Nigel! Farage!

Latest election map of the country, reform may get a few votes from the pricks but doubt they’ll see seats in parliament up here

https://bsky.app/profile/electionmaps.uk/post/3lokwthzzwk27

@somafunk god that's depressing 

It's also totally unrealistic. I remember pre-general election when there was talk of the Tories being down to a couple of dozen seats, that was never going to happen. Although the polls did correctly predict the Labour landslide victory.

I don't know what percentages the above seat prediction is based on but I can't see the Tories dropping below 19-20%

If there was a general election tomorrow it is quite likely that Reform would get the largest share of the vote, almost all recent opinion polls have put them in front, but Labour and the Tories won't be that far behind. 

Obviously absolutely anything is possible, including a LibDem or Green majority government, but it's fairly pointless to dwell on scenarios that won't occur.

Also - up to this point they were a largely theoretical concept of a political party. Now they are in charge of 10 (I think) councils. The **** up potential has increased massively. All those barely background checked elected representatives now in positions of responsibility to fall from grace from. And your average reform voter thinks a lot about the small stuff - like bin collections. All of which is in a local council remit to **** up.      

That's 19 seats short of a full house isn't it?

“The justifiable fury that is provoked when people use his statue as a platform for their protests speaks to the deep and enduring love that all decent British people have for Sir Winston.”

What a load of nonsense, I don't have a deep and enduring love for Winston Churchill. He was a racist who among other things was responsible for the needless deaths of 3 million people during the Bengal Famine, and a Tory.

He really does talk shite.

That confirms the quote, Ernie, you're French. 🙂 - unless you've got round to sorting out British nationality since the last time I nagged you about assuring your future in the UK. 😉

Churchill wasn't perfect but I think most us will forgive him his imperfections given his WWII leadership.

He's the best placed Brit in this list and I can't think of anyone I'd place above him.

https://www.thetoptens.com/leaders/important-leaders-history/

Edit: I just asked Madame Edukator the greatest Brit in History (she's got a doctorate in history), the response came back in seconds: Churchill.

That's an "interesting" list...

given his WWII leadership

What do you mean by leadership? He was prime minister, why does he need special credit for that? Great Britain and its Empire wouldn't have fought if it hadn't been for Winston Churchill?

she's got a doctorate in history

So that makes her opinion on who was the greatest Briton in history a fact?

The idea that Churchill was the greatest Briton in history is nonsense based on some sort of bizarre myth that Germany would have defeated Britain had it not been for him.

What about the Queen Mum, gawd bless her? She always had a smile for us during the Blitz. She said that she would never have been able to look Londoners in eye if she had vacated Buckingham Palace. She kept the nation's morale up during a critical time she did. If it hadn't been for her morale boosting smile we would probably have ended up hearing the sound of crunching jackboots down Whitehall.

Churchill wasn't perfect but I think most us will forgive him his imperfections given his WWII leadership.

A lot of working people had very little time for him, hence the 1945 landslide. There were plenty who were old enough to remember his actions during the general strike.

Posted by: ernielynch

↑

she's got a doctorate in history

So that makes her opinion on who was the greatest Briton in history a fact?

I'd rely on her opinion more than yours regarding his wartime record.

The idea that Churchill was the greatest Briton in history is nonsense based on some sort of bizarre myth that Germany would have defeated Britain had it not been for him.

Going further OT, that reminds me of a piece on psyche.co, it's about Hollywood's focus on the individual...

https://psyche.co/ideas/hollywoods-fixation-on-the-wrong-stories-wont-help-our-world

Posted by: ransos

↑

A lot of working people had very little time for him, hence the 1945 landslide.

Yeah when you read contemporary views on him in the 50-60s its very different from the Christ like figure he has been turned into now. I do think there is a reasonable claim about his wartime leadership being effective especially considering some of those who wanted to make a deal but nowadays I wouldnt be surprised if he was put forward as a saint of the C of E

Going back to Farage something I find odd is how one of their successful lines seems to be providing an alternative to the Labour/Tory duopoly and yet, when we look at their latest mp, we see the common pattern of them being a tory defector.

One of my local Tory councillors is defecting to Reform not because he's right wing but because he's pissed off about broken road signs.

https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/politics/5238110/fife-councillor-robin-lawson-reform/

some sort of bizarre myth that Germany would have defeated Britain had it not been for him.

Well lets face it, some of the royals were quite admirative of the Nazis and some politicians were very much into appeasement. Churchill did and excellent job of motivating the British population and driving the propaganda machine. Strategicaly he did pretty well too, from memory Greece had some unforeseen  (and unforeseeable) consequences but the overall allied strategy of which Churchill was a leading force got the result we all know. If you change the question to best PM as opposed to greatest Brit then I mentioned Attlee on the Starmer thread a couple of days ago, but Churchill was more than just a PM - he convinced a nation to save its arse.

There are very few facts in these rewriting history threads that STW is so good at, just more or less informed opinion. I asked a historian for a spontaneous repsonse and got one, I haven't claimed it as fact, just informed opinion. 

If you want to slag off the Axis powers leaders you'll have a much easier time of it than dissing the Allied leaders for fairly obvious reasons. Churchill did well and trying to deny that is not a very easy position to defend however much you distort what people say, put words into their mouths and diss the opinion of someone with a masters from Dijon and doctorate from Brighton, both on aspects of WWII history. 

Sometimes I find your contrary views interesting and well thought out, Ernie, here not so much - your "bizarre myth" has more than agrain of truth in it. Like him or not, without Churchill's leadership qualities most of us wouldn't have been born and if we had then we'd have lived in a very different world. Churchill, Stalin, Roosevelt and De Gaulle sat at the victory table and between them defined the world I(we) were born into and have thrived in.

Posted by: Phil_H

↑

One of my local Tory councillors is defecting to Reform not because he's right wing but because he's pissed off about broken road signs.

https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/politics/5238110/fife-councillor-robin-lawson-reform/

There’s quite a number of covid deniers, flat earthers, moon mission deniers and vaccine nut jobs up in fife, I say this as I used to know quite a crowd from there till I got pissed of with their tedious bullshit 

I'd rely on her opinion more than yours regarding his wartime record.

I have no idea what her opinion on Churchill's wartime record is, just that in her opinion he was greatest Briton in history.

So what was Churchill's wartime record?

Btw the King of England in 1066, didn't he have a more profound effect on British history than Churchill? Nigel Farage has just been elected to an institution which he helped to establish.

Or doesn't he count because he was an illegal immigrant....who arrived on a boat ?

If you look beyond jingoism and rose tinted views of giving the Hun a bloody nose, it's Isaac Newton, fact.

He developed the laws of motion, unifying physics and classical mechanics. He made huge contributions to optics and explained the colour spectrum. He explained gravitation, and then when challenged on why then planets had elliptical orbits had to develop calculus to work out the answer, a mathematical technique that unlocked theoretical understanding of other processes for centuries after. And then he turned 26 and started at Cambridge.....

So what was Churchill's wartime record?

LOL.

And if that was a serious question I think you'll find there's plenty of reading material on the subject. My father-in-law was a Pole who spent WWII on the run, joined the Brits in Italy and was demobbed in the UK but couldn't return to Poland as the soviets were killing returning Poles. He had book cases full of books on the war from various perspectives. If you're really interested you have years of reading material to wade through in  your local library.

The king of England in 1066 lost, there's a tapestry about it, not the kind of record that would qualify him for greatest Brit. I'm descended from one of the mob that beat him if my cousin's geaneology research is to be believed so kinda happy he was crap.

An interesting story about your polish father-in-law but I am struggling to see it provides much proof that Churchill was the greatest Briton in history. Personally I think they will still be talking about William Shakespeare and the Victorian era in a couple of centuries time but not so much about Winston Churchill, who was only half British anyway 

Good point about William 1st, officially I believe he was King of the English, not King of England. 

Btw if we are comparing war records my father was in the Free French.  I can't remember him ever saying anything positive about Churchill, or indeed any Tory, although he did respect General de Gaulle as a military leader.

In fact was Charles de Gaulle the greatest Frenchman in history

EDIT:

LOL.And if that was a serious question..

Sorry I should have been more specific. I didn't mean what did Churchill do during the War, I meant what was his wartime record as in how many enemy combatants did he capture or enemy aircraft he was responsible for shooting down, etc. After all it seems to me that many people credit Churchill with defeating Nazi Germany.

Personally I think Nazi Germany lost the war when they invaded the Sudetenlands, irrespective who the British prime minister was.

Personally I think Nazi Germany lost the war when they invaded the Sudetenlands, irrespective who the British prime minister was.

I think you could argue that the minute Hitler was made chancellor war was inevitable but I'm not sure that the outcome was also inevitable. There was an offer on the table for Britain to walk away with control of the empire but give Germany control of Europe and there were members of the British establishment that wanted to take that deal . Churchill for all his other faults saw Hitler for what he was and rallied the country, of course there was a lot more going on but to say any other prime minister would have been able to do the same just isn't true . He was the right man at the right time .

As for historians not caring in a 200 years I don't think that's true at all , world war 2 led on to the cold war , the fall of communism, the rise of Putin etc etc Even look at what is happening today in India , Britain unable to maintain its empire after the war drew a line on a map and 80 years later 2 nuclear powers are squaring up to each other . History is a chain of events and Churchill was a pretty big cog in a pretty big event.

To bring it slightly back to farage and his ilk I find it incredibly depressing when people like him use the war as a campaigning point because as far as I can see people like him have learned none of the lessons from it . 

Churchill for all his other faults saw Hitler for what he was and rallied the country, of course there was a lot more going on but to say any other prime minister would have been able to do the same just isn't true . 

How on earth can you say that..... have you got access to an alternative universe?

Are you seriously suggesting that only Churchill could have rallied the country after war on Germany had been declared?

And the idea that only Churchill saw Hitler for what he was is ridiculous. Great Britain was already at war with Germany when Churchill became Prime Minister.

Maybe Great Britain might not have defeated Germany quite so quickly with another Prime Minister, on the other hand maybe another Prime Minister might have done it quicker. It is impossible to know and not least because the UK Prime Minister alone had so little influence on the outcome of WW2, there were so many much more important aspects.

How on earth can you say that..... have you got access to an alternative universe?

Are you seriously suggesting that only Churchill could have rallied the country after war on Germany had been declared

Sorry , I could have written that better . I'm not saying that only Churchill could have done that but you seem to be saying that anyone could have done it and I don't think that's true . If you want to play alternative universe imagine what might have happened if Halifax became prime minister , the what ifs are endless .

And the idea that only Churchill saw Hitler for what he was is ridiculous. Great Britain was already at war with Germany when Churchill became Prime Minister.

Churchill saw Hitler for what he was long before the war started but he wasn't prime minister, another what if moment? 

Maybe Great Britain might not have defeated Germany quite so quickly with another Prime Minister, on the other hand maybe another Prime Minister might have done it quicker. It is impossible to know and not least because the UK Prime Minister alone had so little influence on the outcome of WW2, there were so many much more important aspects.

Great Britain didn't defeat the Nazis , the allies did . But I think it's a bit false to say the prime minister of the UK had little influence , as I wrote earlier he was a cog in a machine but as a far as cogs go he was a pretty big one . History and our understanding of it and interpretation of it is always changing but ultimately if Churchill had thrown the towel in when Britain was standing alone in the summer of 1940 then the 50 years after that would have looked very different.

For what it's worth I'm just an interested amateur when it comes to this stuff , no doctorate here 😁 

@ernie showing showing yet again that a total lack of knowledge on a subject is no bar to espousing an opinion about same. 

if Churchill had thrown the towel in when Britain was standing alone in the summer of 1940 then the 50 years after that would have looked very different.

Oh come on, Churchill's speech "The Few" was brilliant, probably the greatest speech anyone gave during WW2, but it didn't win the Battle of Britain. Churchill had been Prime Minister for two months when the Battle of Britain kicked off, he could not have had any material effect on its outcome.

Yes it was a morale booster but it didn't change the course of history anymore than the saturation bombing of German cities, which was supposed to destroy German morale, won the War.

Churchill was without doubt a brilliant speech writer (he wrote all his own speeches) and his delivery was exceptional, but it is daft to claim that made him the greatest Briton that ever lived or that he was responsible for changing the course of history, millions of people were. Churchill wasn't some sort of all-powerful dictator or war lord like Genghis Khan 

@ernie showing showing yet again that a total lack of knowledge on a subject is no bar to espousing an opinion about same

And you showing yet again how gullible you are in swallowing Tory mythical nonsense, whatever next.... how Margaret Thatcher put the "Great" back in Great Britain? I'm sure Nigel Farage and Keir Starmer would agree 🙂

Apart from the loser in 1066 I haven't seen another contender for greatest Brit from you, Ernie. There are plenty to choose from, go on, entertain us.

As for "Tory", when it mattered Churchill led a coalition government:

At 21:00 on 10 May, Chamberlain announced the change of prime minister over the BBC. Churchill's first act as prime minister was to ask Attlee and Greenwood to come and see him at Admiralty House. Next, he wrote to Chamberlain to thank him for his promised support. He then began to construct his coalition cabinet with the assistance of Attlee and Greenwood. Their conference went on into the early hours of Saturday and they reached a broad agreement on the composition of the new war cabinet, subject to Labour Party confirmation. Attlee and Greenwood were confident of securing this on Saturday after Churchill promised that more than a third of government positions would be offered to Labour members, including some of the key posts.^[13][14]

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c9343wnz9dpo

It featured a picture of Hitler looking at a map and was overlaid with the words "Why don't we invade them slowly? A few men at a time in small boats".

The accompanying text then read: "Let's be grateful this idea was never put to him... or the world as we know it would be a whole lot different."

Classy stuff !

And yet when you look at the photo of his face it looks so kind and full of compassion.

Posted by: moonsaballoon

↑

To bring it slightly back to farage and his ilk I find it incredibly depressing when people like him use the war as a campaigning point because as far as I can see people like him have learned none of the lessons from it . 

I think is the key point - and riding on Churchills coat tails while doing it. Great war time leader, dangerous racist nut job for other parts of his career.

Oh come on, Churchill's speech "The Few" was brilliant, probably the greatest speech anyone gave during WW2, but it didn't win the Battle of Britain. Churchill had been Prime Minister for two months when the Battle of Britain kicked off, he could not have had any material effect on its outcome.

But the battle of Britain wouldn't have happened if other members of the cabinet had been in charge because Britain would of effectively surrendered after Dunkirk . It happened because the British government decided to fight on , Churchill was prime minister so I'd say that he was fairly significant in that decision . 

Might I gently suggest that your personal politics might not necessarily be allowing you to judge Churchill entirely objectively.

I kind of get your point that the guys flying the spitfires and shooting the rifles were  more significant. The more recent studies of the battle of Britain basically say the Germans could never of won it for , as I understand it ,logistics. They didn't have the manpower or equipment to fully defeat the RAF , add into that some foolish decisions and they could never win . All that might be true but it still needed a load of 20 year old boys to climb into their aircraft and face death to actually win the battle and I find those pilots stories infinitely more interesting and engaging than Churchills but if you're talking about how the war was run I believe he was a very hands on leader , probably the modern term for it would be micro manager . 

Anyway , to bring it slightly back on topic it will be interesting to see how farage balances criticizing Starmer and sucking up to trump today.

It featured a picture of Hitler looking at a map and was overlaid with the words "Why don't we invade them slowly? A few men at a time in small boats"

I'd prefer one of Farage - "why don't we invade politics slowly - a few angry-looking racist thugs at a time, in populist bandwagons?"

Great war time leader, dangerous racist nut job for other parts of his career.

Exactly , apart from a few notable exceptions most people are a somethingion of good and bad . 

if other members of the cabinet had been in charge because Britain would of effectively surrendered after Dunkirk . 

You honestly believe that ? Britain was untouched and had an empire which spanned the world but you believe that had it not been for Churchill Britain would have surrendered after Dunkirk?

The Churchill myth marches on unabated!

Edit : Btw I had no idea that despite having a vast empire Brits were so unwilling to fight wars had it not been for Churchill 

You honestly believe that ? Britain was untouched and had an empire which spanned the world but you believe that had it not been for Churchill Britain would have surrendered after Dunkirk?

One last try 😁 Churchill was the prime minister of the government that decided to fight on . There were other cabinet members who could have ended up as prime minister who would of decided to choose peace after Britain and France were militarily defeated on the continent.Could another politician have lead the country in the way he did ? Possibly but I don't think that's a good enough reason to totally dismiss him in the way you seem to want to .

To put it another way would you say Neil Armstrong is insignificant to world history because if he hadn't of walked on the moon first some other bloke would of done it anyway ?

Posted by: moonsaballoon

↑

Anyway , to bring it slightly back on topic it will be interesting to see how farage balances criticizing Starmer and sucking up to trump today.

I think is a good point to try and bring this back on topic, rather than all of us reshaping history through our modern day blinkers.

that decided to fight on .

You really believe that the option whether or not to fight Nazi Germany after Dunkirk up for debate? Wow. I can understand why you put so much emphasis on Churchill now - Britain was ready to throw in the towel after Dunkirk had it not been for him.

Churchill WAS the Dunkirk Spirit !

What about the Queen Mum...... doesn't she get a look in?

You really believe that the option whether or not to fight Nazi Germany after Dunkirk up for debate?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1940_British_war_cabinet_crisis?wprov=sfla1

Okay let's put this one to bed, it's obvious that the Queen Mum with her morale-boosting winning smile [Rest In Peace Ma'am] isn't going to get a look in and it's all down to the grumpy bulldog geezer.

So any opinions concerning the delightful Joel Tetlow?

Are we surprised that Nigel Farage isn't doing more than slapping Tetlow's wrist for his cheap shot during a time when the nation is celebrating its historic victory over a hate-fuelled and bigoted regime?

https://news.sky.com/story/reform-wont-suspend-councillor-who-shared-hitler-meme-during-ve-day-commemorations-13363164

Enough Churchill already - can we please figure out between us how we expose Farage et al and somehow prevent the Trumpisation of the UK sometime in the next 4 years?

I ****ing despair looking at that map!

Posted by: Speeder

↑

Enough Churchill already - can we please figure out between us how we expose Farage et al and somehow prevent the Trumpisation of the UK sometime in the next 4 years?

I ****ing despair looking at that map!

Getting their failure to act on the meme posting councillor more widely publicised would be a start

Posted by: Steve

↑

Posted by: Speeder

↑

Enough Churchill already - can we please figure out between us how we expose Farage et al and somehow prevent the Trumpisation of the UK sometime in the next 4 years?

I ****ing despair looking at that map!

Getting their failure to act on the meme posting councillor more widely publicised would be a start

 

It'd do nothing. Reform supporters and the public in general don't care that someone posted a meme. If anything it weakens the case against Reform as it makes their critics look petty.

Nigel Farage is not popular with voters, he is very slightly less popular than Keir Starmer according than YouGov.

https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/52034-political-favourability-ratings-april-2025

Exposing Farage as an arsehole isn't going reduce support for Reform significantly, most voters know that he's one. Support for Reform is as much an act of desperation as anything else, a bit like support for Trump in the United States.

A more effective way to diminish support for Reform would be to offer real hope and a substantial alternative to austerity and more of the same. That would pull the rug from under Farage.

Instead Starmer offers voters no hope, according to his Health Secretary Wes Streeting no hope is better than false hope, and voters are not seeing the changes they desperately want to see.

Posted by: ernielynch

↑

Instead Starmer offers voters no hope, according to his Health Secretary Wes Streeting no hope is better than false hope, and voters are not seeing the changes they desperately want to see.

Unfortunately it appears to be Labour in all but name - I vote Gary Stevenson for President. Then we might see some actual change. 

I wonder what it is about Reform that attracts Hitler lovers & people like this -

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy0y0ny527wo

Why is there so often the Putin admiration as well?

"The established elite don't like a self-made man, a working class hero. Saville was one, Putin is another. So they make up horrible lies about them and let the media do the rest."

His photo in the Daily Mail has him looking like a lefty eco-warrior, nothing like the obviously upstanding and very presentable Joel Tetlow who is everyone's dream son-in-law.

So he doesn't quite tick all the boxes.

Unless there is a "misfit" box.

https://www.****/news/article-14572711/Reform-UK-suspend-local-election-candidate-revealed-praised-sex-predator-Jimmy-Savile-working-class-hero.html

I'm sure there was some discussions about Reform making no progress in Scotland.  I've no sense of the accuracy of the attached but it suggests otherwise 

https://www.holyrood.com/news/view,reform-to-become-scotlands-secondlargest-party-poll-suggests

^ I guess it’s apt and suitable timing that I’ve just asked a mate to print me a “reform are ****s” sticker for the car

Posted by: olddog

↑

I'm sure there was some discussions about Reform making no progress in Scotland.  I've no sense of the accuracy of the attached but it suggests otherwise 

https://www.holyrood.com/news/view,reform-to-become-scotlands-secondlargest-party-poll-suggests

Not so much a discussion more a case of one person claiming that Reform had made no advances in Scotland and that it was allegedly a uniquely English phenomen.

In terms of accuracy Survation actually have a fairly reasonable track record, certainly better than "I know because none of my mates...blah blah", and even if you take the margin of error into consideration it paints a very rosy picture north of the border for Nigel Farage.

I found this quite surprising :

Reform would move into second place as the main opposition party on 21 seats

The previous prediction I saw, very recently, suggested 12 seats for Reform in Holyrood. It is clear that the direction of travel is very much in Reform's favour. As it is in the rest of the UK where the last 14 national opinion polls have either put Reform in the lead or in tie first place.

The very latest opinion poll out today gives Reform a staggering 13% lead over Labour. Not only has Starmer's Labour Party failed to reverse growing support for Reform but Reform is simply getting stronger as disillusionment with the current government increases.

I'm impressed he's going for a Uk version of DOGE.

he's really looking at the dumpster fire of America 2025, and going "that's what we need".

Posted by: Olly

↑

I'm impressed he's going for a Uk version of DOGE.

he's really looking at the dumpster fire of America 2025, and going "that's what we need".

I think he should do much more of that, and make it clear what a clueless self serving grifter he is.

What is it about Reform that attracts Saville fans, Hitler fans and fans of not doing any actual work? 

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4g2qxr79gdo