All Episodes
Previous Next
July 3, 2024 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters
01:36:24
The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #950
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
it is not long now until the most exciting election of my lifetime is going to happen That's right, it is the zero-seat election, where we expect the Conservative Party to literally get zero seats.
And so we're going to be doing an all-night live stream.
We're going to have loads of great guests, we're going to have a prize giveaway, we're going to have exclusive merch, and if you would like to join us and send us video chats throughout the night, again we're going to be going all night for this, sign up to goldtieronloadseats.com using promo code
Zero seats for three months at 50% off and spread the word it's going to be amazing exclusively on lotuses.com and using rumble as the video player so remember folks Thursday the 4th of July 7 p.m lotuses.com you don't want to miss it Hello and welcome to the podcast of the Lotus Eaters, episode 950, on today, Wednesday the 3rd of July, 2024.
Eve of the election, ladies and gentlemen.
I am your host, Connor, joined by Josh and Harry.
We had such fun.
Hello!
We're each doing a hand signal.
I was doing the zero seat thing, which also looks a bit incriminating.
And I was making a phone call.
Fantastic, I was about to say.
To Rishi Sunak, telling him it's over.
I have to return some videotapes.
It's alright, make your application to be a delivery driver by the morning.
We had such fun with this line-up last time, we thought we'd do it again.
Today we're going to be discussing how the UK's general election coverage has been dreadful, why Nigel Farage should just become the man the left fears he is, and how the deep state is apparently real and that's a good thing.
I'm glad we've caught up to that.
Yes.
Before we begin, we've got a couple of announcements.
First of all, those who are asking about Ireland and magazine copies, because we've had lots of people get in touch, we are pleased to announce that we have sent all the copies to the dispatcher and they should be delivered to you around the end of the week.
God willing, your particular postal service and how third world your country is, if it's Royal Mail, might be in three months.
Sorry, not our fault, but hopefully should get them on Friday-ish.
And then the election stream is obviously tomorrow, 7pm, both on the website and on Rumble.
You'll be able to send in super chats.
We'll look at our comments.
Harry's boasting about his new mug.
He decided- You weren't supposed to draw explicit attention to it.
No, I wasn't supposed to draw explicit attention to it, but it's very distracting if you keep making very satisfactory noises in my large ears.
You child.
They do pick up everything.
Yeah, I've currently got Channel 4 getting- Connor can hear from at least three streets away.
Quite, yes.
And also, today at three o'clock, obviously, Thomson Talks as per usual.
I've got Paul Morland coming in talking about demographic collapse and We're going to touch a little bit on which election party platform has the best family policy, etc.
So it should be good fun!
So if you aren't subscribed to LotusSeats.com, as little as £5 a month, you'll be able to watch it live and hopefully you can take some questions, but... Oh, code, yeah.
Oh yes, you're right.
Yeah, thank you, Samson.
Reminder, code ZeroSeats.
As you just heard from Carl, if you sign up for Gold Tier, it's 50% off the first three months and you can send us video comments for during the election stream.
But all those Nice that he's out the way.
Josh, take it away.
Well, before I actually start my segment, make sure to do soy faces in the chat for Harry's mug.
This is a momentous occasion.
He's got it especially for the election stream tomorrow, so make sure to tune in.
Absolutely.
So yes, obviously Election coverage more generally in the 21st century is terrible.
Why is this news Josh?
Well let me tell you, I'm going to tell you exactly how it's terrible and why it's terrible which is slightly different than normal because of course we've had Nigel Farage in the UK and he's not exactly a favourite of the establishment.
Normally we have very establishment candidates and therefore the coverage isn't as egregious as it normally is and it has been very bad to say the least and Yes.
The first thing is this.
Nigel Farage to boycott BBC over biased Question Time audience.
And I watched this Question Time.
I don't know whether you guys did.
I did.
I also covered a sort of... I did a compilation of all the questions that were asked in order and played some of them on Monday's segment.
I did see that, yeah.
It was appalling.
I actually hate politics.
Alright, well...
Thanks for coming in, Harry.
It's interested in you, however.
Sadly, yes.
But yes, to Conor at least.
I am a Westminster addict, yes.
This was pretty egregious.
I remember watching the Green Party guy and he had all of the charisma of a wet towel and they were giving him softball questions, like the most controversial one was, I like your sentiment but how are you going to pay for this?
And that was the most cutting question to the Green Party, party of Islamists, eco-zealots and socialism, and they're like, well... On that, Fiona Bruce did bring up that 20 candidates had been highlighted by the Times for quote-unquote anti-Semitic comments, one of them saying we should sink any Royal Navy vessels that seeks to be in Israeli waters, if they seek to aid them.
Curiously, no pressure on them to deselect said candidates.
And much more polite about those particular remarks than when she interjected and read off with a very emotional register saying, I can't believe I'm having to say this, almost breaking down in tears.
Various edgy jokes put forward by reform candidates.
Yeah.
The notion of sinking Royal Navy vessels with, you know, staffed by potentially hundreds of our lads.
Oh, that's fine.
Yeah, it is treasonous.
And of course, they're treated with kid gloves.
The media didn't pick up on any of that, really, did they?
You didn't see Green Party candidates, their faces and names and headlines in the BBC.
There was none of that.
And of course, this isn't necessarily a surprise.
Of course, the right gets unfair treatments.
That is the political climate that we exist in now.
But it was on display for everyone, and I think it being juxtaposed in one programme where you have the Green Party, the far left of British politics, against Reform, which are the centre-right basically.
And the centre-right party technically the less extreme one in sort of objective political theory terms is the one that gets given a hard time and the questions sounded like they were asked by a bunch of labour activists and in fact Farage does explain that he recognised some of the people in the audience which we'll go on to talk about later but this has been going on for a very long time with Farage so we know that it's not just a mistake because even what nine years ago He was on the BBC and there was a very left-wing audience.
It's been a known thing to happen and it does influence elections.
It is important because if you stack the panel against a candidate in the way that it seems like the BBC did, then it makes it seem like the public consensus is against them, which for a lot of people who don't necessarily follow politics that closely, is actually quite important in determining how they vote.
Well, this is something media companies do all the time.
I can say back from my days in university, oftentimes, and this isn't necessarily question time because I went to Media City, but they filmed lots of on-stage production shows there, like Jeremy Kyle, for instance.
Most of the time, the audience wouldn't be sold out.
You'd have quite a few seats filled.
So they would just come over to the university and say, hey, does anybody want to come on later so that we've got a full crowd in the audience?
So while this isn't necessarily always going to be specifically selecting for left-wing specifically, but university students are going to be massively over-indexing on being left-wing compared to normal people that you would get out on the street.
So if the BBC is actively selecting people who are going to be left-wing or already industry insiders, I wouldn't be shocked.
I wouldn't also be shocked if they just Go to local media institutions and universities and say, we need some seats filled up, can you get some people in?
And they know the kind of people who are going to come around with that anyway.
So I do actually know how they select people for questions, because I've applied to be in the audience before and I got a ring and I just couldn't do it when I was asked, this was about two years ago.
But you put the application in when it's in your local area, they then call you, they then ask you your particular background and your availability, and they essentially screen you for your opinions, and then you write down a prospective question, They ask you about all your questions, because I've also had friends that have gone on and been in the audience, and then the directors will choose ahead of time who to have their questions asked.
So when Fiona Bruce points at the crowd and goes, this person, she's already been told sort of what order and who to select.
So the people that were in this audience being Palestinian activists who were supposedly running for a Never Stop Gaza party, but then didn't run and seemingly pocketed two grand, Questions to be answered there.
Or a BBC director who bragged about asking the first question, saying, Nigel Frod, why are you a racist and why is your party full of racists and aren't you a mean racist bad man?
Yeah.
Racist, racist, racist.
Yeah, deliberately set that up to happen.
Definitely.
If I got that question, I would just start flexing.
And I would say, oh, so you noticed.
Like Plato.
Your argument is invalid.
But Farage explained this BBC boycott and if you can humour a little clip, if I can find where the mouse has gone.
I think it's off.
I can, I can, I can click it while you turn the mouse on.
How does this technology work?
Right from the start of this campaign, the BBC had behaved like a political actor.
I remember the first interview I did on the Today programme, I came off there and thought, there's no point.
Literally no point.
No opportunity to talk about policy, about ideas.
But what happened on Friday with that Question Time audience was truly astonishing.
First question gets asked by a chap who has himself produced eight programmes for the BBC, including the very woke, now Doctor Who.
Right.
So he gets to ask a question.
That was terrible.
And the third question is asked by a chap who's a well-known street Palestinian campaigning activist.
I think question number seven or eight was asked by a girl who's a very active left-wing campaigner, which is perhaps fine.
The point I'm making is, a Question Time audience is supposed to be representative of the country as we go into the final week of the day.
You get the general idea of what he's trying to say there, don't you?
He felt like the questions asked were unfairly targeting him and all that needed to be done really was a couple of people who were pro-reform or at least not actively hostile to him saying, so what is your plan on immigration?
What effect do you think cutting taxes will Or something like that, asking them about their actual policies and not just saying you're a racist and you're responsible for Brexit.
And it's basically just wagging their finger.
Also, that was weird framing where they're saying you're responsible for Brexit even though it's the Conservative Party that carried it out.
Yeah, one guy asked, so what tax cuts do you benefit from since coming out of the EU?
And Farage was like, none.
Taxes are the highest since 1948 and I'm not the Prime Minister.
What are you talking about?
They're having a go at him like he's already in power, which is a bizarre way for the BBC to pick questions really, isn't it?
But of course the media picked up on this because they're not ones to miss out on a potential smear.
So here we have The National.
Nigel Farage refuses to appear on BBC after question time.
Humiliation.
Well, question time's reputation was humiliated, but not particularly Farage.
Yeah, and I quite liked this from the Telegraph actually.
Green shoots and Farage struggles to score as BBC Bias takes the trophy and she referred to the Green Party guy as a living tofu sculpture, Adrian Ramsey, which I thought was funny.
She mentions he had a gentle ride from the audience but reformly the Obviously didn't.
Went down curiously badly, which is interesting, isn't it?
Sort of suggesting, well actually maybe there was some tomfoolery, and this was more or less published the day after, wasn't it?
The actual thing went on.
So it was even before Farage had come out and said, listen, they've stitched me up.
So people who follow politics are able to spot this, it's not just me sort of plucking it out of thin air.
And it's been something that's been going on this entire election in fact.
If you look at the BBC's page where they have their corrections and clarifications, they have everything, you know, all BBC services, all the mistakes they make.
And it's interesting, like the 21st of June, I'm not even sure if it's, there we go, This is about reform.
They were using out-of-date survey data to basically check the claims of reform.
This was data before Farage announced his candidacy and therefore obviously that had a momentous shift in the popularity of reform.
And then you have down at the 9th of June.
I'm going to have to find it somewhere.
Some of them are a bit out of order, but most of them are to do with reform and Farage.
Here's the thing about Nigel Farage again.
It's because of BBC complaints.
So how the current system in the UK works is because everything's regulated by Ofcom.
you have to make an Ofcom complaint if there's bias against the program.
But for some reason, BBC being the state broadcaster, gets a special carve-out where you have to put in two BBC complaints, one as a viewer, one extra one if you're unhappy with the BBC's response to your complaint, and then a third one to Ofcom.
So it sort of tries to disadvantage people actually complaining about bias in the BBC.
And so people were complaining that Laura Koonsberg's show with Farage after the D-Day kerfuffle with Rishi Sunak, where she kept pressing him saying, but when you say Rishi Sunak doesn't get our culture, what do you mean Nigel?
Obviously trying to bait him into saying, because he's brown, rather than because he's a managerial technocrat who feels more at home in an airport than in Parliament.
So people complaining about bias on there.
I actually complained about the bias of the Question Time thing and immediately the stock answer I got back was Question Time takes a representative sample of the audience.
Well then why weren't there 20% reform supporters in the audience?
Because that's how they're currently polling.
Well yeah that's exactly it isn't it.
And then you go back to the 28th of May.
So this is all of the BBC surfaces and there we go Nigel Farage again.
This was a presenter and this is their direct words.
Our presenter said Mr Farage was using customary inflammatory language.
This did not meet the BBC's editorial standards for impartiality.
This is Guru Murphy's sister.
So you know Guru Murphy, the one who's on Channel 4 all the time?
Of course, yeah.
Yeah, this is his sister, the one who mistakenly put her middle finger up when she thought the camera wasn't rolling.
Cut away from one of Farage's speeches, like sort of CNN cutting away from Trump saying we're not going to dignify his speak about biased mainstream media, and she thought that was completely fine.
Because that's the climate of the BBC newsroom.
So much for impartiality.
They're not impartial, they're just cloaking their bias in the veneer of being objective.
Mm-hmm.
And then we even go back to the 16th of March and they have a retraction where they say we wrongly referred to Reform UK as Far Right.
This was a police apology, wasn't it?
Yeah, but the point being that the BBC covers a lot of stuff.
It's a very big organisation and the fact that lots of these complaints are all to do with reform and Nigel Farage doesn't necessarily suggest that, you know, people who support reform are just more likely to complain.
Because there are lots of people that complain about lots of things and sort of impropriety and that sort of thing.
That still goes on but the fact that there's a significant portion, disproportionate portion, of their coverage is complaining about unfairly positioning reform as being this thing that you should be concerned about is biasing the way that people may vote and it's not correct for a supposedly impartial institution now i don't agree that you can have impartiality because that's impossible you know everyone has biases because everyone has wants and needs because they're a human being
and the sooner we acknowledge that the better really my favorite thing about complaints about the bbc being a partial politically biased actor is that on the left you see similar complaints where they say that the bbc is somehow a far right organization because when it was around the 2019 elections they weren't being favorable towards jeremy corbyn and of course the bbc i believe spearheaded a lot of the investigations and exposés of jeremy corbyn's um anti-semitism uh
The thing that they seem to forget is not that by virtue of being against someone like Jeremy Corbyn, that makes them far right.
No, it makes them regime creatures.
That's what they are.
They're not for the far left.
They're not for the far right, if you want to consider Nigel Farage as that.
They're for the status quo bureaucracy as it exists right now.
And if they perceive either of those sides as being a threat, they'll lash out at them.
So I just find it funny that the left always manages to turn this thing around into, oh, no, the world, despite the fact that we get 99% of everything that we want in our social processes, My goodness.
What a shock, right?
revolutionary agenda.
Because we don't get that tiny little 1%, the entire world is far-right fascists rising against us.
You mean to say, Harry, that the state media favours the state?
My goodness.
What a shock, right?
What a shock.
So they've also done things like this, right?
Rivals attack Farage for saying the West provoked Ukrainian war.
This is things that, you know, as the the WikiLeaks leaks suggested that US diplomats were talking about in 2008, you know, behind closed doors lots of people have been saying that actually yes we did play a role in provoking it.
Obviously, you know, he wasn't letting Putin off the hook either.
He was saying I don't agree with him, I think he's a terrible man, blah blah blah blah blah.
But the BBC has turned it into something that is somehow extreme and terrible when actually it's quite common to say these things.
I will also say that alongside the immigration talk that Farage specifically has been talking about, and we'll get on to some of my complaints with how the reform campaign has been going over the past two weeks in your segment Connor, But alongside his talk of immigration, this was the, my other favourite thing that Farage has come out and said.
Because he seems to be, as far as I can tell, outside of the AFD, the only British or European politician that I can think of, name more in the comments if you can think of more.
George Galloway?
Who wants to, yeah he doesn't represent us though.
Who doesn't want to send me off to war to die in a ditch in Ukraine.
Quite.
Now, Richard Tice, he's quite like, "Maybe you could die a little bit in Ukraine." Nigel Farage seems to be the only one who's actually come out and said, "Maybe we should de-escalate this." So that one immense points from me.
No, no, I definitely agree with that.
So a reform candidate has pointed out the same thing as me, so it's not just me noticing Also people in reform have been like, the BBC's coverage in particular has been egregious.
I'm sort of running over time so I'm going to skip over that.
Another thing, even the Right of the Tory party of all things, and I'm sure Connor will be able to tell us a bit more about this, have been dragged through the mud by the BBC.
So this is Miriam Cates who was a trustee of a church up until 2018 and then they've run a story that that church is now offering conversion therapy but You know, she funded it in 2018 and it's doing something now.
That's a little bit of a stretch, to be honest.
It's just, conversion therapy, it's not Mike Pence strapping electrodes to your brain.
It's having conversations with people that might be confused about their gender or sexuality, which should be allowed, despite if you dispute its efficacy.
And also, Miriam has absolutely nothing to do with that.
The reason why they're trying to trot this out is because she was one of the very, very few decent conservative politicians who stood against her own party and said, "We're not doing conversion therapy, Pan.
You absolute nutcases who are in hock to mermaids and Stonewall under Boris Johnson's wife, Carrie." And so because she's been very effective, because she's flirted with our side of the aisle and she's a friend of the show, they really don't like her and would like to see Mm-hmm Yeah, and I'm not even convinced that conversion therapy really does anything I don't think you can stop being gay or all the inverse, you know, I think it's Pre-programmed.
So it's sort of a bizarre thing.
Who cares?
It's not like this church is going out and press-ganging hog-tying gay people into it and just showing them pictures of Penny Morton in a bikini, which for me would actually reinforce the homosexuality.
I don't get the appeal at all.
But it's not like they're doing some kind of clockwork orange therapy.
You mean you willingly went to an organization for a service?
And spoke to them?
My goodness.
This is dangerous.
That whole moral panic about it is completely blown out of proportion and completely ridiculous.
But she's tweeted about it, she's just saying I wasn't involved with this.
Anyway, back to knocking on doors.
So she didn't seem to take it too seriously which is, you know, probably the way to deal with it.
But one final thing that is not the BBC but I thought was amusing was this from The Guardian, always sane as ever.
Mansplaining UK election coverage marginalises women's concerns, study finds.
Yeah.
And on the topic of mansplaining the UK election I thought it'd be good to mention our election coverage because we're gonna have a lot of blokes talking about election things and there might even be a woman.
I don't want to confirm anything though but yes there is no balance.
So yes, Kyle did a video, you might have seen it on YouTube, announcing it.
There's some details in there and it's free to watch so if you are, you know, come to our website or you go to our Rumble channel you'll be able to watch the election stream in its entirety starting from 7pm British Summer Time and there'll also be Rumble Rants which were basically the equivalent of Super Chats if you're not familiar with them which we'll be reading out and There's also this.
So, we will have Dan with a green screen.
Leaning into his Jeremy Clarkson persona.
Yes, here he is.
And he'll have charts.
I might actually need him.
Sorry Dan, it's nothing personal.
But here you can see we have the best numbers, we've got some of the biggest numbers.
There's something essential for this, please.
I think we should just release the unedited green screen footage of him pointing at a green screen and you can all have some fun with that.
Oh, Samson's foreshadowing there, but we have graphics, we are moving up in the world, we have discovered the world of technology, and see we've even got a thermometer, a zero seat thermometer, to count how few seats the Conservatives will have, so obviously it's going to be very good.
It's also worth mentioning as well, Gold tier website subscribers get to submit video comments, and Remember the FAQ for these video comments.
It tells you what format you need to keep them to, you know, no longer than 30 seconds.
And I think my advice to, you know, the best chance you have of playing, because we do editorialize them, is that either questions for people specifically on the panel is very helpful or, you know, statements about what you think will happen.
Things to do with the election, generally speaking, or the people that are on covering it will be a good way of getting your comment heard.
So that is the way to go.
And also, if that's not enough, we also have the ability to sign up or upgrade to gold tier to receive 50% off for the first three months with the promo code zero seats.
All capital letters, no space.
So if you do want to submit comments, if you want to be a part of our election coverage at this historic moment, you can.
Karl looks really blazed in that image there.
I'm sorry, I had to point it out.
He's been spending some time with Dank, presumably.
But no, Carl's actually very excited about it.
Oh yeah!
And it's also worth mentioning as well, if you aren't able to tune in, there is an election party in London.
Here are the details.
Somewhere in London, the Water Rats.
It's only £5 and they'll be playing us in the bar on a live stream.
So if you want to go to a bar and watch Lotus Eaters and drink your sorrows away at Labour winning, you can do that.
I think it's 8pm till 1am and that's Maven, I think, sorting that out, friend of the show.
Good lad, shorter than you'd expect.
You're so mean.
Mogging our friend.
I love Maven, he's a great guy.
But he is quite short.
Also, I wanted to have a special thank you to Luna for sending us all of this stuff.
You've made her year.
She's made mine.
Look at all of this wonderful stuff.
So thank you to everyone who has sent us gifts to consume during the stream.
For us and our guests, this is going to be great.
I think the coffee and tea as well is going to keep us alive.
So that is very kind of you.
And, you know, you're all sweethearts.
I know it.
You might talk tough sometimes in the comments, but I know you've got soft hearts.
That's going to wind some people up, I imagine.
But also, we want to see your election party pictures as well.
So if you can send them to our social media account, I believe our social media manager will be here.
And, you know, we might be able to feature them in our stream if you're having a particularly good time with our stream featuring.
So we want to see it.
We want to make it an occasion.
We want to make it a good time.
Most people are probably working the next day, so they're not going to be able to do that.
But if you can, enjoy it.
But anyway, obviously.
Obviously, our coverage is better than the BBC's.
Our coverage is the best.
And make sure to watch it.
Right.
Excellent.
Uh oh.
What's happened?
Oh no.
Samson's coming to fight.
Oh, he's adjusting the camera angle.
It's Harry's.
It's Harry's posture.
It's because I shift.
You've become very erect suddenly.
You've become out of frame.
It's because I'm very shifty.
You are, yeah.
You said it, not me.
Shifty northerner, eh?
Ever since you got that new mug, no one can trust you.
It's part of my charm.
I've got good news.
You're no longer Dirty Harry.
That mug likes coming back into style.
Sorry.
I'm so lost.
Right, next tab up.
Fantastic, brilliant, right, okay.
Well, we're on the eve of the election and I think it's no secret around here that lots of people ever since Nigel Farage got back into the race have been putting their hopes in reformers.
If not winning the election, because that doesn't seem possible at all, forming a patriotic populist alternative party to continue assembling the plane as it flies in the next five years.
There have been some disappointing messaging recently, a bit schizophrenic in my opinion.
Quite a lot.
For me, sadly, they were doing really well and then it feels like Richard Tice reasserted himself and said, have you considered that our election tactics should be, we're not racist?
There is discord behind the scenes at Reform about that.
Oh, I'm sure.
Yes.
So I'm actually here to present that side, lambast them for it, and also hopefully provide a bit of reassurance that if you're still considering casting a Reform protest vote, because I wasn't until Nigel showed up, frankly, and now I'm still going to do it, even if some of the candors are not up to stuff, I think it's still fair because after the election, our guys are in and should be able to reform reform, so to speak.
Now, if you want to watch the election live, obviously head over to LotusEaters.com or our Rumble account and watch our zero seats stream with many guests.
I think we start at seven and end at about five in the morning.
Lord help us.
Maybe even later than that.
Depends if I'm still alive.
And if you want to send video comments and questions and predictions, you can sign up for 50% off your first three months, or you can even upgrade if you aren't currently a Gold tier subscriber, with the code ZEROSEATS.
All capitals, no spaces.
And we look forward to seeing you there.
So I thought I'd kick off with some of the polls to start off with.
So these are the final polls going into the election.
This is from Redfield and Wilton.
So the current numbers are Labour at 41%, Conservative at 22%, Reform at 16%, Lib Dems at 10%, Greens at 6% and then the other Celtic Nationalist Sectarian parties... knocked off.
The SNP don't care about Celts!
True, fair point, yes.
Well, they basically masquerade ethnic hatred of the English in progressive-minoritarian concerns.
Oh yeah, of course.
You hate the English?
Well, you best let in all the Indians.
Yeah, it's not even white people at the bottom.
It's the Scots and then the English.
Yeah, they go, do you know who else hates the English?
Pakistanis.
Don't you want more of them?
Yeah, but the last time I tried to make one a leader it didn't work out very well.
Anyway, so I put these into electoral calculus and this translates to the seat numbers as follows.
So there's going to be 468 Labour seats, 69 Conservative seats, 67 Lib Dem seats, 6 for Reform, including Clacton, that's Farage, and 3 for the Greens, so that'll be Brighton Hove, Bristol Central and wherever other Portland we have on this awful island.
So there's been more, of course, there's salvation.
Can we take this moment to just hammer home, as always, that first past the post is an absolute garbage voting mechanism.
Yes, despite your Americanism, I agree with you.
If this is how, you know, if they get a certain amount of votes and they only get, what, six seats out of it, it's pathetic.
Proportional representation though, and I am apathetic about the voting system either way, is that it forces you to create coalition governments that end up dragging you towards compromise and left-wing policies.
I mean we see the internal turmoil that Gert Wilders has recently experienced where he's only just been able to form a government as of yesterday despite winning, what was it, back in November?
The mandate.
So there are problems with both systems but I anticipate that on Sunday, by Sunday, there'll be a massive debate as to whether to scrap First Past the Post for proportional representation, because of the vote share reform we'll get, and command a certain amount of public consciousness.
So I think it'll be something that comes out ahead.
Anyway, so Survation have done their one right beforehand, and they're predicting 484 Labour seats, 64 Conservative seats, 61 Lib Dem seats, 10 seats for the SNP, 7 for Reform, and that's the number that Reform themselves think are probably most likely, 3 for Plaid Cymru and 3 for the Greens.
JLPartners has done one.
Again, Partnering with the Rest is Politics podcast.
Are you guys familiar with that by any chance?
That's Rory Stewart and Alastair Campbell's podcast.
Oh, I actually saw clips from that, yeah.
Yeah, unfortunately so.
So there's been some funny things going on with the JLP polls as soon as they partnered with the Rest is Politics.
They've consistently had reform lower than expected, so I wonder if there's something shaky going on there.
I covered that on my show last week, so...
Suspicions, but let's look at their polling numbers no matter what.
So this is going to be 442 Labour seats, 98 Conservative seats, so far from the zero that lots of people are hoping for, 63 for the Lib Dems, 6 for Reform and 3 for the Greens.
So it looks like Reform are going to get about 6 or 7 seats, unless there's this massive, unrepresented, upset demographic that hasn't yet been registered in the polls, which Nigel is suggesting, but we'll see.
They've been upsets before.
It is true.
I think probably their vote share is more spread out across the country than concentrated unless you're in Ashfield or Clacton.
That's why the Lib Dems, you know, who poll at sort of similar percentages as Reform, sometimes less, tend to be able to get a lot more projected seats because they have their support bases concentrated in certain areas.
Absolutely.
Now what's quite funny though is the Bookies are more bullish on Reform than the Conservatives.
So, this is from Betfred, and they set the markets as follows.
And Betfred have said, Reform UK have actually overtaken the Conservatives in the odds concerning who would be more likely to unseat Labour overall, even though they are consistently polling less than them.
What kind of information are these guys basing it off?
I think sometimes bookies will change their odds depending on how people are betting.
So it could be there are lots of Reform UK supporters being very optimistic and they're betting that they're going to win and that might shape the odds.
I don't know.
I don't necessarily know how they're calculated.
And also, this could be more representative.
Because Farage has essentially boasted that they're going to get more votes than the Conservatives.
And I don't think that's impossible.
And this could be more representative because polls, election polls, have two purposes.
They either register public sentiment, or they shape public sentiment.
This is what I think the JLP polls have been doing.
They've been trying to shape public sentiment towards Labour, away from reform, towards even the Conservatives for the sort of disaffected Tory voters that might break for Farage.
Well you said that the JLP were the ones that were partnered with Rory Stewart.
Well Rory Stewart, I've seen a clip that was played on UO last night where Rory Stewart, who has possibly the worst vocal physiognomy I've ever heard by the way, he was saying that if Tories have a complete wipeout then he wants to basically try and reform it with all of the One Nation Wets.
One Nation Wets again.
So he seems to want there to be some chance to make Tories even worse because he's going to take from this, clearly we weren't gay and left wing enough.
In The Guardian he did an interview where he said he's going to vote either Lib Dem, Green or Labour.
Well that just says it all, doesn't it?
The former Conservative leadership candidate in 2019 running against Boris Johnson is now saying he'll vote Green.
And JLP is actually headed up by the guy who ran his 2019 leadership candidacy.
So, shaky things there.
I think that there's something quite insidious going on there.
Because he has options to the left of reform.
Plenty of them.
That's where most of the party...
Most of the political spectrum is to the left of reform, so I don't know what he's complaining about.
Why do you need a more left-wing Conservatives when, you know, they'll just become the Green Party, won't they?
As if they weren't already.
It sounds like what he would be wanting to do is reform the Conservatives again with Cameronism on steroids.
Yes.
Cameronism is already why we're here.
Yeah, but it's unobstructed Cameronism, basically.
These people will never learn.
So, the Uniparty are getting desperate.
As I covered on Monday, there have been a bunch of smears against Farage, including the Channel 4 thing, including the BBC Question Time audience being absolutely packed out, as we recently covered.
I've got some updates on the stories there.
First on the Channel 4 sting involving Andrew Parker, the strange actor who decided to act like a Cockney gangster, this is a piece that's been written by Stephen Edgington.
He's done some digging and spoken to some people that were actually at Clacton in the constituency office and at the event at the time, and they've said that one reform source said about Parker and then two of the Channel 4 undercover filmers, who people are still trying to identify, That they were obsessed with Tommy Robinson, going up to random volunteers and trying to start a conversation about him.
No one took the bait and they were given short shrift.
When they weren't doing that, they were talking about George Floyd for some reason.
It was all a bit strange, and they told people they'd never done any political campaigning before, so I think people gave them the benefit of the doubt.
They're literally walking up to people like Oblivion NPCs and going, have you heard of the High Elves?
Like, how unnatural do you think that was?
And no wonder they couldn't get anyone to bite on camera and they had to resort to using Parker's exaggerated smears because, yeah, nobody around there thought that that was normal.
They must be on fentanyl to believe that they would fall for that.
So when Carl presented me the evidence for the actor plant last week, I found the evidence somewhat uninspiring and unconvincing.
I think you misheard that, frankly.
Because you didn't hear the two contrast images.
I did hear the contrast and I didn't find it to be that much of a contrast.
I don't think he sounded that posh when he wasn't talking in his active voice.
But what other evidence is there?
Because obviously Stephen has spoken to these people and they said that anybody who was anybody wasn't taking the bait from these two very obviously suspicious people.
So what else is there?
So he was more pronounced in the video where he was talking straight to camera versus the footage of him pretending to be a cockney gangster.
On his own website he says he usually plays mafia and villain types.
There's also another profile where he says he specialises in secret filming.
Those have all been deleted now.
There were multiple videos of him on TikTok playing that same racist Afghani character which have now all been deleted and he himself denied being an actor to the Telegraph when he was quoted and then people went and found his pages and then have since been deleted.
How come Hope Not Hate are obsessed with doxing Rorik Nationalists and Lomers, but they have this guy's information?
And it took random Antifa watch accounts on Twitter to find this out, but not all of the left-wing accounts that could have easily found that he's an actor and could have found he's a union member.
Why has no one gone after him yet on that side?
Okay, that all sounds far more convincing.
He was also a member of the Equity Union, if that's right, which, you know, equity, that's not exactly a soft word, is it?
It's just the sort of actor's union name, to be honest.
Is it really?
It's been that way since before, like, sort of 2020 and the Critical Race Theory.
Were they obviously very left-wing because they're an actor's union?
Of course.
Because I at first didn't think it would be completely out of the realm of possibility that there would be some right-wing actors out there who might decide to do some canvassing, but with all of that evidence there that you've said as well, yes, I'm more convinced now.
Also, he only showed up on that day.
Nobody knew him.
Oh, okay.
He hung around the constituency office and said, I've got a massive car, why don't you guys come with?
And it just so happens that the two Channel 4 filmers got straight in his car.
Oh, okay, alright.
Really, really weird.
So they've actually put complaints into, I think, the Electoral Commission, also to the police about it.
They're investigating the production company, because it could well be the production company lied and Channel 4 didn't know anything about this, but Channel 4 themselves.
They've said, we didn't know Parker was an actor, we just trusted these guys.
We'll see what comes out in the wash.
I will say from my own experience learning about journalism in university, they basically do tell you to be scumbags.
They tell you if you're going if you're trying to make a hit piece on somebody who's a legitimate person basically you make them you follow them with a camera once you've got permission for months make them think that you're their friend and then when they slip up you basically cut everything off you get the footage of them slipping up and you turn that into a big hit piece so it wouldn't be outside outside the realm of possibility at all for some scummy production company to just laugh This is what Channel 4 did in the early 2000s with their BNP hit piece on Mark Collett, if anyone remembers that.
They went around with Collett pretending to do a profile on him as a young BNP activist, and when he decided to say some obvious Nazi apologetics, they then confronted him with the footage and then he flipped.
But my point is, if they were able to get Collett just off the cuff saying that, but nobody except Andrew Parker, a professional actor, saying that, then it clearly shows that a Reform UK campaign is not subject to the kind of smears they've levelled at it.
Silly stuff.
So another one of the dirty tricks that's being alleged as well is, have you heard about all these defections that have been going on?
So there are two former Tories who went to Reform UK and are now defected again back to the Tories.
It's a double agent.
That's actually the allegation.
So, these candidates are Liam Booth Isherwood, who was the candidate in Earwash, and Georgie David, the candidate for West Ham and Becton, who have both said that the vast majority of their candidates are racist, misogynistic and bigoted, though apparently not the top leadership brass, which is a bit confusing.
Reform are currently alleging they were bribed to do this by CCHQ, and part of the evidence of this is that Farage, back in 2019, Steve Baker was part of this little cohort trying to do this, by the way, so he should definitely lose his seat.
Had offered Farage and other candidates, if they stood down when they were part of the Brexit party, peerages and Farage himself a knighthood, and he said, go stuff it, and then eventually stood down anyway without taking any of the offers because he wanted Boris winning Brexit to be done.
Major mistake, there you go.
Instantly these defections were plastered across the front page of the BBC with like these pre-prepared media statements.
It does smell a bit dodgy and so all of that's detailed in this interview here with Richard Tice that you can watch in your own time.
The reason I bring it up is to transition a little bit because Nobody on Reform's organic base, like we three chaps around the table, are bothered by these smears.
We're really not fussed by it.
We know the establishment media is going to play all these dirty tricks.
The defence against it is what we're concerned with.
Not the fact that you're pointing out that there's some obvious chicanery at play, but when Richard Tice comes out and starts saying, well we're the party of true diversity because both of our deputy leaders, Ben Habib, who I rather like by the way, is half pakistanis with an ethnic minority and david ball who also quite like is a gay man so don't worry we're a truly diverse party as soon as i hear diversity i think i just don't want to vote for that yeah don't play on their terms yeah
well that's what faraj has been doing the past week week and a half is that he's been defending himself but under the the terms and through the You don't need to do that.
If you're a genuine alternative, you don't need to justify yourself to the ideology of your opponents.
That's ridiculous.
That's a losing battle.
That's why We've been losing on the right for so long that's why all of the cultural institutions have been captured because of exactly that and it's really quite frustrating that our one hope of actually having meaningful political engagement in the system seems to be falling short yeah capitulating also i can speak from my own experience and then also speak to the experience that's been reported by people like morgoth himself i wasn't planning on voting
people like morgoth weren't planning on voting but then the reform manifesto came out and even old cynical morgoth said i don't know this is this is looking like a pretty good manifesto i I saw it and thought, oh my goodness, that looks good, and it drew me back in, and the reason that it did that is because it's a right-wing manifesto.
It's saying, deport the foreign criminals, put massive restrictions on immigration into the country, take away all the benefits to foreigners who aren't being productive in the country so that it's a soft way of encouraging them to leave, Increase the tax allowance on income to £20,000.
Scrap all net zero.
All of these very sensible, reasonable policies are what I want to hear because it's essentially a more positive vision for the future.
It's a good start.
From our own values, yes, it certainly is a good start.
What I don't want to hear is our one selling point is we're the actually diverse party.
We're the not racist party.
I don't care I actually do not care if the media calls you racist.
I care that you have a vision for the future of this country that benefits me, my people, and benefits my family, my friends, and it doesn't benefit the regime as it exists right now.
It doesn't benefit all of the mercenaries who come to this country to try and steal our taxes off us.
It doesn't benefit all of the people who have been trying to destroy and undermine our culture and history.
Likewise, and Farage, for a little bit of information on this, Farage himself redrafted the Reform Manifesto two days before publishing, and I've got a good source on that.
So he is the one that forwarded all of these ideas, and I will say there's some internal discord within the Reform camp because Farage is not really on board with this type of messaging.
The only time he's really trotted it out, and I'll mention this later, is this Zaya Yusuf chap who's been buying his way on stage.
The side that is very on on brand for the we're the diverse party look we aren't racist here's a brown man is tyson paul oakden the sort of vestige of managers being managers before farad stepped in and frankly look if you can have the courage of your convictions to acquit yourself to know no all of these smears are frankly defamatory and actually my constituency that i want to impress is not the media classes
It's left behind white working class people in places like Clacton or aspirational young men like you or I who have just done the right thing, saved up, want a wife and kids and just work hard and have a sense of national belonging.
Then you don't need to pander to minoritarian politics and have someone who's brown or someone who's gay or someone who's an immigrant and a Muslim stand up and say your opinions because it's like regime-endorsed armour plating.
They're never going to give you that armour plating.
They'd rather see you dead than win the election.
If you're, you know, important in reform, I think it's worth to bear in mind this turn of phrase.
If you fight a pig in the mud, you both get dirty and the pig enjoys it.
It's exactly that, right?
If you engage in this kind of politics, you're going to lose.
If you want some examples of this kind of politics, I have collated them here for you.
Oh dear.
Here's this infamous video.
Oh no, the cringe!
They've reposted it yesterday and they repost it to YouTube after all of the criticism.
This is just, sort of, really...
Ignorant boomerism.
I can't put it any other way.
It's being very pig-headed and not being responsive to the base, who, like us, would actually be megaphones for your message if you just stop pissing us off.
Well, it's Tories 2.0, and I don't want to destroy the Tories to have them replaced by Tories again.
Well, I like this.
Apparently, we're all racists.
Apparently, we're all bigots.
Apparently, we're all xenophobes.
Apparently, we're all far right.
Apparently, we hate foreigners or people with different coloured skin.
And yet... And yet...
I've had enough.
Make it end.
Make it stop.
Ben Habib being the first one on there, I can guarantee he doesn't like that.
Because Ben Habib is the one that's going on GB News saying the indigenous English population have been erased.
I think his mum was English.
So he has an ancestral tie to this place and is very deferential to the host population.
And so I don't think he likes being spoken about as if he's the token shield for any accusations of racism.
You can just hold up a picture of him and go, look, brown, brown!
Ben doesn't like that, so it's a bit demeaning to do that to your own deputies.
And then there's other schizophrenic messaging from, weirdly enough, the party that took in Lee Anderson when he was kicked out of the Tories for saying that Sadiq Khan's far too cosy to Islamists.
You know, something quite brave and bold and true to say.
So then endorse that, but then also celebrate things like this, which is just random African drumming.
Average reform voter right here.
Tommy Drucker fans, just... He brought them back.
He did mention this, actually.
I just, it's very odd.
Richard Tice, again, quote, retweeting this, fantastic.
No, it's not fantastic to see.
Look, frankly, if...
Polite House Guests would like to be fellow travellers in an enterprise to restore the greatness of Britain.
They're more than welcome as long as they defer to the host native population.
But it shouldn't be the tip of the spear that you say, look, brown people are validating us.
Because I don't judge my self-esteem or the validity of my policies based on if someone from Africa who arrived a couple of years ago says, yeah, all good, mate.
No, I don't, actually.
I just think what's good for me and my neighbourhood and my constituency and my congregation and my nation.
I don't need validation from ethnic and sexual minorities to feel good about my policies.
You shouldn't either.
And then there's another one.
This is a reformed candidate and I have to play the music.
They've just moved in.
These are all the removal bands.
Okay, that's enough of that. .
I mean, let's be honest.
This is inevitable with the way demographics are changing in this country.
The second that you become a multicultural, read, multi-ethnic society, electoral politics just becomes a game where you see who you can pander to.
Which ethnic group you can pander to.
Yeah, it's very frustrating.
And speaking of clientelism, we have this example.
And I drew a lot of criticism for this when I decided to quote retweet and say we need some cool heads here.
But this is from the show, Dan Wooten, saying how amazing Muslim entrepreneur Zia Yusuf's speech at this recent conference at Birmingham was.
Yusuf basically bought his way onto the stage and wanted a platform.
And he also recently was then immediately given a GB News spot as one of Michelle Dewberry's panellists, which is dubious.
As I said, more than welcome in the movement, financing the legitimate spokespeople who have already been there, but no, he's not a political rising star, and no, the people in white working class towns like Clacton, who see Farage as an avatar, considerate of their concerns, will not feel represented by a Muslim man.
I would not vote for this man.
Just as I wouldn't vote for Rishi Sunak for being a Hindu.
I don't feel represented by him.
I'm not going to do it.
And so Reformers are very foolish if they put this guy up as, as has now been suggested within the space of a week, a successor to Nigel Farage after 2029.
This is a very stupid idea.
Are they mad?
No, genuinely.
This is an internal conversation.
This is a stupid idea and you will hemorrhage support for it.
Have you considered deport the English?
This is going to happen.
Deport me to Australia for free.
Oh no!
Okay, so they're not going to win over the Anglo-Saxons with this.
That's the core constituency that Farage is going for with his country gent slash...
pub going football fan get up which is authentic so who instead could they win over well this is encouraging here's a jlp poll that i found quite interesting reformer in second place with 16 to 17 year olds and joint first with men huh now that whole there is a zoomer uprising thing going on that i've been predicting for quite a few months now that you've documented over on european continent Yes, yes.
AFD was massively popular with German youths, as is Jordan Badala in France.
Over here, as Farage has been predicting because he's doing good numbers on TikTok, turns out that young men really like Farage.
Aaron Bastani did some investigative journalism, and I have to play this clip, and credit to Aaron for giving them a really fair shake here.
Anyone that criticised him for this interview is, I think, needlessly silly.
Why do young men like fraud so much?
Is it that they've been manipulated by Russian bots, or is it that they just notice patterns?
So I'm just going to play this quick clip here.
England's England.
And sometimes I don't even want to be here.
Why's that?
Well, it's getting worse.
Foreigners.
You look around, there's a foreigner.
No more England?
Might as well name it something else.
Hell.
Hell?
Why Hell?
There's too many foreigners.
Get that man on the show.
What's that?
What does that mean?
Giants?
Flag of the regime in the background there.
Homeless English people.
Not getting housed.
But you have immigrants.
They're illegal and they get housed.
It's a joke.
So just illegal, you're saying just illegal?
But legal, I'm just asking about legal migrants.
Even if they're legal immigrants, they still shouldn't be put over English people.
No.
We spend too much tax money on immigrants.
And I think that's a joke.
And we should worry about our own people before others.
Do you think the political class generally are doing that then?
No.
I think the Conservative Party is an absolute joke and young people in this country don't have a voice and it makes me sick.
Mandem's got a point, yeah.
If you could vote, lads, who would you vote for?
You'd vote for Reform UK, probably.
That's the one.
Reform, yes, mate.
Yes.
Get rid of that.
Rishi Sunner.
Prime Minister.
Get rid of him.
Water mug.
Yes.
So the media would say that people that vote Reform UK are older, boomers, racists.
It's Reform UK, though.
Hold on one sec.
But we've got a young guy, mixed heritage, who's saying Reform UK.
So what are those people wrong about?
What attracts you to Reform UK?
Reform UK is that if you're an actual English citizen, you actually have a voice in what happens in this country.
But then with a conservative party, we don't ever get a voice.
Conservatives are just rich people doing what they want to make the most money that they can, which has always been for ages.
But Reform UK, actual working class English people have a voice in what happens in the country.
So, I don't understand then why, I mean of course I do because Richard Tyres wants to be respected by the Westminster and the party circuit, if you're winning over young Englishmen with the message of, hey young Englishmen, I'm actually attentive to your concerns, why you would then go, you know who we really need to win over?
Random migrants who aren't going to vote for us anyway.
Yeah, I still find it interesting that there was a mixed race kid show up there and support reform because, again, it's startling to me to see people of mixed heritage who identify more with the English side of their heritage.
That's actually quite rare to see, but fair play to the kid.
Just get your hands out of your pants, alright?
Conduct yourself with some manners.
It's a question of belonging.
And that kid clearly sees his local area as his home.
He sees England as his home.
He has an ancestral connection to the place.
So rather than pandering to a migrant class of transient anywheres, as the Conservative and Labour Party want to do, why don't you just hone in on the particular constituency that see themselves as inextricable to England?
As, frankly, Ben Habib does, which is why it's kind of insulting you're just using him as, here's our token brown.
That's not good.
One thing I will ask, you pointed out the age demographics before.
I'm interested, among 16 to 17 year olds, what's the ethnic breakdown of that?
Much more diverse.
Well yeah, that's the thing that I'm thinking is much more diverse, which is probably why it's still slanted so heavily towards Labour.
Because I saw Jess Gill posting earlier that about one third of all children born in the UK at the moment are of foreign background, are born to immigrant mothers.
So I wouldn't be surprised if the 16 to 17 year olds are that same way.
Which means that in all likelihood that 23% of 16-70 year olds looking for reform, who are polling for them, are probably overwhelmingly white.
That, and also there might be a bit of crossover considering the Tate brothers keep responding underneath Farage's post.
Yes.
Yes.
Oh, I think it's probably also the TikTok campaigns that I was talking about last week.
I showed a bit of this last week as well, and these two girls here, they say that they're going to be voting, or at least everybody they know is voting Reform, and he asks them how have they found all of this information out, where are they getting this from, and they say, oh yeah, they're getting it on TikTok.
Yeah, but the thing is they're noticing it in the street.
So that's the guy on the bike.
They're just seeing their local area being flooded by milling foreigners.
Yeah, hell is too many foreigners.
I want that on the t-shirt.
Looking that up online and immediately finding Farage, as I put on the caption on this clip.
So you're getting these people flow to you because of your organic message.
So why change the message to suddenly go, we're not racist, look, here are brown people.
Terrible, terrible idea.
I mean, just before, because I understand we're running out of time, just before we wrap up, so Alison Pearson went down to Clacton and interviewed Farage on, obviously, the eve of the election, and she spoke to a guy, 18-year-old guy called Sam, who lives in Clacton, and he's learning to be a carpenter, and he's got a girlfriend, and doing the right thing, and he said the reason he's voting for Farage, because his granddad, who was 98, died a week ago, spoke often about the Lancaster bombers during the war.
He went Served with the Lancaster Bombers.
And he said, he talked about the time that this country pulled together and I think we've lost that.
So obviously Farage being deferential to the D-Day service rather than Rishi Sunak has incentivised him to vote for reform.
And when she asked him, what do you think of Sunak?
And this is very telling.
He just went, twat.
What do you think of Sarma?
Twat.
Who will make the Wokies even worse.
These people talk about gender at school.
We got it the whole time.
Me and my mates, we hate it.
Shut up.
I don't tell anyone what I do in bed with my girlfriend.
Why do we have to hear what they do?
It's just not normal.
And so they said, OK, well, why do you like Nigel then?
He just went, because he's not afraid.
That is the man that you should be seeking to win over.
That is the man whose message yours is resonating with, rather than, oh, we need infinite legions of people that have arrived here yesterday and don't have a deep ancestral connection.
And you can tell this is working because conservatives are petrified, because in this interview, Farage was asked about, oh, what happens when you wipe out all the good conservatives like Jacob Rees-Mogg and Priti Patel and Kenny Badenock?
And Farage cut her off and just went, Uh, Badenoch is very unpleasant.
She, uh, Rocco Forte threw a party at Brown's Hotel, and I was looking forward to talking to her.
We had an unpleasant exchange, and Kemi was really aggressive, and she said, how dare you?
If you come back, you're gonna split the vote.
You've got to realize you're gonna let us down very, very badly.
Sorry, us.
He doesn't have a partition obligation to continue the treacherous party that is the Tories.
And Kemi seems to know this because in the Daily Express she lamented that voting reform risks losing hundreds of thousands of Tory MPs for a generation.
That's the point.
Yeah, that's the entire point.
You deserve to be punished.
But there are one or two good Tory MPs, as we mentioned, Miriam Cates or someone like Andrea Jekyns.
But the brand itself is contaminated by the exact types like Kemi Badenoch.
Kemi Badenoch is not your girl, no matter how many times this podcast has stumped for her.
The only good Tory is an unseated Tory, one might say.
So, we'll finish on the delusions.
Sunak is insisting that the hung parliament is within their grasp.
I don't think he's taken a look at any of the polls.
Madness.
Anytime soon.
And I don't think he believes this because he trotted out, of all people, Boris Johnson yesterday.
The man they actively deposed, the only one capable of winning a majority, has now been trotted out to stump for people in the party that he himself doesn't like and call everyone a Putin apologist.
Also possibly one of the most disgusting and despicable traitors despite his positive press image that he does have.
Sometimes when the press wants to be, wants to present him as a, oh he's just a plucky blum, bumbling patriot, no he's a disgusting individual who no one should ever have voted for, who has always had it in for the people of this country, who one of his biggest projects, as I covered recently, was the fact that he's always been plumping to try and get amnesty for illegal immigrants, at least in London, stretching out to the rest of the country.
And Calvin asked a fair question, why was I bringing that up at such a latent app?
It was because of the fact I knew at some point the Tories were going to trot him out to try and win votes.
Yes, so just to finish on that, don't remodel yourself in the vein of Boris Johnson, per Richard Tice's strange campaigning in Ukraine and saying we're the party of diversity.
It's Instead, look to those white working-class left-behind areas and those young lads who are stumbling across, on TikTok, Nigel's message and automatically resonating with it.
And if those in the Tory camps, like Suella Braverman, on the eve of the election, publishes a piece in the Telegraph saying, yeah, we lost and we deserve to lose, If your enemies are afraid and they think you're much further right or scarier a boogeyman than you actually are, then live up to that image that the enemies of yours have in their head.
Alright, I'll have to be a bit quick about this one, but first, to waste just a smidge of time, gotta point out, thanks for watching, Maven.
He sent me a message on Twitter of a short midget in a police outfit using a stepladder to slap a taller man.
So I'm glad that my comment resonated with you, although even with the stepladder, I question whether you could reach.
Them's fighting words, Harry.
Them is fighting words there.
So we've been talking a lot about British politics because we've got the election coming up over here.
But as you all know, there is another equally, if not more important election for the entire world coming up in November, that being the American election.
And I think it's interesting to note that after the debate last week, I think the debate is a watershed moment for one thing in particular, which is the question of the Deep State.
The deep state.
That thing that we're told over and over again is a far-right evil conspiracy theory.
But I think now the regime is kind of going to have to plump out and say, okay, yeah, there's a bit of a deep state going on.
They'll find euphemisms for it, they'll find different ways of wording it, but realistically nobody who watched the debate last week thinks that Joe Biden is actually in charge of anything.
He's not even in charge of his own bowel movements.
I was about to say that.
I got you got to it first.
And so everybody is going to have to say to themselves, well, who is in charge of America then?
Because you're supposed to think the executive is the last step on power.
He's the one who has ultimate decision making.
Joe Biden?
No.
No.
So who is?
Well, you're going to have to admit that at some point, OK, there's going to be a whole host of bureaucrats, heads of three-letter agencies and NGOs, and honestly, just a whole Blob of people that you've never even heard of, and you never will hear of, who are actually in control and making the decisions and pulling the levers of power.
And it's interesting because we are going to get more and more people admitting this, slyly or not, and basically, as far as I'm concerned, normalizing it.
Not in a way to try and hurt the regime, but to try and bolster it.
As we'll find out, basically advertise it in a way that, shouldn't you be grateful?
Shouldn't you be grateful that if you have a senile man shitting himself on television as the president, then aren't you glad that someone's in charge?
I can already sort of hear them in my head justifying what they're doing, just like, Are you not grateful for more checks and balances?
You know what democracy is like.
You can elect the wrong person.
Therefore, having a few people to keep the excesses in check is actually a good thing.
It keeps America stable and stops us causing problems.
Yes, but on the mention of the election just a reminder to everybody that we do have the election night stream again going out tomorrow starting at seven it's free to anybody on the website and you can also tune in on rumble so you don't have to be a member or anything although you should be or else i'm going to judge you because you're obviously too poor to afford a membership and if so maybe you should be not watching this and maybe you should be going and working and earning some money for yourself you damn layabout
Also, anybody who's ordered a copy of Islander, that should be at the end of this week printed and sent out, if I'm right there?
Yes.
If you are too poor to afford a membership, we also have a discount going on.
Yes, we do have a discount going on for all of you scroungers out there, which is code ZEROSEATS.
So jump on that as quickly as possible.
Interesting sales tactic.
Hey, shaming has worked plenty of times before.
If you neg the audience, they pay up.
This is what I have learned.
So, back to the Deep State, which totally doesn't exist according to the most reputable, trustworthy source ever, the one that all of your teachers in school tell you to use, Wikipedia, which says that according to an American political conspiracy theory, So not poisoning the well at all with that very first line.
The Deep State is a clandestine network of members of the federal government, especially within the FBI and CIA because they've always known to be upstanding organizations, working in conjunction with high-level financial and industrial entities and leaders to exercise power alongside or within the elected United States government.
Isn't there the Hunter Biden laptop story where wasn't it at least 30 senior members of... 51.
Was it 51?
I was going to say that but for some reason I thought it was fewer but around 50 if not more people in the intelligence agencies telling tech companies to preemptively censor this Russian disinformation story that turned out to be true in the lead up to an election.
No.
Well, surely that is in conjunction with high level... That's conjecture, that's misinformation, that's a Russian conspiracy.
Didn't they shoot JFK and throw out Nixon from office?
No, no, that's Russian misinformation.
Now Josh, I know that you may have spent many hours staring at those pictures of Hunter Biden's penis.
It haunts me.
When I close my eyes, I see its shadow.
But that doesn't mean there was any conspiracy.
The only thing the FBI was trying to do was save those pictures from being plastered all over everybody's Twitter feed.
So it was for the sake of prudence.
Can the CIA get them out of my head, please?
Lucky for you there was this incredible scheme called MKUltra which was totally above board and elected by the electorate and the voter base.
As far as I'm aware at least that's what the CIA does right?
They work with pure democratic mandate.
Yeah, didn't they spike random people with LSD?
So, you know, sounds good to me.
So obviously conspiracy.
It goes on to say here, the term deep state originated in the 1990s as a reference to an alleged longtime deep state in Turkey, but began to be used to refer to the American government as well.
Including during the Obama administration.
However, the theory reached mainstream recognition under the presidency of Donald Trump, who referenced an alleged deep state working against him and his administration's agenda.
Now remember this for a moment, because as ever with these kinds of evil and fake conspiracy theories, you can find a lot of evidence for them simply by scrolling past
The opening paragraphs of the Wikipedia page and see what it says here if you go down where of course Chuck Schumer says oh it's really really dumb he criticised the CIA but also you shouldn't criticise the CIA because quote let me tell you you take on the intelligence community they have six ways from Sunday at getting back from you because that's not an admission of anything at all.
That is undermining what he said almost immediately.
My favourite one though is if I find it down here.
Where is it?
Where is it?
Here we go.
In 2018 the New York Times published an enormous op-ed by Department of Homeland Security Chief of Staff Miles Taylor titled, I am part of the resistance inside the Trump administration.
Attributed at the time to a senior official in the Trump administration.
In the essay, Taylor was critical of President Trump and claimed that many of the senior officials in his own administration are working diligently from within to frustrate parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations.
So again, Wikipedia, conspiracy theory, maybe double check your own page for evidence of the conspiracy theory being real.
I mean this is straight from the horse's mouth, come on!
They just started saying it.
Yeah, they literally just started saying it.
Well, have you got any evidence for that?
Well, yes, here he is saying it himself.
Also, there's plenty of evidence of parallel things in the UK as well.
Of course.
Connor's interview with Liz Truss went over that.
What was it, the OBR projections?
The OBR and the Bank of England, as soon as she said she wanted The lower migration, they said they would essentially run a reputational blackmail exercise by publishing damning statistics saying the economy would take a hit and therefore lower our standing with world banks.
So you can't deviate from consensus policy, otherwise you will become the shortest sitting Prime Minister ever.
Hmm, all sounds above board to me.
What were you saying though, Josh?
I was just going to say that there are plenty of people in the civil service, and we've known this for some time, you know, it's a running joke in Yes Minister, that actually it's the people who aren't elected that are running the show.
And that's the whole premise of that show, which was long before modern times, you know?
Steven Edgerton keeps doing exposes for GB News about how all the civil service members are pumping loads of money into Pride initiatives while on workouts.
Well, there was a critic article that he wrote as well in the most recent issue where he was talking about that and actively naming names and saying, here is the name of a person who is actively trying to force this agenda and ideology onto his department underneath him.
We should fire him!
A pretty good suggestion if you ask me, but no, no such thing as a deep state.
And it's very amusing because if you look at this, this is quite a recent article from Foreign Affairs, June 10th, so obviously before the debate.
And this is what I'm going to talk about with the watershed moment.
There's the before Biden goes out and embarrasses himself again, even worse than before to the point where you can't deny it, even if he had a cold.
No, I've seen people on colds, they're not that bad.
And an after moment when it comes to talking about the deep state.
This is incredible, this is one of the worst articles I've ever read.
I'll read a few excerpts from it so you can see that this person, John D. Michaels, clearly didn't even proofread his own article saying that the deep state doesn't exist but if Donald Trump gets in he will build his own deep state.
So it's possible that one can exist within the American political system But it doesn't yet.
Unless Trump gets in and then the deep state is real.
Projection all round.
He would rely on loyalists within federal agencies to pursue an aggressive agenda which would include, among other things, authorizing the largest deportation program in US history based Purging supposed thugs and criminals from the justice system, based.
Policing women's sports to prevent transgender women from participating, based.
And censoring classroom instructions to ban certain kinds of lessons about race from US schools, also based.
So, he might actually, you know, implement the agenda that he would be elected into office of.
So, this is terrible, this is awful, and we in the civil service and people within the administration need to work to prevent that.
His plan, backed by a powerful network of right-wing lawyers and activists, Christopher Ruffo presumably, in line for senior appointments should Trump prevail in November, is not to obliterate federal regulatory and law enforcement agencies, but to colonize them, radicalize them, and weaponize them to do their commander-in-chief's bidding, which is implicitly saying that these organizations already hold a ridiculous amount of Yeah, isn't that what they're supposed to do anyway?
The president should command executive authority.
You think?
As the head of the executive, that's kind of the point.
It's also very different to our civil service because the civil service appointments aren't selected by the sitting administration.
The administration in America gets to cycle out any federal employee it likes.
They didn't do that the first time around, they were going to do that at Schedule F but it didn't work.
This time around, they have competent people.
And now there's also Project 2025, I believe, from the Heritage Foundation.
And other friendly organisations, including people that I have spoken to, and they are very on the ball with this.
They have our similar way of thinking.
Yes, but again, bear in mind the implication of that statement, and then it finishes the paragraph by saying, instead of eradicating a purported deep state, Trump is angling to create one.
That's a bit of a contradiction.
Hang on, how can you eradicate something that isn't there?
Question.
Here's, Josh, this is going to be your possibly favourite sentence from this entire thing.
Uh oh.
And it might cause you to have a brain bleed, so prepare yourself.
Had one of those, they're not very nice.
There are no state-owned utilities of consequence with the United States government, and with the notable but practically neolithic exception of the Civil War, the country has no culture or history of bureaucrats, military officers, or other government functionaries engaging in subversive, usurping, or otherwise anti-democratic projects.
It's so blatant!
The ATF would like a word.
It's such a bald-faced lie.
The cheek to write something like that is quite remarkable.
There are no dead kids in Waco.
The article starts by referencing Waco.
I mean, honestly.
But then... This should be used as like, this is the dictionary definition of gaslighting.
A very long... No it isn't.
Good job I picked up on that.
And then, like a few paragraphs later, the author says this.
In his first term, Trump achieved very little by way of shrinking the overall size of government, slowing the pace of regulation, or disciplining federal employees who don't tow the MAGA line.
Worse, those government officials whom Trump and his surrogates slurred and slandered as disloyal, including Anthony Fauci and Mark Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff, regularly outmaneuvered him while taking care not to show him up for the good of the nation.
So what they're saying is, so he did have people usurping him from below, he did have people working against his agenda who are permanent, to a degree, employees of the state, outside of the reach of a democratic mandate, except for what the executive can do to shift them around.
Are you serious?
How could you write this and then write that?
But then it does reveal some interesting information at the bottom, which I wasn't aware of, which further cements the point here, which is the Biden administration has recently promulgated a rule that protects career government workers from being reclassified as at-will employees, precisely to thwart Trump's plans to summarily dismiss tens, possibly hundreds of thousands of federal workers.
So they're trying to even more deeply cement themselves into the system.
You can use an executive order to get rid of that, and people will be on the watch for that.
But it is still an attempt to try and make these entrenched bureaucrats even more so than they already are.
And then it finishes, oh my God, I'll scroll all the way down to the bottom, and then after this incredible example of gaslighting.
This left-wing meme.
Yeah, you are.
All the text.
Oh dear God, how long does it go?
The election has already happened!
Here we go, it ends with this.
Time and time again, civil servants in the United States have proven themselves to be faithful, resourceful stewards to the American people and the laws passed in their name.
Incredible.
I mean, give it a round of applause, folks.
That is the worst thing I've ever read.
If by the American people they mean whoever walked across the border yesterday, then yeah.
This is so disjointed, so contradictory, so insane, I can only assume Joe Biden himself proofread it for the author and made some suggestions.
But that's the kind of discourse that was going on about the deep state prior to the debate.
Now what are we seeing?
Well, we're seeing articles like this in the New Statesman.
From Soram Amari, who you're aware of.
He's the owner of Compact Mag.
I believe that he is actually a Trump supporter, but he's a sort of left-wing economic Trump supporter.
I wouldn't be surprised.
He is a former neocon.
To be fair to him, he's a critic of David French, so that's something that we share in common.
Low bar.
It's true, but still, come on, Connor.
He says, Biden's performance should make us grateful for the deep state.
So it does exist, and that's a good thing.
Now, I checked his social media, and I noticed that he was responding to criticism of this headline by saying, oh, well, the article was written with tongue firmly in cheek.
And that might be true.
Whose cheeks?
The deep state's backs on you?
I'm not going to speculate.
Fair play.
Let's read a little bit of it and judge for ourselves whether this is really as damning an indictment of the deep state as you would want it to be if the whole thing is supposed to be a bit of a tongue-in-cheek ribbing of the three-letter agencies.
No, ribbing, Connor, ribbing.
The permanent bureaucracy, especially the national security apparatus, pursues its own long-term plans according to its own logic, even if this means frustrating the will of elected leaders.
But Thursday's night's US presidential debate raises the question, is that such a bad thing when the elected leader in question is an 81-year-old mired in the shadowy bogs of semi-senescence?
And yet, the Federal Leviathan moves despite all of this.
It manages the largest... Bear in mind as well, the previous article said it doesn't really own anything of consequence.
Well, he points out here, it manages the largest landholding in the United States, amounting to 640 million square miles or more than a quarter of the country's land area.
Overseas the world's biggest economy and prints the world's reserve currency.
Air Force offers the commander-in-chief sovereign options that would have been unthinkable to any emperor in the past.
It boasts 11 aircraft carriers.
It can execute mind-boggling logistical feats like launching civilian spacecraft beyond the solar system or arranging the movement of an entire armored division from bases in say Texas or Colorado to the Baltic states.
It can intercept basically any and all electronic communications which sounds a lot like Hefty amount of power for whoever is in charge of the agencies controlling that, correct?
And then he goes on to say, what we call the Biden presidency is actually a joint effort by a cohort of national security lawyers and military industrial types.
Think of Biden's national security advisor Jake Sullivan, though most of them are far less visible than he is.
I would also assume international banking and finance interests would have a lot to do with that as well, but that's just speculation on my part.
The security apparatus has come to anchor the consensus.
By consensus, of course, we mean the things that the security apparatus already wants to do.
Diminishing the influence of presidents and legislators, this probably isn't a healthy development for a democratic republic in the long term, especially because, try as they might, the aforementioned national security lawyers and military industrial types aren't close enough to mainstream Americans to give fuller effect to the popular will.
They don't care about the popular will.
Hence, for example, the Bidenites' self-destructive refusal to rethink open borders until it was too late.
The upside of the deep state capacity to do its own thing on a consensus autopilot, as it were, is that few of the liberals' worst fears are likely to come to pass as Trump smashes his way past a dazed Biden to become the head of the Leviathan.
Now, again, this is all supposed to be tongue-in-cheek,
But it still has quite a conciliatory air to me of yeah it exists and it is kind of useful and it still perpetuates a lot of the myths to do with the liberal democracy as it exists in America right now which is that it's existing on some kind of democratic consensus that's been handed to it by the electorate when we know for a fact the CIA, the FBI, the ATF,
All of these organizations work for their own goals, their own interests, and don't give a damn what you in the public think.
If they did, then again, they would rethink open borders.
And the very fact that this was published in a mainstream publication, like the New Statesman, suggests to me that we're going to get more and more of this kind of thing, tongue in cheek, At first, but more and more we're going to get talk of how the deep state is actually a benefit to you.
To normalise frustrating Trump's agenda?
Yes, basically.
Basically, if he gets in, and we've already seen how Europe, the EU is talking about how they can basically make themselves a bulwark against Russia if Trump gets in, and Trump pulls out of NATO, or at least Relinquishes some of the control of NATO that America has or just pulls out altogether.
And I've also seen in foreign policy, I've mentioned this recently, they were talking about how they can Trump-proof the Ukraine agenda.
So, two very minor quick things on that.
they are already trying to put blocks in the way of trump in case he does get in and in case they're not able to butter him up the same way they were the last time and he actually tries to do something that his voters want him to do so two very minor quick things on that first off i did see reporting today that ukraine has been prevented from joining native until it cleans up its corruption problem so i think that's been put on hold for now two
i've heard from credible sources that trump's vp will be marco rubio not just because he can speak fluent spanish and trounce kamala harris in the telemundo debate but because he is on the house intelligence committee he's from an old florida dynasty near where the intelligence services are based and he can play nice with the deep state apparatus that frustrated trump from before and And this is why Trump helped co-author the Ukraine funding bill with Mike Johnson, and Mike Johnson, Speaker of the House, had said, well I wasn't going to fund them before, but I had a meeting with the FBI and I realised it was my duty.
So it seems there's going to be a sort of playing nice with Trump and the deep state, and this might be why Omari's written this piece actually.
Perhaps, but also, if this kind of thing becomes more and more common, that you're just going to throw out all semblance of the facade of democracy and just say, well, you're really ruled by a bunch of unelected bureaucrats.
I think within maybe the next 10 to 15 years, we might just see the point where our democracy is no longer even pointed to.
And it's just, you throw away all of the fake shit.
You throw away all of the nonsense to do with elections and just say, yep, we rule you, get over it, essentially.
So that's my prediction.
With that, onto the video comments.
No one on yesterday's episode gave this potential explanation on why the media turned on Biden and said that he sucked in the debate.
I think the media knows that Trump is very likely to win.
While the media is extremely partisan all of the time, it is still a semi-separate institution from the Dem Party, and they need to have at least some ounces of perceived legitimacy to critique Trump in the future.
They just could not say that Biden was good at the debate, especially as polls show that even a majority of Senate watchers thought that Trump won.
I'd make you right on that prediction.
They can't layer a hyper-reality convincing enough atop that debate when Biden was basically falling asleep at the podium and is completely incoherent.
Before we play the next one, I think the remote is down by your feet, Harry.
We just need to turn the TV up a little bit on our end.
I think it's over- no, it's over there.
It's over here.
One moment, folks.
Don't panic.
He's not gone.
He still exists.
Yes, I'm wearing these.
He's just there.
Yes, I'm dressed like a Top Gear presenter.
I was thinking you look like Daniel Plainview at the minute from There Will Be Blood.
That might be it.
I'll take that actually.
On with the next one.
I too hate people.
Why do I have to look at this?
Are you serious?
Are you serious?
They just wanted equality, the same rights as you and me.
Every year they find a new way to push their degeneracy and fetishes, and honestly, I can't think of any way of pushing this any further without involving Nambler.
Put this in front of every goddamn left-wings and Pirate supporter you know, and get them to denounce this, and if they don't, remove them from your life.
They should be removed from your life anyway, it's just way easier.
Only have friends that fundamentally support your existential conception of where the world should be.
You can have minor disagreements, but if you have someone in your life who would genuinely imprison you for hate speech, what are you doing?
That's a good point.
Yeah, I mean, I have some friends that are left-wing that I've known since I was like a young kid, basically.
We don't necessarily agree on politics, but I know that they would oppose anything that would see me in prison.
I know they have my interests at heart.
That's what I'm saying.
That's what I'm saying.
And also, yeah, pride isn't about acceptance or equality.
It was always about abolishing your entitlement to judge them for being gross and to get positive affirmation from you because their own consciences are screaming at them.
Anyway, on with the next one.
I have a theory on how phases of liberalism have impacted British colonies.
Locke, with his emphasis of negative liberalism, and Rousseau's positive liberalism, were ascendant while the US and Canada were developing internationally.
We've seen this one before, but it's true.
However, due to French influence, Canada leant way more towards positive liberalism.
Later, Bentham arrived with his emphasis on utility, which he was willing to borrow from both.
This is when Australia was developing.
I think it definitely explains a lot about the characteristics of each former colony.
I think that's really interesting.
I think that's probably correct.
Yeah, we played this one the last time it was on the podcast.
Well, it's good to hear it again because it's true.
So there we go, Connor has heard it now as well.
Thank you, I agree.
By the way, if you want more on liberalism, Carl and I next Friday will be on Tim Pool's Culture War Show debating liberalism with someone.
And if you want to hear the correct opinions about liberalism, we did a series of debates.
Yeah, that's true, yeah.
Which I was also on.
That's true.
Anyway, on with the next one!
Fighting talk there.
Hello, Lotus Eaters!
I, like many others, have followed Carl since about ye olde meme war, and have been a Silver Tier member since day one.
Tomorrow and on the 4th, I'll be posting some things you in the audience should find interesting that I learned while researching for my American History-focused YouTube channel, Mid-Atlantic Chronicles.
Thank you, and Happy Independence Day for us all!
I mean, it's not really independence for us because we're going out of the frying pan and into the fire.
Servitude, Dave.
But thank you for the sentiment and good luck with the YouTube channel.
Yes, definitely.
On with the next one.
Just a very quick exercise to release any tension, headaches or migraines potentially brought on by the news.
Thank you very much for that, by the way.
Interlace your fingers.
Bring them behind your head.
Release your elbows down.
Release your head down.
Hold a couple of minutes.
There's no need for extra weight.
Just release after.
Gently bring your head back up.
Maybe shake it out.
See how you feel right now.
Isn't that what you're meant to do when a plane is crashing?
You go like that.
So your remains are recognisable.
I'm not joking.
I was expecting that it would be get down like that and then SCREAM!
My 4D chess theory is that Rue the Day being the Bo simp in chat is just hoping to see the delightful glean of the lights as soon as Bo were to lean his head forward.
She was hoping he was on the panel today.
I think she's hoping that one of us has a secret bald spot that we're hiding and wants us to reveal it to the camera.
Not quite yet.
But no, I appreciate that.
I mean, the thing giving me a headache at the minute is too thick, so... Can't really do any... Ooh!
Yeah, I know, my neck sucks.
I clicked your neck!
I know, that happens all the time.
Yeah, I've got two things in this room right now giving me a headache, but... Anyway, on to the next one!
Stelios's Pride segment on Monday has ultimately proven that this is the very slippery slope Of everything that the legitimizing gay rights has led to.
This is why I think Anita Bryant was wrongly vilified by the media and gay rights activists because she knew what would happen.
Was this the 80s?
The 70s.
It was a segment I did last year actually saying about how Owen Jones destroyed Boomer Truth because of course he posted a big thread about Anita Bryant and as always it revealed far too much entirely by accident.
Same time and message as Mary Whitehouse who has been utterly vindicated.
Boo.
Oh shut up you degenerate.
I've been trying to film video comments outside just to show the beautiful place I live right here in the middle of Jutland.
This is just where I live.
And I try to take long walks every single day because let me tell you, getting off antidepressant medication is work.
The withdrawals are long term and often delayed.
You have to eat right, you have to get up, you have to fight against your own relapse.
But it's going to be worth it.
I'm sure it will.
It will be worth it.
Good luck with it.
Absolutely hilarious.
Yeah, it looked very wholesome.
On to the next one!
A Gentleman's Observations of Swindon, Chapter 9.
In 1796, the Wilts and Barks Canal began construction, and in 1804 it reached Swindon.
It was completed in 1810 at 52 miles, and was constructed using perbex stone from Oakhurst Quarry.
In 1813, another Act of Parliament authorised the construction of the North Wilts Canal to connect the Wilts and Barks Canal with the Thames and Semine Canal, which was completed the following year.
This led to the creation of a reservoir at Cote in 1822, now known as Cotewater Country Park.
The canals fell out of use at the end of the 19th century, and they were abandoned and filled in in 1914.
Such a shame, isn't it?
All that work to create a man-made waterway as a means of travel, and we just fill them in as soon as they're not convenient.
We couldn't even beautify it and turn it into something useful for the natural world.
Just fill it with dirt.
I'd still happily pull up all of that tarmac that hides all of the lovely cobbled roads that we have in our towns.
And a massive duck pond.
Anyway, on with the next one.
A Gentleman's Observations of Swindon, Chapter 10.
In 1835, a railway project to connect London and Bristol was approved, and Isambard Kingdom Brunel was appointed as chief engineer.
Swindon was chosen as part of the route to make use of the canals for carrying coal and construction materials, and because Swindon was in line between the two destinations.
The railway station was built in 1842, and housing for the railway workers was constructed between 1841 and the mid-1860s, becoming known as the Railway Village.
The completion of the Great Western Railway made the canals obsolete and resulted in their eventual abandonment.
I hate the sight of that railway station, I've been there far too many times.
As do I, however, I'm sure it looked lovely when it was first built, but it has been slowly eroded over time.
Funny enough, Swindon has quite a few parallels with Crewe, and I was actually in there over the weekend and went to some houses that were built by the railway company when the town was first built.
And they're still in really great nick.
They're really lovely.
They're so much prettier to look at.
The interiors of them, very nice.
There's a little courtyard, so you've got communal space for everybody.
And I tell you, man, this country and some of these towns were so much better run when they were in the hands of the railway companies.
I would happily, if it was the same caliber of man as the railway moguls back in the late 19th century, I would happily hand over all of this country to the railway companies again.
They would do such a better job.
You do sound like Daniel Plainview, don't you?
The oil man.
Was he wrong?
Oh, okay.
The next one.
Only my fellow Devonian was intellectual enough to get my heresy of the parlour state of Italian food, and I see I must set you straight about a certain so-called conservative doomer.
Peter Hitchens is someone who speaks from high intellectual authority, but says things only a blithering idiot can maintain.
I really cannot emphasize enough the worth of reading Igor Shafarevich's analysis of the socialist phenomenon, when he observes that socialists are profoundly conservative, but in the worst way.
Hitchens never dropped his left-wing roots, and he can only whine about how he failed to change the world.
In fact, he's not a Conservative at all, but a Preservative, trapping us all in his aspic.
Yeah, you should watch mine and Harrison's interview with Matt Goodwin, who had the unfortunate pleasure of exchanging with Peter about the election last week, about how basically he is the Eeyore of the British Isles, pretending he's the owl.
That's true, yeah.
Go on then, what's this one?
Hello Lotus Eaters.
Orcs for Callum here, celebrating his return to gold tier membership status.
With promo code ZERO SEATS.
71% of Orcs are in favour of zero seats.
The other 29% want zero humies.
Hail Lord Canon!
Orcs!
Well, I've been a bit busy lately, and tomorrow, for obvious reasons, I'll still be busy.
But I still wish you guys to have a good stream, and I do hope the Tories get zero seats because that's what they deserve.
Other than that, happy birthday to America.
Yeah, enjoy Independence Day, and I hope you're recreating that because that looks amazing.
We can be very critical of the American government and regime as it exists, but if that's the true spirit of America, then god damn.
I think it might be.
God damn, I still love that.
It's certainly the spirit of Florida man.
Keep the fireworks going for Sunday when I'm out.
The American people are still good people.
I mean, when I say if I were to live anywhere outside of the British Isles, it would be America, that is high praise when I have such beautiful countries in Europe.
It's just that their governments suck.
Right, so we've probably got only a couple of minutes left, so we might as well go for it.
Do you want to do the ones at the top?
Sure.
So, just some of the general comments?
Oh yeah, I thought they were your segment, but yeah, go for it.
Good afternoon chaps.
Apologies in advance if this gets answered.
Will there still be a 1pm podcast tomorrow?
So not tomorrow and not Friday.
Because we will be way too tired.
We're going to be up all night.
Are you mental?
Yeah, I'm going for 7 to 5 and I'm going to want to die.
So no, sorry.
Also, there'll be no news.
Oh, North FC Zoomer says, back on with the lads lineup.
Gotta love it.
Yes.
We wanted to make it a regular fixture, so.
Shadowband with $50.
Thank you very much.
I've really appreciated your content.
Hoping we'll see something like Contemplations come back soon.
Also, zero seats.
So, I know that I want to do more sort of premium videos that are deep dives, that are a bit more educational, and I've been talking to Stelios because, you know, both of our series have ended, to try and work together to do something.
So, a bit of foreshadowing there, but there's something in the works where we've got some scheming and we'll give you some nourishing good stuff in the future.
Someone online says we're so proud of Harry for his new mug.
Thank you, it's a very nice mug.
I got it off Etsy.
I like your new mug.
We only had to bully him immensely to make him buy a new one.
I bought a new mug before that was an enormous Godfather mug from a charity shop that I thought was going to have a lagoon of coffee in it.
The first time I use it, it cracks straight down the middle and breaks.
So to me that was a sign from God that you can hold on to that other mug for just a little while longer.
But I always wanted to get this.
Animos says, Josh, I'm really interested in your predictions on the number of seats that reform is likely to win tomorrow.
Beau says seven.
What say you, Conor and Harry?
I already said last week, but I gave a very optimistic one and basically trying to channel into the unspoken masses who aren't answering the polls and said, my top would be 25.
Okay, so they're looking at seven in terms of the internal office.
The ones I have down I think are about six or seven, but it'll be Ashfield Clacton, Boston Skegness, which is Tice's seat, great Yarmouth, New Forest and Basildon and Billericay, because the Tories are really screwed up there.
And then there's one more in Essex, so I think that should be the seven.
I'll give you a range of about five to ten.
That's very fence-sitter.
However, I think there is potential actually for them to get a lot if it sort of snowballs, if there's a shock.
They could end up having more seats than even the Tories, if they're lucky.
Very unlikely.
A lot of the constituencies, as far as I'm aware, just have a very small margin, so they might get no seats, or they might get a lot more.
They'll definitely get Clacton, there is no doubt.
Fraud has 75%.
And the Labour candidate has basically stepped down there.
Yes, well, Keir Starmer's banished him to the Midlands.
I'll still look that up.
On that, I think we've run five minutes over time.
We've got a lot of Rumble Superchats that we should at least go through.
We might have to do those quickly because we are 35 over and I have got a show.
Yeah, yeah, go ahead.
Yeah, yeah, of course.
If you want to fight through them.
I'll read through them.
Shadowban for $5 regarding conversion therapy, talking to transgenders, ROPD teens and suggesting they might not actually be trans and should wait is often considered conversion therapy.
Threadnaught, $20.
Hoping this doesn't get censored.
F off Labour, Tories, F off Greens, F off Ukraine, F off, uh, everything.
F off everything.
Thank you very much.
Shadowband for another $5.
What's up with Plaid Cymru?
Is that how you pronounce it?
Plaid Cymru, yeah.
Whatever.
An SMP.
Weren't they essentially founded as ethno-nationalists?
Why do they want their own people to suffer immigration?
C, that was the trick.
Because you can only have, essentially, white ethno-nationalism if you cloak it in progressive concerns.
C, Sinn Féin.
Applied cum rag.
But also, it was all politics to begin with.
Josie Angel's $5 Scotus's decision on Chevron has gutted the federal government agency's free reign over Americans.
That and ending government agencies' unions can decimate the steep state, maybe.
I mean, it all depends on the political will to do so.
The Supreme Court judgment means that they don't have to defer to the agencies.
It's whether the people within government still do or not.
Is really the question there, although it is good, and I'm looking forward to seeing the consequences of that.
We might cover it.
And for another $5, Josie Angels, again, if Rubio is his VP, he'll make it hard to steal another election just because of the demographics and optics.
And with that, thank you all for wanting to get in touch with us so much, you know, had to run over just to accommodate it.
Gents, absolute pleasure.
We will be back tomorrow at 7pm, no podcast on Thursday and Friday, and I'll be back in 20 minutes talking to Paul Morland about his new book.
▲
Export Selection