Best Of

FPT

This is the MP for Boston and Skegness.

"Richard Tice MP 🇬🇧
@TiceRichard

Peter Lynch is dead. Please watch this explanation by @IsabelOakeshott. He said some very unwise, daft, bad things. But he did not deserve to die for it. He was a political prisoner in the UK. Two tier justice by @Keir_Starmer killed this man."

https://x.com/TiceRichard/status/1848320885754630155

Sorry to say but my gut says that you are probably thinking about this backwards. i.e. that Tice outs himself as an extremist for saying this.

More likely he’s reflecting a view point that will be widely held among the electorate, on one of the few political stories of the last year or few with real cut through.

If he’s to avoid a slew of losses to Reform, Starmer is going to have to work very hard indeed to lose the Two Tier tag, if he even yet recognises it as an electoral liability.

You can see the next problem coming along.

Shouty woman gets 2 and a half years for trolling on the internet.

Woman who milkshaked Farage gets what ?

There is a gigantic gulf between a self publicising idiot throwing milkshakes and using words and actions to a large and enraged audience inciting, urging and encouraging them to burn down buildings with people inside them and kill innocent strangers.

Shouty trolling this is not. Shouty trolling is widely available from many sources and is not a criminal offence.

How quickly people forget. Even the owners of this very site were briefly scared by the long arm of the law into threatening expulsion of members. Not for inciting violence or racial hatred, but for what would otherwise count as normal civic discussion in a free society.

But then again our new prime minister thought it was dangerous and reckless to allow citizens to show their faces uncovered even after the vaccine programme. And half the people here fully agreed.

That is a mis-remembering of the situation.

I have friends at the CPS and in the legal profession who rightly predicted given the situation any comments that sought to condone, glorify, encourage, or assist the disorder were likely to lead to the rozzers getting involved.

Robert, myself, and the moderation team had to remove several comments that violated that (along with somebody posting the locations of the upcoming disorder.

Remember you probably didn't see the deleted comments.

OGH has made it clear he doesn't want any legal issues on PB or the potential of damages, so if we appear overly cautious that's why and we're not going to apologise for that.

Political Polls
@Politics_Polls
·
1h
#NEW
@RedfieldWilton
/
@Telegraph
Poll:

Arizona: Trump +3
North Carolina: Trump +3
Nevada: Trump +1
Georgia: Trump +1
Florida: Trump +4
Michigan: Tied
Pennsylvania: Tied
Wisconsin: Harris +1

Interesting. I am not sure Trump will get Nevada. I have no facts to back it up with. Just my intuition.

The polling is harder to read than in 2016. Back then there was enough data to support the hunch that Trump had a path to win via the rustbelt but this time there's less of a pattern. With that said, if he is ahead in the national PV, it's hard to see how he loses.

Yes. I see. It is just a question of waiting for the final result.

It is. But let's speculate wildly right up to when we can't. That's what this febrile period is for.

After Trump's McDonalds triumph, the chances of a Ronnie Reagan style landslide have surely increased.

If that does happen then it will be one of the biggest misses by the intelligentsia in history.

And lots of posters on here will have egg on their faces.

I think you’re quietly getting quite enthusiastic about a Trump victory, and I sense a few posters here are. The frisson of owning the libs is starting to outweigh the downsides of electing a narcissistic wannabe dictator.

By the way I did as you said and told the conference room that I voted Leave and support Trump. The chair thanked me for my interjection and asked whether I knew I was in a meeting to discuss tax rules for digital nomads.

(((Dan Hodges)))
@DPJHodges
·
4h
There is obviously still time for the picture to change. But on current polling - both national and statewide - it's clear Trump is moving ahead. To the point I'm not sure it will be the close result people are expecting. At least not in the Electoral College.

https://x.com/DPJHodges/status/1848308952557105243

As I posted below - anyone who thinks they know the US election result is delusion...

In person early numbers looking good for Trump in Florida.

If he has to worry about Florida then he’s going to be in big trouble in Pennsylvania and Nevada.

Anyone looking at early voting and thinking it tells you anything about the end result is delusional.

Equally I think anyone with a clue as to what the end result of the US election is going to be is also delusional - there isn't enough trustworthy data to give an accurate answer...

Indeed. There's an irony in that certain people, inevitably, are doing exactly the things they did when confidently calling a Hillary win in 2020 - but worse.

In that then, 538, the (imperfect but then longest standing) probability modeller gave Trump a roughly a 30% chance of winning. Which of course made his win in theory less likely - but very much non-zero. The polls only had to be out by a bit and in the wrong places. Yet some saw the vibes and called it as a certainty for Clinton without any caveat and looked quite silly.

Today, 538 has it 52-48 (ho ho) in favour of Trump. Because the most reliable polls in many of the key states are well within the margin of error and even are assuming are spot on something could clearly change even over 2 weeks or by some campaigning mistake.

Yet because Trump has had a small uptick in the polls and some reasonable headlines, the vibes are with him and so it's apparently all over. When if people are being honest and rigorous they'd have to say "I don't know" given the data available and possible ways and directions it could differ.

It's the kind of prediction you'd only be making with a gun to your head.

This is the MP for Boston and Skegness.

"Richard Tice MP 🇬🇧
@TiceRichard

Peter Lynch is dead. Please watch this explanation by @IsabelOakeshott. He said some very unwise, daft, bad things. But he did not deserve to die for it. He was a political prisoner in the UK. Two tier justice by @Keir_Starmer killed this man."

https://x.com/TiceRichard/status/1848320885754630155

Sorry to say but my gut says that you are probably thinking about this backwards. i.e. that Tice outs himself as an extremist for saying this.

More likely he’s reflecting a view point that will be widely held among the electorate, on one of the few political stories of the last year or few with real cut through.

If he’s to avoid a slew of losses to Reform, Starmer is going to have to work very hard indeed to lose the Two Tier tag, if he even yet recognises it as an electoral liability.

You can see the next problem coming along.

Shouty woman gets 2 and a half years for trolling on the internet.

Woman who milkshaked Farage gets what ?

There is a gigantic gulf between a self publicising idiot throwing milkshakes and using words and actions to a large and enraged audience inciting, urging and encouraging them to burn down buildings with people inside them and kill innocent strangers.

Shouty trolling this is not. Shouty trolling is widely available from many sources and is not a criminal offence.

How quickly people forget. Even the owners of this very site were briefly scared by the long arm of the law into threatening expulsion of members. Not for inciting violence or racial hatred, but for what would otherwise count as normal civic discussion in a free society.

But then again our new prime minister thought it was dangerous and reckless to allow citizens to show their faces uncovered even after the vaccine programme. And half the people here fully agreed.

That entirely misrepresents what OGH's acolyte warned us about.

@Malmesbury’s free helpline

Question - Mamesbury, I keep getting mistaken for a racist? How can I fix this?

Don’t set immigrants on fire. Don’t advocate setting immigrants on fire.

What, not even a little one?

Especially not small immigrants, no

But….

No buts. You have to go cold turkey on the whole thing.

Just had lunch with a former colleague of mine who works at the Treasury. He was very glad when Labour took over as the last government hadn't gone anywhere for years but is now pretty horrified in an understated, civil servant kind of way about the Autumn Statement and the mess it is in. He says they're running round like headless chickens desperately trying to make the numbers add up, but the previous government used all the politically painless revenue raisers, so they're left choosing between the bad and the worse, especially given the extra spending commitments the government has made.

I'm sure we all guessed something like that was going on, but it's interesting to hear it confirmed by an inside source. Of course much of it may be last minute nerves. Still, too bad there aren't odds on how long it'll take before the Autumn Statement falls apart.

You weren't making a cogent and relevant point but this one's OK, so I'll engage. These voters are low information because they are not interested in politics hence why I said I was using the term neutrally. They don't understand the consequence of their vote because of that lack of information and interest. I didn't say they were dumb and to be clear I don't think they are.

The characteristics that best predict low voter information, all of which have more effect than partisan affiliation, are being (1) young, (2) poorly-educated, (3) female, (4) low income, and (5) non-white. The only one of these characteristics where the Republicans have a lead is poorly-educated (51-45 among voters without a batchelor's degree); all the others are majority Democrat. Young voters (the biggest determinant of low voter information) split 66-34; female voters 51-44; low income voters 58-36; non-white voters from 61-35 (Hispanic) to 83-12 (black)

lol indeed. PB’s “analysis” of this election is quite pitifully poor and simplistic and biased - with some noble exceptions

Lots and lots and lots of intelligent, aware, high information American voters are going to vote for Trump, even tho they are unhappily cognisant of his multiple flaws

Why? Because, as one despairing educated American put it to me on my last visit “incredibly, the Democrats are even worse”

Genuine question - why did your "despairing educated American" think the Democrats are even worse?

Wokeness, anti whiteness, defund police idiocy, crime, migration, collapsing democrat cities, all the wars under Biden

You weren't making a cogent and relevant point but this one's OK, so I'll engage. These voters are low information because they are not interested in politics hence why I said I was using the term neutrally. They don't understand the consequence of their vote because of that lack of information and interest. I didn't say they were dumb and to be clear I don't think they are.

The characteristics that best predict low voter information, all of which have more effect than partisan affiliation, are being (1) young, (2) poorly-educated, (3) female, (4) low income, and (5) non-white. The only one of these characteristics where the Republicans have a lead is poorly-educated (51-45 among voters without a batchelor's degree); all the others are majority Democrat. Young voters (the biggest determinant of low voter information) split 66-34; female voters 51-44; low income voters 58-36; non-white voters from 61-35 (Hispanic) to 83-12 (black)

lol indeed. PB’s “analysis” of this election is quite pitifully poor and simplistic and biased - with some noble exceptions

Lots and lots and lots of intelligent, aware, high information American voters are going to vote for Trump, even tho they are unhappily cognisant of his multiple flaws

Why? Because, as one despairing educated American put it to me on my last visit “incredibly, the Democrats are even worse”

Genuine question - why did your "despairing educated American" think the Democrats are even worse?

Wokeness, anti whiteness, defund police idiocy, crime, migration, collapsing democrat cities, all the wars under Biden

Crime has fallen under Biden.
'Defund police' isn't a thing.
The cities aren't 'collapsing'.
The U.S. government has no control over either Putin or Hamas.
I'll give you half a point on immigration - but note the Congressional GOP has repeatedly sabotaged Democratic efforts to legislate.

Crime has worsened under Biden in part and in places
Defund police was definitely a thing
You forgot the "mostly peaceful" BLM riots
You ignore Wokeness, anti whiteness and the Trans Black LGBTQIAAA+ DEI horror show
Immigration is a disaster
Democrat cities like Frisco are a fucking trainwreck
Biden was seen as weak, Putin invaded

It's easy to say crime has fallen when theft and drug dealing has been decriminalised.

Crime hasn't fallen, the police just don't record it any longer. Speak to any American about it and suggest to them that crime is falling because the official statistics say so and they'll laugh you out of the room.

The FBI just revised their crime statistics for 2022, such that violent crime was actually up 4% rather than down 2% as originally recorded. They missed 1,600 murders from the original stats.

https://americanmilitarynews.com/2024/10/fbi-quietly-changes-crime-stats-after-falsely-reporting-a-decrease-in-crime/

And that's up 4% even after bug chunks of the west coast stopped recording theft under $500 and drug dealing, but yes "crime is down". Like fuck is crime down, it's worse than ever and I think one of the major drivers of Trump doing well. People yearn for safe streets and parcels not being stolen from their doorsteps again.

Yep. People can literally see stores locking away items that were never locked away before. They can see stores closing DOWN because of shoplifting

This is their lived experience. No folder full of statistics is gonna persuade them otherwise

"gonna" ... lol.

That's the calibre of your response to what is a fair point @Leon makes.

Dear God.

Leon is absolutely right here. In my town on a Friday and a Saturday some businesses have to lock their front doors at 5PM and be careful who they allow in given they have had gangs of kids, some with ski masks and balaclavas on causing trouble inside, being abusive to shop owners and customers.

Now there is minimal crime where I live but crime in the local town is very real, the Police ineffective, and we won't go out there for an evening now.

Do you blame Biden/Harris, too ?

Yes, they are totally responsible for delinquent youths in North East England

But Leon's point is perfectly reasonable, wherever it is happening.

People's lived experience and perception of crime is an issue and certainly some parts of the USA have seen stores closing due to crime.

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/09/26/business/target-retail-theft-store-closures/index.html

Again with the "lived experience".
Perhaps it is a useful term, after all.

Anyway, reposting this, which no one seems to have read.
It's a more sensible analysis of the urban problem in the US, and gives a better idea of how solutions might be thought about.

Facing multiple crises, how can cities survive?
https://thehill.com/future-america/future-of-cities/4934050-cities-crises-climate-finances-housing/

It's funny how "lived experience" is totally legitimate when it's people complaining about Haitians eating swans or something, but woke lefty nonsense when it's someone who has experienced discrimination or similar.

I actually think it's a useful phrase, particularly when trying to understand why people vote for Trump or Corbyn etc. For me, it's how irritated people are by cyclists going through red lights when the data is clear about how few do it, and how little danger they pose. You can point at spreadsheets or video analysis as much as you want but people are deeply influenced by their inherent biases and what they can see and hear in person.

A key element or a "lived experience" is not how it was at the time, but how you look back on it. I've had breakups where I was reasonably calm and resigned at the time, but weeks or even months later it starts to have a dreadful effect on me.

I agree with this.

There is also an element of anecdata... famously the David Herdson post on here predicting Corbyn was way closer in 2017 than the polls suggested, just by being out on the streets canvassing in the days before.

Often with statistics and large datasets, we're either collecting the wrong data (e.g. crime has fallen, but also more minor crimes are going unreported, thus creating the disconnect between experience and the stats). Or the data itself is being cherry picked to paint a narrative, e.g. being told inflation was super low for the last decade (but everyone feels poorer because of skyrocketing housing costs) or the economy is healthy because there's low unemployment (despite the fact that many of the jobs are zero hours or formerly well paid white collar professionals taking jobs far lower than their skill level to make ends meet).

Intuition matters. A lot.

As someone who has done a lot of market research, I tend to listen to the qual first and only then see what the data says. And if the two don't match, I don't just blindly accept the data over the 'lived experience'. I question the data.