Morning all, More in Common with a bit of an 'interesting' weekly poll. A tightening Some shifts in this week's voting intention as Reform’s lead over Labour narrows again: now down to just 3pts. With both Labour and Tories up
➡️ REF UK 28% (-3) 🌹 LAB 25% (+3) 🌳 CON 20% (+2) 🔶 LIB DEM 13% (-1) 🌍 GREEN 8% (nc) 🟡 SNP 3% (nc)
N=2055 |19-22/9|Change w 15/9
Hmm. I wonder if that’s a reaction to Reform’s “deport the settled” proposal. If so, you called it correctly. Farage went too far
Tho they’re still in the lead
It is More In Common. Last I remember they used a fake Likert scale with only four points 'Do you like this, really like it, not care, or HATE IT' as a way of boosting some point they wanted to make - I can't even remember what it was.
I know we're not meant to criticise them, but if they're quite willing to misuse polling that way, I don't see that I can put complete trust their VI polling on a week like this.
It could (for example) have been tacked on the end of some topic specific polling that said 'What do you make of the news that Farage likes to eat babies?' - then do the VI poll.
Shut up.
They ask the VI questions first.
You are treading on thin ice with your approach slagging off pollsters who give answers you don’t like, you did it with YouGov last night thinking they’ve suddenly started downweighting habitual non voters, which is something they’ve done since their founding in 2000.
It was you that said that Yougov had changed their methodology on likelihood to vote not me.
Morning all, More in Common with a bit of an 'interesting' weekly poll. A tightening Some shifts in this week's voting intention as Reform’s lead over Labour narrows again: now down to just 3pts. With both Labour and Tories up
➡️ REF UK 28% (-3) 🌹 LAB 25% (+3) 🌳 CON 20% (+2) 🔶 LIB DEM 13% (-1) 🌍 GREEN 8% (nc) 🟡 SNP 3% (nc)
N=2055 |19-22/9|Change w 15/9
Hmm. I wonder if that’s a reaction to Reform’s “deport the settled” proposal. If so, you called it correctly. Farage went too far
Tho they’re still in the lead
I don't think so tbf, the fieldwork only catches the announcement at the very end. We will call it noise unless further polling confirms a trend
Yes in that case perhaps just a rogue. Hard to see anything that could cause Lab and Con to both ascend
The late Sir Bob Worcester said it can take about two weeks for events to filter into the voting intention figures, so this could be a result of Reform’s conference where they put vaccine deniers and Lucy Letby front and centre.
On BBC headlines, R4 Today trailing that they’ll be looking at the return of Slow Horses this week and why we love the Gary Oldman character. Much as I like the show, why the fck is this news?
Same reason that Jimmy Kimmel is ‘news’. Media likes media stories.
1. Trump’s government publicly threatens TV network for running a show that mocks the president
2. Show is suspended
3. Trump defenders claim the government had nothing to do with it
I've never watched his stuff, and probably never will (and in that respect at least, the reporting has saved me the effort of finding out what was said). I'd prefer never to have had to hear about any of it, but this affair is one of the canaries in the mine regarding state control of the media.
1. Kimmel makes knowingly false statements about a recent murder in order to make a joke at the President’s expense
2. Regulator warns the show about the need to not make such false statements
3. Facing pressure from advertisers and affiliates, Disney suspends the show
4. Hollywood and media immediately spring to his defence, as an issue of freedom of speech rather than about the false statements
5. A week later, facing pressure from supporters, Disney puts the show back on air, also making it clear that it was they and not the administration who made the decision to take the show off air
6. Affiliates are still not playing ball, and the show is not broadcast to half the country
7. Kimmel uses to the show to treat himself as the victim, rather than the guy who was murdered, he makes no apology to Charlie Kirk’s family and doesn’t even mention him by name
The key point here is Point 2. Broadcast TV in the US is regulated by the FCC, in the same way as it is by OFCOM in the UK. Which is why they don’t swear or show nudity, and they don’t tell lies about current events.
The BBC reported him as tearfully apologising. (I haven't listened to the show.)
He said it was “Never his intention to make light of the murder of a young man”, that was as close as he got to apologising.
Morning all, More in Common with a bit of an 'interesting' weekly poll. A tightening Some shifts in this week's voting intention as Reform’s lead over Labour narrows again: now down to just 3pts. With both Labour and Tories up
➡️ REF UK 28% (-3) 🌹 LAB 25% (+3) 🌳 CON 20% (+2) 🔶 LIB DEM 13% (-1) 🌍 GREEN 8% (nc) 🟡 SNP 3% (nc)
N=2055 |19-22/9|Change w 15/9
Not what I expected. I thought Sir Keir's Rayner / Mandy horror show and Nigel's deportations + the Front in Trafalgar Square would have a cancelling-out effect. But perhaps the latter had more salience. Or did the public view Sir Keir's handling of Trump as masterly?
The focus groups Tryl runs liked the state visit and handling........
Morning all, More in Common with a bit of an 'interesting' weekly poll. A tightening Some shifts in this week's voting intention as Reform’s lead over Labour narrows again: now down to just 3pts. With both Labour and Tories up
➡️ REF UK 28% (-3) 🌹 LAB 25% (+3) 🌳 CON 20% (+2) 🔶 LIB DEM 13% (-1) 🌍 GREEN 8% (nc) 🟡 SNP 3% (nc)
N=2055 |19-22/9|Change w 15/9
Hmm. I wonder if that’s a reaction to Reform’s “deport the settled” proposal. If so, you called it correctly. Farage went too far
Tho they’re still in the lead
It is More In Common. Last I remember they used a fake Likert scale with only four points 'Do you like this, really like it, not care, or HATE IT' as a way of boosting some point they wanted to make - I can't even remember what it was.
I know we're not meant to criticise them, but if they're quite willing to misuse polling that way, I don't see that I can put complete trust their VI polling on a week like this.
It could (for example) have been tacked on the end of some topic specific polling that said 'What do you make of the news that Farage likes to eat babies?' - then do the VI poll.
Shut up.
They ask the VI questions first.
You are treading on thin ice with your approach slagging off pollsters who give answers you don’t like, you did it with YouGov last night thinking they’ve suddenly started downweighting habitual non voters, which is something they’ve done since their founding in 2000.
It was you that said that Yougov had changed their methodology on likelihood to vote not me.
No, I said their approach is different to Find Out Now, which is different to habitual non voters and why Find Out Now has the best Reform scores.
Morning all, More in Common with a bit of an 'interesting' weekly poll. A tightening Some shifts in this week's voting intention as Reform’s lead over Labour narrows again: now down to just 3pts. With both Labour and Tories up
➡️ REF UK 28% (-3) 🌹 LAB 25% (+3) 🌳 CON 20% (+2) 🔶 LIB DEM 13% (-1) 🌍 GREEN 8% (nc) 🟡 SNP 3% (nc)
N=2055 |19-22/9|Change w 15/9
Hmm. I wonder if that’s a reaction to Reform’s “deport the settled” proposal. If so, you called it correctly. Farage went too far
Tho they’re still in the lead
It is More In Common. Last I remember they used a fake Likert scale with only four points 'Do you like this, really like it, not care, or HATE IT' as a way of boosting some point they wanted to make - I can't even remember what it was.
I know we're not meant to criticise them, but if they're quite willing to misuse polling that way, I don't see that I can put complete trust their VI polling on a week like this.
It could (for example) have been tacked on the end of some topic specific polling that said 'What do you make of the news that Farage likes to eat babies?' - then do the VI poll.
Shut up.
They ask the VI questions first.
You are treading on thin ice with your approach slagging off pollsters who give answers you don’t like, you did it with YouGov last night thinking they’ve suddenly started downweighting habitual non voters, which is something they’ve done since their founding in 2000.
It was you that said that Yougov had changed their methodology on likelihood to vote not me.
No, I said their approach is different to Find Out Now, which is different to habitual non voters.
Well, I understood that you had told me that this was an innovation, which is why I mentioned it.
If this is not the case, I apologise unreservedly and withdraw all my comments about Yougov's methodology in recent weeks.
I do not withdraw my comments about Find Out Now's Likert Scale, as that was bobbins.
On BBC headlines, R4 Today trailing that they’ll be looking at the return of Slow Horses this week and why we love the Gary Oldman character. Much as I like the show, why the fck is this news?
They also managed nearly 5 minutes on a nightclub back in the late 70s this morning when, call me crazy, a news programme could have got more experts in to discuss the implications of Trump switching sides on Ukraine for example.
The Baron of Banal, Adrian Chiles, has now got a Saturday morning R4 programme for nostalgic randomness like this, he could also no doubt take on the Today programmes section on their listeners’ favourite apple, walk on a beach, brand of fish cakes.
I don't think a single second should be devoted to Trump switching sides on Ukraine until he does.
I wonder whether he is trying to create the narrative “Ukraine doesn’t need our help” while psyching them into going on the offensive against Russia defences to lose troops
Stunning cycle commute this morning - still, clear and cold. The birds have suddenly reappeared, a charm of Goldfinches flitting about my head. The low sun introduces a degree of jeopardy on the carriageway sections but a bit of adrenaline never hurts before morning meetings.
Morning all, More in Common with a bit of an 'interesting' weekly poll. A tightening Some shifts in this week's voting intention as Reform’s lead over Labour narrows again: now down to just 3pts. With both Labour and Tories up
➡️ REF UK 28% (-3) 🌹 LAB 25% (+3) 🌳 CON 20% (+2) 🔶 LIB DEM 13% (-1) 🌍 GREEN 8% (nc) 🟡 SNP 3% (nc)
N=2055 |19-22/9|Change w 15/9
Hmm. I wonder if that’s a reaction to Reform’s “deport the settled” proposal. If so, you called it correctly. Farage went too far
Tho they’re still in the lead
I don't think so tbf, the fieldwork only catches the announcement at the very end. We will call it noise unless further polling confirms a trend
Yes in that case perhaps just a rogue. Hard to see anything that could cause Lab and Con to both ascend
In the personal ratings Starmer gas had a small bounce and MiCs focus groups had good feedback on the state visit so that might be behind Labour's rise. Tories are just swimming around their long term MiC mean, as are Reform really. Its margin of error and within long term trend but we are bamboozled by 'multiple margins of error' perhaps
Outside of election campaigns, very very very few things shift the polls other than random sampling error. If something has shifted the polls, however, it will be from a few to several days before the poll opened, not from the tail end of the survey.
So, maybe, if it's anything, yeah, it could be the state visit. Or could it be the big Tommy Robinson rally putting people off?
Stunning cycle commute this morning - still, clear and cold. The birds have suddenly reappeared, a charm of Goldfinches flitting about my head. The low sun introduces a degree of jeopardy on the carriageway sections but a bit of adrenaline never hurts before morning meetings.
“I have worked with, and written about, politicians for more than 35 years. Of all the prime ministers who’ve been in power in that time, I’ve admired a few, agreed with some, disliked others and disagreed with many.
“But no matter what their party, as a rule I’ve thought these men and women deserved credit for going into politics. At its heart it is a noble profession, despite the opprobrium it attracts.
“I’ve always respected the fact that they held the highest elected office in the land, from Harold Wilson (PM when I was born in 1964) onwards – even if Liz Truss pushed that respect to its limits.
“Sir Keir Starmer is my 13th prime minister. And for the first time, I do not merely disagree with the head of government, but despise him.”
It goes on. And on
Stephen Pollard, Daily Mail
Oh dear. Whatever long standing doubts I have over Starmer are dispelled. If the Daily Mail hate him this much he must be doing something right.
Pollard is, of course, a pro-Israeli NeoCon radical. So Sir Keir's thing with Palestine statehood and his alliance with the great US isolationist Trump was never likely to go down well.
Morning all, More in Common with a bit of an 'interesting' weekly poll. A tightening Some shifts in this week's voting intention as Reform’s lead over Labour narrows again: now down to just 3pts. With both Labour and Tories up
➡️ REF UK 28% (-3) 🌹 LAB 25% (+3) 🌳 CON 20% (+2) 🔶 LIB DEM 13% (-1) 🌍 GREEN 8% (nc) 🟡 SNP 3% (nc)
N=2055 |19-22/9|Change w 15/9
Hmm. I wonder if that’s a reaction to Reform’s “deport the settled” proposal. If so, you called it correctly. Farage went too far
Tho they’re still in the lead
I don't think so tbf, the fieldwork only catches the announcement at the very end. We will call it noise unless further polling confirms a trend
Yes in that case perhaps just a rogue. Hard to see anything that could cause Lab and Con to both ascend
In the personal ratings Starmer gas had a small bounce and MiCs focus groups had good feedback on the state visit so that might be behind Labour's rise. Tories are just swimming around their long term MiC mean, as are Reform really. Its margin of error and within long term trend but we are bamboozled by 'multiple margins of error' perhaps
Outside of election campaigns, very very very few things shift the polls other than random sampling error. If something has shifted the polls, however, it will be from a few days before the poll opened, not from the tail end of the survey.
So, maybe, if it's anything, yeah, it could be the state visit. Or could it be the big Tommy Robinson rally putting people off?
Yeah, its a case of wait and see what the next cycle of polls brings. 28/25/20/13/8 would make for a MUCH more interesting election for all 5 though......!
The key point here is Point 2. Broadcast TV in the US is regulated by the FCC, in the same way as it is by OFCOM in the UK. Which is why they don’t swear or show nudity, and they don’t tell lies about current events.
The problem is under the Mad King that's not true.
The FCC chair explicitly threatened ABC, and they took Kimmel off the air.
Fox News suggested killing homeless people. Nothing.
Last night they said they should bomb the UN. Silence.
Morning all, More in Common with a bit of an 'interesting' weekly poll. A tightening Some shifts in this week's voting intention as Reform’s lead over Labour narrows again: now down to just 3pts. With both Labour and Tories up
➡️ REF UK 28% (-3) 🌹 LAB 25% (+3) 🌳 CON 20% (+2) 🔶 LIB DEM 13% (-1) 🌍 GREEN 8% (nc) 🟡 SNP 3% (nc)
N=2055 |19-22/9|Change w 15/9
Not what I expected. I thought Sir Keir's Rayner / Mandy horror show and Nigel's deportations + the Front in Trafalgar Square would have a cancelling-out effect. But perhaps the latter had more salience. Or did the public view Sir Keir's handling of Trump as masterly?
The focus groups Tryl runs liked the state visit and handling........
Morning all, More in Common with a bit of an 'interesting' weekly poll. A tightening Some shifts in this week's voting intention as Reform’s lead over Labour narrows again: now down to just 3pts. With both Labour and Tories up
➡️ REF UK 28% (-3) 🌹 LAB 25% (+3) 🌳 CON 20% (+2) 🔶 LIB DEM 13% (-1) 🌍 GREEN 8% (nc) 🟡 SNP 3% (nc)
N=2055 |19-22/9|Change w 15/9
Not what I expected. I thought Sir Keir's Rayner / Mandy horror show and Nigel's deportations + the Front in Trafalgar Square would have a cancelling-out effect. But perhaps the latter had more salience. Or did the public view Sir Keir's handling of Trump as masterly?
The focus groups Tryl runs liked the state visit and handling........
Morning all, More in Common with a bit of an 'interesting' weekly poll. A tightening Some shifts in this week's voting intention as Reform’s lead over Labour narrows again: now down to just 3pts. With both Labour and Tories up
➡️ REF UK 28% (-3) 🌹 LAB 25% (+3) 🌳 CON 20% (+2) 🔶 LIB DEM 13% (-1) 🌍 GREEN 8% (nc) 🟡 SNP 3% (nc)
N=2055 |19-22/9|Change w 15/9
Yes, its a bit weird following Labour's 2 weeks of misery and rebellion.
I hope that it is a reaction to Farages mass deportation of legal immigrants, otherwise known as my friends and colleagues?
Quite possibly noise.
Also, it may be that Reform were literally the only party we heard anything from over the summer.
Reason 2 is a huge concern for the Lib Dems. At a time when Labour and Tories can barely reach 20% in the polls, the Lib Dems should be seen as having a great chance of winning.
There are two possibilities. One, the potential Lib Dem voters are glory hunters and don’t want go over to them until others have first.
Alternatively, the public are lying.
The Lib Dems have been the third party for so long that the idea of them not having any chance is ingrained in the public psyche.
This is why I've mused before as to whether GE2024 was not great triumph for them, but a huge missed opportunity. If they could have leapfrogged the Tories into second place, and become His Majesty's Loyal Opposition, then it would have shattered that perception. They fell short.
The fact the LDs are seen as unlikely to form a government being a key reason not to vote for them is holding them back. However if they overtake Labour and the Tories and become the main alternative to Reform as Davey wants that would no longer be an issue. To do that they would need the Tories to leak further to their right to Reform and Labour to their left to Polanski's Greens and Your Party so they could become the main centrist alternative to Farage and the populist and nationalist right Reform. Much as Macron's liberal party is the main alternative to the nationalist RN of Le Pen in France and the Liberals are the main alternative to the populist Canadian Conservatives of Poilievre. They could then also squeeze One Nation Tories and New Labour types.
It is not impossible the LDs could even become the main centre right party as the Liberals are in Australia, in coalition with the conservative Nationals, in Japan and in the Netherlands. Though that is much less likely
I don't watch any more (not enough time, especially with history and the odd current events videos) but Luetin09 does lore videos for Warhammer 40K and has about 940k subs, similar to the official channel.
When looking at YouTube and similar it's not just the raw subs/views (though those are nice for sponsors) it's about how deep that pool is. Just look at the Likes ratio, it's often 1-2% even on perfectly good videos. Even fewer are members or join Patreon, or give superchats (or bits on Twitch). But if you've got a small yet dedicated fanbase that may mean the views are modest but the income and stability (via subs) can be perfectly good, if not better than 'larger'/more viewed channels.
You also get legacy subs. I think it was called WTF1, which was a very popular F1 channel that got bought by another group and has since nose-dived (apologies if I got the name wrong). Views are very low but the sub count is still high.
That's good comment.
Drachinifel (naval history, 560k subs, 300m views) commented on Monetisation recently, and amongst his four streams, Drachinifel's Drydock is the one that monetises best now. The four are:
5 Minute Guides: a short weekly summary of a ship or class of ships. Rum Ration: Midweek, one topic in depth 30-60 minutes. Fun Friday: Something different. Variable length. Last week was Lego Models in War Gaming. Drydock: Q&A about previous videos, where he takes questions and gives 2-15 minute answers. This one can be 1-6 hours of content in 1 or 2 episodes.
He's up to 370 drydocks and 460 Guides.
My impression is that the best creators move elsewhere where they won't be bent over and BFONTed, and use Youtube as a promotional platform, since it is so capricious. It's just like the optimisation games that Google used to play.
“I have worked with, and written about, politicians for more than 35 years. Of all the prime ministers who’ve been in power in that time, I’ve admired a few, agreed with some, disliked others and disagreed with many.
“But no matter what their party, as a rule I’ve thought these men and women deserved credit for going into politics. At its heart it is a noble profession, despite the opprobrium it attracts.
“I’ve always respected the fact that they held the highest elected office in the land, from Harold Wilson (PM when I was born in 1964) onwards – even if Liz Truss pushed that respect to its limits.
“Sir Keir Starmer is my 13th prime minister. And for the first time, I do not merely disagree with the head of government, but despise him.”
It goes on. And on
Stephen Pollard, Daily Mail
I hold no candle for Starmer. I was dissing him before the election. But I think that says more about Pollard than it does about Starmer.
The British right have reacted very badly to the general election result. There's been no introspection about how and why they failed in government. About why they deserved the crushing result at GE2024. About what went so very wrong that they made Liz Truss Prime Minister.
Jumping off the deep end and competing with each other as to who can despise Starmer more is simply a way to avoid facing these uncomfortable questions. It is pathetic.
The lack of forward thinking with which Labour arrived in office after, what? 14 years suggests a lack of introspection on the part of the left, too. That in turn suggests that lack of introspection after losing an election is the general rule.
Maybe if Labour had had a plan the oppositions would have had more of a breathing space to let time pass and be more introspective.
Yes. That was a major part of my criticism of Starmer before the election.
But my comment above was more directed to the right in general, of which journalists like Pollard are an important part, and have a potentially outsized role to play in terms of reflecting on the recent past.
Had a thought about the 'next defection' market. Id advise watching out for who is signing Rupert Lowes various motions on mass deportations etc - anyone in negotiation with Nigel (Zia Yusuf) will be told they arent to play with Rupert under any circumstances. John Hayes, for example, has signed (and was a mentioned possible)
Morning all, More in Common with a bit of an 'interesting' weekly poll. A tightening Some shifts in this week's voting intention as Reform’s lead over Labour narrows again: now down to just 3pts. With both Labour and Tories up
➡️ REF UK 28% (-3) 🌹 LAB 25% (+3) 🌳 CON 20% (+2) 🔶 LIB DEM 13% (-1) 🌍 GREEN 8% (nc) 🟡 SNP 3% (nc)
N=2055 |19-22/9|Change w 15/9
First poll to have the Conservatives at 20% or above in weeks, which will be a relief to Kemi before the Tory conference.
Labour just with a 3% gap with Reform which could easily be eliminated with tactical votes in Labour seats from the 8% Green and 13% LD votes
On BBC headlines, R4 Today trailing that they’ll be looking at the return of Slow Horses this week and why we love the Gary Oldman character. Much as I like the show, why the fck is this news?
Same reason that Jimmy Kimmel is ‘news’. Media likes media stories.
1. Trump’s government publicly threatens TV network for running a show that mocks the president
2. Show is suspended
3. Trump defenders claim the government had nothing to do with it
I've never watched his stuff, and probably never will (and in that respect at least, the reporting has saved me the effort of finding out what was said). I'd prefer never to have had to hear about any of it, but this affair is one of the canaries in the mine regarding state control of the media.
1. Kimmel makes knowingly false statements about a recent murder in order to make a joke at the President’s expense
2. Regulator warns the show about the need to not make such false statements
3. Facing pressure from advertisers and affiliates, Disney suspends the show
4. Hollywood and media immediately spring to his defence, as an issue of freedom of speech rather than about the false statements
5. A week later, facing pressure from supporters, Disney puts the show back on air, also making it clear that it was they and not the administration who made the decision to take the show off air
6. Affiliates are still not playing ball, and the show is not broadcast to half the country
7. Kimmel uses to the show to treat himself as the victim, rather than the guy who was murdered, he makes no apology to Charlie Kirk’s family and doesn’t even mention him by name
The key point here is Point 2. Broadcast TV in the US is regulated by the FCC, in the same way as it is by OFCOM in the UK. Which is why they don’t swear or show nudity, and they don’t tell lies about current events.
1. The clip that was circulated was about Trump not Kirk. I don’t care for Kimmel’s show so didn’t seek out if there was more.
2. The regulator threatened ABC, it didn’t warn them
3 & 6. The affiliates involved are those that imminently require FCC approval of a pending transaction
Morning all, More in Common with a bit of an 'interesting' weekly poll. A tightening Some shifts in this week's voting intention as Reform’s lead over Labour narrows again: now down to just 3pts. With both Labour and Tories up
➡️ REF UK 28% (-3) 🌹 LAB 25% (+3) 🌳 CON 20% (+2) 🔶 LIB DEM 13% (-1) 🌍 GREEN 8% (nc) 🟡 SNP 3% (nc)
N=2055 |19-22/9|Change w 15/9
Yes, its a bit weird following Labour's 2 weeks of misery and rebellion.
I hope that it is a reaction to Farages mass deportation of legal immigrants, otherwise known as my friends and colleagues?
Quite possibly noise.
Also, it may be that Reform were literally the only party we heard anything from over the summer.
That was a great play from Reform.
Most people in politics and political media take their long summers seriously, and they didn’t get one last year because of the July election.
Reason 2 is a huge concern for the Lib Dems. At a time when Labour and Tories can barely reach 20% in the polls, the Lib Dems should be seen as having a great chance of winning.
There are two possibilities. One, the potential Lib Dem voters are glory hunters and don’t want go over to them until others have first.
Alternatively, the public are lying.
The Lib Dems have been the third party for so long that the idea of them not having any chance is ingrained in the public psyche.
This is why I've mused before as to whether GE2024 was not great triumph for them, but a huge missed opportunity. If they could have leapfrogged the Tories into second place, and become His Majesty's Loyal Opposition, then it would have shattered that perception. They fell short.
I wonder if a football team trying to jump, then survive in, a higher football division is a useful analogy?
Political parties can't get a Saudi Sugar Daddy as easily as a Football Club.
As always, wait and see with a poll with that kind of movement. Could be an outlier, could be people pulling back a bit from Farage/suffering from Reform + Flag etc fatigue. Simply need to wait for more.
Interesting that movement has been to both Lab and Con.
“I have worked with, and written about, politicians for more than 35 years. Of all the prime ministers who’ve been in power in that time, I’ve admired a few, agreed with some, disliked others and disagreed with many.
“But no matter what their party, as a rule I’ve thought these men and women deserved credit for going into politics. At its heart it is a noble profession, despite the opprobrium it attracts.
“I’ve always respected the fact that they held the highest elected office in the land, from Harold Wilson (PM when I was born in 1964) onwards – even if Liz Truss pushed that respect to its limits.
“Sir Keir Starmer is my 13th prime minister. And for the first time, I do not merely disagree with the head of government, but despise him.”
It goes on. And on
Stephen Pollard, Daily Mail
I hold no candle for Starmer. I was dissing him before the election. But I think that says more about Pollard than it does about Starmer.
The British right have reacted very badly to the general election result. There's been no introspection about how and why they failed in government. About why they deserved the crushing result at GE2024. About what went so very wrong that they made Liz Truss Prime Minister.
Jumping off the deep end and competing with each other as to who can despise Starmer more is simply a way to avoid facing these uncomfortable questions. It is pathetic.
But Starmer-hatred can be found everywhere. That’s my point - I’m not being partisan
He’s loathed on the left as well. There are centrists that want to push him off a cliff. There are entirely apolitical people - who normally don’t care - who find his strangled vowels enraging in a way they can’t explain. Heck, from what I’ve heard the Starmer family budgie is planning to dive bomb his fat pink head at Christmas
Ergo, he’s a disaster for the government as much as the country and Labour need him gone
Like I said, I was criticising him before the election. But the performative angle of Pollard's diatribe is an important element of the way in which the Right are in denial about what GE2024 meant.
They lost so very badly, and they lost so very badly against such a poor opponent. The focus on the poor opponent, rather than the losing very badly will not serve them well.
As to Labour the problem is, who replaces Starmer? I'd struggle to find a decent replacement for Reeves as Chancellor, so doubling the difficulty in terms of finding a new PM doesn't seem like the obvious route to recovery for them.
Any potential replacements need to have a clear idea of what they would change, otherwise they would be at least as bad as the incumbents, drifting with no purpose.
Hardly a surprise. The Lib Dems have had one shot at government in the last hundred years and they used it to put David Cameron and George Osborne in power. They won't be getting my vote. Like, ever.
What was the alternative?
An unstable rainbow coalition that would torn itself asunder within weeks and likely been Liz Truss on speed.
Plus you forget the legacy Labour bequeathed them, as I point Labour went into that election promising bigger cuts than Thatcher.
The coalition's badly thought out austerity policies (with the triple lock as the cherry on top) created the breeding ground of resentment that gave us Brexit. Worst government ever - until the even worse Tory clusterfucks tht followed. Talk about a legacy! Brexit, NHS in the toilet, asylum system fucked, debt way higher than in 2010, no progress on fixing social care, major infrastructure projects mismanaged and canceled, corrupt Covid projects pouring money down the drain, the triple lock bankrupting working people... it will take a generation to fix the mess the Tories have made of this country. All stemming from that posh boy love fest in the Rose Garden. No thanks.
"... debt way higher than in 2010 ..."
Could you explain the means by which, either in 2015 or 2024, the debt could reasonably be expected to be lower than it was in 2010, after the worst recession in British history and a colossal deficit inherited by the Coalition?
The Coalition government's first budget envisioned debt to GDP rising from 62% to 67% by 2015. Fair enough, they inherited a big deficit in the wake of the global financial crisis. But because their policies were a failure, debt actually rose to 84% of GDP by 2015. So yeah, I do blame them, sorry.
Kamala Harris’s strange memoir epitomises why Trump won Full of gossip, preening and attacks on the Biden family, 107 Days is the most interesting account of total failure you will ever read https://www.telegraph.co.uk/gift/48cf72edfafcc620
It is more his party lost a big regional election in Buenos Aires over opposition to his cuts and the markets fear he cannot continue his reforms, hence Trump may give him extra funds to shore him up
“I have worked with, and written about, politicians for more than 35 years. Of all the prime ministers who’ve been in power in that time, I’ve admired a few, agreed with some, disliked others and disagreed with many.
“But no matter what their party, as a rule I’ve thought these men and women deserved credit for going into politics. At its heart it is a noble profession, despite the opprobrium it attracts.
“I’ve always respected the fact that they held the highest elected office in the land, from Harold Wilson (PM when I was born in 1964) onwards – even if Liz Truss pushed that respect to its limits.
“Sir Keir Starmer is my 13th prime minister. And for the first time, I do not merely disagree with the head of government, but despise him.”
It goes on. And on
Stephen Pollard, Daily Mail
Good morning Leon. How was your meeting with MI6?
You're one of their ideal candidates as you travel the world by invitation of host countries; meet some interesting people and talk to them; and you never seem to have any restrictions on who you meet and where. Is the Groucho Club where you are debriefed?
It was a good meeting. I learned that the *third risk* for MI6 and MI5 is surging up “the grid”. The first and second risks are Islamism and The Far Right, respectively
The third being budget cuts ? (Given you're banned from discussing the other thing.)
This guy is an old friend. I have to be discreet. He also introduced me to a colleague who wants to write a book (with help) when he soon leaves active service
On BBC headlines, R4 Today trailing that they’ll be looking at the return of Slow Horses this week and why we love the Gary Oldman character. Much as I like the show, why the fck is this news?
Same reason that Jimmy Kimmel is ‘news’. Media likes media stories.
1. Trump’s government publicly threatens TV network for running a show that mocks the president
2. Show is suspended
3. Trump defenders claim the government had nothing to do with it
I've never watched his stuff, and probably never will (and in that respect at least, the reporting has saved me the effort of finding out what was said). I'd prefer never to have had to hear about any of it, but this affair is one of the canaries in the mine regarding state control of the media.
1. Kimmel makes knowingly false statements about a recent murder in order to make a joke at the President’s expense
2. Regulator warns the show about the need to not make such false statements
3. Facing pressure from advertisers and affiliates, Disney suspends the show
4. Hollywood and media immediately spring to his defence, as an issue of freedom of speech rather than about the false statements
5. A week later, facing pressure from supporters, Disney puts the show back on air, also making it clear that it was they and not the administration who made the decision to take the show off air
6. Affiliates are still not playing ball, and the show is not broadcast to half the country
7. Kimmel uses to the show to treat himself as the victim, rather than the guy who was murdered, he makes no apology to Charlie Kirk’s family and doesn’t even mention him by name
The key point here is Point 2. Broadcast TV in the US is regulated by the FCC, in the same way as it is by OFCOM in the UK. Which is why they don’t swear or show nudity, and they don’t tell lies about current events.
1. The clip that was circulated was about Trump not Kirk. I don’t care for Kimmel’s show so didn’t seek out if there was more.
2. The regulator threatened ABC, it didn’t warn them
3 & 6. The affiliates involved are those that imminently require FCC approval of a pending transaction
This is a Trump-undermining-USA-life story not a media story, particularly around the Project 2025 programme of politicising the civil state. It's him stepping beyond a customary limitation because he thinks he can.
He's had a fair amount of pushback, even from a few Republicans, and TACOed.
How can anyone be 'phobic' towards Starmer? He's a grey suit, and there are far, far worse people in, and around politics.
He's not very good at the job, but that's little reason to feel 'phobic' towards him.
It's also interesting that many of the responses agreeing come from people who like Farage, who is a far worse person, and whose ideas are disastrous for this country.
Morning all, More in Common with a bit of an 'interesting' weekly poll. A tightening Some shifts in this week's voting intention as Reform’s lead over Labour narrows again: now down to just 3pts. With both Labour and Tories up
➡️ REF UK 28% (-3) 🌹 LAB 25% (+3) 🌳 CON 20% (+2) 🔶 LIB DEM 13% (-1) 🌍 GREEN 8% (nc) 🟡 SNP 3% (nc)
N=2055 |19-22/9|Change w 15/9
Yes, its a bit weird following Labour's 2 weeks of misery and rebellion.
I hope that it is a reaction to Farages mass deportation of legal immigrants, otherwise known as my friends and colleagues?
Quite possibly noise.
Also, it may be that Reform were literally the only party we heard anything from over the summer.
Probably wishful thinking on my part but I do hope they have overplayed their hand. I don't think mass deportations is where even marginal Reform dabblers are, let alone the political centre of gravity in this country. There's an aura of cockiness about them that I suspect people don't like either, and an unwillingness to allow the kind of scrutiny of their policies that a party leading in the polls needs to be subjected to. Let's see what happens. The next election is almost four years away and I make no pretence to predict the result.
I don't watch any more (not enough time, especially with history and the odd current events videos) but Luetin09 does lore videos for Warhammer 40K and has about 940k subs, similar to the official channel.
When looking at YouTube and similar it's not just the raw subs/views (though those are nice for sponsors) it's about how deep that pool is. Just look at the Likes ratio, it's often 1-2% even on perfectly good videos. Even fewer are members or join Patreon, or give superchats (or bits on Twitch). But if you've got a small yet dedicated fanbase that may mean the views are modest but the income and stability (via subs) can be perfectly good, if not better than 'larger'/more viewed channels.
You also get legacy subs. I think it was called WTF1, which was a very popular F1 channel that got bought by another group and has since nose-dived (apologies if I got the name wrong). Views are very low but the sub count is still high.
That's good comment.
Drachinifel (naval history, 560k subs, 300m views) commented on Monetisation recently, and amongst his four streams, Drachinifel's Drydock is the one that monetises best now. The four are:
5 Minute Guides: a short weekly summary of a ship or class of ships. Rum Ration: Midweek, one topic in depth 30-60 minutes. Fun Friday: Something different. Variable length. Last week was Lego Models in War Gaming. Drydock: Q&A about previous videos, where he takes questions and gives 2-15 minute answers. This one can be 1-6 hours of content in 1 or 2 episodes.
He's up to 370 drydocks and 460 Guides.
My impression is that the best creators move elsewhere where they won't be bent over and BFONTed, and use Youtube as a promotional platform, since it is so capricious. It's just like the optimisation games that Google used to play.
Aye, I've heard about Nebula, but haven't joined it. Enough on YouTube for me. But if I had one particular channel I really liked I'd probably want to support it financially (I don't have any media subscriptions except what I need for F1).
Not sure if my own general disconnection with most media is indicative of a trend, but I remember a few years ago being astonished two men not that much older than me on ITV (Rageh Omaar[sp] was one) were surprised that YouTube viewing was either bigger than TV or getting that way.
I'm enjoying DS9 repeats right now, but I barely watch TV beyond that and bits of news. YouTube has plenty of history videos and other things I want, rather than the stuff the BBC creates, which is almost always something I don't want to watch.
*puts on PB Tory spectacles* Presumably reason 4 is because the LDs didn’t shout from the rooftops about their MASSIVE achievements in the coalition.
I'm surprised "they've done a poor job in my local area" is so low, I live in a labour run local authority and work in the LD run LA next door and they're making a total bollocks of it. LD/Con coalition achievements Tuition fee system Destruction of judicial system NHS waiting list Destruction of Sure start Putting electoral reform back a generation Putting reform of second chamber back a generation Tax cuts for the well-off
Took the lowest earners out of income tax too and got same sex marriage through
You have little memory of the Coalition. Lib Dems happy to take up governmental positions no matter how poorly qualified they were for the posts but then going on the Today Programme happily dissing the government they were nominally a part of.
But, their practice of saying one thing to one set of voters and another to another set can only work in opposition.
I can't see many people from farming families voting Lib Dem as Ed Davey kisses Keir Starmer's backside. All those LDs I know are now ardent Reformistas.
Davey has made clear they would only prop up Starmer in a hung parliament if he scrapped the family farm tax
Morning all, More in Common with a bit of an 'interesting' weekly poll. A tightening Some shifts in this week's voting intention as Reform’s lead over Labour narrows again: now down to just 3pts. With both Labour and Tories up
➡️ REF UK 28% (-3) 🌹 LAB 25% (+3) 🌳 CON 20% (+2) 🔶 LIB DEM 13% (-1) 🌍 GREEN 8% (nc) 🟡 SNP 3% (nc)
N=2055 |19-22/9|Change w 15/9
Hmm. I wonder if that’s a reaction to Reform’s “deport the settled” proposal. If so, you called it correctly. Farage went too far
Tho they’re still in the lead
I don't think so tbf, the fieldwork only catches the announcement at the very end. We will call it noise unless further polling confirms a trend
Yes in that case perhaps just a rogue. Hard to see anything that could cause Lab and Con to both ascend
The late Sir Bob Worcester said it can take about two weeks for events to filter into the voting intention figures, so this could be a result of Reform’s conference where they put vaccine deniers and Lucy Letby front and centre.
I note that PB is nearly always ahead of the Facebook & TikTok curve - the number of times my wife and daughters ask me about a story that’s been discussed on PB, the week before… but has just popped up on their feeds.
Yesterday Davey spoke almost exclusively against Farage to the point he lost any positive message about his policies or why he should win over voters
We know he wants to rejoin the EU, pay the WFA, supports the triple lock, wants to pay the WASPI women, and abolish the farmers IHT but doesn't say how he will pay for it
Furthermore he speaks to ' Waitrose' southern England and is barely winning here in Wales , Scotland or the red wall
For these reasons I do not expect the Lib Dems to do any better than 2024 when it should not be forgotten they won all those seats whilst polling less votes than Reform
I would just say he appears too close to Starmer
The LDs focus for now is rejoining a CU not the full EU
How can anyone be 'phobic' towards Starmer? He's a grey suit, and there are far, far worse people in, and around politics.
He's not very good at the job, but that's little reason to feel 'phobic' towards him.
It's also interesting that many of the responses agreeing come from people who like Farage, who is a far worse person, and whose ideas are disastrous for this country.
It’s rather like hating Mayor Kahn - who is better at being Mayor than Starmer is at being PM.
Both are so bland. It’s like hating okish vanilla ice cream.
“I have worked with, and written about, politicians for more than 35 years. Of all the prime ministers who’ve been in power in that time, I’ve admired a few, agreed with some, disliked others and disagreed with many.
“But no matter what their party, as a rule I’ve thought these men and women deserved credit for going into politics. At its heart it is a noble profession, despite the opprobrium it attracts.
“I’ve always respected the fact that they held the highest elected office in the land, from Harold Wilson (PM when I was born in 1964) onwards – even if Liz Truss pushed that respect to its limits.
“Sir Keir Starmer is my 13th prime minister. And for the first time, I do not merely disagree with the head of government, but despise him.”
It goes on. And on
Stephen Pollard, Daily Mail
I hold no candle for Starmer. I was dissing him before the election. But I think that says more about Pollard than it does about Starmer.
The British right have reacted very badly to the general election result. There's been no introspection about how and why they failed in government. About why they deserved the crushing result at GE2024. About what went so very wrong that they made Liz Truss Prime Minister.
Jumping off the deep end and competing with each other as to who can despise Starmer more is simply a way to avoid facing these uncomfortable questions. It is pathetic.
I won't defend much of what the government did post 2015, but the two main reasons for the Tories being destroyed in 2024 were (1) The pandemic and resultant costs and (2) the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
Both led to huge increases in inflation and the cost of living - the second hugely so with energy. No matter who had been in power for those events, they were going to carry the can.
Add in the length of time of Tory or Tory-LD power then it was also obvious that "let Labour have a go" would be a winner. Sadly Labour spent 14 years complaining about everything and coming up with precisely zero ideas about how to change things.
Yes there is a need to the right to look critically at their period in government, but to ignore points (1) and (2) is insane.
How can anyone be 'phobic' towards Starmer? He's a grey suit, and there are far, far worse people in, and around politics.
He's not very good at the job, but that's little reason to feel 'phobic' towards him.
It's also interesting that many of the responses agreeing come from people who like Farage, who is a far worse person, and whose ideas are disastrous for this country.
It’s rather like hating Mayor Kahn - who is better at being Mayor than Starmer is at being PM.
Both are so bland. It’s like hating okish vanilla ice cream.
And yet - like it or not - Starmer DOES evoke this passionate disgust in a lot of people. And not just for partisan reasons. It’s an interesting phenomenon and one we’ve discussed on here before
It makes sense however. If you believe in charisma or charm - and I do believe these exist, however nebulous - then surely it is possible some people have anti-charisma or “negative charm”. Their persona actively annoys, enrages people just because of how they present
Starmer has anti-charisma and negative charm. This is what makes him even less popular than Boris. Boris had plenty of haters but also plenty of admirers. Boris is charismatic (to some), he can make even his enemies laugh. He’s funny
Starmer has none of that. He has no upside to compensate for the flaws
Morning all, More in Common with a bit of an 'interesting' weekly poll. A tightening Some shifts in this week's voting intention as Reform’s lead over Labour narrows again: now down to just 3pts. With both Labour and Tories up
➡️ REF UK 28% (-3) 🌹 LAB 25% (+3) 🌳 CON 20% (+2) 🔶 LIB DEM 13% (-1) 🌍 GREEN 8% (nc) 🟡 SNP 3% (nc)
N=2055 |19-22/9|Change w 15/9
Hmm. I wonder if that’s a reaction to Reform’s “deport the settled” proposal. If so, you called it correctly. Farage went too far
Tho they’re still in the lead
I don't think so tbf, the fieldwork only catches the announcement at the very end. We will call it noise unless further polling confirms a trend
Yes in that case perhaps just a rogue. Hard to see anything that could cause Lab and Con to both ascend
The late Sir Bob Worcester said it can take about two weeks for events to filter into the voting intention figures, so this could be a result of Reform’s conference where they put vaccine deniers and Lucy Letby front and centre.
I note that PB is nearly always ahead of the Facebook & TikTok curve - the number of times my wife and daughters ask me about a story that’s been discussed on PB, the week before… but has just popped up on their feeds.
Pb also covered autism and paracetamol about a fortnight back. The NHS is about to start the winter flu (and covid?) vaccine campaigns, and the new school year means children's vaccination programmes will be gearing up as well, and it may be these are a factor in judging Reform's anti-vax approach (although Farage will step away from this if the polls tell him).
Morning all, More in Common with a bit of an 'interesting' weekly poll. A tightening Some shifts in this week's voting intention as Reform’s lead over Labour narrows again: now down to just 3pts. With both Labour and Tories up
➡️ REF UK 28% (-3) 🌹 LAB 25% (+3) 🌳 CON 20% (+2) 🔶 LIB DEM 13% (-1) 🌍 GREEN 8% (nc) 🟡 SNP 3% (nc)
N=2055 |19-22/9|Change w 15/9
Hmm. I wonder if that’s a reaction to Reform’s “deport the settled” proposal. If so, you called it correctly. Farage went too far
Tho they’re still in the lead
I don't think so tbf, the fieldwork only catches the announcement at the very end. We will call it noise unless further polling confirms a trend
Yes in that case perhaps just a rogue. Hard to see anything that could cause Lab and Con to both ascend
The late Sir Bob Worcester said it can take about two weeks for events to filter into the voting intention figures, so this could be a result of Reform’s conference where they put vaccine deniers and Lucy Letby front and centre.
Lucy Connolly right? Having Lucy Letby up on stage lauded as a hero really would have been a bold move.
I suspect that the increased unsubtlety from Trump is starting to harm Reform as well. Brits have a settled opinion on the US administration that's been put into increased focus by the State visit - and all opposition parties are happily tying Farage and Reform to this. Farage squirming today on the links between paracetamol and autism won't help either.
How can anyone be 'phobic' towards Starmer? He's a grey suit, and there are far, far worse people in, and around politics.
He's not very good at the job, but that's little reason to feel 'phobic' towards him.
It's also interesting that many of the responses agreeing come from people who like Farage, who is a far worse person, and whose ideas are disastrous for this country.
I agree on Starmer not being inspirational and being cautious to a fault - an aspiring technocrat when we need something beyond; even those here opposed to him often complain that he is too indecisive. But he also been notably competent at foreign affairs so far.
I think the Cons and RefUK are phobic towards Starmer, 1) Because the biggest threat they have is that he succeeds, and it works, and 2) Because they have little or nothing to offer themselves, so they have no option other than relying on personality politics.
Personally, I still think we will not be in a position to judge any outcome for 2 years from the Election, and even then it will only be straws in the wind.
His lack of communication cut-through so that the battle is on his home ground eg currently Workers' and Renters' Rights, and reluctance to go for the Opposition in a consistent, brutal manner, makes him his own worst enemy.
Also, the media is tribal as it always is, and chunks of it are now nakedly political.
Hardly a surprise. The Lib Dems have had one shot at government in the last hundred years and they used it to put David Cameron and George Osborne in power. They won't be getting my vote. Like, ever.
What was the alternative?
An unstable rainbow coalition that would torn itself asunder within weeks and likely been Liz Truss on speed.
Plus you forget the legacy Labour bequeathed them, as I point Labour went into that election promising bigger cuts than Thatcher.
The coalition's badly thought out austerity policies (with the triple lock as the cherry on top) created the breeding ground of resentment that gave us Brexit. Worst government ever - until the even worse Tory clusterfucks tht followed. Talk about a legacy! Brexit, NHS in the toilet, asylum system fucked, debt way higher than in 2010, no progress on fixing social care, major infrastructure projects mismanaged and canceled, corrupt Covid projects pouring money down the drain, the triple lock bankrupting working people... it will take a generation to fix the mess the Tories have made of this country. All stemming from that posh boy love fest in the Rose Garden. No thanks.
"... debt way higher than in 2010 ..."
Could you explain the means by which, either in 2015 or 2024, the debt could reasonably be expected to be lower than it was in 2010, after the worst recession in British history and a colossal deficit inherited by the Coalition?
The Coalition government's first budget envisioned debt to GDP rising from 62% to 67% by 2015. Fair enough, they inherited a big deficit in the wake of the global financial crisis. But because their policies were a failure, debt actually rose to 84% of GDP by 2015. So yeah, I do blame them, sorry.
The deficit fell from 10% in 2010 to 2% in 2016
9% in 2010 to 3% in 2016. And the rise in debt to GDP was four times what they forecast so clearly something went awry.
Sky featuring a story about McSweeney and leaked emails
Who is leaking from within labour ?
It's that Stew Steering guy again.
Completely unconnectedly, the weary observation a couple of years ago that it would turn out that everyone was against genocide/ethnic cleansing/mass slaughter of the innocents (delete to taste) all along has come to pass.
Reason 2 is a huge concern for the Lib Dems. At a time when Labour and Tories can barely reach 20% in the polls, the Lib Dems should be seen as having a great chance of winning.
There are two possibilities. One, the potential Lib Dem voters are glory hunters and don’t want go over to them until others have first.
Alternatively, the public are lying.
The Lib Dems have been the third party for so long that the idea of them not having any chance is ingrained in the public psyche.
This is why I've mused before as to whether GE2024 was not great triumph for them, but a huge missed opportunity. If they could have leapfrogged the Tories into second place, and become His Majesty's Loyal Opposition, then it would have shattered that perception. They fell short.
I wonder if a football team trying to jump, then survive in, a higher football division is a useful analogy?
Political parties can't get a Saudi Sugar Daddy as easily as a Football Club.
I voted Lib Dem in 2024, mainly because Labour couldn't be arsed to find a candidate from Wiltshire and bussed in some woman from London. However I still struggle to know what the Lib Dems are really for and what policies they have that make them different. I think their trump card ought to be Brexit and moving as close as possible to the EU so that rejoining is possible. But on other things I just don't know where they stand.
I do think that they can be a Janus party - say one thing nationally then fight tooth and nail against it locally (see house building etc). I think they have issues where liberal values collide with peoples rights (trans rights colliding with women's rights, for instance).
I think the Tories have a long road ahead before they are electable again and if Labour and Starmer don't improve god knows what will happen. The vast majority of the country don't want Reform in power (polls of 30% suggests 70% want someone else). Yet if we are not careful that's what's coming.
Reason 2 is a huge concern for the Lib Dems. At a time when Labour and Tories can barely reach 20% in the polls, the Lib Dems should be seen as having a great chance of winning.
There are two possibilities. One, the potential Lib Dem voters are glory hunters and don’t want go over to them until others have first.
Alternatively, the public are lying.
There's something in this. There could be a tipping point. Watch this space.
Morning all, More in Common with a bit of an 'interesting' weekly poll. A tightening Some shifts in this week's voting intention as Reform’s lead over Labour narrows again: now down to just 3pts. With both Labour and Tories up
➡️ REF UK 28% (-3) 🌹 LAB 25% (+3) 🌳 CON 20% (+2) 🔶 LIB DEM 13% (-1) 🌍 GREEN 8% (nc) 🟡 SNP 3% (nc)
N=2055 |19-22/9|Change w 15/9
Hmm. I wonder if that’s a reaction to Reform’s “deport the settled” proposal. If so, you called it correctly. Farage went too far
Tho they’re still in the lead
If the next GE still looks like a Labour v Reform battle then Labour will win handily. There are far more voters that will vote tactically in seats where Reform might win to keep Farage out than vice versa.
Reform will be mercilessly hammered from all sides during the campaign. They will however hold on to enough core vote to prevent a big Tory revival.
On BBC headlines, R4 Today trailing that they’ll be looking at the return of Slow Horses this week and why we love the Gary Oldman character. Much as I like the show, why the fck is this news?
Same reason that Jimmy Kimmel is ‘news’. Media likes media stories.
A few days ago, the BBC trailed very heavily Hollywood correspondent Ross King and a PR puff piece on his attempts at the slosh for strictly come dancing.
It's this sort of guff that'll make certain licence fee collection continues to decline
Morning all, More in Common with a bit of an 'interesting' weekly poll. A tightening Some shifts in this week's voting intention as Reform’s lead over Labour narrows again: now down to just 3pts. With both Labour and Tories up
➡️ REF UK 28% (-3) 🌹 LAB 25% (+3) 🌳 CON 20% (+2) 🔶 LIB DEM 13% (-1) 🌍 GREEN 8% (nc) 🟡 SNP 3% (nc)
N=2055 |19-22/9|Change w 15/9
Hmm. I wonder if that’s a reaction to Reform’s “deport the settled” proposal. If so, you called it correctly. Farage went too far
Tho they’re still in the lead
I don't think so tbf, the fieldwork only catches the announcement at the very end. We will call it noise unless further polling confirms a trend
Yes in that case perhaps just a rogue. Hard to see anything that could cause Lab and Con to both ascend
The late Sir Bob Worcester said it can take about two weeks for events to filter into the voting intention figures, so this could be a result of Reform’s conference where they put vaccine deniers and Lucy Letby front and centre.
Lucy Connolly right? Having Lucy Letby up on stage lauded as a hero really would have been a bold move.
I suspect that the increased unsubtlety from Trump is starting to harm Reform as well. Brits have a settled opinion on the US administration that's been put into increased focus by the State visit - and all opposition parties are happily tying Farage and Reform to this. Farage squirming today on the links between paracetamol and autism won't help either.
I think Farage is making some mistakes in pandering to people from the further right (meaning those who were previously beyond Farage's red line) who are building bases in Reform. He has shot himself in the foot by killing his vetting system and inviting rejects to reapply, ineffective mess though his vetting system turned out to be.
His featuring of "Pink Ladies" at his conference was an interesting one; he's too desperate for prominent women as headliners to be able to do much quality control.
How can anyone be 'phobic' towards Starmer? He's a grey suit, and there are far, far worse people in, and around politics.
He's not very good at the job, but that's little reason to feel 'phobic' towards him.
It's also interesting that many of the responses agreeing come from people who like Farage, who is a far worse person, and whose ideas are disastrous for this country.
There is something, though, that rubs people up the wrong way about Starmer.
I suspect that it might be the lack of deftness with which he handles political issues or principles. He is always telling us what he believes, and trading off this earnest image, but then contradicts himself. Blair could do this faux sincerity very well. Cameron could too, to a point. Starmer can’t land it at all. He comes off as being a tad holier-than-thou.
He also tries to do “strong and decisive” quite a bit (see all his ‘I won’t stand for it’ tweets) which feel inauthentic given his track record of being pretty weak and indecisive in government.
We might not have noticed some of this in different political times, but mainstream politicians come under a lot of pressure now at sounding inauthentic and “of the elite” and unfortunately for Starmer he fits that bill perfectly.
Morning all, More in Common with a bit of an 'interesting' weekly poll. A tightening Some shifts in this week's voting intention as Reform’s lead over Labour narrows again: now down to just 3pts. With both Labour and Tories up
➡️ REF UK 28% (-3) 🌹 LAB 25% (+3) 🌳 CON 20% (+2) 🔶 LIB DEM 13% (-1) 🌍 GREEN 8% (nc) 🟡 SNP 3% (nc)
N=2055 |19-22/9|Change w 15/9
Hmm. I wonder if that’s a reaction to Reform’s “deport the settled” proposal. If so, you called it correctly. Farage went too far
Tho they’re still in the lead
If the next GE still looks like a Labour v Reform battle then Labour will win handily. There are far more voters that will vote tactically in seats where Reform might win to keep Farage out than vice versa.
Reform will be mercilessly hammered from all sides during the campaign. They will however hold on to enough core vote to prevent a big Tory revival.
What happened in 2024 is voters went for anyone but the Conservatives, and generally they were reasonably good at working out who that was in their local patch. The same could occur at the next election, but for anyone but Reform voters. That would see Labour win lots of seats, but it would also see the LibDems do well, the Greens would at least hang on to their seats and maybe gain a few, maybe Your Party gets a few. That could be hung Parliament territory rather than another Labour majority.
Morning all, More in Common with a bit of an 'interesting' weekly poll. A tightening Some shifts in this week's voting intention as Reform’s lead over Labour narrows again: now down to just 3pts. With both Labour and Tories up
➡️ REF UK 28% (-3) 🌹 LAB 25% (+3) 🌳 CON 20% (+2) 🔶 LIB DEM 13% (-1) 🌍 GREEN 8% (nc) 🟡 SNP 3% (nc)
N=2055 |19-22/9|Change w 15/9
Hmm. I wonder if that’s a reaction to Reform’s “deport the settled” proposal. If so, you called it correctly. Farage went too far
Tho they’re still in the lead
I don't think so tbf, the fieldwork only catches the announcement at the very end. We will call it noise unless further polling confirms a trend
Yes in that case perhaps just a rogue. Hard to see anything that could cause Lab and Con to both ascend
The late Sir Bob Worcester said it can take about two weeks for events to filter into the voting intention figures, so this could be a result of Reform’s conference where they put vaccine deniers and Lucy Letby front and centre.
Lucy Connolly right? Having Lucy Letby up on stage lauded as a hero really would have been a bold move.
I suspect that the increased unsubtlety from Trump is starting to harm Reform as well. Brits have a settled opinion on the US administration that's been put into increased focus by the State visit - and all opposition parties are happily tying Farage and Reform to this. Farage squirming today on the links between paracetamol and autism won't help either.
Reason 2 is a huge concern for the Lib Dems. At a time when Labour and Tories can barely reach 20% in the polls, the Lib Dems should be seen as having a great chance of winning.
There are two possibilities. One, the potential Lib Dem voters are glory hunters and don’t want go over to them until others have first.
Alternatively, the public are lying.
The Lib Dems have been the third party for so long that the idea of them not having any chance is ingrained in the public psyche.
This is why I've mused before as to whether GE2024 was not great triumph for them, but a huge missed opportunity. If they could have leapfrogged the Tories into second place, and become His Majesty's Loyal Opposition, then it would have shattered that perception. They fell short.
I wonder if a football team trying to jump, then survive in, a higher football division is a useful analogy?
Political parties can't get a Saudi Sugar Daddy as easily as a Football Club.
I voted Lib Dem in 2024, mainly because Labour couldn't be arsed to find a candidate from Wiltshire and bussed in some woman from London. However I still struggle to know what the Lib Dems are really for and what policies they have that make them different. I think their trump card ought to be Brexit and moving as close as possible to the EU so that rejoining is possible. But on other things I just don't know where they stand.
I do think that they can be a Janus party - say one thing nationally then fight tooth and nail against it locally (see house building etc). I think they have issues where liberal values collide with peoples rights (trans rights colliding with women's rights, for instance).
I think the Tories have a long road ahead before they are electable again and if Labour and Starmer don't improve god knows what will happen. The vast majority of the country don't want Reform in power (polls of 30% suggests 70% want someone else). Yet if we are not careful that's what's coming.
The key thing here is if Reform can start polling 35+ rather than 28-32 (give or take).
I think a Reform victory looks very rocky on the 28-32 polling, factoring in tactical voting, though it should win them plenty of seats and potentially a plurality. 35+ will likely see them with a decent enough margin (assuming there is still fragmentation on the left) to mitigate that enough to start looking like they could get a majority or very close to one.
How can anyone be 'phobic' towards Starmer? He's a grey suit, and there are far, far worse people in, and around politics.
He's not very good at the job, but that's little reason to feel 'phobic' towards him.
It's also interesting that many of the responses agreeing come from people who like Farage, who is a far worse person, and whose ideas are disastrous for this country.
There is something, though, that rubs people up the wrong way about Starmer.
I suspect that it might be the lack of deftness with which he handles political issues or principles. He is always telling us what he believes, and trading off this earnest image, but then contradicts himself. Blair could do this faux sincerity very well. Cameron could too, to a point. Starmer can’t land it at all. He comes off as being a tad holier-than-thou.
He also tries to do “strong and decisive” quite a bit (see all his ‘I won’t stand for it’ tweets) which feel inauthentic given his track record of being pretty weak and indecisive in government.
We might not have noticed some of this in different political times, but mainstream politicians come under a lot of pressure now at sounding inauthentic and “of the elite” and unfortunately for Starmer he fits that bill perfectly.
Much derided by some on here, his behaviour over 'currygate' showed me who he truly was. For all that the situation was different to 'partygate' he still bent the rules at the same time as being strident for either greater restrictions, or keeping restrictions on longer. He was also an idiot trying to blame Johnson for a virus mutating in the autumn of 2020.
How can anyone be 'phobic' towards Starmer? He's a grey suit, and there are far, far worse people in, and around politics.
He's not very good at the job, but that's little reason to feel 'phobic' towards him.
It's also interesting that many of the responses agreeing come from people who like Farage, who is a far worse person, and whose ideas are disastrous for this country.
There is something, though, that rubs people up the wrong way about Starmer.
I suspect that it might be the lack of deftness with which he handles political issues or principles. He is always telling us what he believes, and trading off this earnest image, but then contradicts himself. Blair could do this faux sincerity very well. Cameron could too, to a point. Starmer can’t land it at all. He comes off as being a tad holier-than-thou.
He also tries to do “strong and decisive” quite a bit (see all his ‘I won’t stand for it’ tweets) which feel inauthentic given his track record of being pretty weak and indecisive in government.
We might not have noticed some of this in different political times, but mainstream politicians come under a lot of pressure now at sounding inauthentic and “of the elite” and unfortunately for Starmer he fits that bill perfectly.
Also, the hypocrisy
They promised to be the “adults in the room”. Oh dear. They promised an end to Tory greed and grift - within a week they were engulfed in freebiegate. And on it goes
Voters REALLY hate hypocrisy. Especially if is dressed in vanity and piety
It’s probably one of the least lovable combinations of characteristics any human can have. And, unfortunately, Starmer has exactly that combination
“I have worked with, and written about, politicians for more than 35 years. Of all the prime ministers who’ve been in power in that time, I’ve admired a few, agreed with some, disliked others and disagreed with many.
“But no matter what their party, as a rule I’ve thought these men and women deserved credit for going into politics. At its heart it is a noble profession, despite the opprobrium it attracts.
“I’ve always respected the fact that they held the highest elected office in the land, from Harold Wilson (PM when I was born in 1964) onwards – even if Liz Truss pushed that respect to its limits.
“Sir Keir Starmer is my 13th prime minister. And for the first time, I do not merely disagree with the head of government, but despise him.”
It goes on. And on
Stephen Pollard, Daily Mail
I hold no candle for Starmer. I was dissing him before the election. But I think that says more about Pollard than it does about Starmer.
The British right have reacted very badly to the general election result. There's been no introspection about how and why they failed in government. About why they deserved the crushing result at GE2024. About what went so very wrong that they made Liz Truss Prime Minister.
Jumping off the deep end and competing with each other as to who can despise Starmer more is simply a way to avoid facing these uncomfortable questions. It is pathetic.
I won't defend much of what the government did post 2015, but the two main reasons for the Tories being destroyed in 2024 were (1) The pandemic and resultant costs and (2) the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
Both led to huge increases in inflation and the cost of living - the second hugely so with energy. No matter who had been in power for those events, they were going to carry the can.
Add in the length of time of Tory or Tory-LD power then it was also obvious that "let Labour have a go" would be a winner. Sadly Labour spent 14 years complaining about everything and coming up with precisely zero ideas about how to change things.
Yes there is a need to the right to look critically at their period in government, but to ignore points (1) and (2) is insane.
I think those factors would be sufficient to explain the Tories losing their majority in 2024, but don't go very far at all to explain why they suffered their worst election defeat in nearly two centuries.
We have a control experiment in Ireland. They also had an election in 2024, where the previous election was just before the pandemic. The main party of government - Fine Gael - had also been in power since coming to office in the wake of the financial crash, and started their period in government with austerity. Ireland also bore the costs of the pandemic and the inflation that followed the invasion of Ukraine. Fine Gael weren't nearly wiped out.
Now, sure, Ireland is currently benefiting from a bonanza of corporate tax income, but the country is still pretty unhappy. It has housing and healthcare crises that are arguably more acute than Britain's, and a similarly strong rate of population growth with high levels of immigration and asylum seeker arrivals. I'd argue that Mary Lou McDonald is a much more capable politician than Starmer, and I struggle to see the Fine Gael leader as more capable than Sunak.
So why did the Tories lose so badly when the incumbents in Ireland did not?
The Year of Three Prime Ministers has to rate very highly as a causal factor. I don't think it is possible to over exaggerate the damage that Liz Truss - and to an extent Boris Johnson - did to the Tories reputation for good government.
Secondly, the Rwanda policy failed. The Tories passed every piece of legislation necessary to implement the policy and then cut and run for an early election to avoid making the failure of the policy all the more obvious.
Thirdly, Brexit. The task of achieving Brexit overwhelmed government and crowded out all other priorities. Before Brexit the Tory government had a purpose - to balance the books and repair the economy. After Brexit the Tory government was directionless and lost.
Morning all, More in Common with a bit of an 'interesting' weekly poll. A tightening Some shifts in this week's voting intention as Reform’s lead over Labour narrows again: now down to just 3pts. With both Labour and Tories up
➡️ REF UK 28% (-3) 🌹 LAB 25% (+3) 🌳 CON 20% (+2) 🔶 LIB DEM 13% (-1) 🌍 GREEN 8% (nc) 🟡 SNP 3% (nc)
N=2055 |19-22/9|Change w 15/9
Hmm. I wonder if that’s a reaction to Reform’s “deport the settled” proposal. If so, you called it correctly. Farage went too far
Tho they’re still in the lead
I don't think so tbf, the fieldwork only catches the announcement at the very end. We will call it noise unless further polling confirms a trend
Yes in that case perhaps just a rogue. Hard to see anything that could cause Lab and Con to both ascend
The late Sir Bob Worcester said it can take about two weeks for events to filter into the voting intention figures, so this could be a result of Reform’s conference where they put vaccine deniers and Lucy Letby front and centre.
Lucy Connolly right? Having Lucy Letby up on stage lauded as a hero really would have been a bold move.
I suspect that the increased unsubtlety from Trump is starting to harm Reform as well. Brits have a settled opinion on the US administration that's been put into increased focus by the State visit - and all opposition parties are happily tying Farage and Reform to this. Farage squirming today on the links between paracetamol and autism won't help either.
Yes, I got my Lucys mixed up.
Acceptable if you are dating two Lucy's at once, then making a mistake has little consequence. Poor form if you mix up the mass murderer with the one who wanted mass murders.
How can anyone be 'phobic' towards Starmer? He's a grey suit, and there are far, far worse people in, and around politics.
He's not very good at the job, but that's little reason to feel 'phobic' towards him.
It's also interesting that many of the responses agreeing come from people who like Farage, who is a far worse person, and whose ideas are disastrous for this country.
It’s rather like hating Mayor Kahn - who is better at being Mayor than Starmer is at being PM.
Both are so bland. It’s like hating okish vanilla ice cream.
And yet - like it or not - Starmer DOES evoke this passionate disgust in a lot of people. And not just for partisan reasons. It’s an interesting phenomenon and one we’ve discussed on here before
It makes sense however. If you believe in charisma or charm - and I do believe these exist, however nebulous - then surely it is possible some people have anti-charisma or “negative charm”. Their persona actively annoys, enrages people just because of how they present
Starmer has anti-charisma and negative charm. This is what makes him even less popular than Boris. Boris had plenty of haters but also plenty of admirers. Boris is charismatic (to some), he can make even his enemies laugh. He’s funny
Starmer has none of that. He has no upside to compensate for the flaws
It wasn't Boris's charisma that caused my mixed feelings about him - it was his capacity for what I see as good. We know that Boris's instincts were against lockdowns for example. In the event, he went with the path of least resistance. But he always managed to convince me that perhaps he would just go for it one day and become a truly great PM. I still think he might have done better if he had survived the knifing once Sunak resigned. As he said at the time 'Now we can go for growth'.
With Starmer I see no hope, or chink of light. I see unrelenting banal authoritarianism and a straight fast track railway track to ruin.
Morning all, More in Common with a bit of an 'interesting' weekly poll. A tightening Some shifts in this week's voting intention as Reform’s lead over Labour narrows again: now down to just 3pts. With both Labour and Tories up
➡️ REF UK 28% (-3) 🌹 LAB 25% (+3) 🌳 CON 20% (+2) 🔶 LIB DEM 13% (-1) 🌍 GREEN 8% (nc) 🟡 SNP 3% (nc)
N=2055 |19-22/9|Change w 15/9
Hmm. I wonder if that’s a reaction to Reform’s “deport the settled” proposal. If so, you called it correctly. Farage went too far
Tho they’re still in the lead
If the next GE still looks like a Labour v Reform battle then Labour will win handily. There are far more voters that will vote tactically in seats where Reform might win to keep Farage out than vice versa.
Reform will be mercilessly hammered from all sides during the campaign. They will however hold on to enough core vote to prevent a big Tory revival.
What happened in 2024 is voters went for anyone but the Conservatives, and generally they were reasonably good at working out who that was in their local patch. The same could occur at the next election, but for anyone but Reform voters. That would see Labour win lots of seats, but it would also see the LibDems do well, the Greens would at least hang on to their seats and maybe gain a few, maybe Your Party gets a few. That could be hung Parliament territory rather than another Labour majority.
This feels more likely to me, right now, than a big Labour recovery. In fact if you were forcing me to guess the next government right now, I’d say it would be likely minority Labour with support from LDs. But we are still of course some ways out.
How can anyone be 'phobic' towards Starmer? He's a grey suit, and there are far, far worse people in, and around politics.
He's not very good at the job, but that's little reason to feel 'phobic' towards him.
It's also interesting that many of the responses agreeing come from people who like Farage, who is a far worse person, and whose ideas are disastrous for this country.
It’s rather like hating Mayor Kahn - who is better at being Mayor than Starmer is at being PM.
Both are so bland. It’s like hating okish vanilla ice cream.
And yet - like it or not - Starmer DOES evoke this passionate disgust in a lot of people. And not just for partisan reasons. It’s an interesting phenomenon and one we’ve discussed on here before
It makes sense however. If you believe in charisma or charm - and I do believe these exist, however nebulous - then surely it is possible some people have anti-charisma or “negative charm”. Their persona actively annoys, enrages people just because of how they present
Starmer has anti-charisma and negative charm. This is what makes him even less popular than Boris. Boris had plenty of haters but also plenty of admirers. Boris is charismatic (to some), he can make even his enemies laugh. He’s funny
Starmer has none of that. He has no upside to compensate for the flaws
It wasn't Boris's charisma that caused my mixed feelings about him - it was his capacity for what I see as good. We know that Boris's instincts were against lockdowns for example. In the event, he went with the path of least resistance. But he always managed to convince me that perhaps he would just go for it one day and become a truly great PM. I still think he might have done better if he had survived the knifing once Sunak resigned. As he said at the time 'Now we can go for growth'.
With Starmer I see no hope, or chink of light. I see unrelenting banal authoritarianism and a straight fast track railway track to ruin.
Morning all, More in Common with a bit of an 'interesting' weekly poll. A tightening Some shifts in this week's voting intention as Reform’s lead over Labour narrows again: now down to just 3pts. With both Labour and Tories up
➡️ REF UK 28% (-3) 🌹 LAB 25% (+3) 🌳 CON 20% (+2) 🔶 LIB DEM 13% (-1) 🌍 GREEN 8% (nc) 🟡 SNP 3% (nc)
N=2055 |19-22/9|Change w 15/9
Hmm. I wonder if that’s a reaction to Reform’s “deport the settled” proposal. If so, you called it correctly. Farage went too far
Tho they’re still in the lead
I don't think so tbf, the fieldwork only catches the announcement at the very end. We will call it noise unless further polling confirms a trend
Yes in that case perhaps just a rogue. Hard to see anything that could cause Lab and Con to both ascend
The late Sir Bob Worcester said it can take about two weeks for events to filter into the voting intention figures, so this could be a result of Reform’s conference where they put vaccine deniers and Lucy Letby front and centre.
Lucy Connolly right? Having Lucy Letby up on stage lauded as a hero really would have been a bold move.
I suspect that the increased unsubtlety from Trump is starting to harm Reform as well. Brits have a settled opinion on the US administration that's been put into increased focus by the State visit - and all opposition parties are happily tying Farage and Reform to this. Farage squirming today on the links between paracetamol and autism won't help either.
Yes, I got my Lucys mixed up.
Acceptable if you are dating two Lucy's at once, then making a mistake has little consequence. Poor form if you mix up the mass murderer with the one who wanted mass murders.
If the convictions of both Lucies are found wanting (I realise Connolly's isn't being contested), it could indicate anti-Lucy bias within the justice system.
How can anyone be 'phobic' towards Starmer? He's a grey suit, and there are far, far worse people in, and around politics.
He's not very good at the job, but that's little reason to feel 'phobic' towards him.
It's also interesting that many of the responses agreeing come from people who like Farage, who is a far worse person, and whose ideas are disastrous for this country.
It’s rather like hating Mayor Kahn - who is better at being Mayor than Starmer is at being PM.
Both are so bland. It’s like hating okish vanilla ice cream.
And yet - like it or not - Starmer DOES evoke this passionate disgust in a lot of people. And not just for partisan reasons. It’s an interesting phenomenon and one we’ve discussed on here before
It makes sense however. If you believe in charisma or charm - and I do believe these exist, however nebulous - then surely it is possible some people have anti-charisma or “negative charm”. Their persona actively annoys, enrages people just because of how they present
Starmer has anti-charisma and negative charm. This is what makes him even less popular than Boris. Boris had plenty of haters but also plenty of admirers. Boris is charismatic (to some), he can make even his enemies laugh. He’s funny
Starmer has none of that. He has no upside to compensate for the flaws
It wasn't Boris's charisma that caused my mixed feelings about him - it was his capacity for what I see as good. We know that Boris's instincts were against lockdowns for example. In the event, he went with the path of least resistance. But he always managed to convince me that perhaps he would just go for it one day and become a truly great PM. I still think he might have done better if he had survived the knifing once Sunak resigned. As he said at the time 'Now we can go for growth'.
With Starmer I see no hope, or chink of light. I see unrelenting banal authoritarianism and a straight fast track railway track to ruin.
How can anyone be 'phobic' towards Starmer? He's a grey suit, and there are far, far worse people in, and around politics.
He's not very good at the job, but that's little reason to feel 'phobic' towards him.
It's also interesting that many of the responses agreeing come from people who like Farage, who is a far worse person, and whose ideas are disastrous for this country.
It’s rather like hating Mayor Kahn - who is better at being Mayor than Starmer is at being PM.
Both are so bland. It’s like hating okish vanilla ice cream.
And yet - like it or not - Starmer DOES evoke this passionate disgust in a lot of people. And not just for partisan reasons. It’s an interesting phenomenon and one we’ve discussed on here before
It makes sense however. If you believe in charisma or charm - and I do believe these exist, however nebulous - then surely it is possible some people have anti-charisma or “negative charm”. Their persona actively annoys, enrages people just because of how they present
Starmer has anti-charisma and negative charm. This is what makes him even less popular than Boris. Boris had plenty of haters but also plenty of admirers. Boris is charismatic (to some), he can make even his enemies laugh. He’s funny
Starmer has none of that. He has no upside to compensate for the flaws
It wasn't Boris's charisma that caused my mixed feelings about him - it was his capacity for what I see as good. We know that Boris's instincts were against lockdowns for example. In the event, he went with the path of least resistance. But he always managed to convince me that perhaps he would just go for it one day and become a truly great PM. I still think he might have done better if he had survived the knifing once Sunak resigned. As he said at the time 'Now we can go for growth'.
With Starmer I see no hope, or chink of light. I see unrelenting banal authoritarianism and a straight fast track railway track to ruin.
There’s precisely no chance that Starmer will be in place when that straight and fast railway line finally opens.
Even if he lives to be as old as his mother, it’s pretty unlikely the current King will be there either.
How can anyone be 'phobic' towards Starmer? He's a grey suit, and there are far, far worse people in, and around politics.
He's not very good at the job, but that's little reason to feel 'phobic' towards him.
It's also interesting that many of the responses agreeing come from people who like Farage, who is a far worse person, and whose ideas are disastrous for this country.
It’s rather like hating Mayor Kahn - who is better at being Mayor than Starmer is at being PM.
Both are so bland. It’s like hating okish vanilla ice cream.
And yet - like it or not - Starmer DOES evoke this passionate disgust in a lot of people. And not just for partisan reasons. It’s an interesting phenomenon and one we’ve discussed on here before
It makes sense however. If you believe in charisma or charm - and I do believe these exist, however nebulous - then surely it is possible some people have anti-charisma or “negative charm”. Their persona actively annoys, enrages people just because of how they present
Starmer has anti-charisma and negative charm. This is what makes him even less popular than Boris. Boris had plenty of haters but also plenty of admirers. Boris is charismatic (to some), he can make even his enemies laugh. He’s funny
Starmer has none of that. He has no upside to compensate for the flaws
It wasn't Boris's charisma that caused my mixed feelings about him - it was his capacity for what I see as good. We know that Boris's instincts were against lockdowns for example. In the event, he went with the path of least resistance. But he always managed to convince me that perhaps he would just go for it one day and become a truly great PM. I still think he might have done better if he had survived the knifing once Sunak resigned. As he said at the time 'Now we can go for growth'.
With Starmer I see no hope, or chink of light. I see unrelenting banal authoritarianism and a straight fast track railway track to ruin.
Boris was brought down as PM because of massive character flaws that were visible long before he became PM - e.g. as mayor. His tragedy was that he was incapable of fixing the effects those character flaws had on the decisions he made as PM. Put simply, he was either incapable of, or unwilling to, learn.
I am one of those who admits to quite liking Boris, but also was on record as saying he should never be PM long before he got the job.
How can anyone be 'phobic' towards Starmer? He's a grey suit, and there are far, far worse people in, and around politics.
He's not very good at the job, but that's little reason to feel 'phobic' towards him.
It's also interesting that many of the responses agreeing come from people who like Farage, who is a far worse person, and whose ideas are disastrous for this country.
I agree on Starmer not being inspirational and being cautious to a fault - an aspiring technocrat when we need something beyond; even those here opposed to him often complain that he is too indecisive. But he also been notably competent at foreign affairs so far.
I think the Cons and RefUK are phobic towards Starmer, 1) Because the biggest threat they have is that he succeeds, and it works, and 2) Because they have little or nothing to offer themselves, so they have no option other than relying on personality politics.
Personally, I still think we will not be in a position to judge any outcome for 2 years from the Election, and even then it will only be straws in the wind.
His lack of communication cut-through so that the battle is on his home ground eg currently Workers' and Renters' Rights, and reluctance to go for the Opposition in a consistent, brutal manner, makes him his own worst enemy.
Also, the media is tribal as it always is, and chunks of it are now nakedly political.
Among people I know, Starmer is more of a joke than hated.
The endless piling on of regulation and then discovering that the government is ever more unable to do anything without the permission of a court is the most commented.
Which isn’t just about A/C - it also explains how rules on A/C interact with rules on building ventilation and fire safety to make new builds more expensive and less dense. And why the windows keep getting pokier. All because of he cult of “one more extra regulation - and regulations cost nothing”
How can anyone be 'phobic' towards Starmer? He's a grey suit, and there are far, far worse people in, and around politics.
He's not very good at the job, but that's little reason to feel 'phobic' towards him.
It's also interesting that many of the responses agreeing come from people who like Farage, who is a far worse person, and whose ideas are disastrous for this country.
It’s rather like hating Mayor Kahn - who is better at being Mayor than Starmer is at being PM.
Both are so bland. It’s like hating okish vanilla ice cream.
And yet - like it or not - Starmer DOES evoke this passionate disgust in a lot of people. And not just for partisan reasons. It’s an interesting phenomenon and one we’ve discussed on here before
It makes sense however. If you believe in charisma or charm - and I do believe these exist, however nebulous - then surely it is possible some people have anti-charisma or “negative charm”. Their persona actively annoys, enrages people just because of how they present
Starmer has anti-charisma and negative charm. This is what makes him even less popular than Boris. Boris had plenty of haters but also plenty of admirers. Boris is charismatic (to some), he can make even his enemies laugh. He’s funny
Starmer has none of that. He has no upside to compensate for the flaws
It wasn't Boris's charisma that caused my mixed feelings about him - it was his capacity for what I see as good. We know that Boris's instincts were against lockdowns for example. In the event, he went with the path of least resistance. But he always managed to convince me that perhaps he would just go for it one day and become a truly great PM. I still think he might have done better if he had survived the knifing once Sunak resigned. As he said at the time 'Now we can go for growth'.
With Starmer I see no hope, or chink of light. I see unrelenting banal authoritarianism and a straight fast track railway track to ruin.
Boris was brought down as PM because of massive character flaws that were visible long before he became PM - e.g. as mayor. His tragedy was that he was incapable of fixing the effects those character flaws had on the decisions he made as PM. Put simply, he was either incapable of, or unwilling to, learn.
I am one of those who admits to quite liking Boris, but also was on record as saying he should never be PM long before he got the job.
I don't disagree. I said the same sort of things, but did waver at times. However, even now, I don't really think if TMay survived the country would be in a better state, or even much of a different state. She was an eminently respectable and upstanding lady, but still not a good PM.
“I have worked with, and written about, politicians for more than 35 years. Of all the prime ministers who’ve been in power in that time, I’ve admired a few, agreed with some, disliked others and disagreed with many.
“But no matter what their party, as a rule I’ve thought these men and women deserved credit for going into politics. At its heart it is a noble profession, despite the opprobrium it attracts.
“I’ve always respected the fact that they held the highest elected office in the land, from Harold Wilson (PM when I was born in 1964) onwards – even if Liz Truss pushed that respect to its limits.
“Sir Keir Starmer is my 13th prime minister. And for the first time, I do not merely disagree with the head of government, but despise him.”
It goes on. And on
Stephen Pollard, Daily Mail
I hold no candle for Starmer. I was dissing him before the election. But I think that says more about Pollard than it does about Starmer.
The British right have reacted very badly to the general election result. There's been no introspection about how and why they failed in government. About why they deserved the crushing result at GE2024. About what went so very wrong that they made Liz Truss Prime Minister.
Jumping off the deep end and competing with each other as to who can despise Starmer more is simply a way to avoid facing these uncomfortable questions. It is pathetic.
I won't defend much of what the government did post 2015, but the two main reasons for the Tories being destroyed in 2024 were (1) The pandemic and resultant costs and (2) the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
Both led to huge increases in inflation and the cost of living - the second hugely so with energy. No matter who had been in power for those events, they were going to carry the can.
Add in the length of time of Tory or Tory-LD power then it was also obvious that "let Labour have a go" would be a winner. Sadly Labour spent 14 years complaining about everything and coming up with precisely zero ideas about how to change things.
Yes there is a need to the right to look critically at their period in government, but to ignore points (1) and (2) is insane.
I think those factors would be sufficient to explain the Tories losing their majority in 2024, but don't go very far at all to explain why they suffered their worst election defeat in nearly two centuries.
We have a control experiment in Ireland. They also had an election in 2024, where the previous election was just before the pandemic. The main party of government - Fine Gael - had also been in power since coming to office in the wake of the financial crash, and started their period in government with austerity. Ireland also bore the costs of the pandemic and the inflation that followed the invasion of Ukraine. Fine Gael weren't nearly wiped out.
Now, sure, Ireland is currently benefiting from a bonanza of corporate tax income, but the country is still pretty unhappy. It has housing and healthcare crises that are arguably more acute than Britain's, and a similarly strong rate of population growth with high levels of immigration and asylum seeker arrivals. I'd argue that Mary Lou McDonald is a much more capable politician than Starmer, and I struggle to see the Fine Gael leader as more capable than Sunak.
So why did the Tories lose so badly when the incumbents in Ireland did not?
The Year of Three Prime Ministers has to rate very highly as a causal factor. I don't think it is possible to over exaggerate the damage that Liz Truss - and to an extent Boris Johnson - did to the Tories reputation for good government.
Secondly, the Rwanda policy failed. The Tories passed every piece of legislation necessary to implement the policy and then cut and run for an early election to avoid making the failure of the policy all the more obvious.
Thirdly, Brexit. The task of achieving Brexit overwhelmed government and crowded out all other priorities. Before Brexit the Tory government had a purpose - to balance the books and repair the economy. After Brexit the Tory government was directionless and lost.
Fair points and I would also add in the end of two party politics skewing a 33.7% Labour vote (1 in 3) giving them 63% of the seats while the Tories with 23.7% received 18.6%. The Lib Dems with 12.2% ended up with 11%.
No one can complain if they support the current voting system (both Labour and Tories do, I think).
Morning all, More in Common with a bit of an 'interesting' weekly poll. A tightening Some shifts in this week's voting intention as Reform’s lead over Labour narrows again: now down to just 3pts. With both Labour and Tories up
➡️ REF UK 28% (-3) 🌹 LAB 25% (+3) 🌳 CON 20% (+2) 🔶 LIB DEM 13% (-1) 🌍 GREEN 8% (nc) 🟡 SNP 3% (nc)
N=2055 |19-22/9|Change w 15/9
Hmm. I wonder if that’s a reaction to Reform’s “deport the settled” proposal. If so, you called it correctly. Farage went too far
Tho they’re still in the lead
If the next GE still looks like a Labour v Reform battle then Labour will win handily. There are far more voters that will vote tactically in seats where Reform might win to keep Farage out than vice versa.
Reform will be mercilessly hammered from all sides during the campaign. They will however hold on to enough core vote to prevent a big Tory revival.
What happened in 2024 is voters went for anyone but the Conservatives, and generally they were reasonably good at working out who that was in their local patch. The same could occur at the next election, but for anyone but Reform voters. That would see Labour win lots of seats, but it would also see the LibDems do well, the Greens would at least hang on to their seats and maybe gain a few, maybe Your Party gets a few. That could be hung Parliament territory rather than another Labour majority.
This feels more likely to me, right now, than a big Labour recovery. In fact if you were forcing me to guess the next government right now, I’d say it would be likely minority Labour with support from LDs. But we are still of course some ways out.
Personally I think its too early to tell, but unless things improve markedly, Labour could suffer a similar fate to the Tories slaughter in 2024. Under attack from Reform, Pro-Palestinians, Lib Dems. Lots of the Labour MP's have wafer thin majorities.
How can anyone be 'phobic' towards Starmer? He's a grey suit, and there are far, far worse people in, and around politics.
He's not very good at the job, but that's little reason to feel 'phobic' towards him.
It's also interesting that many of the responses agreeing come from people who like Farage, who is a far worse person, and whose ideas are disastrous for this country.
It’s rather like hating Mayor Kahn - who is better at being Mayor than Starmer is at being PM.
Both are so bland. It’s like hating okish vanilla ice cream.
And yet - like it or not - Starmer DOES evoke this passionate disgust in a lot of people. And not just for partisan reasons. It’s an interesting phenomenon and one we’ve discussed on here before
It makes sense however. If you believe in charisma or charm - and I do believe these exist, however nebulous - then surely it is possible some people have anti-charisma or “negative charm”. Their persona actively annoys, enrages people just because of how they present
Starmer has anti-charisma and negative charm. This is what makes him even less popular than Boris. Boris had plenty of haters but also plenty of admirers. Boris is charismatic (to some), he can make even his enemies laugh. He’s funny
Starmer has none of that. He has no upside to compensate for the flaws
It wasn't Boris's charisma that caused my mixed feelings about him - it was his capacity for what I see as good. We know that Boris's instincts were against lockdowns for example. In the event, he went with the path of least resistance. But he always managed to convince me that perhaps he would just go for it one day and become a truly great PM. I still think he might have done better if he had survived the knifing once Sunak resigned. As he said at the time 'Now we can go for growth'.
With Starmer I see no hope, or chink of light. I see unrelenting banal authoritarianism and a straight fast track railway track to ruin.
Boris was brought down as PM because of massive character flaws that were visible long before he became PM - e.g. as mayor. His tragedy was that he was incapable of fixing the effects those character flaws had on the decisions he made as PM. Put simply, he was either incapable of, or unwilling to, learn.
I am one of those who admits to quite liking Boris, but also was on record as saying he should never be PM long before he got the job.
I don't disagree. I said the same sort of things, but did waver at times. However, even now, I don't really think if TMay survived the country would be in a better state, or even much of a different state. She was an eminently respectable and upstanding lady, but still not a good PM.
One of May's major problems as PM was control of her own party. And the main cause of that was the crowd of Tory ****s who wanted Boris as PM.
Like (say) Sunak, May would have been a fairly competent, or even good, PM in ordinary times. Sadly, neither inherited ordinary times. In the case of May, she had the consequences of the Brexit vote and the ructions that caused in her own party. In Sunak's, the consequences of Covid and a party that had been in power for over a decade.
Insincere Sir Keir is a complete hypocrite personally and professionally. He’s like a bent copper or a snidey bullying teacher, and that’s why the public seem to hate him. Strange to me that some people just see him as bland and inoffensive.
How can anyone be 'phobic' towards Starmer? He's a grey suit, and there are far, far worse people in, and around politics.
He's not very good at the job, but that's little reason to feel 'phobic' towards him.
It's also interesting that many of the responses agreeing come from people who like Farage, who is a far worse person, and whose ideas are disastrous for this country.
I agree on Starmer not being inspirational and being cautious to a fault - an aspiring technocrat when we need something beyond; even those here opposed to him often complain that he is too indecisive. But he also been notably competent at foreign affairs so far.
I think the Cons and RefUK are phobic towards Starmer, 1) Because the biggest threat they have is that he succeeds, and it works, and 2) Because they have little or nothing to offer themselves, so they have no option other than relying on personality politics.
Personally, I still think we will not be in a position to judge any outcome for 2 years from the Election, and even then it will only be straws in the wind.
His lack of communication cut-through so that the battle is on his home ground eg currently Workers' and Renters' Rights, and reluctance to go for the Opposition in a consistent, brutal manner, makes him his own worst enemy.
Also, the media is tribal as it always is, and chunks of it are now nakedly political.
Among people I know, Starmer is more of a joke than hated.
The endless piling on of regulation and then discovering that the government is ever more unable to do anything without the permission of a court is the most commented.
Which isn’t just about A/C - it also explains how rules on A/C interact with rules on building ventilation and fire safety to make new builds more expensive and less dense. And why the windows keep getting pokier. All because of he cult of “one more extra regulation - and regulations cost nothing”
There would be considerably more support for the government if, despite the obvious financial problems, they were getting on with reforms in areas such as planning and building regulations that are making the housing problem continually worse.
There’s so many things they could be doing that don’t cost money, but they’re more worried about the reaction from lawyers and public sector workers than that of the general public.
How can anyone be 'phobic' towards Starmer? He's a grey suit, and there are far, far worse people in, and around politics.
He's not very good at the job, but that's little reason to feel 'phobic' towards him.
It's also interesting that many of the responses agreeing come from people who like Farage, who is a far worse person, and whose ideas are disastrous for this country.
It’s rather like hating Mayor Kahn - who is better at being Mayor than Starmer is at being PM.
Both are so bland. It’s like hating okish vanilla ice cream.
And yet - like it or not - Starmer DOES evoke this passionate disgust in a lot of people. And not just for partisan reasons. It’s an interesting phenomenon and one we’ve discussed on here before
It makes sense however. If you believe in charisma or charm - and I do believe these exist, however nebulous - then surely it is possible some people have anti-charisma or “negative charm”. Their persona actively annoys, enrages people just because of how they present
Starmer has anti-charisma and negative charm. This is what makes him even less popular than Boris. Boris had plenty of haters but also plenty of admirers. Boris is charismatic (to some), he can make even his enemies laugh. He’s funny
Starmer has none of that. He has no upside to compensate for the flaws
It wasn't Boris's charisma that caused my mixed feelings about him - it was his capacity for what I see as good. We know that Boris's instincts were against lockdowns for example. In the event, he went with the path of least resistance. But he always managed to convince me that perhaps he would just go for it one day and become a truly great PM. I still think he might have done better if he had survived the knifing once Sunak resigned. As he said at the time 'Now we can go for growth'.
With Starmer I see no hope, or chink of light. I see unrelenting banal authoritarianism and a straight fast track railway track to ruin.
Boris was brought down as PM because of massive character flaws that were visible long before he became PM - e.g. as mayor. His tragedy was that he was incapable of fixing the effects those character flaws had on the decisions he made as PM. Put simply, he was either incapable of, or unwilling to, learn.
I am one of those who admits to quite liking Boris, but also was on record as saying he should never be PM long before he got the job.
I don't disagree. I said the same sort of things, but did waver at times. However, even now, I don't really think if TMay survived the country would be in a better state, or even much of a different state. She was an eminently respectable and upstanding lady, but still not a good PM.
How can you make that outrageous claim when she ran through a field of wheat as a child?!
How can anyone be 'phobic' towards Starmer? He's a grey suit, and there are far, far worse people in, and around politics.
He's not very good at the job, but that's little reason to feel 'phobic' towards him.
It's also interesting that many of the responses agreeing come from people who like Farage, who is a far worse person, and whose ideas are disastrous for this country.
I agree on Starmer not being inspirational and being cautious to a fault - an aspiring technocrat when we need something beyond; even those here opposed to him often complain that he is too indecisive. But he also been notably competent at foreign affairs so far.
I think the Cons and RefUK are phobic towards Starmer, 1) Because the biggest threat they have is that he succeeds, and it works, and 2) Because they have little or nothing to offer themselves, so they have no option other than relying on personality politics.
Personally, I still think we will not be in a position to judge any outcome for 2 years from the Election, and even then it will only be straws in the wind.
His lack of communication cut-through so that the battle is on his home ground eg currently Workers' and Renters' Rights, and reluctance to go for the Opposition in a consistent, brutal manner, makes him his own worst enemy.
Also, the media is tribal as it always is, and chunks of it are now nakedly political.
Among people I know, Starmer is more of a joke than hated.
The endless piling on of regulation and then discovering that the government is ever more unable to do anything without the permission of a court is the most commented.
Which isn’t just about A/C - it also explains how rules on A/C interact with rules on building ventilation and fire safety to make new builds more expensive and less dense. And why the windows keep getting pokier. All because of he cult of “one more extra regulation - and regulations cost nothing”
There would be considerably more support for the government if, despite the obvious financial problems, they were getting on with reforms in areas such as planning and building regulations that are making the housing problem continually worse.
There’s so many things they could be doing that don’t cost money, but they’re more worried about the reaction from lawyers and public sector workers than that of the general public.
Yep. I also would have re-launched HS2 all the way to Liverpool and across the Pennines too. Money spent goes into the economy - all those workers get paid.
Insincere Sir Keir is a complete hypocrite personally and professionally. He’s like a bent copper or a snidey bullying teacher, and that’s why the public seem to hate him. Strange to me that some people just see him as bland and inoffensive.
That he, his wife, and seemingly half of the cabinet, spent their first few months in office going to every sporting and music event possible, and putting their clothes on expenses, was the worst possible start he could have made.
Morning all, More in Common with a bit of an 'interesting' weekly poll. A tightening Some shifts in this week's voting intention as Reform’s lead over Labour narrows again: now down to just 3pts. With both Labour and Tories up
➡️ REF UK 28% (-3) 🌹 LAB 25% (+3) 🌳 CON 20% (+2) 🔶 LIB DEM 13% (-1) 🌍 GREEN 8% (nc) 🟡 SNP 3% (nc)
N=2055 |19-22/9|Change w 15/9
Hmm. I wonder if that’s a reaction to Reform’s “deport the settled” proposal. If so, you called it correctly. Farage went too far
Tho they’re still in the lead
If the next GE still looks like a Labour v Reform battle then Labour will win handily. There are far more voters that will vote tactically in seats where Reform might win to keep Farage out than vice versa.
Reform will be mercilessly hammered from all sides during the campaign. They will however hold on to enough core vote to prevent a big Tory revival.
What happened in 2024 is voters went for anyone but the Conservatives, and generally they were reasonably good at working out who that was in their local patch. The same could occur at the next election, but for anyone but Reform voters. That would see Labour win lots of seats, but it would also see the LibDems do well, the Greens would at least hang on to their seats and maybe gain a few, maybe Your Party gets a few. That could be hung Parliament territory rather than another Labour majority.
This feels more likely to me, right now, than a big Labour recovery. In fact if you were forcing me to guess the next government right now, I’d say it would be likely minority Labour with support from LDs. But we are still of course some ways out.
Personally I think its too early to tell, but unless things improve markedly, Labour could suffer a similar fate to the Tories slaughter in 2024. Under attack from Reform, Pro-Palestinians, Lib Dems. Lots of the Labour MP's have wafer thin majorities.
You’re not suggesting that Labour’s majority is like Mr Creosote?
Insincere Sir Keir is a complete hypocrite personally and professionally. He’s like a bent copper or a snidey bullying teacher, and that’s why the public seem to hate him. Strange to me that some people just see him as bland and inoffensive.
A bent copper is a powerful metaphor. It's that gaslighting thing. Yucky.
Morning all, More in Common with a bit of an 'interesting' weekly poll. A tightening Some shifts in this week's voting intention as Reform’s lead over Labour narrows again: now down to just 3pts. With both Labour and Tories up
➡️ REF UK 28% (-3) 🌹 LAB 25% (+3) 🌳 CON 20% (+2) 🔶 LIB DEM 13% (-1) 🌍 GREEN 8% (nc) 🟡 SNP 3% (nc)
N=2055 |19-22/9|Change w 15/9
Hmm. I wonder if that’s a reaction to Reform’s “deport the settled” proposal. If so, you called it correctly. Farage went too far
Tho they’re still in the lead
If the next GE still looks like a Labour v Reform battle then Labour will win handily. There are far more voters that will vote tactically in seats where Reform might win to keep Farage out than vice versa.
Reform will be mercilessly hammered from all sides during the campaign. They will however hold on to enough core vote to prevent a big Tory revival.
What happened in 2024 is voters went for anyone but the Conservatives, and generally they were reasonably good at working out who that was in their local patch. The same could occur at the next election, but for anyone but Reform voters. That would see Labour win lots of seats, but it would also see the LibDems do well, the Greens would at least hang on to their seats and maybe gain a few, maybe Your Party gets a few. That could be hung Parliament territory rather than another Labour majority.
This feels more likely to me, right now, than a big Labour recovery. In fact if you were forcing me to guess the next government right now, I’d say it would be likely minority Labour with support from LDs. But we are still of course some ways out.
Personally I think its too early to tell, but unless things improve markedly, Labour could suffer a similar fate to the Tories slaughter in 2024. Under attack from Reform, Pro-Palestinians, Lib Dems. Lots of the Labour MP's have wafer thin majorities.
Next year's locals will be a preview of this potential shellacking. Our all-out elections in Bradford could result in a very diverse set of councillors elected.
How can anyone be 'phobic' towards Starmer? He's a grey suit, and there are far, far worse people in, and around politics.
He's not very good at the job, but that's little reason to feel 'phobic' towards him.
It's also interesting that many of the responses agreeing come from people who like Farage, who is a far worse person, and whose ideas are disastrous for this country.
I agree on Starmer not being inspirational and being cautious to a fault - an aspiring technocrat when we need something beyond; even those here opposed to him often complain that he is too indecisive. But he also been notably competent at foreign affairs so far.
I think the Cons and RefUK are phobic towards Starmer, 1) Because the biggest threat they have is that he succeeds, and it works, and 2) Because they have little or nothing to offer themselves, so they have no option other than relying on personality politics.
Personally, I still think we will not be in a position to judge any outcome for 2 years from the Election, and even then it will only be straws in the wind.
His lack of communication cut-through so that the battle is on his home ground eg currently Workers' and Renters' Rights, and reluctance to go for the Opposition in a consistent, brutal manner, makes him his own worst enemy.
Also, the media is tribal as it always is, and chunks of it are now nakedly political.
Among people I know, Starmer is more of a joke than hated.
The endless piling on of regulation and then discovering that the government is ever more unable to do anything without the permission of a court is the most commented.
Which isn’t just about A/C - it also explains how rules on A/C interact with rules on building ventilation and fire safety to make new builds more expensive and less dense. And why the windows keep getting pokier. All because of he cult of “one more extra regulation - and regulations cost nothing”
That's a great article.
The Part O building regulations do seem egregiously bad. Passive house design tends to maximise glazing and solar gain, so it's bizarre to see regulations that explicitly forbid that design.
How can anyone be 'phobic' towards Starmer? He's a grey suit, and there are far, far worse people in, and around politics.
He's not very good at the job, but that's little reason to feel 'phobic' towards him.
It's also interesting that many of the responses agreeing come from people who like Farage, who is a far worse person, and whose ideas are disastrous for this country.
It’s rather like hating Mayor Kahn - who is better at being Mayor than Starmer is at being PM.
Both are so bland. It’s like hating okish vanilla ice cream.
And yet - like it or not - Starmer DOES evoke this passionate disgust in a lot of people. And not just for partisan reasons. It’s an interesting phenomenon and one we’ve discussed on here before
It makes sense however. If you believe in charisma or charm - and I do believe these exist, however nebulous - then surely it is possible some people have anti-charisma or “negative charm”. Their persona actively annoys, enrages people just because of how they present
Starmer has anti-charisma and negative charm. This is what makes him even less popular than Boris. Boris had plenty of haters but also plenty of admirers. Boris is charismatic (to some), he can make even his enemies laugh. He’s funny
Starmer has none of that. He has no upside to compensate for the flaws
It wasn't Boris's charisma that caused my mixed feelings about him - it was his capacity for what I see as good. We know that Boris's instincts were against lockdowns for example. In the event, he went with the path of least resistance. But he always managed to convince me that perhaps he would just go for it one day and become a truly great PM. I still think he might have done better if he had survived the knifing once Sunak resigned. As he said at the time 'Now we can go for growth'.
With Starmer I see no hope, or chink of light. I see unrelenting banal authoritarianism and a straight fast track railway track to ruin.
Yes, I agree with nearly all of that
Why don't you get your mate to write the most career ending character expose of Starmer for the Speccie? Just conjecture and opinion, facts can be optional.
How can anyone be 'phobic' towards Starmer? He's a grey suit, and there are far, far worse people in, and around politics.
He's not very good at the job, but that's little reason to feel 'phobic' towards him.
It's also interesting that many of the responses agreeing come from people who like Farage, who is a far worse person, and whose ideas are disastrous for this country.
I agree on Starmer not being inspirational and being cautious to a fault - an aspiring technocrat when we need something beyond; even those here opposed to him often complain that he is too indecisive. But he also been notably competent at foreign affairs so far.
I think the Cons and RefUK are phobic towards Starmer, 1) Because the biggest threat they have is that he succeeds, and it works, and 2) Because they have little or nothing to offer themselves, so they have no option other than relying on personality politics.
Personally, I still think we will not be in a position to judge any outcome for 2 years from the Election, and even then it will only be straws in the wind.
His lack of communication cut-through so that the battle is on his home ground eg currently Workers' and Renters' Rights, and reluctance to go for the Opposition in a consistent, brutal manner, makes him his own worst enemy.
Also, the media is tribal as it always is, and chunks of it are now nakedly political.
I think I'd add a couple of things.
Against Starmer, he comes across as having both some of the insincerity of Blair/Cameron whilst also being dull like May/Brown/Major. The combination is something we haven't had in a while.
There is also a sliver of Trumpism in there. Last week Trump said hate your opponent, this week the Daily Mail brings out an I hate Starmer piece. There is a lot of this kind of reflection going on.
I think we have the sense that Leon uses this place as a proving ground for his Knappers' Gazette and Daily Dildo Pole pieces, so maybe his I hate Starmer schtick will be promoted up at some point.
His Franco and Pinochet were sound guys really along with his prior putsch the left posts, in that context, and in very close response to Trump's hate and root out the Radical Left Lunatics development does chill me, because it is likely in tune with what his paymasters and his paymasters' paymasters want.
The idea of a putsch seems close and real and these guys are preparing to fall in line with it, as they did for Tommy's rally. Worrying times.
“I have worked with, and written about, politicians for more than 35 years. Of all the prime ministers who’ve been in power in that time, I’ve admired a few, agreed with some, disliked others and disagreed with many.
“But no matter what their party, as a rule I’ve thought these men and women deserved credit for going into politics. At its heart it is a noble profession, despite the opprobrium it attracts.
“I’ve always respected the fact that they held the highest elected office in the land, from Harold Wilson (PM when I was born in 1964) onwards – even if Liz Truss pushed that respect to its limits.
“Sir Keir Starmer is my 13th prime minister. And for the first time, I do not merely disagree with the head of government, but despise him.”
It goes on. And on
Stephen Pollard, Daily Mail
I hold no candle for Starmer. I was dissing him before the election. But I think that says more about Pollard than it does about Starmer.
The British right have reacted very badly to the general election result. There's been no introspection about how and why they failed in government. About why they deserved the crushing result at GE2024. About what went so very wrong that they made Liz Truss Prime Minister.
Jumping off the deep end and competing with each other as to who can despise Starmer more is simply a way to avoid facing these uncomfortable questions. It is pathetic.
I won't defend much of what the government did post 2015, but the two main reasons for the Tories being destroyed in 2024 were (1) The pandemic and resultant costs and (2) the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
Both led to huge increases in inflation and the cost of living - the second hugely so with energy. No matter who had been in power for those events, they were going to carry the can.
Add in the length of time of Tory or Tory-LD power then it was also obvious that "let Labour have a go" would be a winner. Sadly Labour spent 14 years complaining about everything and coming up with precisely zero ideas about how to change things.
Yes there is a need to the right to look critically at their period in government, but to ignore points (1) and (2) is insane.
I think those factors would be sufficient to explain the Tories losing their majority in 2024, but don't go very far at all to explain why they suffered their worst election defeat in nearly two centuries.
We have a control experiment in Ireland. They also had an election in 2024, where the previous election was just before the pandemic. The main party of government - Fine Gael - had also been in power since coming to office in the wake of the financial crash, and started their period in government with austerity. Ireland also bore the costs of the pandemic and the inflation that followed the invasion of Ukraine. Fine Gael weren't nearly wiped out.
Now, sure, Ireland is currently benefiting from a bonanza of corporate tax income, but the country is still pretty unhappy. It has housing and healthcare crises that are arguably more acute than Britain's, and a similarly strong rate of population growth with high levels of immigration and asylum seeker arrivals. I'd argue that Mary Lou McDonald is a much more capable politician than Starmer, and I struggle to see the Fine Gael leader as more capable than Sunak.
So why did the Tories lose so badly when the incumbents in Ireland did not?
The Year of Three Prime Ministers has to rate very highly as a causal factor. I don't think it is possible to over exaggerate the damage that Liz Truss - and to an extent Boris Johnson - did to the Tories reputation for good government.
Secondly, the Rwanda policy failed. The Tories passed every piece of legislation necessary to implement the policy and then cut and run for an early election to avoid making the failure of the policy all the more obvious.
Thirdly, Brexit. The task of achieving Brexit overwhelmed government and crowded out all other priorities. Before Brexit the Tory government had a purpose - to balance the books and repair the economy. After Brexit the Tory government was directionless and lost.
Fair points and I would also add in the end of two party politics skewing a 33.7% Labour vote (1 in 3) giving them 63% of the seats while the Tories with 23.7% received 18.6%. The Lib Dems with 12.2% ended up with 11%.
No one can complain if they support the current voting system (both Labour and Tories do, I think).
And it's possible to see Labour surviving as the leading party in government on 23.7% of the vote if vote shares continue to fracture, which would be even more nuts than the last election result.
That would be about the same vote share that propelled the Lib Dems to junior coalition partner status in 2010.
Bit rum of Nigel just to say 'dunno' when asked about the medical safety of paracetamol. Do we take from this that his government will simply refuse to offer health advice when in office? How will that work if we have another Covid-like crisis?
Bit rum of Nigel just to say 'dunno' when asked about the medical safety of paracetamol. Do we take from this that his government will simply refuse to offer health advice when in office? How will that work if we have another Covid-like crisis?
Not pissing off the Mad King is more important than being straight with the British public.
Bit rum of Nigel just to say 'dunno' when asked about the medical safety of paracetamol. Do we take from this that his government will simply refuse to offer health advice when in office? How will that work if we have another Covid-like crisis?
Idiotic move, IMHO.
The more Farage falls down the rabbit hole on things like this the more he pushes away the very voters he needs.
Morning all, More in Common with a bit of an 'interesting' weekly poll. A tightening Some shifts in this week's voting intention as Reform’s lead over Labour narrows again: now down to just 3pts. With both Labour and Tories up
➡️ REF UK 28% (-3) 🌹 LAB 25% (+3) 🌳 CON 20% (+2) 🔶 LIB DEM 13% (-1) 🌍 GREEN 8% (nc) 🟡 SNP 3% (nc)
N=2055 |19-22/9|Change w 15/9
Hmm. I wonder if that’s a reaction to Reform’s “deport the settled” proposal. If so, you called it correctly. Farage went too far
Tho they’re still in the lead
I don't think so tbf, the fieldwork only catches the announcement at the very end. We will call it noise unless further polling confirms a trend
Yes in that case perhaps just a rogue. Hard to see anything that could cause Lab and Con to both ascend
The late Sir Bob Worcester said it can take about two weeks for events to filter into the voting intention figures, so this could be a result of Reform’s conference where they put vaccine deniers and Lucy Letby front and centre.
I note that PB is nearly always ahead of the Facebook & TikTok curve - the number of times my wife and daughters ask me about a story that’s been discussed on PB, the week before… but has just popped up on their feeds.
It's also generally ahead of government and politicians - I've sometimes seen policy or political ideas on here that are picked up by MPs a few days or weeks later.
Bit rum of Nigel just to say 'dunno' when asked about the medical safety of paracetamol. Do we take from this that his government will simply refuse to offer health advice when in office? How will that work if we have another Covid-like crisis?
Not pissing off the Mad King is more important than being straight with the British public.
How can anyone be 'phobic' towards Starmer? He's a grey suit, and there are far, far worse people in, and around politics.
He's not very good at the job, but that's little reason to feel 'phobic' towards him.
It's also interesting that many of the responses agreeing come from people who like Farage, who is a far worse person, and whose ideas are disastrous for this country.
I agree on Starmer not being inspirational and being cautious to a fault - an aspiring technocrat when we need something beyond; even those here opposed to him often complain that he is too indecisive. But he also been notably competent at foreign affairs so far.
I think the Cons and RefUK are phobic towards Starmer, 1) Because the biggest threat they have is that he succeeds, and it works, and 2) Because they have little or nothing to offer themselves, so they have no option other than relying on personality politics.
Personally, I still think we will not be in a position to judge any outcome for 2 years from the Election, and even then it will only be straws in the wind.
His lack of communication cut-through so that the battle is on his home ground eg currently Workers' and Renters' Rights, and reluctance to go for the Opposition in a consistent, brutal manner, makes him his own worst enemy.
Also, the media is tribal as it always is, and chunks of it are now nakedly political.
Among people I know, Starmer is more of a joke than hated.
The endless piling on of regulation and then discovering that the government is ever more unable to do anything without the permission of a court is the most commented.
Which isn’t just about A/C - it also explains how rules on A/C interact with rules on building ventilation and fire safety to make new builds more expensive and less dense. And why the windows keep getting pokier. All because of he cult of “one more extra regulation - and regulations cost nothing”
That's a great article.
The Part O building regulations do seem egregiously bad. Passive house design tends to maximise glazing and solar gain, so it's bizarre to see regulations that explicitly forbid that design.
Solar gain would be good in a cool, sunny climate but not such a good idea for summer in a warming climate. So a good passive design would be well-insulated, utilizing waste appliance heat and occupants heat output to maintain temperature in winter and be shaded from direct sunlight to minimize solar gain in summer so you don't roast.
Morning all, More in Common with a bit of an 'interesting' weekly poll. A tightening Some shifts in this week's voting intention as Reform’s lead over Labour narrows again: now down to just 3pts. With both Labour and Tories up
➡️ REF UK 28% (-3) 🌹 LAB 25% (+3) 🌳 CON 20% (+2) 🔶 LIB DEM 13% (-1) 🌍 GREEN 8% (nc) 🟡 SNP 3% (nc)
N=2055 |19-22/9|Change w 15/9
Hmm. I wonder if that’s a reaction to Reform’s “deport the settled” proposal. If so, you called it correctly. Farage went too far
Tho they’re still in the lead
I don't think so tbf, the fieldwork only catches the announcement at the very end. We will call it noise unless further polling confirms a trend
Yes in that case perhaps just a rogue. Hard to see anything that could cause Lab and Con to both ascend
The late Sir Bob Worcester said it can take about two weeks for events to filter into the voting intention figures, so this could be a result of Reform’s conference where they put vaccine deniers and Lucy Letby front and centre.
I note that PB is nearly always ahead of the Facebook & TikTok curve - the number of times my wife and daughters ask me about a story that’s been discussed on PB, the week before… but has just popped up on their feeds.
It's also generally ahead of government and politicians - I've sometimes seen policy or political ideas on here that are picked up by MPs a few days or weeks later.
Likewise the media. I've seen memes and stories and jokes generated on here, then a few days later they appear in extremely prestigious papers - The Spectator, the Daily Telegraph - sometimes basically verbatim. Shameless
In Ukraine, it looks like the great Dobropillia "breakthrough" the Russians achieved a month or so ago is about to turn into an encirclement of the Russian forces that made the advance.
Insincere Sir Keir is a complete hypocrite personally and professionally. He’s like a bent copper or a snidey bullying teacher, and that’s why the public seem to hate him. Strange to me that some people just see him as bland and inoffensive.
Who the feck flagged this comment by @isam? It is epicene and pathetic
"Oh, miss miss, someone's being mean about Sir Keir"
The PB Lefties and the Centrist Dorks need to grow up
Comments
Transcript https://people.com/everything-jimmy-kimmel-said-return-to-abc-full-transcript-monologue-11816007
Who is leaking from within labour ?
If this is not the case, I apologise unreservedly and withdraw all my comments about Yougov's methodology in recent weeks.
I do not withdraw my comments about Find Out Now's Likert Scale, as that was bobbins.
So, maybe, if it's anything, yeah, it could be the state visit. Or could it be the big Tommy Robinson rally putting people off?
28/25/20/13/8 would make for a MUCH more interesting election for all 5 though......!
The FCC chair explicitly threatened ABC, and they took Kimmel off the air.
Fox News suggested killing homeless people. Nothing.
Last night they said they should bomb the UN. Silence.
Also, it may be that Reform were literally the only party we heard anything from over the summer.
This is why I've mused before as to whether GE2024 was not great triumph for them, but a huge missed opportunity. If they could have leapfrogged the Tories into second place, and become His Majesty's Loyal Opposition, then it would have shattered that perception. They fell short.
It is not impossible the LDs could even become the main centre right party as the Liberals are in Australia, in coalition with the conservative Nationals, in Japan and in the Netherlands. Though that is much less likely
Prime suspects are likely to include the majority of the Labour Party membership
I would be very worried in no 10 if someone can leak an e mail from their lawyers
Drachinifel (naval history, 560k subs, 300m views) commented on Monetisation recently, and amongst his four streams, Drachinifel's Drydock is the one that monetises best now. The four are:
5 Minute Guides: a short weekly summary of a ship or class of ships.
Rum Ration: Midweek, one topic in depth 30-60 minutes.
Fun Friday: Something different. Variable length. Last week was Lego Models in War Gaming.
Drydock: Q&A about previous videos, where he takes questions and gives 2-15 minute answers. This one can be 1-6 hours of content in 1 or 2 episodes.
He's up to 370 drydocks and 460 Guides.
My impression is that the best creators move elsewhere where they won't be bent over and BFONTed, and use Youtube as a promotional platform, since it is so capricious. It's just like the optimisation games that Google used to play.
But my comment above was more directed to the right in general, of which journalists like Pollard are an important part, and have a potentially outsized role to play in terms of reflecting on the recent past.
John Hayes, for example, has signed (and was a mentioned possible)
Labour just with a 3% gap with Reform which could easily be eliminated with tactical votes in Labour seats from the 8% Green and 13% LD votes
2. The regulator threatened ABC, it didn’t warn them
3 & 6. The affiliates involved are those that imminently require FCC approval of a pending transaction
Most people in politics and political media take their long summers seriously, and they didn’t get one last year because of the July election.
While the cat’s away…
Political parties can't get a Saudi Sugar Daddy as easily as a Football Club.
Interesting that movement has been to both Lab and Con.
They lost so very badly, and they lost so very badly against such a poor opponent. The focus on the poor opponent, rather than the losing very badly will not serve them well.
As to Labour the problem is, who replaces Starmer? I'd struggle to find a decent replacement for Reeves as Chancellor, so doubling the difficulty in terms of finding a new PM doesn't seem like the obvious route to recovery for them.
Any potential replacements need to have a clear idea of what they would change, otherwise they would be at least as bad as the incumbents, drifting with no purpose.
Full of gossip, preening and attacks on the Biden family, 107 Days is the most interesting account of total failure you will ever read
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/gift/48cf72edfafcc620
That is the paywall-dodging gift link.
It is more his party lost a big regional election in Buenos Aires over opposition to his cuts and the markets fear he cannot continue his reforms, hence Trump may give him extra funds to shore him up
The stories are fascinating. And quite disturbing
He's had a fair amount of pushback, even from a few Republicans, and TACOed.
He's not very good at the job, but that's little reason to feel 'phobic' towards him.
It's also interesting that many of the responses agreeing come from people who like Farage, who is a far worse person, and whose ideas are disastrous for this country.
Ryan Routh plunged pen into his neck as he was found guilty of trying to assassinate then-Republican presidential candidate
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/us/news/2025/09/23/ryan-routh-guilty-donald-trump-assassination-attempt/ (£££)
Not sure if my own general disconnection with most media is indicative of a trend, but I remember a few years ago being astonished two men not that much older than me on ITV (Rageh Omaar[sp] was one) were surprised that YouTube viewing was either bigger than TV or getting that way.
I'm enjoying DS9 repeats right now, but I barely watch TV beyond that and bits of news. YouTube has plenty of history videos and other things I want, rather than the stuff the BBC creates, which is almost always something I don't want to watch.
Number of hangings carried out between January and September is most in more than three decades, activists say
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2025/09/23/iran-executes-at-least-1000-people-mass-killing-campaign/ (£££)
Both are so bland. It’s like hating okish vanilla ice cream.
Both led to huge increases in inflation and the cost of living - the second hugely so with energy. No matter who had been in power for those events, they were going to carry the can.
Add in the length of time of Tory or Tory-LD power then it was also obvious that "let Labour have a go" would be a winner. Sadly Labour spent 14 years complaining about everything and coming up with precisely zero ideas about how to change things.
Yes there is a need to the right to look critically at their period in government, but to ignore points (1) and (2) is insane.
It makes sense however. If you believe in charisma or charm - and I do believe these exist, however nebulous - then surely it is possible some people have anti-charisma or “negative charm”. Their persona actively annoys, enrages people just because of how they present
Starmer has anti-charisma and negative charm. This is what makes him even less popular than Boris. Boris had plenty of haters but also plenty of admirers. Boris is charismatic (to some), he can make even his enemies laugh. He’s funny
Starmer has none of that. He has no upside to compensate for the flaws
Having Lucy Letby up on stage lauded as a hero really would have been a bold move.
I suspect that the increased unsubtlety from Trump is starting to harm Reform as well. Brits have a settled opinion on the US administration that's been put into increased focus by the State visit - and all opposition parties are happily tying Farage and Reform to this. Farage squirming today on the links between paracetamol and autism won't help either.
I think the Cons and RefUK are phobic towards Starmer, 1) Because the biggest threat they have is that he succeeds, and it works, and 2) Because they have little or nothing to offer themselves, so they have no option other than relying on personality politics.
Personally, I still think we will not be in a position to judge any outcome for 2 years from the Election, and even then it will only be straws in the wind.
His lack of communication cut-through so that the battle is on his home ground eg currently Workers' and Renters' Rights, and reluctance to go for the Opposition in a consistent, brutal manner, makes him his own worst enemy.
Also, the media is tribal as it always is, and chunks of it are now nakedly political.
Completely unconnectedly, the weary observation a couple of years ago that it would turn out that everyone was against genocide/ethnic cleansing/mass slaughter of the innocents (delete to taste) all along has come to pass.
https://x.com/wesstreeting/status/1970097845220016309
I do think that they can be a Janus party - say one thing nationally then fight tooth and nail against it locally (see house building etc). I think they have issues where liberal values collide with peoples rights (trans rights colliding with women's rights, for instance).
I think the Tories have a long road ahead before they are electable again and if Labour and Starmer don't improve god knows what will happen. The vast majority of the country don't want Reform in power (polls of 30% suggests 70% want someone else). Yet if we are not careful that's what's coming.
Reform will be mercilessly hammered from all sides during the campaign. They will however hold on to enough core vote to prevent a big Tory revival.
It's this sort of guff that'll make certain licence fee collection continues to decline
It's what every moggy has been waiting for. Strawberry-flavour cat food
https://www.sainsburys.co.uk/gol-ui/product/webbox-lick-e-puds-with-strawberry-cat-treat-5-x-15g
His featuring of "Pink Ladies" at his conference was an interesting one; he's too desperate for prominent women as headliners to be able to do much quality control.
I suspect that it might be the lack of deftness with which he handles political issues or principles. He is always telling us what he believes, and trading off this earnest image, but then contradicts himself. Blair could do this faux sincerity very well. Cameron could too, to a point. Starmer can’t land it at all. He comes off as being a tad holier-than-thou.
He also tries to do “strong and decisive” quite a bit (see all his ‘I won’t stand for it’ tweets) which feel inauthentic given his track record of being pretty weak and indecisive in government.
We might not have noticed some of this in different political times, but mainstream politicians come under a lot of pressure now at sounding inauthentic and “of the elite” and unfortunately for Starmer he fits that bill perfectly.
I think a Reform victory looks very rocky on the 28-32 polling, factoring in tactical voting, though it should win them plenty of seats and potentially a plurality. 35+ will likely see them with a decent enough margin (assuming there is still fragmentation on the left) to mitigate that enough to start looking like they could get a majority or very close to one.
They promised to be the “adults in the room”. Oh dear. They promised an end to Tory greed and grift - within a week they were engulfed in freebiegate. And on it goes
Voters REALLY hate hypocrisy. Especially if is dressed in vanity and piety
It’s probably one of the least lovable combinations of characteristics any human can have. And, unfortunately, Starmer has exactly that combination
We have a control experiment in Ireland. They also had an election in 2024, where the previous election was just before the pandemic. The main party of government - Fine Gael - had also been in power since coming to office in the wake of the financial crash, and started their period in government with austerity. Ireland also bore the costs of the pandemic and the inflation that followed the invasion of Ukraine. Fine Gael weren't nearly wiped out.
Now, sure, Ireland is currently benefiting from a bonanza of corporate tax income, but the country is still pretty unhappy. It has housing and healthcare crises that are arguably more acute than Britain's, and a similarly strong rate of population growth with high levels of immigration and asylum seeker arrivals. I'd argue that Mary Lou McDonald is a much more capable politician than Starmer, and I struggle to see the Fine Gael leader as more capable than Sunak.
So why did the Tories lose so badly when the incumbents in Ireland did not?
The Year of Three Prime Ministers has to rate very highly as a causal factor. I don't think it is possible to over exaggerate the damage that Liz Truss - and to an extent Boris Johnson - did to the Tories reputation for good government.
Secondly, the Rwanda policy failed. The Tories passed every piece of legislation necessary to implement the policy and then cut and run for an early election to avoid making the failure of the policy all the more obvious.
Thirdly, Brexit. The task of achieving Brexit overwhelmed government and crowded out all other priorities. Before Brexit the Tory government had a purpose - to balance the books and repair the economy. After Brexit the Tory government was directionless and lost.
With Starmer I see no hope, or chink of light. I see unrelenting banal authoritarianism and a straight fast track railway track to ruin.
Even if he lives to be as old as his mother, it’s pretty unlikely the current King will be there either.
I am one of those who admits to quite liking Boris, but also was on record as saying he should never be PM long before he got the job.
The endless piling on of regulation and then discovering that the government is ever more unable to do anything without the permission of a court is the most commented.
Just yesterday, I came across https://www.samdumitriu.com/p/legalise-ac
Which isn’t just about A/C - it also explains how rules on A/C interact with rules on building ventilation and fire safety to make new builds more expensive and less dense. And why the windows keep getting pokier. All because of he cult of “one more extra regulation - and regulations cost nothing”
No one can complain if they support the current voting system (both Labour and Tories do, I think).
Like (say) Sunak, May would have been a fairly competent, or even good, PM in ordinary times. Sadly, neither inherited ordinary times. In the case of May, she had the consequences of the Brexit vote and the ructions that caused in her own party. In Sunak's, the consequences of Covid and a party that had been in power for over a decade.
There’s so many things they could be doing that don’t cost money, but they’re more worried about the reaction from lawyers and public sector workers than that of the general public.
The Part O building regulations do seem egregiously bad. Passive house design tends to maximise glazing and solar gain, so it's bizarre to see regulations that explicitly forbid that design.
Against Starmer, he comes across as having both some of the insincerity of Blair/Cameron whilst also being dull like May/Brown/Major. The combination is something we haven't had in a while.
There is also a sliver of Trumpism in there. Last week Trump said hate your opponent, this week the Daily Mail brings out an I hate Starmer piece. There is a lot of this kind of reflection going on.
I think we have the sense that Leon uses this place as a proving ground for his Knappers' Gazette and Daily Dildo Pole pieces, so maybe his I hate Starmer schtick will be promoted up at some point.
His Franco and Pinochet were sound guys really along with his prior putsch the left posts, in that context, and in very close response to Trump's hate and root out the Radical Left Lunatics development does chill me, because it is likely in tune with what his paymasters and his paymasters' paymasters want.
The idea of a putsch seems close and real and these guys are preparing to fall in line with it, as they did for Tommy's rally. Worrying times.
That would be about the same vote share that propelled the Lib Dems to junior coalition partner status in 2010.
The more Farage falls down the rabbit hole on things like this the more he pushes away the very voters he needs.
So a good passive design would be well-insulated, utilizing waste appliance heat and occupants heat output to maintain temperature in winter and be shaded from direct sunlight to minimize solar gain in summer so you don't roast.
"Oh, miss miss, someone's being mean about Sir Keir"
The PB Lefties and the Centrist Dorks need to grow up