Phone rings. Random mobile. I pick it up for some reason (usually leave for voicemail).
"hello its bloke calling from" company with three letters I have literally never heard of "sorry, from who?" He repeats. "You made an enquiry about" and then some incomprehensible garble description of some business service "No, I didn't" and hung up
This is happening quite a lot. Random cold calls from companies whose script now makes out that we called them and made an enquiry.
Nope. Sod off.
I really hate the ones who are phoning re your recent accident. Which didn't happen. Being someone's agent is actually a fiduciary relationship requiring the upmost good faith. And they start by lying. Even if I had had an accident how insane would I have to be to use them?
Presumably anyone doing that is a scammer and not remotely acting as an actual agent anyway though, and is more acting like a Nigerian Prince?
Clearly a scam. Hoping to hit the nexus of someone who (a) has recently had an accident and (b) can be sucked in. Sadly there will be people who fall for this.
Phone rings. Random mobile. I pick it up for some reason (usually leave for voicemail).
"hello its bloke calling from" company with three letters I have literally never heard of "sorry, from who?" He repeats. "You made an enquiry about" and then some incomprehensible garble description of some business service "No, I didn't" and hung up
This is happening quite a lot. Random cold calls from companies whose script now makes out that we called them and made an enquiry.
Nope. Sod off.
Next time this happens do the following
1. String them along for a bit 2. Put headphones / ear defenders on 3. Test smoke alarm
When I used to get calls from green energy scammers I’d just agree to an appointment. Give them the postcode B1 2JP and tell them I was in a flat there.
It’s the old postcode for Central TV
When I’d get a call saying they could find the flat I’d tell them to pop into Central TV and ask for the private flats then ignore and other calls
Phone rings. Random mobile. I pick it up for some reason (usually leave for voicemail).
"hello its bloke calling from" company with three letters I have literally never heard of "sorry, from who?" He repeats. "You made an enquiry about" and then some incomprehensible garble description of some business service "No, I didn't" and hung up
This is happening quite a lot. Random cold calls from companies whose script now makes out that we called them and made an enquiry.
Nope. Sod off.
I really hate the ones who are phoning re your recent accident. Which didn't happen. Being someone's agent is actually a fiduciary relationship requiring the upmost good faith. And they start by lying. Even if I had had an accident how insane would I have to be to use them?
They’ve now even got automated calls which seem to come from a real person but are just there to pre-scan before putting you through to someone.
Phone rings. Random mobile. I pick it up for some reason (usually leave for voicemail).
"hello its bloke calling from" company with three letters I have literally never heard of "sorry, from who?" He repeats. "You made an enquiry about" and then some incomprehensible garble description of some business service "No, I didn't" and hung up
This is happening quite a lot. Random cold calls from companies whose script now makes out that we called them and made an enquiry.
Nope. Sod off.
Next time this happens do the following
1. String them along for a bit 2. Put headphones / ear defenders on 3. Test smoke alarm
A whistle works equally well. Keep one by the phone.
Nick Palmer's constituency report suggests it might be squeaky bum time for Burnham.
I’d trust NPXMP’s informed comments absolutely.
But I can’t shake my uninformed view that Burnham will win easily.
I wouldn't. NPXMP infamously got it badly wrong in his own constituency in the run up to GE2015.
He's probably concerned about turnout. Burnham will win because he's the root to getting rid of Starmer.
And that's as far as most people's thinking will go.
Here's the thing - what do Conservatives actually want from this by-election?
IF Burnham wins, it's likely Starmer will soon be gone and there'll be a new PM in town and life may get tougher for Badenoch in the Commons, OTOH, Reform will be badly dented and that will increase the chances of the Conservatives moving back into a clear second and re-establishing themselves as the alternative "Right wing" option to Labour.
However, let's say Reform wins - Starmer stays, weakened and humiliated BUT Reform will be buoyant and look more like a Government in waiting with the Conservatives becoming less and less relevant.
Interesting times?
Good morning
Unequivocally this conservative wants Burnham to win for two main reasons:
He will almost certainly end Starmer's tenure { listening to Starmer address a tech conference this am he was more Ai than Ai, robotic and uninspiring} and at the same time stop Farage in his tracks
Yesterday, Starmer entered his comfort zone with Zelensky, Macron and Merz at no 10 in yet another pointless meeting and almost at the same time Iran and Israel recommenced throwing missiles at one another
On Burnham, I have often said I like him and he will bring to labour a charisma but also a laser focus on domestic issues and I doubt he has a clue on the international stage but if he appoints a good foreign secretary { not Starmer or Cooper} let them take the strain much like Cameron did
The Andy v Kemi show will be very interesting and I notice even Gauke is praising Kemi this morning. I do expect their interaction to be more collegiate which would be very welcome
Of course, we cannot know the future but as far as I am concerned the far right (Farage) and far left (Polanski) need to be beaten and a move to more centre policies is desirable, though not endless talk about the EU
Comfort zone?
Comfort zone?
Wash your mouth out with soap and water. It would be nice to ignore Ukraine, but it would be utterly wrong, and not in the UK's interest.
It's one thing to oppose Starmer as PM, but you're better than this
I am not for one minute suggesting we ignore Ukraine and that is not my position
However, Starmer's comfort zone is in the endless meetings he has internationally but simply they have become a talking shop and Starmer in particular is a lame duck Prime Minister who has still not produced a defence plan and we have no money anyway
Phone rings. Random mobile. I pick it up for some reason (usually leave for voicemail).
"hello its bloke calling from" company with three letters I have literally never heard of "sorry, from who?" He repeats. "You made an enquiry about" and then some incomprehensible garble description of some business service "No, I didn't" and hung up
This is happening quite a lot. Random cold calls from companies whose script now makes out that we called them and made an enquiry.
Nope. Sod off.
I really hate the ones who are phoning re your recent accident. Which didn't happen. Being someone's agent is actually a fiduciary relationship requiring the upmost good faith. And they start by lying. Even if I had had an accident how insane would I have to be to use them?
Presumably anyone doing that is a scammer and not remotely acting as an actual agent anyway though, and is more acting like a Nigerian Prince?
Clearly a scam. Hoping to hit the nexus of someone who (a) has recently had an accident and (b) can be sucked in. Sadly there will be people who fall for this.
And whilst it won't be many, the cost of a call is so low that it's profitable overall.
Tricky to fix.
Government creates a 1471 style number you can dial in during the call and the number calling gets blocked reported and if not verified when AI calls it it gets blocked nationally. Verification stops people blocking others for fun or malicious reasons.
Who from the Labour Party is campaigning for Burnham?
Nick Palmer. And I.
This is what I posted on 5 June based on a visit 8 days ago: "I spent half a day doorknocking in Makerfield last Sunday, in two different locations. There were some favourable responses for Burnham who had good name recognition and was personally known to a couple of people I met, but there were quite a few Reform and hostile against responses too. We did quite a bit of driving across about 5 miles of the constituency and in that time and during doorknocking I spotted about 20 homes with Reform stakes/posters compared with about 10 for Labour and 1 Restore, although I don't think you can take too much heed of the relative numbers for Reform v Labour (based on an appreciation that if willingness to display a poster was a reliable indicator of relative support, the Conservatives wouldn't have won a general election in my lifetime.) What was striking was just how many people were not aware of the national implications if Burnham won and the Labour campaign approach was not to mention that. That approach might change a bit now that Burnham has made clear his intentions. A couple of Reform supporters appeared to genuinely equivocate once I went off script and pointed out that if Burnham wins Starmer would probably be out of the door in months.
The overall impression was that it certainly wasn't in the bag for Burnham so I would counsel against going all in on Burnham based on the latest Survation polling. With a lot still in play I don't find odds of 2/9 on attractive although Burnham should still be favourite."
Next question. What's in it for the people of Makerfield. They elected the last MP two years ago only for him to abandon them. Now you have another self-important political type inserting himself into their lives for a clear motive of self-aggrandisement. The only plus point for Burnham is the poor quality of the other candidates. But is there really enthusiasm for him from Labour supporters locally (if you have to bus people in)?
The question is who do you think has the chance to actually change things for you? Directly elect the PM on a platform of change with a track record of doing stuff? Or a moron who wants to ban all knives?
What actual good would electing Kenyon actually do now? Its a by-election so they get a Free Hit. The objective? Get rid of Starmer and change direction. Burnham will do both. And if he fails, then oust him in favour of a Reform government in 2029.
LOL, even if Mr Burnham fails, in 2029 there'll be another argument why Reform shouldn't be elected.
I don't think there's any risk of running out of arguments why Reform shouldn't be elected!
The Trump interview was quite something; an unhinged rant. How anyone can think this man is a suitable leader, let alone president, is utterly beyond me.
Trump crashes out and cuts his interview with Welker short as she presses him on his lack of evidence for claiming elections are rigged
I’d guess he’s feeling the pressure over the Middle East. Especially with his irritating ally Israel trying to start it all up,again by bombing Beirut.
Phone rings. Random mobile. I pick it up for some reason (usually leave for voicemail).
"hello its bloke calling from" company with three letters I have literally never heard of "sorry, from who?" He repeats. "You made an enquiry about" and then some incomprehensible garble description of some business service "No, I didn't" and hung up
This is happening quite a lot. Random cold calls from companies whose script now makes out that we called them and made an enquiry.
Nope. Sod off.
Next time this happens do the following
1. String them along for a bit 2. Put headphones / ear defenders on 3. Test smoke alarm
Actually I have just had a phone call asking if I am John Barr to which I put on my very old voice and said yeees I am. He then went on about my accident and I just strung him along before telling him to get a proper job !!!!
Phone rings. Random mobile. I pick it up for some reason (usually leave for voicemail).
"hello its bloke calling from" company with three letters I have literally never heard of "sorry, from who?" He repeats. "You made an enquiry about" and then some incomprehensible garble description of some business service "No, I didn't" and hung up
This is happening quite a lot. Random cold calls from companies whose script now makes out that we called them and made an enquiry.
Nope. Sod off.
Next time this happens do the following
1. String them along for a bit 2. Put headphones / ear defenders on 3. Test smoke alarm
A whistle works equally well. Keep one by the phone.
I just turn the TV up loud and they hang up in seconds.
Phone rings. Random mobile. I pick it up for some reason (usually leave for voicemail).
"hello its bloke calling from" company with three letters I have literally never heard of "sorry, from who?" He repeats. "You made an enquiry about" and then some incomprehensible garble description of some business service "No, I didn't" and hung up
This is happening quite a lot. Random cold calls from companies whose script now makes out that we called them and made an enquiry.
Nope. Sod off.
Next time this happens do the following
1. String them along for a bit 2. Put headphones / ear defenders on 3. Test smoke alarm
Don't have time to string them along
Yes, you don't (??shouldn't) have time if you're working.
The Trump interview was quite something; an unhinged rant. How anyone can think this man is a suitable leader, let alone president, is utterly beyond me.
Trump crashes out and cuts his interview with Welker short as she presses him on his lack of evidence for claiming elections are rigged
I’d guess he’s feeling the pressure over the Middle East. Especially with his irritating ally Israel trying to start it all up,again by bombing Beirut.
I assume with the WC starting this week he wanted the ME done.
The Trump interview was quite something; an unhinged rant. How anyone can think this man is a suitable leader, let alone president, is utterly beyond me.
Trump crashes out and cuts his interview with Welker short as she presses him on his lack of evidence for claiming elections are rigged
I’d guess he’s feeling the pressure over the Middle East. Especially with his irritating ally Israel trying to start it all up,again by bombing Beirut.
I assume with the WC starting this week he wanted the ME done.
The Trump interview was quite something; an unhinged rant. How anyone can think this man is a suitable leader, let alone president, is utterly beyond me.
Trump crashes out and cuts his interview with Welker short as she presses him on his lack of evidence for claiming elections are rigged
I’d guess he’s feeling the pressure over the Middle East. Especially with his irritating ally Israel trying to start it all up,again by bombing Beirut.
My guess is that he is an obnoxious, misogynistic boor who can't stand to be contradicted.
Who from the Labour Party is campaigning for Burnham?
Nick Palmer. And I.
This is what I posted on 5 June based on a visit 8 days ago: "I spent half a day doorknocking in Makerfield last Sunday, in two different locations. There were some favourable responses for Burnham who had good name recognition and was personally known to a couple of people I met, but there were quite a few Reform and hostile against responses too. We did quite a bit of driving across about 5 miles of the constituency and in that time and during doorknocking I spotted about 20 homes with Reform stakes/posters compared with about 10 for Labour and 1 Restore, although I don't think you can take too much heed of the relative numbers for Reform v Labour (based on an appreciation that if willingness to display a poster was a reliable indicator of relative support, the Conservatives wouldn't have won a general election in my lifetime.) What was striking was just how many people were not aware of the national implications if Burnham won and the Labour campaign approach was not to mention that. That approach might change a bit now that Burnham has made clear his intentions. A couple of Reform supporters appeared to genuinely equivocate once I went off script and pointed out that if Burnham wins Starmer would probably be out of the door in months.
The overall impression was that it certainly wasn't in the bag for Burnham so I would counsel against going all in on Burnham based on the latest Survation polling. With a lot still in play I don't find odds of 2/9 on attractive although Burnham should still be favourite."
Next question. What's in it for the people of Makerfield. They elected the last MP two years ago only for him to abandon them. Now you have another self-important political type inserting himself into their lives for a clear motive of self-aggrandisement. The only plus point for Burnham is the poor quality of the other candidates. But is there really enthusiasm for him from Labour supporters locally (if you have to bus people in)?
Every party "buses" activists in to help with by-elections and have done since time began. Are you new to this politics lark?
Reform have emailed me to ask if I want to join a coach from London to canvass for Reform in Makerfield.
Who from the Labour Party is campaigning for Burnham?
Nick Palmer. And I.
This is what I posted on 5 June based on a visit 8 days ago: "I spent half a day doorknocking in Makerfield last Sunday, in two different locations. There were some favourable responses for Burnham who had good name recognition and was personally known to a couple of people I met, but there were quite a few Reform and hostile against responses too. We did quite a bit of driving across about 5 miles of the constituency and in that time and during doorknocking I spotted about 20 homes with Reform stakes/posters compared with about 10 for Labour and 1 Restore, although I don't think you can take too much heed of the relative numbers for Reform v Labour (based on an appreciation that if willingness to display a poster was a reliable indicator of relative support, the Conservatives wouldn't have won a general election in my lifetime.) What was striking was just how many people were not aware of the national implications if Burnham won and the Labour campaign approach was not to mention that. That approach might change a bit now that Burnham has made clear his intentions. A couple of Reform supporters appeared to genuinely equivocate once I went off script and pointed out that if Burnham wins Starmer would probably be out of the door in months.
The overall impression was that it certainly wasn't in the bag for Burnham so I would counsel against going all in on Burnham based on the latest Survation polling. With a lot still in play I don't find odds of 2/9 on attractive although Burnham should still be favourite."
Next question. What's in it for the people of Makerfield. They elected the last MP two years ago only for him to abandon them. Now you have another self-important political type inserting himself into their lives for a clear motive of self-aggrandisement. The only plus point for Burnham is the poor quality of the other candidates. But is there really enthusiasm for him from Labour supporters locally (if you have to bus people in)?
Every party "buses" activists in to help with by-elections and have done since time began. Are you new to this politics lark?
Reform have emailed me to ask if I want to join a coach from London to canvass for Reform in Makerfield.
Actually they've asked you to canvas. Take a giant marquee or an easel.
Phone rings. Random mobile. I pick it up for some reason (usually leave for voicemail).
"hello its bloke calling from" company with three letters I have literally never heard of "sorry, from who?" He repeats. "You made an enquiry about" and then some incomprehensible garble description of some business service "No, I didn't" and hung up
This is happening quite a lot. Random cold calls from companies whose script now makes out that we called them and made an enquiry.
Nope. Sod off.
I really hate the ones who are phoning re your recent accident. Which didn't happen. Being someone's agent is actually a fiduciary relationship requiring the upmost good faith. And they start by lying. Even if I had had an accident how insane would I have to be to use them?
Presumably anyone doing that is a scammer and not remotely acting as an actual agent anyway though, and is more acting like a Nigerian Prince?
Clearly a scam. Hoping to hit the nexus of someone who (a) has recently had an accident and (b) can be sucked in. Sadly there will be people who fall for this.
Had some fun with one of those a few years ago. I enthusiastically replied that I had indeed had an accident, had suffered whiplash etc. When we got into the details I explained how I'd had six pints* down the pub before driving home and the accident happened on the way...
*in case of doubt, this - and the accident - we're entirely fictitious
Who from the Labour Party is campaigning for Burnham?
Nick Palmer. And I.
This is what I posted on 5 June based on a visit 8 days ago: "I spent half a day doorknocking in Makerfield last Sunday, in two different locations. There were some favourable responses for Burnham who had good name recognition and was personally known to a couple of people I met, but there were quite a few Reform and hostile against responses too. We did quite a bit of driving across about 5 miles of the constituency and in that time and during doorknocking I spotted about 20 homes with Reform stakes/posters compared with about 10 for Labour and 1 Restore, although I don't think you can take too much heed of the relative numbers for Reform v Labour (based on an appreciation that if willingness to display a poster was a reliable indicator of relative support, the Conservatives wouldn't have won a general election in my lifetime.) What was striking was just how many people were not aware of the national implications if Burnham won and the Labour campaign approach was not to mention that. That approach might change a bit now that Burnham has made clear his intentions. A couple of Reform supporters appeared to genuinely equivocate once I went off script and pointed out that if Burnham wins Starmer would probably be out of the door in months.
The overall impression was that it certainly wasn't in the bag for Burnham so I would counsel against going all in on Burnham based on the latest Survation polling. With a lot still in play I don't find odds of 2/9 on attractive although Burnham should still be favourite."
Next question. What's in it for the people of Makerfield. They elected the last MP two years ago only for him to abandon them. Now you have another self-important political type inserting himself into their lives for a clear motive of self-aggrandisement. The only plus point for Burnham is the poor quality of the other candidates. But is there really enthusiasm for him from Labour supporters locally (if you have to bus people in)?
There is a massive amount in it for the people of the Makerfield constituency. A genuinely local PM elected in a what is now a marginal seat and facing reelection within 3 years will not only recognise the need to deliver for his constituents but will also be in a far more powerful position than anyone else in Britain to deliver his priorities. All that on top of the genuine prospect of changing direction nationally with Starmer gone.
Or that prospect could be just frittered away in a meaningless protest vote that will mean more of the same from Starmer.
No-one is being bussed in, are you not aware of election expense rules? What I saw was massive enthusiasm for Burnham causing people to travel miles under their own steam. An overflowing car park at the campaign centre spilling over into local streets.
Any more questions?
Ever heard of public transport?
Get real.
You are coming some distance with a small team to a campaign centre about 1 mile from the centre of Ashton. Once at the campaign centre you randomly collect a canvassing or leafleting round for somewhere in a random direction several miles away in a quite strung out constituency (the area is surprisingly rural, being a collection of separate villages and small towns.) You do said round, find a pub for lunch, then return to the campaign centre for an afternoon repeat.
Nick Palmer's constituency report suggests it might be squeaky bum time for Burnham.
I’d trust NPXMP’s informed comments absolutely.
But I can’t shake my uninformed view that Burnham will win easily.
I wouldn't. NPXMP infamously got it badly wrong in his own constituency in the run up to GE2015.
He's probably concerned about turnout. Burnham will win because he's the root to getting rid of Starmer.
And that's as far as most people's thinking will go.
Here's the thing - what do Conservatives actually want from this by-election?
IF Burnham wins, it's likely Starmer will soon be gone and there'll be a new PM in town and life may get tougher for Badenoch in the Commons, OTOH, Reform will be badly dented and that will increase the chances of the Conservatives moving back into a clear second and re-establishing themselves as the alternative "Right wing" option to Labour.
However, let's say Reform wins - Starmer stays, weakened and humiliated BUT Reform will be buoyant and look more like a Government in waiting with the Conservatives becoming less and less relevant.
Interesting times?
Burnham as PM pushing a tax and spend agenda also makes it easier for Kemi to push clearer economic blue water with Labour and there will be less culture wars against him than Reform have been able to push against Starmer
Yes, its very clearly in the Tories interests that Burnham accelerates the decline of Reform.
Indeed, the best result for the Tories is Burnham winning and starting to win back some working class voters for Labour on a tax and spend agenda (as well as squeezing the Greens) while accepting Brexit for the time being. While Restore comfortably hold their deposit and get a significant vote so Reform face a new threat from the nationalist right potentially dividing the Reform vote
Also - If the Tories win Aberdeen South that would really be a good day for Kemi. Reform will be desperate to split the anti-SNP vote there.
Reform won 0 constituency seats in the Holyrood elections, Scotland is largely irrelevant for them.
Reform would far prefer to win Makerfield and squeeze Restore than stop the Tories winning Aberdeen S from the SNP
I don’t think squeezing Restore is going to work. There were always a bunch of Reform supporters who thought Farage was a wet. Now they have a home.
If the Reform candidate was a firebrand, maybe. But he’s a damp squib.
When Reform lose, the autopsy will be down to a shite candidate.
He inspires GOTV - for his opponents.
Reform seem to have a lot of problem with shite candidates.
As does the Greens. Both their candidates for Makerfield were inept as was their local election candidates (again, same for Reform)
The insurgent parties need to professionalise its candidate selection and vetting ASAP
That's the problem though with being "insurgent" - you attract people who, apart from believing (supposedly) in your core values, have no political experience at all.
I was politically active when the SDP came into being - two thirds of the new SDP members had never been in any political party at all. Inevitably, it was left to the ex-Labour and ex-Conservative members to show them what to do and how it worked. The came the Alliance and the Liberals worked with the SDP.
This was all before the days of social media of course.
Even after that. In 2014 I heard several Labour activists observe that Better Together was a means by which Labour taught the Tories how to fight elections. A refresher might be helpful but I'm not sure who would be giving it these days.
Bit presumptuous of Labour to claim to have schooled the most successful election winning machine in the UK's history...
In fairness that successful election winning machine had made very little dent in Scotland for about 60 years. So, before the collapse of Scottish Labour, they had a point.
So I'm avoiding marking exams and did some research... Here is the Conservative vote share in Scotland in General Elections back to 1950...
You can see an uptick after 2014 for sure, but that would be against a backdrop of a bit national return too?
Andy Burnham’s lead among Makerfield’s women is emphatic, while among men he’s neck and neck with Reform’s Robert Kenyon. But here’s the kicker: voter uncertainty is lower among women than it is among men in the poll. That’s not normal. Typically women tend to be more uncertain about their preferences in opinion polls. In voting intention surveys the world over women are more likely to answer “don’t know”. So what could be behind it?
For Reform candidate Robert Kenyon’s comments on abortion to feature so highly in a by-election campaign is unusual in mainland Britain. “Abortion is the cowardly act of murdering a defenceless baby” reads one X post. And “don’t dole out the ‘what if someone is raped by their brother’ argument” reads another, in response to someone else. These aren’t sentiments often wheeled out by a candidate at election time. It’s a fringe view, even among voters on the right. Similarly, Kenyon’s comments about Carol Vorderman have been much publicised, with Kenyon refusing to apologise for them in an appearance on Question Time on Thursday (5 June).
Kenyon's cv ought to have a big impact... but unfortunately not many Makerfield voters are going to be reading the New Statesman and none of those readers were ever likely to be voting Reform anyway.
(Just thought - shouldn't be the New Statesperson these days? ;-) )
You have totally missed the point. Reporting of Kenyon's misogyny has become widespread in the last week. The NS was just commenting on that.
That will clearly energise the misogynist voters. And those who think you ought to be able to say that sort of thing without censure. How many of them are there?
I'm 60.40 years ago people routinely said things about women (and black people) that are now considered out of order. Indeed, I may have said some of them. Now I certainly wouldn't. However, how many people have changed their views?
Freedom of Speech has to include the fundamental right of stupid people to say stupid things..
Who from the Labour Party is campaigning for Burnham?
Nick Palmer. And I.
This is what I posted on 5 June based on a visit 8 days ago: "I spent half a day doorknocking in Makerfield last Sunday, in two different locations. There were some favourable responses for Burnham who had good name recognition and was personally known to a couple of people I met, but there were quite a few Reform and hostile against responses too. We did quite a bit of driving across about 5 miles of the constituency and in that time and during doorknocking I spotted about 20 homes with Reform stakes/posters compared with about 10 for Labour and 1 Restore, although I don't think you can take too much heed of the relative numbers for Reform v Labour (based on an appreciation that if willingness to display a poster was a reliable indicator of relative support, the Conservatives wouldn't have won a general election in my lifetime.) What was striking was just how many people were not aware of the national implications if Burnham won and the Labour campaign approach was not to mention that. That approach might change a bit now that Burnham has made clear his intentions. A couple of Reform supporters appeared to genuinely equivocate once I went off script and pointed out that if Burnham wins Starmer would probably be out of the door in months.
The overall impression was that it certainly wasn't in the bag for Burnham so I would counsel against going all in on Burnham based on the latest Survation polling. With a lot still in play I don't find odds of 2/9 on attractive although Burnham should still be favourite."
Next question. What's in it for the people of Makerfield. They elected the last MP two years ago only for him to abandon them. Now you have another self-important political type inserting himself into their lives for a clear motive of self-aggrandisement. The only plus point for Burnham is the poor quality of the other candidates. But is there really enthusiasm for him from Labour supporters locally (if you have to bus people in)?
There is a massive amount in it for the people of the Makerfield constituency. A genuinely local PM elected in a what is now a marginal seat and facing reelection within 3 years will not only recognise the need to deliver for his constituents but will also be in a far more powerful position than anyone else in Britain to deliver his priorities. All that on top of the genuine prospect of changing direction nationally with Starmer gone.
Or that prospect could be just frittered away in a meaningless protest vote that will mean more of the same from Starmer.
No-one is being bussed in, are you not aware of election expense rules? What I saw was massive enthusiasm for Burnham causing people to travel miles under their own steam. An overflowing car park at the campaign centre spilling over into local streets.
Any more questions?
Ever heard of public transport?
Get real.
You are coming some distance with a small team to a campaign centre about 1 mile from the centre of Ashton. Once at the campaign centre you randomly collect a canvassing or leafleting round for somewhere in a random direction several miles away in a quite strung out constituency (the area is surprisingly rural, being a collection of separate villages and small towns.) You do said round, find a pub for lunch, then return to the campaign centre for an afternoon repeat.
No, public transport is not an option.
Can get Andy's marvellous yellow 559 once every half hour from Ashton to Hindley. Avoid school times since they closed the only Catholic Secondary in Hindley. I managed on that twice a day for ten years.
I don’t think squeezing Restore is going to work. There were always a bunch of Reform supporters who thought Farage was a wet. Now they have a home.
If the Reform candidate was a firebrand, maybe. But he’s a damp squib.
When Reform lose, the autopsy will be down to a shite candidate.
He inspires GOTV - for his opponents.
Reform seem to have a lot of problem with shite candidates.
As does the Greens. Both their candidates for Makerfield were inept as was their local election candidates (again, same for Reform)
The insurgent parties need to professionalise its candidate selection and vetting ASAP
That's the problem though with being "insurgent" - you attract people who, apart from believing (supposedly) in your core values, have no political experience at all.
I was politically active when the SDP came into being - two thirds of the new SDP members had never been in any political party at all. Inevitably, it was left to the ex-Labour and ex-Conservative members to show them what to do and how it worked. The came the Alliance and the Liberals worked with the SDP.
This was all before the days of social media of course.
Even after that. In 2014 I heard several Labour activists observe that Better Together was a means by which Labour taught the Tories how to fight elections. A refresher might be helpful but I'm not sure who would be giving it these days.
Bit presumptuous of Labour to claim to have schooled the most successful election winning machine in the UK's history...
In fairness that successful election winning machine had made very little dent in Scotland for about 60 years. So, before the collapse of Scottish Labour, they had a point.
So I'm avoiding marking exams and did some research... Here is the Conservative vote share in Scotland in General Elections back to 1950...
You can see an uptick after 2014 for sure, but that would be against a backdrop of a bit national return too?
It would be better to have the SNP share alongside. Labour used to call SNP 'Tartan Tories'. Then SNP ate Labour's lunch in the central belt.
'I have been married for 40 years now - four children, two grandchildren. The best decision was ever made was building our family. It is an appalling shame that so many British men and women feel unable to do the same for reasons outside of their control. My generation has spectacularly failed them all. We need to own up to that, and we need to fix it.
There is finally a pro-family political party that will reverse so much of the damage done - Restore Britain.
How?
Tax breaks for parents. Let working men and women keep more of what they earn to spend how they choose. This is THE most important policy above all else. Merge tax allowances for married couples. Trust families to spend their money, not the Government.
A Restore Britain Government will front-load child benefit. Pay more in the earlier years when the help is needed. Wouldn’t cost a penny, but would mean that parents get help when they really need it buying prams, cots, nappies etc.
This would be exclusively for British children with one or two British parents....'
Who from the Labour Party is campaigning for Burnham?
Nick Palmer. And I.
This is what I posted on 5 June based on a visit 8 days ago: "I spent half a day doorknocking in Makerfield last Sunday, in two different locations. There were some favourable responses for Burnham who had good name recognition and was personally known to a couple of people I met, but there were quite a few Reform and hostile against responses too. We did quite a bit of driving across about 5 miles of the constituency and in that time and during doorknocking I spotted about 20 homes with Reform stakes/posters compared with about 10 for Labour and 1 Restore, although I don't think you can take too much heed of the relative numbers for Reform v Labour (based on an appreciation that if willingness to display a poster was a reliable indicator of relative support, the Conservatives wouldn't have won a general election in my lifetime.) What was striking was just how many people were not aware of the national implications if Burnham won and the Labour campaign approach was not to mention that. That approach might change a bit now that Burnham has made clear his intentions. A couple of Reform supporters appeared to genuinely equivocate once I went off script and pointed out that if Burnham wins Starmer would probably be out of the door in months.
The overall impression was that it certainly wasn't in the bag for Burnham so I would counsel against going all in on Burnham based on the latest Survation polling. With a lot still in play I don't find odds of 2/9 on attractive although Burnham should still be favourite."
Next question. What's in it for the people of Makerfield. They elected the last MP two years ago only for him to abandon them. Now you have another self-important political type inserting himself into their lives for a clear motive of self-aggrandisement. The only plus point for Burnham is the poor quality of the other candidates. But is there really enthusiasm for him from Labour supporters locally (if you have to bus people in)?
Every party "buses" activists in to help with by-elections and have done since time began. Are you new to this politics lark?
Reform have emailed me to ask if I want to join a coach from London to canvass for Reform in Makerfield.
In the words of Simon Cowell, I presume that’s a No !!
Who from the Labour Party is campaigning for Burnham?
Nick Palmer. And I.
This is what I posted on 5 June based on a visit 8 days ago: "I spent half a day doorknocking in Makerfield last Sunday, in two different locations. There were some favourable responses for Burnham who had good name recognition and was personally known to a couple of people I met, but there were quite a few Reform and hostile against responses too. We did quite a bit of driving across about 5 miles of the constituency and in that time and during doorknocking I spotted about 20 homes with Reform stakes/posters compared with about 10 for Labour and 1 Restore, although I don't think you can take too much heed of the relative numbers for Reform v Labour (based on an appreciation that if willingness to display a poster was a reliable indicator of relative support, the Conservatives wouldn't have won a general election in my lifetime.) What was striking was just how many people were not aware of the national implications if Burnham won and the Labour campaign approach was not to mention that. That approach might change a bit now that Burnham has made clear his intentions. A couple of Reform supporters appeared to genuinely equivocate once I went off script and pointed out that if Burnham wins Starmer would probably be out of the door in months.
The overall impression was that it certainly wasn't in the bag for Burnham so I would counsel against going all in on Burnham based on the latest Survation polling. With a lot still in play I don't find odds of 2/9 on attractive although Burnham should still be favourite."
Next question. What's in it for the people of Makerfield. They elected the last MP two years ago only for him to abandon them. Now you have another self-important political type inserting himself into their lives for a clear motive of self-aggrandisement. The only plus point for Burnham is the poor quality of the other candidates. But is there really enthusiasm for him from Labour supporters locally (if you have to bus people in)?
Every party "buses" activists in to help with by-elections and have done since time began. Are you new to this politics lark?
Reform have emailed me to ask if I want to join a coach from London to canvass for Reform in Makerfield.
In the words of Simon Cowell, I presume that’s a No !!
I'm a registered supporter of all the political parties so I get inside info from them all. Not much from the Tories. I think they might be on to me.
'I have been married for 40 years now - four children, two grandchildren. The best decision was ever made was building our family. It is an appalling shame that so many British men and women feel unable to do the same for reasons outside of their control. My generation has spectacularly failed them all. We need to own up to that, and we need to fix it.
There is finally a pro-family political party that will reverse so much of the damage done - Restore Britain.
How?
Tax breaks for parents. Let working men and women keep more of what they earn to spend how they choose. This is THE most important policy above all else. Merge tax allowances for married couples. Trust families to spend their money, not the Government.
A Restore Britain Government will front-load child benefit. Pay more in the earlier years when the help is needed. Wouldn’t cost a penny, but would mean that parents get help when they really need it buying prams, cots, nappies etc.
This would be exclusively for British children with one or two British parents....'
'I have been married for 40 years now - four children, two grandchildren. The best decision was ever made was building our family. It is an appalling shame that so many British men and women feel unable to do the same for reasons outside of their control. My generation has spectacularly failed them all. We need to own up to that, and we need to fix it.
There is finally a pro-family political party that will reverse so much of the damage done - Restore Britain.
How?
Tax breaks for parents. Let working men and women keep more of what they earn to spend how they choose. This is THE most important policy above all else. Merge tax allowances for married couples. Trust families to spend their money, not the Government.
A Restore Britain Government will front-load child benefit. Pay more in the earlier years when the help is needed. Wouldn’t cost a penny, but would mean that parents get help when they really need it buying prams, cots, nappies etc.
This would be exclusively for British children with one or two British parents....'
'I have been married for 40 years now - four children, two grandchildren. The best decision was ever made was building our family. It is an appalling shame that so many British men and women feel unable to do the same for reasons outside of their control. My generation has spectacularly failed them all. We need to own up to that, and we need to fix it.
There is finally a pro-family political party that will reverse so much of the damage done - Restore Britain.
How?
Tax breaks for parents. Let working men and women keep more of what they earn to spend how they choose. This is THE most important policy above all else. Merge tax allowances for married couples. Trust families to spend their money, not the Government.
A Restore Britain Government will front-load child benefit. Pay more in the earlier years when the help is needed. Wouldn’t cost a penny, but would mean that parents get help when they really need it buying prams, cots, nappies etc.
This would be exclusively for British children with one or two British parents....'
'I have been married for 40 years now - four children, two grandchildren. The best decision was ever made was building our family. It is an appalling shame that so many British men and women feel unable to do the same for reasons outside of their control. My generation has spectacularly failed them all. We need to own up to that, and we need to fix it.
There is finally a pro-family political party that will reverse so much of the damage done - Restore Britain.
How?
Tax breaks for parents. Let working men and women keep more of what they earn to spend how they choose. This is THE most important policy above all else. Merge tax allowances for married couples. Trust families to spend their money, not the Government.
A Restore Britain Government will front-load child benefit. Pay more in the earlier years when the help is needed. Wouldn’t cost a penny, but would mean that parents get help when they really need it buying prams, cots, nappies etc.
This would be exclusively for British children with one or two British parents....'
Who from the Labour Party is campaigning for Burnham?
Nick Palmer. And I.
This is what I posted on 5 June based on a visit 8 days ago: "I spent half a day doorknocking in Makerfield last Sunday, in two different locations. There were some favourable responses for Burnham who had good name recognition and was personally known to a couple of people I met, but there were quite a few Reform and hostile against responses too. We did quite a bit of driving across about 5 miles of the constituency and in that time and during doorknocking I spotted about 20 homes with Reform stakes/posters compared with about 10 for Labour and 1 Restore, although I don't think you can take too much heed of the relative numbers for Reform v Labour (based on an appreciation that if willingness to display a poster was a reliable indicator of relative support, the Conservatives wouldn't have won a general election in my lifetime.) What was striking was just how many people were not aware of the national implications if Burnham won and the Labour campaign approach was not to mention that. That approach might change a bit now that Burnham has made clear his intentions. A couple of Reform supporters appeared to genuinely equivocate once I went off script and pointed out that if Burnham wins Starmer would probably be out of the door in months.
The overall impression was that it certainly wasn't in the bag for Burnham so I would counsel against going all in on Burnham based on the latest Survation polling. With a lot still in play I don't find odds of 2/9 on attractive although Burnham should still be favourite."
Next question. What's in it for the people of Makerfield. They elected the last MP two years ago only for him to abandon them. Now you have another self-important political type inserting himself into their lives for a clear motive of self-aggrandisement. The only plus point for Burnham is the poor quality of the other candidates. But is there really enthusiasm for him from Labour supporters locally (if you have to bus people in)?
Every party "buses" activists in to help with by-elections and have done since time began. Are you new to this politics lark?
Reform have emailed me to ask if I want to join a coach from London to canvass for Reform in Makerfield.
In the words of Simon Cowell, I presume that’s a No !!
I'm a registered supporter of all the political parties so I get inside info from them all. Not much from the Tories. I think they might be on to me.
You may get a request to get on a coach to Aberdeen !!
I don’t think squeezing Restore is going to work. There were always a bunch of Reform supporters who thought Farage was a wet. Now they have a home.
If the Reform candidate was a firebrand, maybe. But he’s a damp squib.
When Reform lose, the autopsy will be down to a shite candidate.
He inspires GOTV - for his opponents.
Reform seem to have a lot of problem with shite candidates.
As does the Greens. Both their candidates for Makerfield were inept as was their local election candidates (again, same for Reform)
The insurgent parties need to professionalise its candidate selection and vetting ASAP
That's the problem though with being "insurgent" - you attract people who, apart from believing (supposedly) in your core values, have no political experience at all.
I was politically active when the SDP came into being - two thirds of the new SDP members had never been in any political party at all. Inevitably, it was left to the ex-Labour and ex-Conservative members to show them what to do and how it worked. The came the Alliance and the Liberals worked with the SDP.
This was all before the days of social media of course.
Even after that. In 2014 I heard several Labour activists observe that Better Together was a means by which Labour taught the Tories how to fight elections. A refresher might be helpful but I'm not sure who would be giving it these days.
Bit presumptuous of Labour to claim to have schooled the most successful election winning machine in the UK's history...
In fairness that successful election winning machine had made very little dent in Scotland for about 60 years. So, before the collapse of Scottish Labour, they had a point.
So I'm avoiding marking exams and did some research... Here is the Conservative vote share in Scotland in General Elections back to 1950...
You can see an uptick after 2014 for sure, but that would be against a backdrop of a bit national return too?
It would be better to have the SNP share alongside. Labour used to call SNP 'Tartan Tories'. Then SNP ate Labour's lunch in the central belt.
'I have been married for 40 years now - four children, two grandchildren. The best decision was ever made was building our family. It is an appalling shame that so many British men and women feel unable to do the same for reasons outside of their control. My generation has spectacularly failed them all. We need to own up to that, and we need to fix it.
There is finally a pro-family political party that will reverse so much of the damage done - Restore Britain.
How?
Tax breaks for parents. Let working men and women keep more of what they earn to spend how they choose. This is THE most important policy above all else. Merge tax allowances for married couples. Trust families to spend their money, not the Government.
A Restore Britain Government will front-load child benefit. Pay more in the earlier years when the help is needed. Wouldn’t cost a penny, but would mean that parents get help when they really need it buying prams, cots, nappies etc.
This would be exclusively for British children with one or two British parents....'
Sounds solid Conservative values until the last sentence ....he must have racist tourette's.
If it wasn’t for that last sentence I’d support that.
As I’d also support the govt putting money into a SIPP on birth for all children who are British Citizens/of parents who have ILR to be their pension when they hit 67. The state paying a small amount up front to save a large amount down the line.
Interesting snippet from the SpaceX IPO prospectus: the “Space launch” part of the business has a gross profit margin of 67%.
FAANG level margins in the physical world is impressive, whatever you think of Musk. I guess eventually there will be launch competitors that have re-usable rockets with a similar cost basis, but until they get there SpaceX is the only game in town.
Nick Palmer's constituency report suggests it might be squeaky bum time for Burnham.
I’d trust NPXMP’s informed comments absolutely.
But I can’t shake my uninformed view that Burnham will win easily.
I wouldn't. NPXMP infamously got it badly wrong in his own constituency in the run up to GE2015.
He's probably concerned about turnout. Burnham will win because he's the root to getting rid of Starmer.
And that's as far as most people's thinking will go.
Here's the thing - what do Conservatives actually want from this by-election?
IF Burnham wins, it's likely Starmer will soon be gone and there'll be a new PM in town and life may get tougher for Badenoch in the Commons, OTOH, Reform will be badly dented and that will increase the chances of the Conservatives moving back into a clear second and re-establishing themselves as the alternative "Right wing" option to Labour.
However, let's say Reform wins - Starmer stays, weakened and humiliated BUT Reform will be buoyant and look more like a Government in waiting with the Conservatives becoming less and less relevant.
Interesting times?
Good morning
Unequivocally this conservative wants Burnham to win for two main reasons:
He will almost certainly end Starmer's tenure { listening to Starmer address a tech conference this am he was more Ai than Ai, robotic and uninspiring} and at the same time stop Farage in his tracks
Yesterday, Starmer entered his comfort zone with Zelensky, Macron and Merz at no 10 in yet another pointless meeting and almost at the same time Iran and Israel recommenced throwing missiles at one another
On Burnham, I have often said I like him and he will bring to labour a charisma but also a laser focus on domestic issues and I doubt he has a clue on the international stage but if he appoints a good foreign secretary { not Starmer or Cooper} let them take the strain much like Cameron did
The Andy v Kemi show will be very interesting and I notice even Gauke is praising Kemi this morning. I do expect their interaction to be more collegiate which would be very welcome
Of course, we cannot know the future but as far as I am concerned the far right (Farage) and far left (Polanski) need to be beaten and a move to more centre policies is desirable, though not endless talk about the EU
Comfort zone?
Comfort zone?
Wash your mouth out with soap and water. It would be nice to ignore Ukraine, but it would be utterly wrong, and not in the UK's interest.
It's one thing to oppose Starmer as PM, but you're better than this
BGNW isn't wrong. Carry On Up the Dnepr isn't the ratings smash it was in 2022/3 but it's a non-contentious feelgood policy area that's utterly irrelevant to the people of the UK. Except for the 20bn quid they've had to stump up for it.
'I have been married for 40 years now - four children, two grandchildren. The best decision was ever made was building our family. It is an appalling shame that so many British men and women feel unable to do the same for reasons outside of their control. My generation has spectacularly failed them all. We need to own up to that, and we need to fix it.
There is finally a pro-family political party that will reverse so much of the damage done - Restore Britain.
How?
Tax breaks for parents. Let working men and women keep more of what they earn to spend how they choose. This is THE most important policy above all else. Merge tax allowances for married couples. Trust families to spend their money, not the Government.
A Restore Britain Government will front-load child benefit. Pay more in the earlier years when the help is needed. Wouldn’t cost a penny, but would mean that parents get help when they really need it buying prams, cots, nappies etc.
This would be exclusively for British children with one or two British parents....'
Sounds solid Conservative values until the last sentence ....he must have racist tourette's.
I don't see anything racist about it.
Basically it comes down to statute.
The current laws are unlikely to support such a measure so to achieve it, would need a number of changes to Social Security legislation (and there's a lot of it) whilst batting off the Judicial Reviews that are will come thick and fast. It's kite flying in the knowledge that he'll never been in a position to enact it. Think of him as a poor man's (or rich man's) Liberal Democrat leader. Full of policies that will never see the light of day.
Nick Palmer's constituency report suggests it might be squeaky bum time for Burnham.
I’d trust NPXMP’s informed comments absolutely.
But I can’t shake my uninformed view that Burnham will win easily.
I wouldn't. NPXMP infamously got it badly wrong in his own constituency in the run up to GE2015.
He's probably concerned about turnout. Burnham will win because he's the root to getting rid of Starmer.
And that's as far as most people's thinking will go.
Here's the thing - what do Conservatives actually want from this by-election?
IF Burnham wins, it's likely Starmer will soon be gone and there'll be a new PM in town and life may get tougher for Badenoch in the Commons, OTOH, Reform will be badly dented and that will increase the chances of the Conservatives moving back into a clear second and re-establishing themselves as the alternative "Right wing" option to Labour.
However, let's say Reform wins - Starmer stays, weakened and humiliated BUT Reform will be buoyant and look more like a Government in waiting with the Conservatives becoming less and less relevant.
Interesting times?
Burnham as PM pushing a tax and spend agenda also makes it easier for Kemi to push clearer economic blue water with Labour and there will be less culture wars against him than Reform have been able to push against Starmer
Yes, its very clearly in the Tories interests that Burnham accelerates the decline of Reform.
Indeed, the best result for the Tories is Burnham winning and starting to win back some working class voters for Labour on a tax and spend agenda (as well as squeezing the Greens) while accepting Brexit for the time being. While Restore comfortably hold their deposit and get a significant vote so Reform face a new threat from the nationalist right potentially dividing the Reform vote
Also - If the Tories win Aberdeen South that would really be a good day for Kemi. Reform will be desperate to split the anti-SNP vote there.
Reform won 0 constituency seats in the Holyrood elections, Scotland is largely irrelevant for them.
Reform would far prefer to win Makerfield and squeeze Restore than stop the Tories winning Aberdeen S from the SNP
Reform 17 MSPs, joint second
Conservatives 12 MSPs, trailing in fifth
Irrelevant for Reform, embarrassing for the Conservatives.
'I have been married for 40 years now - four children, two grandchildren. The best decision was ever made was building our family. It is an appalling shame that so many British men and women feel unable to do the same for reasons outside of their control. My generation has spectacularly failed them all. We need to own up to that, and we need to fix it.
There is finally a pro-family political party that will reverse so much of the damage done - Restore Britain.
How?
Tax breaks for parents. Let working men and women keep more of what they earn to spend how they choose. This is THE most important policy above all else. Merge tax allowances for married couples. Trust families to spend their money, not the Government.
A Restore Britain Government will front-load child benefit. Pay more in the earlier years when the help is needed. Wouldn’t cost a penny, but would mean that parents get help when they really need it buying prams, cots, nappies etc.
This would be exclusively for British children with one or two British parents....'
Andy Burnham’s lead among Makerfield’s women is emphatic, while among men he’s neck and neck with Reform’s Robert Kenyon. But here’s the kicker: voter uncertainty is lower among women than it is among men in the poll. That’s not normal. Typically women tend to be more uncertain about their preferences in opinion polls. In voting intention surveys the world over women are more likely to answer “don’t know”. So what could be behind it?
For Reform candidate Robert Kenyon’s comments on abortion to feature so highly in a by-election campaign is unusual in mainland Britain. “Abortion is the cowardly act of murdering a defenceless baby” reads one X post. And “don’t dole out the ‘what if someone is raped by their brother’ argument” reads another, in response to someone else. These aren’t sentiments often wheeled out by a candidate at election time. It’s a fringe view, even among voters on the right. Similarly, Kenyon’s comments about Carol Vorderman have been much publicised, with Kenyon refusing to apologise for them in an appearance on Question Time on Thursday (5 June).
Kenyon's cv ought to have a big impact... but unfortunately not many Makerfield voters are going to be reading the New Statesman and none of those readers were ever likely to be voting Reform anyway.
(Just thought - shouldn't be the New Statesperson these days? ;-) )
You have totally missed the point. Reporting of Kenyon's misogyny has become widespread in the last week. The NS was just commenting on that.
That will clearly energise the misogynist voters. And those who think you ought to be able to say that sort of thing without censure. How many of them are there?
I'm 60.40 years ago people routinely said things about women (and black people) that are now considered out of order. Indeed, I may have said some of them. Now I certainly wouldn't. However, how many people have changed their views?
Phone rings. Random mobile. I pick it up for some reason (usually leave for voicemail).
"hello its bloke calling from" company with three letters I have literally never heard of "sorry, from who?" He repeats. "You made an enquiry about" and then some incomprehensible garble description of some business service "No, I didn't" and hung up
This is happening quite a lot. Random cold calls from companies whose script now makes out that we called them and made an enquiry.
Nope. Sod off.
Just hang up. Don't speak, don't say *anything*, don't get angry, don't debate, just hang up.
Phone rings. Random mobile. I pick it up for some reason (usually leave for voicemail).
"hello its bloke calling from" company with three letters I have literally never heard of "sorry, from who?" He repeats. "You made an enquiry about" and then some incomprehensible garble description of some business service "No, I didn't" and hung up
This is happening quite a lot. Random cold calls from companies whose script now makes out that we called them and made an enquiry.
Nope. Sod off.
I really hate the ones who are phoning re your recent accident. Which didn't happen. Being someone's agent is actually a fiduciary relationship requiring the upmost good faith. And they start by lying. Even if I had had an accident how insane would I have to be to use them?
Presumably anyone doing that is a scammer and not remotely acting as an actual agent anyway though, and is more acting like a Nigerian Prince?
Clearly a scam. Hoping to hit the nexus of someone who (a) has recently had an accident and (b) can be sucked in. Sadly there will be people who fall for this.
And whilst it won't be many, the cost of a call is so low that it's profitable overall.
Tricky to fix.
Impossible to fix. It's a very, very lucrative 'business' (I use the word business in the loosest possible sense as there really is no trading or value taking place, it's just stealing from the elderly and the confused) in some parts of the world. I believe that (no source, just heard) that 40% of Cambodia's GDP is made from scamming, and they basically have entire data centres set up for scamming, staffed by Chinese nationals who've basically been enslaved (China doesn't give a shit about its nationals and lets it happen).
Spend a few days reading the subreddit r/scams, and you'll really have your eyes opened by it: https://www.reddit.com/r/Scams/
& just to demonstrate how modern social media puts us all in news bubbles that are completely independent of each other, my X/Twitter feed has absolutely nothing about the LA Mayoral elections at all.
I did get a lot of Hunter Biden content over the weekend though!
Nick Palmer's constituency report suggests it might be squeaky bum time for Burnham.
I’d trust NPXMP’s informed comments absolutely.
But I can’t shake my uninformed view that Burnham will win easily.
I wouldn't. NPXMP infamously got it badly wrong in his own constituency in the run up to GE2015.
He's probably concerned about turnout. Burnham will win because he's the root to getting rid of Starmer.
And that's as far as most people's thinking will go.
Here's the thing - what do Conservatives actually want from this by-election?
IF Burnham wins, it's likely Starmer will soon be gone and there'll be a new PM in town and life may get tougher for Badenoch in the Commons, OTOH, Reform will be badly dented and that will increase the chances of the Conservatives moving back into a clear second and re-establishing themselves as the alternative "Right wing" option to Labour.
However, let's say Reform wins - Starmer stays, weakened and humiliated BUT Reform will be buoyant and look more like a Government in waiting with the Conservatives becoming less and less relevant.
Interesting times?
Good morning
Unequivocally this conservative wants Burnham to win for two main reasons:
He will almost certainly end Starmer's tenure { listening to Starmer address a tech conference this am he was more Ai than Ai, robotic and uninspiring} and at the same time stop Farage in his tracks
Yesterday, Starmer entered his comfort zone with Zelensky, Macron and Merz at no 10 in yet another pointless meeting and almost at the same time Iran and Israel recommenced throwing missiles at one another
On Burnham, I have often said I like him and he will bring to labour a charisma but also a laser focus on domestic issues and I doubt he has a clue on the international stage but if he appoints a good foreign secretary { not Starmer or Cooper} let them take the strain much like Cameron did
The Andy v Kemi show will be very interesting and I notice even Gauke is praising Kemi this morning. I do expect their interaction to be more collegiate which would be very welcome
Of course, we cannot know the future but as far as I am concerned the far right (Farage) and far left (Polanski) need to be beaten and a move to more centre policies is desirable, though not endless talk about the EU
Comfort zone?
Comfort zone?
Wash your mouth out with soap and water. It would be nice to ignore Ukraine, but it would be utterly wrong, and not in the UK's interest.
It's one thing to oppose Starmer as PM, but you're better than this
BGNW isn't wrong. Carry On Up the Dnepr isn't the ratings smash it was in 2022/3 but it's a non-contentious feelgood policy area that's utterly irrelevant to the people of the UK. Except for the 20bn quid they've had to stump up for it.
20Bn to eliminate Putin’s ability to do much more than kill his own soldiers seems quite cheap.
'I have been married for 40 years now - four children, two grandchildren. The best decision was ever made was building our family. It is an appalling shame that so many British men and women feel unable to do the same for reasons outside of their control. My generation has spectacularly failed them all. We need to own up to that, and we need to fix it.
There is finally a pro-family political party that will reverse so much of the damage done - Restore Britain.
How?
Tax breaks for parents. Let working men and women keep more of what they earn to spend how they choose. This is THE most important policy above all else. Merge tax allowances for married couples. Trust families to spend their money, not the Government.
A Restore Britain Government will front-load child benefit. Pay more in the earlier years when the help is needed. Wouldn’t cost a penny, but would mean that parents get help when they really need it buying prams, cots, nappies etc.
This would be exclusively for British children with one or two British parents....'
Cutting tax is great, but there's no mention of how to pay for it.
'Foreign children with foreign parents would not be eligible for free childcare paid for by the taxpayer.
If a healthy Brit is on benefits and refuses to work? They will not receive free childcare. You’ve got the time, look after your child. Working parents should be given the help. Not the healthy indolent.
The two-child cap would be reinstated.
If you want more children but can’t be bothered to work? That’s your problem, not the taxpayer...IVF and fertility treatment. There should be proper investment in helping those who struggle to have children naturally. Not brutally rationed as it currently is. More rounds, more chances. This would not be offered to the entire third world as it is now - it would all be funded by simply not doing that.'
Nick Palmer's constituency report suggests it might be squeaky bum time for Burnham.
I’d trust NPXMP’s informed comments absolutely.
But I can’t shake my uninformed view that Burnham will win easily.
I wouldn't. NPXMP infamously got it badly wrong in his own constituency in the run up to GE2015.
He's probably concerned about turnout. Burnham will win because he's the root to getting rid of Starmer.
And that's as far as most people's thinking will go.
Here's the thing - what do Conservatives actually want from this by-election?
IF Burnham wins, it's likely Starmer will soon be gone and there'll be a new PM in town and life may get tougher for Badenoch in the Commons, OTOH, Reform will be badly dented and that will increase the chances of the Conservatives moving back into a clear second and re-establishing themselves as the alternative "Right wing" option to Labour.
However, let's say Reform wins - Starmer stays, weakened and humiliated BUT Reform will be buoyant and look more like a Government in waiting with the Conservatives becoming less and less relevant.
Interesting times?
Burnham as PM pushing a tax and spend agenda also makes it easier for Kemi to push clearer economic blue water with Labour and there will be less culture wars against him than Reform have been able to push against Starmer
Yes, its very clearly in the Tories interests that Burnham accelerates the decline of Reform.
Indeed, the best result for the Tories is Burnham winning and starting to win back some working class voters for Labour on a tax and spend agenda (as well as squeezing the Greens) while accepting Brexit for the time being. While Restore comfortably hold their deposit and get a significant vote so Reform face a new threat from the nationalist right potentially dividing the Reform vote
Also - If the Tories win Aberdeen South that would really be a good day for Kemi. Reform will be desperate to split the anti-SNP vote there.
Reform won 0 constituency seats in the Holyrood elections, Scotland is largely irrelevant for them.
Reform would far prefer to win Makerfield and squeeze Restore than stop the Tories winning Aberdeen S from the SNP
Reform 17 MSPs, joint second
Conservatives 12 MSPs, trailing in fifth
Irrelevant for Reform, embarrassing for the Conservatives.
ALL Reform MSPs were won on the list. Westminster is 100% FPTP and in the FPTP Holyrood seats the Conservatives won 5 and Reform 0
Phone rings. Random mobile. I pick it up for some reason (usually leave for voicemail).
"hello its bloke calling from" company with three letters I have literally never heard of "sorry, from who?" He repeats. "You made an enquiry about" and then some incomprehensible garble description of some business service "No, I didn't" and hung up
This is happening quite a lot. Random cold calls from companies whose script now makes out that we called them and made an enquiry.
Nope. Sod off.
Just hang up. Don't speak, don't say *anything*, don't get angry, don't debate, just hang up.
A Scouser friend of mine spends an age on the phone to those "an accident that wasn't your fault" calls. Usually involves losing a leg - "we looked everywhere for it..." and then admits it was his fault because he drove over a cliff. "I was trying to kill myself..."
The left's obsession with labelling things they don't like as "racist" is going to be what finishes them off as a political force.
No and no. Even if 'the left' did have such an obsession (it doesn't), it wouldn't finish them off.
I could say: 'the right's obsession with labelling things they don't like as "woke" is going to be what finishes them off as a political force'. That would be equally untrue on both counts.
Australia has enjoyed decent economic growth and successfully "stopped the boats", so the strong support for the far right is difficult to rationalise from the perspective of the UK and the reasons often given for the rise of Reform.
The left's obsession with labelling things they don't like as "racist" is going to be what finishes them off as a political force.
Perhaps the question is not who is "right" or who is "left" but who is able to read statute and understand the implications. For example excluding EU nationals that have settled here would be a breach of the Brexit agreement and all the implications that brings. By all means show your 'patriotism' but apply some knowledge as well. No point in being patriotic if you f'up the country will doing so.
Which brings me neatly to Trump and Iran.
Seems they want to use frozen Iranian funds for the reconstruction of the Gulf States. So Iran looks like they'll be wanting their money's worth and more.
Interesting snippet from the SpaceX IPO prospectus: the “Space launch” part of the business has a gross profit margin of 67%.
FAANG level margins in the physical world is impressive, whatever you think of Musk. I guess eventually there will be launch competitors that have re-usable rockets with a similar cost basis, but until they get there SpaceX is the only game in town.
The Falcon 9 first stage is damn close to “just drag it back to the pad and refuel it”, which is totally crazy. The new Starship v3 might well be the one that actually goes to production, and will be able to launch hundreds of tonnes to orbit in short order.
Starlink also has a massive first-mover advantage, and now offers broadband pretty much anywhere on the planet, land, sea, or air. They’re a couple of years ahead of the competition there too, and already have the majority of airlines on board.
Then add in the xAI business, and what used to be called Twitter, and it’s quite the company.
A seriously strong price for the IPO though, the early investors will do very well indeed, but there’s somehow still a lot of potential for exponential growth in the next 2-4 years timespan.
Nick Palmer's constituency report suggests it might be squeaky bum time for Burnham.
I’d trust NPXMP’s informed comments absolutely.
But I can’t shake my uninformed view that Burnham will win easily.
I wouldn't. NPXMP infamously got it badly wrong in his own constituency in the run up to GE2015.
He's probably concerned about turnout. Burnham will win because he's the root to getting rid of Starmer.
And that's as far as most people's thinking will go.
Here's the thing - what do Conservatives actually want from this by-election?
IF Burnham wins, it's likely Starmer will soon be gone and there'll be a new PM in town and life may get tougher for Badenoch in the Commons, OTOH, Reform will be badly dented and that will increase the chances of the Conservatives moving back into a clear second and re-establishing themselves as the alternative "Right wing" option to Labour.
However, let's say Reform wins - Starmer stays, weakened and humiliated BUT Reform will be buoyant and look more like a Government in waiting with the Conservatives becoming less and less relevant.
Interesting times?
Burnham as PM pushing a tax and spend agenda also makes it easier for Kemi to push clearer economic blue water with Labour and there will be less culture wars against him than Reform have been able to push against Starmer
Yes, its very clearly in the Tories interests that Burnham accelerates the decline of Reform.
Indeed, the best result for the Tories is Burnham winning and starting to win back some working class voters for Labour on a tax and spend agenda (as well as squeezing the Greens) while accepting Brexit for the time being. While Restore comfortably hold their deposit and get a significant vote so Reform face a new threat from the nationalist right potentially dividing the Reform vote
Also - If the Tories win Aberdeen South that would really be a good day for Kemi. Reform will be desperate to split the anti-SNP vote there.
Reform won 0 constituency seats in the Holyrood elections, Scotland is largely irrelevant for them.
Reform would far prefer to win Makerfield and squeeze Restore than stop the Tories winning Aberdeen S from the SNP
Reform 17 MSPs, joint second
Conservatives 12 MSPs, trailing in fifth
Irrelevant for Reform, embarrassing for the Conservatives.
ALL Reform MSPs were won on the list. Westminster is 100% FPTP and in the FPTP Holyrood seats the Conservatives won 5 and Reform 0
Correction, 4 Tory constituency seats, 0 Reform but same point
Australia has enjoyed decent economic growth and successfully "stopped the boats", so the strong support for the far right is difficult to rationalise from the perspective of the UK and the reasons often given for the rise of Reform.
Also the same anti woke agenda from One Nation as Reform have
Interesting snippet from the SpaceX IPO prospectus: the “Space launch” part of the business has a gross profit margin of 67%.
FAANG level margins in the physical world is impressive, whatever you think of Musk. I guess eventually there will be launch competitors that have re-usable rockets with a similar cost basis, but until they get there SpaceX is the only game in town.
The Falcon 9 first stage is damn close to “just drag it back to the pad and refuel it”, which is totally crazy. The new Starship v3 might well be the one that actually goes to production, and will be able to launch hundreds of tonnes to orbit in short order.
Starlink also has a massive first-mover advantage, and now offers broadband pretty much anywhere on the planet, land, sea, or air. They’re a couple of years ahead of the competition there too, and already have the majority of airlines on board.
Then add in the xAI business, and what used to be called Twitter, and it’s quite the company.
A seriously strong price for the IPO though, the early investors will do very well indeed, but there’s somehow still a lot of potential for exponential growth in the next 2-4 years timespan.
Although I suspect all that exponential growth is already included in the IPO price - especially at the point the general public can buy.
Andy Burnham’s lead among Makerfield’s women is emphatic, while among men he’s neck and neck with Reform’s Robert Kenyon. But here’s the kicker: voter uncertainty is lower among women than it is among men in the poll. That’s not normal. Typically women tend to be more uncertain about their preferences in opinion polls. In voting intention surveys the world over women are more likely to answer “don’t know”. So what could be behind it?
For Reform candidate Robert Kenyon’s comments on abortion to feature so highly in a by-election campaign is unusual in mainland Britain. “Abortion is the cowardly act of murdering a defenceless baby” reads one X post. And “don’t dole out the ‘what if someone is raped by their brother’ argument” reads another, in response to someone else. These aren’t sentiments often wheeled out by a candidate at election time. It’s a fringe view, even among voters on the right. Similarly, Kenyon’s comments about Carol Vorderman have been much publicised, with Kenyon refusing to apologise for them in an appearance on Question Time on Thursday (5 June).
Kenyon's cv ought to have a big impact... but unfortunately not many Makerfield voters are going to be reading the New Statesman and none of those readers were ever likely to be voting Reform anyway.
(Just thought - shouldn't be the New Statesperson these days? ;-) )
You have totally missed the point. Reporting of Kenyon's misogyny has become widespread in the last week. The NS was just commenting on that.
That will clearly energise the misogynist voters. And those who think you ought to be able to say that sort of thing without censure. How many of them are there?
I'm 60.40 years ago people routinely said things about women (and black people) that are now considered out of order. Indeed, I may have said some of them. Now I certainly wouldn't. However, how many people have changed their views?
Same here but I think that gives the clue to the answer to your last question: How many people have changed their views? The vast majority imo, certainly all decent people and I continue to believe that most people are decent.
If they are decent people why were their views different then? Because by the standards of the time such comments were not seen as offensive. Attitudes change gradually, and generally for the better. That's why we don't burn people at the stake or have children working up chimneys, etc. etc. any more.
'I have been married for 40 years now - four children, two grandchildren. The best decision was ever made was building our family. It is an appalling shame that so many British men and women feel unable to do the same for reasons outside of their control. My generation has spectacularly failed them all. We need to own up to that, and we need to fix it.
There is finally a pro-family political party that will reverse so much of the damage done - Restore Britain.
How?
Tax breaks for parents. Let working men and women keep more of what they earn to spend how they choose. This is THE most important policy above all else. Merge tax allowances for married couples. Trust families to spend their money, not the Government.
A Restore Britain Government will front-load child benefit. Pay more in the earlier years when the help is needed. Wouldn’t cost a penny, but would mean that parents get help when they really need it buying prams, cots, nappies etc.
This would be exclusively for British children with one or two British parents....'
There is apparently a substantial portion of Labour members who want to keep Starmer.
If some of them live in Makersfield, I wonder how they would vote in this by- election?
I don't want Starmer to stay.
I don't want Burnham to replace him.
If I lived in Makerfield I would spoil my ballot.
...which would allow Starmer to stay.
I hesitate to say it but the best way to achieve your twin aims would be to vote Reform, because if Burnham loses I still think Starmer is toast... it's just that Rayner will be taking over.
It was all going so well until those last 8 words.
Well that's my point. Does @SandyRentool want Burnham to replace Starmer? Or Rayner? Because that's the choice imo.
The Trump interview was quite something; an unhinged rant. How anyone can think this man is a suitable leader, let alone president, is utterly beyond me.
Trump crashes out and cuts his interview with Welker short as she presses him on his lack of evidence for claiming elections are rigged
Phone rings. Random mobile. I pick it up for some reason (usually leave for voicemail).
"hello its bloke calling from" company with three letters I have literally never heard of "sorry, from who?" He repeats. "You made an enquiry about" and then some incomprehensible garble description of some business service "No, I didn't" and hung up
This is happening quite a lot. Random cold calls from companies whose script now makes out that we called them and made an enquiry.
Nope. Sod off.
Just hang up. Don't speak, don't say *anything*, don't get angry, don't debate, just hang up.
A Scouser friend of mine spends an age on the phone to those "an accident that wasn't your fault" calls. Usually involves losing a leg - "we looked everywhere for it..." and then admits it was his fault because he drove over a cliff. "I was trying to kill myself..."
Well he enjoys himself.
I used to run an IT helpdesk 20 years ago, when the “Microsoft Support” called first started.
We had a sweepstake running, as to how long we could keep them on the line before they realised we knew a lot more about computers than they did! An hour wasn’t uncommon if it was a quiet day.
Australia has enjoyed decent economic growth and successfully "stopped the boats", so the strong support for the far right is difficult to rationalise from the perspective of the UK and the reasons often given for the rise of Reform.
Also the same anti woke agenda from One Nation as Reform have
And yet Australia is not exactly a bastion of wokeness that is crying out for a correction. In my opinion the rise of the far right is really driven by two fundamental factors. The first is passage of time, with the post World War Two settlement passing into history. An important part of that settlement in Western countries was a kind of unwritten prohibition on supporting parties or political platforms on the far right, based on the experience with fascism and Naziism, that held across a sufficienly broad section of the population to lock these parties out. As that inoculation against the far right wears off, so these parties have gained support. The second factor is the rise of social media as a radicalisation tool, including its exploitation by malign foreign actors. English speaking countries have been most affected by this, as the US is at the epicentre of these efforts.
Interesting snippet from the SpaceX IPO prospectus: the “Space launch” part of the business has a gross profit margin of 67%.
FAANG level margins in the physical world is impressive, whatever you think of Musk. I guess eventually there will be launch competitors that have re-usable rockets with a similar cost basis, but until they get there SpaceX is the only game in town.
The Falcon 9 first stage is damn close to “just drag it back to the pad and refuel it”, which is totally crazy. The new Starship v3 might well be the one that actually goes to production, and will be able to launch hundreds of tonnes to orbit in short order.
Starlink also has a massive first-mover advantage, and now offers broadband pretty much anywhere on the planet, land, sea, or air. They’re a couple of years ahead of the competition there too, and already have the majority of airlines on board.
Then add in the xAI business, and what used to be called Twitter, and it’s quite the company.
A seriously strong price for the IPO though, the early investors will do very well indeed, but there’s somehow still a lot of potential for exponential growth in the next 2-4 years timespan.
It would require exponential growth to begin to justify the price. And the downside risk is serious. Starship might never be a viable design (a 50/50 bet ?); Blue Origin and/or the Chinese or Japanese finally provide competition; xAI could end up worthless - there is already serious competition there; Twitter is unlikely ever to be a large profit centre, and its value to Musk largely lies in the influence it gives him. And they might buy Tesla, just before it starts haemorrhaging cash.
Who from the Labour Party is campaigning for Burnham?
Nick Palmer. And I.
This is what I posted on 5 June based on a visit 8 days ago: "I spent half a day doorknocking in Makerfield last Sunday, in two different locations. There were some favourable responses for Burnham who had good name recognition and was personally known to a couple of people I met, but there were quite a few Reform and hostile against responses too. We did quite a bit of driving across about 5 miles of the constituency and in that time and during doorknocking I spotted about 20 homes with Reform stakes/posters compared with about 10 for Labour and 1 Restore, although I don't think you can take too much heed of the relative numbers for Reform v Labour (based on an appreciation that if willingness to display a poster was a reliable indicator of relative support, the Conservatives wouldn't have won a general election in my lifetime.) What was striking was just how many people were not aware of the national implications if Burnham won and the Labour campaign approach was not to mention that. That approach might change a bit now that Burnham has made clear his intentions. A couple of Reform supporters appeared to genuinely equivocate once I went off script and pointed out that if Burnham wins Starmer would probably be out of the door in months.
The overall impression was that it certainly wasn't in the bag for Burnham so I would counsel against going all in on Burnham based on the latest Survation polling. With a lot still in play I don't find odds of 2/9 on attractive although Burnham should still be favourite."
Next question. What's in it for the people of Makerfield. They elected the last MP two years ago only for him to abandon them. Now you have another self-important political type inserting himself into their lives for a clear motive of self-aggrandisement. The only plus point for Burnham is the poor quality of the other candidates. But is there really enthusiasm for him from Labour supporters locally (if you have to bus people in)?
I don’t know what the people of Makerfield think, but were I one of them, I’d be excited to put Makerfield on the map, by making it the PM’s seat. Obviously Burnham is doing this to promote himself, but he is a local boy who is going to represent the needs of local people. Isn’t that a possible strong reason to vote for him?
'I have been married for 40 years now - four children, two grandchildren. The best decision was ever made was building our family. It is an appalling shame that so many British men and women feel unable to do the same for reasons outside of their control. My generation has spectacularly failed them all. We need to own up to that, and we need to fix it.
There is finally a pro-family political party that will reverse so much of the damage done - Restore Britain.
How?
Tax breaks for parents. Let working men and women keep more of what they earn to spend how they choose. This is THE most important policy above all else. Merge tax allowances for married couples. Trust families to spend their money, not the Government.
A Restore Britain Government will front-load child benefit. Pay more in the earlier years when the help is needed. Wouldn’t cost a penny, but would mean that parents get help when they really need it buying prams, cots, nappies etc.
This would be exclusively for British children with one or two British parents....'
So presumably British children with one or two British parents would get less child benefit than first generation British children get in their teenage years.
I can see that going well/happening. Yeah, sure.
While babies/cots/prams/nappies/formula (if needed) etc are not cheap, I am curious who thinks that feeding and clothing teenagers is cheap either.
Australia has enjoyed decent economic growth and successfully "stopped the boats", so the strong support for the far right is difficult to rationalise from the perspective of the UK and the reasons often given for the rise of Reform.
But their population has increased hugely over the last 10 years or so compared to previously. House prices have become unaffordable for many ordinary people. (No excuse given how large the country is).
Phone rings. Random mobile. I pick it up for some reason (usually leave for voicemail).
"hello its bloke calling from" company with three letters I have literally never heard of "sorry, from who?" He repeats. "You made an enquiry about" and then some incomprehensible garble description of some business service "No, I didn't" and hung up
This is happening quite a lot. Random cold calls from companies whose script now makes out that we called them and made an enquiry.
Nope. Sod off.
I really hate the ones who are phoning re your recent accident. Which didn't happen. Being someone's agent is actually a fiduciary relationship requiring the upmost good faith. And they start by lying. Even if I had had an accident how insane would I have to be to use them?
Presumably anyone doing that is a scammer and not remotely acting as an actual agent anyway though, and is more acting like a Nigerian Prince?
Clearly a scam. Hoping to hit the nexus of someone who (a) has recently had an accident and (b) can be sucked in. Sadly there will be people who fall for this.
Had some fun with one of those a few years ago. I enthusiastically replied that I had indeed had an accident, had suffered whiplash etc. When we got into the details I explained how I'd had six pints* down the pub before driving home and the accident happened on the way...
*in case of doubt, this - and the accident - we're entirely fictitious
I sometimes express confusion as to which car they think I was driving.
"Was it the Ferrari or the Lambo? I can't remember. I was probably stoned at the time." etc etc.
One did at least ask if I thought I was Tom Cruise before hanging up.
[These days, probably best not to use your normal voice]
There is apparently a substantial portion of Labour members who want to keep Starmer.
If some of them live in Makersfield, I wonder how they would vote in this by- election?
I don't want Starmer to stay.
I don't want Burnham to replace him.
If I lived in Makerfield I would spoil my ballot.
...which would allow Starmer to stay.
I hesitate to say it but the best way to achieve your twin aims would be to vote Reform, because if Burnham loses I still think Starmer is toast... it's just that Rayner will be taking over.
It was all going so well until those last 8 words.
Well that's my point. Does @SandyRentool want Burnham to replace Starmer? Or Rayner? Because that's the choice imo.
Sandy is on record as being in favour of the extinction of the human race, so I can understand why he might see the choice as inconsequential.
Australia has enjoyed decent economic growth and successfully "stopped the boats", so the strong support for the far right is difficult to rationalise from the perspective of the UK and the reasons often given for the rise of Reform.
Also the same anti woke agenda from One Nation as Reform have
And yet Australia is not exactly a bastion of wokeness that is crying out for a correction. In my opinion the rise of the far right is really driven by two fundamental factors. The first is passage of time, with the post World War Two settlement passing into history. An important part of that settlement in Western countries was a kind of unwritten prohibition on supporting parties or political platforms on the far right, based on the experience with fascism and Naziism, that held across a sufficienly broad section of the population to lock these parties out. As that inoculation against the far right wears off, so these parties have gained support. The second factor is the rise of social media as a radicalisation tool, including its exploitation by malign foreign actors. English speaking countries have been most affected by this, as the US is at the epicentre of these efforts.
In the UK, how much is Uncle Nige a significant factor in all of this? If he had never existed I can't imagine, say, Lozza Fox garnering those levels of support. But perhaps I'm wrong and he would expand to fill the hole in Nige's absence.
'I have been married for 40 years now - four children, two grandchildren. The best decision was ever made was building our family. It is an appalling shame that so many British men and women feel unable to do the same for reasons outside of their control. My generation has spectacularly failed them all. We need to own up to that, and we need to fix it.
There is finally a pro-family political party that will reverse so much of the damage done - Restore Britain.
How?
Tax breaks for parents. Let working men and women keep more of what they earn to spend how they choose. This is THE most important policy above all else. Merge tax allowances for married couples. Trust families to spend their money, not the Government.
A Restore Britain Government will front-load child benefit. Pay more in the earlier years when the help is needed. Wouldn’t cost a penny, but would mean that parents get help when they really need it buying prams, cots, nappies etc.
This would be exclusively for British children with one or two British parents....'
There is apparently a substantial portion of Labour members who want to keep Starmer.
If some of them live in Makersfield, I wonder how they would vote in this by- election?
I don't want Starmer to stay.
I don't want Burnham to replace him.
If I lived in Makerfield I would spoil my ballot.
...which would allow Starmer to stay.
I hesitate to say it but the best way to achieve your twin aims would be to vote Reform, because if Burnham loses I still think Starmer is toast... it's just that Rayner will be taking over.
It was all going so well until those last 8 words.
Well that's my point. Does @SandyRentool want Burnham to replace Starmer? Or Rayner? Because that's the choice imo.
Sandy is on record as being in favour of the extinction of the human race, so I can understand why he might see the choice as inconsequential.
Doesn't matter who the Labour leader is, he wouldn't vote for them. I wanted Penny Mordaunt at the previous Conservative leader vacancy. I still wouldn't have voted Tory, so it's a pointless opinion.
Who from the Labour Party is campaigning for Burnham?
Nick Palmer. And I.
This is what I posted on 5 June based on a visit 8 days ago: "I spent half a day doorknocking in Makerfield last Sunday, in two different locations. There were some favourable responses for Burnham who had good name recognition and was personally known to a couple of people I met, but there were quite a few Reform and hostile against responses too. We did quite a bit of driving across about 5 miles of the constituency and in that time and during doorknocking I spotted about 20 homes with Reform stakes/posters compared with about 10 for Labour and 1 Restore, although I don't think you can take too much heed of the relative numbers for Reform v Labour (based on an appreciation that if willingness to display a poster was a reliable indicator of relative support, the Conservatives wouldn't have won a general election in my lifetime.) What was striking was just how many people were not aware of the national implications if Burnham won and the Labour campaign approach was not to mention that. That approach might change a bit now that Burnham has made clear his intentions. A couple of Reform supporters appeared to genuinely equivocate once I went off script and pointed out that if Burnham wins Starmer would probably be out of the door in months.
The overall impression was that it certainly wasn't in the bag for Burnham so I would counsel against going all in on Burnham based on the latest Survation polling. With a lot still in play I don't find odds of 2/9 on attractive although Burnham should still be favourite."
Next question. What's in it for the people of Makerfield. They elected the last MP two years ago only for him to abandon them. Now you have another self-important political type inserting himself into their lives for a clear motive of self-aggrandisement. The only plus point for Burnham is the poor quality of the other candidates. But is there really enthusiasm for him from Labour supporters locally (if you have to bus people in)?
Every party "buses" activists in to help with by-elections and have done since time began. Are you new to this politics lark?
Reform have emailed me to ask if I want to join a coach from London to canvass for Reform in Makerfield.
Pace @JohnLilburne ’s question presumably that *would* count as a donation to reform? But may be not spending?
'I have been married for 40 years now - four children, two grandchildren. The best decision was ever made was building our family. It is an appalling shame that so many British men and women feel unable to do the same for reasons outside of their control. My generation has spectacularly failed them all. We need to own up to that, and we need to fix it.
There is finally a pro-family political party that will reverse so much of the damage done - Restore Britain.
How?
Tax breaks for parents. Let working men and women keep more of what they earn to spend how they choose. This is THE most important policy above all else. Merge tax allowances for married couples. Trust families to spend their money, not the Government.
A Restore Britain Government will front-load child benefit. Pay more in the earlier years when the help is needed. Wouldn’t cost a penny, but would mean that parents get help when they really need it buying prams, cots, nappies etc.
This would be exclusively for British children with one or two British parents....'
So presumably British children with one or two British parents would get less child benefit than first generation British children get in their teenage years.
I can see that going well/happening. Yeah, sure.
While babies/cots/prams/nappies/formula (if needed) etc are not cheap, I am curious who thinks that feeding and clothing teenagers is cheap either.
An early intervention of the new Reform UK Council in Wakefield has been to cut their support scheme for school uniforms from all children to make it means-tested, reducing expenditure by 2/3 .
(I have not developed a view on that, but to me it highlights the cut of the jib, as does the removal of much of the Adult Education service in Derbyshire. It's make a declaration and cut it without much thought, imo - that is, to me, Muskalike.)
Who from the Labour Party is campaigning for Burnham?
Nick Palmer. And I.
This is what I posted on 5 June based on a visit 8 days ago: "I spent half a day doorknocking in Makerfield last Sunday, in two different locations. There were some favourable responses for Burnham who had good name recognition and was personally known to a couple of people I met, but there were quite a few Reform and hostile against responses too. We did quite a bit of driving across about 5 miles of the constituency and in that time and during doorknocking I spotted about 20 homes with Reform stakes/posters compared with about 10 for Labour and 1 Restore, although I don't think you can take too much heed of the relative numbers for Reform v Labour (based on an appreciation that if willingness to display a poster was a reliable indicator of relative support, the Conservatives wouldn't have won a general election in my lifetime.) What was striking was just how many people were not aware of the national implications if Burnham won and the Labour campaign approach was not to mention that. That approach might change a bit now that Burnham has made clear his intentions. A couple of Reform supporters appeared to genuinely equivocate once I went off script and pointed out that if Burnham wins Starmer would probably be out of the door in months.
The overall impression was that it certainly wasn't in the bag for Burnham so I would counsel against going all in on Burnham based on the latest Survation polling. With a lot still in play I don't find odds of 2/9 on attractive although Burnham should still be favourite."
Next question. What's in it for the people of Makerfield. They elected the last MP two years ago only for him to abandon them. Now you have another self-important political type inserting himself into their lives for a clear motive of self-aggrandisement. The only plus point for Burnham is the poor quality of the other candidates. But is there really enthusiasm for him from Labour supporters locally (if you have to bus people in)?
There is a massive amount in it for the people of the Makerfield constituency. A genuinely local PM elected in a what is now a marginal seat and facing reelection within 3 years will not only recognise the need to deliver for his constituents but will also be in a far more powerful position than anyone else in Britain to deliver his priorities. All that on top of the genuine prospect of changing direction nationally with Starmer gone.
Or that prospect could be just frittered away in a meaningless protest vote that will mean more of the same from Starmer.
No-one is being bussed in, are you not aware of election expense rules? What I saw was massive enthusiasm for Burnham causing people to travel miles under their own steam. An overflowing car park at the campaign centre spilling over into local streets.
Any more questions?
Ever heard of public transport?
Get real.
You are coming some distance with a small team to a campaign centre about 1 mile from the centre of Ashton. Once at the campaign centre you randomly collect a canvassing or leafleting round for somewhere in a random direction several miles away in a quite strung out constituency (the area is surprisingly rural, being a collection of separate villages and small towns.) You do said round, find a pub for lunch, then return to the campaign centre for an afternoon repeat.
No, public transport is not an option.
Train to town centre. Local volunteers lend cars for ride sharing
80% of votes cast are posted; on the day votes have always skewed massively.
One thing the state could do is spend about $50m in grants that every county could afford to buy and staff automatic counting machines (or in the case of LA acquire more than the two it now has). It wouldn't solve everything, but would improve counting speed considerably.
Since Trump took over, the GOP have alleged fraud in almost every election they've lost. They've yet to present any substantive evidence (see for example the recent Trump interview).
Australia has enjoyed decent economic growth and successfully "stopped the boats", so the strong support for the far right is difficult to rationalise from the perspective of the UK and the reasons often given for the rise of Reform.
Also the same anti woke agenda from One Nation as Reform have
And yet Australia is not exactly a bastion of wokeness that is crying out for a correction. In my opinion the rise of the far right is really driven by two fundamental factors. The first is passage of time, with the post World War Two settlement passing into history. An important part of that settlement in Western countries was a kind of unwritten prohibition on supporting parties or political platforms on the far right, based on the experience with fascism and Naziism, that held across a sufficienly broad section of the population to lock these parties out. As that inoculation against the far right wears off, so these parties have gained support. The second factor is the rise of social media as a radicalisation tool, including its exploitation by malign foreign actors. English speaking countries have been most affected by this, as the US is at the epicentre of these efforts.
More broadly, the English speaking world is at the epicentre of driven-mad-by-social-media - in all respects - because English is the world language so there is just such a huge volume of malign shit. This includes malign shit created by bad actors paid for by hostile powers (see, for example, the reaction to black footballers missing penalties in that football tournament a few years ago).
80% of votes cast are posted; on the day votes have always skewed massively.
One thing the state could do is spend about $50m in grants that every county could afford to buy and staff automatic counting machines (or in the case of LA acquire more than the two it now has). It wouldn't solve everything, but would improve counting speed considerably.
Since Trump took over, the GOP have alleged fraud in almost every election they've lost. They've yet to present any substantive evidence (see for example the recent Trump interview).
Reform have alleged fraud in almost every election they’ve lost lately. I wonder what they’ll say if they lose Makerfield.
Interesting snippet from the SpaceX IPO prospectus: the “Space launch” part of the business has a gross profit margin of 67%.
FAANG level margins in the physical world is impressive, whatever you think of Musk. I guess eventually there will be launch competitors that have re-usable rockets with a similar cost basis, but until they get there SpaceX is the only game in town.
Gross margin of 67% is a bit mediocre. Most of my clients (definitely not FAANG) are 70-80%+ GM)
Interesting snippet from the SpaceX IPO prospectus: the “Space launch” part of the business has a gross profit margin of 67%.
FAANG level margins in the physical world is impressive, whatever you think of Musk. I guess eventually there will be launch competitors that have re-usable rockets with a similar cost basis, but until they get there SpaceX is the only game in town.
Gross margin of 67% is a bit mediocre. Most of my clients (definitely not FAANG) are 70-80%+ GM)
Mediocre !
My old place we did the Biopharma products and our GM was 55 - 60% and that was not too shabby.
It’s certainly far better than what automotive businesses with ‘open book’ costing got.
Of course when we didn’t win business we quoted it was always because the parts were too expensive !!
80% of votes cast are posted; on the day votes have always skewed massively.
One thing the state could do is spend about $50m in grants that every county could afford to buy and staff automatic counting machines (or in the case of LA acquire more than the two it now has). It wouldn't solve everything, but would improve counting speed considerably.
Since Trump took over, the GOP have alleged fraud in almost every election they've lost. They've yet to present any substantive evidence (see for example the recent Trump interview).
Here’s an actual conviction for election fraud, only a month ago.
Marina del Rey resident Brenda Lee Brown Armstrong, 64, was charged with a felony count of paying another person to register to vote. She'd worked as a petition circulator for about 20 years, where she'd collect voter signatures on petitions that would then qualify initiatives for California ballot measures.
As part of her job, which would pay her per signature obtained, she drove around LA in an effort to find registered voters who could sign those petitions. She would not be paid for signatures provided by individuals who weren't registered to vote, prosecutors said.
Dhillon said Armstrong would occasionally go to LA's Skid Row neighborhood, regarded as the epicenter of the city's homelessness crisis, to collect signatures, knowing that its population would be willing to sign for money.
"She did this in exchange for cash and other items of value," including cigarettes and prepaid cellphone gift cards, Dhillon said.
80% of votes cast are posted; on the day votes have always skewed massively.
One thing the state could do is spend about $50m in grants that every county could afford to buy and staff automatic counting machines (or in the case of LA acquire more than the two it now has). It wouldn't solve everything, but would improve counting speed considerably.
Since Trump took over, the GOP have alleged fraud in almost every election they've lost. They've yet to present any substantive evidence (see for example the recent Trump interview).
Reform have alleged fraud in almost every election they’ve lost lately. I wonder what they’ll say if they lose Makerfield.
‘We lose because our candidate selection was poor and the Labour candidate was, effectively, an anti govt candidate’ 🤔
Comments
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQSY98g1sA4
It’s the old postcode for Central TV
When I’d get a call saying they could find the flat I’d tell them to pop into Central TV and ask for the private flats then ignore and other calls
They waste my time I’ll,waste theirs.
Same with others.
However, Starmer's comfort zone is in the endless meetings he has internationally but simply they have become a talking shop and Starmer in particular is a lame duck Prime Minister who has still not produced a defence plan and we have no money anyway
I use this and add to it…
https://who-called.co.uk/
Peter.
I’d guess he’s feeling the pressure over the Middle East. Especially with his irritating ally Israel trying to start it all up,again by bombing Beirut.
Us retirees on the other hand..........
Take a giant marquee or an easel.
*in case of doubt, this - and the accident - we're entirely fictitious
You are coming some distance with a small team to a campaign centre about 1 mile from the centre of Ashton. Once at the campaign centre you randomly collect a canvassing or leafleting round for somewhere in a random direction several miles away in a quite strung out constituency (the area is surprisingly rural, being a collection of separate villages and small towns.) You do said round, find a pub for lunch, then return to the campaign centre for an afternoon repeat.
No, public transport is not an option.
@cnn.com
President Trump demands that Israel and Iran "immediately stop 'shooting'" as fresh exchange of strikes imperils ceasefire.
Reform would far prefer to win Makerfield and squeeze Restore than stop the Tories winning Aberdeen S from the SNP
You can see an uptick after 2014 for sure, but that would be against a backdrop of a bit national return too?
https://x.com/Zeeeee_xx/status/2063918741318939036?s=20
Avoid school times since they closed the only Catholic Secondary in Hindley.
I managed on that twice a day for ten years.
https://scottishelections.ac.uk/2024/10/01/ge2024-in-scotland-are-there-really-so-called-tartan-tories-out-there/
'I have been married for 40 years now - four children, two grandchildren. The best decision was ever made was building our family. It is an appalling shame that so many British men and women feel unable to do the same for reasons outside of their control. My generation has spectacularly failed them all. We need to own up to that, and we need to fix it.
There is finally a pro-family political party that will reverse so much of the damage done - Restore Britain.
How?
Tax breaks for parents. Let working men and women keep more of what they earn to spend how they choose. This is THE most important policy above all else. Merge tax allowances for married couples. Trust families to spend their money, not the Government.
A Restore Britain Government will front-load child benefit. Pay more in the earlier years when the help is needed. Wouldn’t cost a penny, but would mean that parents get help when they really need it buying prams, cots, nappies etc.
This would be exclusively for British children with one or two British parents....'
https://x.com/RupertLowe10/status/2063871549430522243?s=20
Not much from the Tories. I think they might be on to me.
https://kellnerp.substack.com/p/makerfield-update-burnhams-chances
Surely a new party will be started any day now to the right of him vowing to clamp down on this largesse?
Real life outdoes satire under Trump.
Conservative in blue, SNP in purple.
As I’d also support the govt putting money into a SIPP on birth for all children who are British Citizens/of parents who have ILR to be their pension when they hit 67. The state paying a small amount up front to save a large amount down the line.
FAANG level margins in the physical world is impressive, whatever you think of Musk. I guess eventually there will be launch competitors that have re-usable rockets with a similar cost basis, but until they get there SpaceX is the only game in town.
Farrukh
@implausibleblog
Labour's Baroness Smith announces an AI conversation tool to help jobseekers find jobs in a market where people are worried about losing jobs to AI
https://x.com/implausibleblog/status/2063901298261422212
Farrukh
@implausibleblog
Labour's Baroness Smith announces an AI conversation tool to help jobseekers find jobs in a market where people are worried about losing jobs to AI
https://x.com/implausibleblog/status/2063901298261422212
The current laws are unlikely to support such a measure so to achieve it, would need a number of changes to Social Security legislation (and there's a lot of it) whilst batting off the Judicial Reviews that are will come thick and fast. It's kite flying in the knowledge that he'll never been in a position to enact it. Think of him as a poor man's (or rich man's) Liberal Democrat leader. Full of policies that will never see the light of day.
Conservatives 12 MSPs, trailing in fifth
Irrelevant for Reform, embarrassing for the Conservatives.
For some bizarre reason my Twitter feed is full of stuff alleging corruption over the LA Mayor run offs.
Something I care as much about as I know about.
However, what’s your view ? All tin hat stuff.
https://x.com/bennyjohnson/status/2063796719314223112?s=61
One Nation 31%
Lab 30%
Coaltn 18%
https://www.pollbludger.net/2026/06/07/newspoll-labor-30-one-nation-31-coalition-18-open-thread/comment-page-1/#comments
Spend a few days reading the subreddit r/scams, and you'll really have your eyes opened by it: https://www.reddit.com/r/Scams/
I did get a lot of Hunter Biden content over the weekend though!
That’s what, 3 Ajax projects?
If a healthy Brit is on benefits and refuses to work? They will not receive free childcare. You’ve got the time, look after your child. Working parents should be given the help. Not the healthy indolent.
The two-child cap would be reinstated.
If you want more children but can’t be bothered to work? That’s your problem, not the taxpayer...IVF and fertility treatment. There should be proper investment in helping those who struggle to have children naturally. Not brutally rationed as it currently is. More rounds, more chances. This would not be offered to the entire third world as it is now - it would all be funded by simply not doing that.'
https://x.com/RupertLowe10/status/2063871549430522243?s=20
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_Australian_federal_election
Well he enjoys himself.
I could say: 'the right's obsession with labelling things they don't like as "woke" is going to be what finishes them off as a political force'. That would be equally untrue on both counts.
Which brings me neatly to Trump and Iran.
Seems they want to use frozen Iranian funds for the reconstruction of the Gulf States. So Iran looks like they'll be wanting their money's worth and more.
Starlink also has a massive first-mover advantage, and now offers broadband pretty much anywhere on the planet, land, sea, or air. They’re a couple of years ahead of the competition there too, and already have the majority of airlines on board.
Then add in the xAI business, and what used to be called Twitter, and it’s quite the company.
A seriously strong price for the IPO though, the early investors will do very well indeed, but there’s somehow still a lot of potential for exponential growth in the next 2-4 years timespan.
If they are decent people why were their views different then? Because by the standards of the time such comments were not seen as offensive. Attitudes change gradually, and generally for the better. That's why we don't burn people at the stake or have children working up chimneys, etc. etc. any more.
His natural puce was showing through the orange pancake.
https://x.com/cabot_phillips/status/2063687928371408906
Los Angeles
Votes counted on Election Day:
Karen Bass: 34.8%
Spencer Pratt: 30.4%
Nithya Raman: 22.3%
Votes counted since Election Day:
Nithya Raman: 40.8%
Karen Bass: 38.5%
Spencer Pratt: 20.6%
We had a sweepstake running, as to how long we could keep them on the line before they realised we knew a lot more about computers than they did! An hour wasn’t uncommon if it was a quiet day.
In my opinion the rise of the far right is really driven by two fundamental factors. The first is passage of time, with the post World War Two settlement passing into history. An important part of that settlement in Western countries was a kind of unwritten prohibition on supporting parties or political platforms on the far right, based on the experience with fascism and Naziism, that held across a sufficienly broad section of the population to lock these parties out. As that inoculation against the far right wears off, so these parties have gained support. The second factor is the rise of social media as a radicalisation tool, including its exploitation by malign foreign actors. English speaking countries have been most affected by this, as the US is at the epicentre of these efforts.
And the downside risk is serious.
Starship might never be a viable design (a 50/50 bet ?);
Blue Origin and/or the Chinese or Japanese finally provide competition;
xAI could end up worthless - there is already serious competition there;
Twitter is unlikely ever to be a large profit centre, and its value to Musk largely lies in the influence it gives him.
And they might buy Tesla, just before it starts haemorrhaging cash.
I can see that going well/happening. Yeah, sure.
While babies/cots/prams/nappies/formula (if needed) etc are not cheap, I am curious who thinks that feeding and clothing teenagers is cheap either.
(And the allegations are nonsense.)
"Was it the Ferrari or the Lambo? I can't remember. I was probably stoned at the time." etc etc.
One did at least ask if I thought I was Tom Cruise before hanging up.
[These days, probably best not to use your normal voice]
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c7v9yl1d022o
(I have not developed a view on that, but to me it highlights the cut of the jib, as does the removal of much of the Adult Education service in Derbyshire. It's make a declaration and cut it without much thought, imo - that is, to me, Muskalike.)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c2020jrpxz3o
80% of votes cast are posted; on the day votes have always skewed massively.
One thing the state could do is spend about $50m in grants that every county could afford to buy and staff automatic counting machines (or in the case of LA acquire more than the two it now has).
It wouldn't solve everything, but would improve counting speed considerably.
Since Trump took over, the GOP have alleged fraud in almost every election they've lost. They've yet to present any substantive evidence (see for example the recent Trump interview).
My old place we did the Biopharma products and our GM was 55 - 60% and that was not too shabby.
It’s certainly far better than what automotive businesses with ‘open book’ costing got.
Of course when we didn’t win business we quoted it was always because the parts were too expensive !!
https://www.cbsnews.com/losangeles/news/los-angeles-paid-homeless-register-vote-federal-prosecutors/
Marina del Rey resident Brenda Lee Brown Armstrong, 64, was charged with a felony count of paying another person to register to vote. She'd worked as a petition circulator for about 20 years, where she'd collect voter signatures on petitions that would then qualify initiatives for California ballot measures.
As part of her job, which would pay her per signature obtained, she drove around LA in an effort to find registered voters who could sign those petitions. She would not be paid for signatures provided by individuals who weren't registered to vote, prosecutors said.
Dhillon said Armstrong would occasionally go to LA's Skid Row neighborhood, regarded as the epicenter of the city's homelessness crisis, to collect signatures, knowing that its population would be willing to sign for money.
"She did this in exchange for cash and other items of value," including cigarettes and prepaid cellphone gift cards, Dhillon said.