Howdy, Stranger!

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

Why being English is a bad sign – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,047
edited July 4 in General
Why being English is a bad sign – politicalbetting.com

And as the share of people intending to vote for smaller parties has shrunk over the last year, the "third" parties that people have chosen have more-or-less lined up with their English identity pic.twitter.com/2AiiNT4P3x

Read the full story here

«134567

Comments

  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 53,314
    Two firsts in one day?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,455
    Is that polling for residents in England only?
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 21,969
    FPT

    Riddle me this PB - If the election ends up something like:

    Lab 250
    Lib 70
    Con 65
    Ref 15

    Do Con and Ref merge so the Right can hang on to official opposition status? But if they do merge would some Con MP's quit and join the Lib-Dems?

    The days after the election could be somewhat fraught..

    Any takers?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 118,517
    Carnyx said:

    Is that polling for residents in England only?

    As far as I can see yes, it was conducted as part of a GB wide poll, there may be a Scottish and Welsh elements that may be released later.

    Pollsters are known to stagger their releases.
  • eekeek Posts: 27,481
    Oh what a pity - it seems that Nigel now thinks more TV is going to cost him votes...


    Nigel Farage
    @Nigel_Farage
    I have just been invited to appear on Laura Kuenssberg.

    I’m refusing until the BBC apologises for their dishonest QT audience.

    Our state broadcaster has behaved like a political actor throughout this election.

    Reform will be campaigning vigorously to abolish the license fee.


  • eekeek Posts: 27,481
    edited June 29
    GIN1138 said:

    FPT

    Riddle me this PB - If the election ends up something like:

    Lab 250
    Lib 70
    Con 65
    Ref 15

    Do Con and Ref merge so the Right can hang on to official opposition status? But if they do merge would some Con MP's quit and join the Lib-Dems?

    The days after the election could be somewhat fraught..

    Any takers?

    That's 400 seats - where are the other MPs - take it you mean Labour 450.

    Why would the 65 Tory MPs accept Farage as leader?
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 21,448
    edited June 29
    Perhaps its due to growing up as an English Cricket fan in Australia in the 90s, but I've always considered myself much more English than British.

    I totally despite the vile Putinist racists of Reform as do most other English, not British, people on that survey.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,040
    Always been happier describing myself as British. Half Cymro, half English, seemed logical. Even though I’ve spent most of my life in Essex.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 53,240
    Me ne frego
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 21,448
    GIN1138 said:

    FPT

    Riddle me this PB - If the election ends up something like:

    Lab 250
    Lib 70
    Con 65
    Ref 15

    Do Con and Ref merge so the Right can hang on to official opposition status? But if they do merge would some Con MP's quit and join the Lib-Dems?

    The days after the election could be somewhat fraught..

    Any takers?

    I'd bloody hope so!

    Most Conservatives still voting Conservative on this site despite Farage and won't vote for him. I'd hope at least 6 of the surviving Tory MPs would think the same which is all it would take to defect to the Lib Dems on those numbers (assuming Lab and others make up the missing MPs).
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 5,053
    eek said:

    Oh what a pity - it seems that Nigel now thinks more TV is going to cost him votes...


    Nigel Farage
    @Nigel_Farage
    I have just been invited to appear on Laura Kuenssberg.

    I’m refusing until the BBC apologises for their dishonest QT audience.

    Our state broadcaster has behaved like a political actor throughout this election.

    Reform will be campaigning vigorously to abolish the license fee.


    Classic right wing populism trick copying what Orban and PIS have done to national broadcasting.
  • TweedledeeTweedledee Posts: 1,405
    GIN1138 said:

    FPT

    Riddle me this PB - If the election ends up something like:

    Lab 250
    Lib 70
    Con 65
    Ref 15

    Do Con and Ref merge so the Right can hang on to official opposition status? But if they do merge would some Con MP's quit and join the Lib-Dems?

    The days after the election could be somewhat fraught..

    Any takers?

    Lib won't take cons because sir Ed does not want faeces through the letterbox every day for 5 years. The correct answer is that labour lends lib enough "defectors" to get it de facto control of both government and opposition
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 9,946
    edited June 29

    Always been happier describing myself as British. Half Cymro, half English, seemed logical. Even though I’ve spent most of my life in Essex.

    I'm an Angle, fortifying the Waveney against slightly more southern angles or, worse, Saxons
  • bobbobbobbob Posts: 99
    Here’s what a REAL right wing govt would do:

    1. Introduce a flat tax to replace ALL current taxes (NI/VAT/CGT/Council Tax/ULEZ/fuel tax/ved/“apprenticeship levy”/sugar tax/sin taxes, the lot). Save BILLIONS on bureaucracy and let people. Show how much tax People are really paying !

    2 Privatise the BBC, channel 4, post office, Transport for London, national rail, public owned museums/galleries/british library, libraries etc. Not what the govt should be doing !

    3. Policy of gov outsourcing as much ans possible and reform to ensure bidding and competition and more efficient quicker procurement. Esp councils !!

    4. Long term goal to remove ALL state subsidies on transport, higher education, Hollywood “tax credits” and similar bs.

    5. Reform planning and building regulations to remove almost all restrictions. Remove listed buildings, “area of natural beauty”, grrenbelt and similar bs to allow easier demolition and building. Have a decade of national renewal ! New mass housing, wind farms, building new transport eithout govt getting in the way

    6. Bonfire of red tape. Reform licensing housing and street trading laws. Look at “all will” employment for both employees and employers to improve job flexibility by making it easier to hire and move jobs to create growth

    Prob more but that’s where I’d start
  • mwadamsmwadams Posts: 3,533
    Farooq said:

    GIN1138 said:

    FPT

    Riddle me this PB - If the election ends up something like:

    Lab 250
    Lib 70
    Con 65
    Ref 15

    Do Con and Ref merge so the Right can hang on to official opposition status? But if they do merge would some Con MP's quit and join the Lib-Dems?

    The days after the election could be somewhat fraught..

    Any takers?

    - it won't
    - no
    - also no
    - yes it will be fraught anyway
    I agree with all of that except "-also no" - in the unlikely event of the first two propositions coming to pass.

    I am *sure* there would be at least one Conservative MP who had the moral fibre not to cave to whatever demands Farage would make for that deal, and be unable to sit with them on the opposition benches.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,040
    eristdoof said:

    eek said:

    Oh what a pity - it seems that Nigel now thinks more TV is going to cost him votes...


    Nigel Farage
    @Nigel_Farage
    I have just been invited to appear on Laura Kuenssberg.

    I’m refusing until the BBC apologises for their dishonest QT audience.

    Our state broadcaster has behaved like a political actor throughout this election.

    Reform will be campaigning vigorously to abolish the license fee.


    Classic right wing populism trick copying what Orban and PIS have done to national broadcasting.
    He’s got a nerve, after all the coverage he’s had over the years.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 21,969
    edited June 29
    eek said:

    GIN1138 said:

    FPT

    Riddle me this PB - If the election ends up something like:

    Lab 250
    Lib 70
    Con 65
    Ref 15

    Do Con and Ref merge so the Right can hang on to official opposition status? But if they do merge would some Con MP's quit and join the Lib-Dems?

    The days after the election could be somewhat fraught..

    Any takers?

    That's 400 seats - where are the other MPs - take it you mean Labour 450.

    Why would the 65 Tory MPs accept Farage as leader?
    Yeah, sorry. 450 Lab (250 majority) Lib 70, Con 65, Ref 15

    Con and Ref merge to stop Libs being official opposition to Lab government. Farage become LOTO.

    BUT...

    Some Con MPs quit for Lib-Dems, so Libs still become official Opposition.

    With the polling we're seeing this scenario has got to be a possibility after the election?
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,069
    edited June 29
    GIN1138 said:

    FPT

    Riddle me this PB - If the election ends up something like:

    Lab 250
    Lib 70
    Con 65
    Ref 15

    Do Con and Ref merge so the Right can hang on to official opposition status? But if they do merge would some Con MP's quit and join the Lib-Dems?

    The days after the election could be somewhat fraught..

    Any takers?

    Pure guesswork, as so much of this would be new both constitutionally and practically.

    My guess: The speaker will judge who is LOTO on the basis of the number of unambiguous firm commitments from MPs to a party; party meaning a party that stood candidates in the election. This will happen and be judged on day 1 of parliament sitting. The speaker will take final soundings from Davey and ?Rishi the evening before.

    So there will be a few days for horsetrading with a chance to switch loyalties. They won't be dull

    Other guesses: The LDs and centrist Tories will work together to ensure that Reform are no part of HMLO.

    Only certainty: Tim Shipman will write a book about it. Matt cartoons will be brilliant. Like this classic:

    https://telegraph.newsprints.co.uk/37507349-matt-cartoon-university-i-m-studying-politics-the-course-covers-the-period-from-8am-on-thursday-to-lunchtime-on-friday/
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,451
    I have multiple identities:
    I am a Londoner in England
    From Camden in London
    I am English in the rest of the UK, Europe and the Commonwealth.
    British everywhere else.
    Except in the US, where I am European.

    But if I'm asked where I am from I always say England. I guess that makes me English most of all.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 9,946
    If we get a ConRef merger will we get a Dr David Bull or Ben Habib led Continuity Reform emerging?!
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 5,053
    GIN1138 said:

    FPT

    Riddle me this PB - If the election ends up something like:

    Lab 250
    Lib 70
    Con 65
    Ref 15

    Do Con and Ref merge so the Right can hang on to official opposition status? But if they do merge would some Con MP's quit and join the Lib-Dems?

    The days after the election could be somewhat fraught..

    Any takers?

    To "grab" the role of oppsition, the two parties would have to make at least a formal alliance, like the SDP/Liberal alliance in the 80's. I can't see either the cnservatives or Reform wanting that, it is much more likely that a big rivalry between the two parties will emerge with some MPs moving from one to the other party.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 21,969

    GIN1138 said:

    FPT

    Riddle me this PB - If the election ends up something like:

    Lab 250
    Lib 70
    Con 65
    Ref 15

    Do Con and Ref merge so the Right can hang on to official opposition status? But if they do merge would some Con MP's quit and join the Lib-Dems?

    The days after the election could be somewhat fraught..

    Any takers?

    Lib won't take cons because sir Ed does not want faeces through the letterbox every day for 5 years. The correct answer is that labour lends lib enough "defectors" to get it de facto control of both government and opposition
    Hmmm... Lab > Lib to enable Libs to still be the official Opposition isn't a scenario I'd thought of lol! 😂
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 21,056
    TimS said:

    GIN1138 said:

    As a liberal right winger who wants liberal economics and liberal social rights, I always preferred the right wing party in Australia being called Liberals over the Conservatives.

    It will be interesting in the extremely unlikely, but not impossible, event that the Liberal Democrats do become the Opposition with plenty of seats in the South.

    Do they then oppose Labour from the left, like Charles Kennedy? Or the Orange Book right like Nick Clegg?

    If the left, the Conservatives will regain official opposition status the following election. The country doesn't have space for two parties of the left arguing with each other.

    If the right, then there's a chance of a future Liberal Democrat government with the Liberals in the UK, like Australia, being the party of the centre right.

    Interesting times.

    Their instinct, especially from their activists will be to oppose Labour from the left. But like you say, the real opening for the Lib-Dems to once again rise as a potential party of government would be to oppose from the center right as that's where the space will be until the Tories either get their act together or another center right party emerges.
    There is a place for a liberal green (teal) political force. That’s the direction I’d like to see the party go in.

    There’s also a possibility of a French split: populist right (Reform and Suella-Tories), socialist left (soft left of Labour leftwards), and centrist liberals incorporating the Blairites and Cameronians.
    Yellow-and-green give you lime-green or chartreuse.
    Teal is blue-and-green: Cameron's lot.
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 5,053

    Nigel Farage: "IT IS A DISGRACE THAT REFORM ARE NOT GIVEN COVERAGE BY THE BBC"
    BBC: asks Nigel Farage questions
    Nigel Farage: "NO, NOT LIKE THAT!"

    Farage wants the BBC to ask him the questions he wants to answer....that's not how politics in a free democracy works.
  • eekeek Posts: 27,481
    algarkirk said:

    GIN1138 said:

    FPT

    Riddle me this PB - If the election ends up something like:

    Lab 250
    Lib 70
    Con 65
    Ref 15

    Do Con and Ref merge so the Right can hang on to official opposition status? But if they do merge would some Con MP's quit and join the Lib-Dems?

    The days after the election could be somewhat fraught..

    Any takers?

    Pure guesswork, as so much of this would be new both constitutionally and practically.

    My guess: The speaker will judge who is LOTO on the basis of the number of unambiguous firm commitments from MPs to a party; party meaning a party that stood candidates in the election. This will happen and be judged on day 1 of parliament sitting. The speaker will take final soundings from Davey and ?Rishi the evening before.

    So there will be a few days for horsetrading with a chance to switch loyalties. They won't be dull

    Other guesses: The LDs and centrist Tories will work together to ensure that Reform are no part of HMLO.

    Only certainty: Tim Shipman will write a book about it. Matt cartoons will be brilliant. Like this classic:

    https://telegraph.newsprints.co.uk/37507349-matt-cartoon-university-i-m-studying-politics-the-course-covers-the-period-from-8am-on-thursday-to-lunchtime-on-friday/
    Surely 10pm Thursday because little happens during Thursday day time - people vote but that's it..
  • HeathenerHeathener Posts: 7,077
    Anyway, decided to break up my journey today by hopping off at Salisbury for the night. What a beautiful city centre and I can see the glorious spire from my room.

    You can travel all over the world but the British Isles still have a huge amount to offer.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,451

    GIN1138 said:

    FPT

    Riddle me this PB - If the election ends up something like:

    Lab 250
    Lib 70
    Con 65
    Ref 15

    Do Con and Ref merge so the Right can hang on to official opposition status? But if they do merge would some Con MP's quit and join the Lib-Dems?

    The days after the election could be somewhat fraught..

    Any takers?

    Lib won't take cons because sir Ed does not want faeces through the letterbox every day for 5 years. The correct answer is that labour lends lib enough "defectors" to get it de facto control of both government and opposition

    Who gets the other 260 seats?

  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 80,366
    edited June 29
    Heathener said:

    Anyway, decided to break up my journey today by hopping off at Salisbury for the night. What a beautiful city centre and I can see the glorious spire from my room.

    You can travel all over the world but the British Isles still have a huge amount to offer.

    Its very popular with Russian tourists....
  • novanova Posts: 672
    Leon said:

    nova said:

    nova said:

    I am begging Tories, please don't copy 2019 Labour and tell the voters they are wrong. It's really not what you want to do.

    To be fair, if Starmer gets election based on a platform of staying out of the single market, cutting immigration, and being tougher on crime, the Tories will be able to say that they won the argument. They just weren't seen as credible people to deliver it.
    And, Starmer either delivers on it, and better than the Tories did, or his vote collapses in 5 years time too.

    This isn't a game.
    According to polling of Labour voters their main priorities are healthcare, housing, and the economy, so that's where he needs to deliver.

    Still, cutting immigration won't be hard. That's been neatly set up for any party with the recent record numbers.
    Sunak's most recent measures will probably take effect within 12-18 months, so Starmer will be lucky there too.

    He'll have a big problems with the boats though. My guess is the smugglers test his resolve as they'll assume a Labour government will be "softer".
    Agree that immigration is coming down whatever happens with changes already in the pipeline, and I suspect that was why Labour were happy to take an easy win by committing to it.

    The boats will be harder, although it's still relatively small numbers, and there are probably easier ways to solve it than totally smashing the gangs. I suspect a few slightly easier routes, quicker decisions and quicker returns, plus offshore processing etc., might make it less appealing. The numbers involved are tiny compared to current immigration figures, so being a little more relaxed about it all might be the easiest plan.

    But even if they fail, it's not an issue that seems to significantly bother most Labour voters. If a few tens of thousands of people arriving by boats, who will likely never impact on your life, is one of your major concerns, you're probably not voting Labour whatever happens.
    Delusional on so many levels
    Explain your thinking then?

    Plenty of polling to suggest that the people actually voting Labour are least bothered about immigration.

    People who are overly concerned by small boats are not voting Labour in significant numbers.

    The number of people coming by boats isn't huge, and if they came in a different way, it's unlikely they'd even be noticed.

    So, tell me, why would it be such a big problem for Labour?
  • CookieCookie Posts: 13,025

    I have multiple identities:
    I am a Londoner in England
    From Camden in London
    I am English in the rest of the UK, Europe and the Commonwealth.
    British everywhere else.
    Except in the US, where I am European.

    But if I'm asked where I am from I always say England. I guess that makes me English most of all.

    I've become more English and less British since the 1990s. I think that's probably true of everyone. That said, the pasrt of the world that feels to me like home does include a fair bit of Scotland (probably coincidentally the bits my maternal ancestors came from - Edinburgh, Stirlingshire, Perthshire and some of the borders) and excludes large parts of the South East of England. So still some blurring.
    I am also enthusiastically and patriotically Stopfordian, Greater Mancunian, Cestrian, North Western and Northern.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 80,366

    If we get a ConRef merger will we get a Dr David Bull or Ben Habib led Continuity Reform emerging?!

    Wasn't Dr David Bull a mainstream Cameron Tory at one point?
  • MattWMattW Posts: 21,866
    edited June 29

    Always been happier describing myself as British. Half Cymro, half English, seemed logical. Even though I’ve spent most of my life in Essex.

    I'm an Angle, fortifying the Waveney against slightly more southern angles or, worse, Saxons
    A cute comment, but rather obtuse.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 9,946

    If we get a ConRef merger will we get a Dr David Bull or Ben Habib led Continuity Reform emerging?!

    Wasn't Dr David Bull a mainstream Cameron Tory at one point?
    Natalie Elphicke was a Tory once, too!
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 6,520
    M
    eristdoof said:

    GIN1138 said:

    FPT

    Riddle me this PB - If the election ends up something like:

    Lab 250
    Lib 70
    Con 65
    Ref 15

    Do Con and Ref merge so the Right can hang on to official opposition status? But if they do merge would some Con MP's quit and join the Lib-Dems?

    The days after the election could be somewhat fraught..

    Any takers?

    To "grab" the role of oppsition, the two parties would have to make at least a formal alliance, like the SDP/Liberal alliance in the 80's. I can't see either the cnservatives or Reform wanting that, it is much more likely that a big rivalry between the two parties will emerge with some MPs moving from one to the other party.
    I actually see a CON/REF "Alliance" being more likely than a formal merger/reverse takeover, at least to start with.

    It requires the Tories to have a shocker and it requires Reform to grab a fair few seats and a lot of second places.

    I could see a scenario where it is advantageous for each party to maintain its separate identity/voter base but caucus together and build a voter coalition, reaching parts the other cannot. It would be a fundamental reshaping of the UK political landscape but if the Tories fall below 100 seats we cannot rule out such radical moves.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 70,627

    If we get a ConRef merger will we get a Dr David Bull or Ben Habib led Continuity Reform emerging?!

    Wasn't Dr David Bull a mainstream Cameron Tory at one point?
    Then he went to Shit.

    Sorry @Farooq
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 9,946
    Farooq said:

    MattW said:

    Always been happier describing myself as British. Half Cymro, half English, seemed logical. Even though I’ve spent most of my life in Essex.

    I'm an Angle, fortifying the Waveney against slightly more southern angles or, worse, Saxons
    A cute comment, but rather obtuse.
    Can we PLEASE not get into another protracted pun-fest?
    My reflex is that we shouldn't
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 70,627
    Farooq said:

    MattW said:

    Always been happier describing myself as British. Half Cymro, half English, seemed logical. Even though I’ve spent most of my life in Essex.

    I'm an Angle, fortifying the Waveney against slightly more southern angles or, worse, Saxons
    A cute comment, but rather obtuse.
    Can we PLEASE not get into another protracted pun-fest?
    It makes the thread fractionally more interesting.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 53,240
    nova said:

    Leon said:

    nova said:

    nova said:

    I am begging Tories, please don't copy 2019 Labour and tell the voters they are wrong. It's really not what you want to do.

    To be fair, if Starmer gets election based on a platform of staying out of the single market, cutting immigration, and being tougher on crime, the Tories will be able to say that they won the argument. They just weren't seen as credible people to deliver it.
    And, Starmer either delivers on it, and better than the Tories did, or his vote collapses in 5 years time too.

    This isn't a game.
    According to polling of Labour voters their main priorities are healthcare, housing, and the economy, so that's where he needs to deliver.

    Still, cutting immigration won't be hard. That's been neatly set up for any party with the recent record numbers.
    Sunak's most recent measures will probably take effect within 12-18 months, so Starmer will be lucky there too.

    He'll have a big problems with the boats though. My guess is the smugglers test his resolve as they'll assume a Labour government will be "softer".
    Agree that immigration is coming down whatever happens with changes already in the pipeline, and I suspect that was why Labour were happy to take an easy win by committing to it.

    The boats will be harder, although it's still relatively small numbers, and there are probably easier ways to solve it than totally smashing the gangs. I suspect a few slightly easier routes, quicker decisions and quicker returns, plus offshore processing etc., might make it less appealing. The numbers involved are tiny compared to current immigration figures, so being a little more relaxed about it all might be the easiest plan.

    But even if they fail, it's not an issue that seems to significantly bother most Labour voters. If a few tens of thousands of people arriving by boats, who will likely never impact on your life, is one of your major concerns, you're probably not voting Labour whatever happens.
    Delusional on so many levels
    Explain your thinking then?

    Plenty of polling to suggest that the people actually voting Labour are least bothered about immigration.

    People who are overly concerned by small boats are not voting Labour in significant numbers.

    The number of people coming by boats isn't huge, and if they came in a different way, it's unlikely they'd even be noticed.

    So, tell me, why would it be such a big problem for Labour?
    Just apply what cognitive skills you have to the facts of the matter. I have to get a boat from glorious and Edenic Ushant back to the European mainland

    😞
  • LeonLeon Posts: 53,240
    Honestly this flowery gorgeous island is Paradisical in the sun. It’s like Enid Blyton with everyone cycling everywhere - kids and teens and families - except at the end everyone drinks huge amounts of wine and cider instead of ginger beer. Even the babies
  • MattWMattW Posts: 21,866
    edited June 29
    Farooq said:

    MattW said:

    Always been happier describing myself as British. Half Cymro, half English, seemed logical. Even though I’ve spent most of my life in Essex.

    I'm an Angle, fortifying the Waveney against slightly more southern angles or, worse, Saxons
    A cute comment, but rather obtuse.
    Can we PLEASE not get into another protracted pun-fest?
    Back to political strategy.

    Stop triangulating.

    Or do a U-turn - that is, 180 degrees.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 53,240
    Also it doesn’t get many tourists. It’s only an hour from le conquet but people can’t be bothered. Local hotelier said “we don’t even get French people. Just bretons”. Its not fashionable like belle ile

    But that makes it intensely charming and laid back. And the coast is magnificent
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 70,627
    MattW said:

    Farooq said:

    MattW said:

    Always been happier describing myself as British. Half Cymro, half English, seemed logical. Even though I’ve spent most of my life in Essex.

    I'm an Angle, fortifying the Waveney against slightly more southern angles or, worse, Saxons
    A cute comment, but rather obtuse.
    Can we PLEASE not get into another protracted pun-fest?
    Back to political strategy.

    Stop triangulating.
    We can en compass both, surely?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 80,366
    edited June 29
    Leon said:

    Honestly this flowery gorgeous island is Paradisical in the sun. It’s like Enid Blyton with everyone cycling everywhere - kids and teens and families - except at the end everyone drinks huge amounts of wine and cider instead of ginger beer. Even the babies

    Given this is France, I hope they are also enjoying ciggies as well....including the babies.
  • novanova Posts: 672
    Leon said:

    nova said:

    Leon said:

    nova said:

    nova said:

    I am begging Tories, please don't copy 2019 Labour and tell the voters they are wrong. It's really not what you want to do.

    To be fair, if Starmer gets election based on a platform of staying out of the single market, cutting immigration, and being tougher on crime, the Tories will be able to say that they won the argument. They just weren't seen as credible people to deliver it.
    And, Starmer either delivers on it, and better than the Tories did, or his vote collapses in 5 years time too.

    This isn't a game.
    According to polling of Labour voters their main priorities are healthcare, housing, and the economy, so that's where he needs to deliver.

    Still, cutting immigration won't be hard. That's been neatly set up for any party with the recent record numbers.
    Sunak's most recent measures will probably take effect within 12-18 months, so Starmer will be lucky there too.

    He'll have a big problems with the boats though. My guess is the smugglers test his resolve as they'll assume a Labour government will be "softer".
    Agree that immigration is coming down whatever happens with changes already in the pipeline, and I suspect that was why Labour were happy to take an easy win by committing to it.

    The boats will be harder, although it's still relatively small numbers, and there are probably easier ways to solve it than totally smashing the gangs. I suspect a few slightly easier routes, quicker decisions and quicker returns, plus offshore processing etc., might make it less appealing. The numbers involved are tiny compared to current immigration figures, so being a little more relaxed about it all might be the easiest plan.

    But even if they fail, it's not an issue that seems to significantly bother most Labour voters. If a few tens of thousands of people arriving by boats, who will likely never impact on your life, is one of your major concerns, you're probably not voting Labour whatever happens.
    Delusional on so many levels
    Explain your thinking then?

    Plenty of polling to suggest that the people actually voting Labour are least bothered about immigration.

    People who are overly concerned by small boats are not voting Labour in significant numbers.

    The number of people coming by boats isn't huge, and if they came in a different way, it's unlikely they'd even be noticed.

    So, tell me, why would it be such a big problem for Labour?
    Just apply what cognitive skills you have to the facts of the matter. I have to get a boat from glorious and Edenic Ushant back to the European mainland

    😞
    So, just bluster and froth as usual ;)
  • peter_from_putneypeter_from_putney Posts: 6,956

    I have multiple identities:
    I am a Londoner in England
    From Camden in London
    I am English in the rest of the UK, Europe and the Commonwealth.
    British everywhere else.
    Except in the US, where I am European.

    But if I'm asked where I am from I always say England. I guess that makes me English most of all.

    I'm surprised by just how few cars and other vehicles these days continue to display the once all too familiar black and white oval "GB" stickers at the rear signifying that it is registered in Great Britain. I was even more surprised very recently to notice a vehicle displaying a "UK" sticker in this style. Unless there has been a recent change, surely this contravenes the regulations. If there has been such a change, what letters are now required to signify that a particular vehicle is registered in Northern Ireland?
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 16,544
    ydoethur said:

    MattW said:

    Farooq said:

    MattW said:

    Always been happier describing myself as British. Half Cymro, half English, seemed logical. Even though I’ve spent most of my life in Essex.

    I'm an Angle, fortifying the Waveney against slightly more southern angles or, worse, Saxons
    A cute comment, but rather obtuse.
    Can we PLEASE not get into another protracted pun-fest?
    Back to political strategy.

    Stop triangulating.
    We can en compass both, surely?
    Any news from the Pentagon on the state of President Biden?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 70,627

    Heathener said:

    Anyway, decided to break up my journey today by hopping off at Salisbury for the night. What a beautiful city centre and I can see the glorious spire from my room.

    You can travel all over the world but the British Isles still have a huge amount to offer.

    Its very popular with Russian tourists....
    They find it in spiring.
  • FeersumEnjineeyaFeersumEnjineeya Posts: 4,310
    I have placed the very occasional political bet in my time, but I couldn't possibly bet on this election. That's because my hopes (that the Tories get annihilated) diverge so far from my expectations (that a fair number of Tory voters return grumbling to the fold so that Labour still win by a comfortable majority, but the Tories live to fight another day). It would completely spoil the fun of election night.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 53,314

    ydoethur said:

    MattW said:

    Farooq said:

    MattW said:

    Always been happier describing myself as British. Half Cymro, half English, seemed logical. Even though I’ve spent most of my life in Essex.

    I'm an Angle, fortifying the Waveney against slightly more southern angles or, worse, Saxons
    A cute comment, but rather obtuse.
    Can we PLEASE not get into another protracted pun-fest?
    Back to political strategy.

    Stop triangulating.
    We can en compass both, surely?
    Any news from the Pentagon on the state of President Biden?
    Originally from Delaware, but now in Washington DC which strictly speaking isn’t a State at all.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 53,240
    I am a white Anglo-Celtic European Briton, descended from William the Conqueror and Maud Ingelric, the Saxon Princess, and also the grandson of Annie Maud Jory, last of the Cornish bal maidens, a child slave sent to the tin mines of st Agnes to break rocks, up at grass
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 21,969
    edited June 29

    M

    eristdoof said:

    GIN1138 said:

    FPT

    Riddle me this PB - If the election ends up something like:

    Lab 250
    Lib 70
    Con 65
    Ref 15

    Do Con and Ref merge so the Right can hang on to official opposition status? But if they do merge would some Con MP's quit and join the Lib-Dems?

    The days after the election could be somewhat fraught..

    Any takers?

    To "grab" the role of oppsition, the two parties would have to make at least a formal alliance, like the SDP/Liberal alliance in the 80's. I can't see either the cnservatives or Reform wanting that, it is much more likely that a big rivalry between the two parties will emerge with some MPs moving from one to the other party.
    I actually see a CON/REF "Alliance" being more likely than a formal merger/reverse takeover, at least to start with.

    It requires the Tories to have a shocker and it requires Reform to grab a fair few seats and a lot of second places.

    I could see a scenario where it is advantageous for each party to maintain its separate identity/voter base but caucus together and build a voter coalition, reaching parts the other cannot. It would be a fundamental reshaping of the UK political landscape but if the Tories fall below 100 seats we cannot rule out such radical moves.
    Yeah, I think the chance of a Con/Ref alliance or merger is being underestimated. It seems the natural end point of what a lot of the polling is suggesting?

    The chance of Lib-Dems becoming the official Opposition is also being underestimated IMO.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 118,517
    Leon said:

    I am a white Anglo-Celtic European Briton, descended from William the Conqueror and Maud Ingelric, the Saxon Princess, and also the grandson of Annie Maud Jory, last of the Cornish bal maidens, a child slave sent to the tin mines of st Agnes to break rocks, up at grass

    So you’re really French.

    It explains a lot.
  • paulyork64paulyork64 Posts: 2,505
    If I've counted right Conservatives are favourites in 96 seats, some at odds against. This is somewhat higher than most predictions I've seen to have them winning, with them in danger of slipping behind the LDs.

    Not sure if there is a contradiction here or which if either is more likely to be wrong. is there value in opposing Cons in some of those seats? or is winning 96 more trustworthy?
  • TheGreenMachineTheGreenMachine Posts: 1,072


    Interesting Poll.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 31,358
    FPT
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    FPT.

    Roger said:

    boulay said:

    The Mail’s editorial comment is saying what many of us thought it would. Don’t allow a “Starmageddon”, seriously don't vote reform, the Tories have actually done well under the circumstances. Labour will win but vote Tory to ensure a proper opposition to stop the worst of Starmer is a summary.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-13581819/Tories-say-right-angry-partys-errors-dont-let-anger-blind-perils-Starmerism.html

    The Sun will likely say exactly the same and I’m guessing the Times, Telegraph and Express too. “Its lost but you need to still vote Tory to rein in Labour”.

    Interesting that those Tory Papers so openly admit their current irrelevance. Be interesting to see which of them are no longer around in their current form when the next election happens
    Telegraph and Mail are profitable for starters, successfully moving to subscription model. Times is profitable as well.

    I would say the biggest liability is Reach group i.e. Mirror. Mirror is irrelevant, and they bought all those regional newspapers that are failing.
    The raverage age of the readership of the Telegraph must be close to 100. Its rumoured Sheikh Mansour wants to turn it into a City fanzine
    I thought it was stuffed and has definitely gone downhill, but when we have discussed this previously have on here, have been reliably informed their move to paywall has gone surprisingly well and making money. 100 year olds don't generally know how to use ipads, so i think they have attracted those over who a tad younger than than that are capable of ipad usage.
    In all seriousness It had quite a good film critic which worked for me and those who subscribed found something they wanted. The subscription was also cheap and easy to cancel and was sent online so the mechanics plus the price worked. Oddly enough I find the Guardian the most irritating. I just send an arbitrary amount of money at different times as requested but it still manages to behave like a market trader and do a big selling job before I can read anything
    Its because the Guardian still struggling to make it all work in the modern landscape. Apparently they get a good chunk of their readership from online via US audience. For whatever reason they don't want to or aren't confident to go the full pay wall route, so they have gone the begging letter approach instead. If I was them, I would bite the bullet and go pay wall. Its works for Times, the NYT, the Athletic. People are willing to pay £5-10 a month for really good content.

    I presume at some point we will get a Netflix / Spotify service for written content.
    There’s also a lot of independents making serious bank from Substack.
    Yes, some of those people are making far more than they ever would as a journalist with a mainstream publication.

    I think the landscape is if you have expert knowledge and you can provide it in a format that is interesting and entertaining, people will pay. You aren't trying to target a market of millions like a old school newspaper, you are trying to target the 1,000s or 10,000s that are really interested in whatever niche it is you know about.
    The numbers are all rather vague, but there’s at least a couple of dozen making a million dollars per year.

    https://pressgazette.co.uk/newsletters/highest-earning-substacks/
    Substacks might be good for some people, but it's possible they're taking us even further down the echo chambers route.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 21,866
    Farooq said:

    viewcode said:

    TimS said:

    GIN1138 said:

    As a liberal right winger who wants liberal economics and liberal social rights, I always preferred the right wing party in Australia being called Liberals over the Conservatives.

    It will be interesting in the extremely unlikely, but not impossible, event that the Liberal Democrats do become the Opposition with plenty of seats in the South.

    Do they then oppose Labour from the left, like Charles Kennedy? Or the Orange Book right like Nick Clegg?

    If the left, the Conservatives will regain official opposition status the following election. The country doesn't have space for two parties of the left arguing with each other.

    If the right, then there's a chance of a future Liberal Democrat government with the Liberals in the UK, like Australia, being the party of the centre right.

    Interesting times.

    Their instinct, especially from their activists will be to oppose Labour from the left. But like you say, the real opening for the Lib-Dems to once again rise as a potential party of government would be to oppose from the center right as that's where the space will be until the Tories either get their act together or another center right party emerges.
    There is a place for a liberal green (teal) political force. That’s the direction I’d like to see the party go in.

    There’s also a possibility of a French split: populist right (Reform and Suella-Tories), socialist left (soft left of Labour leftwards), and centrist liberals incorporating the Blairites and Cameronians.
    Yellow-and-green give you lime-green or chartreuse.
    Teal is blue-and-green: Cameron's lot.
    But the Lib Dems are already limeys, aren't they? I would pin the Lib Dems as by far the greenest non-Green party in the UK.
    The Green chap on Question Time came across as quite green. A refreshing change from the mash-up of Trots, Woke and Hamas apologists that seem to make up their rank and file.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 9,946

    If I've counted right Conservatives are favourites in 96 seats, some at odds against. This is somewhat higher than most predictions I've seen to have them winning, with them in danger of slipping behind the LDs.

    Not sure if there is a contradiction here or which if either is more likely to be wrong. is there value in opposing Cons in some of those seats? or is winning 96 more trustworthy?

    It's a numbers game. If the Tories get 25% as some polling and mrp output suggests I think they clear 100 by a fair few, it will be increasingly hard the further below 25 they drop. Obviously the level of the LD vote impacts top. If they end up on 10% they won't top 40 seats imo and the Tories will again be fave to get 100 plus.
    Fwiw I think the polling and mrps are a fair few London seats short on the Tories, I think they'll hold at least 10 in the capital but 100 is a bit of a toss up
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,092
    Leon said:

    I am a white Anglo-Celtic European Briton, descended from William the Conqueror and Maud Ingelric, the Saxon Princess, and also the grandson of Annie Maud Jory, last of the Cornish bal maidens, a child slave sent to the tin mines of st Agnes to break rocks, up at grass

    If we go back far enough, you and I share a common ancestor from east Africa, say Somalia/Ethiopia way.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 94,977
    eek said:

    Oh what a pity - it seems that Nigel now thinks more TV is going to cost him votes...


    Nigel Farage
    @Nigel_Farage
    I have just been invited to appear on Laura Kuenssberg.

    I’m refusing until the BBC apologises for their dishonest QT audience.

    Our state broadcaster has behaved like a political actor throughout this election.

    Reform will be campaigning vigorously to abolish the license fee.


    That is a very snowflakey, disingeneous response from him. As you say, it indicates he thinks going on would harm him, so is a sign of weakness.

    Not really going to change much at this points, campaigns usually do not, but indicates he knows they are not as strong as they would like to project.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 94,977
    Farooq said:

    If I've counted right Conservatives are favourites in 96 seats, some at odds against. This is somewhat higher than most predictions I've seen to have them winning, with them in danger of slipping behind the LDs.

    Not sure if there is a contradiction here or which if either is more likely to be wrong. is there value in opposing Cons in some of those seats? or is winning 96 more trustworthy?

    They'll easily win more than 100. Back them.
    I'm presently thinking between 85-115.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 9,946
    edited June 29

    Farooq said:

    viewcode said:

    TimS said:

    GIN1138 said:

    As a liberal right winger who wants liberal economics and liberal social rights, I always preferred the right wing party in Australia being called Liberals over the Conservatives.

    It will be interesting in the extremely unlikely, but not impossible, event that the Liberal Democrats do become the Opposition with plenty of seats in the South.

    Do they then oppose Labour from the left, like Charles Kennedy? Or the Orange Book right like Nick Clegg?

    If the left, the Conservatives will regain official opposition status the following election. The country doesn't have space for two parties of the left arguing with each other.

    If the right, then there's a chance of a future Liberal Democrat government with the Liberals in the UK, like Australia, being the party of the centre right.

    Interesting times.

    Their instinct, especially from their activists will be to oppose Labour from the left. But like you say, the real opening for the Lib-Dems to once again rise as a potential party of government would be to oppose from the center right as that's where the space will be until the Tories either get their act together or another center right party emerges.
    There is a place for a liberal green (teal) political force. That’s the direction I’d like to see the party go in.

    There’s also a possibility of a French split: populist right (Reform and Suella-Tories), socialist left (soft left of Labour leftwards), and centrist liberals incorporating the Blairites and Cameronians.
    Yellow-and-green give you lime-green or chartreuse.
    Teal is blue-and-green: Cameron's lot.
    But the Lib Dems are already limeys, aren't they? I would pin the Lib Dems as by far the greenest non-Green party in the UK.
    The Green chap on Question Time came across as quite green. A refreshing change from the mash-up of Trots, Woke and Hamas apologists that seem to make up their rank and file.
    He's got a reasonable chance of getting in in Waveney Valley
    He got 15% here in Norwich South in 2010
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,092
    ydoethur said:

    Farooq said:

    MattW said:

    Always been happier describing myself as British. Half Cymro, half English, seemed logical. Even though I’ve spent most of my life in Essex.

    I'm an Angle, fortifying the Waveney against slightly more southern angles or, worse, Saxons
    A cute comment, but rather obtuse.
    Can we PLEASE not get into another protracted pun-fest?
    It makes the thread fractionally more interesting.
    Not the reflex I was expecting.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 94,977
    These results on party affiliation whether people say more English than British, or not British at all, are not much of a surprise, but the extent is still interesting. For instance, I believe the LDs do even worse in Wales and Scotland than England, in vote share, but their voters as a whole are more likely to focus on the British identity.

    Of the manifestos I've read only the SDP one got into issues like an English Parliament, IIRC>
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 6,520

    If I've counted right Conservatives are favourites in 96 seats, some at odds against. This is somewhat higher than most predictions I've seen to have them winning, with them in danger of slipping behind the LDs.

    Not sure if there is a contradiction here or which if either is more likely to be wrong. is there value in opposing Cons in some of those seats? or is winning 96 more trustworthy?

    I still expect them to get over 100. I can understand the polling leading some to cast doubt on that, but I think they’ll cling on in enough places to avoid complete catastrophe. There will be some who waver on the day, some Labour voters who don’t turn out, and a few Reform voters who return to the fold. That won’t make a difference to the overall result, but it will avoid a 50-seat scenario by a fair margin.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 94,977

    Farooq said:

    viewcode said:

    TimS said:

    GIN1138 said:

    As a liberal right winger who wants liberal economics and liberal social rights, I always preferred the right wing party in Australia being called Liberals over the Conservatives.

    It will be interesting in the extremely unlikely, but not impossible, event that the Liberal Democrats do become the Opposition with plenty of seats in the South.

    Do they then oppose Labour from the left, like Charles Kennedy? Or the Orange Book right like Nick Clegg?

    If the left, the Conservatives will regain official opposition status the following election. The country doesn't have space for two parties of the left arguing with each other.

    If the right, then there's a chance of a future Liberal Democrat government with the Liberals in the UK, like Australia, being the party of the centre right.

    Interesting times.

    Their instinct, especially from their activists will be to oppose Labour from the left. But like you say, the real opening for the Lib-Dems to once again rise as a potential party of government would be to oppose from the center right as that's where the space will be until the Tories either get their act together or another center right party emerges.
    There is a place for a liberal green (teal) political force. That’s the direction I’d like to see the party go in.

    There’s also a possibility of a French split: populist right (Reform and Suella-Tories), socialist left (soft left of Labour leftwards), and centrist liberals incorporating the Blairites and Cameronians.
    Yellow-and-green give you lime-green or chartreuse.
    Teal is blue-and-green: Cameron's lot.
    But the Lib Dems are already limeys, aren't they? I would pin the Lib Dems as by far the greenest non-Green party in the UK.
    The Green chap on Question Time came across as quite green. A refreshing change from the mash-up of Trots, Woke and Hamas apologists that seem to make up their rank and file.
    He's got a reasonable chance of getting in in Waveney Valley
    He got 15% here in Norwich South in 2010
    I know they did well there in the local, er, Locals, but it feels like it came out of nowhere to have become such a likely prospect, compared to places where they have had much strength before like Bristol.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,503
    Farooq said:

    William the Conqueror was a fat sadist who was hated by everyone

    A right bastard.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 9,946
    kle4 said:

    Farooq said:

    viewcode said:

    TimS said:

    GIN1138 said:

    As a liberal right winger who wants liberal economics and liberal social rights, I always preferred the right wing party in Australia being called Liberals over the Conservatives.

    It will be interesting in the extremely unlikely, but not impossible, event that the Liberal Democrats do become the Opposition with plenty of seats in the South.

    Do they then oppose Labour from the left, like Charles Kennedy? Or the Orange Book right like Nick Clegg?

    If the left, the Conservatives will regain official opposition status the following election. The country doesn't have space for two parties of the left arguing with each other.

    If the right, then there's a chance of a future Liberal Democrat government with the Liberals in the UK, like Australia, being the party of the centre right.

    Interesting times.

    Their instinct, especially from their activists will be to oppose Labour from the left. But like you say, the real opening for the Lib-Dems to once again rise as a potential party of government would be to oppose from the center right as that's where the space will be until the Tories either get their act together or another center right party emerges.
    There is a place for a liberal green (teal) political force. That’s the direction I’d like to see the party go in.

    There’s also a possibility of a French split: populist right (Reform and Suella-Tories), socialist left (soft left of Labour leftwards), and centrist liberals incorporating the Blairites and Cameronians.
    Yellow-and-green give you lime-green or chartreuse.
    Teal is blue-and-green: Cameron's lot.
    But the Lib Dems are already limeys, aren't they? I would pin the Lib Dems as by far the greenest non-Green party in the UK.
    The Green chap on Question Time came across as quite green. A refreshing change from the mash-up of Trots, Woke and Hamas apologists that seem to make up their rank and file.
    He's got a reasonable chance of getting in in Waveney Valley
    He got 15% here in Norwich South in 2010
    I know they did well there in the local, er, Locals, but it feels like it came out of nowhere to have become such a likely prospect, compared to places where they have had much strength before like Bristol.
    Yeah I don't have him as favourite but he will do well, they are chucking the kitchen sink at it
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 47,731

    Leon said:

    I am a white Anglo-Celtic European Briton, descended from William the Conqueror and Maud Ingelric, the Saxon Princess, and also the grandson of Annie Maud Jory, last of the Cornish bal maidens, a child slave sent to the tin mines of st Agnes to break rocks, up at grass

    If we go back far enough, you and I share a common ancestor from east Africa, say Somalia/Ethiopia way.
    Who got to Britain via a small boat with no papers.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 50,605
    eristdoof said:

    eek said:

    Oh what a pity - it seems that Nigel now thinks more TV is going to cost him votes...


    Nigel Farage
    @Nigel_Farage
    I have just been invited to appear on Laura Kuenssberg.

    I’m refusing until the BBC apologises for their dishonest QT audience.

    Our state broadcaster has behaved like a political actor throughout this election.

    Reform will be campaigning vigorously to abolish the license fee.

    Classic right wing populism trick copying what Orban and PIS have done to national broadcasting.
    The licence fee is regressive and prosecutions disproportionally affect women. You're engaging in a culture war by framing opposition to it as right wing.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 94,977
    edited June 29
    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    viewcode said:

    TimS said:

    GIN1138 said:

    As a liberal right winger who wants liberal economics and liberal social rights, I always preferred the right wing party in Australia being called Liberals over the Conservatives.

    It will be interesting in the extremely unlikely, but not impossible, event that the Liberal Democrats do become the Opposition with plenty of seats in the South.

    Do they then oppose Labour from the left, like Charles Kennedy? Or the Orange Book right like Nick Clegg?

    If the left, the Conservatives will regain official opposition status the following election. The country doesn't have space for two parties of the left arguing with each other.

    If the right, then there's a chance of a future Liberal Democrat government with the Liberals in the UK, like Australia, being the party of the centre right.

    Interesting times.

    Their instinct, especially from their activists will be to oppose Labour from the left. But like you say, the real opening for the Lib-Dems to once again rise as a potential party of government would be to oppose from the center right as that's where the space will be until the Tories either get their act together or another center right party emerges.
    There is a place for a liberal green (teal) political force. That’s the direction I’d like to see the party go in.

    There’s also a possibility of a French split: populist right (Reform and Suella-Tories), socialist left (soft left of Labour leftwards), and centrist liberals incorporating the Blairites and Cameronians.
    Yellow-and-green give you lime-green or chartreuse.
    Teal is blue-and-green: Cameron's lot.
    But the Lib Dems are already limeys, aren't they? I would pin the Lib Dems as by far the greenest non-Green party in the UK.
    The Green chap on Question Time came across as quite green. A refreshing change from the mash-up of Trots, Woke and Hamas apologists that seem to make up their rank and file.
    I know quite a few Greens in both England and Scotland and they're all in it for the environment. It's just the filter between you and the party that means you think they've gone away from it. Greens talking about green stuff doesn't propagate very far because most people who are into politics are not actually into politics, they're into political-flavoured entertainment. So Greens talking about WOKE MARXIST YOGHURT KNITTING GENDER IDEOLOGY is delicious news, and suddenly everybody else thinks they've forgotten their roots.

    That said, one or two of them that I know are hard left too.
    I sometimes think the wider Green movement is probably a lot more focused on the environment than the leadership of the party, the same way trade union leaders can be a lot more interested in external, national, or international matters than the rank and file. So since all parties tend to be a bit green now, it is not as interesting or distinctive for the Greens to talk about it, so the leadership finds it more interesting, and more of a way to be politically unique, to bang on about other matters.

    Their manifesto was trying a bit too hard to persuade otherwise, but most chapters being headed about X being fairer and greener. Fairer greener farming, fairer greener education, fairer greener social support. Some of it probably was, but it was a bit over the top.
  • eristdoof said:

    eek said:

    Oh what a pity - it seems that Nigel now thinks more TV is going to cost him votes...


    Nigel Farage
    @Nigel_Farage
    I have just been invited to appear on Laura Kuenssberg.

    I’m refusing until the BBC apologises for their dishonest QT audience.

    Our state broadcaster has behaved like a political actor throughout this election.

    Reform will be campaigning vigorously to abolish the license fee.

    Classic right wing populism trick copying what Orban and PIS have done to national broadcasting.
    The licence fee is regressive and prosecutions disproportionally affect women. You're engaging in a culture war by framing opposition to it as right wing.
    Can we have the liberal William Glenn opine?
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,112



    Interesting Poll.

    It is. The clear pattern is increasing support for the moderate non-crazy parties Alliance, SDLP and UUP, and declining support for TUV and Sinn Fein. DUP presumably flat because it’s taking back TUV votes while shipping some to UUP.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 47,731
    edited June 29
    I identify as British. I was born in England, but have heritage from all 4 nations, plus from the British diaspora in Australia, New Zealand and Jamaica.

    British just seems to fit better than English.
  • novanova Posts: 672

    I have multiple identities:
    I am a Londoner in England
    From Camden in London
    I am English in the rest of the UK, Europe and the Commonwealth.
    British everywhere else.
    Except in the US, where I am European.

    But if I'm asked where I am from I always say England. I guess that makes me English most of all.

    I'm surprised by just how few cars and other vehicles these days continue to display the once all too familiar black and white oval "GB" stickers at the rear signifying that it is registered in Great Britain. I was even more surprised very recently to notice a vehicle displaying a "UK" sticker in this style. Unless there has been a recent change, surely this contravenes the regulations. If there has been such a change, what letters are now required to signify that a particular vehicle is registered in Northern Ireland?
    Had a quick look, and it appears to have changed to UK instead of GB in 2021.

    There are also a lot of newer number plates with the country identifier on them, so they wouldn't need a sticker.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,112
    Foxy said:

    I identify as British. I was born in England, but have heritage from all 4 nations, plus from the British diaspora in Australia, New Zealand and Jamaica.

    British just seems to fit better than English.

    I’m British here and in most countries but Anglais/Ingles etc in Western Europe. Except in the aftermath of football tournaments.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,867

    I have multiple identities:
    I am a Londoner in England
    From Camden in London
    I am English in the rest of the UK, Europe and the Commonwealth.
    British everywhere else.
    Except in the US, where I am European.

    But if I'm asked where I am from I always say England. I guess that makes me English most of all.

    I'm surprised by just how few cars and other vehicles these days continue to display the once all too familiar black and white oval "GB" stickers at the rear signifying that it is registered in Great Britain. I was even more surprised very recently to notice a vehicle displaying a "UK" sticker in this style. Unless there has been a recent change, surely this contravenes the regulations. If there has been such a change, what letters are now required to signify that a particular vehicle is registered in Northern Ireland?
    Another Brexit benefit?
    The government has replaced the GB identifier with UK on car stickers.
    If your license plate shows GB, you need to use a UK sticker.
    If your plate shows the UK identifier or a Union Flag, no additional sticker is needed
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,455
    MattW said:

    Always been happier describing myself as British. Half Cymro, half English, seemed logical. Even though I’ve spent most of my life in Essex.

    I'm an Angle, fortifying the Waveney against slightly more southern angles or, worse, Saxons
    A cute comment, but rather obtuse.
    Quite right!
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 47,731
    kle4 said:

    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    viewcode said:

    TimS said:

    GIN1138 said:

    As a liberal right winger who wants liberal economics and liberal social rights, I always preferred the right wing party in Australia being called Liberals over the Conservatives.

    It will be interesting in the extremely unlikely, but not impossible, event that the Liberal Democrats do become the Opposition with plenty of seats in the South.

    Do they then oppose Labour from the left, like Charles Kennedy? Or the Orange Book right like Nick Clegg?

    If the left, the Conservatives will regain official opposition status the following election. The country doesn't have space for two parties of the left arguing with each other.

    If the right, then there's a chance of a future Liberal Democrat government with the Liberals in the UK, like Australia, being the party of the centre right.

    Interesting times.

    Their instinct, especially from their activists will be to oppose Labour from the left. But like you say, the real opening for the Lib-Dems to once again rise as a potential party of government would be to oppose from the center right as that's where the space will be until the Tories either get their act together or another center right party emerges.
    There is a place for a liberal green (teal) political force. That’s the direction I’d like to see the party go in.

    There’s also a possibility of a French split: populist right (Reform and Suella-Tories), socialist left (soft left of Labour leftwards), and centrist liberals incorporating the Blairites and Cameronians.
    Yellow-and-green give you lime-green or chartreuse.
    Teal is blue-and-green: Cameron's lot.
    But the Lib Dems are already limeys, aren't they? I would pin the Lib Dems as by far the greenest non-Green party in the UK.
    The Green chap on Question Time came across as quite green. A refreshing change from the mash-up of Trots, Woke and Hamas apologists that seem to make up their rank and file.
    I know quite a few Greens in both England and Scotland and they're all in it for the environment. It's just the filter between you and the party that means you think they've gone away from it. Greens talking about green stuff doesn't propagate very far because most people who are into politics are not actually into politics, they're into political-flavoured entertainment. So Greens talking about WOKE MARXIST YOGHURT KNITTING GENDER IDEOLOGY is delicious news, and suddenly everybody else thinks they've forgotten their roots.

    That said, one or two of them that I know are hard left too.
    I sometimes think the wider Green movement is probably a lot more focused on the environment than the leadership of the party, the same way trade union leaders can be a lot more interested in external, national, or international matters than the rank and file. So since all parties tend to be a bit green now, it is not as interesting or distinctive for the Greens to talk about it, so the leadership finds it more interesting, and more of a way to be politically unique, to bang on about other matters.

    Their manifesto was trying a bit too hard to persuade otherwise, but most chapters being headed about X being fairer and greener. Fairer greener farming, fairer greener education, fairer greener social support. Some of it probably was, but it was a bit over the top.
    The Greens I know are very motivated by environmental issues, but when appearing in national debates and forums the leadership get asked about other issues.

    It's a bit like Reform and immigration. The party might wasn't to talk of only one thing, but it will get asked about other things.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,112

    eristdoof said:

    eek said:

    Oh what a pity - it seems that Nigel now thinks more TV is going to cost him votes...


    Nigel Farage
    @Nigel_Farage
    I have just been invited to appear on Laura Kuenssberg.

    I’m refusing until the BBC apologises for their dishonest QT audience.

    Our state broadcaster has behaved like a political actor throughout this election.

    Reform will be campaigning vigorously to abolish the license fee.

    Classic right wing populism trick copying what Orban and PIS have done to national broadcasting.
    The licence fee is regressive and prosecutions disproportionally affect women. You're engaging in a culture war by framing opposition to it as right wing.
    Can we have the liberal William Glenn opine?
    I think the BBC should be massively subsidised through general taxation and then set free to clean up internationally. It’s an absolutely huge brand and a soft power tool, and every pound spent on it here creates a multiplier effect in its global revenues and jobs and investment in the wider industry at home.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,455
    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    I am a white Anglo-Celtic European Briton, descended from William the Conqueror and Maud Ingelric, the Saxon Princess, and also the grandson of Annie Maud Jory, last of the Cornish bal maidens, a child slave sent to the tin mines of st Agnes to break rocks, up at grass

    If we go back far enough, you and I share a common ancestor from east Africa, say Somalia/Ethiopia way.
    Who got to Britain via a small boat with no papers.
    Not necessarily: some of the ancestors qualifying for Sunil's stipulation could have walked. Doggerland and all that.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 94,977
    Farooq said:

    William the Conqueror was a fat sadist who was hated by everyone

    Not William himself, but that does put me in mind of a quote I read of a Norman lord from around that time, in the postscript of a novel set in the period, describing one of the historical characters.

    The most powerful and the most most dangerous of the Norman baronage, he was also the most repellant in character. In a society of ruffianly, bloodthirsty men, Robert de Belleme stands out as particularly atrocious; an evil, treacherous man with an insatiable ambition and a love of cruelty for cruelty's sake; a medieval sadist, whose ingenious barbarities were proverbal among the people of that time.

    Sounds like a real go getter, I think a descendant might be standing for Reform somewhere in East Anglia.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,112
    nova said:

    I have multiple identities:
    I am a Londoner in England
    From Camden in London
    I am English in the rest of the UK, Europe and the Commonwealth.
    British everywhere else.
    Except in the US, where I am European.

    But if I'm asked where I am from I always say England. I guess that makes me English most of all.

    I'm surprised by just how few cars and other vehicles these days continue to display the once all too familiar black and white oval "GB" stickers at the rear signifying that it is registered in Great Britain. I was even more surprised very recently to notice a vehicle displaying a "UK" sticker in this style. Unless there has been a recent change, surely this contravenes the regulations. If there has been such a change, what letters are now required to signify that a particular vehicle is registered in Northern Ireland?
    Had a quick look, and it appears to have changed to UK instead of GB in 2021.

    There are also a lot of newer number plates with the country identifier on them, so they wouldn't need a sticker.
    It was a post Brexit change. I’m not sure if there was a regulatory reason for it or just some sort of optics thing to emphasise no border in the Irish Sea.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 94,977
    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    William the Conqueror was a fat sadist who was hated by everyone

    A right bastard.
    In every sense.
    When the fucker died, nobody could be bothered to deal with the body. They took his stuff, including his clothes, and his naked body was left to start to rot until some random came and cleaned up the mess. When he was interred, he was so bloated by decay that he burst.
    How people treat you after death can sometimes be a good indicator of what type of person you were.

    Not always though, thinking of the likes of Stalin or Mao.
  • novanova Posts: 672
    TimS said:

    nova said:

    I have multiple identities:
    I am a Londoner in England
    From Camden in London
    I am English in the rest of the UK, Europe and the Commonwealth.
    British everywhere else.
    Except in the US, where I am European.

    But if I'm asked where I am from I always say England. I guess that makes me English most of all.

    I'm surprised by just how few cars and other vehicles these days continue to display the once all too familiar black and white oval "GB" stickers at the rear signifying that it is registered in Great Britain. I was even more surprised very recently to notice a vehicle displaying a "UK" sticker in this style. Unless there has been a recent change, surely this contravenes the regulations. If there has been such a change, what letters are now required to signify that a particular vehicle is registered in Northern Ireland?
    Had a quick look, and it appears to have changed to UK instead of GB in 2021.

    There are also a lot of newer number plates with the country identifier on them, so they wouldn't need a sticker.
    It was a post Brexit change. I’m not sure if there was a regulatory reason for it or just some sort of optics thing to emphasise no border in the Irish Sea.
    From what I can see, it was a bit of Tory PR, rather than something they had to do.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,572

    I have multiple identities:
    I am a Londoner in England
    From Camden in London
    I am English in the rest of the UK, Europe and the Commonwealth.
    British everywhere else.
    Except in the US, where I am European.

    But if I'm asked where I am from I always say England. I guess that makes me English most of all.

    I'm surprised by just how few cars and other vehicles these days continue to display the once all too familiar black and white oval "GB" stickers at the rear signifying that it is registered in Great Britain. I was even more surprised very recently to notice a vehicle displaying a "UK" sticker in this style. Unless there has been a recent change, surely this contravenes the regulations. If there has been such a change, what letters are now required to signify that a particular vehicle is registered in Northern Ireland?

    Yes, there’s been a change. A GB sticker is now non compliant.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,455
    kle4 said:

    Farooq said:

    William the Conqueror was a fat sadist who was hated by everyone

    Not William himself, but that does put me in mind of a quote I read of a Norman lord from around that time, in the postscript of a novel set in the period, describing one of the historical characters.

    The most powerful and the most most dangerous of the Norman baronage, he was also the most repellant in character. In a society of ruffianly, bloodthirsty men, Robert de Belleme stands out as particularly atrocious; an evil, treacherous man with an insatiable ambition and a love of cruelty for cruelty's sake; a medieval sadist, whose ingenious barbarities were proverbal among the people of that time.

    Sounds like a real go getter, I think a descendant might be standing for Reform somewhere in East Anglia.
    Interesting. But is that really a novel? Doesn't sound like Duggan. And I get a google hit for Austin Poole's From Domesday to Magna Carta.
  • TimS said:

    eristdoof said:

    eek said:

    Oh what a pity - it seems that Nigel now thinks more TV is going to cost him votes...


    Nigel Farage
    @Nigel_Farage
    I have just been invited to appear on Laura Kuenssberg.

    I’m refusing until the BBC apologises for their dishonest QT audience.

    Our state broadcaster has behaved like a political actor throughout this election.

    Reform will be campaigning vigorously to abolish the license fee.

    Classic right wing populism trick copying what Orban and PIS have done to national broadcasting.
    The licence fee is regressive and prosecutions disproportionally affect women. You're engaging in a culture war by framing opposition to it as right wing.
    Can we have the liberal William Glenn opine?
    I think the BBC should be massively subsidised through general taxation and then set free to clean up internationally. It’s an absolutely huge brand and a soft power tool, and every pound spent on it here creates a multiplier effect in its global revenues and jobs and investment in the wider industry at home.
    Thanks, it's a shame we've lost that other William Glenn and then the other, other William Glenn but this William Glenn is still nice to read occasionally.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 21,866

    Farooq said:

    viewcode said:

    TimS said:

    GIN1138 said:

    As a liberal right winger who wants liberal economics and liberal social rights, I always preferred the right wing party in Australia being called Liberals over the Conservatives.

    It will be interesting in the extremely unlikely, but not impossible, event that the Liberal Democrats do become the Opposition with plenty of seats in the South.

    Do they then oppose Labour from the left, like Charles Kennedy? Or the Orange Book right like Nick Clegg?

    If the left, the Conservatives will regain official opposition status the following election. The country doesn't have space for two parties of the left arguing with each other.

    If the right, then there's a chance of a future Liberal Democrat government with the Liberals in the UK, like Australia, being the party of the centre right.

    Interesting times.

    Their instinct, especially from their activists will be to oppose Labour from the left. But like you say, the real opening for the Lib-Dems to once again rise as a potential party of government would be to oppose from the center right as that's where the space will be until the Tories either get their act together or another center right party emerges.
    There is a place for a liberal green (teal) political force. That’s the direction I’d like to see the party go in.

    There’s also a possibility of a French split: populist right (Reform and Suella-Tories), socialist left (soft left of Labour leftwards), and centrist liberals incorporating the Blairites and Cameronians.
    Yellow-and-green give you lime-green or chartreuse.
    Teal is blue-and-green: Cameron's lot.
    But the Lib Dems are already limeys, aren't they? I would pin the Lib Dems as by far the greenest non-Green party in the UK.
    The Green chap on Question Time came across as quite green. A refreshing change from the mash-up of Trots, Woke and Hamas apologists that seem to make up their rank and file.
    He's got a reasonable chance of getting in in Waveney Valley
    He got 15% here in Norwich South in 2010
    Ah, right. That must be where the chap on the train last week is voting Reform to keep out the Green.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 94,977
    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    viewcode said:

    TimS said:

    GIN1138 said:

    As a liberal right winger who wants liberal economics and liberal social rights, I always preferred the right wing party in Australia being called Liberals over the Conservatives.

    It will be interesting in the extremely unlikely, but not impossible, event that the Liberal Democrats do become the Opposition with plenty of seats in the South.

    Do they then oppose Labour from the left, like Charles Kennedy? Or the Orange Book right like Nick Clegg?

    If the left, the Conservatives will regain official opposition status the following election. The country doesn't have space for two parties of the left arguing with each other.

    If the right, then there's a chance of a future Liberal Democrat government with the Liberals in the UK, like Australia, being the party of the centre right.

    Interesting times.

    Their instinct, especially from their activists will be to oppose Labour from the left. But like you say, the real opening for the Lib-Dems to once again rise as a potential party of government would be to oppose from the center right as that's where the space will be until the Tories either get their act together or another center right party emerges.
    There is a place for a liberal green (teal) political force. That’s the direction I’d like to see the party go in.

    There’s also a possibility of a French split: populist right (Reform and Suella-Tories), socialist left (soft left of Labour leftwards), and centrist liberals incorporating the Blairites and Cameronians.
    Yellow-and-green give you lime-green or chartreuse.
    Teal is blue-and-green: Cameron's lot.
    But the Lib Dems are already limeys, aren't they? I would pin the Lib Dems as by far the greenest non-Green party in the UK.
    The Green chap on Question Time came across as quite green. A refreshing change from the mash-up of Trots, Woke and Hamas apologists that seem to make up their rank and file.
    I know quite a few Greens in both England and Scotland and they're all in it for the environment. It's just the filter between you and the party that means you think they've gone away from it. Greens talking about green stuff doesn't propagate very far because most people who are into politics are not actually into politics, they're into political-flavoured entertainment. So Greens talking about WOKE MARXIST YOGHURT KNITTING GENDER IDEOLOGY is delicious news, and suddenly everybody else thinks they've forgotten their roots.

    That said, one or two of them that I know are hard left too.
    I sometimes think the wider Green movement is probably a lot more focused on the environment than the leadership of the party, the same way trade union leaders can be a lot more interested in external, national, or international matters than the rank and file. So since all parties tend to be a bit green now, it is not as interesting or distinctive for the Greens to talk about it, so the leadership finds it more interesting, and more of a way to be politically unique, to bang on about other matters.

    Their manifesto was trying a bit too hard to persuade otherwise, but most chapters being headed about X being fairer and greener. Fairer greener farming, fairer greener education, fairer greener social support. Some of it probably was, but it was a bit over the top.
    The Greens I know are very motivated by environmental issues, but when appearing in national debates and forums the leadership get asked about other issues.

    It's a bit like Reform and immigration. The party might wasn't to talk of only one thing, but it will get asked about other things.
    At the hustings I attended I'm not sure the Reform candidate talked about immigration once, and was really quite subdued and indistinguishable from the 'normal' political range (as opposed to the one in Salisbury, who has been speaking about what a good chap Putin is, among other things).

    It might have been reading the audience though, as some other candidate started on immigration early on and there was quite a bit of groaning heckling, so he might have just pivoted.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 53,240
    P
    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    William the Conqueror was a fat sadist who was hated by everyone

    A right bastard.
    In every sense.
    When the fucker died, nobody could be bothered to deal with the body. They took his stuff, including his clothes, and his naked body was left to start to rot until some random came and cleaned up the mess. When he was interred, he was so bloated by decay that he burst.
    I doubt he particularly cared at that point
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 9,946

    Farooq said:

    viewcode said:

    TimS said:

    GIN1138 said:

    As a liberal right winger who wants liberal economics and liberal social rights, I always preferred the right wing party in Australia being called Liberals over the Conservatives.

    It will be interesting in the extremely unlikely, but not impossible, event that the Liberal Democrats do become the Opposition with plenty of seats in the South.

    Do they then oppose Labour from the left, like Charles Kennedy? Or the Orange Book right like Nick Clegg?

    If the left, the Conservatives will regain official opposition status the following election. The country doesn't have space for two parties of the left arguing with each other.

    If the right, then there's a chance of a future Liberal Democrat government with the Liberals in the UK, like Australia, being the party of the centre right.

    Interesting times.

    Their instinct, especially from their activists will be to oppose Labour from the left. But like you say, the real opening for the Lib-Dems to once again rise as a potential party of government would be to oppose from the center right as that's where the space will be until the Tories either get their act together or another center right party emerges.
    There is a place for a liberal green (teal) political force. That’s the direction I’d like to see the party go in.

    There’s also a possibility of a French split: populist right (Reform and Suella-Tories), socialist left (soft left of Labour leftwards), and centrist liberals incorporating the Blairites and Cameronians.
    Yellow-and-green give you lime-green or chartreuse.
    Teal is blue-and-green: Cameron's lot.
    But the Lib Dems are already limeys, aren't they? I would pin the Lib Dems as by far the greenest non-Green party in the UK.
    The Green chap on Question Time came across as quite green. A refreshing change from the mash-up of Trots, Woke and Hamas apologists that seem to make up their rank and file.
    He's got a reasonable chance of getting in in Waveney Valley
    He got 15% here in Norwich South in 2010
    Ah, right. That must be where the chap on the train last week is voting Reform to keep out the Green.
    Crazy dude
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 94,977
    edited June 29
    Carnyx said:

    kle4 said:

    Farooq said:

    William the Conqueror was a fat sadist who was hated by everyone

    Not William himself, but that does put me in mind of a quote I read of a Norman lord from around that time, in the postscript of a novel set in the period, describing one of the historical characters.

    The most powerful and the most most dangerous of the Norman baronage, he was also the most repellant in character. In a society of ruffianly, bloodthirsty men, Robert de Belleme stands out as particularly atrocious; an evil, treacherous man with an insatiable ambition and a love of cruelty for cruelty's sake; a medieval sadist, whose ingenious barbarities were proverbal among the people of that time.

    Sounds like a real go getter, I think a descendant might be standing for Reform somewhere in East Anglia.
    Interesting. But is that really a novel? Doesn't sound like Duggan. And I get a google hit for Austin Poole's From Domesday to Magna Carta.
    The quote itself is Poole, the novel's author quoted him in the post script for A Head for Poisoning by Simon Beaufort (who is Susanna Gregory* and her husband) *(who is really Elizabeth Cruwys)
  • LeonLeon Posts: 53,240

    Leon said:

    I am a white Anglo-Celtic European Briton, descended from William the Conqueror and Maud Ingelric, the Saxon Princess, and also the grandson of Annie Maud Jory, last of the Cornish bal maidens, a child slave sent to the tin mines of st Agnes to break rocks, up at grass

    So you’re really French.

    It explains a lot.
    My main identity is WHITE
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 94,977
    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    I am a white Anglo-Celtic European Briton, descended from William the Conqueror and Maud Ingelric, the Saxon Princess, and also the grandson of Annie Maud Jory, last of the Cornish bal maidens, a child slave sent to the tin mines of st Agnes to break rocks, up at grass

    If we go back far enough, you and I share a common ancestor from east Africa, say Somalia/Ethiopia way.
    Who got to Britain via a small boat with no papers.
    Britain for the Beaker People!
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 94,977
    edited June 29
    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    P

    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    William the Conqueror was a fat sadist who was hated by everyone

    A right bastard.
    In every sense.
    When the fucker died, nobody could be bothered to deal with the body. They took his stuff, including his clothes, and his naked body was left to start to rot until some random came and cleaned up the mess. When he was interred, he was so bloated by decay that he burst.
    I doubt he particularly cared at that point
    The point is, when he died, the last person who cared about him died. His kids fucked off as soon as he named their inheritance, even before he expired. They hated the bastard just like everyone else did.
    Did any of the Norman or Angevin kings get along with their kids? People give John shit about what he did with Richard, but they were all at it I think, bro against bro, son and against dad.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,572
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    I am a white Anglo-Celtic European Briton, descended from William the Conqueror and Maud Ingelric, the Saxon Princess, and also the grandson of Annie Maud Jory, last of the Cornish bal maidens, a child slave sent to the tin mines of st Agnes to break rocks, up at grass

    So you’re really French.

    It explains a lot.
    My main identity is WHITE
    No, your main identity is TWAT. Being white is a secondary characteristic.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 118,517
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    I am a white Anglo-Celtic European Briton, descended from William the Conqueror and Maud Ingelric, the Saxon Princess, and also the grandson of Annie Maud Jory, last of the Cornish bal maidens, a child slave sent to the tin mines of st Agnes to break rocks, up at grass

    So you’re really French.

    It explains a lot.
    My main identity is WHITE
    My main identity is working class.

    Soz but I've polluted the white British line.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 53,240
    edited June 29
    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    P

    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    William the Conqueror was a fat sadist who was hated by everyone

    A right bastard.
    In every sense.
    When the fucker died, nobody could be bothered to deal with the body. They took his stuff, including his clothes, and his naked body was left to start to rot until some random came and cleaned up the mess. When he was interred, he was so bloated by decay that he burst.
    I doubt he particularly cared at that point
    The point is, when he died, the last person who cared about him died. His kids fucked off as soon as he named their inheritance, even before he expired. They hated the bastard just like everyone else did.
    You’re talking about my great great great etc grandfather here. Have some respect for royalty. Just coz you’re some smelly peasant, doesn’t give you an excuse

    Also, I studied this era of history for my A levels. I think this story of William’s corpse is a bit of an urban myth, told by the many people who he conquered (who did, it is fair to say, have a very good reason to hate my grandpa)
This discussion has been closed.