Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Harris v Buttigieg – the WH2024 nomination race? – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited November 22 in General
imageHarris v Buttigieg – the WH2024 nomination race? – politicalbetting.com

Joe Biden is surely not going to want to put himself forward as candidate for 2024. He is heading for his 80s and that is showing and indeed it might not be that he is able to complete his first term.

Read the full story here

«134

Comments

  • swing_voterswing_voter Posts: 1,023
    First, like the Blues in Shropshire North... 66-1 is very generous, I buy into sleepy Joe not running again.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 34,932
    Second… like Harris?

    Nah - if it becomes a contested nomination she is going down in flames. A VP who doesn’t get the nomination without competing lacks all credibility
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 941
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-59347577

    "Ms Price, headmistress of the prestigious, independent Benenden School in Kent, will tell her organisation's annual conference: "Adults comment that they feel today's teenagers are speaking a different language; that they can't say anything without being corrected or 'called out' by these PC children."

    She says she is "weary of hearing the older generation say, 'you can't say anything any more'."

    And she adds: "The fact is that times have changed, and we simply need to keep up with them."


    So - the head of the head teachers association apparently no longer actually believes in free speech or indeed free enquiry any more, or indeed that childrens views should not actually even be challenged, according to this article by the BBC, which, appropriately enough, merely reports her views and does not even interrogate them.


  • darkagedarkage Posts: 941
    It is as Noam Chomsky said: when you are in a fight and your life is at risk, you need to follow the toughest, most brutal fighter; and that is how it is with freedom of thought and speech. As this realisation dawns on people over the next few years, many will end up voting Conservative for the first time. At least in the UK we have a reasonable alternative and don't have to vote for Trump.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,992
    Charles said:

    darkage said:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-59347577

    "Ms Price, headmistress of the prestigious, independent Benenden School in Kent, will tell her organisation's annual conference: "Adults comment that they feel today's teenagers are speaking a different language; that they can't say anything without being corrected or 'called out' by these PC children."

    She says she is "weary of hearing the older generation say, 'you can't say anything any more'."

    And she adds: "The fact is that times have changed, and we simply need to keep up with them."


    So - the head of the head teachers association apparently no longer actually believes in free speech or indeed free enquiry any more, or indeed that childrens views should not actually even be challenged, according to this article by the BBC, which, appropriately enough, merely reports her views and does not even interrogate them.


    It sounds more like the adults don’t like to be challenged
    Isn’t the point of education to teach you how to think, rather than what to think?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 34,932
    Sandpit said:

    Charles said:

    darkage said:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-59347577

    "Ms Price, headmistress of the prestigious, independent Benenden School in Kent, will tell her organisation's annual conference: "Adults comment that they feel today's teenagers are speaking a different language; that they can't say anything without being corrected or 'called out' by these PC children."

    She says she is "weary of hearing the older generation say, 'you can't say anything any more'."

    And she adds: "The fact is that times have changed, and we simply need to keep up with them."


    So - the head of the head teachers association apparently no longer actually believes in free speech or indeed free enquiry any more, or indeed that childrens views should not actually even be challenged, according to this article by the BBC, which, appropriately enough, merely reports her views and does not even interrogate them.


    It sounds more like the adults don’t like to be challenged
    Isn’t the point of education to teach you how to think, rather than what to think?
    Yes. It’s rather a good thing that the girls at Beneden are willing to challenge adults politely and respectfully

  • CharlesCharles Posts: 34,932
    Completely O/T

    Interesting to see Amol Rajan described as “ambitious” in the Mail’s article about the Palace documentary.

    Someone doesn’t want him to get Laura K’s gig
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 43,228
    edited November 22
    Am I right in thinking that since 1860* only one serving Cabinet minister who is not the Vice President has ever been elected President - Herbert Hoover in 1928?

    If so, that does rather indicate the scale of Buttigieg’s challenge in getting the nomination.

    *A couple were elected earlier, notably Madison and Monroe who were both the Secretary of State.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 57,370
    Good morning, everyone.

    That BBC article is amusing. Complains that old people don't want to be told not to say things, and says they shouldn't things. Bloody old people, having different views. Don't they know diversity is unacceptable? Er...
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 5,320
    darkage said:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-59347577

    "Ms Price, headmistress of the prestigious, independent Benenden School in Kent, will tell her organisation's annual conference: "Adults comment that they feel today's teenagers are speaking a different language; that they can't say anything without being corrected or 'called out' by these PC children."

    She says she is "weary of hearing the older generation say, 'you can't say anything any more'."

    And she adds: "The fact is that times have changed, and we simply need to keep up with them."


    So - the head of the head teachers association apparently no longer actually believes in free speech or indeed free enquiry any more, or indeed that childrens views should not actually even be challenged, according to this article by the BBC, which, appropriately enough, merely reports her views and does not even interrogate them.

    Actual journalism died long ago. Rewriting press releases is much easier.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 40,280
    It increasingly looks likely to me that the next President will be a Republican and all we can do is hope that it is not Trump. Buttigieg has a couple of years to nail his reputation as a can do administrator. He has already made it clear that he is the most articulate and fleet footed Democrat around but if Biden continues to deteriorate his party will get punished for it.
  • Fwiw I'm on Buttigieg and Harris for 2024, but not Trump.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 40,280
    ydoethur said:

    Am I right in thinking that since 1860* only one serving Cabinet minister who is not the Vice President has ever been elected President - Herbert Hoover in 1928?

    If so, that does rather indicate the scale of Buttigieg’s challenge in getting the nomination.

    *A couple were elected earlier, notably Madison and Monroe who were both the Secretary of State.

    That's a pretty small sample though, isn't it? How often does a still living and serving President get replaced by someone in his own party? Bush senior was just about the only example that came to mind other than Hoover. I may have missed one or two pre WW1.

    It's one of the reasons that I think Biden's successor will be a Republican.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 43,228
    edited November 22
    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    Am I right in thinking that since 1860* only one serving Cabinet minister who is not the Vice President has ever been elected President - Herbert Hoover in 1928?

    If so, that does rather indicate the scale of Buttigieg’s challenge in getting the nomination.

    *A couple were elected earlier, notably Madison and Monroe who were both the Secretary of State.

    That's a pretty small sample though, isn't it? How often does a still living and serving President get replaced by someone in his own party? Bush senior was just about the only example that came to mind other than Hoover. I may have missed one or two pre WW1.

    It's one of the reasons that I think Biden's successor will be a Republican.
    I missed one - Taft in 1908, although he resigned before the election. He was Secretary of War.

    It was quite common from 1861 to 1912, when there were lots of one term Republican presidents. But they tended to go for governors or senators rather than cabinet ministers.

    But even if we go for nominations, it's quite unusual. In 2016 it was a former cabinet minister, but long retired. In 2000 it was the Vice President. In 1968 it was a former Vice President versus the incumbent Vice President. In 1960 it was again the Vice President. In 1952 it was a Governor.
  • Charles said:

    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    Charles said:

    darkage said:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-59347577

    "Ms Price, headmistress of the prestigious, independent Benenden School in Kent, will tell her organisation's annual conference: "Adults comment that they feel today's teenagers are speaking a different language; that they can't say anything without being corrected or 'called out' by these PC children."

    She says she is "weary of hearing the older generation say, 'you can't say anything any more'."

    And she adds: "The fact is that times have changed, and we simply need to keep up with them."


    So - the head of the head teachers association apparently no longer actually believes in free speech or indeed free enquiry any more, or indeed that childrens views should not actually even be challenged, according to this article by the BBC, which, appropriately enough, merely reports her views and does not even interrogate them.


    It sounds more like the adults don’t like to be challenged
    Isn’t the point of education to teach you how to think, rather than what to think?
    There is an important difference between what you think and using casual racism and bigotry to express it, all too often because people use words and phrases that were once commonplace without thought even although they are offensive to others. I will confess that I find some modern parlance, especially the pronouns, quite difficult but I have no desire to cause unnecessary offence and do my best. Its really a question of manners.
    That’s exactly the right approach.

    Although I confess to being amused by @Leon ’s joke last night: “there’s gold in them/their hills”
    It's an amusing joke that doesn't hurt anyone. The sort of thing the world needs.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 15,622
    Biden's been trying to be president for his whole life, and there's no sign that his health is any worse than it was when he ran the last time. I wouldn't assume he'll stand down, especially if it looks like that would create a Trump-Harris race that Harris would likely lose.

    Another part of this is that Biden is more likely to run again if his administration is popular, and if it's unpopular, that will rub off on both his VP and his otherwise unknown Secretary of Transportation. It's also very hard to see Buttigieg or Harris running against him if he decides to stay, which will also handicap them if he drops out late in the cycle. So I'd be looking at people outside the administration - either popular Dem governors who can run against Washington, or somebody from the left of the party like Warren or AOC who can run against timidity.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 68,499
    Trump will demolish either of these, particularly Harris
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 27,609
    Pulpstar said:

    Trump will demolish either of these, particularly Harris

    If America chooses a President that attempted a couple against democracy, it is hard to see how the Republic survives.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 25,236
    Good morning everyone. Bright but chilly this morning.
    Definitely in Christmas planning mode chez Cole.

    And I do wonder whether the American presidential cycle isn't getting a bit too drawn out. This time last year we were wondering if Trump would actually admit that he'd lost.
    Incidentally, I wonder how deluded he really is; does he, when he wakes, as we all do, in the wee small hours, admit to himself that Biden won?
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 11,995
    Pulpstar said:

    Trump will demolish either of these, particularly Harris

    There are not many reasons that will make Americans switch votes between the parties any more. Two (spurious but real for at least a percent or two) reasons will be they don't want a woman or a gay man as President.

    It is hard to see a Democrat not called Biden winning the next election.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 43,228

    Good morning everyone. Bright but chilly this morning.
    Definitely in Christmas planning mode chez Cole.

    And I do wonder whether the American presidential cycle isn't getting a bit too drawn out. This time last year we were wondering if Trump would actually admit that he'd lost.
    Incidentally, I wonder how deluded he really is; does he, when he wakes, as we all do, in the wee small hours, admit to himself that Biden won?

    A frost here. Only the second one of the winter.

    On your second point, I doubt it.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 43,228
    edited November 22

    Pulpstar said:

    Trump will demolish either of these, particularly Harris

    There are not many reasons that will make Americans switch votes between the parties any more. Two (spurious but real for at least a percent or two) reasons will be they don't want a woman or a gay man as President.

    It is hard to see a Democrat not called Biden winning the next election.
    The smart move would surely be for Biden to draft Buttigieg as VP nominee. That gets round both issues.

    Similarly, if Biden quits you would have thought Buttigieg would be favourite for the promotion to Veep, especially given the age of the Secretary of State and the speaker and House Majority Leader. The only realistic alternative would be Osoff and would they really want a special election in Georgia?
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 16,888
    Had to defrost the car this morning for the first time
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 36,564
    edited November 22
    Telegraph: A Conservative MP who swore at Owen Paterson in a row over sleaze has admitted a mixture of "anger and codeine" led to the insult after he took painkillers for a broken ankle.

    Christian Wakeford, who was elected to Bury South in 2019, was reported to have called the former Tory MP for North Shropshire a "c---" during voting in Parliament earlier this month.

    "But I do think it went to show the, I guess, the quantum of anger in the party and that's still high now. But the fact that after all that kind of marching up the top of the hill, not once was there gratitude from Owen, not once was there, kind of, apologies or repentance."

    and the same MP in the Guardian:

    Christian Wakeford, the Bury South MP, expressed anger that the plans appeared to have been changed since MPs voted in September to support the £12bn a year health and social care levy that will pay for the policy.

    “If we’re changing the goalposts again, halfway through the match, it doesn’t sit comfortably with me or many colleagues,” he said, warning the government: “it shouldn’t be taken for granted that we’re just going to walk through the same lobby”.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 4,579
    IanB2 said:

    Telegraph: A Conservative MP who swore at Owen Paterson in a row over sleaze has admitted a mixture of "anger and codeine" led to the insult after he took painkillers for a broken ankle.

    Christian Wakeford, who was elected to Bury South in 2019, was reported to have called the former Tory MP for North Shropshire a "c---" during voting in Parliament earlier this month.

    "But I do think it went to show the, I guess, the quantum of anger in the party and that's still high now. But the fact that after all that kind of marching up the top of the hill, not once was there gratitude from Owen, not once was there, kind of, apologies or repentance."

    Read that as cocaine... Now that would have been a story!
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 4,579

    Had to defrost the car this morning for the first time

    Soft Northerners. It’ll be the fifth time for me down South... :D
  • IanB2 said:

    Telegraph: A Conservative MP who swore at Owen Paterson in a row over sleaze has admitted a mixture of "anger and codeine" led to the insult after he took painkillers for a broken ankle.

    Christian Wakeford, who was elected to Bury South in 2019, was reported to have called the former Tory MP for North Shropshire a "c---" during voting in Parliament earlier this month.

    "But I do think it went to show the, I guess, the quantum of anger in the party and that's still high now. But the fact that after all that kind of marching up the top of the hill, not once was there gratitude from Owen, not once was there, kind of, apologies or repentance."

    and the same MP in the Guardian:

    Christian Wakeford, the Bury South MP, expressed anger that the plans appeared to have been changed since MPs voted in September to support the £12bn a year health and social care levy that will pay for the policy.

    “If we’re changing the goalposts again, halfway through the match, it doesn’t sit comfortably with me or many colleagues,” he said, warning the government: “it shouldn’t be taken for granted that we’re just going to walk through the same lobby”.

    Smells like BS to me.

    I rather expect Paterson being a c*** was the issue instead.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,992
    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    Am I right in thinking that since 1860* only one serving Cabinet minister who is not the Vice President has ever been elected President - Herbert Hoover in 1928?

    If so, that does rather indicate the scale of Buttigieg’s challenge in getting the nomination.

    *A couple were elected earlier, notably Madison and Monroe who were both the Secretary of State.

    That's a pretty small sample though, isn't it? How often does a still living and serving President get replaced by someone in his own party? Bush senior was just about the only example that came to mind other than Hoover. I may have missed one or two pre WW1.

    It's one of the reasons that I think Biden's successor will be a Republican.
    2022 and 2024 do look like they are heading for Republican wins - so long as the GOP can keep one Donald J Trump quiet!
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 68,499
    Foxy said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Trump will demolish either of these, particularly Harris

    If America chooses a President that attempted a couple against democracy, it is hard to see how the Republic survives.
    One thing, the House; the Senate; SCOTUS and most of the key state legislatures will be tilting the table in favour of the GOP.
    Last election Trump was too far behind but the GOP has moved even further since then. GOP that uphold the law against their own party are being kicked out https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.mlive.com/public-interest/2021/01/gov-whitmer-replaces-gop-canvasser-who-certified-election-with-conservative-activist.html?outputType=amp
    The Democrats are going to be robbed if they have what should be a narrow victory, their piss weak / non existant sanctions on the GOP post election mean they'll deserve it
  • Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    Am I right in thinking that since 1860* only one serving Cabinet minister who is not the Vice President has ever been elected President - Herbert Hoover in 1928?

    If so, that does rather indicate the scale of Buttigieg’s challenge in getting the nomination.

    *A couple were elected earlier, notably Madison and Monroe who were both the Secretary of State.

    That's a pretty small sample though, isn't it? How often does a still living and serving President get replaced by someone in his own party? Bush senior was just about the only example that came to mind other than Hoover. I may have missed one or two pre WW1.

    It's one of the reasons that I think Biden's successor will be a Republican.
    2022 and 2024 do look like they are heading for Republican wins - so long as the GOP can keep one Donald J Trump quiet!
    Newcastle United do look like they are heading for Premier League victory next season - so long as they can win every game.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 16,501
    ...
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 27,609
    Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    Am I right in thinking that since 1860* only one serving Cabinet minister who is not the Vice President has ever been elected President - Herbert Hoover in 1928?

    If so, that does rather indicate the scale of Buttigieg’s challenge in getting the nomination.

    *A couple were elected earlier, notably Madison and Monroe who were both the Secretary of State.

    That's a pretty small sample though, isn't it? How often does a still living and serving President get replaced by someone in his own party? Bush senior was just about the only example that came to mind other than Hoover. I may have missed one or two pre WW1.

    It's one of the reasons that I think Biden's successor will be a Republican.
    2022 and 2024 do look like they are heading for Republican wins - so long as the GOP can keep one Donald J Trump quiet!
    With him disappearing from Social Media it is hard to know how crazy he now is. I am not convinced that he will run, but if he does then he is the nominee. America will be in a very dark place if he does.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 20,893
    Charles said:

    Sandpit said:

    Charles said:

    darkage said:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-59347577

    "Ms Price, headmistress of the prestigious, independent Benenden School in Kent, will tell her organisation's annual conference: "Adults comment that they feel today's teenagers are speaking a different language; that they can't say anything without being corrected or 'called out' by these PC children."

    She says she is "weary of hearing the older generation say, 'you can't say anything any more'."

    And she adds: "The fact is that times have changed, and we simply need to keep up with them."


    So - the head of the head teachers association apparently no longer actually believes in free speech or indeed free enquiry any more, or indeed that childrens views should not actually even be challenged, according to this article by the BBC, which, appropriately enough, merely reports her views and does not even interrogate them.


    It sounds more like the adults don’t like to be challenged
    Isn’t the point of education to teach you how to think, rather than what to think?
    Yes. It’s rather a good thing that the girls at Beneden are willing to challenge adults politely and respectfully

    She assumes that all change is for the better. It isn't.

    "Think before you speak. Read before you think. This will give you something to think about that you didn't make up yourself - a wise move at any age, but most especially at seventeen, when you are in the greatest danger of coming to annoying conclusions."

    Fran Lebowitz
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 25,236
    It is, I suppose, possible, that some at least of the legal processes which are swirling about Trump's rather ramshackle business empire come to court. While I realise he'll delegate the work to his lawyers ...... if he can still find any ...... surely even the current GOP wouldn't nominate as President someone with no or very few funds or his own. Or, worst case, someone in real danger of imprisonment.
    AIUI, he can't pardon himself!
  • It is, I suppose, possible, that some at least of the legal processes which are swirling about Trump's rather ramshackle business empire come to court. While I realise he'll delegate the work to his lawyers ...... if he can still find any ...... surely even the current GOP wouldn't nominate as President someone with no or very few funds or his own. Or, worst case, someone in real danger of imprisonment.
    AIUI, he can't pardon himself!

    America is broken, he'll have no need to pardon himself as there'll be about as much chance of 12 people unanimously agreeing to convict him as there was of Rittenhouse being convicted.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,992
    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    Am I right in thinking that since 1860* only one serving Cabinet minister who is not the Vice President has ever been elected President - Herbert Hoover in 1928?

    If so, that does rather indicate the scale of Buttigieg’s challenge in getting the nomination.

    *A couple were elected earlier, notably Madison and Monroe who were both the Secretary of State.

    That's a pretty small sample though, isn't it? How often does a still living and serving President get replaced by someone in his own party? Bush senior was just about the only example that came to mind other than Hoover. I may have missed one or two pre WW1.

    It's one of the reasons that I think Biden's successor will be a Republican.
    2022 and 2024 do look like they are heading for Republican wins - so long as the GOP can keep one Donald J Trump quiet!
    With him disappearing from Social Media it is hard to know how crazy he now is. I am not convinced that he will run, but if he does then he is the nominee. America will be in a very dark place if he does.
    Indeed, right now he’s being artificially silenced, but if he runs again he likely gets his ‘voice’ back. I think he probably stands aside, but gets behind another nominee who will see huge momentum as a result.

    Both major parties seem in a pretty bad place at the moment, driven by factional infighting rather than looking at how best to improve the country.
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 941
    edited November 22
    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    Charles said:

    darkage said:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-59347577

    "Ms Price, headmistress of the prestigious, independent Benenden School in Kent, will tell her organisation's annual conference: "Adults comment that they feel today's teenagers are speaking a different language; that they can't say anything without being corrected or 'called out' by these PC children."

    She says she is "weary of hearing the older generation say, 'you can't say anything any more'."

    And she adds: "The fact is that times have changed, and we simply need to keep up with them."


    So - the head of the head teachers association apparently no longer actually believes in free speech or indeed free enquiry any more, or indeed that childrens views should not actually even be challenged, according to this article by the BBC, which, appropriately enough, merely reports her views and does not even interrogate them.


    It sounds more like the adults don’t like to be challenged
    Isn’t the point of education to teach you how to think, rather than what to think?
    There is an important difference between what you think and using casual racism and bigotry to express it, all too often because people use words and phrases that were once commonplace without thought even although they are offensive to others. I will confess that I find some modern parlance, especially the pronouns, quite difficult but I have no desire to cause unnecessary offence and do my best. Its really a question of manners.
    But this is not about using the right pronouns. It is convenient to think of it that way, but there is abundant evidence that it goes much further than that. Things like transgender rights and critical race theory need to be challenged, not just accepted uncritically as correct, as suggested by this headteacher. This is an attack on the whole idea of free enquiry. The alarming thing is that people in positions of power and authority go along with it. If you place any value on freedom of thought, these ideas must be fought and stopped, not pandered to or even humoured.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 41,589
    Charles said:

    Second… like Harris?

    Nah - if it becomes a contested nomination she is going down in flames. A VP who doesn’t get the nomination without competing lacks all credibility

    History is a little kinder than you would think.

    Back in 1988, Vice President George HW Bush ran for the Republican nomination, and won only one of the first four Primaries, against two for Bob Dole and one for Pat Robertson. Indeed, 10 Primaries in at the end of February, Dole narrowly led Bush for delegates, with Robertson still hanging in there.

    It was only on Super Tuesday - close to three months from the first Primary - that Bush basically swept the board and secured the nomination.

    (As an aside, back in 1987 Trump ran a series of advertisements hinting that he was considering running for President. It's a shame he didn't win - and lose - then. It might have saved us all a whole bunch of trouble.)
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 41,589
    darkage said:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-59347577

    "Ms Price, headmistress of the prestigious, independent Benenden School in Kent, will tell her organisation's annual conference: "Adults comment that they feel today's teenagers are speaking a different language; that they can't say anything without being corrected or 'called out' by these PC children."

    She says she is "weary of hearing the older generation say, 'you can't say anything any more'."

    And she adds: "The fact is that times have changed, and we simply need to keep up with them."


    So - the head of the head teachers association apparently no longer actually believes in free speech or indeed free enquiry any more, or indeed that childrens views should not actually even be challenged, according to this article by the BBC, which, appropriately enough, merely reports her views and does not even interrogate them.


    Is that what she says? Without the full transcript of the speech, it's very hard to tell.
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 3,701

    Good morning, everyone.

    That BBC article is amusing. Complains that old people don't want to be told not to say things, and says they shouldn't things. Bloody old people, having different views. Don't they know diversity is unacceptable? Er...

    I'm sure her views will go down particularly well in many Red Wall seats.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 41,589
    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    Charles said:

    darkage said:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-59347577

    "Ms Price, headmistress of the prestigious, independent Benenden School in Kent, will tell her organisation's annual conference: "Adults comment that they feel today's teenagers are speaking a different language; that they can't say anything without being corrected or 'called out' by these PC children."

    She says she is "weary of hearing the older generation say, 'you can't say anything any more'."

    And she adds: "The fact is that times have changed, and we simply need to keep up with them."


    So - the head of the head teachers association apparently no longer actually believes in free speech or indeed free enquiry any more, or indeed that childrens views should not actually even be challenged, according to this article by the BBC, which, appropriately enough, merely reports her views and does not even interrogate them.


    It sounds more like the adults don’t like to be challenged
    Isn’t the point of education to teach you how to think, rather than what to think?
    There is an important difference between what you think and using casual racism and bigotry to express it, all too often because people use words and phrases that were once commonplace without thought even although they are offensive to others. I will confess that I find some modern parlance, especially the pronouns, quite difficult but I have no desire to cause unnecessary offence and do my best. Its really a question of manners.
    I find the idea of sexualised pronouns for people in the 12 to 22 age group unnecessary. Wouldn't it be better to have a single, non-gender bound word that we can use for anyone in that group?

    I'd like to nominate 'it'.
  • IanB2 said:

    Telegraph: A Conservative MP who swore at Owen Paterson in a row over sleaze has admitted a mixture of "anger and codeine" led to the insult after he took painkillers for a broken ankle.

    Christian Wakeford, who was elected to Bury South in 2019, was reported to have called the former Tory MP for North Shropshire a "c---" during voting in Parliament earlier this month.

    "But I do think it went to show the, I guess, the quantum of anger in the party and that's still high now. But the fact that after all that kind of marching up the top of the hill, not once was there gratitude from Owen, not once was there, kind of, apologies or repentance."

    Read that as cocaine... Now that would have been a story!
    Cocaine is no longer a bar to high office in the Conservative Party, and nor is icing sugar.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 41,589
    MrEd said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    That BBC article is amusing. Complains that old people don't want to be told not to say things, and says they shouldn't things. Bloody old people, having different views. Don't they know diversity is unacceptable? Er...

    I'm sure her views will go down particularly well in many Red Wall seats.
    As she's the Head Mistress of Benenden, I'm not sure her views will be much repeated in the pubs and bars of Hartlepool.
  • MrEd said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    That BBC article is amusing. Complains that old people don't want to be told not to say things, and says they shouldn't things. Bloody old people, having different views. Don't they know diversity is unacceptable? Er...

    I'm sure her views will go down particularly well in many Red Wall seats.
    Will red wall voters be enfranchised to vote for or against the boss of a private girls' school and if so, though it seems unlikely, does this weaken her chances of re-election in your view?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 36,564
    Dilnot on R4 nailing the changes to his social care proposals that particularly hit the less well off
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 13,854
    I've put £10 on Richard Tice in Bexley at 120/1 with BE.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 41,589
    darkage said:

    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    Charles said:

    darkage said:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-59347577

    "Ms Price, headmistress of the prestigious, independent Benenden School in Kent, will tell her organisation's annual conference: "Adults comment that they feel today's teenagers are speaking a different language; that they can't say anything without being corrected or 'called out' by these PC children."

    She says she is "weary of hearing the older generation say, 'you can't say anything any more'."

    And she adds: "The fact is that times have changed, and we simply need to keep up with them."


    So - the head of the head teachers association apparently no longer actually believes in free speech or indeed free enquiry any more, or indeed that childrens views should not actually even be challenged, according to this article by the BBC, which, appropriately enough, merely reports her views and does not even interrogate them.


    It sounds more like the adults don’t like to be challenged
    Isn’t the point of education to teach you how to think, rather than what to think?
    There is an important difference between what you think and using casual racism and bigotry to express it, all too often because people use words and phrases that were once commonplace without thought even although they are offensive to others. I will confess that I find some modern parlance, especially the pronouns, quite difficult but I have no desire to cause unnecessary offence and do my best. Its really a question of manners.
    But this is not about using the right pronouns. It is convenient to think of it that way, but there is abundant evidence that it goes much further than that. Things like transgender rights and critical race theory need to be challenged, not just accepted uncritically as correct, as suggested by this headteacher. This is an attack on the whole idea of free enquiry. The alarming thing is that people in positions of power and authority go along with it. If you place any value on freedom of thought, these ideas must be fought and stopped, not pandered to or even humoured.
    "If you place any value on freedom of thought, these ideas must be fought and stopped"

    You, ummm, don't seem to be following your own advice.

    Surely they should be challenged and tested.

    While I have been extremely critical of CRT on this board, I suspect there may well be elements of it that are not without merit.

    When you come out and throw the whole of trangender and CRT in a single bucket, and say it must be 'fought and stopped' then aren't you behaving just as rashly?
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 3,701
    rcs1000 said:

    MrEd said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    That BBC article is amusing. Complains that old people don't want to be told not to say things, and says they shouldn't things. Bloody old people, having different views. Don't they know diversity is unacceptable? Er...

    I'm sure her views will go down particularly well in many Red Wall seats.
    As she's the Head Mistress of Benenden, I'm not sure her views will be much repeated in the pubs and bars of Hartlepool.
    I was thinking more Wigan myself.

    More seriously, having the head of a Private Girls' school come out and say this (and be publicised) will probably have the opposite effect to what she intended.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 10,753
    edited November 22
    rcs1000 said:

    darkage said:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-59347577

    "Ms Price, headmistress of the prestigious, independent Benenden School in Kent, will tell her organisation's annual conference: "Adults comment that they feel today's teenagers are speaking a different language; that they can't say anything without being corrected or 'called out' by these PC children."

    She says she is "weary of hearing the older generation say, 'you can't say anything any more'."

    And she adds: "The fact is that times have changed, and we simply need to keep up with them."


    So - the head of the head teachers association apparently no longer actually believes in free speech or indeed free enquiry any more, or indeed that childrens views should not actually even be challenged, according to this article by the BBC, which, appropriately enough, merely reports her views and does not even interrogate them.


    Is that what she says? Without the full transcript of the speech, it's very hard to tell.
    And what has free speech to do with the price of fish? We have never enjoyed free speech, subject as we are to laws against blasphemy, slander and libel, and even blasphemous libel for gay poetry lovers of a certain age.

    Interestingly, Ian Hislop in a recent discussion of the late Robert Maxwell, opined that these days Maxwell would not sue for libel but would instead seek injunctions on privacy grounds, so that is yet another encroachment on our non-existent right to free speech.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ty1K3XjuEbs
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 941
    rcs1000 said:

    darkage said:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-59347577

    "Ms Price, headmistress of the prestigious, independent Benenden School in Kent, will tell her organisation's annual conference: "Adults comment that they feel today's teenagers are speaking a different language; that they can't say anything without being corrected or 'called out' by these PC children."

    She says she is "weary of hearing the older generation say, 'you can't say anything any more'."

    And she adds: "The fact is that times have changed, and we simply need to keep up with them."


    So - the head of the head teachers association apparently no longer actually believes in free speech or indeed free enquiry any more, or indeed that childrens views should not actually even be challenged, according to this article by the BBC, which, appropriately enough, merely reports her views and does not even interrogate them.


    Is that what she says? Without the full transcript of the speech, it's very hard to tell.
    She hasn't even made the speech yet. It's most likely a press release by the Girls' school association and repeated uncritically by the BBC, to emphasise their woke credentials. It should be read as such. Presumably this is part of a PR strategy, given that private school education ultimately perpetuates the social inequalities which the woke claim to be against.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 6,476
    Charles said:

    Completely O/T

    Interesting to see Amol Rajan described as “ambitious” in the Mail’s article about the Palace documentary.

    Someone doesn’t want him to get Laura K’s gig

    Is "ambitious" an insult now? Is it one of those words that upper middle class white people use to describe non upper middle class white people who don't know their place?
  • TomsToms Posts: 2,263
    edited November 22
    To call Joe Biden "sleepy Joe" is succumbing to Trump's perverse talent for "epitheting". Let him who has never fallen asleep during a lengthy and dull conference cast the first stone.

    To harp on Biden's age may well bear on betting possibilities, for this is indeed a site for bettors.

    But Biden is very busy trying to unravel some of Trump's many perverse acts and lacunae. And actually some of us think he is sometimes bringing it off.

    https://www.berkshireeagle.com/opinion/columnists/david-brooks-joe-biden-is-succeeding/article_0f5adc10-4981-11ec-926d-0b5b4184eb38.html
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 9,811
    Toms said:

    To call Joe Biden "sleepy Joe" is succumbing to Trump's perverse talent for "epitheting". Let him who has never fallen asleep during a lengthy and dull conference cast the first stone.

    To harp on Biden's age may well bear on betting possibilities, for this is indeed a site for bettors.

    But Biden is very busy trying to unravel some of Trump's many perverse acts and lacunae. And actually some of us think he is sometimes bringing it off.

    https://www.berkshireeagle.com/opinion/columnists/david-brooks-joe-biden-is-succeeding/article_0f5adc10-4981-11ec-926d-0b5b4184eb38.html

    His obvious inability to remember names is nothing to do with sleepiness, or Trump
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 6,476
    darkage said:

    rcs1000 said:

    darkage said:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-59347577

    "Ms Price, headmistress of the prestigious, independent Benenden School in Kent, will tell her organisation's annual conference: "Adults comment that they feel today's teenagers are speaking a different language; that they can't say anything without being corrected or 'called out' by these PC children."

    She says she is "weary of hearing the older generation say, 'you can't say anything any more'."

    And she adds: "The fact is that times have changed, and we simply need to keep up with them."


    So - the head of the head teachers association apparently no longer actually believes in free speech or indeed free enquiry any more, or indeed that childrens views should not actually even be challenged, according to this article by the BBC, which, appropriately enough, merely reports her views and does not even interrogate them.


    Is that what she says? Without the full transcript of the speech, it's very hard to tell.
    She hasn't even made the speech yet. It's most likely a press release by the Girls' school association and repeated uncritically by the BBC, to emphasise their woke credentials. It should be read as such. Presumably this is part of a PR strategy, given that private school education ultimately perpetuates the social inequalities which the woke claim to be against.
    I do think it's hilarious that the baby boomers, of all people, are so freaked out by the concept of an intergenerational difference in opinion. Did the 1960s never happen? Were they all so stoned that they can't remember it?
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 2,307
    darkage said:

    It is as Noam Chomsky said: when you are in a fight and your life is at risk, you need to follow the toughest, most brutal fighter; and that is how it is with freedom of thought and speech. As this realisation dawns on people over the next few years, many will end up voting Conservative for the first time. At least in the UK we have a reasonable alternative and don't have to vote for Trump.

    You aren't the first and you won't be the last to think "pretty soon, everyone will end agree with me!"
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 20,241

    Charles said:

    Completely O/T

    Interesting to see Amol Rajan described as “ambitious” in the Mail’s article about the Palace documentary.

    Someone doesn’t want him to get Laura K’s gig

    Is "ambitious" an insult now? Is it one of those words that upper middle class white people use to describe non upper middle class white people who don't know their place?

    Is this the work of an ambitious man? When the poor cried, Caesar cried too. Ambition shouldn’t be so soft. Yet Brutus says he was ambitious, and Brutus is an honorable man. You all saw that on the Lupercal feast day I offered him a king’s crown three times, and he refused it three times. Was this ambition? Yet Brutus says he was ambitious.
  • MrEd said:

    On topic. Buttigieg is one of those candidates who appeal to those 'in the know' but has little chance in the outside world. I'll give you 4 reasons (and there are more) why I wouldn't taken this bet:

    1. If he ran against Harris, he'd be crucified by the progressive wing. Yes, he is gay but, given he is a white male, running against a black woman can only go one way in today's Democrat party, especially as Harris is the sitting VP and shows no signs of stepping down (nor does her career suggest she would anyway, especially when she is so close to the Presidency);

    2. He is part of an unpopular administration that shows no signs of being able to pull out of its nosedive and where the newsflow looks grim (inflation rising, clear signs that a substantial part of the Hispanic vote is shifting, revolt in the burbs against CRT etc etc);

    3. So far, he is being remembered as the guy who took time off for parental leave when the country was going through a logistics crisis. That alone is likely to sink him as Americans don't really do part-time Presidents (I'd also suggest that gives an indication he is counting himself out);

    4. 2024 is three years away so lots can happen but I really do not see anything on the Republican side that is likely to stop the momentum. For those who think Trump will self-implode and take the GOP down with him, look at his behaviour in Virginia and New Jersey - he kept quiet for the most part. The GOP seems to have found a working solution for swing states is to have presentable candidates who are acceptable to the burbs while Trump gets odd the base - the quid pro quo is those candidates don't slag off Trump and Trump gets to feel his GOTV efforts won the election.

    The corollary of point 4, that Republicans can get elected without mentioning Trump, is that Democrats need quickly to find ways of electioneering against the opponent on the ticket rather than the boogeyman in Mar-A-Lago.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 5,266
    MrEd said:

    1. If he ran against Harris, he'd be crucified by the progressive wing. Yes, he is gay but, given he is a white male, running against a black woman can only go one way in today's Democrat party, especially as Harris is the sitting VP and shows no signs of stepping down (nor does her career suggest she would anyway, especially when she is so close to the Presidency);

    People say this sort of thing a lot, and yet we have the recent example of the nomination race in 2020, and several white males lasted longer in that nomination contest than Harris, the black woman. It just isn't true.

    Now it might be different when she's the VP running for nomination, but that would be because she's the VP, not because she's a black woman.
  • TomsToms Posts: 2,263
    IshmaelZ said:

    Toms said:

    To call Joe Biden "sleepy Joe" is succumbing to Trump's perverse talent for "epitheting". Let him who has never fallen asleep during a lengthy and dull conference cast the first stone.

    To harp on Biden's age may well bear on betting possibilities, for this is indeed a site for bettors.

    But Biden is very busy trying to unravel some of Trump's many perverse acts and lacunae. And actually some of us think he is sometimes bringing it off.

    https://www.berkshireeagle.com/opinion/columnists/david-brooks-joe-biden-is-succeeding/article_0f5adc10-4981-11ec-926d-0b5b4184eb38.html

    His obvious inability to remember names is nothing to do with sleepiness, or Trump
    Oversimplification is allowed on this site.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 16,501
    Boris Johnson faces a damaging rebellion over his proposed social care reforms after the former justice secretary, Robert Buckland, signalled that he was likely to vote against the plan https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/boris-johnson-faces-tory-dissent-over-social-care-plans-kspxk3dtb?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1637565944
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 6,476

    Charles said:

    Completely O/T

    Interesting to see Amol Rajan described as “ambitious” in the Mail’s article about the Palace documentary.

    Someone doesn’t want him to get Laura K’s gig

    Is "ambitious" an insult now? Is it one of those words that upper middle class white people use to describe non upper middle class white people who don't know their place?

    Is this the work of an ambitious man? When the poor cried, Caesar cried too. Ambition shouldn’t be so soft. Yet Brutus says he was ambitious, and Brutus is an honorable man. You all saw that on the Lupercal feast day I offered him a king’s crown three times, and he refused it three times. Was this ambition? Yet Brutus says he was ambitious.
    I guess that's a yes then.
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 2,307
    Toms said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Toms said:

    To call Joe Biden "sleepy Joe" is succumbing to Trump's perverse talent for "epitheting". Let him who has never fallen asleep during a lengthy and dull conference cast the first stone.

    To harp on Biden's age may well bear on betting possibilities, for this is indeed a site for bettors.

    But Biden is very busy trying to unravel some of Trump's many perverse acts and lacunae. And actually some of us think he is sometimes bringing it off.

    https://www.berkshireeagle.com/opinion/columnists/david-brooks-joe-biden-is-succeeding/article_0f5adc10-4981-11ec-926d-0b5b4184eb38.html

    His obvious inability to remember names is nothing to do with sleepiness, or Trump
    Oversimplification is allowed mandatory on this site.
    FTFY
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 9,811

    rcs1000 said:

    darkage said:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-59347577

    "Ms Price, headmistress of the prestigious, independent Benenden School in Kent, will tell her organisation's annual conference: "Adults comment that they feel today's teenagers are speaking a different language; that they can't say anything without being corrected or 'called out' by these PC children."

    She says she is "weary of hearing the older generation say, 'you can't say anything any more'."

    And she adds: "The fact is that times have changed, and we simply need to keep up with them."


    So - the head of the head teachers association apparently no longer actually believes in free speech or indeed free enquiry any more, or indeed that childrens views should not actually even be challenged, according to this article by the BBC, which, appropriately enough, merely reports her views and does not even interrogate them.


    Is that what she says? Without the full transcript of the speech, it's very hard to tell.
    And what has free speech to do with the price of fish? We have never enjoyed free speech, subject as we are to laws against blasphemy, slander and libel, and even blasphemous libel for gay poetry lovers of a certain age.

    Interestingly, Ian Hislop in a recent discussion of the late Robert Maxwell, opined that these days Maxwell would not sue for libel but would instead seek injunctions on privacy grounds, so that is yet another encroachment on our non-existent right to free speech.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ty1K3XjuEbs
    Blasphemous libel has been abolished. The poem was dreadful, I can presumably legally quote it now but it is too embarrassing

    https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2008/01/10/the-gay-poem-that-broke-blasphemy-laws/
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 2,307
    Scott_xP said:

    Boris Johnson faces a damaging rebellion over his proposed social care reforms after the former justice secretary, Robert Buckland, signalled that he was likely to vote against the plan https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/boris-johnson-faces-tory-dissent-over-social-care-plans-kspxk3dtb?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1637565944

    What's the betting... five, six "rebels"? The Conservative party hasn't show itself lately to have much backbone.This morning's potential rebellion is this afternoon's damp squib.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 41,589
    MrEd said:

    rcs1000 said:

    MrEd said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    That BBC article is amusing. Complains that old people don't want to be told not to say things, and says they shouldn't things. Bloody old people, having different views. Don't they know diversity is unacceptable? Er...

    I'm sure her views will go down particularly well in many Red Wall seats.
    As she's the Head Mistress of Benenden, I'm not sure her views will be much repeated in the pubs and bars of Hartlepool.
    I was thinking more Wigan myself.

    More seriously, having the head of a Private Girls' school come out and say this (and be publicised) will probably have the opposite effect to what she intended.
    Firstly, you don't know what she said. I suspect that if you had the full transcript, you might well find it rather a lot more nuanced than the BBC quotes suggest.

    Secondly, even if it was the most rabidly transrights speech in existence (and I suspect it wasn't, because said Head Mistress knows she needs to sell hundreds of 60k/year places a year), it probably still wouldn't resonate in the Red Wall. Because this isn't a politician. It's the head mistress of a school which Red Wall voters have never heard of.
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 941
    rcs1000 said:

    darkage said:

    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    Charles said:

    darkage said:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-59347577

    "Ms Price, headmistress of the prestigious, independent Benenden School in Kent, will tell her organisation's annual conference: "Adults comment that they feel today's teenagers are speaking a different language; that they can't say anything without being corrected or 'called out' by these PC children."

    She says she is "weary of hearing the older generation say, 'you can't say anything any more'."

    And she adds: "The fact is that times have changed, and we simply need to keep up with them."


    So - the head of the head teachers association apparently no longer actually believes in free speech or indeed free enquiry any more, or indeed that childrens views should not actually even be challenged, according to this article by the BBC, which, appropriately enough, merely reports her views and does not even interrogate them.


    It sounds more like the adults don’t like to be challenged
    Isn’t the point of education to teach you how to think, rather than what to think?
    There is an important difference between what you think and using casual racism and bigotry to express it, all too often because people use words and phrases that were once commonplace without thought even although they are offensive to others. I will confess that I find some modern parlance, especially the pronouns, quite difficult but I have no desire to cause unnecessary offence and do my best. Its really a question of manners.
    But this is not about using the right pronouns. It is convenient to think of it that way, but there is abundant evidence that it goes much further than that. Things like transgender rights and critical race theory need to be challenged, not just accepted uncritically as correct, as suggested by this headteacher. This is an attack on the whole idea of free enquiry. The alarming thing is that people in positions of power and authority go along with it. If you place any value on freedom of thought, these ideas must be fought and stopped, not pandered to or even humoured.
    "If you place any value on freedom of thought, these ideas must be fought and stopped"

    You, ummm, don't seem to be following your own advice.

    Surely they should be challenged and tested.

    While I have been extremely critical of CRT on this board, I suspect there may well be elements of it that are not without merit.

    When you come out and throw the whole of trangender and CRT in a single bucket, and say it must be 'fought and stopped' then aren't you behaving just as rashly?
    I haven't ever come out 'against' transgender rights or CRT. These are things that need to be discussed and it is only possible to do this where there is an atmosphere of free enquiry, which this type of statement works directly against; because the headteacher is effectively saying that teenagers views on these contentious issues should not be challenged.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 32,017
    Charles said:

    Completely O/T

    Interesting to see Amol Rajan described as “ambitious” in the Mail’s article about the Palace documentary.

    Someone doesn’t want him to get Laura K’s gig

    As I have noted previously, he is great on R4 Today prog so it would be a shame to lose him anywhere. He is quietly and determinedly insistent on getting his interviewees to face whatever point he wants them to face. Listening to Kuenssburg this morning about social care it would be a mistake for her to join the Today team which I understand she wants.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 15,622

    MrEd said:

    1. If he ran against Harris, he'd be crucified by the progressive wing. Yes, he is gay but, given he is a white male, running against a black woman can only go one way in today's Democrat party, especially as Harris is the sitting VP and shows no signs of stepping down (nor does her career suggest she would anyway, especially when she is so close to the Presidency);

    People say this sort of thing a lot, and yet we have the recent example of the nomination race in 2020, and several white males lasted longer in that nomination contest than Harris, the black woman. It just isn't true.

    Now it might be different when she's the VP running for nomination, but that would be because she's the VP, not because she's a black woman.
    I think the VP part and the black woman part go together; It'll be much harder for a white man to dislodge a black woman who looks like the next in line.

    This is why I think if Biden stands down in good time, keep an eye out for another black woman who could take on Kamala - particularly Stacey Abrams who could easily be the only Dem success story in 2022 if the Georgia Trumpists decide to punish their GOP incumbent for being insufficiently helpful with the attempted coup.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 9,811

    Charles said:

    Completely O/T

    Interesting to see Amol Rajan described as “ambitious” in the Mail’s article about the Palace documentary.

    Someone doesn’t want him to get Laura K’s gig

    Is "ambitious" an insult now? Is it one of those words that upper middle class white people use to describe non upper middle class white people who don't know their place?

    Is this the work of an ambitious man? When the poor cried, Caesar cried too. Ambition shouldn’t be so soft. Yet Brutus says he was ambitious, and Brutus is an honorable man. You all saw that on the Lupercal feast day I offered him a king’s crown three times, and he refused it three times. Was this ambition? Yet Brutus says he was ambitious.
    Why the translation?

    Did this in Caesar seem ambitious?
    When that the poor have cried, Caesar hath wept:
    Ambition should be made of sterner stuff:
    Yet Brutus says he was ambitious;
    And Brutus is an honourable man.
    You all did see that on the Lupercal
    I thrice presented him a kingly crown,
    Which he did thrice refuse: was this ambition?
    Yet Brutus says he was ambitious;
    And, sure, he is an honourable man.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 32,017
    darkage said:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-59347577

    "Ms Price, headmistress of the prestigious, independent Benenden School in Kent, will tell her organisation's annual conference: "Adults comment that they feel today's teenagers are speaking a different language; that they can't say anything without being corrected or 'called out' by these PC children."

    She says she is "weary of hearing the older generation say, 'you can't say anything any more'."

    And she adds: "The fact is that times have changed, and we simply need to keep up with them."


    So - the head of the head teachers association apparently no longer actually believes in free speech or indeed free enquiry any more, or indeed that childrens views should not actually even be challenged, according to this article by the BBC, which, appropriately enough, merely reports her views and does not even interrogate them.


    Is that your kick-off speech for the campaign to bring back Love Thy Neighbour et al.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 16,501
    It takes some doing to come up with an inheritance tax aimed at the least well off but that’s what the Tories have done. And of course it doesn’t fix social care either.
    https://twitter.com/patmcfaddenmp/status/1462699444781080578
    https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1461474536440872971
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 32,017

    Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    Am I right in thinking that since 1860* only one serving Cabinet minister who is not the Vice President has ever been elected President - Herbert Hoover in 1928?

    If so, that does rather indicate the scale of Buttigieg’s challenge in getting the nomination.

    *A couple were elected earlier, notably Madison and Monroe who were both the Secretary of State.

    That's a pretty small sample though, isn't it? How often does a still living and serving President get replaced by someone in his own party? Bush senior was just about the only example that came to mind other than Hoover. I may have missed one or two pre WW1.

    It's one of the reasons that I think Biden's successor will be a Republican.
    2022 and 2024 do look like they are heading for Republican wins - so long as the GOP can keep one Donald J Trump quiet!
    Newcastle United do look like they are heading for Premier League victory next season - so long as they can win every game.
    Turkey is joining the EU. So long as they conform completely to EU/Western norms about society and freedoms and human rights and the rule of law.
  • Charles said:

    Completely O/T

    Interesting to see Amol Rajan described as “ambitious” in the Mail’s article about the Palace documentary.

    Someone doesn’t want him to get Laura K’s gig

    Is "ambitious" an insult now? Is it one of those words that upper middle class white people use to describe non upper middle class white people who don't know their place?
    Amol Rajan might not be White but you are stretching to describe him as not upper middle class. He is a Cambridge graduate who edited a national newspaper and is a senior BBC presenter and editor; not a horny-handed son of toil. As for the Mail, "ambitious" is code for "on manoeuvres" which is also code.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 41,589

    MrEd said:

    1. If he ran against Harris, he'd be crucified by the progressive wing. Yes, he is gay but, given he is a white male, running against a black woman can only go one way in today's Democrat party, especially as Harris is the sitting VP and shows no signs of stepping down (nor does her career suggest she would anyway, especially when she is so close to the Presidency);

    People say this sort of thing a lot, and yet we have the recent example of the nomination race in 2020, and several white males lasted longer in that nomination contest than Harris, the black woman. It just isn't true.

    Now it might be different when she's the VP running for nomination, but that would be because she's the VP, not because she's a black woman.
    I'm slightly surprised by the idea that the Progressive Wing of the Democratic Party is going to be out there fighting for a Right Wing former prosecutor, who they loathed in 2020.

    Surely, they'll find their own champion? Perhaps Ms Warren will run again (unincumbered by a fight with Sanders for the soul of the Left). Or maybe Ms AOC will choose to pitch in.

    But... if there's one thing that 2020 told us, it's that the voters in the Democratic primaries are a long, long way to the Right of the Progressive Wing.

    And that really matters in the Democratic Primary, because this isn't an FPTP system, where a Left wing candidate could amass a big block of delegates by winning primaries with 30-35% of the vote. Instead, they end up with 30-35% of the delegates.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 41,589
    darkage said:

    rcs1000 said:

    darkage said:

    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    Charles said:

    darkage said:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-59347577

    "Ms Price, headmistress of the prestigious, independent Benenden School in Kent, will tell her organisation's annual conference: "Adults comment that they feel today's teenagers are speaking a different language; that they can't say anything without being corrected or 'called out' by these PC children."

    She says she is "weary of hearing the older generation say, 'you can't say anything any more'."

    And she adds: "The fact is that times have changed, and we simply need to keep up with them."


    So - the head of the head teachers association apparently no longer actually believes in free speech or indeed free enquiry any more, or indeed that childrens views should not actually even be challenged, according to this article by the BBC, which, appropriately enough, merely reports her views and does not even interrogate them.


    It sounds more like the adults don’t like to be challenged
    Isn’t the point of education to teach you how to think, rather than what to think?
    There is an important difference between what you think and using casual racism and bigotry to express it, all too often because people use words and phrases that were once commonplace without thought even although they are offensive to others. I will confess that I find some modern parlance, especially the pronouns, quite difficult but I have no desire to cause unnecessary offence and do my best. Its really a question of manners.
    But this is not about using the right pronouns. It is convenient to think of it that way, but there is abundant evidence that it goes much further than that. Things like transgender rights and critical race theory need to be challenged, not just accepted uncritically as correct, as suggested by this headteacher. This is an attack on the whole idea of free enquiry. The alarming thing is that people in positions of power and authority go along with it. If you place any value on freedom of thought, these ideas must be fought and stopped, not pandered to or even humoured.
    "If you place any value on freedom of thought, these ideas must be fought and stopped"

    You, ummm, don't seem to be following your own advice.

    Surely they should be challenged and tested.

    While I have been extremely critical of CRT on this board, I suspect there may well be elements of it that are not without merit.

    When you come out and throw the whole of trangender and CRT in a single bucket, and say it must be 'fought and stopped' then aren't you behaving just as rashly?
    I haven't ever come out 'against' transgender rights or CRT. These are things that need to be discussed and it is only possible to do this where there is an atmosphere of free enquiry, which this type of statement works directly against; because the headteacher is effectively saying that teenagers views on these contentious issues should not be challenged.
    You don't know she says that at all.

    Have you read the transcript of the speech? Or just the edited highlights from a 22 year old BBC reporter who just grabbed the tastiest lines to wrap a story around
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 34,080
    darkage said:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-59347577

    "Ms Price, headmistress of the prestigious, independent Benenden School in Kent, will tell her organisation's annual conference: "Adults comment that they feel today's teenagers are speaking a different language; that they can't say anything without being corrected or 'called out' by these PC children."

    She says she is "weary of hearing the older generation say, 'you can't say anything any more'."

    And she adds: "The fact is that times have changed, and we simply need to keep up with them."


    So - the head of the head teachers association apparently no longer actually believes in free speech or indeed free enquiry any more, or indeed that childrens views should not actually even be challenged, according to this article by the BBC, which, appropriately enough, merely reports her views and does not even interrogate them.

    That's a very odd interpretation of what she said, which was basically 'don't be an old whinger when children challenge your views'.
    You might disagree with the message, but it's in no way an attack on free speech.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 20,241

    MrEd said:

    1. If he ran against Harris, he'd be crucified by the progressive wing. Yes, he is gay but, given he is a white male, running against a black woman can only go one way in today's Democrat party, especially as Harris is the sitting VP and shows no signs of stepping down (nor does her career suggest she would anyway, especially when she is so close to the Presidency);

    People say this sort of thing a lot, and yet we have the recent example of the nomination race in 2020, and several white males lasted longer in that nomination contest than Harris, the black woman. It just isn't true.

    Now it might be different when she's the VP running for nomination, but that would be because she's the VP, not because she's a black woman.
    I think the VP part and the black woman part go together; It'll be much harder for a white man to dislodge a black woman who looks like the next in line.

    This is why I think if Biden stands down in good time, keep an eye out for another black woman who could take on Kamala - particularly Stacey Abrams who could easily be the only Dem success story in 2022 if the Georgia Trumpists decide to punish their GOP incumbent for being insufficiently helpful with the attempted coup.
    I think she will be harder to dislodge - but not impossible.

    Harris has a lack of support from the progressive wing of the Democrats - based on her time as a prosecutor. A number of African Americans are not fans either.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 32,017
    rcs1000 said:

    darkage said:

    rcs1000 said:

    darkage said:

    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    Charles said:

    darkage said:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-59347577

    "Ms Price, headmistress of the prestigious, independent Benenden School in Kent, will tell her organisation's annual conference: "Adults comment that they feel today's teenagers are speaking a different language; that they can't say anything without being corrected or 'called out' by these PC children."

    She says she is "weary of hearing the older generation say, 'you can't say anything any more'."

    And she adds: "The fact is that times have changed, and we simply need to keep up with them."


    So - the head of the head teachers association apparently no longer actually believes in free speech or indeed free enquiry any more, or indeed that childrens views should not actually even be challenged, according to this article by the BBC, which, appropriately enough, merely reports her views and does not even interrogate them.


    It sounds more like the adults don’t like to be challenged
    Isn’t the point of education to teach you how to think, rather than what to think?
    There is an important difference between what you think and using casual racism and bigotry to express it, all too often because people use words and phrases that were once commonplace without thought even although they are offensive to others. I will confess that I find some modern parlance, especially the pronouns, quite difficult but I have no desire to cause unnecessary offence and do my best. Its really a question of manners.
    But this is not about using the right pronouns. It is convenient to think of it that way, but there is abundant evidence that it goes much further than that. Things like transgender rights and critical race theory need to be challenged, not just accepted uncritically as correct, as suggested by this headteacher. This is an attack on the whole idea of free enquiry. The alarming thing is that people in positions of power and authority go along with it. If you place any value on freedom of thought, these ideas must be fought and stopped, not pandered to or even humoured.
    "If you place any value on freedom of thought, these ideas must be fought and stopped"

    You, ummm, don't seem to be following your own advice.

    Surely they should be challenged and tested.

    While I have been extremely critical of CRT on this board, I suspect there may well be elements of it that are not without merit.

    When you come out and throw the whole of trangender and CRT in a single bucket, and say it must be 'fought and stopped' then aren't you behaving just as rashly?
    I haven't ever come out 'against' transgender rights or CRT. These are things that need to be discussed and it is only possible to do this where there is an atmosphere of free enquiry, which this type of statement works directly against; because the headteacher is effectively saying that teenagers views on these contentious issues should not be challenged.
    You don't know she says that at all.

    Have you read the transcript of the speech? Or just the edited highlights from a 22 year old BBC reporter who just grabbed the tastiest lines to wrap a story around
    Sounds much more like she is saying that children's views oughtn't to be dismissed and that guess what yes times do change.

    2x nieces at Benenden I can confirm that if typical, they are all very balanced and thoughtful about any particular current affairs debate. Have not engaged them on trans rights, that said, but I would welcome their opinion.
  • Farooq said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Boris Johnson faces a damaging rebellion over his proposed social care reforms after the former justice secretary, Robert Buckland, signalled that he was likely to vote against the plan https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/boris-johnson-faces-tory-dissent-over-social-care-plans-kspxk3dtb?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1637565944

    What's the betting... five, six "rebels"? The Conservative party hasn't show itself lately to have much backbone.This morning's potential rebellion is this afternoon's damp squib.
    It depends how widely it is seen that the government has unfairly, and apparently without consultation, changed the cap to disfavour poorer voters, since MPs last voted on it.
    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/nov/21/tory-mps-warn-boris-johnson-not-to-take-support-for-granted-over-social-care-cap
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 44,632
    Yep. Great header. I'm on Buttigieg at 60/1 for POTUS.

    It will be v clear by 2023/4 that Harris would lose to Trump. Dems have to roll the dice.
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 3,701
    rcs1000 said:

    MrEd said:

    rcs1000 said:

    MrEd said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    That BBC article is amusing. Complains that old people don't want to be told not to say things, and says they shouldn't things. Bloody old people, having different views. Don't they know diversity is unacceptable? Er...

    I'm sure her views will go down particularly well in many Red Wall seats.
    As she's the Head Mistress of Benenden, I'm not sure her views will be much repeated in the pubs and bars of Hartlepool.
    I was thinking more Wigan myself.

    More seriously, having the head of a Private Girls' school come out and say this (and be publicised) will probably have the opposite effect to what she intended.
    Firstly, you don't know what she said. I suspect that if you had the full transcript, you might well find it rather a lot more nuanced than the BBC quotes suggest.

    Secondly, even if it was the most rabidly transrights speech in existence (and I suspect it wasn't, because said Head Mistress knows she needs to sell hundreds of 60k/year places a year), it probably still wouldn't resonate in the Red Wall. Because this isn't a politician. It's the head mistress of a school which Red Wall voters have never heard of.
    What she said in her full transcript doesn't matter, it is what is reported that will count and, given it is #3 at the moment on Most Read on the BBC website, I suspect it will get a bit more traction than you think.

    In any event, given her comments, I doubt it will be much different in tone. It would be interesting to hear whether she thinks the opposite side of the coin applies and maybe suggest to the privileged young girls that form her base that maybe they ought to be not self-righteous and condemning of views that do not match their own. Or is that another privilege of being rich these days?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 32,017
    edited November 22

    Charles said:

    Completely O/T

    Interesting to see Amol Rajan described as “ambitious” in the Mail’s article about the Palace documentary.

    Someone doesn’t want him to get Laura K’s gig

    Is "ambitious" an insult now? Is it one of those words that upper middle class white people use to describe non upper middle class white people who don't know their place?
    Blimey race gets everywhere. Perhaps it should, I don't know.

    The only discussions I can remember here about Rajan have been how one might say that his is more a Radio 5 Live voice than a R4 voice and then also, having listened to him on the Today Prog, how he is excellent in that role.

    Edit: although that last could just be me.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 34,080
    rcs1000 said:

    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    Charles said:

    darkage said:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-59347577

    "Ms Price, headmistress of the prestigious, independent Benenden School in Kent, will tell her organisation's annual conference: "Adults comment that they feel today's teenagers are speaking a different language; that they can't say anything without being corrected or 'called out' by these PC children."

    She says she is "weary of hearing the older generation say, 'you can't say anything any more'."

    And she adds: "The fact is that times have changed, and we simply need to keep up with them."


    So - the head of the head teachers association apparently no longer actually believes in free speech or indeed free enquiry any more, or indeed that childrens views should not actually even be challenged, according to this article by the BBC, which, appropriately enough, merely reports her views and does not even interrogate them.


    It sounds more like the adults don’t like to be challenged
    Isn’t the point of education to teach you how to think, rather than what to think?
    There is an important difference between what you think and using casual racism and bigotry to express it, all too often because people use words and phrases that were once commonplace without thought even although they are offensive to others. I will confess that I find some modern parlance, especially the pronouns, quite difficult but I have no desire to cause unnecessary offence and do my best. Its really a question of manners.
    I find the idea of sexualised pronouns for people in the 12 to 22 age group unnecessary. Wouldn't it be better to have a single, non-gender bound word that we can use for anyone in that group?

    I'd like to nominate 'it'.
    Do you some issues with your children ? 😊
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 3,701

    MrEd said:

    1. If he ran against Harris, he'd be crucified by the progressive wing. Yes, he is gay but, given he is a white male, running against a black woman can only go one way in today's Democrat party, especially as Harris is the sitting VP and shows no signs of stepping down (nor does her career suggest she would anyway, especially when she is so close to the Presidency);

    People say this sort of thing a lot, and yet we have the recent example of the nomination race in 2020, and several white males lasted longer in that nomination contest than Harris, the black woman. It just isn't true.

    Now it might be different when she's the VP running for nomination, but that would be because she's the VP, not because she's a black woman.
    I think the VP part and the black woman part go together; It'll be much harder for a white man to dislodge a black woman who looks like the next in line.

    This is why I think if Biden stands down in good time, keep an eye out for another black woman who could take on Kamala - particularly Stacey Abrams who could easily be the only Dem success story in 2022 if the Georgia Trumpists decide to punish their GOP incumbent for being insufficiently helpful with the attempted coup.
    That would be Stacey Abrams who still doesn't believe she lost the Georgia Governor's race in 2018?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 44,632

    MrEd said:

    1. If he ran against Harris, he'd be crucified by the progressive wing. Yes, he is gay but, given he is a white male, running against a black woman can only go one way in today's Democrat party, especially as Harris is the sitting VP and shows no signs of stepping down (nor does her career suggest she would anyway, especially when she is so close to the Presidency);

    People say this sort of thing a lot, and yet we have the recent example of the nomination race in 2020, and several white males lasted longer in that nomination contest than Harris, the black woman. It just isn't true.

    Now it might be different when she's the VP running for nomination, but that would be because she's the VP, not because she's a black woman.
    I think the VP part and the black woman part go together; It'll be much harder for a white man to dislodge a black woman who looks like the next in line.

    This is why I think if Biden stands down in good time, keep an eye out for another black woman who could take on Kamala - particularly Stacey Abrams who could easily be the only Dem success story in 2022 if the Georgia Trumpists decide to punish their GOP incumbent for being insufficiently helpful with the attempted coup.
    I think she will be harder to dislodge - but not impossible.

    Harris has a lack of support from the progressive wing of the Democrats - based on her time as a prosecutor. A number of African Americans are not fans either.
    Who will Biden recommend? Or will he stay above the fray?
  • kjhkjh Posts: 4,452
    TOPPING said:

    Charles said:

    Completely O/T

    Interesting to see Amol Rajan described as “ambitious” in the Mail’s article about the Palace documentary.

    Someone doesn’t want him to get Laura K’s gig

    Is "ambitious" an insult now? Is it one of those words that upper middle class white people use to describe non upper middle class white people who don't know their place?
    Blimey race gets everywhere. Perhaps it should, I don't know.

    The only discussions I can remember here about Rajan have been how one might say that his is more a Radio 5 Live voice than a R4 voice and then also, having listened to him on the Today Prog, how he is excellent in that role.

    Edit: although that last could just be me.
    I have always been impressed by him.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 32,017
    Farooq said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Boris Johnson faces a damaging rebellion over his proposed social care reforms after the former justice secretary, Robert Buckland, signalled that he was likely to vote against the plan https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/boris-johnson-faces-tory-dissent-over-social-care-plans-kspxk3dtb?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1637565944

    What's the betting... five, six "rebels"? The Conservative party hasn't show itself lately to have much backbone.This morning's potential rebellion is this afternoon's damp squib.
    Well, and this is one reason why I think Laura K would be wrong for Today as her forte is analysis and back channel knowledge, she said that there were not enough rebels for the bill not to pass but that there was a hope that it would receive a bumpier ride in the Lords.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 57,370
    Good morning, everyone.

    Mr. Boy, I'm not a baby boomer, but I certainly don't subscribe to the nonsense of woke and 'critical thinking', or the race-baiting Marxism of BLM.
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 2,307
    TOPPING said:

    rcs1000 said:

    darkage said:

    rcs1000 said:

    darkage said:

    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    Charles said:

    darkage said:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-59347577

    "Ms Price, headmistress of the prestigious, independent Benenden School in Kent, will tell her organisation's annual conference: "Adults comment that they feel today's teenagers are speaking a different language; that they can't say anything without being corrected or 'called out' by these PC children."

    She says she is "weary of hearing the older generation say, 'you can't say anything any more'."

    And she adds: "The fact is that times have changed, and we simply need to keep up with them."


    So - the head of the head teachers association apparently no longer actually believes in free speech or indeed free enquiry any more, or indeed that childrens views should not actually even be challenged, according to this article by the BBC, which, appropriately enough, merely reports her views and does not even interrogate them.


    It sounds more like the adults don’t like to be challenged
    Isn’t the point of education to teach you how to think, rather than what to think?
    There is an important difference between what you think and using casual racism and bigotry to express it, all too often because people use words and phrases that were once commonplace without thought even although they are offensive to others. I will confess that I find some modern parlance, especially the pronouns, quite difficult but I have no desire to cause unnecessary offence and do my best. Its really a question of manners.
    But this is not about using the right pronouns. It is convenient to think of it that way, but there is abundant evidence that it goes much further than that. Things like transgender rights and critical race theory need to be challenged, not just accepted uncritically as correct, as suggested by this headteacher. This is an attack on the whole idea of free enquiry. The alarming thing is that people in positions of power and authority go along with it. If you place any value on freedom of thought, these ideas must be fought and stopped, not pandered to or even humoured.
    "If you place any value on freedom of thought, these ideas must be fought and stopped"

    You, ummm, don't seem to be following your own advice.

    Surely they should be challenged and tested.

    While I have been extremely critical of CRT on this board, I suspect there may well be elements of it that are not without merit.

    When you come out and throw the whole of trangender and CRT in a single bucket, and say it must be 'fought and stopped' then aren't you behaving just as rashly?
    I haven't ever come out 'against' transgender rights or CRT. These are things that need to be discussed and it is only possible to do this where there is an atmosphere of free enquiry, which this type of statement works directly against; because the headteacher is effectively saying that teenagers views on these contentious issues should not be challenged.
    You don't know she says that at all.

    Have you read the transcript of the speech? Or just the edited highlights from a 22 year old BBC reporter who just grabbed the tastiest lines to wrap a story around
    Sounds much more like she is saying that children's views oughtn't to be dismissed and that guess what yes times do change.

    2x nieces at Benenden I can confirm that if typical, they are all very balanced and thoughtful about any particular current affairs debate. Have not engaged them on trans rights, that said, but I would welcome their opinion.
    Indeed, one of the the most harmful impediments to free thought is people having their views dismissed because they are too young. People often don't get heard until they say what people to hear, and that's a lesson many children absorb very readily.
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 2,307

    Good morning, everyone.

    Mr. Boy, I'm not a baby boomer, but I certainly don't subscribe to the nonsense of woke and 'critical thinking', or the race-baiting Marxism of BLM.

    You're against critical thinking?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 34,080
    TOPPING said:

    Charles said:

    Completely O/T

    Interesting to see Amol Rajan described as “ambitious” in the Mail’s article about the Palace documentary.

    Someone doesn’t want him to get Laura K’s gig

    Is "ambitious" an insult now? Is it one of those words that upper middle class white people use to describe non upper middle class white people who don't know their place?
    Blimey race gets everywhere. Perhaps it should, I don't know.

    The only discussions I can remember here about Rajan have been how one might say that his is more a Radio 5 Live voice than a R4 voice and then also, having listened to him on the Today Prog, how he is excellent in that role.

    Edit: although that last could just be me.
    Well I agree, so it's not.
    Having listened to him on the media show, I thought he might not transfer well to politics, but I was wrong. And he's a great deal smarter than (say) Justin Webb.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 12,743
    darkage said:

    It is as Noam Chomsky said: when you are in a fight and your life is at risk, you need to follow the toughest, most brutal fighter; and that is how it is with freedom of thought and speech. As this realisation dawns on people over the next few years, many will end up voting Conservative for the first time. At least in the UK we have a reasonable alternative and don't have to vote for Trump.

    Calm down dear!
  • eekeek Posts: 15,853
    TOPPING said:

    Farooq said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Boris Johnson faces a damaging rebellion over his proposed social care reforms after the former justice secretary, Robert Buckland, signalled that he was likely to vote against the plan https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/boris-johnson-faces-tory-dissent-over-social-care-plans-kspxk3dtb?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1637565944

    What's the betting... five, six "rebels"? The Conservative party hasn't show itself lately to have much backbone.This morning's potential rebellion is this afternoon's damp squib.
    Well, and this is one reason why I think Laura K would be wrong for Today as her forte is analysis and back channel knowledge, she said that there were not enough rebels for the bill not to pass but that there was a hope that it would receive a bumpier ride in the Lords.
    By pushing it through today there isn't enough time for MPs to see the issue it will cause up North - because it basically says - we will protect children down South who will inherit 70-90% of their parents assets, up North you may get 50% if you are lucky.

  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 41,589
    MrEd said:

    rcs1000 said:

    MrEd said:

    rcs1000 said:

    MrEd said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    That BBC article is amusing. Complains that old people don't want to be told not to say things, and says they shouldn't things. Bloody old people, having different views. Don't they know diversity is unacceptable? Er...

    I'm sure her views will go down particularly well in many Red Wall seats.
    As she's the Head Mistress of Benenden, I'm not sure her views will be much repeated in the pubs and bars of Hartlepool.
    I was thinking more Wigan myself.

    More seriously, having the head of a Private Girls' school come out and say this (and be publicised) will probably have the opposite effect to what she intended.
    Firstly, you don't know what she said. I suspect that if you had the full transcript, you might well find it rather a lot more nuanced than the BBC quotes suggest.

    Secondly, even if it was the most rabidly transrights speech in existence (and I suspect it wasn't, because said Head Mistress knows she needs to sell hundreds of 60k/year places a year), it probably still wouldn't resonate in the Red Wall. Because this isn't a politician. It's the head mistress of a school which Red Wall voters have never heard of.
    What she said in her full transcript doesn't matter, it is what is reported that will count and, given it is #3 at the moment on Most Read on the BBC website, I suspect it will get a bit more traction than you think.

    In any event, given her comments, I doubt it will be much different in tone. It would be interesting to hear whether she thinks the opposite side of the coin applies and maybe suggest to the privileged young girls that form her base that maybe they ought to be not self-righteous and condemning of views that do not match their own. Or is that another privilege of being rich these days?
    "What she said doesn't matter"

    I think truth does matter.

    But look, if you want we can have a small wager and we can get YouGov to sample 1,000 representative voters in Red Wall constituencies. Loser pays for the poll.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 36,564
    England’s flagship test-and-trace service is still spending more than £1m a day on private consultants, official figures reveal weeks after MPs lambasted it as an “eye-watering” waste of taxpayers’ money that is failing to cut Covid infection levels.
Sign In or Register to comment.