The header is a very good description of my stepdaughter. She's been to uni, got a decent degree and is working at entry level in her chosen career in law. But the combination of a low wage and high house prices means that she won't be able to afford a place of her own for ages. A lot of her friends are in a similar position and, despite not being especially environmentally conscious, are mostly intending to vote Green. It is indeed a cry for help.
Younger people have been betrayed. The thing I find very annoying is the lecturing they’re subjected to by those who had free tuition fees , lower house prices etc .
Younger people find it almost impossible now to get on the housing ladder unless they have parental help or are in very high paying jobs.
You get the lecturing whereby they’re told they spend too much , shouldn’t go on holidays or socialise but the reality is they have lost hope because even if they did those things they’d never save enough for a deposit because each year the goalposts are widened .
I think to an extent both things can be true. I have no doubt of how hard it is to get on the housing ladder (certainly London and the South-East). Prices are high, wage growth has been poor.
But it is also true, I think, that some people do spend more than perhaps their grandparents or parents generations did. Mainly because there is more to spend it on.
Take mobile phones. Most people have mobiles (arguably its hard to function without one now). But thats a cost that I didn't have in my early twenties. Take TV streaming. Take the rise of coffee shops and meal deals. Previous generations didn't spend 10 a day on coffee from St%rbucks or Pret. So you can also save money.
But I get the issue - owning the house is so distant that you just think 'feck it, I'll have that latte with the bun'. And I'm sure I would too, if I was in their shoes.
All that is choice though. I rarely buy coffee out, unless I am travelling. When I worked, I made a packed lunch most days, and made coffee at the office. I have a mobile phone, it cost me £200 and the sim is £11 a month. I don't pay for lots of TV streaming, plenty is available for free on the Internet and I have a basic cable package. I tinker with the central heating controls to keep costs down (I'm amazed how many places I see windows open in the winter)
However... I would be surprised if by doing so you could actually save enough for a deposit on the house. In my case it just meant I had money to spend on beer.
The header is a very good description of my stepdaughter. She's been to uni, got a decent degree and is working at entry level in her chosen career in law. But the combination of a low wage and high house prices means that she won't be able to afford a place of her own for ages. A lot of her friends are in a similar position and, despite not being especially environmentally conscious, are mostly intending to vote Green. It is indeed a cry for help.
Younger people have been betrayed. The thing I find very annoying is the lecturing they’re subjected to by those who had free tuition fees , lower house prices etc .
Younger people find it almost impossible now to get on the housing ladder unless they have parental help or are in very high paying jobs.
You get the lecturing whereby they’re told they spend too much , shouldn’t go on holidays or socialise but the reality is they have lost hope because even if they did those things they’d never save enough for a deposit because each year the goalposts are widened .
I think to an extent both things can be true. I have no doubt of how hard it is to get on the housing ladder (certainly London and the South-East). Prices are high, wage growth has been poor.
But it is also true, I think, that some people do spend more than perhaps their grandparents or parents generations did. Mainly because there is more to spend it on.
Take mobile phones. Most people have mobiles (arguably its hard to function without one now). But thats a cost that I didn't have in my early twenties. Take TV streaming. Take the rise of coffee shops and meal deals. Previous generations didn't spend 10 a day on coffee from St%rbucks or Pret. So you can also save money.
But I get the issue - owning the house is so distant that you just think 'feck it, I'll have that latte with the bun'. And I'm sure I would too, if I was in their shoes.
People of earlier generations went out and spent frivolously too - cinema, pub, records, etc (and a lot of those sorts of things were arguably cheaper in the past too).
The big difference, as data in the link about Janet shows, is that young people today have vastly higher housing costs. The Baby Boomers started out paying 8% of their net income on housing costs, whereas for Millienials that was 22%. The young simply have less money left over after housing costs.
In 1968 (!) the bank demurred at assisting me with the purchase of a four-bedroomed, recently built, detached house, with a substantial garden in a 'good' area, costing £14k, on the grounds I was then earning about £4k pa in a secure job. I did buy the house though, and, of course, eventually moved on. I understand that the last time it was sold it went for £750k.
Yes the Polanski Greens are basically Corbyn lite attracting the same type of voters, mainly under 40 burdened by student debt and not owning a house and feeling capitalism does not work for them and willing to give tax and spend socialism a go. They are no longer the party of posh middle class environmentalists like Jonathan Porritt.
Green voters do though have some similarity with Reform voters though in that they are less likely to be financially comfortable than average
Isn't the reason that Green voters don't feel like capitalism is working for them that, in many cases, it isn't particularly? Not exclusively because it's so hard to escape the rental trap, but that being a very large factor. And that, in turn being linked to a change in small-c-conservatism from "pass a better life on to the next generation/enough evolution to prevent revolution" to "après moi le déluge".
And that's just another form of nihlism- that of the powerful, rather than the powerless.
The ironic thing is that Green voters are probably slightly better off than average, and thus doing better under capitalism than a lot of other people.
Not now, the recent polling on it had Green voters now the poorest of any party just below Reform voters on average
The Greens and Reform are underrepresented on PB. The header explains why. Greens and Reform are the parties for people with few assets and little chance of obtaining them. Most on here have plenty of assets and are happy to keep them, if necessary at the expense of those without. The term that used to be used for us was boomers. A few, such as @OldKingCole, @Foxy and @NickPalmer think of the wider population, and are those at least considering the Greens. Probably not coincidentally, they are posters that seem to take more interest in the views of their families.
I have no significant assets and little chance of obtaining same but have not been tempted by the Reform or Green offering. I dont see either as offering anything worthwhile to the 50 plus asset poor folk.
The header is a very good description of my stepdaughter. She's been to uni, got a decent degree and is working at entry level in her chosen career in law. But the combination of a low wage and high house prices means that she won't be able to afford a place of her own for ages. A lot of her friends are in a similar position and, despite not being especially environmentally conscious, are mostly intending to vote Green. It is indeed a cry for help.
Younger people have been betrayed. The thing I find very annoying is the lecturing they’re subjected to by those who had free tuition fees , lower house prices etc .
Younger people find it almost impossible now to get on the housing ladder unless they have parental help or are in very high paying jobs.
You get the lecturing whereby they’re told they spend too much , shouldn’t go on holidays or socialise but the reality is they have lost hope because even if they did those things they’d never save enough for a deposit because each year the goalposts are widened .
I think to an extent both things can be true. I have no doubt of how hard it is to get on the housing ladder (certainly London and the South-East). Prices are high, wage growth has been poor.
But it is also true, I think, that some people do spend more than perhaps their grandparents or parents generations did. Mainly because there is more to spend it on.
Take mobile phones. Most people have mobiles (arguably its hard to function without one now). But thats a cost that I didn't have in my early twenties. Take TV streaming. Take the rise of coffee shops and meal deals. Previous generations didn't spend 10 a day on coffee from St%rbucks or Pret. So you can also save money.
But I get the issue - owning the house is so distant that you just think 'feck it, I'll have that latte with the bun'. And I'm sure I would too, if I was in their shoes.
People of earlier generations went out and spent frivolously too - cinema, pub, records, etc (and a lot of those sorts of things were arguably cheaper in the past too).
The big difference, as data in the link about Janet shows, is that young people today have vastly higher housing costs. The Baby Boomers started out paying 8% of their net income on housing costs, whereas for Millienials that was 22%. The young simply have less money left over after housing costs.
As I said both things can be true. I genuinely believe that there is just more stuff to spend money on now. Look at the clutter in houses. Look how many garages are full of not cars but other stuff. Look at the rise of TV shows about decluttering houses.
Its absolutely true that housing costs is a large part of the problem and I don't deny that. But it is also possible that some people are not good at saving as well.
The header is a very good description of my stepdaughter. She's been to uni, got a decent degree and is working at entry level in her chosen career in law. But the combination of a low wage and high house prices means that she won't be able to afford a place of her own for ages. A lot of her friends are in a similar position and, despite not being especially environmentally conscious, are mostly intending to vote Green. It is indeed a cry for help.
Younger people have been betrayed. The thing I find very annoying is the lecturing they’re subjected to by those who had free tuition fees , lower house prices etc .
Younger people find it almost impossible now to get on the housing ladder unless they have parental help or are in very high paying jobs.
You get the lecturing whereby they’re told they spend too much , shouldn’t go on holidays or socialise but the reality is they have lost hope because even if they did those things they’d never save enough for a deposit because each year the goalposts are widened .
I think to an extent both things can be true. I have no doubt of how hard it is to get on the housing ladder (certainly London and the South-East). Prices are high, wage growth has been poor.
But it is also true, I think, that some people do spend more than perhaps their grandparents or parents generations did. Mainly because there is more to spend it on.
Take mobile phones. Most people have mobiles (arguably its hard to function without one now). But thats a cost that I didn't have in my early twenties. Take TV streaming. Take the rise of coffee shops and meal deals. Previous generations didn't spend 10 a day on coffee from St%rbucks or Pret. So you can also save money.
But I get the issue - owning the house is so distant that you just think 'feck it, I'll have that latte with the bun'. And I'm sure I would too, if I was in their shoes.
People of earlier generations went out and spent frivolously too - cinema, pub, records, etc (and a lot of those sorts of things were arguably cheaper in the past too).
The big difference, as data in the link about Janet shows, is that young people today have vastly higher housing costs. The Baby Boomers started out paying 8% of their net income on housing costs, whereas for Millienials that was 22%. The young simply have less money left over after housing costs.
In our day, there were council houses for those that couldn’t afford to buy. Now it’s private rentals at a price equivalent to a mortgage. The only financial difference is that the rental deposit is less than a house purchase deposit. The ridiculous aspect is that mortgage lenders seem unable to realise that, when calculating affordability, the mortgage payment will be instead of the rental, not in addition to it.
The header is a very good description of my stepdaughter. She's been to uni, got a decent degree and is working at entry level in her chosen career in law. But the combination of a low wage and high house prices means that she won't be able to afford a place of her own for ages. A lot of her friends are in a similar position and, despite not being especially environmentally conscious, are mostly intending to vote Green. It is indeed a cry for help.
Younger people have been betrayed. The thing I find very annoying is the lecturing they’re subjected to by those who had free tuition fees , lower house prices etc .
Younger people find it almost impossible now to get on the housing ladder unless they have parental help or are in very high paying jobs.
You get the lecturing whereby they’re told they spend too much , shouldn’t go on holidays or socialise but the reality is they have lost hope because even if they did those things they’d never save enough for a deposit because each year the goalposts are widened .
I think to an extent both things can be true. I have no doubt of how hard it is to get on the housing ladder (certainly London and the South-East). Prices are high, wage growth has been poor.
But it is also true, I think, that some people do spend more than perhaps their grandparents or parents generations did. Mainly because there is more to spend it on.
Take mobile phones. Most people have mobiles (arguably its hard to function without one now). But thats a cost that I didn't have in my early twenties. Take TV streaming. Take the rise of coffee shops and meal deals. Previous generations didn't spend 10 a day on coffee from St%rbucks or Pret. So you can also save money.
But I get the issue - owning the house is so distant that you just think 'feck it, I'll have that latte with the bun'. And I'm sure I would too, if I was in their shoes.
People of earlier generations went out and spent frivolously too - cinema, pub, records, etc (and a lot of those sorts of things were arguably cheaper in the past too).
The big difference, as data in the link about Janet shows, is that young people today have vastly higher housing costs. The Baby Boomers started out paying 8% of their net income on housing costs, whereas for Millienials that was 22%. The young simply have less money left over after housing costs.
Free university tuition dates from when most people started work at 16. That's five years of extra work compared with someone now who leaves school at 21. Even if you knock off a couple of years for the rise in pension age, they still work longer.
As for housing costs, you are right, but that is partly a consequence of women in the workplace allowing dual-income households to bid up prices. Worse, highly-paid men marrying highly-paid women multiplies their advantage over average households, who have an advantage over singles.
As for generational unfairness, it is not about age, boomers versus millennials or whatever, it is about assets. And because housing is seen as an asset, it is rational to spend (or ‘invest’) as much as you can afford, in the near-certain knowledge its value will appreciate with time. There aren't many purchasing decisions made that way: we do not buy clothes or cars with a view to spending as much as we can borrow.
Have we done the Tories in fourth place with YouGov?
Ref 23 (-2)
Lab 19 (+2)
GRN 18 (-1)
Con 17 (=)
LD 13 (-1)
I reckon it is the war that is behind a lot of this.
Hearing the focus groups are sympathetic to Starmer re Trump & the war.
Albeit Tories only 1% behind the Greens and only 6% separates them from top placed Reform with Yougov now.
If those are the voteshares in the NEV after the local and devolved elections in May and the Tories are 4th behind Reform, Labour and even the Greens though Kemi will be gone, there will be a VONC in her leadership from Tory MPs and she will then be replaced by Cleverly. So Kemi needs to get a better result than that, on the plus side for her Yougov have the Greens higher than most pollsters do
A £50 charity bet that Kemi either does not face a VONC by 1st September - or if she does, she survives it.
Interested?
Yes, if the Tories are 4th in May Kemi will certainly face a VONC in my view, so I will take a bet on those terms, the Tories coming third or worse in May will have a VONC. If the Tories are second or better she won't so the bet is then void
You're in the party am I'm not. But I would have thought the pressure on her was past: Tories have cleared out the mad, insane and stupid to Reform. You are a Better Party without those morons. Reform are on the slide. Plot the trendline, look at the hurdles they face. Kemi has found her rhythm - previous government a bit crap, I'm new, I'm punchy, life vs Starmer's inertia
And you want to replace her with Shithole Cleverley?
If the Tories are second to Reform in May then yes Kemi will be safe.
If Yougov is right though and the Conservatives are behind not only Reform but Labour too and even maybe the Greens I am afraid Kemi is gone and will be removed. Not only will she have failed to win back rightwing voters from Reform she will also have lost centrist swing voters to Labour, the latter the type of voters Cleverly appeals more to
What do you think Cleverly would do any different to Kemi other than take the party lower in the polls ?
Well he polls better with all voters as shown at the time of the 2024 leadership election and if the Tories are fourth as Yougov says this morning there really isn't much lower they can go Kemi hasn't already taken them
If you are using a 2024 poll then you have no case
Kemi is a gnats bollock away from losing 33% of the Tory vote in a GE that was their worst result in 100 years
She tries to out Reform as Reform lose 20% of their headline vote.
One Nation Toryism of the likes of Heseltine and Cameron would comfortably polling low to mid 20s
She has no Brand Identity Policy Vision Plan
Everything is an argument She is surrounded by busted flushes
The more people see of her the less they like.
She is irrelevant to the right, the left and in the centre.
Usual tripe from you
Kemi tops leaders approval and is on 84% approval with members
Kemi is not the problem, the brand is still suffering from Johnson Truss years but she has 3 years to recover the brand
Anyway you and @HYUFD seem to agree and like each other posts so that is the strangest of alliances on here
This is over optimistic. With Reform trending down, the Tories should be, but are not, the big gainers. The Greens' upward curve mirrors Reform's exactly.
Kemi is not addressing the central questions of Tory voters (I was one for nearly 50 years): Who do I vote for is I want a sane centre right party that that can actually form a coherent government with 326 seats?
Why should I vote Tory instead of Reform if I am one of their more right wing voters voters?
Who do I vote for tactically if I certainly want to stop Reform but I think the Tories can't form a government and might keep Reform in power?
Kemi has announced the end of stamp duty and farmers IT, will address student loans and wants to help the young, will address the boats and fair immigration, drill in the north sea, and above all prioritise defence
Of course the conservative brand is a problem but changing the leader who is popular amongst her mps and the membership would be an act of self harm and you do have to wonder why some lefties concentrate on attacking her if they do not see her as a threat and would like her gone
I would exclude @HYUFD because he seems fairly unique in conservatives who would prefer Cleverly for reasons beter known to himself
To be honest BigG I think lefties think Kemi makes even IDS look a terrifying threat in retrospect. At the moment the only threat she poses is to Tory MPs holding their seats
You live in little england farage land and are very much a de facto supporter of the right and of course where Cleverly is an mp
I fully expect the mps and party to reject your calls post May
I was very frustrated at being denied the opportunity to vote for James Cleverly at the time of the leadership election because the MPs ballsed things up. He would have been the best choice as LOTO not least because he looks prime ministerial, is reassuring, and would have contrasted with Farage in a positive way.
However, we are where we are, and I kinda like Kemi. She definitely has a dash of stardust and can be effective.
I cannot believe that changing the leader now would be a good idea. Party would risk being seen as a laughing stock, and I'm unconvinced that there would be any kind of Cleverly "bounce". I'm afraid we just have to keep buggerin' on (as I believe WSC once said).
Sorry if the Tories come fourth in May voters will have made their mind up on Kemi, that she has to go
You mean you have but her mps and party haven't
If the Tories are fourth in May most Tory MPs face losing their seats and will act accordingly
You are not listening to wise council on here from fellow conservatives and sensible thinking left contributors leading amongst them @NickPalmer who are agreed changing leader does not make election prospects better and in Kemi's case she has 84% member support
I am expecting a difficult May, especially in Scotland and Wales, and the biggest irony of all, the leading contender for trashing of the conservative brand is your hero Johnson !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The Conservatives were polling 30% when Boris resigned, they are now polling just 17% today with Kemi
And that is the damage he caused the party
Nope, had Boris stayed 100 Tory MPs would have kept their seats and the Tories still well ahead of Reform. Truss would never have become PM with her budget disaster and Sunak not Kemi might be Leader of the Opposition with a big poll lead
On the other hand the level of disgust might have got worse and the Tories crashed to an even worse defeat than in 2064!
Have we done the Tories in fourth place with YouGov?
Ref 23 (-2)
Lab 19 (+2)
GRN 18 (-1)
Con 17 (=)
LD 13 (-1)
I reckon it is the war that is behind a lot of this.
Hearing the focus groups are sympathetic to Starmer re Trump & the war.
Albeit Tories only 1% behind the Greens and only 6% separates them from top placed Reform with Yougov now.
If those are the voteshares in the NEV after the local and devolved elections in May and the Tories are 4th behind Reform, Labour and even the Greens though Kemi will be gone, there will be a VONC in her leadership from Tory MPs and she will then be replaced by Cleverly. So Kemi needs to get a better result than that, on the plus side for her Yougov have the Greens higher than most pollsters do
A £50 charity bet that Kemi either does not face a VONC by 1st September - or if she does, she survives it.
Interested?
Yes, if the Tories are 4th in May Kemi will certainly face a VONC in my view, so I will take a bet on those terms, the Tories coming third or worse in May will have a VONC. If the Tories are second or better she won't so the bet is then void
You're in the party am I'm not. But I would have thought the pressure on her was past: Tories have cleared out the mad, insane and stupid to Reform. You are a Better Party without those morons. Reform are on the slide. Plot the trendline, look at the hurdles they face. Kemi has found her rhythm - previous government a bit crap, I'm new, I'm punchy, life vs Starmer's inertia
And you want to replace her with Shithole Cleverley?
If the Tories are second to Reform in May then yes Kemi will be safe.
If Yougov is right though and the Conservatives are behind not only Reform but Labour too and even maybe the Greens I am afraid Kemi is gone and will be removed. Not only will she have failed to win back rightwing voters from Reform she will also have lost centrist swing voters to Labour, the latter the type of voters Cleverly appeals more to
What do you think Cleverly would do any different to Kemi other than take the party lower in the polls ?
Well he polls better with all voters as shown at the time of the 2024 leadership election and if the Tories are fourth as Yougov says this morning there really isn't much lower they can go Kemi hasn't already taken them
If you are using a 2024 poll then you have no case
Kemi is a gnats bollock away from losing 33% of the Tory vote in a GE that was their worst result in 100 years
She tries to out Reform as Reform lose 20% of their headline vote.
One Nation Toryism of the likes of Heseltine and Cameron would comfortably polling low to mid 20s
She has no Brand Identity Policy Vision Plan
Everything is an argument She is surrounded by busted flushes
The more people see of her the less they like.
She is irrelevant to the right, the left and in the centre.
Usual tripe from you
Kemi tops leaders approval and is on 84% approval with members
Kemi is not the problem, the brand is still suffering from Johnson Truss years but she has 3 years to recover the brand
Anyway you and @HYUFD seem to agree and like each other posts so that is the strangest of alliances on here
This is over optimistic. With Reform trending down, the Tories should be, but are not, the big gainers. The Greens' upward curve mirrors Reform's exactly.
Kemi is not addressing the central questions of Tory voters (I was one for nearly 50 years): Who do I vote for is I want a sane centre right party that that can actually form a coherent government with 326 seats?
Why should I vote Tory instead of Reform if I am one of their more right wing voters voters?
Who do I vote for tactically if I certainly want to stop Reform but I think the Tories can't form a government and might keep Reform in power?
Kemi has announced the end of stamp duty and farmers IT, will address student loans and wants to help the young, will address the boats and fair immigration, drill in the north sea, and above all prioritise defence
Of course the conservative brand is a problem but changing the leader who is popular amongst her mps and the membership would be an act of self harm and you do have to wonder why some lefties concentrate on attacking her if they do not see her as a threat and would like her gone
I would exclude @HYUFD because he seems fairly unique in conservatives who would prefer Cleverly for reasons beter known to himself
To be honest BigG I think lefties think Kemi makes even IDS look a terrifying threat in retrospect. At the moment the only threat she poses is to Tory MPs holding their seats
You live in little england farage land and are very much a de facto supporter of the right and of course where Cleverly is an mp
I fully expect the mps and party to reject your calls post May
I was very frustrated at being denied the opportunity to vote for James Cleverly at the time of the leadership election because the MPs ballsed things up. He would have been the best choice as LOTO not least because he looks prime ministerial, is reassuring, and would have contrasted with Farage in a positive way.
However, we are where we are, and I kinda like Kemi. She definitely has a dash of stardust and can be effective.
I cannot believe that changing the leader now would be a good idea. Party would risk being seen as a laughing stock, and I'm unconvinced that there would be any kind of Cleverly "bounce". I'm afraid we just have to keep buggerin' on (as I believe WSC once said).
Sorry if the Tories come fourth in May voters will have made their mind up on Kemi, that she has to go
You mean you have but her mps and party haven't
If the Tories are fourth in May most Tory MPs face losing their seats and will act accordingly
You are not listening to wise council on here from fellow conservatives and sensible thinking left contributors leading amongst them @NickPalmer who are agreed changing leader does not make election prospects better and in Kemi's case she has 84% member support
I am expecting a difficult May, especially in Scotland and Wales, and the biggest irony of all, the leading contender for trashing of the conservative brand is your hero Johnson !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The Conservatives were polling 30% when Boris resigned, they are now polling just 17% today with Kemi
And that is the damage he caused the party
Nope, had Boris stayed 100 Tory MPs would have kept their seats and the Tories still well ahead of Reform. Truss would never have become PM with her budget disaster and Sunak not Kemi might be Leader of the Opposition with a big poll lead
You seem to think that the only function of the Tories is to gain power, not to use it in furtherance of policies you wish to see enacted. Look what a disaster that has proved to be for Starmer’s Labour party.
Have we done the Tories in fourth place with YouGov?
Ref 23 (-2)
Lab 19 (+2)
GRN 18 (-1)
Con 17 (=)
LD 13 (-1)
I reckon it is the war that is behind a lot of this.
Hearing the focus groups are sympathetic to Starmer re Trump & the war.
Albeit Tories only 1% behind the Greens and only 6% separates them from top placed Reform with Yougov now.
If those are the voteshares in the NEV after the local and devolved elections in May and the Tories are 4th behind Reform, Labour and even the Greens though Kemi will be gone, there will be a VONC in her leadership from Tory MPs and she will then be replaced by Cleverly. So Kemi needs to get a better result than that, on the plus side for her Yougov have the Greens higher than most pollsters do
A £50 charity bet that Kemi either does not face a VONC by 1st September - or if she does, she survives it.
Interested?
Yes, if the Tories are 4th in May Kemi will certainly face a VONC in my view, so I will take a bet on those terms, the Tories coming third or worse in May will have a VONC. If the Tories are second or better she won't so the bet is then void
You're in the party am I'm not. But I would have thought the pressure on her was past: Tories have cleared out the mad, insane and stupid to Reform. You are a Better Party without those morons. Reform are on the slide. Plot the trendline, look at the hurdles they face. Kemi has found her rhythm - previous government a bit crap, I'm new, I'm punchy, life vs Starmer's inertia
And you want to replace her with Shithole Cleverley?
If the Tories are second to Reform in May then yes Kemi will be safe.
If Yougov is right though and the Conservatives are behind not only Reform but Labour too and even maybe the Greens I am afraid Kemi is gone and will be removed. Not only will she have failed to win back rightwing voters from Reform she will also have lost centrist swing voters to Labour, the latter the type of voters Cleverly appeals more to
What do you think Cleverly would do any different to Kemi other than take the party lower in the polls ?
Well he polls better with all voters as shown at the time of the 2024 leadership election and if the Tories are fourth as Yougov says this morning there really isn't much lower they can go Kemi hasn't already taken them
If you are using a 2024 poll then you have no case
Kemi is a gnats bollock away from losing 33% of the Tory vote in a GE that was their worst result in 100 years
She tries to out Reform as Reform lose 20% of their headline vote.
One Nation Toryism of the likes of Heseltine and Cameron would comfortably polling low to mid 20s
She has no Brand Identity Policy Vision Plan
Everything is an argument She is surrounded by busted flushes
The more people see of her the less they like.
She is irrelevant to the right, the left and in the centre.
Usual tripe from you
Kemi tops leaders approval and is on 84% approval with members
Kemi is not the problem, the brand is still suffering from Johnson Truss years but she has 3 years to recover the brand
Anyway you and @HYUFD seem to agree and like each other posts so that is the strangest of alliances on here
This is over optimistic. With Reform trending down, the Tories should be, but are not, the big gainers. The Greens' upward curve mirrors Reform's exactly.
Kemi is not addressing the central questions of Tory voters (I was one for nearly 50 years): Who do I vote for is I want a sane centre right party that that can actually form a coherent government with 326 seats?
Why should I vote Tory instead of Reform if I am one of their more right wing voters voters?
Who do I vote for tactically if I certainly want to stop Reform but I think the Tories can't form a government and might keep Reform in power?
Kemi has announced the end of stamp duty and farmers IT, will address student loans and wants to help the young, will address the boats and fair immigration, drill in the north sea, and above all prioritise defence
Of course the conservative brand is a problem but changing the leader who is popular amongst her mps and the membership would be an act of self harm and you do have to wonder why some lefties concentrate on attacking her if they do not see her as a threat and would like her gone
I would exclude @HYUFD because he seems fairly unique in conservatives who would prefer Cleverly for reasons beter known to himself
To be honest BigG I think lefties think Kemi makes even IDS look a terrifying threat in retrospect. At the moment the only threat she poses is to Tory MPs holding their seats
You live in little england farage land and are very much a de facto supporter of the right and of course where Cleverly is an mp
I fully expect the mps and party to reject your calls post May
I was very frustrated at being denied the opportunity to vote for James Cleverly at the time of the leadership election because the MPs ballsed things up. He would have been the best choice as LOTO not least because he looks prime ministerial, is reassuring, and would have contrasted with Farage in a positive way.
However, we are where we are, and I kinda like Kemi. She definitely has a dash of stardust and can be effective.
I cannot believe that changing the leader now would be a good idea. Party would risk being seen as a laughing stock, and I'm unconvinced that there would be any kind of Cleverly "bounce". I'm afraid we just have to keep buggerin' on (as I believe WSC once said).
Sorry if the Tories come fourth in May voters will have made their mind up on Kemi, that she has to go
You mean you have but her mps and party haven't
If the Tories are fourth in May most Tory MPs face losing their seats and will act accordingly
You are not listening to wise council on here from fellow conservatives and sensible thinking left contributors leading amongst them @NickPalmer who are agreed changing leader does not make election prospects better and in Kemi's case she has 84% member support
I am expecting a difficult May, especially in Scotland and Wales, and the biggest irony of all, the leading contender for trashing of the conservative brand is your hero Johnson !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The Conservatives were polling 30% when Boris resigned, they are now polling just 17% today with Kemi
And that is the damage he caused the party
Nope, had Boris stayed 100 Tory MPs would have kept their seats and the Tories still well ahead of Reform. Truss would never have become PM with her budget disaster and Sunak not Kemi might be Leader of the Opposition with a big poll lead
On the other hand the level of disgust might have got worse and the Tories crashed to an even worse defeat than in 2064!
The Conservatives were on 30% when Boris resigned, 6% ahead of the 24% Rishi got in 2024
Have we done the Tories in fourth place with YouGov?
Ref 23 (-2)
Lab 19 (+2)
GRN 18 (-1)
Con 17 (=)
LD 13 (-1)
I reckon it is the war that is behind a lot of this.
Hearing the focus groups are sympathetic to Starmer re Trump & the war.
Albeit Tories only 1% behind the Greens and only 6% separates them from top placed Reform with Yougov now.
If those are the voteshares in the NEV after the local and devolved elections in May and the Tories are 4th behind Reform, Labour and even the Greens though Kemi will be gone, there will be a VONC in her leadership from Tory MPs and she will then be replaced by Cleverly. So Kemi needs to get a better result than that, on the plus side for her Yougov have the Greens higher than most pollsters do
To some extent the figures can be overlooked. The reasons for the figures and the likely futures are the matters of political, power and betting interest.
The Tories problem is not the 4th place and 17%. It's that as things stand, at the next GE the are not the right answer to any sensible question.
Do you want a Right of Centre radical government without years of government failure in your record? Vote Reform.
Do you want a One Nation Tory government? Not on the menu
Do you want to ensure Reform don't govern? Vote tactically for Lab/Greeen/LD/Nat
Do you want a Reformlite bunch of confused people who may or may not keep a Reform government in power but won't tell you which and if they did you would not believe them, and have zero chance of getting power themselves? Vote Tory.
The chances therefore of a Left Of Centre government 2029 are high. (Reform government low). It is hard to say much more than that. But I expect Labour to recover a lot of ground.
I agree with yor reasoning but it's even worse for the Tories - the answer at the moment to the question 'Do you want a One Nation Tory government?' is Vote Labour (as I think from previous comments, grudgingly, you still would).
Agree, and yes. Nearly 50 years of voting Tory because I would like a government cautious about abolishing institutions and respectful of our history combined with a welfare state and regulated free enterprise, the rule of law, and doing its best to achieve greater equality of opportunity even though it isn't attainable. Competence and non extremism is central.
My vote also at the moment has to be for a party who can win my seat (which could go Tory, Lab or Reform) and will oppose Reform and are 100% sure of not helping them form a government.
Only Labour comes close, though not very close and not nearly close enough.
Have we done the Tories in fourth place with YouGov?
Ref 23 (-2)
Lab 19 (+2)
GRN 18 (-1)
Con 17 (=)
LD 13 (-1)
I reckon it is the war that is behind a lot of this.
Hearing the focus groups are sympathetic to Starmer re Trump & the war.
Albeit Tories only 1% behind the Greens and only 6% separates them from top placed Reform with Yougov now.
If those are the voteshares in the NEV after the local and devolved elections in May and the Tories are 4th behind Reform, Labour and even the Greens though Kemi will be gone, there will be a VONC in her leadership from Tory MPs and she will then be replaced by Cleverly. So Kemi needs to get a better result than that, on the plus side for her Yougov have the Greens higher than most pollsters do
A £50 charity bet that Kemi either does not face a VONC by 1st September - or if she does, she survives it.
Interested?
Yes, if the Tories are 4th in May Kemi will certainly face a VONC in my view, so I will take a bet on those terms, the Tories coming third or worse in May will have a VONC. If the Tories are second or better she won't so the bet is then void
You're in the party am I'm not. But I would have thought the pressure on her was past: Tories have cleared out the mad, insane and stupid to Reform. You are a Better Party without those morons. Reform are on the slide. Plot the trendline, look at the hurdles they face. Kemi has found her rhythm - previous government a bit crap, I'm new, I'm punchy, life vs Starmer's inertia
And you want to replace her with Shithole Cleverley?
If the Tories are second to Reform in May then yes Kemi will be safe.
If Yougov is right though and the Conservatives are behind not only Reform but Labour too and even maybe the Greens I am afraid Kemi is gone and will be removed. Not only will she have failed to win back rightwing voters from Reform she will also have lost centrist swing voters to Labour, the latter the type of voters Cleverly appeals more to
What do you think Cleverly would do any different to Kemi other than take the party lower in the polls ?
Well he polls better with all voters as shown at the time of the 2024 leadership election and if the Tories are fourth as Yougov says this morning there really isn't much lower they can go Kemi hasn't already taken them
If you are using a 2024 poll then you have no case
Kemi is a gnats bollock away from losing 33% of the Tory vote in a GE that was their worst result in 100 years
She tries to out Reform as Reform lose 20% of their headline vote.
One Nation Toryism of the likes of Heseltine and Cameron would comfortably polling low to mid 20s
She has no Brand Identity Policy Vision Plan
Everything is an argument She is surrounded by busted flushes
The more people see of her the less they like.
She is irrelevant to the right, the left and in the centre.
Usual tripe from you
Kemi tops leaders approval and is on 84% approval with members
Kemi is not the problem, the brand is still suffering from Johnson Truss years but she has 3 years to recover the brand
Anyway you and @HYUFD seem to agree and like each other posts so that is the strangest of alliances on here
This is over optimistic. With Reform trending down, the Tories should be, but are not, the big gainers. The Greens' upward curve mirrors Reform's exactly.
Kemi is not addressing the central questions of Tory voters (I was one for nearly 50 years): Who do I vote for is I want a sane centre right party that that can actually form a coherent government with 326 seats?
Why should I vote Tory instead of Reform if I am one of their more right wing voters voters?
Who do I vote for tactically if I certainly want to stop Reform but I think the Tories can't form a government and might keep Reform in power?
Kemi has announced the end of stamp duty and farmers IT, will address student loans and wants to help the young, will address the boats and fair immigration, drill in the north sea, and above all prioritise defence
Of course the conservative brand is a problem but changing the leader who is popular amongst her mps and the membership would be an act of self harm and you do have to wonder why some lefties concentrate on attacking her if they do not see her as a threat and would like her gone
I would exclude @HYUFD because he seems fairly unique in conservatives who would prefer Cleverly for reasons beter known to himself
To be honest BigG I think lefties think Kemi makes even IDS look a terrifying threat in retrospect. At the moment the only threat she poses is to Tory MPs holding their seats
You live in little england farage land and are very much a de facto supporter of the right and of course where Cleverly is an mp
I fully expect the mps and party to reject your calls post May
I was very frustrated at being denied the opportunity to vote for James Cleverly at the time of the leadership election because the MPs ballsed things up. He would have been the best choice as LOTO not least because he looks prime ministerial, is reassuring, and would have contrasted with Farage in a positive way.
However, we are where we are, and I kinda like Kemi. She definitely has a dash of stardust and can be effective.
I cannot believe that changing the leader now would be a good idea. Party would risk being seen as a laughing stock, and I'm unconvinced that there would be any kind of Cleverly "bounce". I'm afraid we just have to keep buggerin' on (as I believe WSC once said).
Sorry if the Tories come fourth in May voters will have made their mind up on Kemi, that she has to go
You mean you have but her mps and party haven't
If the Tories are fourth in May most Tory MPs face losing their seats and will act accordingly
You are not listening to wise council on here from fellow conservatives and sensible thinking left contributors leading amongst them @NickPalmer who are agreed changing leader does not make election prospects better and in Kemi's case she has 84% member support
I am expecting a difficult May, especially in Scotland and Wales, and the biggest irony of all, the leading contender for trashing of the conservative brand is your hero Johnson !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The Conservatives were polling 30% when Boris resigned, they are now polling just 17% today with Kemi
And that is the damage he caused the party
Nope, had Boris stayed 100 Tory MPs would have kept their seats and the Tories still well ahead of Reform. Truss would never have become PM with her budget disaster and Sunak not Kemi might be Leader of the Opposition with a big poll lead
On the other hand the level of disgust might have got worse and the Tories crashed to an even worse defeat than in 2064!
The Conservatives were on 30% when Boris resigned, 6% ahead of the 24% Rishi got in 2024
You cannot assume that they would have stayed on that though.
The Greens and Reform are underrepresented on PB. The header explains why. Greens and Reform are the parties for people with few assets and little chance of obtaining them. Most on here have plenty of assets and are happy to keep them, if necessary at the expense of those without. The term that used to be used for us was boomers. A few, such as @OldKingCole, @Foxy and @NickPalmer think of the wider population, and are those at least considering the Greens. Probably not coincidentally, they are posters that seem to take more interest in the views of their families.
The data in the header doesn't indicate that Reform voters are unusually poor. 41% of them are financially comfortable compared to the 43% in the general population who are. That's not very different. But point taken re PBers. We are mainly top quartile (at least) in wealth. Least that's my impression.
I wonder how they assessed 'financially comfortable' btw. I wouldn't totally trust a self-select on that. People tend to shy away from saying that about themselves.
The header is a very good description of my stepdaughter. She's been to uni, got a decent degree and is working at entry level in her chosen career in law. But the combination of a low wage and high house prices means that she won't be able to afford a place of her own for ages. A lot of her friends are in a similar position and, despite not being especially environmentally conscious, are mostly intending to vote Green. It is indeed a cry for help.
Younger people have been betrayed. The thing I find very annoying is the lecturing they’re subjected to by those who had free tuition fees , lower house prices etc .
Younger people find it almost impossible now to get on the housing ladder unless they have parental help or are in very high paying jobs.
You get the lecturing whereby they’re told they spend too much , shouldn’t go on holidays or socialise but the reality is they have lost hope because even if they did those things they’d never save enough for a deposit because each year the goalposts are widened .
I think to an extent both things can be true. I have no doubt of how hard it is to get on the housing ladder (certainly London and the South-East). Prices are high, wage growth has been poor.
But it is also true, I think, that some people do spend more than perhaps their grandparents or parents generations did. Mainly because there is more to spend it on.
Take mobile phones. Most people have mobiles (arguably its hard to function without one now). But thats a cost that I didn't have in my early twenties. Take TV streaming. Take the rise of coffee shops and meal deals. Previous generations didn't spend 10 a day on coffee from St%rbucks or Pret. So you can also save money.
But I get the issue - owning the house is so distant that you just think 'feck it, I'll have that latte with the bun'. And I'm sure I would too, if I was in their shoes.
People of earlier generations went out and spent frivolously too - cinema, pub, records, etc (and a lot of those sorts of things were arguably cheaper in the past too).
The big difference, as data in the link about Janet shows, is that young people today have vastly higher housing costs. The Baby Boomers started out paying 8% of their net income on housing costs, whereas for Millienials that was 22%. The young simply have less money left over after housing costs.
In 1968 (!) the bank demurred at assisting me with the purchase of a four-bedroomed, recently built, detached house, with a substantial garden in a 'good' area, costing £14k, on the grounds I was then earning about £4k pa in a secure job. I did buy the house though, and, of course, eventually moved on. I understand that the last time it was sold it went for £750k.
There's a bit missing, viz: after £14k should have read "on the grounds that, even in these inflationary times the price was high."
Johnson's duplicity cost him. And then Conservative members being fools got Truss which did substantial damage (despite being tossed overboard pronto).
The current bizarreness of five party politics is because of Labour's pathetically timid 'Ming vase' refusal to have any policies beyond More Nice Spending means they lack a degree of moral mandate for necessary changes, and are further hamstrung by their juvenile Sweeties For Everyone backbenchers.
There's a vast yawning chasm for competent, boring, centrist government, but Starmer struggles to do anything despite a landslide (cf arguments over tightening migration and failure to cut benefits at all) and Badenoch's dopey decision to try and out-reform Reform means there's plenty of options if you want financially innumerate overspending or really want a migration crackdown. But if you want basic competence and to cut our cloth according to our means you're out of luck.
The header is a very good description of my stepdaughter. She's been to uni, got a decent degree and is working at entry level in her chosen career in law. But the combination of a low wage and high house prices means that she won't be able to afford a place of her own for ages. A lot of her friends are in a similar position and, despite not being especially environmentally conscious, are mostly intending to vote Green. It is indeed a cry for help.
Younger people have been betrayed. The thing I find very annoying is the lecturing they’re subjected to by those who had free tuition fees , lower house prices etc .
Younger people find it almost impossible now to get on the housing ladder unless they have parental help or are in very high paying jobs.
You get the lecturing whereby they’re told they spend too much , shouldn’t go on holidays or socialise but the reality is they have lost hope because even if they did those things they’d never save enough for a deposit because each year the goalposts are widened .
I think to an extent both things can be true. I have no doubt of how hard it is to get on the housing ladder (certainly London and the South-East). Prices are high, wage growth has been poor.
But it is also true, I think, that some people do spend more than perhaps their grandparents or parents generations did. Mainly because there is more to spend it on.
Take mobile phones. Most people have mobiles (arguably its hard to function without one now). But thats a cost that I didn't have in my early twenties. Take TV streaming. Take the rise of coffee shops and meal deals. Previous generations didn't spend 10 a day on coffee from St%rbucks or Pret. So you can also save money.
But I get the issue - owning the house is so distant that you just think 'feck it, I'll have that latte with the bun'. And I'm sure I would too, if I was in their shoes.
People of earlier generations went out and spent frivolously too - cinema, pub, records, etc (and a lot of those sorts of things were arguably cheaper in the past too).
The big difference, as data in the link about Janet shows, is that young people today have vastly higher housing costs. The Baby Boomers started out paying 8% of their net income on housing costs, whereas for Millienials that was 22%. The young simply have less money left over after housing costs.
In our day, there were council houses for those that couldn’t afford to buy. Now it’s private rentals at a price equivalent to a mortgage. The only financial difference is that the rental deposit is less than a house purchase deposit. The ridiculous aspect is that mortgage lenders seem unable to realise that, when calculating affordability, the mortgage payment will be instead of the rental, not in addition to it.
More that they aren’t prepared to lend money that will stretch people to the point of breaking to repay.
See risk rules following the Great Financial Crisis. Which was, at heart, all about lending to buy house. To people who were stretched beyond breaking point by the repayments.
So banks try and impose affordability on mortgages.
So instead, people are stretched to the point of breaking, to pay rent.
It's hard to imagine the Conservatives being in power after 2029 except as the willing junior partner in a Farage government. Badenoch and Farage don't seem miles apart in their political outlooks, so that fits too.
The header is a very good description of my stepdaughter. She's been to uni, got a decent degree and is working at entry level in her chosen career in law. But the combination of a low wage and high house prices means that she won't be able to afford a place of her own for ages. A lot of her friends are in a similar position and, despite not being especially environmentally conscious, are mostly intending to vote Green. It is indeed a cry for help.
Younger people have been betrayed. The thing I find very annoying is the lecturing they’re subjected to by those who had free tuition fees , lower house prices etc .
Younger people find it almost impossible now to get on the housing ladder unless they have parental help or are in very high paying jobs.
You get the lecturing whereby they’re told they spend too much , shouldn’t go on holidays or socialise but the reality is they have lost hope because even if they did those things they’d never save enough for a deposit because each year the goalposts are widened .
I think to an extent both things can be true. I have no doubt of how hard it is to get on the housing ladder (certainly London and the South-East). Prices are high, wage growth has been poor.
But it is also true, I think, that some people do spend more than perhaps their grandparents or parents generations did. Mainly because there is more to spend it on.
Take mobile phones. Most people have mobiles (arguably its hard to function without one now). But thats a cost that I didn't have in my early twenties. Take TV streaming. Take the rise of coffee shops and meal deals. Previous generations didn't spend 10 a day on coffee from St%rbucks or Pret. So you can also save money.
But I get the issue - owning the house is so distant that you just think 'feck it, I'll have that latte with the bun'. And I'm sure I would too, if I was in their shoes.
People of earlier generations went out and spent frivolously too - cinema, pub, records, etc (and a lot of those sorts of things were arguably cheaper in the past too).
The big difference, as data in the link about Janet shows, is that young people today have vastly higher housing costs. The Baby Boomers started out paying 8% of their net income on housing costs, whereas for Millienials that was 22%. The young simply have less money left over after housing costs.
As I said both things can be true. I genuinely believe that there is just more stuff to spend money on now. Look at the clutter in houses. Look how many garages are full of not cars but other stuff. Look at the rise of TV shows about decluttering houses.
Its absolutely true that housing costs is a large part of the problem and I don't deny that. But it is also possible that some people are not good at saving as well.
I think it's fair to say that capitalism has become better at parting people from their money. And consumer credit laws have been relaxed, making it easier for people to borrow money they don't have to pay for consumer goods too.
I advocate a ban on advertising. I think it would do a lot to reduce consumer demand that is generated by manipulative advertising.
But if you had more young people saving instead of spending you'd simply see them bid house prices even higher, given the overall shortage.
The header is a very good description of my stepdaughter. She's been to uni, got a decent degree and is working at entry level in her chosen career in law. But the combination of a low wage and high house prices means that she won't be able to afford a place of her own for ages. A lot of her friends are in a similar position and, despite not being especially environmentally conscious, are mostly intending to vote Green. It is indeed a cry for help.
Younger people have been betrayed. The thing I find very annoying is the lecturing they’re subjected to by those who had free tuition fees , lower house prices etc .
Younger people find it almost impossible now to get on the housing ladder unless they have parental help or are in very high paying jobs.
You get the lecturing whereby they’re told they spend too much , shouldn’t go on holidays or socialise but the reality is they have lost hope because even if they did those things they’d never save enough for a deposit because each year the goalposts are widened .
I think to an extent both things can be true. I have no doubt of how hard it is to get on the housing ladder (certainly London and the South-East). Prices are high, wage growth has been poor.
But it is also true, I think, that some people do spend more than perhaps their grandparents or parents generations did. Mainly because there is more to spend it on.
Take mobile phones. Most people have mobiles (arguably its hard to function without one now). But thats a cost that I didn't have in my early twenties. Take TV streaming. Take the rise of coffee shops and meal deals. Previous generations didn't spend 10 a day on coffee from St%rbucks or Pret. So you can also save money.
But I get the issue - owning the house is so distant that you just think 'feck it, I'll have that latte with the bun'. And I'm sure I would too, if I was in their shoes.
All that is choice though. I rarely buy coffee out, unless I am travelling. When I worked, I made a packed lunch most days, and made coffee at the office. I have a mobile phone, it cost me £200 and the sim is £11 a month. I don't pay for lots of TV streaming, plenty is available for free on the Internet and I have a basic cable package. I tinker with the central heating controls to keep costs down (I'm amazed how many places I see windows open in the winter)
However... I would be surprised if by doing so you could actually save enough for a deposit on the house. In my case it just meant I had money to spend on beer.
Meal deal every day at the COOP on campus 4.10. Two coffees 5. Basically 10 a day, 5 days a week, 20 times a month. 200 pounds right there.
Have we done the Tories in fourth place with YouGov?
Ref 23 (-2)
Lab 19 (+2)
GRN 18 (-1)
Con 17 (=)
LD 13 (-1)
I reckon it is the war that is behind a lot of this.
Hearing the focus groups are sympathetic to Starmer re Trump & the war.
Albeit Tories only 1% behind the Greens and only 6% separates them from top placed Reform with Yougov now.
If those are the voteshares in the NEV after the local and devolved elections in May and the Tories are 4th behind Reform, Labour and even the Greens though Kemi will be gone, there will be a VONC in her leadership from Tory MPs and she will then be replaced by Cleverly. So Kemi needs to get a better result than that, on the plus side for her Yougov have the Greens higher than most pollsters do
A £50 charity bet that Kemi either does not face a VONC by 1st September - or if she does, she survives it.
Interested?
Yes, if the Tories are 4th in May Kemi will certainly face a VONC in my view, so I will take a bet on those terms, the Tories coming third or worse in May will have a VONC. If the Tories are second or better she won't so the bet is then void
You're in the party am I'm not. But I would have thought the pressure on her was past: Tories have cleared out the mad, insane and stupid to Reform. You are a Better Party without those morons. Reform are on the slide. Plot the trendline, look at the hurdles they face. Kemi has found her rhythm - previous government a bit crap, I'm new, I'm punchy, life vs Starmer's inertia
And you want to replace her with Shithole Cleverley?
If the Tories are second to Reform in May then yes Kemi will be safe.
If Yougov is right though and the Conservatives are behind not only Reform but Labour too and even maybe the Greens I am afraid Kemi is gone and will be removed. Not only will she have failed to win back rightwing voters from Reform she will also have lost centrist swing voters to Labour, the latter the type of voters Cleverly appeals more to
What do you think Cleverly would do any different to Kemi other than take the party lower in the polls ?
Well he polls better with all voters as shown at the time of the 2024 leadership election and if the Tories are fourth as Yougov says this morning there really isn't much lower they can go Kemi hasn't already taken them
If you are using a 2024 poll then you have no case
Kemi is a gnats bollock away from losing 33% of the Tory vote in a GE that was their worst result in 100 years
She tries to out Reform as Reform lose 20% of their headline vote.
One Nation Toryism of the likes of Heseltine and Cameron would comfortably polling low to mid 20s
She has no Brand Identity Policy Vision Plan
Everything is an argument She is surrounded by busted flushes
The more people see of her the less they like.
She is irrelevant to the right, the left and in the centre.
Usual tripe from you
Kemi tops leaders approval and is on 84% approval with members
Kemi is not the problem, the brand is still suffering from Johnson Truss years but she has 3 years to recover the brand
Anyway you and @HYUFD seem to agree and like each other posts so that is the strangest of alliances on here
This is over optimistic. With Reform trending down, the Tories should be, but are not, the big gainers. The Greens' upward curve mirrors Reform's exactly.
Kemi is not addressing the central questions of Tory voters (I was one for nearly 50 years): Who do I vote for is I want a sane centre right party that that can actually form a coherent government with 326 seats?
Why should I vote Tory instead of Reform if I am one of their more right wing voters voters?
Who do I vote for tactically if I certainly want to stop Reform but I think the Tories can't form a government and might keep Reform in power?
Kemi has announced the end of stamp duty and farmers IT, will address student loans and wants to help the young, will address the boats and fair immigration, drill in the north sea, and above all prioritise defence
Of course the conservative brand is a problem but changing the leader who is popular amongst her mps and the membership would be an act of self harm and you do have to wonder why some lefties concentrate on attacking her if they do not see her as a threat and would like her gone
I would exclude @HYUFD because he seems fairly unique in conservatives who would prefer Cleverly for reasons beter known to himself
To be honest BigG I think lefties think Kemi makes even IDS look a terrifying threat in retrospect. At the moment the only threat she poses is to Tory MPs holding their seats
You live in little england farage land and are very much a de facto supporter of the right and of course where Cleverly is an mp
I fully expect the mps and party to reject your calls post May
I was very frustrated at being denied the opportunity to vote for James Cleverly at the time of the leadership election because the MPs ballsed things up. He would have been the best choice as LOTO not least because he looks prime ministerial, is reassuring, and would have contrasted with Farage in a positive way.
However, we are where we are, and I kinda like Kemi. She definitely has a dash of stardust and can be effective.
I cannot believe that changing the leader now would be a good idea. Party would risk being seen as a laughing stock, and I'm unconvinced that there would be any kind of Cleverly "bounce". I'm afraid we just have to keep buggerin' on (as I believe WSC once said).
Sorry if the Tories come fourth in May voters will have made their mind up on Kemi, that she has to go
You mean you have but her mps and party haven't
If the Tories are fourth in May most Tory MPs face losing their seats and will act accordingly
You are not listening to wise council on here from fellow conservatives and sensible thinking left contributors leading amongst them @NickPalmer who are agreed changing leader does not make election prospects better and in Kemi's case she has 84% member support
I am expecting a difficult May, especially in Scotland and Wales, and the biggest irony of all, the leading contender for trashing of the conservative brand is your hero Johnson !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The Conservatives were polling 30% when Boris resigned, they are now polling just 17% today with Kemi
And that is the damage he caused the party
Nope, had Boris stayed 100 Tory MPs would have kept their seats and the Tories still well ahead of Reform. Truss would never have become PM with her budget disaster and Sunak not Kemi might be Leader of the Opposition with a big poll lead
You seem to think that the only function of the Tories is to gain power, not to use it in furtherance of policies you wish to see enacted. Look what a disaster that has proved to be for Starmer’s Labour party.
Or the Cameron/Osborne/Johnson generation of Conservatives. The stuff they did was all about winning votes, and enough of the right votes, to gain power. That very little of it was sustainable, that it was all very likely to bite them and the country on the behind a decade down the line, was Somebody Else's Problem.
Though given the consumer culture in the electorate, where if we don't get our wants indulged right now we will take our custom to that other party down the road, I'm not sure what politicians are meant to do.
"An episode of the BBC’s The Repair Shop was pulled after a TV production worker objected to a “sexist” Bob Monkhouse joke.
The late comedian and presenter’s famous joke books had been brought into the studio for repair by Colin Edmonds, his former comedy partner, and Abigail Williams, his adopted daughter.
The restoration of the books was to be filmed at the show’s barn in Singleton, West Sussex, for a special tribute programme, to be aired this year.
However, a member of Ricochet, the production company that makes Repair Shop, complained about one of Monkhouse’s jokes, claiming it was sexist. Corporation bosses then decided to pull the segment."
Hard to judge without more (I've skimmed the article). What was the joke? Could the joke be pulled and still keep the show (or did the family/partner object to that?). Were there so many jokes that can't be broadcast now (perhaps could never have been broadcast if this was live material) that it wasn't viable to do the show at all?
Have we done the Tories in fourth place with YouGov?
Ref 23 (-2)
Lab 19 (+2)
GRN 18 (-1)
Con 17 (=)
LD 13 (-1)
I reckon it is the war that is behind a lot of this.
Hearing the focus groups are sympathetic to Starmer re Trump & the war.
Albeit Tories only 1% behind the Greens and only 6% separates them from top placed Reform with Yougov now.
If those are the voteshares in the NEV after the local and devolved elections in May and the Tories are 4th behind Reform, Labour and even the Greens though Kemi will be gone, there will be a VONC in her leadership from Tory MPs and she will then be replaced by Cleverly. So Kemi needs to get a better result than that, on the plus side for her Yougov have the Greens higher than most pollsters do
A £50 charity bet that Kemi either does not face a VONC by 1st September - or if she does, she survives it.
Interested?
Yes, if the Tories are 4th in May Kemi will certainly face a VONC in my view, so I will take a bet on those terms, the Tories coming third or worse in May will have a VONC. If the Tories are second or better she won't so the bet is then void
You're in the party am I'm not. But I would have thought the pressure on her was past: Tories have cleared out the mad, insane and stupid to Reform. You are a Better Party without those morons. Reform are on the slide. Plot the trendline, look at the hurdles they face. Kemi has found her rhythm - previous government a bit crap, I'm new, I'm punchy, life vs Starmer's inertia
And you want to replace her with Shithole Cleverley?
If the Tories are second to Reform in May then yes Kemi will be safe.
If Yougov is right though and the Conservatives are behind not only Reform but Labour too and even maybe the Greens I am afraid Kemi is gone and will be removed. Not only will she have failed to win back rightwing voters from Reform she will also have lost centrist swing voters to Labour, the latter the type of voters Cleverly appeals more to
What do you think Cleverly would do any different to Kemi other than take the party lower in the polls ?
Well he polls better with all voters as shown at the time of the 2024 leadership election and if the Tories are fourth as Yougov says this morning there really isn't much lower they can go Kemi hasn't already taken them
If you are using a 2024 poll then you have no case
Kemi is a gnats bollock away from losing 33% of the Tory vote in a GE that was their worst result in 100 years
She tries to out Reform as Reform lose 20% of their headline vote.
One Nation Toryism of the likes of Heseltine and Cameron would comfortably polling low to mid 20s
She has no Brand Identity Policy Vision Plan
Everything is an argument She is surrounded by busted flushes
The more people see of her the less they like.
She is irrelevant to the right, the left and in the centre.
Usual tripe from you
Kemi tops leaders approval and is on 84% approval with members
Kemi is not the problem, the brand is still suffering from Johnson Truss years but she has 3 years to recover the brand
Anyway you and @HYUFD seem to agree and like each other posts so that is the strangest of alliances on here
This is over optimistic. With Reform trending down, the Tories should be, but are not, the big gainers. The Greens' upward curve mirrors Reform's exactly.
Kemi is not addressing the central questions of Tory voters (I was one for nearly 50 years): Who do I vote for is I want a sane centre right party that that can actually form a coherent government with 326 seats?
Why should I vote Tory instead of Reform if I am one of their more right wing voters voters?
Who do I vote for tactically if I certainly want to stop Reform but I think the Tories can't form a government and might keep Reform in power?
Kemi has announced the end of stamp duty and farmers IT, will address student loans and wants to help the young, will address the boats and fair immigration, drill in the north sea, and above all prioritise defence
Of course the conservative brand is a problem but changing the leader who is popular amongst her mps and the membership would be an act of self harm and you do have to wonder why some lefties concentrate on attacking her if they do not see her as a threat and would like her gone
I would exclude @HYUFD because he seems fairly unique in conservatives who would prefer Cleverly for reasons beter known to himself
To be honest BigG I think lefties think Kemi makes even IDS look a terrifying threat in retrospect. At the moment the only threat she poses is to Tory MPs holding their seats
You live in little england farage land and are very much a de facto supporter of the right and of course where Cleverly is an mp
I fully expect the mps and party to reject your calls post May
I was very frustrated at being denied the opportunity to vote for James Cleverly at the time of the leadership election because the MPs ballsed things up. He would have been the best choice as LOTO not least because he looks prime ministerial, is reassuring, and would have contrasted with Farage in a positive way.
However, we are where we are, and I kinda like Kemi. She definitely has a dash of stardust and can be effective.
I cannot believe that changing the leader now would be a good idea. Party would risk being seen as a laughing stock, and I'm unconvinced that there would be any kind of Cleverly "bounce". I'm afraid we just have to keep buggerin' on (as I believe WSC once said).
Sorry if the Tories come fourth in May voters will have made their mind up on Kemi, that she has to go
You mean you have but her mps and party haven't
If the Tories are fourth in May most Tory MPs face losing their seats and will act accordingly
You are not listening to wise council on here from fellow conservatives and sensible thinking left contributors leading amongst them @NickPalmer who are agreed changing leader does not make election prospects better and in Kemi's case she has 84% member support
I am expecting a difficult May, especially in Scotland and Wales, and the biggest irony of all, the leading contender for trashing of the conservative brand is your hero Johnson !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The Conservatives were polling 30% when Boris resigned, they are now polling just 17% today with Kemi
And that is the damage he caused the party
Nope, had Boris stayed 100 Tory MPs would have kept their seats and the Tories still well ahead of Reform. Truss would never have become PM with her budget disaster and Sunak not Kemi might be Leader of the Opposition with a big poll lead
The header is a very good description of my stepdaughter. She's been to uni, got a decent degree and is working at entry level in her chosen career in law. But the combination of a low wage and high house prices means that she won't be able to afford a place of her own for ages. A lot of her friends are in a similar position and, despite not being especially environmentally conscious, are mostly intending to vote Green. It is indeed a cry for help.
Younger people have been betrayed. The thing I find very annoying is the lecturing they’re subjected to by those who had free tuition fees , lower house prices etc .
Younger people find it almost impossible now to get on the housing ladder unless they have parental help or are in very high paying jobs.
You get the lecturing whereby they’re told they spend too much , shouldn’t go on holidays or socialise but the reality is they have lost hope because even if they did those things they’d never save enough for a deposit because each year the goalposts are widened .
I think to an extent both things can be true. I have no doubt of how hard it is to get on the housing ladder (certainly London and the South-East). Prices are high, wage growth has been poor.
But it is also true, I think, that some people do spend more than perhaps their grandparents or parents generations did. Mainly because there is more to spend it on.
Take mobile phones. Most people have mobiles (arguably its hard to function without one now). But thats a cost that I didn't have in my early twenties. Take TV streaming. Take the rise of coffee shops and meal deals. Previous generations didn't spend 10 a day on coffee from St%rbucks or Pret. So you can also save money.
But I get the issue - owning the house is so distant that you just think 'feck it, I'll have that latte with the bun'. And I'm sure I would too, if I was in their shoes.
All that is choice though. I rarely buy coffee out, unless I am travelling. When I worked, I made a packed lunch most days, and made coffee at the office. I have a mobile phone, it cost me £200 and the sim is £11 a month. I don't pay for lots of TV streaming, plenty is available for free on the Internet and I have a basic cable package. I tinker with the central heating controls to keep costs down (I'm amazed how many places I see windows open in the winter)
However... I would be surprised if by doing so you could actually save enough for a deposit on the house. In my case it just meant I had money to spend on beer.
I expect young people are already minimizing their outgoings by using cheaper sim providers etc as well as drinking less than previous generations. They simply have less net disposable income to save for a deposit (housing, student loans etc) and need higher deposits.
It's hard to imagine the Conservatives being in power after 2029 except as the willing junior partner in a Farage government. Badenoch and Farage don't seem miles apart in their political outlooks, so that fits too.
Which is precisely their dilemma. If you support Reform, you vote Reform, if you don't then you don't vote for a party who would be the junior partner. The Tories have two routes out of this, which could be worked together:
1) Be so brilliant that the polling shifts so that by the end of 2027 the question is reversed. Not 'Will the Tories support Reform' (Kemi's dilemma) but 'Will Reform support the Tories' (Farage's dilemma).
2) Make it clear that the Tories are One Nation Centre Right and won't touch Reform with a bargepole.
The only other option, inconsistent with (1) and (2) is an electoral pact with Reform. IMO that is the only way the Right of Centre might possibly actually win in 2029. Hopefully it won't happen. Scorpions in a cage and all that.
Is admitting that you know quite a few Green voters something you disclose in decent company?
It's a function of two things. Whether you have young members of your family. As several posters have already attested. Or whether you work with them. Most of the TA's at my school are under 35 and female. It would be a shock if there weren't a plurality of Green voters there.
"An episode of the BBC’s The Repair Shop was pulled after a TV production worker objected to a “sexist” Bob Monkhouse joke.
The late comedian and presenter’s famous joke books had been brought into the studio for repair by Colin Edmonds, his former comedy partner, and Abigail Williams, his adopted daughter.
The restoration of the books was to be filmed at the show’s barn in Singleton, West Sussex, for a special tribute programme, to be aired this year.
However, a member of Ricochet, the production company that makes Repair Shop, complained about one of Monkhouse’s jokes, claiming it was sexist. Corporation bosses then decided to pull the segment."
The Lebanese government has declared Mohammad Reza Shibani, the ambassador-designate of the Islamic Republic of Iran, to be persona non grata and is giving him until Sunday to leave Lebanon.
This makes four Arab nations that have expelled Islamic Republic of Iran diplomats in the last week.
"An episode of the BBC’s The Repair Shop was pulled after a TV production worker objected to a “sexist” Bob Monkhouse joke.
The late comedian and presenter’s famous joke books had been brought into the studio for repair by Colin Edmonds, his former comedy partner, and Abigail Williams, his adopted daughter.
The restoration of the books was to be filmed at the show’s barn in Singleton, West Sussex, for a special tribute programme, to be aired this year.
However, a member of Ricochet, the production company that makes Repair Shop, complained about one of Monkhouse’s jokes, claiming it was sexist. Corporation bosses then decided to pull the segment."
Hard to judge without more (I've skimmed the article). What was the joke? Could the joke be pulled and still keep the show (or did the family/partner object to that?). Were there so many jokes that can't be broadcast now (perhaps could never have been broadcast if this was live material) that it wasn't viable to do the show at all?
Article implies the employee simply found the joke looking through the books... no suggestion it was to be broadcast.
"A production employee stumbled across a joke – no doubt written in the 1960s – and took offence, believing it to be sexist.
They flagged the problem, and a ‘collective decision’ was made to cull the whole thing."
It's deeply offensive imo to suggest that anyone who thinks life was better in say the 1990s is a "nihilist".
I wouldn't my life was better or worse in the 90's. It was very different. Young, single, doing great at Uni, playing sport and socializing etc. Now I'm old, don't go out, do get to play much sport BUT I have a lovely family, a nice house, a great job etc.
"An episode of the BBC’s The Repair Shop was pulled after a TV production worker objected to a “sexist” Bob Monkhouse joke.
The late comedian and presenter’s famous joke books had been brought into the studio for repair by Colin Edmonds, his former comedy partner, and Abigail Williams, his adopted daughter.
The restoration of the books was to be filmed at the show’s barn in Singleton, West Sussex, for a special tribute programme, to be aired this year.
However, a member of Ricochet, the production company that makes Repair Shop, complained about one of Monkhouse’s jokes, claiming it was sexist. Corporation bosses then decided to pull the segment."
The header is a very good description of my stepdaughter. She's been to uni, got a decent degree and is working at entry level in her chosen career in law. But the combination of a low wage and high house prices means that she won't be able to afford a place of her own for ages. A lot of her friends are in a similar position and, despite not being especially environmentally conscious, are mostly intending to vote Green. It is indeed a cry for help.
Younger people have been betrayed. The thing I find very annoying is the lecturing they’re subjected to by those who had free tuition fees , lower house prices etc .
Younger people find it almost impossible now to get on the housing ladder unless they have parental help or are in very high paying jobs.
You get the lecturing whereby they’re told they spend too much , shouldn’t go on holidays or socialise but the reality is they have lost hope because even if they did those things they’d never save enough for a deposit because each year the goalposts are widened .
I think to an extent both things can be true. I have no doubt of how hard it is to get on the housing ladder (certainly London and the South-East). Prices are high, wage growth has been poor.
But it is also true, I think, that some people do spend more than perhaps their grandparents or parents generations did. Mainly because there is more to spend it on.
Take mobile phones. Most people have mobiles (arguably its hard to function without one now). But thats a cost that I didn't have in my early twenties. Take TV streaming. Take the rise of coffee shops and meal deals. Previous generations didn't spend 10 a day on coffee from St%rbucks or Pret. So you can also save money.
But I get the issue - owning the house is so distant that you just think 'feck it, I'll have that latte with the bun'. And I'm sure I would too, if I was in their shoes.
People of earlier generations went out and spent frivolously too - cinema, pub, records, etc (and a lot of those sorts of things were arguably cheaper in the past too).
The big difference, as data in the link about Janet shows, is that young people today have vastly higher housing costs. The Baby Boomers started out paying 8% of their net income on housing costs, whereas for Millienials that was 22%. The young simply have less money left over after housing costs.
In 1968 (!) the bank demurred at assisting me with the purchase of a four-bedroomed, recently built, detached house, with a substantial garden in a 'good' area, costing £14k, on the grounds I was then earning about £4k pa in a secure job. I did buy the house though, and, of course, eventually moved on. I understand that the last time it was sold it went for £750k.
£14k now is about £260k, so roughly 3x in real terms.
Yes the Polanski Greens are basically Corbyn lite attracting the same type of voters, mainly under 40 burdened by student debt and not owning a house and feeling capitalism does not work for them and willing to give tax and spend socialism a go. They are no longer the party of posh middle class environmentalists like Jonathan Porritt.
Green voters do though have some similarity with Reform voters though in that they are less likely to be financially comfortable than average
Isn't the reason that Green voters don't feel like capitalism is working for them that, in many cases, it isn't particularly? Not exclusively because it's so hard to escape the rental trap, but that being a very large factor. And that, in turn being linked to a change in small-c-conservatism from "pass a better life on to the next generation/enough evolution to prevent revolution" to "après moi le déluge".
And that's just another form of nihlism- that of the powerful, rather than the powerless.
The ironic thing is that Green voters are probably slightly better off than average, and thus doing better under capitalism than a lot of other people.
I consider myself to be in that category.
Still doesn't stop me wanting to change the type of capitalism we have.
"An episode of the BBC’s The Repair Shop was pulled after a TV production worker objected to a “sexist” Bob Monkhouse joke.
The late comedian and presenter’s famous joke books had been brought into the studio for repair by Colin Edmonds, his former comedy partner, and Abigail Williams, his adopted daughter.
The restoration of the books was to be filmed at the show’s barn in Singleton, West Sussex, for a special tribute programme, to be aired this year.
However, a member of Ricochet, the production company that makes Repair Shop, complained about one of Monkhouse’s jokes, claiming it was sexist. Corporation bosses then decided to pull the segment."
Putting as much distance as possible between himself and Trump/Netanyahu is the gift that will keep on giving.
Badenoch had her chance but backed the wrong horse and Farage will always be seen as Trumps best buddy
Zack and Davey too but the market leader always benefits disproportionately and that can only be Starmer. Is it possible Labour could take the lead? I wouldn't rule it out. Trump is way beyond insane and Netanyahu is genuinely evil.
The British media have entirely invented a stand-his-ground Keir Starmer that bears zero relation to reality. He tried to give Trump access to the bases, the cabinet blocked him, then he invented a legal fig leaf and access was granted. This stuff is professional malpractice.
Is this the same British media that have propelled Farage to the brink of government with absolutely no scrutiny whatsoever?
You are right they are a bunch of Charlatans.
The 'British media' reference seems to me flawed in two ways. Firstly, whatever this media are doing only about a quarter of voters plan to support them. The other 75% seem immune to this media thingy. Secondly, I am a consumer of British media, including: BBC, ITV, Ch 4, LBC, Times Radio, Guardian, Economist, New Statesman, Private Eye, and use PB to link to a multitude of stuff.
I almost never see/hear anything at all giving reasoned, or even unreasoned, support to Reform. If you take out the Express, Mail, GB News, which most people don't read/see, who are these people bringing Farage to the dizzy heights of 27%?
You may not have come across this organisation and their Political Editor. This chap is very enthusiastic after the Reform Conference.
The Greens and Reform are underrepresented on PB. The header explains why. Greens and Reform are the parties for people with few assets and little chance of obtaining them. Most on here have plenty of assets and are happy to keep them, if necessary at the expense of those without. The term that used to be used for us was boomers. A few, such as @OldKingCole, @Foxy and @NickPalmer think of the wider population, and are those at least considering the Greens. Probably not coincidentally, they are posters that seem to take more interest in the views of their families.
The data in the header doesn't indicate that Reform voters are unusually poor. 41% of them are financially comfortable compared to the 43% in the general population who are. That's not very different. But point taken re PBers. We are mainly top quartile (at least) in wealth. Least that's my impression.
I wonder how they assessed 'financially comfortable' btw. I wouldn't totally trust a self-select on that. People tend to shy away from saying that about themselves.
Nicking a line from Steven J Gould, The Median is not The Message. That's especially true for Farage Followers. Some are the properly Left Behind, and it's a blot on the records of all governments in my lifetime how much that was just allowed to happen. But very many are extremely comfortable materially, and their discontent is more cultural. Some of that is just that they're getting old, and the cultural caravan is moving on without them. Some of it is not liking the conseqences of their votes and personal spending decisions. (Yes, your High Street is crumbling, but that's mostly because you have spent years not buying things there.)
The first group were often historically non-voters, and who can blame them? The second tend to cluster in the posher bits of unposh areas. How you analyse those is a problem for analysts. How you simultaneously please them both is a problem for all the Reform councillors about to be elected.
"An episode of the BBC’s The Repair Shop was pulled after a TV production worker objected to a “sexist” Bob Monkhouse joke.
The late comedian and presenter’s famous joke books had been brought into the studio for repair by Colin Edmonds, his former comedy partner, and Abigail Williams, his adopted daughter.
The restoration of the books was to be filmed at the show’s barn in Singleton, West Sussex, for a special tribute programme, to be aired this year.
However, a member of Ricochet, the production company that makes Repair Shop, complained about one of Monkhouse’s jokes, claiming it was sexist. Corporation bosses then decided to pull the segment."
The Greens and Reform are underrepresented on PB. The header explains why. Greens and Reform are the parties for people with few assets and little chance of obtaining them. Most on here have plenty of assets and are happy to keep them, if necessary at the expense of those without. The term that used to be used for us was boomers. A few, such as @OldKingCole, @Foxy and @NickPalmer think of the wider population, and are those at least considering the Greens. Probably not coincidentally, they are posters that seem to take more interest in the views of their families.
The data in the header doesn't indicate that Reform voters are unusually poor. 41% of them are financially comfortable compared to the 43% in the general population who are. That's not very different. But point taken re PBers. We are mainly top quartile (at least) in wealth. Least that's my impression.
I wonder how they assessed 'financially comfortable' btw. I wouldn't totally trust a self-select on that. People tend to shy away from saying that about themselves.
Nicking a line from Steven J Gould, The Median is not The Message. That's especially true for Farage Followers. Some are the properly Left Behind, and it's a blot on the records of all governments in my lifetime how much that was just allowed to happen. But very many are extremely comfortable materially, and their discontent is more cultural. Some of that is just that they're getting old, and the cultural caravan is moving on without them. Some of it is not liking the conseqences of their votes and personal spending decisions. (Yes, your High Street is crumbling, but that's mostly because you have spent years not buying things there.)
The first group were often historically non-voters, and who can blame them? The second tend to cluster in the posher bits of unposh areas. How you analyse those is a problem for analysts. How you simultaneously please them both is a problem for all the Reform councillors about to be elected.
"An episode of the BBC’s The Repair Shop was pulled after a TV production worker objected to a “sexist” Bob Monkhouse joke.
The late comedian and presenter’s famous joke books had been brought into the studio for repair by Colin Edmonds, his former comedy partner, and Abigail Williams, his adopted daughter.
The restoration of the books was to be filmed at the show’s barn in Singleton, West Sussex, for a special tribute programme, to be aired this year.
However, a member of Ricochet, the production company that makes Repair Shop, complained about one of Monkhouse’s jokes, claiming it was sexist. Corporation bosses then decided to pull the segment."
"An episode of the BBC’s The Repair Shop was pulled after a TV production worker objected to a “sexist” Bob Monkhouse joke.
The late comedian and presenter’s famous joke books had been brought into the studio for repair by Colin Edmonds, his former comedy partner, and Abigail Williams, his adopted daughter.
The restoration of the books was to be filmed at the show’s barn in Singleton, West Sussex, for a special tribute programme, to be aired this year.
However, a member of Ricochet, the production company that makes Repair Shop, complained about one of Monkhouse’s jokes, claiming it was sexist. Corporation bosses then decided to pull the segment."
Hard to judge without more (I've skimmed the article). What was the joke? Could the joke be pulled and still keep the show (or did the family/partner object to that?). Were there so many jokes that can't be broadcast now (perhaps could never have been broadcast if this was live material) that it wasn't viable to do the show at all?
Article implies the employee simply found the joke looking through the books... no suggestion it was to be broadcast.
"A production employee stumbled across a joke – no doubt written in the 1960s – and took offence, believing it to be sexist.
They flagged the problem, and a ‘collective decision’ was made to cull the whole thing."
The books must be burned. Publically. And a gofundme set up for the offended worker
Have we done the Tories in fourth place with YouGov?
Ref 23 (-2)
Lab 19 (+2)
GRN 18 (-1)
Con 17 (=)
LD 13 (-1)
I reckon it is the war that is behind a lot of this.
Hearing the focus groups are sympathetic to Starmer re Trump & the war.
Albeit Tories only 1% behind the Greens and only 6% separates them from top placed Reform with Yougov now.
If those are the voteshares in the NEV after the local and devolved elections in May and the Tories are 4th behind Reform, Labour and even the Greens though Kemi will be gone, there will be a VONC in her leadership from Tory MPs and she will then be replaced by Cleverly. So Kemi needs to get a better result than that, on the plus side for her Yougov have the Greens higher than most pollsters do
A £50 charity bet that Kemi either does not face a VONC by 1st September - or if she does, she survives it.
Interested?
Yes, if the Tories are 4th in May Kemi will certainly face a VONC in my view, so I will take a bet on those terms, the Tories coming third or worse in May will have a VONC. If the Tories are second or better she won't so the bet is then void
You're in the party am I'm not. But I would have thought the pressure on her was past: Tories have cleared out the mad, insane and stupid to Reform. You are a Better Party without those morons. Reform are on the slide. Plot the trendline, look at the hurdles they face. Kemi has found her rhythm - previous government a bit crap, I'm new, I'm punchy, life vs Starmer's inertia
And you want to replace her with Shithole Cleverley?
If the Tories are second to Reform in May then yes Kemi will be safe.
If Yougov is right though and the Conservatives are behind not only Reform but Labour too and even maybe the Greens I am afraid Kemi is gone and will be removed. Not only will she have failed to win back rightwing voters from Reform she will also have lost centrist swing voters to Labour, the latter the type of voters Cleverly appeals more to
What do you think Cleverly would do any different to Kemi other than take the party lower in the polls ?
Well he polls better with all voters as shown at the time of the 2024 leadership election and if the Tories are fourth as Yougov says this morning there really isn't much lower they can go Kemi hasn't already taken them
If you are using a 2024 poll then you have no case
Kemi is a gnats bollock away from losing 33% of the Tory vote in a GE that was their worst result in 100 years
She tries to out Reform as Reform lose 20% of their headline vote.
One Nation Toryism of the likes of Heseltine and Cameron would comfortably polling low to mid 20s
She has no Brand Identity Policy Vision Plan
Everything is an argument She is surrounded by busted flushes
The more people see of her the less they like.
She is irrelevant to the right, the left and in the centre.
Usual tripe from you
Kemi tops leaders approval and is on 84% approval with members
Kemi is not the problem, the brand is still suffering from Johnson Truss years but she has 3 years to recover the brand
Anyway you and @HYUFD seem to agree and like each other posts so that is the strangest of alliances on here
This is over optimistic. With Reform trending down, the Tories should be, but are not, the big gainers. The Greens' upward curve mirrors Reform's exactly.
Kemi is not addressing the central questions of Tory voters (I was one for nearly 50 years): Who do I vote for is I want a sane centre right party that that can actually form a coherent government with 326 seats?
Why should I vote Tory instead of Reform if I am one of their more right wing voters voters?
Who do I vote for tactically if I certainly want to stop Reform but I think the Tories can't form a government and might keep Reform in power?
Kemi has announced the end of stamp duty and farmers IT, will address student loans and wants to help the young, will address the boats and fair immigration, drill in the north sea, and above all prioritise defence
Of course the conservative brand is a problem but changing the leader who is popular amongst her mps and the membership would be an act of self harm and you do have to wonder why some lefties concentrate on attacking her if they do not see her as a threat and would like her gone
I would exclude @HYUFD because he seems fairly unique in conservatives who would prefer Cleverly for reasons beter known to himself
To be honest BigG I think lefties think Kemi makes even IDS look a terrifying threat in retrospect. At the moment the only threat she poses is to Tory MPs holding their seats
You live in little england farage land and are very much a de facto supporter of the right and of course where Cleverly is an mp
I fully expect the mps and party to reject your calls post May
I was very frustrated at being denied the opportunity to vote for James Cleverly at the time of the leadership election because the MPs ballsed things up. He would have been the best choice as LOTO not least because he looks prime ministerial, is reassuring, and would have contrasted with Farage in a positive way.
However, we are where we are, and I kinda like Kemi. She definitely has a dash of stardust and can be effective.
I cannot believe that changing the leader now would be a good idea. Party would risk being seen as a laughing stock, and I'm unconvinced that there would be any kind of Cleverly "bounce". I'm afraid we just have to keep buggerin' on (as I believe WSC once said).
Sorry if the Tories come fourth in May voters will have made their mind up on Kemi, that she has to go
You mean you have but her mps and party haven't
If the Tories are fourth in May most Tory MPs face losing their seats and will act accordingly
You are not listening to wise council on here from fellow conservatives and sensible thinking left contributors leading amongst them @NickPalmer who are agreed changing leader does not make election prospects better and in Kemi's case she has 84% member support
I am expecting a difficult May, especially in Scotland and Wales, and the biggest irony of all, the leading contender for trashing of the conservative brand is your hero Johnson !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The Conservatives were polling 30% when Boris resigned, they are now polling just 17% today with Kemi
And that is the damage he caused the party
Nope, had Boris stayed 100 Tory MPs would have kept their seats and the Tories still well ahead of Reform. Truss would never have become PM with her budget disaster and Sunak not Kemi might be Leader of the Opposition with a big poll lead
On the other hand the level of disgust might have got worse and the Tories crashed to an even worse defeat than in 2064!
The Conservatives were on 30% when Boris resigned, 6% ahead of the 24% Rishi got in 2024
When Johnson resigned not everyone had quite realised how comprehensive his dirty protest on the nation had been.
"An episode of the BBC’s The Repair Shop was pulled after a TV production worker objected to a “sexist” Bob Monkhouse joke.
The late comedian and presenter’s famous joke books had been brought into the studio for repair by Colin Edmonds, his former comedy partner, and Abigail Williams, his adopted daughter.
The restoration of the books was to be filmed at the show’s barn in Singleton, West Sussex, for a special tribute programme, to be aired this year.
However, a member of Ricochet, the production company that makes Repair Shop, complained about one of Monkhouse’s jokes, claiming it was sexist. Corporation bosses then decided to pull the segment."
Hard to judge without more (I've skimmed the article). What was the joke? Could the joke be pulled and still keep the show (or did the family/partner object to that?). Were there so many jokes that can't be broadcast now (perhaps could never have been broadcast if this was live material) that it wasn't viable to do the show at all?
Article implies the employee simply found the joke looking through the books... no suggestion it was to be broadcast.
"A production employee stumbled across a joke – no doubt written in the 1960s – and took offence, believing it to be sexist.
They flagged the problem, and a ‘collective decision’ was made to cull the whole thing."
I didn't read it that way. Seems crazy if if that's the case.
"An episode of the BBC’s The Repair Shop was pulled after a TV production worker objected to a “sexist” Bob Monkhouse joke.
The late comedian and presenter’s famous joke books had been brought into the studio for repair by Colin Edmonds, his former comedy partner, and Abigail Williams, his adopted daughter.
The restoration of the books was to be filmed at the show’s barn in Singleton, West Sussex, for a special tribute programme, to be aired this year
However, a member of Ricochet, the production company that makes Repair Shop, complained about one of Monkhouse’s jokes, claiming it was sexist. Corporation bosses then decided to pull the segment."
"An episode of the BBC’s The Repair Shop was pulled after a TV production worker objected to a “sexist” Bob Monkhouse joke.
The late comedian and presenter’s famous joke books had been brought into the studio for repair by Colin Edmonds, his former comedy partner, and Abigail Williams, his adopted daughter.
The restoration of the books was to be filmed at the show’s barn in Singleton, West Sussex, for a special tribute programme, to be aired this year.
However, a member of Ricochet, the production company that makes Repair Shop, complained about one of Monkhouse’s jokes, claiming it was sexist. Corporation bosses then decided to pull the segment."
"An episode of the BBC’s The Repair Shop was pulled after a TV production worker objected to a “sexist” Bob Monkhouse joke.
The late comedian and presenter’s famous joke books had been brought into the studio for repair by Colin Edmonds, his former comedy partner, and Abigail Williams, his adopted daughter.
The restoration of the books was to be filmed at the show’s barn in Singleton, West Sussex, for a special tribute programme, to be aired this year.
However, a member of Ricochet, the production company that makes Repair Shop, complained about one of Monkhouse’s jokes, claiming it was sexist. Corporation bosses then decided to pull the segment."
"An episode of the BBC’s The Repair Shop was pulled after a TV production worker objected to a “sexist” Bob Monkhouse joke.
The late comedian and presenter’s famous joke books had been brought into the studio for repair by Colin Edmonds, his former comedy partner, and Abigail Williams, his adopted daughter.
The restoration of the books was to be filmed at the show’s barn in Singleton, West Sussex, for a special tribute programme, to be aired this year.
However, a member of Ricochet, the production company that makes Repair Shop, complained about one of Monkhouse’s jokes, claiming it was sexist. Corporation bosses then decided to pull the segment."
"An episode of the BBC’s The Repair Shop was pulled after a TV production worker objected to a “sexist” Bob Monkhouse joke.
The late comedian and presenter’s famous joke books had been brought into the studio for repair by Colin Edmonds, his former comedy partner, and Abigail Williams, his adopted daughter.
The restoration of the books was to be filmed at the show’s barn in Singleton, West Sussex, for a special tribute programme, to be aired this year.
However, a member of Ricochet, the production company that makes Repair Shop, complained about one of Monkhouse’s jokes, claiming it was sexist. Corporation bosses then decided to pull the segment."
Hard to judge without more (I've skimmed the article). What was the joke? Could the joke be pulled and still keep the show (or did the family/partner object to that?). Were there so many jokes that can't be broadcast now (perhaps could never have been broadcast if this was live material) that it wasn't viable to do the show at all?
Monkhouse wasn’t exactly Bernard Manning, anything considered sexist today would have been relatively tame at the time.
Don’t know if it’s online anywhere, but his “An Audience With” show was absolutely brilliant. The last act of which is doing a word association game for a good 10 minutes, working his way around the names of the “celebrities” in the audience.
The Lebanese government has declared Mohammad Reza Shibani, the ambassador-designate of the Islamic Republic of Iran, to be persona non grata and is giving him until Sunday to leave Lebanon.
This makes four Arab nations that have expelled Islamic Republic of Iran diplomats in the last week.
Lebanon joins Saudi Arabia, UAE, and Qatar.
Now if only they declare Hezbollah persona non grata and kick them out, we might get somewhere.
Putting as much distance as possible between himself and Trump/Netanyahu is the gift that will keep on giving.
Badenoch had her chance but backed the wrong horse and Farage will always be seen as Trumps best buddy
Zack and Davey too but the market leader always benefits disproportionately and that can only be Starmer. Is it possible Labour could take the lead? I wouldn't rule it out. Trump is way beyond insane and Netanyahu is genuinely evil.
The British media have entirely invented a stand-his-ground Keir Starmer that bears zero relation to reality. He tried to give Trump access to the bases, the cabinet blocked him, then he invented a legal fig leaf and access was granted. This stuff is professional malpractice.
Is this the same British media that have propelled Farage to the brink of government with absolutely no scrutiny whatsoever?
You are right they are a bunch of Charlatans.
The 'British media' reference seems to me flawed in two ways. Firstly, whatever this media are doing only about a quarter of voters plan to support them. The other 75% seem immune to this media thingy. Secondly, I am a consumer of British media, including: BBC, ITV, Ch 4, LBC, Times Radio, Guardian, Economist, New Statesman, Private Eye, and use PB to link to a multitude of stuff.
I almost never see/hear anything at all giving reasoned, or even unreasoned, support to Reform. If you take out the Express, Mail, GB News, which most people don't read/see, who are these people bringing Farage to the dizzy heights of 27%?
You may not have come across this organisation and their Political Editor. This chap is very enthusiastic after the Reform Conference.
Mason is giving neither reasoned nor unreasoned support for Reform. He is reflecting a particular moment of heightened Reform mania, telling it how the vibes feel in September 2025 at a point, now over, when they were getting double digit leads quite often. He correctly identifies how this phenomenon may be hard to sustain, draws attention to the problems they have associating with loonies and draws attention to the professional populism of the whole thing. Not a single word is in favour of any Reform policy or politics.
The thought that in any general sense the BBC is lending sustenance to Reform is completely bizarre. They are properly giving this ghastly collection of chancers the coverage due to their polling lead and place in the political realm.
On issues central to Reform like Islamification, the BBC, if anything, underplays the nature of the societal and cultural difficulties Reform are trying to play on.
Yes the Polanski Greens are basically Corbyn lite attracting the same type of voters, mainly under 40 burdened by student debt and not owning a house and feeling capitalism does not work for them and willing to give tax and spend socialism a go. They are no longer the party of posh middle class environmentalists like Jonathan Porritt.
Green voters do though have some similarity with Reform voters though in that they are less likely to be financially comfortable than average
Isn't the reason that Green voters don't feel like capitalism is working for them that, in many cases, it isn't particularly? Not exclusively because it's so hard to escape the rental trap, but that being a very large factor. And that, in turn being linked to a change in small-c-conservatism from "pass a better life on to the next generation/enough evolution to prevent revolution" to "après moi le déluge".
And that's just another form of nihlism- that of the powerful, rather than the powerless.
The ironic thing is that Green voters are probably slightly better off than average, and thus doing better under capitalism than a lot of other people.
Not now, the recent polling on it had Green voters now the poorest of any party just below Reform voters on average
That probably reflects the surge in support for the Greens from younger folk. They're poor because they are young, even though they are probably mostly from middle class backgrounds. Your average Reform voter is more likely to be poor because they are in a poorly paying job, even though they are older.
Having said that, both parties will also have a few rich supporters: the traditional older middle class Greens, and the very wealthy Reform types close to the party leadership who hope to benefit from a future low regulation environment.
"An episode of the BBC’s The Repair Shop was pulled after a TV production worker objected to a “sexist” Bob Monkhouse joke.
The late comedian and presenter’s famous joke books had been brought into the studio for repair by Colin Edmonds, his former comedy partner, and Abigail Williams, his adopted daughter.
The restoration of the books was to be filmed at the show’s barn in Singleton, West Sussex, for a special tribute programme, to be aired this year
However, a member of Ricochet, the production company that makes Repair Shop, complained about one of Monkhouse’s jokes, claiming it was sexist. Corporation bosses then decided to pull the segment."
...we have also forgotten how to say "Dude, what the actual fuck! They're books! We are restoring books! That's a good thing, yes?".
Although I accept that "No" is shorter.
In our local museum we have a punishment book from the local school, dated at 1910 (I think). It records the 'beatings' of children; not particularly severe, IMO, based on my recollections of a 50's grammar school. Should we have it on display?
It's hard to imagine the Conservatives being in power after 2029 except as the willing junior partner in a Farage government. Badenoch and Farage don't seem miles apart in their political outlooks, so that fits too.
Which is precisely their dilemma. If you support Reform, you vote Reform, if you don't then you don't vote for a party who would be the junior partner. The Tories have two routes out of this, which could be worked together:
1) Be so brilliant that the polling shifts so that by the end of 2027 the question is reversed. Not 'Will the Tories support Reform' (Kemi's dilemma) but 'Will Reform support the Tories' (Farage's dilemma).
2) Make it clear that the Tories are One Nation Centre Right and won't touch Reform with a bargepole.
The only other option, inconsistent with (1) and (2) is an electoral pact with Reform. IMO that is the only way the Right of Centre might possibly actually win in 2029. Hopefully it won't happen. Scorpions in a cage and all that.
I'm not sure the Tory Party could survive a pact. It would be the centre right equivalent of the SDP (or the old Liberal Party) evolving (I know there were centre-rights in the SDP but it would not have happened without the longest suicide note in history)
"An episode of the BBC’s The Repair Shop was pulled after a TV production worker objected to a “sexist” Bob Monkhouse joke.
The late comedian and presenter’s famous joke books had been brought into the studio for repair by Colin Edmonds, his former comedy partner, and Abigail Williams, his adopted daughter.
The restoration of the books was to be filmed at the show’s barn in Singleton, West Sussex, for a special tribute programme, to be aired this year.
However, a member of Ricochet, the production company that makes Repair Shop, complained about one of Monkhouse’s jokes, claiming it was sexist. Corporation bosses then decided to pull the segment."
"An episode of the BBC’s The Repair Shop was pulled after a TV production worker objected to a “sexist” Bob Monkhouse joke.
The late comedian and presenter’s famous joke books had been brought into the studio for repair by Colin Edmonds, his former comedy partner, and Abigail Williams, his adopted daughter.
The restoration of the books was to be filmed at the show’s barn in Singleton, West Sussex, for a special tribute programme, to be aired this year
However, a member of Ricochet, the production company that makes Repair Shop, complained about one of Monkhouse’s jokes, claiming it was sexist. Corporation bosses then decided to pull the segment."
...we have also forgotten how to say "Dude, what the actual fuck! They're books! We are restoring books! That's a good thing, yes?".
Although I accept that "No" is shorter.
In our local museum we have a punishment book from the local school, dated at 1910 (I think). It records the 'beatings' of children; not particularly severe, IMO, based on my recollections of a 50's grammar school. Should we have it on display?
Have we done the Tories in fourth place with YouGov?
Ref 23 (-2)
Lab 19 (+2)
GRN 18 (-1)
Con 17 (=)
LD 13 (-1)
I reckon it is the war that is behind a lot of this.
Hearing the focus groups are sympathetic to Starmer re Trump & the war.
Albeit Tories only 1% behind the Greens and only 6% separates them from top placed Reform with Yougov now.
If those are the voteshares in the NEV after the local and devolved elections in May and the Tories are 4th behind Reform, Labour and even the Greens though Kemi will be gone, there will be a VONC in her leadership from Tory MPs and she will then be replaced by Cleverly. So Kemi needs to get a better result than that, on the plus side for her Yougov have the Greens higher than most pollsters do
A £50 charity bet that Kemi either does not face a VONC by 1st September - or if she does, she survives it.
Interested?
Yes, if the Tories are 4th in May Kemi will certainly face a VONC in my view, so I will take a bet on those terms, the Tories coming third or worse in May will have a VONC. If the Tories are second or better she won't so the bet is then void
You're in the party am I'm not. But I would have thought the pressure on her was past: Tories have cleared out the mad, insane and stupid to Reform. You are a Better Party without those morons. Reform are on the slide. Plot the trendline, look at the hurdles they face. Kemi has found her rhythm - previous government a bit crap, I'm new, I'm punchy, life vs Starmer's inertia
And you want to replace her with Shithole Cleverley?
If the Tories are second to Reform in May then yes Kemi will be safe.
If Yougov is right though and the Conservatives are behind not only Reform but Labour too and even maybe the Greens I am afraid Kemi is gone and will be removed. Not only will she have failed to win back rightwing voters from Reform she will also have lost centrist swing voters to Labour, the latter the type of voters Cleverly appeals more to
What do you think Cleverly would do any different to Kemi other than take the party lower in the polls ?
Well he polls better with all voters as shown at the time of the 2024 leadership election and if the Tories are fourth as Yougov says this morning there really isn't much lower they can go Kemi hasn't already taken them
If you are using a 2024 poll then you have no case
Kemi is a gnats bollock away from losing 33% of the Tory vote in a GE that was their worst result in 100 years
She tries to out Reform as Reform lose 20% of their headline vote.
One Nation Toryism of the likes of Heseltine and Cameron would comfortably polling low to mid 20s
She has no Brand Identity Policy Vision Plan
Everything is an argument She is surrounded by busted flushes
The more people see of her the less they like.
She is irrelevant to the right, the left and in the centre.
Usual tripe from you
Kemi tops leaders approval and is on 84% approval with members
Kemi is not the problem, the brand is still suffering from Johnson Truss years but she has 3 years to recover the brand
Anyway you and @HYUFD seem to agree and like each other posts so that is the strangest of alliances on here
This is over optimistic. With Reform trending down, the Tories should be, but are not, the big gainers. The Greens' upward curve mirrors Reform's exactly.
Kemi is not addressing the central questions of Tory voters (I was one for nearly 50 years): Who do I vote for is I want a sane centre right party that that can actually form a coherent government with 326 seats?
Why should I vote Tory instead of Reform if I am one of their more right wing voters voters?
Who do I vote for tactically if I certainly want to stop Reform but I think the Tories can't form a government and might keep Reform in power?
Kemi has announced the end of stamp duty and farmers IT, will address student loans and wants to help the young, will address the boats and fair immigration, drill in the north sea, and above all prioritise defence
Of course the conservative brand is a problem but changing the leader who is popular amongst her mps and the membership would be an act of self harm and you do have to wonder why some lefties concentrate on attacking her if they do not see her as a threat and would like her gone
I would exclude @HYUFD because he seems fairly unique in conservatives who would prefer Cleverly for reasons beter known to himself
Thing is, she's not likely to do any of those things, is she? Becuase as things stand, she's nowhere near being on track to be PM after the next election.
That's probably for the best, given that her shopping list seems to consist of tax cuts and spending increases.
You mean spending decreasing and tax reduction generating growth
Then you have to spell out what spending, because the ideas on student fees and defence (in as much as they are ideas) are going to cost. And if you want economic activity, cutting taxes on inheritance and property are almost certainly not where to start. (A shiny sixpence, based on experience, says that any cuts in stamp duty will feed through to higher house prices in about 47 minutes.)
Stamp duty is the one tax that affects mobility and growth
Binning it is one of the ways to growth
Also bin it on Share transactions.
But make people hold shares bought for a minimum length of time.
"An episode of the BBC’s The Repair Shop was pulled after a TV production worker objected to a “sexist” Bob Monkhouse joke.
The late comedian and presenter’s famous joke books had been brought into the studio for repair by Colin Edmonds, his former comedy partner, and Abigail Williams, his adopted daughter.
The restoration of the books was to be filmed at the show’s barn in Singleton, West Sussex, for a special tribute programme, to be aired this year.
However, a member of Ricochet, the production company that makes Repair Shop, complained about one of Monkhouse’s jokes, claiming it was sexist. Corporation bosses then decided to pull the segment."
Hard to judge without more (I've skimmed the article). What was the joke? Could the joke be pulled and still keep the show (or did the family/partner object to that?). Were there so many jokes that can't be broadcast now (perhaps could never have been broadcast if this was live material) that it wasn't viable to do the show at all?
Monkhouse wasn’t exactly Bernard Manning, anything considered sexist today would have been relatively tame at the time.
Don’t know if it’s online anywhere, but his “An Audience With” show was absolutely brilliant. The last act of which is doing a word association game for a good 10 minutes, working his way around the names of the “celebrities” in the audience.
He wasn't Bernard Manning - and typically I think his jokes were at his own expense - but as I understand it his live comedy was considerably bluer than you would expect if all you knew him by was his TV persona. Probably the production staffer was just being a whingeing ninny, but there was a lot of his material that would not pass the 20202 standards of 'you can't say that'.
"An episode of the BBC’s The Repair Shop was pulled after a TV production worker objected to a “sexist” Bob Monkhouse joke.
The late comedian and presenter’s famous joke books had been brought into the studio for repair by Colin Edmonds, his former comedy partner, and Abigail Williams, his adopted daughter.
The restoration of the books was to be filmed at the show’s barn in Singleton, West Sussex, for a special tribute programme, to be aired this year.
However, a member of Ricochet, the production company that makes Repair Shop, complained about one of Monkhouse’s jokes, claiming it was sexist. Corporation bosses then decided to pull the segment."
Hard to judge without more (I've skimmed the article). What was the joke? Could the joke be pulled and still keep the show (or did the family/partner object to that?). Were there so many jokes that can't be broadcast now (perhaps could never have been broadcast if this was live material) that it wasn't viable to do the show at all?
Monkhouse wasn’t exactly Bernard Manning, anything considered sexist today would have been relatively tame at the time.
Don’t know if it’s online anywhere, but his “An Audience With” show was absolutely brilliant. The last act of which is doing a word association game for a good 10 minutes, working his way around the names of the “celebrities” in the audience.
He wasn't Bernard Manning, but as I understand it his live comedy was considerably bluer than you would expect if all you knew him by was his TV persona. Probably the production staffer was just being a whingeing ninny, but there was a lot of his material that would not pass the 20202 standards of 'you can't say that'.
Yet the show did feature an item once belonging to Roald Dahl!
The Greens and Reform are underrepresented on PB. The header explains why. Greens and Reform are the parties for people with few assets and little chance of obtaining them. Most on here have plenty of assets and are happy to keep them, if necessary at the expense of those without. The term that used to be used for us was boomers. A few, such as @OldKingCole, @Foxy and @NickPalmer think of the wider population, and are those at least considering the Greens. Probably not coincidentally, they are posters that seem to take more interest in the views of their families.
The data in the header doesn't indicate that Reform voters are unusually poor. 41% of them are financially comfortable compared to the 43% in the general population who are. That's not very different. But point taken re PBers. We are mainly top quartile (at least) in wealth. Least that's my impression.
I wonder how they assessed 'financially comfortable' btw. I wouldn't totally trust a self-select on that. People tend to shy away from saying that about themselves.
Nicking a line from Steven J Gould, The Median is not The Message. That's especially true for Farage Followers. Some are the properly Left Behind, and it's a blot on the records of all governments in my lifetime how much that was just allowed to happen. But very many are extremely comfortable materially, and their discontent is more cultural. Some of that is just that they're getting old, and the cultural caravan is moving on without them. Some of it is not liking the conseqences of their votes and personal spending decisions. (Yes, your High Street is crumbling, but that's mostly because you have spent years not buying things there.)
The first group were often historically non-voters, and who can blame them? The second tend to cluster in the posher bits of unposh areas. How you analyse those is a problem for analysts. How you simultaneously please them both is a problem for all the Reform councillors about to be elected.
That's an interesting analysis. The core sentiment fuelling the Populist Right is anti-immigration imo. Farage has to own that 'want our country back' vote. He can't have them drifting off to the likes of Rupert Lowe. If that happens he can't win. But neither can he win with just those votes - so he has to try and appeal wider whilst not diluting his USP. All the while getting older and more scrutinised/exposed. It's a massive ask and I don't think he'll manage it. But if he does, like you say, he'll have a virtually impossible task meeting the aspirations of the peculiar voter coalition he'll have managed to assemble.
It's hard to imagine the Conservatives being in power after 2029 except as the willing junior partner in a Farage government. Badenoch and Farage don't seem miles apart in their political outlooks, so that fits too.
Which is precisely their dilemma. If you support Reform, you vote Reform, if you don't then you don't vote for a party who would be the junior partner. The Tories have two routes out of this, which could be worked together:
1) Be so brilliant that the polling shifts so that by the end of 2027 the question is reversed. Not 'Will the Tories support Reform' (Kemi's dilemma) but 'Will Reform support the Tories' (Farage's dilemma).
2) Make it clear that the Tories are One Nation Centre Right and won't touch Reform with a bargepole.
The only other option, inconsistent with (1) and (2) is an electoral pact with Reform. IMO that is the only way the Right of Centre might possibly actually win in 2029. Hopefully it won't happen. Scorpions in a cage and all that.
I'm not sure the Tory Party could survive a pact. It would be the centre right equivalent of the SDP (or the old Liberal Party) evolving (I know there were centre-rights in the SDP but it would not have happened without the longest suicide note in history)
Their best chance of survival, a state by no means guaranteed, is to be brilliantly effective in opposition, and to have brilliantly coherent, honest and comprehensible policies, well communicated, to resolve the biggest elephant in the room problems such as debt, borrowing, inflation, NEETS, benefits culture, sickness culture, social cohesion, housing, defence, equality of opportunity (but not outcomes!), the process state, unfairness in taxation, student loans and a long list more.
Since no-one else is doing it they have the field to themselves, and since this is what parliament and government exist to do really well, they might as well have a go.
Yes the Polanski Greens are basically Corbyn lite attracting the same type of voters, mainly under 40 burdened by student debt and not owning a house and feeling capitalism does not work for them and willing to give tax and spend socialism a go. They are no longer the party of posh middle class environmentalists like Jonathan Porritt.
Green voters do though have some similarity with Reform voters though in that they are less likely to be financially comfortable than average
Isn't the reason that Green voters don't feel like capitalism is working for them that, in many cases, it isn't particularly? Not exclusively because it's so hard to escape the rental trap, but that being a very large factor. And that, in turn being linked to a change in small-c-conservatism from "pass a better life on to the next generation/enough evolution to prevent revolution" to "après moi le déluge".
And that's just another form of nihlism- that of the powerful, rather than the powerless.
The ironic thing is that Green voters are probably slightly better off than average, and thus doing better under capitalism than a lot of other people.
I consider myself to be in that category.
Still doesn't stop me wanting to change the type of capitalism we have.
Big fan of Zack
I'm not a fan of big tits but most of the other stuff he wants to do I'm in favour of
"An episode of the BBC’s The Repair Shop was pulled after a TV production worker objected to a “sexist” Bob Monkhouse joke.
The late comedian and presenter’s famous joke books had been brought into the studio for repair by Colin Edmonds, his former comedy partner, and Abigail Williams, his adopted daughter.
The restoration of the books was to be filmed at the show’s barn in Singleton, West Sussex, for a special tribute programme, to be aired this year
However, a member of Ricochet, the production company that makes Repair Shop, complained about one of Monkhouse’s jokes, claiming it was sexist. Corporation bosses then decided to pull the segment."
...we have also forgotten how to say "Dude, what the actual fuck! They're books! We are restoring books! That's a good thing, yes?".
Although I accept that "No" is shorter.
In our local museum we have a punishment book from the local school, dated at 1910 (I think). It records the 'beatings' of children; not particularly severe, IMO, based on my recollections of a 50's grammar school. Should we have it on display?
It's hard to imagine the Conservatives being in power after 2029 except as the willing junior partner in a Farage government. Badenoch and Farage don't seem miles apart in their political outlooks, so that fits too.
Which is precisely their dilemma. If you support Reform, you vote Reform, if you don't then you don't vote for a party who would be the junior partner. The Tories have two routes out of this, which could be worked together:
1) Be so brilliant that the polling shifts so that by the end of 2027 the question is reversed. Not 'Will the Tories support Reform' (Kemi's dilemma) but 'Will Reform support the Tories' (Farage's dilemma).
2) Make it clear that the Tories are One Nation Centre Right and won't touch Reform with a bargepole.
The only other option, inconsistent with (1) and (2) is an electoral pact with Reform. IMO that is the only way the Right of Centre might possibly actually win in 2029. Hopefully it won't happen. Scorpions in a cage and all that.
The issue Reform may well have is that a chunk of their support is traditional non voters. Theyve done pretty well at converting them to voters for LE25 and by elections since but maintaining that level of engagement for 5 years? Reform were overstated in polling in 2024 and i fancy still are - if their engagement drops into May alongside the general polling decline they might struggle to break low 20s to 25% in the NEV. A problem i only see getting worse for them as time ticks on.
Permanent presence parties have more core vote than new kids on the block
"An episode of the BBC’s The Repair Shop was pulled after a TV production worker objected to a “sexist” Bob Monkhouse joke.
The late comedian and presenter’s famous joke books had been brought into the studio for repair by Colin Edmonds, his former comedy partner, and Abigail Williams, his adopted daughter.
The restoration of the books was to be filmed at the show’s barn in Singleton, West Sussex, for a special tribute programme, to be aired this year.
However, a member of Ricochet, the production company that makes Repair Shop, complained about one of Monkhouse’s jokes, claiming it was sexist. Corporation bosses then decided to pull the segment."
Hard to judge without more (I've skimmed the article). What was the joke? Could the joke be pulled and still keep the show (or did the family/partner object to that?). Were there so many jokes that can't be broadcast now (perhaps could never have been broadcast if this was live material) that it wasn't viable to do the show at all?
Article implies the employee simply found the joke looking through the books... no suggestion it was to be broadcast.
"A production employee stumbled across a joke – no doubt written in the 1960s – and took offence, believing it to be sexist.
They flagged the problem, and a ‘collective decision’ was made to cull the whole thing."
I didn't read it that way. Seems crazy if if that's the case.
When the original ammunition buying team in the MOD was disbanded, one of the reasons was that a young civil servant, seconded to the team, had been grossly offended.
"An episode of the BBC’s The Repair Shop was pulled after a TV production worker objected to a “sexist” Bob Monkhouse joke.
The late comedian and presenter’s famous joke books had been brought into the studio for repair by Colin Edmonds, his former comedy partner, and Abigail Williams, his adopted daughter.
The restoration of the books was to be filmed at the show’s barn in Singleton, West Sussex, for a special tribute programme, to be aired this year.
However, a member of Ricochet, the production company that makes Repair Shop, complained about one of Monkhouse’s jokes, claiming it was sexist. Corporation bosses then decided to pull the segment."
Yes the Polanski Greens are basically Corbyn lite attracting the same type of voters, mainly under 40 burdened by student debt and not owning a house and feeling capitalism does not work for them and willing to give tax and spend socialism a go. They are no longer the party of posh middle class environmentalists like Jonathan Porritt.
Green voters do though have some similarity with Reform voters though in that they are less likely to be financially comfortable than average
Isn't the reason that Green voters don't feel like capitalism is working for them that, in many cases, it isn't particularly? Not exclusively because it's so hard to escape the rental trap, but that being a very large factor. And that, in turn being linked to a change in small-c-conservatism from "pass a better life on to the next generation/enough evolution to prevent revolution" to "après moi le déluge".
And that's just another form of nihlism- that of the powerful, rather than the powerless.
The ironic thing is that Green voters are probably slightly better off than average, and thus doing better under capitalism than a lot of other people.
I consider myself to be in that category.
Still doesn't stop me wanting to change the type of capitalism we have.
Big fan of Zack
He's done well so far. I feel, on the basis of no evidence whatsoever, that he could fold under the pressure of a GE campaign and start chasing centrist arsehole votes with less radical policies. On reflection, I would have rather had the Ramsay/Chowns leadership because they are sounder on direct action and less ideologically pliable.
Yes the Polanski Greens are basically Corbyn lite attracting the same type of voters, mainly under 40 burdened by student debt and not owning a house and feeling capitalism does not work for them and willing to give tax and spend socialism a go. They are no longer the party of posh middle class environmentalists like Jonathan Porritt.
Green voters do though have some similarity with Reform voters though in that they are less likely to be financially comfortable than average
Isn't the reason that Green voters don't feel like capitalism is working for them that, in many cases, it isn't particularly? Not exclusively because it's so hard to escape the rental trap, but that being a very large factor. And that, in turn being linked to a change in small-c-conservatism from "pass a better life on to the next generation/enough evolution to prevent revolution" to "après moi le déluge".
And that's just another form of nihlism- that of the powerful, rather than the powerless.
The ironic thing is that Green voters are probably slightly better off than average, and thus doing better under capitalism than a lot of other people.
I consider myself to be in that category.
Still doesn't stop me wanting to change the type of capitalism we have.
Big fan of Zack
I'm not a fan of big tits but most of the other stuff he wants to do I'm in favour of
I'm an environmentalist and a liberal (small L), but not a socialist, I would welcome the Greens into government. Not necessarily as the majority mind you. That said, I am in a traditional Lib (Dem) seat that switched to Tories for a few years, then went Labour at the last election. I suspect there's a good number of Greens out there now too, as well as Reform, so who I should vote for is very much up for debate.
Sometimes there is too much wind for our outdated grid to handle, especially in Scotland and the East of England.
Rather than paying wind farms to switch off we’re trialling a new system where people who live near these constrained areas get cheaper - or even free - electricity.
Putting as much distance as possible between himself and Trump/Netanyahu is the gift that will keep on giving.
Badenoch had her chance but backed the wrong horse and Farage will always be seen as Trumps best buddy
Zack and Davey too but the market leader always benefits disproportionately and that can only be Starmer. Is it possible Labour could take the lead? I wouldn't rule it out. Trump is way beyond insane and Netanyahu is genuinely evil.
The British media have entirely invented a stand-his-ground Keir Starmer that bears zero relation to reality. He tried to give Trump access to the bases, the cabinet blocked him, then he invented a legal fig leaf and access was granted. This stuff is professional malpractice.
Is this the same British media that have propelled Farage to the brink of government with absolutely no scrutiny whatsoever?
You are right they are a bunch of Charlatans.
The 'British media' reference seems to me flawed in two ways. Firstly, whatever this media are doing only about a quarter of voters plan to support them. The other 75% seem immune to this media thingy. Secondly, I am a consumer of British media, including: BBC, ITV, Ch 4, LBC, Times Radio, Guardian, Economist, New Statesman, Private Eye, and use PB to link to a multitude of stuff.
I almost never see/hear anything at all giving reasoned, or even unreasoned, support to Reform. If you take out the Express, Mail, GB News, which most people don't read/see, who are these people bringing Farage to the dizzy heights of 27%?
You may not have come across this organisation and their Political Editor. This chap is very enthusiastic after the Reform Conference.
Mason is giving neither reasoned nor unreasoned support for Reform. He is reflecting a particular moment of heightened Reform mania, telling it how the vibes feel in September 2025 at a point, now over, when they were getting double digit leads quite often. He correctly identifies how this phenomenon may be hard to sustain, draws attention to the problems they have associating with loonies and draws attention to the professional populism of the whole thing. Not a single word is in favour of any Reform policy or politics.
The thought that in any general sense the BBC is lending sustenance to Reform is completely bizarre. They are properly giving this ghastly collection of chancers the coverage due to their polling lead and place in the political realm.
On issues central to Reform like Islamification, the BBC, if anything, underplays the nature of the societal and cultural difficulties Reform are trying to play on.
You are starting from the perspective that the BBC are a bunch of sandal wearing Zack Polanski groupies. Thirty years ago that may have been almost true. It certainly isn't now.
Farage is currently boycotting the BBC (an odd kind of a boycott because he is still never off the BBC) because he has cried foul, in much the same way he is critical of YouGov because they aren't fully on board with his narrative and every whim. There was a point when he was on QT almost every as often as Fiona Bruce. And that is just the BBC. They are not deliberately promoting Farage but they are promoting the idea of a future story, namely Farage is PM in waiting.
Now GB News on the other hand do nothing more than blow smoke up Farage's fundament.
Sometimes there is too much wind for our outdated grid to handle, especially in Scotland and the East of England.
Rather than paying wind farms to switch off we’re trialling a new system where people who live near these constrained areas get cheaper - or even free - electricity.
Putting energy to a productive use is far superior to paying people to switch it off.
"An episode of the BBC’s The Repair Shop was pulled after a TV production worker objected to a “sexist” Bob Monkhouse joke.
The late comedian and presenter’s famous joke books had been brought into the studio for repair by Colin Edmonds, his former comedy partner, and Abigail Williams, his adopted daughter.
The restoration of the books was to be filmed at the show’s barn in Singleton, West Sussex, for a special tribute programme, to be aired this year.
However, a member of Ricochet, the production company that makes Repair Shop, complained about one of Monkhouse’s jokes, claiming it was sexist. Corporation bosses then decided to pull the segment."
What was the joke? ISTR he did a fair number of mother-in-law jokes...
Les Dawson was more your man for mother in law jokes. My favoutite Monkhouse is 'my father still enjoys sex at 75. He lives at 71, its no distance'
"When I was a child I told everyone I wanted to be a comedian. Everyone laughed at me. No one is laughing now!" is one of Bob's most subtly brilliant one liners.
Sometimes there is too much wind for our outdated grid to handle, especially in Scotland and the East of England.
Rather than paying wind farms to switch off we’re trialling a new system where people who live near these constrained areas get cheaper - or even free - electricity.
Putting energy to a productive use is far superior to paying people to switch it off.
We're driving forward the rollout of “plug-in" solar panels to be available in shops within months, saving people money on their bills.
This comes alongside new rules to ensure the majority of new homes are built cheaper to run, with solar panels & clean heating as standard.
It's fairly new - in Germany there are now over 1 million systems installed - often hanging off balconies of flats. They are limited to 800W of generation (= 2-3 traditional 1m x 1.6m panels, compared to the 35 on my roof), and can be plugged into a domestic socket, essentially working backwards to feed energy direct to household appliances.
The effectiveness is the inverse of a small reduction in baseload from say 150W to 50W running 24-7 saves £200+ per annum. This is a small increase in free supply, so at the other end.
It's a brilliant concept, and could double the amount of domestic solar in short order, which could reduce demand by 5% or more - and is a very big marginal gain. It supplies at the point of demand so there are no transmission losses, and the load on the grid is reduced.
There's chatter about LiDL and Amazon, but I say watch Ikea who were first with LED spotlights and did low price solar, much the same way as Octopus do low price heat pumps now (1000 per month).
AIUI it came in in Germany in 2019. A German system:
The Greens and Reform are underrepresented on PB. The header explains why. Greens and Reform are the parties for people with few assets and little chance of obtaining them. Most on here have plenty of assets and are happy to keep them, if necessary at the expense of those without. The term that used to be used for us was boomers. A few, such as @OldKingCole, @Foxy and @NickPalmer think of the wider population, and are those at least considering the Greens. Probably not coincidentally, they are posters that seem to take more interest in the views of their families.
The data in the header doesn't indicate that Reform voters are unusually poor. 41% of them are financially comfortable compared to the 43% in the general population who are. That's not very different. But point taken re PBers. We are mainly top quartile (at least) in wealth. Least that's my impression.
I wonder how they assessed 'financially comfortable' btw. I wouldn't totally trust a self-select on that. People tend to shy away from saying that about themselves.
Nicking a line from Steven J Gould, The Median is not The Message. That's especially true for Farage Followers. Some are the properly Left Behind, and it's a blot on the records of all governments in my lifetime how much that was just allowed to happen. But very many are extremely comfortable materially, and their discontent is more cultural. Some of that is just that they're getting old, and the cultural caravan is moving on without them. Some of it is not liking the conseqences of their votes and personal spending decisions. (Yes, your High Street is crumbling, but that's mostly because you have spent years not buying things there.)
The first group were often historically non-voters, and who can blame them? The second tend to cluster in the posher bits of unposh areas. How you analyse those is a problem for analysts. How you simultaneously please them both is a problem for all the Reform councillors about to be elected.
That's an interesting analysis. The core sentiment fuelling the Populist Right is anti-immigration imo. Farage has to own that 'want our country back' vote. He can't have them drifting off to the likes of Rupert Lowe. If that happens he can't win. But neither can he win with just those votes - so he has to try and appeal wider whilst not diluting his USP. All the while getting older and more scrutinised/exposed. It's a massive ask and I don't think he'll manage it. But if he does, like you say, he'll have a virtually impossible task meeting the aspirations of the peculiar voter coalition he'll have managed to assemble.
Agree. Anti migration may well be the core sentiment of the populist right, but it hits the difficulty that the migration they are anti has already occurred, and cannot without full fat fascism be undone. Dim people have not spotted this. (Like people think that getting to net zero CO2 somehow solves a problem.) The fascist tendency spotted it ages ago. The great majority of people would find it unacceptable to the millionth degree.
The populist right has sentiments, it also has unexpressed assumptions. Right at the top of these is the assumption of continuation, for oneself and therefore for all, of the social democratic post WWII welfare state. My guess is that Reform voters are more than averagely reliant on free NHS, state pensions, welfare safety nets, free education etc. which means of course that Reform's voters are deeply committed to high spend, therefore high tax, government.
The Greens and Reform are underrepresented on PB. The header explains why. Greens and Reform are the parties for people with few assets and little chance of obtaining them. Most on here have plenty of assets and are happy to keep them, if necessary at the expense of those without. The term that used to be used for us was boomers. A few, such as @OldKingCole, @Foxy and @NickPalmer think of the wider population, and are those at least considering the Greens. Probably not coincidentally, they are posters that seem to take more interest in the views of their families.
The data in the header doesn't indicate that Reform voters are unusually poor. 41% of them are financially comfortable compared to the 43% in the general population who are. That's not very different. But point taken re PBers. We are mainly top quartile (at least) in wealth. Least that's my impression.
I wonder how they assessed 'financially comfortable' btw. I wouldn't totally trust a self-select on that. People tend to shy away from saying that about themselves.
Nicking a line from Steven J Gould, The Median is not The Message. That's especially true for Farage Followers. Some are the properly Left Behind, and it's a blot on the records of all governments in my lifetime how much that was just allowed to happen. But very many are extremely comfortable materially, and their discontent is more cultural. Some of that is just that they're getting old, and the cultural caravan is moving on without them. Some of it is not liking the conseqences of their votes and personal spending decisions. (Yes, your High Street is crumbling, but that's mostly because you have spent years not buying things there.)
The first group were often historically non-voters, and who can blame them? The second tend to cluster in the posher bits of unposh areas. How you analyse those is a problem for analysts. How you simultaneously please them both is a problem for all the Reform councillors about to be elected.
Farage-ism like the Zhadovshchina it apes in many ways, is an intellectual dead end.
Even if they fluke an election win, which would be funny, then what? We've seen the Fukkers in action in local government now and have an idea how it will go when reality is more complicated and intractable than a Facebook post.
Sometimes there is too much wind for our outdated grid to handle, especially in Scotland and the East of England.
Rather than paying wind farms to switch off we’re trialling a new system where people who live near these constrained areas get cheaper - or even free - electricity.
It's not a new idea. Some communities have been desperate for a local grid for quite some time.
Sometimes there is too much wind for our outdated grid to handle, especially in Scotland and the East of England.
Rather than paying wind farms to switch off we’re trialling a new system where people who live near these constrained areas get cheaper - or even free - electricity.
YES
We also have a great spot in our garden for plug-in solar. Feeling a bit better about life.
We're driving forward the rollout of “plug-in" solar panels to be available in shops within months, saving people money on their bills.
This comes alongside new rules to ensure the majority of new homes are built cheaper to run, with solar panels & clean heating as standard.
It's fairly new - in Germany there are now over 1 million systems installed - often hanging off balconies of flats. They are limited to 800W of generation (= 2-3 traditional 1m x 1.6m panels, compared to the 35 on my roof), and can be plugged into a domestic socket, essentially working backwards to feed energy direct to household appliances.
The effectiveness is the inverse of a small reduction in baseload from say 150W to 50W running 24-7 saves £200+ per annum. This is a small increase in free supply, so at the other end.
It's a brilliant concept, and could double the amount of domestic solar in short order, which could reduce demand by 5% or more - and is a very big marginal gain. It supplies at the point of demand so there are no transmission losses, and the load on the grid is reduced.
There's chatter about LiDL and Amazon, but I say watch Ikea who were first with LED spotlights and did low price solar, much the same way as Octopus do low price heat pumps now (1000 per month).
AIUI it came in in Germany in 2019. A German system:
That's a really cool concept. My room does not have a South facing side so I have not prioritised getting solar installed yet, though I would like to at some point, I don't want to borrow to get it.
That could be a good bridge though, to get and put out of a South facing window.
The Greens and Reform are underrepresented on PB. The header explains why. Greens and Reform are the parties for people with few assets and little chance of obtaining them. Most on here have plenty of assets and are happy to keep them, if necessary at the expense of those without. The term that used to be used for us was boomers. A few, such as @OldKingCole, @Foxy and @NickPalmer think of the wider population, and are those at least considering the Greens. Probably not coincidentally, they are posters that seem to take more interest in the views of their families.
The data in the header doesn't indicate that Reform voters are unusually poor. 41% of them are financially comfortable compared to the 43% in the general population who are. That's not very different. But point taken re PBers. We are mainly top quartile (at least) in wealth. Least that's my impression.
I wonder how they assessed 'financially comfortable' btw. I wouldn't totally trust a self-select on that. People tend to shy away from saying that about themselves.
Nicking a line from Steven J Gould, The Median is not The Message. That's especially true for Farage Followers. Some are the properly Left Behind, and it's a blot on the records of all governments in my lifetime how much that was just allowed to happen. But very many are extremely comfortable materially, and their discontent is more cultural. Some of that is just that they're getting old, and the cultural caravan is moving on without them. Some of it is not liking the conseqences of their votes and personal spending decisions. (Yes, your High Street is crumbling, but that's mostly because you have spent years not buying things there.)
The first group were often historically non-voters, and who can blame them? The second tend to cluster in the posher bits of unposh areas. How you analyse those is a problem for analysts. How you simultaneously please them both is a problem for all the Reform councillors about to be elected.
Farage-ism like the Zhadovshchina it apes in many ways, is an intellectual dead end.
Even if they fluke an election win, which would be funny, then what? We've seen the Fukkers in action in local government now and have an idea how it will go when reality is more complicated and intractable than a Facebook post.
Their key priorities have captured the zeitgeist. Smoking in public places and reintroducing foxhunting are at the top of everyone's priority list surely?
The Greens and Reform are underrepresented on PB. The header explains why. Greens and Reform are the parties for people with few assets and little chance of obtaining them. Most on here have plenty of assets and are happy to keep them, if necessary at the expense of those without. The term that used to be used for us was boomers. A few, such as @OldKingCole, @Foxy and @NickPalmer think of the wider population, and are those at least considering the Greens. Probably not coincidentally, they are posters that seem to take more interest in the views of their families.
The data in the header doesn't indicate that Reform voters are unusually poor. 41% of them are financially comfortable compared to the 43% in the general population who are. That's not very different. But point taken re PBers. We are mainly top quartile (at least) in wealth. Least that's my impression.
I wonder how they assessed 'financially comfortable' btw. I wouldn't totally trust a self-select on that. People tend to shy away from saying that about themselves.
Nicking a line from Steven J Gould, The Median is not The Message. That's especially true for Farage Followers. Some are the properly Left Behind, and it's a blot on the records of all governments in my lifetime how much that was just allowed to happen. But very many are extremely comfortable materially, and their discontent is more cultural. Some of that is just that they're getting old, and the cultural caravan is moving on without them. Some of it is not liking the conseqences of their votes and personal spending decisions. (Yes, your High Street is crumbling, but that's mostly because you have spent years not buying things there.)
The first group were often historically non-voters, and who can blame them? The second tend to cluster in the posher bits of unposh areas. How you analyse those is a problem for analysts. How you simultaneously please them both is a problem for all the Reform councillors about to be elected.
That's an interesting analysis. The core sentiment fuelling the Populist Right is anti-immigration imo. Farage has to own that 'want our country back' vote. He can't have them drifting off to the likes of Rupert Lowe. If that happens he can't win. But neither can he win with just those votes - so he has to try and appeal wider whilst not diluting his USP. All the while getting older and more scrutinised/exposed. It's a massive ask and I don't think he'll manage it. But if he does, like you say, he'll have a virtually impossible task meeting the aspirations of the peculiar voter coalition he'll have managed to assemble.
Agree. Anti migration may well be the core sentiment of the populist right, but it hits the difficulty that the migration they are anti has already occurred, and cannot without full fat fascism be undone. Dim people have not spotted this. (Like people think that getting to net zero CO2 somehow solves a problem.) The fascist tendency spotted it ages ago. The great majority of people would find it unacceptable to the millionth degree.
The populist right has sentiments, it also has unexpressed assumptions. Right at the top of these is the assumption of continuation, for oneself and therefore for all, of the social democratic post WWII welfare state. My guess is that Reform voters are more than averagely reliant on free NHS, state pensions, welfare safety nets, free education etc. which means of course that Reform's voters are deeply committed to high spend, therefore high tax, government.
So Reform's aspirations cannot possibly be met.
Under First Past the Post, Reform only have to beat the Conservatives once, in a general election, to consign them to the same fate as the Liberals, after 1924. And, what we're going to see in May, is big headline losses for the Conservatives, as well as Labour, and big headline gains for Reform. That reinforces the notion that a Conservative vote is a wasted vote, for Right of Centre voters.
Achieve that, and in subsequent elections, the Right of Centre vote goes Reform by default.
Can somebody explain how if you plug a solar panel into your plug socket energy goes back into the grid? Does that just work somehow?
I am not sure how that works but I know how a fixed application works. An inverter is required to convert DC produced at home into AC as used by the grid.
My mother in law is so fat that 6 smaller mothers in law orbit her
Wouldn't hear that sort of gag at a Stewart Lee show (unless delivered ironically as a joke on the joke itself). I went to see him recently (first time) and he is very skillful. You get plenty of laughs but - key point - all the time you are laughing up not down and you know everyone else is too because they share the same sensibility. Nothing smug about it, it's just an uplifting communal experience that you feel better for being intelligent and enlightened enough to be a part of.
holy moly Trump has been a Kharg Island Crank for FORTY YEARS:
He sketched out the first outlines in 1987, spending $94,801 to place a full- page advert in three US newspapers. Trump declared the world was "laughing" at America's leaders over the Gulf crisis triggered by the Iran-Iraq war.
As the US then escorted tankers through the Strait of Hormuz, Trump said Washington was trying to "protect ships we don't own, carrying oil we don't need, destined for allies who won't help".
Appearing a few weeks later at a New Hampshire rotary club event in 1987, Trump sneered at how the Iranian navy - "little runabouts with machine guns" — had held America to ransom. "Why couldn't we go in there and take some of their oilfields near the coast?" he asked.
The then 41-year-old businessman put it even more starkly in a 1988 interview with the Guardian: "One bullet shot at one of our men or ships, and I'd do a number on Kharg Island. I'd go in and take it."
ooh Mr Glenn is starting to go through Trump's past. I look forward to your updates from when he discussed molesting the children at the teenage beauty pageants he used to organise.
Reeves explaining why she will not do universal energy bail-out
Definitely the right call. Another Truss bailout will be too expensive.
The indemnity sounds like it could be effective at reducing delays.
I think they need something with a more immediate impact though. My first thought was a more generous/aggressive scheme to subsidize people making their house more energy efficient - could help people through the next winter.
The Greens and Reform are underrepresented on PB. The header explains why. Greens and Reform are the parties for people with few assets and little chance of obtaining them. Most on here have plenty of assets and are happy to keep them, if necessary at the expense of those without. The term that used to be used for us was boomers. A few, such as @OldKingCole, @Foxy and @NickPalmer think of the wider population, and are those at least considering the Greens. Probably not coincidentally, they are posters that seem to take more interest in the views of their families.
The data in the header doesn't indicate that Reform voters are unusually poor. 41% of them are financially comfortable compared to the 43% in the general population who are. That's not very different. But point taken re PBers. We are mainly top quartile (at least) in wealth. Least that's my impression.
I wonder how they assessed 'financially comfortable' btw. I wouldn't totally trust a self-select on that. People tend to shy away from saying that about themselves.
Nicking a line from Steven J Gould, The Median is not The Message. That's especially true for Farage Followers. Some are the properly Left Behind, and it's a blot on the records of all governments in my lifetime how much that was just allowed to happen. But very many are extremely comfortable materially, and their discontent is more cultural. Some of that is just that they're getting old, and the cultural caravan is moving on without them. Some of it is not liking the conseqences of their votes and personal spending decisions. (Yes, your High Street is crumbling, but that's mostly because you have spent years not buying things there.)
The first group were often historically non-voters, and who can blame them? The second tend to cluster in the posher bits of unposh areas. How you analyse those is a problem for analysts. How you simultaneously please them both is a problem for all the Reform councillors about to be elected.
That's an interesting analysis. The core sentiment fuelling the Populist Right is anti-immigration imo. Farage has to own that 'want our country back' vote. He can't have them drifting off to the likes of Rupert Lowe. If that happens he can't win. But neither can he win with just those votes - so he has to try and appeal wider whilst not diluting his USP. All the while getting older and more scrutinised/exposed. It's a massive ask and I don't think he'll manage it. But if he does, like you say, he'll have a virtually impossible task meeting the aspirations of the peculiar voter coalition he'll have managed to assemble.
Agree. Anti migration may well be the core sentiment of the populist right, but it hits the difficulty that the migration they are anti has already occurred, and cannot without full fat fascism be undone. Dim people have not spotted this. (Like people think that getting to net zero CO2 somehow solves a problem.) The fascist tendency spotted it ages ago. The great majority of people would find it unacceptable to the millionth degree.
The populist right has sentiments, it also has unexpressed assumptions. Right at the top of these is the assumption of continuation, for oneself and therefore for all, of the social democratic post WWII welfare state. My guess is that Reform voters are more than averagely reliant on free NHS, state pensions, welfare safety nets, free education etc. which means of course that Reform's voters are deeply committed to high spend, therefore high tax, government.
So Reform's aspirations cannot possibly be met.
Like the US evangelicals with the Third Coming /Rebuilding the Temple. Doesn't stop politicians collecting donations for these aspirations
Putting as much distance as possible between himself and Trump/Netanyahu is the gift that will keep on giving.
Badenoch had her chance but backed the wrong horse and Farage will always be seen as Trumps best buddy
Zack and Davey too but the market leader always benefits disproportionately and that can only be Starmer. Is it possible Labour could take the lead? I wouldn't rule it out. Trump is way beyond insane and Netanyahu is genuinely evil.
The British media have entirely invented a stand-his-ground Keir Starmer that bears zero relation to reality. He tried to give Trump access to the bases, the cabinet blocked him, then he invented a legal fig leaf and access was granted. This stuff is professional malpractice.
Is this the same British media that have propelled Farage to the brink of government with absolutely no scrutiny whatsoever?
You are right they are a bunch of Charlatans.
The 'British media' reference seems to me flawed in two ways. Firstly, whatever this media are doing only about a quarter of voters plan to support them. The other 75% seem immune to this media thingy. Secondly, I am a consumer of British media, including: BBC, ITV, Ch 4, LBC, Times Radio, Guardian, Economist, New Statesman, Private Eye, and use PB to link to a multitude of stuff.
I almost never see/hear anything at all giving reasoned, or even unreasoned, support to Reform. If you take out the Express, Mail, GB News, which most people don't read/see, who are these people bringing Farage to the dizzy heights of 27%?
You may not have come across this organisation and their Political Editor. This chap is very enthusiastic after the Reform Conference.
Mason is giving neither reasoned nor unreasoned support for Reform. He is reflecting a particular moment of heightened Reform mania, telling it how the vibes feel in September 2025 at a point, now over, when they were getting double digit leads quite often. He correctly identifies how this phenomenon may be hard to sustain, draws attention to the problems they have associating with loonies and draws attention to the professional populism of the whole thing. Not a single word is in favour of any Reform policy or politics.
The thought that in any general sense the BBC is lending sustenance to Reform is completely bizarre. They are properly giving this ghastly collection of chancers the coverage due to their polling lead and place in the political realm.
On issues central to Reform like Islamification, the BBC, if anything, underplays the nature of the societal and cultural difficulties Reform are trying to play on.
You are starting from the perspective that the BBC are a bunch of sandal wearing Zack Polanski groupies. Thirty years ago that may have been almost true. It certainly isn't now.
Farage is currently boycotting the BBC (an odd kind of a boycott because he is still never off the BBC) because he has cried foul, in much the same way he is critical of YouGov because they aren't fully on board with his narrative and every whim. There was a point when he was on QT almost every as often as Fiona Bruce. And that is just the BBC. They are not deliberately promoting Farage but they are promoting the idea of a future story, namely Farage is PM in waiting.
Now GB News on the other hand do nothing more than blow smoke up Farage's fundament.
Thanks. The bit I have italicised is simply 100% evidence free and incorrect.
The BBC is a public service broadcaster. Farage and Reform really might overturn a century of political assumptions and take over the country in the name of populist grubby chancers. Farage truly is a PM in waiting, as you suggest. This is news box office. The BBC does news.
To cover this neutrally when they are the most popular party in the UK and at the same time full of chancers and bogus impossible and inconsistent policies is hard. Like trying to be 'fair' when covering Trump, when the idea of 'fair' or 'neutral' feels a category error.
On the whole the BBC does well. It is a lot more boring than other outlets, which loses it market share. That is because of its remit. Facts are often boring. Opinions are interesting. The BBC doesn't do opinion.
Comments
However... I would be surprised if by doing so you could actually save enough for a deposit on the house. In my case it just meant I had money to spend on beer.
I did buy the house though, and, of course, eventually moved on. I understand that the last time it was sold it went for £750k.
Its absolutely true that housing costs is a large part of the problem and I don't deny that. But it is also possible that some people are not good at saving as well.
As for housing costs, you are right, but that is partly a consequence of women in the workplace allowing dual-income households to bid up prices. Worse, highly-paid men marrying highly-paid women multiplies their advantage over average households, who have an advantage over singles.
As for generational unfairness, it is not about age, boomers versus millennials or whatever, it is about assets. And because housing is seen as an asset, it is rational to spend (or ‘invest’) as much as you can afford, in the near-certain knowledge its value will appreciate with time. There aren't many purchasing decisions made that way: we do not buy clothes or cars with a view to spending as much as we can borrow.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gru2EDJvj9Q (13mins)
Characteristic quote: "clearly deranged and incredibly irresponsible".
My vote also at the moment has to be for a party who can win my seat (which could go Tory, Lab or Reform) and will oppose Reform and are 100% sure of not helping them form a government.
Only Labour comes close, though not very close and not nearly close enough.
I wonder how they assessed 'financially comfortable' btw. I wouldn't totally trust a self-select on that. People tend to shy away from saying that about themselves.
Johnson's duplicity cost him. And then Conservative members being fools got Truss which did substantial damage (despite being tossed overboard pronto).
The current bizarreness of five party politics is because of Labour's pathetically timid 'Ming vase' refusal to have any policies beyond More Nice Spending means they lack a degree of moral mandate for necessary changes, and are further hamstrung by their juvenile Sweeties For Everyone backbenchers.
There's a vast yawning chasm for competent, boring, centrist government, but Starmer struggles to do anything despite a landslide (cf arguments over tightening migration and failure to cut benefits at all) and Badenoch's dopey decision to try and out-reform Reform means there's plenty of options if you want financially innumerate overspending or really want a migration crackdown. But if you want basic competence and to cut our cloth according to our means you're out of luck.
See risk rules following the Great Financial Crisis. Which was, at heart, all about lending to buy house. To people who were stretched beyond breaking point by the repayments.
So banks try and impose affordability on mortgages.
So instead, people are stretched to the point of breaking, to pay rent.
I advocate a ban on advertising. I think it would do a lot to reduce consumer demand that is generated by manipulative advertising.
But if you had more young people saving instead of spending you'd simply see them bid house prices even higher, given the overall shortage.
200 pounds right there.
Its not that simple of course.
Though given the consumer culture in the electorate, where if we don't get our wants indulged right now we will take our custom to that other party down the road, I'm not sure what politicians are meant to do.
1) Be so brilliant that the polling shifts so that by the end of 2027 the question is reversed. Not 'Will the Tories support Reform' (Kemi's dilemma) but 'Will Reform support the Tories' (Farage's dilemma).
2) Make it clear that the Tories are One Nation Centre Right and won't touch Reform with a bargepole.
The only other option, inconsistent with (1) and (2) is an electoral pact with Reform. IMO that is the only way the Right of Centre might possibly actually win in 2029. Hopefully it won't happen. Scorpions in a cage and all that.
Whether you have young members of your family. As several posters have already attested.
Or whether you work with them. Most of the TA's at my school are under 35 and female.
It would be a shock if there weren't a plurality of Green voters there.
The Lebanese government has declared Mohammad Reza Shibani, the ambassador-designate of the Islamic Republic of Iran, to be persona non grata and is giving him until Sunday to leave Lebanon.
This makes four Arab nations that have expelled Islamic Republic of Iran diplomats in the last week.
Lebanon joins Saudi Arabia, UAE, and Qatar.
"A production employee stumbled across a joke – no doubt written in the 1960s – and took offence, believing it to be sexist.
They flagged the problem, and a ‘collective decision’ was made to cull the whole thing."
Still doesn't stop me wanting to change the type of capitalism we have.
Big fan of Zack
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c62zdpke8kko
The first group were often historically non-voters, and who can blame them? The second tend to cluster in the posher bits of unposh areas. How you analyse those is a problem for analysts. How you simultaneously please them both is a problem for all the Reform councillors about to be elected.
My favoutite Monkhouse is 'my father still enjoys sex at 75. He lives at 71, its no distance'
We're becoming more prudish than the Victorians.
Although I accept that "No" is shorter.
Don’t know if it’s online anywhere, but his “An Audience With” show was absolutely brilliant. The last act of which is doing a word association game for a good 10 minutes, working his way around the names of the “celebrities” in the audience.
Mason is giving neither reasoned nor unreasoned support for Reform. He is reflecting a particular moment of heightened Reform mania, telling it how the vibes feel in September 2025 at a point, now over, when they were getting double digit leads quite often. He correctly identifies how this phenomenon may be hard to sustain, draws attention to the problems they have associating with loonies and draws attention to the professional populism of the whole thing. Not a single word is in favour of any Reform policy or politics.
The thought that in any general sense the BBC is lending sustenance to Reform is completely bizarre. They are properly giving this ghastly collection of chancers the coverage due to their polling lead and place in the political realm.
On issues central to Reform like Islamification, the BBC, if anything, underplays the nature of the societal and cultural difficulties Reform are trying to play on.
Having said that, both parties will also have a few rich supporters: the traditional older middle class Greens, and the very wealthy Reform types close to the party leadership who hope to benefit from a future low regulation environment.
Should we have it on display?
Since no-one else is doing it they have the field to themselves, and since this is what parliament and government exist to do really well, they might as well have a go.
Reform were overstated in polling in 2024 and i fancy still are - if their engagement drops into May alongside the general polling decline they might struggle to break low 20s to 25% in the NEV. A problem i only see getting worse for them as time ticks on.
Permanent presence parties have more core vote than new kids on the block
By the images of the effects of projectiles.
Which made it a hostile workplace.
Or doesn't the report say ?
Sometimes there is too much wind for our outdated grid to handle, especially in Scotland and the East of England.
Rather than paying wind farms to switch off we’re trialling a new system where people who live near these constrained areas get cheaper - or even free - electricity.
Farage is currently boycotting the BBC (an odd kind of a boycott because he is still never off the BBC) because he has cried foul, in much the same way he is critical of YouGov because they aren't fully on board with his narrative and every whim. There was a point when he was on QT almost every as often as Fiona Bruce. And that is just the BBC. They are not deliberately promoting Farage but they are promoting the idea of a future story, namely Farage is PM in waiting.
Now GB News on the other hand do nothing more than blow smoke up Farage's fundament.
The effectiveness is the inverse of a small reduction in baseload from say 150W to 50W running 24-7 saves £200+ per annum. This is a small increase in free supply, so at the other end.
It's a brilliant concept, and could double the amount of domestic solar in short order, which could reduce demand by 5% or more - and is a very big marginal gain. It supplies at the point of demand so there are no transmission losses, and the load on the grid is reduced.
There's chatter about LiDL and Amazon, but I say watch Ikea who were first with LED spotlights and did low price solar, much the same way as Octopus do low price heat pumps now (1000 per month).
AIUI it came in in Germany in 2019. A German system:
The populist right has sentiments, it also has unexpressed assumptions. Right at the top of these is the assumption of continuation, for oneself and therefore for all, of the social democratic post WWII welfare state. My guess is that Reform voters are more than averagely reliant on free NHS, state pensions, welfare safety nets, free education etc. which means of course that Reform's voters are deeply committed to high spend, therefore high tax, government.
So Reform's aspirations cannot possibly be met.
Even if they fluke an election win, which would be funny, then what? We've seen the Fukkers in action in local government now and have an idea how it will go when reality is more complicated and intractable than a Facebook post.
We also have a great spot in our garden for plug-in solar. Feeling a bit better about life.
That could be a good bridge though, to get and put out of a South facing window.
Achieve that, and in subsequent elections, the Right of Centre vote goes Reform by default.
The indemnity sounds like it could be effective at reducing delays.
I think they need something with a more immediate impact though. My first thought was a more generous/aggressive scheme to subsidize people making their house more energy efficient - could help people through the next winter.
The BBC is a public service broadcaster. Farage and Reform really might overturn a century of political assumptions and take over the country in the name of populist grubby chancers. Farage truly is a PM in waiting, as you suggest. This is news box office. The BBC does news.
To cover this neutrally when they are the most popular party in the UK and at the same time full of chancers and bogus impossible and inconsistent policies is hard. Like trying to be 'fair' when covering Trump, when the idea of 'fair' or 'neutral' feels a category error.
On the whole the BBC does well. It is a lot more boring than other outlets, which loses it market share. That is because of its remit. Facts are often boring. Opinions are interesting. The BBC doesn't do opinion.