They just interviewed two polish women at the Cheese rolling about where did they hear about it...in my English language book at school.....
Another sport that we invented that other countries beat us at...
Clean sweep for the foreigners in all the downhill races. The last one being the spitting image of Bill from Bill and Ted.
I am sure Rupert Lowe will have something to say about bloody foreigners coming over here taking our cheese...
ITS. A. DISGRACE!
Where are our psycho's when the nation needs them?
I blame the snowflake generation, not willing to put their body on the line for this country and passing up the opportunity to win a wheel of cheese ;-)
Would an Andy Burnham Westminster majority of any size be considered a victory or a loss?
Victory. It doesn't matter at all what the margin is.
Conversely a loss by even a single vote would be a total career-ending defeat, and also very very funny.
I think he mean next GE in which case a majority of any size for Labour would be a win, even most seat and needing LD support for be a win given Reform leads current polls.
Makerfield on current polls should be an easy win, Reform got 50% of Makerfield ward votes in the local elections, so if Burnham gets it close even if he lost that would not necessarily be career ending
Odd that Peter Murrel has been found guilty of taking £400,000 from party funds. Nicola was making a salary of £200,000 and he was presumably making a reasonable amount as Party treasurer. From reading her book they lived a parsimonious lifestyle and Glasgow isn't an expensive place to live. Being a fan of hers now I find it rather sad and suspect there's more to this story that is at first obvious.
I recommend her book strongly. Well written and I was surprised how closely her politics aligned with mine. She's definitely on the side of the angels! If I'd been a Scot I'd have voted for her without hesitation.
OT - The Greens and Lib Dems can certainly be squeezed to 2%, 1% or even less in exceptional circumstances. These may well be just those circumstances. Of course if that poll is right (a huge if) then Reform could probably squeeze Restore GB to even better results.
Oh - to get the Burnham for PM bandwagon rolling he needs to win by one vote. Any more is just a bonus.
There is good news coming from Russia - fuel shortages are starting to happen not far from Moscow in the Tver region. Seems like the Ukrainian campaign against oil infrastructure in the vicinity of Moscow is starting to have noticeable consequences.
And at the same time, Ukraine targeted the oil export terminal in Novorossiysk, very soon after Reuters reported it had been fully repaired. This shows that Ukraine is not being pressured to hold off on targeting Russia's oil export infrastructure (or, at least, it feels able to resist any such pressure).
There is no petrol or diesel to be had in Crimea.
Next: water.
Next: Russians.
Unlikely, but one can only hope the Russian populace might one day see the errors of imperialism.
To give the rest of us some peace from his witterings.
But then why am I not banned?
You don't combine racism with aggressively insulting other posters?
Is Leon racist? I don’t think he is.
The truth is he’s a very liberal bloke who I am not allowed to name, playing a character.
Poor form to analyse him in his absence.
How is it poor form? I am basically defending the bloke, who I don't think to be a racist.
It is impossible to have windows into mens souls, but certainly @Leon_VotedForStarmer is prone to making racist and islamophobic posts.
I don't think he has the intellectual depth of Enoch Powell in his racism. It is more that he is gullible to what ever bit of rage bait that is circulating in the sewers of right wing social media. He has the intellectual backbone of a jelly fish combined with a narcissm that makes him lash out whenever someone points out his obvious ignorance.
So far I have yet to see any serious suggestions from yourself about how to better integrate our Muslim population into UK society.
I would start by not accepting your premise. Many Muslims are well integrated, including one of our hosts and all my Muslim colleagues at work. Distinctive dress and religious observence does not mean not integrated.
I may be misremembering but didn’t the 2010 Labour manifesto have electoral reform in it and weren’t Labour already legislating for it before the election started?
Yes, because they knew they were going to lose massively and wanted a bone to dangle in front of the Liberal Democrats.
But so there is precedent? Why can’t Burnham just legislate?
Okay he might lose the election after but if the voting system has already changed, how is there ever going to be a majority to remove it?
You really want to try and normalise a political party altering the electoral system for partisan advantage with neither an election nor referendum result providing a popular mandate?
Johnson did it over ditching SV for directly elected mayors - that wasn't in the manifesto or subject to a referendum.
I believe they claimed it was fulfilling a manifesto commitment, in that the manifesto said something very generic like that they supported FPTP, but that's a bit of a stretch when it comes to introducing specific measures.
OT - The Greens and Lib Dems can certainly be squeezed to 2%, 1% or even less in exceptional circumstances. These may well be just those circumstances. Of course if that poll is right (a huge if) then Reform could probably squeeze Restore GB to even better results.
Oh - to get the Burnham for PM bandwagon rolling he needs to win by one vote. Any more is just a bonus.
Though Restore supporters on X are firmly of the view Reform is just now a part for British Asians and ex Tories and only Lowe offers true British nationalism
Thanks to Elon, 30 million views. Of whom 7 have heard of Makerfield, and not many more of Rupert Lowe.
It is impossible not to notice some utter cretins in America, usually streamers of some kind, who react to videos and reports from incredibly fringe figures in the UK and are utterly convinced we are muslim run or that Tommy Robinson is a very popular figure or something. Musk is not an idiot, but for a man who really should be very busy he seems to have a lot of time to instantly believe stuff online like he was a random unemployed person.
I'd hope we are a little better informed about American politics due to it just generally being bigger news for us culturally, but it makes me worry what I do get completely qeong.
Thanks to Elon, 30 million views. Of whom 7 have heard of Makerfield, and not many more of Rupert Lowe.
It is impossible not to notice some utter cretins in America, usually streamers of some kind, who react to videos and reports from incredibly fringe figures in the UK and are utterly convinced we are muslim run or that Tommy Robinson is a very popular figure or something. Musk is not an idiot, but for a man who really should be very busy he seems to have a lot of time to instantly believe stuff online like he was a random unemployed person.
I'd hope we are a little better informed about American politics due to it just generally being bigger news for us culturally, but it makes me worry what I do get completely qeong.
He isn't and he doesn't. It's unlimitedly funded and perfectly targeted propaganda. To believe anything other is naive in the extreme.
Odd that Peter Murrel has been found guilty of taking £400,000 from party funds. Nicola was making a salary of £200,000 and he was presumably making a reasonable amount as Party treasurer. From reading her book they lived a parsimonious lifestyle and Glasgow isn't an expensive place to live. Being a fan of hers now I find it rather sad and suspect there's more to this story that is at first obvious.
I never thought Murrell would plead or be found guilty, given how long it took even to get to charge. It's an utterly bizarre story of why he would do this all
Accepting the premise somehow the Leader of the Party and his wife knew nothing whatsoever about it, how he was able to so easily get away with it due to opacity of the finances and presumably a lack of care from her and everyone else, is still a major question and not one which reflects well on her as a Leader.
It's a classic case where it relies on her being incompetent in her job, or him a genius at hiding his crime, but that can never square with her own reputation of not being incompetent.
Thanks to Elon, 30 million views. Of whom 7 have heard of Makerfield, and not many more of Rupert Lowe.
It is impossible not to notice some utter cretins in America, usually streamers of some kind, who react to videos and reports from incredibly fringe figures in the UK and are utterly convinced we are muslim run or that Tommy Robinson is a very popular figure or something. Musk is not an idiot, but for a man who really should be very busy he seems to have a lot of time to instantly believe stuff online like he was a random unemployed person.
I'd hope we are a little better informed about American politics due to it just generally being bigger news for us culturally, but it makes me worry what I do get completely qeong.
He isn't and he doesn't. It's unlimitedly funded and perfectly targeted propaganda. To believe anything other is naive in the extreme.
On this occasion. He's shared too much nonsense before which is not 'perfectly targeted' to believe every time he shares nonsense it is part of some masterplan.
A Ref UK Councillor proposed a committee be created to monitor UFOs. (In Scotland that would be Frying objects).
Thorne and Moorends Ward councillor Kieran Lay suggested to a City of Doncaster Council meeting that a "Doncaster UAP Overview and Safety Committee or panel" should be established to track "unidentified anomaly phenomena," also known as UFOs, at Doncaster Sheffield Airport.
The airport closed in 2022 after its owner said it was no longer financially viable. Doncaster Council is planning to reopen it, with a £57m loan to support this.
"If we are serious about delivering a safe, successful airport for the people of Doncaster, shouldn't we at least examine all verified data, including the UAP activity recorded right here, before committing any further public money?" Mr Lay asked.
To give the rest of us some peace from his witterings.
But then why am I not banned?
You don't combine racism with aggressively insulting other posters?
Is Leon racist? I don’t think he is.
The truth is he’s a very liberal bloke who I am not allowed to name, playing a character.
Poor form to analyse him in his absence.
How is it poor form? I am basically defending the bloke, who I don't think to be a racist.
It is impossible to have windows into mens souls, but certainly @Leon_VotedForStarmer is prone to making racist and islamophobic posts.
I don't think he has the intellectual depth of Enoch Powell in his racism. It is more that he is gullible to what ever bit of rage bait that is circulating in the sewers of right wing social media. He has the intellectual backbone of a jelly fish combined with a narcissm that makes him lash out whenever someone points out his obvious ignorance.
So far I have yet to see any serious suggestions from yourself about how to better integrate our Muslim population into UK society.
Trump, in a new post on Iran this morning, demands that as part of the peace deal, other Middle East nations join the Abraham Accords and recognize Israel.
To me those purchases on expenses were every bit as unacceptable as anything Murrell has done (I can be definitive as he pled guilty), since they involved declarations of being required for Parliamentary purposes (or similar words).
Point of order...the duck house wasn't bought on the expenses. I don't think the moat cleaning was paid for either. The duck house was part of a big list of stuff that the MP chucked in and said basically from this what can I claim for, stick what can be on expenses and the duck house was not part of that. It seems incredibly arrogant, but it was actually quite common.
Sometimes it wasn't done so arrogantly and there was an MP who got blasted by the Telegraph where they ignored his response where he was able to show he didn't start from a position of can I claim the maximum. It started with been an MP for 10+ years, I am allowed to expense kitchen refit, I have had a somebody design the refit, but I think some of the things won't be claim-able, I will paid for them myself, but would like clarity before we agree final design.
My recollection is that you could basically claim anything, with anything that wasn't allowable struck out, with no hard feelings - there were lots of marginal things. I didn't claim much, but I remember asking about a sub to the Danish Berlingske Tidende (roughly like the Telegraph) when I was on the European Affairs Committee. I added in a note that I wasn't sure about it, since it would be helpful to my committee work to know what Danes were saying and I was probaqbly the only member who was in a position to do that, but that partly I just thought it'd be privately interesting to keep in touch with Danish affairs. I had a polite reply disallowing it, and thought fair enough. I'd have been startled to be challenged as a fiddler.
Unsurprisingly Wings is doing a bit of a victory lap on Murrell in the incredibly exhaustive way he does. I had forgotten about when members of the SNP finance committee apparently resigned after Murrell did not let them look at the accounts properly. Thank goodness the treasurer for nearly all that time didn't spot anything either I guess.
To give the rest of us some peace from his witterings.
But then why am I not banned?
You don't combine racism with aggressively insulting other posters?
Is Leon racist? I don’t think he is.
The truth is he’s a very liberal bloke who I am not allowed to name, playing a character.
Poor form to analyse him in his absence.
How is it poor form? I am basically defending the bloke, who I don't think to be a racist.
The idea of PB is that, as well as posting regularly yourself, you pay at least some attention to the posts in between?
I do. But I’ve not seen any racism from him. That’s my point.
Examples?
Please, no. Just give it a rest, eh?
Why should I?
I don’t think he should have been banned. That’s my opinion.
He seems to essentially ask for time outs when he becomes abusive on a periodic basis. Being critical is certainly not the reason, he then pushes and pushes with gratuitous insults. I am assuming something like that happened.
Thanks to Elon, 30 million views. Of whom 7 have heard of Makerfield, and not many more of Rupert Lowe.
It is impossible not to notice some utter cretins in America, usually streamers of some kind, who react to videos and reports from incredibly fringe figures in the UK and are utterly convinced we are muslim run or that Tommy Robinson is a very popular figure or something. Musk is not an idiot, but for a man who really should be very busy he seems to have a lot of time to instantly believe stuff online like he was a random unemployed person.
I'd hope we are a little better informed about American politics due to it just generally being bigger news for us culturally, but it makes me worry what I do get completely qeong.
What is the current frame through which you look at the USA?
To me it is now Governed as a classic 19203/30s South America style Banana Republic - run for the benefit of a cabal of rich individuals and corporations, rather than for the people or according to the Constitution. The machinery of Government is corrupted and distorted to serve this purpose, and significant players in society are intimidated into compliance.
There is a significant civil resistance movement as it gets worse, but no one can call the outcome. But in the end the incompetent nature of autocrats will run it into the ground, over many years if it is not slowed down and reversed in the short term by what democracy remains.
American society has done this several times before, so hope remains.
To give the rest of us some peace from his witterings.
But then why am I not banned?
You don't combine racism with aggressively insulting other posters?
Is Leon racist? I don’t think he is.
The truth is he’s a very liberal bloke who I am not allowed to name, playing a character.
Poor form to analyse him in his absence.
How is it poor form? I am basically defending the bloke, who I don't think to be a racist.
The idea of PB is that, as well as posting regularly yourself, you pay at least some attention to the posts in between?
I do. But I’ve not seen any racism from him. That’s my point.
Examples?
Please, no. Just give it a rest, eh?
Why should I?
I don’t think he should have been banned. That’s my opinion.
He seems to essentially ask for time outs when he becomes abusive on a periodic basis. Being critical is certainly not the reason, he then pushes and pushes with gratuitous insults. I am assuming something like that happened.
I think he’s got a drinking problem. He deserves compassion.
I may be misremembering but didn’t the 2010 Labour manifesto have electoral reform in it and weren’t Labour already legislating for it before the election started?
Yes, because they knew they were going to lose massively and wanted a bone to dangle in front of the Liberal Democrats.
But so there is precedent? Why can’t Burnham just legislate?
Okay he might lose the election after but if the voting system has already changed, how is there ever going to be a majority to remove it?
You really want to try and normalise a political party altering the electoral system for partisan advantage with neither an election nor referendum result providing a popular mandate?
Johnson did it over ditching SV for directly elected mayors - that wasn't in the manifesto or subject to a referendum.
I believe they claimed it was fulfilling a manifesto commitment, in that the manifesto said something very generic like that they supported FPTP, but that's a bit of a stretch when it comes to introducing specific measures.
Well, one wouldn't expect Johnson to stick to any prior promises, would one?
IF we moved to PR for local elections, it wouldn't make much difference.
At Westminster, however, we'd have, as we see in other countries, a period of interregnum between Government formation. Denmark voted on 24th March - two months on, they still don't have a new Government.
I remember the almost panic in 2010 when we went without a Government for four days - imagine four weeks or four months with the previous PM in a caretaker capacity.We are used to the instant certainty of rapid change - within 12-18 hours of the end of polling, we have a new Prime Minister and Government.
That's an advantage of the current system - we wouldn't have paralysis without a Government - we'd have the good old tradition of paralysis with a Government.
I broadly agree.
Some form of PR, or even full PR via party lists, for local elections actually makes a fair amount of sense. Local government is structurally much better suited to consensus and coalition politics anyway.
It just does not scale naturally to Westminster as it is currently structured and organised.
Westminster still operates culturally and procedurally on the assumption that:
one party governs one party opposes manifestos are quasi-contractual governments are expected to implement a coherent programme elections are mechanisms for choosing executives, not simply representative assemblies
Trying to graft permanent coalition politics onto that system without wider constitutional redesign could easily create instability and voter confusion rather than greater legitimacy.
Constitutional systems are ecosystems. Electoral systems cannot really be analysed in isolation from the institutions and political culture around them.
I don't see why local government is different to Westminster.
Because Westminster is not simply a representative chamber. It is also the mechanism by which the national executive is created and sustained.
Local government does not carry the same constitutional role, political expectations or concentration of sovereign authority.
That distinction matters because different electoral systems optimise for different things. PR systems tend to prioritise representational fairness and negotiated consensus, whereas Westminster historically prioritised decisive executive formation and clear electoral accountability.
You can absolutely argue the latter model should change, but that is a broader constitutional argument than simply “PR is fairer”.
If you have lots of parties, then no system, not FPTP or anything else, will deliver a majority in Parliament. The choice is not between clear majorities with FPTP versus messy coalitions with PR. No, the choice is between messy coalitions with FPTP and messy coalitions with PR, but at least with the latter the parties start with results representing their national support.
If you want decisive executive formation, you need to have a two-party system (or close thereto) when electing a parliament. But if the voters insist on voting for lots of different parties, it won’t happen.
Unless you stop electing a parliament and start directly electing the executive, e.g. with a President. If you are electing a single position, then you necessarily have decisive executive formation.
That's not true. It all depends on the FPTP vote efficiency. If you have 5 parties on an average of 20% each, then mathematically possible outcomes include: 1) Each party gets 100% of the vote in 20% of the seats, thus each party gets 20% of seats 2) Four parties get 100% of the vote each in 10% of the seats, and the rest divided equally across the other 60% of seats. Those 4 parties get 10% of seats each, the fifth party wins 60% of seats and a majority.
Obviously reality is messier than this, but the same principles hold true.
You can make up theoretical, "mathematically possible" scenarios where that happens, but it doesn't happen in practice. If the effective number of parties https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effective_number_of_parties is up at 4+, you're not going to get a majority in Parliament, not without a massively distorting electoral system.
The point is that it's high effective numbers of parties that prevents decisive executive formation. FPTP indirectly promotes that, because it tends to encourage a lower effective number of parties (see Lijphart). But if you have a high effective number of parties, the pressures of FPTP notwithstanding, as we now do in the UK, then any vaguely plausible electoral system will have to give you a hung parliament. FPTP won't save us.
To me those purchases on expenses were every bit as unacceptable as anything Murrell has done (I can be definitive as he pled guilty), since they involved declarations of being required for Parliamentary purposes (or similar words).
Point of order...the duck house wasn't bought on the expenses. I don't think the moat cleaning was paid for either. The duck house was part of a big list of stuff that the MP chucked in and said basically from this what can I claim for, stick what can be on expenses and the duck house was not part of that. It seems incredibly arrogant, but it was actually quite common.
Sometimes it wasn't done so arrogantly and there was an MP who got blasted by the Telegraph where they ignored his response where he was able to show he didn't start from a position of can I claim the maximum. It started with been an MP for 10+ years, I am allowed to expense kitchen refit, I have had a somebody design the refit, but I think some of the things won't be claim-able, I will paid for them myself, but would like clarity before we agree final design.
My recollection is that you could basically claim anything, with anything that wasn't allowable struck out, with no hard feelings - there were lots of marginal things. I didn't claim much, but I remember asking about a sub to the Danish Berlingske Tidende (roughly like the Telegraph) when I was on the European Affairs Committee. I added in a note that I wasn't sure about it, since it would be helpful to my committee work to know what Danes were saying and I was probaqbly the only member who was in a position to do that, but that partly I just thought it'd be privately interesting to keep in touch with Danish affairs. I had a polite reply disallowing it, and thought fair enough. I'd have been startled to be challenged as a fiddler.
You may have me on the detail, Francis, and I'm not going down a rabbit hole to trace the precise history on a sunny bank holiday, or getting my Telegraph Special Expenses Supplement off the shelf. But it's a tell even if it was just an attempt.
Nick, I'd actually support a newspaper subscription; that seems quite necessary for the requirements of the job.
The stuff that really concerned me was around the conservatories, and house repairs, and mortgage flipping and so on, and the heavy concealment * , in the face of the declaration signed. None of that was 'required by the job' expenditure.
I think the reforms introduced were a great positive, though I'd have done things differently in some respects - as for everyone.
I think we now need something very thorough in donations and earnings, and I hope that this Govt really grasps the nettle. I would like to lobby my MP to lean on OFCOM properly to regulate broadcasters, but he gets more from GB News for presenting a programme than his Parliamentary Salary, so it's a bit difficult. I should not be placed in that position. The key - as with the last time around - is to treat our MPs like everyone else.
* Many seem to have forgotten the extreme redactions applied to information published by Parliament, before the Telegraph got hold of the disk.
Just been reading the BBC report on the Murrell situation. Apparently Swinney appointed him Chief Executive, so he bears some responsibility. Unless Murrell was straight then and went rogue later.
The Restore vs Reform war on Twitter suggests many possibilities: 1) Restore talking absolute gash about their prospects to try and harm Reform as much as possible 2) Restore actually harming Reform in Yarmouth-level numbers
Either way us good news for Burnham.
That tweet from Matt Badloser was prescient. If you vote Restore then Reform will lose and that means Burnham will win and then hold a GE and then Reform will lose and we're locked into "hard left" government until 2031.
Reform chief thinker saying they would lose to Burnham. Which in itself feeds back into the "what's the point in compromising to voting Reform when you could have the Real Thing instead" piece. If Reform will lose, why waste your time with them?
OT - The Greens and Lib Dems can certainly be squeezed to 2%, 1% or even less in exceptional circumstances. These may well be just those circumstances. Of course if that poll is right (a huge if) then Reform could probably squeeze Restore GB to even better results.
Oh - to get the Burnham for PM bandwagon rolling he needs to win by one vote. Any more is just a bonus.
Though Restore supporters on X are firmly of the view Reform is just now a part for British Asians and ex Tories and only Lowe offers true British nationalism
Could it be the far right have the same in-built tendency to factionalism as the far left?
Comments
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLwSSGM6tzc
Conversely a loss by even a single vote would be a total career-ending defeat, and also very very funny.
I am sure Rupert Lowe will have something to say about bloody foreigners coming over here taking our cheese...
Where are our psychos when the nation needs them?
There are uphill cheese rolling races???
Makerfield on current polls should be an easy win, Reform got 50% of Makerfield ward votes in the local elections, so if Burnham gets it close even if he lost that would not necessarily be career ending
I recommend her book strongly. Well written and I was surprised how closely her politics aligned with mine. She's definitely on the side of the angels! If I'd been a Scot I'd have voted for her without hesitation.
Oh - to get the Burnham for PM bandwagon rolling he needs to win by one vote. Any more is just a bonus.
“Some motherfuckers are always trying to ice-skate uphill”
I'd hope we are a little better informed about American politics due to it just generally being bigger news for us culturally, but it makes me worry what I do get completely qeong.
Pentagon: “Possible UFO footage.”
OSINT community: “It’s a fucking inflatable Stormtrooper balloon.”
Billions in military intelligence, defeated by internet autists with frame-by-frame analysis and free time.
https://x.com/inexorable_swe/status/2058202107270897855
It's unlimitedly funded and perfectly targeted propaganda.
To believe anything other is naive in the extreme.
Accepting the premise somehow the Leader of the Party and his wife knew nothing whatsoever about it, how he was able to so easily get away with it due to opacity of the finances and presumably a lack of care from her and everyone else, is still a major question and not one which reflects well on her as a Leader.
It's a classic case where it relies on her being incompetent in her job, or him a genius at hiding his crime, but that can never square with her own reputation of not being incompetent.
A Ref UK Councillor proposed a committee be created to monitor UFOs. (In Scotland that would be Frying objects).
Thorne and Moorends Ward councillor Kieran Lay suggested to a City of Doncaster Council meeting that a "Doncaster UAP Overview and Safety Committee or panel" should be established to track "unidentified anomaly phenomena," also known as UFOs, at Doncaster Sheffield Airport.
The airport closed in 2022 after its owner said it was no longer financially viable. Doncaster Council is planning to reopen it, with a £57m loan to support this.
"If we are serious about delivering a safe, successful airport for the people of Doncaster, shouldn't we at least examine all verified data, including the UAP activity recorded right here, before committing any further public money?" Mr Lay asked.
https://www.independent.co.uk/tv/news/reform-councillor-ufo-doncaster-sheffield-airport-b2975579.html
https://x.com/osinttechnical/status/2058892020022739008
Trump, in a new post on Iran this morning, demands that as part of the peace deal, other Middle East nations join the Abraham Accords and recognize Israel.
civilians: omg look there’s a UFO
government: it’s just a balloon, you people are crazy
2026
government: omg look at this UFO
civilians: it’s just a balloon, you people are crazy
https://x.com/noffinater/status/2058518911012753545
https://wingsoverscotland.com/the-final-robbery/
To me it is now Governed as a classic 19203/30s South America style Banana Republic - run for the benefit of a cabal of rich individuals and corporations, rather than for the people or according to the Constitution. The machinery of Government is corrupted and distorted to serve this purpose, and significant players in society are intimidated into compliance.
There is a significant civil resistance movement as it gets worse, but no one can call the outcome. But in the end the incompetent nature of autocrats will run it into the ground, over many years if it is not slowed down and reversed in the short term by what democracy remains.
American society has done this several times before, so hope remains.
It's very pleasant if you can sit in the shade but the sun is hot... so sit in the shade.
The point is that it's high effective numbers of parties that prevents decisive executive formation. FPTP indirectly promotes that, because it tends to encourage a lower effective number of parties (see Lijphart). But if you have a high effective number of parties, the pressures of FPTP notwithstanding, as we now do in the UK, then any vaguely plausible electoral system will have to give you a hung parliament. FPTP won't save us.
https://x.com/jenniferjs_/status/2058633995017998748
'@RupertLowe10
Your Reform Makerfield candidate publicly bragged about how he would love to both smell and lick Carol Vorderman’s arsehole.
A healthy mind, that is not.'
https://x.com/RupertLowe10/status/2058894799285985710?s=20
Nick, I'd actually support a newspaper subscription; that seems quite necessary for the requirements of the job.
The stuff that really concerned me was around the conservatories, and house repairs, and mortgage flipping and so on, and the heavy concealment * , in the face of the declaration signed. None of that was 'required by the job' expenditure.
I think the reforms introduced were a great positive, though I'd have done things differently in some respects - as for everyone.
I think we now need something very thorough in donations and earnings, and I hope that this Govt really grasps the nettle. I would like to lobby my MP to lean on OFCOM properly to regulate broadcasters, but he gets more from GB News for presenting a programme than his Parliamentary Salary, so it's a bit difficult. I should not be placed in that position. The key - as with the last time around - is to treat our MPs like everyone else.
* Many seem to have forgotten the extreme redactions applied to information published by Parliament, before the Telegraph got hold of the disk.
NEW THREAD
1) Restore talking absolute gash about their prospects to try and harm Reform as much as possible
2) Restore actually harming Reform in Yarmouth-level numbers
Either way us good news for Burnham.
That tweet from Matt Badloser was prescient. If you vote Restore then Reform will lose and that means Burnham will win and then hold a GE and then Reform will lose and we're locked into "hard left" government until 2031.
Reform chief thinker saying they would lose to Burnham. Which in itself feeds back into the "what's the point in compromising to voting Reform when you could have the Real Thing instead" piece. If Reform will lose, why waste your time with them?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WboggjN_G-4