Farage is far too flaky to lead the Reform party. Good idea initially, but he might as well have been on a piece of elastic since 2016 and Brexit. He leads the party, then he lets someone else have a go, then he comes back and pulls it all back together when they fail and the party splinters. I admire him as a disruptor, but he hasn't got the staying power now. Like a dog follows a bone, he leaps on a jet to hover in Trump's wake, for whatever advantage that may bring him. He could have made something greater of Reform, but has probably had enough of politics, having been an MEP in Brussels and fought for a UK referendum for two decades.
The terms "muddled" and "incoherent" appear to be hallmarks of politics today. Not just in the UK but Europe (very similar problems of persistent state overspend and uncontrolled immigration; Scholz & Macron in particular are floundering badly) and US too (Kamala Harris soundly beaten and Trump, despite appearing to be one of the few to have a grasp of the immigration problem, is almost diametrically opposed to classic republican rhetoric. He's even wooed the unions!). The terms are too mild to describe Russia's Putin, whose "special military operation" will probably result in a demographic catastrophe for no obvious gain.
It's like watching a global race to scrape the bottom of the barrel of turds after diving headfirst through the branches of the ugly tree.
Perhaps we should be looking at mandatory IQ testing before candidates are allowed to enter Westminster.
Farage was shocking in that interview with Marshall, he basically said we must accept Islamisation. All Labour have to do to appear sensible is reduce immigration slightly.
Reform are a step in the right direction, but right now they are not a solution. It is not clear yet what their overall vision is and whether they have the direction and leadership to achieve it. Nigel Farage is a useful and important contributor to any debate; and he is doing a very good job, but I am not sure he is the end solution. I don't see him as PM. To progress, Reform have to move on from personalities such as Farage and provide better clarity on their vision and direction.
If Reform and the Tories are competing with each other for votes Labour wins. It does not have to have policies to win elections. As a people we seem to be under a delusion that we have, or will have, a say in the matter.
Reform's election manifesto pledged to implement net zero immigration, leave the ECHR, stop the small boats, detain all asylum seekers and deport foreign criminals.
And in a recent X post (x.com/FUDdaily/status/1864309234201940407) Pete expressed the view that, by the next election, Reform may well have committed to deporting those in the country illegally. I too think that's likely.
However, Pete also talks of "rumblings that Farage is going soft and taking the party towards the centre". But if Reform's policy platform going into the next GE is as above, I don't see how this could be described as centrist. And given that immigration is the principal issue of which Reform campaigns, I think it's unlikely that they'd water this platform down.
Pete also suggests that Labour and the Tories could outflank Reform on immigration. I personally find it difficult to see Labour outflanking Reform's platform. And I'm not sure a Badenoch-led Tory party would either. But, of course, if Jenrick takes over as leader there could well be a bidding war on immigration. And, as far as I'm concerned, that would be all to the good!
Parliament can make any laws it likes - it is not bound by previous laws on immigration. As long as the UK leaves the ECHR, there is nothing to stop Parliament changing the law to anything at all - for example, to deport anyone not born here. Common law cannot be changed, but statutes come and go. Immigration status is a construct created by Parliament and it can do what it likes with it.
Farage is far too flaky to lead the Reform party. Good idea initially, but he might as well have been on a piece of elastic since 2016 and Brexit. He leads the party, then he lets someone else have a go, then he comes back and pulls it all back together when they fail and the party splinters. I admire him as a disruptor, but he hasn't got the staying power now. Like a dog follows a bone, he leaps on a jet to hover in Trump's wake, for whatever advantage that may bring him. He could have made something greater of Reform, but has probably had enough of politics, having been an MEP in Brussels and fought for a UK referendum for two decades.
The terms "muddled" and "incoherent" appear to be hallmarks of politics today. Not just in the UK but Europe (very similar problems of persistent state overspend and uncontrolled immigration; Scholz & Macron in particular are floundering badly) and US too (Kamala Harris soundly beaten and Trump, despite appearing to be one of the few to have a grasp of the immigration problem, is almost diametrically opposed to classic republican rhetoric. He's even wooed the unions!). The terms are too mild to describe Russia's Putin, whose "special military operation" will probably result in a demographic catastrophe for no obvious gain.
It's like watching a global race to scrape the bottom of the barrel of turds after diving headfirst through the branches of the ugly tree.
Perhaps we should be looking at mandatory IQ testing before candidates are allowed to enter Westminster.
Farage was shocking in that interview with Marshall, he basically said we must accept Islamisation. All Labour have to do to appear sensible is reduce immigration slightly.
Reform are a step in the right direction, but right now they are not a solution. It is not clear yet what their overall vision is and whether they have the direction and leadership to achieve it. Nigel Farage is a useful and important contributor to any debate; and he is doing a very good job, but I am not sure he is the end solution. I don't see him as PM. To progress, Reform have to move on from personalities such as Farage and provide better clarity on their vision and direction.
If Reform and the Tories are competing with each other for votes Labour wins. It does not have to have policies to win elections. As a people we seem to be under a delusion that we have, or will have, a say in the matter.
Reform's election manifesto pledged to implement net zero immigration, leave the ECHR, stop the small boats, detain all asylum seekers and deport foreign criminals.
And in a recent X post (x.com/FUDdaily/status/1864309234201940407) Pete expressed the view that, by the next election, Reform may well have committed to deporting those in the country illegally. I too think that's likely.
However, Pete also talks of "rumblings that Farage is going soft and taking the party towards the centre". But if Reform's policy platform going into the next GE is as above, I don't see how this could be described as centrist. And given that immigration is the principal issue of which Reform campaigns, I think it's unlikely that they'd water this platform down.
Pete also suggests that Labour and the Tories could outflank Reform on immigration. I personally find it difficult to see Labour outflanking Reform's platform. And I'm not sure a Badenoch-led Tory party would either. But, of course, if Jenrick takes over as leader there could well be a bidding war on immigration. And, as far as I'm concerned, that would be all to the good!
Parliament can make any laws it likes - it is not bound by previous laws on immigration. As long as the UK leaves the ECHR, there is nothing to stop Parliament changing the law to anything at all - for example, to deport anyone not born here. Common law cannot be changed, but statutes come and go. Immigration status is a construct created by Parliament and it can do what it likes with it.