Skip to content

Fools Rusholme in? – politicalbetting.com

124»

Comments

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 104,608

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Andy_JS said:

    I can see some Reform and Tory supporters in Rusholme voting for the Greens since neither of those parties stands a chance of winning.

    No Tory is ever going to vote for the Marxist Polanski and his party and no Reform vote will vote for uber woke Polanski's party either
    You really don’t understand the voters, do you?
    I know Tory and Reform voters despise the Polanski Greens far more than they hate Burnham
    A few in your circle maybe but that is anecdotal
    What Tory or Reform voter is going to vote for a far left Marxist Republican who wants massive tax hikes, unlimited spending, unlimited immigration and is uber woke and wants to rejoin the EU?
    You are just silly

    Tactical voting is very real
    I would vote for any party over the far left Greens as would any sane Tory
    Stop insulting conservatives who see tactical voting as legitimate
    Any Conservative considering voting for the Polanski led Greens should certainly be expelled from the party if a member and should not be allowed to call themselves a Conservative if just a voter. As clearly anyone voting for Polanski and his awful party has not a Tory bone in his body
    You cannot call yourself a Conservative because you voted for a party that wants to break up the UK.
    I voted for 4 Tories on a 6 vote ballot and 2 Plaid as they were the only other party who bothered to stand so still technically I mainly voted for unionist candidates
    And Harold Shipman mainly didn't kill his patients.
    As I've noted before, the lead prosecutor in that case recounted an anecdote from a medical member of the prosecution team, who noted drily that when Shipman wasn't murdering his patients he was an extremely competent and caring doctor.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 104,608

    dixiedean said:

    If Andy Burnham had any sense he would continue to serve his term out as a successful mayor and wait until after the next general election, to take over from whomever loses it. Becoming Prime Minister now is not very appealing since there is no money in the coffers and the party is divided and lacking realism. Labour could regain power as part of a coalition in about 2031. We may have to wait until 2029 for the next election but we won't be waiting that much longer for the one after I reckon.

    He'd be 59 by the next election and possibly facing 5 years as LOTO.
    Is that really a plan?
    His time was Gorton and Denton.
    But the control freaks in Labour HQ weren't having it.
    Not for the first time in history, the control freaks seem freakishly terrible at controlling stuff.
    Strengths often become weaknesses. Confidence to arrogance. Caution to indecisiveness. A strong cover drive to an edge to slip.
  • prh47bridgeprh47bridge Posts: 514
    viewcode said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Nick Watt on Newsnight: senior Labour source says two-thirds of cabinet have told Starmer he needs to go soon.

    "Cabinet" is not a fixed number. Are we talking about the Minister ministers, or everybody including the Parliamentary undersecretaries?
    Cabinet is very much a fixed number. If the source said two-thirds of the government, that is not a fixed number, but cabinet is. The members of the cabinet are listed at https://members.parliament.uk/government/cabinet
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 40,950
    "@ElectionMapsUK

    Result in Manchester Rusholme Constituency in the 2026 Local Elections:

    GRN: 52.1%
    LAB: 30.6%
    RFM: 6.3%
    WPB: 5.1%
    LDM: 3.0%
    CON: 2.8%
    CPB: 0.1%"

    https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/2054650555327205833
  • DoctorGDoctorG Posts: 847

    ohnotnow said:

    rcs1000 said:

    nico67 said:

    Ratters said:

    The biggest tragedy of this as a centre left liberal, is that Labour were in opposition for 14 years. Four election defeats. And they managed to scrape themselves to a huge majority where they shouldn't have been constrained on passing legislation, not if they were good at politics.

    And yet here we are, 22 months in, discussing how they best replace the PM who has become one of the least liked in history.

    And two of the four potential candidates to replace him are the same as those who contested the 2010 leadership election. And the king over the water not only lost that one, but also the 2015 leadership election.

    It's just so tragically useless.

    I really hope we get a surprise and someone unexpected comes through and wins . It’s bizarre that we’ll end up with two PMs , Johnson and Starmer who had big majorities and couldn’t even get close to serving a full term .

    Maybe this is just the new normal .
    No it’s not normal

    Starmer, in particular, just had to be a competent man with a plan. Given that he was DPP for years and they had 14 years in opposition, this expectation was entirely reasonable

    His failures on both counts are bizarre. I see only two policies where he’s shown real determination and a plan to battle through opposition. But those two policies were “assisted dying” and paying to give away the Chagos islands. The first was highly contentious and the second arguably treasonous

    It’s mad. Why those two? It’s not implausible Starmer is compromised in some way. If he isn’t compromised then he’s really quite dim, singularly unsuited to politics, and becoming DPP merely requires a paper shuffling apparatchik
    Never attribute to malice, that which might be otherwise explained by incompetence.

    Starmer is simply dim. And he's not even dim but cunning, he is just simply and irredeemably, dim
    I wouldn't say 'dim' - just a very narrow horizon. I somehow imagine him pondering over a menu - then ordering the same thing as last time. I think that's maybe my overriding picture of him - 'Same again'.
    "Peas again tonight, Norma?"
    Memories of "these peas are rounder" come flooding back

    Surely no puppet could possibly have been greyer than Major, but Starmer would nail it
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 40,950
    "How Labour can win again
    Working-class voters did not abandon the party – we have forced them to leave

    By Al Carns" (£)

    https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk-politics/2026/05/how-labour-can-win-again
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 29,253

    viewcode said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Nick Watt on Newsnight: senior Labour source says two-thirds of cabinet have told Starmer he needs to go soon.

    "Cabinet" is not a fixed number. Are we talking about the Minister ministers, or everybody including the Parliamentary undersecretaries?
    Cabinet is very much a fixed number. If the source said two-thirds of the government, that is not a fixed number, but cabinet is. The members of the cabinet are listed at https://members.parliament.uk/government/cabinet
    Fair point, but the news media are including the undersecretaries. For example Miatta Fahnbulleh (Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Devolution, Faith and Communities) is not in the Cabinet per se, but was included as a ministerial resignation. Hence my point and my question

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/c1e2n923v1lt?post=asset:9b681441-14af-4aee-b12b-ce53d622ffe9#post
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 29,253
    Andy_JS said:

    "How Labour can win again
    Working-class voters did not abandon the party – we have forced them to leave

    By Al Carns" (£)

    https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk-politics/2026/05/how-labour-can-win-again

    Unfortunately, my usual paywall bypass methods have stopped working. Care to summarise?
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 40,950
    "What kind of prime minister would Wes Streeting be?" (£)

    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/wes-streeting-prime-minister-vp2wl5sw8
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 29,253
    Andy_JS said:

    "What kind of prime minister would Wes Streeting be?" (£)

    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/wes-streeting-prime-minister-vp2wl5sw8

    Unfortunately, my usual paywall bypass methods have stopped working. Care to summarise?
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 40,950
    edited May 14
    For Burnham, it's Bootle or bust, according to this article.

    "Data reveal there is really only one safe seat for Burnham
    Greater Manchester mayor would have to secure Bootle seat to guarantee a path back to Parliament" (£)

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2026/05/12/data-reveal-only-one-safe-seat-for-burnham
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 29,253
    Andy_JS said:

    "How Labour can win again
    Working-class voters did not abandon the party – we have forced them to leave

    By Al Carns" (£)

    https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk-politics/2026/05/how-labour-can-win-again

    For all those of us who DON'T have a NS subscription, an AI summary of the text in that article is:

    "...The recent election results reflect a long-standing sentiment among working people that the system is failing them. Issues such as deindustrialization, austerity, Brexit, and COVID-19 contributed to widespread feelings of insecurity. People believe that working hard should guarantee a stable life, but economic and community instability prevents that. Carns argues that the interconnectedness of defence, economy, healthcare, and education underscores the fragility of the nation. Simplistic solutions from figures like Nigel Farage are appealing because they exploit those disillusioned by politics. But these proposals lack serious plans for the country's recovery and can lead to further division without addressing the root causes of insecurity faced by families..."

    In short, it's an article that is too long on sentiment and far too short on policies that will fix this. I don't care that he was in the Marines and can kick the crap out of me, he should have his arse slapped for such a lazy article. I KNOW PEOPLE ARE INSECURE AND THAT FARAGE IS OFFERING SIMPLISTIC SOLUTIONS. NOW TELL ME HOW TO FIX IT.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 29,253
    edited May 14
    viewcode said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "How Labour can win again
    Working-class voters did not abandon the party – we have forced them to leave

    By Al Carns" (£)

    https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk-politics/2026/05/how-labour-can-win-again

    For all those of us who DON'T have a NS subscription, an AI summary of the text in that article is:

    "...The recent election results reflect a long-standing sentiment among working people that the system is failing them. Issues such as deindustrialization, austerity, Brexit, and COVID-19 contributed to widespread feelings of insecurity. People believe that working hard should guarantee a stable life, but economic and community instability prevents that. Carns argues that the interconnectedness of defence, economy, healthcare, and education underscores the fragility of the nation. Simplistic solutions from figures like Nigel Farage are appealing because they exploit those disillusioned by politics. But these proposals lack serious plans for the country's recovery and can lead to further division without addressing the root causes of insecurity faced by families..."

    In short, it's an article that is too long on sentiment and far too short on policies that will fix this. I don't care that he was in the Marines and can kick the crap out of me, he should have his arse slapped for such a lazy article. I KNOW PEOPLE ARE INSECURE AND THAT FARAGE IS OFFERING SIMPLISTIC SOLUTIONS. NOW TELL ME HOW TO FIX IT.
    @TheScreamingEagles @TSE @rcs1000 , what's the site position on AI summaries of paywalled articles? I know cut-and-paste isn't allowed, but are AI summaries?
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 29,253
    "...will forever remember a very clever and kind and, crucially, normal friend going to work for the Labour party some years ago because he wanted to help then quitting like a year in and going "what the everliving fuck was that I never want to be near the Labour party ever again"..."

    https://bsky.app/profile/youngvulgarian.marieleconte.com/post/3mlpyvsq6cs2v
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 37,210

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Andy_JS said:

    I can see some Reform and Tory supporters in Rusholme voting for the Greens since neither of those parties stands a chance of winning.

    No Tory is ever going to vote for the Marxist Polanski and his party and no Reform vote will vote for uber woke Polanski's party either
    You really don’t understand the voters, do you?
    I know Tory and Reform voters despise the Polanski Greens far more than they hate Burnham
    A few in your circle maybe but that is anecdotal
    What Tory or Reform voter is going to vote for a far left Marxist Republican who wants massive tax hikes, unlimited spending, unlimited immigration and is uber woke and wants to rejoin the EU?
    You are just silly

    Tactical voting is very real
    I would vote for any party over the far left Greens as would any sane Tory
    I'd vote Green over Reform/Restore on the grounds that the Greens are going to deport me like the Re lot.

    I'm sane by the way, my mother had me tested.
    Missing word? Subtle TBBT reference.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 29,253
    edited May 14
    Andy_JS said:

    For Burnham, it's Bootle or bust, according to this article.

    "Data reveal there is really only one safe seat for Burnham
    Greater Manchester mayor would have to secure Bootle seat to guarantee a path back to Parliament" (£)

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2026/05/12/data-reveal-only-one-safe-seat-for-burnham

    Well, I looked in Pressreader but it wasn't there, so presumably it's an online-only article not in the print version. Grr.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 62,557
    Another morning, and still no-one has actually resigned or been fired from the Cabinet. Will today actually be the day?
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 18,005
    viewcode said:

    "...will forever remember a very clever and kind and, crucially, normal friend going to work for the Labour party some years ago because he wanted to help then quitting like a year in and going "what the everliving fuck was that I never want to be near the Labour party ever again"..."

    https://bsky.app/profile/youngvulgarian.marieleconte.com/post/3mlpyvsq6cs2v

    I think this is a common thing with organizations.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 37,210
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    nico67 said:

    Ratters said:

    The biggest tragedy of this as a centre left liberal, is that Labour were in opposition for 14 years. Four election defeats. And they managed to scrape themselves to a huge majority where they shouldn't have been constrained on passing legislation, not if they were good at politics.

    And yet here we are, 22 months in, discussing how they best replace the PM who has become one of the least liked in history.

    And two of the four potential candidates to replace him are the same as those who contested the 2010 leadership election. And the king over the water not only lost that one, but also the 2015 leadership election.

    It's just so tragically useless.

    I really hope we get a surprise and someone unexpected comes through and wins . It’s bizarre that we’ll end up with two PMs , Johnson and Starmer who had big majorities and couldn’t even get close to serving a full term .

    Maybe this is just the new normal .
    No it’s not normal

    Starmer, in particular, just had to be a competent man with a plan. Given that he was DPP for years and they had 14 years in opposition, this expectation was entirely reasonable

    His failures on both counts are bizarre. I see only two policies where he’s shown real determination and a plan to battle through opposition. But those two policies were “assisted dying” and paying to give away the Chagos islands. The first was highly contentious and the second arguably treasonous

    It’s mad. Why those two? It’s not implausible Starmer is compromised in some way. If he isn’t compromised then he’s really quite dim, singularly unsuited to politics, and becoming DPP merely requires a paper shuffling apparatchik
    Never attribute to malice, that which might be otherwise explained by incompetence.

    Starmer is simply dim. And he's not even dim but cunning, he is just simply and irredeemably, dim
    Can you really be dim and make it as a DPP?

    Good night.
    Yes.

    Also, it's possibly he has got supider as he's gotten older.
    I'd remind you of my prediction that Starmer would retire early following Wilson's example.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 37,210
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    nico67 said:

    Ratters said:

    The biggest tragedy of this as a centre left liberal, is that Labour were in opposition for 14 years. Four election defeats. And they managed to scrape themselves to a huge majority where they shouldn't have been constrained on passing legislation, not if they were good at politics.

    And yet here we are, 22 months in, discussing how they best replace the PM who has become one of the least liked in history.

    And two of the four potential candidates to replace him are the same as those who contested the 2010 leadership election. And the king over the water not only lost that one, but also the 2015 leadership election.

    It's just so tragically useless.

    I really hope we get a surprise and someone unexpected comes through and wins . It’s bizarre that we’ll end up with two PMs , Johnson and Starmer who had big majorities and couldn’t even get close to serving a full term .

    Maybe this is just the new normal .
    No it’s not normal

    Starmer, in particular, just had to be a competent man with a plan. Given that he was DPP for years and they had 14 years in opposition, this expectation was entirely reasonable

    His failures on both counts are bizarre. I see only two policies where he’s shown real determination and a plan to battle through opposition. But those two policies were “assisted dying” and paying to give away the Chagos islands. The first was highly contentious and the second arguably treasonous

    It’s mad. Why those two? It’s not implausible Starmer is compromised in some way. If he isn’t compromised then he’s really quite dim, singularly unsuited to politics, and becoming DPP merely requires a paper shuffling apparatchik
    Never attribute to malice, that which might be otherwise explained by incompetence.

    Starmer is simply dim. And he's not even dim but cunning, he is just simply and irredeemably, dim
    Can you really be dim and make it as a DPP?

    Good night.
    Yes.

    Also, it's possibly he has got supider as he's gotten older.
    I'd remind you of my prediction that Starmer would retire early following Wilson's example.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 18,005
    edited May 14
    Sandpit said:

    Another morning, and still no-one has actually resigned or been fired from the Cabinet. Will today actually be the day?

    I think Streeting will have to at this point, even if he doesn't have the votes yet he'd look a right chump going, "lol nvm"
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 37,210
    Andy_JS said:

    ohnotnow said:

    rcs1000 said:

    nico67 said:

    Ratters said:

    The biggest tragedy of this as a centre left liberal, is that Labour were in opposition for 14 years. Four election defeats. And they managed to scrape themselves to a huge majority where they shouldn't have been constrained on passing legislation, not if they were good at politics.

    And yet here we are, 22 months in, discussing how they best replace the PM who has become one of the least liked in history.

    And two of the four potential candidates to replace him are the same as those who contested the 2010 leadership election. And the king over the water not only lost that one, but also the 2015 leadership election.

    It's just so tragically useless.

    I really hope we get a surprise and someone unexpected comes through and wins . It’s bizarre that we’ll end up with two PMs , Johnson and Starmer who had big majorities and couldn’t even get close to serving a full term .

    Maybe this is just the new normal .
    No it’s not normal

    Starmer, in particular, just had to be a competent man with a plan. Given that he was DPP for years and they had 14 years in opposition, this expectation was entirely reasonable

    His failures on both counts are bizarre. I see only two policies where he’s shown real determination and a plan to battle through opposition. But those two policies were “assisted dying” and paying to give away the Chagos islands. The first was highly contentious and the second arguably treasonous

    It’s mad. Why those two? It’s not implausible Starmer is compromised in some way. If he isn’t compromised then he’s really quite dim, singularly unsuited to politics, and becoming DPP merely requires a paper shuffling apparatchik
    Never attribute to malice, that which might be otherwise explained by incompetence.

    Starmer is simply dim. And he's not even dim but cunning, he is just simply and irredeemably, dim
    I wouldn't say 'dim' - just a very narrow horizon. I somehow imagine him pondering over a menu - then ordering the same thing as last time. I think that's maybe my overriding picture of him - 'Same again'.
    He plays the flute but there are apparently no public videos of him playing it. Sums up Starmer's boring-ness. This would be something interesting for the public to see.

    Sir Keir Starmer on playing flute and violin and his love of Beethoven | Classic FM
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2BAAhZw9Qg

    Keir Starmer talking about music. He even sounds moderately passionate. Not only did he play the flute, violin, piano and recorder at the Guildhall School of Music, he also played Sunday league football while leading the Labour Party. However, I don't think he mentioned that he still plays any instrument. “Then I realised at the age of 17-18 that the other people at the Guildhall were hugely talented, whereas I just practised hard.”
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 37,210
    viewcode said:

    Andy_JS said:

    For Burnham, it's Bootle or bust, according to this article.

    "Data reveal there is really only one safe seat for Burnham
    Greater Manchester mayor would have to secure Bootle seat to guarantee a path back to Parliament" (£)

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2026/05/12/data-reveal-only-one-safe-seat-for-burnham

    Well, I looked in Pressreader but it wasn't there, so presumably it's an online-only article not in the print version. Grr.
    Here is a gift link to the Telegraph article:-

    Data reveal there is really only one safe seat for Burnham
    Greater Manchester mayor would have to secure Bootle seat to guarantee a path back to Parliament

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/gift/981589aa303a1984
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 40,950
    "The Uncomfortable Parallels Between Starmer and Biden

    In Britain, some argue that Prime Minister Keir Starmer, by rejecting calls to step aside, risks repeating the mistakes of President Joseph R. Biden Jr." (£)

    https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/13/world/europe/starmer-labour-uk-biden-debate-resign.html
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 57,532
    kle4 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Andy_JS said:

    I can see some Reform and Tory supporters in Rusholme voting for the Greens since neither of those parties stands a chance of winning.

    No Tory is ever going to vote for the Marxist Polanski and his party and no Reform vote will vote for uber woke Polanski's party either
    You really don’t understand the voters, do you?
    I know Tory and Reform voters despise the Polanski Greens far more than they hate Burnham
    A few in your circle maybe but that is anecdotal
    What Tory or Reform voter is going to vote for a far left Marxist Republican who wants massive tax hikes, unlimited spending, unlimited immigration and is uber woke and wants to rejoin the EU?
    You are just silly

    Tactical voting is very real
    I would vote for any party over the far left Greens as would any sane Tory
    I'd vote Green over Reform/Restore on the grounds that the Greens are going to deport me like the Re lot.

    I'm sane by the way, my mother had me tested.
    You don't seriously believe Reform/Restore would start deporting people who are legally in the UK?
    Reform? Probably not, especially as they try to become more and more mainstream.

    Restore? Of course they would.
    Why is it that people do not believe official Reform policy statements?

    Reform wants to abolish ILR, and make all ILR holders to reapply for visas every 5 years with high income and other requirements. This is not simply those on the pathway to ILR, but those holding it. Apparently not including EU citizens under the EU withdrawal agreement.

    These are people who in order to be eligible for ILR have been permenant residents for at least 5 years, and often much longer, potentially decades. If not granted visas under new criteria they would become illegal visa overstayers liable to deportation. So it is Reform policy to deport legal immigrants too. About 430 000 non-EU ILR holders live in the UK.

    BBC News - Reform plans to scrap indefinite leave to remain for migrants - BBC News
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c930xypxpqpo?app-referrer=deep-link

  • FishingFishing Posts: 6,420
    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    Peston show poll just show on ITV finds Burnham leads Farage by 16% but Streeting by only 7% even worse than the 11% Starmer lead over the Reform leader

    Folk keep ignoring the polling which is staring them in the face.
    It is said Major became PM because polling showed he had the best chance of winning an election.
    And he lasted 7 years despite few obvious qualities.
    Burnham beats Farage.
    That is all.
    The rest is overthinking.
    Folks rightly ignore such hypothetical polling because it's worthless.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 37,210
    Mystery Microsoft bug leaker keeps the zero-days coming
    Security pros warn YellowKey [which bypasses Bitlocker] claim could make stolen laptops a much bigger problem
    ...
    Nightmare-Eclipse hinted at YellowKey also acting as a backdoor, allegedly injected by Microsoft, although the people we spoke to said this was impossible to verify based on the information available.

    https://www.theregister.com/security/2026/05/13/disgruntled-researcher-releases-two-more-microsoft-zero-days/5239758

    Stay safe everyone, and remember nothing can go wrong when governments demand weakened security.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 60,933

    Andy_JS said:

    ohnotnow said:

    rcs1000 said:

    nico67 said:

    Ratters said:

    The biggest tragedy of this as a centre left liberal, is that Labour were in opposition for 14 years. Four election defeats. And they managed to scrape themselves to a huge majority where they shouldn't have been constrained on passing legislation, not if they were good at politics.

    And yet here we are, 22 months in, discussing how they best replace the PM who has become one of the least liked in history.

    And two of the four potential candidates to replace him are the same as those who contested the 2010 leadership election. And the king over the water not only lost that one, but also the 2015 leadership election.

    It's just so tragically useless.

    I really hope we get a surprise and someone unexpected comes through and wins . It’s bizarre that we’ll end up with two PMs , Johnson and Starmer who had big majorities and couldn’t even get close to serving a full term .

    Maybe this is just the new normal .
    No it’s not normal

    Starmer, in particular, just had to be a competent man with a plan. Given that he was DPP for years and they had 14 years in opposition, this expectation was entirely reasonable

    His failures on both counts are bizarre. I see only two policies where he’s shown real determination and a plan to battle through opposition. But those two policies were “assisted dying” and paying to give away the Chagos islands. The first was highly contentious and the second arguably treasonous

    It’s mad. Why those two? It’s not implausible Starmer is compromised in some way. If he isn’t compromised then he’s really quite dim, singularly unsuited to politics, and becoming DPP merely requires a paper shuffling apparatchik
    Never attribute to malice, that which might be otherwise explained by incompetence.

    Starmer is simply dim. And he's not even dim but cunning, he is just simply and irredeemably, dim
    I wouldn't say 'dim' - just a very narrow horizon. I somehow imagine him pondering over a menu - then ordering the same thing as last time. I think that's maybe my overriding picture of him - 'Same again'.
    He plays the flute but there are apparently no public videos of him playing it. Sums up Starmer's boring-ness. This would be something interesting for the public to see.

    Sir Keir Starmer on playing flute and violin and his love of Beethoven | Classic FM
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2BAAhZw9Qg

    Keir Starmer talking about music. He even sounds moderately passionate. Not only did he play the flute, violin, piano and recorder at the Guildhall School of Music, he also played Sunday league football while leading the Labour Party. However, I don't think he mentioned that he still plays any instrument. “Then I realised at the age of 17-18 that the other people at the Guildhall were hugely talented, whereas I just practised hard.”
    So at 18 he accepted he was shite as a musiian - but still hasn't accepted he is shite as a politician?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 62,557
    edited May 14
    Looks like a collapsed apartment block in central Kyiv, following Russian attack overnight.

    https://x.com/bohuslavskakate/status/2054750217505763573
    https://x.com/bohuslavskakate/status/2054740565187510659
    https://x.com/jurgen_nauditt/status/2054773748369162354

    Not a military target, just trying to kill civilians in their beds.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 32,422
    It’s Ed Milliband I feel sorry for. The Cliff Lawton of this race
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 37,210
    edited May 14

    Rayner in the clear with HMRC

    Angela Rayner says no deal with Andy Burnham, as she's ‘cleared’ by HMRC
    Thur 14 May 6am • Angela Rayner has exclusively told ITV News that she has been “cleared” of any wrongdoing by HMRC.

    https://www.itv.com/watch/news/angela-rayner-says-no-deal-with-andy-burnham-as-shes-cleared-by-hmrc/qxlfvnr
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 35,704
    HYUFD said:

    'Pope infuriates Iranians and risks reigniting Trump row by awarding top Vatican honour to Tehran ambassador'

    https://x.com/DailyMail/status/2054610524525011072?s=20

    This is what I mean by this being a fake, political Pope. Regardless of your opinion of Trump and his war, I don't see how you can heap accolades on a representative of a regime that executes protestors.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 37,210

    HYUFD said:

    'Pope infuriates Iranians and risks reigniting Trump row by awarding top Vatican honour to Tehran ambassador'

    https://x.com/DailyMail/status/2054610524525011072?s=20

    This is what I mean by this being a fake, political Pope. Regardless of your opinion of Trump and his war, I don't see how you can heap accolades on a representative of a regime that executes protestors.
    Last night the US Embassy in the Vatican pushed back at Tehran's claims and stressed the honour is given to all ambassadors after two years' service.
    https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15815259/Pope-infuriates-Iranians-risks-reigniting-Trump-row-awarding-Vatican-honour-Tehran-ambassador.html
  • The_WoodpeckerThe_Woodpecker Posts: 592

    Rayner in the clear with HMRC

    Angela Rayner says no deal with Andy Burnham, as she's ‘cleared’ by HMRC
    Thur 14 May 6am • Angela Rayner has exclusively told ITV News that she has been “cleared” of any wrongdoing by HMRC.

    https://www.itv.com/watch/news/angela-rayner-says-no-deal-with-andy-burnham-as-shes-cleared-by-hmrc/qxlfvnr
    And just like that she's back to being favourite on Betfair's Next PM market.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 62,557

    Rayner in the clear with HMRC

    Angela Rayner says no deal with Andy Burnham, as she's ‘cleared’ by HMRC
    Thur 14 May 6am • Angela Rayner has exclusively told ITV News that she has been “cleared” of any wrongdoing by HMRC.

    https://www.itv.com/watch/news/angela-rayner-says-no-deal-with-andy-burnham-as-shes-cleared-by-hmrc/qxlfvnr
    And just like that she's back to being favourite on Betfair's Next PM market.
    Surely the MPs are going to learn from their mistake when they nominated Corbyn, and keep the noms this time to serious candidates when in government? How many MPs genuinely think Rayner would make a good Prime Minister?
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 21,697

    Rayner in the clear with HMRC

    Angela Rayner says no deal with Andy Burnham, as she's ‘cleared’ by HMRC
    Thur 14 May 6am • Angela Rayner has exclusively told ITV News that she has been “cleared” of any wrongdoing by HMRC.

    https://www.itv.com/watch/news/angela-rayner-says-no-deal-with-andy-burnham-as-shes-cleared-by-hmrc/qxlfvnr
    Does that mean she paid all the right tax in the first place?

    Or does that mean she did not pay the right tax, but there’s no penalty for that, the HMRC accept it’s just a mistake?
  • AndypetsAndypets Posts: 14

    Rayner in the clear with HMRC

    Angela Rayner says no deal with Andy Burnham, as she's ‘cleared’ by HMRC
    Thur 14 May 6am • Angela Rayner has exclusively told ITV News that she has been “cleared” of any wrongdoing by HMRC.

    https://www.itv.com/watch/news/angela-rayner-says-no-deal-with-andy-burnham-as-shes-cleared-by-hmrc/qxlfvnr
    Does that mean she paid all the right tax in the first place?

    Or does that mean she did not pay the right tax, but there’s no penalty for that, the HMRC accept it’s just a mistake?
    The latter, I think. Sky News headline says she has settled her unpaid tax bill.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 37,210
    edited May 14

    Rayner in the clear with HMRC

    Angela Rayner says no deal with Andy Burnham, as she's ‘cleared’ by HMRC
    Thur 14 May 6am • Angela Rayner has exclusively told ITV News that she has been “cleared” of any wrongdoing by HMRC.

    https://www.itv.com/watch/news/angela-rayner-says-no-deal-with-andy-burnham-as-shes-cleared-by-hmrc/qxlfvnr
    Does that mean she paid all the right tax in the first place?

    Or does that mean she did not pay the right tax, but there’s no penalty for that, the HMRC accept it’s just a mistake?
    Angela Rayner has been cleared by HMRC of deliberate wrongdoing or carelessness over her tax affairs, the Guardian can reveal, paving the way for a potential leadership bid as Keir Starmer’s grip on power unravels.

    The former deputy prime minister has settled £40,000 in unpaid stamp duty after initially paying the lower rate, but has not paid any penalty as a result of the investigation. HMRC was also satisfied there was no tax avoidance.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/may/14/angela-rayner-cleared-hmrc-tax-affairs-labour-leadership-starmer
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 57,532
    Andypets said:

    Rayner in the clear with HMRC

    Angela Rayner says no deal with Andy Burnham, as she's ‘cleared’ by HMRC
    Thur 14 May 6am • Angela Rayner has exclusively told ITV News that she has been “cleared” of any wrongdoing by HMRC.

    https://www.itv.com/watch/news/angela-rayner-says-no-deal-with-andy-burnham-as-shes-cleared-by-hmrc/qxlfvnr
    Does that mean she paid all the right tax in the first place?

    Or does that mean she did not pay the right tax, but there’s no penalty for that, the HMRC accept it’s just a mistake?
    The latter, I think. Sky News headline says she has settled her unpaid tax bill.
    Yes that is what she says in the Guardian too.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/may/14/angela-rayner-cleared-hmrc-tax-affairs-labour-leadership-starmer?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 64,114
    Good morning, everyone.

    Very convenient for Rayner.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 29,370

    Rayner in the clear with HMRC

    Convenient timing.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 67,185

    HYUFD said:

    'Pope infuriates Iranians and risks reigniting Trump row by awarding top Vatican honour to Tehran ambassador'

    https://x.com/DailyMail/status/2054610524525011072?s=20

    This is what I mean by this being a fake, political Pope. Regardless of your opinion of Trump and his war, I don't see how you can heap accolades on a representative of a regime that executes protestors.
    Agreed, but I'm not a Catholic and so find what the Pope says and does completely irrelevant.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 57,532

    Rayner in the clear with HMRC

    Convenient timing.
    Perfect timing.

    She clearly should now be favourite. The Rayner PM / Miliband CoE dream team is on.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 23,397
    Foxy said:

    Andy_JS said:

    ohnotnow said:

    rcs1000 said:

    nico67 said:

    Ratters said:

    The biggest tragedy of this as a centre left liberal, is that Labour were in opposition for 14 years. Four election defeats. And they managed to scrape themselves to a huge majority where they shouldn't have been constrained on passing legislation, not if they were good at politics.

    And yet here we are, 22 months in, discussing how they best replace the PM who has become one of the least liked in history.

    And two of the four potential candidates to replace him are the same as those who contested the 2010 leadership election. And the king over the water not only lost that one, but also the 2015 leadership election.

    It's just so tragically useless.

    I really hope we get a surprise and someone unexpected comes through and wins . It’s bizarre that we’ll end up with two PMs , Johnson and Starmer who had big majorities and couldn’t even get close to serving a full term .

    Maybe this is just the new normal .
    No it’s not normal

    Starmer, in particular, just had to be a competent man with a plan. Given that he was DPP for years and they had 14 years in opposition, this expectation was entirely reasonable

    His failures on both counts are bizarre. I see only two policies where he’s shown real determination and a plan to battle through opposition. But those two policies were “assisted dying” and paying to give away the Chagos islands. The first was highly contentious and the second arguably treasonous

    It’s mad. Why those two? It’s not implausible Starmer is compromised in some way. If he isn’t compromised then he’s really quite dim, singularly unsuited to politics, and becoming DPP merely requires a paper shuffling apparatchik
    Never attribute to malice, that which might be otherwise explained by incompetence.

    Starmer is simply dim. And he's not even dim but cunning, he is just simply and irredeemably, dim
    I wouldn't say 'dim' - just a very narrow horizon. I somehow imagine him pondering over a menu - then ordering the same thing as last time. I think that's maybe my overriding picture of him - 'Same again'.
    He plays the flute but there are apparently no public videos of him playing it. Sums up Starmer's boring-ness. This would be something interesting for the public to see.

    Sir Keir Starmer on playing flute and violin and his love of Beethoven | Classic FM
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2BAAhZw9Qg

    Keir Starmer talking about music. He even sounds moderately passionate. Not only did he play the flute, violin, piano and recorder at the Guildhall School of Music, he also played Sunday league football while leading the Labour Party. However, I don't think he mentioned that he still plays any instrument. “Then I realised at the age of 17-18 that the other people at the Guildhall were hugely talented, whereas I just practised hard.”
    So at 18 he accepted he was shite as a musiian - but still hasn't accepted he is shite as a politician?
    Hardly shite. You have to be very good to get into the Guildhall School of Music.

    See also every professional footballer (except, perhaps that Southampton one). Or every failed Prime Minister. Yes, even Liz Truss. Or, widening the net to include party leaders, even JCorbz.

    Not good enough is not the same as no good at all, and losing that distinction is one of the reasons the conversation is do scratchy these days. (Which matters, because it encourages the sane to steer clear.)

    The harder question is "who is up to the job?" And if the answer is "nobody", what do we do next?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 57,532

    HYUFD said:

    'Pope infuriates Iranians and risks reigniting Trump row by awarding top Vatican honour to Tehran ambassador'

    https://x.com/DailyMail/status/2054610524525011072?s=20

    This is what I mean by this being a fake, political Pope. Regardless of your opinion of Trump and his war, I don't see how you can heap accolades on a representative of a regime that executes protestors.
    Agreed, but I'm not a Catholic and so find what the Pope says and does completely irrelevant.
    Such baubles are a pretty standard piece of diplomacy, see also State visits like Trump in China.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 21,697
    Gunfire chaos as Philippine senator resists ICC arrest

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5y7edln4j0o
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 80,187
    Foxy said:

    Rayner in the clear with HMRC

    Convenient timing.
    Perfect timing.

    She clearly should now be favourite. The Rayner PM / Miliband CoE dream team is on.
    That would hardly be a dream team. I actually rate Miliband, but apart from screwing up her taxes what did Rayner actually *do* as housing secretary? She'd be Starmer in a dress with a northern accent.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 29,370
    Be ironic if after all the talk of Streeting, it is Rayner who pulls the trigger today.

    Not good for my book, Streeting is best for that. Though all green (by about £1) on everyone else.
  • londonpubmanlondonpubman Posts: 3,925
    I wonder if the UK bond markets will be calm today? 😈
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 9,400
    edited May 14

    Rayner in the clear with HMRC

    Convenient timing.
    I really hope he she hasnt taken a loan from someone to pay the tax bill!
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 80,187
    rkrkrk said:

    Rayner in the clear with HMRC

    Convenient timing.
    I really hope he she hasnt taken a loan from someone to pay the tax bill!
    Sometimes rich friends come in Mandy.

    Sorry, not sorry.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 9,400
    Foxy said:

    Rayner in the clear with HMRC

    Convenient timing.
    Perfect timing.

    She clearly should now be favourite. The Rayner PM / Miliband CoE dream team is on.
    Can I claim to be the first to have predicted it?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 57,532
    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    Rayner in the clear with HMRC

    Convenient timing.
    Perfect timing.

    She clearly should now be favourite. The Rayner PM / Miliband CoE dream team is on.
    That would hardly be a dream team. I actually rate Miliband, but apart from screwing up her taxes what did Rayner actually *do* as housing secretary? She'd be Starmer in a dress with a northern accent.
    While her private life can be colourful* she has great political instincts and more charisma than anyone else in cabinet. She is a good communicator and does empathy well.

    *There's a lot of misogyny about this. Compare Farage with pint and fag and history of divorces yet seen as relatable, with when Rayner is seen with a glass of prosecco and a vape. Let alone Johnson!
  • FossFoss Posts: 2,927
    rkrkrk said:

    Rayner in the clear with HMRC

    Convenient timing.
    I really hope he she hasnt taken a loan from someone to pay the tax bill!
    It was a gift.
  • Rayner it is then. She will trouble Farage a bit more than Miliband. An unknown quantity

    She will trouble the bond markets a great deal
  • Leon_VotedForStarmerLeon_VotedForStarmer Posts: 69,000
    edited May 14
    Anyway. I’m off foraging in the cold sunshine on the Chillingham Estate, Northumberland

    At 7am…..

    Later!
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 22,207
    Could Rayner be about to run…

    … for Manchester Mayor?
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 23,397
    Surely the end of the road for Streeting's bid. If he provokes a contest, he will have a rival other than Starmer and he will lose.

    Bad for Burnham too, I'd have thought. Rayner may be a worse PM-in-waiting, but she has a constituency and Burnham has pulled the "I have a marvellous seat lined up, but the margin is to small for me to write its name" thing too many times.

    I wonder if we're heading for a late-era Major equilibrium, where both the wets and dries held fire for fear that the other side would win the ensuing melee.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 55,806
    edited May 14

    viewcode said:

    Andy_JS said:

    For Burnham, it's Bootle or bust, according to this article.

    "Data reveal there is really only one safe seat for Burnham
    Greater Manchester mayor would have to secure Bootle seat to guarantee a path back to Parliament" (£)

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2026/05/12/data-reveal-only-one-safe-seat-for-burnham

    Well, I looked in Pressreader but it wasn't there, so presumably it's an online-only article not in the print version. Grr.
    Here is a gift link to the Telegraph article:-

    Data reveal there is really only one safe seat for Burnham
    Greater Manchester mayor would have to secure Bootle seat to guarantee a path back to Parliament

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/gift/981589aa303a1984
    Other constituencies that allies of Burnham have been targeting include Peter Dowd’s seat of Bootle, in Merseyside, Charlotte Nichols’s seat of Warrington North, and Marie Rimmer’s seat of St Helens South – although all have denied that they are preparing to step down.

    Burnham, who has made a series of policy speeches at ideologically aligned think-tanks in recent months, is said to be preparing an explicit programme for government that would be announced at a prospective parliamentary by-election campaign. Pledges backed by Burnham, a former health secretary, include introducing proportional representation for parliamentary elections across the UK, a 10-year plan for local services and an overhaul of inheritance tax to pay for the social care system.
  • DopermeanDopermean Posts: 3,419

    Anyway. I’m off foraging in the cold sunshine on the Chillingham Estate, Northumberland

    At 7am…..

    Later!

    What are you foraging for?
    Round there it was traditionally 1990s hot hatches, have you got your screwdriver?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 62,557

    Rayner in the clear with HMRC

    Angela Rayner says no deal with Andy Burnham, as she's ‘cleared’ by HMRC
    Thur 14 May 6am • Angela Rayner has exclusively told ITV News that she has been “cleared” of any wrongdoing by HMRC.

    https://www.itv.com/watch/news/angela-rayner-says-no-deal-with-andy-burnham-as-shes-cleared-by-hmrc/qxlfvnr
    Does that mean she paid all the right tax in the first place?

    Or does that mean she did not pay the right tax, but there’s no penalty for that, the HMRC accept it’s just a mistake?
    Angela Rayner has been cleared by HMRC of deliberate wrongdoing or carelessness over her tax affairs, the Guardian can reveal, paving the way for a potential leadership bid as Keir Starmer’s grip on power unravels.

    The former deputy prime minister has settled £40,000 in unpaid stamp duty after initially paying the lower rate, but has not paid any penalty as a result of the investigation. HMRC was also satisfied there was no tax avoidance.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/may/14/angela-rayner-cleared-hmrc-tax-affairs-labour-leadership-starmer
    So her salary dropped from £150k to £90k, she has a whacking great mortgage on her £600,000 house, and she’s managed to find £40k in cash (more than £80k in earnings, thanks to the personal allowance withdrawal) in four months?

    It’s a fair question to ask, where did she get the money?
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 8,001
    rkrkrk said:

    Foxy said:

    Rayner in the clear with HMRC

    Convenient timing.
    Perfect timing.

    She clearly should now be favourite. The Rayner PM / Miliband CoE dream team is on.
    Can I claim to be the first to have predicted it?
    Makes me feel sick at the prospect
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 57,532

    Surely the end of the road for Streeting's bid. If he provokes a contest, he will have a rival other than Starmer and he will lose.

    Bad for Burnham too, I'd have thought. Rayner may be a worse PM-in-waiting, but she has a constituency and Burnham has pulled the "I have a marvellous seat lined up, but the margin is to small for me to write its name" thing too many times.

    I wonder if we're heading for a late-era Major equilibrium, where both the wets and dries held fire for fear that the other side would win the ensuing melee.

    If Streeting funks it then he won't get another chance. A bit like Burnham, there are only so many times that you can march the troops to the top of the hill and march them down again.
  • RattersRatters Posts: 2,114
    I think it's a good thing that HMRC being slow in its investigations isn't impacting who might be our next Prime Minister.

    It would have been a farce if we'd ended up with Miliband as PM and then HMRC announced the same thing two weeks after.
  • RazedabodeRazedabode Posts: 3,196
    We are totally stuffed with Rayner.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 129,764

    NEW THREAD

This discussion has been closed.