Emergency debate about Mandelson tomorrow in Parliament
LOL. This is getting ridiculous.
Not really. As I see it, the question is did the PM lie about the sequencing of Mandy's appointment. Did he engage in (typical?) spin so as to give the impression, or indeed flatly state that he didn't know something that he did actually know because as we have seen with this PM, he is not averse to changing his mind or trying to change the facts to accord with what would have been politically preferable to have happened.
So it turns on his integrity which imo is grounds for an emergency debate.
Oh and if it comes down to the detail of what actually happened and who knew what and when and what they then did as a result....I'd back Mandy all day long over the PM (and his office).
Responding to your edit:
Mandelson has already had to 'resign' from government twice over dodgy dealings. Starmer, not once.
Why would you back Mandelson, given that?
(As an aside, what has Mandelson said about his departure? Is he actually personally at odds with Starmer?)
The point is that Mandy in all likelihood has a "little black book" or equivalent wherein he notes down all this stuff. Whatever else he is he is an operator.
"in all likelihood"
And given his history, why would you trust what's in this imaginary little black book as being the truth?
I am not convinced that Mandelson would want to go for early revenge. I think he will most likely keep quiet and lie low for a bit before popping up as an informal advisor. Why burn bridges and risk getting sent to Coventry?
Incidentally, I am not sure it is wise of the Tories to try to bring down Starmer. He would almost certainly be replaced by someone more formidable. Better to let him limp on wounded.
Who?
What you might get is someone who: a) is better at enthusing the left, winning voters back from Lib, Green and Sofa to Lab b) does policy things that are less agreeable to anyone of a centre-right disposition (Starmer's sucessor is likely to go a lot further and faster on Europe than SKS) c) is less competent as a manager of systems (no giggling at the back).
Remember, the consequence of Starmer falling isn't the right back in government. It's someone else with nearly four years to play with and a huge majority. Be very careful what you wish for.
Ok. Who?
If Starmer falls under a bus tomorrow, Lammy.
If she has long enough to do a meaningful job on the boats, Mahmood comes into play.
If her time in exile has been sufficient, maybe Rayner.
Maybe the Deputy Leader, once there is one.
I suspect Streeting loses under the unwritten 'if you want it too much, it shows your unsuitability' rule.
The point is, I won't get a say, and I don't think you will either. The socialists will replace one socialist with another one of their choice. Same principle as all the changes of PM from 2016 to 2022.
8 people charged after 'Unite the Kingdom' protest
There really needs to be a charge of being really embarrassing and entirely failing to understand history or the way to behave.
I find all 100,000 guilty.
And there lies the problem
As Trevor Phillips has just said in an interview on Sky that he mingled with the crowd at the March and he was struck just how normal they were and certainly not of the right
He went on to say that the Labour and Conservative Party are barely at 40% combined in the polls, and that is because they are simply not relating to people’s concerns
He said the asylum hotels are a particular problem in communities where family's had either had a wedding reception there, or a celebration, or a dance, and now saw them taken over by the asylum seekers which is upsetting their communities
Now, Sir Trevor Phillips, who was once head of the Equalties and Human Rights Commissioner, is probably one of the best journalists in the media at present and is well worth listening too
You cannot simply condemn 100,000 people who may even be your neighbours, because you try to associate them with the unacceptable face of the far right because they aren't
No, no. I feel I can simply condemn them. And let it be a lesson to them!
And especially so if they are my neighbours. Rabble to a man!
Seriously the antics of these people are unacceptable. Much as the antics of the violent football fans were in the 80s and 90s. The leaders of this sort of thing should be horribly ashamed of themselves and much of their following too.
The antics of the Palestine mob similarly, and pretty much all the mobs that have ever congregated,
And so it goes on and Farage grows stronger
And only 8 arrests so far and less than expected
I wonder if the police were under instructions to go softly softly, the idea being that too many arrests would have upset Nigel and, perhaps more importantly, Donald, Elon and JD. I do feel we've rather been put on notice by the latter three, and we need to demonstrate we've humbly taken their criticisms onboard and have addressed our attitude problems.
Mostly it was policy of the Thin Blue Line to film and arrest later. It keeps front line coppers in action on the day and allows dawn raids with safety later on. It's the way the long arm of the law works.
In a peaceful protest like the Palestine Action one a week before it is safer to arrest on the day. Also it's much less likely that the PA "Terrorists"feature in existing police files, so harder to trace.
They just have to review domestic abuse convictions to home in on the main 'free speech' protestors, I believe. A very useful shortcut.
The opposite is equally relevant, I suspect you could identify likely domestic abusers simply by looking at those protesting
It's all getting a bit Meeksy on here this evening.
For anyone who likes a Norfolk take, my current assessment of most likely seats for each party from most to least likely
Reform - Norwich North, NW Norfolk, Great Yarmouth (if Rupert drops out then its massive favourite obviously), SW Norfolk, Mid Norfolk, Broadland and Fakenham, South Norfolk, North Norfolk, Norwich South
Tories - South Norfolk, North Norfolk, Broadland and Fakenham, Mid Norfolk, SW Norfolk, NW Norfolk, (Norwich North, Great Yarmouth, Norwich South in that order but no chance in any)
Labour - Norwich South, Norwich North, No other realistic chances but South Norfolk hold ahead of SW Norfolk
LD - North Norfolk. No other chances
If Reform run vs Lowe in Great Yarmouth that must risk letting Labour through on 30% or less. It could be a very low winning %.
8 people charged after 'Unite the Kingdom' protest
There really needs to be a charge of being really embarrassing and entirely failing to understand history or the way to behave.
I find all 100,000 guilty.
And there lies the problem
As Trevor Phillips has just said in an interview on Sky that he mingled with the crowd at the March and he was struck just how normal they were and certainly not of the right
He went on to say that the Labour and Conservative Party are barely at 40% combined in the polls, and that is because they are simply not relating to people’s concerns
He said the asylum hotels are a particular problem in communities where family's had either had a wedding reception there, or a celebration, or a dance, and now saw them taken over by the asylum seekers which is upsetting their communities
Now, Sir Trevor Phillips, who was once head of the Equalties and Human Rights Commissioner, is probably one of the best journalists in the media at present and is well worth listening too
You cannot simply condemn 100,000 people who may even be your neighbours, because you try to associate them with the unacceptable face of the far right because they aren't
8 - so far. I think since so many police were assaulted, we can expect more. Though I would say they would be more public order offences in this case, than eg the one who received a sentence of 8 years for organising and animating last years' riots.
On the flip side of that, they have chosen to create the association themselves. It is driven by Yaxley-Lennon himself, and organised through his company. They may be useful idiots, but they are self-selected, volunteer useful idiots.
Regardless of real problems which exist and need addressing, Yaxley-Lennon is a jailbird who has received by my reckoning at least 8 jail sentences (when I tried, I got that far and then lost track there are so many), totalling around 8 years, of which he has served at least around 3 years inside, including for violent crimes, turning up at the homes of journalists in order to threaten and intimidate them, mortgage fraud involving transactions in excess of half a million pounds, and placing the trials of members of a sex abuse ring at risk of collapse by contempt of court.
This is all well known, and in the public domain. It is also easy to find out by anyone who can type 20 letters into Google, or ask the AI on their smartphone.
If they wish to protest by other - not associating with violent criminals with fascist or neo-Nazi politics - they can do so.
My not very tolerant view is that anyone who chooses attach themselves to a YL event have made a decision to smear themselves with the shit that comes off him, and need to take responsibility for themselves and their actions.
Emergency debate about Mandelson tomorrow in Parliament
LOL. This is getting ridiculous.
Not really. As I see it, the question is did the PM lie about the sequencing of Mandy's appointment. Did he engage in (typical?) spin so as to give the impression, or indeed flatly state that he didn't know something that he did actually know because as we have seen with this PM, he is not averse to changing his mind or trying to change the facts to accord with what would have been politically preferable to have happened.
So it turns on his integrity which imo is grounds for an emergency debate.
Oh and if it comes down to the detail of what actually happened and who knew what and when and what they then did as a result....I'd back Mandy all day long over the PM (and his office).
Responding to your edit:
Mandelson has already had to 'resign' from government twice over dodgy dealings. Starmer, not once.
Why would you back Mandelson, given that?
(As an aside, what has Mandelson said about his departure? Is he actually personally at odds with Starmer?)
The point is that Mandy in all likelihood has a "little black book" or equivalent wherein he notes down all this stuff. Whatever else he is he is an operator.
"in all likelihood"
And given his history, why would you trust what's in this imaginary little black book as being the truth?
I am not convinced that Mandelson would want to go for early revenge. I think he will most likely keep quiet and lie low for a bit before popping up as an informal advisor. Why burn bridges and risk getting sent to Coventry?
Incidentally, I am not sure it is wise of the Tories to try to bring down Starmer. He would almost certainly be replaced by someone more formidable. Better to let him limp on wounded.
Who?
What you might get is someone who: a) is better at enthusing the left, winning voters back from Lib, Green and Sofa to Lab b) does policy things that are less agreeable to anyone of a centre-right disposition (Starmer's sucessor is likely to go a lot further and faster on Europe than SKS) c) is less competent as a manager of systems (no giggling at the back).
Remember, the consequence of Starmer falling isn't the right back in government. It's someone else with nearly four years to play with and a huge majority. Be very careful what you wish for.
Ok. Who?
If Starmer falls under a bus tomorrow, Lammy.
If she has long enough to do a meaningful job on the boats, Mahmood comes into play.
If her time in exile has been sufficient, maybe Rayner.
Maybe the Deputy Leader, once there is one.
I suspect Streeting loses under the unwritten 'if you want it too much, it shows your unsuitability' rule.
The point is, I won't get a say, and I don't think you will either. The socialists will replace one socialist with another one of their choice. Same principle as all the changes of PM from 2016 to 2022.
Starmer wanted it too much and got it.
Rayner has the wrong chromosomes to be eligible to be Labour leader.
For anyone who likes a Norfolk take, my current assessment of most likely seats for each party from most to least likely
Reform - Norwich North, NW Norfolk, Great Yarmouth (if Rupert drops out then its massive favourite obviously), SW Norfolk, Mid Norfolk, Broadland and Fakenham, South Norfolk, North Norfolk, Norwich South
Tories - South Norfolk, North Norfolk, Broadland and Fakenham, Mid Norfolk, SW Norfolk, NW Norfolk, (Norwich North, Great Yarmouth, Norwich South in that order but no chance in any)
Labour - Norwich South, Norwich North, No other realistic chances but South Norfolk hold ahead of SW Norfolk
LD - North Norfolk. No other chances
If Reform run vs Lowe in Great Yarmouth that must risk letting Labour through on 30% or less. It could be a very low winning %.
Labour wont get over 20% imo, they certainly wont get near 30%. The seat has gone hard against them since Tony Wright's time
For anyone who likes a Norfolk take, my current assessment of most likely seats for each party from most to least likely
Reform - Norwich North, NW Norfolk, Great Yarmouth (if Rupert drops out then its massive favourite obviously), SW Norfolk, Mid Norfolk, Broadland and Fakenham, South Norfolk, North Norfolk, Norwich South
Tories - South Norfolk, North Norfolk, Broadland and Fakenham, Mid Norfolk, SW Norfolk, NW Norfolk, (Norwich North, Great Yarmouth, Norwich South in that order but no chance in any)
Labour - Norwich South, Norwich North, No other realistic chances but South Norfolk hold ahead of SW Norfolk
LD - North Norfolk. No other chances
If Reform run vs Lowe in Great Yarmouth that must risk letting Labour through on 30% or less. It could be a very low winning %.
Labour wont get over 20% imo, they certainly wont get near 30%. The seat has gone hard against them since Tony Wright's time
Also quite likely the Tories will do a deal with Lowe if Lowe indeed doesnt run under a Tory/Restore banner (especially if Jenrick is leader)
Michael Crick believes Danny Kruger's the second coming......
Steve Baker thinks he's the best thing since Maggie (excluding himself)
......With Tommy and his bunch of thugs ......Farage with his freebe house .......and Kemi sounding like Mrs Robinson
This has turned out to be a surprisingly good day for Sir Keir.
I listened to PM too.
Until the Kruger news dropped there was a plan for a big hit on Starmer, which after Kruger only happened after 5.45. But they still went for him.
Prior to that I was listening to Swarbrick on LBC. Tom thinks there was and is too much immigration after he left the May Government in 2019. He had a guy called Neil phone in who essentially was a replacement theorist. Neil wasn't too hard on the Tories immigration record but was of the opinion that Labour are traitors, for the almost a million a year "replacement" immigration they have overseen in the last five years, and should be dealt with as traitors.
Emergency debate about Mandelson tomorrow in Parliament
LOL. This is getting ridiculous.
Not really. As I see it, the question is did the PM lie about the sequencing of Mandy's appointment. Did he engage in (typical?) spin so as to give the impression, or indeed flatly state that he didn't know something that he did actually know because as we have seen with this PM, he is not averse to changing his mind or trying to change the facts to accord with what would have been politically preferable to have happened.
So it turns on his integrity which imo is grounds for an emergency debate.
Oh and if it comes down to the detail of what actually happened and who knew what and when and what they then did as a result....I'd back Mandy all day long over the PM (and his office).
Responding to your edit:
Mandelson has already had to 'resign' from government twice over dodgy dealings. Starmer, not once.
Why would you back Mandelson, given that?
(As an aside, what has Mandelson said about his departure? Is he actually personally at odds with Starmer?)
The point is that Mandy in all likelihood has a "little black book" or equivalent wherein he notes down all this stuff. Whatever else he is he is an operator.
"in all likelihood"
And given his history, why would you trust what's in this imaginary little black book as being the truth?
I am not convinced that Mandelson would want to go for early revenge. I think he will most likely keep quiet and lie low for a bit before popping up as an informal advisor. Why burn bridges and risk getting sent to Coventry?
Incidentally, I am not sure it is wise of the Tories to try to bring down Starmer. He would almost certainly be replaced by someone more formidable. Better to let him limp on wounded.
Who?
What you might get is someone who: a) is better at enthusing the left, winning voters back from Lib, Green and Sofa to Lab b) does policy things that are less agreeable to anyone of a centre-right disposition (Starmer's sucessor is likely to go a lot further and faster on Europe than SKS) c) is less competent as a manager of systems (no giggling at the back).
Remember, the consequence of Starmer falling isn't the right back in government. It's someone else with nearly four years to play with and a huge majority. Be very careful what you wish for.
Ok. Who?
If Starmer falls under a bus tomorrow, Lammy.
If she has long enough to do a meaningful job on the boats, Mahmood comes into play.
If her time in exile has been sufficient, maybe Rayner.
Maybe the Deputy Leader, once there is one.
I suspect Streeting loses under the unwritten 'if you want it too much, it shows your unsuitability' rule.
The point is, I won't get a say, and I don't think you will either. The socialists will replace one socialist with another one of their choice. Same principle as all the changes of PM from 2016 to 2022.
Starmer wanted it too much and got it.
Rayner has the wrong chromosomes to be eligible to be Labour leader.
Disagree on Starmer.
When he got the Labour leadership, nobody can have thought that they would win next time. Surely?
If he had a plan, I'm sure it was to have handed over to the next Labour PM in waiting after losing in the 2023 election.
(Hence the mood flip from his 2020/1 shadow cabinet and platform to his 2022/3 one, which were much more governmental).
Michael Crick believes Danny Kruger's the second coming......
Steve Baker thinks he's the best thing since Maggie (excluding himself)
......With Tommy and his bunch of thugs ......Farage with his freebe house .......and Kemi sounding like Mrs Robinson
This has turned out to be a surprisingly good day for Sir Keir.
Not really. Reform are taking over the position of Conservatives, the Greens/LDs are taking over the position of Labour, and the two legacy parties will end up like France, hovering around the 15% mark and wondering where the future went. Bear in mind the French Socialists won the Presidency as recently as 2012 (I won that bet if memory serves ) and now they are nowhere.
Stephen Miller: “We are going to channel all the anger we have over the organized campaign to led to this assassination to uproot and dismantle these terrorist networks … The organized doxxing campaigns. The organized riots. The organized street violence. The organized of dehumanization. Vilification. Posting people’s addresses. Combining that with messaging designed to trigger and incite violence and the actual organized cells that carry out and facilitate the violence. It is a vast domestic terror movement. With God and as my witness, we are going to use every resource we have at the Department of Justice, Homeland Security and throughout this government to identify, disrupt, dismantle and destroy these networks, and make America safe again for the American people. It will happen, and we will do it in Charlie’s name.”
8 people charged after 'Unite the Kingdom' protest
There really needs to be a charge of being really embarrassing and entirely failing to understand history or the way to behave.
I find all 100,000 guilty.
And there lies the problem
As Trevor Phillips has just said in an interview on Sky that he mingled with the crowd at the March and he was struck just how normal they were and certainly not of the right
He went on to say that the Labour and Conservative Party are barely at 40% combined in the polls, and that is because they are simply not relating to people’s concerns
He said the asylum hotels are a particular problem in communities where family's had either had a wedding reception there, or a celebration, or a dance, and now saw them taken over by the asylum seekers which is upsetting their communities
Now, Sir Trevor Phillips, who was once head of the Equalties and Human Rights Commissioner, is probably one of the best journalists in the media at present and is well worth listening too
You cannot simply condemn 100,000 people who may even be your neighbours, because you try to associate them with the unacceptable face of the far right because they aren't
8 - so far. I think since so many police were assaulted, we can expect more. Though I would say they would be more public order offences in this case, than eg the one who received a sentence of 8 years for organising and animating last years' riots.
On the flip side of that, they have chosen to create the association themselves. It is driven by Yaxley-Lennon himself, and organised through his company. They may be useful idiots, but they are self-selected, volunteer useful idiots.
Regardless of real problems which exist and need addressing, Yaxley-Lennon is a jailbird who has received by my reckoning at least 8 jail sentences (when I tried, I got that far and then lost track there are so many), totalling around 8 years, of which he has served at least around 3 years inside, including for violent crimes, turning up at the homes of journalists in order to threaten and intimidate them, mortgage fraud involving transactions in excess of half a million pounds, and placing the trials of members of a sex abuse ring at risk of collapse by contempt of court.
This is all well known, and in the public domain. It is also easy to find out by anyone who can type 20 letters into Google, or ask the AI on their smartphone.
If they wish to protest by other - not associating with violent criminals with fascist or neo-Nazi politics - they can do so.
My not very tolerant view is that anyone who chooses attach themselves to a YL event have made a decision to smear themselves with the shit that comes off him, and need to take responsibility for themselves and their actions.
Gah - timed out again - sorry.
"eg like the one who received" "If they wish to protest by other means" "last year's riots"
Emergency debate about Mandelson tomorrow in Parliament
LOL. This is getting ridiculous.
Not really. As I see it, the question is did the PM lie about the sequencing of Mandy's appointment. Did he engage in (typical?) spin so as to give the impression, or indeed flatly state that he didn't know something that he did actually know because as we have seen with this PM, he is not averse to changing his mind or trying to change the facts to accord with what would have been politically preferable to have happened.
So it turns on his integrity which imo is grounds for an emergency debate.
Oh and if it comes down to the detail of what actually happened and who knew what and when and what they then did as a result....I'd back Mandy all day long over the PM (and his office).
Responding to your edit:
Mandelson has already had to 'resign' from government twice over dodgy dealings. Starmer, not once.
Why would you back Mandelson, given that?
(As an aside, what has Mandelson said about his departure? Is he actually personally at odds with Starmer?)
The point is that Mandy in all likelihood has a "little black book" or equivalent wherein he notes down all this stuff. Whatever else he is he is an operator.
"in all likelihood"
And given his history, why would you trust what's in this imaginary little black book as being the truth?
I am not convinced that Mandelson would want to go for early revenge. I think he will most likely keep quiet and lie low for a bit before popping up as an informal advisor. Why burn bridges and risk getting sent to Coventry?
Incidentally, I am not sure it is wise of the Tories to try to bring down Starmer. He would almost certainly be replaced by someone more formidable. Better to let him limp on wounded.
Who?
What you might get is someone who: a) is better at enthusing the left, winning voters back from Lib, Green and Sofa to Lab b) does policy things that are less agreeable to anyone of a centre-right disposition (Starmer's sucessor is likely to go a lot further and faster on Europe than SKS) c) is less competent as a manager of systems (no giggling at the back).
Remember, the consequence of Starmer falling isn't the right back in government. It's someone else with nearly four years to play with and a huge majority. Be very careful what you wish for.
Ok. Who?
If Starmer falls under a bus tomorrow, Lammy.
If she has long enough to do a meaningful job on the boats, Mahmood comes into play.
If her time in exile has been sufficient, maybe Rayner.
Maybe the Deputy Leader, once there is one.
I suspect Streeting loses under the unwritten 'if you want it too much, it shows your unsuitability' rule.
The point is, I won't get a say, and I don't think you will either. The socialists will replace one socialist with another one of their choice. Same principle as all the changes of PM from 2016 to 2022.
Starmer wanted it too much and got it.
Rayner has the wrong chromosomes to be eligible to be Labour leader.
Disagree on Starmer.
When he got the Labour leadership, nobody can have thought that they would win next time. Surely?
(Snip)
It wasn't out of the question. Boris Johnson was always unsuited to be PM, as wise people pointed out well before he became PM. There was always a possibility - not a certainty - that he would crash and burn the party.
The size of the majority was the thing that was amazing, and shows the damage Boris did to the party.
Ooh, self- proclaimed future Tory Prime Minister Steve Baker was on PM as a commentator on and a friend of Danny Kruger. He is working towards some sort of 2019 style Reform- Conservative deal for the next election.
Stephen Miller: “We are going to channel all the anger we have over the organized campaign to led to this assassination to uproot and dismantle these terrorist networks … The organized doxxing campaigns. The organized riots. The organized street violence. The organized of dehumanization. Vilification. Posting people’s addresses. Combining that with messaging designed to trigger and incite violence and the actual organized cells that carry out and facilitate the violence. It is a vast domestic terror movement. With God and as my witness, we are going to use every resource we have at the Department of Justice, Homeland Security and throughout this government to identify, disrupt, dismantle and destroy these networks, and make America safe again for the American people. It will happen, and we will do it in Charlie’s name.”
Emergency debate about Mandelson tomorrow in Parliament
LOL. This is getting ridiculous.
Not really. As I see it, the question is did the PM lie about the sequencing of Mandy's appointment. Did he engage in (typical?) spin so as to give the impression, or indeed flatly state that he didn't know something that he did actually know because as we have seen with this PM, he is not averse to changing his mind or trying to change the facts to accord with what would have been politically preferable to have happened.
So it turns on his integrity which imo is grounds for an emergency debate.
Oh and if it comes down to the detail of what actually happened and who knew what and when and what they then did as a result....I'd back Mandy all day long over the PM (and his office).
Responding to your edit:
Mandelson has already had to 'resign' from government twice over dodgy dealings. Starmer, not once.
Why would you back Mandelson, given that?
(As an aside, what has Mandelson said about his departure? Is he actually personally at odds with Starmer?)
The point is that Mandy in all likelihood has a "little black book" or equivalent wherein he notes down all this stuff. Whatever else he is he is an operator.
"in all likelihood"
And given his history, why would you trust what's in this imaginary little black book as being the truth?
I am not convinced that Mandelson would want to go for early revenge. I think he will most likely keep quiet and lie low for a bit before popping up as an informal advisor. Why burn bridges and risk getting sent to Coventry?
Incidentally, I am not sure it is wise of the Tories to try to bring down Starmer. He would almost certainly be replaced by someone more formidable. Better to let him limp on wounded.
Who?
What you might get is someone who: a) is better at enthusing the left, winning voters back from Lib, Green and Sofa to Lab b) does policy things that are less agreeable to anyone of a centre-right disposition (Starmer's sucessor is likely to go a lot further and faster on Europe than SKS) c) is less competent as a manager of systems (no giggling at the back).
Remember, the consequence of Starmer falling isn't the right back in government. It's someone else with nearly four years to play with and a huge majority. Be very careful what you wish for.
Ok. Who?
If Starmer falls under a bus tomorrow, Lammy.
If she has long enough to do a meaningful job on the boats, Mahmood comes into play.
If her time in exile has been sufficient, maybe Rayner.
Maybe the Deputy Leader, once there is one.
I suspect Streeting loses under the unwritten 'if you want it too much, it shows your unsuitability' rule.
The point is, I won't get a say, and I don't think you will either. The socialists will replace one socialist with another one of their choice. Same principle as all the changes of PM from 2016 to 2022.
“Somebody more formidable” was the challenge.
Lammy ain’t that. Mahmood I’d never heard of until her recent promotion. Rayner would be formidable - but shoots from the hip - but I think she’s done.
I don’t see anyone in the government (or on the opposition benches) who would be any good
Stephen Miller: “We are going to channel all the anger we have over the organized campaign to led to this assassination to uproot and dismantle these terrorist networks … The organized doxxing campaigns. The organized riots. The organized street violence. The organized of dehumanization. Vilification. Posting people’s addresses. Combining that with messaging designed to trigger and incite violence and the actual organized cells that carry out and facilitate the violence. It is a vast domestic terror movement. With God and as my witness, we are going to use every resource we have at the Department of Justice, Homeland Security and throughout this government to identify, disrupt, dismantle and destroy these networks, and make America safe again for the American people. It will happen, and we will do it in Charlie’s name.”
Stephen Miller: “We are going to channel all the anger we have over the organized campaign to led to this assassination to uproot and dismantle these terrorist networks … The organized doxxing campaigns. The organized riots. The organized street violence. The organized of dehumanization. Vilification. Posting people’s addresses. Combining that with messaging designed to trigger and incite violence and the actual organized cells that carry out and facilitate the violence. It is a vast domestic terror movement. With God and as my witness, we are going to use every resource we have at the Department of Justice, Homeland Security and throughout this government to identify, disrupt, dismantle and destroy these networks, and make America safe again for the American people. It will happen, and we will do it in Charlie’s name.”
8 people charged after 'Unite the Kingdom' protest
There really needs to be a charge of being really embarrassing and entirely failing to understand history or the way to behave.
I find all 100,000 guilty.
And there lies the problem
As Trevor Phillips has just said in an interview on Sky that he mingled with the crowd at the March and he was struck just how normal they were and certainly not of the right
He went on to say that the Labour and Conservative Party are barely at 40% combined in the polls, and that is because they are simply not relating to people’s concerns
He said the asylum hotels are a particular problem in communities where family's had either had a wedding reception there, or a celebration, or a dance, and now saw them taken over by the asylum seekers which is upsetting their communities
Now, Sir Trevor Phillips, who was once head of the Equalties and Human Rights Commissioner, is probably one of the best journalists in the media at present and is well worth listening too
You cannot simply condemn 100,000 people who may even be your neighbours, because you try to associate them with the unacceptable face of the far right because they aren't
8 - so far. I think since so many police were assaulted, we can expect more. Though I would say they would be more public order offences in this case, than eg the one who received a sentence of 8 years for organising and animating last years' riots.
On the flip side of that, they have chosen to create the association themselves. It is driven by Yaxley-Lennon himself, and organised through his company. They may be useful idiots, but they are self-selected, volunteer useful idiots.
Regardless of real problems which exist and need addressing, Yaxley-Lennon is a jailbird who has received by my reckoning at least 8 jail sentences (when I tried, I got that far and then lost track there are so many), totalling around 8 years, of which he has served at least around 3 years inside, including for violent crimes, turning up at the homes of journalists in order to threaten and intimidate them, mortgage fraud involving transactions in excess of half a million pounds, and placing the trials of members of a sex abuse ring at risk of collapse by contempt of court.
This is all well known, and in the public domain. It is also easy to find out by anyone who can type 20 letters into Google, or ask the AI on their smartphone.
If they wish to protest by other - not associating with violent criminals with fascist or neo-Nazi politics - they can do so.
My not very tolerant view is that anyone who chooses attach themselves to a YL event have made a decision to smear themselves with the shit that comes off him, and need to take responsibility for themselves and their actions.
"What is it about violent, fascist thug Yaxley-Lennon that attracts you to his rally?"
Stephen Miller: “We are going to channel all the anger we have over the organized campaign to led to this assassination to uproot and dismantle these terrorist networks … The organized doxxing campaigns. The organized riots. The organized street violence. The organized of dehumanization. Vilification. Posting people’s addresses. Combining that with messaging designed to trigger and incite violence and the actual organized cells that carry out and facilitate the violence. It is a vast domestic terror movement. With God and as my witness, we are going to use every resource we have at the Department of Justice, Homeland Security and throughout this government to identify, disrupt, dismantle and destroy these networks, and make America safe again for the American people. It will happen, and we will do it in Charlie’s name.”
Miller looks and behaves like Doctor Evil. Doctor Evil was a comic caricature, Miller seems to be even more of a World domineering comic villain than was Doctor Evil.
"The details of my life are quite inconsequential... very well, where do I begin? My father was a relentlessly self-improving boulangerie owner from Belgium with low grade narcolepsy and a penchant for buggery. My mother was a fifteen year old French prostitute named Chloe with webbed feet. My father would womanize, he would drink. He would make outrageous claims like he invented the question mark. Sometimes he would accuse chestnuts of being lazy. The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament. My childhood was typical. Summers in Rangoon, luge lessons. In the spring we'd make meat helmets. When I was insolent I was placed in a burlap bag and beaten with reeds - pretty standard really. At the age of twelve I received my first scribe. At the age of fourteen a Zoroastrian named Vilma ritualistically shaved my testicles. There really is nothing like a shorn scrotum... it's breathtaking - I highly suggest you try it!"
Ooh, self- proclaimed future Tory Prime Minister Steve Baker was on PM as a commentator on and a friend of Danny Kruger. He is working towards some sort of 2019 style Reform- Conservative deal for the next election.
Reform are in a position to extract maximum pay off atm. Offer to stand aside in 40 blue wall seats and 10 Tory-Lab fights and demand Tories abandon 100 red wall seats
Emergency debate about Mandelson tomorrow in Parliament
LOL. This is getting ridiculous.
Not really. As I see it, the question is did the PM lie about the sequencing of Mandy's appointment. Did he engage in (typical?) spin so as to give the impression, or indeed flatly state that he didn't know something that he did actually know because as we have seen with this PM, he is not averse to changing his mind or trying to change the facts to accord with what would have been politically preferable to have happened.
So it turns on his integrity which imo is grounds for an emergency debate.
Oh and if it comes down to the detail of what actually happened and who knew what and when and what they then did as a result....I'd back Mandy all day long over the PM (and his office).
Responding to your edit:
Mandelson has already had to 'resign' from government twice over dodgy dealings. Starmer, not once.
Why would you back Mandelson, given that?
(As an aside, what has Mandelson said about his departure? Is he actually personally at odds with Starmer?)
The point is that Mandy in all likelihood has a "little black book" or equivalent wherein he notes down all this stuff. Whatever else he is he is an operator.
"in all likelihood"
And given his history, why would you trust what's in this imaginary little black book as being the truth?
I am not convinced that Mandelson would want to go for early revenge. I think he will most likely keep quiet and lie low for a bit before popping up as an informal advisor. Why burn bridges and risk getting sent to Coventry?
Incidentally, I am not sure it is wise of the Tories to try to bring down Starmer. He would almost certainly be replaced by someone more formidable. Better to let him limp on wounded.
Who?
What you might get is someone who: a) is better at enthusing the left, winning voters back from Lib, Green and Sofa to Lab b) does policy things that are less agreeable to anyone of a centre-right disposition (Starmer's sucessor is likely to go a lot further and faster on Europe than SKS) c) is less competent as a manager of systems (no giggling at the back).
Remember, the consequence of Starmer falling isn't the right back in government. It's someone else with nearly four years to play with and a huge majority. Be very careful what you wish for.
Ok. Who?
If Starmer falls under a bus tomorrow, Lammy.
If she has long enough to do a meaningful job on the boats, Mahmood comes into play.
If her time in exile has been sufficient, maybe Rayner.
Maybe the Deputy Leader, once there is one.
I suspect Streeting loses under the unwritten 'if you want it too much, it shows your unsuitability' rule.
The point is, I won't get a say, and I don't think you will either. The socialists will replace one socialist with another one of their choice. Same principle as all the changes of PM from 2016 to 2022.
“Somebody more formidable” was the challenge.
Lammy ain’t that. Mahmood I’d never heard of until her recent promotion. Rayner would be formidable - but shoots from the hip - but I think she’s done.
I don’t see anyone in the government (or on the opposition benches) who would be any good
Phillipson is certainly formidable. Good articulate speaker too.
8 people charged after 'Unite the Kingdom' protest
There really needs to be a charge of being really embarrassing and entirely failing to understand history or the way to behave.
I find all 100,000 guilty.
And there lies the problem
As Trevor Phillips has just said in an interview on Sky that he mingled with the crowd at the March and he was struck just how normal they were and certainly not of the right
He went on to say that the Labour and Conservative Party are barely at 40% combined in the polls, and that is because they are simply not relating to people’s concerns
He said the asylum hotels are a particular problem in communities where family's had either had a wedding reception there, or a celebration, or a dance, and now saw them taken over by the asylum seekers which is upsetting their communities
Now, Sir Trevor Phillips, who was once head of the Equalties and Human Rights Commissioner, is probably one of the best journalists in the media at present and is well worth listening too
You cannot simply condemn 100,000 people who may even be your neighbours, because you try to associate them with the unacceptable face of the far right because they aren't
No, no. I feel I can simply condemn them. And let it be a lesson to them!
And especially so if they are my neighbours. Rabble to a man!
Seriously the antics of these people are unacceptable. Much as the antics of the violent football fans were in the 80s and 90s. The leaders of this sort of thing should be horribly ashamed of themselves and much of their following too.
The antics of the Palestine mob similarly, and pretty much all the mobs that have ever congregated,
And so it goes on and Farage grows stronger
And only 8 arrests so far and less than expected
Could the small number of arrests be partly down to the fact that the Police appear to have been overwhelmed by the sheer numbers that turned up on the march and hence the large number of police officers who were injured during the outbreaks of violence when they clearly lost control of the situation?
Emergency debate about Mandelson tomorrow in Parliament
LOL. This is getting ridiculous.
Not really. As I see it, the question is did the PM lie about the sequencing of Mandy's appointment. Did he engage in (typical?) spin so as to give the impression, or indeed flatly state that he didn't know something that he did actually know because as we have seen with this PM, he is not averse to changing his mind or trying to change the facts to accord with what would have been politically preferable to have happened.
So it turns on his integrity which imo is grounds for an emergency debate.
Oh and if it comes down to the detail of what actually happened and who knew what and when and what they then did as a result....I'd back Mandy all day long over the PM (and his office).
Responding to your edit:
Mandelson has already had to 'resign' from government twice over dodgy dealings. Starmer, not once.
Why would you back Mandelson, given that?
(As an aside, what has Mandelson said about his departure? Is he actually personally at odds with Starmer?)
The point is that Mandy in all likelihood has a "little black book" or equivalent wherein he notes down all this stuff. Whatever else he is he is an operator.
"in all likelihood"
And given his history, why would you trust what's in this imaginary little black book as being the truth?
I am not convinced that Mandelson would want to go for early revenge. I think he will most likely keep quiet and lie low for a bit before popping up as an informal advisor. Why burn bridges and risk getting sent to Coventry?
Incidentally, I am not sure it is wise of the Tories to try to bring down Starmer. He would almost certainly be replaced by someone more formidable. Better to let him limp on wounded.
Who?
What you might get is someone who: a) is better at enthusing the left, winning voters back from Lib, Green and Sofa to Lab b) does policy things that are less agreeable to anyone of a centre-right disposition (Starmer's sucessor is likely to go a lot further and faster on Europe than SKS) c) is less competent as a manager of systems (no giggling at the back).
Remember, the consequence of Starmer falling isn't the right back in government. It's someone else with nearly four years to play with and a huge majority. Be very careful what you wish for.
Ok. Who?
If Starmer falls under a bus tomorrow, Lammy.
If she has long enough to do a meaningful job on the boats, Mahmood comes into play.
If her time in exile has been sufficient, maybe Rayner.
Maybe the Deputy Leader, once there is one.
I suspect Streeting loses under the unwritten 'if you want it too much, it shows your unsuitability' rule.
The point is, I won't get a say, and I don't think you will either. The socialists will replace one socialist with another one of their choice. Same principle as all the changes of PM from 2016 to 2022.
Not much socialism going on this Government. We haven't had a fiscally socialist Prime Minister since Boris Johnson.
Emergency debate about Mandelson tomorrow in Parliament
LOL. This is getting ridiculous.
Not really. As I see it, the question is did the PM lie about the sequencing of Mandy's appointment. Did he engage in (typical?) spin so as to give the impression, or indeed flatly state that he didn't know something that he did actually know because as we have seen with this PM, he is not averse to changing his mind or trying to change the facts to accord with what would have been politically preferable to have happened.
So it turns on his integrity which imo is grounds for an emergency debate.
Oh and if it comes down to the detail of what actually happened and who knew what and when and what they then did as a result....I'd back Mandy all day long over the PM (and his office).
Responding to your edit:
Mandelson has already had to 'resign' from government twice over dodgy dealings. Starmer, not once.
Why would you back Mandelson, given that?
(As an aside, what has Mandelson said about his departure? Is he actually personally at odds with Starmer?)
The point is that Mandy in all likelihood has a "little black book" or equivalent wherein he notes down all this stuff. Whatever else he is he is an operator.
It's mauve, darling.
Lilac, surely, in the UK.
Like the Lilac Leopard buses that used to be the posh end of Nottingham City Transport (I think it was they - they were in the NCT exclusive pickup zone) in the 1970s-early 1980s.
(If it turns out to have been Barton Buses, I deprecate their marketing that they did not make it stick.)
Ooh, self- proclaimed future Tory Prime Minister Steve Baker was on PM as a commentator on and a friend of Danny Kruger. He is working towards some sort of 2019 style Reform- Conservative deal for the next election.
Reform are in a position to extract maximum pay off atm. Offer to stand aside in 40 blue wall seats and 10 Tory-Lab fights and demand Tories abandon 100 red wall seats
Steve seemed quite chipper about his and Tory prospects. I am guessing he has a fifty-fifty stand aside in mind. Your proposal gives the Tories a decent almost 200ish tally with Labour nowhere to be seen.
Ooh, self- proclaimed future Tory Prime Minister Steve Baker was on PM as a commentator on and a friend of Danny Kruger. He is working towards some sort of 2019 style Reform- Conservative deal for the next election.
Reform are in a position to extract maximum pay off atm. Offer to stand aside in 40 blue wall seats and 10 Tory-Lab fights and demand Tories abandon 100 red wall seats
It’s hard to imagine the Tories will agree to surrender their status as a national party. But who knows. I suppose it depends on how dire things become them.
Emergency debate about Mandelson tomorrow in Parliament
LOL. This is getting ridiculous.
Not really. As I see it, the question is did the PM lie about the sequencing of Mandy's appointment. Did he engage in (typical?) spin so as to give the impression, or indeed flatly state that he didn't know something that he did actually know because as we have seen with this PM, he is not averse to changing his mind or trying to change the facts to accord with what would have been politically preferable to have happened.
So it turns on his integrity which imo is grounds for an emergency debate.
Oh and if it comes down to the detail of what actually happened and who knew what and when and what they then did as a result....I'd back Mandy all day long over the PM (and his office).
Responding to your edit:
Mandelson has already had to 'resign' from government twice over dodgy dealings. Starmer, not once.
Why would you back Mandelson, given that?
(As an aside, what has Mandelson said about his departure? Is he actually personally at odds with Starmer?)
The point is that Mandy in all likelihood has a "little black book" or equivalent wherein he notes down all this stuff. Whatever else he is he is an operator.
It's mauve, darling.
Lilac, surely, in the UK.
Like the Lilac Leopard buses that used to be the posh end of Nottingham City Transport (I think it was they - they were in the NCT exclusive pickup zone) in the 1970s-early 1980s.
Emergency debate about Mandelson tomorrow in Parliament
LOL. This is getting ridiculous.
Not really. As I see it, the question is did the PM lie about the sequencing of Mandy's appointment. Did he engage in (typical?) spin so as to give the impression, or indeed flatly state that he didn't know something that he did actually know because as we have seen with this PM, he is not averse to changing his mind or trying to change the facts to accord with what would have been politically preferable to have happened.
So it turns on his integrity which imo is grounds for an emergency debate.
Oh and if it comes down to the detail of what actually happened and who knew what and when and what they then did as a result....I'd back Mandy all day long over the PM (and his office).
Responding to your edit:
Mandelson has already had to 'resign' from government twice over dodgy dealings. Starmer, not once.
Why would you back Mandelson, given that?
(As an aside, what has Mandelson said about his departure? Is he actually personally at odds with Starmer?)
The point is that Mandy in all likelihood has a "little black book" or equivalent wherein he notes down all this stuff. Whatever else he is he is an operator.
It's mauve, darling.
Lilac, surely, in the UK.
Like the Lilac Leopard buses that used to be the posh end of Nottingham City Transport (I think it was they - they were in the NCT exclusive pickup zone) in the 1970s-early 1980s.
Perkin Mauve, OTOH. Patriotic Victorian Boffinry. Made from Patriotic British Coal Tar, not furrin snails.
Ooh, self- proclaimed future Tory Prime Minister Steve Baker was on PM as a commentator on and a friend of Danny Kruger. He is working towards some sort of 2019 style Reform- Conservative deal for the next election.
A pity. I liked him (Baker) but I think he's forgotten his libertarianism. Possibly not coincidentally he's started a podcast https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9l0Iagj72vQ . I'll have a listen but going by the title ("The Insurgency with Steve Baker" - smh) I suspect he's been Americanised. Will let you know
Ooh, self- proclaimed future Tory Prime Minister Steve Baker was on PM as a commentator on and a friend of Danny Kruger. He is working towards some sort of 2019 style Reform- Conservative deal for the next election.
Reform are in a position to extract maximum pay off atm. Offer to stand aside in 40 blue wall seats and 10 Tory-Lab fights and demand Tories abandon 100 red wall seats
Steve seemed quite chipper about his and Tory prospects. I am guessing he has a fifty-fifty stand aside in mind.
He'd win Wycombe if Reform weren't there certainly. He might well win it anyway as its a Reform underperform seat and he wasn't a million miles behind Labour
8 people charged after 'Unite the Kingdom' protest
There really needs to be a charge of being really embarrassing and entirely failing to understand history or the way to behave.
I find all 100,000 guilty.
And there lies the problem
As Trevor Phillips has just said in an interview on Sky that he mingled with the crowd at the March and he was struck just how normal they were and certainly not of the right
He went on to say that the Labour and Conservative Party are barely at 40% combined in the polls, and that is because they are simply not relating to people’s concerns
He said the asylum hotels are a particular problem in communities where family's had either had a wedding reception there, or a celebration, or a dance, and now saw them taken over by the asylum seekers which is upsetting their communities
Now, Sir Trevor Phillips, who was once head of the Equalties and Human Rights Commissioner, is probably one of the best journalists in the media at present and is well worth listening too
You cannot simply condemn 100,000 people who may even be your neighbours, because you try to associate them with the unacceptable face of the far right because they aren't
"One of the best jounalists in the media at present....." I nearly choked on my croissant!
He's dreadful. Cringmakingly dreadful. He crept onto the BBC this morning and told how the person of the day was a 14 year old girl who told the crowd how she had been turned away from school for wearing a Union Jack flag made into a dress.
He said it in a hushed whisper so enchanted was he by this sight of this beguiling young fascist in the making. I couldn't believe the BBC let him drone on....
Fortunately he was on with a pollster who rightly ridiculed his mawkish nonsense.
Emergency debate about Mandelson tomorrow in Parliament
LOL. This is getting ridiculous.
Not really. As I see it, the question is did the PM lie about the sequencing of Mandy's appointment. Did he engage in (typical?) spin so as to give the impression, or indeed flatly state that he didn't know something that he did actually know because as we have seen with this PM, he is not averse to changing his mind or trying to change the facts to accord with what would have been politically preferable to have happened.
So it turns on his integrity which imo is grounds for an emergency debate.
Oh and if it comes down to the detail of what actually happened and who knew what and when and what they then did as a result....I'd back Mandy all day long over the PM (and his office).
Responding to your edit:
Mandelson has already had to 'resign' from government twice over dodgy dealings. Starmer, not once.
Why would you back Mandelson, given that?
(As an aside, what has Mandelson said about his departure? Is he actually personally at odds with Starmer?)
The point is that Mandy in all likelihood has a "little black book" or equivalent wherein he notes down all this stuff. Whatever else he is he is an operator.
It's mauve, darling.
Lilac, surely, in the UK.
Like the Lilac Leopard buses that used to be the posh end of Nottingham City Transport (I think it was they - they were in the NCT exclusive pickup zone) in the 1970s-early 1980s.
Emergency debate about Mandelson tomorrow in Parliament
LOL. This is getting ridiculous.
Not really. As I see it, the question is did the PM lie about the sequencing of Mandy's appointment. Did he engage in (typical?) spin so as to give the impression, or indeed flatly state that he didn't know something that he did actually know because as we have seen with this PM, he is not averse to changing his mind or trying to change the facts to accord with what would have been politically preferable to have happened.
So it turns on his integrity which imo is grounds for an emergency debate.
Oh and if it comes down to the detail of what actually happened and who knew what and when and what they then did as a result....I'd back Mandy all day long over the PM (and his office).
Responding to your edit:
Mandelson has already had to 'resign' from government twice over dodgy dealings. Starmer, not once.
Why would you back Mandelson, given that?
(As an aside, what has Mandelson said about his departure? Is he actually personally at odds with Starmer?)
The point is that Mandy in all likelihood has a "little black book" or equivalent wherein he notes down all this stuff. Whatever else he is he is an operator.
It's mauve, darling.
Lilac, surely, in the UK.
Like the Lilac Leopard buses that used to be the posh end of Nottingham City Transport (I think it was they - they were in the NCT exclusive pickup zone) in the 1970s-early 1980s.
Perkin Mauve, OTOH. Patriotic Victorian Boffinry. Made from Patriotic British Coal Tar, not furrin snails.
Ooh, self- proclaimed future Tory Prime Minister Steve Baker was on PM as a commentator on and a friend of Danny Kruger. He is working towards some sort of 2019 style Reform- Conservative deal for the next election.
Reform are in a position to extract maximum pay off atm. Offer to stand aside in 40 blue wall seats and 10 Tory-Lab fights and demand Tories abandon 100 red wall seats
Reform are in a position where they have a very good chance to become the main party of the right after the next election. Maybe even leading the government.
I'm not sure why they'd make a deal with their main rival after they've got them on the ropes. They will surely be focussed on how to land the knock-out punch.
Ooh, self- proclaimed future Tory Prime Minister Steve Baker was on PM as a commentator on and a friend of Danny Kruger. He is working towards some sort of 2019 style Reform- Conservative deal for the next election.
Reform are in a position to extract maximum pay off atm. Offer to stand aside in 40 blue wall seats and 10 Tory-Lab fights and demand Tories abandon 100 red wall seats
Only Jenrick might consider that. Kemi likely wouldn't, if Cleverly replaces her he definitely would do no deals with Reform
Michael Crick believes Danny Kruger's the second coming......
Steve Baker thinks he's the best thing since Maggie (excluding himself)
......With Tommy and his bunch of thugs ......Farage with his freebe house .......and Kemi sounding like Mrs Robinson
This has turned out to be a surprisingly good day for Sir Keir.
Not really. Reform are taking over the position of Conservatives, the Greens/LDs are taking over the position of Labour, and the two legacy parties will end up like France, hovering around the 15% mark and wondering where the future went. Bear in mind the French Socialists won the Presidency as recently as 2012 (I won that bet if memory serves ) and now they are nowhere.
The French Socialists are currently part of Melenchon's block, the largest in the French parliament.
The LDs are too rightwing economically to overtake Labour unless the Tories cease to exist and they get One Nation Tories, the Greens have a slim chance to overtake Labour on the left with Polanski and a deal with Your Party
8 people charged after 'Unite the Kingdom' protest
There really needs to be a charge of being really embarrassing and entirely failing to understand history or the way to behave.
I find all 100,000 guilty.
And there lies the problem
As Trevor Phillips has just said in an interview on Sky that he mingled with the crowd at the March and he was struck just how normal they were and certainly not of the right
He went on to say that the Labour and Conservative Party are barely at 40% combined in the polls, and that is because they are simply not relating to people’s concerns
He said the asylum hotels are a particular problem in communities where family's had either had a wedding reception there, or a celebration, or a dance, and now saw them taken over by the asylum seekers which is upsetting their communities
Now, Sir Trevor Phillips, who was once head of the Equalties and Human Rights Commissioner, is probably one of the best journalists in the media at present and is well worth listening too
You cannot simply condemn 100,000 people who may even be your neighbours, because you try to associate them with the unacceptable face of the far right because they aren't
No, no. I feel I can simply condemn them. And let it be a lesson to them!
And especially so if they are my neighbours. Rabble to a man!
Seriously the antics of these people are unacceptable. Much as the antics of the violent football fans were in the 80s and 90s. The leaders of this sort of thing should be horribly ashamed of themselves and much of their following too.
The antics of the Palestine mob similarly, and pretty much all the mobs that have ever congregated,
And so it goes on and Farage grows stronger
And only 8 arrests so far and less than expected
Could the small number of arrests be partly down to the fact that the Police appear to have been overwhelmed by the sheer numbers that turned up on the march and hence the large number of police officers who were injured during the outbreaks of violence when they clearly lost control of the situation?
24 arrests, 8 charges, by Sunday.
A number of people turned off onto Victoria Embankment to get out of the crowds which was understandable.
However, we then saw large crowds ignore police directions, turning left up Horse Guards Avenue, Whitehall Place, Northumberland Avenue and Craven Street in an effort to get into Whitehall, including into sterile areas and areas occupied by those taking part in the Stand Up To Racism protest.
When officers intervened to block their path they were assaulted with kicks and punches. Bottles, flares and other projectiles were also thrown and concerted attempts to get past barriers were made. ... “The violence they faced was wholly unacceptable. 26 officers were injured, including four seriously – among them broken teeth, a possible broken nose, a concussion, a prolapsed disc and a head injury,
Emergency debate about Mandelson tomorrow in Parliament
LOL. This is getting ridiculous.
Not really. As I see it, the question is did the PM lie about the sequencing of Mandy's appointment. Did he engage in (typical?) spin so as to give the impression, or indeed flatly state that he didn't know something that he did actually know because as we have seen with this PM, he is not averse to changing his mind or trying to change the facts to accord with what would have been politically preferable to have happened.
So it turns on his integrity which imo is grounds for an emergency debate.
Oh and if it comes down to the detail of what actually happened and who knew what and when and what they then did as a result....I'd back Mandy all day long over the PM (and his office).
Responding to your edit:
Mandelson has already had to 'resign' from government twice over dodgy dealings. Starmer, not once.
Why would you back Mandelson, given that?
(As an aside, what has Mandelson said about his departure? Is he actually personally at odds with Starmer?)
The point is that Mandy in all likelihood has a "little black book" or equivalent wherein he notes down all this stuff. Whatever else he is he is an operator.
"in all likelihood"
And given his history, why would you trust what's in this imaginary little black book as being the truth?
I am not convinced that Mandelson would want to go for early revenge. I think he will most likely keep quiet and lie low for a bit before popping up as an informal advisor. Why burn bridges and risk getting sent to Coventry?
Incidentally, I am not sure it is wise of the Tories to try to bring down Starmer. He would almost certainly be replaced by someone more formidable. Better to let him limp on wounded.
Who?
What you might get is someone who: a) is better at enthusing the left, winning voters back from Lib, Green and Sofa to Lab b) does policy things that are less agreeable to anyone of a centre-right disposition (Starmer's sucessor is likely to go a lot further and faster on Europe than SKS) c) is less competent as a manager of systems (no giggling at the back).
Remember, the consequence of Starmer falling isn't the right back in government. It's someone else with nearly four years to play with and a huge majority. Be very careful what you wish for.
Ok. Who?
If Starmer falls under a bus tomorrow, Lammy.
If she has long enough to do a meaningful job on the boats, Mahmood comes into play.
If her time in exile has been sufficient, maybe Rayner.
Maybe the Deputy Leader, once there is one.
I suspect Streeting loses under the unwritten 'if you want it too much, it shows your unsuitability' rule.
The point is, I won't get a say, and I don't think you will either. The socialists will replace one socialist with another one of their choice. Same principle as all the changes of PM from 2016 to 2022.
“Somebody more formidable” was the challenge.
Lammy ain’t that. Mahmood I’d never heard of until her recent promotion. Rayner would be formidable - but shoots from the hip - but I think she’s done.
I don’t see anyone in the government (or on the opposition benches) who would be any good
Lammy is a Harvard-educated lawyer who practised law in America. He should have been left at the Foreign Office given the importance and fragility of our trans-Atlantic relationships.
Although at first sight he is a natural fit at Justice, probably the most urgent problems there are a lack of prison places and court capacity, neither of which are specifically legal problems.
Ooh, self- proclaimed future Tory Prime Minister Steve Baker was on PM as a commentator on and a friend of Danny Kruger. He is working towards some sort of 2019 style Reform- Conservative deal for the next election.
Reform are in a position to extract maximum pay off atm. Offer to stand aside in 40 blue wall seats and 10 Tory-Lab fights and demand Tories abandon 100 red wall seats
Reform are in a position where they have a very good chance to become the main party of the right after the next election. Maybe even leading the government.
I'm not sure why they'd make a deal with their main rival after they've got them on the ropes. They will surely be focussed on how to land the knock-out punch.
I agree. But if they decided to thenthey currently hold the cards Also however, knocking out Lab and LD in seats they cant win is not bad for them long term
Emergency debate about Mandelson tomorrow in Parliament
LOL. This is getting ridiculous.
Not really. As I see it, the question is did the PM lie about the sequencing of Mandy's appointment. Did he engage in (typical?) spin so as to give the impression, or indeed flatly state that he didn't know something that he did actually know because as we have seen with this PM, he is not averse to changing his mind or trying to change the facts to accord with what would have been politically preferable to have happened.
So it turns on his integrity which imo is grounds for an emergency debate.
Oh and if it comes down to the detail of what actually happened and who knew what and when and what they then did as a result....I'd back Mandy all day long over the PM (and his office).
Responding to your edit:
Mandelson has already had to 'resign' from government twice over dodgy dealings. Starmer, not once.
Why would you back Mandelson, given that?
(As an aside, what has Mandelson said about his departure? Is he actually personally at odds with Starmer?)
The point is that Mandy in all likelihood has a "little black book" or equivalent wherein he notes down all this stuff. Whatever else he is he is an operator.
"in all likelihood"
And given his history, why would you trust what's in this imaginary little black book as being the truth?
I am not convinced that Mandelson would want to go for early revenge. I think he will most likely keep quiet and lie low for a bit before popping up as an informal advisor. Why burn bridges and risk getting sent to Coventry?
Incidentally, I am not sure it is wise of the Tories to try to bring down Starmer. He would almost certainly be replaced by someone more formidable. Better to let him limp on wounded.
Who?
What you might get is someone who: a) is better at enthusing the left, winning voters back from Lib, Green and Sofa to Lab b) does policy things that are less agreeable to anyone of a centre-right disposition (Starmer's sucessor is likely to go a lot further and faster on Europe than SKS) c) is less competent as a manager of systems (no giggling at the back).
Remember, the consequence of Starmer falling isn't the right back in government. It's someone else with nearly four years to play with and a huge majority. Be very careful what you wish for.
Ok. Who?
If Starmer falls under a bus tomorrow, Lammy.
If she has long enough to do a meaningful job on the boats, Mahmood comes into play.
If her time in exile has been sufficient, maybe Rayner.
Maybe the Deputy Leader, once there is one.
I suspect Streeting loses under the unwritten 'if you want it too much, it shows your unsuitability' rule.
The point is, I won't get a say, and I don't think you will either. The socialists will replace one socialist with another one of their choice. Same principle as all the changes of PM from 2016 to 2022.
Starmer wanted it too much and got it.
Rayner has the wrong chromosomes to be eligible to be Labour leader.
Disagree on Starmer.
When he got the Labour leadership, nobody can have thought that they would win next time. Surely?
(Snip)
It wasn't out of the question. Boris Johnson was always unsuited to be PM, as wise people pointed out well before he became PM. There was always a possibility - not a certainty - that he would crash and burn the party.
The size of the majority was the thing that was amazing, and shows the damage Boris did to the party.
If Boris was still Tory leader, the Tories would probably be leading the polls with Reform second.
Boris would also have won well over 200 seats in 2024 with a lower Reform vote than Rishi faced
Ooh, self- proclaimed future Tory Prime Minister Steve Baker was on PM as a commentator on and a friend of Danny Kruger. He is working towards some sort of 2019 style Reform- Conservative deal for the next election.
Reform are in a position to extract maximum pay off atm. Offer to stand aside in 40 blue wall seats and 10 Tory-Lab fights and demand Tories abandon 100 red wall seats
It’s hard to imagine the Tories will agree to surrender their status as a national party. But who knows. I suppose it depends on how dire things become them.
I agree tbf, its an end of days gambit. Im not predicting it
Emergency debate about Mandelson tomorrow in Parliament
LOL. This is getting ridiculous.
Not really. As I see it, the question is did the PM lie about the sequencing of Mandy's appointment. Did he engage in (typical?) spin so as to give the impression, or indeed flatly state that he didn't know something that he did actually know because as we have seen with this PM, he is not averse to changing his mind or trying to change the facts to accord with what would have been politically preferable to have happened.
So it turns on his integrity which imo is grounds for an emergency debate.
Oh and if it comes down to the detail of what actually happened and who knew what and when and what they then did as a result....I'd back Mandy all day long over the PM (and his office).
Responding to your edit:
Mandelson has already had to 'resign' from government twice over dodgy dealings. Starmer, not once.
Why would you back Mandelson, given that?
(As an aside, what has Mandelson said about his departure? Is he actually personally at odds with Starmer?)
The point is that Mandy in all likelihood has a "little black book" or equivalent wherein he notes down all this stuff. Whatever else he is he is an operator.
"in all likelihood"
And given his history, why would you trust what's in this imaginary little black book as being the truth?
I am not convinced that Mandelson would want to go for early revenge. I think he will most likely keep quiet and lie low for a bit before popping up as an informal advisor. Why burn bridges and risk getting sent to Coventry?
Incidentally, I am not sure it is wise of the Tories to try to bring down Starmer. He would almost certainly be replaced by someone more formidable. Better to let him limp on wounded.
Who?
What you might get is someone who: a) is better at enthusing the left, winning voters back from Lib, Green and Sofa to Lab b) does policy things that are less agreeable to anyone of a centre-right disposition (Starmer's sucessor is likely to go a lot further and faster on Europe than SKS) c) is less competent as a manager of systems (no giggling at the back).
Remember, the consequence of Starmer falling isn't the right back in government. It's someone else with nearly four years to play with and a huge majority. Be very careful what you wish for.
Ok. Who?
If Starmer falls under a bus tomorrow, Lammy.
If she has long enough to do a meaningful job on the boats, Mahmood comes into play.
If her time in exile has been sufficient, maybe Rayner.
Maybe the Deputy Leader, once there is one.
I suspect Streeting loses under the unwritten 'if you want it too much, it shows your unsuitability' rule.
The point is, I won't get a say, and I don't think you will either. The socialists will replace one socialist with another one of their choice. Same principle as all the changes of PM from 2016 to 2022.
Starmer wanted it too much and got it.
Rayner has the wrong chromosomes to be eligible to be Labour leader.
Disagree on Starmer.
When he got the Labour leadership, nobody can have thought that they would win next time. Surely?
(Snip)
It wasn't out of the question. Boris Johnson was always unsuited to be PM, as wise people pointed out well before he became PM. There was always a possibility - not a certainty - that he would crash and burn the party.
The size of the majority was the thing that was amazing, and shows the damage Boris did to the party.
If Boris was still Tory leader, the Tories would probably be leading the polls with Reform second.
Boris would also have won well over 200 seats in 2024 with a lower Reform vote than Rishi faced
Ooh, self- proclaimed future Tory Prime Minister Steve Baker was on PM as a commentator on and a friend of Danny Kruger. He is working towards some sort of 2019 style Reform- Conservative deal for the next election.
Reform are in a position to extract maximum pay off atm. Offer to stand aside in 40 blue wall seats and 10 Tory-Lab fights and demand Tories abandon 100 red wall seats
It’s hard to imagine the Tories will agree to surrender their status as a national party. But who knows. I suppose it depends on how dire things become them.
I agree tbf, its an end of days gambit. Im not predicting it
If they are to be replaced by Reform, or turn into Reform Mk 2 to replace or absorb Reform Mk 1, it would seem problematic for the Reform minded MPs who would be the ones to make the decision to be doing the Reform-chicken-run !
Michael Crick believes Danny Kruger's the second coming......
Steve Baker thinks he's the best thing since Maggie (excluding himself)
......With Tommy and his bunch of thugs ......Farage with his freebe house .......and Kemi sounding like Mrs Robinson
This has turned out to be a surprisingly good day for Sir Keir.
Not really. Reform are taking over the position of Conservatives, the Greens/LDs are taking over the position of Labour, and the two legacy parties will end up like France, hovering around the 15% mark and wondering where the future went. Bear in mind the French Socialists won the Presidency as recently as 2012 (I won that bet if memory serves ) and now they are nowhere.
Except that the Reform vote and the Tory vote are not the same. On a variety of issues from Ukraine to Welfare, they vehemently disagree. The Tories were a coalition of Christian Democrat style Centre-Right people as well as the more Poujardiste groups further to the right. The fact is that Farage is not getting and is not likely to get the support of a large number of the more centrist Conservatives. This places a ceiling on whatever the Faragists can get from them. Of course some suggest that Reform can create a far Right/Left coalition in the former Red wall, but that only works certain areas and risks losing a lot of ground in the South, which is where half the population of the UK actually lives. Tactical voting could limit Farage even further and all of this assumes that he won't seriously screw up, and that is far from a given. Ed Davey is fully aware of the opportunity that he now has, of being the anti-Farage leader that ex Tories can trust and is quite prepared to fight on that basis. In straight fights between Reform and the Lib Dems, plenty of Tories are breaking for the Lib Dems, not Reform.
The question then comes, with Ed Davey getting his tanks on the Tory lawns in the Shires, are the Tories going to end up being obliterated by the FPTP squeeze, or can the venerable old Hector survive? Under Kemi, you wouldn't chance it too much, and Jenrick?? Surely faced with the choice between the fake Populist and the real one, the Tories would still get minced.
So, what about a completely new face like Katie Lam? To be honest, it may be their only hope. Kruger may cross the floor, but I don't see people like Andrew Mitchell wanting to be even in the same town as Farage. Mind you I don't think Andrew gets to Brussels or Washington that much these days. Plenty of Tory grandees are thinking very carefully and are more loyal and much less mercurial than the mildly demented Danny Kruger.
8 people charged after 'Unite the Kingdom' protest
There really needs to be a charge of being really embarrassing and entirely failing to understand history or the way to behave.
I find all 100,000 guilty.
And there lies the problem
As Trevor Phillips has just said in an interview on Sky that he mingled with the crowd at the March and he was struck just how normal they were and certainly not of the right
He went on to say that the Labour and Conservative Party are barely at 40% combined in the polls, and that is because they are simply not relating to people’s concerns
He said the asylum hotels are a particular problem in communities where family's had either had a wedding reception there, or a celebration, or a dance, and now saw them taken over by the asylum seekers which is upsetting their communities
Now, Sir Trevor Phillips, who was once head of the Equalties and Human Rights Commissioner, is probably one of the best journalists in the media at present and is well worth listening too
You cannot simply condemn 100,000 people who may even be your neighbours, because you try to associate them with the unacceptable face of the far right because they aren't
"One of the best jounalists in the media at present....." I nearly choked on my croissant!
He's dreadful. Cringmakingly dreadful. He crept onto the BBC this morning and told how the person of the day was a 14 year old girl who told the crowd how she had been turned away from school for wearing a Union Jack flag made into a dress.
He said it in a hushed whisper so enchanted was he by this sight of this beguiling young fascist in the making. I couldn't believe the BBC let him drone on....
Fortunately he was on with a pollster who rightly ridiculed his mawkish nonsense.
You do know he is labour and has an exemplary labour CV
But then you wouldn't recognise anything that upsets you
8 people charged after 'Unite the Kingdom' protest
There really needs to be a charge of being really embarrassing and entirely failing to understand history or the way to behave.
I find all 100,000 guilty.
And there lies the problem
As Trevor Phillips has just said in an interview on Sky that he mingled with the crowd at the March and he was struck just how normal they were and certainly not of the right
He went on to say that the Labour and Conservative Party are barely at 40% combined in the polls, and that is because they are simply not relating to people’s concerns
He said the asylum hotels are a particular problem in communities where family's had either had a wedding reception there, or a celebration, or a dance, and now saw them taken over by the asylum seekers which is upsetting their communities
Now, Sir Trevor Phillips, who was once head of the Equalties and Human Rights Commissioner, is probably one of the best journalists in the media at present and is well worth listening too
You cannot simply condemn 100,000 people who may even be your neighbours, because you try to associate them with the unacceptable face of the far right because they aren't
No, no. I feel I can simply condemn them. And let it be a lesson to them!
And especially so if they are my neighbours. Rabble to a man!
Seriously the antics of these people are unacceptable. Much as the antics of the violent football fans were in the 80s and 90s. The leaders of this sort of thing should be horribly ashamed of themselves and much of their following too.
The antics of the Palestine mob similarly, and pretty much all the mobs that have ever congregated,
And so it goes on and Farage grows stronger
And only 8 arrests so far and less than expected
Could the small number of arrests be partly down to the fact that the Police appear to have been overwhelmed by the sheer numbers that turned up on the march and hence the large number of police officers who were injured during the outbreaks of violence when they clearly lost control of the situation?
24 arrests, 8 charges, by Sunday.
A number of people turned off onto Victoria Embankment to get out of the crowds which was understandable.
However, we then saw large crowds ignore police directions, turning left up Horse Guards Avenue, Whitehall Place, Northumberland Avenue and Craven Street in an effort to get into Whitehall, including into sterile areas and areas occupied by those taking part in the Stand Up To Racism protest.
When officers intervened to block their path they were assaulted with kicks and punches. Bottles, flares and other projectiles were also thrown and concerted attempts to get past barriers were made. ... “The violence they faced was wholly unacceptable. 26 officers were injured, including four seriously – among them broken teeth, a possible broken nose, a concussion, a prolapsed disc and a head injury,
Michael Crick believes Danny Kruger's the second coming......
Steve Baker thinks he's the best thing since Maggie (excluding himself)
......With Tommy and his bunch of thugs ......Farage with his freebe house .......and Kemi sounding like Mrs Robinson
This has turned out to be a surprisingly good day for Sir Keir.
Not really. Reform are taking over the position of Conservatives, the Greens/LDs are taking over the position of Labour, and the two legacy parties will end up like France, hovering around the 15% mark and wondering where the future went. Bear in mind the French Socialists won the Presidency as recently as 2012 (I won that bet if memory serves ) and now they are nowhere.
Except that the Reform vote and the Tory vote are not the same. On a variety of issues from Ukraine to Welfare, they vehemently disagree. The Tories were a coalition of Christian Democrat style Centre-Right people as well as the more Poujardiste groups further to the right. The fact is that Farage is not getting and is not likely to get the support of a large number of the more centrist Conservatives. This places a ceiling on whatever the Faragists can get from them. Of course some suggest that Reform can create a far Right/Left coalition in the former Red wall, but that only works certain areas and risks losing a lot of ground in the South, which is where half the population of the UK actually lives. Tactical voting could limit Farage even further and all of this assumes that he won't seriously screw up, and that is far from a given. Ed Davey is fully aware of the opportunity that he now has, of being the anti-Farage leader that ex Tories can trust and is quite prepared to fight on that basis. In straight fights between Reform and the Lib Dems, plenty of Tories are breaking for the Lib Dems, not Reform.
The question then comes, with Ed Davey getting his tanks on the Tory lawns in the Shires, are the Tories going to end up being obliterated by the FPTP squeeze, or can the venerable old Hector survive? Under Kemi, you wouldn't chance it too much, and Jenrick?? Surely faced with the choice between the fake Populist and the real one, the Tories would still get minced.
So, what about a completely new face like Katie Lam? To be honest, it may be their only hope. Kruger may cross the floor, but I don't see people like Andrew Mitchell wanting to be even in the same town as Farage. Mind you I don't think Andrew gets to Brussels or Washington that much these days. Plenty of Tory grandees are thinking very carefully and are more loyal and much less mercurial than the mildly demented Danny Kruger.
No, the Tories best hope while Farage is around is Cleverly. He could at least hold the 2024 Sunak vote
Stephen Miller: “We are going to channel all the anger we have over the organized campaign to led to this assassination to uproot and dismantle these terrorist networks … The organized doxxing campaigns. The organized riots. The organized street violence. The organized of dehumanization. Vilification. Posting people’s addresses. Combining that with messaging designed to trigger and incite violence and the actual organized cells that carry out and facilitate the violence. It is a vast domestic terror movement. With God and as my witness, we are going to use every resource we have at the Department of Justice, Homeland Security and throughout this government to identify, disrupt, dismantle and destroy these networks, and make America safe again for the American people. It will happen, and we will do it in Charlie’s name.”
Emergency debate about Mandelson tomorrow in Parliament
LOL. This is getting ridiculous.
Not really. As I see it, the question is did the PM lie about the sequencing of Mandy's appointment. Did he engage in (typical?) spin so as to give the impression, or indeed flatly state that he didn't know something that he did actually know because as we have seen with this PM, he is not averse to changing his mind or trying to change the facts to accord with what would have been politically preferable to have happened.
So it turns on his integrity which imo is grounds for an emergency debate.
Oh and if it comes down to the detail of what actually happened and who knew what and when and what they then did as a result....I'd back Mandy all day long over the PM (and his office).
Responding to your edit:
Mandelson has already had to 'resign' from government twice over dodgy dealings. Starmer, not once.
Why would you back Mandelson, given that?
(As an aside, what has Mandelson said about his departure? Is he actually personally at odds with Starmer?)
The point is that Mandy in all likelihood has a "little black book" or equivalent wherein he notes down all this stuff. Whatever else he is he is an operator.
"in all likelihood"
And given his history, why would you trust what's in this imaginary little black book as being the truth?
I am not convinced that Mandelson would want to go for early revenge. I think he will most likely keep quiet and lie low for a bit before popping up as an informal advisor. Why burn bridges and risk getting sent to Coventry?
Incidentally, I am not sure it is wise of the Tories to try to bring down Starmer. He would almost certainly be replaced by someone more formidable. Better to let him limp on wounded.
Who?
What you might get is someone who: a) is better at enthusing the left, winning voters back from Lib, Green and Sofa to Lab b) does policy things that are less agreeable to anyone of a centre-right disposition (Starmer's sucessor is likely to go a lot further and faster on Europe than SKS) c) is less competent as a manager of systems (no giggling at the back).
Remember, the consequence of Starmer falling isn't the right back in government. It's someone else with nearly four years to play with and a huge majority. Be very careful what you wish for.
Ok. Who?
If Starmer falls under a bus tomorrow, Lammy.
If she has long enough to do a meaningful job on the boats, Mahmood comes into play.
If her time in exile has been sufficient, maybe Rayner.
Maybe the Deputy Leader, once there is one.
I suspect Streeting loses under the unwritten 'if you want it too much, it shows your unsuitability' rule.
The point is, I won't get a say, and I don't think you will either. The socialists will replace one socialist with another one of their choice. Same principle as all the changes of PM from 2016 to 2022.
Starmer wanted it too much and got it.
Rayner has the wrong chromosomes to be eligible to be Labour leader.
Disagree on Starmer.
When he got the Labour leadership, nobody can have thought that they would win next time. Surely?
(Snip)
It wasn't out of the question. Boris Johnson was always unsuited to be PM, as wise people pointed out well before he became PM. There was always a possibility - not a certainty - that he would crash and burn the party.
The size of the majority was the thing that was amazing, and shows the damage Boris did to the party.
If Boris was still Tory leader, the Tories would probably be leading the polls with Reform second.
Boris would also have won well over 200 seats in 2024 with a lower Reform vote than Rishi faced
8 people charged after 'Unite the Kingdom' protest
There really needs to be a charge of being really embarrassing and entirely failing to understand history or the way to behave.
I find all 100,000 guilty.
And there lies the problem
As Trevor Phillips has just said in an interview on Sky that he mingled with the crowd at the March and he was struck just how normal they were and certainly not of the right
He went on to say that the Labour and Conservative Party are barely at 40% combined in the polls, and that is because they are simply not relating to people’s concerns
He said the asylum hotels are a particular problem in communities where family's had either had a wedding reception there, or a celebration, or a dance, and now saw them taken over by the asylum seekers which is upsetting their communities
Now, Sir Trevor Phillips, who was once head of the Equalties and Human Rights Commissioner, is probably one of the best journalists in the media at present and is well worth listening too
You cannot simply condemn 100,000 people who may even be your neighbours, because you try to associate them with the unacceptable face of the far right because they aren't
No, no. I feel I can simply condemn them. And let it be a lesson to them!
And especially so if they are my neighbours. Rabble to a man!
Seriously the antics of these people are unacceptable. Much as the antics of the violent football fans were in the 80s and 90s. The leaders of this sort of thing should be horribly ashamed of themselves and much of their following too.
The antics of the Palestine mob similarly, and pretty much all the mobs that have ever congregated,
And so it goes on and Farage grows stronger
And only 8 arrests so far and less than expected
Could the small number of arrests be partly down to the fact that the Police appear to have been overwhelmed by the sheer numbers that turned up on the march and hence the large number of police officers who were injured during the outbreaks of violence when they clearly lost control of the situation?
24 arrests, 8 charges, by Sunday.
A number of people turned off onto Victoria Embankment to get out of the crowds which was understandable.
However, we then saw large crowds ignore police directions, turning left up Horse Guards Avenue, Whitehall Place, Northumberland Avenue and Craven Street in an effort to get into Whitehall, including into sterile areas and areas occupied by those taking part in the Stand Up To Racism protest.
When officers intervened to block their path they were assaulted with kicks and punches. Bottles, flares and other projectiles were also thrown and concerted attempts to get past barriers were made. ... “The violence they faced was wholly unacceptable. 26 officers were injured, including four seriously – among them broken teeth, a possible broken nose, a concussion, a prolapsed disc and a head injury,
Ooh, self- proclaimed future Tory Prime Minister Steve Baker was on PM as a commentator on and a friend of Danny Kruger. He is working towards some sort of 2019 style Reform- Conservative deal for the next election.
A pity. I liked him (Baker) but I think he's forgotten his libertarianism. Possibly not coincidentally he's started a podcast https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9l0Iagj72vQ . I'll have a listen but going by the title ("The Insurgency with Steve Baker" - smh) I suspect he's been Americanised. Will let you know
Was Steve Baker the one who did that interestingly reflective interview with the Spectator earlier this year, which contrasted so strongly with Kruger and Jenrick?
There are so many ex-Conservative MPs wandering all over the niche media, that it's tricky trying to keep track without a phalanx of Rolodexi.
The Kruger defection does illustrate some fascinating undercurrents within politics as existing parties struggle with the rise of Reform and the changed landscape.
There's an old adage but the more things changing the more they stay the same and that's as true of politics as of anything else. The "two party" system isn't dead but it is evolving and changing. The faultlines and the priority afforded to those faultlines is changing - if anything, the new "line" is between the socially conservative Reform (containing elements from within the old Labour and Conservative parties as well as a significant tranche of previous "non voters") and the more "liberal" parties such as the LDs, Greens and elements of the Conservative and Labour Parties.
Are there enough socially conservative people to put Reform into power? Probably, given a divided and divergent opposition but that is in itself enough to mobilise the more liberal elements to vote tactically against "the social conservative party".
Most Reform voters may be socially conservative but that doesn't apply to all Conservative voters some of whom see their conservatism in economic terms (free market, deregulation, lower taxes, less spending but in a socially and culturally liberal environment). Thus, the whole may not be greater or equal to the sum of the parts.
Yet, the tendency is for things to evolve to a binary state - not Butskellism or John Jackson vs Jack Johnson - but two competing and diverse social and cultural scenarios (with the economic aspects suppressed or given a lower priority as they matter less to voters).
That has been the fundamental political change brought about by Reform which in turn has caused problems for both the Labour and Conservative parties whose existence was and is predicated on competing economic rather than social visions.
Ooh, self- proclaimed future Tory Prime Minister Steve Baker was on PM as a commentator on and a friend of Danny Kruger. He is working towards some sort of 2019 style Reform- Conservative deal for the next election.
Reform are in a position to extract maximum pay off atm. Offer to stand aside in 40 blue wall seats and 10 Tory-Lab fights and demand Tories abandon 100 red wall seats
It’s hard to imagine the Tories will agree to surrender their status as a national party. But who knows. I suppose it depends on how dire things become them.
I agree tbf, its an end of days gambit. Im not predicting it
If they did jump ship en-masse to Reform, Farage could become LOTO and the combination would increase its vote share into the forties. The remaining Tories would still carry the can for 2019 to 24, but essentially the backbone of the Tory Party would be neatly dovetailed into a new name party and their skins are once again clean. The only bit that changes for these turncoats is the name, and they could reclaim that when it is less toxic.
Stephen Miller: “We are going to channel all the anger we have over the organized campaign to led to this assassination to uproot and dismantle these terrorist networks … The organized doxxing campaigns. The organized riots. The organized street violence. The organized of dehumanization. Vilification. Posting people’s addresses. Combining that with messaging designed to trigger and incite violence and the actual organized cells that carry out and facilitate the violence. It is a vast domestic terror movement. With God and as my witness, we are going to use every resource we have at the Department of Justice, Homeland Security and throughout this government to identify, disrupt, dismantle and destroy these networks, and make America safe again for the American people. It will happen, and we will do it in Charlie’s name.”
McCarthyism redux, 70 years later, updated for the new 'threats'. No surprise.
I find the views expressed by Stephen Miller astonishing, given his ethnicity and that Charles Kirk was an antisemite.
Ironically one of the favourite derogatory terms for liberal Jews who don’t subscribe to the hard right ethno nationalism of the likes of Miller is ‘kapo’. I’d say Miller is closer to that concept than those who express any criticism of slaughtering Palestinians.
Emergency debate about Mandelson tomorrow in Parliament
LOL. This is getting ridiculous.
Not really. As I see it, the question is did the PM lie about the sequencing of Mandy's appointment. Did he engage in (typical?) spin so as to give the impression, or indeed flatly state that he didn't know something that he did actually know because as we have seen with this PM, he is not averse to changing his mind or trying to change the facts to accord with what would have been politically preferable to have happened.
So it turns on his integrity which imo is grounds for an emergency debate.
Oh and if it comes down to the detail of what actually happened and who knew what and when and what they then did as a result....I'd back Mandy all day long over the PM (and his office).
Responding to your edit:
Mandelson has already had to 'resign' from government twice over dodgy dealings. Starmer, not once.
Why would you back Mandelson, given that?
(As an aside, what has Mandelson said about his departure? Is he actually personally at odds with Starmer?)
The point is that Mandy in all likelihood has a "little black book" or equivalent wherein he notes down all this stuff. Whatever else he is he is an operator.
"in all likelihood"
And given his history, why would you trust what's in this imaginary little black book as being the truth?
I am not convinced that Mandelson would want to go for early revenge. I think he will most likely keep quiet and lie low for a bit before popping up as an informal advisor. Why burn bridges and risk getting sent to Coventry?
Incidentally, I am not sure it is wise of the Tories to try to bring down Starmer. He would almost certainly be replaced by someone more formidable. Better to let him limp on wounded.
Who?
What you might get is someone who: a) is better at enthusing the left, winning voters back from Lib, Green and Sofa to Lab b) does policy things that are less agreeable to anyone of a centre-right disposition (Starmer's sucessor is likely to go a lot further and faster on Europe than SKS) c) is less competent as a manager of systems (no giggling at the back).
Remember, the consequence of Starmer falling isn't the right back in government. It's someone else with nearly four years to play with and a huge majority. Be very careful what you wish for.
Ok. Who?
If Starmer falls under a bus tomorrow, Lammy.
If she has long enough to do a meaningful job on the boats, Mahmood comes into play.
If her time in exile has been sufficient, maybe Rayner.
Maybe the Deputy Leader, once there is one.
I suspect Streeting loses under the unwritten 'if you want it too much, it shows your unsuitability' rule.
The point is, I won't get a say, and I don't think you will either. The socialists will replace one socialist with another one of their choice. Same principle as all the changes of PM from 2016 to 2022.
“Somebody more formidable” was the challenge.
Lammy ain’t that. Mahmood I’d never heard of until her recent promotion. Rayner would be formidable - but shoots from the hip - but I think she’s done.
I don’t see anyone in the government (or on the opposition benches) who would be any good
Phillipson is certainly formidable. Good articulate speaker too.
One odd thing about the Mandelson/Epstein emails – Mandelson describes Epstein as his ‘best pal’. If I were to hear a man use this phrase – or more commonly, ‘best friend’ or ‘best mate’ I would infer it to be someone he had known since childhood – or, at the very outset, since his late teens or early twenties. Can Jeffrey Epstein really be Peter Mandelson’s ‘best pal’? It paints a very strange picture of him.
Everything seems to paint an odd picture of Mandelson. It'd be nice to know what Mandelson actually honestly wanted from this life...
Position and wealth
Certainly not reputation.
Some senior politicians - e.g. Major, Balls, or Portillo, are hated during their time in politics, but become more popular afterwards. In the case of the latter two, through TV. Mandelson was admired for his skills, but also disliked, and when he left power seems to have done little to improve his standing.
The dynamics of this are curious. Blair, for instance, seems to have shed popularity despite retiring undefeated. Hague, his oppo number during his first term, has ended up being elected Chancellor of Oxford (handily beating Mandy in the process), and is seen as an all round good egg. What's at play here?
In Major's case, I think it was that he was unfairly maligned whilst in power (he wasn't *that* bad, and he was head of an ungovernable party), and he has maintained a fairly quiet, thoughtful and stately demeanour since leaving office.
In Blair's case, Iraq hangs around him like the stink from a pig farm. And I think many on the left of the party, who may have been very glad to be in power, are more than happy to give his reputation a kicking now. He's also been less 'stately' since he left office. So both left and right love to give him a bit of a kicking - but he does not help his own cause.
Strange to ponder that if not for Iraq, Tony Blair would be hailed as the best Prime Minister of this century, and possibly since the war.
I remember going on the big anti-Iraq war demo - one of the few demo's I've ever been on. And then realising that despite a million or two people making it very clear they didn't want The Thing, that... well... f**k you.
Certainly rather tarnished my view of him and New Labour generally.
8 people charged after 'Unite the Kingdom' protest
There really needs to be a charge of being really embarrassing and entirely failing to understand history or the way to behave.
I find all 100,000 guilty.
And there lies the problem
As Trevor Phillips has just said in an interview on Sky that he mingled with the crowd at the March and he was struck just how normal they were and certainly not of the right
He went on to say that the Labour and Conservative Party are barely at 40% combined in the polls, and that is because they are simply not relating to people’s concerns
He said the asylum hotels are a particular problem in communities where family's had either had a wedding reception there, or a celebration, or a dance, and now saw them taken over by the asylum seekers which is upsetting their communities
Now, Sir Trevor Phillips, who was once head of the Equalties and Human Rights Commissioner, is probably one of the best journalists in the media at present and is well worth listening too
You cannot simply condemn 100,000 people who may even be your neighbours, because you try to associate them with the unacceptable face of the far right because they aren't
"One of the best jounalists in the media at present....." I nearly choked on my croissant!
He's dreadful. Cringmakingly dreadful. He crept onto the BBC this morning and told how the person of the day was a 14 year old girl who told the crowd how she had been turned away from school for wearing a Union Jack flag made into a dress.
He said it in a hushed whisper so enchanted was he by this sight of this beguiling young fascist in the making. I couldn't believe the BBC let him drone on....
Fortunately he was on with a pollster who rightly ridiculed his mawkish nonsense.
You do know he is labour and has an exemplary labour CV
But then you wouldn't recognise anything that upsets you
And by the way, how's France doing at present?
You really don't like Labour or their posters do you?
Ooh, self- proclaimed future Tory Prime Minister Steve Baker was on PM as a commentator on and a friend of Danny Kruger. He is working towards some sort of 2019 style Reform- Conservative deal for the next election.
Reform are in a position to extract maximum pay off atm. Offer to stand aside in 40 blue wall seats and 10 Tory-Lab fights and demand Tories abandon 100 red wall seats
Reform are in a position where they have a very good chance to become the main party of the right after the next election. Maybe even leading the government.
I'm not sure why they'd make a deal with their main rival after they've got them on the ropes. They will surely be focussed on how to land the knock-out punch.
I agree. But if they decided to thenthey currently hold the cards Also however, knocking out Lab and LD in seats they cant win is not bad for them long term
I agree but is it worth the association with the Tory brand elsewhere? I'm not sure.
Particularly as Reform can't wipe out Labour / LDs. There will always be one party or more of 'the left', however defined. The Tories getting even fewer seats, even at the expense of Labour / Lib Dems getting more, increases the relative strength of Reform to usurp them as the main party of the right.
8 people charged after 'Unite the Kingdom' protest
There really needs to be a charge of being really embarrassing and entirely failing to understand history or the way to behave.
I find all 100,000 guilty.
And there lies the problem
As Trevor Phillips has just said in an interview on Sky that he mingled with the crowd at the March and he was struck just how normal they were and certainly not of the right
He went on to say that the Labour and Conservative Party are barely at 40% combined in the polls, and that is because they are simply not relating to people’s concerns
He said the asylum hotels are a particular problem in communities where family's had either had a wedding reception there, or a celebration, or a dance, and now saw them taken over by the asylum seekers which is upsetting their communities
Now, Sir Trevor Phillips, who was once head of the Equalties and Human Rights Commissioner, is probably one of the best journalists in the media at present and is well worth listening too
You cannot simply condemn 100,000 people who may even be your neighbours, because you try to associate them with the unacceptable face of the far right because they aren't
"One of the best jounalists in the media at present....." I nearly choked on my croissant!
He's dreadful. Cringmakingly dreadful. He crept onto the BBC this morning and told how the person of the day was a 14 year old girl who told the crowd how she had been turned away from school for wearing a Union Jack flag made into a dress.
He said it in a hushed whisper so enchanted was he by this sight of this beguiling young fascist in the making. I couldn't believe the BBC let him drone on....
Fortunately he was on with a pollster who rightly ridiculed his mawkish nonsense.
You do know he is labour and has an exemplary labour CV
But then you wouldn't recognise anything that upsets you
And by the way, how's France doing at present?
You really don't like Labour or their posters do you?
Is Rog Labour or merely anti-Tory? Not that he has to say if he doesn't want to.
Emergency debate about Mandelson tomorrow in Parliament
LOL. This is getting ridiculous.
Not really. As I see it, the question is did the PM lie about the sequencing of Mandy's appointment. Did he engage in (typical?) spin so as to give the impression, or indeed flatly state that he didn't know something that he did actually know because as we have seen with this PM, he is not averse to changing his mind or trying to change the facts to accord with what would have been politically preferable to have happened.
So it turns on his integrity which imo is grounds for an emergency debate.
Oh and if it comes down to the detail of what actually happened and who knew what and when and what they then did as a result....I'd back Mandy all day long over the PM (and his office).
Responding to your edit:
Mandelson has already had to 'resign' from government twice over dodgy dealings. Starmer, not once.
Why would you back Mandelson, given that?
(As an aside, what has Mandelson said about his departure? Is he actually personally at odds with Starmer?)
The point is that Mandy in all likelihood has a "little black book" or equivalent wherein he notes down all this stuff. Whatever else he is he is an operator.
"in all likelihood"
And given his history, why would you trust what's in this imaginary little black book as being the truth?
I am not convinced that Mandelson would want to go for early revenge. I think he will most likely keep quiet and lie low for a bit before popping up as an informal advisor. Why burn bridges and risk getting sent to Coventry?
Incidentally, I am not sure it is wise of the Tories to try to bring down Starmer. He would almost certainly be replaced by someone more formidable. Better to let him limp on wounded.
Who?
What you might get is someone who: a) is better at enthusing the left, winning voters back from Lib, Green and Sofa to Lab b) does policy things that are less agreeable to anyone of a centre-right disposition (Starmer's sucessor is likely to go a lot further and faster on Europe than SKS) c) is less competent as a manager of systems (no giggling at the back).
Remember, the consequence of Starmer falling isn't the right back in government. It's someone else with nearly four years to play with and a huge majority. Be very careful what you wish for.
Ok. Who?
If Starmer falls under a bus tomorrow, Lammy.
If she has long enough to do a meaningful job on the boats, Mahmood comes into play.
If her time in exile has been sufficient, maybe Rayner.
Maybe the Deputy Leader, once there is one.
I suspect Streeting loses under the unwritten 'if you want it too much, it shows your unsuitability' rule.
The point is, I won't get a say, and I don't think you will either. The socialists will replace one socialist with another one of their choice. Same principle as all the changes of PM from 2016 to 2022.
Starmer wanted it too much and got it.
Rayner has the wrong chromosomes to be eligible to be Labour leader.
Disagree on Starmer.
When he got the Labour leadership, nobody can have thought that they would win next time. Surely?
(Snip)
It wasn't out of the question. Boris Johnson was always unsuited to be PM, as wise people pointed out well before he became PM. There was always a possibility - not a certainty - that he would crash and burn the party.
The size of the majority was the thing that was amazing, and shows the damage Boris did to the party.
If Boris was still Tory leader, the Tories would probably be leading the polls with Reform second.
Boris would also have won well over 200 seats in 2024 with a lower Reform vote than Rishi faced
Perhaps.
But he would still be unsuitable to be PM, just as he was before 2019.
Your belief also ignores one other thing: the odds are that, even if he had remained in No. 10, he would have continued doing stupid things that damaged his premiership, the party, and even the country. Why would he have changed, when he never changed before?
Michael Crick believes Danny Kruger's the second coming......
Steve Baker thinks he's the best thing since Maggie (excluding himself)
......With Tommy and his bunch of thugs ......Farage with his freebe house .......and Kemi sounding like Mrs Robinson
This has turned out to be a surprisingly good day for Sir Keir.
Not really. Reform are taking over the position of Conservatives, the Greens/LDs are taking over the position of Labour, and the two legacy parties will end up like France, hovering around the 15% mark and wondering where the future went. Bear in mind the French Socialists won the Presidency as recently as 2012 (I won that bet if memory serves ) and now they are nowhere.
Except that the Reform vote and the Tory vote are not the same. On a variety of issues from Ukraine to Welfare, they vehemently disagree. The Tories were a coalition of Christian Democrat style Centre-Right people as well as the more Poujardiste groups further to the right. The fact is that Farage is not getting and is not likely to get the support of a large number of the more centrist Conservatives. This places a ceiling on whatever the Faragists can get from them. Of course some suggest that Reform can create a far Right/Left coalition in the former Red wall, but that only works certain areas and risks losing a lot of ground in the South, which is where half the population of the UK actually lives. Tactical voting could limit Farage even further and all of this assumes that he won't seriously screw up, and that is far from a given. Ed Davey is fully aware of the opportunity that he now has, of being the anti-Farage leader that ex Tories can trust and is quite prepared to fight on that basis. In straight fights between Reform and the Lib Dems, plenty of Tories are breaking for the Lib Dems, not Reform.
The question then comes, with Ed Davey getting his tanks on the Tory lawns in the Shires, are the Tories going to end up being obliterated by the FPTP squeeze, or can the venerable old Hector survive? Under Kemi, you wouldn't chance it too much, and Jenrick?? Surely faced with the choice between the fake Populist and the real one, the Tories would still get minced.
So, what about a completely new face like Katie Lam? To be honest, it may be their only hope. Kruger may cross the floor, but I don't see people like Andrew Mitchell wanting to be even in the same town as Farage. Mind you I don't think Andrew gets to Brussels or Washington that much these days. Plenty of Tory grandees are thinking very carefully and are more loyal and much less mercurial than the mildly demented Danny Kruger.
No, the Tories best hope while Farage is around is Cleverly. He could at least hold the 2024 Sunak vote
Well, far be it from me to interrupt an opponent while they make a political error, but I would fear a Conservative party which goes for a shiny, new, young leader than one who, with the best will in the world, is a hangover from a period of disastrous failure. I appreciate that there is a certain respect for seniority on the parliamentary benches, and after Truss there is fully understandable concern about opting for an untested leader. Nevertheless I think that where there is talent on the Tory benches, it lies with the new intake of bright young women, Katie Lam, Harriet Cross among others.
8 people charged after 'Unite the Kingdom' protest
There really needs to be a charge of being really embarrassing and entirely failing to understand history or the way to behave.
I find all 100,000 guilty.
And there lies the problem
As Trevor Phillips has just said in an interview on Sky that he mingled with the crowd at the March and he was struck just how normal they were and certainly not of the right
He went on to say that the Labour and Conservative Party are barely at 40% combined in the polls, and that is because they are simply not relating to people’s concerns
He said the asylum hotels are a particular problem in communities where family's had either had a wedding reception there, or a celebration, or a dance, and now saw them taken over by the asylum seekers which is upsetting their communities
Now, Sir Trevor Phillips, who was once head of the Equalties and Human Rights Commissioner, is probably one of the best journalists in the media at present and is well worth listening too
You cannot simply condemn 100,000 people who may even be your neighbours, because you try to associate them with the unacceptable face of the far right because they aren't
No, no. I feel I can simply condemn them. And let it be a lesson to them!
And especially so if they are my neighbours. Rabble to a man!
Seriously the antics of these people are unacceptable. Much as the antics of the violent football fans were in the 80s and 90s. The leaders of this sort of thing should be horribly ashamed of themselves and much of their following too.
The antics of the Palestine mob similarly, and pretty much all the mobs that have ever congregated,
And so it goes on and Farage grows stronger
And only 8 arrests so far and less than expected
Could the small number of arrests be partly down to the fact that the Police appear to have been overwhelmed by the sheer numbers that turned up on the march and hence the large number of police officers who were injured during the outbreaks of violence when they clearly lost control of the situation?
24 arrests, 8 charges, by Sunday.
A number of people turned off onto Victoria Embankment to get out of the crowds which was understandable.
However, we then saw large crowds ignore police directions, turning left up Horse Guards Avenue, Whitehall Place, Northumberland Avenue and Craven Street in an effort to get into Whitehall, including into sterile areas and areas occupied by those taking part in the Stand Up To Racism protest.
When officers intervened to block their path they were assaulted with kicks and punches. Bottles, flares and other projectiles were also thrown and concerted attempts to get past barriers were made. ... “The violence they faced was wholly unacceptable. 26 officers were injured, including four seriously – among them broken teeth, a possible broken nose, a concussion, a prolapsed disc and a head injury,
I just don’t believe the police. Not any more. Fuck them
24 arrests is nothing for a 300k crowd. Notting Hill carnival had more than double the arrest rate and over 100 knives and other weapons including guns were confiscated.
The march was largely very peaceful, nothing like the hard left ones we've had in past smashing up central London, vandalising memorials and generally causing mayhem.
The liberal media mafia can't stand that there's no actual hard evidence that there was "unruly violence" so now they're just making it up with a compliant police putting out nonsense PR.
Emergency debate about Mandelson tomorrow in Parliament
LOL. This is getting ridiculous.
Not really. As I see it, the question is did the PM lie about the sequencing of Mandy's appointment. Did he engage in (typical?) spin so as to give the impression, or indeed flatly state that he didn't know something that he did actually know because as we have seen with this PM, he is not averse to changing his mind or trying to change the facts to accord with what would have been politically preferable to have happened.
So it turns on his integrity which imo is grounds for an emergency debate.
Oh and if it comes down to the detail of what actually happened and who knew what and when and what they then did as a result....I'd back Mandy all day long over the PM (and his office).
Responding to your edit:
Mandelson has already had to 'resign' from government twice over dodgy dealings. Starmer, not once.
Why would you back Mandelson, given that?
(As an aside, what has Mandelson said about his departure? Is he actually personally at odds with Starmer?)
The point is that Mandy in all likelihood has a "little black book" or equivalent wherein he notes down all this stuff. Whatever else he is he is an operator.
"in all likelihood"
And given his history, why would you trust what's in this imaginary little black book as being the truth?
I am not convinced that Mandelson would want to go for early revenge. I think he will most likely keep quiet and lie low for a bit before popping up as an informal advisor. Why burn bridges and risk getting sent to Coventry?
Incidentally, I am not sure it is wise of the Tories to try to bring down Starmer. He would almost certainly be replaced by someone more formidable. Better to let him limp on wounded.
Who?
What you might get is someone who: a) is better at enthusing the left, winning voters back from Lib, Green and Sofa to Lab b) does policy things that are less agreeable to anyone of a centre-right disposition (Starmer's sucessor is likely to go a lot further and faster on Europe than SKS) c) is less competent as a manager of systems (no giggling at the back).
Remember, the consequence of Starmer falling isn't the right back in government. It's someone else with nearly four years to play with and a huge majority. Be very careful what you wish for.
Ok. Who?
If Starmer falls under a bus tomorrow, Lammy.
If she has long enough to do a meaningful job on the boats, Mahmood comes into play.
If her time in exile has been sufficient, maybe Rayner.
Maybe the Deputy Leader, once there is one.
I suspect Streeting loses under the unwritten 'if you want it too much, it shows your unsuitability' rule.
The point is, I won't get a say, and I don't think you will either. The socialists will replace one socialist with another one of their choice. Same principle as all the changes of PM from 2016 to 2022.
Starmer wanted it too much and got it.
Rayner has the wrong chromosomes to be eligible to be Labour leader.
Disagree on Starmer.
When he got the Labour leadership, nobody can have thought that they would win next time. Surely?
(Snip)
It wasn't out of the question. Boris Johnson was always unsuited to be PM, as wise people pointed out well before he became PM. There was always a possibility - not a certainty - that he would crash and burn the party.
The size of the majority was the thing that was amazing, and shows the damage Boris did to the party.
If Boris was still Tory leader, the Tories would probably be leading the polls with Reform second.
Boris would also have won well over 200 seats in 2024 with a lower Reform vote than Rishi faced
Ooh, self- proclaimed future Tory Prime Minister Steve Baker was on PM as a commentator on and a friend of Danny Kruger. He is working towards some sort of 2019 style Reform- Conservative deal for the next election.
Reform are in a position to extract maximum pay off atm. Offer to stand aside in 40 blue wall seats and 10 Tory-Lab fights and demand Tories abandon 100 red wall seats
It’s hard to imagine the Tories will agree to surrender their status as a national party. But who knows. I suppose it depends on how dire things become them.
I think that it would be unwise and could really backfire on them because voters don't like being denied political choices or being manipulated in this way.
Comments
If she has long enough to do a meaningful job on the boats, Mahmood comes into play.
If her time in exile has been sufficient, maybe Rayner.
Maybe the Deputy Leader, once there is one.
I suspect Streeting loses under the unwritten 'if you want it too much, it shows your unsuitability' rule.
The point is, I won't get a say, and I don't think you will either. The socialists will replace one socialist with another one of their choice. Same principle as all the changes of PM from 2016 to 2022.
On the flip side of that, they have chosen to create the association themselves. It is driven by Yaxley-Lennon himself, and organised through his company. They may be useful idiots, but they are self-selected, volunteer useful idiots.
Regardless of real problems which exist and need addressing, Yaxley-Lennon is a jailbird who has received by my reckoning at least 8 jail sentences (when I tried, I got that far and then lost track there are so many), totalling around 8 years, of which he has served at least around 3 years inside, including for violent crimes, turning up at the homes of journalists in order to threaten and intimidate them, mortgage fraud involving transactions in excess of half a million pounds, and placing the trials of members of a sex abuse ring at risk of collapse by contempt of court.
This is all well known, and in the public domain. It is also easy to find out by anyone who can type 20 letters into Google, or ask the AI on their smartphone.
If they wish to protest by other - not associating with violent criminals with fascist or neo-Nazi politics - they can do so.
My not very tolerant view is that anyone who chooses attach themselves to a YL event have made a decision to smear themselves with the shit that comes off him, and need to take responsibility for themselves and their actions.
Rayner has the wrong chromosomes to be eligible to be Labour leader.
Until the Kruger news dropped there was a plan for a big hit on Starmer, which after Kruger only happened after 5.45. But they still went for him.
Prior to that I was listening to Swarbrick on LBC. Tom thinks there was and is too much immigration after he left the May Government in 2019. He had a guy called Neil phone in who essentially was a replacement theorist. Neil wasn't too hard on the Tories immigration record but was of the opinion that Labour are traitors, for the almost a million a year "replacement" immigration they have overseen in the last five years, and should be dealt with as traitors.
When he got the Labour leadership, nobody can have thought that they would win next time. Surely?
If he had a plan, I'm sure it was to have handed over to the next Labour PM in waiting after losing in the 2023 election.
(Hence the mood flip from his 2020/1 shadow cabinet and platform to his 2022/3 one, which were much more governmental).
"eg like the one who received"
"If they wish to protest by other means"
"last year's riots"
The size of the majority was the thing that was amazing, and shows the damage Boris did to the party.
Every allegation is a confession.
Lammy ain’t that. Mahmood I’d never heard of until her recent promotion. Rayner would be formidable - but shoots from the hip - but I think she’s done.
I don’t see anyone in the government (or on the opposition benches) who would be any good
Like the Lilac Leopard buses that used to be the posh end of Nottingham City Transport (I think it was they - they were in the NCT exclusive pickup zone) in the 1970s-early 1980s.
(If it turns out to have been Barton Buses, I deprecate their marketing that they did not make it stick.)
https://royalsociety.org/blog/2022/05/perkins-purple/
He might well win it anyway as its a Reform underperform seat and he wasn't a million miles behind Labour
He's dreadful. Cringmakingly dreadful. He crept onto the BBC this morning and told how the person of the day was a 14 year old girl who told the crowd how she had been turned away from school for wearing a Union Jack flag made into a dress.
He said it in a hushed whisper so enchanted was he by this sight of this beguiling young fascist in the making. I couldn't believe the BBC let him drone on....
Fortunately he was on with a pollster who rightly ridiculed his mawkish nonsense.
I'm not sure why they'd make a deal with their main rival after they've got them on the ropes. They will surely be focussed on how to land the knock-out punch.
The LDs are too rightwing economically to overtake Labour unless the Tories cease to exist and they get One Nation Tories, the Greens have a slim chance to overtake Labour on the left with Polanski and a deal with Your Party
A number of people turned off onto Victoria Embankment to get out of the crowds which was understandable.
However, we then saw large crowds ignore police directions, turning left up Horse Guards Avenue, Whitehall Place, Northumberland Avenue and Craven Street in an effort to get into Whitehall, including into sterile areas and areas occupied by those taking part in the Stand Up To Racism protest.
When officers intervened to block their path they were assaulted with kicks and punches. Bottles, flares and other projectiles were also thrown and concerted attempts to get past barriers were made.
...
“The violence they faced was wholly unacceptable. 26 officers were injured, including four seriously – among them broken teeth, a possible broken nose, a concussion, a prolapsed disc and a head injury,
“The 25 (corrected to 24) arrests we have made so far is just the start. Our post-event investigation has already begun – we are identifying those who were involved in the disorder and they can expect to face robust police action in the coming days and weeks."
https://news.met.police.uk/news/update-26-officers-injured-in-disorder-at-central-london-protest-501006
Although at first sight he is a natural fit at Justice, probably the most urgent problems there are a lack of prison places and court capacity, neither of which are specifically legal problems.
Also however, knocking out Lab and LD in seats they cant win is not bad for them long term
Boris would also have won well over 200 seats in 2024 with a lower Reform vote than Rishi faced
It's a bit of a cleft stick?
The question then comes, with Ed Davey getting his tanks on the Tory lawns in the Shires, are the Tories going to end up being obliterated by the FPTP squeeze, or can the venerable old Hector survive? Under Kemi, you wouldn't chance it too much, and Jenrick?? Surely faced with the choice between the fake Populist and the real one, the Tories would still get minced.
So, what about a completely new face like Katie Lam? To be honest, it may be their only hope. Kruger may cross the floor, but I don't see people like Andrew Mitchell wanting to be even in the same town as Farage. Mind you I don't think Andrew gets to Brussels or Washington that much these days. Plenty of Tory grandees are thinking very carefully and are more loyal and much less mercurial than the mildly demented Danny Kruger.
But then you wouldn't recognise anything that upsets you
And by the way, how's France doing at present?
They knew the speeches were by far right racists.
They didn't mind the racist chanting.
They didn't mind the assaults on the police.
I expect many of them don't think that they are racist, but they are certainly comfortable in the company of racists.
https://x.com/LabourList/status/1967679991380066751?s=19
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stochastic_terrorism
A sort of male Nadine Dorries when it comes to Boris
There are so many ex-Conservative MPs wandering all over the niche media, that it's tricky trying to keep track without a phalanx of Rolodexi.
NEW THREAD
The Kruger defection does illustrate some fascinating undercurrents within politics as existing parties struggle with the rise of Reform and the changed landscape.
There's an old adage but the more things changing the more they stay the same and that's as true of politics as of anything else. The "two party" system isn't dead but it is evolving and changing. The faultlines and the priority afforded to those faultlines is changing - if anything, the new "line" is between the socially conservative Reform (containing elements from within the old Labour and Conservative parties as well as a significant tranche of previous "non voters") and the more "liberal" parties such as the LDs, Greens and elements of the Conservative and Labour Parties.
Are there enough socially conservative people to put Reform into power? Probably, given a divided and divergent opposition but that is in itself enough to mobilise the more liberal elements to vote tactically against "the social conservative party".
Most Reform voters may be socially conservative but that doesn't apply to all Conservative voters some of whom see their conservatism in economic terms (free market, deregulation, lower taxes, less spending but in a socially and culturally liberal environment). Thus, the whole may not be greater or equal to the sum of the parts.
Yet, the tendency is for things to evolve to a binary state - not Butskellism or John Jackson vs Jack Johnson - but two competing and diverse social and cultural scenarios (with the economic aspects suppressed or given a lower priority as they matter less to voters).
That has been the fundamental political change brought about by Reform which in turn has caused problems for both the Labour and Conservative parties whose existence was and is predicated on competing economic rather than social visions.
Certainly rather tarnished my view of him and New Labour generally.
Particularly as Reform can't wipe out Labour / LDs. There will always be one party or more of 'the left', however defined. The Tories getting even fewer seats, even at the expense of Labour / Lib Dems getting more, increases the relative strength of Reform to usurp them as the main party of the right.
But he would still be unsuitable to be PM, just as he was before 2019.
Your belief also ignores one other thing: the odds are that, even if he had remained in No. 10, he would have continued doing stupid things that damaged his premiership, the party, and even the country. Why would he have changed, when he never changed before?
The march was largely very peaceful, nothing like the hard left ones we've had in past smashing up central London, vandalising memorials and generally causing mayhem.
The liberal media mafia can't stand that there's no actual hard evidence that there was "unruly violence" so now they're just making it up with a compliant police putting out nonsense PR.