Home
Creators
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

The Thick of It | Season 2 | Episode 1 (Patreon)

Published:
2026-03-11 17:00:12
Imported:
2026-10
Tags:

Content

Sorry, where's Terri!? And who's Robyn!?

Thank you all for being here with us on these watch throughs and thank you for always being a supportive and wonderful community!

https://youtu.be/kYNDL1A_M3Y

Book a Cameo from us!

https://www.cameo.com/gallifrey_pals

PAULA DEMING

YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/PaulaDeming

TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@paulademing?

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/paolobandita/

Twitter: https://twitter.com/PaulaDeming

IMDb: https://www.imdb.com/name/nm2984865/

KAT ALYSHA

YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/KatrinaAlysha

TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@kat_alyshat=8gg7Kkp4FwJ&r=1

Instagram: https://instagram.com/kat_alysha?igshid=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==

Twitter: https://twitter.com/kat_alysha

IMDb: https://www.imdb.com/name/nm8371578/

All the videos, songs, images, and graphics used in the video belong to their respective owners and I or this channel does not claim any right over them.

Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.

Files

The Thick of It | Season 2 | Episode 1

Sorry, where's Terri!? And who's Robyn!? Book a Cameo from us! https://www.cameo.com/gallifrey_pals Thank you all for being here with us on these watch throughs and thank you for always being a supportive and wonderful community!

Comments

streaky

In The Loop is completely disconnected from the show - it's related, but people jump around it's kinda weird in a way that will only make sense when you watch it, but the story is entirely separate - you could watch it tomorrow, and it wouldn't make a blind bit of difference beyond the obvious budget jump. It's not a The Thick of It movie, though it kinda is, it's kinda odd.. It'll make sense when you see it. But yeah, just deal with it when you like. Also yes you totally should..

davmeltz

Think of In The Loop as like an alternate universe, with most of the same cast but only Capaldi and a couple others play the same characters. Everyone else has a new name and a new job, but have the same personalities.

Lintrinsic

In the loop isn't really related to the show. It has some of the same cast, mostly playing different characters in similar situations. Probably best to watch it at the end.

Hell3Quin

Its basically a Laura Roslyn situation unless they call a snap election.

Hell3Quin

Oh wow, was this before the Gorden Brown hot mic moment or after? Just checked and it's 5 years before!

Kieran B

I think Malcom is the only character that’s exactly the same, others play similar characters (like Chris Addison) but not the same

Kieran B

Think of In the Loop as an alternate universe, only Malcolm is exactly the same character. Veep was made by largely the same crew and writers, Chris Addison who’s Ollie in this is one of the main directors

Kieran B

Veep is the Thick of It with higher status (and more importantly for an American audience supposedly - successful) characters and no swearing

Jae Armstrong

So, re: the British political system and how it works: The country is divided (by the boundary commissions) into six hundred and fifty constituencies, which are supposed to be coherent geographic units containing roughly equivalent numbers of people eligible to vote- currently about 70k ~ 80k. At the general election, each constituency elects one representative to sit and vote in the House of Commons from a pool of candidates that have nominated themselves for the selection, by a straight FPTP vote. After the election- the day after, generally- the monarch invites a person to form a government. That person- if they accept the invitation- becomes the Prime Minister and then appoints other ministers to lead the various ministries that run the country. Now, the skeleton key that unlocks all this, the formal principle on which the whole thing turns, is that the Commons is those 650 members as a collective and nothing but. This is why I have not yet mentioned anything about political parties- they exist, insofar as they are registered legal entities with staff members and bank accounts and legal obligations, but as far as Parliament is concerned they are nothing more than informal agreements between members to form a voting bloc. It is the person that is elected to the seat, not the party, and they do not need to be affiliated with or endorsed by a party either to stand for election or to be elected (though a large proportion of candidates and almost all of those elected will be). Once elected, the person is under no formal obligation to remain in their party or even to vote with it, even if practically speaking these days 99% of what gets someone elected is what party endorses them for the election. Similarly, while *conventionally* the person that is invited to form a government will be a sitting Member of Parliament and the leader of the party that controls a plurality of seats in the Commons, and will select ministers from other MPs from that party, none of those things strictly need to be true. The PM does not need to sit in the Commons or even the Lords, they don't need to belong to any party, and they can select anyone they like to fill ministerial positions. The reason all these things end up the way they do is that the Commons has, over the centuries, arrogated to itself all power. Only it* can make law and approve government taxation, by a simple majority vote on motions proposed to it. The leader if the largest party forms the government needs to be able to "command the confidence of the Commons"- have a reasonable expectation of being able to get their motions passed- or they cannot do anything. These leaders more or less have to be MPs because being in the House is how you build the relationships and reputations with other MPs that you need to get them to listen to you. They give the ministries to other MPs because *they* need to have that social weight to pass *their* motions. (And also, in modern times, because it is imagined that being elected legitimates someone to legislate, though again no one is elected to the position of PM or a ministry, so I think the logic there is somewhat dubious). This principle- "parliamentary sovereignty"- is taken so seriously that it is held that not even Parliament has power over Parliament- there is no law a Parliament could pass that Parliament could not at any point unmake with a simple majority vote. There was some silliness a few years ago where they passed a bill that required a government to get a two-thirds majority to call an early election. This ended up being repealed when Boris Johnson wanted to call an election, couldn't find the votes, but could get the votes to get rid of the requirement. (*There is a caveat here that the monarch must grant their "Royal Assent" to acts of Parliament before they pass into law; it is traditionally believed that this is nowadays largely a formality, and governments don't *publicly* have difficulty getting the monarch to do this, but it has come out once or twice that the Queen had rather more influence on policy than was generally acknowledged and the whole process is very shadowy. The House of Lords is also involved in reviewing legislation, but lost its ability to outright veto it in 1911.) So, the Commons as a collective runs the country. The Prime Minister is a appointed by the Crown to lead the Commons, and is selected for their (expected) ability to command it effectively. They may be dismissed and replaced at the monarch's pleasure, who will do so if circumstances change such that they are thought to have lost that ability (well, I don't think the monarch has actually *fired* a PM in centuries, and any attempt to do so would undoubtedly spark a constitutional crisis; rather the PM says, I can't do this any more, and then they're replaced). This doesn't have to go to the country, because the country is not asked who should be PM (formally), each constituency is asked who should represent them in Parliament- although, traditionally, if it is believed that there is no one who could feasibly command the Commons, the PM advises the monarch to call another election (in the hope of getting a more functional Parliament). Of course, I think these days most people do think they're voting for the Prime Minister, or at least the party, but the process is at least well established enough that the public accept that sometimes the PM will change and you don't get a say in it.

Kieran B

Malcolm has no power to sack Terri, she’s a civil servant whereas Malcom is a member of the party I still use NOMF(U)P at work

davmeltz

There’s Jamie too, and very brief cameos from Angela Heeney and Sam, I recall.

Kieran B

Charisma? He’s a British politician 😂 I don’t think charismatic American politicians would do well here, we’d be even more skeptical of them

Kieran B

Funnily enough on the reality outpacing parody front they had exactly the same issue with The Day Today - the satirical news show of the mid 90s, the news stated to look like the over the top production that they had. That was created by Armando and Chris Morris. Armando also has his own six episode show called the Armando Iannucci Shows which is an absolute cult classic that I’d highly recommend

Kieran B

You vote for your local MP, that’s it. The party chooses the leader and ultimately PM effectively. The winning party wins by having the most MPs. When they talk about resigning they don’t mean as a politician but as a Secretary of State - so Hugh is in the Cabinet which means he sits on the front bench in parliament next to the PM, and has another job to do other than be a representative (ie Member of Congress). So you can have Minister of Health, Minister of Transport or here the fictional Minister for Social Affairs. Unlike the US where you can appoint any old tech billionaire to the head of a government department here you must be a sitting member of Parliament. When you resign you still carry on being a representative you’re just leaving the Department of Whatever. However if you do stop being an MP then there will by a by-election for that post Also on the cabinet, the opposition also has a ‘shadow cabinet’ with their own people in the equivalent roles, so obviously they don’t run anything but their job is to challenge their opposite number that is in power and hold them to account (the concept of Loyal Opposition is a big one in British parliamentary politics). That’s the whole reason for Prime Ministers Questions every week - every Wednesday the prime minister must face questions and be challenged, and in the same sessions MPs will raised issues that their constituents have contacted them about.

streaky

"The PM does not need to sit in the Commons or even the Lords" - 10/10 for correctness. Even serious news media orgs which are centuries old and have very serious journalists get this wrong. It isn't even *convention* that the PM has to be an MP or in the Lords, let alone a constitutional requirement. The Commons can have whoever they like be PM; they could, hypothetically tomorrow vote to make Donald Trump or Xi Jinping PM, and absolutely nothing can stop them, the Supreme Court might try to wrongly claim otherwise, but it isn't even vaguely justiciable. Impractical for the PM not to be an MP, but the only constitutional requirement (which Parliament could change anyway) is to keep Parliament informed, which he can do by sending a letter or an email if he wishes to.

Kieran B

As an addendum to my last spam post the thing about voting is that it’s the only real method of accountability you have for politicians so that’s why there’s so much more emphasis on part, and becuse election cycles are so long and there’s always elections going on for something it looks from the outside that US politicians spend all of their time campaigning for re-election instead of doing their job. So politicians here definitely care about votes just not quite to the same extent American politicians do. And it because of resigning because the actual system is the opposite of what you thought, you only vote for Hugh (ie the MP), you don’t vote for the prime minister - but in practice many people do as a proxy, when they vote they’ll think who the PM will be and don’t care too much about the local MP

Kirk Deighton

In the Loop is set in a parallel universe (closer to ours), it is very worth a watch but don't think everyone is who they look like they are.

Sloane Lysbeth

the woman that goes at hugh. that was a real thing except it was a woman going at tony blair.

Donald Baillie

It has to be said that Armando Ianucci, creator of this and Veep, is a genius, one of the finest satrists Britain has produced in the last 50 years. I think you can watch the film, In the Loop any time you like. It's kind of orthogonal to The Thick of It, same style, some of the same actors but different characters and situations. it doesn't fit in the same time line. Also, definitely look out for his film The Death of Stalin, which is exactly what you might think, like Thick of It meets communist dictatorship. But on the other end of the spectrum, emotionally speaking, he has also made a super lovely version of David Copperfield, starring Dev Patel.

Jack Bonner

A chav is basically the equivalent of what you guys might call trailer trash. It stands for council house and violent. So it's basically someone who's on the lower level of the socio-economic scale. So it's quite a bit of an insult, but it's a fairly widely used term. I have exactly that same thing Paula! If I hear another conversation going on and say I'm reading something, I just can't concentrate on the thing I'm reading, my focus just locks onto that conversation. It's so stressful! As for the whole thing of prime ministers resigning and others within the party replacing them, you're very much spot on actually. They would from what I remember have a vote within that party, but there would be no general election unless the prime minister calls for a snap-election, which is basically where an election takes place before their terms is over. I could have some of those details wrong, so take that with a pinch of salt, but that's kind of the gist of it from what I remember. There really are some seriously sexist heartless bastards in this line of work in particular. It's a stark reminder of why I would never want a job anywhere near politics, even if I could. Compared to what a woman would have to put up with, I would have it pretty lucky to be fair. Although that autism dig (which I think was in the last one) got to me a bit tbh, I can't lie. 😅

Mark Ten

I used to get tapes of BBC radio shows and his name kept coming up. Genuinely funny! Knowing Me Knowing You w/ Alan Partridge, Armando Iannucci's Charm Offensive, News Quiz & others.

Sebastian Bodine

As someone who saw In The Loop in theaters before seeing the Thick of It, I think it would be nice to watch the movie after the specials. I think it would be nice for you to see Malcolm Tucker's debut for American audiences and it's a good stepping stone in the improvements made by the production team that carry over in series 3.

Kieran B

That meaning of chav is a backronym, it’s Romani for kid / boy, because most of my town’s slang it Romani it was used long before it became national - and it had that connotation before too - I think the northeast use it a lot as well (or rather chava) and in Only Fool’s and Horses they refer to babies and kids as chavvies 😄

Kieran B

Ah fair play it’s been a while, I didn’t think Angela or Sam we’re named so I was assuming they followed the pattern - I’d totally forgotten about Jamie, definitely need to watch it again!

Jack Bonner

Ah that's so interesting. I had no idea. It's funny how a lot of these phrases and words come about. A lot of the time their origin is the last thing you'd expect! 😄