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.
Party at the residence of an important government official involved cocaine is still a news story, even if in reality we know it probably happens all the time. Context matters.
Dog bites man would still be a news story if it involved biting the king in the groin, for example.
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.
...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.”
I can believe that some of them might be users, but all ?
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 :
I've read that, it's an excellent albeit depressing article.
Personally, I've never touched drugs other than beer, but the % of staffers I know who use drugs to self medicate is growing higher every year; the pandemic was definitely responsible for a spike but it's not slowed down since then.
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.”
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.”
They aren't up and coming, they are the main men importing to Europe. They are the ones that organised the supply routes from South America (there are Albanians living there who go direct to source), the Moroccans do the unloading in Holland / Belgium, the Italians do the money laundering. Until recently, the Irish where still high up in the distribution into the UK, but obviously lots of arrests and apparently they don't have any credit with the Albanians now, so can't get product, so I presume UK Albanians will totally take over (although I believe the Albanian doing supply don't see eye to eye with the UK based Albanians gangs as they see them as careless and unprofessional, hence why they careful to put people in-between).
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.”
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.”
They aren't up and coming, they are the main men importing to Europe. They are the ones that organised the supply routes from South America (there are Albanians living there who go direct to source), the Moroccans do the unloading in Holland / Belgium, the Italians do the money laundering. Until recently, the Irish where still high up in the distribution into the UK, but obviously lots of arrests and apparently they don't have any credit with the Albanians now, so can't get product, so I presume UK Albanians will totally take over.
Legalise, control and tax the supply. Big revenue earner for HMG.
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
Yep - its a huge hypocrisy. Society would be improved if we gave up on the war against drugs (apart from alcohol of course - that ones fine and no-on ever dies or ruins their lives with booze, right?) and legalized, supplied and taxed coke, E, whatever. Educate the masses as to the genuine risks, regulate supply and get on with it.
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.”
They aren't up and coming, they are the main men importing to Europe. They are the ones that organised the supply routes from South America (there are Albanians living there who go direct to source), the Moroccans do the unloading in Holland / Belgium, the Italians do the money laundering. Until recently, the Irish where still high up in the distribution into the UK, but obviously lots of arrests and apparently they don't have any credit with the Albanians now, so can't get product, so I presume UK Albanians will totally take over.
Legalise, control and tax the supply. Big revenue earner for HMG.
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.”
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.
Sure it could be any of a large number of politicians, permanent secretaries, lawyers, bankers, parliamentary figures, members of the royal family, or what have you, but you are missing the point. Someone's got it in for someone, may perhaps be threatening them, or sending a message to someone else, or whatever. What contracts or possible contracts may be involved? I dunno. Britain has no equivalent of Daphne Caruana Galizia.
Once upon a time a large part of the House of Commons was stood down in an expenses scandal. Thanks, Torygraph! MPs on the fiddle - who'd have believed it? I mean being allowed to claim for sh*t on expenses and then claiming an unfair amount! Shocking! OK it's funny, but that would be the wrong response. Perhaps next time there's a clearout it will be part of Hootergate?
"Political allies of Liz Truss", huh?
"A member of staff claimed they tested the powder using a swab which changes colour when it comes into contact with cocaine, and it indicated the drug was present."
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
Yep - its a huge hypocrisy. Society would be improved if we gave up on the war against drugs (apart from alcohol of course - that ones fine and no-on ever dies or ruins their lives with booze, right?) and legalized, supplied and taxed coke, E, whatever. Educate the masses as to the genuine risks, regulate supply and get on with it.
Society would be improved if we solved the issues that encourage people to self medicate with addictive substances. Making it easier for people to access addictive substances while society continues to deteriorate will just make the decline worse.
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.”
They aren't up and coming, they are the main men importing to Europe. They are the ones that organised the supply routes from South America (there are Albanians living there who go direct to source), the Moroccans do the unloading in Holland / Belgium, the Italians do the money laundering. Until recently, the Irish where still high up in the distribution into the UK, but obviously lots of arrests and apparently they don't have any credit with the Albanians now, so can't get product, so I presume UK Albanians will totally take over.
Legalise, control and tax the supply. Big revenue earner for HMG.
I am genuinely surprised Jezza didn't propose that at least for Cannabis at the last general election.
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.
Party at the residence of an important government official involved cocaine is still a news story, even if in reality we know it probably happens all the time. Context matters.
Dog bites man would still be a news story if it involved biting the king in the groin, for example.
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.
So perhaps the government might adopt a more appropriate policy on the matter?
If it wishes to continue posturing with its supposed zero-tolerance, and continue to seek political advantage from attacking those politicians calling for a more sensible, mature, constructive and achievable policy - then surely it deserves all it gets if illegal activity is detected inside government circles? Cf. Banning parties and then having parties.
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.
So perhaps the government might adopt a more appropriate policy on the matter?
If it wishes to continue posturing with its supposed zero-tolerance, and continue to seek political advantage from attacking those politicians calling for a more sensible, mature, constructive and achievable policy - then surely it deserves all it gets if illegal activity is detected inside government circles? Cf. Banning parties and then having parties.
No because if you’re a politician or rich drugs aren’t illegal. Only if you’re poor
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.
Cocaine usually consumed in the form of crack has been rife in poor areas for decades.
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.”
They aren't up and coming, they are the main men importing to Europe. They are the ones that organised the supply routes from South America (there are Albanians living there who go direct to source), the Moroccans do the unloading in Holland / Belgium, the Italians do the money laundering. Until recently, the Irish where still high up in the distribution into the UK, but obviously lots of arrests and apparently they don't have any credit with the Albanians now, so can't get product, so I presume UK Albanians will totally take over.
Legalise, control and tax the supply. Big revenue earner for HMG.
I am genuinely surprised Jezza didn't propose that at least for Cannabis at the last general election.
I do wonder at what point for weed especially we will legalise. It's mainstream in north america, and not just there.
While not at the same scale as coke, it's still a big earner for a lot of criminals (and this is the perfect weather to find them - spot the roofs without frost...)
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.”
They aren't up and coming, they are the main men importing to Europe. They are the ones that organised the supply routes from South America (there are Albanians living there who go direct to source), the Moroccans do the unloading in Holland / Belgium, the Italians do the money laundering. Until recently, the Irish where still high up in the distribution into the UK, but obviously lots of arrests and apparently they don't have any credit with the Albanians now, so can't get product, so I presume UK Albanians will totally take over.
Legalise, control and tax the supply. Big revenue earner for HMG.
I am genuinely surprised Jezza didn't propose that at least for Cannabis at the last general election.
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.”
"This is the real difference between working- and middle-class cocaine users, as far as I can see. The middle classes have a greater margin for error. They don’t have to submit to drug tests at work. Their lives are set up in such a way that they can keep their drug use private. Until they choose not to. Then they can monetise their mistakes, expurgating sin through confession, because they also dominate the arts (and media)..."
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.”
They aren't up and coming, they are the main men importing to Europe. They are the ones that organised the supply routes from South America (there are Albanians living there who go direct to source), the Moroccans do the unloading in Holland / Belgium, the Italians do the money laundering. Until recently, the Irish where still high up in the distribution into the UK, but obviously lots of arrests and apparently they don't have any credit with the Albanians now, so can't get product, so I presume UK Albanians will totally take over.
Legalise, control and tax the supply. Big revenue earner for HMG.
I am genuinely surprised Jezza didn't propose that at least for Cannabis at the last general election.
Far too puritan for that, surely?
His son runs (or rather tried to run) a business in that sector.
Virginia Dems squeeze House special election into one breakneck week
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/12/16/virginia-dems-house-primary-election-00074270 ...State Sens. Jennifer McClellan and Joe Morrissey are among the Democrats running for Virginia’s vacant 4th District, previously held by the late Democratic Rep. Don McEachin, who died on Nov. 28, just weeks after winning reelection. ...The voters who are able to turn out on an unusual December Tuesday have a distinct choice before them. Morrissey has decades of experience in Virginia politics, as well as a litany of scandals. He’s thrown punches in the courtroom. He’s been disbarred twice. He resigned from the House of Delegates in 2014 after being convicted of contributing to the delinquency of a minor — a 17-year-old receptionist at his law firm, whom he later married as an adult and now has a family with. He even won the special election to fill his state House seat as an independent while in jail. ...McClellan, who would be the first Black woman from Virginia in Congress if elected, has quickly raised over $100,000 and raked in dozens of endorsements, including all eight members of the Virginia Democratic congressional delegation. But the fast and unpredictable nature of the firehouse primary leaves room for surprise...\
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.
Cocaine usually consumed in the form of crack has been rife in poor areas for decades.
Good point, that was because pure coke in the 80/90s was on the face of it too expensive and thus crack was invented to produce a cheaper bigger more addiction high. Coke is now extremely cheap so even minimum wage earners can afford it.
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.
Cocaine usually consumed in the form of crack has been rife in poor areas for decades.
My first job was picking & packing in a warehouse (legal pharmaceuticals, funnily enough) in the late nineties. I was shocked, as an impressionable teen, at how much of my colleagues' pay packets went up their noses. So I dunno if it's changed that much since then. The 'posh drug' stereotype has been wrong for a long time.
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.
So perhaps the government might adopt a more appropriate policy on the matter?
If it wishes to continue posturing with its supposed zero-tolerance, and continue to seek political advantage from attacking those politicians calling for a more sensible, mature, constructive and achievable policy - then surely it deserves all it gets if illegal activity is detected inside government circles? Cf. Banning parties and then having parties.
I agree with you that the government should take a more appropriate stance on the matter. I'd legalise and tax the whole lot to take it out of the hands of the gangs, personally.
However, the idea that everyone "in government circles" can be policed for drugs is absurd. It's simply endemic in society at this point, not exclusive to government circles.
Perhaps the loos at the Guardian offices should be swabbed and the paper shut down every time drugs are found. Might put an end to the ridiculous non-stories, at least.
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.
So perhaps the government might adopt a more appropriate policy on the matter?
If it wishes to continue posturing with its supposed zero-tolerance, and continue to seek political advantage from attacking those politicians calling for a more sensible, mature, constructive and achievable policy - then surely it deserves all it gets if illegal activity is detected inside government circles? Cf. Banning parties and then having parties.
I agree with you that the government should take a more appropriate stance on the matter. I'd legalise and tax the whole lot to take it out of the hands of the gangs, personally.
However, the idea that everyone "in government circles" can be policed for drugs is absurd. It's simply endemic in society at this point, not exclusive to government circles.
Perhaps the loos at the Guardian offices should be swabbed and the paper shut down every time drugs are found. Might put an end to the ridiculous non-stories, at least.
It would take more than just legalisation to take it out of the hands of the gangs. You'd need to have an alternative supply chain and superior offering to drive them out of business.
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.
So perhaps the government might adopt a more appropriate policy on the matter?
If it wishes to continue posturing with its supposed zero-tolerance, and continue to seek political advantage from attacking those politicians calling for a more sensible, mature, constructive and achievable policy - then surely it deserves all it gets if illegal activity is detected inside government circles? Cf. Banning parties and then having parties.
I agree with you that the government should take a more appropriate stance on the matter. I'd legalise and tax the whole lot to take it out of the hands of the gangs, personally.
However, the idea that everyone "in government circles" can be policed for drugs is absurd. It's simply endemic in society at this point, not exclusive to government circles.
Perhaps the loos at the Guardian offices should be swabbed and the paper shut down every time drugs are found. Might put an end to the ridiculous non-stories, at least.
Yes, but as with parties during the covid lockdown, those responsible for imposing draconian restrictions on the rest of us really are obliged to set an example when it comes to following their own rules. Otherwise we might just all go and live in Russia.
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.
So perhaps the government might adopt a more appropriate policy on the matter?
If it wishes to continue posturing with its supposed zero-tolerance, and continue to seek political advantage from attacking those politicians calling for a more sensible, mature, constructive and achievable policy - then surely it deserves all it gets if illegal activity is detected inside government circles? Cf. Banning parties and then having parties.
I agree with you that the government should take a more appropriate stance on the matter. I'd legalise and tax the whole lot to take it out of the hands of the gangs, personally.
However, the idea that everyone "in government circles" can be policed for drugs is absurd. It's simply endemic in society at this point, not exclusive to government circles.
Perhaps the loos at the Guardian offices should be swabbed and the paper shut down every time drugs are found. Might put an end to the ridiculous non-stories, at least.
It would take more than just legalisation to take it out of the hands of the gangs. You'd need to have an alternative supply chain and superior offering to drive them out of business.
Legalisation in the US hasn't stopped all the illegal production. The Mexican cartel have now moved loads of people in California growing the stuff illegally because its a very good place to grow it, now with the knowledge that in reality there aren't going to be any real repercussions for doing so.
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.
So perhaps the government might adopt a more appropriate policy on the matter?
If it wishes to continue posturing with its supposed zero-tolerance, and continue to seek political advantage from attacking those politicians calling for a more sensible, mature, constructive and achievable policy - then surely it deserves all it gets if illegal activity is detected inside government circles? Cf. Banning parties and then having parties.
I agree with you that the government should take a more appropriate stance on the matter. I'd legalise and tax the whole lot to take it out of the hands of the gangs, personally.
However, the idea that everyone "in government circles" can be policed for drugs is absurd. It's simply endemic in society at this point, not exclusive to government circles.
Perhaps the loos at the Guardian offices should be swabbed and the paper shut down every time drugs are found. Might put an end to the ridiculous non-stories, at least.
Is it *actually* endemic? I personally don't know anyone who uses it (for all that's worth, obvs). I'm not sure I'd call alcohol 'endemic'; there are great swathes of society that don't drink,
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.
Cocaine usually consumed in the form of crack has been rife in poor areas for decades.
My first job was picking & packing in a warehouse (legal pharmaceuticals, funnily enough) in the late nineties. I was shocked, as an impressionable teen, at how much of my colleagues' pay packets went up their noses. So I dunno if it's changed that much since then. The 'posh drug' stereotype has been wrong for a long time.
I worked 40 years in financial services, most recently in central London, and I never saw any drug-taking at all.
I have no doubt it went on but I never noticed it at all. If ever I was involved in a crime scene I suspect I'd be a lousy witness.
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.
Cocaine usually consumed in the form of crack has been rife in poor areas for decades.
My first job was picking & packing in a warehouse (legal pharmaceuticals, funnily enough) in the late nineties. I was shocked, as an impressionable teen, at how much of my colleagues' pay packets went up their noses. So I dunno if it's changed that much since then. The 'posh drug' stereotype has been wrong for a long time.
I worked 40 years in financial services, most recently in central London, and I never saw any drug-taking at all.
I have no doubt it went on but I never noticed it at all. If ever I was involved in a crime scene I suspect I'd be a lousy witness.
You never experience your colleagues desire to keep visiting the bogs and coming back well refreshed, perhaps with quite a sniffle?
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.
So perhaps the government might adopt a more appropriate policy on the matter?
If it wishes to continue posturing with its supposed zero-tolerance, and continue to seek political advantage from attacking those politicians calling for a more sensible, mature, constructive and achievable policy - then surely it deserves all it gets if illegal activity is detected inside government circles? Cf. Banning parties and then having parties.
I agree with you that the government should take a more appropriate stance on the matter. I'd legalise and tax the whole lot to take it out of the hands of the gangs, personally.
However, the idea that everyone "in government circles" can be policed for drugs is absurd. It's simply endemic in society at this point, not exclusive to government circles.
Perhaps the loos at the Guardian offices should be swabbed and the paper shut down every time drugs are found. Might put an end to the ridiculous non-stories, at least.
Yes, but as with parties during the covid lockdown, those responsible for imposing draconian restrictions on the rest of us really are obliged to set an example when it comes to following their own rules. Otherwise we might just all go and live in Russia.
So what do you suggest? Drug testing everyone who attends such parties, including the staff (as I say, hospitality is rife with it)? How far down the line (er, no pun intended) do you go? Junior staffers? Campaign donors? Secretaries? Researchers at think tanks? All people who move in government circles. Are they really setting the rules?
Mandatory piss testing for everyone even remotely connected to government sounds a bit draconian so yes, we might as well all go and live in Russia, if that's your solution to the problem.
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
Just bring Tough on stupid policies, and tough on the causes of stupid policies.
All the PB posts so far on this policy Announcement have missed the point - the main inherent vice here is it doesn’t bring in the promised money, and all those promised goodies. that is the best attack on it.
It’s illiterate gimmick because if meagre extra £1.7bn is found, but can’t be as it needs those who can’t pay still paying - it doesn’t deliver “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” it just get swallowed by the debt schools in already barely staying afloat keeping the lights and heating on.
Do you see this point about why that Labour policy announcement needs us to be excruciatingly stupid to miss the fact this ain’t extra money riding to the rescue? I suspect it’s nothing more than a dead cat thrown on table. Chaff. A sop to the left, like Blair’s awful fox hunting ban was. It’s certainly not a serious funding stream for a state sector badly in need of one.
More grist to the elbows of those pointing out, an unserious Labour Party are badly blowing this opportunity with silly gimmicks like that one.
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.
Not many people end up dead because a condom full of coffee beans has ruptured in their gut.
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.
When you say "plurality", what exactly do you mean?
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.
Not many people end up dead because a condom full of coffee beans has ruptured in their gut.
I don't think very much coke is smuggled that way anymore. Its all via container ships to the big ports of Europe mixed in with every day items, where corrupt port workers ensure its safe passage into the distribution networks across Europe.
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?
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.
So perhaps the government might adopt a more appropriate policy on the matter?
If it wishes to continue posturing with its supposed zero-tolerance, and continue to seek political advantage from attacking those politicians calling for a more sensible, mature, constructive and achievable policy - then surely it deserves all it gets if illegal activity is detected inside government circles? Cf. Banning parties and then having parties.
I agree with you that the government should take a more appropriate stance on the matter. I'd legalise and tax the whole lot to take it out of the hands of the gangs, personally.
However, the idea that everyone "in government circles" can be policed for drugs is absurd. It's simply endemic in society at this point, not exclusive to government circles.
Perhaps the loos at the Guardian offices should be swabbed and the paper shut down every time drugs are found. Might put an end to the ridiculous non-stories, at least.
Is it *actually* endemic? I personally don't know anyone who uses it (for all that's worth, obvs). I'm not sure I'd call alcohol 'endemic'; there are great swathes of society that don't drink,
According to the ONS, 3.4% of those aged 16-59 took class As last year, a figure rising to 7.4% for the under 25s.
Is it everywhere all of the time? No. But if you extrapolate from the above that approximately 1 in 20 under 40s are users of class A drugs, then I'd suggest that finding cocaine residue the next day after any given party is not particularly surprising or noteworthy.
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.
So perhaps the government might adopt a more appropriate policy on the matter?
If it wishes to continue posturing with its supposed zero-tolerance, and continue to seek political advantage from attacking those politicians calling for a more sensible, mature, constructive and achievable policy - then surely it deserves all it gets if illegal activity is detected inside government circles? Cf. Banning parties and then having parties.
I agree with you that the government should take a more appropriate stance on the matter. I'd legalise and tax the whole lot to take it out of the hands of the gangs, personally.
However, the idea that everyone "in government circles" can be policed for drugs is absurd. It's simply endemic in society at this point, not exclusive to government circles.
Perhaps the loos at the Guardian offices should be swabbed and the paper shut down every time drugs are found. Might put an end to the ridiculous non-stories, at least.
Yes, but as with parties during the covid lockdown, those responsible for imposing draconian restrictions on the rest of us really are obliged to set an example when it comes to following their own rules. Otherwise we might just all go and live in Russia.
So what do you suggest? Drug testing everyone who attends such parties, including the staff (as I say, hospitality is rife with it)? How far down the line (er, no pun intended) do you go? Junior staffers? Campaign donors? Secretaries? Researchers at think tanks? All people who move in government circles. Are they really setting the rules?
Mandatory piss testing for everyone even remotely connected to government sounds a bit draconian so yes, we might as well all go and live in Russia, if that's your solution to the problem.
Sometimes people don't have a ready made solution to a problem, but despite what politicians would have us believe that doesn't automatically mean the current approach, whatever it is, is not a problem. Seeking to do something, without specifics, is in fact sometimes the right attitude, even if more work is needed on a plan, because getting people to accept the problem - such a disparity of experience of using drugs - is a necessary first step.
As it stands it seems doubtful the authorities give two shits, and changing that attitude is needed, even if means diverting them from low hanging fruit measures like announcing newer, tougher sentences or something.
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.
Cocaine usually consumed in the form of crack has been rife in poor areas for decades.
My first job was picking & packing in a warehouse (legal pharmaceuticals, funnily enough) in the late nineties. I was shocked, as an impressionable teen, at how much of my colleagues' pay packets went up their noses. So I dunno if it's changed that much since then. The 'posh drug' stereotype has been wrong for a long time.
I worked 40 years in financial services, most recently in central London, and I never saw any drug-taking at all.
I have no doubt it went on but I never noticed it at all. If ever I was involved in a crime scene I suspect I'd be a lousy witness.
You never experience your colleagues desire to keep visiting the bogs and coming back well refreshed, perhaps with quite a sniffle?
I probably did experience it but didn't twig tbf. Like I say, I am sure it went on.
Then again I did a weekly commute, most midweek evenings I'd be out with work colleagues in pubs, bars and restaurants and I still never saw anything. Says more about my poor observation skills than their piety, I suspect.
I did see lots of erratic behaviour but I just put that down to some of them being complete tossers.
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.
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.
The cynic in me thinks this was FIFA's plan all along. Clubs said to FIFA that they would not countenance a World Cup where the finalists play more than seven games. So FIFA came up with this format knowing that everyone would say that's rubbish, we need to keep groups of four. And before you know it, FIFA will be saying to clubs, "there is no alternative, we need an eighth game."
Of course, the obvious solution is to go straight to the last 16 from 12 groups of four with group winners and the best four runners up progressing from the groups. But that would be far too sensible.
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.
Not many people end up dead because a condom full of coffee beans has ruptured in their gut.
You shouldn't mocha those poor sods running drugs.
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.
When you say "plurality", what exactly do you mean?
A "strong plurality", no less.
Perhaps he's using 'real polling'.
Trump blasts polling that shows DeSantis surging: ‘Leading by a lot’ in ‘REAL POLLING’
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/3777889-trump-blasts-polling-that-shows-desantis-surging-leading-by-a-lot-in-real-polling/ Former President Trump, who has already entered the race for the White House in 2024, on Thursday took to Truth Social to dispute recent polling showing Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R), who has widely been floated as a possible presidential contender, outperforming the former president in hypothetical primary match-ups. In his post, Trump showed a poll that he said was conducted by polling firm McLaughlin & Associates, which previously worked with Trump’s 2020 campaign, showing him at 58 percent compared to DeSantis at 36 percent when respondents were asked whom they would choose in a 2024 GOP presidential primary. “This is the McLaughlin & Associates POLL that just came out and which got it right in 2016 & 2020,” Trump said, further adding “unlike The WSJ, NBC Fake News, ABC Fake News, Fake Polling FOX NEWS, the dying and very sickly USA Today, and most others in the LameStream Media.” “In other words, it is REAL POLLING. As you can see, we are leading by a lot, despite the never ending Communist (Democrat) WEAPONIZED ATTACKS on me and the GREAT PATRIOTS OF MAGA. More to come!!!”...
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.
Cocaine usually consumed in the form of crack has been rife in poor areas for decades.
My first job was picking & packing in a warehouse (legal pharmaceuticals, funnily enough) in the late nineties. I was shocked, as an impressionable teen, at how much of my colleagues' pay packets went up their noses. So I dunno if it's changed that much since then. The 'posh drug' stereotype has been wrong for a long time.
I worked 40 years in financial services, most recently in central London, and I never saw any drug-taking at all.
I have no doubt it went on but I never noticed it at all. If ever I was involved in a crime scene I suspect I'd be a lousy witness.
I think a lot of people have anxiety about finding themselves needing to report something criminal, and realising their recollections are crap. "So you claim the person who robbed you was between 5 and 6 ft tall, white, possibly mixed race, or black, and between 30 and 130 years old? Why don't come in and we can have a longer talk?"
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 :
Grim reading, but a chicken shop on The Wirral isn't that typical. It's not even that typical of The Wirral (I'm guessing it's Ellesmere Port but I might be wrong). The Graun like to drop a bit of poverty safari porn every now and again. Winds me up a bit tbh.
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.
Not many people end up dead because a condom full of coffee beans has ruptured in their gut.
You shouldn't mocha those poor sods running drugs.
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.
Oh! Well it's an excellent quote, and very truthful - good for the neo-Nazi.
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.
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.
The cynic in me thinks this was FIFA's plan all along. Clubs said to FIFA that they would not countenance a World Cup where the finalists play more than seven games. So FIFA came up with this format knowing that everyone would say that's rubbish, we need to keep groups of four. And before you know it, FIFA will be saying to clubs, "there is no alternative, we need an eighth game."
Of course, the obvious solution is to go straight to the last 16 from 12 groups of four with group winners and the best four runners up progressing from the groups. But that would be far too sensible.
FIFA isn't going to consider a group format where only group winners are guaranteed to qualify - especially in four team groups. Too much chance of groups of death whittling out the big teams too early.
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.
Cocaine usually consumed in the form of crack has been rife in poor areas for decades.
My first job was picking & packing in a warehouse (legal pharmaceuticals, funnily enough) in the late nineties. I was shocked, as an impressionable teen, at how much of my colleagues' pay packets went up their noses. So I dunno if it's changed that much since then. The 'posh drug' stereotype has been wrong for a long time.
I worked 40 years in financial services, most recently in central London, and I never saw any drug-taking at all.
I have no doubt it went on but I never noticed it at all. If ever I was involved in a crime scene I suspect I'd be a lousy witness.
I think a lot of people have anxiety about finding themselves needing to report something criminal, and realising their recollections are crap. "So you claim the person who robbed you was between 5 and 6 ft tall, white, possibly mixed race, or black, and between 30 and 130 years old? Why don't come in and we can have a longer talk?"
I dread ever being asked to give a witness statement. Questions in crime dramas like "Where were you between the hours of 7 and 12 on the 14th of August, sir?" break me out in a cold sweat - I'd have no clue.
Comments on two newspapers mentioned earlier: I buy only the Sunday edition of the Seattle Times regularly so I can't say I have seen all their education articles. But what I have seen makes me think Bill Gates's contributions to the newspaper haven't done much to inform the public. (They probably have helped his image.)
And I'll repeat the advice I gave yesterday: Those who want to understand what is going wrong -- and, sometimes, right -- in American education should read Joanne Jacobs regularly: https://www.joannejacobs.com/
I read the Washington Post on line regularly, though I don't much care for Jeff Bezos, but I will say these two things about the newspaper: They have a wider range of columnists on politics than any other newspaper I know of -- and some of their columnists are quite good. Second, they recently did a good piece showing that Amazon has increased the ad content on its site, making it harder to search for the items you actually want.
(Full disclosure: When Amazon refused to carry "When Harry Became Sally", I decided to -- as much as possible -- buy books elsewhere. And I buy a lot of books.)
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.
Not many people end up dead because a condom full of coffee beans has ruptured in their gut.
If your condom full of coffee beans ruptures you have to call the resultant offspring Kenco FACT
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
MoonRabbit is SKS?
Oh you are cheeky.
A couple of other examples of Starmers economic illiteracy - the insanely expensive bucking of the energy market for 6 months WAS THEIR IDEA not Truss.
And ending non Dom status supposedly nets only about £3.2bn? That’s Not a proper financial announcement, that’s merely wasting everybody’s time hearing that repeated endlessly. There’s estimated 68,300 non doms who are actually contributing £8bn in tax each year - what Labour don’t tell you the nom doms can so easily leave Britain once non Dom status is axed by Labour - so Labour doesn’t get the 3.2bn, and not the 8bn EITHER. the policy actually makes the exchequer poorer. It’s economically insane. Labours non Dom policy makes the country poorer.
Labour badly need some sensible economic polices for making the exchequer richer not poorer - or else this poll lead will slip through their fingers up to election day.
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.
When you say "plurality", what exactly do you mean?
A "strong plurality", no less.
Perhaps he's using 'real polling'.
Trump blasts polling that shows DeSantis surging: ‘Leading by a lot’ in ‘REAL POLLING’
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/3777889-trump-blasts-polling-that-shows-desantis-surging-leading-by-a-lot-in-real-polling/ Former President Trump, who has already entered the race for the White House in 2024, on Thursday took to Truth Social to dispute recent polling showing Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R), who has widely been floated as a possible presidential contender, outperforming the former president in hypothetical primary match-ups. In his post, Trump showed a poll that he said was conducted by polling firm McLaughlin & Associates, which previously worked with Trump’s 2020 campaign, showing him at 58 percent compared to DeSantis at 36 percent when respondents were asked whom they would choose in a 2024 GOP presidential primary. “This is the McLaughlin & Associates POLL that just came out and which got it right in 2016 & 2020,” Trump said, further adding “unlike The WSJ, NBC Fake News, ABC Fake News, Fake Polling FOX NEWS, the dying and very sickly USA Today, and most others in the LameStream Media.” “In other words, it is REAL POLLING. As you can see, we are leading by a lot, despite the never ending Communist (Democrat) WEAPONIZED ATTACKS on me and the GREAT PATRIOTS OF MAGA. More to come!!!”...
I fear Trump will be McLaughlin all the way to the GOP nomination. That said, he'll lose the GE.
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.
Cocaine usually consumed in the form of crack has been rife in poor areas for decades.
My first job was picking & packing in a warehouse (legal pharmaceuticals, funnily enough) in the late nineties. I was shocked, as an impressionable teen, at how much of my colleagues' pay packets went up their noses. So I dunno if it's changed that much since then. The 'posh drug' stereotype has been wrong for a long time.
I worked 40 years in financial services, most recently in central London, and I never saw any drug-taking at all.
I have no doubt it went on but I never noticed it at all. If ever I was involved in a crime scene I suspect I'd be a lousy witness.
You never experience your colleagues desire to keep visiting the bogs and coming back well refreshed, perhaps with quite a sniffle?
I probably did experience it but didn't twig tbf. Like I say, I am sure it went on.
Then again I did a weekly commute, most midweek evenings I'd be out with work colleagues in pubs, bars and restaurants and I still never saw anything. Says more about my poor observation skills than their piety, I suspect.
I did see lots of erratic behaviour but I just put that down to some of them being complete tossers.
The erratic twatish behaviour is the give-away. Obviously people get pissed up and some can turn into violent knobheads, but coked up its wider spectrum and a different level. Post COVID I left a number of catch up friends for that reason, you could see it descending into such BS (and they really are of the age where they should know better).
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.
Cocaine usually consumed in the form of crack has been rife in poor areas for decades.
My first job was picking & packing in a warehouse (legal pharmaceuticals, funnily enough) in the late nineties. I was shocked, as an impressionable teen, at how much of my colleagues' pay packets went up their noses. So I dunno if it's changed that much since then. The 'posh drug' stereotype has been wrong for a long time.
I worked 40 years in financial services, most recently in central London, and I never saw any drug-taking at all.
I have no doubt it went on but I never noticed it at all. If ever I was involved in a crime scene I suspect I'd be a lousy witness.
I think a lot of people have anxiety about finding themselves needing to report something criminal, and realising their recollections are crap. "So you claim the person who robbed you was between 5 and 6 ft tall, white, possibly mixed race, or black, and between 30 and 130 years old? Why don't come in and we can have a longer talk?"
I dread ever being asked to give a witness statement. Questions in crime dramas like "Where were you between the hours of 7 and 12 on the 14th of August, sir?" break me out in a cold sweat - I'd have no clue.
I couldn't tell you with certainty where I was, but I could tell you where my phone was. Google Timeline is frightening but could be useful.
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?
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.
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.
The cynic in me thinks this was FIFA's plan all along. Clubs said to FIFA that they would not countenance a World Cup where the finalists play more than seven games. So FIFA came up with this format knowing that everyone would say that's rubbish, we need to keep groups of four. And before you know it, FIFA will be saying to clubs, "there is no alternative, we need an eighth game."
Of course, the obvious solution is to go straight to the last 16 from 12 groups of four with group winners and the best four runners up progressing from the groups. But that would be far too sensible.
FIFA isn't going to consider a group format where only group winners are guaranteed to qualify - especially in four team groups. Too much chance of groups of death whittling out the big teams too early.
The original proposal was x number of "best" 3rd placed teams would qualify to the knock-out. Screams, make sure all the big boys get through, while we get 10s of extra games worth of revenue. Would make pretty much all the group games irreverent, like the stupid new Champions League format.
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
MoonRabbit is SKS?
Oh you are cheeky.
A couple of other examples of Starmers economic illiteracy - the insanely expensive bucking of the energy market for 6 months WAS THEIR IDEA not Truss.
And ending non Dom status supposedly nets only about £3.2bn? That’s Not a proper financial announcement, that’s merely wasting everybody’s time hearing that repeated endlessly. There’s estimated 68,300 non doms who are actually contributing £8bn in tax each year - what Labour don’t tell you the nom doms can so easily leave Britain once non Dom status is axed by Labour - so Labour doesn’t get the 3.2bn, and not the 8bn EITHER. the policy actually makes the exchequer poorer. It’s economically insane. Labours non Dom policy makes the country poorer.
Labour badly need some sensible economic polices for making the exchequer richer not poorer - or else this poll lead will slip through their fingers up to election day.
Agreed.
Its amazing how few actual policy ideas New Labour 2 has.
Not a single original thought on the whole of the front bench IMO
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.
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.
The cynic in me thinks this was FIFA's plan all along. Clubs said to FIFA that they would not countenance a World Cup where the finalists play more than seven games. So FIFA came up with this format knowing that everyone would say that's rubbish, we need to keep groups of four. And before you know it, FIFA will be saying to clubs, "there is no alternative, we need an eighth game."
Of course, the obvious solution is to go straight to the last 16 from 12 groups of four with group winners and the best four runners up progressing from the groups. But that would be far too sensible.
FIFA isn't going to consider a group format where only group winners are guaranteed to qualify - especially in four team groups. Too much chance of groups of death whittling out the big teams too early.
The original proposal was x number of "best" 3rd placed teams would qualify to the knock-out. Screams, make sure all the big boys get through, while we get 10s of extra games worth of revenue. Would make pretty much the group game irreverent.
8 groups of 6 top two go through? Then R16, QFs, SFs, Final
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.
When you say "plurality", what exactly do you mean?
A "strong plurality", no less.
Perhaps he's using 'real polling'.
Trump blasts polling that shows DeSantis surging: ‘Leading by a lot’ in ‘REAL POLLING’
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/3777889-trump-blasts-polling-that-shows-desantis-surging-leading-by-a-lot-in-real-polling/ Former President Trump, who has already entered the race for the White House in 2024, on Thursday took to Truth Social to dispute recent polling showing Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R), who has widely been floated as a possible presidential contender, outperforming the former president in hypothetical primary match-ups. In his post, Trump showed a poll that he said was conducted by polling firm McLaughlin & Associates, which previously worked with Trump’s 2020 campaign, showing him at 58 percent compared to DeSantis at 36 percent when respondents were asked whom they would choose in a 2024 GOP presidential primary. “This is the McLaughlin & Associates POLL that just came out and which got it right in 2016 & 2020,” Trump said, further adding “unlike The WSJ, NBC Fake News, ABC Fake News, Fake Polling FOX NEWS, the dying and very sickly USA Today, and most others in the LameStream Media.” “In other words, it is REAL POLLING. As you can see, we are leading by a lot, despite the never ending Communist (Democrat) WEAPONIZED ATTACKS on me and the GREAT PATRIOTS OF MAGA. More to come!!!”...
I fear Trump will be McLaughlin all the way to the GOP nomination...
I'm not convinced there are sufficient GREAT PATRIOTS OF MAGA left for that.
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 ?
To the best of my memory I've seem more snot than a bucket of hagfish poured on the following by assorted PBers (cutting and pasting the list in the previous post):
Nurses. David Attenborough. Those who raise awareness. Modern founders of charities. James O'Brien. Children's charities. The NHS as opposed to The Government/Dept of Health. Foodbanks. Religions and their founders except Christianity. Self styled 'Community Leaders'. Scientists.
But never any criticism of Armed forces charities other than the poppy merchants, unless it's simply that 'the rest' don't register.
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
Just bring Tough on stupid policies, and tough on the causes of stupid policies.
All the PB posts so far on this policy Announcement have missed the point - the main inherent vice here is it doesn’t bring in the promised money, and all those promised goodies. that is the best attack on it.
It’s illiterate gimmick because if meagre extra £1.7bn is found, but can’t be as it needs those who can’t pay still paying - it doesn’t deliver “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” it just get swallowed by the debt schools in already barely staying afloat keeping the lights and heating on.
Do you see this point about why that Labour policy announcement needs us to be excruciatingly stupid to miss the fact this ain’t extra money riding to the rescue? I suspect it’s nothing more than a dead cat thrown on table. Chaff. A sop to the left, like Blair’s awful fox hunting ban was. It’s certainly not a serious funding stream for a state sector badly in need of one.
More grist to the elbows of those pointing out, an unserious Labour Party are badly blowing this opportunity with silly gimmicks like that one.
You clearly want more meat in your socialism. Me too - but the electorate are such pussies we have to start slow and play the long game.
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.
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.
The cynic in me thinks this was FIFA's plan all along. Clubs said to FIFA that they would not countenance a World Cup where the finalists play more than seven games. So FIFA came up with this format knowing that everyone would say that's rubbish, we need to keep groups of four. And before you know it, FIFA will be saying to clubs, "there is no alternative, we need an eighth game."
Of course, the obvious solution is to go straight to the last 16 from 12 groups of four with group winners and the best four runners up progressing from the groups. But that would be far too sensible.
FIFA isn't going to consider a group format where only group winners are guaranteed to qualify - especially in four team groups. Too much chance of groups of death whittling out the big teams too early.
Just have 16 groups of 4, followed by 8 groups of 4, then back on track. Adds a shit load of extra games and an extra fortnight of footy. And increasing to 64 teams means that even Scotland might qualify. What's not to like?
An early finish for work and an excursion through the tundra wasteland that is East London - much of the snow which fell five days ago is still lying which is extraordinary and testament to how cold it has been even in the urban heat island.
Kantar, Techne and Omnisis all herding 46-29, 46-28 and 47-26 so a slight recovery for the Conservatives from the depths of the low 20s and a slight easing for Labour from the 50%+ numbers recorded a few weeks ago.
The Stretford & Urmston by-election was pretty much what you would expect in this scenario - swings in "safe" seats to the party holding are often less dramatic than the UNS but a 10.5% move to Labour still reads well. It's a seat where the Conservative vote share remained remarkably consistent from 2005-19 yet last night was a significant drop.
We are probably less than two years from an election so this all looks promising for Labour, doesn't it? Well, yes and no. History tells us Conservative Governments can recover strongly from their midterm trough but that's not always true and given the unprecedented events since the last GE, it's impossible to know.
Some would have you believe the electorate will be gripped by a collective amnesia and the inadequacies of the Opposition will allow the Government to win re-election.
Perhaps.
As we get nearer any vote, there will, quite rightly, be scrutiny of the Labour plans and equally rightly of the Conservative record and plans. What. for example, does a re-elected Sunak Government look like? I've no clue.
With two years to go, Starmer is not going to give any hostages to fortune but he will know the Devil will be in the detail. Labour oppositions don't generally win from a radical position (Attlee was the exception under unique circumstances). Starmer may be no Blair - nor should he try to be - but he will know re-assuring the Conservative disillusioned the Labour Party he leads is a non-socialist party of the centre or centre-left is the prerequisite.
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 :
Grim reading, but a chicken shop on The Wirral isn't that typical. It's not even that typical of The Wirral (I'm guessing it's Ellesmere Port but I might be wrong). The Graun like to drop a bit of poverty safari porn every now and again. Winds me up a bit tbh.
Illegal drugs are absolutely everywhere, though, it is true. Anyone who wants to get hold of them can do so extremely easily, and you can't make any kind of generalisation about the people taking them, except that they probably like taking drugs.
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?
That sounds like a no.
Labour can stop me voting Conservative to keep them out - and I’m not alone in that based on last election. But they can’t do anything to get me to vote for them. That doesn’t mean if they came up with sensible economic policies I would dislike them or be unfair about it - but the tax break axe in private schools, and banning non Dom status don’t remotely add up financially - they are silly gimmicks economically, so what are they playing at. Just wasting their own time to tie voters down with some sensible policies.
Labour are the party of the greedy union barons. On strike yesterday was a union on 37K average wage demanding 19% more. No wonder Labour going down in the polls, their paymasters causing such discontent and division in our country. He who pays the piper plays the tune. These strikes are bad news for Labour because we all know if they were in power they would squirm and surrender to these greedy pay demands.
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.
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.
The cynic in me thinks this was FIFA's plan all along. Clubs said to FIFA that they would not countenance a World Cup where the finalists play more than seven games. So FIFA came up with this format knowing that everyone would say that's rubbish, we need to keep groups of four. And before you know it, FIFA will be saying to clubs, "there is no alternative, we need an eighth game."
Of course, the obvious solution is to go straight to the last 16 from 12 groups of four with group winners and the best four runners up progressing from the groups. But that would be far too sensible.
FIFA isn't going to consider a group format where only group winners are guaranteed to qualify - especially in four team groups. Too much chance of groups of death whittling out the big teams too early.
The original proposal was x number of "best" 3rd placed teams would qualify to the knock-out. Screams, make sure all the big boys get through, while we get 10s of extra games worth of revenue. Would make pretty much the group game irreverent.
8 groups of 6 top two go through? Then R16, QFs, SFs, Final
That's nine games! I think the clubs will say yes to eight games but only if a FIFA weekend is removed from the calendar every other season.
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.
Not many people end up dead because a condom full of coffee beans has ruptured in their gut.
I'm sure you know that's a stupid point - a condom full of paracetemol or pure alcohol that ruptured in someone's gut wouldn't be pleasant either - but the point here is that it's something people use to deal with life, rather than it being something they're doing out of malice, evil intent, or general "wrong"ness.
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.
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.
The cynic in me thinks this was FIFA's plan all along. Clubs said to FIFA that they would not countenance a World Cup where the finalists play more than seven games. So FIFA came up with this format knowing that everyone would say that's rubbish, we need to keep groups of four. And before you know it, FIFA will be saying to clubs, "there is no alternative, we need an eighth game."
Of course, the obvious solution is to go straight to the last 16 from 12 groups of four with group winners and the best four runners up progressing from the groups. But that would be far too sensible.
FIFA isn't going to consider a group format where only group winners are guaranteed to qualify - especially in four team groups. Too much chance of groups of death whittling out the big teams too early.
Just have 16 groups of 4, followed by 8 groups of 4, then back on track. Adds a shit load of extra games and an extra fortnight of footy. And increasing to 64 teams means that even Scotland might qualify. What's not to like?
Every country in the world, straight knockout. Unseeded, but give the top twenty-odd nations a bye into the round of 128.
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.
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.
The cynic in me thinks this was FIFA's plan all along. Clubs said to FIFA that they would not countenance a World Cup where the finalists play more than seven games. So FIFA came up with this format knowing that everyone would say that's rubbish, we need to keep groups of four. And before you know it, FIFA will be saying to clubs, "there is no alternative, we need an eighth game."
Of course, the obvious solution is to go straight to the last 16 from 12 groups of four with group winners and the best four runners up progressing from the groups. But that would be far too sensible.
FIFA isn't going to consider a group format where only group winners are guaranteed to qualify - especially in four team groups. Too much chance of groups of death whittling out the big teams too early.
The original proposal was x number of "best" 3rd placed teams would qualify to the knock-out. Screams, make sure all the big boys get through, while we get 10s of extra games worth of revenue. Would make pretty much the group game irreverent.
8 groups of 6 top two go through? Then R16, QFs, SFs, Final
That's nine games! I think the clubs will say yes to eight games but only if a FIFA weekend is removed from the calendar every other season.
Only five games for 75% of the teams. It does mean lesser teams get more chance to play on the big stage.
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.
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.
The cynic in me thinks this was FIFA's plan all along. Clubs said to FIFA that they would not countenance a World Cup where the finalists play more than seven games. So FIFA came up with this format knowing that everyone would say that's rubbish, we need to keep groups of four. And before you know it, FIFA will be saying to clubs, "there is no alternative, we need an eighth game."
Of course, the obvious solution is to go straight to the last 16 from 12 groups of four with group winners and the best four runners up progressing from the groups. But that would be far too sensible.
FIFA isn't going to consider a group format where only group winners are guaranteed to qualify - especially in four team groups. Too much chance of groups of death whittling out the big teams too early.
The original proposal was x number of "best" 3rd placed teams would qualify to the knock-out. Screams, make sure all the big boys get through, while we get 10s of extra games worth of revenue. Would make pretty much all the group games irreverent, like the stupid new Champions League format.
It worked OK at the euros last year, and IIRC when they had a 24 team World Cup format.
The problem is, FIFA has three aims - expand the tournament, have a sensible group stage, have a maximum 7 games per team. And they can have only two.
The maths is quite simple, though - if you aren't going to expand to 64 teams (I know, don't give FIFA ideas) then somewhere along the line a non-power of 2 has to be involved. You either have groups not of 4 teams or you have a non-power of 2 number of groups, in which case you have to have some "best nth place" teams somewhere.
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.
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.
The cynic in me thinks this was FIFA's plan all along. Clubs said to FIFA that they would not countenance a World Cup where the finalists play more than seven games. So FIFA came up with this format knowing that everyone would say that's rubbish, we need to keep groups of four. And before you know it, FIFA will be saying to clubs, "there is no alternative, we need an eighth game."
Of course, the obvious solution is to go straight to the last 16 from 12 groups of four with group winners and the best four runners up progressing from the groups. But that would be far too sensible.
FIFA isn't going to consider a group format where only group winners are guaranteed to qualify - especially in four team groups. Too much chance of groups of death whittling out the big teams too early.
If the top 12 teams (okay, maybe less depending on host(s)) are seeded, then that should avoid groups of death. This year's tournament would have had the following teams in Pots 1 and 2:
Qatar (51) (hosts) Brazil (1) Belgium (2) France (3) Argentina (4) England (5) Spain (7) Portugal (8) Mexico (9) Netherlands (10) Denmark (11) Germany (12)
Uruguay (13) Switzerland (14) United States (15) Croatia (16) Senegal (20) Iran (21) Japan (23) Morocco (24) Serbia (25) Poland (26) South Korea (29) Tunisia (35)
Some decent teams in Pot 2, including Croatia and Morocco who made the semis, but if any of those top seeds didn't make it out of a group, they'd only have themselves to blame.
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.
When you say "plurality", what exactly do you mean?
A "strong plurality", no less.
Perhaps he's using 'real polling'.
Trump blasts polling that shows DeSantis surging: ‘Leading by a lot’ in ‘REAL POLLING’
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/3777889-trump-blasts-polling-that-shows-desantis-surging-leading-by-a-lot-in-real-polling/ Former President Trump, who has already entered the race for the White House in 2024, on Thursday took to Truth Social to dispute recent polling showing Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R), who has widely been floated as a possible presidential contender, outperforming the former president in hypothetical primary match-ups. In his post, Trump showed a poll that he said was conducted by polling firm McLaughlin & Associates, which previously worked with Trump’s 2020 campaign, showing him at 58 percent compared to DeSantis at 36 percent when respondents were asked whom they would choose in a 2024 GOP presidential primary. “This is the McLaughlin & Associates POLL that just came out and which got it right in 2016 & 2020,” Trump said, further adding “unlike The WSJ, NBC Fake News, ABC Fake News, Fake Polling FOX NEWS, the dying and very sickly USA Today, and most others in the LameStream Media.” “In other words, it is REAL POLLING. As you can see, we are leading by a lot, despite the never ending Communist (Democrat) WEAPONIZED ATTACKS on me and the GREAT PATRIOTS OF MAGA. More to come!!!”...
I fear Trump will be McLaughlin all the way to the GOP nomination...
I'm not convinced there are sufficient GREAT PATRIOTS OF MAGA left for that.
Even they find his focus on hawking NFTs to raise a quick buck a bit off, for someone who claims to be focused on becoming president?
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.
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.
The cynic in me thinks this was FIFA's plan all along. Clubs said to FIFA that they would not countenance a World Cup where the finalists play more than seven games. So FIFA came up with this format knowing that everyone would say that's rubbish, we need to keep groups of four. And before you know it, FIFA will be saying to clubs, "there is no alternative, we need an eighth game."
Of course, the obvious solution is to go straight to the last 16 from 12 groups of four with group winners and the best four runners up progressing from the groups. But that would be far too sensible.
FIFA isn't going to consider a group format where only group winners are guaranteed to qualify - especially in four team groups. Too much chance of groups of death whittling out the big teams too early.
Just have 16 groups of 4, followed by 8 groups of 4, then back on track. Adds a shit load of extra games and an extra fortnight of footy. And increasing to 64 teams means that even Scotland might qualify. What's not to like?
Oh, 16 groups of 4 followed by a straight knockout from the round of 32 is obviously where FIFA is going. But I think they think they have to go through a 48 team format first.
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.
When you say "plurality", what exactly do you mean?
Off the top of my head, of the people I know who work in the field, probably over 1 in 5. I'd say it's higher than the % of alcoholics or people who excessively smoke weed, which are the other common forms of self medication.
An early finish for work and an excursion through the tundra wasteland that is East London - much of the snow which fell five days ago is still lying which is extraordinary and testament to how cold it has been even in the urban heat island.
Kantar, Techne and Omnisis all herding 46-29, 46-28 and 47-26 so a slight recovery for the Conservatives from the depths of the low 20s and a slight easing for Labour from the 50%+ numbers recorded a few weeks ago.
The Stretford & Urmston by-election was pretty much what you would expect in this scenario - swings in "safe" seats to the party holding are often less dramatic than the UNS but a 10.5% move to Labour still reads well. It's a seat where the Conservative vote share remained remarkably consistent from 2005-19 yet last night was a significant drop.
We are probably less than two years from an election so this all looks promising for Labour, doesn't it? Well, yes and no. History tells us Conservative Governments can recover strongly from their midterm trough but that's not always true and given the unprecedented events since the last GE, it's impossible to know.
Some would have you believe the electorate will be gripped by a collective amnesia and the inadequacies of the Opposition will allow the Government to win re-election.
Perhaps.
As we get nearer any vote, there will, quite rightly, be scrutiny of the Labour plans and equally rightly of the Conservative record and plans. What. for example, does a re-elected Sunak Government look like? I've no clue.
With two years to go, Starmer is not going to give any hostages to fortune but he will know the Devil will be in the detail. Labour oppositions don't generally win from a radical position (Attlee was the exception under unique circumstances). Starmer may be no Blair - nor should he try to be - but he will know re-assuring the Conservative disillusioned the Labour Party he leads is a non-socialist party of the centre or centre-left is the prerequisite.
"History tells us Conservative Governments can recover strongly from their midterm trough"
I don't doubt you but which examples did you have in mind? 1990 - 1992 is the only one I can think of, but that required getting rid of Thatcher.
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.
Not many people end up dead because a condom full of coffee beans has ruptured in their gut.
I'm sure you know that's a stupid point - a condom full of paracetemol or pure alcohol that ruptured in someone's gut wouldn't be pleasant either - but the point here is that it's something people use to deal with life, rather than it being something they're doing out of malice, evil intent, or general "wrong"ness.
Blame should be shared equally between the people buying illegal drugs, the people selling illegal drugs and the people who think that making a widespread social practice illegal is a smart way to proceed. In fact I'd be tempted to load more of the blame on the last group.
Comments
Dog bites man would still be a news story if it involved biting the king in the groin, for example.
Personally, I've never touched drugs other than beer, but the % of staffers I know who use drugs to self medicate is growing higher every year; the pandemic was definitely responsible for a spike but it's not slowed down since then.
Once upon a time a large part of the House of Commons was stood down in an expenses scandal. Thanks, Torygraph! MPs on the fiddle - who'd have believed it? I mean being allowed to claim for sh*t on expenses and then claiming an unfair amount! Shocking! OK it's funny, but that would be the wrong response. Perhaps next time there's a clearout it will be part of Hootergate?
"Political allies of Liz Truss", huh?
"A member of staff claimed they tested the powder using a swab which changes colour when it comes into contact with cocaine, and it indicated the drug was present."
Just had the swab on them, I suppose.
Next, the bondage pictures!
If it wishes to continue posturing with its supposed zero-tolerance, and continue to seek political advantage from attacking those politicians calling for a more sensible, mature, constructive and achievable policy - then surely it deserves all it gets if illegal activity is detected inside government circles? Cf. Banning parties and then having parties.
While not at the same scale as coke, it's still a big earner for a lot of criminals (and this is the perfect weather to find them - spot the roofs without frost...)
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/12/16/virginia-dems-house-primary-election-00074270
...State Sens. Jennifer McClellan and Joe Morrissey are among the Democrats running for Virginia’s vacant 4th District, previously held by the late Democratic Rep. Don McEachin, who died on Nov. 28, just weeks after winning reelection.
...The voters who are able to turn out on an unusual December Tuesday have a distinct choice before them. Morrissey has decades of experience in Virginia politics, as well as a litany of scandals. He’s thrown punches in the courtroom. He’s been disbarred twice. He resigned from the House of Delegates in 2014 after being convicted of contributing to the delinquency of a minor — a 17-year-old receptionist at his law firm, whom he later married as an adult and now has a family with. He even won the special election to fill his state House seat as an independent while in jail.
...McClellan, who would be the first Black woman from Virginia in Congress if elected, has quickly raised over $100,000 and raked in dozens of endorsements, including all eight members of the Virginia Democratic congressional delegation. But the fast and unpredictable nature of the firehouse primary leaves room for surprise...\
Tough choice.
However, the idea that everyone "in government circles" can be policed for drugs is absurd. It's simply endemic in society at this point, not exclusive to government circles.
Perhaps the loos at the Guardian offices should be swabbed and the paper shut down every time drugs are found. Might put an end to the ridiculous non-stories, at least.
It is notably pleasant. A few sublingual drops and you become benign and mellow, and then you sleep well
This one
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gljtvwhcdhc
If they take cannabis tincture they are more likely to try interesting new artisanal chocolate and then nod off in front of White Lotus 2
I have no doubt it went on but I never noticed it at all. If ever I was involved in a crime scene I suspect I'd be a lousy witness.
LAB: 47% (-1)
CON: 26% (-4)
LDM: 9% (=)
GRN: 6% (=)
RFM: 6% (+2)
SNP: 5% (+2)
Via @Omnisis, 15 Dec.
Changes w/ 8-9 Dec.
https://twitter.com/electionmapsuk/status/1603783011039952896?s=46&t=6EEF0e8aG_w4MQ-7uVW5Cw
I think that deserves a......
CROSSOVER!
Whose name was Meghan, how about that?
She was fluffy, full of sass,
And loved to sit on Harry's lap
Mandatory piss testing for everyone even remotely connected to government sounds a bit draconian so yes, we might as well all go and live in Russia, if that's your solution to the problem.
All the PB posts so far on this policy Announcement have missed the point - the main inherent vice here is it doesn’t bring in the promised money, and all those promised goodies. that is the best attack on it.
It’s illiterate gimmick because if meagre extra £1.7bn is found, but can’t be as it needs those who can’t pay still paying - it doesn’t deliver “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” it just get swallowed by the debt schools in already barely staying afloat keeping the lights and heating on.
Do you see this point about why that Labour policy announcement needs us to be excruciatingly stupid to miss the fact this ain’t extra money riding to the rescue? I suspect it’s nothing more than a dead cat thrown on table. Chaff. A sop to the left, like Blair’s awful fox hunting ban was. It’s certainly not a serious funding stream for a state sector badly in need of one.
More grist to the elbows of those pointing out, an unserious Labour Party are badly blowing this opportunity with silly gimmicks like that one.
No news on whether the interview was taped by either party this time, or whether either plans to post a transcript on Twitter.
Is it everywhere all of the time? No. But if you extrapolate from the above that approximately 1 in 20 under 40s are users of class A drugs, then I'd suggest that finding cocaine residue the next day after any given party is not particularly surprising or noteworthy.
As it stands it seems doubtful the authorities give two shits, and changing that attitude is needed, even if means diverting them from low hanging fruit measures like announcing newer, tougher sentences or something.
Then again I did a weekly commute, most midweek evenings I'd be out with work colleagues in pubs, bars and restaurants and I still never saw anything. Says more about my poor observation skills than their piety, I suspect.
I did see lots of erratic behaviour but I just put that down to some of them being complete tossers.
Of course, the obvious solution is to go straight to the last 16 from 12 groups of four with group winners and the best four runners up progressing from the groups. But that would be far too sensible.
Perhaps he's using 'real polling'.
Trump blasts polling that shows DeSantis surging: ‘Leading by a lot’ in ‘REAL POLLING’
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/3777889-trump-blasts-polling-that-shows-desantis-surging-leading-by-a-lot-in-real-polling/
Former President Trump, who has already entered the race for the White House in 2024, on Thursday took to Truth Social to dispute recent polling showing Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R), who has widely been floated as a possible presidential contender, outperforming the former president in hypothetical primary match-ups.
In his post, Trump showed a poll that he said was conducted by polling firm McLaughlin & Associates, which previously worked with Trump’s 2020 campaign, showing him at 58 percent compared to DeSantis at 36 percent when respondents were asked whom they would choose in a 2024 GOP presidential primary.
“This is the McLaughlin & Associates POLL that just came out and which got it right in 2016 & 2020,” Trump said, further adding “unlike The WSJ, NBC Fake News, ABC Fake News, Fake Polling FOX NEWS, the dying and very sickly USA Today, and most others in the LameStream Media.”
“In other words, it is REAL POLLING. As you can see, we are leading by a lot, despite the never ending Communist (Democrat) WEAPONIZED ATTACKS on me and the GREAT PATRIOTS OF MAGA. More to come!!!”...
And I'll repeat the advice I gave yesterday: Those who want to understand what is going wrong -- and, sometimes, right -- in American education should read Joanne Jacobs regularly: https://www.joannejacobs.com/
I read the Washington Post on line regularly, though I don't much care for Jeff Bezos, but I will say these two things about the newspaper: They have a wider range of columnists on politics than any other newspaper I know of -- and some of their columnists are quite good. Second, they recently did a good piece showing that Amazon has increased the ad content on its site, making it harder to search for the items you actually want.
(Full disclosure: When Amazon refused to carry "When Harry Became Sally", I decided to -- as much as possible -- buy books elsewhere. And I buy a lot of books.)
A couple of other examples of Starmers economic illiteracy - the insanely expensive bucking of the energy market for 6 months WAS THEIR IDEA not Truss.
And ending non Dom status supposedly nets only about £3.2bn? That’s Not a proper financial announcement, that’s merely wasting everybody’s time hearing that repeated endlessly. There’s estimated 68,300 non doms who are actually contributing £8bn in tax each year - what Labour don’t tell you the nom doms can so easily leave Britain once non Dom status is axed by Labour - so Labour doesn’t get the 3.2bn, and not the 8bn EITHER. the policy actually makes the exchequer poorer. It’s economically insane. Labours non Dom policy makes the country poorer.
Labour badly need some sensible economic polices for making the exchequer richer not poorer - or else this poll lead will slip through their fingers up to election day.
Its amazing how few actual policy ideas New Labour 2 has.
Not a single original thought on the whole of the front bench IMO
Not genius, but not bad
(I am writing a deeply pessimistic article for the Knappers Gazette about the End of Writing)
Nurses. David Attenborough. Those who raise awareness. Modern founders of charities. James O'Brien. Children's charities. The NHS as opposed to The Government/Dept of Health. Foodbanks. Religions and their founders except Christianity. Self styled 'Community Leaders'. Scientists.
But never any criticism of Armed forces charities other than the poppy merchants, unless it's simply that 'the rest' don't register.
An early finish for work and an excursion through the tundra wasteland that is East London - much of the snow which fell five days ago is still lying which is extraordinary and testament to how cold it has been even in the urban heat island.
Kantar, Techne and Omnisis all herding 46-29, 46-28 and 47-26 so a slight recovery for the Conservatives from the depths of the low 20s and a slight easing for Labour from the 50%+ numbers recorded a few weeks ago.
The Stretford & Urmston by-election was pretty much what you would expect in this scenario - swings in "safe" seats to the party holding are often less dramatic than the UNS but a 10.5% move to Labour still reads well. It's a seat where the Conservative vote share remained remarkably consistent from 2005-19 yet last night was a significant drop.
We are probably less than two years from an election so this all looks promising for Labour, doesn't it? Well, yes and no. History tells us Conservative Governments can recover strongly from their midterm trough but that's not always true and given the unprecedented events since the last GE, it's impossible to know.
Some would have you believe the electorate will be gripped by a collective amnesia and the inadequacies of the Opposition will allow the Government to win re-election.
Perhaps.
As we get nearer any vote, there will, quite rightly, be scrutiny of the Labour plans and equally rightly of the Conservative record and plans. What. for example, does a re-elected Sunak Government look like? I've no clue.
With two years to go, Starmer is not going to give any hostages to fortune but he will know the Devil will be in the detail. Labour oppositions don't generally win from a radical position (Attlee was the exception under unique circumstances). Starmer may be no Blair - nor should he try to be - but he will know re-assuring the Conservative disillusioned the Labour Party he leads is a non-socialist party of the centre or centre-left is the prerequisite.
Labour are the party of the greedy union barons. On strike yesterday was a union on 37K average wage demanding 19% more.
No wonder Labour going down in the polls, their paymasters causing such discontent and division in our country. He who pays the piper plays the tune. These strikes are bad news for Labour because we all know if they were in power they would squirm and surrender to these greedy pay demands.
The problem is, FIFA has three aims - expand the tournament, have a sensible group stage, have a maximum 7 games per team. And they can have only two.
The maths is quite simple, though - if you aren't going to expand to 64 teams (I know, don't give FIFA ideas) then somewhere along the line a non-power of 2 has to be involved. You either have groups not of 4 teams or you have a non-power of 2 number of groups, in which case you have to have some "best nth place" teams somewhere.
Qatar (51) (hosts)
Brazil (1)
Belgium (2)
France (3)
Argentina (4)
England (5)
Spain (7)
Portugal (8)
Mexico (9)
Netherlands (10)
Denmark (11)
Germany (12)
Uruguay (13)
Switzerland (14)
United States (15)
Croatia (16)
Senegal (20)
Iran (21)
Japan (23)
Morocco (24)
Serbia (25)
Poland (26)
South Korea (29)
Tunisia (35)
Some decent teams in Pot 2, including Croatia and Morocco who made the semis, but if any of those top seeds didn't make it out of a group, they'd only have themselves to blame.
"Here are all the ways to get around ChatGPT's safeguards"
I don't doubt you but which examples did you have in mind? 1990 - 1992 is the only one I can think of, but that required getting rid of Thatcher.