Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

Well this is interesting – politicalbetting.com

245

Comments

  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 44,117
    edited 8:19AM

    Who'd have thought these test tube grown mouthers of meaninglessness would be bad at persuading even their own colleagues of stuff?

    Saul Staniforth
    @SaulStaniforth
    "Yesterday you had almost every cabinet minister drafted in by Downing Street to get on the phone or hold meetings with Labour rebels & potential rebels & urge them to back down, to take their names off that wrecking amendment. And the effect is that things have only got worse"

    https://x.com/SaulStaniforth/status/1937778130984288754

    Even if we do need to reduce the lead swingers welfare bill by £5b a year the way this Government have gone about it couldn't look worse. If it looks like performative cruelty against society's most vulnerable it probably is performative cruelty against society's vulnerable. The Labour rebels should take this to the brink. If Starmer falls, Starmer falls.
    The oft repeated rebuttals to criticism of this is that 'we are the party of work, we believe people should not be left on the scrapheap, work is good for people', etc etc. In fact I strongly believe that a shitload of resources should be flung at the long-term unemployed and sick to help (emphasis on help) them back to some sort of independent working life, but is there any such programme attached to this anti skivers bill? If there is I've missed it.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 11,934
    Pulpstar said:

    Sean_F said:

    *hypothetical polling klaxon*
    More in Common sees polling with a Corbyn led socialist party thus.....

    Reform 27
    Con 20
    Labour 20
    LD 14
    Magic Grandpas magic army 10
    Green 5
    SNP 2

    https://x.com/LukeTryl/status/1937775607263141898?s=19

    We remain consistently, a 50/50 nation, in voting terms.
    Indeed. A further hypothetical nugget from this hypothetical - Magic Gs army with 33% support in the youngest cohort and leading
    The splitting of the left isn't all bad news for Labour, the Greens running in Ilford probably saved Streeting his seat.
    Im going to enjoy him losing next time!
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 54,719
    Dura_Ace said:

    boulay said:

    Do we know when these new F35s arrive, when we will have pilots for them and do we actually have enough RAF pilots for twelve more jets?

    The way the story is being pushed it’s like we’ve popped down to Fighter jets R us and bought them (and of course had to buy a big bag for life to take them home in) and they will be ready to defend us by the weekend.

    Unless the USAF want to give up 12 jets from Lot 18 the UK F-35As will be Lot 19, if they are ordered immediately. So 2028/29.

    Twelve aircraft imply one squadron and no OCU so the crew can be trained in the US fairly easily if expensively.

    It's a bit of a kick in the nads for GCAP/Tempest because every quid spent on F-35A is a quid less for that.
    OCU = Operational Conversion Unit.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 128,279
    Yes not surprising Iranian or indeed Russian bots are trying to destabilise the UK and the rest of the West
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 11,934
    Nerd info klaxon

    The last time a bill was defeated by a reasoned amendment was the 1986 Shops Bill attempting to reform Sunday Trading (the only bill Thatcher lost in entirety)
    That, of course, was not a key plank of the government economic platform
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 44,117
    edited 8:29AM
    viewcode said:
    Wasn't even particularly close.
    Mamdani is going to get the full Islamist Maoist antisemitic bicycle treatment now. Interesting to see how enthusiastically the centrist dad Dems will be about campaigning for him.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 65,834
    edited 8:27AM
    Good morning

    Live on Sky just now Rutte and Trump in front of the cameras

    To the anti Trump lobby you would be aghast at the fawning and embarrassing personal tribute to Trump and his action on Iran by Rutte

    To be honest I found it nauseating and shows Rutte and othes have no pride
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 9,410

    Nerd info klaxon

    The last time a bill was defeated by a reasoned amendment was the 1986 Shops Bill attempting to reform Sunday Trading (the only bill Thatcher lost in entirety)
    That, of course, was not a key plank of the government economic platform

    Did for Thatcher though. She barely lasted four and a half years after that :wink:
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,805

    algarkirk said:

    So yesterdays intensive efforts by cabibet ministers and whips managed to get one single MP to remove their name from the reasoned amendment whilst 16 others added theirs alongside the 11 Irish MPs who attend

    134 (Lab rebels plus NI) plus LD plus Green plus Plaid plus SNP plus Magic Grandpas roving band equals 228 - reform will probably switch to defeat the govt and there are payroll MPs waiting to join the rebellion and Khan and Burnham are out and proud opposers now

    He wont agree to Kemis terms and his bill is going down and its the beginning of the end of Starmer

    Fudge on the way. Labour MPs don't want benefit cuts but they won't want a GE either; after a GE right now about 300 Labour MPs may well be living off welfare for a bit. In 2029 most will be able to renew their contracts of employment with the great British public.

    (And of course the same MPs don't want tax rises, cuts anywhere else, or interest rates rising because of massive state borrowing. What they do want is completely mysterious.)
    Many of them openly say that they entered politics to do nice things and not to take difficult decisions.
    I don't think many Labour MPs expected a Labour Government to sling wheel chair bound voters into homelessness.

    I appreciate the welfare bill burgeoned under the last Government and is unsustainable but paying some hateful private contractor millions each year to throw genuinely helpless people into penury is not good politics.
    Well they should have because its what Labour governments do:

    Disabled protesters have thrown red paint over Downing Street's gates during a protest against the Government's welfare reforms.

    The group chanted slogans against the Prime Minister, Tony Blair, outside his official residence, Number 10 Downing Street.

    The paint was thrown at the gate blocking public access to the street from Whitehall.

    "Blair's Blood" was daubed on the pavement nearby.

    Four protesters got out of their wheelchairs to smear the red paint on the road.

    Kevin Donnellon, 35, a thalidomide victim, said the Government's intention to reform the benefits system would lead him to lose his invalidity benefit and mobility allowance.

    He said: "I will not be able to run my car without my benefit and allowance money.

    "These benefits are worth around £150 a week to me and my whole lifestyle is based around getting this money.

    "I live on my own and I also have to pay for home help care so that will be under threat now.

    "I feel that the Government are picking on us as soft targets, but we are going to show them that we are not soft targets."


    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/41746.stm
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 65,834
    HYUFD said:

    Yes not surprising Iranian or indeed Russian bots are trying to destabilise the UK and the rest of the West

    We even have them on here from time to time, but they are not very good
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 11,934
    Selebian said:

    Nerd info klaxon

    The last time a bill was defeated by a reasoned amendment was the 1986 Shops Bill attempting to reform Sunday Trading (the only bill Thatcher lost in entirety)
    That, of course, was not a key plank of the government economic platform

    Did for Thatcher though. She barely lasted four and a half years after that :wink:
    This is true! I imagine had it been, for example, union reform or the poll tax bill she wouldnt have survived though.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 32,570

    Who'd have thought these test tube grown mouthers of meaninglessness would be bad at persuading even their own colleagues of stuff?

    Saul Staniforth
    @SaulStaniforth
    "Yesterday you had almost every cabinet minister drafted in by Downing Street to get on the phone or hold meetings with Labour rebels & potential rebels & urge them to back down, to take their names off that wrecking amendment. And the effect is that things have only got worse"

    https://x.com/SaulStaniforth/status/1937778130984288754

    Even if we do need to reduce the lead swingers welfare bill by £5b a year the way this Government have gone about it couldn't look worse. If it looks like performative cruelty against society's most vulnerable it probably is performative cruelty against society's vulnerable. The Labour rebels should take this to the brink. If Starmer falls, Starmer falls.
    The oft repeated rebuttals to criticism of this is that 'we are the party of work, we believe people should not be left on the scrapheap, work is good for people', etc etc. In fact I strongly believe that a shitload of resources should be flung at the long-term unemployed and sick to help (emphasis on help) them back to some sort of independent working life, but is there any such programme attached to this anti skivers bill? If there is I've missed it.
    You are absolutely correct. That is why this bill is both absurd and cruel.

    However the Conservatives by using the bill as a weapon to damage Starmer, and in the way they are doing so, demonstrates they are wholly unserious people. Badenoch offering to support the bill on the provisional that there will be NO future tax rises amplified this notion.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 9,410
    edited 8:32AM

    algarkirk said:

    So yesterdays intensive efforts by cabibet ministers and whips managed to get one single MP to remove their name from the reasoned amendment whilst 16 others added theirs alongside the 11 Irish MPs who attend

    134 (Lab rebels plus NI) plus LD plus Green plus Plaid plus SNP plus Magic Grandpas roving band equals 228 - reform will probably switch to defeat the govt and there are payroll MPs waiting to join the rebellion and Khan and Burnham are out and proud opposers now

    He wont agree to Kemis terms and his bill is going down and its the beginning of the end of Starmer

    Fudge on the way. Labour MPs don't want benefit cuts but they won't want a GE either; after a GE right now about 300 Labour MPs may well be living off welfare for a bit. In 2029 most will be able to renew their contracts of employment with the great British public.

    (And of course the same MPs don't want tax rises, cuts anywhere else, or interest rates rising because of massive state borrowing. What they do want is completely mysterious.)
    Many of them openly say that they entered politics to do nice things and not to take difficult decisions.
    I don't think many Labour MPs expected a Labour Government to sling wheel chair bound voters into homelessness.

    I appreciate the welfare bill burgeoned under the last Government and is unsustainable but paying some hateful private contractor millions each year to throw genuinely helpless people into penury is not good politics.
    Well they should have because its what Labour governments do:

    Disabled protesters have thrown red paint over Downing Street's gates during a protest against the Government's welfare reforms.

    The group chanted slogans against the Prime Minister, Tony Blair, outside his official residence, Number 10 Downing Street.

    The paint was thrown at the gate blocking public access to the street from Whitehall.

    "Blair's Blood" was daubed on the pavement nearby.

    Four protesters got out of their wheelchairs to smear the red paint on the road.

    Kevin Donnellon, 35, a thalidomide victim, said the Government's intention to reform the benefits system would lead him to lose his invalidity benefit and mobility allowance.

    He said: "I will not be able to run my car without my benefit and allowance money.

    "These benefits are worth around £150 a week to me and my whole lifestyle is based around getting this money.

    "I live on my own and I also have to pay for home help care so that will be under threat now.

    "I feel that the Government are picking on us as soft targets, but we are going to show them that we are not soft targets."


    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/41746.stm
    "Four protesters got out of their wheelchairs to smear the red paint on the road."

    Thus outing themselves as scroungers and malingerers?
    (Non-serious comment, given Poe's Law may apply!)

    ETA: The archived BBC website looks so quaint now and - especially - so narrow. Very limited screen resolution in those days!
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,761
    viewcode said:
    From his wiki:

    His campaign platform includes support for free city buses, public child care, city-owned grocery stores, a rent freeze on rent-stabilized units, and building affordable housing units.

    Is New York short of privately run grocery shops?
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 11,934
    Happy halfway to Christmas everyone anyway
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 128,279

    It's bloody good that the elected Prime Minister is putting our unelected head of state in his place.

    Starmer goes against the King by bringing forward Trump’s full state visit

    The palace is expected to announce a state visit is scheduled for September, despite the monarch’s concerns over threats to Canada


    Sir Keir Starmer has gone against the wishes of the King in bringing ­President Trump’s state visit forward, despite the monarch’s concerns over threats to Canada.

    Britain and the US are expected to confirm that a full state visit by the president will take place in September as Starmer prioritises his attempt to curry favour with Trump.

    Going against the original proposal for an earlier informal visit outlined by the King, the prime minister has expedited a full “bells and whistles” visit in an attempt to capitalise on the president’s fascination with the royal family.

    The Palace had hoped for a more ­leisurely and considered approach, building towards a full state visit. However, the president made clear that his preference was for a full visit first, which would not be overshadowed by an informal handshake picture.

    It is understood that the “manu regia”, the formal document required to ­initiate a state visit, was signed by the King and hand-delivered to the White House last week.


    https://www.thetimes.com/article/1e48e2af-33d9-43fb-a6fa-a3e9aa815591?shareToken=286fc33a4ec9ee67eee5c1f5fc6208f8

    Well at least the King got in a visit to Canada first and can now blame Starmer for the state visit
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 44,117
    Selebian said:

    Nerd info klaxon

    The last time a bill was defeated by a reasoned amendment was the 1986 Shops Bill attempting to reform Sunday Trading (the only bill Thatcher lost in entirety)
    That, of course, was not a key plank of the government economic platform

    Did for Thatcher though. She barely lasted four and a half years after that :wink:
    Her sanity didn't.
    Look out for 'We are a grandmother' stuff from Sir Keir (thinking he's a granny would definitely be a bad sign).
  • LeonLeon Posts: 62,230

    viewcode said:
    Wasn't even particularly close.
    Mandani is going to get the full Islamist Maoist antisemitic bicycle treatment now. Interesting to see how enthusiastically the centrist dad Dems will be about campaigning for him.
    I’ve been rabbit-holing this guy. He’s…. interesting

    The word “anti-Semite” is thrown around far too much, not least by Israelis seeking to deflect from Israeli barbarity - but this guy seems to be the real deal. An anti-Semite. After October 7th his first remarks were mainly aimed at evil Israel and he did not mention Hamas once

    https://www.nationalreview.com/2025/06/zohran-mamdani-is-a-public-menace/

    There is much more

  • stodgestodge Posts: 14,752

    stodge said:

    So yesterdays intensive efforts by cabibet ministers and whips managed to get one single MP to remove their name from the reasoned amendment whilst 16 others added theirs alongside the 11 Irish MPs who attend

    134 (Lab rebels plus NI) plus LD plus Green plus Plaid plus SNP plus Magic Grandpas roving band equals 228 - reform will probably switch to defeat the govt and there are payroll MPs waiting to join the rebellion and Khan and Burnham are out and proud opposers now

    He wont agree to Kemis terms and his bill is going down and its the beginning of the end of Starmer

    Apologies for pouring cold water on your dreams of toppling a Prime Minister and Government with a majority of 170-something in just one vote but politics doesn't work like this.

    To be fair, the "reasoned amendment" sounds like another bad day for the can which will get another kicking down the road and it may well be the right thing to do but no Prime Minister is going to walk if an amendment to a bill gets through the Commons.

    I'm not even sure how this is the "beginning of the end" for Starmer either. It won't look good but I imagine there will be a couple of trips to the nearest fudge shop and something will back which will be reluctantly accepted.
    The amendment kills the bill if it passes, it prevents second reading, so its ripping up the governments programme.
    Yes if he kicks the can and delays he's not going to fall but is weakened and Kendall probably at least gets moved or sacked if they cant find a way to proceed.
    Beginning of the end is if the bill is lost by the amendment passing (reasoned amendments as I say kill the bill dead), his authority will be fatally damaged.
    He needs to delay and compromise with the rebels but appears unable to do so.

    Edit - 'beginning of the end' btw was a comment by a Labour MP signatory to the amendment that I pinched
    You and I both know plenty will be going on behind the scenes and what backbench (and indeed payroll Government) Labour MPs are saying now may not necessarily be how it plays out.

    Arms will be twisted - advancement will be offered (perhaps a junior Government role in the next reshuffle?) and threats will be made (you'll never join the Government if you vote for this amendment) by the Whips - we all know that's how the Conservative Whips operated when rebellion threatened and Labour's Whips will be no different (neither will the Reform Whips if and when they are in Government by the way).

    Those proposing the amendment will be "invited" to review, revisit and redraft and defiance for public consumption isn't necessarily how the political game plays out.

    We don't know what Kemi Badenoch will do - I doubt she does at the moment. The opportunity of inflicting a defeat on the Government is surely very attractive but the fact remains if they implicitly or explicitly support the Welfare Bill, they will also be implicitly or explicitly supporting the cuts Starmer and Reeves are proposing and that's a position they will have to defend down the road.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 65,834

    Who'd have thought these test tube grown mouthers of meaninglessness would be bad at persuading even their own colleagues of stuff?

    Saul Staniforth
    @SaulStaniforth
    "Yesterday you had almost every cabinet minister drafted in by Downing Street to get on the phone or hold meetings with Labour rebels & potential rebels & urge them to back down, to take their names off that wrecking amendment. And the effect is that things have only got worse"

    https://x.com/SaulStaniforth/status/1937778130984288754

    Even if we do need to reduce the lead swingers welfare bill by £5b a year the way this Government have gone about it couldn't look worse. If it looks like performative cruelty against society's most vulnerable it probably is performative cruelty against society's vulnerable. The Labour rebels should take this to the brink. If Starmer falls, Starmer falls.
    The oft repeated rebuttals to criticism of this is that 'we are the party of work, we believe people should not be left on the scrapheap, work is good for people', etc etc. In fact I strongly believe that a shitload of resources should be flung at the long-term unemployed and sick to help (emphasis on help) them back to some sort of independent working life, but is there any such programme attached to this anti skivers bill? If there is I've missed it.
    You are absolutely correct. That is why this bill is both absurd and cruel.

    However the Conservatives by using the bill as a weapon to damage Starmer, and in the way they are doing so, demonstrates they are wholly unserious people. Badenoch offering to support the bill on the provisional that there will be NO future tax rises amplified this notion.
    Re your last paragraph, on the contrary Badenoch is playing the role of opposition perfectly on this

    It's how politics works even if it upsets you
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,805
    Plus ca change etc:

    Tomorrow's demonstration will be coupled with what may be the most serious backbench rebellion of this administration so far. By Friday, 67 Labour MPs had signed an amendment to the Bill to kill its two most contentious clauses. It is open to others to add their names tomorrow.

    If they were all to vote against the Government, it would be a bigger rebellion even than the one provoked last year by a proposed cut in benefits for single mothers.

    Cabinet Ministers are determined to defeat the forces ranged against them, but welfare reform has not been a Blair success story. Tory leader William Hague has even suggested that it could be Blair's 'Vietnam'.

    The 1997 Labour election manifesto promised to curb the rising cost of benefits and release money for health, education and other services. But working out how has caused ferocious rows. In opposition, the then Social Security spokesman Chris Smith was abruptly shoved aside after quarrelling with Shadow Chancellor Gordon Brown.

    Smith was replaced by Harriet Harman, but in government she fell out with her deputy, Frank Field, and they were both sacked last July.

    The Social Security Secretary, Alistair Darling, is a Blairite toughie whose previous job was at the Treasury, working with Brown on limiting public spending. Darling is in no mood to give in. He accuses the rebels of focusing on one disliked part of the Bill, and ignoring its more generous deal for the young severely disabled and new rules allowing men to claim widow's benefit for the first time.

    He said: 'We are proposing a fair and balanced package. At the same time, we are making sure the benefits system reflects modern conditions. People cannot pick and choose. We were elected to reform the welfare state, and that is what we intend to do.'

    Far from falling, the cost of welfare is scheduled to rise by £40 billion over the next three years. Benefits for the disabled now cost £25bn. Incapacity benefit is intended to help those who have been stopped from working because of an accident or illness. Yet four out of 10 people starting to receive it now are leaving unemployment rather than leaving work. In many cases, they have been signed off as sick by sympathetic GPs to give them extra money.

    The Government therefore says anyone who has failed to pay any National Insurance contributions for two years will not get incapacity benefit, and those on occupational pensions of more than £50 a week will have part of their benefit docked.


    https://www.theguardian.com/uk/1999/may/16/richardthomas.theobserver

    I suppose one difference is that in 1999 government debt was £362bn and now its £2,867bn.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 31,313
    boulay said:

    Do we know when these new F35s arrive, when we will have pilots for them and do we actually have enough RAF pilots for twelve more jets?

    The way the story is being pushed it’s like we’ve popped down to Fighter jets R us and bought them (and of course had to buy a big bag for life to take them home in) and they will be ready to defend us by the weekend.

    Someone or other said that what makes Chinese weapons competitive is that China delivers, whereas others make a note of your order and might have something ready in a decade or so.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 11,934
    stodge said:

    stodge said:

    So yesterdays intensive efforts by cabibet ministers and whips managed to get one single MP to remove their name from the reasoned amendment whilst 16 others added theirs alongside the 11 Irish MPs who attend

    134 (Lab rebels plus NI) plus LD plus Green plus Plaid plus SNP plus Magic Grandpas roving band equals 228 - reform will probably switch to defeat the govt and there are payroll MPs waiting to join the rebellion and Khan and Burnham are out and proud opposers now

    He wont agree to Kemis terms and his bill is going down and its the beginning of the end of Starmer

    Apologies for pouring cold water on your dreams of toppling a Prime Minister and Government with a majority of 170-something in just one vote but politics doesn't work like this.

    To be fair, the "reasoned amendment" sounds like another bad day for the can which will get another kicking down the road and it may well be the right thing to do but no Prime Minister is going to walk if an amendment to a bill gets through the Commons.

    I'm not even sure how this is the "beginning of the end" for Starmer either. It won't look good but I imagine there will be a couple of trips to the nearest fudge shop and something will back which will be reluctantly accepted.
    The amendment kills the bill if it passes, it prevents second reading, so its ripping up the governments programme.
    Yes if he kicks the can and delays he's not going to fall but is weakened and Kendall probably at least gets moved or sacked if they cant find a way to proceed.
    Beginning of the end is if the bill is lost by the amendment passing (reasoned amendments as I say kill the bill dead), his authority will be fatally damaged.
    He needs to delay and compromise with the rebels but appears unable to do so.

    Edit - 'beginning of the end' btw was a comment by a Labour MP signatory to the amendment that I pinched
    You and I both know plenty will be going on behind the scenes and what backbench (and indeed payroll Government) Labour MPs are saying now may not necessarily be how it plays out.

    Arms will be twisted - advancement will be offered (perhaps a junior Government role in the next reshuffle?) and threats will be made (you'll never join the Government if you vote for this amendment) by the Whips - we all know that's how the Conservative Whips operated when rebellion threatened and Labour's Whips will be no different (neither will the Reform Whips if and when they are in Government by the way).

    Those proposing the amendment will be "invited" to review, revisit and redraft and defiance for public consumption isn't necessarily how the political game plays out.

    We don't know what Kemi Badenoch will do - I doubt she does at the moment. The opportunity of inflicting a defeat on the Government is surely very attractive but the fact remains if they implicitly or explicitly support the Welfare Bill, they will also be implicitly or explicitly supporting the cuts Starmer and Reeves are proposing and that's a position they will have to defend down the road.
    Oh I'm fully aware of what they will be doing.
    They spent all day yesterday twisting arms and threatening and sending out nasty little oik McFadden to storm the airwaves and managed to get one MP to remove their name whilst a further 16 added theirs.
    The most likely outcome is a can kicking and a further weakening of the weak little man in number 10. If he ploughs on I think he is defeated and then we shall see
  • MattWMattW Posts: 27,965
    boulay said:

    Do we know when these new F35s arrive, when we will have pilots for them and do we actually have enough RAF pilots for twelve more jets?

    The way the story is being pushed it’s like we’ve popped down to Fighter jets R us and bought them (and of course had to buy a big bag for life to take them home in) and they will be ready to defend us by the weekend.

    I have not seen dates.

    I'm quite inclined to the thought that this is another bit of Trump-fluffing, which will be long term enough to wait until he is out of power or 6 feet under, and will then be withdrawn as a programme.

    That was the strategy advised by John Bolton, who said more or less "the guy is so unstable that you should say yes but make sure it will take longer than he will be here for, so you can do something sensible later."

    That is imo a wise strategy.

    In RAF terms, I'd be happier with a further batch of Typhoons, though I can see some utility in having stealth strike aircraft. I don't see the utility of these if FCAS will be coming on stream circa 2035-38, which is a fairly hard deadline for the Japanese.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 19,275

    Good morning

    Live on Sky just now Rutte and Trump in front of the cameras

    To the anti Trump lobby you would be aghast at the fawning and embarrassing personal tribute to Trump and his action on Iran by Rutte

    To be honest I found it nauseating and shows Rutte and othes have no pride

    Thing is, just like in Band of Brothers, you salute the rank, not the man. Feel free to hate Donald Trump, its a rational response, while at the same time paying court to the President of the USA, probably the most powerful person on the planet.
  • ClippPClippP Posts: 1,979

    As some of you may know, I have a nerdish interest in local government Councillors who defect from one party to another. In my opinion it says more about the state of political parties than local government by elections. If anyone else is interested, my latest jottings on the subject can be found here, in a guest article for the Liberal England website -

    https://liberalengland.blogspot.com/2025/06/guest-post-councillor-defections.html

    Management Summary - 1.26% of elected Conservative Councillors have defected from the party since the local elections in May.

    A very interesting article - a large number of defections since May, including from the Labour Party. I suppose this reflects the low standing in the opinion polls shown by both Labour and Conservatives. So perhaaps not all that surprising.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 78,637
    Dura_Ace said:

    boulay said:

    Do we know when these new F35s arrive, when we will have pilots for them and do we actually have enough RAF pilots for twelve more jets?

    The way the story is being pushed it’s like we’ve popped down to Fighter jets R us and bought them (and of course had to buy a big bag for life to take them home in) and they will be ready to defend us by the weekend.

    Unless the USAF want to give up 12 jets from Lot 18 the UK F-35As will be Lot 19, if they are ordered immediately. So 2028/29.

    Twelve aircraft imply one squadron and no OCU so the crew can be trained in the US fairly easily if expensively.

    It's a bit of a kick in the nads for GCAP/Tempest because every quid spent on F-35A is a quid less for that.
    It's £25m less than we spend on the B.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 78,637
    edited 8:44AM

    Good morning

    Live on Sky just now Rutte and Trump in front of the cameras

    To the anti Trump lobby you would be aghast at the fawning and embarrassing personal tribute to Trump and his action on Iran by Rutte

    To be honest I found it nauseating and shows Rutte and othes have no pride

    It's also stupid.
    Trump has zero respect for those who abase themselves in that manner.

    If you act like a poodle, you'll be treated as one.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 65,834

    Good morning

    Live on Sky just now Rutte and Trump in front of the cameras

    To the anti Trump lobby you would be aghast at the fawning and embarrassing personal tribute to Trump and his action on Iran by Rutte

    To be honest I found it nauseating and shows Rutte and othes have no pride

    Thing is, just like in Band of Brothers, you salute the rank, not the man. Feel free to hate Donald Trump, its a rational response, while at the same time paying court to the President of the USA, probably the most powerful person on the planet.
    There is a difference between a rational response and Rutte's fawning this morning
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 78,637
    tlg86 said:

    viewcode said:
    From his wiki:

    His campaign platform includes support for free city buses, public child care, city-owned grocery stores, a rent freeze on rent-stabilized units, and building affordable housing units.

    Is New York short of privately run grocery shops?
    No; it's a daft idea (as are rent controls).
  • AugustusCarp2AugustusCarp2 Posts: 365
    ClippP said:

    As some of you may know, I have a nerdish interest in local government Councillors who defect from one party to another. In my opinion it says more about the state of political parties than local government by elections. If anyone else is interested, my latest jottings on the subject can be found here, in a guest article for the Liberal England website -

    https://liberalengland.blogspot.com/2025/06/guest-post-councillor-defections.html

    Management Summary - 1.26% of elected Conservative Councillors have defected from the party since the local elections in May.

    A very interesting article - a large number of defections since May, including from the Labour Party. I suppose this reflects the low standing in the opinion polls shown by both Labour and Conservatives. So perhaaps not all that surprising.
    You ate probably right, but I remain surprised at the number of defections. Unfortunately, I only have the figures for the last couple of years, so it's not possible to be too emphatic, but it does seem that the numbers are increasing.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 78,637

    Good morning

    Live on Sky just now Rutte and Trump in front of the cameras

    To the anti Trump lobby you would be aghast at the fawning and embarrassing personal tribute to Trump and his action on Iran by Rutte

    To be honest I found it nauseating and shows Rutte and othes have no pride

    Thing is, just like in Band of Brothers, you salute the rank, not the man. Feel free to hate Donald Trump, its a rational response, while at the same time paying court to the President of the USA, probably the most powerful person on the planet.
    Trump isn't our commander in chief, so that comparison doesn't apply.
    And in any event, there's nothing in military regs which demands slavish flattery.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 11,934
    Leon will be delighted, the mighty Mel Stride is taking on Ange in PMQs today
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 55,870
    Nigelb said:

    Good morning

    Live on Sky just now Rutte and Trump in front of the cameras

    To the anti Trump lobby you would be aghast at the fawning and embarrassing personal tribute to Trump and his action on Iran by Rutte

    To be honest I found it nauseating and shows Rutte and othes have no pride

    Thing is, just like in Band of Brothers, you salute the rank, not the man. Feel free to hate Donald Trump, its a rational response, while at the same time paying court to the President of the USA, probably the most powerful person on the planet.
    Trump isn't our commander in chief, so that comparison doesn't apply.
    And in any event, there's nothing in military regs which demands slavish flattery.
    Would Starmer be making a 5% defence spending commitment without Trump commanding it?
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 7,592

    Who'd have thought these test tube grown mouthers of meaninglessness would be bad at persuading even their own colleagues of stuff?

    Saul Staniforth
    @SaulStaniforth
    "Yesterday you had almost every cabinet minister drafted in by Downing Street to get on the phone or hold meetings with Labour rebels & potential rebels & urge them to back down, to take their names off that wrecking amendment. And the effect is that things have only got worse"

    https://x.com/SaulStaniforth/status/1937778130984288754

    Even if we do need to reduce the lead swingers welfare bill by £5b a year the way this Government have gone about it couldn't look worse. If it looks like performative cruelty against society's most vulnerable it probably is performative cruelty against society's vulnerable. The Labour rebels should take this to the brink. If Starmer falls, Starmer falls.
    The oft repeated rebuttals to criticism of this is that 'we are the party of work, we believe people should not be left on the scrapheap, work is good for people', etc etc. In fact I strongly believe that a shitload of resources should be flung at the long-term unemployed and sick to help (emphasis on help) them back to some sort of independent working life, but is there any such programme attached to this anti skivers bill? If there is I've missed it.
    You are absolutely correct. That is why this bill is both absurd and cruel.

    However the Conservatives by using the bill as a weapon to damage Starmer, and in the way they are doing so, demonstrates they are wholly unserious people. Badenoch offering to support the bill on the provisional that there will be NO future tax rises amplified this notion.
    Yes the Tory position is opportunistic, but then I can give you myriad examples of the exact same thing being done by Labour in opposition. It’s politics at the end of the day. I said yesterday that it’s the first bit of tactical positioning from Badenoch that is halfway decent.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 19,275
    Nigelb said:

    Good morning

    Live on Sky just now Rutte and Trump in front of the cameras

    To the anti Trump lobby you would be aghast at the fawning and embarrassing personal tribute to Trump and his action on Iran by Rutte

    To be honest I found it nauseating and shows Rutte and othes have no pride

    Thing is, just like in Band of Brothers, you salute the rank, not the man. Feel free to hate Donald Trump, its a rational response, while at the same time paying court to the President of the USA, probably the most powerful person on the planet.
    Trump isn't our commander in chief, so that comparison doesn't apply.
    And in any event, there's nothing in military regs which demands slavish flattery.
    You've totally missed the point then. Forget the military - if Trump is in the room he is both an obnoxious arse and the President of the United States. Despise the former and respect the latter.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 31,313

    Plus ca change etc:

    Tomorrow's demonstration will be coupled with what may be the most serious backbench rebellion of this administration so far. By Friday, 67 Labour MPs had signed an amendment to the Bill to kill its two most contentious clauses. It is open to others to add their names tomorrow.

    If they were all to vote against the Government, it would be a bigger rebellion even than the one provoked last year by a proposed cut in benefits for single mothers.

    Cabinet Ministers are determined to defeat the forces ranged against them, but welfare reform has not been a Blair success story. Tory leader William Hague has even suggested that it could be Blair's 'Vietnam'.

    The 1997 Labour election manifesto promised to curb the rising cost of benefits and release money for health, education and other services. But working out how has caused ferocious rows. In opposition, the then Social Security spokesman Chris Smith was abruptly shoved aside after quarrelling with Shadow Chancellor Gordon Brown.

    Smith was replaced by Harriet Harman, but in government she fell out with her deputy, Frank Field, and they were both sacked last July.

    The Social Security Secretary, Alistair Darling, is a Blairite toughie whose previous job was at the Treasury, working with Brown on limiting public spending. Darling is in no mood to give in. He accuses the rebels of focusing on one disliked part of the Bill, and ignoring its more generous deal for the young severely disabled and new rules allowing men to claim widow's benefit for the first time.

    He said: 'We are proposing a fair and balanced package. At the same time, we are making sure the benefits system reflects modern conditions. People cannot pick and choose. We were elected to reform the welfare state, and that is what we intend to do.'

    Far from falling, the cost of welfare is scheduled to rise by £40 billion over the next three years. Benefits for the disabled now cost £25bn. Incapacity benefit is intended to help those who have been stopped from working because of an accident or illness. Yet four out of 10 people starting to receive it now are leaving unemployment rather than leaving work. In many cases, they have been signed off as sick by sympathetic GPs to give them extra money.

    The Government therefore says anyone who has failed to pay any National Insurance contributions for two years will not get incapacity benefit, and those on occupational pensions of more than £50 a week will have part of their benefit docked.


    https://www.theguardian.com/uk/1999/may/16/richardthomas.theobserver

    I suppose one difference is that in 1999 government debt was £362bn and now its £2,867bn.

    This came from the Thatcher government's tractor-statting the unemployment figures by getting anyone with a pulse, or a slightly irregular pulse, off the dole and onto some other benefit.
  • BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 3,050
    Nigelb said:

    Good morning

    Live on Sky just now Rutte and Trump in front of the cameras

    To the anti Trump lobby you would be aghast at the fawning and embarrassing personal tribute to Trump and his action on Iran by Rutte

    To be honest I found it nauseating and shows Rutte and othes have no pride

    It's also stupid.
    Trump has zero respect for those who abase themselves in that manner.

    If you act like a poodle, you'll be treated as one.
    There is, of course, a danger in that. But I really think that however personally nauseating Rutte (and Sir Keir) must find it, they are acting rationally and in the public interest. And ensuring the USA remains engaged in NATO is well worth the cringing. There can hardly be anything more important than that surely?

    I loathe Trump with a passion but we are where we are, and I am grateful that Rutte and Starmer are putting aside their personal feelings and doing this.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 14,752

    ClippP said:

    As some of you may know, I have a nerdish interest in local government Councillors who defect from one party to another. In my opinion it says more about the state of political parties than local government by elections. If anyone else is interested, my latest jottings on the subject can be found here, in a guest article for the Liberal England website -

    https://liberalengland.blogspot.com/2025/06/guest-post-councillor-defections.html

    Management Summary - 1.26% of elected Conservative Councillors have defected from the party since the local elections in May.

    A very interesting article - a large number of defections since May, including from the Labour Party. I suppose this reflects the low standing in the opinion polls shown by both Labour and Conservatives. So perhaaps not all that surprising.
    You ate probably right, but I remain surprised at the number of defections. Unfortunately, I only have the figures for the last couple of years, so it's not possible to be too emphatic, but it does seem that the numbers are increasing.
    The Conservatives still have 2000 District Councillors in England but that will reduce with local Government reorganisation (it will impact the LDs as well) and 466 "County" Councillors including in authorities which will cease to exist in the next two or three years.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 11,088
    Some interesting and sensible comments from the CCC this morning. Basically, we need to cut taxes on electricity if we're going to make the next step away from fossil fuels (obviously).

    Just pop them up on petrol/diesel and gas to make up the revenue and we're sorted. It's even progressive, with poorer people using more electricity as a proportion of their fuel costs than rich people*.

    *For now - that will be balanced out by the proliferation of EVs in the coming years.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 35,860

    Good morning

    Live on Sky just now Rutte and Trump in front of the cameras

    To the anti Trump lobby you would be aghast at the fawning and embarrassing personal tribute to Trump and his action on Iran by Rutte

    To be honest I found it nauseating and shows Rutte and othes have no pride

    I think Trump made the right decision in trying to neutralise Iran's nuclear weapons programme. I'm not bothered which US president does it as long as it gets done.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 31,313

    Leon will be delighted, the mighty Mel Stride is taking on Ange in PMQs today

    Chris Philp last week, Mel Stride this? The blue team is rotating the DPMQs slot.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 14,752
    ClippP said:

    As some of you may know, I have a nerdish interest in local government Councillors who defect from one party to another. In my opinion it says more about the state of political parties than local government by elections. If anyone else is interested, my latest jottings on the subject can be found here, in a guest article for the Liberal England website -

    https://liberalengland.blogspot.com/2025/06/guest-post-councillor-defections.html

    Management Summary - 1.26% of elected Conservative Councillors have defected from the party since the local elections in May.

    A very interesting article - a large number of defections since May, including from the Labour Party. I suppose this reflects the low standing in the opinion polls shown by both Labour and Conservatives. So perhaaps not all that surprising.
    Labour and Conservatives still have over 10,000 councillors between them with everyone else on 8,000 (roughly). Twice as many moves have been defections to Indpendent or Unaffiliated as direct defections to Reform and of course there are the regular numbers of resignations for all manner of reasons.

    https://opencouncildata.co.uk/tracker.php
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 31,313
    Nigelb said:

    tlg86 said:

    viewcode said:
    From his wiki:

    His campaign platform includes support for free city buses, public child care, city-owned grocery stores, a rent freeze on rent-stabilized units, and building affordable housing units.

    Is New York short of privately run grocery shops?
    No; it's a daft idea (as are rent controls).
    Aren't what we would call off-licences often state-run in the land of the free-ish?
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 44,117
    Leon said:

    viewcode said:
    Wasn't even particularly close.
    Mandani is going to get the full Islamist Maoist antisemitic bicycle treatment now. Interesting to see how enthusiastically the centrist dad Dems will be about campaigning for him.
    I’ve been rabbit-holing this guy. He’s…. interesting

    The word “anti-Semite” is thrown around far too much, not least by Israelis seeking to deflect from Israeli barbarity - but this guy seems to be the real deal. An anti-Semite. After October 7th his first remarks were mainly aimed at evil Israel and he did not mention Hamas once

    https://www.nationalreview.com/2025/06/zohran-mamdani-is-a-public-menace/

    There is much more

    I am shocked that the National Review has uncovered this.
    It is a truth that should be universally aknowledged that the loudest screechers of 'Why didn't you mention Hamas!!!?' are always utterly silent on the IDF's Gazan activities (unless it's cheerleading them).
  • AugustusCarp2AugustusCarp2 Posts: 365
    stodge said:

    ClippP said:

    As some of you may know, I have a nerdish interest in local government Councillors who defect from one party to another. In my opinion it says more about the state of political parties than local government by elections. If anyone else is interested, my latest jottings on the subject can be found here, in a guest article for the Liberal England website -

    https://liberalengland.blogspot.com/2025/06/guest-post-councillor-defections.html

    Management Summary - 1.26% of elected Conservative Councillors have defected from the party since the local elections in May.

    A very interesting article - a large number of defections since May, including from the Labour Party. I suppose this reflects the low standing in the opinion polls shown by both Labour and Conservatives. So perhaaps not all that surprising.
    You ate probably right, but I remain surprised at the number of defections. Unfortunately, I only have the figures for the last couple of years, so it's not possible to be too emphatic, but it does seem that the numbers are increasing.
    The Conservatives still have 2000 District Councillors in England but that will reduce with local Government reorganisation (it will impact the LDs as well) and 466 "County" Councillors including in authorities which will cease to exist in the next two or three years.
    Indeed. But I am not concerning myself with the absolute number of councillors, just the attrition rate caused by defections, and what those defections might mean. Sadly, this subject doesn't seem to get the attention it deserves from political analysts. In all probability a defecting councillor handicaps the next Parliamentary campaign by removing an activist with detailed knowledge of (at least) one ward. They may also take their families and friends with them. That's a fair number of leaflets undelivered, doors un-canvassed and posters not displayed. Maybe even financial donations not made. If the election is fought mainly as an "air war", then it may not be relevant, but if the "ground war" is still important (and I think it is) then defecting councillors can be a significant hindrance to a Parliamentary campaign.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 35,860

    Nerd info klaxon

    The last time a bill was defeated by a reasoned amendment was the 1986 Shops Bill attempting to reform Sunday Trading (the only bill Thatcher lost in entirety)
    That, of course, was not a key plank of the government economic platform

    One of the best examples of why Thatcher wasn't really a conservative — trying to bring in Sunday shopping.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,805

    DavidL said:

    algarkirk said:

    So yesterdays intensive efforts by cabibet ministers and whips managed to get one single MP to remove their name from the reasoned amendment whilst 16 others added theirs alongside the 11 Irish MPs who attend

    134 (Lab rebels plus NI) plus LD plus Green plus Plaid plus SNP plus Magic Grandpas roving band equals 228 - reform will probably switch to defeat the govt and there are payroll MPs waiting to join the rebellion and Khan and Burnham are out and proud opposers now

    He wont agree to Kemis terms and his bill is going down and its the beginning of the end of Starmer

    Fudge on the way. Labour MPs don't want benefit cuts but they won't want a GE either; after a GE right now about 300 Labour MPs may well be living off welfare for a bit. In 2029 most will be able to renew their contracts of employment with the great British public.

    (And of course the same MPs don't want tax rises, cuts anywhere else, or interest rates rising because of massive state borrowing. What they do want is completely mysterious.)
    Talking about drinking your own poison. These idiots apparently really did believe that the Tories tried (not very successfully) to keep down the costs of welfare because they were evil and greedy; that it was a choice that they had made and it was the wrong one.

    Winning power and becoming the government has forced some of their leaders to recognise that we are beyond broke, that we are living massively and unsustainably beyond our means and the Tories deserve the lash for their profligacy and irresponsibility, not their meanness. Reality is a bitch.
    I do suspect that many of these Labour MPs believe that everyone is entitled to be a net recipient of government money.

    I've met various small groups in recent years where they were baffled that I'm a net contributor to government funds - they didn't seem to have ever encountered such a person before.
    Theories about MMT have convinced a lot of people that the government can just print money to pay for things and tax is an optional policy choice.
    In reality it’s more that people think that the tax burden should be on corporations not normal people
    People who think that also being the first to complain about price rises caused by corporate taxation.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 44,117

    Nigelb said:

    Good morning

    Live on Sky just now Rutte and Trump in front of the cameras

    To the anti Trump lobby you would be aghast at the fawning and embarrassing personal tribute to Trump and his action on Iran by Rutte

    To be honest I found it nauseating and shows Rutte and othes have no pride

    Thing is, just like in Band of Brothers, you salute the rank, not the man. Feel free to hate Donald Trump, its a rational response, while at the same time paying court to the President of the USA, probably the most powerful person on the planet.
    Trump isn't our commander in chief, so that comparison doesn't apply.
    And in any event, there's nothing in military regs which demands slavish flattery.
    You've totally missed the point then. Forget the military - if Trump is in the room he is both an obnoxious arse and the President of the United States. Despise the former and respect the latter.
    Where does fawning come into this construction? Are you saying it's ok to announce you despise the man while saluting the rank?
    'Welcome Mr President, you wanker.'
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 7,067
    edited 9:09AM
    Viz a viz the Cricket.... it is interesting that England bat to at least no7 whereas India do not and the Indian 6,7,8,9,10 are not worth a row of beans.. they collapsed twice..
    The Indian fast bowlers are v good but the first change bowlers are sub optimal at best.

    Most importantly the attendance at Headingley was v poor indeed .. loads of empty seats.. I know why. Overcharging. My seat was £142.50 for a seat in the gods on the right opposite the Kirkstall Lane end.
    I think canny Yorkshire folk put two fingers up at the ECB/YCCC and watched at home... and I don't blame them.
    My ticket for my guest at Lords is £160.. outrageously expensive. Sadly Lords is always massively oversubscribed and they are hiking the prices as a result.


  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 78,637

    Nigelb said:

    Good morning

    Live on Sky just now Rutte and Trump in front of the cameras

    To the anti Trump lobby you would be aghast at the fawning and embarrassing personal tribute to Trump and his action on Iran by Rutte

    To be honest I found it nauseating and shows Rutte and othes have no pride

    Thing is, just like in Band of Brothers, you salute the rank, not the man. Feel free to hate Donald Trump, its a rational response, while at the same time paying court to the President of the USA, probably the most powerful person on the planet.
    Trump isn't our commander in chief, so that comparison doesn't apply.
    And in any event, there's nothing in military regs which demands slavish flattery.
    You've totally missed the point then. Forget the military - if Trump is in the room he is both an obnoxious arse and the President of the United States. Despise the former and respect the latter.
    You can, and should show him polite respect.
    A tongue bath is unnecessary.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,805
    Andy_JS said:

    Nerd info klaxon

    The last time a bill was defeated by a reasoned amendment was the 1986 Shops Bill attempting to reform Sunday Trading (the only bill Thatcher lost in entirety)
    That, of course, was not a key plank of the government economic platform

    One of the best examples of why Thatcher wasn't really a conservative — trying to bring in Sunday shopping.
    Thatcher was generally a small state progressive.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 24,962

    Leon will be delighted, the mighty Mel Stride is taking on Ange in PMQs today

    Chris Philp last week, Mel Stride this? The blue team is rotating the DPMQs slot.
    Guest presenter. They're having Alexander Armstrong on next week. They wanted Boris Johnson, but he got a better offer from HIGNFY
  • BattlebusBattlebus Posts: 1,007
    boulay said:

    Jesus, as it’s BBC Christmas (AKA Glastonbury) they are interviewing Rod Stewart and the interviewer asked him about an £11k bill for trashing a hotel on tour.

    Stewart’s answer was that the hotels treated them like the scum of the earth so they trashed the hotels.

    Clearly oblivious the fact that the hotels judged correctly.

    They must have been in a lot of Travelodge's from the looks of them.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 62,230

    Leon said:

    viewcode said:
    Wasn't even particularly close.
    Mandani is going to get the full Islamist Maoist antisemitic bicycle treatment now. Interesting to see how enthusiastically the centrist dad Dems will be about campaigning for him.
    I’ve been rabbit-holing this guy. He’s…. interesting

    The word “anti-Semite” is thrown around far too much, not least by Israelis seeking to deflect from Israeli barbarity - but this guy seems to be the real deal. An anti-Semite. After October 7th his first remarks were mainly aimed at evil Israel and he did not mention Hamas once

    https://www.nationalreview.com/2025/06/zohran-mamdani-is-a-public-menace/

    There is much more

    I am shocked that the National Review has uncovered this.
    It is a truth that should be universally aknowledged that the loudest screechers of 'Why didn't you mention Hamas!!!?' are always utterly silent on the IDF's Gazan activities (unless it's cheerleading them).
    Nonetheless it is the case. His first reaction to October 7 was to bang on about apartheid Israel and NOT mention Hamas. It’s a pretty acid test, and he failed

    It looks like the Democrats are doubling down on their lunacies (this guy is a commie nutter as well as anti-Jewish - a kind of young Muslim American Corbyn). So the polarisation of American/western politics continues

  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,805
    edited 9:13AM

    Plus ca change etc:

    Tomorrow's demonstration will be coupled with what may be the most serious backbench rebellion of this administration so far. By Friday, 67 Labour MPs had signed an amendment to the Bill to kill its two most contentious clauses. It is open to others to add their names tomorrow.

    If they were all to vote against the Government, it would be a bigger rebellion even than the one provoked last year by a proposed cut in benefits for single mothers.

    Cabinet Ministers are determined to defeat the forces ranged against them, but welfare reform has not been a Blair success story. Tory leader William Hague has even suggested that it could be Blair's 'Vietnam'.

    The 1997 Labour election manifesto promised to curb the rising cost of benefits and release money for health, education and other services. But working out how has caused ferocious rows. In opposition, the then Social Security spokesman Chris Smith was abruptly shoved aside after quarrelling with Shadow Chancellor Gordon Brown.

    Smith was replaced by Harriet Harman, but in government she fell out with her deputy, Frank Field, and they were both sacked last July.

    The Social Security Secretary, Alistair Darling, is a Blairite toughie whose previous job was at the Treasury, working with Brown on limiting public spending. Darling is in no mood to give in. He accuses the rebels of focusing on one disliked part of the Bill, and ignoring its more generous deal for the young severely disabled and new rules allowing men to claim widow's benefit for the first time.

    He said: 'We are proposing a fair and balanced package. At the same time, we are making sure the benefits system reflects modern conditions. People cannot pick and choose. We were elected to reform the welfare state, and that is what we intend to do.'

    Far from falling, the cost of welfare is scheduled to rise by £40 billion over the next three years. Benefits for the disabled now cost £25bn. Incapacity benefit is intended to help those who have been stopped from working because of an accident or illness. Yet four out of 10 people starting to receive it now are leaving unemployment rather than leaving work. In many cases, they have been signed off as sick by sympathetic GPs to give them extra money.

    The Government therefore says anyone who has failed to pay any National Insurance contributions for two years will not get incapacity benefit, and those on occupational pensions of more than £50 a week will have part of their benefit docked.


    https://www.theguardian.com/uk/1999/may/16/richardthomas.theobserver

    I suppose one difference is that in 1999 government debt was £362bn and now its £2,867bn.

    This came from the Thatcher government's tractor-statting the unemployment figures by getting anyone with a pulse, or a slightly irregular pulse, off the dole and onto some other benefit.
    To be fair thirty years down the pit was more likely to give you disabilities than current workplaces do.

    Not to mention all those who had been on twenty fags a day for thirty years.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 27,965
    ClippP said:

    As some of you may know, I have a nerdish interest in local government Councillors who defect from one party to another. In my opinion it says more about the state of political parties than local government by elections. If anyone else is interested, my latest jottings on the subject can be found here, in a guest article for the Liberal England website -

    https://liberalengland.blogspot.com/2025/06/guest-post-councillor-defections.html

    Management Summary - 1.26% of elected Conservative Councillors have defected from the party since the local elections in May.

    A very interesting article - a large number of defections since May, including from the Labour Party. I suppose this reflects the low standing in the opinion polls shown by both Labour and Conservatives. So perhaps not all that surprising.
    Interesting. It would be useful to have the pluses and minuses, as well as the Net.
  • AugustusCarp2AugustusCarp2 Posts: 365
    MattW said:

    ClippP said:

    As some of you may know, I have a nerdish interest in local government Councillors who defect from one party to another. In my opinion it says more about the state of political parties than local government by elections. If anyone else is interested, my latest jottings on the subject can be found here, in a guest article for the Liberal England website -

    https://liberalengland.blogspot.com/2025/06/guest-post-councillor-defections.html

    Management Summary - 1.26% of elected Conservative Councillors have defected from the party since the local elections in May.

    A very interesting article - a large number of defections since May, including from the Labour Party. I suppose this reflects the low standing in the opinion polls shown by both Labour and Conservatives. So perhaps not all that surprising.
    Interesting. It would be useful to have the pluses and minuses, as well as the Net.
    Give me half an hour, @MattW, and I will check the numbers and post them here.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 78,637

    Leon said:

    viewcode said:
    Wasn't even particularly close.
    Mandani is going to get the full Islamist Maoist antisemitic bicycle treatment now. Interesting to see how enthusiastically the centrist dad Dems will be about campaigning for him.
    I’ve been rabbit-holing this guy. He’s…. interesting

    The word “anti-Semite” is thrown around far too much, not least by Israelis seeking to deflect from Israeli barbarity - but this guy seems to be the real deal. An anti-Semite. After October 7th his first remarks were mainly aimed at evil Israel and he did not mention Hamas once

    https://www.nationalreview.com/2025/06/zohran-mamdani-is-a-public-menace/

    There is much more

    I am shocked that the National Review has uncovered this.
    It is a truth that should be universally aknowledged that the loudest screechers of 'Why didn't you mention Hamas!!!?' are always utterly silent on the IDF's Gazan activities (unless it's cheerleading them).
    Let's see how he is in office, as he'll quite likely win now.

    A Ugandan Indian immigrant, via South Africa, as a child; left wing student activist; former rapper; "Democratic Socialist"... he might or might not turn out to be a pragmatist.

    If the Democratic establishment were less useless, and hadn't backed someone with several closets bursting with skeletons, he'd never have got the nomination.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 35,860
    Video from a few months ago about the brilliance of Jason Beer KC at the Post Office Inquiry.

    "What makes Mr Beer magnificent?
    Dr Paul Duckett"

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGbGsIKnp-c
  • BattlebusBattlebus Posts: 1,007

    Who'd have thought these test tube grown mouthers of meaninglessness would be bad at persuading even their own colleagues of stuff?

    Saul Staniforth
    @SaulStaniforth
    "Yesterday you had almost every cabinet minister drafted in by Downing Street to get on the phone or hold meetings with Labour rebels & potential rebels & urge them to back down, to take their names off that wrecking amendment. And the effect is that things have only got worse"

    https://x.com/SaulStaniforth/status/1937778130984288754

    Even if we do need to reduce the lead swingers welfare bill by £5b a year the way this Government have gone about it couldn't look worse. If it looks like performative cruelty against society's most vulnerable it probably is performative cruelty against society's vulnerable. The Labour rebels should take this to the brink. If Starmer falls, Starmer falls.
    Good at economics but shit at politics. WFA and cutting the welfare bill are good economics. The first for reasons of poor targeting. The second for reasons of overdue legislative revision.

    Saint Tony of Blair was a sneaky b***** as he would salt different legislation with enabling clauses to achieve what he wanted. Just as GOP are trying now with the BBB.

    He really needs to get with the politics if he wants to make the economic changes needed.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 44,117
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    viewcode said:
    Wasn't even particularly close.
    Mandani is going to get the full Islamist Maoist antisemitic bicycle treatment now. Interesting to see how enthusiastically the centrist dad Dems will be about campaigning for him.
    I’ve been rabbit-holing this guy. He’s…. interesting

    The word “anti-Semite” is thrown around far too much, not least by Israelis seeking to deflect from Israeli barbarity - but this guy seems to be the real deal. An anti-Semite. After October 7th his first remarks were mainly aimed at evil Israel and he did not mention Hamas once

    https://www.nationalreview.com/2025/06/zohran-mamdani-is-a-public-menace/

    There is much more

    I am shocked that the National Review has uncovered this.
    It is a truth that should be universally aknowledged that the loudest screechers of 'Why didn't you mention Hamas!!!?' are always utterly silent on the IDF's Gazan activities (unless it's cheerleading them).
    Nonetheless it is the case. His first reaction to October 7 was to bang on about apartheid Israel and NOT mention Hamas. It’s a pretty acid test, and he failed

    It looks like the Democrats are doubling down on their lunacies (this guy is a commie nutter as well as anti-Jewish - a kind of young Muslim American Corbyn). So the polarisation of American/western politics continues

    Yep, doubling down on *checks notes* putting forward noted commie, anti Jewish nutter Kamala as a candidate.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 27,965

    MattW said:

    ClippP said:

    As some of you may know, I have a nerdish interest in local government Councillors who defect from one party to another. In my opinion it says more about the state of political parties than local government by elections. If anyone else is interested, my latest jottings on the subject can be found here, in a guest article for the Liberal England website -

    https://liberalengland.blogspot.com/2025/06/guest-post-councillor-defections.html

    Management Summary - 1.26% of elected Conservative Councillors have defected from the party since the local elections in May.

    A very interesting article - a large number of defections since May, including from the Labour Party. I suppose this reflects the low standing in the opinion polls shown by both Labour and Conservatives. So perhaps not all that surprising.
    Interesting. It would be useful to have the pluses and minuses, as well as the Net.
    Give me half an hour, @MattW, and I will check the numbers and post them here.
    Cheers. Given that our area has now gone Reform in the LIncs-Derbys-Notts-Staffs belt, I'm interested especially in their defections in and out. That +16 looks to be predominantly a couple of group defections, from my impressions.

    Do your numbers cover .. ahem .. "involuntary defections"?
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 24,962

    Even if we do need to reduce the lead swingers welfare bill... If Starmer falls, Starmer falls.

    I know you meant "shirkers who swing the lead", but I read it as "pre-eminent people who have sex with strangers". Dude, there's a bill for that??? :):)

  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 35,860
    I didn't expect Trump to question his own intelligence agencies.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 62,230
    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    viewcode said:
    Wasn't even particularly close.
    Mandani is going to get the full Islamist Maoist antisemitic bicycle treatment now. Interesting to see how enthusiastically the centrist dad Dems will be about campaigning for him.
    I’ve been rabbit-holing this guy. He’s…. interesting

    The word “anti-Semite” is thrown around far too much, not least by Israelis seeking to deflect from Israeli barbarity - but this guy seems to be the real deal. An anti-Semite. After October 7th his first remarks were mainly aimed at evil Israel and he did not mention Hamas once

    https://www.nationalreview.com/2025/06/zohran-mamdani-is-a-public-menace/

    There is much more

    I am shocked that the National Review has uncovered this.
    It is a truth that should be universally aknowledged that the loudest screechers of 'Why didn't you mention Hamas!!!?' are always utterly silent on the IDF's Gazan activities (unless it's cheerleading them).
    Let's see how he is in office, as he'll quite likely win now.

    A Ugandan Indian immigrant, via South Africa, as a child; left wing student activist; former rapper; "Democratic Socialist"... he might or might not turn out to be a pragmatist.

    If the Democratic establishment were less useless, and hadn't backed someone with several closets bursting with skeletons, he'd never have got the nomination.
    Yes, the Dems have only themselves to blame. Is the deeply tarnished Cuomo really the best alternative they could find?!

    This Mamdani guy is openly and viscerally hostile to Israel. That’s going to be a combustible situation when he seeks to govern the biggest Jewish city in the world
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 84,874
    edited 9:22AM

    Viz a viz the Cricket.... it is interesting that England bat to at least no7 whereas India do not and the Indian 6,7,8,9,10 are not worth a row of beans.. they collapsed twice..
    The Indian fast bowlers are v good but the first change bowlers are sub optimal at best.

    Most importantly the attendance at Headingley was v poor indeed .. loads of empty seats.. I know why. Overcharging. My seat was £142.50 for a seat in the gods on the right opposite the Kirkstall Lane end.
    I think canny Yorkshire folk put two fingers up at the ECB/YCCC and watched at home... and I don't blame them.
    My ticket for my guest at Lords is £160.. outrageously expensive. Sadly Lords is always massively oversubscribed and they are hiking the prices as a result.


    The cricket prices have got out of hand and we have been seeing it all summer with the ODIs / T20s not selling out either, where as a few years ago you had to buy your T20 ticket the year before. T20 was £90 after fees.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 32,570

    Good morning

    Live on Sky just now Rutte and Trump in front of the cameras

    To the anti Trump lobby you would be aghast at the fawning and embarrassing personal tribute to Trump and his action on Iran by Rutte

    To be honest I found it nauseating and shows Rutte and othes have no pride

    Thing is, just like in Band of Brothers, you salute the rank, not the man. Feel free to hate Donald Trump, its a rational response, while at the same time paying court to the President of the USA, probably the most powerful person on the planet.
    There is a difference between a rational response and Rutte's fawning this morning
    He has to keep NATO together and tickling Trump's toes is one way to assist. I am not sure it works, likewise Starmer railroading Chas into an early State Visit.

    With Trump the sycophancy might be necessary. It's probably at least worth a try.
  • TazTaz Posts: 19,254
    Ah yes, the Beebs annual jolly for many of its staff, Glastonbury.

    What a great time to be a vendor of Palestinian flags
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 32,570
    edited 9:28AM
    viewcode said:

    Even if we do need to reduce the lead swingers welfare bill... If Starmer falls, Starmer falls.

    I know you meant "shirkers who swing the lead", but I read it as "pre-eminent people who have sex with strangers". Dude, there's a bill for that??? :):)

    That is why a missed apostrophe can be very dangerous. Sorry!

    Just put your car keys in the fruit bowl and it will all fall into place.
  • BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 3,050

    stodge said:

    ClippP said:

    As some of you may know, I have a nerdish interest in local government Councillors who defect from one party to another. In my opinion it says more about the state of political parties than local government by elections. If anyone else is interested, my latest jottings on the subject can be found here, in a guest article for the Liberal England website -

    https://liberalengland.blogspot.com/2025/06/guest-post-councillor-defections.html

    Management Summary - 1.26% of elected Conservative Councillors have defected from the party since the local elections in May.

    A very interesting article - a large number of defections since May, including from the Labour Party. I suppose this reflects the low standing in the opinion polls shown by both Labour and Conservatives. So perhaaps not all that surprising.
    You ate probably right, but I remain surprised at the number of defections. Unfortunately, I only have the figures for the last couple of years, so it's not possible to be too emphatic, but it does seem that the numbers are increasing.
    The Conservatives still have 2000 District Councillors in England but that will reduce with local Government reorganisation (it will impact the LDs as well) and 466 "County" Councillors including in authorities which will cease to exist in the next two or three years.
    Indeed. But I am not concerning myself with the absolute number of councillors, just the attrition rate caused by defections, and what those defections might mean. Sadly, this subject doesn't seem to get the attention it deserves from political analysts. In all probability a defecting councillor handicaps the next Parliamentary campaign by removing an activist with detailed knowledge of (at least) one ward. They may also take their families and friends with them. That's a fair number of leaflets undelivered, doors un-canvassed and posters not displayed. Maybe even financial donations not made. If the election is fought mainly as an "air war", then it may not be relevant, but if the "ground war" is still important (and I think it is) then defecting councillors can be a significant hindrance to a Parliamentary campaign.
    I think that's right. Nevertheless have been a little surprised that (so far) the Con ranks at Westminster and devolved level have remained pretty solid despite everything. And Labour haven't lost any MPs to other parties, tho some sit as Indies. The Tories did lose an MSP (to the LibDems) at Holyrood but that was mainly down to his pro-trans views and that he had no chance of being re-selected.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 84,874
    Taz said:

    Ah yes, the Beebs annual jolly for many of its staff, Glastonbury.

    What a great time to be a vendor of Palestinian flags

    Maybe we will get the return of ohhhhhhhhhhhhh Jeremmmmy Coooooorrrbyyynnnnnn
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,805
    Andy_JS said:

    I didn't expect Trump to question his own intelligence agencies.

    Trump doesn't question anything as he has no intellectual curiosity.

    He just declares he's right about everything and any different opinion is wrong.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 84,874

    Andy_JS said:

    I didn't expect Trump to question his own intelligence agencies.

    Trump doesn't question anything as he has no intellectual curiosity.

    He just declares he's right about everything and any different opinion is wrong.
    Taps mic.....WRRRRRRORNNNNNNNGGGGGGGGG....
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 84,874
    edited 9:31AM
    So the government given up on cabinet meetings when Starmer is away (which given the world at the moment, is often) and looks like going to have to back down on welfare cuts after u-turning on WFA. This is only year one of the government, rather than year 14.
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 14,767

    Viz a viz the Cricket.... it is interesting that England bat to at least no7 whereas India do not and the Indian 6,7,8,9,10 are not worth a row of beans.. they collapsed twice..
    The Indian fast bowlers are v good but the first change bowlers are sub optimal at best.

    Most importantly the attendance at Headingley was v poor indeed .. loads of empty seats.. I know why. Overcharging. My seat was £142.50 for a seat in the gods on the right opposite the Kirkstall Lane end.
    I think canny Yorkshire folk put two fingers up at the ECB/YCCC and watched at home... and I don't blame them.
    My ticket for my guest at Lords is £160.. outrageously expensive. Sadly Lords is always massively oversubscribed and they are hiking the prices as a result.


    Yes, I paid £140 for a day four seat at the Oval. It's a rare treat and I can afford it, but it is too much.
  • BattlebusBattlebus Posts: 1,007

    Plus ca change etc:

    Tomorrow's demonstration will be coupled with what may be the most serious backbench rebellion of this administration so far. By Friday, 67 Labour MPs had signed an amendment to the Bill to kill its two most contentious clauses. It is open to others to add their names tomorrow.

    If they were all to vote against the Government, it would be a bigger rebellion even than the one provoked last year by a proposed cut in benefits for single mothers.

    Cabinet Ministers are determined to defeat the forces ranged against them, but welfare reform has not been a Blair success story. Tory leader William Hague has even suggested that it could be Blair's 'Vietnam'.

    The 1997 Labour election manifesto promised to curb the rising cost of benefits and release money for health, education and other services. But working out how has caused ferocious rows. In opposition, the then Social Security spokesman Chris Smith was abruptly shoved aside after quarrelling with Shadow Chancellor Gordon Brown.

    Smith was replaced by Harriet Harman, but in government she fell out with her deputy, Frank Field, and they were both sacked last July.

    The Social Security Secretary, Alistair Darling, is a Blairite toughie whose previous job was at the Treasury, working with Brown on limiting public spending. Darling is in no mood to give in. He accuses the rebels of focusing on one disliked part of the Bill, and ignoring its more generous deal for the young severely disabled and new rules allowing men to claim widow's benefit for the first time.

    He said: 'We are proposing a fair and balanced package. At the same time, we are making sure the benefits system reflects modern conditions. People cannot pick and choose. We were elected to reform the welfare state, and that is what we intend to do.'

    Far from falling, the cost of welfare is scheduled to rise by £40 billion over the next three years. Benefits for the disabled now cost £25bn. Incapacity benefit is intended to help those who have been stopped from working because of an accident or illness. Yet four out of 10 people starting to receive it now are leaving unemployment rather than leaving work. In many cases, they have been signed off as sick by sympathetic GPs to give them extra money.

    The Government therefore says anyone who has failed to pay any National Insurance contributions for two years will not get incapacity benefit, and those on occupational pensions of more than £50 a week will have part of their benefit docked.


    https://www.theguardian.com/uk/1999/may/16/richardthomas.theobserver

    I suppose one difference is that in 1999 government debt was £362bn and now its £2,867bn.

    This came from the Thatcher government's tractor-statting the unemployment figures by getting anyone with a pulse, or a slightly irregular pulse, off the dole and onto some other benefit.
    But she sold state assets to pay for it. Low 'unemployment' and low 'tax' and pass the cost onto future generations. A playbook that is being used by every government since. They are all heirs to Thatcher.
  • DeclanFDeclanF Posts: 53

    Leon said:

    viewcode said:
    Wasn't even particularly close.
    Mandani is going to get the full Islamist Maoist antisemitic bicycle treatment now. Interesting to see how enthusiastically the centrist dad Dems will be about campaigning for him.
    I’ve been rabbit-holing this guy. He’s…. interesting

    The word “anti-Semite” is thrown around far too much, not least by Israelis seeking to deflect from Israeli barbarity - but this guy seems to be the real deal. An anti-Semite. After October 7th his first remarks were mainly aimed at evil Israel and he did not mention Hamas once

    https://www.nationalreview.com/2025/06/zohran-mamdani-is-a-public-menace/

    There is much more

    I am shocked that the National Review has uncovered this.
    It is a truth that should be universally aknowledged that the loudest screechers of 'Why didn't you mention Hamas!!!?' are always utterly silent on the IDF's Gazan activities (unless it's cheerleading them).
    If a person's first response to the worst massacre of Jews since WW2 by a terrorist group (before Israel has taken any action at all) is to condemn Israel not the those carrying out the massacre then people are certainly entitled to draw adverse conclusions about that person's attitudes and prejudices.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 32,570
    edited 9:33AM

    Andy_JS said:

    I didn't expect Trump to question his own intelligence agencies.

    (Edit)

    He just declares he's right about everything and any different opinion is wrong.
    Don't we have a poster here who operates similarly?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 62,230

    Andy_JS said:

    I didn't expect Trump to question his own intelligence agencies.

    (Edit)

    He just declares he's right about everything and any different opinion is wrong.
    Don't we have a poster here who operates similarly?
    No we don’t. And you can take that statement as fact because I’m never wrong
  • CookieCookie Posts: 15,416

    Viz a viz the Cricket.... it is interesting that England bat to at least no7 whereas India do not and the Indian 6,7,8,9,10 are not worth a row of beans.. they collapsed twice..
    The Indian fast bowlers are v good but the first change bowlers are sub optimal at best.

    Most importantly the attendance at Headingley was v poor indeed .. loads of empty seats.. I know why. Overcharging. My seat was £142.50 for a seat in the gods on the right opposite the Kirkstall Lane end.
    I think canny Yorkshire folk put two fingers up at the ECB/YCCC and watched at home... and I don't blame them.
    My ticket for my guest at Lords is £160.. outrageously expensive. Sadly Lords is always massively oversubscribed and they are hiking the prices as a result.


    The cricket prices have got out of hand and we have been seeing it all summer with the ODIs / T20s not selling out either, where as a few years ago you had to buy your T20 ticket the year before. T20 was £90 after fees.
    My ticket at Old TRafford cost about £70. It's in the party stand, but I don't think that's too bad.
    And I took three daughters to see Lancs v Nothants in the T20 for a combined total of, I think, £23 for the four of us. Some of cricket is still getting it right.
    Oh, and a day at Eng v Zim at Trent Bridge for £40.
  • AugustusCarp2AugustusCarp2 Posts: 365
    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    ClippP said:

    As some of you may know, I have a nerdish interest in local government Councillors who defect from one party to another. In my opinion it says more about the state of political parties than local government by elections. If anyone else is interested, my latest jottings on the subject can be found here, in a guest article for the Liberal England website -

    https://liberalengland.blogspot.com/2025/06/guest-post-councillor-defections.html

    Management Summary - 1.26% of elected Conservative Councillors have defected from the party since the local elections in May.

    A very interesting article - a large number of defections since May, including from the Labour Party. I suppose this reflects the low standing in the opinion polls shown by both Labour and Conservatives. So perhaps not all that surprising.
    Interesting. It would be useful to have the pluses and minuses, as well as the Net.
    Give me half an hour, @MattW, and I will check the numbers and post them here.
    Cheers. Given that our area has now gone Reform in the LIncs-Derbys-Notts-Staffs belt, I'm interested especially in their defections in and out. That +16 looks to be predominantly a couple of group defections, from my impressions.

    Do your numbers cover .. ahem .. "involuntary defections"?
    Hi. @MattW - here are some numbers for you - but remember, this is just what I have been able to identify, and I am not a proper statistician, so Do Your Own Research, Errors and Omissions Excepted, The Value of Your Investments Can Go Down as well as Belly Up etc etc.

    Conservatives 59 out, 3 in
    Labour 46 out, 5 in
    Lib Dems 11 out, 15 in
    Greens 1 out, 4 in
    Nats (both sorts) no change
    RefUk 6 out, 22 in

    That's since the local elections in May - not quite two months ago. And yes, the figures include people who have been suspended, expelled, de-emphasised, terminated with extreme prejudice etc.
  • No_Offence_AlanNo_Offence_Alan Posts: 5,099
    MattW said:

    Nigelb said:

    It's bloody good that the elected Prime Minister is putting our unelected head of state in his place.

    Starmer goes against the King by bringing forward Trump’s full state visit

    The palace is expected to announce a state visit is scheduled for September, despite the monarch’s concerns over threats to Canada


    Sir Keir Starmer has gone against the wishes of the King in bringing ­President Trump’s state visit forward, despite the monarch’s concerns over threats to Canada.

    Britain and the US are expected to confirm that a full state visit by the president will take place in September as Starmer prioritises his attempt to curry favour with Trump.

    Going against the original proposal for an earlier informal visit outlined by the King, the prime minister has expedited a full “bells and whistles” visit in an attempt to capitalise on the president’s fascination with the royal family.

    The Palace had hoped for a more ­leisurely and considered approach, building towards a full state visit. However, the president made clear that his preference was for a full visit first, which would not be overshadowed by an informal handshake picture.

    It is understood that the “manu regia”, the formal document required to ­initiate a state visit, was signed by the King and hand-delivered to the White House last week.


    https://www.thetimes.com/article/1e48e2af-33d9-43fb-a6fa-a3e9aa815591?shareToken=286fc33a4ec9ee67eee5c1f5fc6208f8

    #we are all Trump rimmers now
    My wife is already planning to attend protests when he shows up.
    This is the part I do not understand. How is exposing Trump to crowds of British demonstrators supposed to boost our image?
    He won't be. Trump is a coward who cannot bear to look in a mirror to view himself as he is.

    I'd say it will be helicopter here, helicopter there, bit of fluffing, short stopover at Turnberry, then run away back to the land of the formerly free.
    KC3 should troll him by serving him TACOs at the state banquet.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 27,965
    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    viewcode said:
    Wasn't even particularly close.
    Mandani is going to get the full Islamist Maoist antisemitic bicycle treatment now. Interesting to see how enthusiastically the centrist dad Dems will be about campaigning for him.
    I’ve been rabbit-holing this guy. He’s…. interesting

    The word “anti-Semite” is thrown around far too much, not least by Israelis seeking to deflect from Israeli barbarity - but this guy seems to be the real deal. An anti-Semite. After October 7th his first remarks were mainly aimed at evil Israel and he did not mention Hamas once

    https://www.nationalreview.com/2025/06/zohran-mamdani-is-a-public-menace/

    There is much more

    I am shocked that the National Review has uncovered this.
    It is a truth that should be universally aknowledged that the loudest screechers of 'Why didn't you mention Hamas!!!?' are always utterly silent on the IDF's Gazan activities (unless it's cheerleading them).
    Let's see how he is in office, as he'll quite likely win now.

    A Ugandan Indian immigrant, via South Africa, as a child; left wing student activist; former rapper; "Democratic Socialist"... he might or might not turn out to be a pragmatist.

    If the Democratic establishment were less useless, and hadn't backed someone with several closets bursting with skeletons, he'd never have got the nomination.
    I'd say they are trying a bit too hard on the "anti-Semitism" angle, given that that Mamdani is a representative for the 36th New York Congressional District, which is in .. Queens.

    Their strongest attack line is based on something he said whilst he was in High School (ie USA version of 6th form). Born 1991, statement made in 2008.

    Reading his policies - things like Universal Healthcare and aspiring to a minimum wage set at perhaps 40% of the national average by 2030, he seems mainly to be proposing a few steps towards introducing civilisation to the USA. I'm not sure of the ins and outs of free bus travel, though certain places in Europe have it (Luxembourg?).

    He does afaics I can see support Israel's right to exist (as has been said); and does not seem to endorse it as a "Jewish State" (whatever that means in National Review code).

    They seem quite worried, and are reaching for some startling language: "We oppose Mamdani’s moral unworthiness: He is worse than a democratic socialist; he is — as evidenced by an adult life’s worth of political actions — a deeply committed pro-Hamas activist and advocate for the abolition of Israel."
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 44,117

    stodge said:

    ClippP said:

    As some of you may know, I have a nerdish interest in local government Councillors who defect from one party to another. In my opinion it says more about the state of political parties than local government by elections. If anyone else is interested, my latest jottings on the subject can be found here, in a guest article for the Liberal England website -

    https://liberalengland.blogspot.com/2025/06/guest-post-councillor-defections.html

    Management Summary - 1.26% of elected Conservative Councillors have defected from the party since the local elections in May.

    A very interesting article - a large number of defections since May, including from the Labour Party. I suppose this reflects the low standing in the opinion polls shown by both Labour and Conservatives. So perhaaps not all that surprising.
    You ate probably right, but I remain surprised at the number of defections. Unfortunately, I only have the figures for the last couple of years, so it's not possible to be too emphatic, but it does seem that the numbers are increasing.
    The Conservatives still have 2000 District Councillors in England but that will reduce with local Government reorganisation (it will impact the LDs as well) and 466 "County" Councillors including in authorities which will cease to exist in the next two or three years.
    Indeed. But I am not concerning myself with the absolute number of councillors, just the attrition rate caused by defections, and what those defections might mean. Sadly, this subject doesn't seem to get the attention it deserves from political analysts. In all probability a defecting councillor handicaps the next Parliamentary campaign by removing an activist with detailed knowledge of (at least) one ward. They may also take their families and friends with them. That's a fair number of leaflets undelivered, doors un-canvassed and posters not displayed. Maybe even financial donations not made. If the election is fought mainly as an "air war", then it may not be relevant, but if the "ground war" is still important (and I think it is) then defecting councillors can be a significant hindrance to a Parliamentary campaign.
    I think that's right. Nevertheless have been a little surprised that (so far) the Con ranks at Westminster and devolved level have remained pretty solid despite everything. And Labour haven't lost any MPs to other parties, tho some sit as Indies. The Tories did lose an MSP (to the LibDems) at Holyrood but that was mainly down to his pro-trans views and that he had no chance of being re-selected.
    Fuck me, I'd missed the SCon-SLD defection! I'd say I'm more than averagely interested in politics so that probably says a lot about the SCons and SLDs.
    Still, at least the SCons still have Russell 'In Liz we Trust' Findlay at the helm.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 14,573

    MattW said:

    Nigelb said:

    It's bloody good that the elected Prime Minister is putting our unelected head of state in his place.

    Starmer goes against the King by bringing forward Trump’s full state visit

    The palace is expected to announce a state visit is scheduled for September, despite the monarch’s concerns over threats to Canada


    Sir Keir Starmer has gone against the wishes of the King in bringing ­President Trump’s state visit forward, despite the monarch’s concerns over threats to Canada.

    Britain and the US are expected to confirm that a full state visit by the president will take place in September as Starmer prioritises his attempt to curry favour with Trump.

    Going against the original proposal for an earlier informal visit outlined by the King, the prime minister has expedited a full “bells and whistles” visit in an attempt to capitalise on the president’s fascination with the royal family.

    The Palace had hoped for a more ­leisurely and considered approach, building towards a full state visit. However, the president made clear that his preference was for a full visit first, which would not be overshadowed by an informal handshake picture.

    It is understood that the “manu regia”, the formal document required to ­initiate a state visit, was signed by the King and hand-delivered to the White House last week.


    https://www.thetimes.com/article/1e48e2af-33d9-43fb-a6fa-a3e9aa815591?shareToken=286fc33a4ec9ee67eee5c1f5fc6208f8

    #we are all Trump rimmers now
    My wife is already planning to attend protests when he shows up.
    This is the part I do not understand. How is exposing Trump to crowds of British demonstrators supposed to boost our image?
    He won't be. Trump is a coward who cannot bear to look in a mirror to view himself as he is.

    I'd say it will be helicopter here, helicopter there, bit of fluffing, short stopover at Turnberry, then run away back to the land of the formerly free.
    KC3 should troll him by serving him TACOs at the state banquet.
    He'll bend over and take it up his (presumably cancerous) hole just like the rest of them.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 32,570
    Leon said:

    Andy_JS said:

    I didn't expect Trump to question his own intelligence agencies.

    (Edit)

    He just declares he's right about everything and any different opinion is wrong.
    Don't we have a poster here who operates similarly?
    No we don’t. And you can take that statement as fact because I’m never wrong
    How do you know I had yourself in mind?

    FWIW there are one or two other names that spring to mind.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 44,117
    DeclanF said:

    Leon said:

    viewcode said:
    Wasn't even particularly close.
    Mandani is going to get the full Islamist Maoist antisemitic bicycle treatment now. Interesting to see how enthusiastically the centrist dad Dems will be about campaigning for him.
    I’ve been rabbit-holing this guy. He’s…. interesting

    The word “anti-Semite” is thrown around far too much, not least by Israelis seeking to deflect from Israeli barbarity - but this guy seems to be the real deal. An anti-Semite. After October 7th his first remarks were mainly aimed at evil Israel and he did not mention Hamas once

    https://www.nationalreview.com/2025/06/zohran-mamdani-is-a-public-menace/

    There is much more

    I am shocked that the National Review has uncovered this.
    It is a truth that should be universally aknowledged that the loudest screechers of 'Why didn't you mention Hamas!!!?' are always utterly silent on the IDF's Gazan activities (unless it's cheerleading them).
    If a person's first response to the worst massacre of Jews since WW2 by a terrorist group (before Israel has taken any action at all) is to condemn Israel not the those carrying out the massacre then people are certainly entitled to draw adverse conclusions about that person's attitudes and prejudices.
    He won't have your vote then?
  • MattWMattW Posts: 27,965

    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    ClippP said:

    As some of you may know, I have a nerdish interest in local government Councillors who defect from one party to another. In my opinion it says more about the state of political parties than local government by elections. If anyone else is interested, my latest jottings on the subject can be found here, in a guest article for the Liberal England website -

    https://liberalengland.blogspot.com/2025/06/guest-post-councillor-defections.html

    Management Summary - 1.26% of elected Conservative Councillors have defected from the party since the local elections in May.

    A very interesting article - a large number of defections since May, including from the Labour Party. I suppose this reflects the low standing in the opinion polls shown by both Labour and Conservatives. So perhaps not all that surprising.
    Interesting. It would be useful to have the pluses and minuses, as well as the Net.
    Give me half an hour, @MattW, and I will check the numbers and post them here.
    Cheers. Given that our area has now gone Reform in the LIncs-Derbys-Notts-Staffs belt, I'm interested especially in their defections in and out. That +16 looks to be predominantly a couple of group defections, from my impressions.

    Do your numbers cover .. ahem .. "involuntary defections"?
    Hi. @MattW - here are some numbers for you - but remember, this is just what I have been able to identify, and I am not a proper statistician, so Do Your Own Research, Errors and Omissions Excepted, The Value of Your Investments Can Go Down as well as Belly Up etc etc.

    Conservatives 59 out, 3 in
    Labour 46 out, 5 in
    Lib Dems 11 out, 15 in
    Greens 1 out, 4 in
    Nats (both sorts) no change
    RefUk 6 out, 22 in

    That's since the local elections in May - not quite two months ago. And yes, the figures include people who have been suspended, expelled, de-emphasised, terminated with extreme prejudice etc.
    Cheers - data is thin so it is all useful.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 11,934
    edited 9:39AM
    Lol Morgan 'absolutely useless' McSweeney is apparently getting the blame for the Welfare kerfuffle.
    Popcorntastic

    Shouldn't have sacked Sue
  • LeonLeon Posts: 62,230
    MattW said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    viewcode said:
    Wasn't even particularly close.
    Mandani is going to get the full Islamist Maoist antisemitic bicycle treatment now. Interesting to see how enthusiastically the centrist dad Dems will be about campaigning for him.
    I’ve been rabbit-holing this guy. He’s…. interesting

    The word “anti-Semite” is thrown around far too much, not least by Israelis seeking to deflect from Israeli barbarity - but this guy seems to be the real deal. An anti-Semite. After October 7th his first remarks were mainly aimed at evil Israel and he did not mention Hamas once

    https://www.nationalreview.com/2025/06/zohran-mamdani-is-a-public-menace/

    There is much more

    I am shocked that the National Review has uncovered this.
    It is a truth that should be universally aknowledged that the loudest screechers of 'Why didn't you mention Hamas!!!?' are always utterly silent on the IDF's Gazan activities (unless it's cheerleading them).
    Let's see how he is in office, as he'll quite likely win now.

    A Ugandan Indian immigrant, via South Africa, as a child; left wing student activist; former rapper; "Democratic Socialist"... he might or might not turn out to be a pragmatist.

    If the Democratic establishment were less useless, and hadn't backed someone with several closets bursting with skeletons, he'd never have got the nomination.
    I'd say they are trying a bit too hard on the "anti-Semitism" angle, given that that Mamdani is a representative for the 36th New York Congressional District, which is in .. Queens.

    Their strongest attack line is based on something he said whilst he was in High School (ie USA version of 6th form). Born 1991, statement made in 2008.

    Reading his policies - things like Universal Healthcare and aspiring to a minimum wage set at perhaps 40% of the national average by 2030, he seems mainly to be proposing a few steps towards introducing civilisation to the USA. I'm not sure of the ins and outs of free bus travel, though certain places in Europe have it (Luxembourg?).

    He does afaics I can see support Israel's right to exist (as has been said); and does not seem to endorse it as a "Jewish State" (whatever that means in National Review code).

    They seem quite worried, and are reaching for some startling language: "We oppose Mamdani’s moral unworthiness: He is worse than a democratic socialist; he is — as evidenced by an adult life’s worth of political actions — a deeply committed pro-Hamas activist and advocate for the abolition of Israel."
    His statement after October 7 did NOT mention Hamas and did NOT condemn the specific terror attacks, and it went straight to blaming Israeli occupation and apartheid while mourning “everyone who has died in Israel and Gaza”

    It’s anti Semitism. He couldn’t bring himself to condemn the terror rape and murder of Jews, even 36 hours after the October attacks, when the bodies were still unburied
  • BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 3,050

    stodge said:

    ClippP said:

    As some of you may know, I have a nerdish interest in local government Councillors who defect from one party to another. In my opinion it says more about the state of political parties than local government by elections. If anyone else is interested, my latest jottings on the subject can be found here, in a guest article for the Liberal England website -

    https://liberalengland.blogspot.com/2025/06/guest-post-councillor-defections.html

    Management Summary - 1.26% of elected Conservative Councillors have defected from the party since the local elections in May.

    A very interesting article - a large number of defections since May, including from the Labour Party. I suppose this reflects the low standing in the opinion polls shown by both Labour and Conservatives. So perhaaps not all that surprising.
    You ate probably right, but I remain surprised at the number of defections. Unfortunately, I only have the figures for the last couple of years, so it's not possible to be too emphatic, but it does seem that the numbers are increasing.
    The Conservatives still have 2000 District Councillors in England but that will reduce with local Government reorganisation (it will impact the LDs as well) and 466 "County" Councillors including in authorities which will cease to exist in the next two or three years.
    Indeed. But I am not concerning myself with the absolute number of councillors, just the attrition rate caused by defections, and what those defections might mean. Sadly, this subject doesn't seem to get the attention it deserves from political analysts. In all probability a defecting councillor handicaps the next Parliamentary campaign by removing an activist with detailed knowledge of (at least) one ward. They may also take their families and friends with them. That's a fair number of leaflets undelivered, doors un-canvassed and posters not displayed. Maybe even financial donations not made. If the election is fought mainly as an "air war", then it may not be relevant, but if the "ground war" is still important (and I think it is) then defecting councillors can be a significant hindrance to a Parliamentary campaign.
    I think that's right. Nevertheless have been a little surprised that (so far) the Con ranks at Westminster and devolved level have remained pretty solid despite everything. And Labour haven't lost any MPs to other parties, tho some sit as Indies. The Tories did lose an MSP (to the LibDems) at Holyrood but that was mainly down to his pro-trans views and that he had no chance of being re-selected.
    Fuck me, I'd missed the SCon-SLD defection! I'd say I'm more than averagely interested in politics so that probably says a lot about the SCons and SLDs.
    Still, at least the SCons still have Russell 'In Liz we Trust' Findlay at the helm.
    You need to pay more attention! I thought you of all people would have seen that!!

    Jamie Greene MSP. Possibly best known for the highlights in his beard.
  • DeclanFDeclanF Posts: 53
    edited 9:47AM

    DeclanF said:

    Leon said:

    viewcode said:
    Wasn't even particularly close.
    Mandani is going to get the full Islamist Maoist antisemitic bicycle treatment now. Interesting to see how enthusiastically the centrist dad Dems will be about campaigning for him.
    I’ve been rabbit-holing this guy. He’s…. interesting

    The word “anti-Semite” is thrown around far too much, not least by Israelis seeking to deflect from Israeli barbarity - but this guy seems to be the real deal. An anti-Semite. After October 7th his first remarks were mainly aimed at evil Israel and he did not mention Hamas once

    https://www.nationalreview.com/2025/06/zohran-mamdani-is-a-public-menace/

    There is much more

    I am shocked that the National Review has uncovered this.
    It is a truth that should be universally aknowledged that the loudest screechers of 'Why didn't you mention Hamas!!!?' are always utterly silent on the IDF's Gazan activities (unless it's cheerleading them).
    If a person's first response to the worst massacre of Jews since WW2 by a terrorist group (before Israel has taken any action at all) is to condemn Israel not the those carrying out the massacre then people are certainly entitled to draw adverse conclusions about that person's attitudes and prejudices.
    He won't have your vote then?
    I don't live in NY. So no. Nor will anyone else get my vote.

    You must have missed the "if" at the start of my comment. Whether the allegations against him are true I don't know.

    It is perfectly possible - and many have done so - to condemn both Hamas and its massacres of Jews and the nature of Israel's response. I do think that Israel had a right to respond but I am troubled by how it has done so. Many of those condemning it do not, however, do so in good faith because they seem to be entirely unbothered by the massacres and some are rather keen on the killing of Jews and the obliteration of Israel.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 84,874
    Have we done this?

    Megapoll finds Nigel Farage is on track for huge election win with 377 Reform MPs - while Labour would be slashed to just 118 and the Tories 29

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14845173/Megapoll-Nigel-Farage-huge-election-win-Reform-government.html
  • MattWMattW Posts: 27,965
    edited 9:50AM
    DeclanF said:

    Leon said:

    viewcode said:
    Wasn't even particularly close.
    Mandani is going to get the full Islamist Maoist antisemitic bicycle treatment now. Interesting to see how enthusiastically the centrist dad Dems will be about campaigning for him.
    I’ve been rabbit-holing this guy. He’s…. interesting

    The word “anti-Semite” is thrown around far too much, not least by Israelis seeking to deflect from Israeli barbarity - but this guy seems to be the real deal. An anti-Semite. After October 7th his first remarks were mainly aimed at evil Israel and he did not mention Hamas once

    https://www.nationalreview.com/2025/06/zohran-mamdani-is-a-public-menace/

    There is much more

    I am shocked that the National Review has uncovered this.
    It is a truth that should be universally aknowledged that the loudest screechers of 'Why didn't you mention Hamas!!!?' are always utterly silent on the IDF's Gazan activities (unless it's cheerleading them).
    If a person's first response to the worst massacre of Jews since WW2 by a terrorist group (before Israel has taken any action at all) is to condemn Israel not the those carrying out the massacre then people are certainly entitled to draw adverse conclusions about that person's attitudes and prejudices.
    This is his full statement on October 8th. My photo today:

    https://x.com/ZohranKMamdani/status/1711093032907321525

    IMO it is weak on explicit condemnation of the terror attack, but I think 'this guy is a supporter of Hamas' is overreach in return - because that implies he supports the terror attack.
  • AugustusCarp2AugustusCarp2 Posts: 365

    stodge said:

    ClippP said:

    As some of you may know, I have a nerdish interest in local government Councillors who defect from one party to another. In my opinion it says more about the state of political parties than local government by elections. If anyone else is interested, my latest jottings on the subject can be found here, in a guest article for the Liberal England website -

    https://liberalengland.blogspot.com/2025/06/guest-post-councillor-defections.html

    Management Summary - 1.26% of elected Conservative Councillors have defected from the party since the local elections in May.

    A very interesting article - a large number of defections since May, including from the Labour Party. I suppose this reflects the low standing in the opinion polls shown by both Labour and Conservatives. So perhaaps not all that surprising.
    You ate probably right, but I remain surprised at the number of defections. Unfortunately, I only have the figures for the last couple of years, so it's not possible to be too emphatic, but it does seem that the numbers are increasing.
    The Conservatives still have 2000 District Councillors in England but that will reduce with local Government reorganisation (it will impact the LDs as well) and 466 "County" Councillors including in authorities which will cease to exist in the next two or three years.
    Indeed. But I am not concerning myself with the absolute number of councillors, just the attrition rate caused by defections, and what those defections might mean. Sadly, this subject doesn't seem to get the attention it deserves from political analysts. In all probability a defecting councillor handicaps the next Parliamentary campaign by removing an activist with detailed knowledge of (at least) one ward. They may also take their families and friends with them. That's a fair number of leaflets undelivered, doors un-canvassed and posters not displayed. Maybe even financial donations not made. If the election is fought mainly as an "air war", then it may not be relevant, but if the "ground war" is still important (and I think it is) then defecting councillors can be a significant hindrance to a Parliamentary campaign.
    I think that's right. Nevertheless have been a little surprised that (so far) the Con ranks at Westminster and devolved level have remained pretty solid despite everything. And Labour haven't lost any MPs to other parties, tho some sit as Indies. The Tories did lose an MSP (to the LibDems) at Holyrood but that was mainly down to his pro-trans views and that he had no chance of being re-selected.
    I think that's because it must be much more traumatic for an elected Parliamentarian to leave the party of which they are an elected representative. It's not just the career structure that binds them - they owe a social debt and obligations to people who may have become close friends over years of campaigning, and there's also the problem of what to do about their employed staff. It's much easier for a Councillor to defect than it is for an MP, MSP or Sennedd member,
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 46,016
    MattW said:

    DeclanF said:

    Leon said:

    viewcode said:
    Wasn't even particularly close.
    Mandani is going to get the full Islamist Maoist antisemitic bicycle treatment now. Interesting to see how enthusiastically the centrist dad Dems will be about campaigning for him.
    I’ve been rabbit-holing this guy. He’s…. interesting

    The word “anti-Semite” is thrown around far too much, not least by Israelis seeking to deflect from Israeli barbarity - but this guy seems to be the real deal. An anti-Semite. After October 7th his first remarks were mainly aimed at evil Israel and he did not mention Hamas once

    https://www.nationalreview.com/2025/06/zohran-mamdani-is-a-public-menace/

    There is much more

    I am shocked that the National Review has uncovered this.
    It is a truth that should be universally aknowledged that the loudest screechers of 'Why didn't you mention Hamas!!!?' are always utterly silent on the IDF's Gazan activities (unless it's cheerleading them).
    If a person's first response to the worst massacre of Jews since WW2 by a terrorist group (before Israel has taken any action at all) is to condemn Israel not the those carrying out the massacre then people are certainly entitled to draw adverse conclusions about that person's attitudes and prejudices.
    This is his full statement on October 8th. My photo today:


    https://x.com/ZohranKMamdani/status/1711093032907321525
    That's not good.
  • DeclanFDeclanF Posts: 53
    edited 9:51AM
    MattW said:

    DeclanF said:

    Leon said:

    viewcode said:
    Wasn't even particularly close.
    Mandani is going to get the full Islamist Maoist antisemitic bicycle treatment now. Interesting to see how enthusiastically the centrist dad Dems will be about campaigning for him.
    I’ve been rabbit-holing this guy. He’s…. interesting

    The word “anti-Semite” is thrown around far too much, not least by Israelis seeking to deflect from Israeli barbarity - but this guy seems to be the real deal. An anti-Semite. After October 7th his first remarks were mainly aimed at evil Israel and he did not mention Hamas once

    https://www.nationalreview.com/2025/06/zohran-mamdani-is-a-public-menace/

    There is much more

    I am shocked that the National Review has uncovered this.
    It is a truth that should be universally aknowledged that the loudest screechers of 'Why didn't you mention Hamas!!!?' are always utterly silent on the IDF's Gazan activities (unless it's cheerleading them).
    If a person's first response to the worst massacre of Jews since WW2 by a terrorist group (before Israel has taken any action at all) is to condemn Israel not the those carrying out the massacre then people are certainly entitled to draw adverse conclusions about that person's attitudes and prejudices.
    This is his full statement on October 8th. My photo today:


    https://x.com/ZohranKMamdani/status/1711093032907321525
    There is an obvious factual error in his statement. Two in fact.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 35,860
    edited 9:52AM
    Although I'm a fan of Adam Curtis, today's More or Less on Radio 4 — with the help of Sir John Curtice — debunked 4 of the claims that appeared in Adam Curtis's latest documentary Shifty, namely that Mrs Thatcher was behind in the polls during the 1979 election campaign until she made a speech on immigration. As Sir John Curtice pointed out, she wasn't behind in the polls at any stage during the 1979 election campaign, she didn't make a significant speech about immigration, (she made some in early 1978), and the main factor that put the Tories ahead in the polls in early 1979 was the Winter of Discontent. Sloppy of Adam Curtis to make those mistakes, especially when the documentary is about people believing in things that probably aren't true, ie. Thatcherism.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m002dzj6
Sign In or Register to comment.