Byronic Enigma

@Pwebstertimes These days there's so much 'briefing' that I expect much of it is fabricated. Journalists are under so much pressure for new material that they are easy prey for people who are on the fringes of circles of power to claim faux insider knowledge.

Just reading Times front of website story on Burnham going for the kill quickly if he wins. never seen such amateurish briefing . Why brief that kind of detail ? How does it help him get over line in makerfield ? He needs one person speaking for him and tell “allies” to shut it

@BellaWallerstei Govt has tried very hard to work with tech companies. The problem is that, backed by an aggressive US government, they are emboldened to expect to dictate to UK/European companies how they want the regulatory environment to be, not to try to compromise with governments.

I have experienced death threats, rape threats, stalking-like behaviour and had my content manipulated into extreme pornographic material using AI. These experiences have shown me just how urgently stronger protections are needed online. But while I believe tougher regulation is necessary I do worry that an outright ban on social media for young people is unlikely to be effective in practice. I can’t help but feel government would achieve more by working closely with technology companies to make their platforms safer and ensure better enforcement against abuse. I say this with no agenda other than a genuine desire to prevent other girls and young women from experiencing what I have

@Lfc_ola_ is it Harry Kewell?

99% of football fans will fail this Guess the missing player Level: Hard

@FUDdaily The funding and some policy comes from group 2, the frontmen/women are group 1 - who are generally incapable of public policy that goes beyond making statements complaining that things are woke. Group 3 are almost a sideshow and the more extreme versions put off the electorate.

@FUDdaily 3) nationalist ideologues (who come in different forms) who argue amongst themselves but are motivated by discussions on culture/race/identity rather than public policy and have little interest in the detail of public service

Policy is an essential part of building credibility. I'm not going to vote for a party that churns out generic populist slop. I need to know that my vote isn't being wasted on people who have no idea how to proceed. I have seen no evidence whatsoever that the slop-right are capable of doing even half of what they propose.

@Number10cat @elliehodges62 Farage won't like being dictated to by anyone so he will resist for a long time. But if 6 months out from an election, Lowe can say: look Nigel, you won't get in No 10 with us as a rival, lets agree something where I remove the spoiler vote and bring Musk's resources on board...

@Number10cat @elliehodges62 Probably also looking for future leverage. If Restore get to a position where they have a credible threat of blocking Reform's route to power they can force "unite the right" talks and extract leverage in terms of influence, appointments and policy for their people.

I find it absolutely bizarre how Restore focus all their time on attacking Reform instead of the Labour Party. Really weird…..

@cta84 @PolitlcsUK @thetimes Could give a dispensation for those who join the army as an incentive to improve recruitment. Allow screenings in the barracks. "Won't even bother looking for that let alone chasing it....that's gone into the confectionary stall, and out again..."

@PolitlcsUK @thetimes They can join the army but can't watch Botham's Ashes on YT after midnight? What rot

🚨 NEW: Keir Starmer will introduce nightly social media curfews for 16 and 17-year-olds as part of the Government's social media ban [@thetimes]

@vkc1000 He's wearing a sweater so he's in England. I'm going to guess this is the 1989 tour where his skiddy inswing was a great foil to Terry Alderman's masterful outswing.

2nd question of the day. Who is this bowler in this picture attached below here 👇 Answer it without using Google or other internet sites.

@The_tired_giant @joseph_gellman She was out of the John Major / Gordon Brown mould of PMs who saw the job as a public service role not a prize to be won as a reward for ambition which then allows you to use the power/prestige to favour your own cronies and improve your post-politics career prospects.

@joseph_gellman May was goofy as fuck but in comparison to what we’ve had since she was the most centrist PM possibly ever while also being very socially progressive

Do you reckon Theresa May had some non-evil equivalent to the JK Rowling black mould which turned her from a section 28 supporter to the most progressive PM on LGBT rights the UK has ever had?

@GordonFielden It's a by election to elect an MP for that constituency. The public know there's a Labour government, whoever they elect. They are choosing who they want to represent them in Makerfield.

The most striking thing about this image is not who is in it, but what is missing from it. Where is the Labour Party? There are "Vote Andy" signs everywhere. There are references to hope. There is a campaign built around one individual. Yet there appears to be no visible Labour Party branding, no Labour message and no sense that this is a campaign for the party rather than for a personality. That should concern every Labour member. The Labour Party has never been about one individual. It is a collective movement built by millions of members, supporters, trade unionists and elected representatives over more than a century. What this image portrays is something very different. It portrays a campaign centred entirely on Andy Burnham. The difficulty with personal movements is that they often assume everyone else will simply fall into line afterwards. Politics rarely works that way. Hundreds of thousands of Labour members have invested years of their lives campaigning for the party, defending its values and supporting its manifesto. They did not join an Andy Burnham party. Many MPs are only a short time into their parliamentary careers, elected on a Labour manifesto under Keir Starmer's leadership. If they choose to place personal ambition above that mandate, they should not assume there will be no consequences. This could prove to be a defining moment for the Labour Party. Because if members conclude that the party has become about personalities rather than principles, many may simply walk away. And history teaches us that when mainstream democratic parties become divided and consumed by internal struggles, the beneficiaries are rarely those involved in the dispute. They are the movements waiting outside, ready to exploit division and public frustration for their own ends. That is a lesson politics should never forget.

@TomSoede @juliasm18659356 It would be hard to shift him as leader of Reform but if Parliament decided he could no longer command the confidence of the House they could remove him as PM. Might mean some negotiations with Tories as to whether Jenrick/Kruger could form a govt with Tory support.

Good question. The public cannot directly remove a Prime Minister halfway through a Parliament. Reform could replace Farage internally, but its rules make that extremely difficult: 50% of the entire membership must request a confidence process. The MPs’ route only applies once Reform has more than 100 MPs. Alternatively, Reform MPs and ministers could rebel or resign until he was forced out. Parliament could defeat his government in a confidence vote, which would normally mean resignation or a general election. So safeguards exist — but ordinary Reform members have remarkably little practical power to initiate his removal. That is exactly my concern.

Perhaps Nigel Farage should return power to its own members before promising to return power to the country. Reform UK is not a normal democratic political party. It is constitutionally structured like a one-man operation wearing a party badge. Nigel Farage sits on the board. He appoints three board members. He appoints the party chairman, subject to board approval. And between board meetings, the powers of the board are delegated to the leader - 100% Meanwhile, ordinary members face an extraordinary process if they want to challenge him. They cannot simply trigger a leadership contest through local branches. They cannot remove him through a straightforward membership vote. Instead, 50% of the entire eligible membership must write to the chairman within the required period merely to initiate a no-confidence process. Not 50% of those who vote. Not 50% of local branches. Half of every eligible member And even then, the matter goes to the board. That is the structure. Members may pay their subscriptions. They may deliver leaflets. They may knock on doors. They may vote if a leadership contest is permitted. But when it comes to holding the man at the top accountable, their power is impossible to exercise. Reform calls itself a people’s movement. But its constitution reads more like a one-man command structure. Same strongman. Different logo.

@timajackson @anon_opin Gary Davies is still legit.

@anon_opin They are almost down to Simon Mayo only

If the BBC won't show Scott Mills TOTP episodes anymore, they definitely shouldn't show John Peel episodes.

@SteveAkehurst An interesting point is whether Restore / Reform voters would put each other as 2nd preference in a single transferable vote system. I expect lots would put the Tories 2nd.

If a split opposition bloc devalues a win then not only was Reform’s win in Runcorn (0.02% vs 7% Green voters) void, the entire Tory majority in 2019 was (60+ seats where the Tory majority was less than combined left vote). At least be consistent with this stuff.

Appreciate there’s spinning going on, but FYI “Burnham needs to win by more than the Restore vote” is a totally nonsense test to set. On national polling, Labour should be 20+ points behind in Makerfield. Whatever you think of him, if he wins it’s a genuine achievement.

@oldbencjw @JimmyMu35984013 Des Walker was one of the best centre backs in that World Cup

@JimmyMu35984013 Goalie - awful Defenders - ok for 1990 Midfielder- Gazza, Barnes, Waddle - class Strikers- Lineker, Beardsley - class Barnes and Gazza today would be best players in England

This was a really great England team. Probably the last time I watched them with interest. After John Barnes being booed every time he touched the ball a few years later I lost interest and stuck to just supporting Liverpool.

@GrahamDoolan1 @JimmyMu35984013 Was it Rangers?

@JimmyMu35984013 Without googling, what club had the most players in that squad?

@FUDdaily I can see a situation where they set up some sort of DOGE and get high on their own farts for the first 6 months after an election, closing down loads of government functions that they don't understand and sacking experienced people. Then discovering in a crisis they needed them.

@FUDdaily The other risk is events overtaking them, like covid did with Boris and Trump term 1. 2029-34 could see direct military action from Russia against the UK, or an AI-driven economic crisis. How will Reform be equipped to deal with a major national situation?

I have a hunch that the people of Makerfield will not look too kindly on all of the political parties turning their constituency into a circus. If Restore is throwing the kitchen sink at the constituency to block Reform, when Burnham was already a strong contender, I suspect rather a lot people will simply not bother voting - particularly those who might have voted for Reform. As such, Restore is likely to come away from this by-election with an inflated sense of what it can achieve, even though it cannot mobilise the same resources in a general election. That might be enough to force Reform to harden up its rhetoric. Meanwhile, all Reform has to do is raise the spectre of a Labour/Green/Lib Dem coalition, and that shoots Rupert's fox. There is also a chance, though, that something more profound is happening, in which (after events in Northern Ireland) there's a surge of white sectarianism, in which case Restore, as a voting faction, is a fixture - and a direct competitor to Reform, at which point a Tory Reform merger deal seems plausible - at which point we are back to square one, with a centre right party and an insurgent party, neither of which are capable of winning in their own right. What's entertaining about this is that if Restore does manage to bag a few seats at the general election, they are forced to prop up a Reform government in almost every vote, at which point its own MPs start wondering what the point of being a splinter party is, and defect to Reform. For my part, I have no vested interest in any of these outcomes. It's all just political entertainment. Either way, if the right wins, we're getting a lolcow government that won't see out a full term intact, and it definitely isn't getting re-elected. Slopulism doesn't survive first contact with reality, and the right lacks the talent and understanding to pull of even half of what they'd like to do. It won't take two years to paint themselves int a corner with a major constitutional crisis and a financial crisis. They'll attempt too do too much all at once and bite off more than they can chew. The era of stable government is over.