Skip to content

Could a Healey or Benn finally lead Labour? – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,934
edited 9:27AM in General
Could a Healey or Benn finally lead Labour? – politicalbetting.com

My strategy in this market has generally been to lay Andy Burnham and back long odds bets and I am adding John Healey to that portfolio. He could be the compromise candidate and this has all the hallmarks of being an excellent trading bet.

Read the full story here

«134

Comments

  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 69,510
    I agree but is labour wise ?
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 24,405
    The sun has come out!
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 55,044
    edited 9:32AM
    First,

    Or maybe 3rd like Labour in Gorton and Denton.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 24,405
    Foxy said:

    First,

    Or maybe 3rd like Labour in Gorton and Denton.

    Fifth, like the Tories in Scotland.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 24,405
    33/1 that the Leader of the Opposition will be the next PM.

    Not a great look.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 63,496
    edited 9:39AM

    33/1 that the Leader of the Opposition will be the next PM.

    Not a great look.

    Mr. Rentool, currently that says more about Starmer's political life expectancy than Badenoch's.

    Edited extra bit: that might yet change. My suspicion is Starmer will stay, but we'll see.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 126,221

    33/1 that the Leader of the Opposition will be the next PM.

    Not a great look.

    It's irrelevant, I think Starmer was 66/1 at one point during the last parliament, Dave was 100/1 during 2005 parliament.

    The betting markets are just reflecting the belief Starmer goes before the next election.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 27,584

    33/1 that the Leader of the Opposition will be the next PM.

    Not a great look.

    Mr. Rentool, currently that says more about Starmer's political life expectancy than Badenoch's.

    Edited extra bit: that might yet change. My suspicion is Starmer will stay, but we'll see.
    Indeed - Farage between 12s and 19s.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 24,405

    33/1 that the Leader of the Opposition will be the next PM.

    Not a great look.

    Mr. Rentool, currently that says more about Starmer's political life expectancy than Badenoch's.

    Edited extra bit: that might yet change. My suspicion is Starmer will stay, but we'll see.
    But the leader of a party with a handful of MPs is only 12/1.

    As far as the markets are concerned, the Tories aren't at the races.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 133,829
    edited 9:42AM
    If Starmer resigned then yes a Healey or Benn could replace Sir Keir. Yet there is no sign Starmer will resign and after last night’s Opinium poll putting Labour 7% ahead of the Tories and Reform
    unchanged despite Mandelson, why would he? Rayner would also need 81 MPs to challenge Starmer and no sign of that at present.

    Indeed unless Kemi improves the Tory voteshare and manages to see the Conservatives beat Labour on the NEV after the May local and devolved elections it will likely be her going not Starmer. Not least as Tory MPs have no mercy historically for leaders clearly failing to perform electorally unlike Labour MPs
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 21,539

    33/1 that the Leader of the Opposition will be the next PM.

    Not a great look.

    Mr. Rentool, currently that says more about Starmer's political life expectancy than Badenoch's.
    The odds on any opposition figure being next PM show how few people RTFQ. If we get to 2028 and Labour are on track to lose, they will press the "new leader" emergency button.

    We saw exactly the same happen 2019-24.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 63,496

    33/1 that the Leader of the Opposition will be the next PM.

    Not a great look.

    Mr. Rentool, currently that says more about Starmer's political life expectancy than Badenoch's.

    Edited extra bit: that might yet change. My suspicion is Starmer will stay, but we'll see.
    But the leader of a party with a handful of MPs is only 12/1.

    As far as the markets are concerned, the Tories aren't at the races.
    Mr. Rentool, there are several factors at play with Badenoch's next PM odds being 34.

    1) Chance that Starmer goes pre-election and is replaced by a Labour PM.
    2) Chance that Badenoch is ousted and the Con leader changes.
    3) Chance both stay in post and Badenoch does not get sufficient seats to be PM.

    Right now 1) has a high chance (although personally I think he'll stay) of coming off, much higher than Badenoch's ousting, at the moment.

    As for the Conservatives being behind Reform: yes. That's true of every other party in the polling as well.
  • TazTaz Posts: 24,658
    Another white man leading Labour.

    No.

    The DEI fanatics in the party will demand a woman or a person from a minority. Shabana Mahmood would be ideal but is too mainstream for the members.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 9,728
    Foxy said:

    Taz said:

    fitalass said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Does anyone know why so many of the best PB posters have left the site over the last few years? I'm thinking of people like Antifrank/Alistair Meeks, SouthamObserver, Richard Navabi, Fitalass, etc. I just think it's sad and regrettable that they're not here anymore.

    I was sorry to see Antifrank and David Herdson leave PB, both regularly contributed very insightful and imformative must read regular articles. And I also miss SouthernObserver, Richard Navabi and HurstLlama as well as that ancient old Jacobite rogue JackW who was always teasing us all tried to guess his identity. Sadly I have not been posting as much since Christmas due to ill health.

    There doesn't seem to be such a big pool of cross party contributors these days, and definitely not enough much needed cross party female contributions to add more spice to a broader robust debate across a range of political issues. I still also miss the contributions from the SNP supporting poster Marcia, such a lovely lady and always a pleasure to debate with her on back in the days when we both posted here regularly and before that Indy Referendum tribally turned Scottish political discourse toxic across social media.

    I hate to say it and I know I am not going to be popular, but lads, some nights/weekends on here its like reading the equivalent of watching what I call Fitaloon's and our sons beloved mens shed TV programmes on the documentary channels. And now more than twenty years on from when I first started posting on here I hit the big 60 recently, and I am now officially calling myself the Scottish grumpy female equivalent of MalcolmG!

    Ironic you mention Men’s Sheds. I looked to possibly join one locally as it sounded a worthy thing for men to get together, and can talk about issues. The two local to me are run by women !!

    This board since I first same in 2021 has steadily moved towards ‘my side right or wrong’ and a lack of tolerance of views that the majority posters don’t align with. Be it on US politics, again just look at the bullying of William Glenn over his posts during the US election, or be it on U.K. politics.

    Hopefully your health picks up.
    Going to a PB drinks is quite interesting. Quite a lot of posters I didnt think I would get along with were quite different in person. It changed my online relationships to them afterwards.

    Perhaps it is time for another one.
    I agree. I've been to two or three PB drink events. Great fun. Some people were very different from my mental image of them (eg Cyclefree pretty young thing) but all very friendly.

    I once held an open Zoom session through the night at some election or other. I forget which. About 15-20 turned up including HYUFD who was much younger than I imagined and Peter the Punter much slimmer.
  • DopermeanDopermean Posts: 2,239
    Hilary Benn? I'd be surprised if he got into double figures of MP nominations or even single figures.

    FPT: outrage at British men over Epstein.
    Daily Record has list of Brits linked to Epstein...
    G Maxwell, Andrew MBW, Sarah F, Mandelson, Branson and Hawking. No UK politicians apart from Mandelson.
    https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/entertainment/celebrity/british-celebrities-named-epstein-files-36682313
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 86,169
    Barnesian said:

    Foxy said:

    Taz said:

    fitalass said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Does anyone know why so many of the best PB posters have left the site over the last few years? I'm thinking of people like Antifrank/Alistair Meeks, SouthamObserver, Richard Navabi, Fitalass, etc. I just think it's sad and regrettable that they're not here anymore.

    I was sorry to see Antifrank and David Herdson leave PB, both regularly contributed very insightful and imformative must read regular articles. And I also miss SouthernObserver, Richard Navabi and HurstLlama as well as that ancient old Jacobite rogue JackW who was always teasing us all tried to guess his identity. Sadly I have not been posting as much since Christmas due to ill health.

    There doesn't seem to be such a big pool of cross party contributors these days, and definitely not enough much needed cross party female contributions to add more spice to a broader robust debate across a range of political issues. I still also miss the contributions from the SNP supporting poster Marcia, such a lovely lady and always a pleasure to debate with her on back in the days when we both posted here regularly and before that Indy Referendum tribally turned Scottish political discourse toxic across social media.

    I hate to say it and I know I am not going to be popular, but lads, some nights/weekends on here its like reading the equivalent of watching what I call Fitaloon's and our sons beloved mens shed TV programmes on the documentary channels. And now more than twenty years on from when I first started posting on here I hit the big 60 recently, and I am now officially calling myself the Scottish grumpy female equivalent of MalcolmG!

    Ironic you mention Men’s Sheds. I looked to possibly join one locally as it sounded a worthy thing for men to get together, and can talk about issues. The two local to me are run by women !!

    This board since I first same in 2021 has steadily moved towards ‘my side right or wrong’ and a lack of tolerance of views that the majority posters don’t align with. Be it on US politics, again just look at the bullying of William Glenn over his posts during the US election, or be it on U.K. politics.

    Hopefully your health picks up.
    Going to a PB drinks is quite interesting. Quite a lot of posters I didnt think I would get along with were quite different in person. It changed my online relationships to them afterwards.

    Perhaps it is time for another one.
    I agree. I've been to two or three PB drink events. Great fun. Some people were very different from my mental image of them (eg Cyclefree pretty young thing) but all very friendly.

    I once held an open Zoom session through the night at some election or other. I forget which. About 15-20 turned up including HYUFD who was much younger than I imagined and Peter the Punter much slimmer.
    Did you misread him as Peter the Bunter ?
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 15,336
    FPT

    @fitalass

    Naturally one regrets the loss of top class contributors but twas ever thus on PB. People come and go, and as they do so the character of the site changes like a slowly turning kaleidoscope. Like you, I could make a long list of people who I miss. I'd start with Benedict White, and that really is going back a long way to the time when the Tory Herd was a thing.

    The site goes through its phases, but it has always been light on female contributors. This is no doubt connected to its betting origins. Although we miss the late Plato and the combative Snowflake I should say there are thankfully more women posters now than there have ever been. There are still not enough though, so may I entreat you personally to stick around. There is less misogyny and locker room humour than there used to be but there's still plenty of room for improvement, and I say that as a serial offender. The contributions of Cyclefree and your good self are a helpful corrective.

    Sixty, eh? I hadn't realised you were one of the youngsters. Here's to many more years of Fit contributions.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 24,405
    If Starmer believes he'll have to go at some point, and if he doesn't want Rayner to take over, then an early departure would do the trick.

    If he hangs on until she gets her tax sorted, then she's in the box seat.
  • eekeek Posts: 32,500
    edited 9:49AM
    Taz said:

    Another white man leading Labour.

    No.

    The DEI fanatics in the party will demand a woman or a person from a minority. Shabana Mahmood would be ideal but is too mainstream for the members.

    Too right wing for the members - its why Angela is the winner unless SKS goes early before HMRC are finished "investigating" (they won't be btw as that isn't how HMRC works) and even then I think Angela will try and stand.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 21,539
    The other argument against Healey is that he's 65. Does he really want to be fronting the government and a general election campaign, let alone in three years time? This isn't the United States, after all.
  • Brixian59Brixian59 Posts: 171
    Couple of interesting takes from Mcfadden on LK

    Accepting he's a high competent politician, well respected and a good communicator.

    Accepting too he's worked for and with Mandelson pre 2010.

    Noticable the time and care and diligence he took to answer questions re recent contact with Mandelson
    Clearly everyone is going to be very careful to be accurate.

    It also struck me that this purge of information and data gathering may actually have the side effect of trawling up some potentially damaging detail on a completely different hot topic

    A topic that has the propensity to deeply embarrass the main Opposition Party and Reform.

    As a passionate pro Zionist, Friend of Israel and apologist of Netanyahu, Mandelson will no doubt have friends and confidants accross that Spectrum too and links to similar in Israel and the Trump administration

    This investigation could snowball in to deep uncharted waters.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 16,811

    FPT

    @fitalass

    Naturally one regrets the loss of top class contributors but twas ever thus on PB. People come and go, and as they do so the character of the site changes like a slowly turning kaleidoscope. Like you, I could make a long list of people who I miss. I'd start with Benedict White, and that really is going back a long way to the time when the Tory Herd was a thing.

    The site goes through its phases, but it has always been light on female contributors. This is no doubt connected to its betting origins. Although we miss the late Plato and the combative Snowflake I should say there are thankfully more women posters now than there have ever been. There are still not enough though, so may I entreat you personally to stick around. There is less misogyny and locker room humour than there used to be but there's still plenty of room for improvement, and I say that as a serial offender. The contributions of Cyclefree and your good self are a helpful corrective.
    ŵ
    Sixty, eh? I hadn't realised you were one of the youngsters. Here's to many more years of Fit contributions.

    No single reason why posters move on, except that the past <> the present. People find other things to do with their time. Chatting here is a hobby, nothing more.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 15,057
    edited 10:02AM
    I am still at a loss to understand how Lammy is still in post this morning.
    Has Starmers authority completely evaporated??
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 36,660
    Barnesian said:

    Foxy said:

    Taz said:

    fitalass said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Does anyone know why so many of the best PB posters have left the site over the last few years? I'm thinking of people like Antifrank/Alistair Meeks, SouthamObserver, Richard Navabi, Fitalass, etc. I just think it's sad and regrettable that they're not here anymore.

    I was sorry to see Antifrank and David Herdson leave PB, both regularly contributed very insightful and imformative must read regular articles. And I also miss SouthernObserver, Richard Navabi and HurstLlama as well as that ancient old Jacobite rogue JackW who was always teasing us all tried to guess his identity. Sadly I have not been posting as much since Christmas due to ill health.

    There doesn't seem to be such a big pool of cross party contributors these days, and definitely not enough much needed cross party female contributions to add more spice to a broader robust debate across a range of political issues. I still also miss the contributions from the SNP supporting poster Marcia, such a lovely lady and always a pleasure to debate with her on back in the days when we both posted here regularly and before that Indy Referendum tribally turned Scottish political discourse toxic across social media.

    I hate to say it and I know I am not going to be popular, but lads, some nights/weekends on here its like reading the equivalent of watching what I call Fitaloon's and our sons beloved mens shed TV programmes on the documentary channels. And now more than twenty years on from when I first started posting on here I hit the big 60 recently, and I am now officially calling myself the Scottish grumpy female equivalent of MalcolmG!

    Ironic you mention Men’s Sheds. I looked to possibly join one locally as it sounded a worthy thing for men to get together, and can talk about issues. The two local to me are run by women !!

    This board since I first same in 2021 has steadily moved towards ‘my side right or wrong’ and a lack of tolerance of views that the majority posters don’t align with. Be it on US politics, again just look at the bullying of William Glenn over his posts during the US election, or be it on U.K. politics.

    Hopefully your health picks up.
    Going to a PB drinks is quite interesting. Quite a lot of posters I didnt think I would get along with were quite different in person. It changed my online relationships to them afterwards.

    Perhaps it is time for another one.
    I agree. I've been to two or three PB drink events. Great fun. Some people were very different from my mental image of them (eg Cyclefree pretty young thing) but all very friendly.

    I once held an open Zoom session through the night at some election or other. I forget which. About 15-20 turned up including HYUFD who was much younger than I imagined and Peter the Punter much slimmer.
    Good morning everyone. A little foggy this morning but at least it's dry!

    No way I could get to a drinks event nowadays but I'd be happy to go to a Zoom and provide my own drink!. I go to three or four a month (mostly u3a and u3acommunities ...... two different organisations) but they're not as good as face-to-face for casual chat.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 12,522

    I am still at a loss to understand how Lammy is still in post this morning.
    Has Starmers authority completely evaporated??

    Well the quotes seem to have been from 'friends of Lammy' rather than direct.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 69,510
    edited 10:10AM
    HYUFD said:

    If Starmer resigned then yes a Healey or Benn could replace Sir Keir. Yet there is no sign Starmer will resign and after last night’s Opinium poll putting Labour 7% ahead of the Tories and Reform
    unchanged despite Mandelson, why would he? Rayner would also need 81 MPs to challenge Starmer and no sign of that at present.

    Indeed unless Kemi improves the Tory voteshare and manages to see the Conservatives beat Labour on the NEV after the May local and devolved elections it will likely be her going not Starmer. Not least as Tory MPs have no mercy historically for leaders clearly failing to perform electorally unlike Labour MPs

    The ladies on the panel on Trevor Phillips furiously attacked the man's club in politics which you certainly qualify for with your relentless anti Kemi propaganda

    The Telegraph does not agree with you

    Kemi Badenoch: ‘Starmer knew Mandelson was still friends with Epstein. He chose not to care’

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/02/07/kemi-badenoch-interview-starmer-mandelson-epstein/
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 21,539
    Brixian59 said:

    Couple of interesting takes from Mcfadden on LK

    Accepting he's a high competent politician, well respected and a good communicator.

    Accepting too he's worked for and with Mandelson pre 2010.

    Noticable the time and care and diligence he took to answer questions re recent contact with Mandelson
    Clearly everyone is going to be very careful to be accurate.

    It also struck me that this purge of information and data gathering may actually have the side effect of trawling up some potentially damaging detail on a completely different hot topic

    A topic that has the propensity to deeply embarrass the main Opposition Party and Reform.

    As a passionate pro Zionist, Friend of Israel and apologist of Netanyahu, Mandelson will no doubt have friends and confidants accross that Spectrum too and links to similar in Israel and the Trump administration

    This investigation could snowball in to deep uncharted waters.

    The surprise would be if it didn't.

    Remember the expenses scandal?
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 15,057
    'David, go out and tell them the Telegraph story is untrue or you are dismissed'
    Just helping you out here, Keir
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 36,660
    In sports news England 57-3 off 6 overs against Nepal. Looks like a good effort from the Nepalese.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 89,888

    In sports news England 57-3 off 6 overs against Nepal. Looks like a good effort from the Nepalese.

    Good job England bat deep.....
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 15,057
    Omnium said:

    I am still at a loss to understand how Lammy is still in post this morning.
    Has Starmers authority completely evaporated??

    Well the quotes seem to have been from 'friends of Lammy' rather than direct.
    Yes, so id assume Starmer should be telling him to refute the story publically and back him or go
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 12,522

    Omnium said:

    I am still at a loss to understand how Lammy is still in post this morning.
    Has Starmers authority completely evaporated??

    Well the quotes seem to have been from 'friends of Lammy' rather than direct.
    Yes, so id assume Starmer should be telling him to refute the story publically and back him or go
    Well I suspect the story itself is true. But perhaps Lammy didn't authorise anyone to say so on his behalf. So really not much can be said. Just guessing of course.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 27,341
    WTAF is 'AI-mentum'?
  • stodgestodge Posts: 16,030

    FPT

    @fitalass

    Naturally one regrets the loss of top class contributors but twas ever thus on PB. People come and go, and as they do so the character of the site changes like a slowly turning kaleidoscope. Like you, I could make a long list of people who I miss. I'd start with Benedict White, and that really is going back a long way to the time when the Tory Herd was a thing.

    The site goes through its phases, but it has always been light on female contributors. This is no doubt connected to its betting origins. Although we miss the late Plato and the combative Snowflake I should say there are thankfully more women posters now than there have ever been. There are still not enough though, so may I entreat you personally to stick around. There is less misogyny and locker room humour than there used to be but there's still plenty of room for improvement, and I say that as a serial offender. The contributions of Cyclefree and your good self are a helpful corrective.

    Sixty, eh? I hadn't realised you were one of the youngsters. Here's to many more years of Fit contributions.

    You're not wrong, my friend. I'd add such alumni as @MarkSenior and the @HYUFD of his time, Richard Willis.

    Broadly speaking, the site has been anti-"Left" and anti-"Labour" for most of its existence. That doesn't translate to "it's all just Tories" and there was plenty of criticism of the Conservatives in Government though more often of the Mail-esque "why aren't you governing like Conservatives and cutting my taxes?" angle.

    LDs have always been over represented, I'll cheerfully admit that.

    The coming of social media has been the game changer - whereas individuals had to form their own arguments in posts, now they can run off to X or Bluesky or wherever and simply "cut and paste" that so instead of being a forum for political debate, it becomes a forum for political and news reportage and instant (over)reaction to events.

    The betting aspect has never perhaps been as strong as Mike Smithson wanted and that's probably because the bookies have gotten wise to politics in a way they weren't 25-30 years ago. I won a lot of money in the 1997 election betting on LD seat gains which I could see and even the local independent bookie in Carshalton couldn't.

    The market mentioned in the thread is unappealing unless you want a speculative wager. IF you think Starmer will walk away before the next election, you can play on the Labour possibles but if he chooses to tough it out, given three years is an eternity in politics, assuming one of the non-Labour options will succeed is probably wishful thinking and bookies love people who bet on sentiment (they coin it in every World Cup when patriotic punters play at unrealistic prices and lose their cash).

    To be honest, I'd rather play on the all weather card at Lingfield.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 9,464
    "Our first thoughts should be for the victims". This, by Labour defenders, is a way of obfuscating the most serious allegations against Mandelson, namely the treachery of relaying confidential information from Cabinet discussions to American bankers.
  • eekeek Posts: 32,500

    'David, go out and tell them the Telegraph story is untrue or you are dismissed'
    Just helping you out here, Keir

    Dismiss me and see who else decides to have a few weeks holiday from cabinet...

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 126,221
    Starmer needs to hang on for 38 days to beat Sunak, and 63 for Eden, though I'm pretty convinced that most of the people he's beaten lately are pubs and not actual Prime Ministers



    https://x.com/BristOliver/status/2020440661493751918/photo/1
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 27,341
    Brixian59 said:

    Couple of interesting takes from Mcfadden on LK

    Accepting he's a high competent politician, well respected and a good communicator.

    Accepting too he's worked for and with Mandelson pre 2010.

    Noticable the time and care and diligence he took to answer questions re recent contact with Mandelson
    Clearly everyone is going to be very careful to be accurate.

    It also struck me that this purge of information and data gathering may actually have the side effect of trawling up some potentially damaging detail on a completely different hot topic

    A topic that has the propensity to deeply embarrass the main Opposition Party and Reform.

    As a passionate pro Zionist, Friend of Israel and apologist of Netanyahu, Mandelson will no doubt have friends and confidants accross that Spectrum too and links to similar in Israel and the Trump administration

    This investigation could snowball in to deep uncharted waters.

    I thought you were one of our Saturday morning 'regulars', but are you actually @Roger in disguise?

    Its not about paedophilia and the sexual abuse and trafficking of girls and women, no, its actually 'Zionists' that are the issue. 🤮
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 7,434
    I wonder why Blair And Campbell have been silent.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 15,057
    edited 10:17AM
    Omnium said:

    Omnium said:

    I am still at a loss to understand how Lammy is still in post this morning.
    Has Starmers authority completely evaporated??

    Well the quotes seem to have been from 'friends of Lammy' rather than direct.
    Yes, so id assume Starmer should be telling him to refute the story publically and back him or go
    Well I suspect the story itself is true. But perhaps Lammy didn't authorise anyone to say so on his behalf. So really not much can be said. Just guessing of course.
    Which means the deputy PM is now 'on record' failing in his collective responsibility and backing the boss responsibilities
    He has to correct that record or go. Or SKS is demonstrably a lame duck
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 15,057
    eek said:

    'David, go out and tell them the Telegraph story is untrue or you are dismissed'
    Just helping you out here, Keir

    Dismiss me and see who else decides to have a few weeks holiday from cabinet...

    Which brings us to SKS is a lame duck and must himself go
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 69,510
    Cyclefree said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:
    Interesting the ladies on the Trevor Phillips programme are incandescent that this is all about men acting as if they are the victims from Mandelson, to Blair, Brown, Starmer and in the US

    They reminded viewers it is the female victims who are wronged not an international mans club


    Ahem ...... as I have been saying.

    "Phallic drift": The powerful tendency for public discussion of female issues to drift, inexorably, back to the male point of view.

    If we really want serious change, instead of focusing on yet another process of what it means for the future career of this or that politician, perhaps the Gordon Browns of this world (especially the Gordon Brown who brought Mandelson back into government, who employed the McBride who decided to spin luridly sexual lies about Tory women) and other commentators could just this once - and for a change - stop giving us their views and learn to listen to women, really listen. They could accept that they have been wrong to ignore what women have been saying for YEARS. They could discuss - just for once - what should be done now for women rather than simply trotting out the same old empty cliches about strategies against VAWG while promulgating policies which make this more likely or do damn all about it. They might also think about what this case, the Pelicot one, the Joanne Young one, grooming gangs, the consistent murder rate of women by men, the language used to describe women if they so much as complain about any of this, and many many other examples say about male behaviour and society's tolerance of it.

    Women don't need talking heads. What we want and need are politicians - male or female - who show some genuine interest in improving matters for women, have effective plans to make this happen and the courage and determination to see these through. We've been waiting long enough. And we are both unsurprised by any of this and utterly bloody furious.

    As you have often said, this forum has so little women representation and maybe we should ask why

    You and @fitalass have a real case, and I have an instinct that the 'mans club' in politics is about to see a women's movement even similar to the suffragettes rising up and saying enough

    We see it on here with men pilling into Kemi Badenoch, one of only 2 high profile women in politics at present

    Mandelson's outrage must lead to the end of the mans club both here and abroad
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 27,341

    Omnium said:

    Omnium said:

    I am still at a loss to understand how Lammy is still in post this morning.
    Has Starmers authority completely evaporated??

    Well the quotes seem to have been from 'friends of Lammy' rather than direct.
    Yes, so id assume Starmer should be telling him to refute the story publically and back him or go
    Well I suspect the story itself is true. But perhaps Lammy didn't authorise anyone to say so on his behalf. So really not much can be said. Just guessing of course.
    Which means the deputy PM is now 'on record' failing in his collective responsibility and backing the boss responsibilities
    He has to correct that record or go. Or SKS is demonstrably a lame duck
    Not the way its ever worked. 'Friends of' is quite standard UK journalist code for off the record, not on the record.

    And silence is quite standard too, when you don't want to say anything.

    If directly asked, he could obfuscate or say something one way or another, or try to change the topic - again all standard ways for politicians to respond.

    Its not on the record, until he says something on the record.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 126,221

    Cyclefree said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:
    Interesting the ladies on the Trevor Phillips programme are incandescent that this is all about men acting as if they are the victims from Mandelson, to Blair, Brown, Starmer and in the US

    They reminded viewers it is the female victims who are wronged not an international mans club


    Ahem ...... as I have been saying.

    "Phallic drift": The powerful tendency for public discussion of female issues to drift, inexorably, back to the male point of view.

    If we really want serious change, instead of focusing on yet another process of what it means for the future career of this or that politician, perhaps the Gordon Browns of this world (especially the Gordon Brown who brought Mandelson back into government, who employed the McBride who decided to spin luridly sexual lies about Tory women) and other commentators could just this once - and for a change - stop giving us their views and learn to listen to women, really listen. They could accept that they have been wrong to ignore what women have been saying for YEARS. They could discuss - just for once - what should be done now for women rather than simply trotting out the same old empty cliches about strategies against VAWG while promulgating policies which make this more likely or do damn all about it. They might also think about what this case, the Pelicot one, the Joanne Young one, grooming gangs, the consistent murder rate of women by men, the language used to describe women if they so much as complain about any of this, and many many other examples say about male behaviour and society's tolerance of it.

    Women don't need talking heads. What we want and need are politicians - male or female - who show some genuine interest in improving matters for women, have effective plans to make this happen and the courage and determination to see these through. We've been waiting long enough. And we are both unsurprised by any of this and utterly bloody furious.

    As you have often said, this forum has so little women representation and maybe we should ask why

    You and @fitalass have a real case, and I have an instinct that the 'mans club' in politics is about to see a women's movement even similar to the suffragettes rising up and saying enough

    We see it on here with men pilling into Kemi Badenoch, one of only 2 high profile women in politics at present

    Mandelson's outrage must lead to the end of the mans club both here and abroad
    So you're saying any criticism of Rachel Reeves is misogyny?
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 24,405

    Starmer needs to hang on for 38 days to beat Sunak, and 63 for Eden, though I'm pretty convinced that most of the people he's beaten lately are pubs and not actual Prime Ministers



    https://x.com/BristOliver/status/2020440661493751918/photo/1

    "pubs and not actual Prime Ministers"

    First LOL of the day
  • RogerRoger Posts: 22,092
    Cookie said:

    FPT

    @fitalass

    Naturally one regrets the loss of top class contributors but twas ever thus on PB. People come and go, and as they do so the character of the site changes like a slowly turning kaleidoscope. Like you, I could make a long list of people who I miss. I'd start with Benedict White, and that really is going back a long way to the time when the Tory Herd was a thing.

    The site goes through its phases, but it has always been light on female contributors. This is no doubt connected to its betting origins. Although we miss the late Plato and the combative Snowflake I should say there are thankfully more women posters now than there have ever been. There are still not enough though, so may I entreat you personally to stick around. There is less misogyny and locker room humour than there used to be but there's still plenty of room for improvement, and I say that as a serial offender. The contributions of Cyclefree and your good self are a helpful corrective.
    ŵ
    Sixty, eh? I hadn't realised you were one of the youngsters. Here's to many more years of Fit contributions.

    No single reason why posters move on, except that the past <> the present. People find other things to do with their time. Chatting here is a hobby, nothing more.
    I see it like a newspaper. If a Hartley Brewer or a Littlejohn arrive and bring their racist bile with them those like myself who find if offensive will move off.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 69,510

    Cyclefree said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:
    Interesting the ladies on the Trevor Phillips programme are incandescent that this is all about men acting as if they are the victims from Mandelson, to Blair, Brown, Starmer and in the US

    They reminded viewers it is the female victims who are wronged not an international mans club


    Ahem ...... as I have been saying.

    "Phallic drift": The powerful tendency for public discussion of female issues to drift, inexorably, back to the male point of view.

    If we really want serious change, instead of focusing on yet another process of what it means for the future career of this or that politician, perhaps the Gordon Browns of this world (especially the Gordon Brown who brought Mandelson back into government, who employed the McBride who decided to spin luridly sexual lies about Tory women) and other commentators could just this once - and for a change - stop giving us their views and learn to listen to women, really listen. They could accept that they have been wrong to ignore what women have been saying for YEARS. They could discuss - just for once - what should be done now for women rather than simply trotting out the same old empty cliches about strategies against VAWG while promulgating policies which make this more likely or do damn all about it. They might also think about what this case, the Pelicot one, the Joanne Young one, grooming gangs, the consistent murder rate of women by men, the language used to describe women if they so much as complain about any of this, and many many other examples say about male behaviour and society's tolerance of it.

    Women don't need talking heads. What we want and need are politicians - male or female - who show some genuine interest in improving matters for women, have effective plans to make this happen and the courage and determination to see these through. We've been waiting long enough. And we are both unsurprised by any of this and utterly bloody furious.

    As you have often said, this forum has so little women representation and maybe we should ask why

    You and @fitalass have a real case, and I have an instinct that the 'mans club' in politics is about to see a women's movement even similar to the suffragettes rising up and saying enough

    We see it on here with men pilling into Kemi Badenoch, one of only 2 high profile women in politics at present

    Mandelson's outrage must lead to the end of the mans club both here and abroad
    So you're saying any criticism of Rachel Reeves is misogyny?
    You miss the point
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 126,221

    I wonder why Blair And Campbell have been silent.

    Bad Al has his own legal and financial problems.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 15,057
    edited 10:26AM
    I was thinking about Rentouls rather daft 'nuclear option' (GE) piece........
    SKS tells cabinet to back him or he will call a GE and immediately stand down as leader forcing Labour to agree a leader post haste and stumble into an election.
    Nah, thats a Boris move
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 27,341

    Cyclefree said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:
    Interesting the ladies on the Trevor Phillips programme are incandescent that this is all about men acting as if they are the victims from Mandelson, to Blair, Brown, Starmer and in the US

    They reminded viewers it is the female victims who are wronged not an international mans club


    Ahem ...... as I have been saying.

    "Phallic drift": The powerful tendency for public discussion of female issues to drift, inexorably, back to the male point of view.

    If we really want serious change, instead of focusing on yet another process of what it means for the future career of this or that politician, perhaps the Gordon Browns of this world (especially the Gordon Brown who brought Mandelson back into government, who employed the McBride who decided to spin luridly sexual lies about Tory women) and other commentators could just this once - and for a change - stop giving us their views and learn to listen to women, really listen. They could accept that they have been wrong to ignore what women have been saying for YEARS. They could discuss - just for once - what should be done now for women rather than simply trotting out the same old empty cliches about strategies against VAWG while promulgating policies which make this more likely or do damn all about it. They might also think about what this case, the Pelicot one, the Joanne Young one, grooming gangs, the consistent murder rate of women by men, the language used to describe women if they so much as complain about any of this, and many many other examples say about male behaviour and society's tolerance of it.

    Women don't need talking heads. What we want and need are politicians - male or female - who show some genuine interest in improving matters for women, have effective plans to make this happen and the courage and determination to see these through. We've been waiting long enough. And we are both unsurprised by any of this and utterly bloody furious.

    As you have often said, this forum has so little women representation and maybe we should ask why

    You and @fitalass have a real case, and I have an instinct that the 'mans club' in politics is about to see a women's movement even similar to the suffragettes rising up and saying enough

    We see it on here with men pilling into Kemi Badenoch, one of only 2 high profile women in politics at present

    Mandelson's outrage must lead to the end of the mans club both here and abroad
    Don't be so precious, Badenoch is Tory leader.

    In the entire history of this site, name me any Tory leader ever that has not had men piling in to criticise them.

    It goes with the territory.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 16,030

    WTAF is 'AI-mentum'?

    As you well know, it's the idea a political unknown like Al Carns could be the next Prime Minister.

    He ticks a couple of boxes - reasonably photogenic, military background but it's a real leap in the dark to imagine him as PM. Could he move up the Cabinet? Yes, certainly and in time he could well be a serious contender.

    It looks desperate - it could work and redefine politics for the next two decades or he could be Labour's Liz Truss, who knows?

    My current view, and this won't surprise, is Starmer is going nowhere unless he wants to go somewhere. I've been disappointed by him but not surprised - it's not the timidity or the caution that's the problem but the lack of any policy which could be called "radical". Where is the response to child poverty, homelessness, addiction problems etc, etc? If a majority of 170 doesn't give you a mandate to do something, we might as well end elections.

    It's not as though the "Right" (whatever that means) has anything to offer either which is the tragedy of all this.

    It's left to Reform or the Greens or groups like the Newham Independents to make big policy pronouncements and promise the Sun, the Moon and the stars but you and I both know they are all fiscally incoherent in extremis but desperate, disillusioned people will once again sign up to the nonsense.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 60,611

    I am still at a loss to understand how Lammy is still in post this morning.
    Has Starmers authority completely evaporated??

    Starmer has, himself, publicly described his personal lack of power.

    See his speech on not being able to do things.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 27,341
    stodge said:

    WTAF is 'AI-mentum'?

    As you well know, it's the idea a political unknown like Al Carns could be the next Prime Minister.

    He ticks a couple of boxes - reasonably photogenic, military background but it's a real leap in the dark to imagine him as PM. Could he move up the Cabinet? Yes, certainly and in time he could well be a serious contender.

    It looks desperate - it could work and redefine politics for the next two decades or he could be Labour's Liz Truss, who knows?

    My current view, and this won't surprise, is Starmer is going nowhere unless he wants to go somewhere. I've been disappointed by him but not surprised - it's not the timidity or the caution that's the problem but the lack of any policy which could be called "radical". Where is the response to child poverty, homelessness, addiction problems etc, etc? If a majority of 170 doesn't give you a mandate to do something, we might as well end elections.

    It's not as though the "Right" (whatever that means) has anything to offer either which is the tragedy of all this.

    It's left to Reform or the Greens or groups like the Newham Independents to make big policy pronouncements and promise the Sun, the Moon and the stars but you and I both know they are all fiscally incoherent in extremis but desperate, disillusioned people will once again sign up to the nonsense.
    Ah!

    Too early in the morning, didn't think about the fact that his name was Al, though its still a stupid term (and idea).

    I read it as AI (Artificial Intelligence) and thought what preposterous nonsense is this?
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 69,510
    edited 10:34AM

    Cyclefree said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:
    Interesting the ladies on the Trevor Phillips programme are incandescent that this is all about men acting as if they are the victims from Mandelson, to Blair, Brown, Starmer and in the US

    They reminded viewers it is the female victims who are wronged not an international mans club


    Ahem ...... as I have been saying.

    "Phallic drift": The powerful tendency for public discussion of female issues to drift, inexorably, back to the male point of view.

    If we really want serious change, instead of focusing on yet another process of what it means for the future career of this or that politician, perhaps the Gordon Browns of this world (especially the Gordon Brown who brought Mandelson back into government, who employed the McBride who decided to spin luridly sexual lies about Tory women) and other commentators could just this once - and for a change - stop giving us their views and learn to listen to women, really listen. They could accept that they have been wrong to ignore what women have been saying for YEARS. They could discuss - just for once - what should be done now for women rather than simply trotting out the same old empty cliches about strategies against VAWG while promulgating policies which make this more likely or do damn all about it. They might also think about what this case, the Pelicot one, the Joanne Young one, grooming gangs, the consistent murder rate of women by men, the language used to describe women if they so much as complain about any of this, and many many other examples say about male behaviour and society's tolerance of it.

    Women don't need talking heads. What we want and need are politicians - male or female - who show some genuine interest in improving matters for women, have effective plans to make this happen and the courage and determination to see these through. We've been waiting long enough. And we are both unsurprised by any of this and utterly bloody furious.

    As you have often said, this forum has so little women representation and maybe we should ask why

    You and @fitalass have a real case, and I have an instinct that the 'mans club' in politics is about to see a women's movement even similar to the suffragettes rising up and saying enough

    We see it on here with men pilling into Kemi Badenoch, one of only 2 high profile women in politics at present

    Mandelson's outrage must lead to the end of the mans club both here and abroad
    Don't be so precious, Badenoch is Tory leader.

    In the entire history of this site, name me any Tory leader ever that has not had men piling in to criticise them.

    It goes with the territory.
    Of course she should be criticised when it is justified, but at present she is the one leading politician receiving praise for her improvement

    The wider point is womans anger at the mans club in politics and power
  • RogerRoger Posts: 22,092

    Cyclefree said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:
    Interesting the ladies on the Trevor Phillips programme are incandescent that this is all about men acting as if they are the victims from Mandelson, to Blair, Brown, Starmer and in the US

    They reminded viewers it is the female victims who are wronged not an international mans club


    Ahem ...... as I have been saying.

    "Phallic drift": The powerful tendency for public discussion of female issues to drift, inexorably, back to the male point of view.

    If we really want serious change, instead of focusing on yet another process of what it means for the future career of this or that politician, perhaps the Gordon Browns of this world (especially the Gordon Brown who brought Mandelson back into government, who employed the McBride who decided to spin luridly sexual lies about Tory women) and other commentators could just this once - and for a change - stop giving us their views and learn to listen to women, really listen. They could accept that they have been wrong to ignore what women have been saying for YEARS. They could discuss - just for once - what should be done now for women rather than simply trotting out the same old empty cliches about strategies against VAWG while promulgating policies which make this more likely or do damn all about it. They might also think about what this case, the Pelicot one, the Joanne Young one, grooming gangs, the consistent murder rate of women by men, the language used to describe women if they so much as complain about any of this, and many many other examples say about male behaviour and society's tolerance of it.

    Women don't need talking heads. What we want and need are politicians - male or female - who show some genuine interest in improving matters for women, have effective plans to make this happen and the courage and determination to see these through. We've been waiting long enough. And we are both unsurprised by any of this and utterly bloody furious.

    As you have often said, this forum has so little women representation and maybe we should ask why

    You and @fitalass have a real case, and I have an instinct that the 'mans club' in politics is about to see a women's movement even similar to the suffragettes rising up and saying enough

    We see it on here with men pilling into Kemi Badenoch, one of only 2 high profile women in politics at present

    Mandelson's outrage must lead to the end of the mans club both here and abroad
    What is Mandelson's outrage? How should we behave towards Kemi?
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 27,341

    Cyclefree said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:
    Interesting the ladies on the Trevor Phillips programme are incandescent that this is all about men acting as if they are the victims from Mandelson, to Blair, Brown, Starmer and in the US

    They reminded viewers it is the female victims who are wronged not an international mans club


    Ahem ...... as I have been saying.

    "Phallic drift": The powerful tendency for public discussion of female issues to drift, inexorably, back to the male point of view.

    If we really want serious change, instead of focusing on yet another process of what it means for the future career of this or that politician, perhaps the Gordon Browns of this world (especially the Gordon Brown who brought Mandelson back into government, who employed the McBride who decided to spin luridly sexual lies about Tory women) and other commentators could just this once - and for a change - stop giving us their views and learn to listen to women, really listen. They could accept that they have been wrong to ignore what women have been saying for YEARS. They could discuss - just for once - what should be done now for women rather than simply trotting out the same old empty cliches about strategies against VAWG while promulgating policies which make this more likely or do damn all about it. They might also think about what this case, the Pelicot one, the Joanne Young one, grooming gangs, the consistent murder rate of women by men, the language used to describe women if they so much as complain about any of this, and many many other examples say about male behaviour and society's tolerance of it.

    Women don't need talking heads. What we want and need are politicians - male or female - who show some genuine interest in improving matters for women, have effective plans to make this happen and the courage and determination to see these through. We've been waiting long enough. And we are both unsurprised by any of this and utterly bloody furious.

    As you have often said, this forum has so little women representation and maybe we should ask why

    You and @fitalass have a real case, and I have an instinct that the 'mans club' in politics is about to see a women's movement even similar to the suffragettes rising up and saying enough

    We see it on here with men pilling into Kemi Badenoch, one of only 2 high profile women in politics at present

    Mandelson's outrage must lead to the end of the mans club both here and abroad
    Don't be so precious, Badenoch is Tory leader.

    In the entire history of this site, name me any Tory leader ever that has not had men piling in to criticise them.

    It goes with the territory.
    Of course she should be criticised when it is justified, but at present she is the one leading politician receiving praise for her improvement

    The wider point is womans anger at the mans club in poltics and power
    Her being Tory leader is all the justification some people need to seek to criticise her.

    See also Starmer and any other major party leader ever.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 60,611

    Brixian59 said:

    Couple of interesting takes from Mcfadden on LK

    Accepting he's a high competent politician, well respected and a good communicator.

    Accepting too he's worked for and with Mandelson pre 2010.

    Noticable the time and care and diligence he took to answer questions re recent contact with Mandelson
    Clearly everyone is going to be very careful to be accurate.

    It also struck me that this purge of information and data gathering may actually have the side effect of trawling up some potentially damaging detail on a completely different hot topic

    A topic that has the propensity to deeply embarrass the main Opposition Party and Reform.

    As a passionate pro Zionist, Friend of Israel and apologist of Netanyahu, Mandelson will no doubt have friends and confidants accross that Spectrum too and links to similar in Israel and the Trump administration

    This investigation could snowball in to deep uncharted waters.

    I thought you were one of our Saturday morning 'regulars', but are you actually @Roger in disguise?

    Its not about paedophilia and the sexual abuse and trafficking of girls and women, no, its actually 'Zionists' that are the issue. 🤮
    Just the usual - trying to bend the scandal to match the prejudices of the correspondent.

    The scandal starts with the abuse of women*. Much of it about expressing power - being in the “in club”.

    It further metastasised into the world of favours, money.

    The final touch is the near complete unaccountability. Up til now.

    *mostly. Epstein abused victims of both sexes, but the vast majority were women.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 69,510
    Roger said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:
    Interesting the ladies on the Trevor Phillips programme are incandescent that this is all about men acting as if they are the victims from Mandelson, to Blair, Brown, Starmer and in the US

    They reminded viewers it is the female victims who are wronged not an international mans club


    Ahem ...... as I have been saying.

    "Phallic drift": The powerful tendency for public discussion of female issues to drift, inexorably, back to the male point of view.

    If we really want serious change, instead of focusing on yet another process of what it means for the future career of this or that politician, perhaps the Gordon Browns of this world (especially the Gordon Brown who brought Mandelson back into government, who employed the McBride who decided to spin luridly sexual lies about Tory women) and other commentators could just this once - and for a change - stop giving us their views and learn to listen to women, really listen. They could accept that they have been wrong to ignore what women have been saying for YEARS. They could discuss - just for once - what should be done now for women rather than simply trotting out the same old empty cliches about strategies against VAWG while promulgating policies which make this more likely or do damn all about it. They might also think about what this case, the Pelicot one, the Joanne Young one, grooming gangs, the consistent murder rate of women by men, the language used to describe women if they so much as complain about any of this, and many many other examples say about male behaviour and society's tolerance of it.

    Women don't need talking heads. What we want and need are politicians - male or female - who show some genuine interest in improving matters for women, have effective plans to make this happen and the courage and determination to see these through. We've been waiting long enough. And we are both unsurprised by any of this and utterly bloody furious.

    As you have often said, this forum has so little women representation and maybe we should ask why

    You and @fitalass have a real case, and I have an instinct that the 'mans club' in politics is about to see a women's movement even similar to the suffragettes rising up and saying enough

    We see it on here with men pilling into Kemi Badenoch, one of only 2 high profile women in politics at present

    Mandelson's outrage must lead to the end of the mans club both here and abroad
    What is Mandelson's outrage? How should we behave towards Kemi?
    Listen to the women on this mornings programmes and you will see
  • maxhmaxh Posts: 1,900

    Cyclefree said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:
    Interesting the ladies on the Trevor Phillips programme are incandescent that this is all about men acting as if they are the victims from Mandelson, to Blair, Brown, Starmer and in the US

    They reminded viewers it is the female victims who are wronged not an international mans club


    Ahem ...... as I have been saying.

    "Phallic drift": The powerful tendency for public discussion of female issues to drift, inexorably, back to the male point of view.

    If we really want serious change, instead of focusing on yet another process of what it means for the future career of this or that politician, perhaps the Gordon Browns of this world (especially the Gordon Brown who brought Mandelson back into government, who employed the McBride who decided to spin luridly sexual lies about Tory women) and other commentators could just this once - and for a change - stop giving us their views and learn to listen to women, really listen. They could accept that they have been wrong to ignore what women have been saying for YEARS. They could discuss - just for once - what should be done now for women rather than simply trotting out the same old empty cliches about strategies against VAWG while promulgating policies which make this more likely or do damn all about it. They might also think about what this case, the Pelicot one, the Joanne Young one, grooming gangs, the consistent murder rate of women by men, the language used to describe women if they so much as complain about any of this, and many many other examples say about male behaviour and society's tolerance of it.

    Women don't need talking heads. What we want and need are politicians - male or female - who show some genuine interest in improving matters for women, have effective plans to make this happen and the courage and determination to see these through. We've been waiting long enough. And we are both unsurprised by any of this and utterly bloody furious.

    As you have often said, this forum has so little women representation and maybe we should ask why

    You and @fitalass have a real case, and I have an instinct that the 'mans club' in politics is about to see a women's movement even similar to the suffragettes rising up and saying enough

    We see it on here with men pilling into Kemi Badenoch, one of only 2 high profile women in politics at present

    Mandelson's outrage must lead to the end of the mans club both here and abroad
    Don't be so precious, Badenoch is Tory leader.

    In the entire history of this site, name me any Tory leader ever that has not had men piling in to criticise them.

    It goes with the territory.
    Both things can be true. Any leader of any political party will get piled into on here, with good cause. And on this site and elsewhere that will be mostly men, because this site is dominated by men.

    But it is also true that women are not heard in politics in the same way as men are, whether the woman is a leader, pundit or nerd on a political site. Politics is fascinating (partly) because it is about power, and men and women hold power in different (not so say unequal) ways.

    Cyclefree's point about cliches and strategies about combatting violence against women and girls whilst promulgating a society that engenders exactly this violence rings particularly true for me.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 45,817

    Omnium said:

    Omnium said:

    I am still at a loss to understand how Lammy is still in post this morning.
    Has Starmers authority completely evaporated??

    Well the quotes seem to have been from 'friends of Lammy' rather than direct.
    Yes, so id assume Starmer should be telling him to refute the story publically and back him or go
    Well I suspect the story itself is true. But perhaps Lammy didn't authorise anyone to say so on his behalf. So really not much can be said. Just guessing of course.
    Which means the deputy PM is now 'on record' failing in his collective responsibility and backing the boss responsibilities
    He has to correct that record or go. Or SKS is demonstrably a lame duck
    Not the way its ever worked. 'Friends of' is quite standard UK journalist code for off the record, not on the record.

    And silence is quite standard too, when you don't want to say anything.

    If directly asked, he could obfuscate or say something one way or another, or try to change the topic - again all standard ways for politicians to respond.

    Its not on the record, until he says something on the record.
    Does not have the bollox to say it himself so gets his patsies to say it so he can later say it was not him, spineless useless donkey and nasty with it.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 69,510
    maxh said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:
    Interesting the ladies on the Trevor Phillips programme are incandescent that this is all about men acting as if they are the victims from Mandelson, to Blair, Brown, Starmer and in the US

    They reminded viewers it is the female victims who are wronged not an international mans club


    Ahem ...... as I have been saying.

    "Phallic drift": The powerful tendency for public discussion of female issues to drift, inexorably, back to the male point of view.

    If we really want serious change, instead of focusing on yet another process of what it means for the future career of this or that politician, perhaps the Gordon Browns of this world (especially the Gordon Brown who brought Mandelson back into government, who employed the McBride who decided to spin luridly sexual lies about Tory women) and other commentators could just this once - and for a change - stop giving us their views and learn to listen to women, really listen. They could accept that they have been wrong to ignore what women have been saying for YEARS. They could discuss - just for once - what should be done now for women rather than simply trotting out the same old empty cliches about strategies against VAWG while promulgating policies which make this more likely or do damn all about it. They might also think about what this case, the Pelicot one, the Joanne Young one, grooming gangs, the consistent murder rate of women by men, the language used to describe women if they so much as complain about any of this, and many many other examples say about male behaviour and society's tolerance of it.

    Women don't need talking heads. What we want and need are politicians - male or female - who show some genuine interest in improving matters for women, have effective plans to make this happen and the courage and determination to see these through. We've been waiting long enough. And we are both unsurprised by any of this and utterly bloody furious.

    As you have often said, this forum has so little women representation and maybe we should ask why

    You and @fitalass have a real case, and I have an instinct that the 'mans club' in politics is about to see a women's movement even similar to the suffragettes rising up and saying enough

    We see it on here with men pilling into Kemi Badenoch, one of only 2 high profile women in politics at present

    Mandelson's outrage must lead to the end of the mans club both here and abroad
    Don't be so precious, Badenoch is Tory leader.

    In the entire history of this site, name me any Tory leader ever that has not had men piling in to criticise them.

    It goes with the territory.
    Both things can be true. Any leader of any political party will get piled into on here, with good cause. And on this site and elsewhere that will be mostly men, because this site is dominated by men.

    But it is also true that women are not heard in politics in the same way as men are, whether the woman is a leader, pundit or nerd on a political site. Politics is fascinating (partly) because it is about power, and men and women hold power in different (not so say unequal) ways.

    Cyclefree's point about cliches and strategies about combatting violence against women and girls whilst promulgating a society that engenders exactly this violence rings particularly true for me.
    This is the central issue being discussed in the media this morning

    Women are furious with this 'mans club' and they are on the warpath
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 89,888

    I wonder why Blair And Campbell have been silent.

    Bad Al has his own legal and financial problems.
    Given they are making squillions from centrist dad podcast he can't be sort of a bob or two?
  • stodgestodge Posts: 16,030

    Cyclefree said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:
    Interesting the ladies on the Trevor Phillips programme are incandescent that this is all about men acting as if they are the victims from Mandelson, to Blair, Brown, Starmer and in the US

    They reminded viewers it is the female victims who are wronged not an international mans club


    Ahem ...... as I have been saying.

    "Phallic drift": The powerful tendency for public discussion of female issues to drift, inexorably, back to the male point of view.

    If we really want serious change, instead of focusing on yet another process of what it means for the future career of this or that politician, perhaps the Gordon Browns of this world (especially the Gordon Brown who brought Mandelson back into government, who employed the McBride who decided to spin luridly sexual lies about Tory women) and other commentators could just this once - and for a change - stop giving us their views and learn to listen to women, really listen. They could accept that they have been wrong to ignore what women have been saying for YEARS. They could discuss - just for once - what should be done now for women rather than simply trotting out the same old empty cliches about strategies against VAWG while promulgating policies which make this more likely or do damn all about it. They might also think about what this case, the Pelicot one, the Joanne Young one, grooming gangs, the consistent murder rate of women by men, the language used to describe women if they so much as complain about any of this, and many many other examples say about male behaviour and society's tolerance of it.

    Women don't need talking heads. What we want and need are politicians - male or female - who show some genuine interest in improving matters for women, have effective plans to make this happen and the courage and determination to see these through. We've been waiting long enough. And we are both unsurprised by any of this and utterly bloody furious.

    As you have often said, this forum has so little women representation and maybe we should ask why

    You and @fitalass have a real case, and I have an instinct that the 'mans club' in politics is about to see a women's movement even similar to the suffragettes rising up and saying enough

    We see it on here with men pilling into Kemi Badenoch, one of only 2 high profile women in politics at present

    Mandelson's outrage must lead to the end of the mans club both here and abroad
    I fundamentally disagree. The notion Badenoch is somehow not to be criticised because of her gender is as absurd as claiming she is being criticised because of her gender.

    She is an elected MP and the Leader of His Majesty's Opposition - she could be Prime Minister one day. What she says matters and has to be scrutinised as much as anyone else.

    If I'm being honest, I detect a fraility among Conservatives like yourself - she is your party's last hope (arguably) and IF the party drops below Reform in terms of votes and seats at the next election, people will ask the same question as they asked of Liberals for decades in terms of relevance.

    She is being lauded and elevated by Conservatives for that reason - it remains to be seen if the broader electorate see her in the terms you do.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 12,522

    Omnium said:

    Omnium said:

    I am still at a loss to understand how Lammy is still in post this morning.
    Has Starmers authority completely evaporated??

    Well the quotes seem to have been from 'friends of Lammy' rather than direct.
    Yes, so id assume Starmer should be telling him to refute the story publically and back him or go
    Well I suspect the story itself is true. But perhaps Lammy didn't authorise anyone to say so on his behalf. So really not much can be said. Just guessing of course.
    Which means the deputy PM is now 'on record' failing in his collective responsibility and backing the boss responsibilities
    He has to correct that record or go. Or SKS is demonstrably a lame duck
    When he was on the record after the appointment he backed Mandelson I believe. Perfectly legitimate for him to air a different opinion in private beforehand. And I can't imagine any FSec being at all happy about having Mandelson as US Ambassador even if he was an unsullied version.

    But it'll be interesting to see if there's follow up on this story. I'd imagined Lammy to be 100% loyal, but perhaps not.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 126,221
    edited 10:43AM

    I wonder why Blair And Campbell have been silent.

    Bad Al has his own legal and financial problems.
    Given they are making squillions from centrist dad podcast he can't be sort of a bob or two?
    From late last year.

    Police make arrest over collapse of Alastair Campbell son’s football betting fund

    Rory Campbell launched the fund in 2017, vowing to beat the bookies with bets on games around Europe


    Detectives probing the collapse of a betting syndicate led by spin doctor Alastair Campbell’s son have arrested a 37-year-old man in north London, the Metropolitan Police said.

    Rory Campbell launched the fund in 2017, vowing to beat the bookies with bets on games around Europe, including in England’s Premier League and Spain’s La Liga.

    But approximately 50 backers of the Oxford graduate and football analyst’s venture were left out of pocket in December - including his own parents, The Sun said.

    Some were said to have lost up to £500,000 from their involvement in the failed fund.

    One of the investors reportedly died before receiving his money back.

    Campbell’s father and mother Fiona Millar were reported to be facing losses running into hundreds of thousands of pounds relating to the alleged £5 million Ponzi-style pyramid scheme.


    https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/met-police-man-arrested-alastair-campbell-son-football-betting-fund-b1253057.html
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 8,289
    "British conservatives have much to learn from German Chancellor Friedrich Merz"

    https://thecritic.co.uk/issues/february-2026/dont-be-beastly-to-the-germans/
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 89,888
    edited 10:48AM

    I wonder why Blair And Campbell have been silent.

    Bad Al has his own legal and financial problems.
    Given they are making squillions from centrist dad podcast he can't be sort of a bob or two?
    From late last year.

    Police make arrest over collapse of Alastair Campbell son’s football betting fund

    Rory Campbell launched the fund in 2017, vowing to beat the bookies with bets on games around Europe


    Campbell’s father and mother Fiona Millar were reported to be facing losses running into hundreds of thousands of pounds relating to the alleged £5 million Ponzi-style pyramid scheme.

    https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/met-police-man-arrested-alastair-campbell-son-football-betting-fund-b1253057.html
    Oh yes I forgot about how his son thought / claimed he could beat Tony Bloom and his team of 100 math PhDs....and I presume because his fund was "public" he also can't pull the sort of moves Tony Bloom associates do by betting in Asian markets via "interesting" go-betweens.

    Anybody claims they can beat betting on football, unless its Tony Bloom or Matthew Benham they are lying. Even legendary sports bettors like Haralabos Voulgaris (who has also bought a football club from his gambling winnings) never bet on football.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 46,525

    Roger said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:
    Interesting the ladies on the Trevor Phillips programme are incandescent that this is all about men acting as if they are the victims from Mandelson, to Blair, Brown, Starmer and in the US

    They reminded viewers it is the female victims who are wronged not an international mans club


    Ahem ...... as I have been saying.

    "Phallic drift": The powerful tendency for public discussion of female issues to drift, inexorably, back to the male point of view.

    If we really want serious change, instead of focusing on yet another process of what it means for the future career of this or that politician, perhaps the Gordon Browns of this world (especially the Gordon Brown who brought Mandelson back into government, who employed the McBride who decided to spin luridly sexual lies about Tory women) and other commentators could just this once - and for a change - stop giving us their views and learn to listen to women, really listen. They could accept that they have been wrong to ignore what women have been saying for YEARS. They could discuss - just for once - what should be done now for women rather than simply trotting out the same old empty cliches about strategies against VAWG while promulgating policies which make this more likely or do damn all about it. They might also think about what this case, the Pelicot one, the Joanne Young one, grooming gangs, the consistent murder rate of women by men, the language used to describe women if they so much as complain about any of this, and many many other examples say about male behaviour and society's tolerance of it.

    Women don't need talking heads. What we want and need are politicians - male or female - who show some genuine interest in improving matters for women, have effective plans to make this happen and the courage and determination to see these through. We've been waiting long enough. And we are both unsurprised by any of this and utterly bloody furious.

    As you have often said, this forum has so little women representation and maybe we should ask why

    You and @fitalass have a real case, and I have an instinct that the 'mans club' in politics is about to see a women's movement even similar to the suffragettes rising up and saying enough

    We see it on here with men pilling into Kemi Badenoch, one of only 2 high profile women in politics at present

    Mandelson's outrage must lead to the end of the mans club both here and abroad
    What is Mandelson's outrage? How should we behave towards Kemi?
    Listen to the women on this mornings programmes and you will see
    Did any of them bring up the appropriateness of their interlocutor (Phillips) having had Mandelson as his best man?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 63,496
    For what it's worth, and I pay less attention to politics than I used to and much less than the average here, the criticism and negative attention I've seen thrown at Badenoch seems par for the course for a major political leader. Consider the heaps of effluence regularly emptied atop Starmer.
  • maxhmaxh Posts: 1,900
    maxh said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:
    Interesting the ladies on the Trevor Phillips programme are incandescent that this is all about men acting as if they are the victims from Mandelson, to Blair, Brown, Starmer and in the US

    They reminded viewers it is the female victims who are wronged not an international mans club


    Ahem ...... as I have been saying.

    "Phallic drift": The powerful tendency for public discussion of female issues to drift, inexorably, back to the male point of view.

    If we really want serious change, instead of focusing on yet another process of what it means for the future career of this or that politician, perhaps the Gordon Browns of this world (especially the Gordon Brown who brought Mandelson back into government, who employed the McBride who decided to spin luridly sexual lies about Tory women) and other commentators could just this once - and for a change - stop giving us their views and learn to listen to women, really listen. They could accept that they have been wrong to ignore what women have been saying for YEARS. They could discuss - just for once - what should be done now for women rather than simply trotting out the same old empty cliches about strategies against VAWG while promulgating policies which make this more likely or do damn all about it. They might also think about what this case, the Pelicot one, the Joanne Young one, grooming gangs, the consistent murder rate of women by men, the language used to describe women if they so much as complain about any of this, and many many other examples say about male behaviour and society's tolerance of it.

    Women don't need talking heads. What we want and need are politicians - male or female - who show some genuine interest in improving matters for women, have effective plans to make this happen and the courage and determination to see these through. We've been waiting long enough. And we are both unsurprised by any of this and utterly bloody furious.

    As you have often said, this forum has so little women representation and maybe we should ask why

    You and @fitalass have a real case, and I have an instinct that the 'mans club' in politics is about to see a women's movement even similar to the suffragettes rising up and saying enough

    We see it on here with men pilling into Kemi Badenoch, one of only 2 high profile women in politics at present

    Mandelson's outrage must lead to the end of the mans club both here and abroad
    Don't be so precious, Badenoch is Tory leader.

    In the entire history of this site, name me any Tory leader ever that has not had men piling in to criticise them.

    It goes with the territory.
    Both things can be true. Any leader of any political party will get piled into on here, with good cause. And on this site and elsewhere that will be mostly men, because this site is dominated by men.

    But it is also true that women are not heard in politics in the same way as men are, whether the woman is a leader, pundit or nerd on a political site. Politics is fascinating (partly) because it is about power, and men and women hold power in different (not so say unequal) ways.

    Cyclefree's point about cliches and strategies about combatting violence against women and girls whilst promulgating a society that engenders exactly this violence rings particularly true for me.
    That being said, on this particular issue (Starmer's competency in employing Mandelson as Ambassador) I would argue that Mandelson's alleged leaking of confidential information to Epstein is of greater concern than that Mandelson associated with Epstein after his conviction. And this does necessitate what Cyclefree describes as phallic drift.

    Of course it is perfectly possible (and necessary) to be talking about both things.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 15,057
    Omnium said:

    Omnium said:

    Omnium said:

    I am still at a loss to understand how Lammy is still in post this morning.
    Has Starmers authority completely evaporated??

    Well the quotes seem to have been from 'friends of Lammy' rather than direct.
    Yes, so id assume Starmer should be telling him to refute the story publically and back him or go
    Well I suspect the story itself is true. But perhaps Lammy didn't authorise anyone to say so on his behalf. So really not much can be said. Just guessing of course.
    Which means the deputy PM is now 'on record' failing in his collective responsibility and backing the boss responsibilities
    He has to correct that record or go. Or SKS is demonstrably a lame duck
    When he was on the record after the appointment he backed Mandelson I believe. Perfectly legitimate for him to air a different opinion in private beforehand. And I can't imagine any FSec being at all happy about having Mandelson as US Ambassador even if he was an unsullied version.

    But it'll be interesting to see if there's follow up on this story. I'd imagined Lammy to be 100% loyal, but perhaps not.
    I suppose my point is that the PM and DPM cannot, in normal times and in public, be seen to have anything but one mind on things.
    That not being addressed suggests fatal weakness in the PM (to me anyway)
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 36,660
    stodge said:

    WTAF is 'AI-mentum'?

    As you well know, it's the idea a political unknown like Al Carns could be the next Prime Minister.

    He ticks a couple of boxes - reasonably photogenic, military background but it's a real leap in the dark to imagine him as PM. Could he move up the Cabinet? Yes, certainly and in time he could well be a serious contender.

    It looks desperate - it could work and redefine politics for the next two decades or he could be Labour's Liz Truss, who knows?

    My current view, and this won't surprise, is Starmer is going nowhere unless he wants to go somewhere. I've been disappointed by him but not surprised - it's not the timidity or the caution that's the problem but the lack of any policy which could be called "radical". Where is the response to child poverty, homelessness, addiction problems etc, etc? If a majority of 170 doesn't give you a mandate to do something, we might as well end elections.

    It's not as though the "Right" (whatever that means) has anything to offer either which is the tragedy of all this.

    It's left to Reform or the Greens or groups like the Newham Independents to make big policy pronouncements and promise the Sun, the Moon and the stars but you and I both know they are all fiscally incoherent in extremis but desperate, disillusioned people will once again sign up to the nonsense.
    Another excellent post from @stodge. When Labour won the 2024 election I was expecting all sorts of things, but what happened; nothing. Admittedly they were blown a bit of course by the riots which followed the Southport killings but one could, I think, reasonably have expected more action in support of the disadvantaged.
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 8,289
    On holiday, but I gather from PB there are problems back in the UK with rich foreign financiers?



    Quite partial to them myself.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 12,522

    Omnium said:

    Omnium said:

    Omnium said:

    I am still at a loss to understand how Lammy is still in post this morning.
    Has Starmers authority completely evaporated??

    Well the quotes seem to have been from 'friends of Lammy' rather than direct.
    Yes, so id assume Starmer should be telling him to refute the story publically and back him or go
    Well I suspect the story itself is true. But perhaps Lammy didn't authorise anyone to say so on his behalf. So really not much can be said. Just guessing of course.
    Which means the deputy PM is now 'on record' failing in his collective responsibility and backing the boss responsibilities
    He has to correct that record or go. Or SKS is demonstrably a lame duck
    When he was on the record after the appointment he backed Mandelson I believe. Perfectly legitimate for him to air a different opinion in private beforehand. And I can't imagine any FSec being at all happy about having Mandelson as US Ambassador even if he was an unsullied version.

    But it'll be interesting to see if there's follow up on this story. I'd imagined Lammy to be 100% loyal, but perhaps not.
    I suppose my point is that the PM and DPM cannot, in normal times and in public, be seen to have anything but one mind on things.
    That not being addressed suggests fatal weakness in the PM (to me anyway)
    And I think its a very good point.

    We will see.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 126,221

    I wonder why Blair And Campbell have been silent.

    Bad Al has his own legal and financial problems.
    Given they are making squillions from centrist dad podcast he can't be sort of a bob or two?
    From late last year.

    Police make arrest over collapse of Alastair Campbell son’s football betting fund

    Rory Campbell launched the fund in 2017, vowing to beat the bookies with bets on games around Europe


    Campbell’s father and mother Fiona Millar were reported to be facing losses running into hundreds of thousands of pounds relating to the alleged £5 million Ponzi-style pyramid scheme.

    https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/met-police-man-arrested-alastair-campbell-son-football-betting-fund-b1253057.html
    Oh yes I forgot about how his son thought / claimed he could beat Tony Bloom and his team of 100 math PhDs....and I presume because his fund was "public" he also can't pull the sort of moves Tony Bloom associates do by betting in Asian markets via "interesting" go-betweens.
    IIRC at one point the Campbell syndicate team was two people, both with other jobs.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 89,888
    edited 10:50AM

    I wonder why Blair And Campbell have been silent.

    Bad Al has his own legal and financial problems.
    Given they are making squillions from centrist dad podcast he can't be sort of a bob or two?
    From late last year.

    Police make arrest over collapse of Alastair Campbell son’s football betting fund

    Rory Campbell launched the fund in 2017, vowing to beat the bookies with bets on games around Europe


    Campbell’s father and mother Fiona Millar were reported to be facing losses running into hundreds of thousands of pounds relating to the alleged £5 million Ponzi-style pyramid scheme.

    https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/met-police-man-arrested-alastair-campbell-son-football-betting-fund-b1253057.html
    Oh yes I forgot about how his son thought / claimed he could beat Tony Bloom and his team of 100 math PhDs....and I presume because his fund was "public" he also can't pull the sort of moves Tony Bloom associates do by betting in Asian markets via "interesting" go-betweens.
    IIRC at one point the Campbell syndicate team was two people, both with other jobs.
    Head in hands....football markets are basically the most efficient markets in sports betting. Putting aside lower league match fixing, even Tony Bloom's edge is single digits. He is putting on billions worth of bets.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 36,660

    I wonder why Blair And Campbell have been silent.

    Bad Al has his own legal and financial problems.
    Given they are making squillions from centrist dad podcast he can't be sort of a bob or two?
    From late last year.

    Police make arrest over collapse of Alastair Campbell son’s football betting fund

    Rory Campbell launched the fund in 2017, vowing to beat the bookies with bets on games around Europe


    Campbell’s father and mother Fiona Millar were reported to be facing losses running into hundreds of thousands of pounds relating to the alleged £5 million Ponzi-style pyramid scheme.

    https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/met-police-man-arrested-alastair-campbell-son-football-betting-fund-b1253057.html
    Oh yes I forgot about how his son thought / claimed he could beat Tony Bloom and his team of 100 math PhDs....and I presume because his fund was "public" he also can't pull the sort of moves Tony Bloom associates do by betting in Asian markets via "interesting" go-betweens.
    IIRC at one point the Campbell syndicate team was two people, both with other jobs.
    Oxford graduate thinking he knew better than people who actually did things?

    Or am I being unfair?
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 15,057
    On Badenoch,
    Her net favourability is now around or better than Farages generally but with more 'DKs' and therefore fewer of both positive 'favourable' and negative 'unfavourable'.
    If she can get her positive 'favourable' above Farages that is when id expect Tory polling to approach Reforms (although the party lag her a bit)
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 60,611

    I wonder why Blair And Campbell have been silent.

    Bad Al has his own legal and financial problems.
    Given they are making squillions from centrist dad podcast he can't be sort of a bob or two?
    From late last year.

    Police make arrest over collapse of Alastair Campbell son’s football betting fund

    Rory Campbell launched the fund in 2017, vowing to beat the bookies with bets on games around Europe


    Campbell’s father and mother Fiona Millar were reported to be facing losses running into hundreds of thousands of pounds relating to the alleged £5 million Ponzi-style pyramid scheme.

    https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/met-police-man-arrested-alastair-campbell-son-football-betting-fund-b1253057.html
    Oh yes I forgot about how his son thought / claimed he could beat Tony Bloom and his team of 100 math PhDs....and I presume because his fund was "public" he also can't pull the sort of moves Tony Bloom associates do by betting in Asian markets via "interesting" go-betweens.

    Anybody claims they can beat betting on football, unless its Tony Bloom or Matthew Benham they are lying. Even legendary sports bettors like Haralabos Voulgaris (who has also bought a football club from his gambling winnings) never bet on football.
    Oh, I don’t know.

    A bit of “leverage” over some football stars (gambling is probably a good one) and I’m sure I could guarantee a good return.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 126,221

    I wonder why Blair And Campbell have been silent.

    Bad Al has his own legal and financial problems.
    Given they are making squillions from centrist dad podcast he can't be sort of a bob or two?
    From late last year.

    Police make arrest over collapse of Alastair Campbell son’s football betting fund

    Rory Campbell launched the fund in 2017, vowing to beat the bookies with bets on games around Europe


    Campbell’s father and mother Fiona Millar were reported to be facing losses running into hundreds of thousands of pounds relating to the alleged £5 million Ponzi-style pyramid scheme.

    https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/met-police-man-arrested-alastair-campbell-son-football-betting-fund-b1253057.html
    Oh yes I forgot about how his son thought / claimed he could beat Tony Bloom and his team of 100 math PhDs....and I presume because his fund was "public" he also can't pull the sort of moves Tony Bloom associates do by betting in Asian markets via "interesting" go-betweens.
    IIRC at one point the Campbell syndicate team was two people, both with other jobs.
    Oxford graduate thinking he knew better than people who actually did things?

    Or am I being unfair?
    No you are not.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 89,888
    edited 10:54AM

    I wonder why Blair And Campbell have been silent.

    Bad Al has his own legal and financial problems.
    Given they are making squillions from centrist dad podcast he can't be sort of a bob or two?
    From late last year.

    Police make arrest over collapse of Alastair Campbell son’s football betting fund

    Rory Campbell launched the fund in 2017, vowing to beat the bookies with bets on games around Europe


    Campbell’s father and mother Fiona Millar were reported to be facing losses running into hundreds of thousands of pounds relating to the alleged £5 million Ponzi-style pyramid scheme.

    https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/met-police-man-arrested-alastair-campbell-son-football-betting-fund-b1253057.html
    Oh yes I forgot about how his son thought / claimed he could beat Tony Bloom and his team of 100 math PhDs....and I presume because his fund was "public" he also can't pull the sort of moves Tony Bloom associates do by betting in Asian markets via "interesting" go-betweens.
    IIRC at one point the Campbell syndicate team was two people, both with other jobs.
    Oxford graduate thinking he knew better than people who actually did things?

    Or am I being unfair?
    When it comes to football, the market is very very efficient and even if you do have an edge, trying to actually get the serious money on to make decent returns is another incredibly difficult task. The second part often requires some extremely dodgy manoeuvres.

    I still find it quite amazing that the EPL have given Bloom and Benham special allowances to carry on their betting operations (although I think Benham isn't as active as he was).
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 12,585
    stodge said:

    WTAF is 'AI-mentum'?

    As you well know, it's the idea a political unknown like Al Carns could be the next Prime Minister.

    He ticks a couple of boxes - reasonably photogenic, military background but it's a real leap in the dark to imagine him as PM. Could he move up the Cabinet? Yes, certainly and in time he could well be a serious contender.

    It looks desperate - it could work and redefine politics for the next two decades or he could be Labour's Liz Truss, who knows?

    My current view, and this won't surprise, is Starmer is going nowhere unless he wants to go somewhere. I've been disappointed by him but not surprised - it's not the timidity or the caution that's the problem but the lack of any policy which could be called "radical". Where is the response to child poverty, homelessness, addiction problems etc, etc? If a majority of 170 doesn't give you a mandate to do something, we might as well end elections.

    It's not as though the "Right" (whatever that means) has anything to offer either which is the tragedy of all this.

    It's left to Reform or the Greens or groups like the Newham Independents to make big policy pronouncements and promise the Sun, the Moon and the stars but you and I both know they are all fiscally incoherent in extremis but desperate, disillusioned people will once again sign up to the nonsense.
    Re: “radical” I think the issue is that none of the things you mention are Starmer’s passion. Of course he supports them, like any bien pessant member of the Hampstead set but he’s not motivated to make them his legacy. He’s an international human rights lawyer - what he cares about is things like Chagos and cleaning up the loose ends of Empire. But those aren’t exactly popular… I reckon if he thought he could get away with it he’d give up Gib and the Falklands too…
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 69,510

    On Badenoch,
    Her net favourability is now around or better than Farages generally but with more 'DKs' and therefore fewer of both positive 'favourable' and negative 'unfavourable'.
    If she can get her positive 'favourable' above Farages that is when id expect Tory polling to approach Reforms (although the party lag her a bit)

    It's a 3 year project and time will tell

    The point I make is she should be given the time and not a new leadership crisis
  • Brixian59Brixian59 Posts: 171

    On Badenoch,
    Her net favourability is now around or better than Farages generally but with more 'DKs' and therefore fewer of both positive 'favourable' and negative 'unfavourable'.
    If she can get her positive 'favourable' above Farages that is when id expect Tory polling to approach Reforms (although the party lag her a bit)

    Oh dear god
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 46,525
    Visual metaphor with many applications. Notable that even with much prodding and stick waving, the Lagomorph still wasn't at the races.
    Ed Is Tortoise Is PM?

    This Account Makes You Happy
    @FeelYouHappy
    The fable of the rabbit and the tortoise has been tested in real life. 😂

    https://x.com/FeelYouHappy/status/2020160372364451856?s=20
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 15,057
    Brixian59 said:

    On Badenoch,
    Her net favourability is now around or better than Farages generally but with more 'DKs' and therefore fewer of both positive 'favourable' and negative 'unfavourable'.
    If she can get her positive 'favourable' above Farages that is when id expect Tory polling to approach Reforms (although the party lag her a bit)

    Oh dear god
    What do you disagree with? (The post is an analysis not a prediction)
  • FishingFishing Posts: 6,051
    edited 11:04AM
    maxh said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:
    Interesting the ladies on the Trevor Phillips programme are incandescent that this is all about men acting as if they are the victims from Mandelson, to Blair, Brown, Starmer and in the US

    They reminded viewers it is the female victims who are wronged not an international mans club


    Ahem ...... as I have been saying.

    "Phallic drift": The powerful tendency for public discussion of female issues to drift, inexorably, back to the male point of view.

    If we really want serious change, instead of focusing on yet another process of what it means for the future career of this or that politician, perhaps the Gordon Browns of this world (especially the Gordon Brown who brought Mandelson back into government, who employed the McBride who decided to spin luridly sexual lies about Tory women) and other commentators could just this once - and for a change - stop giving us their views and learn to listen to women, really listen. They could accept that they have been wrong to ignore what women have been saying for YEARS. They could discuss - just for once - what should be done now for women rather than simply trotting out the same old empty cliches about strategies against VAWG while promulgating policies which make this more likely or do damn all about it. They might also think about what this case, the Pelicot one, the Joanne Young one, grooming gangs, the consistent murder rate of women by men, the language used to describe women if they so much as complain about any of this, and many many other examples say about male behaviour and society's tolerance of it.

    Women don't need talking heads. What we want and need are politicians - male or female - who show some genuine interest in improving matters for women, have effective plans to make this happen and the courage and determination to see these through. We've been waiting long enough. And we are both unsurprised by any of this and utterly bloody furious.

    As you have often said, this forum has so little women representation and maybe we should ask why

    You and @fitalass have a real case, and I have an instinct that the 'mans club' in politics is about to see a women's movement even similar to the suffragettes rising up and saying enough

    We see it on here with men pilling into Kemi Badenoch, one of only 2 high profile women in politics at present

    Mandelson's outrage must lead to the end of the mans club both here and abroad
    Don't be so precious, Badenoch is Tory leader.

    In the entire history of this site, name me any Tory leader ever that has not had men piling in to criticise them.

    It goes with the territory.
    Both things can be true. Any leader of any political party will get piled into on here, with good cause. And on this site and elsewhere that will be mostly men, because this site is dominated by men.

    But it is also true that women are not heard in politics in the same way as men are, whether the woman is a leader, pundit or nerd on a political site. Politics is fascinating (partly) because it is about power, and men and women hold power in different (not so say unequal) ways.

    Cyclefree's point about cliches and strategies about combatting violence against women and girls whilst promulgating a society that engenders exactly this violence rings particularly true for me.
    But men are almost twice as likely to be victims of violent crime than women - about 1.8% of men, compared to 1.1% of women in 22/23, despite there being more women than men in the population, and about 72% of homicide victims are male, for instance. As this Home Office document says (section 3): "Excluding fraud and computer misuse, females were significantly less likely of being a victim of personal crime than males."

    https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/women-and-the-criminal-justice-system-2023/statistics-on-women-and-the-criminal-justice-system-2023-html#victims

    Actually, far from society engendering violence against women and girls, I've noticed significant social taboos against it.

    Of course any violence is wrong, except to defend oneself or others. And women's general physical weakness compared to men makes them much easier targets. But the notion that society somehow engenders it more than it does violence against men just doesn't stack up.

    Rather than focusing unnecessarily and divisively on who the victims are, we should perhaps be concentrating on why (from memory) about 85% of the perpetrators of violent crime are male, and how to reduce that.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 36,660

    stodge said:

    WTAF is 'AI-mentum'?

    As you well know, it's the idea a political unknown like Al Carns could be the next Prime Minister.

    He ticks a couple of boxes - reasonably photogenic, military background but it's a real leap in the dark to imagine him as PM. Could he move up the Cabinet? Yes, certainly and in time he could well be a serious contender.

    It looks desperate - it could work and redefine politics for the next two decades or he could be Labour's Liz Truss, who knows?

    My current view, and this won't surprise, is Starmer is going nowhere unless he wants to go somewhere. I've been disappointed by him but not surprised - it's not the timidity or the caution that's the problem but the lack of any policy which could be called "radical". Where is the response to child poverty, homelessness, addiction problems etc, etc? If a majority of 170 doesn't give you a mandate to do something, we might as well end elections.

    It's not as though the "Right" (whatever that means) has anything to offer either which is the tragedy of all this.

    It's left to Reform or the Greens or groups like the Newham Independents to make big policy pronouncements and promise the Sun, the Moon and the stars but you and I both know they are all fiscally incoherent in extremis but desperate, disillusioned people will once again sign up to the nonsense.
    Re: “radical” I think the issue is that none of the things you mention are Starmer’s passion. Of course he supports them, like any bien pessant member of the Hampstead set but he’s not motivated to make them his legacy. He’s an international human rights lawyer - what he cares about is things like Chagos and cleaning up the loose ends of Empire. But those aren’t exactly popular… I reckon if he thought he could get away with it he’d give up Gib and the Falklands too…
    Then what is he doing at the top of the Labour Party? Surely that exists primarily for the benefit of working people in the UK!
  • Brixian59Brixian59 Posts: 171

    Cyclefree said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:
    Interesting the ladies on the Trevor Phillips programme are incandescent that this is all about men acting as if they are the victims from Mandelson, to Blair, Brown, Starmer and in the US

    They reminded viewers it is the female victims who are wronged not an international mans club


    Ahem ...... as I have been saying.

    "Phallic drift": The powerful tendency for public discussion of female issues to drift, inexorably, back to the male point of view.

    If we really want serious change, instead of focusing on yet another process of what it means for the future career of this or that politician, perhaps the Gordon Browns of this world (especially the Gordon Brown who brought Mandelson back into government, who employed the McBride who decided to spin luridly sexual lies about Tory women) and other commentators could just this once - and for a change - stop giving us their views and learn to listen to women, really listen. They could accept that they have been wrong to ignore what women have been saying for YEARS. They could discuss - just for once - what should be done now for women rather than simply trotting out the same old empty cliches about strategies against VAWG while promulgating policies which make this more likely or do damn all about it. They might also think about what this case, the Pelicot one, the Joanne Young one, grooming gangs, the consistent murder rate of women by men, the language used to describe women if they so much as complain about any of this, and many many other examples say about male behaviour and society's tolerance of it.

    Women don't need talking heads. What we want and need are politicians - male or female - who show some genuine interest in improving matters for women, have effective plans to make this happen and the courage and determination to see these through. We've been waiting long enough. And we are both unsurprised by any of this and utterly bloody furious.

    As you have often said, this forum has so little women representation and maybe we should ask why

    You and @fitalass have a real case, and I have an instinct that the 'mans club' in politics is about to see a women's movement even similar to the suffragettes rising up and saying enough

    We see it on here with men pilling into Kemi Badenoch, one of only 2 high profile women in politics at present

    Mandelson's outrage must lead to the end of the mans club both here and abroad
    Don't be so precious, Badenoch is Tory leader.

    In the entire history of this site, name me any Tory leader ever that has not had men piling in to criticise them.

    It goes with the territory.
    Of course she should be criticised when it is justified, but at present she is the one leading politician receiving praise for her improvement

    The wider point is womans anger at the mans club in poltics and power
    Her being Tory leader is all the justification some people need to seek to criticise her.

    See also Starmer and any other major party leader ever.
    Burgardt made the statement Kemi is "honest"

    A Web hacker is a criminal

    Not honest

    Simeone who lies about a University offer that the University have no record of is a bare faced liar.

    Not honest

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 126,221

    Visual metaphor with many applications. Notable that even with much prodding and stick waving, the Lagomorph still wasn't at the races.
    Ed Is Tortoise Is PM?

    This Account Makes You Happy
    @FeelYouHappy
    The fable of the rabbit and the tortoise has been tested in real life. 😂

    https://x.com/FeelYouHappy/status/2020160372364451856?s=20

    The pedant in me has to point out is that it is fable of the tortoise and hare.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 60,611

    I wonder why Blair And Campbell have been silent.

    Bad Al has his own legal and financial problems.
    Given they are making squillions from centrist dad podcast he can't be sort of a bob or two?
    From late last year.

    Police make arrest over collapse of Alastair Campbell son’s football betting fund

    Rory Campbell launched the fund in 2017, vowing to beat the bookies with bets on games around Europe


    Campbell’s father and mother Fiona Millar were reported to be facing losses running into hundreds of thousands of pounds relating to the alleged £5 million Ponzi-style pyramid scheme.

    https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/met-police-man-arrested-alastair-campbell-son-football-betting-fund-b1253057.html
    Oh yes I forgot about how his son thought / claimed he could beat Tony Bloom and his team of 100 math PhDs....and I presume because his fund was "public" he also can't pull the sort of moves Tony Bloom associates do by betting in Asian markets via "interesting" go-betweens.
    IIRC at one point the Campbell syndicate team was two people, both with other jobs.
    Oxford graduate thinking he knew better than people who actually did things?

    Or am I being unfair?
    There’s a whole raft of people out there who fuck up in business, on that exact plan.

    This one was more stupid than most. The smart ones exit the business before the smash.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 69,510
    Rhun ap Iorwerth on Kunnesberg says he will not increase taxes in Wales but will demand a fair share from Westminster

    He will generate growth

    He is likely to be First Minister but not sure how he moves the dial

  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 15,057
    edited 11:03AM

    On Badenoch,
    Her net favourability is now around or better than Farages generally but with more 'DKs' and therefore fewer of both positive 'favourable' and negative 'unfavourable'.
    If she can get her positive 'favourable' above Farages that is when id expect Tory polling to approach Reforms (although the party lag her a bit)

    It's a 3 year project and time will tell

    The point I make is she should be given the time and not a new leadership crisis
    Naturally, yes.
    40 points ahead Labour were.
    An opinion poll on a random Sunday 18 months in is not a GE
    MRPs are not crystal balls.
    May will provide actual regional analysis and data to enjoy
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 89,888
    edited 11:02AM

    Bezos is a cnut news, further updates expected.

    Kelly
    @broadwaybabyto
    ·
    5h
    Jeff Bezos fired more than 300 people and didn’t even arrange for them to get safely home.

    Staffers were abandoned in foreign countries and war zones and are having to crowd source to get home.

    One of the richest men in the world left them behind.

    https://x.com/broadwaybabyto/status/2020375224282189873?s=20

    Of all the big tech companies, Amazon have by far the worst reputation among your ML PhD type people. Their pay packages are like most big tech companies spread over 4 years, but unlike Google, its hugely weighted towards the 4th year....and hardly anybody makes the 4th year. Its like the Running Man of jobs.

    It seems people only do it because if you can make it say year 3 or even 4, the rest of the industry go f##k me they must be amazing, pay them loads to join us.
  • maxhmaxh Posts: 1,900

    stodge said:

    WTAF is 'AI-mentum'?

    As you well know, it's the idea a political unknown like Al Carns could be the next Prime Minister.

    He ticks a couple of boxes - reasonably photogenic, military background but it's a real leap in the dark to imagine him as PM. Could he move up the Cabinet? Yes, certainly and in time he could well be a serious contender.

    It looks desperate - it could work and redefine politics for the next two decades or he could be Labour's Liz Truss, who knows?

    My current view, and this won't surprise, is Starmer is going nowhere unless he wants to go somewhere. I've been disappointed by him but not surprised - it's not the timidity or the caution that's the problem but the lack of any policy which could be called "radical". Where is the response to child poverty, homelessness, addiction problems etc, etc? If a majority of 170 doesn't give you a mandate to do something, we might as well end elections.

    It's not as though the "Right" (whatever that means) has anything to offer either which is the tragedy of all this.

    It's left to Reform or the Greens or groups like the Newham Independents to make big policy pronouncements and promise the Sun, the Moon and the stars but you and I both know they are all fiscally incoherent in extremis but desperate, disillusioned people will once again sign up to the nonsense.
    Another excellent post from @stodge. When Labour won the 2024 election I was expecting all sorts of things, but what happened; nothing. Admittedly they were blown a bit of course by the riots which followed the Southport killings but one could, I think, reasonably have expected more action in support of the disadvantaged.
    I suspect Starmer was also blown off course somewhat by Trump's election - whilst it doesn't have a direct bearing on domestic issues it did dramatically shift the Overton window and I suspect he struggled to adapt.

    I couldn't agree more with the rest of your post. It is abundantly clear, from the climate crisis through stagnant growth rates and ballooning debt, to the rise of the far right, that we cannot simply carry on with continuity Blairite-Cameroon centrism.

    Labour had the perfect platform with their majority to unveil a bold, economically literate, socially just project of national renewal that would serve as a global beacon of how to respond to our current challenges without going fash. And it's not as if they don't have ideas waiting in the wings - think tanks like the New Economics Foundation have plenty to offer.

    They blew it, which leaves voters with the twin peaks of insanity of Green or Reform to express their plaintive: "this can't go on." And globally, we are left with the twin peaks of insanity of fascist, authoritarian Trump or spying, authoritarian Xi.

    This is why Starmer is a dud, not because of his Faustian pact with Mandelson in response to Trump.
  • boulayboulay Posts: 8,220
    Oh Lindsey Vonn. Brave but maybe foolish decision to race.
  • Brixian59Brixian59 Posts: 171

    I am still at a loss to understand how Lammy is still in post this morning.
    Has Starmers authority completely evaporated??

    Starmer has, himself, publicly described his personal lack of power.

    See his speech on not being able to do things.
    No actual proof Lammy made any such comnent

    No credible source
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 12,585

    stodge said:

    WTAF is 'AI-mentum'?

    As you well know, it's the idea a political unknown like Al Carns could be the next Prime Minister.

    He ticks a couple of boxes - reasonably photogenic, military background but it's a real leap in the dark to imagine him as PM. Could he move up the Cabinet? Yes, certainly and in time he could well be a serious contender.

    It looks desperate - it could work and redefine politics for the next two decades or he could be Labour's Liz Truss, who knows?

    My current view, and this won't surprise, is Starmer is going nowhere unless he wants to go somewhere. I've been disappointed by him but not surprised - it's not the timidity or the caution that's the problem but the lack of any policy which could be called "radical". Where is the response to child poverty, homelessness, addiction problems etc, etc? If a majority of 170 doesn't give you a mandate to do something, we might as well end elections.

    It's not as though the "Right" (whatever that means) has anything to offer either which is the tragedy of all this.

    It's left to Reform or the Greens or groups like the Newham Independents to make big policy pronouncements and promise the Sun, the Moon and the stars but you and I both know they are all fiscally incoherent in extremis but desperate, disillusioned people will once again sign up to the nonsense.
    Re: “radical” I think the issue is that none of the things you mention are Starmer’s passion. Of course he supports them, like any bien pessant member of the Hampstead set but he’s not motivated to make them his legacy. He’s an international human rights lawyer - what he cares about is things like Chagos and cleaning up the loose ends of Empire. But those aren’t exactly popular… I reckon if he thought he could get away with it he’d give up Gib and the Falklands too…
    Then what is he doing at the top of the Labour Party? Surely that exists primarily for the benefit of working people in the UK!
    Because it was the logical next step in his career
Sign In or Register to comment.