That 19% Reform looks tasty. They'd need the Left to split correctly. But never underestimate the Left's ability to do exactly that.
They seem to be splitting very nicely atm. First it looks like Greens will easy be the lefty choice. Then there are all these rumours of joy on the doorsteps for Labour canvassers, so Labour look like regaining the advantage. Then this betting rumour comes out. If I were a progressive I wouldn't know who to vote for.
Reform are putting everything into this, but I do detect a struggle. It will be heroic if they pull it off.
Yeah. I wouldn't know who to vote for either. Not helped by the fact that Gorton and Denton are heterogeneous places. So even sounding out the neighbours wouldn't necessarily be an infallible guide to what elsewhere was thinking.
Just musing on the result here and possible knock on effects..... Ssy Greens take this, perhaps handsomely. Then, in May, Reform struggle in Scotland perhaps coming third and come fourth in wards won or votes or both in London and behind Plaid in Wales..... Potential for the bubble to burst?
Certainly. However. I suspect they'll do very well in the non City Metro boroughs.
Yes, agreed, but will it be enough? The big tickets are the nations and capital. And they might get a bit undone by the 'thirds' and 'halves' up in some areas stopping them gettihg the 'gain' headlines of the full county elections last year. An example is Suellas backyard of Fareham (half up) - Reform cant gain it but if the Tories hold 6 of the 16 up they retain msjority on the council (i think prediction is Tories hold 4 to 6 so......) and it generates its iwn negative feedback 'Reform fall short in Suellas back yard' etc
Only because of where the media is based. 9m people in London. 5.5m in Scotland. 3m in Wales. Metro boroughs voting c. 11m. When it comes to actual numbers it's the Metros which are the "big ticket". Though I appreciate Wandsworth and Westminster will lead the news as ever.
Well, yes. Im talking about what will drive he headlines and narrative. There will always be that element of fog in the channel, europe cut off
A number of boroughs are holding all out elections.
Labour losing places like Sunderland, Barnsley Swindon, Wakefield, Sandwell, to Reform, and the Conservatives losing Walsall and Essex to them, will generate headlines.
Nah - worst possible result for Labour is a Tory win. For then the world would have truly turned upside down....
Green 40% Ref 35% Lab 10% Con 9.5% LD 4% Others buttons %
'At least we beat the Tories'
You think the Tories will get 9.5% in G+D? They'll think themselves fortunate to get a fifth of that.
If Labour finished behind the Tories in this bye election Starmer would be gone the next day. But they won't. He has until May to improve things. At that point things are likely to get a bit tricky.
How many careers will.have to be laid down for Starmer to survive?
As many as necessary of course. Its the way he thinks.
Just musing on the result here and possible knock on effects..... Ssy Greens take this, perhaps handsomely. Then, in May, Reform struggle in Scotland perhaps coming third and come fourth in wards won or votes or both in London and behind Plaid in Wales..... Potential for the bubble to burst?
Certainly. However. I suspect they'll do very well in the non City Metro boroughs.
Yes, agreed, but will it be enough? The big tickets are the nations and capital. And they might get a bit undone by the 'thirds' and 'halves' up in some areas stopping them gettihg the 'gain' headlines of the full county elections last year. An example is Suellas backyard of Fareham (half up) - Reform cant gain it but if the Tories hold 6 of the 16 up they retain msjority on the council (i think prediction is Tories hold 4 to 6 so......) and it generates its iwn negative feedback 'Reform fall short in Suellas back yard' etc
Only because of where the media is based. 9m people in London. 5.5m in Scotland. 3m in Wales. Metro boroughs voting c. 11m. When it comes to actual numbers it's the Metros which are the "big ticket". Though I appreciate Wandsworth and Westminster will lead the news as ever.
Well, yes. Im talking about what will drive he headlines and narrative. There will always be that element of fog in the channel, europe cut off
A number of boroughs are holding all out elections.
Labour losing places like Sunderland, Barnsley Swindon, Wakefield, Sandwell, to Reform, and the Conservatives losing Walsall and Essex to them, will generate headlines.
Just musing on the result here and possible knock on effects..... Ssy Greens take this, perhaps handsomely. Then, in May, Reform struggle in Scotland perhaps coming third and come fourth in wards won or votes or both in London and behind Plaid in Wales..... Potential for the bubble to burst?
Certainly. However. I suspect they'll do very well in the non City Metro boroughs.
Yes, agreed, but will it be enough? The big tickets are the nations and capital. And they might get a bit undone by the 'thirds' and 'halves' up in some areas stopping them gettihg the 'gain' headlines of the full county elections last year. An example is Suellas backyard of Fareham (half up) - Reform cant gain it but if the Tories hold 6 of the 16 up they retain msjority on the council (i think prediction is Tories hold 4 to 6 so......) and it generates its iwn negative feedback 'Reform fall short in Suellas back yard' etc
Only because of where the media is based. 9m people in London. 5.5m in Scotland. 3m in Wales. Metro boroughs voting c. 11m. When it comes to actual numbers it's the Metros which are the "big ticket". Though I appreciate Wandsworth and Westminster will lead the news as ever.
Well, yes. Im talking about what will drive he headlines and narrative. There will always be that element of fog in the channel, europe cut off
A number of boroughs are holding all out elections.
Labour losing places like Sunderland, Barnsley Swindon, Wakefield, Sandwell, to Reform, and the Conservatives losing Walsall and Essex to them, will generate headlines.
Well, yes, but not to the extent of last year. Only Reform and the LDs won overall control of councils last year. All 5 parties will have 'successes' to point at this year. Plus the 2 Nat parties will too. The 'utterly dominant' narrative will not be there
That 19% Reform looks tasty. They'd need the Left to split correctly. But never underestimate the Left's ability to do exactly that.
They seem to be splitting very nicely atm. First it looks like Greens will easy be the lefty choice. Then there are all these rumours of joy on the doorsteps for Labour canvassers, so Labour look like regaining the advantage. Then this betting rumour comes out. If I were a progressive I wouldn't know who to vote for.
Reform are putting everything into this, but I do detect a struggle. It will be heroic if they pull it off.
Yeah. I wouldn't know who to vote for either. Not helped by the fact that Gorton and Denton are heterogeneous places. So even sounding out the neighbours wouldn't necessarily be an infallible guide to what elsewhere was thinking.
Matt Goodwin's shorts come up in my Youtube feed, and there's a focus on 'all communities' that there wasn't before - rightly so as he's seeking to represent the whole constituency. It's hard to tell what that means. Got all the classic WWC voters onside so now he's rolling the tanks on to Labour's lawn? Or belated realisation of the electoral realities of the seat?
Ch 4 News gives Ratcliffe a well deserved hammering. He avoided £4 billion in tax in the last 5 years lived as a tax exile in Monaco and claimed we had 21 million immigrants when the figure was 3 million. Presumably they were paying the tax he was avoiding
There's a bit of a side-of-a-bus argument going on here. The left repeatedly making the point that 'only' 3 million immigrants have arrived in the last five years isn't the zinger they think it is.
Though otoh it highlights ‘hard headed businessman’ Ratcliffe is either speaking through his arse or is a dishonest propagandiser. Also that the right despite their opportunistic outrage is mostly responsible for that 3 million.
The reality is that average annual net migration was higher under the Tories than under Labour. And yet somehow this is all the fault of "the left". Lol.
Nah - worst possible result for Labour is a Tory win. For then the world would have truly turned upside down....
Green 40% Ref 35% Lab 10% Con 9.5% LD 4% Others buttons %
'At least we beat the Tories'
You think the Tories will get 9.5% in G+D? They'll think themselves fortunate to get a fifth of that.
If Labour finished behind the Tories in this bye election Starmer would be gone the next day. But they won't. He has until May to improve things. At that point things are likely to get a bit tricky.
How many careers will.have to be laid down for Starmer to survive?
That 19% Reform looks tasty. They'd need the Left to split correctly. But never underestimate the Left's ability to do exactly that.
They seem to be splitting very nicely atm. First it looks like Greens will easy be the lefty choice. Then there are all these rumours of joy on the doorsteps for Labour canvassers, so Labour look like regaining the advantage. Then this betting rumour comes out. If I were a progressive I wouldn't know who to vote for.
Reform are putting everything into this, but I do detect a struggle. It will be heroic if they pull it off.
Yeah. I wouldn't know who to vote for either. Not helped by the fact that Gorton and Denton are heterogeneous places. So even sounding out the neighbours wouldn't necessarily be an infallible guide to what elsewhere was thinking.
Matt Goodwin's shorts come up in my Youtube feed, and there's a focus on 'all communities' that there wasn't before - rightly so as he's seeking to represent the whole constituency. It's hard to tell what that means. Got all the classic WWC voters onside so now he's rolling the tanks on to Labour's lawn? Or belated realisation of the electoral realities of the seat?
Matt Goodwin's shorts are the last thing I'd want to see on YouTube or indeed anywhere else.
Nah - worst possible result for Labour is a Tory win. For then the world would have truly turned upside down....
Green 40% Ref 35% Lab 10% Con 9.5% LD 4% Others buttons %
'At least we beat the Tories'
You think the Tories will get 9.5% in G+D? They'll think themselves fortunate to get a fifth of that.
If Labour finished behind the Tories in this bye election Starmer would be gone the next day. But they won't. He has until May to improve things. At that point things are likely to get a bit tricky.
How many careers will.have to be laid down for Starmer to survive?
As many as it takes...
starts to make joke about the numbers sacrificed to the Golden Throne to keep the Emperor alive in the Grim Darkness of the Far Future, then chickens out...
That 19% Reform looks tasty. They'd need the Left to split correctly. But never underestimate the Left's ability to do exactly that.
They seem to be splitting very nicely atm. First it looks like Greens will easy be the lefty choice. Then there are all these rumours of joy on the doorsteps for Labour canvassers, so Labour look like regaining the advantage. Then this betting rumour comes out. If I were a progressive I wouldn't know who to vote for.
Reform are putting everything into this, but I do detect a struggle. It will be heroic if they pull it off.
Yeah. I wouldn't know who to vote for either. Not helped by the fact that Gorton and Denton are heterogeneous places. So even sounding out the neighbours wouldn't necessarily be an infallible guide to what elsewhere was thinking.
Matt Goodwin's shorts come up in my Youtube feed, and there's a focus on 'all communities' that there wasn't before - rightly so as he's seeking to represent the whole constituency. It's hard to tell what that means. Got all the classic WWC voters onside so now he's rolling the tanks on to Labour's lawn? Or belated realisation of the electoral realities of the seat?
It means they're trying to appeal to swing voters, and not just their base.
That 19% Reform looks tasty. They'd need the Left to split correctly. But never underestimate the Left's ability to do exactly that.
They seem to be splitting very nicely atm. First it looks like Greens will easy be the lefty choice. Then there are all these rumours of joy on the doorsteps for Labour canvassers, so Labour look like regaining the advantage. Then this betting rumour comes out. If I were a progressive I wouldn't know who to vote for.
Reform are putting everything into this, but I do detect a struggle. It will be heroic if they pull it off.
Yeah. I wouldn't know who to vote for either. Not helped by the fact that Gorton and Denton are heterogeneous places. So even sounding out the neighbours wouldn't necessarily be an infallible guide to what elsewhere was thinking.
Matt Goodwin's shorts come up in my Youtube feed, and there's a focus on 'all communities' that there wasn't before - rightly so as he's seeking to represent the whole constituency. It's hard to tell what that means. Got all the classic WWC voters onside so now he's rolling the tanks on to Labour's lawn? Or belated realisation of the electoral realities of the seat?
Matt Goodwin's shorts are the last thing I'd want to see on YouTube or indeed anywhere else.
It's an odd thing the algorithm. I get a lot of tv show clips, dog videos, video game stuff, but also posts from an account which thinks Trump is far too soft which I'm not sure what I first watched which added that to what it thinks my preferences are.
Just musing on the result here and possible knock on effects..... Ssy Greens take this, perhaps handsomely. Then, in May, Reform struggle in Scotland perhaps coming third and come fourth in wards won or votes or both in London and behind Plaid in Wales..... Potential for the bubble to burst?
Certainly. However. I suspect they'll do very well in the non City Metro boroughs.
Yes, agreed, but will it be enough? The big tickets are the nations and capital. And they might get a bit undone by the 'thirds' and 'halves' up in some areas stopping them gettihg the 'gain' headlines of the full county elections last year. An example is Suellas backyard of Fareham (half up) - Reform cant gain it but if the Tories hold 6 of the 16 up they retain msjority on the council (i think prediction is Tories hold 4 to 6 so......) and it generates its iwn negative feedback 'Reform fall short in Suellas back yard' etc
Only because of where the media is based. 9m people in London. 5.5m in Scotland. 3m in Wales. Metro boroughs voting c. 11m. When it comes to actual numbers it's the Metros which are the "big ticket". Though I appreciate Wandsworth and Westminster will lead the news as ever.
Well, yes. Im talking about what will drive he headlines and narrative. There will always be that element of fog in the channel, europe cut off
A number of boroughs are holding all out elections.
Labour losing places like Sunderland, Barnsley Swindon, Wakefield, Sandwell, to Reform, and the Conservatives losing Walsall and Essex to them, will generate headlines.
Well, yes, but not to the extent of last year. Only Reform and the LDs won overall control of councils last year. All 5 parties will have 'successes' to point at this year. Plus the 2 Nat parties will too. The 'utterly dominant' narrative will not be there
My best guess is Reform will take c.1,000 seats, overall.
Larry the Cat is getting on a bit. Hopefully we won't find out whether Starmer gets a dead cat bounce.
Larry is nearly 20 the old legend
I have it on very good authority that this is the 2nd Larry. The original passed during Covid.
I'd always assumed it was a Dread Pirate Roberts type arrangement. Go into port, change the crew have an election, kick out the PM and staff, switch the cat, no one's any the wiser.
Larry the Cat is getting on a bit. Hopefully we won't find out whether Starmer gets a dead cat bounce.
Larry is nearly 20 the old legend
I have it on very good authority that this is the 2nd Larry. The original passed during Covid.
I'd always assumed it was a Dread Pirate Roberts type arrangement. Go into port, change the crew have an election, kick out the PM and staff, switch the cat, no one's any the wiser.
The entire foundation of my trust in government has just been kicked away by that suggestion.
Ch 4 News gives Ratcliffe a well deserved hammering. He avoided £4 billion in tax in the last 5 years lived as a tax exile in Monaco and claimed we had 21 million immigrants when the figure was 3 million. Presumably they were paying the tax he was avoiding
There's a bit of a side-of-a-bus argument going on here. The left repeatedly making the point that 'only' 3 million immigrants have arrived in the last five years isn't the zinger they think it is.
Though otoh it highlights ‘hard headed businessman’ Ratcliffe is either speaking through his arse or is a dishonest propagandiser. Also that the right despite their opportunistic outrage is mostly responsible for that 3 million.
The reality is that average annual net migration was higher under the Tories than under Labour. And yet somehow this is all the fault of "the left". Lol.
I think you're misunderstanding. Noone's denying that the Tories were terrible at controlling immigration. But also, no-one's voting for the left to keep immigration down because they don't appear to consider it a problem. Saying "it's only 3 million in five years" only reinforces this view. And pushes more voters towards Reform i.e. the party which majors on immigration and wasn't the right wing party in government when immigration surged. And this is bad news for Labour, because the more one right-wing party is clear of the other, the worse Labour do. And Reform is already the one in the lead.
Nah - worst possible result for Labour is a Tory win. For then the world would have truly turned upside down....
Green 40% Ref 35% Lab 10% Con 9.5% LD 4% Others buttons %
'At least we beat the Tories'
You think the Tories will get 9.5% in G+D? They'll think themselves fortunate to get a fifth of that.
If Labour finished behind the Tories in this bye election Starmer would be gone the next day. But they won't. He has until May to improve things. At that point things are likely to get a bit tricky.
How many careers will.have to be laid down for Starmer to survive?
As many as necessary of course. Its the way he thinks.
That 19% Reform looks tasty. They'd need the Left to split correctly. But never underestimate the Left's ability to do exactly that.
They seem to be splitting very nicely atm. First it looks like Greens will easy be the lefty choice. Then there are all these rumours of joy on the doorsteps for Labour canvassers, so Labour look like regaining the advantage. Then this betting rumour comes out. If I were a progressive I wouldn't know who to vote for.
Reform are putting everything into this, but I do detect a struggle. It will be heroic if they pull it off.
Yeah. I wouldn't know who to vote for either. Not helped by the fact that Gorton and Denton are heterogeneous places. So even sounding out the neighbours wouldn't necessarily be an infallible guide to what elsewhere was thinking.
Matt Goodwin's shorts come up in my Youtube feed, and there's a focus on 'all communities' that there wasn't before - rightly so as he's seeking to represent the whole constituency. It's hard to tell what that means. Got all the classic WWC voters onside so now he's rolling the tanks on to Labour's lawn? Or belated realisation of the electoral realities of the seat?
Matt Goodwin's shorts are the last thing I'd want to see on YouTube or indeed anywhere else.
Just musing on the result here and possible knock on effects..... Ssy Greens take this, perhaps handsomely. Then, in May, Reform struggle in Scotland perhaps coming third and come fourth in wards won or votes or both in London and behind Plaid in Wales..... Potential for the bubble to burst?
Certainly. However. I suspect they'll do very well in the non City Metro boroughs.
Yes, agreed, but will it be enough? The big tickets are the nations and capital. And they might get a bit undone by the 'thirds' and 'halves' up in some areas stopping them gettihg the 'gain' headlines of the full county elections last year. An example is Suellas backyard of Fareham (half up) - Reform cant gain it but if the Tories hold 6 of the 16 up they retain msjority on the council (i think prediction is Tories hold 4 to 6 so......) and it generates its iwn negative feedback 'Reform fall short in Suellas back yard' etc
Only because of where the media is based. 9m people in London. 5.5m in Scotland. 3m in Wales. Metro boroughs voting c. 11m. When it comes to actual numbers it's the Metros which are the "big ticket". Though I appreciate Wandsworth and Westminster will lead the news as ever.
Well, yes. Im talking about what will drive he headlines and narrative. There will always be that element of fog in the channel, europe cut off
A number of boroughs are holding all out elections.
Labour losing places like Sunderland, Barnsley Swindon, Wakefield, Sandwell, to Reform, and the Conservatives losing Walsall and Essex to them, will generate headlines.
Well, yes, but not to the extent of last year. Only Reform and the LDs won overall control of councils last year. All 5 parties will have 'successes' to point at this year. Plus the 2 Nat parties will too. The 'utterly dominant' narrative will not be there
My best guess is Reform will take c.1,000 seats, overall.
Larry the Cat is getting on a bit. Hopefully we won't find out whether Starmer gets a dead cat bounce.
Larry is nearly 20 the old legend
I have it on very good authority that this is the 2nd Larry. The original passed during Covid.
I'd always assumed it was a Dread Pirate Roberts type arrangement. Go into port, change the crew have an election, kick out the PM and staff, switch the cat, no one's any the wiser.
No drama
Natural causes
Carrie found him
Then all hell let loose with concerns the Conspiracy Theorists would have a field day.
Fortunately they had time to find a suitable lookalike.
Ch 4 News gives Ratcliffe a well deserved hammering. He avoided £4 billion in tax in the last 5 years lived as a tax exile in Monaco and claimed we had 21 million immigrants when the figure was 3 million. Presumably they were paying the tax he was avoiding
There's a bit of a side-of-a-bus argument going on here. The left repeatedly making the point that 'only' 3 million immigrants have arrived in the last five years isn't the zinger they think it is.
Though otoh it highlights ‘hard headed businessman’ Ratcliffe is either speaking through his arse or is a dishonest propagandiser. Also that the right despite their opportunistic outrage is mostly responsible for that 3 million.
The reality is that average annual net migration was higher under the Tories than under Labour. And yet somehow this is all the fault of "the left". Lol.
I think you're misunderstanding. Noone's denying that the Tories were terrible at controlling immigration. But also, no-one's voting for the left to keep immigration down because they don't appear to consider it a problem. Saying "it's only 3 million in five years" only reinforces this view. And pushes more voters towards Reform i.e. the party which majors on immigration and wasn't the right wing party in government when immigration surged. And this is bad news for Labour, because the more one right-wing party is clear of the other, the worse Labour do. And Reform is already the one in the lead.
Nobody is saying "it's only three million." They're saying that someone who doesn't know the difference between 3 million and 21 million is perhaps not very well informed on this topic. As for Reform not being in power when immigration surged, they currently contain more of the Johnson cabinet than the Tories do, so I'm not sure that comment is even true. Has it occurred to you that maybe these people keep screaming immigration because they want power and they've figured it's the easiest way to get it?
That 19% Reform looks tasty. They'd need the Left to split correctly. But never underestimate the Left's ability to do exactly that.
They seem to be splitting very nicely atm. First it looks like Greens will easy be the lefty choice. Then there are all these rumours of joy on the doorsteps for Labour canvassers, so Labour look like regaining the advantage. Then this betting rumour comes out. If I were a progressive I wouldn't know who to vote for.
Reform are putting everything into this, but I do detect a struggle. It will be heroic if they pull it off.
Yeah. I wouldn't know who to vote for either. Not helped by the fact that Gorton and Denton are heterogeneous places. So even sounding out the neighbours wouldn't necessarily be an infallible guide to what elsewhere was thinking.
My reckoning is that Greens + Labour will more than double a committed but topped out Reform vote, so I'd be chill about which way to jump. I don't think the Reform vote will quite scale with their national polling. But, subject to local indications that I don't have, I'd probably lean Green to defeat Reform this time were I there.
That 19% Reform looks tasty. They'd need the Left to split correctly. But never underestimate the Left's ability to do exactly that.
They seem to be splitting very nicely atm. First it looks like Greens will easy be the lefty choice. Then there are all these rumours of joy on the doorsteps for Labour canvassers, so Labour look like regaining the advantage. Then this betting rumour comes out. If I were a progressive I wouldn't know who to vote for.
Reform are putting everything into this, but I do detect a struggle. It will be heroic if they pull it off.
Yeah. I wouldn't know who to vote for either. Not helped by the fact that Gorton and Denton are heterogeneous places. So even sounding out the neighbours wouldn't necessarily be an infallible guide to what elsewhere was thinking.
Matt Goodwin's shorts come up in my Youtube feed, and there's a focus on 'all communities' that there wasn't before - rightly so as he's seeking to represent the whole constituency. It's hard to tell what that means. Got all the classic WWC voters onside so now he's rolling the tanks on to Labour's lawn? Or belated realisation of the electoral realities of the seat?
Matt Goodwin's shorts are the last thing I'd want to see on YouTube or indeed anywhere else.
It's an odd thing the algorithm. I get a lot of tv show clips, dog videos, video game stuff, but also posts from an account which thinks Trump is far too soft which I'm not sure what I first watched which added that to what it thinks my preferences are.
Larry the Cat is getting on a bit. Hopefully we won't find out whether Starmer gets a dead cat bounce.
Larry is nearly 20 the old legend
I have it on very good authority that this is the 2nd Larry. The original passed during Covid.
I'd always assumed it was a Dread Pirate Roberts type arrangement. Go into port, change the crew have an election, kick out the PM and staff, switch the cat, no one's any the wiser.
No drama
Natural causes
Carrie found him
Then all hell let loose with concerns the Conspiracy Theorists would have a field day.
Fortunately they had time to find a suitable lookalike.
Well, one Conspiracy Theorist sure is having a field day.
I see the argument that a Green win in this by-election is strategically worse for Labour than a Reform win but this is where my 'tribalism' (which I'm not ashamed of) breaks down. If Labour don't hold the seat, and I hope they do, I'd vastly prefer the Greens to win it than Reform. Give me non-racist delusional populism over the racist type any day of the week.
Larry the Cat is getting on a bit. Hopefully we won't find out whether Starmer gets a dead cat bounce.
Larry is nearly 20 the old legend
I have it on very good authority that this is the 2nd Larry. The original passed during Covid.
I'd always assumed it was a Dread Pirate Roberts type arrangement. Go into port, change the crew have an election, kick out the PM and staff, switch the cat, no one's any the wiser.
No drama
Natural causes
Carrie found him
Then all hell let loose with concerns the Conspiracy Theorists would have a field day.
Fortunately they had time to find a suitable lookalike.
Change the record. Its all about Starmers appalling decision making and his inability to answer a simple question. His avoidance at PMQ's does not go unnoticed
Just musing on the result here and possible knock on effects..... Ssy Greens take this, perhaps handsomely. Then, in May, Reform struggle in Scotland perhaps coming third and come fourth in wards won or votes or both in London and behind Plaid in Wales..... Potential for the bubble to burst?
Certainly. However. I suspect they'll do very well in the non City Metro boroughs.
Yes, agreed, but will it be enough? The big tickets are the nations and capital. And they might get a bit undone by the 'thirds' and 'halves' up in some areas stopping them gettihg the 'gain' headlines of the full county elections last year. An example is Suellas backyard of Fareham (half up) - Reform cant gain it but if the Tories hold 6 of the 16 up they retain msjority on the council (i think prediction is Tories hold 4 to 6 so......) and it generates its iwn negative feedback 'Reform fall short in Suellas back yard' etc
Only because of where the media is based. 9m people in London. 5.5m in Scotland. 3m in Wales. Metro boroughs voting c. 11m. When it comes to actual numbers it's the Metros which are the "big ticket". Though I appreciate Wandsworth and Westminster will lead the news as ever.
Well, yes. Im talking about what will drive he headlines and narrative. There will always be that element of fog in the channel, europe cut off
A number of boroughs are holding all out elections.
Labour losing places like Sunderland, Barnsley Swindon, Wakefield, Sandwell, to Reform, and the Conservatives losing Walsall and Essex to them, will generate headlines.
Well, yes, but not to the extent of last year. Only Reform and the LDs won overall control of councils last year. All 5 parties will have 'successes' to point at this year. Plus the 2 Nat parties will too. The 'utterly dominant' narrative will not be there
My best guess is Reform will take c.1,000 seats, overall.
Yeah probably. But there are 4000 seats up.
It's the biggest round since 2023 I believe even with the postponed contests.
About 40% of the seats (1,817) are in London's 32 Boroughs (plus six Mayoral contests).
Ch 4 News gives Ratcliffe a well deserved hammering. He avoided £4 billion in tax in the last 5 years lived as a tax exile in Monaco and claimed we had 21 million immigrants when the figure was 3 million. Presumably they were paying the tax he was avoiding
There's a bit of a side-of-a-bus argument going on here. The left repeatedly making the point that 'only' 3 million immigrants have arrived in the last five years isn't the zinger they think it is.
Though otoh it highlights ‘hard headed businessman’ Ratcliffe is either speaking through his arse or is a dishonest propagandiser. Also that the right despite their opportunistic outrage is mostly responsible for that 3 million.
The reality is that average annual net migration was higher under the Tories than under Labour. And yet somehow this is all the fault of "the left". Lol.
I think you're misunderstanding. Noone's denying that the Tories were terrible at controlling immigration. But also, no-one's voting for the left to keep immigration down because they don't appear to consider it a problem. Saying "it's only 3 million in five years" only reinforces this view. And pushes more voters towards Reform i.e. the party which majors on immigration and wasn't the right wing party in government when immigration surged. And this is bad news for Labour, because the more one right-wing party is clear of the other, the worse Labour do. And Reform is already the one in the lead.
Nobody is saying "it's only three million." They're saying that someone who doesn't know the difference between 3 million and 21 million is perhaps not very well informed on this topic. As for Reform not being in power when immigration surged, they currently contain more of the Johnson cabinet than the Tories do, so I'm not sure that comment is even true. Has it occurred to you that maybe these people keep screaming immigration because they want power and they've figured it's the easiest way to get it?
Well yes. If you go back up through the nested comments this started with Roger saying Jim Ratciffe got a well-deserved hammering. My point is that that well-deserved hammering saying that immigration over the last five years was 'only' 3 million does Reform no harm at all and does not convince wavering voters to embrace immigration in the way that that argument's exponents suppose.
On the Shipman critique of Starmer as "having no philosophy", that's an Eric Morecambe piece - all his normal points at slightly greater length in a slightly different order with the philosophy point as a go faster stripe. There is no demonstration that Starmer's questions are anything more than a not-political-enough technocrat trying gradually to sort out the pile of rubble he inherited.
I wonder if we asked ChatGPT for a summary of his previous 48 columns, how much of the content would be overlap?
Has Shipman identified the "philosophy" of any of our previous say 5 or 6 Prime Ministers, that made them successes? What is it?
Given that Shippers is the Political Editor of the Spectator, that's probably to be expected.
On philosophy, yes one is always necessary otherwise there can only be drift and dead reckoning, but it needs to be developed into a set of policies for, and to be applied in, the context.
One current Conservative problem is that they have no real philosophy to develop into policy, so all they have is tactical reactionism.
(I think the Tugendhat piece is more interesting and more revealing, but I may not have time to comment.)
Larry the Cat is getting on a bit. Hopefully we won't find out whether Starmer gets a dead cat bounce.
Larry is nearly 20 the old legend
I have it on very good authority that this is the 2nd Larry. The original passed during Covid.
I'd always assumed it was a Dread Pirate Roberts type arrangement. Go into port, change the crew have an election, kick out the PM and staff, switch the cat, no one's any the wiser.
No drama
Natural causes
Carrie found him
Then all hell let loose with concerns the Conspiracy Theorists would have a field day.
Fortunately they had time to find a suitable lookalike.
Change the record. Its all about Starmers appalling decision making and his inability to answer a simple question. His avoidance at PMQ's does not go unnoticed
Larry the Cat is getting on a bit. Hopefully we won't find out whether Starmer gets a dead cat bounce.
Larry is nearly 20 the old legend
I have it on very good authority that this is the 2nd Larry. The original passed during Covid.
I'd always assumed it was a Dread Pirate Roberts type arrangement. Go into port, change the crew have an election, kick out the PM and staff, switch the cat, no one's any the wiser.
No drama
Natural causes
Carrie found him
Then all hell let loose with concerns the Conspiracy Theorists would have a field day.
Fortunately they had time to find a suitable lookalike.
Change the record. Its all about Starmers appalling decision making and his inability to answer a simple question. His avoidance at PMQ's does not go unnoticed
First lot of Mandleson e.mails.. incoming.
What are you talking about.
Has your bot malfunctioned.
This conversation is nothing to do with politics, it's about a national icon who transcends petty point scoring.
That 19% Reform looks tasty. They'd need the Left to split correctly. But never underestimate the Left's ability to do exactly that.
They seem to be splitting very nicely atm. First it looks like Greens will easy be the lefty choice. Then there are all these rumours of joy on the doorsteps for Labour canvassers, so Labour look like regaining the advantage. Then this betting rumour comes out. If I were a progressive I wouldn't know who to vote for.
Reform are putting everything into this, but I do detect a struggle. It will be heroic if they pull it off.
Yeah. I wouldn't know who to vote for either. Not helped by the fact that Gorton and Denton are heterogeneous places. So even sounding out the neighbours wouldn't necessarily be an infallible guide to what elsewhere was thinking.
Matt Goodwin's shorts come up in my Youtube feed, and there's a focus on 'all communities' that there wasn't before - rightly so as he's seeking to represent the whole constituency. It's hard to tell what that means. Got all the classic WWC voters onside so now he's rolling the tanks on to Labour's lawn? Or belated realisation of the electoral realities of the seat?
Matt Goodwin's shorts are the last thing I'd want to see on YouTube or indeed anywhere else.
Second last thing, after Farage's, surely ? Don't give implied permission for TSE to post the pic again,
But Incorrect Horse Battery says AI coding is crap fad.
I'm not sure that's as good an ad for coding AI as you think it is, given how the Spotify client (at least on Windows) has become notably slower and buggier recently...
Larry the Cat is getting on a bit. Hopefully we won't find out whether Starmer gets a dead cat bounce.
Larry is nearly 20 the old legend
I have it on very good authority that this is the 2nd Larry. The original passed during Covid.
I'd always assumed it was a Dread Pirate Roberts type arrangement. Go into port, change the crew have an election, kick out the PM and staff, switch the cat, no one's any the wiser.
No drama
Natural causes
Carrie found him
Then all hell let loose with concerns the Conspiracy Theorists would have a field day.
Fortunately they had time to find a suitable lookalike.
Well, one Conspiracy Theorist sure is having a field day.
I was told by a highly respected ex Tory MP few years ago about Larry. I've no reason to doubt him.
It explains why a cat allegedly 20 years old, who is actually 14 years old, looks so sprightly.
The MP told the tale at a post GE event as an anecdote and I've no reason to suspect he was stringing us all along.
On the Shipman critique of Starmer as "having no philosophy", that's an Eric Morecambe piece - all his normal points at slightly greater length in a slightly different order with the philosophy point as a go faster stripe. There is no demonstration that Starmer's questions are anything more than a not-political-enough technocrat trying gradually to sort out the pile of rubble he inherited.
I wonder if we asked ChatGPT for a summary of his previous 48 columns, how much of the content would be overlap?
Has Shipman identified the "philosophy" of any of our previous say 5 or 6 Prime Ministers, that made them successes? What is it?
Given that Shippers is the Political Editor of the Spectator, that's probably to be expected.
On philosophy, yes one is always necessary otherwise their can only be drift but it needs to be developed into a set of policies for, and to be applied in, the context.
One current Conservative problem is that they have no real philosophy to develop into policy, so all they have is tactical reactionism.
I am annoyed he lifted one of my lines.
Political authority is a lot like virginity, once it has gone it is close to impossible to regain
Just musing on the result here and possible knock on effects..... Ssy Greens take this, perhaps handsomely. Then, in May, Reform struggle in Scotland perhaps coming third and come fourth in wards won or votes or both in London and behind Plaid in Wales..... Potential for the bubble to burst?
Certainly. However. I suspect they'll do very well in the non City Metro boroughs.
Yes, agreed, but will it be enough? The big tickets are the nations and capital. And they might get a bit undone by the 'thirds' and 'halves' up in some areas stopping them gettihg the 'gain' headlines of the full county elections last year. An example is Suellas backyard of Fareham (half up) - Reform cant gain it but if the Tories hold 6 of the 16 up they retain msjority on the council (i think prediction is Tories hold 4 to 6 so......) and it generates its iwn negative feedback 'Reform fall short in Suellas back yard' etc
Only because of where the media is based. 9m people in London. 5.5m in Scotland. 3m in Wales. Metro boroughs voting c. 11m. When it comes to actual numbers it's the Metros which are the "big ticket". Though I appreciate Wandsworth and Westminster will lead the news as ever.
Well, yes. Im talking about what will drive he headlines and narrative. There will always be that element of fog in the channel, europe cut off
A number of boroughs are holding all out elections.
Labour losing places like Sunderland, Barnsley Swindon, Wakefield, Sandwell, to Reform, and the Conservatives losing Walsall and Essex to them, will generate headlines.
Well, yes, but not to the extent of last year. Only Reform and the LDs won overall control of councils last year. All 5 parties will have 'successes' to point at this year. Plus the 2 Nat parties will too. The 'utterly dominant' narrative will not be there
My best guess is Reform will take c.1,000 seats, overall.
Yeah probably. But there are 4000 seats up.
It's the biggest round since 2023 I believe even with the postponed contests.
About 40% of the seats (1,817) are in London's 32 Boroughs (plus six Mayoral contests).
Yep, it's a big set of votes. Labour could conceivably win the most councillors on the night (i think they won't but its not impossible of course) and still have an utter disaster losing tens of councils. Reform could double their current councillors and still come second It's a big night for the picture and narrative
But Incorrect Horse Battery says AI coding is crap fad.
I'm not sure that's as good an ad for coding AI as you think it is, given how the Spotify client (at least on Windows) has become notably slower and buggier recently...
People still use windows? Why would anybody use Windows 11?
Ch 4 News gives Ratcliffe a well deserved hammering. He avoided £4 billion in tax in the last 5 years lived as a tax exile in Monaco and claimed we had 21 million immigrants when the figure was 3 million. Presumably they were paying the tax he was avoiding
There's a bit of a side-of-a-bus argument going on here. The left repeatedly making the point that 'only' 3 million immigrants have arrived in the last five years isn't the zinger they think it is.
Though otoh it highlights ‘hard headed businessman’ Ratcliffe is either speaking through his arse or is a dishonest propagandiser. Also that the right despite their opportunistic outrage is mostly responsible for that 3 million.
The reality is that average annual net migration was higher under the Tories than under Labour. And yet somehow this is all the fault of "the left". Lol.
I think you're misunderstanding. Noone's denying that the Tories were terrible at controlling immigration. But also, no-one's voting for the left to keep immigration down because they don't appear to consider it a problem. Saying "it's only 3 million in five years" only reinforces this view. And pushes more voters towards Reform i.e. the party which majors on immigration and wasn't the right wing party in government when immigration surged. And this is bad news for Labour, because the more one right-wing party is clear of the other, the worse Labour do. And Reform is already the one in the lead.
Nobody is saying "it's only three million." They're saying that someone who doesn't know the difference between 3 million and 21 million is perhaps not very well informed on this topic. As for Reform not being in power when immigration surged, they currently contain more of the Johnson cabinet than the Tories do, so I'm not sure that comment is even true. Has it occurred to you that maybe these people keep screaming immigration because they want power and they've figured it's the easiest way to get it?
The other point Cookie ignores is that immigration is coming down.
The only true reason to vote Farage plus the right wing Tory retreads is if you want to see a pallid imitation of Trump.
Larry the Cat is getting on a bit. Hopefully we won't find out whether Starmer gets a dead cat bounce.
Larry is nearly 20 the old legend
I have it on very good authority that this is the 2nd Larry. The original passed during Covid.
I'd always assumed it was a Dread Pirate Roberts type arrangement. Go into port, change the crew have an election, kick out the PM and staff, switch the cat, no one's any the wiser.
No drama
Natural causes
Carrie found him
Then all hell let loose with concerns the Conspiracy Theorists would have a field day.
Fortunately they had time to find a suitable lookalike.
Change the record. Its all about Starmers appalling decision making and his inability to answer a simple question. His avoidance at PMQ's does not go unnoticed
Larry the Cat is getting on a bit. Hopefully we won't find out whether Starmer gets a dead cat bounce.
Larry is nearly 20 the old legend
I have it on very good authority that this is the 2nd Larry. The original passed during Covid.
I'd always assumed it was a Dread Pirate Roberts type arrangement. Go into port, change the crew have an election, kick out the PM and staff, switch the cat, no one's any the wiser.
No drama
Natural causes
Carrie found him
Then all hell let loose with concerns the Conspiracy Theorists would have a field day.
Fortunately they had time to find a suitable lookalike.
Change the record. Its all about Starmers appalling decision making and his inability to answer a simple question. His avoidance at PMQ's does not go unnoticed
First lot of Mandleson e.mails.. incoming.
What are you talking about.
Has your bot malfunctioned.
This conversation is nothing to do with politics, it's about a national icon who transcends petty point scoring.
You might be trying to divert the conversation from.the real.issue. but it will always come back.to the incompetence of Starmer. His incompetence has just cost us 250k because he can't work with the Cabinet Secretary. His incompetence has made Britain a laughing stock appointing Mandleson.
Larry the Cat is getting on a bit. Hopefully we won't find out whether Starmer gets a dead cat bounce.
Larry is nearly 20 the old legend
I have it on very good authority that this is the 2nd Larry. The original passed during Covid.
I'd always assumed it was a Dread Pirate Roberts type arrangement. Go into port, change the crew have an election, kick out the PM and staff, switch the cat, no one's any the wiser.
No drama
Natural causes
Carrie found him
Then all hell let loose with concerns the Conspiracy Theorists would have a field day.
Fortunately they had time to find a suitable lookalike.
Well, one Conspiracy Theorist sure is having a field day.
As Conspiracy Theories go, it's one of the milder and more plausible ones.
Larry the Cat is getting on a bit. Hopefully we won't find out whether Starmer gets a dead cat bounce.
Larry is nearly 20 the old legend
I have it on very good authority that this is the 2nd Larry. The original passed during Covid.
I'd always assumed it was a Dread Pirate Roberts type arrangement. Go into port, change the crew have an election, kick out the PM and staff, switch the cat, no one's any the wiser.
No drama
Natural causes
Carrie found him
Then all hell let loose with concerns the Conspiracy Theorists would have a field day.
Fortunately they had time to find a suitable lookalike.
Change the record. Its all about Starmers appalling decision making and his inability to answer a simple question. His avoidance at PMQ's does not go unnoticed
Larry the Cat is getting on a bit. Hopefully we won't find out whether Starmer gets a dead cat bounce.
Larry is nearly 20 the old legend
I have it on very good authority that this is the 2nd Larry. The original passed during Covid.
I'd always assumed it was a Dread Pirate Roberts type arrangement. Go into port, change the crew have an election, kick out the PM and staff, switch the cat, no one's any the wiser.
No drama
Natural causes
Carrie found him
Then all hell let loose with concerns the Conspiracy Theorists would have a field day.
Fortunately they had time to find a suitable lookalike.
Change the record. Its all about Starmers appalling decision making and his inability to answer a simple question. His avoidance at PMQ's does not go unnoticed
First lot of Mandleson e.mails.. incoming.
What are you talking about.
Has your bot malfunctioned.
This conversation is nothing to do with politics, it's about a national icon who transcends petty point scoring.
You might be trying to divert the conversation from.the real.issue. but it will always come back.to the incompetence of Starmer. His incompetence has just cost us 250k because he can't work with the Cabinet Secretary. His incompetence has made Britain a laughing stock appointing Mandleson.
That 19% Reform looks tasty. They'd need the Left to split correctly. But never underestimate the Left's ability to do exactly that.
They seem to be splitting very nicely atm. First it looks like Greens will easy be the lefty choice. Then there are all these rumours of joy on the doorsteps for Labour canvassers, so Labour look like regaining the advantage. Then this betting rumour comes out. If I were a progressive I wouldn't know who to vote for.
Reform are putting everything into this, but I do detect a struggle. It will be heroic if they pull it off.
Yeah. I wouldn't know who to vote for either. Not helped by the fact that Gorton and Denton are heterogeneous places. So even sounding out the neighbours wouldn't necessarily be an infallible guide to what elsewhere was thinking.
I've just realised there is an Official Monster Raving Loony Party candidate. Sir Oink a Lot has to be in with a serious chance, surely.
Larry the Cat is getting on a bit. Hopefully we won't find out whether Starmer gets a dead cat bounce.
Larry is nearly 20 the old legend
I have it on very good authority that this is the 2nd Larry. The original passed during Covid.
I'd always assumed it was a Dread Pirate Roberts type arrangement. Go into port, change the crew have an election, kick out the PM and staff, switch the cat, no one's any the wiser.
No drama
Natural causes
Carrie found him
Then all hell let loose with concerns the Conspiracy Theorists would have a field day.
Fortunately they had time to find a suitable lookalike.
Well, one Conspiracy Theorist sure is having a field day.
I was told by a highly respected ex Tory MP few years ago about Larry. I've no reason to doubt him.
It explains why a cat allegedly 20 years old, who is actually 14 years old, looks so sprightly.
The MP told the tale at a post GE event as an anecdote and I've no reason to suspect he was stringing us all along.
'highly respected ex Tory MP'? Come now, if you're going to spin a yarn, you've got to keep the incidental details plausible!
Ch 4 News gives Ratcliffe a well deserved hammering. He avoided £4 billion in tax in the last 5 years lived as a tax exile in Monaco and claimed we had 21 million immigrants when the figure was 3 million. Presumably they were paying the tax he was avoiding
There's a bit of a side-of-a-bus argument going on here. The left repeatedly making the point that 'only' 3 million immigrants have arrived in the last five years isn't the zinger they think it is.
Though otoh it highlights ‘hard headed businessman’ Ratcliffe is either speaking through his arse or is a dishonest propagandiser. Also that the right despite their opportunistic outrage is mostly responsible for that 3 million.
The reality is that average annual net migration was higher under the Tories than under Labour. And yet somehow this is all the fault of "the left". Lol.
I think you're misunderstanding. Noone's denying that the Tories were terrible at controlling immigration. But also, no-one's voting for the left to keep immigration down because they don't appear to consider it a problem. Saying "it's only 3 million in five years" only reinforces this view. And pushes more voters towards Reform i.e. the party which majors on immigration and wasn't the right wing party in government when immigration surged. And this is bad news for Labour, because the more one right-wing party is clear of the other, the worse Labour do. And Reform is already the one in the lead.
Nobody is saying "it's only three million." They're saying that someone who doesn't know the difference between 3 million and 21 million is perhaps not very well informed on this topic. As for Reform not being in power when immigration surged, they currently contain more of the Johnson cabinet than the Tories do, so I'm not sure that comment is even true. Has it occurred to you that maybe these people keep screaming immigration because they want power and they've figured it's the easiest way to get it?
The other point Cookie ignores is that immigration is coming down.
The only true reason to vote Farage plus the right wing Tory retreads is if you want to see a pallid imitation of Trump.
It coming down but still by historical standards very high levels. Saying only 900k gross in, 200-300k a year net is still to a lot of the British public too high. And the small boat people i.e. what a lot of people see as illegal immigration is rising. That is the door Farage will keep pushing on.
Talking of which, it's luge doubles. I wonder at the conversation whereby a chap asks another chap to be his partner for luge doubles. It boggles the mind.
Larry the Cat is getting on a bit. Hopefully we won't find out whether Starmer gets a dead cat bounce.
Larry is nearly 20 the old legend
I have it on very good authority that this is the 2nd Larry. The original passed during Covid.
I'd always assumed it was a Dread Pirate Roberts type arrangement. Go into port, change the crew have an election, kick out the PM and staff, switch the cat, no one's any the wiser.
No drama
Natural causes
Carrie found him
Then all hell let loose with concerns the Conspiracy Theorists would have a field day.
Fortunately they had time to find a suitable lookalike.
Also, when I first read this, without thinking about the quoted post, I thought for a moment that Johnson had snuffed it!
On the Shipman critique of Starmer as "having no philosophy", that's an Eric Morecambe piece - all his normal points at slightly greater length in a slightly different order with the philosophy point as a go faster stripe. There is no demonstration that Starmer's questions are anything more than a not-political-enough technocrat trying gradually to sort out the pile of rubble he inherited.
I wonder if we asked ChatGPT for a summary of his previous 48 columns, how much of the content would be overlap?
Has Shipman identified the "philosophy" of any of our previous say 5 or 6 Prime Ministers, that made them successes? What is it?
Given that Shippers is the Political Editor of the Spectator, that's probably to be expected.
On philosophy, yes one is always necessary otherwise their can only be drift but it needs to be developed into a set of policies for, and to be applied in, the context.
One current Conservative problem is that they have no real philosophy to develop into policy, so all they have is tactical reactionism.
I am annoyed he lifted one of my lines.
Political authority is a lot like virginity, once it has gone it is close to impossible to regain
Larry the Cat is getting on a bit. Hopefully we won't find out whether Starmer gets a dead cat bounce.
Larry is nearly 20 the old legend
I have it on very good authority that this is the 2nd Larry. The original passed during Covid.
I'd always assumed it was a Dread Pirate Roberts type arrangement. Go into port, change the crew have an election, kick out the PM and staff, switch the cat, no one's any the wiser.
No drama
Natural causes
Carrie found him
Then all hell let loose with concerns the Conspiracy Theorists would have a field day.
Fortunately they had time to find a suitable lookalike.
Change the record. Its all about Starmers appalling decision making and his inability to answer a simple question. His avoidance at PMQ's does not go unnoticed
Larry the Cat is getting on a bit. Hopefully we won't find out whether Starmer gets a dead cat bounce.
Larry is nearly 20 the old legend
I have it on very good authority that this is the 2nd Larry. The original passed during Covid.
I'd always assumed it was a Dread Pirate Roberts type arrangement. Go into port, change the crew have an election, kick out the PM and staff, switch the cat, no one's any the wiser.
No drama
Natural causes
Carrie found him
Then all hell let loose with concerns the Conspiracy Theorists would have a field day.
Fortunately they had time to find a suitable lookalike.
Change the record. Its all about Starmers appalling decision making and his inability to answer a simple question. His avoidance at PMQ's does not go unnoticed
First lot of Mandleson e.mails.. incoming.
What are you talking about.
Has your bot malfunctioned.
This conversation is nothing to do with politics, it's about a national icon who transcends petty point scoring.
You might be trying to divert the conversation from.the real.issue. but it will always come back.to the incompetence of Starmer. His incompetence has just cost us 250k because he can't work with the Cabinet Secretary. His incompetence has made Britain a laughing stock appointing Mandleson.
You really need to get a life.
What's Larry the Cat got to do with Wirmold
I relied to a comment about Larry the cat
Larry the Cat will be last man standing when Starmer has emptied No 10. Hes not someone it would seem that people warm to working with.
Larry the Cat is getting on a bit. Hopefully we won't find out whether Starmer gets a dead cat bounce.
Larry is nearly 20 the old legend
I have it on very good authority that this is the 2nd Larry. The original passed during Covid.
I'd always assumed it was a Dread Pirate Roberts type arrangement. Go into port, change the crew have an election, kick out the PM and staff, switch the cat, no one's any the wiser.
No drama
Natural causes
Carrie found him
Then all hell let loose with concerns the Conspiracy Theorists would have a field day.
Fortunately they had time to find a suitable lookalike.
Well, one Conspiracy Theorist sure is having a field day.
I was told by a highly respected ex Tory MP few years ago about Larry. I've no reason to doubt him.
It explains why a cat allegedly 20 years old, who is actually 14 years old, looks so sprightly.
The MP told the tale at a post GE event as an anecdote and I've no reason to suspect he was stringing us all along.
On the Shipman critique of Starmer as "having no philosophy", that's an Eric Morecambe piece - all his normal points at slightly greater length in a slightly different order with the philosophy point as a go faster stripe. There is no demonstration that Starmer's questions are anything more than a not-political-enough technocrat trying gradually to sort out the pile of rubble he inherited.
I wonder if we asked ChatGPT for a summary of his previous 48 columns, how much of the content would be overlap?
Has Shipman identified the "philosophy" of any of our previous say 5 or 6 Prime Ministers, that made them successes? What is it?
Given that Shippers is the Political Editor of the Spectator, that's probably to be expected.
On philosophy, yes one is always necessary otherwise their can only be drift but it needs to be developed into a set of policies for, and to be applied in, the context.
One current Conservative problem is that they have no real philosophy to develop into policy, so all they have is tactical reactionism.
I am annoyed he lifted one of my lines.
Political authority is a lot like virginity, once it has gone it is close to impossible to regain
Larry the Cat is getting on a bit. Hopefully we won't find out whether Starmer gets a dead cat bounce.
Larry is nearly 20 the old legend
I have it on very good authority that this is the 2nd Larry. The original passed during Covid.
I'd always assumed it was a Dread Pirate Roberts type arrangement. Go into port, change the crew have an election, kick out the PM and staff, switch the cat, no one's any the wiser.
No drama
Natural causes
Carrie found him
Then all hell let loose with concerns the Conspiracy Theorists would have a field day.
Fortunately they had time to find a suitable lookalike.
Change the record. Its all about Starmers appalling decision making and his inability to answer a simple question. His avoidance at PMQ's does not go unnoticed
Larry the Cat is getting on a bit. Hopefully we won't find out whether Starmer gets a dead cat bounce.
Larry is nearly 20 the old legend
I have it on very good authority that this is the 2nd Larry. The original passed during Covid.
I'd always assumed it was a Dread Pirate Roberts type arrangement. Go into port, change the crew have an election, kick out the PM and staff, switch the cat, no one's any the wiser.
No drama
Natural causes
Carrie found him
Then all hell let loose with concerns the Conspiracy Theorists would have a field day.
Fortunately they had time to find a suitable lookalike.
Change the record. Its all about Starmers appalling decision making and his inability to answer a simple question. His avoidance at PMQ's does not go unnoticed
First lot of Mandleson e.mails.. incoming.
What are you talking about.
Has your bot malfunctioned.
This conversation is nothing to do with politics, it's about a national icon who transcends petty point scoring.
You might be trying to divert the conversation from.the real.issue. but it will always come back.to the incompetence of Starmer. His incompetence has just cost us 250k because he can't work with the Cabinet Secretary. His incompetence has made Britain a laughing stock appointing Mandleson.
You really need to get a life.
What's Larry the Cat got to do with Wirmold
I relied to a comment about Larry the cat
Larry the Cat will be last man standing when Starmer has emptied No 10. Hes not someone it would seem that people warm to working with.
Larry the Cat is getting on a bit. Hopefully we won't find out whether Starmer gets a dead cat bounce.
Larry is nearly 20 the old legend
I have it on very good authority that this is the 2nd Larry. The original passed during Covid.
I'd always assumed it was a Dread Pirate Roberts type arrangement. Go into port, change the crew have an election, kick out the PM and staff, switch the cat, no one's any the wiser.
No drama
Natural causes
Carrie found him
Then all hell let loose with concerns the Conspiracy Theorists would have a field day.
Fortunately they had time to find a suitable lookalike.
Well, one Conspiracy Theorist sure is having a field day.
I was told by a highly respected ex Tory MP few years ago about Larry. I've no reason to doubt him.
It explains why a cat allegedly 20 years old, who is actually 14 years old, looks so sprightly.
The MP told the tale at a post GE event as an anecdote and I've no reason to suspect he was stringing us all along.
Larry the Cat is getting on a bit. Hopefully we won't find out whether Starmer gets a dead cat bounce.
Larry is nearly 20 the old legend
I have it on very good authority that this is the 2nd Larry. The original passed during Covid.
I'd always assumed it was a Dread Pirate Roberts type arrangement. Go into port, change the crew have an election, kick out the PM and staff, switch the cat, no one's any the wiser.
No drama
Natural causes
Carrie found him
Then all hell let loose with concerns the Conspiracy Theorists would have a field day.
Fortunately they had time to find a suitable lookalike.
Well, one Conspiracy Theorist sure is having a field day.
I was told by a highly respected ex Tory MP few years ago about Larry. I've no reason to doubt him.
It explains why a cat allegedly 20 years old, who is actually 14 years old, looks so sprightly.
The MP told the tale at a post GE event as an anecdote and I've no reason to suspect he was stringing us all along.
Larry the Cat is getting on a bit. Hopefully we won't find out whether Starmer gets a dead cat bounce.
Larry is nearly 20 the old legend
I have it on very good authority that this is the 2nd Larry. The original passed during Covid.
I'd always assumed it was a Dread Pirate Roberts type arrangement. Go into port, change the crew have an election, kick out the PM and staff, switch the cat, no one's any the wiser.
No drama
Natural causes
Carrie found him
Then all hell let loose with concerns the Conspiracy Theorists would have a field day.
Fortunately they had time to find a suitable lookalike.
Well, one Conspiracy Theorist sure is having a field day.
I was told by a highly respected ex Tory MP few years ago about Larry. I've no reason to doubt him.
It explains why a cat allegedly 20 years old, who is actually 14 years old, looks so sprightly.
The MP told the tale at a post GE event as an anecdote and I've no reason to suspect he was stringing us all along.
There's a highly respected ex Tory MP?
There were a few.
You don't have to agree with someone to respect them.
The one in question was very helpful to myself and a business colleague on a few occasions.
Larry the Cat is getting on a bit. Hopefully we won't find out whether Starmer gets a dead cat bounce.
Larry is nearly 20 the old legend
I have it on very good authority that this is the 2nd Larry. The original passed during Covid.
I'd always assumed it was a Dread Pirate Roberts type arrangement. Go into port, change the crew have an election, kick out the PM and staff, switch the cat, no one's any the wiser.
No drama
Natural causes
Carrie found him
Then all hell let loose with concerns the Conspiracy Theorists would have a field day.
Fortunately they had time to find a suitable lookalike.
Well, one Conspiracy Theorist sure is having a field day.
I was told by a highly respected ex Tory MP few years ago about Larry. I've no reason to doubt him.
It explains why a cat allegedly 20 years old, who is actually 14 years old, looks so sprightly.
The MP told the tale at a post GE event as an anecdote and I've no reason to suspect he was stringing us all along.
On the Shipman critique of Starmer as "having no philosophy", that's an Eric Morecambe piece - all his normal points at slightly greater length in a slightly different order with the philosophy point as a go faster stripe. There is no demonstration that Starmer's questions are anything more than a not-political-enough technocrat trying gradually to sort out the pile of rubble he inherited.
I wonder if we asked ChatGPT for a summary of his previous 48 columns, how much of the content would be overlap?
Has Shipman identified the "philosophy" of any of our previous say 5 or 6 Prime Ministers, that made them successes? What is it?
Given that Shippers is the Political Editor of the Spectator, that's probably to be expected.
On philosophy, yes one is always necessary otherwise their can only be drift but it needs to be developed into a set of policies for, and to be applied in, the context.
One current Conservative problem is that they have no real philosophy to develop into policy, so all they have is tactical reactionism.
I am annoyed he lifted one of my lines.
Political authority is a lot like virginity, once it has gone it is close to impossible to regain
An Irish court apparently issued a warrant for the arrest of the Irish man currently embroiled in controversy with US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), which has been ramping up detentions and activity around the United States since last year.
Seamus Culleton has spent five months in US custody and faces deportation despite having a valid work permit in a case that has attracted widespread publicity. His lawyer called him a “model immigrant” with no criminal record.
On Thursday, it emerged that in April 2009 – a month after Culleton entered the US on a tourist visa – a district court in New Ross, County Wexford, Ireland, issued a warrant over the alleged possession of drugs for sale or supply the previous year. Culleton also faced charges of allegedly obstructing a garda – a police officer – during a search by throwing 25 ecstasy tablets on the ground, the Irish Times reported.
These disclosures have added a new dimension to a case that has become a lightning rod for concern about ongoing ICE immigration sweeps and detentions around the US.
90% of these stories, this is how it ends up. There is back story to it all where the person isn't actually as whiter than whiter as first appears. All those detained at the border / deported from 12 months have stopped, and I think of all over them only 1 actually seemed really hard done by.
Now does he seem top of the list to deport, no, and the way US process deportations (not just Trump) where they get stuck in detaintion for months doesn't seem good.
On the Shipman critique of Starmer as "having no philosophy", that's an Eric Morecambe piece - all his normal points at slightly greater length in a slightly different order with the philosophy point as a go faster stripe. There is no demonstration that Starmer's questions are anything more than a not-political-enough technocrat trying gradually to sort out the pile of rubble he inherited.
I wonder if we asked ChatGPT for a summary of his previous 48 columns, how much of the content would be overlap?
Has Shipman identified the "philosophy" of any of our previous say 5 or 6 Prime Ministers, that made them successes? What is it?
Given that Shippers is the Political Editor of the Spectator, that's probably to be expected.
On philosophy, yes one is always necessary otherwise their can only be drift but it needs to be developed into a set of policies for, and to be applied in, the context.
One current Conservative problem is that they have no real philosophy to develop into policy, so all they have is tactical reactionism.
I am annoyed he lifted one of my lines.
Political authority is a lot like virginity, once it has gone it is close to impossible to regain
Larry the Cat is getting on a bit. Hopefully we won't find out whether Starmer gets a dead cat bounce.
Larry is nearly 20 the old legend
I have it on very good authority that this is the 2nd Larry. The original passed during Covid.
I'd always assumed it was a Dread Pirate Roberts type arrangement. Go into port, change the crew have an election, kick out the PM and staff, switch the cat, no one's any the wiser.
No drama
Natural causes
Carrie found him
Then all hell let loose with concerns the Conspiracy Theorists would have a field day.
Fortunately they had time to find a suitable lookalike.
Well, one Conspiracy Theorist sure is having a field day.
I was told by a highly respected ex Tory MP few years ago about Larry. I've no reason to doubt him.
It explains why a cat allegedly 20 years old, who is actually 14 years old, looks so sprightly.
The MP told the tale at a post GE event as an anecdote and I've no reason to suspect he was stringing us all along.
There's a highly respected ex Tory MP?
There were a few.
You don't have to agree with someone to respect them.
The one in question was very helpful to myself and a business colleague on a few occasions.
A joint statement by 16 U.S. Ambassadors to NATO and Supreme Allied Commanders, arguing "NATO is not an act of American generosity. It is a strategic bargain that ensures the United States remains the world’s most powerful and economically secure nation at a fraction of the cost of going it alone." https://www.belfercenter.org/research-analysis/nato-vital-us-national-security
Bottom line of their detailed argument; NATO is not an act of American generosity. It is a strategic bargain that ensures the United States remains the world’s most powerful and economically secure nation at a fraction of the cost of going it alone. America’s allies are its single greatest geo-strategic advantage. Russia and China, despite their efforts to align with other nations like North Korea and Iran, simply have nothing to compare.
Ch 4 News gives Ratcliffe a well deserved hammering. He avoided £4 billion in tax in the last 5 years lived as a tax exile in Monaco and claimed we had 21 million immigrants when the figure was 3 million. Presumably they were paying the tax he was avoiding
There's a bit of a side-of-a-bus argument going on here. The left repeatedly making the point that 'only' 3 million immigrants have arrived in the last five years isn't the zinger they think it is.
Though otoh it highlights ‘hard headed businessman’ Ratcliffe is either speaking through his arse or is a dishonest propagandiser. Also that the right despite their opportunistic outrage is mostly responsible for that 3 million.
The reality is that average annual net migration was higher under the Tories than under Labour. And yet somehow this is all the fault of "the left". Lol.
I think you're misunderstanding. Noone's denying that the Tories were terrible at controlling immigration. But also, no-one's voting for the left to keep immigration down because they don't appear to consider it a problem. Saying "it's only 3 million in five years" only reinforces this view. And pushes more voters towards Reform i.e. the party which majors on immigration and wasn't the right wing party in government when immigration surged. And this is bad news for Labour, because the more one right-wing party is clear of the other, the worse Labour do. And Reform is already the one in the lead.
Nobody is saying "it's only three million." They're saying that someone who doesn't know the difference between 3 million and 21 million is perhaps not very well informed on this topic. As for Reform not being in power when immigration surged, they currently contain more of the Johnson cabinet than the Tories do, so I'm not sure that comment is even true. Has it occurred to you that maybe these people keep screaming immigration because they want power and they've figured it's the easiest way to get it?
Well yes. If you go back up through the nested comments this started with Roger saying Jim Ratciffe got a well-deserved hammering. My point is that that well-deserved hammering saying that immigration over the last five years was 'only' 3 million does Reform no harm at all and does not convince wavering voters to embrace immigration in the way that that argument's exponents suppose.
I just don't think that's what people are saying. They're pointing out that 3 million and 21 million are very different numbers. Perhaps to your average Reform voter that's too subtle a point but to people like me who are paid a nice salary to know the difference between two different numbers it's a pretty glaring piece of idiocy. Ratcliffe's comments were stupid and offensive on so many levels. Let me list them here: 1. 21,000,000 != 3,000,000 2. Colonization consists of a lot more than moving somewhere to live - ask anybody who has actually been colonized 3. Ratcliffe owns Man Utd and 3/4 of their squad are immigrants 4. Ratcliffe is himself an immigrant 5. Whatever problems are created by immigration would be easier to fix if Ratcliffe paid his taxes to HM Treasury.
On the Shipman critique of Starmer as "having no philosophy", that's an Eric Morecambe piece - all his normal points at slightly greater length in a slightly different order with the philosophy point as a go faster stripe. There is no demonstration that Starmer's questions are anything more than a not-political-enough technocrat trying gradually to sort out the pile of rubble he inherited.
I wonder if we asked ChatGPT for a summary of his previous 48 columns, how much of the content would be overlap?
Has Shipman identified the "philosophy" of any of our previous say 5 or 6 Prime Ministers, that made them successes? What is it?
Given that Shippers is the Political Editor of the Spectator, that's probably to be expected.
On philosophy, yes one is always necessary otherwise their can only be drift but it needs to be developed into a set of policies for, and to be applied in, the context.
One current Conservative problem is that they have no real philosophy to develop into policy, so all they have is tactical reactionism.
I am annoyed he lifted one of my lines.
Political authority is a lot like virginity, once it has gone it is close to impossible to regain
A joint statement by 16 U.S. Ambassadors to NATO and Supreme Allied Commanders, arguing "NATO is not an act of American generosity. It is a strategic bargain that ensures the United States remains the world’s most powerful and economically secure nation at a fraction of the cost of going it alone." https://www.belfercenter.org/research-analysis/nato-vital-us-national-security
Bottom line of their detailed argument; NATO is not an act of American generosity. It is a strategic bargain that ensures the United States remains the world’s most powerful and economically secure nation at a fraction of the cost of going it alone. America’s allies are its single greatest geo-strategic advantage. Russia and China, despite their efforts to align with other nations like North Korea and Iran, simply have nothing to compare.
On the Shipman critique of Starmer as "having no philosophy", that's an Eric Morecambe piece - all his normal points at slightly greater length in a slightly different order with the philosophy point as a go faster stripe. There is no demonstration that Starmer's questions are anything more than a not-political-enough technocrat trying gradually to sort out the pile of rubble he inherited.
I wonder if we asked ChatGPT for a summary of his previous 48 columns, how much of the content would be overlap?
Has Shipman identified the "philosophy" of any of our previous say 5 or 6 Prime Ministers, that made them successes? What is it?
Given that Shippers is the Political Editor of the Spectator, that's probably to be expected.
On philosophy, yes one is always necessary otherwise their can only be drift but it needs to be developed into a set of policies for, and to be applied in, the context.
One current Conservative problem is that they have no real philosophy to develop into policy, so all they have is tactical reactionism.
I am annoyed he lifted one of my lines.
Political authority is a lot like virginity, once it has gone it is close to impossible to regain
Updated Labour List net favourability ratings of Cabinet members amongst self-declared Labour members.
Taking those featuring in the next PM market: Streeting + 22 Miliband +70 Mahmood +3 Cooper +29 Healey +45 Lammy +12 Benn +51
Starmer +5
Rayner, Powell and Burnham excluded as not in Cabinet.
"Survation surveyed 1,264 readers of LabourList, the leading dedicated newsletter and news and comment website for Labour supporters, who also said they were Labour Party members between February 5 and 6. Data was weighted to the profile of party members by age group, sex, region and 2025 deputy leadership vote. "
On the Shipman critique of Starmer as "having no philosophy", that's an Eric Morecambe piece - all his normal points at slightly greater length in a slightly different order with the philosophy point as a go faster stripe. There is no demonstration that Starmer's questions are anything more than a not-political-enough technocrat trying gradually to sort out the pile of rubble he inherited.
I wonder if we asked ChatGPT for a summary of his previous 48 columns, how much of the content would be overlap?
Has Shipman identified the "philosophy" of any of our previous say 5 or 6 Prime Ministers, that made them successes? What is it?
Given that Shippers is the Political Editor of the Spectator, that's probably to be expected.
On philosophy, yes one is always necessary otherwise their can only be drift but it needs to be developed into a set of policies for, and to be applied in, the context.
One current Conservative problem is that they have no real philosophy to develop into policy, so all they have is tactical reactionism.
I am annoyed he lifted one of my lines.
Political authority is a lot like virginity, once it has gone it is close to impossible to regain
Surely virginity isn't "close to" impossible to regain?
Well some parts of the world perform hymen reconstruction surgery.
That doesn't make you a virgin, just a liar.
Its an unfair pressure on women. There is no such pressure on men.
I've never slept with a virgin and I don't know why you'd want to. Wanting to sleep with a virgin has always struck me as a bit of a red flag in terms of male personality types, it reeks of someone who'd exhibit controlling behaviour.
On the Shipman critique of Starmer as "having no philosophy", that's an Eric Morecambe piece - all his normal points at slightly greater length in a slightly different order with the philosophy point as a go faster stripe. There is no demonstration that Starmer's questions are anything more than a not-political-enough technocrat trying gradually to sort out the pile of rubble he inherited.
I wonder if we asked ChatGPT for a summary of his previous 48 columns, how much of the content would be overlap?
Has Shipman identified the "philosophy" of any of our previous say 5 or 6 Prime Ministers, that made them successes? What is it?
Given that Shippers is the Political Editor of the Spectator, that's probably to be expected.
On philosophy, yes one is always necessary otherwise their can only be drift but it needs to be developed into a set of policies for, and to be applied in, the context.
One current Conservative problem is that they have no real philosophy to develop into policy, so all they have is tactical reactionism.
I am annoyed he lifted one of my lines.
Political authority is a lot like virginity, once it has gone it is close to impossible to regain
Surely virginity isn't "close to" impossible to regain?
Well some parts of the world perform hymen reconstruction surgery.
That doesn't make you a virgin, just a liar.
Its an unfair pressure on women. There is no such pressure on men.
I've never slept with a virgin and I don't know why you'd want to. Wanting to sleep with a virgin has always struck me as a bit of a red flag in terms of male personality types, it reeks of someone who'd exhibit controlling behaviour.
Despite being a devout Muslim the 72 virgins has never appealed to me, just give me one experienced lady who knows what she is doing.
Updated Labour List net favourability ratings of Cabinet members amongst self-declared Labour members.
Taking those featuring in the next PM market: Streeting + 22 Miliband +70 Mahmood +3 Cooper +29 Healey +45 Lammy +12 Benn +51
Starmer +5
Rayner, Powell and Burnham excluded as not in Cabinet.
"Survation surveyed 1,264 readers of LabourList, the leading dedicated newsletter and news and comment website for Labour supporters, who also said they were Labour Party members between February 5 and 6. Data was weighted to the profile of party members by age group, sex, region and 2025 deputy leadership vote. "
A joint statement by 16 U.S. Ambassadors to NATO and Supreme Allied Commanders, arguing "NATO is not an act of American generosity. It is a strategic bargain that ensures the United States remains the world’s most powerful and economically secure nation at a fraction of the cost of going it alone." https://www.belfercenter.org/research-analysis/nato-vital-us-national-security
Bottom line of their detailed argument; NATO is not an act of American generosity. It is a strategic bargain that ensures the United States remains the world’s most powerful and economically secure nation at a fraction of the cost of going it alone. America’s allies are its single greatest geo-strategic advantage. Russia and China, despite their efforts to align with other nations like North Korea and Iran, simply have nothing to compare.
Incredible that somebody has to spell this out.
It seems bloody obvious the US gets tremendous advantages from the arrangement, plus they successfully got them to increase spending anyway.
All undone by militarily threatening allies over an island they could do whatever they wanted with anyway. NATO is a zombie organisation now, since everyone knows the US would never come to the aid of the others, and in fact regards them as rivals at best and enemies at worst.
It will take a long time and won't be easy, but it's not going to be worth retaining in the long run.
On the Shipman critique of Starmer as "having no philosophy", that's an Eric Morecambe piece - all his normal points at slightly greater length in a slightly different order with the philosophy point as a go faster stripe. There is no demonstration that Starmer's questions are anything more than a not-political-enough technocrat trying gradually to sort out the pile of rubble he inherited.
I wonder if we asked ChatGPT for a summary of his previous 48 columns, how much of the content would be overlap?
Has Shipman identified the "philosophy" of any of our previous say 5 or 6 Prime Ministers, that made them successes? What is it?
Given that Shippers is the Political Editor of the Spectator, that's probably to be expected.
On philosophy, yes one is always necessary otherwise their can only be drift but it needs to be developed into a set of policies for, and to be applied in, the context.
One current Conservative problem is that they have no real philosophy to develop into policy, so all they have is tactical reactionism.
I am annoyed he lifted one of my lines.
Political authority is a lot like virginity, once it has gone it is close to impossible to regain
Surely virginity isn't "close to" impossible to regain?
Well some parts of the world perform hymen reconstruction surgery.
That doesn't make you a virgin, just a liar.
Its an unfair pressure on women. There is no such pressure on men.
I've never slept with a virgin and I don't know why you'd want to. Wanting to sleep with a virgin has always struck me as a bit of a red flag in terms of male personality types, it reeks of someone who'd exhibit controlling behaviour.
"Someone possessed this thing before me? Outrageous"
More than half of the £220k that has been put on the Greens on Betfair has been put on today.
Isn't that likely to be a few big hitters.
Could it even by Reform money, they are awash with it.
Build the Green surge narrative, lengthen the Reform price, makes it easier to get the right vote behind Reform and split the left vote.
A few big bettors in Reform ranks.
Polling is a far better indication
The biggest price movement coincides with an 8-9k trading volume at about 10 this morning. There was a big spike of over 50k at about 2pm which would suggest a big hitter making a move.
On the Shipman critique of Starmer as "having no philosophy", that's an Eric Morecambe piece - all his normal points at slightly greater length in a slightly different order with the philosophy point as a go faster stripe. There is no demonstration that Starmer's questions are anything more than a not-political-enough technocrat trying gradually to sort out the pile of rubble he inherited.
I wonder if we asked ChatGPT for a summary of his previous 48 columns, how much of the content would be overlap?
Has Shipman identified the "philosophy" of any of our previous say 5 or 6 Prime Ministers, that made them successes? What is it?
Given that Shippers is the Political Editor of the Spectator, that's probably to be expected.
On philosophy, yes one is always necessary otherwise their can only be drift but it needs to be developed into a set of policies for, and to be applied in, the context.
One current Conservative problem is that they have no real philosophy to develop into policy, so all they have is tactical reactionism.
I am annoyed he lifted one of my lines.
Political authority is a lot like virginity, once it has gone it is close to impossible to regain
Surely virginity isn't "close to" impossible to regain?
Well some parts of the world perform hymen reconstruction surgery.
That doesn't make you a virgin, just a liar.
Its an unfair pressure on women. There is no such pressure on men.
I've never slept with a virgin and I don't know why you'd want to. Wanting to sleep with a virgin has always struck me as a bit of a red flag in terms of male personality types, it reeks of someone who'd exhibit controlling behaviour.
Despite being a devout Muslim the 72 virgins has never appealed to me, just give me one experienced lady who knows what she is doing.
Does the Koran make it clear what sex the virgins are?
On the Shipman critique of Starmer as "having no philosophy", that's an Eric Morecambe piece - all his normal points at slightly greater length in a slightly different order with the philosophy point as a go faster stripe. There is no demonstration that Starmer's questions are anything more than a not-political-enough technocrat trying gradually to sort out the pile of rubble he inherited.
I wonder if we asked ChatGPT for a summary of his previous 48 columns, how much of the content would be overlap?
Has Shipman identified the "philosophy" of any of our previous say 5 or 6 Prime Ministers, that made them successes? What is it?
Given that Shippers is the Political Editor of the Spectator, that's probably to be expected.
On philosophy, yes one is always necessary otherwise their can only be drift but it needs to be developed into a set of policies for, and to be applied in, the context.
One current Conservative problem is that they have no real philosophy to develop into policy, so all they have is tactical reactionism.
I am annoyed he lifted one of my lines.
Political authority is a lot like virginity, once it has gone it is close to impossible to regain
Surely virginity isn't "close to" impossible to regain?
Well some parts of the world perform hymen reconstruction surgery.
That doesn't make you a virgin, just a liar.
Its an unfair pressure on women. There is no such pressure on men.
I've never slept with a virgin and I don't know why you'd want to. Wanting to sleep with a virgin has always struck me as a bit of a red flag in terms of male personality types, it reeks of someone who'd exhibit controlling behaviour.
Despite being a devout Muslim the 72 virgins has never appealed to me, just give me one experienced lady who knows what she is doing.
Translational errors - could be one 72 [year old] virgin. Experienced in many aspects of life!
Updated Labour List net favourability ratings of Cabinet members amongst self-declared Labour members.
Taking those featuring in the next PM market: Streeting + 22 Miliband +70 Mahmood +3 Cooper +29 Healey +45 Lammy +12 Benn +51
Starmer +5
Rayner, Powell and Burnham excluded as not in Cabinet.
"Survation surveyed 1,264 readers of LabourList, the leading dedicated newsletter and news and comment website for Labour supporters, who also said they were Labour Party members between February 5 and 6. Data was weighted to the profile of party members by age group, sex, region and 2025 deputy leadership vote. "
This is why Ed Miliband is going to succeed Sir Keir if Sir Keir falls soon.
20+ years experience as an MP, a taste of ministerial experience before having extended experience of opposition including at the highest level, leadership of a major department, displays a sense of purpose and vision (albeit one plenty don't like), popular with party members, has a ruthless streak.
Updated Labour List net favourability ratings of Cabinet members amongst self-declared Labour members.
Taking those featuring in the next PM market: Streeting + 22 Miliband +70 Mahmood +3 Cooper +29 Healey +45 Lammy +12 Benn +51
Starmer +5
Rayner, Powell and Burnham excluded as not in Cabinet.
"Survation surveyed 1,264 readers of LabourList, the leading dedicated newsletter and news and comment website for Labour supporters, who also said they were Labour Party members between February 5 and 6. Data was weighted to the profile of party members by age group, sex, region and 2025 deputy leadership vote. "
This is why Ed Miliband is going to succeed Sir Keir if Sir Keir falls soon.
20+ years experience as an MP, a taste of ministerial experience before having extended experience of opposition including at the highest level, leadership of a major department, displays a sense of purpose and vision (albeit one plenty don't like), popular with party members, has a ruthless streak.
On paper he's not a terrible candidate.
He might gain a few from the Greens but Ed Miliband would likely leak a few voters to the Tories and fail to win back any votes to Labour from Reform
Updated Labour List net favourability ratings of Cabinet members amongst self-declared Labour members.
Taking those featuring in the next PM market: Streeting + 22 Miliband +70 Mahmood +3 Cooper +29 Healey +45 Lammy +12 Benn +51
Starmer +5
Rayner, Powell and Burnham excluded as not in Cabinet.
"Survation surveyed 1,264 readers of LabourList, the leading dedicated newsletter and news and comment website for Labour supporters, who also said they were Labour Party members between February 5 and 6. Data was weighted to the profile of party members by age group, sex, region and 2025 deputy leadership vote. "
On the Shipman critique of Starmer as "having no philosophy", that's an Eric Morecambe piece - all his normal points at slightly greater length in a slightly different order with the philosophy point as a go faster stripe. There is no demonstration that Starmer's questions are anything more than a not-political-enough technocrat trying gradually to sort out the pile of rubble he inherited.
I wonder if we asked ChatGPT for a summary of his previous 48 columns, how much of the content would be overlap?
Has Shipman identified the "philosophy" of any of our previous say 5 or 6 Prime Ministers, that made them successes? What is it?
Given that Shippers is the Political Editor of the Spectator, that's probably to be expected.
On philosophy, yes one is always necessary otherwise their can only be drift but it needs to be developed into a set of policies for, and to be applied in, the context.
One current Conservative problem is that they have no real philosophy to develop into policy, so all they have is tactical reactionism.
I am annoyed he lifted one of my lines.
Political authority is a lot like virginity, once it has gone it is close to impossible to regain
Surely virginity isn't "close to" impossible to regain?
Well some parts of the world perform hymen reconstruction surgery.
That doesn't make you a virgin, just a liar.
Its an unfair pressure on women. There is no such pressure on men.
I've never slept with a virgin and I don't know why you'd want to. Wanting to sleep with a virgin has always struck me as a bit of a red flag in terms of male personality types, it reeks of someone who'd exhibit controlling behaviour.
Despite being a devout Muslim the 72 virgins has never appealed to me, just give me one experienced lady who knows what she is doing.
Virgins is a mistranslation for raisins, haven’t you been told?
Ch 4 News gives Ratcliffe a well deserved hammering. He avoided £4 billion in tax in the last 5 years lived as a tax exile in Monaco and claimed we had 21 million immigrants when the figure was 3 million. Presumably they were paying the tax he was avoiding
There's a bit of a side-of-a-bus argument going on here. The left repeatedly making the point that 'only' 3 million immigrants have arrived in the last five years isn't the zinger they think it is.
Though otoh it highlights ‘hard headed businessman’ Ratcliffe is either speaking through his arse or is a dishonest propagandiser. Also that the right despite their opportunistic outrage is mostly responsible for that 3 million.
The reality is that average annual net migration was higher under the Tories than under Labour. And yet somehow this is all the fault of "the left". Lol.
I think you're misunderstanding. Noone's denying that the Tories were terrible at controlling immigration. But also, no-one's voting for the left to keep immigration down because they don't appear to consider it a problem. Saying "it's only 3 million in five years" only reinforces this view. And pushes more voters towards Reform i.e. the party which majors on immigration and wasn't the right wing party in government when immigration surged. And this is bad news for Labour, because the more one right-wing party is clear of the other, the worse Labour do. And Reform is already the one in the lead.
Nobody is saying "it's only three million." They're saying that someone who doesn't know the difference between 3 million and 21 million is perhaps not very well informed on this topic. As for Reform not being in power when immigration surged, they currently contain more of the Johnson cabinet than the Tories do, so I'm not sure that comment is even true. Has it occurred to you that maybe these people keep screaming immigration because they want power and they've figured it's the easiest way to get it?
The other point Cookie ignores is that immigration is coming down.
The only true reason to vote Farage plus the right wing Tory retreads is if you want to see a pallid imitation of Trump.
Immigration is only half the story, the other half is old people not dying as early. If only old people would die off as early as they used to there'd be a lot less complaining about immigration. And also less need for immigrants.
If reports are correct, Taylor will win but it could run much closer than people expect. Not that it will make any difference to the fortunes of the Liberal party. They have fallen into the same trap as the Labor party during the Rudd/Gillard years. The constant bickering and changing of leaders does not instil confidence amongst the public. The relative stability offered by Albanese has been largely rewarded by the Australian public. The Liberals have - through Turnbull, Abbott, Scotty from Marketing, Dutton, Ley, etc. - undermined any claim to stability.
The Telegraph has revealed that children, including ones with learning difficulties, have been promised up to £500 in vouchers, which can be redeemed at retailers like XBOX & Uber Eats, if they take part in an NHS 'transgender' trial to block their puberty
Not necessarily. Actually *reading* the article it says...
It can now be revealed that the children taking part in the trial will be incentivised with the promise of up to £500 in vouchers for completing psychometric tests. These will measure the effect of the puberty blockers on their brains, including effects on impulse control and memory...Participants, aged under 16, will receive £30 vouchers for each of the 15 cognitive assessments they complete, as well as £15 vouchers for each of the three MRI scans they undertake, over the two years of the trial...Children in another arm of the trial, not taking the drugs, will be given £15 vouchers for each bone density scan and blood test they have.
Points to note
The children are already in the trial and have been randomised into one of the two arms, so they've already been consented.
Those in the intervention arm (on the drugs) are paid a nominal amount (£15 or £30) for each of the tests (cogntive assessments or MRI scans) they undertake
Those in the control arm (not on the drugs) are paid a nominal amount (£15) for each of the tests (bone density scan and blood test) they undertake
In short the participants are paid nominal sums to take part in tests they have already agreed to prior to assignment, and that this is an incentive to complete the trial, not an incentive to take part in the trial. Since a criticism of many studies in the trans sphere is dropout rate, this is a good idea.
There's a concept in RCT called "equipoise". The surgeons/doctors in a study must be genuinely undecided/unbiased as to which of the two arms is better, and the patients must be equally noncommittal: this enables randomisation to take place believably. In trans studies this is difficult since if the patients believe the study is biased or bent towards one outcome they will refuse to take part or simply bugger off to Europe and get the treatment they want there (Baroness Cass pointed this out as a reason to undertake the PATHWAY studies). The PATHWAY designers seem to have created a study that enables equipoise. The fact that these sums are paid to make sure they stay in the study prevents dropout
(Incidentally @isam, you said last night you wanted to know how tests of drugs in humans take place. You might want to google the term "CTIMP")
Why are people dropping out? If there is a good reason why they are, the trial should be reporting that as part of the data.
They should not be remaining in a trial they would otherwise drop out of, solely due to fiscal considerations.
Dropout rates Many studies (most?) have dropout rates. Yes, dropouts are reported. Sample size calculations often incorporate a 10% or even 20% dropout rate to ensure the end amount are still big enough to provide sufficient statistical power to assess the (usually) two arms.
(Google "dropout rate" if you don't believe me).
Safety Studies are often monitored by one or more external committees, which may combine safety and procedural issues into one committee or separate them into two or more. Those external committees (ie from outside the University or organisation doing the study) will meet at least once a year and often more frequently. If the study is going seriously wrong or not recruiting fast enough then those committees may recommend that the study be terminated, and the people funding the study will also monitor it and may also recommend termination under certain circumstances.
(Google "adverse events" (AEs) and "serious adverse events" (SAEs) if you don't believe me. )
Why do people drop out? People move house, emigrate, simply want to stop, may develop conditions that prevent them from continuing, or simply die by accident or pre-existing conditions or (God forbid) from the intervention or control. They are there voluntarily, not by force.
Endpiece You seem to think that people are forced to take place in studies and studies are just thrown together by amateurs. This is Britain in the 2020s, and studies involving human subjects are regulated, registered and reported. They will be conducted and monitored by extremely skilled individuals and reported in a serious manner.
(Google "CTIMP" if you don't believe me, and that's just one example)
You have misunderstood.
I never said it is thrown together or anything like that, like ChatGPT you have hallucinated that.
However you said (previously) that payments were a good idea to prevent drop outs and I responded to say no, it is not, if people wish to drop out they should. They should not remain in the study due to financial payments.
Ethics committees will reject proposals with unduly large financial payments for exactly those reasons. However, if you are asking people to spend time coming in on multiple occasions for lengthy tests, then some financial compensation is considered appropriate. It would be unethical to exclude people from a study because they couldn't afford to take part.
A bone density scan can take half an hour. Factor in some waiting time and travel time and that's an hour and a half out of someone's day. The £15 payment is thus below minimum wage. That sort of rate is considered ethical: you are providing some compensation, but not so much that the person is only participating in the research for the money.
Ch 4 News gives Ratcliffe a well deserved hammering. He avoided £4 billion in tax in the last 5 years lived as a tax exile in Monaco and claimed we had 21 million immigrants when the figure was 3 million. Presumably they were paying the tax he was avoiding
There's a bit of a side-of-a-bus argument going on here. The left repeatedly making the point that 'only' 3 million immigrants have arrived in the last five years isn't the zinger they think it is.
Though otoh it highlights ‘hard headed businessman’ Ratcliffe is either speaking through his arse or is a dishonest propagandiser. Also that the right despite their opportunistic outrage is mostly responsible for that 3 million.
The reality is that average annual net migration was higher under the Tories than under Labour. And yet somehow this is all the fault of "the left". Lol.
Ch 4 News gives Ratcliffe a well deserved hammering. He avoided £4 billion in tax in the last 5 years lived as a tax exile in Monaco and claimed we had 21 million immigrants when the figure was 3 million. Presumably they were paying the tax he was avoiding
There's a bit of a side-of-a-bus argument going on here. The left repeatedly making the point that 'only' 3 million immigrants have arrived in the last five years isn't the zinger they think it is.
Though otoh it highlights ‘hard headed businessman’ Ratcliffe is either speaking through his arse or is a dishonest propagandiser. Also that the right despite their opportunistic outrage is mostly responsible for that 3 million.
The reality is that average annual net migration was higher under the Tories than under Labour. And yet somehow this is all the fault of "the left". Lol.
I think you're misunderstanding. Noone's denying that the Tories were terrible at controlling immigration. But also, no-one's voting for the left to keep immigration down because they don't appear to consider it a problem. Saying "it's only 3 million in five years" only reinforces this view. And pushes more voters towards Reform i.e. the party which majors on immigration and wasn't the right wing party in government when immigration surged. And this is bad news for Labour, because the more one right-wing party is clear of the other, the worse Labour do. And Reform is already the one in the lead.
Nobody is saying "it's only three million." They're saying that someone who doesn't know the difference between 3 million and 21 million is perhaps not very well informed on this topic. As for Reform not being in power when immigration surged, they currently contain more of the Johnson cabinet than the Tories do, so I'm not sure that comment is even true. Has it occurred to you that maybe these people keep screaming immigration because they want power and they've figured it's the easiest way to get it?
Well yes. If you go back up through the nested comments this started with Roger saying Jim Ratciffe got a well-deserved hammering. My point is that that well-deserved hammering saying that immigration over the last five years was 'only' 3 million does Reform no harm at all and does not convince wavering voters to embrace immigration in the way that that argument's exponents suppose.
I just don't think that's what people are saying. They're pointing out that 3 million and 21 million are very different numbers. Perhaps to your average Reform voter that's too subtle a point but to people like me who are paid a nice salary to know the difference between two different numbers it's a pretty glaring piece of idiocy. Ratcliffe's comments were stupid and offensive on so many levels. Let me list them here: 1. 21,000,000 != 3,000,000 2. Colonization consists of a lot more than moving somewhere to live - ask anybody who has actually been colonized 3. Ratcliffe owns Man Utd and 3/4 of their squad are immigrants 4. Ratcliffe is himself an immigrant 5. Whatever problems are created by immigration would be easier to fix if Ratcliffe paid his taxes to HM Treasury.
None of which features on a Reform voters list of concerns as high as 3,000,000 in 5 years. If you want people not to be voting Reform, it's not smart to be banging on it. Just as it wasn't smart to keep banging on about 'actually technically it's onky £250m a week'.
EXCL: We have seen the 2600-word charge sheet detailing alleged embezzlement of £459,046 of SNP funds by Nicola Sturgeon's husband Peter Murrell. It covers alleged crimes spanning 12 years & 5 months between 2010 & 2023, including falsifying documents.
EXCL: Peter Murrell ‘falsified docs to buy £125k motorhome using SNP funds'. Indictment alleges the vehicle was bought for 'personal use'
Comments
I wouldn't know who to vote for either.
Not helped by the fact that Gorton and Denton are heterogeneous places.
So even sounding out the neighbours wouldn't necessarily be an infallible guide to what elsewhere was thinking.
Labour losing places like Sunderland, Barnsley Swindon, Wakefield, Sandwell, to Reform, and the Conservatives losing Walsall and Essex to them, will generate headlines.
Only Reform and the LDs won overall control of councils last year. All 5 parties will have 'successes' to point at this year. Plus the 2 Nat parties will too. The 'utterly dominant' narrative will not be there
Which means they're confident of their base.
And this is bad news for Labour, because the more one right-wing party is clear of the other, the worse Labour do. And Reform is already the one in the lead.
Natural causes
Carrie found him
Then all hell let loose with concerns the Conspiracy Theorists would have a field day.
Fortunately they had time to find a suitable lookalike.
As for Reform not being in power when immigration surged, they currently contain more of the Johnson cabinet than the Tories do, so I'm not sure that comment is even true.
Has it occurred to you that maybe these people keep screaming immigration because they want power and they've figured it's the easiest way to get it?
His avoidance at PMQ's does not go unnoticed
First lot of Mandleson e.mails.. incoming.
About 40% of the seats (1,817) are in London's 32 Boroughs (plus six Mayoral contests).
https://techcrunch.com/2026/02/12/spotify-says-its-best-developers-havent-written-a-line-of-code-since-december-thanks-to-ai/
But Incorrect Horse Battery says AI coding is crap fad.
I wonder if we asked ChatGPT for a summary of his previous 48 columns, how much of the content would be overlap?
Has Shipman identified the "philosophy" of any of our previous say 5 or 6 Prime Ministers, that made them successes? What is it?
Given that Shippers is the Political Editor of the Spectator, that's probably to be expected.
On philosophy, yes one is always necessary otherwise there can only be drift and dead reckoning, but it needs to be developed into a set of policies for, and to be applied in, the context.
One current Conservative problem is that they have no real philosophy to develop into policy, so all they have is tactical reactionism.
(I think the Tugendhat piece is more interesting and more revealing, but I may not have time to comment.)
PM had to issue a direction to overrule officials re Wormald’s pay-off
Has your bot malfunctioned.
This conversation is nothing to do with politics, it's about a national icon who transcends petty point scoring.
Don't give implied permission for TSE to post the pic again,
It explains why a cat allegedly 20 years old, who is actually 14 years old, looks so sprightly.
The MP told the tale at a post GE event as an anecdote and I've no reason to suspect he was stringing us all along.
Political authority is a lot like virginity, once it has gone it is close to impossible to regain
https://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2025/11/17/politicians-usually-never-recover-from-these-figures/
Labour could conceivably win the most councillors on the night (i think they won't but its not impossible of course) and still have an utter disaster losing tens of councils.
Reform could double their current councillors and still come second
It's a big night for the picture and narrative
The only true reason to vote Farage plus the right wing Tory retreads is if you want to see a pallid imitation of Trump.
His incompetence has made Britain a laughing stock appointing Mandleson.
What's Larry the Cat got to do with Wirmold
I relied to a comment about Larry the cat
I wonder at the conversation whereby a chap asks another chap to be his partner for luge doubles. It boggles the mind.
Hes not someone it would seem that people warm to working with.
You don't have to agree with someone to respect them.
The one in question was very helpful to myself and a business colleague on a few occasions.
He was a good Constituency MP.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/02/12/scrap-unfair-migrant-crackdown-labour-mps-tell-starmer/
Seamus Culleton has spent five months in US custody and faces deportation despite having a valid work permit in a case that has attracted widespread publicity. His lawyer called him a “model immigrant” with no criminal record.
On Thursday, it emerged that in April 2009 – a month after Culleton entered the US on a tourist visa – a district court in New Ross, County Wexford, Ireland, issued a warrant over the alleged possession of drugs for sale or supply the previous year. Culleton also faced charges of allegedly obstructing a garda – a police officer – during a search by throwing 25 ecstasy tablets on the ground, the Irish Times reported.
These disclosures have added a new dimension to a case that has become a lightning rod for concern about ongoing ICE immigration sweeps and detentions around the US.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/feb/12/seamus-culleton-ice-detention-ireland-drug-charges
90% of these stories, this is how it ends up. There is back story to it all where the person isn't actually as whiter than whiter as first appears. All those detained at the border / deported from 12 months have stopped, and I think of all over them only 1 actually seemed really hard done by.
Now does he seem top of the list to deport, no, and the way US process deportations (not just Trump) where they get stuck in detaintion for months doesn't seem good.
A joint statement by 16 U.S. Ambassadors to NATO and Supreme Allied Commanders, arguing "NATO is not an act of American generosity. It is a strategic bargain that ensures the United States remains the world’s most powerful and economically secure nation at a fraction of the cost of going it alone."
https://www.belfercenter.org/research-analysis/nato-vital-us-national-security
Bottom line of their detailed argument;
NATO is not an act of American generosity. It is a strategic bargain that ensures the United States remains the world’s most powerful and economically secure nation at a fraction of the cost of going it alone. America’s allies are its single greatest geo-strategic advantage. Russia and China, despite their efforts to align with other nations like North Korea and Iran, simply have nothing to compare.
Ratcliffe's comments were stupid and offensive on so many levels. Let me list them here:
1. 21,000,000 != 3,000,000
2. Colonization consists of a lot more than moving somewhere to live - ask anybody who has actually been colonized
3. Ratcliffe owns Man Utd and 3/4 of their squad are immigrants
4. Ratcliffe is himself an immigrant
5. Whatever problems are created by immigration would be easier to fix if Ratcliffe paid his taxes to HM Treasury.
Could it even by Reform money, they are awash with it.
Build the Green surge narrative, lengthen the Reform price, makes it easier to get the right vote behind Reform and split the left vote.
A few big bettors in Reform ranks.
Polling is a far better indication
Updated Labour List net favourability ratings of Cabinet members amongst self-declared Labour members.
Taking those featuring in the next PM market:
Streeting + 22
Miliband +70
Mahmood +3
Cooper +29
Healey +45
Lammy +12
Benn +51
Starmer +5
Rayner, Powell and Burnham excluded as not in Cabinet.
"Survation surveyed 1,264 readers of LabourList, the leading dedicated newsletter and news and comment website for Labour supporters, who also said they were Labour Party members between February 5 and 6. Data was weighted to the profile of party members by age group, sex, region and 2025 deputy leadership vote. "
https://labourlist.org/2026/02/cabinet-league-table-february-2026/
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-02-13/federal-politics-live-blog-liberal-spill/106339480
All undone by militarily threatening allies over an island they could do whatever they wanted with anyway. NATO is a zombie organisation now, since everyone knows the US would never come to the aid of the others, and in fact regards them as rivals at best and enemies at worst.
It will take a long time and won't be easy, but it's not going to be worth retaining in the long run.
Lead down to 4 points
Squeaky bum time
On paper he's not a terrible candidate.
It would be if we had any.
And also less need for immigrants.
Sounds ever so familiar…
A bone density scan can take half an hour. Factor in some waiting time and travel time and that's an hour and a half out of someone's day. The £15 payment is thus below minimum wage. That sort of rate is considered ethical: you are providing some compensation, but not so much that the person is only participating in the research for the money.
If you want people not to be voting Reform, it's not smart to be banging on it. Just as it wasn't smart to keep banging on about 'actually technically it's onky £250m a week'.
EXCL: We have seen the 2600-word charge sheet detailing alleged embezzlement of £459,046 of SNP funds by Nicola Sturgeon's husband Peter Murrell. It covers alleged crimes spanning 12 years & 5 months between 2010 & 2023, including falsifying documents.
EXCL: Peter Murrell ‘falsified docs to buy £125k motorhome using SNP funds'. Indictment alleges the vehicle was bought for 'personal use'
https://x.com/ChrisMusson/status/2022068531433767388