politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Looking at when Boris Johnson’s tenure as Conservative Party l

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Gallowgate said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Gallowgate said:

CarlottaVance said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

CarlottaVance said:

It was only a matter of time until somebody linked the decision taken by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to Brexit. “It’s the racism,” claimed the writer Afua Hirsch in The New York Times. “With a new prime minister whose track record includes overtly racist statements . . . a Brexit project linked to native nationalism and a desire to rid Britain of large numbers of immigrants, and an ever-thickening loom of imperial nostalgia, many of us are also thinking about moving.”

Welcome to the incredibly depressing world-view of the liberal left. The only problem is that it isn’t true. Compare and contrast this bleak picture of Britain with the evidence.

As every study of Brexit has shown, the British voted this way not because of white supremacism, to kick out immigrants or to return to splendid isolation.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/goodbye-little-england-we-are-positively-happy-0hk3sgd8c

Newsnight ran a piece by Lewis Goodall the other day that said basically the same thing. The country is split, those that eat quinoa and those that don't

The trouble is the quinoa eaters write the newspapers, broadcast the news, tweet and talk to politicians. The non-quinoa eaters have now twice reminded them who is actually in charge.

I should remind you that Liberal Democrat and Labour "quinoa eaters" outnumber Conservative "non-quinoa eaters".

Con 365
Lab 202
LD 11

That doesn't invalidate the truth in my statement.

202+11 does not outnumber 365!

If you read carefully, you'd notice that I was talking about "quinoa eaters" and not "seats in the House of Commons".

ExiledInScotland said:

logical_song said:

MaxPB said:

stodge said:

Mrs Stodge is furious over the proposed IR35 tax changes which are going to make her working life as a Contractor much harder.

Good. It is working as intended. Too many people are getting away with tax dodging by being personal service "companies". The solution we've used is to bring the contractors on staff at a 38% gross pay cut or say goodbye. I have very little sympathy for tax dodgers.

So you want to deprive the economy of freelancers who are willing to work away from home for periods of a few months.? The country needs them to help deliver an agile economy. The answer is simple, put. a time limit on contracts to determine what is within IR35.

I’m a contractor. I used a limited company because that’s what the end clients wanted. Now they don’t. The benefit to me was reduced NI contributions. That has been almost totally offset by the changes to allowable expenses and tax on dividends. My accountant told me last year that the net annual benefit to me of limited company status was about £500. So not a significant avoidance.

What I see is the market for my type of role has collapsed, end client projects are failing and the government will lose a lot of tax revenue due to lower activity. How is that good?

Conservatives are no longer interested in pragmatic policies. It doesn't matter if tax revenue is less if it "feels right".

Gallowgate said:

CarlottaVance said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

CarlottaVance said:

It was only a matter of time until somebody linked the decision taken by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to Brexit. “It’s the racism,” claimed the writer Afua Hirsch in The New York Times. “With a new prime minister whose track record includes overtly racist statements . . . a Brexit project linked to native nationalism and a desire to rid Britain of large numbers of immigrants, and an ever-thickening loom of imperial nostalgia, many of us are also thinking about moving.”

Welcome to the incredibly depressing world-view of the liberal left. The only problem is that it isn’t true. Compare and contrast this bleak picture of Britain with the evidence.

As every study of Brexit has shown, the British voted this way not because of white supremacism, to kick out immigrants or to return to splendid isolation.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/goodbye-little-england-we-are-positively-happy-0hk3sgd8c

Newsnight ran a piece by Lewis Goodall the other day that said basically the same thing. The country is split, those that eat quinoa and those that don't

The trouble is the quinoa eaters write the newspapers, broadcast the news, tweet and talk to politicians. The non-quinoa eaters have now twice reminded them who is actually in charge.

I should remind you that Liberal Democrat and Labour "quinoa eaters" outnumber Conservative "non-quinoa eaters".

That's actually not true. It's highly unlikely that 100% of the voters of both parties are metropolitan liberals. I'd just about agree to the Lib Dems, but not Labour.

Lol, on fact it's definitely not true, we got 13.9m votes compared to 13.8m for Lab+LD.

Gallowgate said:

TGOHF666 said:

https://twitter.com/mike_blackley/status/1216301869934481410?s=21

One nation Conservatives uniting the nation through petulance.

The 2016 Referendum question was on whether the United Kingdom should remain or leave.

You know that Labour has fecked up when Greggs customers vote Tory and our votes come from Waitrose shoppers.

SandyRentool said:

You know that Labour has fecked up when Greggs customers vote Tory and our votes come from Waitrose shoppers.

**spits out Vegan sausage roll**

MaxPB said:

Gallowgate said:

MaxPB said:

Gallowgate said:

CarlottaVance said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

CarlottaVance said:

It was only a matter of time until somebody linked the decision taken by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to Brexit. “It’s the racism,” claimed the writer Afua Hirsch in The New York Times. “With a new prime minister whose track record includes overtly racist statements . . . a Brexit project linked to native nationalism and a desire to rid Britain of large numbers of immigrants, and an ever-thickening loom of imperial nostalgia, many of us are also thinking about moving.”

Welcome to the incredibly depressing world-view of the liberal left. The only problem is that it isn’t true. Compare and contrast this bleak picture of Britain with the evidence.

As every study of Brexit has shown, the British voted this way not because of white supremacism, to kick out immigrants or to return to splendid isolation.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/goodbye-little-england-we-are-positively-happy-0hk3sgd8c

Newsnight ran a piece by Lewis Goodall the other day that said basically the same thing. The country is split, those that eat quinoa and those that don't

The trouble is the quinoa eaters write the newspapers, broadcast the news, tweet and talk to politicians. The non-quinoa eaters have now twice reminded them who is actually in charge.

I should remind you that Liberal Democrat and Labour "quinoa eaters" outnumber Conservative "non-quinoa eaters".

That's actually not true. It's highly unlikely that 100% of the voters of both parties are metropolitan liberals. I'd just about agree to the Lib Dems, but not Labour.

Well likewise by the same metric, it's highly unlikely that 100% of the voters of the Conservatives are not metropolitan liberals.

Indeed, I've been known to have a quinoa salad with an oat milk cortado...

And I hate quinoa.

Gallowgate said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Gallowgate said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Gallowgate said:

CarlottaVance said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

CarlottaVance said:

It was only a matter of time until somebody linked the decision taken by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to Brexit. “It’s the racism,” claimed the writer Afua Hirsch in The New York Times. “With a new prime minister whose track record includes overtly racist statements . . . a Brexit project linked to native nationalism and a desire to rid Britain of large numbers of immigrants, and an ever-thickening loom of imperial nostalgia, many of us are also thinking about moving.”

Welcome to the incredibly depressing world-view of the liberal left. The only problem is that it isn’t true. Compare and contrast this bleak picture of Britain with the evidence.

As every study of Brexit has shown, the British voted this way not because of white supremacism, to kick out immigrants or to return to splendid isolation.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/goodbye-little-england-we-are-positively-happy-0hk3sgd8c

Newsnight ran a piece by Lewis Goodall the other day that said basically the same thing. The country is split, those that eat quinoa and those that don't

The trouble is the quinoa eaters write the newspapers, broadcast the news, tweet and talk to politicians. The non-quinoa eaters have now twice reminded them who is actually in charge.

I should remind you that Liberal Democrat and Labour "quinoa eaters" outnumber Conservative "non-quinoa eaters".

Con 365
Lab 202
LD 11

That doesn't invalidate the truth in my statement.

202+11 does not outnumber 365!

If you read carefully, you'd notice that I was talking about "quinoa eaters" and not "seats in the House of Commons".

And I was talking about "who is in charge" - and that does depend on the number of seats in the HoC...

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Gallowgate said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Gallowgate said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Gallowgate said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Gallowgate said:

CarlottaVance said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

CarlottaVance said:

It was only a matter of time until somebody linked the decision taken by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to Brexit. “It’s the racism,” claimed the writer Afua Hirsch in The New York Times. “With a new prime minister whose track record includes overtly racist statements . . . a Brexit project linked to native nationalism and a desire to rid Britain of large numbers of immigrants, and an ever-thickening loom of imperial nostalgia, many of us are also thinking about moving.”

Welcome to the incredibly depressing world-view of the liberal left. The only problem is that it isn’t true. Compare and contrast this bleak picture of Britain with the evidence.

As every study of Brexit has shown, the British voted this way not because of white supremacism, to kick out immigrants or to return to splendid isolation.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/goodbye-little-england-we-are-positively-happy-0hk3sgd8c

Newsnight ran a piece by Lewis Goodall the other day that said basically the same thing. The country is split, those that eat quinoa and those that don't

The trouble is the quinoa eaters write the newspapers, broadcast the news, tweet and talk to politicians. The non-quinoa eaters have now twice reminded them who is actually in charge.

I should remind you that Liberal Democrat and Labour "quinoa eaters" outnumber Conservative "non-quinoa eaters".

Con 365
Lab 202
LD 11

That doesn't invalidate the truth in my statement.

202+11 does not outnumber 365!

If you read carefully, you'd notice that I was talking about "quinoa eaters" and not "seats in the House of Commons".

Give us the 2011 Census data for quinoa eaters vs. non-quinoa eaters!

According to some, anyone who lives or works inside the M25 is a Labour voting quinoa eater (apart from themselves obviously), and anyone who lives or works outside the M25 is a Brexit supporting Boris obsessive who hates pansexuals and quinoa.

But surely those living/working outside the M25 outnumber those inside the M25?

Yes but it's b*llocks regardless. The people who shout loudest about the "Westminster bubble" are those who live in London themselves. @Byronic is a prime example.

CarlottaVance said:

Gallowgate said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Gallowgate said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Gallowgate said:

CarlottaVance said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

CarlottaVance said:

It was only a matter of time until somebody linked the decision taken by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to Brexit. “It’s the racism,” claimed the writer Afua Hirsch in The New York Times. “With a new prime minister whose track record includes overtly racist statements . . . a Brexit project linked to native nationalism and a desire to rid Britain of large numbers of immigrants, and an ever-thickening loom of imperial nostalgia, many of us are also thinking about moving.”

Welcome to the incredibly depressing world-view of the liberal left. The only problem is that it isn’t true. Compare and contrast this bleak picture of Britain with the evidence.

As every study of Brexit has shown, the British voted this way not because of white supremacism, to kick out immigrants or to return to splendid isolation.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/goodbye-little-england-we-are-positively-happy-0hk3sgd8c

Newsnight ran a piece by Lewis Goodall the other day that said basically the same thing. The country is split, those that eat quinoa and those that don't

The trouble is the quinoa eaters write the newspapers, broadcast the news, tweet and talk to politicians. The non-quinoa eaters have now twice reminded them who is actually in charge.

I should remind you that Liberal Democrat and Labour "quinoa eaters" outnumber Conservative "non-quinoa eaters".

Con 365
Lab 202
LD 11

That doesn't invalidate the truth in my statement.

202+11 does not outnumber 365!

If you read carefully, you'd notice that I was talking about "quinoa eaters" and not "seats in the House of Commons".

And I was talking about "who is in charge" - and that does depend on the number of seats in the HoC...

And I was reminding you that you may be in charge but you don't represent the majority.

Gallowgate said:

SandyRentool said:

You know that Labour has fecked up when Greggs customers vote Tory and our votes come from Waitrose shoppers.

I'm not sure that's even true. Everyone I know who shops at Waitrose is a massive Tory.

Not in Morningside

Gallowgate said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Gallowgate said:

CarlottaVance said:

Gallowgate said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Gallowgate said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Gallowgate said:

CarlottaVance said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

CarlottaVance said:

It was only a matter of time until somebody linked the decision taken by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to Brexit. “It’s the racism,” claimed the writer Afua Hirsch in The New York Times. “With a new prime minister whose track record includes overtly racist statements . . . a Brexit project linked to native nationalism and a desire to rid Britain of large numbers of immigrants, and an ever-thickening loom of imperial nostalgia, many of us are also thinking about moving.”

Welcome to the incredibly depressing world-view of the liberal left. The only problem is that it isn’t true. Compare and contrast this bleak picture of Britain with the evidence.

As every study of Brexit has shown, the British voted this way not because of white supremacism, to kick out immigrants or to return to splendid isolation.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/goodbye-little-england-we-are-positively-happy-0hk3sgd8c

Newsnight ran a piece by Lewis Goodall the other day that said basically the same thing. The country is split, those that eat quinoa and those that don't

The trouble is the quinoa eaters write the newspapers, broadcast the news, tweet and talk to politicians. The non-quinoa eaters have now twice reminded them who is actually in charge.

I should remind you that Liberal Democrat and Labour "quinoa eaters" outnumber Conservative "non-quinoa eaters".

Con 365
Lab 202
LD 11

That doesn't invalidate the truth in my statement.

202+11 does not outnumber 365!

If you read carefully, you'd notice that I was talking about "quinoa eaters" and not "seats in the House of Commons".

And I was talking about "who is in charge" - and that does depend on the number of seats in the HoC...

And I was reminding you that you may be in charge but you don't represent the majority.

Boris has an 80-seat majority...

Yes. But he doesn't represent the majority. Hence a bit of humility might not go amiss.

80-seat majority!

Gallowgate said:

CarlottaVance said:

Gallowgate said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Gallowgate said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Gallowgate said:

CarlottaVance said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

CarlottaVance said:

It was only a matter of time until somebody linked the decision taken by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to Brexit. “It’s the racism,” claimed the writer Afua Hirsch in The New York Times. “With a new prime minister whose track record includes overtly racist statements . . . a Brexit project linked to native nationalism and a desire to rid Britain of large numbers of immigrants, and an ever-thickening loom of imperial nostalgia, many of us are also thinking about moving.”

Welcome to the incredibly depressing world-view of the liberal left. The only problem is that it isn’t true. Compare and contrast this bleak picture of Britain with the evidence.

As every study of Brexit has shown, the British voted this way not because of white supremacism, to kick out immigrants or to return to splendid isolation.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/goodbye-little-england-we-are-positively-happy-0hk3sgd8c

Newsnight ran a piece by Lewis Goodall the other day that said basically the same thing. The country is split, those that eat quinoa and those that don't

The trouble is the quinoa eaters write the newspapers, broadcast the news, tweet and talk to politicians. The non-quinoa eaters have now twice reminded them who is actually in charge.

I should remind you that Liberal Democrat and Labour "quinoa eaters" outnumber Conservative "non-quinoa eaters".

Con 365
Lab 202
LD 11

That doesn't invalidate the truth in my statement.

202+11 does not outnumber 365!

If you read carefully, you'd notice that I was talking about "quinoa eaters" and not "seats in the House of Commons".

And I was talking about "who is in charge" - and that does depend on the number of seats in the HoC...

And I was reminding you that you may be in charge but you don't represent the majority.

I'd remind you that Boris represents the democratic outcome across the whole of the United Kingdom. If you want to rail at that, suggest you start with asking Tony Blair why he didn't change the system when he had a 177 seat majority.

(Spoiler: because the system gave him a 177 seat majority....)

StuartDickson said:

‘Chaos reigns within Labour as Leonard forced into U-turn over indyref2’

Sources told the Herald on Sunday that the outcome was ‘utterly humiliating’, ‘a complete mess’ and showed ‘ a complete loss of authority’ for Scottish Labour leader Richard Leonard.

Miles Briggs, the Conservative MSP said... “They are all over the place when it comes to Scotland’s place in the Union.“

Willie Rennie... “The Liberal Democrats are clear: we are opposed to independence. Who knows what Labour’s position is.”

(Herald on Sunday £)

Richard Leonard is still the shortest priced Unionist to be next FM, at 12/1 (Shadsy). I find it very hard to believe that he’ll survive as SLab leader until May 2021.

Next Scottish First Minister (Ladbrokes)

Derek Mackay (SNP) 3/1
Kate Forbes (SNP) 8/1
Angus Robertson (SNP) 10/1
Keith Brown (SNP) 12/1
Richard Leonard (Lab) 12/1
John Swinney (SNP) 12/1
Mhairi Black (SNP) 16/1
Shona Robison (SNP) 16/1
Mike Russell (SNP) 16/1
Humza Yousaf (SNP) 16/1

It’ll be interesting to see how Shadsy prices Jackson Carlaw (next Con leader?) in this market. A lot will depend on how conciliatory Carlaw is towards Scottish Labour and the Scottish Liberal Democrats, both deeply bruised and hurt by their treatment from the Conservatives over the last five years. Forgive & forget is profoundly unlikely.

Derek Mackay has to be the value there. If the Salmond trial brings down Nicola he seems a shoo in given that most of his senior rivals are not even in Holyrood.

StuartDickson said:

‘Chaos reigns within Labour as Leonard forced into U-turn over indyref2’

Sources told the Herald on Sunday that the outcome was ‘utterly humiliating’, ‘a complete mess’ and showed ‘ a complete loss of authority’ for Scottish Labour leader Richard Leonard.

Miles Briggs, the Conservative MSP said... “They are all over the place when it comes to Scotland’s place in the Union.“

Willie Rennie... “The Liberal Democrats are clear: we are opposed to independence. Who knows what Labour’s position is.”

(Herald on Sunday £)

Richard Leonard is still the shortest priced Unionist to be next FM, at 12/1 (Shadsy). I find it very hard to believe that he’ll survive as SLab leader until May 2021.

Next Scottish First Minister (Ladbrokes)

Derek Mackay (SNP) 3/1
Kate Forbes (SNP) 8/1
Angus Robertson (SNP) 10/1
Keith Brown (SNP) 12/1
Richard Leonard (Lab) 12/1
John Swinney (SNP) 12/1
Mhairi Black (SNP) 16/1
Shona Robison (SNP) 16/1
Mike Russell (SNP) 16/1
Humza Yousaf (SNP) 16/1

It’ll be interesting to see how Shadsy prices Jackson Carlaw (next Con leader?) in this market. A lot will depend on how conciliatory Carlaw is towards Scottish Labour and the Scottish Liberal Democrats, both deeply bruised and hurt by their treatment from the Conservatives over the last five years. Forgive & forget is profoundly unlikely.

Next First Minister in the short term is largely irrelevant, it will almost certainly still be Sturgeon after the Holyrood 2021 elections, far more important and far more likely is to get a Unionist majority to block indyref2 in Holyrood even if the SNP are still largest party

HYUFD said:

StuartDickson said:

‘Chaos reigns within Labour as Leonard forced into U-turn over indyref2’

Sources told the Herald on Sunday that the outcome was ‘utterly humiliating’, ‘a complete mess’ and showed ‘ a complete loss of authority’ for Scottish Labour leader Richard Leonard.

Miles Briggs, the Conservative MSP said... “They are all over the place when it comes to Scotland’s place in the Union.“

Willie Rennie... “The Liberal Democrats are clear: we are opposed to independence. Who knows what Labour’s position is.”

(Herald on Sunday £)

Richard Leonard is still the shortest priced Unionist to be next FM, at 12/1 (Shadsy). I find it very hard to believe that he’ll survive as SLab leader until May 2021.

Next Scottish First Minister (Ladbrokes)

Derek Mackay (SNP) 3/1
Kate Forbes (SNP) 8/1
Angus Robertson (SNP) 10/1
Keith Brown (SNP) 12/1
Richard Leonard (Lab) 12/1
John Swinney (SNP) 12/1
Mhairi Black (SNP) 16/1
Shona Robison (SNP) 16/1
Mike Russell (SNP) 16/1
Humza Yousaf (SNP) 16/1

It’ll be interesting to see how Shadsy prices Jackson Carlaw (next Con leader?) in this market. A lot will depend on how conciliatory Carlaw is towards Scottish Labour and the Scottish Liberal Democrats, both deeply bruised and hurt by their treatment from the Conservatives over the last five years. Forgive & forget is profoundly unlikely.

Next First Minister in the short term is largely irrelevant, it will almost certainly still be Sturgeon after the Holyrood 2021 elections, far more important and far more likely is to get a Unionist majority to block indyref2 in Holyrood even if the SNP are still largest party

I think that you are underestimating the risks for Nicola. The trial is now set down for early March. How many complainers will say that they spoke to someone who was both deputy FM and a power in the SNP both in her own right and through her husband? It seems inevitable that some or all of these women will be challenged about not having done or said anything at the time. If that is their response Nicola is toast.

SandyRentool said:

Also, as the "Corbynism without Corbyn" candidate it is surely sensible for RLB to at least hint that Jezza was the problem, and that otherwise our radical manifesto was a vote winner.

Otherwise she is just saying vote for me, more of the same, lose again next time.

I suppose that appeals to that part of the membership who aren't interested in forming a government.

Surely all this is the wrong way round, from most of the commentariat and indeed politicians.

If, as the the press and some on the right suggest, the problem is Corbyn was toxic, then Corbynism without Corbyn will win. It is RLB who is saying Labour lost due to policy issues.

DecrepiterJohnL said:

SandyRentool said:

Also, as the "Corbynism without Corbyn" candidate it is surely sensible for RLB to at least hint that Jezza was the problem, and that otherwise our radical manifesto was a vote winner.

Otherwise she is just saying vote for me, more of the same, lose again next time.

I suppose that appeals to that part of the membership who aren't interested in forming a government.

Surely all this is the wrong way round, from most of the commentariat and indeed politicians.

If, as the the press and some on the right suggest, the problem is Corbyn was toxic, then Corbynism without Corbyn will win. It is RLB who is saying Labour lost due to policy issues.

Correct. If Corbyn is 10/10 then the policies must have been mince.

Gallowgate said:

ExiledInScotland said:

Gallowgate said:

SandyRentool said:

You know that Labour has fecked up when Greggs customers vote Tory and our votes come from Waitrose shoppers.

I'm not sure that's even true. Everyone I know who shops at Waitrose is a massive Tory.

Not in Morningside

All my "metropolitan liberal" friends in Newcastle shop at Tesco or ASDA and eat vegan sausage rolls or steak bakes from Greggs.

Yeah, the "metropolitan elite" narrative has relevance, but many people are taking it way too far. The historical alignment of Labour poor vs Tory rich has been eroded almost to nothing. It hasn't been reversed.

CarlottaVance said:

DavidL said:

HYUFD said:

StuartDickson said:

‘Chaos reigns within Labour as Leonard forced into U-turn over indyref2’

Sources told the Herald on Sunday that the outcome was ‘utterly humiliating’, ‘a complete mess’ and showed ‘ a complete loss of authority’ for Scottish Labour leader Richard Leonard.

Miles Briggs, the Conservative MSP said... “They are all over the place when it comes to Scotland’s place in the Union.“

Willie Rennie... “The Liberal Democrats are clear: we are opposed to independence. Who knows what Labour’s position is.”

(Herald on Sunday £)

Richard Leonard is still the shortest priced Unionist to be next FM, at 12/1 (Shadsy). I find it very hard to believe that he’ll survive as SLab leader until May 2021.

Next Scottish First Minister (Ladbrokes)

Derek Mackay (SNP) 3/1
Kate Forbes (SNP) 8/1
Angus Robertson (SNP) 10/1
Keith Brown (SNP) 12/1
Richard Leonard (Lab) 12/1
John Swinney (SNP) 12/1
Mhairi Black (SNP) 16/1
Shona Robison (SNP) 16/1
Mike Russell (SNP) 16/1
Humza Yousaf (SNP) 16/1

It’ll be interesting to see how Shadsy prices Jackson Carlaw (next Con leader?) in this market. A lot will depend on how conciliatory Carlaw is towards Scottish Labour and the Scottish Liberal Democrats, both deeply bruised and hurt by their treatment from the Conservatives over the last five years. Forgive & forget is profoundly unlikely.

Next First Minister in the short term is largely irrelevant, it will almost certainly still be Sturgeon after the Holyrood 2021 elections, far more important and far more likely is to get a Unionist majority to block indyref2 in Holyrood even if the SNP are still largest party

If that is their response Nicola is toast.

And a witness in a trial.

Not sure if she will be or not. It might be problematic for either side.

NickPalmer said:

HYUFD said:

squareroot2 said:

NickPalmer said:

SandyRentool said:

Also, as the "Corbynism without Corbyn" candidate it is surely sensible for RLB to at least hint that Jezza was the problem, and that otherwise our radical manifesto was a vote winner.

Otherwise she is just saying vote for me, more of the same, lose again next time.

I suppose that appeals to that part of the membership who aren't interested in forming a government.

I think the 10 out of 10 comment was loyalty kicking in - as you say, it's not a sensible strategy, and the much-maligned Thornberry was much more reasonable (10 out of 10 for attracting members and inspiration, 0 out of 10 for winning the election).

If the choice was today I'd vote Starmer. But still keeping my mind open for the debate(s).

Really.. will the policies he hard left enough for you or are you hoping someone will do a Ken Livingstone /GLC?

Given Starmer would almost certainly need LD support to become PM after the next general election given how far Labour are behind the Tories (as Cameron did in 2010 also after 13 years out of power) it is rather a different scenario to the GLC in the early 80s when Labour had a majority

Yes, I agree. My basic philosophy is to vote as a first priority for someone with a reasonably left-wing reformist project and secondly for someone who can win. Thr former is enough while it lasts (hence Blair+Brown), but not when they run out of ideas and seem merely vaguely centrist (hence Corbyn rather than Owen etc.). I see Starmer as left-wing enough to do attractive things, and with a reasonable chance of winning. I think it's a common Labour view, even among Momentum members like me.

Starmer does seem to have had a good campaign start and making the right moves.

DavidL said:

HYUFD said:

StuartDickson said:

‘Chaos reigns within Labour as Leonard forced into U-turn over indyref2’

Sources told the Herald on Sunday that the outcome was ‘utterly humiliating’, ‘a complete mess’ and showed ‘ a complete loss of authority’ for Scottish Labour leader Richard Leonard.

Miles Briggs, the Conservative MSP said... “They are all over the place when it comes to Scotland’s place in the Union.“

Willie Rennie... “The Liberal Democrats are clear: we are opposed to independence. Who knows what Labour’s position is.”

(Herald on Sunday £)

Richard Leonard is still the shortest priced Unionist to be next FM, at 12/1 (Shadsy). I find it very hard to believe that he’ll survive as SLab leader until May 2021.

Next Scottish First Minister (Ladbrokes)

Derek Mackay (SNP) 3/1
Kate Forbes (SNP) 8/1
Angus Robertson (SNP) 10/1
Keith Brown (SNP) 12/1
Richard Leonard (Lab) 12/1
John Swinney (SNP) 12/1
Mhairi Black (SNP) 16/1
Shona Robison (SNP) 16/1
Mike Russell (SNP) 16/1
Humza Yousaf (SNP) 16/1

It’ll be interesting to see how Shadsy prices Jackson Carlaw (next Con leader?) in this market. A lot will depend on how conciliatory Carlaw is towards Scottish Labour and the Scottish Liberal Democrats, both deeply bruised and hurt by their treatment from the Conservatives over the last five years. Forgive & forget is profoundly unlikely.

Next First Minister in the short term is largely irrelevant, it will almost certainly still be Sturgeon after the Holyrood 2021 elections, far more important and far more likely is to get a Unionist majority to block indyref2 in Holyrood even if the SNP are still largest party

I think that you are underestimating the risks for Nicola. The trial is now set down for early March. How many complainers will say that they spoke to someone who was both deputy FM and a power in the SNP both in her own right and through her husband? It seems inevitable that some or all of these women will be challenged about not having done or said anything at the time. If that is their response Nicola is toast.

Bridge. Cross. Arrive.

NickPalmer said:

HYUFD said:

squareroot2 said:

NickPalmer said:

SandyRentool said:

Also, as the "Corbynism without Corbyn" candidate it is surely sensible for RLB to at least hint that Jezza was the problem, and that otherwise our radical manifesto was a vote winner.

Otherwise she is just saying vote for me, more of the same, lose again next time.

I suppose that appeals to that part of the membership who aren't interested in forming a government.

I think the 10 out of 10 comment was loyalty kicking in - as you say, it's not a sensible strategy, and the much-maligned Thornberry was much more reasonable (10 out of 10 for attracting members and inspiration, 0 out of 10 for winning the election).

If the choice was today I'd vote Starmer. But still keeping my mind open for the debate(s).

Really.. will the policies he hard left enough for you or are you hoping someone will do a Ken Livingstone /GLC?

Given Starmer would almost certainly need LD support to become PM after the next general election given how far Labour are behind the Tories (as Cameron did in 2010 also after 13 years out of power) it is rather a different scenario to the GLC in the early 80s when Labour had a majority

Yes, I agree. My basic philosophy is to vote as a first priority for someone with a reasonably left-wing reformist project and secondly for someone who can win. Thr former is enough while it lasts (hence Blair+Brown), but not when they run out of ideas and seem merely vaguely centrist (hence Corbyn rather than Owen etc.). I see Starmer as left-wing enough to do attractive things, and with a reasonable chance of winning. I think it's a common Labour view, even among Momentum members like me.

Starmer is no Blairite but he is more Ed Miliband than Corbyn

DavidL said:

HYUFD said:

StuartDickson said:

‘Chaos reigns within Labour as Leonard forced into U-turn over indyref2’

Sources told the Herald on Sunday that the outcome was ‘utterly humiliating’, ‘a complete mess’ and showed ‘ a complete loss of authority’ for Scottish Labour leader Richard Leonard.

Miles Briggs, the Conservative MSP said... “They are all over the place when it comes to Scotland’s place in the Union.“

Willie Rennie... “The Liberal Democrats are clear: we are opposed to independence. Who knows what Labour’s position is.”

(Herald on Sunday £)

Richard Leonard is still the shortest priced Unionist to be next FM, at 12/1 (Shadsy). I find it very hard to believe that he’ll survive as SLab leader until May 2021.

Next Scottish First Minister (Ladbrokes)

Derek Mackay (SNP) 3/1
Kate Forbes (SNP) 8/1
Angus Robertson (SNP) 10/1
Keith Brown (SNP) 12/1
Richard Leonard (Lab) 12/1
John Swinney (SNP) 12/1
Mhairi Black (SNP) 16/1
Shona Robison (SNP) 16/1
Mike Russell (SNP) 16/1
Humza Yousaf (SNP) 16/1

It’ll be interesting to see how Shadsy prices Jackson Carlaw (next Con leader?) in this market. A lot will depend on how conciliatory Carlaw is towards Scottish Labour and the Scottish Liberal Democrats, both deeply bruised and hurt by their treatment from the Conservatives over the last five years. Forgive & forget is profoundly unlikely.

Next First Minister in the short term is largely irrelevant, it will almost certainly still be Sturgeon after the Holyrood 2021 elections, far more important and far more likely is to get a Unionist majority to block indyref2 in Holyrood even if the SNP are still largest party

I think that you are underestimating the risks for Nicola. The trial is now set down for early March. How many complainers will say that they spoke to someone who was both deputy FM and a power in the SNP both in her own right and through her husband? It seems inevitable that some or all of these women will be challenged about not having done or said anything at the time. If that is their response Nicola is toast.

I am not really bothered about the personal fate of Sturgeon, getting a Unionist majority is more important than seeing her replaced as First Minister

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/jessphillips/status/1216264310793609216

Time to reset the "Days since Labour's last anti-semitism crisis" counter?

StuartDickson said:

TGOHF666 said:

Hilarious article - Boris will win the next GE with some ease.

Really? Then you’d better get down the bookies. Con Most Seats is a terrific 4/6.

Guaranteed 67% return on investment in less than five years. You’d be a fool not to.

Without doubt, Greatest bet of the decade.

FF43 said:

Johnson will go on and on. He's England's Berlusconi.

Most likely.

HYUFD said:

Emily Thornberry on Marr says the taxpayer should continue to pay for Harry and Meghan's security

No use.

SandyRentool said:

You know that Labour has fecked up when Greggs customers vote Tory and our votes come from Waitrose shoppers.

Labour are divided on Brexit and that's why they're In a bad place now.

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Gallowgate said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Gallowgate said:

CarlottaVance said:

Gallowgate said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Gallowgate said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Gallowgate said:

CarlottaVance said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

CarlottaVance said:

It was only a matter of time until somebody linked the decision taken by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to Brexit. “It’s the racism,” claimed the writer Afua Hirsch in The New York Times. “With a new prime minister whose track record includes overtly racist statements . . . a Brexit project linked to native nationalism and a desire to rid Britain of large numbers of immigrants, and an ever-thickening loom of imperial nostalgia, many of us are also thinking about moving.”

Welcome to the incredibly depressing world-view of the liberal left. The only problem is that it isn’t true. Compare and contrast this bleak picture of Britain with the evidence.

As every study of Brexit has shown, the British voted this way not because of white supremacism, to kick out immigrants or to return to splendid isolation.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/goodbye-little-england-we-are-positively-happy-0hk3sgd8c

Newsnight ran a piece by Lewis Goodall the other day that said basically the same thing. The country is split, those that eat quinoa and those that don't

The trouble is the quinoa eaters write the newspapers, broadcast the news, tweet and talk to politicians. The non-quinoa eaters have now twice reminded them who is actually in charge.

I should remind you that Liberal Democrat and Labour "quinoa eaters" outnumber Conservative "non-quinoa eaters".

Con 365
Lab 202
LD 11

That doesn't invalidate the truth in my statement.

202+11 does not outnumber 365!

If you read carefully, you'd notice that I was talking about "quinoa eaters" and not "seats in the House of Commons".

And I was talking about "who is in charge" - and that does depend on the number of seats in the HoC...

And I was reminding you that you may be in charge but you don't represent the majority.

Boris has an 80-seat majority...

Yes. But he doesn't represent the majority. Hence a bit of humility might not go amiss.

80-seat majority!

First past the post.

I'm with @Gallowgate on this one.

He unreservedly doesn't represent the majority.

MattW said:

When is an aircraft shot down with a SAM actually a 'normal' air crash?

https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1215999658310492160

While in general I find Corbyn's equivocations about conflicts in the middle-east as repulsive as the next man, I wonder which bit of 'It is right that Iran has accepted responsibility for this appalling act' is causing you a problem here?

MarqueeMark said:

Gallowgate said:

CarlottaVance said:

Gallowgate said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Gallowgate said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Gallowgate said:

CarlottaVance said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

CarlottaVance said:

It was only a matter of time until somebody linked the decision taken by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to Brexit. “It’s the racism,” claimed the writer Afua Hirsch in The New York Times. “With a new prime minister whose track record includes overtly racist statements . . . a Brexit project linked to native nationalism and a desire to rid Britain of large numbers of immigrants, and an ever-thickening loom of imperial nostalgia, many of us are also thinking about moving.”

Welcome to the incredibly depressing world-view of the liberal left. The only problem is that it isn’t true. Compare and contrast this bleak picture of Britain with the evidence.

As every study of Brexit has shown, the British voted this way not because of white supremacism, to kick out immigrants or to return to splendid isolation.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/goodbye-little-england-we-are-positively-happy-0hk3sgd8c

Newsnight ran a piece by Lewis Goodall the other day that said basically the same thing. The country is split, those that eat quinoa and those that don't

The trouble is the quinoa eaters write the newspapers, broadcast the news, tweet and talk to politicians. The non-quinoa eaters have now twice reminded them who is actually in charge.

s".

t:

That doesn't invalidate the truth in my statement.

365!

.

And I was talking about "who is in charge" - and that does depend on the number of seats in the HoC...

And I was reminding you that you may be in charge but you don't represent the majority.

I'd remind you that Boris represents the democratic outcome across the whole of the United Kingdom. If you want to rail at that, suggest you start with asking Tony Blair why he didn't change the system when he had a 177 seat majority.

(Spoiler: because the system gave him a 177 seat majority....)

Just cos your opponent wins under an unfair system doesn't make it ok for you to also. On that basis we never change anything. We would never have moved forward from slavery, sending children up chimneys or invading our neighbour's village and massacring them.

If it is wrong change it. The fact that Tony promised to change it and didn't once it benefited him is not a good argument for you doing the same.

Alphabet_Soup said:

ClippP said:

Gallowgate said:

MarqueeMark said:

I'd remind you that Boris represents the democratic outcome across the whole of the United Kingdom. If you want to rail at that, suggest you start with asking Tony Blair why he didn't change the system when he had a 177 seat majority.
(Spoiler: because the system gave him a 177 seat majority....)

I'm not doubting that. You are missing the point in your arrogance.
No one is doubting Boris's legitimacy. I'm merely reminding you that a bit of humility might not go amiss as a majority voted for people other than Boris. He represents a minority.
It would serve you well to remember that.

Very sorry, Mr Gallowgate, but I for one doubt his legitimacy. The recent election was a shocking example of a thoroughly corrupt and discredited process. And the Conservatives are now working hard to make it even more unjust. I do not see Boris Johnson as a real prime minister at all, and the sooner he and his latest whore leave Downing Street the better.

I bow to no man in my disgust at Johnson's persistent sexual delinquency.

Carrie's bloody hot, though, you've go to admit.

Should've gone to Specsavers

I think TSE would love to return to the fold, and be a born again Boris supporter, but is waiting for Boris to do something to piss off the right wing so he can claim it's Boris who's seen the light.

CorrectHorseBattery said:

What are the general thoughts here on KS as Labour leader?

Many worry about his level of charisma, but he comes across as sensible, credible and will find it easier to get some top Labour MPs into senior positions than Corbyn.

TheGreenMachine said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Gallowgate said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Gallowgate said:

CarlottaVance said:

Gallowgate said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Gallowgate said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Gallowgate said:

CarlottaVance said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

CarlottaVance said:

It was only a matter of time until somebody linked the decision taken by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to Brexit. “It’s the racism,” claimed the writer Afua Hirsch in The New York Times. “With a new prime minister whose track record includes overtly racist statements . . . a Brexit project linked to native nationalism and a desire to rid Britain of large numbers of immigrants, and an ever-thickening loom of imperial nostalgia, many of us are also thinking about moving.”

Welcome to the incredibly depressing world-view of the liberal left. The only problem is that it isn’t true. Compare and contrast this bleak picture of Britain with the evidence.

As every study of Brexit has shown, the British voted this way not because of white supremacism, to kick out immigrants or to return to splendid isolation.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/goodbye-little-england-we-are-positively-happy-0hk3sgd8c

Newsnight ran a piece by Lewis Goodall the other day that said basically the same thing. The country is split, those that eat quinoa and those that don't

The trouble is the quinoa eaters write the newspapers,

I should remind you that Liberal Democrat and Labour "quinoa eaters" outnumber Conservative "non-quinoa eaters".

Con 365
Lab 202
LD 11

That doesn't invalidate the truth in my statement.

202+11 does not outnumber 365!

If you read carefully, you'd notice that I was talking about "quinoa eaters" and not "seats in the House of Commons".

And I was talking about "who is in charge" - and that does depend on the number of seats in the HoC...

And I was reminding you that you may be in charge but you don't represent the majority.

Boris has an 80-seat majority...

Yes. But he doesn't represent the majority. Hence a bit of humility might not go amiss.

80-seat majority!

First past the post.

I'm with @Gallowgate on this one.

He unreservedly doesn't represent the majority.

"Now, boy, witness the firepower of this fully armed and operational battle station Tory majority."
[into intercom]
"Fire Legislate at will, Commander Prime Minister!"

RobD said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/jessphillips/status/1216264310793609216

Time to reset the "Days since Labour's last anti-semitism crisis" counter?

At this point the entire shadow cabinet could walk around dressed like characters from Shtisel and people would still moan it wasn't enough.

CorrectHorseBattery said:

What are the general thoughts here on KS as Labour leader?

He would be Michael Howard, not Tony Blair. But a Howard figure to sort out the organisational mess, the factions, and the weirdos in the current Labour Party would be beneficial for them.

Whether he can win them a majority is another question but equally I don’t see anyone else who can at this moment. Some people talk about Nandy but unless she is more impressive than at first glance - which is very possible - she isn’t the answer yet.

justin124 said:

kle4 said:

ClippP said:

Gallowgate said:

MarqueeMark said:

I'd remind you that Boris represents the democratic outcome across the whole of the United Kingdom. If you want to rail at that, suggest you start with asking Tony Blair why he didn't change the system when he had a 177 seat majority.
(Spoiler: because the system gave him a 177 seat majority....)

I'm not doubting that. You are missing the point in your arrogance.
No one is doubting Boris's legitimacy. I'm merely reminding you that a bit of humility might not go amiss as a majority voted for people other than Boris. He represents a minority.
It would serve you well to remember that.

Very sorry, Mr Gallowgate, but I for one doubt his legitimacy. The recent election was a shocking example of a thoroughly corrupt and discredited process. And the Conservatives are now working hard to make it even more unjust. I do not see Boris Johnson as a real prime minister at all, MODERATED

I don't see how nursing that kind of grievance helps you. He is a real prime minister and whinging won't make it not so. Railing against the system and how awful he is, sure, no problem there, but taking that forward to saying he is not a real prime minister crosses over from anger at our electoral system and Boris Johnson into a pettiness to make yourself feel better, which will undermine criticism that is deserved of our system and the PM we have.

He obviously is PM - but I think I can see where such comments are coming from.Johnson really does not look the part - he has no gravitas , and it is difficult to take him seriously as PM in the same way that many cannot take Trump seriously as US President. Essentially both debase the offices they hold.

Perhaps you could explain the ways in which Johnson debases the office. Preferably by reference to Gladstone or other ancient history which you consider valid and relevant today.

CorrectHorseBattery said:

What are the general thoughts here on KS as Labour leader?

He's the only candidate with a chance of winning with an aura of competence, he'd be a decent performer in the media and in the commons.

His anti-Brexit views are unlikely to win back red wall seats but he is perfectly placed to say "I told you so" if anything goes wrong.

He seems like a policy over personality guy. But that kind of dull, managerial quality makes him harder to dislike than the foaming-at-the-mouth "all Tories are scum" brigade that will never win over a single blue vote.

I don't think he can beat Boris at the next GE, it doesn't feel like he has that kind of star quality. But he might be the man to bring Labour back from the abyss, kick out the far left entryists and the anti semites, and give us a functioning opposition again.

matt said:

justin124 said:

kle4 said:

ClippP said:

Gallowgate said:

MarqueeMark said:

I'd remind you that Boris represents the democratic outcome across the whole of the United Kingdom. If you want to rail at that, suggest you start with asking Tony Blair why he didn't change the system when he had a 177 seat majority.
(Spoiler: because the system gave him a 177 seat majority....)

I'm not doubting that. You are missing the point in your arrogance.
No one is doubting Boris's legitimacy. I'm merely reminding you that a bit of humility might not go amiss as a majority voted for people other than Boris. He represents a minority.
It would serve you well to remember that.

Very sorry, Mr Gallowgate, but I for one doubt his legitimacy. The recent election was a shocking example of a thoroughly corrupt and discredited process. And the Conservatives are now working hard to make it even more unjust. I do not see Boris Johnson as a real prime minister at all, MODERATED

I don't see how nursing that kind of grievance helps you. He is a real prime minister and whinging won't make it not so. Railing against the system and how awful he is, sure, no problem there, but taking that forward to saying he is not a real prime minister crosses over from anger at our electoral system and Boris Johnson into a pettiness to make yourself feel better, which will undermine criticism that is deserved of our system and the PM we have.

He obviously is PM - but I think I can see where such comments are coming from.Johnson really does not look the part - he has no gravitas , and it is difficult to take him seriously as PM in the same way that many cannot take Trump seriously as US President. Essentially both debase the offices they hold.

Perhaps you could explain the ways in which Johnson debases the office. Preferably by reference to Gladstone or other ancient history which you consider valid and relevant today.

Cicero is ancient history, Gladstone is modern.

Although it was Gladstone who went out saving er, ladies of negotiable affection every night.

Gallowgate said:

logical_song said:

MaxPB said:

stodge said:

Mrs Stodge is furious over the proposed IR35 tax changes which are going to make her working life as a Contractor much harder.

Good. It is working as intended. Too many people are getting away with tax dodging by being personal service "companies". The solution we've used is to bring the contractors on staff at a 38% gross pay cut or say goodbye. I have very little sympathy for tax dodgers.

So you want to deprive the economy of freelancers who are willing to work away from home for periods of a few months.? The country needs them to help deliver an agile economy. The answer is simple, put. a time limit on contracts to determine what is within IR35.

Where would you draw the arbitrary line? What about long-running contracts? Wouldn't contracts just be renewed?

It’s to do with the number of clients

A minimum of 3 per year was the rule of thumb our tax advisers used

Charles said:

Gallowgate said:

logical_song said:

MaxPB said:

stodge said:

Mrs Stodge is furious over the proposed IR35 tax changes which are going to make her working life as a Contractor much harder.

Good. It is working as intended. Too many people are getting away with tax dodging by being personal service "companies". The solution we've used is to bring the contractors on staff at a 38% gross pay cut or say goodbye. I have very little sympathy for tax dodgers.

So you want to deprive the economy of freelancers who are willing to work away from home for periods of a few months.? The country needs them to help deliver an agile economy. The answer is simple, put. a time limit on contracts to determine what is within IR35.

Where would you draw the arbitrary line? What about long-running contracts? Wouldn't contracts just be renewed?

It’s to do with the number of clients

A minimum of 3 per year was the rule of thumb our tax advisers used

That sounds reasonable to me.

rottenborough said:

Good article by Tony Blair in Observer, outlining what needs to change for Lab to have a chance in 2024.

One thing Blair says is crucial and shows the difference between the two parties, and between winning and losing.

Sixth, if we denounce our own government’s record, don’t be surprised if the people conclude we shouldn’t be put back into power. The constant assertion by the Labour leadership that Britain’s problems were the product of 40 years of “neoliberalism”, as if the policies of the Thatcher era were the same as the last Labour government, was a hideous combination of bad politics and worse history. Can you imagine the Tories making such an error?

That is the point. Boris ran against Cameron and May without making it explicit. The Conservatives pledged to recruit 20,000 more police officers but Boris never said, Theresa May was a damn fool for cutting 20,000 coppers in the first place.

Nor did Boris say, George Osborne was an economic klutz who flatlined the recovery inherited from Labour. He announced more spending and an end to austerity.

(Mind you, Mrs Thatcher was perhaps more explicit in her condemnation of the Heath government.)

Gallowgate said:

MaxPB said:

Gallowgate said:

MaxPB said:

Gallowgate said:

CarlottaVance said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

CarlottaVance said:

It was only a matter of time until somebody linked the decision taken by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to Brexit. “It’s the racism,” claimed the writer Afua Hirsch in The New York Times. “With a new prime minister whose track record includes overtly racist statements . . . a Brexit project linked to native nationalism and a desire to rid Britain of large numbers of immigrants, and an ever-thickening loom of imperial nostalgia, many of us are also thinking about moving.”

Welcome to the incredibly depressing world-view of the liberal left. The only problem is that it isn’t true. Compare and contrast this bleak picture of Britain with the evidence.

As every study of Brexit has shown, the British voted this way not because of white supremacism, to kick out immigrants or to return to splendid isolation.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/goodbye-little-england-we-are-positively-happy-0hk3sgd8c

Newsnight ran a piece by Lewis Goodall the other day that said basically the same thing. The country is split, those that eat quinoa and those that don't

The trouble is the quinoa eaters write the newspapers, broadcast the news, tweet and talk to politicians. The non-quinoa eaters have now twice reminded them who is actually in charge.

I should remind you that Liberal Democrat and Labour "quinoa eaters" outnumber Conservative "non-quinoa eaters".

That's actually not true. It's highly unlikely that 100% of the voters of both parties are metropolitan liberals. I'd just about agree to the Lib Dems, but not Labour.

Well likewise by the same metric, it's highly unlikely that 100% of the voters of the Conservatives are not metropolitan liberals.

Indeed, I've been known to have a quinoa salad with an oat milk cortado...

And I hate quinoa.

With pomegranate seeds it is delightful

Cyclefree said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

nunu2 said:

Nope, no racism in the coverage of Kate vs. Meghan. Nope, no sir.....

https://mobile.twitter.com/gazzman5/status/1216242762837843968/photo/1

Is it racism or is it that a bit like Fergie, some elements of the press decided they don't like her for the woke progress stuff and never have a good word to say about her? Fergie got negative story about negative story, all about how much of a commoner she was, ugly, fat, money grabber etc etc etc.

Kate had a lot of negative press too - about not having a proper job and about her mother being an air hostess. Meghan had/has a lot to offer - a bit of spark and a mind of her own. But the more that comes out about them trademarking stuff, setting up companies etc as far back as last spring makes one wonder whether they ever had any real intention to contribute as opposed to using royal status for their own benefit. Do they really want a private life or do they want a celebrity lifestyle without the obligations of royalty? Whatever it needs resolving soon and without them or other royals taking the piss.

If you were being charitable you could argue trademarking as a defensive strategy