Howdy, Stranger!

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

LAB moves to a 72% betting chance of winning most seats – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,163
edited December 2022 in General
imageLAB moves to a 72% betting chance of winning most seats – politicalbetting.com

Inevitably after the very strong performance in the by-election yesterday the money has been going on LAB to win most seats at the next election.

Read the full story here

«13456

Comments

  • MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Bill Gates uses charitable causes to cover up his own personal malfeasance. It's not an unknown way of hiding in plain sight as a dick head or worse. Jimmy Savile did it too.

    If anyone is interested in that stuff, Gate’s ex-wife have some interesting reasons for the divorce.
    His friendship with Epstein was chief among the reasons. He's as bad as Prince Andrew but because he gives to the right causes people have decided to ignore it. It's another Jimmy Savile scandal waiting to be blown open.
    SBF clearly was following the same approach, but its all gone tits up....I imagine quite a lot of politicians are rather nervous about how close they have got to this con man and how much money it took for him to get that close.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,994
    edited December 2022
    First?

    Apparently not
  • MaxPB said:

    Bill Gates uses charitable causes to cover up his own personal malfeasance. It's not an unknown way of hiding in plain sight as a dick head or worse. Jimmy Savile did it too.

    Been doing this for ages. This was 10 years ago and the Seattle Times was wondering if giving all this money to journalists could taint objectivity.

    https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/does-gates-funding-of-media-taint-objectivity/

    Two years after the story appeared, the Seattle Times accepted substantial funding from the Gates Foundation for an education reporting project and became uninterested in this issue.

    Since then the funding of these programmes is huge, $300+ millions in public donations (and nobody knows how much via contracts / dark money).

    Obviously Jeff Bezos just cut out the middle man and bought the Washington Post.

  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,994
    FPT

    If I were wargaming a Chinese policy response to the quandary it has found itself in the what they now seem to be doing would be high up on the likelihood list: open up, get it all over with quickly, but maintain tight control of the narrative and falsify the stats to make it look like nobody is dying of it (or just let a few death stats through - the CCP public health equivalent of allowing the opposition in a fixed election get a few percent of the vote).

    It seems the population were getting much more cross about being locked down than they would about a few hundred thousand dying, so politically it was probably the right decision.
  • Betfair, World Cup. Flip-flopping favourites.

    Argentina now narrow favourites but it is basically still 50/50.

    Argentina 1.98
    France 2
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,526
    Latest YouGov:

    Westminster voting intention:

    LAB: 48% (-)
    CON: 23% (-1)
    LDEM: 8% (-1)
    REF: 9% (+1)
    GRN: 5% (-1)

    via
    @YouGov
    , 14 - 15 Dec
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,020
    edited December 2022
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Bill Gates uses charitable causes to cover up his own personal malfeasance. It's not an unknown way of hiding in plain sight as a dick head or worse. Jimmy Savile did it too.

    If anyone is interested in that stuff, Gate’s ex-wife have some interesting reasons for the divorce.
    His friendship with Epstein was chief among the reasons. He's as bad as Prince Andrew but because he gives to the right causes people have decided to ignore it. It's another Jimmy Savile scandal waiting to be blown open.
    It fascinating how uninterested large portions of the fourth estate are in regards to just who were buddy buddy with Epstein and just what was the true backstory. He seemed to manage to transform from a minor conman pretending to be a teacher, to secondary figure in a wallstreet ponzi in the late 1980s, to this guy who was all these famous people's bestie.

    That's quite a leap of upward mobility.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,269
    OT - I think the chances of Labour being largest party are higher now than 72%

    I would say 95% - Black Swan territory for a different result.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,269

    MaxPB said:

    Bill Gates uses charitable causes to cover up his own personal malfeasance. It's not an unknown way of hiding in plain sight as a dick head or worse. Jimmy Savile did it too.

    Been doing this for ages. This was 10 years ago and the Seattle Times was wondering if giving all this money to journalists could taint objectivity.

    https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/does-gates-funding-of-media-taint-objectivity/

    Two years after the story appeared, the Seattle Times accepted substantial funding from the Gates Foundation for an education reporting project and became uninterested in this issue.

    Since then the funding of these programmes is huge, $300+ millions in public donations (and nobody knows how much via contracts / dark money).

    Obviously Jeff Bezos just cut out the middle man and bought the Washington Post.

    Gates was following the Soros style of feeding friends, to build an image - more the old style of cultivating media friendship.

    Bezos is being a bit cruder.

    Elon appears to be taking a wrecking ball to the idea.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,930

    Well now.


    Did she invite journalists or just Michael Gove?
    Certainly explains the budget.
  • I do always have to chuckle somewhat at the massive hypocritical outrage the media class have when they report stories of coke use....e.g. Gove story, they were the ones literally there sharing the stuff with him.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,269
    edited December 2022

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Bill Gates uses charitable causes to cover up his own personal malfeasance. It's not an unknown way of hiding in plain sight as a dick head or worse. Jimmy Savile did it too.

    If anyone is interested in that stuff, Gate’s ex-wife have some interesting reasons for the divorce.
    His friendship with Epstein was chief among the reasons. He's as bad as Prince Andrew but because he gives to the right causes people have decided to ignore it. It's another Jimmy Savile scandal waiting to be blown open.
    It fascinating how uninterested large portions of the fourth estate are in regards to just who were buddy buddy with Epstein and just what was the true backstory. He seemed to manage to transform from a minor conman pretending to be a teacher, to secondary figure in a wallstreet ponzi in the late 1980s, to this guy who was all these famous people's bestie.

    That's quite a leap of upward mobility.
    History is full of upwardly mobile pimps/influence gamers.

    Edit: with a side order of blackmail
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,994

    Latest YouGov:

    Westminster voting intention:

    LAB: 48% (-)
    CON: 23% (-1)
    LDEM: 8% (-1)
    REF: 9% (+1)
    GRN: 5% (-1)

    via
    @YouGov
    , 14 - 15 Dec

    Quite a few now with Green and LD on roughly 5% and 8% respectively, despite the volatility in others like REF. LLG 61% vs REFCON 32%.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,994

    I do always have to chuckle somewhat at the massive hypocritical outrage the media class have when they report stories of coke use....e.g. Gove story, they were the ones literally there sharing the stuff with him.

    "Traces of caviar and alba truffle" would have more cut through in these straitened times.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,437

    Well now.


    Did she invite journalists or just Michael Gove?
    I doubt there would have been any traces left if Michael Gove's reputation in that department is warranted.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,269
    TimS said:

    Latest YouGov:

    Westminster voting intention:

    LAB: 48% (-)
    CON: 23% (-1)
    LDEM: 8% (-1)
    REF: 9% (+1)
    GRN: 5% (-1)

    via
    @YouGov
    , 14 - 15 Dec

    Quite a few now with Green and LD on roughly 5% and 8% respectively, despite the volatility in others like REF. LLG 61% vs REFCON 32%.
    Several Hard Lefties of my acquaintance are using Green as Spare Labour. Will be interesting to see how many break back to Labour come the election.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,961

    Latest YouGov:

    Westminster voting intention:

    LAB: 48% (-)
    CON: 23% (-1)
    LDEM: 8% (-1)
    REF: 9% (+1)
    GRN: 5% (-1)

    via
    @YouGov
    , 14 - 15 Dec

    RefUK 9% far higher with Yougov than other polls
  • Latest YouGov:

    Westminster voting intention:

    LAB: 48% (-)
    CON: 23% (-1)
    LDEM: 8% (-1)
    REF: 9% (+1)
    GRN: 5% (-1)

    via
    @YouGov
    , 14 - 15 Dec

    MoonRabbit please explain.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,437

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Bill Gates uses charitable causes to cover up his own personal malfeasance. It's not an unknown way of hiding in plain sight as a dick head or worse. Jimmy Savile did it too.

    If anyone is interested in that stuff, Gate’s ex-wife have some interesting reasons for the divorce.
    His friendship with Epstein was chief among the reasons. He's as bad as Prince Andrew but because he gives to the right causes people have decided to ignore it. It's another Jimmy Savile scandal waiting to be blown open.
    It fascinating how uninterested large portions of the fourth estate are in regards to just who were buddy buddy with Epstein and just what was the true backstory. He seemed to manage to transform from a minor conman pretending to be a teacher, to secondary figure in a wallstreet ponzi in the late 1980s, to this guy who was all these famous people's bestie.

    That's quite a leap of upward mobility.
    Yes. Which is why I have a sneaking sympathy with Prince Andrew, who, whilst a sleazy twat, has clearly been thrown to the wolves to satisfy the public, leaving Epstein's other friends to skulk away.

    I read an interesting quote of Voltaire's in the comments on John Redwood's blog the other day. To paraphrase - 'If you want to find out who rules you, just find out who you're not allowed to criticise.' The media is obviously encouraged to go ham on Randy Andy - less so on Bill Gates. And it's interesting to me that as a whole the Royal family seems less protected than it once was in this regard. They have always been criticised, but the sustained criticism and seeming determination on the part of the US elite to change the Royal household/power structures in its own image (see M&H) seems new.

    The comment was originally made in the context of the Bank of England. UK politicians are regularly ridiculed and hauled over the coals, but the bone-headed decisions of the Bank are treated like Holy writ.

  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,486

    Latest YouGov:

    Westminster voting intention:

    LAB: 48% (-)
    CON: 23% (-1)
    LDEM: 8% (-1)
    REF: 9% (+1)
    GRN: 5% (-1)

    via
    @YouGov
    , 14 - 15 Dec

    Ah but have you unskewed the polling, taking into account a rapid and significant renaissance in Tory popularity for hypothetical reasons at an undefined point in the future? No you have not. Duh.

  • Well now.


  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,930

    Well now.


    What did I say earlier about coincidences?
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,486

    Latest YouGov:

    Westminster voting intention:

    LAB: 48% (-)
    CON: 23% (-1)
    LDEM: 8% (-1)
    REF: 9% (+1)
    GRN: 5% (-1)

    via
    @YouGov
    , 14 - 15 Dec

    MoonRabbit please explain.
    Easy, you need either transpose the Tory and Labour figures or dismiss this an outlier while awaiting a poll that fits the narrative. Duh.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,437
    RobD said:

    Well now.


    What did I say earlier about coincidences?
    I wonder who's decided that Truss needs to be trashed even more.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,961
    UK healthcare needs to move to a European style insurance model says Javid or the NHS will not survive longer term

    https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1603556056600305665?s=20&t=QkQIdiuYaY1smxNna8xkzg
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,486

    Well now.


    Who cares?
  • Superb - and scathing - as ever, Chris Grey’s weekly Brexit blog. I’m not going to spend 20 mins copy and pasting the best bits, but I recommend a read. This week’s post: Post-Brexit Britain: a country broken by lies

    https://chrisgreybrexitblog.blogspot.com/2022/12/post-brexit-britain-country-broken-by.html?m=1
  • Well now.


    Did she invite journalists or just Michael Gove?
    Liz Who?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,961

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Bill Gates uses charitable causes to cover up his own personal malfeasance. It's not an unknown way of hiding in plain sight as a dick head or worse. Jimmy Savile did it too.

    If anyone is interested in that stuff, Gate’s ex-wife have some interesting reasons for the divorce.
    His friendship with Epstein was chief among the reasons. He's as bad as Prince Andrew but because he gives to the right causes people have decided to ignore it. It's another Jimmy Savile scandal waiting to be blown open.
    It fascinating how uninterested large portions of the fourth estate are in regards to just who were buddy buddy with Epstein and just what was the true backstory. He seemed to manage to transform from a minor conman pretending to be a teacher, to secondary figure in a wallstreet ponzi in the late 1980s, to this guy who was all these famous people's bestie.

    That's quite a leap of upward mobility.
    Yes. Which is why I have a sneaking sympathy with Prince Andrew, who, whilst a sleazy twat, has clearly been thrown to the wolves to satisfy the public, leaving Epstein's other friends to skulk away.

    I read an interesting quote of Voltaire's in the comments on John Redwood's blog the other day. To paraphrase - 'If you want to find out who rules you, just find out who you're not allowed to criticise.' The media is obviously encouraged to go ham on Randy Andy - less so on Bill Gates. And it's interesting to me that as a whole the Royal family seems less protected than it once was in this regard. They have always been criticised, but the sustained criticism and seeming determination on the part of the US elite to change the Royal household/power structures in its own image (see M&H) seems new.

    The comment was originally made in the context of the Bank of England. UK politicians are regularly ridiculed and hauled over the coals, but the bone-headed decisions of the Bank are treated like Holy writ.

    Though Meghan is ironically now less popular than Kate in the US

    https://www.newsweek.com/meghan-markle-less-popular-america-prince-william-kate-middleton-prince-harry-1765877
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,648

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Bill Gates uses charitable causes to cover up his own personal malfeasance. It's not an unknown way of hiding in plain sight as a dick head or worse. Jimmy Savile did it too.

    If anyone is interested in that stuff, Gate’s ex-wife have some interesting reasons for the divorce.
    His friendship with Epstein was chief among the reasons. He's as bad as Prince Andrew but because he gives to the right causes people have decided to ignore it. It's another Jimmy Savile scandal waiting to be blown open.
    SBF clearly was following the same approach, but its all gone tits up....I imagine quite a lot of politicians are rather nervous about how close they have got to this con man and how much money it took for him to get that close.
    He must have seemed like a pretty straight kind of guy.

    image
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,961

    Latest YouGov:

    Westminster voting intention:

    LAB: 48% (-)
    CON: 23% (-1)
    LDEM: 8% (-1)
    REF: 9% (+1)
    GRN: 5% (-1)

    via
    @YouGov
    , 14 - 15 Dec

    MoonRabbit please explain.
    Reform got just 3% in Stretford last night in an actual parliamentary election
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,020
    edited December 2022

    Well now.


    While the Guardian are making this purely political angle, the epidemic of coke use in society is off the charts. I bet if you went looking you wouldn't find many places where events are held, that there isn't evidence of its use.
  • MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Bill Gates uses charitable causes to cover up his own personal malfeasance. It's not an unknown way of hiding in plain sight as a dick head or worse. Jimmy Savile did it too.

    If anyone is interested in that stuff, Gate’s ex-wife have some interesting reasons for the divorce.
    His friendship with Epstein was chief among the reasons. He's as bad as Prince Andrew but because he gives to the right causes people have decided to ignore it. It's another Jimmy Savile scandal waiting to be blown open.
    SBF clearly was following the same approach, but its all gone tits up....I imagine quite a lot of politicians are rather nervous about how close they have got to this con man and how much money it took for him to get that close.
    He must have seemed like a pretty straight kind of guy.

    image
    Those trainers are a huge red flag.
  • Cookie said:

    On thread (well, it was until the thread changed), Britain's newest MP, Andrew Western, is also my councillor (as well as leader of Trafford council). I have come across him personally on a couple of occasions and I rate him moderately highly.

    Off thread: what a day to be alive. Do you remember noughties miserablism? Grumpy Old Men, Is it just me or is everything shit, and so on? To which an enjoyable if essentially fluffy rejoined was published: "It's Just You, Everything's Not Shit"? This post is in the spirit of that. Without downplaying individual misfortunes, truly those of us who have the good fortune to be alive and healthy and to live in Britain in 2022 (or Ireland, or France, or Germany - we're fortunate, but not uniquely so) are the winners of existence's lottery. Granted, the doubly whammy of Covid and Ukraine have put is in a position where things are not quite so rosy as they in the late teens, but come on, let's count some blessings. We have hundreds.

    Specific, personal reasons to be cheerful today:
    1) My daughters' school Christmas concert. The first whole school event they've put on since 2019. I shed a few tears. Firstly, for my own kids - first time I've had two daughters in the same show. It's a big school (well, I think it's big, for a junior school - 270 children - but that's par for the course in urban areas these days) so most children just had very brief appearances of singing parts, but both of mine had lines to deliver. Middle daughter is a natural performer, oldest in the school - it was never in doubt that she'd carry of her bit with aplomb, but she did: she sparkled and I enjoyed the warm glow of a proud parent. Yongest daughter is less emotionally reliable, and is prone to getting anxious and shy; she also has ADHD, and is prone to relentless fidgeting and not engaging - I have no idea, frankly, why she was one of three year 3s with speaking parts - but she carried it off faultlessly. Remembered her lines, was audible, looked at the audience, stood reasonably still. Absolutely at the top of her game and so far ahead of where she was a year ago. Tears of pride. I'm not saying she stole the show - but sometimes just competence is a triumph. Also (it was an emotional morning) a few tears for some of the other kids - years 6s who I've known since they were wee dots, now at the top of the school, brimming with confidence and ownership, on the fringe of their teenage years, doing a primary school nativity for the last time - a milestone for some of their parents, too, for whom this will be the last nativity as a parent. It was a good nativity: a mix of the informative (how Christmas is celebrated in other countries), a bit of (genuine) humour, a brief run through of the nativity story itself from the year 3s, Christmas songs both secular and religious, the latter a mix of the traditional and pointless modern ones which no-one had heard before and which add nothing to the cannon.

    ...

    There is no shot of pure happiness and festive joy quite like a school Christmas show or concert. I've had a whole string of them in the last few days and they have been utterly life-affirming. Merry Christmas!
  • MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Bill Gates uses charitable causes to cover up his own personal malfeasance. It's not an unknown way of hiding in plain sight as a dick head or worse. Jimmy Savile did it too.

    If anyone is interested in that stuff, Gate’s ex-wife have some interesting reasons for the divorce.
    His friendship with Epstein was chief among the reasons. He's as bad as Prince Andrew but because he gives to the right causes people have decided to ignore it. It's another Jimmy Savile scandal waiting to be blown open.
    SBF clearly was following the same approach, but its all gone tits up....I imagine quite a lot of politicians are rather nervous about how close they have got to this con man and how much money it took for him to get that close.
    He must have seemed like a pretty straight kind of guy.

    image
    Those trainers are a huge red flag.
    SBFs aren't much better ;-)
  • FishingFishing Posts: 5,039

    Well now.


    From what I hear of these ghastly events it would be news if drug residue WASN'T there afterwards.

  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,020
    edited December 2022
    Fifa is to reconsider the format of the 2026 World Cup in the United States, Mexico and Canada, says president Gianni Infantino.

    The teams will increase from 32 to 48 for the competition and were set to be divided into 16 groups of three, with the top two progressing to the last 32. Infantino said that would be looked at after the "success" of the four-team groups at the 2022 World Cup in Qatar.

    https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/63998821

    The proposed new format is nearly as bad as the new Champions League format!


    And of course...

    Fifa will stage an expanded Club World Cup featuring 32 men's teams from June 2025, says its president Gianni Infantino.

    At this rate, top clubs are going to need squads of 50 players to play all the games in all the competitions.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,157

    Betfair, World Cup. Flip-flopping favourites.

    Argentina now narrow favourites but it is basically still 50/50.

    Argentina 1.98
    France 2

    Crazy market. I have it the dead opposite - France favs at 1.98.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,157
    edited December 2022
    Cookie said:

    On thread (well, it was until the thread changed), Britain's newest MP, Andrew Western, is also my councillor (as well as leader of Trafford council). I have come across him personally on a couple of occasions and I rate him moderately highly.

    Off thread: what a day to be alive. Do you remember noughties miserablism? Grumpy Old Men, Is it just me or is everything shit, and so on? To which an enjoyable if essentially fluffy rejoined was published: "It's Just You, Everything's Not Shit"? This post is in the spirit of that. Without downplaying individual misfortunes, truly those of us who have the good fortune to be alive and healthy and to live in Britain in 2022 (or Ireland, or France, or Germany - we're fortunate, but not uniquely so) are the winners of existence's lottery. Granted, the doubly whammy of Covid and Ukraine have put is in a position where things are not quite so rosy as they in the late teens, but come on, let's count some blessings. We have hundreds.

    Specific, personal reasons to be cheerful today:
    1) My daughters' school Christmas concert. The first whole school event they've put on since 2019. I shed a few tears. Firstly, for my own kids - first time I've had two daughters in the same show. It's a big school (well, I think it's big, for a junior school - 270 children - but that's par for the course in urban areas these days) so most children just had very brief appearances of singing parts, but both of mine had lines to deliver. Middle daughter is a natural performer, oldest in the school - it was never in doubt that she'd carry of her bit with aplomb, but she did: she sparkled and I enjoyed the warm glow of a proud parent. Yongest daughter is less emotionally reliable, and is prone to getting anxious and shy; she also has ADHD, and is prone to relentless fidgeting and not engaging - I have no idea, frankly, why she was one of three year 3s with speaking parts - but she carried it off faultlessly. Remembered her lines, was audible, looked at the audience, stood reasonably still. Absolutely at the top of her game and so far ahead of where she was a year ago. Tears of pride. I'm not saying she stole the show - but sometimes just competence is a triumph. Also (it was an emotional morning) a few tears for some of the other kids - years 6s who I've known since they were wee dots, now at the top of the school, brimming with confidence and ownership, on the fringe of their teenage years, doing a primary school nativity for the last time - a milestone for some of their parents, too, for whom this will be the last nativity as a parent. It was a good nativity: a mix of the informative (how Christmas is celebrated in other countries), a bit of (genuine) humour, a brief run through of the nativity story itself from the year 3s, Christmas songs both secular and religious, the latter a mix of the traditional and pointless modern ones which no-one had heard before and which add nothing to the cannon.

    You're a great big softy.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,497

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Bill Gates uses charitable causes to cover up his own personal malfeasance. It's not an unknown way of hiding in plain sight as a dick head or worse. Jimmy Savile did it too.

    If anyone is interested in that stuff, Gate’s ex-wife have some interesting reasons for the divorce.
    His friendship with Epstein was chief among the reasons. He's as bad as Prince Andrew but because he gives to the right causes people have decided to ignore it. It's another Jimmy Savile scandal waiting to be blown open.
    It fascinating how uninterested large portions of the fourth estate are in regards to just who were buddy buddy with Epstein and just what was the true backstory. He seemed to manage to transform from a minor conman pretending to be a teacher, to secondary figure in a wallstreet ponzi in the late 1980s, to this guy who was all these famous people's bestie.

    That's quite a leap of upward mobility.
    Yes. Which is why I have a sneaking sympathy with Prince Andrew, who, whilst a sleazy twat, has clearly been thrown to the wolves to satisfy the public, leaving Epstein's other friends to skulk away.

    I read an interesting quote of Voltaire's in the comments on John Redwood's blog the other day. To paraphrase - 'If you want to find out who rules you, just find out who you're not allowed to criticise.' The media is obviously encouraged to go ham on Randy Andy - less so on Bill Gates. And it's interesting to me that as a whole the Royal family seems less protected than it once was in this regard. They have always been criticised, but the sustained criticism and seeming determination on the part of the US elite to change the Royal household/power structures in its own image (see M&H) seems new.

    The comment was originally made in the context of the Bank of England. UK politicians are regularly ridiculed and hauled over the coals, but the bone-headed decisions of the Bank are treated like Holy writ.

    Who am I not allowed to criticise? In the strict sense no-one but:

    Nurses. Children. Mary Berry. David Attenborough. HM the late Queen. Reception class teachers. Those who raise awareness. Modern founders of charities. Armed forces charities. James O'Brien. Children's charities. The NHS as opposed to The Government/Dept of Health. Foodbanks. Warm hubs. Religions and their founders except Christianity. Self styled 'Community Leaders'. Scientists.

    All have a place in the pantheon.


  • GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,860
    Cookie said:

    ...cont

    2) Christmas shopping. The threat of Christmas shopping hangs over me through December like a thundercloud, but now I have largely done it. My strategy is to do it in Knutsford. Manchester offers far too much choice, the internet offers more still: a small town focuses the mind (and also tends to offer the odd surprise). You can be round the town in an hour - in that time you don't even have to pay for parking. It doesn't offer everything, but generally where it fails to offer what you want it offers enough inspiration to know how you will finish it off. It's also a very pleasant little town to be in. But the thing which really brought me happiness was driving through rural Cheshire, which is still covered in snow. (There are patches of white here in the suburbs, but it is largely frost rather than snow). The Cheshire Plain is one of the north's less spectacular landscapes, but - like anywhere, probably - dust it in snow and it looks like an image of heaven. The snow - which must be over a week old now - still crunches satisfyingly underfoot. Joy.

    3) I discovered not just a Christmas song, but a Christmas album that I very much enjoyed last night - Aidan Moffat's 'Ghost Stories for Christmas'. Christmassy as a dark day and a fireplace and a glass of port and a spot of introspection: superficially gloomy but strangely uplifting. This is my highlight:
    https://aidanmoffatandrmhubbert.bandcamp.com/track/the-recurrence-of-dickens

    Aiden Moffat is great - not heard this though, so I'll give it a listen.

    There is plenty of nice stuff to be happy about. On a personal level, my lad just got promoted up to be goalie for his club's first team and will be playing on Sunday; he's not always the most confident (and is a chronic non-focuser/fidgeter like your daughter) so it's a lovely boost for him and totally deserved for the work he's put into it.

    Agree that Knutsford is a pleasantly compact town; I recommend Dexter & Jones if you've time for a bevvy or want a fancy beer. I won't be out in the Cheshire Plain for a bit, mind - I need that snow and ice to bugger off before I get out on my bike.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,507

    Latest YouGov:

    Westminster voting intention:

    LAB: 48% (-)
    CON: 23% (-1)
    LDEM: 8% (-1)
    REF: 9% (+1)
    GRN: 5% (-1)

    via
    @YouGov
    , 14 - 15 Dec

    MoonRabbit please explain.
    Easy, you need either transpose the Tory and Labour figures or dismiss this an outlier while awaiting a poll that fits the narrative. Duh.
    The narrative is, after a good few weeks climbing Tory share in polls, most recent handful of polls now MOE stalemate creeping in.

    The Yougov is actually a bit of an outlier compared to average of polls, but not outlying with a particular bent you can predict, a few months ago they gave Lab just 1% lead. Yougov are off the pace these days and a bit random, but used by Sky so get lots of coverage like, Tories still miles behind, which if Sky do that it won’t really reflect the last few weeks in the polls in my opinion.

    Opinium will show a Tory +2 advance this weekend to 31% which by my method indicates single digit leads from some pollsters in Jan or Feb. Whether the halo of popularity slips off Sunak and his government at some point after that is conjecture, but I don’t deal in conjecture, just solid facts and solid factual analysis.
  • Must confess I had no idea before today that Katie Price stood as an independent in the 2001 GE for Stretford and Urmston.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,486

    Well now.


    While the Guardian are making this purely political angle, the epidemic of coke use in society is off the charts. I bet if you went looking you wouldn't find many places where events are held, that there isn't evidence of its use.
    Indeed. A complete non-story for exactly that reason. The House of Commons loos have traces (there was a 'news' story about this fairly recently as I recall) as do most public venues most probably.
  • ohnotnowohnotnow Posts: 3,790
    Cookie said:

    ...cont

    2) Christmas shopping. The threat of Christmas shopping hangs over me through December like a thundercloud, but now I have largely done it. My strategy is to do it in Knutsford. Manchester offers far too much choice, the internet offers more still: a small town focuses the mind (and also tends to offer the odd surprise). You can be round the town in an hour - in that time you don't even have to pay for parking. It doesn't offer everything, but generally where it fails to offer what you want it offers enough inspiration to know how you will finish it off. It's also a very pleasant little town to be in. But the thing which really brought me happiness was driving through rural Cheshire, which is still covered in snow. (There are patches of white here in the suburbs, but it is largely frost rather than snow). The Cheshire Plain is one of the north's less spectacular landscapes, but - like anywhere, probably - dust it in snow and it looks like an image of heaven. The snow - which must be over a week old now - still crunches satisfyingly underfoot. Joy.

    3) I discovered not just a Christmas song, but a Christmas album that I very much enjoyed last night - Aidan Moffat's 'Ghost Stories for Christmas'. Christmassy as a dark day and a fireplace and a glass of port and a spot of introspection: superficially gloomy but strangely uplifting. This is my highlight:
    https://aidanmoffatandrmhubbert.bandcamp.com/track/the-recurrence-of-dickens

    Aidan Moffat is one of my favourite artists. The Copper Top was especially beautiful https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifY4v3maKZY . Some of the tracks from the film he made 'Where You're Meant To Be' are similarly affecting (and it's a wonderful film imho) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CEENhOVDMrs . He's also released a lot of quite strange, dark ambient stuff as 'L.Pierre'/'Lucky Pierre' and Nyx Nótt.

    (Oh, and he does some more upbeat stuff too. Like this track which Ian Rankin described as 'An STD roller-coaster https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66-79BFioh8 )
  • GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,860
    kinabalu said:

    Well now.

    Some will sniff but for me that's crossing a line.
    I'd say we need a blow by blow account.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,507
    TimS said:

    Latest YouGov:

    Westminster voting intention:

    LAB: 48% (-)
    CON: 23% (-1)
    LDEM: 8% (-1)
    REF: 9% (+1)
    GRN: 5% (-1)

    via
    @YouGov
    , 14 - 15 Dec

    Quite a few now with Green and LD on roughly 5% and 8% respectively, despite the volatility in others like REF. LLG 61% vs REFCON 32%.
    There has to be an element of the Libdem vote that will never ever vote Labour - I vote Libdem becuase I don’t recognise Conservatives as conservatism these days, and I would never vote Labour.

    It’s obvious why yougov have got this poll wrong, with 9% ref. 5% ref with 27 Con fits closer to the herding.
  • DriverDriver Posts: 4,963
    Ghedebrav said:

    kinabalu said:

    Well now.

    Some will sniff but for me that's crossing a line.
    I'd say we need a blow by blow account.
    I wonder what King Charlie makes of it.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 8,727
    Ghedebrav said:

    kinabalu said:

    Well now.

    Some will sniff but for me that's crossing a line.
    I'd say we need a blow by blow account.
    Snow joke?
  • Well now.


    Actually explains a lot.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,486

    Latest YouGov:

    Westminster voting intention:

    LAB: 48% (-)
    CON: 23% (-1)
    LDEM: 8% (-1)
    REF: 9% (+1)
    GRN: 5% (-1)

    via
    @YouGov
    , 14 - 15 Dec

    MoonRabbit please explain.
    Easy, you need either transpose the Tory and Labour figures or dismiss this an outlier while awaiting a poll that fits the narrative. Duh.
    The narrative is, after a good few weeks climbing Tory share in polls, most recent handful of polls now MOE stalemate creeping in.

    The Yougov is actually a bit of an outlier compared to average of polls, but not outlying with a particular bent you can predict, a few months ago they gave Lab just 1% lead. Yougov are off the pace these days and a bit random, but used by Sky so get lots of coverage like, Tories still miles behind, which if Sky do that it won’t really reflect the last few weeks in the polls in my opinion.

    Opinium will show a Tory +2 advance this weekend to 31% which by my method indicates single digit leads from some pollsters in Jan or Feb. Whether the halo of popularity slips off Sunak and his government at some point after that is conjecture, but I don’t deal in conjecture, just solid facts and solid factual analysis.
    :D
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,157

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Bill Gates uses charitable causes to cover up his own personal malfeasance. It's not an unknown way of hiding in plain sight as a dick head or worse. Jimmy Savile did it too.

    If anyone is interested in that stuff, Gate’s ex-wife have some interesting reasons for the divorce.
    His friendship with Epstein was chief among the reasons. He's as bad as Prince Andrew but because he gives to the right causes people have decided to ignore it. It's another Jimmy Savile scandal waiting to be blown open.
    SBF clearly was following the same approach, but its all gone tits up....I imagine quite a lot of politicians are rather nervous about how close they have got to this con man and how much money it took for him to get that close.
    He must have seemed like a pretty straight kind of guy.

    image
    The globalist WEF elite induct new young trainee!
  • Latest YouGov:

    Westminster voting intention:

    LAB: 48% (-)
    CON: 23% (-1)
    LDEM: 8% (-1)
    REF: 9% (+1)
    GRN: 5% (-1)

    via
    @YouGov
    , 14 - 15 Dec

    MoonRabbit please explain.
    Easy, you need either transpose the Tory and Labour figures or dismiss this an outlier while awaiting a poll that fits the narrative. Duh.
    The narrative is, after a good few weeks climbing Tory share in polls, most recent handful of polls now MOE stalemate creeping in.

    The Yougov is actually a bit of an outlier compared to average of polls, but not outlying with a particular bent you can predict, a few months ago they gave Lab just 1% lead. Yougov are off the pace these days and a bit random, but used by Sky so get lots of coverage like, Tories still miles behind, which if Sky do that it won’t really reflect the last few weeks in the polls in my opinion.

    Opinium will show a Tory +2 advance this weekend to 31% which by my method indicates single digit leads from some pollsters in Jan or Feb. Whether the halo of popularity slips off Sunak and his government at some point after that is conjecture, but I don’t deal in conjecture, just solid facts and solid factual analysis.
    The halo of popularity? Sunak has negative approval ratings (though he's more popular than the Poundland Thatcher and Churchill impersonators, I grant).
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,015

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Bill Gates uses charitable causes to cover up his own personal malfeasance. It's not an unknown way of hiding in plain sight as a dick head or worse. Jimmy Savile did it too.

    If anyone is interested in that stuff, Gate’s ex-wife have some interesting reasons for the divorce.
    His friendship with Epstein was chief among the reasons. He's as bad as Prince Andrew but because he gives to the right causes people have decided to ignore it. It's another Jimmy Savile scandal waiting to be blown open.
    SBF clearly was following the same approach, but its all gone tits up....I imagine quite a lot of politicians are rather nervous about how close they have got to this con man and how much money it took for him to get that close.
    He must have seemed like a pretty straight kind of guy.

    image
    To be fair, he's the only one not holding a sex toy.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,863
    HYUFD said:
    But it is absurd to apply UNS from a safe seat swing, as you have been told already.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,015
    HYUFD said:

    Latest YouGov:

    Westminster voting intention:

    LAB: 48% (-)
    CON: 23% (-1)
    LDEM: 8% (-1)
    REF: 9% (+1)
    GRN: 5% (-1)

    via
    @YouGov
    , 14 - 15 Dec

    MoonRabbit please explain.
    Reform got just 3% in Stretford last night in an actual parliamentary election
    ReFuk:Tory ratio consistent with national polling though.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,863

    TimS said:

    Latest YouGov:

    Westminster voting intention:

    LAB: 48% (-)
    CON: 23% (-1)
    LDEM: 8% (-1)
    REF: 9% (+1)
    GRN: 5% (-1)

    via
    @YouGov
    , 14 - 15 Dec

    Quite a few now with Green and LD on roughly 5% and 8% respectively, despite the volatility in others like REF. LLG 61% vs REFCON 32%.
    There has to be an element of the Libdem vote that will never ever vote Labour - I vote Libdem becuase I don’t recognise Conservatives as conservatism these days, and I would never vote Labour.

    It’s obvious why yougov have got this poll wrong, with 9% ref. 5% ref with 27 Con fits closer to the herding.
    The Ref 9% is clearly nonsense. I suspect it reveals a difference between the sort of people signed up for and willing to regularly and quickly complete online polls, and the wider population, which will always be a handicap for YouGov.
  • GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,860

    Fifa is to reconsider the format of the 2026 World Cup in the United States, Mexico and Canada, says president Gianni Infantino.

    The teams will increase from 32 to 48 for the competition and were set to be divided into 16 groups of three, with the top two progressing to the last 32. Infantino said that would be looked at after the "success" of the four-team groups at the 2022 World Cup in Qatar.

    https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/63998821

    The proposed new format is nearly as bad as the new Champions League format!


    And of course...

    Fifa will stage an expanded Club World Cup featuring 32 men's teams from June 2025, says its president Gianni Infantino.

    At this rate, top clubs are going to need squads of 50 players to play all the games in all the competitions.

    When will they stop flogging this Club World Cup nonsense? Even in South America, where it's taken a bit more seriously than Europe - it's barely a real trophy; charity shield level stuff.

    And there's the fairly obvious flaw that nobody else from any given country is going to get behind their nation's entrant unless they actually support that team, and even then surely it'll just end up being resented for interrupting the normal season?
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,507
    Selebian said:

    Ghedebrav said:

    kinabalu said:

    Well now.

    Some will sniff but for me that's crossing a line.
    I'd say we need a blow by blow account.
    Snow joke?
    The occasional one-liner on PB makes me snort 😮‍💨
  • kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 4,945

    Well now.

    What an absolute non story!

    There will be traces of cocaine found in any venue after a party has been hosted that involves journalists, any kind of media types at all really, bankers, or really anyone who's rich and powerful. To be honest, you might as well say any party attended by middle-class city types under the age of 40.

    If I hosted a party for a bunch of rich people I'd be more shocked if there weren't traces of cocaine in the loo the day afterwards.
  • GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,860
    Driver said:

    Ghedebrav said:

    kinabalu said:

    Well now.

    Some will sniff but for me that's crossing a line.
    I'd say we need a blow by blow account.
    I wonder what King Charlie makes of it.
    I suspect he might have a crack too.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,020
    edited December 2022
    kyf_100 said:

    Well now.

    What an absolute non story!

    There will be traces of cocaine found in any venue after a party has been hosted that involves journalists, any kind of media types at all really, bankers, or really anyone who's rich and powerful. To be honest, you might as well say any party attended by middle-class city types under the age of 40.

    If I hosted a party for a bunch of rich people I'd be more shocked if there weren't traces of cocaine in the loo the day afterwards.
    Coke use is now far wider use than rich middle classes at their nice dinner parties, go to any pub on a Friday / Saturday night, plenty of people will be off their tits on it. The price of the stuff has become incredibly cheap due in no small part to the Albanian Mafia taking control and cutting out the middle men. We were talking yesterday how football violence has been on the rise and a lot of that has been put down to widespread coke use.
  • Mr. Malmesbury, I'm inclined to agree Labour are a 95% chance (or more) for most seats. They'd have to work hard not to get that many.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,507

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Bill Gates uses charitable causes to cover up his own personal malfeasance. It's not an unknown way of hiding in plain sight as a dick head or worse. Jimmy Savile did it too.

    If anyone is interested in that stuff, Gate’s ex-wife have some interesting reasons for the divorce.
    His friendship with Epstein was chief among the reasons. He's as bad as Prince Andrew but because he gives to the right causes people have decided to ignore it. It's another Jimmy Savile scandal waiting to be blown open.
    SBF clearly was following the same approach, but its all gone tits up....I imagine quite a lot of politicians are rather nervous about how close they have got to this con man and how much money it took for him to get that close.
    He must have seemed like a pretty straight kind of guy.

    image
    To be fair, he's the only one not holding a sex toy.
    Bills been holding his for the last 50years, waiting for the yams to come along.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,015
    While use of cocaine may be widespread in certain sectors of society, this does not make it right.
  • kyf_100 said:

    Well now.

    What an absolute non story!

    There will be traces of cocaine found in any venue after a party has been hosted that involves journalists, any kind of media types at all really, bankers, or really anyone who's rich and powerful. To be honest, you might as well say any party attended by middle-class city types under the age of 40.

    If I hosted a party for a bunch of rich people I'd be more shocked if there weren't traces of cocaine in the loo the day afterwards.
    There's the recreational factor, but a strong plurality of workers in Parliament, Whitehall and/or Downing Street will be using cocaine in any given week simply to give themselves the energy to get through the day.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,648
    kinabalu said:

    Well now.

    Some will sniff but for me that's crossing a line.
    Say what you like about Liz Truss, but she don't lie.
  • While use of cocaine may be widespread in certain sectors of society, this does not make it right.

    Its not really certain sectors, its across the board. The focus of the political party angle is missing the wood for the trees, there is an epidemic of its use across society.
  • GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,860

    While use of cocaine may be widespread in certain sectors of society, this does not make it right.

    The rights and wrongs of taking psychoactive substances aside, the supply chain is nightmarishly horrible; taking part in it as end user makes you considerably worse in my eyes than someone who, I dunno, had a small gathering during lockdown. Though I daresay plenty of small gatherings (including at notable addresses) might have left residue the day after too.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,103
    Wes Streeting seems sensible

    “I am not going to pretend the NHS is the envy of the world.” @wesstreeting
    https://policyexchange.org.uk/events/double-

    https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1603711445883129857?cxt=HHwWgsC84YXEw8EsAAAA
  • While use of cocaine may be widespread in certain sectors of society, this does not make it right.

    You might as well complain that certain sectors of society consume coffee, alcohol, or paracetemol - at this point, cocaine isn't some kind of illicit recreational vice, it's just another substance overworked and underpaid staffers use to get through the day.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,157

    TimS said:

    Latest YouGov:

    Westminster voting intention:

    LAB: 48% (-)
    CON: 23% (-1)
    LDEM: 8% (-1)
    REF: 9% (+1)
    GRN: 5% (-1)

    via
    @YouGov
    , 14 - 15 Dec

    Quite a few now with Green and LD on roughly 5% and 8% respectively, despite the volatility in others like REF. LLG 61% vs REFCON 32%.
    There has to be an element of the Libdem vote that will never ever vote Labour - I vote Libdem becuase I don’t recognise Conservatives as conservatism these days, and I would never vote Labour.
    Not even now they've made it clear they'll remove the private school subsidy?
  • ohnotnowohnotnow Posts: 3,790

    While use of cocaine may be widespread in certain sectors of society, this does not make it right.

    You might as well complain that certain sectors of society consume coffee, alcohol, or paracetemol - at this point, cocaine isn't some kind of illicit recreational vice, it's just another substance overworked and underpaid staffers use to get through the day.
    There was a piece in The Guardian a while back with someone who worked in a deep-fried chicken shop and the huge usage of cocaine (and more) by everyone at every level :

    https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2022/jun/25/cocaine-class-everyone-in-this-town-takes-drugs-all-the-time
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,664
    Ghedebrav said:

    Driver said:

    Ghedebrav said:

    kinabalu said:

    Well now.

    Some will sniff but for me that's crossing a line.
    I'd say we need a blow by blow account.
    I wonder what King Charlie makes of it.
    I suspect he might have a crack too.
    That one made me snort tbf.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,158
    algarkirk said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Bill Gates uses charitable causes to cover up his own personal malfeasance. It's not an unknown way of hiding in plain sight as a dick head or worse. Jimmy Savile did it too.

    If anyone is interested in that stuff, Gate’s ex-wife have some interesting reasons for the divorce.
    His friendship with Epstein was chief among the reasons. He's as bad as Prince Andrew but because he gives to the right causes people have decided to ignore it. It's another Jimmy Savile scandal waiting to be blown open.
    It fascinating how uninterested large portions of the fourth estate are in regards to just who were buddy buddy with Epstein and just what was the true backstory. He seemed to manage to transform from a minor conman pretending to be a teacher, to secondary figure in a wallstreet ponzi in the late 1980s, to this guy who was all these famous people's bestie.

    That's quite a leap of upward mobility.
    Yes. Which is why I have a sneaking sympathy with Prince Andrew, who, whilst a sleazy twat, has clearly been thrown to the wolves to satisfy the public, leaving Epstein's other friends to skulk away.

    I read an interesting quote of Voltaire's in the comments on John Redwood's blog the other day. To paraphrase - 'If you want to find out who rules you, just find out who you're not allowed to criticise.' The media is obviously encouraged to go ham on Randy Andy - less so on Bill Gates. And it's interesting to me that as a whole the Royal family seems less protected than it once was in this regard. They have always been criticised, but the sustained criticism and seeming determination on the part of the US elite to change the Royal household/power structures in its own image (see M&H) seems new.

    The comment was originally made in the context of the Bank of England. UK politicians are regularly ridiculed and hauled over the coals, but the bone-headed decisions of the Bank are treated like Holy writ.

    Who am I not allowed to criticise? In the strict sense no-one but:

    Nurses. Children. Mary Berry. David Attenborough. HM the late Queen. Reception class teachers. Those who raise awareness. Modern founders of charities. Armed forces charities. James O'Brien. Children's charities. The NHS as opposed to The Government/Dept of Health. Foodbanks. Warm hubs. Religions and their founders except Christianity. Self styled 'Community Leaders'. Scientists.

    All have a place in the pantheon.


    Ahem

    You've missed the big two:

    - Radiohead
    - the moderators
  • kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 4,945

    kyf_100 said:

    Well now.

    What an absolute non story!

    There will be traces of cocaine found in any venue after a party has been hosted that involves journalists, any kind of media types at all really, bankers, or really anyone who's rich and powerful. To be honest, you might as well say any party attended by middle-class city types under the age of 40.

    If I hosted a party for a bunch of rich people I'd be more shocked if there weren't traces of cocaine in the loo the day afterwards.
    There's the recreational factor, but a strong plurality of workers in Parliament, Whitehall and/or Downing Street will be using cocaine in any given week simply to give themselves the energy to get through the day.
    I lost count of the number of people who used to take it at my old job, for precisely that reason.

    Though the most fiendish bunch I ever encountered were chefs - while I understand that pretty much most of the hospitality trade in london is at it, if you want the good stuff, ask a chef.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,664
    rcs1000 said:

    algarkirk said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Bill Gates uses charitable causes to cover up his own personal malfeasance. It's not an unknown way of hiding in plain sight as a dick head or worse. Jimmy Savile did it too.

    If anyone is interested in that stuff, Gate’s ex-wife have some interesting reasons for the divorce.
    His friendship with Epstein was chief among the reasons. He's as bad as Prince Andrew but because he gives to the right causes people have decided to ignore it. It's another Jimmy Savile scandal waiting to be blown open.
    It fascinating how uninterested large portions of the fourth estate are in regards to just who were buddy buddy with Epstein and just what was the true backstory. He seemed to manage to transform from a minor conman pretending to be a teacher, to secondary figure in a wallstreet ponzi in the late 1980s, to this guy who was all these famous people's bestie.

    That's quite a leap of upward mobility.
    Yes. Which is why I have a sneaking sympathy with Prince Andrew, who, whilst a sleazy twat, has clearly been thrown to the wolves to satisfy the public, leaving Epstein's other friends to skulk away.

    I read an interesting quote of Voltaire's in the comments on John Redwood's blog the other day. To paraphrase - 'If you want to find out who rules you, just find out who you're not allowed to criticise.' The media is obviously encouraged to go ham on Randy Andy - less so on Bill Gates. And it's interesting to me that as a whole the Royal family seems less protected than it once was in this regard. They have always been criticised, but the sustained criticism and seeming determination on the part of the US elite to change the Royal household/power structures in its own image (see M&H) seems new.

    The comment was originally made in the context of the Bank of England. UK politicians are regularly ridiculed and hauled over the coals, but the bone-headed decisions of the Bank are treated like Holy writ.

    Who am I not allowed to criticise? In the strict sense no-one but:

    Nurses. Children. Mary Berry. David Attenborough. HM the late Queen. Reception class teachers. Those who raise awareness. Modern founders of charities. Armed forces charities. James O'Brien. Children's charities. The NHS as opposed to The Government/Dept of Health. Foodbanks. Warm hubs. Religions and their founders except Christianity. Self styled 'Community Leaders'. Scientists.

    All have a place in the pantheon.


    Ahem

    You've missed the big two:

    - Radiohead
    - the moderators
    P***apples on pizzas say Hi!
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,863
    kyf_100 said:

    Well now.

    What an absolute non story!

    There will be traces of cocaine found in any venue after a party has been hosted that involves journalists, any kind of media types at all really, bankers, or really anyone who's rich and powerful. To be honest, you might as well say any party attended by middle-class city types under the age of 40.

    If I hosted a party for a bunch of rich people I'd be more shocked if there weren't traces of cocaine in the loo the day afterwards.
    Nevertheless the government has decided that it is illegal. Hence it’s a story.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,507

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Bill Gates uses charitable causes to cover up his own personal malfeasance. It's not an unknown way of hiding in plain sight as a dick head or worse. Jimmy Savile did it too.

    If anyone is interested in that stuff, Gate’s ex-wife have some interesting reasons for the divorce.
    His friendship with Epstein was chief among the reasons. He's as bad as Prince Andrew but because he gives to the right causes people have decided to ignore it. It's another Jimmy Savile scandal waiting to be blown open.
    SBF clearly was following the same approach, but its all gone tits up....I imagine quite a lot of politicians are rather nervous about how close they have got to this con man and how much money it took for him to get that close.
    He must have seemed like a pretty straight kind of guy.

    image
    To be fair, he's the only one not holding a sex toy.
    Bills been holding his for the last 50years, waiting for the yams to come along.
    The yam is the power that be
    You can smell them as your walking down the street
    But don’t take it just from me,
    listen to Mordor Investments.

    https://www.mordorintelligence.com/industry-reports/yams-market

    I’ve started early on the gin 🍹
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,863
    edited December 2022

    While use of cocaine may be widespread in certain sectors of society, this does not make it right.

    Its not really certain sectors, its across the board. The focus of the political party angle is missing the wood for the trees, there is an epidemic of its use across society.
    Which either needs concerted action to stamp out, or maybe the government might be brave enough to have a thorough review of whether or not its policy on drugs is having a positive or counter-productive effect?

    What cannot be right is that the government maintains a zero tolerance policy - and the governing party merrily smears for political advantage any of its opponents who suggest looking at more mature and practical alternatives - while simultaneously many of the rich and powerful continue to indulge their habits.
  • IanB2 said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Well now.

    What an absolute non story!

    There will be traces of cocaine found in any venue after a party has been hosted that involves journalists, any kind of media types at all really, bankers, or really anyone who's rich and powerful. To be honest, you might as well say any party attended by middle-class city types under the age of 40.

    If I hosted a party for a bunch of rich people I'd be more shocked if there weren't traces of cocaine in the loo the day afterwards.
    Nevertheless the government has decided that it is illegal. Hence it’s a story.
    I’m sure people will go to jail just like they would if they were working class kids
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,072
    algarkirk said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Bill Gates uses charitable causes to cover up his own personal malfeasance. It's not an unknown way of hiding in plain sight as a dick head or worse. Jimmy Savile did it too.

    If anyone is interested in that stuff, Gate’s ex-wife have some interesting reasons for the divorce.
    His friendship with Epstein was chief among the reasons. He's as bad as Prince Andrew but because he gives to the right causes people have decided to ignore it. It's another Jimmy Savile scandal waiting to be blown open.
    It fascinating how uninterested large portions of the fourth estate are in regards to just who were buddy buddy with Epstein and just what was the true backstory. He seemed to manage to transform from a minor conman pretending to be a teacher, to secondary figure in a wallstreet ponzi in the late 1980s, to this guy who was all these famous people's bestie.

    That's quite a leap of upward mobility.
    Yes. Which is why I have a sneaking sympathy with Prince Andrew, who, whilst a sleazy twat, has clearly been thrown to the wolves to satisfy the public, leaving Epstein's other friends to skulk away.

    I read an interesting quote of Voltaire's in the comments on John Redwood's blog the other day. To paraphrase - 'If you want to find out who rules you, just find out who you're not allowed to criticise.' The media is obviously encouraged to go ham on Randy Andy - less so on Bill Gates. And it's interesting to me that as a whole the Royal family seems less protected than it once was in this regard. They have always been criticised, but the sustained criticism and seeming determination on the part of the US elite to change the Royal household/power structures in its own image (see M&H) seems new.

    The comment was originally made in the context of the Bank of England. UK politicians are regularly ridiculed and hauled over the coals, but the bone-headed decisions of the Bank are treated like Holy writ.

    Who am I not allowed to criticise? In the strict sense no-one but:

    Nurses. Children. Mary Berry. David Attenborough. HM the late Queen. Reception class teachers. Those who raise awareness. Modern founders of charities. Armed forces charities. James O'Brien. Children's charities. The NHS as opposed to The Government/Dept of Health. Foodbanks. Warm hubs. Religions and their founders except Christianity. Self styled 'Community Leaders'. Scientists.

    All have a place in the pantheon.

    Who is not allowing you ?
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,664

    While use of cocaine may be widespread in certain sectors of society, this does not make it right.

    Aside from the potential harm to users, the cocaine trade probably funds a good proportion of the illegal immigrant gangs people rightly get worked up about.

    I seem to recall there are some on here (no names) who are happy to rant against the state of the nation (including immigrant gangs) whilst bragging about their own illegal drug use that funds said gangs.
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 4,931
    rcs1000 said:

    algarkirk said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Bill Gates uses charitable causes to cover up his own personal malfeasance. It's not an unknown way of hiding in plain sight as a dick head or worse. Jimmy Savile did it too.

    If anyone is interested in that stuff, Gate’s ex-wife have some interesting reasons for the divorce.
    His friendship with Epstein was chief among the reasons. He's as bad as Prince Andrew but because he gives to the right causes people have decided to ignore it. It's another Jimmy Savile scandal waiting to be blown open.
    It fascinating how uninterested large portions of the fourth estate are in regards to just who were buddy buddy with Epstein and just what was the true backstory. He seemed to manage to transform from a minor conman pretending to be a teacher, to secondary figure in a wallstreet ponzi in the late 1980s, to this guy who was all these famous people's bestie.

    That's quite a leap of upward mobility.
    Yes. Which is why I have a sneaking sympathy with Prince Andrew, who, whilst a sleazy twat, has clearly been thrown to the wolves to satisfy the public, leaving Epstein's other friends to skulk away.

    I read an interesting quote of Voltaire's in the comments on John Redwood's blog the other day. To paraphrase - 'If you want to find out who rules you, just find out who you're not allowed to criticise.' The media is obviously encouraged to go ham on Randy Andy - less so on Bill Gates. And it's interesting to me that as a whole the Royal family seems less protected than it once was in this regard. They have always been criticised, but the sustained criticism and seeming determination on the part of the US elite to change the Royal household/power structures in its own image (see M&H) seems new.

    The comment was originally made in the context of the Bank of England. UK politicians are regularly ridiculed and hauled over the coals, but the bone-headed decisions of the Bank are treated like Holy writ.

    Who am I not allowed to criticise? In the strict sense no-one but:

    Nurses. Children. Mary Berry. David Attenborough. HM the late Queen. Reception class teachers. Those who raise awareness. Modern founders of charities. Armed forces charities. James O'Brien. Children's charities. The NHS as opposed to The Government/Dept of Health. Foodbanks. Warm hubs. Religions and their founders except Christianity. Self styled 'Community Leaders'. Scientists.

    All have a place in the pantheon.


    Ahem

    You've missed the big two:

    - Radiohead
    - the moderators
    I would add poppies and poppy wearers.
  • DJ41DJ41 Posts: 792
    edited December 2022

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Bill Gates uses charitable causes to cover up his own personal malfeasance. It's not an unknown way of hiding in plain sight as a dick head or worse. Jimmy Savile did it too.

    If anyone is interested in that stuff, Gate’s ex-wife have some interesting reasons for the divorce.
    His friendship with Epstein was chief among the reasons. He's as bad as Prince Andrew but because he gives to the right causes people have decided to ignore it. It's another Jimmy Savile scandal waiting to be blown open.
    It fascinating how uninterested large portions of the fourth estate are in regards to just who were buddy buddy with Epstein and just what was the true backstory. He seemed to manage to transform from a minor conman pretending to be a teacher, to secondary figure in a wallstreet ponzi in the late 1980s, to this guy who was all these famous people's bestie.

    That's quite a leap of upward mobility.
    Yes. Which is why I have a sneaking sympathy with Prince Andrew, who, whilst a sleazy twat, has clearly been thrown to the wolves to satisfy the public, leaving Epstein's other friends to skulk away.

    I read an interesting quote of Voltaire's in the comments on John Redwood's blog the other day. To paraphrase - 'If you want to find out who rules you, just find out who you're not allowed to criticise.'
    That's not from Voltaire. It's from Kevin Alfred Strom, the neo-Nazi.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,020
    edited December 2022
    ohnotnow said:

    While use of cocaine may be widespread in certain sectors of society, this does not make it right.

    You might as well complain that certain sectors of society consume coffee, alcohol, or paracetemol - at this point, cocaine isn't some kind of illicit recreational vice, it's just another substance overworked and underpaid staffers use to get through the day.
    There was a piece in The Guardian a while back with someone who worked in a deep-fried chicken shop and the huge usage of cocaine (and more) by everyone at every level :

    https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2022/jun/25/cocaine-class-everyone-in-this-town-takes-drugs-all-the-time
    "statistics point to cocaine being classless now. In 2019, a Home Office drug review found that 42% of users were in managerial roles, 35% were manual workers, and 3% were unemployed. And though the government still regards it as a London thing, figures from the rest of the country would belie this. In 2020, Middlesbrough had the highest rate of hospital admissions for poisoning by drug misuse (followed by the Wirral, St Helens and Knowsley), while the north-east had the highest number of cocaine-related deaths."
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,664

    rcs1000 said:

    algarkirk said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Bill Gates uses charitable causes to cover up his own personal malfeasance. It's not an unknown way of hiding in plain sight as a dick head or worse. Jimmy Savile did it too.

    If anyone is interested in that stuff, Gate’s ex-wife have some interesting reasons for the divorce.
    His friendship with Epstein was chief among the reasons. He's as bad as Prince Andrew but because he gives to the right causes people have decided to ignore it. It's another Jimmy Savile scandal waiting to be blown open.
    It fascinating how uninterested large portions of the fourth estate are in regards to just who were buddy buddy with Epstein and just what was the true backstory. He seemed to manage to transform from a minor conman pretending to be a teacher, to secondary figure in a wallstreet ponzi in the late 1980s, to this guy who was all these famous people's bestie.

    That's quite a leap of upward mobility.
    Yes. Which is why I have a sneaking sympathy with Prince Andrew, who, whilst a sleazy twat, has clearly been thrown to the wolves to satisfy the public, leaving Epstein's other friends to skulk away.

    I read an interesting quote of Voltaire's in the comments on John Redwood's blog the other day. To paraphrase - 'If you want to find out who rules you, just find out who you're not allowed to criticise.' The media is obviously encouraged to go ham on Randy Andy - less so on Bill Gates. And it's interesting to me that as a whole the Royal family seems less protected than it once was in this regard. They have always been criticised, but the sustained criticism and seeming determination on the part of the US elite to change the Royal household/power structures in its own image (see M&H) seems new.

    The comment was originally made in the context of the Bank of England. UK politicians are regularly ridiculed and hauled over the coals, but the bone-headed decisions of the Bank are treated like Holy writ.

    Who am I not allowed to criticise? In the strict sense no-one but:

    Nurses. Children. Mary Berry. David Attenborough. HM the late Queen. Reception class teachers. Those who raise awareness. Modern founders of charities. Armed forces charities. James O'Brien. Children's charities. The NHS as opposed to The Government/Dept of Health. Foodbanks. Warm hubs. Religions and their founders except Christianity. Self styled 'Community Leaders'. Scientists.

    All have a place in the pantheon.


    Ahem

    You've missed the big two:

    - Radiohead
    - the moderators
    I would add poppies and poppy wearers.
    Nah, it's fine to rail against poppy-fascism on PB - plenty of examples.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,507
    kinabalu said:

    TimS said:

    Latest YouGov:

    Westminster voting intention:

    LAB: 48% (-)
    CON: 23% (-1)
    LDEM: 8% (-1)
    REF: 9% (+1)
    GRN: 5% (-1)

    via
    @YouGov
    , 14 - 15 Dec

    Quite a few now with Green and LD on roughly 5% and 8% respectively, despite the volatility in others like REF. LLG 61% vs REFCON 32%.
    There has to be an element of the Libdem vote that will never ever vote Labour - I vote Libdem becuase I don’t recognise Conservatives as conservatism these days, and I would never vote Labour.
    Not even now they've made it clear they'll remove the private school subsidy?
    “Labour would end tax breaks for private schools and invest in thousands more teachers, more mental health support in every school and professional careers advice to ensure young people are ready for work and ready for life”

    Is this it, is gimmicks like this all they got?

    I hate this gimmicky politics, and Labour leading the field in shit like this now Boris is out the game - this policy stinks like any magic money tree promise, because even at Labours best estimate it nets treasury £1.7bn, the current education budget is £100bn. And what about the obvious inherent vice of it not getting in near 1.7bn but creates new government costs instead, as children switch to state schooling? At the moment is the scenario of the wealthy subsidising education with their own money, rather than dumping those further costs on the state.

    Economically illiterate Labour think we are stupid. Where’s the real growth making, education and health funding policies from them?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,072
    rcs1000 said:

    algarkirk said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Bill Gates uses charitable causes to cover up his own personal malfeasance. It's not an unknown way of hiding in plain sight as a dick head or worse. Jimmy Savile did it too.

    If anyone is interested in that stuff, Gate’s ex-wife have some interesting reasons for the divorce.
    His friendship with Epstein was chief among the reasons. He's as bad as Prince Andrew but because he gives to the right causes people have decided to ignore it. It's another Jimmy Savile scandal waiting to be blown open.
    It fascinating how uninterested large portions of the fourth estate are in regards to just who were buddy buddy with Epstein and just what was the true backstory. He seemed to manage to transform from a minor conman pretending to be a teacher, to secondary figure in a wallstreet ponzi in the late 1980s, to this guy who was all these famous people's bestie.

    That's quite a leap of upward mobility.
    Yes. Which is why I have a sneaking sympathy with Prince Andrew, who, whilst a sleazy twat, has clearly been thrown to the wolves to satisfy the public, leaving Epstein's other friends to skulk away.

    I read an interesting quote of Voltaire's in the comments on John Redwood's blog the other day. To paraphrase - 'If you want to find out who rules you, just find out who you're not allowed to criticise.' The media is obviously encouraged to go ham on Randy Andy - less so on Bill Gates. And it's interesting to me that as a whole the Royal family seems less protected than it once was in this regard. They have always been criticised, but the sustained criticism and seeming determination on the part of the US elite to change the Royal household/power structures in its own image (see M&H) seems new.

    The comment was originally made in the context of the Bank of England. UK politicians are regularly ridiculed and hauled over the coals, but the bone-headed decisions of the Bank are treated like Holy writ.

    Who am I not allowed to criticise? In the strict sense no-one but:

    Nurses. Children. Mary Berry. David Attenborough. HM the late Queen. Reception class teachers. Those who raise awareness. Modern founders of charities. Armed forces charities. James O'Brien. Children's charities. The NHS as opposed to The Government/Dept of Health. Foodbanks. Warm hubs. Religions and their founders except Christianity. Self styled 'Community Leaders'. Scientists.

    All have a place in the pantheon.


    Ahem

    You've missed the big two:

    - Radiohead
    - the moderators
    No, those would actually be true.
  • kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 4,945
    edited December 2022
    IanB2 said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Well now.

    What an absolute non story!

    There will be traces of cocaine found in any venue after a party has been hosted that involves journalists, any kind of media types at all really, bankers, or really anyone who's rich and powerful. To be honest, you might as well say any party attended by middle-class city types under the age of 40.

    If I hosted a party for a bunch of rich people I'd be more shocked if there weren't traces of cocaine in the loo the day afterwards.
    Nevertheless the government has decided that it is illegal. Hence it’s a story.
    As others have said, it's ingrained in contemporary society - that's the story, not "oooh, someone close to Liz Truss has been on the toot"

    If Liz Truss invited a cross section of 20 random people from the UK to a party, I'd more or less guarantee you there would be traces of cocaine in the venue the next day. If not from the guests, then almost certainly from the catering staff.

    Short of photographic evidence of something egregious e.g. Gove whipping out his snuff kit and racking them up while giving a thumbs up to the camera, it's a non story.

    "People at parties take cocaine shocker!" The whole point of news is that it's supposed to be, er, news.

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,103
    edited December 2022

    kyf_100 said:

    Well now.

    What an absolute non story!

    There will be traces of cocaine found in any venue after a party has been hosted that involves journalists, any kind of media types at all really, bankers, or really anyone who's rich and powerful. To be honest, you might as well say any party attended by middle-class city types under the age of 40.

    If I hosted a party for a bunch of rich people I'd be more shocked if there weren't traces of cocaine in the loo the day afterwards.
    Coke use is now far wider use than rich middle classes at their nice dinner parties, go to any pub on a Friday / Saturday night, plenty of people will be off their tits on it. The price of the stuff has become incredibly cheap due in no small part to the Albanian Mafia taking control and cutting out the middle men. We were talking yesterday how football violence has been on the rise and a lot of that has been put down to widespread coke use.
    They seem an up and coming mafia.

    Saggers said: “They have shown that you don’t have to be greedy to dominate drug markets. They’ve gone down the route of sustainable prices, good quality.”

    Mohammed Qasim, a research fellow at Leeds Beckett University who studys drug dealers, described the Albanian business approach as “fantastic”, adding: “If they were on Dragon’s Den with this model, all the dragons would be giving them money.”


    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jan/13/kings-of-cocaine-albanian-mafia-uk-drugs-crime
  • CorrectHorseBattery3CorrectHorseBattery3 Posts: 2,757
    edited December 2022
    We are very happy to attack illegal immigrants and the gangs that support this stuff and then these same people and politicians go and buy some coke for a Saturday night party
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,664
    -7.7°C here last night, it's not got above freezing all day.

    The hot and cold pipes to our en-suite froze last night (they usually do if it gets below -6) but for the first time ever they have not defrosted during the day :-(

    Plastic pipes so the have never spilt (they will one day though). Must get this properly sorted instead of forgetting about it until the next time.
  • kinabalu said:

    TimS said:

    Latest YouGov:

    Westminster voting intention:

    LAB: 48% (-)
    CON: 23% (-1)
    LDEM: 8% (-1)
    REF: 9% (+1)
    GRN: 5% (-1)

    via
    @YouGov
    , 14 - 15 Dec

    Quite a few now with Green and LD on roughly 5% and 8% respectively, despite the volatility in others like REF. LLG 61% vs REFCON 32%.
    There has to be an element of the Libdem vote that will never ever vote Labour - I vote Libdem becuase I don’t recognise Conservatives as conservatism these days, and I would never vote Labour.
    Not even now they've made it clear they'll remove the private school subsidy?
    “Labour would end tax breaks for private schools and invest in thousands more teachers, more mental health support in every school and professional careers advice to ensure young people are ready for work and ready for life”

    Is this it, is gimmicks like this all they got?

    I hate this gimmicky politics, and Labour leading the field in shit like this now Boris is out the game - this policy stinks like any magic money tree promise, because even at Labours best estimate it nets treasury £1.7bn, the current education budget is £100bn. And what about the obvious inherent vice of it not getting in near 1.7bn but creates new government costs instead, as children switch to state schooling? At the moment is the scenario of the wealthy subsidising education with their own money, rather than dumping those further costs on the state.

    Economically illiterate Labour think we are stupid. Where’s the real growth making, education and health funding policies from them?
    So you’re back to being a Tory then, no worries
This discussion has been closed.