Category Archives: Brexit

Boris Johnson, Brexit, elections, Jewish lobby in UK, MPs, Party Politics, Rishi Sunak, society, The Great Replacement, the Great Reset, Uncategorized

The Conservatives, Boris Johnson, Upcoming Political Events and the Currents in Society

85 Comments

We come soon to the culmination of the farcical Conservative Party leadership election, the result of which will be decided by a simple majority of the supposed 140,000 (possibly only 100,000, though a few say 160,000) members of that party. About 1 in every 300 or 400 UK adults is a Conservative Party member. If two-thirds vote in the leadership election, that means that not only the Conservative Party leader but also the Prime Minister –by default– is about to be elected by perhaps 50,000 or 60,000 people, in other words by about 1 in every 900 adults in the UK. There is something bizarre and even sick about this.

At time of writing (5 July 2019) it looks as if Boris Johnson (for me, Boris-Idiot is the right label…) will win easily. Others say that the race may be closer than most have thought. Either way, very few if any are predicting a win for Jeremy Hunt.

I have blogged before about the contest and also about a few of the main protagonists. Most relevant now would be these:

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/06/12/boris-a-story-for-our-times/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/06/09/the-conservative-party-leadership-contenders-in-outline/

Returning to my first paragraph, I happened recently to hear some Radio 4 Today Programme interviewer, perhaps Nick Robinson, asking Conservative Party members in Wales their views on what I see as the tragi-comic “leadership” contest. There were about half a dozen or so, all from one local Conservative Association.

Only one in that group was thinking of voting for Hunt; the rest all preferred Boris-Idiot. Only one struck me as in any way thoughtful, a young man (the only one, in fact, who seemed to be of under pensionable age) who was not much taken with either candidate.

What interested me most about that group was the incredible level of both political ignorance and socio-political unreality. One old bird, who sounded around 80, opined (re. Brexit) “we got through two world wars, we can get through this, and I think that Boris is the man to bring the country together.”

Where does one even start to unpack nonsense of that sort? First of all, it implies that Britain somehow endured two massive wars and came out OK (if not “victorious”), whereas in fact the two main open conflicts of the 20th Century crippled the UK and mortally-wounded the British Empire (qua empire), a fact concealed by the very great overall improvement in British living standards since 1914.

Then there is that bit about “Boris” being the politician (surely even the aforesaid old bird cannot regard the idiot as a “statesman”?) who can “bring the country together”. What country is that? Can people really be that blind? There is no “country” to speak of any more. What there is is a geographic space, inhabited by a motley collection of races, ethnicities, social groups, “tribes” (both social and ethnic), lifestyles etc. I do not think that even the old descriptive term “classes” really fits any more. Society has fallen apart to the extent that the idea of a “working class”, a “middle class” or “middle classes”, let alone an “upper class” or “aristocracy”, is not just lacking in credibility but is actually pathetic. That is even if we leave aside the race question.

What is the “working class” now? Anyone who receives less than a designated income? The bottle-throwers of the EDL? “White van man” with his artisan trade and his purchased council house or tract home, complete with Sky TV and an above-ground pool in the back garden? The “chavs” or “chavscum”, with their sub-American “culture” of baseball caps, untaxed cars and drug use? The officially-bullied and taunted unemployed or disabled? The blacks and browns?

Faux-revolutionary scribbler and metro-gay propagandist Owen Jones was unable to shoehorn these new types into the traditional Marxist categories, so conflated proletariat and lumpenproletariat in his book “Chavs: the demonization of the working class“. Unable to find enough steel workers, miners and trawlermen to constitute a viable “working class”, Jones ropes in whatever he can from the poorly-incomed “precariat”: call centre workers, unemployed, retail staff, low-paid office bods etc.

Then we have the “middle class”, or as used to be said, “the middle classes”. Prior to World War Two, these strata were fairly well defined: the “upper” middle-classes (fringing on the gentry and even aristocracy), with their successful, long-established business firms (The Forsyte Saga), Oxford/Cambridge education (Brideshead Revisited, Zuleika Dobson etc), careeerism in the Diplomatic Service, the Bar, the higher ranks of the medical profession, the armed services. Then there were the “middle middles” in management, small business ownership etc. The “lower middle class”, meaning the lower ranks of management etc, were a vast throng, sometimes only distinguishable from “the workers” by the wearing of a tie.

In America, these terms are (certainly now) either not used, or used differently.

Then we have the “aristocracy” and “gentry”, the latter sometimes termed (as late as the 1950s, in novels by the likes of Agatha Christie) as “the County” (the older, more significant, or wealthy landed families in any particular county). This stratum was already being infiltrated by foreign or alien elements as early as the 19th Century.

Winston Churchill was famously half-American. He was not alone. Many ancient or at least old houses admitted an American admixture, usually for reasons of money. Even some Jewish and part-Jewish women married into the English and Scottish nobility. One well-known example was the 6th Duke of Carnarvon, whose ancestral home, Highclere Castle, is today used as the fictional Downton Abbey on TV. His mother’s biological father was a Rothschild: “Rothschild provided a marriage settlement of £500,000 and paid off all Lord Carnarvon’s existing debts.” [Wikipedia] Tens of millions in the money of today.

The 2nd Duke of Westminster was incensed by the way in which Jews were infiltrating the British aristocracy, and (according to his third wife, Loelia) was writing a book on the subject, which book has, regrettably, never been published.

The society which now exists in Britain, especially in England and Wales, is a mixture of the old pre-1939 society, that which developed between 1939 and —arguably— 1979 or 1989, and that which has since emerged.

I think that we have to be quite clear here. At present, we do not have a functioning or sustainable society in the UK. The appearance of one owes much to the older, pre-1989, way of doing things, to institutions which still exist, though badly-wounded: the monarchy, the police, the armed services, the NHS, the Civil Service, local government. The people who grew up in the 1930s, 1940s, 1950s, and even 1960s are carrying on as if Britain is a unified country. It is not. It is a mass of contradictions and absurdities.

After the Soviet Union collapsed in the late 1980s and early 1990s (officially, 1991), huge numbers of people in factories, on farms, attending country rail stations, driving trams, carried on working even though in many cases they were not being paid. The society carried on under its own momentum for a while. Britain is like that socially, politically. More and more parts of British society are either not working properly or are not working at all, but many have not fully woken up to that fact.

If the working classes and to a large extent the middle classes have been replaced by the “chavscum” and “precariat”, the short-term contract people, the here-today-gone-tomorrow little businesses etc, then the former “gentry”, “aristocracy” (insofar as the term has meaning in Britain) and even royals have just become functions of the cosmopolitan wealth-soaked “celebrity” culture, in which it is hard to distinguish between a film star, a pop star, a TV talking head, a Premier League footballer and his WAG, Gary Lineker, Prince Harry or the Royal Mulatta.

As far as the Royal Family are concerned, it is noticeable how there is an almost-complete gulf between the older royals, such as the Queen and Prince Philip and the present generation, with Prince Charles and the others a kind of halfway house. The older royals are recognizably “royal”. One might or might not be “royalist”; that is another question, but no-one could mistake the Queen and consort (whether one “likes” them or not) for “ordinary citizens”.

By the time you get to Prince William and “Kate”, or Harry and the “Royal Mulatta”, there is very little that marks them out as “royal” at all, unless it is ingrained public acceptance (propped up by the msm) and their own huge sense of entitlement, brought home most recently by the endless boring soap opera of Harry, the £2.5 million refurbishment of his new house (work paid for, in effect, by the people) , and the various rumours and tabloid interest around “the Royal Mulatta” (a mixed-race woman, formerly a Hollywood TV actress, and formerly married to an American Jew).

The present generation of “royals” are scarcely “royal” at all: they are educated in ordinary (if expensive) schools and universities, live lives which are carefully crafted to at least seem “ordinary” most of the time, and seem to feel that they can do largely as they please in terms of marriages, children etc.

In fact, it could well be said that the only thing linking the attitudes of the present three generations of royals is their sense of entitlement.

When we look at the more “ordinary” people of the UK, do we see there a “country” which is “united” or which might be “unified” (leaving aside the question of whether a clown like Boris Johnson could “unify” anything)? I think not.

The racial question is also hugely-important. Can a multikulti society survive and thrive? I think not; not for long. People used to point at the USA. Well, look now. Falling to pieces. Britain is about 87% “white” (mainly English), but even that figure is doubtful. If you take out Scotland, and Wales, and Northern Ireland, that figure, now for England alone, shrinks alarmingly. Huge cities and large towns in England now have a minority of inhabitants who are really English.

Looking again at Boris-Idiot:

“The Balliol College Register for 1983 contains an entry that begins: “JOHNSON Alexander Boris de Pfeffel: JOHNSON, Boris – b. 19 June 1964. New York. American. Generally known while at Balliol as Boris Johnson. Eton; Balliol 1983–7.” [Daily Telegraph]

Note that. “American”. At that time, Johnson was considered to be an American, born in the USA, with an American passport, and brought up in the USA and Belgium as well as the UK.

“Johnson was born to British parents on 19 June 1964 in Manhattan‘s Upper East Side in New York City.[4] His birth was registered with both the U.S authorities and the city’s British Consulate, thereby granting him both American and British citizenship.[5] His father, Stanley Johnson, was then studying economics at Columbia University.[6]

Johnson’s maternal grandfather was the lawyer Sir James Fawcett.[7] Johnson’s paternal great-grandfather was Circassian–Turkishjournalist Ali Kemal[8][9][10] who was a secular Muslim; his father’s other ancestry includes English and French, including descent from King George II of Great Britain.[11] Johnson’s mother was Charlotte Fawcett;[12] an artist from a family of liberal intellectuals, she had married Stanley in 1963, prior to their move to the U.S.[13] She is the granddaughter of Elias Avery Lowe, a palaeographer, who was a Russian Jewish immigrant to the U.S.,[14] and Helen Tracy Lowe-Porter, a translator of Thomas Mann. Johnson’s maternal great-grandfather was a Lithuanian Jew and Orthodox Jewish rabbi.”

“In reference to his varied ancestry, Johnson has described himself as a “one-man melting pot” – with a combination of Muslims, Jews, and Christians as great-grandparents.”

[Wikipedia]

We see, time and again, and reflective of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion [usually called a “forgery” but better described as “literary fantasy reflecting facts and real events”], that those assigned leading political positions by the New World Order [NWO] and ZOG [“Zionist Occupation Government”] are not Jewish as such but part-Jew. Boris Johnson is one example. David Cameron [Cameron-Levita] was another. Theresa May another. Sarkozy too. This all fits in with the Coudenhove-Kalergi Plan, which underpins the EU.

http://www.westernspring.co.uk/the-coudenhove-kalergi-plan-the-genocide-of-the-peoples-of-europe/

Wikipedia:

“In his book Praktischer Idealismus (Practical Idealism), written in 1925, [Coudenhove-Kalergi] describes the future of Jews in Europe and of European racial composition with the following words:

The man of the future will be of mixed race. Today’s races and classes will gradually disappear owing to the vanishing of space, time, and prejudice. The Eurasian–Negroid race of the future, similar in its appearance to the Ancient Egyptians, will replace the diversity of peoples with a diversity of individuals. […]

Instead of destroying European Jewry, Europe, against its own will, refined and educated this people into a future leader-nation through this artificial selection process. No wonder that this people, that escaped Ghetto-Prison, developed into a spiritual nobility of Europe. Therefore a gracious Providence provided Europe with a new race of nobility by the Grace of Spirit. This happened at the moment when Europe’s feudal aristocracy became dilapidated, and thanks to Jewish emancipation.”

[Wikipedia]

There you have it: a black-brown-white mulatto dustbin race, ruled over by Jews and part-Jews, and/or by freemasons. That is their vision of EU Europe, including the UK. Now you see how it is that the 2016 Referendum result has led to delay, vacillation, huge fear propaganda, plans to hold a second referendum, blah blah blah. All because this goes beyond trade, beyond co-operation. It is a massive international and cosmopolitan conspiracy.

“Hitler did not share the ideas of his Austrian compatriot. He argued in his 1928 Secret Book that they are unfit for the future defence of Europe against America. As America fills its North American lebensraum, “the natural activist urge that is peculiar to young nations will turn outward.” But then “a pacifist-democratic pan-European hodgepodge state” would not be able to oppose the United States, as it is “according to the conception of that commonplace bastard, Coudenhove-Kalergi…”“

[Wikipedia]

As so often, Hitler has been proven to be right. The EU, that “pacifist-democratic pan-European hodgepodge state” is indeed unable to oppose the American expansionism which is in fact better termed NWO/ZOG expansion. It was planned to be like that, secretly. The EU does not stand in opposition to the USA (meaning the NWO) but is at the higher levels tied in with it.

The EU has already begun “the Great Replacement”, the replacement of decent, progressive, evolving European peoples with the backward black and brown peoples who will make suitable slaves for the planned robotic and AI-oriented superstate or “European space” of the near or medium-term future. Below, one aspect of that:

An injection of millions of blacks and browns into the heart of white Northern Europe.

Not for nothing did Angela Merkel, a recipient of the Coudenhove-Kalergi Prize [sanitized as the “Charlemagne Prize”]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlemagne_Prize

decide to break EU law and to “invite” untold millions of blacks and browns etc to invade EU territory. This is all part of the plan.

CSwbJ9yWwAAdQ73

CgFqWSRXEAICTlz

This continues, though now not much publicized. Meanwhile, EU “leaders” [NWO puppets such as Macron] recently met in Marrakesh, where they “decided” to funnel millions more migrants “legally” into the EU, thus not so much disturbing the invaded European peoples. At the same time, they decided to make any criticism of it illegal. The real decisions are of course taken earlier, behind closed doors.

Returning to the UK, to the Conservative leadership farce etc, there seem to be various possibilities when Johnson wins and, however briefly, becomes Prime Minister. The first thing to understand is that Boris-Idiot is no strong character, but a weak and vacillating one. I cannot be sure, but I think that he will probably agree to something with the EU, then try to sell it to the British people as a huge improvement on Theresa May’s “deal”. I doubt that he will, in any real sense, take the UK out of the EU in October 2019. If he does, it will almost certainly be a con-trick. Brexit In Name Only.

One has to ask oneself why the msm have been promoting Boris-Idiot as “Prime Minister in Waiting” for years and years, despite his obvious unfitness for any kind of high office.

Should Boris Johnson really try to take the UK out of the EU on WTO terms, his time as Prime Minister will be measured in weeks not months. It only takes 3 or 4 Conservative MPs to abstain in a confidence vote to effectively remove Boris Johnson as PM. Or for 2 or 3 Conservatives to vote against their own government.

If that were to happen, there would be a general election and one of the first seats to fall would be that of Boris Johnson himself, at Uxbridge. It will be recalled how Johnson at first signed up to the Theresa May “deal” (he wanted to stay in the Cabinet…). How much more will Johnson want to cling on as Prime Minister! He has no honour, no real ideas (beyond schoolboy ones such as garden bridges, cablecars over the Thames, water-cannon, Boris Island etc). He has no ideals, no real ideology. He is also administratively incompetent. He is very likely going to be the worst prime minister the UK has ever had, certainly for the past century or more.

Boris Johnson is looking to be not only one of the least-worthy and least-fitted persons ever to hold that great office of Prime Minister of the UK, but also one of the weakest. Johnson will be a prisoner of Remain-favouring MPs. He has no real desire to Remain or Leave. All that matters to him is being Prime Minister for as long as possible, not to accomplish anything, but just to be there (and to get the perks etc). Money in terms of salary etc is not the main thing, in fact he might lose out, though only temporarily. Memoirs can be penned later and millions paid…

Will Johnson last as PM (assuming that he even gets that far)? Probably not. He is being pulled in various directions, by the DUP whose votes he will need, by the pro-Remain MPs, by the EU. He is as weak as weak could be, politically.

The likelihood must be a 2019 general election.

Ctdcka4WAAApkQ6

C7_6DhaW4AA5xQV

Beyond that, there is a crying necessity for a serious social-national movement in the UK.

Notes

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48854280

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/07/05/tory-leadership-latest-news-boris-johnson-jeremy-hunt-hustings/

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Chav

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chav

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugh_Grosvenor,_2nd_Duke_of_Westminster#Political_ideology

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loelia_Lindsay

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Herbert,_6th_Earl_of_Carnarvon

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Almina_Herbert,_Countess_of_Carnarvon

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_von_Coudenhove-Kalergi

https://archive.org/details/TheProtocolsOfTheLearnedEldersOfZion

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/04/04/mass-hysteria/

Typically, the Jews look only to their own interests, and the Conservative Party leadership farce is no exception to this rule:

https://www.thejc.com/news/news-features/brexit-schmexit-how-jewish-are-boris-johnson-and-jeremy-hunt-1.486180

The Jewish Chronicle at least admits to it: “we rate them on the only scale that matters [their Jewishness and/or attitude to the Jews]”

Boris Johnson is liked more than disliked by Conservative Party members (+31%) but greatly more disliked than liked by voters as a whole (-19%)…

Who knows what the future holds for Europe and the world?

bq-5c87ada639494

Update, 9 July 2019

Having watched the above clip, either Boris Johnson is on cocaine, which would be worrying, or he is not, which would be even more worrying. What more can one say? This is somehow an area beyond ideology. It was once said that the Soviet Union was divided into the drinkers and the non-drinkers. Now Britain, whatever its other divisions, divides into, on the one side, those who see that an idiotic, uncontrolled, madly-ambitious, conscienceless incompetent, without ideas or ideals, is about to become, incredibly, Prime Minister of this country, and on the other side, those who either do not see, are too stupid to understand what Boris-Idiot is, or are totally deluded (or both, or all).

If anyone wanted to be convinced of the complete decadence of “democracy” in the UK, I should think that the Boris-Idiot/Jeremy Hunt “debate” (schoolboy level spout-fest) would be enough, judging from –admittedly– the bits that I myself have now seen. As for the audience, they seemed to love Boris-Idiot, I suppose because they, like mobs and crowds of plebs down the ages, from the days of the Roman Empire and even Republic, want to be entertained, want to be pandered to, and above all do not want to have to think seriously.

A small selection of Twitter vox pop

The lady below sets the bar low! What a stupid woman!

https://twitter.com/prixsalop/status/1148713350861336576

Someone [below] is awake, anyway…

Another who is not asleep…

As I predicted some time ago, Boris Johnson, Boris Idiot, shows weakness in every way. Here is his latest indication.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/10/kim-darroch-effectively-sacked-by-johnson-on-the-orders-of-trump?CMP=share_btn_tw

Johnson is a doormat for for the USA and for Israel.

https://twitter.com/ottocrat/status/1148960286478667776

https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/boris-johnson-shows-that-hes-donald-trumps-poodle

Update, 15 July 2019

Ha. Here we are…https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7248815/Next-EU-chief-Ursula-von-der-Leyen-says-agree-Brexit-delay.html

Update, 18 July 2019

What more can one add?…

Update, 24 July 2019

Boris-Idiot won by about 92,000 votes to about 48,000. Clear but not overwhelming. “Boris” will therefore become PM today or tomorrow, unless some public-spirited chauffeur runs over him in a ministerial limousine.

92,000 elderly Conservative members have decided that they want Boris-Idiot as Prime Minister. The other 65 million UK residents have no say. All that UK voters can do, in any future Westminster election, starting today, is vote any way except Conservative. 

The reaction has been sharp and is not confined to those who want to Remain in the EU.

Foreign or near-abroad reaction?

Update, 21 June 2023

If I say so myself, my blog post above has proven prophetic…

Brexit, by-elections, Deadhead MPs, elections, MPs, Party Politics, Uncategorized

Brecon and Radnorshire By-Election 2019

104 Comments

Recent events in Brecon and Radnorshire

A by-election is to be held in Brecon and Radnorshire constituency (formerly Brecon and Radnor, 1918-1997). Unusually, this by-election has been triggered by the conviction for (what amounts to) fraud relating to the Parliamentary expenses of the sitting MP. Christopher Davies, who had held the seat since 2015, pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 50 hours of community service and a fine of £1,500.

The relative leniency of the sentence may reflect the fact that the £700 wrongfully claimed by way of expenses by Davies could have been claimed legitimately (whether approved or not); the way in which he went about it (creating two false invoices amounting to the sum in question) made it unlawful. On a kind interpretation, Davies was stupid or incompetent more than (very) dishonest. Still not very good for him, I would have thought.

The position of the MP and the calling of the by-election

The events around this by-election raise interesting issues.

The news reports say that the seat “has been vacated”, but I have seen nothing about the Speaker declaring it so, a problem which previously arose during the Fiona Onasanya case, when that MP, despite having been sentenced for perversion of the course of justice, and despite a recall petition having been approved by more than the requisite 10% of eligible voters, still sat and voted as MP for Peterborough (including, crucially, in a significant Brexit debate and vote), also getting paid for months.

Davies may or may not, at time of writing, still be an MP. Even the more serious newspapers and the specialized websites (eg Politics Home) have not clarified the position. The Wikipedia entry for Davies says that his removal as MP was “automatic” once the results of the petition were known, but such is not the case. Wikipedia also says that “the seat was declared vacant on 21 June 2019” (today). Perhaps.

The Conservatives must “move a writ” to start the by-election process. In Britain’s unwritten or (more accurately) uncodified Constitution, this is supposed to happen within (usually) 3 months of the seat being declared vacant. After that, the by-election usually happens within 27 days (of the writ having been moved).

In other words, while in theory this by-election could happen by the end of July 2019, it might not happen until late October or, if the Conservatives really stretched the Constitutional proprieties to the limit, even later. Parliament rises for its Summer Recess on 25 July, so if the writ is not moved by then, the very earliest date on which the writ could be moved would be 3 September, after the Commons return, making the earliest by-election date one in late September.

If Davies is still nominally the MP, then he is entitled to his salary and expenses until such time as he is declared (by the Speaker) not the MP.

Christopher Davies, remarkably (bearing in mind that he pleaded guilty to the charges), seems to be breezy about the matter, and has invited his constituents to his local office, in the small Welsh town of Builth Wells, to view and enjoy the 9 landscape photographs which were the subject-matter of the expenses claims in question! I daresay that many of his constituents might wonder why Parliamentary expenses cover such purchases anyway (surely he or the local Conservative Association should have paid?).

Even more remarkably, Davies says that he intends to stand again! The local Conservatives, meanwhile, have not pronounced on whether Davies will be allowed to stand as a Conservative Party candidate! One can see their difficulty: if Davies stands as Conservative candidate, their chance of success is weakened, contaminated by his candidature, but if Davies stands as Independent Conservative or some such, he may draw off at least a few hundred, maybe even a thousand or more otherwise “Conservative” votes. None dare call it blackmail?

Still, one would have thought that simple ethical standards might have come into play, but in the contemporary Conservative Party, it seems not.

Another strange aspect: one would have thought that the two contenders for the Conservative Party leadership would have condemned Davies for his offences, or at least mumbled something neutral, but it seems that both have been “very supportive”.

The constituency

Before 1939, the constituency, under its Brecon and Radnor name, had as MPs persons from the Labour, Liberal, Conservative, Unionist, National and National Liberal parties (the latter three effectively Conservative coalition candidates).

Labour held the seat between 1939 and 1979. From 1979 to 2019, the Conservatives won 3 times, the Liberals/Liberal Democrats 3 times.

The post-WW2 Labour vote peaked in 1964 at just under 58%; its lowest was 10% in 2010. In general, the Labour vote has declined over the years, having not exceeded 20% of votes cast since the General Election of 2001.

The LibDem vote peaked in 2010 at 44.8% (1st placed), since when it declined to about 28% in 2015 and about 29% in 2017; however in both 2015 and 2017, the LibDems were placed 2nd.

In 2017, the Conservative candidate, Davies, achieved a vote of 48.6%, a post-WW2 record for Conservatives in the seat.

The only other (slightly) significant party contending over the years has been Plaid Cymru, which however has rarely retained its deposit in recent decades. Its typical vote share in recent years has been 2%-3%, though it reached 4.4% in 2015 (3.1% in 2017).

A few other parties have stood over the years. UKIP got 8.3% in 2015 (its best in the seat), but slumped to 1.4% in 2017.

The joker in the pack is Brexit Party.

Conclusion

There are some uncertain factors here: will Christopher Davies really stand again, and if so will it be as Conservative Party candidate or as some type of Independent? Will Brexit Party put up a strong candidate? Whatever happens, the Conservatives must be toast here. If Davies stands as Independent, and with Brexit Party now standing, then the Conservative vote will (probably though not necessarily) be even lower than if Davies brazenly stands again as Conservative. Davies does seem to be quite embedded locally, as a former livestock auctioneer, Royal Welsh Show ring commentator and manager of a veterinary practice.

The LibDems are currently strong favourites. The only thing that would or might upset the applecart would be the Brexit Party, now (announced today) entering the fray. Looking at 2015/2017, the LibDem core vote in the seat is below 30%. Even so, the LibDems must be in pole position here. It’s their election to lose.

Further factors

It is plainly in the Conservative interest to delay this by-election as long as possible. Their notional working Commons majority, even with DUP support, is now only four. If Brecon and Radnorshire goes LibDem or Brexit Party, that will reduce to three. Some Conservative MPs are ready to abandon support if Brexit no-deal looks likely. Boris Johnson may be a very short-lived Prime Minister.

Notes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brecon_and_Radnorshire_(UK_Parliament_constituency)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Brecon_and_Radnorshire_by-election

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tudor_Watkins,_Baron_Watkins

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-48720176

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Davies_(Conservative_politician)

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/12/21/deadhead-mps-an-occasional-series-the-fiona-onasanya-story/

https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/conservative-party/news/104734/convicted-tory-mp-chris-davies-booted

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/21/petition-to-recall-convicted-tory-mp-chris-davies-succeeds

https://www.parliament.uk/about/faqs/house-of-commons-faqs/business-faq-page/recess-dates/

Update, 24 June 2019

The Brecon and Radnorshire Conservatives have reselected Christopher Davies as their candidate.

Davies faces an uphill struggle. While his offence was only marginally dishonest, it was still dishonest. It also showed Davies as both lacking in judgment and as simply inept. Apart from that, there is the point that the Conservatives have rarely if ever been lower in public estimation. Also, this is a by-election and the Conservative Party is in government.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-48736879

Update, 27 June 2019

The position has now been clarified. Davies is no longer the MP and the writ is expected to be moved today, Thursday 27 June, having failed two days ago. The by-election is now or soon will be set for 1 August 2019.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-48764106

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-48777219

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/breaking-brecon-radnorshire-byelection-date-17264118

In a sense, I am surprised that the Conservatives did not play this more tactically, in view of their situation re. the numbers in the Commons, but there it is.

Now that Brexit Party is standing, the chance of the Conservatives actually winning (especially with a rather discredited candidate) has shrunk accordingly. If Brexit Party gets half of the 2017 Conservative vote, that would give them about 24%. The LibDems are unlikely to get less than the c.29% they got in 2017. Labour got over 17% in 2017.

If Labour does better than it did in 2017, and if Brexit Party does well too, and the LibDems do at least as well as they did in 2017, then all four serious contenders might well get vote shares in the 20%-35% range. If the Conservative vote were to collapse to, say, 10% or 15%, then the other three parties in serious contention might well end up getting about the same vote shares as each other.

This might turn out to be quite close among LibDems, Brexit Party, Labour, and maybe Conservatives too, with the likelihood of placings in that order.

Update, 29 June 2019

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-48798705

The Brexit Party has announced its candidate, a retired senior police detective. Ouch! (in view of the Conservative Party backing a convict!)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-48810457

Meanwhile, minor Remain-friendly parties look like not contesting the seat, in order to give the LibDems a clear run. Green Party, Renew, Change UK (probably, if they even bother to make a statement, they are already so marginal), Plaid Cymru (maybe).

Renew has never contested this seat, though it scored about 4% in Newport West recently; Change UK is already a “dead parrot” party, marginal, negligible in support (below 1%); the Greens last contested this seat in 2015, scoring 3.1%; Plaid got 3.1% in the seat in 2017.

If Plaid get on board the non-contest train, the boost to the LibDems must be worth several points, maybe as much as 7%, though more realistically about 5%. Worth having, anyway.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1146794/brexit-news-brexit-party-brecon-and-radnorshire-by-election-renew-party-remain-coalition

Update, 3 July 2019

There are so far 4 candidates standing (LibDems, Conservatives, Brexit Party, Labour), with less than 48 hours until nominations close. Plaid Cymru has “indicated” that it will not be standing, in order to give the pro-Remain LibDems their best possible chance. The other pro-Remain parties, meaning Greens and Renew, are both not standing and for the same reason. Any late entries are likely to be vanity or joke candidates and will not at all change the outcome of the by-election.

The LibDems must be in an even stronger position to take the seat now that the smaller parties are not standing. In the last few elections, minor parties accounted for between 5% and 10% of the total vote.

Update, 4 July 2019

My eye was caught by the latest YouGov national opinion poll, as reported by Britain Elects.

If this poll is in any way accurate (and Ipsos Mori put out a very different result only a week ago, which shows how volatile UK politics is becoming), then Brexit Party would actually be the largest party in the Commons after a general election:

https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/userpoll.html

Brexit Party 196 seats (130 short of Commons majority), Labour 148, Conservative 169, LibDem 66. That would mean a Brexit Party government with, almost inevitably, Conservative support; possibly a coalition government. Large numbers of both Conservative and Labour MPs would be gone, including half of those recently vying for Conservative leadership.

Thinking about how that might apply to the Brecon and Radnorshire by-election, it may be that most of the 2017 Conservative votes in the seat will go to Brexit Party, but they might not. There is uncertainty. Personality often means more in rural constituencies than in urban and suburban ones. Much depends on whether voters regard the Conservative, Christopher Davies, as an “expenses cheat” and/or “fraudster” after his criminal conviction, or whether they will “forgive and forget” his sin/error because they (do they?) regard him otherwise as OK and his offence a technical one.

My view is obviously no more than an educated guess, but I should think that many locals will think that £700 is a ridiculous sum to pay out for 9 photographs anyway. Others will see the dishonesty aspect; yet others may think that the former MP should be given a second chance. Much depends on his personal vote, on his local popularity.

I find this by-election hard to call. However, it must be done. On present facts, I think that Labour has no chance, realistically. It is seen as the party of the blacks and browns now, for one thing. They are few in number in that part of the world, unless it has changed hugely since I was last there. Also, Remain voters will go LibDem here, not Labour, whereas committed Leave/Brexit voters will go Brexit Party or maybe Con.

I think that it is quite possible that at least half the 2017 Conservative vote will defect to Brexit Party. The LibDem vote will be solid now that the party is bouncing in the polls; also, in this seat, the LibDems are not seen as a wasted vote, Brecon and Radnorshire having had LibDem MPs from 1997 until 2015.

If the LibDems can build on the 29% they got in 2017, and I think that they will, then they are in with a very good chance. They might get a vote between 30% and 40%.

I doubt whether Labour will get more than 10% or so.

The Conservative vote may collapse, though I remain unconvinced that it will go much lower than 20%.

Brexit Party, if it can capture disaffected Conservative votes, might go as high as 30%. There is another point, which is whether people who prefer Conservative or Labour will vote tactically for Brexit Party. Hard to say. The LibDems must get at least 30% and may get 40%, so Brexit Party has to get around 40% to have a chance of winning.

Provisional Conclusion (with nearly 4 weeks left to run):

  1. LibDems
  2. Brexit Party
  3. Conservatives
  4. Labour

Update, 5 July 2019

With weeks left to run, the online betting market shows the LibDems as heavily odds-on (about 1/5), Labour (oddly, but the market is thin) on 2/1, Conservatives on 9/1, Brexit Party at 12/1. Political betting is a minefield. The favourites often go down. Labour on 2/1 looks like exceptionally poor value! Brexit Party, however, looks like fairly good value at 12/1. My own valuation of the odds would be nearer to: LibDems 1/2, Brexit Party 2/1, Conservatives 3/1, Labour 10/1, but we shall see.

In the meantime, msm commentary has started:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/05/pro-emain-parties-strike-brecon-and-radnorshire-byelection-pact-to-fight-conservatives

11 July 2019

The confirmed final list of candidates shows the four expected parties (Con, Lab, LibDem, Brexit Party) and two late entrants, namely UKIP and Monster Raving Loony. The UKIP entry will obviously eat into Brexit Party’s chances; to what extent we shall see, though even 500 or 1,000 votes might be enough to sink Brexit Party in the by-election. Looks more like a spoiler than a serious candidature.

https://www.countytimes.co.uk/news/17756758.brecon-radnorshire-by-election-candidates-confirmed/

The Guardian interviews locals. One part stands out:

“Given that 19% of the local electorate signed the recall petition, almost double the 10% threshold, a surprising number of locals of different party allegiances express sympathy for Davies’s plight. Yet there are some who are adamant that he should have stood down. One council worker tells me that, owing to her job, she’s in electoral purdah and can only speak off the record. “I signed the petition against Chris Davies because he tried to shaft a friend of mine who works in his office, by blaming the expenses mistake on her,” she says. As far as this council worker is concerned, Davies, whom she voted for in 2017, was given a second chance for cynical reasons. “Everyone knows that they didn’t want to put any promising new candidate in,” she says, “because they know they’re going to lose the seat.””

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/07/brecon-byelection-battle–remain-alliance-quiet-revolution

Meanwhile…

http://www.brecon-radnor.co.uk/article.cfm?id=110936&headline=Homebase%20store%20in%20Brecon%20to%20close&sectionIs=news&searchyear=2019

Update, 19 July 2019

Had a look at Oddschecker betting array. LibDems are hugely odds-on (1/9), Conservatives second at aroung 7/1, Brexit Party about 12/1, Labour 100/1. Not noted were UKIP and Monster Raving Loony. I expect that anyone wanting to throw away a few pounds could ask for and get 500/1 against either of those.

Betting is not always a sure indicator of a election or referendum result, but the LibDems have, as previously said, a lot going for them here: a fairly recent history of providing the local MP, the fact that the Conservative candidate is damaged goods, the fact that those who would have voted for the parties that have voluntarily withdrawn (Green, Plaid Cymru, Renew) will vote LibDem in a contest where Labour is anyway a wasted vote.

Update, 29 July 2019

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/convicted-tory-chris-davies-is-a-no-show-at-brecon-and-radnorshire-by-election-hustings-zlrn0p80l

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-wales-49090993/brecon-and-radnorshire-by-election-a-history

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/29/lib-dems-quiet-bollocks-to-brexit-brecon-and-radnorshire-byelection

Update, 31 July 2019

Well, “the moment of truth”, meaning that the by-election will be held tomorrow, Thursday 1 August 2019. This blog post has so far had, in about 5-6 weeks, 600+ views, far above the norm for my blog. Brecon and Radnorshire is having its 15 minutes of fame…

The BBC Wales take on it all:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-wales-49170677/brecon-and-radnorshire-by-election-voters-highlight-issues

The LibDems are in pole position, hugely odds-on with the bookmakers (1/20 in some quarters), with the Conservatives in 2nd place (about 9/1) and (perhaps surprisingly) Brexit Party in 3rd position (as high as 50/1, which may be, at those odds, a value bet); Labour seems out of it at odds of 150-1.

A month ago, I was predicting, provisionally, LibDems to win, followed by Brexit Party, Conservatives, Labour, UKIP (a pure spoiler candidature, it seems) and the inevitable joke candidate, a Monster Raving Loony calling herself Lily the Pink (presumably after the comic song of 1968).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lily_the_Pink_(song)

I see no reason to think that the LibDems will not win Brecon and Radnorshire. They have all the Remain votes and so many of the votes of the highly-subsidized local farmers, though no doubt some of the latter will remain loyal to the Conservative Party and its recently-convicted candidate. I do not know what sort of campaign Brexit Party put up in the constituency, but I should imagine that BP might still come second, notwithstanding the bookmakers. If it does not, Brexit Party’s balloon deflates a little more, but many will be looking at the result of the by-election to see whether the Conservative might have won were there no Brexit Party candidate. If the Brexit Party candidature alone meant that the Conservative could not win, alarm bells will sound at CCHQ.

Update, 1 August 2019

Polling day. The betting odds, for what they are worth are (best odds) LibDems 1/18 odds-on; Conservatives 7/1, Brexit Party 100/1, Labour 150/1. The bookmakers, at least, think that Brexit Party is heading for 3rd place. Perhaps.

It may well be that tactical voting is taking place, in particular that Labour supporters, recognizing that Labour has no chance here, are going with the LibDems in order to ensure defeat for the Conservatives (and Brexit Party).

The only significant changes in the betting are the Conservatives taking closer order (yesterday 8/1 or 9/1, today 6/1 or 7/1, and Brexit Party sliding from 50/1 to 100/1.

Looks as if the LibDems have probably nailed it and that the Government’s majority, even with DUP support, is now 1 MP vote.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/aug/01/the-view-from-brecon-and-radnorshire-voters-byelection

Update, 2 August 2019

The LibDems won fairly decisively, but with a smaller majority than the betting might have been suggesting. I have posted links here below.

For me, the most important aspect beyond the headline result is the fact that the Conservative ex-MP would have won, even handsomely, were it not for the candidature of Brexit Party, which received 3,331 votes.

The LibDem majority over the Conservatives was only 1,425. In other words, had Brexit Party not been standing, the Conservatives would almost certainly have won by nearly 2,000 votes. I shall be blogging separately later about the by-election and the implications of that Brexit Party aspect for the national political picture.

The Labour vote had suffered a general decline in the constituency over the years (all-time high was 57.69% in 1964), but this was its lowest-ever vote-share (5.3%). I attribute that partly and perhaps mainly to tactical voting: Labour supporters voting against the Conservatives (mainly) in a situation where Labour had no real chance anyway: the Labour vote here has not exceeded 20% since 2001 (21.4%).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brecon_and_Radnorshire_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2010s

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-49200636

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/voters-head-to-the-polls-for-brecon-and-radnorshire-byelection-live-a4202956.html

https://news.sky.com/story/liberal-democrats-win-brecon-and-radnorshire-by-election-as-johnson-suffers-first-defeat-as-pm-11775356

The Monster Raving Loony Party got 1% (334 votes), the UKIP spoiler candidate (or was she just irredeemably stupid?) only 0.8% (242 votes).

There is not much sunshine for the Conservatives in this result. Still, ex-MP Christopher Davies can always return to auctioning cattle; and he has some lovely landscape photographs (the subject-matter of his criminal case) for his Builth Wells office. Something to think about as he endures his community service serf-labour…

“Always look on the bright side of Life”

Update, 13 May 2020

Prior to the 2019 General Election, Christopher Davies was selected to fight the Ynys Mon [Anglesey] seat [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ynys_M%C3%B4n_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2010s] but stood down after criticism.

Ynys Mon, a constituency which (sub nom Anglesey) goes back to 1545, was won by the Conservative Party at the 2019 General Election, only the third time a Conservative Party MP had been elected there, and only the second Conservative MP (the first having been the multikulti supporter, Keith Best [MP 1979-1987], who was convicted, while MP, on charges of having made fraudulent share applications).

As to Brecon and Radnorshire, the Conservative Party won easily, with a vote-share of over 53%, at the General Election. Brexit Party had not stood (rather, withdrawn) a candidate after Nigel Farage stabbed his own supporters in the back.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brecon_and_Radnorshire_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2010s

The present MP for Brecon and Radnorshire is Fay Jones, a rather obscure and youngish woman (34/35 y-o) whose father was also once a Conservative Party MP (and is a prominent freemason in Wales).

Alison Chabloz, Alt-Right, Brexit, Campaign Against AntiSemitism, Carl Benjamin, Count Dankula, David Icke, free speech, Ian Millard, Jewish lobby in UK, Jez Turner, London Forum, Mark Meechan, Reminiscences and Musings, Sargon of Akkad, society, The Great Replacement, Uncategorized

Repulsive Jo Brand, Repulsive BBC

11 Comments

For those who have never heard of her, Jo Brand is a terminally unfunny comedienne, the sort of artiste the BBC have specialized in for the past 20-30 years.

Jo Brand is highly political and supports the Labour Party.

Recently, Jo Brand made comments that she excused later as “a joke”, to the effect that Nigel Farage and other basically (even mildly) nationalist political candidates should have acid thrown over them. Wikipedia has the following description of the matter:

“In June 2019, Brand was featured in the BBC Radio 4 comedy show Heresy, after a number of  European election candidates had been doused with milkshakes during campaign walkabouts the previous month. Brand said “Why bother with a milkshake when you could get some battery acid?” She later added: “That’s just me, sorry, I’m not gonna do it, it’s purely a fantasy, but I think milk shakes are pathetic, I honestly do. Sorry.”[32] The BBC later defended Brand, explaining “the jokes made on Heresy are deliberately provocative as the title implies” and that they were “not intended to be taken seriously.”[33] Acting Prime Minister Theresa May said the BBC should explain why a Jo Brand joke about throwing battery acid was “appropriate content” for broadcast[34] and the BBC later announced that the remark would be edited out of any future broadcasts. The Metropolitan Police confirmed that it had “received an allegation of incitement to violence that was reported to the MPS on 13 June”.[35] and that they were investigating the matter.[36][37] Appearing at an event in Henley, Oxfordshire, on the same day, the comedian was said to have apologised for making the joke, saying “Looking back it probably was somewhat a crass and ill-judged joke that might upset people.” It was understood that the allegation reported to the police was not made by Nigel Farage or the Brexit Party. Ofcom said it has received 65 complaints about the episode of Heresy.[38] The police dropped the investigation two days later.” [Wikipedia]

Jo Brand was talking (no doubt well-paid for it too) on a BBC radio show hosted by the Jewess Victoria Coren.

Afterwards, the BBC removed the clip from public access. The Jew comic David Baddiel (the show’s “creator”, again no doubt very well paid for all of this degenerate nonsense) said that the BBC was “cowardly” in removing the comments.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-48640411

Strangely enough, Baddiel is often heard complaining about jokes….about Jews.

Jo Brand is obviously a disgusting woman (I thought that a long time prior to the recent “joke” and still think it). Britain is in the midst of a spate of horrible acid (and strong alkali) attacks, in which victims have been killed or seriously injured and/or disfigured for life by criminal attackers.

These types of attack were unknown until mass immigration destroyed Britain. Even the massaged statistics of the System say that white people (still the large majority of the population) only perpetrated about 30% of the attacks; non-whites, despite being only a minority of the population, perpetrated 70% of such attacks. White people (i.e. real British people) were the victims in about 50% of cases. This type of crime has been imported from other parts of the world, and the UK courts are only now, belatedly, starting to hand down suitably condign sentences.

Coming back to the repulsive Jo Brand, she thinks that throwing milkshakes over political opponents is “just pathetic”, by which she plainly means that the attacks do not hurt or damage enough. How could someone with her attitudes ever have been a psychiatric nurse, as she is said to have been for a decade?

In fact, the “milkshakes” (which are mostly not even milk-based but are a glutinous mixture sold to the masses by McDonalds and the like), do considerable damage to clothing, and more importantly are an affront to the victim’s dignity and rights as human being and as citizen. Which, of course, is why the perpetrators do it. The attackers are always smug, narcissistic “me too” types like Jo Brand. They are always Remain whiners, always pro-mass immigration, and usually have jobs in the mass media or public services (when not students).

To imply, as Jo Brand does, that to throw a fast-food “milk”-shake over someone is nothing, and by no means painful enough, is to incite violence for political motives. There is no other explanation for it.

As to Brand’s “apology”, designed as a fig leaf so that BBC etc can carry on giving her (via her tax-dodging private company) licence-payers’ money so that she can carry on boring and repelling the public, it carries no weight whatever. Would any “ordinary” (in fact, far more valuable) citizen be let off so easily by the police on the plea that “I only said that acid should be thrown because I was joking”? I think not.

Let us look at a few people whom the police or professional bodies have not let off for making remarks, or for singing amusing songs etc:

  • Alison Chabloz sang amusing satirical songs about, inter alia, the many proven “holocaust” fakes.

alison

CnDUXkuVMAExy6n

She was prosecuted and eventually convicted, though is appealing her conviction and sentence; see

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/04/18/alison-chabloz-the-show-goes-on/

  • Jez Turner made a humorous speech in Whitehall in 2015, during which he suggested that Jews should be (again) ejected from the UK. Prosecuted in 2018 and actually imprisoned (!) for a year (released on licence after 6 months);
  • Vlogger Mark Meechan, aka “Count Dankula”, was convicted in Scotland of having taught his pug dog to give the “Hitler” salute, then posting the film online. Fined £800 and refused permission (needed in Scotland) to appeal; the fact that I regard him (and other “alt-right” vloggers) as complete wastes of space does not change the fact that he should never have been prosecuted;
  • I myself was questioned by the police after politically-motivated Jews complained that tweets I was said to have posted were “grossly offensive” (they could not bag me, though, and I continue to post as I see fit, though not on Twitter: the Jews managed to procure my expulsion from that platform); in a related case, effectively the same pack of Jews (though notionally different because using a different organizational name), had me disbarred

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2017/07/13/when-i-was-a-victim-of-a-malicious-zionist-complaint/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2017/07/09/the-slide-of-the-english-bar-and-uk-society-continues-and-accelerates/

The Jo Brand case is another item in the indictment against the BBC, the degenerate msm milieu in general (cf. the Gove confession) and UK society today. There must be, some day soon, a chistka or purge (a “cultural revolution”, if you like) to destroy msm degeneracy and its practitioners and profiteers, to wipe out evil of this kind and restore European culture to TV, radio, Press and book publishing. Online too.

In the meantime, I wait to see whether Jo Brand herself will be confronted by a milkshake. I wonder whether, in that event, she will see the “joke”?

News reports and what people have been saying

First, a half-hearted defence of Jo Brand from (yet another) Jewess, this time in The Guardian:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jun/16/jo-brand-joke-are-we-all-disgusted-tunbridge-wells

and here [below] is the Jew Baddiel defending Jo Brand (and of course his show, from which he makes yet more money from the BBC…and as he will, no doubt, in future); but where was he when my free speech was trashed? Where was he when Alison Chabloz was persecuted and prosecuted for singing songs?

…and (what a shock) here is Ricky Gervais, another one who has never stood up for Alison Chabloz etc (though admittedly he did so for the waste of space “Count Dankula”, and his silly saluting dog film….); and, on another but not directly relevant point, I do like his support for animal welfare etc.

Yet another System-subsidized “humorist” (apparently— I’ve never heard of the idiot) below:

That one [above] seems to ignore the fact that both milkshake and acid attacks occur all too often; semi-conservative politicians like Nigel Farage are in fact not “picking up rifles”.

Here’s another one, Gyles Brandreth , defending Jo Brand. Funny how these bastards all make large amounts of money from the BBC…

…and [below] yet another defender of Jo Brand: Jew, atheist, gay, and…yes, as expected (I had to look up the bastard on Wikipedia) another who makes his income from BBC work. The BBC is now a corrupt mess and should be dropped down a black hole.

And here is another member of the London msm club, Adam Boulton, of Sky News. Strange, I must have missed his defence of, say, Alison Chabloz and her songs (or, for that matter, his defence of my tweets of years ago). That’s right, Adam Boulton did not defend freedom of expression. “They” would not have approved…

Fucking doormat for Zionist Jews…

While this silly woman, below, thinks that Jo Brand is a saint, apparently. You stupid creature, the BBC will still not employ you, you thick plank!

[Update, 4 September 2020. Seems that I was wrong; the BBC has now thrown a few crumbs her way: “In 2020, she and fellow comedian Fern Brady started a podcast for the BBC called Wheel of Misfortune, which is obviously based in [sic] the Wheel of Fortune.” [Wikipedia]]

“Count Dankula”/Mark Meechan [below] exposes the hypocrisy of those who defend Jo Brand but not, er, him! Fair enough, but where were you, Mr. Meechan, when Alison Chabloz was facing persecution and prosecution? Where were you, on your precious “social media”, when I myself was traduced in the msm? Nowhere. So that’s where you are and will stay: nowhere!

This one (below) apparently reviews newspapers on Sky News sometimes. Seems that she cannot reach even their usual low standards, never having heard (it seems) of Alison Chabloz, Mark Meechan, or the fellow whose family was subjected to a police raid because they made a joking remark about a Guy Fawkes bonfire in their own garden. Or are edgy “jokes” OK unless they mention Jews and Gypsies?

https://twitter.com/LovattMo/status/1139286012058882050

Here, below, the columnist Allison Pearson answers the tweet of Jew Zionist scribbler Hugo Rifkind:

In fact, it seems that a great number of people do not approve of the so-called “joke” by Jo Brand (the bitch wouldn’t know a joke if it splattered all over her…). Strangely enough, few if any of her critics make money out of the BBC…

https://twitter.com/DVATW/status/1139417967400144897

https://twitter.com/DVATW/status/1139258131333169152

https://twitter.com/JackBMontgomery/status/1139947205681393665

https://twitter.com/AndraSneddon/status/1139441404231475200

and here’s another BBC hypocrite: Jimmy Carr. Makes millions (literally) from the BBC and other msm, was exposed as a tax-dodger in 2012, but tries to pose as both somehow “radical” and as terribly “edgy”.

https://twitter.com/DVATW/status/1139244350402113536

Here’s another example of Jimmy Carr humour, laughing at British service personnel who have been badly-injured:

“In October 2009, Carr received criticism from several Sunday tabloid newspapers for a joke he made about British soldiers who had lost limbs in Iraq and Afghanistan, saying that the UK would have a strong team in the London 2012 Paralympic Games.[34] Carr defended his own joke as “totally acceptable” in an interview with The Guardian.”

[Wikipedia]

Why is he still around? The little bastard only jokes at the expense of those who cannot fight back. Why has no serving soldier or ex-military person *explained* the matter to Jimmy Carr?

Alexander Nekrassov not mincing his words! Go, Sasha!

Nekrassov with another point which applies not only to Jo Brand but a hundred or more others:

https://twitter.com/StirringTrouble/status/1139864753424216064

A stray thought: does Jo Brand fantasize about acid being thrown on people she dislikes, or with whom she disagrees, because her own face already looks as though acid has been thrown on it?

Notes

https://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcthree/article/5d38c003-c54a-4513-a369-f9eae0d52f91

Update, 19 June 2019

Below, rent-a-mouth BBC ignoramus James O’Brien defends disgusting Jo Brand. Apparently, it’s OK to “joke” about Nigel Farage having battery acid thrown at him, because “it was on a comedy show”. Funny, I never saw O’Brien and his type stand up for Alison Chabloz and her comedic songs…Must be that it’s OK to joke about acid being thrown —on a named person who has already had other stuff thrown on him recently— but not OK to lampoon the proven Jewish frauds and fakes of the “holocaust” mythus…(we really are just “occupied” in this poor country…)

[Update, 4 November 2021: Looks as though the BBC had O’Brien delete his tweet. No surprise there; I would only be surprised had O’Brien the courage of his convictions].

…and now look at who’s looking for trouble!

His ancestors “died fighting” what he is pleased to call “this shit” (meaning white civilization), he says. Thus speaks David Lammy MP, barrister of Lincoln’s Inn, to which I myself belonged before the Jew Zionist cabals procured my disbarment in 2016, an injustice no doubt applauded by barrister Lammy (he only practised actively at the Bar for a few years, and at a very low level, doing the simplest criminal cases).

When did his “ancestors” “die fighting”? In African tribal wars, or attacking the police at the 1980s Broadwater Farm riots; or in more recent gang activity? I do not know the bastard’s background in detail, so cannot guess. Lammy seems to want a fight himself, judging by the inflammatory nature of his tweets. He obviously has a violent nature. In fact he supports corporal punishment too. He is out of place in the UK, in Europe.

I think that at one time Lammy hoped to become the first black Attorney-General, but was beaten to it by Patricia Scotland (who was rubbish, and went on on to be rubbish at the Commonwealth Secretariat as well, but that is another issue). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patricia_Scotland#Expenses_controversy . The price of so-called “diversity”? Labour’s travails since 2009 and his own odd behaviour seem to have put paid to Lammy’s ministerial ambitions. He was (briefly) a Minister of State (non-Cabinet) under crazed bully and psycho case Gordon Brown, but now is just a backbencher and will stay one. Still, not a bad little earner for someone whose huge ignorance is regularly highlighted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Lammy#Controversies_and_criticism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicola_Green

One has to question whether a society like that of the UK can survive, when its key and/or prestige institutions prefer such as David Lammy to someone like me, when the BBC and its highly-paid drones pay lip-service to incitement to horrific violence, and when those guilty have mostly so far got away without having been taken down.

Update, 11 July 2019

Latest:

Alison Chabloz talks from her piano…

https://alisonchabloz.com/2019/07/11/fighting-back-and-winning/

Update, 28 January 2020

Predictable System bias.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7935063/Jo-Brands-joke-unlikely-incite-crime-rules-Ofcom.html

Update, 27 June 2025

Never say never: cretinous “diversity hire” David Lammy is now Foreign Secretary! What an insult to the white people who built this country! He is a total idiot, and totally ignorant. Just a puppet on a stick, marked “diversity”.

Boris Johnson, Brexit, Deadhead MPs, elections, free speech, Ian Millard, MPs, Party Politics, society, Uncategorized

Boris, A Story for Our Times…

9 Comments

The time has come for me to write about the most incredible charlatan and mountebank the UK has seen since the days of Horatio Bottomley.

The background we all know (though when I say “we”, of course I diplomatically pretend to mean “all British people” but in fact mean “the tiny minority who take a serious interest in how the country and society they themselves live in is run”).

In outline, therefore: the UK has a combined political and electoral system that no longer really works. Part of that is the sclerosis of the major political parties of the System.

The LibDems, heirs to the great late 19th and early 20th Century Liberal Party, failed in 2010 to demand (as they had the power to do) some form of proportional electoral system. They are flagging, though may benefit from not being Conservative or Labour, if Brexit Party grows stronger.

Labour is doing well within its boundaries, as the party of the public services and of the “blacks and browns”. In terms of MP numbers, Labour under Corbyn is doing about as well as it has generally done in the past, if one excludes the Tony Blair years:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labour_Party_(UK)#UK_General_Elections

though it may struggle to get a popular vote much above 30% in future.

Then we have the Conservatives, for long considered “the natural party of government”, but which now struggles to attract votes from anyone much under pensionable age, or from those not in the most affluent 10%-20% strata of the population. Its MPs are mediocre or worse, and its ministers no better. The leading contender to take Theresa May’s purple is now Boris Johnson. He is the leading contender because the Conservative Party is terminally sick. In its healthier days, someone like Boris Johnson would not even be an MP, let alone promoted (briefly, disastrously) to Foreign Secretary; the idea of someone like him becoming Prime Minister would be a joke, rather like that of The Simpsons, c. 1993, casting Donald Trump as a future President of the USA. Jokes are dangerous!

A serious point from Lewis Goodall. It has been a long time since the Conservative Party had anything like a solid majority in the House of Commons (1992; arguably, 1987). 27 or even 32 years:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_Party_(UK)#UK_general_elections

So we now consider the candidate considered most likely to lead the Conservative Party after July-August 2019.

I have in fact already blogged about Boris Johnson and some of the other would-be Conservative Party leaders:

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/06/09/the-conservative-party-leadership-contenders-in-outline/

Boris Johnson: a few tweets from journalists, commentators etc

https://twitter.com/bexin2d/status/1138401617248698369

[Below, Boris Johnson, the part-Jew public entertainer, clowning and posing as the great patriot…]

https://twitter.com/ajimmydixon/status/1129019292601769984

“After the briefest of honeymoons,” he wrote, “the voters would quickly start to wonder how this spectacularly incompetent braggart, with a Churchill complex but no Commons majority, had ended up in Downing Street in the first place.”

There was a Mafia leader in New York once, John Gotti, who at one time enjoyed the newspaper-invented title “The Teflon Don”, because he was always being arrested and even charged with serious crimes, but who always seemed to get away with whatever. No charges stuck. There is something of that in Boris Johnson.

“Matthew Engel in The Guardian notes [Bottomley’s] ability to charm the public even while swindling them; one victim, cheated of £40,000, apparently insisted: “I am not sorry I lent him the money, and I would do it again”. If London had had a mayor in those days, says Engel, Bottomley would have won in a landslide.”

A transparent reference to the (one-time) Mayor of London, Boris Johnson. Johnson seems able to shrug off, not so much allegations against him, but allegations proven beyond all doubt and repeatedly, against him.

Boris Johnson, journalist trainee (sacked), journalist (sacked), Spectator editor (hopeless, largely absent), MP twice, Shadow minister (sacked), Foreign Secretary (“resigned”), Mayor of London (useless). That’s before we even look at detail, or about his personal failings (easily available elsewhere, so no need to again detail them here).

One of the most risible aspects of Boris Johnson is his am-dram reprise of Churchill. Johnson affects not only the voice (slightly) at times, but (also occasionally) the solid buffalo-like massed body posture, hunched, looking down etc. I may have my trenchant criticisms of Churchill’s historical role, but the man was a titan compared to Boris Johnson!

There is something sick here about the Conservative Party, the UK, and the UK’s political system. The Conservative Party consists now of between 50,000 and 120,000 mostly elderly, mostly affluent persons, who are going to vote on a leader. The majority will vote and a majority of those will elect the leader. In other words, about 40,000 or so of those elderly people will, in effect, elect the next Prime Minister of the UK, a position which the “elected” candidate may hold for nearly three years, until 2022!

What kind of fake “democracy” is that?!

What will happen if Boris Johnson wins this contest?

Either Boris Johnson will take the UK out of the EU without a trade “deal” with the EU in place (I am sanguine on that score), in which case there is every chance of his losing a House of Commons confidence vote either immediately or not very long afterward, or Johnson will renege on his meaningless “pledge”, in which case he will be giving Brexit Party a gift worth rubies. Either way, the Conservative Party will be toast. Any loss of a confidence vote will result in a general election in which the Conservative Party might well be wiped out.

The Daily Express (meaning the Jew who owns the Daily Express) has been pushing an opinion poll which says that a Boris Johnson Conservative Party might win a landslide 140-seat House of Commons majority. That is very unlikely, for several reasons.

What Britain needs is a powerful social-national movement. So far, there have been mere straws in the wind only. No movement, no party exists, as yet. An inevitably-disastrous Boris Johnson government might create the socio-political conditions for one to emerge.

Notes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boris_Johnson

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horatio_Bottomley

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Gotti#%22The_Teflon_Don%22

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/12/boris-johnson-is-every-bit-as-dull-and-evasive-as-his-minders-hoped

(“It’s quite something when Liz Truss, Gavin Williamson and Chris Grayling are three of the brightest people in the room.“)

(“No, he didn’t want to talk about his record at the Foreign Office. Probably because his tenure had been an unmitigated disaster. Rather, he wanted to claim other people’s achievements during his time as London mayor as his own.”)

(“Just as the event threatened to unravel, Johnson remembered his instructions and dashed for the exit. Some journalists shouted that the whole event had been a total disgrace, but for Boris it had done the business. He had got through the day more or less unexamined. Onwards and downwards, further into the cesspit of Tory party politics.”)

https://metro.co.uk/2019/06/16/boris-johnson-said-f-families-7-7-terror-attacks-9970567/?ito=article.desktop.share.top.twitter?ito=cbshare

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/boris-johnson-tory-leadership-contest-brexit-steve-baker-conservatives-a8955631.html

(“This was the Tory party in survival mode, reduced to its basest instinct. Things were serious now. The Tory party had decided it must live, and so everything else must die.”)

(“All dignity dispensed with. All integrity gone. Survival is everything.”)

(“The most telling fact of the speech was how bad it was. Boris Johnson is on his best behaviour, but bad behaviour is all he is.“)

(“What was he offering exactly? There was something or other on “investing in the infrastructure this country so badly needs”. His current record on infrastructure is an utterly pointless cable car in east London that recent TfL research showed is used by precisely six actual commuters. ​It now serves alcohol in the evenings to try and stay afloat.

Then there are the rolling windowless sauna buses, and his decision to make himself chief executive of the London Legacy Development Corporation, and personally see through the execrable Olympic Stadium deal with West Ham United – the only aspect of London 2012 over which he had any executive control, and the only aspect considered to be an utter failure.”)

https://twitter.com/ToryFibs/status/877583434184609796

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2019/06/why-conservatives-deserve-face-extinction-if-they-make-boris-johnson-prime

We keep hearing that “Boris Johnson has the ability to be Prime Minister, but does he have the necessary character?”

My response is “where has Boris Johnson proven that he has the ability?”; on the contrary, he has, if anything, proven that he has not the ability.

Afterthought, 20 June 2019

It occurs to me that some readers, on reading my assertion that Boris Johnson is the most egregious charlatan and mountebank since Horatio Bottomley, may object “what about Robert Maxwell?”, and it is true that Johnson does invite comparison with “Maxwell”.

However, Maxwell was a far more organized and intelligent figure, and in some respects far more sinister (he is supposed to have been Israel’s chief secret operative in Europe). Also, though “Maxwell” was indeed an MP (in the UK) for 6 years (1964-1970), Britain in those days was still decently “anti-Semitic” and (rightly) somewhat “prejudiced” against “Maxwell” (though Britain still allowed him to become an MP, defraud pensioners etc). No-one would ever have even thought of “Maxwell” as a potential Prime Minister.

It is true that Maxwell was every bit as much of a charlatan as Boris Johnson is, but there was an element of seriousness or even tragedy in Maxwell that does not exist in Boris-Idiot. I don’t suppose that anyone would entrust Boris with millions to invest, neither would he know what to do with it, though his incompetence in every sphere would still ensure that every penny was lost! One could ask, “then why is Boris being entrusted with the fate of the whole country?” God knows. I don’t.

Update, 21 June 2019
Seems that Boris-Idiot and his girlfriend/fiancee (?) had what the police used to call “a domestic”, the neighbours then calling the police emergency line 999. “Our” next Prime Minister”… He is as fit for that position as I might be to take Olympic gold (in any sport).
Update, 22 June 2019
Surprise! (not)
Update, 25 June 2019
Update, 30 June 2019
Johnson may never become Prime Minister even if he wins the absurd contest with Jeremy Hunt:
Update, 24 July 2019
Well, the idiot has been appointed Prime Minister, most of the Cabinet of Theresa May has resigned, others have been sacked. I shall blog separately about this disastrous new Cabinet of “kings and queens for a day” when it is complete. I just note now that Boris-Idiot has appointed, as Home Secretary, one of the traditional “Great Offices of State”, Priti Patel, who is non-European, thick as two short planks, and a proven Israeli agent. We no longer have freedom of speech in the UK; otherwise I would express what I think should happen to her. I therefore content myself with observing that, had it not been for Idi Amin, she would now be serving customers from behind the counter of a Kampala grocery shop.
Britain is now officially in big trouble.
Ctdcka4WAAApkQ6
Brexit, MPs, Party Politics, Uncategorized

The Main Conservative Party Leadership Contenders in Outline

27 Comments

First words

One of the 5 tweets that got me disbarred at the instigation of a pack of Jews was that describing Michael Gove MP as “a pro-Jew, pro-Israel expenses cheat”. I am very glad to be able to post the key words yet again (as I do from time to time), now with the addition “who is also a dishonest, cocaine-snorting little degenerate with a Jewish wife.”

Major Candidates

I have decided now to blog about the main rivals for Theresa May’s threadbare purple as leader of the Conservative Party. I start with Gove.

Michael Gove

currie-janner-and-gove

[above, Gove enjoys the company of Jew paedophile and rapist, the now-deceased one-time Labour MP and (later) “lord”, Greville Janner, at a Zionist social gathering]

Gove was adopted, his origins not publicly known. He was a journalist before becoming an MP. At that time, he showed his adherence to the Israeli cause by participating in a pro-Israel demonstration in Trafalgar Square.

It seems that, like —sadly— too many of “our” mainstream media scribblers, Michael Gove was a fairly frequent abuser of cocaine before (only before?) his Jewish Zionist backers got him onto the System political racket as an MP.

For several years, Gove had a relatively low public profile as MP, despite his promotion to Shadow Cabinet in 2007, after only 2 years as a backbench MP. He was one of the most blatant (though far from the worst) expenses cheats and blodgers exposed in 2009: he and his Jewish or part-Jewish wife, Sarah Vine (a Daily Mail columnist), claimed as detailed here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Gove#Expenses_claims

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Vine

Gove is an active member of Conservative Friends of Israel. He is a non-Jewish Zionist, completely in the pocket of the Jewish Zionist lobby. He has always supported UK “intervention” in the Middle East and elsewhere (eg Libya).

Gove was Boris Johnson’s campaign manager (in effect, Johnson’s deputy) in the Conservative leadership contest of 2016, but stabbed Johnson in the back at the crucial moment, causing maximum damage to the leadership bid that he, Gove, had been supporting until that moment.

Gove’s wife has said that he cannot do as much as boil a kettle. Well, Einstein was like that and look how he benefited humanity. Oh, no, wait…

Conclusion: A doormat for Zionism and the Jewish lobby; intelligent, but not as intelligent or cultured as he and his backers believe him to be. A driven careerist. Completely untrustworthy. Not reliable in any way (except in his support for Israel, which for me is a negative). Administratively, probably competent. Otherwise unfit for the office of Prime Minister.

https://twitter.com/BermondseyBoy68/status/1137341476323700736

Boris Johnson

Ctdcka4WAAApkQ6

[above, Boris Johnson “praying” at the “Wailing Wall” in Jerusalem]

Boris Johnson, aka Boris-Idiot, has wanted to be Prime Minister for a long time. A melange of different ethnicities, he is partly-European, partly-Turkic, partly-Jew: his maternal great-grandfather was an Orthodox Jewish rabbi in Lithuania! Three generations on, the Eton and Oxford “fiddler on the roof” was born in New York City to a father who worked for the World Bank and was later a Conservative MP.

Boris Johnson has been a backbench MP twice, without having distinguished himself. He has been Foreign Secretary and was terrible at it, incapable of doing the job properly. He has been a journalist-trainee (at the Times— sacked for making up a quotation), a journalist (at the Telegraph— where he was known for making up news) and an editor (The Spectator-— where he was notorious for absenteeism, lateness, making the staff make up for his defaults, also rude and unpleasant to the staff, and spent much of his time, in office hours, out of the office screwing lightweight airhead Spectator scribbler Petronella Wyatt).

Johnson has always had to face accusations of incompetence, complacency, laziness, lack of serious thought and application, as well as charges of dishonesty. These traits have characterized Johnson from his days at Eton right up to his shambolic and quite brief time as Foreign Secretary. A further trait has been appointment by reason of connections, rather than merit.

Johnson, who spent his childhood and youth amid the wealthy without himself really being of (very/extremely) wealthy background, is obsessed with scrabbling for as much money as he can get, and apparently gets (on top of MP salary and expenses) £250,000 per year for writing garbage in the Telegraph, which garbage he cobbles together once a week in about one and a half hours. One has to wonder at the motivations of the Telegraph’s editor or, perhaps being more significant, owners. The Telegraph is owned by the Barclay Brothers [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_and_Frederick_Barclay] who both favour Brexit and would no doubt find it very useful to have a UK Prime Minister obligated to them. Johnson tried to be Mayor of London and MP at the same time, in order to double his salary.

Boris Johnson is not prepared to do the preparation necessary to avoid egregious and avoidable mistakes. Two that come to mind are the water-cannon he bought as Mayor of London (unusable because not approved by the Home Office, a fact that Johnson did not bother to find out in advance) and Johnson’s painful mishandling of the Zaghari-Ratcliffe case:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazanin_Zaghari-Ratcliffe#Boris_Johnson_intervention

Johnson will do almost anything to become Prime Minister. Though probably genuinely at least cynical or sceptical about the EU, he has fluctuated between Leave and Remain for most of the past two decades, and only committed himself to Leave when it became politic so to do.

“He’s lied his way through life, he’s lied his way through politics, he’s a huckster with a degree of charm to which I am immune”

[Anon., said to be a Cabinet minister, quoted in The Times of Israel]

Johnson, like 80% of Conservative MPs, is a member of Conservative Friends of Israel. In 2017, an Israeli employed by the Israeli Embassy in London, Shai Masot, was covertly filmed talking about how he had a million pound slush fund for “friendly” Westminster MPs, and how he wanted to have others “taken down”.

The Jew Masot talked to a “British” traitress and/or agent, one Maria Strizzolo (an aide to Jew Zionist “Conservative” MP Robert Halfon), about Boris Johnson, who, said Masot, was OK. “Ah, Boris…Boris…is good; he is solid on Israel. Of course, Boris is an idiot…” (and smirks…).

After being openly talked about like that, Boris Johnson just laughed it off in the Commons. He knows that he needs the Jew-influenced “British” msm to publicize him and support him. What’s a few insults from his Jewish “friends” anyway?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/news/video-1387955/Al-Jazeera-Investigations-film-Shai-Masot-undercover.html

As MP and as Mayor of London, Boris was rumoured to have been an occasional drug abuser and, more often, a stalker of women in supermarkets etc. After having been (in the Minder appellation) “‘Er indoors” for many years, his (second) wife, a half-Indian woman, finally chucked him out in 2018.

Apparently, Johnson rarely if ever reads a book or anything beyond newspaper opinion columns. His pathetic attempts to pull rank on the plebs and make himself seem cultured by using Latin or classical Greek words fell flat after a few years. People saw through it.

Johnson’s latest girlfriend, whom he will probably marry, is a Conservative backroom PR woman who has smartened him up, cut his hair, put him on a diet and generally made him look less like a clown. She cannot do much about what is in his head, though.

Johnson has something in common with Donald Trump. Nothing that he says can be taken at face value. In fact, the sharp-eyed Jews have not had difficulty noticing that:

“Johnson’s…actions have done little to assuage liberal Britons. Last year, he came under heavy attack from Jewish community leaders after he described Muslim women wearing burkas as looking “absolutely ridiculous” and like “letter boxes” and “bank robbers.” The Jewish Leadership Council said Johnson’s words were “utterly disgraceful,” while a leading rabbi accused him of “racism with a smile.” The Jewish Chronicle compared the former foreign secretary to a “bar-room bigot”.” [The Times of Israel]

Now we see that Johnson is again trying to run with the fox and hunt with the hounds.

Conclusion: Boris Johnson is a basically rootless character. Ethnically somewhat “diverse”, born in New York City, brought up in Belgium and England, educated with the (very) wealthy while not being quite one of them [cf. David Cameron-Levita, who was heir to a fortune in the tens of millions of pounds], Boris is always the slight outsider. He is pro-Israel mainly because it is convenient to be so (though he is part-Jew). His am-dram Bertie Wooster impression is no doubt an attempt to fit in with an England where he still does not wholly belong. The same is true of his equally am-dram but totally empty Winston Churchill impression and mimicry (he even affects a slightly-hunched posture at times). As a politician, he makes a good public entertainer. Driven. Unreliable. Incompetent. His Uxbridge seat may not be safe. Unfit to be Prime Minister, however looked at.

 Jeremy Hunt

The most serious main contender for Conservative Party leader, as I identified some time ago.

From an English background, Hunt is distantly related both to the Queen and to one-time Labour government minister and founder-leader (1930s) of the British Union of Fascists and (1950s) Union Movement, Sir Oswald Mosley. Born into an old Establishment family (his father was an admiral).

Politically, Hunt has had a fairly meteoric career. Elected as MP in 2005 (at age 39), he was made a Shadow minister almost immediately, promoted to Shadow Cabinet minister in 2007 and, as soon as the Conservatives formed the Con Coalition in 2010, appointed Cabinet minister (Culture Secretary 2010-2012, Health Secretary 2012-2018, Foreign Secretary 2018-present).

Hunt has by far the widest experience of government of the present contenders.

Hunt’s wife is Chinese, yet he has on occasion criticized the Chinese government.

Hunt is (predictably) pro-Israel:

https://cfoi.co.uk/foreign-secretary-jeremy-hunt-affirms-israels-unconditional-right-to-self-defence-at-cfi-parliamentary-reception/

Conclusion: Probably the most serious contender for Conservative leader if one forgets about level of public profile (Boris Johnson’s trump card). A smarmy snake type, but (despite gaffes here and there) reasonably competent (when compared to Johnson, especially). It would be surprising were he not one of the final two candidates.

Sajid Javid

CYHP3gvWYAArn3_

By origin Pakistani Muslim, Javid could be described as an apostate, having said that:

“My own family’s heritage is Muslim. Myself and my four brothers were brought up to believe in God, but I do not practise any religion. My wife is a practising Christian and the only religion practised in my house is Christianity.” [Wikipedia]

Javid is not a practising Muslim and he drinks alcohol. One of his brothers died from ingestion of alcohol and codeine.

Javid has been a devotee of the “philosophical selfishness” of so-called “Objectivism”, the “philosophy” invented by Jewess Ayn Rand.

“Philosopher and theologian John Milbank commented [about Javid]: “It is extraordinarily disturbing that any mainstream politician should express any admiration for Ayn Rand. We should be concerned that someone like Sajid Javid can now hold high office within the United Kingdom.” [Wikipedia]

Javid was an international banker for about 18 years, rising by 2009 (when he quit to pursue his political ambitions) to an income of some £3 million a year. At least it can be said for Javid that his political career is not motivated by money-grubbing (cf. Johnson and, to some extent, Gove). Whether being an international banker is quite as impressive as it sounds, after the debacle of 2007-2008, is a matter for debate.

It was a shock to many that Sajid Javid, as Home Secretary no less, expressed support for the “antifa” thugs and snoopers. It shows either malice or, more likely (?) ignorance. I saw a Twitter photo of Javid at a Metropolitan Police event at which some of the most notorious Jew-Zionist trolls and troublemakers were in attendance.

Javid is yet another Conservative MP who belongs to Conservative Friends of Israel.

“Javid is regarded as one of Israel’s staunchest supporters in the Cabinet and is a long-time supporter of Conservative Friends of Israel.” [Wikipedia]. He even went there on his honeymoon!

“Javid’s strong record of speaking out against anti-Semitism has earned him plaudits from leading Jewish communal figures” [Wikipedia]

“In 2015, at a Board of Deputies of British Jews hustings event, Javid stated that publicly funded cultural institutions that boycott Israel risk having their government grants cut.[81] Citing a boycott of the UK Jewish Film Festival[82] by the Tricycle Theatre in Kilburn, Javid said: “I have made it absolutely clear what might happen to their [the theatre’s] funding if they try, or if anyone tries, that kind of thing again.” [81] British playwright Caryl Churchill raised concerns about political interference in the arts and questioned: “All Charlie Hebdo? Except when freedom of expression means freedom to criticise Israel.”

[Wikipedia]

Conclusion:

Sajid Javid seems to be a genuine Leaver/Brexiteer. Put another way, a convinced globalist…in favour (unsurprisingly) of immigration into the UK. A complete doormat for the Jews and Israel, too. Intelligent…up to a point. Seems to be another one who is either narrow or has idees-fixes: Israel, Ayn Rand etc. May be administratively competent. As potential Prime Minister, a Pakistani-origined capitalist-globalist who supports Israel, the Jewish lobby, the mindless “antifa” idiots and the outlook of Ayn Rand, is not my idea of the right selection.

Dominic Raab

Raab is half-Jewish (and half-English) but was brought up culturally mainly English, including Church of England, and in –perhaps appropriately– Gerrard’s Cross, Buckinghamshire, the next rail stop from Beaconsfield, one-time seat of deracinated Jew Benjamin Disraeli, later Lord Beaconsfield, who became both Conservative leader and then, in 1868, Prime Minister.

Raab has a background in law (a degree and solicitor’s qualification, as well as a 2-year training term with Linklaters, a leading City of London firm), the Foreign Office (5-6 years) and as adviser for 3-4 years to Conservative Shadow Cabinet ministers. He was elected MP in 2010.

Raab has had a turbocharged career in Parliament, being involved with numerous serious policies and initiatives, including cross-party ones. Evenhanded (on the surface) re. Israel, he has criticized the most egregious excesses of the Zionists, in particular the settlement movement. He reached the Cabinet in 8 years.

Raab was involved with the Britannia Unchained booklet, which might be said to endorse what some have termed  a “Zionist slavemaster agenda” for the British people.

Raab is a sincere Leaver/Brexiteer.

I assess Raab as hard and indeed ruthless.

Conclusion: Another rather rootless person. Not quite Jew, not quite full English. Probably competent in terms of administrative and executive ability, but there have been allegations that he bullies his staff. Seems doubtful whether he can much impress the British voters, and his suggestion of forcing a WTO Brexit through via the prorogation of Parliament (something not done, for purely tactical political reasons, and as far as I know, since Cromwellian times), must give pause to those who would support him as potential Prime Minister.

Other candidates

There are a number of other candidates, though it may be that few if any can get 8 MPs (increased from 2 to cull the numbers) to support their candidatures. I have already blogged, a while ago, about Rory Stewart, arguably the most interesting candidate individually:

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/05/03/will-rory-stewart-mp-be-prime-minister/

though I note that some msm commentators have now expressed some of the same doubts as I did some time ago, and wondering whether his whole adds up to the sum of his parts, basically.

Should other candidates get through the initial process, I shall also examine them (or should that be “turn on them”?).

Overview

The Conservative leadership contest is yet another “shitshow” (in the elegant word of Johnny Mercer MP). The Conservatives cannot organize Brexit, cannot even organize their own leadership election effectively! They certainly cannot run the country properly. I wonder how long they can cling to government.

Another point comes to mind, in relation to various issues but, for example, Gove’s cocaine abuse. MSM commentators and talking heads all saying that the public don’t really mind if journalists, MPs, Prime Ministers, snort drugs. I wonder. There may be plenty of people who think that frequent abusers or users should be machinegunned , if only as a public health measure. I merely pose the question…

There is a real and growing rift between the “socially liberal” metro-people and the other “tribes” in the UK.

[example: the Political Correspondent of Sky News does not regard it as significant that at least two of the main contenders for the Conservative Party leadership were habitual cocaine abusers!

https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1138085102808965121 ]

and

As for the Conservative Party, it seems bizarre that a few hundred MPs, and then what amounts to about 40,000 70 and 80 year olds, can elect a party leader who will then automatically become Prime Minister and may serve until 2022 without any need to be endorsed by the whole people. 

Notes

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9236464/tory-leadership-election-security-measures-ballots/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Gove

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boris_Johnson

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petronella_Wyatt

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremy_Hunt

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sajid_Javid

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominic_Raab

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominic_Raab#Britannia_Unchained

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Disraeli

https://www.jpost.com/Diaspora/British-PM-contender-Dominic-Raab-has-Jewish-father-who-fled-the-Nazis-590730

https://www.timesofisrael.com/meet-the-frontrunners-to-become-britains-next-pm-and-their-stances-on-israel/

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/news/video-1387955/Al-Jazeera-Investigations-film-Shai-Masot-undercover.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazanin_Zaghari-Ratcliffe#Boris_Johnson_intervention

Afterthought, 10 June 2019

Boris Johnson has just “pledged” (whatever little weight that carries in the mouth of a congenital liar like him) to cut taxes for the 5%-10% of the adult population with gross incomes above £50,000 a year. He thus addresses directly the affluent and wealthy people who, as members of the Conservative Party, are about to elect the leader of that party. People who would benefit from any such policy.

To put it another way, Boris Johnson has just made it more likely that he will be elected Conservative Party leader, but at the same time has made it even less likely than it already is that the Conservatives will win the next general election. In fact, they will probably not even be the largest party in the Commons after a general election. They might not even be the second-largest party.

I wonder what the mass of voters (90%+) who earn less than £50K a year gross will think about a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson that prioritizes tax cuts for the affluent and wealthy 10% at the expense of the other 90%? If only 10% of voters vote Conservative next time, it is “Goodnight Vienna” for the Conservative Party; and Boris Johnson, in his modest-majority Uxbridge seat, will be one of the first to fall.

Tweets and updates

Update, 13 June 2019

After the first ballot, the three least-supported candidates have been eliminated: nonentity Andrea Leadsom, ex-accountant Mark Harper, and dishonest (and thick-as-two-short-planks) Esther McVey.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esther_McVey#Out_of_Cabinet_(2018%E2%80%93)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Harper

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrea_Leadsom#Alleged_exaggeration_of_pre-government_jobs_and_responsibilities

As previously said, you can have any Model T Ford car as long as it is black, and you can have any Conservative MP as leader so long as he or she is pro-Jew and pro-Israel. In fact, the voting record of the candidates shows identical voting on a number of important issues; for example [see tweet below]

Update, 14 June 2019

“Suited thug” Matthew “Matt” Hancock MP has withdrawn.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48631706

Rory Stewart MP on Marr. It seems that, in polling of Conservative Party members, he is now second-placed (after Boris-Idiot). That would seem to prove what I have previously written, that Boris Johnson’s “popularity” is no more than the outcome of his 20 years of publicity largely generated by himself. Stewart has matched that, or tried to match that, via a social media blitz.

I have written about Stewart individually and I see no reason to alter anything I wrote then (except that I thought then that Stewart would have more MPs behind him), at the beginning of May of this year:

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/05/03/will-rory-stewart-mp-be-prime-minister/

Stewart only received 19 votes in the second ballot, thus coming last. Matt Hancock MP (who had received 20 votes) then withdrew.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Conservative_Party_(UK)_leadership_election

Stewart has more self-belief than Hancock (and more intelligence). He is still standing and may be gaining ground. For him it is all or nothing. He has ruled out serving in a Boris Johnson Cabinet, and it is hard to see Boris appointing him anyway. Boris does not like to see his idiocies floodlit.

To me as an observer, it seems that Gove is probably out of the running now, as is Sajid Javid. Be grateful for small mercies. That leaves, realistically, Johnson, Hunt, Raab and Stewart.

I had thought that Stewart would find more support among MPs than he has done so far. However, assuming that Johnson will be in the top two, Stewart now has a 3/1 chance of being there too. I had thought Hunt the obvious second-place candidate at the end. Now, well, we shall see.

Stewart is basically pro-EU, so it is hard to see Conservative Party rank and file members voting for him on that basis, but on most other bases he scores over Johnson.

Whoever becomes Conservative Party leader, this is a party going nowhere but down.

Update, 17 June 2019

Well, as I guessed a couple of days ago, Rory Stewart has gained ground, at least in the betting, though the betting exchanges’ and bookmakers’ odds are often not a reliable guide to political results (see the EU Referendum, the Trump election, the recent Peterborough by-election etc).

Stewart is now at 2nd place in the betting to be next Conservative leader, though only at 16/1. Boris Johnson is favourite at around 1/5 odds-on (Hunt 20/1, Gove 46/1, Raab 85/1, Javid 120/1).

By all accounts, Stewart did well in the TV debate (Johnson the sole absentee, obviously afraid of being exposed as an idiot and incompetent, as well as wanting to seem to  be the “presidential” figure above the fray).

Update, 19 June 2019

The latest “debate” on TV was held. I heard a few minutes. Boris Johnson…what a complete idiot. Is that really the best that can be offered for potential Prime Minister? God help the UK…

The tax plans of both Johnson and Hunt are mad. Anyway, there it is…

A piece in The Guardian (see below), by Jessica Elgot, a Jewish Zionist journalist (who used to block me when I had a Twitter account). She refers to Rory Stewart as a “Black Watch veteran”. Not sure what the hard core of that very tough regiment would say to that; after all, Stewart only spent 5 months, if that, in that regiment (as a probationary short service 2nd lieutenant). Still, the inside track on the Con leadership campaign is interesting. Seems that my 3 May blog about Stewart hit the spot, pretty much.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/18/rory-stewart-the-black-watch-veteran-shaking-up-the-tory-leadership-race

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/05/03/will-rory-stewart-mp-be-prime-minister/

Update, 19 June 2019

Well, Rory Stewart is out of the race, which means that, until or unless Boris Johnson leaves frontline politics, his career is stalled again. He pledged not to serve in a Johnson Cabinet, and, as I blogged previously, it is doubtful that Johnson will appoint him to anything significant.

That leaves Johnson, Hunt, Gove, Javid.

Gove has said that he would serve under Johnson. As usual, willing to do whatever it takes to keep the career going and the salaries rolling in (a Cabinet minister gets about £75,000 a year on top of the MP salary of about £80,000; also, a ministerial car, a large and staffed country house in several cases).

I doubt whether Gove will be one of the final two; neither can I see Sajid Javid making the cut. That would leave Johnson and Hunt. The assumption is that Boris-Idiot would be be given a triumph by all those retired affluent Conservative Party members across the UK, all 100,000 or so of them (about 1 in maybe every 500 UK people belong to the Con Party). The assumption may or may not be right. If Hunt is the alternative, he may yet be in with a chance.

As to Boris-Idiot, this completely incompetent and clueless fool may well be posing as Prime Minister soon. Good grief…

Update, 20 June 2019

The final ballot having been held, the two candidates still standing are Boris-Idiot and Jeremy Hunt. Exactly what I predicted at the start (see above), though I was beginning to wonder whether Rory Stewart might make it into the final showdown.

Everyone is now assuming that the conclusion is already cut-and-dried. Probably, though Hunt may do better than expected as runner-up.

I find myself wondering about why it is that Boris Johnson has managed to shrug off all the (entirely justified and proven) allegations about his drug abuse, sex life, incompetence, lies etc. I think that the answer(s) are as follows:

  • Boris took drugs. Gove took drugs. Boris has been unaffected, while Gove has been diminished, ending up looking like a squalid and rather silly little figure. Why? I think because people are not comparing like with like. If Mick Jagger, at age 65 or for that matter (and as now) 75, plays around with some young girl, well, people just shrug and say “that’s what he’s like, he’s always been so”, or “that’s rock music for you”. Now, if some, say, respectable vicar, bank manager or headmaster does the same or even somewhat less, he will be pilloried, because people do not expect such behaviour from their local vicar or whatever. I think that that is part of the answer. People assume that louche Johnson might have snorted cocaine, but few not in the know thought it of apparently straitlaced Gove;
  • Gove has policy in mind. He is at home in the world of policy. Johnson has no real policy (or indeed ideology, or indeed belief in anything). So why do most people prefer Boris-Idiot? Because emotion is stronger than intellect, and will is stronger than emotion. Boris does not appeal on the intellectual level (how could he?!) which is Gove’s stronghold; he, Boris, appeals to emotion, whether to people liking his public persona, or his “dogwhistling” re Muslims, those two combined neatly and amusingly in his “Muslim women looking like” pillar-boxes or letter-boxes. It could even be said that Boris is appealing to the Will, to an inchoate Englishness (even though Boris himself is, at highest, only part-English);

Of course, the political fusion of all three parts of human mentality and being, meaning Will, emotion and intellect, was personified by Adolf Hitler. Obviously Hitler “bestrides the narrow world like a colossus”, even today, and was a titan compared to a silly creepy grubber like Boris Johnson, but there we are: “history repeats itself, first tragedy, second time farce.”

Poor UK…

https://twitter.com/mrjackb1/status/1141680593845051394

Update, 25 June 2019

Update, 30 June 2019

Even if Boris Johnson wins the absurd Conservative leadership contest, he may be prevented from becoming Prime Minister:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/30/boris-johnson-might-never-enter-no-10-if-mps-withdraw-support

Brexit, by-elections, elections, Party Politics, Uncategorized

A Few Peterborough Afterthoughts About The LibDems

2 Comments

I blogged about the LibDems and the EU elections only a week ago:

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/05/29/eu-elections-2019-in-review-the-libdems/

After their overall 2nd place in the EU elections, there was much talk about (another) LibDem revival, which echoed the chatter of 2010 and (as Liberal Party) right back to Orpington in 1961.

I was unconvinced by the talk of LibDem “revival” or “surge”, despite the post-EU elections polling which (in one case) made the LibDems the most popular party re. the next general election.

I also covered the LibDems, inter alia, in a piece about the Peterborough by-election, written a few weeks before polling day:

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/05/09/notes-from-the-peterborough-by-election/

As I predicted, the LibDems came 4th there.

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/06/07/peterborough-by-election-post-poll-analysis-and-thoughts/

So what now? Well, I still think that there is not and will not be any LibDem surge or revival, as such. What I do think will or may boost the LibDems is the Brexit Party surge, if it happens.

In the 2017 General Election, the LibDems won in 12 constituencies and came second in 37. If the Brexit Party continues to grow stronger and if it gets at least 15% nationwide at the next general election, many of those seats will see a significant fall in the Conservative vote-share by reason only of the existence of the Brexit Party, in addition to any fall for other reasons. In many, perhaps most cases, the beneficiaries will be the LibDems. It is not unreasonable to suppose that the LibDems will win seats. They might win 20 or 30, they might win 50. They might even win many more. However, this will mostly not if at all be a surge in enthusiasm for the LibDems as much as a victory by default, the result of Brexit Party taking Conservative votes, together with a more general fall in support for the Conservative Party.

Having said the above, if the LibDems win seats, they win seats, whatever the reason.

Notes

Lib Dem 2017 general election performance – charts and analysis
byu/theinspectorst inLibDem

Update, 23 February 2024

Well, my analysis was right but —as at other times— “events” meant that my conclusion proved to be wide of the mark. At the 2019 General Election, Brexit Party was stabbed in the back by its founder and “owner”, Nigel Farage, so fell out of serious contention, gifting “Boris Idiot” with an 80-seat Commons majority. The LibDems, let by Jewish-lobby puppet Jo Swinson, crashed and burned; Swinson lost her own seat in the process.

Today, in 2024, we relive 2019. This time, Farage has “Reform UK”, and the Labour Party is far ahead in the opinion polling. Present forecasts show Labour possibly getting 300, 400, even 500 seats, the Conservative Party falling back to 150, 10, even 50 or fewer seats.

A side-effect of the above is an unmerited LibDem rise, from their present 15 seats to 30, 40, even 50.

Brexit, by-elections, elections, immigration, Jewish lobby in UK, MPs, Party Politics, society, The Great Replacement, Uncategorized

Peterborough By-Election: post-poll analysis and thoughts

11 Comments

Well, I got it wrong vis a vis the headline result. I thought that the Brexit Party would win and indeed enjoy a near-walkover. In the event, Brexit Party had to accept a close 2nd place. As the Americans are supposed to say, “close but no cigar”.

The result of the Peterborough by-election

The result was:

  • Labour 10,484 votes, a vote share of 31% (down from 48% in 2017);
  • Brexit Party 9,801 (29%);
  • Conservative Party 7,243 (21%, down from 46% in 2017);
  • LibDems 4,159;
  • Green 1,035;
  • UKIP 400.

All others, nine in number, received fewer than 200 votes each, most below 100.

In retrospect, my own prediction was badly misled by the betting (which even on the day showed Brexit Party as very heavily odds-on) and by the large and impressive meetings Farage held in the city (one with 2,000 in the auditorium).

I was right about the Conservatives coming third and the LibDems in fourth etc. Still, irritating to have misread the main contest, close as it was. No cigar for me, either.

Why did Brexit Party lose at Peterborough?

In my previous blogging on the specific subject of this by-election, and on other topics, I have made the point that the UK now has cities (including London) where the white population (let alone the British white population) is less than 50%. Peterborough still has, supposedly, about 80% white population, but at least 10% are from other parts of Europe. The white British part of the population is below 70% of the whole, possibly as low as 60%.

There is also the point that the city and constituency are not delineated the same; part of the city is not within the constituency.

When a city has more than a token non-white presence, a nationalist party of any kind will struggle to win elections there, and that applies even if (as is the case with Brexit Party) the party is not social-national, has no racial or ethnic principles or policies, and even if (as with Brexit Party) some of its actual candidates are black or brown.

It is not only that, in general, the “blacks and browns” will not vote for even a mildly (and notionally) “patriotic” party such as Brexit Party (let alone a social-national party) because they fear that party. The point is that the vast majority of ethnic minority voters have little or no real connection with Britain, its society, its history, its culture etc. They are, in a word, alien to Britain. Look at how even those adhering to the far-longer-standing Jewish community are always “threatening” (“promising”?) to flee from the UK if their demands are not met. They are not really rooted here; the roots of the “blacks and browns” are shallower yet.

Thus, in Peterborough, one can surmise that few blacks, Muslims etc voted Brexit Party. Why should they? Why would they? Brexit Party is hardly the British National Party. It offers no implied threat to the minorities, but it is broadly conservative-nationalist in ethos, and that is enough for the ethnic minorities to vote elsewhere, mainly for Labour.

I have been blogging and tweeting for several years about how the UK part of the “Great Replacement” (of whites by non-whites) means that elections become a no-win situation in much of the UK. That was true, for example, in the Stoke-on-Trent Central constituency in 2017. In the by-election of that year, Gareth Snell, a spotty unpleasant Twitter troll, was the Labour candidate. Paul Nuttall stood for UKIP. Snell beat Nuttall, Labour beat UKIP, by only 2,620 votes. The Pakistani Muslim community locally, numbering over 6,000,  almost all (always) vote Labour, a cohesion enforced by dodgy postal ballots and “community” exhortations (eg in local mosques) to vote Labour. Local Muslims 6,000+, Labour majority 2,620…

In other words, without those 6,000 or more Muslims (and others), Nuttall and UKIP would have won Stoke-on-Trent Central easily. As it was, UKIP faded and, at the General Election of 2017, Labour won again, against the Conservatives in 2nd place. Labour won by 3,897 votes. Point made, I think.

Now look at Peterborough. The postal votes were very high (who knows who really fills in the forms?) but even leaving that aside, we see that Brexit Party lost to Labour by 683, in a constituency where the non-European ethnic minorities number perhaps as many as 20,000. “It was the w**s wot won it!”, to paraphrase the famous Sun headline of 1992.

Non-white ethnic minority population in the constituency—10,000-20,000. Votes for Labour in the by-election—10,484

In fact, Labour only won Peterborough by 607 votes at the 2017 General Election, thus propelling useless African ex-“solicitor” Fiona Onasanya into Parliament.

The Future

Labour is, as I have often noted before, now the party, in terms of core vote, of the ethnic minorities (excluding Jews), of the metropolitan “socially liberal” types, of public service workers or officials. The real hard core is mainly the blacks and browns, and the public service people. Labour struggles to win votes wider than that core. Labour won Peterborough in the by-election on a vote-share of only 31%.

Brexit Party has suffered a bad blow. Had it won at Peterborough, its momentum would have carried on. Now, its future seems unclear. It may continue and may yet win seats, but Peterborough was a very good chance despite the ethnic minority vote, and Brexit Party fluffed it.

The LibDems almost quadrupled their 2017 3.3% vote to about 12%, but are still well behind the 2010 days of “Cleggmania”, in which they scored nearly 20% at Peterborough. My opinion? There will be no LibDem revival, at least not on a big scale. Most voters are getting angry. “Centrism” is not the flavour of the times.

The Conservatives were the big losers, as in the EU elections. They achieved what might be regarded as, had it been elsewhere, a respectable 3rd place on a vote-share of 21%, 7,243 votes, only 3,000 or so behind the Labour victor; but Peterborough has mainly been a Conservative seat since 1945. It had a Conservative MP as recently as 2 years ago.

If this result were to be replicated nationwide, there would be little left of the Conservative bloc in the House of Commons. Seats would fall either to Brexit Party, or to Labour (or in a few cases, to LibDems).

Final words

Strategically, a Brexit Party win would have been my preference, in that, down the line, it would expedite the break-up of the “LibLabCon” “three main parties” scam. Having said that, the Conservatives were rightly cast down, while at least the Labour MP elected seems to be to some extent against the Jewish Zionists (though pretty invertebrate when “challenged” on that).

Tweets etc

https://twitter.com/KTHopkins/status/1136962411666321410

Below, illustrating my point that Labour’s core vote is now “the blacks and browns”

Notes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peterborough_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2010s

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoke-on-Trent_Central_(UK_Parliament_constituency)

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/05/09/notes-from-the-peterborough-by-election/

https://gab.com/Fosfoe/posts/YldMYkx4cXRRdlpGM2NqWE40QjNYZz09

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisa_Forbes_(politician)

https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/peterboroughs-new-mayor-says-prison-stint-should-be-forgotten-as-he-prepares-to-become-citys-first-citizen/

http://participator.online/articles/2019/06/peterborough_byelection_postal_voting_questions_20190611.php

https://twitter.com/RaheemKassam/status/1140260185446989824

Brexit, by-elections, elections, Party Politics, Uncategorized

EU Elections 2019 in Review: Brexit Party

11 Comments

Cl3KWpkWQAAP-lJ

So we come finally to the summit: laurels and oak leaves to the victor. Brexit Party rode its tank over the prostrate bodies of the other parties.

In the EU Elections 2019, Brexit Party was in 1st place, received 5,248,533 votes, a vote-share of 30.7%, resulting in 29 new MEPs. A party which scarcely existed a month or so before the poll.

The Brexit Party vote numbered over one and a half times the vote of the second-placed party, the LibDems, far more than double that of the Labour Party (which was 3rd), about 3x the vote of the Greens, and between 3x and 4x the vote of the Conservatives. As for UKIP and Change UK, which scraped in together in 6th/7th place (excluding SNP, Plaid Cymru and Northern Irish parties), the Brexit Party vote was 10x higher than that of either of them.

Brexit Party was 1st in 9 of the 11 (ex-Northern Ireland) EU constituencies. In Scotland and London it came in 2nd and 3rd respectively.

Brexit Party emerged, apparently from nowhere (perhaps not entirely so, though) and was soon holding rallies where thousands of people turned up to hear Nigel Farage (mainly). They even paid to hear him.

Here is Farage talking in Peterborough, where the vital by-election will be held this Thursday 6 June 2019:

I find it amusing that the Peterborough by-election will be held on 6 June 2019, 75 years to the day after the Normandy Landings of 1944. I have not seen Brexit Party making much of that, but it may have at least a limited effect.

Brexit Party has somehow managed to run an incredibly professional campaign including social media campaign, as with this ad for the EU Elections:

https://twitter.com/brexitparty_uk/status/1129054384069980161

There is no doubt about it, though: Brexit Party must win the Peterborough by-election to keep its momentum going. So far, its campaign has gone well, resulting in Brexit Party, which started as 5/4 second favourite (after Labour), now quoted by bookmakers and on the betting exchanges as not only favourite but very heavily odds-on, (this morning at 1/5, but now, as I write, already yet firmer at 1/6!). https://www.betfair.com/sport/politics for updates.

I am updating my own [first written 9 May 2019] look at the by-election on a daily basis:

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/05/09/notes-from-the-peterborough-by-election/

So what is the future for Brexit Party and what is its effect on other parties?

Well, as I write, an opinion poll has Brexit Party as the most popular party for voters intending to vote in the next UK general election:

According to Electoral Calculus [https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/userpoll.html ] , the approximate result of that, if applied in the real next general election, would be Brexit Party 322 seats, Labour 129 seats, Conservatives 93 seats, LibDems 26 seats (I have assessed the main Scottish votes as SNP 40%, Con 20%, Lab and LibDem 15% each).

In the above scenario, Brexit Party would be only 4 seats short of a Commons majority.

Another poll  (they are both very recent) comes to slightly different results in the poll but hugely different results in the Commons! Indicative of the volatility creeping or seeping into UK politics.

On the immediately-above scenario, Brexit Party would still be largest party in the Commons (Brexit Party 219 seats, Lab 177, Con 156, LibDems 47) but would be 107 seats short of a majority.

Many may say that all either of the above polls would mean in practice (apart from Nigel Farage as Prime Minister!) would be a quasi-Conservative (real Conservative) minority or coalition government and no big change politically in the end. I disagree. The Conservative Party has nearly 200 years of history (some would say more, including its informal origins long before the 1830s). Brexit Party has no history, no traditions, no roots. A shallow plant. Labour too has long tradition and history.

Once those corrupted old parties are mainly uprooted, once people see that there is a world beyond utterly corrupt LibLabCon and its mirages, the way becomes a lot easier for near-future social nationalism and for pan-European real co-operation of free nations for a new world and a new Europe. For race and culture!

Notes, musings and updates

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Results_of_the_2019_European_Parliament_election_in_the_United_Kingdom

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/05/12/what-is-brexit-party-why-does-it-exist-what-are-its-chances/

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/european-election-results-tories-brexit-party-farage-no-deal-eu-a8931561.html

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/jun/02/peterborough-prepares-for-byelection-that-could-see-first-brexit-party-mp

Brexit Party is certainly not social-national, even if it is a way-station on that journey.

Brexit Party is planning a large rally on 4 June 2019, two days before the actual by-election at Peterborough. The last one they held in the city attracted 2,000 people who actually paid to attend! This one? We shall see. This one is free, so who knows, though the auditorium which seems to be the largest space at the chosen location (The Cresset, Bretton) only has 850 seats: https://www.cresset.co.uk/functions-and-events/conferences/

It may be that the exhibition space at the same place is larger.

The Remain whiners are still desperately tweeting against Brexit Party. See, for example (below) a tweet by angry lesbian scribbler and msm “celebrity” Emma Kennedy, who tweets endlessly on things she thinks she knows about (she used to get angry at me on Twitter until I muted the silly woman). Her “Brexit supporters are ignorant knuckledraggers” viewpoint is very very typical of Remain whiners, who so often imagine themselves to be well educated and intelligent and Leave partisans to be the reverse. She has evidently not considered the alternative view, i.e. “anyone who keeps voting for the LibLabCon parties, who have detailed policies sometimes but rarely carry them out, is a fucking idiot”! Discuss.

In fact, in that regard, stand up, Emma Kennedy! She now supports the LibDems, who fooled millions in 2010 with a lot of talk about human rights, helping the disadvantaged, having a fairer voting system. They betrayed every single one of their manifesto promises!

https://twitter.com/EmmaKennedy/status/1134176961193009153

Someone answers the same tweet of Emma Kennedy, who evidently has time on her hands…(but she herself does not deign to answer the tweeter; of course not— he disagreed with her kneejerk flawed view and lack of logic…)

Actually, Emma Kennedy never replies to those who contradict her nonsense, as here, where she had tweeted that some black Remain nonentity should have stood at Peterborough (I agree. He should have: when he lost, it would have provided a laugh, and in the unlikely event that he won, he would at long last have a job!)

https://twitter.com/neverheardofher/status/1134177136980500480

https://twitter.com/EmmaKennedy/status/1134180501206556672

https://twitter.com/CotswoldsBloke/status/1134512220036042752

Oh, dear. Seems that most people disagree with Emma…

and

https://twitter.com/k69tie/status/1134506412497940480

Seems that some people do not give angry scribbler Emma the respect that she thinks that her “ideas” (derivative, flawed) deserve. Don’t they know that she is a “celebrity“?! I mean, she was on Celebrity Masterchef only, er, 7 years ago (in 2012)…and was writing children’s books from 2007 to, it seems, 2011…Ah, well, time can be cruel…

I really should not waste too much time on someone unknown to most people, but it seems to me that Emma Kennedy is rather typical of the Remain whiners: abusive, unable to see that the EU is no guarantor of human rights or civil rights (in reality), sure that she and her Remainiac colleagues are both right and far far more intelligent and better-educated than the Leave/Brexit “fucking idiots”.

What would she make of me? Well, in fact I already know, because (before Twitter expelled me in 2018) she tweeted to the effect that I am a “Nazi” etc (and even if so, does that mean that I am always wrong??). She of course has no idea that I once had my IQ tested at 156, and was (like her) a lawyer (a practising barrister as well as an expat international lawyer; she was a failed solicitor in the 1990s: she did 3 years in the City of London but admits that she was “no bloody good”).

Likewise, Emma Kennedy of course has no idea that I have visited (and even lived in) countries all over the world, from Kazakhstan to the USA, and Egypt to Australia, from the Caribbean to Southern Africa, from the Arabian Gulf to Russia, Poland etc etc (to name but a few places). That would not fit her constipated Hampstead/msm world-view, in which the typical Leave/Brexit supporter is someone of low IQ, poorly-educated, who has never travelled beyond his home in a “left behind” town such as Clacton or Margate, and has of course never met any persons of other race or culture.

By the way, this (below) is the African loudmouth that Emma Kennedy and various other idiotic Remain whiners, pro-immigration whiners etc wanted to see stand as a candidate at the Peterborough by-election:

His name is Femi Oluwole (from the name, I presume Nigerian origin). Who/what is he? Until the EU elections, I had never heard of him. His Twitter account (@Femi_Sorry) says that he is a “law grad”. That seems to be the sum total of his life achievement to date. Age? 20-something; maybe 30. He does not appear to have a job, as such, or a profession. He works for “Our Future Our Choice” [https://www.ofoc.co.uk/], which says (in small print and buried in its website) that “OFOC is powered by: Best for Britain, Open Britain, and The European Movement”.

“Powered by”? In other words, “funded by”. The EU is funding “OFOC” (and him), in other words. It has several people working full-time for it, and its office is in very expensive Millbank Tower, where the Labour Party, Conservative Party, EU and UN organizations etc have or have had offices.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millbank_Tower

http://www.millbanktower.co.uk/

This Femi person may pretend to be some kind of semi-amateur social media activist, but the big guns of the EU propaganda machine are behind him, broadcasting to his 177,000 apparently rather silly Twitter followers. Ironic that here we have a directly-involved organization, paid ultimately by the EU, and involving itself in a by-election (not for a party but against a party —Brexit Party), yet the Femi person and others make much of the supposed foreign funding for that party!

Below, a tweet from “Femi”, which to me shows that logic is not his strong point.

Another? It seems that “Femi” does not understand the UK political system or the British Constitution:

I wonder whether this Femi will ever get a real job? Doubtful. Another example of the wonderful multikulti “diverse” UK. He does not seem to have understood that Peterborough (where black Africans are “only” 1.4% of the population) had an African MP until quite recently. It was not a successful experiment.

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/12/21/deadhead-mps-an-occasional-series-the-fiona-onasanya-story/

Still, there it is. “Femi” is going around Peterborough, loudly talking mostly at (and insulting) the locals, filming himself and unwittingly causing even more voters to vote Brexit Party on 6 June…I suppose that he assumes that he will be offered a political position by a System party, or even become an MP at some point. Ha ha. Don’t count on it.

 

Brexit, by-elections, elections, Party Politics, society, Uncategorized

EU Elections 2019 in Review: Conservative Party

4 Comments

The Conservatives were the big losers of the 2019 EU Elections in the UK: 1,512,809 votes, a vote-share of 8.8%, 4 MEPs (down from 19), 5th-placed after Brexit Party, LibDems, Labour and Greens.

The Conservatives were in 5th place in most of the 11 EU constituencies. Their best results were in Scotland, East of England, South East England and South West England, in all of which they were placed 4th, the largest vote-share being in Scotland (11.6%).

This was the worst nationwide result for the Conservatives since the party was officially formed in or about 1832, the year of the first Reform Act (some date its foundation by reference to the publication of the Tamworth Manifesto by Sir Robert Peel in 1834; no matter).

Since the 2019 EU elections (last week), much has happened: Theresa May staying on temporarily as a ghost PM, but having resigned as Conservative leader in advance (effective 7 June 2019); between one and two dozen candidates scrabbling for her purple, with Boris Johnson (“Boris Idiot”) in the lead. More significantly, only 40% of 2017 Conservative voters aver that they will vote Conservative at the next general election, and a YouGov poll taken a week after the EU elections resulted thus:

(UKIP and CHUKUP both on 1%; I have taken SNP support in Scotland as 40%, Con 20%).

If that poll reflects the next general election, the House of Commons would be hung: largest party would be Labour (186 seats), then Brexit Party (184 seats), then LibDem (116 seats). The Conservatives would have 86 seats, only 30 ahead of the SNP.

Note that, though: 86 seats! That would be the smallest MP contingent ever for the Conservatives, easily beating the smallest so far, following the General Election of 1997, at which the Conservatives scored 165 seats on a vote-share of 30.7%: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_Party_(UK)#UK_general_elections

Many cannot forgive the Conservatives the cruel “welfare” policies of 2010-present. I am at one with that. The “Conservative” ministers responsible should be put on trial at some future point.

However, the uncaring policies of the Con-Coalition and of the Theresa May government did not directly affect the majority of the population. What has affected the majority has been the starvation of large areas of other public spending: police (albeit that I think that much police effort is misdirected), NHS, justice system etc.

Then there is the sheer ineptitude of so many Conservative ministers. Chris Grayling alone! How many times does that obvious sociopath have to mess up before he is sacked and booted back onto the backbenches? God knows. He is still a Cabinet minister today, despite having messed up at Transport, Justice and Employment, as well as in other roles! The Labour Party has alleged that Grayling alone has mis-spent nearly £3 BILLION in public funds, the Probation Service fiasco merely being his latest failure. “Failing Grayling”.

Grayling is not alone. One only has to think of Esther McVey, dishonest and thick as two short planks. Others abound. Iain Dunce Duncan Smith comes to mind…

Again, the UK (ie the Conservatives) adopted the wrongheaded “austerity” policies of 2010-present, which have not only made the country so much more threadbare but are in in contrast to those of other EU countries (except Greece), which have recovered, and grown so much faster, in recent years.

Now, as Theresa May is banished to the land of the political shades, a mass of idiots (mainly) is scrabbling to tear off her purple. The eventual field may number as many as 20.

The dilemma the Conservatives have is that they can

  • elect a leader who is Remain or “Soft-Brexit” (Brexit In Name Only), and then very likely get slaughtered when they eventually find the courage to hold a general election (perhaps not until 2022 or until Brexit Party deflates, which latter may never happen); or
  • elect as leader a Brexiteer (or, like Boris Johnson, a fake Brexiteer), which will mean that his/her attempt to exit the EU on WTO terms will trigger a vote against in the Commons and then a confidence vote, which, with a number of Remain Conservatives abstaining, or even voting against the Government, will mean that the Government must fall and a general election held, at which the Conservatives will probably be slaughtered. Catch-22.

The Conservatives really are in trouble, and it could be terminal. The newspapers (look at the Daily Telegraph) are full of articles saying how the Conservatives have no decent leadership candidates, no ideas, no overarching “story” or ideology etc.

Who now votes Conservative? According to opinion polls, only 4% of under-25s, and only 16% of under-35s. The bulk of Conservative voters are retired people, often in their 70s, 80s, 90s. A rapidly-depleting contingent.

Then we have income and capital demographics. The Conservatives are desperately trying to appeal to renters, students etc, by bringing in “helpful” measures to match Labour promises. I doubt that these late ploys will be very effective.

As to “culture wars” aspects, the Conservatives have failed to prevent the continuing migration invasion, are very much identified with the Jewish Zionist and City of London speculator element, and have lost their traditional supporters by supporting “socially liberal” policies such as gay marriage and all the “multikulti” stuff. One MP personifies all that, though he is not alone (far from it): Nick Boles MP, Bilderberg attendee, Remainer, expenses cheat and blodger (he even claimed on expenses to have Hebrew lessons so that he could communicate with his Israeli boyfriend!); he wants to continue with mass immigration, building millions of rabbithutches on the countryside for the influx and their offspring. Goodbye England!

On 6 June, there will be held the very important Peterborough by-election. Peterborough is or was a Con-Lab marginal.

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/05/09/notes-from-the-peterborough-by-election/

In 2017, a black African woman, Fiona Onasanya, was foisted on the people of Peterborough by the Labour Party machine in London. It turned out that she was not only yet another MP whose CV was partly a fake, but that she was totally incompetent and useless (5,000 unanswered emails from constituents were found by the assistant she then hired, which lady is now suing Onasanya in the Employment Tribunal).

Onasanya was only removed as MP following a petition triggered by her conviction for perverting the course of justice; she spent 28 days of a lenient 3-month sentence in prison. That did not stop her from not only getting her pay, free London flat, bills paid etc until she was kicked out, but she even voted maliciously against Brexit in the Commons, while still wearing her electronic tag!

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/12/21/deadhead-mps-an-occasional-series-the-fiona-onasanya-story/

Labour has a lot to live down in Leave-supporting Peterborough. However, their present candidate, Lisa Forbes, a trade union woman, is 2nd favourite (after the odds-on Brexit Party candidate) to win the by-election. At time of writing, 4/1. At the start of the campaign, Labour was Evens favourite with the bookmakers, so is struggling.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1134470/peterborough-byelection-labour-candidate-gordon-brown-nigel-farage-hustings-brexit

As to the Conservatives, who only lost to Labour in 2017 by 607 votes, their stock has fallen, or should I write “plunged”? 25/1 today with the bookmakers. My analysis is that Brexit Party is being supported on its merits as anti-System but also supported as the best way to keep Labour out. That is, even Conservative voters who prefer their usual party to Brexit Party are going to vote Brexit Party to keep Labour out. At the same time, Remain voters (including former Con Remainers) are clustering round the LibDems (whose odds have fallen from 70/1 a week ago to 12/1 today). The Conservatives are therefore being deserted both by Brexit-favouring voters and Remain-favouring voters.

If Brexit Party wins at Peterborough, that will confirm that 2019 is the beginning of the end for the Conservative Party. If Brexit Party can get 10% at the next general election (assuming before 2022), the Conservative Party is unlikely to get a majority. If Brexit Party gets 20%, then the Commons will have, probably, three or even four English parties with substantial blocs of MPs (and also the SNP). Above 20%, and the Brexit Party effectively replaces the Conservatives (and maybe Labour, to a lesser extent) in the Commons.

Both Labour and Conservatives are fading from relevance, partly for the same reasons, partly for different reasons. The Conservatives face the immediate threat of near-extinction. They now look as if their days are numbered.

slipperyslope1

Notes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Results_of_the_2019_European_Parliament_election_in_the_United_Kingdom

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamworth_Manifesto

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reform_Act_1832

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Peel

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_Party_(UK)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_Party_(UK)#UK_general_elections

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Grayling#Government_Minister_(2010%E2%80%93)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Grayling

Afterthought, 4 June 2019

I watched “63-Up”, the latest in the TV experiment that follows a group of people born, as chance would have it, the same year as me (1956), a film about them being made every 7 years. The sort of original-thinking TV project that is rarely if ever attempted today.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Up_(film_series)

The subjects are now all 62 (like me) or 63. One of those featured today was a young London East-Ender, Tony Walker [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Up_(film_series)#Tony] who had been a jockey and a taxi driver. Politically, what interested me is that the subject said that, as an adult, i.e. since the late 1970s, he had always voted Conservative, but now would never do so again. Why? Not for economic reasons: he had done well in aspirational terms, had moved from East London proper to relatively leafy South Woodford https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Woodford,

https://www.pettyson.co.uk/area-guides/south-woodford

and even had a holiday home in Spain.

The subject, Tony, was never going to vote Conservative again because he wanted the UK to be free of EU control but also because he evidently has woken up to the fact that globalist puppet-masters are pulling the strings. I do not know what other issues were or are of importance to him, and in a sense it hardly matters. What does matter, as we look at events politically, is that Tony and a million other Tonys are not voting Conservative in the next UK general election. People like him do not vote Labour these days, so where? In the film, he even said that the Greens might get his vote (to me, surprisingly). The film would have been made a few months ago, before the advent of Brexit Party and its rise to pre-eminence, but I think that I can guess where Tony’s vote is going next time…

The Conservatives are now revealed by events and their own actions as a bunch of clowns, who have failed on Brexit, failed on everything. They cannot even run the election for their own leader effectively! I really believe that the Conservatives, even more than Labour and the LibDems, are heading for the scrap-heap, rapidly.

Brexit, elections, Party Politics, Uncategorized

EU Elections 2019 in Review: Labour

4 Comments

Labour did not do well at the EU elections: 3rd-placed with 2,347,255 votes, a 13.7% vote share, and 10 MEPs (down from 20). Labour only got two-thirds as many votes as the LibDems, and far less than half as many votes as Brexit Party attracted.

Remain whiners are saying that that happened because Labour did not proclaim itself as anti-Brexit and/or pro a second EU referendum. That is a doubtful proposition, in that it seems that more Labour voters voted Leave than Remain in 2016. What probably is correct is in saying that Labour’s message was mixed, or that Labour and Corbyn were “fence-sitting” re. Brexit (true, but what else can he do?). Parties that had a clear Brexit message (Brexit Party, LibDems, Greens) did better than those with mixed messages (Conservative and Labour). In the Russian proverb, “if you chase two hares, you won’t catch one”.

True, Change UK and UKIP had clear messages either way on Brexit and both failed miserably, but in the case of UKIP, Brexit Party simply took its votes and was seen as the bandwagon on which to jump; Change UK was just seen as a joke (there was something of that in UKIP too, it having joined with the “alt-Right” wastes of space “Sargon of Akkad” Carl Benjamin, “Prison Planet” Paul Watson and “Count Dankula” Mark Meechan).

Labour did not come in 1st place in any of the EU constituencies and, in the 5 constituencies where it came 2nd, was far behind Brexit Party (and typically with less than half of the votes of Brexit Party), with the sole exception of London, where Labour came 2nd to the LibDems (23.9% vote, LibDems on 27.2%).

Labour’s campaign was weak, and the Jewish-Zionist element was, as always, still there, sniping from cover at Corbyn and his (as far as I can see) very limited if even existent “anti-Semitism”.

Labour’s best argument in respect of Westminster elections has been, for the past 9 years, that it is not the Conservative Party. That trend has continued and strengthened under Corbyn. Is that enough?

True, Labour has policies designed to appeal to the middle-of-the-road voter (public ownership of some utilities, rail lines etc, a fairer deal for tenants, promises of more money for NHS etc).

On the other hand, if a voter wants to really give the Conservatives a kick, particularly in usually-Conservative-voting areas or in marginal Con-LibDem (Westminster) constituencies, that angry former Labour voter or floating voter might well do better to vote Brexit Party rather than Labour, because in strongly Conservative areas, Labour has no chance anyway in most years, whereas the LibDems are often the second party in such areas. Such a voter could (obviously) just vote LibDem straight off. Many voters, though, if there is a 3-way Con-LibDem-Brexit Party split (realistically), may want to vote Brexit Party rather than LibDem in the hope that a BP candidate can come through the middle to win, or because the LibDems enabled the 2010-2015 “coalition” government.

As to the impact of Brexit Party on Labour seats in the North and Midlands, I should assess it as potentially very damaging, but difficult to quantify. It is not just that Corbyn is said to be unpopular. It is also a question of Labour’s failure to stand up for (real) British people, for white neighbourhoods and communities. Labour failed to stem mass immigration and in fact encouraged it (of course, we now know from a whistleblower that Labour Jews such as Barbara Roche, and Phil Woolas, deliberately imported millions of non-European immigrants in order to destroy our race and culture).

There is also the connected fact that Labour never even admitted the nature and extent of the sexual exploitation of young girls by Pakistani gangs across the country, and particularly Northern England. In fact, Labour covered up the crimes, assisted by Common Purpose organization members in the police and in local councils.

The Labour voters who voted Green in the EU elections (held under proportional voting) will mostly return in a Westminster election (held under FPTP voting) because in the Westminster election, a Green vote is a wasted vote, without doubt.

If Brexit Party can take away 10% or more of what would otherwise be the Conservative vote, the Conservative Party is badly damaged (as when UKIP got 12% in 2015). If Brexit Party can get an overall 20%, the Conservative Party is toast except in a few very safe seats. Labour voters should therefore (whatever they think of Farage and his party) vote Brexit Party and not Labour, unless Labour is in a very strong position to win in any particular seat.

Labour has a good chance of forming a minority government or even a (small?) majority one if a general election is held soon, meaning in 2019, maybe 2020. The Conservatives are despised, divided, and weakened both internally and by the upstart Brexit Party. I blogged recently about how the Conservatives might try to limp on to 2022, when the reduction in MP numbers to 600 and accompanying boundary changes will cost Labour as many as 30 MPs. Much depends also on whether Brexit Party is a flash in the pan or a growing menace to the Conservatives.

I wrote the following after the Stoke-on-Trent by-election of 2017:

“Labour has been declining for years. Corbyn is both symptom and cause. The disappearance of the industrial proletariat has swept away the bedrock underneath Labour, replacing it by the sand of the “precariat”. Labour imported millions of immigrants, who are now breeding. The social landscape becomes volatile. The political landscape too.”

I see no reason to change my view.

Notes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbara_Roche

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Woolas

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/6418456/Labour-wanted-mass-immigration-to-make-UK-more-multicultural-says-former-adviser.html

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/7198329/Labours-secret-plan-to-lure-migrants.html

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-7095191/DAN-HODGES-Labour-declare-party-smug-metropolitan-elite.html

Update, 6 June 2019

The tweet below, from the Peterborough by-election, illustrates my often-posted belief that the Labour core vote is now largely composed of the “blacks and browns”:

More proof…

In other words, Labour is now the party of the blacks and browns.

Update, 21 September 2019

…from the Independent, “reporting” on beach patrols at Dover; all too typical of the sort of persons now prominent in “Labour” and what is left of the trade unions:

“Riccardo La Torre, firefighter and Eastern Region Secretary of the Fire Brigade Union, branded the coast patrol “despicable” and said: “These have-a-go, racist vigilantes have no place in any kind of enforcement or emergency activities and will only serve to make conditions and tensions worse.”

“These groups claim to be the voice of the working class, but now they want to act as an arm of the authorities by patrolling beaches to apprehend struggling working-class people desperately trying to get to safety.”
[https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/far-right-britain-first-beach-patrols-calais-dover-anti-migrant-a9113471.html]

So “Riccardo La Torre” (que?), a regional secretary of the Fire Brigade Union, thinks that migrant invaders from Africa and the Middle East are “working class people”, who are “trying to get to safety”?!

Safety from, er, France? There you have in a nutshell, the craziness that is much of “Labour” now. Alien migrant-invaders are “working class people”, who should be allowed to occupy the UK at will (and be subsidized too)! Note the fag-end “Marxism”, trying to shoehorn the facts into some 1980s polytechnic back-of-postcard Marxism-Leninism.

Proposals for a new society…