Are they going to hire a James Dyson or Jim Radcliffe, or are they looking for someone with at least four decades of public sector experience looking for the Sir or Dame?
A safe pair of hands. With no ugly technical knowledge that would cause them to focus too much on details.
I look forward to my public/private partnership in growing ground nuts in Africa to create biofuel.
I'm surprised the previous, late unlamented administration didn't think to bolt that onto (so to speak) the Rwanda scheme. Instant 1950s vibes, what's not to like?
The right-wing media are making a bit of an ass of themselves over Starmer and his uncle.
Yes, some of the resultant memes are funny. But saying 'torpedoed' rather than 'bombed' is an easy misspeak to make. It's hardly major in the context, and I wouldn't classify it as a lie. His uncle served, and was on a ship that suffered damage in battle.
Starmer is having a bit of an unfortunate run of misspeaking, calling Sunak PM repeatedly, releasing the sausages...
So what?
Just saying he has is an unfortunate run where he has a number of gaffes in short succession. You are very defensive.
I noticed at PMQs yesterday he fell into the trap of demanding an answer to 'his' question which when Sunak did that previously the Speaker reminded him it is PMs questions !!
As for 'so what' or 'who cares' or 172 seat majority just indicates an attempt to close down the uncomfortable truth that Starmer's first 100 days has descended into freebies, cronyism and a terrible civil war in no 10 reflecting in approval poll ratings even below Sunak
Starmer was elected on his undertaking for change and a new way of doing politics, which has disappointed many including myself as I thought he would at least be true to his word but ultimely all he has been is the same as the rest sadly
Change the record.
Thats the other one I forgot !!!!!
Who are you voting for in the Tory leadership contest?
Autonomous track and kill drones. From Anduril. One of those Lord-Of-The-Rings names that always make me a bit scared (see Palantir for another example).
Space stuff pre-Elon always used classical or Star Trek references, but post-Elon that's gone away. US Armed Forces are more on Stargate references (eg Replicators) or generic sci-fi like Raptor. But when they start doing LOTR, back away nervously.
Are they going to hire a James Dyson or Jim Radcliffe, or are they looking for someone with at least four decades of public sector experience looking for the Sir or Dame?
A safe pair of hands. With no ugly technical knowledge that would cause them to focus too much on details.
I look forward to my public/private partnership in growing ground nuts in Africa to create biofuel.
If the job came with a £500k salary and uncapped commission based on savings made, I might be inclined to think that the new government was actually serious about cutting the red tape.
I think whoever wins will make it to the election.
I’m minded to agree, it feels to me overpriced due to the musical chairs we all endured from them in the last 8 years. If they’re polling within a few points of Labour either way, I’m not convinced there’ll be any desire to change.
The one caveat I’d make to that is how well they work with others. Badenoch for instance has often been accused of being able to start a fight in an empty room, if she p*sses enough people off that could see her go.
The challenge for the Tories is simple - who are they?
If it was clear what modern Toryism was, we could find a way for a leader to lead it. But they seem to have long abandoned things like capitalism and conservatism, and instead march to the tune of Farage's pipe. That Farage is an agitator with zero policies or a plan to govern and yet they still want him demonstrates how far from safety they are.
The final 2 both represent the bonkers wing of the party, and with so few MPs the new leader will be sat on a hair-trigger before the letters trip the 22 into another entertaining blue on blue festival. If LOTO tries to keep MPs on board they lose the membership and get ousted by another further out in bonkers space. If they try to outmanoeuvre other insaniacs they get ousted by the Hunt caucus of MPs.
In short, the party looks unleadable. Hence the likelihood of another contest(s) before the election.
I don't agree Rochdale. Kemi's views aren't extreme. She just makes little attempt to sugar coat them. I don't really know what Jenrick thinks.
I think Kemi at least has a good opportunity to define what modern Conservatism does mean. Well, both of them do - but Kemi seems more of the thinker. Have you seen the TED talk she did that WilliamGlenn posted the link to last night?
She is, though, going to get painted as a mad extremist, because that's what happens to unapologetic Tories. It will be interesting to see how she responds.
We see this completely differently. Kemi is sounding off making right wing noises - showing some leg. Her actual record of delivery is poor. Jenrick has real policies - he has explained why he feels they need to be put in place, and he's now persuading people of the need for them. That puts him in an entirely league to her. That's also why all the centrists and left wingers on this board have instantly switched allegiance to Kemi after Jimmy Dimmly was knocked out.
Jenrick is surely the more radical candidate? Eg he's said he's had enough of European human rights whereas Badenoch is more ambivalent and it's possible she'll tolerate at least some of them.
My post from yesterday got a bit lost as it was ten minutes before Cleverley got knocked out, but for those who want more background on Jenrick other than the obvious (mural-painting, Desmond-loving) this takedown of Jenrick's time as Housing Secretary by journalist Peter Apps is worth a read -
In it he describes Jenrick as both callous and uncaring, as well as ineffective, delivering catastrophe after catastrophe during his tenure, delivering plans described as 'unworkable as well as politically unpalatable'. Later, after losing his job, he sought to blame the Treasury for his failures, avoiding any sort of accountability.
Apps goes on to note that no other housing minister attracted such a personal level of ire, with Brokenshire and Javid there was 'anger with the whole system' but with Jenrick 'it was personal'.
As someone put it the other day, if you could turn this guy into an aerosol (no snickering at the back, please), you could put him in a can and market him as a literal voter-repellent.
The Tories elect him at their peril.
If anything that suggests Jenrick was too focused on planning reform and building more homes, that may have distracted him a bit from cladding and annoyed Nimbys but was not necessarily a bad policy for the Tories longer term
I mean, that's a rather interesting spin on an utterly devastating article.
Cladding was literally _the_ immediate issue of the post-Grenfell years, with hundreds of thousands of people directly affected, being trapped in unsaleable potential death trap flats, paying a small fortune in 'waking watch' costs, _and_ expected to foot the bill for developers who sold them the shoddy death traps in the first place. 'Caveat emptor' was literally Jenrick's reply.
The article notes Jenrick's utter lack of empathy - "When one of them burst into tears, Jenrick simply looked astonished and uncomfortable. No warm words of sympathy, no heartfelt expression of a desire to put things right. Just a blank stare at the webcam and a hope that it would stop."
Saying Jenrick was more concerned with planning reform (notably, reforms "popular with developers") ignores the thrust of that article, which describes "What he delivered was an almost immediate catastrophe," " taking a quick, hopeful punt, closing your ears to warnings that it could go wrong and assuming everything will be fine." "His next effort... went down like a bucket of cold sick" ..."a betrayal" etc.
It's his attitude that's the problem. Over the course of his tenure, he "alienated" and "angered" people with his "bullish, defensive attitude", leading to a personal ire from voters that wasn't there with his predecessors Brokenshire and Javid, or his successor, Gove.
And therein lies the problem. Jenrick proved himself to be not only incompetent and venal, but lacking in empathy and more interested in listening to developers and vested interests than in ordinary voters.
What you want in a party leader and potential prime minister is someone who combines popularity, empathy and competence, in a way that voters warm to.
There is every evidence from his time as Housing Secretary that Jenrick is the polar opposite.
I am not sure who I would vote for. They both seem like very poor candidates.
Even if I were still a Tory member, I think I would hope that neither would ever be prime minister - their faults would seem to make them particularly ill-suited to that role. (Jenrick's aggression and lack of intellect, Badenoch's inability to get the brain=>mouth ordering correct).
On balance, Badenoch would seem like the least-worst-option. Even if that is disastrous for my betting.
I would agree they seem poor candidates, but then I am not a Tory or a Tory member and they are not really going to appeal to me initially as they have a different audience to appeal to.
I find the comment about Jenrick being voter repellent a little misplaced given he was the only Tory who managed to hold his seat in Nottinghamshire when other, formerly safe Tory seats, fell. He clearly has some appeal.
I think whoever wins will make it to the election.
I’m minded to agree, it feels to me overpriced due to the musical chairs we all endured from them in the last 8 years. If they’re polling within a few points of Labour either way, I’m not convinced there’ll be any desire to change.
The one caveat I’d make to that is how well they work with others. Badenoch for instance has often been accused of being able to start a fight in an empty room, if she p*sses enough people off that could see her go.
The challenge for the Tories is simple - who are they?
If it was clear what modern Toryism was, we could find a way for a leader to lead it. But they seem to have long abandoned things like capitalism and conservatism, and instead march to the tune of Farage's pipe. That Farage is an agitator with zero policies or a plan to govern and yet they still want him demonstrates how far from safety they are.
The final 2 both represent the bonkers wing of the party, and with so few MPs the new leader will be sat on a hair-trigger before the letters trip the 22 into another entertaining blue on blue festival. If LOTO tries to keep MPs on board they lose the membership and get ousted by another further out in bonkers space. If they try to outmanoeuvre other insaniacs they get ousted by the Hunt caucus of MPs.
In short, the party looks unleadable. Hence the likelihood of another contest(s) before the election.
I don't agree Rochdale. Kemi's views aren't extreme. She just makes little attempt to sugar coat them. I don't really know what Jenrick thinks.
I think Kemi at least has a good opportunity to define what modern Conservatism does mean. Well, both of them do - but Kemi seems more of the thinker. Have you seen the TED talk she did that WilliamGlenn posted the link to last night?
She is, though, going to get painted as a mad extremist, because that's what happens to unapologetic Tories. It will be interesting to see how she responds.
We see this completely differently. Kemi is sounding off making right wing noises - showing some leg. Her actual record of delivery is poor. Jenrick has real policies - he has explained why he feels they need to be put in place, and he's now persuading people of the need for them. That puts him in an entirely league to her. That's also why all the centrists and left wingers on this board have instantly switched allegiance to Kemi after Jimmy Dimmly was knocked out.
Jenrick is surely the more radical candidate? Eg he's said he's had enough of European human rights whereas Badenoch is more ambivalent and it's possible she'll tolerate at least some of them.
My post from yesterday got a bit lost as it was ten minutes before Cleverley got knocked out, but for those who want more background on Jenrick other than the obvious (mural-painting, Desmond-loving) this takedown of Jenrick's time as Housing Secretary by journalist Peter Apps is worth a read -
In it he describes Jenrick as both callous and uncaring, as well as ineffective, delivering catastrophe after catastrophe during his tenure, delivering plans described as 'unworkable as well as politically unpalatable'. Later, after losing his job, he sought to blame the Treasury for his failures, avoiding any sort of accountability.
Apps goes on to note that no other housing minister attracted such a personal level of ire, with Brokenshire and Javid there was 'anger with the whole system' but with Jenrick 'it was personal'.
As someone put it the other day, if you could turn this guy into an aerosol (no snickering at the back, please), you could put him in a can and market him as a literal voter-repellent.
The Tories elect him at their peril.
If anything that suggests Jenrick was too focused on planning reform and building more homes, that may have distracted him a bit from cladding and annoyed Nimbys but was not necessarily a bad policy for the Tories longer term
I mean, that's a rather interesting spin on an utterly devastating article.
Cladding was literally _the_ immediate issue of the post-Grenfell years, with hundreds of thousands of people directly affected, being trapped in unsaleable potential death trap flats, paying a small fortune in 'waking watch' costs, _and_ expected to foot the bill for developers who sold them the shoddy death traps in the first place. 'Caveat emptor' was literally Jenrick's reply.
The article notes Jenrick's utter lack of empathy - "When one of them burst into tears, Jenrick simply looked astonished and uncomfortable. No warm words of sympathy, no heartfelt expression of a desire to put things right. Just a blank stare at the webcam and a hope that it would stop."
Saying Jenrick was more concerned with planning reform (notably, reforms "popular with developers") ignores the thrust of that article, which describes "What he delivered was an almost immediate catastrophe," " taking a quick, hopeful punt, closing your ears to warnings that it could go wrong and assuming everything will be fine." "His next effort... went down like a bucket of cold sick" ..."a betrayal" etc.
It's his attitude that's the problem. Over the course of his tenure, he "alienated" and "angered" people with his "bullish, defensive attitude", leading to a personal ire from voters that wasn't there with his predecessors Brokenshire and Javid, or his successor, Gove.
And therein lies the problem. Jenrick proved himself to be not only incompetent and venal, but lacking in empathy and more interested in listening to developers and vested interests than in ordinary voters.
What you want in a party leader and potential prime minister is someone who combines popularity, empathy and competence, in a way that voters warm to.
There is every evidence from his time as Housing Secretary that Jenrick is the polar opposite.
An article to gladden the heart and head, "voter repellant" vs "argument in an empty room" should see the current government in place long enough for the electorate to judge them on the results of their actions.
The right-wing media are making a bit of an ass of themselves over Starmer and his uncle.
Yes, some of the resultant memes are funny. But saying 'torpedoed' rather than 'bombed' is an easy misspeak to make. It's hardly major in the context, and I wouldn't classify it as a lie. His uncle served, and was on a ship that suffered damage in battle.
Starmer is having a bit of an unfortunate run of misspeaking, calling Sunak PM repeatedly, releasing the sausages...
So what?
Just saying he has is an unfortunate run where he has a number of gaffes in short succession. You are very defensive.
I noticed at PMQs yesterday he fell into the trap of demanding an answer to 'his' question which when Sunak did that previously the Speaker reminded him it is PMs questions !!
As for 'so what' or 'who cares' or 172 seat majority just indicates an attempt to close down the uncomfortable truth that Starmer's first 100 days has descended into freebies, cronyism and a terrible civil war in no 10 reflecting in approval poll ratings even below Sunak
Starmer was elected on his undertaking for change and a new way of doing politics, which has disappointed many including myself as I thought he would at least be true to his word but ultimely all he has been is the same as the rest sadly
Change the record.
Thats the other one I forgot !!!!!
Who are you voting for in the Tory leadership contest?
The right-wing media are making a bit of an ass of themselves over Starmer and his uncle.
Yes, some of the resultant memes are funny. But saying 'torpedoed' rather than 'bombed' is an easy misspeak to make. It's hardly major in the context, and I wouldn't classify it as a lie. His uncle served, and was on a ship that suffered damage in battle.
Starmer is having a bit of an unfortunate run of misspeaking, calling Sunak PM repeatedly, releasing the sausages...
So what?
Just saying he has is an unfortunate run where he has a number of gaffes in short succession. You are very defensive.
I noticed at PMQs yesterday he fell into the trap of demanding an answer to 'his' question which when Sunak did that previously the Speaker reminded him it is PMs questions !!
As for 'so what' or 'who cares' or 172 seat majority just indicates an attempt to close down the uncomfortable truth that Starmer's first 100 days has descended into freebies, cronyism and a terrible civil war in no 10 reflecting in approval poll ratings even below Sunak
Starmer was elected on his undertaking for change and a new way of doing politics, which has disappointed many including myself as I thought he would at least be true to his word but ultimely all he has been is the same as the rest sadly
Change the record.
Thats the other one I forgot !!!!!
Who are you voting for in the Tory leadership contest?
I am not a member
Who are you supporting?
Badenoch as I have always been very anti Jenrick
I fear for the nation's pearls!!!
Total gifts and donations to Kemi in 24/25 was £274,655 according to ChatGPT – you will surely be happy to check its working?
Graham Edwards: £12,000 Charles Keymer: £10,000 + £40,000 = £50,000 Robert West: £1,855 Shaya Raymond: £5,000 + £5,000 = £10,000 (in-kind donations) Neil Record: £10,000 Dean Richmond: £5,000 David Eventhall: £10,000 Caroline O'Kane: £5,000 David Watson: £10,000 James Mellon: £10,000 Dominic Brisby: £10,000 Martin Bellamy: £5,000 James Emslie: £10,000 Alison Frost: £5,000 Dambisa Moyo: £10,000 Douglas Shaw: £20,000 Andrew Scott: £10,000 Growth Financial Services: £10,000 David Naylor Leyland: £10,000 John Goodall: £5,000 John Edward James: £10,000 Roger Brookhouse: £5,000 Quentin Marshall: £5,000 Charles Morgan: £5,000 Jingle Bell Ball (free tickets): £800
How did humans get smart enough to detect and use muons?
"It's a warm summer evening, circa 600 BC. You've finished your shopping at the local market, or agora... and you look up at the night sky. There you notice some of the stars seem to move, so you name them planetes or wanderer..."
How did humans get smart enough to detect and use muons?
The first section of The Making of the Atomic Bomb gives an excellent, relatively short, and non-scientist accessible account of the chain of discovery that led to modern nuclear physics.
Problem now is that 'Sir Keir has been a complete disaster' is becoming a default setting. Even if Labour can rebuild its reputation it will only do so amongst the charitably minded, which most people are not when it comes to politicians. And is Rachel's budget going to do even that?
The right-wing media are making a bit of an ass of themselves over Starmer and his uncle.
Yes, some of the resultant memes are funny. But saying 'torpedoed' rather than 'bombed' is an easy misspeak to make. It's hardly major in the context, and I wouldn't classify it as a lie. His uncle served, and was on a ship that suffered damage in battle.
Starmer is having a bit of an unfortunate run of misspeaking, calling Sunak PM repeatedly, releasing the sausages...
So what?
Just saying he has is an unfortunate run where he has a number of gaffes in short succession. You are very defensive.
I noticed at PMQs yesterday he fell into the trap of demanding an answer to 'his' question which when Sunak did that previously the Speaker reminded him it is PMs questions !!
As for 'so what' or 'who cares' or 172 seat majority just indicates an attempt to close down the uncomfortable truth that Starmer's first 100 days has descended into freebies, cronyism and a terrible civil war in no 10 reflecting in approval poll ratings even below Sunak
Starmer was elected on his undertaking for change and a new way of doing politics, which has disappointed many including myself as I thought he would at least be true to his word but ultimely all he has been is the same as the rest sadly
Change the record.
Thats the other one I forgot !!!!!
Who are you voting for in the Tory leadership contest?
I am not a member
Who are you supporting?
Badenoch as I have always been very anti Jenrick
I fear for the nation's pearls!!!
Total gifts and donations to Kemi in 24/25 was £274,655 according to ChatGPT – you will surely be happy to check its working?
Graham Edwards: £12,000 Charles Keymer: £10,000 + £40,000 = £50,000 Robert West: £1,855 Shaya Raymond: £5,000 + £5,000 = £10,000 (in-kind donations) Neil Record: £10,000 Dean Richmond: £5,000 David Eventhall: £10,000 Caroline O'Kane: £5,000 David Watson: £10,000 James Mellon: £10,000 Dominic Brisby: £10,000 Martin Bellamy: £5,000 James Emslie: £10,000 Alison Frost: £5,000 Dambisa Moyo: £10,000 Douglas Shaw: £20,000 Andrew Scott: £10,000 Growth Financial Services: £10,000 David Naylor Leyland: £10,000 John Goodall: £5,000 John Edward James: £10,000 Roger Brookhouse: £5,000 Quentin Marshall: £5,000 Charles Morgan: £5,000 Jingle Bell Ball (free tickets): £800
Stephen Fry has the characteristics of a smart person but isn't academically smart, and his treatment of Dara O'Briain (who *is* academically smart but not in the same social milieu) made me dislike Fry a bit. Not a lot, but he gets by a lot on bluster.
I think whoever wins will make it to the election.
I’m minded to agree, it feels to me overpriced due to the musical chairs we all endured from them in the last 8 years. If they’re polling within a few points of Labour either way, I’m not convinced there’ll be any desire to change.
The one caveat I’d make to that is how well they work with others. Badenoch for instance has often been accused of being able to start a fight in an empty room, if she p*sses enough people off that could see her go.
The challenge for the Tories is simple - who are they?
If it was clear what modern Toryism was, we could find a way for a leader to lead it. But they seem to have long abandoned things like capitalism and conservatism, and instead march to the tune of Farage's pipe. That Farage is an agitator with zero policies or a plan to govern and yet they still want him demonstrates how far from safety they are.
The final 2 both represent the bonkers wing of the party, and with so few MPs the new leader will be sat on a hair-trigger before the letters trip the 22 into another entertaining blue on blue festival. If LOTO tries to keep MPs on board they lose the membership and get ousted by another further out in bonkers space. If they try to outmanoeuvre other insaniacs they get ousted by the Hunt caucus of MPs.
In short, the party looks unleadable. Hence the likelihood of another contest(s) before the election.
I don't agree Rochdale. Kemi's views aren't extreme. She just makes little attempt to sugar coat them. I don't really know what Jenrick thinks.
I think Kemi at least has a good opportunity to define what modern Conservatism does mean. Well, both of them do - but Kemi seems more of the thinker. Have you seen the TED talk she did that WilliamGlenn posted the link to last night?
She is, though, going to get painted as a mad extremist, because that's what happens to unapologetic Tories. It will be interesting to see how she responds.
We see this completely differently. Kemi is sounding off making right wing noises - showing some leg. Her actual record of delivery is poor. Jenrick has real policies - he has explained why he feels they need to be put in place, and he's now persuading people of the need for them. That puts him in an entirely league to her. That's also why all the centrists and left wingers on this board have instantly switched allegiance to Kemi after Jimmy Dimmly was knocked out.
Jenrick is surely the more radical candidate? Eg he's said he's had enough of European human rights whereas Badenoch is more ambivalent and it's possible she'll tolerate at least some of them.
My post from yesterday got a bit lost as it was ten minutes before Cleverley got knocked out, but for those who want more background on Jenrick other than the obvious (mural-painting, Desmond-loving) this takedown of Jenrick's time as Housing Secretary by journalist Peter Apps is worth a read -
In it he describes Jenrick as both callous and uncaring, as well as ineffective, delivering catastrophe after catastrophe during his tenure, delivering plans described as 'unworkable as well as politically unpalatable'. Later, after losing his job, he sought to blame the Treasury for his failures, avoiding any sort of accountability.
Apps goes on to note that no other housing minister attracted such a personal level of ire, with Brokenshire and Javid there was 'anger with the whole system' but with Jenrick 'it was personal'.
As someone put it the other day, if you could turn this guy into an aerosol (no snickering at the back, please), you could put him in a can and market him as a literal voter-repellent.
The Tories elect him at their peril.
If anything that suggests Jenrick was too focused on planning reform and building more homes, that may have distracted him a bit from cladding and annoyed Nimbys but was not necessarily a bad policy for the Tories longer term
I mean, that's a rather interesting spin on an utterly devastating article.
Cladding was literally _the_ immediate issue of the post-Grenfell years, with hundreds of thousands of people directly affected, being trapped in unsaleable potential death trap flats, paying a small fortune in 'waking watch' costs, _and_ expected to foot the bill for developers who sold them the shoddy death traps in the first place. 'Caveat emptor' was literally Jenrick's reply.
The article notes Jenrick's utter lack of empathy - "When one of them burst into tears, Jenrick simply looked astonished and uncomfortable. No warm words of sympathy, no heartfelt expression of a desire to put things right. Just a blank stare at the webcam and a hope that it would stop."
Saying Jenrick was more concerned with planning reform (notably, reforms "popular with developers") ignores the thrust of that article, which describes "What he delivered was an almost immediate catastrophe," " taking a quick, hopeful punt, closing your ears to warnings that it could go wrong and assuming everything will be fine." "His next effort... went down like a bucket of cold sick" ..."a betrayal" etc.
It's his attitude that's the problem. Over the course of his tenure, he "alienated" and "angered" people with his "bullish, defensive attitude", leading to a personal ire from voters that wasn't there with his predecessors Brokenshire and Javid, or his successor, Gove.
And therein lies the problem. Jenrick proved himself to be not only incompetent and venal, but lacking in empathy and more interested in listening to developers and vested interests than in ordinary voters.
What you want in a party leader and potential prime minister is someone who combines popularity, empathy and competence, in a way that voters warm to.
There is every evidence from his time as Housing Secretary that Jenrick is the polar opposite.
I am not sure who I would vote for. They both seem like very poor candidates.
Even if I were still a Tory member, I think I would hope that neither would ever be prime minister - their faults would seem to make them particularly ill-suited to that role. (Jenrick's aggression and lack of intellect, Badenoch's inability to get the brain=>mouth ordering correct).
On balance, Badenoch would seem like the least-worst-option. Even if that is disastrous for my betting.
I would agree they seem poor candidates, but then I am not a Tory or a Tory member and they are not really going to appeal to me initially as they have a different audience to appeal to.
I find the comment about Jenrick being voter repellent a little misplaced given he was the only Tory who managed to hold his seat in Nottinghamshire when other, formerly safe Tory seats, fell. He clearly has some appeal.
Actually, the article which kyf_100 linked to didn't say anything of the sort - suggesting that despite his manifest unsuitability for high office, he might well be electorally successful.
The right-wing media are making a bit of an ass of themselves over Starmer and his uncle.
Yes, some of the resultant memes are funny. But saying 'torpedoed' rather than 'bombed' is an easy misspeak to make. It's hardly major in the context, and I wouldn't classify it as a lie. His uncle served, and was on a ship that suffered damage in battle.
Starmer is having a bit of an unfortunate run of misspeaking, calling Sunak PM repeatedly, releasing the sausages...
So what?
Just saying he has is an unfortunate run where he has a number of gaffes in short succession. You are very defensive.
I noticed at PMQs yesterday he fell into the trap of demanding an answer to 'his' question which when Sunak did that previously the Speaker reminded him it is PMs questions !!
As for 'so what' or 'who cares' or 172 seat majority just indicates an attempt to close down the uncomfortable truth that Starmer's first 100 days has descended into freebies, cronyism and a terrible civil war in no 10 reflecting in approval poll ratings even below Sunak
Starmer was elected on his undertaking for change and a new way of doing politics, which has disappointed many including myself as I thought he would at least be true to his word but ultimely all he has been is the same as the rest sadly
Change the record.
Thats the other one I forgot !!!!!
Who are you voting for in the Tory leadership contest?
Problem now is that 'Sir Keir has been a complete disaster' is becoming a default setting. Even if Labour can rebuild its reputation it will only do so amongst the charitably minded, which most people are not when it comes to politicians. And is Rachel's budget going to do even that?
There will always be @Anabobazina quoting 172 majority !!!!
Having dissed Geneva for 36 hours I can say that CERN is incredible
I had no idea humans could make antimatter. I mean, I’d probably read that but here you understand that. And grasp it. Also I got to try my first really good virtual reality headset - it takes you down in the collider! - and I saw the original computer where Tim Berners Lee invented the world as it is today. We should demand it back and put it in the British museum
Even better the whole thing js free - as well as brilliant - so amazingly I still have money for a nice glass of wine at Geneva airport
What do you mean "back"? I don't suppose that computer has ever left Switzerland, and Elgin Marbles style waltzing off with things to put in the BM is a bit out of fashion these days...
I mean “BACK to the British Museum” in the “handing BACK to Mauritius” sense, employed by our present government
You'd need to rip out all the wiring from the walls and floors. Network, not individual console, remember.
Plus it was never a British-owned computer network, though, but a European one. CERN, the clue is in the name.
Ah yes. Completely English Research Network, isn't it?
ETA: I met Tim Berners-Lee, once. Well, I held a door open for him and he said "thank you".
The right-wing media are making a bit of an ass of themselves over Starmer and his uncle.
Yes, some of the resultant memes are funny. But saying 'torpedoed' rather than 'bombed' is an easy misspeak to make. It's hardly major in the context, and I wouldn't classify it as a lie. His uncle served, and was on a ship that suffered damage in battle.
Starmer is having a bit of an unfortunate run of misspeaking, calling Sunak PM repeatedly, releasing the sausages...
So what?
Just saying he has is an unfortunate run where he has a number of gaffes in short succession. You are very defensive.
I noticed at PMQs yesterday he fell into the trap of demanding an answer to 'his' question which when Sunak did that previously the Speaker reminded him it is PMs questions !!
As for 'so what' or 'who cares' or 172 seat majority just indicates an attempt to close down the uncomfortable truth that Starmer's first 100 days has descended into freebies, cronyism and a terrible civil war in no 10 reflecting in approval poll ratings even below Sunak
Starmer was elected on his undertaking for change and a new way of doing politics, which has disappointed many including myself as I thought he would at least be true to his word but ultimely all he has been is the same as the rest sadly
Change the record.
Thats the other one I forgot !!!!!
Who are you voting for in the Tory leadership contest?
I am not a member
Who are you supporting?
Badenoch as I have always been very anti Jenrick
I fear for the nation's pearls!!!
Total gifts and donations to Kemi in 24/25 was £274,655 according to ChatGPT – you will surely be happy to check its working?
Graham Edwards: £12,000 Charles Keymer: £10,000 + £40,000 = £50,000 Robert West: £1,855 Shaya Raymond: £5,000 + £5,000 = £10,000 (in-kind donations) Neil Record: £10,000 Dean Richmond: £5,000 David Eventhall: £10,000 Caroline O'Kane: £5,000 David Watson: £10,000 James Mellon: £10,000 Dominic Brisby: £10,000 Martin Bellamy: £5,000 James Emslie: £10,000 Alison Frost: £5,000 Dambisa Moyo: £10,000 Douglas Shaw: £20,000 Andrew Scott: £10,000 Growth Financial Services: £10,000 David Naylor Leyland: £10,000 John Goodall: £5,000 John Edward James: £10,000 Roger Brookhouse: £5,000 Quentin Marshall: £5,000 Charles Morgan: £5,000 Jingle Bell Ball (free tickets): £800
How did humans get smart enough to detect and use muons?
"It's a warm summer evening, circa 600 BC. You've finished your shopping at the local market, or agora... and you look up at the night sky. There you notice some of the stars seem to move, so you name them planetes or wanderer..."
TMOTAB has a better opening para: In London, where Southampton Row passes Russell Square, across from the British Museum in Bloomsbury, Leó Szilárd waited irritably one gray Depression morning for the stoplight to change. A trace of rain had fallen during the night; Tuesday, September 12, 1933, dawned cool, humid and dull. Drizzling rain would begin again in early afternoon. When Szilárd told the story later he never mentioned his destination that morning. He may have had none; he often walked to think. In any case another destination intervened. The stoplight changed to green. Szilárd stepped off the curb. As he crossed the street time cracked open before him and he saw a way to the future, death into the world and all our woe, the shape of things to come...
I think whoever wins will make it to the election.
I’m minded to agree, it feels to me overpriced due to the musical chairs we all endured from them in the last 8 years. If they’re polling within a few points of Labour either way, I’m not convinced there’ll be any desire to change.
The one caveat I’d make to that is how well they work with others. Badenoch for instance has often been accused of being able to start a fight in an empty room, if she p*sses enough people off that could see her go.
The challenge for the Tories is simple - who are they?
If it was clear what modern Toryism was, we could find a way for a leader to lead it. But they seem to have long abandoned things like capitalism and conservatism, and instead march to the tune of Farage's pipe. That Farage is an agitator with zero policies or a plan to govern and yet they still want him demonstrates how far from safety they are.
The final 2 both represent the bonkers wing of the party, and with so few MPs the new leader will be sat on a hair-trigger before the letters trip the 22 into another entertaining blue on blue festival. If LOTO tries to keep MPs on board they lose the membership and get ousted by another further out in bonkers space. If they try to outmanoeuvre other insaniacs they get ousted by the Hunt caucus of MPs.
In short, the party looks unleadable. Hence the likelihood of another contest(s) before the election.
I don't agree Rochdale. Kemi's views aren't extreme. She just makes little attempt to sugar coat them. I don't really know what Jenrick thinks.
I think Kemi at least has a good opportunity to define what modern Conservatism does mean. Well, both of them do - but Kemi seems more of the thinker. Have you seen the TED talk she did that WilliamGlenn posted the link to last night?
She is, though, going to get painted as a mad extremist, because that's what happens to unapologetic Tories. It will be interesting to see how she responds.
We see this completely differently. Kemi is sounding off making right wing noises - showing some leg. Her actual record of delivery is poor. Jenrick has real policies - he has explained why he feels they need to be put in place, and he's now persuading people of the need for them. That puts him in an entirely league to her. That's also why all the centrists and left wingers on this board have instantly switched allegiance to Kemi after Jimmy Dimmly was knocked out.
Jenrick is surely the more radical candidate? Eg he's said he's had enough of European human rights whereas Badenoch is more ambivalent and it's possible she'll tolerate at least some of them.
My post from yesterday got a bit lost as it was ten minutes before Cleverley got knocked out, but for those who want more background on Jenrick other than the obvious (mural-painting, Desmond-loving) this takedown of Jenrick's time as Housing Secretary by journalist Peter Apps is worth a read -
In it he describes Jenrick as both callous and uncaring, as well as ineffective, delivering catastrophe after catastrophe during his tenure, delivering plans described as 'unworkable as well as politically unpalatable'. Later, after losing his job, he sought to blame the Treasury for his failures, avoiding any sort of accountability.
Apps goes on to note that no other housing minister attracted such a personal level of ire, with Brokenshire and Javid there was 'anger with the whole system' but with Jenrick 'it was personal'.
As someone put it the other day, if you could turn this guy into an aerosol (no snickering at the back, please), you could put him in a can and market him as a literal voter-repellent.
The Tories elect him at their peril.
If anything that suggests Jenrick was too focused on planning reform and building more homes, that may have distracted him a bit from cladding and annoyed Nimbys but was not necessarily a bad policy for the Tories longer term
I mean, that's a rather interesting spin on an utterly devastating article.
Cladding was literally _the_ immediate issue of the post-Grenfell years, with hundreds of thousands of people directly affected, being trapped in unsaleable potential death trap flats, paying a small fortune in 'waking watch' costs, _and_ expected to foot the bill for developers who sold them the shoddy death traps in the first place. 'Caveat emptor' was literally Jenrick's reply.
The article notes Jenrick's utter lack of empathy - "When one of them burst into tears, Jenrick simply looked astonished and uncomfortable. No warm words of sympathy, no heartfelt expression of a desire to put things right. Just a blank stare at the webcam and a hope that it would stop."
Saying Jenrick was more concerned with planning reform (notably, reforms "popular with developers") ignores the thrust of that article, which describes "What he delivered was an almost immediate catastrophe," " taking a quick, hopeful punt, closing your ears to warnings that it could go wrong and assuming everything will be fine." "His next effort... went down like a bucket of cold sick" ..."a betrayal" etc.
It's his attitude that's the problem. Over the course of his tenure, he "alienated" and "angered" people with his "bullish, defensive attitude", leading to a personal ire from voters that wasn't there with his predecessors Brokenshire and Javid, or his successor, Gove.
And therein lies the problem. Jenrick proved himself to be not only incompetent and venal, but lacking in empathy and more interested in listening to developers and vested interests than in ordinary voters.
What you want in a party leader and potential prime minister is someone who combines popularity, empathy and competence, in a way that voters warm to.
There is every evidence from his time as Housing Secretary that Jenrick is the polar opposite.
I am not sure who I would vote for. They both seem like very poor candidates.
Even if I were still a Tory member, I think I would hope that neither would ever be prime minister - their faults would seem to make them particularly ill-suited to that role. (Jenrick's aggression and lack of intellect, Badenoch's inability to get the brain=>mouth ordering correct).
On balance, Badenoch would seem like the least-worst-option. Even if that is disastrous for my betting.
I would agree they seem poor candidates, but then I am not a Tory or a Tory member and they are not really going to appeal to me initially as they have a different audience to appeal to.
I find the comment about Jenrick being voter repellent a little misplaced given he was the only Tory who managed to hold his seat in Nottinghamshire when other, formerly safe Tory seats, fell. He clearly has some appeal.
Actually, the article which kyf_100 linked to didn't say anything of the sort - suggesting that despite his manifest unsuitability for high office, he might well be electorally successful.
Yes, it was someone else, unnamed, who made that comment which Kyf referred to.
It just seemed an odd thing to say given he survived with a decent-ish majority.
Where does it say in that piece that Labour have lost him? Has he withdrawn his support for the party? (genuinely, I just scan read it and might have missed it...)
Problem now is that 'Sir Keir has been a complete disaster' is becoming a default setting. Even if Labour can rebuild its reputation it will only do so amongst the charitably minded, which most people are not when it comes to politicians. And is Rachel's budget going to do even that?
There will always be @Anabobazina quoting 172 majority !!!!
You are the one repeating the point, not me.
What do you make of Kemi's gifts and donations? Scandalous, eh?
Problem now is that 'Sir Keir has been a complete disaster' is becoming a default setting. Even if Labour can rebuild its reputation it will only do so amongst the charitably minded, which most people are not when it comes to politicians. And is Rachel's budget going to do even that?
There will always be @Anabobazina quoting 172 majority !!!!
Stephen Fry has the characteristics of a smart person but isn't academically smart, and his treatment of Dara O'Briain (who *is* academically smart but not in the same social milieu) made me dislike Fry a bit. Not a lot, but he gets by a lot on bluster.
Chief Secretary to the Treasury Darren Jones has announced there will be a 10 year infrastructure strategy at the full spending review next year, which includes housing and schools as key economic growth drivers, and overseen by a new body NISTA…
Labour must be feeling more confident than a day ago..
How did humans get smart enough to detect and use muons?
Simple answer is that hardly anyone did. After all, I'm in the top (small) percent of humanity for being good at physics, and I haven't got a blooming clue.
Where scientists got lucky (where we all got lucky) was finding a way to record and connect the momentary flashes of brilliance that individuals have from time to time.
Which, if we can stop it hallucinating and feeding off its own hallucinations, is sort of what AI promises/threatens to do for other bits of human endeavour.
The NYT is "right wing"? I suppose from the point of the US Communist Party, it is. But not from the view of, say, moderate Bari Weiss: https://www.bariweiss.com/
Perhaps NigelB has mixed up the NYT with the Washington Post; the first is still controlled by the same family that has always owned it, the second was bought by Jeff Bezos in 2013.
(Some years ago, I concluded that the WSJ was both conservative and liberal, the first in its editorial side, the second in its news side. Don't know if that is still true.)
I think whoever wins will make it to the election.
I’m minded to agree, it feels to me overpriced due to the musical chairs we all endured from them in the last 8 years. If they’re polling within a few points of Labour either way, I’m not convinced there’ll be any desire to change.
The one caveat I’d make to that is how well they work with others. Badenoch for instance has often been accused of being able to start a fight in an empty room, if she p*sses enough people off that could see her go.
The challenge for the Tories is simple - who are they?
If it was clear what modern Toryism was, we could find a way for a leader to lead it. But they seem to have long abandoned things like capitalism and conservatism, and instead march to the tune of Farage's pipe. That Farage is an agitator with zero policies or a plan to govern and yet they still want him demonstrates how far from safety they are.
The final 2 both represent the bonkers wing of the party, and with so few MPs the new leader will be sat on a hair-trigger before the letters trip the 22 into another entertaining blue on blue festival. If LOTO tries to keep MPs on board they lose the membership and get ousted by another further out in bonkers space. If they try to outmanoeuvre other insaniacs they get ousted by the Hunt caucus of MPs.
In short, the party looks unleadable. Hence the likelihood of another contest(s) before the election.
I don't agree Rochdale. Kemi's views aren't extreme. She just makes little attempt to sugar coat them. I don't really know what Jenrick thinks.
I think Kemi at least has a good opportunity to define what modern Conservatism does mean. Well, both of them do - but Kemi seems more of the thinker. Have you seen the TED talk she did that WilliamGlenn posted the link to last night?
She is, though, going to get painted as a mad extremist, because that's what happens to unapologetic Tories. It will be interesting to see how she responds.
We see this completely differently. Kemi is sounding off making right wing noises - showing some leg. Her actual record of delivery is poor. Jenrick has real policies - he has explained why he feels they need to be put in place, and he's now persuading people of the need for them. That puts him in an entirely league to her. That's also why all the centrists and left wingers on this board have instantly switched allegiance to Kemi after Jimmy Dimmly was knocked out.
Jenrick is surely the more radical candidate? Eg he's said he's had enough of European human rights whereas Badenoch is more ambivalent and it's possible she'll tolerate at least some of them.
My post from yesterday got a bit lost as it was ten minutes before Cleverley got knocked out, but for those who want more background on Jenrick other than the obvious (mural-painting, Desmond-loving) this takedown of Jenrick's time as Housing Secretary by journalist Peter Apps is worth a read -
In it he describes Jenrick as both callous and uncaring, as well as ineffective, delivering catastrophe after catastrophe during his tenure, delivering plans described as 'unworkable as well as politically unpalatable'. Later, after losing his job, he sought to blame the Treasury for his failures, avoiding any sort of accountability.
Apps goes on to note that no other housing minister attracted such a personal level of ire, with Brokenshire and Javid there was 'anger with the whole system' but with Jenrick 'it was personal'.
As someone put it the other day, if you could turn this guy into an aerosol (no snickering at the back, please), you could put him in a can and market him as a literal voter-repellent.
The Tories elect him at their peril.
If anything that suggests Jenrick was too focused on planning reform and building more homes, that may have distracted him a bit from cladding and annoyed Nimbys but was not necessarily a bad policy for the Tories longer term
I mean, that's a rather interesting spin on an utterly devastating article.
Cladding was literally _the_ immediate issue of the post-Grenfell years, with hundreds of thousands of people directly affected, being trapped in unsaleable potential death trap flats, paying a small fortune in 'waking watch' costs, _and_ expected to foot the bill for developers who sold them the shoddy death traps in the first place. 'Caveat emptor' was literally Jenrick's reply.
The article notes Jenrick's utter lack of empathy - "When one of them burst into tears, Jenrick simply looked astonished and uncomfortable. No warm words of sympathy, no heartfelt expression of a desire to put things right. Just a blank stare at the webcam and a hope that it would stop."
Saying Jenrick was more concerned with planning reform (notably, reforms "popular with developers") ignores the thrust of that article, which describes "What he delivered was an almost immediate catastrophe," " taking a quick, hopeful punt, closing your ears to warnings that it could go wrong and assuming everything will be fine." "His next effort... went down like a bucket of cold sick" ..."a betrayal" etc.
It's his attitude that's the problem. Over the course of his tenure, he "alienated" and "angered" people with his "bullish, defensive attitude", leading to a personal ire from voters that wasn't there with his predecessors Brokenshire and Javid, or his successor, Gove.
And therein lies the problem. Jenrick proved himself to be not only incompetent and venal, but lacking in empathy and more interested in listening to developers and vested interests than in ordinary voters.
What you want in a party leader and potential prime minister is someone who combines popularity, empathy and competence, in a way that voters warm to.
There is every evidence from his time as Housing Secretary that Jenrick is the polar opposite.
I am not sure who I would vote for. They both seem like very poor candidates.
Even if I were still a Tory member, I think I would hope that neither would ever be prime minister - their faults would seem to make them particularly ill-suited to that role. (Jenrick's aggression and lack of intellect, Badenoch's inability to get the brain=>mouth ordering correct).
On balance, Badenoch would seem like the least-worst-option. Even if that is disastrous for my betting.
I would agree they seem poor candidates, but then I am not a Tory or a Tory member and they are not really going to appeal to me initially as they have a different audience to appeal to.
I find the comment about Jenrick being voter repellent a little misplaced given he was the only Tory who managed to hold his seat in Nottinghamshire when other, formerly safe Tory seats, fell. He clearly has some appeal.
Actually, the article which kyf_100 linked to didn't say anything of the sort - suggesting that despite his manifest unsuitability for high office, he might well be electorally successful.
Yes, it was someone else, unnamed, who made that comment which Kyf referred to.
It just seemed an odd thing to say given he survived with a decent-ish majority.
The article notes that Jenrick is a slick talker who looks professional. And indeed, if the leadership election was the first time I'd heard of him, I might think he was a competent, polished, professional PM in waiting. He has surface appeal, but the more you see of him, the less you like him. And that makes him dangerous, once you actually know his record in office and total lack of empathy.
The classic slick salesman type. Says the right things to get in the right rooms with the right people, but demonstrates extreme incompetence, venality and lack of empathy once he actually gets there.
My guess is he'd be found out by the electorate long before getting to Number 10. See the recent scandal over how his leadership campaign was funded via anonymous donor through an offshore company (later revealed to be someone called Philip Ullman). Jenrick just can't help himself.
From the way he treated trapped leaseholders to his infamous painting over of the childrens' mural to his dodgy dealings with Dirty Desmond, every little thing you find out about Jenrick adds up to a damning portrayal of his character.
It wouldn't be the first time the Tories have put a shameless grifter into Number 10. But haven't we had enough of them?
Chief Secretary to the Treasury Darren Jones has announced there will be a 10 year infrastructure strategy at the full spending review next year, which includes housing and schools as key economic growth drivers, and overseen by a new body NISTA…
Labour must be feeling more confident than a day ago..
10 years really isn’t enough - you need a 25 year plan with intermediate staging posts
Problem now is that 'Sir Keir has been a complete disaster' is becoming a default setting. Even if Labour can rebuild its reputation it will only do so amongst the charitably minded, which most people are not when it comes to politicians. And is Rachel's budget going to do even that?
There will always be @Anabobazina quoting 172 majority !!!!
You are the one repeating the point, not me.
What do you make of Kemi's gifts and donations? Scandalous, eh?
Three things.
1) She hasn't been wandering around complaining bitterly complaining about politicians being dirty little grifters, got elected to clean up politics, and then turned out have her snout crammed as far into the trough as she can get it. It's the hypocriticy that's the problem with KS, far more than the gifts themselves.
2) A lot depends what the donations were for; I've no real problem with donations for genuine political purposes, it's the concert tickets, lavish birthday parties, designer glasses which really grate.
3) A lot of moderate donations from different donors is far better than having the government turn out to be a wholly owned subsidiary of Lord Ali.
Problem now is that 'Sir Keir has been a complete disaster' is becoming a default setting. Even if Labour can rebuild its reputation it will only do so amongst the charitably minded, which most people are not when it comes to politicians. And is Rachel's budget going to do even that?
There will always be @Anabobazina quoting 172 majority !!!!
You are the one repeating the point, not me.
What do you make of Kemi's gifts and donations? Scandalous, eh?
Whataboutery is all you are left with and is not going to change the narrative around Starmer
Stephen Fry has the characteristics of a smart person but isn't academically smart, and his treatment of Dara O'Briain (who *is* academically smart but not in the same social milieu) made me dislike Fry a bit. Not a lot, but he gets by a lot on bluster.
Problem now is that 'Sir Keir has been a complete disaster' is becoming a default setting. Even if Labour can rebuild its reputation it will only do so amongst the charitably minded, which most people are not when it comes to politicians. And is Rachel's budget going to do even that?
There will always be @Anabobazina quoting 172 majority !!!!
You are the one repeating the point, not me.
What do you make of Kemi's gifts and donations? Scandalous, eh?
Three things.
1) She hasn't been wandering around complaining bitterly complaining about politicians being dirty little grifters, got elected to clean up politics, and then turned out have her snout crammed as far into the trough as she can get it. It's the hypocriticy that's the problem with KS, far more than the gifts themselves.
2) A lot depends what the donations were for; I've no real problem with donations for genuine political purposes, it's the concert tickets, lavish birthday parties, designer glasses which really grate.
3) A lot of moderate donations from different donors is far better than having the government turn out to be a wholly owned subsidiary of Lord Ali.
May I present you with exhibit 1: Frank Hester's cheque book.
Stephen Fry has the characteristics of a smart person but isn't academically smart, and his treatment of Dara O'Briain (who *is* academically smart but not in the same social milieu) made me dislike Fry a bit. Not a lot, but he gets by a lot on bluster.
What was his treatment of DOB?
I'd be keen to know too! One thing - Fry used to host QI and its rather easy when you have all the information on cards in front of you or in your ear.
Similarly Paxman on University Challenge. Although he revealed his bias and ignorance routinely as he was unable to pronounce the scientific names and terms, but would sneer at any poor student found lacking in arts knowledge.
The NYT is "right wing"? I suppose from the point of the US Communist Party, it is. But not from the view of, say, moderate Bari Weiss: https://www.bariweiss.com/
Perhaps NigelB has mixed up the NYT with the Washington Post; the first is still controlled by the same family that has always owned it, the second was bought by Jeff Bezos in 2013.
(Some years ago, I concluded that the WSJ was both conservative and liberal, the first in its editorial side, the second in its news side. Don't know if that is still true.)
I’ve a massive load of respect for Bari Weiss and what she’s doing with The Free Press and her Substack.
It’s really difficult to have a centrist online presence, when most of the success online comes from the extremes driving clicks and likes.
I think whoever wins will make it to the election.
I’m minded to agree, it feels to me overpriced due to the musical chairs we all endured from them in the last 8 years. If they’re polling within a few points of Labour either way, I’m not convinced there’ll be any desire to change.
The one caveat I’d make to that is how well they work with others. Badenoch for instance has often been accused of being able to start a fight in an empty room, if she p*sses enough people off that could see her go.
The challenge for the Tories is simple - who are they?
If it was clear what modern Toryism was, we could find a way for a leader to lead it. But they seem to have long abandoned things like capitalism and conservatism, and instead march to the tune of Farage's pipe. That Farage is an agitator with zero policies or a plan to govern and yet they still want him demonstrates how far from safety they are.
The final 2 both represent the bonkers wing of the party, and with so few MPs the new leader will be sat on a hair-trigger before the letters trip the 22 into another entertaining blue on blue festival. If LOTO tries to keep MPs on board they lose the membership and get ousted by another further out in bonkers space. If they try to outmanoeuvre other insaniacs they get ousted by the Hunt caucus of MPs.
In short, the party looks unleadable. Hence the likelihood of another contest(s) before the election.
I don't agree Rochdale. Kemi's views aren't extreme. She just makes little attempt to sugar coat them. I don't really know what Jenrick thinks.
I think Kemi at least has a good opportunity to define what modern Conservatism does mean. Well, both of them do - but Kemi seems more of the thinker. Have you seen the TED talk she did that WilliamGlenn posted the link to last night?
She is, though, going to get painted as a mad extremist, because that's what happens to unapologetic Tories. It will be interesting to see how she responds.
We see this completely differently. Kemi is sounding off making right wing noises - showing some leg. Her actual record of delivery is poor. Jenrick has real policies - he has explained why he feels they need to be put in place, and he's now persuading people of the need for them. That puts him in an entirely league to her. That's also why all the centrists and left wingers on this board have instantly switched allegiance to Kemi after Jimmy Dimmly was knocked out.
Jenrick is surely the more radical candidate? Eg he's said he's had enough of European human rights whereas Badenoch is more ambivalent and it's possible she'll tolerate at least some of them.
My post from yesterday got a bit lost as it was ten minutes before Cleverley got knocked out, but for those who want more background on Jenrick other than the obvious (mural-painting, Desmond-loving) this takedown of Jenrick's time as Housing Secretary by journalist Peter Apps is worth a read -
In it he describes Jenrick as both callous and uncaring, as well as ineffective, delivering catastrophe after catastrophe during his tenure, delivering plans described as 'unworkable as well as politically unpalatable'. Later, after losing his job, he sought to blame the Treasury for his failures, avoiding any sort of accountability.
Apps goes on to note that no other housing minister attracted such a personal level of ire, with Brokenshire and Javid there was 'anger with the whole system' but with Jenrick 'it was personal'.
As someone put it the other day, if you could turn this guy into an aerosol (no snickering at the back, please), you could put him in a can and market him as a literal voter-repellent.
The Tories elect him at their peril.
If anything that suggests Jenrick was too focused on planning reform and building more homes, that may have distracted him a bit from cladding and annoyed Nimbys but was not necessarily a bad policy for the Tories longer term
I mean, that's a rather interesting spin on an utterly devastating article.
Cladding was literally _the_ immediate issue of the post-Grenfell years, with hundreds of thousands of people directly affected, being trapped in unsaleable potential death trap flats, paying a small fortune in 'waking watch' costs, _and_ expected to foot the bill for developers who sold them the shoddy death traps in the first place. 'Caveat emptor' was literally Jenrick's reply.
The article notes Jenrick's utter lack of empathy - "When one of them burst into tears, Jenrick simply looked astonished and uncomfortable. No warm words of sympathy, no heartfelt expression of a desire to put things right. Just a blank stare at the webcam and a hope that it would stop."
Saying Jenrick was more concerned with planning reform (notably, reforms "popular with developers") ignores the thrust of that article, which describes "What he delivered was an almost immediate catastrophe," " taking a quick, hopeful punt, closing your ears to warnings that it could go wrong and assuming everything will be fine." "His next effort... went down like a bucket of cold sick" ..."a betrayal" etc.
It's his attitude that's the problem. Over the course of his tenure, he "alienated" and "angered" people with his "bullish, defensive attitude", leading to a personal ire from voters that wasn't there with his predecessors Brokenshire and Javid, or his successor, Gove.
And therein lies the problem. Jenrick proved himself to be not only incompetent and venal, but lacking in empathy and more interested in listening to developers and vested interests than in ordinary voters.
What you want in a party leader and potential prime minister is someone who combines popularity, empathy and competence, in a way that voters warm to.
There is every evidence from his time as Housing Secretary that Jenrick is the polar opposite.
I am not sure who I would vote for. They both seem like very poor candidates.
Even if I were still a Tory member, I think I would hope that neither would ever be prime minister - their faults would seem to make them particularly ill-suited to that role. (Jenrick's aggression and lack of intellect, Badenoch's inability to get the brain=>mouth ordering correct).
On balance, Badenoch would seem like the least-worst-option. Even if that is disastrous for my betting.
I would agree they seem poor candidates, but then I am not a Tory or a Tory member and they are not really going to appeal to me initially as they have a different audience to appeal to.
I find the comment about Jenrick being voter repellent a little misplaced given he was the only Tory who managed to hold his seat in Nottinghamshire when other, formerly safe Tory seats, fell. He clearly has some appeal.
I'd say that's also significantly about buffer ... he had the largest majority in 2019 - 22,000, and he lost nearly 90% of it. In numbers his voteshare went from 63% to 39%, even on a lower turnout.
Stephen Fry has the characteristics of a smart person but isn't academically smart, and his treatment of Dara O'Briain (who *is* academically smart but not in the same social milieu) made me dislike Fry a bit. Not a lot, but he gets by a lot on bluster.
"A Stupid person’s idea of a clever person."
Quite. Working, as I do, at a top University means I know a hell of a lot of very smart people. And very few are like Stephen Fry. There are a couple who are, though.
£22 for a sandwich and a Diet Coke at Geneva airport. Admittedly the sandwich was jamon Iberica de bellota but still. The chicken sandwiches were roughly the same price
Good job CERN was free. I’m gonna come in almost smack bang on £400
The right-wing media are making a bit of an ass of themselves over Starmer and his uncle.
Yes, some of the resultant memes are funny. But saying 'torpedoed' rather than 'bombed' is an easy misspeak to make. It's hardly major in the context, and I wouldn't classify it as a lie. His uncle served, and was on a ship that suffered damage in battle.
Starmer is having a bit of an unfortunate run of misspeaking, calling Sunak PM repeatedly, releasing the sausages...
So what?
Just saying he has is an unfortunate run where he has a number of gaffes in short succession. You are very defensive.
I noticed at PMQs yesterday he fell into the trap of demanding an answer to 'his' question which when Sunak did that previously the Speaker reminded him it is PMs questions !!
As for 'so what' or 'who cares' or 172 seat majority just indicates an attempt to close down the uncomfortable truth that Starmer's first 100 days has descended into freebies, cronyism and a terrible civil war in no 10 reflecting in approval poll ratings even below Sunak
Starmer was elected on his undertaking for change and a new way of doing politics, which has disappointed many including myself as I thought he would at least be true to his word but ultimely all he has been is the same as the rest sadly
Change the record.
Thats the other one I forgot !!!!!
Who are you voting for in the Tory leadership contest?
I am not a member
Who are you supporting?
Badenoch as I have always been very anti Jenrick
I fear for the nation's pearls!!!
Total gifts and donations to Kemi in 24/25 was £274,655 according to ChatGPT – you will surely be happy to check its working?
Graham Edwards: £12,000 Charles Keymer: £10,000 + £40,000 = £50,000 Robert West: £1,855 Shaya Raymond: £5,000 + £5,000 = £10,000 (in-kind donations) Neil Record: £10,000 Dean Richmond: £5,000 David Eventhall: £10,000 Caroline O'Kane: £5,000 David Watson: £10,000 James Mellon: £10,000 Dominic Brisby: £10,000 Martin Bellamy: £5,000 James Emslie: £10,000 Alison Frost: £5,000 Dambisa Moyo: £10,000 Douglas Shaw: £20,000
Andrew Scott: £10,000 Growth Financial Services: £10,000 David Naylor Leyland: £10,000 John Goodall: £5,000 John Edward James: £10,000 Roger Brookhouse: £5,000 Quentin Marshall: £5,000 Charles Morgan: £5,000 Jingle Bell Ball (free tickets): £800
Those look like donations to her office. Which are fine. Do you have more detail?
I think whoever wins will make it to the election.
I’m minded to agree, it feels to me overpriced due to the musical chairs we all endured from them in the last 8 years. If they’re polling within a few points of Labour either way, I’m not convinced there’ll be any desire to change.
The one caveat I’d make to that is how well they work with others. Badenoch for instance has often been accused of being able to start a fight in an empty room, if she p*sses enough people off that could see her go.
The challenge for the Tories is simple - who are they?
If it was clear what modern Toryism was, we could find a way for a leader to lead it. But they seem to have long abandoned things like capitalism and conservatism, and instead march to the tune of Farage's pipe. That Farage is an agitator with zero policies or a plan to govern and yet they still want him demonstrates how far from safety they are.
The final 2 both represent the bonkers wing of the party, and with so few MPs the new leader will be sat on a hair-trigger before the letters trip the 22 into another entertaining blue on blue festival. If LOTO tries to keep MPs on board they lose the membership and get ousted by another further out in bonkers space. If they try to outmanoeuvre other insaniacs they get ousted by the Hunt caucus of MPs.
In short, the party looks unleadable. Hence the likelihood of another contest(s) before the election.
I don't agree Rochdale. Kemi's views aren't extreme. She just makes little attempt to sugar coat them. I don't really know what Jenrick thinks.
I think Kemi at least has a good opportunity to define what modern Conservatism does mean. Well, both of them do - but Kemi seems more of the thinker. Have you seen the TED talk she did that WilliamGlenn posted the link to last night?
She is, though, going to get painted as a mad extremist, because that's what happens to unapologetic Tories. It will be interesting to see how she responds.
We see this completely differently. Kemi is sounding off making right wing noises - showing some leg. Her actual record of delivery is poor. Jenrick has real policies - he has explained why he feels they need to be put in place, and he's now persuading people of the need for them. That puts him in an entirely league to her. That's also why all the centrists and left wingers on this board have instantly switched allegiance to Kemi after Jimmy Dimmly was knocked out.
Jenrick is surely the more radical candidate? Eg he's said he's had enough of European human rights whereas Badenoch is more ambivalent and it's possible she'll tolerate at least some of them.
My post from yesterday got a bit lost as it was ten minutes before Cleverley got knocked out, but for those who want more background on Jenrick other than the obvious (mural-painting, Desmond-loving) this takedown of Jenrick's time as Housing Secretary by journalist Peter Apps is worth a read -
In it he describes Jenrick as both callous and uncaring, as well as ineffective, delivering catastrophe after catastrophe during his tenure, delivering plans described as 'unworkable as well as politically unpalatable'. Later, after losing his job, he sought to blame the Treasury for his failures, avoiding any sort of accountability.
Apps goes on to note that no other housing minister attracted such a personal level of ire, with Brokenshire and Javid there was 'anger with the whole system' but with Jenrick 'it was personal'.
As someone put it the other day, if you could turn this guy into an aerosol (no snickering at the back, please), you could put him in a can and market him as a literal voter-repellent.
The Tories elect him at their peril.
But he's now up against Badenoch, and many of the same things can be said about her: ineffective as a minister, blamed others, sought to blame civil servants all the time.
Yes. The rumours about Badenoch say she is disliked within Whitehall
However this may be true of any right wing minister who has a genuinely right wing agenda
Or indeed any minister of any stripe with any agenda contrary to departmental orthodoxy. The views expressed in views from the foothills and Politics on the Edge were, in my view, remarkably consistent.
Stephen Fry has the characteristics of a smart person but isn't academically smart, and his treatment of Dara O'Briain (who *is* academically smart but not in the same social milieu) made me dislike Fry a bit. Not a lot, but he gets by a lot on bluster.
What was his treatment of DOB?
I'd be keen to know too! One thing - Fry used to host QI and its rather easy when you have all the information on cards in front of you or in your ear.
Similarly Paxman on University Challenge. Although he revealed his bias and ignorance routinely as he was unable to pronounce the scientific names and terms, but would sneer at any poor student found lacking in arts knowledge.
Fun facts: Stephen Fry competed on University Challenge, Hugh Laurie competed in the Boat Race.
Stephen Fry has the characteristics of a smart person but isn't academically smart, and his treatment of Dara O'Briain (who *is* academically smart but not in the same social milieu) made me dislike Fry a bit. Not a lot, but he gets by a lot on bluster.
"A Stupid person’s idea of a clever person."
Quite. Working, as I do, at a top University means I know a hell of a lot of very smart people. And very few are like Stephen Fry. There are a couple who are, though.
The very brightest people I have ever met are the humblest about their knowledge.
Problem now is that 'Sir Keir has been a complete disaster' is becoming a default setting. Even if Labour can rebuild its reputation it will only do so amongst the charitably minded, which most people are not when it comes to politicians. And is Rachel's budget going to do even that?
There will always be @Anabobazina quoting 172 majority !!!!
You are the one repeating the point, not me.
What do you make of Kemi's gifts and donations? Scandalous, eh?
Whataboutery is all you are left with and is not going to change the narrative around Starmer
"What about this list of Kemi's freebies" is not "whataboutary", it's counting. Of course so long as they remain within the rules Kemi's freebies are as appropriate as Starmer's. Although one could argue the rules need changing.
The NYT is "right wing"? I suppose from the point of the US Communist Party, it is. But not from the view of, say, moderate Bari Weiss: https://www.bariweiss.com/
Perhaps NigelB has mixed up the NYT with the Washington Post; the first is still controlled by the same family that has always owned it, the second was bought by Jeff Bezos in 2013.
(Some years ago, I concluded that the WSJ was both conservative and liberal, the first in its editorial side, the second in its news side. Don't know if that is still true.)
Ross Douthat is left wing ? I suppose from the point of view of the US fascist party, he is.
I should have said new chairman, rather than owner.
Badenoch is a remarkable politician. I didn’t think it possible, but could a Farage led Reform might be preferable to a Badenoch led Tory party?
Will she demonstrate a Cobynite ability to motivate voters to come out to vote against her.
Surely any conservative One Nation Tories should now vote Lib Dem. Do they really want to support someone who wants to jail civil servants?
I think Badenoch is shit, but her comment about jailing civil servants was a joke, not meant literally.
Jokes are dangerous things, though. Some people can get away with them, others can't. I'm not convinced that Badenoch has the lightness of touch to do so. A smarter joker would have said "I'm not saying they should be sent to prison... well, not all of them..., but a lot of them are doing a bad job."
Nothing wrong with not being able to do jokes, Thatcher couldn't either. But one does have to be careful. Especially when, given Badenoch's... reputation... it's not too much of a stretch to imagine her saying it in earnest.
I think whoever wins will make it to the election.
I’m minded to agree, it feels to me overpriced due to the musical chairs we all endured from them in the last 8 years. If they’re polling within a few points of Labour either way, I’m not convinced there’ll be any desire to change.
The one caveat I’d make to that is how well they work with others. Badenoch for instance has often been accused of being able to start a fight in an empty room, if she p*sses enough people off that could see her go.
The challenge for the Tories is simple - who are they?
If it was clear what modern Toryism was, we could find a way for a leader to lead it. But they seem to have long abandoned things like capitalism and conservatism, and instead march to the tune of Farage's pipe. That Farage is an agitator with zero policies or a plan to govern and yet they still want him demonstrates how far from safety they are.
The final 2 both represent the bonkers wing of the party, and with so few MPs the new leader will be sat on a hair-trigger before the letters trip the 22 into another entertaining blue on blue festival. If LOTO tries to keep MPs on board they lose the membership and get ousted by another further out in bonkers space. If they try to outmanoeuvre other insaniacs they get ousted by the Hunt caucus of MPs.
In short, the party looks unleadable. Hence the likelihood of another contest(s) before the election.
I don't agree Rochdale. Kemi's views aren't extreme. She just makes little attempt to sugar coat them. I don't really know what Jenrick thinks.
I think Kemi at least has a good opportunity to define what modern Conservatism does mean. Well, both of them do - but Kemi seems more of the thinker. Have you seen the TED talk she did that WilliamGlenn posted the link to last night?
She is, though, going to get painted as a mad extremist, because that's what happens to unapologetic Tories. It will be interesting to see how she responds.
We see this completely differently. Kemi is sounding off making right wing noises - showing some leg. Her actual record of delivery is poor. Jenrick has real policies - he has explained why he feels they need to be put in place, and he's now persuading people of the need for them. That puts him in an entirely league to her. That's also why all the centrists and left wingers on this board have instantly switched allegiance to Kemi after Jimmy Dimmly was knocked out.
Jenrick is surely the more radical candidate? Eg he's said he's had enough of European human rights whereas Badenoch is more ambivalent and it's possible she'll tolerate at least some of them.
My post from yesterday got a bit lost as it was ten minutes before Cleverley got knocked out, but for those who want more background on Jenrick other than the obvious (mural-painting, Desmond-loving) this takedown of Jenrick's time as Housing Secretary by journalist Peter Apps is worth a read -
In it he describes Jenrick as both callous and uncaring, as well as ineffective, delivering catastrophe after catastrophe during his tenure, delivering plans described as 'unworkable as well as politically unpalatable'. Later, after losing his job, he sought to blame the Treasury for his failures, avoiding any sort of accountability.
Apps goes on to note that no other housing minister attracted such a personal level of ire, with Brokenshire and Javid there was 'anger with the whole system' but with Jenrick 'it was personal'.
As someone put it the other day, if you could turn this guy into an aerosol (no snickering at the back, please), you could put him in a can and market him as a literal voter-repellent.
The Tories elect him at their peril.
If anything that suggests Jenrick was too focused on planning reform and building more homes, that may have distracted him a bit from cladding and annoyed Nimbys but was not necessarily a bad policy for the Tories longer term
I mean, that's a rather interesting spin on an utterly devastating article.
Cladding was literally _the_ immediate issue of the post-Grenfell years, with hundreds of thousands of people directly affected, being trapped in unsaleable potential death trap flats, paying a small fortune in 'waking watch' costs, _and_ expected to foot the bill for developers who sold them the shoddy death traps in the first place. 'Caveat emptor' was literally Jenrick's reply.
The article notes Jenrick's utter lack of empathy - "When one of them burst into tears, Jenrick simply looked astonished and uncomfortable. No warm words of sympathy, no heartfelt expression of a desire to put things right. Just a blank stare at the webcam and a hope that it would stop."
Saying Jenrick was more concerned with planning reform (notably, reforms "popular with developers") ignores the thrust of that article, which describes "What he delivered was an almost immediate catastrophe," " taking a quick, hopeful punt, closing your ears to warnings that it could go wrong and assuming everything will be fine." "His next effort... went down like a bucket of cold sick" ..."a betrayal" etc.
It's his attitude that's the problem. Over the course of his tenure, he "alienated" and "angered" people with his "bullish, defensive attitude", leading to a personal ire from voters that wasn't there with his predecessors Brokenshire and Javid, or his successor, Gove.
And therein lies the problem. Jenrick proved himself to be not only incompetent and venal, but lacking in empathy and more interested in listening to developers and vested interests than in ordinary voters.
What you want in a party leader and potential prime minister is someone who combines popularity, empathy and competence, in a way that voters warm to.
There is every evidence from his time as Housing Secretary that Jenrick is the polar opposite.
I am not sure who I would vote for. They both seem like very poor candidates.
Even if I were still a Tory member, I think I would hope that neither would ever be prime minister - their faults would seem to make them particularly ill-suited to that role. (Jenrick's aggression and lack of intellect, Badenoch's inability to get the brain=>mouth ordering correct).
On balance, Badenoch would seem like the least-worst-option. Even if that is disastrous for my betting.
I would agree they seem poor candidates, but then I am not a Tory or a Tory member and they are not really going to appeal to me initially as they have a different audience to appeal to.
I find the comment about Jenrick being voter repellent a little misplaced given he was the only Tory who managed to hold his seat in Nottinghamshire when other, formerly safe Tory seats, fell. He clearly has some appeal.
I'd say that's also significantly about buffer ... he had the largest majority in 2019 - 22,000, and he lost nearly 90% of it. In numbers his voteshare went from 63% to 39%, even on a lower turnout.
But then the swing against him was less than it was in some of the other seats. So he may have been personally popular or more popular than some other Tories.
Problem now is that 'Sir Keir has been a complete disaster' is becoming a default setting. Even if Labour can rebuild its reputation it will only do so amongst the charitably minded, which most people are not when it comes to politicians. And is Rachel's budget going to do even that?
There will always be @Anabobazina quoting 172 majority !!!!
You are the one repeating the point, not me.
What do you make of Kemi's gifts and donations? Scandalous, eh?
Whataboutery is all you are left with and is not going to change the narrative around Starmer
"What about this list of Kemi's freebies" is not "whataboutary", it's counting. Of course so long as they remain within the rules Kemi's freebies are as appropriate as Starmer's. Although one could argue the rules need changing.
But as has been pointed out Badenoch has said that she sees nothing wrong with accepting them and Starmer made a big issue about free stuff, govt sleaze and govt being of the highest standard when in opposition.
The issue is his hypocrisy. There is no hypocrisy with Badenoch.
Stephen Fry has the characteristics of a smart person but isn't academically smart, and his treatment of Dara O'Briain (who *is* academically smart but not in the same social milieu) made me dislike Fry a bit. Not a lot, but he gets by a lot on bluster.
"A Stupid person’s idea of a clever person."
Quite. Working, as I do, at a top University means I know a hell of a lot of very smart people. And very few are like Stephen Fry. There are a couple who are, though.
Problem now is that 'Sir Keir has been a complete disaster' is becoming a default setting. Even if Labour can rebuild its reputation it will only do so amongst the charitably minded, which most people are not when it comes to politicians. And is Rachel's budget going to do even that?
There will always be @Anabobazina quoting 172 majority !!!!
You are the one repeating the point, not me.
What do you make of Kemi's gifts and donations? Scandalous, eh?
Whataboutery is all you are left with and is not going to change the narrative around Starmer
@PippaCrerar NEW: The centrist Tory Reform Group refuses to endorse either Kemi Badenoch or Robert Jenrick in leadership race.
"Unfortunately, we have been consistently disappointed by the lack of engagement from the two candidates chosen by MPs.
"Both have used rhetoric and focused on issues which are far and away from the party at its best, let alone the One Nation values we cherish and uphold."
Stephen Fry has the characteristics of a smart person but isn't academically smart, and his treatment of Dara O'Briain (who *is* academically smart but not in the same social milieu) made me dislike Fry a bit. Not a lot, but he gets by a lot on bluster.
What was his treatment of DOB?
I'd be keen to know too! One thing - Fry used to host QI and its rather easy when you have all the information on cards in front of you or in your ear.
Similarly Paxman on University Challenge. Although he revealed his bias and ignorance routinely as he was unable to pronounce the scientific names and terms, but would sneer at any poor student found lacking in arts knowledge.
Fun facts: Stephen Fry competed on University Challenge, Hugh Laurie competed in the Boat Race.
Problem now is that 'Sir Keir has been a complete disaster' is becoming a default setting. Even if Labour can rebuild its reputation it will only do so amongst the charitably minded, which most people are not when it comes to politicians. And is Rachel's budget going to do even that?
There will always be @Anabobazina quoting 172 majority !!!!
You are the one repeating the point, not me.
What do you make of Kemi's gifts and donations? Scandalous, eh?
Whataboutery is all you are left with and is not going to change the narrative around Starmer
"What about this list of Kemi's freebies" is not "whataboutary", it's counting. Of course so long as they remain within the rules Kemi's freebies are as appropriate as Starmer's. Although one could argue the rules need changing.
Appropriate =/= in the rules
£10k in cash to fund someone’s political office or research is very different to a £10k donation of clothes or tickets to shows
The right-wing media are making a bit of an ass of themselves over Starmer and his uncle.
Yes, some of the resultant memes are funny. But saying 'torpedoed' rather than 'bombed' is an easy misspeak to make. It's hardly major in the context, and I wouldn't classify it as a lie. His uncle served, and was on a ship that suffered damage in battle.
Starmer is having a bit of an unfortunate run of misspeaking, calling Sunak PM repeatedly, releasing the sausages...
So what?
Just saying he has is an unfortunate run where he has a number of gaffes in short succession. You are very defensive.
I noticed at PMQs yesterday he fell into the trap of demanding an answer to 'his' question which when Sunak did that previously the Speaker reminded him it is PMs questions !!
As for 'so what' or 'who cares' or 172 seat majority just indicates an attempt to close down the uncomfortable truth that Starmer's first 100 days has descended into freebies, cronyism and a terrible civil war in no 10 reflecting in approval poll ratings even below Sunak
Starmer was elected on his undertaking for change and a new way of doing politics, which has disappointed many including myself as I thought he would at least be true to his word but ultimely all he has been is the same as the rest sadly
Change the record.
Thats the other one I forgot !!!!!
Who are you voting for in the Tory leadership contest?
I am not a member
Who are you supporting?
Badenoch as I have always been very anti Jenrick
I fear for the nation's pearls!!!
Total gifts and donations to Kemi in 24/25 was £274,655 according to ChatGPT – you will surely be happy to check its working?
Graham Edwards: £12,000 Charles Keymer: £10,000 + £40,000 = £50,000 Robert West: £1,855 Shaya Raymond: £5,000 + £5,000 = £10,000 (in-kind donations) Neil Record: £10,000 Dean Richmond: £5,000 David Eventhall: £10,000 Caroline O'Kane: £5,000 David Watson: £10,000 James Mellon: £10,000 Dominic Brisby: £10,000 Martin Bellamy: £5,000 James Emslie: £10,000 Alison Frost: £5,000 Dambisa Moyo: £10,000 Douglas Shaw: £20,000
Andrew Scott: £10,000 Growth Financial Services: £10,000 David Naylor Leyland: £10,000 John Goodall: £5,000 John Edward James: £10,000 Roger Brookhouse: £5,000 Quentin Marshall: £5,000 Charles Morgan: £5,000 Jingle Bell Ball (free tickets): £800
Those look like donations to her office. Which are fine. Do you have more detail?
Well as I have now said multiple times on here, this is not some secret dossier, but the REGISTER OF MEMBERS INTERESTS which is in the pubic domain and takes about three seconds to google. I mean, we all guessed that PB Tories like G hadn't even bothered to look at it – preferring instead to get their 'information' from Guido Fawkes, the man on the internet.
Problem now is that 'Sir Keir has been a complete disaster' is becoming a default setting. Even if Labour can rebuild its reputation it will only do so amongst the charitably minded, which most people are not when it comes to politicians. And is Rachel's budget going to do even that?
There will always be @Anabobazina quoting 172 majority !!!!
You are the one repeating the point, not me.
What do you make of Kemi's gifts and donations? Scandalous, eh?
Three things.
1) She hasn't been wandering around complaining bitterly complaining about politicians being dirty little grifters, got elected to clean up politics, and then turned out have her snout crammed as far into the trough as she can get it. It's the hypocriticy that's the problem with KS, far more than the gifts themselves.
2) A lot depends what the donations were for; I've no real problem with donations for genuine political purposes, it's the concert tickets, lavish birthday parties, designer glasses which really grate.
3) A lot of moderate donations from different donors is far better than having the government turn out to be a wholly owned subsidiary of Lord Ali.
Can you point me to the part where Sir Keir said politicians shouldn't accepted declared gifts? Before or after the election is fine. Take your time.
Chief Secretary to the Treasury Darren Jones has announced there will be a 10 year infrastructure strategy at the full spending review next year, which includes housing and schools as key economic growth drivers, and overseen by a new body NISTA…
Labour must be feeling more confident than a day ago..
Great. Another public body to “oversee” investment. We are being spoiled.
During my government days, I remember once being told by an Ofgem employee who was shocked at the overstaffing that the German energy regulator had visited and "they couldn't understand what the UK regulator does with so many people".
Obviously things haven't changed since then, in fact they've got much worse. And under the current Prime Minister, surely the epitome of complacent, unaccountable quangocrat mediocrity, arrogance and incompetence if ever there was one, they will no doubt get worse yet.
Chief Secretary to the Treasury Darren Jones has announced there will be a 10 year infrastructure strategy at the full spending review next year, which includes housing and schools as key economic growth drivers, and overseen by a new body NISTA…
Labour must be feeling more confident than a day ago..
Great. Another public body to “oversee” investment. We are being spoiled.
Yeah, surely we could just leave it to Tory MPs' friends and relations to take on the onerous task of spending the investment money?
Stephen Fry has the characteristics of a smart person but isn't academically smart, and his treatment of Dara O'Briain (who *is* academically smart but not in the same social milieu) made me dislike Fry a bit. Not a lot, but he gets by a lot on bluster.
"A Stupid person’s idea of a clever person."
Quite. Working, as I do, at a top University means I know a hell of a lot of very smart people. And very few are like Stephen Fry. There are a couple who are, though.
The very brightest people I have ever met are the humblest about their knowledge.
My favourite judge when I started was Lord Macfadyen. “Perhaps it’s me,” he would say diffidently.
Chief Secretary to the Treasury Darren Jones has announced there will be a 10 year infrastructure strategy at the full spending review next year, which includes housing and schools as key economic growth drivers, and overseen by a new body NISTA…
Labour must be feeling more confident than a day ago..
Great. Another public body to “oversee” investment. We are being spoiled.
Spoiled with civil servants on six-figure salaries and superannuated pensions, rather than spoiled with any actual ideas about growing the economy.
Problem now is that 'Sir Keir has been a complete disaster' is becoming a default setting. Even if Labour can rebuild its reputation it will only do so amongst the charitably minded, which most people are not when it comes to politicians. And is Rachel's budget going to do even that?
There will always be @Anabobazina quoting 172 majority !!!!
You are the one repeating the point, not me.
What do you make of Kemi's gifts and donations? Scandalous, eh?
Whataboutery is all you are left with and is not going to change the narrative around Starmer
"What about this list of Kemi's freebies" is not "whataboutary", it's counting. Of course so long as they remain within the rules Kemi's freebies are as appropriate as Starmer's. Although one could argue the rules need changing.
But as has been pointed out Badenoch has said that she sees nothing wrong with accepting them and Starmer made a big issue about free stuff, govt sleaze and govt being of the highest standard when in opposition.
The issue is his hypocrisy. There is no hypocrisy with Badenoch.
Bob J. "sees nothing wrong" with overturning a planning decision that saved Desmond £45m, in return for a 12 grand party donation. It doesn't make it right.
Problem now is that 'Sir Keir has been a complete disaster' is becoming a default setting. Even if Labour can rebuild its reputation it will only do so amongst the charitably minded, which most people are not when it comes to politicians. And is Rachel's budget going to do even that?
There will always be @Anabobazina quoting 172 majority !!!!
You are the one repeating the point, not me.
What do you make of Kemi's gifts and donations? Scandalous, eh?
Whataboutery is all you are left with and is not going to change the narrative around Starmer
"What about this list of Kemi's freebies" is not "whataboutary", it's counting. Of course so long as they remain within the rules Kemi's freebies are as appropriate as Starmer's. Although one could argue the rules need changing.
Appropriate =/= in the rules
£10k in cash to fund someone’s political office or research is very different to a £10k donation of clothes or tickets to shows
What about £10k of "personal strategic coaching" – good or bad in your view?
Chief Secretary to the Treasury Darren Jones has announced there will be a 10 year infrastructure strategy at the full spending review next year, which includes housing and schools as key economic growth drivers, and overseen by a new body NISTA…
Labour must be feeling more confident than a day ago..
It looks clever politics to me (and actually good for the national interest too).
At the next GE the Tories will be either committed to the projects and spending, or have to announce cancellation of them. It's not just the Tories who can set heffalump traps.
Stephen Fry has the characteristics of a smart person but isn't academically smart, and his treatment of Dara O'Briain (who *is* academically smart but not in the same social milieu) made me dislike Fry a bit. Not a lot, but he gets by a lot on bluster.
"A Stupid person’s idea of a clever person."
Quite. Working, as I do, at a top University means I know a hell of a lot of very smart people. And very few are like Stephen Fry. There are a couple who are, though.
The very brightest people I have ever met are the humblest about their knowledge.
How did humans get smart enough to detect and use muons?
"It's a warm summer evening, circa 600 BC. You've finished your shopping at the local market, or agora... and you look up at the night sky. There you notice some of the stars seem to move, so you name them planetes or wanderer..."
TMOTAB has a better opening para: In London, where Southampton Row passes Russell Square, across from the British Museum in Bloomsbury, Leó Szilárd waited irritably one gray Depression morning for the stoplight to change. A trace of rain had fallen during the night; Tuesday, September 12, 1933, dawned cool, humid and dull. Drizzling rain would begin again in early afternoon. When Szilárd told the story later he never mentioned his destination that morning. He may have had none; he often walked to think. In any case another destination intervened. The stoplight changed to green. Szilárd stepped off the curb. As he crossed the street time cracked open before him and he saw a way to the future, death into the world and all our woe, the shape of things to come...
During my government days, I remember once being told by an Ofgem employee who was shocked at the overstaffing that the German energy regulator had visited and "they couldn't understand what the UK regulator does with so many people".
Obviously things haven't changed since then, in fact they've got much worse. And under the current Prime Minister, surely the epitome of complacent, unaccountable quangocrat mediocrity, arrogance and incompetence if ever there was one, they will no doubt get worse yet.
Civil service headcount is up by a quarter since June 2016, can some-one remind me what happened then?
During my government days, I remember once being told by an Ofgem employee who was shocked at the overstaffing that the German energy regulator had visited and "they couldn't understand what the UK regulator does with so many people".
Obviously things haven't changed since then, in fact they've got much worse. And under the current Prime Minister, surely the epitome of complacent, unaccountable quangocrat mediocrity, arrogance and incompetence if ever there was one, they will no doubt get worse yet.
Same for the other quangos no doubt. Still don't know why we need one quango for water, another for gas and a third for electricity.
This is one of the big fails from the Cons' time in office for me
Chief Secretary to the Treasury Darren Jones has announced there will be a 10 year infrastructure strategy at the full spending review next year, which includes housing and schools as key economic growth drivers, and overseen by a new body NISTA…
Labour must be feeling more confident than a day ago..
Do we get to pronounce it as "Nice! Ta!"? Or more like the bastard offspring of Nisa and Costa?
Chief Secretary to the Treasury Darren Jones has announced there will be a 10 year infrastructure strategy at the full spending review next year, which includes housing and schools as key economic growth drivers, and overseen by a new body NISTA…
Labour must be feeling more confident than a day ago..
It looks clever politics to me (and actually good for the national interest too).
At the next GE the Tories will be either committed to the projects and spending, or have to announce cancellation of them. It's not just the Tories who can set heffalump traps.
... or they can just do what Labour did this time - pretend they are committed to growth and infrastructure, then when they are elected, lie about the state of the public finances and cancel dozens of projects.
The right-wing media are making a bit of an ass of themselves over Starmer and his uncle.
Yes, some of the resultant memes are funny. But saying 'torpedoed' rather than 'bombed' is an easy misspeak to make. It's hardly major in the context, and I wouldn't classify it as a lie. His uncle served, and was on a ship that suffered damage in battle.
Starmer is having a bit of an unfortunate run of misspeaking, calling Sunak PM repeatedly, releasing the sausages...
So what?
Just saying he has is an unfortunate run where he has a number of gaffes in short succession. You are very defensive.
I noticed at PMQs yesterday he fell into the trap of demanding an answer to 'his' question which when Sunak did that previously the Speaker reminded him it is PMs questions !!
As for 'so what' or 'who cares' or 172 seat majority just indicates an attempt to close down the uncomfortable truth that Starmer's first 100 days has descended into freebies, cronyism and a terrible civil war in no 10 reflecting in approval poll ratings even below Sunak
Starmer was elected on his undertaking for change and a new way of doing politics, which has disappointed many including myself as I thought he would at least be true to his word but ultimely all he has been is the same as the rest sadly
Change the record.
Thats the other one I forgot !!!!!
Who are you voting for in the Tory leadership contest?
I am not a member
Who are you supporting?
Badenoch as I have always been very anti Jenrick
I fear for the nation's pearls!!!
Total gifts and donations to Kemi in 24/25 was £274,655 according to ChatGPT – you will surely be happy to check its working?
Graham Edwards: £12,000 Charles Keymer: £10,000 + £40,000 = £50,000 Robert West: £1,855 Shaya Raymond: £5,000 + £5,000 = £10,000 (in-kind donations) Neil Record: £10,000 Dean Richmond: £5,000 David Eventhall: £10,000 Caroline O'Kane: £5,000 David Watson: £10,000 James Mellon: £10,000 Dominic Brisby: £10,000 Martin Bellamy: £5,000 James Emslie: £10,000 Alison Frost: £5,000 Dambisa Moyo: £10,000 Douglas Shaw: £20,000
Andrew Scott: £10,000 Growth Financial Services: £10,000 David Naylor Leyland: £10,000 John Goodall: £5,000 John Edward James: £10,000 Roger Brookhouse: £5,000 Quentin Marshall: £5,000 Charles Morgan: £5,000 Jingle Bell Ball (free tickets): £800
Those look like donations to her office. Which are fine. Do you have more detail?
Well as I have now said multiple times on here, this is not some secret dossier, but the REGISTER OF MEMBERS INTERESTS which is in the pubic domain and takes about three seconds to google. I mean, we all guessed that PB Tories like G hadn't even bothered to look at it – preferring instead to get their 'information' from Guido Fawkes, the man on the internet.
"You're not getting your hands on my pubic domain, Missus!!" - "Carry on PB", dir. Gerald Thomas
Problem now is that 'Sir Keir has been a complete disaster' is becoming a default setting. Even if Labour can rebuild its reputation it will only do so amongst the charitably minded, which most people are not when it comes to politicians. And is Rachel's budget going to do even that?
There will always be @Anabobazina quoting 172 majority !!!!
You are the one repeating the point, not me.
What do you make of Kemi's gifts and donations? Scandalous, eh?
Whataboutery is all you are left with and is not going to change the narrative around Starmer
"What about this list of Kemi's freebies" is not "whataboutary", it's counting. Of course so long as they remain within the rules Kemi's freebies are as appropriate as Starmer's. Although one could argue the rules need changing.
Appropriate =/= in the rules
£10k in cash to fund someone’s political office or research is very different to a £10k donation of clothes or tickets to shows
What about £10k of "personal strategic coaching" – good or bad in your view?
You need to conclude freebies for Tories are fine and freebies for Labour equate to unquestionable Tory corruption, see PPE, see Bunga Bunga parties, see Desmond's planning issues.
Stephen Fry has the characteristics of a smart person but isn't academically smart, and his treatment of Dara O'Briain (who *is* academically smart but not in the same social milieu) made me dislike Fry a bit. Not a lot, but he gets by a lot on bluster.
What was his treatment of DOB?
I'd be keen to know too! One thing - Fry used to host QI and its rather easy when you have all the information on cards in front of you or in your ear.
Similarly Paxman on University Challenge. Although he revealed his bias and ignorance routinely as he was unable to pronounce the scientific names and terms, but would sneer at any poor student found lacking in arts knowledge.
Yes, Paxman was incredulous that anyone didn't know something so obvious that Paxman knew it, and incredulous that anyone knew anything so obscure that even Paxman didn't know it.
Stephen Fry has the characteristics of a smart person but isn't academically smart, and his treatment of Dara O'Briain (who *is* academically smart but not in the same social milieu) made me dislike Fry a bit. Not a lot, but he gets by a lot on bluster.
What was his treatment of DOB?
I'd be keen to know too! One thing - Fry used to host QI and its rather easy when you have all the information on cards in front of you or in your ear.
Similarly Paxman on University Challenge. Although he revealed his bias and ignorance routinely as he was unable to pronounce the scientific names and terms, but would sneer at any poor student found lacking in arts knowledge.
Fun facts: Stephen Fry competed on University Challenge, Hugh Laurie competed in the Boat Race.
Does the Young Ones count?
The University Challenge between Scumbag University and Footlights College is the best episode. Credit to Fry, Laurie etal at being so willing to send themselves up.
Problem now is that 'Sir Keir has been a complete disaster' is becoming a default setting. Even if Labour can rebuild its reputation it will only do so amongst the charitably minded, which most people are not when it comes to politicians. And is Rachel's budget going to do even that?
There will always be @Anabobazina quoting 172 majority !!!!
You are the one repeating the point, not me.
What do you make of Kemi's gifts and donations? Scandalous, eh?
Whataboutery is all you are left with and is not going to change the narrative around Starmer
"What about this list of Kemi's freebies" is not "whataboutary", it's counting. Of course so long as they remain within the rules Kemi's freebies are as appropriate as Starmer's. Although one could argue the rules need changing.
But as has been pointed out Badenoch has said that she sees nothing wrong with accepting them and Starmer made a big issue about free stuff, govt sleaze and govt being of the highest standard when in opposition.
The issue is his hypocrisy. There is no hypocrisy with Badenoch.
Bob J. "sees nothing wrong" with overturning a planning decision that saved Desmond £45m, in return for a 12 grand party donation. It doesn't make it right.
This has been said several times now. Lord knows I am no fan of Jenrick, his behaviour in relation to the refugee children was contemptible, but if a politician thinks that the decision is wrong and preventing desired investment what’s he supposed to do? Refuse to intervene because of how it might look?
Chief Secretary to the Treasury Darren Jones has announced there will be a 10 year infrastructure strategy at the full spending review next year, which includes housing and schools as key economic growth drivers, and overseen by a new body NISTA…
Labour must be feeling more confident than a day ago..
It looks clever politics to me (and actually good for the national interest too).
At the next GE the Tories will be either committed to the projects and spending, or have to announce cancellation of them. It's not just the Tories who can set heffalump traps.
... or they can just do what Labour did this time - pretend they are committed to growth and infrastructure, then when they are elected, lie about the state of the public finances and cancel dozens of projects.
The right-wing media are making a bit of an ass of themselves over Starmer and his uncle.
Yes, some of the resultant memes are funny. But saying 'torpedoed' rather than 'bombed' is an easy misspeak to make. It's hardly major in the context, and I wouldn't classify it as a lie. His uncle served, and was on a ship that suffered damage in battle.
Starmer is having a bit of an unfortunate run of misspeaking, calling Sunak PM repeatedly, releasing the sausages...
So what?
Just saying he has is an unfortunate run where he has a number of gaffes in short succession. You are very defensive.
I noticed at PMQs yesterday he fell into the trap of demanding an answer to 'his' question which when Sunak did that previously the Speaker reminded him it is PMs questions !!
As for 'so what' or 'who cares' or 172 seat majority just indicates an attempt to close down the uncomfortable truth that Starmer's first 100 days has descended into freebies, cronyism and a terrible civil war in no 10 reflecting in approval poll ratings even below Sunak
Starmer was elected on his undertaking for change and a new way of doing politics, which has disappointed many including myself as I thought he would at least be true to his word but ultimely all he has been is the same as the rest sadly
Change the record.
Thats the other one I forgot !!!!!
Who are you voting for in the Tory leadership contest?
I am not a member
Who are you supporting?
Badenoch as I have always been very anti Jenrick
I fear for the nation's pearls!!!
Total gifts and donations to Kemi in 24/25 was £274,655 according to ChatGPT – you will surely be happy to check its working?
Graham Edwards: £12,000 Charles Keymer: £10,000 + £40,000 = £50,000 Robert West: £1,855 Shaya Raymond: £5,000 + £5,000 = £10,000 (in-kind donations) Neil Record: £10,000 Dean Richmond: £5,000 David Eventhall: £10,000 Caroline O'Kane: £5,000 David Watson: £10,000 James Mellon: £10,000 Dominic Brisby: £10,000 Martin Bellamy: £5,000 James Emslie: £10,000 Alison Frost: £5,000 Dambisa Moyo: £10,000 Douglas Shaw: £20,000
Andrew Scott: £10,000 Growth Financial Services: £10,000 David Naylor Leyland: £10,000 John Goodall: £5,000 John Edward James: £10,000 Roger Brookhouse: £5,000 Quentin Marshall: £5,000 Charles Morgan: £5,000 Jingle Bell Ball (free tickets): £800
Those look like donations to her office. Which are fine. Do you have more detail?
Well as I have now said multiple times on here, this is not some secret dossier, but the REGISTER OF MEMBERS INTERESTS which is in the pubic domain and takes about three seconds to google. I mean, we all guessed that PB Tories like G hadn't even bothered to look at it – preferring instead to get their 'information' from Guido Fawkes, the man on the internet.
You completely miss the point
As explained in @Taz at 1.36 it is the hypocrisy that is Starmers problem
You also have a weird idea that everyone opposed to Starmer is a right wing Tory when in my case nothing could be further from the truth
I am a one nation conservatives and I post widely from across the media including Sky, Guardian, Times and others but you will not see a post from me from GB news
Your problem is you seem to be in denial just how badly Starmer has been received by the public in his first 100 days and maybe accepting that would be cathartic
The right-wing media are making a bit of an ass of themselves over Starmer and his uncle.
Yes, some of the resultant memes are funny. But saying 'torpedoed' rather than 'bombed' is an easy misspeak to make. It's hardly major in the context, and I wouldn't classify it as a lie. His uncle served, and was on a ship that suffered damage in battle.
Starmer is having a bit of an unfortunate run of misspeaking, calling Sunak PM repeatedly, releasing the sausages...
So what?
Just saying he has is an unfortunate run where he has a number of gaffes in short succession. You are very defensive.
I noticed at PMQs yesterday he fell into the trap of demanding an answer to 'his' question which when Sunak did that previously the Speaker reminded him it is PMs questions !!
As for 'so what' or 'who cares' or 172 seat majority just indicates an attempt to close down the uncomfortable truth that Starmer's first 100 days has descended into freebies, cronyism and a terrible civil war in no 10 reflecting in approval poll ratings even below Sunak
Starmer was elected on his undertaking for change and a new way of doing politics, which has disappointed many including myself as I thought he would at least be true to his word but ultimely all he has been is the same as the rest sadly
Change the record.
Thats the other one I forgot !!!!!
Who are you voting for in the Tory leadership contest?
I am not a member
Who are you supporting?
Badenoch as I have always been very anti Jenrick
I fear for the nation's pearls!!!
Total gifts and donations to Kemi in 24/25 was £274,655 according to ChatGPT – you will surely be happy to check its working?
Graham Edwards: £12,000 Charles Keymer: £10,000 + £40,000 = £50,000 Robert West: £1,855 Shaya Raymond: £5,000 + £5,000 = £10,000 (in-kind donations) Neil Record: £10,000 Dean Richmond: £5,000 David Eventhall: £10,000 Caroline O'Kane: £5,000 David Watson: £10,000 James Mellon: £10,000 Dominic Brisby: £10,000 Martin Bellamy: £5,000 James Emslie: £10,000 Alison Frost: £5,000 Dambisa Moyo: £10,000 Douglas Shaw: £20,000
Andrew Scott: £10,000 Growth Financial Services: £10,000 David Naylor Leyland: £10,000 John Goodall: £5,000 John Edward James: £10,000 Roger Brookhouse: £5,000 Quentin Marshall: £5,000 Charles Morgan: £5,000 Jingle Bell Ball (free tickets): £800
Those look like donations to her office. Which are fine. Do you have more detail?
Well as I have now said multiple times on here, this is not some secret dossier, but the REGISTER OF MEMBERS INTERESTS which is in the pubic domain and takes about three seconds to google. I mean, we all guessed that PB Tories like G hadn't even bothered to look at it – preferring instead to get their 'information' from Guido Fawkes, the man on the internet.
You’ve never had the courtesy to respond to my questions on this, but generally if you are trying to make a serious point you have to substantiate.
Otherwise it appears that you are Silji at hand waving and throwing up chaff to try and distract from the inappropriate behaviour of Starmer and others
The right-wing media are making a bit of an ass of themselves over Starmer and his uncle.
Yes, some of the resultant memes are funny. But saying 'torpedoed' rather than 'bombed' is an easy misspeak to make. It's hardly major in the context, and I wouldn't classify it as a lie. His uncle served, and was on a ship that suffered damage in battle.
Starmer is having a bit of an unfortunate run of misspeaking, calling Sunak PM repeatedly, releasing the sausages...
So what?
Just saying he has is an unfortunate run where he has a number of gaffes in short succession. You are very defensive.
I noticed at PMQs yesterday he fell into the trap of demanding an answer to 'his' question which when Sunak did that previously the Speaker reminded him it is PMs questions !!
As for 'so what' or 'who cares' or 172 seat majority just indicates an attempt to close down the uncomfortable truth that Starmer's first 100 days has descended into freebies, cronyism and a terrible civil war in no 10 reflecting in approval poll ratings even below Sunak
Starmer was elected on his undertaking for change and a new way of doing politics, which has disappointed many including myself as I thought he would at least be true to his word but ultimely all he has been is the same as the rest sadly
Change the record.
Thats the other one I forgot !!!!!
Who are you voting for in the Tory leadership contest?
I am not a member
Who are you supporting?
Badenoch as I have always been very anti Jenrick
I fear for the nation's pearls!!!
Total gifts and donations to Kemi in 24/25 was £274,655 according to ChatGPT – you will surely be happy to check its working?
Graham Edwards: £12,000 Charles Keymer: £10,000 + £40,000 = £50,000 Robert West: £1,855 Shaya Raymond: £5,000 + £5,000 = £10,000 (in-kind donations) Neil Record: £10,000 Dean Richmond: £5,000 David Eventhall: £10,000 Caroline O'Kane: £5,000 David Watson: £10,000 James Mellon: £10,000 Dominic Brisby: £10,000 Martin Bellamy: £5,000 James Emslie: £10,000 Alison Frost: £5,000 Dambisa Moyo: £10,000 Douglas Shaw: £20,000
Andrew Scott: £10,000 Growth Financial Services: £10,000 David Naylor Leyland: £10,000 John Goodall: £5,000 John Edward James: £10,000 Roger Brookhouse: £5,000 Quentin Marshall: £5,000 Charles Morgan: £5,000 Jingle Bell Ball (free tickets): £800
Those look like donations to her office. Which are fine. Do you have more detail?
Well as I have now said multiple times on here, this is not some secret dossier, but the REGISTER OF MEMBERS INTERESTS which is in the pubic domain and takes about three seconds to google. I mean, we all guessed that PB Tories like G hadn't even bothered to look at it – preferring instead to get their 'information' from Guido Fawkes, the man on the internet.
You completely miss the point
As explained in @Taz at 1.36 it is the hypocrisy that is Starmers problem
You also have a weird idea that everyone opposed to Starmer is a right wing Tory when in my case nothing could be further from the truth
I am a one nation conservatives and I post widely from across the media including Sky, Guardian, Times and others but you will not see a post from me from GB news
Your problem is you seem to be in denial just how badly Starmer has been received by the public in his first 100 days and maybe accepting that would be cathartic
Can you point me to the part where Sir Keir said MPs shouldn't accept declared gifts? Whenever you are ready...
Chief Secretary to the Treasury Darren Jones has announced there will be a 10 year infrastructure strategy at the full spending review next year, which includes housing and schools as key economic growth drivers, and overseen by a new body NISTA…
Labour must be feeling more confident than a day ago..
Great. Another public body to “oversee” investment. We are being spoiled.
Problem now is that 'Sir Keir has been a complete disaster' is becoming a default setting. Even if Labour can rebuild its reputation it will only do so amongst the charitably minded, which most people are not when it comes to politicians. And is Rachel's budget going to do even that?
There will always be @Anabobazina quoting 172 majority !!!!
You are the one repeating the point, not me.
What do you make of Kemi's gifts and donations? Scandalous, eh?
Whataboutery is all you are left with and is not going to change the narrative around Starmer
"What about this list of Kemi's freebies" is not "whataboutary", it's counting. Of course so long as they remain within the rules Kemi's freebies are as appropriate as Starmer's. Although one could argue the rules need changing.
Appropriate =/= in the rules
£10k in cash to fund someone’s political office or research is very different to a £10k donation of clothes or tickets to shows
What about £10k of "personal strategic coaching" – good or bad in your view?
You need to conclude freebies for Tories are fine and freebies for Labour equate to unquestionable Tory corruption, see PPE, see Bunga Bunga parties, see Desmond's planning issues.
Comments
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/other/stephen-fry-bemoans-keir-starmer-s-disastrous-first-100-days-as-pm/ar-AA1s19RB?ocid=entnewsntp&pc=U531&cvid=425faa8e57f14c35957105b8086e2af1&ei=26
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEXI6r08908
Space stuff pre-Elon always used classical or Star Trek references, but post-Elon that's gone away. US Armed Forces are more on Stargate references (eg Replicators) or generic sci-fi like Raptor. But when they start doing LOTR, back away nervously.
I find the comment about Jenrick being voter repellent a little misplaced given he was the only Tory who managed to hold his seat in Nottinghamshire when other, formerly safe Tory seats, fell. He clearly has some appeal.
I would have if Cleverly had won
Total gifts and donations to Kemi in 24/25 was £274,655 according to ChatGPT – you will surely be happy to check its working?
Graham Edwards: £12,000
Charles Keymer: £10,000 + £40,000 = £50,000
Robert West: £1,855
Shaya Raymond: £5,000 + £5,000 = £10,000 (in-kind donations)
Neil Record: £10,000
Dean Richmond: £5,000
David Eventhall: £10,000
Caroline O'Kane: £5,000
David Watson: £10,000
James Mellon: £10,000
Dominic Brisby: £10,000
Martin Bellamy: £5,000
James Emslie: £10,000
Alison Frost: £5,000
Dambisa Moyo: £10,000
Douglas Shaw: £20,000
Andrew Scott: £10,000
Growth Financial Services: £10,000
David Naylor Leyland: £10,000
John Goodall: £5,000
John Edward James: £10,000
Roger Brookhouse: £5,000
Quentin Marshall: £5,000
Charles Morgan: £5,000
Jingle Bell Ball (free tickets): £800
Start there.
"In his LBC interview, Fry also spoke about his decision to gain Austrian citizenship earlier this year.
'My grandmother was Austrian and it's partly a finger up to Brexit,' he added. 'Obviously, to have a Schengen group passport is a good thing.'"
So clever, and so clued up on the EU, he doesn't understand what Schengen is.
As in necklaces ?
Sherwood Forest and long time Rushcliffe were less safe.
ETA: I met Tim Berners-Lee, once. Well, I held a door open for him and he said "thank you".
In London, where Southampton Row passes Russell Square, across from the British Museum in Bloomsbury, Leó Szilárd waited irritably one gray Depression morning for the stoplight to change. A trace of rain had fallen during the night; Tuesday, September 12, 1933, dawned cool, humid and dull. Drizzling rain would begin again in early afternoon. When Szilárd told the story later he never mentioned his destination that morning. He may have had none; he often walked to think. In any case another destination intervened. The stoplight changed to green. Szilárd stepped off the curb. As he crossed the street time cracked open before him and he saw a way to the future, death into the world and all our woe, the shape of things to come...
Yes, it was someone else, unnamed, who made that comment which Kyf referred to.
It just seemed an odd thing to say given he survived with a decent-ish majority.
Will she demonstrate a Cobynite ability to motivate voters to come out to vote against her.
Surely any conservative One Nation Tories should now vote Lib Dem. Do they really want to support someone who wants to jail civil servants?
What do you make of Kemi's gifts and donations? Scandalous, eh?
@faisalislam
NEW
Chief Secretary to the Treasury Darren Jones has announced there will be a 10 year infrastructure strategy at the full spending review next year, which includes housing and schools as key economic growth drivers, and overseen by a new body NISTA…
Labour must be feeling more confident than a day ago..
Where scientists got lucky (where we all got lucky) was finding a way to record and connect the momentary flashes of brilliance that individuals have from time to time.
Which, if we can stop it hallucinating and feeding off its own hallucinations, is sort of what AI promises/threatens to do for other bits of human endeavour.
Perhaps NigelB has mixed up the NYT with the Washington Post; the first is still controlled by the same family that has always owned it, the second was bought by Jeff Bezos in 2013.
(Some years ago, I concluded that the WSJ was both conservative and liberal, the first in its editorial side, the second in its news side. Don't know if that is still true.)
The classic slick salesman type. Says the right things to get in the right rooms with the right people, but demonstrates extreme incompetence, venality and lack of empathy once he actually gets there.
My guess is he'd be found out by the electorate long before getting to Number 10. See the recent scandal over how his leadership campaign was funded via anonymous donor through an offshore company (later revealed to be someone called Philip Ullman). Jenrick just can't help himself.
From the way he treated trapped leaseholders to his infamous painting over of the childrens' mural to his dodgy dealings with Dirty Desmond, every little thing you find out about Jenrick adds up to a damning portrayal of his character.
It wouldn't be the first time the Tories have put a shameless grifter into Number 10. But haven't we had enough of them?
Remember hs2 was a 20 year plan by itself
1) She hasn't been wandering around complaining bitterly complaining about politicians being dirty little grifters, got elected to clean up politics, and then turned out have her snout crammed as far into the trough as she can get it. It's the hypocriticy that's the problem with KS, far more than the gifts themselves.
2) A lot depends what the donations were for; I've no real problem with donations for genuine political purposes, it's the concert tickets, lavish birthday parties, designer glasses which really grate.
3) A lot of moderate donations from different donors is far better than having the government turn out to be a wholly owned subsidiary of Lord Ali.
Similarly Paxman on University Challenge. Although he revealed his bias and ignorance routinely as he was unable to pronounce the scientific names and terms, but would sneer at any poor student found lacking in arts knowledge.
It’s really difficult to have a centrist online presence, when most of the success online comes from the extremes driving clicks and likes.
Good job CERN was free. I’m gonna come in almost smack bang on £400
Bad judgment from an extraordinarily polarising figure
I suppose from the point of view of the US fascist party, he is.
I should have said new chairman, rather than owner.
Nothing wrong with not being able to do jokes, Thatcher couldn't either. But one does have to be careful. Especially when, given Badenoch's... reputation... it's not too much of a stretch to imagine her saying it in earnest.
The issue is his hypocrisy. There is no hypocrisy with Badenoch.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/bills/energy/ofgem-blows-35m-year-on-empty-office/
NEW: The centrist Tory Reform Group refuses to endorse either Kemi Badenoch or Robert Jenrick in leadership race.
"Unfortunately, we have been consistently disappointed by the lack of engagement from the two candidates chosen by MPs.
"Both have used rhetoric and focused on issues which are far and away from the party at its best, let alone the One Nation values we cherish and uphold."
Certainly a few have chosen the wrong horse.
£10k in cash to fund someone’s political office or research is very different to a £10k donation of clothes or tickets to shows
Obviously things haven't changed since then, in fact they've got much worse. And under the current Prime Minister, surely the epitome of complacent, unaccountable quangocrat mediocrity, arrogance and incompetence if ever there was one, they will no doubt get worse yet.
It invariably wasn’t.
At the next GE the Tories will be either committed to the projects and spending, or have to announce cancellation of them. It's not just the Tories who can set heffalump traps.
TMOTAB is The Making of the Atomic Bomb by Richard Rhodes
This is one of the big fails from the Cons' time in office for me
As explained in @Taz at 1.36 it is the hypocrisy that is Starmers problem
You also have a weird idea that everyone opposed to Starmer is a right wing Tory when in my case nothing could be further from the truth
I am a one nation conservatives and I post widely from across the media including Sky, Guardian, Times and others but you will not see a post from me from GB news
Your problem is you seem to be in denial just how badly Starmer has been received by the public in his first 100 days and maybe accepting that would be cathartic
Otherwise it appears that you are Silji at hand waving and throwing up chaff to try and distract from the inappropriate behaviour of Starmer and others
Jenrick BAD
Cleverly LADTugendhat DADStride SADPatel FADNo, I'd also not heard of NIC or IPA, other than in the National Insurance of beer senses.