“Really fascinating looking at voting intention by life satisfaction: Both the Green Party and Reform do much better with people with lower life satisfaction, Labour is only convincingly ahead with people who rate their life satisfaction at 10/10” - Ed Hodgson https://x.com/edhodgsoned/status/1932102321796005937/photo/1
And Reform is well ahead among life's losers - those scoring 0/10. No other party comes close. It's a USP of sorts, but not one to admire.
They are people who are not satisfied with their life.
That does not make them necessarily losers. They will be a cross section of society.
As long as Reform is Farage then churn around him won't matter all that much in terms of perception of whether it's united. The impression that it is comes from the lack of evidence to the contrary (hence the hit this week with Yusuf).
But Reform can't always be just Farage and at that point people will start noticing the divisions, splits, resignations and arguments. At some point, Reform are going to have to have some proper policies too; they can't survive forever on opposition and cakeism.
I think we got a flavour of division with that silly question about the burqa.
And why is it a silly question?
Multiple Muslim countries have partial or total bans on the burqa: Tunisia, Morocco, Chad, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, etc. Are they evil and Islamophobic? Clearly not
So why have they done this? Because they understand islamism better than us, and they understand the dangerous attitudes that often come with the burqa/niqab
Whereas well meaning woke fools in the UK haven’t got a clue
Thanks @Leon. And @Cookie. This well meaning woke fool is not sure if he'd like to line up with some at least of the countries quoted. He's worked with people of all sorts of faiths; one or two have worn the burqa and he isn't comfortable with it, and he's especially unhappy with it in healthcare situations. But, and it's a big but, he's not in favour of bans. In his experience bans merely encourage people, and what we ought to be doing is educating people not to make it difficult to communicate with them, or them to communicate with others.
Fair enough, that’s an eloquent explanation of your feelings
However “asking about a burqa ban” is certainly not “a silly question” as you first said. It’s a totally legitimate inquiry
In Central Asia the ban on full face veils is often driven by women politicians and feminist activists. They cherish their relative freedom (one of the few positive legacies of the USSR) and have less than zero desire to be shrouded in these horrific garments
And they know that if they burqa/niqab are allowed a lot of conservative Islamic men WILL start pushing for his. For women to dress “more modestly”. And so their female freedoms will be eroded - as we have seen, tragically, in places like Iran
Point noted and taken about women in Central Asia supporting such bans and why. I don't understand what it is about Islam that drives such a repressive attitudes; I don't think it's suggested in the Qu'ran, is it? The same attitudes as some of those of St Paul.
Are you thinking of the St Paul who said (Galatians 3.28):
There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
“Really fascinating looking at voting intention by life satisfaction: Both the Green Party and Reform do much better with people with lower life satisfaction, Labour is only convincingly ahead with people who rate their life satisfaction at 10/10” - Ed Hodgson https://x.com/edhodgsoned/status/1932102321796005937/photo/1
And Reform is well ahead among life's losers - those scoring 0/10. No other party comes close. It's a USP of sorts, but not one to admire.
Lifes losers....you mean all those people not on six figure salaries
In the replies, Ed gives the breakdown of the distribution of people reporting life satisfaction values from 0-10 as follows:
So 0-4/10 is ~20% of the population. The other 80% will be mostly on fairly normal salaries - a six figure household income would put you in the top 20% of households by income.
Most have come to accept less. Reform are the next government because they know tories or labour or libdem don't have any plans to help them......good riddance to arseholes
“Really fascinating looking at voting intention by life satisfaction: Both the Green Party and Reform do much better with people with lower life satisfaction, Labour is only convincingly ahead with people who rate their life satisfaction at 10/10” - Ed Hodgson https://x.com/edhodgsoned/status/1932102321796005937/photo/1
And Reform is well ahead among life's losers - those scoring 0/10. No other party comes close. It's a USP of sorts, but not one to admire.
They are people who are not satisfied with their life.
That does not make them necessarily losers. They will be a cross section of society.
There were times in my long life when I was dissatisfied with my life. Indeed times when I was very dissatisfied. Equally there are times when I was very satisfied.
“Really fascinating looking at voting intention by life satisfaction: Both the Green Party and Reform do much better with people with lower life satisfaction, Labour is only convincingly ahead with people who rate their life satisfaction at 10/10” - Ed Hodgson https://x.com/edhodgsoned/status/1932102321796005937/photo/1
And Reform is well ahead among life's losers - those scoring 0/10. No other party comes close. It's a USP of sorts, but not one to admire.
They are people who are not satisfied with their life.
That does not make them necessarily losers. They will be a cross section of society.
There were times in my long life when I was dissatisfied with my life. Indeed times when I was very dissatisfied. Equally there are times when I was very satisfied.
Satisfaction however comes with its as good as it can be feels. There was a time I was satisfied...I was a high earner I could afford a lot of stuff like a house....now I cant so hell yes I am unsatisfied when almost half my pay goes on rent before bills
“Really fascinating looking at voting intention by life satisfaction: Both the Green Party and Reform do much better with people with lower life satisfaction, Labour is only convincingly ahead with people who rate their life satisfaction at 10/10” - Ed Hodgson https://x.com/edhodgsoned/status/1932102321796005937/photo/1
And Reform is well ahead among life's losers - those scoring 0/10. No other party comes close. It's a USP of sorts, but not one to admire.
The Labour Party was set up specifically to help people who were dissatisfied with life.
Re header: whether Reform or any other party are seen as united or not doesn't matter, but the actual degree to which they are united is really quite important from a betting perspective.
If Reform were to fracture then who knows where those votes might go.
For this reason Tories most seats is wandering into being a bet, and LDs most seats has long been a bet. (Greens most seats surely can't be a bet, although fracturing of other parties couldn't hurt them)
Re header: whether Reform or any other party are seen as united or not doesn't matter, but the actual degree to which they are united is really quite important from a betting perspective.
If Reform were to fracture then who knows where those votes might go.
For this reason Tories most seats is wandering into being a bet, and LDs most seats has long been a bet. (Greens most seats surely can't be a bet, although fracturing of other parties couldn't hurt them)
Agree. Reform is more a state of mind than a political party and hence it matters not whether they are united, fractured or have an image of a small boat or a rainbow flag as their logo. They are an indicator of how much people want to blame their own ills on "the other" together with a legitimate concern about the levels of immigration these past few years.
“Really fascinating looking at voting intention by life satisfaction: Both the Green Party and Reform do much better with people with lower life satisfaction, Labour is only convincingly ahead with people who rate their life satisfaction at 10/10” - Ed Hodgson https://x.com/edhodgsoned/status/1932102321796005937/photo/1
And Reform is well ahead among life's losers - those scoring 0/10. No other party comes close. It's a USP of sorts, but not one to admire.
Not so much losers as those who feel their life is bad. They may well be correct in this, the constant negativity of Reform eventually saps their souls, turning them into Gollum like creatures sulking in the dark, then emerging like Morlocks to inflict their misery on others.
“Really fascinating looking at voting intention by life satisfaction: Both the Green Party and Reform do much better with people with lower life satisfaction, Labour is only convincingly ahead with people who rate their life satisfaction at 10/10” - Ed Hodgson https://x.com/edhodgsoned/status/1932102321796005937/photo/1
And Reform is well ahead among life's losers - those scoring 0/10. No other party comes close. It's a USP of sorts, but not one to admire.
Not so much losers as those who feel their life is bad. They may well be correct in this, the constant negativity of Reform eventually saps their souls, turning them into Gollum like creatures sulking in the dark, then emerging like Morlocks to inflict their misery on others.
Why do you think it's that way round? More likely they feel negative in the first place and then decide to support Reform.
“Really fascinating looking at voting intention by life satisfaction: Both the Green Party and Reform do much better with people with lower life satisfaction, Labour is only convincingly ahead with people who rate their life satisfaction at 10/10” - Ed Hodgson https://x.com/edhodgsoned/status/1932102321796005937/photo/1
And Reform is well ahead among life's losers - those scoring 0/10. No other party comes close. It's a USP of sorts, but not one to admire.
Not so much losers as those who feel their life is bad. They may well be correct in this, the constant negativity of Reform eventually saps their souls, turning them into Gollum like creatures sulking in the dark, then emerging like Morlocks to inflict their misery on others.
“Really fascinating looking at voting intention by life satisfaction: Both the Green Party and Reform do much better with people with lower life satisfaction, Labour is only convincingly ahead with people who rate their life satisfaction at 10/10” - Ed Hodgson https://x.com/edhodgsoned/status/1932102321796005937/photo/1
And Reform is well ahead among life's losers - those scoring 0/10. No other party comes close. It's a USP of sorts, but not one to admire.
Not so much losers as those who feel their life is bad. They may well be correct in this, the constant negativity of Reform eventually saps their souls, turning them into Gollum like creatures sulking in the dark, then emerging like Morlocks to inflict their misery on others.
Like Brexit...
Brexit has certainly turned you into a miserable git.
“Really fascinating looking at voting intention by life satisfaction: Both the Green Party and Reform do much better with people with lower life satisfaction, Labour is only convincingly ahead with people who rate their life satisfaction at 10/10” - Ed Hodgson https://x.com/edhodgsoned/status/1932102321796005937/photo/1
And Reform is well ahead among life's losers - those scoring 0/10. No other party comes close. It's a USP of sorts, but not one to admire.
They are people who are not satisfied with their life.
That does not make them necessarily losers. They will be a cross section of society.
There were times in my long life when I was dissatisfied with my life. Indeed times when I was very dissatisfied. Equally there are times when I was very satisfied.
DNI Tulsi Gabbard repeats Putin’s talking points today, releasing an unhinged video where she claims that “political elites” want a nuclear war with Russia because they have sophisticated bomb shelters that will help them survive it.
“Really fascinating looking at voting intention by life satisfaction: Both the Green Party and Reform do much better with people with lower life satisfaction, Labour is only convincingly ahead with people who rate their life satisfaction at 10/10” - Ed Hodgson https://x.com/edhodgsoned/status/1932102321796005937/photo/1
And Reform is well ahead among life's losers - those scoring 0/10. No other party comes close. It's a USP of sorts, but not one to admire.
They are people who are not satisfied with their life.
That does not make them necessarily losers. They will be a cross section of society.
There were times in my long life when I was dissatisfied with my life. Indeed times when I was very dissatisfied. Equally there are times when I was very satisfied.
DNI Tulsi Gabbard repeats Putin’s talking points today, releasing an unhinged video where she claims that “political elites” want a nuclear war with Russia because they have sophisticated bomb shelters that will help them survive it.
Perhaps she's just leaking Trump's plans. He's obviously the US political elite these days, and he's quite clearly itching to go to condition orange (aka chaos).
“Really fascinating looking at voting intention by life satisfaction: Both the Green Party and Reform do much better with people with lower life satisfaction, Labour is only convincingly ahead with people who rate their life satisfaction at 10/10” - Ed Hodgson https://x.com/edhodgsoned/status/1932102321796005937/photo/1
And Reform is well ahead among life's losers - those scoring 0/10. No other party comes close. It's a USP of sorts, but not one to admire.
Not so much losers as those who feel their life is bad. They may well be correct in this, the constant negativity of Reform eventually saps their souls, turning them into Gollum like creatures sulking in the dark, then emerging like Morlocks to inflict their misery on others.
Why do you think it's that way round? More likely they feel negative in the first place and then decide to support Reform.
It is the other way round for most of them and I include myself here....every year our bills increase in actual pounds than our pay....why would we not feel negative....most of us for example unlike foxy don't have the luxury of doing less days because our pension was capped which as I remember he did. Hell most of us can't even give up the second or third job without being able to feed our families
DNI Tulsi Gabbard repeats Putin’s talking points today, releasing an unhinged video where she claims that “political elites” want a nuclear war with Russia because they have sophisticated bomb shelters that will help them survive it.
DNI Tulsi Gabbard repeats Putin’s talking points today, releasing an unhinged video where she claims that “political elites” want a nuclear war with Russia because they have sophisticated bomb shelters that will help them survive it.
Perhaps she's just leaking Trump's plans. He's obviously the US political elite these days, and he's quite clearly itching to go to condition orange (aka chaos).
Very odd.
Well NATO isnt pushing 5% for peace, it's intending to fight a war
A sense of humour can definitely run in the family.
Last week, not long after my nan's funeral, my wife said that her choice of funeral song would be "This Girl Is On Fire".
Today on the drive home the Love The Way You Lie played and after the line "Just gonna stand there and watch me burn" my daughter called out that's the song she wants playing at her funeral.
Both suitable options but I'd have to go for a more classic song, Highway To Hell.
DNI Tulsi Gabbard repeats Putin’s talking points today, releasing an unhinged video where she claims that “political elites” want a nuclear war with Russia because they have sophisticated bomb shelters that will help them survive it.
As long as Reform is Farage then churn around him won't matter all that much in terms of perception of whether it's united. The impression that it is comes from the lack of evidence to the contrary (hence the hit this week with Yusuf).
But Reform can't always be just Farage and at that point people will start noticing the divisions, splits, resignations and arguments. At some point, Reform are going to have to have some proper policies too; they can't survive forever on opposition and cakeism.
I think we got a flavour of division with that silly question about the burqa.
And why is it a silly question?
Multiple Muslim countries have partial or total bans on the burqa: Tunisia, Morocco, Chad, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, etc. Are they evil and Islamophobic? Clearly not
So why have they done this? Because they understand islamism better than us, and they understand the dangerous attitudes that often come with the burqa/niqab
Whereas well meaning woke fools in the UK haven’t got a clue
Thanks @Leon. And @Cookie. This well meaning woke fool is not sure if he'd like to line up with some at least of the countries quoted. He's worked with people of all sorts of faiths; one or two have worn the burqa and he isn't comfortable with it, and he's especially unhappy with it in healthcare situations. But, and it's a big but, he's not in favour of bans. In his experience bans merely encourage people, and what we ought to be doing is educating people not to make it difficult to communicate with them, or them to communicate with others.
Fair enough, that’s an eloquent explanation of your feelings
However “asking about a burqa ban” is certainly not “a silly question” as you first said. It’s a totally legitimate inquiry
In Central Asia the ban on full face veils is often driven by women politicians and feminist activists. They cherish their relative freedom (one of the few positive legacies of the USSR) and have less than zero desire to be shrouded in these horrific garments
And they know that if they burqa/niqab are allowed a lot of conservative Islamic men WILL start pushing for his. For women to dress “more modestly”. And so their female freedoms will be eroded - as we have seen, tragically, in places like Iran
Point noted and taken about women in Central Asia supporting such bans and why. I don't understand what it is about Islam that drives such a repressive attitudes; I don't think it's suggested in the Qu'ran, is it? The same attitudes as some of those of St Paul.
Are you thinking of the St Paul who said (Galatians 3.28):
There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
A sense of humour can definitely run in the family.
Last week, not long after my nan's funeral, my wife said that her choice of funeral song would be "This Girl Is On Fire".
Today on the drive home the Love The Way You Lie played and after the line "Just gonna stand there and watch me burn" my daughter called out that's the song she wants playing at her funeral.
Both suitable options but I'd have to go for a more classic song, Highway To Hell.
DNI Tulsi Gabbard repeats Putin’s talking points today, releasing an unhinged video where she claims that “political elites” want a nuclear war with Russia because they have sophisticated bomb shelters that will help them survive it.
A sense of humour can definitely run in the family.
Last week, not long after my nan's funeral, my wife said that her choice of funeral song would be "This Girl Is On Fire".
Today on the drive home the Love The Way You Lie played and after the line "Just gonna stand there and watch me burn" my daughter called out that's the song she wants playing at her funeral.
Both suitable options but I'd have to go for a more classic song, Highway To Hell.
Any choices here?
Don't Jump Off the Roof, Dad – or it would have been until a friend did take the advice therein.
ETA it used to be played a children's song but might be banned today in these woke times.
DNI Tulsi Gabbard repeats Putin’s talking points today, releasing an unhinged video where she claims that “political elites” want a nuclear war with Russia because they have sophisticated bomb shelters that will help them survive it.
Perhaps she's just leaking Trump's plans. He's obviously the US political elite these days, and he's quite clearly itching to go to condition orange (aka chaos).
Very odd.
Well NATO isnt pushing 5% for peace, it's intending to fight a war
It's intending to end a war and deter a follow up.
A sense of humour can definitely run in the family.
Last week, not long after my nan's funeral, my wife said that her choice of funeral song would be "This Girl Is On Fire".
Today on the drive home the Love The Way You Lie played and after the line "Just gonna stand there and watch me burn" my daughter called out that's the song she wants playing at her funeral.
Both suitable options but I'd have to go for a more classic song, Highway To Hell.
Any choices here?
Don't Jump Off the Roof, Dad – or it would have been until a friend did take the advice therein.
ETA it used to be played a children's song but might be banned today in these woke times.
“Really fascinating looking at voting intention by life satisfaction: Both the Green Party and Reform do much better with people with lower life satisfaction, Labour is only convincingly ahead with people who rate their life satisfaction at 10/10” - Ed Hodgson https://x.com/edhodgsoned/status/1932102321796005937/photo/1
And Reform is well ahead among life's losers - those scoring 0/10. No other party comes close. It's a USP of sorts, but not one to admire.
They are people who are not satisfied with their life.
That does not make them necessarily losers. They will be a cross section of society.
There were times in my long life when I was dissatisfied with my life. Indeed times when I was very dissatisfied. Equally there are times when I was very satisfied.
Same here, and some of the least satisfying was when I was earning well
“Really fascinating looking at voting intention by life satisfaction: Both the Green Party and Reform do much better with people with lower life satisfaction, Labour is only convincingly ahead with people who rate their life satisfaction at 10/10” - Ed Hodgson https://x.com/edhodgsoned/status/1932102321796005937/photo/1
As expected, really. Reform are the catch-all 'my life is shit, this party is NOTA'.
But around 70% of peoples lives are shit....they are going to be the next government therefore....the number of people that think most lives are shit are reserved to people who mostly interact with people like themselves....here being an example....pretty much everyone here is rich
That is simply not true. In the polling most people rated their life Satisfaction 6-8 out of 10, while only 20% rated it 4 or less. So nowhere near 70% of people's lives are shit.
I also note that average earnings were up 5.2% in today's ONS figures, so both better than inflation and better than the public sector. If your earnings are falling behind inflation then that might colour your own view, but don't project it onto others.
Life is good, if you let it be good. A high proportion of people's misery is self inflicted through their own poor life decisions.
Off topic, we are having a couple of nights in the Lake District. A complimentary bottle of Da Luca Prosecco awaited us in our room. This retails at £12.50 a bottle, so way more than I would pay for fizz. Probably double that from the hotel bar.
As Wor Lass ain't drinking, I am likely to be somewhat pre-loaded before we reach the restaurant!
And the rest - I would expect it to be £30 minimum at a bar
What's the full context of the quote, I expect Lowe has missed out the big glaring "however" that comes after the sentence.
David Bull praised Merkel on immigration, he's a very odd choice
Maybe this is Farage's attempt to tack to the centre to win more votes. Not sure it'll work.
Two potential problems.
Centrists hate Farage, and I'm not sure that going more reasonable will work for him.
If he does go centrist, his current supporters are likely to see it as another betrayal, and someone else (Lowe?) will grab his crown.
As long as he is tougher on immigration than Labour & the Tories that’s all that matters really. There’s no chance of anyone else on the right stealing his crown
There is a fair chance, probably big odds on actually, that had Enoch Powell been active in politics right now he would be calling for all cultures to rub along as best they could. His call for repatriation was based on the fact that there was a chance then to prevent what we have now. As things stand, with the stable door unable to be closed, I think he would say real patriots have to accept where we are and make the best of it which seems to be Farage’s conclusion
A sense of humour can definitely run in the family.
Last week, not long after my nan's funeral, my wife said that her choice of funeral song would be "This Girl Is On Fire".
Today on the drive home the Love The Way You Lie played and after the line "Just gonna stand there and watch me burn" my daughter called out that's the song she wants playing at her funeral.
Both suitable options but I'd have to go for a more classic song, Highway To Hell.
DNI Tulsi Gabbard repeats Putin’s talking points today, releasing an unhinged video where she claims that “political elites” want a nuclear war with Russia because they have sophisticated bomb shelters that will help them survive it.
Perhaps she's just leaking Trump's plans. He's obviously the US political elite these days, and he's quite clearly itching to go to condition orange (aka chaos).
Very odd.
Well NATO isnt pushing 5% for peace, it's intending to fight a war
It's intending to end a war and deter a follow up.
Hmm. Arms races often end in war. Sooner or later the generals want to play with their new toys.
No doubt on the doorstep many pensioners have told Labour politicians, including the chancellor, that they simply can’t do without the £200 winter fuel allowance; it’s a choice between heating and eating, according to them. Yet for many pensioners this is simply not true. If we take the bottom 20 per cent of pensioner households we find they spend 17 per cent of their income on recreation, hotels, restaurants, alcohol and tobacco, or, around £2,000 a year. To balance the books, these pensioners could have cut their leisure expenditure by 10 per cent
And that there should be substantially fewer one hopes. 500k per year net migration is completely unsustainable.
I actually did a small bit of pub chat research the other weekend about this subject. Somehow it came onto immigration and the poll that said people mostly want less immigration not more, I didn't bring it up but did test out a theory. I asked for the consensus (and this is basically my middle class wanky liberal friends) on what they thought "lower immigration", all but one person equated the phrase less immigration with more immigrants leaving the country than arriving, that is to say net emigration. If that group is broadly in favour of net emigration not just lower immigration then the overton window is substantially further to the right on this subject than I think politicians realise.
Small sample size and all that but I think when pollsters ask the public the question "do you want lower immigration, the same number of higher immigration?" the public interpret the three options as negative migration (net emigration), no more additional immigrants (net zero immigration) and net migration of less than today's numbers but not zero or below.
I think the appetite for immigration is seriously a lot lower than the polling indicates at first glance. I'd like to see YouGov ask what people think "lower immigration" means, I'll be shocked if more than a handful think it means plus 300k migrants as Labour's plans seem to be.
What's the full context of the quote, I expect Lowe has missed out the big glaring "however" that comes after the sentence.
David Bull praised Merkel on immigration, he's a very odd choice
Maybe this is Farage's attempt to tack to the centre to win more votes. Not sure it'll work.
Two potential problems.
Centrists hate Farage, and I'm not sure that going more reasonable will work for him.
If he does go centrist, his current supporters are likely to see it as another betrayal, and someone else (Lowe?) will grab his crown.
As long as he is tougher on immigration than Labour & the Tories that’s all that matters really. There’s no chance of anyone else on the right stealing his crown
There is a fair chance, probably big odds on actually, that had Enoch Powell been active in politics right now he would be calling for all cultures to rub along as best they could. His call for repatriation was based on the fact that there was a chance then to prevent what we have now. As things stand, with the stable door unable to be closed, I think he would say real patriots have to accept where we are and make the best of it which seems to be Farage’s conclusion
I disagree. Reforms vote is built in large part on the usual non voter. If they think Reform are softer on immigration than theyd like they will go back to not voting.
A sense of humour can definitely run in the family.
Last week, not long after my nan's funeral, my wife said that her choice of funeral song would be "This Girl Is On Fire".
Today on the drive home the Love The Way You Lie played and after the line "Just gonna stand there and watch me burn" my daughter called out that's the song she wants playing at her funeral.
Both suitable options but I'd have to go for a more classic song, Highway To Hell.
Any choices here?
Going in, the Guitar Coda from Hotel California
Going out, Keep Right on Til the End of the Road.
I am thinking that "Don't Fear the Reaper" by Blue Oyster Cult is the way to go.
A sense of humour can definitely run in the family.
Last week, not long after my nan's funeral, my wife said that her choice of funeral song would be "This Girl Is On Fire".
Today on the drive home the Love The Way You Lie played and after the line "Just gonna stand there and watch me burn" my daughter called out that's the song she wants playing at her funeral.
Both suitable options but I'd have to go for a more classic song, Highway To Hell.
A sense of humour can definitely run in the family.
Last week, not long after my nan's funeral, my wife said that her choice of funeral song would be "This Girl Is On Fire".
Today on the drive home the Love The Way You Lie played and after the line "Just gonna stand there and watch me burn" my daughter called out that's the song she wants playing at her funeral.
Both suitable options but I'd have to go for a more classic song, Highway To Hell.
Any choices here?
Going in, the Guitar Coda from Hotel California
Going out, Keep Right on Til the End of the Road.
After the song in the first post, I read that as "Going in" to the Crematorium chamber behind the curtains.
Article about the chief fundraiser for UKIP, and now Reform, who looks to be about 15 in the picture and whose convictions for money laundering and wire fraud stand him in good stead in the "Values Party".
A sense of humour can definitely run in the family.
Last week, not long after my nan's funeral, my wife said that her choice of funeral song would be "This Girl Is On Fire".
Today on the drive home the Love The Way You Lie played and after the line "Just gonna stand there and watch me burn" my daughter called out that's the song she wants playing at her funeral.
Both suitable options but I'd have to go for a more classic song, Highway To Hell.
Any choices here?
Don't Jump Off the Roof, Dad – or it would have been until a friend did take the advice therein.
ETA it used to be played a children's song but might be banned today in these woke times.
My dad used to sing that to me, and now I sing it to my son. Perhaps worryingly, he loves it.
A sense of humour can definitely run in the family.
Last week, not long after my nan's funeral, my wife said that her choice of funeral song would be "This Girl Is On Fire".
Today on the drive home the Love The Way You Lie played and after the line "Just gonna stand there and watch me burn" my daughter called out that's the song she wants playing at her funeral.
Both suitable options but I'd have to go for a more classic song, Highway To Hell.
Any choices here?
Going in, the Guitar Coda from Hotel California
Going out, Keep Right on Til the End of the Road.
After the song in the first post, I read that as "Going in" to the Crematorium chamber behind the curtains.
And that there should be substantially fewer one hopes. 500k per year net migration is completely unsustainable.
I actually did a small bit of pub chat research the other weekend about this subject. Somehow it came onto immigration and the poll that said people mostly want less immigration not more, I didn't bring it up but did test out a theory. I asked for the consensus (and this is basically my middle class wanky liberal friends) on what they thought "lower immigration", all but one person equated the phrase less immigration with more immigrants leaving the country than arriving, that is to say net emigration. If that group is broadly in favour of net emigration not just lower immigration then the overton window is substantially further to the right on this subject than I think politicians realise.
Small sample size and all that but I think when pollsters ask the public the question "do you want lower immigration, the same number of higher immigration?" the public interpret the three options as negative migration (net emigration), no more additional immigrants (net zero immigration) and net migration of less than today's numbers but not zero or below.
I think the appetite for immigration is seriously a lot lower than the polling indicates at first glance. I'd like to see YouGov ask what people think "lower immigration" means, I'll be shocked if more than a handful think it means plus 300k migrants as Labour's plans seem to be.
It depends who you go to the pub* with. Polling shows support for the same or more immigration across most categories apart from asylum seekers.
Police have said 15 officers were injured in disorder in Ballymena which they described as "racist thuggery, pure and simple" and targeted at ethnic minorities and law enforcement.
Violence broke out following an earlier peaceful protest over an alleged sexual assault in the County Antrim town.
A 29-year-old man was arrested on suspicion of riotous and disorderly behaviour, attempted criminal damage and resisting police.
North Antrim MP Jim Allister said the violence was "very distressing".
The Traditional Unionist Voice (TUV) leader said the "context" for the initial protest was that there had been "significant demographic change in the area" because of "unfettered immigration".
Earlier on Monday, two teenage boys appeared before Coleraine Magistrates' Court accused of sexually assaulting a teenage girl in Ballymena.
They spoke through an interpreter in Romanian to confirm their names and ages.
Their solicitor said they would be denying the charges.
The prime minister's official spokesman described the events in Ballymena as "very concerning".
"Obviously, the reports of an [alleged] sexual assault in the area are extremely distressing, but there is no justification for attacks on police officers while they continue to protect local communities," they said.
What's the full context of the quote, I expect Lowe has missed out the big glaring "however" that comes after the sentence.
David Bull praised Merkel on immigration, he's a very odd choice
Maybe this is Farage's attempt to tack to the centre to win more votes. Not sure it'll work.
Two potential problems.
Centrists hate Farage, and I'm not sure that going more reasonable will work for him.
If he does go centrist, his current supporters are likely to see it as another betrayal, and someone else (Lowe?) will grab his crown.
As long as he is tougher on immigration than Labour & the Tories that’s all that matters really. There’s no chance of anyone else on the right stealing his crown
There is a fair chance, probably big odds on actually, that had Enoch Powell been active in politics right now he would be calling for all cultures to rub along as best they could. His call for repatriation was based on the fact that there was a chance then to prevent what we have now. As things stand, with the stable door unable to be closed, I think he would say real patriots have to accept where we are and make the best of it which seems to be Farage’s conclusion
I disagree. Reforms vote is built in large part on the usual non voter. If they think Reform are softer on immigration than theyd like they will go back to not voting.
Actually, on immigration I’m sure they will be pretty tough, as well as deporting asylum seekers, what I meant was they won’t be as racist about non white British subjects as some would like,
No doubt on the doorstep many pensioners have told Labour politicians, including the chancellor, that they simply can’t do without the £200 winter fuel allowance; it’s a choice between heating and eating, according to them. Yet for many pensioners this is simply not true. If we take the bottom 20 per cent of pensioner households we find they spend 17 per cent of their income on recreation, hotels, restaurants, alcohol and tobacco, or, around £2,000 a year. To balance the books, these pensioners could have cut their leisure expenditure by 10 per cent
And that there should be substantially fewer one hopes. 500k per year net migration is completely unsustainable.
I actually did a small bit of pub chat research the other weekend about this subject. Somehow it came onto immigration and the poll that said people mostly want less immigration not more, I didn't bring it up but did test out a theory. I asked for the consensus (and this is basically my middle class wanky liberal friends) on what they thought "lower immigration", all but one person equated the phrase less immigration with more immigrants leaving the country than arriving, that is to say net emigration. If that group is broadly in favour of net emigration not just lower immigration then the overton window is substantially further to the right on this subject than I think politicians realise.
Small sample size and all that but I think when pollsters ask the public the question "do you want lower immigration, the same number of higher immigration?" the public interpret the three options as negative migration (net emigration), no more additional immigrants (net zero immigration) and net migration of less than today's numbers but not zero or below.
I think the appetite for immigration is seriously a lot lower than the polling indicates at first glance. I'd like to see YouGov ask what people think "lower immigration" means, I'll be shocked if more than a handful think it means plus 300k migrants as Labour's plans seem to be.
It depends who you go to the pub* with. Polling shows support for the same or more immigration across most categories apart from asylum seekers.
“Really fascinating looking at voting intention by life satisfaction: Both the Green Party and Reform do much better with people with lower life satisfaction, Labour is only convincingly ahead with people who rate their life satisfaction at 10/10” - Ed Hodgson https://x.com/edhodgsoned/status/1932102321796005937/photo/1
And Reform is well ahead among life's losers - those scoring 0/10. No other party comes close. It's a USP of sorts, but not one to admire.
They are people who are not satisfied with their life.
That does not make them necessarily losers. They will be a cross section of society.
If they are not literally losers, you are suggesting they are miserable gits instead. I'm not sure that's better. If they are losers it might be because life has dealt them a bad hand, and it's not their fault.
And that there should be substantially fewer one hopes. 500k per year net migration is completely unsustainable.
I actually did a small bit of pub chat research the other weekend about this subject. Somehow it came onto immigration and the poll that said people mostly want less immigration not more, I didn't bring it up but did test out a theory. I asked for the consensus (and this is basically my middle class wanky liberal friends) on what they thought "lower immigration", all but one person equated the phrase less immigration with more immigrants leaving the country than arriving, that is to say net emigration. If that group is broadly in favour of net emigration not just lower immigration then the overton window is substantially further to the right on this subject than I think politicians realise.
Small sample size and all that but I think when pollsters ask the public the question "do you want lower immigration, the same number of higher immigration?" the public interpret the three options as negative migration (net emigration), no more additional immigrants (net zero immigration) and net migration of less than today's numbers but not zero or below.
I think the appetite for immigration is seriously a lot lower than the polling indicates at first glance. I'd like to see YouGov ask what people think "lower immigration" means, I'll be shocked if more than a handful think it means plus 300k migrants as Labour's plans seem to be.
It depends who you go to the pub* with. Polling shows support for the same or more immigration across most categories apart from asylum seekers.
And that there should be substantially fewer one hopes. 500k per year net migration is completely unsustainable.
I actually did a small bit of pub chat research the other weekend about this subject. Somehow it came onto immigration and the poll that said people mostly want less immigration not more, I didn't bring it up but did test out a theory. I asked for the consensus (and this is basically my middle class wanky liberal friends) on what they thought "lower immigration", all but one person equated the phrase less immigration with more immigrants leaving the country than arriving, that is to say net emigration. If that group is broadly in favour of net emigration not just lower immigration then the overton window is substantially further to the right on this subject than I think politicians realise.
Small sample size and all that but I think when pollsters ask the public the question "do you want lower immigration, the same number of higher immigration?" the public interpret the three options as negative migration (net emigration), no more additional immigrants (net zero immigration) and net migration of less than today's numbers but not zero or below.
I think the appetite for immigration is seriously a lot lower than the polling indicates at first glance. I'd like to see YouGov ask what people think "lower immigration" means, I'll be shocked if more than a handful think it means plus 300k migrants as Labour's plans seem to be.
It depends who you go to the pub* with. Polling shows support for the same or more immigration across most categories apart from asylum seekers.
And that there should be substantially fewer one hopes. 500k per year net migration is completely unsustainable.
I actually did a small bit of pub chat research the other weekend about this subject. Somehow it came onto immigration and the poll that said people mostly want less immigration not more, I didn't bring it up but did test out a theory. I asked for the consensus (and this is basically my middle class wanky liberal friends) on what they thought "lower immigration", all but one person equated the phrase less immigration with more immigrants leaving the country than arriving, that is to say net emigration. If that group is broadly in favour of net emigration not just lower immigration then the overton window is substantially further to the right on this subject than I think politicians realise.
Small sample size and all that but I think when pollsters ask the public the question "do you want lower immigration, the same number of higher immigration?" the public interpret the three options as negative migration (net emigration), no more additional immigrants (net zero immigration) and net migration of less than today's numbers but not zero or below.
I think the appetite for immigration is seriously a lot lower than the polling indicates at first glance. I'd like to see YouGov ask what people think "lower immigration" means, I'll be shocked if more than a handful think it means plus 300k migrants as Labour's plans seem to be.
It depends who you go to the pub* with. Polling shows support for the same or more immigration across most categories apart from asylum seekers.
Going in: Jonathan Richman - I'm a Little Dinosaur ("and I'm planning to go away....")
Going out: the sound of a Merlin engine in a Spitfire .
My late brother went for Highway to Hell. To be honest it’s kind of lost its shock value. Personally I have told my wife that a bin bag would suffice. Once you’re deid you’re deid.
“Really fascinating looking at voting intention by life satisfaction: Both the Green Party and Reform do much better with people with lower life satisfaction, Labour is only convincingly ahead with people who rate their life satisfaction at 10/10” - Ed Hodgson https://x.com/edhodgsoned/status/1932102321796005937/photo/1
And Reform is well ahead among life's losers - those scoring 0/10. No other party comes close. It's a USP of sorts, but not one to admire.
They are people who are not satisfied with their life.
That does not make them necessarily losers. They will be a cross section of society.
If they are not literally losers, you are suggesting they are miserable gits instead. I'm not sure that's better. If they are losers it might be because life has dealt them a bad hand, and it's not their fault.
I’m suggesting that, true, based on people I’ve known in work and also myself !!
As I get older I realise Victor Meldrew was right about everything and should be the hero of One Foot in the Grave.
DNI Tulsi Gabbard repeats Putin’s talking points today, releasing an unhinged video where she claims that “political elites” want a nuclear war with Russia because they have sophisticated bomb shelters that will help them survive it.
Perhaps she's just leaking Trump's plans. He's obviously the US political elite these days, and he's quite clearly itching to go to condition orange (aka chaos).
Very odd.
Well NATO isnt pushing 5% for peace, it's intending to fight a war
It's intending to end a war and deter a follow up.
Hmm. Arms races often end in war. Sooner or later the generals want to play with their new toys.
The Cold War saw many NATO members spending more than 5% on defence. Germany a vast army.
I seem not to recall any wars with the USSR. Mind you, easy to miss the occasional Thermonuclear War.
I'm ambivalent on the winter fuel payment, but am glad it seems Labour aren't recovering any political capital by it's restoration. They don't deserve to.
And that there should be substantially fewer one hopes. 500k per year net migration is completely unsustainable.
I actually did a small bit of pub chat research the other weekend about this subject. Somehow it came onto immigration and the poll that said people mostly want less immigration not more, I didn't bring it up but did test out a theory. I asked for the consensus (and this is basically my middle class wanky liberal friends) on what they thought "lower immigration", all but one person equated the phrase less immigration with more immigrants leaving the country than arriving, that is to say net emigration. If that group is broadly in favour of net emigration not just lower immigration then the overton window is substantially further to the right on this subject than I think politicians realise.
Small sample size and all that but I think when pollsters ask the public the question "do you want lower immigration, the same number of higher immigration?" the public interpret the three options as negative migration (net emigration), no more additional immigrants (net zero immigration) and net migration of less than today's numbers but not zero or below.
I think the appetite for immigration is seriously a lot lower than the polling indicates at first glance. I'd like to see YouGov ask what people think "lower immigration" means, I'll be shocked if more than a handful think it means plus 300k migrants as Labour's plans seem to be.
It depends who you go to the pub* with. Polling shows support for the same or more immigration across most categories apart from asylum seekers.
*probably not the best place for a representative straw poll.
The idea the British want MORE immigration is insultingly stupid
It also doesn't disprove my hypothesis that the idea of lower/higher doesn't centre around the zero migration rather than 500k migration.
It doesn't.
On the other hand, the evidence is that people think levels of immigration and the number of immigrants in the UK are far higher tham they actually are too.
And that there should be substantially fewer one hopes. 500k per year net migration is completely unsustainable.
I actually did a small bit of pub chat research the other weekend about this subject. Somehow it came onto immigration and the poll that said people mostly want less immigration not more, I didn't bring it up but did test out a theory. I asked for the consensus (and this is basically my middle class wanky liberal friends) on what they thought "lower immigration", all but one person equated the phrase less immigration with more immigrants leaving the country than arriving, that is to say net emigration. If that group is broadly in favour of net emigration not just lower immigration then the overton window is substantially further to the right on this subject than I think politicians realise.
Small sample size and all that but I think when pollsters ask the public the question "do you want lower immigration, the same number of higher immigration?" the public interpret the three options as negative migration (net emigration), no more additional immigrants (net zero immigration) and net migration of less than today's numbers but not zero or below.
I think the appetite for immigration is seriously a lot lower than the polling indicates at first glance. I'd like to see YouGov ask what people think "lower immigration" means, I'll be shocked if more than a handful think it means plus 300k migrants as Labour's plans seem to be.
It depends who you go to the pub* with. Polling shows support for the same or more immigration across most categories apart from asylum seekers.
*probably not the best place for a representative straw poll.
The idea the British want MORE immigration is insultingly stupid
It also doesn't disprove my hypothesis that the idea of lower/higher doesn't centre around the zero migration rather than 500k migration.
I suspect you’re right - indeed I recall a poll recently saying quite a large chunk of Brits want REMigration. They want some migrants here to start going home. The Boriswave is the obvious driver of this
I think Farage should come clean with voters and say “reducing net migration to zero and asking recent arrivals to go will cause economic pain, but we believe it is necessary to achieve greater cohesion and integration”. Because I reckon the voters would accept it. As a price that must be paid
Also this whole debate needs openness and truth from politicians. For twenty bloody years - at least - voters have made it obvious they want much lower immigration. Every election the parties on all sides have promised this. And every single time the parties have betrayed the people - the last Tory government being the very worst of all
Truth. We need truth. And we need a government that does what it promises
It’s not quantum physics. As that Danish politician said to simon reeves on the BBC - “the voters wanted lower immigration so we gave them lower immigration.” As a result of these firm honest policies on migration the Danish social democrats got reelected, and the Danish hard right has disappeared as a force
Do the Brits in Spain adopt Spanish culture and values? Would argue that immigrants don't but their offspring do having been immersed in culture and language from an early age.
And that there should be substantially fewer one hopes. 500k per year net migration is completely unsustainable.
I actually did a small bit of pub chat research the other weekend about this subject. Somehow it came onto immigration and the poll that said people mostly want less immigration not more, I didn't bring it up but did test out a theory. I asked for the consensus (and this is basically my middle class wanky liberal friends) on what they thought "lower immigration", all but one person equated the phrase less immigration with more immigrants leaving the country than arriving, that is to say net emigration. If that group is broadly in favour of net emigration not just lower immigration then the overton window is substantially further to the right on this subject than I think politicians realise.
Small sample size and all that but I think when pollsters ask the public the question "do you want lower immigration, the same number of higher immigration?" the public interpret the three options as negative migration (net emigration), no more additional immigrants (net zero immigration) and net migration of less than today's numbers but not zero or below.
I think the appetite for immigration is seriously a lot lower than the polling indicates at first glance. I'd like to see YouGov ask what people think "lower immigration" means, I'll be shocked if more than a handful think it means plus 300k migrants as Labour's plans seem to be.
It depends who you go to the pub* with. Polling shows support for the same or more immigration across most categories apart from asylum seekers.
*probably not the best place for a representative straw poll.
The idea the British want MORE immigration is insultingly stupid
It also doesn't disprove my hypothesis that the idea of lower/higher doesn't centre around the zero migration rather than 500k migration.
It doesn't.
On the other hand, the evidence is that people think levels of immigration and the number of immigrants in the UK are far higher tham they actually are too.
Maybe but that also doesn't disprove the theory. If anything I think that makes it more likely that people feel "lower immigration" means net emigration.
And that there should be substantially fewer one hopes. 500k per year net migration is completely unsustainable.
I actually did a small bit of pub chat research the other weekend about this subject. Somehow it came onto immigration and the poll that said people mostly want less immigration not more, I didn't bring it up but did test out a theory. I asked for the consensus (and this is basically my middle class wanky liberal friends) on what they thought "lower immigration", all but one person equated the phrase less immigration with more immigrants leaving the country than arriving, that is to say net emigration. If that group is broadly in favour of net emigration not just lower immigration then the overton window is substantially further to the right on this subject than I think politicians realise.
Small sample size and all that but I think when pollsters ask the public the question "do you want lower immigration, the same number of higher immigration?" the public interpret the three options as negative migration (net emigration), no more additional immigrants (net zero immigration) and net migration of less than today's numbers but not zero or below.
I think the appetite for immigration is seriously a lot lower than the polling indicates at first glance. I'd like to see YouGov ask what people think "lower immigration" means, I'll be shocked if more than a handful think it means plus 300k migrants as Labour's plans seem to be.
It depends who you go to the pub* with. Polling shows support for the same or more immigration across most categories apart from asylum seekers.
*probably not the best place for a representative straw poll.
The idea the British want MORE immigration is insultingly stupid
It also doesn't disprove my hypothesis that the idea of lower/higher doesn't centre around the zero migration rather than 500k migration.
It doesn't.
On the other hand, the evidence is that people think levels of immigration and the number of immigrants in the UK are far higher tham they actually are too.
Two points on that. Firstly, people are bad at estimating percentages overall, so their getting it wrong isn't evidence of much at all. Secondly, if you go into many provincial town centres, particularly on working days, it genuinely is hard to find native British people.
Comments
That does not make them necessarily losers. They will be a cross section of society.
There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
Tories raised £2.8 million from individuals and companies in the first three months of the year, while Labour raised £530,000.
Reform UK reported donations of almost £1.5 million, including £250,000 from the mother of one of Nigel Farage’s aides and more than £600,000 from a company run by Richard Tice.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2025/06/10/tories-raise-almost-six-times-more-in-donations-than-labour/ (£££)
Latest YouGov Westminster voting intention (8-9 June)
Ref: 29% (+1 from 1-2 June)
Lab: 23% (+1)
Con: 17% (-1)
Lib Dem: 15% (-2)
Green: 10% (+1)
SNP: 3% (=)"
https://x.com/YouGov/status/1932387472467522039
"Immigration is the lifeblood of this country. It always has been."
‘Lifeblood’?! What total BS.
We need controlled borders, national cohesion, and robust policies that serve the people already here - the British people.
https://x.com/rupertlowe10/status/1932435399474876659?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
If Reform were to fracture then who knows where those votes might go.
For this reason Tories most seats is wandering into being a bet, and LDs most seats has long been a bet. (Greens most seats surely can't be a bet, although fracturing of other parties couldn't hurt them)
"ChatGPT goes down worldwide leaving users 'to type their own emails'"
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-14798497/ChatGPT-goes-worldwide-leaving-users-type-emails.html
Spoiler alert. Its quite a bit. https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/media-centre/political-parties-accept-ps1295m-donations-first-quarter-2025
@RonFilipkowski
·
33m
DNI Tulsi Gabbard repeats Putin’s talking points today, releasing an unhinged video where she claims that “political elites” want a nuclear war with Russia because they have sophisticated bomb shelters that will help them survive it.
https://x.com/RonFilipkowski/status/1932464516480262438
Very odd.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/articles/ce3zg3y23v7o
Centrists hate Farage, and I'm not sure that going more reasonable will work for him.
If he does go centrist, his current supporters are likely to see it as another betrayal, and someone else (Lowe?) will grab his crown.
Last week, not long after my nan's funeral, my wife said that her choice of funeral song would be "This Girl Is On Fire".
Today on the drive home the Love The Way You Lie played and after the line "Just gonna stand there and watch me burn" my daughter called out that's the song she wants playing at her funeral.
Both suitable options but I'd have to go for a more classic song, Highway To Hell.
Any choices here?
What's worse, though, is that a large number of people believe it.
That said, I firmly agree.
ETA it used to be played a children's song but might be banned today in these woke times.
He qualifies it by saying the immigrants should adopt our culture and values.
https://x.com/basil_tgmd/status/1932429964571291660?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
I like big buts and I can not lie.
That's not really what the bulk of Reforms support are looking for id guess
I also note that average earnings were up 5.2% in today's ONS figures, so both better than inflation and better than the public sector. If your earnings are falling behind inflation then that might colour your own view, but don't project it onto others.
Life is good, if you let it be good. A high proportion of people's misery is self inflicted through their own poor life decisions.
There is a fair chance, probably big odds on actually, that had Enoch Powell been active in politics right now he would be calling for all cultures to rub along as best they could. His call for repatriation was based on the fact that there was a chance then to prevent what we have now. As things stand, with the stable door unable to be closed, I think he would say real patriots have to accept where we are and make the best of it which seems to be Farage’s conclusion
Going out, Keep Right on Til the End of the Road.
“Daniel Marsden”
“By quite some margin, your best writer @spectator”
https://x.com/mrcharlesamos/status/1932471952159256618?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
I actually did a small bit of pub chat research the other weekend about this subject. Somehow it came onto immigration and the poll that said people mostly want less immigration not more, I didn't bring it up but did test out a theory. I asked for the consensus (and this is basically my middle class wanky liberal friends) on what they thought "lower immigration", all but one person equated the phrase less immigration with more immigrants leaving the country than arriving, that is to say net emigration. If that group is broadly in favour of net emigration not just lower immigration then the overton window is substantially further to the right on this subject than I think politicians realise.
Small sample size and all that but I think when pollsters ask the public the question "do you want lower immigration, the same number of higher immigration?" the public interpret the three options as negative migration (net emigration), no more additional immigrants (net zero immigration) and net migration of less than today's numbers but not zero or below.
I think the appetite for immigration is seriously a lot lower than the polling indicates at first glance. I'd like to see YouGov ask what people think "lower immigration" means, I'll be shocked if more than a handful think it means plus 300k migrants as Labour's plans seem to be.
Quite how the BBC are ‘complicit in Genicode’ remains to be seen.
https://youtu.be/46IQu0yuJzU?si=UGQFbPVOKcP2tb-6
"Going out" then scared the crap out of me!
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/jun/10/fiona-cottrell-mother-of-nigel-farage-aide-reform-uk-donors
https://www.britishfuture.org/white-paper-attitudes-research/
*probably not the best place for a representative straw poll.
"Disorder after alleged sex assault was 'racist thuggery', say police"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ckg4v04p008o
Police have said 15 officers were injured in disorder in Ballymena which they described as "racist thuggery, pure and simple" and targeted at ethnic minorities and law enforcement.
Violence broke out following an earlier peaceful protest over an alleged sexual assault in the County Antrim town.
A 29-year-old man was arrested on suspicion of riotous and disorderly behaviour, attempted criminal damage and resisting police.
North Antrim MP Jim Allister said the violence was "very distressing".
The Traditional Unionist Voice (TUV) leader said the "context" for the initial protest was that there had been "significant demographic change in the area" because of "unfettered immigration".
Earlier on Monday, two teenage boys appeared before Coleraine Magistrates' Court accused of sexually assaulting a teenage girl in Ballymena.
They spoke through an interpreter in Romanian to confirm their names and ages.
Their solicitor said they would be denying the charges.
The prime minister's official spokesman described the events in Ballymena as "very concerning".
"Obviously, the reports of an [alleged] sexual assault in the area are extremely distressing, but there is no justification for attacks on police officers while they continue to protect local communities," they said.
Going out: the sound of a Merlin engine in a Spitfire .
The local dogging spot ? A soccer ground ?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-14793419/Boil-bag-funerals-Britain-works.html
Edit- and of course a little in the honest soil of Norfolk
I’ll demand a refund of my license fee !
Lower taxes and more spending on most categories.
Lower immigration and more migrants in most categories.
As I get older I realise Victor Meldrew was right about everything and should be the hero of One Foot in the Grave.
I seem not to recall any wars with the USSR. Mind you, easy to miss the occasional Thermonuclear War.
On the other hand, the evidence is that people think levels of immigration and the number of immigrants in the UK are far higher tham they actually are too.
I think Farage should come clean with voters and say “reducing net migration to zero and asking recent arrivals to go will cause economic pain, but we believe it is necessary to achieve greater cohesion and integration”. Because I reckon the voters would accept it. As a price that must be paid
Also this whole debate needs openness and truth from politicians. For twenty bloody years - at least - voters have made it obvious they want much lower immigration. Every election the parties on all sides have promised this. And every single time the parties have betrayed the people - the last Tory government being the very worst of all
Truth. We need truth. And we need a government that does what it promises
It’s not quantum physics. As that Danish politician said to simon reeves on the BBC - “the voters wanted lower immigration so we gave them lower immigration.” As a result of these firm honest policies on migration the Danish social democrats
got reelected, and the Danish hard right has disappeared as a force
That’s it. That’s what you do. And it can be done
You might end up with a twelve-inch pianist...