out, a few voting Labour to send a message, a few reluctantly voting Conservative for fear of worse (Farage, or a massive Labour majority).

    But I'm struggling to think of anyone who's actually declared for Reform. Including Leon.

    With Reform at ~18% in the polls, it's a sign of how detached PB demographics are from reality. Either that, or there are a lot of 'shy reformers' out there.
    I'll fess up. I might vote Reform. It's either Starmer for laughs or Reform to kill the Tories

    But in what universe is Reform "far right"? They aren't even "hard right" by mainland European standards. Indeed they sometimes struggle to be rightwing, so far has the Overton Window shifted

    Their big thing is immigration, Are they going to shoot the boats and drown people (as has been happening off the EU shores)? No. They want to "tow boats back to France". That may be a dream, but it ain't the Shoah. As for overall immigration, they want "net zero" - in a recent interview Farage admitted that might still mean "600,000 immigrants" but they want to keep the incomings and outgoings balanced and the population stable, for a while, as our infrastructure cannot sustain explosive growth (and looking at our rivers, they have a point)

    That's it. That's Britain's "Nazi party" - gently towing boats and trying not to destroy rivers. Wow. Practically Treblinka
    You do know that net zero migration is completely mental, yes? We'd be better off with Truss and PM and Corbyn as Chancellor. You want runaway inflation and the collapse of half the public and private services in the country? That's what Farage is offering.
    To be fair being 'completely mental' is not necessarily the same as being far right. Some of Corbyn's ideas, plenty of the Green ideas and even some of the main party ideas can be considerd 'completely mental' but they would not be considered right wing.

    You are conflating two completely separate, although not always exclusive, arguments.
    No argument from me. There's a problem with identifying racist authoritarians as right wing and identifying hardcore liberals as left wing. My only point here is zero NET migration is completely loopy.
    Why is it loopy? Do you want perpetual population growth driven by immigration?
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 78,346
    edited June 18
    Putting aside Chomsky politics, his academic work is really interesting. But with LLMs, there is real debate in academic circles if actually it was all wrong.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 118,523

    Noam Chomsky has died.

    Vote for Jezza, win one for Noam!
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 34,629
    @TelePolitics

    🔵 Tom Tugendhat, the security minister, is set to run for the Conservative leadership if a contest is triggered next month by election defeat, The Telegraph understands
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 49,952
    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Oh god, you are all morons

    No, some of us are idiots.
    You, my dear friend, are a mensch

    It's them others that are morons
  • Options
    Nunu5Nunu5 Posts: 287

    Have we done this?

    "Re-elect Rehman in Rainham" is in trouble...

    Gillingham & Rainham voting intention (+/- 5%, changes vs 2019 notional)

    LAB: 55% (+27)
    CON: 23% (-39)
    REF: 15% (+15)
    LDEM: 5% (=)
    GRN: 2% (=)

    @wethinkpolling/@TheEconomist, 5th-16th June. N=376


    https://twitter.com/OwenWntr/status/1803116579397177578

    I am going through my stats and I think that would be the biggest swing at a general election against either the Tories or Labour since 1945.
    Then again, if the average swing is in the high teens, and the local swings are more proportional than uniform, the top end has to come out here or hereabouts.

    What is the record GE swing? (If I had to guess, somewhere with a New Town).
    Turns out I'm wrong;

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election_records

    39.3% in Glasgow NE, 2015

    In England, 29% in Brent East, 2005.

    Several Brent seats in the subsidiary records. Is there something in the air?
    Strongly Lab in general elections but with a strong local showing for the libdems in many wards at the Cllr level. Fertile territory for big swings in by elections
  • Options
    GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,613

    Ghedebrav said:

    Shame about the equaliser. Always had a soft spot for the Czechs. A hard-drinking, underdog nation with overbearing neighbours and a great literary tradition.

    Not unlike the Irish, come to think of it.

    Even better in terms of music: Dvorak, Janacek, Smetana, Martinu ..
    Some real beauty as well. I’m a sucker for Austro-Hungarian decadence and Prague (and elsewhere) still bears this atmos. Also a rare (unique?) example of cubist architecture, I think.

    About twenty-two years ago I visited fairly often; I had a girlfriend there (which felt impossibly debonair at the time) and got to know Prague fairly well, while never ever cracking the language at all.

    There’s an absurdist streak to Czech culture I like. I highly recommend Bohumil Hrabal to anyone who hasn’t encountered his work. Short, funny, bleak, beer-drenched novels.
  • Options
    HeathenerHeathener Posts: 6,781
    Heathener said:

    Leon said:

    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    FPT

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Leon said:

    An absolutely terrifying thread about what an actual Labour government will be like


    https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/1803104439697313995

    "In November, long before #zeroseats, even as the media was reporting politics as usual, I wrote a thread on why the Tories were heading for an epochal defeat. Now that this is received wisdom, it's time for a new thread, forecasting how Labour will govern. Be very afraid."


    I pray that this dude is wrong; I fear in my vittals that he is bang on

    A lot of this talk about Labour seeking to stop any future government going in a right wing direction seems like scaremongering to me.

    No Parliament can bind it's successor. The Tories could have thrown out most or all of the 1997-2010 reforms in the past 14 years if they'd wished but the fact is they chose not to.
    But the Equality Act did exactly that, without anyone realising, until very recently

    And he makes that point
    As did the European Communities Act Solution to the Equality act preventing reform is same as European Communities Act & Human Rights preventing reform. Repeal or Heavily Amend it.

    Tories have been torn apart because they thought Brexit was enough. It wasn't Brexit was just the enabling measure that enabled the rest to be done. They were not done and as a result reforms that the public wanted could not be enacted and they regard the Tories as having betrayed them.
    Exactly right

    I blame Boris. He had the majority to do all this, but he was too frit of his posh lefty friends, fam and neighbz

    For this to change, it will take a firmly rightwing leader of a firmly rightwing party that doesn't give a tinker's wank about fashionable opinion

    OMG Georgia!!!
    Sadly, Fair comment.

    I fear Boris had two fatal flaws (possibly 3).

    1) Weakness - so he didn't have the balls to stick with essentially the same policy as Sweden and more unforgivably, didn't end the lockdown nonsense after six weeks when it was obvious that Covid was a disease of the very elderly, very ill with something else and very unlucky (he clearly thought it was nonsense as illustrated by his behaviour).

    2) Needing to be liked (which let his posh lefty friends have a veto).

    3) I suspect (pure spectulation) he got some policy ideas from domestic sources. That would account for his U turn on Eagle Slicers and the like, when the M'Learned former Mrs Boris was swapped for the current incumbent.

    It is the firm bit rather than particularly right wing bit that is needed. Someone willing to do what Thatcher did when losing a judicial review. Pass an act overthrowing the judgement.
    Did Boris have any lefty friends while Prime Minister? Based on the friend he married and the friends who gave him freebies and those friends who advised him on getting Paterson and/or Pincher off the hook, Boris's entire social circle is well-heeled Tory poshos.
    Well-heeled Tory poshos are generally left of Corbyn. That's the problem

    And twas ever thus. Wasn't it Wodehouse who observed that his dukes voted Labour and Jeeves was a Tory?
    Tories to the left of Corbyn must be a pretty select group. Johnson is just a standard issue boarding school libertarian with a side order of little Englander prejudices and his social circle would I imagine be in tune with that. If he has any left wing friends he has certainly kept them well hidden. The "rich upper class lefty" trope is well loved by chippy rightists on here but I have never encountered one in the wild.
    That just proves how irredeemably lower middle class you are

    No, seriously, the posh are left wing. It's not a joke. The gags about Guardian journalists' backgrounds are not a spoof

    Marina Hyde has been mentioned on this thread:

    "Hyde is the daughter of Sir Alastair Edgcumbe James Dudley-Williams, 2nd Baronet, and his wife, the former Diana Elizabeth Jane Duncan. Through her father, she is the granddaughter of aviation pioneer and Conservative politician Sir Rolf Dudley-Williams, 1st Baronet. She attended Downe House School, near Newbury in Berkshire,[1] and read English at Christ Church, Oxford.["

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marina_Hyde

    She's not just posh she's absurdly rich, I know this personally
    I'm sure these people exist, but the point is that you can name them because there are so few of them. They probably all work for the Guardian. I've never met any of them. But I've met a never ending line of posh right wingers, because there are so many more of them (maybe you should get a job in finance).
    One thing you need to bear in mind is that you are extremely right wing. So people you think of as lefties (despite them eg working for the Tory party) are not lefties on any reasonable definition of the word. It's the same mindset that sees Corbynites call Labour moderate red Tories etc.
    In what way am I "extreme rightwing"? Genuinely curious
    Dude are you serious?
    How many actual "hard" right posters do we have on here? Plenty of disgruntled conservatives, some sitting this one out, a few voting Labour to send a message, a few reluctantly voting Conservative for fear of worse (Farage, or a massive Labour majority).

    But I'm struggling to think of anyone who's actually declared for Reform. Including Leon.

    With Reform at ~18% in the polls, it's a sign of how detached PB demographics are from reality. Either that, or there are a lot of 'shy reformers' out there.
    I'll fess up. I might vote Reform. It's either Starmer for laughs or Reform to kill the Tories

    But in what universe is Reform "far right"? They aren't even "hard right" by mainland European standards. Indeed they sometimes struggle to be rightwing, so far has the Overton Window shifted

    Their big thing is immigration, Are they going to shoot the boats and drown people (as has been happening off the EU shores)? No. They want to "tow boats back to France". That may be a dream, but it ain't the Shoah. As for overall immigration, they want "net zero" - in a recent interview Farage admitted that might still mean "600,000 immigrants" but they want to keep the incomings and outgoings balanced and the population stable, for a while, as our infrastructure cannot sustain explosive growth (and looking at our rivers, they have a point)

    That's it. That's Britain's "Nazi party" - gently towing boats and trying not to destroy rivers. Wow. Practically Treblinka
    You do know that net zero migration is completely mental, yes? We'd be better off with Truss and PM and Corbyn as Chancellor. You want runaway inflation and the collapse of half the public and private services in the country? That's what Farage is offering.
    To be fair being 'completely mental' is not necessarily the same as being far right. Some of Corbyn's ideas, plenty of the Green ideas and even some of the main party ideas can be considerd 'completely mental' but they would not be considered right wing.

    You are conflating two completely separate, although not always exclusive, arguments.
    No argument from me. There's a problem with identifying racist authoritarians as right wing and identifying hardcore liberals as left wing. My only point here is zero NET migration is completely loopy.
    you might even get a column on "The National" paying £15 per 1000 words
    Lol! ;)

    When I write for the nationals I’m on £1 to £2 a word, which isn’t a massive amount for the effort. You?
    Before I turn in, I should explain this because peeps might think it’s ridiculous. But I find that for a proper article of say 2000 words, if you want a watertight, well-researched piece that doesn’t invite ridicule, and if you don’t want the newspaper to get its butt sued, it takes about 3 days all told. Clearly not to write the piece itself, which can happen in an hour or two, but to have it copper-bottomed ready for publication.

    I think I’ve been published in every single national newspaper except the Guardian, which is kind-of funny considering.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 28,966
    Scott_xP said:

    @TelePolitics

    🔵 Tom Tugendhat, the security minister, is set to run for the Conservative leadership if a contest is triggered next month by election defeat, The Telegraph understands

    As expected he'll be the One Nation candidate.
  • Options
    EPGEPG Posts: 6,427

    rcs1000 said:

    Nigelb said:

    AlsoLei said:

    biggles said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Omnium said:

    rcs1000 said:

    On topic, but also a little bit of a rant.

    The Conservative Party has, for so long, been a successful political party because it has been able to tie together disparate groups, who don't all share exactly the same ideology.

    And it's done this by being pragmatic and remembering that there are going to be people who believe homosexuality is a sin, and there are going to be people are publicly gay, but they might share common views about - say - the size of the state.

    I'm reminded of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, who was caught on tape saying that the US was in a (culture) war, and there would only be one winner.

    No, Justice Alito, there is no winner. You cannot silence the voices of the 50% of people who disagree with you without actual war. And that actual war (see the Thirty Years War for an example) will end with everyone grudgingly agreeing that actually they can't agree and they can't force other people to agree with them.

    The Conservative Party cannot just be the party of people left behind by globalisation. Nor can it just be the party of pensioners. Nor can it just be the party of wealthy plutocrats. It needs to be a big tent. If you choose to silence - or make unwelcome - the voices that disagree with you, then you are consigning yourself to electoral oblivion.

    This is why "we didn't win because we weren't centrist enough" and "we didn't win because we weren't right wing enough" are both bullshit arguments. You didn't win because you were unable to make the tent big enough.

    Where was the voting market behind monetarism when MT made that her guiding theme? There wasn't one. She decided that that was the right thing for Britain, and set about winning the arguments. That's how you get positive change. Crafting your platform out of a mishmash of what voters have found acceptable up until now is not a plan to get into (or stay in) government; it's a way to go around in circles achieving very little.

    And I also don't think the issue is that Tories 'haven't been right wing enough', it's that they have sold themselves as the right wing alternative, benefitted from doing so, and changed their minds completely when it comes to actually doing anything right wing. That's a question of trust, rather than a question of politics. Those who feel that they haven't been centrist enough should vote for parties that espouse social democracy, of which there are two in the political mainstream. Why do they need a third? It smacks of reducing the alternatives available to voters because they aren't actually that confident in the attractiveness of their centrist prospectus.
    Every time the Tories get into power they're lured into nanny-statism. Thatcher had enough about her to push against that for several years. Imperfect though such direction might prove I think it is beneficial. Reducing the size of the state should be top of the list for any government.
    OK.

    The number of people of pensionable age is rising every year: we have promised them (repeatedly) that there is no circumstance where their pensions will grow less than 2% or wages or inflation. In addition, the proportion of people who are pensioners will grow every year. And a pensioner costs approximately 15x as much in social and health care as someone in their 20s.

    So: interest payments, healthcare and pension cost increases are nailed on. And they are half the budget.

    We need to spend more on defence.
    Policing and the administration of justice have been cut to the bone.

    I want to cut the size of the state too. But we all need to be realistic about the challenges facing us with a greying population.
    Plus everyone wants more transport projects and everyone wants increasingly improving schools. Add on people always having a pet regulation….
    The problem is that most expect the state can do more than it can do. It could only do what it did in the first place due to the revenue of empire and tbe legacy assets and soft power in the post empire world which have slowly inevitably decayed

    Also, as life becomes more complex the state can do less. EM Forsters "The Machine Stops" was a boring book foisted on us at school but a very prohetic one.

    The choice is collapse with authoritarianism on the way or a wholesale deregulation, a very limited state based on a principle of Caveat Emptor and an acceptance that people will make bad or inept decisions and suffer as a result and it is not the states job to prevent or mitigate this, other than to set some core, simple to understand rules (which is basically what Common Law is).

    I think the die was cast though when Cameron beat Davis in 2005, or perhaps even when Wilson won in 1964.
    You're overstating the "revenue of empire" here, as costs matched benefits from the 1870s onwards even if you look at it from a pure revenue perspective.

    On a wider economic basis it produced a clear loss, especially when you factor in the downsides of it fucking our trade and monetary policy over and over and over again until we finally began to cut our losses in 1957.
    Direct revenue is one thing. Indirect (a captive market for UK manufacturers) is another, this has lingered on to a certain extent even now (e.g MK will have good sales in Singapore, Ireland, Cyprus, Hong Kong and half the middle East and Africa as a legacy of empire is that they use BS1363 plugs and sockets.

    Plenty more such trade was kicked in the nuts in 1973 when joined customs union with rival industrial countries and put trade barriers up with such countries as a result.

    The root cause of empire is need, a country not having enough land and resources to support it's population sustainably. See Rome, Japan and us (not to mention Russia invading Ukraine, both now and in aftermath of the Russian Revolution)

    It dosen't help that we are making it worse by unsustainable population increase and shunning the Oil, Gas and Coal resources (the latter of which is still abundant) so are therefore making our industry uncompetitive compared with those that do exploit such resources unreserved.

    And yet S Korea - and postwar Japan - achieved great prosperity without significant natural resources, or captive markets.
    And Hong Kong. And Singapore. And Switzerland.

    It's almost like the most important natural resource is the human brain.
    Denmark and South Korea are more prosperous than us because we have too many thickos..

    Very interesting point but heads in directions as contentious as a TERF war on Twitter if you are not careful.

    For what it is worth I think it is not too many thickos in the UK it is a somewhat nihilistic dog in manger attitude in too much of the population.

    As a kid in a Lambeth comprehensive, if you worked hard and strived you had a target on your back.

    As far as the peer group was concerned the aim was to do as little work as possible and make the teachers life a misery.

    This was institutionalised in comics like the Beano where Walter the Softie and an equivalent in the Bash Street Kids had their lives made a misery for being "swots"

    Basically ingrained class warfare and factionalisation engendering nihilism and low productivity.

    The same at Slough Grammar where Boris derided his old school chum Cameron as a girly swot. Even at the top, effortless superiority is preferred to visible effort.
    I posted this the other day.
    https://tomblomfield.com/post/750852175114174464/taking-risk

    We have a problem that even our best educated don't like taking risk, unis are bad at fairly supporting ideas* and even those that do get a start-up going those in the UK seem keen to exit ASAP and take their payday.

    Politicians seem pretty clueless about this.

    * some UK universities will ask for upto 40% of a start-up for very small injection of capital.
    In fairness, if the UK taxed multi-millionaires like the USA, I think this would not only compensate for the culture but generate the culture. And once you have lots of multi-millionaires, they are willing to take many risks to provide capital to create other multi-millionaires. But there is also a global strategy layer that is naively missing - the United States does not long tolerate overseas companies of strategic importance.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 93,792
    Scott_xP said:

    @TelePolitics

    🔵 Tom Tugendhat, the security minister, is set to run for the Conservative leadership if a contest is triggered next month by election defeat, The Telegraph understands

    Should be returned, not too young and not too old, junior level ministerial experience but not too associated with the past Cabinets.

    But went backwards each round of the Tory leadership contest he took part in, campaigned on a clean start, presumably a wet.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 28,966

    Putting aside Chomsky politics, his academic work is really interesting. But with LLMs, there is real debate in academic circles if actually it was all wrong.

    IIRC he unexpectedly came out against some elements of Woke-ism recently, which annoyed a lot of his younger followers.
  • Options
    Scott_xP said:

    @TelePolitics

    🔵 Tom Tugendhat, the security minister, is set to run for the Conservative leadership if a contest is triggered next month by election defeat, The Telegraph understands

    26k majority in Tonbridge, could/should be safe. Probably far too sensible for those left as the Parliamentary party, though.
  • Options
    Nunu5Nunu5 Posts: 287
    Clacton:
    https://x.com/kateferguson4/status/1803136837222855144

    Something big is happening. Nigel will be an MP after July 5th.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 49,952
    Scott_xP said:

    @TelePolitics

    🔵 Tom Tugendhat, the security minister, is set to run for the Conservative leadership if a contest is triggered next month by election defeat, The Telegraph understands

    Their 32 MPs are gonna end up led by Tug-end-hat

    And that will be their last meaningful leader ever. He will agree with everything Labour does and just pretend that the rump Tories will tax slightly less. This meaningless politics cannot continue. The Tories either become populist rightwing or they die
  • Options
    HeathenerHeathener Posts: 6,781
    The other thing to state about writing ref. earlier discussions is that you need never retire. If your brain/body stays fit you can write until you drop. It’s good for keeping the mind active and if you love it, keep at it.
  • Options
    PedestrianRockPedestrianRock Posts: 460
    Andy_JS said:

    Have we done this?

    "Re-elect Rehman in Rainham" is in trouble...

    Gillingham & Rainham voting intention (+/- 5%, changes vs 2019 notional)

    LAB: 55% (+27)
    CON: 23% (-39)
    REF: 15% (+15)
    LDEM: 5% (=)
    GRN: 2% (=)

    @wethinkpolling/@TheEconomist, 5th-16th June. N=376


    https://twitter.com/OwenWntr/status/1803116579397177578

    Today's MRP from Ipsos/MORI has these figures:

    Gillingham & Rainham

    Lab 41%
    Con 32%
    Ref 18%
    LD 5%
    Grn 4%

    So quite a lot of variation between the various different models.

    https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/uk-opinion-polls/ipsos-election-mrp
    Ipsos MRP by its nature seems less relevant for constituencies, e.g. no Corbyn in Islington North, no Ashfield Independents in Ashfield.

    OTOH the Constituency Poll above is from 376 people, and removes 'don't knows' - I'm no expert, but I can't tell how useful that is either.
  • Options
    bigglesbiggles Posts: 5,400
    Leon said:

    Heathener said:

    Leon said:

    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    FPT

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Leon said:

    An absolutely terrifying thread about what an actual Labour government will be like


    https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/1803104439697313995

    "In November, long before #zeroseats, even as the media was reporting politics as usual, I wrote a thread on why the Tories were heading for an epochal defeat. Now that this is received wisdom, it's time for a new thread, forecasting how Labour will govern. Be very afraid."


    I pray that this dude is wrong; I fear in my vittals that he is bang on

    A lot of this talk about Labour seeking to stop any future government going in a right wing direction seems like scaremongering to me.

    No Parliament can bind it's successor. The Tories could have thrown out most or all of the 1997-2010 reforms in the past 14 years if they'd wished but the fact is they chose not to.
    But the Equality Act did exactly that, without anyone realising, until very recently

    And he makes that point
    As did the European Communities Act Solution to the Equality act preventing reform is same as European Communities Act & Human Rights preventing reform. Repeal or Heavily Amend it.

    Tories have been torn apart because they thought Brexit was enough. It wasn't Brexit was just the enabling measure that enabled the rest to be done. They were not done and as a result reforms that the public wanted could not be enacted and they regard the Tories as having betrayed them.
    Exactly right

    I blame Boris. He had the majority to do all this, but he was too frit of his posh lefty friends, fam and neighbz

    For this to change, it will take a firmly rightwing leader of a firmly rightwing party that doesn't give a tinker's wank about fashionable opinion

    OMG Georgia!!!
    Sadly, Fair comment.

    I fear Boris had two fatal flaws (possibly 3).

    1) Weakness - so he didn't have the balls to stick with essentially the same policy as Sweden and more unforgivably, didn't end the lockdown nonsense after six weeks when it was obvious that Covid was a disease of the very elderly, very ill with something else and very unlucky (he clearly thought it was nonsense as illustrated by his behaviour).

    2) Needing to be liked (which let his posh lefty friends have a veto).

    3) I suspect (pure spectulation) he got some policy ideas from domestic sources. That would account for his U turn on Eagle Slicers and the like, when the M'Learned former Mrs Boris was swapped for the current incumbent.

    It is the firm bit rather than particularly right wing bit that is needed. Someone willing to do what Thatcher did when losing a judicial review. Pass an act overthrowing the judgement.
    Did Boris have any lefty friends while Prime Minister? Based on the friend he married and the friends who gave him freebies and those friends who advised him on getting Paterson and/or Pincher off the hook, Boris's entire social circle is well-heeled Tory poshos.
    Well-heeled Tory poshos are generally left of Corbyn. That's the problem

    And twas ever thus. Wasn't it Wodehouse who observed that his dukes voted Labour and Jeeves was a Tory?
    Tories to the left of Corbyn must be a pretty select group. Johnson is just a standard issue boarding school libertarian with a side order of little Englander prejudices and his social circle would I imagine be in tune with that. If he has any left wing friends he has certainly kept them well hidden. The "rich upper class lefty" trope is well loved by chippy rightists on here but I have never encountered one in the wild.
    That just proves how irredeemably lower middle class you are

    No, seriously, the posh are left wing. It's not a joke. The gags about Guardian journalists' backgrounds are not a spoof

    Marina Hyde has been mentioned on this thread:

    "Hyde is the daughter of Sir Alastair Edgcumbe James Dudley-Williams, 2nd Baronet, and his wife, the former Diana Elizabeth Jane Duncan. Through her father, she is the granddaughter of aviation pioneer and Conservative politician Sir Rolf Dudley-Williams, 1st Baronet. She attended Downe House School, near Newbury in Berkshire,[1] and read English at Christ Church, Oxford.["

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marina_Hyde

    She's not just posh she's absurdly rich, I know this personally
    I'm sure these people exist, but the point is that you can name them because there are so few of them. They probably all work for the Guardian. I've never met any of them. But I've met a never ending line of posh right wingers, because there are so many more of them (maybe you should get a job in finance).
    One thing you need to bear in mind is that you are extremely right wing. So people you think of as lefties (despite them eg working for the Tory party) are not lefties on any reasonable definition of the word. It's the same mindset that sees Corbynites call Labour moderate red Tories etc.
    In what way am I "extreme rightwing"? Genuinely curious
    Dude are you serious?
    How many actual "hard" right posters do we have on here? Plenty of disgruntled conservatives, some sitting this one out, a few voting Labour to send a message, a few reluctantly voting Conservative for fear of worse (Farage, or a massive Labour majority).

    But I'm struggling to think of anyone who's actually declared for Reform. Including Leon.

    With Reform at ~18% in the polls, it's a sign of how detached PB demographics are from reality. Either that, or there are a lot of 'shy reformers' out there.
    I'll fess up. I might vote Reform. It's either Starmer for laughs or Reform to kill the Tories

    But in what universe is Reform "far right"? They aren't even "hard right" by mainland European standards. Indeed they sometimes struggle to be rightwing, so far has the Overton Window shifted

    Their big thing is immigration, Are they going to shoot the boats and drown people (as has been happening off the EU shores)? No. They want to "tow boats back to France". That may be a dream, but it ain't the Shoah. As for overall immigration, they want "net zero" - in a recent interview Farage admitted that might still mean "600,000 immigrants" but they want to keep the incomings and outgoings balanced and the population stable, for a while, as our infrastructure cannot sustain explosive growth (and looking at our rivers, they have a point)

    That's it. That's Britain's "Nazi party" - gently towing boats and trying not to destroy rivers. Wow. Practically Treblinka
    You do know that net zero migration is completely mental, yes? We'd be better off with Truss and PM and Corbyn as Chancellor. You want runaway inflation and the collapse of half the public and private services in the country? That's what Farage is offering.
    To be fair being 'completely mental' is not necessarily the same as being far right. Some of Corbyn's ideas, plenty of the Green ideas and even some of the main party ideas can be considerd 'completely mental' but they would not be considered right wing.

    You are conflating two completely separate, although not always exclusive, arguments.
    No argument from me. There's a problem with identifying racist authoritarians as right wing and identifying hardcore liberals as left wing. My only point here is zero NET migration is completely loopy.
    you might even get a column on "The National" paying £15 per 1000 words
    Lol! ;)

    When I write for the nationals I’m on £1 to £2 a word, which isn’t a massive amount for the effort. You?
    £7
    Are they really paying per word in 2024? I’d have thought it was about click through or other indicators they can show to advertisers or their subscription sales team? I get that a column should pay less than a long form travel piece, probably. But it seems odd to create an incentive for you to write the flabby 2200 words and not the tight 2000.
  • Options
    TweedledeeTweedledee Posts: 486
    Heathener said:

    Heathener said:

    Leon said:

    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    FPT

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Leon said:

    An absolutely terrifying thread about what an actual Labour government will be like


    https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/1803104439697313995

    "In November, long before #zeroseats, even as the media was reporting politics as usual, I wrote a thread on why the Tories were heading for an epochal defeat. Now that this is received wisdom, it's time for a new thread, forecasting how Labour will govern. Be very afraid."


    I pray that this dude is wrong; I fear in my vittals that he is bang on

    A lot of this talk about Labour seeking to stop any future government going in a right wing direction seems like scaremongering to me.

    No Parliament can bind it's successor. The Tories could have thrown out most or all of the 1997-2010 reforms in the past 14 years if they'd wished but the fact is they chose not to.
    But the Equality Act did exactly that, without anyone realising, until very recently

    And he makes that point
    As did the European Communities Act Solution to the Equality act preventing reform is same as European Communities Act & Human Rights preventing reform. Repeal or Heavily Amend it.

    Tories have been torn apart because they thought Brexit was enough. It wasn't Brexit was just the enabling measure that enabled the rest to be done. They were not done and as a result reforms that the public wanted could not be enacted and they regard the Tories as having betrayed them.
    Exactly right

    I blame Boris. He had the majority to do all this, but he was too frit of his posh lefty friends, fam and neighbz

    For this to change, it will take a firmly rightwing leader of a firmly rightwing party that doesn't give a tinker's wank about fashionable opinion

    OMG Georgia!!!
    Sadly, Fair comment.

    I fear Boris had two fatal flaws (possibly 3).

    1) Weakness - so he didn't have the balls to stick with essentially the same policy as Sweden and more unforgivably, didn't end the lockdown nonsense after six weeks when it was obvious that Covid was a disease of the very elderly, very ill with something else and very unlucky (he clearly thought it was nonsense as illustrated by his behaviour).

    2) Needing to be liked (which let his posh lefty friends have a veto).

    3) I suspect (pure spectulation) he got some policy ideas from domestic sources. That would account for his U turn on Eagle Slicers and the like, when the M'Learned former Mrs Boris was swapped for the current incumbent.

    It is the firm bit rather than particularly right wing bit that is needed. Someone willing to do what Thatcher did when losing a judicial review. Pass an act overthrowing the judgement.
    Did Boris have any lefty friends while Prime Minister? Based on the friend he married and the friends who gave him freebies and those friends who advised him on getting Paterson and/or Pincher off the hook, Boris's entire social circle is well-heeled Tory poshos.
    Well-heeled Tory poshos are generally left of Corbyn. That's the problem

    And twas ever thus. Wasn't it Wodehouse who observed that his dukes voted Labour and Jeeves was a Tory?
    Tories to the left of Corbyn must be a pretty select group. Johnson is just a standard issue boarding school libertarian with a side order of little Englander prejudices and his social circle would I imagine be in tune with that. If he has any left wing friends he has certainly kept them well hidden. The "rich upper class lefty" trope is well loved by chippy rightists on here but I have never encountered one in the wild.
    That just proves how irredeemably lower middle class you are

    No, seriously, the posh are left wing. It's not a joke. The gags about Guardian journalists' backgrounds are not a spoof

    Marina Hyde has been mentioned on this thread:

    "Hyde is the daughter of Sir Alastair Edgcumbe James Dudley-Williams, 2nd Baronet, and his wife, the former Diana Elizabeth Jane Duncan. Through her father, she is the granddaughter of aviation pioneer and Conservative politician Sir Rolf Dudley-Williams, 1st Baronet. She attended Downe House School, near Newbury in Berkshire,[1] and read English at Christ Church, Oxford.["

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marina_Hyde

    She's not just posh she's absurdly rich, I know this personally
    I'm sure these people exist, but the point is that you can name them because there are so few of them. They probably all work for the Guardian. I've never met any of them. But I've met a never ending line of posh right wingers, because there are so many more of them (maybe you should get a job in finance).
    One thing you need to bear in mind is that you are extremely right wing. So people you think of as lefties (despite them eg working for the Tory party) are not lefties on any reasonable definition of the word. It's the same mindset that sees Corbynites call Labour moderate red Tories etc.
    In what way am I "extreme rightwing"? Genuinely curious
    Dude are you serious?
    How many actual "hard" right posters do we have on here? Plenty of disgruntled conservatives, some sitting this one out, a few voting Labour to send a message, a few reluctantly voting Conservative for fear of worse (Farage, or a massive Labour majority).

    But I'm struggling to think of anyone who's actually declared for Reform. Including Leon.

    With Reform at ~18% in the polls, it's a sign of how detached PB demographics are from reality. Either that, or there are a lot of 'shy reformers' out there.
    I'll fess up. I might vote Reform. It's either Starmer for laughs or Reform to kill the Tories

    But in what universe is Reform "far right"? They aren't even "hard right" by mainland European standards. Indeed they sometimes struggle to be rightwing, so far has the Overton Window shifted

    Their big thing is immigration, Are they going to shoot the boats and drown people (as has been happening off the EU shores)? No. They want to "tow boats back to France". That may be a dream, but it ain't the Shoah. As for overall immigration, they want "net zero" - in a recent interview Farage admitted that might still mean "600,000 immigrants" but they want to keep the incomings and outgoings balanced and the population stable, for a while, as our infrastructure cannot sustain explosive growth (and looking at our rivers, they have a point)

    That's it. That's Britain's "Nazi party" - gently towing boats and trying not to destroy rivers. Wow. Practically Treblinka
    You do know that net zero migration is completely mental, yes? We'd be better off with Truss and PM and Corbyn as Chancellor. You want runaway inflation and the collapse of half the public and private services in the country? That's what Farage is offering.
    To be fair being 'completely mental' is not necessarily the same as being far right. Some of Corbyn's ideas, plenty of the Green ideas and even some of the main party ideas can be considerd 'completely mental' but they would not be considered right wing.

    You are conflating two completely separate, although not always exclusive, arguments.
    No argument from me. There's a problem with identifying racist authoritarians as right wing and identifying hardcore liberals as left wing. My only point here is zero NET migration is completely loopy.
    you might even get a column on "The National" paying £15 per 1000 words
    Lol! ;)

    When I write for the nationals I’m on £1 to £2 a word, which isn’t a massive amount for the effort. You?
    Before I turn in, I should explain this because peeps might think it’s ridiculous. But I find that for a proper article of say 2000 words, if you want a watertight, well-researched piece that doesn’t invite ridicule, and if you don’t want the newspaper to get its butt sued, it takes about 3 days all told. Clearly not to write the piece itself, which can happen in an hour or two, but to have it copper-bottomed ready for publication.

    I think I’ve been published in every single national newspaper except the Guardian, which is kind-of funny considering.
    There's a distinct all fur coat and no knickers vibe here, surely? Link or it didn't happen.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 28,966
    Offside, no goal.
  • Options
    FarooqFarooq Posts: 12,329

    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    FPT

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Leon said:

    An absolutely terrifying thread about what an actual Labour government will be like


    https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/1803104439697313995

    "In November, long before #zeroseats, even as the media was reporting politics as usual, I wrote a thread on why the Tories were heading for an epochal defeat. Now that this is received wisdom, it's time for a new thread, forecasting how Labour will govern. Be very afraid."


    I pray that this dude is wrong; I fear in my vittals that he is bang on

    A lot of this talk about Labour seeking to stop any future government going in a right wing direction seems like scaremongering to me.

    No Parliament can bind it's successor. The Tories could have thrown out most or all of the 1997-2010 reforms in the past 14 years if they'd wished but the fact is they chose not to.
    But the Equality Act did exactly that, without anyone realising, until very recently

    And he makes that point
    As did the European Communities Act Solution to the Equality act preventing reform is same as European Communities Act & Human Rights preventing reform. Repeal or Heavily Amend it.

    Tories have been torn apart because they thought Brexit was enough. It wasn't Brexit was just the enabling measure that enabled the rest to be done. They were not done and as a result reforms that the public wanted could not be enacted and they regard the Tories as having betrayed them.
    Exactly right

    I blame Boris. He had the majority to do all this, but he was too frit of his posh lefty friends, fam and neighbz

    For this to change, it will take a firmly rightwing leader of a firmly rightwing party that doesn't give a tinker's wank about fashionable opinion

    OMG Georgia!!!
    Sadly, Fair comment.

    I fear Boris had two fatal flaws (possibly 3).

    1) Weakness - so he didn't have the balls to stick with essentially the same policy as Sweden and more unforgivably, didn't end the lockdown nonsense after six weeks when it was obvious that Covid was a disease of the very elderly, very ill with something else and very unlucky (he clearly thought it was nonsense as illustrated by his behaviour).

    2) Needing to be liked (which let his posh lefty friends have a veto).

    3) I suspect (pure spectulation) he got some policy ideas from domestic sources. That would account for his U turn on Eagle Slicers and the like, when the M'Learned former Mrs Boris was swapped for the current incumbent.

    It is the firm bit rather than particularly right wing bit that is needed. Someone willing to do what Thatcher did when losing a judicial review. Pass an act overthrowing the judgement.
    Did Boris have any lefty friends while Prime Minister? Based on the friend he married and the friends who gave him freebies and those friends who advised him on getting Paterson and/or Pincher off the hook, Boris's entire social circle is well-heeled Tory poshos.
    Well-heeled Tory poshos are generally left of Corbyn. That's the problem

    And twas ever thus. Wasn't it Wodehouse who observed that his dukes voted Labour and Jeeves was a Tory?
    Tories to the left of Corbyn must be a pretty select group. Johnson is just a standard issue boarding school libertarian with a side order of little Englander prejudices and his social circle would I imagine be in tune with that. If he has any left wing friends he has certainly kept them well hidden. The "rich upper class lefty" trope is well loved by chippy rightists on here but I have never encountered one in the wild.
    That just proves how irredeemably lower middle class you are

    No, seriously, the posh are left wing. It's not a joke. The gags about Guardian journalists' backgrounds are not a spoof

    Marina Hyde has been mentioned on this thread:

    "Hyde is the daughter of Sir Alastair Edgcumbe James Dudley-Williams, 2nd Baronet, and his wife, the former Diana Elizabeth Jane Duncan. Through her father, she is the granddaughter of aviation pioneer and Conservative politician Sir Rolf Dudley-Williams, 1st Baronet. She attended Downe House School, near Newbury in Berkshire,[1] and read English at Christ Church, Oxford.["

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marina_Hyde

    She's not just posh she's absurdly rich, I know this personally
    I'm sure these people exist, but the point is that you can name them because there are so few of them. They probably all work for the Guardian. I've never met any of them. But I've met a never ending line of posh right wingers, because there are so many more of them (maybe you should get a job in finance).
    One thing you need to bear in mind is that you are extremely right wing. So people you think of as lefties (despite them eg working for the Tory party) are not lefties on any reasonable definition of the word. It's the same mindset that sees Corbynites call Labour moderate red Tories etc.
    In what way am I "extreme rightwing"? Genuinely curious
    Dude are you serious?
    How many actual "hard" right posters do we have on here? Plenty of disgruntled conservatives, some sitting this one out, a few voting Labour to send a message, a few reluctantly voting Conservative for fear of worse (Farage, or a massive Labour majority).

    But I'm struggling to think of anyone who's actually declared for Reform. Including Leon.

    With Reform at ~18% in the polls, it's a sign of how detached PB demographics are from reality. Either that, or there are a lot of 'shy reformers' out there.
    I'll fess up. I might vote Reform. It's either Starmer for laughs or Reform to kill the Tories

    But in what universe is Reform "far right"? They aren't even "hard right" by mainland European standards. Indeed they sometimes struggle to be rightwing, so far has the Overton Window shifted

    Their big thing is immigration, Are they going to shoot the boats and drown people (as has been happening off the EU shores)? No. They want to "tow boats back to France". That may be a dream, but it ain't the Shoah. As for overall immigration, they want "net zero" - in a recent interview Farage admitted that might still mean "600,000 immigrants" but they want to keep the incomings and outgoings balanced and the population stable, for a while, as our infrastructure cannot sustain explosive growth (and looking at our rivers, they have a point)

    That's it. That's Britain's "Nazi party" - gently towing boats and trying not to destroy rivers. Wow. Practically Treblinka
    You do know that net zero migration is completely mental, yes? We'd be better off with Truss and PM and Corbyn as Chancellor. You want runaway inflation and the collapse of half the public and private services in the country? That's what Farage is offering.
    To be fair being 'completely mental' is not necessarily the same as being far right. Some of Corbyn's ideas, plenty of the Green ideas and even some of the main party ideas can be considerd 'completely mental' but they would not be considered right wing.

    You are conflating two completely separate, although not always exclusive, arguments.
    No argument from me. There's a problem with identifying racist authoritarians as right wing and identifying hardcore liberals as left wing. My only point here is zero NET migration is completely loopy.
    Why is it loopy? Do you want perpetual population growth driven by immigration?
    I believe in free markets: low barriers to moving commodities, goods, and freedom for people to do business and work where the work is needed. If Britain's businesses are doing well and they need to hire people from abroad, they should be free to do so.

    Saying "one in one out" is a fuck-business policy undreamed of by even Boris. It'll fuck the whole economy up.

    Free movement of labour also has the benefit that people can leave easily when there are better opportunities elsewhere. What do you prefer, high unemployment in the bad times?
  • Options
    OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,446
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    FPT

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Leon said:

    An absolutely terrifying thread about what an actual Labour government will be like


    https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/1803104439697313995

    "In November, long before #zeroseats, even as the media was reporting politics as usual, I wrote a thread on why the Tories were heading for an epochal defeat. Now that this is received wisdom, it's time for a new thread, forecasting how Labour will govern. Be very afraid."


    I pray that this dude is wrong; I fear in my vittals that he is bang on

    A lot of this talk about Labour seeking to stop any future government going in a right wing direction seems like scaremongering to me.

    No Parliament can bind it's successor. The Tories could have thrown out most or all of the 1997-2010 reforms in the past 14 years if they'd wished but the fact is they chose not to.
    But the Equality Act did exactly that, without anyone realising, until very recently

    And he makes that point
    As did the European Communities Act Solution to the Equality act preventing reform is same as European Communities Act & Human Rights preventing reform. Repeal or Heavily Amend it.

    Tories have been torn apart because they thought Brexit was enough. It wasn't Brexit was just the enabling measure that enabled the rest to be done. They were not done and as a result reforms that the public wanted could not be enacted and they regard the Tories as having betrayed them.
    Exactly right

    I blame Boris. He had the majority to do all this, but he was too frit of his posh lefty friends, fam and neighbz

    For this to change, it will take a firmly rightwing leader of a firmly rightwing party that doesn't give a tinker's wank about fashionable opinion

    OMG Georgia!!!
    Sadly, Fair comment.

    I fear Boris had two fatal flaws (possibly 3).

    1) Weakness - so he didn't have the balls to stick with essentially the same policy as Sweden and more unforgivably, didn't end the lockdown nonsense after six weeks when it was obvious that Covid was a disease of the very elderly, very ill with something else and very unlucky (he clearly thought it was nonsense as illustrated by his behaviour).

    2) Needing to be liked (which let his posh lefty friends have a veto).

    3) I suspect (pure spectulation) he got some policy ideas from domestic sources. That would account for his U turn on Eagle Slicers and the like, when the M'Learned former Mrs Boris was swapped for the current incumbent.

    It is the firm bit rather than particularly right wing bit that is needed. Someone willing to do what Thatcher did when losing a judicial review. Pass an act overthrowing the judgement.
    Did Boris have any lefty friends while Prime Minister? Based on the friend he married and the friends who gave him freebies and those friends who advised him on getting Paterson and/or Pincher off the hook, Boris's entire social circle is well-heeled Tory poshos.
    Well-heeled Tory poshos are generally left of Corbyn. That's the problem

    And twas ever thus. Wasn't it Wodehouse who observed that his dukes voted Labour and Jeeves was a Tory?
    Tories to the left of Corbyn must be a pretty select group. Johnson is just a standard issue boarding school libertarian with a side order of little Englander prejudices and his social circle would I imagine be in tune with that. If he has any left wing friends he has certainly kept them well hidden. The "rich upper class lefty" trope is well loved by chippy rightists on here but I have never encountered one in the wild.
    That just proves how irredeemably lower middle class you are

    No, seriously, the posh are left wing. It's not a joke. The gags about Guardian journalists' backgrounds are not a spoof

    Marina Hyde has been mentioned on this thread:

    "Hyde is the daughter of Sir Alastair Edgcumbe James Dudley-Williams, 2nd Baronet, and his wife, the former Diana Elizabeth Jane Duncan. Through her father, she is the granddaughter of aviation pioneer and Conservative politician Sir Rolf Dudley-Williams, 1st Baronet. She attended Downe House School, near Newbury in Berkshire,[1] and read English at Christ Church, Oxford.["

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marina_Hyde

    She's not just posh she's absurdly rich, I know this personally
    I'm sure these people exist, but the point is that you can name them because there are so few of them. They probably all work for the Guardian. I've never met any of them. But I've met a never ending line of posh right wingers, because there are so many more of them (maybe you should get a job in finance).
    One thing you need to bear in mind is that you are extremely right wing. So people you think of as lefties (despite them eg working for the Tory party) are not lefties on any reasonable definition of the word. It's the same mindset that sees Corbynites call Labour moderate red Tories etc.
    In what way am I "extreme rightwing"? Genuinely curious
    Dude are you serious?
    Yes, serious and curious. That's quite a label to put on me. "Extreme rightwing". It means I am the same as Hitler

    You need to justify it. I am unaware that I have advocated gassing Jews, but maybe I have?
    I'm somewhat lothe to indulge your narcissism but I guess I owe you a response. I said you were extremely right wing, not that you were "extreme rightwing". That's just the impression I get from your posts, eg on "Muslim rape gangs", admiration for Putinist positions on gender and love of post fascist politicians like Giorgia Meloni, espousal of zero immigration, your war on woke, the fact you see a Thatcherite Brexiteer like Rishi Sunak as a wet, that you think people who work for the Tory party are lefties, your dislike of paying tax... I could go in but I won't as I don't find you quite as interesting as you do.
    Why don't you do one of those political compass tests and see what it says? I am fairly sure it won't identify you as a libertarian socialist as it did for me. None of this is a value judgement BTW, you are welcome to your views, I simply struggle to see how you can be so unaware of where your opinions place you on the political scale.
    In this slew of desperate gibberish one gem stands out: you accuse me of "disliking paying tax" as proof that I am a Nazi

    I dunno, but I've got a weird feeling that makes Britain 98.94% Nazi
    Leon you are arguing with yourself, as always, because at no point did I say you were a nazi.
    What is it they say about wrestling with a pig?
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 59,550
    Leon said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @TelePolitics

    🔵 Tom Tugendhat, the security minister, is set to run for the Conservative leadership if a contest is triggered next month by election defeat, The Telegraph understands

    Their 32 MPs are gonna end up led by Tug-end-hat

    And that will be their last meaningful leader ever. He will agree with everything Labour does and just pretend that the rump Tories will tax slightly less. This meaningless politics cannot continue. The Tories either become populist rightwing or they die
    How does he know he will still be in parliament?
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 78,346
    VAR....strikes again.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 49,952
    Heathener said:

    The other thing to state about writing ref. earlier discussions is that you need never retire. If your brain/body stays fit you can write until you drop. It’s good for keeping the mind active and if you love it, keep at it.

    If you are paid £1 or £2 a word you are one of the better paid jpurnalists on Fleet Street, and therefore one of the more noticeable. It's weird I cannot recognise your style. Do you specialise in a certain field?
  • Options
    HeathenerHeathener Posts: 6,781
    p.s. re Tugendhat, if the tories do go to a 1997 or worse, remember what happened after that one. The young new darling of the party, William Hague, took on the leadership at the wrong time and when the inevitable happened in 2001, he went.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 78,346
    Nunu5 said:

    Clacton:
    https://x.com/kateferguson4/status/1803136837222855144

    Something big is happening. Nigel will be an MP after July 5th.

    Not going to be winning any DEI awards.
  • Options
    CookieCookie Posts: 12,114
    Leon said:

    Cookie said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    biggles said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Omnium said:

    rcs1000 said:

    On topic, but also a little bit of a rant.

    The Conservative Party has, for so long, been a successful political party because it has been able to tie together disparate groups, who don't all share exactly the same ideology.

    And it's done this by being pragmatic and remembering that there are going to be people who believe homosexuality is a sin, and there are going to be people are publicly gay, but they might share common views about - say - the size of the state.

    I'm reminded of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, who was caught on tape saying that the US was in a (culture) war, and there would only be one winner.

    No, Justice Alito, there is no winner. You cannot silence the voices of the 50% of people who disagree with you without actual war. And that actual war (see the Thirty Years War for an example) will end with everyone grudgingly agreeing that actually they can't agree and they can't force other people to agree with them.

    The Conservative Party cannot just be the party of people left behind by globalisation. Nor can it just be the party of pensioners. Nor can it just be the party of wealthy plutocrats. It needs to be a big tent. If you choose to silence - or make unwelcome - the voices that disagree with you, then you are consigning yourself to electoral oblivion.

    This is why "we didn't win because we weren't centrist enough" and "we didn't win because we weren't right wing enough" are both bullshit arguments. You didn't win because you were unable to make the tent big enough.

    Where was the voting market behind monetarism when MT made that her guiding theme? There wasn't one. She decided that that was the right thing for Britain, and set about winning the arguments. That's how you get positive change. Crafting your platform out of a mishmash of what voters have found acceptable up until now is not a plan to get into (or stay in) government; it's a way to go around in circles achieving very little.

    And I also don't think the issue is that Tories 'haven't been right wing enough', it's that they have sold themselves as the right wing alternative, benefitted from doing so, and changed their minds completely when it comes to actually doing anything right wing. That's a question of trust, rather than a question of politics. Those who feel that they haven't been centrist enough should vote for parties that espouse social democracy, of which there are two in the political mainstream. Why do they need a third? It smacks of reducing the alternatives available to voters because they aren't actually that confident in the attractiveness of their centrist prospectus.
    Every time the Tories get into power they're lured into nanny-statism. Thatcher had enough about her to push against that for several years. Imperfect though such direction might prove I think it is beneficial. Reducing the size of the state should be top of the list for any government.
    OK.

    The number of people of pensionable age is rising every year: we have promised them (repeatedly) that there is no circumstance where their pensions will grow less than 2% or wages or inflation. In addition, the proportion of people who are pensioners will grow every year. And a pensioner costs approximately 15x as much in social and health care as someone in their 20s.

    So: interest payments, healthcare and pension cost increases are nailed on. And they are half the budget.

    We need to spend more on defence.
    Policing and the administration of justice have been cut to the bone.

    I want to cut the size of the state too. But we all need to be realistic about the challenges facing us with a greying population.
    Plus everyone wants more transport projects and everyone wants increasingly improving schools. Add on people always having a pet regulation….
    The problem is that most expect the state can do more than it can do. It could only do what it did in the first place due to the revenue of empire and tbe legacy assets and soft power in the post empire world which have slowly inevitably decayed

    Also, as life becomes more complex the state can do less. EM Forsters "The Machine Stops" was a boring book foisted on us at school but a very prohetic one.

    The choice is collapse with authoritarianism on the way or a wholesale deregulation, a very limited state based on a principle of Caveat Emptor and an acceptance that people will make bad or inept decisions and suffer as a result and it is not the states job to prevent or mitigate this, other than to set some core, simple to understand rules (which is basically what Common Law is).

    I think the die was cast though when Cameron beat Davis in 2005, or perhaps even when Wilson won in 1964.
    What bollocks. Countries like Denmark and Finland didn’t have an empire, but work fine today through the simple measure of people being OK to pay a bit more tax.
    Nothing to do with Denmark having a far lower population (and population density) and fertile land enabling them to produce three times as much food as they need for self sufficiency and export the difference.

    Similar arguments apply with Finland.

    UK. Not so much.
    This is laughable.

    Much of Finland is uninhabitable tundra. It suggests that the UK's problems would be solved by merger with Greenland. Or, indeed, made much worse by Scottish independence.

    And if population size is all, we can constantly get richer by cutting the country in half.
    None of Finland is uninhabitable tundra - it's nothing like Greenland in the slightest. Agriculture extends right up into the north of the country
    Hmm: when I visited Nokia's research division in Oolu in winter, it seemed pretty uninhabitable outside the city.

    And by agriculture, I assume you mostly mean "trees".

    Finland, like most countries, has the vast bulk of its population in a very small percentage of its landmass. This is true of Canada, Australia, the US, Finland, Norway, Sweden, Russia, Japan, etc.

    It's why using raw population density as a measure of how crowded a country is mostly demonstrates the density of the person making the argument.
    It's not often I'll contradict you, but Northern Finland is not uninhabitable. You visited in winter, and little agriculture is possible in winter - but it's possible to grow a surplus in the summer. That's how the cities are there in the first place: they were enabled by a surplus. That's why the agricultural Finns displaced the nomadic herdsmen Lapps right into the Arctic Circle.
    I was quite struck when I visited Lapland in the winter how many farmhouses there were. Yew, farming seems hopeless in winter - but summer is very different.
    Here's the map

    https://www.vectormaps.co.uk/vectormaps/finland-agricultural-map/

    Some pastoral land quite far north - but that's livestock, Cows, sheep, reindeer. Of course there might be the odd kitchen garden but it's trivial

    Agriculture as we know it: fields of wheat or corn, even turnips or kale, are limited to the far south. Coz Finland is col and northerly
    I found this map too, after I thought I'd look for a source after I confidently waded into the debate after the pb world geography tour had surprisingly got onto somewhere I had actually been. But there are others, too.

    But can I point you towards this source:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agriculture_in_Finland#Geography
    "The majority of farms and agricultural land in Finland lie between the 60th and 65th parallel, making it the only country in the world with a significant agricultural sector so far in the north. The percentage of farms concentrating on animal production increases towards the north and east"

    So yes, the further north you get the more pastoral. But that is a question of specialisation - if you are growing cereals, the best place to do it is in the south, which leaves pastoral land in the north. But you can grow crops in the north if you want to - it's just a less efficient use of land.

    I stick to my original points:
    - Agriculture extends surprisingly far north in Finland, even into the Arctic Circle
    - There's relatively little utterly uninhabitable land in Finland (much more in Sweden). You can grow stuff a surprisingly long way north, if you're content to write off half the year.
    - The possibility of argriculture is why the Finns edged out the Lapps.
    - I've been to Arctic Finland, and there were farms. In a way I don't believe there are in Arctic Norway or Arctic Sweden or Arctic Canada. Or even Arctic Russia. Finland is weirdly benign for its latitude.


    I LOVE that this debate is what is engaging pb tonight. Amongst other things.

  • Options
    bigglesbiggles Posts: 5,400
    Leon said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @TelePolitics

    🔵 Tom Tugendhat, the security minister, is set to run for the Conservative leadership if a contest is triggered next month by election defeat, The Telegraph understands

    Their 32 MPs are gonna end up led by Tug-end-hat

    And that will be their last meaningful leader ever. He will agree with everything Labour does and just pretend that the rump Tories will tax slightly less. This meaningless politics cannot continue. The Tories either become populist rightwing or they die
    But they’ll be awfully nice chaps and get a pat on the head every now and again from people who would never vote for them for “keeping out Reform”.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 78,346
    Andy_JS said:

    Putting aside Chomsky politics, his academic work is really interesting. But with LLMs, there is real debate in academic circles if actually it was all wrong.

    IIRC he unexpectedly came out against some elements of Woke-ism recently, which annoyed a lot of his younger followers.
    I long switched off from his ramblings about politics.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 93,792
    Nunu5 said:

    Clacton:
    https://x.com/kateferguson4/status/1803136837222855144

    Something big is happening. Nigel will be an MP after July 5th.

    Cue sea of old people jokes.

    But in all seriousness people finally seem ready to put Farage into the Commons. He's been an important political figure for a long time, it will be interesting to see how he adapts to the role, or if he still spends his time licking boots in the United States.

    He could be Tory Deputy Leader by Christmas.
  • Options
    EPGEPG Posts: 6,427

    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    FPT

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Leon said:

    An absolutely terrifying thread about what an actual Labour government will be like


    https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/1803104439697313995

    "In November, long before #zeroseats, even as the media was reporting politics as usual, I wrote a thread on why the Tories were heading for an epochal defeat. Now that this is received wisdom, it's time for a new thread, forecasting how Labour will govern. Be very afraid."


    I pray that this dude is wrong; I fear in my vittals that he is bang on

    A lot of this talk about Labour seeking to stop any future government going in a right wing direction seems like scaremongering to me.

    No Parliament can bind it's successor. The Tories could have thrown out most or all of the 1997-2010 reforms in the past 14 years if they'd wished but the fact is they chose not to.
    But the Equality Act did exactly that, without anyone realising, until very recently

    And he makes that point
    As did the European Communities Act Solution to the Equality act preventing reform is same as European Communities Act & Human Rights preventing reform. Repeal or Heavily Amend it.

    Tories have been torn apart because they thought Brexit was enough. It wasn't Brexit was just the enabling measure that enabled the rest to be done. They were not done and as a result reforms that the public wanted could not be enacted and they regard the Tories as having betrayed them.
    Exactly right

    I blame Boris. He had the majority to do all this, but he was too frit of his posh lefty friends, fam and neighbz

    For this to change, it will take a firmly rightwing leader of a firmly rightwing party that doesn't give a tinker's wank about fashionable opinion

    OMG Georgia!!!
    Sadly, Fair comment.

    I fear Boris had two fatal flaws (possibly 3).

    1) Weakness - so he didn't have the balls to stick with essentially the same policy as Sweden and more unforgivably, didn't end the lockdown nonsense after six weeks when it was obvious that Covid was a disease of the very elderly, very ill with something else and very unlucky (he clearly thought it was nonsense as illustrated by his behaviour).

    2) Needing to be liked (which let his posh lefty friends have a veto).

    3) I suspect (pure spectulation) he got some policy ideas from domestic sources. That would account for his U turn on Eagle Slicers and the like, when the M'Learned former Mrs Boris was swapped for the current incumbent.

    It is the firm bit rather than particularly right wing bit that is needed. Someone willing to do what Thatcher did when losing a judicial review. Pass an act overthrowing the judgement.
    Did Boris have any lefty friends while Prime Minister? Based on the friend he married and the friends who gave him freebies and those friends who advised him on getting Paterson and/or Pincher off the hook, Boris's entire social circle is well-heeled Tory poshos.
    Well-heeled Tory poshos are generally left of Corbyn. That's the problem

    And twas ever thus. Wasn't it Wodehouse who observed that his dukes voted Labour and Jeeves was a Tory?
    Tories to the left of Corbyn must be a pretty select group. Johnson is just a standard issue boarding school libertarian with a side order of little Englander prejudices and his social circle would I imagine be in tune with that. If he has any left wing friends he has certainly kept them well hidden. The "rich upper class lefty" trope is well loved by chippy rightists on here but I have never encountered one in the wild.
    That just proves how irredeemably lower middle class you are

    No, seriously, the posh are left wing. It's not a joke. The gags about Guardian journalists' backgrounds are not a spoof

    Marina Hyde has been mentioned on this thread:

    "Hyde is the daughter of Sir Alastair Edgcumbe James Dudley-Williams, 2nd Baronet, and his wife, the former Diana Elizabeth Jane Duncan. Through her father, she is the granddaughter of aviation pioneer and Conservative politician Sir Rolf Dudley-Williams, 1st Baronet. She attended Downe House School, near Newbury in Berkshire,[1] and read English at Christ Church, Oxford.["

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marina_Hyde

    She's not just posh she's absurdly rich, I know this personally
    I'm sure these people exist, but the point is that you can name them because there are so few of them. They probably all work for the Guardian. I've never met any of them. But I've met a never ending line of posh right wingers, because there are so many more of them (maybe you should get a job in finance).
    One thing you need to bear in mind is that you are extremely right wing. So people you think of as lefties (despite them eg working for the Tory party) are not lefties on any reasonable definition of the word. It's the same mindset that sees Corbynites call Labour moderate red Tories etc.
    In what way am I "extreme rightwing"? Genuinely curious
    Dude are you serious?
    How many actual "hard" right posters do we have on here? Plenty of disgruntled conservatives, some sitting this one out, a few voting Labour to send a message, a few reluctantly voting Conservative for fear of worse (Farage, or a massive Labour majority).

    But I'm struggling to think of anyone who's actually declared for Reform. Including Leon.

    With Reform at ~18% in the polls, it's a sign of how detached PB demographics are from reality. Either that, or there are a lot of 'shy reformers' out there.
    I'll fess up. I might vote Reform. It's either Starmer for laughs or Reform to kill the Tories

    But in what universe is Reform "far right"? They aren't even "hard right" by mainland European standards. Indeed they sometimes struggle to be rightwing, so far has the Overton Window shifted

    Their big thing is immigration, Are they going to shoot the boats and drown people (as has been happening off the EU shores)? No. They want to "tow boats back to France". That may be a dream, but it ain't the Shoah. As for overall immigration, they want "net zero" - in a recent interview Farage admitted that might still mean "600,000 immigrants" but they want to keep the incomings and outgoings balanced and the population stable, for a while, as our infrastructure cannot sustain explosive growth (and looking at our rivers, they have a point)

    That's it. That's Britain's "Nazi party" - gently towing boats and trying not to destroy rivers. Wow. Practically Treblinka
    You do know that net zero migration is completely mental, yes? We'd be better off with Truss and PM and Corbyn as Chancellor. You want runaway inflation and the collapse of half the public and private services in the country? That's what Farage is offering.
    To be fair being 'completely mental' is not necessarily the same as being far right. Some of Corbyn's ideas, plenty of the Green ideas and even some of the main party ideas can be considerd 'completely mental' but they would not be considered right wing.

    You are conflating two completely separate, although not always exclusive, arguments.
    No argument from me. There's a problem with identifying racist authoritarians as right wing and identifying hardcore liberals as left wing. My only point here is zero NET migration is completely loopy.
    So what is YOUR target for net migration, or do you have no target at all? Do you let everyone in? Let no one in? What is it? Come on, try and answer, if you come up with something coherent and articulate and sensible you might even get a column on "The National" paying £15 per 1000 words
    Rejoin EU, freedom of movement.

    5 words, that'll be 7.5 pence, please.
    But only for nice white Europeans?
    You're better than that quip. EU freedom of movement isn't conditional on race.
  • Options
    HeathenerHeathener Posts: 6,781
    Danny Murphy is hopeless isn’t he?
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 78,346
    The delay to showing the Hawkeye offside animation is far too long.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 78,346
    edited June 18
    Heathener said:

    Danny Murphy is hopeless isn’t he?

    Both BBC and ITV need a big clear out. A feel like I lose IQ points anytime I listen to their analysis.
  • Options
    HeathenerHeathener Posts: 6,781

    Heathener said:

    Heathener said:

    Leon said:

    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    FPT

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Leon said:

    An absolutely terrifying thread about what an actual Labour government will be like


    https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/1803104439697313995

    "In November, long before #zeroseats, even as the media was reporting politics as usual, I wrote a thread on why the Tories were heading for an epochal defeat. Now that this is received wisdom, it's time for a new thread, forecasting how Labour will govern. Be very afraid."


    I pray that this dude is wrong; I fear in my vittals that he is bang on

    A lot of this talk about Labour seeking to stop any future government going in a right wing direction seems like scaremongering to me.

    No Parliament can bind it's successor. The Tories could have thrown out most or all of the 1997-2010 reforms in the past 14 years if they'd wished but the fact is they chose not to.
    But the Equality Act did exactly that, without anyone realising, until very recently

    And he makes that point
    As did the European Communities Act Solution to the Equality act preventing reform is same as European Communities Act & Human Rights preventing reform. Repeal or Heavily Amend it.

    Tories have been torn apart because they thought Brexit was enough. It wasn't Brexit was just the enabling measure that enabled the rest to be done. They were not done and as a result reforms that the public wanted could not be enacted and they regard the Tories as having betrayed them.
    Exactly right

    I blame Boris. He had the majority to do all this, but he was too frit of his posh lefty friends, fam and neighbz

    For this to change, it will take a firmly rightwing leader of a firmly rightwing party that doesn't give a tinker's wank about fashionable opinion

    OMG Georgia!!!
    Sadly, Fair comment.

    I fear Boris had two fatal flaws (possibly 3).

    1) Weakness - so he didn't have the balls to stick with essentially the same policy as Sweden and more unforgivably, didn't end the lockdown nonsense after six weeks when it was obvious that Covid was a disease of the very elderly, very ill with something else and very unlucky (he clearly thought it was nonsense as illustrated by his behaviour).

    2) Needing to be liked (which let his posh lefty friends have a veto).

    3) I suspect (pure spectulation) he got some policy ideas from domestic sources. That would account for his U turn on Eagle Slicers and the like, when the M'Learned former Mrs Boris was swapped for the current incumbent.

    It is the firm bit rather than particularly right wing bit that is needed. Someone willing to do what Thatcher did when losing a judicial review. Pass an act overthrowing the judgement.
    Did Boris have any lefty friends while Prime Minister? Based on the friend he married and the friends who gave him freebies and those friends who advised him on getting Paterson and/or Pincher off the hook, Boris's entire social circle is well-heeled Tory poshos.
    Well-heeled Tory poshos are generally left of Corbyn. That's the problem

    And twas ever thus. Wasn't it Wodehouse who observed that his dukes voted Labour and Jeeves was a Tory?
    Tories to the left of Corbyn must be a pretty select group. Johnson is just a standard issue boarding school libertarian with a side order of little Englander prejudices and his social circle would I imagine be in tune with that. If he has any left wing friends he has certainly kept them well hidden. The "rich upper class lefty" trope is well loved by chippy rightists on here but I have never encountered one in the wild.
    That just proves how irredeemably lower middle class you are

    No, seriously, the posh are left wing. It's not a joke. The gags about Guardian journalists' backgrounds are not a spoof

    Marina Hyde has been mentioned on this thread:

    "Hyde is the daughter of Sir Alastair Edgcumbe James Dudley-Williams, 2nd Baronet, and his wife, the former Diana Elizabeth Jane Duncan. Through her father, she is the granddaughter of aviation pioneer and Conservative politician Sir Rolf Dudley-Williams, 1st Baronet. She attended Downe House School, near Newbury in Berkshire,[1] and read English at Christ Church, Oxford.["

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marina_Hyde

    She's not just posh she's absurdly rich, I know this personally
    I'm sure these people exist, but the point is that you can name them because there are so few of them. They probably all work for the Guardian. I've never met any of them. But I've met a never ending line of posh right wingers, because there are so many more of them (maybe you should get a job in finance).
    One thing you need to bear in mind is that you are extremely right wing. So people you think of as lefties (despite them eg working for the Tory party) are not lefties on any reasonable definition of the word. It's the same mindset that sees Corbynites call Labour moderate red Tories etc.
    In what way am I "extreme rightwing"? Genuinely curious
    Dude are you serious?
    How many actual "hard" right posters do we have on here? Plenty of disgruntled conservatives, some sitting this one out, a few voting Labour to send a message, a few reluctantly voting Conservative for fear of worse (Farage, or a massive Labour majority).

    But I'm struggling to think of anyone who's actually declared for Reform. Including Leon.

    With Reform at ~18% in the polls, it's a sign of how detached PB demographics are from reality. Either that, or there are a lot of 'shy reformers' out there.
    I'll fess up. I might vote Reform. It's either Starmer for laughs or Reform to kill the Tories

    But in what universe is Reform "far right"? They aren't even "hard right" by mainland European standards. Indeed they sometimes struggle to be rightwing, so far has the Overton Window shifted

    Their big thing is immigration, Are they going to shoot the boats and drown people (as has been happening off the EU shores)? No. They want to "tow boats back to France". That may be a dream, but it ain't the Shoah. As for overall immigration, they want "net zero" - in a recent interview Farage admitted that might still mean "600,000 immigrants" but they want to keep the incomings and outgoings balanced and the population stable, for a while, as our infrastructure cannot sustain explosive growth (and looking at our rivers, they have a point)

    That's it. That's Britain's "Nazi party" - gently towing boats and trying not to destroy rivers. Wow. Practically Treblinka
    You do know that net zero migration is completely mental, yes? We'd be better off with Truss and PM and Corbyn as Chancellor. You want runaway inflation and the collapse of half the public and private services in the country? That's what Farage is offering.
    To be fair being 'completely mental' is not necessarily the same as being far right. Some of Corbyn's ideas, plenty of the Green ideas and even some of the main party ideas can be considerd 'completely mental' but they would not be considered right wing.

    You are conflating two completely separate, although not always exclusive, arguments.
    No argument from me. There's a problem with identifying racist authoritarians as right wing and identifying hardcore liberals as left wing. My only point here is zero NET migration is completely loopy.
    you might even get a column on "The National" paying £15 per 1000 words
    Lol! ;)

    When I write for the nationals I’m on £1 to £2 a word, which isn’t a massive amount for the effort. You?
    Before I turn in, I should explain this because peeps might think it’s ridiculous. But I find that for a proper article of say 2000 words, if you want a watertight, well-researched piece that doesn’t invite ridicule, and if you don’t want the newspaper to get its butt sued, it takes about 3 days all told. Clearly not to write the piece itself, which can happen in an hour or two, but to have it copper-bottomed ready for publication.

    I think I’ve been published in every single national newspaper except the Guardian, which is kind-of funny considering.
    There's a distinct all fur coat and no knickers vibe here, surely? Link or it didn't happen.
    Nope

    Prefer keeping my anonymity thanks and no intention of breaking cover.

    Others prefer showing their leg on here. Not me. And don’t attempt to doxx me. Ta.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 28,966
    2-1 again. Did anyone bet on Portugal when they were 1-0 down?
  • Options
    Oh, fgs Portugal.
  • Options
    FarooqFarooq Posts: 12,329

    Heathener said:

    Danny Murphy is hopeless isn’t he?

    Both BBC and ITV need a big clear out. A feel like I lose IQ points anytime I listen to their analysis.
    You need to keep your IQ points safe. If you slip below 107 you'll be off Leon's list and down in with the rest of us morons idiots.
Sign In or Register to comment.