RugbyRebels

Son of Mathonwy wrote: ↑Thu Jan 15, 2026 12:33 pm

Puja wrote: ↑Thu Jan 15, 2026 12:29 pm Badenoch's just fired Jenrick for "plotting to imminently defect to Reform". What a pair of characterful politicians.

Puja

Looks more like she's removing her main leadership rival.

I think my take here is wrong. I haven't been following the Tories too closely over the law 6 months. I assumed Jenrick was still well placed to sweep to leadership once they inevitably booted Badenoch out. But in the last few months the Tories have taken a few % off Reform and gone ahead of Labour in the polls. Not sure if any of that is because of Badenoch's leadership but I guess it has made her much more secure and put Jenrick's plans on hold. He hasn't the patience to wait so he was in the final stages of jumping ship. On finding out about this Badenoch did the only sensible thing and dumped him first, ruining the optics for him and Reform. I'm still pretty surprised that Jenrick would prefer to be under Farage's thumb than have the chance of running a party but that's what he's gone for. We'll see if Farage puts him to work or merely uses him to stick it to the Tories. But it is funny to hear from an ex Tory minister how the Tories broke Britain.

This move will make a Reform-Tory merger less likely, so it's a good thing. Also, keep them marginally less far right and racist. Whether that's best for the success of the Tory party itself, who knows?

But it's all pretty funny.

WTAF?



Woman guilty of keeping slave for 25 years

A woman has been found guilty of keeping another woman with learning difficulties captive for 25 years and using her as a slave.

Mother-of-10 Mandy Wixon made the vulnerable woman clean her squalid and overcrowded home in Tewkesbury, Gloucestershire, and forced her to live off scraps.

Washing-up liquid would be squirted down the victim's throat, bleach splashed on her face, and she had her head repeatedly shaved against her will

Which Tyler wrote: ↑Wed Jan 21, 2026 6:41 pm WTAF?



Woman guilty of keeping slave for 25 years

A woman has been found guilty of keeping another woman with learning difficulties captive for 25 years and using her as a slave.

Mother-of-10 Mandy Wixon made the vulnerable woman clean her squalid and overcrowded home in Tewkesbury, Gloucestershire, and forced her to live off scraps.

Washing-up liquid would be squirted down the victim's throat, bleach splashed on her face, and she had her head repeatedly shaved against her will

They let this psycho out on bail??

25 years sounds like an appropriate sentence.

Andy Burnham really is a dick, isn't he? Deliberately chucking a grenade into the Labour party by putting his name forward as a candidate for the Gorton and Denton by-election, knowing full well that he would be declined permission to stand, partly because it would then create another potentially losable by-election for Greater Manchester mayor, partly because Starmer is not a complete imbecile and is aware it is Step 1 on Burnham's cunning and stealthy secret plan for a leadership challenge. Now he gets to stand there morosely and be all, "I'm disappointed, but I'm now going back to be the best mayor I can," while all his allies get to pile in on Starmer who was faced with the choice of allowing a second by-election and Tory-style leadership turmoil or looking like a petty, controlling dick. I mean, he *is* a petty and controlling dick, but it's rude to showcase it quite so thoroughly.

What limited polling there currently is seems to suggest that it's a three-way bunfight between Greens, Labour, and Reform (in that order, but with a cigarette paper between them). Feels like Burnham's given a gift to the Greens by souring local leftist opinions on the Labour leadership even further and there might be a fair few who would vote Labour who'll lend their votes to the Greens in protest at Starmer. Hopefully it'll be enough to hold off Reform, cause that'd be the worst case scenario.

Puja

Puja wrote: ↑Sun Jan 25, 2026 11:01 pm Andy Burnham really is a dick, isn't he? Deliberately chucking a grenade into the Labour party by putting his name forward as a candidate for the Gorton and Denton by-election, knowing full well that he would be declined permission to stand, partly because it would then create another potentially losable by-election for Greater Manchester mayor, partly because Starmer is not a complete imbecile and is aware it is Step 1 on Burnham's cunning and stealthy secret plan for a leadership challenge. Now he gets to stand there morosely and be all, "I'm disappointed, but I'm now going back to be the best mayor I can," while all his allies get to pile in on Starmer who was faced with the choice of allowing a second by-election and Tory-style leadership turmoil or looking like a petty, controlling dick. I mean, he *is* a petty and controlling dick, but it's rude to showcase it quite so thoroughly.

What limited polling there currently is seems to suggest that it's a three-way bunfight between Greens, Labour, and Reform (in that order, but with a cigarette paper between them). Feels like Burnham's given a gift to the Greens by souring local leftist opinions on the Labour leadership even further and there might be a fair few who would vote Labour who'll lend their votes to the Greens in protest at Starmer. Hopefully it'll be enough to hold off Reform, cause that'd be the worst case scenario.

Puja

An ambitious, opportunist centre-right dick against an ambitious, opportunist centre-right dick (pretending to be more left wing). They're welcome to each other. Hope it brings Starmer closer to stepping down but Burnham doesn't get his seat in time.

It's a gift to the Greens and Reform. Will Polanski run for the seat himself?

Son of Mathonwy wrote: ↑Mon Jan 26, 2026 8:49 am

Puja wrote: ↑Sun Jan 25, 2026 11:01 pm Andy Burnham really is a dick, isn't he? Deliberately chucking a grenade into the Labour party by putting his name forward as a candidate for the Gorton and Denton by-election, knowing full well that he would be declined permission to stand, partly because it would then create another potentially losable by-election for Greater Manchester mayor, partly because Starmer is not a complete imbecile and is aware it is Step 1 on Burnham's cunning and stealthy secret plan for a leadership challenge. Now he gets to stand there morosely and be all, "I'm disappointed, but I'm now going back to be the best mayor I can," while all his allies get to pile in on Starmer who was faced with the choice of allowing a second by-election and Tory-style leadership turmoil or looking like a petty, controlling dick. I mean, he *is* a petty and controlling dick, but it's rude to showcase it quite so thoroughly.

What limited polling there currently is seems to suggest that it's a three-way bunfight between Greens, Labour, and Reform (in that order, but with a cigarette paper between them). Feels like Burnham's given a gift to the Greens by souring local leftist opinions on the Labour leadership even further and there might be a fair few who would vote Labour who'll lend their votes to the Greens in protest at Starmer. Hopefully it'll be enough to hold off Reform, cause that'd be the worst case scenario.

Puja

An ambitious, opportunist centre-right dick against an ambitious, opportunist centre-right dick (pretending to be more left wing). They're welcome to each other. Hope it brings Starmer closer to stepping down but Burnham doesn't get his seat in time.

It's a gift to the Greens and Reform. Will Polanski run for the seat himself?

Polanski's already said he won't - the local Greens select their own candidates democratically without interference from the main party. Revolutionary idea.

Besides, he lives in Hackney and is a member of the London Assembly, so it'd be a striking change of moral direction to try and parachute himself into a seat across the country just because it's a good chance to win. More of a Farage move that.

I suspect that Polanski is eyeing up the idea of running against Starmer himself in Holborn & St Pancras. Bit more of a gamble, but I believe both Hackney seats are currently occupied by fellow socialist travellers, current polling suggests that the Greens are on course to take Holborn (although you'd imagine Labour will pour everything in come the election), and it would be both symbolic and highly entertaining. Plus Polanski's on record saying he'd only work with Labour if Starmer wasn't in charge, so it'd be a neat way of forcing a change in leadership.

Puja

Puja wrote: ↑Mon Jan 26, 2026 9:07 am

Son of Mathonwy wrote: ↑Mon Jan 26, 2026 8:49 am

Puja wrote: ↑Sun Jan 25, 2026 11:01 pm Andy Burnham really is a dick, isn't he? Deliberately chucking a grenade into the Labour party by putting his name forward as a candidate for the Gorton and Denton by-election, knowing full well that he would be declined permission to stand, partly because it would then create another potentially losable by-election for Greater Manchester mayor, partly because Starmer is not a complete imbecile and is aware it is Step 1 on Burnham's cunning and stealthy secret plan for a leadership challenge. Now he gets to stand there morosely and be all, "I'm disappointed, but I'm now going back to be the best mayor I can," while all his allies get to pile in on Starmer who was faced with the choice of allowing a second by-election and Tory-style leadership turmoil or looking like a petty, controlling dick. I mean, he *is* a petty and controlling dick, but it's rude to showcase it quite so thoroughly.

What limited polling there currently is seems to suggest that it's a three-way bunfight between Greens, Labour, and Reform (in that order, but with a cigarette paper between them). Feels like Burnham's given a gift to the Greens by souring local leftist opinions on the Labour leadership even further and there might be a fair few who would vote Labour who'll lend their votes to the Greens in protest at Starmer. Hopefully it'll be enough to hold off Reform, cause that'd be the worst case scenario.

Puja

An ambitious, opportunist centre-right dick against an ambitious, opportunist centre-right dick (pretending to be more left wing). They're welcome to each other. Hope it brings Starmer closer to stepping down but Burnham doesn't get his seat in time.

It's a gift to the Greens and Reform. Will Polanski run for the seat himself?

Polanski's already said he won't - the local Greens select their own candidates democratically without interference from the main party. Revolutionary idea.

Besides, he lives in Hackney and is a member of the London Assembly, so it'd be a striking change of moral direction to try and parachute himself into a seat across the country just because it's a good chance to win. More of a Farage move that.

I suspect that Polanski is eyeing up the idea of running against Starmer himself in Holborn & St Pancras. Bit more of a gamble, but I believe both Hackney seats are currently occupied by fellow socialist travellers, current polling suggests that the Greens are on course to take Holborn (although you'd imagine Labour will pour everything in come the election), and it would be both symbolic and highly entertaining. Plus Polanski's on record saying he'd only work with Labour if Starmer wasn't in charge, so it'd be a neat way of forcing a change in leadership.

Puja

I don't think it would be unreasonable for the popular, non-MP Green leader to stand in any by-election that came up. And the local Greens choosing their candidate doesn't preclude him from offering himself to them to be that candidate. However, it would be a risky move and even if he won would get him bogged down with basic MP work, taking him away from his campaigning to some extent. So I can see why he might not want to do it.

Son of Mathonwy wrote: ↑Mon Jan 26, 2026 9:22 am

Puja wrote: ↑Mon Jan 26, 2026 9:07 am

Son of Mathonwy wrote: ↑Mon Jan 26, 2026 8:49 am
An ambitious, opportunist centre-right dick against an ambitious, opportunist centre-right dick (pretending to be more left wing). They're welcome to each other. Hope it brings Starmer closer to stepping down but Burnham doesn't get his seat in time.

It's a gift to the Greens and Reform. Will Polanski run for the seat himself?

Polanski's already said he won't - the local Greens select their own candidates democratically without interference from the main party. Revolutionary idea.

Besides, he lives in Hackney and is a member of the London Assembly, so it'd be a striking change of moral direction to try and parachute himself into a seat across the country just because it's a good chance to win. More of a Farage move that.

I suspect that Polanski is eyeing up the idea of running against Starmer himself in Holborn & St Pancras. Bit more of a gamble, but I believe both Hackney seats are currently occupied by fellow socialist travellers, current polling suggests that the Greens are on course to take Holborn (although you'd imagine Labour will pour everything in come the election), and it would be both symbolic and highly entertaining. Plus Polanski's on record saying he'd only work with Labour if Starmer wasn't in charge, so it'd be a neat way of forcing a change in leadership.

Puja

I don't think it would be unreasonable for the popular, non-MP Green leader to stand in any by-election that came up. And the local Greens choosing their candidate doesn't preclude him from offering himself to them to be that candidate. However, it would be a risky move and even if he won would get him bogged down with basic MP work, taking him away from his campaigning to some extent. So I can see why he might not want to do it.

Surely an MP should be a local person in a position to serve their constituency? That's the point of the current system, is it not? Even Farage pretended like he lived in Clacton before he stood there.

Puja

Puja wrote: ↑Mon Jan 26, 2026 10:13 am Surely an MP should be a local person in a position to serve their constituency? That's the point of the current system, is it not? Even Farage pretended like he lived in Clacton before he stood there.

Did he?
I though he (very begrudgingly) pretended to have a 2nd (6th) home there after a furore about him not being there after winning the seat?
Am I remembering wrongly?

Good policy from the government:

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2026/ ... 250-a-year

Which Tyler wrote: ↑Mon Jan 26, 2026 10:46 am

Puja wrote: ↑Mon Jan 26, 2026 10:13 am Surely an MP should be a local person in a position to serve their constituency? That's the point of the current system, is it not? Even Farage pretended like he lived in Clacton before he stood there.

Did he?
I though he (very begrudgingly) pretended to have a 2nd (6th) home there after a furore about him not being there after winning the seat?
Am I remembering wrongly?

He *officially* lives in Clacton, in his partner's house that she bought mortgage free with the money that she can totally explain how she got if anyone asks. It just so happens that he travels a lot.

Puja

Yeah, but even that was what? 6 months AFTER the election?

Which Tyler wrote: ↑Tue Jan 27, 2026 9:24 am Yeah, but even that was what? 6 months AFTER the election?

I believe the controversy over the funding was 6 months after. The actual "living" there came beforehand IIRC.

Puja

Purchased 11th of November 2024
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce845w70g0yo

Which Tyler wrote: ↑Tue Jan 27, 2026 9:34 am Purchased 11th of November 2024
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce845w70g0yo

I stand corrected. Still, it was seen as unusual and unacceptable for him not to be living in his constituency (or at least somewhere near it). Mind, as someone who grew up in the Clacton constituency, I can confirm that, even if he did spend any time in "his" house, Frinton-on-Sea is not really representative of most of his constituents' lives.

Puja

Son of Mathonwy wrote: ↑Tue Jan 27, 2026 8:59 am Good policy from the government:

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2026/ ... 250-a-year

That *is* good. Admittedly, it was in their manifesto and yet has taken the better part of 18 months to get done, which hasn't been great for people stuck on exploitative leasehold contracts in the meantime, but they have finally pulled the trigger. ETA. Although on closer inspection, what was in their manifesto was to "finally bring the feudal leasehold system to an end" and those plans have been watered down and delayed because wealthy freehold owners lobbied about having their free unearned money supply curtailed. Yaay for "Labour", the party of the "common" "people".

Puja

Puja wrote: ↑Tue Jan 27, 2026 10:03 am

Son of Mathonwy wrote: ↑Tue Jan 27, 2026 8:59 am Good policy from the government:

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2026/ ... 250-a-year

That *is* good. Admittedly, it was in their manifesto and yet has taken the better part of 18 months to get done, which hasn't been great for people stuck on exploitative leasehold contracts in the meantime, but they have finally pulled the trigger. ETA. Although on closer inspection, what was in their manifesto was to "finally bring the feudal leasehold system to an end" and those plans have been watered down and delayed because wealthy freehold owners lobbied about having their free unearned money supply curtailed. Yaay for "Labour", the party of the "common" "people".

Puja

It's amazing how these £hings get watered down £ £ £ what is it £hat these £obbyists say £hat is so persuasive £ £ £ ?

Braverman defecting to reform. A natural fit. In fact you'd be forgiven for thinking she'd defected a while ago.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... -reform-uk

Hope Farage keeps accepting these damaged goods. He's already taken so many Tory ex-ministers that his argument for being an outsider is flagging. The Tories were to blame but not these . . . ?

Too incompetent for the tories, and needed to be voted out
Competent enough to be the key and core of Reform, and need to be voted in

Wonder when the lettuce will defect...

Puja wrote: ↑Mon Jan 26, 2026 10:13 am

Son of Mathonwy wrote: ↑Mon Jan 26, 2026 9:22 am

Puja wrote: ↑Mon Jan 26, 2026 9:07 am

Polanski's already said he won't - the local Greens select their own candidates democratically without interference from the main party. Revolutionary idea.

Besides, he lives in Hackney and is a member of the London Assembly, so it'd be a striking change of moral direction to try and parachute himself into a seat across the country just because it's a good chance to win. More of a Farage move that.

I suspect that Polanski is eyeing up the idea of running against Starmer himself in Holborn & St Pancras. Bit more of a gamble, but I believe both Hackney seats are currently occupied by fellow socialist travellers, current polling suggests that the Greens are on course to take Holborn (although you'd imagine Labour will pour everything in come the election), and it would be both symbolic and highly entertaining. Plus Polanski's on record saying he'd only work with Labour if Starmer wasn't in charge, so it'd be a neat way of forcing a change in leadership.

Puja

I don't think it would be unreasonable for the popular, non-MP Green leader to stand in any by-election that came up. And the local Greens choosing their candidate doesn't preclude him from offering himself to them to be that candidate. However, it would be a risky move and even if he won would get him bogged down with basic MP work, taking him away from his campaigning to some extent. So I can see why he might not want to do it.

Surely an MP should be a local person in a position to serve their constituency? That's the point of the current system, is it not? Even Farage pretended like he lived in Clacton before he stood there.

Puja

Polanski was born and grew up in Manchester, so he has reasonable ties to the area.

But given the situation, if Polanski thought that it was important, as leader, to be an MP, I think it would be reasonable for him to stand in any by-election. Not ideal but he has to work within the system.

Which Tyler wrote: ↑Tue Jan 27, 2026 12:13 pm Too incompetent for the tories, and needed to be voted out
Competent enough to be the key and core of Reform, and need to be voted in

Wonder when the lettuce will defect...

Surely even Farage has standards? Bravermann comes with the advantage of being a sitting MP, whereas Truss has... name-recognition, I guess? Not the good kind, but we could try and stretch Wilde's law of publicity to its breaking point?

I would've thought Badenoch would be delighted. She's not got enough MPs to be wasteful of them, but getting rid of Jenrick and Bravermann removes two of the biggest trouble-makers and press-hounds and Rosindell (who I had to google) appears to be an utter shitehawk as well. Without her having to do much of anything, she's solidified her control over the party and can, if she chooses to, position the party more towards the centre ground and detoxify, rather than facing pressure to follow Reform rightwards.

Puja

Reform have nominated Matthew Goodwin, a GB News presenter and ex-academic, who was born and raised in St Albans and currently lives just outside of London, to stand in Gorton and Denton. A google tells me that he's known for fulminating on wokeness, immigration, and how terrible Islam is. It also tells me that he has previously opined that being born in Britain isn't enough to make someone British, Britain’s 'ruling class' is 'silencing debate about Islam in one of the most serious assaults on free speech and free expression Britain has ever seen', and that he mentioned 'grooming gangs'* and 'houses of multiple occupancy'** several times in his nomination announcement, which are well known anti-Islamic tropes.

It's certainly a bold choice for a seat that's 25% Muslim and 44% minority ethnic, but I suspect Reform's plan is about getting their base out - the people who are just as angry about wokeness as Goodwin is. It'll come down to turnout and the messages from other parties - if the Greens can engage enough people and get them a) excited about a candidate with a Manchester accent and a genuine interest in the constituency rather than his national ratings, and b) horrified at Fucko the Wannabe Fox News Presenter, then the numbers are definitely there to win, especially if the Lib Dems and Worker's Party can be persuaded to take one for the team. However, Reform appealing to their base (and I mean that both in the meanings of their core vote and of their lowest inclinations) will get them a good driving factor to get people to the polls.

Puja


* 'Grooming gangs' of course being what we have decided to call paedophile rings where the perpetrators are not white, despite that kind of delineation not really being of any value to anyone apart from racists.

** For those who don't speak fluent right-wing, an HMO is a property that has 5+ bedrooms where they can be rented out invididually, so a landlord can make money from 5 different tenancy agreements on the same property and tenants can share a place even if they don't want to be joint tenants. Used to be that people hated them because "bloody students" but nowadays, it's because this is a type of accomodation that is affordable to young poor people, meaning that you will often get the absolute horror of a house that contains 5-6 young black or Asian men, which is clearly a blight on the neighbourhood and probably an active hub for terrorism. Certainly grounds for pearls to be clutched.