Rebellious Labour MPs will be a problem for SKSPM. Reeves' first budget in November is going to be a hard pill for many of the new MPs to swallow and there could be around 300 backbenchers with a lot of time on their hands. How SKS responds will be interesting. His past actions suggest he might just fold to pressure and that will cause tensions with Reeves. Alternatively he could stick to the fiscal rules and face multiple challenges (led by a certain Jeremy Corbyn if things go his way). Either way I predict a new PM or a new Chancellor within 18 months of Labour taking power.
It’s completely unfair that France gets all this natural beauty (and better weather, and slimmer women) while we have Newent, Wick and @kinabalu’s golf club
I’m therefore trying to cheer myself out of my jealousy by working out what is the most boring, least interesting department of France. The obvious choice would be somewhere in Picardy but I think I’ve found a prime candidate
Creuse. It seems to be the ultimate nowhere land smack bang in the middle of the country. It has a tiny population with only lozere smaller (in departments) but Lozere is quite spectacular -moors, mountains, megaliths and ravines
Creuse has… farms. And a town that used to make tapestries. That seems to be it
Is it that bad? Has anyone been? How boring is creuse?
If we're comparing like with like then you'll need to see what if offers vis a vis Bedfordshire.
Hah. I did for a moment wonder about the “most boring county in Britain” and yes Bedfordshire floated into my head
Oi.
Nothing boring about Bedfordshire. Quite small but have some splendid countryside that is the equal of anything in the Cotswolds and market towns and far enough out of London to be beyond the worst of the stockbroker belt. They get as far as Luton (our London Inner City type borough) and turn back.
And no ULEZ, Congestion Charge or 20mph limits (except short bits by schools)
"Bedfordshire isn't boring because [checks notes] you can drive at 30mph" I was going to plump for Herefordshire, but you've just converted me to the Bedfordshire camp.
Herefordshire is a stunningly beautiful county. Lots of uphill and down dale rather than flat sandpit Bedfordshire. OK, the people are like the duelling banjo players from Deliverance if very much more scary.
Yes, Herefordshire is ravishingly beautiful. If only every British county was as lovely and unspoilt!
It’s also really really noomy in the south and west as it butts up against the Welsh hills. Plus the Wye valley, the orchard lands of the east, half the malverns and half the Forest of Dean. Tintern abbey. Kilpeck. Galway. The lugg. Craswall
One of the happiest days of my life was a bike ride I did from Lyonshall to Hay on Wye and back again. Just absolutely perfect. Big blue skies, hot and silent. Every pub looked inviting. I crossed over into Wales and rode over the Begwns. My expectation is that less than 5% of this board will have heard of the Begwns, and yet it is one of the most spectacular locations in the country; views over the Wye Valley to the Black Mountains, east into the appealing loveliness of Herefordshire, North and West into the drama of Wales. I was there at midday: I understand it is spectacular at dawn and dusk. And yet almost noone has heard of it. That's the marches for you.
Try volume one of Kilvert's diary - magical account of the area, though a bit creepy to modern mores.
More seriously, I wouldn't be surprised if Labour get a lot tougher on betting. The Corbynite ex-problem gambler has been pushing pieces out to the media for several years and they lap it up. I fits with the anti-energy drink and anti-smoking stuff we will be getting.
So how does a Labour candidate have inside knowledge about the surprise election date the Tory PM is about to announce?
We’re approaching the point where the question arises as to how no-one on PB knew in advance?
Apart, maybe, from moonrabbit.
I knew, I know it gauche to point out my brilliance and modest fellow that I am but I did tip a July election back in March at 20s when MoonRabbit was spamming the site with why it would be a May election.
"As I understand it, what appears to have happened is this Labour candidate in this seat, which has a large Conservative majority, actually bet that he himself would lose the seat."
"Labour candidate suspended as Gambling Commission launches investigation
Kevin Craig was seeking to become the party's MP for Central Suffolk and North Ipswich, but Sky News understands he placed a bet on the outcome in the seat."
If he bet on himself to win, I don't see a problem. Well there is now for him because he's not running ( officially).
It's a game of chance in this instance, not one of betting on dead cert. data.
Has Starmer over reacted again?
Edit, not if he bet himself to lose. What an idiot.
Nottingham is a great city, handsome even. A peacock of a regional capital. Excellent food scene too. The rest of Nottinghamshire not so much. Cheshire is lovely. Absolutely bizarre that that would even be suggested.
So how does a Labour candidate have inside knowledge about the surprise election date the Tory PM is about to announce?
We’re approaching the point where the question arises as to how no-one on PB knew in advance?
Apart, maybe, from moonrabbit.
I knew, I know it gauche to point out my brilliance and modest fellow that I am but I did tip a July election back in March at 20s when MoonRabbit was spamming the site with why it would be a May election.
If you knew, it wasn’t brilliance.
I didn't know.
The tipping point for me was a couple of days before the announcement was Lord Finkelstein saying he had heard talk about a July election which started moving the market.
Lord F is close to Lord Hague who is very close to Rishi Sunak was my logic.
It’s completely unfair that France gets all this natural beauty (and better weather, and slimmer women) while we have Newent, Wick and @kinabalu’s golf club
I’m therefore trying to cheer myself out of my jealousy by working out what is the most boring, least interesting department of France. The obvious choice would be somewhere in Picardy but I think I’ve found a prime candidate
Creuse. It seems to be the ultimate nowhere land smack bang in the middle of the country. It has a tiny population with only lozere smaller (in departments) but Lozere is quite spectacular -moors, mountains, megaliths and ravines
Creuse has… farms. And a town that used to make tapestries. That seems to be it
Is it that bad? Has anyone been? How boring is creuse?
If we're comparing like with like then you'll need to see what if offers vis a vis Bedfordshire.
Hah. I did for a moment wonder about the “most boring county in Britain” and yes Bedfordshire floated into my head
Yes, Bedfordshire is boringest county (traditional boundaries) by some way. The competition is for number 2. Staffordshire or Cheshire perhaps. But even Bedfordshire has a lifetime of interest in it. Marston Moretaine; Elstow; Shillington; Luton Central Mosque interior; Luton bus station at night; Luton Airport departure lounge.
No, not having Cheshire as boring, either on traditional or modern boundaries. Cheshire has some National Park, for as start. Cheshire has Joddrell Bank, one of the seven wonders of the North West* Cheshire has the rows and walls of Chester, the Peckforton Hills, the Anderton Boat Lift, Stockport Bus Station, Port Sunlight, the Dee Estuary, Helsby Hill, Little Moreton Hall, Gawsworth Hall, Alderley Edge. Cheshire has the books of Alan Garner. Cheshire has the Macc Lads. Cheshire has a panhandle. Cheshire has Lyme Park. Cheshire is, what, the seventh highest county in the country (or thereabouts). Boring this place is not.
Cheshire is less instantly exciting than most of the other northern counties, but beats most of the Midlands and South East. Imagine one of those calendars you get in moderately upmarket garden centres. Cheshire's calendars will beat at least 50% of other counties into a cocked hat.
I would say most boring county probably Huntingdonshire. Highest point in Huntingdonshire? Boring Field. QED, my friends, QED. Other clearly more boring counties than Cheshire include Bedfordshire, Hertfordshire, Northamptonshire, Leicestershire, Nottinghamshire, Lincolnshire, Rutland, Berkshire and Buckinghamshire.
I offer an unconditional surrender. But you are not having Lincolnshire (England's most interesting county) or Northamptonshire (most underestimated). Nottinghamshire you can have; I had forgotten it existed.
Go on then, offer a defence of Lincolnshire? I do actually quite like a reason to go to Lincolnshire - the flatness feels quite exotic. It is quite unlike most of the rest of England. I like Lincoln, and I like Boston Stump, and the Fens are strangely compelling. But England's most interesting?
Its not all flat (at least, compared to the levels) - the Wolds are quite hilly and pleasantly rural in parts (and are an AONB) and there's a few chalk downs with interesting flora. Some of the coast is interesting too - such as Gibraltar Point & Donna Nook.
There was something in the papers the other day about him being one of the bosses of a company that does loads of work for private schools. His colleagues must be loving him.
"Labour candidate suspended as Gambling Commission launches investigation
Kevin Craig was seeking to become the party's MP for Central Suffolk and North Ipswich, but Sky News understands he placed a bet on the outcome in the seat."
If he bet on himself to win, I don't see a problem. Well there is now for him because he's not running ( officially).
It's a game of chance in this instance, not one of betting on dead cert. data.
Has Starmer over reacted again?
I'd switch my vote for him in the seat as of today
There was something in the papers the other day about him being one of the bosses of a company that does loads of work for private schools. His colleagues must be loving him.
He runs PLMR which is a PR agency and they have represented Independent Schools body.
"Labour candidate suspended as Gambling Commission launches investigation
Kevin Craig was seeking to become the party's MP for Central Suffolk and North Ipswich, but Sky News understands he placed a bet on the outcome in the seat."
If he bet on himself to win, I don't see a problem. Well there is now for him because he's not running ( officially).
It's a game of chance in this instance, not one of betting on dead cert. data.
Has Starmer over reacted again?
I'd switch my vote for him in the seat as of today
And what if you'd already cast a postal vote for him...?
There was something in the papers the other day about him being one of the bosses of a company that does loads of work for private schools. His colleagues must be loving him.
He must be one of life's good guys if he works for private schools.
It’s completely unfair that France gets all this natural beauty (and better weather, and slimmer women) while we have Newent, Wick and @kinabalu’s golf club
I’m therefore trying to cheer myself out of my jealousy by working out what is the most boring, least interesting department of France. The obvious choice would be somewhere in Picardy but I think I’ve found a prime candidate
Creuse. It seems to be the ultimate nowhere land smack bang in the middle of the country. It has a tiny population with only lozere smaller (in departments) but Lozere is quite spectacular -moors, mountains, megaliths and ravines
Creuse has… farms. And a town that used to make tapestries. That seems to be it
Is it that bad? Has anyone been? How boring is creuse?
If we're comparing like with like then you'll need to see what if offers vis a vis Bedfordshire.
Hah. I did for a moment wonder about the “most boring county in Britain” and yes Bedfordshire floated into my head
Yes, Bedfordshire is boringest county (traditional boundaries) by some way. The competition is for number 2. Staffordshire or Cheshire perhaps. But even Bedfordshire has a lifetime of interest in it. Marston Moretaine; Elstow; Shillington; Luton Central Mosque interior; Luton bus station at night; Luton Airport departure lounge.
No, not having Cheshire as boring, either on traditional or modern boundaries. Cheshire has some National Park, for as start. Cheshire has Joddrell Bank, one of the seven wonders of the North West* Cheshire has the rows and walls of Chester, the Peckforton Hills, the Anderton Boat Lift, Stockport Bus Station, Port Sunlight, the Dee Estuary, Helsby Hill, Little Moreton Hall, Gawsworth Hall, Alderley Edge. Cheshire has the books of Alan Garner. Cheshire has the Macc Lads. Cheshire has a panhandle. Cheshire has Lyme Park. Cheshire is, what, the seventh highest county in the country (or thereabouts). Boring this place is not.
Cheshire is less instantly exciting than most of the other northern counties, but beats most of the Midlands and South East. Imagine one of those calendars you get in moderately upmarket garden centres. Cheshire's calendars will beat at least 50% of other counties into a cocked hat.
I would say most boring county probably Huntingdonshire. Highest point in Huntingdonshire? Boring Field. QED, my friends, QED. Other clearly more boring counties than Cheshire include Bedfordshire, Hertfordshire, Northamptonshire, Leicestershire, Nottinghamshire, Lincolnshire, Rutland, Berkshire and Buckinghamshire.
I offer an unconditional surrender. But you are not having Lincolnshire (England's most interesting county) or Northamptonshire (most underestimated). Nottinghamshire you can have; I had forgotten it existed.
Go on then, offer a defence of Lincolnshire? I do actually quite like a reason to go to Lincolnshire - the flatness feels quite exotic. It is quite unlike most of the rest of England. I like Lincoln, and I like Boston Stump, and the Fens are strangely compelling. But England's most interesting?
Thanks for the invitation. It needs a book. In Leon's language it is the county of noom. abandoned lostness, whole towns forgotten, good roads to nowhere, architectural sensations and a heritage to die for, fantastic variety, huge spaces and sky, openness. Manor houses. Gentry. Yeomen. Best growing lands in England. Try the recent Turner: 'Edge of England', or the old Rawnsley 'Highways and Byways'. or Treherne's 'Dangerous Precincts'., (which mentions Algarkirk on the first page).
The Labour guy has been suspended FOR BETTING ON HIMSELF TO LOSE. No this is too much.
Just when you thought the Tories were going to get a complete sweep on the podium for dumb fucks. here comes one from Labour.
"Hold my pint..."
I imagine the reaction in Labour HQ was "oh FFS". In one fell swoop a story about dodgy Tories transforms into a story about dodgy politicians of both parties.
"As I understand it, what appears to have happened is this Labour candidate in this seat, which has a large Conservative majority, actually bet that he himself would lose the seat."
I cannot understand on what possible basis this justifies a Gambling Commission investigation.
I don't actually think the election date bets were in breach of the Gambling Act, but there is absolutely no chance this is. He's either knocked on some doors and reckons he'll lose or it's an insurance bet ("well, I've lost, but at least I can buy myself and the missus a restaurant meal").
The Gambling Commission have taken leave of their senses. This is absolutely no different from a horse racing fan coming to a judgment based on form and looking at the horse in the paddock.
"As I understand it, what appears to have happened is this Labour candidate in this seat, which has a large Conservative majority, actually bet that he himself would lose the seat."
I cannot understand on what possible basis this justifies a Gambling Commission investigation.
I don't actually think the election date bets were in breach of the Gambling Act, but there is absolutely no chance this is. He's either knocked on some doors and reckons he'll lose or it's an insurance bet ("well, I've lost, but at least I can buy myself and the missus a restaurant meal").
The Gambling Commission have taken leave of their senses. This is absolutely no different from a horse racing fan coming to a judgment based on form and looking at the horse in the paddock.
It's not a million miles away from match fixing though, is it? Admittedly it's a lot harder for an MP to throw an election than a goalkeeper or wicket keeper to throw a match, but in theory it's possible. The candidate does have some influence over the outcome.
Betting on yourself to win is, I think, far less dodgy than betting on yourself to lose.
"As I understand it, what appears to have happened is this Labour candidate in this seat, which has a large Conservative majority, actually bet that he himself would lose the seat."
I cannot understand on what possible basis this justifies a Gambling Commission investigation.
I don't actually think the election date bets were in breach of the Gambling Act, but there is absolutely no chance this is. He's either knocked on some doors and reckons he'll lose or it's an insurance bet ("well, I've lost, but at least I can buy myself and the missus a restaurant meal").
The Gambling Commission have taken leave of their senses. This is absolutely no different from a horse racing fan coming to a judgment based on form and looking at the horse in the paddock.
It's strange how a former DPP seems to find people guilty before an investigation is complete. Perhaps it comes with the territory. Did he learn that you're supposed to be innocent until proved guilty of wrongdoing?
It’s completely unfair that France gets all this natural beauty (and better weather, and slimmer women) while we have Newent, Wick and @kinabalu’s golf club
I’m therefore trying to cheer myself out of my jealousy by working out what is the most boring, least interesting department of France. The obvious choice would be somewhere in Picardy but I think I’ve found a prime candidate
Creuse. It seems to be the ultimate nowhere land smack bang in the middle of the country. It has a tiny population with only lozere smaller (in departments) but Lozere is quite spectacular -moors, mountains, megaliths and ravines
Creuse has… farms. And a town that used to make tapestries. That seems to be it
Is it that bad? Has anyone been? How boring is creuse?
If we're comparing like with like then you'll need to see what if offers vis a vis Bedfordshire.
Hah. I did for a moment wonder about the “most boring county in Britain” and yes Bedfordshire floated into my head
Yes, Bedfordshire is boringest county (traditional boundaries) by some way. The competition is for number 2. Staffordshire or Cheshire perhaps. But even Bedfordshire has a lifetime of interest in it. Marston Moretaine; Elstow; Shillington; Luton Central Mosque interior; Luton bus station at night; Luton Airport departure lounge.
No, not having Cheshire as boring, either on traditional or modern boundaries. Cheshire has some National Park, for as start. Cheshire has Joddrell Bank, one of the seven wonders of the North West* Cheshire has the rows and walls of Chester, the Peckforton Hills, the Anderton Boat Lift, Stockport Bus Station, Port Sunlight, the Dee Estuary, Helsby Hill, Little Moreton Hall, Gawsworth Hall, Alderley Edge. Cheshire has the books of Alan Garner. Cheshire has the Macc Lads. Cheshire has a panhandle. Cheshire has Lyme Park. Cheshire is, what, the seventh highest county in the country (or thereabouts). Boring this place is not.
Cheshire is less instantly exciting than most of the other northern counties, but beats most of the Midlands and South East. Imagine one of those calendars you get in moderately upmarket garden centres. Cheshire's calendars will beat at least 50% of other counties into a cocked hat.
I would say most boring county probably Huntingdonshire. Highest point in Huntingdonshire? Boring Field. QED, my friends, QED. Other clearly more boring counties than Cheshire include Bedfordshire, Hertfordshire, Northamptonshire, Leicestershire, Nottinghamshire, Lincolnshire, Rutland, Berkshire and Buckinghamshire.
I offer an unconditional surrender. But you are not having Lincolnshire (England's most interesting county) or Northamptonshire (most underestimated). Nottinghamshire you can have; I had forgotten it existed.
Go on then, offer a defence of Lincolnshire? I do actually quite like a reason to go to Lincolnshire - the flatness feels quite exotic. It is quite unlike most of the rest of England. I like Lincoln, and I like Boston Stump, and the Fens are strangely compelling. But England's most interesting?
Thanks for the invitation. It needs a book. In Leon's language it is the county of noom. abandoned lostness, whole towns forgotten, good roads to nowhere, architectural sensations and a heritage to die for, fantastic variety, huge spaces and sky, openness. Manor houses. Gentry. Yeomen. Best growing lands in England. Try the recent Turner: 'Edge of England', or the old Rawnsley 'Highways and Byways'. or Treherne's 'Dangerous Precincts'., (which mentions Algarkirk on the first page).
Nicely put. I will bear this exchange in mind when I next go there. Which could be some time, because it's very much off the beaten track. But still. Looking forward now to my next trip.
"As I understand it, what appears to have happened is this Labour candidate in this seat, which has a large Conservative majority, actually bet that he himself would lose the seat."
I cannot understand on what possible basis this justifies a Gambling Commission investigation.
I don't actually think the election date bets were in breach of the Gambling Act, but there is absolutely no chance this is. He's either knocked on some doors and reckons he'll lose or it's an insurance bet ("well, I've lost, but at least I can buy myself and the missus a restaurant meal").
The Gambling Commission have taken leave of their senses. This is absolutely no different from a horse racing fan coming to a judgment based on form and looking at the horse in the paddock.
Absolutely. The conservative cases were on inside information. This is a nothing burger.
There was something in the papers the other day about him being one of the bosses of a company that does loads of work for private schools. His colleagues must be loving him.
He must be one of life's good guys if he works for private schools.
Or one of life’s hypocrites, happy to take Private Schools’ money to do their PR but happy to support a party that wants to damage them.
The Labour guy has been suspended FOR BETTING ON HIMSELF TO LOSE. No this is too much.
Just when you thought the Tories were going to get a complete sweep on the podium for dumb fucks. here comes one from Labour.
"Hold my pint..."
I imagine the reaction in Labour HQ was "oh FFS". In one fell swoop a story about dodgy Tories transforms into a story about dodgy politicians of both parties.
If the expenses scandal is anything to go by (wrong-doing seemed to be pretty much 50/50 on both sides?) it's fair to assume there will be quite a few Labour candidates getting up to all sorts of shenanigans both now and after the election...
At the moment the focus is nearly 100% on the Tories but I'm sure we'll hear about the wrongdoings of various Labour people over the next five years...
"Labour candidate suspended as Gambling Commission launches investigation
Kevin Craig was seeking to become the party's MP for Central Suffolk and North Ipswich, but Sky News understands he placed a bet on the outcome in the seat."
If he bet on himself to win, I don't see a problem. Well there is now for him because he's not running ( officially).
It's a game of chance in this instance, not one of betting on dead cert. data.
Has Starmer over reacted again?
Edit, not if he bet himself to lose. What an idiot.
Funny thing is he might just have won, given the opinion polls.
Like "Peppa Pig" from the amusefest that was Boris Johnson wasn't the fucking cringiest thing ever from a politician.
C'mon. Get a grip. Various people are just pissed off Starmer's winning.
I'm *bored* that Starmer is winning. Because he is being terribly boring and inoffensive. Where's the umph?
This bit is 'win the election' and barring a mega shock it's going to be a resounding success. Then, 5/7 onwards, he's PM. Will he be boring, cautious, ineffectual? Or will he be a good, maybe very good, PM who'll relax a bit more in public over time?
I hope and expect the second, but who knows? What I do know is that people writing him off on the basis he hasn't been a thrill-a-minute as Opposition Leader or in this GE campaign are mainly engaging in prejudice-informed guesswork.
No, we’re just mocking his cringe. In my comment immediately after my mockery (which seems to have upset so many of you so weirdly) I actually say This won’t matter as long as he learns from it. We don’t want or need him to be funny so he doesn’t have to try and he shouldn’t even try
After the last few years we will take dull but competent if he can manage it. We all know he has a tough task (I expect him to fail but I genuinely hope he succeeds)
What we don’t want is an inept politician who also makes us cringe. That will be damaging. Quit the gags Sir Kir
No point trying to backtrack now. You're really put out that he isn't making you laugh so hard it hurts every time you see him. You think it's a big deal that he doesn't (can't?) do that. So much of a big deal that it's cost him your vote.
No, you're missing the point. See also the Ryan Giggs clip. It's not just not funny, its the antithesis of funny. If funny is 1 and not funny is 0, what SKS and Ryan Giggs are are -1. Perhaps even i. It has all the cadences of humour, without the humour itself. It's awful and weirdly compelling. It's not just failing to tell a joke well, it's failing to recognise whether the story he's telling falls into the category of 'anecdote' or not. Many people aren't particularly funny. But this is more than just telling a joke which doesn't land. It's, well, weird. And certainly worthy of comment.
I think Leon has said though that he still intends to vote Labour. Doesn't mean he can't then comment on the Labour leader's oddities.
I don't miss points, Cookie, you know that.
It's just a sweet and rather forced little story in front of a bunch of stony faced teenagers. THAT is what's funny - least to me - them in the background. The awkwardness. Lol. Poor kids.
But look, it was clearly meant to be gently amusing not bring the house down. And it fell a little flat. So the fuck what? People going on about how incredibly 'cringy' it is - they are the weirdos here. Eg it's absolutely nothing next to "Peppa Pig" and "Buses".
But the good news? Leon is not voting Labour. It's Reform for our gammon with a vocab.
lol. You’re SO defensive. Is it because you’re a bit like kir royale yourself so it feels personal? Quite fascinating
If only. I am actually - to my great chagrin and discredit - far more like Boris Johnson than Keir Starmer. I so wish could change that. Too late now though.
No you’re not. Boris is a rampantly heterosexual ladies man and old Etonian and very funny and deeply deeply irresponsible. You are not irresponsible. Nor did you go to eton and so on
You are really quite like sir kir royale. A provincial upper working class lad made good in london. Hard working and sensible. Bit stiff. Intelligent and earnest. Similar age. Now in north london. Spooky!
You are so defensive about skyr because you are so alike. Perhaps you don’t realise this
I have lived a careless, deeply irresponsible life is the actual truth of the matter, I'm afraid. But thank you. The assessment is most flattering - and since it's based on my nearly 40k posts on here there must be a germ. I do a little shrug.
"As I understand it, what appears to have happened is this Labour candidate in this seat, which has a large Conservative majority, actually bet that he himself would lose the seat."
I cannot understand on what possible basis this justifies a Gambling Commission investigation.
I don't actually think the election date bets were in breach of the Gambling Act, but there is absolutely no chance this is. He's either knocked on some doors and reckons he'll lose or it's an insurance bet ("well, I've lost, but at least I can buy myself and the missus a restaurant meal").
The Gambling Commission have taken leave of their senses. This is absolutely no different from a horse racing fan coming to a judgment based on form and looking at the horse in the paddock.
It's not a million miles away from match fixing though, is it? Admittedly it's a lot harder for an MP to throw an election than a goalkeeper or wicket keeper to throw a match, but in theory it's possible. The candidate does have some influence over the outcome.
Betting on yourself to win is, I think, far less dodgy than betting on yourself to lose.
Would it be ok for Rishi to have backed the Tories to get less than 50 seats? No.
Backing yourself to lose inevitably leaves one open to suspicion. Whether you are favourite or underdog doesn't really matter, nor does that the intent of this bet is very unlikely to be bad. It is just basic common sense not to do this, if they don't have that they shouldn't be an MP.
If you have a spare £100k knocking about to donate to a political party, I can't imagine whatever money you can get on for a constituency bet will be worth much financially in the grand scheme of things.
So how does a Labour candidate have inside knowledge about the surprise election date the Tory PM is about to announce?
We’re approaching the point where the question arises as to how no-one on PB knew in advance?
Apart, maybe, from moonrabbit.
I knew, I know it gauche to point out my brilliance and modest fellow that I am but I did tip a July election back in March at 20s when MoonRabbit was spamming the site with why it would be a May election.
So how does a Labour candidate have inside knowledge about the surprise election date the Tory PM is about to announce?
We’re approaching the point where the question arises as to how no-one on PB knew in advance?
Apart, maybe, from moonrabbit.
I knew, I know it gauche to point out my brilliance and modest fellow that I am but I did tip a July election back in March at 20s when MoonRabbit was spamming the site with why it would be a May election.
If you knew, it wasn’t brilliance.
I didn't know.
The tipping point for me was a couple of days before the announcement was Lord Finkelstein saying he had heard talk about a July election which started moving the market.
Lord F is close to Lord Hague who is very close to Rishi Sunak was my logic.
Like "Peppa Pig" from the amusefest that was Boris Johnson wasn't the fucking cringiest thing ever from a politician.
C'mon. Get a grip. Various people are just pissed off Starmer's winning.
I'm *bored* that Starmer is winning. Because he is being terribly boring and inoffensive. Where's the umph?
This bit is 'win the election' and barring a mega shock it's going to be a resounding success. Then, 5/7 onwards, he's PM. Will he be boring, cautious, ineffectual? Or will he be a good, maybe very good, PM who'll relax a bit more in public over time?
I hope and expect the second, but who knows? What I do know is that people writing him off on the basis he hasn't been a thrill-a-minute as Opposition Leader or in this GE campaign are mainly engaging in prejudice-informed guesswork.
No, we’re just mocking his cringe. In my comment immediately after my mockery (which seems to have upset so many of you so weirdly) I actually say This won’t matter as long as he learns from it. We don’t want or need him to be funny so he doesn’t have to try and he shouldn’t even try
After the last few years we will take dull but competent if he can manage it. We all know he has a tough task (I expect him to fail but I genuinely hope he succeeds)
What we don’t want is an inept politician who also makes us cringe. That will be damaging. Quit the gags Sir Kir
No point trying to backtrack now. You're really put out that he isn't making you laugh so hard it hurts every time you see him. You think it's a big deal that he doesn't (can't?) do that. So much of a big deal that it's cost him your vote.
No, you're missing the point. See also the Ryan Giggs clip. It's not just not funny, its the antithesis of funny. If funny is 1 and not funny is 0, what SKS and Ryan Giggs are are -1. Perhaps even i. It has all the cadences of humour, without the humour itself. It's awful and weirdly compelling. It's not just failing to tell a joke well, it's failing to recognise whether the story he's telling falls into the category of 'anecdote' or not. Many people aren't particularly funny. But this is more than just telling a joke which doesn't land. It's, well, weird. And certainly worthy of comment.
I think Leon has said though that he still intends to vote Labour. Doesn't mean he can't then comment on the Labour leader's oddities.
Exactly right and very eloquent to boot. He doesn’t apparently understand humour at a basic level. This is like “how do you do fellow kids” but he means it
Add in the non-dreaming and third person stuff and we have a proper oddball coming into number 10. But then maybe that’s what Britain needs as we stare into the abyss
He doesn’t have a favourite poem or novel either. Hmmm. He’s the cliche of an alien trying to be human and failing. But again - that could be just the ticket
Tho TMay and Brown were a bit like this and they were disasters
The man is institutionalised after years working for the CPS. Hes a dangerous man in the sense he will be a puritan on legislating on things like ethnic minority pay gaps.
Sir Keir will basically be another Gordon Brown as PM, except if Brown had won a landslide majority for his policies
You're obsessed with how everything that might happen is somehow just the same as something that happened before. It's really weird. Like you've only got five slots in your head and everything has to conform to one of those. 1. The 1997 election 2. Gordon Brown 3. The Russell Group 4. A cat 5. The monarchy
Here, HYUFD, here's a picture of my dog "It's basically like a cat only larger and with a longer nose"
Hey, HYUFD, did you see Eurovision? "Yes, it was like the the 1997 election only with a jury system and more political parties. The winner was basically Gordon Brown if Gordon Brown had been a 24 year old woman from Azerbaijan who was dancing on a floor screen the size of 400 cats. Yass queen [consort, HRH Camilla]"
Give it a year and I will be proved right. A Starmer government will be legislating and policymaking and running the economy in a very similar way to how Brown did as PM (though they will hope without another banking crash)
"As I understand it, what appears to have happened is this Labour candidate in this seat, which has a large Conservative majority, actually bet that he himself would lose the seat."
I cannot understand on what possible basis this justifies a Gambling Commission investigation.
I don't actually think the election date bets were in breach of the Gambling Act, but there is absolutely no chance this is. He's either knocked on some doors and reckons he'll lose or it's an insurance bet ("well, I've lost, but at least I can buy myself and the missus a restaurant meal").
The Gambling Commission have taken leave of their senses. This is absolutely no different from a horse racing fan coming to a judgment based on form and looking at the horse in the paddock.
Absolutely. The conservative cases were on inside information. This is a nothing burger.
It equalises the story for the media. They have been pretty much uninterested to date. It hasn't generated the copy of Currygate or Raynergate.Now it might stir some interest.
It is not entirely fair or judicial - it is not immediately obvious that he has done anything terrible, and it doesn't feel at all like insider 'trading' - but after the Tory disaster re gambling Starmer had to act immediately and decisively to kill the matter dead. Life is not always fair. Starmer does appear to be able to make necessary and horrible decisions. PMs have to all the time. One of the reasons we don't want the job.
So how does a Labour candidate have inside knowledge about the surprise election date the Tory PM is about to announce?
We’re approaching the point where the question arises as to how no-one on PB knew in advance?
Apart, maybe, from moonrabbit.
I knew, I know it gauche to point out my brilliance and modest fellow that I am but I did tip a July election back in March at 20s when MoonRabbit was spamming the site with why it would be a May election.
So how does a Labour candidate have inside knowledge about the surprise election date the Tory PM is about to announce?
We’re approaching the point where the question arises as to how no-one on PB knew in advance?
Apart, maybe, from moonrabbit.
I knew, I know it gauche to point out my brilliance and modest fellow that I am but I did tip a July election back in March at 20s when MoonRabbit was spamming the site with why it would be a May election.
If you knew, it wasn’t brilliance.
I didn't know.
The tipping point for me was a couple of days before the announcement was Lord Finkelstein saying he had heard talk about a July election which started moving the market.
Lord F is close to Lord Hague who is very close to Rishi Sunak was my logic.
Make up your mind.
The first post was a joke (That's for the attention of the Gambling Commission).
"As I understand it, what appears to have happened is this Labour candidate in this seat, which has a large Conservative majority, actually bet that he himself would lose the seat."
I cannot understand on what possible basis this justifies a Gambling Commission investigation.
I don't actually think the election date bets were in breach of the Gambling Act, but there is absolutely no chance this is. He's either knocked on some doors and reckons he'll lose or it's an insurance bet ("well, I've lost, but at least I can buy myself and the missus a restaurant meal").
The Gambling Commission have taken leave of their senses. This is absolutely no different from a horse racing fan coming to a judgment based on form and looking at the horse in the paddock.
That analogy doesn't quite work. He is the candidate so he could throw the race on purpose. Like if a jockey was to bet against him.
"As I understand it, what appears to have happened is this Labour candidate in this seat, which has a large Conservative majority, actually bet that he himself would lose the seat."
I cannot understand on what possible basis this justifies a Gambling Commission investigation.
I don't actually think the election date bets were in breach of the Gambling Act, but there is absolutely no chance this is. He's either knocked on some doors and reckons he'll lose or it's an insurance bet ("well, I've lost, but at least I can buy myself and the missus a restaurant meal").
The Gambling Commission have taken leave of their senses. This is absolutely no different from a horse racing fan coming to a judgment based on form and looking at the horse in the paddock.
Absolutely. The conservative cases were on inside information. This is a nothing burger.
It sort of depends. When did he put the bet on. Lets say he put a big bet on to lose a couple of days ago, could that be due to insider info about the state of the campaign in that seat e.g. private polling, returns from door knocking, etc.
If he put it on at the start of the campaign, I reckon its more hedging for the time / effort of campaigning for 6 weeks, and you can get some money out of it if you lose.
"As I understand it, what appears to have happened is this Labour candidate in this seat, which has a large Conservative majority, actually bet that he himself would lose the seat."
I cannot understand on what possible basis this justifies a Gambling Commission investigation.
I don't actually think the election date bets were in breach of the Gambling Act, but there is absolutely no chance this is. He's either knocked on some doors and reckons he'll lose or it's an insurance bet ("well, I've lost, but at least I can buy myself and the missus a restaurant meal").
The Gambling Commission have taken leave of their senses. This is absolutely no different from a horse racing fan coming to a judgment based on form and looking at the horse in the paddock.
It is absolutely no different from a jockey backing or laying themselves. In fact jockeys cannot bet on horses at all, not footballers on football, by their association rules.
If you have a spare £100k knocking about to donate to a political party, I can't imagine whatever money you can get on for a constituency bet will be worth much financially in the grand scheme of things.
If you have a spare £100k knocking about to donate to a political party, I can't imagine whatever money you can get on for a constituency bet will be worth much financially in the grand scheme of things.
It’s completely unfair that France gets all this natural beauty (and better weather, and slimmer women) while we have Newent, Wick and @kinabalu’s golf club
I’m therefore trying to cheer myself out of my jealousy by working out what is the most boring, least interesting department of France. The obvious choice would be somewhere in Picardy but I think I’ve found a prime candidate
Creuse. It seems to be the ultimate nowhere land smack bang in the middle of the country. It has a tiny population with only lozere smaller (in departments) but Lozere is quite spectacular -moors, mountains, megaliths and ravines
Creuse has… farms. And a town that used to make tapestries. That seems to be it
Is it that bad? Has anyone been? How boring is creuse?
Fuck dont start me.
I owned a factory in La Creuse and commuted there for 4 years. Its a cultural vacuum. Parisians laugh at it as the arsehole of France - but thts a level of national pride I never understood - it's worse than that. It's the kind of place where the swingers sleep with their other sister. The town I stayed in had an Irish Pub called le Loch Ness I couldnt be arsed explaining but that was international division of the departement. For years it held the record of the only department without a Michelin star, its population has been on the slide for a century and has only pepped up in the last decade or so because nitwit english are buying houses there. Houses they will never be able to sell unless some numpty like Pater Mayle is sponsored to write ficion by the local estate agents
Surpisingly for what is quite an agricultural area it votes far left. All those years of interbreeding with their cousins and their livestock have produced some seriously screwed up people. When I was driving to Limoges airport to go home I passed signs for Oradour sur Glane and had to suppress my guilt that I understood where the 2SS Division Das Reich were coming from. There is next to no industry and what there is the locals try to wreck as they are all paid up members of the CGT the manic communist union. The type of people who key your car and knife your tyres if your negotiating wages. Meanwhile the local plods just stand back and watch.
And it's not just me, Macron famously had a bust up with people at the factory ( after my time )
There is sod all in the place except the people who cant leave, some charolais cattle who are smarter than their owners and regular riots. By all means visit, it will give you an appreciation for the dynamism and jet setting which is rural Suffolk. But dont try bedding the locals its a french SSI and you'll disrupt the gene pool. Anyway if the women have 3 legs how do you know youve got the right crevice, you could be unlucky and enter the one with the penis.
If you have a spare £100k knocking about to donate to a political party, I can't imagine whatever money you can get on for a constituency bet will be worth much financially in the grand scheme of things.
There people are morons.
I'd very much like to know the amount. If it's an insurance bet that's one thing (and something he should probably explain ASAP tbh - it's something sensible people will understand).
If it's not, then it's probably interesting info as it would be presumably based on canvas returns.
Anyway 4/7 is currently still available on Tories on his seat at Bet 365 and Boyle Sports, and a tenner for 1.4 on Betfair. I can't be arsed personally, but this may be of use to someone.
"As I understand it, what appears to have happened is this Labour candidate in this seat, which has a large Conservative majority, actually bet that he himself would lose the seat."
I cannot understand on what possible basis this justifies a Gambling Commission investigation.
I don't actually think the election date bets were in breach of the Gambling Act, but there is absolutely no chance this is. He's either knocked on some doors and reckons he'll lose or it's an insurance bet ("well, I've lost, but at least I can buy myself and the missus a restaurant meal").
The Gambling Commission have taken leave of their senses. This is absolutely no different from a horse racing fan coming to a judgment based on form and looking at the horse in the paddock.
That analogy doesn't quite work. He is the candidate so he could throw the race on purpose. Like if a jockey was to bet against him.
As the candidate he will also be in possession of information that's not in the public domain, which it's being suggested is what may make the bets on the date of the election into "cheating". But then again, that will be true of very many people who bet, to a greater or a lesser extent.
Well looking at the viewing figures for the latest season, they are becoming a lot rarer. "not exist any more", not very tolerant and open to differing opinions from Tennant.
I think it is personal for the 10th and 14th Doctor, rumour has it that his stepkid is trans.
I doubt it'll change any Who fan's vote pro or con, but given it's had trans actors in guest roles for many years and currently has one in a semi-regular role, this can hardly be counted as a surprise.
I don't know what PBers watch on television, I really don't. Probably Matt Walsh and Paul Marshall wearing tutus and lathering each other up before snogging. PB be weird.
"As I understand it, what appears to have happened is this Labour candidate in this seat, which has a large Conservative majority, actually bet that he himself would lose the seat."
I cannot understand on what possible basis this justifies a Gambling Commission investigation.
I don't actually think the election date bets were in breach of the Gambling Act, but there is absolutely no chance this is. He's either knocked on some doors and reckons he'll lose or it's an insurance bet ("well, I've lost, but at least I can buy myself and the missus a restaurant meal").
The Gambling Commission have taken leave of their senses. This is absolutely no different from a horse racing fan coming to a judgment based on form and looking at the horse in the paddock.
Absolutely. The conservative cases were on inside information. This is a nothing burger.
It sort of depends. When did he put the bet on. Lets say he put a big bet on to lose a couple of days ago, could that be due to insider info about the state of the campaign in that seat e.g. private polling, returns from door knocking, etc.
If he put it on at the start of the campaign, I reckon its more hedging for the time / effort of campaigning for 6 weeks, and you can get some money out of it if you lose.
In ordinary common sense the line is pretty clear. If you have proper, advance, confidential inside information about event X happening on day Y and you place a bet on it, that's obviously a crime just like insider trading is. Some of the election date bets look a bit that way.
If you have information, lawfully obtained, because of your research, hard work or the nature of your job which gives you an informational edge over a matter which is still a contingency, you are doing what all gamblers would like to do. It could not possibly be a crime. In the realm of election politics it is plainly inappropriate - but that's different.
I can see it now, Starmer is going to announce some law banning politicians from betting.
It;s not just that I want British politicians to be hit by a passing asteroid, it's getting to the point that I don't know which one to aim the asteroid first. Why doesn't the authoritarian busybody just fuck off?
If peoole persist on claiming Bedfordshire is Boring I shall start interminably posting extracts of Nadine Dorries book, cutting and pasting the most sychophactic twitter responses to Farages tweets that I can find and start waxing lyrical on the subject of Pineapple on Pizza.
NEW: Kevin Craig admits he put a bet on the Tories to win in his constituency.
Ful statement: “Throughout my life I have enjoyed the odd bet for fun whether on politics or horses. A few weeks ago when I thought I would never win this seat I put a bet on the Tories to win here with the intention of giving any winnings to local charities. While I did not place this bet with any prior knowledge of the outcome, this was a huge mistake, for which I apologise unreservedly. I have so much respect for how Keir Starmer has changed the Labour Party and I have been fighting so hard to win this seat and change the country alongside him. However, it is right that the party upholds the highest standards for its Parliamentary candidates - just as the public expects the highest standards from any party hoping to serve in government. I deeply regret what I have done and will take the consequences of this stupid error of judgement on the chin. I am deeply sorry to the many dedicated and loyal local Labour Party volunteers who have been supporting my campaign. I will comply fully with the investigation.”
"As I understand it, what appears to have happened is this Labour candidate in this seat, which has a large Conservative majority, actually bet that he himself would lose the seat."
I cannot understand on what possible basis this justifies a Gambling Commission investigation.
I don't actually think the election date bets were in breach of the Gambling Act, but there is absolutely no chance this is. He's either knocked on some doors and reckons he'll lose or it's an insurance bet ("well, I've lost, but at least I can buy myself and the missus a restaurant meal").
The Gambling Commission have taken leave of their senses. This is absolutely no different from a horse racing fan coming to a judgment based on form and looking at the horse in the paddock.
Absolutely. The conservative cases were on inside information. This is a nothing burger.
It sort of depends. When did he put the bet on. Lets say he put a big bet on to lose a couple of days ago, could that be due to insider info about the state of the campaign in that seat e.g. private polling, returns from door knocking, etc.
If he put it on at the start of the campaign, I reckon its more hedging for the time / effort of campaigning for 6 weeks, and you can get some money out of it if you lose.
In ordinary common sense the line is pretty clear. If you have proper, advance, confidential inside information about event X happening on day Y and you place a bet on it, that's obviously a crime just like insider trading is. Some of the election date bets look a bit that way.
If you have information, lawfully obtained, because of your research, hard work or the nature of your job which gives you an informational edge over a matter which is still a contingency, you are doing what all gamblers would like to do. It could not possibly be a crime. In the realm of election politics it is plainly inappropriate - but that's different.
The last bit is the important bit. Most MPs didn't break the expenses rules, but there was a huge amount of inappropriate spending and actions taken to enrich oneself by playing the system.
Like "Peppa Pig" from the amusefest that was Boris Johnson wasn't the fucking cringiest thing ever from a politician.
C'mon. Get a grip. Various people are just pissed off Starmer's winning.
I'm *bored* that Starmer is winning. Because he is being terribly boring and inoffensive. Where's the umph?
This bit is 'win the election' and barring a mega shock it's going to be a resounding success. Then, 5/7 onwards, he's PM. Will he be boring, cautious, ineffectual? Or will he be a good, maybe very good, PM who'll relax a bit more in public over time?
I hope and expect the second, but who knows? What I do know is that people writing him off on the basis he hasn't been a thrill-a-minute as Opposition Leader or in this GE campaign are mainly engaging in prejudice-informed guesswork.
No, we’re just mocking his cringe. In my comment immediately after my mockery (which seems to have upset so many of you so weirdly) I actually say This won’t matter as long as he learns from it. We don’t want or need him to be funny so he doesn’t have to try and he shouldn’t even try
After the last few years we will take dull but competent if he can manage it. We all know he has a tough task (I expect him to fail but I genuinely hope he succeeds)
What we don’t want is an inept politician who also makes us cringe. That will be damaging. Quit the gags Sir Kir
No point trying to backtrack now. You're really put out that he isn't making you laugh so hard it hurts every time you see him. You think it's a big deal that he doesn't (can't?) do that. So much of a big deal that it's cost him your vote.
No, you're missing the point. See also the Ryan Giggs clip. It's not just not funny, its the antithesis of funny. If funny is 1 and not funny is 0, what SKS and Ryan Giggs are are -1. Perhaps even i. It has all the cadences of humour, without the humour itself. It's awful and weirdly compelling. It's not just failing to tell a joke well, it's failing to recognise whether the story he's telling falls into the category of 'anecdote' or not. Many people aren't particularly funny. But this is more than just telling a joke which doesn't land. It's, well, weird. And certainly worthy of comment.
I think Leon has said though that he still intends to vote Labour. Doesn't mean he can't then comment on the Labour leader's oddities.
Exactly right and very eloquent to boot. He doesn’t apparently understand humour at a basic level. This is like “how do you do fellow kids” but he means it
Add in the non-dreaming and third person stuff and we have a proper oddball coming into number 10. But then maybe that’s what Britain needs as we stare into the abyss
He doesn’t have a favourite poem or novel either. Hmmm. He’s the cliche of an alien trying to be human and failing. But again - that could be just the ticket
Tho TMay and Brown were a bit like this and they were disasters
The man is institutionalised after years working for the CPS. Hes a dangerous man in the sense he will be a puritan on legislating on things like ethnic minority pay gaps.
Sir Keir will basically be another Gordon Brown as PM, except if Brown had won a landslide majority for his policies
You're obsessed with how everything that might happen is somehow just the same as something that happened before. It's really weird. Like you've only got five slots in your head and everything has to conform to one of those. 1. The 1997 election 2. Gordon Brown 3. The Russell Group 4. A cat 5. The monarchy
Here, HYUFD, here's a picture of my dog "It's basically like a cat only larger and with a longer nose"
Hey, HYUFD, did you see Eurovision? "Yes, it was like the the 1997 election only with a jury system and more political parties. The winner was basically Gordon Brown if Gordon Brown had been a 24 year old woman from Azerbaijan who was dancing on a floor screen the size of 400 cats. Yass queen [consort, HRH Camilla]"
Give it a year and I will be proved right. A Starmer government will be legislating and policymaking and running the economy in a very similar way to how Brown did as PM (though they will hope without another banking crash)
NEW: Kevin Craig admits he put a bet on the Tories to win in his constituency.
Ful statement: “Throughout my life I have enjoyed the odd bet for fun whether on politics or horses. A few weeks ago when I thought I would never win this seat I put a bet on the Tories to win here with the intention of giving any winnings to local charities. While I did not place this bet with any prior knowledge of the outcome, this was a huge mistake, for which I apologise unreservedly. I have so much respect for how Keir Starmer has changed the Labour Party and I have been fighting so hard to win this seat and change the country alongside him. However, it is right that the party upholds the highest standards for its Parliamentary candidates - just as the public expects the highest standards from any party hoping to serve in government. I deeply regret what I have done and will take the consequences of this stupid error of judgement on the chin. I am deeply sorry to the many dedicated and loyal local Labour Party volunteers who have been supporting my campaign. I will comply fully with the investigation.”
"As I understand it, what appears to have happened is this Labour candidate in this seat, which has a large Conservative majority, actually bet that he himself would lose the seat."
I cannot understand on what possible basis this justifies a Gambling Commission investigation.
I don't actually think the election date bets were in breach of the Gambling Act, but there is absolutely no chance this is. He's either knocked on some doors and reckons he'll lose or it's an insurance bet ("well, I've lost, but at least I can buy myself and the missus a restaurant meal").
The Gambling Commission have taken leave of their senses. This is absolutely no different from a horse racing fan coming to a judgment based on form and looking at the horse in the paddock.
Absolutely. The conservative cases were on inside information. This is a nothing burger.
It sort of depends. When did he put the bet on. Lets say he put a big bet on to lose a couple of days ago, could that be due to insider info about the state of the campaign in that seat e.g. private polling, returns from door knocking, etc.
If he put it on at the start of the campaign, I reckon its more hedging for the time / effort of campaigning for 6 weeks, and you can get some money out of it if you lose.
In ordinary common sense the line is pretty clear. If you have proper, advance, confidential inside information about event X happening on day Y and you place a bet on it, that's obviously a crime just like insider trading is. Some of the election date bets look a bit that way.
If you have information, lawfully obtained, because of your research, hard work or the nature of your job which gives you an informational edge over a matter which is still a contingency, you are doing what all gamblers would like to do. It could not possibly be a crime. In the realm of election politics it is plainly inappropriate - but that's different.
I hope our own Rochdale isn't going to be in trouble for betting on himself.
It is betting against yourself that seems ... dodgy.
It’s completely unfair that France gets all this natural beauty (and better weather, and slimmer women) while we have Newent, Wick and @kinabalu’s golf club
I’m therefore trying to cheer myself out of my jealousy by working out what is the most boring, least interesting department of France. The obvious choice would be somewhere in Picardy but I think I’ve found a prime candidate
Creuse. It seems to be the ultimate nowhere land smack bang in the middle of the country. It has a tiny population with only lozere smaller (in departments) but Lozere is quite spectacular -moors, mountains, megaliths and ravines
Creuse has… farms. And a town that used to make tapestries. That seems to be it
Is it that bad? Has anyone been? How boring is creuse?
Fuck dont start me.
I owned a factory in La Creuse and commuted there for 4 years. Its a cultural vacuum. Parisians laugh at it as the arsehole of France - but thts a level of national pride I never understood - it's worse than that. It's the kind of place where the swingers sleep with their other sister. The town I stayed in had an Irish Pub called le Loch Ness I couldnt be arsed explaining but that was international division of the departement. For years it held the record of the only department without a Michelin star, its population has been on the slide for a century and has only pepped up in the last decade or so because nitwit english are buying houses there. Houses they will never be able to sell unless some numpty like Pater Mayle is sponsored to write ficion by the local estate agents
Surpisingly for what is quite an agricultural area it votes far left. All those years of interbreeding with their cousins and their livestock have produced some seriously screwed up people. When I was driving to Limoges airport to go home I passed signs for Oradour sur Glane and had to suppress my guilt that I understood where the 2SS Division Das Reich were coming from. There is next to no industry and what there is the locals try to wreck as they are all paid up members of the CGT the manic communist union. The type of people who key your car and knife your tyres if your negotiating wages. Meanwhile the local plods just stand back and watch.
And it's not just me, Macron famously had a bust up with people at the factory ( after my time )
There is sod all in the place except the people who cant leave, some charolais cattle who are smarter than their owners and regular riots. By all means visit, it will give you an appreciation for the dynamism and jet setting which is rural Suffolk. But dont try bedding the locals its a french SSI and you'll disrupt the gene pool. Anyway if the women have 3 legs how do you know youve got the right crevice, you could be unlucky and enter the one with the penis.
A superb rant. Bravo
I was actually thinking of going there on my next French jaunt - just to see. You’ve successfully dissuaded me
He said the issue shouldn't be worth remarking on, but until we wake up in a world where Kemi Badenich doesn't exist any more ... [it would be remarked on].
As to saying you wish a politician would shut up, I wonder who after the last few weeks is in a position to cast the first stone.
Could the Labour candidate's suspension open up the set to the LDs? I've just had £9 at 100 LDs to win Central Suffolk and Norfolk. If this bet wins am I going to have my collar felt?
It’s completely unfair that France gets all this natural beauty (and better weather, and slimmer women) while we have Newent, Wick and @kinabalu’s golf club
I’m therefore trying to cheer myself out of my jealousy by working out what is the most boring, least interesting department of France. The obvious choice would be somewhere in Picardy but I think I’ve found a prime candidate
Creuse. It seems to be the ultimate nowhere land smack bang in the middle of the country. It has a tiny population with only lozere smaller (in departments) but Lozere is quite spectacular -moors, mountains, megaliths and ravines
Creuse has… farms. And a town that used to make tapestries. That seems to be it
Is it that bad? Has anyone been? How boring is creuse?
If we're comparing like with like then you'll need to see what if offers vis a vis Bedfordshire.
Hah. I did for a moment wonder about the “most boring county in Britain” and yes Bedfordshire floated into my head
Oi.
Nothing boring about Bedfordshire. Quite small but have some splendid countryside that is the equal of anything in the Cotswolds and market towns and far enough out of London to be beyond the worst of the stockbroker belt. They get as far as Luton (our London Inner City type borough) and turn back.
And no ULEZ, Congestion Charge or 20mph limits (except short bits by schools)
"Bedfordshire isn't boring because [checks notes] you can drive at 30mph" I was going to plump for Herefordshire, but you've just converted me to the Bedfordshire camp.
Herefordshire is a stunningly beautiful county. Lots of uphill and down dale rather than flat sandpit Bedfordshire. OK, the people are like the duelling banjo players from Deliverance if very much more scary.
Yes, Herefordshire is ravishingly beautiful. If only every British county was as lovely and unspoilt!
It’s also really really noomy in the south and west as it butts up against the Welsh hills. Plus the Wye valley, the orchard lands of the east, half the malverns and half the Forest of Dean. Tintern abbey. Kilpeck. Galway. The lugg. Craswall
What we really need now is for the SNP candidate in Aberdeenshire North & Moray East to have placed bets on the Tories/Lib Dems to win the seat.
lol - I can emphatically confirm that my only bet is on myself to win. And at 66/1 it’s hardly me cheating the system to make money…
Isn’t what you have just confessed to, identical to what the Labour candidate has been sacked for?
Why on earth would you bet on yourself? What’s the point?
I am so disappointed in you 🥺
There is a proud history of candidates betting on themselves. Clement Freud I think got 33/1 on his entry to parliament in Ely. And not small stakes either!
Like "Peppa Pig" from the amusefest that was Boris Johnson wasn't the fucking cringiest thing ever from a politician.
C'mon. Get a grip. Various people are just pissed off Starmer's winning.
I'm *bored* that Starmer is winning. Because he is being terribly boring and inoffensive. Where's the umph?
This bit is 'win the election' and barring a mega shock it's going to be a resounding success. Then, 5/7 onwards, he's PM. Will he be boring, cautious, ineffectual? Or will he be a good, maybe very good, PM who'll relax a bit more in public over time?
I hope and expect the second, but who knows? What I do know is that people writing him off on the basis he hasn't been a thrill-a-minute as Opposition Leader or in this GE campaign are mainly engaging in prejudice-informed guesswork.
No, we’re just mocking his cringe. In my comment immediately after my mockery (which seems to have upset so many of you so weirdly) I actually say This won’t matter as long as he learns from it. We don’t want or need him to be funny so he doesn’t have to try and he shouldn’t even try
After the last few years we will take dull but competent if he can manage it. We all know he has a tough task (I expect him to fail but I genuinely hope he succeeds)
What we don’t want is an inept politician who also makes us cringe. That will be damaging. Quit the gags Sir Kir
No point trying to backtrack now. You're really put out that he isn't making you laugh so hard it hurts every time you see him. You think it's a big deal that he doesn't (can't?) do that. So much of a big deal that it's cost him your vote.
No, you're missing the point. See also the Ryan Giggs clip. It's not just not funny, its the antithesis of funny. If funny is 1 and not funny is 0, what SKS and Ryan Giggs are are -1. Perhaps even i. It has all the cadences of humour, without the humour itself. It's awful and weirdly compelling. It's not just failing to tell a joke well, it's failing to recognise whether the story he's telling falls into the category of 'anecdote' or not. Many people aren't particularly funny. But this is more than just telling a joke which doesn't land. It's, well, weird. And certainly worthy of comment.
I think Leon has said though that he still intends to vote Labour. Doesn't mean he can't then comment on the Labour leader's oddities.
I don't miss points, Cookie, you know that.
It's just a sweet and rather forced little story in front of a bunch of stony faced teenagers. THAT is what's funny - least to me - them in the background. The awkwardness. Lol. Poor kids.
But look, it was clearly meant to be gently amusing not bring the house down. And it fell a little flat. So the fuck what? People going on about how incredibly 'cringy' it is - they are the weirdos here. Eg it's absolutely nothing next to "Peppa Pig" and "Buses".
But the good news? Leon is not voting Labour. It's Reform for our gammon with a vocab.
lol. You’re SO defensive. Is it because you’re a bit like kir royale yourself so it feels personal? Quite fascinating
If only. I am actually - to my great chagrin and discredit - far more like Boris Johnson than Keir Starmer. I so wish could change that. Too late now though.
No you’re not. Boris is a rampantly heterosexual ladies man and old Etonian and very funny and deeply deeply irresponsible. You are not irresponsible. Nor did you go to eton and so on
You are really quite like sir kir royale. A provincial upper working class lad made good in london. Hard working and sensible. Bit stiff. Intelligent and earnest. Similar age. Now in north london. Spooky!
You are so defensive about skyr because you are so alike. Perhaps you don’t realise this
I have lived a careless, deeply irresponsible life is the actual truth of the matter, I'm afraid. But thank you. The assessment is most flattering - and since it's based on my nearly 40k posts on here there must be a germ. I do a little shrug.
I often wonder if you mistreated women in your youth which is why you are so ridiculously woke now. A sense of guilt.
"As I understand it, what appears to have happened is this Labour candidate in this seat, which has a large Conservative majority, actually bet that he himself would lose the seat."
I cannot understand on what possible basis this justifies a Gambling Commission investigation.
I don't actually think the election date bets were in breach of the Gambling Act, but there is absolutely no chance this is. He's either knocked on some doors and reckons he'll lose or it's an insurance bet ("well, I've lost, but at least I can buy myself and the missus a restaurant meal").
The Gambling Commission have taken leave of their senses. This is absolutely no different from a horse racing fan coming to a judgment based on form and looking at the horse in the paddock.
The stuff about insiders acting poorly even if legally was a real story, this seems like nonsense.
What we really need now is for the SNP candidate in Aberdeenshire North & Moray East to have placed bets on the Tories/Lib Dems to win the seat.
lol - I can emphatically confirm that my only bet is on myself to win. And at 66/1 it’s hardly me cheating the system to make money…
Isn’t what you have just confessed to, identical to what the Labour candidate has been sacked for?
Why on earth would you bet on yourself? What’s the point?
I am so disappointed in you 🥺
There is a proud history of candidates betting on themselves. Clement Freud I think got 33/1 on his entry to parliament in Ely. And not small stakes either!
£1000 at the time £1000 was serious money. The £34,000 won was what kept in the seat for years as it paid for extra workers...
"As I understand it, what appears to have happened is this Labour candidate in this seat, which has a large Conservative majority, actually bet that he himself would lose the seat."
I cannot understand on what possible basis this justifies a Gambling Commission investigation.
I don't actually think the election date bets were in breach of the Gambling Act, but there is absolutely no chance this is. He's either knocked on some doors and reckons he'll lose or it's an insurance bet ("well, I've lost, but at least I can buy myself and the missus a restaurant meal").
The Gambling Commission have taken leave of their senses. This is absolutely no different from a horse racing fan coming to a judgment based on form and looking at the horse in the paddock.
Absolutely. The conservative cases were on inside information. This is a nothing burger.
It sort of depends. When did he put the bet on. Lets say he put a big bet on to lose a couple of days ago, could that be due to insider info about the state of the campaign in that seat e.g. private polling, returns from door knocking, etc.
If he put it on at the start of the campaign, I reckon its more hedging for the time / effort of campaigning for 6 weeks, and you can get some money out of it if you lose.
In ordinary common sense the line is pretty clear. If you have proper, advance, confidential inside information about event X happening on day Y and you place a bet on it, that's obviously a crime just like insider trading is. Some of the election date bets look a bit that way.
If you have information, lawfully obtained, because of your research, hard work or the nature of your job which gives you an informational edge over a matter which is still a contingency, you are doing what all gamblers would like to do. It could not possibly be a crime. In the realm of election politics it is plainly inappropriate - but that's different.
The last bit is the important bit. Most MPs didn't break the expenses rules, but there was a huge amount of inappropriate spending and actions taken to enrich oneself by playing the system.
And it revealed the system was deliberately set up to allow inappropriate spending, so whether it was criminal was largely irrelevant. I remember Charles always trying defend the Moat man.
It’s completely unfair that France gets all this natural beauty (and better weather, and slimmer women) while we have Newent, Wick and @kinabalu’s golf club
I’m therefore trying to cheer myself out of my jealousy by working out what is the most boring, least interesting department of France. The obvious choice would be somewhere in Picardy but I think I’ve found a prime candidate
Creuse. It seems to be the ultimate nowhere land smack bang in the middle of the country. It has a tiny population with only lozere smaller (in departments) but Lozere is quite spectacular -moors, mountains, megaliths and ravines
Creuse has… farms. And a town that used to make tapestries. That seems to be it
Is it that bad? Has anyone been? How boring is creuse?
If we're comparing like with like then you'll need to see what if offers vis a vis Bedfordshire.
Hah. I did for a moment wonder about the “most boring county in Britain” and yes Bedfordshire floated into my head
Yes, Bedfordshire is boringest county (traditional boundaries) by some way. The competition is for number 2. Staffordshire or Cheshire perhaps. But even Bedfordshire has a lifetime of interest in it. Marston Moretaine; Elstow; Shillington; Luton Central Mosque interior; Luton bus station at night; Luton Airport departure lounge.
No, not having Cheshire as boring, either on traditional or modern boundaries. Cheshire has some National Park, for as start. Cheshire has Joddrell Bank, one of the seven wonders of the North West* Cheshire has the rows and walls of Chester, the Peckforton Hills, the Anderton Boat Lift, Stockport Bus Station, Port Sunlight, the Dee Estuary, Helsby Hill, Little Moreton Hall, Gawsworth Hall, Alderley Edge. Cheshire has the books of Alan Garner. Cheshire has the Macc Lads. Cheshire has a panhandle. Cheshire has Lyme Park. Cheshire is, what, the seventh highest county in the country (or thereabouts). Boring this place is not.
Cheshire is less instantly exciting than most of the other northern counties, but beats most of the Midlands and South East. Imagine one of those calendars you get in moderately upmarket garden centres. Cheshire's calendars will beat at least 50% of other counties into a cocked hat.
I would say most boring county probably Huntingdonshire. Highest point in Huntingdonshire? Boring Field. QED, my friends, QED. Other clearly more boring counties than Cheshire include Bedfordshire, Hertfordshire, Northamptonshire, Leicestershire, Nottinghamshire, Lincolnshire, Rutland, Berkshire and Buckinghamshire.
I offer an unconditional surrender. But you are not having Lincolnshire (England's most interesting county) or Northamptonshire (most underestimated). Nottinghamshire you can have; I had forgotten it existed.
Go on then, offer a defence of Lincolnshire? I do actually quite like a reason to go to Lincolnshire - the flatness feels quite exotic. It is quite unlike most of the rest of England. I like Lincoln, and I like Boston Stump, and the Fens are strangely compelling. But England's most interesting?
Its not all flat (at least, compared to the levels) - the Wolds are quite hilly and pleasantly rural in parts (and are an AONB) and there's a few chalk downs with interesting flora. Some of the coast is interesting too - such as Gibraltar Point & Donna Nook.
"As I understand it, what appears to have happened is this Labour candidate in this seat, which has a large Conservative majority, actually bet that he himself would lose the seat."
I cannot understand on what possible basis this justifies a Gambling Commission investigation.
I don't actually think the election date bets were in breach of the Gambling Act, but there is absolutely no chance this is. He's either knocked on some doors and reckons he'll lose or it's an insurance bet ("well, I've lost, but at least I can buy myself and the missus a restaurant meal").
The Gambling Commission have taken leave of their senses. This is absolutely no different from a horse racing fan coming to a judgment based on form and looking at the horse in the paddock.
That analogy doesn't quite work. He is the candidate so he could throw the race on purpose. Like if a jockey was to bet against him.
Jockeys literally aren't allowed to do so by the sporting authorities, though. Maybe there should be rules in politics - but the fact is that there are not. Breaking a rule that maybe should exist but doesn't is identical to not breaking a rule.
I mean I do sort of get your point that it could theoretically be an offence of "manipulation" under the Gambling Act if the candidate bet against himself, then promptly ensured he was pictured in Wetherspoons popping his todger in a pint of lager while screaming "elephant want drink" at startled onlookers. But there's absolutely no indication this man did anything of the sort.
Like "Peppa Pig" from the amusefest that was Boris Johnson wasn't the fucking cringiest thing ever from a politician.
C'mon. Get a grip. Various people are just pissed off Starmer's winning.
I'm *bored* that Starmer is winning. Because he is being terribly boring and inoffensive. Where's the umph?
This bit is 'win the election' and barring a mega shock it's going to be a resounding success. Then, 5/7 onwards, he's PM. Will he be boring, cautious, ineffectual? Or will he be a good, maybe very good, PM who'll relax a bit more in public over time?
I hope and expect the second, but who knows? What I do know is that people writing him off on the basis he hasn't been a thrill-a-minute as Opposition Leader or in this GE campaign are mainly engaging in prejudice-informed guesswork.
No, we’re just mocking his cringe. In my comment immediately after my mockery (which seems to have upset so many of you so weirdly) I actually say This won’t matter as long as he learns from it. We don’t want or need him to be funny so he doesn’t have to try and he shouldn’t even try
After the last few years we will take dull but competent if he can manage it. We all know he has a tough task (I expect him to fail but I genuinely hope he succeeds)
What we don’t want is an inept politician who also makes us cringe. That will be damaging. Quit the gags Sir Kir
No point trying to backtrack now. You're really put out that he isn't making you laugh so hard it hurts every time you see him. You think it's a big deal that he doesn't (can't?) do that. So much of a big deal that it's cost him your vote.
No, you're missing the point. See also the Ryan Giggs clip. It's not just not funny, its the antithesis of funny. If funny is 1 and not funny is 0, what SKS and Ryan Giggs are are -1. Perhaps even i. It has all the cadences of humour, without the humour itself. It's awful and weirdly compelling. It's not just failing to tell a joke well, it's failing to recognise whether the story he's telling falls into the category of 'anecdote' or not. Many people aren't particularly funny. But this is more than just telling a joke which doesn't land. It's, well, weird. And certainly worthy of comment.
I think Leon has said though that he still intends to vote Labour. Doesn't mean he can't then comment on the Labour leader's oddities.
I don't miss points, Cookie, you know that.
It's just a sweet and rather forced little story in front of a bunch of stony faced teenagers. THAT is what's funny - least to me - them in the background. The awkwardness. Lol. Poor kids.
But look, it was clearly meant to be gently amusing not bring the house down. And it fell a little flat. So the fuck what? People going on about how incredibly 'cringy' it is - they are the weirdos here. Eg it's absolutely nothing next to "Peppa Pig" and "Buses".
But the good news? Leon is not voting Labour. It's Reform for our gammon with a vocab.
lol. You’re SO defensive. Is it because you’re a bit like kir royale yourself so it feels personal? Quite fascinating
If only. I am actually - to my great chagrin and discredit - far more like Boris Johnson than Keir Starmer. I so wish could change that. Too late now though.
No you’re not. Boris is a rampantly heterosexual ladies man and old Etonian and very funny and deeply deeply irresponsible. You are not irresponsible. Nor did you go to eton and so on
You are really quite like sir kir royale. A provincial upper working class lad made good in london. Hard working and sensible. Bit stiff. Intelligent and earnest. Similar age. Now in north london. Spooky!
You are so defensive about skyr because you are so alike. Perhaps you don’t realise this
I have lived a careless, deeply irresponsible life is the actual truth of the matter, I'm afraid. But thank you. The assessment is most flattering - and since it's based on my nearly 40k posts on here there must be a germ. I do a little shrug.
I often wonder if you mistreated women in your youth which is why you are so ridiculously woke now. A sense of guilt.
Not that woke. I've got my 🏴 shirt on again. Big performance coming up methinks.
Like "Peppa Pig" from the amusefest that was Boris Johnson wasn't the fucking cringiest thing ever from a politician.
C'mon. Get a grip. Various people are just pissed off Starmer's winning.
I'm *bored* that Starmer is winning. Because he is being terribly boring and inoffensive. Where's the umph?
This bit is 'win the election' and barring a mega shock it's going to be a resounding success. Then, 5/7 onwards, he's PM. Will he be boring, cautious, ineffectual? Or will he be a good, maybe very good, PM who'll relax a bit more in public over time?
I hope and expect the second, but who knows? What I do know is that people writing him off on the basis he hasn't been a thrill-a-minute as Opposition Leader or in this GE campaign are mainly engaging in prejudice-informed guesswork.
No, we’re just mocking his cringe. In my comment immediately after my mockery (which seems to have upset so many of you so weirdly) I actually say This won’t matter as long as he learns from it. We don’t want or need him to be funny so he doesn’t have to try and he shouldn’t even try
After the last few years we will take dull but competent if he can manage it. We all know he has a tough task (I expect him to fail but I genuinely hope he succeeds)
What we don’t want is an inept politician who also makes us cringe. That will be damaging. Quit the gags Sir Kir
No point trying to backtrack now. You're really put out that he isn't making you laugh so hard it hurts every time you see him. You think it's a big deal that he doesn't (can't?) do that. So much of a big deal that it's cost him your vote.
No, you're missing the point. See also the Ryan Giggs clip. It's not just not funny, its the antithesis of funny. If funny is 1 and not funny is 0, what SKS and Ryan Giggs are are -1. Perhaps even i. It has all the cadences of humour, without the humour itself. It's awful and weirdly compelling. It's not just failing to tell a joke well, it's failing to recognise whether the story he's telling falls into the category of 'anecdote' or not. Many people aren't particularly funny. But this is more than just telling a joke which doesn't land. It's, well, weird. And certainly worthy of comment.
I think Leon has said though that he still intends to vote Labour. Doesn't mean he can't then comment on the Labour leader's oddities.
I don't miss points, Cookie, you know that.
It's just a sweet and rather forced little story in front of a bunch of stony faced teenagers. THAT is what's funny - least to me - them in the background. The awkwardness. Lol. Poor kids.
But look, it was clearly meant to be gently amusing not bring the house down. And it fell a little flat. So the fuck what? People going on about how incredibly 'cringy' it is - they are the weirdos here. Eg it's absolutely nothing next to "Peppa Pig" and "Buses".
But the good news? Leon is not voting Labour. It's Reform for our gammon with a vocab.
lol. You’re SO defensive. Is it because you’re a bit like kir royale yourself so it feels personal? Quite fascinating
If only. I am actually - to my great chagrin and discredit - far more like Boris Johnson than Keir Starmer. I so wish could change that. Too late now though.
No you’re not. Boris is a rampantly heterosexual ladies man and old Etonian and very funny and deeply deeply irresponsible. You are not irresponsible. Nor did you go to eton and so on
You are really quite like sir kir royale. A provincial upper working class lad made good in london. Hard working and sensible. Bit stiff. Intelligent and earnest. Similar age. Now in north london. Spooky!
You are so defensive about skyr because you are so alike. Perhaps you don’t realise this
I have lived a careless, deeply irresponsible life is the actual truth of the matter, I'm afraid. But thank you. The assessment is most flattering - and since it's based on my nearly 40k posts on here there must be a germ. I do a little shrug.
I often wonder if you mistreated women in your youth which is why you are so ridiculously woke now. A sense of guilt.
If you're going to make a baseless accusation like that there's no point playing it in coy fashion.
Comments
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cqqqqx25rz0t
I understand Labour will return the £100,000 Kevin Craig has donated to the party under Keir Starmer's leadership
https://x.com/breeallegretti/status/1805641880304005389
Was nice knowing you all!
It's a game of chance in this instance, not one of betting on dead cert. data.
Has Starmer over reacted again?
Edit, not if he bet himself to lose. What an idiot.
The tipping point for me was a couple of days before the announcement was Lord Finkelstein saying he had heard talk about a July election which started moving the market.
Lord F is close to Lord Hague who is very close to Rishi Sunak was my logic.
Lincoln Cathedral is a medieval wonder.
I'd certainly defend it against Bedfordshire.
I don't actually think the election date bets were in breach of the Gambling Act, but there is absolutely no chance this is. He's either knocked on some doors and reckons he'll lose or it's an insurance bet ("well, I've lost, but at least I can buy myself and the missus a restaurant meal").
The Gambling Commission have taken leave of their senses. This is absolutely no different from a horse racing fan coming to a judgment based on form and looking at the horse in the paddock.
Betting on yourself to win is, I think, far less dodgy than betting on yourself to lose.
Which could be some time, because it's very much off the beaten track. But still. Looking forward now to my next trip.
At the moment the focus is nearly 100% on the Tories but I'm sure we'll hear about the wrongdoings of various Labour people over the next five years...
https://x.com/___Riz1902/status/1805644186462326995
Backing yourself to lose inevitably leaves one open to suspicion. Whether you are favourite or underdog doesn't really matter, nor does that the intent of this bet is very unlikely to be bad. It is just basic common sense not to do this, if they don't have that they shouldn't be an MP.
There people are morons.
I didn't know.
If he put it on at the start of the campaign, I reckon its more hedging for the time / effort of campaigning for 6 weeks, and you can get some money out of it if you lose.
Lookalike is a real stretch
https://www.hampshirechronicle.co.uk/news/24394620.george-clooney-lookalike-will-stand-candidate-winchester/
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/estimated-declaration-times-general-election-093817984.html
If it's not, then it's probably interesting info as it would be presumably based on canvas returns.
Anyway 4/7 is currently still available on Tories on his seat at Bet 365 and Boyle Sports, and a tenner for 1.4 on Betfair. I can't be arsed personally, but this may be of use to someone.
- https://x.com/RDLaverty/status/1727655364777169013?lang=en
- https://www.hellomagazine.com/healthandbeauty/mother-and-baby/700962/david-georgia-tennant-photos-children-pride-month-celebrations/
- https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/london/londoner-left-dumbstruck-after-seeing-actor-david-tennant-wear-their-pro-trans-shirt-1.7243375
I doubt it'll change any Who fan's vote pro or con, but given it's had trans actors in guest roles for many years and currently has one in a semi-regular role, this can hardly be counted as a surprise.I don't know what PBers watch on television, I really don't. Probably Matt Walsh and Paul Marshall wearing tutus and lathering each other up before snogging. PB be weird.
If you have information, lawfully obtained, because of your research, hard work or the nature of your job which gives you an informational edge over a matter which is still a contingency, you are doing what all gamblers would like to do. It could not possibly be a crime. In the realm of election politics it is plainly inappropriate - but that's different.
Lab 43
Jez 29
Rest nowhere
https://twitter.com/alantravis40/status/1805647026945654946
Oh yes.
Ful statement: “Throughout my life I have enjoyed the odd bet for fun whether on politics or horses. A few weeks ago when I thought I would never win this seat I put a bet on the Tories to win here with the intention of giving any winnings to local charities. While I did not place this bet with any prior knowledge of the outcome, this was a huge mistake, for which I apologise unreservedly. I have so much respect for how Keir Starmer has changed the Labour Party and I have been fighting so hard to win this seat and change the country alongside him. However, it is right that the party upholds the highest standards for its Parliamentary candidates - just as the public expects the highest standards from any party hoping to serve in government. I deeply regret what I have done and will take the consequences of this stupid error of judgement on the chin. I am deeply sorry to the many dedicated and loyal local Labour Party volunteers who have been supporting my campaign. I will comply fully with the investigation.”
https://x.com/breeallegretti/status/1805649666090189088
It is betting against yourself that seems ... dodgy.
I was actually thinking of going there on my next French jaunt - just to see. You’ve successfully dissuaded me
He said the issue shouldn't be worth remarking on, but until we wake up in a world where Kemi Badenich doesn't exist any more ... [it would be remarked on].
As to saying you wish a politician would shut up, I wonder who after the last few weeks is in a position to cast the first stone.
Tories keep £5m from Frank Hester of definitely-dodgy racist attack on Diane Abbott fame.
Why on earth would you bet on yourself? What’s the point?
I am so disappointed in you 🥺
I even resent bits of the Lakes for giving us Wordsworth poems,
Edit https://www.sportsjournalists.co.uk/sports-broadcasting/spend-just-a-minute-to-remember-clement-freud/
Ladbrokes paid for me to have rather more secretarial and research staff than other MPs, which helped to keep me in for five parliaments.
And the fact that he's not saying how much it was for suggests that it was for a substantial amount.
I mean I do sort of get your point that it could theoretically be an offence of "manipulation" under the Gambling Act if the candidate bet against himself, then promptly ensured he was pictured in Wetherspoons popping his todger in a pint of lager while screaming "elephant want drink" at startled onlookers. But there's absolutely no indication this man did anything of the sort.