105 MPs/MEPs declared according to Guido's spreadsheet.
So Gardiner will need ~20% of the remainder to qualify.
Not all of those 105 have actually put in nomination papers (and even if they have perhaps they can alter them?). Still, it does look a big mountain for Gardiner to climb - to win these things you ideally need to have got organised and have your key support locked in before the contest formally starts.
Good point. Can you withdraw support before the deadline? Would seem reasonable to be able to do so.
The bigger point is whether several candidates will actually withdraw their names before the deadline.
*looks at you Thornberry, Lewis.....*
It would shake things up if RLB managed to escape from her captors and withdraw her bid.
Has anyone been buying packs of discounted Labour Party Christmas cards?
"HELP ME. I'M BEING FORCED TO WORK IN A POLITICAL PARTY AGAINST MY WILL....."
Was that story ever confirmed? It always sounded very iffy...the chances of a Chinese worker in a sweat shop being able to write extremely clear English with decent grammar, seems unlikely.
Story I heard was that it was written by a Nigerian - who had already been released when they were found.
Blitzed the argument. Shifted the Overton Window. Turned the Tories into a fiscally reckless statist party. Left them owning the looming Brexit disaster. Oh Jeremy Corbyn!
Of course Labour won 3 elections under Blair on a Thatcherite lite agenda, if Boris wins elections on a Corbyn lite economic agenda just returning the favour
That has already occurred to me! However, it also does raise the question faced by Labour supporters during the Blair years of ' What was the point of having a Labour Government to pursue Tory policies? '. What is the point - from a Tory perspective - of having a Tory Government seeking to carry out Old Labour policies?
105 MPs/MEPs declared according to Guido's spreadsheet.
So Gardiner will need ~20% of the remainder to qualify.
Not all of those 105 have actually put in nomination papers (and even if they have perhaps they can alter them?). Still, it does look a big mountain for Gardiner to climb - to win these things you ideally need to have got organised and have your key support locked in before the contest formally starts.
Good point. Can you withdraw support before the deadline? Would seem reasonable to be able to do so.
The bigger point is whether several candidates will actually withdraw their names before the deadline.
*looks at you Thornberry, Lewis.....*
It would shake things up if RLB managed to escape from her captors and withdraw her bid.
Has anyone been buying packs of discounted Labour Party Christmas cards?
"HELP ME. I'M BEING FORCED TO WORK IN A POLITICAL PARTY AGAINST MY WILL....."
Was that story ever confirmed? It always sounded very iffy...the chances of a Chinese worker in a sweat shop being able to write extremely clear English with decent grammar, seems unlikely.
Blitzed the argument. Shifted the Overton Window. Turned the Tories into a fiscally reckless statist party. Left them owning the looming Brexit disaster. Oh Jeremy Corbyn!
Of course Labour won 3 elections under Blair on a Thatcherite lite agenda, if Boris wins elections on a Corbyn lite economic agenda just returning the favour
That has already occurred to me! However, it also does raise the question faced by Labour supporters during the Blair years of ' What was the point of having a Labour Government to pursue Tory policies? '. What is the point - from a Tory perspective - of having a Tory Government seeking to carry out Old Labour policies?
Trivia: Blair, Corbyn and Boris all shared the same slogan: For the many, not the few!
Blair put it into his reworked Clause IV; Corbyn made it Labour's campaign slogan; Boris has it from his ancient Greek hero, Pericles.
105 MPs/MEPs declared according to Guido's spreadsheet.
So Gardiner will need ~20% of the remainder to qualify.
Not all of those 105 have actually put in nomination papers (and even if they have perhaps they can alter them?). Still, it does look a big mountain for Gardiner to climb - to win these things you ideally need to have got organised and have your key support locked in before the contest formally starts.
Good point. Can you withdraw support before the deadline? Would seem reasonable to be able to do so.
The bigger point is whether several candidates will actually withdraw their names before the deadline.
*looks at you Thornberry, Lewis.....*
It would shake things up if RLB managed to escape from her captors and withdraw her bid.
Has anyone been buying packs of discounted Labour Party Christmas cards?
"HELP ME. I'M BEING FORCED TO WORK IN A POLITICAL PARTY AGAINST MY WILL....."
Was that story ever confirmed? It always sounded very iffy...the chances of a Chinese worker in a sweat shop being able to write extremely clear English with decent grammar, seems unlikely.
Yes.
The Sunday Times did a proper expose on it, including confirmation via a British journalist who served time in Chinese prisons.
Blitzed the argument. Shifted the Overton Window. Turned the Tories into a fiscally reckless statist party. Left them owning the looming Brexit disaster. Oh Jeremy Corbyn!
Of course Labour won 3 elections under Blair on a Thatcherite lite agenda, if Boris wins elections on a Corbyn lite economic agenda just returning the favour
That has already occurred to me! However, it also does raise the question faced by Labour supporters during the Blair years of ' What was the point of having a Labour Government to pursue Tory policies? '. What is the point - from a Tory perspective - of having a Tory Government seeking to carry out Old Labour policies?
New Labour also produced the minimum wage, civil partnerships for homosexuals, devolution and ultimately more spending and a 50p top rate of tax.
Boris is pursuing Brexit,a points based immigration system, tougher sentences for the worst criminals etc.
Blair was not a full on Thatcherite like Hague, IDS and Howard and Boris is not a full on Corbynite like Corbyn
A Brazilian judge on Wednesday ordered Netflix to stop showing a Christmas special that some called blasphemous for depicting Jesus as a gay man and which prompted a bomb attack on the satirists behind the programme.
The ruling by a Rio de Janeiro judge, Benedicto Abicair, responded to a petition by a Brazilian Catholic organisation that argued the “honour of millions of Catholics” was hurt by the airing of The First Temptation of Christ. The special was produced by the Rio-based film company Porta dos Fundos, whose headquarters was targeted in the Christmas Eve attack.
Blitzed the argument. Shifted the Overton Window. Turned the Tories into a fiscally reckless statist party. Left them owning the looming Brexit disaster. Oh Jeremy Corbyn!
Of course Labour won 3 elections under Blair on a Thatcherite lite agenda, if Boris wins elections on a Corbyn lite economic agenda just returning the favour
That has already occurred to me! However, it also does raise the question faced by Labour supporters during the Blair years of ' What was the point of having a Labour Government to pursue Tory policies? '. What is the point - from a Tory perspective - of having a Tory Government seeking to carry out Old Labour policies?
A Brazilian judge on Wednesday ordered Netflix to stop showing a Christmas special that some called blasphemous for depicting Jesus as a gay man and which prompted a bomb attack on the satirists behind the programme.
The ruling by a Rio de Janeiro judge, Benedicto Abicair, responded to a petition by a Brazilian Catholic organisation that argued the “honour of millions of Catholics” was hurt by the airing of The First Temptation of Christ. The special was produced by the Rio-based film company Porta dos Fundos, whose headquarters was targeted in the Christmas Eve attack.
Blitzed the argument. Shifted the Overton Window. Turned the Tories into a fiscally reckless statist party. Left them owning the looming Brexit disaster. Oh Jeremy Corbyn!
Of course Labour won 3 elections under Blair on a Thatcherite lite agenda, if Boris wins elections on a Corbyn lite economic agenda just returning the favour
That has already occurred to me! However, it also does raise the question faced by Labour supporters during the Blair years of ' What was the point of having a Labour Government to pursue Tory policies? '. What is the point - from a Tory perspective - of having a Tory Government seeking to carry out Old Labour policies?
New Labour also produced the minimum wage, civil partnerships for homosexuals, devolution and ultimately more spending and a 50p top rate of tax.
Boris is pursuing Brexit,a points based immigration system, tougher sentences for the worst criminals etc.
Blair was not a full on Thatcherite like Hague, IDS and Howard and Boris is not a full on Corbynite like Corbyn
But in terms of economic and industrial policy , Johnson could reasonably be seen as being well to the left of Blair.
Blitzed the argument. Shifted the Overton Window. Turned the Tories into a fiscally reckless statist party. Left them owning the looming Brexit disaster. Oh Jeremy Corbyn!
Of course Labour won 3 elections under Blair on a Thatcherite lite agenda, if Boris wins elections on a Corbyn lite economic agenda just returning the favour
That has already occurred to me! However, it also does raise the question faced by Labour supporters during the Blair years of ' What was the point of having a Labour Government to pursue Tory policies? '. What is the point - from a Tory perspective - of having a Tory Government seeking to carry out Old Labour policies?
Purity is for Nuns and opposition.
The point is that we stop the wholesale Marxist revolution Corbyn wanted, while picking out a few Labour items that will benefit the country and help us win again, while also having a big majority to do more naturally Tory things.
Blitzed the argument. Shifted the Overton Window. Turned the Tories into a fiscally reckless statist party. Left them owning the looming Brexit disaster. Oh Jeremy Corbyn!
Of course Labour won 3 elections under Blair on a Thatcherite lite agenda, if Boris wins elections on a Corbyn lite economic agenda just returning the favour
That has already occurred to me! However, it also does raise the question faced by Labour supporters during the Blair years of ' What was the point of having a Labour Government to pursue Tory policies? '. What is the point - from a Tory perspective - of having a Tory Government seeking to carry out Old Labour policies?
Purity is for Nuns and opposition.
The point is that we stop the wholesale Marxist revolution Corbyn wanted, while picking out a few Labour items that will benefit the country and help us win again, while also having a big majority to do more naturally Tory things.
The Tories didn't become the most successful political party on earth by sticking to their principles.
No sign of Flash Harry updating us on the recent NHS A&E information I see. Given his constant worries about Scottish NHS I would have expected him to be more concerned about his adopted country and the bad news.
Give him time, he's constructing a complicated theory as to why it's all the fault of Nicola Sturgeon and the Pope.
Blitzed the argument. Shifted the Overton Window. Turned the Tories into a fiscally reckless statist party. Left them owning the looming Brexit disaster. Oh Jeremy Corbyn!
Of course Labour won 3 elections under Blair on a Thatcherite lite agenda, if Boris wins elections on a Corbyn lite economic agenda just returning the favour
That has already occurred to me! However, it also does raise the question faced by Labour supporters during the Blair years of ' What was the point of having a Labour Government to pursue Tory policies? '. What is the point - from a Tory perspective - of having a Tory Government seeking to carry out Old Labour policies?
Purity is for Nuns and opposition.
The point is that we stop the wholesale Marxist revolution Corbyn wanted, while picking out a few Labour items that will benefit the country and help us win again, while also having a big majority to do more naturally Tory things.
Well as I say, if he can radically reduce inequality in this country he is no longer the charlatan "Boris" but the Great Man PM Boris Johnson and if I didn't then vote him it would out of sheer churlishness. Which I am capable of TBF.
It does all rather suggest that the view that the hard left are a well-organised coherent force who have the Labour Party in an iron grip isn't entirely right. In fact, they seem to be an utter shambles.
Is there no middle ground between Stalin and Mr Bean?
I think there is - and that's where the Hard Left are in Labour right now.
She`s not just losing badly she`s being humiliated.
That's the odd thing about this contest. With the exception of Sir Keir, none of the candidates seems to be really trying. They've had plenty of notice that a leadership contest was likely, and even if they didn't guess before the election, they've still had all of the Xmas period to get on to WhatsApp to plot with fellow MPs, set up a campaign team, organise supporters to ring around cajoling their fellow MPs for support, and so on. But, from the outside at least, there seems to have been none of this - where is Team Nandy, or Team Jess, or even Team Becky - let alone Team Thornberry? The whole thing is oddly bloodless, as though they are all going though the motions.
Blitzed the argument. Shifted the Overton Window. Turned the Tories into a fiscally reckless statist party. Left them owning the looming Brexit disaster. Oh Jeremy Corbyn!
Of course Labour won 3 elections under Blair on a Thatcherite lite agenda, if Boris wins elections on a Corbyn lite economic agenda just returning the favour
That has already occurred to me! However, it also does raise the question faced by Labour supporters during the Blair years of ' What was the point of having a Labour Government to pursue Tory policies? '. What is the point - from a Tory perspective - of having a Tory Government seeking to carry out Old Labour policies?
Purity is for Nuns and opposition.
The point is that we stop the wholesale Marxist revolution Corbyn wanted, while picking out a few Labour items that will benefit the country and help us win again, while also having a big majority to do more naturally Tory things.
The Tories didn't become the most successful political party on earth by sticking to their principles.
It's one of the Tories' best qualities - intellectual generosity towards our opponents and an acknowledgement that they might very occasionally have had a couple of good ideas worth implementing.
Only after we've swept them away in a landslide though!
Blitzed the argument. Shifted the Overton Window. Turned the Tories into a fiscally reckless statist party. Left them owning the looming Brexit disaster. Oh Jeremy Corbyn!
Of course Labour won 3 elections under Blair on a Thatcherite lite agenda, if Boris wins elections on a Corbyn lite economic agenda just returning the favour
That has already occurred to me! However, it also does raise the question faced by Labour supporters during the Blair years of ' What was the point of having a Labour Government to pursue Tory policies? '. What is the point - from a Tory perspective - of having a Tory Government seeking to carry out Old Labour policies?
New Labour also produced the minimum wage, civil partnerships for homosexuals, devolution and ultimately more spending and a 50p top rate of tax.
Boris is pursuing Brexit,a points based immigration system, tougher sentences for the worst criminals etc.
Blair was not a full on Thatcherite like Hague, IDS and Howard and Boris is not a full on Corbynite like Corbyn
The 50p tax rate was a typical piece of Brown’s efforts to slash an burn. The 50p tax rate was in place for 28 days of the thirteen years of a labour government, minus 28days it was retained at 40p in the pound. It was introduced not because it would raise sufficient revenue, but as a trap to catch the tories. Who as expected when the top rate was cut to 45p in the pound two years later accused the conservatives of giving tax breaks to millionaires.
Anyone on Barry? We've had some longshots and optimistic trading bets trotted out here over the years, but I don't remember him being among them. He looks like my wife's uncle.
Blitzed the argument. Shifted the Overton Window. Turned the Tories into a fiscally reckless statist party. Left them owning the looming Brexit disaster. Oh Jeremy Corbyn!
Of course Labour won 3 elections under Blair on a Thatcherite lite agenda, if Boris wins elections on a Corbyn lite economic agenda just returning the favour
That has already occurred to me! However, it also does raise the question faced by Labour supporters during the Blair years of ' What was the point of having a Labour Government to pursue Tory policies? '. What is the point - from a Tory perspective - of having a Tory Government seeking to carry out Old Labour policies?
Purity is for Nuns and opposition.
The point is that we stop the wholesale Marxist revolution Corbyn wanted, while picking out a few Labour items that will benefit the country and help us win again, while also having a big majority to do more naturally Tory things.
We need a big majority to BBQ babies?
I don't believe that to be true, if there are enough sane Tory MPs to outnumber the ERG, the baby barbercueing can stop.
That is a justification for permanent Boris landslides, which I am not comfortable with.
Yes, speaking formally, and there will be times and places for that, but there is also the need for a more casual name for a high-powered, glamorous coupling as they go about whatever it is that is their business. "Ooo, I met David and Victoria Beckham at this do last night!" Nobody says that. It's the Beckhams. Although the rumour is separate lives atm so the issue doesn't arise quite so much.
Anyone on Barry? We've had some longshots and optimistic trading bets trotted out here over the years, but I don't remember him being among them. He looks like my wife's uncle.
I think he looks like he could be Ricky Gervais's dad.
She`s not just losing badly she`s being humiliated.
That's the odd thing about this contest. With the exception of Sir Keir, none of the candidates seems to be really trying. They've had plenty of notice that a leadership contest was likely, and even if they didn't guess before the election, they've still had all of the Xmas period to get on to WhatsApp to plot with fellow MPs, set up a campaign team, organise supporters to ring around cajoling their fellow MPs for support, and so on. But, from the outside at least, there seems to have been none of this - where is Team Nandy, or Team Jess, or even Team Becky - let alone Team Thornberry? The whole thing is oddly bloodless, as though they are all going though the motions.
This week is all about Parliament. Next week when they've got over the first fence I suspect we will hear more as they will need to reach the next set of nominees.
Either way I've zeroed my Starmer position on the basis that his odds will improve at some point in the next 3 months. A 66% chance of winning feels too high.
Yes, speaking formally, and there will be times and places for that, but there is also the need for a more casual name for a high-powered, glamorous coupling as they go about whatever it is that is their business. "Ooo, I met David and Victoria Beckham at this do last night!" Nobody says that. It's the Beckhams. Although the rumour is separate lives atm so the issue doesn't arise quite so much.
Blitzed the argument. Shifted the Overton Window. Turned the Tories into a fiscally reckless statist party. Left them owning the looming Brexit disaster. Oh Jeremy Corbyn!
Of course Labour won 3 elections under Blair on a Thatcherite lite agenda, if Boris wins elections on a Corbyn lite economic agenda just returning the favour
That has already occurred to me! However, it also does raise the question faced by Labour supporters during the Blair years of ' What was the point of having a Labour Government to pursue Tory policies? '. What is the point - from a Tory perspective - of having a Tory Government seeking to carry out Old Labour policies?
New Labour also produced the minimum wage, civil partnerships for homosexuals, devolution and ultimately more spending and a 50p top rate of tax.
Boris is pursuing Brexit,a points based immigration system, tougher sentences for the worst criminals etc.
Blair was not a full on Thatcherite like Hague, IDS and Howard and Boris is not a full on Corbynite like Corbyn
But in terms of economic and industrial policy , Johnson could reasonably be seen as being well to the left of Blair.
Yes but Blair was well to the right of Macmillan and Heath or even Major
Blitzed the argument. Shifted the Overton Window. Turned the Tories into a fiscally reckless statist party. Left them owning the looming Brexit disaster. Oh Jeremy Corbyn!
Of course Labour won 3 elections under Blair on a Thatcherite lite agenda, if Boris wins elections on a Corbyn lite economic agenda just returning the favour
That has already occurred to me! However, it also does raise the question faced by Labour supporters during the Blair years of ' What was the point of having a Labour Government to pursue Tory policies? '. What is the point - from a Tory perspective - of having a Tory Government seeking to carry out Old Labour policies?
New Labour also produced the minimum wage, civil partnerships for homosexuals, devolution and ultimately more spending and a 50p top rate of tax.
Boris is pursuing Brexit,a points based immigration system, tougher sentences for the worst criminals etc.
Blair was not a full on Thatcherite like Hague, IDS and Howard and Boris is not a full on Corbynite like Corbyn
But in terms of economic and industrial policy , Johnson could reasonably be seen as being well to the left of Blair.
Yes but Blair was well to the right of Macmillan and Heath or even Major
Not Major - but certainly Blair was well to the Right of the 1951 - 1964 Tory Govt and the Heath Govt post Selsdon period.
You can't go calling H&M "The Sussex". That just does not sound right.
You call them the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
For now.
Would be quite hillarious if she got told she can't use the "Sussex Royal" brand that has been registered in the USA.
They could lose the HRH but keep the title of Duke and Duchess of Sussex as the Duke and Duchess of Windsor did when in exile in the South of France
That seems a likely solution to me, unless the Sussexeses row back from this calamitous misjudgement.
Yes, cut all royal funds and perks if they want to move to the US or Canada and become self financing but they can keep the token title of Duke and Duchess which are not royal titles by themselves anyway
You can't go calling H&M "The Sussex". That just does not sound right.
You call them the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
For now.
Would be quite hillarious if she got told she can't use the "Sussex Royal" brand that has been registered in the USA.
It shouldn't have surprised me, but did, to find out today that they don't actually live in Sussex. The aristocracy's casual appropriation if bits of geography is a minor but not insignificant factor in my general irritation with the whole institution.
Maybe this is all a conspiracy to make those further up the order of precedence look good by comparison.
Notice how all those daily anti-Brexit stories on BBC/Sky/ITV have suddenly stopped since 12th December?
They have disappeared almost as quickly as "CHB" disappeared from here after 12th Dec!!!!!
How odd!
I have noticed both of those things. I'd add Yahoo finance and MSN to the news sources which have changed tone significantly since Dec 12th. I miss Horse. He was a lot more fun than many of the popups we get leading up to election time, though increasingly angry as time went on.
You can't go calling H&M "The Sussex". That just does not sound right.
You call them the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
For now.
Would be quite hillarious if she got told she can't use the "Sussex Royal" brand that has been registered in the USA.
It shouldn't have surprised me, but did, to find out today that they don't actually live in Sussex. The aristocracy's casual appropriation if bits of geography is a minor but not insignificant factor in my general irritation with the whole institution.
Maybe this is all a conspiracy to make those further up the order of precedence look good by comparison.
Next you'll be telling me the Prince of Wales doesn't live in Caerphilly and that Andrew doesn't live the shadow of York Minster.
Jeremy Corbyn will stop being leader in April. But he won’t stop being Jeremy Corbyn — the Jeremy Corbyn, that is, who spent decades campaigning and speaking about his political passions, and who will be given a new freedom when he steps down. That’s why Labour is going to find it impossible to escape from his shadow in 2020 — and beyond.
Jeremy Corbyn will stop being leader in April. But he won’t stop being Jeremy Corbyn — the Jeremy Corbyn, that is, who spent decades campaigning and speaking about his political passions, and who will be given a new freedom when he steps down. That’s why Labour is going to find it impossible to escape from his shadow in 2020 — and beyond.
Is there any way of setting up a dedicated thread for those fascinated by Royal news?
My office has decided Meghan is a wrong'un fwiw.
Like the rest of the country. This is clearly a catastrophic move by Hal and Meg.
Did they seek PR advice from Prince Andrew first? Seems so.
She’s lost my wife too, who’s hitherto been a defender of hers.
She's lost ME. I was a Meghan defender until yesterday. She's a bit annoying and woke, and rather vain, but she's also interesting, independent, refreshing, and really very pretty (which helps). And her entry into the royal family was a great way to signal inclusivity.
But this mis-step is so huge and glaring and awful (and they didn't warn the Queen???!) it blows all that away and makes me look at her the way others have looked at her. Harshly.
Notice how all those daily anti-Brexit stories on BBC/Sky/ITV have suddenly stopped since 12th December?
They have disappeared almost as quickly as "CHB" disappeared from here after 12th Dec!!!!!
How odd!
I have noticed both of those things. I'd add Yahoo finance and MSN to the news sources which have changed tone significantly since Dec 12th. I miss Horse. He was a lot more fun than many of the popups we get leading up to election time, though increasingly angry as time went on.
He wanted Starmer to win the leadership I think, so he should be quite pleased at the way things are now going, especially if Nandy and Wrong-Dailey split the vote in some way.
If Starmer turns out to want PR it'll brighten my day too although it comes far too late to stop B*****.
Notice how all those daily anti-Brexit stories on BBC/Sky/ITV have suddenly stopped since 12th December?
They have disappeared almost as quickly as "CHB" disappeared from here after 12th Dec!!!!!
How odd!
I have noticed both of those things. I'd add Yahoo finance and MSN to the news sources which have changed tone significantly since Dec 12th. I miss Horse. He was a lot more fun than many of the popups we get leading up to election time, though increasingly angry as time went on.
He wanted Starmer to win the leadership I think, so he should be quite pleased at the way things are now going, especially if Nandy and Wrong-Dailey split the vote in some way.
If Starmer turns out to want PR it'll brighten my day too although it comes far too late to stop B*****.
But doesn't the transfer system mean that vote-splitting is meaningless? [I'm not fully up to speed on the process, so might be wrong]
Jeremy Corbyn will stop being leader in April. But he won’t stop being Jeremy Corbyn — the Jeremy Corbyn, that is, who spent decades campaigning and speaking about his political passions, and who will be given a new freedom when he steps down. That’s why Labour is going to find it impossible to escape from his shadow in 2020 — and beyond.
The fact that he's going to camp on the back benches forever will provide an irresistible target for the Tories any time the new Labour leader either diverges from or cleaves to Corbynism in any significant way... the potential for mischief is massive.
Quite right. The poor woman was a hate figure to the miserable, hypocritical British press. You only live once. I can perfectly understand their wish to tell those vultures where to stick it.
Jeremy Corbyn will stop being leader in April. But he won’t stop being Jeremy Corbyn — the Jeremy Corbyn, that is, who spent decades campaigning and speaking about his political passions, and who will be given a new freedom when he steps down. That’s why Labour is going to find it impossible to escape from his shadow in 2020 — and beyond.
The fact that he's going to camp on the back benches forever will provide an irresistible target for the Tories any time the new Labour leader either diverges from or cleaves to Corbynism in any significant way... the potential for mischief is massive.
Quite right. The poor woman was a hate figure to the miserable, hypocritical British press. You only live once. I can perfectly understand their wish to tell those vultures where to stick it.
Yes, I get all that. So why don't they toddle off to Hollywood as Mr and Mrs Wales, where they could both earn squillions and be private.
But no, they ALSO want to take their royal titles, take their (just trademarked) Sussex royal tat, they want to keep their VIP status, they want to keep their £3m Frogmore home (which we paid for), they want to keep 95% of their royal income which comes from Dad (but is still ultimately funded by us). And meanwhile they don't want to do any more royal work, thanks.
And this is how they will achieve "financial independence"?
What's even stranger is that there is no mention of the possibility they might, you know, use their OWN money to achieve "financial independence", which wouldn't be too hard as they are worth an estimated $50m between them. Most of it Harry's,
You talk of "vomit-inducing". I suggest that, to the average Briton, Harry and Meghan's self pitying greed, with its nauseating justifications, will go down like a cup of cold sick
Is there any way of setting up a dedicated thread for those fascinated by Royal news?
My office has decided Meghan is a wrong'un fwiw.
Like the rest of the country. This is clearly a catastrophic move by Hal and Meg.
Did they seek PR advice from Prince Andrew first? Seems so.
She’s lost my wife too, who’s hitherto been a defender of hers.
She's lost ME. I was a Meghan defender until yesterday. She's a bit annoying and woke, and rather vain, but she's also interesting, independent, refreshing, and really very pretty (which helps). And her entry into the royal family was a great way to signal inclusivity.
But this mis-step is so huge and glaring and awful (and they didn't warn the Queen???!) it blows all that away and makes me look at her the way others have looked at her. Harshly.
Mrs U had some friends round last night. All labour voters, not big fans of the traditional royal family. So I fully expected for them to be very supportive of Meghan and be banging on about how awful the Daily Rant is. It was quite the opposite, particularly not telling Liz.
I presume we are going to get some polling on this, will be interesting to see what the wider public think.
Is there any way of setting up a dedicated thread for those fascinated by Royal news?
My office has decided Meghan is a wrong'un fwiw.
Like the rest of the country. This is clearly a catastrophic move by Hal and Meg.
Did they seek PR advice from Prince Andrew first? Seems so.
She’s lost my wife too, who’s hitherto been a defender of hers.
She's lost ME. I was a Meghan defender until yesterday. She's a bit annoying and woke, and rather vain, but she's also interesting, independent, refreshing, and really very pretty (which helps). And her entry into the royal family was a great way to signal inclusivity.
But this mis-step is so huge and glaring and awful (and they didn't warn the Queen???!) it blows all that away and makes me look at her the way others have looked at her. Harshly.
Mrs U had some friends round last night. All labour voters, not big fans of the traditional royal family. So I fully expected for them to be very supportive of Meghan and be banging on about how awful the Daily Rant is. It was quite the opposite, particularly not telling Liz.
I presume we are going to get some polling on this, will be interesting to see what the wider public think.
Maybe that's why the government is rather guarded on this. They want to see which way the public wind is blowing...
Is there any way of setting up a dedicated thread for those fascinated by Royal news?
My office has decided Meghan is a wrong'un fwiw.
Like the rest of the country. This is clearly a catastrophic move by Hal and Meg.
Did they seek PR advice from Prince Andrew first? Seems so.
She’s lost my wife too, who’s hitherto been a defender of hers.
She's lost ME. I was a Meghan defender until yesterday. She's a bit annoying and woke, and rather vain, but she's also interesting, independent, refreshing, and really very pretty (which helps). And her entry into the royal family was a great way to signal inclusivity.
But this mis-step is so huge and glaring and awful (and they didn't warn the Queen???!) it blows all that away and makes me look at her the way others have looked at her. Harshly.
Mrs U had some friends round last night. All labour voters, not big fans of the traditional royal family. So I fully expected for them to be very supportive of Meghan and be banging on about how awful the Daily Rant is. It was quite the opposite, particularly not telling Liz.
I presume we are going to get some polling on this, will be interesting to see what the wider public think.
Noticeable that Meghan's few defenders on Twitter are the preening lefty celebs, Caitlin Moran, Matt Haig etc
My guess is the polling will be BAD for Hal and Megz
It's such a shame. Really sad. They could have been a wonderfully popular interesting addition to the royal family. And yes the vile tabloids have much to do with this. But the couple have handled their side so very very badly. Sigh,
Quite right. The poor woman was a hate figure to the miserable, hypocritical British press. You only live once. I can perfectly understand their wish to tell those vultures where to stick it.
Yes, I get all that. So why don't they toddle off to Hollywood as Mr and Mrs Wales, where they could both earn squillions and be private.
But no, they ALSO want to take their royal titles, take their (just trademarked) Sussex royal tat, they want to keep their VIP status, they want to keep their £3m Frogmore home (which we paid for), they want to keep 95% of their royal income which comes from Dad (but is still ultimately funded by us). And meanwhile they don't want to do any more royal work, thanks.
And this is how they will achieve "financial independence"?
What's even stranger is that there is no mention of the possibility they might, you know, use their OWN money to achieve "financial independence", which wouldn't be too hard as they are worth an estimated $50m between them. Most of it Harry's,
You talk of "vomit-inducing". I suggest that, to the average Briton, Harry and Meghan's self pitying greed, with its nauseating justifications, will go down like a cup of cold sick
All we're getting at the moment is shrill tittle-tattle from the media. I suspect that when the smoke clears we'll see that this was planned all along as part of Charles's greater project to downsize the monarchical structure. Yes, the PR hasn't been great, but Megs would have taken a bloody big hit however they did it.
You can't go calling H&M "The Sussex". That just does not sound right.
You call them the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
For now.
Would be quite hillarious if she got told she can't use the "Sussex Royal" brand that has been registered in the USA.
It shouldn't have surprised me, but did, to find out today that they don't actually live in Sussex. The aristocracy's casual appropriation if bits of geography is a minor but not insignificant factor in my general irritation with the whole institution.
Maybe this is all a conspiracy to make those further up the order of precedence look good by comparison.
Next you'll be telling me the Prince of Wales doesn't live in Caerphilly and that Andrew doesn't live the shadow of York Minster.
Madness.
The Prince of Wales is a highly offensive title. Many Welsh people see it as a symbol of subjugation, dislike it heartily, and would like to see it abolished.
You can call him the Prince of Anorak, if you're so fond of him and want to claim him. I am not and I don't.
Quite right. The poor woman was a hate figure to the miserable, hypocritical British press. You only live once. I can perfectly understand their wish to tell those vultures where to stick it.
Yes, I get all that. So why don't they toddle off to Hollywood as Mr and Mrs Wales, where they could both earn squillions and be private.
But no, they ALSO want to take their royal titles, take their (just trademarked) Sussex royal tat, they want to keep their VIP status, they want to keep their £3m Frogmore home (which we paid for), they want to keep 95% of their royal income which comes from Dad (but is still ultimately funded by us). And meanwhile they don't want to do any more royal work, thanks.
And this is how they will achieve "financial independence"?
What's even stranger is that there is no mention of the possibility they might, you know, use their OWN money to achieve "financial independence", which wouldn't be too hard as they are worth an estimated $50m between them. Most of it Harry's,
You talk of "vomit-inducing". I suggest that, to the average Briton, Harry and Meghan's self pitying greed, with its nauseating justifications, will go down like a cup of cold sick
All we're getting at the moment is shrill tittle-tattle from the media. I suspect that when the smoke clears we'll see that this was planned all along as part of Charles's greater project to downsize the monarchical structure. Yes, the PR hasn't been great, but Megs would have taken a bloody big hit however they did it.
If you can be bothered to get off your rhetorical arse the Standard has the timeline. Basically Meg and Hal fucked it all up, and behaved like kids.
"Another member of the royal household told the Standard: “This hasn’t been properly thought through.
"It is an incredibly self-indulgent and the way they made this announcement showed little or no respect to the Queen or the Prince of Wales who have been given a lifetime of service to the Crown. It is shocking, just shocking behaviour."
Anyone on Barry? We've had some longshots and optimistic trading bets trotted out here over the years, but I don't remember him being among them. He looks like my wife's uncle.
I am apparently on him for £7.50 @ 358/1.
Amusingly, I have since cashed out the market (after it became clear that I have no idea what's going to happen), but couldn't do anything about this one since there was no money down backing him.
I also like the way the Sussexeses say "we will be spending our time in North America" like they are gonna buy a ranch in Manitoba or do good works in Newfoundland
Of course, in reality, they are off to southern California.
"It is understood that the focus of their new lives in North America is likely to be southern California, so that Meghan can spend time with her mother Doria Ragland....
One source was quoted saying: “Meghan really wants to live in California, it’s where she is from and where her mother lives. She likes the lifestyle and the privacy there.""
I also like the way the Sussexeses say "we will be spending our time in North America" like they are gonna buy a ranch in Manitoba or do good works in Newfoundland
Of course, in reality, they are off to southern California.
"It is understood that the focus of their new lives in North America is likely to be southern California, so that Meghan can spend time with her mother Doria Ragland....
One source was quoted saying: “Meghan really wants to live in California, it’s where she is from and where her mother lives. She likes the lifestyle and the privacy there.""
Privacy in California? Really? Seems unlikely. Vancouver Island I could see, but if they move to Southern California the paps will be following around day and night.
Comments
File under: Things That Make You Go Hmmmm......
The guy was a Nigerian fraudster, so it's odd he forgot the bit about $25m in the note.
I feel a bit sorry for Emily.
Mine is voting for Bill Weld in the Republican primary on the grounds that “he is the only sensible one”
Blair put it into his reworked Clause IV; Corbyn made it Labour's campaign slogan; Boris has it from his ancient Greek hero, Pericles.
The Sunday Times did a proper expose on it, including confirmation via a British journalist who served time in Chinese prisons.
There’s almost three months to go in the race, which is an eternity.
Boris is pursuing Brexit,a points based immigration system, tougher sentences for the worst criminals etc.
Blair was not a full on Thatcherite like Hague, IDS and Howard and Boris is not a full on Corbynite like Corbyn
A Brazilian judge on Wednesday ordered Netflix to stop showing a Christmas special that some called blasphemous for depicting Jesus as a gay man and which prompted a bomb attack on the satirists behind the programme.
The ruling by a Rio de Janeiro judge, Benedicto Abicair, responded to a petition by a Brazilian Catholic organisation that argued the “honour of millions of Catholics” was hurt by the airing of The First Temptation of Christ. The special was produced by the Rio-based film company Porta dos Fundos, whose headquarters was targeted in the Christmas Eve attack.
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2020/jan/09/brazil-orders-netflix-remove-gay-jesus-comedy-first-temptation-christ?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
I think there is - and that's where the Hard Left are in Labour right now.
Only after we've swept them away in a landslide though!
He looks like my wife's uncle.
(Sorry. Nerd reflex. I am a bad person...
That is a justification for permanent Boris landslides, which I am not comfortable with.
Would be quite hillarious if she got told she can't use the "Sussex Royal" brand that has been registered in the USA.
Either way I've zeroed my Starmer position on the basis that his odds will improve at some point in the next 3 months. A 66% chance of winning feels too high.
They have disappeared almost as quickly as "CHB" disappeared from here after 12th Dec!!!!!
How odd!
Did they seek PR advice from Prince Andrew first? Seems so.
Over and out.
Back for some real politics in due course.
The aristocracy's casual appropriation if bits of geography is a minor but not insignificant factor in my general irritation with the whole institution.
Maybe this is all a conspiracy to make those further up the order of precedence look good by comparison.
I miss Horse. He was a lot more fun than many of the popups we get leading up to election time, though increasingly angry as time went on.
Madness.
https://twitter.com/ExStrategist/status/1215016115920879618
https://twitter.com/lusamedusa/status/1215196671686127616
https://unherd.com/2020/01/dont-expect-corbyn-to-go-quietly/
But this mis-step is so huge and glaring and awful (and they didn't warn the Queen???!) it blows all that away and makes me look at her the way others have looked at her. Harshly.
If Starmer turns out to want PR it'll brighten my day too although it comes far too late to stop B*****.
But no, they ALSO want to take their royal titles, take their (just trademarked) Sussex royal tat, they want to keep their VIP status, they want to keep their £3m Frogmore home (which we paid for), they want to keep 95% of their royal income which comes from Dad (but is still ultimately funded by us). And meanwhile they don't want to do any more royal work, thanks.
And this is how they will achieve "financial independence"?
What's even stranger is that there is no mention of the possibility they might, you know, use their OWN money to achieve "financial independence", which wouldn't be too hard as they are worth an estimated $50m between them. Most of it Harry's,
https://www.cosmopolitan.com/entertainment/celebs/a30446498/prince-harry-net-worth/
You talk of "vomit-inducing". I suggest that, to the average Briton, Harry and Meghan's self pitying greed, with its nauseating justifications, will go down like a cup of cold sick
I presume we are going to get some polling on this, will be interesting to see what the wider public think.
My guess is the polling will be BAD for Hal and Megz
It's such a shame. Really sad. They could have been a wonderfully popular interesting addition to the royal family. And yes the vile tabloids have much to do with this. But the couple have handled their side so very very badly. Sigh,
You can call him the Prince of Anorak, if you're so fond of him and want to claim him. I am not and I don't.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/prince-harry-queen-meghan-markle-defied-plans-senior-royals-a4330341.html
"Another member of the royal household told the Standard: “This hasn’t been properly thought through.
"It is an incredibly self-indulgent and the way they made this announcement showed little or no respect to the Queen or the Prince of Wales who have been given a lifetime of service to the Crown. It is shocking, just shocking behaviour."
Amusingly, I have since cashed out the market (after it became clear that I have no idea what's going to happen), but couldn't do anything about this one since there was no money down backing him.
So, er, the bet stands. Go Bazza!
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/world/boeing-737-iran-plane-crash-cause-a4330511.html
Of course, in reality, they are off to southern California.
"It is understood that the focus of their new lives in North America is likely to be southern California, so that Meghan can spend time with her mother Doria Ragland....
One source was quoted saying: “Meghan really wants to live in California, it’s where she is from and where her mother lives. She likes the lifestyle and the privacy there.""