The Philosophy Discussion Forum

Farage versus Count Binface

An epic battle.

Who will prevail?

phyllo wrote: ↑Fri Jul 10, 2026 2:13 pm Farage versus Count Binface

An epic battle.

Who will prevail?

Interesting that the traditional parties bailed out. Normally, they would contest any riding they could get; but in this case, they don't want to impart to Reform any credibility by losing to Farage, obviously. So they know they'll lose -- because otherwise, they would contest the riding and simply eliminate him. But they know that Farage is actually representing large numbers of English people. And they know the English are turning on them.

So their countermove is to eliminate his opposition, in the hopes that English voters can be distracted with "Count Binface." He's clearly got them running, and terrified. Given their record, they should be, of course.

I expect English voters are smart enough to realize that that is what it actually indicates.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Jul 10, 2026 2:31 pm
Interesting that the traditional parties bailed out. Normally, they would contest any riding they could get; but in this case, they don't want to impart to Reform any credibility by losing to Farage, obviously. So they know they'll lose -- because otherwise, they would contest the riding and simply eliminate him. But they know that Farage is actually representing large numbers of English people. And they know the English are turning on them.

Huh? I agree Farage running in a riding safe for him, and thus reasonable not to contest the riding. But the reason you give, "representing large numbers of English people" is wrong. Were Farage foolish enough to run in a safe Labour riding (for example) he would have been opposed and crushed.

The SNP and Plaid Cymru do not hold seats in Parliament because "representing large numbers of English people" but because they represent large numbers in some specific ridings.

LOL --I once had a Republican candidate running to represent my congressional district tell me "my opponent is out of step with the rest of the country". He didn't know the job description for the office he was seeking. NOT to represent the interests of "most Americans" but the interests of the people of the district. Irrelevant if the wishes of the people of the district out of step with the wishes of people in other parts of the country.

MikeNovack wrote: ↑Fri Jul 10, 2026 3:28 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Jul 10, 2026 2:31 pm
Interesting that the traditional parties bailed out. Normally, they would contest any riding they could get; but in this case, they don't want to impart to Reform any credibility by losing to Farage, obviously. So they know they'll lose -- because otherwise, they would contest the riding and simply eliminate him. But they know that Farage is actually representing large numbers of English people. And they know the English are turning on them.

Huh? I agree Farage running in a riding safe for him, and thus reasonable not to contest the riding. But the reason you give, "representing large numbers of English people" is wrong. Were Farage foolish enough to run in a safe Labour riding (for example) he would have been opposed and crushed.

Reform does have large numbers...and growing numbers, too...behind it, obviously. And you can tell, because it's gone from being a "nothing" party to being the biggest threat to the incumbent nitwits that they have ever seen in their history. That's not hard to establish, if you look at the polling numbers.

That's why the two conventional parties are so desperate to keep Reform out. It really stands to break their back-and-forth elitist monopoly, and to upset their gravy train. And this is why they're also desperate not to allow it to achieve any wins...even if it means running away from a by-election. Neither of them can afford for Reform to gain any more ground.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Jul 10, 2026 3:34 pm
Reform does have large numbers...and growing numbers, too...behind it, obviously. And you can tell, because it's gone from being a "nothing" party to being the biggest threat to the incumbent nitwits that they have ever seen in their history. That's not hard to establish, if you look at the polling numbers.

That's why the two conventional parties are so desperate to keep Reform out. It really stands to break their back-and-forth elitist monopoly, and to upset their gravy train. And this is why they're also desperate not to allow it to achieve any wins...even if it means running away from a by-election. Neither of them can afford for Reform to gain any more ground.

I did NOT say that Reform did not have large numbers nationally. I was saying that how much support Reform had nationally was not relevant to the decision whether to contest THIS riding. In the UK where candidates are allowed to run to represent any riding, it is NORMAL to assign party leaders a safe seat (riding where support for that party strong). Where that support is very strong, often unopposed. Not news, no reason required.

Here in the US, even if technically becoming a resident for purposes of running to represent a district, would be called a "carpet bagger" (stigma attached to that). But in the UK, accepted as SOP.

Do you really believe that Farage would have been unopposed had he chosen to stand for Dwyfor Meirionnydd? No matter how much support he had in the rest of GB? << Plaid Cymru will win that riding >>

HOWEVER -- I agree with you that the growing widespread support for Reform means that things are very much up in the air in most ridings.

You realize that Farage resigned his seat and he is running in the same riding that he resigned. Right?

The byelection is being held because of his resignation.

Costing the tax payers 350 thousand pounds to run an election.

The major parties are not going along with the stunt.

The f*** are you idiots going on about "ridings" for?

MikeNovack wrote: ↑Fri Jul 10, 2026 5:15 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Jul 10, 2026 3:34 pm
Reform does have large numbers...and growing numbers, too...behind it, obviously. And you can tell, because it's gone from being a "nothing" party to being the biggest threat to the incumbent nitwits that they have ever seen in their history. That's not hard to establish, if you look at the polling numbers.

That's why the two conventional parties are so desperate to keep Reform out. It really stands to break their back-and-forth elitist monopoly, and to upset their gravy train. And this is why they're also desperate not to allow it to achieve any wins...even if it means running away from a by-election. Neither of them can afford for Reform to gain any more ground.

I did NOT say that Reform did not have large numbers nationally. I was saying that how much support Reform had nationally was not relevant to the decision whether to contest THIS riding.

Then you made a nutty claim. Of course that's what it's about...in politics, that's what it's always about. Farage is the figurehead of the party that has the momentum to decapitate the lame-duck traditional parties. By getting him out, Labour and the Conservatives would hedge their bets for retaining power. So they won't contest this election because a) they know they'd lose, and b) they don't want people to accept Farage as a legitimate party leader, or Reform as a third option.

HOWEVER -- I agree with you that the growing widespread support for Reform means that things are very much up in the air in most ridings.

And you think that concern isn't in the minds of Labour and of the Conservatives every minute of their waking lives right now?

You bet it is.

Canadians yanks and Vikings going on about Ridings aside, everyone actually in Britain knows that Nigel "gas the jews - hiss" Farage is a fraud. He might get 30% of the vote, but 60% will vote anyone but his vile party and he is totally capable of losing an election to a bin even on home territory.

He is doing this stunt because he thinks it will bury two major financial scandals he's got himself into by being a sleazy thief. Even the people who like him think he's a thieving scum bag. The reason why nobody is bothering to stand against him is because after he wins his procession election, he still has to face the music for the money laundering and bribery.

Vikings?

phyllo wrote: ↑Fri Jul 10, 2026 6:08 pmVikings?

Flash is just a ranter.

Consider the source, flick your teeth, and keep on walking. It's the only thing to do.

phyllo wrote: ↑Fri Jul 10, 2026 6:08 pmVikings?

Nobody in Britain says "ridings". It's a scandinavian term and the three places in Britain that use it at all only do so as a leftover of the Danelaw. We don't call our parliamentary constituencies ridings, they are seats.

So therefore whoever introduced that term must be a viking invader of some sort.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Jul 10, 2026 6:28 pm

phyllo wrote: ↑Fri Jul 10, 2026 6:08 pmVikings?

Flash is just a ranter.

Consider the source, flick your teeth, and keep on walking. It's the only thing to do.

"He used to sing: 'Gas them all, gas them out, gas them all, into the chambers they crawl' - and the rest of those horrible words,"
https://news.sky.com/story/nigel-farage ... s-13479621

It's best not to be somebody that you would like really.

phyllo wrote: ↑Fri Jul 10, 2026 2:13 pm Farage versus Count Binface

An epic battle.

Who will prevail?

Just seen this polling published today via YouGov

YouGov wrote:73% of Britons describe Nigel Farage as sleazy, including 56% thinking he is *very* sleazy
This includes 40% of Reform UK voters seeing Farage as sleazy

He really might lose that election. But winning it won't save him.

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Fri Jul 10, 2026 5:42 pm Canadians yanks and Vikings going on about Ridings aside, everyone actually in Britain knows that Nigel "gas the jews - hiss" Farage is a fraud. He might get 30% of the vote, but 60% will vote anyone but his vile party and he is totally capable of losing an election to a bin even on home territory.

The problem is, with votes counted "first past the [post", it doesn't matter 60% opposed, anybody but him, unless agreed on ONE alternative. If 3-4 opponents splitting the opposed vote 30-40% can be enough to win. Politics as usual makes it difficult/impossible for the opposition parties to agree on a "unity" candidate.

Keep something in mind, folks. 30% support might be too little to take power but plenty to disrupt anybody else from taking power.