Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A 100/1 tip to be Theresa May’s successor

2

Comments

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    Hancock on Marr now
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    Glad that this royal wedding rubbish is all done. Though I'm sure the bandwagons will start rolling when Megan gets pregnant.

    Even as a supporter of the Monarchy it was all a bit much.

    However, one can't help but feel happy for them. The sour people this morning who are somehow put out by this wedding because they are either republican or racist against Megan should take a long look at themselves in the mirror. Why should two people's happiness detract from their own.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392

    Blimey, just noticed the Lewisham selection.

    Dire result for the Left.

    Wow.

    These things are surely relative. Corbyn will have another MP who is sure to be loyal most of the time, and who wants him to become PM, so he and the left are surely not going to be that upset.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    Here come the scratch and sniff porno passes..
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. Max, not sure I've heard anyone say anything racist about the bride. Or much republican tosh either.

    There's been an over-egging of the "Oh wow, she's mixed race!" cake by the media but that'll be at least partly down to them overdoing the whole thing.

    Good for British tourism, though.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    Pulpstar said:

    Here come the scratch and sniff porno passes..

    What, at this hour?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    Alex Bennet is very good.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    felix said:

    kle4 said:

    Foxy said:

    Sean_F said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Listening to the radio now, reporting on the papers' analysis of a wedding, there is the most awful and OTT guff being written about its alleged significance. From some of the commentary you'd have thought no-one in the Royal family had ever spoken to a non-white person before.

    I hope the couple don't fall into the trap of believing the hype, concentrate on their marriage, family (with luck) and what they can do with the privileges they enjoy.

    Enough.

    Some exquisite birdsong this morning in my garden. And more glorious weather on the way.

    It is pretty silly. I just cannot wait for the OTT opposite reaction where some one suggests meghan is not black enough or something as she is very light skinned.
    Has anyone opened a book on what the first racist remark Emma Dent Coad will make about the Duchess of Sussex (as I suppose we must now call her) will be?
    Maybe she'll call her a coconut.
    It is the right wing that is giving Meghan the slagging at present:

    https://twitter.com/KTHopkins/status/997841195165454337?s=19
    I don't even know what she's on about. She's put up pictures of 2 very pretty women side by side, am I supposed to notice something about it?
    Maybe one of the dresses is from Primark?
    Is it a visible shoulders/hairh back vs a long neckline/hair showing debate.
    Both look very well turned out, I think this is where the whole "women can't win whatever they do" stuff originates from or Hopkins prefers lighter hues...
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,263
    rcs1000 said:



    Lithuania!

    How many migrants trek to a middle income country with an indecipherable language?

    I think the Baltic issue is still with their large Russian minorities. Though apparently they're making an effort to attract IT geeks and other cross-border services, with some success. A big translation agency focused on EU translation that I do work for has just moved from Belgium to Lithuania. We freelancers don't care where they're based, of course, and presumably they have had tax or other incentives.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,765
    MaxPB said:

    Glad that this royal wedding rubbish is all done. Though I'm sure the bandwagons will start rolling when Megan gets pregnant.

    Even as a supporter of the Monarchy it was all a bit much.

    However, one can't help but feel happy for them. The sour people this morning who are somehow put out by this wedding because they are either republican or racist against Megan should take a long look at themselves in the mirror. Why should two people's happiness detract from their own.

    There are people whose lives are spoiled by other peoples' happiness, and enhanced by other peoples' misery.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,009
    Pulpstar said:

    felix said:

    kle4 said:

    Foxy said:

    Sean_F said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Listening to the radio now, reporting on the papers' analysis of a wedding, there is the most awful and OTT guff being written about its alleged significance. From some of the commentary you'd have thought no-one in the Royal family had ever spoken to a non-white person before.

    I hope the couple don't fall into the trap of believing the hype, concentrate on their marriage, family (with luck) and what they can do with the privileges they enjoy.

    Enough.

    Some exquisite birdsong this morning in my garden. And more glorious weather on the way.

    It is pretty silly. I just cannot wait for the OTT opposite reaction where some one suggests meghan is not black enough or something as she is very light skinned.
    Has anyone opened a book on what the first racist remark Emma Dent Coad will make about the Duchess of Sussex (as I suppose we must now call her) will be?
    Maybe she'll call her a coconut.
    It is the right wing that is giving Meghan the slagging at present:

    https://twitter.com/KTHopkins/status/997841195165454337?s=19
    I don't even know what she's on about. She's put up pictures of 2 very pretty women side by side, am I supposed to notice something about it?
    Maybe one of the dresses is from Primark?
    Is it a visible shoulders/hairh back vs a long neckline/hair showing debate.
    Both look very well turned out, I think this is where the whole "women can't win whatever they do" stuff originates from or Hopkins prefers lighter hues...
    The rule is that she'll take the most controversial position she can on any given subject, and the more contrary and outrageous the better.

    I think she sees herself as performing some sort of public debate balancing act and as a guardian of free speech, and thus she lives up to that role. I doubt she sincerely believes everything she writes. Her teachers used to describe her as a very nice and pleasant girl.

    Either way: she gets everyone talking about her, every single time, so it works.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,009
    Sean_F said:

    MaxPB said:

    Glad that this royal wedding rubbish is all done. Though I'm sure the bandwagons will start rolling when Megan gets pregnant.

    Even as a supporter of the Monarchy it was all a bit much.

    However, one can't help but feel happy for them. The sour people this morning who are somehow put out by this wedding because they are either republican or racist against Megan should take a long look at themselves in the mirror. Why should two people's happiness detract from their own.

    There are people whose lives are spoiled by other peoples' happiness, and enhanced by other peoples' misery.
    I do enjoy the approach Republicans use to win hearts and minds every time there's a royal wedding on.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    Lord Mandelson on Peston and says William and Harry have secured the monarchy's future for many years to come
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    edited May 2018
    Nicola Sturgeon again congratulates the royal couple on Peston, reiterates she wants more powers for Scotland post-Brexit
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614

    HYUFD said:

    Barry Gardiner tying himself in knots on Marr about his recorded statement that Britain could not secure 'the exact same benefits' as the single market

    Emma Barnett much more persistent in her questioning than Andrew Marr ever is.

    She’s very good. Emma was the lady who tripped up Corbyn in a radio interview before the last election. He obviously thought she was primarily a “presenter”, rather than a respected and experienced broadsheet journalist who does her research and knows how to tease answers out of an unwilling subject through her questioning.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,124
    Pulpstar said:

    felix said:

    kle4 said:

    Foxy said:

    Sean_F said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Listening to the radio now, reporting on the papers' analysis of a wedding, there is the most awful and OTT guff being written about its alleged significance. From some of the commentary you'd have thought no-one in the Royal family had ever spoken to a non-white person before.

    I hope the couple don't fall into the trap of believing the hype, concentrate on their marriage, family (with luck) and what they can do with the privileges they enjoy.

    Enough.

    Some exquisite birdsong this morning in my garden. And more glorious weather on the way.

    It is pretty silly. I just cannot wait for the OTT opposite reaction where some one suggests meghan is not black enough or something as she is very light skinned.
    Has anyone opened a book on what the first racist remark Emma Dent Coad will make about the Duchess of Sussex (as I suppose we must now call her) will be?
    Maybe she'll call her a coconut.
    It is the right wing that is giving Meghan the slagging at present:

    https://twitter.com/KTHopkins/status/997841195165454337?s=19
    I don't even know what she's on about. She's put up pictures of 2 very pretty women side by side, am I supposed to notice something about it?
    Maybe one of the dresses is from Primark?
    Is it a visible shoulders/hairh back vs a long neckline/hair showing debate.
    Both look very well turned out, I think this is where the whole "women can't win whatever they do" stuff originates from or Hopkins prefers lighter hues...
    I was struck by Harry's resemblance to early c20 royals with his cap on in the carriage.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,005
    HYUFD said:

    I was busy yesterday and saw none of the Royal wedding. I’ve glanced at the newspaper front pages today and they look a happy couple. Meghan looks lovely in the pictures.

    If you don’t like fawning and endless coverage, you can always opt out.

    For once I'm in agreement. I don't know what it's like for other people but my entire Facebook feed on the wedding has been unpleasant and unnecessary. Snide remarks about Harry's parentage etc complaints about the fawning BBC coverage.

    Matt Hancock seems to have suffered from being attached to Osborne and denoted a 'rising star' making little impression. If he's doing a competent job as a minister fair play but from his public appearances he doesn't strike me as convincing.
    I think that is more evidence of how leftwing your Facebook followers are
    On the whole that's true. But most people haven't posted anything - like me they've just ignored it. I suspect a fair few of them do find it below the belt but don't tend to say anything.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,762
    Surely a part of the problem is that Hancock has a relatively trivial department where making the news is relatively difficult. The FOBTs were such a chance and in fairness he seized it. But the key areas of this government are the economy, the NHS, housing, Brexit and immigration. The Ministers who make a success of failure of these areas will be the ones in the running or not in my view.

  • Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 4,572

    Blimey, just noticed the Lewisham selection.

    Dire result for the Left.

    Wow.

    It's a pretty good result for the electable left.

  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,074
    kle4 said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:



    Seriously - do you really think that many people will give a damn about something so obviously trivial? Why should he send them a tweet any more than to the many others who were married yesterday?

    Because while about half of the UK electorate shares your indifference, a minority of the UK electorate care quite a lot about what happened yesterday. And quite a number of those will be seriously pissed off by what will be reported correctly as a Corbyn snub. He did find the time send a tweet of congratulations yesterday to someone in London, but it happened to be a Lewisham by-election candidate. When you are still 4% behind in the polls and seemingly going backwards some 8 years into a Conservative government, you really can't afford to piss anyone off unnecessarily.
    And that conduct is being widely reported today. Not quite silence on the matter it turns out, instead he found time to also advise a constituent to "Try Russia Today" as an alternative news source.
    Kev doubling down:

    https://twitter.com/Kevin_Maguire/status/998092686077972480
    Boy, what a bitter way to talk about it all. I feel like there must be more effective means of making the point.
    On her father's side Meghan is descended from miners who emigrated to the US and ended up working in the mines of Pennsylvania. The poor white working class - the class that is alternately ignored or patronised by the likes of Kevin Maguire.

    Next month I shall be at the Ulverston Music Festival where there will be a performance by the colliery band which provided the music for the film "Brassed Off". On another night I'll be seeing The Marriage of Figaro. It is possible to enjoy a diverse range of music.

    Not everything has to be so aggressively "either/or". Nor does everything have to make a point.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,124
    @OwenJones84
    Lewisham East's Blairite CLP chair @iMcKenzied tells the left not to campaign in the by-election or it'll put off voters.

    Under Corbyn's leadership in 2017, Labour win 67.9% in Lewisham East, 10 points higher than in Blair's landslide victory in 1997 and the highest in history.

    Poor Owen forgets that much of the Labour surge in Lewisham is simple demographic change and nothing to do with Momentum .
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,673
    edited May 2018
    MaxPB said:

    Glad that this royal wedding rubbish is all done. Though I'm sure the bandwagons will start rolling when Megan gets pregnant.

    Even as a supporter of the Monarchy it was all a bit much.

    However, one can't help but feel happy for them. The sour people this morning who are somehow put out by this wedding because they are either republican or racist against Megan should take a long look at themselves in the mirror. Why should two people's happiness detract from their own.

    helps if you can spell her name mind you
    PS: who gives a fig for the stupid rich tw*ts anyway, overhyped mince for the even more stupid pleb's. Royals trying to be hip be introducing divorcees to the cult.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709

    HYUFD said:

    I was busy yesterday and saw none of the Royal wedding. I’ve glanced at the newspaper front pages today and they look a happy couple. Meghan looks lovely in the pictures.

    If you don’t like fawning and endless coverage, you can always opt out.

    For once I'm in agreement. I don't know what it's like for other people but my entire Facebook feed on the wedding has been unpleasant and unnecessary. Snide remarks about Harry's parentage etc complaints about the fawning BBC coverage.

    Matt Hancock seems to have suffered from being attached to Osborne and denoted a 'rising star' making little impression. If he's doing a competent job as a minister fair play but from his public appearances he doesn't strike me as convincing.
    I think that is more evidence of how leftwing your Facebook followers are
    On the whole that's true. But most people haven't posted anything - like me they've just ignored it. I suspect a fair few of them do find it below the belt but don't tend to say anything.
    I think republicans just like complaining.

    For perspective, Peston just did a public approval ratings table comparing the royals and politicians.

    Prince Harry was on +63%, the Queen +56%, Prince William +55%, Prince Charles +4%, Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall was the only royal with a negative approval rating on -32%.

    All the politicans surveyed though had negative approval ratings with May just ahead of Corbyn, then Cameron and Brown and Blair last on -50%.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 24,967
    DavidL said:

    Surely a part of the problem is that Hancock has a relatively trivial department where making the news is relatively difficult. The FOBTs were such a chance and in fairness he seized it. But the key areas of this government are the economy, the NHS, housing, Brexit and immigration. The Ministers who make a success of failure of these areas will be the ones in the running or not in my view.

    The only other occasion I remember Hancock making the news was when he and Olly Letwin shoveled millions of taxpayers money to Kids Company.

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/aug/06/kids-company-closure-government-knew-3m-grant-pay-staff
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,074
    Foxy said:

    Sean_F said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Listening to the radio now, reporting on the papers' analysis of a wedding, there is the most awful and OTT guff being written about its alleged significance. From some of the commentary you'd have thought no-one in the Royal family had ever spoken to a non-white person before.

    I hope the couple don't fall into the trap of believing the hype, concentrate on their marriage, family (with luck) and what they can do with the privileges they enjoy.

    Enough.

    Some exquisite birdsong this morning in my garden. And more glorious weather on the way.

    It is pretty silly. I just cannot wait for the OTT opposite reaction where some one suggests meghan is not black enough or something as she is very light skinned.
    Has anyone opened a book on what the first racist remark Emma Dent Coad will make about the Duchess of Sussex (as I suppose we must now call her) will be?
    Maybe she'll call her a coconut.
    It is the right wing that is giving Meghan the slagging at present:

    https://twitter.com/KTHopkins/status/997841195165454337?s=19
    And what would Katie Hopkins know about class?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,762
    I don't really care what Katie Hopkins thinks about everything but I do think some Kate supporters (I believe that is a thing) had their noses put slightly out of joint by the OTT comments yesterday such as this was the most significant thing to happen to the Royal family for decades etc. There is plenty of room for both. Harry and William seem close and I very much hope they remain so but Harry and his family will become less significant as William's kids grow up. Charlotte looked a future star to me.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,762

    DavidL said:

    Surely a part of the problem is that Hancock has a relatively trivial department where making the news is relatively difficult. The FOBTs were such a chance and in fairness he seized it. But the key areas of this government are the economy, the NHS, housing, Brexit and immigration. The Ministers who make a success of failure of these areas will be the ones in the running or not in my view.

    The only other occasion I remember Hancock making the news was when he and Olly Letwin shoveled millions of taxpayers money to Kids Company.

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/aug/06/kids-company-closure-government-knew-3m-grant-pay-staff
    That was a weird episode. I am seriously disappointed that woman did not end up in jail for fraud.
  • JSpringJSpring Posts: 95
    felix said:

    @OwenJones84
    Lewisham East's Blairite CLP chair @iMcKenzied tells the left not to campaign in the by-election or it'll put off voters.

    Under Corbyn's leadership in 2017, Labour win 67.9% in Lewisham East, 10 points higher than in Blair's landslide victory in 1997 and the highest in history.

    Poor Owen forgets that much of the Labour surge in Lewisham is simple demographic change and nothing to do with Momentum .

    Similarly the CLP chair doesn't seem to know that voters in any constituency generally don't give the slightest as to which faction of a party is sent to canvass them. The average voter wouldn't be able to give a particularly coherent description of the general terms left/right/centre, let alone describe them within the internal context of a particular political party.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,074
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Surely a part of the problem is that Hancock has a relatively trivial department where making the news is relatively difficult. The FOBTs were such a chance and in fairness he seized it. But the key areas of this government are the economy, the NHS, housing, Brexit and immigration. The Ministers who make a success of failure of these areas will be the ones in the running or not in my view.

    The only other occasion I remember Hancock making the news was when he and Olly Letwin shoveled millions of taxpayers money to Kids Company.

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/aug/06/kids-company-closure-government-knew-3m-grant-pay-staff
    That was a weird episode. I am seriously disappointed that woman did not end up in jail for fraud.
    I recently heard information from someone in a position to know that puts a different complexion on that story.

    The work done by that charity is being taken forward by others. But without the Batwoman's involvement. And some of the trustees are being pursued, I believe.
  • NormNorm Posts: 1,251
    I have to be honest I didn't feel I was watching the next leader of the Tory party on Marr this morning although admittedly Emma Barnett's slightly aggressive, hectoring approach seemed to be designed not to bring out the best in him. A more laid back, subtle style such as that adopted by the rather good Sarah Smith on the Sunday Politics works better.
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506
    Norm said:

    I have to be honest I didn't feel I was watching the next leader of the Tory party on Marr this morning although admittedly Emma Barnett's slightly aggressive, hectoring approach seemed to be designed not to bring out the best in him. A more laid back, subtle style such as that adopted by the rather good Sarah Smith on the Sunday Politics works better.

    Hancock would crumble in the face of an Andrew Neil interview.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    edited May 2018
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Surely a part of the problem is that Hancock has a relatively trivial department where making the news is relatively difficult. The FOBTs were such a chance and in fairness he seized it. But the key areas of this government are the economy, the NHS, housing, Brexit and immigration. The Ministers who make a success of failure of these areas will be the ones in the running or not in my view.

    The only other occasion I remember Hancock making the news was when he and Olly Letwin shoveled millions of taxpayers money to Kids Company.

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/aug/06/kids-company-closure-government-knew-3m-grant-pay-staff
    That was a weird episode. I am seriously disappointed that woman did not end up in jail for fraud.
    I don't know about fraud but perhaps she is lucky not to be in prison for going far, far beyond the Peter principle. Good intentions aren't enough when your charity turns overnight from a kitchen table job to a multi-million pound operation.
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506
    malcolmg said:

    MaxPB said:

    Glad that this royal wedding rubbish is all done. Though I'm sure the bandwagons will start rolling when Megan gets pregnant.

    Even as a supporter of the Monarchy it was all a bit much.

    However, one can't help but feel happy for them. The sour people this morning who are somehow put out by this wedding because they are either republican or racist against Megan should take a long look at themselves in the mirror. Why should two people's happiness detract from their own.

    helps if you can spell her name mind you
    PS: who gives a fig for the stupid rich tw*ts anyway, overhyped mince for the even more stupid pleb's. Royals trying to be hip be introducing divorcees to the cult.
    Not the first American divorcee to marry into the Royal family.
  • tysontyson Posts: 6,049
    As a diehard Republican I would much rather our heirs choose capable partners who provide them with love and stability instead of of the usual notrights...Fergie, Diana et al......

    My opposition has always been about birthright, deference and principle...not about the people. The two lads have done well to fish outside the defective genetic stock of English aristocratic girls with all their destructive, obsessional neurosis.....
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    Cyclefree said:

    Foxy said:

    Sean_F said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Listening to the radio now, reporting on the papers' analysis of a wedding, there is the most awful and OTT guff being written about its alleged significance. From some of the commentary you'd have thought no-one in the Royal family had ever spoken to a non-white person before.

    I hope the couple don't fall into the trap of believing the hype, concentrate on their marriage, family (with luck) and what they can do with the privileges they enjoy.

    Enough.

    Some exquisite birdsong this morning in my garden. And more glorious weather on the way.

    It is pretty silly. I just cannot wait for the OTT opposite reaction where some one suggests meghan is not black enough or something as she is very light skinned.
    Has anyone opened a book on what the first racist remark Emma Dent Coad will make about the Duchess of Sussex (as I suppose we must now call her) will be?
    Maybe she'll call her a coconut.
    It is the right wing that is giving Meghan the slagging at present:

    https://twitter.com/KTHopkins/status/997841195165454337?s=19
    And what would Katie Hopkins know about class?
    Hopkins might have broken irony with "you can't buy class".
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,005
    DavidL said:

    I don't really care what Katie Hopkins thinks about everything but I do think some Kate supporters (I believe that is a thing) had their noses put slightly out of joint by the OTT comments yesterday such as this was the most significant thing to happen to the Royal family for decades etc. There is plenty of room for both. Harry and William seem close and I very much hope they remain so but Harry and his family will become less significant as William's kids grow up. Charlotte looked a future star to me.

    I'm one of those who thinks that woman (I won't use her name) shouldn't be given any more oxygen than she needs to keep breathing. Don't people getting outraged by her understand that they are feeding the beast? There's something rather funny about the not very self aware 'money can't by class' comment though. But perhaps even that was more knowing than we realise? All part of the business plan.

    More interestingly she could be an ardent royalist trying to work out how to get all the snivelling, sanctimonious, miserable republicans on team Meghan. What better way than an insult from the devil woman herself?
  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    Cyclefree said:

    Foxy said:

    Sean_F said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Listening to the radio now, reporting on the papers' analysis of a wedding, there is the most awful and OTT guff being written about its alleged significance. From some of the commentary you'd have thought no-one in the Royal family had ever spoken to a non-white person before.

    I hope the couple don't fall into the trap of believing the hype, concentrate on their marriage, family (with luck) and what they can do with the privileges they enjoy.

    Enough.

    Some exquisite birdsong this morning in my garden. And more glorious weather on the way.

    It is pretty silly. I just cannot wait for the OTT opposite reaction where some one suggests meghan is not black enough or something as she is very light skinned.
    Has anyone opened a book on what the first racist remark Emma Dent Coad will make about the Duchess of Sussex (as I suppose we must now call her) will be?
    Maybe she'll call her a coconut.
    It is the right wing that is giving Meghan the slagging at present:

    https://twitter.com/KTHopkins/status/997841195165454337?s=19
    And what would Katie Hopkins know about class?
    A cyclefree post I can agree with.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,074
    tyson said:

    As a diehard Republican I would much rather our heirs choose capable partners who provide them with love and stability instead of of the usual notrights...Fergie, Diana et al......

    My opposition has always been about birthright, deference and principle...not about the people. The two lads have done well to fish outside the defective genetic stock of English aristocratic girls with all their destructive, obsessional neurosis.....

    A pity that in complimenting the lads you also had to make a broad brush untrue and insulting generalisation about English girls.

    Is it so hard to understand that interesting people come in all shapes, sizes, and in all sorts of groups and classes?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    malcolmg said:

    MaxPB said:

    Glad that this royal wedding rubbish is all done. Though I'm sure the bandwagons will start rolling when Megan gets pregnant.

    Even as a supporter of the Monarchy it was all a bit much.

    However, one can't help but feel happy for them. The sour people this morning who are somehow put out by this wedding because they are either republican or racist against Megan should take a long look at themselves in the mirror. Why should two people's happiness detract from their own.

    helps if you can spell her name mind you
    PS: who gives a fig for the stupid rich tw*ts anyway, overhyped mince for the even more stupid pleb's. Royals trying to be hip be introducing divorcees to the cult.
    Nicola Sturgeon at least congratulated them on their wedding unlike Corbyn.

    The SNP leadership is now more monarchist than the current republican Labour leadership it seems and Sturgeon and Salmond have said Scotland would retain the monarchy even in the unlikely event it becomes independent (let us not forget the Scots had their own monarch for centuries and shared one with England for a century, from James 1st to Anne, excluding Cromwell's Protectorate, until the Act of Union in 1707)
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,005
    tyson said:

    As a diehard Republican I would much rather our heirs choose capable partners who provide them with love and stability instead of of the usual notrights...Fergie, Diana et al......

    My opposition has always been about birthright, deference and principle...not about the people. The two lads have done well to fish outside the defective genetic stock of English aristocratic girls with all their destructive, obsessional neurosis.....

    It's interesting that the House of Windsor survives by allowing itself to be transformed into other families - the Spencers of course but also the Markles too. So there I said it. There IS something interesting about the Monarchy.

    I think you and I would both agree that the really big event is next Saturday of course.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603

    tyson said:

    As a diehard Republican I would much rather our heirs choose capable partners who provide them with love and stability instead of of the usual notrights...Fergie, Diana et al......

    My opposition has always been about birthright, deference and principle...not about the people. The two lads have done well to fish outside the defective genetic stock of English aristocratic girls with all their destructive, obsessional neurosis.....

    It's interesting that the House of Windsor survives by allowing itself to be transformed into other families - the Spencers of course but also the Markles too. So there I said it. There IS something interesting about the Monarchy.

    I think you and I would both agree that the really big event is next Saturday of course.
    Qualifying in Monaco? You may be right, the race is going to be extremely boring.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Sean_F said:

    There are people whose lives are spoiled by other peoples' happiness, and enhanced by other peoples' misery.

    *cough*Malcolmg*cough*
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    malcolmg said:

    PS: who gives a fig for the stupid rich tw*ts anyway, overhyped mince for the even more stupid pleb's. Royals trying to be hip be introducing divorcees to the cult.

    Morning Malc!
  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    Surprising that in these modern times that to land such a plum job Megan didn't have to audition.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540
    More boiling frogs:

    However, it is hard not to conclude, as one mulls over the events of this year – the Chequers summit, Downing Street’s push for the customs partnership, last week’s committee agreement on the backstop – that May is slowly boiling the ERG frog. A furtive twitch of the dial is more effective than a frantic wrench. Gently does it.

    https://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2018/05/boiling-the-brexiteer-frog.html
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,005
    Okay - final comment on the wedding. Couldn't care less about Beckham/Clooney's attendance, the Gospel choir/Bishop Berry's contributions were intriguing but surely the really inspiring move would have an invite for one of Meghan's favourite authors Noam Chomsky. Nearly 90 and still one of the world's great intellectual heavyweights, with a lifetime of radical thought and writing - THAT would have been a transformative move for the Monarchy.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    HYUFD said:

    Lord Mandelson on Peston and says William and Harry have secured the monarchy's future for many years to come

    I think zeitgeist will have more to do with that than william and Harry. The line between the wedding being a grand spectacle and vulgar is a thin line
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,005
    Roger said:

    Surprising that in these modern times that to land such a plum job Megan didn't have to audition.

    Not sure how devious a comment that is Roger.
  • surbysurby Posts: 1,227
    Foxy said:

    Sean_F said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Listening to the radio now, reporting on the papers' analysis of a wedding, there is the most awful and OTT guff being written about its alleged significance. From some of the commentary you'd have thought no-one in the Royal family had ever spoken to a non-white person before.

    I hope the couple don't fall into the trap of believing the hype, concentrate on their marriage, family (with luck) and what they can do with the privileges they enjoy.

    Enough.

    Some exquisite birdsong this morning in my garden. And more glorious weather on the way.

    It is pretty silly. I just cannot wait for the OTT opposite reaction where some one suggests meghan is not black enough or something as she is very light skinned.
    Has anyone opened a book on what the first racist remark Emma Dent Coad will make about the Duchess of Sussex (as I suppose we must now call her) will be?
    Maybe she'll call her a coconut.
    It is the right wing that is giving Meghan the slagging at present:

    https://twitter.com/KTHopkins/status/997841195165454337?s=19
    Totally unfair to attack Kate like that.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Surely a part of the problem is that Hancock has a relatively trivial department where making the news is relatively difficult. The FOBTs were such a chance and in fairness he seized it. But the key areas of this government are the economy, the NHS, housing, Brexit and immigration. The Ministers who make a success of failure of these areas will be the ones in the running or not in my view.

    The only other occasion I remember Hancock making the news was when he and Olly Letwin shoveled millions of taxpayers money to Kids Company.

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/aug/06/kids-company-closure-government-knew-3m-grant-pay-staff
    That was a weird episode. I am seriously disappointed that woman did not end up in jail for fraud.
    At the very least she had a a frankly bizarre view of the accountability of public money.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,891

    Okay - final comment on the wedding. Couldn't care less about Beckham/Clooney's attendance, the Gospel choir/Bishop Berry's contributions were intriguing but surely the really inspiring move would have an invite for one of Meghan's favourite authors Noam Chomsky. Nearly 90 and still one of the world's great intellectual heavyweights, with a lifetime of radical thought and writing - THAT would have been a transformative move for the Monarchy.

    Is Chomsky really one of her favourite authors? She's zoomed up in my estimation
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,231
    Was working yesterday and could not see the live stream. Visited my sister last night and we had many wines and chocolate biscuits on the couch whilst viewing it on playback. Takeaways were:

    * Meghan is proper beautiful. Seriously.
    * Harry is a scruffy haporth who really should have shaved.
    * Did they know *any* of the slebs?
    * Oprah!
    * James Corden? Why?
    * I'm in a minority here, but did not like the preacher. Short, dull and low-key, please.
    * Choir was fantastic
    * Prince Philip looked very ill.
    * Harry wore the wrong uniform. Should have gone with the one he wore to Kate's. Braid, sash, cap: would it have been too hard?
    * Lovely dress.
    * Possibly the best royal wedding for some years.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,958

    malcolmg said:

    MaxPB said:

    Glad that this royal wedding rubbish is all done. Though I'm sure the bandwagons will start rolling when Megan gets pregnant.

    Even as a supporter of the Monarchy it was all a bit much.

    However, one can't help but feel happy for them. The sour people this morning who are somehow put out by this wedding because they are either republican or racist against Megan should take a long look at themselves in the mirror. Why should two people's happiness detract from their own.

    helps if you can spell her name mind you
    PS: who gives a fig for the stupid rich tw*ts anyway, overhyped mince for the even more stupid pleb's. Royals trying to be hip be introducing divorcees to the cult.
    Not the first American divorcee to marry into the Royal family.
    Remind me, how well did that previous one go?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    Huh, somehow I missed this story

    Neil Hamilton has been ousted as UKIP group leader in the Welsh Assembly.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-44152343

    I love how in these types of events people can get away with just flat out lies

    Mr Hamilton said it was an "ambush" and he was told of his sacking by text but Ms Jones had said the decision was "amicable".

    Clearly Hamilton does not feel it was very amicable.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-44187815
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    viewcode said:


    * Did they know *any* of the slebs?
    .

    Well several or the Duchess's former co-stars were there, so she clearly knew them!
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    edited May 2018
    viewcode said:

    Was working yesterday and could not see the live stream. Visited my sister last night and we had many wines and chocolate biscuits on the couch whilst viewing it on playback. Takeaways were:

    * Meghan is proper beautiful. Seriously.
    * Harry is a scruffy haporth who really should have shaved.
    * Did they know *any* of the slebs?
    * Oprah!
    * James Corden? Why?
    * I'm in a minority here, but did not like the preacher. Short, dull and low-key, please.
    * Choir was fantastic
    * Prince Philip looked very ill.
    * Harry wore the wrong uniform. Should have gone with the one he wore to Kate's. Braid, sash, cap: would it have been too hard?
    * Lovely dress.
    * Possibly the best royal wedding for some years.

    I did have to chuckle at James Blunt response to somebody on twitter asking who the hell invited him...

    I know Blunt served in the military with Harry, but James Haskell the rugby player...what is the connection there? Is there some super secret VIP version of seatwave, where celebs and poshos can resell invites to society events they can't / don't want to attend?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,038
    Roger said:

    Okay - final comment on the wedding. Couldn't care less about Beckham/Clooney's attendance, the Gospel choir/Bishop Berry's contributions were intriguing but surely the really inspiring move would have an invite for one of Meghan's favourite authors Noam Chomsky. Nearly 90 and still one of the world's great intellectual heavyweights, with a lifetime of radical thought and writing - THAT would have been a transformative move for the Monarchy.

    Is Chomsky really one of her favourite authors? She's zoomed up in my estimation
    How do we know he wasn't invited and is still deconstructing the hidden meaning of the invite letter?
  • surbysurby Posts: 1,227
    Roger said:

    Okay - final comment on the wedding. Couldn't care less about Beckham/Clooney's attendance, the Gospel choir/Bishop Berry's contributions were intriguing but surely the really inspiring move would have an invite for one of Meghan's favourite authors Noam Chomsky. Nearly 90 and still one of the world's great intellectual heavyweights, with a lifetime of radical thought and writing - THAT would have been a transformative move for the Monarchy.

    Is Chomsky really one of her favourite authors? She's zoomed up in my estimation
    She does have strong views and is not too shy to express it. The fun has just started!
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392

    viewcode said:

    Was working yesterday and could not see the live stream. Visited my sister last night and we had many wines and chocolate biscuits on the couch whilst viewing it on playback. Takeaways were:

    * Meghan is proper beautiful. Seriously.
    * Harry is a scruffy haporth who really should have shaved.
    * Did they know *any* of the slebs?
    * Oprah!
    * James Corden? Why?
    * I'm in a minority here, but did not like the preacher. Short, dull and low-key, please.
    * Choir was fantastic
    * Prince Philip looked very ill.
    * Harry wore the wrong uniform. Should have gone with the one he wore to Kate's. Braid, sash, cap: would it have been too hard?
    * Lovely dress.
    * Possibly the best royal wedding for some years.

    I did have to chuckle at James Blunt response to somebody on twitter asking who the hell invited him...
    I don't know much about Blunt, but he seems to have a sense of humour. Just glancing at his twitter I see the him responding to a Trump all cap tweet of WITCH HUNT with JAMES BLUNT, and to someone else referring to a 'James Blunt kind of night' with 'Quite wet and and disappointing?'
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    kle4 said:

    viewcode said:

    Was working yesterday and could not see the live stream. Visited my sister last night and we had many wines and chocolate biscuits on the couch whilst viewing it on playback. Takeaways were:

    * Meghan is proper beautiful. Seriously.
    * Harry is a scruffy haporth who really should have shaved.
    * Did they know *any* of the slebs?
    * Oprah!
    * James Corden? Why?
    * I'm in a minority here, but did not like the preacher. Short, dull and low-key, please.
    * Choir was fantastic
    * Prince Philip looked very ill.
    * Harry wore the wrong uniform. Should have gone with the one he wore to Kate's. Braid, sash, cap: would it have been too hard?
    * Lovely dress.
    * Possibly the best royal wedding for some years.

    I did have to chuckle at James Blunt response to somebody on twitter asking who the hell invited him...
    I don't know much about Blunt, but he seems to have a sense of humour. Just glancing at his twitter I see the him responding to a Trump all cap tweet of WITCH HUNT with JAMES BLUNT, and to someone else referring to a 'James Blunt kind of night' with 'Quite wet and and disappointing?'
    He is a lot better at witty one liner responses to abuse on twitter than writing songs...
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,880



    I know Blunt served in the military with Harry,

    Blunt quit the army to go and live in Carrie Fisher's pool house before Harry ever got his (won entirely on merit) place at Sandhurst.

    I don't care for uniforms on non-serving officers but my wife to be begged me to wear my White Number One tunic (which is the best uniform in the British armed services) for our wedding. As I knew she was signing on for a lifetime of confused disappointment I relented and let her have her day.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,231

    viewcode said:

    Was working yesterday and could not see the live stream. Visited my sister last night and we had many wines and chocolate biscuits on the couch whilst viewing it on playback. Takeaways were:

    * Meghan is proper beautiful. Seriously.
    * Harry is a scruffy haporth who really should have shaved.
    * Did they know *any* of the slebs?
    * Oprah!
    * James Corden? Why?
    * I'm in a minority here, but did not like the preacher. Short, dull and low-key, please.
    * Choir was fantastic
    * Prince Philip looked very ill.
    * Harry wore the wrong uniform. Should have gone with the one he wore to Kate's. Braid, sash, cap: would it have been too hard?
    * Lovely dress.
    * Possibly the best royal wedding for some years.

    I did have to chuckle at James Blunt response to somebody on twitter asking who the hell invited him...

    I know Blunt served in the military with Harry, but James Haskell the rugby player...what is the connection there? Is there some super secret VIP version of seatwave, where celebs and poshos can resell invites to society events they can't / don't want to attend?
    I have a horrible feeling they just grabbed whoever they thought would say "yes" and filtered out the obvious embarrassments.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    edited May 2018
    Dura_Ace said:



    I know Blunt served in the military with Harry,

    Blunt quit the army to go and live in Carrie Fisher's pool house before Harry ever got his (won entirely on merit) place at Sandhurst.

    I don't care for uniforms on non-serving officers but my wife to be begged me to wear my White Number One tunic (which is the best uniform in the British armed services) for our wedding. As I knew she was signing on for a lifetime of confused disappointment I relented and let her have her day.
    According to the Currant Bun,

    James Blunt served in the army with Prince Harry.

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/6327926/famous-guests-royal-wedding-tom-hardy/

    But checking on wikipedia, seems they are wrong.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    Was working yesterday and could not see the live stream. Visited my sister last night and we had many wines and chocolate biscuits on the couch whilst viewing it on playback. Takeaways were:

    * Meghan is proper beautiful. Seriously.
    * Harry is a scruffy haporth who really should have shaved.
    * Did they know *any* of the slebs?
    * Oprah!
    * James Corden? Why?
    * I'm in a minority here, but did not like the preacher. Short, dull and low-key, please.
    * Choir was fantastic
    * Prince Philip looked very ill.
    * Harry wore the wrong uniform. Should have gone with the one he wore to Kate's. Braid, sash, cap: would it have been too hard?
    * Lovely dress.
    * Possibly the best royal wedding for some years.

    I did have to chuckle at James Blunt response to somebody on twitter asking who the hell invited him...

    I know Blunt served in the military with Harry, but James Haskell the rugby player...what is the connection there? Is there some super secret VIP version of seatwave, where celebs and poshos can resell invites to society events they can't / don't want to attend?
    I have a horrible feeling they just grabbed whoever they thought would say "yes" and filtered out the obvious embarrassments.
    My invite obviously got lost in the mail.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,957
    edited May 2018

    viewcode said:

    Was working yesterday and could not see the live stream. Visited my sister last night and we had many wines and chocolate biscuits on the couch whilst viewing it on playback. Takeaways were:

    * Meghan is proper beautiful. Seriously.
    * Harry is a scruffy haporth who really should have shaved.
    * Did they know *any* of the slebs?
    * Oprah!
    * James Corden? Why?
    * I'm in a minority here, but did not like the preacher. Short, dull and low-key, please.
    * Choir was fantastic
    * Prince Philip looked very ill.
    * Harry wore the wrong uniform. Should have gone with the one he wore to Kate's. Braid, sash, cap: would it have been too hard?
    * Lovely dress.
    * Possibly the best royal wedding for some years.

    I did have to chuckle at James Blunt response to somebody on twitter asking who the hell invited him...

    I know Blunt served in the military with Harry, but James Haskell the rugby player...what is the connection there? Is there some super secret VIP version of seatwave, where celebs and poshos can resell invites to society events they can't / don't want to attend?
    Harry's a huge England rugby fan, he knows quite a few players.

    Have you all forgotten this picture from when England lost to the ramshaggers in the 2015 world cup?

    image

    Edit and of course, Prince Harry's cousin married an England player.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274

    viewcode said:

    Was working yesterday and could not see the live stream. Visited my sister last night and we had many wines and chocolate biscuits on the couch whilst viewing it on playback. Takeaways were:

    * Meghan is proper beautiful. Seriously.
    * Harry is a scruffy haporth who really should have shaved.
    * Did they know *any* of the slebs?
    * Oprah!
    * James Corden? Why?
    * I'm in a minority here, but did not like the preacher. Short, dull and low-key, please.
    * Choir was fantastic
    * Prince Philip looked very ill.
    * Harry wore the wrong uniform. Should have gone with the one he wore to Kate's. Braid, sash, cap: would it have been too hard?
    * Lovely dress.
    * Possibly the best royal wedding for some years.

    I did have to chuckle at James Blunt response to somebody on twitter asking who the hell invited him...

    I know Blunt served in the military with Harry, but James Haskell the rugby player...what is the connection there? Is there some super secret VIP version of seatwave, where celebs and poshos can resell invites to society events they can't / don't want to attend?
    Harry's a huge England rugby fan, he knows quite a few players.

    Have you all forgotten this picture from when England lost to the ramshaggers in the 2015 world cup?

    image

    Edit and of course, Prince Harry's cousin married an England player.
    Now Mike Tindall definitely batting out of his league!
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981
    edited May 2018

    viewcode said:

    Was working yesterday and could not see the live stream. Visited my sister last night and we had many wines and chocolate biscuits on the couch whilst viewing it on playback. Takeaways were:

    * Meghan is proper beautiful. Seriously.
    * Harry is a scruffy haporth who really should have shaved.
    * Did they know *any* of the slebs?
    * Oprah!
    * James Corden? Why?
    * I'm in a minority here, but did not like the preacher. Short, dull and low-key, please.
    * Choir was fantastic
    * Prince Philip looked very ill.
    * Harry wore the wrong uniform. Should have gone with the one he wore to Kate's. Braid, sash, cap: would it have been too hard?
    * Lovely dress.
    * Possibly the best royal wedding for some years.

    I did have to chuckle at James Blunt response to somebody on twitter asking who the hell invited him...

    I know Blunt served in the military with Harry, but James Haskell the rugby player...what is the connection there? Is there some super secret VIP version of seatwave, where celebs and poshos can resell invites to society events they can't / don't want to attend?
    Wild whacky and totally off-the-wall speculation: perhaps he is a friend of H or M or both?

    Edit: the answer, as so often, is in the Sun, with a brilliant grammatical fail or two:

    "James Haskell & fiance Chloe Madeley

    As Prince Harry is an avid rugby fan and patron for the Rugby Football Union, he has been spotted joking around with the England player at a recent training session.

    He got engaged to Richard Madeley and Judy Finnigan’s daughter in Paris last month."
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    Oh dear....

    Stormzy has turned down an invite to play at Jeremy Corbyn's Glastonbury-style music festival, it has been claimed.

    The grime star is a fan of the Labour leader and led the crowds in a chorus of 'Oh, Jeremy Corbyn' when he performed at Glastonbury last year.

    Party bosses had asked him to perform at Labour Live - a day-long festival in north London next month - with Labour insiders believing his star billing could help save the struggling event.

    But in a fresh blow to the festival - dubbed 'Labour Dive' by party staff because of the low ticket sales - he turned down the offer.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5749857/Stormzy-turns-invite-perform-Corbyns-Labour-Live-festival.html
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    edited May 2018
    Ishmael_Z said:

    viewcode said:

    Was working yesterday and could not see the live stream. Visited my sister last night and we had many wines and chocolate biscuits on the couch whilst viewing it on playback. Takeaways were:

    * Meghan is proper beautiful. Seriously.
    * Harry is a scruffy haporth who really should have shaved.
    * Did they know *any* of the slebs?
    * Oprah!
    * James Corden? Why?
    * I'm in a minority here, but did not like the preacher. Short, dull and low-key, please.
    * Choir was fantastic
    * Prince Philip looked very ill.
    * Harry wore the wrong uniform. Should have gone with the one he wore to Kate's. Braid, sash, cap: would it have been too hard?
    * Lovely dress.
    * Possibly the best royal wedding for some years.

    I did have to chuckle at James Blunt response to somebody on twitter asking who the hell invited him...

    I know Blunt served in the military with Harry, but James Haskell the rugby player...what is the connection there? Is there some super secret VIP version of seatwave, where celebs and poshos can resell invites to society events they can't / don't want to attend?
    Wild whacky and totally off-the-wall speculation: perhaps he is a friend of H or M or both?
    If you have seen any of James Haskell's videos on YouTube you would be shocked if he had any friends. Owen Farrell is not a fan.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300

    malcolmg said:

    MaxPB said:

    Glad that this royal wedding rubbish is all done. Though I'm sure the bandwagons will start rolling when Megan gets pregnant.

    Even as a supporter of the Monarchy it was all a bit much.

    However, one can't help but feel happy for them. The sour people this morning who are somehow put out by this wedding because they are either republican or racist against Megan should take a long look at themselves in the mirror. Why should two people's happiness detract from their own.

    helps if you can spell her name mind you
    PS: who gives a fig for the stupid rich tw*ts anyway, overhyped mince for the even more stupid pleb's. Royals trying to be hip be introducing divorcees to the cult.
    Not the first American divorcee to marry into the Royal family.
    Remind me, how well did that previous one go?
    It lasted for 37 years so by recent standards would be judged among the more successful unions.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,957
    edited May 2018
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,124
    Roger said:

    Surprising that in these modern times that to land such a plum job Megan didn't have to audition.

    I'd imagine there have been numerous auditions of the traditional variety before the question was popped.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842

    Pulpstar said:

    felix said:

    kle4 said:

    Foxy said:

    Sean_F said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Listening to the radio now, reporting on the papers' analysis of a wedding, there is the most awful and OTT guff being written about its alleged significance. From some of the commentary you'd have thought no-one in the Royal family had ever spoken to a non-white person before.

    I hope the couple don't fall into the trap of believing the hype, concentrate on their marriage, family (with luck) and what they can do with the privileges they enjoy.

    Enough.

    Some exquisite birdsong this morning in my garden. And more glorious weather on the way.

    It is pretty silly. I just cannot wait for the OTT opposite reaction where some one suggests meghan is not black enough or something as she is very light skinned.
    Has anyone opened a book on what the first racist remark Emma Dent Coad will make about the Duchess of Sussex (as I suppose we must now call her) will be?
    Maybe she'll call her a coconut.
    It is the right wing that is giving Meghan the slagging at present:

    https://twitter.com/KTHopkins/status/997841195165454337?s=19
    I don't even know what she's on about. She's put up pictures of 2 very pretty women side by side, am I supposed to notice something about it?
    Maybe one of the dresses is from Primark?
    Is it a visible shoulders/hairh back vs a long neckline/hair showing debate.
    Both look very well turned out, I think this is where the whole "women can't win whatever they do" stuff originates from or Hopkins prefers lighter hues...
    The rule is that she'll take the most controversial position she can on any given subject, and the more contrary and outrageous the better.

    I think she sees herself as performing some sort of public debate balancing act and as a guardian of free speech, and thus she lives up to that role. I doubt she sincerely believes everything she writes. Her teachers used to describe her as a very nice and pleasant girl.

    Either way: she gets everyone talking about her, every single time, so it works.
    I know someone else who'll take a controversial position on a controversial subject.
  • NormNorm Posts: 1,251
    Norm said:

    I have to be honest I didn't feel I was watching the next leader of the Tory party on Marr this morning although admittedly Emma Barnett's slightly aggressive, hectoring approach seemed to be designed not to bring out the best in him. A more laid back, subtle style such as that adopted by the rather good Sarah Smith on the Sunday Politics works better.

    Ha ha. Clearly I'm in the minority re Ms Barnett as she now seems to be getting rave reviews for her demolition of Barry Gardiner. Even Matt Hancock is joining in the praise although I stand by the fact I don't think he exactly advanced his ambitions on that showing.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,571
    edited May 2018

    I was busy yesterday and saw none of the Royal wedding. I’ve glanced at the newspaper front pages today and they look a happy couple. Meghan looks lovely in the pictures.

    If you don’t like fawning and endless coverage, you can always opt out.

    Roger said:

    Okay - final comment on the wedding. Couldn't care less about Beckham/Clooney's attendance, the Gospel choir/Bishop Berry's contributions were intriguing but surely the really inspiring move would have an invite for one of Meghan's favourite authors Noam Chomsky. Nearly 90 and still one of the world's great intellectual heavyweights, with a lifetime of radical thought and writing - THAT would have been a transformative move for the Monarchy.

    Is Chomsky really one of her favourite authors? She's zoomed up in my estimation
    Chomsky is responsible for introducing decades of stultifying and tendentious dogma into the study of linguistics. Dreadful, arrogant man.

    (The only objection I had to the wedding coverage was its interruption of my usual Saturday morning radio listening. Did it have to be quite so ubiquitous ?)
  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 3,037
    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Sean_F said:

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Listening to the radio now, reporting on the papers' analysis of a wedding, there is the most awful and OTT guff being written about its alleged significance. From some of the commentary you'd have thought no-one in the Royal family had ever spoken to a non-white person before.

    I hope the couple don't fall into the trap of believing the hype, concentrate on their marriage, family (with luck) and what they can do with the privileges they enjoy.

    Enough.

    Some exquisite birdsong this morning in my garden. And more glorious weather on the way.

    It is pretty silly. I just cannot wait for the OTT opposite reaction where some one suggests meghan is not black enough or something as she is very light skinned.
    Has anyone opened a book on what the first racist remark Emma Dent Coad will make about the Duchess of Sussex (as I suppose we must now call her) will be?
    Maybe she'll call her a coconut.
    It is the right wing that is giving Meghan the slagging at present:

    https://twitter.com/KTHopkins/status/997841195165454337?s=19
    I'm amused to discover you're a reader of the utterances of Katie Hopkins.
    I saw it via retweets such as this:


    https://twitter.com/donmoyn/status/997935413351387136?s=19
    Meghan - absolutely gorgeous x

    Katie Hopkins - that is one ugly motherf*ck, both on the inside and outside!
  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 3,037
    edited May 2018
    Scott_P said:
    Brexit is one huge clusterf*ck. A clusterf*ck that we voted for (via lies, bigotry and xenophobia). God have mercy on us!
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,038
    murali_s said:

    Scott_P said:
    Brexit is one huge clusterf*ck. A clusterf*ck that we voted for (via lies, bigotry and xenophobia). God have mercy on us!
    Don't panic, it's not going to happen.

    We are well on the way down the road to a 2nd referendum.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,571

    viewcode said:

    Was working yesterday and could not see the live stream. Visited my sister last night and we had many wines and chocolate biscuits on the couch whilst viewing it on playback. Takeaways were:

    * Meghan is proper beautiful. Seriously.
    * Harry is a scruffy haporth who really should have shaved.
    * Did they know *any* of the slebs?
    * Oprah!
    * James Corden? Why?
    * I'm in a minority here, but did not like the preacher. Short, dull and low-key, please.
    * Choir was fantastic
    * Prince Philip looked very ill.
    * Harry wore the wrong uniform. Should have gone with the one he wore to Kate's. Braid, sash, cap: would it have been too hard?
    * Lovely dress.
    * Possibly the best royal wedding for some years.

    I did have to chuckle at James Blunt response to somebody on twitter asking who the hell invited him...

    I know Blunt served in the military with Harry, but James Haskell the rugby player...what is the connection there? Is there some super secret VIP version of seatwave, where celebs and poshos can resell invites to society events they can't / don't want to attend?
    Harry's a huge England rugby fan, he knows quite a few players.

    Have you all forgotten this picture from when England lost to the ramshaggers in the 2015 world cup?

    image

    Edit and of course, Prince Harry's cousin married an England player.
    Now Mike Tindall definitely batting out of his league!
    Surely he’s Union ?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,038
    Norm said:

    Norm said:

    I have to be honest I didn't feel I was watching the next leader of the Tory party on Marr this morning although admittedly Emma Barnett's slightly aggressive, hectoring approach seemed to be designed not to bring out the best in him. A more laid back, subtle style such as that adopted by the rather good Sarah Smith on the Sunday Politics works better.

    Ha ha. Clearly I'm in the minority re Ms Barnett as she now seems to be getting rave reviews for her demolition of Barry Gardiner. Even Matt Hancock is joining in the praise although I stand by the fact I don't think he exactly advanced his ambitions on that showing.
    From the main man himself:

    https://twitter.com/afneil/status/998159686896676864
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,831
    Norm said:

    Norm said:

    I have to be honest I didn't feel I was watching the next leader of the Tory party on Marr this morning although admittedly Emma Barnett's slightly aggressive, hectoring approach seemed to be designed not to bring out the best in him. A more laid back, subtle style such as that adopted by the rather good Sarah Smith on the Sunday Politics works better.

    Ha ha. Clearly I'm in the minority re Ms Barnett as she now seems to be getting rave reviews for her demolition of Barry Gardiner. Even Matt Hancock is joining in the praise although I stand by the fact I don't think he exactly advanced his ambitions on that showing.
    A good interviewer is not there to 'bring out the best' in their interviewee. They are there to deliver the best, most informative interview possible and to hold the interviewee to account.

    If Gardiner wanted an easy ride, he shouldn't put himself forward for live broadcast interviews.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 24,967
    murali_s said:

    Scott_P said:
    Brexit is one huge clusterf*ck. A clusterf*ck that we voted for (via lies, bigotry and xenophobia). God have mercy on us!
    Yet we haven't had the immediate recession, punishment budget, million more unemployed, stock market crash, car factories closing down, City relocating to Frankfurt, refugee camps in Dover and shops empty of food which you Remainers so loudly predicted.

    All we get now is whiny bleats that its a disaster without giving any details as to what this disaster is.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 24,967

    murali_s said:

    Scott_P said:
    Brexit is one huge clusterf*ck. A clusterf*ck that we voted for (via lies, bigotry and xenophobia). God have mercy on us!
    Yet we haven't had the immediate recession, punishment budget, million more unemployed, stock market crash, car factories closing down, City relocating to Frankfurt, refugee camps in Dover and shops empty of food which you Remainers so loudly predicted.

    All we get now is whiny bleats that its a disaster without giving any details as to what this disaster is.
    In fact the only thing Remainers were right about is that wages have risen for the low paid:

    https://www.theguardian.com/money/2018/may/18/number-of-low-paid-uk-workers-falls-to-lowest-level-in-decades

    though Stuart Rose thought that was 'not necessarily a good thing'

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MNAdVjZ_h1c
  • RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 3,223
    Terrifying. Whatever you think about Brexit, this man has to be kept out of power at all costs.
  • nunuonenunuone Posts: 1,138

    murali_s said:

    Scott_P said:
    Brexit is one huge clusterf*ck. A clusterf*ck that we voted for (via lies, bigotry and xenophobia). God have mercy on us!
    Yet we haven't had the immediate recession, punishment budget, million more unemployed, stock market crash, car factories closing down, City relocating to Frankfurt, refugee camps in Dover and shops empty of food which you Remainers so loudly predicted.

    All we get now is whiny bleats that its a disaster without giving any details as to what this disaster is.
    In fact the only thing Remainers were right about is that wages have risen for the low paid:

    https://www.theguardian.com/money/2018/may/18/number-of-low-paid-uk-workers-falls-to-lowest-level-in-decades

    though Stuart Rose thought that was 'not necessarily a good thing'

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MNAdVjZ_h1c
    Of course a Retail boss would say that.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,673
    Scott_P said:

    Sean_F said:

    There are people whose lives are spoiled by other peoples' happiness, and enhanced by other peoples' misery.

    *cough*Malcolmg*cough*
    Cheeky beggar
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,673
    Scott_P said:

    malcolmg said:

    PS: who gives a fig for the stupid rich tw*ts anyway, overhyped mince for the even more stupid pleb's. Royals trying to be hip be introducing divorcees to the cult.

    Morning Malc!
    Morning Scott, did you have a street party yesterday
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,673

    murali_s said:

    Scott_P said:
    Brexit is one huge clusterf*ck. A clusterf*ck that we voted for (via lies, bigotry and xenophobia). God have mercy on us!
    Don't panic, it's not going to happen.

    We are well on the way down the road to a 2nd referendum.
    A Scottish one for sure
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,164
    Oh, so oil prices wouldn't have collapsed had it not been for the death of Hugo Chávez. You learn something new every day.
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362

    murali_s said:

    Scott_P said:
    Brexit is one huge clusterf*ck. A clusterf*ck that we voted for (via lies, bigotry and xenophobia). God have mercy on us!
    Yet we haven't had the immediate recession, punishment budget, million more unemployed, stock market crash, car factories closing down, City relocating to Frankfurt, refugee camps in Dover and shops empty of food which you Remainers so loudly predicted.

    All we get now is whiny bleats that its a disaster without giving any details as to what this disaster is.
    He's a wind-up merchant and just come's on here to be provocative.

    And he probably hates this country and a majority of it's inhabitants.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    edited May 2018
    tlg86 said:

    Oh, so oil prices wouldn't have collapsed had it not been for the death of Hugo Chávez. You learn something new every day.
    I can't work out if Jon Oliver took his led from McDonnell or the other way around. Both in the past week have tried to argue that Venezuela isn't really socialist and Chavez wasn't the reason for all the problems.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,880
    RoyalBlue said:

    Terrifying. Whatever you think about Brexit, this man has to be kept out of power at all costs.
    It's going to be a wheeze to see Boris undergoing political re-education through labour on Southern Thule.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,957

    NEW THREAD

This discussion has been closed.