Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Starmer gets big betting boost after Britain’s biggest union a

124

Comments

  • alteregoalterego Posts: 1,100

    alterego said:

    Sandpit said:

    alterego said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sky breaking

    Harry and Markle resign from the royal family

    You cannot resign from the royal family, you are born into it.

    They are merely stepping down as senior royals to become more financially independent

    https://news.sky.com/story/harry-and-meghan-to-step-back-as-senior-royals-11904052
    Will they sell their story to the tabloids? How else will they manage financial independence?
    I don't imagine she will be short of offers for parts.
    Can’t imagine Harry would be too happy about the traditional casting process.
    No casting process needed. Markle on board = guaranteed financing, media coverage and bums on seats.

    Just form an orderly queue with your proposal, dear producers.
    They won't want the publicity
    Sorry, but the way I read that you appeared to suggest Meghan Markle did not want publicity......

    LOL
    The irony, the irony
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,486
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sky breaking

    Harry and Markle resign from the royal family

    You cannot resign from the royal family, you are born into it.

    They are merely stepping down as senior royals to become more financially independent

    https://news.sky.com/story/harry-and-meghan-to-step-back-as-senior-royals-11904052
    MONARCHY = SOCIALISM! :lol:
    No, inherited wealth, which conservatives support unlike socialists and inherited jobs, which include executives in family businesses, are not socialist. Socialism is state control of the economy
    * Jobs for life
    * Hereditary principle
    * Pomp and circumstance

    Just like SOCIALIST North Korea!
    Jobs for life has got nothing to do with socialism, plenty of farmers and those in family businesses have jobs for life in capitalist economies.

    Plenty of US political dynasties such as the Kennedys and the Bushes and inaugration day in the US and Bastille Day in France are full of pomp and circumstance, neither are socialist

    Brian Clough -> Greatest English manager ever?

    Without a shadow of a doubt
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468
    Keir has to appeal to Labour members first before he can pivot to the so called “red wall” voters. The same way Boris spewed a load of crap in the leadership contest before capitulating on almost all his red lines to get a deal.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,491

    TGOHF666 said:

    Wow. Some raw hatred for Meghan Markle on here tonight. Curious. When Boris diverts public funds to his fancy woman he's lauded; when Harry removes them from his wife he's vilified.

    That really is quite depressing. Maybe it is because Meghan is American? Oh wait...
    Its not her nationality- it’s her politics.
    What are her politics?

    I suspect the nation is being disingenuous. It's not her race it's her politics!
    It's also the behaviour.

    It's being reported that no member of the Royal Family was consulted before Harry and Meghan issued their personal statement tonight.

    If so, that's extraordinarily inconsiderate and self-centred.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,486
    TGOHF666 said:
    Why should they? They are human beings in a free country, they can do WTF they like.
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,842

    Eleanor Laing, Rosie Winterton and Nigel Evans elected Deputy Speakers

    First two were highly expected.
    Evans doesn't surprise me either - he has done the job before, of course.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,484
    In a post-Diana age, I don't understand what anyone expects marrying a Royal will be like. Namely very hard work, deathly boring. In return you get some nice geegaws and (still) fawned over a lot. If you're happy with that, go for it. If you want to be Amal Clooney, marry George Clooney.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,153

    TGOHF666 said:
    Why should they? They are human beings in a free country, they can do WTF they like.
    Well they said they were stepping back from royal duties not intending to do no royal duties. Therefore there would need to be discussion with the others about what level of duties they intend to do.

    If they were just quitting being royals it would indeed be just their business, but they are not so your outrage is a little phoney.
  • Eleanor Laing, Rosie Winterton and Nigel Evans elected Deputy Speakers

    First two were highly expected.
    Evans doesn't surprise me either - he has done the job before, of course.
    Eleanor or Rosie could be the next Speaker.
  • @oxfordsimon

    Nigel Farage would be a funny speaker.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,491
    kle4 said:

    TGOHF666 said:
    Why should they? They are human beings in a free country, they can do WTF they like.
    Well they said they were stepping back from royal duties not intending to do no royal duties. Therefore there would need to be discussion with the others about what level of duties they intend to do.

    If they were just quitting being royals it would indeed be just their business, but they are not so your outrage is a little phoney.
    Like on many things I suspect much opinion on this will fall across values and politics lines, particularly for republicans.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,486
    TGOHF666 said:
    Lol. Brilliant. They don’t like it up em.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,491

    TGOHF666 said:
    Why should they? They are human beings in a free country, they can do WTF they like.
    Well, yes, as we all can. And such choices have consequences too.

    Would you release a statement to the media about your employer before speaking to them first about your serious concerns and desire for a different relationship?

    It's a basic courtesy if nothing else, and shows respect for others.
  • contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818
    edited January 2020

    TGOHF666 said:
    Why should they? They are human beings in a free country, they can do WTF they like.
    Of course its not illlegal, but its really quite unpleasant. Extremely rude. Vindictive even.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,386

    TGOHF666 said:

    Wow. Some raw hatred for Meghan Markle on here tonight. Curious. When Boris diverts public funds to his fancy woman he's lauded; when Harry removes them from his wife he's vilified.

    That really is quite depressing. Maybe it is because Meghan is American? Oh wait...
    Its not her nationality- it’s her politics.
    What are her politics?

    I suspect the nation is being disingenuous. It's not her race it's her politics!
    It's also the behaviour.

    It's being reported that no member of the Royal Family was consulted before Harry and Meghan issued their personal statement tonight.

    If so, that's extraordinarily inconsiderate and self-centred.
    Do you know what? I believe that to be a smokescreen I can't put my finger on it but it might just be something else.

    Good luck to them.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    ydoethur said:

    Hi ydoethur,

    Was it you that was asking for stats about SLab voters who back Scottish independence? A couple of days later I read an article by a SLab member that dealt with this topic. I’ll see if I can find it.

    It was, and thanks, I would be interested.
    Here it is. Not sure if he is actually a member. It’s a guy doing a PhD. The tone is SLab-sympathetic. Anyhoo, he links to a couple of articles:

    Poll: Four in 10 Labour members support Scottish independence

    Almost half of Labour members support Scottish independence despite the party's long-standing Unionism, a poll has suggested.

    A wide-ranging YouGov survey of more than 1,000 registered members of the party also found that two-thirds back Irish reunification.

    Among members living in Scotland, opposition to independence was stronger, at 60%, with 31% in favour while 9% did not know.

    https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/poll-four-in-10-labour-members-support-scottish-independence-1-4969884

    While more than nine in ten Conservatives oppose a referendum, a return to the polls is favoured by more than one third of 2017 Labour voters, more than half of EU Remain voters, and by more than one in five of those who voted No to independence in 2014.

    https://lordashcroftpolls.com/2019/08/my-scotland-poll-yes-to-independence-takes-the-lead/#more-16041

    Scottish Labour must argue for an independence referendum – or be punished again
    Rory Scothorne

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jan/03/scotland-labour-independence-referendum


  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,148

    Eleanor Laing, Rosie Winterton and Nigel Evans elected Deputy Speakers

    Well done Dame Eleanor
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    TGOHF666 said:
    Lol. Brilliant. They don’t like it up em.
    How can a Palace be disappointed? Do they mean Queenie is, or a lot of fawning old courtiers are pretending to be because they know their bread is buttered on the Chas n Baldy side and that's what they think C and B would want them to say?
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,164

    TGOHF666 said:
    Why should they? They are human beings in a free country, they can do WTF they like.
    Golly you are stupid. Would it not be the commonest courtesy to consult the Queen? They have lavished millions of taxpayers dosh mostly on themselves and show a lack of self-awareness only an idiot like you apparentl;y can match.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,148

    TGOHF666 said:
    Why should they? They are human beings in a free country, they can do WTF they like.
    Prince Harry's ex, Cressida Bonas, on White House Farm on ITV now
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,842

    Eleanor Laing, Rosie Winterton and Nigel Evans elected Deputy Speakers

    First two were highly expected.
    Evans doesn't surprise me either - he has done the job before, of course.
    Eleanor or Rosie could be the next Speaker.
    Seems unlikely. I suspect it will skip a generation (assuming Hoyle serves through this Parliament into the next)
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146

    Ian Murray has secured enough MP support in his quest to become Deputy

    Good. He’s one of the good guys in the cesspit of SLab politics.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,491

    TGOHF666 said:

    Wow. Some raw hatred for Meghan Markle on here tonight. Curious. When Boris diverts public funds to his fancy woman he's lauded; when Harry removes them from his wife he's vilified.

    That really is quite depressing. Maybe it is because Meghan is American? Oh wait...
    Its not her nationality- it’s her politics.
    What are her politics?

    I suspect the nation is being disingenuous. It's not her race it's her politics!
    It's also the behaviour.

    It's being reported that no member of the Royal Family was consulted before Harry and Meghan issued their personal statement tonight.

    If so, that's extraordinarily inconsiderate and self-centred.
    Do you know what? I believe that to be a smokescreen I can't put my finger on it but it might just be something else.

    Good luck to them.
    It's been widely reported (including by the BBC, in case you think this is fake news) that Harry has also fallen out with his brother William over this. Neither have denied it.

    Harry was William's best man at his own wedding less than eight years ago. The two had been very close for years.

    I don't wish ill will on anyone but there's obviously something seriously wrong here, which is very sad.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,148

    ydoethur said:

    Hi ydoethur,

    Was it you that was asking for stats about SLab voters who back Scottish independence? A couple of days later I read an article by a SLab member that dealt with this topic. I’ll see if I can find it.

    It was, and thanks, I would be interested.
    Here it is. Not sure if he is actually a member. It’s a guy doing a PhD. The tone is SLab-sympathetic. Anyhoo, he links to a couple of articles:

    Poll: Four in 10 Labour members support Scottish independence

    Almost half of Labour members support Scottish independence despite the party's long-standing Unionism, a poll has suggested.

    A wide-ranging YouGov survey of more than 1,000 registered members of the party also found that two-thirds back Irish reunification.

    Among members living in Scotland, opposition to independence was stronger, at 60%, with 31% in favour while 9% did not know.

    https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/poll-four-in-10-labour-members-support-scottish-independence-1-4969884

    While more than nine in ten Conservatives oppose a referendum, a return to the polls is favoured by more than one third of 2017 Labour voters, more than half of EU Remain voters, and by more than one in five of those who voted No to independence in 2014.

    https://lordashcroftpolls.com/2019/08/my-scotland-poll-yes-to-independence-takes-the-lead/#more-16041

    Scottish Labour must argue for an independence referendum – or be punished again
    Rory Scothorne

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jan/03/scotland-labour-independence-referendum


    So 60% of Scottish Labour members oppose indyref2 and we have a majority Conservative UK government elected on a manifesto commitment to block indyref2 for its full 5 year term
  • Eleanor Laing, Rosie Winterton and Nigel Evans elected Deputy Speakers

    First two were highly expected.
    Evans doesn't surprise me either - he has done the job before, of course.
    Eleanor or Rosie could be the next Speaker.
    Seems unlikely. I suspect it will skip a generation (assuming Hoyle serves through this Parliament into the next)
    There you are now.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,424
    edited January 2020

    ydoethur said:

    Hi ydoethur,

    Was it you that was asking for stats about SLab voters who back Scottish independence? A couple of days later I read an article by a SLab member that dealt with this topic. I’ll see if I can find it.

    It was, and thanks, I would be interested.
    Here it is. Not sure if he is actually a member. It’s a guy doing a PhD. The tone is SLab-sympathetic. Anyhoo, he links to a couple of articles:

    Poll: Four in 10 Labour members support Scottish independence

    Almost half of Labour members support Scottish independence despite the party's long-standing Unionism, a poll has suggested.

    A wide-ranging YouGov survey of more than 1,000 registered members of the party also found that two-thirds back Irish reunification.

    Among members living in Scotland, opposition to independence was stronger, at 60%, with 31% in favour while 9% did not know.

    https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/poll-four-in-10-labour-members-support-scottish-independence-1-4969884

    While more than nine in ten Conservatives oppose a referendum, a return to the polls is favoured by more than one third of 2017 Labour voters, more than half of EU Remain voters, and by more than one in five of those who voted No to independence in 2014.

    https://lordashcroftpolls.com/2019/08/my-scotland-poll-yes-to-independence-takes-the-lead/#more-16041

    Scottish Labour must argue for an independence referendum – or be punished again
    Rory Scothorne

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jan/03/scotland-labour-independence-referendum


    That is of interest, thank you. At the same time it does tend to confirm what I said - the majority of Labour's Scottish voters are still pro-unionist, and therefore it would be damaging to the party to be allied to the SNP.
  • TGOHF666 said:
    Why should they? They are human beings in a free country, they can do WTF they like.
    If that is your attitude then I genuinely pity anyone in your family. There are such things as respect and basic good manners. If you are going to take a decision that will have repercussions for your family or for the business you work for then it is basic common decency to at least discuss it with those concerned before announcing it to the world.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,486

    That statement by the Palace is as close to DefCon One as it gets.

    The apologists for Harry and Meghan on here tonight might want to reflect on the part their behaviour might have played in this rather than just casting aspirations on those who critique them.

    LOL
  • Don't worry about the royal family, they don't worry about you, lol.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,486
    kle4 said:

    TGOHF666 said:
    Why should they? They are human beings in a free country, they can do WTF they like.
    Well they said they were stepping back from royal duties not intending to do no royal duties. Therefore there would need to be discussion with the others about what level of duties they intend to do.

    If they were just quitting being royals it would indeed be just their business, but they are not so your outrage is a little phoney.
    I’m not the one who is outraged old bean.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,486

    TGOHF666 said:
    Why should they? They are human beings in a free country, they can do WTF they like.
    Of course its not illlegal, but its really quite unpleasant. Extremely rude. Vindictive even.
    LOL
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,864
    Just ouch. From the Indy of all places: https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/corbyn-pmqs-boris-johnson-trump-trade-deal-brexit-commons-a9275186.html

    The metaphor of Japanese soldiers at the end is bordering on vicious.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,318

    Sky breaking

    Harry and Markle resign from the royal family

    Good luck to them, as long as they don't want any money from the public finances, they can do what they want.
    They can make a start by repaying the public money spent on their home in Windsor.

    I really couldn’t care less what they do. Charles’s slimmed down monarchy rather appeals. The Cambridges seem dutiful and there really is not much of a role for Harry. But it does seem very discourteous not to inform HMQ first - and unbecoming of Harry, who has become an unattractive whinger in recent months. HMQ has gone out of her way to make Meghan welcome and asked Harry to work with the Commonwealth and it feels as if they’ve just thrown this back in her face.

    I also hope they don’t abuse their membership of the Royal Family to make money or unfortunate friendships (*cough* Andrew *cough*). If they want to live privately frankly it might make sense to give up their titles as well. And they’d be well advised to cool it on the celebrity circuit. There are plenty of stories about Meghan’s time in Hollywood which will be made public if they’re not careful.

    Still good luck to them.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,868

    TGOHF666 said:
    Why should they? They are human beings in a free country, they can do WTF they like.
    No, they aren't.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    I’ve long advocated that upon independence Harry should be elected King of Scots. He’s strengthened his case today.

    See: Haakon VII of Norway, much more fondly remembered than his big brother Christian X of Denmark, a notorious authoritarian and opponent of democracy.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,486
    felix said:

    TGOHF666 said:
    Why should they? They are human beings in a free country, they can do WTF they like.
    Golly you are stupid. Would it not be the commonest courtesy to consult the Queen? They have lavished millions of taxpayers dosh mostly on themselves and show a lack of self-awareness only an idiot like you apparentl;y can match.
    Thanks for that.

    Had they given the Royal Family advance warning, the full force of that oppressive institution would turn on them to attempt to shut it down. No. Short, sharp, shock. Good for them.
  • IshmaelZ said:

    TGOHF666 said:
    Lol. Brilliant. They don’t like it up em.
    How can a Palace be disappointed? Do they mean Queenie is, or a lot of fawning old courtiers are pretending to be because they know their bread is buttered on the Chas n Baldy side and that's what they think C and B would want them to say?
    Yes, it's ridiculous to suggest that Queenie/Charles weren't in the know. It's well understood that Charles, who now pretty much runs the shop, intends to scale down the monarchy further when he ascends to the throne. I suspect this is just a preliminary stage of that process. As for the reports of 'disappointment' from 'The Palace' - probably just hangers-on who know they'll be for the chop too and are sh*t stirring accordingly.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,486

    TGOHF666 said:
    Why should they? They are human beings in a free country, they can do WTF they like.
    If that is your attitude then I genuinely pity anyone in your family. There are such things as respect and basic good manners. If you are going to take a decision that will have repercussions for your family or for the business you work for then it is basic common decency to at least discuss it with those concerned before announcing it to the world.
    That would be true in any normal family Richard.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,864

    Ian Murray has secured enough MP support in his quest to become Deputy

    Good. He’s one of the good guys in the cesspit of SLab politics.
    One of? He is the good guy in the cesspit of SLab politics.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,486
    IshmaelZ said:

    TGOHF666 said:
    Lol. Brilliant. They don’t like it up em.
    How can a Palace be disappointed? Do they mean Queenie is, or a lot of fawning old courtiers are pretending to be because they know their bread is buttered on the Chas n Baldy side and that's what they think C and B would want them to say?
    😀
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,486

    TGOHF666 said:
    Why should they? They are human beings in a free country, they can do WTF they like.
    Well, yes, as we all can. And such choices have consequences too.

    Would you release a statement to the media about your employer before speaking to them first about your serious concerns and desire for a different relationship?

    It's a basic courtesy if nothing else, and shows respect for others.
    That would certainly be true of any normal employer Casino.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,491
    edited January 2020

    TGOHF666 said:
    Why should they? They are human beings in a free country, they can do WTF they like.
    Well, yes, as we all can. And such choices have consequences too.

    Would you release a statement to the media about your employer before speaking to them first about your serious concerns and desire for a different relationship?

    It's a basic courtesy if nothing else, and shows respect for others.
    That would certainly be true of any normal employer Casino.
    They were a fully established part of the royal family, doing a job for them, and in receipt of civil list (or sovereign grant, if you prefer) payments.

    Other than you obvious personal distaste for the monarchy, in what way did they too not deserve the same courtesy?

  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,318

    TGOHF666 said:
    Why should they? They are human beings in a free country, they can do WTF they like.
    At the moment they are living a life of luxury at our expense. If they were ordinary people no-one would give a toss about their plans. So they do - as a matter of politeness, if nothing else - have obligations to their family and to HMQ - and us - from whom they derive their status, their home and wealth.

    If they don’t want the obligations, then they don’t also get the advantages.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,486
    Cyclefree said:

    Sky breaking

    Harry and Markle resign from the royal family

    Good luck to them, as long as they don't want any money from the public finances, they can do what they want.
    They can make a start by repaying the public money spent on their home in Windsor.

    I really couldn’t care less what they do. Charles’s slimmed down monarchy rather appeals. The Cambridges seem dutiful and there really is not much of a role for Harry. But it does seem very discourteous not to inform HMQ first - and unbecoming of Harry, who has become an unattractive whinger in recent months. HMQ has gone out of her way to make Meghan welcome and asked Harry to work with the Commonwealth and it feels as if they’ve just thrown this back in her face.

    I also hope they don’t abuse their membership of the Royal Family to make money or unfortunate friendships (*cough* Andrew *cough*). If they want to live privately frankly it might make sense to give up their titles as well. And they’d be well advised to cool it on the celebrity circuit. There are plenty of stories about Meghan’s time in Hollywood which will be made public if they’re not careful.

    Still good luck to them.
    The
    MaxPB said:

    TGOHF666 said:
    Why should they? They are human beings in a free country, they can do WTF they like.
    No, they aren't.
    They are not human beings?
  • Starmer must be praying that Long-Bailey gets the support of Unite, thereby guaranteeing her a place on the membership ballot paper and equally ensuring that Sir Keir becomes the next leader of the Labour Party and that yours truly is then just one step away from making a small fortune when he becomes Prime Minister in 5 years' time ... and who knows, maybe sooner?
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1215023092424204288

    with another denial from McCluskey a few minutes ago.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,486
    Cyclefree said:

    TGOHF666 said:
    Why should they? They are human beings in a free country, they can do WTF they like.
    At the moment they are living a life of luxury at our expense. If they were ordinary people no-one would give a toss about their plans. So they do - as a matter of politeness, if nothing else - have obligations to their family and to HMQ - and us - from whom they derive their status, their home and wealth.

    If they don’t want the obligations, then they don’t also get the advantages.
    Yes they have clearly said that they want to be financially independent.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,231

    That statement by the Palace is as close to DefCon One as it gets.

    The apologists for Harry and Meghan on here tonight might want to reflect on the part their behaviour might have played in this rather than just casting aspirations on those who critique them.

    "Critique" ??
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,484

    felix said:

    TGOHF666 said:
    Why should they? They are human beings in a free country, they can do WTF they like.
    Golly you are stupid. Would it not be the commonest courtesy to consult the Queen? They have lavished millions of taxpayers dosh mostly on themselves and show a lack of self-awareness only an idiot like you apparentl;y can match.
    Thanks for that.

    Had they given the Royal Family advance warning, the full force of that oppressive institution would turn on them to attempt to shut it down. No. Short, sharp, shock. Good for them.
    Except it wasn't particularly short or sharp, or very well written. Not very clear either. I think my main impression from it is that this couple isn't very bright, and nor are the people working for them. The Royal riposte (which I don't find particularly appropriate either - you can make your position clear without explicit disagreement) is saturated with worn down exasperation. It's like someone speaking to a five year old. I am guessing that dealing with them has been a sore trial.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,424
    dr_spyn said:

    https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1215023092424204288

    with another denial from McCluskey a few minutes ago.

    Well, they might both be true. Gardiner might have lost his mind and be planning to stand, and McCluskey might not have been urging him to.

    I don’t think Gardiner has a chaunce though.
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,842
    dr_spyn said:

    https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1215023092424204288

    with another denial from McCluskey a few minutes ago.

    piss up and brewery spring to mind
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,486

    TGOHF666 said:
    Why should they? They are human beings in a free country, they can do WTF they like.
    Well, yes, as we all can. And such choices have consequences too.

    Would you release a statement to the media about your employer before speaking to them first about your serious concerns and desire for a different relationship?

    It's a basic courtesy if nothing else, and shows respect for others.
    That would certainly be true of any normal employer Casino.
    They were a fully established part of the royal family, doing a job for them, and in receipt of civil list (or sovereign grant, if you prefer) payments.

    Other than you obvious personal distaste for the monarchy, in what way did they too not deserve the same courtesy?

    An advance warning would have seen the monarchy exert its full force on them to stop them. The monarchy is a vehicle hardwired for self-preservation.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,486
    kinabalu said:

    That statement by the Palace is as close to DefCon One as it gets.

    The apologists for Harry and Meghan on here tonight might want to reflect on the part their behaviour might have played in this rather than just casting aspirations on those who critique them.

    "Critique" ??
    Casting aspirations??
  • BigRichBigRich Posts: 3,492

    I’ve long advocated that upon independence Harry should be elected King of Scots. He’s strengthened his case today.

    See: Haakon VII of Norway, much more fondly remembered than his big brother Christian X of Denmark, a notorious authoritarian and opponent of democracy.

    Perhaps, (given the popularity or lack there of of US politicians at the moment), they could be angling for the Head of State job for those rebellious colones on the other side of the Atlantic?
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,359

    FPT:

    I suspect Boris will obey Trump's wishes. The calculation will be that the only people who'll be upset are the discredited liberal Left. Meanwhile it will be great for the development of brand Boris, imbuing him with some Trumpian tough-guy vengefulness. Boris as the slightly wishy washy joshing fop is a look they'll want to move away from.
    His tongue will be so far up Trump's butt he will be likely to lose it. The great future for the UK is to be Trump's poodle. What a bunch of useless tossers.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,359

    TGOHF666 said:
    Why should they? They are human beings in a free country, they can do WTF they like.
    No-one will miss the pair of leeches, bet they don't give up taking public money.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,486

    dr_spyn said:

    https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1215023092424204288

    with another denial from McCluskey a few minutes ago.

    piss up and brewery spring to mind
    It really is laughable. The hard left turning to Bazza G is in and of itself a living farce; this too-ing and fro-ing with Big Len is gilding the lily.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,359
    DavidL said:

    Ian Murray has secured enough MP support in his quest to become Deputy

    Good. He’s one of the good guys in the cesspit of SLab politics.
    One of? He is the good guy in the cesspit of SLab politics.
    He is as big an arsehole as the rest of them.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,491

    TGOHF666 said:
    Why should they? They are human beings in a free country, they can do WTF they like.
    Well, yes, as we all can. And such choices have consequences too.

    Would you release a statement to the media about your employer before speaking to them first about your serious concerns and desire for a different relationship?

    It's a basic courtesy if nothing else, and shows respect for others.
    That would certainly be true of any normal employer Casino.
    They were a fully established part of the royal family, doing a job for them, and in receipt of civil list (or sovereign grant, if you prefer) payments.

    Other than you obvious personal distaste for the monarchy, in what way did they too not deserve the same courtesy?

    An advance warning would have seen the monarchy exert its full force on them to stop them. The monarchy is a vehicle hardwired for self-preservation.
    That's the sort of nonsense anyone says to self-excuse themselves from doing the right thing.

    I think HMQ and the whole family have bent over backwards to help them fit in, and would have tried to find a solution here too as well.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,359

    I’ve long advocated that upon independence Harry should be elected King of Scots. He’s strengthened his case today.

    See: Haakon VII of Norway, much more fondly remembered than his big brother Christian X of Denmark, a notorious authoritarian and opponent of democracy.

    He is just another arsehole, we want nothing to do with these leeches.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,231
    Chameleon said:
    He is well qualified to run. Bright, good communicator, heart of gold. Always liked him. Little chance though, I have to say.
  • TGOHF666 said:
    Why should they? They are human beings in a free country, they can do WTF they like.
    Well, yes, as we all can. And such choices have consequences too.

    Would you release a statement to the media about your employer before speaking to them first about your serious concerns and desire for a different relationship?

    It's a basic courtesy if nothing else, and shows respect for others.
    That would certainly be true of any normal employer Casino.
    They were a fully established part of the royal family, doing a job for them, and in receipt of civil list (or sovereign grant, if you prefer) payments.

    Other than you obvious personal distaste for the monarchy, in what way did they too not deserve the same courtesy?

    An advance warning would have seen the monarchy exert its full force on them to stop them. The monarchy is a vehicle hardwired for self-preservation.
    Bullshit.
  • TGOHF666 said:
    Why should they? They are human beings in a free country, they can do WTF they like.
    Well, yes, as we all can. And such choices have consequences too.

    Would you release a statement to the media about your employer before speaking to them first about your serious concerns and desire for a different relationship?

    It's a basic courtesy if nothing else, and shows respect for others.
    That would certainly be true of any normal employer Casino.
    They were a fully established part of the royal family, doing a job for them, and in receipt of civil list (or sovereign grant, if you prefer) payments.

    Other than you obvious personal distaste for the monarchy, in what way did they too not deserve the same courtesy?

    When did he apply for that "job"? What was the selection criteria, when was he interviewed?

    He's an individual who can and should be respected to be able to make his own grown up choices how he wants and when he wants.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,486

    TGOHF666 said:
    Why should they? They are human beings in a free country, they can do WTF they like.
    Well, yes, as we all can. And such choices have consequences too.

    Would you release a statement to the media about your employer before speaking to them first about your serious concerns and desire for a different relationship?

    It's a basic courtesy if nothing else, and shows respect for others.
    That would certainly be true of any normal employer Casino.
    They were a fully established part of the royal family, doing a job for them, and in receipt of civil list (or sovereign grant, if you prefer) payments.

    Other than you obvious personal distaste for the monarchy, in what way did they too not deserve the same courtesy?

    An advance warning would have seen the monarchy exert its full force on them to stop them. The monarchy is a vehicle hardwired for self-preservation.
    That's the sort of nonsense anyone says to self-excuse themselves from doing the right thing.

    I think HMQ and the whole family have bent over backwards to help them fit in, and would have tried to find a solution here too as well.
    Yes I suspect it was the “finding a solution” bit they were worried about!
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468
    Man 2020 is a total sh*t show already and we’re only 8 days in.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,231

    Casting aspirations??

    Just struck by the choice of word. Seemed a little elevated for what it was referring to.
  • TGOHF666 said:
    Why should they? They are human beings in a free country, they can do WTF they like.
    If that is your attitude then I genuinely pity anyone in your family. There are such things as respect and basic good manners. If you are going to take a decision that will have repercussions for your family or for the business you work for then it is basic common decency to at least discuss it with those concerned before announcing it to the world.
    That would be true in any normal family Richard.
    And therein lies your problem. You have such loathing for the institution that you will excuse any behaviour that undermines it no matter how poor that behaviour is.

    Assuming, that is, the reports about how it has been done are true and not yet more media fiction.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,219
    I really don't care about Harry and Meghan. My only concern is that they're going to end up in LA.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,484

    kinabalu said:

    That statement by the Palace is as close to DefCon One as it gets.

    The apologists for Harry and Meghan on here tonight might want to reflect on the part their behaviour might have played in this rather than just casting aspirations on those who critique them.

    "Critique" ??
    Casting aspirations??
    Probably autocorrect.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,486
    kinabalu said:

    Chameleon said:
    He is well qualified to run. Bright, good communicator, heart of gold. Always liked him. Little chance though, I have to say.
    I like him. What I find incredible is that the hard left is reaching out for him - he’s hardly a true believer.
  • alteregoalterego Posts: 1,100

    Cyclefree said:

    TGOHF666 said:
    Why should they? They are human beings in a free country, they can do WTF they like.
    At the moment they are living a life of luxury at our expense. If they were ordinary people no-one would give a toss about their plans. So they do - as a matter of politeness, if nothing else - have obligations to their family and to HMQ - and us - from whom they derive their status, their home and wealth.

    If they don’t want the obligations, then they don’t also get the advantages.
    Yes they have clearly said that they want to be financially independent.
    It's walking the walk that's likely to be the problem
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,491

    TGOHF666 said:
    Why should they? They are human beings in a free country, they can do WTF they like.
    Well, yes, as we all can. And such choices have consequences too.

    Would you release a statement to the media about your employer before speaking to them first about your serious concerns and desire for a different relationship?

    It's a basic courtesy if nothing else, and shows respect for others.
    That would certainly be true of any normal employer Casino.
    They were a fully established part of the royal family, doing a job for them, and in receipt of civil list (or sovereign grant, if you prefer) payments.

    Other than you obvious personal distaste for the monarchy, in what way did they too not deserve the same courtesy?

    An advance warning would have seen the monarchy exert its full force on them to stop them. The monarchy is a vehicle hardwired for self-preservation.
    That's the sort of nonsense anyone says to self-excuse themselves from doing the right thing.

    I think HMQ and the whole family have bent over backwards to help them fit in, and would have tried to find a solution here too as well.
    Yes I suspect it was the “finding a solution” bit they were worried about!
    If you're nodding and winking at a Diana "bump off" then you're just marking yourself out as a conspiracy theorist fruitcake whose other views on this subject can be safely dismissed.

    I sincerely hope that's not the case.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,491
    Why is BBC iPlayer soooo shite?

    I can't watch anything on it for more than 30 seconds with a painful buffering pink doughnut of death, and have no problems at all with NowTV, Amazon and Netflix.

    And this is the service I (compulsorily) pay for.
  • Why is BBC iPlayer soooo shite?

    I can't watch anything on it for more than 30 seconds with a painful buffering pink doughnut of death, and have no problems at all with NowTV, Amazon and Netflix.

    And this is the service I (compulsorily) pay for.

    At least it's up and running, unlike a certain railway under Central London...
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,486

    TGOHF666 said:
    Why should they? They are human beings in a free country, they can do WTF they like.
    Well, yes, as we all can. And such choices have consequences too.

    Would you release a statement to the media about your employer before speaking to them first about your serious concerns and desire for a different relationship?

    It's a basic courtesy if nothing else, and shows respect for others.
    That would certainly be true of any normal employer Casino.
    They were a fully established part of the royal family, doing a job for them, and in receipt of civil list (or sovereign grant, if you prefer) payments.

    Other than you obvious personal distaste for the monarchy, in what way did they too not deserve the same courtesy?

    When did he apply for that "job"? What was the selection criteria, when was he interviewed?

    He's an individual who can and should be respected to be able to make his own grown up choices how he wants and when he wants.
    Ha! Quite.

    It reminds me of that great exchange in Mad Men, where Peggy says to Draper: “What made you assume I’d just follow you? [to the new agency]”

    Draper says: “I’m not going to beg you!”

    Peggy says: “Beg me? You didn’t even ask me!”
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,695
    edited January 2020

    TGOHF666 said:
    Why should they? They are human beings in a free country, they can do WTF they like.
    Well, yes, as we all can. And such choices have consequences too.

    Would you release a statement to the media about your employer before speaking to them first about your serious concerns and desire for a different relationship?

    It's a basic courtesy if nothing else, and shows respect for others.
    That would certainly be true of any normal employer Casino.
    They were a fully established part of the royal family, doing a job for them, and in receipt of civil list (or sovereign grant, if you prefer) payments.

    Other than you obvious personal distaste for the monarchy, in what way did they too not deserve the same courtesy?

    When did he apply for that "job"? What was the selection criteria, when was he interviewed?

    He's an individual who can and should be respected to be able to make his own grown up choices how he wants and when he wants.
    That's true but he can't carry on taking the state's money in the meantime.

    "We intend to step back as 'senior' members of the Royal Family and work to become financially independent" is simply not good enough; if you quit you stop taking your salary.
  • Why is BBC iPlayer soooo shite?

    I can't watch anything on it for more than 30 seconds with a painful buffering pink doughnut of death, and have no problems at all with NowTV, Amazon and Netflix.

    And this is the service I (compulsorily) pay for.

    It works for me, and I've just watched Silent Witness live on iplayer.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,695
    edited January 2020

    Why is BBC iPlayer soooo shite?

    I can't watch anything on it for more than 30 seconds with a painful buffering pink doughnut of death, and have no problems at all with NowTV, Amazon and Netflix.

    And this is the service I (compulsorily) pay for.

    It works for me, and I've just watched Silent Witness live on iplayer.
    iPlayer is fine for me too (appears bullet-proof in fact).

    What broadband speed have you got @Casino_Royale?
  • rcs1000 said:

    I really don't care about Harry and Meghan. My only concern is that they're going to end up in LA.

    But wasn't that always the case?
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,491

    TGOHF666 said:
    Why should they? They are human beings in a free country, they can do WTF they like.
    Well, yes, as we all can. And such choices have consequences too.

    Would you release a statement to the media about your employer before speaking to them first about your serious concerns and desire for a different relationship?

    It's a basic courtesy if nothing else, and shows respect for others.
    That would certainly be true of any normal employer Casino.
    They were a fully established part of the royal family, doing a job for them, and in receipt of civil list (or sovereign grant, if you prefer) payments.

    Other than you obvious personal distaste for the monarchy, in what way did they too not deserve the same courtesy?

    When did he apply for that "job"? What was the selection criteria, when was he interviewed?

    He's an individual who can and should be respected to be able to make his own grown up choices how he wants and when he wants.
    They talked in their statement about carving out a "progressive new role within this institution".

    Don't you think they should have consulted the head of that "institution" as to how they might come about first?
  • We should just bring in Ben Stokes and his wife as a replacement ginger royal couple. Far more useful.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,491

    Why is BBC iPlayer soooo shite?

    I can't watch anything on it for more than 30 seconds with a painful buffering pink doughnut of death, and have no problems at all with NowTV, Amazon and Netflix.

    And this is the service I (compulsorily) pay for.

    It works for me, and I've just watched Silent Witness live on iplayer.
    iPlayer is fine for me too (appears bullet-proof in fact).

    What broadband speed have you got @Casino_Royale?
    Oh, I dunno. Pretty good.

    That's not the problem. It's not fibre-optic but it's as fast as hell on everything else.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,864

    We should just bring in Ben Stokes and his wife as a replacement ginger royal couple. Far more useful.

    He’s got a proper job. Winning cricket matches for a team far too prone to screwing things up.
  • DavidL said:

    We should just bring in Ben Stokes and his wife as a replacement ginger royal couple. Far more useful.

    He’s got a proper job. Winning cricket matches for a team far too prone to screwing things up.
    Nah, he could fit it all in. He could probably also find time to sort the Middle East peace process. He’s having that sort of a year.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,486

    TGOHF666 said:
    Why should they? They are human beings in a free country, they can do WTF they like.
    That would be true in any normal family Richard.
    And therein lies your problem. You have such loathing for the institution that you will excuse any behaviour that undermines it no matter how poor that behaviour is.

    Assuming, that is, the reports about how it has been done are true and not yet more media fiction.

    Well yes, the fog of war theory means that much of this could be

    TGOHF666 said:
    Why should they? They are human beings in a free country, they can do WTF they like.
    Well, yes, as we all can. And such choices have consequences too.

    Would you release a statement to the media about your employer before speaking to them first about your serious concerns and desire for a different relationship?

    It's a basic courtesy if nothing else, and shows respect for others.
    That would certainly be true of any normal employer Casino.
    An advance warning would have seen the monarchy exert its full force on them to stop them. The monarchy is a vehicle hardwired for self-preservation.
    That's the sort of nonsense anyone says to self-excuse themselves from doing the right thing.

    I think HMQ and the whole family have bent over backwards to help them fit in, and would have tried to find a solution here too as well.
    Yes I suspect it was the “finding a solution” bit they were worried about!
    If you're nodding and winking at a Diana "bump off" then you're just marking yourself out as a conspiracy theorist fruitcake whose other views on this subject can be safely dismissed.

    I sincerely hope that's not the case.
    No, I was not referring to that. What a bizarre idea.

    I merely go back to my earlier point that advance warning would have had the monarchy try to force them into a retreat, which, quite reasonably, they are determined to avoid.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,148

    TGOHF666 said:
    Why should they? They are human beings in a free country, they can do WTF they like.
    Well, yes, as we all can. And such choices have consequences too.

    Would you release a statement to the media about your employer before speaking to them first about your serious concerns and desire for a different relationship?

    It's a basic courtesy if nothing else, and shows respect for others.
    That would certainly be true of any normal employer Casino.
    They were a fully established part of the royal family, doing a job for them, and in receipt of civil list (or sovereign grant, if you prefer) payments.

    Other than you obvious personal distaste for the monarchy, in what way did they too not deserve the same courtesy?

    An advance warning would have seen the monarchy exert its full force on them to stop them. The monarchy is a vehicle hardwired for self-preservation.
    That's the sort of nonsense anyone says to self-excuse themselves from doing the right thing.

    I think HMQ and the whole family have bent over backwards to help them fit in, and would have tried to find a solution here too as well.
    Given all the noises coming from the Palace I suspect the Queen will now 'progressively' remove Harry and Meghan's apartments in royal palaces, chauffeur driven cars, flights in royal aircraft and many of their protection officers too
  • TGOHF666 said:
    Why should they? They are human beings in a free country, they can do WTF they like.
    Well, yes, as we all can. And such choices have consequences too.

    Would you release a statement to the media about your employer before speaking to them first about your serious concerns and desire for a different relationship?

    It's a basic courtesy if nothing else, and shows respect for others.
    That would certainly be true of any normal employer Casino.
    They were a fully established part of the royal family, doing a job for them, and in receipt of civil list (or sovereign grant, if you prefer) payments.

    Other than you obvious personal distaste for the monarchy, in what way did they too not deserve the same courtesy?

    When did he apply for that "job"? What was the selection criteria, when was he interviewed?

    He's an individual who can and should be respected to be able to make his own grown up choices how he wants and when he wants.
    They talked in their statement about carving out a "progressive new role within this institution".

    Don't you think they should have consulted the head of that "institution" as to how they might come about first?
    "Progressive"? Who do they think they are? The Duke and Duchess of Windsor?
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,486

    TGOHF666 said:
    Why should they? They are human beings in a free country, they can do WTF they like.
    Well, yes, as we all can. And such choices have consequences too.

    Would you release a statement to the media about your employer before speaking to them first about your serious concerns and desire for a different relationship?

    It's a basic courtesy if nothing else, and shows respect for others.
    That would certainly be true of any normal employer Casino.
    They were a fully established part of the royal family, doing a job for them, and in receipt of civil list (or sovereign grant, if you prefer) payments.

    Other than you obvious personal distaste for the monarchy, in what way did they too not deserve the same courtesy?

    When did he apply for that "job"? What was the selection criteria, when was he interviewed?

    He's an individual who can and should be respected to be able to make his own grown up choices how he wants and when he wants.
    That's true but he can't carry on taking the state's money in the meantime.

    "We intend to step back as 'senior' members of the Royal Family and work to become financially independent" is simply not good enough; if you quit you stop taking your salary.
    Not so. If I quit tomorrow I’d give three months notice.
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669

    kinabalu said:

    That statement by the Palace is as close to DefCon One as it gets.

    The apologists for Harry and Meghan on here tonight might want to reflect on the part their behaviour might have played in this rather than just casting aspirations on those who critique them.

    "Critique" ??
    Casting aspirations??
    aspirations are the damp marks left on a plastic seat when you stand up on a hot day.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,695

    Why is BBC iPlayer soooo shite?

    I can't watch anything on it for more than 30 seconds with a painful buffering pink doughnut of death, and have no problems at all with NowTV, Amazon and Netflix.

    And this is the service I (compulsorily) pay for.

    It works for me, and I've just watched Silent Witness live on iplayer.
    iPlayer is fine for me too (appears bullet-proof in fact).

    What broadband speed have you got @Casino_Royale?
    Oh, I dunno. Pretty good.

    That's not the problem. It's not fibre-optic but it's as fast as hell on everything else.
    It must be something to do with your set-up though because I am not aware of widespread reports of issues and it is still probably one of, if not the, most used streaming service in the UK.

    Are you watching on a TV or a computer?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,769
    kinabalu said:

    Chameleon said:
    He is well qualified to run. Bright, good communicator, heart of gold. Always liked him. Little chance though, I have to say.
    https://twitter.com/BethRigby/status/1215020451711377410
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,695

    TGOHF666 said:
    Why should they? They are human beings in a free country, they can do WTF they like.
    Well, yes, as we all can. And such choices have consequences too.

    Would you release a statement to the media about your employer before speaking to them first about your serious concerns and desire for a different relationship?

    It's a basic courtesy if nothing else, and shows respect for others.
    That would certainly be true of any normal employer Casino.
    They were a fully established part of the royal family, doing a job for them, and in receipt of civil list (or sovereign grant, if you prefer) payments.

    Other than you obvious personal distaste for the monarchy, in what way did they too not deserve the same courtesy?

    When did he apply for that "job"? What was the selection criteria, when was he interviewed?

    He's an individual who can and should be respected to be able to make his own grown up choices how he wants and when he wants.
    That's true but he can't carry on taking the state's money in the meantime.

    "We intend to step back as 'senior' members of the Royal Family and work to become financially independent" is simply not good enough; if you quit you stop taking your salary.
    Not so. If I quit tomorrow I’d give three months notice.
    Mmmm... I've got a feeling they will be receiving their handouts long after they have 'stepped back'.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,486
    I’ve got it now.

    Barry Gardiner is running to be the next Duke of Sussex.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,486

    Why is BBC iPlayer soooo shite?

    I can't watch anything on it for more than 30 seconds with a painful buffering pink doughnut of death, and have no problems at all with NowTV, Amazon and Netflix.

    And this is the service I (compulsorily) pay for.

    It works for me, and I've just watched Silent Witness live on iplayer.
    iPlayer is fine for me too (appears bullet-proof in fact).

    What broadband speed have you got @Casino_Royale?
    Oh, I dunno. Pretty good.

    That's not the problem. It's not fibre-optic but it's as fast as hell on everything else.
    It must be something to do with your set-up though because I am not aware of widespread reports of issues and it is still probably one of, if not the, most used streaming service in the UK.

    Are you watching on a TV or a computer?

    Why is BBC iPlayer soooo shite?

    I can't watch anything on it for more than 30 seconds with a painful buffering pink doughnut of death, and have no problems at all with NowTV, Amazon and Netflix.

    And this is the service I (compulsorily) pay for.

    It works for me, and I've just watched Silent Witness live on iplayer.
    iPlayer is fine for me too (appears bullet-proof in fact).

    What broadband speed have you got @Casino_Royale?
    Oh, I dunno. Pretty good.

    That's not the problem. It's not fibre-optic but it's as fast as hell on everything else.
    It must be something to do with your set-up though because I am not aware of widespread reports of issues and it is still probably one of, if not the, most used streaming service in the UK.

    Are you watching on a TV or a computer?
    www.speedtest.net
This discussion has been closed.