I feel sorry for Armando Iannucci and satirists everywhere – politicalbetting.com

Blogging shall be light this weekend.

FPT:
Good morning, everyone.

F1: If you're inclined to go safety first and have backed Piastri each way at 8, you can lay him (just for the win) at 5.5 on Betfair.

TheScreamingEagles said:

I take back all the nasty things I have said about The Hundred and the ECB.

The Hundred has given us this seminal moment in cricket.

The batsman's Holden, the bowler's WIlley.

Crikey, I’ve never seen anything of the Hundred before and that screen shot looks like some computer game rather than what I think of as cricket on tv.

Where Tugendhat is concerned the smell lingering around him will always be the one of principle-free opportunism.

DavidL said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Blogging shall be light this weekend.

Me too. Got to go into work today for a training day from 9-3. Status: not exactly thrilled. I will have to spend a chunk of tomorrow preparing a trial for next week as well. Don't these people understand that there is a test match on??

Deadpool 3 and the Belgian Grand Prix too, I am so excited.

TheScreamingEagles said:

DavidL said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Blogging shall be light this weekend.

Me too. Got to go into work today for a training day from 9-3. Status: not exactly thrilled. I will have to spend a chunk of tomorrow preparing a trial for next week as well. Don't these people understand that there is a test match on??

Deadpool 3 and the Belgian Grand Prix too, I am so excited.

Well it sure beats trauma informed practice and the Lord Advocate's Reference Number 1 of 2023.

boulay said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

boulay said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I take back all the nasty things I have said about The Hundred and the ECB.

The Hundred has given us this seminal moment in cricket.

The batsman's Holden, the bowler's WIlley.

Crikey, I’ve never seen anything of the Hundred before and that screen shot looks like some computer game rather than what I think of as cricket on tv.

The graphics can be worse, at the start of the innings both those bars on the side practically go all the way up the screen, they reduce proportionally when the runs required/balls remaining reduce.

Hmm, it’s not for me. Looks like they mashed-up one day cricket with Barbie.

The only thing that should be mashed up with Barbie is Oppenheimer.

Latest Fox News Swing polls. Its gone from a small edge for Trump to pretty much a dead heat but its this north central area of the US that is going to decide the election.

Wisconsin: Trump 50, Harris 49
Minnesota: Harris 52, Trump 46
Pennsylvania: Trump 49, Harris 49
Michigan: Trump 49, Harris 49

FrequentLurker said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I take back all the nasty things I have said about The Hundred and the ECB.

The Hundred has given us this seminal moment in cricket.

The batsman's Holden, the bowler's WIlley.

Not quite as good as the 1976 original, involving David Willey's father (Peter) and the great West Indian quick Michael Holding.

A great moment in the Test Match Special annals, but in my opinion beaten by the Botham "couldn't quite get his leg over" comment (and its absolutely uncontrolled aftermath).
That still brings tears to my eyes every time I rehear it, even though I'm old enough to have heard in live in 1991.

They don't make bloopers like they used to!

The legover comment (a) wasn't funny and (b) was by Jonathan Agnew and (c) replayed endlessly by Jonathan Agnew.

DavidL said:

Monksfield said:

Where Tugendhat is concerned the smell lingering around him will always be the one of principle-free opportunism.

He's just someone who has made no impression on me at all. The idea he might move from total obscurity to leader is slightly surreal, even in the current febrile environment.

But isn't that what has just happened in America?

ydoethur said:

If Harris is smart, she will run ads based on all the nonsense Vance is spouting.

Then finish with 'one prison sentence away.'

Her line about a country where no one is above the law with a mashup of various Trump headlines looked to me to be a fruitful area. I am not so sure that taking any of the focus off the unsuitability of Trump is a good idea. VPs don't count for much.

DecrepiterJohnL said:

DavidL said:

Monksfield said:

Where Tugendhat is concerned the smell lingering around him will always be the one of principle-free opportunism.

He's just someone who has made no impression on me at all. The idea he might move from total obscurity to leader is slightly surreal, even in the current febrile environment.

But isn't that what has just happened in America?

I don't think that Vice President for 3.5 years and a Senator before that and AG for California before that really qualifies as "obscurity". Trump was a joke candidate initially in 2016 but the laughter died out a long time ago.

ydoethur said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

As we are replaying The Thick of It moments from the last thread, the people who broke Thames Water (in both senses) are now:-

Macquarie to acquire remaining stake in UK's National Gas
https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/macquarie-acquire-remaining-stake-uks-102642211.html

That needs to be blocked. If Starmer's cabinet allows an organisation that stands accused of divers crimes when owning Thames Water to take over more of our infrastructure they really are asking for a shot to the head on credibility.

I would say the price of clearance is to pay back £20bn or so that they have stripped out of Thames Water.

DavidL said:

Monksfield said:

Where Tugendhat is concerned the smell lingering around him will always be the one of principle-free opportunism.

He's just someone who has made no impression on me at all. The idea he might move from total obscurity to leader is slightly surreal, even in the current febrile environment.

Tugendhat was supposed to be the stable, moderate voice. Turns out he's just as useless as the nutters. Maybe we should be betting on the Tories becoming the third party.

TheScreamingEagles said:

I take back all the nasty things I have said about The Hundred and the ECB.

The Hundred has given us this seminal moment in cricket.

The batsman's Holden, the bowler's WIlley.

Did the commentator make the joke that Brian Johnston actually didn’t?

https://youtu.be/D0a-FOoM9ms

Jonathan said:

If Tugendhat the answer, what on Earth is the question.

'who is the least crazy candidate for the Tory leadership?'

ydoethur said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

As we are replaying The Thick of It moments from the last thread, the people who broke Thames Water (in both senses) are now:-

Macquarie to acquire remaining stake in UK's National Gas
https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/macquarie-acquire-remaining-stake-uks-102642211.html

That needs to be blocked. If Starmer's cabinet allows an organisation that stands accused of divers crimes when owning Thames Water to take over more of our infrastructure they really are asking for a shot to the head on credibility.

They already own 80% so it’s more a tidying up exercise than anything else.

The answer is going to be rigorous regulation which can be implemented as part of the approval request with an eye on ensuring the firm does not end up bankrupt as we reduce the amount of gas used over the next 30 years

This might be unfair, but I can’t see Tom Tugendhat dominating the Tory party, setting a bold direction, dragging it back to electability and then having the broader appeal to the country sufficient to overcome a 170 seat majority.

Reminds me of Ed Milliband on a rainy day.

Jonathan said:

This might be unfair, but I can’t see Tom Tugendhat dominating the Tory party, setting a bold direction, dragging it back to electability and then having the broader appeal to the country sufficient to overcome a 170 seat majority.

Reminds me of Ed Milliband on a rainy day.

Are any of them capable of doing all that?

Jonathan said:

This might be unfair, but I can’t see Tom Tugendhat dominating the Tory party, setting a bold direction, dragging it back to electability and then having the broader appeal to the country sufficient to overcome a 170 seat majority.

Reminds me of Ed Milliband on a rainy day.

Starmer only did that after a decade of Labour in opposition and four consecutive Labour defeats.

Tugendhat is though probably the most centrist of the Tory leadership candidates, whereas in. 2010 the most centrist Labour leadership candidate was David Miliband but the party chose Ed.

However regardless of the ideology of the Leader of the Opposition or their dodgy campaign slogans, how quickly they return to power depends in large part how the Labour government manages the economy and immigration

DecrepiterJohnL said:

As we are replaying The Thick of It moments from the last thread, the people who broke Thames Water (in both senses) are now:-

Macquarie to acquire remaining stake in UK's National Gas
https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/macquarie-acquire-remaining-stake-uks-102642211.html

A better argument for net zero, I can't imagine.

Just don't let them invest in UK renewables, the leeches.

Cicero said:

DavidL said:

Monksfield said:

Where Tugendhat is concerned the smell lingering around him will always be the one of principle-free opportunism.

He's just someone who has made no impression on me at all. The idea he might move from total obscurity to leader is slightly surreal, even in the current febrile environment.

Tugendhat was supposed to be the stable, moderate voice. Turns out he's just as useless as the nutters. Maybe we should be betting on the Tories becoming the third party.

He always was useless, as far as I ever noticed his existence.
As chair of the Foreign Affairs select committee, he was a notable hindsight merchant.

Cleverly, or even Stride (who has something of the Jim Hacker about him) would be a better choice.

Jonathan said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Jonathan said:

ThomasNashe said:

ydoethur said:

Jonathan said:

If Tugendhat the answer, what on Earth is the question.

'who is the least crazy candidate for the Tory leadership?'

Cleverly, I suppose.

At best there are just one or two long routes that eventually lead back to power one day, numerous routes going nowhere and far too many that would take the Tories to oblivion.

The trick the Tories have to manage now is to ignore their current instincts, remember who they once were, not get tempted by maga and avoid the latter.

Tough. Cleverly might buy them time.

Continuing your trend of offering the opposite of good advice I see.

Labour will put the right back in contention - they're already shooting themselves in the foot and they've been in Government for weeks. They're going to be disastrously unpopular - an exemplar of all the worst anti-quality-of-life policies on everything that the rest of the world is currently moving away from.

What the Tories need to do is make sure that they're the ones who the public turns to as the alternative, at least the majority - some Reform presence in unwinnable red wall seats is not undesirable.

Smelling a tad complacent there.

I love the smell of tory wishcasting in the morning. Some of them have taken to opposition like a duck to water though.

DecrepiterJohnL said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

DavidL said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Blogging shall be light this weekend.

Me too. Got to go into work today for a training day from 9-3. Status: not exactly thrilled. I will have to spend a chunk of tomorrow preparing a trial for next week as well. Don't these people understand that there is a test match on??

Deadpool 3 and the Belgian Grand Prix too, I am so excited.

And the King George at Ascot.

And the T100 triathlon in London; the women today, the men tomorrow.

Race start at 14.00. It should be online here: https://www.youtube.com/@T100Triathlon/streams

If you want to see it live, the bike course goes through London from Docklands to Westminter:
https://t100triathlon.com/london/100km-open/

(Amateurs race as well as the pros)

squareroot2 said:

Pretty sad that people try to cause trouble by making something rubber out of not

Jonathan said:

This might be unfair, but I can’t see Tom Tugendhat dominating the Tory party, setting a bold direction, dragging it back to electability and then having the broader appeal to the country sufficient to overcome a 170 seat majority.

Reminds me of Ed Milliband on a rainy day.

I seem to recall you were v supportive of Ed.

We did our best, but sadly the moment he was chosen we lost 2015. I remember that feeling of dread as the leadership result was announced.

JosiasJessop said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

DavidL said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Blogging shall be light this weekend.

Me too. Got to go into work today for a training day from 9-3. Status: not exactly thrilled. I will have to spend a chunk of tomorrow preparing a trial for next week as well. Don't these people understand that there is a test match on??

Deadpool 3 and the Belgian Grand Prix too, I am so excited.

And the King George at Ascot.

And the T100 triathlon in London; the women today, the men tomorrow.

Race start at 14.00. It should be online here: https://www.youtube.com/@T100Triathlon/streams

If you want to see it live, the bike course goes through London from Docklands to Westminter:
https://t100triathlon.com/london/100km-open/

(Amateurs race as well as the pros)

Triathlon stopped being a true test of the three disciplines when they allowed competitors to just sit on the wheels in the cycling. Some even use domestiques to give them an easy ride.

Luckyguy1983 said:

Jonathan said:

ThomasNashe said:

ydoethur said:

Jonathan said:

If Tugendhat the answer, what on Earth is the question.

'who is the least crazy candidate for the Tory leadership?'

Cleverly, I suppose.

At best there are just one or two long routes that eventually lead back to power one day, numerous routes going nowhere and far too many that would take the Tories to oblivion.

The trick the Tories have to manage now is to ignore their current instincts, remember who they once were, not get tempted by maga and avoid the latter.

Tough. Cleverly might buy them time.

Continuing your trend of offering the opposite of good advice I see.

Labour will put the right back in contention - they're already shooting themselves in the foot and they've been in Government for weeks. They're going to be disastrously unpopular - an exemplar of all the worst anti-quality-of-life policies on everything that the rest of the world is currently moving away from.

What the Tories need to do is make sure that they're the ones who the public turns to as the alternative, at least the majority - some Reform presence in unwinnable red wall seats is not undesirable.

I don't think you realise just what a dire place the Conservatives are in. What you describe might happen in say ten years, by which time literally everyone who previously voted Conservative will be dead. The party could try to appeal to new recruits, but they don't appear to be interested.

boulay said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I take back all the nasty things I have said about The Hundred and the ECB.

The Hundred has given us this seminal moment in cricket.

The batsman's Holden, the bowler's WIlley.

Crikey, I’ve never seen anything of the Hundred before and that screen shot looks like some computer game rather than what I think of as cricket on tv.

They obviously think it is part of the brand of the competition as they've done it every year. IDK, I guess I'm just a bluff old traditionalist, but I just don't get how crappy overlays and weird replay angles is the innovation Cricket needed.

I'm not even against the competition otherwise and like the men and women's teams set up.

squareroot2 said:

Jonathan said:

squareroot2 said:

Pretty sad that people try to cause trouble by making something rubber out of not

Jonathan said:

This might be unfair, but I can’t see Tom Tugendhat dominating the Tory party, setting a bold direction, dragging it back to electability and then having the broader appeal to the country sufficient to overcome a 170 seat majority.

Reminds me of Ed Milliband on a rainy day.

I seem to recall you were v supportive of Ed.

We did our best, but sadly the moment he was chosen we lost 2015. I remember that feeling of dread as the leadership result was announced.

David would probably have been no better

DM at least passed the PM in waiting test. The reason the Salmond campaign worked so well was that EM looked weak. He was never accepted as a PM. He should never had stood.

FWIW I voted Balls to grapple the economic argument directly.

kle4 said:

DavidL said:

Monksfield said:

Where Tugendhat is concerned the smell lingering around him will always be the one of principle-free opportunism.

He's just someone who has made no impression on me at all. The idea he might move from total obscurity to leader is slightly surreal, even in the current febrile environment.

I'm a fan of bland middle age white guys, I am one myself, but I don't really see his appeal.

We joke about Starmer being dull but he was what the party wanted at the time and as it turns out what they needed too. Even if Tugendhat was the latter is his pitch the former?

I like mine white, and weak, like my men.

(On topic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXEQRVhXpOQ)

Two other on-topic(ISH) thoughts.

"Win back the country" is a better, more positive message than "defeat Labour" anyway.

The acronym TURD is how GCSE physicists are taught to remember the behaviour of a standard thermistor (temperature up, resistance down). Maybe one of the remaining Tory Teachers did v1 of the graphic.

squareroot2 said:

Jonathan said:

squareroot2 said:

Pretty sad that people try to cause trouble by making something rubber out of not

Jonathan said:

This might be unfair, but I can’t see Tom Tugendhat dominating the Tory party, setting a bold direction, dragging it back to electability and then having the broader appeal to the country sufficient to overcome a 170 seat majority.

Reminds me of Ed Milliband on a rainy day.

I seem to recall you were v supportive of Ed.

We did our best, but sadly the moment he was chosen we lost 2015. I remember that feeling of dread as the leadership result was announced.

David would probably have been no better

If he couldn't beat Ed I see little reason to believe he would have been that much better. Was Sunak better than Truss after all? Yes in the sense of avoiding instantaneous collapse, an unheard of political feat, but that he lost to her in the first place was somewhat borne out by his delivery.

SandyRentool said:

JosiasJessop said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

DavidL said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Blogging shall be light this weekend.

Me too. Got to go into work today for a training day from 9-3. Status: not exactly thrilled. I will have to spend a chunk of tomorrow preparing a trial for next week as well. Don't these people understand that there is a test match on??

Deadpool 3 and the Belgian Grand Prix too, I am so excited.

And the King George at Ascot.

And the T100 triathlon in London; the women today, the men tomorrow.

Race start at 14.00. It should be online here: https://www.youtube.com/@T100Triathlon/streams

If you want to see it live, the bike course goes through London from Docklands to Westminter:
https://t100triathlon.com/london/100km-open/

(Amateurs race as well as the pros)

Triathlon stopped being a true test of the three disciplines when they allowed competitors to just sit on the wheels in the cycling. Some even use domestiques to give them an easy ride.

AIUI that's only in the Olympics, to make it closer. And yes, it does favour the stronger riders. Most Ironman and iron distances don't allow drafting, nor do the shorter distances, such as the one I did (and hope to do more of...)

For instance, the T100 today has a 20-metre drafting rule.

As an inexperienced rider, I found it hard to maintain the drafting distance at times wen a rider was slightly slower than me. I didn't have too much spare power to overtake in the allotted time, nor the biking skills to 'read' the course to take advantage of gradients. But since I was so far down the order, and riding so slowly, I didn't really gain anything and I doubt anyone cared.

Jonathan said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Jonathan said:

ThomasNashe said:

ydoethur said:

Jonathan said:

If Tugendhat the answer, what on Earth is the question.

'who is the least crazy candidate for the Tory leadership?'

Cleverly, I suppose.

At best there are just one or two long routes that eventually lead back to power one day, numerous routes going nowhere and far too many that would take the Tories to oblivion.

The trick the Tories have to manage now is to ignore their current instincts, remember who they once were, not get tempted by maga and avoid the latter.

Tough. Cleverly might buy them time.

Continuing your trend of offering the opposite of good advice I see.

Labour will put the right back in contention - they're already shooting themselves in the foot and they've been in Government for weeks. They're going to be disastrously unpopular - an exemplar of all the worst anti-quality-of-life policies on everything that the rest of the world is currently moving away from.

What the Tories need to do is make sure that they're the ones who the public turns to as the alternative, at least the majority - some Reform presence in unwinnable red wall seats is not undesirable.

Smelling a tad complacent there.

Not at all. I would prefer them not to ruin Britain - I have no allegiance to a rosette. But they are quite determined to put in place policies that will earn them a pat on the back from Klaus Schwab but go down like a bucket of sick with the electorate. The Tories need to oppose them clearly, professionally, and distinctively from Reform but not let Reform have all the space to the right of Lenin. Then they'll get back in.

No_Offence_Alan said:

Monksfield said:

Where Tugendhat is concerned the smell lingering around him will always be the one of principle-free opportunism.

People always criticise "opportunists" but surely it is better to take opportunities than to miss them?

Yes, but we prefer opportunists with some sort of principles.
(Which is perhaps an another definition of what the Tories used to be.)

I like the way they’re trolling Trump with “many people are saying”.
https://x.com/Victorshi2020/status/1816888331000529352

TheScreamingEagles said:

I take back all the nasty things I have said about The Hundred and the ECB.

The Hundred has given us this seminal moment in cricket.

The batsman's Holden, the bowler's WIlley.

That’s just a heated gag from the 80s

Dura_Ace said:

Sandpit said:

Watching the F1 support races, and annoyed to notice that the F1 Safety Car is sponsored by Cr***S***ke. After the last week at work, I never want to see that name ever again!

https://www.carpixel.net/w/94574fadcf626a43cf0310e5f118815a/mercedes-amg-gt-black-series-f1-safety-car-wallpaper-hd-107844.jpg

I'm surprised they are using the previous gen GT that you can't buy anymore. The Black Series was fully sick, though. Flat plane crank and Ti roll cage.

The Crowdstrike head dickhead owns the Ferrari "Big 5" so that's cool.

Yes the BS had the road car ‘Ring record when it first launched, properly quick.

I guess next year they’ll swap it for the new 800bhp hybrid one.
https://www.pistonheads.com/news/ph-driven/mercedes-amg-gt63-s-e-performance-ph-review/48784

Crowdstrike guy should be forced to auction his Ferraris, with the money going to his pissed-off customers. Hit him hard where he’d notice.

I said yesterday I feel sorry for 2016 Vance.

This tends to reinforce that.
https://x.com/mattsheffield/status/1816900473540214863

StillWaters said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I take back all the nasty things I have said about The Hundred and the ECB.

The Hundred has given us this seminal moment in cricket.

The batsman's Holden, the bowler's WIlley.

That’s just a heated gag from the 80s

I know we're only a few games into the hundred, and I know this feels like confirmation of a bias, but the hundred feels curiously flat compared to the T20. All the matches so far seem to havr been largely decided in the first 30 balls or so. Contrast to the T20, where in numerous matches implied probability of victory often stayed tight until the end, or even swung wildly from one team to another. This was true last year too. It would be interesting to see some analysis on this.

It also feels curiously flat. The events fight so hard to grab its audiences attention - often with stuff they remain stubbornly indifferent to, like DJs and inane presenters - that the audience starts to switch off from everything its attention isn't explicitly directed towards.
Also, while its supposed to be for the kids, no amount of BBC3-style guff can compensate in my kids's opinion fot tge excitement of a man dressed as a giraffe and the sporadic projection of free tshirts into the crowd.

On thread: in any case, "Win back the country" is infinitely better than "defeat Labour". I am pretty sceptical of Labour's benignity - but the point cannot simplybe to replace the other lot in power. It looks partisan and inane.
To br fair, Labour are not immune to this, and will often present "defeat the Tories" as a self evident good. (Shades of Gordon Brown, after the bust of 2008, claiming hr never said "No more boom and bust" but "No more Tory boom and bust" - as if a Labour boom and bust was self evidently better - which he was such a mad tribalist I can well imagine he believed.)

Shouldn't really matter, should it. But I suppose it does.

Jonathan said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Jonathan said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Jonathan said:

ThomasNashe said:

ydoethur said:

Jonathan said:

If Tugendhat the answer, what on Earth is the question.

'who is the least crazy candidate for the Tory leadership?'

Cleverly, I suppose.

At best there are just one or two long routes that eventually lead back to power one day, numerous routes going nowhere and far too many that would take the Tories to oblivion.

The trick the Tories have to manage now is to ignore their current instincts, remember who they once were, not get tempted by maga and avoid the latter.

Tough. Cleverly might buy them time.

Continuing your trend of offering the opposite of good advice I see.

Labour will put the right back in contention - they're already shooting themselves in the foot and they've been in Government for weeks. They're going to be disastrously unpopular - an exemplar of all the worst anti-quality-of-life policies on everything that the rest of the world is currently moving away from.

What the Tories need to do is make sure that they're the ones who the public turns to as the alternative, at least the majority - some Reform presence in unwinnable red wall seats is not undesirable.

Smelling a tad complacent there.

Not at all. I would prefer them not to ruin Britain - I have no allegiance to a rosette. But they are quite determined to put in place policies that will earn them a pat on the back from Klaus Schwab but go down like a bucket of sick with the electorate. The Tories need to oppose them clearly, professionally, and distinctively from Reform but not let Reform have all the space to the right of Lenin. Then they'll get back in.

Being professional (quite a leap) and being distinctive (defeating) Reform are necessary, but insufficient to win power. Assuming that your opponent will let you win is a complacent strategy.

The fact you can only define a space to the right of Lenin is the hint of the problem. Who are the Tories and what are they for? It’s not clear right now. Are they conservatives or are they populist maga? Do they care about protecting the environment? Or are they drill baby drill? Do they care about individual liberty or are they social conservatives? Do they follow Thatcher or Truss when it comes to sound money?

These are good questions but I don't think any of them have simple answers (and wouldn't in any mainstream political party, tbh).
I'd say if I was to distil the Conservatism I'd like to see into onr overriding principle, it would be that our grandchildren should become better off than we are. That's what all policy positions should be tested against. The answers will always be complex, but it's a good starting point.

Cookie said:

Jonathan said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Jonathan said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Jonathan said:

ThomasNashe said:

ydoethur said:

Jonathan said:

If Tugendhat the answer, what on Earth is the question.

'who is the least crazy candidate for the Tory leadership?'

Cleverly, I suppose.

At best there are just one or two long routes that eventually lead back to power one day, numerous routes going nowhere and far too many that would take the Tories to oblivion.

The trick the Tories have to manage now is to ignore their current instincts, remember who they once were, not get tempted by maga and avoid the latter.

Tough. Cleverly might buy them time.

Continuing your trend of offering the opposite of good advice I see.

Labour will put the right back in contention - they're already shooting themselves in the foot and they've been in Government for weeks. They're going to be disastrously unpopular - an exemplar of all the worst anti-quality-of-life policies on everything that the rest of the world is currently moving away from.

What the Tories need to do is make sure that they're the ones who the public turns to as the alternative, at least the majority - some Reform presence in unwinnable red wall seats is not undesirable.

Smelling a tad complacent there.

Not at all. I would prefer them not to ruin Britain - I have no allegiance to a rosette. But they are quite determined to put in place policies that will earn them a pat on the back from Klaus Schwab but go down like a bucket of sick with the electorate. The Tories need to oppose them clearly, professionally, and distinctively from Reform but not let Reform have all the space to the right of Lenin. Then they'll get back in.

Being professional (quite a leap) and being distinctive (defeating) Reform are necessary, but insufficient to win power. Assuming that your opponent will let you win is a complacent strategy.

The fact you can only define a space to the right of Lenin is the hint of the problem. Who are the Tories and what are they for? It’s not clear right now. Are they conservatives or are they populist maga? Do they care about protecting the environment? Or are they drill baby drill? Do they care about individual liberty or are they social conservatives? Do they follow Thatcher or Truss when it comes to sound money?

These are good questions but I don't think any of them have simple answers (and wouldn't in any mainstream political party, tbh).
I'd say if I was to distil the Conservatism I'd like to see into onr overriding principle, it would be that our grandchildren should become better off than we are. That's what all policy positions should be tested against. The answers will always be complex, but it's a good starting point.

Delayed Gratification has been the heart of provincial middle-class conservatism. And a splendid star it is to navigate by.

Which is why 'drill baby, drill', 'burn baby, burn', and 'borrow baby, borrow' are such unconservative things to do. See also Boomer Service, which often boils down to spending the grandkids' inheritance.

Stuartinromford said:

Cookie said:

Jonathan said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Jonathan said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Jonathan said:

ThomasNashe said:

ydoethur said:

Jonathan said:

If Tugendhat the answer, what on Earth is the question.

'who is the least crazy candidate for the Tory leadership?'

Cleverly, I suppose.

At best there are just one or two long routes that eventually lead back to power one day, numerous routes going nowhere and far too many that would take the Tories to oblivion.

The trick the Tories have to manage now is to ignore their current instincts, remember who they once were, not get tempted by maga and avoid the latter.

Tough. Cleverly might buy them time.

Continuing your trend of offering the opposite of good advice I see.

Labour will put the right back in contention - they're already shooting themselves in the foot and they've been in Government for weeks. They're going to be disastrously unpopular - an exemplar of all the worst anti-quality-of-life policies on everything that the rest of the world is currently moving away from.

What the Tories need to do is make sure that they're the ones who the public turns to as the alternative, at least the majority - some Reform presence in unwinnable red wall seats is not undesirable.

Smelling a tad complacent there.

Not at all. I would prefer them not to ruin Britain - I have no allegiance to a rosette. But they are quite determined to put in place policies that will earn them a pat on the back from Klaus Schwab but go down like a bucket of sick with the electorate. The Tories need to oppose them clearly, professionally, and distinctively from Reform but not let Reform have all the space to the right of Lenin. Then they'll get back in.

Being professional (quite a leap) and being distinctive (defeating) Reform are necessary, but insufficient to win power. Assuming that your opponent will let you win is a complacent strategy.

The fact you can only define a space to the right of Lenin is the hint of the problem. Who are the Tories and what are they for? It’s not clear right now. Are they conservatives or are they populist maga? Do they care about protecting the environment? Or are they drill baby drill? Do they care about individual liberty or are they social conservatives? Do they follow Thatcher or Truss when it comes to sound money?

These are good questions but I don't think any of them have simple answers (and wouldn't in any mainstream political party, tbh).
I'd say if I was to distil the Conservatism I'd like to see into onr overriding principle, it would be that our grandchildren should become better off than we are. That's what all policy positions should be tested against. The answers will always be complex, but it's a good starting point.

Delayed Gratification has been the heart of provincial middle-class conservatism. And a splendid star it is to navigate by.

Which is why 'drill baby, drill', 'burn baby, burn', and 'borrow baby, borrow' are such unconservative things to do. See also Boomer Service, which often boils down to spending the grandkids' inheritance.

Wokeism (institutionslised Instant Gratification) is also the total antithesis of both conservatism and Christianity as it preaches a gospel of instant gratification and moreover a *right* to instant gratification. Provided your opinions support approved oppressed minorities you can behave like and use people like a selfish little toad.

This is why it is so popular among the wealthy centrist elite running the Tory Party. Providing they say the right things they are absolved from patriachal care of the Oiks. Indeed they can demonise the Oiks for wrongthink.

For anyone wanting to watch all the olympics - Discovery plus have an offer that gives you their none Sport (but it does include the Olympics) for £3.99 a month if you purchase it from via their website.

I'm not going to complain at that price..

Champagne sales slump due to lack of ‘celebration’ and joy in the world, industry execs say trib.al/S6Fp9Yq

https://x.com/nypost/status/1816551361476977006?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw