This was BNP policy around when Griffin was on Question Time. I see that the remnants of UKIP are now advocating it.
My paternal grandmother came to England in 1938 from Nazi Vienna. When my Grandad retired in 1980 they moved to Vienna. In 1990 they decided to move to Derbyshire, in part because the rise of the Freedom Party in Austria has unpleasant echoes for my grandmother of the rise of Fabian in the 1930s.
She died in 1997. I've recently been thinking quite often how it would feel for her today, had she been alive at the grand old age of 111, to see how far fascist politics has made inroads across democracies. I'm kinda glad she hasn't had to live through it.
Although, now that I think about it, at the time the BNP policy was for grants for "voluntary" repatriation. So we now have two MPs in Parliament with a more extreme policy than the BNP 15-20 years ago.
We're heading in a very dark direction.
15-20 years ago the mere idea of net migration of 1m a year would have been laughed at, as some kind of Nazi dystopian fantasy, as would the idea of 50,000 unvetted foreign young men simply invading our beaches, every year, and then being put in 4 star hotels at our expense
Or importing Taliban fighters because of "family" reunions. I honestly think the government, civil service and judiciary have all completely got a screw loose. The shock of a Reform government might be the only thing left to the British public to get any kind of real change on immigration and deportation of illegals and asylum seekers.
I think if we did get a Reform government and they had actually thought through what they wanted to do (stay with me....), it would be like after Brexit vote, the 10k working even harder to find ways to thwart such changes. In reality, I think much more likely scenario is the Reform would be like Trump government, not really thought beyond the slogans.
Trump 47 is definitely having much more success at deporting people than Trump 45. Reform are surely going to use Trump 47 as their blueprint and just fuck all of the international legal consequences as bullshit just like the US has done with their deportation programme.
He is getting back up from a supreme court that sways his way though. I have a funny feeling our supreme court might have different take on matters.
That won't be an issue, as the Great Repeal Bill will abolish The Supreme Court, and re-establish the Lord Chancellor's role as the Supreme Judge.
It won't be easy, but for the first time, the right in politics has a good idea of what it's up against.
Yes exactly. Parliament must reassert sovereignty over EVERYTHING. Roll back the entire Blairite liberal “consensus”. Destroy the blob. Sack anyone that objects - judges included
We need a peaceful revolution or we will have something nastier later. I want peace
This was BNP policy around when Griffin was on Question Time. I see that the remnants of UKIP are now advocating it.
My paternal grandmother came to England in 1938 from Nazi Vienna. When my Grandad retired in 1980 they moved to Vienna. In 1990 they decided to move to Derbyshire, in part because the rise of the Freedom Party in Austria has unpleasant echoes for my grandmother of the rise of Fabian in the 1930s.
She died in 1997. I've recently been thinking quite often how it would feel for her today, had she been alive at the grand old age of 111, to see how far fascist politics has made inroads across democracies. I'm kinda glad she hasn't had to live through it.
Although, now that I think about it, at the time the BNP policy was for grants for "voluntary" repatriation. So we now have two MPs in Parliament with a more extreme policy than the BNP 15-20 years ago.
We're heading in a very dark direction.
15-20 years ago the mere idea of net migration of 1m a year would have been laughed at, as some kind of Nazi dystopian fantasy, as would the idea of 50,000 unvetted foreign young men simply invading our beaches, every year, and then being put in 4 star hotels at our expense
Or importing Taliban fighters because of "family" reunions. I honestly think the government, civil service and judiciary have all completely got a screw loose. The shock of a Reform government might be the only thing left to the British public to get any kind of real change on immigration and deportation of illegals and asylum seekers.
I think if we did get a Reform government and they had actually thought through what they wanted to do (stay with me....), it would be like after Brexit vote, the 10k working even harder to find ways to thwart such changes. In reality, I think much more likely scenario is the Reform would be like Trump government, not really thought beyond the slogans.
Trump 47 is definitely having much more success at deporting people than Trump 45. Reform are surely going to use Trump 47 as their blueprint and just fuck all of the international legal consequences as bullshit just like the US has done with their deportation programme.
He is getting back up from a supreme court that sways his way though. I have a funny feeling our supreme court might have different take on matters.
That won't be an issue, as the Great Repeal Bill will abolish The Supreme Court, and re-establish the Lord Chancellor's role as the Supreme Judge.
It won't be easy, but for the first time, the right in politics has a good idea of what it's up against.
Yes exactly. Parliament must reassert sovereignty over EVERYTHING. Roll back the entire Blairite liberal “consensus”. Destroy the blob. Sack anyone that objects - judges included
We need a peaceful revolution or we will have something nastier later. I want peace
Parliament already has sovereignty over anything, no judges can overrule a statute passed by parliament and signed by the King and even the Human Rights Act can be repealed
Wait just a fucking minute. Labour announced the voting age is to be dropped to 16 just at the moment a law is activated that means internet providers have to make sure people are 18 for vast swathes of content.
Wait just a fucking minute. Labour announced the voting age is to be dropped to 16 just at the moment a law is activated that means internet providers have to make sure people are 18 for vast swathes of content.
WTF?
So they're going to have to vote for MPs based on subjects they are not allowed to know about?
(somewhere in a basement viewcode is rocking back and forth, muttering "they don't know how to fly the plane" over and over again)
Wait just a fucking minute. Labour announced the voting age is to be dropped to 16 just at the moment a law is activated that means internet providers have to make sure people are 18 for vast swathes of content.
This was BNP policy around when Griffin was on Question Time. I see that the remnants of UKIP are now advocating it.
My paternal grandmother came to England in 1938 from Nazi Vienna. When my Grandad retired in 1980 they moved to Vienna. In 1990 they decided to move to Derbyshire, in part because the rise of the Freedom Party in Austria has unpleasant echoes for my grandmother of the rise of Fabian in the 1930s.
She died in 1997. I've recently been thinking quite often how it would feel for her today, had she been alive at the grand old age of 111, to see how far fascist politics has made inroads across democracies. I'm kinda glad she hasn't had to live through it.
Although, now that I think about it, at the time the BNP policy was for grants for "voluntary" repatriation. So we now have two MPs in Parliament with a more extreme policy than the BNP 15-20 years ago.
We're heading in a very dark direction.
15-20 years ago the mere idea of net migration of 1m a year would have been laughed at, as some kind of Nazi dystopian fantasy, as would the idea of 50,000 unvetted foreign young men simply invading our beaches, every year, and then being put in 4 star hotels at our expense
Or importing Taliban fighters because of "family" reunions. I honestly think the government, civil service and judiciary have all completely got a screw loose. The shock of a Reform government might be the only thing left to the British public to get any kind of real change on immigration and deportation of illegals and asylum seekers.
I think if we did get a Reform government and they had actually thought through what they wanted to do (stay with me....), it would be like after Brexit vote, the 10k working even harder to find ways to thwart such changes. In reality, I think much more likely scenario is the Reform would be like Trump government, not really thought beyond the slogans.
Trump 47 is definitely having much more success at deporting people than Trump 45. Reform are surely going to use Trump 47 as their blueprint and just fuck all of the international legal consequences as bullshit just like the US has done with their deportation programme.
He is getting back up from a supreme court that sways his way though. I have a funny feeling our supreme court might have different take on matters.
That won't be an issue, as the Great Repeal Bill will abolish The Supreme Court, and re-establish the Lord Chancellor's role as the Supreme Judge.
It won't be easy, but for the first time, the right in politics has a good idea of what it's up against.
Yes exactly. Parliament must reassert sovereignty over EVERYTHING. Roll back the entire Blairite liberal “consensus”. Destroy the blob. Sack anyone that objects - judges included
We need a peaceful revolution or we will have something nastier later. I want peace
Wait just a fucking minute. Labour announced the voting age is to be dropped to 16 just at the moment a law is activated that means internet providers have to make sure people are 18 for vast swathes of content.
WTF?
Absurd, isn’t it? Votes for 16 isn’t being done for any principled reason, hence why it is so disconnected with everything else where the age of majority is either at, or being pushed to, 18.
This was BNP policy around when Griffin was on Question Time. I see that the remnants of UKIP are now advocating it.
My paternal grandmother came to England in 1938 from Nazi Vienna. When my Grandad retired in 1980 they moved to Vienna. In 1990 they decided to move to Derbyshire, in part because the rise of the Freedom Party in Austria has unpleasant echoes for my grandmother of the rise of Fabian in the 1930s.
She died in 1997. I've recently been thinking quite often how it would feel for her today, had she been alive at the grand old age of 111, to see how far fascist politics has made inroads across democracies. I'm kinda glad she hasn't had to live through it.
Although, now that I think about it, at the time the BNP policy was for grants for "voluntary" repatriation. So we now have two MPs in Parliament with a more extreme policy than the BNP 15-20 years ago.
We're heading in a very dark direction.
15-20 years ago the mere idea of net migration of 1m a year would have been laughed at, as some kind of Nazi dystopian fantasy, as would the idea of 50,000 unvetted foreign young men simply invading our beaches, every year, and then being put in 4 star hotels at our expense
Or importing Taliban fighters because of "family" reunions. I honestly think the government, civil service and judiciary have all completely got a screw loose. The shock of a Reform government might be the only thing left to the British public to get any kind of real change on immigration and deportation of illegals and asylum seekers.
I think if we did get a Reform government and they had actually thought through what they wanted to do (stay with me....), it would be like after Brexit vote, the 10k working even harder to find ways to thwart such changes. In reality, I think much more likely scenario is the Reform would be like Trump government, not really thought beyond the slogans.
Trump 47 is definitely having much more success at deporting people than Trump 45. Reform are surely going to use Trump 47 as their blueprint and just fuck all of the international legal consequences as bullshit just like the US has done with their deportation programme.
He is getting back up from a supreme court that sways his way though. I have a funny feeling our supreme court might have different take on matters.
That won't be an issue, as the Great Repeal Bill will abolish The Supreme Court, and re-establish the Lord Chancellor's role as the Supreme Judge.
It won't be easy, but for the first time, the right in politics has a good idea of what it's up against.
Yes exactly. Parliament must reassert sovereignty over EVERYTHING. Roll back the entire Blairite liberal “consensus”. Destroy the blob. Sack anyone that objects - judges included
We need a peaceful revolution or we will have something nastier later. I want peace
Parliament already has sovereignty over anything, no judges can overrule a statute passed by parliament and signed by the King and even the Human Rights Act can be repealed
Wait just a fucking minute. Labour announced the voting age is to be dropped to 16 just at the moment a law is activated that means internet providers have to make sure people are 18 for vast swathes of content.
WTF?
Absurd, isn’t it? Votes for 16 isn’t being done for any principled reason, hence why it is so disconnected with everything else where the age of majority is either at, or being pushed to, 18.
Does no one ever sit in the Cabinet and suddenly just put their hand up and go 'you know this is illogical bollocks don't you?'
Mind you, in the old days, that was probably the job of the Cabinet Secretary.
Wait just a fucking minute. Labour announced the voting age is to be dropped to 16 just at the moment a law is activated that means internet providers have to make sure people are 18 for vast swathes of content.
WTF?
So they're going to have to vote for MPs based on subjects they are not allowed to know about?
(somewhere in a basement viewcode is rocking back and forth, muttering "they don't know how to fly the plane" over and over again)
It is madness. PG Wodehouse couldn't have done better.
Wait just a fucking minute. Labour announced the voting age is to be dropped to 16 just at the moment a law is activated that means internet providers have to make sure people are 18 for vast swathes of content.
WTF?
It's like when they announced £20bn blackhole and spending £20bn on carbon capture.
It's strange how as it gets late the site is left with the same old lags. The kind of people you wouldn't ever want to meet in real life and you wonder what happened to the nice guys who were around earlier? And you realise that they've quietly drifted off and if you want to stay sane you should do the same
The media grid meeting for last week will have been interesting...
Right votes for 16 year old...that is good for us as they all vote Labour, have you checked, nah, but they do...and we will spin it as they are very mature and informed so why shouldn't they get the vote
Anything else...no naked ladies for 16/17 year old, can't be trusted to be seeing boobies at that age.
The media grid meeting for last week will have been interesting...
Right votes for 16 year old...that is good for us as they all vote Labour, have you checked, nah, but they do...and we will spin it as they are very mature and informed so why shouldn't they get the vote
Anything else...no naked ladies for 16/17 year old, can't be trusted to be seeing boobies at that age.
Next week: 'We will stop the boats' and 'VAT on rubber dinghies removed to get rid of red tape and help growth'
The media grid meeting for last week will have been interesting...
Right votes for 16 year old...that is good for us as they all vote Labour, have you checked, nah, but they do...and we will spin it as they are very mature and informed so why shouldn't they get the vote
Anything else...no naked ladies for 16/17 year old, can't be trusted to be seeing boobies at that age.
The whole No10 operation is totally dysfunctional and no one seems to be in charge, Starmer desperately needs a loyal politically astute elected senior Minister to oversee the media/policy operation as well as keeping an eye on the various Ministerial departments.
He needs a Willie Whitelaw or a George Osborne. One of the biggest mistakes Theresa May made on becoming PM was to sack George Osborne, she should have kept him on in No11 or moved him to the Foreign Office. He was proved right when it came to her two most senior advisers while she was at the Home Office, and he was right about Dominic Cummings when he worked for Michael Gove.
Wait just a fucking minute. Labour announced the voting age is to be dropped to 16 just at the moment a law is activated that means internet providers have to make sure people are 18 for vast swathes of content.
WTF?
In much the same way the last government was making it all up as they went along, so too is this one... In the words of Mrs May: Nothing. Has. Changes.
Reading this is like reading something from the 1950s in terms of the fact they haven't visited the sea before.
"Sheer joy as kids see the sea for the first time, as cost of living's impact on school trips revealed Children from the Rockliffe Manor Primary school in Plumstead, south London, headed for a day of seaside fun at Broadstairs Beach in Kent. Some of them had never been to a beach before or even seen the sea."
Seaside? We used to travel 35 miles to the seaside as unaccompanied children. These days we'd be taken into care before we got the train home, and our parents imprisoned for neglect. Children can't even be trusted to walk to school on their own.
But in the late 1970s I went to the West End with teenage girls who'd never seen it before, just half an hour or so on the tube.
This was BNP policy around when Griffin was on Question Time. I see that the remnants of UKIP are now advocating it.
My paternal grandmother came to England in 1938 from Nazi Vienna. When my Grandad retired in 1980 they moved to Vienna. In 1990 they decided to move to Derbyshire, in part because the rise of the Freedom Party in Austria has unpleasant echoes for my grandmother of the rise of Fabian in the 1930s.
She died in 1997. I've recently been thinking quite often how it would feel for her today, had she been alive at the grand old age of 111, to see how far fascist politics has made inroads across democracies. I'm kinda glad she hasn't had to live through it.
F me. Nick Griffin and QT was nearly 20 years ago!
Reading this is like reading something from the 1950s in terms of the fact they haven't visited the sea before.
"Sheer joy as kids see the sea for the first time, as cost of living's impact on school trips revealed Children from the Rockliffe Manor Primary school in Plumstead, south London, headed for a day of seaside fun at Broadstairs Beach in Kent. Some of them had never been to a beach before or even seen the sea."
Seaside? We used to travel 35 miles to the seaside as unaccompanied children. These days we'd be taken into care before we got the train home, and our parents imprisoned for neglect. Children can't even be trusted to walk to school on their own.
But in the late 1970s I went to the West End with teenage girls who'd never seen it before, just half an hour or so on the tube.
"You had to walk thirty five miles to the seaside unaccompanied? You were lucky! That’s nowt. We had to….."
This was BNP policy around when Griffin was on Question Time. I see that the remnants of UKIP are now advocating it.
My paternal grandmother came to England in 1938 from Nazi Vienna. When my Grandad retired in 1980 they moved to Vienna. In 1990 they decided to move to Derbyshire, in part because the rise of the Freedom Party in Austria has unpleasant echoes for my grandmother of the rise of Fabian in the 1930s.
She died in 1997. I've recently been thinking quite often how it would feel for her today, had she been alive at the grand old age of 111, to see how far fascist politics has made inroads across democracies. I'm kinda glad she hasn't had to live through it.
Although, now that I think about it, at the time the BNP policy was for grants for "voluntary" repatriation. So we now have two MPs in Parliament with a more extreme policy than the BNP 15-20 years ago.
We're heading in a very dark direction.
15-20 years ago the mere idea of net migration of 1m a year would have been laughed at, as some kind of Nazi dystopian fantasy, as would the idea of 50,000 unvetted foreign young men simply invading our beaches, every year, and then being put in 4 star hotels at our expense
Or importing Taliban fighters because of "family" reunions. I honestly think the government, civil service and judiciary have all completely got a screw loose. The shock of a Reform government might be the only thing left to the British public to get any kind of real change on immigration and deportation of illegals and asylum seekers.
I think if we did get a Reform government and they had actually thought through what they wanted to do (stay with me....), it would be like after Brexit vote, the 10k working even harder to find ways to thwart such changes. In reality, I think much more likely scenario is the Reform would be like Trump government, not really thought beyond the slogans.
Trump 47 is definitely having much more success at deporting people than Trump 45. Reform are surely going to use Trump 47 as their blueprint and just fuck all of the international legal consequences as bullshit just like the US has done with their deportation programme.
Are you in favour of the way that ICE is operating?
I have decided that Zia Yusuf reminds me a bit of J D Vance. Impressive, hungry, but punchy, and a bit of a loose canon.
I feel that Reform would be safer with Suella and her husband balancing out the top team. But Zia obviously saw to that challenge by going after them (quite unfairly) over Afghanistan.
Just for you.
Cannon.
Although he does have a philosophy all of his own as well as a screw loose… so loose canon might work…
An elite team of police officers is to monitor social media for anti-migrant sentiment amid fears of summer riots. Detectives will be drawn from forces across the country to take part in a new investigations unit that will flag up early signs of potential civil unrest.
Calling BS on this, the thought there are "elite" police officers just doesn't pass the smell test.
Sounds dystopian.
Yes and no.
The police have always had “intelligence” units (albeit an oxymoron) and that makes perfect sense to try and anticipate trouble in advance. But some PR flunky making it a news story, nah…
The media grid meeting for last week will have been interesting...
Right votes for 16 year old...that is good for us as they all vote Labour, have you checked, nah, but they do...and we will spin it as they are very mature and informed so why shouldn't they get the vote
Anything else...no naked ladies for 16/17 year old, can't be trusted to be seeing boobies at that age.
Reading this is like reading something from the 1950s in terms of the fact they haven't visited the sea before.
"Sheer joy as kids see the sea for the first time, as cost of living's impact on school trips revealed Children from the Rockliffe Manor Primary school in Plumstead, south London, headed for a day of seaside fun at Broadstairs Beach in Kent. Some of them had never been to a beach before or even seen the sea."
Today’s Sunday Rawnsley, nice and early as we trundle through Riihimaki, and very pertinent indeed for our own forum:
Told that there’s been a gas leak in the building, Nigel Farage is the guy who fires up a cigarette. There’s no situation so combustible that he can’t contrive to try to make it more frightening.
“Civil disobedience on a vast scale”? “Nothing short of societal collapse”? Unless I am entirely mistaken about my country, Britain is not about to descend into the anarchic Fury Road dystopia feverishly predicted by the leader of Reform, presumably because he thinks that kind of apocalyptic demagoguery plays to his political advantage. This is Trump-like “American carnage” stuff. Not at all British.
The language used by prominent politicians can cool confrontations and draw incensed folk back from the brink. Words can also feed febrility and stoke fears. No one knows this better than Mr Farage. Here’s his Achilles heel – or one of them. As a rule, Britain has balked at putting someone into Number 10 if they can’t be trusted not to strike sparks when the air is combustible.
There have been signs that Mr Farage grasps that he will not achieve his ambitions unless his party can “broaden its appeal”. This is generally interpreted as meaning that it needs to behave less recklessly, come over as more professional and stop looking like a one-man protest party with a playbook that contains just the single trick. Hostility to migration has been a potent attractor of support for Reform among voters for whom the issue is fiercely salient. It has also been a support-limiter among voters who see benefits from immigration or among those who find Reform monomaniacally obsessed with the one subject at the expense of all the other issues facing Britain. Then there are the many voters who simply find the party too repulsive and its leader too toxic to ever contemplate supporting it.
Mr Farage affects not to be bothered that none of his sums add up. For now and for the immediate future, this lack of credibility will probably not greatly matter. Its rivals already sound resigned to Reform doing well at next May’s mid-term elections, which will be a classic opportunity for protest voting. At a general election, when Britain is choosing a government, I suspect his irresponsibility will matter a lot. There’s a clue in the opinion polls. Given the choice between prime minister Farage or prime minister Starmer or Badenoch or Davey, pollsters report that in each head-to-head most voters will plump for anybody but the Reform leader. Britain has many problems but the country retains an admirable reluctance to make a prime minister of someone who can’t be trusted around matches.
Found the race difficult for betting as passing is hard but there'll be strategy, however there's also the chance of rain. So... I went for Bearman to score at 3.1. He's 12th but has much better pace and has a high downforce setup. Handy if it's wet.
Also, I put a pound or two on Hulkenberg to win at 375 each way. Just in case...
The media grid meeting for last week will have been interesting...
Right votes for 16 year old...that is good for us as they all vote Labour, have you checked, nah, but they do...and we will spin it as they are very mature and informed so why shouldn't they get the vote
Anything else...no naked ladies for 16/17 year old, can't be trusted to be seeing boobies at that age.
boobies might influence their vote?
Unlikely. I don't think they're too impressed with this bunch of tits and c
The media grid meeting for last week will have been interesting...
Right votes for 16 year old...that is good for us as they all vote Labour, have you checked, nah, but they do...and we will spin it as they are very mature and informed so why shouldn't they get the vote
Anything else...no naked ladies for 16/17 year old, can't be trusted to be seeing boobies at that age.
boobies might influence their vote?
Unlikely. I don't think they're too impressed with this bunch of tits and c
Labour don’t want them to have a basis for comparison?
The media grid meeting for last week will have been interesting...
Right votes for 16 year old...that is good for us as they all vote Labour, have you checked, nah, but they do...and we will spin it as they are very mature and informed so why shouldn't they get the vote
Anything else...no naked ladies for 16/17 year old, can't be trusted to be seeing boobies at that age.
boobies might influence their vote?
Unlikely. I don't think they're too impressed with this bunch of tits and c
Labour don’t want them to have a basis for comparison?
Today’s Sunday Rawnsley, nice and early as we trundle through Riihimaki, and very pertinent indeed for our own forum:
Told that there’s been a gas leak in the building, Nigel Farage is the guy who fires up a cigarette. There’s no situation so combustible that he can’t contrive to try to make it more frightening.
“Civil disobedience on a vast scale”? “Nothing short of societal collapse”? Unless I am entirely mistaken about my country, Britain is not about to descend into the anarchic Fury Road dystopia feverishly predicted by the leader of Reform, presumably because he thinks that kind of apocalyptic demagoguery plays to his political advantage. This is Trump-like “American carnage” stuff. Not at all British.
The language used by prominent politicians can cool confrontations and draw incensed folk back from the brink. Words can also feed febrility and stoke fears. No one knows this better than Mr Farage. Here’s his Achilles heel – or one of them. As a rule, Britain has balked at putting someone into Number 10 if they can’t be trusted not to strike sparks when the air is combustible.
There have been signs that Mr Farage grasps that he will not achieve his ambitions unless his party can “broaden its appeal”. This is generally interpreted as meaning that it needs to behave less recklessly, come over as more professional and stop looking like a one-man protest party with a playbook that contains just the single trick. Hostility to migration has been a potent attractor of support for Reform among voters for whom the issue is fiercely salient. It has also been a support-limiter among voters who see benefits from immigration or among those who find Reform monomaniacally obsessed with the one subject at the expense of all the other issues facing Britain. Then there are the many voters who simply find the party too repulsive and its leader too toxic to ever contemplate supporting it.
Mr Farage affects not to be bothered that none of his sums add up. For now and for the immediate future, this lack of credibility will probably not greatly matter. Its rivals already sound resigned to Reform doing well at next May’s mid-term elections, which will be a classic opportunity for protest voting. At a general election, when Britain is choosing a government, I suspect his irresponsibility will matter a lot. There’s a clue in the opinion polls. Given the choice between prime minister Farage or prime minister Starmer or Badenoch or Davey, pollsters report that in each head-to-head most voters will plump for anybody but the Reform leader. Britain has many problems but the country retains an admirable reluctance to make a prime minister of someone who can’t be trusted around matches.
Given the choice between prime minister Farage or prime minister Starmer or Badenoch or Davey, pollsters report that in each head-to-head most voters will plump for anybody but the Reform leader.
People who fantasise about a Reform government need to reflect on this and remember FPTP.
Today’s Sunday Rawnsley, nice and early as we trundle through Riihimaki, and very pertinent indeed for our own forum:
Told that there’s been a gas leak in the building, Nigel Farage is the guy who fires up a cigarette. There’s no situation so combustible that he can’t contrive to try to make it more frightening.
“Civil disobedience on a vast scale”? “Nothing short of societal collapse”? Unless I am entirely mistaken about my country, Britain is not about to descend into the anarchic Fury Road dystopia feverishly predicted by the leader of Reform, presumably because he thinks that kind of apocalyptic demagoguery plays to his political advantage. This is Trump-like “American carnage” stuff. Not at all British.
The language used by prominent politicians can cool confrontations and draw incensed folk back from the brink. Words can also feed febrility and stoke fears. No one knows this better than Mr Farage. Here’s his Achilles heel – or one of them. As a rule, Britain has balked at putting someone into Number 10 if they can’t be trusted not to strike sparks when the air is combustible.
There have been signs that Mr Farage grasps that he will not achieve his ambitions unless his party can “broaden its appeal”. This is generally interpreted as meaning that it needs to behave less recklessly, come over as more professional and stop looking like a one-man protest party with a playbook that contains just the single trick. Hostility to migration has been a potent attractor of support for Reform among voters for whom the issue is fiercely salient. It has also been a support-limiter among voters who see benefits from immigration or among those who find Reform monomaniacally obsessed with the one subject at the expense of all the other issues facing Britain. Then there are the many voters who simply find the party too repulsive and its leader too toxic to ever contemplate supporting it.
Mr Farage affects not to be bothered that none of his sums add up. For now and for the immediate future, this lack of credibility will probably not greatly matter. Its rivals already sound resigned to Reform doing well at next May’s mid-term elections, which will be a classic opportunity for protest voting. At a general election, when Britain is choosing a government, I suspect his irresponsibility will matter a lot. There’s a clue in the opinion polls. Given the choice between prime minister Farage or prime minister Starmer or Badenoch or Davey, pollsters report that in each head-to-head most voters will plump for anybody but the Reform leader. Britain has many problems but the country retains an admirable reluctance to make a prime minister of someone who can’t be trusted around matches.
Given the choice between prime minister Farage or prime minister Starmer or Badenoch or Davey, pollsters report that in each head-to-head most voters will plump for anybody but the Reform leader.
People who fantasise about a Reform government need to reflect on this and remember FPTP.
The problem with a FPTP inn a 4-5 party system will be people correctly predicting how is the not Farage candidate who can win in their constituency - because there are likely to be 2 possible options in many constituencies..
Today’s Sunday Rawnsley, nice and early as we trundle through Riihimaki, and very pertinent indeed for our own forum:
Told that there’s been a gas leak in the building, Nigel Farage is the guy who fires up a cigarette. There’s no situation so combustible that he can’t contrive to try to make it more frightening.
“Civil disobedience on a vast scale”? “Nothing short of societal collapse”? Unless I am entirely mistaken about my country, Britain is not about to descend into the anarchic Fury Road dystopia feverishly predicted by the leader of Reform, presumably because he thinks that kind of apocalyptic demagoguery plays to his political advantage. This is Trump-like “American carnage” stuff. Not at all British.
The language used by prominent politicians can cool confrontations and draw incensed folk back from the brink. Words can also feed febrility and stoke fears. No one knows this better than Mr Farage. Here’s his Achilles heel – or one of them. As a rule, Britain has balked at putting someone into Number 10 if they can’t be trusted not to strike sparks when the air is combustible.
There have been signs that Mr Farage grasps that he will not achieve his ambitions unless his party can “broaden its appeal”. This is generally interpreted as meaning that it needs to behave less recklessly, come over as more professional and stop looking like a one-man protest party with a playbook that contains just the single trick. Hostility to migration has been a potent attractor of support for Reform among voters for whom the issue is fiercely salient. It has also been a support-limiter among voters who see benefits from immigration or among those who find Reform monomaniacally obsessed with the one subject at the expense of all the other issues facing Britain. Then there are the many voters who simply find the party too repulsive and its leader too toxic to ever contemplate supporting it.
Mr Farage affects not to be bothered that none of his sums add up. For now and for the immediate future, this lack of credibility will probably not greatly matter. Its rivals already sound resigned to Reform doing well at next May’s mid-term elections, which will be a classic opportunity for protest voting. At a general election, when Britain is choosing a government, I suspect his irresponsibility will matter a lot. There’s a clue in the opinion polls. Given the choice between prime minister Farage or prime minister Starmer or Badenoch or Davey, pollsters report that in each head-to-head most voters will plump for anybody but the Reform leader. Britain has many problems but the country retains an admirable reluctance to make a prime minister of someone who can’t be trusted around matches.
Given the choice between prime minister Farage or prime minister Starmer or Badenoch or Davey, pollsters report that in each head-to-head most voters will plump for anybody but the Reform leader.
People who fantasise about a Reform government need to reflect on this and remember FPTP.
The problem with a FPTP inn a 4-5 party system will be people correctly predicting how is the not Farage candidate who can win in their constituency - because there are likely to be 2 possible options in many constituencies..
Today’s Sunday Rawnsley, nice and early as we trundle through Riihimaki, and very pertinent indeed for our own forum:
Told that there’s been a gas leak in the building, Nigel Farage is the guy who fires up a cigarette. There’s no situation so combustible that he can’t contrive to try to make it more frightening.
“Civil disobedience on a vast scale”? “Nothing short of societal collapse”? Unless I am entirely mistaken about my country, Britain is not about to descend into the anarchic Fury Road dystopia feverishly predicted by the leader of Reform, presumably because he thinks that kind of apocalyptic demagoguery plays to his political advantage. This is Trump-like “American carnage” stuff. Not at all British.
The language used by prominent politicians can cool confrontations and draw incensed folk back from the brink. Words can also feed febrility and stoke fears. No one knows this better than Mr Farage. Here’s his Achilles heel – or one of them. As a rule, Britain has balked at putting someone into Number 10 if they can’t be trusted not to strike sparks when the air is combustible.
There have been signs that Mr Farage grasps that he will not achieve his ambitions unless his party can “broaden its appeal”. This is generally interpreted as meaning that it needs to behave less recklessly, come over as more professional and stop looking like a one-man protest party with a playbook that contains just the single trick. Hostility to migration has been a potent attractor of support for Reform among voters for whom the issue is fiercely salient. It has also been a support-limiter among voters who see benefits from immigration or among those who find Reform monomaniacally obsessed with the one subject at the expense of all the other issues facing Britain. Then there are the many voters who simply find the party too repulsive and its leader too toxic to ever contemplate supporting it.
Mr Farage affects not to be bothered that none of his sums add up. For now and for the immediate future, this lack of credibility will probably not greatly matter. Its rivals already sound resigned to Reform doing well at next May’s mid-term elections, which will be a classic opportunity for protest voting. At a general election, when Britain is choosing a government, I suspect his irresponsibility will matter a lot. There’s a clue in the opinion polls. Given the choice between prime minister Farage or prime minister Starmer or Badenoch or Davey, pollsters report that in each head-to-head most voters will plump for anybody but the Reform leader. Britain has many problems but the country retains an admirable reluctance to make a prime minister of someone who can’t be trusted around matches.
Given the choice between prime minister Farage or prime minister Starmer or Badenoch or Davey, pollsters report that in each head-to-head most voters will plump for anybody but the Reform leader.
People who fantasise about a Reform government need to reflect on this and remember FPTP.
The problem with a FPTP inn a 4-5 party system will be people correctly predicting how is the not Farage candidate who can win in their constituency - because there are likely to be 2 possible options in many constituencies..
A focus by the other parties on 'not Farage' or, god forbid they get that far, 'not Corbyn' risks rather obscuring the fact that the other likely MPs in these parties are far more to be avoided than the leaders.
I think a lot of Con/Lab/LD MPs are rather useless, but they're intellectual titans compared with the riff-raff that the lesser parties put forward.
Today’s Sunday Rawnsley, nice and early as we trundle through Riihimaki, and very pertinent indeed for our own forum:
Told that there’s been a gas leak in the building, Nigel Farage is the guy who fires up a cigarette. There’s no situation so combustible that he can’t contrive to try to make it more frightening.
“Civil disobedience on a vast scale”? “Nothing short of societal collapse”? Unless I am entirely mistaken about my country, Britain is not about to descend into the anarchic Fury Road dystopia feverishly predicted by the leader of Reform, presumably because he thinks that kind of apocalyptic demagoguery plays to his political advantage. This is Trump-like “American carnage” stuff. Not at all British.
The language used by prominent politicians can cool confrontations and draw incensed folk back from the brink. Words can also feed febrility and stoke fears. No one knows this better than Mr Farage. Here’s his Achilles heel – or one of them. As a rule, Britain has balked at putting someone into Number 10 if they can’t be trusted not to strike sparks when the air is combustible.
There have been signs that Mr Farage grasps that he will not achieve his ambitions unless his party can “broaden its appeal”. This is generally interpreted as meaning that it needs to behave less recklessly, come over as more professional and stop looking like a one-man protest party with a playbook that contains just the single trick. Hostility to migration has been a potent attractor of support for Reform among voters for whom the issue is fiercely salient. It has also been a support-limiter among voters who see benefits from immigration or among those who find Reform monomaniacally obsessed with the one subject at the expense of all the other issues facing Britain. Then there are the many voters who simply find the party too repulsive and its leader too toxic to ever contemplate supporting it.
Mr Farage affects not to be bothered that none of his sums add up. For now and for the immediate future, this lack of credibility will probably not greatly matter. Its rivals already sound resigned to Reform doing well at next May’s mid-term elections, which will be a classic opportunity for protest voting. At a general election, when Britain is choosing a government, I suspect his irresponsibility will matter a lot. There’s a clue in the opinion polls. Given the choice between prime minister Farage or prime minister Starmer or Badenoch or Davey, pollsters report that in each head-to-head most voters will plump for anybody but the Reform leader. Britain has many problems but the country retains an admirable reluctance to make a prime minister of someone who can’t be trusted around matches.
Perhaps, but that might also prove wishful thinking.
I've been astonished at how his favourability ratings have changed.
Comments
WTF?
(somewhere in a basement viewcode is rocking back and forth, muttering "they don't know how to fly the plane" over and over again)
Mind you, in the old days, that was probably the job of the Cabinet Secretary.
No wonder they have hired the bloke from the Sun.
Right votes for 16 year old...that is good for us as they all vote Labour, have you checked, nah, but they do...and we will spin it as they are very mature and informed so why shouldn't they get the vote
Anything else...no naked ladies for 16/17 year old, can't be trusted to be seeing boobies at that age.
He needs a Willie Whitelaw or a George Osborne. One of the biggest mistakes Theresa May made on becoming PM was to sack George Osborne, she should have kept him on in No11 or moved him to the Foreign Office. He was proved right when it came to her two most senior advisers while she was at the Home Office, and he was right about Dominic Cummings when he worked for Michael Gove.
But in the late 1970s I went to the West End with teenage girls who'd never seen it before, just half an hour or so on the tube.
The police have always had “intelligence” units (albeit an oxymoron) and that makes perfect sense to try and anticipate trouble in advance. But some PR flunky making it a news story, nah…
Told that there’s been a gas leak in the building, Nigel Farage is the guy who fires up a cigarette. There’s no situation so combustible that he can’t contrive to try to make it more frightening.
“Civil disobedience on a vast scale”? “Nothing short of societal collapse”? Unless I am entirely mistaken about my country, Britain is not about to descend into the anarchic Fury Road dystopia feverishly predicted by the leader of Reform, presumably because he thinks that kind of apocalyptic demagoguery plays to his political advantage. This is Trump-like “American carnage” stuff. Not at all British.
The language used by prominent politicians can cool confrontations and draw incensed folk back from the brink. Words can also feed febrility and stoke fears. No one knows this better than Mr Farage. Here’s his Achilles heel – or one of them. As a rule, Britain has balked at putting someone into Number 10 if they can’t be trusted not to strike sparks when the air is combustible.
There have been signs that Mr Farage grasps that he will not achieve his ambitions unless his party can “broaden its appeal”. This is generally interpreted as meaning that it needs to behave less recklessly, come over as more professional and stop looking like a one-man protest party with a playbook that contains just the single trick. Hostility to migration has been a potent attractor of support for Reform among voters for whom the issue is fiercely salient. It has also been a support-limiter among voters who see benefits from immigration or among those who find Reform monomaniacally obsessed with the one subject at the expense of all the other issues facing Britain. Then there are the many voters who simply find the party too repulsive and its leader too toxic to ever contemplate supporting it.
Mr Farage affects not to be bothered that none of his sums add up. For now and for the immediate future, this lack of credibility will probably not greatly matter. Its rivals already sound resigned to Reform doing well at next May’s mid-term elections, which will be a classic opportunity for protest voting. At a general election, when Britain is choosing a government, I suspect his irresponsibility will matter a lot. There’s a clue in the opinion polls. Given the choice between prime minister Farage or prime minister Starmer or Badenoch or Davey, pollsters report that in each head-to-head most voters will plump for anybody but the Reform leader. Britain has many problems but the country retains an admirable reluctance to make a prime minister of someone who can’t be trusted around matches.
Betting PostGood morning, everyone.
Found the race difficult for betting as passing is hard but there'll be strategy, however there's also the chance of rain. So... I went for Bearman to score at 3.1. He's 12th but has much better pace and has a high downforce setup. Handy if it's wet.
Also, I put a pound or two on Hulkenberg to win at 375 each way. Just in case...
People who fantasise about a Reform government need to reflect on this and remember FPTP.
I think a lot of Con/Lab/LD MPs are rather useless, but they're intellectual titans compared with the riff-raff that the lesser parties put forward.
I've been astonished at how his favourability ratings have changed.
NEW THREAD