Isn't some at least of that a matter of youngsters not bothering to keep iup with the news/have an opinion?
Maybe, but there's no excuse for "accidentally" supporting Russia because you haven't been taking an interest in the news.
Nah, for this century America has been led by Bush 43 and Trump, you can see why people aren't enamoured by America.
For some there's no difference between the invasion of Ukraine and the liberation of Iraq in 2003.
I wonder if the yoof also think more globally than we old farts. Despite the fact I have lived most my life outside Britain (46/17 years out/in), I tend to think about Ukraine being a European war and hence 'our' problem, whereas Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Burma, Nagorny-Karabakh, etc... are really other peoples' problems (until we made them ours, where we did). So they are fundamentally different in my mind.
But for many of the younger generation, it appears that what is front and centre for them is the contrast in how the West has reacted to 'like' situations, and hence for them the hypocrisy in our actions.
I don't really understand how the cry of hypocrisy, even if true, leads some to equivocate on the issue, or even support Russia, though. It's bonkers!
But then having just entered the 35-54 demographic I've transitioned into middle age fart status.
"Sticking it to the man"?
This is probably my prejudice toward the youth showing, but I wonder if they might be more inclined to this tendency as identified by David Baddiel the other day, though old people do it too - a corrollary being people thinking things must be more complicated than they are (and on Ukraine it is a very simple situation in terms of blame)
I have a phrase for this, which is naive sophistication. People who think they will appear sophisticated, that is, by naively thinking, with a raised sophisticated eyebrow, that "nothing is what it seems." Truth is, quite a lot of things are what they seem.
I see a lot of issues as edge and corner cases. There is the norm, then edge cases. Where two or more edge cases meet, you get corner cases. Edge and corner cases are viable and allowable, but are often where things fail because few people care about them ...
On topic Boris Johnson is the kind of man to be caught in flagrante delicto with another woman by his wife and denying to his wife he was having an affair.
I know a couple where the girl caught her boyfriend NAKED IN BED WITH ANOTHER WOMAN in the middle of the afternoon, and he managed to talk his way out of it, and convince her nothing untoward was going on
It is amazing what people will believe, when they REALLY want to
Isn't some at least of that a matter of youngsters not bothering to keep iup with the news/have an opinion?
Maybe, but there's no excuse for "accidentally" supporting Russia because you haven't been taking an interest in the news.
Nah, for this century America has been led by Bush 43 and Trump, you can see why people aren't enamoured by America.
For some there's no difference between the invasion of Ukraine and the liberation of Iraq in 2003.
I wonder if the yoof also think more globally than we old farts. Despite the fact I have lived most my life outside Britain (46/17 years out/in), I tend to think about Ukraine being a European war and hence 'our' problem, whereas Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Burma, Nagorny-Karabakh, etc... are really other peoples' problems (until we made them ours, where we did). So they are fundamentally different in my mind.
But for many of the younger generation, it appears that what is front and centre for them is the contrast in how the West has reacted to 'like' situations, and hence for them the hypocrisy in our actions.
I doubt they care any more about other places.
I suspect its more some embittered resentment of the western world which manifests itself in supporting anything opposed to it.
Also, young people are just a lot more stupid than us oldsters. IQs are declining across the West
And they really obviously ARE stupider. You can see it all around you. Less questioning. Sheeplike. Idiotic. Look at @CorrectHorseBattery and @Gallowgate on here. Fucking morons
Macron, Boris, sacked in same year - Putin survives the year."
I am beginning to get weird feelings in me waters about France. There is an awful lot of discontent. As a nation, they haven't thrown a total strop in decades. They like global attention. Le Pen has detoxed the brand and is gathering all the opposition around her. Macron is fecking annoying, even for the French (esp the French?). He is a snob
Le Pen could just snatch it.
As it happens, if she did, I don't think it would be Fascist Apocalypse, more like a spasm of Gaullist Nationalism, but it would frighten all the horses of Europe
I'm no expert and not betting on this, but from memory La Pen was doing quite well last time, until the One on One debates, after the first and before the second round.
She may have rehearsed a bit in the last few years, but I suspect that will be her undoing again this time.
Seems to have been relatively steady - a rise after the first round occurred in April, but then a fall back.
Firstly, that movement at the end (up for Macron, down for Le Pen) is indeed the second round debate as mentioned.
Secondly, you see the bold yellow and blue dots at the end of the graph? That's the actual result - the only poll that matters. For Macron, it's higher than his polling line not just at the end but at ANY point. For Le Pen it's below the blue line at ANY point. That't the "holding your nose" effect for Macron from hard left and moderate right voters.
It’s warming to have endorsement of My Macron in trouble views from Leon, what a dream team. But it’s the hold your nose in this post which grabbed me. Macrons win last time looked decisive, until you realise how much abstaining and nose holding was going on, which just cannot be relied on now they know he wants to make tax more unfair not make it fairer, wants French to work longer till retirement. And he is just not Nationalist or anti EU enough for the French electorate at this time. I actually think Mélenchon will come second and beat Macron by even more, as he will have less baggage than Le Pen more slick debater so will attract more votes to what is basically, the same anti Macron platform.
Isn't some at least of that a matter of youngsters not bothering to keep iup with the news/have an opinion?
Maybe, but there's no excuse for "accidentally" supporting Russia because you haven't been taking an interest in the news.
Nah, for this century America has been led by Bush 43 and Trump, you can see why people aren't enamoured by America.
For some there's no difference between the invasion of Ukraine and the liberation of Iraq in 2003.
I wonder if the yoof also think more globally than we old farts. Despite the fact I have lived most my life outside Britain (46/17 years out/in), I tend to think about Ukraine being a European war and hence 'our' problem, whereas Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Burma, Nagorny-Karabakh, etc... are really other peoples' problems (until we made them ours, where we did). So they are fundamentally different in my mind.
But for many of the younger generation, it appears that what is front and centre for them is the contrast in how the West has reacted to 'like' situations, and hence for them the hypocrisy in our actions.
I don't really understand how the cry of hypocrisy, even if true, leads some to equivocate on the issue, or even support Russia, though. It's bonkers!
But then having just entered the 35-54 demographic I've transitioned into middle age fart status.
"Sticking it to the man"?
This is probably my prejudice toward the youth showing, but I wonder if they might be more inclined to this tendency as identified by David Baddiel the other day, though old people do it too - a corrollary being people thinking things must be more complicated than they are (and on Ukraine it is a very simple situation in terms of blame)
I have a phrase for this, which is naive sophistication. People who think they will appear sophisticated, that is, by naively thinking, with a raised sophisticated eyebrow, that "nothing is what it seems." Truth is, quite a lot of things are what they seem.
I had not seen that phrase before, but I did accuse Lucky of being 'so sophisticated you are seeing things upside down' or words to that effect, when he started opining that it was just too convenient for cameras to be on hand when the Mariupol maternity ward was hit.
In addition to the situation Baddiel describes, I think some people think that they are being sophisticated simply by not going along with the majority view. (I am not thinking about people who are deliberately contrarian here)
As an aside, someone in NASA was tasked to write the operational history of the Shuttle after its last flight in 2011. He had a few interns to help him with the work. They assembled a draft, and asked the interns to read it, looking for any terms they did not understand and which needed explanation. The idea being that the history might be a little too technical.
One of the interns asked: "What is the Cold War?"
Despite bring bright enough to get an internship at NASA, she did not know about the Cold War. Which had ended just twenty years earlier...
Many modern kids probably know less about it.
Everyone surely knows that it started when the Soviets leaked a cold virus from their lab at Wuhansk.
Isn't some at least of that a matter of youngsters not bothering to keep iup with the news/have an opinion?
Maybe, but there's no excuse for "accidentally" supporting Russia because you haven't been taking an interest in the news.
Nah, for this century America has been led by Bush 43 and Trump, you can see why people aren't enamoured by America.
For some there's no difference between the invasion of Ukraine and the liberation of Iraq in 2003.
I wonder if the yoof also think more globally than we old farts. Despite the fact I have lived most my life outside Britain (46/17 years out/in), I tend to think about Ukraine being a European war and hence 'our' problem, whereas Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Burma, Nagorny-Karabakh, etc... are really other peoples' problems (until we made them ours, where we did). So they are fundamentally different in my mind.
But for many of the younger generation, it appears that what is front and centre for them is the contrast in how the West has reacted to 'like' situations, and hence for them the hypocrisy in our actions.
I doubt they care any more about other places.
I suspect its more some embittered resentment of the western world which manifests itself in supporting anything opposed to it.
Also, young people are just a lot more stupid than us oldsters. IQs are declining across the West
And they really obviously ARE stupider. You can see it all around you. Less questioning. Sheeplike. Idiotic. Look at @CorrectHorseBattery and @Gallowgate on here. Fucking morons
It's actually a bit more complicated than that.
Today's 21 years olds are not scoring as well as those born in 1974 (for example) and testing in 1995.
However, we all suffer from cognitive decline as we get older, particularly if we're gin-riddled. This mean that a 21 year old today will score more highly on an IQ test (on average) than a 54 year old.
Isn't some at least of that a matter of youngsters not bothering to keep iup with the news/have an opinion?
Maybe, but there's no excuse for "accidentally" supporting Russia because you haven't been taking an interest in the news.
Nah, for this century America has been led by Bush 43 and Trump, you can see why people aren't enamoured by America.
For some there's no difference between the invasion of Ukraine and the liberation of Iraq in 2003.
I wonder if the yoof also think more globally than we old farts. Despite the fact I have lived most my life outside Britain (46/17 years out/in), I tend to think about Ukraine being a European war and hence 'our' problem, whereas Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Burma, Nagorny-Karabakh, etc... are really other peoples' problems (until we made them ours, where we did). So they are fundamentally different in my mind.
But for many of the younger generation, it appears that what is front and centre for them is the contrast in how the West has reacted to 'like' situations, and hence for them the hypocrisy in our actions.
I doubt they care any more about other places.
I suspect its more some embittered resentment of the western world which manifests itself in supporting anything opposed to it.
Also, young people are just a lot more stupid than us oldsters. IQs are declining across the West
And they really obviously ARE stupider. You can see it all around you. Less questioning. Sheeplike. Idiotic. Look at @CorrectHorseBattery and @Gallowgate on here. Fucking morons
It's actually a bit more complicated than that.
Today's 21 years olds are not scoring as well as those born in 1974 (for example) and testing in 1995.
However, we all suffer from cognitive decline as we get older, particularly if we're gin-riddled. This mean that a 21 year old today will score more highly on an IQ test (on average) than a 54 year old.
Unless said gin-riddled 54 year old started out with an IQ of about 190. He'd now be down to about 160?
On topic Boris Johnson is the kind of man to be caught in flagrante delicto with another woman by his wife and denying to his wife he was having an affair.
I know a couple where the girl caught her boyfriend NAKED IN BED WITH ANOTHER WOMAN in the middle of the afternoon, and he managed to talk his way out of it, and convince her nothing untoward was going on
It is amazing what people will believe, when they REALLY want to
Isn't some at least of that a matter of youngsters not bothering to keep iup with the news/have an opinion?
Maybe, but there's no excuse for "accidentally" supporting Russia because you haven't been taking an interest in the news.
Nah, for this century America has been led by Bush 43 and Trump, you can see why people aren't enamoured by America.
For some there's no difference between the invasion of Ukraine and the liberation of Iraq in 2003.
I wonder if the yoof also think more globally than we old farts. Despite the fact I have lived most my life outside Britain (46/17 years out/in), I tend to think about Ukraine being a European war and hence 'our' problem, whereas Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Burma, Nagorny-Karabakh, etc... are really other peoples' problems (until we made them ours, where we did). So they are fundamentally different in my mind.
But for many of the younger generation, it appears that what is front and centre for them is the contrast in how the West has reacted to 'like' situations, and hence for them the hypocrisy in our actions.
I doubt they care any more about other places.
I suspect its more some embittered resentment of the western world which manifests itself in supporting anything opposed to it.
Also, young people are just a lot more stupid than us oldsters. IQs are declining across the West
And they really obviously ARE stupider. You can see it all around you. Less questioning. Sheeplike. Idiotic. Look at @CorrectHorseBattery and @Gallowgate on here. Fucking morons
I don't know if young people are stupider but I suspect they think they're cleverer than they are.
Which gets them into similar problems as if they were stupider but also fills them with resentment.
Isn't some at least of that a matter of youngsters not bothering to keep iup with the news/have an opinion?
Maybe, but there's no excuse for "accidentally" supporting Russia because you haven't been taking an interest in the news.
Nah, for this century America has been led by Bush 43 and Trump, you can see why people aren't enamoured by America.
For some there's no difference between the invasion of Ukraine and the liberation of Iraq in 2003.
I wonder if the yoof also think more globally than we old farts. Despite the fact I have lived most my life outside Britain (46/17 years out/in), I tend to think about Ukraine being a European war and hence 'our' problem, whereas Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Burma, Nagorny-Karabakh, etc... are really other peoples' problems (until we made them ours, where we did). So they are fundamentally different in my mind.
But for many of the younger generation, it appears that what is front and centre for them is the contrast in how the West has reacted to 'like' situations, and hence for them the hypocrisy in our actions.
I doubt they care any more about other places.
I suspect its more some embittered resentment of the western world which manifests itself in supporting anything opposed to it.
Also, young people are just a lot more stupid than us oldsters. IQs are declining across the West
And they really obviously ARE stupider. You can see it all around you. Less questioning. Sheeplike. Idiotic. Look at @CorrectHorseBattery and @Gallowgate on here. Fucking morons
It's actually a bit more complicated than that.
Today's 21 years olds are not scoring as well as those born in 1974 (for example) and testing in 1995.
However, we all suffer from cognitive decline as we get older, particularly if we're gin-riddled. This mean that a 21 year old today will score more highly on an IQ test (on average) than a 54 year old.
I wonder why you chose 1974? My limited understanding of the latest research is that the peak was sometime in the 70s. I have no idea whether this is having a noticeable affect on the workplace.
On topic Boris Johnson is the kind of man to be caught in flagrante delicto with another woman by his wife and denying to his wife he was having an affair.
I know a couple where the girl caught her boyfriend NAKED IN BED WITH ANOTHER WOMAN in the middle of the afternoon, and he managed to talk his way out of it, and convince her nothing untoward was going on
It is amazing what people will believe, when they REALLY want to
is that story really about you?
No. I kinda wish it was, as I admire the sheer chutzpah that guy demonstrated.
He was, incidentally, quite a shit in many respects, and she finally wised up and booted him out
His excuse, I believe, was he and this girl both felt really tired at the same time, and got onto the bed to sleep, then it was cold so they got under the covers. I can't remember how he explained the total nudity (more comfy?) but the girlfriend bought it
There was also an empty bottle of champagne and two glasses on the bedside table. I guess that explained why they both got so "tired"
Macron, Boris, sacked in same year - Putin survives the year."
I am beginning to get weird feelings in me waters about France. There is an awful lot of discontent. As a nation, they haven't thrown a total strop in decades. They like global attention. Le Pen has detoxed the brand and is gathering all the opposition around her. Macron is fecking annoying, even for the French (esp the French?). He is a snob
Le Pen could just snatch it.
As it happens, if she did, I don't think it would be Fascist Apocalypse, more like a spasm of Gaullist Nationalism, but it would frighten all the horses of Europe
Indeed, Macron is most popular amongst the rich, Parisians and the highly educated. Most of the rest of France loathes him.
I still think he will win it but Le Pen has sufficiently detoxified the brand she is more of a viable alternative than 5 years ago or than her father ever was. Even if Macron is re elected, Le Pen will probably win the white working class vote and the rural vote
Bet365 has Macron at 1/33, which is ridiculous in the light of that poll. Le Pen is within touching distance
Like you, I am still pretty sure Macron will win, but in a time of war and plague - literally - nothing is as certain as 1/33
Some things are. I and many others laid Trump as next President in December last year on Betfair to the tune of thousands - not a huge % return, but better than a bank and just as safe. It was taking free money from fantasists.
I accept this isn't on that level, but think you're underestimating how likely the likely outcome is here.
A YES vote in Scotland seemed impossible - until it became highly possible, and David Cameron started weeping on live TV. A Brexit vote seemed ludicrously unlikely - I recall Richard Nabavi predicting it would be 70/30 Remain - and then Brexit won
Ditto Trump in, say, 2015
We are in a time of unusual events
Let's not rewrite history here.
Polling for the 2016 Referendum often showed a lead for Leave. Polling for the 2016 Presidential election sometimes showed a Trump lead and often showed him within 2% (noting that was in fact the Clinton margin in the popular vote). A couple of polls showed a lead for "Yes" in the 2014, and most in the final six weeks indicated it was a good deal closer than the final, double digit margin.
That's not to say Trump and Brexit weren't surprises - they were. But people misremember them as coming completely out of the blue when actually plenty of polls were bang on the money.
Remember, we're not looking at polling a year out from the French Presidential election. It's a month out, with two well known figures and very stable polling over a long period. So your comparison with Trump a year from the 2016 election isn't apt.
Nothing is impossible in a two horse race - I accept that. But you're always addicted to the drama and narrative arc of these things and therefore tend to underestimate the likelihood that the thing that looks very likely to happen on the evidence will indeed happen.
Its worth remembering that Brexit seemed a shock because "received wisdom" was people "couldn't" vote that way surely - not because the polls said they wouldn't.
I agree, and the betting was indeed out of line with the polling as you describe.
But would also say that part of the impact is that Leave was obviously a more consequential vote in terms of post war British politics than Remain would have been. So part of the "shock" wasn't like an FA Cup giant-killing - it was the knowledge that a momentous thing had happened. That's remembered by many in hindsight as the result being totally out of the blue. That's not quite right - part of that feeling is that it was an impactful result.
The reverse is true for those of us who remember the 1992 election. That was genuinely a "shock" in that the polling was badly out of line (some polls had the Tories ahead, but those that did had it easily in hung Parliament territory whereas Major won a majority which wasn't large but perfectly workable until by-elections eroded it away). But did it feel that much of a shock? Certainly not to the same degree - lots of people were pleased, lots were disappointed... but it didn't actually feel all that momentous and impactful (and indeed wasn't - a man who was a fairly moderate, establishment PM continued to be PM).
I cant read the article paywall, (unless somebody has a good workaround?)
but it is interesting how its much more pronounced in the USA middling in France and very small in UK.
Leaving the contrary's defences aside, is this mostly a difference of weather you have a memory of the cold war? maybe?
I think Salisbury is a major effect in the UK. Despite all the talk about oligarchs, we've ben fairly bullish against Russia since at least before Crimea/Donbass/MH17, and all the major parties generally agree about that. Whereas in the US, you have the Donald backing Russia, so it splits on partisan divides.
Well except there's no partisan divide in the US survey results. That's the most interesting thing. Perhaps because the young are influenced by the extreme left and the old by the extreme right, both of which are full of Putin apologists?
Thanks, didn't know that. It does make it more interesting...
As I've said in various posts, the far left in Western Europe have really gone off Russia (to the extent that they were ever fans) - everyone from Corbyn and McDonnell in Britain to the Linke in Germany is supporting Ukraine. That doesn't mean that the left is suddenly signed up to the whole NATO/commercial globalisation agenda, merely that this is so like a classic imperialist war that it's impossible for even hardened leftists to accept as a reasonable way to pursue territorial disputes. In the US, alienation from the whole political establishment may be stronger on both far left and far right, so that if Biden and Congress think Russia are bad, it follows that they must be good? Most people don't really do alienation to that degree in Britain, even on the political wings - neither Farage nor Corbyn are really screaming "Down with the whole system".
Isn't some at least of that a matter of youngsters not bothering to keep iup with the news/have an opinion?
Maybe, but there's no excuse for "accidentally" supporting Russia because you haven't been taking an interest in the news.
Nah, for this century America has been led by Bush 43 and Trump, you can see why people aren't enamoured by America.
For some there's no difference between the invasion of Ukraine and the liberation of Iraq in 2003.
I wonder if the yoof also think more globally than we old farts. Despite the fact I have lived most my life outside Britain (46/17 years out/in), I tend to think about Ukraine being a European war and hence 'our' problem, whereas Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Burma, Nagorny-Karabakh, etc... are really other peoples' problems (until we made them ours, where we did). So they are fundamentally different in my mind.
But for many of the younger generation, it appears that what is front and centre for them is the contrast in how the West has reacted to 'like' situations, and hence for them the hypocrisy in our actions.
I doubt they care any more about other places.
I suspect its more some embittered resentment of the western world which manifests itself in supporting anything opposed to it.
Yes maybe, it would be interesting to poll, but I suspect that a lot of the 'Putin's the good guy' and 'there is rong on both sides' are probably split between left and right, but are bunched in the fringe party's Reform and green mostly.
I don't know if that was discussed in the economist article, but would like to see any poling on this.
As an aside, someone in NASA was tasked to write the operational history of the Shuttle after its last flight in 2011. He had a few interns to help him with the work. They assembled a draft, and asked the interns to read it, looking for any terms they did not understand and which needed explanation. The idea being that the history might be a little too technical.
One of the interns asked: "What is the Cold War?"
Despite bring bright enough to get an internship at NASA, she did not know about the Cold War. Which had ended just twenty years earlier...
Many modern kids probably know less about it.
In 1974, my maths teacher came into school in the morning with a flabbergasted look on her face. She asked us, (15-year olds) if we knew which band Paul McCartney played in. We all knew, of course. What had flabbergasted her was that, talking with her young nephew the night before, he had asked her, "Auntie, did you know that Paul McCartney used to play in a band called the Beatles?"
Isn't some at least of that a matter of youngsters not bothering to keep iup with the news/have an opinion?
Maybe, but there's no excuse for "accidentally" supporting Russia because you haven't been taking an interest in the news.
Nah, for this century America has been led by Bush 43 and Trump, you can see why people aren't enamoured by America.
For some there's no difference between the invasion of Ukraine and the liberation of Iraq in 2003.
I wonder if the yoof also think more globally than we old farts. Despite the fact I have lived most my life outside Britain (46/17 years out/in), I tend to think about Ukraine being a European war and hence 'our' problem, whereas Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Burma, Nagorny-Karabakh, etc... are really other peoples' problems (until we made them ours, where we did). So they are fundamentally different in my mind.
But for many of the younger generation, it appears that what is front and centre for them is the contrast in how the West has reacted to 'like' situations, and hence for them the hypocrisy in our actions.
I doubt they care any more about other places.
I suspect its more some embittered resentment of the western world which manifests itself in supporting anything opposed to it.
Also, young people are just a lot more stupid than us oldsters. IQs are declining across the West
And they really obviously ARE stupider. You can see it all around you. Less questioning. Sheeplike. Idiotic. Look at @CorrectHorseBattery and @Gallowgate on here. Fucking morons
I don't know if young people are stupider but I suspect they think they're cleverer than they are.
Which gets them into similar problems as if they were stupider but also fills them with resentment.
What do you look down on as young? Under 50?
Is there not a change by having not only all the knowledge in the world but cross checkable with other views on it, held in your hand and into your brain in seconds?
I don't think I'd ever heard of aphasia. I hope he does a Michael J. Fox and work towards finding a cure for, and raise awareness of, the illness that afflicts him.
Macron, Boris, sacked in same year - Putin survives the year."
I am beginning to get weird feelings in me waters about France. There is an awful lot of discontent. As a nation, they haven't thrown a total strop in decades. They like global attention. Le Pen has detoxed the brand and is gathering all the opposition around her. Macron is fecking annoying, even for the French (esp the French?). He is a snob
Le Pen could just snatch it.
As it happens, if she did, I don't think it would be Fascist Apocalypse, more like a spasm of Gaullist Nationalism, but it would frighten all the horses of Europe
Indeed, Macron is most popular amongst the rich, Parisians and the highly educated. Most of the rest of France loathes him.
I still think he will win it but Le Pen has sufficiently detoxified the brand she is more of a viable alternative than 5 years ago or than her father ever was. Even if Macron is re elected, Le Pen will probably win the white working class vote and the rural vote
Bet365 has Macron at 1/33, which is ridiculous in the light of that poll. Le Pen is within touching distance
Like you, I am still pretty sure Macron will win, but in a time of war and plague - literally - nothing is as certain as 1/33
Some things are. I and many others laid Trump as next President in December last year on Betfair to the tune of thousands - not a huge % return, but better than a bank and just as safe. It was taking free money from fantasists.
I accept this isn't on that level, but think you're underestimating how likely the likely outcome is here.
A YES vote in Scotland seemed impossible - until it became highly possible, and David Cameron started weeping on live TV. A Brexit vote seemed ludicrously unlikely - I recall Richard Nabavi predicting it would be 70/30 Remain - and then Brexit won
Ditto Trump in, say, 2015
We are in a time of unusual events
Let's not rewrite history here.
Polling for the 2016 Referendum often showed a lead for Leave. Polling for the 2016 Presidential election sometimes showed a Trump lead and often showed him within 2% (noting that was in fact the Clinton margin in the popular vote). A couple of polls showed a lead for "Yes" in the 2014, and most in the final six weeks indicated it was a good deal closer than the final, double digit margin.
That's not to say Trump and Brexit weren't surprises - they were. But people misremember them as coming completely out of the blue when actually plenty of polls were bang on the money.
Remember, we're not looking at polling a year out from the French Presidential election. It's a month out, with two well known figures and very stable polling over a long period. So your comparison with Trump a year from the 2016 election isn't apt.
Nothing is impossible in a two horse race - I accept that. But you're always addicted to the drama and narrative arc of these things and therefore tend to underestimate the likelihood that the thing that looks very likely to happen on the evidence will indeed happen.
Its worth remembering that Brexit seemed a shock because "received wisdom" was people "couldn't" vote that way surely - not because the polls said they wouldn't.
I agree, and the betting was indeed out of line with the polling as you describe.
But would also say that part of the impact is that Leave was obviously a more consequential vote in terms of post war British politics than Remain would have been. So part of the "shock" wasn't like an FA Cup giant-killing - it was the knowledge that a momentous thing had happened. That's remembered by many in hindsight as the result being totally out of the blue. That's not quite right - part of that feeling is that it was an impactful result.
The reverse is true for those of us who remember the 1992 election. That was genuinely a "shock" in that the polling was badly out of line (some polls had the Tories ahead, but those that did had it easily in hung Parliament territory whereas Major won a majority which wasn't large but perfectly workable until by-elections eroded it away). But did it feel that much of a shock? Certainly not to the same degree - lots of people were pleased, lots were disappointed... but it didn't actually feel all that momentous and impactful (and indeed wasn't - a man who was a fairly moderate, establishment PM continued to be PM).
I predicted 1992 Tory seats to within 2, to my colleagues.
As an aside, someone in NASA was tasked to write the operational history of the Shuttle after its last flight in 2011. He had a few interns to help him with the work. They assembled a draft, and asked the interns to read it, looking for any terms they did not understand and which needed explanation. The idea being that the history might be a little too technical.
One of the interns asked: "What is the Cold War?"
Despite bring bright enough to get an internship at NASA, she did not know about the Cold War. Which had ended just twenty years earlier...
Many modern kids probably know less about it.
In 1974, my maths teacher came into school in the morning with a flabbergasted look on her face. She asked us, (15-year olds) if we knew which band Paul McCartney played in. We all knew, of course. What had flabbergasted her was that, talking with her young nephew the night before, he had asked her, "Auntie, did you know that Paul McCartney used to play in a band called the Beatles?"
A YES vote in Scotland seemed impossible - until it became highly possible, and David Cameron started weeping on live TV. A Brexit vote seemed ludicrously unlikely - I recall Richard Nabavi predicting it would be 70/30 Remain - and then Brexit won [snip]
I think it's easy to forget just what a complete shambles the Leave campaign was just a few months before the referendum, especially during that hilarious time when Bernard Jenkin and other Tory Brexiteers tried to get Dominic Cummings sacked from Vote Leave, and ended up having to ask him how to do it, before changing their minds, but then Cummings and Matthew Elliott resigned from the board anyway:
I think it was probably around then that I posted that I thought that my long-term prediction of Remain winning by 60:40 might be over-cautious and that it could be 70:30.
So, yes, more uncertainty than one tends to think, but there's a bit of a difference compared with the French election in that a referendum is a one-off, whereas in regular elections you can look at how voters behaved in previous contests. No guarantee that it won't be different this time, but previously Le Pen has lost vote share in the final round compared with the polling.
Isn't some at least of that a matter of youngsters not bothering to keep iup with the news/have an opinion?
Maybe, but there's no excuse for "accidentally" supporting Russia because you haven't been taking an interest in the news.
Nah, for this century America has been led by Bush 43 and Trump, you can see why people aren't enamoured by America.
For some there's no difference between the invasion of Ukraine and the liberation of Iraq in 2003.
I wonder if the yoof also think more globally than we old farts. Despite the fact I have lived most my life outside Britain (46/17 years out/in), I tend to think about Ukraine being a European war and hence 'our' problem, whereas Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Burma, Nagorny-Karabakh, etc... are really other peoples' problems (until we made them ours, where we did). So they are fundamentally different in my mind.
But for many of the younger generation, it appears that what is front and centre for them is the contrast in how the West has reacted to 'like' situations, and hence for them the hypocrisy in our actions.
I doubt they care any more about other places.
I suspect its more some embittered resentment of the western world which manifests itself in supporting anything opposed to it.
Also, young people are just a lot more stupid than us oldsters. IQs are declining across the West
And they really obviously ARE stupider. You can see it all around you. Less questioning. Sheeplike. Idiotic. Look at @CorrectHorseBattery and @Gallowgate on here. Fucking morons
I don't know if young people are stupider but I suspect they think they're cleverer than they are.
Which gets them into similar problems as if they were stupider but also fills them with resentment.
We all think we're cleverer than we are. Except me. I really am just that clever.
On topic Boris Johnson is the kind of man to be caught in flagrante delicto with another woman by his wife and denying to his wife he was having an affair.
I know a couple where the girl caught her boyfriend NAKED IN BED WITH ANOTHER WOMAN in the middle of the afternoon, and he managed to talk his way out of it, and convince her nothing untoward was going on
It is amazing what people will believe, when they REALLY want to
is that story really about you?
No. I kinda wish it was, as I admire the sheer chutzpah that guy demonstrated.
He was, incidentally, quite a shit in many respects, and she finally wised up and booted him out
His excuse, I believe, was he and this girl both felt really tired at the same time, and got onto the bed to sleep, then it was cold so they got under the covers. I can't remember how he explained the total nudity (more comfy?) but the girlfriend bought it
There was also an empty bottle of champagne and two glasses on the bedside table. I guess that explained why they both got so "tired"
Just after posting that I had a really bad feeling realized what I had just accused somebody off. so sorry and thanks for taking it well you have managed to accumulate an awfully good set of anecdotes in you life. I don't think I will match, but I do enjoy hearing other peoples.
I don't think I'd ever heard of aphasia. I hope he does a Michael J. Fox and work towards finding a cure for, and raise awareness of, the illness that afflicts him.
I don't know if he was in a Nicolas Cage tax trouble type situation, but in the least 5-10 years he seems to have devolved into doing loads of cheap awful movies for as little effort as possible. Which was a shame anyway as he is a better actor than, say, Stallone, ever was.
Isn't some at least of that a matter of youngsters not bothering to keep iup with the news/have an opinion?
Maybe, but there's no excuse for "accidentally" supporting Russia because you haven't been taking an interest in the news.
Nah, for this century America has been led by Bush 43 and Trump, you can see why people aren't enamoured by America.
For some there's no difference between the invasion of Ukraine and the liberation of Iraq in 2003.
I wonder if the yoof also think more globally than we old farts. Despite the fact I have lived most my life outside Britain (46/17 years out/in), I tend to think about Ukraine being a European war and hence 'our' problem, whereas Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Burma, Nagorny-Karabakh, etc... are really other peoples' problems (until we made them ours, where we did). So they are fundamentally different in my mind.
But for many of the younger generation, it appears that what is front and centre for them is the contrast in how the West has reacted to 'like' situations, and hence for them the hypocrisy in our actions.
I doubt they care any more about other places.
I suspect its more some embittered resentment of the western world which manifests itself in supporting anything opposed to it.
Also, young people are just a lot more stupid than us oldsters. IQs are declining across the West
And they really obviously ARE stupider. You can see it all around you. Less questioning. Sheeplike. Idiotic. Look at @CorrectHorseBattery and @Gallowgate on here. Fucking morons
It's actually a bit more complicated than that.
Today's 21 years olds are not scoring as well as those born in 1974 (for example) and testing in 1995.
However, we all suffer from cognitive decline as we get older, particularly if we're gin-riddled. This mean that a 21 year old today will score more highly on an IQ test (on average) than a 54 year old.
I wonder why you chose 1974? My limited understanding of the latest research is that the peak was sometime in the 70s. I have no idea whether this is having a noticeable affect on the workplace.
I have heard from several people - not given to trolling like me - that their younger employees are noticeably dimmer, and more annoying and simultaneously more sensitive and entitled. But definitely dimmer
I'm not entirely making this up to irritate (tho that too)
On the evidence here, it looks like Absolute Peak Human IQ was achieved by people born in the mid 1960s, and then measured in the mid 1970s, which makes total sense
I cant read the article paywall, (unless somebody has a good workaround?)
but it is interesting how its much more pronounced in the USA middling in France and very small in UK.
Leaving the contrary's defences aside, is this mostly a difference of weather you have a memory of the cold war? maybe?
I think Salisbury is a major effect in the UK. Despite all the talk about oligarchs, we've ben fairly bullish against Russia since at least before Crimea/Donbass/MH17, and all the major parties generally agree about that. Whereas in the US, you have the Donald backing Russia, so it splits on partisan divides.
Well except there's no partisan divide in the US survey results. That's the most interesting thing. Perhaps because the young are influenced by the extreme left and the old by the extreme right, both of which are full of Putin apologists?
Thanks, didn't know that. It does make it more interesting...
As I've said in various posts, the far left in Western Europe have really gone off Russia (to the extent that they were ever fans) - everyone from Corbyn and McDonnell in Britain to the Linke in Germany is supporting Ukraine. That doesn't mean that the left is suddenly signed up to the whole NATO/commercial globalisation agenda, merely that this is so like a classic imperialist war that it's impossible for even hardened leftists to accept as a reasonable way to pursue territorial disputes. In the US, alienation from the whole political establishment may be stronger on both far left and far right, so that if Biden and Congress think Russia are bad, it follows that they must be good? Most people don't really do alienation to that degree in Britain, even on the political wings - neither Farage nor Corbyn are really screaming "Down with the whole system".
Is Corbyn 'supporting' Ukraine? Was he in the build-up to the war, or did he think the west were 'poking' Russia into invading?
Isn't some at least of that a matter of youngsters not bothering to keep iup with the news/have an opinion?
Maybe, but there's no excuse for "accidentally" supporting Russia because you haven't been taking an interest in the news.
Nah, for this century America has been led by Bush 43 and Trump, you can see why people aren't enamoured by America.
For some there's no difference between the invasion of Ukraine and the liberation of Iraq in 2003.
I wonder if the yoof also think more globally than we old farts. Despite the fact I have lived most my life outside Britain (46/17 years out/in), I tend to think about Ukraine being a European war and hence 'our' problem, whereas Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Burma, Nagorny-Karabakh, etc... are really other peoples' problems (until we made them ours, where we did). So they are fundamentally different in my mind.
But for many of the younger generation, it appears that what is front and centre for them is the contrast in how the West has reacted to 'like' situations, and hence for them the hypocrisy in our actions.
I doubt they care any more about other places.
I suspect its more some embittered resentment of the western world which manifests itself in supporting anything opposed to it.
Also, young people are just a lot more stupid than us oldsters. IQs are declining across the West
And they really obviously ARE stupider. You can see it all around you. Less questioning. Sheeplike. Idiotic. Look at @CorrectHorseBattery and @Gallowgate on here. Fucking morons
I don't know if young people are stupider but I suspect they think they're cleverer than they are.
Which gets them into similar problems as if they were stupider but also fills them with resentment.
What do you look down on as young? Under 50?
Is there not a change by having not only all the knowledge in the world but cross checkable with other views on it, held in your hand and into your Brian in seconds?
Intelligence and knowledge are not the same things at all. Intelligence in a way is knowing the right questions to ask. No amount of knowledge in the ether accessible via a mobile helps you with that.
I don't think I'd ever heard of aphasia. I hope he does a Michael J. Fox and work towards finding a cure for, and raise awareness of, the illness that afflicts him.
Isn't some at least of that a matter of youngsters not bothering to keep iup with the news/have an opinion?
Maybe, but there's no excuse for "accidentally" supporting Russia because you haven't been taking an interest in the news.
Nah, for this century America has been led by Bush 43 and Trump, you can see why people aren't enamoured by America.
For some there's no difference between the invasion of Ukraine and the liberation of Iraq in 2003.
I wonder if the yoof also think more globally than we old farts. Despite the fact I have lived most my life outside Britain (46/17 years out/in), I tend to think about Ukraine being a European war and hence 'our' problem, whereas Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Burma, Nagorny-Karabakh, etc... are really other peoples' problems (until we made them ours, where we did). So they are fundamentally different in my mind.
But for many of the younger generation, it appears that what is front and centre for them is the contrast in how the West has reacted to 'like' situations, and hence for them the hypocrisy in our actions.
I doubt they care any more about other places.
I suspect its more some embittered resentment of the western world which manifests itself in supporting anything opposed to it.
Also, young people are just a lot more stupid than us oldsters. IQs are declining across the West
And they really obviously ARE stupider. You can see it all around you. Less questioning. Sheeplike. Idiotic. Look at @CorrectHorseBattery and @Gallowgate on here. Fucking morons
I don't know if young people are stupider but I suspect they think they're cleverer than they are.
Which gets them into similar problems as if they were stupider but also fills them with resentment.
What do you look down on as young? Under 50?
Is there not a change by having not only all the knowledge in the world but cross checkable with other views on it, held in your hand and into your Brian in seconds?
Intelligence and knowledge are not the same things at all. Intelligence in a way is knowing the right questions to ask. No amount of knowledge in the ether accessible via a mobile helps you with that.
The current Google ad is based on asking questions.
A YES vote in Scotland seemed impossible - until it became highly possible, and David Cameron started weeping on live TV. A Brexit vote seemed ludicrously unlikely - I recall Richard Nabavi predicting it would be 70/30 Remain - and then Brexit won [snip]
I think it's easy to forget just what a complete shambles the Leave campaign was just a few months before the referendum, especially during that hilarious time when Bernard Jenkin and other Tory Brexiteers tried to get Dominic Cummings sacked from Vote Leave, and ended up having to ask him how to do it, before changing their minds, but then Cummings and Matthew Elliott resigned from the board anyway:
I think it was probably around then that I posted that I thought that my long-term prediction of Remain winning by 60:40 might be over-cautious and that it could be 70:30.
So, yes, more uncertainty than one tends to think, but there's a bit of a difference compared with the French election in that a referendum is a one-off, whereas in regular elections you can look at how voters behaved in previous contests. No guarantee that it won't be different this time, but previously Le Pen has lost vote share in the final round compared with the polling.
Fair play for fessing up. And yes, agreed. I think it all hinges on the debates.
Le Pen did so badly last time. That's possibly to her benefit as the bar is low. However it also means she is crap at debates. So who knows.
As an aside, someone in NASA was tasked to write the operational history of the Shuttle after its last flight in 2011. He had a few interns to help him with the work. They assembled a draft, and asked the interns to read it, looking for any terms they did not understand and which needed explanation. The idea being that the history might be a little too technical.
One of the interns asked: "What is the Cold War?"
Despite bring bright enough to get an internship at NASA, she did not know about the Cold War. Which had ended just twenty years earlier...
Many modern kids probably know less about it.
In 1974, my maths teacher came into school in the morning with a flabbergasted look on her face. She asked us, (15-year olds) if we knew which band Paul McCartney played in. We all knew, of course. What had flabbergasted her was that, talking with her young nephew the night before, he had asked her, "Auntie, did you know that Paul McCartney used to play in a band called the Beatles?"
I never had you pegged as a Wings fan.
LOL. I was not. Couldn't stand them. To my eternal shame, I was a Genesis and ELP fan at that time.
But Band on the Run was doing well in the charts at the time. Which I guess is why the nephew knew who Paul McCartney was.
As an aside, someone in NASA was tasked to write the operational history of the Shuttle after its last flight in 2011. He had a few interns to help him with the work. They assembled a draft, and asked the interns to read it, looking for any terms they did not understand and which needed explanation. The idea being that the history might be a little too technical.
One of the interns asked: "What is the Cold War?"
Despite bring bright enough to get an internship at NASA, she did not know about the Cold War. Which had ended just twenty years earlier...
Many modern kids probably know less about it.
In 1974, my maths teacher came into school in the morning with a flabbergasted look on her face. She asked us, (15-year olds) if we knew which band Paul McCartney played in. We all knew, of course. What had flabbergasted her was that, talking with her young nephew the night before, he had asked her, "Auntie, did you know that Paul McCartney used to play in a band called the Beatles?"
I first felt somewhat old when I realised I was chatting up girls who not only had no idea who the Sex Pistols were, but were born long after they disbanded.
Then I started meeting girls who had never heard of Oasis...
A YES vote in Scotland seemed impossible - until it became highly possible, and David Cameron started weeping on live TV. A Brexit vote seemed ludicrously unlikely - I recall Richard Nabavi predicting it would be 70/30 Remain - and then Brexit won [snip]
I think it's easy to forget just what a complete shambles the Leave campaign was just a few months before the referendum, especially during that hilarious time when Bernard Jenkin and other Tory Brexiteers tried to get Dominic Cummings sacked from Vote Leave, and ended up having to ask him how to do it, before changing their minds, but then Cummings and Matthew Elliott resigned from the board anyway:
I think it was probably around then that I posted that I thought that my long-term prediction of Remain winning by 60:40 might be over-cautious and that it could be 70:30.
So, yes, more uncertainty than one tends to think, but there's a bit of a difference compared with the French election in that a referendum is a one-off, whereas in regular elections you can look at how voters behaved in previous contests. No guarantee that it won't be different this time, but previously Le Pen has lost vote share in the final round compared with the polling.
Fair play for fessing up. And yes, agreed. I think it all hinges on the debates.
Le Pen did so badly last time. That's possibly to her benefit as the bar is low. However it also means she is crap at debates. So who knows.
She's already had her most amusing moment in a debate, when one of Macron's ministers said she was soft on Islam.
I don't think I'd ever heard of aphasia. I hope he does a Michael J. Fox and work towards finding a cure for, and raise awareness of, the illness that afflicts him.
I don't know the individual circumstances of course, but aphasia isn't really a disease in the sense Parkinson's is, I understand. It's a description of a set of symptoms, but the underlying cause is a brain injury, normally resulting from a stroke but potentially another disease, bleeding from a blow to the head etc.
I cant read the article paywall, (unless somebody has a good workaround?)
but it is interesting how its much more pronounced in the USA middling in France and very small in UK.
Leaving the contrary's defences aside, is this mostly a difference of weather you have a memory of the cold war? maybe?
I think Salisbury is a major effect in the UK. Despite all the talk about oligarchs, we've ben fairly bullish against Russia since at least before Crimea/Donbass/MH17, and all the major parties generally agree about that. Whereas in the US, you have the Donald backing Russia, so it splits on partisan divides.
Well except there's no partisan divide in the US survey results. That's the most interesting thing. Perhaps because the young are influenced by the extreme left and the old by the extreme right, both of which are full of Putin apologists?
Thanks, didn't know that. It does make it more interesting...
As I've said in various posts, the far left in Western Europe have really gone off Russia (to the extent that they were ever fans) - everyone from Corbyn and McDonnell in Britain to the Linke in Germany is supporting Ukraine. That doesn't mean that the left is suddenly signed up to the whole NATO/commercial globalisation agenda, merely that this is so like a classic imperialist war that it's impossible for even hardened leftists to accept as a reasonable way to pursue territorial disputes. In the US, alienation from the whole political establishment may be stronger on both far left and far right, so that if Biden and Congress think Russia are bad, it follows that they must be good? Most people don't really do alienation to that degree in Britain, even on the political wings - neither Farage nor Corbyn are really screaming "Down with the whole system".
Hang on Dr P. You were quite one of the far left until recently.
Macron, Boris, sacked in same year - Putin survives the year."
I am beginning to get weird feelings in me waters about France. There is an awful lot of discontent. As a nation, they haven't thrown a total strop in decades. They like global attention. Le Pen has detoxed the brand and is gathering all the opposition around her. Macron is fecking annoying, even for the French (esp the French?). He is a snob
Le Pen could just snatch it.
As it happens, if she did, I don't think it would be Fascist Apocalypse, more like a spasm of Gaullist Nationalism, but it would frighten all the horses of Europe
Indeed, Macron is most popular amongst the rich, Parisians and the highly educated. Most of the rest of France loathes him.
I still think he will win it but Le Pen has sufficiently detoxified the brand she is more of a viable alternative than 5 years ago or than her father ever was. Even if Macron is re elected, Le Pen will probably win the white working class vote and the rural vote
Bet365 has Macron at 1/33, which is ridiculous in the light of that poll. Le Pen is within touching distance
Like you, I am still pretty sure Macron will win, but in a time of war and plague - literally - nothing is as certain as 1/33
Some things are. I and many others laid Trump as next President in December last year on Betfair to the tune of thousands - not a huge % return, but better than a bank and just as safe. It was taking free money from fantasists.
I accept this isn't on that level, but think you're underestimating how likely the likely outcome is here.
A YES vote in Scotland seemed impossible - until it became highly possible, and David Cameron started weeping on live TV. A Brexit vote seemed ludicrously unlikely - I recall Richard Nabavi predicting it would be 70/30 Remain - and then Brexit won
Ditto Trump in, say, 2015
We are in a time of unusual events
Let's not rewrite history here.
Polling for the 2016 Referendum often showed a lead for Leave. Polling for the 2016 Presidential election sometimes showed a Trump lead and often showed him within 2% (noting that was in fact the Clinton margin in the popular vote). A couple of polls showed a lead for "Yes" in the 2014, and most in the final six weeks indicated it was a good deal closer than the final, double digit margin.
That's not to say Trump and Brexit weren't surprises - they were. But people misremember them as coming completely out of the blue when actually plenty of polls were bang on the money.
Remember, we're not looking at polling a year out from the French Presidential election. It's a month out, with two well known figures and very stable polling over a long period. So your comparison with Trump a year from the 2016 election isn't apt.
Nothing is impossible in a two horse race - I accept that. But you're always addicted to the drama and narrative arc of these things and therefore tend to underestimate the likelihood that the thing that looks very likely to happen on the evidence will indeed happen.
Its worth remembering that Brexit seemed a shock because "received wisdom" was people "couldn't" vote that way surely - not because the polls said they wouldn't.
I agree, and the betting was indeed out of line with the polling as you describe.
But would also say that part of the impact is that Leave was obviously a more consequential vote in terms of post war British politics than Remain would have been. So part of the "shock" wasn't like an FA Cup giant-killing - it was the knowledge that a momentous thing had happened. That's remembered by many in hindsight as the result being totally out of the blue. That's not quite right - part of that feeling is that it was an impactful result.
The reverse is true for those of us who remember the 1992 election. That was genuinely a "shock" in that the polling was badly out of line (some polls had the Tories ahead, but those that did had it easily in hung Parliament territory whereas Major won a majority which wasn't large but perfectly workable until by-elections eroded it away). But did it feel that much of a shock? Certainly not to the same degree - lots of people were pleased, lots were disappointed... but it didn't actually feel all that momentous and impactful (and indeed wasn't - a man who was a fairly moderate, establishment PM continued to be PM).
I predicted 1992 Tory seats to within 2, to my colleagues.
As an aside, someone in NASA was tasked to write the operational history of the Shuttle after its last flight in 2011. He had a few interns to help him with the work. They assembled a draft, and asked the interns to read it, looking for any terms they did not understand and which needed explanation. The idea being that the history might be a little too technical.
One of the interns asked: "What is the Cold War?"
Despite bring bright enough to get an internship at NASA, she did not know about the Cold War. Which had ended just twenty years earlier...
Many modern kids probably know less about it.
In 1974, my maths teacher came into school in the morning with a flabbergasted look on her face. She asked us, (15-year olds) if we knew which band Paul McCartney played in. We all knew, of course. What had flabbergasted her was that, talking with her young nephew the night before, he had asked her, "Auntie, did you know that Paul McCartney used to play in a band called the Beatles?"
I first felt somewhat old when I realised I was chatting up girls who not only had no idea who the Sex Pistols were, but were born long after they disbanded.
Then I started meeting girls who had never heard of Oasis...
Isn't some at least of that a matter of youngsters not bothering to keep iup with the news/have an opinion?
Maybe, but there's no excuse for "accidentally" supporting Russia because you haven't been taking an interest in the news.
Nah, for this century America has been led by Bush 43 and Trump, you can see why people aren't enamoured by America.
For some there's no difference between the invasion of Ukraine and the liberation of Iraq in 2003.
I wonder if the yoof also think more globally than we old farts. Despite the fact I have lived most my life outside Britain (46/17 years out/in), I tend to think about Ukraine being a European war and hence 'our' problem, whereas Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Burma, Nagorny-Karabakh, etc... are really other peoples' problems (until we made them ours, where we did). So they are fundamentally different in my mind.
But for many of the younger generation, it appears that what is front and centre for them is the contrast in how the West has reacted to 'like' situations, and hence for them the hypocrisy in our actions.
I doubt they care any more about other places.
I suspect its more some embittered resentment of the western world which manifests itself in supporting anything opposed to it.
Also, young people are just a lot more stupid than us oldsters. IQs are declining across the West
And they really obviously ARE stupider. You can see it all around you. Less questioning. Sheeplike. Idiotic. Look at @CorrectHorseBattery and @Gallowgate on here. Fucking morons
It's actually a bit more complicated than that.
Today's 21 years olds are not scoring as well as those born in 1974 (for example) and testing in 1995.
However, we all suffer from cognitive decline as we get older, particularly if we're gin-riddled. This mean that a 21 year old today will score more highly on an IQ test (on average) than a 54 year old.
I wonder why you chose 1974? My limited understanding of the latest research is that the peak was sometime in the 70s. I have no idea whether this is having a noticeable affect on the workplace.
I have heard from several people - not given to trolling like me - that their younger employees are noticeably dimmer, and more annoying and simultaneously more sensitive and entitled. But definitely dimmer
I'm not entirely making this up to irritate (tho that too)
On the evidence here, it looks like Absolute Peak Human IQ was achieved by people born in the mid 1960s, and then measured in the mid 1970s, which makes total sense
I was undere the impression that the reverse was the case. This was because the reduction of lead pollution from petrol [edit]in recent decades had improved IQ and, in particular, the crime rate in polluted urban areas. The 1960s-born would have been very vulnertable to lead pollution at their conception, gestation and childhood.
So maybe they are too stupid to appreciate the intelligence of the young uns.
Isn't some at least of that a matter of youngsters not bothering to keep iup with the news/have an opinion?
Maybe, but there's no excuse for "accidentally" supporting Russia because you haven't been taking an interest in the news.
Nah, for this century America has been led by Bush 43 and Trump, you can see why people aren't enamoured by America.
For some there's no difference between the invasion of Ukraine and the liberation of Iraq in 2003.
I wonder if the yoof also think more globally than we old farts. Despite the fact I have lived most my life outside Britain (46/17 years out/in), I tend to think about Ukraine being a European war and hence 'our' problem, whereas Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Burma, Nagorny-Karabakh, etc... are really other peoples' problems (until we made them ours, where we did). So they are fundamentally different in my mind.
But for many of the younger generation, it appears that what is front and centre for them is the contrast in how the West has reacted to 'like' situations, and hence for them the hypocrisy in our actions.
I doubt they care any more about other places.
I suspect its more some embittered resentment of the western world which manifests itself in supporting anything opposed to it.
Also, young people are just a lot more stupid than us oldsters. IQs are declining across the West
And they really obviously ARE stupider. You can see it all around you. Less questioning. Sheeplike. Idiotic. Look at @CorrectHorseBattery and @Gallowgate on here. Fucking morons
It's actually a bit more complicated than that.
Today's 21 years olds are not scoring as well as those born in 1974 (for example) and testing in 1995.
However, we all suffer from cognitive decline as we get older, particularly if we're gin-riddled. This mean that a 21 year old today will score more highly on an IQ test (on average) than a 54 year old.
I wonder why you chose 1974? My limited understanding of the latest research is that the peak was sometime in the 70s. I have no idea whether this is having a noticeable affect on the workplace.
I have heard from several people - not given to trolling like me - that their younger employees are noticeably dimmer, and more annoying and simultaneously more sensitive and entitled. But definitely dimmer
I'm not entirely making this up to irritate (tho that too)
On the evidence here, it looks like Absolute Peak Human IQ was achieved by people born in the mid 1960s, and then measured in the mid 1970s, which makes total sense
one controversial argument is: That IQ is partly genetic and that dumb people generally and thought history have had more babies, but that a lot of these die before reaching child rearing age, intelligent people have less babies but they are more likely to live. and for generations this has been in more or less equilibrium, possibly with a slite rise in intelligence form one generation to the next. but that since the 1960 we have reduced the rate at witch less intelligent kids/young people die and therefor the equilibrium has shifted the other way.
Have no idea if there is anything in this, but thought I would put it out there.
Isn't some at least of that a matter of youngsters not bothering to keep iup with the news/have an opinion?
Maybe, but there's no excuse for "accidentally" supporting Russia because you haven't been taking an interest in the news.
Nah, for this century America has been led by Bush 43 and Trump, you can see why people aren't enamoured by America.
For some there's no difference between the invasion of Ukraine and the liberation of Iraq in 2003.
I wonder if the yoof also think more globally than we old farts. Despite the fact I have lived most my life outside Britain (46/17 years out/in), I tend to think about Ukraine being a European war and hence 'our' problem, whereas Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Burma, Nagorny-Karabakh, etc... are really other peoples' problems (until we made them ours, where we did). So they are fundamentally different in my mind.
But for many of the younger generation, it appears that what is front and centre for them is the contrast in how the West has reacted to 'like' situations, and hence for them the hypocrisy in our actions.
I doubt they care any more about other places.
I suspect its more some embittered resentment of the western world which manifests itself in supporting anything opposed to it.
Also, young people are just a lot more stupid than us oldsters. IQs are declining across the West
And they really obviously ARE stupider. You can see it all around you. Less questioning. Sheeplike. Idiotic. Look at @CorrectHorseBattery and @Gallowgate on here. Fucking morons
It's actually a bit more complicated than that.
Today's 21 years olds are not scoring as well as those born in 1974 (for example) and testing in 1995.
However, we all suffer from cognitive decline as we get older, particularly if we're gin-riddled. This mean that a 21 year old today will score more highly on an IQ test (on average) than a 54 year old.
I wonder why you chose 1974? My limited understanding of the latest research is that the peak was sometime in the 70s. I have no idea whether this is having a noticeable affect on the workplace.
I have heard from several people - not given to trolling like me - that their younger employees are noticeably dimmer, and more annoying and simultaneously more sensitive and entitled. But definitely dimmer
I'm not entirely making this up to irritate (tho that too)
On the evidence here, it looks like Absolute Peak Human IQ was achieved by people born in the mid 1960s, and then measured in the mid 1970s, which makes total sense
As an aside, someone in NASA was tasked to write the operational history of the Shuttle after its last flight in 2011. He had a few interns to help him with the work. They assembled a draft, and asked the interns to read it, looking for any terms they did not understand and which needed explanation. The idea being that the history might be a little too technical.
One of the interns asked: "What is the Cold War?"
Despite bring bright enough to get an internship at NASA, she did not know about the Cold War. Which had ended just twenty years earlier...
Many modern kids probably know less about it.
In 1974, my maths teacher came into school in the morning with a flabbergasted look on her face. She asked us, (15-year olds) if we knew which band Paul McCartney played in. We all knew, of course. What had flabbergasted her was that, talking with her young nephew the night before, he had asked her, "Auntie, did you know that Paul McCartney used to play in a band called the Beatles?"
I first felt somewhat old when I realised I was chatting up girls who not only had no idea who the Sex Pistols were, but were born long after they disbanded.
Then I started meeting girls who had never heard of Oasis...
And after that, everything was a Blur.
I suppose when he started talking about The Kinks they thought he meant sex.
Isn't some at least of that a matter of youngsters not bothering to keep iup with the news/have an opinion?
Maybe, but there's no excuse for "accidentally" supporting Russia because you haven't been taking an interest in the news.
Nah, for this century America has been led by Bush 43 and Trump, you can see why people aren't enamoured by America.
For some there's no difference between the invasion of Ukraine and the liberation of Iraq in 2003.
I wonder if the yoof also think more globally than we old farts. Despite the fact I have lived most my life outside Britain (46/17 years out/in), I tend to think about Ukraine being a European war and hence 'our' problem, whereas Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Burma, Nagorny-Karabakh, etc... are really other peoples' problems (until we made them ours, where we did). So they are fundamentally different in my mind.
But for many of the younger generation, it appears that what is front and centre for them is the contrast in how the West has reacted to 'like' situations, and hence for them the hypocrisy in our actions.
I doubt they care any more about other places.
I suspect its more some embittered resentment of the western world which manifests itself in supporting anything opposed to it.
Also, young people are just a lot more stupid than us oldsters. IQs are declining across the West
And they really obviously ARE stupider. You can see it all around you. Less questioning. Sheeplike. Idiotic. Look at @CorrectHorseBattery and @Gallowgate on here. Fucking morons
It's actually a bit more complicated than that.
Today's 21 years olds are not scoring as well as those born in 1974 (for example) and testing in 1995.
However, we all suffer from cognitive decline as we get older, particularly if we're gin-riddled. This mean that a 21 year old today will score more highly on an IQ test (on average) than a 54 year old.
I wonder why you chose 1974? My limited understanding of the latest research is that the peak was sometime in the 70s. I have no idea whether this is having a noticeable affect on the workplace.
I have heard from several people - not given to trolling like me - that their younger employees are noticeably dimmer, and more annoying and simultaneously more sensitive and entitled. But definitely dimmer
I'm not entirely making this up to irritate (tho that too)
On the evidence here, it looks like Absolute Peak Human IQ was achieved by people born in the mid 1960s, and then measured in the mid 1970s, which makes total sense
You're one of the dumbest posters here. Ironic.
With a field so competitive it is pretty hard to highlight frontrunners in fairness.
I don't think I'd ever heard of aphasia. I hope he does a Michael J. Fox and work towards finding a cure for, and raise awareness of, the illness that afflicts him.
I don't know if he was in a Nicolas Cage tax trouble type situation, but in the least 5-10 years he seems to have devolved into doing loads of cheap awful movies for as little effort as possible. Which was a shame anyway as he is a better actor than, say, Stallone, ever was.
I think within the industry he became known for really just dialing it in.
I stopped watching his films after Expendables 2 and A Good Day to Die Hard. In both of those films, his scenes were unwatchable.
I cant read the article paywall, (unless somebody has a good workaround?)
but it is interesting how its much more pronounced in the USA middling in France and very small in UK.
Leaving the contrary's defences aside, is this mostly a difference of weather you have a memory of the cold war? maybe?
I think Salisbury is a major effect in the UK. Despite all the talk about oligarchs, we've ben fairly bullish against Russia since at least before Crimea/Donbass/MH17, and all the major parties generally agree about that. Whereas in the US, you have the Donald backing Russia, so it splits on partisan divides.
Well except there's no partisan divide in the US survey results. That's the most interesting thing. Perhaps because the young are influenced by the extreme left and the old by the extreme right, both of which are full of Putin apologists?
Thanks, didn't know that. It does make it more interesting...
As I've said in various posts, the far left in Western Europe have really gone off Russia (to the extent that they were ever fans) - everyone from Corbyn and McDonnell in Britain to the Linke in Germany is supporting Ukraine. That doesn't mean that the left is suddenly signed up to the whole NATO/commercial globalisation agenda, merely that this is so like a classic imperialist war that it's impossible for even hardened leftists to accept as a reasonable way to pursue territorial disputes. In the US, alienation from the whole political establishment may be stronger on both far left and far right, so that if Biden and Congress think Russia are bad, it follows that they must be good? Most people don't really do alienation to that degree in Britain, even on the political wings - neither Farage nor Corbyn are really screaming "Down with the whole system".
Is Corbyn 'supporting' Ukraine? Was he in the build-up to the war, or did he think the west were 'poking' Russia into invading?
He has been far more critical of Putin than Blair and Mandelson and Johnson and Cameron for years now.
No Socialist would support Putin he is a tin pot Capitalist dictator
I don't think I'd ever heard of aphasia. I hope he does a Michael J. Fox and work towards finding a cure for, and raise awareness of, the illness that afflicts him.
I don't know if he was in a Nicolas Cage tax trouble type situation, but in the least 5-10 years he seems to have devolved into doing loads of cheap awful movies for as little effort as possible. Which was a shame anyway as he is a better actor than, say, Stallone, ever was.
I think within the industry he became known for really just dialing it in.
I stopped watching his films after Expendables 2 and A Good Day to Die Hard. In both of those films, his scenes were unwatchable.
I really lose respect for actors who phone it in. Maybe it's a crappy project you don't care about, you can still have professional pride and make your performance as memorable and impactful as possible. Even in a bad movie, sometimes especially in one, you can stand out and elevate it.
Isn't some at least of that a matter of youngsters not bothering to keep iup with the news/have an opinion?
Maybe, but there's no excuse for "accidentally" supporting Russia because you haven't been taking an interest in the news.
Nah, for this century America has been led by Bush 43 and Trump, you can see why people aren't enamoured by America.
For some there's no difference between the invasion of Ukraine and the liberation of Iraq in 2003.
I wonder if the yoof also think more globally than we old farts. Despite the fact I have lived most my life outside Britain (46/17 years out/in), I tend to think about Ukraine being a European war and hence 'our' problem, whereas Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Burma, Nagorny-Karabakh, etc... are really other peoples' problems (until we made them ours, where we did). So they are fundamentally different in my mind.
But for many of the younger generation, it appears that what is front and centre for them is the contrast in how the West has reacted to 'like' situations, and hence for them the hypocrisy in our actions.
I doubt they care any more about other places.
I suspect its more some embittered resentment of the western world which manifests itself in supporting anything opposed to it.
Also, young people are just a lot more stupid than us oldsters. IQs are declining across the West
And they really obviously ARE stupider. You can see it all around you. Less questioning. Sheeplike. Idiotic. Look at @CorrectHorseBattery and @Gallowgate on here. Fucking morons
It's actually a bit more complicated than that.
Today's 21 years olds are not scoring as well as those born in 1974 (for example) and testing in 1995.
However, we all suffer from cognitive decline as we get older, particularly if we're gin-riddled. This mean that a 21 year old today will score more highly on an IQ test (on average) than a 54 year old.
I wonder why you chose 1974? My limited understanding of the latest research is that the peak was sometime in the 70s. I have no idea whether this is having a noticeable affect on the workplace.
I have heard from several people - not given to trolling like me - that their younger employees are noticeably dimmer, and more annoying and simultaneously more sensitive and entitled. But definitely dimmer
I'm not entirely making this up to irritate (tho that too)
On the evidence here, it looks like Absolute Peak Human IQ was achieved by people born in the mid 1960s, and then measured in the mid 1970s, which makes total sense
You're one of the dumbest posters here. Ironic.
With a field so competitive it is pretty hard to highlight frontrunners in fairness.
Leaving that aside, I was pondering about the 'one' part of that sentence...
I don't think I'd ever heard of aphasia. I hope he does a Michael J. Fox and work towards finding a cure for, and raise awareness of, the illness that afflicts him.
I don't know if he was in a Nicolas Cage tax trouble type situation, but in the least 5-10 years he seems to have devolved into doing loads of cheap awful movies for as little effort as possible. Which was a shame anyway as he is a better actor than, say, Stallone, ever was.
I think within the industry he became known for really just dialing it in.
I stopped watching his films after Expendables 2 and A Good Day to Die Hard. In both of those films, his scenes were unwatchable.
I really lose respect for actors who phone it in. Maybe it's a crappy project you don't care about, you can still have professional pride and make your performance as memorable and impactful as possible. Even in a bad movie, sometimes especially in one, you can stand out and elevate it.
Interesting that after Red 2 (a film that just had to be made but which should not have been) in 2013 and Sin City in 2014, all his films were either cameos or direct-to-video.
Le Pen is likely to do much better than last time but she simply cannot escape her past and her previous fawning over Putin will come back to haunt her as Macron will drive this point home .
It's the taxing of unrealised gains that he objects to, as discussed here a couple of days ago:
“You can’t tax something that’s not earned. Earned income is what we’re based on,” he said. “There’s other ways to do it. Everybody has to pay their fair share.”
Macron (EC-RE): 52.5% (-3.5) Le Pen (RN-ID): 47.5% (+3.5)
+/- vs. 19-21 March 2022
Should be more like 7/1 or 8/1?
She's not a rank outsider, not on those numbers
Agreed.
And can I just say, as someone who is generally pretty critical of you, it’s great to see a genuine betting post.
More like this please. Let’s get the site back to how it used to be with the bulk of the conversation about betting and value.
Yes that is such a smart betting tip,, I just went into PP put a pony on it, but it was next President 10-1 Le Pen, 50-1 Zemmour, and 80-1 Melenchon, so I put the money on Melenchon. That will be a massive return that much on at 80-1
I cant read the article paywall, (unless somebody has a good workaround?)
but it is interesting how its much more pronounced in the USA middling in France and very small in UK.
Leaving the contrary's defences aside, is this mostly a difference of weather you have a memory of the cold war? maybe?
I think Salisbury is a major effect in the UK. Despite all the talk about oligarchs, we've ben fairly bullish against Russia since at least before Crimea/Donbass/MH17, and all the major parties generally agree about that. Whereas in the US, you have the Donald backing Russia, so it splits on partisan divides.
Well except there's no partisan divide in the US survey results. That's the most interesting thing. Perhaps because the young are influenced by the extreme left and the old by the extreme right, both of which are full of Putin apologists?
Thanks, didn't know that. It does make it more interesting...
As I've said in various posts, the far left in Western Europe have really gone off Russia (to the extent that they were ever fans) - everyone from Corbyn and McDonnell in Britain to the Linke in Germany is supporting Ukraine. That doesn't mean that the left is suddenly signed up to the whole NATO/commercial globalisation agenda, merely that this is so like a classic imperialist war that it's impossible for even hardened leftists to accept as a reasonable way to pursue territorial disputes. In the US, alienation from the whole political establishment may be stronger on both far left and far right, so that if Biden and Congress think Russia are bad, it follows that they must be good? Most people don't really do alienation to that degree in Britain, even on the political wings - neither Farage nor Corbyn are really screaming "Down with the whole system".
Is Corbyn 'supporting' Ukraine? Was he in the build-up to the war, or did he think the west were 'poking' Russia into invading?
I would be interested to understand what Corbyn and the left think about what should be done about the current situation.
Would they supply arms to Ukraine - or go one step further - send soldiers there to fight? Would they join the SNP in calling for a 'no fly zone', meaning that they would be willing to shoot down Russian jets?
Or is it just the case that they would try and resolve the situation by protesting outside the Russian embassy, and disbanding NATO.
I cant read the article paywall, (unless somebody has a good workaround?)
but it is interesting how its much more pronounced in the USA middling in France and very small in UK.
Leaving the contrary's defences aside, is this mostly a difference of weather you have a memory of the cold war? maybe?
I think Salisbury is a major effect in the UK. Despite all the talk about oligarchs, we've ben fairly bullish against Russia since at least before Crimea/Donbass/MH17, and all the major parties generally agree about that. Whereas in the US, you have the Donald backing Russia, so it splits on partisan divides.
Well except there's no partisan divide in the US survey results. That's the most interesting thing. Perhaps because the young are influenced by the extreme left and the old by the extreme right, both of which are full of Putin apologists?
Thanks, didn't know that. It does make it more interesting...
As I've said in various posts, the far left in Western Europe have really gone off Russia (to the extent that they were ever fans) - everyone from Corbyn and McDonnell in Britain to the Linke in Germany is supporting Ukraine. That doesn't mean that the left is suddenly signed up to the whole NATO/commercial globalisation agenda, merely that this is so like a classic imperialist war that it's impossible for even hardened leftists to accept as a reasonable way to pursue territorial disputes. In the US, alienation from the whole political establishment may be stronger on both far left and far right, so that if Biden and Congress think Russia are bad, it follows that they must be good? Most people don't really do alienation to that degree in Britain, even on the political wings - neither Farage nor Corbyn are really screaming "Down with the whole system".
Is Corbyn 'supporting' Ukraine? Was he in the build-up to the war, or did he think the west were 'poking' Russia into invading?
He has been far more critical of Putin than Blair and Mandelson and Johnson and Cameron for years now.
No Socialist would support Putin he is a tin pot Capitalist dictator
Which poster was it kept insisting Corbyn wasn't a socialist? Was it TheJezziah?
Isn't some at least of that a matter of youngsters not bothering to keep iup with the news/have an opinion?
Maybe, but there's no excuse for "accidentally" supporting Russia because you haven't been taking an interest in the news.
Nah, for this century America has been led by Bush 43 and Trump, you can see why people aren't enamoured by America.
For some there's no difference between the invasion of Ukraine and the liberation of Iraq in 2003.
I wonder if the yoof also think more globally than we old farts. Despite the fact I have lived most my life outside Britain (46/17 years out/in), I tend to think about Ukraine being a European war and hence 'our' problem, whereas Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Burma, Nagorny-Karabakh, etc... are really other peoples' problems (until we made them ours, where we did). So they are fundamentally different in my mind.
But for many of the younger generation, it appears that what is front and centre for them is the contrast in how the West has reacted to 'like' situations, and hence for them the hypocrisy in our actions.
I doubt they care any more about other places.
I suspect its more some embittered resentment of the western world which manifests itself in supporting anything opposed to it.
Also, young people are just a lot more stupid than us oldsters. IQs are declining across the West
And they really obviously ARE stupider. You can see it all around you. Less questioning. Sheeplike. Idiotic. Look at @CorrectHorseBattery and @Gallowgate on here. Fucking morons
Unfair.
I'd say I'd seen evidence of nuance and development amongst both those posters since they started on here - they are far less ideological and more reasoned now.
A YES vote in Scotland seemed impossible - until it became highly possible, and David Cameron started weeping on live TV. A Brexit vote seemed ludicrously unlikely - I recall Richard Nabavi predicting it would be 70/30 Remain - and then Brexit won [snip]
I think it's easy to forget just what a complete shambles the Leave campaign was just a few months before the referendum, especially during that hilarious time when Bernard Jenkin and other Tory Brexiteers tried to get Dominic Cummings sacked from Vote Leave, and ended up having to ask him how to do it, before changing their minds, but then Cummings and Matthew Elliott resigned from the board anyway:
I think it was probably around then that I posted that I thought that my long-term prediction of Remain winning by 60:40 might be over-cautious and that it could be 70:30.
So, yes, more uncertainty than one tends to think, but there's a bit of a difference compared with the French election in that a referendum is a one-off, whereas in regular elections you can look at how voters behaved in previous contests. No guarantee that it won't be different this time, but previously Le Pen has lost vote share in the final round compared with the polling.
You called it badly wrong but I thought the Leave campaign was an embarrassment.
It's the taxing of unrealised gains that he objects to, as discussed here a couple of days ago:
“You can’t tax something that’s not earned. Earned income is what we’re based on,” he said. “There’s other ways to do it. Everybody has to pay their fair share.”
It’s hard to see how it gets through. Manchin is not a surprise.
Re: nuclear weapons they're not volatile chemicals that just need a "spark" and oxygen to go off - they need to be detonated in a very specific way to go supercritical and cause a chain reaction at the same time.
Otherwise, the explosives just go off an distribute the plug of plutonium/uranium over an area.
Isn't some at least of that a matter of youngsters not bothering to keep iup with the news/have an opinion?
Maybe, but there's no excuse for "accidentally" supporting Russia because you haven't been taking an interest in the news.
Nah, for this century America has been led by Bush 43 and Trump, you can see why people aren't enamoured by America.
For some there's no difference between the invasion of Ukraine and the liberation of Iraq in 2003.
I wonder if the yoof also think more globally than we old farts. Despite the fact I have lived most my life outside Britain (46/17 years out/in), I tend to think about Ukraine being a European war and hence 'our' problem, whereas Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Burma, Nagorny-Karabakh, etc... are really other peoples' problems (until we made them ours, where we did). So they are fundamentally different in my mind.
But for many of the younger generation, it appears that what is front and centre for them is the contrast in how the West has reacted to 'like' situations, and hence for them the hypocrisy in our actions.
I doubt they care any more about other places.
I suspect its more some embittered resentment of the western world which manifests itself in supporting anything opposed to it.
Also, young people are just a lot more stupid than us oldsters. IQs are declining across the West
And they really obviously ARE stupider. You can see it all around you. Less questioning. Sheeplike. Idiotic. Look at @CorrectHorseBattery and @Gallowgate on here. Fucking morons
Unfair.
I'd say I'd seen evidence of nuance and development amongst both those posters since they started on here - they are far less ideological and more reasoned now.
This site is an education.
CHB is a decent chap but gallowgate, although not a moron has no nuance whatsoever. Just few word summaries.
It's the taxing of unrealised gains that he objects to, as discussed here a couple of days ago:
“You can’t tax something that’s not earned. Earned income is what we’re based on,” he said. “There’s other ways to do it. Everybody has to pay their fair share.”
It’s hard to see how it gets through. Manchin is not a surprise.
Yes, the Biden administration seems remarkably poor at calibrating their policy proposals to fit the Senate they actually have, rather than the one they wish they had.
I cant read the article paywall, (unless somebody has a good workaround?)
but it is interesting how its much more pronounced in the USA middling in France and very small in UK.
Leaving the contrary's defences aside, is this mostly a difference of weather you have a memory of the cold war? maybe?
I think Salisbury is a major effect in the UK. Despite all the talk about oligarchs, we've ben fairly bullish against Russia since at least before Crimea/Donbass/MH17, and all the major parties generally agree about that. Whereas in the US, you have the Donald backing Russia, so it splits on partisan divides.
Well except there's no partisan divide in the US survey results. That's the most interesting thing. Perhaps because the young are influenced by the extreme left and the old by the extreme right, both of which are full of Putin apologists?
Thanks, didn't know that. It does make it more interesting...
As I've said in various posts, the far left in Western Europe have really gone off Russia (to the extent that they were ever fans) - everyone from Corbyn and McDonnell in Britain to the Linke in Germany is supporting Ukraine. That doesn't mean that the left is suddenly signed up to the whole NATO/commercial globalisation agenda, merely that this is so like a classic imperialist war that it's impossible for even hardened leftists to accept as a reasonable way to pursue territorial disputes. In the US, alienation from the whole political establishment may be stronger on both far left and far right, so that if Biden and Congress think Russia are bad, it follows that they must be good? Most people don't really do alienation to that degree in Britain, even on the political wings - neither Farage nor Corbyn are really screaming "Down with the whole system".
Is Corbyn 'supporting' Ukraine? Was he in the build-up to the war, or did he think the west were 'poking' Russia into invading?
He has been far more critical of Putin than Blair and Mandelson and Johnson and Cameron for years now.
No Socialist would support Putin he is a tin pot Capitalist dictator
Oh, go away. Jeremy Corbyn signed the Stop The War statement on the war.
One that said there should not be a war for one paragraph, and then spent the rest of the document blaming 'us' for the war, and essentially said Ukraine should not defend itself.
"Our focus is on the policies of the British government which have poured oil on the fire throughout this episode. In taking this position we do not endorse the nature or conduct of either the Russian or Ukrainian regimes."
"We urge the entire anti-war movement to unite on the basis of challenging the British government’s aggressive posturing and direct its campaigning to that end above all."
Yes, Corbyn blames *us* for the war. As did Nick Palmer, of this parish.
Why this pisses me off: it is rare in international relations to get such a clear-cut case of right versus wrong; good versus evil. And yet Corbyn and his fellow bottom-feeders look at blaming us for Putin's evil.
There is one person to blame for this evil: Putin. Do you agree?
Re: nuclear weapons they're not volatile chemicals that just need a "spark" and oxygen to go off - they need to be detonated in a very specific way to go supercritical and cause a chain reaction at the same time.
Otherwise, the explosives just go off an distribute the plug of plutonium/uranium over an area.
I once wrote a story where someone steals a nuclear warhead. But they cannot work out how to trigger it. So she uses its explosives and the main device to make a dirty bomb.
IF Macron loses, he'll be the third successive one term President after Sarkozy and Hollande. 2012 was the last time an incumbent lost when Sarkozy lost by three points in the run off having been one and a half points behind Hollande in the first round.
Marine Le Pen was third polling just under 18% and Melenchon was fourth with 11%.
Le Pen now trails Macron by seven points according to Elabe and six and a half points with Ipsos Sopra Steria.
The parallel here might be the London Mayoral system which has so far never seen a candidate finishing first in the first round of polling losing in the second round. There just isn't that degree of cross-candidate transfer if one candidate has, I would say, more than a three point lead.
3 points is about the Fidesz lead in Hungary in two new polls - 49/46. A Ninamedia poll in Serbia suggests the ruling Serbian Democratic Party will again achieve a majority in Sunday's election. They and their allies have lost about twelve points on the 2020 numbers but will still win comfortably.
Reports from Hungary claim Fidesz has spent eight times as much as their opponents and has smashed the legal limit for election spending but the notion of parties buying their way to power in a democratic system is nothing new.
On topic Boris Johnson is the kind of man to be caught in flagrante delicto with another woman by his wife and denying to his wife he was having an affair.
I know a couple where the girl caught her boyfriend NAKED IN BED WITH ANOTHER WOMAN in the middle of the afternoon, and he managed to talk his way out of it, and convince her nothing untoward was going on
It is amazing what people will believe, when they REALLY want to
Pretending to believe, out of convenience, and really believing, aren’t the same.
Most Tories know (and knew before) that the clown was unfit for high office, but it was convenient to pretend otherwise. And here we are.
Re: nuclear weapons they're not volatile chemicals that just need a "spark" and oxygen to go off - they need to be detonated in a very specific way to go supercritical and cause a chain reaction at the same time.
Otherwise, the explosives just go off an distribute the plug of plutonium/uranium over an area.
I once wrote a story where someone steals a nuclear warhead. But they cannot work out how to trigger it. So she uses its explosives and the main device to make a dirty bomb.
Patricularly for the implosion design of bomb, the engineering is very difficult and the need for precision of explosive charge consistency and timing of detonation very high. As one bomb-designer described it to me, "It's like squeezing on a lemon pip so that it crushes rather than squirts out"
Interesting that the decline in IQ coincides with the start of the almost dysgenic breeding programme we now have in the west whereby low iq women and men have been allowed by the benefits system to breed to their hearts content. At the same time many intelligent women prioritise their career and may have put off having a family to the last minute often having one or zero children. We are now seeing the effects of this which will only get worse and will cause much of the economy to start operating at 3rd world levels
Isn't some at least of that a matter of youngsters not bothering to keep iup with the news/have an opinion?
Maybe, but there's no excuse for "accidentally" supporting Russia because you haven't been taking an interest in the news.
Nah, for this century America has been led by Bush 43 and Trump, you can see why people aren't enamoured by America.
For some there's no difference between the invasion of Ukraine and the liberation of Iraq in 2003.
I wonder if the yoof also think more globally than we old farts. Despite the fact I have lived most my life outside Britain (46/17 years out/in), I tend to think about Ukraine being a European war and hence 'our' problem, whereas Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Burma, Nagorny-Karabakh, etc... are really other peoples' problems (until we made them ours, where we did). So they are fundamentally different in my mind.
But for many of the younger generation, it appears that what is front and centre for them is the contrast in how the West has reacted to 'like' situations, and hence for them the hypocrisy in our actions.
I doubt they care any more about other places.
I suspect its more some embittered resentment of the western world which manifests itself in supporting anything opposed to it.
Also, young people are just a lot more stupid than us oldsters. IQs are declining across the West
And they really obviously ARE stupider. You can see it all around you. Less questioning. Sheeplike. Idiotic. Look at @CorrectHorseBattery and @Gallowgate on here. Fucking morons
It's actually a bit more complicated than that.
Today's 21 years olds are not scoring as well as those born in 1974 (for example) and testing in 1995.
However, we all suffer from cognitive decline as we get older, particularly if we're gin-riddled. This mean that a 21 year old today will score more highly on an IQ test (on average) than a 54 year old.
I wonder why you chose 1974? My limited understanding of the latest research is that the peak was sometime in the 70s. I have no idea whether this is having a noticeable affect on the workplace.
I have heard from several people - not given to trolling like me - that their younger employees are noticeably dimmer, and more annoying and simultaneously more sensitive and entitled. But definitely dimmer
I'm not entirely making this up to irritate (tho that too)
On the evidence here, it looks like Absolute Peak Human IQ was achieved by people born in the mid 1960s, and then measured in the mid 1970s, which makes total sense
Interesting that the decline in IQ coincides with the start of the almost dysgenic breeding programme we now have in the west whereby low iq women and men have been allowed by the benefits system to breed to their hearts content. At the same time many intelligent women prioritise their career and may have put off having a family to the last minute often having one or zero children. We are now seeing the effects of this which will only get worse and will cause much of the economy to start operating at 3rd world levels
There’s going to be a ‘referendum’ in South Ossetia on being annexed by Russia.
In a way it is progress - giving up the pretence of these 'independent' republics within Russia's orbit, and just being clear they are Russia. More honest at any rate.
A YES vote in Scotland seemed impossible - until it became highly possible, and David Cameron started weeping on live TV. A Brexit vote seemed ludicrously unlikely - I recall Richard Nabavi predicting it would be 70/30 Remain - and then Brexit won [snip]
I think it's easy to forget just what a complete shambles the Leave campaign was just a few months before the referendum, especially during that hilarious time when Bernard Jenkin and other Tory Brexiteers tried to get Dominic Cummings sacked from Vote Leave, and ended up having to ask him how to do it, before changing their minds, but then Cummings and Matthew Elliott resigned from the board anyway:
I think it was probably around then that I posted that I thought that my long-term prediction of Remain winning by 60:40 might be over-cautious and that it could be 70:30.
So, yes, more uncertainty than one tends to think, but there's a bit of a difference compared with the French election in that a referendum is a one-off, whereas in regular elections you can look at how voters behaved in previous contests. No guarantee that it won't be different this time, but previously Le Pen has lost vote share in the final round compared with the polling.
You called it badly wrong but I thought the Leave campaign was an embarrassment.
I basically took matters into my own hands.
Thing is, you never know what the other side is like. Hindsight is 20:20, but the Remain campaign was atrocious.
It's the taxing of unrealised gains that he objects to, as discussed here a couple of days ago:
“You can’t tax something that’s not earned. Earned income is what we’re based on,” he said. “There’s other ways to do it. Everybody has to pay their fair share.”
It’s hard to see how it gets through. Manchin is not a surprise.
Yes, the Biden administration seems remarkably poor at calibrating their policy proposals to fit the Senate they actually have, rather than the one they wish they had.
Given getting parity was a bit of a bonus, with both Georgia seats after all, it is a bit of a surprise. It's not like Biden himself is a super progressive unreaslistically shooting for the starts - progressives cannot seem to stand him.
Isn't some at least of that a matter of youngsters not bothering to keep iup with the news/have an opinion?
Maybe, but there's no excuse for "accidentally" supporting Russia because you haven't been taking an interest in the news.
Nah, for this century America has been led by Bush 43 and Trump, you can see why people aren't enamoured by America.
For some there's no difference between the invasion of Ukraine and the liberation of Iraq in 2003.
I wonder if the yoof also think more globally than we old farts. Despite the fact I have lived most my life outside Britain (46/17 years out/in), I tend to think about Ukraine being a European war and hence 'our' problem, whereas Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Burma, Nagorny-Karabakh, etc... are really other peoples' problems (until we made them ours, where we did). So they are fundamentally different in my mind.
But for many of the younger generation, it appears that what is front and centre for them is the contrast in how the West has reacted to 'like' situations, and hence for them the hypocrisy in our actions.
I doubt they care any more about other places.
I suspect its more some embittered resentment of the western world which manifests itself in supporting anything opposed to it.
Also, young people are just a lot more stupid than us oldsters. IQs are declining across the West
And they really obviously ARE stupider. You can see it all around you. Less questioning. Sheeplike. Idiotic. Look at @CorrectHorseBattery and @Gallowgate on here. Fucking morons
Governments and parties do have a love of creating new offences because it looks cooler than enforcing ones already on the books, but the key word may be Federal.
Isn't some at least of that a matter of youngsters not bothering to keep iup with the news/have an opinion?
Maybe, but there's no excuse for "accidentally" supporting Russia because you haven't been taking an interest in the news.
Nah, for this century America has been led by Bush 43 and Trump, you can see why people aren't enamoured by America.
For some there's no difference between the invasion of Ukraine and the liberation of Iraq in 2003.
I wonder if the yoof also think more globally than we old farts. Despite the fact I have lived most my life outside Britain (46/17 years out/in), I tend to think about Ukraine being a European war and hence 'our' problem, whereas Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Burma, Nagorny-Karabakh, etc... are really other peoples' problems (until we made them ours, where we did). So they are fundamentally different in my mind.
But for many of the younger generation, it appears that what is front and centre for them is the contrast in how the West has reacted to 'like' situations, and hence for them the hypocrisy in our actions.
I doubt they care any more about other places.
I suspect its more some embittered resentment of the western world which manifests itself in supporting anything opposed to it.
Also, young people are just a lot more stupid than us oldsters. IQs are declining across the West
And they really obviously ARE stupider. You can see it all around you. Less questioning. Sheeplike. Idiotic. Look at @CorrectHorseBattery and @Gallowgate on here. Fucking morons
It's actually a bit more complicated than that.
Today's 21 years olds are not scoring as well as those born in 1974 (for example) and testing in 1995.
However, we all suffer from cognitive decline as we get older, particularly if we're gin-riddled. This mean that a 21 year old today will score more highly on an IQ test (on average) than a 54 year old.
I wonder why you chose 1974? My limited understanding of the latest research is that the peak was sometime in the 70s. I have no idea whether this is having a noticeable affect on the workplace.
I have heard from several people - not given to trolling like me - that their younger employees are noticeably dimmer, and more annoying and simultaneously more sensitive and entitled. But definitely dimmer
I'm not entirely making this up to irritate (tho that too)
On the evidence here, it looks like Absolute Peak Human IQ was achieved by people born in the mid 1960s, and then measured in the mid 1970s, which makes total sense
Interesting that the decline in IQ coincides with the start of the almost dysgenic breeding programme we now have in the west whereby low iq women and men have been allowed by the benefits system to breed to their hearts content. At the same time many intelligent women prioritise their career and may have put off having a family to the last minute often having one or zero children. We are now seeing the effects of this which will only get worse and will cause much of the economy to start operating at 3rd world levels
As an aside, someone in NASA was tasked to write the operational history of the Shuttle after its last flight in 2011. He had a few interns to help him with the work. They assembled a draft, and asked the interns to read it, looking for any terms they did not understand and which needed explanation. The idea being that the history might be a little too technical.
One of the interns asked: "What is the Cold War?"
Despite bring bright enough to get an internship at NASA, she did not know about the Cold War. Which had ended just twenty years earlier...
Many modern kids probably know less about it.
In 1974, my maths teacher came into school in the morning with a flabbergasted look on her face. She asked us, (15-year olds) if we knew which band Paul McCartney played in. We all knew, of course. What had flabbergasted her was that, talking with her young nephew the night before, he had asked her, "Auntie, did you know that Paul McCartney used to play in a band called the Beatles?"
I never had you pegged as a Wings fan.
LOL. I was not. Couldn't stand them. To my eternal shame, I was a Genesis and ELP fan at that time.
But Band on the Run was doing well in the charts at the time. Which I guess is why the nephew knew who Paul McCartney was.
I don’t like the Beatles, and definitely not that keen on Paul McCartney. However, I think Band on the Run is a great record. And I just think it was so thoughtful of Paul to put all his tracks worth listening to onto just one album. Really convenient and time-saving.
Isn't some at least of that a matter of youngsters not bothering to keep iup with the news/have an opinion?
Maybe, but there's no excuse for "accidentally" supporting Russia because you haven't been taking an interest in the news.
Nah, for this century America has been led by Bush 43 and Trump, you can see why people aren't enamoured by America.
For some there's no difference between the invasion of Ukraine and the liberation of Iraq in 2003.
I wonder if the yoof also think more globally than we old farts. Despite the fact I have lived most my life outside Britain (46/17 years out/in), I tend to think about Ukraine being a European war and hence 'our' problem, whereas Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Burma, Nagorny-Karabakh, etc... are really other peoples' problems (until we made them ours, where we did). So they are fundamentally different in my mind.
But for many of the younger generation, it appears that what is front and centre for them is the contrast in how the West has reacted to 'like' situations, and hence for them the hypocrisy in our actions.
I doubt they care any more about other places.
I suspect its more some embittered resentment of the western world which manifests itself in supporting anything opposed to it.
Also, young people are just a lot more stupid than us oldsters. IQs are declining across the West
And they really obviously ARE stupider. You can see it all around you. Less questioning. Sheeplike. Idiotic. Look at @CorrectHorseBattery and @Gallowgate on here. Fucking morons
Perhaps so, but less in decline with alcoholic dementia...
No, but it seems that the new Fed law will back up individual state laws to stop killers slipping through the net. Seems to be largely symbolic at the moment, but civil rights campaigners have worked for years on this.
ABC News says: "the 30-year sentence is valuable because state charges and convictions are not guaranteed to stand. “Even if they somehow are able to appeal the underlying sentence, you still have the federal charge."
Isn't some at least of that a matter of youngsters not bothering to keep iup with the news/have an opinion?
Maybe, but there's no excuse for "accidentally" supporting Russia because you haven't been taking an interest in the news.
Nah, for this century America has been led by Bush 43 and Trump, you can see why people aren't enamoured by America.
For some there's no difference between the invasion of Ukraine and the liberation of Iraq in 2003.
I wonder if the yoof also think more globally than we old farts. Despite the fact I have lived most my life outside Britain (46/17 years out/in), I tend to think about Ukraine being a European war and hence 'our' problem, whereas Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Burma, Nagorny-Karabakh, etc... are really other peoples' problems (until we made them ours, where we did). So they are fundamentally different in my mind.
But for many of the younger generation, it appears that what is front and centre for them is the contrast in how the West has reacted to 'like' situations, and hence for them the hypocrisy in our actions.
I doubt they care any more about other places.
I suspect its more some embittered resentment of the western world which manifests itself in supporting anything opposed to it.
Also, young people are just a lot more stupid than us oldsters. IQs are declining across the West
And they really obviously ARE stupider. You can see it all around you. Less questioning. Sheeplike. Idiotic. Look at @CorrectHorseBattery and @Gallowgate on here. Fucking morons
It's actually a bit more complicated than that.
Today's 21 years olds are not scoring as well as those born in 1974 (for example) and testing in 1995.
However, we all suffer from cognitive decline as we get older, particularly if we're gin-riddled. This mean that a 21 year old today will score more highly on an IQ test (on average) than a 54 year old.
I wonder why you chose 1974? My limited understanding of the latest research is that the peak was sometime in the 70s. I have no idea whether this is having a noticeable affect on the workplace.
I have heard from several people - not given to trolling like me - that their younger employees are noticeably dimmer, and more annoying and simultaneously more sensitive and entitled. But definitely dimmer
I'm not entirely making this up to irritate (tho that too)
On the evidence here, it looks like Absolute Peak Human IQ was achieved by people born in the mid 1960s, and then measured in the mid 1970s, which makes total sense
Interesting that the decline in IQ coincides with the start of the almost dysgenic breeding programme we now have in the west whereby low iq women and men have been allowed by the benefits system to breed to their hearts content. At the same time many intelligent women prioritise their career and may have put off having a family to the last minute often having one or zero children. We are now seeing the effects of this which will only get worse and will cause much of the economy to start operating at 3rd world levels
Sterilize the poor!
My point made....its impossible to have a sensible conversation about things such as this. Might as well put your feet up and enjoy the decline
Isn't some at least of that a matter of youngsters not bothering to keep iup with the news/have an opinion?
Maybe, but there's no excuse for "accidentally" supporting Russia because you haven't been taking an interest in the news.
Nah, for this century America has been led by Bush 43 and Trump, you can see why people aren't enamoured by America.
For some there's no difference between the invasion of Ukraine and the liberation of Iraq in 2003.
I wonder if the yoof also think more globally than we old farts. Despite the fact I have lived most my life outside Britain (46/17 years out/in), I tend to think about Ukraine being a European war and hence 'our' problem, whereas Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Burma, Nagorny-Karabakh, etc... are really other peoples' problems (until we made them ours, where we did). So they are fundamentally different in my mind.
But for many of the younger generation, it appears that what is front and centre for them is the contrast in how the West has reacted to 'like' situations, and hence for them the hypocrisy in our actions.
I doubt they care any more about other places.
I suspect its more some embittered resentment of the western world which manifests itself in supporting anything opposed to it.
Also, young people are just a lot more stupid than us oldsters. IQs are declining across the West
And they really obviously ARE stupider. You can see it all around you. Less questioning. Sheeplike. Idiotic. Look at @CorrectHorseBattery and @Gallowgate on here. Fucking morons
It's actually a bit more complicated than that.
Today's 21 years olds are not scoring as well as those born in 1974 (for example) and testing in 1995.
However, we all suffer from cognitive decline as we get older, particularly if we're gin-riddled. This mean that a 21 year old today will score more highly on an IQ test (on average) than a 54 year old.
I wonder why you chose 1974? My limited understanding of the latest research is that the peak was sometime in the 70s. I have no idea whether this is having a noticeable affect on the workplace.
I have heard from several people - not given to trolling like me - that their younger employees are noticeably dimmer, and more annoying and simultaneously more sensitive and entitled. But definitely dimmer
I'm not entirely making this up to irritate (tho that too)
On the evidence here, it looks like Absolute Peak Human IQ was achieved by people born in the mid 1960s, and then measured in the mid 1970s, which makes total sense
Interesting that the decline in IQ coincides with the start of the almost dysgenic breeding programme we now have in the west whereby low iq women and men have been allowed by the benefits system to breed to their hearts content. At the same time many intelligent women prioritise their career and may have put off having a family to the last minute often having one or zero children. We are now seeing the effects of this which will only get worse and will cause much of the economy to start operating at 3rd world levels
Sterilize the poor!
My point made....its impossible to have a sensible conversation about things such as this. Might as well put your feet up and enjoy the decline
My understanding - and I don't have the stats to hand - is that in general the rich have more kids than the poor, and that the balance of rich kids/poor kids is currently more skewed towards rich kids than at any time in British history. I may be wrong and am too cold to look up the details.
Isn't some at least of that a matter of youngsters not bothering to keep iup with the news/have an opinion?
Maybe, but there's no excuse for "accidentally" supporting Russia because you haven't been taking an interest in the news.
Nah, for this century America has been led by Bush 43 and Trump, you can see why people aren't enamoured by America.
For some there's no difference between the invasion of Ukraine and the liberation of Iraq in 2003.
I wonder if the yoof also think more globally than we old farts. Despite the fact I have lived most my life outside Britain (46/17 years out/in), I tend to think about Ukraine being a European war and hence 'our' problem, whereas Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Burma, Nagorny-Karabakh, etc... are really other peoples' problems (until we made them ours, where we did). So they are fundamentally different in my mind.
But for many of the younger generation, it appears that what is front and centre for them is the contrast in how the West has reacted to 'like' situations, and hence for them the hypocrisy in our actions.
I doubt they care any more about other places.
I suspect its more some embittered resentment of the western world which manifests itself in supporting anything opposed to it.
Also, young people are just a lot more stupid than us oldsters. IQs are declining across the West
And they really obviously ARE stupider. You can see it all around you. Less questioning. Sheeplike. Idiotic. Look at @CorrectHorseBattery and @Gallowgate on here. Fucking morons
It's actually a bit more complicated than that.
Today's 21 years olds are not scoring as well as those born in 1974 (for example) and testing in 1995.
However, we all suffer from cognitive decline as we get older, particularly if we're gin-riddled. This mean that a 21 year old today will score more highly on an IQ test (on average) than a 54 year old.
I wonder why you chose 1974? My limited understanding of the latest research is that the peak was sometime in the 70s. I have no idea whether this is having a noticeable affect on the workplace.
I have heard from several people - not given to trolling like me - that their younger employees are noticeably dimmer, and more annoying and simultaneously more sensitive and entitled. But definitely dimmer
I'm not entirely making this up to irritate (tho that too)
On the evidence here, it looks like Absolute Peak Human IQ was achieved by people born in the mid 1960s, and then measured in the mid 1970s, which makes total sense
Interesting that the decline in IQ coincides with the start of the almost dysgenic breeding programme we now have in the west whereby low iq women and men have been allowed by the benefits system to breed to their hearts content. At the same time many intelligent women prioritise their career and may have put off having a family to the last minute often having one or zero children. We are now seeing the effects of this which will only get worse and will cause much of the economy to start operating at 3rd world levels
Sterilize the poor!
My point made....its impossible to have a sensible conversation about things such as this. Might as well put your feet up and enjoy the decline
Isn't some at least of that a matter of youngsters not bothering to keep iup with the news/have an opinion?
Maybe, but there's no excuse for "accidentally" supporting Russia because you haven't been taking an interest in the news.
Nah, for this century America has been led by Bush 43 and Trump, you can see why people aren't enamoured by America.
For some there's no difference between the invasion of Ukraine and the liberation of Iraq in 2003.
I wonder if the yoof also think more globally than we old farts. Despite the fact I have lived most my life outside Britain (46/17 years out/in), I tend to think about Ukraine being a European war and hence 'our' problem, whereas Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Burma, Nagorny-Karabakh, etc... are really other peoples' problems (until we made them ours, where we did). So they are fundamentally different in my mind.
But for many of the younger generation, it appears that what is front and centre for them is the contrast in how the West has reacted to 'like' situations, and hence for them the hypocrisy in our actions.
I doubt they care any more about other places.
I suspect its more some embittered resentment of the western world which manifests itself in supporting anything opposed to it.
Also, young people are just a lot more stupid than us oldsters. IQs are declining across the West
And they really obviously ARE stupider. You can see it all around you. Less questioning. Sheeplike. Idiotic. Look at @CorrectHorseBattery and @Gallowgate on here. Fucking morons
It's actually a bit more complicated than that.
Today's 21 years olds are not scoring as well as those born in 1974 (for example) and testing in 1995.
However, we all suffer from cognitive decline as we get older, particularly if we're gin-riddled. This mean that a 21 year old today will score more highly on an IQ test (on average) than a 54 year old.
I wonder why you chose 1974? My limited understanding of the latest research is that the peak was sometime in the 70s. I have no idea whether this is having a noticeable affect on the workplace.
I have heard from several people - not given to trolling like me - that their younger employees are noticeably dimmer, and more annoying and simultaneously more sensitive and entitled. But definitely dimmer
I'm not entirely making this up to irritate (tho that too)
On the evidence here, it looks like Absolute Peak Human IQ was achieved by people born in the mid 1960s, and then measured in the mid 1970s, which makes total sense
Interesting that the decline in IQ coincides with the start of the almost dysgenic breeding programme we now have in the west whereby low iq women and men have been allowed by the benefits system to breed to their hearts content. At the same time many intelligent women prioritise their career and may have put off having a family to the last minute often having one or zero children. We are now seeing the effects of this which will only get worse and will cause much of the economy to start operating at 3rd world levels
Sterilize the poor!
My point made....its impossible to have a sensible conversation about things such as this. Might as well put your feet up and enjoy the decline
My understanding - and I don't have the stats to hand - is that in general the rich have more kids than the poor, and that the balance of rich kids/poor kids is currently more skewed towards rich kids than at any time in British history. I may be wrong and am too cold to look up the details.
Isn't some at least of that a matter of youngsters not bothering to keep iup with the news/have an opinion?
Maybe, but there's no excuse for "accidentally" supporting Russia because you haven't been taking an interest in the news.
Nah, for this century America has been led by Bush 43 and Trump, you can see why people aren't enamoured by America.
For some there's no difference between the invasion of Ukraine and the liberation of Iraq in 2003.
I wonder if the yoof also think more globally than we old farts. Despite the fact I have lived most my life outside Britain (46/17 years out/in), I tend to think about Ukraine being a European war and hence 'our' problem, whereas Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Burma, Nagorny-Karabakh, etc... are really other peoples' problems (until we made them ours, where we did). So they are fundamentally different in my mind.
But for many of the younger generation, it appears that what is front and centre for them is the contrast in how the West has reacted to 'like' situations, and hence for them the hypocrisy in our actions.
I doubt they care any more about other places.
I suspect its more some embittered resentment of the western world which manifests itself in supporting anything opposed to it.
Also, young people are just a lot more stupid than us oldsters. IQs are declining across the West
And they really obviously ARE stupider. You can see it all around you. Less questioning. Sheeplike. Idiotic. Look at @CorrectHorseBattery and @Gallowgate on here. Fucking morons
It's actually a bit more complicated than that.
Today's 21 years olds are not scoring as well as those born in 1974 (for example) and testing in 1995.
However, we all suffer from cognitive decline as we get older, particularly if we're gin-riddled. This mean that a 21 year old today will score more highly on an IQ test (on average) than a 54 year old.
I wonder why you chose 1974? My limited understanding of the latest research is that the peak was sometime in the 70s. I have no idea whether this is having a noticeable affect on the workplace.
I have heard from several people - not given to trolling like me - that their younger employees are noticeably dimmer, and more annoying and simultaneously more sensitive and entitled. But definitely dimmer
I'm not entirely making this up to irritate (tho that too)
On the evidence here, it looks like Absolute Peak Human IQ was achieved by people born in the mid 1960s, and then measured in the mid 1970s, which makes total sense
Interesting that the decline in IQ coincides with the start of the almost dysgenic breeding programme we now have in the west whereby low iq women and men have been allowed by the benefits system to breed to their hearts content. At the same time many intelligent women prioritise their career and may have put off having a family to the last minute often having one or zero children. We are now seeing the effects of this which will only get worse and will cause much of the economy to start operating at 3rd world levels
I love the way you start with something vaguely rooted in fact, and then veer off at the end.
If you are correct, btw, then we should start to see that French IQs rise relative to everywhere else, as France is the only country in the world where birth rate correlates positively with income and education levels (due to the country's rather sensible pronatal policies).
As an aside, someone in NASA was tasked to write the operational history of the Shuttle after its last flight in 2011. He had a few interns to help him with the work. They assembled a draft, and asked the interns to read it, looking for any terms they did not understand and which needed explanation. The idea being that the history might be a little too technical.
One of the interns asked: "What is the Cold War?"
Despite bring bright enough to get an internship at NASA, she did not know about the Cold War. Which had ended just twenty years earlier...
Many modern kids probably know less about it.
In 1974, my maths teacher came into school in the morning with a flabbergasted look on her face. She asked us, (15-year olds) if we knew which band Paul McCartney played in. We all knew, of course. What had flabbergasted her was that, talking with her young nephew the night before, he had asked her, "Auntie, did you know that Paul McCartney used to play in a band called the Beatles?"
I never had you pegged as a Wings fan.
LOL. I was not. Couldn't stand them. To my eternal shame, I was a Genesis and ELP fan at that time.
But Band on the Run was doing well in the charts at the time. Which I guess is why the nephew knew who Paul McCartney was.
I don’t like the Beatles, and definitely not that keen on Paul McCartney. However, I think Band on the Run is a great record. And I just think it was so thoughtful of Paul to put all his tracks worth listening to onto just one album. Really convenient and time-saving.
I am not a Beatles 'fan', although they did some great songs (I listen to Sergeant Pepper a lot). But of the four of them, McCartney is probably my favourite. He has a certain "I don't give a damn" about his music, where he composes and sings what interests him. Why else the 'Frog Chorus' ?
Compare with Lennon. A wife-beater and absent father who sung 'Give Peace a Chance'.
Isn't some at least of that a matter of youngsters not bothering to keep iup with the news/have an opinion?
Maybe, but there's no excuse for "accidentally" supporting Russia because you haven't been taking an interest in the news.
Nah, for this century America has been led by Bush 43 and Trump, you can see why people aren't enamoured by America.
For some there's no difference between the invasion of Ukraine and the liberation of Iraq in 2003.
I wonder if the yoof also think more globally than we old farts. Despite the fact I have lived most my life outside Britain (46/17 years out/in), I tend to think about Ukraine being a European war and hence 'our' problem, whereas Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Burma, Nagorny-Karabakh, etc... are really other peoples' problems (until we made them ours, where we did). So they are fundamentally different in my mind.
But for many of the younger generation, it appears that what is front and centre for them is the contrast in how the West has reacted to 'like' situations, and hence for them the hypocrisy in our actions.
I doubt they care any more about other places.
I suspect its more some embittered resentment of the western world which manifests itself in supporting anything opposed to it.
Also, young people are just a lot more stupid than us oldsters. IQs are declining across the West
And they really obviously ARE stupider. You can see it all around you. Less questioning. Sheeplike. Idiotic. Look at @CorrectHorseBattery and @Gallowgate on here. Fucking morons
It's actually a bit more complicated than that.
Today's 21 years olds are not scoring as well as those born in 1974 (for example) and testing in 1995.
However, we all suffer from cognitive decline as we get older, particularly if we're gin-riddled. This mean that a 21 year old today will score more highly on an IQ test (on average) than a 54 year old.
I wonder why you chose 1974? My limited understanding of the latest research is that the peak was sometime in the 70s. I have no idea whether this is having a noticeable affect on the workplace.
I have heard from several people - not given to trolling like me - that their younger employees are noticeably dimmer, and more annoying and simultaneously more sensitive and entitled. But definitely dimmer
I'm not entirely making this up to irritate (tho that too)
On the evidence here, it looks like Absolute Peak Human IQ was achieved by people born in the mid 1960s, and then measured in the mid 1970s, which makes total sense
Interesting that the decline in IQ coincides with the start of the almost dysgenic breeding programme we now have in the west whereby low iq women and men have been allowed by the benefits system to breed to their hearts content. At the same time many intelligent women prioritise their career and may have put off having a family to the last minute often having one or zero children. We are now seeing the effects of this which will only get worse and will cause much of the economy to start operating at 3rd world levels
Sterilize the poor!
My point made....its impossible to have a sensible conversation about things such as this. Might as well put your feet up and enjoy the decline
Isn't some at least of that a matter of youngsters not bothering to keep iup with the news/have an opinion?
Maybe, but there's no excuse for "accidentally" supporting Russia because you haven't been taking an interest in the news.
Nah, for this century America has been led by Bush 43 and Trump, you can see why people aren't enamoured by America.
For some there's no difference between the invasion of Ukraine and the liberation of Iraq in 2003.
I wonder if the yoof also think more globally than we old farts. Despite the fact I have lived most my life outside Britain (46/17 years out/in), I tend to think about Ukraine being a European war and hence 'our' problem, whereas Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Burma, Nagorny-Karabakh, etc... are really other peoples' problems (until we made them ours, where we did). So they are fundamentally different in my mind.
But for many of the younger generation, it appears that what is front and centre for them is the contrast in how the West has reacted to 'like' situations, and hence for them the hypocrisy in our actions.
I doubt they care any more about other places.
I suspect its more some embittered resentment of the western world which manifests itself in supporting anything opposed to it.
Also, young people are just a lot more stupid than us oldsters. IQs are declining across the West
And they really obviously ARE stupider. You can see it all around you. Less questioning. Sheeplike. Idiotic. Look at @CorrectHorseBattery and @Gallowgate on here. Fucking morons
It's actually a bit more complicated than that.
Today's 21 years olds are not scoring as well as those born in 1974 (for example) and testing in 1995.
However, we all suffer from cognitive decline as we get older, particularly if we're gin-riddled. This mean that a 21 year old today will score more highly on an IQ test (on average) than a 54 year old.
I wonder why you chose 1974? My limited understanding of the latest research is that the peak was sometime in the 70s. I have no idea whether this is having a noticeable affect on the workplace.
I have heard from several people - not given to trolling like me - that their younger employees are noticeably dimmer, and more annoying and simultaneously more sensitive and entitled. But definitely dimmer
I'm not entirely making this up to irritate (tho that too)
On the evidence here, it looks like Absolute Peak Human IQ was achieved by people born in the mid 1960s, and then measured in the mid 1970s, which makes total sense
Interesting that the decline in IQ coincides with the start of the almost dysgenic breeding programme we now have in the west whereby low iq women and men have been allowed by the benefits system to breed to their hearts content. At the same time many intelligent women prioritise their career and may have put off having a family to the last minute often having one or zero children. We are now seeing the effects of this which will only get worse and will cause much of the economy to start operating at 3rd world levels
Sterilize the poor!
My point made....its impossible to have a sensible conversation about things such as this. Might as well put your feet up and enjoy the decline
My understanding - and I don't have the stats to hand - is that in general the rich have more kids than the poor, and that the balance of rich kids/poor kids is currently more skewed towards rich kids than at any time in British history. I may be wrong and am too cold to look up the details.
mmm if you are talking about jacob rees mogg...hedge fund level of wealth yes that might be true....these families can afford nannies and or a stay at home wife....im talking more about the broad middle class saddled with mortgage debt
Nope, I reckon it’s those unable to get a mortgage who are having fewer kids.
Isn't some at least of that a matter of youngsters not bothering to keep iup with the news/have an opinion?
Maybe, but there's no excuse for "accidentally" supporting Russia because you haven't been taking an interest in the news.
Nah, for this century America has been led by Bush 43 and Trump, you can see why people aren't enamoured by America.
For some there's no difference between the invasion of Ukraine and the liberation of Iraq in 2003.
I wonder if the yoof also think more globally than we old farts. Despite the fact I have lived most my life outside Britain (46/17 years out/in), I tend to think about Ukraine being a European war and hence 'our' problem, whereas Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Burma, Nagorny-Karabakh, etc... are really other peoples' problems (until we made them ours, where we did). So they are fundamentally different in my mind.
But for many of the younger generation, it appears that what is front and centre for them is the contrast in how the West has reacted to 'like' situations, and hence for them the hypocrisy in our actions.
I doubt they care any more about other places.
I suspect its more some embittered resentment of the western world which manifests itself in supporting anything opposed to it.
Also, young people are just a lot more stupid than us oldsters. IQs are declining across the West
And they really obviously ARE stupider. You can see it all around you. Less questioning. Sheeplike. Idiotic. Look at @CorrectHorseBattery and @Gallowgate on here. Fucking morons
Isn't some at least of that a matter of youngsters not bothering to keep iup with the news/have an opinion?
Maybe, but there's no excuse for "accidentally" supporting Russia because you haven't been taking an interest in the news.
Nah, for this century America has been led by Bush 43 and Trump, you can see why people aren't enamoured by America.
For some there's no difference between the invasion of Ukraine and the liberation of Iraq in 2003.
I wonder if the yoof also think more globally than we old farts. Despite the fact I have lived most my life outside Britain (46/17 years out/in), I tend to think about Ukraine being a European war and hence 'our' problem, whereas Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Burma, Nagorny-Karabakh, etc... are really other peoples' problems (until we made them ours, where we did). So they are fundamentally different in my mind.
But for many of the younger generation, it appears that what is front and centre for them is the contrast in how the West has reacted to 'like' situations, and hence for them the hypocrisy in our actions.
I doubt they care any more about other places.
I suspect its more some embittered resentment of the western world which manifests itself in supporting anything opposed to it.
Also, young people are just a lot more stupid than us oldsters. IQs are declining across the West
And they really obviously ARE stupider. You can see it all around you. Less questioning. Sheeplike. Idiotic. Look at @CorrectHorseBattery and @Gallowgate on here. Fucking morons
It's actually a bit more complicated than that.
Today's 21 years olds are not scoring as well as those born in 1974 (for example) and testing in 1995.
However, we all suffer from cognitive decline as we get older, particularly if we're gin-riddled. This mean that a 21 year old today will score more highly on an IQ test (on average) than a 54 year old.
I wonder why you chose 1974? My limited understanding of the latest research is that the peak was sometime in the 70s. I have no idea whether this is having a noticeable affect on the workplace.
I have heard from several people - not given to trolling like me - that their younger employees are noticeably dimmer, and more annoying and simultaneously more sensitive and entitled. But definitely dimmer
I'm not entirely making this up to irritate (tho that too)
On the evidence here, it looks like Absolute Peak Human IQ was achieved by people born in the mid 1960s, and then measured in the mid 1970s, which makes total sense
Interesting that the decline in IQ coincides with the start of the almost dysgenic breeding programme we now have in the west whereby low iq women and men have been allowed by the benefits system to breed to their hearts content. At the same time many intelligent women prioritise their career and may have put off having a family to the last minute often having one or zero children. We are now seeing the effects of this which will only get worse and will cause much of the economy to start operating at 3rd world levels
You are wrong for two reasons:
1) actually the proportion of births to higher SE women is increasing, not decreasing
Comments
It is amazing what people will believe, when they REALLY want to
https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/iq-rates-are-dropping-many-developed-countries-doesn-t-bode-ncna1008576
And they really obviously ARE stupider. You can see it all around you. Less questioning. Sheeplike. Idiotic. Look at @CorrectHorseBattery and @Gallowgate on here. Fucking morons
But it’s the hold your nose in this post which grabbed me. Macrons win last time looked decisive, until you realise how much abstaining and nose holding was going on, which just cannot be relied on now they know he wants to make tax more unfair not make it fairer, wants French to work longer till retirement. And he is just not Nationalist or anti EU enough for the French electorate at this time.
I actually think Mélenchon will come second and beat Macron by even more, as he will have less baggage than Le Pen more slick debater so will attract more votes to what is basically, the same anti Macron platform.
In addition to the situation Baddiel describes, I think some people think that they are being sophisticated simply by not going along with the majority view. (I am not thinking about people who are deliberately contrarian here)
Today's 21 years olds are not scoring as well as those born in 1974 (for example) and testing in 1995.
However, we all suffer from cognitive decline as we get older, particularly if we're gin-riddled. This mean that a 21 year old today will score more highly on an IQ test (on average) than a 54 year old.
Just guessin'
Which gets them into similar problems as if they were stupider but also fills them with resentment.
He was, incidentally, quite a shit in many respects, and she finally wised up and booted him out
His excuse, I believe, was he and this girl both felt really tired at the same time, and got onto the bed to sleep, then it was cold so they got under the covers. I can't remember how he explained the total nudity (more comfy?) but the girlfriend bought it
There was also an empty bottle of champagne and two glasses on the bedside table. I guess that explained why they both got so "tired"
But would also say that part of the impact is that Leave was obviously a more consequential vote in terms of post war British politics than Remain would have been. So part of the "shock" wasn't like an FA Cup giant-killing - it was the knowledge that a momentous thing had happened. That's remembered by many in hindsight as the result being totally out of the blue. That's not quite right - part of that feeling is that it was an impactful result.
The reverse is true for those of us who remember the 1992 election. That was genuinely a "shock" in that the polling was badly out of line (some polls had the Tories ahead, but those that did had it easily in hung Parliament territory whereas Major won a majority which wasn't large but perfectly workable until by-elections eroded it away). But did it feel that much of a shock? Certainly not to the same degree - lots of people were pleased, lots were disappointed... but it didn't actually feel all that momentous and impactful (and indeed wasn't - a man who was a fairly moderate, establishment PM continued to be PM).
I don't know if that was discussed in the economist article, but would like to see any poling on this.
Is there not a change by having not only all the knowledge in the world but cross checkable with other views on it, held in your hand and into your brain in seconds?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-60934576
I don't think I'd ever heard of aphasia. I hope he does a Michael J. Fox and work towards finding a cure for, and raise awareness of, the illness that afflicts him.
Smug doesn't begin to cover it.
https://www.businessinsider.com/matthew-elliott-and-dominic-cummings-exit-vote-leave-board-2016-2
I think it was probably around then that I posted that I thought that my long-term prediction of Remain winning by 60:40 might be over-cautious and that it could be 70:30.
So, yes, more uncertainty than one tends to think, but there's a bit of a difference compared with the French election in that a referendum is a one-off, whereas in regular elections you can look at how voters behaved in previous contests. No guarantee that it won't be different this time, but previously Le Pen has lost vote share in the final round compared with the polling.
I'm not entirely making this up to irritate (tho that too)
This article blames environmental causes
https://time.com/5311672/iq-scores-decline-environment/
On the evidence here, it looks like Absolute Peak Human IQ was achieved by people born in the mid 1960s, and then measured in the mid 1970s, which makes total sense
Le Pen did so badly last time. That's possibly to her benefit as the bar is low. However it also means she is crap at debates. So who knows.
But Band on the Run was doing well in the charts at the time. Which I guess is why the nephew knew who Paul McCartney was.
Then I started meeting girls who had never heard of Oasis...
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9256651/French-far-right-leader-Marine-Le-Pen-accused-soft-Islam-election-debate.html
What are three possible causes of aphasia?
Stroke.
Head injury.
Brain tumor.
Infection.
Dementia.
And can I just say, as someone who is generally pretty critical of you, it’s great to see a genuine betting post.
More like this please. Let’s get the site back to how it used to be with the bulk of the conversation about betting and value.
So maybe they are too stupid to appreciate the intelligence of the young uns.
Have no idea if there is anything in this, but thought I would put it out there.
What we need is BETTING on trans issues
I stopped watching his films after Expendables 2 and A Good Day to Die Hard. In both of those films, his scenes were unwatchable.
No Socialist would support Putin he is a tin pot Capitalist dictator
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rogue-democrat-joe-manchin-shoots-down-bidens-billionaire-tax-plan-hqkp9t708 (£)
It's the taxing of unrealised gains that he objects to, as discussed here a couple of days ago:
“You can’t tax something that’s not earned. Earned income is what we’re based on,” he said. “There’s other ways to do it. Everybody has to pay their fair share.”
Would they supply arms to Ukraine - or go one step further - send soldiers there to fight? Would they join the SNP in calling for a 'no fly zone', meaning that they would be willing to shoot down Russian jets?
Or is it just the case that they would try and resolve the situation by protesting outside the Russian embassy, and disbanding NATO.
I'd say I'd seen evidence of nuance and development amongst both those posters since they started on here - they are far less ideological and more reasoned now.
This site is an education.
I basically took matters into my own hands.
One of Kadyrov’s Chechen soldiers steals a motorcycle
https://twitter.com/video_ukraine/status/1509114731222679552?s=20&t=cKWYUQ8YHKuMXzHZYFK7UQ
https://twitter.com/JCTHFC/status/942914685728411649?s=20&t=cKWYUQ8YHKuMXzHZYFK7UQ
Otherwise, the explosives just go off an distribute the plug of plutonium/uranium over an area.
Yes 12 / 26
No 1.03 / 1.1"
https://smarkets.com/event/42632630/politics/uk/opinion-polling/2022/03/31/00-00/conservative-poll-lead-in-march
https://www.stopwar.org.uk/article/list-of-signatories-stop-the-war-statement-on-the-crisis-over-ukraine/
One that said there should not be a war for one paragraph, and then spent the rest of the document blaming 'us' for the war, and essentially said Ukraine should not defend itself.
"Our focus is on the policies of the British government which have poured oil on the fire throughout this episode. In taking this position we do not endorse the nature or conduct of either the Russian or Ukrainian regimes."
"We urge the entire anti-war movement to unite on the basis of challenging the British government’s aggressive posturing and direct its campaigning to that end above all."
Yes, Corbyn blames *us* for the war. As did Nick Palmer, of this parish.
Why this pisses me off: it is rare in international relations to get such a clear-cut case of right versus wrong; good versus evil. And yet Corbyn and his fellow bottom-feeders look at blaming us for Putin's evil.
There is one person to blame for this evil: Putin. Do you agree?
IF Macron loses, he'll be the third successive one term President after Sarkozy and Hollande. 2012 was the last time an incumbent lost when Sarkozy lost by three points in the run off having been one and a half points behind Hollande in the first round.
Marine Le Pen was third polling just under 18% and Melenchon was fourth with 11%.
Le Pen now trails Macron by seven points according to Elabe and six and a half points with Ipsos Sopra Steria.
The parallel here might be the London Mayoral system which has so far never seen a candidate finishing first in the first round of polling losing in the second round. There just isn't that degree of cross-candidate transfer if one candidate has, I would say, more than a three point lead.
3 points is about the Fidesz lead in Hungary in two new polls - 49/46. A Ninamedia poll in Serbia suggests the ruling Serbian Democratic Party will again achieve a majority in Sunday's election. They and their allies have lost about twelve points on the 2020 numbers but will still win comfortably.
Reports from Hungary claim Fidesz has spent eight times as much as their opponents and has smashed the legal limit for election spending but the notion of parties buying their way to power in a democratic system is nothing new.
Most Tories know (and knew before) that the clown was unfit for high office, but it was convenient to pretend otherwise. And here we are.
https://www.nytimes.com/video/us/100000008222314/ahmaud-arbery-verdict-reaction.html?playlistId=video/race-in-america
A slightly emotional Veep celebrates.
Considering some of the bonkers posts you have made in the past you might want to look closer to home. Dunning-Kruger might apply.
Surely not with profundities like this.
ABC News says: "the 30-year sentence is valuable because state charges and convictions are not guaranteed to stand. “Even if they somehow are able to appeal the underlying sentence, you still have the federal charge."
https://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2022/01/02/maybe-baby-population-politics-part-2/
If you are correct, btw, then we should start to see that French IQs rise relative to everywhere else, as France is the only country in the world where birth rate correlates positively with income and education levels (due to the country's rather sensible pronatal policies).
Also: https://xkcd.com/603/
Compare with Lennon. A wife-beater and absent father who sung 'Give Peace a Chance'.
1) actually the proportion of births to higher SE women is increasing, not decreasing
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10456215/More-half-babies-born-middle-class-mothers-figures.html
2) the phenomenon of regression to the mean affects both ends of the scale as geniuses sometimes have dunces for children, and vice versa.