Have we done Starmer's uncle was on the Belgrano yet?
It’ll be bigger than RAF gate than last week.
Fair play to BigG and Sky News. They have got all the big calls right; Currygate, Goonergate, RAFgate and TaylorSwiftgate*.
*Although Jenrick just got a pasting on LBC for TaylorSwiftgate.
What on God's green Earth is RAFgate?
Is this more or less world-shattering than Swiftgate and Currygate?
Starmer was criticised last week by Big G for not praising the RAF pilots who shot down the Iranian missiles headed for Iran because Starmer didn't want to antagonise his left.
Turns out the RAF didn't take part in shooting down any missiles, turns out we gave other military and intelligence support which Starmer did praise
Have we done Starmer's uncle was on the Belgrano yet?
It’ll be bigger than RAF gate than last week.
Fair play to BigG and Sky News. They have got all the big calls right; Currygate, Goonergate, RAFgate and TaylorSwiftgate*.
*Although Jenrick just got a pasting on LBC for TaylorSwiftgate.
And you, seemingly, will defend anyone-but-Tories over everything. No-one ever does anything wrong; unless they're Tories, in which case they're automagically guilty.
Here you go again. As far as I am aware other than a late submission, Starmer has done nothing contrary to the rules. Now whether the rules are inappropriate and Starmer is a hypocrite are pertinent but different questions.
I believe one of the current Tory candidates failed to acknowledge his wife's free tickets to the Women's World Cup in Sydney. I don't care about that. I don't care about Mrs Bamford paying for Johnson's home delivered dinner or wallpaper paid for by Lord Brownlow. Johnson by the way complained of Starmer's greedy freebies just yesterday. What I do care about is PPE contract fast lanes and Foreign Secretaries attending Bunga Bunga Parties with KGB officers and over ruling planning in favour of Richard Desmond. One is froth, one is corruption.
When I defend non-Conservative corruption you will have a point.
Have we done Starmer's uncle was on the Belgrano yet?
It’ll be bigger than RAF gate than last week.
Fair play to BigG and Sky News. They have got all the big calls right; Currygate, Goonergate, RAFgate and TaylorSwiftgate*.
*Although Jenrick just got a pasting on LBC for TaylorSwiftgate.
And you, seemingly, will defend anyone-but-Tories over everything. No-one ever does anything wrong; unless they're Tories, in which case they're automagically guilty.
Here you go again. As far as I am aware other than a late submission, Starmer has done nothing contrary to the rules. Now whether the rules are inappropriate and Starmer is a hypocrite are pertinent but different questions.
I believe one of the current Tory candidates failed to acknowledge his wife's free tickets to the Women's World Cup in Sydney. I don't care about that. I don't care about Mrs Bamford paying for Johnson's home delivered dinner or wallpaper paid for by Lord Brownlow. Johnson by the way complained of Starmer's greedy freebies just yesterday. What I do care about is PPE contract fast lanes and Foreign Secretaries attending Bunga Bunga Parties with KGB officers and over ruling planning in favour of Richard Desmond. One is froth, one is corruption.
When I defend non-Conservative corruption you will have a point.
The problem is with seeing corruption whenever a Conservative breathes, yet you seem to ignore everything by everyone else. As you show in your very post with your look-Tories! paragraph.
When it's a Tory, you see wrong-doing everywhere. Yet you excuse Labour. You don't defend 'non-Conservative corruption' because you don't see it; whilst every Tory is corrupt.
If these claims were being made about a Tory, you would be all over them.
Have we done Starmer's uncle was on the Belgrano yet?
It’ll be bigger than RAF gate than last week.
Fair play to BigG and Sky News. They have got all the big calls right; Currygate, Goonergate, RAFgate and TaylorSwiftgate*.
*Although Jenrick just got a pasting on LBC for TaylorSwiftgate.
And you, seemingly, will defend anyone-but-Tories over everything. No-one ever does anything wrong; unless they're Tories, in which case they're automagically guilty.
Here you go again. As far as I am aware other than a late submission, Starmer has done nothing contrary to the rules. Now whether the rules are inappropriate and Starmer is a hypocrite are pertinent but different questions.
I believe one of the current Tory candidates failed to acknowledge his wife's free tickets to the Women's World Cup in Sydney. I don't care about that. I don't care about Mrs Bamford paying for Johnson's home delivered dinner or wallpaper paid for by Lord Brownlow. Johnson by the way complained of Starmer's greedy freebies just yesterday. What I do care about is PPE contract fast lanes and Foreign Secretaries attending Bunga Bunga Parties with KGB officers and over ruling planning in favour of Richard Desmond. One is froth, one is corruption.
When I defend non-Conservative corruption you will have a point.
Have we done Starmer's uncle was on the Belgrano yet?
It’ll be bigger than RAF gate than last week.
Fair play to BigG and Sky News. They have got all the big calls right; Currygate, Goonergate, RAFgate and TaylorSwiftgate*.
*Although Jenrick just got a pasting on LBC for TaylorSwiftgate.
And you, seemingly, will defend anyone-but-Tories over everything. No-one ever does anything wrong; unless they're Tories, in which case they're automagically guilty.
Here you go again. As far as I am aware other than a late submission, Starmer has done nothing contrary to the rules. Now whether the rules are inappropriate and Starmer is a hypocrite are pertinent but different questions.
I believe one of the current Tory candidates failed to acknowledge his wife's free tickets to the Women's World Cup in Sydney. I don't care about that. I don't care about Mrs Bamford paying for Johnson's home delivered dinner or wallpaper paid for by Lord Brownlow. Johnson by the way complained of Starmer's greedy freebies just yesterday. What I do care about is PPE contract fast lanes and Foreign Secretaries attending Bunga Bunga Parties with KGB officers and over ruling planning in favour of Richard Desmond. One is froth, one is corruption.
When I defend non-Conservative corruption you will have a point.
The problem is with seeing corruption whenever a Conservative breathes, yet you seem to ignore everything by everyone else. As you show in your very post with your look-Tories! paragraph.
When it's a Tory, you see wrong-doing everywhere. Yet you excuse Labour. You don't defend 'non-Conservative corruption' because you don't see it; whilst every Tory is corrupt.
If these claims were being made about a Tory, you would be all over them.
Did you read my post?
RichardDesmondgate is not comparable to Aliigate. Wallpapergate is comparable to Aliigate and I don't care about either.
In case anyone wants to know why “Miss Piggy” is trending, it’s the nickname of the US government’s atmospheric research plane which is currently having their definition of “fun”, going into the washing-machine that is Milton just off the Florida coast.
Those pilots and crew have rather large balls. God speed.
Or, if you read other places, the tinfoil-hatters have it that they're somehow causing, or powering up, the hurricane.
But yes, the guys (and gals?) in those planes are braver than I am. It's also interesting that it's a prop-driven airplane rather than a jet. expense, or are prop-driven planes less susceptible to such violent weather effects (flameouts?)
Good question. They’re turbine-engined, but not sure if having a prop rather than a fan on the front makes it more or less likely to flameout out with a deluge of water when flying in thick cloud. Perhaps older engines have more tolerance for poor conditions, as opposed to modern engines built to a spec and designed to fail 1% outside that spec.
More likely is that they built these aircraft decades ago, they have a million grandfather rights, and trying to build and certify something new would be close to impossible in the current regulatory regime regardless of cost.
I've not followed this contest in detail but would comment that Jenrick came across poorly on TV. He imitates Cameron's attempts to project authority, but the promises are to do all the stuff that the same people have just failed to do for the last 14 years. If the aim is to target reform voters, that will be the rebuttal. I have a sense that Badenoch would make more progress in terms of creating something new that appeals to younger voters; a reinvention of the conservative party, rather than just a tweaked 'business as usual', I suppose the key to success is to make her gaffes part of her political style rather than evidence of weakness.
Jenrick actually has the ideas on building new affordable homes, controlling immigration etc.
All Badenoch wants is a war on woke and a war with the civil service which will be toxic to most younger voters
Jenrick was about as much use as a fart in a spacesuit when he was Housing Secretary. He's remembered by leaseholders (of which there are 4.77 million in the country) as the man who presided over a complete cock up on remediation post-grenfell, leading to distressing bills, EWS 1 form complications and other disasters that led to a complete upending of people's lives, a gumming up of the property market and slump in values.
Here's a good takedown of Jenrick's calamitous time as Housing Secretary by a journalist who writes for Inside Housing on his personal substack:
I supported Tom Tugendhat for the Tory leadership until he was knocked out today. I will vote for Rob Jenrick tomorrow. My party needs to be unsparing in its analysis of why we lost and what we must do next. Rob has shown his willingness to do that, so he has my full support."
Indeed, punters can say what they want but most Tugendhat backers I know are backing Jenrick or Cleverly.
Tim Montgomerie has also now switched from Tugendhat to Jenrick, given Badenoch was already behind Jenrick in the last round she urgently needs more Tugendhat backers, especially as Cleverly may also lend some votes to Jenrick to knock her out https://x.com/montie/status/1843944885306732980
Cleverly won't lend any votes - he will want to be seen as the clear leader amongst MPs, and dare the membership to vote the other way.
You don't know the members that well, there's still loads of them that are seething about Liz Truss being forced to resign and Rishi being installed without their (our) consent. Cleverly shouldn't be banking on the members doing him any favours, he'll need to win every single one of their votes.
At least they will have been placated when he did as asked and secured that cherished election victory that was so central to his bid.
If the members had elected him instead of Truss from the off I think we'd have ended up with a hung parliament as the Tories would have held on to their economic trust rating that Liz Truss threw away. Voters put up with a lot of shit if they think you will keep them in their jobs and a roof over their heads.
It was also the process of defenestrating Truss, so soon after the members had elected her, that gave Reform the first boost to their opinion poll scores.
If Sunak had been elected from the off then Reform may have remained moribund.
Reform are not a reaction to Truss’s defenestration. To Johnson’s, maybe.
I can see why you would say that, but the evidence suggests otherwise. Reform opinion poll scores are flat through 2022, with the highest at 5%, unmoved when Johnson announced his resignation, or Truss took over.
Immediately after Sunak takes over they score 6% in a YouGov, then 9% in a YouGov one month later. 5% is by this point looking like their lower bound with all pollsters, besides dear old Ipsos who still had them on 2%.
I supported Tom Tugendhat for the Tory leadership until he was knocked out today. I will vote for Rob Jenrick tomorrow. My party needs to be unsparing in its analysis of why we lost and what we must do next. Rob has shown his willingness to do that, so he has my full support."
Indeed, punters can say what they want but most Tugendhat backers I know are backing Jenrick or Cleverly.
Tim Montgomerie has also now switched from Tugendhat to Jenrick, given Badenoch was already behind Jenrick in the last round she urgently needs more Tugendhat backers, especially as Cleverly may also lend some votes to Jenrick to knock her out https://x.com/montie/status/1843944885306732980
Cleverly won't lend any votes - he will want to be seen as the clear leader amongst MPs, and dare the membership to vote the other way.
You don't know the members that well, there's still loads of them that are seething about Liz Truss being forced to resign and Rishi being installed without their (our) consent. Cleverly shouldn't be banking on the members doing him any favours, he'll need to win every single one of their votes.
At least they will have been placated when he did as asked and secured that cherished election victory that was so central to his bid.
Is the current membership the same as the previous membership or have a lot of the Boris fans and Brexiteers allowed their subscriptions to lapse?
The vast increase in the Reform membership might indicate that, but I don't see why it wouldn't have lapsed a fair bit in whatever remoaner faction there is too. People like BigG.
Unpopular opinion on the test. We need the occasional batting wicket borefest draw. Modern test matches are usually done in 3-4 days and I think they’re giving bowlers an easy ride. It develops bowlers’ skill to have to toil in hard conditions and winkle out a wicket from time to time. It also tests captains in different ways.
Plus it’s great for batsmen’s test averages. A nice occasional top up opportunity.
The Rest is Entertainment looks at Boris's new book and comparing it with other PMs' memoirs. Apparently some people at Harper Collins think it will sell as well as Prince Harry's, which sold 400,000 in a week. There's also a special edition based on fantasy novels. £2 million advance and £1 million from the Mail. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6331qRVJiwo
TRiE seems to have scooped The Rest is Politics and The Rest is Football.
40k subscribers vs ~300k for the other two, though I'm not sure what it has to do with football. I'd guess they are trying boost subscribers on the tiddler, then may re-run it on the bigger podcasts.
Or alternatively could run one with a different focus.
Whatever happens, it's all money in Gary Lineker's pocket - assuming the network is profitable.
Have we done Starmer's uncle was on the Belgrano yet?
It’ll be bigger than RAF gate than last week.
Fair play to BigG and Sky News. They have got all the big calls right; Currygate, Goonergate, RAFgate and TaylorSwiftgate*.
*Although Jenrick just got a pasting on LBC for TaylorSwiftgate.
And you, seemingly, will defend anyone-but-Tories over everything. No-one ever does anything wrong; unless they're Tories, in which case they're automagically guilty.
Here you go again. As far as I am aware other than a late submission, Starmer has done nothing contrary to the rules. Now whether the rules are inappropriate and Starmer is a hypocrite are pertinent but different questions.
I believe one of the current Tory candidates failed to acknowledge his wife's free tickets to the Women's World Cup in Sydney. I don't care about that. I don't care about Mrs Bamford paying for Johnson's home delivered dinner or wallpaper paid for by Lord Brownlow. Johnson by the way complained of Starmer's greedy freebies just yesterday. What I do care about is PPE contract fast lanes and Foreign Secretaries attending Bunga Bunga Parties with KGB officers and over ruling planning in favour of Richard Desmond. One is froth, one is corruption.
When I defend non-Conservative corruption you will have a point.
Have we done Starmer's uncle was on the Belgrano yet?
It’ll be bigger than RAF gate than last week.
Fair play to BigG and Sky News. They have got all the big calls right; Currygate, Goonergate, RAFgate and TaylorSwiftgate*.
*Although Jenrick just got a pasting on LBC for TaylorSwiftgate.
And you, seemingly, will defend anyone-but-Tories over everything. No-one ever does anything wrong; unless they're Tories, in which case they're automagically guilty.
Here you go again. As far as I am aware other than a late submission, Starmer has done nothing contrary to the rules. Now whether the rules are inappropriate and Starmer is a hypocrite are pertinent but different questions.
I believe one of the current Tory candidates failed to acknowledge his wife's free tickets to the Women's World Cup in Sydney. I don't care about that. I don't care about Mrs Bamford paying for Johnson's home delivered dinner or wallpaper paid for by Lord Brownlow. Johnson by the way complained of Starmer's greedy freebies just yesterday. What I do care about is PPE contract fast lanes and Foreign Secretaries attending Bunga Bunga Parties with KGB officers and over ruling planning in favour of Richard Desmond. One is froth, one is corruption.
When I defend non-Conservative corruption you will have a point.
The problem is with seeing corruption whenever a Conservative breathes, yet you seem to ignore everything by everyone else. As you show in your very post with your look-Tories! paragraph.
When it's a Tory, you see wrong-doing everywhere. Yet you excuse Labour. You don't defend 'non-Conservative corruption' because you don't see it; whilst every Tory is corrupt.
If these claims were being made about a Tory, you would be all over them.
Did you read my post?
RichardDesmondgate is not comparable to Aliigate. Wallpapergate is comparable to Aliigate and I don't care about either.
Of course I read your post.
The problem is in your 'not comparable'; which is where, I fear, you are going wrong.
Add to this private parking fines and TV licensing.
Kafka would be proud.
It's a nightmare.
A a few years ago I had a ticket from St Pancras to Sheffield but due to an incident the lines were closed and there was a ticket acceptance in place.
I went from next door at King's Cross to Doncaster on LNER then Doncaster to Sheffield on a Northern service.
The conductor on the LNER service was fine, no issues.
On the Northern leg I was threatened will all sorts as I didn't have a valid ticket for Doncaster to Sheffield, conductor threatened me with all of the above and only backed down when I showed him Northern's social media account which said there was a ticket acceptance in place.
Our railway system is broken at a fundamental level. There is a presumption that customers are criminals - so many operators simply assume that any infraction is purposeful and deliberate. Despite the vast multiplicity of stupid tickets and rules.
The case there on Twitter is brilliant. Northern sell him a ticket and then prosecute him for using it. Madness on stilts, yet you still get wazzocks banging on about "terms and conditions.'" No luv, they *sold* the ticket. So if anyone is in breach it is the train company.
And TSE's example? Happens so much. I read about other examples of mendacious idiocy where grippers and revenue inspectors seem almost giddy to have caught a "criminal".
Unpopular opinion on the test. We need the occasional batting wicket borefest draw. Modern test matches are usually done in 3-4 days and I think they’re giving bowlers an easy ride. It develops bowlers’ skill to have to toil in hard conditions and winkle out a wicket from time to time. It also tests captains in different ways.
Plus it’s great for batsmen’s test averages. A nice occasional top up opportunity.
Also, draws aren't boring.
If we lose the draw cricket will no longer quite be cricket.
Have we done Starmer's uncle was on the Belgrano yet?
It’ll be bigger than RAF gate than last week.
Fair play to BigG and Sky News. They have got all the big calls right; Currygate, Goonergate, RAFgate and TaylorSwiftgate*.
*Although Jenrick just got a pasting on LBC for TaylorSwiftgate.
What on God's green Earth is RAFgate?
Is this more or less world-shattering than Swiftgate and Currygate?
Starmer was criticised last week by Big G for not praising the RAF pilots who shot down the Iranian missiles headed for Iran because Starmer didn't want to antagonise his left.
Turns out the RAF didn't take part in shooting down any missiles, turns out we gave other military and intelligence support which Starmer did praise
Ah, thanks for the explanation. I can see why Sir Keir will now be sleeping uneasy, what with BigG on his afterburner.
Have we done Starmer's uncle was on the Belgrano yet?
It’ll be bigger than RAF gate than last week.
Fair play to BigG and Sky News. They have got all the big calls right; Currygate, Goonergate, RAFgate and TaylorSwiftgate*.
*Although Jenrick just got a pasting on LBC for TaylorSwiftgate.
And you, seemingly, will defend anyone-but-Tories over everything. No-one ever does anything wrong; unless they're Tories, in which case they're automagically guilty.
Here you go again. As far as I am aware other than a late submission, Starmer has done nothing contrary to the rules. Now whether the rules are inappropriate and Starmer is a hypocrite are pertinent but different questions.
I believe one of the current Tory candidates failed to acknowledge his wife's free tickets to the Women's World Cup in Sydney. I don't care about that. I don't care about Mrs Bamford paying for Johnson's home delivered dinner or wallpaper paid for by Lord Brownlow. Johnson by the way complained of Starmer's greedy freebies just yesterday. What I do care about is PPE contract fast lanes and Foreign Secretaries attending Bunga Bunga Parties with KGB officers and over ruling planning in favour of Richard Desmond. One is froth, one is corruption.
When I defend non-Conservative corruption you will have a point.
Have we done Starmer's uncle was on the Belgrano yet?
It’ll be bigger than RAF gate than last week.
Fair play to BigG and Sky News. They have got all the big calls right; Currygate, Goonergate, RAFgate and TaylorSwiftgate*.
*Although Jenrick just got a pasting on LBC for TaylorSwiftgate.
And you, seemingly, will defend anyone-but-Tories over everything. No-one ever does anything wrong; unless they're Tories, in which case they're automagically guilty.
Here you go again. As far as I am aware other than a late submission, Starmer has done nothing contrary to the rules. Now whether the rules are inappropriate and Starmer is a hypocrite are pertinent but different questions.
I believe one of the current Tory candidates failed to acknowledge his wife's free tickets to the Women's World Cup in Sydney. I don't care about that. I don't care about Mrs Bamford paying for Johnson's home delivered dinner or wallpaper paid for by Lord Brownlow. Johnson by the way complained of Starmer's greedy freebies just yesterday. What I do care about is PPE contract fast lanes and Foreign Secretaries attending Bunga Bunga Parties with KGB officers and over ruling planning in favour of Richard Desmond. One is froth, one is corruption.
When I defend non-Conservative corruption you will have a point.
The problem is with seeing corruption whenever a Conservative breathes, yet you seem to ignore everything by everyone else. As you show in your very post with your look-Tories! paragraph.
When it's a Tory, you see wrong-doing everywhere. Yet you excuse Labour. You don't defend 'non-Conservative corruption' because you don't see it; whilst every Tory is corrupt.
If these claims were being made about a Tory, you would be all over them.
Did you read my post?
RichardDesmondgate is not comparable to Aliigate. Wallpapergate is comparable to Aliigate and I don't care about either.
Of course I read your post.
The problem is in your 'not comparable'; which is where, I fear, you are going wrong.
Do you genuinely believe that Alli's bankrolling of Starmer is equitable to Johnson visiting Lebedev's villa or Ministers's relatives making pots of money on dodgy PPE or Jenrick accepting a (pathetic) £10,000 donation to the Conservative Party for interfering with planning decisions?
Have we done Starmer's uncle was on the Belgrano yet?
It’ll be bigger than RAF gate than last week.
Fair play to BigG and Sky News. They have got all the big calls right; Currygate, Goonergate, RAFgate and TaylorSwiftgate*.
*Although Jenrick just got a pasting on LBC for TaylorSwiftgate.
What on God's green Earth is RAFgate?
Is this more or less world-shattering than Swiftgate and Currygate?
Starmer was criticised last week by Big G for not praising the RAF pilots who shot down the Iranian missiles headed for Iran because Starmer didn't want to antagonise his left.
Turns out the RAF didn't take part in shooting down any missiles, turns out we gave other military and intelligence support which Starmer did praise
And I apologised for my error re the missiles, but did then quote the full statement from the Ministry of Defence
Sometimes we get it wrong and recognise it
I was impressed with Starmer’s response on the Falklands today at PMQs and certainly there can be no reason to doubt he supports the Falklands
Have we done Starmer's uncle was on the Belgrano yet?
It’ll be bigger than RAF gate than last week.
Fair play to BigG and Sky News. They have got all the big calls right; Currygate, Goonergate, RAFgate and TaylorSwiftgate*.
*Although Jenrick just got a pasting on LBC for TaylorSwiftgate.
And you, seemingly, will defend anyone-but-Tories over everything. No-one ever does anything wrong; unless they're Tories, in which case they're automagically guilty.
Here you go again. As far as I am aware other than a late submission, Starmer has done nothing contrary to the rules. Now whether the rules are inappropriate and Starmer is a hypocrite are pertinent but different questions.
I believe one of the current Tory candidates failed to acknowledge his wife's free tickets to the Women's World Cup in Sydney. I don't care about that. I don't care about Mrs Bamford paying for Johnson's home delivered dinner or wallpaper paid for by Lord Brownlow. Johnson by the way complained of Starmer's greedy freebies just yesterday. What I do care about is PPE contract fast lanes and Foreign Secretaries attending Bunga Bunga Parties with KGB officers and over ruling planning in favour of Richard Desmond. One is froth, one is corruption.
When I defend non-Conservative corruption you will have a point.
Have we done Starmer's uncle was on the Belgrano yet?
It’ll be bigger than RAF gate than last week.
Fair play to BigG and Sky News. They have got all the big calls right; Currygate, Goonergate, RAFgate and TaylorSwiftgate*.
*Although Jenrick just got a pasting on LBC for TaylorSwiftgate.
And you, seemingly, will defend anyone-but-Tories over everything. No-one ever does anything wrong; unless they're Tories, in which case they're automagically guilty.
Here you go again. As far as I am aware other than a late submission, Starmer has done nothing contrary to the rules. Now whether the rules are inappropriate and Starmer is a hypocrite are pertinent but different questions.
I believe one of the current Tory candidates failed to acknowledge his wife's free tickets to the Women's World Cup in Sydney. I don't care about that. I don't care about Mrs Bamford paying for Johnson's home delivered dinner or wallpaper paid for by Lord Brownlow. Johnson by the way complained of Starmer's greedy freebies just yesterday. What I do care about is PPE contract fast lanes and Foreign Secretaries attending Bunga Bunga Parties with KGB officers and over ruling planning in favour of Richard Desmond. One is froth, one is corruption.
When I defend non-Conservative corruption you will have a point.
The problem is with seeing corruption whenever a Conservative breathes, yet you seem to ignore everything by everyone else. As you show in your very post with your look-Tories! paragraph.
When it's a Tory, you see wrong-doing everywhere. Yet you excuse Labour. You don't defend 'non-Conservative corruption' because you don't see it; whilst every Tory is corrupt.
If these claims were being made about a Tory, you would be all over them.
Did you read my post?
RichardDesmondgate is not comparable to Aliigate. Wallpapergate is comparable to Aliigate and I don't care about either.
Of course I read your post.
The problem is in your 'not comparable'; which is where, I fear, you are going wrong.
Do you genuinely believe that Alli's bankrolling Starmer is equitable to Johnson visiting Lebedev's villa or Ministers's relatives making pots of money on dodgy PPE or Jenrick accepting a (pathetic) £10,000 donation to the Conservative Party for interfering with planning decisions?
It’s not the offence, it’s the hypocrisy.
Starmer was telling everyone he’d be whiter than white, then spent almost every weekend at the football in the company of Euro Prem League lobbyists, and he and many of his ministers turned up at pop concerts and nightclubs, and had ridiculous amounts thrown at them for clothes.
I supported Tom Tugendhat for the Tory leadership until he was knocked out today. I will vote for Rob Jenrick tomorrow. My party needs to be unsparing in its analysis of why we lost and what we must do next. Rob has shown his willingness to do that, so he has my full support."
Indeed, punters can say what they want but most Tugendhat backers I know are backing Jenrick or Cleverly.
Tim Montgomerie has also now switched from Tugendhat to Jenrick, given Badenoch was already behind Jenrick in the last round she urgently needs more Tugendhat backers, especially as Cleverly may also lend some votes to Jenrick to knock her out https://x.com/montie/status/1843944885306732980
Cleverly won't lend any votes - he will want to be seen as the clear leader amongst MPs, and dare the membership to vote the other way.
You don't know the members that well, there's still loads of them that are seething about Liz Truss being forced to resign and Rishi being installed without their (our) consent. Cleverly shouldn't be banking on the members doing him any favours, he'll need to win every single one of their votes.
At least they will have been placated when he did as asked and secured that cherished election victory that was so central to his bid.
If the members had elected him instead of Truss from the off I think we'd have ended up with a hung parliament as the Tories would have held on to their economic trust rating that Liz Truss threw away. Voters put up with a lot of shit if they think you will keep them in their jobs and a roof over their heads.
It was also the process of defenestrating Truss, so soon after the members had elected her, that gave Reform the first boost to their opinion poll scores.
If Sunak had been elected from the off then Reform may have remained moribund.
Reform are not a reaction to Truss’s defenestration. To Johnson’s, maybe.
I think it's both. She came into power promising to do all of the things that Reform were saying they'd do wrt tax cuts and then she got ejected by the MPs so the chunk of Tory voters who aligned with that began to vote Reform after that. If she had not been voted in they'd never have had that impetus in the first place. Far, far fewer voters would have gone over without Truss showing that the Tories weren't going to implement policies for Reform.
I think also that the conspiracy that her failure as PM was a coup organised by left-wing bankers was then back-projected onto Johnson's removal as well, since Johnson is a more popular figure than Truss as a martyr.
But this reaction didn't happen until after Truss was given the heave. That was what kicked it off.
Add to this private parking fines and TV licensing.
Kafka would be proud.
It's a nightmare.
A a few years ago I had a ticket from St Pancras to Sheffield but due to an incident the lines were closed and there was a ticket acceptance in place.
I went from next door at King's Cross to Doncaster on LNER then Doncaster to Sheffield on a Northern service.
The conductor on the LNER service was fine, no issues.
On the Northern leg I was threatened will all sorts as I didn't have a valid ticket for Doncaster to Sheffield, conductor threatened me with all of the above and only backed down when I showed him Northern's social media account which said there was a ticket acceptance in place.
Our railway system is broken at a fundamental level. There is a presumption that customers are criminals - so many operators simply assume that any infraction is purposeful and deliberate. Despite the vast multiplicity of stupid tickets and rules.
The case there on Twitter is brilliant. Northern sell him a ticket and then prosecute him for using it. Madness on stilts, yet you still get wazzocks banging on about "terms and conditions.'" No luv, they *sold* the ticket. So if anyone is in breach it is the train company.
And TSE's example? Happens so much. I read about other examples of mendacious idiocy where grippers and revenue inspectors seem almost giddy to have caught a "criminal".
I recently had to travel from Reading to Swindon, by train, at 9:30. (For the benefit of non-Southerners, both Reading and Swindon are stations on the main GWR line from London Paddington to Bristol.) The ticket office explained to me (because I certainly didn't know!) that it was cheaper for me to buy tickets from Reading to Didcot and then Didcot to Swindon, rather than buy a direct ticket. If I was trying to get to somewhere exotic or interesting I could understand that split ticketing might be advantageous, but not when my destination is just two stations down the line. Full marks to the ticket office for noticing and telling me about it. The whole system is just daft.
If Kemi gets to the last two she wins If Kemi gets to the last two she wins If Kemi gets to the last two she wins If Kemi gets to the last two she wins If Kemi gets to the last two she wins
Is this a good time to remind you that I have a fiver on Kemi at 11/8 from several weeks ago?
Geneva is definitely a bit on the dull side. On the other hand, it's near to both Zurich anf the South of France, whence one can make up for it, and then get a boat onto Italy and Greece.
If Kemi gets to the last two she wins If Kemi gets to the last two she wins If Kemi gets to the last two she wins If Kemi gets to the last two she wins If Kemi gets to the last two she wins
Is this a good time to remind you that I have a fiver on Kemi at 11/8 from several weeks ago?
If Kemi gets to the last two she wins If Kemi gets to the last two she wins If Kemi gets to the last two she wins If Kemi gets to the last two she wins If Kemi gets to the last two she wins
Is this a good time to remind you that I have a fiver on Kemi at 11/8 from several weeks ago?
I had Kemi tipped as the next LOTO on 4th July, lol!
Were Badenoch/Jenrick supporters voting for Cleverly yesterday and why? Perhaps to convince him he was in the final two and could 'lend' a few votes elsewhere. This really doesn't make much sense.
If Kemi gets to the last two she wins If Kemi gets to the last two she wins If Kemi gets to the last two she wins If Kemi gets to the last two she wins If Kemi gets to the last two she wins
Is this a good time to remind you that I have a fiver on Kemi at 11/8 from several weeks ago?
Suspect there will be another Tory contest before the next GE. Neither of those two have a hope in hell and Kemi, who will obviously win, will prove as toxic as Truss I expect.
Gutted for Cleverly, he was the only realistic candidate who had a chance albeit small of ever becoming PM.
Suspect there will be another Tory contest before the next GE. Neither of those two have a hope in hell and Kemi, who will obviously win, will prove as toxic as Truss I expect.
Gutted for Cleverly, he was the only realistic candidate who had a chance albeit small of ever becoming PM.
The obvious approach for the Tories was to go for Tugendhat, have 2-3 boring years in opposition, then reassess.
Comments
Turns out the RAF didn't take part in shooting down any missiles, turns out we gave other military and intelligence support which Starmer did praise
When it's a Tory, you see wrong-doing everywhere. Yet you excuse Labour. You don't defend 'non-Conservative corruption' because you don't see it; whilst every Tory is corrupt.
If these claims were being made about a Tory, you would be all over them.
My Apple Watch Series 10 detected my grandmother’s atrial fibrillation today using the ECG feature.
She’s now at the hospital and receiving the care she needs.
I still can’t believe it.
https://x.com/NikiasMolina/status/1843749096064164107
RichardDesmondgate is not comparable to Aliigate. Wallpapergate is comparable to Aliigate and I don't care about either.
More likely is that they built these aircraft decades ago, they have a million grandfather rights, and trying to build and certify something new would be close to impossible in the current regulatory regime regardless of cost.
https://www.businessinsider.in/Meet-the-Hurricane-Hunters-the-pilots-and-scientists-who-fly-into-hurricanes-like-Dorian-to-gather-data-for-forecasters/Meet-Miss-Piggy-one-of-NOAAs-two-Lockheed-WP-3D-Orion-Hurricane-Hunter-aircraft-/slideshow/70901627.cms
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_WP-3D_Orion
Here's a good takedown of Jenrick's calamitous time as Housing Secretary by a journalist who writes for Inside Housing on his personal substack:
https://peteapps.substack.com/p/robert-jenrick-was-the-worst-housing
Not only was he incompetent, he was callous and contemptuous, too.
That's at least 4.77m people who haven't forgotten, and wouldn't vote for him even if the alternative was a literal lettuce.
Immediately after Sunak takes over they score 6% in a YouGov, then 9% in a YouGov one month later. 5% is by this point looking like their lower bound with all pollsters, besides dear old Ipsos who still had them on 2%.
Or alternatively could run one with a different focus.
Whatever happens, it's all money in Gary Lineker's pocket - assuming the network is profitable.
The problem is in your 'not comparable'; which is where, I fear, you are going wrong.
The case there on Twitter is brilliant. Northern sell him a ticket and then prosecute him for using it. Madness on stilts, yet you still get wazzocks banging on about "terms and conditions.'" No luv, they *sold* the ticket. So if anyone is in breach it is the train company.
And TSE's example? Happens so much. I read about other examples of mendacious idiocy where grippers and revenue inspectors seem almost giddy to have caught a "criminal".
I hope she receives excellent treatment as I did
Sometimes we get it wrong and recognise it
I was impressed with Starmer’s response on the Falklands today at PMQs and certainly there can be no reason to doubt he supports the Falklands
Well, that would be 'exciting' wouldn't it?
Starmer was telling everyone he’d be whiter than white, then spent almost every weekend at the football in the company of Euro Prem League lobbyists, and he and many of his ministers turned up at pop concerts and nightclubs, and had ridiculous amounts thrown at them for clothes.
But this reaction didn't happen until after Truss was given the heave. That was what kicked it off.
It's makes the removal of WFP one of the smartest policies ever. 4D economics from Reeves.
Jenrick 41
Cleverly 37
ETA I see now.
The Tories have just committed hare kare.
What a choice for Tory party members!!!
If Kemi gets to the last two she wins
If Kemi gets to the last two she wins
If Kemi gets to the last two she wins
If Kemi gets to the last two she wins
Is this a good time to remind you that I have a fiver on Kemi at 11/8 from several weeks ago?
On the other hand, it's near to both Zurich anf the South of France, whence one can make up for it, and then get a boat onto Italy and Greece.
He should still be 14/1, Kemi’s got this with the members.
At least should be an interesting contest between them, I will vote for Jenrick but I expect Badenoch to win.
I expect Starmer and Davey will be feeling rather more pleased than Farage this afternoon though
Were Badenoch/Jenrick supporters voting for Cleverly yesterday and why? Perhaps to convince him he was in the final two and could 'lend' a few votes elsewhere. This really doesn't make much sense.
Ladbrokes have 'Republicans to win popular vote and Harris to win Presidency' combo, at 25/1.
Seems pretty unlikely to be, but those are nice odds if you think it might happen.
Was Cleverly too Cleverly by half?
How many Green seats in GE24?
If we ever shall meet, the beers are all on me.
https://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2024/10/01/is-kemi-kaze-badenoch-about-to-blow-an-18-lead/
But in this one? It's bonkers or bonkers. And this is before the two of them really start going after the membership and get Even More Bonkers.
One nation Tories: perhaps its time for a change of party?
Jenrick has so many disqualifying negatives.
Gutted for Cleverly, he was the only realistic candidate who had a chance albeit small of ever becoming PM.
On the other hand, she's slightly brighter, and also slightly more self-aware, than Truss.
Not my choice but just confirms politics is impossible to predict
https://polymarket.com/event/next-uk-leader-of-the-conservatives?tid=1728484117396