Howdy, Stranger!

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

Donald Trump and knocking up the voters – politicalbetting.com

13

Comments

  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,069
    edited September 22
    Barnesian said:

    Foxy said:

    boulay said:

    Philippson must be mentally retarded, which is a bit of a worry as she is Minister for Education.

    Who goes on national tv and describes what was obviously some kind of political gathering (involving front benchers and trade unionists) as her “birthday party”, even if turning 40 was the ostensible reason for the gathering?

    Can you imagine the thinking, “ I’ve been given £14k for my 40th birthday party, I just really want it to be spent with politicians and trade unionists because it will be a wild hoot.” She deserves the boot for shit partying decisions above all else.
    Trevor Phillips on Sky this morning asked Philipson when they are all going to repay this largesse and she just looked as if she wanted to be anywhere (maybe at a party) then in the studio
    Still seems like small change to me. Frank Hester, whose company has had contracts worth £135 million from the NHS and who personally received an OBE for services to healthcare, gave the Conservatives over £10 million, including £15k for one helicopter trip by Sunak. Remember him? The one who said Diane Abbott should be shot.

    Graham Edwards donated £5.52m to the Conservatives. Sunak made him the Conservative Party treasurer. Another guy who was made Conservative Party treasurer was Mohamed Mansour. He donated £5m. The Bamford brothers gave the Tories over £10 million. They and Edwards have been investigated for tax issues.

    Lubov Chernukhin, wife of the former Russian oligarch Vladimir Chernukhin, gave £136k to the Tories under Sunak, and over £2 million historically. Michael Hintze gave them more than £4.5 million and got a peerage.
    Desperate whatabouterry

    Unless you didn't notice the conservative party were decimated at the GE for sleeze and cronyism and Starmer stood tall saying he would end it, and yet he and his fellow cabinet have found themselves under attack from all quarters, not least from within their party and by the unions and now Starmer has fallen below Sunak in popularity

    Your posts try to defend the indefensible by saying the other lot were worse, but the nation has passed judgment on that and now Starmer and his colleagues have been shamed you just do not like it

    Indeed are you Sue Gray in disguise?
    Were the Conservatives decimated "for sleeze [sic] and cronyism"? Issues polling before the election had the top 5 issues as cost of living, health, economy, immigration and the environment. Sleaze did not appear in YouGov's top 15.

    Lord Ashcroft's post-election poll had this on the main reasons voted for Labour: "Just over 6 in 10 (62%) of those who voted Labour said one of their three main reasons was that they thought Labour would do a better job of running the economy. Just over half (57%) said they trusted the motives of Labour more than other parties, while 46% thought Keir Starmer would make a better prime minister."

    It also found: "We asked those who voted Conservative in 2019 but not in 2024 why they moved away from the party. The most important reasons were that “they are out of touch with people like me” (36% naming in the top three), that “they didn’t deliver what they promised” (35%) and that “they’re not competent” (30%), while 28% said “I don’t trust them”. Just over 1 in 5 (21%) chose “partygate and other scandals”."

    So, about a fifth of Conservative defectors did so because of scandals, but it wasn't the main issue for most voters.
    You simply do not get the damage this has done to Labour and no amount of deflection will change the narrative in the public's eyes which already has Starmer below Sunak in popularity

    Maybe reflect and accept it is a terrible story for labour
    Though Starmer still 10 points ahead as best PM. That's how low Tory popularity is. Lower than a snakes belly.
    I see you have few straws left to clutch
    OK, betting question. If one is convinced that Starmer's government is toast after this, how should you bet? You can get 9/4 on Tories most seats at the next election or lay Labour for most seats at 1.99, but that's a while off. Is there a next Labour leader bet worth making? Reeves is joint favourite, albeit only at 8/1, but worth laying her? Or you can lay Reeves as next PM at 15. You can lay Rayner as next PM at 23.
    The next government depends most on what deal Farage strikes with the next Tory leader.

    If Farage is given a clear run in say 50 seats and gives the Tories a clear run in the rest then they may gain a majority between them.

    The next government will be Tory with Reform support, or Labour with LibDem support. 50/50 at the moment. I'm not betting yet.
    Tricky to set up.

    For a start, Farage taking on 50 seats means accepting that he is second banana on the right. That seems unlikely.

    More importantly, there is a slice of the Conservative electorate who stuck with the party in 2024 for whom a deal like that would be the last straw. Some of them are here.

    Having failed to strangle Reform at birth, the Conservatives are going to find them tricky to eradicate.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,576
    Has the SDP beaten AfD in the Brandenburg election? I thought I saw something posted on here earlier suggesting the opposite?

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c24315lrv18o

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2024/sep/22/germany-brandenburg-state-election-afd-spd-exit-poll-latest-live-news-updates
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 10,696

    boulay said:

    Philippson must be mentally retarded, which is a bit of a worry as she is Minister for Education.

    Who goes on national tv and describes what was obviously some kind of political gathering (involving front benchers and trade unionists) as her “birthday party”, even if turning 40 was the ostensible reason for the gathering?

    Can you imagine the thinking, “ I’ve been given £14k for my 40th birthday party, I just really want it to be spent with politicians and trade unionists because it will be a wild hoot.” She deserves the boot for shit partying decisions above all else.
    Trevor Phillips on Sky this morning asked Philipson when they are all going to repay this largesse and she just looked as if she wanted to be anywhere (maybe at a party) then in the studio
    Still seems like small change to me. Frank Hester, whose company has had contracts worth £135 million from the NHS and who personally received an OBE for services to healthcare, gave the Conservatives over £10 million, including £15k for one helicopter trip by Sunak. Remember him? The one who said Diane Abbott should be shot.

    Graham Edwards donated £5.52m to the Conservatives. Sunak made him the Conservative Party treasurer. Another guy who was made Conservative Party treasurer was Mohamed Mansour. He donated £5m. The Bamford brothers gave the Tories over £10 million. They and Edwards have been investigated for tax issues.

    Lubov Chernukhin, wife of the former Russian oligarch Vladimir Chernukhin, gave £136k to the Tories under Sunak, and over £2 million historically. Michael Hintze gave them more than £4.5 million and got a peerage.
    Desperate whatabouterry

    Unless you didn't notice the conservative party were decimated at the GE for sleeze and cronyism and Starmer stood tall saying he would end it, and yet he and his fellow cabinet have found themselves under attack from all quarters, not least from within their party and by the unions and now Starmer has fallen below Sunak in popularity

    Your posts try to defend the indefensible by saying the other lot were worse, but the nation has passed judgment on that and now Starmer and his colleagues have been shamed you just do not like it

    Indeed are you Sue Gray in disguise?
    Were the Conservatives decimated "for sleeze [sic] and cronyism"? Issues polling before the election had the top 5 issues as cost of living, health, economy, immigration and the environment. Sleaze did not appear in YouGov's top 15.

    Lord Ashcroft's post-election poll had this on the main reasons voted for Labour: "Just over 6 in 10 (62%) of those who voted Labour said one of their three main reasons was that they thought Labour would do a better job of running the economy. Just over half (57%) said they trusted the motives of Labour more than other parties, while 46% thought Keir Starmer would make a better prime minister."

    It also found: "We asked those who voted Conservative in 2019 but not in 2024 why they moved away from the party. The most important reasons were that “they are out of touch with people like me” (36% naming in the top three), that “they didn’t deliver what they promised” (35%) and that “they’re not competent” (30%), while 28% said “I don’t trust them”. Just over 1 in 5 (21%) chose “partygate and other scandals”."

    So, about a fifth of Conservative defectors did so because of scandals, but it wasn't the main issue for most voters.
    You simply do not get the damage this has done to Labour and no amount of deflection will change the narrative in the public's eyes which already has Starmer below Sunak in popularity

    Maybe reflect and accept it is a terrible story for labour
    It's not a good story for Labour. They've not handled it well. I hope the LibDems can capitalise on this.

    You support the Greens, don't you? I was going to cut and paste Carla Denyer's declaration, but it's too long and Vanilla Forum won't even accept it! You can read it at https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmregmem/240902/denyer_carla.htm Highlights include £70k from one donor and £30k from another.
    I cannot believe you think I support the Greens if you have followed my posting over the last few months let alone years
    Of all the parties the Greens would be the last one I voted for

    Maybe you are confusing me for @bigjohnowls

    My voting history since 1964 to 2024 has been conservative apart from 1997 and 2001 when I voted Blair
    I am so sorry. Yes, I have twice confused you with bigjohnowls. Mea culpa.

    Sunak's declaration is short, but very helicopter focused:

    2. (a) Support linked to an MP but received by a local party organisation or indirectly via a central party organisation

    Name of donor: The Phoenix Partnership
    Address of donor: TPP House, 129 Low Lane, Horsforth, Leeds LS18 5PX
    Amount of donation or nature and value if donation in kind: Provision of helicopter to fly me to a political visit and event on 23 November 2023, value £15,900
    Donor status: company, registration 4077829

    (Registered 6 December 2023)

    Name of donor: Richard David Harpin
    Address of donor: private
    Amount of donation or nature and value if donation in kind: Provision of a helicopter to fly me to a political event on 23 February 2024, value £4,719.25
    Donor status: individual

    (Registered 18 March 2024)

    3. Gifts, benefits and hospitality from UK sources

    Name of donor: Richard Harpin
    Address of donor: private
    Amount of donation or nature and value if donation in kind: Helicopter travel during the election campaign, value £7,896
    Date received: 25 May 2024
    Date accepted: 25 May 2024
    Donor status: individual

    (Registered 4 August 2024)

    Name of donor: Richard David Harpin
    Address of donor: private
    Amount of donation or nature and value if donation in kind: Use of helicopter for travel with staff during election campaign, value £3,600
    Date received: 24 May 2024
    Date accepted: 24 May 2024
    Donor status: individual

    (Registered 4 August 2024)

    You do seem to be almost wilfully missing the point - this is all about Labour and nobody else
    It is said oppositions don't win elections, governments lose them, which fits your view here. But I think oppositions do need to look OK. The current Conservative Party crumbles after 5 seconds of attention on the subject of donations. The Conservative Party in 5 years time may be very different, of course. But I can't see them turning down all donations. Jenrick's latest declaration reports around £300k in donations, I think. Today journalists aren't paying any attention to that. If he's leader at the next general election and this is all still a story, they will.
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 4,488
    TimS said:

    Today’s tally of Lib Dem corruption revelations: zero.

    Like yesterday’s. And tomorrow’s.

    Give it a couple of years:

    https://www.thetimes.com/article/d9e1c404-191c-11ea-a9c5-93ba951187e8?shareToken=cae155fad82946e19de82bc3bae37463
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 4,488
    carnforth said:

    TimS said:

    Today’s tally of Lib Dem corruption revelations: zero.

    Like yesterday’s. And tomorrow’s.

    Give it a couple of years:

    https://www.thetimes.com/article/d9e1c404-191c-11ea-a9c5-93ba951187e8?shareToken=cae155fad82946e19de82bc3bae37463
    Oh, plus the £4m they took from Michael Brown, who stole it. And their reason for not paying it back to make the victims whole was "we can't afford to".
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,637

    @DawnButlerBrent
    We kicked off
    @UKLabour
    Conference in Liverpool with a bang!

    Lord Ali donated the 🎆 fireworks presumably
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,307

    boulay said:

    Philippson must be mentally retarded, which is a bit of a worry as she is Minister for Education.

    Who goes on national tv and describes what was obviously some kind of political gathering (involving front benchers and trade unionists) as her “birthday party”, even if turning 40 was the ostensible reason for the gathering?

    Can you imagine the thinking, “ I’ve been given £14k for my 40th birthday party, I just really want it to be spent with politicians and trade unionists because it will be a wild hoot.” She deserves the boot for shit partying decisions above all else.
    Trevor Phillips on Sky this morning asked Philipson when they are all going to repay this largesse and she just looked as if she wanted to be anywhere (maybe at a party) then in the studio
    Still seems like small change to me. Frank Hester, whose company has had contracts worth £135 million from the NHS and who personally received an OBE for services to healthcare, gave the Conservatives over £10 million, including £15k for one helicopter trip by Sunak. Remember him? The one who said Diane Abbott should be shot.

    Graham Edwards donated £5.52m to the Conservatives. Sunak made him the Conservative Party treasurer. Another guy who was made Conservative Party treasurer was Mohamed Mansour. He donated £5m. The Bamford brothers gave the Tories over £10 million. They and Edwards have been investigated for tax issues.

    Lubov Chernukhin, wife of the former Russian oligarch Vladimir Chernukhin, gave £136k to the Tories under Sunak, and over £2 million historically. Michael Hintze gave them more than £4.5 million and got a peerage.
    Desperate whatabouterry

    Unless you didn't notice the conservative party were decimated at the GE for sleeze and cronyism and Starmer stood tall saying he would end it, and yet he and his fellow cabinet have found themselves under attack from all quarters, not least from within their party and by the unions and now Starmer has fallen below Sunak in popularity

    Your posts try to defend the indefensible by saying the other lot were worse, but the nation has passed judgment on that and now Starmer and his colleagues have been shamed you just do not like it

    Indeed are you Sue Gray in disguise?
    Were the Conservatives decimated "for sleeze [sic] and cronyism"? Issues polling before the election had the top 5 issues as cost of living, health, economy, immigration and the environment. Sleaze did not appear in YouGov's top 15.

    Lord Ashcroft's post-election poll had this on the main reasons voted for Labour: "Just over 6 in 10 (62%) of those who voted Labour said one of their three main reasons was that they thought Labour would do a better job of running the economy. Just over half (57%) said they trusted the motives of Labour more than other parties, while 46% thought Keir Starmer would make a better prime minister."

    It also found: "We asked those who voted Conservative in 2019 but not in 2024 why they moved away from the party. The most important reasons were that “they are out of touch with people like me” (36% naming in the top three), that “they didn’t deliver what they promised” (35%) and that “they’re not competent” (30%), while 28% said “I don’t trust them”. Just over 1 in 5 (21%) chose “partygate and other scandals”."

    So, about a fifth of Conservative defectors did so because of scandals, but it wasn't the main issue for most voters.
    You simply do not get the damage this has done to Labour and no amount of deflection will change the narrative in the public's eyes which already has Starmer below Sunak in popularity

    Maybe reflect and accept it is a terrible story for labour
    It's not a good story for Labour. They've not handled it well. I hope the LibDems can capitalise on this.

    You support the Greens, don't you? I was going to cut and paste Carla Denyer's declaration, but it's too long and Vanilla Forum won't even accept it! You can read it at https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmregmem/240902/denyer_carla.htm Highlights include £70k from one donor and £30k from another.
    I cannot believe you think I support the Greens if you have followed my posting over the last few months let alone years
    Of all the parties the Greens would be the last one I voted for

    Maybe you are confusing me for @bigjohnowls

    My voting history since 1964 to 2024 has been conservative apart from 1997 and 2001 when I voted Blair
    I am so sorry. Yes, I have twice confused you with bigjohnowls. Mea culpa.

    Sunak's declaration is short, but very helicopter focused:

    2. (a) Support linked to an MP but received by a local party organisation or indirectly via a central party organisation

    Name of donor: The Phoenix Partnership
    Address of donor: TPP House, 129 Low Lane, Horsforth, Leeds LS18 5PX
    Amount of donation or nature and value if donation in kind: Provision of helicopter to fly me to a political visit and event on 23 November 2023, value £15,900
    Donor status: company, registration 4077829

    (Registered 6 December 2023)

    Name of donor: Richard David Harpin
    Address of donor: private
    Amount of donation or nature and value if donation in kind: Provision of a helicopter to fly me to a political event on 23 February 2024, value £4,719.25
    Donor status: individual

    (Registered 18 March 2024)

    3. Gifts, benefits and hospitality from UK sources

    Name of donor: Richard Harpin
    Address of donor: private
    Amount of donation or nature and value if donation in kind: Helicopter travel during the election campaign, value £7,896
    Date received: 25 May 2024
    Date accepted: 25 May 2024
    Donor status: individual

    (Registered 4 August 2024)

    Name of donor: Richard David Harpin
    Address of donor: private
    Amount of donation or nature and value if donation in kind: Use of helicopter for travel with staff during election campaign, value £3,600
    Date received: 24 May 2024
    Date accepted: 24 May 2024
    Donor status: individual

    (Registered 4 August 2024)

    You do seem to be almost wilfully missing the point - this is all about Labour and nobody else
    It is said oppositions don't win elections, governments lose them, which fits your view here. But I think oppositions do need to look OK. The current Conservative Party crumbles after 5 seconds of attention on the subject of donations. The Conservative Party in 5 years time may be very different, of course. But I can't see them turning down all donations. Jenrick's latest declaration reports around £300k in donations, I think. Today journalists aren't paying any attention to that. If he's leader at the next general election and this is all still a story, they will.
    It's a mistake to think that something that is an issue for one party is automatically an issue for another party just because they're guilty of the same things. People judge them according to different standards.

    For example sex scandals were an issue for the Tories in the 1990s because of the 'back to basics' rhetoric on family values. Labour weren't as vulnerable because they were perceived as less judgemental.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,720

    TimS said:

    Foxy said:

    boulay said:

    Philippson must be mentally retarded, which is a bit of a worry as she is Minister for Education.

    Who goes on national tv and describes what was obviously some kind of political gathering (involving front benchers and trade unionists) as her “birthday party”, even if turning 40 was the ostensible reason for the gathering?

    Can you imagine the thinking, “ I’ve been given £14k for my 40th birthday party, I just really want it to be spent with politicians and trade unionists because it will be a wild hoot.” She deserves the boot for shit partying decisions above all else.
    Trevor Phillips on Sky this morning asked Philipson when they are all going to repay this largesse and she just looked as if she wanted to be anywhere (maybe at a party) then in the studio
    Still seems like small change to me. Frank Hester, whose company has had contracts worth £135 million from the NHS and who personally received an OBE for services to healthcare, gave the Conservatives over £10 million, including £15k for one helicopter trip by Sunak. Remember him? The one who said Diane Abbott should be shot.

    Graham Edwards donated £5.52m to the Conservatives. Sunak made him the Conservative Party treasurer. Another guy who was made Conservative Party treasurer was Mohamed Mansour. He donated £5m. The Bamford brothers gave the Tories over £10 million. They and Edwards have been investigated for tax issues.

    Lubov Chernukhin, wife of the former Russian oligarch Vladimir Chernukhin, gave £136k to the Tories under Sunak, and over £2 million historically. Michael Hintze gave them more than £4.5 million and got a peerage.
    Desperate whatabouterry

    Unless you didn't notice the conservative party were decimated at the GE for sleeze and cronyism and Starmer stood tall saying he would end it, and yet he and his fellow cabinet have found themselves under attack from all quarters, not least from within their party and by the unions and now Starmer has fallen below Sunak in popularity

    Your posts try to defend the indefensible by saying the other lot were worse, but the nation has passed judgment on that and now Starmer and his colleagues have been shamed you just do not like it

    Indeed are you Sue Gray in disguise?
    Were the Conservatives decimated "for sleeze [sic] and cronyism"? Issues polling before the election had the top 5 issues as cost of living, health, economy, immigration and the environment. Sleaze did not appear in YouGov's top 15.

    Lord Ashcroft's post-election poll had this on the main reasons voted for Labour: "Just over 6 in 10 (62%) of those who voted Labour said one of their three main reasons was that they thought Labour would do a better job of running the economy. Just over half (57%) said they trusted the motives of Labour more than other parties, while 46% thought Keir Starmer would make a better prime minister."

    It also found: "We asked those who voted Conservative in 2019 but not in 2024 why they moved away from the party. The most important reasons were that “they are out of touch with people like me” (36% naming in the top three), that “they didn’t deliver what they promised” (35%) and that “they’re not competent” (30%), while 28% said “I don’t trust them”. Just over 1 in 5 (21%) chose “partygate and other scandals”."

    So, about a fifth of Conservative defectors did so because of scandals, but it wasn't the main issue for most voters.
    You simply do not get the damage this has done to Labour and no amount of deflection will change the narrative in the public's eyes which already has Starmer below Sunak in popularity

    Maybe reflect and accept it is a terrible story for labour
    Though Starmer still 10 points ahead as best PM. That's how low Tory popularity is. Lower than a snakes belly.
    I see you have few straws left to clutch
    OK, betting question. If one is convinced that Starmer's government is toast after this, how should you bet? You can get 9/4 on Tories most seats at the next election or lay Labour for most seats at 1.99, but that's a while off. Is there a next Labour leader bet worth making? Reeves is joint favourite, albeit only at 8/1, but worth laying her? Or you can lay Reeves as next PM at 15. You can lay Rayner as next PM at 23.
    2029 is possibly the hardest election to call in living memory.
    Your memory is a bit dodgy Tim. How many people called the 2024 GE correctly five years ago?
    I doubt anybody would have predicted any party winning other than Labour or Conservative. They might have not anticipated the shitting of the bed by the Tories, but they certainly wouldn’t have had the sheer range of options facing us in 2029.
  • Barnesian said:

    TomW said:

    Seems like it will come down to pennsylvania and nevada in the end. Interesting how Florida and Ohio are no longer swing states.

    Nevada is only 6 EC. Pennsylvania, Georgia and North Carolina are the ones to watch.

    Pennsylvania Kamala lead 1.5%
    Georgia Trump lead 1%
    North Carolina Trump lead 0.1%
    but the trend is to Kamala, and polls lag.
    In NC, full fallout re: Black Nazi allegedly fond of watersports as GOP gov nominee has yet to be reckoned methinks.

    Interesting (perhaps?) that there was a famous White Nazi allegedly fond of something similar.

    How many PBers are familiar with Kurt Vonegut's "Mother Night" which features (briefly) a character styled "the Black Hitler", who KV based (very loosely) on a real person

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sufi_Abdul_Hamid
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,390
    "Minister: Let me eat cake"

    Daily Star
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,637
    Bridget Philipson claimed she was accepted free Taylor Swift ttickets. She attended as Education Secretary.

    When pushed she admitted she accepted them as it was hard to turn them down as her daughter was a fan.

    It's a fucking pandemic of greed
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,344

    Barnesian said:

    Foxy said:

    boulay said:

    Philippson must be mentally retarded, which is a bit of a worry as she is Minister for Education.

    Who goes on national tv and describes what was obviously some kind of political gathering (involving front benchers and trade unionists) as her “birthday party”, even if turning 40 was the ostensible reason for the gathering?

    Can you imagine the thinking, “ I’ve been given £14k for my 40th birthday party, I just really want it to be spent with politicians and trade unionists because it will be a wild hoot.” She deserves the boot for shit partying decisions above all else.
    Trevor Phillips on Sky this morning asked Philipson when they are all going to repay this largesse and she just looked as if she wanted to be anywhere (maybe at a party) then in the studio
    Still seems like small change to me. Frank Hester, whose company has had contracts worth £135 million from the NHS and who personally received an OBE for services to healthcare, gave the Conservatives over £10 million, including £15k for one helicopter trip by Sunak. Remember him? The one who said Diane Abbott should be shot.

    Graham Edwards donated £5.52m to the Conservatives. Sunak made him the Conservative Party treasurer. Another guy who was made Conservative Party treasurer was Mohamed Mansour. He donated £5m. The Bamford brothers gave the Tories over £10 million. They and Edwards have been investigated for tax issues.

    Lubov Chernukhin, wife of the former Russian oligarch Vladimir Chernukhin, gave £136k to the Tories under Sunak, and over £2 million historically. Michael Hintze gave them more than £4.5 million and got a peerage.
    Desperate whatabouterry

    Unless you didn't notice the conservative party were decimated at the GE for sleeze and cronyism and Starmer stood tall saying he would end it, and yet he and his fellow cabinet have found themselves under attack from all quarters, not least from within their party and by the unions and now Starmer has fallen below Sunak in popularity

    Your posts try to defend the indefensible by saying the other lot were worse, but the nation has passed judgment on that and now Starmer and his colleagues have been shamed you just do not like it

    Indeed are you Sue Gray in disguise?
    Were the Conservatives decimated "for sleeze [sic] and cronyism"? Issues polling before the election had the top 5 issues as cost of living, health, economy, immigration and the environment. Sleaze did not appear in YouGov's top 15.

    Lord Ashcroft's post-election poll had this on the main reasons voted for Labour: "Just over 6 in 10 (62%) of those who voted Labour said one of their three main reasons was that they thought Labour would do a better job of running the economy. Just over half (57%) said they trusted the motives of Labour more than other parties, while 46% thought Keir Starmer would make a better prime minister."

    It also found: "We asked those who voted Conservative in 2019 but not in 2024 why they moved away from the party. The most important reasons were that “they are out of touch with people like me” (36% naming in the top three), that “they didn’t deliver what they promised” (35%) and that “they’re not competent” (30%), while 28% said “I don’t trust them”. Just over 1 in 5 (21%) chose “partygate and other scandals”."

    So, about a fifth of Conservative defectors did so because of scandals, but it wasn't the main issue for most voters.
    You simply do not get the damage this has done to Labour and no amount of deflection will change the narrative in the public's eyes which already has Starmer below Sunak in popularity

    Maybe reflect and accept it is a terrible story for labour
    Though Starmer still 10 points ahead as best PM. That's how low Tory popularity is. Lower than a snakes belly.
    I see you have few straws left to clutch
    OK, betting question. If one is convinced that Starmer's government is toast after this, how should you bet? You can get 9/4 on Tories most seats at the next election or lay Labour for most seats at 1.99, but that's a while off. Is there a next Labour leader bet worth making? Reeves is joint favourite, albeit only at 8/1, but worth laying her? Or you can lay Reeves as next PM at 15. You can lay Rayner as next PM at 23.
    The next government depends most on what deal Farage strikes with the next Tory leader.

    If Farage is given a clear run in say 50 seats and gives the Tories a clear run in the rest then they may gain a majority between them.

    The next government will be Tory with Reform support, or Labour with LibDem support. 50/50 at the moment. I'm not betting yet.
    Tricky to set up.

    For a start, Farage taking on 50 seats means accepting that he is second banana on the right. That seems unlikely.

    More importantly, there is a slice of the Conservative electorate who stuck with the party in 2024 for whom a deal like that would be the last straw. Some of them are here.

    Having failed to strangle Reform at birth, the Conservatives are going to find them tricky to eradicate.
    Reform will eradicate themselves. Big ego clashes of little men will ensure it.
  • No_Offence_AlanNo_Offence_Alan Posts: 4,465
    edited September 22
    mercator said:

    MattW said:

    A new statue of Oscar Wild has been branded “absolutely hideous” by the writer’s grandson.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/09/22/oscar-wildes-family-criticise-hideous-new-statue-of-writer/

    Has the craft of sculpting been lost? Seem regular occurrence now they are bloody awful representations.

    Wild? He must have been absolutely livid :wink: .
    OW's grandson is still alive and only 72? OW died in 1900, coincidentally the year my paternal GF was born.

    The past is not dead. It's not even past.
    One of John Tyler's (10th USA President 1841-1845) grandsons is still with us.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrison_Ruffin_Tyler
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,080

    What does Lord Alli want for his largesse?

    And when will we see his minions act?

    It's possible he just wants to see the Tories defeated. There are a fair number of such partisans about, and if one of them had a load of dosh, well, what would give them more pleasure, then helping their side to win?
    How does Rayner's RomCom NYE in a luxury NYC apartment help beat the Tories?
    Okay.

    It's possible he just wants to see the Tories defeated and he's very credulous.
  • Bridget Philipson claimed she was accepted free Taylor Swift ttickets. She attended as Education Secretary.

    When pushed she admitted she accepted them as it was hard to turn them down as her daughter was a fan.

    It's a fucking pandemic of greed

    £14,000 for two birthday parties with cake
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 10,696


    @DawnButlerBrent
    We kicked off
    @UKLabour
    Conference in Liverpool with a bang!

    Lord Ali donated the 🎆 fireworks presumably

    Hello bigjohnowls. Have I talked to you about Carla Denyer’s list of declared donations?
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,637

    Has the SDP beaten AfD in the Brandenburg election? I thought I saw something posted on here earlier suggesting the opposite?

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c24315lrv18o

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2024/sep/22/germany-brandenburg-state-election-afd-spd-exit-poll-latest-live-news-updates

    Said they hung on narrowly on 5 live
  • TimS said:

    Today’s tally of Lib Dem corruption revelations: zero.

    Like yesterday’s. And tomorrow’s.

    72 of them now. Some will fall foul.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,344

    Foxy said:

    boulay said:

    Philippson must be mentally retarded, which is a bit of a worry as she is Minister for Education.

    Who goes on national tv and describes what was obviously some kind of political gathering (involving front benchers and trade unionists) as her “birthday party”, even if turning 40 was the ostensible reason for the gathering?

    Can you imagine the thinking, “ I’ve been given £14k for my 40th birthday party, I just really want it to be spent with politicians and trade unionists because it will be a wild hoot.” She deserves the boot for shit partying decisions above all else.
    Trevor Phillips on Sky this morning asked Philipson when they are all going to repay this largesse and she just looked as if she wanted to be anywhere (maybe at a party) then in the studio
    Still seems like small change to me. Frank Hester, whose company has had contracts worth £135 million from the NHS and who personally received an OBE for services to healthcare, gave the Conservatives over £10 million, including £15k for one helicopter trip by Sunak. Remember him? The one who said Diane Abbott should be shot.

    Graham Edwards donated £5.52m to the Conservatives. Sunak made him the Conservative Party treasurer. Another guy who was made Conservative Party treasurer was Mohamed Mansour. He donated £5m. The Bamford brothers gave the Tories over £10 million. They and Edwards have been investigated for tax issues.

    Lubov Chernukhin, wife of the former Russian oligarch Vladimir Chernukhin, gave £136k to the Tories under Sunak, and over £2 million historically. Michael Hintze gave them more than £4.5 million and got a peerage.
    Desperate whatabouterry

    Unless you didn't notice the conservative party were decimated at the GE for sleeze and cronyism and Starmer stood tall saying he would end it, and yet he and his fellow cabinet have found themselves under attack from all quarters, not least from within their party and by the unions and now Starmer has fallen below Sunak in popularity

    Your posts try to defend the indefensible by saying the other lot were worse, but the nation has passed judgment on that and now Starmer and his colleagues have been shamed you just do not like it

    Indeed are you Sue Gray in disguise?
    Were the Conservatives decimated "for sleeze [sic] and cronyism"? Issues polling before the election had the top 5 issues as cost of living, health, economy, immigration and the environment. Sleaze did not appear in YouGov's top 15.

    Lord Ashcroft's post-election poll had this on the main reasons voted for Labour: "Just over 6 in 10 (62%) of those who voted Labour said one of their three main reasons was that they thought Labour would do a better job of running the economy. Just over half (57%) said they trusted the motives of Labour more than other parties, while 46% thought Keir Starmer would make a better prime minister."

    It also found: "We asked those who voted Conservative in 2019 but not in 2024 why they moved away from the party. The most important reasons were that “they are out of touch with people like me” (36% naming in the top three), that “they didn’t deliver what they promised” (35%) and that “they’re not competent” (30%), while 28% said “I don’t trust them”. Just over 1 in 5 (21%) chose “partygate and other scandals”."

    So, about a fifth of Conservative defectors did so because of scandals, but it wasn't the main issue for most voters.
    You simply do not get the damage this has done to Labour and no amount of deflection will change the narrative in the public's eyes which already has Starmer below Sunak in popularity

    Maybe reflect and accept it is a terrible story for labour
    Though Starmer still 10 points ahead as best PM. That's how low Tory popularity is. Lower than a snakes belly.
    I see you have few straws left to clutch
    OK, betting question. If one is convinced that Starmer's government is toast after this, how should you bet? You can get 9/4 on Tories most seats at the next election or lay Labour for most seats at 1.99, but that's a while off. Is there a next Labour leader bet worth making? Reeves is joint favourite, albeit only at 8/1, but worth laying her? Or you can lay Reeves as next PM at 15. You can lay Rayner as next PM at 23.
    Of course Labour are in office for 5 years but then so was Johnson with his 80 seat majority and we saw what happened to him and the conservatives

    Starmer is so similar to Sunak - terrible at politics
    So, if the parallel is Johnson, is the sensible play -- if we accept your thesis that Starmer is terrible at politics and fatally wounded -- to bet on next PM and pick someone Labour but who isn't associated with the current scandal?
    Someone outside the Cabinet then....

  • @DawnButlerBrent
    We kicked off
    @UKLabour
    Conference in Liverpool with a bang!

    Lord Ali donated the 🎆 fireworks presumably

    Hello bigjohnowls. Have I talked to you about Carla Denyer’s list of declared donations?
    Try as you might this is not about the Greens, but entirely Labour and what makes it worse is it is not just Starmer, but Rayner (who has been reported to the standards authorities tonight), Philipson, Lammy, Streeting and other cabinet members
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,534
    edited September 22
    ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    Glad we cleared that up.

    Q: Are you comfortable with Mark Robinson as the Republican nominee for governor of North Carolina?

    Vance: The allegations are out there, but they aren't necessarily reality

    Q: Do you believe him saying that those were not his posts?

    Vance: I don't not believe him

    https://x.com/KamalaHQ/status/1837877308201308188

    Q: Do you have an arsehole?

    Vance: I have something that may be full of shit, but is not necessarily an arsehole.
    Correction - as a proud American, JD Vance has an ASSHOLE. And is one too!
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,851
    Boring alert! The same 4 or 5 dreary posters are still posting the same dross they have been for the last several days. I came on here because I was interested in the US elections. I guess others did too. Can't the obsessives have a separate thread?
  • TomWTomW Posts: 70
    Just watching netflix on the battle of orgreave in 1984.
    There is no way Thatcher could have got away with some of the things she did in the social media age.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,637


    @DawnButlerBrent
    We kicked off
    @UKLabour
    Conference in Liverpool with a bang!

    Lord Ali donated the 🎆 fireworks presumably

    Hello bigjohnowls. Have I talked to you about Carla Denyer’s list of declared donations?
    No what has she done?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,827


    @DawnButlerBrent
    We kicked off
    @UKLabour
    Conference in Liverpool with a bang!

    Lord Ali donated the 🎆 fireworks presumably

    Perhaps all party's should disclose big donors and interest groups in much more public fashion.

    The Conservative and Unionist Party brought to you by HC-One Care homes.

    The Labour Party sponsored by Legal and General.

    Burger King presents Reform UK.

    The Liberal Democrats - a division of CPRE Nimby Services

    The Green Party in collaboration with Comintern.
  • Roger said:

    Boring alert! The same 4 or 5 dreary posters are still posting the same dross they have been for the last several days. I came on here because I was interested in the US elections. I guess others did too. Can't the obsessives have a separate thread?

    Unfortunately for you this is the leading story in the UK media and when even Labour mps and unions are aghast trying to close down the story because you are upset by it will nor work

  • TomWTomW Posts: 70
    Barnesian said:

    TomW said:

    Barnesian said:

    TomW said:

    Barnesian said:

    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    The Dems have a much better ground game than the Republicans. Couldn't use it in 2020 because of Covid...

    Yet I am now in my fifteenth state on my road trip, and have yet to see a single Harris-Walz garden or field poster.
    There's a real gap online between those Democrats who are getting really confident, and those who are super nervous about the outcome (ie if they actually might lose, not just the legal and violent reaction if Harris wins)
    I think it's the difference between those saying honestly what they think, and the more astute, who want to avoid any complacency and say it's too close to call.
    Been there. Done that.

    If I thought I had any influence on Dem activists I wouldn't be calling it for Kamala. I'd be - ooh this is very close. Every vote will count. Keep working.
    Im calling it for Harris. She will be a complete disaster though and will mean leading the west we will have her, Starmer, Macron and Scholz. Im sure Putin and Xi are quaking.
    When you say "we will have her" who is "we"?
    I mean we in the west. Im pretty sure Putin wants Kamala not too bright and easy to manipulate.
    Kamala is brighter than Trump, and Putin has no "material" on her, unlike Trump.
    Kamala may fall for Putins manly charms though.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,307
    TomW said:

    Barnesian said:

    TomW said:

    Barnesian said:

    TomW said:

    Barnesian said:

    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    The Dems have a much better ground game than the Republicans. Couldn't use it in 2020 because of Covid...

    Yet I am now in my fifteenth state on my road trip, and have yet to see a single Harris-Walz garden or field poster.
    There's a real gap online between those Democrats who are getting really confident, and those who are super nervous about the outcome (ie if they actually might lose, not just the legal and violent reaction if Harris wins)
    I think it's the difference between those saying honestly what they think, and the more astute, who want to avoid any complacency and say it's too close to call.
    Been there. Done that.

    If I thought I had any influence on Dem activists I wouldn't be calling it for Kamala. I'd be - ooh this is very close. Every vote will count. Keep working.
    Im calling it for Harris. She will be a complete disaster though and will mean leading the west we will have her, Starmer, Macron and Scholz. Im sure Putin and Xi are quaking.
    When you say "we will have her" who is "we"?
    I mean we in the west. Im pretty sure Putin wants Kamala not too bright and easy to manipulate.
    Kamala is brighter than Trump, and Putin has no "material" on her, unlike Trump.
    Kamala may fall for Putins manly charms though.
    Putin's getting on a bit. Why don't you think she'll be manipulated by Zelensky?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 49,586
    TimS said:

    RobD said:

    TimS said:

    RobD said:

    TimS said:

    Today’s tally of Lib Dem corruption revelations: zero.

    Like yesterday’s. And tomorrow’s.

    Why would anyone bribe the Lib Dems?
    Good, glad we’ve established that. So when you’re extolling the virtues of Reform in due course we can ask the same question.
    Huh? I don’t think I have ever said anything positive about Reform.
    I’ve no idea what your politics are, but everyone seems to have been very keen to explain how all this corruption means that the incorruptible, anti-elite Nigel is going to storm into power. While ignoring the actual 3rd party, as people have been wont to do since the dawn of time.
    Everyone? No.

    What it risks is an Italian style revolt against all the traditional parties. Bunga! Bunga!
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,473
    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    The Dems have a much better ground game than the Republicans. Couldn't use it in 2020 because of Covid...

    Yet I am now in my fifteenth state on my road trip, and have yet to see a single Harris-Walz garden or field poster.
    Never left Trumpistan....
    I’m now in sweltering NC, which is a swing state. Asheville tomorrow, which is where all the Dems hang out.


    That's a hell of a lot of driving.
  • Roger said:

    Boring alert! The same 4 or 5 dreary posters are still posting the same dross they have been for the last several days. I came on here because I was interested in the US elections. I guess others did too. Can't the obsessives have a separate thread?

    Unfortunately for you this is the leading story in the UK media and when even Labour mps and unions are aghast trying to close down the story because you are upset by it will nor work

    If they have any sense they should use this opportunity to pass some legislation on restricting donations to political parties to £1,000 per person/company/organisation per year.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 49,586

    What does Lord Alli want for his largesse?

    And when will we see his minions act?

    It's possible he just wants to see the Tories defeated. There are a fair number of such partisans about, and if one of them had a load of dosh, well, what would give them more pleasure, then helping their side to win?
    How does Rayner's RomCom NYE in a luxury NYC apartment help beat the Tories?
    A! forward! base! For! Plotting! The! revolution! Komrade!

    @{champagne not included for @kinabalu)
  • You can, if you want to be extremely charitable, argue that these donations have each been relatively trivial, if not everyday.

    It’s not as if any other party does anything different.

    But the fact they all come from Lord Alli, who was given a Downing Street pass by the woman whose son - now MP for Beckenham and Penge - received 10k for campaigning expenses…

    And then to have Starmer, Reeves, Rayner and Philippson each do a media round and utterly fail to come up with a coherent story beggars belief.

    What is most disturbing is they have been gifts to individuals. That is exactly what creates a sense of obligation. Give it to a central fund and people feel less of a personal sense of duty to do favours in return
    That might not hold up if you compare the list of donors to Conservative Party funds with the current membership of the House of Lords.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 49,586
    Roger said:

    Boring alert! The same 4 or 5 dreary posters are still posting the same dross they have been for the last several days. I came on here because I was interested in the US elections. I guess others did too. Can't the obsessives have a separate thread?

    That’s a bingo!

    We have

    - Everyone is talking about the wrong story
    - Only opponents are talking about the story
    - And now we have, boring
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 6,200
    Sometimes Democrats are their own worst enemy .

    California Dems seem to have ignored the fact that this is an election year and voted through a raft of legislation which would give Trump and the GOP an open goal .

    Newsom has vetoed the first Bill re help to buy for undocumented workers . An even more head in the sand bill aimed at giving non-citizens unemployment benefit has to either be signed into law or vetoed by September 30th .

    This Bill would be an absolute gift to Trump. Unless Newsom wants the Dems to lose then he’ll wield another veto .

    Newsom implored the Dems to not pass controversial legislation but that’s fallen on deaf ears .

  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,851

    Roger said:

    Boring alert! The same 4 or 5 dreary posters are still posting the same dross they have been for the last several days. I came on here because I was interested in the US elections. I guess others did too. Can't the obsessives have a separate thread?

    Unfortunately for you this is the leading story in the UK media and when even Labour mps and unions are aghast trying to close down the story because you are upset by it will nor work

    If its the biggest story you should find lots of places to read about it and you can write letters at the bottom of the page with like minded obsessives. This is supposed to be about the US elections and people like you are making it unreadable which is why only the usual five or six terminally dull are taking part
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 49,586

    Roger said:

    Boring alert! The same 4 or 5 dreary posters are still posting the same dross they have been for the last several days. I came on here because I was interested in the US elections. I guess others did too. Can't the obsessives have a separate thread?

    Unfortunately for you this is the leading story in the UK media and when even Labour mps and unions are aghast trying to close down the story because you are upset by it will nor work

    If they have any sense they should use this opportunity to pass some legislation on restricting donations to political parties to £1,000 per person/company/organisation per year.
    Cameron wanted to do that, but Labour wanted an exemption for unions.

    I nearly started the National Union of Amalgamated Hedge Fund Owners & Boilermakers.

    With designer stainless steel oil drums for braziers on the picket lines - each one hand crafted by a master Calypso drum maker.

    Turnbull & Asser would do the road mender style jerkins…..
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,463

    Bridget Philipson claimed she was accepted free Taylor Swift ttickets. She attended as Education Secretary.

    When pushed she admitted she accepted them as it was hard to turn them down as her daughter was a fan.

    It's a fucking pandemic of greed

    Bridget Philipson claimed she was accepted free Taylor Swift ttickets. She attended as Education Secretary.

    When pushed she admitted she accepted them as it was hard to turn them down as her daughter was a fan.

    It's a fucking pandemic of greed


    @DawnButlerBrent
    We kicked off
    @UKLabour
    Conference in Liverpool with a bang!

    Lord Ali donated the 🎆 fireworks presumably

    Hello bigjohnowls. Have I talked to you about Carla Denyer’s list of declared donations?
    Try as you might this is not about the Greens, but entirely Labour and what makes it worse is it is not just Starmer, but Rayner (who has been reported to the standards authorities tonight), Philipson, Lammy, Streeting and other cabinet members
    When you say “try as you might” do you actually “me and some in the media want it to be entirely about Labour”? Because donations and gifts aren’t unique to Labour, far from it.
  • TomWTomW Posts: 70

    TomW said:

    Barnesian said:

    TomW said:

    Barnesian said:

    TomW said:

    Barnesian said:

    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    The Dems have a much better ground game than the Republicans. Couldn't use it in 2020 because of Covid...

    Yet I am now in my fifteenth state on my road trip, and have yet to see a single Harris-Walz garden or field poster.
    There's a real gap online between those Democrats who are getting really confident, and those who are super nervous about the outcome (ie if they actually might lose, not just the legal and violent reaction if Harris wins)
    I think it's the difference between those saying honestly what they think, and the more astute, who want to avoid any complacency and say it's too close to call.
    Been there. Done that.

    If I thought I had any influence on Dem activists I wouldn't be calling it for Kamala. I'd be - ooh this is very close. Every vote will count. Keep working.
    Im calling it for Harris. She will be a complete disaster though and will mean leading the west we will have her, Starmer, Macron and Scholz. Im sure Putin and Xi are quaking.
    When you say "we will have her" who is "we"?
    I mean we in the west. Im pretty sure Putin wants Kamala not too bright and easy to manipulate.
    Kamala is brighter than Trump, and Putin has no "material" on her, unlike Trump.
    Kamala may fall for Putins manly charms though.
    Putin's getting on a bit. Why don't you think she'll be manipulated by Zelensky?
    I think we all know Zelensky has tendencies the other way.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,509

    "Minister: Let me eat cake"

    Daily Star

    That old Brass Eye which spoofed ‘cake’ as a new problem drug was actually prophetic.
  • Roger said:

    Roger said:

    Boring alert! The same 4 or 5 dreary posters are still posting the same dross they have been for the last several days. I came on here because I was interested in the US elections. I guess others did too. Can't the obsessives have a separate thread?

    Unfortunately for you this is the leading story in the UK media and when even Labour mps and unions are aghast trying to close down the story because you are upset by it will nor work

    If its the biggest story you should find lots of places to read about it and you can write letters at the bottom of the page with like minded obsessives. This is supposed to be about the US elections and people like you are making it unreadable which is why only the usual five or six terminally dull are taking part
    Typical lefty - hates the story so try to shut it down

    So no @Roger you will not silence me or other posters in discussing the leadng political story of the day

  • nico679 said:

    Sometimes Democrats are their own worst enemy .

    California Dems seem to have ignored the fact that this is an election year and voted through a raft of legislation which would give Trump and the GOP an open goal .

    Newsom has vetoed the first Bill re help to buy for undocumented workers . An even more head in the sand bill aimed at giving non-citizens unemployment benefit has to either be signed into law or vetoed by September 30th .

    This Bill would be an absolute gift to Trump. Unless Newsom wants the Dems to lose then he’ll wield another veto .

    Newsom implored the Dems to not pass controversial legislation but that’s fallen on deaf ears .

    While agreeing with Gov. Newsom re: above, think you are significantly overestimating the impact of ANY newly-enacted California state legislation upon national voting intensions.

    Which outside the Great Bear Republic is pretty much nil. Ditto for GOPs chances of winning statewide for POTUS, US Senate or any other office.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,827

    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    Boring alert! The same 4 or 5 dreary posters are still posting the same dross they have been for the last several days. I came on here because I was interested in the US elections. I guess others did too. Can't the obsessives have a separate thread?

    Unfortunately for you this is the leading story in the UK media and when even Labour mps and unions are aghast trying to close down the story because you are upset by it will nor work

    If its the biggest story you should find lots of places to read about it and you can write letters at the bottom of the page with like minded obsessives. This is supposed to be about the US elections and people like you are making it unreadable which is why only the usual five or six terminally dull are taking part
    Typical lefty - hates the story so try to shut it down

    That is really not a lefty specific behaviour. It's political behaviour.
  • Bridget Philipson claimed she was accepted free Taylor Swift ttickets. She attended as Education Secretary.

    When pushed she admitted she accepted them as it was hard to turn them down as her daughter was a fan.

    It's a fucking pandemic of greed

    Bridget Philipson claimed she was accepted free Taylor Swift ttickets. She attended as Education Secretary.

    When pushed she admitted she accepted them as it was hard to turn them down as her daughter was a fan.

    It's a fucking pandemic of greed


    @DawnButlerBrent
    We kicked off
    @UKLabour
    Conference in Liverpool with a bang!

    Lord Ali donated the 🎆 fireworks presumably

    Hello bigjohnowls. Have I talked to you about Carla Denyer’s list of declared donations?
    Try as you might this is not about the Greens, but entirely Labour and what makes it worse is it is not just Starmer, but Rayner (who has been reported to the standards authorities tonight), Philipson, Lammy, Streeting and other cabinet members
    When you say “try as you might” do you actually “me and some in the media want it to be entirely about Labour”? Because donations and gifts aren’t unique to Labour, far from it.
    Another one who doesn't get it but the public do

    This is all about Labour - the conservatives have already paid the price for their misdemeanours

  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,551
    TomW said:

    Barnesian said:

    TomW said:

    Barnesian said:

    TomW said:

    Barnesian said:

    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    The Dems have a much better ground game than the Republicans. Couldn't use it in 2020 because of Covid...

    Yet I am now in my fifteenth state on my road trip, and have yet to see a single Harris-Walz garden or field poster.
    There's a real gap online between those Democrats who are getting really confident, and those who are super nervous about the outcome (ie if they actually might lose, not just the legal and violent reaction if Harris wins)
    I think it's the difference between those saying honestly what they think, and the more astute, who want to avoid any complacency and say it's too close to call.
    Been there. Done that.

    If I thought I had any influence on Dem activists I wouldn't be calling it for Kamala. I'd be - ooh this is very close. Every vote will count. Keep working.
    Im calling it for Harris. She will be a complete disaster though and will mean leading the west we will have her, Starmer, Macron and Scholz. Im sure Putin and Xi are quaking.
    When you say "we will have her" who is "we"?
    I mean we in the west. Im pretty sure Putin wants Kamala not too bright and easy to manipulate.
    Kamala is brighter than Trump, and Putin has no "material" on her, unlike Trump.
    Kamala may fall for Putins manly charms though.
    "Excuse me. I'm speaking".
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,827

    Roger said:

    Boring alert! The same 4 or 5 dreary posters are still posting the same dross they have been for the last several days. I came on here because I was interested in the US elections. I guess others did too. Can't the obsessives have a separate thread?

    Unfortunately for you this is the leading story in the UK media and when even Labour mps and unions are aghast trying to close down the story because you are upset by it will nor work

    If they have any sense they should use this opportunity to pass some legislation on restricting donations to political parties to £1,000 per person/company/organisation per year.
    Cameron wanted to do that, but Labour wanted an exemption for unions.

    I nearly started the National Union of Amalgamated Hedge Fund Owners & Boilermakers.

    With designer stainless steel oil drums for braziers on the picket lines - each one hand crafted by a master Calypso drum maker.

    Turnbull & Asser would do the road mender style jerkins…..
    I'd say you can raise to about 10k for organisations/unions, 1k for individuals.

    They don't need to be such massive organisations.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 49,586
    edited September 22
    TomW said:

    TomW said:

    Barnesian said:

    TomW said:

    Barnesian said:

    TomW said:

    Barnesian said:

    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    The Dems have a much better ground game than the Republicans. Couldn't use it in 2020 because of Covid...

    Yet I am now in my fifteenth state on my road trip, and have yet to see a single Harris-Walz garden or field poster.
    There's a real gap online between those Democrats who are getting really confident, and those who are super nervous about the outcome (ie if they actually might lose, not just the legal and violent reaction if Harris wins)
    I think it's the difference between those saying honestly what they think, and the more astute, who want to avoid any complacency and say it's too close to call.
    Been there. Done that.

    If I thought I had any influence on Dem activists I wouldn't be calling it for Kamala. I'd be - ooh this is very close. Every vote will count. Keep working.
    Im calling it for Harris. She will be a complete disaster though and will mean leading the west we will have her, Starmer, Macron and Scholz. Im sure Putin and Xi are quaking.
    When you say "we will have her" who is "we"?
    I mean we in the west. Im pretty sure Putin wants Kamala not too bright and easy to manipulate.
    Kamala is brighter than Trump, and Putin has no "material" on her, unlike Trump.
    Kamala may fall for Putins manly charms though.
    Putin's getting on a bit. Why don't you think she'll be manipulated by Zelensky?
    I think we all know Zelensky has tendencies the other way.
    Is that what you discuss in your not-gay sessions, in the showers with the lads, after the gym?
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 6,200

    nico679 said:

    Sometimes Democrats are their own worst enemy .

    California Dems seem to have ignored the fact that this is an election year and voted through a raft of legislation which would give Trump and the GOP an open goal .

    Newsom has vetoed the first Bill re help to buy for undocumented workers . An even more head in the sand bill aimed at giving non-citizens unemployment benefit has to either be signed into law or vetoed by September 30th .

    This Bill would be an absolute gift to Trump. Unless Newsom wants the Dems to lose then he’ll wield another veto .

    Newsom implored the Dems to not pass controversial legislation but that’s fallen on deaf ears .

    While agreeing with Gov. Newsom re: above, think you are significantly overestimating the impact of ANY newly-enacted California state legislation upon national voting intensions.

    Which outside the Great Bear Republic is pretty much nil. Ditto for GOPs chances of winning statewide for POTUS, US Senate or any other office.
    I disagree . Trump will say Harris will try and enact this nationally and it will serve as a magnet to migrants. With such small margins in the swing states you can’t afford those types of mistakes . Anyway I’d be shocked if Newsom doesn’t veto this .
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,419
    edited September 22

    Roger said:

    Boring alert! The same 4 or 5 dreary posters are still posting the same dross they have been for the last several days. I came on here because I was interested in the US elections. I guess others did too. Can't the obsessives have a separate thread?

    Unfortunately for you this is the leading story in the UK media and when even Labour mps and unions are aghast trying to close down the story because you are upset by it will nor work

    If they have any sense they should use this opportunity to pass some legislation on restricting donations to political parties to £1,000 per person/company/organisation per year.
    The concern is always that us the taxpayer will ultimately ending having to pay to fund politician parties.

    I think personal donations look worse than party donations as its personal enrichment rather than keeping the party machine going. However, I don't really begrudge an MP getting the odd ticket to something e.g. tickets to the an England footy game from the FA, but it gets a lot stinkier when as we saw with Blair and Boris, basically every holiday was a donation or some MPs are definitely getting lobbied e.g. we have seen certain MPs being consistently entertained by betting industry at all the big horse racing festivals.

    Perhaps a cap / limited categories of freebies that are allowed to an individual.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,827

    Roger said:

    Boring alert! The same 4 or 5 dreary posters are still posting the same dross they have been for the last several days. I came on here because I was interested in the US elections. I guess others did too. Can't the obsessives have a separate thread?

    Unfortunately for you this is the leading story in the UK media and when even Labour mps and unions are aghast trying to close down the story because you are upset by it will nor work

    If they have any sense they should use this opportunity to pass some legislation on restricting donations to political parties to £1,000 per person/company/organisation per year.
    The concern is always that us the taxpayer will ultimately ending having to pay to fund politician parties.

    I think personal donations look worse than party donations as its personal enrichment rather than getting the party machine going. However, I don't really begrudge an MP getting the odd ticket to something e.g. tickets to the odd England footy game etc, but it gets a lot stinkier when as we saw with Blair and Boris, basically every holiday was a donation or some MPs are definitely getting lobbied e.g. we have seen certain MPs being consistently entertained by betting industry at things like horse racing festivals.

    Perhaps a cap / limited categories of freebies that are allowed to an individual.
    The occasional concert or sports ticket is fine, but the amounts able to be received are just silly, it definitely needs an overhaul, so a cap of some kind seems reasonable without doing away with it entirely.
  • IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    The Dems have a much better ground game than the Republicans. Couldn't use it in 2020 because of Covid...

    Yet I am now in my fifteenth state on my road trip, and have yet to see a single Harris-Walz garden or field poster.
    Never left Trumpistan....
    I’m now in sweltering NC, which is a swing state. Asheville tomorrow, which is where all the Dems hang out.


    "All the Dems" hang out in Asheville? That's bunk . . . or rather Buncombe (County).

    Check out Chapel Hill, Charlotte, Winston-Salem, Raleigh, Fayettville, etc. etc. to find more Tarheel Democrats!
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,509
    Trump posted a photoshopped image of Kamala Harris with Diddy yesterday. The original pic was with Monte Williams.

    NO network media has reported on it.

    https://x.com/RexChapman/status/1837915143138955275

    Of course.
    Getty has 202 photos of Donald with him alone.
    https://x.com/Morgan_C_Ross/status/1837934796414353714

    “What was it that first attracted you to the alleged sex trafficker ?”
  • Roger said:

    Boring alert! The same 4 or 5 dreary posters are still posting the same dross they have been for the last several days. I came on here because I was interested in the US elections. I guess others did too. Can't the obsessives have a separate thread?

    Unfortunately for you this is the leading story in the UK media and when even Labour mps and unions are aghast trying to close down the story because you are upset by it will nor work

    If they have any sense they should use this opportunity to pass some legislation on restricting donations to political parties to £1,000 per person/company/organisation per year.
    The concern is always that us the taxpayer will ultimately ending having to pay to fund politician parties.

    I think personal donations look worse than party donations as its personal enrichment rather than getting the party machine going. However, I don't really begrudge an MP getting the odd ticket to something e.g. tickets to the odd England footy game etc, but it gets a lot stinkier when as we saw with Blair and Boris, basically every holiday was a donation or some MPs are definitely getting lobbied e.g. we have seen certain MPs being consistently entertained by betting industry at things like horse racing festivals.

    Perhaps a cap / limited categories of freebies that are allowed to an individual.
    It is fairly clear the taxpayer cost of delivering the quid for the quo to political donors far exceeds the cost of running the political parties. Otherwise the elite wouldn't be paying for the bungs, sorry, donations.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,509

    Bridget Philipson claimed she was accepted free Taylor Swift ttickets. She attended as Education Secretary.

    When pushed she admitted she accepted them as it was hard to turn them down as her daughter was a fan.

    It's a fucking pandemic of greed

    Bridget Philipson claimed she was accepted free Taylor Swift ttickets. She attended as Education Secretary.

    When pushed she admitted she accepted them as it was hard to turn them down as her daughter was a fan.

    It's a fucking pandemic of greed


    @DawnButlerBrent
    We kicked off
    @UKLabour
    Conference in Liverpool with a bang!

    Lord Ali donated the 🎆 fireworks presumably

    Hello bigjohnowls. Have I talked to you about Carla Denyer’s list of declared donations?
    Try as you might this is not about the Greens, but entirely Labour and what makes it worse is it is not just Starmer, but Rayner (who has been reported to the standards authorities tonight), Philipson, Lammy, Streeting and other cabinet members
    When you say “try as you might” do you actually “me and some in the media want it to be entirely about Labour”? Because donations and gifts aren’t unique to Labour, far from it.
    Another one who doesn't get it but the public do

    This is all about Labour - the conservatives have already paid the price for their misdemeanours

    No, that was just a first installment.
  • TomWTomW Posts: 70

    TomW said:

    TomW said:

    Barnesian said:

    TomW said:

    Barnesian said:

    TomW said:

    Barnesian said:

    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    The Dems have a much better ground game than the Republicans. Couldn't use it in 2020 because of Covid...

    Yet I am now in my fifteenth state on my road trip, and have yet to see a single Harris-Walz garden or field poster.
    There's a real gap online between those Democrats who are getting really confident, and those who are super nervous about the outcome (ie if they actually might lose, not just the legal and violent reaction if Harris wins)
    I think it's the difference between those saying honestly what they think, and the more astute, who want to avoid any complacency and say it's too close to call.
    Been there. Done that.

    If I thought I had any influence on Dem activists I wouldn't be calling it for Kamala. I'd be - ooh this is very close. Every vote will count. Keep working.
    Im calling it for Harris. She will be a complete disaster though and will mean leading the west we will have her, Starmer, Macron and Scholz. Im sure Putin and Xi are quaking.
    When you say "we will have her" who is "we"?
    I mean we in the west. Im pretty sure Putin wants Kamala not too bright and easy to manipulate.
    Kamala is brighter than Trump, and Putin has no "material" on her, unlike Trump.
    Kamala may fall for Putins manly charms though.
    Putin's getting on a bit. Why don't you think she'll be manipulated by Zelensky?
    I think we all know Zelensky has tendencies the other way.
    Is that what you discuss in your not-gay sessions, in the showers with the lads, after the gym?
    Not Zelensky especially but there are 1 or 2 known faces in our gym with tendencies the other way. Still live and let live eh.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,095
    The AI subtitles were definitely struggling with the accent!
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,851
    edited September 22

    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    Boring alert! The same 4 or 5 dreary posters are still posting the same dross they have been for the last several days. I came on here because I was interested in the US elections. I guess others did too. Can't the obsessives have a separate thread?

    Unfortunately for you this is the leading story in the UK media and when even Labour mps and unions are aghast trying to close down the story because you are upset by it will nor work

    If its the biggest story you should find lots of places to read about it and you can write letters at the bottom of the page with like minded obsessives. This is supposed to be about the US elections and people like you are making it unreadable which is why only the usual five or six terminally dull are taking part
    Typical lefty - hates the story so try to shut it down

    So no @Roger you will not silence me or other posters in discussing the leadng political story of the day

    I don't think anyone gives a shit whether she got a ticket to see Taylor Swift. Are you suggesting she bought influence? Has no one ever given you a ticket to a concert or a theatre or a film or a football match? Really?

    .......Probably not or you'd bore them to death and you'd spoil their evening
  • Nigelb said:

    Trump posted a photoshopped image of Kamala Harris with Diddy yesterday. The original pic was with Monte Williams.

    NO network media has reported on it.

    https://x.com/RexChapman/status/1837915143138955275

    Of course.
    Getty has 202 photos of Donald with him alone.
    https://x.com/Morgan_C_Ross/status/1837934796414353714

    “What was it that first attracted you to the alleged sex trafficker ?”

    Reckon Trump was MOST impressed, by previous triumph of MAGA photo-shoppers re: Taylor Swift?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,804
    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    Boring alert! The same 4 or 5 dreary posters are still posting the same dross they have been for the last several days. I came on here because I was interested in the US elections. I guess others did too. Can't the obsessives have a separate thread?

    Unfortunately for you this is the leading story in the UK media and when even Labour mps and unions are aghast trying to close down the story because you are upset by it will nor work

    If its the biggest story you should find lots of places to read about it and you can write letters at the bottom of the page with like minded obsessives. This is supposed to be about the US elections and people like you are making it unreadable which is why only the usual five or six terminally dull are taking part
    Typical lefty - hates the story so try to shut it down

    So no @Roger you will not silence me or other posters in discussing the leadng political story of the day

    I don't think anyone gives a shit whether she got a ticket to see Taylor Swift. Are you suggesting she bought influence? Has no one ever given you a ticket to a concert or a theatre or a film or a football match? Really?

    .......Probably not or you'd bore them to death and you'd spoil their evening
    Come off it, Roger. Someone gifting another private citizen something is not the same as gifting a member of the cabinet or shadow cabinet.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,226
    The key will be whether those activists will be out on polling day as the unions will certainly be out knocking up for the Democrats.

    Though Trump may hope his rallies will be enough to motivate his voters to the polls
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,419
    edited September 22
    Doesn't everybody get £15k for their birthday party from the bosses mate?
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,095
    carnforth said:

    carnforth said:

    TimS said:

    Today’s tally of Lib Dem corruption revelations: zero.

    Like yesterday’s. And tomorrow’s.

    Give it a couple of years:

    https://www.thetimes.com/article/d9e1c404-191c-11ea-a9c5-93ba951187e8?shareToken=cae155fad82946e19de82bc3bae37463
    Oh, plus the £4m they took from Michael Brown, who stole it. And their reason for not paying it back to make the victims whole was "we can't afford to".
    Didn’t they also say that “we took it in good faith - didn’t know it was stolen from pensioners”
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 4,488

    carnforth said:

    carnforth said:

    TimS said:

    Today’s tally of Lib Dem corruption revelations: zero.

    Like yesterday’s. And tomorrow’s.

    Give it a couple of years:

    https://www.thetimes.com/article/d9e1c404-191c-11ea-a9c5-93ba951187e8?shareToken=cae155fad82946e19de82bc3bae37463
    Oh, plus the £4m they took from Michael Brown, who stole it. And their reason for not paying it back to make the victims whole was "we can't afford to".
    Didn’t they also say that “we took it in good faith - didn’t know it was stolen from pensioners”
    May not be legally Receiving Stolen Goods, but morally yes.

    They could have taken a bank loan and payed it back.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 54,668
    Drinks with an old lefty friend tonight

    I was expecting either a mildly sturdy defence or a "whatever, early days, the Tories were worse" - basically MEH

    But no. He expressed absolute contempt and anger at Starmer and Co. This has cut through, even with loyal London lefites. His main complaint was the "naivety and stupidity". I would add the "greed" but still. Impact
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 4,488
    edited September 22
    Leon said:

    Drinks with an old lefty friend tonight

    I was expecting either a mildly sturdy defence or a "whatever, early days, the Tories were worse" - basically MEH

    But no. He expressed absolute contempt and anger at Starmer and Co. This has cut through, even with loyal London lefites. His main complaint was the "naivety and stupidity". I would add the "greed" but still. Impact

    Corbyn lefty or not?
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,095

    You can, if you want to be extremely charitable, argue that these donations have each been relatively trivial, if not everyday.

    It’s not as if any other party does anything different.

    But the fact they all come from Lord Alli, who was given a Downing Street pass by the woman whose son - now MP for Beckenham and Penge - received 10k for campaigning expenses…

    And then to have Starmer, Reeves, Rayner and Philippson each do a media round and utterly fail to come up with a coherent story beggars belief.

    What is most disturbing is they have been gifts to individuals. That is exactly what creates a sense of obligation. Give it to a central fund and people feel less of a personal sense of duty to do favours in return
    That might not hold up if you compare the list of donors to Conservative Party funds with the current membership of the House of Lords.
    Honestly? A bauble like a title is pretty meaningless in practice. It would be better if it was like a baronet rather than coming with a seat in the Lords but that could be fixed.

  • Leon said:

    Drinks with an old lefty friend tonight

    I was expecting either a mildly sturdy defence or a "whatever, early days, the Tories were worse" - basically MEH

    But no. He expressed absolute contempt and anger at Starmer and Co. This has cut through, even with loyal London lefites. His main complaint was the "naivety and stupidity". I would add the "greed" but still. Impact

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/content/dam/PortalPictures/september-2024/2209-MATT-PORTAL-WEB-P1.png?imwidth=640
  • Roger said:

    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    Boring alert! The same 4 or 5 dreary posters are still posting the same dross they have been for the last several days. I came on here because I was interested in the US elections. I guess others did too. Can't the obsessives have a separate thread?

    Unfortunately for you this is the leading story in the UK media and when even Labour mps and unions are aghast trying to close down the story because you are upset by it will nor work

    If its the biggest story you should find lots of places to read about it and you can write letters at the bottom of the page with like minded obsessives. This is supposed to be about the US elections and people like you are making it unreadable which is why only the usual five or six terminally dull are taking part
    Typical lefty - hates the story so try to shut it down

    So no @Roger you will not silence me or other posters in discussing the leadng political story of the day

    I don't think anyone gives a shit whether she got a ticket to see Taylor Swift. Are you suggesting she bought influence? Has no one ever given you a ticket to a concert or a theatre or a film or a football match? Really?

    .......Probably not or you'd bore them to death and you'd spoil their evening
    Well the public are certainly unimpressed with just 7 % supporting the gifts of concert tickets
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,463
    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    Boring alert! The same 4 or 5 dreary posters are still posting the same dross they have been for the last several days. I came on here because I was interested in the US elections. I guess others did too. Can't the obsessives have a separate thread?

    Unfortunately for you this is the leading story in the UK media and when even Labour mps and unions are aghast trying to close down the story because you are upset by it will nor work

    If its the biggest story you should find lots of places to read about it and you can write letters at the bottom of the page with like minded obsessives. This is supposed to be about the US elections and people like you are making it unreadable which is why only the usual five or six terminally dull are taking part
    Typical lefty - hates the story so try to shut it down

    So no @Roger you will not silence me or other posters in discussing the leadng political story of the day

    I don't think anyone gives a shit whether she got a ticket to see Taylor Swift. Are you suggesting she bought influence? Has no one ever given you a ticket to a concert or a theatre or a film or a football match? Really?

    .......Probably not or you'd bore them to death and you'd spoil their evening
    :D
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,851
    edited September 22
    RobD said:

    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    Boring alert! The same 4 or 5 dreary posters are still posting the same dross they have been for the last several days. I came on here because I was interested in the US elections. I guess others did too. Can't the obsessives have a separate thread?

    Unfortunately for you this is the leading story in the UK media and when even Labour mps and unions are aghast trying to close down the story because you are upset by it will nor work

    If its the biggest story you should find lots of places to read about it and you can write letters at the bottom of the page with like minded obsessives. This is supposed to be about the US elections and people like you are making it unreadable which is why only the usual five or six terminally dull are taking part
    Typical lefty - hates the story so try to shut it down

    So no @Roger you will not silence me or other posters in discussing the leadng political story of the day

    I don't think anyone gives a shit whether she got a ticket to see Taylor Swift. Are you suggesting she bought influence? Has no one ever given you a ticket to a concert or a theatre or a film or a football match? Really?

    .......Probably not or you'd bore them to death and you'd spoil their evening
    Come off it, Roger. Someone gifting another private citizen something is not the same as gifting a member of the cabinet or shadow cabinet.
    Really? If you heard that Bridget Phillipson's daughter had an interest in brass bands and someone from the Treorchy male voice choir asked her to come to a concert in Penmaenmawr would you consider it improper? If so you have obviously never worked where these sort of social interactions take place.
  • Anyone who says "nobody cares" is a StarmTrooper
  • RobD said:

    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    Boring alert! The same 4 or 5 dreary posters are still posting the same dross they have been for the last several days. I came on here because I was interested in the US elections. I guess others did too. Can't the obsessives have a separate thread?

    Unfortunately for you this is the leading story in the UK media and when even Labour mps and unions are aghast trying to close down the story because you are upset by it will nor work

    If its the biggest story you should find lots of places to read about it and you can write letters at the bottom of the page with like minded obsessives. This is supposed to be about the US elections and people like you are making it unreadable which is why only the usual five or six terminally dull are taking part
    Typical lefty - hates the story so try to shut it down

    So no @Roger you will not silence me or other posters in discussing the leadng political story of the day

    I don't think anyone gives a shit whether she got a ticket to see Taylor Swift. Are you suggesting she bought influence? Has no one ever given you a ticket to a concert or a theatre or a film or a football match? Really?

    .......Probably not or you'd bore them to death and you'd spoil their evening
    Come off it, Roger. Someone gifting another private citizen something is not the same as gifting a member of the cabinet or shadow cabinet.
    As a matter of fact I have always paid to go to football and @Roger seems very upset and has become unnecessarily personal
  • TomWTomW Posts: 70
    Leon said:

    Drinks with an old lefty friend tonight

    I was expecting either a mildly sturdy defence or a "whatever, early days, the Tories were worse" - basically MEH

    But no. He expressed absolute contempt and anger at Starmer and Co. This has cut through, even with loyal London lefites. His main complaint was the "naivety and stupidity". I would add the "greed" but still. Impact

    Starmer has to be the most charmless pm ever. Yes Major was boring but you felt there was humanity there. With Starmer there is a void of
    nothingness.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,804
    Roger said:

    RobD said:

    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    Boring alert! The same 4 or 5 dreary posters are still posting the same dross they have been for the last several days. I came on here because I was interested in the US elections. I guess others did too. Can't the obsessives have a separate thread?

    Unfortunately for you this is the leading story in the UK media and when even Labour mps and unions are aghast trying to close down the story because you are upset by it will nor work

    If its the biggest story you should find lots of places to read about it and you can write letters at the bottom of the page with like minded obsessives. This is supposed to be about the US elections and people like you are making it unreadable which is why only the usual five or six terminally dull are taking part
    Typical lefty - hates the story so try to shut it down

    So no @Roger you will not silence me or other posters in discussing the leadng political story of the day

    I don't think anyone gives a shit whether she got a ticket to see Taylor Swift. Are you suggesting she bought influence? Has no one ever given you a ticket to a concert or a theatre or a film or a football match? Really?

    .......Probably not or you'd bore them to death and you'd spoil their evening
    Come off it, Roger. Someone gifting another private citizen something is not the same as gifting a member of the cabinet or shadow cabinet.
    Really? If you heard that Bridget Phillipson's daughter had an interest in brass bands and someone from the Treorchy male voice choir asked her to come to a concert in Penmaenmawr would you consider it a big deal? You have obviously never worked where these sort of social interactions take place.
    Well, yes, because gifting is a way of buying influence regardless of who is doing it.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,463
    RobD said:

    Roger said:

    RobD said:

    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    Boring alert! The same 4 or 5 dreary posters are still posting the same dross they have been for the last several days. I came on here because I was interested in the US elections. I guess others did too. Can't the obsessives have a separate thread?

    Unfortunately for you this is the leading story in the UK media and when even Labour mps and unions are aghast trying to close down the story because you are upset by it will nor work

    If its the biggest story you should find lots of places to read about it and you can write letters at the bottom of the page with like minded obsessives. This is supposed to be about the US elections and people like you are making it unreadable which is why only the usual five or six terminally dull are taking part
    Typical lefty - hates the story so try to shut it down

    So no @Roger you will not silence me or other posters in discussing the leadng political story of the day

    I don't think anyone gives a shit whether she got a ticket to see Taylor Swift. Are you suggesting she bought influence? Has no one ever given you a ticket to a concert or a theatre or a film or a football match? Really?

    .......Probably not or you'd bore them to death and you'd spoil their evening
    Come off it, Roger. Someone gifting another private citizen something is not the same as gifting a member of the cabinet or shadow cabinet.
    Really? If you heard that Bridget Phillipson's daughter had an interest in brass bands and someone from the Treorchy male voice choir asked her to come to a concert in Penmaenmawr would you consider it a big deal? You have obviously never worked where these sort of social interactions take place.
    Well, yes, because gifting is a way of buying influence regardless of who is doing it.
    LOL
  • LeonLeon Posts: 54,668
    TomW said:

    Leon said:

    Drinks with an old lefty friend tonight

    I was expecting either a mildly sturdy defence or a "whatever, early days, the Tories were worse" - basically MEH

    But no. He expressed absolute contempt and anger at Starmer and Co. This has cut through, even with loyal London lefites. His main complaint was the "naivety and stupidity". I would add the "greed" but still. Impact

    Starmer has to be the most charmless pm ever. Yes Major was boring but you felt there was humanity there. With Starmer there is a void of
    nothingness.
    Yes, indeed

    As my mate and I agreed, the problem is Starmer hasn't got the charm - Blair - or the humour - Boris - to switch things around. He is a charmless humourless fuckwit who seems like a massively over-promoted middle-manager and with zero ideas as to how to fix the country. There is no there, there

    I dunno how Labour gets out of this. They are gonna lose badly in 2028-9 to a Reform Tory coalition, is my expectation
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,226
    Activote California

    Harris 64% Trump 36%

    Slight swing to Trump from 2020 when he got 34% in California

    https://www.activote.net/harris-again-far-ahead-in-her-home-state/

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_presidential_election_in_California
  • Foxy said:

    boulay said:

    Philippson must be mentally retarded, which is a bit of a worry as she is Minister for Education.

    Who goes on national tv and describes what was obviously some kind of political gathering (involving front benchers and trade unionists) as her “birthday party”, even if turning 40 was the ostensible reason for the gathering?

    Can you imagine the thinking, “ I’ve been given £14k for my 40th birthday party, I just really want it to be spent with politicians and trade unionists because it will be a wild hoot.” She deserves the boot for shit partying decisions above all else.
    Trevor Phillips on Sky this morning asked Philipson when they are all going to repay this largesse and she just looked as if she wanted to be anywhere (maybe at a party) then in the studio
    Still seems like small change to me. Frank Hester, whose company has had contracts worth £135 million from the NHS and who personally received an OBE for services to healthcare, gave the Conservatives over £10 million, including £15k for one helicopter trip by Sunak. Remember him? The one who said Diane Abbott should be shot.

    Graham Edwards donated £5.52m to the Conservatives. Sunak made him the Conservative Party treasurer. Another guy who was made Conservative Party treasurer was Mohamed Mansour. He donated £5m. The Bamford brothers gave the Tories over £10 million. They and Edwards have been investigated for tax issues.

    Lubov Chernukhin, wife of the former Russian oligarch Vladimir Chernukhin, gave £136k to the Tories under Sunak, and over £2 million historically. Michael Hintze gave them more than £4.5 million and got a peerage.
    Desperate whatabouterry

    Unless you didn't notice the conservative party were decimated at the GE for sleeze and cronyism and Starmer stood tall saying he would end it, and yet he and his fellow cabinet have found themselves under attack from all quarters, not least from within their party and by the unions and now Starmer has fallen below Sunak in popularity

    Your posts try to defend the indefensible by saying the other lot were worse, but the nation has passed judgment on that and now Starmer and his colleagues have been shamed you just do not like it

    Indeed are you Sue Gray in disguise?
    Were the Conservatives decimated "for sleeze [sic] and cronyism"? Issues polling before the election had the top 5 issues as cost of living, health, economy, immigration and the environment. Sleaze did not appear in YouGov's top 15.

    Lord Ashcroft's post-election poll had this on the main reasons voted for Labour: "Just over 6 in 10 (62%) of those who voted Labour said one of their three main reasons was that they thought Labour would do a better job of running the economy. Just over half (57%) said they trusted the motives of Labour more than other parties, while 46% thought Keir Starmer would make a better prime minister."

    It also found: "We asked those who voted Conservative in 2019 but not in 2024 why they moved away from the party. The most important reasons were that “they are out of touch with people like me” (36% naming in the top three), that “they didn’t deliver what they promised” (35%) and that “they’re not competent” (30%), while 28% said “I don’t trust them”. Just over 1 in 5 (21%) chose “partygate and other scandals”."

    So, about a fifth of Conservative defectors did so because of scandals, but it wasn't the main issue for most voters.
    You simply do not get the damage this has done to Labour and no amount of deflection will change the narrative in the public's eyes which already has Starmer below Sunak in popularity

    Maybe reflect and accept it is a terrible story for labour
    Though Starmer still 10 points ahead as best PM. That's how low Tory popularity is. Lower than a snakes belly.
    I see you have few straws left to clutch
    OK, betting question. If one is convinced that Starmer's government is toast after this, how should you bet? You can get 9/4 on Tories most seats at the next election or lay Labour for most seats at 1.99, but that's a while off. Is there a next Labour leader bet worth making? Reeves is joint favourite, albeit only at 8/1, but worth laying her? Or you can lay Reeves as next PM at 15. You can lay Rayner as next PM at 23.
    Oh that's easy. If you think Labour is stuffed by these donations, the answer is surely to lay whichever would-be Conservative leader has taken most money.

    Seriously.
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 4,488
    If I were a minister, taking freebies and then resolutely refusing to be influenced by the donor would amuse me. Perhaps that's why I'm not a minister.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 54,668
    carnforth said:

    Leon said:

    Drinks with an old lefty friend tonight

    I was expecting either a mildly sturdy defence or a "whatever, early days, the Tories were worse" - basically MEH

    But no. He expressed absolute contempt and anger at Starmer and Co. This has cut through, even with loyal London lefites. His main complaint was the "naivety and stupidity". I would add the "greed" but still. Impact

    Corbyn lefty or not?
    No, actually centre Left. Blairite/Starmerite. So that made it doubly surprising

    Also, the anger was REAL. Not so much at the "crime" but at the political ineptitude and associated chaos
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,796
    edited September 22

    A new statue of Oscar Wild has been branded “absolutely hideous” by the writer’s grandson.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/09/22/oscar-wildes-family-criticise-hideous-new-statue-of-writer/

    Has the craft of sculpting been lost? Seem regular occurrence now they are bloody awful representations.

    Sir Eduardo died almost 20 years ago at the age of 81, so not exactly a young Turk kicking in the doors of the establishment.

    I quite like, it and I suspect Oscar wouldn’t have been totally dismayed.
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 4,488
    Leon said:

    carnforth said:

    Leon said:

    Drinks with an old lefty friend tonight

    I was expecting either a mildly sturdy defence or a "whatever, early days, the Tories were worse" - basically MEH

    But no. He expressed absolute contempt and anger at Starmer and Co. This has cut through, even with loyal London lefites. His main complaint was the "naivety and stupidity". I would add the "greed" but still. Impact

    Corbyn lefty or not?
    No, actually centre Left. Blairite/Starmerite. So that made it doubly surprising

    Also, the anger was REAL. Not so much at the "crime" but at the political ineptitude and associated chaos
    I was taken in by Starmer, thinking his ability to smack the Labour Party into shape meant he could do the same for the country. Apparently not.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,190

    Barnesian said:

    Foxy said:

    boulay said:

    Philippson must be mentally retarded, which is a bit of a worry as she is Minister for Education.

    Who goes on national tv and describes what was obviously some kind of political gathering (involving front benchers and trade unionists) as her “birthday party”, even if turning 40 was the ostensible reason for the gathering?

    Can you imagine the thinking, “ I’ve been given £14k for my 40th birthday party, I just really want it to be spent with politicians and trade unionists because it will be a wild hoot.” She deserves the boot for shit partying decisions above all else.
    Trevor Phillips on Sky this morning asked Philipson when they are all going to repay this largesse and she just looked as if she wanted to be anywhere (maybe at a party) then in the studio
    Still seems like small change to me. Frank Hester, whose company has had contracts worth £135 million from the NHS and who personally received an OBE for services to healthcare, gave the Conservatives over £10 million, including £15k for one helicopter trip by Sunak. Remember him? The one who said Diane Abbott should be shot.

    Graham Edwards donated £5.52m to the Conservatives. Sunak made him the Conservative Party treasurer. Another guy who was made Conservative Party treasurer was Mohamed Mansour. He donated £5m. The Bamford brothers gave the Tories over £10 million. They and Edwards have been investigated for tax issues.

    Lubov Chernukhin, wife of the former Russian oligarch Vladimir Chernukhin, gave £136k to the Tories under Sunak, and over £2 million historically. Michael Hintze gave them more than £4.5 million and got a peerage.
    Desperate whatabouterry

    Unless you didn't notice the conservative party were decimated at the GE for sleeze and cronyism and Starmer stood tall saying he would end it, and yet he and his fellow cabinet have found themselves under attack from all quarters, not least from within their party and by the unions and now Starmer has fallen below Sunak in popularity

    Your posts try to defend the indefensible by saying the other lot were worse, but the nation has passed judgment on that and now Starmer and his colleagues have been shamed you just do not like it

    Indeed are you Sue Gray in disguise?
    Were the Conservatives decimated "for sleeze [sic] and cronyism"? Issues polling before the election had the top 5 issues as cost of living, health, economy, immigration and the environment. Sleaze did not appear in YouGov's top 15.

    Lord Ashcroft's post-election poll had this on the main reasons voted for Labour: "Just over 6 in 10 (62%) of those who voted Labour said one of their three main reasons was that they thought Labour would do a better job of running the economy. Just over half (57%) said they trusted the motives of Labour more than other parties, while 46% thought Keir Starmer would make a better prime minister."

    It also found: "We asked those who voted Conservative in 2019 but not in 2024 why they moved away from the party. The most important reasons were that “they are out of touch with people like me” (36% naming in the top three), that “they didn’t deliver what they promised” (35%) and that “they’re not competent” (30%), while 28% said “I don’t trust them”. Just over 1 in 5 (21%) chose “partygate and other scandals”."

    So, about a fifth of Conservative defectors did so because of scandals, but it wasn't the main issue for most voters.
    You simply do not get the damage this has done to Labour and no amount of deflection will change the narrative in the public's eyes which already has Starmer below Sunak in popularity

    Maybe reflect and accept it is a terrible story for labour
    Though Starmer still 10 points ahead as best PM. That's how low Tory popularity is. Lower than a snakes belly.
    I see you have few straws left to clutch
    OK, betting question. If one is convinced that Starmer's government is toast after this, how should you bet? You can get 9/4 on Tories most seats at the next election or lay Labour for most seats at 1.99, but that's a while off. Is there a next Labour leader bet worth making? Reeves is joint favourite, albeit only at 8/1, but worth laying her? Or you can lay Reeves as next PM at 15. You can lay Rayner as next PM at 23.
    The next government depends most on what deal Farage strikes with the next Tory leader.

    If Farage is given a clear run in say 50 seats and gives the Tories a clear run in the rest then they may gain a majority between them.

    The next government will be Tory with Reform support, or Labour with LibDem support. 50/50 at the moment. I'm not betting yet.
    Tricky to set up.

    For a start, Farage taking on 50 seats means accepting that he is second banana on the right. That seems unlikely.

    More importantly, there is a slice of the Conservative electorate who stuck with the party in 2024 for whom a deal like that would be the last straw. Some of them are here.

    Having failed to strangle Reform at birth, the Conservatives are going to find them tricky to eradicate.
    Reform will eradicate themselves. Big ego clashes of little men will ensure it.
    The Conservatives have failed. You are wishing Labour to fail, and they may oblige.

    Which offensive Nazi grifter is looking like the incorruptible King of clean at present?
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,851

    RobD said:

    Roger said:

    RobD said:

    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    Boring alert! The same 4 or 5 dreary posters are still posting the same dross they have been for the last several days. I came on here because I was interested in the US elections. I guess others did too. Can't the obsessives have a separate thread?

    Unfortunately for you this is the leading story in the UK media and when even Labour mps and unions are aghast trying to close down the story because you are upset by it will nor work

    If its the biggest story you should find lots of places to read about it and you can write letters at the bottom of the page with like minded obsessives. This is supposed to be about the US elections and people like you are making it unreadable which is why only the usual five or six terminally dull are taking part
    Typical lefty - hates the story so try to shut it down

    So no @Roger you will not silence me or other posters in discussing the leadng political story of the day

    I don't think anyone gives a shit whether she got a ticket to see Taylor Swift. Are you suggesting she bought influence? Has no one ever given you a ticket to a concert or a theatre or a film or a football match? Really?

    .......Probably not or you'd bore them to death and you'd spoil their evening
    Come off it, Roger. Someone gifting another private citizen something is not the same as gifting a member of the cabinet or shadow cabinet.
    Really? If you heard that Bridget Phillipson's daughter had an interest in brass bands and someone from the Treorchy male voice choir asked her to come to a concert in Penmaenmawr would you consider it a big deal? You have obviously never worked where these sort of social interactions take place.
    Well, yes, because gifting is a way of buying influence regardless of who is doing it.
    LOL
    I've just realised I took a Cabinet Minister or dinner at Grouchos. Do you think that's worth a front page in the telegraph?
  • ohnotnowohnotnow Posts: 3,705
    Leon said:

    TomW said:

    Leon said:

    Drinks with an old lefty friend tonight

    I was expecting either a mildly sturdy defence or a "whatever, early days, the Tories were worse" - basically MEH

    But no. He expressed absolute contempt and anger at Starmer and Co. This has cut through, even with loyal London lefites. His main complaint was the "naivety and stupidity". I would add the "greed" but still. Impact

    Starmer has to be the most charmless pm ever. Yes Major was boring but you felt there was humanity there. With Starmer there is a void of
    nothingness.
    Yes, indeed

    As my mate and I agreed, the problem is Starmer hasn't got the charm - Blair - or the humour - Boris - to switch things around. He is a charmless humourless fuckwit who seems like a massively over-promoted middle-manager and with zero ideas as to how to fix the country. There is no there, there

    I dunno how Labour gets out of this. They are gonna lose badly in 2028-9 to a Reform Tory coalition, is my expectation
    I still enjoy that various techie Discord servers I'm on represent Starmer as a '❔' emoji. Even the Americans have picked up on it.
  • You have a cross country, Sir Keir
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,419
    edited September 22
    Roger said:

    RobD said:

    Roger said:

    RobD said:

    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    Boring alert! The same 4 or 5 dreary posters are still posting the same dross they have been for the last several days. I came on here because I was interested in the US elections. I guess others did too. Can't the obsessives have a separate thread?

    Unfortunately for you this is the leading story in the UK media and when even Labour mps and unions are aghast trying to close down the story because you are upset by it will nor work

    If its the biggest story you should find lots of places to read about it and you can write letters at the bottom of the page with like minded obsessives. This is supposed to be about the US elections and people like you are making it unreadable which is why only the usual five or six terminally dull are taking part
    Typical lefty - hates the story so try to shut it down

    So no @Roger you will not silence me or other posters in discussing the leadng political story of the day

    I don't think anyone gives a shit whether she got a ticket to see Taylor Swift. Are you suggesting she bought influence? Has no one ever given you a ticket to a concert or a theatre or a film or a football match? Really?

    .......Probably not or you'd bore them to death and you'd spoil their evening
    Come off it, Roger. Someone gifting another private citizen something is not the same as gifting a member of the cabinet or shadow cabinet.
    Really? If you heard that Bridget Phillipson's daughter had an interest in brass bands and someone from the Treorchy male voice choir asked her to come to a concert in Penmaenmawr would you consider it a big deal? You have obviously never worked where these sort of social interactions take place.
    Well, yes, because gifting is a way of buying influence regardless of who is doing it.
    LOL
    I've just realised I took a Cabinet Minister or dinner at Grouchos. Do you think that's worth a front page in the telegraph?
    Depends, did you then offer them £100k's worth of freebies?

  • @DawnButlerBrent
    We kicked off
    @UKLabour
    Conference in Liverpool with a bang!

    Lord Ali donated the 🎆 fireworks presumably

    Snide ones with delayed ignition that go off in your face.

  • LeonLeon Posts: 54,668
    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    Boring alert! The same 4 or 5 dreary posters are still posting the same dross they have been for the last several days. I came on here because I was interested in the US elections. I guess others did too. Can't the obsessives have a separate thread?

    Unfortunately for you this is the leading story in the UK media and when even Labour mps and unions are aghast trying to close down the story because you are upset by it will nor work

    If its the biggest story you should find lots of places to read about it and you can write letters at the bottom of the page with like minded obsessives. This is supposed to be about the US elections and people like you are making it unreadable which is why only the usual five or six terminally dull are taking part
    Typical lefty - hates the story so try to shut it down

    So no @Roger you will not silence me or other posters in discussing the leadng political story of the day

    I don't think anyone gives a shit whether she got a ticket to see Taylor Swift. Are you suggesting she bought influence? Has no one ever given you a ticket to a concert or a theatre or a film or a football match? Really?

    .......Probably not or you'd bore them to death and you'd spoil their evening
    Yes, but you are literally the stupidest person on this forum. As in, you have the lowest IQ. You are a fucking dumb fuck who went to Millfield. If you were a member of the genus Equus, you would be a beach donkey in Blackpool regularly sodomised by an unwashed kebab shop worker, and tolerating it, just because that is as good as it gets, as far as you can see
  • Seattle Times (via Washington Post) - For 57 days this fall, Earth will have a second moon

    For the next two months, an unusual object about the size of a bus will be orbiting above our heads. Say hello to Earth’s temporary new mini-moon.

    From Sept. 29 to Nov. 25, a passing asteroid will be pulled in by Earth’s gravity — sort of like a window shopper — before returning to its normal orbit around the sun. Objects that get captured by our gravitational force for a short time are known as mini-moons. This one, named asteroid 2024 PT5, came from the Arjuna asteroid belt near our sun, about 93 million miles away.

    SSI - Is THIS the much-hearlded "October Surprise" for 2024?

    And IF so, is it a Harris Moon . . . or a MAGA Death Star . . .
  • ohnotnowohnotnow Posts: 3,705
    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    Boring alert! The same 4 or 5 dreary posters are still posting the same dross they have been for the last several days. I came on here because I was interested in the US elections. I guess others did too. Can't the obsessives have a separate thread?

    Unfortunately for you this is the leading story in the UK media and when even Labour mps and unions are aghast trying to close down the story because you are upset by it will nor work

    If its the biggest story you should find lots of places to read about it and you can write letters at the bottom of the page with like minded obsessives. This is supposed to be about the US elections and people like you are making it unreadable which is why only the usual five or six terminally dull are taking part
    Typical lefty - hates the story so try to shut it down

    So no @Roger you will not silence me or other posters in discussing the leadng political story of the day

    I don't think anyone gives a shit whether she got a ticket to see Taylor Swift. Are you suggesting she bought influence? Has no one ever given you a ticket to a concert or a theatre or a film or a football match? Really?

    .......Probably not or you'd bore them to death and you'd spoil their evening
    An office admin who visited Hong Kong once brought me a 'Hello Kitty' keyring. I managed not to blub in thanks, and for evermore sorted out her IT issues as best I could.

    So yes, I am as guilty as a PM or cabinet minister who has taken 10-100k in gifts. It's all relative.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,134
    edited September 22
    Final seats allocation in Brandenburg. 88 seats available with 45 needed for a majority.

    SPD 32
    AfD 30
    BSW 14
    CDU 12

    https://wahlergebnisse.brandenburg.de/12/500/20240922/landtagswahl_land/ergebnisse.html
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,226
    'Starmer eyes ex-Tory minister David Gauke for sentencing review role'
    https://x.com/ObserverUK/status/1837559809912238280
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,255
    Andy_JS said:

    Final seats allocation in Brandenburg. 88 seats available with 45 needed for a majority.

    SPD 32
    AfD 30
    BSW 14
    CDU 12

    https://wahlergebnisse.brandenburg.de/12/500/20240922/landtagswahl_land/ergebnisse.html

    So that’s Centrist 44, Loonies 44
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,190

    RobD said:

    Roger said:

    RobD said:

    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    Boring alert! The same 4 or 5 dreary posters are still posting the same dross they have been for the last several days. I came on here because I was interested in the US elections. I guess others did too. Can't the obsessives have a separate thread?

    Unfortunately for you this is the leading story in the UK media and when even Labour mps and unions are aghast trying to close down the story because you are upset by it will nor work

    If its the biggest story you should find lots of places to read about it and you can write letters at the bottom of the page with like minded obsessives. This is supposed to be about the US elections and people like you are making it unreadable which is why only the usual five or six terminally dull are taking part
    Typical lefty - hates the story so try to shut it down

    So no @Roger you will not silence me or other posters in discussing the leadng political story of the day

    I don't think anyone gives a shit whether she got a ticket to see Taylor Swift. Are you suggesting she bought influence? Has no one ever given you a ticket to a concert or a theatre or a film or a football match? Really?

    .......Probably not or you'd bore them to death and you'd spoil their evening
    Come off it, Roger. Someone gifting another private citizen something is not the same as gifting a member of the cabinet or shadow cabinet.
    Really? If you heard that Bridget Phillipson's daughter had an interest in brass bands and someone from the Treorchy male voice choir asked her to come to a concert in Penmaenmawr would you consider it a big deal? You have obviously never worked where these sort of social interactions take place.
    Well, yes, because gifting is a way of buying influence regardless of who is doing it.
    LOL
    This place is f*****' insane.

    The hyperbole over Taylor Swift tickets and a box at the Emirates is being painted as substantially more corrupt than other freebies available to members of other parties, and more particularly genuine instances of industrial scale corruption. Corruption like PPE fast lane contracts, like bestowing seats in the House of Lords to the sons of KGB spies, a spy who's bunga, bunga party a serving Foreign Secretary without their close protection unit attended, or taking a ten grand donation on behalf of the Conservative Party for overruling legitimate objections to Richard Desmond's planning applications.

    Oh and why is it OK for Frank Hester to single -handedly bankroll the Conservative Party and Alii cannot buy Mrs Starmer a frock or throw a lavish birthday party for a friend?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,226
    edited September 22
    Leon said:

    TomW said:

    Leon said:

    Drinks with an old lefty friend tonight

    I was expecting either a mildly sturdy defence or a "whatever, early days, the Tories were worse" - basically MEH

    But no. He expressed absolute contempt and anger at Starmer and Co. This has cut through, even with loyal London lefites. His main complaint was the "naivety and stupidity". I would add the "greed" but still. Impact

    Starmer has to be the most charmless pm ever. Yes Major was boring but you felt there was humanity there. With Starmer there is a void of
    nothingness.
    Yes, indeed

    As my mate and I agreed, the problem is Starmer hasn't got the charm - Blair - or the humour - Boris - to switch things around. He is a charmless humourless fuckwit who seems like a massively over-promoted middle-manager and with zero ideas as to how to fix the country. There is no there, there

    I dunno how Labour gets out of this. They are gonna lose badly in 2028-9 to a Reform Tory coalition, is my expectation
    I wouldn't be sure, the LDs will likely hold the bluewall against a Jenrick or Badenoch led Tory Party even if the Tories and Farage's Reform regain the redwall and most Leave voting marginal seats that voted for Boris in 2019 but went Labour in July.

    So at worst for Starmer Labour it ends up a hung parliament, probably with the LDs holding the balance of power
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 49,586

    RobD said:

    Roger said:

    RobD said:

    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    Boring alert! The same 4 or 5 dreary posters are still posting the same dross they have been for the last several days. I came on here because I was interested in the US elections. I guess others did too. Can't the obsessives have a separate thread?

    Unfortunately for you this is the leading story in the UK media and when even Labour mps and unions are aghast trying to close down the story because you are upset by it will nor work

    If its the biggest story you should find lots of places to read about it and you can write letters at the bottom of the page with like minded obsessives. This is supposed to be about the US elections and people like you are making it unreadable which is why only the usual five or six terminally dull are taking part
    Typical lefty - hates the story so try to shut it down

    So no @Roger you will not silence me or other posters in discussing the leadng political story of the day

    I don't think anyone gives a shit whether she got a ticket to see Taylor Swift. Are you suggesting she bought influence? Has no one ever given you a ticket to a concert or a theatre or a film or a football match? Really?

    .......Probably not or you'd bore them to death and you'd spoil their evening
    Come off it, Roger. Someone gifting another private citizen something is not the same as gifting a member of the cabinet or shadow cabinet.
    Really? If you heard that Bridget Phillipson's daughter had an interest in brass bands and someone from the Treorchy male voice choir asked her to come to a concert in Penmaenmawr would you consider it a big deal? You have obviously never worked where these sort of social interactions take place.
    Well, yes, because gifting is a way of buying influence regardless of who is doing it.
    LOL
    This place is f*****' insane.

    The hyperbole over Taylor Swift tickets and a box at the Emirates is being painted as substantially more corrupt than other freebies available to members of other parties, and more particularly genuine instances of industrial scale corruption. Corruption like PPE fast lane contracts, like bestowing seats in the House of Lords to the sons of KGB spies, a spy who's bunga, bunga party a serving Foreign Secretary without their close protection unit attended, or taking a ten grand donation on behalf of the Conservative Party for overruling legitimate objections to Richard Desmond's planning applications.

    Oh and why is it OK for Frank Hester to single -handedly bankroll the Conservative Party and Alii cannot buy Mrs Starmer a frock or throw a lavish birthday party for a friend?
    It depends whether you think getting 23.7% or less at the next election is the target.
This discussion has been closed.