Wondering about the definition of the RedWall. Perhaps a useful way of looking at is politically is a series of constituencies where there used to be a disconnect between the underlying demographics and the voting record, due to historical loyalties and traditions. But which now votes much more in line with similar areas in the rest of the country.
In some senses but not others. There’s little in common between Surrey commuter villages and the vast swathes of Cramlington or Blyth Persimmon housing estates.
I could be proven wrong, but I think that by the time the next election comes the so-called Red Wall seats will revert to type. Why were they previously Labour? Because their demographic meant that the average voter more identified with voting Labour. Did many actually swap from Labour to Tory, and if they did do they now identify as "Tories", the latter which I find very hard to believe? I imagine that in a lot of these seats it was because trad Labour types just didn't vote. A few switched to Tory and a few to other parties. Mike's data seemed to infer what I have always believed, which is that many of these traditionalists were put off by Corbyn, rather than (as many Tories want to believe) voting to "Get Brexit Done". Either way, both these issues will no longer be there at the next election. It will be interesting to see what happens. Tories who rely on their own wishful group think might get a shock.
Not sure. Is it not the case that many have moved to the right because of gradual demographic changes - a process begun long before Johnson or May entered the fray?. In the NE certainly many of the seats have simply steadily become more m/c or l/m/c. In the area of Kent I used to work in Dartford and the Medway towns - these have been solidly Tory for some time, possibly for similar reasons. It could simply be that parts of the north are simply catching up. Also it will be really difficult to anlayse if at the next GE there is a national move to Labour which could mask a long-term trend bedding in. I suspect analysis of what did and will happen is a very difficult task unless approached dispassionately - not sure we get much of this on here as most of us have strongish views, including OGH!
Wondering about the definition of the RedWall. Perhaps a useful way of looking at is politically is a series of constituencies where there used to be a disconnect between the underlying demographics and the voting record, due to historical loyalties and traditions. But which now votes much more in line with similar areas in the rest of the country.
I agree. The most important thing about the red wall is that they were constituencies that Labour could and did take for granted for a long time. Now they can't. The result is that what they actually want is now a relevant question. Which is a good thing.
It is a good thing, and perhaps people who were traditionally Tory in Tory safe seats like myself might want to ponder on the new reality that is that if a government thinks it can't rely on an area, it might well invest that much more in that area
Absolutely. Works both ways. Running a country solely in the interests of the Home Counties or North London were never great alternatives. If Labour had more to gain or lose in the south outside London they might be a bit more interested in their economy and force the Tories to be likewise.
Where Davey has a point is that the counterpoint to the Tory gains in the ‘red wall’ isn’t any collection of seats that Labour might win in return - educated urban/university seats moved away from the Tories long ago - but there is a batch of middle class remain-leaning Home Counties seats where the LibDems could pull off surprises. Ed’s stunt with the hammer and wall of blue bricks might yet prove to be prophetic.
Wondering about the definition of the RedWall. Perhaps a useful way of looking at is politically is a series of constituencies where there used to be a disconnect between the underlying demographics and the voting record, due to historical loyalties and traditions. But which now votes much more in line with similar areas in the rest of the country.
In some senses but not others. There’s little in common between Surrey commuter villages and the vast swathes of Cramlington or Blyth Persimmon housing estates.
I could be proven wrong, but I think that by the time the next election comes the so-called Red Wall seats will revert to type. Why were they previously Labour? Because their demographic meant that the average voter more identified with voting Labour. Did many actually swap from Labour to Tory, and if they did do they now identify as "Tories", the latter which I find very hard to believe? I imagine that in a lot of these seats it was because trad Labour types just didn't vote. A few switched to Tory and a few to other parties. Mike's data seemed to infer what I have always believed, which is that many of these traditionalists were put off by Corbyn, rather than (as many Tories want to believe) voting to "Get Brexit Done". Either way, both these issues will no longer be there at the next election. It will be interesting to see what happens. Tories who rely on their own wishful group think might get a shock.
Again. It varies. The evidence from Council and other elections in the North and West Midlands S Yorkshire and Teesside is that there has been a decisive shift away from Labour. In the NW, Tyneside and W Yorkshire not much more than you might expect from a riding high Tory Party and becalmed Labour. But again, this is a gross generalisation and over-simplification.
In Teesside I don't think it's a move towards the Tories, more a move away from Labour after a decade of failing to deliver (albeit because of cuts enforced by Tory policies). Currently the Tories are delivering so I wouldn't expect things to change much in 2023/4 (except Redcar which once again isn't seeing the improvements) but it's not for certain.
Wondering about the definition of the RedWall. Perhaps a useful way of looking at is politically is a series of constituencies where there used to be a disconnect between the underlying demographics and the voting record, due to historical loyalties and traditions. But which now votes much more in line with similar areas in the rest of the country.
I agree. The most important thing about the red wall is that they were constituencies that Labour could and did take for granted for a long time. Now they can't. The result is that what they actually want is now a relevant question. Which is a good thing.
It is a good thing, and perhaps people who were traditionally Tory in Tory safe seats like myself might want to ponder on the new reality that is that if a government thinks it can't rely on an area, it might well invest that much more in that area
Absolutely. Works both ways. Running a country solely in the interests of the Home Counties or North London were never great alternatives. If Labour had more to gain or lose in the south outside London they might be a bit more interested in their economy and force the Tories to be likewise.
Where Davey has a point is that the counterpoint to the Tory gains in the ‘red wall’ isn’t any collection of seats that Labour might win in return - educated urban/university seats moved away from the Tories long ago - but there is a batch of middle class remain-leaning Home Counties seats where the LibDems could pull off surprises. Ed’s stunt with the hammer and wall of blue bricks might yet prove to be prophetic.
The Libs simply need to become the party of the NIMBY. Considering this country is full of NIMBYs they’ll do alright.
That isn’t liberal of course but neither are the Conservatives conservative.
Someone just sent me an email saying he wanted to "reach out" to me. I responded saying that I was not a member of the Four Tops https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EaflX0MWRo
Wondering about the definition of the RedWall. Perhaps a useful way of looking at is politically is a series of constituencies where there used to be a disconnect between the underlying demographics and the voting record, due to historical loyalties and traditions. But which now votes much more in line with similar areas in the rest of the country.
That would be.
However, that is far from how it is used. It is, in common parlance, anywhere north of Birmingham the Tories gained in 2019. Saw a BBC report on Rishi in Bury describing it as "classic Red Wall territory." Both Bury seats have been bellwether marginals for as long as I can remember.
Bury North was Tory 2010-17 and had a miniscule swing in 2019 to be regained with a tiny majority. Its not remotely 'Red Wall'.
Bury South fits the description a bit better, it had been Labour since 1997 and had a reasonable swing in 2019.
Wondering about the definition of the RedWall. Perhaps a useful way of looking at is politically is a series of constituencies where there used to be a disconnect between the underlying demographics and the voting record, due to historical loyalties and traditions. But which now votes much more in line with similar areas in the rest of the country.
I agree. The most important thing about the red wall is that they were constituencies that Labour could and did take for granted for a long time. Now they can't. The result is that what they actually want is now a relevant question. Which is a good thing.
It is a good thing, and perhaps people who were traditionally Tory in Tory safe seats like myself might want to ponder on the new reality that is that if a government thinks it can't rely on an area, it might well invest that much more in that area
Absolutely. Works both ways. Running a country solely in the interests of the Home Counties or North London were never great alternatives. If Labour had more to gain or lose in the south outside London they might be a bit more interested in their economy and force the Tories to be likewise.
Where Davey has a point is that the counterpoint to the Tory gains in the ‘red wall’ isn’t any collection of seats that Labour might win in return - educated urban/university seats moved away from the Tories long ago - but there is a batch of middle class remain-leaning Home Counties seats where the LibDems could pull off surprises. Ed’s stunt with the hammer and wall of blue bricks might yet prove to be prophetic.
The Libs simply need to become the party of the NIMBY. Considering this country is full of NIMBYs they’ll do alright.
That isn’t liberal of course but neither are the Conservatives conservative.
It’s surely very liberal to assert that everyone has the right to redirect developments toward someone else’s back yard?
Queuing was a thing to show how hot the restaurant was. Or was supposed to be. Ask Giles Coren. No idea now after Covid.
Queuing for a restaurant would be my idea of hell but I am 100% not the demographic a new, a la mode restaurant is targeting.
I always book ahead.
For these places queuing is a feature not a bug and hence they don't take bookings.
There are two places that seem to have persistent queues.
The first, “Dishoom”, is a great concept but you do not need to waste any of your life queuing for it. Anyway, you can get in off-peak, or even Deliveroo it.
The second, “Breakfast Club”, is a really shit concept (all day breakfasts) and I’ve never understood it’s attraction to the sort of people who queue (out of towners and giggly students).
"Yvette Cooper, the shadow home secretary, said: “Too often the government makes grand promises, but then fails to deliver or does the opposite. Drug use is up, serious violence is up, antisocial behaviour is up. More and more offenders are getting away with their crimes as overall prosecutions have plummeted. Any action from the government must be substantial enough to undo the damage they have caused.”
This is another reason why Cooper and some other members of the Blair tribute band worry me. Not a peep on liberties issues ; no, it's only wrong because it's not "tough" enough.
This is a very important part of the background as to why more liberal-minded voters backed the Lib Dems, and even the Tories, in 2010, in the first place. A slightly forgotten but important piece of history about the end of the last Labour government.
People who live in communities blighted by crime and criminals want a tough response. If that doesn't sit well with some of the dinner party set, then so be it.
This is rhetorical nonsense. The current policies are failing people on estates much more than they're failing the dinner party set, and some of the measures announced today will fail them even more.
I wonder whether Sandy and his fellow travellers favour sending heavies to the Andes to duff up hikers who are chewing coca leaves? He seems to consider the taking of 'drugs' sinful and worthy of punishment in and of itself. Presumably he also favours self-flagellation for his daily coffee and pint of ale?
Wondering about the definition of the RedWall. Perhaps a useful way of looking at is politically is a series of constituencies where there used to be a disconnect between the underlying demographics and the voting record, due to historical loyalties and traditions. But which now votes much more in line with similar areas in the rest of the country.
I agree. The most important thing about the red wall is that they were constituencies that Labour could and did take for granted for a long time. Now they can't. The result is that what they actually want is now a relevant question. Which is a good thing.
It is a good thing, and perhaps people who were traditionally Tory in Tory safe seats like myself might want to ponder on the new reality that is that if a government thinks it can't rely on an area, it might well invest that much more in that area
Absolutely. Works both ways. Running a country solely in the interests of the Home Counties or North London were never great alternatives. If Labour had more to gain or lose in the south outside London they might be a bit more interested in their economy and force the Tories to be likewise.
Where Davey has a point is that the counterpoint to the Tory gains in the ‘red wall’ isn’t any collection of seats that Labour might win in return - educated urban/university seats moved away from the Tories long ago - but there is a batch of middle class remain-leaning Home Counties seats where the LibDems could pull off surprises. Ed’s stunt with the hammer and wall of blue bricks might yet prove to be prophetic.
Basically Labour's problem is that while many RedWall white working class Leavers who used to be their core vote have gone Tory post Brexit, posh wealthy Remainers in the South might consider voting LD as they did in Chesham and Amersham but would not be seen dead voting Labour
I did not have a chance to respond to the last thread or the blundering confusion that is Dominic Raab. From what I understand several parties, BBQs, mini raves etc were broken up by the police during lockdown. Fixed penalties were issued (goodness knows if anyone paid them) and there were some prosecutions. But I have not come across any case where the police have thought it necessary to investigate whether any such event took place after the event. We saw a similar approach by the police in respect of Dominic Cummings' bizarre eye test. Had he been stopped during it he may well have been charged. As he wasn't the police were just not interested.
I think that this is what Raab meant although his incoherence and ineptitude means getting meaning from what he said is not easy. The party at Number 10 having happened and been concluded the police are not interested.
Of course, there are good points to be made about the arrogance that such a party demonstrates and the supposed importance of good examples (is there really anyone on the planet that still thinks a politician is a useful role model?). In this particular case, however, they really do seem to have been treated exactly like the rest of us.
Isn't plod normally stood outside the front door of number ten?
Would they not have been able to break up the party at the time?
Someone just sent me an email saying he wanted to "reach out" to me. I responded saying that I was not a member of the Four Tops https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EaflX0MWRo
If you were a member of the Four Tops, I’d have much respect for you.
It is unusual for soul legends to take an interest in U.K. politics, although not unknown for them to play active roles in the domestic scene.
"Yvette Cooper, the shadow home secretary, said: “Too often the government makes grand promises, but then fails to deliver or does the opposite. Drug use is up, serious violence is up, antisocial behaviour is up. More and more offenders are getting away with their crimes as overall prosecutions have plummeted. Any action from the government must be substantial enough to undo the damage they have caused.”
This is another reason why Cooper and some other members of the Blair tribute band worry me. Not a peep on liberties issues ; no, it's only wrong because it's not "tough" enough.
This is a very important part of the background as to why more liberal-minded voters backed the Lib Dems, and even the Tories, in 2010, in the first place. A slightly forgotten but important piece of history about the end of the last Labour government.
People who live in communities blighted by crime and criminals want a tough response. If that doesn't sit well with some of the dinner party set, then so be it.
This is rhetorical nonsense. The current policies are failing people on estates much more than they're failing the dinner party set, and some of the measures announced today will fail them even more.
I wonder whether Sandy and his fellow travellers favour sending heavies to the Andes to duff up hikers who are chewing coca leaves? He seems to consider the taking of 'drugs' sinful and worthy of punishment in and of itself. Presumably he also favours self-flagellation for his daily coffee and pint of ale?
What really bothers me about most, but not all, of the Blair-era approaches to drugs is that's they've been proven to fail, time and time again. Exclusively authoritarian approaches to crime generally only work in very authoritarian cultures, like Singapore or Saudi Arabia. If you mix a broadly liberal society with very authoritarian approaches to crime, you get the U.S, which is the worst crime disaster zone in the western world. It's unfortunately also the model we're copying, and where some of of these more exclusively authoritarian ideas are coming from.
I did not have a chance to respond to the last thread or the blundering confusion that is Dominic Raab. From what I understand several parties, BBQs, mini raves etc were broken up by the police during lockdown. Fixed penalties were issued (goodness knows if anyone paid them) and there were some prosecutions. But I have not come across any case where the police have thought it necessary to investigate whether any such event took place after the event. We saw a similar approach by the police in respect of Dominic Cummings' bizarre eye test. Had he been stopped during it he may well have been charged. As he wasn't the police were just not interested.
I think that this is what Raab meant although his incoherence and ineptitude means getting meaning from what he said is not easy. The party at Number 10 having happened and been concluded the police are not interested.
Of course, there are good points to be made about the arrogance that such a party demonstrates and the supposed importance of good examples (is there really anyone on the planet that still thinks a politician is a useful role model?). In this particular case, however, they really do seem to have been treated exactly like the rest of us.
Isn't plod normally stood outside the front door of number ten?
Would they not have been able to break up the party at the time?
Perhaps they were in the party. Like those cavorting officers you see during Pride Parades.
Wondering about the definition of the RedWall. Perhaps a useful way of looking at is politically is a series of constituencies where there used to be a disconnect between the underlying demographics and the voting record, due to historical loyalties and traditions. But which now votes much more in line with similar areas in the rest of the country.
In some senses but not others. There’s little in common between Surrey commuter villages and the vast swathes of Cramlington or Blyth Persimmon housing estates.
I could be proven wrong, but I think that by the time the next election comes the so-called Red Wall seats will revert to type. Why were they previously Labour? Because their demographic meant that the average voter more identified with voting Labour. Did many actually swap from Labour to Tory, and if they did do they now identify as "Tories", the latter which I find very hard to believe? I imagine that in a lot of these seats it was because trad Labour types just didn't vote. A few switched to Tory and a few to other parties. Mike's data seemed to infer what I have always believed, which is that many of these traditionalists were put off by Corbyn, rather than (as many Tories want to believe) voting to "Get Brexit Done". Either way, both these issues will no longer be there at the next election. It will be interesting to see what happens. Tories who rely on their own wishful group think might get a shock.
Again. It varies. The evidence from Council and other elections in the North and West Midlands S Yorkshire and Teesside is that there has been a decisive shift away from Labour. In the NW, Tyneside and W Yorkshire not much more than you might expect from a riding high Tory Party and becalmed Labour. But again, this is a gross generalisation and over-simplification.
The problem for Labour is that they have moved a very long way from their working class industrial base on matters like immigration, crime, wokeness etc. This difference was glossed over because of tribal, emotional connection to the party (and generational Tory hatred). But Brexit broke the tribal belonging because people felt more emotional over Brexit and the blocking of it than they did over their connection to Labour.
This was worsened by Corbyn portraying visibly that he didn't share their values, due to things like opposing the national anthem and sympathy for militant Muslim groups.
To win these voters back, a simple economic policy offering is not enough. This working class group does not trust politicians and doesn't believe their promises. So they resort to voting based on politicians that seem to share their identity and values. Is this person proud of being British? Do they appreciate where I am from or look down on places like my town? Do they want to maintain the culture I grew up in and value, or do they want to change it to a culture like central London? Do they think our liberal way of life is better than that of traditional Islam, or do they think all cultures are equivalent?
Right now Labour are on the wrong side of these questions and nobody in the party wants to change on them.
Wondering about the definition of the RedWall. Perhaps a useful way of looking at is politically is a series of constituencies where there used to be a disconnect between the underlying demographics and the voting record, due to historical loyalties and traditions. But which now votes much more in line with similar areas in the rest of the country.
That would be.
However, that is far from how it is used. It is, in common parlance, anywhere north of Birmingham the Tories gained in 2019. Saw a BBC report on Rishi in Bury describing it as "classic Red Wall territory." Both Bury seats have been bellwether marginals for as long as I can remember.
Bury North was Tory 2010-17 and had a miniscule swing in 2019 to be regained with a tiny majority. Its not remotely 'Red Wall'.
Bury South fits the description a bit better, it had been Labour since 1997 and had a reasonable swing in 2019.
Bury South is a bit sui generis in this respect. Broadly, it's made up of Prestwich, Whitefield and Radcliffe.
Prestwich is inside the M60, and as urban middle class as North Greater Manchester gets. Almost the antithesis of red wall. It is also, significantly for 2019, very Jewish - that, IMO, was what drove the quite large swing against Labour. Whitefield is suburban, full of three bed semis, and has never been particularly unfavourable territory for the Tories. Only Radcliffe can really be considered Red Wall - historically a small semi-independent working class-ish town surrounded by middle class suburbia. But its transport links to Manchester have always been good, and it's long been a bit of a cheaper option for commuters to Manchester. And it's also not as historically hostile as all that to the Conservatives - it this site's early days ISTR we had a regular poster by the name of Stuart Penketh who was, I think, a Conservative councillor from Radcliffe.
So I wouldn't really describe Bury South as Red Wall either. Heywood and Middleton next door, though - yes.
Wondering about the definition of the RedWall. Perhaps a useful way of looking at is politically is a series of constituencies where there used to be a disconnect between the underlying demographics and the voting record, due to historical loyalties and traditions. But which now votes much more in line with similar areas in the rest of the country.
I agree. The most important thing about the red wall is that they were constituencies that Labour could and did take for granted for a long time. Now they can't. The result is that what they actually want is now a relevant question. Which is a good thing.
It is a good thing, and perhaps people who were traditionally Tory in Tory safe seats like myself might want to ponder on the new reality that is that if a government thinks it can't rely on an area, it might well invest that much more in that area
Absolutely. Works both ways. Running a country solely in the interests of the Home Counties or North London were never great alternatives. If Labour had more to gain or lose in the south outside London they might be a bit more interested in their economy and force the Tories to be likewise.
Where Davey has a point is that the counterpoint to the Tory gains in the ‘red wall’ isn’t any collection of seats that Labour might win in return - educated urban/university seats moved away from the Tories long ago - but there is a batch of middle class remain-leaning Home Counties seats where the LibDems could pull off surprises. Ed’s stunt with the hammer and wall of blue bricks might yet prove to be prophetic.
The Libs simply need to become the party of the NIMBY. Considering this country is full of NIMBYs they’ll do alright.
That isn’t liberal of course but neither are the Conservatives conservative.
Have you found a full lobster for £30 down there yet ?
"Yvette Cooper, the shadow home secretary, said: “Too often the government makes grand promises, but then fails to deliver or does the opposite. Drug use is up, serious violence is up, antisocial behaviour is up. More and more offenders are getting away with their crimes as overall prosecutions have plummeted. Any action from the government must be substantial enough to undo the damage they have caused.”
This is another reason why Cooper and some other members of the Blair tribute band worry me. Not a peep on liberties issues ; no, it's only wrong because it's not "tough" enough.
This is a very important part of the background as to why more liberal-minded voters backed the Lib Dems, and even the Tories, in 2010, in the first place. A slightly forgotten but important piece of history about the end of the last Labour government.
People who live in communities blighted by crime and criminals want a tough response. If that doesn't sit well with some of the dinner party set, then so be it.
This is rhetorical nonsense. The current policies are failing people on estates much more than they're failing the dinner party set, and some of the measures announced today will fail them even more.
I wonder whether Sandy and his fellow travellers favour sending heavies to the Andes to duff up hikers who are chewing coca leaves? He seems to consider the taking of 'drugs' sinful and worthy of punishment in and of itself. Presumably he also favours self-flagellation for his daily coffee and pint of ale?
What really bothers me about most, but not all, of the Blair-era approach to drugs is that's they've been proven to fail, time and time again. Exclusively authoritarian approaches to crime generally only work in very authoritarian cultures, like Singapore or Saudi Arabia. If you mix a broadly liberal society with very authoritarian approaches to crime, you get the U.S, which is the worst crime disaster zone in the western world ; and that's unfortunately where a lot of these more exclusively authoritarian ideas are coming from.
I largely agree with this but I often wonder if it would be possible to take a liberal Portuguese approach to drugs and an authoritarian approach to all other serious crime.
"Yvette Cooper, the shadow home secretary, said: “Too often the government makes grand promises, but then fails to deliver or does the opposite. Drug use is up, serious violence is up, antisocial behaviour is up. More and more offenders are getting away with their crimes as overall prosecutions have plummeted. Any action from the government must be substantial enough to undo the damage they have caused.”
This is another reason why Cooper and some other members of the Blair tribute band worry me. Not a peep on liberties issues ; no, it's only wrong because it's not "tough" enough.
This is a very important part of the background as to why more liberal-minded voters backed the Lib Dems, and even the Tories, in 2010, in the first place. A slightly forgotten but important piece of history about the end of the last Labour government.
People who live in communities blighted by crime and criminals want a tough response. If that doesn't sit well with some of the dinner party set, then so be it.
This is rhetorical nonsense. The current policies are failing people on estates much more than they're failing the dinner party set, and some of the measures announced today will fail them even more.
I wonder whether Sandy and his fellow travellers favour sending heavies to the Andes to duff up hikers who are chewing coca leaves? He seems to consider the taking of 'drugs' sinful and worthy of punishment in and of itself. Presumably he also favours self-flagellation for his daily coffee and pint of ale?
Is the leaf chewing illegal? If so, stick them in the back of the van.
I have just stocked up on Bird & Wild Fairtrade Organic certified Bird Friendly and Shade-Grown coffee from the RSPB. So I'll pass on the self-flagellation.
Wondering about the definition of the RedWall. Perhaps a useful way of looking at is politically is a series of constituencies where there used to be a disconnect between the underlying demographics and the voting record, due to historical loyalties and traditions. But which now votes much more in line with similar areas in the rest of the country.
I agree. The most important thing about the red wall is that they were constituencies that Labour could and did take for granted for a long time. Now they can't. The result is that what they actually want is now a relevant question. Which is a good thing.
It is a good thing, and perhaps people who were traditionally Tory in Tory safe seats like myself might want to ponder on the new reality that is that if a government thinks it can't rely on an area, it might well invest that much more in that area
Absolutely. Works both ways. Running a country solely in the interests of the Home Counties or North London were never great alternatives. If Labour had more to gain or lose in the south outside London they might be a bit more interested in their economy and force the Tories to be likewise.
Where Davey has a point is that the counterpoint to the Tory gains in the ‘red wall’ isn’t any collection of seats that Labour might win in return - educated urban/university seats moved away from the Tories long ago - but there is a batch of middle class remain-leaning Home Counties seats where the LibDems could pull off surprises. Ed’s stunt with the hammer and wall of blue bricks might yet prove to be prophetic.
Basically Labour's problem is that while many RedWall white working class Leavers who used to be their core vote have gone Tory post Brexit, posh wealthy Remainers in the South might consider voting LD as they did in Chesham and Amersham but would not be seen dead voting Labour
Which is why the LDs are challengers in the unlikely seat of NS.
When the LD vote collapsed, it paid no regard to the pseudo-theory of UNS (which has no observable proof in real results). So there’s no reason why, if the LDs ever get a significant upswing, it should pay any regard to UNS, however many hours PB’ers waste entering figures into Electoral Calculus and the like.
Queuing was a thing to show how hot the restaurant was. Or was supposed to be. Ask Giles Coren. No idea now after Covid.
Queuing for a restaurant would be my idea of hell but I am 100% not the demographic a new, a la mode restaurant is targeting.
I always book ahead.
For these places queuing is a feature not a bug and hence they don't take bookings.
There are two places that seem to have persistent queues.
The first, “Dishoom”, is a great concept but you do not need to waste any of your life queuing for it. Anyway, you can get in off-peak, or even Deliveroo it.
The second, “Breakfast Club”, is a really shit concept (all day breakfasts) and I’ve never understood it’s attraction to the sort of people who queue (out of towners and giggly students).
I really like Dishoom and haven't been there when I've had to queue.
Three other central London places I like where you can't book -
Le Relais De Venise L'Entrecôte in Marylebone. Shortest menu in the world - Steak and chips. Or chips for vegetarians. Burger And Lobster in Mayfair (I think there are a load of them now). Slightly longer menu - Burger, Lobster or Lobster Burger Masala Zone in Covent Garden (again I think there are loads of them now). Much longer menu of proper fresh Indian food.
Someone just sent me an email saying he wanted to "reach out" to me. I responded saying that I was not a member of the Four Tops https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EaflX0MWRo
If you were a member of the Four Tops, I’d have much respect for you.
It is unusual for soul legends to take an interest in U.K. politics, although not unknown for them to play active roles in the domestic scene.
Then there's Edwin Starr - I don't know of the interest he took in UK politics, but he was a big fan of the UK - to the extent that he ended up living (and dying) in the perfectly-adequate-but-not-wildly-exciting Nottingham suburb of Chilwell.
Wondering about the definition of the RedWall. Perhaps a useful way of looking at is politically is a series of constituencies where there used to be a disconnect between the underlying demographics and the voting record, due to historical loyalties and traditions. But which now votes much more in line with similar areas in the rest of the country.
I agree. The most important thing about the red wall is that they were constituencies that Labour could and did take for granted for a long time. Now they can't. The result is that what they actually want is now a relevant question. Which is a good thing.
It is a good thing, and perhaps people who were traditionally Tory in Tory safe seats like myself might want to ponder on the new reality that is that if a government thinks it can't rely on an area, it might well invest that much more in that area
Absolutely. Works both ways. Running a country solely in the interests of the Home Counties or North London were never great alternatives. If Labour had more to gain or lose in the south outside London they might be a bit more interested in their economy and force the Tories to be likewise.
Where Davey has a point is that the counterpoint to the Tory gains in the ‘red wall’ isn’t any collection of seats that Labour might win in return - educated urban/university seats moved away from the Tories long ago - but there is a batch of middle class remain-leaning Home Counties seats where the LibDems could pull off surprises. Ed’s stunt with the hammer and wall of blue bricks might yet prove to be prophetic.
Basically Labour's problem is that while many RedWall white working class Leavers who used to be their core vote have gone Tory post Brexit, posh wealthy Remainers in the South might consider voting LD as they did in Chesham and Amersham but would not be seen dead voting Labour
"Yvette Cooper, the shadow home secretary, said: “Too often the government makes grand promises, but then fails to deliver or does the opposite. Drug use is up, serious violence is up, antisocial behaviour is up. More and more offenders are getting away with their crimes as overall prosecutions have plummeted. Any action from the government must be substantial enough to undo the damage they have caused.”
This is another reason why Cooper and some other members of the Blair tribute band worry me. Not a peep on liberties issues ; no, it's only wrong because it's not "tough" enough.
This is a very important part of the background as to why more liberal-minded voters backed the Lib Dems, and even the Tories, in 2010, in the first place. A slightly forgotten but important piece of history about the end of the last Labour government.
People who live in communities blighted by crime and criminals want a tough response. If that doesn't sit well with some of the dinner party set, then so be it.
This is rhetorical nonsense. The current policies are failing people on estates much more than they're failing the dinner party set, and some of the measures announced today will fail them even more.
I wonder whether Sandy and his fellow travellers favour sending heavies to the Andes to duff up hikers who are chewing coca leaves? He seems to consider the taking of 'drugs' sinful and worthy of punishment in and of itself. Presumably he also favours self-flagellation for his daily coffee and pint of ale?
What really bothers me about most, but not all, of the Blair-era approach to drugs is that's they've been proven to fail, time and time again. Exclusively authoritarian approaches to crime generally only work in very authoritarian cultures, like Singapore or Saudi Arabia. If you mix a broadly liberal society with very authoritarian approaches to crime, you get the U.S, which is the worst crime disaster zone in the western world ; and that's unfortunately where a lot of these more exclusively authoritarian ideas are coming from.
I largely agree with this but I often wonder if it would be possible to take a liberal Portuguese approach to drugs and an authoritarian approach to all other serious crime.
The evidence from the US so far isn't good, because that's already what's beginning to emerge in some states, and all sorts of other measures of crime are still far worse than Western Europe's.
You need to have a genuinely integrated approach, because that's the only way you'll ever genuinely be "tough" on crime, not tabloid drivel.
Someone just sent me an email saying he wanted to "reach out" to me. I responded saying that I was not a member of the Four Tops https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EaflX0MWRo
If you were a member of the Four Tops, I’d have much respect for you.
It is unusual for soul legends to take an interest in U.K. politics, although not unknown for them to play active roles in the domestic scene.
Then there's Edwin Starr - I don't know of the interest he took in UK politics, but he was a big fan of the UK - to the extent that he ended up living (and dying) in the perfectly-adequate-but-not-wildly-exciting Nottingham suburb of Chilwell.
Wondering about the definition of the RedWall. Perhaps a useful way of looking at is politically is a series of constituencies where there used to be a disconnect between the underlying demographics and the voting record, due to historical loyalties and traditions. But which now votes much more in line with similar areas in the rest of the country.
I agree. The most important thing about the red wall is that they were constituencies that Labour could and did take for granted for a long time. Now they can't. The result is that what they actually want is now a relevant question. Which is a good thing.
It is a good thing, and perhaps people who were traditionally Tory in Tory safe seats like myself might want to ponder on the new reality that is that if a government thinks it can't rely on an area, it might well invest that much more in that area
Absolutely. Works both ways. Running a country solely in the interests of the Home Counties or North London were never great alternatives. If Labour had more to gain or lose in the south outside London they might be a bit more interested in their economy and force the Tories to be likewise.
Where Davey has a point is that the counterpoint to the Tory gains in the ‘red wall’ isn’t any collection of seats that Labour might win in return - educated urban/university seats moved away from the Tories long ago - but there is a batch of middle class remain-leaning Home Counties seats where the LibDems could pull off surprises. Ed’s stunt with the hammer and wall of blue bricks might yet prove to be prophetic.
Basically Labour's problem is that while many RedWall white working class Leavers who used to be their core vote have gone Tory post Brexit, posh wealthy Remainers in the South might consider voting LD as they did in Chesham and Amersham but would not be seen dead voting Labour
"posh wealthy Remainers"
That's the party leadership, isn't it?
Many of the Labour membership and MPs however are still Corbynites.
The LDs however are more fiscally conservative than Labour if still socially liberal and anti hard Brexit and the LD leader Ed Davey was even a Minister in Cameron's coalition government. For a high earning home owning Home Counties Remainer the LDs are the safe non Tory choice, not Labour
"Yvette Cooper, the shadow home secretary, said: “Too often the government makes grand promises, but then fails to deliver or does the opposite. Drug use is up, serious violence is up, antisocial behaviour is up. More and more offenders are getting away with their crimes as overall prosecutions have plummeted. Any action from the government must be substantial enough to undo the damage they have caused.”
This is another reason why Cooper and some other members of the Blair tribute band worry me. Not a peep on liberties issues ; no, it's only wrong because it's not "tough" enough.
This is a very important part of the background as to why more liberal-minded voters backed the Lib Dems, and even the Tories, in 2010, in the first place. A slightly forgotten but important piece of history about the end of the last Labour government.
People who live in communities blighted by crime and criminals want a tough response. If that doesn't sit well with some of the dinner party set, then so be it.
This is rhetorical nonsense. The current policies are failing people on estates much more than they're failing the dinner party set, and some of the measures announced today will fail them even more.
I wonder whether Sandy and his fellow travellers favour sending heavies to the Andes to duff up hikers who are chewing coca leaves? He seems to consider the taking of 'drugs' sinful and worthy of punishment in and of itself. Presumably he also favours self-flagellation for his daily coffee and pint of ale?
What really bothers me about most, but not all, of the Blair-era approach to drugs is that's they've been proven to fail, time and time again. Exclusively authoritarian approaches to crime generally only work in very authoritarian cultures, like Singapore or Saudi Arabia. If you mix a broadly liberal society with very authoritarian approaches to crime, you get the U.S, which is the worst crime disaster zone in the western world ; and that's unfortunately where a lot of these more exclusively authoritarian ideas are coming from.
I largely agree with this but I often wonder if it would be possible to take a liberal Portuguese approach to drugs and an authoritarian approach to all other serious crime.
The evidence from the US so far isn't good, because that's already what's beginning to emerge in some states, and all sorts of other measures of crime are still far worse than Western Europe's.
You need to have a genuinely integrated approach, because that's the only way you'll genuinely be "tough" on crime, not tabloid drivel.
The counties with a Portuguese approach to drugs seem to have very rich exceedingly well resourced police departments.
Someone just sent me an email saying he wanted to "reach out" to me. I responded saying that I was not a member of the Four Tops https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EaflX0MWRo
If you were a member of the Four Tops, I’d have much respect for you.
It is unusual for soul legends to take an interest in U.K. politics, although not unknown for them to play active roles in the domestic scene.
Then there's Edwin Starr - I don't know of the interest he took in UK politics, but he was a big fan of the UK - to the extent that he ended up living (and dying) in the perfectly-adequate-but-not-wildly-exciting Nottingham suburb of Chilwell.
Which is 25 miles from…?
Bolsover. Maybe that's where he was when he wrote it.
Which reminds me of the cheery fact that the station that Paul Simon was sitting on with a ticket to his destination when he wrote 'Homeward Bound' was Widnes.
Because it’s more racist than Midsomer Murders (or was 7 years ago)
“ In 1985 there were 49 cast members, 37 of whom were White British.. This compares with 41 out of 52 now. As a proportion of the cast this is an increase from 75.5% to 78.8%
(I would be interested to see the numbers for East London as a whole from 1985 compared to 2014)
Walford is supposedly a combination of Walthamstow and Stratford. The actual percentage of White Brits in Walthamstow in 2011 was 38%. In Stratford it was 17%, giving an average of 22.5%, and an overstatement by the BBC in 2014 of 56.3%
The proportion of Asian cast members was 4.1% in 1985, rising to 7.7% in 2014. This is against 21% of Walthamstow & 42% in Stratford, and average of 31.5% and an understatement of 23.8%”
Wondering about the definition of the RedWall. Perhaps a useful way of looking at is politically is a series of constituencies where there used to be a disconnect between the underlying demographics and the voting record, due to historical loyalties and traditions. But which now votes much more in line with similar areas in the rest of the country.
I agree. The most important thing about the red wall is that they were constituencies that Labour could and did take for granted for a long time. Now they can't. The result is that what they actually want is now a relevant question. Which is a good thing.
It is a good thing, and perhaps people who were traditionally Tory in Tory safe seats like myself might want to ponder on the new reality that is that if a government thinks it can't rely on an area, it might well invest that much more in that area
Absolutely. Works both ways. Running a country solely in the interests of the Home Counties or North London were never great alternatives. If Labour had more to gain or lose in the south outside London they might be a bit more interested in their economy and force the Tories to be likewise.
Where Davey has a point is that the counterpoint to the Tory gains in the ‘red wall’ isn’t any collection of seats that Labour might win in return - educated urban/university seats moved away from the Tories long ago - but there is a batch of middle class remain-leaning Home Counties seats where the LibDems could pull off surprises. Ed’s stunt with the hammer and wall of blue bricks might yet prove to be prophetic.
Basically Labour's problem is that while many RedWall white working class Leavers who used to be their core vote have gone Tory post Brexit, posh wealthy Remainers in the South might consider voting LD as they did in Chesham and Amersham but would not be seen dead voting Labour
"posh wealthy Remainers"
That's the party leadership, isn't it?
Many of the Labour membership and MPs however are still Corbynites.
The LDs however are more fiscally conservative than Labour if still socially liberal and anti hard Brexit and the LD leader Ed Davey was even a Minister in Cameron's coalition government. For a high earning home owning Home Counties Remainer the LDs are the safe non Tory choice, not Labour
Plenty of the entryists have now either left the party or been kicked out. The PLP has never contained 'many' Corbynites.
However, I agree with your assessment of which party is likely to be a threat to the Tories in the leafy south east.
Someone just sent me an email saying he wanted to "reach out" to me. I responded saying that I was not a member of the Four Tops https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EaflX0MWRo
If you were a member of the Four Tops, I’d have much respect for you.
It is unusual for soul legends to take an interest in U.K. politics, although not unknown for them to play active roles in the domestic scene.
Then there's Edwin Starr - I don't know of the interest he took in UK politics, but he was a big fan of the UK - to the extent that he ended up living (and dying) in the perfectly-adequate-but-not-wildly-exciting Nottingham suburb of Chilwell.
Which is 25 miles from…?
Bolsover. Maybe that's where he was when he wrote it.
Which reminds me of the cheery fact that the station that Paul Simon was sitting on with a ticket to his destination when he wrote 'Homeward Bound' was Widnes.
When Peaky Blinders comes out in the next few months, it will be a big ratings success and the BBC won't stop talking about how high quality programming is only possible yadda yadda yadda....only problem being it will just be 6hrs of telly that everybody had to wait years for.
Same with the Bodyguard...3 years for a second season.
Someone just sent me an email saying he wanted to "reach out" to me. I responded saying that I was not a member of the Four Tops https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EaflX0MWRo
If you were a member of the Four Tops, I’d have much respect for you.
It is unusual for soul legends to take an interest in U.K. politics, although not unknown for them to play active roles in the domestic scene.
Then there's Edwin Starr - I don't know of the interest he took in UK politics, but he was a big fan of the UK - to the extent that he ended up living (and dying) in the perfectly-adequate-but-not-wildly-exciting Nottingham suburb of Chilwell.
Alfred "Pee Wee" Ellis , the man who arguably invented funk music while working for James Brown, lived for the last thirty years of his life in Frome in Somerset.
He wrote "Say It Loud - I'm Black And I'm Proud" in 1968, which was quite a big deal in the civil rights movement. I don't think he found any causes quite so important in Frome!
I did not have a chance to respond to the last thread or the blundering confusion that is Dominic Raab. From what I understand several parties, BBQs, mini raves etc were broken up by the police during lockdown. Fixed penalties were issued (goodness knows if anyone paid them) and there were some prosecutions. But I have not come across any case where the police have thought it necessary to investigate whether any such event took place after the event. We saw a similar approach by the police in respect of Dominic Cummings' bizarre eye test. Had he been stopped during it he may well have been charged. As he wasn't the police were just not interested.
I think that this is what Raab meant although his incoherence and ineptitude means getting meaning from what he said is not easy. The party at Number 10 having happened and been concluded the police are not interested.
Of course, there are good points to be made about the arrogance that such a party demonstrates and the supposed importance of good examples (is there really anyone on the planet that still thinks a politician is a useful role model?). In this particular case, however, they really do seem to have been treated exactly like the rest of us.
Isn't plod normally stood outside the front door of number ten?
Would they not have been able to break up the party at the time?
You would have to be a very brave policeman (or one who has just won the lottery) to enter and say 'Ello ello, ello, what's going on ere then?'.
Mr. Urquhart, I've been watching one episode of Blake's 7 every weeknight for a while now (onto the third season). It's been rather odd returning to an almost televisual viewing habit. Except for F1 (which is irregular) and the odd snippet of news I just don't watch TV.
What I've heard of current New Who leaves me in little doubt that this 40 year old show with ropey special effects is far superior.
Queuing was a thing to show how hot the restaurant was. Or was supposed to be. Ask Giles Coren. No idea now after Covid.
Queuing for a restaurant would be my idea of hell but I am 100% not the demographic a new, a la mode restaurant is targeting.
I always book ahead.
For these places queuing is a feature not a bug and hence they don't take bookings.
There are two places that seem to have persistent queues.
The first, “Dishoom”, is a great concept but you do not need to waste any of your life queuing for it. Anyway, you can get in off-peak, or even Deliveroo it.
The second, “Breakfast Club”, is a really shit concept (all day breakfasts) and I’ve never understood it’s attraction to the sort of people who queue (out of towners and giggly students).
Someone just sent me an email saying he wanted to "reach out" to me. I responded saying that I was not a member of the Four Tops https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EaflX0MWRo
If you were a member of the Four Tops, I’d have much respect for you.
It is unusual for soul legends to take an interest in U.K. politics, although not unknown for them to play active roles in the domestic scene.
Then there's Edwin Starr - I don't know of the interest he took in UK politics, but he was a big fan of the UK - to the extent that he ended up living (and dying) in the perfectly-adequate-but-not-wildly-exciting Nottingham suburb of Chilwell.
Which is 25 miles from…?
Bolsover. Maybe that's where he was when he wrote it.
Which reminds me of the cheery fact that the station that Paul Simon was sitting on with a ticket to his destination when he wrote 'Homeward Bound' was Widnes.
Warrington
I thought it was Widnes. But to be honest Warrington seems more likely.
Queuing was a thing to show how hot the restaurant was. Or was supposed to be. Ask Giles Coren. No idea now after Covid.
Queuing for a restaurant would be my idea of hell but I am 100% not the demographic a new, a la mode restaurant is targeting.
I always book ahead.
For these places queuing is a feature not a bug and hence they don't take bookings.
There are two places that seem to have persistent queues.
The first, “Dishoom”, is a great concept but you do not need to waste any of your life queuing for it. Anyway, you can get in off-peak, or even Deliveroo it.
The second, “Breakfast Club”, is a really shit concept (all day breakfasts) and I’ve never understood it’s attraction to the sort of people who queue (out of towners and giggly students).
I really like Dishoom and haven't been there when I've had to queue.
Three other central London places I like where you can't book -
Le Relais De Venise L'Entrecôte in Marylebone. Shortest menu in the world - Steak and chips. Or chips for vegetarians. Burger And Lobster in Mayfair (I think there are a load of them now). Slightly longer menu - Burger, Lobster or Lobster Burger Masala Zone in Covent Garden (again I think there are loads of them now). Much longer menu of proper fresh Indian food.
When Peaky Blinders comes out in the next few months, it will be a big ratings success and the BBC won't stop talking about how high quality programming is only possible yadda yadda yadda....only problem being it will just be 6hrs of telly that everybody had to wait years for.
Same with the Bodyguard...3 years for a second season.
Someone just sent me an email saying he wanted to "reach out" to me. I responded saying that I was not a member of the Four Tops https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EaflX0MWRo
If you were a member of the Four Tops, I’d have much respect for you.
It is unusual for soul legends to take an interest in U.K. politics, although not unknown for them to play active roles in the domestic scene.
Then there's Edwin Starr - I don't know of the interest he took in UK politics, but he was a big fan of the UK - to the extent that he ended up living (and dying) in the perfectly-adequate-but-not-wildly-exciting Nottingham suburb of Chilwell.
Alfred "Pee Wee" Ellis , the man who arguably invented funk music while working for James Brown, lived for the last thirty years of his life in Frome in Somerset.
He wrote "Say It Loud - I'm Black And I'm Proud" in 1968, which was quite a big deal in the civil rights movement. I don't think he found any causes quite so important in Frome!
His follow up, “Say it Better, its artisan Cheddar” was sadly under appreciated.
The current seat had a majority of 1276 at 2019 The proposed boundary amends remove one ward (Normanton) and the new seat would have a 2019 notional majority of 747
The reason the seat looks much safer in Rentoul's tweet is that it is based on EC's prediction of what would happen at an election today based on current polling
Because it’s more racist than Midsomer Murders (or was 7 years ago)
“ In 1985 there were 49 cast members, 37 of whom were White British.. This compares with 41 out of 52 now. As a proportion of the cast this is an increase from 75.5% to 78.8%
(I would be interested to see the numbers for East London as a whole from 1985 compared to 2014)
Walford is supposedly a combination of Walthamstow and Stratford. The actual percentage of White Brits in Walthamstow in 2011 was 38%. In Stratford it was 17%, giving an average of 22.5%, and an overstatement by the BBC in 2014 of 56.3%
The proportion of Asian cast members was 4.1% in 1985, rising to 7.7% in 2014. This is against 21% of Walthamstow & 42% in Stratford, and average of 31.5% and an understatement of 23.8%”
Interesting. Of course, that does assume Walthamstow and Stratford have the same population each. But even Walthamstow shows a massive disparity with the soap in the 'best' case!
Edit: I must be misreading - or is that 22.5% an error for 27.5? (It's the end digits that make me wonder.)
Mr. Urquhart, I've been watching one episode of Blake's 7 every weeknight for a while now (onto the third season). It's been rather odd returning to an almost televisual viewing habit. Except for F1 (which is irregular) and the odd snippet of news I just don't watch TV.
What I've heard of current New Who leaves me in little doubt that this 40 year old show with ropey special effects is far superior.
We have done this before, but the BBC are stuck in an out dated mode of thinking, based upon their own belief that everything they produce is superior quality. And that its fine to wait 3 years for a second seasons of a popular show in which they only produce 5-6 episodes.
The problem is they aren't competing against crappy ITV or Sky One, its Netflix, Amazon, Disney, Apple, HBO, they have more money, can hire top quality acting talent and spent crazy money on better tech, and most importantly they have the resources to turn around high quality shows every year.
Because it’s more racist than Midsomer Murders (or was 7 years ago)
“ In 1985 there were 49 cast members, 37 of whom were White British.. This compares with 41 out of 52 now. As a proportion of the cast this is an increase from 75.5% to 78.8%
(I would be interested to see the numbers for East London as a whole from 1985 compared to 2014)
Walford is supposedly a combination of Walthamstow and Stratford. The actual percentage of White Brits in Walthamstow in 2011 was 38%. In Stratford it was 17%, giving an average of 22.5%, and an overstatement by the BBC in 2014 of 56.3%
The proportion of Asian cast members was 4.1% in 1985, rising to 7.7% in 2014. This is against 21% of Walthamstow & 42% in Stratford, and average of 31.5% and an understatement of 23.8%”
Walford East tube station is "supposed" to be where Bromley-by-Bow station is - but that is below street level (A12 Blackwall Tunnel Approach), not above!
Mr. Urquhart, I've been watching one episode of Blake's 7 every weeknight for a while now (onto the third season). It's been rather odd returning to an almost televisual viewing habit. Except for F1 (which is irregular) and the odd snippet of news I just don't watch TV.
What I've heard of current New Who leaves me in little doubt that this 40 year old show with ropey special effects is far superior.
The writing and ideas of Blakes 7 are very strong. We recently re-watched the entire series (in fact first time for series one for me). The special effects are terrible, and the use of earth locations such as factories etc, obviously as a cheap option, just look terrible, but the ideas behind the stories are sound.
There have been many rumours about attempted reboots. In many ways I think it shouldn't happen. Some of new Dr Who has been great, but the last three years have been terrible, and its striking that we are going back to the original saviour to save the series again.
Fans may not all like it, but sometimes enough is enough. Once the shark is jumped, you cannot unjump it.
Queuing was a thing to show how hot the restaurant was. Or was supposed to be. Ask Giles Coren. No idea now after Covid.
Queuing for a restaurant would be my idea of hell but I am 100% not the demographic a new, a la mode restaurant is targeting.
I always book ahead.
For these places queuing is a feature not a bug and hence they don't take bookings.
There are two places that seem to have persistent queues.
The first, “Dishoom”, is a great concept but you do not need to waste any of your life queuing for it. Anyway, you can get in off-peak, or even Deliveroo it.
The second, “Breakfast Club”, is a really shit concept (all day breakfasts) and I’ve never understood it’s attraction to the sort of people who queue (out of towners and giggly students).
The Breakfast Club is effing shite. Despite its bizarre popularity, it doesn't even do the best breakfasts in its own street.
When Peaky Blinders comes out in the next few months, it will be a big ratings success and the BBC won't stop talking about how high quality programming is only possible yadda yadda yadda....only problem being it will just be 6hrs of telly that everybody had to wait years for.
Same with the Bodyguard...3 years for a second season.
Wrong. Who cares? Shorter, six episode occasional series tend to be far better than the elongated super-series that emanate mainly from the US. Most of that stuff is just airtime filler. I mean they managed to tell the entire Godfather story in nine hours of celluloid. The obsession with length is ludicrous.
Queuing was a thing to show how hot the restaurant was. Or was supposed to be. Ask Giles Coren. No idea now after Covid.
Queuing for a restaurant would be my idea of hell but I am 100% not the demographic a new, a la mode restaurant is targeting.
I always book ahead.
For these places queuing is a feature not a bug and hence they don't take bookings.
There are two places that seem to have persistent queues.
The first, “Dishoom”, is a great concept but you do not need to waste any of your life queuing for it. Anyway, you can get in off-peak, or even Deliveroo it.
The second, “Breakfast Club”, is a really shit concept (all day breakfasts) and I’ve never understood it’s attraction to the sort of people who queue (out of towners and giggly students).
I really like Dishoom and haven't been there when I've had to queue.
Three other central London places I like where you can't book -
Le Relais De Venise L'Entrecôte in Marylebone. Shortest menu in the world - Steak and chips. Or chips for vegetarians. Burger And Lobster in Mayfair (I think there are a load of them now). Slightly longer menu - Burger, Lobster or Lobster Burger Masala Zone in Covent Garden (again I think there are loads of them now). Much longer menu of proper fresh Indian food.
When Peaky Blinders comes out in the next few months, it will be a big ratings success and the BBC won't stop talking about how high quality programming is only possible yadda yadda yadda....only problem being it will just be 6hrs of telly that everybody had to wait years for.
Same with the Bodyguard...3 years for a second season.
Someone just sent me an email saying he wanted to "reach out" to me. I responded saying that I was not a member of the Four Tops https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EaflX0MWRo
If you were a member of the Four Tops, I’d have much respect for you.
It is unusual for soul legends to take an interest in U.K. politics, although not unknown for them to play active roles in the domestic scene.
Then there's Edwin Starr - I don't know of the interest he took in UK politics, but he was a big fan of the UK - to the extent that he ended up living (and dying) in the perfectly-adequate-but-not-wildly-exciting Nottingham suburb of Chilwell.
Alfred "Pee Wee" Ellis , the man who arguably invented funk music while working for James Brown, lived for the last thirty years of his life in Frome in Somerset.
He wrote "Say It Loud - I'm Black And I'm Proud" in 1968, which was quite a big deal in the civil rights movement. I don't think he found any causes quite so important in Frome!
His follow up, “Say it Better, its artisan Cheddar” was sadly under appreciated.
Meh Outlaws was rubbish IMO....Stephen Merchant without Ricky Gervais just doesn't quite have it. There are some funny lines, but the plot is tediously cliche, the Daily Mail reading right wing bigot, the black statue toppling protestor, the Asian bookworm, etc. I know that supposedly part of the "funny" bit, but it just isn't for me.
The comedies that work are when everybody can relate to the person / situation, David Brent, everybody has had a boss a bit like him, Kenny Snr in Phoenix Nights, everybody knows a bloke in the pub whose stories are just obviously bullshit.
Queuing was a thing to show how hot the restaurant was. Or was supposed to be. Ask Giles Coren. No idea now after Covid.
Queuing for a restaurant would be my idea of hell but I am 100% not the demographic a new, a la mode restaurant is targeting.
I always book ahead.
For these places queuing is a feature not a bug and hence they don't take bookings.
There are two places that seem to have persistent queues.
The first, “Dishoom”, is a great concept but you do not need to waste any of your life queuing for it. Anyway, you can get in off-peak, or even Deliveroo it.
The second, “Breakfast Club”, is a really shit concept (all day breakfasts) and I’ve never understood it’s attraction to the sort of people who queue (out of towners and giggly students).
The Breakfast Club is effing shite. Despite its bizarre popularity, it doesn't even do the best breakfasts in its own street.
There are several of them. It’s one of the great mysteries of modern life.
I presume the people who go there are the children of those who went to all those Aberdeen Steakhouses.
"Yvette Cooper, the shadow home secretary, said: “Too often the government makes grand promises, but then fails to deliver or does the opposite. Drug use is up, serious violence is up, antisocial behaviour is up. More and more offenders are getting away with their crimes as overall prosecutions have plummeted. Any action from the government must be substantial enough to undo the damage they have caused.”
This is another reason why Cooper and some other members of the Blair tribute band worry me. Not a peep on liberties issues ; no, it's only wrong because it's not "tough" enough.
This is a very important part of the background as to why more liberal-minded voters backed the Lib Dems, and even the Tories, in 2010, in the first place. A slightly forgotten but important piece of history about the end of the last Labour government.
People who live in communities blighted by crime and criminals want a tough response. If that doesn't sit well with some of the dinner party set, then so be it.
This is rhetorical nonsense. The current policies are failing people on estates much more than they're failing the dinner party set, and some of the measures announced today will fail them even more.
I wonder whether Sandy and his fellow travellers favour sending heavies to the Andes to duff up hikers who are chewing coca leaves? He seems to consider the taking of 'drugs' sinful and worthy of punishment in and of itself. Presumably he also favours self-flagellation for his daily coffee and pint of ale?
Is the leaf chewing illegal? If so, stick them in the back of the van.
Mr. Urquhart, I've been watching one episode of Blake's 7 every weeknight for a while now (onto the third season). It's been rather odd returning to an almost televisual viewing habit. Except for F1 (which is irregular) and the odd snippet of news I just don't watch TV.
What I've heard of current New Who leaves me in little doubt that this 40 year old show with ropey special effects is far superior.
The writing and ideas of Blakes 7 are very strong. We recently re-watched the entire series (in fact first time for series one for me). The special effects are terrible, and the use of earth locations such as factories etc, obviously as a cheap option, just look terrible, but the ideas behind the stories are sound.
There have been many rumours about attempted reboots. In many ways I think it shouldn't happen. Some of new Dr Who has been great, but the last three years have been terrible, and its striking that we are going back to the original saviour to save the series again.
Fans may not all like it, but sometimes enough is enough. Once the shark is jumped, you cannot unjump it.
I was a big Doctor Who fan when I was 10. I have not watched the reboot.
I recently took a look at an episode of “Talons of Weng-Chiang”, supposedly one of the very best stories.
Mr. Tubbs, I'd be perfectly content if Capaldi got out of the shower, having had the weirdest dream.
Chibnall is coming across as a spoilt brat who's smashing a toy so his younger brother can't play with it, even though his twelve older brothers all took great care not to damage it.
I generally give a new Doctor a look, but unless the deranged revisionism of Chibnall isn't retconned I don't think I'll bother.
When Peaky Blinders comes out in the next few months, it will be a big ratings success and the BBC won't stop talking about how high quality programming is only possible yadda yadda yadda....only problem being it will just be 6hrs of telly that everybody had to wait years for.
Same with the Bodyguard...3 years for a second season.
Wrong. Who cares? Shorter, six episode occasional series tend to be far better than the elongated super-series that emanate mainly from the US. Most of that stuff is just airtime filler. I mean they managed to tell the entire Godfather story in nine hours of celluloid. The obsession with length is ludicrous.
Its not just length, its the point that the BBC have a ratings hit, and they can't even make 6hrs a year of it. 3 years between seasons isn't how modern media landscape works.
They also have this problem where if they manage to get a big star to make something, they can't tie them for future seasons e.g. They got Tom Hardy to star in Taboo which was very good, then they couldn't make any future seasons as he is too busy with other projects. And so it gets canned. Same with Sherlock.
Taboo was getting 7 million viewers an episode. It was a winner. 5 years later, and oh f##k, that's canned.
When Peaky Blinders comes out in the next few months, it will be a big ratings success and the BBC won't stop talking about how high quality programming is only possible yadda yadda yadda....only problem being it will just be 6hrs of telly that everybody had to wait years for.
Same with the Bodyguard...3 years for a second season.
Wrong. Who cares? Shorter, six episode occasional series tend to be far better than the elongated super-series that emanate mainly from the US. Most of that stuff is just airtime filler. I mean they managed to tell the entire Godfather story in nine hours of celluloid. The obsession with length is ludicrous.
Its not just length, its the point that the BBC have a ratings hit, and they can't even make 6hrs a year of it. 3 years between seasons isn't how modern media landscape works.
I agree with you.
Besides, it’s not so much that they are competing with Netflix etc, as the fact it’s a good show, a hit, and worth decent money in sales.
Mr. Walker, some things holds up better than others. A few years ago I watched some Doctor Who (original run) on the Horror channel and saw a few I hadn't watched before. The Keeper of Traken was very entertaining.
Scotland has 11 non-SNP MPs. The new boundaries make 8 of those seats more marginal (1 is abolished and the other 2 are unchanged).
Here are the current Unionist seats and successor seats, with Baxter’s prediction (likelihoods of HOLD on current boundaries in brackets). (Scottish Conservative leader Douglas Ross excluded as his Moray seat is being abolished and he is not standing at the next UK GE. Two seats are have unchanged boundaries.)
SCon seats
Banff and Buchan HOLD (58% Con Hold) new Banff and Buchan SNP GAIN
Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk HOLD (55% Con Hold) new Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk HOLD
Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale SNP GAIN (50% Con Hold) new Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale SNP GAIN
Dumfries and Galloway SNP GAIN (40% Con Hold) new Dumfries and Galloway SNP GAIN
West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine SNP GAIN (35% Con Hold) Unchanged SNP GAIN
SLD seats
Orkney and Shetland SNP GAIN (44% LD Hold) Unchanged SNP GAIN
Edinburgh West SNP GAIN (35% LD Hold) new Edinburgh West SNP GAIN
North East Fife SNP GAIN (29% LD Hold) new North East Fife SNP GAIN
Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross SNP GAIN (22% LD Hold) new Highland North SNP GAIN
SLab seat
Edinburgh South HOLD (89% Lab Hold) new Edinburgh South HOLD
It’s looking like another Unionist massacre, with only 2 seats left (one SCon and one SLab), unless Sarwar, Ross and Cole-Hamilton can turn their ships around. But Johnson’s boundary changes are an unneeded additional headache.
Mr. Urquhart, I've been watching one episode of Blake's 7 every weeknight for a while now (onto the third season). It's been rather odd returning to an almost televisual viewing habit. Except for F1 (which is irregular) and the odd snippet of news I just don't watch TV.
What I've heard of current New Who leaves me in little doubt that this 40 year old show with ropey special effects is far superior.
We have done this before, but the BBC are stuck in an out dated mode of thinking, based upon their own belief that everything they produce is superior quality. And that its fine to wait 3 years for a second seasons of a popular show in which they only produce 5-6 episodes.
The problem is they aren't competing against crappy ITV or Sky One, its Netflix, Amazon, Disney, Apple, HBO, they have more money, can hire top quality acting talent and spent crazy money on better tech, and most importantly they have the resources to turn around high quality shows every year.
You are weirdly obsessed with this. You probably need to rein in your TV watching if the current output is too little for you. As for Sky One, Amazon and Apple – I can find the totality of ONE series on all three combined currently that's worth watching (The Morning Show) – and even that is a very poor relation to series one. As is so often the case, they'd have been better calling it a day after the first season.
Disney TV is largely absolute drivel.
The best TV series of modern times is Big Little Lies Season 1 – it was a masterpiece told over five episodes. Again, they should have called it a day after season one and found a different book rather than elongating the story pointlessly, undermining their perfect original.
Queuing was a thing to show how hot the restaurant was. Or was supposed to be. Ask Giles Coren. No idea now after Covid.
Queuing for a restaurant would be my idea of hell but I am 100% not the demographic a new, a la mode restaurant is targeting.
I always book ahead.
For these places queuing is a feature not a bug and hence they don't take bookings.
There are two places that seem to have persistent queues.
The first, “Dishoom”, is a great concept but you do not need to waste any of your life queuing for it. Anyway, you can get in off-peak, or even Deliveroo it.
The second, “Breakfast Club”, is a really shit concept (all day breakfasts) and I’ve never understood it’s attraction to the sort of people who queue (out of towners and giggly students).
The Breakfast Club is effing shite. Despite its bizarre popularity, it doesn't even do the best breakfasts in its own street.
The Soho branch of Dishoom doesn't do the best curries on its street either. I would very highly recommend Kolamba, the Sri Lankan place next door.
Queuing was a thing to show how hot the restaurant was. Or was supposed to be. Ask Giles Coren. No idea now after Covid.
Queuing for a restaurant would be my idea of hell but I am 100% not the demographic a new, a la mode restaurant is targeting.
I always book ahead.
For these places queuing is a feature not a bug and hence they don't take bookings.
There are two places that seem to have persistent queues.
The first, “Dishoom”, is a great concept but you do not need to waste any of your life queuing for it. Anyway, you can get in off-peak, or even Deliveroo it.
The second, “Breakfast Club”, is a really shit concept (all day breakfasts) and I’ve never understood it’s attraction to the sort of people who queue (out of towners and giggly students).
The Breakfast Club is effing shite. Despite its bizarre popularity, it doesn't even do the best breakfasts in its own street.
There are several of them. It’s one of the great mysteries of modern life.
I presume the people who go there are the children of those who went to all those Aberdeen Steakhouses.
It's a chain now? Christ. I went to the Shoreditch branch one Saturday morning and resolved never to go again. Absolute rubbish, that you have to queue for. Garbage.
A North Shropshire Conservative councillor has defected to the Reclaim Party days before a by-election for a new MP.
He becomes the first elected official of the party which was set up by actor Laurence Fox in September 2020.
Anthony Allen said the Conservatives had "gone soft on immigration".
The Conservatives are hoping to hold on to the North Shropshire constituency on 16 December. The seat was made vacant when former MP Owen Paterson resigned.
Scotland has 11 non-SNP MPs. The new boundaries make 8 of those seats more marginal (1 is abolished and the other 2 are unchanged).
Here are the current Unionist seats and successor seats, with Baxter’s prediction (likelihoods of HOLD on current boundaries in brackets). (Scottish Conservative leader Douglas Ross excluded as his Moray seat is being abolished and he is not standing at the next UK GE. Two seats are have unchanged boundaries.)
SCon seats
Banff and Buchan HOLD (58% Con Hold) new Banff and Buchan SNP GAIN
Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk HOLD (55% Con Hold) new Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk HOLD
Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale SNP GAIN (50% Con Hold) new Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale SNP GAIN
Dumfries and Galloway SNP GAIN (40% Con Hold) new Dumfries and Galloway SNP GAIN
West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine SNP GAIN (35% Con Hold) Unchanged SNP GAIN
SLD seats
Orkney and Shetland SNP GAIN (44% LD Hold) Unchanged SNP GAIN
Edinburgh West SNP GAIN (35% LD Hold) new Edinburgh West SNP GAIN
North East Fife SNP GAIN (29% LD Hold) new North East Fife SNP GAIN
Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross SNP GAIN (22% LD Hold) new Highland North SNP GAIN
SLab seat
Edinburgh South HOLD (89% Lab Hold) new Edinburgh South HOLD
It’s looking like another Unionist massacre, with only 2 seats left (one SCon and one SLab), unless Sarwar, Ross and Cole-Hamilton can turn their ships around. But Johnson’s boundary changes are an unneeded additional headache.
Put me down as a newly-voting SNP voter in Banff and Buchan. Actually, put 4 new votes down as Mrs RP and my brother / sis-in-law are doing the same.
Queuing was a thing to show how hot the restaurant was. Or was supposed to be. Ask Giles Coren. No idea now after Covid.
Queuing for a restaurant would be my idea of hell but I am 100% not the demographic a new, a la mode restaurant is targeting.
I always book ahead.
For these places queuing is a feature not a bug and hence they don't take bookings.
There are two places that seem to have persistent queues.
The first, “Dishoom”, is a great concept but you do not need to waste any of your life queuing for it. Anyway, you can get in off-peak, or even Deliveroo it.
The second, “Breakfast Club”, is a really shit concept (all day breakfasts) and I’ve never understood it’s attraction to the sort of people who queue (out of towners and giggly students).
The Breakfast Club is effing shite. Despite its bizarre popularity, it doesn't even do the best breakfasts in its own street.
The Soho branch of Dishoom doesn't do the best curries on its street either. I would very highly recommend Kolamba, the Sri Lankan place next door.
Mr. Urquhart, I've been watching one episode of Blake's 7 every weeknight for a while now (onto the third season). It's been rather odd returning to an almost televisual viewing habit. Except for F1 (which is irregular) and the odd snippet of news I just don't watch TV.
What I've heard of current New Who leaves me in little doubt that this 40 year old show with ropey special effects is far superior.
We have done this before, but the BBC are stuck in an out dated mode of thinking, based upon their own belief that everything they produce is superior quality. And that its fine to wait 3 years for a second seasons of a popular show in which they only produce 5-6 episodes.
The problem is they aren't competing against crappy ITV or Sky One, its Netflix, Amazon, Disney, Apple, HBO, they have more money, can hire top quality acting talent and spent crazy money on better tech, and most importantly they have the resources to turn around high quality shows every year.
You are weirdly obsessed with this. You probably need to rein in your TV watching if the current output is too little for you. As for Sky One, Amazon and Apple – I can find the totality of ONE series on all three combined currently that's worth watching (The Morning Show) – and even that is a very poor relation to series one. As is so often the case, they'd have been better calling it a day after the first season.
Disney TV is largely absolute drivel.
The best TV series of modern times is Big Little Lies Season 1 – it was a masterpiece told over five episodes. Again, they should have called it a day after season one and found a different book rather than elongating the story pointlessly, undermining their perfect original.
This is Us, The Shield, Clarkson's Farm, Handmaid's Tale (not watched, that said), The Good Doctor (fluff), Parks & Recs, Modern Family, Fargo and, of course, Succession.
Mr. Urquhart, I've been watching one episode of Blake's 7 every weeknight for a while now (onto the third season). It's been rather odd returning to an almost televisual viewing habit. Except for F1 (which is irregular) and the odd snippet of news I just don't watch TV.
What I've heard of current New Who leaves me in little doubt that this 40 year old show with ropey special effects is far superior.
We have done this before, but the BBC are stuck in an out dated mode of thinking, based upon their own belief that everything they produce is superior quality. And that its fine to wait 3 years for a second seasons of a popular show in which they only produce 5-6 episodes.
The problem is they aren't competing against crappy ITV or Sky One, its Netflix, Amazon, Disney, Apple, HBO, they have more money, can hire top quality acting talent and spent crazy money on better tech, and most importantly they have the resources to turn around high quality shows every year.
You are weirdly obsessed with this. You probably need to rein in your TV watching if the current output is too little for you. As for Sky One, Amazon and Apple – I can find the totality of ONE series on all three combined currently that's worth watching (The Morning Show) – and even that is a very poor relation to series one. As is so often the case, they'd have been better calling it a day after the first season.
Disney TV is largely absolute drivel.
The best TV series of modern times is Big Little Lies Season 1 – it was a masterpiece told over five episodes. Again, they should have called it a day after season one and found a different book rather than elongating the story pointlessly, undermining their perfect original.
This is Us, The Shield, Clarkson's Farm, Handmaid's Tale (not watched, that said), The Good Doctor (fluff), Parks & Recs, Modern Family, Fargo and, of course, Succession.
All on Amazon all excellent.
Bosch...
Wheel of Time is $10m / episode show that for the fantasy types is getting very good reviews.
Apple+ offering is much weaker, but Ted Lasso is absolutely enormous success. And of course they aren't dicking around waiting 3 years between seasons. 10 episodes a year, every October.
When Peaky Blinders comes out in the next few months, it will be a big ratings success and the BBC won't stop talking about how high quality programming is only possible yadda yadda yadda....only problem being it will just be 6hrs of telly that everybody had to wait years for.
Same with the Bodyguard...3 years for a second season.
Wrong. Who cares? Shorter, six episode occasional series tend to be far better than the elongated super-series that emanate mainly from the US. Most of that stuff is just airtime filler. I mean they managed to tell the entire Godfather story in nine hours of celluloid. The obsession with length is ludicrous.
Its not just length, its the point that the BBC have a ratings hit, and they can't even make 6hrs a year of it. 3 years between seasons isn't how modern media landscape works.
They also have this problem where if they manage to get a big star to make something, they can't tie them for future seasons e.g. They got Tom Hardy to star in Taboo which was very good, then they couldn't make any future seasons as he is too busy with other projects. And so it gets canned. Same with Sherlock.
Taboo was getting 7 million viewers an episode. It was a winner. 5 years later, and oh f##k, that's canned.
Although what’s your solution for that? Perhaps just not use Hardy - it’s not like Taboo made his name?
When Peaky Blinders comes out in the next few months, it will be a big ratings success and the BBC won't stop talking about how high quality programming is only possible yadda yadda yadda....only problem being it will just be 6hrs of telly that everybody had to wait years for.
Same with the Bodyguard...3 years for a second season.
Wrong. Who cares? Shorter, six episode occasional series tend to be far better than the elongated super-series that emanate mainly from the US. Most of that stuff is just airtime filler. I mean they managed to tell the entire Godfather story in nine hours of celluloid. The obsession with length is ludicrous.
Its not just length, its the point that the BBC have a ratings hit, and they can't even make 6hrs a year of it. 3 years between seasons isn't how modern media landscape works.
They also have this problem where if they manage to get a big star to make something, they can't tie them for future seasons e.g. They got Tom Hardy to star in Taboo which was very good, then they couldn't make any future seasons as he is too busy with other projects. And so it gets canned. Same with Sherlock.
Taboo was getting 7 million viewers an episode. It was a winner. 5 years later, and oh f##k, that's canned.
You are looking down the wrong end of the telescope.
Big Little Lies was a ratings hit. That didn't mean there was a case for another series. There wasn't. Season 2 simply undermined the perfect original, which was a masterful adaptation from the novel.
It's the same with cinema. The Godfather series was superb. That doesn't mean that they should make parts IV and V. It's a story, and the story has been told. Like a good novel, it has a start, a middle and an end. Not a start, an end, another end, another end and another middle etc etc etc.
Because it’s more racist than Midsomer Murders (or was 7 years ago)
“ In 1985 there were 49 cast members, 37 of whom were White British.. This compares with 41 out of 52 now. As a proportion of the cast this is an increase from 75.5% to 78.8%
(I would be interested to see the numbers for East London as a whole from 1985 compared to 2014)
Walford is supposedly a combination of Walthamstow and Stratford. The actual percentage of White Brits in Walthamstow in 2011 was 38%. In Stratford it was 17%, giving an average of 22.5%, and an overstatement by the BBC in 2014 of 56.3%
The proportion of Asian cast members was 4.1% in 1985, rising to 7.7% in 2014. This is against 21% of Walthamstow & 42% in Stratford, and average of 31.5% and an understatement of 23.8%”
Interesting. Of course, that does assume Walthamstow and Stratford have the same population each. But even Walthamstow shows a massive disparity with the soap in the 'best' case!
Edit: I must be misreading - or is that 22.5% an error for 27.5? (It's the end digits that make me wonder.)
You’re right it should be 27.5% 👍🏻
Yes it is quite amazing, and possibly racist, that the East End is portrayed the way EastEnders has it. That said, in 2021 parts of Hackney and Stratford are being gentrified to the point where you only see middle class white people living a Chelsea village life, so I’m told.
The local Glasgow Life one I go to has a single floor mat on which stupid fat fuckers do standing exercises in their manky trainers, but it's still better doing crunches on that than the floor. The gym has a rule that all the machines, weights etc should be sprayed with disinfectant and wiped down on the bits you've touched after use which is fair enough, but the only bare bit of me that would touch the mat briefly are my elbows so I hadn't been bothering. However this time when I finished some shaved head muscle Mary made a big performance of spraying and wiping down the whole mat, and didn't even go on to use it! I did consider asking what the prevalence of elbow transmitted Covid was but refrained since the guy was quite stacked.
At the other end a red bearded survivalist type who in the past I've heard spout sub Ayn Rand triumph of the will shite to any sap naive enough to engage, loudly revealed himself as an anti vaxxer today, promising the cops would have come at him armed if vaccinations became mandatory. That he was coughing his guts up in the changing rooms last Friday filled me with joy.
Queuing was a thing to show how hot the restaurant was. Or was supposed to be. Ask Giles Coren. No idea now after Covid.
Queuing for a restaurant would be my idea of hell but I am 100% not the demographic a new, a la mode restaurant is targeting.
I always book ahead.
For these places queuing is a feature not a bug and hence they don't take bookings.
There are two places that seem to have persistent queues.
The first, “Dishoom”, is a great concept but you do not need to waste any of your life queuing for it. Anyway, you can get in off-peak, or even Deliveroo it.
The second, “Breakfast Club”, is a really shit concept (all day breakfasts) and I’ve never understood it’s attraction to the sort of people who queue (out of towners and giggly students).
The Breakfast Club is effing shite. Despite its bizarre popularity, it doesn't even do the best breakfasts in its own street.
The Soho branch of Dishoom doesn't do the best curries on its street either. I would very highly recommend Kolamba, the Sri Lankan place next door.
Mr. Urquhart, I've been watching one episode of Blake's 7 every weeknight for a while now (onto the third season). It's been rather odd returning to an almost televisual viewing habit. Except for F1 (which is irregular) and the odd snippet of news I just don't watch TV.
What I've heard of current New Who leaves me in little doubt that this 40 year old show with ropey special effects is far superior.
We have done this before, but the BBC are stuck in an out dated mode of thinking, based upon their own belief that everything they produce is superior quality. And that its fine to wait 3 years for a second seasons of a popular show in which they only produce 5-6 episodes.
The problem is they aren't competing against crappy ITV or Sky One, its Netflix, Amazon, Disney, Apple, HBO, they have more money, can hire top quality acting talent and spent crazy money on better tech, and most importantly they have the resources to turn around high quality shows every year.
You are weirdly obsessed with this. You probably need to rein in your TV watching if the current output is too little for you. As for Sky One, Amazon and Apple – I can find the totality of ONE series on all three combined currently that's worth watching (The Morning Show) – and even that is a very poor relation to series one. As is so often the case, they'd have been better calling it a day after the first season.
Disney TV is largely absolute drivel.
The best TV series of modern times is Big Little Lies Season 1 – it was a masterpiece told over five episodes. Again, they should have called it a day after season one and found a different book rather than elongating the story pointlessly, undermining their perfect original.
This is Us, The Shield, Clarkson's Farm, Handmaid's Tale (not watched, that said), The Good Doctor (fluff), Parks & Recs, Modern Family, Fargo and, of course, Succession.
All on Amazon all excellent.
Bosch...
Wheel of Time is $10m / episode show that for the fantasy types is getting very good reviews.
Apple+ offering is much weaker, but Ted Lasso is absolutely enormous success. And of course they aren't dicking around waiting 3 years between seasons. 10 episodes a year, every October.
On my list. Succession, This is US and Fargo have to be amongst the best TV drama of recent years.
When Peaky Blinders comes out in the next few months, it will be a big ratings success and the BBC won't stop talking about how high quality programming is only possible yadda yadda yadda....only problem being it will just be 6hrs of telly that everybody had to wait years for.
Same with the Bodyguard...3 years for a second season.
Wrong. Who cares? Shorter, six episode occasional series tend to be far better than the elongated super-series that emanate mainly from the US. Most of that stuff is just airtime filler. I mean they managed to tell the entire Godfather story in nine hours of celluloid. The obsession with length is ludicrous.
Its not just length, its the point that the BBC have a ratings hit, and they can't even make 6hrs a year of it. 3 years between seasons isn't how modern media landscape works.
They also have this problem where if they manage to get a big star to make something, they can't tie them for future seasons e.g. They got Tom Hardy to star in Taboo which was very good, then they couldn't make any future seasons as he is too busy with other projects. And so it gets canned. Same with Sherlock.
Taboo was getting 7 million viewers an episode. It was a winner. 5 years later, and oh f##k, that's canned.
This is the inevitable consequence of the Tories starving them of money. Congrats to them, they've got what they wanted.
Mr. Urquhart, I've been watching one episode of Blake's 7 every weeknight for a while now (onto the third season). It's been rather odd returning to an almost televisual viewing habit. Except for F1 (which is irregular) and the odd snippet of news I just don't watch TV.
What I've heard of current New Who leaves me in little doubt that this 40 year old show with ropey special effects is far superior.
We have done this before, but the BBC are stuck in an out dated mode of thinking, based upon their own belief that everything they produce is superior quality. And that its fine to wait 3 years for a second seasons of a popular show in which they only produce 5-6 episodes.
The problem is they aren't competing against crappy ITV or Sky One, its Netflix, Amazon, Disney, Apple, HBO, they have more money, can hire top quality acting talent and spent crazy money on better tech, and most importantly they have the resources to turn around high quality shows every year.
You are weirdly obsessed with this. You probably need to rein in your TV watching if the current output is too little for you. As for Sky One, Amazon and Apple – I can find the totality of ONE series on all three combined currently that's worth watching (The Morning Show) – and even that is a very poor relation to series one. As is so often the case, they'd have been better calling it a day after the first season.
Disney TV is largely absolute drivel.
The best TV series of modern times is Big Little Lies Season 1 – it was a masterpiece told over five episodes. Again, they should have called it a day after season one and found a different book rather than elongating the story pointlessly, undermining their perfect original.
Despite being tight, I've got Amazon Prime - aside from the licence fee, the only entertainments subs I have. On that, there's the excellent 'Expanse' (I'm reading the book as I watch the series); Stargirl was an entertaining superhero romp, and one with surprisingly grown-up storyline in places, and I've just started watching Alex Rider. And there's plenty more of interest.
What t'Internet's rally done is give the consumer a massive amount of choice, although sadly that choice is split up amongst several providers. Neither Stargirl or Alex Rider are in genres I would normally watch, but I've enjoyed them.
When Peaky Blinders comes out in the next few months, it will be a big ratings success and the BBC won't stop talking about how high quality programming is only possible yadda yadda yadda....only problem being it will just be 6hrs of telly that everybody had to wait years for.
Same with the Bodyguard...3 years for a second season.
Wrong. Who cares? Shorter, six episode occasional series tend to be far better than the elongated super-series that emanate mainly from the US. Most of that stuff is just airtime filler. I mean they managed to tell the entire Godfather story in nine hours of celluloid. The obsession with length is ludicrous.
Its not just length, its the point that the BBC have a ratings hit, and they can't even make 6hrs a year of it. 3 years between seasons isn't how modern media landscape works.
They also have this problem where if they manage to get a big star to make something, they can't tie them for future seasons e.g. They got Tom Hardy to star in Taboo which was very good, then they couldn't make any future seasons as he is too busy with other projects. And so it gets canned. Same with Sherlock.
Taboo was getting 7 million viewers an episode. It was a winner. 5 years later, and oh f##k, that's canned.
Although what’s your solution for that? Perhaps just not use Hardy - it’s not like Taboo made his name?
Well...the BBC funding model is broken....that's the ultimate problem. While they try to claim their unique funding model, but then also have weird commercial arms like Dave, then stuff pushed through BBC studios, etc, they are always going to be in this mess. It leaves them with what can they sell, what can't they, how, can they do this tie in with this other entity or not, etc etc etc.
But while they insist on being funded by an unenforceable and increasingly unfair model, I think they only option is not to hire big stars, but produce the content consistently.
Mr. Urquhart, I've been watching one episode of Blake's 7 every weeknight for a while now (onto the third season). It's been rather odd returning to an almost televisual viewing habit. Except for F1 (which is irregular) and the odd snippet of news I just don't watch TV.
What I've heard of current New Who leaves me in little doubt that this 40 year old show with ropey special effects is far superior.
We have done this before, but the BBC are stuck in an out dated mode of thinking, based upon their own belief that everything they produce is superior quality. And that its fine to wait 3 years for a second seasons of a popular show in which they only produce 5-6 episodes.
The problem is they aren't competing against crappy ITV or Sky One, its Netflix, Amazon, Disney, Apple, HBO, they have more money, can hire top quality acting talent and spent crazy money on better tech, and most importantly they have the resources to turn around high quality shows every year.
You are weirdly obsessed with this. You probably need to rein in your TV watching if the current output is too little for you. As for Sky One, Amazon and Apple – I can find the totality of ONE series on all three combined currently that's worth watching (The Morning Show) – and even that is a very poor relation to series one. As is so often the case, they'd have been better calling it a day after the first season.
Disney TV is largely absolute drivel.
The best TV series of modern times is Big Little Lies Season 1 – it was a masterpiece told over five episodes. Again, they should have called it a day after season one and found a different book rather than elongating the story pointlessly, undermining their perfect original.
This is Us, The Shield, Clarkson's Farm, Handmaid's Tale (not watched, that said), The Good Doctor (fluff), Parks & Recs, Modern Family, Fargo and, of course, Succession.
All on Amazon all excellent.
In fairness I haven't seen This is Us or Handmaid's. Of the others, I only like Clarkson's Farm.
Succession is not on Amazon but on Sky Atlantic, which is the one channel I don't have, so cannot comment on that.
Because it’s more racist than Midsomer Murders (or was 7 years ago)
“ In 1985 there were 49 cast members, 37 of whom were White British.. This compares with 41 out of 52 now. As a proportion of the cast this is an increase from 75.5% to 78.8%
(I would be interested to see the numbers for East London as a whole from 1985 compared to 2014)
Walford is supposedly a combination of Walthamstow and Stratford. The actual percentage of White Brits in Walthamstow in 2011 was 38%. In Stratford it was 17%, giving an average of 22.5%, and an overstatement by the BBC in 2014 of 56.3%
The proportion of Asian cast members was 4.1% in 1985, rising to 7.7% in 2014. This is against 21% of Walthamstow & 42% in Stratford, and average of 31.5% and an understatement of 23.8%”
Interesting. Of course, that does assume Walthamstow and Stratford have the same population each. But even Walthamstow shows a massive disparity with the soap in the 'best' case!
Edit: I must be misreading - or is that 22.5% an error for 27.5? (It's the end digits that make me wonder.)
You’re right it should be 27.5% 👍🏻
Yes it is quite amazing, and possibly racist, that the East End is portrayed the way EastEnders has it. That said, in 2021 parts of Hackney and Stratford are being gentrified to the point where you only see middle class white people living a Chelsea village life, so I’m told.
Can confirm.
I am a middle class white person living in Hackney and last night I went to carol practice with someone who is allowed to be referred to as Hon.
Mr. Urquhart, I've been watching one episode of Blake's 7 every weeknight for a while now (onto the third season). It's been rather odd returning to an almost televisual viewing habit. Except for F1 (which is irregular) and the odd snippet of news I just don't watch TV.
What I've heard of current New Who leaves me in little doubt that this 40 year old show with ropey special effects is far superior.
We have done this before, but the BBC are stuck in an out dated mode of thinking, based upon their own belief that everything they produce is superior quality. And that its fine to wait 3 years for a second seasons of a popular show in which they only produce 5-6 episodes.
The problem is they aren't competing against crappy ITV or Sky One, its Netflix, Amazon, Disney, Apple, HBO, they have more money, can hire top quality acting talent and spent crazy money on better tech, and most importantly they have the resources to turn around high quality shows every year.
You are weirdly obsessed with this. You probably need to rein in your TV watching if the current output is too little for you. As for Sky One, Amazon and Apple – I can find the totality of ONE series on all three combined currently that's worth watching (The Morning Show) – and even that is a very poor relation to series one. As is so often the case, they'd have been better calling it a day after the first season.
Disney TV is largely absolute drivel.
The best TV series of modern times is Big Little Lies Season 1 – it was a masterpiece told over five episodes. Again, they should have called it a day after season one and found a different book rather than elongating the story pointlessly, undermining their perfect original.
This is Us, The Shield, Clarkson's Farm, Handmaid's Tale (not watched, that said), The Good Doctor (fluff), Parks & Recs, Modern Family, Fargo and, of course, Succession.
All on Amazon all excellent.
In fairness I haven't seen This is Us or Handmaid's. Of the others, I only like Clarkson's Farm.
Succession is not on Amazon but on Sky Atlantic, which is the one channel I don't have, so cannot comment on that.
Sky gets all the HBO stuff, which tends to be excellent. Although they have certain commissioning standards which means they don’t produce that much stuff.
When Peaky Blinders comes out in the next few months, it will be a big ratings success and the BBC won't stop talking about how high quality programming is only possible yadda yadda yadda....only problem being it will just be 6hrs of telly that everybody had to wait years for.
Same with the Bodyguard...3 years for a second season.
Wrong. Who cares? Shorter, six episode occasional series tend to be far better than the elongated super-series that emanate mainly from the US. Most of that stuff is just airtime filler. I mean they managed to tell the entire Godfather story in nine hours of celluloid. The obsession with length is ludicrous.
Its not just length, its the point that the BBC have a ratings hit, and they can't even make 6hrs a year of it. 3 years between seasons isn't how modern media landscape works.
They also have this problem where if they manage to get a big star to make something, they can't tie them for future seasons e.g. They got Tom Hardy to star in Taboo which was very good, then they couldn't make any future seasons as he is too busy with other projects. And so it gets canned. Same with Sherlock.
Taboo was getting 7 million viewers an episode. It was a winner. 5 years later, and oh f##k, that's canned.
This is the inevitable consequence of the Tories starving them of money. Congrats to them, they've got what they wanted.
On topic: the boundary changes are not favourable to Cooper. On current boundaries Electoral Calculus has it 83/16 in her favour (and recovering to a 15% majority), a little better than the 81/19 (and 14%) for the new boundaries.
The low level change is that Normanton ward is being lost, 700 Labour ward majority in 2021.
2021 locals line up a decent Labour lead (on the new boundaries) still and perhaps hint where BXP GE transfers might land:
Lab : 46.1% LD (1/6 wards): 8%
Green: 5% Workers (1): 0.4%
Con: 30.3% Ref UK (1): 1% Yorks (3): 6.9%
If situation is not great for a national Brexity party, I can see YP saving their deposit and absorbing enough of the right of centre NOTA vote. Perhaps not 14% as for Refuk above, but enough.
Wondering about the definition of the RedWall. Perhaps a useful way of looking at is politically is a series of constituencies where there used to be a disconnect between the underlying demographics and the voting record, due to historical loyalties and traditions. But which now votes much more in line with similar areas in the rest of the country.
In some senses but not others. There’s little in common between Surrey commuter villages and the vast swathes of Cramlington or Blyth Persimmon housing estates.
I could be proven wrong, but I think that by the time the next election comes the so-called Red Wall seats will revert to type. Why were they previously Labour? Because their demographic meant that the average voter more identified with voting Labour. Did many actually swap from Labour to Tory, and if they did do they now identify as "Tories", the latter which I find very hard to believe? I imagine that in a lot of these seats it was because trad Labour types just didn't vote. A few switched to Tory and a few to other parties. Mike's data seemed to infer what I have always believed, which is that many of these traditionalists were put off by Corbyn, rather than (as many Tories want to believe) voting to "Get Brexit Done". Either way, both these issues will no longer be there at the next election. It will be interesting to see what happens. Tories who rely on their own wishful group think might get a shock.
Not sure. Is it not the case that many have moved to the right because of gradual demographic changes - a process begun long before Johnson or May entered the fray?. In the NE certainly many of the seats have simply steadily become more m/c or l/m/c. In the area of Kent I used to work in Dartford and the Medway towns - these have been solidly Tory for some time, possibly for similar reasons. It could simply be that parts of the north are simply catching up. Also it will be really difficult to anlayse if at the next GE there is a national move to Labour which could mask a long-term trend bedding in. I suspect analysis of what did and will happen is a very difficult task unless approached dispassionately - not sure we get much of this on here as most of us have strongish views, including OGH!
Indeed, I think Nigel is looking at the wrong end of the stick. These are areas that vote Labour in part because they'd always voted Labour, despite the demographics now being fairly Conservative-friendly.
Over the past decade many of these areas have drifted to the Conservatives because of the voting catching up with the demographics, not despite of it.
There is a bit of a post hoc, ergo propter hoc fallacy trying to blame/credit all of the change of voting with either Corbyn, or Brexit, or Boris or whatever suits the speaker's agenda a lot of the time. However a considerable portion of the change is simply voting catching up with reality. Middle class home owners with kids and two cars deciding they want to back the Conservatives afterall.
Corbyn/Brexit/Boris etc may have been the final straw, but not the deciding factor alone. Having finally made the jump I think the Labour Party might really struggle to regain these seats because the old reasons for voting Labour just don't exist anymore and Labour have forgotten how to speak to these voters anymore.
Comments
That isn’t liberal of course but neither are the Conservatives conservative.
Bury South fits the description a bit better, it had been Labour since 1997 and had a reasonable swing in 2019.
Lab -> Con 4.55% 43 seats
Con -> LD 1.5% Richmond Park, St Ives (1/2)
Lab -> LD 6.05% Hallam, Leeds NW (0/2)
Con -> SNP 5.8% 10 seats - SNP underperformed, only gained 7.
LD -> SNP 2.65% 0 seats - correct (Albeit seats swapped)
Lab -> SNP 8.3% 6 seats - correct
Con gain 41 seats, LD gain 4 seats
Lab lose 45 seats.
(E&W)
Overall, actual
Con gain 31, actually gained 48
SNP gain 16, gained 13
LD gain 4, lost 1
Lab lose 51, lost 60.
The first, “Dishoom”, is a great concept but you do not need to waste any of your life queuing for it. Anyway, you can get in off-peak, or even Deliveroo it.
The second, “Breakfast Club”, is a really shit concept (all day breakfasts) and I’ve never understood it’s attraction to the sort of people who queue (out of towners and giggly students).
From what primitive insanity doth he spring?
Would they not have been able to break up the party at the time?
It is unusual for soul legends to take an interest in U.K. politics, although not unknown for them to play active roles in the domestic scene.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martha_Reeves
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerry_Butler
Like those cavorting officers you see during Pride Parades.
This was worsened by Corbyn portraying visibly that he didn't share their values, due to things like opposing the national anthem and sympathy for militant Muslim groups.
To win these voters back, a simple economic policy offering is not enough. This working class group does not trust politicians and doesn't believe their promises. So they resort to voting based on politicians that seem to share their identity and values. Is this person proud of being British? Do they appreciate where I am from or look down on places like my town? Do they want to maintain the culture I grew up in and value, or do they want to change it to a culture like central London? Do they think our liberal way of life is better than that of traditional Islam, or do they think all cultures are equivalent?
Right now Labour are on the wrong side of these questions and nobody in the party wants to change on them.
Broadly, it's made up of Prestwich, Whitefield and Radcliffe.
Prestwich is inside the M60, and as urban middle class as North Greater Manchester gets. Almost the antithesis of red wall. It is also, significantly for 2019, very Jewish - that, IMO, was what drove the quite large swing against Labour.
Whitefield is suburban, full of three bed semis, and has never been particularly unfavourable territory for the Tories.
Only Radcliffe can really be considered Red Wall - historically a small semi-independent working class-ish town surrounded by middle class suburbia. But its transport links to Manchester have always been good, and it's long been a bit of a cheaper option for commuters to Manchester. And it's also not as historically hostile as all that to the Conservatives - it this site's early days ISTR we had a regular poster by the name of Stuart Penketh who was, I think, a Conservative councillor from Radcliffe.
So I wouldn't really describe Bury South as Red Wall either.
Heywood and Middleton next door, though - yes.
I have just stocked up on Bird & Wild Fairtrade Organic certified Bird Friendly and Shade-Grown coffee from the RSPB. So I'll pass on the self-flagellation.
When the LD vote collapsed, it paid no regard to the pseudo-theory of UNS (which has no observable proof in real results). So there’s no reason why, if the LDs ever get a significant upswing, it should pay any regard to UNS, however many hours PB’ers waste entering figures into Electoral Calculus and the like.
Three other central London places I like where you can't book -
Le Relais De Venise L'Entrecôte in Marylebone. Shortest menu in the world - Steak and chips. Or chips for vegetarians.
Burger And Lobster in Mayfair (I think there are a load of them now). Slightly longer menu - Burger, Lobster or Lobster Burger
Masala Zone in Covent Garden (again I think there are loads of them now). Much longer menu of proper fresh Indian food.
That's the party leadership, isn't it?
You need to have a genuinely integrated approach, because that's the only way you'll ever genuinely be "tough" on crime, not tabloid drivel.
The LDs however are more fiscally conservative than Labour if still socially liberal and anti hard Brexit and the LD leader Ed Davey was even a Minister in Cameron's coalition government. For a high earning home owning Home Counties Remainer the LDs are the safe non Tory choice, not Labour
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-9889075/EastEnders-drops-lowest-viewing-figures-just-1-7-million-tune-in.html
Which reminds me of the cheery fact that the station that Paul Simon was sitting on with a ticket to his destination when he wrote 'Homeward Bound' was Widnes.
“ In 1985 there were 49 cast members, 37 of whom were White British.. This compares with 41 out of 52 now. As a proportion of the cast this is an increase from 75.5% to 78.8%
(I would be interested to see the numbers for East London as a whole from 1985 compared to 2014)
Walford is supposedly a combination of Walthamstow and Stratford. The actual percentage of White Brits in Walthamstow in 2011 was 38%. In Stratford it was 17%, giving an average of 22.5%, and an overstatement by the BBC in 2014 of 56.3%
The proportion of Asian cast members was 4.1% in 1985, rising to 7.7% in 2014. This is against 21% of Walthamstow & 42% in Stratford, and average of 31.5% and an understatement of 23.8%”
http://aboutasfarasdelgados.blogspot.com/2014/11/is-eastenders-more-racist-than.html
However, I agree with your assessment of which party is likely to be a threat to the Tories in the leafy south east.
Same with the Bodyguard...3 years for a second season.
He wrote "Say It Loud - I'm Black And I'm Proud" in 1968, which was quite a big deal in the civil rights movement. I don't think he found any causes quite so important in Frome!
What I've heard of current New Who leaves me in little doubt that this 40 year old show with ropey special effects is far superior.
There's actually a lengthy discussion on which station it was on Wikipedia. Answer: can't be totally sure.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeward_Bound_(Simon_&_Garfunkel_song)
Though I am enjoying “Outlaws” (two episodes in). His follow up, “Say it Better, its artisan Cheddar” was sadly under appreciated.
The current seat had a majority of 1276 at 2019
The proposed boundary amends remove one ward (Normanton) and the new seat would have a 2019 notional majority of 747
The reason the seat looks much safer in Rentoul's tweet is that it is based on EC's prediction of what would happen at an election today based on current polling
Edit: I must be misreading - or is that 22.5% an error for 27.5? (It's the end digits that make me wonder.)
The problem is they aren't competing against crappy ITV or Sky One, its Netflix, Amazon, Disney, Apple, HBO, they have more money, can hire top quality acting talent and spent crazy money on better tech, and most importantly they have the resources to turn around high quality shows every year.
There have been many rumours about attempted reboots. In many ways I think it shouldn't happen. Some of new Dr Who has been great, but the last three years have been terrible, and its striking that we are going back to the original saviour to save the series again.
Fans may not all like it, but sometimes enough is enough. Once the shark is jumped, you cannot unjump it.
Honestly look at the outline of his white shirt and jacket to what is appearing from his head.
The comedies that work are when everybody can relate to the person / situation, David Brent, everybody has had a boss a bit like him, Kenny Snr in Phoenix Nights, everybody knows a bloke in the pub whose stories are just obviously bullshit.
It’s one of the great mysteries of modern life.
I presume the people who go there are the children of those who went to all those Aberdeen Steakhouses.
I have not watched the reboot.
I recently took a look at an episode of “Talons of Weng-Chiang”, supposedly one of the very best stories.
It was gash.
Chibnall is coming across as a spoilt brat who's smashing a toy so his younger brother can't play with it, even though his twelve older brothers all took great care not to damage it.
I generally give a new Doctor a look, but unless the deranged revisionism of Chibnall isn't retconned I don't think I'll bother.
Astonishing image.
They also have this problem where if they manage to get a big star to make something, they can't tie them for future seasons e.g. They got Tom Hardy to star in Taboo which was very good, then they couldn't make any future seasons as he is too busy with other projects. And so it gets canned. Same with Sherlock.
Taboo was getting 7 million viewers an episode. It was a winner. 5 years later, and oh f##k, that's canned.
Besides, it’s not so much that they are competing with Netflix etc, as the fact it’s a good show, a hit, and worth decent money in sales.
Yet it doesn’t seem to be a priority.
And, of course, Genesis of the Daleks is great.
Here are the current Unionist seats and successor seats, with Baxter’s prediction (likelihoods of HOLD on current boundaries in brackets). (Scottish Conservative leader Douglas Ross excluded as his Moray seat is being abolished and he is not standing at the next UK GE. Two seats are have unchanged boundaries.)
SCon seats
Banff and Buchan HOLD (58% Con Hold)
new Banff and Buchan SNP GAIN
Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk HOLD (55% Con Hold)
new Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk HOLD
Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale SNP GAIN (50% Con Hold)
new Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale SNP GAIN
Dumfries and Galloway SNP GAIN (40% Con Hold)
new Dumfries and Galloway SNP GAIN
West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine SNP GAIN (35% Con Hold)
Unchanged SNP GAIN
SLD seats
Orkney and Shetland SNP GAIN (44% LD Hold)
Unchanged SNP GAIN
Edinburgh West SNP GAIN (35% LD Hold)
new Edinburgh West SNP GAIN
North East Fife SNP GAIN (29% LD Hold)
new North East Fife SNP GAIN
Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross SNP GAIN (22% LD Hold)
new Highland North SNP GAIN
SLab seat
Edinburgh South HOLD (89% Lab Hold)
new Edinburgh South HOLD
It’s looking like another Unionist massacre, with only 2 seats left (one SCon and one SLab), unless Sarwar, Ross and Cole-Hamilton can turn their ships around. But Johnson’s boundary changes are an unneeded additional headache.
Disney TV is largely absolute drivel.
The best TV series of modern times is Big Little Lies Season 1 – it was a masterpiece told over five episodes. Again, they should have called it a day after season one and found a different book rather than elongating the story pointlessly, undermining their perfect original.
He becomes the first elected official of the party which was set up by actor Laurence Fox in September 2020.
Anthony Allen said the Conservatives had "gone soft on immigration".
The Conservatives are hoping to hold on to the North Shropshire constituency on 16 December. The seat was made vacant when former MP Owen Paterson resigned.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-59547081
All on Amazon all excellent.
Wheel of Time is $10m / episode show that for the fantasy types is getting very good reviews.
Apple+ offering is much weaker, but Ted Lasso is absolutely enormous success. And of course they aren't dicking around waiting 3 years between seasons. 10 episodes a year, every October.
Perhaps just not use Hardy - it’s not like Taboo made his name?
Big Little Lies was a ratings hit. That didn't mean there was a case for another series. There wasn't. Season 2 simply undermined the perfect original, which was a masterful adaptation from the novel.
It's the same with cinema. The Godfather series was superb. That doesn't mean that they should make parts IV and V. It's a story, and the story has been told. Like a good novel, it has a start, a middle and an end. Not a start, an end, another end, another end and another middle etc etc etc.
Yes it is quite amazing, and possibly racist, that the East End is portrayed the way EastEnders has it. That said, in 2021 parts of Hackney and Stratford are being gentrified to the point where you only see middle class white people living a Chelsea village life, so I’m told.
The local Glasgow Life one I go to has a single floor mat on which stupid fat fuckers do standing exercises in their manky trainers, but it's still better doing crunches on that than the floor. The gym has a rule that all the machines, weights etc should be sprayed with disinfectant and wiped down on the bits you've touched after use which is fair enough, but the only bare bit of me that would touch the mat briefly are my elbows so I hadn't been bothering. However this time when I finished some shaved head muscle Mary made a big performance of spraying and wiping down the whole mat, and didn't even go on to use it! I did consider asking what the prevalence of elbow transmitted Covid was but refrained since the guy was quite stacked.
At the other end a red bearded survivalist type who in the past I've heard spout sub Ayn Rand triumph of the will shite to any sap naive enough to engage, loudly revealed himself as an anti vaxxer today, promising the cops would have come at him armed if vaccinations became mandatory. That he was coughing his guts up in the changing rooms last Friday filled me with joy.
May have to consider a change of venue.
What t'Internet's rally done is give the consumer a massive amount of choice, although sadly that choice is split up amongst several providers. Neither Stargirl or Alex Rider are in genres I would normally watch, but I've enjoyed them.
But as ever, time's the problem...
But while they insist on being funded by an unenforceable and increasingly unfair model, I think they only option is not to hire big stars, but produce the content consistently.
Succession is not on Amazon but on Sky Atlantic, which is the one channel I don't have, so cannot comment on that.
I am a middle class white person living in Hackney and last night I went to carol practice with someone who is allowed to be referred to as Hon.
The low level change is that Normanton ward is being lost, 700 Labour ward majority in 2021.
2021 locals line up a decent Labour lead (on the new boundaries) still and perhaps hint where BXP GE transfers might land:
Lab : 46.1%
LD (1/6 wards): 8%
Green: 5%
Workers (1): 0.4%
Con: 30.3%
Ref UK (1): 1%
Yorks (3): 6.9%
If situation is not great for a national Brexity party, I can see YP saving their deposit and absorbing enough of the right of centre NOTA vote. Perhaps not 14% as for Refuk above, but enough.
Over the past decade many of these areas have drifted to the Conservatives because of the voting catching up with the demographics, not despite of it.
There is a bit of a post hoc, ergo propter hoc fallacy trying to blame/credit all of the change of voting with either Corbyn, or Brexit, or Boris or whatever suits the speaker's agenda a lot of the time. However a considerable portion of the change is simply voting catching up with reality. Middle class home owners with kids and two cars deciding they want to back the Conservatives afterall.
Corbyn/Brexit/Boris etc may have been the final straw, but not the deciding factor alone. Having finally made the jump I think the Labour Party might really struggle to regain these seats because the old reasons for voting Labour just don't exist anymore and Labour have forgotten how to speak to these voters anymore.