FastFreddy2

Been there ... Somewhere up this thread (maybe 2 years ago) we had similar experiences using a newly installed escalator in a London store. When it happened to my shoes, "we" put it down to carelessness on my part. Two weeks later, same thing with Mrs Freddy's brand new shoes. I wasn't happy. As I was unsure of how this was possible (been using them for years without a problem) I started looking at how they work and how the problem was possible. Firstly, the upward moving stair edge of the new escalator, did not have rounded tips on the 'fins' of the stair. This is the (seemingly) upward moving stair behind, as you go downward. Just about every other stairway I touched, the fins were nicely rounded to prevent any gouging. Conversely the tips on the new escalator were pointed enough to act like the cutting tip of a machine tool, like a lathe. The next problem (in the chain required to create the shoe gouge) is that the rising stair behind, initially goes upward (relative to your foot) but then moves slightly forward into 'your' airspace. If you are wearing a flat shoe, this isn't a problem. The rising stair moves ever-so-slightly into the "nape" of your heel, which is an empty space. Wear a high heel and stand at the back of the stair tread, the heel is in the way of the rising stair. With rounded/smooth tips on the stairs 'fins', at worst you might get pushed a little forward. When those fins are sharp, you get gouges. Although I had let the first gouge to my shoe go, a second event meant there was a problem, and I had found the cause. I asked for compensation for the damage to the shoes, and although I was at first refused, a bit of persistence got me money for both pairs of shoes. I didn't try to fleece them asking for full retail or compo for upsetting us, I just got the prices we paid for the shoes. Paying me, cost considerably less than legal representation at a small claims court, and news of their escalator ruining shoes didn't travel any further. We effectively got full refunds for our shoes, which while damaged, were still wearable. You probably won't have had the chance to do the checks I did, and you're on your way home soon.... Maybe you'll have to consign the sandals to the great shoe-shop in the sky, and wait for a second pair to come up on the auction site? Though you won't be alone in owning shoes that got used for one holiday before they were retired. Safe journey home.

I know this fella doesn't like modern shoes. His father was a cobbler, and I wouldn't be surprised to find the shop was his fathers too. It certainly has the run down appearance of being his fathers shop. The current proprietor may not have just learned his fathers skills, but picked up a cynical view too. This isn't the first time I've been told the shoes I've brought in are poor quality. (Actually the third,) He didn't charge for the last repair, and this one will cost a fiver, and to be collected Thursday. By saying the repair may not last 'do you want me to try anyway?' He has guaranteed himself against failure. Given the grief of the repair, cost of glue, and the speed/price of sub-contracting the job, I'm happy for him to give it a go. He is right about the liquorice part though. There's no way that sole should have separated given where I use them, though Oxford Street ..... I don't know how the original glue was applied, but the word sparingly springs to mind. Looks like the glue was applied with a roller leaving microdots of adhesive. These are my fav wearing out shoe, that I might have paid less than £40 for, and worth every penny to me. Even if they needed new soles, I could live with that.

Some additional notes on the West End visit ..... I did get a 'twisted ankle' a couple of times. This is when my foot is persuaded to bend awkwardly, and gives the appearance of me about to topple over from a stumble. Since I have fairly good control of my body, an outside influence creates this situation. Almost every time it will be a deformation in the path or roadway. Yesterday I noticed that although not apparent to the naked eye, many of the side roads into Oxford Street have indentations in them from years of use by heavy goods vehicles. In a field, these would be called furrows. Without puddles to announce the indentations, it's possible to be caught unawares, and I did either 2 or 3 times. My walking companion assumes I will take a tumble, though to date, I haven't. (A statement that almost guarantees I will next time. ) See P.S. Of course 3 hours of mixed pace walking on often uneven ground in a 5 inch heel must take its toll on ankles. I don't go out anything like as often as I did some 8/9 years ago, Consequently, I almost certainly don't have the core muscle strength that would benefit me during these adventures. In stores or malls where the floor is flat and even, I have no problems at all. Walking is a straightforward exercise. Along Wigmore Street where the pavement has been given some sort of fine bitumen coating, leaving it with a smooth surface, again no problems. But Oxford Street with it's mixed surface texture, occasional rocking slabs, and general unevenness - quite a challenge. Perhaps it's why I don't often see more intelligent people wearing a heel there? Or perhaps I'm shopping in the wrong place? Maybe I should try Kensington? Lastly, a reference to getting spotted. I mentioned being seen in Topshop by a couple of shoppers. I'd be amazed if sales staff hadn't noticed me surreptitiously trying on court stiletto's. But elsewhere I got spotted too, but with no trauma or unpleasantness. One particularly interesting encounter (if it can be called that) was with a petite/slim but attractive middle-aged lady who looked like an American tourist. (Her clothing style and eye make up being indicators.) She looked at my feet, then looked at me, a bit longer than she needed to .... Fortunately I wasn't at one of the junctions where I got a twisted ankle, that would have been proper embarrassing. All in all a good afternoon. I bought 3 pairs of soft shoes for decorating from Primarni, at £3 a pair. These have white soles, so accidentally kicking doors or skirting boards won't leave a scuff mark. I also carry a black pair in the car for unscheduled stops to homes where outdoor shoes in the house are not welcome, and I don't do unshod feet anywhere anytime. My walking companion who has bunion problems, also got some 'bling' walking shoes at a discounted price. She has recently gotten a thing about sparkly footwear, perhaps thinking she has recently acquired a Shirley Bassey or Joan Collins heritage. I am suspicious a lot of these 'bling' designs are Tracey Emin influenced .... Meaning the designs often seem to have a lot in common with an unmade bed .... Tacky, irregular, with no thought to aesthetic other than refusing to recognise the concept in any form. Often a patchwork of uncomplimentary colours and textures, I could describe them succinctly as "bug ugly". And worse ... I had seen some in patchwork green mesh and gold patent, but couldn't locate them during a quick browse of the brands I know I saw. I'm sure those reading will get the gist of my remarks though. P.S. I try to keep all my shoes clean, so when getting ready to go out, I don't have to concern myself with; "Do my shoes need cleaning?" Shortly after wearing, they are cleaned and returned to their storage box. On cleaning the shoes I wore yesterday, mid afternoon today, I found this: I got to the local repairer (fella who may well suspect these are mine), and got them in for repair. He describes modern shoes as having soles like "liquorice", there for a short time before the shoes are discarded. I think he was surprised the shoes were as old as they are, as they look new. (But worn a fair bit in shopping malls.) He says he will try to get the soles stuck back on, and we will "have to see" if they stay stuck. If they don't, a complete new sole will be the answer. I'll be happy to have a new sole that stays stuck, over throwing the shoes. These are a joy to wear. Not very attractive, but have a nice almond/rounded toe, and an almost 5 inch heel. With me standing still, hard to see they are a woman's shoe. And not overly expensive, if bought in a sale. And at the time, available in a UK9.

Hello Mor Åse, and welcome. You will doubtless get your membership approved at HHplace quite soon. This isn't the junior version of the main event, but something completely separate. Sorry to hear about your dystonia. A quick search on google reveals it's an unpleasant sickness. You have done well to make any progress, much less wearing a heel.

I followed 'the plan' today, and visited the West End. No police with guns were seen. They probably didn't want to scare the tourist shoppers. Doubtless they were there, somewhere. Apart from a couple of Sunday drivers, the event was largely without trauma. One driver, a middle-aged man with children in his car who drove like an 18 year old, got some special attention from me. I don't do road-rage really, but I do give some 'the look'. While Mr 18 year old going on 40 weaved in and out of traffic, and purposely cut me up, he still got left behind. When we both had to stop and him a little bit behind and in the left hand (nearside) lane to me, I looked back, to give him 'the look'. (I had on 5" heels at the time, I didn't think leaving the car would work. You can't expect people to take you seriously as Mr RoadRage, if you are wearing high heels, can you?) So I looked, and he gave me the "WTF" look back. Rather than get involved in a problem I didn't have time for, I just blew him a kiss - and laughed. I can't get into trouble for that, can I? He took the very next turn left and we parted company. While TFL (under the auspices of Puffer's guidance) tried to make parking difficult by shutting the southern part of the West End (Regent Street), I took no time at all in finding a parking space, practically at Debenhams back door. Yay! Straight into one of the big stores for coffee and a rather disappointing piece of carrot cake. This kept me going until 7.30pm, so it did it's job even if it wasn't as pleasant as it could be.... Next stop Topshop, and PVC jeans.... Couldn't find the Jamie ones in black, but found some in silver. I still prefer the House.of.C.B. ones, which are only slightly more expensive. No big people need apply though. I found a House pair in a Large, and measured the waist at only 30". I did not buy ... Jury is still out on a £60 purchase. While there, I did try the same brand's £119.99 patent court in a 41/8. As worn by Manchester WAGS.... When I am out in a heel, I almost always wear two pairs of ankle hose. As walkers will know, doubling up, is very effective in the prevention of blisters. I should 'fess up, I was not wearing leggings today, as it was too warm, but long hose that holds itself up. Over my feet, I also wore a pair of the ankle hose I always wear too. When I tried on these shoes, I removed the ankle hose (sock) and walked around a small bit with just the thin long hose on my feet. To my surprise the shoes were a good fit to a little loose. When I had tried them before with double ankle hose, I could barely get the shoes on, much less walk around in reasonable comfort. At £120 a pop, I'm never going to buy a pair, but at least I know should a "worn once" pair appear on an auction site, they will fit. The heel is a measured 5 inches, in my size. In the same store, I tried a pair of these: As my walking companion had found some shoes to try on (which she subsequently bought) I got to try these in my size, and kept them on for a few minutes, as well as had a walk wearing one shoe. I know these come up a size small, so the ankle sock got taken off. The slippery long hose helped get my foot into them, but the toe-box was cramped. The length was okay, but my toes were a bit squished. Odd given I don't have a crooked big toe, or wide feet. As is usually the case, a couple of minutes into wearing the shoe, my toes shape-shift and the shoe fits.... I had a little walk around a couple of the display aisles, with my usual 5" high ankle boot on the left foot, and the stiletto on my right foot. While the rise of the shoe is a challenge, it seemed to be easier to walk in that the boot. I guess because my ankle isn't being held so rigidly in the shoe, like it is in the boot? Anyway, I had a little walk around, and I didn't notice anyone noticing me. Had a bit of trouble getting my ankle hose on discreetly, but I got it back on. Two girls from different groups, saw me return the shoes to the display stand, and my gait as I walked. They individually, correctly put two and two together. I tried to keep shop furniture between them and me, with mixed success. I'm not a big fan of suede on court shoes, so unless I get a pair in a sale, I won't be buying a pair of these either. On the way back along Oxford Street finally toward Selfridges, we stopped in a store to have a look for the fella with the up-do mentioned previously. Sadly, not seen today. I did try these though: Another pair (as all three) with a measured 5 inch heel. Madden shoes often come up a bit on the generous side. These do, though not a whole size, so I tried them with both layers of hose. They were a tad small in the toe box, but that might have been the padding in the foot-bed. Walking around in them, did not feel like I had a 5" heel on. This American brand owes nothing to narrow European sizing. If I worked in a shoe store, I'd be tempted to try wearing these for a working day. If anything, they were a tad loose after my feet shape-shifted. Eventually, we arrived at Selfridges, sadly at only 15 minutes before closing time. It was enough time though. Nothing in the "affordable" range had gone on sale, though 'Sale, 50% off" signs were scattered around. (Secret sale, obviously.) Thinking I should use the Boys Room before we left, I ventured into Menswear to use the loo. What a shock! When I went into the cubicle (the only one), the smell of warm urine nearly knocked me over. It looked like no-one had flushed for quite a while (so I flushed - which immediately helped), and it was obvious previous users had not bothered to put the seat up. Nor had several people bothered to aim well either. After flushing, I washed the seat, and the floor. I didn't scrimp on using Selfridges paper towels to clean up their toilet. I never sit on the seat, but I don't want to hover over someone else's excreta, nor do I want to stand in it.... I suppose this is to be expected, with so many foreign nationals using the facilities. Many countries still use a hole in the floor, and even more will be unfamiliar with infra red flush systems. Leaving the building by the side door .... Visit done, we travelled home.

There's no need to do down that road ... (boom boom).

As a friend often says (usually after making a mistake) ..... "Everyday is a school day" (Learning day.) Interesting read, thank you. Not sure about disposing of asymmetric people though. Few have perfectly identical sides of their body, as photo's taken with mirrors held perpendicular to the nose often reveal. (Gives asymmetrical image, but right-side and left-side don't match.) Plus, if there was any 'medical cleansing' going on, I can think of a far better criteria than a shortage of limbs or any other non-self inflicted causes.

I suspect marrying inside your own family, would produce fewer headlines. (Rumour has it people in Norfolk do it all the time. ) But yes, what a way to get a doctorate, writing up about men wearing heels. I've always wanted to look at a woman and use those legendary words: "Relax, I'm a doctor." Although in recent years, they've had a fair amount of bad-press themselves, so I doubt the phrase would have the same effect it would have had 30 or 40 years ago.... Another boat missed.

I was in a large London store around 3 weeks ago. Walking around, an assistant walked past, a male with high bleached hair. The cut and "upped" hair was very similar in shape to an ancient Egyptian flat topped crown, not unlike this ..... The hair was not only shaped and bleached, it had been colour stripped to give lighter tones as the hair went upward. It was both an incredible cut, and very clever use of the bleaching technique. I had a very good look as he walked past me. Perhaps 15 minutes later, we left the last shoe concession before walking out into the street. Moving toward the door I turned to make sure no one was following who I should keep the door open for. As I turned, I noticed once again, the assistant with the up-do. This time at a distance, I had the chance to see head-to-toe outfit, without it being obvious that I was giving him the-once-over. He was wearing a light coloured maxi-skirt. Not only had I failed to notice before, but so seemingly, had everyone else. He was wearing a flat/casual shoe, not unlike espadrilles. Tempting though it might be to suggest otherwise, I'm 100% sure I was looking at a young man. If there is a chance to see him again, I will make a point to speak to him (and check out his hands). Not that I'm expecting to have made a mistake. No makeup, no hips, no wobbly bits. The conclusion reached then, men-in-heels, cause more of a stir than man-in-skirt.

Just for clarity, I hadn't excluded the UK when I wrote my original comment. I was thinking Europe as opposed to the Americas or one of the other places Western clothing wouldn't usually been seen. I do wonder why those on mainland Europe drive on the wrong side of the road. Are they closet pagans? I wasn't too far off then. I'm the same. Asymmetric hemlines, and single sleeve/single shoulder dresses or tops, brings me out in a rash.

Went to Brent Cross a couple of days ago. Wasn't there long, but long enough. Unusually, I didn't have my regular footwear on, but the M+S pointed ankle boots, the ones my walking companion likes to complain about .... The ones Mrs Freddy has a similar demeanour toward (though is less vocal). As I've mentioned several times, very little of the shoe is seen at all, just 40-50 mm or so of the pointed tip. If you first saw my feet, when you looked up you probably wouldn't expect to see a man on top of them ... We had cause to go into a shoe shop, which was in fact the whole reason for the visit. It's not one I like to go into when I'm at B/C in a heel, because there is always too many staff when I visit. People with time on their hands have time to notice.... The floor inside the shop is tiled, if heels are worn. they make a noise. It's an open plan store with glass shelving (for the most part), so few places to hide, or hide your footwear. Often there is an assistant standing in the doorway, welcoming people into the store, not today. We walked in, with me fast becoming disappointed at the range of casual shoes, and abundance of 'trainers', Not so my walking companion, since it was the very reason we we there. A couple of pairs were selected for trying on, and I asked at the till for the use of a shoe horn. One was found, and as I walked away I noticed the sitting woman of a couple waiting for something, may have spotted my shoes. I wouldn't have been surprised if any one else noticed, but it certainly wasn't the case I felt any one else had noticed them.... Except that my walking companion seemed to take some pleasure in telling me otherwise, once we had left the shop. 'Apparently' as reported to me; "everyone" in the shop had noticed my footwear, and the chap who had passed me the shoe horn "couldn't take his eyes off" my shoes ... I'm either not paranoid enough, or my eyesight is worse than I imagined. I'm fairly confidant that not everyone in the store noticed my shoes, though I'm sure some did. I expected the store staff to, and was pleased I wasn't subjected to awkward staring at my shoes when I spoke to a couple of them at the till station. But I'm hoping there were some who were oblivious. It wasn't busy enough for the noise level or chaos level to hide me, but I thought I'd been careful with my shoe noise, and I like to think I'm more observant than most. Probably, the truth is somewhere in between what I saw, and what was reported to me. Actually, I don't mind people noticing, as long as I don't notice I've been noticed.... I'm not sure why a man in heels, seems to garner more attention than say; two men holding hands, or two women holding hands. A man in high heels more socially taboo - innit? Tomorrow, Sunday, I shall be in the West End. More specifically, Selfridges. Anyone who wishes to meet up, I'm happy to get the coffees in.

I'm trying hard to stop myself being upset by the GE results and the ruptions within the winning political party. It will be the second time in a year they have suffered a shocking surprise, and you'd think they'd have learned to handle it better by now..... The absolutely last thing the Tory party needs, is the upheaval of a change in leadership. The VERY last thing this country needs, is a change in our country's leadership. As with the Tory party, the country has had enough of change. Teresa May got 2M more votes than Cameron, and the Tories were happy with the result he got. Time to move on. Time to move forward.

I have been wearing women's jeans for over 40 years. Never made a secret of it. They fit (significantly) better, on me at least, and certainly look better. The latest style I wear with flat shoes are amongst the very few pairs I've ever owned with a left-hand zipper. I have no idea why the zipper is 'handed', nor do I understand the historic reason for the same thing with shirts/blouses. Maybe to slow-down the dressing of women and make the undressing (by men) a tad easier. People are generally right-handed, and 80/90 years ago left-handed children were punished for using their left hand (as was my left-handed father). Having buttons and zips left-handed for women's styles, undoubtedly makes for easier work from face-to-face situation with a man (or woman). I haven't once been asked about the left-handed zipper, nor have I noticed any interest in it. I do get 'caught' trying to use my right hand though, having forgotten it's easier with my left hand. Overall, I suspect the 'handed' thing might be a bit of a European thing going back a long way. It looks to be something followed by very few retailers/manufacturers. It certainly is a long way off being 'common' in my recent experience. As to the 'street' anonymity of a man wearing PVC trousers .... I have a number of times, 'bumped into' a chap from the London - ish area who goes out in a bright red head-to-toe latex outfit, that comes with horns and a tail. The overall look is that of the devil (as often portrayed) and if I remember, he wears a high heel boot with moderate platforms. I'm sure I have posted a picture in the "meeting" thread. Anyway, in London's West End, he hardly gets a second look. If anything, it's giggly (inebriated) hen-night grade women who had anything to say to him, with others walking straight past with no obvious recognition of his outfit. The term "hiding in plain sight" springs to mind. If you have the cojones for any given situation, I think you are half-way home to managing any suspicion of unusual behaviour or mode of dress. Won't stop everything of course, but will stop mass-hysteria running you out of town.

If I heard rightly, the DUP are okay for a hard Brexit. They will doubtless vie for the sort of funding package Scotland currently enjoys. Time to play the waiting game. Boris Johnson (traitorous turncoat) is eyeing up Mays job, but I think she'll find enough support to stay in place. The country has had enough of turmoil. No more referendums, no more elections, no more changes of in leadership. It's important the EU sees that May can keep her job too. Unlike Cameron, I think May is not a quitter. And as I said before, we are too close to the start of the negotiations for change anyway. You may not like it, some of the Tory party may not like it, but what we have now, is what we'll have for the next 5 years. The only way Brexit is in danger, is if Tory Europhiles stab their own party in the back. That would be a self-destructive move, as an early election, really would give us a Labour government. Corbyn's ego is about to compete with the moon so I'm hoping he will get enough rope to hang himself with his 'spend spend spend' initiative. The Tories must now look at changing the funding regime at universities, to pull the rug from under the Labour party, and bring the elderly back into the fold with their care and pension packages. I'm going to have a couple of prescription tranquillisers, and a lie down. My nerves are in shreds.

Purv. Maybe I'll bump into at a Torture Garden gig? You'll be instantly recognisable, wearing the only cardigan in the place.

If you get the chance, you might consider looking at, or trying the other brand. That said, if I would struggle with their largest size and you are MUCH taller than me ...

Well, she is going to have to ride the humiliation horse for some time yet. We are too close to starting the Brexit negotiations for a change in leader. The procedure for a new PM takes a long time, and that's something we don't have. If there was a change, it would put the leader of the Tory party back where TM was only weeks ago, but without an overall majority. At this time, T.M. can say she's there because she was voted for. (Could Boris or anyone else?) She still got more votes than any other party. She still has more MP's in parliament than every other party. She is in the same to better position than Cameron found himself in 2010 when he only got 306 seats. At that time he formed what was a successful coalition with the LibDems who had quite a large group of MP's to bring with them, which of course gave them leverage in the newly formed government. The DUP (who have offered their services) bring a much smaller group to the table, and if an unofficial deal can be reached (aka tactical voting in parliament) then T.M. would have a majority. I haven't been awake long enough to look, but I will be looking soon, but I suspect (and hope) the Tory party will have more individual votes in 2017 than it had in 2015. That being the case, T.M. has the support she asked for. Whether someone smart enough in the Tory party also capitalises on that, is another story. There's still one more seat to declare, so 2017 figure will change, but: 2015 Results: 11,334,576 Vote share 36.9% 2017 Results: (one more seat to be declared) 13,650,900 Vote Share 42.4% Teresa May didn't "lose" anything. These figures show she actually got what she asked for. May didn't do badly, Corbyn did unbelievably well by mobilising some of the CAB Party, apparently by using social media to great success. What EVERYONE has lost sight of, was the prospect of Scottish Independence and Kranky trying to scupper Brexit. There was a strategic need to curb this increasingly troublesome woman, and an election might take care of that. It did, resoundingly. Kranky lost her Westminster right-hand man, and the man who had carried the "Independence" torch for years before her. If anyone is looking at losing her job, she is. This election has called a full-stop to any notion the SNP might have had for a second Scottish Independence referendum, since any call for one in the Scottish parliament would not get passed with so many Unionist MP's now sitting. After Brexit (a battle already won) the potential collapse of the Union was the next serious challenge facing the UK. Now stopped dead. Someone with the wit to do it, should be slapping Teresa May on the back and congratulating her on her success. Greater proportion of the electorate voting for her, more voters, voting for her. And she's quelled the threat to the Union from the SNP. While the Labour Party is basking in glory, (almost as if they had won the election outright) Corbyn dissenters will still be looking for an excuse to get their way. He is there as a parliamentary representative of the Trades Union movement, who want open doors to the UK. Few of the core Labour supporters (the actual T.U. members) want that too. As I've said elsewhere, British workers don't want to compete with 500M EU workers, who are used to working longer hours for less, without 'free' medical care. Corbyn bought some time, but he is no leader of the UK. Looking at this map (one seat to declare) who would think the Tory party didn't have an overall majority? Today, I feel like a Remainer must have felt last year: deflated. But the statistics say it was a good result that could have been 8 seats better. And the constant threat of an Independent Scotland, has finally gone away for another 5-10 years. Time to crack on with Brexit.

All of the three pairs shown and found on a rack, were smaller sizes. Sizes 6 and 8 were all I found, not that there was much to choose from, I think 5 or 6 pairs in total. The ones i saw looked like they could have been end of line leftovers/residual stock. If you ever get the chance, had a feel of the H.of.C.B. version.

I agree everything, but this. We are too close to Brexit negotiations for that to happen. The EU has already started making noises about delays, hoping they can induce a change of face in the PM seat, and eventually, enough turmoil to produce a complete change in government. They are aware, playing for time suits their needs. They want a change in direction and for the money to keep rolling in.

I think I finally saw some of the Topshop PVC trousers. On a rail I found a pair of these: And a pair of these: And a pair of these: That's one more style than I was aware of. All three styles seemed to be made of the same material, and "vinyl" (PVC) would be an accurate description. All three pairs were super shiny. Proper purve shiny. And as previously suggested, with very little stretch. These are very much not the same item as the £60 House.of.C.B. version which seemed to me to be incredibly stretchy, and much more to my liking. I would wear something of this style to a club, rather than at home. It would form something of an androgynous look I might choose to portray on a special occasion on a 'theme' night somewhere. Unfortunately, it might be the H.O.C.B. version might be too small for me. I'm tempted to try though .... I wonder if I could buy a pair from a retailer, rather than order them by post - that might involve some convoluted returns procedure. We'll see.

I think you are being quite hard on T.M. possibly without cause. There was a programme on during the week quite late Tuesday it may have been, perhaps a Tonight special. The upshot of the slice I saw, indicated that T.M. is a party player. She doesn't like standing alone, doesn't like responding without advisers to provide broad detail on a query. Put succinctly, she will not have made this decision alone, and it probably wasn't even inspired by her. Possibly 10 years from now, her memoirs will reveal the full history of how the decision was reached. I will even go so far to say she was likely all but pressured into calling an election against her better judgement. She is conservative in nature (the programme indicates) and she would have had a natural reluctance to gamble at anything. She is a well-informed plodder, rather than a short-term opportunist. One thing is for sure. Even as late as 10pm last night, publication of the exit polls (30,000 polling results) had people sat in disbelief at the predicted outcome. So even as late as 9 hours ago, people 'in the business' could not believe what they were being told. How much less likely then, was this situation predictable 8 weeks ago?

It's looking like Corbyn dug up 'the youth' vote with promises of free university fees for those South of the border, and an amnesty of university fee debt. (Debt removed.) I suspect when all the numbers are in, the Conservative total vote count has increased over the 2015 vote total, exactly as Teresa May asked. However, the youth voter has significantly bolstered the Labour totals. The UKIP voter, previously thought to be disenfranchised Tories, now seems to have been disenfranchised Labour supporters who have gone back to the party they left. I can only conclude that many of the UKIP voters feared a hard Brexit and effectively 'jumped ship' to a party who want a Brexit so soft it won't be considered a Brexit at all. (Paying to stay in the single market and keeping free movement across borders.) Of course, the Tory campaign contained a number of 'own goals' with a major flaw in their manifesto being the start of a swing toward Labour. Teresa May then refusing to take on Corbyn in a debate, and her election message being almost robotic in it's monotony. Conversely, Corbyn was able to make manifesto promises he and the Tories could be assured he's never need to deliver. "Jam tomorrow" if you vote for me today. Lastly, I found out this morning, there have been 'snap' elections called twice in recent history. Both parties who called those elections, lost. While this election hasn't been 'lost' as such, it certainly hasn't been won. "We", UK PLC as it were, are in the worst possible situation with a 'hung' parliament, given we are about to start Brexit negotiations. The two very minor bits of good news ..... A leading light in the anti-Brexit campaign, Nick Clegg is no longer an MP. Longtime Scottish Independence protagonist Alex Salmond, is no longer an MP. Interestingly, the 2017 election result, isn't far away from what was expected in the 2015 elections. Cameron thought at the time, he was going to have to deal with a second coalition government. Was the Referendum a juicy carrot so tempting that many voters leapt at it, and gave the Tories a convincing win that no-one expected? Same 'anomaly' with SNP, who got an unusually high number of MP's in that particular vote too, and has 'normality' returned there now as well? "Hubris" is what it looks like, but wasn't it quite a good tactical move if it had paid off? Weren't polls indicating the Tories had a substantial lead? Hindsight is a wonderful thing. I don't know where the Labour support came from, and even the Labour party seem surprised at their unexpected success. I am sure the youth vote helped enormously, as did the Brexit backsliders. All stimulated by the Tory manifesto indicating it would once again look at retirees as a source of income. Hubris, or as football pundit Gary Lineker is saying; "own goal"? Maybe a combination of all three. The 'perfect storm'. Sounds just like the title of a film .....

You sir, are bloody genius. With the tag line now known, a little more on the background >> here <<

Trump is at the helm, but he doesn't want help taking control of USS America. Eventually, she'll be grounded, or worse, crash against another ship. He's too used to being the head of a business that could mitigate his everyday mistakes. Other world leaders, those with conflicting ideologies, are much less forgiving. He needs to learn diplomacy, and fast. Chances of success? Very very low, since he has shown no previous ability in this field of expertise.

I try to be "worldly" with international politics, but some of the content is like a foreign language (that I have no intention of learning). I read there's been enough said so Trump isn't likely to be impeached, so the rest would likely seem like personal (arse saving) PR. If there's anything of note to learn, feel free to share it though. I have been searching for some TV adverts I saw in the -I think- 1990's by what could have been a newspaper (possibly Telegraph or Independent) that ran along the lines of "I'm not interested in politics", showing how the person making that statement then asks a question that id then reflected by an answer that indicates the question has political overtones. The 'message' was that anything and everything has a political flavour somewhere. I can't find ANYTHING about the adverts anywhere. They need starting up again. People need to be involved. Why?