I really hope this is what is happening, but I worry that Tom Hamilton is too much of a Labour insider to see this objectively. I know he cites some neutral (BBC) and right wing (Fraser Nelson / The Spectator) pick up of the lies, but I won’t feel comfortable until I see someone like Iain Dale talking about it on LBC.

Starmer’s really ballsed this up hasn’t he. First unambiguous unforced error (some might say letting Elphicke into the party was an error but it’s clear what the logic was there).

Green policies really don’t make sense. You have Green councillors opposing wind farms.

Exactly, if their claims were processed faster and more competently (i.e. with very low likelihood of successful appeal), then the ones who are not genuine asylum seekers can be deported legally and quickly, which is surely a greater deterrent than the Rwanda scheme.

Am I just a naive lefty? What am I missing?

Not really a fan of her being in the Labour party. Think that was quite unnecessary – Starmer is going to win the next election with or without this woman. And what specifically about the Labour Party’s aims and values resonate with her? When you join the Labour party as a member, it’s not like subscribing to Amazon Prime. It means you have to actually agree to the aims and values of the Labour Party as described in Clause IV, which begins “The Labour Party is a democratic socialist party,” and includes things like “promotes equality of opportunity” and “delivers people from … prejudice”. Does she agree with any of that? I’m very confused as to how a right wing ERG member could possibly want to join a democratic socialist party, let alone agree with its broader aims and values.

The merit of permitting her to cross the aisle and sit as a Labour MP is obvious, but so is the cost. I didn’t like it when all those antisemites joined under Corbyn’s leadership, and I don’t like this now.

Say that to a tube driver, he’ll land a really good punch on your face.

The tube drivers, who famously never go on strike.

It’s very weird. I would have thought walking would feel more free than being stuck in traffic all day.

What Case said seems true - is telling the truth undignified? This is a very (small “c”) conservative argument - that the Prime Minister’s dignity is more important than the Prime Minister’s actions, and that the tone of Case’s criticism is more important than its content. Entirely in-keeping with Rory Stewart’s world view of course - he is after all very much a small “c” conservative.

I thought he didn’t like recycling bins? First there’s too many now there’s not enough??

It’s also a deeply unprincipled argument. If you support PR on principle then you should support it even if it means Tory governments for the rest of time. If you only support it because it means “your side” gets in power more often then that’s no different from Starmer supporting FPTP because it means “his side” gets into power more often.

Yeah it’s a coherent argument at least.

I think if local people could benefit from the cheap power the wind turbines generate there’d be far less opposition. Either give locals a discount on their bills, or give them a small shareholding in the company that sells the power to the grid. You’d have people begging for wind farms!

Yet another thing she’s wrong about

That’s cool. Looks like R?

Hard to disagree with that.

Hi! It’s hot as balls!