For me, any bet on the next election at this stage is a mug's game.
Were at roughly the same stage of this Parliament as we were at the time of the Hartlepool by-election when Massive was master of all he surveyed and there was every reason to expect an increased Conservative majority at the next election.
And that didn't quite happen as expected. (Not because of Covid directly, but because of the Trussterfuck.)
So until 2027 I'm holding fire on any predictions.
(By then Farage will of course be 64. I know Trump is about 530 but age may become an issue for him especially if Starmer doesn't fight the next election.)
WRT Farage's populist proposals on migration, these are the key questions I don't think they address:
1) Does Reform propose deportation without process (like Abrego Garcia) whereby a person can be taken from UK territory/UK waters and flown somewhere else without opportunity for a hearing before a court/tribunal?
2) Does a Reform government intend (like Trump's) to overlook or ignore court rulings either about general law or about named individuals?
What the proposals mean, and how much the rule of law nature of UK society would be altered (see the impact ofTrump's gangster regime) depends on those two issues.
Another collision where the car's computer seems to have helped evidence the earlier speed:
The force of the collision caused the police Volvo to be propelled into the back of the Mercedes the officer had stopped.
Mr Mohammed said both cars - along with the one Hood had been driving - suffered "catastrophic damage".
Footage from inside the constables' vehicle at the moment of impact was played in court.
Hood had been going at 86mph when he hit the police car, but had reached 134mph five seconds before the smash.
Hood and one of his passengers managed to clamber out of the Mercedes without getting help for the causalities, some of whom had life-threatening injuries.
WRT Farage's populist proposals on migration, these are the key questions I don't think they address:
1) Does Reform propose deportation without process (like Abrego Garcia) whereby a person can be taken from UK territory/UK waters and flown somewhere else without opportunity for a hearing before a court/tribunal?
2) Does a Reform government intend (like Trump's) to overlook or ignore court rulings either about general law or about named individuals?
What the proposals mean, and how much the rule of law nature of UK society would be altered (see the impact ofTrump's gangster regime) depends on those two issues.
Seems odd for Farage to go this early with his manifesto proposals given the time till the next election. Is there concern about being behind the curve on Asylum hotels? Perhaps Jenrick is beginning to register with his core group. Whatever the issue, he's now putting up targets to be shot at.
For me, any bet on the next election at this stage is a mug's game.
Were at roughly the same stage of this Parliament as we were at the time of the Hartlepool by-election when Massive was master of all he surveyed and there was every reason to expect an increased Conservative majority at the next election.
And that didn't quite happen as expected. (Not because of Covid directly, but because of the Trussterfuck.)
So until 2027 I'm holding fire on any predictions.
(By then Farage will of course be 64. I know Trump is about 530 but age may become an issue for him especially if Starmer doesn't fight the next election.)
I mostly agree with all of this but there is an important difference in your comparison between Hartlepool by election time and now.
It is much much easier for a popular government to lose popularity (trajectory of Hartlepool to 2024 General Election!) than it is for an unpopular government to regain popularity (trajectory from now to 2029).
IMO Labour don't have long to draw a completely different picture of what they are about; they have a chance in October's budget, and if they could be in the position to split the Tory and Reform party votes about equally, both at lowish 20s, Labour with low 30s could win most seats. It is becoming less likely by the week.
WRT Farage's populist proposals on migration, these are the key questions I don't think they address:
1) Does Reform propose deportation without process (like Abrego Garcia) whereby a person can be taken from UK territory/UK waters and flown somewhere else without opportunity for a hearing before a court/tribunal?
2) Does a Reform government intend (like Trump's) to overlook or ignore court rulings either about general law or about named individuals?
What the proposals mean, and how much the rule of law nature of UK society would be altered (see the impact ofTrump's gangster regime) depends on those two issues.
Seems odd for Farage to go this early with his manifesto proposals given the time till the next election. Is there concern about being behind the curve on Asylum hotels? Perhaps Jenrick is beginning to register with his core group. Whatever the issue, he's now putting up targets to be shot at.
More likely, The Times wanted a big story they could prep in advance so that hacks could enjoy the Bank Holiday weekend. And Farage went big on boats because he's a bit of a one-trick pony.
But yes, definition of the line is a risk for him. There are some people in the Reform column right now who aren't good people. Farage wants their votes, but not their public endorsement.
Do we know what Lucy Connolly's licence conditions are set to be?
No but they must include these (repeated FPT):
(f) be of good behaviour, and not behave in a way which undermines the purposes of the release on licence, which are to protect the public, prevent re-offending and promote successful re-integration into the community;
(g) not commit any offence.
It can easily be argued that going around saying that despite my guilty plea to incitement I am the victim, really I am innocent because I ought to be allowed to promote a raging mob setting fire to people and please can I have my fee from GB News and a large advance on my book/series of articles breaches the spirit of (f). As does voluntarily meeting anyone connected with the pro soviet gangster oligarchy.
For me, any bet on the next election at this stage is a mug's game.
Were at roughly the same stage of this Parliament as we were at the time of the Hartlepool by-election when Massive was master of all he surveyed and there was every reason to expect an increased Conservative majority at the next election.
And that didn't quite happen as expected. (Not because of Covid directly, but because of the Trussterfuck.)
So until 2027 I'm holding fire on any predictions.
(By then Farage will of course be 64. I know Trump is about 530 but age may become an issue for him especially if Starmer doesn't fight the next election.)
I mostly agree with all of this but there is an important difference in your comparison between Hartlepool by election time and now.
It is much much easier for a popular government to lose popularity (trajectory of Hartlepool to 2024 General Election!) than it is for an unpopular government to regain popularity (trajectory from now to 2029).
IMO Labour don't have long to draw a completely different picture of what they are about; they have a chance in October's budget, and if they could be in the position to split the Tory and Reform party votes about equally, both at lowish 20s, Labour with low 30s could win most seats. It is becoming less likely by the week.
On the contrary it is very common for unpopular governments to regain popularity. Usually, but not always, it is accompanied by a change of leader. As we saw in 1990, or 1963, or 1957 for the Conservatives and arguably 1976 and 2007 for Labour although it did not save them at the next election. But it can happen without that, as in 1981-1982 (and that was before the Falklands War, not because of it) or indeed in 1969-70 (although that didn't save Labour in the 1970 election).
I'm not saying it will happen, merely that the electorate is so volatile at the moment that pretty much anything could happen. That's why I'd think twice about even having trading bets on this market.
WRT Farage's populist proposals on migration, these are the key questions I don't think they address:
1) Does Reform propose deportation without process (like Abrego Garcia) whereby a person can be taken from UK territory/UK waters and flown somewhere else without opportunity for a hearing before a court/tribunal?
2) Does a Reform government intend (like Trump's) to overlook or ignore court rulings either about general law or about named individuals?
What the proposals mean, and how much the rule of law nature of UK society would be altered (see the impact ofTrump's gangster regime) depends on those two issues.
Seems odd for Farage to go this early with his manifesto proposals given the time till the next election. Is there concern about being behind the curve on Asylum hotels? Perhaps Jenrick is beginning to register with his core group. Whatever the issue, he's now putting up targets to be shot at.
I'd call it nonesense on stilts:
Reform would seek to sign deals with Afghanistan, Eritrea and other countries that are large sources of small-boat migrants, despite claims of human rights abuses by their governments.
The party would also look to “third countries” such as Rwanda and Albania to house asylum seekers and seek to use British overseas territories such as Ascension Island as a “fallback” if people could not be sent elsewhere.
Is not this nicked from the Tories?:
Under the plans, the European Convention on Human Rights would be replaced by a British Bill of Rights.
There's a lot more of it. His biggest problem imo is that Labour might make progress.
15% for the Tories most seats? There's one born every minute.
The Tories seem to have got their mojo back after the Epping court case.
They are going in with their boots on over immigration and asylum. Philp has been very effective at implying immigration and asylum has only been a social concern since July last year.
Immigration is not an issue for me living in the rural Vale of Glamorgan, although I understand there is an asylum hotel near Cardiff Airport. Who knew that? I didn't know that, and there was certainly no misbehaviour reported anecdotally or in the Glamorgan Star.
Jenrick has been very active since the ruling. Some of his comments have been very incendiary. Who knows? If the large scale riots get out of hand and it kicks off this weekend and key Conservatives are filmed at the scene, the voter will see for themselves that asylum hotels were nothing to do with the Tories. I am sure that is the planned narrative anyway.
And then we have Conservative martyr St Lucy who according to her and GBNews was politically imprisoned for no reason, but for Starmer's evil whim.
The Tories are smashing this, and even Nigel has been left trailing too.
For me, any bet on the next election at this stage is a mug's game.
Were at roughly the same stage of this Parliament as we were at the time of the Hartlepool by-election when Massive was master of all he surveyed and there was every reason to expect an increased Conservative majority at the next election.
And that didn't quite happen as expected. (Not because of Covid directly, but because of the Trussterfuck.)
So until 2027 I'm holding fire on any predictions.
(By then Farage will of course be 64. I know Trump is about 530 but age may become an issue for him especially if Starmer doesn't fight the next election.)
I mostly agree with all of this but there is an important difference in your comparison between Hartlepool by election time and now.
It is much much easier for a popular government to lose popularity (trajectory of Hartlepool to 2024 General Election!) than it is for an unpopular government to regain popularity (trajectory from now to 2029).
IMO Labour don't have long to draw a completely different picture of what they are about; they have a chance in October's budget, and if they could be in the position to split the Tory and Reform party votes about equally, both at lowish 20s, Labour with low 30s could win most seats. It is becoming less likely by the week.
On the contrary it is very common for unpopular governments to regain popularity. Usually, but not always, it is accompanied by a change of leader. As we saw in 1990, or 1963, or 1957 for the Conservatives and arguably 1976 and 2007 for Labour although it did not save them at the next election. But it can happen without that, as in 1981-1982 (and that was before the Falklands War, not because of it) or indeed in 1969-70 (although that didn't save Labour in the 1970 election).
I'm not saying it will happen, merely that the electorate is so volatile at the moment that pretty much anything could happen. That's why I'd think twice about even having trading bets on this market.
Absolutely fair points. To which I make two further ones: I said it was easier to lose popularity than to gain it when you are in government. I think that is probably more or less true.
But especially, I think 'that was then and this is now'. My intuition (ie guess) is that in these days right now it is very easy indeed to lose popularity in government and quite hard to regain it. Reasons: Governing is about solutions not talk. We happen to live in times in which solutions are in short supply.
DNI Tulsi Gabbard has classified all Russia-Ukraine peace negotiation info as “NOFORN” (No Foreign Dissemination), barring sharing with allied intelligence, including the Five Eyes: U.S., U.K., Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. https://x.com/PolymarketIntel/status/1958905771514597565
Labour have till the end of the year to reverse things.
No I think they have 3 years to answer the 4 questions Northern Al mentined in his post yesterday. Which is about two years longer than their opponents have to find a candidate and a party who can beat them.
Farage is repulsivre to far too many voters to stand a chance and if you remove him what are you left with? A less noxious Reform leader? I haven't seen one. It's not the sort of Party that attracts well meaning attractive potential leaders
For me, any bet on the next election at this stage is a mug's game.
Were at roughly the same stage of this Parliament as we were at the time of the Hartlepool by-election when Massive was master of all he surveyed and there was every reason to expect an increased Conservative majority at the next election.
And that didn't quite happen as expected. (Not because of Covid directly, but because of the Trussterfuck.)
So until 2027 I'm holding fire on any predictions.
(By then Farage will of course be 64. I know Trump is about 530 but age may become an issue for him especially if Starmer doesn't fight the next election.)
I mostly agree with all of this but there is an important difference in your comparison between Hartlepool by election time and now.
It is much much easier for a popular government to lose popularity (trajectory of Hartlepool to 2024 General Election!) than it is for an unpopular government to regain popularity (trajectory from now to 2029).
IMO Labour don't have long to draw a completely different picture of what they are about; they have a chance in October's budget, and if they could be in the position to split the Tory and Reform party votes about equally, both at lowish 20s, Labour with low 30s could win most seats. It is becoming less likely by the week.
On the contrary it is very common for unpopular governments to regain popularity. Usually, but not always, it is accompanied by a change of leader. As we saw in 1990, or 1963, or 1957 for the Conservatives and arguably 1976 and 2007 for Labour although it did not save them at the next election. But it can happen without that, as in 1981-1982 (and that was before the Falklands War, not because of it) or indeed in 1969-70 (although that didn't save Labour in the 1970 election).
I'm not saying it will happen, merely that the electorate is so volatile at the moment that pretty much anything could happen. That's why I'd think twice about even having trading bets on this market.
In the meantime, the best thing for Labour is probably to keep Starmer and Reeves in place, absorbing the toxicity, so that their candidate for 2029 is a reasonably fresh face.
And who knows? Maybe things will get better. The wiring between government action and consequences is tangled at the best of times.
Do we know what Lucy Connolly's licence conditions are set to be?
I do wonder what her reaction would be to people who appeal to the ECHR or other foreign powers and organisations to stop imigrants being deported. Hoping she’s all for that too as she seems to think it’s ok to appeal to foreign powers herself regarding British matters.
I personally think her sentence was too harsh, I think it was probably so as an attempted deterrent by the judge but it shouldn’t be the role of judges to make points. I think it creates a problem of perception where “two tier justice” will be a rallying cry and so a Rod has been created for the justice system’s back if consistency isn’t apparent.
She also needs to accept she broke the law and got punished. I also think she’s looking at the monetisation aspect of playing this up with Trump/Maga people and will be getting big fees to talk and slag off Britain.
A General all round shitshow and a great display of the law of unintended consequences - the police’s decisions re info on the Southport murders, her decision to do a stupid tweet, a judge sending a message, and then there will be further unintended consequences of her being used by the MAGA and Reformish movements.
Labour have till the end of the year to reverse things.
Which year ?
2025. Next year we start speculating about an election 'the year after next' and it's too late to start the hard graft of painful government towards sunlit uplands. October's budget is the key make or break event.
15% for the Tories most seats? There's one born every minute.
The Tories seem to have got their mojo back after the Epping court case.
They are going in with their boots on over immigration and asylum. Philp has been very effective at implying immigration and asylum has only been a social concern since July last year.
Immigration is not an issue for me living in the rural Vale of Glamorgan, although I understand there is an asylum hotel near Cardiff Airport. Who knew that? I didn't know that, and there was certainly no misbehaviour reported anecdotally or in the Glamorgan Star.
Jenrick has been very active since the ruling. Some of his comments have been very incendiary. Who knows? If the large scale riots get out of hand and it kicks off this weekend and key Conservatives are filmed at the scene, the voter will see for themselves that asylum hotels were nothing to do with the Tories. I am sure that is the planned narrative anyway.
And then we have Conservative martyr St Lucy who according to her and GBNews was politically imprisoned for no reason, but for Starmer's evil whim.
The Tories are smashing this, and even Nigel has been left trailing too.
DNI Tulsi Gabbard has classified all Russia-Ukraine peace negotiation info as “NOFORN” (No Foreign Dissemination), barring sharing with allied intelligence, including the Five Eyes: U.S., U.K., Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. https://x.com/PolymarketIntel/status/1958905771514597565
Oh well, they'll have to read the WhatsApp channel then.
For me, any bet on the next election at this stage is a mug's game.
Were at roughly the same stage of this Parliament as we were at the time of the Hartlepool by-election when Massive was master of all he surveyed and there was every reason to expect an increased Conservative majority at the next election.
And that didn't quite happen as expected. (Not because of Covid directly, but because of the Trussterfuck.)
So until 2027 I'm holding fire on any predictions.
(By then Farage will of course be 64. I know Trump is about 530 but age may become an issue for him especially if Starmer doesn't fight the next election.)
I mostly agree with all of this but there is an important difference in your comparison between Hartlepool by election time and now.
It is much much easier for a popular government to lose popularity (trajectory of Hartlepool to 2024 General Election!) than it is for an unpopular government to regain popularity (trajectory from now to 2029).
IMO Labour don't have long to draw a completely different picture of what they are about; they have a chance in October's budget, and if they could be in the position to split the Tory and Reform party votes about equally, both at lowish 20s, Labour with low 30s could win most seats. It is becoming less likely by the week.
On the contrary it is very common for unpopular governments to regain popularity. Usually, but not always, it is accompanied by a change of leader. As we saw in 1990, or 1963, or 1957 for the Conservatives and arguably 1976 and 2007 for Labour although it did not save them at the next election. But it can happen without that, as in 1981-1982 (and that was before the Falklands War, not because of it) or indeed in 1969-70 (although that didn't save Labour in the 1970 election).
I'm not saying it will happen, merely that the electorate is so volatile at the moment that pretty much anything could happen. That's why I'd think twice about even having trading bets on this market.
Absolutely fair points. To which I make two further ones: I said it was easier to lose popularity than to gain it when you are in government. I think that is probably more or less true.
But especially, I think 'that was then and this is now'. My intuition (ie guess) is that in these days right now it is very easy indeed to lose popularity in government and quite hard to regain it. Reasons: Governing is about solutions not talk. We happen to live in times in which solutions are in short supply.
The question becomes less how you judge the Government's record and we are barely a quarter of the way through this administration so those who have already decided they are the "worst Government in history" are probably being more than a little subjective than to look at the alternatives and see if any of them look or sound or would be better.
We don't even know the issues which will be salient in 2028/29 - will it still be about Gaza and "small boats"? I suspect not. The debate has always moved from immigration to integration and the calls for large scale deportations which seem to be gaining currency irrespective of the legalities, practicalities and logistics.
We also seem to have to magic up "camps" to house 60,000 people out of thin air - again, difficult problems are rarely solved by sinmplistic, impractical solutions.
I suspect the economy will be top of the list as it usually is and that will come down to the hardy perennial of statistics vs perceptions.
15% for the Tories most seats? There's one born every minute.
The Tories seem to have got their mojo back after the Epping court case.
They are going in with their boots on over immigration and asylum. Philp has been very effective at implying immigration and asylum has only been a social concern since July last year.
Immigration is not an issue for me living in the rural Vale of Glamorgan, although I understand there is an asylum hotel near Cardiff Airport. Who knew that? I didn't know that, and there was certainly no misbehaviour reported anecdotally or in the Glamorgan Star.
Jenrick has been very active since the ruling. Some of his comments have been very incendiary. Who knows? If the large scale riots get out of hand and it kicks off this weekend and key Conservatives are filmed at the scene, the voter will see for themselves that asylum hotels were nothing to do with the Tories. I am sure that is the planned narrative anyway.
And then we have Conservative martyr St Lucy who according to her and GBNews was politically imprisoned for no reason, but for Starmer's evil whim.
The Tories are smashing this, and even Nigel has been left trailing too.
Two points: I don't think a word of this is accurate.
Secondly, if the Tories recover then there is a decent chance the Tories and Reform will compete with each other to split the vote about equally, with both losing to a slightly resurgent Labour party.
Psephology requires (IMO) that either the Tories or Reform do conspicuously well at the expense of the other, not both doing modestly OK.
This is why S Korea cancelled its order for AH-64s.
Meanwhile, another legacy from previous government.
DE&S accepts final AH-64E Apache helicopter for British Army https://des.mod.uk/apache-ah-64e-british-army-boeing-helicopter/ The 50th AH-64E Apache has been secured for the British Army, completing the new fleet of the world’s most advanced attack helicopter.
The final Apache was handed over to DE&S at Boeing’s manufacturing facility in Arizona, USA. The UK’s operational fleet is now fully established at the Army’s Wattisham Flying Station in Suffolk, while the training fleet is complete at the Army Aviation Centre in Middle Wallop, Hampshire...
15% for the Tories most seats? There's one born every minute.
The Tories seem to have got their mojo back after the Epping court case.
They are going in with their boots on over immigration and asylum. Philp has been very effective at implying immigration and asylum has only been a social concern since July last year.
Immigration is not an issue for me living in the rural Vale of Glamorgan, although I understand there is an asylum hotel near Cardiff Airport. Who knew that? I didn't know that, and there was certainly no misbehaviour reported anecdotally or in the Glamorgan Star.
Jenrick has been very active since the ruling. Some of his comments have been very incendiary. Who knows? If the large scale riots get out of hand and it kicks off this weekend and key Conservatives are filmed at the scene, the voter will see for themselves that asylum hotels were nothing to do with the Tories. I am sure that is the planned narrative anyway.
And then we have Conservative martyr St Lucy who according to her and GBNews was politically imprisoned for no reason, but for Starmer's evil whim.
The Tories are smashing this, and even Nigel has been left trailing too.
Too early for jokes.....though 'the Tories smashing it' wasn't bad....
For me, any bet on the next election at this stage is a mug's game.
Were at roughly the same stage of this Parliament as we were at the time of the Hartlepool by-election when Massive was master of all he surveyed and there was every reason to expect an increased Conservative majority at the next election.
And that didn't quite happen as expected. (Not because of Covid directly, but because of the Trussterfuck.)
So until 2027 I'm holding fire on any predictions.
(By then Farage will of course be 64. I know Trump is about 530 but age may become an issue for him especially if Starmer doesn't fight the next election.)
I mostly agree with all of this but there is an important difference in your comparison between Hartlepool by election time and now.
It is much much easier for a popular government to lose popularity (trajectory of Hartlepool to 2024 General Election!) than it is for an unpopular government to regain popularity (trajectory from now to 2029).
IMO Labour don't have long to draw a completely different picture of what they are about; they have a chance in October's budget, and if they could be in the position to split the Tory and Reform party votes about equally, both at lowish 20s, Labour with low 30s could win most seats. It is becoming less likely by the week.
On the contrary it is very common for unpopular governments to regain popularity. Usually, but not always, it is accompanied by a change of leader. As we saw in 1990, or 1963, or 1957 for the Conservatives and arguably 1976 and 2007 for Labour although it did not save them at the next election. But it can happen without that, as in 1981-1982 (and that was before the Falklands War, not because of it) or indeed in 1969-70 (although that didn't save Labour in the 1970 election).
I'm not saying it will happen, merely that the electorate is so volatile at the moment that pretty much anything could happen. That's why I'd think twice about even having trading bets on this market.
Absolutely fair points. To which I make two further ones: I said it was easier to lose popularity than to gain it when you are in government. I think that is probably more or less true.
But especially, I think 'that was then and this is now'. My intuition (ie guess) is that in these days right now it is very easy indeed to lose popularity in government and quite hard to regain it. Reasons: Governing is about solutions not talk. We happen to live in times in which solutions are in short supply.
I think it's very easy and has always been easy to become unpopular when in government because ultimately governing means making hard choices rather than easy promises. That was true when Attlee devalued sterling in 1947 and was true, for the matter of that, when the Liberals tried to push through higher taxes in pursuit of social reforms in 1908-1909. Or, indeed, when Gladstone made extensive law reforms in 1870.
It is also true that the difficulties we are in (as in the aftermath of WW2 or the Wall Street Crash) make easy wins or politically acceptable solutions very hard, and the rolling social media means Alastair Campbell's 24 hour rule has been cut to literally minutes - an impossible standard to keep to.
It is however also true that while in government there are still levers to pull to try and regain popularity (Nigel Lawson in 1986) and Labour have a crucial advantage in that their actual opponents - the Conservatives - and presumed opponents are fighting each other rather than the government. The Conservatives are also in a massive crisis entirely of their own making and therefore navel-gazing, while Reform are not a party but an ego trip subsidised by dubious methods. One scandal, or a literal heart attack for Farage, and they are stuffed. This gives Labour an advantage in trying to consolidate their position. OK, so far they haven't taken advantage but it's not out of the question they will. Starmer has been written off many times but he has a remarkable knack of confounding people.
Labour have till the end of the year to reverse things.
No I think they have 3 years to answer the 4 questions Northern Al mentined in his post yesterday. Which is about two years longer than their opponents have to find a candidate and a party who can beat them.
Farage is repulsivre to far too many voters to stand a chance and if you remove him what are you left with? A less noxious Reform leader? I haven't seen one. It's not the sort of Party that attracts well meaning attractive potential leaders
Distinguish two questions. Can Reform win in 2029? Yes. If all the other options seem worse. Is there any reason to think they can govern decently well? No.
Better late than never. There's still a chance of turning things around in the midterms. Probably the last chance; 2028 will be too late.
Which is why there is a reasonable chance that there will not be free and fair election in 2026. Either a truly rigged election or a Reichstag Fire event is a realistic chance.
For me, any bet on the next election at this stage is a mug's game.
Were at roughly the same stage of this Parliament as we were at the time of the Hartlepool by-election when Massive was master of all he surveyed and there was every reason to expect an increased Conservative majority at the next election.
And that didn't quite happen as expected. (Not because of Covid directly, but because of the Trussterfuck.)
So until 2027 I'm holding fire on any predictions.
(By then Farage will of course be 64. I know Trump is about 530 but age may become an issue for him especially if Starmer doesn't fight the next election.)
I mostly agree with all of this but there is an important difference in your comparison between Hartlepool by election time and now.
It is much much easier for a popular government to lose popularity (trajectory of Hartlepool to 2024 General Election!) than it is for an unpopular government to regain popularity (trajectory from now to 2029).
IMO Labour don't have long to draw a completely different picture of what they are about; they have a chance in October's budget, and if they could be in the position to split the Tory and Reform party votes about equally, both at lowish 20s, Labour with low 30s could win most seats. It is becoming less likely by the week.
On the contrary it is very common for unpopular governments to regain popularity. Usually, but not always, it is accompanied by a change of leader. As we saw in 1990, or 1963, or 1957 for the Conservatives and arguably 1976 and 2007 for Labour although it did not save them at the next election. But it can happen without that, as in 1981-1982 (and that was before the Falklands War, not because of it) or indeed in 1969-70 (although that didn't save Labour in the 1970 election).
I'm not saying it will happen, merely that the electorate is so volatile at the moment that pretty much anything could happen. That's why I'd think twice about even having trading bets on this market.
In my 63 years I have never known such World volatility and immediate jeopardy. Even in the deepest, darkest days of the Cold War when Reagan was vilified as a warmonger and Ledbury Welding moved production from underground oil tanks to nuclear shelters we were nowhere near this point.
I have listened to a great deal of Reagan recently to compare and contrast with the orange halfwit. It was said Reagan preferred his information to be presented in video format, as opposed to Trump who according to biographer Michael Wolf can neither assimilate written detail (possibly because he is illiterate) and spoken detail (because he doesn't listen). At the time I despised Reagan, but hell, he was a great orator and a serious politician. Even with the benefit of hindsight I don't buy Mrs Thatcher, but in the light of Trump, I am sold on Reagan.
So back to your point, Labour could be saved, not because they turn their inertia around but because "events dear boy". And f*** me, do we have a leader of the free World who could furnish us with "events".
GP appointments problem has been in existence for 20+ years. However, in the meantime every other industry now has online booking, online chat, DMs, including getting medication from online drug providers. Its crazy we are still having the same discussion about GPs.
My response to that is why wasn't there a problem 25 or 30 years ago? You could ring up your surgery or turn up in person to make an appointment, and most of the time there weren't any significant problems. You'd get an appointment within a reasonable time.
Partly it is fewer WTE GPs per capita, partly an ageing population (demand goes up sharply with age) and partly that hospital staff dump more work on GPs via discharging patients much earlier. So demand exceeds supply. It really isn't difficult to figure out.
Streetings plan is to divert funding away from hospitals and into primary care. He realises that is where 90% of NHS contact is.
The average person in their 40s contributes a net £20k per year to the exchequer. The average person in their 90s costs the government £50k per year. Pretty much everything around our public services and public finances stems from this fact and the changing ratio of elderly to working age people.
No, it doesn't. Demographic change is relatively minor reason for the increase in public spending. England's demographics in particular aren't too bad at all due to immigration over the last 30 years. In terms of tax, economic participation rates and hours worked are much bigger drivers than demographics.
I don't think people can grasp just how quickly health spending is increasing. You'd have to have extraordinary increases in people aged 70+ to account for it (or babies), but demographic change is slow and incremental. Other spending is actually growing quite slowly or not at all, with the exception of political choices like defence.
Demographics are a useful scapegoat for people trying to avoid confronting the current fiscal challenges in my experience. Ultimately it's a political choice.
Respectfully disagree. The ratio of elderly to working age people has risen significantly in the last twenty years and has driven the rise in health spending as well as other age related spending. The ratio will continue to rise and continue to drive a worsening in the fiscal outlook. This is true not just in the UK but across the developed world (and will be far worse in some other countries, incidentally). There is already a robust positive relationship between government debt levels across countries and the old age dependency ratio. Check out eg the OBR's 2024 fiscal risk and long term projections document. All of the rise in government spending in the last thirty years has been driven by three items: health, welfare (including pensions) and debt service. Overall spending on everything else as a share of GDP has gone down. Of course how to deal with this is a political choice. Unfortunately, the electorate don't seem alert to the realities of the situation, and reject things like raising the pension age in line with life expectancy. Even small things like means testing the WFA are shot down. Government debt across the developed world is a Ponzi scheme.
If we're going to quote the OBR, check this graph out. It's a bit out of date but it demonstrates what I'm trying to show.
and @DavidL - NHS productivity growth was solid all the way up to COVID (actually faster than private sector productivity), something the Conservatives have a very good record with. My main complaint is they gutted public health and investment, so while hospitals got more efficient overall health fell during that period. Hence we have a brilliant "National Sickness Service".
Another collision where the car's computer seems to have helped evidence the earlier speed:
The force of the collision caused the police Volvo to be propelled into the back of the Mercedes the officer had stopped.
Mr Mohammed said both cars - along with the one Hood had been driving - suffered "catastrophic damage".
Footage from inside the constables' vehicle at the moment of impact was played in court.
Hood had been going at 86mph when he hit the police car, but had reached 134mph five seconds before the smash.
Hood and one of his passengers managed to clamber out of the Mercedes without getting help for the causalities, some of whom had life-threatening injuries.
15% for the Tories most seats? There's one born every minute.
The Tories seem to have got their mojo back after the Epping court case.
They are going in with their boots on over immigration and asylum. Philp has been very effective at implying immigration and asylum has only been a social concern since July last year.
Immigration is not an issue for me living in the rural Vale of Glamorgan, although I understand there is an asylum hotel near Cardiff Airport. Who knew that? I didn't know that, and there was certainly no misbehaviour reported anecdotally or in the Glamorgan Star.
Jenrick has been very active since the ruling. Some of his comments have been very incendiary. Who knows? If the large scale riots get out of hand and it kicks off this weekend and key Conservatives are filmed at the scene, the voter will see for themselves that asylum hotels were nothing to do with the Tories. I am sure that is the planned narrative anyway.
And then we have Conservative martyr St Lucy who according to her and GBNews was politically imprisoned for no reason, but for Starmer's evil whim.
The Tories are smashing this, and even Nigel has been left trailing too.
Very funny .
No I am being serious. Could it explode in their craven faces? Of course it could, particularly Jenrick, who I would be shocked if he isn't seen protesting outside an asylum seeker hotel near Newark this weekend and with a 90 second soundbite video to prove it.
I might add - the big annoyance with Labour and where they are clearly getting it wrong is they are not making hard choices.
And when they try to make hard choices they usually make the wrong ones and have to be backed out of them.
If that was to maintain popularity it would be understandable if regrettable but they're not managing that either.
I think they would actually get much more credit if they said, OK, tough medicine needed, but actually, three years from now we will get some benefits.
(Classic example - VAT on school fees. If they stopped parroting this '£1.8 billion to spend on state schools and private school fees go up X% a year anyway so there will be no impact' which is complete bullshit, and said, 'you know what, it's going to be tough and cause a number of private schools to close but we need every cent we can get and this will be revenue positive' it would sound a whole lot saner and there would be far fewer bad headlines.)
WRT Farage's populist proposals on migration, these are the key questions I don't think they address:
1) Does Reform propose deportation without process (like Abrego Garcia) whereby a person can be taken from UK territory/UK waters and flown somewhere else without opportunity for a hearing before a court/tribunal?
2) Does a Reform government intend (like Trump's) to overlook or ignore court rulings either about general law or about named individuals?
What the proposals mean, and how much the rule of law nature of UK society would be altered (see the impact ofTrump's gangster regime) depends on those two issues.
Seems odd for Farage to go this early with his manifesto proposals given the time till the next election. Is there concern about being behind the curve on Asylum hotels? Perhaps Jenrick is beginning to register with his core group. Whatever the issue, he's now putting up targets to be shot at.
I'd call it nonesense on stilts:
Reform would seek to sign deals with Afghanistan, Eritrea and other countries that are large sources of small-boat migrants, despite claims of human rights abuses by their governments.
The party would also look to “third countries” such as Rwanda and Albania to house asylum seekers and seek to use British overseas territories such as Ascension Island as a “fallback” if people could not be sent elsewhere.
Is not this nicked from the Tories?:
Under the plans, the European Convention on Human Rights would be replaced by a British Bill of Rights.
There's a lot more of it. His biggest problem imo is that Labour might make progress.
Ascension might work but it'll be insanely expensive, the US might veto because the USSF won't want random hajis wandering around and ASI is often blacked out by crosswinds so commercial operators might not fancy it.
It's a possibility but the UK government would have to really want it and be prepared to pay for it.
This is why S Korea cancelled its order for AH-64s.
Meanwhile, another legacy from previous government.
DE&S accepts final AH-64E Apache helicopter for British Army https://des.mod.uk/apache-ah-64e-british-army-boeing-helicopter/ The 50th AH-64E Apache has been secured for the British Army, completing the new fleet of the world’s most advanced attack helicopter.
The final Apache was handed over to DE&S at Boeing’s manufacturing facility in Arizona, USA. The UK’s operational fleet is now fully established at the Army’s Wattisham Flying Station in Suffolk, while the training fleet is complete at the Army Aviation Centre in Middle Wallop, Hampshire...
Accepting the last of an order presumably costs no more than cancelling the last of an order.
WRT Farage's populist proposals on migration, these are the key questions I don't think they address:
1) Does Reform propose deportation without process (like Abrego Garcia) whereby a person can be taken from UK territory/UK waters and flown somewhere else without opportunity for a hearing before a court/tribunal?
2) Does a Reform government intend (like Trump's) to overlook or ignore court rulings either about general law or about named individuals?
What the proposals mean, and how much the rule of law nature of UK society would be altered (see the impact ofTrump's gangster regime) depends on those two issues.
Seems odd for Farage to go this early with his manifesto proposals given the time till the next election. Is there concern about being behind the curve on Asylum hotels? Perhaps Jenrick is beginning to register with his core group. Whatever the issue, he's now putting up targets to be shot at.
I'd call it nonesense on stilts:
Reform would seek to sign deals with Afghanistan, Eritrea and other countries that are large sources of small-boat migrants, despite claims of human rights abuses by their governments.
The party would also look to “third countries” such as Rwanda and Albania to house asylum seekers and seek to use British overseas territories such as Ascension Island as a “fallback” if people could not be sent elsewhere.
Is not this nicked from the Tories?:
Under the plans, the European Convention on Human Rights would be replaced by a British Bill of Rights.
There's a lot more of it. His biggest problem imo is that Labour might make progress.
Ascension might work but it'll be insanely expensive, the US might veto because the USSF won't want random hajis wandering around and ASI is often blacked out by crosswinds so commercial operators might not fancy it...
It would be absurdly expensive.
But it's UK territory, so the US could go hang. (Though Farage wouldn't have the balls.)
Better late than never. There's still a chance of turning things around in the midterms. Probably the last chance; 2028 will be too late.
Which is why there is a reasonable chance that there will not be free and fair election in 2026. Either a truly rigged election or a Reichstag Fire event is a realistic chance.
Of course. But it's a little early just to give up.
WRT Farage's populist proposals on migration, these are the key questions I don't think they address:
1) Does Reform propose deportation without process (like Abrego Garcia) whereby a person can be taken from UK territory/UK waters and flown somewhere else without opportunity for a hearing before a court/tribunal?
2) Does a Reform government intend (like Trump's) to overlook or ignore court rulings either about general law or about named individuals?
What the proposals mean, and how much the rule of law nature of UK society would be altered (see the impact ofTrump's gangster regime) depends on those two issues.
Seems odd for Farage to go this early with his manifesto proposals given the time till the next election. Is there concern about being behind the curve on Asylum hotels? Perhaps Jenrick is beginning to register with his core group. Whatever the issue, he's now putting up targets to be shot at.
I'd call it nonesense on stilts:
Reform would seek to sign deals with Afghanistan, Eritrea and other countries that are large sources of small-boat migrants, despite claims of human rights abuses by their governments.
The party would also look to “third countries” such as Rwanda and Albania to house asylum seekers and seek to use British overseas territories such as Ascension Island as a “fallback” if people could not be sent elsewhere.
Is not this nicked from the Tories?:
Under the plans, the European Convention on Human Rights would be replaced by a British Bill of Rights.
There's a lot more of it. His biggest problem imo is that Labour might make progress.
Ascension might work but it'll be insanely expensive, the US might veto because the USSF won't want random hajis wandering around and ASI is often blacked out by crosswinds so commercial operators might not fancy it...
It would be absurdly expensive.
But it's UK territory, so the US could go hang. (Though Farage wouldn't have the balls.)
I’m sure future Ambassador Connolly will be able to smooth it over.
15% for the Tories most seats? There's one born every minute.
The Tories seem to have got their mojo back after the Epping court case.
They are going in with their boots on over immigration and asylum. Philp has been very effective at implying immigration and asylum has only been a social concern since July last year.
Immigration is not an issue for me living in the rural Vale of Glamorgan, although I understand there is an asylum hotel near Cardiff Airport. Who knew that? I didn't know that, and there was certainly no misbehaviour reported anecdotally or in the Glamorgan Star.
Jenrick has been very active since the ruling. Some of his comments have been very incendiary. Who knows? If the large scale riots get out of hand and it kicks off this weekend and key Conservatives are filmed at the scene, the voter will see for themselves that asylum hotels were nothing to do with the Tories. I am sure that is the planned narrative anyway.
And then we have Conservative martyr St Lucy who according to her and GBNews was politically imprisoned for no reason, but for Starmer's evil whim.
The Tories are smashing this, and even Nigel has been left trailing too.
Too early for jokes.....though 'the Tories smashing it' wasn't bad....
I live on a diet of LBC and Radio 4. (Let's not mention the YouTube anti-MAGA fare for my American news).
Both LBD and the BBC have run with Philp and Jenrick and also St Lucy's virginal innocence.
The only point against my narrative is events were overtaken by "famine" being called in Gaza, and Bibi's regime claiming there is food aplenty only yards from the starving children, which means they are fine, and would Gazans mind moving South as we are about to further bomb the be Jesus out of Gaza City.
For me, any bet on the next election at this stage is a mug's game.
Were at roughly the same stage of this Parliament as we were at the time of the Hartlepool by-election when Massive was master of all he surveyed and there was every reason to expect an increased Conservative majority at the next election.
And that didn't quite happen as expected. (Not because of Covid directly, but because of the Trussterfuck.)
So until 2027 I'm holding fire on any predictions.
(By then Farage will of course be 64. I know Trump is about 530 but age may become an issue for him especially if Starmer doesn't fight the next election.)
I mostly agree with all of this but there is an important difference in your comparison between Hartlepool by election time and now.
It is much much easier for a popular government to lose popularity (trajectory of Hartlepool to 2024 General Election!) than it is for an unpopular government to regain popularity (trajectory from now to 2029).
IMO Labour don't have long to draw a completely different picture of what they are about; they have a chance in October's budget, and if they could be in the position to split the Tory and Reform party votes about equally, both at lowish 20s, Labour with low 30s could win most seats. It is becoming less likely by the week.
On the contrary it is very common for unpopular governments to regain popularity. Usually, but not always, it is accompanied by a change of leader. As we saw in 1990, or 1963, or 1957 for the Conservatives and arguably 1976 and 2007 for Labour although it did not save them at the next election. But it can happen without that, as in 1981-1982 (and that was before the Falklands War, not because of it) or indeed in 1969-70 (although that didn't save Labour in the 1970 election).
I'm not saying it will happen, merely that the electorate is so volatile at the moment that pretty much anything could happen. That's why I'd think twice about even having trading bets on this market.
In my 63 years I have never known such World volatility and immediate jeopardy...
Labour have till the end of the year to reverse things.
No I think they have 3 years to answer the 4 questions Northern Al mentined in his post yesterday. Which is about two years longer than their opponents have to find a candidate and a party who can beat them.
Farage is repulsivre to far too many voters to stand a chance and if you remove him what are you left with? A less noxious Reform leader? I haven't seen one. It's not the sort of Party that attracts well meaning attractive potential leaders
Distinguish two questions. Can Reform win in 2029? Yes. If all the other options seem worse. Is there any reason to think they can govern decently well? No.
Surely the only way they can govern decently is if (a) the civil servants & advisers they'll need to rely on give them good advice and (b) they flow the advice.
Some of their candidates may know how politics works but most won't have a clue how government works.
Labour have till the end of the year to reverse things.
No I think they have 3 years to answer the 4 questions Northern Al mentined in his post yesterday. Which is about two years longer than their opponents have to find a candidate and a party who can beat them.
Farage is repulsivre to far too many voters to stand a chance and if you remove him what are you left with? A less noxious Reform leader? I haven't seen one. It's not the sort of Party that attracts well meaning attractive potential leaders
Distinguish two questions. Can Reform win in 2029? Yes. If all the other options seem worse. Is there any reason to think they can govern decently well? No.
Surely the only way they can govern decently is if (a) the civil servants & advisers they'll need to rely on give them good advice
Professor David “there’s gonna be a civil war” Betz might be feeling smug this morning
Looks like some flag hangers were attacked with petrol bombs last night. We can’t know for sure but the video is convincing
If this is true this is exactly what he’s been predicting. The “locals” will react with displays of anger and protests, but then THOSE will be met with violence from others. And so it spirals
WRT Farage's populist proposals on migration, these are the key questions I don't think they address:
1) Does Reform propose deportation without process (like Abrego Garcia) whereby a person can be taken from UK territory/UK waters and flown somewhere else without opportunity for a hearing before a court/tribunal?
2) Does a Reform government intend (like Trump's) to overlook or ignore court rulings either about general law or about named individuals?
What the proposals mean, and how much the rule of law nature of UK society would be altered (see the impact ofTrump's gangster regime) depends on those two issues.
Seems odd for Farage to go this early with his manifesto proposals given the time till the next election. Is there concern about being behind the curve on Asylum hotels? Perhaps Jenrick is beginning to register with his core group. Whatever the issue, he's now putting up targets to be shot at.
I'd call it nonesense on stilts:
Reform would seek to sign deals with Afghanistan, Eritrea and other countries that are large sources of small-boat migrants, despite claims of human rights abuses by their governments.
The party would also look to “third countries” such as Rwanda and Albania to house asylum seekers and seek to use British overseas territories such as Ascension Island as a “fallback” if people could not be sent elsewhere.
Is not this nicked from the Tories?:
Under the plans, the European Convention on Human Rights would be replaced by a British Bill of Rights.
There's a lot more of it. His biggest problem imo is that Labour might make progress.
Ascension might work but it'll be insanely expensive, the US might veto because the USSF won't want random hajis wandering around and ASI is often blacked out by crosswinds so commercial operators might not fancy it.
It's a possibility but the UK government would have to really want it and be prepared to pay for it.
As with all opposition plans- is it a real programme for government, or a bag of lollipops to cause trouble for the current government?
Given that even the Times's commentary is a bit "distancing ourselves from the crazy guy we put on the front page" (Of course, this is Mr Farage speaking and a generous sprinkling of salt is required. Saying that you are willing to surrender people to the tender mercies of the Taliban when they face a real risk of retribution is not serious or ethical politics...), I'm going with the latter.
WRT Farage's populist proposals on migration, these are the key questions I don't think they address:
1) Does Reform propose deportation without process (like Abrego Garcia) whereby a person can be taken from UK territory/UK waters and flown somewhere else without opportunity for a hearing before a court/tribunal?
2) Does a Reform government intend (like Trump's) to overlook or ignore court rulings either about general law or about named individuals?
What the proposals mean, and how much the rule of law nature of UK society would be altered (see the impact ofTrump's gangster regime) depends on those two issues.
Seems odd for Farage to go this early with his manifesto proposals given the time till the next election. Is there concern about being behind the curve on Asylum hotels? Perhaps Jenrick is beginning to register with his core group. Whatever the issue, he's now putting up targets to be shot at.
I'd call it nonesense on stilts:
Reform would seek to sign deals with Afghanistan, Eritrea and other countries that are large sources of small-boat migrants, despite claims of human rights abuses by their governments.
The party would also look to “third countries” such as Rwanda and Albania to house asylum seekers and seek to use British overseas territories such as Ascension Island as a “fallback” if people could not be sent elsewhere.
Is not this nicked from the Tories?:
Under the plans, the European Convention on Human Rights would be replaced by a British Bill of Rights.
There's a lot more of it. His biggest problem imo is that Labour might make progress.
Ascension might work but it'll be insanely expensive, the US might veto because the USSF won't want random hajis wandering around and ASI is often blacked out by crosswinds so commercial operators might not fancy it.
It's a possibility but the UK government would have to really want it and be prepared to pay for it.
As with all opposition plans- is it a real programme for government, or a bag of lollipops to cause trouble for the current government?
Given that even the Times's commentary is a bit "distancing ourselves from the crazy guy we put on the front page" (Of course, this is Mr Farage speaking and a generous sprinkling of salt is required. Saying that you are willing to surrender people to the tender mercies of the Taliban when they face a real risk of retribution is not serious or ethical politics...), I'm going with the latter.
Reform want to dehumanise migrants so that sending them back to the Taliban to be tortured and killed is met by a shrug by the public . Apparently the big launch is on Tuesday where I expect the UK media to be as useless as normal in asking the right questions .
This is why S Korea cancelled its order for AH-64s.
Meanwhile, another legacy from previous government.
DE&S accepts final AH-64E Apache helicopter for British Army https://des.mod.uk/apache-ah-64e-british-army-boeing-helicopter/ The 50th AH-64E Apache has been secured for the British Army, completing the new fleet of the world’s most advanced attack helicopter.
The final Apache was handed over to DE&S at Boeing’s manufacturing facility in Arizona, USA. The UK’s operational fleet is now fully established at the Army’s Wattisham Flying Station in Suffolk, while the training fleet is complete at the Army Aviation Centre in Middle Wallop, Hampshire...
Accepting the last of an order presumably costs no more than cancelling the last of an order.
Of course. Point is, it was an extremely expensive acquisition which was supposed to provide a capability we could rely on for the next couple of decades, and there are already grounds to think it's obsolete.
It a very important lesson not to gamble on big ticket items. A country the size of the US can afford to write off multi billion dollar mistakes; we can't anymore.
I might add - the big annoyance with Labour and where they are clearly getting it wrong is they are not making hard choices.
And when they try to make hard choices they usually make the wrong ones and have to be backed out of them.
If that was to maintain popularity it would be understandable if regrettable but they're not managing that either.
I think they would actually get much more credit if they said, OK, tough medicine needed, but actually, three years from now we will get some benefits.
(Classic example - VAT on school fees. If they stopped parroting this '£1.8 billion to spend on state schools and private school fees go up X% a year anyway so there will be no impact' which is complete bullshit, and said, 'you know what, it's going to be tough and cause a number of private schools to close but we need every cent we can get and this will be revenue positive' it would sound a whole lot saner and there would be far fewer bad headlines.)
I suspect that is fair enough.
The asylum seeker issue too is problematic for year one of this Government because they have done precisely nothing about it. Now asylum seekers aren't a particular priority of mine, which is probably why the Government are beached on the subject. They remain unconcerned because like me, they are middle class snobs. However it is an issue to Johnny Brexit because GBNews and the Daily Mail have pointed out to him that "foreigners will likely want to kill him and sell his daughters into slavery". The Government need to consider Johnny Brexit's unhinged mindset, but I don't think they have the capacity to breach their own logic.
Do we know what Lucy Connolly's licence conditions are set to be?
No but they must include these (repeated FPT):
(f) be of good behaviour, and not behave in a way which undermines the purposes of the release on licence, which are to protect the public, prevent re-offending and promote successful re-integration into the community;
(g) not commit any offence.
It can easily be argued that going around saying that despite my guilty plea to incitement I am the victim, really I am innocent because I ought to be allowed to promote a raging mob setting fire to people and please can I have my fee from GB News and a large advance on my book/series of articles breaches the spirit of (f). As does voluntarily meeting anyone connected with the pro soviet gangster oligarchy.
If they're stupid enough to bang her up again now they'll deserve the hostile public reaction.
Professor David “there’s gonna be a civil war” Betz might be feeling smug this morning
Looks like some flag hangers were attacked with petrol bombs last night. We can’t know for sure but the video is convincing
If this is true this is exactly what he’s been predicting. The “locals” will react with displays of anger and protests, but then THOSE will be met with violence from others. And so it spirals
Oh goody, you must be so pleased there are more riots for you to fap over on your social media feeds. Pond life like you started a demonstration against a hotel near me that has been housing the destitute for over a decade with no issues.
With this in mind, Bromley Council wishes to put on record the facts surrounding this Central Government funded hostel in St Mary Cray as the Council has been advised by both the Government as well as the management at TLK itself.
The hostel has been in situ at the TLK building for two years and according to the Government’s latest statistics, updated weekly, the hostel is not occupied by ‘single young men’, as was the case in Epping, and is being asserted by some locally.
A Council Spokesperson said: “ Our first hand advice remains that the hostel is currently occupied by children, women and families only in temporary accommodation, awaiting a decision from the Government concerning their future immigration status at which point they will leave.
"Also, that there are no current police investigations in relation to residents of the TLK apartments taking place, contrary to other reports circulating.
Professor David “there’s gonna be a civil war” Betz might be feeling smug this morning
Looks like some flag hangers were attacked with petrol bombs last night. We can’t know for sure but the video is convincing
If this is true this is exactly what he’s been predicting. The “locals” will react with displays of anger and protests, but then THOSE will be met with violence from others. And so it spirals
Another collision where the car's computer seems to have helped evidence the earlier speed:
The force of the collision caused the police Volvo to be propelled into the back of the Mercedes the officer had stopped.
Mr Mohammed said both cars - along with the one Hood had been driving - suffered "catastrophic damage".
Footage from inside the constables' vehicle at the moment of impact was played in court.
Hood had been going at 86mph when he hit the police car, but had reached 134mph five seconds before the smash.
Hood and one of his passengers managed to clamber out of the Mercedes without getting help for the causalities, some of whom had life-threatening injuries.
Goodness. Not his fault; these things happen; he was driving that fast he couldn't see anything.
I'm surprised the Crown Office didn't attempt a more serious charge. There's wicked recklessness there given they abandoned the officers injured in their car.
Better late than never. There's still a chance of turning things around in the midterms. Probably the last chance; 2028 will be too late.
Which is why there is a reasonable chance that there will not be free and fair election in 2026. Either a truly rigged election or a Reichstag Fire event is a realistic chance.
Of course. But it's a little early just to give up.
Newsom: 175 billion in the bill that was just signed to reinforce the ranks of ICE for what is increasingly becoming self-evident a private army for Donald Trump. Owing an oath only to him, not the constitution.
WRT Farage's populist proposals on migration, these are the key questions I don't think they address:
1) Does Reform propose deportation without process (like Abrego Garcia) whereby a person can be taken from UK territory/UK waters and flown somewhere else without opportunity for a hearing before a court/tribunal?
2) Does a Reform government intend (like Trump's) to overlook or ignore court rulings either about general law or about named individuals?
What the proposals mean, and how much the rule of law nature of UK society would be altered (see the impact ofTrump's gangster regime) depends on those two issues.
Seems odd for Farage to go this early with his manifesto proposals given the time till the next election. Is there concern about being behind the curve on Asylum hotels? Perhaps Jenrick is beginning to register with his core group. Whatever the issue, he's now putting up targets to be shot at.
I'd call it nonesense on stilts:
Reform would seek to sign deals with Afghanistan, Eritrea and other countries that are large sources of small-boat migrants, despite claims of human rights abuses by their governments.
The party would also look to “third countries” such as Rwanda and Albania to house asylum seekers and seek to use British overseas territories such as Ascension Island as a “fallback” if people could not be sent elsewhere.
Is not this nicked from the Tories?:
Under the plans, the European Convention on Human Rights would be replaced by a British Bill of Rights.
There's a lot more of it. His biggest problem imo is that Labour might make progress.
Ascension might work but it'll be insanely expensive, the US might veto because the USSF won't want random hajis wandering around and ASI is often blacked out by crosswinds so commercial operators might not fancy it.
It's a possibility but the UK government would have to really want it and be prepared to pay for it.
As with all opposition plans- is it a real programme for government, or a bag of lollipops to cause trouble for the current government?
Given that even the Times's commentary is a bit "distancing ourselves from the crazy guy we put on the front page" (Of course, this is Mr Farage speaking and a generous sprinkling of salt is required. Saying that you are willing to surrender people to the tender mercies of the Taliban when they face a real risk of retribution is not serious or ethical politics...), I'm going with the latter.
Reform want to dehumanise migrants so that sending them back to the Taliban to be tortured and killed is met by a shrug by the public . Apparently the big launch is on Tuesday where I expect the UK media to be as useless as normal in asking the right questions .
Do Reform intend to abide by orders of the courts? Do Reform intend to remove people from the UK without a hearing? I suspect these are two questions they will evade.
If the answer is No and Yes we are in Trump gangster territory. If the answer is Yes and No we are in territory a Reform government cannot control - the rule of law.
I'm surprised the Crown Office didn't attempt a more serious charge. There's wicked recklessness there given they abandoned the officers injured in their car.
Pulling people over on the hard shoulder of a motorway is always insanely dangerous. The fact that the old bill continue to do it tells us that their actions are nothing to do with safety.
Buck Sexton: "Ghislaine Maxwell effectively downplaying this whole thing. Yeah, he was a pedophile, he hid it from everybody, nobody else was involved, there's no proof of anything else, there's no blackmail, there's no foreign intelligence tie. Oh, wow. That just brings it all together with a bow for her, doesn't it? She probably wants to get out early." https://x.com/BlueATLGeorgia/status/1958991955112702200
Fox: The question is whether Maxwell is gaming the system. You have to assume that she is. She is in a very desperate situation, and she wants to offer something up. The critics will come forward and say, 'she knew the only shot she has is presidential commutation, and that will only come if she clears Trump.' https://x.com/factpostnews/status/1958982638171001310
Professor David “there’s gonna be a civil war” Betz might be feeling smug this morning
Looks like some flag hangers were attacked with petrol bombs last night. We can’t know for sure but the video is convincing
If this is true this is exactly what he’s been predicting. The “locals” will react with displays of anger and protests, but then THOSE will be met with violence from others. And so it spirals
I'm surprised the Crown Office didn't attempt a more serious charge. There's wicked recklessness there given they abandoned the officers injured in their car.
Pulling people over on the hard shoulder of a motorway is always insanely dangerous. The fact that the old bill continue to do it tells us that their actions are nothing to do with safety.
The person they had pulled over must surely have a claim against the police for damages, although it does rather depend on why he was pulled over.
Starmer's big problem is his fake, I'm a flag flying patriot image, pisses off most of his party, while the rest of us know full well his real beliefs are pretty close to Corbyn. And he seems too dim to realise the contradiction. All the desperate straw clutching here to magic up a recovery based on arguments and time , however rational, shows a wilful misunderstanding of the mood out there.
Do we know what Lucy Connolly's licence conditions are set to be?
No but they must include these (repeated FPT):
(f) be of good behaviour, and not behave in a way which undermines the purposes of the release on licence, which are to protect the public, prevent re-offending and promote successful re-integration into the community;
(g) not commit any offence.
It can easily be argued that going around saying that despite my guilty plea to incitement I am the victim, really I am innocent because I ought to be allowed to promote a raging mob setting fire to people and please can I have my fee from GB News and a large advance on my book/series of articles breaches the spirit of (f). As does voluntarily meeting anyone connected with the pro soviet gangster oligarchy.
If they're stupid enough to bang her up again now they'll deserve the hostile public reaction.
I might be playing the man here, but do you understand how criminal justice works?
If a prisoner out on licence breaches those licence conditions it is an independent judge and not a malign Prime Minister who determines if they need to be returned to prison. If that comes to pass in this case the optics for the Government don't look good. Nonetheless the prisoner will be the architect of their own downfall should that come to pass
If some Just Stop Oil protester was behaving in a similar way, wouldn't you want them locked up and the key disposed of?
Professor David “there’s gonna be a civil war” Betz might be feeling smug this morning
Looks like some flag hangers were attacked with petrol bombs last night. We can’t know for sure but the video is convincing
If this is true this is exactly what he’s been predicting. The “locals” will react with displays of anger and protests, but then THOSE will be met with violence from others. And so it spirals
Oh goody, you must be so pleased there are more riots for you to fap over on your social media feeds. Pond life like you started a demonstration against a hotel near me that has been housing the destitute for over a decade with no issues.
With this in mind, Bromley Council wishes to put on record the facts surrounding this Central Government funded hostel in St Mary Cray as the Council has been advised by both the Government as well as the management at TLK itself.
The hostel has been in situ at the TLK building for two years and according to the Government’s latest statistics, updated weekly, the hostel is not occupied by ‘single young men’, as was the case in Epping, and is being asserted by some locally.
A Council Spokesperson said: “ Our first hand advice remains that the hostel is currently occupied by children, women and families only in temporary accommodation, awaiting a decision from the Government concerning their future immigration status at which point they will leave.
"Also, that there are no current police investigations in relation to residents of the TLK apartments taking place, contrary to other reports circulating.
How am I “starting a riot” by quietly mentioning an alleged and unpleasant incident in Stevenage? On pb? Its not quite Gabriel Princip, is it?
Professor David “there’s gonna be a civil war” Betz might be feeling smug this morning
Looks like some flag hangers were attacked with petrol bombs last night. We can’t know for sure but the video is convincing
If this is true this is exactly what he’s been predicting. The “locals” will react with displays of anger and protests, but then THOSE will be met with violence from others. And so it spirals
Starmer's big problem is his fake, I'm a flag flying patriot image, pisses off most of his party, while the rest of us know full well his real beliefs are pretty close to Corbyn. And he seems too dim to realise the contradiction. All the desperate straw clutching here to magic up a recovery based on arguments and time , however rational, shows a wilful misunderstanding of the mood out there.
'Out there' on the mean Streets of the UK or in Fuengirola?
Professor David “there’s gonna be a civil war” Betz might be feeling smug this morning
Looks like some flag hangers were attacked with petrol bombs last night. We can’t know for sure but the video is convincing
If this is true this is exactly what he’s been predicting. The “locals” will react with displays of anger and protests, but then THOSE will be met with violence from others. And so it spirals
I don't know why you encourage this. It is appalling. It is also very sad if the flag of St George and Union Jack become associated with extreme right wing groups once more. For decades from the 70s it was an embarrassment to hang out these flags without being associated with the BNP or football thugs. They had hijacked them. Finally we got to the stage where you could display these flags with pride without being a racist or thug. You are encouraging the undoing of all of that once more. Shame on you and those doing this.
To add evidence to that it is clearly localised in areas where conflict is more likely. Where I live in a posh bit of Surrey there is not a single flag to be seen. In Southwold the only flags are the ones that have always been there.
Professor David “there’s gonna be a civil war” Betz might be feeling smug this morning
Looks like some flag hangers were attacked with petrol bombs last night. We can’t know for sure but the video is convincing
If this is true this is exactly what he’s been predicting. The “locals” will react with displays of anger and protests, but then THOSE will be met with violence from others. And so it spirals
Oh goody, you must be so pleased there are more riots for you to fap over on your social media feeds. Pond life like you started a demonstration against a hotel near me that has been housing the destitute for over a decade with no issues.
With this in mind, Bromley Council wishes to put on record the facts surrounding this Central Government funded hostel in St Mary Cray as the Council has been advised by both the Government as well as the management at TLK itself.
The hostel has been in situ at the TLK building for two years and according to the Government’s latest statistics, updated weekly, the hostel is not occupied by ‘single young men’, as was the case in Epping, and is being asserted by some locally.
A Council Spokesperson said: “ Our first hand advice remains that the hostel is currently occupied by children, women and families only in temporary accommodation, awaiting a decision from the Government concerning their future immigration status at which point they will leave.
"Also, that there are no current police investigations in relation to residents of the TLK apartments taking place, contrary to other reports circulating.
How am I “starting a riot” by quietly mentioning an alleged and unpleasant incident in Stevenage? On pb? Its not quite Gabriel Princip, is it?
Gavrilo! GAVRILO
🤬 autocorrect
That said I’ve just realised Gavrilo must be the Serbian form of Gabriel, so it’s a poetic typo
Professor David “there’s gonna be a civil war” Betz might be feeling smug this morning
Looks like some flag hangers were attacked with petrol bombs last night. We can’t know for sure but the video is convincing
If this is true this is exactly what he’s been predicting. The “locals” will react with displays of anger and protests, but then THOSE will be met with violence from others. And so it spirals
I don't know why you encourage this. It is appalling. It is also very sad if the flag of St George and Union Jack become associated with extreme right wing groups once more. For decades from the 70s it was an embarrassment to hang out these flags without being associated with the BNP or football thugs. They had hijacked them. Finally we got to the stage where you could display these flags with pride without being a racist or thug. You are encouraging the undoing of all of that once more. Shame on you and those doing this.
To add evidence to that it is clearly localised in areas where conflict is more likely. Where I live in a posh bit of Surrey there is not a single flag to be seen. In Southwold the only flags are the ones that have always been there.
I think it incumbent on @Leon to provide us with the What.Three.Words. location from where the revolution commences. It would be helpful to know and avoid. Dates would be handy too.
Professor David “there’s gonna be a civil war” Betz might be feeling smug this morning
Looks like some flag hangers were attacked with petrol bombs last night. We can’t know for sure but the video is convincing
If this is true this is exactly what he’s been predicting. The “locals” will react with displays of anger and protests, but then THOSE will be met with violence from others. And so it spirals
I don't know why you encourage this. It is appalling. It is also very sad if the flag of St George and Union Jack become associated with extreme right wing groups once more. For decades from the 70s it was an embarrassment to hang out these flags without being associated with the BNP or football thugs. They had hijacked them. Finally we got to the stage where you could display these flags with pride without being a racist or thug. You are encouraging the undoing of all of that once more. Shame on you and those doing this.
To add evidence to that it is clearly localised in areas where conflict is more likely. Where I live in a posh bit of Surrey there is not a single flag to be seen. In Southwold the only flags are the ones that have always been there.
Again, how am I “encouraging” violent attacks on flag hangers? Show me
The centrist Dorks on PB want to blame me for what is happening out there in the UK, and for me telling them about it. I like to think I’m a powerful and influential figure in the lithic sex toy carving business, but no I do not control the actions and beliefs of millions of people around the UK. Get a grip
Professor David “there’s gonna be a civil war” Betz might be feeling smug this morning
Looks like some flag hangers were attacked with petrol bombs last night. We can’t know for sure but the video is convincing
If this is true this is exactly what he’s been predicting. The “locals” will react with displays of anger and protests, but then THOSE will be met with violence from others. And so it spirals
Professor David “there’s gonna be a civil war” Betz might be feeling smug this morning
Looks like some flag hangers were attacked with petrol bombs last night. We can’t know for sure but the video is convincing
If this is true this is exactly what he’s been predicting. The “locals” will react with displays of anger and protests, but then THOSE will be met with violence from others. And so it spirals
I don't know why you encourage this. It is appalling. It is also very sad if the flag of St George and Union Jack become associated with extreme right wing groups once more. For decades from the 70s it was an embarrassment to hang out these flags without being associated with the BNP or football thugs. They had hijacked them. Finally we got to the stage where you could display these flags with pride without being a racist or thug. You are encouraging the undoing of all of that once more. Shame on you and those doing this.
To add evidence to that it is clearly localised in areas where conflict is more likely. Where I live in a posh bit of Surrey there is not a single flag to be seen. In Southwold the only flags are the ones that have always been there.
Again, how am I “encouraging” violent attacks on flag hangers? Show me
The centrist Dorks on PB want to blame me for what is happening out there in the UK, and for me telling them about it. I like to think I’m a powerful and influential figure in the lithic sex toy carving business, but no I do not control the actions and beliefs of millions of people around the UK. Get a grip
The glee drips out of the screen. Semi-Demi-Fascism with soft furnishings.
Professor David “there’s gonna be a civil war” Betz might be feeling smug this morning
Looks like some flag hangers were attacked with petrol bombs last night. We can’t know for sure but the video is convincing
If this is true this is exactly what he’s been predicting. The “locals” will react with displays of anger and protests, but then THOSE will be met with violence from others. And so it spirals
I don't know why you encourage this. It is appalling. It is also very sad if the flag of St George and Union Jack become associated with extreme right wing groups once more. For decades from the 70s it was an embarrassment to hang out these flags without being associated with the BNP or football thugs. They had hijacked them. Finally we got to the stage where you could display these flags with pride without being a racist or thug. You are encouraging the undoing of all of that once more. Shame on you and those doing this.
To add evidence to that it is clearly localised in areas where conflict is more likely. Where I live in a posh bit of Surrey there is not a single flag to be seen. In Southwold the only flags are the ones that have always been there.
I think it incumbent on @Leon to provide us with the What.Three.Words. location from where the revolution commences. It would be helpful to know and avoid. Dates would be handy too.
Well if @kjh and the other sad bumbling imbeciles on here are right, it will start wherever I am and whenever I choose, as I’m in charge of everything
Professor David “there’s gonna be a civil war” Betz might be feeling smug this morning
Looks like some flag hangers were attacked with petrol bombs last night. We can’t know for sure but the video is convincing
If this is true this is exactly what he’s been predicting. The “locals” will react with displays of anger and protests, but then THOSE will be met with violence from others. And so it spirals
I don't know why you encourage this. It is appalling. It is also very sad if the flag of St George and Union Jack become associated with extreme right wing groups once more. For decades from the 70s it was an embarrassment to hang out these flags without being associated with the BNP or football thugs. They had hijacked them. Finally we got to the stage where you could display these flags with pride without being a racist or thug. You are encouraging the undoing of all of that once more. Shame on you and those doing this.
To add evidence to that it is clearly localised in areas where conflict is more likely. Where I live in a posh bit of Surrey there is not a single flag to be seen. In Southwold the only flags are the ones that have always been there.
Again, how am I “encouraging” violent attacks on flag hangers? Show me
The centrist Dorks on PB want to blame me for what is happening out there in the UK, and for me telling them about it. I like to think I’m a powerful and influential figure in the lithic sex toy carving business, but no I do not control the actions and beliefs of millions of people around the UK. Get a grip
Well you are certainly encouraging it. Definition: 'giving someone support or confidence; supportive'
There you go. I have shown you. That was easy. Next.
I accept you are not very good at it, but that wasn't the challenge.
Professor David “there’s gonna be a civil war” Betz might be feeling smug this morning
Looks like some flag hangers were attacked with petrol bombs last night. We can’t know for sure but the video is convincing
If this is true this is exactly what he’s been predicting. The “locals” will react with displays of anger and protests, but then THOSE will be met with violence from others. And so it spirals
I don't know why you encourage this. It is appalling. It is also very sad if the flag of St George and Union Jack become associated with extreme right wing groups once more. For decades from the 70s it was an embarrassment to hang out these flags without being associated with the BNP or football thugs. They had hijacked them. Finally we got to the stage where you could display these flags with pride without being a racist or thug. You are encouraging the undoing of all of that once more. Shame on you and those doing this.
To add evidence to that it is clearly localised in areas where conflict is more likely. Where I live in a posh bit of Surrey there is not a single flag to be seen. In Southwold the only flags are the ones that have always been there.
Thank you for expressing this so well. This is my sentiment as well.
Professor David “there’s gonna be a civil war” Betz might be feeling smug this morning
Looks like some flag hangers were attacked with petrol bombs last night. We can’t know for sure but the video is convincing
If this is true this is exactly what he’s been predicting. The “locals” will react with displays of anger and protests, but then THOSE will be met with violence from others. And so it spirals
I don't know why you encourage this. It is appalling. It is also very sad if the flag of St George and Union Jack become associated with extreme right wing groups once more. For decades from the 70s it was an embarrassment to hang out these flags without being associated with the BNP or football thugs. They had hijacked them. Finally we got to the stage where you could display these flags with pride without being a racist or thug. You are encouraging the undoing of all of that once more. Shame on you and those doing this.
To add evidence to that it is clearly localised in areas where conflict is more likely. Where I live in a posh bit of Surrey there is not a single flag to be seen. In Southwold the only flags are the ones that have always been there.
A bit late but WRT flags did we note this yesterday:
Professor David “there’s gonna be a civil war” Betz might be feeling smug this morning
Looks like some flag hangers were attacked with petrol bombs last night. We can’t know for sure but the video is convincing
If this is true this is exactly what he’s been predicting. The “locals” will react with displays of anger and protests, but then THOSE will be met with violence from others. And so it spirals
I don't know why you encourage this. It is appalling. It is also very sad if the flag of St George and Union Jack become associated with extreme right wing groups once more. For decades from the 70s it was an embarrassment to hang out these flags without being associated with the BNP or football thugs. They had hijacked them. Finally we got to the stage where you could display these flags with pride without being a racist or thug. You are encouraging the undoing of all of that once more. Shame on you and those doing this.
To add evidence to that it is clearly localised in areas where conflict is more likely. Where I live in a posh bit of Surrey there is not a single flag to be seen. In Southwold the only flags are the ones that have always been there.
Again, how am I “encouraging” violent attacks on flag hangers? Show me
The centrist Dorks on PB want to blame me for what is happening out there in the UK, and for me telling them about it. I like to think I’m a powerful and influential figure in the lithic sex toy carving business, but no I do not control the actions and beliefs of millions of people around the UK. Get a grip
The glee drips out of the screen. Semi-Demi-Fascism with soft furnishings.
lol. Though the soft furnishings are beautiful. Got my inspo from the home of d’Annunzio by Lake Garda*
I’m like the Dollar Store d’Annunzio
*actually this isn’t true. I’ve been to his utterly weird home and it’s quite sad and a little creepy
Professor David “there’s gonna be a civil war” Betz might be feeling smug this morning
Looks like some flag hangers were attacked with petrol bombs last night. We can’t know for sure but the video is convincing
If this is true this is exactly what he’s been predicting. The “locals” will react with displays of anger and protests, but then THOSE will be met with violence from others. And so it spirals
I don't know why you encourage this. It is appalling. It is also very sad if the flag of St George and Union Jack become associated with extreme right wing groups once more. For decades from the 70s it was an embarrassment to hang out these flags without being associated with the BNP or football thugs. They had hijacked them. Finally we got to the stage where you could display these flags with pride without being a racist or thug. You are encouraging the undoing of all of that once more. Shame on you and those doing this.
To add evidence to that it is clearly localised in areas where conflict is more likely. Where I live in a posh bit of Surrey there is not a single flag to be seen. In Southwold the only flags are the ones that have always been there.
I think it incumbent on @Leon to provide us with the What.Three.Words. location from where the revolution commences. It would be helpful to know and avoid. Dates would be handy too.
Well if @kjh and the other sad bumbling imbeciles on here are right, it will start wherever I am and whenever I choose, as I’m in charge of everything
I’ll be sure to let you know
See my other post. You seem to be confused with the meaning of words. Encouragement and competence do not have the same meaning. You are encouraging. It doesn't mean you have any ability to achieve anything.
Professor David “there’s gonna be a civil war” Betz might be feeling smug this morning
Looks like some flag hangers were attacked with petrol bombs last night. We can’t know for sure but the video is convincing
If this is true this is exactly what he’s been predicting. The “locals” will react with displays of anger and protests, but then THOSE will be met with violence from others. And so it spirals
I don't know why you encourage this. It is appalling. It is also very sad if the flag of St George and Union Jack become associated with extreme right wing groups once more. For decades from the 70s it was an embarrassment to hang out these flags without being associated with the BNP or football thugs. They had hijacked them. Finally we got to the stage where you could display these flags with pride without being a racist or thug. You are encouraging the undoing of all of that once more. Shame on you and those doing this.
To add evidence to that it is clearly localised in areas where conflict is more likely. Where I live in a posh bit of Surrey there is not a single flag to be seen. In Southwold the only flags are the ones that have always been there.
I think it incumbent on @Leon to provide us with the What.Three.Words. location from where the revolution commences. It would be helpful to know and avoid. Dates would be handy too.
Well if @kjh and the other sad bumbling imbeciles on here are right, it will start wherever I am and whenever I choose, as I’m in charge of everything
I’ll be sure to let you know
Thanks, and much appreciated. Try and avoid starting the revolution from your safe house in the Vale of Glamorgan mind.
Professor David “there’s gonna be a civil war” Betz might be feeling smug this morning
Looks like some flag hangers were attacked with petrol bombs last night. We can’t know for sure but the video is convincing
If this is true this is exactly what he’s been predicting. The “locals” will react with displays of anger and protests, but then THOSE will be met with violence from others. And so it spirals
This is why S Korea cancelled its order for AH-64s.
Meanwhile, another legacy from previous government.
DE&S accepts final AH-64E Apache helicopter for British Army https://des.mod.uk/apache-ah-64e-british-army-boeing-helicopter/ The 50th AH-64E Apache has been secured for the British Army, completing the new fleet of the world’s most advanced attack helicopter.
The final Apache was handed over to DE&S at Boeing’s manufacturing facility in Arizona, USA. The UK’s operational fleet is now fully established at the Army’s Wattisham Flying Station in Suffolk, while the training fleet is complete at the Army Aviation Centre in Middle Wallop, Hampshire...
Accepting the last of an order presumably costs no more than cancelling the last of an order.
Of course. Point is, it was an extremely expensive acquisition which was supposed to provide a capability we could rely on for the next couple of decades, and there are already grounds to think it's obsolete.
It a very important lesson not to gamble on big ticket items. A country the size of the US can afford to write off multi billion dollar mistakes; we can't anymore.
Yes, I suspect the big defence spending splurge is going to be blown on obsolete technology. Ironically it might leave us worse prepared than if we had not spent the money but had saved it for later.
Professor David “there’s gonna be a civil war” Betz might be feeling smug this morning
Looks like some flag hangers were attacked with petrol bombs last night. We can’t know for sure but the video is convincing
If this is true this is exactly what he’s been predicting. The “locals” will react with displays of anger and protests, but then THOSE will be met with violence from others. And so it spirals
I don't know why you encourage this. It is appalling. It is also very sad if the flag of St George and Union Jack become associated with extreme right wing groups once more. For decades from the 70s it was an embarrassment to hang out these flags without being associated with the BNP or football thugs. They had hijacked them. Finally we got to the stage where you could display these flags with pride without being a racist or thug. You are encouraging the undoing of all of that once more. Shame on you and those doing this.
To add evidence to that it is clearly localised in areas where conflict is more likely. Where I live in a posh bit of Surrey there is not a single flag to be seen. In Southwold the only flags are the ones that have always been there.
Again, how am I “encouraging” violent attacks on flag hangers? Show me
The centrist Dorks on PB want to blame me for what is happening out there in the UK, and for me telling them about it. I like to think I’m a powerful and influential figure in the lithic sex toy carving business, but no I do not control the actions and beliefs of millions of people around the UK. Get a grip
Well you are certainly encouraging it. Definition: 'giving someone support or confidence; supportive'
There you go. I have shown you. That was easy. Next.
I accept you are not very good at it, but that wasn't the challenge.
At most, I’m encouraging people to put up patriotic flags. But I’m not even sure I’ve done that particularly. I’ve noted that it’s happening, is more the case
You’ll be pushed to find a comment where I encourage people to attack the flag hangers
Professor David “there’s gonna be a civil war” Betz might be feeling smug this morning
Looks like some flag hangers were attacked with petrol bombs last night. We can’t know for sure but the video is convincing
If this is true this is exactly what he’s been predicting. The “locals” will react with displays of anger and protests, but then THOSE will be met with violence from others. And so it spirals
I don't know why you encourage this. It is appalling. It is also very sad if the flag of St George and Union Jack become associated with extreme right wing groups once more. For decades from the 70s it was an embarrassment to hang out these flags without being associated with the BNP or football thugs. They had hijacked them. Finally we got to the stage where you could display these flags with pride without being a racist or thug. You are encouraging the undoing of all of that once more. Shame on you and those doing this.
To add evidence to that it is clearly localised in areas where conflict is more likely. Where I live in a posh bit of Surrey there is not a single flag to be seen. In Southwold the only flags are the ones that have always been there.
A bit late but WRT flags did we note this yesterday:
Professor David “there’s gonna be a civil war” Betz might be feeling smug this morning
Looks like some flag hangers were attacked with petrol bombs last night. We can’t know for sure but the video is convincing
If this is true this is exactly what he’s been predicting. The “locals” will react with displays of anger and protests, but then THOSE will be met with violence from others. And so it spirals
I don't know why you encourage this. It is appalling. It is also very sad if the flag of St George and Union Jack become associated with extreme right wing groups once more. For decades from the 70s it was an embarrassment to hang out these flags without being associated with the BNP or football thugs. They had hijacked them. Finally we got to the stage where you could display these flags with pride without being a racist or thug. You are encouraging the undoing of all of that once more. Shame on you and those doing this.
To add evidence to that it is clearly localised in areas where conflict is more likely. Where I live in a posh bit of Surrey there is not a single flag to be seen. In Southwold the only flags are the ones that have always been there.
A bit late but WRT flags did we note this yesterday:
Darn those fictional immigrant knights coming over here, taking the jobs of unemployed British knights.
Not to mention working without a visa, hunting fictional, endangered wildlife without a license. Not wearing hi-viz. No environmental impact survey. No risk study done. Bet he brought the horse along as well - animal welfare, transport, quarantine?
Professor David “there’s gonna be a civil war” Betz might be feeling smug this morning
Looks like some flag hangers were attacked with petrol bombs last night. We can’t know for sure but the video is convincing
If this is true this is exactly what he’s been predicting. The “locals” will react with displays of anger and protests, but then THOSE will be met with violence from others. And so it spirals
I don't know why you encourage this. It is appalling. It is also very sad if the flag of St George and Union Jack become associated with extreme right wing groups once more. For decades from the 70s it was an embarrassment to hang out these flags without being associated with the BNP or football thugs. They had hijacked them. Finally we got to the stage where you could display these flags with pride without being a racist or thug. You are encouraging the undoing of all of that once more. Shame on you and those doing this.
To add evidence to that it is clearly localised in areas where conflict is more likely. Where I live in a posh bit of Surrey there is not a single flag to be seen. In Southwold the only flags are the ones that have always been there.
Again, how am I “encouraging” violent attacks on flag hangers? Show me
The centrist Dorks on PB want to blame me for what is happening out there in the UK, and for me telling them about it. I like to think I’m a powerful and influential figure in the lithic sex toy carving business, but no I do not control the actions and beliefs of millions of people around the UK. Get a grip
Are you not one of these incendiary right wing hacks demanding regime change?
Professor David “there’s gonna be a civil war” Betz might be feeling smug this morning
Looks like some flag hangers were attacked with petrol bombs last night. We can’t know for sure but the video is convincing
If this is true this is exactly what he’s been predicting. The “locals” will react with displays of anger and protests, but then THOSE will be met with violence from others. And so it spirals
Comments
Were at roughly the same stage of this Parliament as we were at the time of the Hartlepool by-election when Massive was master of all he surveyed and there was every reason to expect an increased Conservative majority at the next election.
And that didn't quite happen as expected. (Not because of Covid directly, but because of the Trussterfuck.)
So until 2027 I'm holding fire on any predictions.
(By then Farage will of course be 64. I know Trump is about 530 but age may become an issue for him especially if Starmer doesn't fight the next election.)
1) Does Reform propose deportation without process (like Abrego Garcia) whereby a person can be taken from UK territory/UK waters and flown somewhere else without opportunity for a hearing before a court/tribunal?
2) Does a Reform government intend (like Trump's) to overlook or ignore court rulings either about general law or about named individuals?
What the proposals mean, and how much the rule of law nature of UK society would be altered (see the impact ofTrump's gangster regime) depends on those two issues.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c9vd3rx33g1o
The force of the collision caused the police Volvo to be propelled into the back of the Mercedes the officer had stopped.
Mr Mohammed said both cars - along with the one Hood had been driving - suffered "catastrophic damage".
Footage from inside the constables' vehicle at the moment of impact was played in court.
Hood had been going at 86mph when he hit the police car, but had reached 134mph five seconds before the smash.
Hood and one of his passengers managed to clamber out of the Mercedes without getting help for the causalities, some of whom had life-threatening injuries.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg0zp56yjlo
https://bsky.app/profile/parodypm.bsky.social/post/3lx2hj5tefk2f
It is much much easier for a popular government to lose popularity (trajectory of Hartlepool to 2024 General Election!) than it is for an unpopular government to regain popularity (trajectory from now to 2029).
IMO Labour don't have long to draw a completely different picture of what they are about; they have a chance in October's budget, and if they could be in the position to split the Tory and Reform party votes about equally, both at lowish 20s, Labour with low 30s could win most seats. It is becoming less likely by the week.
But yes, definition of the line is a risk for him. There are some people in the Reform column right now who aren't good people. Farage wants their votes, but not their public endorsement.
(f) be of good behaviour, and not behave in a way which undermines the purposes of the release on licence, which are to protect the public, prevent re-offending and promote successful re-integration into the community;
(g) not commit any offence.
It can easily be argued that going around saying that despite my guilty plea to incitement I am the victim, really I am innocent because I ought to be allowed to promote a raging mob setting fire to people and please can I have my fee from GB News and a large advance on my book/series of articles breaches the spirit of (f). As does voluntarily meeting anyone connected with the pro soviet gangster oligarchy.
I'm not saying it will happen, merely that the electorate is so volatile at the moment that pretty much anything could happen. That's why I'd think twice about even having trading bets on this market.
Their fly tipping was particularly problematic
Reform would seek to sign deals with Afghanistan, Eritrea and other countries that are large sources of small-boat migrants, despite claims of human rights abuses by their governments.
The party would also look to “third countries” such as Rwanda and Albania to house asylum seekers and seek to use British overseas territories such as Ascension Island as a “fallback” if people could not be sent elsewhere.
Is not this nicked from the Tories?:
Under the plans, the European Convention on Human Rights would be replaced by a British Bill of Rights.
There's a lot more of it. His biggest problem imo is that Labour might make progress.
They are going in with their boots on over immigration and asylum. Philp has been very effective at implying immigration and asylum has only been a social concern since July last year.
Immigration is not an issue for me living in the rural Vale of Glamorgan, although I understand there is an asylum hotel near Cardiff Airport. Who knew that? I didn't know that, and there was certainly no misbehaviour reported anecdotally or in the Glamorgan Star.
Jenrick has been very active since the ruling. Some of his comments have been very incendiary. Who knows? If the large scale riots get out of hand and it kicks off this weekend and key Conservatives are filmed at the scene, the voter will see for themselves that asylum hotels were nothing to do with the Tories. I am sure that is the planned narrative anyway.
And then we have Conservative martyr St Lucy who according to her and GBNews was politically imprisoned for no reason, but for Starmer's evil whim.
The Tories are smashing this, and even Nigel has been left trailing too.
But especially, I think 'that was then and this is now'. My intuition (ie guess) is that in these days right now it is very easy indeed to lose popularity in government and quite hard to regain it. Reasons: Governing is about solutions not talk. We happen to live in times in which solutions are in short supply.
https://x.com/PolymarketIntel/status/1958905771514597565
Farage is repulsivre to far too many voters to stand a chance and if you remove him what are you left with? A less noxious Reform leader? I haven't seen one. It's not the sort of Party that attracts well meaning attractive potential leaders
https://x.com/kylegriffin1/status/1958920871370006869
And who knows? Maybe things will get better. The wiring between government action and consequences is tangled at the best of times.
I personally think her sentence was too harsh, I think it was probably so as an attempted deterrent by the judge but it shouldn’t be the role of judges to make points. I think it creates a problem of perception where “two tier justice” will be a rallying cry and so a Rod has been created for the justice system’s back if consistency isn’t apparent.
She also needs to accept she broke the law and got punished. I also think she’s looking at the monetisation aspect of playing this up with Trump/Maga people and will be getting big fees to talk and slag off Britain.
A General all round shitshow and a great display of the law of unintended consequences - the police’s decisions re info on the Southport murders, her decision to do a stupid tweet, a judge sending a message, and then there will be further unintended consequences of her being used by the MAGA and Reformish movements.
We don't even know the issues which will be salient in 2028/29 - will it still be about Gaza and "small boats"? I suspect not. The debate has always moved from immigration to integration and the calls for large scale deportations which seem to be gaining currency irrespective of the legalities, practicalities and logistics.
We also seem to have to magic up "camps" to house 60,000 people out of thin air - again, difficult problems are rarely solved by sinmplistic, impractical solutions.
I suspect the economy will be top of the list as it usually is and that will come down to the hardy perennial of statistics vs perceptions.
Secondly, if the Tories recover then there is a decent chance the Tories and Reform will compete with each other to split the vote about equally, with both losing to a slightly resurgent Labour party.
Psephology requires (IMO) that either the Tories or Reform do conspicuously well at the expense of the other, not both doing modestly OK.
https://www.twz.com/air/colombian-black-hawk-downed-by-drone-is-a-glimpse-of-whats-to-come
This is why S Korea cancelled its order for AH-64s.
Meanwhile, another legacy from previous government.
DE&S accepts final AH-64E Apache helicopter for British Army
https://des.mod.uk/apache-ah-64e-british-army-boeing-helicopter/
The 50th AH-64E Apache has been secured for the British Army, completing the new fleet of the world’s most advanced attack helicopter.
The final Apache was handed over to DE&S at Boeing’s manufacturing facility in Arizona, USA. The UK’s operational fleet is now fully established at the Army’s Wattisham Flying Station in Suffolk, while the training fleet is complete at the Army Aviation Centre in Middle Wallop, Hampshire...
It is also true that the difficulties we are in (as in the aftermath of WW2 or the Wall Street Crash) make easy wins or politically acceptable solutions very hard, and the rolling social media means Alastair Campbell's 24 hour rule has been cut to literally minutes - an impossible standard to keep to.
It is however also true that while in government there are still levers to pull to try and regain popularity (Nigel Lawson in 1986) and Labour have a crucial advantage in that their actual opponents - the Conservatives - and presumed opponents are fighting each other rather than the government. The Conservatives are also in a massive crisis entirely of their own making and therefore navel-gazing, while Reform are not a party but an ego trip subsidised by dubious methods. One scandal, or a literal heart attack for Farage, and they are stuffed. This gives Labour an advantage in trying to consolidate their position. OK, so far they haven't taken advantage but it's not out of the question they will. Starmer has been written off many times but he has a remarkable knack of confounding people.
So bottom line is - no market for me.
There's still a chance of turning things around in the midterms. Probably the last chance; 2028 will be too late.
I have listened to a great deal of Reagan recently to compare and contrast with the orange halfwit. It was said Reagan preferred his information to be presented in video format, as opposed to Trump who according to biographer Michael Wolf can neither assimilate written detail (possibly because he is illiterate) and spoken detail (because he doesn't listen). At the time I despised Reagan, but hell, he was a great orator and a serious politician. Even with the benefit of hindsight I don't buy Mrs Thatcher, but in the light of Trump, I am sold on Reagan.
So back to your point, Labour could be saved, not because they turn their inertia around but because "events dear boy". And f*** me, do we have a leader of the free World who could furnish us with "events".
If we're going to quote the OBR, check this graph out. It's a bit out of date but it demonstrates what I'm trying to show.
and @DavidL - NHS productivity growth was solid all the way up to COVID (actually faster than private sector productivity), something the Conservatives have a very good record with. My main complaint is they gutted public health and investment, so while hospitals got more efficient overall health fell during that period. Hence we have a brilliant "National Sickness Service".
And when they try to make hard choices they usually make the wrong ones and have to be backed out of them.
If that was to maintain popularity it would be understandable if regrettable but they're not managing that either.
I think they would actually get much more credit if they said, OK, tough medicine needed, but actually, three years from now we will get some benefits.
(Classic example - VAT on school fees. If they stopped parroting this '£1.8 billion to spend on state schools and private school fees go up X% a year anyway so there will be no impact' which is complete bullshit, and said, 'you know what, it's going to be tough and cause a number of private schools to close but we need every cent we can get and this will be revenue positive' it would sound a whole lot saner and there would be far fewer bad headlines.)
It's a possibility but the UK government would have to really want it and be prepared to pay for it.
David Lammy given formal warning over lack of licence during fishing trip with JD Vance - but will avoid fine
https://news.sky.com/story/david-lammy-given-formal-warning-over-lack-of-licence-during-fishing-trip-with-jd-vance-but-will-avoid-fine-13416213
But it's UK territory, so the US could go hang.
(Though Farage wouldn't have the balls.)
But it's a little early just to give up.
Both LBD and the BBC have run with Philp and Jenrick and also St Lucy's virginal innocence.
The only point against my narrative is events were overtaken by "famine" being called in Gaza, and Bibi's regime claiming there is food aplenty only yards from the starving children, which means they are fine, and would Gazans mind moving South as we are about to further bomb the be Jesus out of Gaza City.
Some of their candidates may know how politics works but most won't have a clue how government works.
Looks like some flag hangers were attacked with petrol bombs last night. We can’t know for sure but the video is convincing
If this is true this is exactly what he’s been predicting. The “locals” will react with displays of anger and protests, but then THOSE will be met with violence from others. And so it spirals
https://x.com/journojones05/status/1959172414065009083?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw
Given that even the Times's commentary is a bit "distancing ourselves from the crazy guy we put on the front page" (Of course, this is Mr Farage speaking and a generous sprinkling of salt is required. Saying that you are willing to surrender people to the tender mercies of the Taliban when they face a real risk of retribution is not serious or ethical politics...), I'm going with the latter.
Point is, it was an extremely expensive acquisition which was supposed to provide a capability we could rely on for the next couple of decades, and there are already grounds to think it's obsolete.
It a very important lesson not to gamble on big ticket items. A country the size of the US can afford to write off multi billion dollar mistakes; we can't anymore.
The asylum seeker issue too is problematic for year one of this Government because they have done precisely nothing about it. Now asylum seekers aren't a particular priority of mine, which is probably why the Government are beached on the subject. They remain unconcerned because like me, they are middle class snobs. However it is an issue to Johnny Brexit because GBNews and the Daily Mail have pointed out to him that "foreigners will likely want to kill him and sell his daughters into slavery". The Government need to consider Johnny Brexit's unhinged mindset, but I don't think they have the capacity to breach their own logic.
https://www.bromley.gov.uk/news/article/872/a-statement-regarding-the-tlk-building-in-st-mary-cray
The hostel has been in situ at the TLK building for two years and according to the Government’s latest statistics, updated weekly, the hostel is not occupied by ‘single young men’, as was the case in Epping, and is being asserted by some locally.
A Council Spokesperson said: “ Our first hand advice remains that the hostel is currently occupied by children, women and families only in temporary accommodation, awaiting a decision from the Government concerning their future immigration status at which point they will leave.
"Also, that there are no current police investigations in relation to residents of the TLK apartments taking place, contrary to other reports circulating.
Open your eyes.
https://x.com/Acyn/status/1958669999880773727
If the answer is No and Yes we are in Trump gangster territory.
If the answer is Yes and No we are in territory a Reform government cannot control - the rule of law.
Buck Sexton: "Ghislaine Maxwell effectively downplaying this whole thing. Yeah, he was a pedophile, he hid it from everybody, nobody else was involved, there's no proof of anything else, there's no blackmail, there's no foreign intelligence tie. Oh, wow. That just brings it all together with a bow for her, doesn't it? She probably wants to get out early."
https://x.com/BlueATLGeorgia/status/1958991955112702200
Fox: The question is whether Maxwell is gaming the system. You have to assume that she is. She is in a very desperate situation, and she wants to offer something up. The critics will come forward and say, 'she knew the only shot she has is presidential commutation, and that will only come if she clears Trump.'
https://x.com/factpostnews/status/1958982638171001310
If a prisoner out on licence breaches those licence conditions it is an independent judge and not a malign Prime Minister who determines if they need to be returned to prison. If that comes to pass in this case the optics for the Government don't look good. Nonetheless the prisoner will be the architect of their own downfall should that come to pass
If some Just Stop Oil protester was behaving in a similar way, wouldn't you want them locked up and the key disposed of?
There was another violent flag-related incident in York which HAS been exaggerated (I think) so 🤷🏼♂️
To add evidence to that it is clearly localised in areas where conflict is more likely. Where I live in a posh bit of Surrey there is not a single flag to be seen. In Southwold the only flags are the ones that have always been there.
🤬 autocorrect
That said I’ve just realised Gavrilo must be the Serbian form of Gabriel, so it’s a poetic typo
The centrist Dorks on PB want to blame me for what is happening out there in the UK, and for me telling them about it. I like to think I’m a powerful and influential figure in the lithic sex toy carving business, but no I do not control the actions and beliefs of millions of people around the UK. Get a grip
I suggested the union to put extra security on.
They said “women aren’t like that”
The damage was 5 figures - way more than a singed flag.
I’ll be sure to let you know
There you go. I have shown you. That was easy. Next.
I accept you are not very good at it, but that wasn't the challenge.
https://x.com/MattCartoonist/status/1958932628100218883
Genius.
I’m like the Dollar Store d’Annunzio
*actually this isn’t true. I’ve been to his utterly weird home and it’s quite sad and a little creepy
Ironically it might leave us worse prepared than if we had not spent the money but had saved it for later.
You’ll be pushed to find a comment where I encourage people to attack the flag hangers
Not to mention working without a visa, hunting fictional, endangered wildlife without a license. Not wearing hi-viz. No environmental impact survey. No risk study done. Bet he brought the horse along as well - animal welfare, transport, quarantine?
Furrin criminality all the way.