The latest polling still has the Tories comfortably winning most seats and most polls still have Boris preferred as PM to Starmer.
Unless that changes, Boris will survive up to 2024. Plus of course the longer he stays as PM the more his valued on the lecture circuit increases post Premiership. If he wants to be in the Blair and Thatcher league of speakers and earning millions on the lecture circuit he needs to be there for a decade at least
How many points ahead do Labour have to be for most seats crossover?
40 to 37 just manages it on new boundaries if everyone else stays the same.
Ominously, no majority is possible on those numbers without the SNP. Except Grand Coalition of course.
Labour's SNP problem never seems to go away. The only way it would is if somehow another independence referendum is held before the next election and the pro-Indy side loses it, which would mean they wouldn't be able to demand another one from Labour so soon.
Yeah. Although the really interesting thing about 40-37 is that there would be no combination which would produce a majority at all. Apart from 3. Lab SNP. CON SNP LAB CON.
You would feel the SNP would be in a strong position. Would not like to speculate what might happen. And how would voters behave if that were the prospect? Difficult to say.
Labour have been soft on the indyref2 for a while now. A Lab-SNP coaltion doesn't seem that unlikely.
Starmer would likely give the SNP indyref2 if he needs their confidence and supply to become PM in a hung parliament.
Probably with devomax as a carrot to Scots to try and get them to vote No again
I agree with this analysis apart from the devomax bit (although you may be right there too)
Us Yoons know that Tories/Bozo are best for the union.
Why don't you want to have the vote, win it, and kill Sindy off good and proper instead of this 'delay delay' approach?
If the Union side were to win again the next day you'd have indyref3 trending on twitter.
Boris has a good political reason not to hold Ref2 - if he loses it it is bad for the union and for Boris, but if he wins it it is good for Labour, and therefore bad for the Tories, because the SNP will be for a few years a harmless centre left party that can ally with Labour against the Tories. Which would make voting Labour much easier for unionists who want a stable government. Ref2 is lose/lose for Boris.
I don't entirely understand the convoluted argument I'll play anyway; it's a Lose/Win for Labour
Lose the chance of governing England (or indeed the Island)
Very little variation at all, except that many 18-21s have no opinion while the 65+ generation is particularly hostile (as are LibDems). Gender, region and other political preferences have only small differences.
Fucking hell, next he'll admit to not knowing 'Paki' is an offensive term.
Yorkshire head coach Andrew Gale is being investigated by bosses over anti-Semitic social media messages, it has emerged amid the club's deepening racism crisis.
In a now deleted post on Twitter from November 2010, the then club captain told Paul Dews, who was head of media at Leeds United Football Club at the time, to "Button it y--!"
Gale told the Jewish News website, which first reported the tweet, that he was “completely unaware” of the offensive nature of the term at the time he sent the message.
I am starting to think Yorkshire CCC won't survive this.
Even back in the late seventies I was aware that paki and yid were offensive terms.
Yes, I lived in Leeds in the 70s and 80s, near Headingley. The local skinheads, loosely affiliated to the National Front, had a favourite sport. It was called "Paki-bashing", and was, sadly, quite widespread. The idea that anybody in Leeds, even back then, didn't know that 'Paki' was offensive is ludicrous.
The argument seems to be that although "Paki" was offensive in the 70s / 80s by 2010 it was merely banter.
No, sorry that's only true if you are completely stupid, I can't think of any word that has become less offensive over time.
Fuck? As in, a word that's become less offensive over time. When I were a lad, it was a complete no-no, whereas these days - well, I believe it's very common, even on television and in the cinema......
George Carlin could probably do his “Seven words you can’t say on television” bit, in the early evening these days.
Stan Boardman was banned from TV for telling the joke about the Focke and the Messerschmitt live on prime time TV in the 1980s on the Des O'Connor show.
Mind you, these days he'd be cancelled for his racist views anyway.
The latest polling still has the Tories comfortably winning most seats and most polls still have Boris preferred as PM to Starmer.
Unless that changes, Boris will survive up to 2024. Plus of course the longer he stays as PM the more his valued on the lecture circuit increases post Premiership. If he wants to be in the Blair and Thatcher league of speakers and earning millions on the lecture circuit he needs to be there for a decade at least
How many points ahead do Labour have to be for most seats crossover?
40 to 37 just manages it on new boundaries if everyone else stays the same.
Ominously, no majority is possible on those numbers without the SNP. Except Grand Coalition of course.
Labour's SNP problem never seems to go away. The only way it would is if somehow another independence referendum is held before the next election and the pro-Indy side loses it, which would mean they wouldn't be able to demand another one from Labour so soon.
Yeah. Although the really interesting thing about 40-37 is that there would be no combination which would produce a majority at all. Apart from 3. Lab SNP. CON SNP LAB CON.
You would feel the SNP would be in a strong position. Would not like to speculate what might happen. And how would voters behave if that were the prospect? Difficult to say.
Labour have been soft on the indyref2 for a while now. A Lab-SNP coaltion doesn't seem that unlikely.
Starmer would likely give the SNP indyref2 if he needs their confidence and supply to become PM in a hung parliament.
Probably with devomax as a carrot to Scots to try and get them to vote No again
I agree with this analysis apart from the devomax bit (although you may be right there too)
Us Yoons know that Tories/Bozo are best for the union.
Why don't you want to have the vote, win it, and kill Sindy off good and proper instead of this 'delay delay' approach?
You won't kill Sindy off unless a second vote is held a genuine generation after 2014, which is at minimum 10-15 years after. Canada proved that when the second Quebec independence referendum was only held in 1995, 15 years after the first in 1980.
Otherwise the SNP would demand indyref3 the next day you already having given in to them once and held indyref2 within a generation of indyref1, unless No won by a landslide
You will never kill off indyrefs
I have lived with them since the early 1950s
There's only been one!
The threat has been there since then, and remember Berwick where I lived in the early fifties has changed hands 13 times
The latest polling still has the Tories comfortably winning most seats and most polls still have Boris preferred as PM to Starmer.
Unless that changes, Boris will survive up to 2024. Plus of course the longer he stays as PM the more his valued on the lecture circuit increases post Premiership. If he wants to be in the Blair and Thatcher league of speakers and earning millions on the lecture circuit he needs to be there for a decade at least
How many points ahead do Labour have to be for most seats crossover?
40 to 37 just manages it on new boundaries if everyone else stays the same.
Ominously, no majority is possible on those numbers without the SNP. Except Grand Coalition of course.
Labour's SNP problem never seems to go away. The only way it would is if somehow another independence referendum is held before the next election and the pro-Indy side loses it, which would mean they wouldn't be able to demand another one from Labour so soon.
Yeah. Although the really interesting thing about 40-37 is that there would be no combination which would produce a majority at all. Apart from 3. Lab SNP. CON SNP LAB CON.
You would feel the SNP would be in a strong position. Would not like to speculate what might happen. And how would voters behave if that were the prospect? Difficult to say.
Labour have been soft on the indyref2 for a while now. A Lab-SNP coaltion doesn't seem that unlikely.
Starmer would likely give the SNP indyref2 if he needs their confidence and supply to become PM in a hung parliament.
Probably with devomax as a carrot to Scots to try and get them to vote No again
I agree with this analysis apart from the devomax bit (although you may be right there too)
Us Yoons know that Tories/Bozo are best for the union.
Why don't you want to have the vote, win it, and kill Sindy off good and proper instead of this 'delay delay' approach?
These people haven't got their underwear entirely clean since a single poll showed Yes ahead in the week before the 2014 referendum. Avoidance of grief, incontinence and having to sell Bettertogether II with the fat, lying sack of jizz at the centre of it are the psychological drivers.
The latest polling still has the Tories comfortably winning most seats and most polls still have Boris preferred as PM to Starmer.
Unless that changes, Boris will survive up to 2024. Plus of course the longer he stays as PM the more his valued on the lecture circuit increases post Premiership. If he wants to be in the Blair and Thatcher league of speakers and earning millions on the lecture circuit he needs to be there for a decade at least
How many points ahead do Labour have to be for most seats crossover?
40 to 37 just manages it on new boundaries if everyone else stays the same.
Ominously, no majority is possible on those numbers without the SNP. Except Grand Coalition of course.
Labour's SNP problem never seems to go away. The only way it would is if somehow another independence referendum is held before the next election and the pro-Indy side loses it, which would mean they wouldn't be able to demand another one from Labour so soon.
Yeah. Although the really interesting thing about 40-37 is that there would be no combination which would produce a majority at all. Apart from 3. Lab SNP. CON SNP LAB CON.
You would feel the SNP would be in a strong position. Would not like to speculate what might happen. And how would voters behave if that were the prospect? Difficult to say.
Labour have been soft on the indyref2 for a while now. A Lab-SNP coaltion doesn't seem that unlikely.
Starmer would likely give the SNP indyref2 if he needs their confidence and supply to become PM in a hung parliament.
Probably with devomax as a carrot to Scots to try and get them to vote No again
I agree with this analysis apart from the devomax bit (although you may be right there too)
Us Yoons know that Tories/Bozo are best for the union.
Why don't you want to have the vote, win it, and kill Sindy off good and proper instead of this 'delay delay' approach?
You won't kill Sindy off unless a second vote is held a genuine generation after 2014, which is at minimum 10-15 years after. Canada proved that when the second Quebec independence referendum was only held in 1995, 15 years after the first in 1980.
Otherwise the SNP would demand indyref3 the next day you already having given in to them once and held indyref2 within a generation of indyref1, unless No won by a landslide
You will never kill off indyrefs
I have lived with them since the early 1950s
There's only been one!
Scotland did once choose to form a union with England. So really the 2014 thing was the 2nd.
Very little variation at all, except that many 18-21s have no opinion while the 65+ generation is particularly hostile (as are LibDems). Gender, region and other political preferences have only small differences.
Of course, yes: confounding variabvle of age. It's actually other parties which are harder on him, thanks.
The latest polling still has the Tories comfortably winning most seats and most polls still have Boris preferred as PM to Starmer.
Unless that changes, Boris will survive up to 2024. Plus of course the longer he stays as PM the more his valued on the lecture circuit increases post Premiership. If he wants to be in the Blair and Thatcher league of speakers and earning millions on the lecture circuit he needs to be there for a decade at least
How many points ahead do Labour have to be for most seats crossover?
40 to 37 just manages it on new boundaries if everyone else stays the same.
Ominously, no majority is possible on those numbers without the SNP. Except Grand Coalition of course.
Labour's SNP problem never seems to go away. The only way it would is if somehow another independence referendum is held before the next election and the pro-Indy side loses it, which would mean they wouldn't be able to demand another one from Labour so soon.
Yeah. Although the really interesting thing about 40-37 is that there would be no combination which would produce a majority at all. Apart from 3. Lab SNP. CON SNP LAB CON.
You would feel the SNP would be in a strong position. Would not like to speculate what might happen. And how would voters behave if that were the prospect? Difficult to say.
Labour have been soft on the indyref2 for a while now. A Lab-SNP coaltion doesn't seem that unlikely.
Starmer would likely give the SNP indyref2 if he needs their confidence and supply to become PM in a hung parliament.
Probably with devomax as a carrot to Scots to try and get them to vote No again
I agree with this analysis apart from the devomax bit (although you may be right there too)
Us Yoons know that Tories/Bozo are best for the union.
Why don't you want to have the vote, win it, and kill Sindy off good and proper instead of this 'delay delay' approach?
You won't kill Sindy off unless a second vote is held a genuine generation after 2014, which is at minimum 10-15 years after. Canada proved that when the second Quebec independence referendum was only held in 1995, 15 years after the first in 1980.
Otherwise the SNP would demand indyref3 the next day you already having given in to them once and held indyref2 within a generation of indyref1, unless No won by a landslide
You will never kill off indyrefs
I have lived with them since the early 1950s
And yet there's only been one since 1707, so it's not a lot of living with really.
The latest polling still has the Tories comfortably winning most seats and most polls still have Boris preferred as PM to Starmer.
Unless that changes, Boris will survive up to 2024. Plus of course the longer he stays as PM the more his valued on the lecture circuit increases post Premiership. If he wants to be in the Blair and Thatcher league of speakers and earning millions on the lecture circuit he needs to be there for a decade at least
How many points ahead do Labour have to be for most seats crossover?
40 to 37 just manages it on new boundaries if everyone else stays the same.
Ominously, no majority is possible on those numbers without the SNP. Except Grand Coalition of course.
Labour's SNP problem never seems to go away. The only way it would is if somehow another independence referendum is held before the next election and the pro-Indy side loses it, which would mean they wouldn't be able to demand another one from Labour so soon.
Yeah. Although the really interesting thing about 40-37 is that there would be no combination which would produce a majority at all. Apart from 3. Lab SNP. CON SNP LAB CON.
You would feel the SNP would be in a strong position. Would not like to speculate what might happen. And how would voters behave if that were the prospect? Difficult to say.
Labour have been soft on the indyref2 for a while now. A Lab-SNP coaltion doesn't seem that unlikely.
Starmer would likely give the SNP indyref2 if he needs their confidence and supply to become PM in a hung parliament.
Probably with devomax as a carrot to Scots to try and get them to vote No again
I agree with this analysis apart from the devomax bit (although you may be right there too)
Us Yoons know that Tories/Bozo are best for the union.
Why don't you want to have the vote, win it, and kill Sindy off good and proper instead of this 'delay delay' approach?
These people haven't got their underwear entirely clean since a single poll showed Yes ahead in the week before the 2014 referendum. Avoidance of grief, incontinence and having to sell Bettertogether II with the fat, lying sack of jizz at the centre of it are the psychological drivers.
I wouldn't have said Nicola Sturgeon was fat, personally.
Fucking hell, next he'll admit to not knowing 'Paki' is an offensive term.
Yorkshire head coach Andrew Gale is being investigated by bosses over anti-Semitic social media messages, it has emerged amid the club's deepening racism crisis.
In a now deleted post on Twitter from November 2010, the then club captain told Paul Dews, who was head of media at Leeds United Football Club at the time, to "Button it y--!"
Gale told the Jewish News website, which first reported the tweet, that he was “completely unaware” of the offensive nature of the term at the time he sent the message.
I am starting to think Yorkshire CCC won't survive this.
Even back in the late seventies I was aware that paki and yid were offensive terms.
Yes, I lived in Leeds in the 70s and 80s, near Headingley. The local skinheads, loosely affiliated to the National Front, had a favourite sport. It was called "Paki-bashing", and was, sadly, quite widespread. The idea that anybody in Leeds, even back then, didn't know that 'Paki' was offensive is ludicrous.
The argument seems to be that although "Paki" was offensive in the 70s / 80s by 2010 it was merely banter.
No, sorry that's only true if you are completely stupid, I can't think of any word that has become less offensive over time.
Fuck? As in, a word that's become less offensive over time. When I were a lad, it was a complete no-no, whereas these days - well, I believe it's very common, even on television and in the cinema......
George Carlin could probably do his “Seven words you can’t say on television” bit, in the early evening these days.
Stan Boardman was banned from TV for telling the joke about the Focke and the Messerschmitt live on prime time TV in the 1980s on the Des O'Connor show.
Mind you, these days he'd be cancelled for his racist views anyway.
According to Wokepedia he was cancelled by Leeds United as far back as 2002.
Fucking hell, next he'll admit to not knowing 'Paki' is an offensive term.
Yorkshire head coach Andrew Gale is being investigated by bosses over anti-Semitic social media messages, it has emerged amid the club's deepening racism crisis.
In a now deleted post on Twitter from November 2010, the then club captain told Paul Dews, who was head of media at Leeds United Football Club at the time, to "Button it y--!"
Gale told the Jewish News website, which first reported the tweet, that he was “completely unaware” of the offensive nature of the term at the time he sent the message.
I am starting to think Yorkshire CCC won't survive this.
I think they need to appoint me Chief Executive and Executive Chairman of YCCC and I'll fix all the problems.
A strong Yorkshire means a strong England.
I have always found Yorkshire kind of annoying, for a few reasons:
1. Claiming to be in the North, even though parts of it are closer to London than to the Scottish border 2. Yorkshire Tea, which self-evidently isn't produced in Yorkshire 3. Being referred to by its residents as God's own Country, which seems rather boastful and potentially blasphemous, especially if you've ever spent time in some of the ropier bits 4. Geoffrey Boycott.
Boycott, I'll concede. You can have YCCC too.
As a southerner naturalised in Yorkshire I answer the others as follows: 1. Anything north of Watford Gap is north. Plus Yorkshire folk say bath, not barth. 2. Yorkshire tea is indeed produced in Yorkshire. The raw ingredients come from elsewhere. Next you'll be claiming that BP petrol isn't really British! 3. God's Own Country? Well Jacob Rees-Mogg says it isn't.[1] Case closed?
On the basis that JRM is always wrong I will concede 3. On 1. you are basically denying the existence of the Midlands, where I think most of Yorkshire is located. On 2., I think the petrol refining process is a more substantive procedure than mixing up tea leaves from several countries and putting them in a perforated bag. Yorkshire tea is not from Yorkshire (it is from India, Sri Lanka and Kenya).
Ah, compromise I'm happy to negotiate.
On 1. There was a lad at university (in the midlands) from Nottingham who denied he was northern. We didn't believe him, either. I have slightly more sympathy with his position now. Happy to re-set the dividing line to the Humber and disown South Yorkshire (happy, on current events, to lose West Yorkshire, too). On 2. Rename the product to 'Yorkshire Teabags'? At least until it turns out the bagging is done in High Wycombe...
The latest polling still has the Tories comfortably winning most seats and most polls still have Boris preferred as PM to Starmer.
Unless that changes, Boris will survive up to 2024. Plus of course the longer he stays as PM the more his valued on the lecture circuit increases post Premiership. If he wants to be in the Blair and Thatcher league of speakers and earning millions on the lecture circuit he needs to be there for a decade at least
How many points ahead do Labour have to be for most seats crossover?
40 to 37 just manages it on new boundaries if everyone else stays the same.
Ominously, no majority is possible on those numbers without the SNP. Except Grand Coalition of course.
Labour's SNP problem never seems to go away. The only way it would is if somehow another independence referendum is held before the next election and the pro-Indy side loses it, which would mean they wouldn't be able to demand another one from Labour so soon.
Yeah. Although the really interesting thing about 40-37 is that there would be no combination which would produce a majority at all. Apart from 3. Lab SNP. CON SNP LAB CON.
You would feel the SNP would be in a strong position. Would not like to speculate what might happen. And how would voters behave if that were the prospect? Difficult to say.
Labour have been soft on the indyref2 for a while now. A Lab-SNP coaltion doesn't seem that unlikely.
Starmer would likely give the SNP indyref2 if he needs their confidence and supply to become PM in a hung parliament.
Probably with devomax as a carrot to Scots to try and get them to vote No again
I agree with this analysis apart from the devomax bit (although you may be right there too)
Us Yoons know that Tories/Bozo are best for the union.
Why don't you want to have the vote, win it, and kill Sindy off good and proper instead of this 'delay delay' approach?
These people haven't got their underwear entirely clean since a single poll showed Yes ahead in the week before the 2014 referendum. Avoidance of grief, incontinence and having to sell Bettertogether II with the fat, lying sack of jizz at the centre of it are the psychological drivers.
And no (or at least a much smaller) figleaf in the way of Slab to cover the soiled underwear this time. That alone will be a huge difference.
The latest polling still has the Tories comfortably winning most seats and most polls still have Boris preferred as PM to Starmer.
Unless that changes, Boris will survive up to 2024. Plus of course the longer he stays as PM the more his valued on the lecture circuit increases post Premiership. If he wants to be in the Blair and Thatcher league of speakers and earning millions on the lecture circuit he needs to be there for a decade at least
How many points ahead do Labour have to be for most seats crossover?
40 to 37 just manages it on new boundaries if everyone else stays the same.
Ominously, no majority is possible on those numbers without the SNP. Except Grand Coalition of course.
Labour's SNP problem never seems to go away. The only way it would is if somehow another independence referendum is held before the next election and the pro-Indy side loses it, which would mean they wouldn't be able to demand another one from Labour so soon.
Yeah. Although the really interesting thing about 40-37 is that there would be no combination which would produce a majority at all. Apart from 3. Lab SNP. CON SNP LAB CON.
You would feel the SNP would be in a strong position. Would not like to speculate what might happen. And how would voters behave if that were the prospect? Difficult to say.
Labour have been soft on the indyref2 for a while now. A Lab-SNP coaltion doesn't seem that unlikely.
Starmer would likely give the SNP indyref2 if he needs their confidence and supply to become PM in a hung parliament.
Probably with devomax as a carrot to Scots to try and get them to vote No again
I agree with this analysis apart from the devomax bit (although you may be right there too)
Us Yoons know that Tories/Bozo are best for the union.
Why don't you want to have the vote, win it, and kill Sindy off good and proper instead of this 'delay delay' approach?
You won't kill Sindy off unless a second vote is held a genuine generation after 2014, which is at minimum 10-15 years after. Canada proved that when the second Quebec independence referendum was only held in 1995, 15 years after the first in 1980.
Otherwise the SNP would demand indyref3 the next day you already having given in to them once and held indyref2 within a generation of indyref1, unless No won by a landslide
You will never kill off indyrefs
I have lived with them since the early 1950s
And yet there's only been one since 1707, so it's not a lot of living with really.
Very little variation at all, except that many 18-21s have no opinion while the 65+ generation is particularly hostile (as are LibDems). Gender, region and other political preferences have only small differences.
That 65+ figure isn't good news for the government, is it? Hopefully the oldies are turning on the Tories due to their moral turpitude (the Tories' moral turpitude that is, not the oldies').
34k cases, & numbers in hospital declining in all 4 nations, looks like pretty good news.
Are you still in favour of Plan B?
I haven't changed my opinion we should be doing what I see as good bits of plan B (compulsory masks on public transport, encourage wfh) + some things not on plan B -> improve school ventilation, update symptom list, improve sick pay.
Given R is about 1 now, we could probably nudge it below with that lot and get cases down before Winter comes.
The latest polling still has the Tories comfortably winning most seats and most polls still have Boris preferred as PM to Starmer.
Unless that changes, Boris will survive up to 2024. Plus of course the longer he stays as PM the more his valued on the lecture circuit increases post Premiership. If he wants to be in the Blair and Thatcher league of speakers and earning millions on the lecture circuit he needs to be there for a decade at least
How many points ahead do Labour have to be for most seats crossover?
40 to 37 just manages it on new boundaries if everyone else stays the same.
Ominously, no majority is possible on those numbers without the SNP. Except Grand Coalition of course.
Labour's SNP problem never seems to go away. The only way it would is if somehow another independence referendum is held before the next election and the pro-Indy side loses it, which would mean they wouldn't be able to demand another one from Labour so soon.
Yeah. Although the really interesting thing about 40-37 is that there would be no combination which would produce a majority at all. Apart from 3. Lab SNP. CON SNP LAB CON.
You would feel the SNP would be in a strong position. Would not like to speculate what might happen. And how would voters behave if that were the prospect? Difficult to say.
Labour have been soft on the indyref2 for a while now. A Lab-SNP coaltion doesn't seem that unlikely.
Starmer would likely give the SNP indyref2 if he needs their confidence and supply to become PM in a hung parliament.
Probably with devomax as a carrot to Scots to try and get them to vote No again
I agree with this analysis apart from the devomax bit (although you may be right there too)
Us Yoons know that Tories/Bozo are best for the union.
Why don't you want to have the vote, win it, and kill Sindy off good and proper instead of this 'delay delay' approach?
These people haven't got their underwear entirely clean since a single poll showed Yes ahead in the week before the 2014 referendum. Avoidance of grief, incontinence and having to sell Bettertogether II with the fat, lying sack of jizz at the centre of it are the psychological drivers.
Just simply wrong - You'd by a #indyref3 Type as surely as you are a SNP Type now.
Fucking hell, next he'll admit to not knowing 'Paki' is an offensive term.
Yorkshire head coach Andrew Gale is being investigated by bosses over anti-Semitic social media messages, it has emerged amid the club's deepening racism crisis.
In a now deleted post on Twitter from November 2010, the then club captain told Paul Dews, who was head of media at Leeds United Football Club at the time, to "Button it y--!"
Gale told the Jewish News website, which first reported the tweet, that he was “completely unaware” of the offensive nature of the term at the time he sent the message.
I am starting to think Yorkshire CCC won't survive this.
Even back in the late seventies I was aware that paki and yid were offensive terms.
Yes, I lived in Leeds in the 70s and 80s, near Headingley. The local skinheads, loosely affiliated to the National Front, had a favourite sport. It was called "Paki-bashing", and was, sadly, quite widespread. The idea that anybody in Leeds, even back then, didn't know that 'Paki' was offensive is ludicrous.
The argument seems to be that although "Paki" was offensive in the 70s / 80s by 2010 it was merely banter.
No, sorry that's only true if you are completely stupid, I can't think of any word that has become less offensive over time.
Fuck? As in, a word that's become less offensive over time. When I were a lad, it was a complete no-no, whereas these days - well, I believe it's very common, even on television and in the cinema......
I still couldn't say it in earshot of my parents but, yes, these days it's more a case of you're a bit unusual if you don't spray that around. I watched a Bob Dylan doc recently and the (still) angelic looking Joan Baez when being interviewed could not get through a sentence without a dozen or so fucks. It was slightly disconcerting.
Very little variation at all, except that many 18-21s have no opinion while the 65+ generation is particularly hostile (as are LibDems). Gender, region and other political preferences have only small differences.
That 65+ figure isn't good news for the government, is it? Hopefully the oldies are turning on the Tories due to their moral turpitude (the Tories' moral turpitude that is, not the oldies').
The only saving grace in this saga is that Paterson has resigned and left politics
34k cases, & numbers in hospital declining in all 4 nations, looks like pretty good news.
Are you still in favour of Plan B?
I haven't changed my opinion we should be doing what I see as good bits of plan B (compulsory masks on public transport, encourage wfh) + some things not on plan B -> improve school ventilation, update symptom list, improve sick pay.
Given R is about 1 now, we could probably nudge it below with that lot and get cases down before Winter comes.
What astounds me is that if one goes and looks at a good quality Victorian school - say, one of the late C19 "public schools", but even an ordinary board school will often do - there is huge emphasis on ventilation. High ceilings, high windows, great chunks of the windows open, the dormitories are like a Florence Nightingale-ist hospital ward, and so on. This has been lost to a great degree.
34k cases, & numbers in hospital declining in all 4 nations, looks like pretty good news.
Are you still in favour of Plan B?
I haven't changed my opinion we should be doing what I see as good bits of plan B (compulsory masks on public transport, encourage wfh) + some things not on plan B -> improve school ventilation, update symptom list, improve sick pay.
Given R is about 1 now, we could probably nudge it below with that lot and get cases down before Winter comes.
As you say, a big fall in new infections today - 22% lower than the same day last week.
We wait for the good figures of the last few days to feed through to lower hospitalisations.
Prof. Christina Pagel @chrischirp · 8m Replying to @chrischirp There was a reduction in both LFD and PCR tests over half term, so take drop in reported cases with a grain of salt over half term.
Very little variation at all, except that many 18-21s have no opinion while the 65+ generation is particularly hostile (as are LibDems). Gender, region and other political preferences have only small differences.
That 65+ figure isn't good news for the government, is it? Hopefully the oldies are turning on the Tories due to their moral turpitude (the Tories' moral turpitude that is, not the oldies').
The only saving grace in this saga is that Paterson has resigned and left politics
Not yet; he seems quite likely to end up as a peer.
Prof. Christina Pagel @chrischirp · 8m Replying to @chrischirp There was a reduction in both LFD and PCR tests over half term, so take drop in reported cases with a grain of salt over half term.
What on Earth are Christina and friends going to do once there’s no more pandemic, and a dozen journalists and TV producers no longer have them on speed dial?
Very little variation at all, except that many 18-21s have no opinion while the 65+ generation is particularly hostile (as are LibDems). Gender, region and other political preferences have only small differences.
That 65+ figure isn't good news for the government, is it? Hopefully the oldies are turning on the Tories due to their moral turpitude (the Tories' moral turpitude that is, not the oldies').
The only saving grace in this saga is that Paterson has resigned and left politics
Not yet; he seems quite likely to end up as a peer.
Very little variation at all, except that many 18-21s have no opinion while the 65+ generation is particularly hostile (as are LibDems). Gender, region and other political preferences have only small differences.
That 65+ figure isn't good news for the government, is it? Hopefully the oldies are turning on the Tories due to their moral turpitude (the Tories' moral turpitude that is, not the oldies').
The only saving grace in this saga is that Paterson has resigned and left politics
Very little variation at all, except that many 18-21s have no opinion while the 65+ generation is particularly hostile (as are LibDems). Gender, region and other political preferences have only small differences.
That 65+ figure isn't good news for the government, is it? Hopefully the oldies are turning on the Tories due to their moral turpitude (the Tories' moral turpitude that is, not the oldies').
The only saving grace in this saga is that Paterson has resigned and left politics
Not yet; he seems quite likely to end up as a peer.
SKS is next PM if that happens. Paterson should be chased from the face of the Earth.
Despite having a Glaswegian mother, I'm not hugely invested in the Scottish issue, being fairly neutral. But for Labour, the politics of it are simple. Starmer will fight the next election on a) no coalition with the SNP, b) no promise, or even hint, of another referendum. He has no choice.
What happens after that, if by any chance the Tories don't succeed in having a majority to form a government, will depend entirely on the numbers. But I'm confident that Starmer would prefer to risk another election rather than be held to ransom by the SNP.
Very little variation at all, except that many 18-21s have no opinion while the 65+ generation is particularly hostile (as are LibDems). Gender, region and other political preferences have only small differences.
That 65+ figure isn't good news for the government, is it? Hopefully the oldies are turning on the Tories due to their moral turpitude (the Tories' moral turpitude that is, not the oldies').
The only saving grace in this saga is that Paterson has resigned and left politics
Not yet; he seems quite likely to end up as a peer.
I very much doubt that no matter the rumours
Fair enough, but No 10 won't deny it, and just look who else has ended up as a peer. I wouldn't regard the story as closed.
Prof. Christina Pagel @chrischirp · 8m Replying to @chrischirp There was a reduction in both LFD and PCR tests over half term, so take drop in reported cases with a grain of salt over half term.
What on Earth are Christina and friends going to do once there’s no more pandemic, and a dozen journalists and TV producers no longer have them on speed dial?
Go back to writing bad books that show their ignorance of any given subject and saying how much better life would be if we had only listened to them.
34k cases, & numbers in hospital declining in all 4 nations, looks like pretty good news.
Are you still in favour of Plan B?
I haven't changed my opinion we should be doing what I see as good bits of plan B (compulsory masks on public transport, encourage wfh) + some things not on plan B -> improve school ventilation, update symptom list, improve sick pay.
Given R is about 1 now, we could probably nudge it below with that lot and get cases down before Winter comes.
Today's R number drops to 0.9 and 1.1 from 1.1 and 1.3
BBC statement on Michael Vaughan says he "won't appear as a presenter" on 5 Live's Tuffers & Vaughan Show on Monday. "We remain in discussion with Michael and his team". #bbccricket
The latest polling still has the Tories comfortably winning most seats and most polls still have Boris preferred as PM to Starmer.
Unless that changes, Boris will survive up to 2024. Plus of course the longer he stays as PM the more his valued on the lecture circuit increases post Premiership. If he wants to be in the Blair and Thatcher league of speakers and earning millions on the lecture circuit he needs to be there for a decade at least
How many points ahead do Labour have to be for most seats crossover?
40 to 37 just manages it on new boundaries if everyone else stays the same.
Ominously, no majority is possible on those numbers without the SNP. Except Grand Coalition of course.
Labour's SNP problem never seems to go away. The only way it would is if somehow another independence referendum is held before the next election and the pro-Indy side loses it, which would mean they wouldn't be able to demand another one from Labour so soon.
Yeah. Although the really interesting thing about 40-37 is that there would be no combination which would produce a majority at all. Apart from 3. Lab SNP. CON SNP LAB CON.
You would feel the SNP would be in a strong position. Would not like to speculate what might happen. And how would voters behave if that were the prospect? Difficult to say.
Labour have been soft on the indyref2 for a while now. A Lab-SNP coaltion doesn't seem that unlikely.
Starmer would likely give the SNP indyref2 if he needs their confidence and supply to become PM in a hung parliament.
Probably with devomax as a carrot to Scots to try and get them to vote No again
I agree with this analysis apart from the devomax bit (although you may be right there too)
Us Yoons know that Tories/Bozo are best for the union.
Why don't you want to have the vote, win it, and kill Sindy off good and proper instead of this 'delay delay' approach?
These people haven't got their underwear entirely clean since a single poll showed Yes ahead in the week before the 2014 referendum. Avoidance of grief, incontinence and having to sell Bettertogether II with the fat, lying sack of jizz at the centre of it are the psychological drivers.
I wouldn't have said Nicola Sturgeon was fat, personally.
While Boris (who has polling figures in Scottish subsamples that would make Hitler look liked and electable) is in charge of the UK, Scottish Independence is still a vague possibility.
It doesn't help that "Independence would have solved this" is used whenever anyone in the SNP has a difficult question to answer.
This was literally the day after the referendum. It looks like, adimittedly, like the Yoons were being the dicks but it was SNP types who started the indyref2 campaign literally the next day last time round.
Very little variation at all, except that many 18-21s have no opinion while the 65+ generation is particularly hostile (as are LibDems). Gender, region and other political preferences have only small differences.
That 65+ figure isn't good news for the government, is it? Hopefully the oldies are turning on the Tories due to their moral turpitude (the Tories' moral turpitude that is, not the oldies').
The only saving grace in this saga is that Paterson has resigned and left politics
Not yet; he seems quite likely to end up as a peer.
I very much doubt that no matter the rumours
Fair enough, but No 10 won't deny it, and just look who else has ended up as a peer. I wouldn't regard the story as closed.
With the furore in the party it is the last thing Boris will do
BBC statement on Michael Vaughan says he "won't appear as a presenter" on 5 Live's Tuffers & Vaughan Show on Monday. "We remain in discussion with Michael and his team". #bbccricket
Very little variation at all, except that many 18-21s have no opinion while the 65+ generation is particularly hostile (as are LibDems). Gender, region and other political preferences have only small differences.
That 65+ figure isn't good news for the government, is it? Hopefully the oldies are turning on the Tories due to their moral turpitude (the Tories' moral turpitude that is, not the oldies').
The only saving grace in this saga is that Paterson has resigned and left politics
Prof. Christina Pagel @chrischirp · 8m Replying to @chrischirp There was a reduction in both LFD and PCR tests over half term, so take drop in reported cases with a grain of salt over half term.
What on Earth are Christina and friends going to do once there’s no more pandemic, and a dozen journalists and TV producers no longer have them on speed dial?
She's got one thing right:
Prof. Christina Pagel @chrischirp · 15m Although two thirds of over 75s are boosted, almost all of them are elgibile. In general, only about 55% of those who got their 2nd dose 6+ mnths ago have been boosted. We need to match the 500K a day we were doing in winter and spring!
34k cases, & numbers in hospital declining in all 4 nations, looks like pretty good news.
Are you still in favour of Plan B?
I haven't changed my opinion we should be doing what I see as good bits of plan B (compulsory masks on public transport, encourage wfh) + some things not on plan B -> improve school ventilation, update symptom list, improve sick pay.
Given R is about 1 now, we could probably nudge it below with that lot and get cases down before Winter comes.
As you say, a big fall in new infections today - 22% lower than the same day last week.
We wait for the good figures of the last few days to feed through to lower hospitalisations.
I'm tracking cases by sample date to the last completed date.
We're fairly consistent at around or below 5% reduction now, cases by sample date for 31/10 (the last day regarded as substantially complete) ÷ cases by sample date for 24/10 = 0.967
That would give an epidemiological Rt of a little above 0.98 (approximate this by splitting the difference between weekly change rate and 1).
No strong indicator of R moving much in the partial figures for the next couple of days.
Very little variation at all, except that many 18-21s have no opinion while the 65+ generation is particularly hostile (as are LibDems). Gender, region and other political preferences have only small differences.
That 65+ figure isn't good news for the government, is it? Hopefully the oldies are turning on the Tories due to their moral turpitude (the Tories' moral turpitude that is, not the oldies').
The only saving grace in this saga is that Paterson has resigned and left politics
Not yet; he seems quite likely to end up as a peer.
I very much doubt that no matter the rumours
Fair enough, but No 10 won't deny it, and just look who else has ended up as a peer. I wouldn't regard the story as closed.
With the furore in the party it is the last thing Boris will do
It does depend on whom Mr Johnson is most frightened of, and he is usually much more frightened of the Brexiter MPs than anyone else (except perhaps Mrs J?). They are the ones who can depose him instantly. And they may feel that Mr Paterson deserves recompense and reward for his hard work [edited] as a MP. A peerage would do very nicely.
The latest polling still has the Tories comfortably winning most seats and most polls still have Boris preferred as PM to Starmer.
Unless that changes, Boris will survive up to 2024. Plus of course the longer he stays as PM the more his valued on the lecture circuit increases post Premiership. If he wants to be in the Blair and Thatcher league of speakers and earning millions on the lecture circuit he needs to be there for a decade at least
How many points ahead do Labour have to be for most seats crossover?
40 to 37 just manages it on new boundaries if everyone else stays the same.
Ominously, no majority is possible on those numbers without the SNP. Except Grand Coalition of course.
Labour's SNP problem never seems to go away. The only way it would is if somehow another independence referendum is held before the next election and the pro-Indy side loses it, which would mean they wouldn't be able to demand another one from Labour so soon.
Yeah. Although the really interesting thing about 40-37 is that there would be no combination which would produce a majority at all. Apart from 3. Lab SNP. CON SNP LAB CON.
You would feel the SNP would be in a strong position. Would not like to speculate what might happen. And how would voters behave if that were the prospect? Difficult to say.
Labour have been soft on the indyref2 for a while now. A Lab-SNP coaltion doesn't seem that unlikely.
Starmer would likely give the SNP indyref2 if he needs their confidence and supply to become PM in a hung parliament.
Probably with devomax as a carrot to Scots to try and get them to vote No again
I agree with this analysis apart from the devomax bit (although you may be right there too)
Us Yoons know that Tories/Bozo are best for the union.
Why don't you want to have the vote, win it, and kill Sindy off good and proper instead of this 'delay delay' approach?
These people haven't got their underwear entirely clean since a single poll showed Yes ahead in the week before the 2014 referendum. Avoidance of grief, incontinence and having to sell Bettertogether II with the fat, lying sack of jizz at the centre of it are the psychological drivers.
I wouldn't have said Nicola Sturgeon was fat, personally.
While Boris (who has polling figures in Scottish subsamples that would make Hitler look liked and electable) is in charge of the UK, Scottish Independence is still a vague possibility.
It doesn't help that "Independence would have solved this" is used whenever anyone in the SNP has a difficult question to answer.
Tbf having a fat, lying sack of jizz imposed on us as pm by other people would certainly be a problem solved by independence.
Very little variation at all, except that many 18-21s have no opinion while the 65+ generation is particularly hostile (as are LibDems). Gender, region and other political preferences have only small differences.
That 65+ figure isn't good news for the government, is it? Hopefully the oldies are turning on the Tories due to their moral turpitude (the Tories' moral turpitude that is, not the oldies').
The only saving grace in this saga is that Paterson has resigned and left politics
Not yet; he seems quite likely to end up as a peer.
I very much doubt that no matter the rumours
Fair enough, but No 10 won't deny it, and just look who else has ended up as a peer. I wouldn't regard the story as closed.
With the furore in the party it is the last thing Boris will do
It does depend on whom Mr Johnson is most frightened of, and he is usually much more frightened of the Brexiter MPs than anyone else (except perhaps Mrs J?). They are the ones who can depose him instantly. And they may feel that Mr Paterson deserves recompense and reward for his hard work [edited] as a MP. A peerage would do very nicely.
Fucking hell, next he'll admit to not knowing 'Paki' is an offensive term.
Yorkshire head coach Andrew Gale is being investigated by bosses over anti-Semitic social media messages, it has emerged amid the club's deepening racism crisis.
In a now deleted post on Twitter from November 2010, the then club captain told Paul Dews, who was head of media at Leeds United Football Club at the time, to "Button it y--!"
Gale told the Jewish News website, which first reported the tweet, that he was “completely unaware” of the offensive nature of the term at the time he sent the message.
I am starting to think Yorkshire CCC won't survive this.
Even back in the late seventies I was aware that paki and yid were offensive terms.
Yes, I lived in Leeds in the 70s and 80s, near Headingley. The local skinheads, loosely affiliated to the National Front, had a favourite sport. It was called "Paki-bashing", and was, sadly, quite widespread. The idea that anybody in Leeds, even back then, didn't know that 'Paki' was offensive is ludicrous.
The argument seems to be that although "Paki" was offensive in the 70s / 80s by 2010 it was merely banter.
No, sorry that's only true if you are completely stupid, I can't think of any word that has become less offensive over time.
Fuck? As in, a word that's become less offensive over time. When I were a lad, it was a complete no-no, whereas these days - well, I believe it's very common, even on television and in the cinema......
George Carlin could probably do his “Seven words you can’t say on television” bit, in the early evening these days.
Stan Boardman was banned from TV for telling the joke about the Focke and the Messerschmitt live on prime time TV in the 1980s on the Des O'Connor show.
Mind you, these days he'd be cancelled for his racist views anyway.
Evelyn Waugh told Nancy Mitford that joke in a wartime letter. Wounded airman in hospital: I had this fokker right on my tail your majesty HMQ: and was he flying a Messerschmitt?
Just saw Greta on the BBC webpage telling us the world of literally burning. Meanwhile I think I have solved the climate crisis.
All those who think as she does should instantly reduce their carbon footprint to zero or close to it. No more electricity, driving, flying, cooking hot food, you name it.
Given the urgency that will surely be the majority of the world's population. Hence problem solved. The remainder can go about their normal lives knowing that the planet is safe.
Very little variation at all, except that many 18-21s have no opinion while the 65+ generation is particularly hostile (as are LibDems). Gender, region and other political preferences have only small differences.
That 65+ figure isn't good news for the government, is it? Hopefully the oldies are turning on the Tories due to their moral turpitude (the Tories' moral turpitude that is, not the oldies').
The only saving grace in this saga is that Paterson has resigned and left politics
Not yet; he seems quite likely to end up as a peer.
I very much doubt that no matter the rumours
Fair enough, but No 10 won't deny it, and just look who else has ended up as a peer. I wouldn't regard the story as closed.
I do hope so. He could become Lord Patterson, thereby replicating the Peter Carington/Lord Carrington anomaly of four decades ago and bringing comfort to those who can never quite get his name right.
The thing that is always said about how long he’ll be in Number 10 is that his salary as PM is nowhere what he was earning from journalism before he became leader and PM and it is said that he is under pressure financially. I have always thought that it will be this factor that could be decisive.
This assumes there are two possibilities:
Johnson quits to get a better salary
Johnson stays on and his salary stays the same
But really, what's stopping him giving himself a raise? Do we really think he'd be too embarrassed?
Even if you think he wouldn't do it now for political reasons, that's no reason to think he would step down before an election, when he could be counting on the idea of increasing his pay after any win.
I am not much of a bettor, but I definitely wouldn't bet on Johnson lacking chutzspa or deferring to ethics.
Fucking hell, next he'll admit to not knowing 'Paki' is an offensive term.
Yorkshire head coach Andrew Gale is being investigated by bosses over anti-Semitic social media messages, it has emerged amid the club's deepening racism crisis.
In a now deleted post on Twitter from November 2010, the then club captain told Paul Dews, who was head of media at Leeds United Football Club at the time, to "Button it y--!"
Gale told the Jewish News website, which first reported the tweet, that he was “completely unaware” of the offensive nature of the term at the time he sent the message.
I am starting to think Yorkshire CCC won't survive this.
I think they need to appoint me Chief Executive and Executive Chairman of YCCC and I'll fix all the problems.
A strong Yorkshire means a strong England.
I have always found Yorkshire kind of annoying, for a few reasons:
1. Claiming to be in the North, even though parts of it are closer to London than to the Scottish border 2. Yorkshire Tea, which self-evidently isn't produced in Yorkshire 3. Being referred to by its residents as God's own Country, which seems rather boastful and potentially blasphemous, especially if you've ever spent time in some of the ropier bits 4. Geoffrey Boycott.
Boycott, I'll concede. You can have YCCC too.
As a southerner naturalised in Yorkshire I answer the others as follows: 1. Anything north of Watford Gap is north. Plus Yorkshire folk say bath, not barth. 2. Yorkshire tea is indeed produced in Yorkshire. The raw ingredients come from elsewhere. Next you'll be claiming that BP petrol isn't really British! 3. God's Own Country? Well Jacob Rees-Mogg says it isn't.[1] Case closed?
On the basis that JRM is always wrong I will concede 3. On 1. you are basically denying the existence of the Midlands, where I think most of Yorkshire is located. On 2., I think the petrol refining process is a more substantive procedure than mixing up tea leaves from several countries and putting them in a perforated bag. Yorkshire tea is not from Yorkshire (it is from India, Sri Lanka and Kenya).
Ah, compromise I'm happy to negotiate.
On 1. There was a lad at university (in the midlands) from Nottingham who denied he was northern. We didn't believe him, either. I have slightly more sympathy with his position now. Happy to re-set the dividing line to the Humber and disown South Yorkshire (happy, on current events, to lose West Yorkshire, too). On 2. Rename the product to 'Yorkshire Teabags'? At least until it turns out the bagging is done in High Wycombe...
Traditionally the barrier between some form of North and South has been the Trent and the Fosse Way.
In the Roman period the Fosse was the boundary between the civilian and military zones.
Then in the Hundred Years War the Trent was used as a boundary for tax revenues. During the reign of Edward III all counties had to provide taxes for paying for the campaigns. Exemptions were made for the south coast counties which were already having to pay for the defence against raids and also any county North of the Trent as that was considered bandit country defending against those evil Scots.
During the Pilgrimage of Grace, the Trent again was considered the boundary between the loyal South and the rebellious North
The latest polling still has the Tories comfortably winning most seats and most polls still have Boris preferred as PM to Starmer.
Unless that changes, Boris will survive up to 2024. Plus of course the longer he stays as PM the more his valued on the lecture circuit increases post Premiership. If he wants to be in the Blair and Thatcher league of speakers and earning millions on the lecture circuit he needs to be there for a decade at least
How many points ahead do Labour have to be for most seats crossover?
40 to 37 just manages it on new boundaries if everyone else stays the same.
Ominously, no majority is possible on those numbers without the SNP. Except Grand Coalition of course.
Labour's SNP problem never seems to go away. The only way it would is if somehow another independence referendum is held before the next election and the pro-Indy side loses it, which would mean they wouldn't be able to demand another one from Labour so soon.
Yeah. Although the really interesting thing about 40-37 is that there would be no combination which would produce a majority at all. Apart from 3. Lab SNP. CON SNP LAB CON.
You would feel the SNP would be in a strong position. Would not like to speculate what might happen. And how would voters behave if that were the prospect? Difficult to say.
Labour have been soft on the indyref2 for a while now. A Lab-SNP coaltion doesn't seem that unlikely.
Starmer would likely give the SNP indyref2 if he needs their confidence and supply to become PM in a hung parliament.
Probably with devomax as a carrot to Scots to try and get them to vote No again
I agree with this analysis apart from the devomax bit (although you may be right there too)
Us Yoons know that Tories/Bozo are best for the union.
Why don't you want to have the vote, win it, and kill Sindy off good and proper instead of this 'delay delay' approach?
These people haven't got their underwear entirely clean since a single poll showed Yes ahead in the week before the 2014 referendum. Avoidance of grief, incontinence and having to sell Bettertogether II with the fat, lying sack of jizz at the centre of it are the psychological drivers.
I wouldn't have said Nicola Sturgeon was fat, personally.
While Boris (who has polling figures in Scottish subsamples that would make Hitler look liked and electable) is in charge of the UK, Scottish Independence is still a vague possibility.
It doesn't help that "Independence would have solved this" is used whenever anyone in the SNP has a difficult question to answer.
Tbf having a fat, lying sack of jizz imposed on us as pm by other people would certainly be a problem solved by independence.
Suck it up SNP Type
Bozo only has to write one letter - where as you've got another decade to pollute this place with your wittering.
Family pornography? Is he talking about stepmom porn?
The campaign to make it illegal to photograph breastfeeding without consent met an obstacle in the Lords when Lord Wolfson of Tredegar argued it could spoil family pornography. The minister said it would be rough on a man who photographed his wife on the beach “for his own sexual gratification” and “unintentionally” included a woman he didn’t know with her breast out suckling. Wolfson’s holiday snaps must be fascinating.
That's a really bizarre (way of making the) argument. There is a discussion about photos in all kinds of settings that happen to include a breastfeeding woman in the background - e.g. family pic in a cafe or whatever and someone is breastfeeding on the next table and how you would make such a law workable given that - but it seems to me that this is a bit of a niche angle.
I'm going to regret asking this, I think, but is intentionally taking photos of random women breastfeeding a thing? Strikes me there are far easier ways of accessing pictures of a (more exposed) bosom, even buying the Sun, for example (does page 3 still exist?).
I took dozens exactly a fortnight ago - without asking! #edgy
Well, 'family porn' exception
I'd missed the news, if announced - but that means you are a father then? Congratulations if so. Hope all went smoothly.
Fucking hell, next he'll admit to not knowing 'Paki' is an offensive term.
Yorkshire head coach Andrew Gale is being investigated by bosses over anti-Semitic social media messages, it has emerged amid the club's deepening racism crisis.
In a now deleted post on Twitter from November 2010, the then club captain told Paul Dews, who was head of media at Leeds United Football Club at the time, to "Button it y--!"
Gale told the Jewish News website, which first reported the tweet, that he was “completely unaware” of the offensive nature of the term at the time he sent the message.
I am starting to think Yorkshire CCC won't survive this.
Even back in the late seventies I was aware that paki and yid were offensive terms.
Yes, I lived in Leeds in the 70s and 80s, near Headingley. The local skinheads, loosely affiliated to the National Front, had a favourite sport. It was called "Paki-bashing", and was, sadly, quite widespread. The idea that anybody in Leeds, even back then, didn't know that 'Paki' was offensive is ludicrous.
The argument seems to be that although "Paki" was offensive in the 70s / 80s by 2010 it was merely banter.
No, sorry that's only true if you are completely stupid, I can't think of any word that has become less offensive over time.
Fuck? As in, a word that's become less offensive over time. When I were a lad, it was a complete no-no, whereas these days - well, I believe it's very common, even on television and in the cinema......
George Carlin could probably do his “Seven words you can’t say on television” bit, in the early evening these days.
Stan Boardman was banned from TV for telling the joke about the Focke and the Messerschmitt live on prime time TV in the 1980s on the Des O'Connor show.
Mind you, these days he'd be cancelled for his racist views anyway.
Evelyn Waugh told Nancy Mitford that joke in a wartime letter. Wounded airman in hospital: I had this fokker right on my tail your majesty HMQ: and was he flying a Messerschmitt?
There are even some credulous people who actually believe that Douglas Bader told this tale to a class room of schoolgirls.
There was a Bernard Manning joke on Parkinson one time. I wouldn't dare repeat it but it is topical given the goings on of YCC. He told it against himself and those who accused him of being racist and to show that comedy is inviolate. A bit like Dave Chappelle now.
And everyone then laughed uproariously. Including some as I remember it non-white critics of his being interviewed at the same time.
Just saw Greta on the BBC webpage telling us the world of literally burning. I think I have solved the climate crisis.
All those who think as she does should instantly reduce their carbon footprint to zero or close to it. No more electricity, driving, flying, cooking hot food, you name it.
Given the urgency that will surely be the majority of the world's population. Hence problem solved. The remainder can go about their normal lives knowing that the planet is safe.
Your welcome.
I think she's rather good. She's quite careful as to what she says. Her supporters are the problem.
Fucking hell, next he'll admit to not knowing 'Paki' is an offensive term.
Yorkshire head coach Andrew Gale is being investigated by bosses over anti-Semitic social media messages, it has emerged amid the club's deepening racism crisis.
In a now deleted post on Twitter from November 2010, the then club captain told Paul Dews, who was head of media at Leeds United Football Club at the time, to "Button it y--!"
Gale told the Jewish News website, which first reported the tweet, that he was “completely unaware” of the offensive nature of the term at the time he sent the message.
I am starting to think Yorkshire CCC won't survive this.
I think they need to appoint me Chief Executive and Executive Chairman of YCCC and I'll fix all the problems.
A strong Yorkshire means a strong England.
I have always found Yorkshire kind of annoying, for a few reasons:
1. Claiming to be in the North, even though parts of it are closer to London than to the Scottish border 2. Yorkshire Tea, which self-evidently isn't produced in Yorkshire 3. Being referred to by its residents as God's own Country, which seems rather boastful and potentially blasphemous, especially if you've ever spent time in some of the ropier bits 4. Geoffrey Boycott.
Boycott, I'll concede. You can have YCCC too.
As a southerner naturalised in Yorkshire I answer the others as follows: 1. Anything north of Watford Gap is north. Plus Yorkshire folk say bath, not barth. 2. Yorkshire tea is indeed produced in Yorkshire. The raw ingredients come from elsewhere. Next you'll be claiming that BP petrol isn't really British! 3. God's Own Country? Well Jacob Rees-Mogg says it isn't.[1] Case closed?
On the basis that JRM is always wrong I will concede 3. On 1. you are basically denying the existence of the Midlands, where I think most of Yorkshire is located. On 2., I think the petrol refining process is a more substantive procedure than mixing up tea leaves from several countries and putting them in a perforated bag. Yorkshire tea is not from Yorkshire (it is from India, Sri Lanka and Kenya).
Ah, compromise I'm happy to negotiate.
On 1. There was a lad at university (in the midlands) from Nottingham who denied he was northern. We didn't believe him, either. I have slightly more sympathy with his position now. Happy to re-set the dividing line to the Humber and disown South Yorkshire (happy, on current events, to lose West Yorkshire, too). On 2. Rename the product to 'Yorkshire Teabags'? At least until it turns out the bagging is done in High Wycombe...
Traditionally the barrier between some form of North and South has been the Trent and the Fosse Way.
In the Roman period the Fosse was the boundary between the civilian and military zones.
Then in the Hundred Years War the Trent was used as a boundary for tax revenues. During the reign of Edward III all counties had to provide taxes for paying for the campaigns. Exemptions were made for the south coast counties which were already having to pay for the defence against raids and also any county North of the Trent as that was considered bandit country defending against those evil Scots.
During the Pilgrimage of Grace, the Trent again was considered the boundary between the loyal South and the rebellious North
If the definition of North is rebellious - remember that North of the Tees Prince Bishops had to be appointed to keep the locals in line.
Which means the Midlands could start/stop as far North as the Tees.
Personally though - I would classify North and West Yorkshire as North and slightly more um and err before putting South Yorkshire in the North.
Jesus.. didn't realise it was (allegedly) this bad
Adil Ray OBE @adilray Allegations that a Muslim prayer mat was used by Yorkshire cricket players to clean up the mess from having sex with a woman on her period and players p**sed on an Asian players head are vile. We need answers & action now. I fear a DCMS review won’t cut it. This is much bigger. 9:56 AM · Nov 5, 2021·Twitter for iPhone https://twitter.com/adilray/status/1456561106147758084
If that's true then yes, it is much bigger.
I wanted to give Michael Vaughan the benefit of the doubt, but the news today that another player head him say the "Too many" quote, and this tweet mentioned in that thread put paid to that.
Just saw Greta on the BBC webpage telling us the world of literally burning. Meanwhile I think I have solved the climate crisis.
All those who think as she does should instantly reduce their carbon footprint to zero or close to it. No more electricity, driving, flying, cooking hot food, you name it.
Given the urgency that will surely be the majority of the world's population. Hence problem solved. The remainder can go about their normal lives knowing that the planet is safe.
Your welcome.
She is a crank, and neatly illustrates the old maxim that perfect is the enemy of good.
England cases down aggressively, hospital admissions down 15% on last week, and total hospital occupancy down on yesterday and same day last week.
So - lockdown coming then...
Sir Keir last week
“Sir Keir Starmer today called for No10 to reintroduce compulsory face masks and WFH guidance in response to rising Covid cases amid growing calls for ministers to resort to Plan B — despite Government modelling suggesting the measures are unnecessary.”
The thing that is always said about how long he’ll be in Number 10 is that his salary as PM is nowhere what he was earning from journalism before he became leader and PM and it is said that he is under pressure financially. I have always thought that it will be this factor that could be decisive.
This assumes there are two possibilities:
Johnson quits to get a better salary
Johnson stays on and his salary stays the same
But really, what's stopping him giving himself a raise? Do we really think he'd be too embarrassed?
Even if you think he wouldn't do it now for political reasons, that's no reason to think he would step down before an election, when he could be counting on the idea of increasing his pay after any win.
I am not much of a bettor, but I definitely wouldn't bet on Johnson lacking chutzspa or deferring to ethics.
Funnel the grift through the missus? Carrie to be paid £1 million a year as a premium travel writer?
Just saw Greta on the BBC webpage telling us the world of literally burning. I think I have solved the climate crisis.
All those who think as she does should instantly reduce their carbon footprint to zero or close to it. No more electricity, driving, flying, cooking hot food, you name it.
Given the urgency that will surely be the majority of the world's population. Hence problem solved. The remainder can go about their normal lives knowing that the planet is safe.
Your welcome.
I think she's rather good. She's quite careful as to what she says. Her supporters are the problem.
Have you seen the Extinction Rebellion founder's "Advice to Young People as they face Annihilation"?
Prof. Christina Pagel @chrischirp · 8m Replying to @chrischirp There was a reduction in both LFD and PCR tests over half term, so take drop in reported cases with a grain of salt over half term.
What on Earth are Christina and friends going to do once there’s no more pandemic, and a dozen journalists and TV producers no longer have them on speed dial?
She's got one thing right:
Prof. Christina Pagel @chrischirp · 15m Although two thirds of over 75s are boosted, almost all of them are elgibile. In general, only about 55% of those who got their 2nd dose 6+ mnths ago have been boosted. We need to match the 500K a day we were doing in winter and spring!
====
Action this day.
We seem to be doing 350k - 400k per day now.
Considering that's with us living without any restrictions, that's pretty decent in my eyes.
Already one in six over 12s are triple-vaccinated.
Just saw Greta on the BBC webpage telling us the world of literally burning. Meanwhile I think I have solved the climate crisis.
All those who think as she does should instantly reduce their carbon footprint to zero or close to it. No more electricity, driving, flying, cooking hot food, you name it.
Given the urgency that will surely be the majority of the world's population. Hence problem solved. The remainder can go about their normal lives knowing that the planet is safe.
Your welcome.
She is a crank, and neatly illustrates the old maxim that perfect is the enemy of good.
But thinking it through, on this early Friday evening/late afternoon. If everyone who really, really cared about climate change were to amend their behaviour dramatically then that would be problem solved.
A bit like if people only stopped buying the Daily Mail and/or started buying the Socialist Worker those newspapers would experience a dramatic change of fortune.
The thing that is always said about how long he’ll be in Number 10 is that his salary as PM is nowhere what he was earning from journalism before he became leader and PM and it is said that he is under pressure financially. I have always thought that it will be this factor that could be decisive.
This assumes there are two possibilities:
Johnson quits to get a better salary
Johnson stays on and his salary stays the same
But really, what's stopping him giving himself a raise? Do we really think he'd be too embarrassed?
Even if you think he wouldn't do it now for political reasons, that's no reason to think he would step down before an election, when he could be counting on the idea of increasing his pay after any win.
I am not much of a bettor, but I definitely wouldn't bet on Johnson lacking chutzspa or deferring to ethics.
Funnel the grift through the missus? Carrie to be paid £1 million a year as a premium travel writer?
SeanT would love that sort of money. From memory his travel writing pays little to nothing in return for him spending a week in freebie 5 star luxury...
The latest polling still has the Tories comfortably winning most seats and most polls still have Boris preferred as PM to Starmer.
Unless that changes, Boris will survive up to 2024. Plus of course the longer he stays as PM the more his valued on the lecture circuit increases post Premiership. If he wants to be in the Blair and Thatcher league of speakers and earning millions on the lecture circuit he needs to be there for a decade at least
How many points ahead do Labour have to be for most seats crossover?
40 to 37 just manages it on new boundaries if everyone else stays the same.
Ominously, no majority is possible on those numbers without the SNP. Except Grand Coalition of course.
Labour's SNP problem never seems to go away. The only way it would is if somehow another independence referendum is held before the next election and the pro-Indy side loses it, which would mean they wouldn't be able to demand another one from Labour so soon.
Yeah. Although the really interesting thing about 40-37 is that there would be no combination which would produce a majority at all. Apart from 3. Lab SNP. CON SNP LAB CON.
You would feel the SNP would be in a strong position. Would not like to speculate what might happen. And how would voters behave if that were the prospect? Difficult to say.
Labour have been soft on the indyref2 for a while now. A Lab-SNP coaltion doesn't seem that unlikely.
Starmer would likely give the SNP indyref2 if he needs their confidence and supply to become PM in a hung parliament.
Probably with devomax as a carrot to Scots to try and get them to vote No again
I agree with this analysis apart from the devomax bit (although you may be right there too)
Us Yoons know that Tories/Bozo are best for the union.
Why don't you want to have the vote, win it, and kill Sindy off good and proper instead of this 'delay delay' approach?
You won't kill Sindy off unless a second vote is held a genuine generation after 2014, which is at minimum 10-15 years after. Canada proved that when the second Quebec independence referendum was only held in 1995, 15 years after the first in 1980.
Otherwise the SNP would demand indyref3 the next day you already having given in to them once and held indyref2 within a generation of indyref1, unless No won by a landslide
You will never kill off indyrefs
I have lived with them since the early 1950s
There's only been one!
The threat has been there since then, and remember Berwick where I lived in the early fifties has changed hands 13 times
You've changed your mind then? Last time I posted my opinion that the best way forward was to have the vote rather than frustrate it, you were a big 'yay' to that. I remember distinctly since I thought, "Oh, Big G agrees with me on this, excellent."
England cases down aggressively, hospital admissions down 15% on last week, and total hospital occupancy down on yesterday and same day last week.
So - lockdown coming then...
Sir Keir last week
“Sir Keir Starmer today called for No10 to reintroduce compulsory face masks and WFH guidance in response to rising Covid cases amid growing calls for ministers to resort to Plan B — despite Government modelling suggesting the measures are unnecessary.”
The Labour leadership's enthusiasm for stapling cloth gags to people's faces forever yet again reminds us why there is as much toleration for Boris Johnson as still remains. You only have to look at the God-awful alternative.
Just saw Greta on the BBC webpage telling us the world of literally burning. I think I have solved the climate crisis.
All those who think as she does should instantly reduce their carbon footprint to zero or close to it. No more electricity, driving, flying, cooking hot food, you name it.
Given the urgency that will surely be the majority of the world's population. Hence problem solved. The remainder can go about their normal lives knowing that the planet is safe.
Your welcome.
I think she's rather good. She's quite careful as to what she says. Her supporters are the problem.
Have you seen the Extinction Rebellion founder's "Advice to Young People as they face Annihilation"?
I hadn't. It's clearly stupid. I've no idea whether Greta is part of that or otherwise. She's clearly become a figurehead for all sorts of daft things. What she says though I'll listen to.
There was a Bernard Manning joke on Parkinson one time. I wouldn't dare repeat it but it is topical given the goings on of YCC. He told it against himself and those who accused him of being racist and to show that comedy is inviolate. A bit like Dave Chappelle now.
And everyone then laughed uproariously. Including some as I remember it non-white critics of his being interviewed at the same time.
I agree that the boundaries of what's acceptable have shifted a lot, But it's actually hard to know what to do if someone with you on TV cracks a joke that seems offensive and everyone round you laughs uproariously. You can object, which sounds prissy. You can be stony-faced, which looks robotic. You can smile puzzledly (my usual technique), which looks dim-witted. Or you can laugh heartily and be thought a good sport. I wouldn't necessarily assume that the last reaction is genuine.
Just saw Greta on the BBC webpage telling us the world of literally burning. Meanwhile I think I have solved the climate crisis.
All those who think as she does should instantly reduce their carbon footprint to zero or close to it. No more electricity, driving, flying, cooking hot food, you name it.
Given the urgency that will surely be the majority of the world's population. Hence problem solved. The remainder can go about their normal lives knowing that the planet is safe.
Your welcome.
She is a crank, and neatly illustrates the old maxim that perfect is the enemy of good.
But thinking it through, on this early Friday evening/late afternoon. If everyone who really, really cared about climate change were to amend their behaviour dramatically then that would be problem solved.
A bit like if people only stopped buying the Daily Mail and/or started buying the Socialist Worker those newspapers would experience a dramatic change of fortune.
The number of people who really, really care about climate change drops as soon as they have to change their lifestyle or pay up.
Just saw Greta on the BBC webpage telling us the world of literally burning. Meanwhile I think I have solved the climate crisis.
All those who think as she does should instantly reduce their carbon footprint to zero or close to it. No more electricity, driving, flying, cooking hot food, you name it.
Given the urgency that will surely be the majority of the world's population. Hence problem solved. The remainder can go about their normal lives knowing that the planet is safe.
Your welcome.
She is a crank, and neatly illustrates the old maxim that perfect is the enemy of good.
But thinking it through, on this early Friday evening/late afternoon. If everyone who really, really cared about climate change were to amend their behaviour dramatically then that would be problem solved.
A bit like if people only stopped buying the Daily Mail and/or started buying the Socialist Worker those newspapers would experience a dramatic change of fortune.
Video meliora proboque, deteriora sequor. Ovid (I think)
I just wanna have my kicks before the whole shithouse goes up in flames - Jim Morrison
Just saw Greta on the BBC webpage telling us the world of literally burning. Meanwhile I think I have solved the climate crisis.
All those who think as she does should instantly reduce their carbon footprint to zero or close to it. No more electricity, driving, flying, cooking hot food, you name it.
Given the urgency that will surely be the majority of the world's population. Hence problem solved. The remainder can go about their normal lives knowing that the planet is safe.
There was a Bernard Manning joke on Parkinson one time. I wouldn't dare repeat it but it is topical given the goings on of YCC. He told it against himself and those who accused him of being racist and to show that comedy is inviolate. A bit like Dave Chappelle now.
And everyone then laughed uproariously. Including some as I remember it non-white critics of his being interviewed at the same time.
I agree that the boundaries of what's acceptable have shifted a lot, But it's actually hard to know what to do if someone with you on TV cracks a joke that seems offensive and everyone round you laughs uproariously. You can object, which sounds prissy. You can be stony-faced, which looks robotic. You can smile puzzledly (my usual technique), which looks dim-witted. Or you can laugh heartily and be thought a good sport. I wouldn't necessarily assume that the last reaction is genuine.
There was a Bernard Manning joke on Parkinson one time. I wouldn't dare repeat it but it is topical given the goings on of YCC. He told it against himself and those who accused him of being racist and to show that comedy is inviolate. A bit like Dave Chappelle now.
And everyone then laughed uproariously. Including some as I remember it non-white critics of his being interviewed at the same time.
I agree that the boundaries of what's acceptable have shifted a lot, But it's actually hard to know what to do if someone with you on TV cracks a joke that seems offensive and everyone round you laughs uproariously. You can object, which sounds prissy. You can be stony-faced, which looks robotic. You can smile puzzledly (my usual technique), which looks dim-witted. Or you can laugh heartily and be thought a good sport. I wouldn't necessarily assume that the last reaction is genuine.
As I said the joke is now beyond the pale but it appeared genuinely "funny". Timing was 3/4 of it of course.
Just saw Greta on the BBC webpage telling us the world of literally burning. Meanwhile I think I have solved the climate crisis.
All those who think as she does should instantly reduce their carbon footprint to zero or close to it. No more electricity, driving, flying, cooking hot food, you name it.
Given the urgency that will surely be the majority of the world's population. Hence problem solved. The remainder can go about their normal lives knowing that the planet is safe.
Your welcome.
She is a crank, and neatly illustrates the old maxim that perfect is the enemy of good.
But thinking it through, on this early Friday evening/late afternoon. If everyone who really, really cared about climate change were to amend their behaviour dramatically then that would be problem solved.
A bit like if people only stopped buying the Daily Mail and/or started buying the Socialist Worker those newspapers would experience a dramatic change of fortune.
The number of people who really, really care about climate change drops as soon as they have to change their lifestyle or pay up.
Very little variation at all, except that many 18-21s have no opinion while the 65+ generation is particularly hostile (as are LibDems). Gender, region and other political preferences have only small differences.
That 65+ figure isn't good news for the government, is it? Hopefully the oldies are turning on the Tories due to their moral turpitude (the Tories' moral turpitude that is, not the oldies').
The only saving grace in this saga is that Paterson has resigned and left politics
Not yet; he seems quite likely to end up as a peer.
SKS is next PM if that happens. Paterson should be chased from the face of the Earth.
I am sure Owen Paterson will be well looked after, no matter what.
MPs who fall-- whether Tory or not -- always land with their bums in the butter.
Just saw Greta on the BBC webpage telling us the world of literally burning. Meanwhile I think I have solved the climate crisis.
All those who think as she does should instantly reduce their carbon footprint to zero or close to it. No more electricity, driving, flying, cooking hot food, you name it.
Given the urgency that will surely be the majority of the world's population. Hence problem solved. The remainder can go about their normal lives knowing that the planet is safe.
Your welcome.
She is a crank, and neatly illustrates the old maxim that perfect is the enemy of good.
But thinking it through, on this early Friday evening/late afternoon. If everyone who really, really cared about climate change were to amend their behaviour dramatically then that would be problem solved.
A bit like if people only stopped buying the Daily Mail and/or started buying the Socialist Worker those newspapers would experience a dramatic change of fortune.
Video meliora proboque, deteriora sequor. Ovid (I think)
I just wanna have my kicks before the whole shithouse goes up in flames - Jim Morrison
But it's win win. There is evidently a large number of people for whom the situation is so desperate that any measure is worthwhile.
The rest can take a justified and welcome free rider on their actions. Because for the former group of people the priority is to save the world.
Very little variation at all, except that many 18-21s have no opinion while the 65+ generation is particularly hostile (as are LibDems). Gender, region and other political preferences have only small differences.
That 65+ figure isn't good news for the government, is it? Hopefully the oldies are turning on the Tories due to their moral turpitude (the Tories' moral turpitude that is, not the oldies').
The only saving grace in this saga is that Paterson has resigned and left politics
Not yet; he seems quite likely to end up as a peer.
I very much doubt that no matter the rumours
Fair enough, but No 10 won't deny it, and just look who else has ended up as a peer. I wouldn't regard the story as closed.
I do hope so. He could become Lord Patterson, thereby replicating the Peter Carington/Lord Carrington anomaly of four decades ago and bringing comfort to those who can never quite get his name right.
Just saw Greta on the BBC webpage telling us the world of literally burning. Meanwhile I think I have solved the climate crisis.
All those who think as she does should instantly reduce their carbon footprint to zero or close to it. No more electricity, driving, flying, cooking hot food, you name it.
Given the urgency that will surely be the majority of the world's population. Hence problem solved. The remainder can go about their normal lives knowing that the planet is safe.
Your welcome.
No more apostrophes, even?
I have just solved the climate crisis. Of course there will be casualties.
Very little variation at all, except that many 18-21s have no opinion while the 65+ generation is particularly hostile (as are LibDems). Gender, region and other political preferences have only small differences.
That 65+ figure isn't good news for the government, is it? Hopefully the oldies are turning on the Tories due to their moral turpitude (the Tories' moral turpitude that is, not the oldies').
The only saving grace in this saga is that Paterson has resigned and left politics
Not yet; he seems quite likely to end up as a peer.
SKS is next PM if that happens. Paterson should be chased from the face of the Earth.
I am sure Owen Paterson will be well looked after, no matter what.
MPs who fall-- whether Tory or not -- always land with their bums in the butter.
It's those of us who have to eat the butter I worry about.
There was a Bernard Manning joke on Parkinson one time. I wouldn't dare repeat it but it is topical given the goings on of YCC. He told it against himself and those who accused him of being racist and to show that comedy is inviolate. A bit like Dave Chappelle now.
And everyone then laughed uproariously. Including some as I remember it non-white critics of his being interviewed at the same time.
I agree that the boundaries of what's acceptable have shifted a lot, But it's actually hard to know what to do if someone with you on TV cracks a joke that seems offensive and everyone round you laughs uproariously. You can object, which sounds prissy. You can be stony-faced, which looks robotic. You can smile puzzledly (my usual technique), which looks dim-witted. Or you can laugh heartily and be thought a good sport. I wouldn't necessarily assume that the last reaction is genuine.
As I said the joke is now beyond the pale but it appeared genuinely "funny". Timing was 3/4 of it of course.
Timing and confidence are key to telling jokes well.
But also there's an issue that many comedians love to push the boundaries of what is acceptable, and for some issues (see Carlin) what's acceptable moves so that what was borderline in the past can be fairly tame in the future.
But sometimes (see Manning) what's acceptable moves so that what was borderline in the past can be beyond the pale in the future.
The latest polling still has the Tories comfortably winning most seats and most polls still have Boris preferred as PM to Starmer.
Unless that changes, Boris will survive up to 2024. Plus of course the longer he stays as PM the more his valued on the lecture circuit increases post Premiership. If he wants to be in the Blair and Thatcher league of speakers and earning millions on the lecture circuit he needs to be there for a decade at least
How many points ahead do Labour have to be for most seats crossover?
40 to 37 just manages it on new boundaries if everyone else stays the same.
Ominously, no majority is possible on those numbers without the SNP. Except Grand Coalition of course.
Labour's SNP problem never seems to go away. The only way it would is if somehow another independence referendum is held before the next election and the pro-Indy side loses it, which would mean they wouldn't be able to demand another one from Labour so soon.
Yeah. Although the really interesting thing about 40-37 is that there would be no combination which would produce a majority at all. Apart from 3. Lab SNP. CON SNP LAB CON.
You would feel the SNP would be in a strong position. Would not like to speculate what might happen. And how would voters behave if that were the prospect? Difficult to say.
Labour have been soft on the indyref2 for a while now. A Lab-SNP coaltion doesn't seem that unlikely.
Starmer would likely give the SNP indyref2 if he needs their confidence and supply to become PM in a hung parliament.
Probably with devomax as a carrot to Scots to try and get them to vote No again
I agree with this analysis apart from the devomax bit (although you may be right there too)
Us Yoons know that Tories/Bozo are best for the union.
Why don't you want to have the vote, win it, and kill Sindy off good and proper instead of this 'delay delay' approach?
If the Union side were to win again the next day you'd have indyref3 trending on twitter.
Boris has a good political reason not to hold Ref2 - if he loses it it is bad for the union and for Boris, but if he wins it it is good for Labour, and therefore bad for the Tories, because the SNP will be for a few years a harmless centre left party that can ally with Labour against the Tories. Which would make voting Labour much easier for unionists who want a stable government. Ref2 is lose/lose for Boris.
A good point. And I'm pleased to see you agree with me that another No in 23 would force the SNP to backburner the issue. That all this talk of "but if we give in they'll be demanding one every Thursday!" is tosh.
Just saw Greta on the BBC webpage telling us the world of literally burning. Meanwhile I think I have solved the climate crisis.
All those who think as she does should instantly reduce their carbon footprint to zero or close to it. No more electricity, driving, flying, cooking hot food, you name it.
Given the urgency that will surely be the majority of the world's population. Hence problem solved. The remainder can go about their normal lives knowing that the planet is safe.
Your welcome.
She is a crank, and neatly illustrates the old maxim that perfect is the enemy of good.
But thinking it through, on this early Friday evening/late afternoon. If everyone who really, really cared about climate change were to amend their behaviour dramatically then that would be problem solved.
A bit like if people only stopped buying the Daily Mail and/or started buying the Socialist Worker those newspapers would experience a dramatic change of fortune.
The number of people who really, really care about climate change drops as soon as they have to change their lifestyle or pay up.
Which is why we are not going to stop it. So 3 billion climate refugees by 2070...
There was a Bernard Manning joke on Parkinson one time. I wouldn't dare repeat it but it is topical given the goings on of YCC. He told it against himself and those who accused him of being racist and to show that comedy is inviolate. A bit like Dave Chappelle now.
And everyone then laughed uproariously. Including some as I remember it non-white critics of his being interviewed at the same time.
I agree that the boundaries of what's acceptable have shifted a lot, But it's actually hard to know what to do if someone with you on TV cracks a joke that seems offensive and everyone round you laughs uproariously. You can object, which sounds prissy. You can be stony-faced, which looks robotic. You can smile puzzledly (my usual technique), which looks dim-witted. Or you can laugh heartily and be thought a good sport. I wouldn't necessarily assume that the last reaction is genuine.
As I said the joke is now beyond the pale but it appeared genuinely "funny". Timing was 3/4 of it of course.
Timing and confidence are key to telling jokes well.
But also there's an issue that many comedians love to push the boundaries of what is acceptable, and for some issues (see Carlin) what's acceptable moves so that what was borderline in the past can be fairly tame in the future.
But sometimes (see Manning) what's acceptable moves so that what was borderline in the past can be beyond the pale in the future.
Yes absolutely. It begs the question of what is funny. I want to think that if the joke was aimed at me then I would laugh but I can't be at all sure.
Very little variation at all, except that many 18-21s have no opinion while the 65+ generation is particularly hostile (as are LibDems). Gender, region and other political preferences have only small differences.
That 65+ figure isn't good news for the government, is it? Hopefully the oldies are turning on the Tories due to their moral turpitude (the Tories' moral turpitude that is, not the oldies').
The only saving grace in this saga is that Paterson has resigned and left politics
Not yet; he seems quite likely to end up as a peer.
SKS is next PM if that happens. Paterson should be chased from the face of the Earth.
I am sure Owen Paterson will be well looked after, no matter what.
MPs who fall-- whether Tory or not -- always land with their bums in the butter.
I don't think he will. Simply because he has managed to be seen to put himself ahead of the interests of the party. The Tory party will lose my financial support if Paterson ever troubles us again.
Note the total acceptance that Divvie will be an #indyref3 type.
How long does PB have to put up with his garbage?
FWIW I don't think theuniondivvie is right. There won't be a third. I think the independence side will win the second one.
If SNP Types could just accept the result of the last referendum - that might allow for a potential #indyref2 at some point in the future.
As it is all PBers will just have to cope with constant SNP Type wittering pretty much 24/7.
PB is open to wittering from SNP Types just as it is to wittering from Conservative Types, Labour Types, Lib Dem Types, Green Types, Brexit Party or whatever the fuck they're called these days Types, and even People Who Don't Belong In A Type Types.
I don't know which Type you are, but please continue to post your Type's witterings too.
I'm a Yoon Type and am very much grateful that I'm allowed to witter by Team OGH.
Seems only fair given the abundance of SNP Types here, Balance and all that.
BBC statement on Michael Vaughan says he "won't appear as a presenter" on 5 Live's Tuffers & Vaughan Show on Monday. "We remain in discussion with Michael and his team". #bbccricket
That's Michael's career cancelled - that 2010 tweet was probably justification enough...
I met Michael Vaughan once when he was dining with Michael Atherton at Groucho's. A good enough reason to ban him from TV I know but he seemed very pleasant.
Irrespective of this I'm not at all comfortable with him being pilloried for his alleged comment to three players of Pakistani origin. Cricket is a game of banter. None more so than between the Australians the West Indians the South Africans the Indians and the Pakistanis. The competition between these cricketing nations is both fierce and friendly as any spectator at a test match will attest.
I have no idea about the behaviour of Yorkshire cricket Club which I can easily believe the worst of. They don't even like women in their pavilion! But the story with Micheal Vaughan is different. If they were playing a match and he jokingly said there are too many Geordies or too many Scousers would that also be worthy of a lifetime of shame?
Just saw Greta on the BBC webpage telling us the world of literally burning. I think I have solved the climate crisis.
All those who think as she does should instantly reduce their carbon footprint to zero or close to it. No more electricity, driving, flying, cooking hot food, you name it.
Given the urgency that will surely be the majority of the world's population. Hence problem solved. The remainder can go about their normal lives knowing that the planet is safe.
Your welcome.
I think she's rather good. She's quite careful as to what she says. Her supporters are the problem.
Have you seen the Extinction Rebellion founder's "Advice to Young People as they face Annihilation"?
England cases down aggressively, hospital admissions down 15% on last week, and total hospital occupancy down on yesterday and same day last week.
So - lockdown coming then...
Sir Keir last week
“Sir Keir Starmer today called for No10 to reintroduce compulsory face masks and WFH guidance in response to rising Covid cases amid growing calls for ministers to resort to Plan B — despite Government modelling suggesting the measures are unnecessary.”
The Labour leadership's enthusiasm for stapling cloth gags to people's faces forever yet again reminds us why there is as much toleration for Boris Johnson as still remains. You only have to look at the God-awful alternative.
I accept that there are reasons for folk not wanting to vote Labour but I fail to see that SKS pushing mask wearing in a climate where all polling shows a majority supporting it or even extending it is a killer point. The man babies of PB are not particularly representative of the general public on this issue (and in oh so many other ways) afaics.
Just saw Greta on the BBC webpage telling us the world of literally burning. Meanwhile I think I have solved the climate crisis.
All those who think as she does should instantly reduce their carbon footprint to zero or close to it. No more electricity, driving, flying, cooking hot food, you name it.
Given the urgency that will surely be the majority of the world's population. Hence problem solved. The remainder can go about their normal lives knowing that the planet is safe.
Your welcome.
She is a crank, and neatly illustrates the old maxim that perfect is the enemy of good.
But thinking it through, on this early Friday evening/late afternoon. If everyone who really, really cared about climate change were to amend their behaviour dramatically then that would be problem solved.
A bit like if people only stopped buying the Daily Mail and/or started buying the Socialist Worker those newspapers would experience a dramatic change of fortune.
The number of people who really, really care about climate change drops as soon as they have to change their lifestyle or pay up.
Which is why we are not going to stop it. So 3 billion climate refugees by 2070...
Great date that, 2070. Just out of reach.
But no one seems to be taking it seriously. So I wonder.
Fucking hell, next he'll admit to not knowing 'Paki' is an offensive term.
Yorkshire head coach Andrew Gale is being investigated by bosses over anti-Semitic social media messages, it has emerged amid the club's deepening racism crisis.
In a now deleted post on Twitter from November 2010, the then club captain told Paul Dews, who was head of media at Leeds United Football Club at the time, to "Button it y--!"
Gale told the Jewish News website, which first reported the tweet, that he was “completely unaware” of the offensive nature of the term at the time he sent the message.
I am starting to think Yorkshire CCC won't survive this.
I think they need to appoint me Chief Executive and Executive Chairman of YCCC and I'll fix all the problems.
A strong Yorkshire means a strong England.
I have always found Yorkshire kind of annoying, for a few reasons:
1. Claiming to be in the North, even though parts of it are closer to London than to the Scottish border 2. Yorkshire Tea, which self-evidently isn't produced in Yorkshire 3. Being referred to by its residents as God's own Country, which seems rather boastful and potentially blasphemous, especially if you've ever spent time in some of the ropier bits 4. Geoffrey Boycott.
Boycott, I'll concede. You can have YCCC too.
As a southerner naturalised in Yorkshire I answer the others as follows: 1. Anything north of Watford Gap is north. Plus Yorkshire folk say bath, not barth. 2. Yorkshire tea is indeed produced in Yorkshire. The raw ingredients come from elsewhere. Next you'll be claiming that BP petrol isn't really British! 3. God's Own Country? Well Jacob Rees-Mogg says it isn't.[1] Case closed?
On the basis that JRM is always wrong I will concede 3. On 1. you are basically denying the existence of the Midlands, where I think most of Yorkshire is located. On 2., I think the petrol refining process is a more substantive procedure than mixing up tea leaves from several countries and putting them in a perforated bag. Yorkshire tea is not from Yorkshire (it is from India, Sri Lanka and Kenya).
Ah, compromise I'm happy to negotiate.
On 1. There was a lad at university (in the midlands) from Nottingham who denied he was northern. We didn't believe him, either. I have slightly more sympathy with his position now. Happy to re-set the dividing line to the Humber and disown South Yorkshire (happy, on current events, to lose West Yorkshire, too). On 2. Rename the product to 'Yorkshire Teabags'? At least until it turns out the bagging is done in High Wycombe...
Traditionally the barrier between some form of North and South has been the Trent and the Fosse Way.
In the Roman period the Fosse was the boundary between the civilian and military zones.
Then in the Hundred Years War the Trent was used as a boundary for tax revenues. During the reign of Edward III all counties had to provide taxes for paying for the campaigns. Exemptions were made for the south coast counties which were already having to pay for the defence against raids and also any county North of the Trent as that was considered bandit country defending against those evil Scots.
During the Pilgrimage of Grace, the Trent again was considered the boundary between the loyal South and the rebellious North
If the definition of North is rebellious - remember that North of the Tees Prince Bishops had to be appointed to keep the locals in line.
Which means the Midlands could start/stop as far North as the Tees.
Personally though - I would classify North and West Yorkshire as North and slightly more um and err before putting South Yorkshire in the North.
There is of course no such thing as South Yorkshire, it is mostly all the West Riding...
Could be worse, I suppose. At least it isn't Greater Sheffield (although sometimes I wonder).
The thing that is always said about how long he’ll be in Number 10 is that his salary as PM is nowhere what he was earning from journalism before he became leader and PM and it is said that he is under pressure financially. I have always thought that it will be this factor that could be decisive.
This assumes there are two possibilities:
Johnson quits to get a better salary
Johnson stays on and his salary stays the same
But really, what's stopping him giving himself a raise? Do we really think he'd be too embarrassed?
Even if you think he wouldn't do it now for political reasons, that's no reason to think he would step down before an election, when he could be counting on the idea of increasing his pay after any win.
I am not much of a bettor, but I definitely wouldn't bet on Johnson lacking chutzspa or deferring to ethics.
He'd not actually be totally unjustified. I'm not going to wheel out the tiny violin, but UK leaders aren't hugely well paid (he's on a lot less than Jacinda Ardern for instance).
Is it a major priority? No. Would I do it in his place? No. Would there be an uproar? Yes. But it'd actually be a hell of a lot better than the approach he does in fact take of accepting lavish freebies and favours from secretive donors with a cocktail of ulterior motives. If the trade-off was he'd knock that off and settle for the salary, that's a bit of a win. Of course, the problem is he'd most likely do both.
Fuck? As in, a word that's become less offensive over time. When I were a lad, it was a complete no-no, whereas these days - well, I believe it's very common, even on television and in the cinema......
I still couldn't say it in earshot of my parents but, yes, these days it's more a case of you're a bit unusual if you don't spray that around. I watched a Bob Dylan doc recently and the (still) angelic looking Joan Baez when being interviewed could not get through a sentence without a dozen or so fucks. It was slightly disconcerting.
My parents were incredibly averse to swearing - over 35 years with them, the most severe expression they ever used was "bloody". The perhaps perverse result was that when I first met a girl who said fuck, I thought it was incredibly sexy and liberating. Many years later, when I worked as PPS for Margaret Beckett, who said it all the time in the sober environment of Defra, I still got a modest thrill out of it. An innocent soul.
BBC statement on Michael Vaughan says he "won't appear as a presenter" on 5 Live's Tuffers & Vaughan Show on Monday. "We remain in discussion with Michael and his team". #bbccricket
That's Michael's career cancelled - that 2010 tweet was probably justification enough...
I met Michael Vaughan once when he was dining with Michael Atherton at Groucho's. A good enough reason to ban him from TV I know but he seemed very pleasant.
Irrespective of this I'm not at all comfortable with him being pilloried for his alleged comment to three players of Pakistani origin. Cricket is a game of banter. None more so than between the Australians the West Indians the South Africans the Indians and the Pakistanis. The competition between these cricketing nations is both fierce and friendly as any spectator at a test match will attest.
I have no idea about the behaviour of Yorkshire cricket Club which I can easily believe the worst of. They don't even like women in their pavilion! But the story with Micheal Vaughan is different. If they were playing a match and he jokingly said there are too many Geordies or too many Scousers would that also be worthy of a lifetime of shame?
He's a Leaver, Roger. Quite a strong one. Don't know if you were aware of that.
Comments
Lose the chance of governing England (or indeed the Island)
Win the chance of governing Scotland.
https://twitter.com/mocent0/status/1456339146088357896/photo/1
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/survey-results/daily/2021/11/05/f7086/1?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=website_article&utm_campaign=DA_5_Nov_2011_A
Very little variation at all, except that many 18-21s have no opinion while the 65+ generation is particularly hostile (as are LibDems). Gender, region and other political preferences have only small differences.
Mind you, these days he'd be cancelled for his racist views anyway.
The oldies can remember a different time.
On 1. There was a lad at university (in the midlands) from Nottingham who denied he was northern. We didn't believe him, either. I have slightly more sympathy with his position now. Happy to re-set the dividing line to the Humber and disown South Yorkshire (happy, on current events, to lose West Yorkshire, too).
On 2. Rename the product to 'Yorkshire Teabags'? At least until it turns out the bagging is done in High Wycombe...
Given R is about 1 now, we could probably nudge it below with that lot and get cases down before Winter comes.
We wait for the good figures of the last few days to feed through to lower hospitalisations.
Prof. Christina Pagel
@chrischirp
·
8m
Replying to
@chrischirp
There was a reduction in both LFD and PCR tests over half term, so take drop in reported cases with a grain of salt over half term.
LONG THREAD on UK Covid situation...
cases, hospitals, deaths, long covid, variants, global - all dealing with consistent themes.
TLDR: "living with" with high cases is bad idea. Especially while boosters and teen vax is slow and new viral treatments are on the horizon! 1/25
https://twitter.com/chrischirp/status/1456663740397535233?s=20
What happens after that, if by any chance the Tories don't succeed in having a majority to form a government, will depend entirely on the numbers. But I'm confident that Starmer would prefer to risk another election rather than be held to ransom by the SNP.
Sky News: https://news.sky.com/liveblog-webview/covid-sky-news-coronavirus-live-blog-uk-latest-r-number-12443026?inApp=true
Both for the reason cited by Carnyx, for making my side look bad . . . and deservedly so.
AND also because I want for us to be the ones truly standing for Truth, Justice and the American Way.
"We remain in discussion with Michael and his team". #bbccricket
https://twitter.com/ShamoonHafez/status/1456662633826897927
It doesn't help that "Independence would have solved this" is used whenever anyone in the SNP has a difficult question to answer.
https://youtu.be/miB2i2I76EE
This was literally the day after the referendum. It looks like, adimittedly, like the Yoons were being the dicks but it was SNP types who started the indyref2 campaign literally the next day last time round.
Prof. Christina Pagel
@chrischirp
·
15m
Although two thirds of over 75s are boosted, almost all of them are elgibile. In general, only about 55% of those who got their 2nd dose 6+ mnths ago have been boosted. We need to match the 500K a day we were doing in winter and spring!
====
Action this day.
We're fairly consistent at around or below 5% reduction now, cases by sample date for 31/10 (the last day regarded as substantially complete) ÷ cases by sample date for 24/10 = 0.967
That would give an epidemiological Rt of a little above 0.98 (approximate this by splitting the difference between weekly change rate and 1).
No strong indicator of R moving much in the partial figures for the next couple of days.
Oliver Johnson
@BristOliver
·
1h
Nice drop in cases. 5 days past school return. Few more days and I'll be starting to believe.
All those who think as she does should instantly reduce their carbon footprint to zero or close to it. No more electricity, driving, flying, cooking hot food, you name it.
Given the urgency that will surely be the majority of the world's population. Hence problem solved. The remainder can go about their normal lives knowing that the planet is safe.
Your welcome.
https://twitter.com/stuart_gibson/status/1456623954135822338?s=20
This assumes there are two possibilities:
- Johnson quits to get a better salary
- Johnson stays on and his salary stays the same
But really, what's stopping him giving himself a raise? Do we really think he'd be too embarrassed?Even if you think he wouldn't do it now for political reasons, that's no reason to think he would step down before an election, when he could be counting on the idea of increasing his pay after any win.
I am not much of a bettor, but I definitely wouldn't bet on Johnson lacking chutzspa or deferring to ethics.
In the Roman period the Fosse was the boundary between the civilian and military zones.
Then in the Hundred Years War the Trent was used as a boundary for tax revenues. During the reign of Edward III all counties had to provide taxes for paying for the campaigns. Exemptions were made for the south coast counties which were already having to pay for the defence against raids and also any county North of the Trent as that was considered bandit country defending against those evil Scots.
During the Pilgrimage of Grace, the Trent again was considered the boundary between the loyal South and the rebellious North
Bozo only has to write one letter - where as you've got another decade to pollute this place with your wittering.
And everyone then laughed uproariously. Including some as I remember it non-white critics of his being interviewed at the same time.
How long does PB have to put up with his garbage?
Which means the Midlands could start/stop as far North as the Tees.
Personally though - I would classify North and West Yorkshire as North and slightly more um and err before putting South Yorkshire in the North.
“Sir Keir Starmer today called for No10 to reintroduce compulsory face masks and WFH guidance in response to rising Covid cases amid growing calls for ministers to resort to Plan B — despite Government modelling suggesting the measures are unnecessary.”
https://twitter.com/MaxCRoser/status/1455644914327379978
Considering that's with us living without any restrictions, that's pretty decent in my eyes.
Already one in six over 12s are triple-vaccinated.
A bit like if people only stopped buying the Daily Mail and/or started buying the Socialist Worker those newspapers would experience a dramatic change of fortune.
As it is all PBers will just have to cope with constant SNP Type wittering pretty much 24/7.
I just wanna have my kicks before the whole shithouse goes up in flames - Jim Morrison
(Sorry NP
MPs who fall-- whether Tory or not -- always land with their bums in the butter.
The rest can take a justified and welcome free rider on their actions. Because for the former group of people the priority is to save the world.
But also there's an issue that many comedians love to push the boundaries of what is acceptable, and for some issues (see Carlin) what's acceptable moves so that what was borderline in the past can be fairly tame in the future.
But sometimes (see Manning) what's acceptable moves so that what was borderline in the past can be beyond the pale in the future.
PS My support is very small beer financially
Seems only fair given the abundance of SNP Types here, Balance and all that.
Irrespective of this I'm not at all comfortable with him being pilloried for his alleged comment to three players of Pakistani origin. Cricket is a game of banter. None more so than between the Australians the West Indians the South Africans the Indians and the Pakistanis. The competition between these cricketing nations is both fierce and friendly as any spectator at a test match will attest.
I have no idea about the behaviour of Yorkshire cricket Club which I can easily believe the worst of. They don't even like women in their pavilion! But the story with Micheal Vaughan is different. If they were playing a match and he jokingly said there are too many Geordies or too many Scousers would that also be worthy of a lifetime of shame?
But no one seems to be taking it seriously. So I wonder.
Could be worse, I suppose. At least it isn't Greater Sheffield (although sometimes I wonder).
Is it a major priority? No. Would I do it in his place? No. Would there be an uproar? Yes. But it'd actually be a hell of a lot better than the approach he does in fact take of accepting lavish freebies and favours from secretive donors with a cocktail of ulterior motives. If the trade-off was he'd knock that off and settle for the salary, that's a bit of a win. Of course, the problem is he'd most likely do both.