Mailwatch(ed) Forum

Only couple of weeks after a Reform politician was murdered, Zack Polanski shares this. He's not been arrested yet, but it can only be a matter of time.

And as ever, if you're left of the Tories you'll get roped in with that lot.

What a moron Polanski is.

But I'm wondering how Lucy Connolly gets a place on stage at conference but they want Polanski arrested. Hurty wurty political satire in the vigorous British tradition, surely? The cops aren't going to waste any time on this.

Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Mon Jul 27, 2026 7:14 pm What a moron Polanski is.

But I'm wondering how Lucy Connolly gets a place on stage at conference but they want Polanski arrested. Hurty wurty political satire in the vigorous British tradition, surely? The cops aren't going to waste any time on this.

I wouldn't be too sure, Polanski's status, the size of his following and the proximity to Widdecombe's murder make this a lot more serious than Connolly's Tweet for which she did time.

Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Mon Jul 27, 2026 7:14 pm What a moron Polanski is.

But I'm wondering how Lucy Connolly gets a place on stage at conference but they want Polanski arrested. Hurty wurty political satire in the vigorous British tradition, surely? The cops aren't going to waste any time on this.

Because nobody is as sanctimoniously insistent on the law being upheld as someone who is permanently in the wrong, except for this time.

Farage is after a silly “two tier” talking point, nothing more. Polanski will no more get nicked than Morrissey did for Margaret On The Guillotine, or The Stone Roses for Elizabeth My Dear.

Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Mon Jul 27, 2026 8:29 pm Farage is after a silly “two tier” talking point, nothing more. Polanski will no more get nicked than Morrissey did for Margaret On The Guillotine, or The Stone Roses for Elizabeth My Dear.

Two major differences:
1. Neither Morrissey or The Stones Roses were leaders of a political party.
2. Neither record was released three weeks after the murder of a Tory MP or a Royal.

As ever, context is important.

What an arse. Meanwhile, he also wants to reset relations with Labour.

Talking of politicians being for the chop etc is established metaphor for defeating them. The Lib Dems in 2005 openly called their strategy of challenging senior Tories "decapitation", and clocked up nearly 6 million votes. This was no time of political innocence- one of their own MPs (Nigel Jones) survived an assassination attempt in 2000, with his aide being killed. Yet nobody batted an eye lid at talk of decapitating Oliver Letwin and David Davis (and failing).

This is tactless timing by Polanski, hence he deleted, but it's not criminal. It's an attempt at false equivalence by the bad faith Right.

The Weeping Angel wrote: ↑Mon Jul 27, 2026 9:25 pm What an arse. Meanwhile, he also wants to reset relations with Labour.

What's Burnham changed exactly that justifies this shift apart from being more popular than Starmer? We've still got Mahmood in the Home Office, and a new Chancellor more committed than the last one to Defence funding, both of which are supposed to be key points of contention for the Greens. There's no commitment to renationalizing Water or a Wealth Tax and Rent Control has been ruled out by Angela Rayner (rightly, I think). So that's the 3 things he talks about all the time not happening.

This is pure self-interest. Attacking someone doing mostly the same policies with a better political touch is less of a vote winner.

And anyway, what's Burnham supposed to do? Run everything past Zack because Zack's being nice? Nah, the PM can put his platform forward, and the Greens can vote for or against.

Polanski says he didn't notice what was on the t-shirt when he posted that photo and admits he should have and that he was careless. When challenged to apologise to Farage he said he wouldn't because it was a mistake and therefore an apology would be insincere.
Wot?
We shouldn't apologise for our mistakes?
Our mistakes are still our fault, we are the cause and therefore need to own them.
As for insincerity, I'd argue that apologising for something you did deliberately is more likely to be insincere than something which you never intended to do.
I note that the Green Party are not rallying around Polanski, seems like they may be getting tired of defending the indefensible.

I'm wondering how long it'll be before they realise he's more of a liability than he is an asset.

If the rumours of dissent are to be believed I think they already have. Greens keep having to answer for his idiocy (I'm being generous here) and it looks like they've finally had enough with this latest.
There's no obvious replacement, but surely there must be many who would do less harm?
Poll numbers are on the slide and what's the point of a populist who's unpopular?

Polanski should be sacked for appalling judgement if nothing else. Farage's finances have been replaced in the news by Most Threatened Politician Ever.

Correct. Thanks a bunch, Plankski.

‘Terminally online’: why frustrated Greens want Polanski to hand over his social media

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... nham-green

It is just coincidence that a very public mishap by Zack Polanski arrived at the same time as new polls showed Labour in the lead. But it did neatly illustrate the point that while Andy Burnham is enjoying a political honeymoon, the Green leader’s now seems over...

...However, an internal debate about Polanski’s prolific and largely solo social media efforts has started after he shared an Instagram post that included someone wearing a T-shirt intimating that they would welcome Nigel Farage’s death.

Polanski’s official output – for example the much-watched videos of him talking to voters – are for obvious reasons created by professionals. But on X, Bluesky and Facebook, the Green leader likes or reposts content at a dizzying pace.

As such, few were hugely surprised when Polanski pressed the “collaborate” button on an Instagram post comprising about 20 photos from an event he attended, the first a photo of himself...

...“There are discussions at all levels about how to avoid this sort of thing happening in the future,” the senior party figure said. “There does seem to be a keenness from people around Zack for him to hand over the keys to his social media accounts.”

Another party source said Polanski had to be rescued from himself when it came to social media: “There is a problem among some people of being terminally online, and Zack is terminally online.”...

It does appear that the Party isn't too happy with Planski's online behaviour.

Meanwhile in Hackney.

This is what would have happened if Corbyn had been allowed anywhere near government.

They’ve been pushing very aggressive poorly demonstrated leaflets in Manchester. We will see if it’s right or wrong tomorrow but the polling doesn’t look great for them.

Using results from a FPTP result and comparing with a STV polling is a little silly. Hopefully the public have seen through it as it could easily let Reform in through the back door.

However it would seem Labour are comfortably ahead in the polls. I understand this is something that all parties do but I think the online obsessive who will argue that this is true is fucking annoying.