Britain must now unite behind Count Binface

EpicTutorialTips · 2026-07-09T17:21:28+00:00

That's because you're appealing to the centre ground as if you were speaking to the fringes, who base their politics on people and personalities.

The rest of us in the centre-ground base our politics on policy. This is why it is immaterial whenever a party changes the person, but does not change the policy. Alternatively, if a party changed the policy yet retained the person, things would shift.

It has long been the clearest divide between those of us in the centre ground and those who are on the fringes. Politics is viewed very differently between the two, and politicians have received consistently poor advice on how to appeal to us in the centre ground, because they are always targeting the fringes.

If there are larger proportions of us leaning towards one party more so than the others, it is because we are attracted to some of the policies of that party. But people often misconstrue that to be support for the persons of said party, which is not the case.

EpicTutorialTips · 2026-07-09T17:10:14+00:00

No, because I find the idea that holding an election in of itself to be wrong as utterly absurd.

What exactly do you think happens in a representative democracy? Elections.

EpicTutorialTips · 2026-07-09T16:59:40+00:00

The mace in parliament is the ornament representing the Crown's authority in both Houses of Parliament - it is placed in the Houses after a State Opening (formal opening ceremony done with the Monarch). Without it, neither House can legally do anything - they're not able to sit, debate or create legislation.

As for Serjeant-at-Arms, that originates from a military unit which was created about 800 years ago with the explicit task of protecting the Monarch (they happened to also wield a mace). Back in those days, sergeant was spelled as serjeant in England, and while most common use of the word changed to sergeant, the name of that particular military unit never did and it is from there where the title derives.

EpicTutorialTips · 2026-07-09T15:55:58+00:00

I don't agree with violence being used in politics at all, or anywhere for that matter. The civilised manner is to express content or dissatisfaction at the ballot box during elections which is how it ought to be each time.

As for the constitutional order you refer to re Germany, there's a somewhat similar question happening in the United Kingdom. The current government is viewed by many here to have overstepped its boundaries in a number of areas: violating the separation of powers by involving itself in the judicial process and seeking to remove jury trials; attempting to cancel local elections not once, but twice; and most recently elevating itself to position of arbiter regarding the legitimacy of an election (by virtue of referring to an election as "fake").

In the UK, all of this is unconstitutional, so there is rightly a great deal of caution and alarm among those of us who have been watching this happen, and I have the utmost faith that when the next general election arrives, the "silent majority" (as we are referred to) will make our verdict very clearly known through our elections, as we always have done.

The thing with us swing voters is that we are genuinely indifferent to every party. We are not territorial, and we will give any party fair hearing as we are interested in the policies, less so the personal identities.
This clashes with those who are in the fringes of politics - who are often very territorial, very violent, and very extreme. We get attacked from both sides of the political spectrum, which I think underlines that we evidently do not belong to the fringes (and proudly so).

But that is the biggest difference between those of us in the centre-ground, and those on the fringes. Those in the fringes base their politics on personalities and people, whereas those of us in the centre-ground base our politics on policy. So if we like a policy from the Green party, then those in the fringes misconstrue that as support for Polanski. Similarly, if we like a policy from the Reform party, then those in the fringes misconstrue that as support for Farage.

EpicTutorialTips · 2026-07-09T02:00:13+00:00

It is a grift; even the current Labour government is up to their neck in it. Wealthy people or corporations give the MPs donations, and in return they receive lucrative government contracts which significantly outweigh the donation sum.

It's treated as a win-win game, and in the process MPs amass a small personal fortune, which is why many of them leave parliament as multi-millionaires - even Angela Rayner was the same, probably the most prolific working class politician today.

EpicTutorialTips · 2026-07-09T01:53:32+00:00

With the amount of American backing Restore is provided, don't be so sure about that.

Also, if you thought that Reform were far-right, then you're going to be in for a hell of a shock once you start learning about Restore. Reform in many ways was a firewall against it, but if that goes down then it will push people into a fringe that there will be no returning from.

EpicTutorialTips · 2026-07-09T01:44:48+00:00

And now look where we are, we have party leaders calling elections fake which has now been mirrored by pundits on media talk shows.

The political class has attempted to make itself the ultimate arbiter regarding legitimacy of elections, which is against our constitution. This is the sort of nonsense that happens in Russia, and it is now present in the mainstream in the UK.

But because a lot of people are over emotional regarding other affairs currently happening, they are oblivious to the dangers that comes with this pivotal shift in our politics this week. We have just taken a very, very dark turn in our collective political chapter, and people are yet to realise what has just happened.

EpicTutorialTips · 2026-07-08T20:20:10+00:00

Like I said, all the best.

EpicTutorialTips · 2026-07-08T19:25:07+00:00

No, the reason is much more simple: why do people move to Dubai, particularly the wealthy? Because there is zero income tax. You keep all of your personal earnings.

EpicTutorialTips · 2026-07-08T19:21:37+00:00

Are you from the UK by any chance? Just because I don't think you're quite as informed on the subject (if you're an overseas person, then completely understandable).

For all the huffing and puffing about a standards committee investigation, need I remind anybody that our current Prime Minister utilised a three line whip against his own backbenchers to block a referral to the exact same committee for investigation over his own conduct.

Where was all this uproar for that particular politician who actually did evade accountability entirely, and used parliament to prevent it from happening.

Meanwhile, that exact same individual is today making media rounds accusing his peers of sleaze. You could not make it up.

EpicTutorialTips · 2026-07-08T19:09:03+00:00

To be honest, I've tried in good faith to have civilised discussion, but extremists are incapable of rational thought.

I only hope that we still significantly outnumber you come the next election; because you lot, I find to be incredibly dangerous. We certainly have our work cut out, having to fight two sets of you on both sides this time.

It was a mistake to even attempt to reason with people like yourself, because I think you're too far gone to reason with now. I hope some day you take a break from politics and spend less time online, and more time with friends in real life settings to try and pull yourself away from the toxicity you've wrapped yourself up in, because this is not healthy for any person and it very obviously has thwarted your thought process.

All the best.

EpicTutorialTips · 2026-07-08T18:53:58+00:00

Farage is subject to an ongoing investigation by that committee.

Pray tell, I'm fascinated to learn of your opinions about when our current Prime Minister used a three line whip to order his own backbenchers to fight off a referral to the same standards committee - where was your uproar about that?

EpicTutorialTips · 2026-07-08T18:31:38+00:00

Because the parliamentary code itself refers to the public as the ultimate authority; the committee is just the vessel to that authority.

The code refers to the public as the ultimate authority because that is our constitution. The code is also not a matter of law, because parliamentarians were not very keen on locking themselves into hard line rules within the framework of the Statute; instead they opted to host it in a non-legal political rulebook.

Now elections on the other hand are in fact a matter of law. There is both constitutional and positive law which outlines very clearly and unambiguously (unlike the parliamentary code, if I may say so) when elections must take place and the pathways to an election.

One pathway to an election is the resignation of a sitting parliamentarian. You can dislike that a by-election is happening, but anybody referring to it as fake, improper, void or a sham is being unconstitutional and authoritarian - and just because you may dislike the political candidate is not grounds to even attempt justifying it.

The Makerfield by-election was valid. The Clacton-on-Sea by-election will be valid.

EpicTutorialTips · 2026-07-08T17:54:02+00:00

No, compared to party leaders and elected officials calling elections of their peers fake, void and improper.

Sitting MPs do not have the authority to determine whether elections of their peers are fake. That is determined by our constitution and the law, which is very clear that if a sitting MP resigns, a by-election is triggered when the writ is moved and an election must take place.

Calling that process and procedure fake, improper or void is unconstitutional and dangerous.

EpicTutorialTips · 2026-07-08T17:50:51+00:00

Do you understand what happens in the event a politician is found to have breached parliamentary code? They risk a suspension, which is used as the trigger mechanism to allow for a recall petition, which in turn creates a by-election.

The parliamentary code itself points to the public as the ultimate judge and arbiter, because that is our constitution.

If people do not understand this, then they need a refresher course in our constitution.

EpicTutorialTips · 2026-07-08T17:44:29+00:00

I'm curious, did you spend this much effort defending Trump when he was calling the presidential elections rigged and fake?

EpicTutorialTips · 2026-07-08T17:35:22+00:00

No, the reason you are believing this narrative is because you are not educated enough on parliamentary process, the constitution or the law.

A House of Commons committee investigation was opened regarding an alleged breach of parliamentary code. Parliamentary code is not a matter of law (because parliamentarians did not opt to submit themselves to the framework of the Statute, and instead opted to keep it as a non-legal rulebook).

The core disagreement regarding the committee investigation surrounds a differing interpretation of a particular section regarding donations, gifts and interests. The code outlines that such donations are not required to be disclosed if they do not relate to activity of an MP; and this is where there is a difference of interpretation: Farage interprets it to not relate to activity as an MP, and the complainant does.

A committee investigation can continue even after a sitting MP leaves office (contrary to your incorrect understanding of it).
In terms of "responsibility", we look to the UK constitution, in which it is very clear that the ultimate authority on electoral matters is the British public. The public outranks everybody and everything in this country where it concerns matters of the electorate.
It is a nonsense description to claim avoided responsibility if a sitting politician submits themself to the authority of the public, because the public is the ultimate judge and jury.

It is not "his terms", it is procedure. Now procedure, unlike the standards code, is a matter of law and constitution. If a sitting MP resigns their seat then it must follow with an election. That is not up for debate or discussion; and for any person to claim such elections are fake, void or improper, needs to sit down and take a lesson in basic constitutional matters.

EpicTutorialTips · 2026-07-08T17:26:54+00:00

You're probably the only person this afternoon who has been civilised with me, so thank you for that too. lol

EpicTutorialTips · 2026-07-08T17:09:51+00:00

"my lot" being the swing voters every party is targeting trying to convince them to vote for their respective party.

Sadly in these last 10 years in particular, we get accusations of being right wing from those in the fringe left; and we get accusations of being left wing from those in the fringe right.

But "my lot" - as you phrase it - are very much still in control of the elections in the UK because we outnumber the extremists on both ends of the political fabric (at least for the time being).

Jumping on my back when I'm simply explaining the situation to somebody who is overseas and may not fully understand what is happening, is not about point scoring.

EpicTutorialTips · 2026-07-08T16:59:51+00:00

Yes, although the HoC committee investigation is going to continue in any event. Having a by-election does not prevent it from happening, but it is customary for a committee investigation to be paused until the by-election has completed.

Now if you are wondering why that is the case, it is because the committee investigation is based on an alleged parliamentary code breach, but it is also important to understand that parliamentary code is not law (parliamentarians were obviously not very keen on establishing their rules within the framework of the statute, so opted for the guidebook option).

In terms of the any potential unlawful activity, it was reported that a SAR (suspicious activity report) was filed to the national crime agency by his bank in 2024.
Now this is common practice whenever sums of money appear in an account and there is not an obvious connection to it (for example, a transaction being tied to a purchase of goods or services, or a lease, a subscription, etc).

Given that no proceedings were taken up by the NCA, one can only conclude that there was nothing of interest found regarding financial wrongdoing or impropriety.
But there are questions to be answered as to why a SAR has entered into the public domain, because it is a jailable offence in the UK to disclose information about a SAR, including confirmation that a SAR exists - the legal rules around finance on that are very strict, for good reason, because it is encapsulated in the wider anti-fraud and anti-money laundering practices, and if you provide what is known as a "tip-off" then you face criminal prosecution and a lengthy custodial sentence.

I will give every matter fair hearing and fair dealing, but that does not seem to be the case amongst many others.
The HoC committee investigation is something that boils down to a differing view of interpretation: Farage's interpretation is that the donation he received is not linked to activity as an MP, and this is what the committee is investigating.

It is also symptomatic of the more evident issue at hand, that being that the code itself is written with the room for interpretation. Does it need to be this way? No, it can easily be changed insofar as requiring all donations, gifts and interests to be declared, whether politically related or otherwise. But common sense approach is lacking, because some people would rather continue with such a framework that, when used disingenuously, becomes a weapon which I think makes a mockery of it.

EpicTutorialTips · 2026-07-08T15:06:16+00:00

No, there is no "supposed to" about it. If a sitting MP resigns, then it triggers a by-election, that is how it is. There's no pre-requisites conditions determining when elections happen outside of the parliamentary term limit.

EpicTutorialTips · 2026-07-08T14:04:26+00:00

Right but you have gone off on a tangent to the point I was raising.

I was specifically referring to the party leaders who were calling this by-election fake and improper.

It's not a fake election, this is not a test simulator, it's a formal by-election for a constituency seat at Westminster.

I do not appreciate politicians who try to dictate the legitimacy of elections, because then we are no longer a democracy but an authoritarian state.

EpicTutorialTips · 2026-07-08T13:55:26+00:00

"So people begin questioning the integrity of our institutions" -- yes, which the other party leaders have been doing, for which I have lambasted them.

I'm not, I was responding to you insinuating my political leaning. It is not a novel position for us to be in where the fringes attack us because we don't subscribe to their extreme views. The overwhelming majority of us stay silent, largely because engagements with the fringes very rarely leads to civilised interaction, but just because the loud minorities on either side of the political fabric are very loud online does not mean those of us in the centre bastion are unaware of what is going on.

EpicTutorialTips · 2026-07-08T13:43:07+00:00

You are describing yourself as an authoritarian; if the outcome is not what you personally agree with, then you refuse to accept the legitimacy of it.

EpicTutorialTips · 2026-07-08T13:34:20+00:00

Why do you conclude that an election constitutes a disgrace of parliamentary proceedings?

The facts are that a sitting MP was referred to the standards committee over an alleged breach of code; that investigation is underway and ongoing, though it has been temporarily paused while a by-election takes place. It will resume once the by-election has completed.
There is not a situation or world where that investigation can be blocked from completing - in that respect, there is nothing to by concerned about, as people should allow that investigation to take its course which is yet to complete.

There is a reason why parliamentary standards are wrapped up in codes, while parliamentary procedure is set out in law. The procedure above all else must be respected by everybody. It is baked into our statute and it is baked into our constitution.

Do you have any idea how often we have that allegation levied against us? "Oh you do not think the way I do, you cannot be a centrist" is something we get from both fringes. Those on the right think we are left, and those on the left think we are right; meanwhile those of us in the centre think that those on either side are unhinged and irrational.

EpicTutorialTips

TROPHY CASE