Howdy, Stranger!

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

Johnson’s making a big mistake on the Women’s soccer team – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited August 7 in General
imageJohnson’s making a big mistake on the Women’s soccer team – politicalbetting.com

I know that Johnson is on his way out but what better way to get some good publicity than inviting the victorious England Woman’s soccer team to a special reception at Number 10.

Read the full story here

«134567

Comments

  • LennonLennon Posts: 1,623
    edited August 3
    First. Like the football team.

    Edit: And why on earth has Johnson made this decision - it seems like such an obvious own goal that I feel I must be missing something.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 35,150
    Leon said:

    carnforth said:

    Nick Clegg joins clique of Meta bosses switching to London

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/28f2f03c-1306-11ed-b5dc-213f5c972cc4?shareToken=cb91256f53919399519b38d953342047

    Clegg is back, part time…

    Clegg is back, and London is back!


    From that thread of articles:

    "Hoberman said: “They also move because they see the US so fractionalised. As San Francisco loses its density [of tech headquarters], there’s a chance for London to be the global leader.”"

    This is absolutely true. Why step over homeless addict in SF when you can be in glorious sunny London? In King's X? With no threat of Trump? And two hours from all of Europe?
    I saw recently that parts of East London have taken over SF for density of tech startups. Kings cross looks like the choice for established tech so will be another huge draw for startups looking for global locations. I know one SAAS company which is currently HQ'd in SF that's considering moving operationally to London from there and leaving behind a small outpost of sales people in NYC. That's the other one that's coming for SF, operational excellence in development by being based in London and sales/GTM based on the East Coast of the US either in NYC or Miami. It's such a better set of timezones. SF used to have the advantage of crossover with APAC countries but with the ease of remote work and setting up remote workers on a single payroll tech companies are choosing to hire locally in Singapore, Melbourne and Wellington.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 24,250
    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    carnforth said:

    Nick Clegg joins clique of Meta bosses switching to London

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/28f2f03c-1306-11ed-b5dc-213f5c972cc4?shareToken=cb91256f53919399519b38d953342047

    Clegg is back, part time…

    Clegg is back, and London is back!


    From that thread of articles:

    "Hoberman said: “They also move because they see the US so fractionalised. As San Francisco loses its density [of tech headquarters], there’s a chance for London to be the global leader.”"

    This is absolutely true. Why step over homeless addict in SF when you can be in glorious sunny London? In King's X? With no threat of Trump? And two hours from all of Europe?
    I saw recently that parts of East London have taken over SF for density of tech startups. Kings cross looks like the choice for established tech so will be another huge draw for startups looking for global locations. I know one SAAS company which is currently HQ'd in SF that's considering moving operationally to London from there and leaving behind a small outpost of sales people in NYC. That's the other one that's coming for SF, operational excellence in development by being based in London and sales/GTM based on the East Coast of the US either in NYC or Miami. It's such a better set of timezones. SF used to have the advantage of crossover with APAC countries but with the ease of remote work and setting up remote workers on a single payroll tech companies are choosing to hire locally in Singapore, Melbourne and Wellington.
    FPT

    Yes, and more: as NYC sinks into crime, and is menaced by deeper political division, a lot of business in NYC will come here. Remote working suddenly benefits the UK

    Really. Why would you work in NYC or LA or SF if you can work in London?

    NYC is a truly great city and LA is jolly interesting and SF has a certain beauty, but they have grave downsides, and they are all trillions of miles from anywhere else

    Fly two hours from NYC and you are in, er, Toronto

    Compare that with London, when in 2 hours or less you can be in Paris, Venice, Berlin, Barcelona, Amsterdam, Rome, Florence, Edinburgh, Nice... and the Alps, the Balearics, Sicily, western Ireland, Burgundy, the Algarve, the Black Forest, the Dordogne, the Italian lakes, the Dolomites, Tyrol,...

    There is no comparison. If your job is no longer quite so tied to the Silicon Valley office, you will move to London
  • LeonLeon Posts: 24,250
    edited August 3
    I note that I said this two days ago: a stupid error by Boris, not inviting them to Number 10

    HOWEVER La Truss has said she WILL do it, so there's that
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 6,282
    fpt

    Can anyone explain what the Tory grassroots love so much about Boris? Thatcher I could understand. But Johnson only seems to care about Johnson. He didn't even really believe in Brexit and has shown no concern with protecting its legacy, just the continuance of his own time in office. He has lied repeatedly, including in parliament and appears hopelessly disorganised and incapable of getting stuff done. He received credit for 'getting Brexit done' although the situation patently isn't settled. The covid vaccines was hailed as a triumph but I doubt the Tory grassroots approved of all the restrictions, tax and spending. As for Ukraine he continued longstanding UK policy and is that really why they love him?

    Just a thought but I understand that the average member is a southern, higher income man. Are these yuppies? The sort who may be on to their third marriage, been taken to the cleaners a couple of times and see something of Boris in themselves, empathising with a kindred spirit locked out of his own home and alienated from the family he provided for? Maybe it's just a silly indulgence.

    Happy to be proven wrong.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 24,250

    fpt

    Can anyone explain what the Tory grassroots love so much about Boris? Thatcher I could understand. But Johnson only seems to care about Johnson. He didn't even really believe in Brexit and has shown no concern with protecting its legacy, just the continuance of his own time in office. He has lied repeatedly, including in parliament and appears hopelessly disorganised and incapable of getting stuff done. He received credit for 'getting Brexit done' although the situation patently isn't settled. The covid vaccines was hailed as a triumph but I doubt the Tory grassroots approved of all the restrictions, tax and spending. As for Ukraine he continued longstanding UK policy and is that really why they love him?

    Just a thought but I understand that the average member is a southern, higher income man. Are these yuppies? The sort who may be on to their third marriage, been taken to the cleaners a couple of times and see something of Boris in themselves, empathising with a kindred spirit locked out of his own home and alienated from the family he provided for? Maybe it's just a silly indulgence.

    Happy to be proven wrong.

    No, that's over-complicated nonsense, sorry

    Two things:


    1. He is a proven winner

    2. He cheers them up and makes them laugh


    That's it
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 35,150
    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    carnforth said:

    Nick Clegg joins clique of Meta bosses switching to London

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/28f2f03c-1306-11ed-b5dc-213f5c972cc4?shareToken=cb91256f53919399519b38d953342047

    Clegg is back, part time…

    Clegg is back, and London is back!


    From that thread of articles:

    "Hoberman said: “They also move because they see the US so fractionalised. As San Francisco loses its density [of tech headquarters], there’s a chance for London to be the global leader.”"

    This is absolutely true. Why step over homeless addict in SF when you can be in glorious sunny London? In King's X? With no threat of Trump? And two hours from all of Europe?
    I saw recently that parts of East London have taken over SF for density of tech startups. Kings cross looks like the choice for established tech so will be another huge draw for startups looking for global locations. I know one SAAS company which is currently HQ'd in SF that's considering moving operationally to London from there and leaving behind a small outpost of sales people in NYC. That's the other one that's coming for SF, operational excellence in development by being based in London and sales/GTM based on the East Coast of the US either in NYC or Miami. It's such a better set of timezones. SF used to have the advantage of crossover with APAC countries but with the ease of remote work and setting up remote workers on a single payroll tech companies are choosing to hire locally in Singapore, Melbourne and Wellington.
    FPT

    Yes, and more: as NYC sinks into crime, and is menaced by deeper political division, a lot of business in NYC will come here. Remote working suddenly benefits the UK

    Really. Why would you work in NYC or LA or SF if you can work in London?

    NYC is a truly great city and LA is jolly interesting and SF has a certain beauty, but they have grave downsides, and they are all trillions of miles from anywhere else

    Fly two hours from NYC and you are in, er, Toronto

    Compare that with London, when in 2 hours or less you can be in Paris, Venice, Berlin, Barcelona, Amsterdam, Rome, Florence, Edinburgh, Nice... and the Alps, the Balearics, Sicily, western Ireland, Burgundy, the Algarve, the Black Forest, the Dordogne, the Italian lakes, the Dolomites, Tyrol,...

    There is no comparison. If your job is no longer quite so tied to the Silicon Valley office, you will move to London
    NYC makes sense for a lot of reasons despite the crime (and it's nowhere near as bad as SF) it's got the 2pm-6pm crossover with London, there's already quite a few companies in the area, it's bigger and better connected than SF (which means people have the option of living in NJ and commuting in) and it's only 7h on a cheap business class flight from London for business meetings. For tech startups there's also a fuckton of potential clients on the doorstep in NYC because there's so many financial services companies looking to cut costs. The City is one of the reasons tech has thrived in London, its clients and financing for startups.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 8,176


    Can anyone explain what the Tory grassroots love so much about Boris?

    Yes.

    They're really so stupid they have fallen hook, line and sinker for his act.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 30,794
    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    carnforth said:

    Nick Clegg joins clique of Meta bosses switching to London

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/28f2f03c-1306-11ed-b5dc-213f5c972cc4?shareToken=cb91256f53919399519b38d953342047

    Clegg is back, part time…

    Clegg is back, and London is back!


    From that thread of articles:

    "Hoberman said: “They also move because they see the US so fractionalised. As San Francisco loses its density [of tech headquarters], there’s a chance for London to be the global leader.”"

    This is absolutely true. Why step over homeless addict in SF when you can be in glorious sunny London? In King's X? With no threat of Trump? And two hours from all of Europe?
    I saw recently that parts of East London have taken over SF for density of tech startups. Kings cross looks like the choice for established tech so will be another huge draw for startups looking for global locations. I know one SAAS company which is currently HQ'd in SF that's considering moving operationally to London from there and leaving behind a small outpost of sales people in NYC. That's the other one that's coming for SF, operational excellence in development by being based in London and sales/GTM based on the East Coast of the US either in NYC or Miami. It's such a better set of timezones. SF used to have the advantage of crossover with APAC countries but with the ease of remote work and setting up remote workers on a single payroll tech companies are choosing to hire locally in Singapore, Melbourne and Wellington.
    This is all great; but a word of warning: global companies that choose to move to London, can easily move out again.

    We really need to get the startups here, support them, and base them here so they'll never think of moving. I'll leave it to better brains to work out how we do that...

    Incidentally, I know of one software guy (a Brit) who moved back after a couple of decades in the US, who has less of a commute travelling by train from south of Cambridge into London than he had by car in the US. It sounds as though he thinks their QoL is far better than it was.

    (His wife is also a Brit. They met in the US.)
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 30,794
    Chris said:


    Can anyone explain what the Tory grassroots love so much about Boris?

    Yes.

    They're really so stupid they have fallen hook, line and sinker for his act.
    Of course, the same can be said for Labour and Corbyn...
  • ChrisChris Posts: 8,176

    Chris said:


    Can anyone explain what the Tory grassroots love so much about Boris?

    Yes.

    They're really so stupid they have fallen hook, line and sinker for his act.
    Of course, the same can be said for Labour and Corbyn...
    For anyone who says "But what about ... ?" as a matter of reflex, probably.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 35,421
    The moment will have passed and BoJo knows this. The whole point of an England victory, politically speaking, is to bask in the national joy and thereby receive a popularity boost if you are PM welcoming everyone to No.10.

    Johnson won't get this because he is on his way out and therefore realises that it is pointless as it won't do him any good at all. He couldn't care less about the "Lionesses"; he couldn't give a toss. His every action is designed to improve his own position and this will do nothing for that so he decided against.

    Sadly for Rishi and Liz even if they promise riches later on neither will receive the boost of being the incumbent PM welcoming in the victorious national team so it doesn't matter what they promise.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 41,394
    edited August 3
    (Since we're doing FPT)
    Leon said:

    ping said:

    Taz said:

    Paging @Leon :


    Andrew Lilico
    @andrew_lilico
    ·
    57m
    The matters I currently personally regard as the biggest issues in UK politics:
    1) Short-term: Defeating inflation
    2) Medium-term: Defeating wokeness
    3) Long-term: Navigating climate change

    Of these, the biggest & most important of the battles - the one where the battle itself will determine things the most - is the defeat of wokeness. The urgency of that fight is the single biggest reason I would consider a Labour govt at present intolerable.

    https://twitter.com/andrew_lilico/status/1554821354125373443

    What a melt.

    Wokeness is irrelevant. The other two are essential to tackle. Wokeness few people care about.
    Over the last year or so I’ve read and listened to, probably, hundreds of hours of podcasts, interviews and audiobooks. All of the Brendan O’Neill & Spiked stuff. The TRIGGERnometry guys (and his new book), Douglas Murray’s output etc.

    I’ve tried to challenge myself and my assumptions and see if the anti-woke brigade have a point.

    And, aside from a few niche cases and examples, they really don’t.

    My initial view, was this was just section 28 type phobias re-emerging under a new guise. The kind of crap you get at the fag end of a Tory government. After much research and soul searching, that’s pretty much still my view.

    Worth listening, imo, to Adam Fleming’s Antisocial on r4/bbc sounds;

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/series/m0018h15

    It’s a few hours of listening, but generally quite a good, balanced overview of the woke/antiwoke battlefield.
    Good for you for trying, but if you don't get it even now, you are simply too stupid, or too set in your ways and narrow-minded, which is a kind of stupid

    I put you in the same category as @kinabalu
    'Categories Leon thinks I'm in' is not the primary concern for about 99.9999999% of humanity.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 3,580
    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    carnforth said:

    Nick Clegg joins clique of Meta bosses switching to London

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/28f2f03c-1306-11ed-b5dc-213f5c972cc4?shareToken=cb91256f53919399519b38d953342047

    Clegg is back, part time…

    Clegg is back, and London is back!


    From that thread of articles:

    "Hoberman said: “They also move because they see the US so fractionalised. As San Francisco loses its density [of tech headquarters], there’s a chance for London to be the global leader.”"

    This is absolutely true. Why step over homeless addict in SF when you can be in glorious sunny London? In King's X? With no threat of Trump? And two hours from all of Europe?
    I saw recently that parts of East London have taken over SF for density of tech startups. Kings cross looks like the choice for established tech so will be another huge draw for startups looking for global locations. I know one SAAS company which is currently HQ'd in SF that's considering moving operationally to London from there and leaving behind a small outpost of sales people in NYC. That's the other one that's coming for SF, operational excellence in development by being based in London and sales/GTM based on the East Coast of the US either in NYC or Miami. It's such a better set of timezones. SF used to have the advantage of crossover with APAC countries but with the ease of remote work and setting up remote workers on a single payroll tech companies are choosing to hire locally in Singapore, Melbourne and Wellington.
    We don't have a problem with attracting tech startups here. But since 98% of them will go nowhere, that's the least important part - tech startups are something you have to tolerate to get to the next phase, and that's where we have the problem. The 2% of successful firms all too often bugger off after their first couple of funding rounds, usually because they can't raise capital (and the exorbitant cost of property is often a secondary issue).

    I was doing some analysis on this for a client recently and it is fairly easy to raise your first round or two of funding in London, but you'd be crazy to stick around when you're looking for tens or hundreds of millions rather than a couple of million. America still wins hands down there.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 15,680
    Betfair next prime minister
    1.12 Liz Truss 89%
    9.2 Rishi Sunak 11%

    Next Conservative leader
    1.12 Liz Truss 89%
    9.2 Rishi Sunak 11%
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 9,084
    edited August 3
    Lennon said:

    First. Like the football team.

    Edit: And why on earth has Johnson made this decision - it seems like such an obvious own goal that I feel I must be missing something.

    Normally politicians fall over themselves to be associated with anything vaguely popular or successful. I'm really confused by why he'd not do so.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 9,107
    Lennon said:

    First. Like the football team.

    Edit: And why on earth has Johnson made this decision - it seems like such an obvious own goal that I feel I must be missing something.

    My own guess - a theory already mentioned on PB but by which PBer I can't remember - is that the Euro cup winners were approached by No. 10, but declined to provide BJ with his desired photo op. Him being disgraced and soon-to-be chucked out a convenient window (and into a new pile of shit just like in Prague 1618).

    From team's point of view, why not wait for the new (if not much improved) PM? Even IF she's the Boris Continuity candidate, at least she's NOT Boris himself.
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,605
    Lennon said:

    First. Like the football team.

    Edit: And why on earth has Johnson made this decision - it seems like such an obvious own goal that I feel I must be missing something.

    It's so Truss can get brownie points from opposing it. No-one believes Sunak really cares about football, because he's Indian. So Truss gets the credit, even if both of them say the same thing on the subject. And Johnson wants Truss to win, because a) Sunak betrays him and b) Truss is the more likely to crash and burn inside 12 months, leaving the path clear for a comeback.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 15,680
    Boris Johnson going on holiday less than 5 weeks before leaving No 10
    https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/boris-johnson-holiday-downing-street-prime-minister-rishi-sunak-liz-truss-b1016304.html

    No time for the Lionesses. Or Taiwan.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 41,256
    Lennon said:

    First. Like the football team.

    Edit: And why on earth has Johnson made this decision - it seems like such an obvious own goal that I feel I must be missing something.

    Maybe Carrie vetoed it.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 6,598
    Chris said:


    Can anyone explain what the Tory grassroots love so much about Boris?

    Yes.

    They're really so stupid they have fallen hook, line and sinker for his act.
    It's not quite about stupidity; it's a bloody good act. Lots of smart people fall for it at the beginning.

    It's why he's always been Marmite. If you see the facade, he's quite an attractive National Leader. It's only when he betrays you personally that you realise that he's been playing you for a stooge all along, and that he's actually an utter sh1t. But everyone has to have that epithany for themselves, which is consistent with the absurd number of Conservative MPs and members who still hold out a candle for him.

    As for the reception- it's bad politcs, sure, but Bozza isn't up for election, so who gives a stuff? The Lionesses aren't about to sleep with him, and the honour would be theirs not his... why would Johnson throw a party for them?

    (And if your answer is "because it's the right thing to do", why should he start worrying about that now?)
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 22,808
    edited August 3

    Lennon said:

    First. Like the football team.

    Edit: And why on earth has Johnson made this decision - it seems like such an obvious own goal that I feel I must be missing something.

    Normally politicians fall over themselves to be associated with anything vaguely popular or successful. I'm really confused by why he'd not do so.
    He's on his hollibobs.
    Simple as.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 24,284
    Leon said:

    I note that I said this two days ago: a stupid error by Boris, not inviting them to Number 10

    HOWEVER La Truss has said she WILL do it, so there's that

    By which it'll be too late, and too insulting, and too much so to accept.

    It's not as if Mr Johnson and the Conservative Party have a good record when it comes to England football teams, either.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 24,284
    dixiedean said:

    Lennon said:

    First. Like the football team.

    Edit: And why on earth has Johnson made this decision - it seems like such an obvious own goal that I feel I must be missing something.

    Normally politicians fall over themselves to be associated with anything vaguely popular or successful. I'm really confused by why he'd not do so.
    He's on his hollibobs.
    Takes about 5 mins to phone up some minion to do the needful.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 24,250
    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    carnforth said:

    Nick Clegg joins clique of Meta bosses switching to London

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/28f2f03c-1306-11ed-b5dc-213f5c972cc4?shareToken=cb91256f53919399519b38d953342047

    Clegg is back, part time…

    Clegg is back, and London is back!


    From that thread of articles:

    "Hoberman said: “They also move because they see the US so fractionalised. As San Francisco loses its density [of tech headquarters], there’s a chance for London to be the global leader.”"

    This is absolutely true. Why step over homeless addict in SF when you can be in glorious sunny London? In King's X? With no threat of Trump? And two hours from all of Europe?
    I saw recently that parts of East London have taken over SF for density of tech startups. Kings cross looks like the choice for established tech so will be another huge draw for startups looking for global locations. I know one SAAS company which is currently HQ'd in SF that's considering moving operationally to London from there and leaving behind a small outpost of sales people in NYC. That's the other one that's coming for SF, operational excellence in development by being based in London and sales/GTM based on the East Coast of the US either in NYC or Miami. It's such a better set of timezones. SF used to have the advantage of crossover with APAC countries but with the ease of remote work and setting up remote workers on a single payroll tech companies are choosing to hire locally in Singapore, Melbourne and Wellington.
    FPT

    Yes, and more: as NYC sinks into crime, and is menaced by deeper political division, a lot of business in NYC will come here. Remote working suddenly benefits the UK

    Really. Why would you work in NYC or LA or SF if you can work in London?

    NYC is a truly great city and LA is jolly interesting and SF has a certain beauty, but they have grave downsides, and they are all trillions of miles from anywhere else

    Fly two hours from NYC and you are in, er, Toronto

    Compare that with London, when in 2 hours or less you can be in Paris, Venice, Berlin, Barcelona, Amsterdam, Rome, Florence, Edinburgh, Nice... and the Alps, the Balearics, Sicily, western Ireland, Burgundy, the Algarve, the Black Forest, the Dordogne, the Italian lakes, the Dolomites, Tyrol,...

    There is no comparison. If your job is no longer quite so tied to the Silicon Valley office, you will move to London
    NYC makes sense for a lot of reasons despite the crime (and it's nowhere near as bad as SF) it's got the 2pm-6pm crossover with London, there's already quite a few companies in the area, it's bigger and better connected than SF (which means people have the option of living in NJ and commuting in) and it's only 7h on a cheap business class flight from London for business meetings. For tech startups there's also a fuckton of potential clients on the doorstep in NYC because there's so many financial services companies looking to cut costs. The City is one of the reasons tech has thrived in London, its clients and financing for startups.
    NYC is unquestionably a magnificent city (as I said in my earlier comment), but so is London. And the downsides of NYC - crime, racial tension, MAGA-Trump, divided country, healthcare, opiates, guns - now seem to me to outweigh the downsides of London: weather, greyness, grotty areas

    Both are English-speaking world cities with glorious culture, London has more history, New York City has that skyline

    The proximity of the rest of Europe might be the clincher for me, if I was a highly paid tech exec. And where do you want your kids to grow up? Safely?

    But of course I am biased

    I think we will see more American execs choosing London on a quasi-WFH basis. It will be a complex and remarkable irony if post-Brexit London ascends to world capital status (again?)..... because it is in Europe

  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 30,794
    Chris said:

    Chris said:


    Can anyone explain what the Tory grassroots love so much about Boris?

    Yes.

    They're really so stupid they have fallen hook, line and sinker for his act.
    Of course, the same can be said for Labour and Corbyn...
    For anyone who says "But what about ... ?" as a matter of reflex, probably.
    A good way of avoiding the substantive point. There are still many on the left, and even within the Labour Party, who worship the party's ex-leader. As we saw last night, people who are willing to defend Corbyn from the indefensible, even now.

    The same is true of Boris. Some say Boris is like Trump; in reality, he is more like Corbyn than either would like to admit.
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 6,105
    edited August 3
    Boris is a greedy, in-it-for-himself politican who isn't half as clever as he thinks he is. But compared to Corbyn, he's far less of a menace. Corbyn opining on Iranian media recently demonstrates that. I'd prefer a disinterested, lazy bastard than a committed, brainless moron.

    It's a pity the LDs have embraced wokehood so heavily. They should have retained more cynicism.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 9,107
    Seattle Times ($) - Danny Westneat: That big red wave? It didn’t reach the shores of WA state

    So much for that rumored big red conservative wave.

    So much also for the conspiracy theorists, the election deniers (most of them, anyway), and the MAGA right-wingers.

    All of these things were not faring well, at all, in Tuesday’s vote count in the Washington primary. Overall, voters in this state seemed to be repudiating the conventional wisdom that this would be the first good year for Republicans around here since 2014. . . .

    But Tuesday’s early primary results showed no signs of any sort of tidal change in our local, blue-heavy politics.

    If anything, voters were signaling they just want a break from all the insanity.

    Voters appeared in no mood to experiment with the fringes of either party. MAGA candidates were struggling on the right, while Democratic Socialists were not making any dent at all on the left.

    Both of former President Donald Trump’s favored candidates in the state were trailing, for example, and may not make it out of the top-two primary. Former GOP governor candidate Loren Culp, in Central Washington, was running third in the 4th Congressional District, as was Fox News regular and newcomer Joe Kent, in southwest Washington’s 3rd District. . . .

    Losing were a host of election conspiracy theorists. . . .

    For all the talk that incumbent congressional Democrats such as Rep. Kim Schrier, D-Issaquah, and U.S. Sen. Patty Murray might be in trouble, both were easily outpacing their rivals. Schrier in particular is doing better than she did in her last primary, in 2020. This doesn’t mean she’s a lock in November. But it does mean no red wave came crashing down on her. . . .

    There’s a rule of thumb among election analysts that if you add up the vote shares for the parties in each of our open primary contests, it’s a decent guide for which side will win that race in November. It’s not perfect, but as a general guide, it captures the overall mood.

    Using this technique on the preliminary results from Tuesday shows that despite high inflation, concerns about crime and President Joe Biden’s low approval ratings, Democrats are doing about as well as usual, particularly in the hard-fought suburbs.

    Example: Republicans spent heavily targeting a series of state legislative districts in the King and Snohomish County suburbs, where the GOP had been wiped out in the Trump years. Yet Democrats were running well ahead on Tuesday in all of them. . . .

    Biden, like Trump before him, was supposed to be a drag on his own party. It’s not normal that a party runs this far ahead of its own president’s poor approval ratings.

    If in this environment Republicans can’t get a red wave, a swell or even a ripple, it’s tough to see how they’ll ever fight their way back in this state.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 22,808

    Lennon said:

    First. Like the football team.

    Edit: And why on earth has Johnson made this decision - it seems like such an obvious own goal that I feel I must be missing something.

    My own guess - a theory already mentioned on PB but by which PBer I can't remember - is that the Euro cup winners were approached by No. 10, but declined to provide BJ with his desired photo op. Him being disgraced and soon-to-be chucked out a convenient window (and into a new pile of shit just like in Prague 1618).

    From team's point of view, why not wait for the new (if not much improved) PM? Even IF she's the Boris Continuity candidate, at least she's NOT Boris himself.
    But then they'll be in training for the WSL season which starts September 9th. Several play overseas too.
    Finding a date will be next to impossible.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 29,938
    Nigelb said:

    (Since we're doing FPT)

    Leon said:

    ping said:

    Taz said:

    Paging @Leon :


    Andrew Lilico
    @andrew_lilico
    ·
    57m
    The matters I currently personally regard as the biggest issues in UK politics:
    1) Short-term: Defeating inflation
    2) Medium-term: Defeating wokeness
    3) Long-term: Navigating climate change

    Of these, the biggest & most important of the battles - the one where the battle itself will determine things the most - is the defeat of wokeness. The urgency of that fight is the single biggest reason I would consider a Labour govt at present intolerable.

    https://twitter.com/andrew_lilico/status/1554821354125373443

    What a melt.

    Wokeness is irrelevant. The other two are essential to tackle. Wokeness few people care about.
    Over the last year or so I’ve read and listened to, probably, hundreds of hours of podcasts, interviews and audiobooks. All of the Brendan O’Neill & Spiked stuff. The TRIGGERnometry guys (and his new book), Douglas Murray’s output etc.

    I’ve tried to challenge myself and my assumptions and see if the anti-woke brigade have a point.

    And, aside from a few niche cases and examples, they really don’t.

    My initial view, was this was just section 28 type phobias re-emerging under a new guise. The kind of crap you get at the fag end of a Tory government. After much research and soul searching, that’s pretty much still my view.

    Worth listening, imo, to Adam Fleming’s Antisocial on r4/bbc sounds;

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/series/m0018h15

    It’s a few hours of listening, but generally quite a good, balanced overview of the woke/antiwoke battlefield.
    Good for you for trying, but if you don't get it even now, you are simply too stupid, or too set in your ways and narrow-minded, which is a kind of stupid

    I put you in the same category as @kinabalu
    'Categories Leon thinks I'm in' is not the primary concern for about 99.9999999% of humanity.
    Well I'm honoured to have my own category!

    Leon has one too - that of verbose, hard right, cliche mongers who endlessly parrot the received views and obsessions of speccyland rather than thinking for themselves.

    Other than that, I'm a fan.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 102,795
    I like the theory that Boris Johnson wanted to host the Lionesses but Carrie put the kibosh on it.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 14,612
    edited August 3
    FPT:

    London.

    The opportunity is there.

    Has been for a while and indeed for a brief moment London was essentially “the” global capital.

    Ironically, Ken Livingstone seemed to get this. Sadiq Khan doesn’t have a “Danny”.

    There are things London needs to work on to support this; someone upthread mentioned Shannon style facilities at Heathrow. Housing is a big one (it is much more affordable within a generous commuting distance in the US)
    and dare I say it, various forms of access to the Continent would also be on the list.
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 478
    London has its charms, but New York is a better starting point for many things, for example, climbing the 50 high points: "From the top of North America to the top of a trailer park in suburban Delaware, this collection of 50 mountains and otherwise obscure places quite possibly ranks as America's most unique peakbagging list. Unlike most lists of mountains that fall within the natural boundaries of geologic formations, United States highpoints are both a testament to man's need to draw his own geographic boundaries and a celebration of some of the most beautiful places on the North American continent. The names Denali, Rainier, Hood, Gannett and Granite are enough to make nearly any mountaineer drool. But Ebright Azimuth? Jerimoth Hill? Britton Hill? Panorama Point? Mount Sunflower? Surely you must be kidding! But in the world of state highpointing, all of these places share equal footing."
    source: https://www.summitpost.org/u-s-state-highpoints/171191

  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 35,421

    I like the theory that Boris Johnson wanted to host the Lionesses but Carrie put the kibosh on it.

    He'd want Chloe Kelly to recreate that immortal moment.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 24,284
    dixiedean said:

    Lennon said:

    First. Like the football team.

    Edit: And why on earth has Johnson made this decision - it seems like such an obvious own goal that I feel I must be missing something.

    My own guess - a theory already mentioned on PB but by which PBer I can't remember - is that the Euro cup winners were approached by No. 10, but declined to provide BJ with his desired photo op. Him being disgraced and soon-to-be chucked out a convenient window (and into a new pile of shit just like in Prague 1618).

    From team's point of view, why not wait for the new (if not much improved) PM? Even IF she's the Boris Continuity candidate, at least she's NOT Boris himself.
    But then they'll be in training for the WSL season which starts September 9th. Several play overseas too.
    Finding a date will be next to impossible.
    Is it not possible to have a Cabinet Minister stand in for Mr J given he's away with his bucket and spade? There is, of course, Ms Dorries - she's CM for Sport inter alia.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 23,402

    I like the theory that Boris Johnson wanted to host the Lionesses but Carrie put the kibosh on it.

    That was my theory!
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 9,084
    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    carnforth said:

    Nick Clegg joins clique of Meta bosses switching to London

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/28f2f03c-1306-11ed-b5dc-213f5c972cc4?shareToken=cb91256f53919399519b38d953342047

    Clegg is back, part time…

    Clegg is back, and London is back!


    From that thread of articles:

    "Hoberman said: “They also move because they see the US so fractionalised. As San Francisco loses its density [of tech headquarters], there’s a chance for London to be the global leader.”"

    This is absolutely true. Why step over homeless addict in SF when you can be in glorious sunny London? In King's X? With no threat of Trump? And two hours from all of Europe?
    I saw recently that parts of East London have taken over SF for density of tech startups. Kings cross looks like the choice for established tech so will be another huge draw for startups looking for global locations. I know one SAAS company which is currently HQ'd in SF that's considering moving operationally to London from there and leaving behind a small outpost of sales people in NYC. That's the other one that's coming for SF, operational excellence in development by being based in London and sales/GTM based on the East Coast of the US either in NYC or Miami. It's such a better set of timezones. SF used to have the advantage of crossover with APAC countries but with the ease of remote work and setting up remote workers on a single payroll tech companies are choosing to hire locally in Singapore, Melbourne and Wellington.
    FPT

    Yes, and more: as NYC sinks into crime, and is menaced by deeper political division, a lot of business in NYC will come here. Remote working suddenly benefits the UK

    Really. Why would you work in NYC or LA or SF if you can work in London?

    NYC is a truly great city and LA is jolly interesting and SF has a certain beauty, but they have grave downsides, and they are all trillions of miles from anywhere else

    Fly two hours from NYC and you are in, er, Toronto

    Compare that with London, when in 2 hours or less you can be in Paris, Venice, Berlin, Barcelona, Amsterdam, Rome, Florence, Edinburgh, Nice... and the Alps, the Balearics, Sicily, western Ireland, Burgundy, the Algarve, the Black Forest, the Dordogne, the Italian lakes, the Dolomites, Tyrol,...

    There is no comparison. If your job is no longer quite so tied to the Silicon Valley office, you will move to London
    NYC makes sense for a lot of reasons despite the crime (and it's nowhere near as bad as SF) it's got the 2pm-6pm crossover with London, there's already quite a few companies in the area, it's bigger and better connected than SF (which means people have the option of living in NJ and commuting in) and it's only 7h on a cheap business class flight from London for business meetings. For tech startups there's also a fuckton of potential clients on the doorstep in NYC because there's so many financial services companies looking to cut costs. The City is one of the reasons tech has thrived in London, its clients and financing for startups.
    NYC is unquestionably a magnificent city (as I said in my earlier comment), but so is London. And the downsides of NYC - crime, racial tension, MAGA-Trump, divided country, healthcare, opiates, guns - now seem to me to outweigh the downsides of London: weather, greyness, grotty areas

    Both are English-speaking world cities with glorious culture, London has more history, New York City has that skyline

    The proximity of the rest of Europe might be the clincher for me, if I was a highly paid tech exec. And where do you want your kids to grow up? Safely?

    But of course I am biased

    I think we will see more American execs choosing London on a quasi-WFH basis. It will be a complex and remarkable irony if post-Brexit London ascends to world capital status (again?)..... because it is in Europe

    Cheaper for the corporations if they only have to buy the politicians in Westminster and not have to worry about politicians across the whole EU.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 14,612

    London has its charms, but New York is a better starting point for many things, for example, climbing the 50 high points: "From the top of North America to the top of a trailer park in suburban Delaware, this collection of 50 mountains and otherwise obscure places quite possibly ranks as America's most unique peakbagging list. Unlike most lists of mountains that fall within the natural boundaries of geologic formations, United States highpoints are both a testament to man's need to draw his own geographic boundaries and a celebration of some of the most beautiful places on the North American continent. The names Denali, Rainier, Hood, Gannett and Granite are enough to make nearly any mountaineer drool. But Ebright Azimuth? Jerimoth Hill? Britton Hill? Panorama Point? Mount Sunflower? Surely you must be kidding! But in the world of state highpointing, all of these places share equal footing."
    source: https://www.summitpost.org/u-s-state-highpoints/171191

    One of my favourite things I’ve discovered about New York is how crazily easy it is to escape into quite sublime landscape.

    London cannot compete.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 41,394

    I like the theory that Boris Johnson wanted to host the Lionesses but Carrie put the kibosh on it.

    A clash of two prides ?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 35,421
    Jeez there is precisely no personal gain for Johnson if he hosts the Lionesses. So he won't do it. He literally doesn't care about anything else.

    That's it. Thread over.

    Now, what about restaurants in Kyghtrplgsdristan.
  • What's the story here, I must have missed it. Not seen any controversy on Sky or the BBC website or anywhere else. As far as I was aware it had been announced there would be a reception and it would be hosted by the new PM, that seems reasonable.

    How long do these things normally take to organise? If its a month, there'd be a new PM by this time next month. And Parliament is shut down for their annual holiday in the mean time anyway.

    I'd expect the new PM to be the one to get the privilege to host the Lionesses, I don't see why Boris should get that privilege when he's gone by the time that everything reopens after Parliament's holiday.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 41,394
    kinabalu said:

    Nigelb said:

    (Since we're doing FPT)

    Leon said:

    ping said:

    Taz said:

    Paging @Leon :


    Andrew Lilico
    @andrew_lilico
    ·
    57m
    The matters I currently personally regard as the biggest issues in UK politics:
    1) Short-term: Defeating inflation
    2) Medium-term: Defeating wokeness
    3) Long-term: Navigating climate change

    Of these, the biggest & most important of the battles - the one where the battle itself will determine things the most - is the defeat of wokeness. The urgency of that fight is the single biggest reason I would consider a Labour govt at present intolerable.

    https://twitter.com/andrew_lilico/status/1554821354125373443

    What a melt.

    Wokeness is irrelevant. The other two are essential to tackle. Wokeness few people care about.
    Over the last year or so I’ve read and listened to, probably, hundreds of hours of podcasts, interviews and audiobooks. All of the Brendan O’Neill & Spiked stuff. The TRIGGERnometry guys (and his new book), Douglas Murray’s output etc.

    I’ve tried to challenge myself and my assumptions and see if the anti-woke brigade have a point.

    And, aside from a few niche cases and examples, they really don’t.

    My initial view, was this was just section 28 type phobias re-emerging under a new guise. The kind of crap you get at the fag end of a Tory government. After much research and soul searching, that’s pretty much still my view.

    Worth listening, imo, to Adam Fleming’s Antisocial on r4/bbc sounds;

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/series/m0018h15

    It’s a few hours of listening, but generally quite a good, balanced overview of the woke/antiwoke battlefield.
    Good for you for trying, but if you don't get it even now, you are simply too stupid, or too set in your ways and narrow-minded, which is a kind of stupid

    I put you in the same category as @kinabalu
    'Categories Leon thinks I'm in' is not the primary concern for about 99.9999999% of humanity.
    Well I'm honoured to have my own category!

    Leon has one too - that of verbose, hard right, cliche mongers who endlessly parrot the received views and obsessions of speccyland rather than thinking for themselves.

    Other than that, I'm a fan.
    That's a harsh assessment.
    He's quite capable of thinking for himself and frequently does.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 6,282
    Leon said:

    fpt

    Can anyone explain what the Tory grassroots love so much about Boris? Thatcher I could understand. But Johnson only seems to care about Johnson. He didn't even really believe in Brexit and has shown no concern with protecting its legacy, just the continuance of his own time in office. He has lied repeatedly, including in parliament and appears hopelessly disorganised and incapable of getting stuff done. He received credit for 'getting Brexit done' although the situation patently isn't settled. The covid vaccines was hailed as a triumph but I doubt the Tory grassroots approved of all the restrictions, tax and spending. As for Ukraine he continued longstanding UK policy and is that really why they love him?

    Just a thought but I understand that the average member is a southern, higher income man. Are these yuppies? The sort who may be on to their third marriage, been taken to the cleaners a couple of times and see something of Boris in themselves, empathising with a kindred spirit locked out of his own home and alienated from the family he provided for? Maybe it's just a silly indulgence.

    Happy to be proven wrong.

    No, that's over-complicated nonsense, sorry

    Two things:


    1. He is a proven winner

    2. He cheers them up and makes them laugh


    That's it
    He's not a likely winner anymore. And as for making them laugh. Seriously? This is what Tory members now care about? The thing is people didn't always like the conservative party but in a certain way they respected it. They thought it was serious. Uncaring perhaps. Reactionary. Knowing the price of everything and the value of nothing. But this just sounds like rampant silliness.
  • MISTYMISTY Posts: 1,209

    I like the theory that Boris Johnson wanted to host the Lionesses but Carrie put the kibosh on it.

    Imagine Johnson on the lucrative American University tour circuit....

    Like throwing petrol on a fire...
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 35,150
    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    carnforth said:

    Nick Clegg joins clique of Meta bosses switching to London

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/28f2f03c-1306-11ed-b5dc-213f5c972cc4?shareToken=cb91256f53919399519b38d953342047

    Clegg is back, part time…

    Clegg is back, and London is back!


    From that thread of articles:

    "Hoberman said: “They also move because they see the US so fractionalised. As San Francisco loses its density [of tech headquarters], there’s a chance for London to be the global leader.”"

    This is absolutely true. Why step over homeless addict in SF when you can be in glorious sunny London? In King's X? With no threat of Trump? And two hours from all of Europe?
    I saw recently that parts of East London have taken over SF for density of tech startups. Kings cross looks like the choice for established tech so will be another huge draw for startups looking for global locations. I know one SAAS company which is currently HQ'd in SF that's considering moving operationally to London from there and leaving behind a small outpost of sales people in NYC. That's the other one that's coming for SF, operational excellence in development by being based in London and sales/GTM based on the East Coast of the US either in NYC or Miami. It's such a better set of timezones. SF used to have the advantage of crossover with APAC countries but with the ease of remote work and setting up remote workers on a single payroll tech companies are choosing to hire locally in Singapore, Melbourne and Wellington.
    FPT

    Yes, and more: as NYC sinks into crime, and is menaced by deeper political division, a lot of business in NYC will come here. Remote working suddenly benefits the UK

    Really. Why would you work in NYC or LA or SF if you can work in London?

    NYC is a truly great city and LA is jolly interesting and SF has a certain beauty, but they have grave downsides, and they are all trillions of miles from anywhere else

    Fly two hours from NYC and you are in, er, Toronto

    Compare that with London, when in 2 hours or less you can be in Paris, Venice, Berlin, Barcelona, Amsterdam, Rome, Florence, Edinburgh, Nice... and the Alps, the Balearics, Sicily, western Ireland, Burgundy, the Algarve, the Black Forest, the Dordogne, the Italian lakes, the Dolomites, Tyrol,...

    There is no comparison. If your job is no longer quite so tied to the Silicon Valley office, you will move to London
    NYC makes sense for a lot of reasons despite the crime (and it's nowhere near as bad as SF) it's got the 2pm-6pm crossover with London, there's already quite a few companies in the area, it's bigger and better connected than SF (which means people have the option of living in NJ and commuting in) and it's only 7h on a cheap business class flight from London for business meetings. For tech startups there's also a fuckton of potential clients on the doorstep in NYC because there's so many financial services companies looking to cut costs. The City is one of the reasons tech has thrived in London, its clients and financing for startups.
    NYC is unquestionably a magnificent city (as I said in my earlier comment), but so is London. And the downsides of NYC - crime, racial tension, MAGA-Trump, divided country, healthcare, opiates, guns - now seem to me to outweigh the downsides of London: weather, greyness, grotty areas

    Both are English-speaking world cities with glorious culture, London has more history, New York City has that skyline

    The proximity of the rest of Europe might be the clincher for me, if I was a highly paid tech exec. And where do you want your kids to grow up? Safely?

    But of course I am biased

    I think we will see more American execs choosing London on a quasi-WFH basis. It will be a complex and remarkable irony if post-Brexit London ascends to world capital status (again?)..... because it is in Europe

    Yes, that's why I think London is a good shout for operational and potentially tax HQ. My point on NYC is more in relation to having the sales function for NA run out of there rather than SF because it has significantly better crossover with London and it's only a 7h flight for when seniors and execs need face to face meetings.

    The London/NYC split works brilliantly for financial services, it being replicated for tech would be no surprise.

    The last piece of the puzzle is higher risk funds in London willing to invest hundreds of millions for series D onwards.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 23,697
    TOPPING said:

    I like the theory that Boris Johnson wanted to host the Lionesses but Carrie put the kibosh on it.

    He'd want Chloe Kelly to recreate that immortal moment.
    kick his ball?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 24,250

    Leon said:

    fpt

    Can anyone explain what the Tory grassroots love so much about Boris? Thatcher I could understand. But Johnson only seems to care about Johnson. He didn't even really believe in Brexit and has shown no concern with protecting its legacy, just the continuance of his own time in office. He has lied repeatedly, including in parliament and appears hopelessly disorganised and incapable of getting stuff done. He received credit for 'getting Brexit done' although the situation patently isn't settled. The covid vaccines was hailed as a triumph but I doubt the Tory grassroots approved of all the restrictions, tax and spending. As for Ukraine he continued longstanding UK policy and is that really why they love him?

    Just a thought but I understand that the average member is a southern, higher income man. Are these yuppies? The sort who may be on to their third marriage, been taken to the cleaners a couple of times and see something of Boris in themselves, empathising with a kindred spirit locked out of his own home and alienated from the family he provided for? Maybe it's just a silly indulgence.

    Happy to be proven wrong.

    No, that's over-complicated nonsense, sorry

    Two things:


    1. He is a proven winner

    2. He cheers them up and makes them laugh


    That's it
    He's not a likely winner anymore. And as for making them laugh. Seriously? This is what Tory members now care about? The thing is people didn't always like the conservative party but in a certain way they respected it. They thought it was serious. Uncaring perhaps. Reactionary. Knowing the price of everything and the value of nothing. But this just sounds like rampant silliness.
    It's not silly at all. People - even party members - like optimism and cheeriness and the ability to convey these things. It's one reason Churchill was a great leader: he convinced the British they could win, he was gritty but optimistic

    Clearly Boris is several leagues below Churchill but nonetheless the ability to boost the troops is REALLY important. Blair had it as well (in a different way). You listened to him and you smiled (even I smiled, sometimes), he cheered you up

    Contrast with Brown
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 11,523
    Leon said:

    fpt

    Can anyone explain what the Tory grassroots love so much about Boris? Thatcher I could understand. But Johnson only seems to care about Johnson. He didn't even really believe in Brexit and has shown no concern with protecting its legacy, just the continuance of his own time in office. He has lied repeatedly, including in parliament and appears hopelessly disorganised and incapable of getting stuff done. He received credit for 'getting Brexit done' although the situation patently isn't settled. The covid vaccines was hailed as a triumph but I doubt the Tory grassroots approved of all the restrictions, tax and spending. As for Ukraine he continued longstanding UK policy and is that really why they love him?

    Just a thought but I understand that the average member is a southern, higher income man. Are these yuppies? The sort who may be on to their third marriage, been taken to the cleaners a couple of times and see something of Boris in themselves, empathising with a kindred spirit locked out of his own home and alienated from the family he provided for? Maybe it's just a silly indulgence.

    Happy to be proven wrong.

    No, that's over-complicated nonsense, sorry

    Two things:


    1. He is a proven winner

    2. He cheers them up and makes them laugh


    That's it
    Yes, but no-one seems to have told them that he is actually now a loser, and he might make them laugh but he is actually a joke that the world laughs at, not with.

    The sad reality is that the Conservative Party membership is now full of swivel-eyed fruitcakes and low achievers. They are extremely gullible, so it is one thing, and one thing only:

    They are collectively thick as planks.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 24,284
    TOPPING said:

    Jeez there is precisely no personal gain for Johnson if he hosts the Lionesses. So he won't do it. He literally doesn't care about anything else.

    That's it. Thread over.

    Now, what about restaurants in Kyghtrplgsdristan.

    This what you have in mind? Currently one of those 'I'll have that sheep' places.

    https://twitter.com/_restaurant_bot
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 30,794
    I've just put some music onto my new computer, and despite putting nearly a thousand tracks on, I've realised I have none beginning with X or Z.

    So, classic music tracks whose titles begin with 'x' or 'z' ? ;)
  • Leon said:

    fpt

    Can anyone explain what the Tory grassroots love so much about Boris? Thatcher I could understand. But Johnson only seems to care about Johnson. He didn't even really believe in Brexit and has shown no concern with protecting its legacy, just the continuance of his own time in office. He has lied repeatedly, including in parliament and appears hopelessly disorganised and incapable of getting stuff done. He received credit for 'getting Brexit done' although the situation patently isn't settled. The covid vaccines was hailed as a triumph but I doubt the Tory grassroots approved of all the restrictions, tax and spending. As for Ukraine he continued longstanding UK policy and is that really why they love him?

    Just a thought but I understand that the average member is a southern, higher income man. Are these yuppies? The sort who may be on to their third marriage, been taken to the cleaners a couple of times and see something of Boris in themselves, empathising with a kindred spirit locked out of his own home and alienated from the family he provided for? Maybe it's just a silly indulgence.

    Happy to be proven wrong.

    No, that's over-complicated nonsense, sorry

    Two things:


    1. He is a proven winner

    2. He cheers them up and makes them laugh


    That's it
    He's not a likely winner anymore. And as for making them laugh. Seriously? This is what Tory members now care about? The thing is people didn't always like the conservative party but in a certain way they respected it. They thought it was serious. Uncaring perhaps. Reactionary. Knowing the price of everything and the value of nothing. But this just sounds like rampant silliness.
    He'll be a proven winner for the rest of time, just as Tony Blair is for Labour folks that still like him. Everyone who's ever won is a proven winner.
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 478
    SeaShantyIrish2 - I think you should have told readers here that Danny Westneat has many faults, but is usually not that bad a writer. His subjects and verbs almost always agree, and he usually doesn't mix metaphors. But this, for example, is pitiful: ". . . no signs of any sort of tidal change in our local, blue-heavy politics".

    (When I read Frank Rich in the New York Times years ago, I began to suspect he was deliberately mixing metaphors to protect himself against substantive criticism. Westneat ahs never been that bad.)
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 23,697
    edited August 3

    I've just put some music onto my new computer, and despite putting nearly a thousand tracks on, I've realised I have none beginning with X or Z.

    So, classic music tracks whose titles begin with 'x' or 'z' ? ;)

    Xanadu, by Rush

    Ziggy Stardust, David Bowie
  • LeonLeon Posts: 24,250
    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    carnforth said:

    Nick Clegg joins clique of Meta bosses switching to London

    https:/Yes, is back, part time…

    Clegg is back, and London is back!


    From that thread of articles:

    "Hoberman said: “They also move because they see the US so fractionalised. As San Francisco loses its density [of tech headquarters], there’s a chance for London to be the global leader.”"

    This is absolutely true. Why step over homeless addict in SF when you can be in glorious sunny London? In King's X? With no threat of Trump? And two hours from all of Europe?
    I saw recently that parts of East London have taken over SF for density of tech startups. Kings cross looks like the choice for established tech so will be another huge draw for startups looking for global locations. I know one SAAS company which is currently HQ'd in SF that's considering moving operationally to London from there and leaving behind a small outpost of sales people in NYC. That's the other one that's coming for SF, operational excellence in development by being based in London and sales/GTM based on the East Coast of the US either in NYC or Miami. It's such a better set of timezones. SF used to have the advantage of crossover with APAC countries but with the ease of remote work and setting up remote workers on a single payroll tech companies are choosing to hire locally in Singapore, Melbourne and Wellington.
    FPT

    Yes, and more: as NYC sinks into crime, and is menaced by deeper political division, a lot of business in NYC will come here. Remote working suddenly benefits the UK

    Really. Why would you work in NYC or LA or SF if you can work in London?

    NYC is a truly great city and LA is jolly interesting and SF has a certain beauty, but they have grave downsides, and they are all trillions of miles from anywhere else

    Fly two hours from NYC and you are in, er, Toronto

    Compare that with London, when in 2 hours or less you can be in Paris, Venice, Berlin, Barcelona, Amsterdam, Rome, Florence, Edinburgh, Nice... and the Alps, the Balearics, Sicily, western Ireland, Burgundy, the Algarve, the Black Forest, the Dordogne, the Italian lakes, the Dolomites, Tyrol,...

    There is no comparison. If your job is no longer quite so tied to the Silicon Valley office, you will move to London
    NYC makes sense for a lot of reasons despite the crime (and it's nowhere near as bad as SF) it's got the 2pm-6pm crossover with London, there's already quite a few companies in the area, it's bigger and better connected than SF (which means people have the option of living in NJ and commuting in) and it's only 7h on a cheap business class flight from London for business meetings. For tech startups there's also a fuckton of potential clients on the doorstep in NYC because there's so many financial services companies looking to cut costs. The City is one of the reasons tech has thrived in London, its clients and financing for startups.
    NYC is unquestionably a magnificent city (as I said in my earlier comment), but so is London. And the downsides of NYC - crime, racial tension, MAGA-Trump, divided country, healthcare, opiates, guns - now seem to me to outweigh the downsides of London: weather, greyness, grotty areas

    Both are English-speaking world cities with glorious culture, London has more history, New York City has that skyline

    The proximity of the rest of Europe might be the clincher for me, if I was a highly paid tech exec. And where do you want your kids to grow up? Safely?

    But of course I am biased

    I think we will see more American execs choosing London on a quasi-WFH basis. It will be a complex and remarkable irony if post-Brexit London ascends to world capital status (again?)..... because it is in Europe

    Yes, that's why I think London is a good shout for operational and potentially tax HQ. My point on NYC is more in relation to having the sales function for NA run out of there rather than SF because it has significantly better crossover with London and it's only a 7h flight for when seniors and execs need face to face meetings.

    The London/NYC split works brilliantly for financial services, it being replicated for tech would be no surprise.

    The last piece of the puzzle is higher risk funds in London willing to invest hundreds of millions for series D onwards.
    Yes, I concur

    Finance/sales stuff might stay in NYC but a lot of intellectual/HQ heft will move to London

    Add in the boost from Hong Kong and - perhaps unexpectedly - London could really thrive in the next decade

    I wonder if this is what I sensed in King's X yesterday. Essentially they are - wittingly or not - creating a Silicon Valley in an amazing new London neighborhood, but with added universities and science institutes and art galleries and biochemistry labs and the British Library and the rest, and all of it 300m from St Pancras and the eurostar, and half an hour from Heathrow via the Liz Line, with Shoreditch and the Silicon roundabout just down the road

    It is completely unique. London - esp King's X - has the chance to be THE tech hub for the world, or at least the western world

    If I was the head of Instagram, I'd move from California to King's Cross (never thought I'd write that). Just to see

  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 30,794
    Blooming heck, scrapping a film after it has been made but not released must hurt the bottom line:
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-62406098

    Doe this make sense to anyone?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 41,394

    I've just put some music onto my new computer, and despite putting nearly a thousand tracks on, I've realised I have none beginning with X or Z.

    So, classic music tracks whose titles begin with 'x' or 'z' ? ;)

    The Well Tempered Xavier ?
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 30,794
    Scott_xP said:

    I've just put some music onto my new computer, and despite putting nearly a thousand tracks on, I've realised I have none beginning with X or Z.

    So, classic music tracks whose titles begin with 'x' or 'z' ? ;)

    Xanadu, by Rush

    Ziggy Stardust, David Bowie
    Thanks. Mrs J is a great Rush fan, and I think she has all the classic Bowie albums, so I'll nick those.

    Incidentally, there's only one 'Q': Queen of the New Year, by Deacon Blue.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 23,697

    Scott_xP said:

    I've just put some music onto my new computer, and despite putting nearly a thousand tracks on, I've realised I have none beginning with X or Z.

    So, classic music tracks whose titles begin with 'x' or 'z' ? ;)

    Xanadu, by Rush

    Ziggy Stardust, David Bowie
    Thanks. Mrs J is a great Rush fan, and I think she has all the classic Bowie albums, so I'll nick those.

    Incidentally, there's only one 'Q': Queen of the New Year, by Deacon Blue.
    No Question of Time, Depeche Mode?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 24,250
    Nigelb said:

    I've just put some music onto my new computer, and despite putting nearly a thousand tracks on, I've realised I have none beginning with X or Z.

    So, classic music tracks whose titles begin with 'x' or 'z' ? ;)

    The Well Tempered Xavier ?
    Xipe Totec by EadricG Byronic
  • DriverDriver Posts: 477
    edited August 3

    I've just put some music onto my new computer, and despite putting nearly a thousand tracks on, I've realised I have none beginning with X or Z.

    So, classic music tracks whose titles begin with 'x' or 'z' ? ;)

    (deleted, misread!)
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 50,432
    edited August 3

    Blooming heck, scrapping a film after it has been made but not released must hurt the bottom line:
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-62406098

    Doe this make sense to anyone?

    If they don't release it can they claim some insurance back as a cancelled production, while if they release it they have to carry the whole loss themselves?
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 35,150

    Blooming heck, scrapping a film after it has been made but not released must hurt the bottom line:
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-62406098

    Doe this make sense to anyone?

    Yes, apparently it's really, really awful and WB decided it wasn't worth releasing to get panned and poison the well for Batgirl.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 24,284
    edited August 3

    Blooming heck, scrapping a film after it has been made but not released must hurt the bottom line:
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-62406098

    Doe this make sense to anyone?

    Apparently for tax reasons ( and more generally, I imagine, not spending more money on it, and avoiding damage to rep, etc. etc.).

    'Writing in Variety, Adam B Vary and Brent Lang noted that the decision to cancel Batgirl entirely would allow the studio to “take a tax write-down”, citing sources who said it was “seen internally as the most financially sound way to recoup the costs (at least, on an accountant’s ledger)”.'

    https://www.theguardian.com/film/2022/aug/03/irredeemable-batgirl-movie-unexpectedly-cancelled-despite-being-in-final-stages

    https://www.theguardian.com/film/2022/aug/03/3d-mermaids-cobragator-and-louis-ck-the-never-released-films-batgirl-will-join-in-hollywoods-vault-of-shame
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 4,821

    Scott_xP said:

    I've just put some music onto my new computer, and despite putting nearly a thousand tracks on, I've realised I have none beginning with X or Z.

    So, classic music tracks whose titles begin with 'x' or 'z' ? ;)

    Xanadu, by Rush

    Ziggy Stardust, David Bowie
    Thanks. Mrs J is a great Rush fan, and I think she has all the classic Bowie albums, so I'll nick those.

    Incidentally, there's only one 'Q': Queen of the New Year, by Deacon Blue.
    Quicksand - Bowie - Hunky Dory.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 41,394
    Scott_xP said:

    Scott_xP said:

    I've just put some music onto my new computer, and despite putting nearly a thousand tracks on, I've realised I have none beginning with X or Z.

    So, classic music tracks whose titles begin with 'x' or 'z' ? ;)

    Xanadu, by Rush

    Ziggy Stardust, David Bowie
    Thanks. Mrs J is a great Rush fan, and I think she has all the classic Bowie albums, so I'll nick those.

    Incidentally, there's only one 'Q': Queen of the New Year, by Deacon Blue.
    No Question of Time, Depeche Mode?
    Queen Jane Approximately
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 50,432
    MaxPB said:

    Blooming heck, scrapping a film after it has been made but not released must hurt the bottom line:
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-62406098

    Doe this make sense to anyone?

    Yes, apparently it's really, really awful and WB decided it wasn't worth releasing to get panned and poison the well for Batgirl.
    Worse than Batman v Superman? The mind boggles it really does.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 4,185

    I've just put some music onto my new computer, and despite putting nearly a thousand tracks on, I've realised I have none beginning with X or Z.

    So, classic music tracks whose titles begin with 'x' or 'z' ? ;)

    ELO/Newton John Xanadu
    Fat Larry's Band Zoom

    If those two aren't on there, pack up
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 41,394
    ydoethur said:

    MaxPB said:

    Blooming heck, scrapping a film after it has been made but not released must hurt the bottom line:
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-62406098

    Doe this make sense to anyone?

    Yes, apparently it's really, really awful and WB decided it wasn't worth releasing to get panned and poison the well for Batgirl.
    Worse than Batman v Superman? The mind boggles it really does.
    The movie business is intensely political, which might have more to do with it.
    ...The unusual move follows a change in leadership after Warner Bros merged with Discovery in May 2021, with David Zaslav its new CEO....
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 35,421

    Scott_xP said:

    I've just put some music onto my new computer, and despite putting nearly a thousand tracks on, I've realised I have none beginning with X or Z.

    So, classic music tracks whose titles begin with 'x' or 'z' ? ;)

    Xanadu, by Rush

    Ziggy Stardust, David Bowie
    Thanks. Mrs J is a great Rush fan, and I think she has all the classic Bowie albums, so I'll nick those.

    Incidentally, there's only one 'Q': Queen of the New Year, by Deacon Blue.
    Quite Disappointing - 999
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 41,256

    I've just put some music onto my new computer, and despite putting nearly a thousand tracks on, I've realised I have none beginning with X or Z.

    So, classic music tracks whose titles begin with 'x' or 'z' ? ;)

    Zombie by the Cranberries.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 28,117
    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    carnforth said:

    Nick Clegg joins clique of Meta bosses switching to London

    https:/Yes, is back, part time…

    Clegg is back, and London is back!


    From that thread of articles:

    "Hoberman said: “They also move because they see the US so fractionalised. As San Francisco loses its density [of tech headquarters], there’s a chance for London to be the global leader.”"

    This is absolutely true. Why step over homeless addict in SF when you can be in glorious sunny London? In King's X? With no threat of Trump? And two hours from all of Europe?
    I saw recently that parts of East London have taken over SF for density of tech startups. Kings cross looks like the choice for established tech so will be another huge draw for startups looking for global locations. I know one SAAS company which is currently HQ'd in SF that's considering moving operationally to London from there and leaving behind a small outpost of sales people in NYC. That's the other one that's coming for SF, operational excellence in development by being based in London and sales/GTM based on the East Coast of the US either in NYC or Miami. It's such a better set of timezones. SF used to have the advantage of crossover with APAC countries but with the ease of remote work and setting up remote workers on a single payroll tech companies are choosing to hire locally in Singapore, Melbourne and Wellington.
    FPT

    Yes, and more: as NYC sinks into crime, and is menaced by deeper political division, a lot of business in NYC will come here. Remote working suddenly benefits the UK

    Really. Why would you work in NYC or LA or SF if you can work in London?

    NYC is a truly great city and LA is jolly interesting and SF has a certain beauty, but they have grave downsides, and they are all trillions of miles from anywhere else

    Fly two hours from NYC and you are in, er, Toronto

    Compare that with London, when in 2 hours or less you can be in Paris, Venice, Berlin, Barcelona, Amsterdam, Rome, Florence, Edinburgh, Nice... and the Alps, the Balearics, Sicily, western Ireland, Burgundy, the Algarve, the Black Forest, the Dordogne, the Italian lakes, the Dolomites, Tyrol,...

    There is no comparison. If your job is no longer quite so tied to the Silicon Valley office, you will move to London
    NYC makes sense for a lot of reasons despite the crime (and it's nowhere near as bad as SF) it's got the 2pm-6pm crossover with London, there's already quite a few companies in the area, it's bigger and better connected than SF (which means people have the option of living in NJ and commuting in) and it's only 7h on a cheap business class flight from London for business meetings. For tech startups there's also a fuckton of potential clients on the doorstep in NYC because there's so many financial services companies looking to cut costs. The City is one of the reasons tech has thrived in London, its clients and financing for startups.
    NYC is unquestionably a magnificent city (as I said in my earlier comment), but so is London. And the downsides of NYC - crime, racial tension, MAGA-Trump, divided country, healthcare, opiates, guns - now seem to me to outweigh the downsides of London: weather, greyness, grotty areas

    Both are English-speaking world cities with glorious culture, London has more history, New York City has that skyline

    The proximity of the rest of Europe might be the clincher for me, if I was a highly paid tech exec. And where do you want your kids to grow up? Safely?

    But of course I am biased

    I think we will see more American execs choosing London on a quasi-WFH basis. It will be a complex and remarkable irony if post-Brexit London ascends to world capital status (again?)..... because it is in Europe

    Yes, that's why I think London is a good shout for operational and potentially tax HQ. My point on NYC is more in relation to having the sales function for NA run out of there rather than SF because it has significantly better crossover with London and it's only a 7h flight for when seniors and execs need face to face meetings.

    The London/NYC split works brilliantly for financial services, it being replicated for tech would be no surprise.

    The last piece of the puzzle is higher risk funds in London willing to invest hundreds of millions for series D onwards.
    Yes, I concur

    Finance/sales stuff might stay in NYC but a lot of intellectual/HQ heft will move to London

    Add in the boost from Hong Kong and - perhaps unexpectedly - London could really thrive in the next decade

    I wonder if this is what I sensed in King's X yesterday. Essentially they are - wittingly or not - creating a Silicon Valley in an amazing new London neighborhood, but with added universities and science institutes and art galleries and biochemistry labs and the British Library and the rest, and all of it 300m from St Pancras and the eurostar, and half an hour from Heathrow via the Liz Line, with Shoreditch and the Silicon roundabout just down the road

    It is completely unique. London - esp King's X - has the chance to be THE tech hub for the world, or at least the western world

    If I was the head of Instagram, I'd move from California to King's Cross (never thought I'd write that). Just to see

    For the really crazy bit. Crazier than “aliens are my hamster”

    According to refugees from SF in the IT line I have met in London, one bonus of moving to London is less insane property prices.

    Yes, I typed that right…

    That is, if you are in IT on 6 figures, London is cheaper than SF - at least in terms of commutable stuff.

    I was talking to one guy, He’s looking at Hemel Hempstead and a house for 800k…..
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 35,150
    ydoethur said:

    MaxPB said:

    Blooming heck, scrapping a film after it has been made but not released must hurt the bottom line:
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-62406098

    Doe this make sense to anyone?

    Yes, apparently it's really, really awful and WB decided it wasn't worth releasing to get panned and poison the well for Batgirl.
    Worse than Batman v Superman? The mind boggles it really does.
    Yes, worse. Test screenings apparently had a cinema score of E which is an A-F scale, BvS got a B which is considered quite poor. Morbius got a C+ and that bombed really hard ($160m on a $75m budget so a probable loss of around $100m for Sony). Not releasing caps the loss to $90m. This is the smart decision. They may sell the rights to Netflix or Amazon later down the road but for now this makes sense to me.
  • BlancheLivermoreBlancheLivermore Posts: 3,350

    I've just put some music onto my new computer, and despite putting nearly a thousand tracks on, I've realised I have none beginning with X or Z.

    So, classic music tracks whose titles begin with 'x' or 'z' ? ;)

    Zombie by the Cranberries.
    Zeitgeist - Black Sabbath
  • LeonLeon Posts: 24,250
    edited August 3

    Scott_xP said:

    I've just put some music onto my new computer, and despite putting nearly a thousand tracks on, I've realised I have none beginning with X or Z.

    So, classic music tracks whose titles begin with 'x' or 'z' ? ;)

    Xanadu, by Rush

    Ziggy Stardust, David Bowie
    Thanks. Mrs J is a great Rush fan, and I think she has all the classic Bowie albums, so I'll nick those.

    Incidentally, there's only one 'Q': Queen of the New Year, by Deacon Blue.
    Just checked my iTunes library


    Quicksilver - Thomas Leeb
    Quiet Joys of Brotherhood - Fairport Convention (Take 1)
    Xpectations - Unloved (not a great song, but it is an X)
    Zombie - the Cranberries (you must have that? Great song)
    Zadok the Priest - Handel
    Zooma Zooma - Louis Prima
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 102,795
    tlg86 said:

    I like the theory that Boris Johnson wanted to host the Lionesses but Carrie put the kibosh on it.

    That was my theory!
    I shall credit you in future.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 22,808
    edited August 3

    I've just put some music onto my new computer, and despite putting nearly a thousand tracks on, I've realised I have none beginning with X or Z.

    So, classic music tracks whose titles begin with 'x' or 'z' ? ;)

    Zoo Station U2
    Zero and Blind Terry by Bruce Springsteen.
    Zip a Dee Doo dah.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 14,725
    MaxPB said:

    ydoethur said:

    MaxPB said:

    Blooming heck, scrapping a film after it has been made but not released must hurt the bottom line:
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-62406098

    Doe this make sense to anyone?

    Yes, apparently it's really, really awful and WB decided it wasn't worth releasing to get panned and poison the well for Batgirl.
    Worse than Batman v Superman? The mind boggles it really does.
    Yes, worse. Test screenings apparently had a cinema score of E which is an A-F scale, BvS got a B which is considered quite poor. Morbius got a C+ and that bombed really hard ($160m on a $75m budget so a probable loss of around $100m for Sony). Not releasing caps the loss to $90m. This is the smart decision. They may sell the rights to Netflix or Amazon later down the road but for now this makes sense to me.
    Release it as a series of exclusive 1 min NFTs at $1m each.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 102,795
    MaxPB said:

    ydoethur said:

    MaxPB said:

    Blooming heck, scrapping a film after it has been made but not released must hurt the bottom line:
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-62406098

    Doe this make sense to anyone?

    Yes, apparently it's really, really awful and WB decided it wasn't worth releasing to get panned and poison the well for Batgirl.
    Worse than Batman v Superman? The mind boggles it really does.
    Yes, worse. Test screenings apparently had a cinema score of E which is an A-F scale, BvS got a B which is considered quite poor. Morbius got a C+ and that bombed really hard ($160m on a $75m budget so a probable loss of around $100m for Sony). Not releasing caps the loss to $90m. This is the smart decision. They may sell the rights to Netflix or Amazon later down the road but for now this makes sense to me.
    So it is worse than Sharknado?

    That is bad.

    WB really have screwed up the DC universe so badly.

    Put Kevin Feige in charge.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 17,547

    Blooming heck, scrapping a film after it has been made but not released must hurt the bottom line:
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-62406098

    Doe this make sense to anyone?

    I didn't even know it was happening, but a shame it's not being released, as I have always had Glasgow down as the perfect Gotham City.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 30,794
    dixiedean said:

    I've just put some music onto my new computer, and despite putting nearly a thousand tracks on, I've realised I have none beginning with X or Z.

    So, classic music tracks whose titles begin with 'x' or 'z' ? ;)

    Zoo Station U2
    Zero and Blind Terry by Bruce Springsteen.
    Zip a Dee Doo dah.
    I'm not polluting my PC with anything from U2. Have you got a Radiohead alternative? ;)
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 35,421
    A ton of songs called "Zero". Some by people you've heard of.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 22,802


    For the really crazy bit. Crazier than “aliens are my hamster”

    According to refugees from SF in the IT line I have met in London, one bonus of moving to London is less insane property prices.

    Yes, I typed that right…

    That is, if you are in IT on 6 figures, London is cheaper than SF - at least in terms of commutable stuff.

    I was talking to one guy, He’s looking at Hemel Hempstead and a house for 800k…..

    Yah, a friend in a senior tech position at Apple bought an absolute wreck of a bungalow a few years ago in Cupertino for *checks notes* a million dollars+. Has spent a vast amount of money to bringing it up to standard.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 30,794
    TOPPING said:

    Scott_xP said:

    I've just put some music onto my new computer, and despite putting nearly a thousand tracks on, I've realised I have none beginning with X or Z.

    So, classic music tracks whose titles begin with 'x' or 'z' ? ;)

    Xanadu, by Rush

    Ziggy Stardust, David Bowie
    Thanks. Mrs J is a great Rush fan, and I think she has all the classic Bowie albums, so I'll nick those.

    Incidentally, there's only one 'Q': Queen of the New Year, by Deacon Blue.
    Quite Disappointing - 999
    For a moment I thought that you were disappointed because you only had 999 tracks in your system...
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 35,421
    TOPPING said:

    A ton of songs called "Zero". Some by people you've heard of.

    The Imagine Dragons one is pretty good.
  • MISTYMISTY Posts: 1,209
    Xanadu - Olivia NJ
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 23,697

    I'm not polluting my PC with anything from U2. Have you got a Radiohead alternative? ;)

    Nobody admitting to X+Y, Coldplay...
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 35,421

    TOPPING said:

    Scott_xP said:

    I've just put some music onto my new computer, and despite putting nearly a thousand tracks on, I've realised I have none beginning with X or Z.

    So, classic music tracks whose titles begin with 'x' or 'z' ? ;)

    Xanadu, by Rush

    Ziggy Stardust, David Bowie
    Thanks. Mrs J is a great Rush fan, and I think she has all the classic Bowie albums, so I'll nick those.

    Incidentally, there's only one 'Q': Queen of the New Year, by Deacon Blue.
    Quite Disappointing - 999
    For a moment I thought that you were disappointed because you only had 999 tracks in your system...
    Just listening again to their album, er, 999. It's as excellent now as it was then.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 4,185
    MISTY said:

    Xanadu - Olivia NJ

    Yes, but its really ELO, ONJ just sang it for the film
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 478
    tig86 - Yes, you were the first with the Carrie theory. I know that because I was going to mention it as a possibility, and found you had beaten me to it.

    (Biologists have a phrase for that kind of behavior: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mate_guarding_in_humans )
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 7,592

    I've just put some music onto my new computer, and despite putting nearly a thousand tracks on, I've realised I have none beginning with X or Z.

    So, classic music tracks whose titles begin with 'x' or 'z' ? ;)

    Xplosion by Outkast

  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 41,256
    Alistair said:


    For the really crazy bit. Crazier than “aliens are my hamster”

    According to refugees from SF in the IT line I have met in London, one bonus of moving to London is less insane property prices.

    Yes, I typed that right…

    That is, if you are in IT on 6 figures, London is cheaper than SF - at least in terms of commutable stuff.

    I was talking to one guy, He’s looking at Hemel Hempstead and a house for 800k…..

    Yah, a friend in a senior tech position at Apple bought an absolute wreck of a bungalow a few years ago in Cupertino for *checks notes* a million dollars+. Has spent a vast amount of money to bringing it up to standard.
    The climate is so forgiving that properties can have major issues that just get ignored or badly patched up. In theory the property codes are very strict and you need a permit to do virtually anything but people just ignore it and use undocumented labour.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 30,794
    Scott_xP said:

    Scott_xP said:

    I've just put some music onto my new computer, and despite putting nearly a thousand tracks on, I've realised I have none beginning with X or Z.

    So, classic music tracks whose titles begin with 'x' or 'z' ? ;)

    Xanadu, by Rush

    Ziggy Stardust, David Bowie
    Thanks. Mrs J is a great Rush fan, and I think she has all the classic Bowie albums, so I'll nick those.

    Incidentally, there's only one 'Q': Queen of the New Year, by Deacon Blue.
    No Question of Time, Depeche Mode?
    No Depeche Mode at all (though I think I've got a CD somewhere I've not ripped yet).

    Sorry, Sunil... ;)
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 29,938
    edited August 3
    Nigelb said:

    kinabalu said:

    Nigelb said:

    (Since we're doing FPT)

    Leon said:

    ping said:

    Taz said:

    Paging @Leon :


    Andrew Lilico
    @andrew_lilico
    ·
    57m
    The matters I currently personally regard as the biggest issues in UK politics:
    1) Short-term: Defeating inflation
    2) Medium-term: Defeating wokeness
    3) Long-term: Navigating climate change

    Of these, the biggest & most important of the battles - the one where the battle itself will determine things the most - is the defeat of wokeness. The urgency of that fight is the single biggest reason I would consider a Labour govt at present intolerable.

    https://twitter.com/andrew_lilico/status/1554821354125373443

    What a melt.

    Wokeness is irrelevant. The other two are essential to tackle. Wokeness few people care about.
    Over the last year or so I’ve read and listened to, probably, hundreds of hours of podcasts, interviews and audiobooks. All of the Brendan O’Neill & Spiked stuff. The TRIGGERnometry guys (and his new book), Douglas Murray’s output etc.

    I’ve tried to challenge myself and my assumptions and see if the anti-woke brigade have a point.

    And, aside from a few niche cases and examples, they really don’t.

    My initial view, was this was just section 28 type phobias re-emerging under a new guise. The kind of crap you get at the fag end of a Tory government. After much research and soul searching, that’s pretty much still my view.

    Worth listening, imo, to Adam Fleming’s Antisocial on r4/bbc sounds;

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/series/m0018h15

    It’s a few hours of listening, but generally quite a good, balanced overview of the woke/antiwoke battlefield.
    Good for you for trying, but if you don't get it even now, you are simply too stupid, or too set in your ways and narrow-minded, which is a kind of stupid

    I put you in the same category as @kinabalu
    'Categories Leon thinks I'm in' is not the primary concern for about 99.9999999% of humanity.
    Well I'm honoured to have my own category!

    Leon has one too - that of verbose, hard right, cliche mongers who endlessly parrot the received views and obsessions of speccyland rather than thinking for themselves.

    Other than that, I'm a fan.
    That's a harsh assessment.
    He's quite capable of thinking for himself and frequently does.
    You cement your own membership of the "fair almost to a fault" category in my eyes. But, ok, I keep an open mind on this, watch like a hawk for the evidence!
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 4,185

    MISTY said:

    Xanadu - Olivia NJ

    Yes, but its really ELO, ONJ just sang it for the film
    And you can do worse than the Sharleen Spiteri cover of Xanadu
  • LeonLeon Posts: 24,250
    For those that have never heard of him (99.9999999% of the world), here is Thomas Leeb playing Quicksilver

    Genius acoustic "percussive" guitar


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zh0bTtzRVIM
  • MISTYMISTY Posts: 1,209
    Oil prices hit the lowest since February today...

    Is Lizzy going to be lucky?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 41,394
    edited August 3
    Blimey. The guy might be something of a Democrat after all.

    Manchin eviscerates Fox interviewer using Democratic talking points (video at the link).

    https://twitter.com/justinbaragona/status/1554498712700944384
    Joe Manchin: "Who is paying any taxes that doesn’t have a corporation that has revenue of over a billion dollars a year? Not one person."

    Fox News' Harris Faulkner: Americans making below $400,000, their taxes will go up.

    Manchin: "That's a lie. A pure outright lie."
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 30,794
    Scott_xP said:

    I'm not polluting my PC with anything from U2. Have you got a Radiohead alternative? ;)

    Nobody admitting to X+Y, Coldplay...
    I *do* have a Coldplay album. Viva La Vida, because I wanted to compare the Pet Shop Boys' cover of 'Viva la Vida' with theirs.

    The PSB version is far better, if only for the faux-drum intro for the first minute.
This discussion has been closed.