Howdy, Stranger!

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

2023 looks a value bet for year of next general election – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,161
edited February 2022 in General
image2023 looks a value bet for year of next general election – politicalbetting.com

One of the things that surprisingly we do not see much speculation about is when the next general election will be held. Whenever people talk about the date they tend to assume that it will be in 2024 but looking at what previous Prime Ministers with big majorities have done the timing tends to be no more than 4 years after the previous one.

Read the full story here

«13456789

Comments

  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    edited February 2022
    First thing to say is, there's a dado rail behind the bottle which someone forgot to fill in when they PSed the bottle out. The bottleless one is the fake.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,812
    The bottle doesn't look real to me. Its too big and leaning. Of course it could be on something but it just doesn't seem to fit.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,368
    For a 2023 election - the all important factor is when do the new boundaries come into play.

    And from memory that's October so a November 2023 election makes sense unless economically things are bad.

    The problem is I do think economically things are downhill from here and in a potentially seriously bad way, given how much of our economy is services and other items that are very discretionary spending....
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,812
    And on topic I think that they have still not got around to repealing the FTPA have they?
  • DavidL said:

    The bottle doesn't look real to me. Its too big and leaning. Of course it could be on something but it just doesn't seem to fit.

    That might be lens distortion. Both the bottle and Boris on the other side seem to be leaning towards the centre.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,249
    eek said:

    For a 2023 election - the all important factor is when do the new boundaries come into play.

    And from memory that's October so a November 2023 election makes sense unless economically things are bad.

    The problem is I do think economically things are downhill from here and in a potentially seriously bad way, given how much of our economy is services and other items that are very discretionary spending....

    I agree - new boundaries will be the deciding factor on the date of the election. Unless something really massive happens.
  • On-topic: yes, 2023.
  • 2023 was my expectation three months ago.

    Now? Much less likely unless you expect the Tories to regain a significant poll lead surely?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,373
    eek said:

    For a 2023 election - the all important factor is when do the new boundaries come into play.

    And from memory that's October so a November 2023 election makes sense unless economically things are bad.

    The problem is I do think economically things are downhill from here and in a potentially seriously bad way, given how much of our economy is services and other items that are very discretionary spending....

    We've had two elections later than July since 1964. Just two. 2019 and October 1974. You could add February 1974 as another winter election. They all have in common that they were called at a time of crisis (and in the case of February 1974, was clearly the wrong option).

    I don't think November will be the first choice of whoever is in charge unless they have no choice. All the signs are nobody found campaigning in the dark, cold and rain much fun.

    I think May 2024 is still the likeliest date, even if it does leave them boxed in.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,070
    edited February 2022

    DavidL said:

    The bottle doesn't look real to me. Its too big and leaning. Of course it could be on something but it just doesn't seem to fit.

    That might be lens distortion. Both the bottle and Boris on the other side seem to be leaning towards the centre.
    Is lens distortion, very obviously.

    Even professional photographers doing their best get some weird effects:
    https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2021/may/04/why-do-the-carters-look-so-tiny-alongside-joe-biden-and-his-wife-jill-in-this-picture

    (Although Carter might have been replaced by a puppet ...)
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,812
    FTPA aside, if you look at Parliaments which have been dragged out to the bitter end, it tends to be Parliaments where the incumbent is going to get battered. Think Major in 97 and Brown in 2010. Where the PM of the day thinks that they are in with a shout 4 years is more then norm. So this is probably a bet on the polls. If you go for 2023 you are assuming that the Tories' polling, possibly under a new leader, is going to recover.
  • ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    For a 2023 election - the all important factor is when do the new boundaries come into play.

    And from memory that's October so a November 2023 election makes sense unless economically things are bad.

    The problem is I do think economically things are downhill from here and in a potentially seriously bad way, given how much of our economy is services and other items that are very discretionary spending....

    We've had two elections later than July since 1964. Just two. 2019 and October 1974. You could add February 1974 as another winter election. They all have in common that they were called at a time of crisis (and in the case of February 1974, was clearly the wrong option).

    I don't think November will be the first choice of whoever is in charge unless they have no choice. All the signs are nobody found campaigning in the dark, cold and rain much fun.

    I think May 2024 is still the likeliest date, even if it does leave them boxed in.
    Boris has been reported as favouring winter elections.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,249

    DavidL said:

    The bottle doesn't look real to me. Its too big and leaning. Of course it could be on something but it just doesn't seem to fit.

    That might be lens distortion. Both the bottle and Boris on the other side seem to be leaning towards the centre.
    It's pretty much impossible to say, looking at a grainy picture of a picture on a low res screen.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,175

    2023 was my expectation three months ago.

    Now? Much less likely unless you expect the Tories to regain a significant poll lead surely?

    I've always thought it would be 2024 and I think we discussed the whole issue of "why are we having an autumn election?" a few months ago.

    But as you say, whatever the merits of going early but only after the boundary changes are implemented, there's not a cat in hell's chance of the Tories voluntarily going for an early election if the polls aren't great for them.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,277
    Nigelb said:

    DavidL said:

    The bottle doesn't look real to me. Its too big and leaning. Of course it could be on something but it just doesn't seem to fit.

    That might be lens distortion. Both the bottle and Boris on the other side seem to be leaning towards the centre.
    Is lens distortion, very obviously.
    This guy claims to be a pro tog and has analysed it and sees no prima facie evidence of photoshopping of the bottle going by the clarity

    https://twitter.com/planner9818/status/1491703124008083459?s=20

    Tho that does not explain the odd size and tilting (however the latter could be a lens effect, as you say)

    It's all decidedly fishy as when these photos first emerged there was no tinsel or bottle. So someone edited them out, then put them back in? WTF?

    At this late decadent stage of partygate, it could be anyone doing anything. It could be some guy in a Croydon basement making photos for the lolz
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 35,990
    PM asked if he’ll resign if he’s found to have broken the law over Partygate. He says he understands the question being posed and replies: ‘That process must be completed and I’m looking forward to it being completed.’
    https://twitter.com/nickgutteridge/status/1491718767772057604
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,582
    I’d laugh my head off if someone has duped the Mirror with a fake photoshop of a “party”.

    Not as if that rag doesn’t have form for doctoring photographs, isn’t that true Piers Morgan?
  • ApplicantApplicant Posts: 3,379
    DavidL said:

    And on topic I think that they have still not got around to repealing the FTPA have they?

    DACOP cleared Lords Report stage yesterday (with one amendment that the Commons will throw out as it negates the point of the Bill), third reading is set for 24th Feb.

    https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/2859/stages
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,310
    Forget photos: I am curious as to these police questionnaires and exactly how the police propose to comply with the provisions of PACE.

  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,926
    Sandpit said:

    I’d laugh my head off if someone has duped the Mirror with a fake photoshop of a “party”.

    Not as if that rag doesn’t have form for doctoring photographs, isn’t that true Piers Morgan?

    Isn't it more likely someone is muddying the waters by doctoring the photo with the wine and tinsel, to remove them?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,373
    tlg86 said:

    2023 was my expectation three months ago.

    Now? Much less likely unless you expect the Tories to regain a significant poll lead surely?

    I've always thought it would be 2024 and I think we discussed the whole issue of "why are we having an autumn election?" a few months ago.

    But as you say, whatever the merits of going early but only after the boundary changes are implemented, there's not a cat in hell's chance of the Tories voluntarily going for an early election if the polls aren't great for them.
    Yes, but it's not his view that's going to matter, is it? It's what his successor, whoever that is, thinks that will be important.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,277

    DavidL said:

    The bottle doesn't look real to me. Its too big and leaning. Of course it could be on something but it just doesn't seem to fit.

    That might be lens distortion. Both the bottle and Boris on the other side seem to be leaning towards the centre.
    It's pretty much impossible to say, looking at a grainy picture of a picture on a low res screen.
    @IshmaelZ is right, there is a blank behind the bottle-less photo where the dado rail should be

    This suggests that the bottle was originally photoshopped OUT (by the Mirror? by the Mirror and Dom and the CIA?), when the first image was released, then it was put back IN, so as to drag out the agony for Boris and prolong the scandal by making it juicier....

    All jolly fishy, and also rather diverting, in an amateur detective kind of way
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,249
    Nigelb said:

    DavidL said:

    The bottle doesn't look real to me. Its too big and leaning. Of course it could be on something but it just doesn't seem to fit.

    That might be lens distortion. Both the bottle and Boris on the other side seem to be leaning towards the centre.
    Is lens distortion, very obviously.

    Even professional photographers doing their best get some weird effects:
    https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2021/may/04/why-do-the-carters-look-so-tiny-alongside-joe-biden-and-his-wife-jill-in-this-picture

    (Although Carter might have been replaced by a puppet ...)
    The problem has been made worse by modern lens design.

    You cannot design out all the effects in a lens system. But you can chose which ones you end up with.

    So, using computer design and analysis, the cheapest lens system possible is designed to remove as much as possible of the distortions that the designer doesn't want. Which in turn, generally, increases other distortions.

    When you add in the requirement for wide field on laptop and phone cameras...
  • glwglw Posts: 9,906
    IshmaelZ said:

    First thing to say is, there's a dado rail behind the bottle which someone forgot to fill in when they PSed the bottle out. The bottleless one is the fake.

    There is little evidence in the file being served by the Mirror of editing beyond the faces being obscured, although that could be because it has already been recompressed multiple times. It's not a great source as it appears to picture taken on a phone of a tablet or computer screen.

    As to the content itself the lighting on the bottle looks right, the tinsel seems to cast colour onto the white shirt, and the plastic in front of the bottle looks correctly translucent. Getting those things right would take a real expert in photoshopping, that goes way beyond simply making a good mask. Amateurs would get it wrong.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,373
    Cyclefree said:

    Forget photos: I am curious as to these police questionnaires and exactly how the police propose to comply with the provisions of PACE.

    They intend to comply with it? Surely, more likely they want to botch the investigation so it's impossible to bring charges.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,175
    ydoethur said:

    tlg86 said:

    2023 was my expectation three months ago.

    Now? Much less likely unless you expect the Tories to regain a significant poll lead surely?

    I've always thought it would be 2024 and I think we discussed the whole issue of "why are we having an autumn election?" a few months ago.

    But as you say, whatever the merits of going early but only after the boundary changes are implemented, there's not a cat in hell's chance of the Tories voluntarily going for an early election if the polls aren't great for them.
    Yes, but it's not his view that's going to matter, is it? It's what his successor, whoever that is, thinks that will be important.
    Where did I mention the current PM? :)
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,582

    Nigelb said:

    DavidL said:

    The bottle doesn't look real to me. Its too big and leaning. Of course it could be on something but it just doesn't seem to fit.

    That might be lens distortion. Both the bottle and Boris on the other side seem to be leaning towards the centre.
    Is lens distortion, very obviously.

    Even professional photographers doing their best get some weird effects:
    https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2021/may/04/why-do-the-carters-look-so-tiny-alongside-joe-biden-and-his-wife-jill-in-this-picture

    (Although Carter might have been replaced by a puppet ...)
    The problem has been made worse by modern lens design.

    You cannot design out all the effects in a lens system. But you can chose which ones you end up with.

    So, using computer design and analysis, the cheapest lens system possible is designed to remove as much as possible of the distortions that the designer doesn't want. Which in turn, generally, increases other distortions.

    When you add in the requirement for wide field on laptop and phone cameras...
    Everyone’s using crap camera gear these days, that’s the problem.

    But when an iPhone costs £1k, and a DSLR £5k, anyone who isn’t a serious photog makes do with the phone.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,812
    Cyclefree said:
    Ian Blackford, aka the fat crofter, is a bit of an arse but I was concerned that Kate Forbes was so willing to jump on such a bandwagon with significantly less than the requisite number of wheels. Firstly, she is said to be bright and secondly finance ministers should simply be a bit more measured in their judgements. Not her best episode.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    Leon said:

    Nigelb said:

    DavidL said:

    The bottle doesn't look real to me. Its too big and leaning. Of course it could be on something but it just doesn't seem to fit.

    That might be lens distortion. Both the bottle and Boris on the other side seem to be leaning towards the centre.
    Is lens distortion, very obviously.
    This guy claims to be a pro tog and has analysed it and sees no prima facie evidence of photoshopping of the bottle going by the clarity

    https://twitter.com/planner9818/status/1491703124008083459?s=20

    Tho that does not explain the odd size and tilting (however the latter could be a lens effect, as you say)

    It's all decidedly fishy as when these photos first emerged there was no tinsel or bottle. So someone edited them out, then put them back in? WTF?

    At this late decadent stage of partygate, it could be anyone doing anything. It could be some guy in a Croydon basement making photos for the lolz
    Brilliant twitter conversation

    I think it's the same game as the Andrew/Virginia thing - photoshop him out, then claim he was photoshopped *in*. It is not the case that the Mirror ever published the no-bottle photo, that's misdirection.
  • glwglw Posts: 9,906

    DavidL said:

    The bottle doesn't look real to me. Its too big and leaning. Of course it could be on something but it just doesn't seem to fit.

    That might be lens distortion. Both the bottle and Boris on the other side seem to be leaning towards the centre.
    It's two sets of distortion as well. The initial lens effects of the image being taken, and then the effects of taking a picture of a screen. It's non-trivial to assess such things.
  • Leon said:

    Nigelb said:

    DavidL said:

    The bottle doesn't look real to me. Its too big and leaning. Of course it could be on something but it just doesn't seem to fit.

    That might be lens distortion. Both the bottle and Boris on the other side seem to be leaning towards the centre.
    Is lens distortion, very obviously.
    This guy claims to be a pro tog and has analysed it and sees no prima facie evidence of photoshopping of the bottle going by the clarity

    https://twitter.com/planner9818/status/1491703124008083459?s=20

    Tho that does not explain the odd size and tilting (however the latter could be a lens effect, as you say)

    It's all decidedly fishy as when these photos first emerged there was no tinsel or bottle. So someone edited them out, then put them back in? WTF?

    At this late decadent stage of partygate, it could be anyone doing anything. It could be some guy in a Croydon basement making photos for the lolz
    The original defence was the 15/12 event shown was a zoom quiz and not a party.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    DavidL said:

    The bottle doesn't look real to me. Its too big and leaning. Of course it could be on something but it just doesn't seem to fit.

    That might be lens distortion. Both the bottle and Boris on the other side seem to be leaning towards the centre.
    Is lens distortion, very obviously.

    Even professional photographers doing their best get some weird effects:
    https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2021/may/04/why-do-the-carters-look-so-tiny-alongside-joe-biden-and-his-wife-jill-in-this-picture

    (Although Carter might have been replaced by a puppet ...)
    The problem has been made worse by modern lens design.

    You cannot design out all the effects in a lens system. But you can chose which ones you end up with.

    So, using computer design and analysis, the cheapest lens system possible is designed to remove as much as possible of the distortions that the designer doesn't want. Which in turn, generally, increases other distortions.

    When you add in the requirement for wide field on laptop and phone cameras...
    Everyone’s using crap camera gear these days, that’s the problem.

    But when an iPhone costs £1k, and a DSLR £5k, anyone who isn’t a serious photog makes do with the phone.
    That's off a £400 laptop by the look of it. iphone would do a much better job.
  • ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    For a 2023 election - the all important factor is when do the new boundaries come into play.

    And from memory that's October so a November 2023 election makes sense unless economically things are bad.

    The problem is I do think economically things are downhill from here and in a potentially seriously bad way, given how much of our economy is services and other items that are very discretionary spending....

    We've had two elections later than July since 1964. Just two. 2019 and October 1974. You could add February 1974 as another winter election. They all have in common that they were called at a time of crisis (and in the case of February 1974, was clearly the wrong option).

    I don't think November will be the first choice of whoever is in charge unless they have no choice. All the signs are nobody found campaigning in the dark, cold and rain much fun.

    I think May 2024 is still the likeliest date, even if it does leave them boxed in.
    The most effective campaigning seems to be through social media these days, but there's a subsidiary issue of getting voters to the booths after dark. The current idea is that postal and daylight voting tends to favour the Tories. On the other hand, photo ID could result in a much reduced turnout (not to mention some unpleasant scenes at polling stations) so who knows?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,249
    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    DavidL said:

    The bottle doesn't look real to me. Its too big and leaning. Of course it could be on something but it just doesn't seem to fit.

    That might be lens distortion. Both the bottle and Boris on the other side seem to be leaning towards the centre.
    Is lens distortion, very obviously.

    Even professional photographers doing their best get some weird effects:
    https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2021/may/04/why-do-the-carters-look-so-tiny-alongside-joe-biden-and-his-wife-jill-in-this-picture

    (Although Carter might have been replaced by a puppet ...)
    The problem has been made worse by modern lens design.

    You cannot design out all the effects in a lens system. But you can chose which ones you end up with.

    So, using computer design and analysis, the cheapest lens system possible is designed to remove as much as possible of the distortions that the designer doesn't want. Which in turn, generally, increases other distortions.

    When you add in the requirement for wide field on laptop and phone cameras...
    Everyone’s using crap camera gear these days, that’s the problem.

    But when an iPhone costs £1k, and a DSLR £5k, anyone who isn’t a serious photog makes do with the phone.
    You can get a very, very good DSLR for less than the price of an iPhone.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,277
    IshmaelZ said:

    Leon said:

    Nigelb said:

    DavidL said:

    The bottle doesn't look real to me. Its too big and leaning. Of course it could be on something but it just doesn't seem to fit.

    That might be lens distortion. Both the bottle and Boris on the other side seem to be leaning towards the centre.
    Is lens distortion, very obviously.
    This guy claims to be a pro tog and has analysed it and sees no prima facie evidence of photoshopping of the bottle going by the clarity

    https://twitter.com/planner9818/status/1491703124008083459?s=20

    Tho that does not explain the odd size and tilting (however the latter could be a lens effect, as you say)

    It's all decidedly fishy as when these photos first emerged there was no tinsel or bottle. So someone edited them out, then put them back in? WTF?

    At this late decadent stage of partygate, it could be anyone doing anything. It could be some guy in a Croydon basement making photos for the lolz
    Brilliant twitter conversation

    I think it's the same game as the Andrew/Virginia thing - photoshop him out, then claim he was photoshopped *in*. It is not the case that the Mirror ever published the no-bottle photo, that's misdirection.
    Yes, could be

    However I certainly would not rule out my explanation. Release a doctored, more innocent, bottle-free image first, get Boris to say Oh it was a Zoom call, not a party, you can tell from the photo - THEN release the real photo, with tinsel and bottle, and make Boris look even more of a liar, and elongate the "scandal" by another week or two
  • ApplicantApplicant Posts: 3,379

    ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    For a 2023 election - the all important factor is when do the new boundaries come into play.

    And from memory that's October so a November 2023 election makes sense unless economically things are bad.

    The problem is I do think economically things are downhill from here and in a potentially seriously bad way, given how much of our economy is services and other items that are very discretionary spending....

    We've had two elections later than July since 1964. Just two. 2019 and October 1974. You could add February 1974 as another winter election. They all have in common that they were called at a time of crisis (and in the case of February 1974, was clearly the wrong option).

    I don't think November will be the first choice of whoever is in charge unless they have no choice. All the signs are nobody found campaigning in the dark, cold and rain much fun.

    I think May 2024 is still the likeliest date, even if it does leave them boxed in.
    The most effective campaigning seems to be through social media these days, but there's a subsidiary issue of getting voters to the booths after dark. The current idea is that postal and daylight voting tends to favour the Tories. On the other hand, photo ID could result in a much reduced turnout (not to mention some unpleasant scenes at polling stations) so who knows?
    I expect the actual effects of photo ID to be very small, and dwarfed by political activists "being denied the vote" to make a point (and then quietly going to vote later. Or possibly having already voted by post anyway).
  • The winner of the hereditary conservative peers by-election was Lord Strathcarron.

    https://www.parliament.uk/globalassets/documents/lords-information-office/2022/hereditary-peers-by-election-result-ridley.pdf

    Why did they stop the count after round 2? If Lord Strathcarron had 18 votes and the other candidates in total had 18 in total between, it is mathematically possible for their to be a tie. In that situation, presumably the winner is the candidate with the most first round votes?

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,812
    Cyclefree said:

    Forget photos: I am curious as to these police questionnaires and exactly how the police propose to comply with the provisions of PACE.

    I am not an expert on PACE but presumably the content of the questionaires will not be admissible? It does seem bizarre, especially if there are only 50 people to speak to.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,955
    edited February 2022
    Fpt

    IshmaelZ said:

    You'd be surprised. 3 or 4 years ago I did the Atlantic Rally for Cruisers - 200 yachts sailing Canaries - caribbean. Most are just cruising, about 25 are in the "racing" division. It's completely amateur, no serious yacht taking part, 50p prize money, dog with the waggiest tail stuff. Nonetheless one owner begged his crew, just before reaching St Lucia, to go along with his claim they hadn't motored at all when they had. They had had 2 weeks to decide how much they disliked him and told him to piss off. St Lucia is not a large island, and there was a dozen drunk yachties telling this story in every bar on the island to anyone who would listen



    Bit of a long shot, but anyway.
    We have an SA chap, Dave, painting a spare room, nice lad. His forte is small boat building (ie wood) but he says he hasn't been able to find any hook ups or opportunities here (Glasgow) which I was slightly surprised about. I know you get up to this part of the world now and again, any insights or suggestions?

    Edit: he's a very meticulous and reliable decorator, qualities which I'd imagine would be transferrable.

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,373
    tlg86 said:

    ydoethur said:

    tlg86 said:

    2023 was my expectation three months ago.

    Now? Much less likely unless you expect the Tories to regain a significant poll lead surely?

    I've always thought it would be 2024 and I think we discussed the whole issue of "why are we having an autumn election?" a few months ago.

    But as you say, whatever the merits of going early but only after the boundary changes are implemented, there's not a cat in hell's chance of the Tories voluntarily going for an early election if the polls aren't great for them.
    Yes, but it's not his view that's going to matter, is it? It's what his successor, whoever that is, thinks that will be important.
    Where did I mention the current PM? :)
    If this cold isn't Covid, it's still bloody nasty and has caused me yet another moment of confusion. Somehow I've quoted the wrong post. That was a reply to @DecrepiterJohnL . Sorry @tlg86 .
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,859
    edited February 2022
    DavidL said:

    The bottle doesn't look real to me. Its too big and leaning. Of course it could be on something but it just doesn't seem to fit.

    Ask Father Ted?

    He can also probably explain the giant bottle of sanitiser on the table.

    Look closely at the bottle and the sanitiser and they both have the same light reflection in precisely the same place.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,582

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    DavidL said:

    The bottle doesn't look real to me. Its too big and leaning. Of course it could be on something but it just doesn't seem to fit.

    That might be lens distortion. Both the bottle and Boris on the other side seem to be leaning towards the centre.
    Is lens distortion, very obviously.

    Even professional photographers doing their best get some weird effects:
    https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2021/may/04/why-do-the-carters-look-so-tiny-alongside-joe-biden-and-his-wife-jill-in-this-picture

    (Although Carter might have been replaced by a puppet ...)
    The problem has been made worse by modern lens design.

    You cannot design out all the effects in a lens system. But you can chose which ones you end up with.

    So, using computer design and analysis, the cheapest lens system possible is designed to remove as much as possible of the distortions that the designer doesn't want. Which in turn, generally, increases other distortions.

    When you add in the requirement for wide field on laptop and phone cameras...
    Everyone’s using crap camera gear these days, that’s the problem.

    But when an iPhone costs £1k, and a DSLR £5k, anyone who isn’t a serious photog makes do with the phone.
    You can get a very, very good DSLR for less than the price of an iPhone.
    Just as the cameras start to get cheaper, they release a more expensive one!

    I call this a very very good DSLR: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1634703-REG/canon_r5_cine_kit.html

  • ApplicantApplicant Posts: 3,379

    The winner of the hereditary conservative peers by-election was Lord Strathcarron.

    https://www.parliament.uk/globalassets/documents/lords-information-office/2022/hereditary-peers-by-election-result-ridley.pdf

    Why did they stop the count after round 2? If Lord Strathcarron had 18 votes and the other candidates in total had 18 in total between, it is mathematically possible for their to be a tie. In that situation, presumably the winner is the candidate with the most first round votes?

    Yes, that's right, and that was Strathcarron. So after round 2, the worst he could do was a tie in which he had the tiebreaker.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,647
    I know next to nothing about photography but I have to use Lightroom's lens-adjustment thing to even get straight horizons on my SLR.

    I also look noticeably different on my new laptop webcam, according to colleagues. I'd wait for an actual expert to debunk all this first.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,277
    Now I'm even more confused. But in a faintly enjoyable way

    "Here's the supposedly 'original image'. However, it is actually photoshopped from the one publicised by the Mirror. You can see the editor placed a blur effect on the bottom left corner (where they removed the bottle), and the removal of the tinsel leaves some major errors"

    https://twitter.com/Quinby__/status/1491717630918541319?s=20
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    Fpt

    IshmaelZ said:

    You'd be surprised. 3 or 4 years ago I did the Atlantic Rally for Cruisers - 200 yachts sailing Canaries - caribbean. Most are just cruising, about 25 are in the "racing" division. It's completely amateur, no serious yacht taking part, 50p prize money, dog with the waggiest tail stuff. Nonetheless one owner begged his crew, just before reaching St Lucia, to go along with his claim they hadn't motored at all when they had. They had had 2 weeks to decide how much they disliked him and told him to piss off. St Lucia is not a large island, and there was a dozen drunk yachties telling this story in every bar on the island to anyone who would listen



    Bit of a long shot, but anyway.
    We have an SA chap, Dave, painting a spare room, nice lad. His forte is small boat building (ie wood) but he says he hasn't been able to find any hook ups or opportunities here (Glasgow) which I was slightly surprised about. I know you get up to this part of the world now and again, any insights or suggestions?

    Edit: he's a very meticulous and reliable decorator, qualities which I'd imagine would be transferrable.

    Sadly not, I know the guys who rebuilt https://www.eda-frandsen.co.uk/ on Knoydart in the 90s but she is Falmouth based these days. Falmouth is very much the centre of the trad wooden boat building world, the guy to contact is Luke Powell at https://workingsail.co.uk/
  • Leon said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Leon said:

    Nigelb said:

    DavidL said:

    The bottle doesn't look real to me. Its too big and leaning. Of course it could be on something but it just doesn't seem to fit.

    That might be lens distortion. Both the bottle and Boris on the other side seem to be leaning towards the centre.
    Is lens distortion, very obviously.
    This guy claims to be a pro tog and has analysed it and sees no prima facie evidence of photoshopping of the bottle going by the clarity

    https://twitter.com/planner9818/status/1491703124008083459?s=20

    Tho that does not explain the odd size and tilting (however the latter could be a lens effect, as you say)

    It's all decidedly fishy as when these photos first emerged there was no tinsel or bottle. So someone edited them out, then put them back in? WTF?

    At this late decadent stage of partygate, it could be anyone doing anything. It could be some guy in a Croydon basement making photos for the lolz
    Brilliant twitter conversation

    I think it's the same game as the Andrew/Virginia thing - photoshop him out, then claim he was photoshopped *in*. It is not the case that the Mirror ever published the no-bottle photo, that's misdirection.
    Yes, could be

    However I certainly would not rule out my explanation. Release a doctored, more innocent, bottle-free image first, get Boris to say Oh it was a Zoom call, not a party, you can tell from the photo - THEN release the real photo, with tinsel and bottle, and make Boris look even more of a liar, and elongate the "scandal" by another week or two
    I reckon the photo without the tinsel and bottle is the genuine one. Boris's people then photoshopped on the bottle and the tinsel and then leaked it to the Mirror. They then disseminated the innocent original one on social media. This is straight out of the Putin playbook: bombard everyone with so much confusion and fakery that in the end no one knows what to believe and just gives up.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,249
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    DavidL said:

    The bottle doesn't look real to me. Its too big and leaning. Of course it could be on something but it just doesn't seem to fit.

    That might be lens distortion. Both the bottle and Boris on the other side seem to be leaning towards the centre.
    Is lens distortion, very obviously.

    Even professional photographers doing their best get some weird effects:
    https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2021/may/04/why-do-the-carters-look-so-tiny-alongside-joe-biden-and-his-wife-jill-in-this-picture

    (Although Carter might have been replaced by a puppet ...)
    The problem has been made worse by modern lens design.

    You cannot design out all the effects in a lens system. But you can chose which ones you end up with.

    So, using computer design and analysis, the cheapest lens system possible is designed to remove as much as possible of the distortions that the designer doesn't want. Which in turn, generally, increases other distortions.

    When you add in the requirement for wide field on laptop and phone cameras...
    Everyone’s using crap camera gear these days, that’s the problem.

    But when an iPhone costs £1k, and a DSLR £5k, anyone who isn’t a serious photog makes do with the phone.
    You can get a very, very good DSLR for less than the price of an iPhone.
    Just as the cameras start to get cheaper, they release a more expensive one!

    I call this a very very good DSLR: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1634703-REG/canon_r5_cine_kit.html

    Unless you are quite good as a photographer and shooting a difficult shot, the average person won't be able to tell much between the result from a EOS-1DX Mk iii with L series glass and the results from a EOS 250D with the bundled lens.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    Leon said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Leon said:

    Nigelb said:

    DavidL said:

    The bottle doesn't look real to me. Its too big and leaning. Of course it could be on something but it just doesn't seem to fit.

    That might be lens distortion. Both the bottle and Boris on the other side seem to be leaning towards the centre.
    Is lens distortion, very obviously.
    This guy claims to be a pro tog and has analysed it and sees no prima facie evidence of photoshopping of the bottle going by the clarity

    https://twitter.com/planner9818/status/1491703124008083459?s=20

    Tho that does not explain the odd size and tilting (however the latter could be a lens effect, as you say)

    It's all decidedly fishy as when these photos first emerged there was no tinsel or bottle. So someone edited them out, then put them back in? WTF?

    At this late decadent stage of partygate, it could be anyone doing anything. It could be some guy in a Croydon basement making photos for the lolz
    Brilliant twitter conversation

    I think it's the same game as the Andrew/Virginia thing - photoshop him out, then claim he was photoshopped *in*. It is not the case that the Mirror ever published the no-bottle photo, that's misdirection.
    Yes, could be

    However I certainly would not rule out my explanation. Release a doctored, more innocent, bottle-free image first, get Boris to say Oh it was a Zoom call, not a party, you can tell from the photo - THEN release the real photo, with tinsel and bottle, and make Boris look even more of a liar, and elongate the "scandal" by another week or two
    My answer to that would be, you could simply crop the bottle out, and cropping isn't faking - a chargeto which the Mirror is senstive after the Morgan torture photos.

    Apparently Zahawi did in fact say at the time the quiz came to light No alcohol therefore not a party.
  • BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 2,747
    MaxPB said:
    Well, yes, it was uncontroversial until Blackford et al decided to make it controversial by insisting that English taxpayers would pay Scots pensions after Indy.

    What it really shows up is a remarkable lack of confidence in the economics of independence, even among its more avid supporters.
  • Leon said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Leon said:

    Nigelb said:

    DavidL said:

    The bottle doesn't look real to me. Its too big and leaning. Of course it could be on something but it just doesn't seem to fit.

    That might be lens distortion. Both the bottle and Boris on the other side seem to be leaning towards the centre.
    Is lens distortion, very obviously.
    This guy claims to be a pro tog and has analysed it and sees no prima facie evidence of photoshopping of the bottle going by the clarity

    https://twitter.com/planner9818/status/1491703124008083459?s=20

    Tho that does not explain the odd size and tilting (however the latter could be a lens effect, as you say)

    It's all decidedly fishy as when these photos first emerged there was no tinsel or bottle. So someone edited them out, then put them back in? WTF?

    At this late decadent stage of partygate, it could be anyone doing anything. It could be some guy in a Croydon basement making photos for the lolz
    Brilliant twitter conversation

    I think it's the same game as the Andrew/Virginia thing - photoshop him out, then claim he was photoshopped *in*. It is not the case that the Mirror ever published the no-bottle photo, that's misdirection.
    Yes, could be

    However I certainly would not rule out my explanation. Release a doctored, more innocent, bottle-free image first, get Boris to say Oh it was a Zoom call, not a party, you can tell from the photo - THEN release the real photo, with tinsel and bottle, and make Boris look even more of a liar, and elongate the "scandal" by another week or two
    I reckon the photo without the tinsel and bottle is the genuine one. Boris's people then photoshopped on the bottle and the tinsel and then leaked it to the Mirror. They then disseminated the innocent original one on social media. This is straight out of the Putin playbook: bombard everyone with so much confusion and fakery that in the end no one knows what to believe and just gives up.
    Good morning

    Just reading about this, it raises serious questions for the mirror to explain and account for the two photos

    They both cannot be correct and maybe the MET needs to look into this
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,277

    Leon said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Leon said:

    Nigelb said:

    DavidL said:

    The bottle doesn't look real to me. Its too big and leaning. Of course it could be on something but it just doesn't seem to fit.

    That might be lens distortion. Both the bottle and Boris on the other side seem to be leaning towards the centre.
    Is lens distortion, very obviously.
    This guy claims to be a pro tog and has analysed it and sees no prima facie evidence of photoshopping of the bottle going by the clarity

    https://twitter.com/planner9818/status/1491703124008083459?s=20

    Tho that does not explain the odd size and tilting (however the latter could be a lens effect, as you say)

    It's all decidedly fishy as when these photos first emerged there was no tinsel or bottle. So someone edited them out, then put them back in? WTF?

    At this late decadent stage of partygate, it could be anyone doing anything. It could be some guy in a Croydon basement making photos for the lolz
    Brilliant twitter conversation

    I think it's the same game as the Andrew/Virginia thing - photoshop him out, then claim he was photoshopped *in*. It is not the case that the Mirror ever published the no-bottle photo, that's misdirection.
    Yes, could be

    However I certainly would not rule out my explanation. Release a doctored, more innocent, bottle-free image first, get Boris to say Oh it was a Zoom call, not a party, you can tell from the photo - THEN release the real photo, with tinsel and bottle, and make Boris look even more of a liar, and elongate the "scandal" by another week or two
    I reckon the photo without the tinsel and bottle is the genuine one. Boris's people then photoshopped on the bottle and the tinsel and then leaked it to the Mirror. They then disseminated the innocent original one on social media. This is straight out of the Putin playbook: bombard everyone with so much confusion and fakery that in the end no one knows what to believe and just gives up.
    I'm tending to @IshmaelZ's explanation.... probably

    The doctored photo is the one without the bottle and the tinsel. You can tell. It isn't even doctored very well (see below). The removal of the bottle and tinsel have left blurs and lacunae, it's quite poorly done

    The question then is: who did it? Did the Mirror really publish this badly doctored image, ever? There is no proof they did, so it is more likely someone has taken the doctored image and stuck MIRROR EXCLUSIVE on top of it, to cast doubt on the whole of partygate and on the Mirror

    Note that the original tweet which kicked this all off came from a Boris fan account.

    Fabulously murky. And this points to quite a scary and imminent future: in a couple of years photoshopping will be a billion times better than this, thanks to GPT82, and so we will never be able to distinguish between the fakes and reality. Ominous.

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,373

    Leon said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Leon said:

    Nigelb said:

    DavidL said:

    The bottle doesn't look real to me. Its too big and leaning. Of course it could be on something but it just doesn't seem to fit.

    That might be lens distortion. Both the bottle and Boris on the other side seem to be leaning towards the centre.
    Is lens distortion, very obviously.
    This guy claims to be a pro tog and has analysed it and sees no prima facie evidence of photoshopping of the bottle going by the clarity

    https://twitter.com/planner9818/status/1491703124008083459?s=20

    Tho that does not explain the odd size and tilting (however the latter could be a lens effect, as you say)

    It's all decidedly fishy as when these photos first emerged there was no tinsel or bottle. So someone edited them out, then put them back in? WTF?

    At this late decadent stage of partygate, it could be anyone doing anything. It could be some guy in a Croydon basement making photos for the lolz
    Brilliant twitter conversation

    I think it's the same game as the Andrew/Virginia thing - photoshop him out, then claim he was photoshopped *in*. It is not the case that the Mirror ever published the no-bottle photo, that's misdirection.
    Yes, could be

    However I certainly would not rule out my explanation. Release a doctored, more innocent, bottle-free image first, get Boris to say Oh it was a Zoom call, not a party, you can tell from the photo - THEN release the real photo, with tinsel and bottle, and make Boris look even more of a liar, and elongate the "scandal" by another week or two
    I reckon the photo without the tinsel and bottle is the genuine one. Boris's people then photoshopped on the bottle and the tinsel and then leaked it to the Mirror. They then disseminated the innocent original one on social media. This is straight out of the Putin playbook: bombard everyone with so much confusion and fakery that in the end no one knows what to believe and just gives up.
    Good morning

    Just reading about this, it raises serious questions for the mirror to explain and account for the two photos

    They both cannot be correct and maybe the MET needs to look into this
    I would prefer somebody competent to look into it, personally.

    Yes, I mean that seriously. I wouldn't trust the Met to look into a shop window after the last few years.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,070
    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    DavidL said:

    The bottle doesn't look real to me. Its too big and leaning. Of course it could be on something but it just doesn't seem to fit.

    That might be lens distortion. Both the bottle and Boris on the other side seem to be leaning towards the centre.
    Is lens distortion, very obviously.

    Even professional photographers doing their best get some weird effects:
    https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2021/may/04/why-do-the-carters-look-so-tiny-alongside-joe-biden-and-his-wife-jill-in-this-picture

    (Although Carter might have been replaced by a puppet ...)
    The problem has been made worse by modern lens design.

    You cannot design out all the effects in a lens system. But you can chose which ones you end up with.

    So, using computer design and analysis, the cheapest lens system possible is designed to remove as much as possible of the distortions that the designer doesn't want. Which in turn, generally, increases other distortions.

    When you add in the requirement for wide field on laptop and phone cameras...
    Everyone’s using crap camera gear these days, that’s the problem.

    But when an iPhone costs £1k, and a DSLR £5k, anyone who isn’t a serious photog makes do with the phone.
    No it's not.
    I refer you to the Carter photograph above.
  • ydoethur said:

    Leon said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Leon said:

    Nigelb said:

    DavidL said:

    The bottle doesn't look real to me. Its too big and leaning. Of course it could be on something but it just doesn't seem to fit.

    That might be lens distortion. Both the bottle and Boris on the other side seem to be leaning towards the centre.
    Is lens distortion, very obviously.
    This guy claims to be a pro tog and has analysed it and sees no prima facie evidence of photoshopping of the bottle going by the clarity

    https://twitter.com/planner9818/status/1491703124008083459?s=20

    Tho that does not explain the odd size and tilting (however the latter could be a lens effect, as you say)

    It's all decidedly fishy as when these photos first emerged there was no tinsel or bottle. So someone edited them out, then put them back in? WTF?

    At this late decadent stage of partygate, it could be anyone doing anything. It could be some guy in a Croydon basement making photos for the lolz
    Brilliant twitter conversation

    I think it's the same game as the Andrew/Virginia thing - photoshop him out, then claim he was photoshopped *in*. It is not the case that the Mirror ever published the no-bottle photo, that's misdirection.
    Yes, could be

    However I certainly would not rule out my explanation. Release a doctored, more innocent, bottle-free image first, get Boris to say Oh it was a Zoom call, not a party, you can tell from the photo - THEN release the real photo, with tinsel and bottle, and make Boris look even more of a liar, and elongate the "scandal" by another week or two
    I reckon the photo without the tinsel and bottle is the genuine one. Boris's people then photoshopped on the bottle and the tinsel and then leaked it to the Mirror. They then disseminated the innocent original one on social media. This is straight out of the Putin playbook: bombard everyone with so much confusion and fakery that in the end no one knows what to believe and just gives up.
    Good morning

    Just reading about this, it raises serious questions for the mirror to explain and account for the two photos

    They both cannot be correct and maybe the MET needs to look into this
    I would prefer somebody competent to look into it, personally.

    Yes, I mean that seriously. I wouldn't trust the Met to look into a shop window after the last few years.
    Absolutely agree
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,277
    Just to add, if the Mirror actually did publish the doctored image, then they are in deep shit

    But, I don't think they did
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,310
    DavidL said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Forget photos: I am curious as to these police questionnaires and exactly how the police propose to comply with the provisions of PACE.

    I am not an expert on PACE but presumably the content of the questionaires will not be admissible? It does seem bizarre, especially if there are only 50 people to speak to.
    I have never heard of questionnaires being used in this way. It is not how you interview anyone under caution.

    Anyone receiving one would be well advised to consult a lawyer before even thinking about replying. The most you'd ever say in reply is "I was in the offices for the purpose of work and everything I did while there was for the purposes of my work."

    And I certainly would not use this method even in an internal investigation, if I could have an interview with the persons concerned, which the police can do.

    It is quite bizarre.
  • Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    DavidL said:

    The bottle doesn't look real to me. Its too big and leaning. Of course it could be on something but it just doesn't seem to fit.

    That might be lens distortion. Both the bottle and Boris on the other side seem to be leaning towards the centre.
    Is lens distortion, very obviously.

    Even professional photographers doing their best get some weird effects:
    https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2021/may/04/why-do-the-carters-look-so-tiny-alongside-joe-biden-and-his-wife-jill-in-this-picture

    (Although Carter might have been replaced by a puppet ...)
    The problem has been made worse by modern lens design.

    You cannot design out all the effects in a lens system. But you can chose which ones you end up with.

    So, using computer design and analysis, the cheapest lens system possible is designed to remove as much as possible of the distortions that the designer doesn't want. Which in turn, generally, increases other distortions.

    When you add in the requirement for wide field on laptop and phone cameras...
    Everyone’s using crap camera gear these days, that’s the problem.

    But when an iPhone costs £1k, and a DSLR £5k, anyone who isn’t a serious photog makes do with the phone.
    You can get a very, very good DSLR for less than the price of an iPhone.
    Just as the cameras start to get cheaper, they release a more expensive one!

    I call this a very very good DSLR: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1634703-REG/canon_r5_cine_kit.html

    I loved my Nikon DSLR - it was a brilliant bit of kit that took amazing photos. I can now get much the same results from my Pixel phone for most uses - better in many situations due to the wizard processing magic.

    So my DSLR sits in a box unloved and now practically worthless.
  • IshmaelZ said:

    Fpt

    IshmaelZ said:

    You'd be surprised. 3 or 4 years ago I did the Atlantic Rally for Cruisers - 200 yachts sailing Canaries - caribbean. Most are just cruising, about 25 are in the "racing" division. It's completely amateur, no serious yacht taking part, 50p prize money, dog with the waggiest tail stuff. Nonetheless one owner begged his crew, just before reaching St Lucia, to go along with his claim they hadn't motored at all when they had. They had had 2 weeks to decide how much they disliked him and told him to piss off. St Lucia is not a large island, and there was a dozen drunk yachties telling this story in every bar on the island to anyone who would listen



    Bit of a long shot, but anyway.
    We have an SA chap, Dave, painting a spare room, nice lad. His forte is small boat building (ie wood) but he says he hasn't been able to find any hook ups or opportunities here (Glasgow) which I was slightly surprised about. I know you get up to this part of the world now and again, any insights or suggestions?

    Edit: he's a very meticulous and reliable decorator, qualities which I'd imagine would be transferrable.

    Sadly not, I know the guys who rebuilt https://www.eda-frandsen.co.uk/ on Knoydart in the 90s but she is Falmouth based these days. Falmouth is very much the centre of the trad wooden boat building world, the guy to contact is Luke Powell at https://workingsail.co.uk/
    Thanks, will pass that on at least.
  • Leon said:

    Leon said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Leon said:

    Nigelb said:

    DavidL said:

    The bottle doesn't look real to me. Its too big and leaning. Of course it could be on something but it just doesn't seem to fit.

    That might be lens distortion. Both the bottle and Boris on the other side seem to be leaning towards the centre.
    Is lens distortion, very obviously.
    This guy claims to be a pro tog and has analysed it and sees no prima facie evidence of photoshopping of the bottle going by the clarity

    https://twitter.com/planner9818/status/1491703124008083459?s=20

    Tho that does not explain the odd size and tilting (however the latter could be a lens effect, as you say)

    It's all decidedly fishy as when these photos first emerged there was no tinsel or bottle. So someone edited them out, then put them back in? WTF?

    At this late decadent stage of partygate, it could be anyone doing anything. It could be some guy in a Croydon basement making photos for the lolz
    Brilliant twitter conversation

    I think it's the same game as the Andrew/Virginia thing - photoshop him out, then claim he was photoshopped *in*. It is not the case that the Mirror ever published the no-bottle photo, that's misdirection.
    Yes, could be

    However I certainly would not rule out my explanation. Release a doctored, more innocent, bottle-free image first, get Boris to say Oh it was a Zoom call, not a party, you can tell from the photo - THEN release the real photo, with tinsel and bottle, and make Boris look even more of a liar, and elongate the "scandal" by another week or two
    I reckon the photo without the tinsel and bottle is the genuine one. Boris's people then photoshopped on the bottle and the tinsel and then leaked it to the Mirror. They then disseminated the innocent original one on social media. This is straight out of the Putin playbook: bombard everyone with so much confusion and fakery that in the end no one knows what to believe and just gives up.
    I'm tending to @IshmaelZ's explanation.... probably

    The doctored photo is the one without the bottle and the tinsel. You can tell. It isn't even doctored very well (see below). The removal of the bottle and tinsel have left blurs and lacunae, it's quite poorly done

    The question then is: who did it? Did the Mirror really publish this badly doctored image, ever? There is no proof they did, so it is more likely someone has taken the doctored image and stuck MIRROR EXCLUSIVE on top of it, to cast doubt on the whole of partygate and on the Mirror

    Note that the original tweet which kicked this all off came from a Boris fan account.

    Fabulously murky. And this points to quite a scary and imminent future: in a couple of years photoshopping will be a billion times better than this, thanks to GPT82, and so we will never be able to distinguish between the fakes and reality. Ominous.

    But was the fake picture really the work of a Boris zealot? My guess is that it's a Cummings/Rishi sock puppet, and the intention was to make Boris supporters look a little unhinged. I mean - who would waste their time cobbling together a clumsy photoshop in the lame attempt to get Boris Johnson, of all people, off the hook over Partygate?
  • NerysHughesNerysHughes Posts: 3,375
    Leon said:

    Just to add, if the Mirror actually did publish the doctored image, then they are in deep shit

    But, I don't think they did

    The fact that doctored photos are being used in a weird way in an attempt to bring down the PM is not good.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,986
    Countdown until someone tweets the Stalin with boy meme but containing a prosecco bottle and tinsel...
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,986

    Leon said:

    Just to add, if the Mirror actually did publish the doctored image, then they are in deep shit

    But, I don't think they did

    The fact that doctored photos are being used in a weird way in an attempt to bring down the PM is not good.
    It seems it may be the exact opposite of this: that doctored images are being used to try to dig the PM out of a hole and sow uncertainty. Which clearly, if this is the case, they are achieving with great success.
  • On photogate, its obvious that the original is the bottle and the party garland, the photoshop is where they are removed. With respect to the tweeter showing the two alleging photoshopping, she says "I back Boris".

    So she's posted this to try and save her hero, yet it does the opposite. If the original version out there in BJ's defence was doctored to remove the party evidence then it really does make him and his lies look worse. Whomever was responsible for the photoshopping.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    Leon said:

    Just to add, if the Mirror actually did publish the doctored image, then they are in deep shit

    But, I don't think they did

    The fact that doctored photos are being used in a weird way in an attempt to bring down the PM is not good.
    They aren't, they are being used to undermine legitimate attempts to bring the PM down
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,277

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Leon said:

    Nigelb said:

    DavidL said:

    The bottle doesn't look real to me. Its too big and leaning. Of course it could be on something but it just doesn't seem to fit.

    That might be lens distortion. Both the bottle and Boris on the other side seem to be leaning towards the centre.
    Is lens distortion, very obviously.
    This guy claims to be a pro tog and has analysed it and sees no prima facie evidence of photoshopping of the bottle going by the clarity

    https://twitter.com/planner9818/status/1491703124008083459?s=20

    Tho that does not explain the odd size and tilting (however the latter could be a lens effect, as you say)

    It's all decidedly fishy as when these photos first emerged there was no tinsel or bottle. So someone edited them out, then put them back in? WTF?

    At this late decadent stage of partygate, it could be anyone doing anything. It could be some guy in a Croydon basement making photos for the lolz
    Brilliant twitter conversation

    I think it's the same game as the Andrew/Virginia thing - photoshop him out, then claim he was photoshopped *in*. It is not the case that the Mirror ever published the no-bottle photo, that's misdirection.
    Yes, could be

    However I certainly would not rule out my explanation. Release a doctored, more innocent, bottle-free image first, get Boris to say Oh it was a Zoom call, not a party, you can tell from the photo - THEN release the real photo, with tinsel and bottle, and make Boris look even more of a liar, and elongate the "scandal" by another week or two
    I reckon the photo without the tinsel and bottle is the genuine one. Boris's people then photoshopped on the bottle and the tinsel and then leaked it to the Mirror. They then disseminated the innocent original one on social media. This is straight out of the Putin playbook: bombard everyone with so much confusion and fakery that in the end no one knows what to believe and just gives up.
    I'm tending to @IshmaelZ's explanation.... probably

    The doctored photo is the one without the bottle and the tinsel. You can tell. It isn't even doctored very well (see below). The removal of the bottle and tinsel have left blurs and lacunae, it's quite poorly done

    The question then is: who did it? Did the Mirror really publish this badly doctored image, ever? There is no proof they did, so it is more likely someone has taken the doctored image and stuck MIRROR EXCLUSIVE on top of it, to cast doubt on the whole of partygate and on the Mirror

    Note that the original tweet which kicked this all off came from a Boris fan account.

    Fabulously murky. And this points to quite a scary and imminent future: in a couple of years photoshopping will be a billion times better than this, thanks to GPT82, and so we will never be able to distinguish between the fakes and reality. Ominous.

    But was the fake picture really the work of a Boris zealot? My guess is that it's a Cummings/Rishi sock puppet, and the intention was to make Boris supporters look a little unhinged. I mean - who would waste their time cobbling together a clumsy photoshop in the lame attempt to get Boris Johnson, of all people, off the hook over Partygate?
    That also occurred to me. It could be a triple, quadruple, dudecaduple bluff, and the crap bottle-removing photo-doctoring was done by Boris-haters hoping that Boris-lovers would buy it and look insane...


    Or maybe Putin did it in his tea break because he's fucked off that he's screwed up his Ukrainian War
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,918
    edited February 2022
    Unless the Tories have a clear poll lead next year, there is zero chance of a 2023 general election. Brown of course did not hold an early general election because he trailed Cameron's Tories in the polls after Osborne's IHT cut proposal. Major also delayed holding general elections as long as possible for the full 5 years in 1992 and 1997 as he trailed Labour in polls.

    Thatcher and Blair only held early general elections as they were ahead in the polls, same with May in 2017 and Boris in 2019. I therefore do not expect the next general election to be until Spring 2024.

    The only way there would be a general election next year is if the Tories got a clear poll lead again under Boris or a new leader
  • BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 2,747

    The winner of the hereditary conservative peers by-election was Lord Strathcarron.

    https://www.parliament.uk/globalassets/documents/lords-information-office/2022/hereditary-peers-by-election-result-ridley.pdf

    Why did they stop the count after round 2? If Lord Strathcarron had 18 votes and the other candidates in total had 18 in total between, it is mathematically possible for their to be a tie. In that situation, presumably the winner is the candidate with the most first round votes?

    Interesting fellow. (From Wiki):

    "Lord Strathcarron is a student of Advaita Vedanta and has written of his experiences in non-duality in the books Living with Life and Mysticism and Bliss. He is also the author of two spy thriller novels for Troubador: Invisibility, and Black Beach.

    "In 2009, he recreated Lord Byron's 1809–1811 Grand Tour of the Mediterranean for the book Joy Unconfined! Lord Byron's Grand Tour Re-Toured published by Signal Books, an imprint of Christopher Hurst."

  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,582

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    DavidL said:

    The bottle doesn't look real to me. Its too big and leaning. Of course it could be on something but it just doesn't seem to fit.

    That might be lens distortion. Both the bottle and Boris on the other side seem to be leaning towards the centre.
    Is lens distortion, very obviously.

    Even professional photographers doing their best get some weird effects:
    https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2021/may/04/why-do-the-carters-look-so-tiny-alongside-joe-biden-and-his-wife-jill-in-this-picture

    (Although Carter might have been replaced by a puppet ...)
    The problem has been made worse by modern lens design.

    You cannot design out all the effects in a lens system. But you can chose which ones you end up with.

    So, using computer design and analysis, the cheapest lens system possible is designed to remove as much as possible of the distortions that the designer doesn't want. Which in turn, generally, increases other distortions.

    When you add in the requirement for wide field on laptop and phone cameras...
    Everyone’s using crap camera gear these days, that’s the problem.

    But when an iPhone costs £1k, and a DSLR £5k, anyone who isn’t a serious photog makes do with the phone.
    You can get a very, very good DSLR for less than the price of an iPhone.
    Just as the cameras start to get cheaper, they release a more expensive one!

    I call this a very very good DSLR: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1634703-REG/canon_r5_cine_kit.html

    I loved my Nikon DSLR - it was a brilliant bit of kit that took amazing photos. I can now get much the same results from my Pixel phone for most uses - better in many situations due to the wizard processing magic.

    So my DSLR sits in a box unloved and now practically worthless.
    Indeed. I got an early digital SLR to replace the old film camera, and now use the film camera more! The phone is good enough most of the time.

    I do want to get back into it though, maybe with the aforementioned R5. Don’t want all the photos of upcoming family events to be on a phone camera.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,926

    Leon said:

    Just to add, if the Mirror actually did publish the doctored image, then they are in deep shit

    But, I don't think they did

    The fact that doctored photos are being used in a weird way in an attempt to bring down the PM is not good.
    I don't think that's a fact.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,401
    Remarkably, given their fixation with photo ID, the message seems to be you can't trust photos.
    OK.
  • Cyclefree said:



    DavidL said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Forget photos: I am curious as to these police questionnaires and exactly how the police propose to comply with the provisions of PACE.

    I am not an expert on PACE but presumably the content of the questionaires will not be admissible? It does seem bizarre, especially if there are only 50 people to speak to.
    I have never heard of questionnaires being used in this way. It is not how you interview anyone under caution.

    Anyone receiving one would be well advised to consult a lawyer before even thinking about replying. The most you'd ever say in reply is "I was in the offices for the purpose of work and everything I did while there was for the purposes of my work."

    And I certainly would not use this method even in an internal investigation, if I could have an interview with the persons concerned, which the police can do.

    It is quite bizarre.
    Unless of course one wanted to conduct an investigation in such a way that the evidence would be inadmissible...
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,955
    edited February 2022
    TimS said:

    Countdown until someone tweets the Stalin with boy meme but containing a prosecco bottle and tinsel...

    You mean this one? It's actually Yezhov (head of NKVD, architect of the purges, show trials etc) who was very short of stature. When his time came he wept and snivelled like a small boy, which may be of some satisfaction.



  • NerysHughesNerysHughes Posts: 3,375
    RobD said:

    Leon said:

    Just to add, if the Mirror actually did publish the doctored image, then they are in deep shit

    But, I don't think they did

    The fact that doctored photos are being used in a weird way in an attempt to bring down the PM is not good.
    I don't think that's a fact.
    Well someone has definitely doctored the photo
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,926

    RobD said:

    Leon said:

    Just to add, if the Mirror actually did publish the doctored image, then they are in deep shit

    But, I don't think they did

    The fact that doctored photos are being used in a weird way in an attempt to bring down the PM is not good.
    I don't think that's a fact.
    Well someone has definitely doctored the photo
    Yeah, to muddy the waters. It seems obvious that the one without the bottle or tinsel is the one that has been altered. Quite how that is bringing down the PM is beyond me.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,926
    dixiedean said:

    Remarkably, given their fixation with photo ID, the message seems to be you can't trust photos.
    OK.

    Unlike passports and other such things, there is no issuing authority for photos you put on Twitter.
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 5,288
    HYUFD said:

    Unless the Tories have a clear poll lead next year, there is zero chance of a 2023 general election. Brown of course did not hold an early general election because he trailed Cameron's Tories in the polls. Major also delayed holding general elections as long as possible for the full 5 years in 1992 and 1997 as he trailed Labour in polls.

    Thatcher and Blair only held early general elections as they were ahead in the polls, same with May and Boris. I therefore do not expect the next general election to be until Spring 2024.

    The only way there would be a general election next year is if the Tories got a clear poll lead again under Boris or a new leader

    I agree with that as by far the most likely course - I can't see much prospect of a snap honeymoon GE with a new leader, given the decent working majority already, so the question is whether the Tories, under a new leader, can poll recover to a small lead by late 2023.

    I reckon high teens % on this is marginal value, i.e. to the low end of 'about right'
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,310

    Cyclefree said:



    DavidL said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Forget photos: I am curious as to these police questionnaires and exactly how the police propose to comply with the provisions of PACE.

    I am not an expert on PACE but presumably the content of the questionaires will not be admissible? It does seem bizarre, especially if there are only 50 people to speak to.
    I have never heard of questionnaires being used in this way. It is not how you interview anyone under caution.

    Anyone receiving one would be well advised to consult a lawyer before even thinking about replying. The most you'd ever say in reply is "I was in the offices for the purpose of work and everything I did while there was for the purposes of my work."

    And I certainly would not use this method even in an internal investigation, if I could have an interview with the persons concerned, which the police can do.

    It is quite bizarre.
    Unless of course one wanted to conduct an investigation in such a way that the evidence would be inadmissible...
    Yes - but it's so obvious if so. All it will do is put the Met under further criticism. Perhaps I am missing something.
  • NerysHughesNerysHughes Posts: 3,375
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Leon said:

    Just to add, if the Mirror actually did publish the doctored image, then they are in deep shit

    But, I don't think they did

    The fact that doctored photos are being used in a weird way in an attempt to bring down the PM is not good.
    I don't think that's a fact.
    Well someone has definitely doctored the photo
    Yeah, to muddy the waters. It seems obvious that the one without the bottle or tinsel is the one that has been altered. Quite how that is bringing down the PM is beyond me.
    I dont think we can be 100% sure that both photos are not doctored.

    If you look at the architrave behind the bottle, in the one where the bottle is missing the architrave extends much further than where the bottle would cover it up.

    I think both photos have been changed.

    https://twitter.com/Ann06957684/status/1491545566928584711/photo/1
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,070
    .
    IshmaelZ said:

    Leon said:

    Just to add, if the Mirror actually did publish the doctored image, then they are in deep shit

    But, I don't think they did

    The fact that doctored photos are being used in a weird way in an attempt to bring down the PM is not good.
    They aren't, they are being used to undermine legitimate attempts to bring the PM down
    "The fact that..."
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    Afghanistan: Evidence mounts of Taliban reprisal arrests and killings

    A number of women who participated in protests demanding women’s rights in Afghanistan are missing.

    The Taliban deny they are holding them and also say they have granted a general amnesty to all those who worked with the previous regime.

    But the UN has raised alarm about a pattern of reprisals against activists, journalists, former government officials and security forces.

    The BBC has investigated multiple incidents that have taken place recently, some just in the past couple of weeks.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-asia-60323638
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,582
    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:



    DavidL said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Forget photos: I am curious as to these police questionnaires and exactly how the police propose to comply with the provisions of PACE.

    I am not an expert on PACE but presumably the content of the questionaires will not be admissible? It does seem bizarre, especially if there are only 50 people to speak to.
    I have never heard of questionnaires being used in this way. It is not how you interview anyone under caution.

    Anyone receiving one would be well advised to consult a lawyer before even thinking about replying. The most you'd ever say in reply is "I was in the offices for the purpose of work and everything I did while there was for the purposes of my work."

    And I certainly would not use this method even in an internal investigation, if I could have an interview with the persons concerned, which the police can do.

    It is quite bizarre.
    Unless of course one wanted to conduct an investigation in such a way that the evidence would be inadmissible...
    Yes - but it's so obvious if so. All it will do is put the Met under further criticism. Perhaps I am missing something.
    Why would you choose to interview 50 people, almost all of whom live in London, by email rather than by appointment at the nick?
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,401
    Have we done this?

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/feb/10/my-heart-is-broken-death-of-marine-life-is-devastating-englands-fishing-industry

    A fascinating mystery. Encompassing fishing, levelling up and the "Brexit bonus".
    Not in dispute, something is causing it. Whitby will be devastated. A town doesn't survive on Goths alone.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,249
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Leon said:

    Nigelb said:

    DavidL said:

    The bottle doesn't look real to me. Its too big and leaning. Of course it could be on something but it just doesn't seem to fit.

    That might be lens distortion. Both the bottle and Boris on the other side seem to be leaning towards the centre.
    Is lens distortion, very obviously.
    This guy claims to be a pro tog and has analysed it and sees no prima facie evidence of photoshopping of the bottle going by the clarity

    https://twitter.com/planner9818/status/1491703124008083459?s=20

    Tho that does not explain the odd size and tilting (however the latter could be a lens effect, as you say)

    It's all decidedly fishy as when these photos first emerged there was no tinsel or bottle. So someone edited them out, then put them back in? WTF?

    At this late decadent stage of partygate, it could be anyone doing anything. It could be some guy in a Croydon basement making photos for the lolz
    Brilliant twitter conversation

    I think it's the same game as the Andrew/Virginia thing - photoshop him out, then claim he was photoshopped *in*. It is not the case that the Mirror ever published the no-bottle photo, that's misdirection.
    Yes, could be

    However I certainly would not rule out my explanation. Release a doctored, more innocent, bottle-free image first, get Boris to say Oh it was a Zoom call, not a party, you can tell from the photo - THEN release the real photo, with tinsel and bottle, and make Boris look even more of a liar, and elongate the "scandal" by another week or two
    I reckon the photo without the tinsel and bottle is the genuine one. Boris's people then photoshopped on the bottle and the tinsel and then leaked it to the Mirror. They then disseminated the innocent original one on social media. This is straight out of the Putin playbook: bombard everyone with so much confusion and fakery that in the end no one knows what to believe and just gives up.
    I'm tending to @IshmaelZ's explanation.... probably

    The doctored photo is the one without the bottle and the tinsel. You can tell. It isn't even doctored very well (see below). The removal of the bottle and tinsel have left blurs and lacunae, it's quite poorly done

    The question then is: who did it? Did the Mirror really publish this badly doctored image, ever? There is no proof they did, so it is more likely someone has taken the doctored image and stuck MIRROR EXCLUSIVE on top of it, to cast doubt on the whole of partygate and on the Mirror

    Note that the original tweet which kicked this all off came from a Boris fan account.

    Fabulously murky. And this points to quite a scary and imminent future: in a couple of years photoshopping will be a billion times better than this, thanks to GPT82, and so we will never be able to distinguish between the fakes and reality. Ominous.

    But was the fake picture really the work of a Boris zealot? My guess is that it's a Cummings/Rishi sock puppet, and the intention was to make Boris supporters look a little unhinged. I mean - who would waste their time cobbling together a clumsy photoshop in the lame attempt to get Boris Johnson, of all people, off the hook over Partygate?
    That also occurred to me. It could be a triple, quadruple, dudecaduple bluff, and the crap bottle-removing photo-doctoring was done by Boris-haters hoping that Boris-lovers would buy it and look insane...


    Or maybe Putin did it in his tea break because he's fucked off that he's screwed up his Ukrainian War
    I asked the Grand Council to ask the Illuminati who asked the Bildbergers who asked the Trilateral Commission who asked the Zeta Reticullans who asked the Lizard Men.

    The Lizard Men denied having anything to do with the photo.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,496
    Problems with 2023 GE:

    1) There is going to be no point before there has to be a GE when the economics will look good

    2) No leader ever calls an election before he has to unless the polls are right

    3) FTPA means either the commons has a super majority for it, or both houses pass primary legislation top bypass the FTPA, or repeal the act. The first may not occur and the second two can be delayed by the HoL

    4) Boris plans to spin out his leadership turmoil maximally. The more he succeeds, the less likely the polls are to be right for the Tories.

    5) While Labour still can 'win' a GE (126 seats needed), the Tories can very easily lose one (lose 45 or so seats). As things stand the centre left alliance will be the winners.

    On balance before Paterson and Partygate I thought 2023 a decent chance. Now less so.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,926

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Leon said:

    Just to add, if the Mirror actually did publish the doctored image, then they are in deep shit

    But, I don't think they did

    The fact that doctored photos are being used in a weird way in an attempt to bring down the PM is not good.
    I don't think that's a fact.
    Well someone has definitely doctored the photo
    Yeah, to muddy the waters. It seems obvious that the one without the bottle or tinsel is the one that has been altered. Quite how that is bringing down the PM is beyond me.
    I dont think we can be 100% sure that both photos are not doctored.

    If you look at the architrave behind the bottle, in the one where the bottle is missing the architrave extends much further than where the bottle would cover it up.

    I think both photos have been changed.

    https://twitter.com/Ann06957684/status/1491545566928584711/photo/1
    There's no evidence that the photo with the bottle is fake. There's plenty of evidence the other one is.
  • IshmaelZ said:

    Fpt

    IshmaelZ said:

    You'd be surprised. 3 or 4 years ago I did the Atlantic Rally for Cruisers - 200 yachts sailing Canaries - caribbean. Most are just cruising, about 25 are in the "racing" division. It's completely amateur, no serious yacht taking part, 50p prize money, dog with the waggiest tail stuff. Nonetheless one owner begged his crew, just before reaching St Lucia, to go along with his claim they hadn't motored at all when they had. They had had 2 weeks to decide how much they disliked him and told him to piss off. St Lucia is not a large island, and there was a dozen drunk yachties telling this story in every bar on the island to anyone who would listen



    Bit of a long shot, but anyway.
    We have an SA chap, Dave, painting a spare room, nice lad. His forte is small boat building (ie wood) but he says he hasn't been able to find any hook ups or opportunities here (Glasgow) which I was slightly surprised about. I know you get up to this part of the world now and again, any insights or suggestions?

    Edit: he's a very meticulous and reliable decorator, qualities which I'd imagine would be transferrable.

    Sadly not, I know the guys who rebuilt https://www.eda-frandsen.co.uk/ on Knoydart in the 90s but she is Falmouth based these days. Falmouth is very much the centre of the trad wooden boat building world, the guy to contact is Luke Powell at https://workingsail.co.uk/
    Thanks, will pass that on at least.
    You could try the Scottish Coastal Rowing Association at https://scottishcoastalrowing.org/ I just checked, and there are now over 70 clubs around the country with 1-3 boats each. Most clubs have people who make and mend the boats themselves, but some may well need help.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 35,990
    this is probably the most eviscerating extract of the John Major speech https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1491732468751339525/photo/1
  • PhilPhil Posts: 2,315
    Leon said:

    Nigelb said:

    DavidL said:

    The bottle doesn't look real to me. Its too big and leaning. Of course it could be on something but it just doesn't seem to fit.

    That might be lens distortion. Both the bottle and Boris on the other side seem to be leaning towards the centre.
    Is lens distortion, very obviously.
    This guy claims to be a pro tog and has analysed it and sees no prima facie evidence of photoshopping of the bottle going by the clarity

    https://twitter.com/planner9818/status/1491703124008083459?s=20

    Tho that does not explain the odd size and tilting (however the latter could be a lens effect, as you say)

    It's all decidedly fishy as when these photos first emerged there was no tinsel or bottle. So someone edited them out, then put them back in? WTF?

    At this late decadent stage of partygate, it could be anyone doing anything. It could be some guy in a Croydon basement making photos for the lolz
    IIRC it’s not the clarity, it’s the noise levels that are used to distinguish altered from unaltered parts of photographs like this.

    If you have roughly the same amount of noise (i.e. the random variation from pixel to pixel) right across a photograph, then it’s probably not been altered. If you see a particular section that has a noticeably different noise level then that part has probably been pasted in.
  • NerysHughesNerysHughes Posts: 3,375
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Leon said:

    Just to add, if the Mirror actually did publish the doctored image, then they are in deep shit

    But, I don't think they did

    The fact that doctored photos are being used in a weird way in an attempt to bring down the PM is not good.
    I don't think that's a fact.
    Well someone has definitely doctored the photo
    Yeah, to muddy the waters. It seems obvious that the one without the bottle or tinsel is the one that has been altered. Quite how that is bringing down the PM is beyond me.
    I dont think we can be 100% sure that both photos are not doctored.

    If you look at the architrave behind the bottle, in the one where the bottle is missing the architrave extends much further than where the bottle would cover it up.

    I think both photos have been changed.

    https://twitter.com/Ann06957684/status/1491545566928584711/photo/1
    There's no evidence that the photo with the bottle is fake. There's plenty of evidence the other one is.
    How do you explain the architrave being in view when if you had removed the bottle there would be no architrave to see.

    I think something else smaller has been removed and the bottle then added.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,277
    dixiedean said:

    Have we done this?

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/feb/10/my-heart-is-broken-death-of-marine-life-is-devastating-englands-fishing-industry

    A fascinating mystery. Encompassing fishing, levelling up and the "Brexit bonus".
    Not in dispute, something is causing it. Whitby will be devastated. A town doesn't survive on Goths alone.

    It is a horrible story, tho blaming it on Brexit is a bit of a reach
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,310
    Sandpit said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:



    DavidL said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Forget photos: I am curious as to these police questionnaires and exactly how the police propose to comply with the provisions of PACE.

    I am not an expert on PACE but presumably the content of the questionaires will not be admissible? It does seem bizarre, especially if there are only 50 people to speak to.
    I have never heard of questionnaires being used in this way. It is not how you interview anyone under caution.

    Anyone receiving one would be well advised to consult a lawyer before even thinking about replying. The most you'd ever say in reply is "I was in the offices for the purpose of work and everything I did while there was for the purposes of my work."

    And I certainly would not use this method even in an internal investigation, if I could have an interview with the persons concerned, which the police can do.

    It is quite bizarre.
    Unless of course one wanted to conduct an investigation in such a way that the evidence would be inadmissible...
    Yes - but it's so obvious if so. All it will do is put the Met under further criticism. Perhaps I am missing something.
    Why would you choose to interview 50 people, almost all of whom live in London, by email rather than by appointment at the nick?
    That's my point. You always interview in person. Always. You have a file of the relevant documents for each person when doing so.

    This way is, quite apart from any other consideration, incredibly inefficient. And pointless. Because any sensible person will simply write what they need to to get themselves off the hook and the answers would not be admissible anyway if a FPN was challenged. It just seems amazingly inept.

    Perhaps the reports are wrong. Or perhaps the Met really is as useless as I think. Who knows.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,368
    algarkirk said:

    Problems with 2023 GE:

    1) There is going to be no point before there has to be a GE when the economics will look good

    2) No leader ever calls an election before he has to unless the polls are right

    3) FTPA means either the commons has a super majority for it, or both houses pass primary legislation top bypass the FTPA, or repeal the act. The first may not occur and the second two can be delayed by the HoL

    4) Boris plans to spin out his leadership turmoil maximally. The more he succeeds, the less likely the polls are to be right for the Tories.

    5) While Labour still can 'win' a GE (126 seats needed), the Tories can very easily lose one (lose 45 or so seats). As things stand the centre left alliance will be the winners.

    On balance before Paterson and Partygate I thought 2023 a decent chance. Now less so.

    FTPA won't be an issue next year, the legislation to repel it is already in progress.
  • ApplicantApplicant Posts: 3,379

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Leon said:

    Just to add, if the Mirror actually did publish the doctored image, then they are in deep shit

    But, I don't think they did

    The fact that doctored photos are being used in a weird way in an attempt to bring down the PM is not good.
    I don't think that's a fact.
    Well someone has definitely doctored the photo
    Yeah, to muddy the waters. It seems obvious that the one without the bottle or tinsel is the one that has been altered. Quite how that is bringing down the PM is beyond me.
    I dont think we can be 100% sure that both photos are not doctored.

    If you look at the architrave behind the bottle, in the one where the bottle is missing the architrave extends much further than where the bottle would cover it up.

    I think both photos have been changed.

    https://twitter.com/Ann06957684/status/1491545566928584711/photo/1
    There's no evidence that the photo with the bottle is fake. There's plenty of evidence the other one is.
    How do you explain the architrave being in view when if you had removed the bottle there would be no architrave to see.

    I think something else smaller has been removed and the bottle then added.
    A bottle of water? or some soft drink?
  • HYUFD said:

    Unless the Tories have a clear poll lead next year, there is zero chance of a 2023 general election. Brown of course did not hold an early general election because he trailed Cameron's Tories in the polls after Osborne's IHT cut proposal. Major also delayed holding general elections as long as possible for the full 5 years in 1992 and 1997 as he trailed Labour in polls.

    Thatcher and Blair only held early general elections as they were ahead in the polls, same with May in 2017 and Boris in 2019. I therefore do not expect the next general election to be until Spring 2024.

    The only way there would be a general election next year is if the Tories got a clear poll lead again under Boris or a new leader

    The other benefit of a Spring '24 election is the possibility to deploy a feelgood tax cut.

    But the key thing is that if the Conservatives are on track to lose (and that's a smaller if than it seemed a few months back), they are duty-bound to hang on as long as they can. Anything can happen at backgammon and all that.

    What's the latest possible date under the new rules?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,926

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Leon said:

    Just to add, if the Mirror actually did publish the doctored image, then they are in deep shit

    But, I don't think they did

    The fact that doctored photos are being used in a weird way in an attempt to bring down the PM is not good.
    I don't think that's a fact.
    Well someone has definitely doctored the photo
    Yeah, to muddy the waters. It seems obvious that the one without the bottle or tinsel is the one that has been altered. Quite how that is bringing down the PM is beyond me.
    I dont think we can be 100% sure that both photos are not doctored.

    If you look at the architrave behind the bottle, in the one where the bottle is missing the architrave extends much further than where the bottle would cover it up.

    I think both photos have been changed.

    https://twitter.com/Ann06957684/status/1491545566928584711/photo/1
    There's no evidence that the photo with the bottle is fake. There's plenty of evidence the other one is.
    How do you explain the architrave being in view when if you had removed the bottle there would be no architrave to see.

    I think something else smaller has been removed and the bottle then added.
    Someone made a half-arsed attempt to conceal the removal of the bottle? It's obvious the tinsel and bottle have been removed from the original photo.
  • NerysHughesNerysHughes Posts: 3,375
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Leon said:

    Just to add, if the Mirror actually did publish the doctored image, then they are in deep shit

    But, I don't think they did

    The fact that doctored photos are being used in a weird way in an attempt to bring down the PM is not good.
    I don't think that's a fact.
    Well someone has definitely doctored the photo
    Yeah, to muddy the waters. It seems obvious that the one without the bottle or tinsel is the one that has been altered. Quite how that is bringing down the PM is beyond me.
    I dont think we can be 100% sure that both photos are not doctored.

    If you look at the architrave behind the bottle, in the one where the bottle is missing the architrave extends much further than where the bottle would cover it up.

    I think both photos have been changed.

    https://twitter.com/Ann06957684/status/1491545566928584711/photo/1
    There's no evidence that the photo with the bottle is fake. There's plenty of evidence the other one is.
    How do you explain the architrave being in view when if you had removed the bottle there would be no architrave to see.

    I think something else smaller has been removed and the bottle then added.
    Someone made a half-arsed attempt to conceal the removal of the bottle? It's obvious the tinsel and bottle have been removed from the original photo.
    No doubt about that, but if you had the skills to add the achitrave back in you would added it in completely, not partially
This discussion has been closed.