Skip to content

Meet the man who could ruin the Burnham premiership – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 13,207
edited 3:15PM in General
Meet the man who could ruin the Burnham premiership – politicalbetting.com

In some ways any British Prime Minister having to deal with Donald Trump has my immense sympathy having to having to react the unstableness of Trump who is ruining American alliances in a way a Moscow plant can only dream about.

Read the full story here

«134

Comments

  • First and still shaking my head that the headline reads Burnham as PM.
  • boulayboulay Posts: 9,048
    That photo could only be worse if he was coquettishly lifting up the back of his shorts to reveal some arse cheek like the old Athena poster.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 63,885

    First and still shaking my head that the headline reads Burnham as PM.

    Why? We’ve had far sillier PM appointments.

    Yes, he will disappoint.
  • eekeek Posts: 34,127
    Is that the threatened picture or do you have a scarier one still to unleash..

    My eyes, my eyes
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 60,159
    Burnham will quickly emerge as the most compelling figure in Western politics other than Trump.

    He will be fresher than Macron, have a stronger domestic position than Merz, run a more important country than Carney and have more international relevance than Meloni.

    If he plays his cards right, he could be PM for a decade.
  • TazTaz Posts: 28,627
    boulay said:

    That photo could only be worse if he was coquettishly lifting up the back of his shorts to reveal some arse cheek like the old Athena poster.

    I suspect his wiping regime to be more lacking than the poster girls though 😫
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 104,098
    boulay said:

    That photo could only be worse if he was coquettishly lifting up the back of his shorts to reveal some arse cheek like the old Athena poster.

    Saw some comments on an american channel that Trump is just built different which is why he could physically outlast and outcompete people half his age (the poster included himself in that).

    Even if all the sleepy stuff were not true that's such nonsense even for the world's fittest 80 year old, but i don't doubt the poster sincerely believed it.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 104,098

    Burnham will quickly emerge as the most compelling figure in Western politics other than Trump.

    He will be fresher than Macron, have a stronger domestic position than Merz, run a more important country than Carney and have more international relevance than Meloni.

    If he plays his cards right, he could be PM for a decade.

    Good one.

    But i do think Labour could be value for the next GE.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 40,157
    I don't have high hopes for Burnham in the way I did for Starmer, but then Starmer disappointed beyond comprehension.

    There again the PBers who couldn't contain their excitement at PMs Johnson and Truss are the ones predicting Burnham will be rubbish.

    Just sayin'
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 128,987
    eek said:

    Is that the threatened picture or do you have a scarier one still to unleash..

    My eyes, my eyes

    This is the one.


    Missing the Farage shorts photo?
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 17,547
    I suppose it is possible that Trump could trash the Burnham regime, but it is unlikely. IMO none of Starmer's unpopularity arises from his dealings with Trump and I think this trend will continue.

    At the moment I sense the world is actually a bit bored with Trump, has got used to the way he operates and is waiting with interest to see if he can recover the sheer political and rhetorical violence of the peak fascist gangster days of last year. Eg would Trump have the will to put the military on the streets to make sure the November elections don't happen? A year ago I would have said yes. Now, not so sure.

    What I can't see is Burnham using compliments, smarm and kingly letters in his pocket as a party trick. You can take the boy out of Liverpool but... and all that.
  • Burnham is fortunate that Trump basically already blew up USA-UK relations. So he has no need to be nice to him. That wasn't as clear when Starmer started.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 40,157
    edited 3:34PM

    eek said:

    Is that the threatened picture or do you have a scarier one still to unleash..

    My eyes, my eyes

    This is the one.


    Missing the Farage shorts photo?
    The new photo is far more offensive, and the Farage one was bad enough.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 104,098
    Watching some old sitcoms, were they all mostly terrible actors or was it just style of direction? Old man in Steptoe and son is either bloody awful or a good actor told to mug like a 5 year old.
  • MelonBMelonB Posts: 17,435
    Burnham surely has the nous to realise that Trump feeds on weakness. Better to be firm, aggressive when necessary, and back up thread with policy.

    Erdogan, for all his domestic nastiness, has shown for years that a mid ranking regional power can get the better of superpowers if it shows the right amount of chutzpah, with a twinkle in the eye.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 104,098

    Burnham is fortunate that Trump basically already blew up USA-UK relations. So he has no need to be nice to him. That wasn't as clear when Starmer started.

    Yes, it gains nothing, if he then gets upset at something else. So ignore as much as possible.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 28,979

    Burnham is fortunate that Trump basically already blew up USA-UK relations. So he has no need to be nice to him. That wasn't as clear when Starmer started.

    Burnham is also fortunate that Trump is nearly a lame duck already.

    Just keep a civil and polite distance from him.

    No need to have shouting matches as much as some dream of a "Love Actually" moment between the PM and POTUS, but also no need to suck up to him.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 36,680
    France introduces alcohol ban as heatwave grips Europe
    Soaring temperatures force festivals across the country to call time at the bar amid public safety concerns

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2026/06/21/france-alcohol-ban-heatwave-europe-safety-events-cancelled/ (£££)
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 60,584
    algarkirk said:

    I suppose it is possible that Trump could trash the Burnham regime, but it is unlikely. IMO none of Starmer's unpopularity arises from his dealings with Trump and I think this trend will continue.

    At the moment I sense the world is actually a bit bored with Trump, has got used to the way he operates and is waiting with interest to see if he can recover the sheer political and rhetorical violence of the peak fascist gangster days of last year. Eg would Trump have the will to put the military on the streets to make sure the November elections don't happen? A year ago I would have said yes. Now, not so sure.

    What I can't see is Burnham using compliments, smarm and kingly letters in his pocket as a party trick. You can take the boy out of Liverpool but... and all that.

    Trump will come back to the Beast to find it up on bricks...
  • scampi25scampi25 Posts: 598

    I don't have high hopes for Burnham in the way I did for Starmer, but then Starmer disappointed beyond comprehension.

    There again the PBers who couldn't contain their excitement at PMs Johnson and Truss are the ones predicting Burnham will be rubbish.

    Just sayin'

    As with Starmer the problem is not really the leader, it's the members and the MPs - they're only voting for sugar and spice......
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 66,808
    Before I expanded the header, I expected it to be an op-ed on Ed Miliband.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 72,403

    I don't have high hopes for Burnham in the way I did for Starmer, but then Starmer disappointed beyond comprehension.

    There again the PBers who couldn't contain their excitement at PMs Johnson and Truss are the ones predicting Burnham will be rubbish.

    Just sayin'

    I didn't vote for Johnson in the membership ballot, I wanted Sunak not Truss and I think Burnham could be a breath of fresh air

    I assume I am not included in your observation !!!!!
  • I don't think Burnham will make Ed M chancellor.

    I wonder if he will go for somebody a bit more to the right.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 36,680
    edited 3:45PM
    kle4 said:

    Watching some old sitcoms, were they all mostly terrible actors or was it just style of direction? Old man in Steptoe and son is either bloody awful or a good actor told to mug like a 5 year old.

    Wilfred Bramble (Steptoe) was by many accounts an often well-oiled alcoholic. Harry H Corbett aspired to being a serious actor and hated being typecast and trapped in this worldwide hit.

    In general, though, that generation of actor had grown up on the stage where subtlety was barely an option, and then in small-screen television where often they'd be framed in close-up or very small, which combined to give the appearance of mugging.

  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 72,403
    MelonB said:

    Burnham surely has the nous to realise that Trump feeds on weakness. Better to be firm, aggressive when necessary, and back up thread with policy.

    Erdogan, for all his domestic nastiness, has shown for years that a mid ranking regional power can get the better of superpowers if it shows the right amount of chutzpah, with a twinkle in the eye.

    Take a leaf out of Meloni's book
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 34,614
    edited 3:46PM
    FPT

    Trump has announced Starmer is resigning.




    BREAKING

    Donald Trump says Keir Starmer 'will resign as prime minister of the United Kingdom'

    He says that he has 'failed badly' on immigration and energy, particularly on the North Sea

    He signs off: 'I wish him well'


    https://x.com/steven_swinford/status/2068698674310398119?s=46

    Bit unfair. The immigration things was mostly the intentional fault of Britain Trump and Sir Keir was starting to get a grip of it.
    Is it just me, or is Trump desperately wanting the North Sea opened up more because he thinks he and his family can *get something out of it* (especially under a Farage government)?
    Not sure how. There are almost no US oil comoanies left operating in the UK sector and those that are still here are now so advanced on their plans to pull out and reinvest elsewhere that nothing the UK government can now do will change that.

  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 4,917

    Before I expanded the header, I expected it to be an op-ed on Ed Miliband.

    I thought it was going to be an op-ed on...Burnham.
  • TazTaz Posts: 28,627

    kle4 said:

    Watching some old sitcoms, were they all mostly terrible actors or was it just style of direction? Old man in Steptoe and son is either bloody awful or a good actor told to mug like a 5 year old.

    Wilfred Bramble (Steptoe) was by many accounts an often well-oiled alcoholic. Harry H Corbett aspired to being a serious actor and hated being typecast and trapped in this worldwide hit.

    In general, though, that generation of actor had grown up on the stage where subtlety was barely an option, and then in small-screen television where often they'd be framed in close-up or very small, which combined to give the appearance of mugging.

    kle4 said:

    Watching some old sitcoms, were they all mostly terrible actors or was it just style of direction? Old man in Steptoe and son is either bloody awful or a good actor told to mug like a 5 year old.

    Wilfred Bramble (Steptoe) was by many accounts an often well-oiled alcoholic. Harry H Corbett aspired to being a serious actor and hated being typecast and trapped in this worldwide hit.

    In general, though, that generation of actor had grown up on the stage where subtlety was barely an option, and then in small-screen television where often they'd be framed in close-up or very small, which combined to give the appearance of mugging.

    Bramble was also very suave and dressed superbly.

    Old sitcom actors were decent actors and appeared, by and large, in a range of productions. There were the exceptions but generally decent actors.
  • I'm not sure when but Burnham has spoken about support for a land value tax.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 60,159

    I don't think Burnham will make Ed M chancellor.

    I wonder if he will go for somebody a bit more to the right.

    The smart choice would be Streeting because he’ll never be a leadership rival.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 28,979

    I'm not sure when but Burnham has spoken about support for a land value tax.

    In 2010, proposing a LVT combined with the abolition of Stamp Duty. An excellent idea.

    Whether he still supports it, and whether he has the cojones to go ahead with it, is another question.
  • I'm not sure when but Burnham has spoken about support for a land value tax.

    In 2010, proposing a LVT combined with the abolition of Stamp Duty. An excellent idea.

    Whether he still supports it, and whether he has the cojones to go ahead with it, is another question.
    Seems like a significantly newer video than 2010.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 28,979

    I'm not sure when but Burnham has spoken about support for a land value tax.

    In 2010, proposing a LVT combined with the abolition of Stamp Duty. An excellent idea.

    Whether he still supports it, and whether he has the cojones to go ahead with it, is another question.
    Seems like a significantly newer video than 2010.
    Seems like he might support the campaign to abolish Council Tax and Stamp Duty and see it replaced with a LVT.

    Excellent idea if so. Hope it goes ahead. Won't hold my breath though.
  • Burnham will quickly emerge as the most compelling figure in Western politics other than Trump.

    He will be fresher than Macron, have a stronger domestic position than Merz, run a more important country than Carney and have more international relevance than Meloni.

    If he plays his cards right, he could be PM for a decade.

    Andy Burnham strikes me as someone who thinks just being Andy Burnham will be enough to be a successful PM.

    It's exactly the same mistake that SKS did in replacing the Tories.
    If he doesn't step on any rakes, it should get him through a month at least.

    Who does he buy his clothes from?
  • CatManCatMan Posts: 3,870

    Burnham will quickly emerge as the most compelling figure in Western politics other than Trump.

    He will be fresher than Macron, have a stronger domestic position than Merz, run a more important country than Carney and have more international relevance than Meloni.

    If he plays his cards right, he could be PM for a decade.

    Women want to be with him, men want to be him... ;)
  • TazTaz Posts: 28,627

    I'm not sure when but Burnham has spoken about support for a land value tax.

    In 2010, proposing a LVT combined with the abolition of Stamp Duty. An excellent idea.

    Whether he still supports it, and whether he has the cojones to go ahead with it, is another question.
    Seems like a significantly newer video than 2010.
    Seems like he might support the campaign to abolish Council Tax and Stamp Duty and see it replaced with a LVT.

    Excellent idea if so. Hope it goes ahead. Won't hold my breath though.
    While he’s at it scrap stamp duty on share transactions.
  • boulayboulay Posts: 9,048

    MelonB said:

    Burnham surely has the nous to realise that Trump feeds on weakness. Better to be firm, aggressive when necessary, and back up thread with policy.

    Erdogan, for all his domestic nastiness, has shown for years that a mid ranking regional power can get the better of superpowers if it shows the right amount of chutzpah, with a twinkle in the eye.

    Take a leaf out of Meloni's book
    He’s going to have to book a hypnotherapy appointment with Zac for starters.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 60,584
    boulay said:

    MelonB said:

    Burnham surely has the nous to realise that Trump feeds on weakness. Better to be firm, aggressive when necessary, and back up thread with policy.

    Erdogan, for all his domestic nastiness, has shown for years that a mid ranking regional power can get the better of superpowers if it shows the right amount of chutzpah, with a twinkle in the eye.

    Take a leaf out of Meloni's book
    He’s going to have to book a hypnotherapy appointment with Zac for starters.
    Oh I don't know, his moobs are already quite well developed...
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 36,680
    There will be NO TOLLS in the Hormuz Strait for 60 days during the Cease Fire Period, and there will be NO TOLLS after the 60 day period has expired, unless they are imposed by and for the United States of America, should the deal not be completed, for services rendered as the Guardian Angel to the countries of the Middle East for purposes of both past, present, and future reimbursement of costs. Thank you for your attention to this matter!!! President DJT
    https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/116784032456610294

    Iran must immediately stop their highly paid PROXIES in Lebanon from causing trouble. If they don’t, we’ll hit Iran very hard again, just like we did last week, only harder!!! President DONALD J. TRUMP
    https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/116788337995785578

    The great man's thoughts on Middle East peace (and grift).
  • TazTaz Posts: 28,627
    The one thing Burnham is right on is we overtax work. Tax something you get less of it. As we’re finding out.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 60,584
    edited 4:08PM

    There will be NO TOLLS in the Hormuz Strait for 60 days during the Cease Fire Period, and there will be NO TOLLS after the 60 day period has expired, unless they are imposed by and for the United States of America, should the deal not be completed, for services rendered as the Guardian Angel to the countries of the Middle East for purposes of both past, present, and future reimbursement of costs. Thank you for your attention to this matter!!! President DJT
    https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/116784032456610294

    Iran must immediately stop their highly paid PROXIES in Lebanon from causing trouble. If they don’t, we’ll hit Iran very hard again, just like we did last week, only harder!!! President DONALD J. TRUMP
    https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/116788337995785578

    The great man's thoughts on Middle East peace (and grift).

    Trump is remarkable in his pursuit of grift. He's as determined to get on with his mission as a bacteriaphage.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 36,680
    Four minutes and no goals in the Spain vs Saudi match.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 35,442
    FPT:
    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    eek said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:
    Again she's ruling out a pact, but AFAICS she's not ruling out putting Nigel Farage in power.
    Ruling out putting Farage in power would be equivalent to committing to forming a 'coalition of chaos' even if Reform have 300+ MPs. Her position is the only politically sensible one.
    No it’s not.

    There’s other options.

    Such as let Reform run a minority government or have another election.
    Kemi telling Tory MPs to abstain in a confidence vote in a hung Parliament is neither making Farage PM nor keeping Labour in office. So her position is correct
    How is abstaining in a VoC when everyone else votes against not "making Farage PM?"
    As it isn’t voting to make Farage PM anymore than it is voting to make Starmer or Burnham PM
    Let's test this - if an opponent tried the same line would you accept the same logic and not criticise them for 'allowing' it?
    No. A positive vote for Burnham or Starmer is a vote for a Labour government, a positive vote for Farage is a vote for a Reform government, abstaining is a vote for neither only a Kemi led government
    Kemi's in no position to form a government,

    She could be in a position to join a coalition but then who with She;s falling straight in to the CDU trap.
    No she isn’t, the CDU have gone into coalition with the SPD. Kemi has ruled out a deal with Labour or Reform
    Then she's just opting to be the opposition, Or is she going to merge with the LDs ?
    The Tories are in an impossible situation - a large section of their never Labour vote has gone to Reform - it's not exactly easy to get it back.

    Worse they don't want to lose any chance of getting some never Reform votes so they have to rule out supporting Reform.

    It leaves Kemi and the Tory party a very fine line that they have to navigate in the hope / until the political landscape changes to their favour..
    I think the bigger problem for the Tories is trying to recover some credibility. They have been behind some of the worst policy decisions this country has seen. They struggle to take HMG to task as it quite often is just continuing what they started,
    The Tory USP that more than any other factor explains why they usually win UK general elections is that they are trusted with the £££ more than Labour are. Liz Truss dropped that most precious aspect of the brand on the floor, stamped on it, crushed it to dust and buried the ashes deep underground in a heavily locked casket. Kemi has to excavate and retrieve it in order to win again. I've made it sound impossible but it isn't. Just start the dig and keep at it.
    Tbh I didnt even notice the Truss shock either personally or at work. To me most of it was a City flap because a lot of overpaid people found themselves wrong sided.
    You weren't trying to buy a flat at the time as I was, then. What a staggeringly arrogant post.
    Why is you buying a flat my prime concern ?

    Shit happens and you get over it.
    Yeah, that's why the Tories lost.
    Indeed and Labour will be close behind as their record on the economy is appalling.
    I do not believe Labour will lose in 2029.
    Rough approximation model of UK General Elections:

    Whichever side/bloc is less divided, or more efficiently divided, wins.

    Because of that, Kemi and Nigel need an understanding. But because they're both divas, and Nigel is toxic to many, they can't come to an understanding.

    Everything else is noise.
    They need to disagree to appeal to different voter blocs. Farage - WWC, a good portion of pensioners. Tories - young white collar professionals, small to medium-sized business people, people who do something in the city, posh people in the shires. Obviously with some crossover.

    Add them up when the election has happened, you have a powerful coalition representing the majority of the electorate.
    We've just had a real time exercise in testing Farage's preternatural attraction to the WWC.
    Yes we have, it was called the local elections and he cleaned up with the WWC, including in Makerfield.

    In the Makerfield by-election itself, many of Burnham's supporters are Reform voters, directly crossing over either because they like Burnham or because he is going to get rid of Starmer, or both. BigG's convoluted theory that Burnham drew his support from loyal Tories determined to sock it to Farage was deeply implausible.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 128,987

    eek said:

    Is that the threatened picture or do you have a scarier one still to unleash..

    My eyes, my eyes

    This is the one.


    Missing the Farage shorts photo?
    The new photo is far more offensive, and the Farage one was bad enough.
    Looking at this picture is character building.
  • eekeek Posts: 34,127

    FPT:

    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    eek said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:
    Again she's ruling out a pact, but AFAICS she's not ruling out putting Nigel Farage in power.
    Ruling out putting Farage in power would be equivalent to committing to forming a 'coalition of chaos' even if Reform have 300+ MPs. Her position is the only politically sensible one.
    No it’s not.

    There’s other options.

    Such as let Reform run a minority government or have another election.
    Kemi telling Tory MPs to abstain in a confidence vote in a hung Parliament is neither making Farage PM nor keeping Labour in office. So her position is correct
    How is abstaining in a VoC when everyone else votes against not "making Farage PM?"
    As it isn’t voting to make Farage PM anymore than it is voting to make Starmer or Burnham PM
    Let's test this - if an opponent tried the same line would you accept the same logic and not criticise them for 'allowing' it?
    No. A positive vote for Burnham or Starmer is a vote for a Labour government, a positive vote for Farage is a vote for a Reform government, abstaining is a vote for neither only a Kemi led government
    Kemi's in no position to form a government,

    She could be in a position to join a coalition but then who with She;s falling straight in to the CDU trap.
    No she isn’t, the CDU have gone into coalition with the SPD. Kemi has ruled out a deal with Labour or Reform
    Then she's just opting to be the opposition, Or is she going to merge with the LDs ?
    The Tories are in an impossible situation - a large section of their never Labour vote has gone to Reform - it's not exactly easy to get it back.

    Worse they don't want to lose any chance of getting some never Reform votes so they have to rule out supporting Reform.

    It leaves Kemi and the Tory party a very fine line that they have to navigate in the hope / until the political landscape changes to their favour..
    I think the bigger problem for the Tories is trying to recover some credibility. They have been behind some of the worst policy decisions this country has seen. They struggle to take HMG to task as it quite often is just continuing what they started,
    The Tory USP that more than any other factor explains why they usually win UK general elections is that they are trusted with the £££ more than Labour are. Liz Truss dropped that most precious aspect of the brand on the floor, stamped on it, crushed it to dust and buried the ashes deep underground in a heavily locked casket. Kemi has to excavate and retrieve it in order to win again. I've made it sound impossible but it isn't. Just start the dig and keep at it.
    Tbh I didnt even notice the Truss shock either personally or at work. To me most of it was a City flap because a lot of overpaid people found themselves wrong sided.
    You weren't trying to buy a flat at the time as I was, then. What a staggeringly arrogant post.
    Why is you buying a flat my prime concern ?

    Shit happens and you get over it.
    Yeah, that's why the Tories lost.
    Indeed and Labour will be close behind as their record on the economy is appalling.
    I do not believe Labour will lose in 2029.
    Rough approximation model of UK General Elections:

    Whichever side/bloc is less divided, or more efficiently divided, wins.

    Because of that, Kemi and Nigel need an understanding. But because they're both divas, and Nigel is toxic to many, they can't come to an understanding.

    Everything else is noise.
    They need to disagree to appeal to different voter blocs. Farage - WWC, a good portion of pensioners. Tories - young white collar professionals, small to medium-sized business people, people who do something in the city, posh people in the shires. Obviously with some crossover.

    Add them up when the election has happened, you have a powerful coalition representing the majority of the electorate.
    We've just had a real time exercise in testing Farage's preternatural attraction to the WWC.
    Yes we have, it was called the local elections and he cleaned up with the WWC, including in Makerfield.

    In the Makerfield by-election itself, many of Burnham's supporters are Reform voters, directly crossing over either because they like Burnham or because he is going to get rid of Starmer, or both. BigG's convoluted theory that Burnham drew his support from loyal Tories determined to sock it to Farage was deeply implausible.
    Really? It boils down to do you want a Reform government at some point in the future or not. As a never Reform voter - I would have voted for Burnham..
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 60,159
    https://x.com/Peston/status/2068727710248054937

    A cabinet minister tells me that, despite Donald J Trump’s “scoop”, the PM has genuinely not made a decision to quit, or at least he hasn’t yet. The minister says that if Keir Starmer’s wife Vic were to encourage him to fight on, he might just do that - though the minister assumes there is a low probability of such an outcome.
  • eekeek Posts: 34,127
    10 minutes and Spain have scored.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 28,979
    Taz said:

    The one thing Burnham is right on is we overtax work. Tax something you get less of it. As we’re finding out.

    Absolutely agreed.

    This is a funny one that goes against party lines, but there would be significant numbers here on both left and right that would support a rebalancing of tax towards land (which is finite) and away from work. There would of course be equivalently significant numbers here, both on left and right, that would vehemently oppose that too.

    It reminds me of a West Wing scene where they were talking about Social Security, but housing is arguably the British equivalent to that in significance.

    Bartlet: "Social Security is the third rail of American politics. Touch it, and you die."
    Toby: "That's 'cause the third rail's where all the power is."
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 90,120
    edited 4:17PM

    eek said:

    Is that the threatened picture or do you have a scarier one still to unleash..

    My eyes, my eyes

    This is the one.


    Missing the Farage shorts photo?
    It's a pretty old photo (2015) - he can barely walk these days.
    I'd really hate to see the current version of it.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 28,979

    https://x.com/Peston/status/2068727710248054937

    A cabinet minister tells me that, despite Donald J Trump’s “scoop”, the PM has genuinely not made a decision to quit, or at least he hasn’t yet. The minister says that if Keir Starmer’s wife Vic were to encourage him to fight on, he might just do that - though the minister assumes there is a low probability of such an outcome.

    Will the man ever make a decision promptly and by himself?

    Probably waiting for the Supreme Court to let him know if he should resign.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 72,403

    FPT:

    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    eek said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:
    Again she's ruling out a pact, but AFAICS she's not ruling out putting Nigel Farage in power.
    Ruling out putting Farage in power would be equivalent to committing to forming a 'coalition of chaos' even if Reform have 300+ MPs. Her position is the only politically sensible one.
    No it’s not.

    There’s other options.

    Such as let Reform run a minority government or have another election.
    Kemi telling Tory MPs to abstain in a confidence vote in a hung Parliament is neither making Farage PM nor keeping Labour in office. So her position is correct
    How is abstaining in a VoC when everyone else votes against not "making Farage PM?"
    As it isn’t voting to make Farage PM anymore than it is voting to make Starmer or Burnham PM
    Let's test this - if an opponent tried the same line would you accept the same logic and not criticise them for 'allowing' it?
    No. A positive vote for Burnham or Starmer is a vote for a Labour government, a positive vote for Farage is a vote for a Reform government, abstaining is a vote for neither only a Kemi led government
    Kemi's in no position to form a government,

    She could be in a position to join a coalition but then who with She;s falling straight in to the CDU trap.
    No she isn’t, the CDU have gone into coalition with the SPD. Kemi has ruled out a deal with Labour or Reform
    Then she's just opting to be the opposition, Or is she going to merge with the LDs ?
    The Tories are in an impossible situation - a large section of their never Labour vote has gone to Reform - it's not exactly easy to get it back.

    Worse they don't want to lose any chance of getting some never Reform votes so they have to rule out supporting Reform.

    It leaves Kemi and the Tory party a very fine line that they have to navigate in the hope / until the political landscape changes to their favour..
    I think the bigger problem for the Tories is trying to recover some credibility. They have been behind some of the worst policy decisions this country has seen. They struggle to take HMG to task as it quite often is just continuing what they started,
    The Tory USP that more than any other factor explains why they usually win UK general elections is that they are trusted with the £££ more than Labour are. Liz Truss dropped that most precious aspect of the brand on the floor, stamped on it, crushed it to dust and buried the ashes deep underground in a heavily locked casket. Kemi has to excavate and retrieve it in order to win again. I've made it sound impossible but it isn't. Just start the dig and keep at it.
    Tbh I didnt even notice the Truss shock either personally or at work. To me most of it was a City flap because a lot of overpaid people found themselves wrong sided.
    You weren't trying to buy a flat at the time as I was, then. What a staggeringly arrogant post.
    Why is you buying a flat my prime concern ?

    Shit happens and you get over it.
    Yeah, that's why the Tories lost.
    Indeed and Labour will be close behind as their record on the economy is appalling.
    I do not believe Labour will lose in 2029.
    Rough approximation model of UK General Elections:

    Whichever side/bloc is less divided, or more efficiently divided, wins.

    Because of that, Kemi and Nigel need an understanding. But because they're both divas, and Nigel is toxic to many, they can't come to an understanding.

    Everything else is noise.
    They need to disagree to appeal to different voter blocs. Farage - WWC, a good portion of pensioners. Tories - young white collar professionals, small to medium-sized business people, people who do something in the city, posh people in the shires. Obviously with some crossover.

    Add them up when the election has happened, you have a powerful coalition representing the majority of the electorate.
    We've just had a real time exercise in testing Farage's preternatural attraction to the WWC.
    Yes we have, it was called the local elections and he cleaned up with the WWC, including in Makerfield.

    In the Makerfield by-election itself, many of Burnham's supporters are Reform voters, directly crossing over either because they like Burnham or because he is going to get rid of Starmer, or both. BigG's convoluted theory that Burnham drew his support from loyal Tories determined to sock it to Farage was deeply implausible.
    Nothing convoluted about conservatives voting for Burnham to see Starmer lose and embarrass Farage

    I expect Farage may leave Reform in the next 12 months and indeed lose their shine as the Andy - Kemi show hits town over the next 3 years
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 26,328
    Taz said:

    The one thing Burnham is right on is we overtax work. Tax something you get less of it. As we’re finding out.

    It's worse than that, we tax work to subsidise not working
  • Andrew Lilico is a Truss true believer, it makes sense now.
  • Taz said:

    The one thing Burnham is right on is we overtax work. Tax something you get less of it. As we’re finding out.

    It's worse than that, we tax work to subsidise not working
    Starmer destroyed the government for good when he gave up on welfare reform.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 26,328

    FPT:

    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    eek said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:
    Again she's ruling out a pact, but AFAICS she's not ruling out putting Nigel Farage in power.
    Ruling out putting Farage in power would be equivalent to committing to forming a 'coalition of chaos' even if Reform have 300+ MPs. Her position is the only politically sensible one.
    No it’s not.

    There’s other options.

    Such as let Reform run a minority government or have another election.
    Kemi telling Tory MPs to abstain in a confidence vote in a hung Parliament is neither making Farage PM nor keeping Labour in office. So her position is correct
    How is abstaining in a VoC when everyone else votes against not "making Farage PM?"
    As it isn’t voting to make Farage PM anymore than it is voting to make Starmer or Burnham PM
    Let's test this - if an opponent tried the same line would you accept the same logic and not criticise them for 'allowing' it?
    No. A positive vote for Burnham or Starmer is a vote for a Labour government, a positive vote for Farage is a vote for a Reform government, abstaining is a vote for neither only a Kemi led government
    Kemi's in no position to form a government,

    She could be in a position to join a coalition but then who with She;s falling straight in to the CDU trap.
    No she isn’t, the CDU have gone into coalition with the SPD. Kemi has ruled out a deal with Labour or Reform
    Then she's just opting to be the opposition, Or is she going to merge with the LDs ?
    The Tories are in an impossible situation - a large section of their never Labour vote has gone to Reform - it's not exactly easy to get it back.

    Worse they don't want to lose any chance of getting some never Reform votes so they have to rule out supporting Reform.

    It leaves Kemi and the Tory party a very fine line that they have to navigate in the hope / until the political landscape changes to their favour..
    I think the bigger problem for the Tories is trying to recover some credibility. They have been behind some of the worst policy decisions this country has seen. They struggle to take HMG to task as it quite often is just continuing what they started,
    The Tory USP that more than any other factor explains why they usually win UK general elections is that they are trusted with the £££ more than Labour are. Liz Truss dropped that most precious aspect of the brand on the floor, stamped on it, crushed it to dust and buried the ashes deep underground in a heavily locked casket. Kemi has to excavate and retrieve it in order to win again. I've made it sound impossible but it isn't. Just start the dig and keep at it.
    Tbh I didnt even notice the Truss shock either personally or at work. To me most of it was a City flap because a lot of overpaid people found themselves wrong sided.
    You weren't trying to buy a flat at the time as I was, then. What a staggeringly arrogant post.
    Why is you buying a flat my prime concern ?

    Shit happens and you get over it.
    Yeah, that's why the Tories lost.
    Indeed and Labour will be close behind as their record on the economy is appalling.
    I do not believe Labour will lose in 2029.
    Rough approximation model of UK General Elections:

    Whichever side/bloc is less divided, or more efficiently divided, wins.

    Because of that, Kemi and Nigel need an understanding. But because they're both divas, and Nigel is toxic to many, they can't come to an understanding.

    Everything else is noise.
    They need to disagree to appeal to different voter blocs. Farage - WWC, a good portion of pensioners. Tories - young white collar professionals, small to medium-sized business people, people who do something in the city, posh people in the shires. Obviously with some crossover.

    Add them up when the election has happened, you have a powerful coalition representing the majority of the electorate.
    We've just had a real time exercise in testing Farage's preternatural attraction to the WWC.
    Yes we have, it was called the local elections and he cleaned up with the WWC, including in Makerfield.

    In the Makerfield by-election itself, many of Burnham's supporters are Reform voters, directly crossing over either because they like Burnham or because he is going to get rid of Starmer, or both. BigG's convoluted theory that Burnham drew his support from loyal Tories determined to sock it to Farage was deeply implausible.
    Nothing convoluted about conservatives voting for Burnham to see Starmer lose and embarrass Farage

    I expect Farage may leave Reform in the next 12 months and indeed lose their shine as the Andy - Kemi show hits town over the next 3 years
    What are the Conservatives going to use for credibility ?
  • I do think there is a non-zero chance Reform doesn't exist in its current form by the next election.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 40,434
    Nothing Trump wrote in that message was untrue.
  • TazTaz Posts: 28,627

    Taz said:

    The one thing Burnham is right on is we overtax work. Tax something you get less of it. As we’re finding out.

    Absolutely agreed.

    This is a funny one that goes against party lines, but there would be significant numbers here on both left and right that would support a rebalancing of tax towards land (which is finite) and away from work. There would of course be equivalently significant numbers here, both on left and right, that would vehemently oppose that too.

    It reminds me of a West Wing scene where they were talking about Social Security, but housing is arguably the British equivalent to that in significance.

    Bartlet: "Social Security is the third rail of American politics. Touch it, and you die."
    Toby: "That's 'cause the third rail's where all the power is."
    Fuck me, that’s a brilliant bit of dialogue Bart.
  • BatteryCorrectHorse
  • TazTaz Posts: 28,627

    Taz said:

    The one thing Burnham is right on is we overtax work. Tax something you get less of it. As we’re finding out.

    It's worse than that, we tax work to subsidise not working
    Indeed

    Pay people to be idle and they will.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 32,719

    FPT:

    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    eek said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:
    Again she's ruling out a pact, but AFAICS she's not ruling out putting Nigel Farage in power.
    Ruling out putting Farage in power would be equivalent to committing to forming a 'coalition of chaos' even if Reform have 300+ MPs. Her position is the only politically sensible one.
    No it’s not.

    There’s other options.

    Such as let Reform run a minority government or have another election.
    Kemi telling Tory MPs to abstain in a confidence vote in a hung Parliament is neither making Farage PM nor keeping Labour in office. So her position is correct
    How is abstaining in a VoC when everyone else votes against not "making Farage PM?"
    As it isn’t voting to make Farage PM anymore than it is voting to make Starmer or Burnham PM
    Let's test this - if an opponent tried the same line would you accept the same logic and not criticise them for 'allowing' it?
    No. A positive vote for Burnham or Starmer is a vote for a Labour government, a positive vote for Farage is a vote for a Reform government, abstaining is a vote for neither only a Kemi led government
    Kemi's in no position to form a government,

    She could be in a position to join a coalition but then who with She;s falling straight in to the CDU trap.
    No she isn’t, the CDU have gone into coalition with the SPD. Kemi has ruled out a deal with Labour or Reform
    Then she's just opting to be the opposition, Or is she going to merge with the LDs ?
    The Tories are in an impossible situation - a large section of their never Labour vote has gone to Reform - it's not exactly easy to get it back.

    Worse they don't want to lose any chance of getting some never Reform votes so they have to rule out supporting Reform.

    It leaves Kemi and the Tory party a very fine line that they have to navigate in the hope / until the political landscape changes to their favour..
    I think the bigger problem for the Tories is trying to recover some credibility. They have been behind some of the worst policy decisions this country has seen. They struggle to take HMG to task as it quite often is just continuing what they started,
    The Tory USP that more than any other factor explains why they usually win UK general elections is that they are trusted with the £££ more than Labour are. Liz Truss dropped that most precious aspect of the brand on the floor, stamped on it, crushed it to dust and buried the ashes deep underground in a heavily locked casket. Kemi has to excavate and retrieve it in order to win again. I've made it sound impossible but it isn't. Just start the dig and keep at it.
    Tbh I didnt even notice the Truss shock either personally or at work. To me most of it was a City flap because a lot of overpaid people found themselves wrong sided.
    You weren't trying to buy a flat at the time as I was, then. What a staggeringly arrogant post.
    Why is you buying a flat my prime concern ?

    Shit happens and you get over it.
    Yeah, that's why the Tories lost.
    Indeed and Labour will be close behind as their record on the economy is appalling.
    I do not believe Labour will lose in 2029.
    Rough approximation model of UK General Elections:

    Whichever side/bloc is less divided, or more efficiently divided, wins.

    Because of that, Kemi and Nigel need an understanding. But because they're both divas, and Nigel is toxic to many, they can't come to an understanding.

    Everything else is noise.
    They need to disagree to appeal to different voter blocs. Farage - WWC, a good portion of pensioners. Tories - young white collar professionals, small to medium-sized business people, people who do something in the city, posh people in the shires. Obviously with some crossover.

    Add them up when the election has happened, you have a powerful coalition representing the majority of the electorate.
    We've just had a real time exercise in testing Farage's preternatural attraction to the WWC.
    Yes we have, it was called the local elections and he cleaned up with the WWC, including in Makerfield.

    In the Makerfield by-election itself, many of Burnham's supporters are Reform voters, directly crossing over either because they like Burnham or because he is going to get rid of Starmer, or both. BigG's convoluted theory that Burnham drew his support from loyal Tories determined to sock it to Farage was deeply implausible.
    So what you're saying is that in an election which made no difference they flocked to Farage.
    In one that was of crucial significance they chose Burnham.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 19,767
    DavidL said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I couldn't care less how nice Burnham is. It's Labour's rubbish policies which are the problem. If Burnham keeps on with the digital ID/VPN banning and jury trial nonsense, for instance, there's no point changing leader.

    I think I agree with you on most of those issues but they are not, frankly, where the success or failure of Burnham's administration is going to be determined. When Reeves was appointed she claimed she was going to be focused like a laser on growth but then introduced a whole range of policies that were inimical to growth, employment and investment in the UK. That is what needs to change.

    My understanding, and it is pretty vague on the details to be honest, is that in Manchester Burnham has at the very least not got in the way of growth and seems to have been a benign influence. That is what we need from him, a government that is joined up enough to recognise that making it more expensive to employ people costs jobs (duh), that we need to exploit our own resources in the North Sea, that we need to use our tax system to encourage investment in the UK, that makes sure (as I believe he did) that there is good coordination between our educational establishments and growing businesses, that makes London a better place to float businesses, that our transportation system actually facilitates getting people to work, that houses actually get built, I could go on most of the afternoon.

    If Burnham delivers on even some of this I would be delighted for the country and I would expect him to get a second term. If he spends his time on culture wars and social issues he will do almost as badly as Starmer has.
    A touchstone on how serious we are about growth is attitude towards immigration. If we prioritise growth we will support immigration of the right sort. Now we might disapprove of immigration generally, which we have every right to do, but in that case we don't prioritise growth.

    Starmer and Reeves' problem is they have drastically reduced immigration, which some might think is a good thing, but haven't got credit for it. If Burnham is serious about growing the economy he will need to reverse their policy and make the positive case for immigration. The easier option for him though is to take credit for Starmer and Reeves actual reduction in immigration.
  • eekeek Posts: 34,127
    dixiedean said:

    FPT:

    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    eek said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:
    Again she's ruling out a pact, but AFAICS she's not ruling out putting Nigel Farage in power.
    Ruling out putting Farage in power would be equivalent to committing to forming a 'coalition of chaos' even if Reform have 300+ MPs. Her position is the only politically sensible one.
    No it’s not.

    There’s other options.

    Such as let Reform run a minority government or have another election.
    Kemi telling Tory MPs to abstain in a confidence vote in a hung Parliament is neither making Farage PM nor keeping Labour in office. So her position is correct
    How is abstaining in a VoC when everyone else votes against not "making Farage PM?"
    As it isn’t voting to make Farage PM anymore than it is voting to make Starmer or Burnham PM
    Let's test this - if an opponent tried the same line would you accept the same logic and not criticise them for 'allowing' it?
    No. A positive vote for Burnham or Starmer is a vote for a Labour government, a positive vote for Farage is a vote for a Reform government, abstaining is a vote for neither only a Kemi led government
    Kemi's in no position to form a government,

    She could be in a position to join a coalition but then who with She;s falling straight in to the CDU trap.
    No she isn’t, the CDU have gone into coalition with the SPD. Kemi has ruled out a deal with Labour or Reform
    Then she's just opting to be the opposition, Or is she going to merge with the LDs ?
    The Tories are in an impossible situation - a large section of their never Labour vote has gone to Reform - it's not exactly easy to get it back.

    Worse they don't want to lose any chance of getting some never Reform votes so they have to rule out supporting Reform.

    It leaves Kemi and the Tory party a very fine line that they have to navigate in the hope / until the political landscape changes to their favour..
    I think the bigger problem for the Tories is trying to recover some credibility. They have been behind some of the worst policy decisions this country has seen. They struggle to take HMG to task as it quite often is just continuing what they started,
    The Tory USP that more than any other factor explains why they usually win UK general elections is that they are trusted with the £££ more than Labour are. Liz Truss dropped that most precious aspect of the brand on the floor, stamped on it, crushed it to dust and buried the ashes deep underground in a heavily locked casket. Kemi has to excavate and retrieve it in order to win again. I've made it sound impossible but it isn't. Just start the dig and keep at it.
    Tbh I didnt even notice the Truss shock either personally or at work. To me most of it was a City flap because a lot of overpaid people found themselves wrong sided.
    You weren't trying to buy a flat at the time as I was, then. What a staggeringly arrogant post.
    Why is you buying a flat my prime concern ?

    Shit happens and you get over it.
    Yeah, that's why the Tories lost.
    Indeed and Labour will be close behind as their record on the economy is appalling.
    I do not believe Labour will lose in 2029.
    Rough approximation model of UK General Elections:

    Whichever side/bloc is less divided, or more efficiently divided, wins.

    Because of that, Kemi and Nigel need an understanding. But because they're both divas, and Nigel is toxic to many, they can't come to an understanding.

    Everything else is noise.
    They need to disagree to appeal to different voter blocs. Farage - WWC, a good portion of pensioners. Tories - young white collar professionals, small to medium-sized business people, people who do something in the city, posh people in the shires. Obviously with some crossover.

    Add them up when the election has happened, you have a powerful coalition representing the majority of the electorate.
    We've just had a real time exercise in testing Farage's preternatural attraction to the WWC.
    Yes we have, it was called the local elections and he cleaned up with the WWC, including in Makerfield.

    In the Makerfield by-election itself, many of Burnham's supporters are Reform voters, directly crossing over either because they like Burnham or because he is going to get rid of Starmer, or both. BigG's convoluted theory that Burnham drew his support from loyal Tories determined to sock it to Farage was deeply implausible.
    So what you're saying is that in an election which made no difference they flocked to Farage.
    In one that was of crucial significance they chose Burnham.
    If that was true as Gorton and Denton was a very unimportant by-election Reform would have won
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 90,120
    For once (and it is a rare thing) Peston is correct.

    I know we’re mostly inured to Donald Trump’s disregard for institutional norms and proprieties, but pre-announcing the resignation of the prime minister of America’s supposedly most important ally is pretty extreme, even by his standards. UK ministers are genuinely and understandably shocked
    https://x.com/Peston/status/2068705056589758797
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 72,403

    FPT:

    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    eek said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:
    Again she's ruling out a pact, but AFAICS she's not ruling out putting Nigel Farage in power.
    Ruling out putting Farage in power would be equivalent to committing to forming a 'coalition of chaos' even if Reform have 300+ MPs. Her position is the only politically sensible one.
    No it’s not.

    There’s other options.

    Such as let Reform run a minority government or have another election.
    Kemi telling Tory MPs to abstain in a confidence vote in a hung Parliament is neither making Farage PM nor keeping Labour in office. So her position is correct
    How is abstaining in a VoC when everyone else votes against not "making Farage PM?"
    As it isn’t voting to make Farage PM anymore than it is voting to make Starmer or Burnham PM
    Let's test this - if an opponent tried the same line would you accept the same logic and not criticise them for 'allowing' it?
    No. A positive vote for Burnham or Starmer is a vote for a Labour government, a positive vote for Farage is a vote for a Reform government, abstaining is a vote for neither only a Kemi led government
    Kemi's in no position to form a government,

    She could be in a position to join a coalition but then who with She;s falling straight in to the CDU trap.
    No she isn’t, the CDU have gone into coalition with the SPD. Kemi has ruled out a deal with Labour or Reform
    Then she's just opting to be the opposition, Or is she going to merge with the LDs ?
    The Tories are in an impossible situation - a large section of their never Labour vote has gone to Reform - it's not exactly easy to get it back.

    Worse they don't want to lose any chance of getting some never Reform votes so they have to rule out supporting Reform.

    It leaves Kemi and the Tory party a very fine line that they have to navigate in the hope / until the political landscape changes to their favour..
    I think the bigger problem for the Tories is trying to recover some credibility. They have been behind some of the worst policy decisions this country has seen. They struggle to take HMG to task as it quite often is just continuing what they started,
    The Tory USP that more than any other factor explains why they usually win UK general elections is that they are trusted with the £££ more than Labour are. Liz Truss dropped that most precious aspect of the brand on the floor, stamped on it, crushed it to dust and buried the ashes deep underground in a heavily locked casket. Kemi has to excavate and retrieve it in order to win again. I've made it sound impossible but it isn't. Just start the dig and keep at it.
    Tbh I didnt even notice the Truss shock either personally or at work. To me most of it was a City flap because a lot of overpaid people found themselves wrong sided.
    You weren't trying to buy a flat at the time as I was, then. What a staggeringly arrogant post.
    Why is you buying a flat my prime concern ?

    Shit happens and you get over it.
    Yeah, that's why the Tories lost.
    Indeed and Labour will be close behind as their record on the economy is appalling.
    I do not believe Labour will lose in 2029.
    Rough approximation model of UK General Elections:

    Whichever side/bloc is less divided, or more efficiently divided, wins.

    Because of that, Kemi and Nigel need an understanding. But because they're both divas, and Nigel is toxic to many, they can't come to an understanding.

    Everything else is noise.
    They need to disagree to appeal to different voter blocs. Farage - WWC, a good portion of pensioners. Tories - young white collar professionals, small to medium-sized business people, people who do something in the city, posh people in the shires. Obviously with some crossover.

    Add them up when the election has happened, you have a powerful coalition representing the majority of the electorate.
    We've just had a real time exercise in testing Farage's preternatural attraction to the WWC.
    Yes we have, it was called the local elections and he cleaned up with the WWC, including in Makerfield.

    In the Makerfield by-election itself, many of Burnham's supporters are Reform voters, directly crossing over either because they like Burnham or because he is going to get rid of Starmer, or both. BigG's convoluted theory that Burnham drew his support from loyal Tories determined to sock it to Farage was deeply implausible.
    Nothing convoluted about conservatives voting for Burnham to see Starmer lose and embarrass Farage

    I expect Farage may leave Reform in the next 12 months and indeed lose their shine as the Andy - Kemi show hits town over the next 3 years
    What are the Conservatives going to use for credibility ?
    Losing Jenrick Braverman and a few others is excellent news
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 13,513

    FPT:

    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    eek said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:
    Again she's ruling out a pact, but AFAICS she's not ruling out putting Nigel Farage in power.
    Ruling out putting Farage in power would be equivalent to committing to forming a 'coalition of chaos' even if Reform have 300+ MPs. Her position is the only politically sensible one.
    No it’s not.

    There’s other options.

    Such as let Reform run a minority government or have another election.
    Kemi telling Tory MPs to abstain in a confidence vote in a hung Parliament is neither making Farage PM nor keeping Labour in office. So her position is correct
    How is abstaining in a VoC when everyone else votes against not "making Farage PM?"
    As it isn’t voting to make Farage PM anymore than it is voting to make Starmer or Burnham PM
    Let's test this - if an opponent tried the same line would you accept the same logic and not criticise them for 'allowing' it?
    No. A positive vote for Burnham or Starmer is a vote for a Labour government, a positive vote for Farage is a vote for a Reform government, abstaining is a vote for neither only a Kemi led government
    Kemi's in no position to form a government,

    She could be in a position to join a coalition but then who with She;s falling straight in to the CDU trap.
    No she isn’t, the CDU have gone into coalition with the SPD. Kemi has ruled out a deal with Labour or Reform
    Then she's just opting to be the opposition, Or is she going to merge with the LDs ?
    The Tories are in an impossible situation - a large section of their never Labour vote has gone to Reform - it's not exactly easy to get it back.

    Worse they don't want to lose any chance of getting some never Reform votes so they have to rule out supporting Reform.

    It leaves Kemi and the Tory party a very fine line that they have to navigate in the hope / until the political landscape changes to their favour..
    I think the bigger problem for the Tories is trying to recover some credibility. They have been behind some of the worst policy decisions this country has seen. They struggle to take HMG to task as it quite often is just continuing what they started,
    The Tory USP that more than any other factor explains why they usually win UK general elections is that they are trusted with the £££ more than Labour are. Liz Truss dropped that most precious aspect of the brand on the floor, stamped on it, crushed it to dust and buried the ashes deep underground in a heavily locked casket. Kemi has to excavate and retrieve it in order to win again. I've made it sound impossible but it isn't. Just start the dig and keep at it.
    Tbh I didnt even notice the Truss shock either personally or at work. To me most of it was a City flap because a lot of overpaid people found themselves wrong sided.
    You weren't trying to buy a flat at the time as I was, then. What a staggeringly arrogant post.
    Why is you buying a flat my prime concern ?

    Shit happens and you get over it.
    Yeah, that's why the Tories lost.
    Indeed and Labour will be close behind as their record on the economy is appalling.
    I do not believe Labour will lose in 2029.
    Rough approximation model of UK General Elections:

    Whichever side/bloc is less divided, or more efficiently divided, wins.

    Because of that, Kemi and Nigel need an understanding. But because they're both divas, and Nigel is toxic to many, they can't come to an understanding.

    Everything else is noise.
    They need to disagree to appeal to different voter blocs. Farage - WWC, a good portion of pensioners. Tories - young white collar professionals, small to medium-sized business people, people who do something in the city, posh people in the shires. Obviously with some crossover.

    Add them up when the election has happened, you have a powerful coalition representing the majority of the electorate.
    We've just had a real time exercise in testing Farage's preternatural attraction to the WWC.
    Yes we have, it was called the local elections and he cleaned up with the WWC, including in Makerfield.

    In the Makerfield by-election itself, many of Burnham's supporters are Reform voters, directly crossing over either because they like Burnham or because he is going to get rid of Starmer, or both. BigG's convoluted theory that Burnham drew his support from loyal Tories determined to sock it to Farage was deeply implausible.
    Surely they WERE Reform voters given that they defected from Reform to Labour so quickly. Careless to lose so many in a month IMHO.
  • RandallFlaggRandallFlagg Posts: 1,498
    Andy_JS said:

    Nothing Trump wrote in that message was untrue.

    Immigration is falling.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 60,584
    edited 4:25PM
    Spain ripping the Saudis apart.

    3-0 after 23 minutes.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 26,328

    FPT:

    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    eek said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:
    Again she's ruling out a pact, but AFAICS she's not ruling out putting Nigel Farage in power.
    Ruling out putting Farage in power would be equivalent to committing to forming a 'coalition of chaos' even if Reform have 300+ MPs. Her position is the only politically sensible one.
    No it’s not.

    There’s other options.

    Such as let Reform run a minority government or have another election.
    Kemi telling Tory MPs to abstain in a confidence vote in a hung Parliament is neither making Farage PM nor keeping Labour in office. So her position is correct
    How is abstaining in a VoC when everyone else votes against not "making Farage PM?"
    As it isn’t voting to make Farage PM anymore than it is voting to make Starmer or Burnham PM
    Let's test this - if an opponent tried the same line would you accept the same logic and not criticise them for 'allowing' it?
    No. A positive vote for Burnham or Starmer is a vote for a Labour government, a positive vote for Farage is a vote for a Reform government, abstaining is a vote for neither only a Kemi led government
    Kemi's in no position to form a government,

    She could be in a position to join a coalition but then who with She;s falling straight in to the CDU trap.
    No she isn’t, the CDU have gone into coalition with the SPD. Kemi has ruled out a deal with Labour or Reform
    Then she's just opting to be the opposition, Or is she going to merge with the LDs ?
    The Tories are in an impossible situation - a large section of their never Labour vote has gone to Reform - it's not exactly easy to get it back.

    Worse they don't want to lose any chance of getting some never Reform votes so they have to rule out supporting Reform.

    It leaves Kemi and the Tory party a very fine line that they have to navigate in the hope / until the political landscape changes to their favour..
    I think the bigger problem for the Tories is trying to recover some credibility. They have been behind some of the worst policy decisions this country has seen. They struggle to take HMG to task as it quite often is just continuing what they started,
    The Tory USP that more than any other factor explains why they usually win UK general elections is that they are trusted with the £££ more than Labour are. Liz Truss dropped that most precious aspect of the brand on the floor, stamped on it, crushed it to dust and buried the ashes deep underground in a heavily locked casket. Kemi has to excavate and retrieve it in order to win again. I've made it sound impossible but it isn't. Just start the dig and keep at it.
    Tbh I didnt even notice the Truss shock either personally or at work. To me most of it was a City flap because a lot of overpaid people found themselves wrong sided.
    You weren't trying to buy a flat at the time as I was, then. What a staggeringly arrogant post.
    Why is you buying a flat my prime concern ?

    Shit happens and you get over it.
    Yeah, that's why the Tories lost.
    Indeed and Labour will be close behind as their record on the economy is appalling.
    I do not believe Labour will lose in 2029.
    Rough approximation model of UK General Elections:

    Whichever side/bloc is less divided, or more efficiently divided, wins.

    Because of that, Kemi and Nigel need an understanding. But because they're both divas, and Nigel is toxic to many, they can't come to an understanding.

    Everything else is noise.
    They need to disagree to appeal to different voter blocs. Farage - WWC, a good portion of pensioners. Tories - young white collar professionals, small to medium-sized business people, people who do something in the city, posh people in the shires. Obviously with some crossover.

    Add them up when the election has happened, you have a powerful coalition representing the majority of the electorate.
    We've just had a real time exercise in testing Farage's preternatural attraction to the WWC.
    Yes we have, it was called the local elections and he cleaned up with the WWC, including in Makerfield.

    In the Makerfield by-election itself, many of Burnham's supporters are Reform voters, directly crossing over either because they like Burnham or because he is going to get rid of Starmer, or both. BigG's convoluted theory that Burnham drew his support from loyal Tories determined to sock it to Farage was deeply implausible.
    Nothing convoluted about conservatives voting for Burnham to see Starmer lose and embarrass Farage

    I expect Farage may leave Reform in the next 12 months and indeed lose their shine as the Andy - Kemi show hits town over the next 3 years
    What are the Conservatives going to use for credibility ?
    Losing Jenrick Braverman and a few others is excellent news

    Reminds me of the old days when Conservatives used to tell anyone they couldnt win an argument against to fk off and join UKIP.

    Then when they did and stopped the Tories winning seats they looked pretty stupid.

    The Tories have pissed off too many people and need to buy the occasional hair shirt

    A lot of the presnt mess can be traced back to their stupodity
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 40,157

    I don't have high hopes for Burnham in the way I did for Starmer, but then Starmer disappointed beyond comprehension.

    There again the PBers who couldn't contain their excitement at PMs Johnson and Truss are the ones predicting Burnham will be rubbish.

    Just sayin'

    I didn't vote for Johnson in the membership ballot, I wanted Sunak not Truss and I think Burnham could be a breath of fresh air

    I assume I am not included in your observation !!!!!
    No, you have been far more enthusiastic for Burnham than I have been.

    I wish him well now the Machiavellian mischief is done.
  • CatManCatMan Posts: 3,870
    The spirit of El Cid lives on in football it seems

    #TooSoon?
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 28,998

    Andy_JS said:

    Nothing Trump wrote in that message was untrue.

    Immigration is falling.
    Technically, it's not going up as fast. "Falling" would require a net outflow.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 59,163

    Spain ripping the Saudis apart.

    3-0 after 23 minutes.

    Spain ripping the Saudis apart.

    3-0 after 23 minutes.

    That 3rd goal was just brilliant.
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 8,304
    viewcode said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Nothing Trump wrote in that message was untrue.

    Immigration is falling.
    Technically, it's not going up as fast. "Falling" would require a net outflow.
    Not if you are referring to the number of immigrants, as opposed to net immiration
  • I think Burnham inherits a significantly better situation than Starmer did. He can take advantage of publicising things Starmer has been unable to.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 28,979
    viewcode said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Nothing Trump wrote in that message was untrue.

    Immigration is falling.
    Technically, it's not going up as fast. "Falling" would require a net outflow.
    Technically since immigration is by itself already a first order change it falling means a second order change of it not going up as fast.

    Just like inflation falling means prices are not going up as fast, not that they are coming back down.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 59,163
    Nigelb said:

    For once (and it is a rare thing) Peston is correct.

    I know we’re mostly inured to Donald Trump’s disregard for institutional norms and proprieties, but pre-announcing the resignation of the prime minister of America’s supposedly most important ally is pretty extreme, even by his standards. UK ministers are genuinely and understandably shocked
    https://x.com/Peston/status/2068705056589758797

    The only worrying thing about this is that even now some UK Ministers appear not to have worked out that Trump is an arsehole. Which is pretty remarkable for anyone paying even the slightest attention.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 26,328
    DavidL said:

    Nigelb said:

    For once (and it is a rare thing) Peston is correct.

    I know we’re mostly inured to Donald Trump’s disregard for institutional norms and proprieties, but pre-announcing the resignation of the prime minister of America’s supposedly most important ally is pretty extreme, even by his standards. UK ministers are genuinely and understandably shocked
    https://x.com/Peston/status/2068705056589758797

    The only worrying thing about this is that even now some UK Ministers appear not to have worked out that Trump is an arsehole. Which is pretty remarkable for anyone paying even the slightest attention.
    Why the surprise ? It;s taken them 5 years to work out Starmer;s one and theyve been with him all that time.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 28,979

    viewcode said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Nothing Trump wrote in that message was untrue.

    Immigration is falling.
    Technically, it's not going up as fast. "Falling" would require a net outflow.
    Not if you are referring to the number of immigrants, as opposed to net immiration
    Now that changes it again, the number of immigrants falling would require an outflow, if you refer to how many immigrants there are in the country.

    The number of immigrants per annum does not for immigration to be falling.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 28,979

    Spain ripping the Saudis apart.

    3-0 after 23 minutes.

    Oh no, how sad, nevermind.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 72,403

    FPT:

    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    eek said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:
    Again she's ruling out a pact, but AFAICS she's not ruling out putting Nigel Farage in power.
    Ruling out putting Farage in power would be equivalent to committing to forming a 'coalition of chaos' even if Reform have 300+ MPs. Her position is the only politically sensible one.
    No it’s not.

    There’s other options.

    Such as let Reform run a minority government or have another election.
    Kemi telling Tory MPs to abstain in a confidence vote in a hung Parliament is neither making Farage PM nor keeping Labour in office. So her position is correct
    How is abstaining in a VoC when everyone else votes against not "making Farage PM?"
    As it isn’t voting to make Farage PM anymore than it is voting to make Starmer or Burnham PM
    Let's test this - if an opponent tried the same line would you accept the same logic and not criticise them for 'allowing' it?
    No. A positive vote for Burnham or Starmer is a vote for a Labour government, a positive vote for Farage is a vote for a Reform government, abstaining is a vote for neither only a Kemi led government
    Kemi's in no position to form a government,

    She could be in a position to join a coalition but then who with She;s falling straight in to the CDU trap.
    No she isn’t, the CDU have gone into coalition with the SPD. Kemi has ruled out a deal with Labour or Reform
    Then she's just opting to be the opposition, Or is she going to merge with the LDs ?
    The Tories are in an impossible situation - a large section of their never Labour vote has gone to Reform - it's not exactly easy to get it back.

    Worse they don't want to lose any chance of getting some never Reform votes so they have to rule out supporting Reform.

    It leaves Kemi and the Tory party a very fine line that they have to navigate in the hope / until the political landscape changes to their favour..
    I think the bigger problem for the Tories is trying to recover some credibility. They have been behind some of the worst policy decisions this country has seen. They struggle to take HMG to task as it quite often is just continuing what they started,
    The Tory USP that more than any other factor explains why they usually win UK general elections is that they are trusted with the £££ more than Labour are. Liz Truss dropped that most precious aspect of the brand on the floor, stamped on it, crushed it to dust and buried the ashes deep underground in a heavily locked casket. Kemi has to excavate and retrieve it in order to win again. I've made it sound impossible but it isn't. Just start the dig and keep at it.
    Tbh I didnt even notice the Truss shock either personally or at work. To me most of it was a City flap because a lot of overpaid people found themselves wrong sided.
    You weren't trying to buy a flat at the time as I was, then. What a staggeringly arrogant post.
    Why is you buying a flat my prime concern ?

    Shit happens and you get over it.
    Yeah, that's why the Tories lost.
    Indeed and Labour will be close behind as their record on the economy is appalling.
    I do not believe Labour will lose in 2029.
    Rough approximation model of UK General Elections:

    Whichever side/bloc is less divided, or more efficiently divided, wins.

    Because of that, Kemi and Nigel need an understanding. But because they're both divas, and Nigel is toxic to many, they can't come to an understanding.

    Everything else is noise.
    They need to disagree to appeal to different voter blocs. Farage - WWC, a good portion of pensioners. Tories - young white collar professionals, small to medium-sized business people, people who do something in the city, posh people in the shires. Obviously with some crossover.

    Add them up when the election has happened, you have a powerful coalition representing the majority of the electorate.
    We've just had a real time exercise in testing Farage's preternatural attraction to the WWC.
    Yes we have, it was called the local elections and he cleaned up with the WWC, including in Makerfield.

    In the Makerfield by-election itself, many of Burnham's supporters are Reform voters, directly crossing over either because they like Burnham or because he is going to get rid of Starmer, or both. BigG's convoluted theory that Burnham drew his support from loyal Tories determined to sock it to Farage was deeply implausible.
    Nothing convoluted about conservatives voting for Burnham to see Starmer lose and embarrass Farage

    I expect Farage may leave Reform in the next 12 months and indeed lose their shine as the Andy - Kemi show hits town over the next 3 years
    What are the Conservatives going to use for credibility ?
    Losing Jenrick Braverman and a few others is excellent news

    Reminds me of the old days when Conservatives used to tell anyone they couldnt win an argument against to fk off and join UKIP.

    Then when they did and stopped the Tories winning seats they looked pretty stupid.

    The Tories have pissed off too many people and need to buy the occasional hair shirt

    A lot of the presnt mess can be traced back to their stupodity
    Your last sentence is exactly why I named Jenrick and Braverman
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 59,163
    CatMan said:

    The spirit of El Cid lives on in football it seems

    #TooSoon?

    Its nearly `1000 years!
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 23,085
    DavidL said:

    Nigelb said:

    For once (and it is a rare thing) Peston is correct.

    I know we’re mostly inured to Donald Trump’s disregard for institutional norms and proprieties, but pre-announcing the resignation of the prime minister of America’s supposedly most important ally is pretty extreme, even by his standards. UK ministers are genuinely and understandably shocked
    https://x.com/Peston/status/2068705056589758797

    The only worrying thing about this is that even now some UK Ministers appear not to have worked out that Trump is an arsehole. Which is pretty remarkable for anyone paying even the slightest attention.
    1 It's too depressing to contemplate, so I can understand anyone who has to deal with the USA puting a tarpaulin over that piece of information.

    2 Even if you have taken onboard that Trump is not a nice man at all, he can (and does) still shock with how not-nice he is.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 60,159

    Andy_JS said:

    Nothing Trump wrote in that message was untrue.

    Immigration is falling.
    But relative to Carney's performance in Canada or Trump himself in the USA, it's not coming down fast enough.
  • Brixian59Brixian59 Posts: 2,466

    Spain ripping the Saudis apart.

    3-0 after 23 minutes.

    Saudi will bring Glenn Hoddle on at half time and win 6 - 4

    Have no fear
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 59,163
    This is brutal. Absolutely relentless. This is the best I have seen anyone play at this WC.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 37,157
    edited 4:45PM
    DavidL said:

    This is brutal. Absolutely relentless. This is the best I have seen anyone play at this WC.

    The most one-sided for sure. Saudi are allowing them the freedom.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 26,328
    edited 4:44PM

    FPT:

    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    eek said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:
    Again she's ruling out a pact, but AFAICS she's not ruling out putting Nigel Farage in power.
    Ruling out putting Farage in power would be equivalent to committing to forming a 'coalition of chaos' even if Reform have 300+ MPs. Her position is the only politically sensible one.
    No it’s not.

    There’s other options.

    Such as let Reform run a minority government or have another election.
    Kemi telling Tory MPs to abstain in a confidence vote in a hung Parliament is neither making Farage PM nor keeping Labour in office. So her position is correct
    How is abstaining in a VoC when everyone else votes against not "making Farage PM?"
    As it isn’t voting to make Farage PM anymore than it is voting to make Starmer or Burnham PM
    Let's test this - if an opponent tried the same line would you accept the same logic and not criticise them for 'allowing' it?
    No. A positive vote for Burnham or Starmer is a vote for a Labour government, a positive vote for Farage is a vote for a Reform government, abstaining is a vote for neither only a Kemi led government
    Kemi's in no position to form a government,

    She could be in a position to join a coalition but then who with She;s falling straight in to the CDU trap.
    No she isn’t, the CDU have gone into coalition with the SPD. Kemi has ruled out a deal with Labour or Reform
    Then she's just opting to be the opposition, Or is she going to merge with the LDs ?
    The Tories are in an impossible situation - a large section of their never Labour vote has gone to Reform - it's not exactly easy to get it back.

    Worse they don't want to lose any chance of getting some never Reform votes so they have to rule out supporting Reform.

    It leaves Kemi and the Tory party a very fine line that they have to navigate in the hope / until the political landscape changes to their favour..
    I think the bigger problem for the Tories is trying to recover some credibility. They have been behind some of the worst policy decisions this country has seen. They struggle to take HMG to task as it quite often is just continuing what they started,
    The Tory USP that more than any other factor explains why they usually win UK general elections is that they are trusted with the £££ more than Labour are. Liz Truss dropped that most precious aspect of the brand on the floor, stamped on it, crushed it to dust and buried the ashes deep underground in a heavily locked casket. Kemi has to excavate and retrieve it in order to win again. I've made it sound impossible but it isn't. Just start the dig and keep at it.
    Tbh I didnt even notice the Truss shock either personally or at work. To me most of it was a City flap because a lot of overpaid people found themselves wrong sided.
    You weren't trying to buy a flat at the time as I was, then. What a staggeringly arrogant post.
    Why is you buying a flat my prime concern ?

    Shit happens and you get over it.
    Yeah, that's why the Tories lost.
    Indeed and Labour will be close behind as their record on the economy is appalling.
    I do not believe Labour will lose in 2029.
    Rough approximation model of UK General Elections:

    Whichever side/bloc is less divided, or more efficiently divided, wins.

    Because of that, Kemi and Nigel need an understanding. But because they're both divas, and Nigel is toxic to many, they can't come to an understanding.

    Everything else is noise.
    They need to disagree to appeal to different voter blocs. Farage - WWC, a good portion of pensioners. Tories - young white collar professionals, small to medium-sized business people, people who do something in the city, posh people in the shires. Obviously with some crossover.

    Add them up when the election has happened, you have a powerful coalition representing the majority of the electorate.
    We've just had a real time exercise in testing Farage's preternatural attraction to the WWC.
    Yes we have, it was called the local elections and he cleaned up with the WWC, including in Makerfield.

    In the Makerfield by-election itself, many of Burnham's supporters are Reform voters, directly crossing over either because they like Burnham or because he is going to get rid of Starmer, or both. BigG's convoluted theory that Burnham drew his support from loyal Tories determined to sock it to Farage was deeply implausible.
    Nothing convoluted about conservatives voting for Burnham to see Starmer lose and embarrass Farage

    I expect Farage may leave Reform in the next 12 months and indeed lose their shine as the Andy - Kemi show hits town over the next 3 years
    What are the Conservatives going to use for credibility ?
    Losing Jenrick Braverman and a few others is excellent news

    Reminds me of the old days when Conservatives used to tell anyone they couldnt win an argument against to fk off and join UKIP.

    Then when they did and stopped the Tories winning seats they looked pretty stupid.

    The Tories have pissed off too many people and need to buy the occasional hair shirt

    A lot of the presnt mess can be traced back to their stupodity
    Your last sentence is exactly why I named Jenrick and Braverman
    LOL you seem to have neglected the rest of the idiots - Cleverly - Chagos, Cameron - Brexit. May- Net Zero, Osborne - economic vandalism

    I could go on.

    Nothing amuses me more than kamikaze Chris Philp who bravely goes on TV to criticise the government only for interviewres to pull him apart bit by bit as he tries to attack a policy his own party introduced.
  • Brixian59Brixian59 Posts: 2,466

    FPT:

    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    eek said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:
    Again she's ruling out a pact, but AFAICS she's not ruling out putting Nigel Farage in power.
    Ruling out putting Farage in power would be equivalent to committing to forming a 'coalition of chaos' even if Reform have 300+ MPs. Her position is the only politically sensible one.
    No it’s not.

    There’s other options.

    Such as let Reform run a minority government or have another election.
    Kemi telling Tory MPs to abstain in a confidence vote in a hung Parliament is neither making Farage PM nor keeping Labour in office. So her position is correct
    How is abstaining in a VoC when everyone else votes against not "making Farage PM?"
    As it isn’t voting to make Farage PM anymore than it is voting to make Starmer or Burnham PM
    Let's test this - if an opponent tried the same line would you accept the same logic and not criticise them for 'allowing' it?
    No. A positive vote for Burnham or Starmer is a vote for a Labour government, a positive vote for Farage is a vote for a Reform government, abstaining is a vote for neither only a Kemi led government
    Kemi's in no position to form a government,

    She could be in a position to join a coalition but then who with She;s falling straight in to the CDU trap.
    No she isn’t, the CDU have gone into coalition with the SPD. Kemi has ruled out a deal with Labour or Reform
    Then she's just opting to be the opposition, Or is she going to merge with the LDs ?
    The Tories are in an impossible situation - a large section of their never Labour vote has gone to Reform - it's not exactly easy to get it back.

    Worse they don't want to lose any chance of getting some never Reform votes so they have to rule out supporting Reform.

    It leaves Kemi and the Tory party a very fine line that they have to navigate in the hope / until the political landscape changes to their favour..
    I think the bigger problem for the Tories is trying to recover some credibility. They have been behind some of the worst policy decisions this country has seen. They struggle to take HMG to task as it quite often is just continuing what they started,
    The Tory USP that more than any other factor explains why they usually win UK general elections is that they are trusted with the £££ more than Labour are. Liz Truss dropped that most precious aspect of the brand on the floor, stamped on it, crushed it to dust and buried the ashes deep underground in a heavily locked casket. Kemi has to excavate and retrieve it in order to win again. I've made it sound impossible but it isn't. Just start the dig and keep at it.
    Tbh I didnt even notice the Truss shock either personally or at work. To me most of it was a City flap because a lot of overpaid people found themselves wrong sided.
    You weren't trying to buy a flat at the time as I was, then. What a staggeringly arrogant post.
    Why is you buying a flat my prime concern ?

    Shit happens and you get over it.
    Yeah, that's why the Tories lost.
    Indeed and Labour will be close behind as their record on the economy is appalling.
    I do not believe Labour will lose in 2029.
    Rough approximation model of UK General Elections:

    Whichever side/bloc is less divided, or more efficiently divided, wins.

    Because of that, Kemi and Nigel need an understanding. But because they're both divas, and Nigel is toxic to many, they can't come to an understanding.

    Everything else is noise.
    They need to disagree to appeal to different voter blocs. Farage - WWC, a good portion of pensioners. Tories - young white collar professionals, small to medium-sized business people, people who do something in the city, posh people in the shires. Obviously with some crossover.

    Add them up when the election has happened, you have a powerful coalition representing the majority of the electorate.
    We've just had a real time exercise in testing Farage's preternatural attraction to the WWC.
    Yes we have, it was called the local elections and he cleaned up with the WWC, including in Makerfield.

    In the Makerfield by-election itself, many of Burnham's supporters are Reform voters, directly crossing over either because they like Burnham or because he is going to get rid of Starmer, or both. BigG's convoluted theory that Burnham drew his support from loyal Tories determined to sock it to Farage was deeply implausible.
    Nothing convoluted about conservatives voting for Burnham to see Starmer lose and embarrass Farage

    I expect Farage may leave Reform in the next 12 months and indeed lose their shine as the Andy - Kemi show hits town over the next 3 years
    What are the Conservatives going to use for credibility ?
    James Cleverly or Jeremy Hunt.
  • Brixian59Brixian59 Posts: 2,466

    FPT:

    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    eek said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:
    Again she's ruling out a pact, but AFAICS she's not ruling out putting Nigel Farage in power.
    Ruling out putting Farage in power would be equivalent to committing to forming a 'coalition of chaos' even if Reform have 300+ MPs. Her position is the only politically sensible one.
    No it’s not.

    There’s other options.

    Such as let Reform run a minority government or have another election.
    Kemi telling Tory MPs to abstain in a confidence vote in a hung Parliament is neither making Farage PM nor keeping Labour in office. So her position is correct
    How is abstaining in a VoC when everyone else votes against not "making Farage PM?"
    As it isn’t voting to make Farage PM anymore than it is voting to make Starmer or Burnham PM
    Let's test this - if an opponent tried the same line would you accept the same logic and not criticise them for 'allowing' it?
    No. A positive vote for Burnham or Starmer is a vote for a Labour government, a positive vote for Farage is a vote for a Reform government, abstaining is a vote for neither only a Kemi led government
    Kemi's in no position to form a government,

    She could be in a position to join a coalition but then who with She;s falling straight in to the CDU trap.
    No she isn’t, the CDU have gone into coalition with the SPD. Kemi has ruled out a deal with Labour or Reform
    Then she's just opting to be the opposition, Or is she going to merge with the LDs ?
    The Tories are in an impossible situation - a large section of their never Labour vote has gone to Reform - it's not exactly easy to get it back.

    Worse they don't want to lose any chance of getting some never Reform votes so they have to rule out supporting Reform.

    It leaves Kemi and the Tory party a very fine line that they have to navigate in the hope / until the political landscape changes to their favour..
    I think the bigger problem for the Tories is trying to recover some credibility. They have been behind some of the worst policy decisions this country has seen. They struggle to take HMG to task as it quite often is just continuing what they started,
    The Tory USP that more than any other factor explains why they usually win UK general elections is that they are trusted with the £££ more than Labour are. Liz Truss dropped that most precious aspect of the brand on the floor, stamped on it, crushed it to dust and buried the ashes deep underground in a heavily locked casket. Kemi has to excavate and retrieve it in order to win again. I've made it sound impossible but it isn't. Just start the dig and keep at it.
    Tbh I didnt even notice the Truss shock either personally or at work. To me most of it was a City flap because a lot of overpaid people found themselves wrong sided.
    You weren't trying to buy a flat at the time as I was, then. What a staggeringly arrogant post.
    Why is you buying a flat my prime concern ?

    Shit happens and you get over it.
    Yeah, that's why the Tories lost.
    Indeed and Labour will be close behind as their record on the economy is appalling.
    I do not believe Labour will lose in 2029.
    Rough approximation model of UK General Elections:

    Whichever side/bloc is less divided, or more efficiently divided, wins.

    Because of that, Kemi and Nigel need an understanding. But because they're both divas, and Nigel is toxic to many, they can't come to an understanding.

    Everything else is noise.
    They need to disagree to appeal to different voter blocs. Farage - WWC, a good portion of pensioners. Tories - young white collar professionals, small to medium-sized business people, people who do something in the city, posh people in the shires. Obviously with some crossover.

    Add them up when the election has happened, you have a powerful coalition representing the majority of the electorate.
    We've just had a real time exercise in testing Farage's preternatural attraction to the WWC.
    Yes we have, it was called the local elections and he cleaned up with the WWC, including in Makerfield.

    In the Makerfield by-election itself, many of Burnham's supporters are Reform voters, directly crossing over either because they like Burnham or because he is going to get rid of Starmer, or both. BigG's convoluted theory that Burnham drew his support from loyal Tories determined to sock it to Farage was deeply implausible.
    Nothing convoluted about conservatives voting for Burnham to see Starmer lose and embarrass Farage

    I expect Farage may leave Reform in the next 12 months and indeed lose their shine as the Andy - Kemi show hits town over the next 3 years
    What are the Conservatives going to use for credibility ?
    Losing Jenrick Braverman and a few others is excellent news

    Reminds me of the old days when Conservatives used to tell anyone they couldnt win an argument against to fk off and join UKIP.

    Then when they did and stopped the Tories winning seats they looked pretty stupid.

    The Tories have pissed off too many people and need to buy the occasional hair shirt

    A lot of the presnt mess can be traced back to their stupodity
    Your last sentence is exactly why I named Jenrick and Braverman
    LOL you seem to have neglected the rest of the idiots - Cleverly - Chagos, Cameron - Brexit. May- Net Zero, Osborne - economic vandalism

    I could go on.

    Nothing amuses me more than kamikaze Chris Philp who bravely goes on TV to criticise the government only for interviewrs to pull him apart bit by bit as he tries to criticse a policy his own party introduced.
    The utter paucity of the Tory Front Bench and their political background is something that a more balanced Media would have had an absolute field day with.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 35,442
    eek said:

    FPT:

    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    eek said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:
    Again she's ruling out a pact, but AFAICS she's not ruling out putting Nigel Farage in power.
    Ruling out putting Farage in power would be equivalent to committing to forming a 'coalition of chaos' even if Reform have 300+ MPs. Her position is the only politically sensible one.
    No it’s not.

    There’s other options.

    Such as let Reform run a minority government or have another election.
    Kemi telling Tory MPs to abstain in a confidence vote in a hung Parliament is neither making Farage PM nor keeping Labour in office. So her position is correct
    How is abstaining in a VoC when everyone else votes against not "making Farage PM?"
    As it isn’t voting to make Farage PM anymore than it is voting to make Starmer or Burnham PM
    Let's test this - if an opponent tried the same line would you accept the same logic and not criticise them for 'allowing' it?
    No. A positive vote for Burnham or Starmer is a vote for a Labour government, a positive vote for Farage is a vote for a Reform government, abstaining is a vote for neither only a Kemi led government
    Kemi's in no position to form a government,

    She could be in a position to join a coalition but then who with She;s falling straight in to the CDU trap.
    No she isn’t, the CDU have gone into coalition with the SPD. Kemi has ruled out a deal with Labour or Reform
    Then she's just opting to be the opposition, Or is she going to merge with the LDs ?
    The Tories are in an impossible situation - a large section of their never Labour vote has gone to Reform - it's not exactly easy to get it back.

    Worse they don't want to lose any chance of getting some never Reform votes so they have to rule out supporting Reform.

    It leaves Kemi and the Tory party a very fine line that they have to navigate in the hope / until the political landscape changes to their favour..
    I think the bigger problem for the Tories is trying to recover some credibility. They have been behind some of the worst policy decisions this country has seen. They struggle to take HMG to task as it quite often is just continuing what they started,
    The Tory USP that more than any other factor explains why they usually win UK general elections is that they are trusted with the £££ more than Labour are. Liz Truss dropped that most precious aspect of the brand on the floor, stamped on it, crushed it to dust and buried the ashes deep underground in a heavily locked casket. Kemi has to excavate and retrieve it in order to win again. I've made it sound impossible but it isn't. Just start the dig and keep at it.
    Tbh I didnt even notice the Truss shock either personally or at work. To me most of it was a City flap because a lot of overpaid people found themselves wrong sided.
    You weren't trying to buy a flat at the time as I was, then. What a staggeringly arrogant post.
    Why is you buying a flat my prime concern ?

    Shit happens and you get over it.
    Yeah, that's why the Tories lost.
    Indeed and Labour will be close behind as their record on the economy is appalling.
    I do not believe Labour will lose in 2029.
    Rough approximation model of UK General Elections:

    Whichever side/bloc is less divided, or more efficiently divided, wins.

    Because of that, Kemi and Nigel need an understanding. But because they're both divas, and Nigel is toxic to many, they can't come to an understanding.

    Everything else is noise.
    They need to disagree to appeal to different voter blocs. Farage - WWC, a good portion of pensioners. Tories - young white collar professionals, small to medium-sized business people, people who do something in the city, posh people in the shires. Obviously with some crossover.

    Add them up when the election has happened, you have a powerful coalition representing the majority of the electorate.
    We've just had a real time exercise in testing Farage's preternatural attraction to the WWC.
    Yes we have, it was called the local elections and he cleaned up with the WWC, including in Makerfield.

    In the Makerfield by-election itself, many of Burnham's supporters are Reform voters, directly crossing over either because they like Burnham or because he is going to get rid of Starmer, or both. BigG's convoluted theory that Burnham drew his support from loyal Tories determined to sock it to Farage was deeply implausible.
    Really? It boils down to do you want a Reform government at some point in the future or not. As a never Reform voter - I would have voted for Burnham..
    That would be your motivation. You can't impute that to everyone else.
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 8,304

    viewcode said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Nothing Trump wrote in that message was untrue.

    Immigration is falling.
    Technically, it's not going up as fast. "Falling" would require a net outflow.
    Not if you are referring to the number of immigrants, as opposed to net immiration
    Now that changes it again, the number of immigrants falling would require an outflow, if you refer to how many immigrants there are in the country.

    The number of immigrants per annum does not for immigration to be falling.
    I'm not sure your last sentence makes sense.

    By number of immigrants I meant the number of people coming into the country. Not people who already live here, like (I presume) TSE's parents.

    The normal meaning of "immigration" in English is surely 'the number of people coming into the country".
  • MelonBMelonB Posts: 17,435
    edited 4:46PM

    Andy_JS said:

    Nothing Trump wrote in that message was untrue.

    Immigration is falling.
    But relative to Carney's performance in Canada or Trump himself in the USA, it's not coming down fast enough.
    It's quite possible we could be in a situation of next emigration within a year or two. That's not the sign of a successful economy.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 35,442
    Brixian59 said:

    FPT:

    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    eek said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:
    Again she's ruling out a pact, but AFAICS she's not ruling out putting Nigel Farage in power.
    Ruling out putting Farage in power would be equivalent to committing to forming a 'coalition of chaos' even if Reform have 300+ MPs. Her position is the only politically sensible one.
    No it’s not.

    There’s other options.

    Such as let Reform run a minority government or have another election.
    Kemi telling Tory MPs to abstain in a confidence vote in a hung Parliament is neither making Farage PM nor keeping Labour in office. So her position is correct
    How is abstaining in a VoC when everyone else votes against not "making Farage PM?"
    As it isn’t voting to make Farage PM anymore than it is voting to make Starmer or Burnham PM
    Let's test this - if an opponent tried the same line would you accept the same logic and not criticise them for 'allowing' it?
    No. A positive vote for Burnham or Starmer is a vote for a Labour government, a positive vote for Farage is a vote for a Reform government, abstaining is a vote for neither only a Kemi led government
    Kemi's in no position to form a government,

    She could be in a position to join a coalition but then who with She;s falling straight in to the CDU trap.
    No she isn’t, the CDU have gone into coalition with the SPD. Kemi has ruled out a deal with Labour or Reform
    Then she's just opting to be the opposition, Or is she going to merge with the LDs ?
    The Tories are in an impossible situation - a large section of their never Labour vote has gone to Reform - it's not exactly easy to get it back.

    Worse they don't want to lose any chance of getting some never Reform votes so they have to rule out supporting Reform.

    It leaves Kemi and the Tory party a very fine line that they have to navigate in the hope / until the political landscape changes to their favour..
    I think the bigger problem for the Tories is trying to recover some credibility. They have been behind some of the worst policy decisions this country has seen. They struggle to take HMG to task as it quite often is just continuing what they started,
    The Tory USP that more than any other factor explains why they usually win UK general elections is that they are trusted with the £££ more than Labour are. Liz Truss dropped that most precious aspect of the brand on the floor, stamped on it, crushed it to dust and buried the ashes deep underground in a heavily locked casket. Kemi has to excavate and retrieve it in order to win again. I've made it sound impossible but it isn't. Just start the dig and keep at it.
    Tbh I didnt even notice the Truss shock either personally or at work. To me most of it was a City flap because a lot of overpaid people found themselves wrong sided.
    You weren't trying to buy a flat at the time as I was, then. What a staggeringly arrogant post.
    Why is you buying a flat my prime concern ?

    Shit happens and you get over it.
    Yeah, that's why the Tories lost.
    Indeed and Labour will be close behind as their record on the economy is appalling.
    I do not believe Labour will lose in 2029.
    Rough approximation model of UK General Elections:

    Whichever side/bloc is less divided, or more efficiently divided, wins.

    Because of that, Kemi and Nigel need an understanding. But because they're both divas, and Nigel is toxic to many, they can't come to an understanding.

    Everything else is noise.
    They need to disagree to appeal to different voter blocs. Farage - WWC, a good portion of pensioners. Tories - young white collar professionals, small to medium-sized business people, people who do something in the city, posh people in the shires. Obviously with some crossover.

    Add them up when the election has happened, you have a powerful coalition representing the majority of the electorate.
    We've just had a real time exercise in testing Farage's preternatural attraction to the WWC.
    Yes we have, it was called the local elections and he cleaned up with the WWC, including in Makerfield.

    In the Makerfield by-election itself, many of Burnham's supporters are Reform voters, directly crossing over either because they like Burnham or because he is going to get rid of Starmer, or both. BigG's convoluted theory that Burnham drew his support from loyal Tories determined to sock it to Farage was deeply implausible.
    Nothing convoluted about conservatives voting for Burnham to see Starmer lose and embarrass Farage

    I expect Farage may leave Reform in the next 12 months and indeed lose their shine as the Andy - Kemi show hits town over the next 3 years
    What are the Conservatives going to use for credibility ?
    James Cleverly or Jeremy Hunt.
    Um..
  • Brixian59Brixian59 Posts: 2,466
    The irony of the header is that no one played Trump better than Starmer - (other than Bibi) and fundamental to that strategy was Mandelson and all the dirt he has on Trump.

    Farage or Badenoch would by now have us as the 52nd State utterly subservient and at War with Iran.

    Any thought of either of them ever being PM is as dangerous as the Mail and Express wanting Oswald Moseley as PM in 1940.

  • eekeek Posts: 34,127

    eek said:

    FPT:

    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    eek said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:
    Again she's ruling out a pact, but AFAICS she's not ruling out putting Nigel Farage in power.
    Ruling out putting Farage in power would be equivalent to committing to forming a 'coalition of chaos' even if Reform have 300+ MPs. Her position is the only politically sensible one.
    No it’s not.

    There’s other options.

    Such as let Reform run a minority government or have another election.
    Kemi telling Tory MPs to abstain in a confidence vote in a hung Parliament is neither making Farage PM nor keeping Labour in office. So her position is correct
    How is abstaining in a VoC when everyone else votes against not "making Farage PM?"
    As it isn’t voting to make Farage PM anymore than it is voting to make Starmer or Burnham PM
    Let's test this - if an opponent tried the same line would you accept the same logic and not criticise them for 'allowing' it?
    No. A positive vote for Burnham or Starmer is a vote for a Labour government, a positive vote for Farage is a vote for a Reform government, abstaining is a vote for neither only a Kemi led government
    Kemi's in no position to form a government,

    She could be in a position to join a coalition but then who with She;s falling straight in to the CDU trap.
    No she isn’t, the CDU have gone into coalition with the SPD. Kemi has ruled out a deal with Labour or Reform
    Then she's just opting to be the opposition, Or is she going to merge with the LDs ?
    The Tories are in an impossible situation - a large section of their never Labour vote has gone to Reform - it's not exactly easy to get it back.

    Worse they don't want to lose any chance of getting some never Reform votes so they have to rule out supporting Reform.

    It leaves Kemi and the Tory party a very fine line that they have to navigate in the hope / until the political landscape changes to their favour..
    I think the bigger problem for the Tories is trying to recover some credibility. They have been behind some of the worst policy decisions this country has seen. They struggle to take HMG to task as it quite often is just continuing what they started,
    The Tory USP that more than any other factor explains why they usually win UK general elections is that they are trusted with the £££ more than Labour are. Liz Truss dropped that most precious aspect of the brand on the floor, stamped on it, crushed it to dust and buried the ashes deep underground in a heavily locked casket. Kemi has to excavate and retrieve it in order to win again. I've made it sound impossible but it isn't. Just start the dig and keep at it.
    Tbh I didnt even notice the Truss shock either personally or at work. To me most of it was a City flap because a lot of overpaid people found themselves wrong sided.
    You weren't trying to buy a flat at the time as I was, then. What a staggeringly arrogant post.
    Why is you buying a flat my prime concern ?

    Shit happens and you get over it.
    Yeah, that's why the Tories lost.
    Indeed and Labour will be close behind as their record on the economy is appalling.
    I do not believe Labour will lose in 2029.
    Rough approximation model of UK General Elections:

    Whichever side/bloc is less divided, or more efficiently divided, wins.

    Because of that, Kemi and Nigel need an understanding. But because they're both divas, and Nigel is toxic to many, they can't come to an understanding.

    Everything else is noise.
    They need to disagree to appeal to different voter blocs. Farage - WWC, a good portion of pensioners. Tories - young white collar professionals, small to medium-sized business people, people who do something in the city, posh people in the shires. Obviously with some crossover.

    Add them up when the election has happened, you have a powerful coalition representing the majority of the electorate.
    We've just had a real time exercise in testing Farage's preternatural attraction to the WWC.
    Yes we have, it was called the local elections and he cleaned up with the WWC, including in Makerfield.

    In the Makerfield by-election itself, many of Burnham's supporters are Reform voters, directly crossing over either because they like Burnham or because he is going to get rid of Starmer, or both. BigG's convoluted theory that Burnham drew his support from loyal Tories determined to sock it to Farage was deeply implausible.
    Really? It boils down to do you want a Reform government at some point in the future or not. As a never Reform voter - I would have voted for Burnham..
    That would be your motivation. You can't impute that to everyone else.
    All I did there was impute my viewpoint on to others. - which is also what you did but you aren't bright enough to pick up why you post what you post.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 28,979

    viewcode said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Nothing Trump wrote in that message was untrue.

    Immigration is falling.
    Technically, it's not going up as fast. "Falling" would require a net outflow.
    Not if you are referring to the number of immigrants, as opposed to net immiration
    Now that changes it again, the number of immigrants falling would require an outflow, if you refer to how many immigrants there are in the country.

    The number of immigrants per annum does not for immigration to be falling.
    I'm not sure your last sentence makes sense.

    By number of immigrants I meant the number of people coming into the country. Not people who already live here, like (I presume) TSE's parents.

    The normal meaning of "immigration" in English is surely 'the number of people coming into the country".
    Precisely my point.

    Immigration is a first order change, it measures the rate of change. Like inflation. Which means like inflation it can mean the number of immigrants in the country can be going up even if immigration is coming down, just as inflation falling can still mean prices going up.

    However you changed the language by referring to the number of immigrants, rather than the word immigration. The number of immigrants in this country arguably includes previous migration so is not a first order change, it is an absolute number. The number of immigrants per annum, is what immigration measures, so is the first order change and it falling is a second order change that is possible even if still positive, like inflation.
Sign In or Register to comment.