Laugh now, but Ed Miliband and Ed Balls could soon be running the country

Unless something drastic changes in the polls, the Tories will pay dearly for treating Miliband as a joke. And so will the rest of us

21 September 2013

9:00 AM

21 September 2013

9:00 AM

A Tory MP bobbed up at Prime Minister’s Questions recently to ask David Cameron whether he was ‘aware that 4 per cent of people believe that Elvis is still alive? That is double the number, we hear today, who think that Edward Miliband is a natural leader?’ The Tory benches tittered, Labour MPs slumped into their seats as if this was a depressingly fair point,  and the Labour leader himself tried not to look too hurt.

The exchange reflected a Westminster consensus that the idea of Miliband as prime minister is risible. His aestas horribilis has reinforced the view among many in the political class that he simply doesn’t have what it takes to be leader. Those supporters of his brother David who greeted his victory by bitterly declaring that Labour had just lost the next election have been out in force in recent weeks.

Perhaps the person in SW1 least affected by all this is Miliband himself. He is used to being written off by the pundits. His friends love to point out that these self same soothsayers were convinced that his brother would beat him to the leadership. He says he has learned to take opinion polls ‘with a pinch of sugar’.

One hopes he also applies the same medicine to his morning newspapers — the press are now going after him with the same enthusiasm with which they went for Neil Kinnock. But the most damaging depiction of him is not as a dangerous socialist but as the lead character from Wallace & Gromit. He is mocked rather than feared.

But titter ye not, Miliband remains the bookmakers’ favourite to be prime minister. The shortest odds are on a Labour majority, and those who believe Cameron can win outright can get odds of 4 to 1.

The opinion polls might have narrowed in the last few months, with Labour’s lead dropping as low as three points, and Miliband has certainly had the worst of the summer political Punch and Judy show. But his more sober-minded opponents know that bad headlines can’t remove the three huge structural advantages which explain why those who bet on the outcome of the next election are backing Miliband.

For decades now the Westminster voting system has been unfair to the Tories. Boundary changes lag population movements, corralling Tories into larger constituencies. As a result, Labour can win on a far smaller share of the vote than the Tories. Tony Blair secured a comfortable majority in 2005 with 35 per cent of the vote, while David Cameron fell short of one with 36 per cent in 2010. Cameron tried to address this imbalance by reducing the number of MPs and equalising constituency sizes, but the Liberal Democrats — aware of the electoral harm this would do to them — killed the idea off.

Compounding this Tory problem is the rise of Ukip. In effect British elections are decided not by a mass popular vote, but by a handful of swing voters in swing seats. Lord Ashcroft last weekend released a poll of these marginal constituencies which said that Labour’s lead has widened to an almighty 17 points. This was not because Labour has become more popular, but because so many Tory supporters have defected to Ukip. Miliband is also buoyed by the fact that the British left, which split in the 1980s with the creation of the SDP, has reunited. When Clegg jumped into bed with Cameron, just under half of his erstwhile supporters leapt into Labour’s arms.

The Westminster debate has not caught up with this new psephological reality. You may think (as most Tories do) that Miliband will be crushed in television debates before the election. You may laugh at his ideas of ‘predistribution’ and regard his running tensions with Ed Balls, his power-hungry shadow chancellor, as a source of macabre entertainment. But if the bookies are right, these two are just one more summer away from their first Queen’s Speech and budget.

Miliband himself is moving into election fighting mode. His speech at Labour conference next week will ditch the intellectual complexity of his previous addresses and talk only about ‘the cost of living crisis’. It will, I’m told, contain ‘practical measures’ to help families with their budgets. This may resonate more deeply than you’d expect. Official government forecasts suggest it may be 2018 before the average British worker returns to a pre-crash standard of living. As one senior Treasury figure admits, ‘Some of his stuff about living standards is cutting through.’

But those close to the Labour leader concede that he also has to win the broader economic argument. He has to persuade the public of his belief that the current recovery won’t last because it is too narrowly based. As one Labour strategist says of the coalition’s economic strategy: ‘People know it’s unfair but what we’ve got to do is to persuade people that it won’t work.’ The aim is to show that Miliband’s economics are ‘hard-headed as well as soft-hearted’. It’s a reminder that Miliband’s aim is nothing short of forging an entirely different sort of British economy. As Tristram Hunt puts it, ‘Ed’s project’ is a ‘recalibration of our political economy’.

Miliband’s aim, breathtaking in its ambition, is to transform Britain into a hybrid of a German and Scandinavian economy. Its effect on Britain could be breathtaking too — and not in the way that Miliband likes to envisage. His approach to the economy is based round the two ideas of ‘predistribution’ and redistribution. That is to say: regulating companies so more money goes to the lower-paid, and then using the tax system to make doubly sure that this happens. But in office, Miliband will soon find that tax is the easiest part. Alarmingly, he is already planning both a 50p tax rate and a mansion tax. Miliband’s answer to the question of whether to tax income or wealth is to tax both.

This emphasis on the cost of living is being taken seriously by coalition strategists. Downing Street is preparing a major push on ‘making markets work for consumers’. Utility companies and the rail franchises can all expect to come under coalition scrutiny in the coming months. Inside government, there is talk of an ‘adopt or kill’ approach to Labour’s work on the cost of living: if they like an idea, they’ll take it for themselves; if they don’t, they’ll savage it. Having had this done to them for 13 years in opposition by Gordon Brown, the Tories know just how this game works.

But when it comes to the economy, the most alarming thing about Labour’s approach is not Miliband’s attempt to change the structure of it but Ed Balls’s return to the Treasury. One might have expected Balls to enter into a period of quiet reflection following the return of boom and bust. But that would be fundamentally to misunderstand the shadow chancellor, the most bafflingly self-confident politician in recent British history. Balls believes that the crisis has vindicated his judgment. He is so enchanted with his 2010 Bloomberg speech on the economy, which cautioned against an early attempt to reduce the deficit, that he has been known to put parts of it to music when indulging his love of karaoke.

His sing-a-long economics would be funnier if they were not so likely to be the fiscal thinking of the next Labour government. The Balls who returned to the Treasury would be a man totally convinced that, when it comes to the economy, he is right and his critics are wrong. There would be no containing him. The country’s economic future would be wagered on his bust judgment.

In this image-driven political era, it is easier to mock Miliband’s idiosyncrasies than to study his policy programme. It may not be immediately apparent, but he is a leader with a breathtakingly radical political project who is the odds-on favourite to become the next prime minister. He may yet have the last laugh.

Got something to add? Join the discussion and comment below.

You might disagree with half of it, but you’ll enjoy reading all of it. Try your first 10 weeks for just $10

Show comments
  • xDemosthenesx

    I can’t believe it has come to this: I am cheering for Alex Salmond.

    • thesickmanofeurope_com

      Me too!
      That’s the fastest way to get rid of 59 Labour seats!

  • HJ777

    “Balls believes that the crisis has vindicated his judgment. He is so enchanted with his 2010 Bloomberg speech on the economy, which cautioned against an early attempt to reduce the deficit, that he has been known to put parts of it to music when indulging his love of karaoke.”

    This would be his Bloomberg speech in which he claimed that the 1981 budget led to a recession (it did not, the economy grew steadily thereafter).

    It would also be the Bloomberg speech where he claimed that after the 1931 ‘Austerity” budget unemployment rose, debt rose and Britain faced years of low growth, whereas, the record shows that within a year economic contraction turned into growth (which accelerated thereafter, remaining above, often well above, 3% until 1938), unemployment stabilised and then started to fall and debt stabilized and later fell as a proportion of GDP.

    Balls is an idiot. Economic forecasts are difficult, but it’s not hard to check economic history.

    • The man on the Clapham omibus

      You are right, but the man in the street (or bus) would not understand or care. And the overstated stupidity of Wallace & Gromit might not stop their election; actually one should not think them stupid – they are just terminally misguided.

      Cameron needs to stop being so irritatingly complacent and try focusing on what the electors in the marginal seats actually want, and most importantly, ignore what his mates from Eton, Oxford and Notting Hill think. In fact listen and do the opposite!

      • Damon

        All of which implies that DC can do anything to win, given (a) the fundamentally rigged electoral system, and (b) the rise of UKIP. He can’t. I’m a Tory and I know we haven’t got a snowball’s chance in hell. If you’re young enough, emigrate.

        • The man on the Clapham omibus

          You may be right but I would be more optimistic – partly because the view of the UK from a south facing farm house in the Pyreenes is quite calming. However, I will back shortly, and as to the impact of Hollande and where the kids will end up that really is anyone’s guess; probably not in the UK.

  • AnotherDaveB

    I don’t see how Labour can be considered to have a more irresponsible attitude to public spending that the Conservatives.

    The Conservatives response to a budget deficit caused by excessive government spending has been to increase taxation.

    The Conservatives response to high utility bills, has been to legislate to make them higher, inflating them with subsidies to politically favoured companies.

    Pot. Kettle.

    I’ll be voting UKIP.

  • John_Page

    “Adopting” is the Merkel tactic. But if the strategy is that radical, they’ll mostly have to go for the kill.

    What has this government done to cut the cost of living? Anyone?

  • Denis Mollison

    “Tony Blair secured a comfortable majority in 2005 with 35 per cent of the vote, while David Cameron fell short of one with 36 per cent in 2010. Cameron tried to address this imbalance ”

    Isn’t the real scandal that any party can get a comfortable majority with 35 % of the vote! The largest unfairness in 2010 was that the Lib Dems got 23% of the vote but only 9% of the seats.

    • sjb

      Well, Denis, at least the LibDems were represented in the HoC; almost a million voted for UKIP – not even one MP.

      • Denis Mollison

        If UKIP keep up their present performance in the opinion polls (12% according YouGov poll yesterday), they would deserve around 80 MPs; if, as seems quite possible, it gets them none, I hope they will protest!

    • Smithersjones2013

      Having seen how the Libdems behave in government the real disgrace is they got 9% of the seats!

      The most unfair issue of them all were that the three establishment parties behind closed doors were allowed to barter their way to governing the country and for two of them to stitch up an agreement that nobody had voted on. The most undemocratic part of the last election was that the electorate had a coalition imposed on them that nobody formally voted for!

      • Denis Mollison

        The other way of looking at it is that for the first time for a great many years we have a government representing a majority of the votes.
        But as to “stitch up” and “behind closed doors”, how do you suggest parties should negotiate a coalition when none of them commands a majority? Where they set out incompatible aims in their manifestos, of course they have to compromise. The Lib Dems at least went back to a special members’ conference to see whether what they had negotiated was acceptable to their members.

    • Jethro Asquith

      That is because all the Lib Dems all live in a few select parts of the country. Why should the rest of the country have to be represented by these people?

  • thesickmanofeurope_com

    Did your headline mean to say “ruining the country”?
    It’s the economy stupid!

  • FlippityGibbit

    I think this is completely spin to try and recoup some of the true Tory supporters who are flocking to UKIP. It is not the 2 Eds that need to be blamed it is the Tory Party who has chosen to impose a lame duck and completely discredited PM on the country.

    Given the 2 Ed’s are such a pair of plonkers disliked even by their own party it just shows how hopeless and unfit for purpose Dodgy Dave is. Come to Northampton we’ve got a clown who’d do a better job, at least he’s dressed for the part.
    Sorry, but no thanks! UKIP will do just fine for me and a lot of others!

    Don’t blame Labour, blame yourselves and your muppet who if he’d kept his promise on a referendum would be a hero now instead of a lame duck!

  • Linda Breeze

    We do not trust Labour as well as Conservatives, Liberal Democrats and UKIP. Popular Alliance Political Party is the easy way out and got very good policies etc. It is a safest party with common sense and good sound judgement. They will not breach our democratic and human rights.

    • Smithersjones2013

      Popular Alliance Political Party is the easy way out and got very good policies etc.

      So you are suggesting that people vote for P.A.P.P.

      Good luck with that one (branding failure of the year!)

  • emptyend

    Very reprehensible to make no mention of the enormous tactical blunder that Cameron made when cynically shafting the LibDems and their AV referendum. That is what cost him his objective of equalising constituencies. With AV and equal constituencies, Labour would have been out of power for decades!
    Despite having voted for both coalition parties in the past, this one complete blunder has made me switch to vote for UKIP (though other blunders have followed eg in relation to marriage).
    I very much hope that, come 2015, we have four parties with some substance at Westmister – and then perhaps we can leave behind the Labour/Tory Punch & Judy show and move into an era where parliament becomes properly representative of the peoples’ wishes.
    It would be better to have had AV though and for us all to avoid the uncertainties and angst.

    Balls is a complete idiot. People will remember that when they vote.

    • Smithersjones2013

      As a fellow UKIP supporter might I point out a few innaccuracies.

      1. It was Labour who shafted the Libdems over AV+

      – It was they who had a foot in both camps

      – It was their AV supporters who refused to share a platform with Clegg

      – It was their organisers (Joan Ryan & Jane Kennedy) who co-ordinated the No campaign and were picked out for praise by its head.

      – It was their leaflets that slaughtered Clegg.

      – It was their campaign infrastructure that was used for the campaign.

      – It was their leader who gave up on the yes campaign and concetrated on

      – the local elections

      2. AV was not the excuse used by the Libdems. The failure of Nick Clegg’s absurd and still born HoL reforms was the excuse needed for the Libdems to block the boundary changes.

      3. If the Libdems had not have used HoL Reform they would have found another way to sink the boundary changes simply because they lost out comparatively more than the other parties.

      4. Cameron’s real blunder was tacking on some anti-democratic cheap piece of electoral gerrymandering (the reduction in the number of MP’s) with boundary equalisation . The reason he did was that boundary equalisation on its own only redresses the electoral imbalance slightly because the main issues regard differential & low turnouts and tactical voting neither of which can be addressed simply by equalising the size of constituencies. One has to intefere much more significantly with the constituency boundaries before you can start to address that and then thats only until the population changes again and a similar type of problem arises for one or more of the parties.

      Meddling with our voting system is not going to fix our (broken) political system because the problem is the venal and corrupt culture that exists within our establishment political classes and whilst they remain dominant nothing will change. Changing the voting system is no more than shuffling the deckchairs on the Titanic…..

      PS And I favour AV style voting systems but lets not lose sight of the real problem…..

      • emptyend

        Labour shafted the LibDems as well of course. But the Tories were partners in Government operating under the Coalition Agreement and Cameron had promised to take a back seat in the referendum campaign – instead of which he fronted a massive pack of lies about the way AV would work. See this article which gives the full picture from the horse’s mouth: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/av/clegg-lashes-out-against-tory-lies-over-av-campaign-2274228.html

        Cameron lied through his teeth to scupper the AV campaign whilst
        Miliband just did what he normally does – change sides at the last minute for naked political reasons. That is why neither of them is fit for purpose. Neither of them have any principles. Clegg isn’t fit for purpose because he failed to head either of them off.

    • Damon

      “Balls is a complete idiot. People will remember that when they vote.”

      No, they won’t.

  • Mombasa69

    Hard to Speculate on who will win, Labour only have a 42 seat majority in the latest average of polls, hardly a clear run atm.

    Not that it really matters which muppet actually wins ofc.

  • Smithersjones2013

    He may yet have the last laugh.

    No with all political leaders who aspire to lead this country it is the electorate who have the last laugh. Five years of Miliband could finish Labour off for a generation. With Miliband in the Exchequer, government bankruptcy is nigh on certain and with Milibands strategic economic goals scaring away investment, killing enterprise, driving the talent out of Britain and making it pointless to work hard who is goingb to vote Labour in 2020.

  • Sim Chi

    ” His speech at Labour conference next week will ditch the intellectual complexity of his previous addresses and talk only about ‘the cost of living crisis’. It will, I’m told, contain ‘practical measures’ to help families with their budgets.”

    Add to that the fact it will never be off the BBC news for a week. Sickening when you consider the it was his governments fault entirely for the mess we find ourselves in due to high taxes and low productivity.

  • sarahsmith232

    disappointing that the Spec’ shows itself scared of the Guardian reading sheep sections of our society with this article. where’s the fact that Labour knows rightly that it can easily walk it come the next election not just ’cause of they and the Lib Dem’s screwing of the boundary review but also ’cause of their 13yr open-door policy. they’ve worked out that there are 168 constituencies where the ethnic vote ‘will decide’ the outcome and they’re aggressively going after their votes. they know they’ll easy get them, and will easy get 35%.
    we’re no longer living in a democracy and there doesn’t seem to be very many people that care. it’s been over 20yrs since the constituency boundaries were really looked at. since then there’s been dramatic demographic change. it favours the Left and screws the Tories, Labour only needs 35%, the Tories need 40%. how many people are even aware of this? if not many then why not. we’re no longer living in a democracy and nobody even seems to know it. BBC’s not going to go near this, the Murdoch’s are obviously still smarting and on a revenge trip, who is there to do any screaming about this? no one.
    oh well, for what it’s worth, i’m going to be carrying on on as many comment sites as I can manage to get some comments uploaded to about this. it’s an outrage.

  • NBeale

    Almost no-one in parliament believes that Ed M is up to the job of being PM. Nor do many people in the country.
    The only way Ed M can become PM is if the UKIPers are mad enough at the GE to vote for hopeless candidates in sufficient numbers to deprive Cameron of an adequate plurality. This is unlikely but not impossible.

    The latest YouGov poll has a Labour lead of 0. This is almost certainly a random error but the undelrying lead is less than 5% and it was more that 10% a year ago. If present trends continue Labour will be 10-15% behind come the GE.

    • Damon

      “The only way Ed M can become PM is if the UKIPers are mad enough at the
      GE to vote for hopeless candidates in sufficient numbers to deprive
      Cameron of an adequate plurality. This is unlikely but not impossible.”

      Regret to say it’s both possible and likely.

  • Toby Esterházy

    Those who repeatedly and deliberately insult their own core electorate do not deserve the vote.

  • efhrgtgrtrtr

    Ridiculous if they get in the UK will be finished

    Petition for UKIP to be in 2015 TV General Election debates


  • roger

    The modern Conservative Party have one huge problem, I have looked long and hard at UKIP and realised that it is really the conservative party I joined in 1967, surely Cameron’s party (but without Cameron please) could turn and swallow UKIP whole, overnight.
    I’m fed up with voting ‘the least bad option’.

    • Abhay

      The problem is bigger than ‘Cameron’ with Tories. For example, Gove is no Maggie Thatcher. He is a wannabe neo-con, 10 years too late. Check his I-pod. He may be listening to gangsta rap!

  • Abhay

    What sort of lame scare-mongering is this? So we should be running scared of Wallace and Gromit?

    Both the parties presently are governed by metropolitan bourgeoisie with liberal-egalitarian consensus on big issues of the day. There may be some personality cult clashes but that is about all. Some quibble on points of detail. No more.

    We refuse to be blown away by this propaganda.

  • Icebow

    ‘Ead Boy & Ballsebub? Gawdelpus….

  • dodgy

    I can’t see an issue with Mills and Balls having the ‘government’ badge for a while.

    It won’t change the ‘people who run the country’. Who are an unholy clique of semi-international activists, civil servants, media luvvies and security/intelligence staff. And certainly not politicians.

    Note that I left ‘businessmen/gangsters’ out of this list. They are far too busy running/ruining the global economy to worry about anything as piddling as a country. Sometimes failed bankers get involved at the European/Fed level, but that’s as far as it goes…

  • Adrian Wainer

    What is the difference between having a Cameron Clegg scumbag government compared to a Millipede scumbag government and I think the answer is not a lot.

  • ToughShit

    Ed Balls and Ed Miliband running the country would make me laugh at the country stupid enough to elect them: people get the government they deserve.

    • No1important

      Actually no it seems the country could get the government only 35% deserve.

  • Terence Hale

    Laugh now, but Ed Miliband and Ed Balls could soon be running the country. Mr. Cameron is the “Balls-up” has done so much damage that history could amount to war crimes.

    • manonthebus

      Rather confused comment.

  • Roy

    Couldn’t the pieces that are assembling themselves in the UK be in part a procedure to follow in the footsteps of our free world ally and supposed defender, the US? Once we have a tried and true circus embedded on this side of the water; the theatre of the absurd will be complete. For Britain or America to fiddle alone while the free world burns cannot be so bad; but for them both to fiddle in concert will be a supreme disaster.

  • mikewaller

    If they do get in, it will be in part due to the present administrations extreme folly in dropping almost all talk about our appalling debts and horrendous future commitments, talking instead about the deficit which just might be starting to reduce the horrific rate at which the aforementioned are increasing. This wholly unjustified self-congratulation could lull dear old Joe and Josephine Citizen into thinking “happy days are here again”. If that happens, don’t be surprised if they vote Labour so that they can get their share of the (non-existent) goodies.

    In short, it would be a very good idea if George Osborne stopped fooling himself he is a brilliant election strategist and instead gave the people the message any fully responsible Chancellor would: we are still up to our necks in doodoo!

  • hfdgrfthyt

    Miliband is just as corrupt as all the other LibLabCon liars
    none help British people, we need a change, vote UKIP

    For UKIP to participate in 2015 TV Election debates, over
    22,000 have signed.

    Petition http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/43153

  • Adrian Wainer

    The basic point is that Labour, the Lib Dems and the Tories are all scumbag parties and it doesn’t work to try to scare conservative voters to vote for scumbag Cameron’s fake Conservative Party on the pretext that not to do so it might put a Labour or a Labour lib Dem coalition in to Government.

  • pp22pp

    What country? Britain isn’t a country any more. It’s Third world overspill. Who cares?

    • Jackthesmilingblack

      Harsh, but fair.

  • saffrin

    “Unless something drastic changes in the polls”
    What, like no longer using profiling to produce the desired result or the fact even the propaganda machine can’t keep the cost & effects of the 2014 Bulgarian/Romanian invasion quiet?

  • drydamol1


    The word ‘Spin’ is a polite word for Lies and Deceit commonly
    known to us as BS.The Tories have surpassed the Masters Blair & Mandleson.It’s
    like being in an adult School Playground individuals trying to outdo each other
    in the Dark Arts.There are many variables to Lies & Deceit but only Public
    Purse Theft is Blatant & Outright.

    As I have previously said the Politicians ‘War on
    Terrorism’ they continually along with the Media pushed down our throats was
    the excuse for War or some equally bizarre Cause only known to them.We have and
    always had ‘Home grown Terrorists’now we ‘Export ‘them.

    Terrorism is the systematic use of violent terror as a
    means of coercion,miss out the violence & replace it with psychological and
    the last two Governments have been Guilty of it towards us the British Public.Liars
    who call Wolf too often end up being
    ignored,that’s why there is no Credibility in Todays Politics.Labour Lying
    Politicians today were active within the Blair Years,does a Leopard change it’s


  • whs1954

    The sad thing is, all these idiots need is one term to create the Scandinavian-style country you warn about. One term to turn on the hose of benefits – free childcare for all, free this for all, free that – and Miliband will have the middle-class locked in. Labour would then be able to run through the marginals saying to the swing voters, “The Tories will cut your Sure Start, the Tories will cut this and that, what we, Labour have given to you.”

    Pretty much, in fact, Gordon Brown’s whole economic strategy. Oh, that, and importing as many claimants as they can.

    And the sad thing is, it will work. This country will then be governed by a government for the feckless, greedy and lazy, elected by the feckless, greedy and lazy, and their collaborators in the middle class after free Sure Start – just at the very moment the Asian economies get ready to brutally grind the more decadent Western economies under their heel.

    Christ, what a future awaits this country, because our people want everything, now, with jam on top.

  • Jonathan J Lindsell

    “Cameron tried to address this imbalance by reducing the number of MPs and equalising constituency sizes, but the Liberal Democrats — aware of the electoral harm this would do to them — killed the idea off.”

    You mean, “the Liberal Democrats – in retaliation for the Tories blocking Lords reform – killed the idea off.” Regardless of what you think about Lords reform, there’s no need to rewrite history in the Conservatives’ favour.

  • 3x4_34

    If Red Ed and that financial thug Balls get in to power, Britain will witness the biggest brain drain ever seen, leading to the establishment of apartheid, bigger ghettos and so much political trouble they will be very sorry they ever achieved power.

  • Jackthesmilingblack

    Face it; “up north” hasn’t been fashionable since Jane Austen. Now the image is one of obnoxious know-all. So if you’re “cursed” with a “Wallace and Gromet” dialect, compounded by non-RP syntax and grammar, your feet are essentially nailed to the floor of that North Country sister-@hagging multicultural hellhole you call home. So the resident abroad “fly the coop” option hardly exists, as entry-level English teaching work so essentially in getting to first base would be out of the question. Ey up, you’d be forgiven for feeling fate has dealt you a poor hand. It could even turn you into a bitter and twisted person with feelings of paranoia and low self-esteem.
    Jack, Japan Alps

    • Toby Esterházy

      You dare call yourself “British”, yet you clearly hate (like a French frog) any-one who lives (or anywhere) North of Cambridgeshire or West of Worcester. Should you not be back at the Daily Mail, where fellow like-minded Trolls like you would surely feel much more at home?

      • Jackthesmilingblack

        You must be some kind of masochist, Jock. Successive British governments have turned your mediocre hometown into multicultural hellhole filled with immigrants from a different
        culture and religion, but yet you are still patriotic and nationalist to a fault. You’ve never told us exactly what you have against foreigners, Muslims aside obviously. You hate foreigners to the point where you assign a different race and nationality to anyone that disagrees with you. Like that’s the greatest insult you can bestow. There’s little doubt but that you have serious mental
        health problems. Telling a fellow Internet correspondent that they are Japanese (or Korean, or Indian, or American…) at least 100 times, when you know very well that they are British. Hardly the actions of a sane person. Presumably that passes for humour in armpit of the world you’re from, but in fact it’s a form of bullying. But then Britain is a nation of bullies. Presumably this is your reaction to having been made a foreigner in your own land. You’re like a dog with a cruel master, you don’t know whether to expect a kick or a bone. What have you got to be patriotic about? The country you are so proud of has shafted you at every turn. You can’t betray a country that’s already betrayed you in every possible way. And where do you think the buck stops? Who is ultimately responsible? You really think your situation will improve?
        Face reality: Things can only get worse. I almost feel sorry for you.
        Underscore, almost.
        Jack, the only Brit in the village

        • Toby Esterházy

          No, you are just a crazy little Japanese who think that you are somehow entitled to speak for England just because you went to school in Oxfordshire some 20 years ago or so. Were the big and scary Northerners being horrible, nasty, rude and racist to you when you were a nice little Japanese boy? Did they make you poo-poo in your pants?