If I'm faced with Starmer v Burnham on the leadership ballot, it will be time to draw a cock and balls.
So who would you want? As I said down thread it is a lot easier to say what you don't like than to find anything you do. Who would you want our next PM to be?
I want rid of Starmer, as I think he is just rubbish at politics.
I don't want Burnham, as I can't stand his sense of entitlement.
My choice would be one of Mahmood or Phillipson. Two capable women, who could do a much better job than Starmer of setting a direction and selling it to the nation.
Thanks. As a disillusioned Tory I have been quite impressed with Mahmood in the last few months.
Reminds me of Rory Stewart running for Tory leader. As a non-Tory, I liked him. Mahmood is implementing policies Priti Patel would have found extreme. She would drive away the left and centre of the Labour vote. Starmer has already found out being Reform-lite doesn't work.
Sometimes a minister has to do the right thing to deal with an issue, and ignore the bleating from the wannabe social workers on the back benches, and the wider membership.
Fair enough, but the substantive point remains: Mahmood is authoritarian and anti-immigrant, to the point of promoting voluntary repatriation, and has stated publicly that her background as a brown Hindu insulates her from criticism from white liberals. Good or bad, such a stance would be a better fit in the Conservative Party than the Labour Party: so much so in fact I'm wondering why she joined the Labour Party in the first place, especially since the 2026 Conservative Party is remarkably non-racist compared to its 1980s incarnation.
She's not anti-immigrant. She's anti those who break the rules, bend the rules and generally take the piss.
If I'm faced with Starmer v Burnham on the leadership ballot, it will be time to draw a cock and balls.
So who would you want? As I said down thread it is a lot easier to say what you don't like than to find anything you do. Who would you want our next PM to be?
I want rid of Starmer, as I think he is just rubbish at politics.
I don't want Burnham, as I can't stand his sense of entitlement.
My choice would be one of Mahmood or Phillipson. Two capable women, who could do a much better job than Starmer of setting a direction and selling it to the nation.
Thanks. As a disillusioned Tory I have been quite impressed with Mahmood in the last few months.
Reminds me of Rory Stewart running for Tory leader. As a non-Tory, I liked him. Mahmood is implementing policies Priti Patel would have found extreme. She would drive away the left and centre of the Labour vote. Starmer has already found out being Reform-lite doesn't work.
Sometimes a minister has to do the right thing to deal with an issue, and ignore the bleating from the wannabe social workers on the back benches, and the wider membership.
Fair enough, but the substantive point remains: Mahmood is authoritarian and anti-immigrant, to the point of promoting voluntary repatriation, and has stated publicly that her background as a brown Hindu insulates her from criticism from white liberals. Good or bad, such a stance would be a better fit in the Conservative Party than the Labour Party: so much so in fact I'm wondering why she joined the Labour Party in the first place, especially since the 2026 Conservative Party is remarkably non-racist compared to its 1980s incarnation.
Isn't she a Muslim? Her name suggests so, as does her Wikipedia bio
Leclerc has blown it twice for himself this afternoon. If he wanted to stay out, he should have stayed out - entirely his call.
Now binned it.
And blaming the brakes.
"Leclerc has blown it twice for himself this afternoon."
He must have a very flexible spine.
Both he and the team are probably asking themselves if the long term contract they just signed was a good idea..
.."I don't even know why I listen. I know we need to become better. Why are you not letting me out. I don't even understand you're explanation to be honest"..
Have Monaco subcontracted the tarmacking job to a UK outfit?
The growing risk of a collapse of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation system, of which the Gulf Stream is part, is nothing less than the number one long-term security threat to our way of life in Britain, Europe and the Western world in the era in which we live.
The consequences on our societies of an AMOC collapse would be simply devastating for Britain especially, beyond anything imaginable but a full blown super pandemic or nuclear war — with scientists modelling temperatures dropping around 15.c and half of our arable land being lost.
This is just one of many climate catastrophes starring at us of the modelling and the observed data and is why it is why Labour has continued to place such importance on Net Zero and international climate talks despite the Greens and progressive activists now looking elsewhere post-October 7th and the Conservatives joining Reform in now campaigning against them.
So speaking to a pollster one thing they are picking up in the past few weeks is people who previously not voting planning to vote (and will vote for the party best placed to stop Reform.)
The trigger is Reform criticising pride marches/stopping funding/some helmet saying stuff that's out of the 1980s about the gays.
The more and more content like this appears it is sub-optimal for Reform and this is not just the LGBTQ community planning on voting.
The growing risk of a collapse of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation system, of which the Gulf Stream is part, is nothing less than the number one long-term security threat to our way of life in Britain, Europe and the Western world in the era in which we live.
The consequences on our societies of an AMOC collapse would be simply devastating for Britain especially, beyond anything imaginable but a full blown super pandemic or nuclear war — with scientists modelling temperatures dropping around 15.c and half of our arable land being lost.
This is just one of many climate catastrophes starring at us of the modelling and the observed data and is why it is why Labour has continued to place such importance on Net Zero and international climate talks despite the Greens and progressive activists now looking elsewhere post-October 7th and the Conservatives joining Reform in now campaigning against them.
If the AMOC collapses no. 15°C. Look at the latitude we are on.
No sorry that's not it. Take for example Bristol latitude 51.5N, mean annual temperature = 11.4°C. Compare with Vancouver BC: latitude 49.2, mean annual temperature 11.0°C.
Ok, Vancouver is 80 miles further south, and a it is a bit cooler, but nothing like 15°C cooler.
A 15°C drop implies the mean annual temperature of Britain would be -4°C. Which is what you get in Yellowknife NT, or Fairbanks Alaska
This particular online personality isn't a good source for anything except bullshit.
Ben Judah, not Dixie.
Ben's real, I've met him once or twice.
I'm not saying he's not real, I'm saying he's best known for saying silly things online.
If I'm faced with Starmer v Burnham on the leadership ballot, it will be time to draw a cock and balls.
So who would you want? As I said down thread it is a lot easier to say what you don't like than to find anything you do. Who would you want our next PM to be?
I want rid of Starmer, as I think he is just rubbish at politics.
I don't want Burnham, as I can't stand his sense of entitlement.
My choice would be one of Mahmood or Phillipson. Two capable women, who could do a much better job than Starmer of setting a direction and selling it to the nation.
Thanks. As a disillusioned Tory I have been quite impressed with Mahmood in the last few months.
Reminds me of Rory Stewart running for Tory leader. As a non-Tory, I liked him. Mahmood is implementing policies Priti Patel would have found extreme. She would drive away the left and centre of the Labour vote. Starmer has already found out being Reform-lite doesn't work.
Sometimes a minister has to do the right thing to deal with an issue, and ignore the bleating from the wannabe social workers on the back benches, and the wider membership.
Well, it's certainly the far right thing, but not the correct thing.
God, Monaco is the most boring race of the year. By a distance.
Qualifying yesterday was the most exciting hour of F1 you’ll see all year though.
Today is just the party, in front of the Champagne set.
Yes qualifying is good. But the race is terrible. Even when cars don't have a full set of gears or cannot accelerate properly you cannot get past them at any point on the entire track. You can only listen to how close someone is, who has fresher tyres etc for so long. None of it makes any difference.
So speaking to a pollster one thing they are picking up in the past few weeks is people who previously not voting planning to vote (and will vote for the party best placed to stop Reform.)
The trigger is Reform criticising pride marches/stopping funding/some helmet saying stuff that's out of the 1980s about the gays.
The more and more content like this appears it is sub-optimal for Reform and this is not just the LGBTQ community planning on voting.
It could just be my sick mind, but I don't think that looks like they intended it to look.
So speaking to a pollster one thing they are picking up in the past few weeks is people who previously not voting planning to vote (and will vote for the party best placed to stop Reform.)
The trigger is Reform criticising pride marches/stopping funding/some helmet saying stuff that's out of the 1980s about the gays.
The more and more content like this appears it is sub-optimal for Reform and this is not just the LGBTQ community planning on voting.
It could just be my sick mind, but I don't think that looks like they intended it to look.
Jung might have had something to say about subconscious wish fulfillment.
God, Monaco is the most boring race of the year. By a distance.
Qualifying yesterday was the most exciting hour of F1 you’ll see all year though.
Today is just the party, in front of the Champagne set.
Yes qualifying is good. But the race is terrible. Even when cars don't have a full set of gears or cannot accelerate properly you cannot get past them at any point on the entire track. You can only listen to how close someone is, who has fresher tyres etc for so long. None of it makes any difference.
I remember Murray Walker saying 30 years ago, that if there wasn’t already a Grand Prix at Monaco there’s no way they’d allow one now.
It’s an anachronism, so watch it seriously on Saturday and just enjoy the party on Sunday.
So speaking to a pollster one thing they are picking up in the past few weeks is people who previously not voting planning to vote (and will vote for the party best placed to stop Reform.)
The trigger is Reform criticising pride marches/stopping funding/some helmet saying stuff that's out of the 1980s about the gays.
The more and more content like this appears it is sub-optimal for Reform and this is not just the LGBTQ community planning on voting.
It could just be my sick mind, but I don't think that looks like they intended it to look.
Well, now. I don't want to annoy the blessed @TSE but this comment about the Lucy Letby case on the previous thread begs an obvious question.
"My father has done his research on this case given his former job and his view now is that whilst her behaviour screams dodgy he thinks there's reasonable doubts on her guilt and if he were a juror he would have voted to acquit."
What did this research consist of exactly?
Did he read every day's transcript of the evidence and all the reports and written evidence put before the jury in the two trials? And not anything else. Because unless he did that he can't really say that as a juror he would have voted to acquit on all the charges in both trials.
He might think as others have done that there is other evidence which could have been put before a jury. And that if it had been she might have acquitted. He might be right.
But the key question for me is this: Letby had an expert medical witness advising her team who was willing to give evidence undermining the prosecution's evidence about how those babies died and yet the defence did not call him. Why has never been explained? Only Lucy Letby can do so and she has chosen to remain silent.
The obvious inference is that the expert was good for her on some points but damaging on others and they made a tactical decision not to call him.
This is a case where angels fear to tread, so I shall just make one brief comment on the cited Hammond article. It includes this passage:
LETBY’S barrister, Ben Myers KC, tried to call Hall to the stand at the same time as Evans, to debunk the air embolism and air in the stomach claims which account for all the murders. The prosecution refused.
I have no idea what it means to suggest that an attempt was made to call a witness 'at the same time' as another witness. Courts are not an Any Questions panel. The defence could cross examine any expert witness on the basis of his own expert's evidence, and then in due course call his expert.
Secondly, the remark 'The prosecution refused' is extremely odd. All decisions about procedure within a trial are, as everyone knows, made by the judge. It is quite clear that the decision by the defence not to call expert evidence was made by the defence.
So speaking to a pollster one thing they are picking up in the past few weeks is people who previously not voting planning to vote (and will vote for the party best placed to stop Reform.)
The trigger is Reform criticising pride marches/stopping funding/some helmet saying stuff that's out of the 1980s about the gays.
The more and more content like this appears it is sub-optimal for Reform and this is not just the LGBTQ community planning on voting.
It could just be my sick mind, but I don't think that looks like they intended it to look.
Would have been funny if the rainbow man was facing the other way.
So speaking to a pollster one thing they are picking up in the past few weeks is people who previously not voting planning to vote (and will vote for the party best placed to stop Reform.)
The trigger is Reform criticising pride marches/stopping funding/some helmet saying stuff that's out of the 1980s about the gays.
The more and more content like this appears it is sub-optimal for Reform and this is not just the LGBTQ community planning on voting.
It’s weird because it’s not actually a very British position to take. We like to think of ourselves (rightly or wrongly) as a tolerant nation who are quiet unless a tyrant overseas starts behaving badly. We have a strong national identity based on our resistance to the Nazis and their despicable acts and views.
Well, now. I don't want to annoy the blessed @TSE but this comment about the Lucy Letby case on the previous thread begs an obvious question.
"My father has done his research on this case given his former job and his view now is that whilst her behaviour screams dodgy he thinks there's reasonable doubts on her guilt and if he were a juror he would have voted to acquit."
What did this research consist of exactly?
Did he read every day's transcript of the evidence and all the reports and written evidence put before the jury in the two trials? And not anything else. Because unless he did that he can't really say that as a juror he would have voted to acquit on all the charges in both trials.
He might think as others have done that there is other evidence which could have been put before a jury. And that if it had been she might have acquitted. He might be right.
But the key question for me is this: Letby had an expert medical witness advising her team who was willing to give evidence undermining the prosecution's evidence about how those babies died and yet the defence did not call him. Why has never been explained? Only Lucy Letby can do so and she has chosen to remain silent.
The answer to that has actually been clear for some time. There was a pre-trial meeting of experts and the defence experts either deferred to or agreed with the prosecution expert, Peter Hindmarsh, about the insulin evidence.
Recent developments regarding that insulin evidence have been quite prominently reported in the press recently.
It's always a mistake to assume that, just because you haven't done any research on a particular subject, no one else has done any either.
Not quite. There has been Private Eye stuff, which for all I know is soundly based, tending to show why evidence was not called, but that does not mean the answer is clear. Private Eye may be being polemical, selective, or acting with limited information. This sometimes happens. Letby and her defence lawyers have not, SFAICS, made public their approach and its reasons. The CCRC will, I think, have access to all of this if privilege has been waived, as has been reported. So it is quite likely more will be revealed.
So speaking to a pollster one thing they are picking up in the past few weeks is people who previously not voting planning to vote (and will vote for the party best placed to stop Reform.)
The trigger is Reform criticising pride marches/stopping funding/some helmet saying stuff that's out of the 1980s about the gays.
The more and more content like this appears it is sub-optimal for Reform and this is not just the LGBTQ community planning on voting.
It could just be my sick mind, but I don't think that looks like they intended it to look.
So speaking to a pollster one thing they are picking up in the past few weeks is people who previously not voting planning to vote (and will vote for the party best placed to stop Reform.)
The trigger is Reform criticising pride marches/stopping funding/some helmet saying stuff that's out of the 1980s about the gays.
The more and more content like this appears it is sub-optimal for Reform and this is not just the LGBTQ community planning on voting.
It’s weird because it’s not actually a very British position to take. We like to think of ourselves (rightly or wrongly) as a tolerant nation who are quiet unless a tyrant overseas starts behaving badly. We have a strong national identity based on our resistance to the Nazis and their despicable acts and views.
There is actually a very raw, warlike version of English identity (and British identity subsequently) that is very plugged in to jingoism and biffing people. Think hanging a monkey for a French man, Wellington's army of 'scum' defeating Napoleon, even the longbowmen of Agincourt and their two-fingered salute. Toward the end of Empire a sort of world-weary, polite, apologetic version of Britishness prevailed, and that has been more or less the fashion ever since. But football hooligans and those like them are not entirely outside the British tradition.
Just completed my civic duty and voted. Used four of my nine votes for Senators and one for a deputy but it was least bad option and my vote for one of two Connétables (nearest equivalent is a Mayor in a French or Swiss commune really but they also have special policing powers, in charge of the honorary police and have sentencing powers for certain offences).
Queued for ten minutes but had hit a sweet spot as one of the officials I spoke to said that people had be queuing for over an hour at points this morning and they have never seen anything like the turnout this time before.
Anyway I feel truly virtuous now and hope get back to my normal self over the course of the day.
So speaking to a pollster one thing they are picking up in the past few weeks is people who previously not voting planning to vote (and will vote for the party best placed to stop Reform.)
The trigger is Reform criticising pride marches/stopping funding/some helmet saying stuff that's out of the 1980s about the gays.
The more and more content like this appears it is sub-optimal for Reform and this is not just the LGBTQ community planning on voting.
Interesting. People clearly don’t like having pride pushed in their faces too much but equally seem to not want to turn the clocks back. It would seem Reform have started to step into the latter.
For me it was their death penalty idea that put me off the idea of ever voting for them.
If I'm faced with Starmer v Burnham on the leadership ballot, it will be time to draw a cock and balls.
So who would you want? As I said down thread it is a lot easier to say what you don't like than to find anything you do. Who would you want our next PM to be?
I want rid of Starmer, as I think he is just rubbish at politics.
I don't want Burnham, as I can't stand his sense of entitlement.
My choice would be one of Mahmood or Phillipson. Two capable women, who could do a much better job than Starmer of setting a direction and selling it to the nation.
Thanks. As a disillusioned Tory I have been quite impressed with Mahmood in the last few months.
Reminds me of Rory Stewart running for Tory leader. As a non-Tory, I liked him. Mahmood is implementing policies Priti Patel would have found extreme. She would drive away the left and centre of the Labour vote. Starmer has already found out being Reform-lite doesn't work.
Sometimes a minister has to do the right thing to deal with an issue, and ignore the bleating from the wannabe social workers on the back benches, and the wider membership.
Fair enough, but the substantive point remains: Mahmood is authoritarian and anti-immigrant, to the point of promoting voluntary repatriation, and has stated publicly that her background as a brown Hindu insulates her from criticism from white liberals. Good or bad, such a stance would be a better fit in the Conservative Party than the Labour Party: so much so in fact I'm wondering why she joined the Labour Party in the first place, especially since the 2026 Conservative Party is remarkably non-racist compared to its 1980s incarnation.
Narrator: Mahmood is a Muslim name, not a Hindu one.
Lords has 3 tests this summer, the grounds who missed out and have pitches in decent condition will be annoyed. We also have the Oval which will be a road if the county games are a guide.
So speaking to a pollster one thing they are picking up in the past few weeks is people who previously not voting planning to vote (and will vote for the party best placed to stop Reform.)
The trigger is Reform criticising pride marches/stopping funding/some helmet saying stuff that's out of the 1980s about the gays.
The more and more content like this appears it is sub-optimal for Reform and this is not just the LGBTQ community planning on voting.
It’s weird because it’s not actually a very British position to take. We like to think of ourselves (rightly or wrongly) as a tolerant nation who are quiet unless a tyrant overseas starts behaving badly. We have a strong national identity based on our resistance to the Nazis and their despicable acts and views.
Reform aren't proposing to ban Pride or even scrap gay marriage (though Farage has said he would have preferred just to keep civil unions).
Their position is to stop flying Pride flags on government and council buildings and funding Pride events with taxpayer funds, it is not a position I agree with but it is a position many of their voters back
The growing risk of a collapse of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation system, of which the Gulf Stream is part, is nothing less than the number one long-term security threat to our way of life in Britain, Europe and the Western world in the era in which we live.
The consequences on our societies of an AMOC collapse would be simply devastating for Britain especially, beyond anything imaginable but a full blown super pandemic or nuclear war — with scientists modelling temperatures dropping around 15.c and half of our arable land being lost.
This is just one of many climate catastrophes starring at us of the modelling and the observed data and is why it is why Labour has continued to place such importance on Net Zero and international climate talks despite the Greens and progressive activists now looking elsewhere post-October 7th and the Conservatives joining Reform in now campaigning against them.
If the AMOC collapses no. 15°C. Look at the latitude we are on.
No sorry that's not it. Take for example Bristol latitude 51.5N, mean annual temperature = 11.4°C. Compare with Vancouver BC: latitude 49.2, mean annual temperature 11.0°C.
Ok, Vancouver is 80 miles further south, and a it is a bit cooler, but nothing like 15°C cooler.
A 15°C drop implies the mean annual temperature of Britain would be -4°C. Which is what you get in Yellowknife NT, or Fairbanks Alaska
This particular online personality isn't a good source for anything except bullshit.
Ben Judah, not Dixie.
Ben's real, I've met him once or twice.
I'm not saying he's not real, I'm saying he's best known for saying silly things online.
So, Vancouver is similarly warmed type climate to ours, by the time you get to California that is explicitly a Mediterranean type climate.
- Bristol at 51.5 degrees averages 10.9C over the year. - Petropavlovsk on the Russian coast at 53 degrees, slightly more of a continental influence but no warming current averages 3C over the year. - Port Stanley at exact Bristol latitude but cooled by the Antarctic averages 6C. - St. Anthony on the Newfoundland coast, at Bristol latitude averages 0.3C over the year.
AIUI, with Arctic winds, and from the previous time I looked at this, the 15C cooling applies to northern Scotland and the impact gets progressively less the further south you go, so Bristol wouldn't be particularly badly affected.
Isn't she a Muslim? Her name suggests so, as does her Wikipedia bio
Aaaand the prize for "most stupid post in June" goes to viewcode. Thank you folks. Yes you are right, Shabana Mahmood is Muslim not Hindu.
Not be any stretch the stupidest post in June, or probably even today.
In a very odd piece of not really trivia, for some reason I watched a couple of George Galloway videos the other week (I know), and he claims that Shabana wears a wig. Presumably (if true) to remain religiously observant whilst avoiding wearing a hijab. A lot of Jewish women do the same. If true it is extremely realistic.
So speaking to a pollster one thing they are picking up in the past few weeks is people who previously not voting planning to vote (and will vote for the party best placed to stop Reform.)
The trigger is Reform criticising pride marches/stopping funding/some helmet saying stuff that's out of the 1980s about the gays.
The more and more content like this appears it is sub-optimal for Reform and this is not just the LGBTQ community planning on voting.
Interesting. People clearly don’t like having pride pushed in their faces too much but equally seem to not want to turn the clocks back. It would seem Reform have started to step into the latter.
For me it was their death penalty idea that put me off the idea of ever voting for them.
I wonder what's different for the new Reform councils this year compared with last... there does feel like a bit more "that's not nice" normie pushback. Is it where the councils are? What they're trying to do? Or the unsavoury bits of the Reform coalition are more vocal and off-putting?
But the "we just don't want it rammed down our throats" line is not holding as well.
So speaking to a pollster one thing they are picking up in the past few weeks is people who previously not voting planning to vote (and will vote for the party best placed to stop Reform.)
The trigger is Reform criticising pride marches/stopping funding/some helmet saying stuff that's out of the 1980s about the gays.
The more and more content like this appears it is sub-optimal for Reform and this is not just the LGBTQ community planning on voting.
It’s weird because it’s not actually a very British position to take. We like to think of ourselves (rightly or wrongly) as a tolerant nation who are quiet unless a tyrant overseas starts behaving badly. We have a strong national identity based on our resistance to the Nazis and their despicable acts and views.
Reform aren't proposing to ban Pride or even scrap gay marriage (though Farage has said he would have preferred just to keep civil unions).
Their position is to stop flying Pride flags on government and council buildings and funding Pride events with taxpayer funds, it is not a position I agree with but it is a position many of their voters back
Why do you think the taxpayers should be funding pride events?
So speaking to a pollster one thing they are picking up in the past few weeks is people who previously not voting planning to vote (and will vote for the party best placed to stop Reform.)
The trigger is Reform criticising pride marches/stopping funding/some helmet saying stuff that's out of the 1980s about the gays.
The more and more content like this appears it is sub-optimal for Reform and this is not just the LGBTQ community planning on voting.
Interesting. People clearly don’t like having pride pushed in their faces too much but equally seem to not want to turn the clocks back. It would seem Reform have started to step into the latter.
For me it was their death penalty idea that put me off the idea of ever voting for them.
I wonder what's different for the new Reform councils this year compared with last... there does feel like a bit more "that's not nice" normie pushback. Is it where the councils are? What they're trying to do? Or the unsavoury bits of the Reform coalition are more vocal and off-putting?
But the "we just don't want it rammed down our throats" line is not holding as well.
Yeah, this poster is not just suggesting that they prefer "British pride", but they actively want to harm those who are celebrating pride month. It looks grubby.
So speaking to a pollster one thing they are picking up in the past few weeks is people who previously not voting planning to vote (and will vote for the party best placed to stop Reform.)
The trigger is Reform criticising pride marches/stopping funding/some helmet saying stuff that's out of the 1980s about the gays.
The more and more content like this appears it is sub-optimal for Reform and this is not just the LGBTQ community planning on voting.
Interesting. People clearly don’t like having pride pushed in their faces too much but equally seem to not want to turn the clocks back. It would seem Reform have started to step into the latter.
For me it was their death penalty idea that put me off the idea of ever voting for them.
I wonder what's different for the new Reform councils this year compared with last... there does feel like a bit more "that's not nice" normie pushback. Is it where the councils are? What they're trying to do? Or the unsavoury bits of the Reform coalition are more vocal and off-putting?
But the "we just don't want it rammed down our throats" line is not holding as well.
Yeah, this poster is not just suggesting that they prefer "British pride", but they actively want to harm those who are celebrating pride month. It looks grubby.
So speaking to a pollster one thing they are picking up in the past few weeks is people who previously not voting planning to vote (and will vote for the party best placed to stop Reform.)
The trigger is Reform criticising pride marches/stopping funding/some helmet saying stuff that's out of the 1980s about the gays.
The more and more content like this appears it is sub-optimal for Reform and this is not just the LGBTQ community planning on voting.
Interesting. People clearly don’t like having pride pushed in their faces too much but equally seem to not want to turn the clocks back. It would seem Reform have started to step into the latter.
For me it was their death penalty idea that put me off the idea of ever voting for them.
I wonder what's different for the new Reform councils this year compared with last... there does feel like a bit more "that's not nice" normie pushback. Is it where the councils are? What they're trying to do? Or the unsavoury bits of the Reform coalition are more vocal and off-putting?
But the "we just don't want it rammed down our throats" line is not holding as well.
Liberal Democrat’s private polling is also picking up greater resistance to Reform; Farage’s popularity has clearly taken a knock this year, at least among folks who didn’t much like him to begin with. That said, so far at least, the Reform lot on IOW’s council are keeping a relatively low profile; perhaps the gravity of the position they and the council is in has begun to sink home.
Apparently the single demographic that correlates most strongly with propensity to vote Reform is not having a passport.
So speaking to a pollster one thing they are picking up in the past few weeks is people who previously not voting planning to vote (and will vote for the party best placed to stop Reform.)
The trigger is Reform criticising pride marches/stopping funding/some helmet saying stuff that's out of the 1980s about the gays.
The more and more content like this appears it is sub-optimal for Reform and this is not just the LGBTQ community planning on voting.
It’s weird because it’s not actually a very British position to take. We like to think of ourselves (rightly or wrongly) as a tolerant nation who are quiet unless a tyrant overseas starts behaving badly. We have a strong national identity based on our resistance to the Nazis and their despicable acts and views.
Reform aren't proposing to ban Pride or even scrap gay marriage (though Farage has said he would have preferred just to keep civil unions).
Their position is to stop flying Pride flags on government and council buildings and funding Pride events with taxpayer funds, it is not a position I agree with but it is a position many of their voters back
Why do you think the taxpayers should be funding pride events?
So clearly you back the Reform position and think taxpayers should not fund Pride events, which is fair enough
Comments
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temperature_in_Canada
Today is just the party, in front of the Champagne set.
The trigger is Reform criticising pride marches/stopping funding/some helmet saying stuff that's out of the 1980s about the gays.
The more and more content like this appears it is sub-optimal for Reform and this is not just the LGBTQ community planning on voting.
https://www.skysports.com/cricket/news/12173/13551655/england-vs-new-zealand-mcc-apologises-for-condition-of-lords-pitch-following-second-shortest-test-match-in-grounds-history
It’s an anachronism, so watch it seriously on Saturday and just enjoy the party on Sunday.
Restart in 3m.
26 wickets at 9.5!
LETBY’S barrister, Ben Myers KC, tried
to call Hall to the stand at the same time
as Evans, to debunk the air embolism and
air in the stomach claims which account
for all the murders. The prosecution
refused.
I have no idea what it means to suggest that an attempt was made to call a witness 'at the same time' as another witness. Courts are not an Any Questions panel. The defence could cross examine any expert witness on the basis of his own expert's evidence, and then in due course call his expert.
Secondly, the remark 'The prosecution refused' is extremely odd. All decisions about procedure within a trial are, as everyone knows, made by the judge. It is quite clear that the decision by the defence not to call expert evidence was made by the defence.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_Jersey_general_election
For me it was their death penalty idea that put me off the idea of ever voting for them.
We also have the Oval which will be a road if the county games are a guide.
Their position is to stop flying Pride flags on government and council buildings and funding Pride events with taxpayer funds, it is not a position I agree with but it is a position many of their voters back
- Bristol at 51.5 degrees averages 10.9C over the year.
- Petropavlovsk on the Russian coast at 53 degrees, slightly more of a continental influence but no warming current averages 3C over the year.
- Port Stanley at exact Bristol latitude but cooled by the Antarctic averages 6C.
- St. Anthony on the Newfoundland coast, at Bristol latitude averages 0.3C over the year.
AIUI, with Arctic winds, and from the previous time I looked at this, the 15C cooling applies to northern Scotland and the impact gets progressively less the further south you go, so Bristol wouldn't be particularly badly affected.
🐐🐐🐐🐐🐐🐐🐐🐐
In a very odd piece of not really trivia, for some reason I watched a couple of George Galloway videos the other week (I know), and he claims that Shabana wears a wig. Presumably (if true) to remain religiously observant whilst avoiding wearing a hijab. A lot of Jewish women do the same. If true it is extremely realistic.
But the "we just don't want it rammed down our throats" line is not holding as well.
https://x.com/leeharris/status/2063576210983018969?s=46
Apparently the single demographic that correlates most strongly with propensity to vote Reform is not having a passport.
Neither seem to be any good at the current job.