"As I understand it, what appears to have happened is this Labour candidate in this seat, which has a large Conservative majority, actually bet that he himself would lose the seat."
I cannot understand on what possible basis this justifies a Gambling Commission investigation.
I don't actually think the election date bets were in breach of the Gambling Act, but there is absolutely no chance this is. He's either knocked on some doors and reckons he'll lose or it's an insurance bet ("well, I've lost, but at least I can buy myself and the missus a restaurant meal").
The Gambling Commission have taken leave of their senses. This is absolutely no different from a horse racing fan coming to a judgment based on form and looking at the horse in the paddock.
Absolutely. The conservative cases were on inside information. This is a nothing burger.
It sort of depends. When did he put the bet on. Lets say he put a big bet on to lose a couple of days ago, could that be due to insider info about the state of the campaign in that seat e.g. private polling, returns from door knocking, etc.
If he put it on at the start of the campaign, I reckon its more hedging for the time / effort of campaigning for 6 weeks, and you can get some money out of it if you lose.
In ordinary common sense the line is pretty clear. If you have proper, advance, confidential inside information about event X happening on day Y and you place a bet on it, that's obviously a crime just like insider trading is. Some of the election date bets look a bit that way.
If you have information, lawfully obtained, because of your research, hard work or the nature of your job which gives you an informational edge over a matter which is still a contingency, you are doing what all gamblers would like to do. It could not possibly be a crime. In the realm of election politics it is plainly inappropriate - but that's different.
I hope our own Rochdale isn't going to be in trouble for betting on himself.
It is betting against yourself that seems ... dodgy.
Practically every other candidate in that seat has been disowned by their party or stirred up a scandal, so he may want to fit in.
We're all assuming Labour will win big. Wouldn't it be more fun to think about individual seat bets. What are the odds on Truss/Braverman and others holding on?
It’s completely unfair that France gets all this natural beauty (and better weather, and slimmer women) while we have Newent, Wick and @kinabalu’s golf club
I’m therefore trying to cheer myself out of my jealousy by working out what is the most boring, least interesting department of France. The obvious choice would be somewhere in Picardy but I think I’ve found a prime candidate
Creuse. It seems to be the ultimate nowhere land smack bang in the middle of the country. It has a tiny population with only lozere smaller (in departments) but Lozere is quite spectacular -moors, mountains, megaliths and ravines
Creuse has… farms. And a town that used to make tapestries. That seems to be it
Is it that bad? Has anyone been? How boring is creuse?
If we're comparing like with like then you'll need to see what if offers vis a vis Bedfordshire.
Hah. I did for a moment wonder about the “most boring county in Britain” and yes Bedfordshire floated into my head
Yes, Bedfordshire is boringest county (traditional boundaries) by some way. The competition is for number 2. Staffordshire or Cheshire perhaps. But even Bedfordshire has a lifetime of interest in it. Marston Moretaine; Elstow; Shillington; Luton Central Mosque interior; Luton bus station at night; Luton Airport departure lounge.
No, not having Cheshire as boring, either on traditional or modern boundaries. Cheshire has some National Park, for as start. Cheshire has Joddrell Bank, one of the seven wonders of the North West* Cheshire has the rows and walls of Chester, the Peckforton Hills, the Anderton Boat Lift, Stockport Bus Station, Port Sunlight, the Dee Estuary, Helsby Hill, Little Moreton Hall, Gawsworth Hall, Alderley Edge. Cheshire has the books of Alan Garner. Cheshire has the Macc Lads. Cheshire has a panhandle. Cheshire has Lyme Park. Cheshire is, what, the seventh highest county in the country (or thereabouts). Boring this place is not.
Cheshire is less instantly exciting than most of the other northern counties, but beats most of the Midlands and South East. Imagine one of those calendars you get in moderately upmarket garden centres. Cheshire's calendars will beat at least 50% of other counties into a cocked hat.
I would say most boring county probably Huntingdonshire. Highest point in Huntingdonshire? Boring Field. QED, my friends, QED. Other clearly more boring counties than Cheshire include Bedfordshire, Hertfordshire, Northamptonshire, Leicestershire, Nottinghamshire, Lincolnshire, Rutland, Berkshire and Buckinghamshire.
And you can actually get odds on the Tories holding Huntingdon, when within most PB’ers living memory it was the Tories safest seat.
It’s completely unfair that France gets all this natural beauty (and better weather, and slimmer women) while we have Newent, Wick and @kinabalu’s golf club
I’m therefore trying to cheer myself out of my jealousy by working out what is the most boring, least interesting department of France. The obvious choice would be somewhere in Picardy but I think I’ve found a prime candidate
Creuse. It seems to be the ultimate nowhere land smack bang in the middle of the country. It has a tiny population with only lozere smaller (in departments) but Lozere is quite spectacular -moors, mountains, megaliths and ravines
Creuse has… farms. And a town that used to make tapestries. That seems to be it
Is it that bad? Has anyone been? How boring is creuse?
"As I understand it, what appears to have happened is this Labour candidate in this seat, which has a large Conservative majority, actually bet that he himself would lose the seat."
I cannot understand on what possible basis this justifies a Gambling Commission investigation.
I don't actually think the election date bets were in breach of the Gambling Act, but there is absolutely no chance this is. He's either knocked on some doors and reckons he'll lose or it's an insurance bet ("well, I've lost, but at least I can buy myself and the missus a restaurant meal").
The Gambling Commission have taken leave of their senses. This is absolutely no different from a horse racing fan coming to a judgment based on form and looking at the horse in the paddock.
It is absolutely no different from a jockey backing or laying themselves. In fact jockeys cannot bet on horses at all, not footballers on football, by their association rules.
They have a lot more impact on the result than a politician does, weirdly, given most are elected, or not, off the back of national leaders and press.
It’s completely unfair that France gets all this natural beauty (and better weather, and slimmer women) while we have Newent, Wick and @kinabalu’s golf club
I’m therefore trying to cheer myself out of my jealousy by working out what is the most boring, least interesting department of France. The obvious choice would be somewhere in Picardy but I think I’ve found a prime candidate
Creuse. It seems to be the ultimate nowhere land smack bang in the middle of the country. It has a tiny population with only lozere smaller (in departments) but Lozere is quite spectacular -moors, mountains, megaliths and ravines
Creuse has… farms. And a town that used to make tapestries. That seems to be it
Is it that bad? Has anyone been? How boring is creuse?
If we're comparing like with like then you'll need to see what if offers vis a vis Bedfordshire.
Hah. I did for a moment wonder about the “most boring county in Britain” and yes Bedfordshire floated into my head
Oi.
Nothing boring about Bedfordshire. Quite small but have some splendid countryside that is the equal of anything in the Cotswolds and market towns and far enough out of London to be beyond the worst of the stockbroker belt. They get as far as Luton (our London Inner City type borough) and turn back.
And no ULEZ, Congestion Charge or 20mph limits (except short bits by schools)
"Bedfordshire isn't boring because [checks notes] you can drive at 30mph" I was going to plump for Herefordshire, but you've just converted me to the Bedfordshire camp.
Herefordshire is a stunningly beautiful county. Lots of uphill and down dale rather than flat sandpit Bedfordshire. OK, the people are like the duelling banjo players from Deliverance if very much more scary.
Yes, Herefordshire is ravishingly beautiful. If only every British county was as lovely and unspoilt!
It’s also really really noomy in the south and west as it butts up against the Welsh hills. Plus the Wye valley, the orchard lands of the east, half the malverns and half the Forest of Dean. Tintern abbey. Kilpeck. Galway. The lugg. Craswall
Had a look at the Press Association list of declaration times. Not many before 3am..looks like a long night. Hopefully returning officers erring on the side of caution because of boundary changes and so many candidates.
If peoole persist on claiming Bedfordshire is Boring I shall start interminably posting extracts of Nadine Dorries book, cutting and pasting the most sychophactic twitter responses to Farages tweets that I can find and start waxing lyrical on the subject of Pineapple on Pizza.
"As I understand it, what appears to have happened is this Labour candidate in this seat, which has a large Conservative majority, actually bet that he himself would lose the seat."
I cannot understand on what possible basis this justifies a Gambling Commission investigation.
I don't actually think the election date bets were in breach of the Gambling Act, but there is absolutely no chance this is. He's either knocked on some doors and reckons he'll lose or it's an insurance bet ("well, I've lost, but at least I can buy myself and the missus a restaurant meal").
The Gambling Commission have taken leave of their senses. This is absolutely no different from a horse racing fan coming to a judgment based on form and looking at the horse in the paddock.
That analogy doesn't quite work. He is the candidate so he could throw the race on purpose. Like if a jockey was to bet against him.
Jockeys literally aren't allowed to do so by the sporting authorities, though. Maybe there should be rules in politics - but the fact is that there are not. Breaking a rule that maybe should exist but doesn't is identical to not breaking a rule.
I mean I do sort of get your point that it could theoretically be an offence of "manipulation" under the Gambling Act if the candidate bet against himself, then promptly ensured he was pictured in Wetherspoons popping his todger in a pint of lager while screaming "elephant want drink" at startled onlookers. But there's absolutely no indication this man did anything of the sort.
That example is very specific to have been random.
It’s completely unfair that France gets all this natural beauty (and better weather, and slimmer women) while we have Newent, Wick and @kinabalu’s golf club
I’m therefore trying to cheer myself out of my jealousy by working out what is the most boring, least interesting department of France. The obvious choice would be somewhere in Picardy but I think I’ve found a prime candidate
Creuse. It seems to be the ultimate nowhere land smack bang in the middle of the country. It has a tiny population with only lozere smaller (in departments) but Lozere is quite spectacular -moors, mountains, megaliths and ravines
Creuse has… farms. And a town that used to make tapestries. That seems to be it
Is it that bad? Has anyone been? How boring is creuse?
What's wrong with Newent?
Or indeed my golf club. It's a lovely bit of real estate.
The only way you can get an edge in betting is to have knowledge or information the bookmaker doesn't have. When I backed Tom Brake to win Carshalton & Wallington in 1997, I knew how positive the response was on the doorsteps, the work that had gone into the constituency since 1992 etc. The local bookie either didn't know, didn't understand or didn't care and I got 4/1.
If, as a candidate and with access to canvass returns, you have that information advantage. If you know who is going to win and if it isn't you, you send someone else to back your opponent - you don't do it yourself. That's just crass politics - it demoralises your own side and if the Conservatives now think they don't have to worry about this seat, they can move workers to other seats. You always have plausible deniability if the activist on your side is found out.
Back yourself by all means and have a nice photo opportunity - the worst that will happen is you'll lose and look like a fool. Craig's stupidity is to back his opponent and then do it publicly.
Like "Peppa Pig" from the amusefest that was Boris Johnson wasn't the fucking cringiest thing ever from a politician.
C'mon. Get a grip. Various people are just pissed off Starmer's winning.
I'm *bored* that Starmer is winning. Because he is being terribly boring and inoffensive. Where's the umph?
This bit is 'win the election' and barring a mega shock it's going to be a resounding success. Then, 5/7 onwards, he's PM. Will he be boring, cautious, ineffectual? Or will he be a good, maybe very good, PM who'll relax a bit more in public over time?
I hope and expect the second, but who knows? What I do know is that people writing him off on the basis he hasn't been a thrill-a-minute as Opposition Leader or in this GE campaign are mainly engaging in prejudice-informed guesswork.
No, we’re just mocking his cringe. In my comment immediately after my mockery (which seems to have upset so many of you so weirdly) I actually say This won’t matter as long as he learns from it. We don’t want or need him to be funny so he doesn’t have to try and he shouldn’t even try
After the last few years we will take dull but competent if he can manage it. We all know he has a tough task (I expect him to fail but I genuinely hope he succeeds)
What we don’t want is an inept politician who also makes us cringe. That will be damaging. Quit the gags Sir Kir
No point trying to backtrack now. You're really put out that he isn't making you laugh so hard it hurts every time you see him. You think it's a big deal that he doesn't (can't?) do that. So much of a big deal that it's cost him your vote.
No, you're missing the point. See also the Ryan Giggs clip. It's not just not funny, its the antithesis of funny. If funny is 1 and not funny is 0, what SKS and Ryan Giggs are are -1. Perhaps even i. It has all the cadences of humour, without the humour itself. It's awful and weirdly compelling. It's not just failing to tell a joke well, it's failing to recognise whether the story he's telling falls into the category of 'anecdote' or not. Many people aren't particularly funny. But this is more than just telling a joke which doesn't land. It's, well, weird. And certainly worthy of comment.
I think Leon has said though that he still intends to vote Labour. Doesn't mean he can't then comment on the Labour leader's oddities.
Exactly right and very eloquent to boot. He doesn’t apparently understand humour at a basic level. This is like “how do you do fellow kids” but he means it
Add in the non-dreaming and third person stuff and we have a proper oddball coming into number 10. But then maybe that’s what Britain needs as we stare into the abyss
He doesn’t have a favourite poem or novel either. Hmmm. He’s the cliche of an alien trying to be human and failing. But again - that could be just the ticket
Tho TMay and Brown were a bit like this and they were disasters
The man is institutionalised after years working for the CPS. Hes a dangerous man in the sense he will be a puritan on legislating on things like ethnic minority pay gaps.
Sir Keir will basically be another Gordon Brown as PM, except if Brown had won a landslide majority for his policies
You're obsessed with how everything that might happen is somehow just the same as something that happened before. It's really weird. Like you've only got five slots in your head and everything has to conform to one of those. 1. The 1997 election 2. Gordon Brown 3. The Russell Group 4. A cat 5. The monarchy
Here, HYUFD, here's a picture of my dog "It's basically like a cat only larger and with a longer nose"
Hey, HYUFD, did you see Eurovision? "Yes, it was like the the 1997 election only with a jury system and more political parties. The winner was basically Gordon Brown if Gordon Brown had been a 24 year old woman from Azerbaijan who was dancing on a floor screen the size of 400 cats. Yass queen [consort, HRH Camilla]"
Give it a year and I will be proved right. A Starmer government will be legislating and policymaking and running the economy in a very similar way to how Brown did as PM (though they will hope without another banking crash)
I thought Farooq’s post amusing but implausible, All of a sudden, less implausible.
"As I understand it, what appears to have happened is this Labour candidate in this seat, which has a large Conservative majority, actually bet that he himself would lose the seat."
I cannot understand on what possible basis this justifies a Gambling Commission investigation.
I don't actually think the election date bets were in breach of the Gambling Act, but there is absolutely no chance this is. He's either knocked on some doors and reckons he'll lose or it's an insurance bet ("well, I've lost, but at least I can buy myself and the missus a restaurant meal").
The Gambling Commission have taken leave of their senses. This is absolutely no different from a horse racing fan coming to a judgment based on form and looking at the horse in the paddock.
Absolutely. The conservative cases were on inside information. This is a nothing burger.
It sort of depends. When did he put the bet on. Lets say he put a big bet on to lose a couple of days ago, could that be due to insider info about the state of the campaign in that seat e.g. private polling, returns from door knocking, etc.
If he put it on at the start of the campaign, I reckon its more hedging for the time / effort of campaigning for 6 weeks, and you can get some money out of it if you lose.
In ordinary common sense the line is pretty clear. If you have proper, advance, confidential inside information about event X happening on day Y and you place a bet on it, that's obviously a crime just like insider trading is. Some of the election date bets look a bit that way.
If you have information, lawfully obtained, because of your research, hard work or the nature of your job which gives you an informational edge over a matter which is still a contingency, you are doing what all gamblers would like to do. It could not possibly be a crime. In the realm of election politics it is plainly inappropriate - but that's different.
You say that betting on insider information is "obviously a crime just like insider trading is". But the Gambling Act doesn't really back you up on that, in my view, and I do not think any such prosecution has been brought.
It could have a range of offences about using "insider information" as financial legislation does... but it does not have them. The reason is that well functioning financial markets are seen to underpin the operation of the economy, firms' access to finance etc. With betting that simply isn't the case.
What the Gambling Act has is "cheating" defined by reference to either "manipulation" of "deceit". Manipulation fairly clearly doesn't apply here (I don't think anyone suggests Sunak had his arm twisted on the date as it suited anyone's book). On "deceit" while I see some argument, it isn't a particularly good one as it relies on the concept being broad enough to cover deceit by ommission.
I've never been asked by a bookie whether the reason I'm placing a bet is because I know something, or work in the area covered, or anything like that. And I've never felt under any obligation at all to volunteer it.
Someone on here made the point that the "nut hand" in poker is a good example. You can, in fact, have a perfect hand given what's on the table. You're not obliged to tell anyone you're in an unbeatable position and that any money they put on the table, they are guaranteed to lose.
It’s completely unfair that France gets all this natural beauty (and better weather, and slimmer women) while we have Newent, Wick and @kinabalu’s golf club
I’m therefore trying to cheer myself out of my jealousy by working out what is the most boring, least interesting department of France. The obvious choice would be somewhere in Picardy but I think I’ve found a prime candidate
Creuse. It seems to be the ultimate nowhere land smack bang in the middle of the country. It has a tiny population with only lozere smaller (in departments) but Lozere is quite spectacular -moors, mountains, megaliths and ravines
Creuse has… farms. And a town that used to make tapestries. That seems to be it
Is it that bad? Has anyone been? How boring is creuse?
What's wrong with Newent?
And Wick has a great deal to be said for it. Town planning at the Bath level (indeed by some of the same chaps) and magnificent scenery.
It’s completely unfair that France gets all this natural beauty (and better weather, and slimmer women) while we have Newent, Wick and @kinabalu’s golf club
I’m therefore trying to cheer myself out of my jealousy by working out what is the most boring, least interesting department of France. The obvious choice would be somewhere in Picardy but I think I’ve found a prime candidate
Creuse. It seems to be the ultimate nowhere land smack bang in the middle of the country. It has a tiny population with only lozere smaller (in departments) but Lozere is quite spectacular -moors, mountains, megaliths and ravines
Creuse has… farms. And a town that used to make tapestries. That seems to be it
Is it that bad? Has anyone been? How boring is creuse?
If we're comparing like with like then you'll need to see what if offers vis a vis Bedfordshire.
Hah. I did for a moment wonder about the “most boring county in Britain” and yes Bedfordshire floated into my head
Yes, Bedfordshire is boringest county (traditional boundaries) by some way. The competition is for number 2. Staffordshire or Cheshire perhaps. But even Bedfordshire has a lifetime of interest in it. Marston Moretaine; Elstow; Shillington; Luton Central Mosque interior; Luton bus station at night; Luton Airport departure lounge.
No, not having Cheshire as boring, either on traditional or modern boundaries. Cheshire has some National Park, for as start. Cheshire has Joddrell Bank, one of the seven wonders of the North West* Cheshire has the rows and walls of Chester, the Peckforton Hills, the Anderton Boat Lift, Stockport Bus Station, Port Sunlight, the Dee Estuary, Helsby Hill, Little Moreton Hall, Gawsworth Hall, Alderley Edge. Cheshire has the books of Alan Garner. Cheshire has the Macc Lads. Cheshire has a panhandle. Cheshire has Lyme Park. Cheshire is, what, the seventh highest county in the country (or thereabouts). Boring this place is not.
Cheshire is less instantly exciting than most of the other northern counties, but beats most of the Midlands and South East. Imagine one of those calendars you get in moderately upmarket garden centres. Cheshire's calendars will beat at least 50% of other counties into a cocked hat.
I would say most boring county probably Huntingdonshire. Highest point in Huntingdonshire? Boring Field. QED, my friends, QED. Other clearly more boring counties than Cheshire include Bedfordshire, Hertfordshire, Northamptonshire, Leicestershire, Nottinghamshire, Lincolnshire, Rutland, Berkshire and Buckinghamshire.
I offer an unconditional surrender. But you are not having Lincolnshire (England's most interesting county) or Northamptonshire (most underestimated). Nottinghamshire you can have; I had forgotten it existed.
Go on then, offer a defence of Lincolnshire? I do actually quite like a reason to go to Lincolnshire - the flatness feels quite exotic. It is quite unlike most of the rest of England. I like Lincoln, and I like Boston Stump, and the Fens are strangely compelling. But England's most interesting?
Its not all flat (at least, compared to the levels) - the Wolds are quite hilly and pleasantly rural in parts (and are an AONB) and there's a few chalk downs with interesting flora. Some of the coast is interesting too - such as Gibraltar Point & Donna Nook.
Lincoln Cathedral is a medieval wonder.
I'd certainly defend it against Bedfordshire.
Louth and around it. A gem!
It also boasts one of the most haunted buildings in Britain - and thus the world. Temple Bruer
What we really need now is for the SNP candidate in Aberdeenshire North & Moray East to have placed bets on the Tories/Lib Dems to win the seat.
lol - I can emphatically confirm that my only bet is on myself to win. And at 66/1 it’s hardly me cheating the system to make money…
Isn’t what you have just confessed to, identical to what the Labour candidate has been sacked for?
Why on earth would you bet on yourself? What’s the point?
I am so disappointed in you 🥺
The Labour candidate was betting against himself - that's the difference. It gives him an incentive to throw the result.
And the fact that he's not saying how much it was for suggests that it was for a substantial amount.
“The Labour candidate was betting against himself - that's the difference. It gives him an incentive to throw the result.”
Disgusting. Utterly disgusting. What sort of people do that?
He should be jailed and struck off.
Do we all agree placing huge amount on yourself to lose is far more disgusting than the Conservative Party bets?
If it wasn’t for the furore over the Tory bets, this Labour sleaze would never have come to light would it?
How much more Labour sleaze not come to light, still out there? 😠
I'm not sure it's the same as Michael Tabor walking up to Star Sports pitch at Ascot and having £50k on the Juddmonte horse in a race where he has a runner.
As I've said, the stupidity was having the bet publicly - if you want to bet against yourself, don't do it yourself.
It’s completely unfair that France gets all this natural beauty (and better weather, and slimmer women) while we have Newent, Wick and @kinabalu’s golf club
I’m therefore trying to cheer myself out of my jealousy by working out what is the most boring, least interesting department of France. The obvious choice would be somewhere in Picardy but I think I’ve found a prime candidate
Creuse. It seems to be the ultimate nowhere land smack bang in the middle of the country. It has a tiny population with only lozere smaller (in departments) but Lozere is quite spectacular -moors, mountains, megaliths and ravines
Creuse has… farms. And a town that used to make tapestries. That seems to be it
Is it that bad? Has anyone been? How boring is creuse?
What's wrong with Newent?
And Wick has a great deal to be said for it. Town planning at the Bath level (indeed by some of the same chaps) and magnificent scenery.
It’s the ugliest scenery in the entire world. Apart from the sea. But you can never see the sea because of the fog and the rain
"As I understand it, what appears to have happened is this Labour candidate in this seat, which has a large Conservative majority, actually bet that he himself would lose the seat."
I cannot understand on what possible basis this justifies a Gambling Commission investigation.
I don't actually think the election date bets were in breach of the Gambling Act, but there is absolutely no chance this is. He's either knocked on some doors and reckons he'll lose or it's an insurance bet ("well, I've lost, but at least I can buy myself and the missus a restaurant meal").
The Gambling Commission have taken leave of their senses. This is absolutely no different from a horse racing fan coming to a judgment based on form and looking at the horse in the paddock.
Absolutely. The conservative cases were on inside information. This is a nothing burger.
It sort of depends. When did he put the bet on. Lets say he put a big bet on to lose a couple of days ago, could that be due to insider info about the state of the campaign in that seat e.g. private polling, returns from door knocking, etc.
If he put it on at the start of the campaign, I reckon its more hedging for the time / effort of campaigning for 6 weeks, and you can get some money out of it if you lose.
In ordinary common sense the line is pretty clear. If you have proper, advance, confidential inside information about event X happening on day Y and you place a bet on it, that's obviously a crime just like insider trading is. Some of the election date bets look a bit that way.
If you have information, lawfully obtained, because of your research, hard work or the nature of your job which gives you an informational edge over a matter which is still a contingency, you are doing what all gamblers would like to do. It could not possibly be a crime. In the realm of election politics it is plainly inappropriate - but that's different.
I hope our own Rochdale isn't going to be in trouble for betting on himself.
It is betting against yourself that seems ... dodgy.
Practically every other candidate in that seat has been disowned by their party or stirred up a scandal, so he may want to fit in.
Like "Peppa Pig" from the amusefest that was Boris Johnson wasn't the fucking cringiest thing ever from a politician.
C'mon. Get a grip. Various people are just pissed off Starmer's winning.
I'm *bored* that Starmer is winning. Because he is being terribly boring and inoffensive. Where's the umph?
This bit is 'win the election' and barring a mega shock it's going to be a resounding success. Then, 5/7 onwards, he's PM. Will he be boring, cautious, ineffectual? Or will he be a good, maybe very good, PM who'll relax a bit more in public over time?
I hope and expect the second, but who knows? What I do know is that people writing him off on the basis he hasn't been a thrill-a-minute as Opposition Leader or in this GE campaign are mainly engaging in prejudice-informed guesswork.
No, we’re just mocking his cringe. In my comment immediately after my mockery (which seems to have upset so many of you so weirdly) I actually say This won’t matter as long as he learns from it. We don’t want or need him to be funny so he doesn’t have to try and he shouldn’t even try
After the last few years we will take dull but competent if he can manage it. We all know he has a tough task (I expect him to fail but I genuinely hope he succeeds)
What we don’t want is an inept politician who also makes us cringe. That will be damaging. Quit the gags Sir Kir
No point trying to backtrack now. You're really put out that he isn't making you laugh so hard it hurts every time you see him. You think it's a big deal that he doesn't (can't?) do that. So much of a big deal that it's cost him your vote.
No, you're missing the point. See also the Ryan Giggs clip. It's not just not funny, its the antithesis of funny. If funny is 1 and not funny is 0, what SKS and Ryan Giggs are are -1. Perhaps even i. It has all the cadences of humour, without the humour itself. It's awful and weirdly compelling. It's not just failing to tell a joke well, it's failing to recognise whether the story he's telling falls into the category of 'anecdote' or not. Many people aren't particularly funny. But this is more than just telling a joke which doesn't land. It's, well, weird. And certainly worthy of comment.
I think Leon has said though that he still intends to vote Labour. Doesn't mean he can't then comment on the Labour leader's oddities.
Exactly right and very eloquent to boot. He doesn’t apparently understand humour at a basic level. This is like “how do you do fellow kids” but he means it
Add in the non-dreaming and third person stuff and we have a proper oddball coming into number 10. But then maybe that’s what Britain needs as we stare into the abyss
He doesn’t have a favourite poem or novel either. Hmmm. He’s the cliche of an alien trying to be human and failing. But again - that could be just the ticket
Tho TMay and Brown were a bit like this and they were disasters
The man is institutionalised after years working for the CPS. Hes a dangerous man in the sense he will be a puritan on legislating on things like ethnic minority pay gaps.
Sir Keir will basically be another Gordon Brown as PM, except if Brown had won a landslide majority for his policies
You're obsessed with how everything that might happen is somehow just the same as something that happened before. It's really weird. Like you've only got five slots in your head and everything has to conform to one of those. 1. The 1997 election 2. Gordon Brown 3. The Russell Group 4. A cat 5. The monarchy
Here, HYUFD, here's a picture of my dog "It's basically like a cat only larger and with a longer nose"
Hey, HYUFD, did you see Eurovision? "Yes, it was like the the 1997 election only with a jury system and more political parties. The winner was basically Gordon Brown if Gordon Brown had been a 24 year old woman from Azerbaijan who was dancing on a floor screen the size of 400 cats. Yass queen [consort, HRH Camilla]"
Give it a year and I will be proved right. A Starmer government will be legislating and policymaking and running the economy in a very similar way to how Brown did as PM (though they will hope without another banking crash)
I thought Farooq’s post amusing but implausible, All of a sudden, less implausible.
Maybe you were wrong twice. Unfunny and tryhard... but true.
It’s completely unfair that France gets all this natural beauty (and better weather, and slimmer women) while we have Newent, Wick and @kinabalu’s golf club
I’m therefore trying to cheer myself out of my jealousy by working out what is the most boring, least interesting department of France. The obvious choice would be somewhere in Picardy but I think I’ve found a prime candidate
Creuse. It seems to be the ultimate nowhere land smack bang in the middle of the country. It has a tiny population with only lozere smaller (in departments) but Lozere is quite spectacular -moors, mountains, megaliths and ravines
Creuse has… farms. And a town that used to make tapestries. That seems to be it
Is it that bad? Has anyone been? How boring is creuse?
If we're comparing like with like then you'll need to see what if offers vis a vis Bedfordshire.
Hah. I did for a moment wonder about the “most boring county in Britain” and yes Bedfordshire floated into my head
Oi.
Nothing boring about Bedfordshire. Quite small but have some splendid countryside that is the equal of anything in the Cotswolds and market towns and far enough out of London to be beyond the worst of the stockbroker belt. They get as far as Luton (our London Inner City type borough) and turn back.
And no ULEZ, Congestion Charge or 20mph limits (except short bits by schools)
"Bedfordshire isn't boring because [checks notes] you can drive at 30mph" I was going to plump for Herefordshire, but you've just converted me to the Bedfordshire camp.
Herefordshire is a stunningly beautiful county. Lots of uphill and down dale rather than flat sandpit Bedfordshire. OK, the people are like the duelling banjo players from Deliverance if very much more scary.
Yes, Herefordshire is ravishingly beautiful. If only every British county was as lovely and unspoilt!
It’s also really really noomy in the south and west as it butts up against the Welsh hills. Plus the Wye valley, the orchard lands of the east, half the malverns and half the Forest of Dean. Tintern abbey. Kilpeck. Galway. The lugg. Craswall
One of the happiest days of my life was a bike ride I did from Lyonshall to Hay on Wye and back again. Just absolutely perfect. Big blue skies, hot and silent. Every pub looked inviting. I crossed over into Wales and rode over the Begwns. My expectation is that less than 5% of this board will have heard of the Begwns, and yet it is one of the most spectacular locations in the country; views over the Wye Valley to the Black Mountains, east into the appealing loveliness of Herefordshire, North and West into the drama of Wales. I was there at midday: I understand it is spectacular at dawn and dusk. And yet almost noone has heard of it. That's the marches for you.
Shhh, don't tell anyone.
The Roast Ox at Painscastle, just over the Begwns, is a lovely place. Ancient drovers' inn. Today it's unfussy, not posh, just a relaxing place to stay in absolute silence apart from the occasional tractor. I've stayed there a couple of times while cycling, sometimes as the last night before heading back to Hereford and the train home.
Comments
NEW THREAD
He's Nathan Jones
Disgusting. Utterly disgusting. What sort of people do that?
He should be jailed and struck off.
Do we all agree placing huge amount on yourself to lose is far more disgusting than the Conservative Party bets?
If it wasn’t for the furore over the Tory bets, this Labour sleaze would never have come to light would it?
How much more Labour sleaze not come to light, still out there? 😠
The only way you can get an edge in betting is to have knowledge or information the bookmaker doesn't have. When I backed Tom Brake to win Carshalton & Wallington in 1997, I knew how positive the response was on the doorsteps, the work that had gone into the constituency since 1992 etc. The local bookie either didn't know, didn't understand or didn't care and I got 4/1.
If, as a candidate and with access to canvass returns, you have that information advantage. If you know who is going to win and if it isn't you, you send someone else to back your opponent - you don't do it yourself. That's just crass politics - it demoralises your own side and if the Conservatives now think they don't have to worry about this seat, they can move workers to other seats. You always have plausible deniability if the activist on your side is found out.
Back yourself by all means and have a nice photo opportunity - the worst that will happen is you'll lose and look like a fool. Craig's stupidity is to back his opponent and then do it publicly.
All of a sudden, less implausible.
It could have a range of offences about using "insider information" as financial legislation does... but it does not have them. The reason is that well functioning financial markets are seen to underpin the operation of the economy, firms' access to finance etc. With betting that simply isn't the case.
What the Gambling Act has is "cheating" defined by reference to either "manipulation" of "deceit". Manipulation fairly clearly doesn't apply here (I don't think anyone suggests Sunak had his arm twisted on the date as it suited anyone's book). On "deceit" while I see some argument, it isn't a particularly good one as it relies on the concept being broad enough to cover deceit by ommission.
I've never been asked by a bookie whether the reason I'm placing a bet is because I know something, or work in the area covered, or anything like that. And I've never felt under any obligation at all to volunteer it.
Someone on here made the point that the "nut hand" in poker is a good example. You can, in fact, have a perfect hand given what's on the table. You're not obliged to tell anyone you're in an unbeatable position and that any money they put on the table, they are guaranteed to lose.
Omfg major major dark noom
As I've said, the stupidity was having the bet publicly - if you want to bet against yourself, don't do it yourself.
The Roast Ox at Painscastle, just over the Begwns, is a lovely place. Ancient drovers' inn. Today it's unfussy, not posh, just a relaxing place to stay in absolute silence apart from the occasional tractor. I've stayed there a couple of times while cycling, sometimes as the last night before heading back to Hereford and the train home.