As well as saying the US might still end up owning Greenland, he said NATO troops were not on the frontline in Afghanistan
Fuck this guy
Vain hope to expect the NYSE to be monitoring his entourages' dealing activities I suppose. Another 3 years of crises interspersed with brief calms , if not longer.
When I was travelling with work I had a collection of photos of outlandish toilet arrangements
A Vietnamese hotel had both a glass walled shower room in the middle of the room and glass toilet cubicle door with telephone in the cubicle Boutique hotel in B A I snuck into the suite to grab photos of the half-height glass surround en-suite with external urinal
Best hotel room for photos, got booked into the last available room somewhere in Bulgaria, Presidential Suite on the top floor, lounge with real fire, small ship themed balcony with ship's wheel, bathroom with shower, bath and jacuzzi the length of one side of the hotel and absolute priority over the lift ... when I pressed the button it stopped whatever it was doing, came to my floor and didn't stop anywhere else until it got to the floor I selected. I had a lot of fun with that
I don't want to bring this too close to home but anyone who has stayed at Groucho's will know that their toilet showers are exactly like the one shown in the Guardian infact it was probably taken there. These bohemian establishments!
Oddly enough I got told by a hairdresser friend a while ago that he'd heard it on very good authority that this was happening. I gave him all the reasons that I'd read on here why that was unlikely but he assured me this was definitely a goer. Hairdressers in my experience have always been the most reliable purveyors of gossip -though not usually political -and he has never so far been wrong. I hope it doesn't happen but I fear it will.
@SamCoatesSky EXC: Could Andy Burnham be on the brink of becoming a member of the Parliament? Well he faces a BIG hurdle. There is a new rule - introduced in the 2026 Labour rule book https://labour.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/Rule-Book-2026.pdf About Mayors wanting to become MP. It says: “Directly Elected Mayors and Police and Crime Commissioners must seek the express permission of the NEC/SEC/WEC (as applicable) before seeking nomination as Labour candidates for the Westminster Parliament. The NEC/SEC/WEC’s decision shall be final” Andy Burnham would have to stand down as Metro Mayor of Manchester, triggering an election for that post which Labour is not guaranteed to win and will cost hundreds of thousands of pounds. So these are the grounds that could be used to block Burnham by the NEC. I’m told Morgan McSweeny thinks he’s got the NEC sewn up to block Burnham. But you never quite know. If Burnham is granted permission to apply for the seat, the NEC does a long and a shortlist. The long list over email, then the shortlisting is done by a panel. The panel has 3 members of the NEC, one member of the board and a local constituency rep. The panel is chosen by the office of the general secretary, Hollie Ridley, who is close to Morgan, decides the panel. So it’s far from clear he wins this
There's the possibility that such a stitch up is downright counterproductive.
I'll be surprised if there is not a stitch up of some kind. It's in McSweeney's DNA to stitch people up. And despite his fallout with Streeting, McSweeney knows that Burnham will challenge Starmer given a chance and that he'll be out of a job when Burnham wins.
However, in the event of a stitch up, there will be a huge backlash within Labour. There would still be a challenge to Starmer after disasterous May results. The backlash will mean that whoever runs as the Stop Streeting candidate of the soft left will get added benefit from Burnham's endorsement. And Gwynne's departure means that Burnham might just choose to resign and seek the MP nomination anyway, in order just to provoke a stitch up, having done a deal to receive a senior Cabinet post (via being made a Lord) by however he chooses to endorse should they win. Burnham will become a modern day Warwick the Kingmaker (or Queenmaker.)
Anyway, it's not necessarily the case that the odds for Rayner and Miliband should drift that much in response to the news of Gwynne's departure. By contrast, this is definitely bad news for Streeting. The only good outcome for Streeting would be if Burnham got the Labour nomination but failed to win the by-election.
Apart from a direct stitch up, a more subtle way of stitching up Burnham would be for the gauntlet of a leadership challenge to be thrown down by someone before a by-election took place. But if Gwynne resigns imminently, then it would be hard for the by-election to be delayed beyond May, and I don't think anyone would dare challenge Starmer before May because their disloyalty will then become the excuse for poor May results and they'll transform themselves into the scapegoat. So I'd discount the likelihood of this scenario.
Starmer maybe rightly doesn’t take bait each time but he needs an outrider - a semi-licensed “off message” attack dog - to make Haw-Haw Farage pay for sucking up to the guy who denigrates British war dead.
Oddly enough I got told by a hairdresser friend a while ago that he'd heard it on very good authority that this was happening. I gave him all the reasons that I'd read on here why that was unlikely but he assured me this was definitely a goer. Hairdressers in my experience have always been the most reliable purveyors of gossip -though not usually political -and he has never so far been wrong. I hope it doesn't happen but I fear it will.
Starmer maybe rightly doesn’t take bait each time but he needs an outrider - a semi-licensed “off message” attack dog - to make Haw-Haw Farage pay for sucking up to the guy who denigrates British war dead.
I see that GBNews are developing their USA audience
On an article entitled "Canada 'plots guerilla tactics' to prevent American attack as US defence plans drawn up for first time in a CENTURY" a commenter asserts:
"What a risible, CCP owned, WEF acolyte, fool and lickspittal Carney is! Selling out Canada’s freedom to China and attempting to make the USA a pariah country!
Oddly enough I got told by a hairdresser friend a while ago that he'd heard it on very good authority that this was happening. I gave him all the reasons that I'd read on here why that was unlikely but he assured me this was definitely a goer. Hairdressers in my experience have always been the most reliable purveyors of gossip -though not usually political -and he has never so far been wrong. I hope it doesn't happen but I fear it will.
Albanians are dressing hair nowadays?
Someone told the Albanians that the Gay Trans Illegal Alien Immigrant AIs were coming for the cab drivers first (see Waymo). So they retrained.
Oddly enough I got told by a hairdresser friend a while ago that he'd heard it on very good authority that this was happening. I gave him all the reasons that I'd read on here why that was unlikely but he assured me this was definitely a goer. Hairdressers in my experience have always been the most reliable purveyors of gossip -though not usually political -and he has never so far been wrong. I hope it doesn't happen but I fear it will.
Starmer maybe rightly doesn’t take bait each time but he needs an outrider - a semi-licensed “off message” attack dog - to make Haw-Haw Farage pay for sucking up to the guy who denigrates British war dead.
Oddly enough I got told by a hairdresser friend a while ago that he'd heard it on very good authority that this was happening. I gave him all the reasons that I'd read on here why that was unlikely but he assured me this was definitely a goer. Hairdressers in my experience have always been the most reliable purveyors of gossip -though not usually political -and he has never so far been wrong. I hope it doesn't happen but I fear it will.
Albanians are dressing hair nowadays?
This one is solid Mancunion. Born in Longsight!
Could’ve been worse, they could have been from Levenshulme or Trashton.
1) would he be better than SKS? 2) would he be better at retaining Labour seats than an SKS lead Labour party in the next election?
I suspect the answer to both those questions is that neither would be difficult to achieve...
Starmer is a do-nothing PM, which isn't doing him, Labour, or the country any favours.
Burnham has said very little about what his alternative policy programme for the country is. There's lots of potential for him to be a do-all-the-wrong-things PM, a Labour mini-Truss. It's a lot easier to make things worse than people realise.
Burnham's outburst in the run up to the budget along the lines of "why do we even care about what the bond market thinks anyway" is sufficient to tell you that a Burnham premiership would almost certainly be exceptionally short and painful.
All the evidence is that he's a fully committed believer in the magic money tree, who hasn't yet realised that the party ended in 2008, and we're now well into the hangover.
Truss was at least trying to achieve growth, in the hope that it would start to bring in more tax revenue to offset the losses from her tax cuts - a kind of fiscal version of diving an aircraft as the first step to pull off a loop the loop. We'll never know if she would have made it, as her party saw the ground heading towards them, panicked, threw her out of the cockpit and pulled out of the dive.
Burnham is going to try the dive without any intention off pulling off a loop. He's just hoping that by the time the ground arrives it will be someone else's problem. The problem is that all he'll have round him are people cheerleading for "more nose down now" and "look how fast we're going - isn't it great!".
The reason I name-checked Truss was precisely this sense I get from Burnham that he thinks he can change the rules of the game, but that he doesn't understand what the consequences would be.
I think Polanski has a much better understanding of what the constraints are than Burnham does, and would be less risky with respect to the bond markets.
To be honest I had hoped Burnham was misquoted or at least quoted out of context. Because it is crazy view to have - and I did not think he was that daft. US gets to do what it does because of the Dollar privilege. Everyone else, like James Carville, suggested should be scared of the bond market.
That doesn’t mean to say a state can’t be ambitious or work within the constraints - these funds have to park their money somewhere. There are ways of working with the market to invest in the sort of things left of centre Governments want to do (and indeed do what right of centre governments want to do with regard tax and growth) or at least not scaring the sh!t out of them. But if you cut them out of the conversation they’ll just sit on their hands. A before you know it you are outlasted by a lettuce.
I see that GBNews are developing their USA audience
On an article entitled "Canada 'plots guerilla tactics' to prevent American attack as US defence plans drawn up for first time in a CENTURY" a commenter asserts:
"What a risible, CCP owned, WEF acolyte, fool and lickspittal Carney is! Selling out Canada’s freedom to China and attempting to make the USA a pariah country!
1) would he be better than SKS? 2) would he be better at retaining Labour seats than an SKS lead Labour party in the next election?
I suspect the answer to both those questions is that neither would be difficult to achieve...
Starmer is a do-nothing PM, which isn't doing him, Labour, or the country any favours.
Burnham has said very little about what his alternative policy programme for the country is. There's lots of potential for him to be a do-all-the-wrong-things PM, a Labour mini-Truss. It's a lot easier to make things worse than people realise.
Burnham's outburst in the run up to the budget along the lines of "why do we even care about what the bond market thinks anyway" is sufficient to tell you that a Burnham premiership would almost certainly be exceptionally short and painful.
All the evidence is that he's a fully committed believer in the magic money tree, who hasn't yet realised that the party ended in 2008, and we're now well into the hangover.
Truss was at least trying to achieve growth, in the hope that it would start to bring in more tax revenue to offset the losses from her tax cuts - a kind of fiscal version of diving an aircraft as the first step to pull off a loop the loop. We'll never know if she would have made it, as her party saw the ground heading towards them, panicked, threw her out of the cockpit and pulled out of the dive.
Burnham is going to try the dive without any intention off pulling off a loop. He's just hoping that by the time the ground arrives it will be someone else's problem. The problem is that all he'll have round him are people cheerleading for "more nose down now" and "look how fast we're going - isn't it great!".
The reason I name-checked Truss was precisely this sense I get from Burnham that he thinks he can change the rules of the game, but that he doesn't understand what the consequences would be.
I think Polanski has a much better understanding of what the constraints are than Burnham does, and would be less risky with respect to the bond markets.
To be honest I had hoped Burnham was misquoted or at least quoted out of context. Because it is crazy view to have - and I did not think he was that daft. US gets to do what it does because of the Dollar privilege. Everyone else, like James Carville, suggested should be scared of the bond market.
That doesn’t mean to say a state can’t be ambitious or work within the constraints - these funds have to park their money somewhere. There are ways of working with the market to invest in the sort of things left of centre Governments want to do (and indeed do what right of centre governments want to do with regard tax and growth) or at least not scaring the sh!t out of them. But if you cut them out of the conversation they’ll just sit on their hands. A before you know it you are outlasted by a lettuce.
Not so much that, as a default gets priced in. And runaway inflation from money printing is just another way to default.
During the early stages of the Greek Crisis there was an editorial in the Guardian - which took the view that borrowing at the same rate as Germany was a basic (collective) democratic human right. If the people voted for borrowing, they must have their cheap money.
BREAKING: Ukrainian, Russian and US officials will hold their first trilateral talks to end Russia’s war, Volodymyr Zelensky says. The talks will take place in the United Arab Emirates on Friday and Saturday
From an American perspective, this is very much a feature and not a bug.
They’re the superpower, and they don’t like the idea of superior international law or external agreements. The high bar means that there needs to be significant bipartisan agreement that any given Treaty is squarely in the American interest.
Everyone else also knows this when negotiating with the Americans.
For Palestine/Israel, I'm not sure why European powers particularly need to be involved. Some of the unsavoury characters may well be better placed than democrats anyway, and the key is that the regional powers whose $ are needed and have local influence are represented, which it seems they are.
The issue is the ambitions beyond that conflict for those bored of peace.
BREAKING: Ukrainian, Russian and US officials will hold their first trilateral talks to end Russia’s war, Volodymyr Zelensky says. The talks will take place in the United Arab Emirates on Friday and Saturday
Oh wow.
Maybe I cancel my planned trip to go and watch the golf tomorrow.
I expect Burnham would do a bit better in by-election than you'd expect based on dire labour polling given he would be running under a backdrop of everyone saying he'd ultimately replace Starmer.
From an American perspective, this is very much a feature and not a bug.
They’re the superpower, and they don’t like the idea of superior international law or external agreements. The high bar means that there needs to be significant bipartisan agreement that any given Treaty is squarely in the American interest.
Everyone else also knows this when negotiating with the Americans.
From an American perspective, this is very much a feature and not a bug.
They’re the superpower, and they don’t like the idea of superior international law or external agreements. The high bar means that there needs to be significant bipartisan agreement that any given Treaty is squarely in the American interest.
Everyone else also knows this when negotiating with the Americans.
But what happens when Trump ignores it?
The Supreme Court asserts itself.
The US signs almost no international treaties for exactly this reason. They don’t need to, they can always be the bully in the room, and presidents of both parties have kept this up pretty much since WWII.
This is a very old fashioned ODI performance from England. In the olden days you took the score at 30 overs and doubled it. England are currently 135. SL got 271. This is going to be very close.
From an American perspective, this is very much a feature and not a bug.
They’re the superpower, and they don’t like the idea of superior international law or external agreements. The high bar means that there needs to be significant bipartisan agreement that any given Treaty is squarely in the American interest.
Everyone else also knows this when negotiating with the Americans.
But what happens when Trump ignores it?
The Supreme Court asserts itself.
The US signs almost no international treaties for exactly this reason. They don’t need to, they can always be the bully in the room, and presidents of both parties have kept this up pretty much since WWII.
Waiting on the Supreme Court to assert itself is like waiting for Godot.
Conservative amendment on social media ban for under 16s backed by the Lords - 261 - 150
Disgracefully authoritarian.
Nanny state Tories. Where will it end?
It is certainly a topic of conversation with our children who really struggle with their children's [16, 14, and 13] phone use both in school and elsewhere
It is very much backed by them and childrens mental health charities
So no benefits of learning and communication get lost?
And there’s no other options to investigate and try first?
It will all be in the detail
Wrong footing government and showing you are leading on the popular agenda from opposition, and actually achieving things, is exactly what is needed from opposition.
Wrong footing government and showing you are leading on the popular agenda from opposition, and actually achieving things… by doing away with investigations and any consideration of inherent vice, without bothering with pilots schemes, without observing what happens in Australia as time passes, just diving straight in based on seeing something on morning television and told is hugely popular in voodoo polls, is exactly THE WRONG WAY to show you are ready again for power.
Do you see my point?
No
I followed it closely when proposed, argued and introduced in Australia. I can tell you the key piece of detail straight away - it’s not a ban on under sixteens having access to phones, devices or internet use - it’s merely a ban on platforms giving under sixteens accounts. The rest is still parenting.
So where some children will have better quality of life, better quality education and self learning, other children will be deprived this, so I liken it to those parents who banned Rock n Roll in the house, believing they were doing good. Banning Rock n Roll was actual bizarre, bad parenting.
And the real kicker here is the actual problem - predatory and addictive algorithms - problem applies to everyone, all ages, not just children. Where is the actual policy needed?
I have already said the answer will be in the detail but there is overwhelming parental support
One of my children and his wife is in a constant battle with their children over the time on line and also their peer pressure to keep in 24/7 touch including often overnight
That's always the big problem - you can have well-meaning parents but if every other kid at school has an e-scooter (actually illegal to use) and that's the way they meet up pals, what can you do?
What this legislation needs paired with is an extensive and high-quality public information campaign making it clear what is supposed to be normal and appropriate behaviour. That seems seriously lacking at the moment for some reason - particularly changes to things like the Highway Code. There's more to governance than passing laws.
Peer pressure in teenagers is very much part of the problem, and there is no way parents can control their behaviour when they are together or communicating as I said sometimes overnight
Parents can put restrictions on devices and set controls, including locking devices overnight if required.
My daughter has a phone with restrictions, including the restriction that I can see what apps she is using, that to install an app requires my consent (and we have consented to TikTok which she uses on rules my wife set). I can see how long she has spent on each app and set restrictions of time limits and time eg overnight or school hours where the device is locked.
Poor behaviour can result in the device being locked as a punishment too.
If that’s how things are in a libertarian household, I fear for all the other kids….
LOL!
Libertarian means that the state does not set overly burdensome regulations, not that parents don't.
If the state was monitoring like I am for my kids, then I would be very concerned at that authoritarianism - but I bought the phone for her and gave it to her with those conditions. She can accept our conditions, or not have the restrictions.
BREAKING: Ukrainian, Russian and US officials will hold their first trilateral talks to end Russia’s war, Volodymyr Zelensky says. The talks will take place in the United Arab Emirates on Friday and Saturday
2 v 1. I'd want at least a Macron, Carney or Tusk in the room too.
Tell me again what’s so uniquely bad about Donald Trump?
Trump on NATO: "I've always said, will they be there if we ever needed them? That's really the ultimate test. I'm not sure of that. We've never needed them. They'll say they sent some troops to Afghanistan and this or that. And they did. They stayed a little back, off the front lines."
"Assisted dying bill backers say it is ‘near impossible’ it will pass House of Lords Exclusive: Legislation thought unlikely even to be put to vote before timing out after delay tactics by opponents"
"Assisted dying bill backers say it is ‘near impossible’ it will pass House of Lords Exclusive: Legislation thought unlikely even to be put to vote before timing out after delay tactics by opponents"
Labour. Cancelling elections. Abandoning Jury trials. Bringing in blasphemy laws
Tell me again what’s so uniquely bad about Donald Trump?
It hadn't taken you long to remind us of your obnoxious sh*ittyness.
If you want to know how much of the US currently sees the UK, then @Leon is right.
If I want to know what people misled by alt right propaganda think, I can look at much of the US or Leon or you. If I want to know what’s so bad about Donald Trump, I can look at the real world.
"Assisted dying bill backers say it is ‘near impossible’ it will pass House of Lords Exclusive: Legislation thought unlikely even to be put to vote before timing out after delay tactics by opponents"
"Assisted dying bill backers say it is ‘near impossible’ it will pass House of Lords Exclusive: Legislation thought unlikely even to be put to vote before timing out after delay tactics by opponents"
You have to get both houses to agree. I don't know if going thru the House of Commons twice is enough to force it thru: I've been told that the Salisbury Convention isn't applicable to private members' bills, which means the HoC can't force it thru the HoL nonconsensually.
Labour. Cancelling elections. Abandoning Jury trials. Bringing in blasphemy laws
Tell me again what’s so uniquely bad about Donald Trump?
It hadn't taken you long to remind us of your obnoxious sh*ittyness.
I’ve often wondered if you are brain damaged. I don’t mean that personally. Just a holistic view of your remarks over several years. You write and talk like someone who only has a basic spinal cord and rudimentary nervous system. Like a kind of human newt - or perhaps a sea slug that farts as a means of propulsion
Comments
Another 3 years of crises interspersed with brief calms , if not longer.
He really is scum.
"In this increasingly scary and unpredictable world, how reassuringly familiar it is to see Crawley nick off early."
Leon and William will be along soon to tell you why Trump’s comments are awesome.
However, in the event of a stitch up, there will be a huge backlash within Labour. There would still be a challenge to Starmer after disasterous May results. The backlash will mean that whoever runs as the Stop Streeting candidate of the soft left will get added benefit from Burnham's endorsement. And Gwynne's departure means that Burnham might just choose to resign and seek the MP nomination anyway, in order just to provoke a stitch up, having done a deal to receive a senior Cabinet post (via being made a Lord) by however he chooses to endorse should they win. Burnham will become a modern day Warwick the Kingmaker (or Queenmaker.)
Anyway, it's not necessarily the case that the odds for Rayner and Miliband should drift that much in response to the news of Gwynne's departure. By contrast, this is definitely bad news for Streeting. The only good outcome for Streeting would be if Burnham got the Labour nomination but failed to win the by-election.
Apart from a direct stitch up, a more subtle way of stitching up Burnham would be for the gauntlet of a leadership challenge to be thrown down by someone before a by-election took place. But if Gwynne resigns imminently, then it would be hard for the by-election to be delayed beyond May, and I don't think anyone would dare challenge Starmer before May because their disloyalty will then become the excuse for poor May results and they'll transform themselves into the scapegoat. So I'd discount the likelihood of this scenario.
That list will be a whole lot shorter, if it's still around in three years' time.
Starmer maybe rightly doesn’t take bait each time but he needs an outrider - a semi-licensed “off message” attack dog - to make Haw-Haw Farage pay for sucking up to the guy who denigrates British war dead.
https://bsky.app/profile/rafaelbehr.bsky.social/post/3mczd4sroks2c
Obviously a backhanded compliment to NATO troops.
Reform and the rest of the right wing Trump supporters are plastic patriots . When will the UK media nail the bunch of traitors to the wall .
No doubt lapped up by the usual Trump fluffers on this side of the pond.
Karoline Leavitt announced that Belgium joined Trump’s ‘Board of Peace’. Belgium’s foreign minister responds.
https://x.com/RonFilipkowski/status/2014314854530568548
On an article entitled "Canada 'plots guerilla tactics' to prevent American attack as US defence plans drawn up for first time in a CENTURY" a commenter asserts:
"What a risible, CCP owned, WEF acolyte, fool and lickspittal Carney is! Selling out Canada’s freedom to China and attempting to make the USA a pariah country!
The WEF Agenda to destroy the West, with its installed glove puppet order takers, has never been more obvious!"
https://www.gbnews.com/news/world/canada-defence-plans-donald-trump-southern-border-attack?__vfz=medium=comment_share|sharer_uuid=00000000-0000-4000-8000-02f0587d8a59#vf-d5b39f2f-7b45-4797-9962-90a29ae8ecb5
Now we know.
https://people.com/oscars-2026-nominations-list-11883901
That doesn’t mean to say a state can’t be ambitious or work within the constraints - these funds have to park their money somewhere. There are ways of working with the market to invest in the sort of things left of centre Governments want to do (and indeed do what right of centre governments want to do with regard tax and growth) or at least not scaring the sh!t out of them. But if you cut them out of the conversation they’ll just sit on their hands. A before you know it you are outlasted by a lettuce.
Seems laser targetted at him personally.
https://x.com/hering_david/status/2014258388587213255?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q
During the early stages of the Greek Crisis there was an editorial in the Guardian - which took the view that borrowing at the same rate as Germany was a basic (collective) democratic human right. If the people voted for borrowing, they must have their cheap money.
BREAKING: Ukrainian, Russian and US officials will hold their first trilateral talks to end Russia’s war, Volodymyr Zelensky says.
The talks will take place in the United Arab Emirates on Friday and Saturday
They’re the superpower, and they don’t like the idea of superior international law or external agreements. The high bar means that there needs to be significant bipartisan agreement that any given Treaty is squarely in the American interest.
Everyone else also knows this when negotiating with the Americans.
The issue is the ambitions beyond that conflict for those bored of peace.
Maybe I cancel my planned trip to go and watch the golf tomorrow.
The US signs almost no international treaties for exactly this reason. They don’t need to, they can always be the bully in the room, and presidents of both parties have kept this up pretty much since WWII.
https://x.com/trussliz/status/2010056953096224961
The model has failed.
The US needs to take the next step.
The United Nations building in New York should be closed down.
Libertarian means that the state does not set overly burdensome regulations, not that parents don't.
If the state was monitoring like I am for my kids, then I would be very concerned at that authoritarianism - but I bought the phone for her and gave it to her with those conditions. She can accept our conditions, or not have the restrictions.
Parents should feel free to be parents.
Current score 142/2, England need 130 runs from 110 balls.
Tell me again what’s so uniquely bad about Donald Trump?
@VoteHub
NEWS — Trump plans to campaign in the 2026 midterms like he’s on the ballot, turning control of Congress into a referendum on his presidency.
Source: @nypost
I'm Shocked! Shocked!
https://x.com/i/status/2014347207902671049
"Assisted dying bill backers say it is ‘near impossible’ it will pass House of Lords
Exclusive: Legislation thought unlikely even to be put to vote before timing out after delay tactics by opponents"
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2026/jan/22/assisted-dying-bill-near-impossible-pass-house-of-lords
- complaining about cancelling elections;
- complaining about abandoning jury trials; or
- complaining about bringing in blasphemy laws
that you consider shitty?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HnpY2vCwvU0
Westminster Voting Intention:
RFM: 32% (+4)
CON: 18% (-1)
GRN: 17% (-1)
LAB: 14% (-1)
LDM: 11% (-1)
SNP: 3% (=)
Via @FindoutnowUK
, 21 Jan.
Changes w/ 14 Jan.
RFM: 32% (+4)
CON: 18% (-1)
GRN: 17% (-1)
LAB: 14% (-1)
LDM: 11% (-1)
SNP: 3% (=)
Like I said, this is not meant as an insult
I can’t work it out. Why are they doing this? It’s so mystifying
RFM: 32% (+4)
CON: 18% (-1)
GRN: 17% (-1)
LAB: 14% (-1)
LDM: 11% (-1)
SNP: 3% (=)
https://x.com/bohuslavskakate/status/2014360094234816991
Ref 434
Green 54
SNP 44
LD 41
Con 21
Lab 20
(Gorton and Denton goes Green on that split, FWIW)