Jeremy's Den: October 2019

Doomsday D-10 or could it be D-101 now?
214th Anniversary of the Battle of Trafalgar, also Kim Kardashian's 39th birthday, Peter Mandelson's 66th and would have been Carrie Fisher's 63th

And a link that might come in handy while your peruse this, to use a word Jacob Rees-Mogg will understand….

Killer Queen 🔉 🔊
© Freddie Mercury, 1974

So now it has happened. The Yearly State Opening and Queen's Speech Costume Ball has come and gone live on BBC, no lip sync here. We definitely missed it last year when Theresa May ruled Commons had no time for a new batch of minor legislation and should concentrate on Brexit. Glad to see it back this year after Boris Johnson ruled Commons have more than enough time for Brexit and should concentrate on a new batch of minor legislation. And if we're lucky we will have another one for Christmas after the snap GE when Jeremy Corbyn rules Commons will work double shifts without extra pay and concentrate on both Brexit and a whole new batch of minor legislation. Glad too to see Black Rod performing again and giving oiks something in return for her yearly £93k. And finally kudos to Lloyd Russell-Moyle for his admirable restraint and refraining to hug the Mace again, though I fully understand Englanders' attachment to ancient artefacts of no value other than sentimental. And at long last Elizabeth Hath Spoken. In her white lace you could clearly see the lady sadly looking, saying that she'd take the blame for the crucifixion of her own domain.

Elizabeth: So Boris, how much of a naughty boy have we been this week?

Boris: But… but… My Maj... wasn't me… Barnier made me do it… Dominic's honour…

Having Elizabeth Windsor deliver some badly drafted spoilers from the Tory manifesto, the one that allegedly needed a five-week blackout to prepare, in a hoarse and convincingly unconvincing voice is quite an embarrassment in and out of itself, but worse was yet to come. The Conservatives have surely got used to England being the laughing stock of Europe, but now they have turned Their Maj into the laughing stock of England with a performance that deserves no better than 20% on Rotten Tomatoes. Of course the rest of the cast did not help with even Dennis Skinner not being his usual self and his Black Rod Heckling Ritual the worst of his whole career. Obviously one does know none of the twenty-six and some wannabe bills will ever be goatskinned for One's Assent, and before one knows it, one will read from Corbyn Zhûxi Yûlù with equal zeal and conviction. This is one of downsides of being in charge ad vitam aut culpam, though you'd have to be a Nazi sympathizer like one's Uncle Ed to fall because of the culpam bit. Then of course one does love Oor Precious Union but the only one of the Three Colonies worth an explicit mention was Northern Ireland, because (wink wink) one does need those fucking DUP votes (nudge nudge) or doesn't one? (cough cough).

Now Commons will have to vote on One's Speech some time this week after the conventionally prescribed five or six days of Humble Addresses. Which will probably be the first in a series of meaningless meaningful votes. Because under the provisions of the Fixed-Term Parliaments Act 2011 (FTPA), voting down a Queen's Speech is legally not a vote of no-confidence (VONC) per se. It may walk like a VONC and quack like a VONC but it's not a VONC, which is not a fluffy beast from a Star Wars deleted scene. To kick out the First Minister of England, you have to table an FTPA-compliant VONC motion, which only the Leader of the Opposition (LOTO) can do. Actually no, any MP can but only a LOTO-submitted VONC is subject to an FTPA-prescribed mandatory debate and vote. Actually no, as the Speaker can rule ad arbitrium that a VONC motion submitted by anyone else, like say…. uh…. Ian Blackford, may also go to a vote if LOTO does not table one. Which, in the current context, would have the added bonus of pissing off both Johnson, who wants a snap GE only on his own terms, and Labour, who still do not know if they want a snap GE or not.

We Will Rock You 🔊
© Brian May, 1977

Two weeks ago the Guardian again devoted a full page to an article warning us about something we already knew. So now we know the electorate is volatile and Brexit has made it even more so. Who would have guessed? Now if the British Election Study says it, it must be true, mustn't it? That we did not need a 30k poll to reach the conclusion that 'there are likely to be high levels of volatility in a forthcoming election, and that Brexit is likely to play a key role in defining the next election outcome' (their words, not mine, I would have stated it without the conditionals) does not mean we're more clever than the self-appointed experts, only that we don't have the dosh to spend on useless polls that don't reveal anything that was not obvious months ago already. Just search for 'volatility' or 'fluidity' in my previous articles if you have any doubt. Polls conducted over the last month again prove the point with voting intentions that could project into anything from a solid Conservative majority to an unmanageably hung Parliament.

A lot may hinge on the public's perception of the Queen's Political Broadcast On Behalf Of The European Research Group and when they realize the numbers don't add up. Johnson has actually fuck all chance of implementing it, and fuck all chance at implementing it too just for the sake of reesmoggian grammatical exhaustivity, as he does not have the first farthing to do so, to put it in terms the Leader of the House of Commons is familiar with. So either they play it short term and take the deficit back to Cameronesque levels or they delude themselves into thinking they're here to last and they borrow until the national debt exceeds two trillion guineas, to put it in terms…. see above. Problem is that they're currently doing both with this year's deficit expected to be double of last year's and national debt expected to increase by £100 billion, give or take. Then nobody has ever conclusively proved that Tories are guided by bonum commune communitatis, with them it's more like beati possendentes especially when these are Tory donors or Somerset Capital Management's business partners, while canis canem edit out there in the real world. Back to the raw numbers, my current Poll'O'Polls includes the six most recent polls for which full data tables are available, conducted between 9 and 18 October. Super-sample size is 9,849 with a theoretical 0.96% margin of error, and is again massively favourable to the Conservatives.

There is some interesting movement here though, compared to what we had two weeks ago. The Brexit Party and the LibDems both lose votes while the Conservatives and Labour both gain some. This could be the beginning of a trend, but only the next batch of polls will tell us if voters are actually coalescing around the two 'main' parties as we come nearer the snap GE. Meanwhile it never ceases to amaze me that so many people are still ready to vote for a party that drove the whole country into descensus in cuniculi cavum as a way to solve their never-ending civil war, and their current leader is a daily living reminder that cucullus non facit monachum. But of course regnat populus and any warning ad populum about the massive wrongdoings of the three consecutive Conservative governments sounds like vox clamantis in deserto. For now and only in England and Wales if regional subsamples of current polls are to be believed, that show the SNP still bagging about twice as many votes as the Scottish Branch Office of the English Conservative and Unionist Party. And don't get me started on Tory voters who have instant buyer's remorse and start whining about Tory policies hurting them, as they should always remember that volenti non fit injuria. Then Johnson can still count on the toxic combination of English Exceptionalism and English Masochism to get the votes he needs to cling to power even after a lousy Brexit Deal and a farcical Queen's Speech.

We Are The Champions 🔊
© Freddie Mercury, 1977

On this polling average, my model projects a Conservative majority for the first time in seven months. Of course individual polls delivered a Tory majority every now and then, but the successive rolling averages always dampened the effects of such polls, which were mostly YouGov's by the way. As usual my mix of uniform swing and proportional swing benefits the LibDems mostly, as they're the ones with the largest multiplying factor, their predicted vote share being 2.35 times their 2017 share. As usual too, the more sophisticated 'advanced regression' algorithms used by Flavible and Electoral Calculus strongly benefit the Conservatives, though I haven't the slightest clue which one of the multiplicity of variables they factor in would explain this. Only sure thing is that Martin Baxter at Electoral Calculus freely admitted that his advanced model mechanically awards the Conservatives a 'bonus' of about 20 seats compared with uniform swing, which is roughly what we have here. Then everyone agrees the Conservatives would get a majority without any outside support, the only debate being about the size of this majority and how it might make things more or less easy for Boris Johnson.

Interestingly Flavible recently added a 'User Predictions' option to their site, which is more sophisticated than Electoral Calculus's 'Make Your Prediction' option. They allow you to run a simulation including a Remain Pact or a Brexit Pact with any parties you want to include. This is of course only a theoretical extrapolation as it is based on current voting intentions with mechanical transfers of votes between the members of each Pact. The situation would obviously quite different if any Pact happened in real life, because it would be based ex hypothesi that corvis oculum corvi non eruit, id est incumbents would be explicitely protected against any challenge from the other signatories. Which would not seriously impact any hypothetical Brexit Pact as the New Model Blackshirts on 12% would be in no position to challenge Conservative incumbents. The situation would be different for a hypothetical Remain Pact as it would preclude any LibDem gains from Labour and any SNP gains from Labour or the LibDems. With these caveats, here is what you get with my own projection used as the baseline, not Flavible's which is more favourable for the Conservatives. But as usual what matters is the differences between the various options, more than the numbers per se.

Of course this kind of simulation only reflects what could possibly happen if either or both Pacts were implemented nationally after a very public agreement between parties. It says nothing about the political expediency of such strategies or their likelihood, which is obviously close to fuck all. For example including the SNP and possibly Plaid Cymru in a Pact with Union-obsessed English parties is obviously pushing the scenario ad absurdum as neither would write off any expected gains purely ex gratia. All you can say is that a Brexit Pact would be much more efficient than a Remain Pact under current voting intentions. The impact of a Remain Pact would be quite ironic as it would not strengthen Labour enough for an outright majority, but would open the door to either a Con-Lib or a Lab-Lib minority Government, effectively giving Jo Swinson the power to choose the next PM. Which might not be exactly what voters actually want. But unintended consequences abound in politics.

Another One Bites The Dust 🔊

© John Deacon, 1980

On current polling 104 sitting MPs would be sent packing by their constituents, midway between the 1880 and 1923 elections. Again the breakdown and cartography of gains and losses would be quite disastrous for Labour but they can only blame themselves for this. Faber est sua quisque fortunae and nobody held their hand over the fire to make them the worst Loyal Opposition in 30 years. What we have here also proves again that voters instinctively don't like turncoats as Change UK and The Independents would lose all their seats, and the seats gained by the LibDems through defections would all switch back to their original party.

What happens to rebels and defectors will be interesting to watch. Pure electoral math says all their seats will return to the party who won them in 2017 with only three or four exceptions (John Woodcock's Barrow and Furness, Angela Smith's Penistone and Stocksbridge both gained by the Conservatives, Steve Brine's Winchester definitely and Oliver Letwin's West Dorset possibly switching to the LibDems). but of course what happens in the real world is quite a wee smitch more complicated than what the math says. I think high-profile Tory Rebels like Philip Hammond, Nick Boles and Dominic Grieve definitely have a chance at surviving on their own merits and personal appeal, no matter what kitchen sink Dominic Cummings throws at them. Then it's obviously easier for Greive now that he no longer has LibDem competition for the centrist Europhile vote. Seven of the original Gaukeward Squad have decided not to seek re-election, so their seats are bound to return to the Conservatives. Lesser known backbench rebels will face an uphill battle against official Conservative candidates, unless they are restored the whip before the snap GE. Which can definitely happen for a number of reasons, including the risk that a split conservative vote might hand some of the seats to Labour or the LibDems. Even Dominic Cummings can do that sort of math, so wait and see. Just bear in mind that repeat sex harasser Charlie Elphicke was restored the whip so he could vote in an internal Tory vote of confidence in Theresa May, so you never know what can happen when the 'national interest' is at stake.

Under Pressure 🔊
© Freddie Mercury, Brian May, John Deacon, Roger Taylor, David Bowie, 1981

Under current polling 55 seats would qualify as marginals, a relatively small number compared to previous elections. But the potential battleground remains fare larger than this as another 135 would be decided by less than 10% and thus remain quite competitive. The updated cartography of marginals is less favourable to the Conservatives than two weeks ago, with 28 of their projected seats in the danger zone against only 17 Labour seats. But of course the Conservatives would start with a higher number of seats, so the alternate scenarios don't look that bad for them.

The Con Max scenario would deliver a 44-seat Conservative majority, more than enough to feel relatively safe for the next five years, save for some implausibly severe backlash in future by-elections. At the other end of the possible futures, the Lab Max scenario is another of these cases where Jo Swinson principledly asks herself 'what would Nick Clegg do?' and it takes her six seconds to principledly decide to go into Coalition with the Conservatives. Because the only alternative would be pissing off Willie Rennie by going into a loose Big Tent Rainbow Max deal with Labour and the SNP, and we wouldn't want to piss off Oor Wee Wullie, or would we?

The Loser In The End 🔊
© Roger Taylor, 1974

In these days of heavily edited Wikipedia entries, fake news and rule-by-Twitter, the leaders' personality, or public perception thereof, is as much a factor in any election as what is in the parties' manifestos, or isn't. And this is the game Jeremy Corbyn is currently losing if favourability polls are to be believed. Here is what the latest YouGov favourability poll has to say: Corbyn gets 21% favourable, 71% unfavourable and 8% undecided, so a net -50. Johnson gets 40-52-8, a net -12. Swinson gets 22-46-32, a net -24 but not fully convincing with a third undecided, or probably unable to make head or tail of what she actually wants. As always the devil is in the details, namely the poll's crosstabs that show Corbyn losing the favourability game across the board. Here is what YouGov has to say about our Three Stooges, with undecideds removed. Political breakdown here is based on the 2017 votes, not current voting intentions. This is a GB-wide poll so Nicola Sturgeon and SNP voters are not included in the crosstabs. But we know from other polls that Nicola gets a net -9 rating GB-wide, better than any of the other three, and a net +5 among Scottish voters. In both cases these are her best results since polls started testing her in 2017. Now back to Jeremy.

Corbyn's problems are quite obvious here. He does badly, and in some cases abysmally badly, in every political tribe, every demographic and every region. Even his own voters view him unfavourably and it gets even worse if you try crosstabbing the crosstabs and focus on what might be key groups in the snap GE. Young Southern middle-class Remainers don't like Corbyn and boost the LibDem vote especially in London and the Southwest. As usual this does not necessarily benefit the LibDems directly, but mostly snatches enough votes in Lab-Con marginals to switch them to the Conservatives. Then middle-aged Northern working-class Leavers don't like Corbyn either and would either stay home or stick to the Brexit Party at the snap GE, with devastating results in Wales and the post-industrial Northern Powerhouse. Of course John McDonnell doesn't help here when he openly suggests Corbyn would find it hard to keep himself alive and kicking as Labour leader after an election defeat. Which I don't consider a given as the 2017 GE was widely seen as a victory, so Corbynistas could try and spin that 2019 was in fact only his first real defeat and other Labour leaders before him have been granted a second chance to lead Labour to a second consecutive electoral clubbing. Then the direct opposite point also works as polls predict Corbyn's shit-or-bust moment would end up in a disaster of Footesque proportions so he would probably have to let go no matter what.

Now what about the First Minister of England? There is definitely a lot of ambiguity in the How and the Why Johnson manages to emerge as the front runner in the beauty contest while a significant majority view him unfavourably. Massive support among Conservative and Leave voters obviously skew the average his way but does not explain everything. I venture it's not a case of Johnson being actively liked but rather instinctively undislked as he is a good comedian and people easily fall for eccentric buffoonery without realizing it's just a well-rehearsed act and his main drive is power for power's sake. I guess that this will sadly work as long as he sticks to his Del-Boy-Cum-Trump persona and makes people forget about his true nature, an entitled sluggard. Then the poll was conducted before Johnson taking the Damascus Road from scrapping the undemocratic backstop to backstopping the backstop with something that walks so much like a backstop and quacks so much like a backstop that it's actually a frontstop, including but not limited to the customs booth right in the middle of the £20bn Portpatrick-Larne Bridge, right on top of Dad's Army's not-so-deep-sea munitions dump. Then of course vulpes pilum mutat, non mores so just wait until Johnson's next stunt to figure out if this one was just a stunt too. Shouldn't have to wait too long, Boris loves his legerdemains.

Last but not least, PM Jo remains an unknown quantity for a third of the electorate and even a sixth of her own voters, so her 'without undecideds' ratings are to be taken cum grano salis. But you can't help noticing she does almost as well as Jeremy Corbyn among Labour and working-class voters, though you might wonder what they find attractive in someone who duly supported Tory austerity during the coalition years and still stands firmly to the right of the LibDems. But her relative popularity does not match the Cleggmania of ten years ago even if the LibDems electoral prospects remain surprisingly good. Guess we will soon know if her 'neither neither' talking point is as effective as she expects it to be, though its impact will obviously fall short of getting the LibDems the hundredish seats they allegedly aim for.

I Want To Break Free 🔊

© John Deacon, 1984

A massive 200,000 and maybe more marched in Edinburgh two weeks ago and die-hard Unionists are still entangled in their Alien-ish tagline, in Scotland no one can hear you scream, though for once even the BBC could not pretend it did not happen. But Unionists of all shades also have an unhealthy disregard for polls showing they are on the wrong side, not just in the view of Scotland's public opinion but also of all of the UK's public opinion. Opinium polled UK-wide in August whether respondents thought the English Government should 'allow' or 'prevent' a second Scottish Independence referendum. Their wording, not mind, though you could argue it is a fairly accurate description of the current legal situation, and also a fairly adequate way to measure support and opposition to IndyRef2. BMG asked the very same question in early September and the results are just as clear. Here are the numbers for support to IndyRef2 after undecideds removed, and the changes between the two polls.

Most salient result here is that support for IndyRef2 is now on 60% UK-wide, up 4% on the previous poll, and the feeling is pretty much shared all across the political spectrum (based on current voting intentions this time, not past votes) and all demographics. Interestingly the increase in support for IndyRef2 comes mostly from Conservative and Brexit voters switching from opposition to support, though you would probably be right if you suspected some ulterior motive here. Like in 'kick out the subsidy junkies and keep the dosh for ourselves Doon Sooth' but anyway it's the result that counts. Especially when support comes not only from the Celtic Nations (Northern Ireland again not polled here) but also from all across England. With a reality check for the benefit of Jackson Carlaw, Richard Leonard and Willie Rennie. Next time you venture on thin ice arguing that there is no appetite for IndyRef2, just remember 61% of Scots expressing an opinion want it. Telt.

So now it's pretty much up to Scotland to seize any opportunity and listen to those who say it's high time to libera te tutemet ex inferis. Nobody could seriously campaign on 'Better Together' after a hard Brexit. Would be like better together on the Titanic but, so sorry lads, there's no lifeboat for Scotland. And nobody so far has made the case that it would be in any way better after the lousy Johnson deal or a so-called soft Brexit. Not even Jeremy Corbyn could argue that a Labour-deal Brexit, in the unlikely event it could happen, would be in any way good for Scotland. Note thet the BMG poll also showed massive support for an Irish Reunification referendum, commonly known as the Border Poll, with 52% supporting, 19% opposing and 29% undecided (or 73% supporting and 27% opposing after undecideds removed). So the story goes, mene mene tekel upharsin and there is nothing Tony Blair can do about anything, even if anyone still gave a rat's fuck about what he has to say, ceterum autem censeo Unionem esse delendam.

There is now a strong majority sharing the view that Scots should be given the choice whatever convoluted arguments are used against IndyRef2. Even the highly hypocritical LibDem talking point that Brits have an unalienable right to change their minds about EU membership and that's why they demand a People's Vote, but Scots don't have that same right about Independence and should bow to their Imperial Masters for generations. To which the answer is: futue te ipsum, PM Jo. Of course there is not yet an overwhelming majority of Scots ready to vote for Independence, but our number is growing and obviously more and more have reached the inevitable conclusion that the Union will ultimately succumb, and most likely at the very hands of those who profess to be its most ardent defenders. Because history will have it on record that 'the most successful Union of all times' was in fact an abject failure that proved again and again unable to take care of its own and divided them rather than united them.

The Show Must Go On 🔊

Odd things keep happening in British politics. The Saturday Night Fever sitting, the first since la Guerra de las Malvinas, could have been Johnson's magic moment and it turned into yet another dies horribilis with his seventh major defeat. Having Commons sit on Saturday might at first have looked like a strange move from Johnson, who first wanted to gag Parliament and now seems to never get enough of them. But he had every reason to want a vote on his New Brexit Deal celerius quam asparagi cocunctur because that was the only way to kill the Benn Act as cessante ratione legis cessat ipsa lex and he could finally say that he made good on his promise and anerrhíphthō kýbos, he got Brexit done. Of course Johnson will never openly admit he got that Great New Deal only after making some calculated U-turns, effectively surrendering to the EU to put it in terms Brexiteers understand. He was happy enough to be bragging that habemus pactum at long last, even if it is a lousy deal, arguably worse than Theresa May's thrice-rejected deal. Then the question was 'House, whither goest thou?' as the result of a straight up-and-down vote on the Brave New Deal was pretty much like the electorate's mood, far from solidly predictable.

Then Oliver Letwin popped up as the deus ex machina throwing yet another spanner in the works. Questions are already being asked about Letwin's ulterior motives as he had announced earlier he would vote for Johnson's deal, and allowing the deal to pass would effectively have avoided a No Deal Crashout and made the Benn Act irrelevant. That he tabled his amendment at all says a lot about the level of distrust in Johnson and the structural belief among MPs that whatever Johnson says, he is lying. A lot can be said too about the DUP's vote as it definitely made sense for them to defeat Letwin, go straight to the vote on the deal and defeat it too.Voting for Letwin was literally a last minute decision as they showed up just as the doors to the lobbies were being closed, which might be interpreted as a precaution against any pressure, either from the Government benches or from their own leader who is probably not too happy with the outcome. Then Letwin must love the additional irony in passing his amendment thanks to the DUP and their bizarre approach.

Next step now will be Meaningful Vote Four probably tomorrow, on the full Withdrawal Agreement and Implementation Bill (WAIB) and Bercow can't block it, even if pissing off Johnson up to his very last day in the Chair has its merits too, but this vote would not be 'repetitive and disorderly' even if the core of the bill is indeed Johnson's deal that met an untimely demise on Saturday. Right now there are 639 voting MPs (650 minus Sinn Féin, Speaker and Deputy Speakers) which goes down to 635 on divisions with the four Tellers (most probably two Conservatives and two Labour) voting but not counted in the official tally. So the magic number here is 318, not 320 as routinely reported, and Johnson is very close to it and might not even need it. Anyway I'll go out on a limb with my prediction, or best educated guess, of what will happen. I think Johnson will win it though it will extremely close but he does start from a much more favourable baseline than May ever had. But passing the WAIB on its second reading is only the beginning. Amendments will pop up afterwards and might very well defeat the very purpose of the WAIB, once again turning Brexit into a series of BrexHog Days. So here's my headcount for the WAIB vote itself:

Johnson has now secured most of the Rebels' votes and also the Spartans' as it's obviously better to have them inside the tent pissing out than outside the tent pissing in, and I don't know the Latin equivalent for THAT. Now all Johnson needs is to flip a handful of Labour leavers, and even their abstention would be a win for him if it takes the number of valid votes cast to 629 or fewer. But imagine it's a tie after all votes are counted and John Bercow has the tiebreaking vote. By convention he has to cast it for the status quo if there is no majority for a change, but what is the status quo here? So he might choose to vote for the Government and save Johnson's fat sorry ass. Unless of course he says to himself "fuck it Johnny, in ten days you're out of this fucking circus, so let's just do this and fuck the fuckers" and votes against the Government. Possibly against convention but not out of character and totally bulletproof in Court as unwritten conventions count for fuck all in the eyes of the Judiciary unless they go with consuetudo pro lege servatur. Could be fun. The next episode is of course the Court of Session ruling which has now been delayed pending further events in London. Johnson has avoided acting ultra vires after his prospective deal was voted down and he has technically sought an extension in compliance with the Benn Act. But he seems to have forgotten that draco dormiens nunquam titillandus and turbo-charged anti-Brexiters now have new arguments against him. Saturday's events may have taken nobile officium off the table but Johnson could still be held in contempt for the creative way he handled 'abiding by the law', which has something of a Putino-Trumpian feel to it. It's definitely a bad idea to piss off judges, even if it's just what can be expected from an entitled incompetent sluggard, and the First Minister of England will probably learn it the hard way some time this week from the Court of Session.

Some time after the vote on the Queen's 2019 Conservative Manifesto, Commons will probably have to vote on a LOTO-submitted FTPA-compliant VONC motion (more on this some paragraphs earlier) and nobody really knows how it could end. Grapevine also has it that Johnson might try a self-engineered vote of no confidence a.k.a. The Schröder Manoeuvre after former German Chancellor Gerhardt Schröder who did just that to get Bundestag dissolved in 2005. You don't even have to convince any of you own MPs to vote against you, all they need to do is not show up for the vote so the opposition wins and you get your snap GE on your own terms. Or that's what Schröder thought and then he lost the snap GE to Angela Merkel by four seats in a hung Bundestag. Ye ken, even the best-laid schemes… But just don't take this as a prediction. Just not yet, wait until the Season's Big Finale.

The next episodes of the farce look quite promising, so don't miss a beat and stay tuned for further broadcasts.

It's times like these, when long-standing patterns are disrupted,
That things become more fluid, that's when a small group of people
Or even a single individual can change the course of history
(Dark Matter, episode We Should Have Seen This Coming, 2016)

Jeremy's Den

21/10/2019

Westminster Projection - New Model Session Special

We Must Be Dreaming