Howdy, Stranger!

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

Ladbrokes think the Tory contest winner will not lead the party at the GE – politicalbetting.com

12346

Comments

  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 16,966
    Pulpstar said:

    viewcode said:

    Taz said:
    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.
    I see Chris Budd is still there !
    Yep - I know him through a colleague mainly.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 22,761
    Leon said:

    Badenoch MAD
    Jenrick BAD
    Cleverly LAD
    Tugendhat DAD
    Stride SAD
    Patel FAD

    Jenrick should be CAD then you can give BAD to Patel
    Also like.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 22,761
    Badenoch MAD
    Jenrick CAD
    Cleverly HAD
    Tugendhat DAD
    Stride SAD
    Patel BAD
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 31,600
    edited 1:03PM
    The hurricane in Florida appears to have severely affected wind speeds in the UK, with London at 3,508 mph for example.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/2643743
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 62,306

    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...
    Pointless argument going round in circles

    Look at public opinion on Starmer and his first 100 days and now honestly state that the freebies and cronyism on display from him and his colleagues has not damaged his reputation

  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,494

    Carnyx said:

    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?
    Misspeaks by the First Lord of the Treasury can cause diplomatic incidents, cause the stock market to crash, Sterling to crater, and start wars.
    Indeed. But mistaking a torpedo for a bomb in a war that took place when you were 20 years of age is hardly likely to do so.
    Especially if the chaps in Junkers or SM.79s were dropping both and both were going bang; plus uncle Starmer couldn't see outside for all I know.
    Genuine question, when was the last time a vessel was sunk by a torpedo carried by an aircraft? The concept sounds very quaint nowadays - 'Deploy the Stringbags!"
    Late Pacific War, would have to be. Such as HIJMS Yamato and its consorts in April 1945 (albeit with bombs as well).

    Though the USN did torpedo some Korean dams in that 1950s police action of course.

    And if whales count, I seem to recall the apocryphal story that the odd whale was sunk en route to the Falklands. I checked but it was missiles and depth charges that hit the ARA Santa Fe at Grytviken - the one torpedo fired missed.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 22,761

    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...
    Pointless argument going round in circles

    Look at public opinion on Starmer and his first 100 days and now honestly state that the freebies and cronyism on display from him and his colleagues has not damaged his reputation

    Sorry, again – I'm not talking about "public opinion", or what some hypocritical hack on 'Sky News' said, or what you read on 'PB'. I'm talking about facts.

    I ask again, can you point me to the part where Sir Keir said MPs shouldn't accept declared gifts? Take your time.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 50,765

    Badenoch MAD
    Jenrick CAD
    Cleverly HAD
    Tugendhat DAD
    Stride SAD
    Patel BAD

    Badenoch might surprise on the upside and be RAD.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 62,306

    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...
    Pointless argument going round in circles

    Look at public opinion on Starmer and his first 100 days and now honestly state that the freebies and cronyism on display from him and his colleagues has not damaged his reputation

    Sorry, again – I'm not talking about "public opinion", or what some hypocritical hack on 'Sky News' said, or what you read on 'PB'. I'm talking about facts.

    I ask again, can you point me to the part where Sir Keir said MPs shouldn't accept declared gifts? Take your time.
    The whole point is public perception, and just now yougov have published a poll with Starmer below Farage in approval

    That is what is happening to your leader and time for you to accept this is a PR disaster for him

    https://x.com/YouGov/status/1844321310522110453?t=KXzbomAS9yDylJWl7CztZg&s=19
  • CharlieSharkCharlieShark Posts: 60

    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...
    “The Prime Minister is saying there is a difference between what you do as Government and what you do in Opposition, what you do as a minister and as a shadow minister,” After he ended up paying back gifts he accepted, declared and then decided they weren't appropriate.

    Still here.
  • No_Offence_AlanNo_Offence_Alan Posts: 4,430
    DavidL said:

    Taz said:

    Taz said:
    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?
    No, refuse the money.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 17,627
    Sandpit said:

    Why does OfGem employ 1,160 people, and spend £3.5m on its office?

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/bills/energy/ofgem-blows-35m-year-on-empty-office/

    The thing that most obviously comes to mind is that they have to deal with complaints about complaints when the energy companies rip people off. I could imagine that absorbing a thousand people's working lives with some ease.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 17,627

    DavidL said:

    Taz said:

    Taz said:
    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?
    No, refuse the money.
    Or recuse himself from the decision and have someone else make it.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 121,385

    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...
    Pointless argument going round in circles

    Look at public opinion on Starmer and his first 100 days and now honestly state that the freebies and cronyism on display from him and his colleagues has not damaged his reputation

    Sorry, again – I'm not talking about "public opinion", or what some hypocritical hack on 'Sky News' said, or what you read on 'PB'. I'm talking about facts.

    I ask again, can you point me to the part where Sir Keir said MPs shouldn't accept declared gifts? Take your time.
    The whole point is public perception, and just now yougov have published a poll with Starmer below Farage in approval

    That is what is happening to your leader and time for you to accept this is a PR disaster for him

    https://x.com/YouGov/status/1844321310522110453?t=KXzbomAS9yDylJWl7CztZg&s=19
    Jenrick on -19% and Badenoch on -27% both have higher net favourables than Starmer, who is now on -36% and Farage on -35%.

    Though Davey is highest on -7%


    https://x.com/YouGov/status/1843641197736133023
    https://x.com/YouGov/status/1844321310522110453
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,056

    Sandpit said:

    Why does OfGem employ 1,160 people, and spend £3.5m on its office?

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/bills/energy/ofgem-blows-35m-year-on-empty-office/

    The thing that most obviously comes to mind is that they have to deal with complaints about complaints when the energy companies rip people off. I could imagine that absorbing a thousand people's working lives with some ease.
    Nope, that would be this lot:

    https://www.energyombudsman.org/
  • TazTaz Posts: 13,802

    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...
    Well he's a lawyer, so not daft, he is not going to box himself in by being so specific when he could just make a general statement to make him appear to be virtuous and put clear blue water between him and the sleazy Tories which meant, when he did help himself to freebies he could merely really on people to say "well he meant he was going to clean up politics but that didn't mean he shouldnt trouser freebies according to the rules" when, maybe, the rules need revisiting.
  • TazTaz Posts: 13,802

    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...
    Pointless argument going round in circles

    Look at public opinion on Starmer and his first 100 days and now honestly state that the freebies and cronyism on display from him and his colleagues has not damaged his reputation

    OF course Starmer deliberately did not make such a specific commitment as is being demanded. However it still does not mean he is not a hypocrite or guilty of doing one thing and saying another.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 62,306
    Taz said:

    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...
    Pointless argument going round in circles

    Look at public opinion on Starmer and his first 100 days and now honestly state that the freebies and cronyism on display from him and his colleagues has not damaged his reputation

    OF course Starmer deliberately did not make such a specific commitment as is being demanded. However it still does not mean he is not a hypocrite or guilty of doing one thing and saying another.
    The voting public certainly have reacted putting him behind Farage today
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 17,627
    tlg86 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Why does OfGem employ 1,160 people, and spend £3.5m on its office?

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/bills/energy/ofgem-blows-35m-year-on-empty-office/

    The thing that most obviously comes to mind is that they have to deal with complaints about complaints when the energy companies rip people off. I could imagine that absorbing a thousand people's working lives with some ease.
    Nope, that would be this lot:

    https://www.energyombudsman.org/
    Oh my. So they're are two separate quangos to do with the energy market? Special.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,056
    The state of this:

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/30979217/bukayo-saka-law-student-dodges-jail/

    A LAW student who called Arsenal and England ace Bukayo Saka a “monkey” has dodged a jail term after insisting he was not being racist.

    Westminster magistrates chair Kieran O’Donnell told Ali: “Your lawyer said your intention was not to be racist, but whoever heard it would have heard racial abuse.

    “But you are of previous good character.”

    "You have no previous convictions. You are remorseful"


    Hopefully Arsenal give him a lifetime ban from the Emirates.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 121,385
    edited 1:31PM

    How the mighty have fallen

    How on earth can Starmer be below Farage in net favourability in the latest yougov ?

    Also, despite the lack of enthusiasm for Jenrick and Badenoch from many, Starmer is already so unpopular the new Leader of the Opposition whichever of them wins could well have higher net favourable ratings than him once elected if Yougov is correct.

    When was the last time a new Leader of the Opposition had higher net approval ratings than a new PM who had recently won a general election to take his party into power? Certainly Ed Miliband and William Hague had much worse net approval ratings than Cameron and Blair in late 2010 and late 1997. Even Thatcher had lower net approval ratings than Wilson and Callaghan initially.

    Maybe Wilson in late 1970?
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 22,761
    Taz said:

    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...
    Pointless argument going round in circles

    Look at public opinion on Starmer and his first 100 days and now honestly state that the freebies and cronyism on display from him and his colleagues has not damaged his reputation

    OF course Starmer deliberately did not make such a specific commitment as is being demanded. However it still does not mean he is not a hypocrite or guilty of doing one thing and saying another.
    Hang on, we've just established that he hasn't said another. Okay, I mean, he might have said another, down the pub, or in the kitchen when rustling up tandoori salmon. But nobody has managed to find a quote.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 22,761
    tlg86 said:

    The state of this:

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/30979217/bukayo-saka-law-student-dodges-jail/

    A LAW student who called Arsenal and England ace Bukayo Saka a “monkey” has dodged a jail term after insisting he was not being racist.

    Westminster magistrates chair Kieran O’Donnell told Ali: “Your lawyer said your intention was not to be racist, but whoever heard it would have heard racial abuse.

    “But you are of previous good character.”

    "You have no previous convictions. You are remorseful"


    Hopefully Arsenal give him a lifetime ban from the Emirates.

    It's only when yo read the story do you see what else the guy said. A quite disgusting series of epithets.
  • TazTaz Posts: 13,802
    edited 1:35PM

    Taz said:

    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...
    Pointless argument going round in circles

    Look at public opinion on Starmer and his first 100 days and now honestly state that the freebies and cronyism on display from him and his colleagues has not damaged his reputation

    OF course Starmer deliberately did not make such a specific commitment as is being demanded. However it still does not mean he is not a hypocrite or guilty of doing one thing and saying another.
    Hang on, we've just established that he hasn't said another. Okay, I mean, he might have said another, down the pub, or in the kitchen when rustling up tandoori salmon. But nobody has managed to find a quote.
    WTF are you prattling on about now ?

  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,236
    Taz said:

    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...
    Well he's a lawyer, so not daft, he is not going to box himself in by being so specific when he could just make a general statement to make him appear to be virtuous and put clear blue water between him and the sleazy Tories which meant, when he did help himself to freebies he could merely really on people to say "well he meant he was going to clean up politics but that didn't mean he shouldnt trouser freebies according to the rules" when, maybe, the rules need revisiting.
    The rules need revising indeed. I was told by a very patronising poster on here the other day that I was a "beerhall accountant" (I think that was an attempt at wit) for suggesting that there should be a BIK tax applied. This pompous twat/self-appointed expert stated that it does not apply to anyone receiving gifts. Real accountants disagree. It has been pointed out that celebs and "influencers" who receive gifts in the course of their work have BIK applied. HMRC has simply turned a blind eye to MPs. It is about time they did not. I personally do not care about the odd trip to the football, but tens of thousands of pounds worth of designer clothes is outrageous.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 62,306
    edited 1:36PM

    Taz said:

    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...
    Pointless argument going round in circles

    Look at public opinion on Starmer and his first 100 days and now honestly state that the freebies and cronyism on display from him and his colleagues has not damaged his reputation

    OF course Starmer deliberately did not make such a specific commitment as is being demanded. However it still does not mean he is not a hypocrite or guilty of doing one thing and saying another.
    Hang on, we've just established that he hasn't said another. Okay, I mean, he might have said another, down the pub, or in the kitchen when rustling up tandoori salmon. But nobody has managed to find a quote.
    What is your point when your leader is tanking in the polls and sits below Farage and as @HYUFD has just said whichever conservative is elected would have higher approval ratings than Starmer
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 27,635
    ...

    Taz said:

    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...
    Pointless argument going round in circles

    Look at public opinion on Starmer and his first 100 days and now honestly state that the freebies and cronyism on display from him and his colleagues has not damaged his reputation

    OF course Starmer deliberately did not make such a specific commitment as is being demanded. However it still does not mean he is not a hypocrite or guilty of doing one thing and saying another.
    Hang on, we've just established that he hasn't said another. Okay, I mean, he might have said another, down the pub, or in the kitchen when rustling up tandoori salmon. But nobody has managed to find a quote.
    Labour are in the mire when Starmer has lost lifelong Labour voter Taz. It's end of days mate!
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 35,493
    @JohnRentoul

    Former special adviser predicts that James Cleverly will be the Conservative leader at the next election
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,236
    Taz said:
    Boris Johnson and Dominic Cummings claimed to do the same. That ended well. It provides good cover for incompetence and cock-up though.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 27,635
    HYUFD said:

    How the mighty have fallen

    How on earth can Starmer be below Farage in net favourability in the latest yougov ?

    Also, despite the lack of enthusiasm for Jenrick and Badenoch from many, Starmer is already so unpopular the new Leader of the Opposition whichever of them wins could well have higher net favourable ratings than him once elected if Yougov is correct.

    When was the last time a new Leader of the Opposition had higher net approval ratings than a new PM who had recently won a general election to take his party into power? Certainly Ed Miliband and William Hague had much worse net approval ratings than Cameron and Blair in late 2010 and late 1997. Even Thatcher had lower net approval ratings than Wilson and Callaghan initially.

    Maybe Wilson in late 1970?
    Are you sure? ( And I genuinely don't know) Harold was odds on to win in 1970.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 22,761

    Taz said:

    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...
    Pointless argument going round in circles

    Look at public opinion on Starmer and his first 100 days and now honestly state that the freebies and cronyism on display from him and his colleagues has not damaged his reputation

    OF course Starmer deliberately did not make such a specific commitment as is being demanded. However it still does not mean he is not a hypocrite or guilty of doing one thing and saying another.
    Hang on, we've just established that he hasn't said another. Okay, I mean, he might have said another, down the pub, or in the kitchen when rustling up tandoori salmon. But nobody has managed to find a quote.
    What is your point when your leader is tanking in the polls and sits below Farage and as @HYUFD has just said whichever conservative is elected would have higher approval ratings than Starmer
    Ah, the crutch of 'public opinion' – a favourite of yours. I note you haven't engaged with the substantive point... again.

    Funny old world.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,236

    How the mighty have fallen

    How on earth can Starmer be below Farage in net favourability in the latest yougov ?

    I guess that however much one might think Farage is a nasty fascist little shit, one can at least be sure that he buys his own clothes
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 62,306
    edited 1:44PM

    Taz said:

    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...
    Pointless argument going round in circles

    Look at public opinion on Starmer and his first 100 days and now honestly state that the freebies and cronyism on display from him and his colleagues has not damaged his reputation

    OF course Starmer deliberately did not make such a specific commitment as is being demanded. However it still does not mean he is not a hypocrite or guilty of doing one thing and saying another.
    Hang on, we've just established that he hasn't said another. Okay, I mean, he might have said another, down the pub, or in the kitchen when rustling up tandoori salmon. But nobody has managed to find a quote.
    What is your point when your leader is tanking in the polls and sits below Farage and as @HYUFD has just said whichever conservative is elected would have higher approval ratings than Starmer
    Ah, the crutch of 'public opinion' – a favourite of yours. I note you haven't engaged with the substantive point... again.

    Funny old world.
    There is no substantive point other than some weird idea that you are trying to justify Starmer with and cannot accept what is obvious to everyone Starmer is hopeless at politics
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 27,635

    How the mighty have fallen

    How on earth can Starmer be below Farage in net favourability in the latest yougov ?

    I guess that however much one might think Farage is a nasty fascist little shit, one can at least be sure that he buys his own clothes
    Harris Tweed would probably prefer to pay him not to wear their threads.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 22,761

    How the mighty have fallen

    How on earth can Starmer be below Farage in net favourability in the latest yougov ?

    I guess that however much one might think Farage is a nasty fascist little shit, one can at least be sure that he buys his own clothes
    Can you explain to me why clothing allowances from party donors are somehow morally different to any other allowances, gifts or donations? The suits and dresses were worn in the course of the Starmers' work, after all.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 22,761

    Taz said:

    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...
    Pointless argument going round in circles

    Look at public opinion on Starmer and his first 100 days and now honestly state that the freebies and cronyism on display from him and his colleagues has not damaged his reputation

    OF course Starmer deliberately did not make such a specific commitment as is being demanded. However it still does not mean he is not a hypocrite or guilty of doing one thing and saying another.
    Hang on, we've just established that he hasn't said another. Okay, I mean, he might have said another, down the pub, or in the kitchen when rustling up tandoori salmon. But nobody has managed to find a quote.
    What is your point when your leader is tanking in the polls and sits below Farage and as @HYUFD has just said whichever conservative is elected would have higher approval ratings than Starmer
    Ah, the crutch of 'public opinion' – a favourite of yours. I note you haven't engaged with the substantive point... again.

    Funny old world.
    There is no substantive point other than some weird idea that you are trying to justify Starmer with and cannot accept what is obvious to everyone Starmer is hopeless at politics
    I will have to put that reply through the Google Translator later. Now I have work to do, and a run to run.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 22,761
    Scott_xP said:

    @JohnRentoul

    Former special adviser predicts that James Cleverly will be the Conservative leader at the next election

    Yep, I said this yesterday – could be a Sliding Doors moment for him. The fact that the TRG (One Nation caucus) has refused to support either Kemi or Bob means that Cleverly has a groundswell of support to come back when either of those fail.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,418

    Badenoch MAD
    Jenrick CAD
    Cleverly HAD
    Tugendhat DAD
    Stride SAD
    Patel BAD

    Sunak was WAD
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,570

    How the mighty have fallen

    How on earth can Starmer be below Farage in net favourability in the latest yougov ?

    I guess that however much one might think Farage is a nasty fascist little shit, one can at least be sure that he buys his own clothes
    Farage is paid £100k a month to appear on a loss making TV station that's the vanity project of a hedge fund billionaire. There are different ways for rich people to give politicians money.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,418

    Taz said:

    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...
    Pointless argument going round in circles

    Look at public opinion on Starmer and his first 100 days and now honestly state that the freebies and cronyism on display from him and his colleagues has not damaged his reputation

    OF course Starmer deliberately did not make such a specific commitment as is being demanded. However it still does not mean he is not a hypocrite or guilty of doing one thing and saying another.
    Hang on, we've just established that he hasn't said another. Okay, I mean, he might have said another, down the pub, or in the kitchen when rustling up tandoori salmon. But nobody has managed to find a quote.
    What is your point when your leader is tanking in the polls and sits below Farage and as @HYUFD has just said whichever conservative is elected would have higher approval ratings than Starmer
    Ah, the crutch of 'public opinion' – a favourite of yours. I note you haven't engaged with the substantive point... again.

    Funny old world.
    There is no substantive point other than some weird idea that you are trying to justify Starmer with and cannot accept what is obvious to everyone Starmer is hopeless at politics
    He’s done pretty well for someone hopeless at politics. Most politicians would love to be that hopeless. He has to defeat a number of people to get where he got to today.

    The interesting question is what happens next. Government is different to opposition.
  • TazTaz Posts: 13,802
    edited 1:54PM

    ...

    Taz said:

    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...
    Pointless argument going round in circles

    Look at public opinion on Starmer and his first 100 days and now honestly state that the freebies and cronyism on display from him and his colleagues has not damaged his reputation

    OF course Starmer deliberately did not make such a specific commitment as is being demanded. However it still does not mean he is not a hypocrite or guilty of doing one thing and saying another.
    Hang on, we've just established that he hasn't said another. Okay, I mean, he might have said another, down the pub, or in the kitchen when rustling up tandoori salmon. But nobody has managed to find a quote.
    Labour are in the mire when Starmer has lost lifelong Labour voter Taz. It's end of days mate!
    Waiting for your next flounce, mate. It won't be long.

    I supported labour at the last election and, unlike Cpt Cash, have voted for them at Every General Election I have voted in but I do not support them like I support my soccer team.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 27,635

    Scott_xP said:

    @JohnRentoul

    Former special adviser predicts that James Cleverly will be the Conservative leader at the next election

    Yep, I said this yesterday – could be a Sliding Doors moment for him. The fact that the TRG (One Nation caucus) has refused to support either Kemi or Bob means that Cleverly has a groundswell of support to come back when either of those fail.
    But if Jenrick or Badenoch start rimming Farage what's left for one nation Tories? They would have more in common with the LDs. Why stay when the cause is lost? Change UK are a template to be avoided but is there anything to salvage?
  • TazTaz Posts: 13,802

    Taz said:

    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...
    Pointless argument going round in circles

    Look at public opinion on Starmer and his first 100 days and now honestly state that the freebies and cronyism on display from him and his colleagues has not damaged his reputation

    OF course Starmer deliberately did not make such a specific commitment as is being demanded. However it still does not mean he is not a hypocrite or guilty of doing one thing and saying another.
    Hang on, we've just established that he hasn't said another. Okay, I mean, he might have said another, down the pub, or in the kitchen when rustling up tandoori salmon. But nobody has managed to find a quote.
    What is your point when your leader is tanking in the polls and sits below Farage and as @HYUFD has just said whichever conservative is elected would have higher approval ratings than Starmer
    Ah, the crutch of 'public opinion' – a favourite of yours. I note you haven't engaged with the substantive point... again.

    Funny old world.
    There is no substantive point other than some weird idea that you are trying to justify Starmer with and cannot accept what is obvious to everyone Starmer is hopeless at politics
    I will have to put that reply through the Google Translator later. Now I have work to do, and a run to run.
    Work.

    Make sure you wipe around the U-Bend too.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 80,604
    edited 1:56PM
    The Portuguese government is proposing to slash taxes for under-35s in an attempt to dissuade young people from emigrating - and encourage foreigners to settle in Portugal.

    As part of the annual budget, being presented to parliament on Thursday, the centre-right government of Luís Montenegro aims to reduce income tax for under-35s to a maximum of 15%.

    The tax rate for Portuguese earning the average salary of just under €20,000 (£16,700) is currently 26%.

    Under the government's plan, people in their 20s at the start of their careers could pay nothing at all in tax for the first year, and the tax burden would then be applied on a sliding scale. It would apply to young foreigners, too.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cm2yrx8yny2o
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 62,306
    edited 1:58PM
    Jonathan said:

    Taz said:

    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...
    Pointless argument going round in circles

    Look at public opinion on Starmer and his first 100 days and now honestly state that the freebies and cronyism on display from him and his colleagues has not damaged his reputation

    OF course Starmer deliberately did not make such a specific commitment as is being demanded. However it still does not mean he is not a hypocrite or guilty of doing one thing and saying another.
    Hang on, we've just established that he hasn't said another. Okay, I mean, he might have said another, down the pub, or in the kitchen when rustling up tandoori salmon. But nobody has managed to find a quote.
    What is your point when your leader is tanking in the polls and sits below Farage and as @HYUFD has just said whichever conservative is elected would have higher approval ratings than Starmer
    Ah, the crutch of 'public opinion' – a favourite of yours. I note you haven't engaged with the substantive point... again.

    Funny old world.
    There is no substantive point other than some weird idea that you are trying to justify Starmer with and cannot accept what is obvious to everyone Starmer is hopeless at politics
    He’s done pretty well for someone hopeless at politics. Most politicians would love to be that hopeless. He has to defeat a number of people to get where he got to today.

    The interesting question is what happens next. Government is different to opposition.
    In government is very different and Starmer has similarities to Sunak in his political antennae

    I am disappointed in him, not that I expected a new Blair, but I really did not see the sleeze, freebies and cronyism coming at all nor do I suspect did most anyone else
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 27,635
    edited 2:02PM
    Taz said:

    ...

    Taz said:

    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...
    Pointless argument going round in circles

    Look at public opinion on Starmer and his first 100 days and now honestly state that the freebies and cronyism on display from him and his colleagues has not damaged his reputation

    OF course Starmer deliberately did not make such a specific commitment as is being demanded. However it still does not mean he is not a hypocrite or guilty of doing one thing and saying another.
    Hang on, we've just established that he hasn't said another. Okay, I mean, he might have said another, down the pub, or in the kitchen when rustling up tandoori salmon. But nobody has managed to find a quote.
    Labour are in the mire when Starmer has lost lifelong Labour voter Taz. It's end of days mate!
    Waiting for your next flounce, mate. It won't be long.

    I supported labour at the last election and, unlike Cpt Cash, have voted for them at Every General Election I have voted in but I do not support them like I support my soccer team.
    Just to cheer you up I'll jump when I'm ready. I have enjoyed the discomfort the last 24 hours have brought to those PB Tories who assumed Cleverly was a shoo-in and the future. All bets are on Badenoch now, although in a couple of weeks Jenrick might be the answer. It's a funny old game Saint!

    P.S. I don't think there are as many on here with red scarves tied quite as tightly around the neck as there are blue ones. I couldn't care less who wins the next election so long as it's not any cabal of right wing headbangers.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,418

    Jonathan said:

    Taz said:

    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...
    Pointless argument going round in circles

    Look at public opinion on Starmer and his first 100 days and now honestly state that the freebies and cronyism on display from him and his colleagues has not damaged his reputation

    OF course Starmer deliberately did not make such a specific commitment as is being demanded. However it still does not mean he is not a hypocrite or guilty of doing one thing and saying another.
    Hang on, we've just established that he hasn't said another. Okay, I mean, he might have said another, down the pub, or in the kitchen when rustling up tandoori salmon. But nobody has managed to find a quote.
    What is your point when your leader is tanking in the polls and sits below Farage and as @HYUFD has just said whichever conservative is elected would have higher approval ratings than Starmer
    Ah, the crutch of 'public opinion' – a favourite of yours. I note you haven't engaged with the substantive point... again.

    Funny old world.
    There is no substantive point other than some weird idea that you are trying to justify Starmer with and cannot accept what is obvious to everyone Starmer is hopeless at politics
    He’s done pretty well for someone hopeless at politics. Most politicians would love to be that hopeless. He has to defeat a number of people to get where he got to today.

    The interesting question is what happens next. Government is different to opposition.
    In government is very different and Starmer has similarities to Sunak in his political antennae

    I am disappointed in him, not that I expected a new Blair, but I really did not see the sleeze, freebies and cronyism coming at all nor do I suspect to most anyone else
    He has made serious mistakes. They are disappointing, but it’s early days and he was written off before. To call him hopeless at politics is absurd given what he has already achieved.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,115
    tlg86 said:

    The state of this:

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/30979217/bukayo-saka-law-student-dodges-jail/

    A LAW student who called Arsenal and England ace Bukayo Saka a “monkey” has dodged a jail term after insisting he was not being racist.

    Westminster magistrates chair Kieran O’Donnell told Ali: “Your lawyer said your intention was not to be racist, but whoever heard it would have heard racial abuse.

    “But you are of previous good character.”

    "You have no previous convictions. You are remorseful"


    Hopefully Arsenal give him a lifetime ban from the Emirates.

    I'm (sort of) aware of a case where a member of nursery staff called a child of African (at last in part) extraction 'a little monkey' due to his misbehaving. The mother heard the remark and complained to the management, demanding the member of staff's racialism.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 121,385
    Emerson swing states poll

    Arizona Trump 49% Harris 47%

    Michigan and Wisconsin Harris 49% Trump 49%

    Nevada Harris 48% Trump 47%

    Georgia, NC and Pennsylvania Trump 49% Harris 48%
    https://emersoncollegepolling.com/october-2024-state-polls-mixed-movement-across-swing-states-shows-dead-heat/
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 16,966
    Jonathan said:

    Taz said:

    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...
    Pointless argument going round in circles

    Look at public opinion on Starmer and his first 100 days and now honestly state that the freebies and cronyism on display from him and his colleagues has not damaged his reputation

    OF course Starmer deliberately did not make such a specific commitment as is being demanded. However it still does not mean he is not a hypocrite or guilty of doing one thing and saying another.
    Hang on, we've just established that he hasn't said another. Okay, I mean, he might have said another, down the pub, or in the kitchen when rustling up tandoori salmon. But nobody has managed to find a quote.
    What is your point when your leader is tanking in the polls and sits below Farage and as @HYUFD has just said whichever conservative is elected would have higher approval ratings than Starmer
    Ah, the crutch of 'public opinion' – a favourite of yours. I note you haven't engaged with the substantive point... again.

    Funny old world.
    There is no substantive point other than some weird idea that you are trying to justify Starmer with and cannot accept what is obvious to everyone Starmer is hopeless at politics
    He’s done pretty well for someone hopeless at politics. Most politicians would love to be that hopeless. He has to defeat a number of people to get where he got to today.

    The interesting question is what happens next. Government is different to opposition.
    You can make a similar argument for Sunak - he became PM while being actively shit at politics.

    The rather sterile debate on PB about whether Starmer is a hypocrite or not is getting very tedious. Part of his appeal while leader of the opposition was based on hammering the wrong doing of the Tories, even when said wrong doing wasn't necessarily actually wrong doing (such as redecorating No 10 etc). he excoriated repeatedly over partygate, yet was rather close to the rules for his own affairs with curry and beer. The image was of someone playing by the rules, being honest and upfront.

    And arguably, no rules have been broken by the donations of a rich man to multiple Labour MP's. It is, however, the perception that is the problem. The perception is that he is a grasping, money grubbing lawyer, never quite breaking the rules but stretching them oh so thin. And I don't think we have had the real truth about the house borrowing.

    So Anabob can keep saying - "show me where he did this, or that or the other" and Big G can point to opinion polling and never the twain will meet.

    And we can all skip gloriously past those posts...
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 62,306
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Taz said:

    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...
    Pointless argument going round in circles

    Look at public opinion on Starmer and his first 100 days and now honestly state that the freebies and cronyism on display from him and his colleagues has not damaged his reputation

    OF course Starmer deliberately did not make such a specific commitment as is being demanded. However it still does not mean he is not a hypocrite or guilty of doing one thing and saying another.
    Hang on, we've just established that he hasn't said another. Okay, I mean, he might have said another, down the pub, or in the kitchen when rustling up tandoori salmon. But nobody has managed to find a quote.
    What is your point when your leader is tanking in the polls and sits below Farage and as @HYUFD has just said whichever conservative is elected would have higher approval ratings than Starmer
    Ah, the crutch of 'public opinion' – a favourite of yours. I note you haven't engaged with the substantive point... again.

    Funny old world.
    There is no substantive point other than some weird idea that you are trying to justify Starmer with and cannot accept what is obvious to everyone Starmer is hopeless at politics
    He’s done pretty well for someone hopeless at politics. Most politicians would love to be that hopeless. He has to defeat a number of people to get where he got to today.

    The interesting question is what happens next. Government is different to opposition.
    In government is very different and Starmer has similarities to Sunak in his political antennae

    I am disappointed in him, not that I expected a new Blair, but I really did not see the sleeze, freebies and cronyism coming at all nor do I suspect to most anyone else
    He has made serious mistakes. They are disappointing, but it’s early days and he was written off before. To call him hopeless at politics is absurd given what he has already achieved.
    I do respect you acknowledging mistakes have been made and it all adds up to a volatile unpredictable future for everyone involved in politics and of course he could recover but equally he may have sustained reputational damage that will be hard to shift

    Time and events will tell but anyone who thinks they know the outcome of the next GE are either wish casting or do not see how rapidly change is happening both here and across the world
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,056

    tlg86 said:

    The state of this:

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/30979217/bukayo-saka-law-student-dodges-jail/

    A LAW student who called Arsenal and England ace Bukayo Saka a “monkey” has dodged a jail term after insisting he was not being racist.

    Westminster magistrates chair Kieran O’Donnell told Ali: “Your lawyer said your intention was not to be racist, but whoever heard it would have heard racial abuse.

    “But you are of previous good character.”

    "You have no previous convictions. You are remorseful"


    Hopefully Arsenal give him a lifetime ban from the Emirates.

    I'm (sort of) aware of a case where a member of nursery staff called a child of African (at last in part) extraction 'a little monkey' due to his misbehaving. The mother heard the remark and complained to the management, demanding the member of staff's racialism.
    I rather doubt this individual was being nice about Saka in light of a 1-0 defeat at Nottingham Forest.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 35,493
    @MrHarryCole
    LEAK: Robert Jenrick proposed deal with France for Britain to PAY Paris to swap their successful asylum seekers for small boat illegal crossers

    Sunak put it to Macron in 2023, who said no…

    Quizzed over leak, he launches astonishing broadside at French
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 5,965
    HYUFD said:

    Emerson swing states poll

    Arizona Trump 49% Harris 47%

    Michigan and Wisconsin Harris 49% Trump 49%

    Nevada Harris 48% Trump 47%

    Georgia, NC and Pennsylvania Trump 49% Harris 48%
    https://emersoncollegepolling.com/october-2024-state-polls-mixed-movement-across-swing-states-shows-dead-heat/

    I can’t remember a time when poll after poll shows such a tight race in the swing states . Anything could happen . This election is also harder to read re the early vote because party affiliation has dropped , quite a few states now also have auto-registration which could effect turnout .

  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 17,627
    Are the US and Europe going to make any effective response to the escalatory involvement of North Korean troops in the Russia-Ukraine War?

    So disappointingly weak.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/oct/10/north-korea-engineers-deployed-russia-ukraine
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 27,635
    HYUFD said:

    Emerson swing states poll

    Arizona Trump 49% Harris 47%

    Michigan and Wisconsin Harris 49% Trump 49%

    Nevada Harris 48% Trump 47%

    Georgia, NC and Pennsylvania Trump 49% Harris 48%
    https://emersoncollegepolling.com/october-2024-state-polls-mixed-movement-across-swing-states-shows-dead-heat/

    I am not sure how helpful any of that is. The result will be somewhere between all seven for Trump and all seven for Harris.

    On the sort of YouTube channels I watch Trump seems to be struggling, but on here, he's smashing it out of the park.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 21,245

    HYUFD said:

    How the mighty have fallen

    How on earth can Starmer be below Farage in net favourability in the latest yougov ?

    Also, despite the lack of enthusiasm for Jenrick and Badenoch from many, Starmer is already so unpopular the new Leader of the Opposition whichever of them wins could well have higher net favourable ratings than him once elected if Yougov is correct.

    When was the last time a new Leader of the Opposition had higher net approval ratings than a new PM who had recently won a general election to take his party into power? Certainly Ed Miliband and William Hague had much worse net approval ratings than Cameron and Blair in late 2010 and late 1997. Even Thatcher had lower net approval ratings than Wilson and Callaghan initially.

    Maybe Wilson in late 1970?
    Are you sure? ( And I genuinely don't know) Harold was odds on to win in 1970.
    Famously. It was the polling failure that created the benchmark for future polling failures.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 53,671

    tlg86 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Why does OfGem employ 1,160 people, and spend £3.5m on its office?

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/bills/energy/ofgem-blows-35m-year-on-empty-office/

    The thing that most obviously comes to mind is that they have to deal with complaints about complaints when the energy companies rip people off. I could imagine that absorbing a thousand people's working lives with some ease.
    Nope, that would be this lot:

    https://www.energyombudsman.org/
    Oh my. So they're are two separate quangos to do with the energy market? Special.
    So what do the 1,160 people at OfGem do?
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 27,635
    edited 2:20PM
    Scott_xP said:

    @MrHarryCole
    LEAK: Robert Jenrick proposed deal with France for Britain to PAY Paris to swap their successful asylum seekers for small boat illegal crossers

    Sunak put it to Macron in 2023, who said no…

    Quizzed over leak, he launches astonishing broadside at French

    Now that smells more like a scandal than do Mrs Starmer's free pants!
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 27,893

    Scott_xP said:

    @MrHarryCole
    LEAK: Robert Jenrick proposed deal with France for Britain to PAY Paris to swap their successful asylum seekers for small boat illegal crossers

    Sunak put it to Macron in 2023, who said no…

    Quizzed over leak, he launches astonishing broadside at French

    Now that smells more like a scandal than do Mrs Starmer's free pants!
    Astonishing broadside at the French - is Jenrick still hopeful for @TSE's vote?
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 21,245
    Sandpit said:

    tlg86 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Why does OfGem employ 1,160 people, and spend £3.5m on its office?

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/bills/energy/ofgem-blows-35m-year-on-empty-office/

    The thing that most obviously comes to mind is that they have to deal with complaints about complaints when the energy companies rip people off. I could imagine that absorbing a thousand people's working lives with some ease.
    Nope, that would be this lot:

    https://www.energyombudsman.org/
    Oh my. So they're are two separate quangos to do with the energy market? Special.
    So what do the 1,160 people at OfGem do?
    Attend meetings, write documents, review documents, make presentations, increase awareness. They work very hard and an independent review will show that more employees are required to do it.

    200kg of TNT should be enough to level the building https://unsaferguard.org/un-saferguard/blast-damage-estimation
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,289
    Sandpit said:

    tlg86 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Why does OfGem employ 1,160 people, and spend £3.5m on its office?

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/bills/energy/ofgem-blows-35m-year-on-empty-office/

    The thing that most obviously comes to mind is that they have to deal with complaints about complaints when the energy companies rip people off. I could imagine that absorbing a thousand people's working lives with some ease.
    Nope, that would be this lot:

    https://www.energyombudsman.org/
    Oh my. So they're are two separate quangos to do with the energy market? Special.
    So what do the 1,160 people at OfGem do?
    OfTheirRocker
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 27,635

    Scott_xP said:

    @MrHarryCole
    LEAK: Robert Jenrick proposed deal with France for Britain to PAY Paris to swap their successful asylum seekers for small boat illegal crossers

    Sunak put it to Macron in 2023, who said no…

    Quizzed over leak, he launches astonishing broadside at French

    Now that smells more like a scandal than do Mrs Starmer's free pants!
    Astonishing broadside at the French - is Jenrick still hopeful for @TSE's vote?
    And the Sun out and batting for Kemi.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 8,477
    Sandpit said:

    tlg86 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Why does OfGem employ 1,160 people, and spend £3.5m on its office?

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/bills/energy/ofgem-blows-35m-year-on-empty-office/

    The thing that most obviously comes to mind is that they have to deal with complaints about complaints when the energy companies rip people off. I could imagine that absorbing a thousand people's working lives with some ease.
    Nope, that would be this lot:

    https://www.energyombudsman.org/
    Oh my. So they're are two separate quangos to do with the energy market? Special.
    So what do the 1,160 people at OfGem do?
    Does it matter? Sounds like the Office of Generating EMployment is unusually effective :smile:
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 41,704
    Seeing the video of the Big Z arriving at No. 10, I wonder how much Larry the Cat paid the Labour Party for its unrestricted pass to the building... ;)
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 53,671

    The Portuguese government is proposing to slash taxes for under-35s in an attempt to dissuade young people from emigrating - and encourage foreigners to settle in Portugal.

    As part of the annual budget, being presented to parliament on Thursday, the centre-right government of Luís Montenegro aims to reduce income tax for under-35s to a maximum of 15%.

    The tax rate for Portuguese earning the average salary of just under €20,000 (£16,700) is currently 26%.

    Under the government's plan, people in their 20s at the start of their careers could pay nothing at all in tax for the first year, and the tax burden would then be applied on a sliding scale. It would apply to young foreigners, too.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cm2yrx8yny2o

    The EU will nix that idea in no time. They definitely don’t want internal competition for new young graduates.

    Meanwhile, Singapore and Dubai say hello…
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 62,306
    edited 2:29PM

    Seeing the video of the Big Z arriving at No. 10, I wonder how much Larry the Cat paid the Labour Party for its unrestricted pass to the building... ;)

    I misread that and thought it was about me !!!

    Should have gone to specsavers !!
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 48,660
    edited 2:28PM
    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    The state of this:

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/30979217/bukayo-saka-law-student-dodges-jail/

    A LAW student who called Arsenal and England ace Bukayo Saka a “monkey” has dodged a jail term after insisting he was not being racist.

    Westminster magistrates chair Kieran O’Donnell told Ali: “Your lawyer said your intention was not to be racist, but whoever heard it would have heard racial abuse.

    “But you are of previous good character.”

    "You have no previous convictions. You are remorseful"


    Hopefully Arsenal give him a lifetime ban from the Emirates.

    I'm (sort of) aware of a case where a member of nursery staff called a child of African (at last in part) extraction 'a little monkey' due to his misbehaving. The mother heard the remark and complained to the management, demanding the member of staff's racialism.
    I rather doubt this individual was being nice about Saka in light of a 1-0 defeat at Nottingham Forest.
    Apparently he included an audio message on Twatter - “fing b***k piece of s**t”

    Not sure how you say that without intending to be racist....
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 8,477

    Seeing the video of the Big Z arriving at No. 10, I wonder how much Larry the Cat paid the Labour Party for its unrestricted pass to the building... ;)

    Big Z? I thought he was roughly Sunak-sized, a little under 0.9 Wales.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 41,704
    Selebian said:

    Seeing the video of the Big Z arriving at No. 10, I wonder how much Larry the Cat paid the Labour Party for its unrestricted pass to the building... ;)

    Big Z? I thought he was roughly Sunak-sized, a little under 0.9 Wales.
    He may be short in stature, but the 'big' refers to the wheelbarrow he needs to carry his big balls around in.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 8,477

    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    The state of this:

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/30979217/bukayo-saka-law-student-dodges-jail/

    A LAW student who called Arsenal and England ace Bukayo Saka a “monkey” has dodged a jail term after insisting he was not being racist.

    Westminster magistrates chair Kieran O’Donnell told Ali: “Your lawyer said your intention was not to be racist, but whoever heard it would have heard racial abuse.

    “But you are of previous good character.”

    "You have no previous convictions. You are remorseful"


    Hopefully Arsenal give him a lifetime ban from the Emirates.

    I'm (sort of) aware of a case where a member of nursery staff called a child of African (at last in part) extraction 'a little monkey' due to his misbehaving. The mother heard the remark and complained to the management, demanding the member of staff's racialism.
    I rather doubt this individual was being nice about Saka in light of a 1-0 defeat at Nottingham Forest.
    Apparently he included an audio message on Twatter - “fing b***k piece of s**t”

    Not sure how you say that without intending to be racist....
    Also used the N word, apparently. And I don't mean 'numpty'.

    Interestingly the defendant himself is black. Which is not to suggest it's any more acceptable, but it is interesting that he referenced Saka's ethnic group in this way.
  • TazTaz Posts: 13,802

    Taz said:

    ...

    Taz said:

    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...
    Pointless argument going round in circles

    Look at public opinion on Starmer and his first 100 days and now honestly state that the freebies and cronyism on display from him and his colleagues has not damaged his reputation

    OF course Starmer deliberately did not make such a specific commitment as is being demanded. However it still does not mean he is not a hypocrite or guilty of doing one thing and saying another.
    Hang on, we've just established that he hasn't said another. Okay, I mean, he might have said another, down the pub, or in the kitchen when rustling up tandoori salmon. But nobody has managed to find a quote.
    Labour are in the mire when Starmer has lost lifelong Labour voter Taz. It's end of days mate!
    Waiting for your next flounce, mate. It won't be long.

    I supported labour at the last election and, unlike Cpt Cash, have voted for them at Every General Election I have voted in but I do not support them like I support my soccer team.
    Just to cheer you up I'll jump when I'm ready. I have enjoyed the discomfort the last 24 hours have brought to those PB Tories who assumed Cleverly was a shoo-in and the future. All bets are on Badenoch now, although in a couple of weeks Jenrick might be the answer. It's a funny old game Saint!

    P.S. I don't think there are as many on here with red scarves tied quite as tightly around the neck as there are blue ones. I couldn't care less who wins the next election so long as it's not any cabal of right wing headbangers.
    As I said before, I don't mind either way if you stay or go (and I would say that about anyone) but, you know, it is not Heathrow Airport and departures don't need announcing.
  • kenObikenObi Posts: 110

    Taz said:

    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...
    Well he's a lawyer, so not daft, he is not going to box himself in by being so specific when he could just make a general statement to make him appear to be virtuous and put clear blue water between him and the sleazy Tories which meant, when he did help himself to freebies he could merely really on people to say "well he meant he was going to clean up politics but that didn't mean he shouldnt trouser freebies according to the rules" when, maybe, the rules need revisiting.
    The rules need revising indeed. I was told by a very patronising poster on here the other day that I was a "beerhall accountant" (I think that was an attempt at wit) for suggesting that there should be a BIK tax applied. This pompous twat/self-appointed expert stated that it does not apply to anyone receiving gifts. Real accountants disagree. It has been pointed out that celebs and "influencers" who receive gifts in the course of their work have BIK applied. HMRC has simply turned a blind eye to MPs. It is about time they did not. I personally do not care about the odd trip to the football, but tens of thousands of pounds worth of designer clothes is outrageous.
    If that was it was alehouse accountant, not beerhall.

    Which real world accountants (I am one ?)

    Benefits in Kind are provided to employees by their employer. Many on here may have a P11D which lists a company car as a BIK. In the past mobile phones for employees were included as a benefit in kind.

    I also stated influencers could be liable to pay tax on a gift from a company that they then promoted, however it is not a BIK, its a potential tax on a non-monetary consideration.

    Gifts from out of tax income from 'friends', ie Lord Alli are not taxable.

    You might get 'real accountants' to say it's 'arguable' that its taxable, but if you pay a barrister enough, they will say anything is 'arguable'.

    Gifts by companies (tickets for example) would only be taxable if in return for the consideration, the recipient provided a service or influenced a decision - in which case a politician would have bigger things to worry about than tax.

  • SirNorfolkPassmoreSirNorfolkPassmore Posts: 7,104
    Scott_xP said:

    @JohnRentoul

    Former special adviser predicts that James Cleverly will be the Conservative leader at the next election

    I just think he's made a bit of a fool of himself, and his inability to count merely confirms his convivial but thick reputation.

    When the circus comes round again, as it may well, I see no reason Cleverly would be the one to benefit. People merely say that because, until 24 hours ago, he was the man with momentum. Well, he very definitely ain't now.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 22,761
    Is Luís Montenegro the only leader of a European country that is named after another European country?

    (France once had a leader called France)
  • TazTaz Posts: 13,802
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Taz said:

    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...
    Pointless argument going round in circles

    Look at public opinion on Starmer and his first 100 days and now honestly state that the freebies and cronyism on display from him and his colleagues has not damaged his reputation

    OF course Starmer deliberately did not make such a specific commitment as is being demanded. However it still does not mean he is not a hypocrite or guilty of doing one thing and saying another.
    Hang on, we've just established that he hasn't said another. Okay, I mean, he might have said another, down the pub, or in the kitchen when rustling up tandoori salmon. But nobody has managed to find a quote.
    What is your point when your leader is tanking in the polls and sits below Farage and as @HYUFD has just said whichever conservative is elected would have higher approval ratings than Starmer
    Ah, the crutch of 'public opinion' – a favourite of yours. I note you haven't engaged with the substantive point... again.

    Funny old world.
    There is no substantive point other than some weird idea that you are trying to justify Starmer with and cannot accept what is obvious to everyone Starmer is hopeless at politics
    He’s done pretty well for someone hopeless at politics. Most politicians would love to be that hopeless. He has to defeat a number of people to get where he got to today.

    The interesting question is what happens next. Government is different to opposition.
    In government is very different and Starmer has similarities to Sunak in his political antennae

    I am disappointed in him, not that I expected a new Blair, but I really did not see the sleeze, freebies and cronyism coming at all nor do I suspect to most anyone else
    He has made serious mistakes. They are disappointing, but it’s early days and he was written off before. To call him hopeless at politics is absurd given what he has already achieved.
    It is early days. For me the key thing is the budget. Everything this govt does hangs on that. That is what should, and will, matter not the hypocrisy of SKS and the Taylor Grift brigade.

    The budget will affect and shape our lives. Taking freebies won't
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,281

    Is Luís Montenegro the only leader of a European country that is named after another European country?

    (France once had a leader called France)

    We've had several Turkeys recently.
  • boulayboulay Posts: 5,383

    Is Luís Montenegro the only leader of a European country that is named after another European country?

    (France once had a leader called France)

    France also had François Hollande.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 22,761
    boulay said:

    Is Luís Montenegro the only leader of a European country that is named after another European country?

    (France once had a leader called France)

    France also had François Hollande.
    True!
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 48,660
    Selebian said:

    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    The state of this:

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/30979217/bukayo-saka-law-student-dodges-jail/

    A LAW student who called Arsenal and England ace Bukayo Saka a “monkey” has dodged a jail term after insisting he was not being racist.

    Westminster magistrates chair Kieran O’Donnell told Ali: “Your lawyer said your intention was not to be racist, but whoever heard it would have heard racial abuse.

    “But you are of previous good character.”

    "You have no previous convictions. You are remorseful"


    Hopefully Arsenal give him a lifetime ban from the Emirates.

    I'm (sort of) aware of a case where a member of nursery staff called a child of African (at last in part) extraction 'a little monkey' due to his misbehaving. The mother heard the remark and complained to the management, demanding the member of staff's racialism.
    I rather doubt this individual was being nice about Saka in light of a 1-0 defeat at Nottingham Forest.
    Apparently he included an audio message on Twatter - “fing b***k piece of s**t”

    Not sure how you say that without intending to be racist....
    Also used the N word, apparently. And I don't mean 'numpty'.

    Interestingly the defendant himself is black. Which is not to suggest it's any more acceptable, but it is interesting that he referenced Saka's ethnic group in this way.
    Indeed. When Blair was in power, they looked at banning the N word. But ran into the problem that nearly all of its use was by young gentleman of the group on question. So how to create an exemption?

    So they asked various lawyers and law firms for ideas. I came across a group of very young lawyers who'd been given it as an exercise, while out drinking. I sold them on using the number of grandparents......
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 8,477

    Selebian said:

    Seeing the video of the Big Z arriving at No. 10, I wonder how much Larry the Cat paid the Labour Party for its unrestricted pass to the building... ;)

    Big Z? I thought he was roughly Sunak-sized, a little under 0.9 Wales.
    He may be short in stature, but the 'big' refers to the wheelbarrow he needs to carry his big balls around in.
    Interestingly*, while I always pronounce 'Z' as 'zed', I most definitely read 'Big Z' as 'Big Zee', not 'Big Zed'. Is that due to my own subconscious confusion with our own Big G?

    *well, maybe not that interestingly!
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 61,735
    American polling:

    Simon Rosenberg
    @SimonWDC
    If you wanted clear confirmation the right is running an op to push the polling averages to Trump here we have a start-up right-aligned university in Texas finding the wherewithal to field a poll in PA, which of course has Trump ahead:

    https://x.com/SimonWDC/status/1844375746611118390

    Austin appears to have 100 students and 23 staff!
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 53,671
    Selebian said:

    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    The state of this:

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/30979217/bukayo-saka-law-student-dodges-jail/

    A LAW student who called Arsenal and England ace Bukayo Saka a “monkey” has dodged a jail term after insisting he was not being racist.

    Westminster magistrates chair Kieran O’Donnell told Ali: “Your lawyer said your intention was not to be racist, but whoever heard it would have heard racial abuse.

    “But you are of previous good character.”

    "You have no previous convictions. You are remorseful"


    Hopefully Arsenal give him a lifetime ban from the Emirates.

    I'm (sort of) aware of a case where a member of nursery staff called a child of African (at last in part) extraction 'a little monkey' due to his misbehaving. The mother heard the remark and complained to the management, demanding the member of staff's racialism.
    I rather doubt this individual was being nice about Saka in light of a 1-0 defeat at Nottingham Forest.
    Apparently he included an audio message on Twatter - “fing b***k piece of s**t”

    Not sure how you say that without intending to be racist....
    Also used the N word, apparently. And I don't mean 'numpty'.

    Interestingly the defendant himself is black. Which is not to suggest it's any more acceptable, but it is interesting that he referenced Saka's ethnic group in this way.
    Dave Chapelle would argue that the N-word merely means ‘person’, when expressed by a person of ‘color’.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,418

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Taz said:

    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...
    Pointless argument going round in circles

    Look at public opinion on Starmer and his first 100 days and now honestly state that the freebies and cronyism on display from him and his colleagues has not damaged his reputation

    OF course Starmer deliberately did not make such a specific commitment as is being demanded. However it still does not mean he is not a hypocrite or guilty of doing one thing and saying another.
    Hang on, we've just established that he hasn't said another. Okay, I mean, he might have said another, down the pub, or in the kitchen when rustling up tandoori salmon. But nobody has managed to find a quote.
    What is your point when your leader is tanking in the polls and sits below Farage and as @HYUFD has just said whichever conservative is elected would have higher approval ratings than Starmer
    Ah, the crutch of 'public opinion' – a favourite of yours. I note you haven't engaged with the substantive point... again.

    Funny old world.
    There is no substantive point other than some weird idea that you are trying to justify Starmer with and cannot accept what is obvious to everyone Starmer is hopeless at politics
    He’s done pretty well for someone hopeless at politics. Most politicians would love to be that hopeless. He has to defeat a number of people to get where he got to today.

    The interesting question is what happens next. Government is different to opposition.
    In government is very different and Starmer has similarities to Sunak in his political antennae

    I am disappointed in him, not that I expected a new Blair, but I really did not see the sleeze, freebies and cronyism coming at all nor do I suspect to most anyone else
    He has made serious mistakes. They are disappointing, but it’s early days and he was written off before. To call him hopeless at politics is absurd given what he has already achieved.
    I do respect you acknowledging mistakes have been made and it all adds up to a volatile unpredictable future for everyone involved in politics and of course he could recover but equally he may have sustained reputational damage that will be hard to shift

    Time and events will tell but anyone who thinks they know the outcome of the next GE are either wish casting or do not see how rapidly change is happening both here and across the world
    I completely agree that anyone who claims to know the result of the next election is a fool. Almost any outcome is possible.

    It is utterly bizarre that anyone could deny that Starmer made an error of judgement taking things like free glasses. What on Earth was he thinking? Bizarre. I know you’re busy Keir, but you can pay for your own glasses.

    It is equally obvious that he has incurred political damage from this. It’s especially bad in the context of the winter fuel allowance.

    Where I deviate from Internet hyperbole and chit chat from opponents is that the election is five years hence and the consequences are trivial compared to the outcome of economic performance and the success of other reforms and “events”.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 16,712

    Scott_xP said:

    @JohnRentoul

    Former special adviser predicts that James Cleverly will be the Conservative leader at the next election

    I just think he's made a bit of a fool of himself, and his inability to count merely confirms his convivial but thick reputation.

    When the circus comes round again, as it may well, I see no reason Cleverly would be the one to benefit. People merely say that because, until 24 hours ago, he was the man with momentum. Well, he very definitely ain't now.
    That would be a bit unfair; after all, it's more that some of his voters on Tuesday were dumb than he was. And nobody is responsible for dumb people voting for them.

    Of course, perception is all, and "jolly but dim" might stick. And the nature of perception is that it doesn't have to be accurate or fair (coughStarmetcough), it just is.

    Though if Badenoch or Jenrick fail, "jolly but dim" might be the ideal comfort food for a traumatised party.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 48,660
    Sandpit said:

    Selebian said:

    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    The state of this:

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/30979217/bukayo-saka-law-student-dodges-jail/

    A LAW student who called Arsenal and England ace Bukayo Saka a “monkey” has dodged a jail term after insisting he was not being racist.

    Westminster magistrates chair Kieran O’Donnell told Ali: “Your lawyer said your intention was not to be racist, but whoever heard it would have heard racial abuse.

    “But you are of previous good character.”

    "You have no previous convictions. You are remorseful"


    Hopefully Arsenal give him a lifetime ban from the Emirates.

    I'm (sort of) aware of a case where a member of nursery staff called a child of African (at last in part) extraction 'a little monkey' due to his misbehaving. The mother heard the remark and complained to the management, demanding the member of staff's racialism.
    I rather doubt this individual was being nice about Saka in light of a 1-0 defeat at Nottingham Forest.
    Apparently he included an audio message on Twatter - “fing b***k piece of s**t”

    Not sure how you say that without intending to be racist....
    Also used the N word, apparently. And I don't mean 'numpty'.

    Interestingly the defendant himself is black. Which is not to suggest it's any more acceptable, but it is interesting that he referenced Saka's ethnic group in this way.
    Dave Chapelle would argue that the N-word merely means ‘person’, when expressed by a person of ‘color’.
    How do you define a person of 'colour' ?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 53,671
    kenObi said:

    Taz said:

    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...
    Well he's a lawyer, so not daft, he is not going to box himself in by being so specific when he could just make a general statement to make him appear to be virtuous and put clear blue water between him and the sleazy Tories which meant, when he did help himself to freebies he could merely really on people to say "well he meant he was going to clean up politics but that didn't mean he shouldnt trouser freebies according to the rules" when, maybe, the rules need revisiting.
    The rules need revising indeed. I was told by a very patronising poster on here the other day that I was a "beerhall accountant" (I think that was an attempt at wit) for suggesting that there should be a BIK tax applied. This pompous twat/self-appointed expert stated that it does not apply to anyone receiving gifts. Real accountants disagree. It has been pointed out that celebs and "influencers" who receive gifts in the course of their work have BIK applied. HMRC has simply turned a blind eye to MPs. It is about time they did not. I personally do not care about the odd trip to the football, but tens of thousands of pounds worth of designer clothes is outrageous.
    If that was it was alehouse accountant, not beerhall.

    Which real world accountants (I am one ?)

    Benefits in Kind are provided to employees by their employer. Many on here may have a P11D which lists a company car as a BIK. In the past mobile phones for employees were included as a benefit in kind.

    I also stated influencers could be liable to pay tax on a gift from a company that they then promoted, however it is not a BIK, its a potential tax on a non-monetary consideration.

    Gifts from out of tax income from 'friends', ie Lord Alli are not taxable.

    You might get 'real accountants' to say it's 'arguable' that its taxable, but if you pay a barrister enough, they will say anything is 'arguable'.

    Gifts by companies (tickets for example) would only be taxable if in return for the consideration, the recipient provided a service or influenced a decision - in which case a politician would have bigger things to worry about than tax.

    The point is that Alli is basically the employer of half the cabinet at this point. He’s not a ‘friend’, buying Cabinet ministers is his job.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 16,966

    Sandpit said:

    Selebian said:

    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    The state of this:

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/30979217/bukayo-saka-law-student-dodges-jail/

    A LAW student who called Arsenal and England ace Bukayo Saka a “monkey” has dodged a jail term after insisting he was not being racist.

    Westminster magistrates chair Kieran O’Donnell told Ali: “Your lawyer said your intention was not to be racist, but whoever heard it would have heard racial abuse.

    “But you are of previous good character.”

    "You have no previous convictions. You are remorseful"


    Hopefully Arsenal give him a lifetime ban from the Emirates.

    I'm (sort of) aware of a case where a member of nursery staff called a child of African (at last in part) extraction 'a little monkey' due to his misbehaving. The mother heard the remark and complained to the management, demanding the member of staff's racialism.
    I rather doubt this individual was being nice about Saka in light of a 1-0 defeat at Nottingham Forest.
    Apparently he included an audio message on Twatter - “fing b***k piece of s**t”

    Not sure how you say that without intending to be racist....
    Also used the N word, apparently. And I don't mean 'numpty'.

    Interestingly the defendant himself is black. Which is not to suggest it's any more acceptable, but it is interesting that he referenced Saka's ethnic group in this way.
    Dave Chapelle would argue that the N-word merely means ‘person’, when expressed by a person of ‘color’.
    How do you define a person of 'colour' ?
    Well now, that's rather the question isn't it? The whole of critical race theory, self ID and many other things stands or falls on that question.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 53,671
    Nailed on century for Trump to force the decider.

    We’re all watching the snooker, right?
  • SirNorfolkPassmoreSirNorfolkPassmore Posts: 7,104

    Scott_xP said:

    @JohnRentoul

    Former special adviser predicts that James Cleverly will be the Conservative leader at the next election

    I just think he's made a bit of a fool of himself, and his inability to count merely confirms his convivial but thick reputation.

    When the circus comes round again, as it may well, I see no reason Cleverly would be the one to benefit. People merely say that because, until 24 hours ago, he was the man with momentum. Well, he very definitely ain't now.
    That would be a bit unfair; after all, it's more that some of his voters on Tuesday were dumb than he was. And nobody is responsible for dumb people voting for them.

    Of course, perception is all, and "jolly but dim" might stick. And the nature of perception is that it doesn't have to be accurate or fair (coughStarmetcough), it just is.

    Though if Badenoch or Jenrick fail, "jolly but dim" might be the ideal comfort food for a traumatised party.
    It is his - or his campaign's - fault. His supporters needed to know he required their vote unless explicitly told to do something else.

    Either he failed to convey the message and instead conveyed he was home and dry, enabling him to go to a drinks do rather than hitting the phones, which is unforgivably lax and complacent. Or he can't count.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 62,306
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Taz said:

    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...
    Pointless argument going round in circles

    Look at public opinion on Starmer and his first 100 days and now honestly state that the freebies and cronyism on display from him and his colleagues has not damaged his reputation

    OF course Starmer deliberately did not make such a specific commitment as is being demanded. However it still does not mean he is not a hypocrite or guilty of doing one thing and saying another.
    Hang on, we've just established that he hasn't said another. Okay, I mean, he might have said another, down the pub, or in the kitchen when rustling up tandoori salmon. But nobody has managed to find a quote.
    What is your point when your leader is tanking in the polls and sits below Farage and as @HYUFD has just said whichever conservative is elected would have higher approval ratings than Starmer
    Ah, the crutch of 'public opinion' – a favourite of yours. I note you haven't engaged with the substantive point... again.

    Funny old world.
    There is no substantive point other than some weird idea that you are trying to justify Starmer with and cannot accept what is obvious to everyone Starmer is hopeless at politics
    He’s done pretty well for someone hopeless at politics. Most politicians would love to be that hopeless. He has to defeat a number of people to get where he got to today.

    The interesting question is what happens next. Government is different to opposition.
    In government is very different and Starmer has similarities to Sunak in his political antennae

    I am disappointed in him, not that I expected a new Blair, but I really did not see the sleeze, freebies and cronyism coming at all nor do I suspect to most anyone else
    He has made serious mistakes. They are disappointing, but it’s early days and he was written off before. To call him hopeless at politics is absurd given what he has already achieved.
    I do respect you acknowledging mistakes have been made and it all adds up to a volatile unpredictable future for everyone involved in politics and of course he could recover but equally he may have sustained reputational damage that will be hard to shift

    Time and events will tell but anyone who thinks they know the outcome of the next GE are either wish casting or do not see how rapidly change is happening both here and across the world
    I completely agree that anyone who claims to know the result of the next election is a fool. Almost any outcome is possible.

    It is utterly bizarre that anyone could deny that Starmer made an error of judgement taking things like free glasses. What on Earth was he thinking? Bizarre. I know you’re busy Keir, but you can pay for your own glasses.

    It is equally obvious that he has incurred political damage from this. It’s especially bad in the context of the winter fuel allowance.

    Where I deviate from Internet hyperbole and chit chat from opponents is that the election is five years hence and the consequences are trivial compared to the outcome of economic performance and the success of other reforms and “events”.
    Very fair comment
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,115
    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    The state of this:

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/30979217/bukayo-saka-law-student-dodges-jail/

    A LAW student who called Arsenal and England ace Bukayo Saka a “monkey” has dodged a jail term after insisting he was not being racist.

    Westminster magistrates chair Kieran O’Donnell told Ali: “Your lawyer said your intention was not to be racist, but whoever heard it would have heard racial abuse.

    “But you are of previous good character.”

    "You have no previous convictions. You are remorseful"


    Hopefully Arsenal give him a lifetime ban from the Emirates.

    I'm (sort of) aware of a case where a member of nursery staff called a child of African (at last in part) extraction 'a little monkey' due to his misbehaving. The mother heard the remark and complained to the management, demanding the member of staff's racialism.
    I rather doubt this individual was being nice about Saka in light of a 1-0 defeat at Nottingham Forest.
    Well, that would be humiliating for Arsenal, agreed.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 17,627

    Scott_xP said:

    @JohnRentoul

    Former special adviser predicts that James Cleverly will be the Conservative leader at the next election

    I just think he's made a bit of a fool of himself, and his inability to count merely confirms his convivial but thick reputation.

    When the circus comes round again, as it may well, I see no reason Cleverly would be the one to benefit. People merely say that because, until 24 hours ago, he was the man with momentum. Well, he very definitely ain't now.
    That would be a bit unfair; after all, it's more that some of his voters on Tuesday were dumb than he was. And nobody is responsible for dumb people voting for them.

    Of course, perception is all, and "jolly but dim" might stick. And the nature of perception is that it doesn't have to be accurate or fair (coughStarmetcough), it just is.

    Though if Badenoch or Jenrick fail, "jolly but dim" might be the ideal comfort food for a traumatised party.
    It is his - or his campaign's - fault. His supporters needed to know he required their vote unless explicitly told to do something else.

    Either he failed to convey the message and instead conveyed he was home and dry, enabling him to go to a drinks do rather than hitting the phones, which is unforgivably lax and complacent. Or he can't count.
    Maybe he decided he did want to spend more time with his Warhammer models after all?
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,115
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Taz said:

    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...
    Pointless argument going round in circles

    Look at public opinion on Starmer and his first 100 days and now honestly state that the freebies and cronyism on display from him and his colleagues has not damaged his reputation

    OF course Starmer deliberately did not make such a specific commitment as is being demanded. However it still does not mean he is not a hypocrite or guilty of doing one thing and saying another.
    Hang on, we've just established that he hasn't said another. Okay, I mean, he might have said another, down the pub, or in the kitchen when rustling up tandoori salmon. But nobody has managed to find a quote.
    What is your point when your leader is tanking in the polls and sits below Farage and as @HYUFD has just said whichever conservative is elected would have higher approval ratings than Starmer
    Ah, the crutch of 'public opinion' – a favourite of yours. I note you haven't engaged with the substantive point... again.

    Funny old world.
    There is no substantive point other than some weird idea that you are trying to justify Starmer with and cannot accept what is obvious to everyone Starmer is hopeless at politics
    He’s done pretty well for someone hopeless at politics. Most politicians would love to be that hopeless. He has to defeat a number of people to get where he got to today.

    The interesting question is what happens next. Government is different to opposition.
    In government is very different and Starmer has similarities to Sunak in his political antennae

    I am disappointed in him, not that I expected a new Blair, but I really did not see the sleeze, freebies and cronyism coming at all nor do I suspect to most anyone else
    He has made serious mistakes. They are disappointing, but it’s early days and he was written off before. To call him hopeless at politics is absurd given what he has already achieved.
    I do respect you acknowledging mistakes have been made and it all adds up to a volatile unpredictable future for everyone involved in politics and of course he could recover but equally he may have sustained reputational damage that will be hard to shift

    Time and events will tell but anyone who thinks they know the outcome of the next GE are either wish casting or do not see how rapidly change is happening both here and across the world
    I completely agree that anyone who claims to know the result of the next election is a fool. Almost any outcome is possible.

    It is utterly bizarre that anyone could deny that Starmer made an error of judgement taking things like free glasses. What on Earth was he thinking? Bizarre. I know you’re busy Keir, but you can pay for your own glasses.

    It is equally obvious that he has incurred political damage from this. It’s especially bad in the context of the winter fuel allowance.

    Where I deviate from Internet hyperbole and chit chat from opponents is that the election is five years hence and the consequences are trivial compared to the outcome of economic performance and the success of other reforms and “events”.
    Agreed, IF he mends his ways. It's very disappointing; while I agree there's an element of scale, it's only scale and not principle.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 22,761

    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    The state of this:

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/30979217/bukayo-saka-law-student-dodges-jail/

    A LAW student who called Arsenal and England ace Bukayo Saka a “monkey” has dodged a jail term after insisting he was not being racist.

    Westminster magistrates chair Kieran O’Donnell told Ali: “Your lawyer said your intention was not to be racist, but whoever heard it would have heard racial abuse.

    “But you are of previous good character.”

    "You have no previous convictions. You are remorseful"


    Hopefully Arsenal give him a lifetime ban from the Emirates.

    I'm (sort of) aware of a case where a member of nursery staff called a child of African (at last in part) extraction 'a little monkey' due to his misbehaving. The mother heard the remark and complained to the management, demanding the member of staff's racialism.
    I rather doubt this individual was being nice about Saka in light of a 1-0 defeat at Nottingham Forest.
    Well, that would be humiliating for Arsenal, agreed.
    Since they came up, double European Cup winners Forest have beaten Arsenal at the City Ground, Chelsea at Stamford Bridge and Liverpool at Anfield.

    Have all of these clubs been 'humiliated'?
Sign In or Register to comment.