City and St George's are nowhere near each other, academically or geographically. One's a medical school in Tooting and the other's not a medical school in the City. What's going on?
Probably financial desperation. Stand by for more.
And whilst Tooting and the City aren't the same place, there are other universities that are more geographically incoherent.
(And I'm not talking about the University of Cambridge and the College of Hitchin Girton.)
I'd be surprised if Jenrick gets the job. My prediction is Cleverly or Badenoch.
Okay, I am no Tory, but Cleverly seems okay to me. Palatable. Still wouldn't vote for them
Jenrick grew up in Wolverhampton to working class parents, so will have more connection to provincial voters than Rishi did as will Cleverly from an average family in Lewisham
Switch “Lewisham” with “Blackheath”, and that reads rather differently.
I quite like the fact that Cleverly got his degree in hospitality management studies.
So he could organise a piss up in a brewery?
Having been drinking with James Cleverly, I can confirm this is true.
When arguing that the judge should impose reporting restrictions preventing Rudakubana's identification, the prosecution said the suspect had an “autism spectrum disorder diagnosis”, and that he had been “unwilling to leave the house and communicate with family for a period of time”.
The judge allowed Rudakubana's name to be made public, saying "the balance clearly comes down in favour of the public interest".
No grand narrative. Just a young man not coping with the world, with tragic consequences.
It matches with the descriptions from the village that no one saw him, though they did see his parents.
Perhaps lockdown at a critical stage of social development was a factor, though certainly isn't an excuse.
Perhaps if people stopped trying to make excuses for evil bastards and instead told them they are evil bastards instead of handing them excuses "Its not you fault because you (came from a broken family/were in lockdown at a certain period/ too poor/ etc) delete as applicable"
How would that have worked before this lad came to unfortunate prominence? Do you possess unerring evil bastard radar?
I'll be voting for Tom T, hope he manages to pull it out of the bag. Jenrick will be worse than Hague was IMO, speaks to the core voter but no one else.
That's unfair - to Hague.
Jenrick would be worse than Iain Duncan Smith.
Hague and IDS faced Blair at his peak, the most charismatic and centrist leader Labour have ever had who was elected with 43% of the vote in 1997.
Jenrick would only have to face Starmer, one of the dullest leaders Labour have ever had, who only managed 33% of the vote even this year.
Indeed even Hague would probably have beaten Brown in 2010 had Howard been elected leader not him in 1997 and he replaced Howard after the 2001 defeat and stayed on after gains in 2005
So when Jenrick leads them to fourth party status he really has no excuse?
It's rarely mentioned here - but critical for the party's future - to appreciate that the LibDems directly gained around 60 seats on July 4th, and many with large majorities (here in Esher and Walton it was over 12,000 and a 22% margin).
The Tories have only have a lead of 49 seats, so a further switch of just 25 next time will leave them the third party. These are the voters - and those who voted Labour - we need to win back just to survive, let alone any eventual return to Government.
To be honest the Tories are more likely to bring back Reform voters than LD voters for now with their leadership pick, the former voted positively Tory in 2019 for Boris and Brexit, the latter only voted Tory to keep out Corbyn.
Unless Labour replaced Starmer with Rayner say I can't see LD voters going Tory anytime soon, even if Tugendhat was Tory leader.
Those who switched to Labour from Tory though are natural swing voters who may go Tory again if the economy is poor or Tory or Reform if the boats aren't stopped largely regardless of who is Tory leader.
Esher and Walton is now only the 250th Tory target seat, they could get a majority even if it stayed LD
I agree that the Tories mightbenefit from an unpopular Government, but that can't be guaranteed. The LibDems are (unfortunately) another sizeable opposition party and may also benefit.
I want as many former Tory voters to return to the fold, including those who 'defected' to Reform. But that can only happen when the party first appreciates the reasons for its huge rejection (Johnson's antics/sleaze destroyed any moral case - as did too many Tory MPs and the tawdry spiviness of Sunak's PPS and other CCHQ luninaries buzzing off to the bookies - and that Truss did the same for economic competence.
Then the hard work of devising credible social and economic policies that will appeal to younger (30-55?) people and their families. I have little confidence that either can be achieved by Jenrick and not at all should Badenoch or Patel be elected.
Remember though the median voter is already now 50 not 30!
All the Remain voting fiscally conservative Tories who might have gone LD pretty much left on 4th July anyway
I'd be (genuinely) interested in how you see the Tories getting to 200 seats, led alone 325.
In truth, you seem bewilderingly blase about the huge swathes of former True Blues no longer supporting the party. Relying on Labour's unpopularity and a bizarre pact with Farage (who openly wants to destroy the Conservatives, and which will drive away even more of us) simply isn't credible.
I voted tory until 2010, you wont be ever getting me back frankly simple as that. I rather not vote than vote for your party of idiots
They did Brexit for you. Why no gratitude for that?
Didn’t Trump say he was the only one who could persuade Putin to send Gershkovich home? The things not necessarily turning out to the Donald’s advantage are mounting up.
But I suppose the Donald - who is "not like normal politicians" - could have done it with a single phone call. No need for all these complex machinations.
If so, why did he not free the just released U.S. marine, who has been a hostage for six years ?
When arguing that the judge should impose reporting restrictions preventing Rudakubana's identification, the prosecution said the suspect had an “autism spectrum disorder diagnosis”, and that he had been “unwilling to leave the house and communicate with family for a period of time”.
The judge allowed Rudakubana's name to be made public, saying "the balance clearly comes down in favour of the public interest".
No grand narrative. Just a young man not coping with the world, with tragic consequences.
It matches with the descriptions from the village that no one saw him, though they did see his parents.
Perhaps lockdown at a critical stage of social development was a factor, though certainly isn't an excuse.
Perhaps if people stopped trying to make excuses for evil bastards and instead told them they are evil bastards instead of handing them excuses "Its not you fault because you (came from a broken family/were in lockdown at a certain period/ too poor/ etc) delete as applicable"
I certainly did not use it as an excuse, but if we ignore the social and economic roots of violent and criminal behaviour we will struggle to control and prevent it.
When arguing that the judge should impose reporting restrictions preventing Rudakubana's identification, the prosecution said the suspect had an “autism spectrum disorder diagnosis”, and that he had been “unwilling to leave the house and communicate with family for a period of time”.
The judge allowed Rudakubana's name to be made public, saying "the balance clearly comes down in favour of the public interest".
No grand narrative. Just a young man not coping with the world, with tragic consequences.
It matches with the descriptions from the village that no one saw him, though they did see his parents.
Perhaps lockdown at a critical stage of social development was a factor, though certainly isn't an excuse.
Perhaps if people stopped trying to make excuses for evil bastards and instead told them they are evil bastards instead of handing them excuses "Its not you fault because you (came from a broken family/were in lockdown at a certain period/ too poor/ etc) delete as applicable"
How would that have worked before this lad came to unfortunate prominence? Do you possess unerring evil bastard radar?
When I was growing up bad people were bad people no excuses, we didnt have these sort of incidents nearly as frequently, the more people make exuses for these acts about why the bad guy did it the more we seem to get of them. Sorry if thats blunt but its also true
I'll be voting for Tom T, hope he manages to pull it out of the bag. Jenrick will be worse than Hague was IMO, speaks to the core voter but no one else.
That's unfair - to Hague.
Jenrick would be worse than Iain Duncan Smith.
Hague and IDS faced Blair at his peak, the most charismatic and centrist leader Labour have ever had who was elected with 43% of the vote in 1997.
Jenrick would only have to face Starmer, one of the dullest leaders Labour have ever had, who only managed 33% of the vote even this year.
Indeed even Hague would probably have beaten Brown in 2010 had Howard been elected leader not him in 1997 and he replaced Howard after the 2001 defeat and stayed on after gains in 2005
So when Jenrick leads them to fourth party status he really has no excuse?
It's rarely mentioned here - but critical for the party's future - to appreciate that the LibDems directly gained around 60 seats on July 4th, and many with large majorities (here in Esher and Walton it was over 12,000 and a 22% margin).
The Tories have only have a lead of 49 seats, so a further switch of just 25 next time will leave them the third party. These are the voters - and those who voted Labour - we need to win back just to survive, let alone any eventual return to Government.
To be honest the Tories are more likely to bring back Reform voters than LD voters for now with their leadership pick, the former voted positively Tory in 2019 for Boris and Brexit, the latter only voted Tory to keep out Corbyn.
Unless Labour replaced Starmer with Rayner say I can't see LD voters going Tory anytime soon, even if Tugendhat was Tory leader.
Those who switched to Labour from Tory though are natural swing voters who may go Tory again if the economy is poor or Tory or Reform if the boats aren't stopped largely regardless of who is Tory leader.
Esher and Walton is now only the 250th Tory target seat, they could get a majority even if it stayed LD
I agree that the Tories mightbenefit from an unpopular Government, but that can't be guaranteed. The LibDems are (unfortunately) another sizeable opposition party and may also benefit.
I want as many former Tory voters to return to the fold, including those who 'defected' to Reform. But that can only happen when the party first appreciates the reasons for its huge rejection (Johnson's antics/sleaze destroyed any moral case - as did too many Tory MPs and the tawdry spiviness of Sunak's PPS and other CCHQ luninaries buzzing off to the bookies - and that Truss did the same for economic competence.
Then the hard work of devising credible social and economic policies that will appeal to younger (30-55?) people and their families. I have little confidence that either can be achieved by Jenrick and not at all should Badenoch or Patel be elected.
Remember though the median voter is already now 50 not 30!
All the Remain voting fiscally conservative Tories who might have gone LD pretty much left on 4th July anyway
I'd be (genuinely) interested in how you see the Tories getting to 200 seats, led alone 325.
In truth, you seem bewilderingly blase about the huge swathes of former True Blues no longer supporting the party. Relying on Labour's unpopularity and a bizarre pact with Farage (who openly wants to destroy the Conservatives, and which will drive away even more of us) simply isn't credible.
I voted tory until 2010, you wont be ever getting me back frankly simple as that. I rather not vote than vote for your party of idiots
Does anyone else have a feeling of dread at what seems to be going on at the moment re violence and disorder.
Twitter/X is not the real world; I know; but it’s getting very nasty out there.
I genuinely do fear there is more to come.
One thing we can say about Starmer is that he is a serious guy. Maybe he will go after social media as he says?
Ah yes, the old ‘censor the internet’ approach, that’s the reflexive action for Starmer and his lefty lawyer friends, but completely unenforceable in practice.
At a time when Twitter has a totally maverick boss who doesn’t give a f**k about profits and wants to stand up for freedom of speech.
Musk does not stand for freedom of speech. He shuts down accounts he does not like. That is his prerogative. But he is not above the law.
I don’t agree with everything he does, but most of what he’s banning is critism of himself and the company, rather than political philosophies. It’s not perfect, but it’s significantly better than the previous management of the platform.
Bullshit. Absolute bullshit.
Musk is absolutely up Trump's backside atm, and his tweets show this. He is promoting right-wing shit at every opportunity, and his brainless followers slurp it up.
And like fish, companies rot from the head. If you're a Twix employee, you'll know very well what Musk wants. And it isn't in any way neutral.
Okay, so who has Twitter blocked of any political significance?
His own political views are not those of his many companies.
He sacks anyone who disagrees with him. Like many 'hype' bosses, he is surrounded by yes-men; men who know that if you do what the boss wants, you're fine. If you don't... you're not.
Something that was briefly suspended and then reinstated, which if it been from Trump four years ago would have been instantly and banned for racism and misogyny.
Oh, come off it, it's got bells on. You asked for an example, and I gave you one.
And it's odd how, when it came back, it was initially in permanent read-only mode before the stink caused them to give full access back.
Oh okay, so under New Twitter these things get sorted out within hours, whereas under Old Twitter these things would run for months on end or result in permanent bans.
'Sort out within hours' if there's a massive stink thrown up about it (and it's odd you hadn't heard of it...), and it is so egregious that even most Musky Baby fans see that it was stoopid.
And your only answer are counter-factuals. "They're just as bad!" is not an excuse for bad actions. You're essentially admitting that 'New Twitter' is as bad as Old Twitter.
When arguing that the judge should impose reporting restrictions preventing Rudakubana's identification, the prosecution said the suspect had an “autism spectrum disorder diagnosis”, and that he had been “unwilling to leave the house and communicate with family for a period of time”.
The judge allowed Rudakubana's name to be made public, saying "the balance clearly comes down in favour of the public interest".
No grand narrative. Just a young man not coping with the world, with tragic consequences.
Yep, that little bit of detail suggests maybe no agenda (of course there may be more to come out). I wondered from frank booth's comment whether i'd missed something significant
High functioning autism explains nothing about this dreadful crime, where there is no apparent connection between killer and killed or even their location. Unless there was third party involvement, we might never know why three girls lie dead and more hospitalised.
I'll be voting for Tom T, hope he manages to pull it out of the bag. Jenrick will be worse than Hague was IMO, speaks to the core voter but no one else.
That's unfair - to Hague.
Jenrick would be worse than Iain Duncan Smith.
Hague and IDS faced Blair at his peak, the most charismatic and centrist leader Labour have ever had who was elected with 43% of the vote in 1997.
Jenrick would only have to face Starmer, one of the dullest leaders Labour have ever had, who only managed 33% of the vote even this year.
Indeed even Hague would probably have beaten Brown in 2010 had Howard been elected leader not him in 1997 and he replaced Howard after the 2001 defeat and stayed on after gains in 2005
So when Jenrick leads them to fourth party status he really has no excuse?
It's rarely mentioned here - but critical for the party's future - to appreciate that the LibDems directly gained around 60 seats on July 4th, and many with large majorities (here in Esher and Walton it was over 12,000 and a 22% margin).
The Tories have only have a lead of 49 seats, so a further switch of just 25 next time will leave them the third party. These are the voters - and those who voted Labour - we need to win back just to survive, let alone any eventual return to Government.
To be honest the Tories are more likely to bring back Reform voters than LD voters for now with their leadership pick, the former voted positively Tory in 2019 for Boris and Brexit, the latter only voted Tory to keep out Corbyn.
Unless Labour replaced Starmer with Rayner say I can't see LD voters going Tory anytime soon, even if Tugendhat was Tory leader.
Those who switched to Labour from Tory though are natural swing voters who may go Tory again if the economy is poor or Tory or Reform if the boats aren't stopped largely regardless of who is Tory leader.
Esher and Walton is now only the 250th Tory target seat, they could get a majority even if it stayed LD
I agree that the Tories mightbenefit from an unpopular Government, but that can't be guaranteed. The LibDems are (unfortunately) another sizeable opposition party and may also benefit.
I want as many former Tory voters to return to the fold, including those who 'defected' to Reform. But that can only happen when the party first appreciates the reasons for its huge rejection (Johnson's antics/sleaze destroyed any moral case - as did too many Tory MPs and the tawdry spiviness of Sunak's PPS and other CCHQ luninaries buzzing off to the bookies - and that Truss did the same for economic competence.
Then the hard work of devising credible social and economic policies that will appeal to younger (30-55?) people and their families. I have little confidence that either can be achieved by Jenrick and not at all should Badenoch or Patel be elected.
Remember though the median voter is already now 50 not 30!
All the Remain voting fiscally conservative Tories who might have gone LD pretty much left on 4th July anyway
I'd be (genuinely) interested in how you see the Tories getting to 200 seats, led alone 325.
In truth, you seem bewilderingly blase about the huge swathes of former True Blues no longer supporting the party. Relying on Labour's unpopularity and a bizarre pact with Farage (who openly wants to destroy the Conservatives, and which will drive away even more of us) simply isn't credible.
I voted tory until 2010, you wont be ever getting me back frankly simple as that. I rather not vote than vote for your party of idiots
They did Brexit for you. Why no gratitude for that?
I didn't vote for them in 2015 nor did cameron want brexit...he expected to be in coalition with the shit dems and have to give up the referendum as the price. I do not believe for a minute he actually wanted it
When arguing that the judge should impose reporting restrictions preventing Rudakubana's identification, the prosecution said the suspect had an “autism spectrum disorder diagnosis”, and that he had been “unwilling to leave the house and communicate with family for a period of time”.
The judge allowed Rudakubana's name to be made public, saying "the balance clearly comes down in favour of the public interest".
No grand narrative. Just a young man not coping with the world, with tragic consequences.
It matches with the descriptions from the village that no one saw him, though they did see his parents.
Perhaps lockdown at a critical stage of social development was a factor, though certainly isn't an excuse.
Perhaps if people stopped trying to make excuses for evil bastards and instead told them they are evil bastards instead of handing them excuses "Its not you fault because you (came from a broken family/were in lockdown at a certain period/ too poor/ etc) delete as applicable"
How would that have worked before this lad came to unfortunate prominence? Do you possess unerring evil bastard radar?
When I was growing up bad people were bad people no excuses, we didnt have these sort of incidents nearly as frequently, the more people make exuses for these acts about why the bad guy did it the more we seem to get of them. Sorry if thats blunt but its also true
What excuses were made for Rudakubana before his terrible act? You speak with such unerring certainty I assume you must know.
If they think Jenrick is the answer then god help the party.
I'll retire to Bedlam.
He could surprise on the upside.
I am not a Tory, never voted Tory in a GE, only once in a local election, therefore I hold no torch for them and have little knowledge of Jenrick apart from his rather hapless time as a Minister.
Well, it just goes to show you should never judge a book by its cover.
I had you pegged as a diehard Conservative.
If you're one of the "I don't like any of them" brigade. fine, but what would you support or for what would you vote positively rather than negatively?
"pegged" !!!!!
Why would you have me down as a Tory, just as a matter of interest ?
I did post here that I was not going to vote, but in the end, and I said I would, I voted for Luke Akehurst our Labour candidate. I do not loathe Reform supporters like some people on this board, I live among many of them, but I didn't want to risk a Reform MP here and their economic policies were crackers. I'm socially liberal and fiscally more conservative so I like Rachel Reeves and the cut of her jib. I also don't think she has done anything wrong so far. I like the likes our Haigh, Cooper, Phillipson and Streeting too.
The Tories were just to utterly incompetent at the end. They needed putting out of their misery. SKS and co deserve a chance. Another 5 years of the preceding 5 years would be unbearable.
The only time I ever voted Tory was for a local councillor who was excellent and did alot for the ward. I saw that more as an endorsement of him personally than his party.
Pegged - as in a square one going into a round hole it would seem.
You've posted about as often as I have but as I drop in and out on here I don't read every post. I just had the sense you were often defending the Conservatives and being critical of Labour so I made the assumption which I shouldn't have done.
In truth, you aren't a million miles away from me and I'm happy to give the new Government a fair crack of the whip for all some on here seem to think the IMF will be here in four years. I'd only disagree the Conservatives didn't need putting out of their misery, they needed putting out of our misery.
I find Reform a paradox as I've said on here before - the anti-immigration line is all that holds them together. Farage and Tice are unreconstructed Thatcherites who want tax cuts especially for the wealthy while the Reform membership and voters are more nuanced - some still cling to the Johnsonian levelling up agenda, others simply want more spending and investment in WWC areas.
I suspect from the reform voters I know here they are social conservatives but want alot more spending here. Many went for Bojo due to the promise of levelling up. Our areas have been neglected and ignored for long enough. My hope is the local mayor here will make a difference. A reform MP probably won’t .
I think in places like this Reform could be a threat to labour in five years so they will need to do something for the area.
I think they just want solutions. High streets to stop being wastelands full of empty shops. That's not due to lack of spending, that's due to pension funds and their overvalued property portfolios.
Reform voters want a return to a past that is no longer possible - shops can only exist if there is appropriate spare cash to keep them going and in an awful lot of reform voting areas that cash doesn't exist.
We went to Redcar last night because the weather was decent. When you walk along the sea front and see that another few shops have closed it does get rather depression.
Thats because we have allowed it to happen. we subsidised Jeff Bezos to kill off our retailers and screwed councils into to raising ridiculous rates bills,
Along with
1) the housing crisis made turning shops into accommodation an easy win. So leave them derelict until the council gives in on change of use. 2) more importantly, the value of shops has collapsed. But castles in the sky have been built on the foundation of the value of commercial property. Often the banks have clauses preventing the landlord reducing prices…
I take it no-one knows how business rates are set - hint it's based on achieved rents...
Hence the castles in the sky.
Simply - aside from so very high footfall places in some towns, most shops are worth Jack & shit.
And Jack left town.
The problem is that everyone has a vested interest in believing they full of geese laying golden eggs.
But if rents were allowed to fall to their natural level, and shops let for less or sold, a whole new cohort of shopkeepers, Mum who's always wanted to try her hand at selling candles, Uncle who'd like to have a whisky shop, become viable. In my parents town, the High Street has many empty shops, but a set of traffic lights on from the High Street where rents are far smaller is thriving.
Landlords of commercial properties have always preferred voids to accepting lower rents; this isn't a new thing. Hence the fact that high streets got absolutely hammered in the early 1990s as interest rates rose. (I would also point out that there have been commercial property real estate trusts that have owned massive numbers of shops for at least 70 years, and so there's lots of historic commentary and results for you to dig through should you be so inclined.)
These companies have followed the principle that (a) vacancies have always been temporary, while (b) you can be stuck with lower rents for five years or so. Worse is (c), which is that if you raise the rent after five years, you are likely stuck with a void anyway inbetween tenants.
Where you are absolutely correct is that these real estate firms have not appreciated that the world has fundamentally changed, and that unless they change their attitudes towards rent levels, then they will go out of business. And not only will they go out of business, but they'll do an awful lot of damage to high streets around the UK in the interim.
When arguing that the judge should impose reporting restrictions preventing Rudakubana's identification, the prosecution said the suspect had an “autism spectrum disorder diagnosis”, and that he had been “unwilling to leave the house and communicate with family for a period of time”.
The judge allowed Rudakubana's name to be made public, saying "the balance clearly comes down in favour of the public interest".
No grand narrative. Just a young man not coping with the world, with tragic consequences.
It matches with the descriptions from the village that no one saw him, though they did see his parents.
Perhaps lockdown at a critical stage of social development was a factor, though certainly isn't an excuse.
Perhaps if people stopped trying to make excuses for evil bastards and instead told them they are evil bastards instead of handing them excuses "Its not you fault because you (came from a broken family/were in lockdown at a certain period/ too poor/ etc) delete as applicable"
How would that have worked before this lad came to unfortunate prominence? Do you possess unerring evil bastard radar?
When I was growing up bad people were bad people no excuses, we didnt have these sort of incidents nearly as frequently, the more people make exuses for these acts about why the bad guy did it the more we seem to get of them. Sorry if thats blunt but its also true
How does that apply to this case? Are you suggesting SKS knew he was bad but didn’t lock him up? You really need to emerge into the real world rather than your little privileged shelter. To speak the truth about Planet Earth you have to live on it.
When arguing that the judge should impose reporting restrictions preventing Rudakubana's identification, the prosecution said the suspect had an “autism spectrum disorder diagnosis”, and that he had been “unwilling to leave the house and communicate with family for a period of time”.
The judge allowed Rudakubana's name to be made public, saying "the balance clearly comes down in favour of the public interest".
No grand narrative. Just a young man not coping with the world, with tragic consequences.
It matches with the descriptions from the village that no one saw him, though they did see his parents.
Perhaps lockdown at a critical stage of social development was a factor, though certainly isn't an excuse.
Perhaps if people stopped trying to make excuses for evil bastards and instead told them they are evil bastards instead of handing them excuses "Its not you fault because you (came from a broken family/were in lockdown at a certain period/ too poor/ etc) delete as applicable"
I certainly did not use it as an excuse, but if we ignore the social and economic roots of violent and criminal behaviour we will struggle to control and prevent it.
Because there are no roots frankly, plenty of people grow up in those situations and don't go on to commit those sort of insanities. Giving them a reason however to excuse their actions is giving them permission
I'll be voting for Tom T, hope he manages to pull it out of the bag. Jenrick will be worse than Hague was IMO, speaks to the core voter but no one else.
That's unfair - to Hague.
Jenrick would be worse than Iain Duncan Smith.
Hague and IDS faced Blair at his peak, the most charismatic and centrist leader Labour have ever had who was elected with 43% of the vote in 1997.
Jenrick would only have to face Starmer, one of the dullest leaders Labour have ever had, who only managed 33% of the vote even this year.
Indeed even Hague would probably have beaten Brown in 2010 had Howard been elected leader not him in 1997 and he replaced Howard after the 2001 defeat and stayed on after gains in 2005
So when Jenrick leads them to fourth party status he really has no excuse?
It's rarely mentioned here - but critical for the party's future - to appreciate that the LibDems directly gained around 60 seats on July 4th, and many with large majorities (here in Esher and Walton it was over 12,000 and a 22% margin).
The Tories have only have a lead of 49 seats, so a further switch of just 25 next time will leave them the third party. These are the voters - and those who voted Labour - we need to win back just to survive, let alone any eventual return to Government.
To be honest the Tories are more likely to bring back Reform voters than LD voters for now with their leadership pick, the former voted positively Tory in 2019 for Boris and Brexit, the latter only voted Tory to keep out Corbyn.
Unless Labour replaced Starmer with Rayner say I can't see LD voters going Tory anytime soon, even if Tugendhat was Tory leader.
Those who switched to Labour from Tory though are natural swing voters who may go Tory again if the economy is poor or Tory or Reform if the boats aren't stopped largely regardless of who is Tory leader.
Esher and Walton is now only the 250th Tory target seat, they could get a majority even if it stayed LD
I agree that the Tories mightbenefit from an unpopular Government, but that can't be guaranteed. The LibDems are (unfortunately) another sizeable opposition party and may also benefit.
I want as many former Tory voters to return to the fold, including those who 'defected' to Reform. But that can only happen when the party first appreciates the reasons for its huge rejection (Johnson's antics/sleaze destroyed any moral case - as did too many Tory MPs and the tawdry spiviness of Sunak's PPS and other CCHQ luninaries buzzing off to the bookies - and that Truss did the same for economic competence.
Then the hard work of devising credible social and economic policies that will appeal to younger (30-55?) people and their families. I have little confidence that either can be achieved by Jenrick and not at all should Badenoch or Patel be elected.
Remember though the median voter is already now 50 not 30!
All the Remain voting fiscally conservative Tories who might have gone LD pretty much left on 4th July anyway
I'd be (genuinely) interested in how you see the Tories getting to 200 seats, led alone 325.
In truth, you seem bewilderingly blase about the huge swathes of former True Blues no longer supporting the party. Relying on Labour's unpopularity and a bizarre pact with Farage (who openly wants to destroy the Conservatives, and which will drive away even more of us) simply isn't credible.
I think the Cons face extinction as a major party if they don't react carefully to July 4th. The LDs becoming the dominant non-Labour party in the Remainy South and Reform becoming that in the Brexity North - this could squeeze them out of the living room and into the kitchen.
Unless the LDs become fiscally conservative Orange Book and a centre right party that won't happen and in any case would only really be in Remain seats in the South (and of course most Southern seats did still vote Leave) and lead to its social democratic voters defecting to Labour
Approx 3/4 of English seats voted Leave, I think? 2016 was a landslide in this respect. People forget this sometimes. Eg in calls for Labour to embrace Rejoin. Not doing that was one of Starmer's easier decisions.
I'll be voting for Tom T, hope he manages to pull it out of the bag. Jenrick will be worse than Hague was IMO, speaks to the core voter but no one else.
That's unfair - to Hague.
Jenrick would be worse than Iain Duncan Smith.
Hague and IDS faced Blair at his peak, the most charismatic and centrist leader Labour have ever had who was elected with 43% of the vote in 1997.
Jenrick would only have to face Starmer, one of the dullest leaders Labour have ever had, who only managed 33% of the vote even this year.
Indeed even Hague would probably have beaten Brown in 2010 had Howard been elected leader not him in 1997 and he replaced Howard after the 2001 defeat and stayed on after gains in 2005
So when Jenrick leads them to fourth party status he really has no excuse?
It's rarely mentioned here - but critical for the party's future - to appreciate that the LibDems directly gained around 60 seats on July 4th, and many with large majorities (here in Esher and Walton it was over 12,000 and a 22% margin).
The Tories have only have a lead of 49 seats, so a further switch of just 25 next time will leave them the third party. These are the voters - and those who voted Labour - we need to win back just to survive, let alone any eventual return to Government.
To be honest the Tories are more likely to bring back Reform voters than LD voters for now with their leadership pick, the former voted positively Tory in 2019 for Boris and Brexit, the latter only voted Tory to keep out Corbyn.
Unless Labour replaced Starmer with Rayner say I can't see LD voters going Tory anytime soon, even if Tugendhat was Tory leader.
Those who switched to Labour from Tory though are natural swing voters who may go Tory again if the economy is poor or Tory or Reform if the boats aren't stopped largely regardless of who is Tory leader.
Esher and Walton is now only the 250th Tory target seat, they could get a majority even if it stayed LD
I agree that the Tories mightbenefit from an unpopular Government, but that can't be guaranteed. The LibDems are (unfortunately) another sizeable opposition party and may also benefit.
I want as many former Tory voters to return to the fold, including those who 'defected' to Reform. But that can only happen when the party first appreciates the reasons for its huge rejection (Johnson's antics/sleaze destroyed any moral case - as did too many Tory MPs and the tawdry spiviness of Sunak's PPS and other CCHQ luninaries buzzing off to the bookies - and that Truss did the same for economic competence.
Then the hard work of devising credible social and economic policies that will appeal to younger (30-55?) people and their families. I have little confidence that either can be achieved by Jenrick and not at all should Badenoch or Patel be elected.
Remember though the median voter is already now 50 not 30!
All the Remain voting fiscally conservative Tories who might have gone LD pretty much left on 4th July anyway
I'd be (genuinely) interested in how you see the Tories getting to 200 seats, led alone 325.
In truth, you seem bewilderingly blase about the huge swathes of former True Blues no longer supporting the party. Relying on Labour's unpopularity and a bizarre pact with Farage (who openly wants to destroy the Conservatives, and which will drive away even more of us) simply isn't credible.
I voted tory until 2010, you wont be ever getting me back frankly simple as that. I rather not vote than vote for your party of idiots
I'll be voting for Tom T, hope he manages to pull it out of the bag. Jenrick will be worse than Hague was IMO, speaks to the core voter but no one else.
That's unfair - to Hague.
Jenrick would be worse than Iain Duncan Smith.
Hague and IDS faced Blair at his peak, the most charismatic and centrist leader Labour have ever had who was elected with 43% of the vote in 1997.
Jenrick would only have to face Starmer, one of the dullest leaders Labour have ever had, who only managed 33% of the vote even this year.
Indeed even Hague would probably have beaten Brown in 2010 had Howard been elected leader not him in 1997 and he replaced Howard after the 2001 defeat and stayed on after gains in 2005
So when Jenrick leads them to fourth party status he really has no excuse?
It's rarely mentioned here - but critical for the party's future - to appreciate that the LibDems directly gained around 60 seats on July 4th, and many with large majorities (here in Esher and Walton it was over 12,000 and a 22% margin).
The Tories have only have a lead of 49 seats, so a further switch of just 25 next time will leave them the third party. These are the voters - and those who voted Labour - we need to win back just to survive, let alone any eventual return to Government.
To be honest the Tories are more likely to bring back Reform voters than LD voters for now with their leadership pick, the former voted positively Tory in 2019 for Boris and Brexit, the latter only voted Tory to keep out Corbyn.
Unless Labour replaced Starmer with Rayner say I can't see LD voters going Tory anytime soon, even if Tugendhat was Tory leader.
Those who switched to Labour from Tory though are natural swing voters who may go Tory again if the economy is poor or Tory or Reform if the boats aren't stopped largely regardless of who is Tory leader.
Esher and Walton is now only the 250th Tory target seat, they could get a majority even if it stayed LD
I agree that the Tories mightbenefit from an unpopular Government, but that can't be guaranteed. The LibDems are (unfortunately) another sizeable opposition party and may also benefit.
I want as many former Tory voters to return to the fold, including those who 'defected' to Reform. But that can only happen when the party first appreciates the reasons for its huge rejection (Johnson's antics/sleaze destroyed any moral case - as did too many Tory MPs and the tawdry spiviness of Sunak's PPS and other CCHQ luninaries buzzing off to the bookies - and that Truss did the same for economic competence.
Then the hard work of devising credible social and economic policies that will appeal to younger (30-55?) people and their families. I have little confidence that either can be achieved by Jenrick and not at all should Badenoch or Patel be elected.
Remember though the median voter is already now 50 not 30!
All the Remain voting fiscally conservative Tories who might have gone LD pretty much left on 4th July anyway
I'd be (genuinely) interested in how you see the Tories getting to 200 seats, led alone 325.
In truth, you seem bewilderingly blase about the huge swathes of former True Blues no longer supporting the party. Relying on Labour's unpopularity and a bizarre pact with Farage (who openly wants to destroy the Conservatives, and which will drive away even more of us) simply isn't credible.
Thatcher in 1979 won as she offered right wing red meat and the Labour government was unpopular and failing on the economy and got over 40% of the vote and a clear majority. Cameron offered 'hug a hoodie', as green and centrist and socially liberal an agenda as you can get in 2010 and still failed to get over 40% or a majority.
If the right is reunited with the aim of getting rid of Labour and a Labour government unpopular at the next general election anything can happen.
Elections are not always won by liberal centrists, even Starmer got just 33% last month, 7% less than Corbyn got in 2017 and just 1% more than Corbyn got in 2019. There was hardly a surge of enthusiasm for Starmer centrism, it was the divide on the right that gave him a landslide!
Were you even alive in 1979? I was actively campaigning then and was elected a Councillor in that election. Your depiction of that era is seriously flawed. The Tory manifesto was hardly extreme and behind Callagahan and Healey, the far left of the Labour Party was in the ascendant. Mrs T was supported by many 'moderates'. With respect, you are far too simplistic in your analyses.
And the mantra of 'uniting the right' where the putative partner is out to destroy the Conservative Party is one that should be rejected by our members.
Nonetheless in 1979 Callaghan was the centrist leader, Thatcher the rightwinger. Sunak was also on the centrist wing of the Tory party and lost this year.
In 2019 Boris did a pact with Farage and won a Tory landslide, as long as we have FPTP Farage needs a deal with the Tories to gain seats as much as the Tories need a largely clear run from Reform to gain seats. After all Labour only put up paper candidates with no central support in LD target seats this year and the LDs only put up paper candidates in Labour target seats too
Would this be the same Jim Callaghan who went begging to the IMF when the UK ran out of money?
I just want to make sure that we're not talking about different Jim Callaghan's.
Th Hartlipudlians choice (in order) 3 Remainers 3 Leavers
1. Patel (Bring back hanging-Leaver) 2. Jenrick (Rwanda paint over kiddies cartoons ) 3. Badenoch (Leaver Rwanda bring back the birch (probably) Hanging (unconfirmed) 4. Cleverly (Rwanda Leaver) 5 Tugendhat (Leave the ECHR Rwanda) 6. Stride (A big softie in the wrong Party)
Four leavers in your list.
I compiled my list from the Guardian. Perhaps you are confusing 'Leave the ECHR' with being a Leaver? Easy mistake to make with such an eclectic list
Th Hartlipudlians choice (in order) 3 Remainers 3 Leavers
1. Patel (Bring back hanging-Leaver) 2. Jenrick (Rwanda paint over kiddies cartoons ) 3. Badenoch (Leaver Rwanda bring back the birch (probably) Hanging (unconfirmed) 4. Cleverly (Rwanda Leaver) 5 Tugendhat (Leave the ECHR Rwanda) 6. Stride (A big softie in the wrong Party)
Four leavers in your list.
I compiled my list from the Guardian. Perhaps you are confusing 'Leave the ECHR' with being a Leaver? Easy mistake to make with such an eclectic list
When arguing that the judge should impose reporting restrictions preventing Rudakubana's identification, the prosecution said the suspect had an “autism spectrum disorder diagnosis”, and that he had been “unwilling to leave the house and communicate with family for a period of time”.
The judge allowed Rudakubana's name to be made public, saying "the balance clearly comes down in favour of the public interest".
No grand narrative. Just a young man not coping with the world, with tragic consequences.
It matches with the descriptions from the village that no one saw him, though they did see his parents.
Perhaps lockdown at a critical stage of social development was a factor, though certainly isn't an excuse.
Perhaps if people stopped trying to make excuses for evil bastards and instead told them they are evil bastards instead of handing them excuses "Its not you fault because you (came from a broken family/were in lockdown at a certain period/ too poor/ etc) delete as applicable"
How would that have worked before this lad came to unfortunate prominence? Do you possess unerring evil bastard radar?
When I was growing up bad people were bad people no excuses, we didnt have these sort of incidents nearly as frequently, the more people make exuses for these acts about why the bad guy did it the more we seem to get of them. Sorry if thats blunt but its also true
What excuses were made for Rudakubana before his terrible act? You speak with such unerring certainty I assume you must know.
I didn't say they were before but I am sure there will be plenty made now...oh he was abused, he grew up in poverty etc we should be lenient it was societies fault....just watch the guardian
When arguing that the judge should impose reporting restrictions preventing Rudakubana's identification, the prosecution said the suspect had an “autism spectrum disorder diagnosis”, and that he had been “unwilling to leave the house and communicate with family for a period of time”.
The judge allowed Rudakubana's name to be made public, saying "the balance clearly comes down in favour of the public interest".
No grand narrative. Just a young man not coping with the world, with tragic consequences.
It matches with the descriptions from the village that no one saw him, though they did see his parents.
Perhaps lockdown at a critical stage of social development was a factor, though certainly isn't an excuse.
Perhaps if people stopped trying to make excuses for evil bastards and instead told them they are evil bastards instead of handing them excuses "Its not you fault because you (came from a broken family/were in lockdown at a certain period/ too poor/ etc) delete as applicable"
How would that have worked before this lad came to unfortunate prominence? Do you possess unerring evil bastard radar?
When I was growing up bad people were bad people no excuses, we didnt have these sort of incidents nearly as frequently, the more people make exuses for these acts about why the bad guy did it the more we seem to get of them. Sorry if thats blunt but its also true
How does that apply to this case? Are you suggesting SKS knew he was bad but didn’t lock him up? You really need to emerge into the real world rather than your little privileged shelter. To speak the truth about Planet Earth you have to live on it.
My privileged little shelter, the one I cant afford to buy a house? the one I make less than a junior doctor? the one when I will likely retire on 20% of the pension a public sector worker gets? The one where I grew up in a council house with one fire in one room? That privileged little corner when most of you are whinging about the cliff edges of earning more than 100k? Do fuck off.
I didnt say it was known before, I am saying he knew people like you will make excuses for him after he does it
I'll be voting for Tom T, hope he manages to pull it out of the bag. Jenrick will be worse than Hague was IMO, speaks to the core voter but no one else.
That's unfair - to Hague.
Jenrick would be worse than Iain Duncan Smith.
Hague and IDS faced Blair at his peak, the most charismatic and centrist leader Labour have ever had who was elected with 43% of the vote in 1997.
Jenrick would only have to face Starmer, one of the dullest leaders Labour have ever had, who only managed 33% of the vote even this year.
Indeed even Hague would probably have beaten Brown in 2010 had Howard been elected leader not him in 1997 and he replaced Howard after the 2001 defeat and stayed on after gains in 2005
So when Jenrick leads them to fourth party status he really has no excuse?
It's rarely mentioned here - but critical for the party's future - to appreciate that the LibDems directly gained around 60 seats on July 4th, and many with large majorities (here in Esher and Walton it was over 12,000 and a 22% margin).
The Tories have only have a lead of 49 seats, so a further switch of just 25 next time will leave them the third party. These are the voters - and those who voted Labour - we need to win back just to survive, let alone any eventual return to Government.
To be honest the Tories are more likely to bring back Reform voters than LD voters for now with their leadership pick, the former voted positively Tory in 2019 for Boris and Brexit, the latter only voted Tory to keep out Corbyn.
Unless Labour replaced Starmer with Rayner say I can't see LD voters going Tory anytime soon, even if Tugendhat was Tory leader.
Those who switched to Labour from Tory though are natural swing voters who may go Tory again if the economy is poor or Tory or Reform if the boats aren't stopped largely regardless of who is Tory leader.
Esher and Walton is now only the 250th Tory target seat, they could get a majority even if it stayed LD
I agree that the Tories mightbenefit from an unpopular Government, but that can't be guaranteed. The LibDems are (unfortunately) another sizeable opposition party and may also benefit.
I want as many former Tory voters to return to the fold, including those who 'defected' to Reform. But that can only happen when the party first appreciates the reasons for its huge rejection (Johnson's antics/sleaze destroyed any moral case - as did too many Tory MPs and the tawdry spiviness of Sunak's PPS and other CCHQ luninaries buzzing off to the bookies - and that Truss did the same for economic competence.
Then the hard work of devising credible social and economic policies that will appeal to younger (30-55?) people and their families. I have little confidence that either can be achieved by Jenrick and not at all should Badenoch or Patel be elected.
Remember though the median voter is already now 50 not 30!
All the Remain voting fiscally conservative Tories who might have gone LD pretty much left on 4th July anyway
I'd be (genuinely) interested in how you see the Tories getting to 200 seats, led alone 325.
In truth, you seem bewilderingly blase about the huge swathes of former True Blues no longer supporting the party. Relying on Labour's unpopularity and a bizarre pact with Farage (who openly wants to destroy the Conservatives, and which will drive away even more of us) simply isn't credible.
Thatcher in 1979 won as she offered right wing red meat and the Labour government was unpopular and failing on the economy and got over 40% of the vote and a clear majority. Cameron offered 'hug a hoodie', as green and centrist and socially liberal an agenda as you can get in 2010 and still failed to get over 40% or a majority.
If the right is reunited with the aim of getting rid of Labour and a Labour government unpopular at the next general election anything can happen.
Elections are not always won by liberal centrists, even Starmer got just 33% last month, 7% less than Corbyn got in 2017 and just 1% more than Corbyn got in 2019. There was hardly a surge of enthusiasm for Starmer centrism, it was the divide on the right that gave him a landslide!
As a right winger can I just say I don't want anything to do with the tory party, you are a bunch of cupids as mr everett used to say. I would love your party to die
Yes well as you haven't voted Tory since 2010 anyway, we can probably manage without you.
You sound like the type of voter who now swings between Reform and the English Democrats, has a Tommy Robinson poster in his bedroom and wouldn't touch any of the main parties with a bargepole!
I'll be voting for Tom T, hope he manages to pull it out of the bag. Jenrick will be worse than Hague was IMO, speaks to the core voter but no one else.
That's unfair - to Hague.
Jenrick would be worse than Iain Duncan Smith.
Hague and IDS faced Blair at his peak, the most charismatic and centrist leader Labour have ever had who was elected with 43% of the vote in 1997.
Jenrick would only have to face Starmer, one of the dullest leaders Labour have ever had, who only managed 33% of the vote even this year.
Indeed even Hague would probably have beaten Brown in 2010 had Howard been elected leader not him in 1997 and he replaced Howard after the 2001 defeat and stayed on after gains in 2005
So when Jenrick leads them to fourth party status he really has no excuse?
It's rarely mentioned here - but critical for the party's future - to appreciate that the LibDems directly gained around 60 seats on July 4th, and many with large majorities (here in Esher and Walton it was over 12,000 and a 22% margin).
The Tories have only have a lead of 49 seats, so a further switch of just 25 next time will leave them the third party. These are the voters - and those who voted Labour - we need to win back just to survive, let alone any eventual return to Government.
To be honest the Tories are more likely to bring back Reform voters than LD voters for now with their leadership pick, the former voted positively Tory in 2019 for Boris and Brexit, the latter only voted Tory to keep out Corbyn.
Unless Labour replaced Starmer with Rayner say I can't see LD voters going Tory anytime soon, even if Tugendhat was Tory leader.
Those who switched to Labour from Tory though are natural swing voters who may go Tory again if the economy is poor or Tory or Reform if the boats aren't stopped largely regardless of who is Tory leader.
Esher and Walton is now only the 250th Tory target seat, they could get a majority even if it stayed LD
I agree that the Tories mightbenefit from an unpopular Government, but that can't be guaranteed. The LibDems are (unfortunately) another sizeable opposition party and may also benefit.
I want as many former Tory voters to return to the fold, including those who 'defected' to Reform. But that can only happen when the party first appreciates the reasons for its huge rejection (Johnson's antics/sleaze destroyed any moral case - as did too many Tory MPs and the tawdry spiviness of Sunak's PPS and other CCHQ luninaries buzzing off to the bookies - and that Truss did the same for economic competence.
Then the hard work of devising credible social and economic policies that will appeal to younger (30-55?) people and their families. I have little confidence that either can be achieved by Jenrick and not at all should Badenoch or Patel be elected.
Remember though the median voter is already now 50 not 30!
All the Remain voting fiscally conservative Tories who might have gone LD pretty much left on 4th July anyway
I'd be (genuinely) interested in how you see the Tories getting to 200 seats, led alone 325.
In truth, you seem bewilderingly blase about the huge swathes of former True Blues no longer supporting the party. Relying on Labour's unpopularity and a bizarre pact with Farage (who openly wants to destroy the Conservatives, and which will drive away even more of us) simply isn't credible.
I voted tory until 2010, you wont be ever getting me back frankly simple as that. I rather not vote than vote for your party of idiots
They did Brexit for you. Why no gratitude for that?
I didn't vote for them in 2015 nor did cameron want brexit...he expected to be in coalition with the shit dems and have to give up the referendum as the price. I do not believe for a minute he actually wanted it
Yes but Cameron fell and it became a party of Brexit and the populist right.
I'll be voting for Tom T, hope he manages to pull it out of the bag. Jenrick will be worse than Hague was IMO, speaks to the core voter but no one else.
That's unfair - to Hague.
Jenrick would be worse than Iain Duncan Smith.
Hague and IDS faced Blair at his peak, the most charismatic and centrist leader Labour have ever had who was elected with 43% of the vote in 1997.
Jenrick would only have to face Starmer, one of the dullest leaders Labour have ever had, who only managed 33% of the vote even this year.
Indeed even Hague would probably have beaten Brown in 2010 had Howard been elected leader not him in 1997 and he replaced Howard after the 2001 defeat and stayed on after gains in 2005
So when Jenrick leads them to fourth party status he really has no excuse?
It's rarely mentioned here - but critical for the party's future - to appreciate that the LibDems directly gained around 60 seats on July 4th, and many with large majorities (here in Esher and Walton it was over 12,000 and a 22% margin).
The Tories have only have a lead of 49 seats, so a further switch of just 25 next time will leave them the third party. These are the voters - and those who voted Labour - we need to win back just to survive, let alone any eventual return to Government.
To be honest the Tories are more likely to bring back Reform voters than LD voters for now with their leadership pick, the former voted positively Tory in 2019 for Boris and Brexit, the latter only voted Tory to keep out Corbyn.
Unless Labour replaced Starmer with Rayner say I can't see LD voters going Tory anytime soon, even if Tugendhat was Tory leader.
Those who switched to Labour from Tory though are natural swing voters who may go Tory again if the economy is poor or Tory or Reform if the boats aren't stopped largely regardless of who is Tory leader.
Esher and Walton is now only the 250th Tory target seat, they could get a majority even if it stayed LD
I agree that the Tories mightbenefit from an unpopular Government, but that can't be guaranteed. The LibDems are (unfortunately) another sizeable opposition party and may also benefit.
I want as many former Tory voters to return to the fold, including those who 'defected' to Reform. But that can only happen when the party first appreciates the reasons for its huge rejection (Johnson's antics/sleaze destroyed any moral case - as did too many Tory MPs and the tawdry spiviness of Sunak's PPS and other CCHQ luninaries buzzing off to the bookies - and that Truss did the same for economic competence.
Then the hard work of devising credible social and economic policies that will appeal to younger (30-55?) people and their families. I have little confidence that either can be achieved by Jenrick and not at all should Badenoch or Patel be elected.
Remember though the median voter is already now 50 not 30!
All the Remain voting fiscally conservative Tories who might have gone LD pretty much left on 4th July anyway
I'd be (genuinely) interested in how you see the Tories getting to 200 seats, led alone 325.
In truth, you seem bewilderingly blase about the huge swathes of former True Blues no longer supporting the party. Relying on Labour's unpopularity and a bizarre pact with Farage (who openly wants to destroy the Conservatives, and which will drive away even more of us) simply isn't credible.
Thatcher in 1979 won as she offered right wing red meat and the Labour government was unpopular and failing on the economy and got over 40% of the vote and a clear majority. Cameron offered 'hug a hoodie', as green and centrist and socially liberal an agenda as you can get in 2010 and still failed to get over 40% or a majority.
If the right is reunited with the aim of getting rid of Labour and a Labour government unpopular at the next general election anything can happen.
Elections are not always won by liberal centrists, even Starmer got just 33% last month, 7% less than Corbyn got in 2017 and just 1% more than Corbyn got in 2019. There was hardly a surge of enthusiasm for Starmer centrism, it was the divide on the right that gave him a landslide!
Were you even alive in 1979? I was actively campaigning then and was elected a Councillor in that election. Your depiction of that era is seriously flawed. The Tory manifesto was hardly extreme and behind Callagahan and Healey, the far left of the Labour Party was in the ascendant. Mrs T was supported by many 'moderates'. With respect, you are far too simplistic in your analyses.
And the mantra of 'uniting the right' where the putative partner is out to destroy the Conservative Party is one that should be rejected by our members.
Nonetheless in 1979 Callaghan was the centrist leader, Thatcher the rightwinger. Sunak was also on the centrist wing of the Tory party and lost this year.
In 2019 Boris did a pact with Farage and won a Tory landslide, as long as we have FPTP Farage needs a deal with the Tories to gain seats as much as the Tories need a largely clear run from Reform to gain seats. After all Labour only put up paper candidates with no central support in LD target seats this year and the LDs only put up paper candidates in Labour target seats too
Would this be the same Jim Callaghan who went begging to the IMF when the UK ran out of money?
I just want to make sure that we're not talking about different Jim Callaghan's.
We did not run out of money. The IMF loan was not drawn, and it was just another case of wildly inaccurate official economic statistics.
I'll be voting for Tom T, hope he manages to pull it out of the bag. Jenrick will be worse than Hague was IMO, speaks to the core voter but no one else.
That's unfair - to Hague.
Jenrick would be worse than Iain Duncan Smith.
Hague and IDS faced Blair at his peak, the most charismatic and centrist leader Labour have ever had who was elected with 43% of the vote in 1997.
Jenrick would only have to face Starmer, one of the dullest leaders Labour have ever had, who only managed 33% of the vote even this year.
Indeed even Hague would probably have beaten Brown in 2010 had Howard been elected leader not him in 1997 and he replaced Howard after the 2001 defeat and stayed on after gains in 2005
So when Jenrick leads them to fourth party status he really has no excuse?
It's rarely mentioned here - but critical for the party's future - to appreciate that the LibDems directly gained around 60 seats on July 4th, and many with large majorities (here in Esher and Walton it was over 12,000 and a 22% margin).
The Tories have only have a lead of 49 seats, so a further switch of just 25 next time will leave them the third party. These are the voters - and those who voted Labour - we need to win back just to survive, let alone any eventual return to Government.
To be honest the Tories are more likely to bring back Reform voters than LD voters for now with their leadership pick, the former voted positively Tory in 2019 for Boris and Brexit, the latter only voted Tory to keep out Corbyn.
Unless Labour replaced Starmer with Rayner say I can't see LD voters going Tory anytime soon, even if Tugendhat was Tory leader.
Those who switched to Labour from Tory though are natural swing voters who may go Tory again if the economy is poor or Tory or Reform if the boats aren't stopped largely regardless of who is Tory leader.
Esher and Walton is now only the 250th Tory target seat, they could get a majority even if it stayed LD
I agree that the Tories mightbenefit from an unpopular Government, but that can't be guaranteed. The LibDems are (unfortunately) another sizeable opposition party and may also benefit.
I want as many former Tory voters to return to the fold, including those who 'defected' to Reform. But that can only happen when the party first appreciates the reasons for its huge rejection (Johnson's antics/sleaze destroyed any moral case - as did too many Tory MPs and the tawdry spiviness of Sunak's PPS and other CCHQ luninaries buzzing off to the bookies - and that Truss did the same for economic competence.
Then the hard work of devising credible social and economic policies that will appeal to younger (30-55?) people and their families. I have little confidence that either can be achieved by Jenrick and not at all should Badenoch or Patel be elected.
Remember though the median voter is already now 50 not 30!
All the Remain voting fiscally conservative Tories who might have gone LD pretty much left on 4th July anyway
I'd be (genuinely) interested in how you see the Tories getting to 200 seats, led alone 325.
In truth, you seem bewilderingly blase about the huge swathes of former True Blues no longer supporting the party. Relying on Labour's unpopularity and a bizarre pact with Farage (who openly wants to destroy the Conservatives, and which will drive away even more of us) simply isn't credible.
Thatcher in 1979 won as she offered right wing red meat and the Labour government was unpopular and failing on the economy and got over 40% of the vote and a clear majority. Cameron offered 'hug a hoodie', as green and centrist and socially liberal an agenda as you can get in 2010 and still failed to get over 40% or a majority.
If the right is reunited with the aim of getting rid of Labour and a Labour government unpopular at the next general election anything can happen.
Elections are not always won by liberal centrists, even Starmer got just 33% last month, 7% less than Corbyn got in 2017 and just 1% more than Corbyn got in 2019. There was hardly a surge of enthusiasm for Starmer centrism, it was the divide on the right that gave him a landslide!
As a right winger can I just say I don't want anything to do with the tory party, you are a bunch of cupids as mr everett used to say. I would love your party to die
Yes well as you haven't voted Tory since 2010 anyway, we can probably manage without you.
You sound like the type of voter who now swings between Reform and the English Democrats, has a Tommy Robinson poster in his bedroom and wouldn't touch any of the main parties with a bargepole!
No I am the type of voter that has now withdrawn my mandate and regards the state and all its institutions in total contempt....we are the only demographic growing so think about that
I'll be voting for Tom T, hope he manages to pull it out of the bag. Jenrick will be worse than Hague was IMO, speaks to the core voter but no one else.
That's unfair - to Hague.
Jenrick would be worse than Iain Duncan Smith.
Hague and IDS faced Blair at his peak, the most charismatic and centrist leader Labour have ever had who was elected with 43% of the vote in 1997.
Jenrick would only have to face Starmer, one of the dullest leaders Labour have ever had, who only managed 33% of the vote even this year.
Indeed even Hague would probably have beaten Brown in 2010 had Howard been elected leader not him in 1997 and he replaced Howard after the 2001 defeat and stayed on after gains in 2005
So when Jenrick leads them to fourth party status he really has no excuse?
It's rarely mentioned here - but critical for the party's future - to appreciate that the LibDems directly gained around 60 seats on July 4th, and many with large majorities (here in Esher and Walton it was over 12,000 and a 22% margin).
The Tories have only have a lead of 49 seats, so a further switch of just 25 next time will leave them the third party. These are the voters - and those who voted Labour - we need to win back just to survive, let alone any eventual return to Government.
To be honest the Tories are more likely to bring back Reform voters than LD voters for now with their leadership pick, the former voted positively Tory in 2019 for Boris and Brexit, the latter only voted Tory to keep out Corbyn.
Unless Labour replaced Starmer with Rayner say I can't see LD voters going Tory anytime soon, even if Tugendhat was Tory leader.
Those who switched to Labour from Tory though are natural swing voters who may go Tory again if the economy is poor or Tory or Reform if the boats aren't stopped largely regardless of who is Tory leader.
Esher and Walton is now only the 250th Tory target seat, they could get a majority even if it stayed LD
I agree that the Tories mightbenefit from an unpopular Government, but that can't be guaranteed. The LibDems are (unfortunately) another sizeable opposition party and may also benefit.
I want as many former Tory voters to return to the fold, including those who 'defected' to Reform. But that can only happen when the party first appreciates the reasons for its huge rejection (Johnson's antics/sleaze destroyed any moral case - as did too many Tory MPs and the tawdry spiviness of Sunak's PPS and other CCHQ luninaries buzzing off to the bookies - and that Truss did the same for economic competence.
Then the hard work of devising credible social and economic policies that will appeal to younger (30-55?) people and their families. I have little confidence that either can be achieved by Jenrick and not at all should Badenoch or Patel be elected.
Remember though the median voter is already now 50 not 30!
All the Remain voting fiscally conservative Tories who might have gone LD pretty much left on 4th July anyway
I'd be (genuinely) interested in how you see the Tories getting to 200 seats, led alone 325.
In truth, you seem bewilderingly blase about the huge swathes of former True Blues no longer supporting the party. Relying on Labour's unpopularity and a bizarre pact with Farage (who openly wants to destroy the Conservatives, and which will drive away even more of us) simply isn't credible.
Thatcher in 1979 won as she offered right wing red meat and the Labour government was unpopular and failing on the economy and got over 40% of the vote and a clear majority. Cameron offered 'hug a hoodie', as green and centrist and socially liberal an agenda as you can get in 2010 and still failed to get over 40% or a majority.
If the right is reunited with the aim of getting rid of Labour and a Labour government unpopular at the next general election anything can happen.
Elections are not always won by liberal centrists, even Starmer got just 33% last month, 7% less than Corbyn got in 2017 and just 1% more than Corbyn got in 2019. There was hardly a surge of enthusiasm for Starmer centrism, it was the divide on the right that gave him a landslide!
Were you even alive in 1979? I was actively campaigning then and was elected a Councillor in that election. Your depiction of that era is seriously flawed. The Tory manifesto was hardly extreme and behind Callagahan and Healey, the far left of the Labour Party was in the ascendant. Mrs T was supported by many 'moderates'. With respect, you are far too simplistic in your analyses.
And the mantra of 'uniting the right' where the putative partner is out to destroy the Conservative Party is one that should be rejected by our members.
Nonetheless in 1979 Callaghan was the centrist leader, Thatcher the rightwinger. Sunak was also on the centrist wing of the Tory party and lost this year.
In 2019 Boris did a pact with Farage and won a Tory landslide, as long as we have FPTP Farage needs a deal with the Tories to gain seats as much as the Tories need a largely clear run from Reform to gain seats. After all Labour only put up paper candidates with no central support in LD target seats this year and the LDs only put up paper candidates in Labour target seats too
Would this be the same Jim Callaghan who went begging to the IMF when the UK ran out of money?
I just want to make sure that we're not talking about different Jim Callaghan's.
We did not run out of money. The IMF loan was not drawn, and it was just another case of wildly inaccurate official economic statistics.
We still did the cuts though. Suspect the point of it was to get cover for the cuts "the nasty men at the IMF made us do it"
Does anyone else have a feeling of dread at what seems to be going on at the moment re violence and disorder.
Twitter/X is not the real world; I know; but it’s getting very nasty out there.
I genuinely do fear there is more to come.
One thing we can say about Starmer is that he is a serious guy. Maybe he will go after social media as he says?
Ah yes, the old ‘censor the internet’ approach, that’s the reflexive action for Starmer and his lefty lawyer friends, but completely unenforceable in practice.
At a time when Twitter has a totally maverick boss who doesn’t give a f**k about profits and wants to stand up for freedom of speech.
Musk does not stand for freedom of speech. He shuts down accounts he does not like. That is his prerogative. But he is not above the law.
I don’t agree with everything he does, but most of what he’s banning is critism of himself and the company, rather than political philosophies. It’s not perfect, but it’s significantly better than the previous management of the platform.
Bullshit. Absolute bullshit.
Musk is absolutely up Trump's backside atm, and his tweets show this. He is promoting right-wing shit at every opportunity, and his brainless followers slurp it up.
And like fish, companies rot from the head. If you're a Twix employee, you'll know very well what Musk wants. And it isn't in any way neutral.
Okay, so who has Twitter blocked of any political significance?
His own political views are not those of his many companies.
He sacks anyone who disagrees with him. Like many 'hype' bosses, he is surrounded by yes-men; men who know that if you do what the boss wants, you're fine. If you don't... you're not.
Something that was briefly suspended and then reinstated, which if it been from Trump four years ago would have been instantly and banned for racism and misogyny.
Oh, come off it, it's got bells on. You asked for an example, and I gave you one.
And it's odd how, when it came back, it was initially in permanent read-only mode before the stink caused them to give full access back.
Oh okay, so under New Twitter these things get sorted out within hours, whereas under Old Twitter these things would run for months on end or result in permanent bans.
There are a number of things that are better about new Twitter: I think the community notes feature generally works well, and I like the ability to only see posts from people I follow. On the other hand, quite a few people I previously followed have left the platform, and it seems a little less essential than it did before.
Didn’t Trump say he was the only one who could persuade Putin to send Gershkovich home? The things not necessarily turning out to the Donald’s advantage are mounting up.
But I suppose the Donald - who is "not like normal politicians" - could have done it with a single phone call. No need for all these complex machinations.
If so, why did he not free the just released U.S. marine, who has been a hostage for six years ?
Couldn't be bothered ?
That would be my take, yes. No effort free Reality TV moment available.
I'll be voting for Tom T, hope he manages to pull it out of the bag. Jenrick will be worse than Hague was IMO, speaks to the core voter but no one else.
That's unfair - to Hague.
Jenrick would be worse than Iain Duncan Smith.
Hague and IDS faced Blair at his peak, the most charismatic and centrist leader Labour have ever had who was elected with 43% of the vote in 1997.
Jenrick would only have to face Starmer, one of the dullest leaders Labour have ever had, who only managed 33% of the vote even this year.
Indeed even Hague would probably have beaten Brown in 2010 had Howard been elected leader not him in 1997 and he replaced Howard after the 2001 defeat and stayed on after gains in 2005
So when Jenrick leads them to fourth party status he really has no excuse?
It's rarely mentioned here - but critical for the party's future - to appreciate that the LibDems directly gained around 60 seats on July 4th, and many with large majorities (here in Esher and Walton it was over 12,000 and a 22% margin).
The Tories have only have a lead of 49 seats, so a further switch of just 25 next time will leave them the third party. These are the voters - and those who voted Labour - we need to win back just to survive, let alone any eventual return to Government.
To be honest the Tories are more likely to bring back Reform voters than LD voters for now with their leadership pick, the former voted positively Tory in 2019 for Boris and Brexit, the latter only voted Tory to keep out Corbyn.
Unless Labour replaced Starmer with Rayner say I can't see LD voters going Tory anytime soon, even if Tugendhat was Tory leader.
Those who switched to Labour from Tory though are natural swing voters who may go Tory again if the economy is poor or Tory or Reform if the boats aren't stopped largely regardless of who is Tory leader.
Esher and Walton is now only the 250th Tory target seat, they could get a majority even if it stayed LD
I agree that the Tories mightbenefit from an unpopular Government, but that can't be guaranteed. The LibDems are (unfortunately) another sizeable opposition party and may also benefit.
I want as many former Tory voters to return to the fold, including those who 'defected' to Reform. But that can only happen when the party first appreciates the reasons for its huge rejection (Johnson's antics/sleaze destroyed any moral case - as did too many Tory MPs and the tawdry spiviness of Sunak's PPS and other CCHQ luninaries buzzing off to the bookies - and that Truss did the same for economic competence.
Then the hard work of devising credible social and economic policies that will appeal to younger (30-55?) people and their families. I have little confidence that either can be achieved by Jenrick and not at all should Badenoch or Patel be elected.
Remember though the median voter is already now 50 not 30!
All the Remain voting fiscally conservative Tories who might have gone LD pretty much left on 4th July anyway
I'd be (genuinely) interested in how you see the Tories getting to 200 seats, led alone 325.
In truth, you seem bewilderingly blase about the huge swathes of former True Blues no longer supporting the party. Relying on Labour's unpopularity and a bizarre pact with Farage (who openly wants to destroy the Conservatives, and which will drive away even more of us) simply isn't credible.
Thatcher in 1979 won as she offered right wing red meat and the Labour government was unpopular and failing on the economy and got over 40% of the vote and a clear majority. Cameron offered 'hug a hoodie', as green and centrist and socially liberal an agenda as you can get in 2010 and still failed to get over 40% or a majority.
If the right is reunited with the aim of getting rid of Labour and a Labour government unpopular at the next general election anything can happen.
Elections are not always won by liberal centrists, even Starmer got just 33% last month, 7% less than Corbyn got in 2017 and just 1% more than Corbyn got in 2019. There was hardly a surge of enthusiasm for Starmer centrism, it was the divide on the right that gave him a landslide!
Were you even alive in 1979? I was actively campaigning then and was elected a Councillor in that election. Your depiction of that era is seriously flawed. The Tory manifesto was hardly extreme and behind Callagahan and Healey, the far left of the Labour Party was in the ascendant. Mrs T was supported by many 'moderates'. With respect, you are far too simplistic in your analyses.
And the mantra of 'uniting the right' where the putative partner is out to destroy the Conservative Party is one that should be rejected by our members.
Nonetheless in 1979 Callaghan was the centrist leader, Thatcher the rightwinger. Sunak was also on the centrist wing of the Tory party and lost this year.
In 2019 Boris did a pact with Farage and won a Tory landslide, as long as we have FPTP Farage needs a deal with the Tories to gain seats as much as the Tories need a largely clear run from Reform to gain seats. After all Labour only put up paper candidates with no central support in LD target seats this year and the LDs only put up paper candidates in Labour target seats too
Would this be the same Jim Callaghan who went begging to the IMF when the UK ran out of money?
I just want to make sure that we're not talking about different Jim Callaghan's.
We did not run out of money. The IMF loan was not drawn, and it was just another case of wildly inaccurate official economic statistics.
He still went begging to the IMF. I grant you that it later turned out to be unnecessary,
Yes but Cameron fell and it became a party of Brexit and the populist right.
What's not to like?
Well, that.
I was ambivalent on Brexit and only voted Remain because I was worried - entirely rightly as it turned out - that a Leave win might mean the end of a government that I actually liked.
When arguing that the judge should impose reporting restrictions preventing Rudakubana's identification, the prosecution said the suspect had an “autism spectrum disorder diagnosis”, and that he had been “unwilling to leave the house and communicate with family for a period of time”.
The judge allowed Rudakubana's name to be made public, saying "the balance clearly comes down in favour of the public interest".
No grand narrative. Just a young man not coping with the world, with tragic consequences.
It matches with the descriptions from the village that no one saw him, though they did see his parents.
Perhaps lockdown at a critical stage of social development was a factor, though certainly isn't an excuse.
Perhaps if people stopped trying to make excuses for evil bastards and instead told them they are evil bastards instead of handing them excuses "Its not you fault because you (came from a broken family/were in lockdown at a certain period/ too poor/ etc) delete as applicable"
I certainly did not use it as an excuse, but if we ignore the social and economic roots of violent and criminal behaviour we will struggle to control and prevent it.
Because there are no roots frankly, plenty of people grow up in those situations and don't go on to commit those sort of insanities. Giving them a reason however to excuse their actions is giving them permission
So what's your reason for turning out as such a misanthropic paranoid git?
When arguing that the judge should impose reporting restrictions preventing Rudakubana's identification, the prosecution said the suspect had an “autism spectrum disorder diagnosis”, and that he had been “unwilling to leave the house and communicate with family for a period of time”.
The judge allowed Rudakubana's name to be made public, saying "the balance clearly comes down in favour of the public interest".
No grand narrative. Just a young man not coping with the world, with tragic consequences.
It matches with the descriptions from the village that no one saw him, though they did see his parents.
Perhaps lockdown at a critical stage of social development was a factor, though certainly isn't an excuse.
Perhaps if people stopped trying to make excuses for evil bastards and instead told them they are evil bastards instead of handing them excuses "Its not you fault because you (came from a broken family/were in lockdown at a certain period/ too poor/ etc) delete as applicable"
How would that have worked before this lad came to unfortunate prominence? Do you possess unerring evil bastard radar?
When I was growing up bad people were bad people no excuses, we didnt have these sort of incidents nearly as frequently, the more people make exuses for these acts about why the bad guy did it the more we seem to get of them. Sorry if thats blunt but its also true
What excuses were made for Rudakubana before his terrible act? You speak with such unerring certainty I assume you must know.
I didn't say they were before but I am sure there will be plenty made now...oh he was abused, he grew up in poverty etc we should be lenient it was societies fault....just watch the guardian
I think you're the first to mention poverty or abuse. ASD has been mentioned, in which case we're talking mad not bad (though the practical outworking can be similar.)
And that's the problem with tidy moralities. Sometimes, people turn out dysfunctional, and it's nobody's fault, not even the perpetrator and all society can do is manage the situation as well as it can. And it's infuriating not having control of the situation, and it's horrible being on the receiving end. But it is what it is.
When arguing that the judge should impose reporting restrictions preventing Rudakubana's identification, the prosecution said the suspect had an “autism spectrum disorder diagnosis”, and that he had been “unwilling to leave the house and communicate with family for a period of time”.
The judge allowed Rudakubana's name to be made public, saying "the balance clearly comes down in favour of the public interest".
No grand narrative. Just a young man not coping with the world, with tragic consequences.
It matches with the descriptions from the village that no one saw him, though they did see his parents.
Perhaps lockdown at a critical stage of social development was a factor, though certainly isn't an excuse.
Perhaps if people stopped trying to make excuses for evil bastards and instead told them they are evil bastards instead of handing them excuses "Its not you fault because you (came from a broken family/were in lockdown at a certain period/ too poor/ etc) delete as applicable"
I certainly did not use it as an excuse, but if we ignore the social and economic roots of violent and criminal behaviour we will struggle to control and prevent it.
Because there are no roots frankly, plenty of people grow up in those situations and don't go on to commit those sort of insanities. Giving them a reason however to excuse their actions is giving them permission
So what's your reason for turning out as such a misanthropic paranoid git?
Well not finding most people worthwhile humans accounts for being misanthroptic, paranoid I am however not I merely know to much about the surveillance state politicians and companies are bring in by stealth to be comfortable. But you know what...I come from a poor background, a broken home....I never once felt the need to go stab little girls in a dance class
I'll be voting for Tom T, hope he manages to pull it out of the bag. Jenrick will be worse than Hague was IMO, speaks to the core voter but no one else.
That's unfair - to Hague.
Jenrick would be worse than Iain Duncan Smith.
Hague and IDS faced Blair at his peak, the most charismatic and centrist leader Labour have ever had who was elected with 43% of the vote in 1997.
Jenrick would only have to face Starmer, one of the dullest leaders Labour have ever had, who only managed 33% of the vote even this year.
Indeed even Hague would probably have beaten Brown in 2010 had Howard been elected leader not him in 1997 and he replaced Howard after the 2001 defeat and stayed on after gains in 2005
So when Jenrick leads them to fourth party status he really has no excuse?
It's rarely mentioned here - but critical for the party's future - to appreciate that the LibDems directly gained around 60 seats on July 4th, and many with large majorities (here in Esher and Walton it was over 12,000 and a 22% margin).
The Tories have only have a lead of 49 seats, so a further switch of just 25 next time will leave them the third party. These are the voters - and those who voted Labour - we need to win back just to survive, let alone any eventual return to Government.
Really ? You need to win back the 2.8 million conservative voters who stayed at home. The protest voters will come back when theyre pissed off with Labour.
Indeed. Most of the Lib Dem gains were a product of highly coordinated tactical voting by people who are first and foremost anti-Tory and who aren't there to be 'won back' because they're never going to be voting Tory in the first place.
Comparing the increases in vote share to the LDs and to Labour in very similar, often neighbouring seats reveals a pattern of deliberate, explicit collusion on a scale never before seen.
To pick just two not particularly standout examples:
North Cornwall: LDs up 18%, Labour down 4%; but St Austell & Newquay: LDs down 0.5%, Labour up 7.5%
Bicester & Woodstock: LDs up 12%, Labour down 0.5%; but Buckingham & Bletchley: LDs down 6.5%, Labour up 9%
Nothing remotely resembling a 'Uniform Swing', and no evidence of genuine popularity for either party, just a concerted effort to vote out incumbent Tories.
These are votes cast by transients on the basis of hate, not hope. So going after this cohort would be an absolute fools errand and a misreading of the numbers.
So voters who stayed at home, Reform voters and even those who've never voted before who haven't bought into a life of bitter Toryphobic bile are all a more fertile source of potential votes next time.
Reading West and Mid-Berkshire: Labour up 12.1, LDs down 5.9 Didcot and Wantage: LD up 8.5, Labour down 1.3
You may call it “… deliberate, explicit collusion,” but I think Nick Palmer and I might disagree.
When arguing that the judge should impose reporting restrictions preventing Rudakubana's identification, the prosecution said the suspect had an “autism spectrum disorder diagnosis”, and that he had been “unwilling to leave the house and communicate with family for a period of time”.
The judge allowed Rudakubana's name to be made public, saying "the balance clearly comes down in favour of the public interest".
No grand narrative. Just a young man not coping with the world, with tragic consequences.
It matches with the descriptions from the village that no one saw him, though they did see his parents.
Perhaps lockdown at a critical stage of social development was a factor, though certainly isn't an excuse.
Perhaps if people stopped trying to make excuses for evil bastards and instead told them they are evil bastards instead of handing them excuses "Its not you fault because you (came from a broken family/were in lockdown at a certain period/ too poor/ etc) delete as applicable"
How would that have worked before this lad came to unfortunate prominence? Do you possess unerring evil bastard radar?
When I was growing up bad people were bad people no excuses, we didnt have these sort of incidents nearly as frequently, the more people make exuses for these acts about why the bad guy did it the more we seem to get of them. Sorry if thats blunt but its also true
What excuses were made for Rudakubana before his terrible act? You speak with such unerring certainty I assume you must know.
I didn't say they were before but I am sure there will be plenty made now...oh he was abused, he grew up in poverty etc we should be lenient it was societies fault....just watch the guardian
I think you're the first to mention poverty or abuse. ASD has been mentioned, in which case we're talking mad not bad (though the practical outworking can be similar.)
And that's the problem with tidy moralities. Sometimes, people turn out dysfunctional, and it's nobody's fault, not even the perpetrator and all society can do is manage the situation as well as it can. And it's infuriating not having control of the situation, and it's horrible being on the receiving end. But it is what it is.
I mentioned them because you will no doubt see them trotted out in papers like the guardian and he will be claimed to actually be a victim instead of a nasty little shit
I'll be voting for Tom T, hope he manages to pull it out of the bag. Jenrick will be worse than Hague was IMO, speaks to the core voter but no one else.
That's unfair - to Hague.
Jenrick would be worse than Iain Duncan Smith.
Hague and IDS faced Blair at his peak, the most charismatic and centrist leader Labour have ever had who was elected with 43% of the vote in 1997.
Jenrick would only have to face Starmer, one of the dullest leaders Labour have ever had, who only managed 33% of the vote even this year.
Indeed even Hague would probably have beaten Brown in 2010 had Howard been elected leader not him in 1997 and he replaced Howard after the 2001 defeat and stayed on after gains in 2005
So when Jenrick leads them to fourth party status he really has no excuse?
It's rarely mentioned here - but critical for the party's future - to appreciate that the LibDems directly gained around 60 seats on July 4th, and many with large majorities (here in Esher and Walton it was over 12,000 and a 22% margin).
The Tories have only have a lead of 49 seats, so a further switch of just 25 next time will leave them the third party. These are the voters - and those who voted Labour - we need to win back just to survive, let alone any eventual return to Government.
To be honest the Tories are more likely to bring back Reform voters than LD voters for now with their leadership pick, the former voted positively Tory in 2019 for Boris and Brexit, the latter only voted Tory to keep out Corbyn.
Unless Labour replaced Starmer with Rayner say I can't see LD voters going Tory anytime soon, even if Tugendhat was Tory leader.
Those who switched to Labour from Tory though are natural swing voters who may go Tory again if the economy is poor or Tory or Reform if the boats aren't stopped largely regardless of who is Tory leader.
Esher and Walton is now only the 250th Tory target seat, they could get a majority even if it stayed LD
I agree that the Tories mightbenefit from an unpopular Government, but that can't be guaranteed. The LibDems are (unfortunately) another sizeable opposition party and may also benefit.
I want as many former Tory voters to return to the fold, including those who 'defected' to Reform. But that can only happen when the party first appreciates the reasons for its huge rejection (Johnson's antics/sleaze destroyed any moral case - as did too many Tory MPs and the tawdry spiviness of Sunak's PPS and other CCHQ luninaries buzzing off to the bookies - and that Truss did the same for economic competence.
Then the hard work of devising credible social and economic policies that will appeal to younger (30-55?) people and their families. I have little confidence that either can be achieved by Jenrick and not at all should Badenoch or Patel be elected.
Remember though the median voter is already now 50 not 30!
All the Remain voting fiscally conservative Tories who might have gone LD pretty much left on 4th July anyway
I'd be (genuinely) interested in how you see the Tories getting to 200 seats, led alone 325.
In truth, you seem bewilderingly blase about the huge swathes of former True Blues no longer supporting the party. Relying on Labour's unpopularity and a bizarre pact with Farage (who openly wants to destroy the Conservatives, and which will drive away even more of us) simply isn't credible.
Thatcher in 1979 won as she offered right wing red meat and the Labour government was unpopular and failing on the economy and got over 40% of the vote and a clear majority. Cameron offered 'hug a hoodie', as green and centrist and socially liberal an agenda as you can get in 2010 and still failed to get over 40% or a majority.
If the right is reunited with the aim of getting rid of Labour and a Labour government unpopular at the next general election anything can happen.
Elections are not always won by liberal centrists, even Starmer got just 33% last month, 7% less than Corbyn got in 2017 and just 1% more than Corbyn got in 2019. There was hardly a surge of enthusiasm for Starmer centrism, it was the divide on the right that gave him a landslide!
As a right winger can I just say I don't want anything to do with the tory party, you are a bunch of cupids as mr everett used to say. I would love your party to die
Yes well as you haven't voted Tory since 2010 anyway, we can probably manage without you.
You sound like the type of voter who now swings between Reform and the English Democrats, has a Tommy Robinson poster in his bedroom and wouldn't touch any of the main parties with a bargepole!
No I am the type of voter that has now withdrawn my mandate and regards the state and all its institutions in total contempt....we are the only demographic growing so think about that
In the days when I had chickens and you didn't have to register them with Defra, a Libdem friend contacted me to advise me that Defra were advertising in their area for people to register their birds voluntarily due to Bird Flu and had I registered mine?
My response that what Defra don't have to know they are not going to know was met with total incomprehension. He saw such agents of the state as benign helpers building society.
Alas they are long dead now, the last one aged nine shortly before Defra imposed a six month lockdown on the poor creatures.
Now registration is compulsory even if you only have one.
Do we have any inkling of a motive regards this Stockport killer? His appearance in court suggests he had an agenda. Or just a pure sadist?
This Stockport thing is v useful it allows one to immediately identify who is getting their news from rightist bots on the cess pit formerly known as Twitter.
I'll be voting for Tom T, hope he manages to pull it out of the bag. Jenrick will be worse than Hague was IMO, speaks to the core voter but no one else.
That's unfair - to Hague.
Jenrick would be worse than Iain Duncan Smith.
Hague and IDS faced Blair at his peak, the most charismatic and centrist leader Labour have ever had who was elected with 43% of the vote in 1997.
Jenrick would only have to face Starmer, one of the dullest leaders Labour have ever had, who only managed 33% of the vote even this year.
Indeed even Hague would probably have beaten Brown in 2010 had Howard been elected leader not him in 1997 and he replaced Howard after the 2001 defeat and stayed on after gains in 2005
So when Jenrick leads them to fourth party status he really has no excuse?
It's rarely mentioned here - but critical for the party's future - to appreciate that the LibDems directly gained around 60 seats on July 4th, and many with large majorities (here in Esher and Walton it was over 12,000 and a 22% margin).
The Tories have only have a lead of 49 seats, so a further switch of just 25 next time will leave them the third party. These are the voters - and those who voted Labour - we need to win back just to survive, let alone any eventual return to Government.
To be honest the Tories are more likely to bring back Reform voters than LD voters for now with their leadership pick, the former voted positively Tory in 2019 for Boris and Brexit, the latter only voted Tory to keep out Corbyn.
Unless Labour replaced Starmer with Rayner say I can't see LD voters going Tory anytime soon, even if Tugendhat was Tory leader.
Those who switched to Labour from Tory though are natural swing voters who may go Tory again if the economy is poor or Tory or Reform if the boats aren't stopped largely regardless of who is Tory leader.
Esher and Walton is now only the 250th Tory target seat, they could get a majority even if it stayed LD
I agree that the Tories mightbenefit from an unpopular Government, but that can't be guaranteed. The LibDems are (unfortunately) another sizeable opposition party and may also benefit.
I want as many former Tory voters to return to the fold, including those who 'defected' to Reform. But that can only happen when the party first appreciates the reasons for its huge rejection (Johnson's antics/sleaze destroyed any moral case - as did too many Tory MPs and the tawdry spiviness of Sunak's PPS and other CCHQ luninaries buzzing off to the bookies - and that Truss did the same for economic competence.
Then the hard work of devising credible social and economic policies that will appeal to younger (30-55?) people and their families. I have little confidence that either can be achieved by Jenrick and not at all should Badenoch or Patel be elected.
Remember though the median voter is already now 50 not 30!
All the Remain voting fiscally conservative Tories who might have gone LD pretty much left on 4th July anyway
I'd be (genuinely) interested in how you see the Tories getting to 200 seats, led alone 325.
In truth, you seem bewilderingly blase about the huge swathes of former True Blues no longer supporting the party. Relying on Labour's unpopularity and a bizarre pact with Farage (who openly wants to destroy the Conservatives, and which will drive away even more of us) simply isn't credible.
I voted tory until 2010, you wont be ever getting me back frankly simple as that. I rather not vote than vote for your party of idiots
Never is a long time...
Absolutely ruling anything out for ever is silly.
I might even theoretically vote Labour if they somehow reinvent themselves some day as a small-state, pro-individual Libertarian party...
More realistically I suppose I did technically once vote Labour - Frank Dobson as my second choice in the inaugural London Mayor election in a futile attempt to stop Ken. And soon realised that SV doesn't work as a system if your preferences don't align.
I'll be voting for Tom T, hope he manages to pull it out of the bag. Jenrick will be worse than Hague was IMO, speaks to the core voter but no one else.
That's unfair - to Hague.
Jenrick would be worse than Iain Duncan Smith.
Hague and IDS faced Blair at his peak, the most charismatic and centrist leader Labour have ever had who was elected with 43% of the vote in 1997.
Jenrick would only have to face Starmer, one of the dullest leaders Labour have ever had, who only managed 33% of the vote even this year.
Indeed even Hague would probably have beaten Brown in 2010 had Howard been elected leader not him in 1997 and he replaced Howard after the 2001 defeat and stayed on after gains in 2005
So when Jenrick leads them to fourth party status he really has no excuse?
It's rarely mentioned here - but critical for the party's future - to appreciate that the LibDems directly gained around 60 seats on July 4th, and many with large majorities (here in Esher and Walton it was over 12,000 and a 22% margin).
The Tories have only have a lead of 49 seats, so a further switch of just 25 next time will leave them the third party. These are the voters - and those who voted Labour - we need to win back just to survive, let alone any eventual return to Government.
To be honest the Tories are more likely to bring back Reform voters than LD voters for now with their leadership pick, the former voted positively Tory in 2019 for Boris and Brexit, the latter only voted Tory to keep out Corbyn.
Unless Labour replaced Starmer with Rayner say I can't see LD voters going Tory anytime soon, even if Tugendhat was Tory leader.
Those who switched to Labour from Tory though are natural swing voters who may go Tory again if the economy is poor or Tory or Reform if the boats aren't stopped largely regardless of who is Tory leader.
Esher and Walton is now only the 250th Tory target seat, they could get a majority even if it stayed LD
I agree that the Tories mightbenefit from an unpopular Government, but that can't be guaranteed. The LibDems are (unfortunately) another sizeable opposition party and may also benefit.
I want as many former Tory voters to return to the fold, including those who 'defected' to Reform. But that can only happen when the party first appreciates the reasons for its huge rejection (Johnson's antics/sleaze destroyed any moral case - as did too many Tory MPs and the tawdry spiviness of Sunak's PPS and other CCHQ luninaries buzzing off to the bookies - and that Truss did the same for economic competence.
Then the hard work of devising credible social and economic policies that will appeal to younger (30-55?) people and their families. I have little confidence that either can be achieved by Jenrick and not at all should Badenoch or Patel be elected.
Remember though the median voter is already now 50 not 30!
All the Remain voting fiscally conservative Tories who might have gone LD pretty much left on 4th July anyway
I'd be (genuinely) interested in how you see the Tories getting to 200 seats, led alone 325.
In truth, you seem bewilderingly blase about the huge swathes of former True Blues no longer supporting the party. Relying on Labour's unpopularity and a bizarre pact with Farage (who openly wants to destroy the Conservatives, and which will drive away even more of us) simply isn't credible.
I voted tory until 2010, you wont be ever getting me back frankly simple as that. I rather not vote than vote for your party of idiots
Never is a long time...
Absolutely ruling anything out for ever is silly.
I might even theoretically vote Labour if they somehow reinvent themselves some day as a small-state, pro-individual Libertarian party...
More realistically I suppose I did technically once vote Labour - Frank Dobson as my second choice in the inaugural London Mayor election in a futile attempt to stop Ken. And soon realised that SV doesn't work as a system if your preferences don't align.
Chances of me dying before the tory part once gets back to someone worth voting for slim to nil. Never is till I die as I probably won't vote from the grave
When arguing that the judge should impose reporting restrictions preventing Rudakubana's identification, the prosecution said the suspect had an “autism spectrum disorder diagnosis”, and that he had been “unwilling to leave the house and communicate with family for a period of time”.
The judge allowed Rudakubana's name to be made public, saying "the balance clearly comes down in favour of the public interest".
No grand narrative. Just a young man not coping with the world, with tragic consequences.
Yep, that little bit of detail suggests maybe no agenda (of course there may be more to come out). I wondered from frank booth's comment whether i'd missed something significant
High functioning autism explains nothing about this dreadful crime, where there is no apparent connection between killer and killed or even their location. Unless there was third party involvement, we might never know why three girls lie dead and more hospitalised.
I meant the unwilling to leave house and communicate with family bit, which may indicate distress.
I'll be voting for Tom T, hope he manages to pull it out of the bag. Jenrick will be worse than Hague was IMO, speaks to the core voter but no one else.
That's unfair - to Hague.
Jenrick would be worse than Iain Duncan Smith.
Hague and IDS faced Blair at his peak, the most charismatic and centrist leader Labour have ever had who was elected with 43% of the vote in 1997.
Jenrick would only have to face Starmer, one of the dullest leaders Labour have ever had, who only managed 33% of the vote even this year.
Indeed even Hague would probably have beaten Brown in 2010 had Howard been elected leader not him in 1997 and he replaced Howard after the 2001 defeat and stayed on after gains in 2005
So when Jenrick leads them to fourth party status he really has no excuse?
It's rarely mentioned here - but critical for the party's future - to appreciate that the LibDems directly gained around 60 seats on July 4th, and many with large majorities (here in Esher and Walton it was over 12,000 and a 22% margin).
The Tories have only have a lead of 49 seats, so a further switch of just 25 next time will leave them the third party. These are the voters - and those who voted Labour - we need to win back just to survive, let alone any eventual return to Government.
To be honest the Tories are more likely to bring back Reform voters than LD voters for now with their leadership pick, the former voted positively Tory in 2019 for Boris and Brexit, the latter only voted Tory to keep out Corbyn.
Unless Labour replaced Starmer with Rayner say I can't see LD voters going Tory anytime soon, even if Tugendhat was Tory leader.
Those who switched to Labour from Tory though are natural swing voters who may go Tory again if the economy is poor or Tory or Reform if the boats aren't stopped largely regardless of who is Tory leader.
Esher and Walton is now only the 250th Tory target seat, they could get a majority even if it stayed LD
I agree that the Tories mightbenefit from an unpopular Government, but that can't be guaranteed. The LibDems are (unfortunately) another sizeable opposition party and may also benefit.
I want as many former Tory voters to return to the fold, including those who 'defected' to Reform. But that can only happen when the party first appreciates the reasons for its huge rejection (Johnson's antics/sleaze destroyed any moral case - as did too many Tory MPs and the tawdry spiviness of Sunak's PPS and other CCHQ luninaries buzzing off to the bookies - and that Truss did the same for economic competence.
Then the hard work of devising credible social and economic policies that will appeal to younger (30-55?) people and their families. I have little confidence that either can be achieved by Jenrick and not at all should Badenoch or Patel be elected.
Remember though the median voter is already now 50 not 30!
All the Remain voting fiscally conservative Tories who might have gone LD pretty much left on 4th July anyway
I'd be (genuinely) interested in how you see the Tories getting to 200 seats, led alone 325.
In truth, you seem bewilderingly blase about the huge swathes of former True Blues no longer supporting the party. Relying on Labour's unpopularity and a bizarre pact with Farage (who openly wants to destroy the Conservatives, and which will drive away even more of us) simply isn't credible.
I voted tory until 2010, you wont be ever getting me back frankly simple as that. I rather not vote than vote for your party of idiots
They did Brexit for you. Why no gratitude for that?
I didn't vote for them in 2015 nor did cameron want brexit...he expected to be in coalition with the shit dems and have to give up the referendum as the price. I do not believe for a minute he actually wanted it
Yes but Cameron fell and it became a party of Brexit and the populist right.
What's not to like?
They became a left of centre party not populist right if you watch what they did not what they said....increased immigration, highest tax and spend
If they think Jenrick is the answer then god help the party.
I'll retire to Bedlam.
He could surprise on the upside.
I am not a Tory, never voted Tory in a GE, only once in a local election, therefore I hold no torch for them and have little knowledge of Jenrick apart from his rather hapless time as a Minister.
Well, it just goes to show you should never judge a book by its cover.
I had you pegged as a diehard Conservative.
If you're one of the "I don't like any of them" brigade. fine, but what would you support or for what would you vote positively rather than negatively?
"pegged" !!!!!
Why would you have me down as a Tory, just as a matter of interest ?
I did post here that I was not going to vote, but in the end, and I said I would, I voted for Luke Akehurst our Labour candidate. I do not loathe Reform supporters like some people on this board, I live among many of them, but I didn't want to risk a Reform MP here and their economic policies were crackers. I'm socially liberal and fiscally more conservative so I like Rachel Reeves and the cut of her jib. I also don't think she has done anything wrong so far. I like the likes our Haigh, Cooper, Phillipson and Streeting too.
The Tories were just to utterly incompetent at the end. They needed putting out of their misery. SKS and co deserve a chance. Another 5 years of the preceding 5 years would be unbearable.
The only time I ever voted Tory was for a local councillor who was excellent and did alot for the ward. I saw that more as an endorsement of him personally than his party.
Pegged - as in a square one going into a round hole it would seem.
You've posted about as often as I have but as I drop in and out on here I don't read every post. I just had the sense you were often defending the Conservatives and being critical of Labour so I made the assumption which I shouldn't have done.
In truth, you aren't a million miles away from me and I'm happy to give the new Government a fair crack of the whip for all some on here seem to think the IMF will be here in four years. I'd only disagree the Conservatives didn't need putting out of their misery, they needed putting out of our misery.
I find Reform a paradox as I've said on here before - the anti-immigration line is all that holds them together. Farage and Tice are unreconstructed Thatcherites who want tax cuts especially for the wealthy while the Reform membership and voters are more nuanced - some still cling to the Johnsonian levelling up agenda, others simply want more spending and investment in WWC areas.
I suspect from the reform voters I know here they are social conservatives but want alot more spending here. Many went for Bojo due to the promise of levelling up. Our areas have been neglected and ignored for long enough. My hope is the local mayor here will make a difference. A reform MP probably won’t .
I think in places like this Reform could be a threat to labour in five years so they will need to do something for the area.
I think they just want solutions. High streets to stop being wastelands full of empty shops. That's not due to lack of spending, that's due to pension funds and their overvalued property portfolios.
Reform voters want a return to a past that is no longer possible - shops can only exist if there is appropriate spare cash to keep them going and in an awful lot of reform voting areas that cash doesn't exist.
We went to Redcar last night because the weather was decent. When you walk along the sea front and see that another few shops have closed it does get rather depression.
I'm not sure whose spare cash you mean, but I don't think I agree. It is natural for landlords to want to rent their properties to avoid paying to maintain them without an income. That should mean there is never a signficant amount of empty high street stock - rents should fall to meet demand. That's what has always happened in the past. Neighbourhoods have gone up and down, with posh shops replaced by more lowly shops, but there hasn't been a ghost town effect. This isn't happening now afaics because we have a big issue with pension funds being balls deep in commercial property and not wanting to accept that their assets are worth tens of millions less than they say they are. So they hang on to vastly unrealistic rents and nobody bites.
Yes retail shops are definitely yesterday's technology in most cases. We need to speed up the end of the high street, by making it much easier for shops to be converted back to residences. Of course the Luddites will protest for a while, and invoke lots of sentimental drivel to hold back progress, but hopefully they will be ignored.
I disagree, and that isn't the implication of what I am saying. What I'm saying is that physical retail in towns can very much thrive if the free market is allowed to operate in the high street property market, rather than large owners of commercial property bed-blocking it because they don't want to admit their portfolios are not worth what they say they are.
There is a big issue in this country with pension funds becoming massive blockers of progress. That's partly because Governments forced them away from investing in a more varied portfolio - once again, the state fucking up the economy. Rachel Reeves is right that these funds need to vary their portfolios and invest in 'economic growth' - the trouble is that to make 'economic growth' worth a damn, you have to create the conditions for it, and Labour don't just not know how, they don't want to know how.
I'd be surprised if Jenrick gets the job. My prediction is Cleverly or Badenoch.
Okay, I am no Tory, but Cleverly seems okay to me. Palatable. Still wouldn't vote for them
Jenrick grew up in Wolverhampton to working class parents, so will have more connection to provincial voters than Rishi did as will Cleverly from an average family in Lewisham
Switch “Lewisham” with “Blackheath”, and that reads rather differently.
I quite like the fact that Cleverly got his degree in hospitality management studies.
When arguing that the judge should impose reporting restrictions preventing Rudakubana's identification, the prosecution said the suspect had an “autism spectrum disorder diagnosis”, and that he had been “unwilling to leave the house and communicate with family for a period of time”.
The judge allowed Rudakubana's name to be made public, saying "the balance clearly comes down in favour of the public interest".
No grand narrative. Just a young man not coping with the world, with tragic consequences.
It matches with the descriptions from the village that no one saw him, though they did see his parents.
Perhaps lockdown at a critical stage of social development was a factor, though certainly isn't an excuse.
Perhaps if people stopped trying to make excuses for evil bastards and instead told them they are evil bastards instead of handing them excuses "Its not you fault because you (came from a broken family/were in lockdown at a certain period/ too poor/ etc) delete as applicable"
How would that have worked before this lad came to unfortunate prominence? Do you possess unerring evil bastard radar?
When I was growing up bad people were bad people no excuses, we didnt have these sort of incidents nearly as frequently, the more people make exuses for these acts about why the bad guy did it the more we seem to get of them. Sorry if thats blunt but its also true
What excuses were made for Rudakubana before his terrible act? You speak with such unerring certainty I assume you must know.
I didn't say they were before but I am sure there will be plenty made now...oh he was abused, he grew up in poverty etc we should be lenient it was societies fault....just watch the guardian
It's not really about excuses; it's about explanations in order to understand causes. And to learn how to prevent it happening again if we can find the cause. That is a different question to the individual's behaviour.
"Lock him up and throw away the key" may get *him* out of society and give us satisfaction - but what about the catching the next one in advance if there is an identifiable cause?
For this guy we don't know enough to understand causes. The only *potential* relevant context I can spot is that his parents came from Rwanda; did they go through the genocide as children? What has the impact been on him?
Are there implications for PTSD refugees from places where killing, rape and torture are routine settling in Europe? We already know how our former servicemen can be impacted after leaving the military.
One of my grandads was a wife-beater. He had been in the trenches in WW1 (PTSD etc), and also had Huntington's Chorea. Impulsive, unpredictable aggression and anger are behavioural symptoms of both. His wife did not manage it - basically just took his behaviour in a stoic fashion.
My uncle also had the condition (my dad did not, and it does not skip generations), and was also impulsive and I think violent. I think that one thing which may have helped him manage *to an extent* was that he had a fairly ritualised life as a High Church Vicar, with a strong daily pattern.
It does not condone the behaviour, however it does help explain, and potentially help manage it.
Rather than the knee jerking populist reactions of certain people and pols (and I include my own MP in that, who is race-baiting), which will help solve nothing, we need a little more reflection.
Comments
And whilst Tooting and the City aren't the same place, there are other universities that are more geographically incoherent.
(And I'm not talking about the University of Cambridge and the College of Hitchin Girton.)
And bar t'at.
Can it really be that a majority of american voters are begining to notice there's something a bit flaky about Trump?
Couldn't be bothered ?
And your only answer are counter-factuals. "They're just as bad!" is not an excuse for bad actions. You're essentially admitting that 'New Twitter' is as bad as Old Twitter.
(Hint: it is worse.)
These companies have followed the principle that (a) vacancies have always been temporary, while (b) you can be stuck with lower rents for five years or so. Worse is (c), which is that if you raise the rent after five years, you are likely stuck with a void anyway inbetween tenants.
Where you are absolutely correct is that these real estate firms have not appreciated that the world has fundamentally changed, and that unless they change their attitudes towards rent levels, then they will go out of business. And not only will they go out of business, but they'll do an awful lot of damage to high streets around the UK in the interim.
DO NOT ask me how I know.
Well, if you must know, I once drank some for a bet.
Never, ever again. It tasted disgusting.
Since then, whenever I so much as see a can of John Smith's I shudder.
I just want to make sure that we're not talking about different Jim Callaghan's.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/jul/29/who-are-the-conservative-leadership-candidates
Selby seems to be doing all the building for York...
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/jul/29/who-are-the-conservative-leadership-candidates
It reminds me of the John Smith's I drank for a bet...
I didnt say it was known before, I am saying he knew people like you will make excuses for him after he does it
You sound like the type of voter who now swings between Reform and the English Democrats, has a Tommy Robinson poster in his bedroom and wouldn't touch any of the main parties with a bargepole!
What's not to like?
Well, that.
I was ambivalent on Brexit and only voted Remain because I was worried - entirely rightly as it turned out - that a Leave win might mean the end of a government that I actually liked.
And that's the problem with tidy moralities. Sometimes, people turn out dysfunctional, and it's nobody's fault, not even the perpetrator and all society can do is manage the situation as well as it can. And it's infuriating not having control of the situation, and it's horrible being on the receiving end. But it is what it is.
That is, brewed from the well-fermented remains of former Labour Party Leaders!
"Soylent Green Is People!"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2aH9tu4s30
NEW THREAD
Didcot and Wantage: LD up 8.5, Labour down 1.3
You may call it “… deliberate, explicit collusion,” but I think Nick Palmer and I might disagree.
My response that what Defra don't have to know they are not going to know was met with total incomprehension. He saw such agents of the state as benign helpers building society.
Alas they are long dead now, the last one aged nine shortly before Defra imposed a six month lockdown on the poor creatures.
Now registration is compulsory even if you only have one.
Never again.
Absolutely ruling anything out for ever is silly.
I might even theoretically vote Labour if they somehow reinvent themselves some day as a small-state, pro-individual Libertarian party...
More realistically I suppose I did technically once vote Labour - Frank Dobson as my second choice in the inaugural London Mayor election in a futile attempt to stop Ken. And soon realised that SV doesn't work as a system if your preferences don't align.
There is a big issue in this country with pension funds becoming massive blockers of progress. That's partly because Governments forced them away from investing in a more varied portfolio - once again, the state fucking up the economy. Rachel Reeves is right that these funds need to vary their portfolios and invest in 'economic growth' - the trouble is that to make 'economic growth' worth a damn, you have to create the conditions for it, and Labour don't just not know how, they don't want to know how.
"Lock him up and throw away the key" may get *him* out of society and give us satisfaction - but what about the catching the next one in advance if there is an identifiable cause?
For this guy we don't know enough to understand causes. The only *potential* relevant context I can spot is that his parents came from Rwanda; did they go through the genocide as children? What has the impact been on him?
Are there implications for PTSD refugees from places where killing, rape and torture are routine settling in Europe? We already know how our former servicemen can be impacted after leaving the military.
One of my grandads was a wife-beater. He had been in the trenches in WW1 (PTSD etc), and also had Huntington's Chorea. Impulsive, unpredictable aggression and anger are behavioural symptoms of both. His wife did not manage it - basically just took his behaviour in a stoic fashion.
My uncle also had the condition (my dad did not, and it does not skip generations), and was also impulsive and I think violent. I think that one thing which may have helped him manage *to an extent* was that he had a fairly ritualised life as a High Church Vicar, with a strong daily pattern.
It does not condone the behaviour, however it does help explain, and potentially help manage it.
Rather than the knee jerking populist reactions of certain people and pols (and I include my own MP in that, who is race-baiting), which will help solve nothing, we need a little more reflection.
Which must be greatly disappointing to various journalists
Not something I’ll rush to repeat.
https://x.com/awaarahoon/status/1819116692213309513?s=61
Old thread