Reform party seems to be ahead in my area.

Starmer does not hate women and girls. You have a comprehension problem there. He is a family man respecting his wife and mother, thoughtful about his kids including daughter unlike Bojo or Farage, who were using women.

Their immigration solutions are unworkable- but very focussed on the excessive restriction of visas for legal migrants, and the turning back of what the rest of the world would call asylum seekers. I’m not convinced U.K. workers will fill the gaps of working visas, or that universities will survive without international students. I’m not convinced the plan for small boats would work either, as France won’t ’take them back’ and alternate solutions are surely too horrific for the majority of the public to accept (I hope!). It does strike me that there are no plans for the actual illegal migrants such as those who don’t (or didn’t ) go home after a visa expired- more I imagine than enter on boats - of course we prefer to hate on the folk on the boats, as it’s an easy and visual dog whistle for some. Folk - again - are voting for a ‘vibe’ a vision of a happy 50s U.K. (that never was anyway) - would there be uproar if this ‘vibe’ didn’t happen? I expect it would be someone else’s fault though!
I am equally concerned about the NHS privatisation as it must be obvious that Farage would ultimately sell out to US insurance companies- he talks of EU models but they don’t run for profit (and don’t help his US mates either). We heard of Norway models pre referendum but that wasn’t going to happen and didn’t.
There are also other policies and members of the party (aka Ltd company) that are concerning.

I am interested in why people would vote for this? Happy to struggle with impact of immediate net zero migration, and probably particularly the healthcare model as that would impact nearly all the population adversely for sure? And are people voting as a protest and not expecting them to get in? If so what do you want out of the protest? Or are you Voting hoping they’ll become a bigger party? Voting hoping they’ll get in? Voting and looking forward to such policies being implemented? Expecting a better life for most of U.K. if such policies were put in place?

Obviously, Reform won’t be in Government this time, and for me I don’t want any of them in, continuing to stir up things, attract bigger names, become ‘mainstream’ etc because of the absolute horror show that would be unleashed in the U.K. if they got in or held too much sway in future parliaments in my opinion. But interested to discuss how and why Reform and their policies are expected to improve U.K. happiness and wellbeing.

@Noddedoffagain I wonder sometimes if traditional environments choose macho, self-promoting men over hard working and diligent women. Brining in monitoring starts to mean that the promotion goes to macho, self-promoting women over hard working and diligent women

I guess it depends on what you mean by ‘better’. I’m not saying you have done this in your post, but I have seen again and again, white men assuming they are better, promoting themselves as better, talking as if there is certainty when there isn’t and actually being a bit shit. Whilst women humbly and quietly get on with the job, hold onto complexity and a ‘safe uncertain’ position (in my profession there is no clear right and wrong so similar to law in that sense) and doing a damn good job but not crowing about it - more likely picking holes on their own work and then working hard to do even better next time. I’ve seen this loads of times in my 30 year career.

Men are often much better at self promotion rather than being better at the job per se IME.

Why? And have you seen the video shared above of Farages key moments?

I will be voting Reform as will members of my family

Look if a private company hires a person to tick an equalities box rather than the best candidate that's their business. I'm only concerned if it's a public service that we're all paying for.

In our business I interviewed regularly. It's a male dominated industry heavy construction equipment. She set off alarm bells at interview with an aggressive vibe. I chose someone else.

A year later there she was in the local rag suing the council who hired her for sex discrimination. She won a five figure sum.

Jakers we dodged a bullet 🙈

How can they demand the governing party address these issues if they have no credible plan to do so themselves? Just shouting about how much you hate things with no viable solutions to suggest to your perceived problems is pointless and dishonest.

And I'm afraid that Reform's economic proposals are far more delusional than those of the other parties, which is saying something! Being overly optimistic is one thing, deliberately deceiving people is another. And for you to state that you think their voters don't care that their proposed policy solutions are not realistic or remotely viable rather proves the point made in my earlier comment.

@Noddedoffagain the thing is - I don’t think there’s ever a situation where they are neck and neck. Ever. There’s too much variability in humans.

There’s also the problem that employers misunderstand the concept and apply it as ‘hire the woman’ even if the man is better. Which does happen (am a lawyer, have literally seen this occur and not one off).

But that’s fine. You have a view. So do I. I would like the EA to be redone to make it better. You may also wish to rejig it. I’m sure that reasoned discussIon in Parliament, the people paid to do this could teach a compromise position that works.

@Validus I would add to that, that the media needs to tell their interviewers to shut up and allow long form answers. Then think about the answer and ask proper follow up, open questions (rather than the antagonist, ‘gotcha’ statements they are now prone to). Most interviews these days seem to just be the interviewer interrupting and then pushing their own views.

I agree completely. The standard of the ‘debates’ has been an embarrassment.

Positive discrimination doesn’t mean you get a shoe in as a person with a protected characteristic- it means if two candidates come neck and neck, the white male will miss out, because white men are massively over represented in lots of areas, but especially top jobs. As a woman, I feel that this is something I want to continue. It’s still hard and we still get paid less for the same work. I imagine it’s the same for people of colour. Until we have true equality I’m happy to keep
it.

I really wish we had a competent media whp actually asked such questions and pressed for them to be answered. If that had happened during the Brexit fiasco then we wouldn't be where we are. Such a shame that a large proportion of the country seem averse to factual discussions and are only interested in emotive nonsense so politicians play to that and infantilise us all.

I would add to that, that the media needs to tell their interviewers to shut up and allow long form answers. Then think about the answer and ask proper follow up, open questions (rather than the antagonist, ‘gotcha’ statements they are now prone to). Most interviews these days seem to just be the interviewer interrupting and then pushing their own views.

their economic proposals mean that anybody voting for them is swimming at the shallow end of the gene pool in terms of brain capacity

And again with the insults. It’s this kind of discourse that needs to stop. It’s - completely unnecessary attack on others and does nothing to move a debate on. What it does is get everyone’s backs up and causes entrenchment. Please stop.

All parties claim they have fully costed plans, and it always turns out to be fantasy. I would expect that Reform voters don’t care about that because they don’t expect Reform to be the governing party. However, what Reform offers is, in the long term, very attractive to many people. they’d quite like someone in opposition (or at least in Parliament) to be raising these things and making the governing party address them rather than sweeping them under the carpet.

I think Brexit is a fantastic example of what happens when governments fail to carry the people with them. When they ignore and belittle valid concerns. Eventually they’ll get a bloody nose.

That's a large part of why the Conservative party is now dying. They were warned that their approach to this would mean total wipeout in the long run, but persisted anyway to pursue their extremist version of Brexit and make us all significantly poorer, against the will of the majority. Then compounded this with economic mismanagement and disgraceful behaviour in public office.

I'm not convinced Labour are much more honest though, sadly. They haven't levelled with the public. They won't address the Brexit issue and essentially are predicating their own manifesto and their promises on being able to magic up significant economic growth within a very short time period. I hope they'll be successful in doing so, but it is unlikely, especially given their weak proposals regarding how they will achieve this. Therefore they will have to activate plan B but have promised no more austerity and no tax rises on anybody who works.

I would love to know what their plan B is within these constraints because reducing tax relief on pension savings/ savings more would be a manifesto promise break because this is a rise in income tax.

They will likely raise capital gains tax and inheritance tax (presumably with exemptions for working people... otherwise also a breach of their promises!). And claim they'll raise money from reducing tax evasion (as every Government/ wannabe Government does). But that an non-doms and VAT on private education are small beans compared to what is required. So if this growth doesn't materialise fast enough, what will they do?

I really wish we had a competent media whp actually asked such questions and pressed for them to be answered. If that had happened during the Brexit fiasco then we wouldn't be where we are. Such a shame that a large proportion of the country seem averse to factual discussions and are only interested in emotive nonsense so politicians play to that and infantilise us all.

Reform's proposals are economically illiterate. They are fantasists or liars or most likely both. Their proposals are Truss on steroids. Seems like a great idea... what could go wrong?

Their social views are unpleasant from my perspective (to put it politely) but their economic proposals mean that anybody voting for them is swimming at the shallow end of the gene pool in terms of brain capacity.

It’s like the 2016 EU referendum as others have said - certain voters feel ignored, Farage gives the impression he’s listening to them.

I think that we’ll get a Lab majority gov with the Conservatives in opposition but I wouldn’t be surprised if Conservatives and Reform were on the same percentage of votes, about 18% each.

I’ll be voting Labour as I always have done, but I understand the appeal of Reform although I’m unattracted to them myself.

I refuse to dismiss all Reform voters as racist bigots or to sneer at them. Because…well, back to what happened in 2016.

Based on actual policies selected blind to the party they originate from these are the preferences (according to 45000 votes from across the UK).

Admiring the way Putin operates doesn't bode well.

how do people know?
just a poll presumably?

Please don't make stuff up

• at no point did Farage say that he admired Putin.

The actual quote was

“I said I disliked him as a person, but I admired him as a political operator because he’s managed to take control of running Russia.”

Now I would disagree with the use of wording "admired him as a political operator" and would be better phrased as "an effective political operator" just as one could say that Hitler was an effective public speaker but it doesn't equate to supporting Hitler.

He was born in Pakistan.

Ben Habib's dad is Pakistani and his mum is white British.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Habib

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crggy73m2ero

I believe he's British Pakistani.