Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

The polling’s not looking good US Congressman Santos – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 11,683
edited February 2023 in General
imageThe polling’s not looking good US Congressman Santos – politicalbetting.com

One of the big stories in US politics at the moment has been on George Santos who last November gained the Long Island seat in the US House of Representatives for the Republicans.

Read the full story here

«134

Comments

  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,668
    First
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,668
    Is there no recall process?
  • Options
    30 point Labour lead by July.

    Also, Sunak is useless. Now Raab is on the loose
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,007
    Mind you he has got more fame than most US Representatives get from his distorted CV, though he likely won't last another term
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,607
    edited January 2023

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    DJ41a said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    By then they will almost certainly own property themselves given the age of first property ownership is 39 and be starting to look to retirement

    HYUFD I am telling you as a young person, it's not going to happen.

    I own a flat, I hate the Tories for what they have done to us. You are finished.
    Not many young people own a flat though
    Yes because of our failure of economic policy.

    Housing crash now, fuck the elderly.
    If there is a housing crash the young will be rogered big time, .
    Exactly! The elderly with paid off mortgages will simply have less to pass on to their younger heirs. The young who have mortgages will be totally screwed!
    Most people with mortgages will be screwed - including many landlords.

    Most young people haven't got mortgages. Inheriting half as much isn't any kind of a problem if they were going to buy a house with it and houses have halved in value.

    I'm with Horse. Bring on the housing market crash. (I don't share his attitude towards the elderly, though.)

    image
    Those figures for ages 55-64 are remarkably low?
    As most of them have already bought with a mortgage by that age
    Clearly not, based on that graph.
    No clearly, as DJ14 realises now it is cumulative.

    So in fact 52% of those aged 35-44 have bought a property with a mortgage, not 29%
    No, I don't think it's even that. It's a terrible chart that's for sure.

    What I think it's showing is the percentage of a) outright owners and b) owners with a mortgages, who fall in each age group. Hence the percentages for each series add up to 100.

    So, for example, 61.6% of people who own outright are 65 and over. And 29.3% of mortgage holders are in the age group 35 to 44.

    It says nothing about what percentage of a given age group own a house outright, or with a mortgage.

    It's certainly not saying that 52% of those aged 35-44 have bought a property with a mortgage.
    It is once you add the 22% of 25 to 34s and 1% of 16-24s who have also bought a property with a mortgage
    Good God no it is not saying that!

    Please read my post properly.

    By your logic if the chart says "52% of those aged 35-44 have bought a property with a mortgage" then it also says:

    81.9% of those aged 45-54 have bought a property with a mortgage, and

    95.6% of those aged 55-64 have bought a property with a mortgage, and

    100% of those over 65 have bought a property with a mortgage.

    (And also 100% of those over 65 own a property without a mortgage.)

    You have misunderstood the chart. Feel free to admit you are wr*ng, it's not hard ;-)

    image
    Well it certainly doesn't say only 29% of 35-44s have a property with a mortgage either or only 61% of over 65s are owner occupiers.

    You simply can't bring yourself to admit you were wrong, can you?
    I genuinely can't read that graph in any way that makes sense. Surely the lesson of this is that people should stop producing graphs that are so incoherent in what they are trying to show.
    Actually looking at it I can understand it but it is not immediately clear. Ben is right and HYUFD is wrong.

    for the 35 - 44 tranche a total of 32.6% of people have bought a house. That is split down into 3.3% who own it outright and 29.3% who own it with a mortgage. Obviously the house ownership grows with age and just as obviously by the time you get to the 65 or over age range the vast majority of those house owners have now paid off their mortgages. Hence 61.6% own outright whilst 4.4% still have a mortgage - making total house ownership of
    66% of the age range.

    I think... :)
    No, you're both wrong. It's the percentage of the total owned homes of that type per age category. So of the 100% of homes owned outright, 61.6% are owned by over 65s, 23.9% by the next category down etc...

    It is a rubbish visualisation, though.
  • Options
    MaxPB said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    DJ41a said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    By then they will almost certainly own property themselves given the age of first property ownership is 39 and be starting to look to retirement

    HYUFD I am telling you as a young person, it's not going to happen.

    I own a flat, I hate the Tories for what they have done to us. You are finished.
    Not many young people own a flat though
    Yes because of our failure of economic policy.

    Housing crash now, fuck the elderly.
    If there is a housing crash the young will be rogered big time, .
    Exactly! The elderly with paid off mortgages will simply have less to pass on to their younger heirs. The young who have mortgages will be totally screwed!
    Most people with mortgages will be screwed - including many landlords.

    Most young people haven't got mortgages. Inheriting half as much isn't any kind of a problem if they were going to buy a house with it and houses have halved in value.

    I'm with Horse. Bring on the housing market crash. (I don't share his attitude towards the elderly, though.)

    image
    Those figures for ages 55-64 are remarkably low?
    As most of them have already bought with a mortgage by that age
    Clearly not, based on that graph.
    No clearly, as DJ14 realises now it is cumulative.

    So in fact 52% of those aged 35-44 have bought a property with a mortgage, not 29%
    No, I don't think it's even that. It's a terrible chart that's for sure.

    What I think it's showing is the percentage of a) outright owners and b) owners with a mortgages, who fall in each age group. Hence the percentages for each series add up to 100.

    So, for example, 61.6% of people who own outright are 65 and over. And 29.3% of mortgage holders are in the age group 35 to 44.

    It says nothing about what percentage of a given age group own a house outright, or with a mortgage.

    It's certainly not saying that 52% of those aged 35-44 have bought a property with a mortgage.
    It is once you add the 22% of 25 to 34s and 1% of 16-24s who have also bought a property with a mortgage
    Good God no it is not saying that!

    Please read my post properly.

    By your logic if the chart says "52% of those aged 35-44 have bought a property with a mortgage" then it also says:

    81.9% of those aged 45-54 have bought a property with a mortgage, and

    95.6% of those aged 55-64 have bought a property with a mortgage, and

    100% of those over 65 have bought a property with a mortgage.

    (And also 100% of those over 65 own a property without a mortgage.)

    You have misunderstood the chart. Feel free to admit you are wr*ng, it's not hard ;-)

    image
    Well it certainly doesn't say only 29% of 35-44s have a property with a mortgage either or only 61% of over 65s are owner occupiers.

    You simply can't bring yourself to admit you were wrong, can you?
    I genuinely can't read that graph in any way that makes sense. Surely the lesson of this is that people should stop producing graphs that are so incoherent in what they are trying to show.
    Actually looking at it I can understand it but it is not immediately clear. Ben is right and HYUFD is wrong.

    for the 35 - 44 tranche a total of 32.6% of people have bought a house. That is split down into 3.3% who own it outright and 29.3% who own it with a mortgage. Obviously the house ownership grows with age and just as obviously by the time you get to the 65 or over age range the vast majority of those house owners have now paid off their mortgages. Hence 61.6% own outright whilst 4.4% still have a mortgage - making total house ownership of
    66% of the age range.

    I think... :)
    No, you're both wrong. It's the percentage of the total owned homes of that type per age category. So of the 100% of homes owned outright, 61.6% are owned by over 65s, 23.9% by the next category down etc...

    It is a rubbish visualisation, though.
    Like I said. Bloody awful graph :)
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,668

    MaxPB said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    DJ41a said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    By then they will almost certainly own property themselves given the age of first property ownership is 39 and be starting to look to retirement

    HYUFD I am telling you as a young person, it's not going to happen.

    I own a flat, I hate the Tories for what they have done to us. You are finished.
    Not many young people own a flat though
    Yes because of our failure of economic policy.

    Housing crash now, fuck the elderly.
    If there is a housing crash the young will be rogered big time, .
    Exactly! The elderly with paid off mortgages will simply have less to pass on to their younger heirs. The young who have mortgages will be totally screwed!
    Most people with mortgages will be screwed - including many landlords.

    Most young people haven't got mortgages. Inheriting half as much isn't any kind of a problem if they were going to buy a house with it and houses have halved in value.

    I'm with Horse. Bring on the housing market crash. (I don't share his attitude towards the elderly, though.)

    image
    Those figures for ages 55-64 are remarkably low?
    As most of them have already bought with a mortgage by that age
    Clearly not, based on that graph.
    No clearly, as DJ14 realises now it is cumulative.

    So in fact 52% of those aged 35-44 have bought a property with a mortgage, not 29%
    No, I don't think it's even that. It's a terrible chart that's for sure.

    What I think it's showing is the percentage of a) outright owners and b) owners with a mortgages, who fall in each age group. Hence the percentages for each series add up to 100.

    So, for example, 61.6% of people who own outright are 65 and over. And 29.3% of mortgage holders are in the age group 35 to 44.

    It says nothing about what percentage of a given age group own a house outright, or with a mortgage.

    It's certainly not saying that 52% of those aged 35-44 have bought a property with a mortgage.
    It is once you add the 22% of 25 to 34s and 1% of 16-24s who have also bought a property with a mortgage
    Good God no it is not saying that!

    Please read my post properly.

    By your logic if the chart says "52% of those aged 35-44 have bought a property with a mortgage" then it also says:

    81.9% of those aged 45-54 have bought a property with a mortgage, and

    95.6% of those aged 55-64 have bought a property with a mortgage, and

    100% of those over 65 have bought a property with a mortgage.

    (And also 100% of those over 65 own a property without a mortgage.)

    You have misunderstood the chart. Feel free to admit you are wr*ng, it's not hard ;-)

    image
    Well it certainly doesn't say only 29% of 35-44s have a property with a mortgage either or only 61% of over 65s are owner occupiers.

    You simply can't bring yourself to admit you were wrong, can you?
    I genuinely can't read that graph in any way that makes sense. Surely the lesson of this is that people should stop producing graphs that are so incoherent in what they are trying to show.
    Actually looking at it I can understand it but it is not immediately clear. Ben is right and HYUFD is wrong.

    for the 35 - 44 tranche a total of 32.6% of people have bought a house. That is split down into 3.3% who own it outright and 29.3% who own it with a mortgage. Obviously the house ownership grows with age and just as obviously by the time you get to the 65 or over age range the vast majority of those house owners have now paid off their mortgages. Hence 61.6% own outright whilst 4.4% still have a mortgage - making total house ownership of
    66% of the age range.

    I think... :)
    No, you're both wrong. It's the percentage of the total owned homes of that type per age category. So of the 100% of homes owned outright, 61.6% are owned by over 65s, 23.9% by the next category down etc...

    It is a rubbish visualisation, though.
    Like I said. Bloody awful graph :)
    On that point you're 100% right!
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,668
    edited January 2023
    MaxPB said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    DJ41a said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    By then they will almost certainly own property themselves given the age of first property ownership is 39 and be starting to look to retirement

    HYUFD I am telling you as a young person, it's not going to happen.

    I own a flat, I hate the Tories for what they have done to us. You are finished.
    Not many young people own a flat though
    Yes because of our failure of economic policy.

    Housing crash now, fuck the elderly.
    If there is a housing crash the young will be rogered big time, .
    Exactly! The elderly with paid off mortgages will simply have less to pass on to their younger heirs. The young who have mortgages will be totally screwed!
    Most people with mortgages will be screwed - including many landlords.

    Most young people haven't got mortgages. Inheriting half as much isn't any kind of a problem if they were going to buy a house with it and houses have halved in value.

    I'm with Horse. Bring on the housing market crash. (I don't share his attitude towards the elderly, though.)

    image
    Those figures for ages 55-64 are remarkably low?
    As most of them have already bought with a mortgage by that age
    Clearly not, based on that graph.
    No clearly, as DJ14 realises now it is cumulative.

    So in fact 52% of those aged 35-44 have bought a property with a mortgage, not 29%
    No, I don't think it's even that. It's a terrible chart that's for sure.

    What I think it's showing is the percentage of a) outright owners and b) owners with a mortgages, who fall in each age group. Hence the percentages for each series add up to 100.

    So, for example, 61.6% of people who own outright are 65 and over. And 29.3% of mortgage holders are in the age group 35 to 44.

    It says nothing about what percentage of a given age group own a house outright, or with a mortgage.

    It's certainly not saying that 52% of those aged 35-44 have bought a property with a mortgage.
    It is once you add the 22% of 25 to 34s and 1% of 16-24s who have also bought a property with a mortgage
    Good God no it is not saying that!

    Please read my post properly.

    By your logic if the chart says "52% of those aged 35-44 have bought a property with a mortgage" then it also says:

    81.9% of those aged 45-54 have bought a property with a mortgage, and

    95.6% of those aged 55-64 have bought a property with a mortgage, and

    100% of those over 65 have bought a property with a mortgage.

    (And also 100% of those over 65 own a property without a mortgage.)

    You have misunderstood the chart. Feel free to admit you are wr*ng, it's not hard ;-)

    image
    Well it certainly doesn't say only 29% of 35-44s have a property with a mortgage either or only 61% of over 65s are owner occupiers.

    You simply can't bring yourself to admit you were wrong, can you?
    I genuinely can't read that graph in any way that makes sense. Surely the lesson of this is that people should stop producing graphs that are so incoherent in what they are trying to show.
    Actually looking at it I can understand it but it is not immediately clear. Ben is right and HYUFD is wrong.

    for the 35 - 44 tranche a total of 32.6% of people have bought a house. That is split down into 3.3% who own it outright and 29.3% who own it with a mortgage. Obviously the house ownership grows with age and just as obviously by the time you get to the 65 or over age range the vast majority of those house owners have now paid off their mortgages. Hence 61.6% own outright whilst 4.4% still have a mortgage - making total house ownership of
    66% of the age range.

    I think... :)
    No, you're both wrong. It's the percentage of the total owned homes of that type per age category. So of the 100% of homes owned outright, 61.6% are owned by over 65s, 23.9% by the next category down etc...

    It is a rubbish visualisation, though.
    Hey, that's what I said 20 minutes ago!

    "What I think it's showing is the percentage of a) outright owners and b) owners with a mortgages, who fall in each age group. Hence the percentages for each series add up to 100."
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,636
    stjohn said:

    Lord Kenneth Baker interviewed on Newsnight tonight. Talking a lot of sense in my opinion. However the authority of his arguments was somewhat undermined by his mobile phone going off four times during a short interview and his having no idea how to address the problem. 😀

    First thing you have to do when you go on TV is tell your family and friends not to try to phone you.
  • Options
    stjohnstjohn Posts: 1,779
    Foxy said:

    Andy_JS said:

    stjohn said:

    Lord Kenneth Baker interviewed on Newsnight tonight. Talking a lot of sense in my opinion. However the authority of his arguments was somewhat undermined by his mobile phone going off four times during a short interview and his having no idea how to address the problem. 😀

    First thing you have to do when you go on TV is tell your family and friends not to try to phone you.
    Or switch it off...
    Yes. First thing is to switch it off.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,612

    Just out of interest and very much on topic is it realistic to think that someone lying about being Jewish and their parent being in the largest disaster in the nation's history would actually get away with it for more than 30 seconds in the UK? I mean our newspapers are truly terrible in so many ways but they are terriers when it comes to lies about politicians personal lives. And was the whole of social media simply asleep?

    He was elected by a party which celebrates the blatant lies of its last President.
    It wasn't unknown that he was a dodgy character prior to the election, either.

    The media seriously dropped the ball, though.
    As did the Democrats, though slightly more understandably in the circumstances.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Santos
    ...Democrats took Santos seriously enough that Jill Biden campaigned for Zimmerman.[60] His campaign tried in vain to interest the media, at both the national and local levels, to look more closely at Santos. "We knew a lot about him did not add up; we were very conscious of that", Zimmerman said later. "But we didn't have the resources as a campaign to do the kind of digging that had to be done."[31]

    One local outlet, The North Shore Leader, a weekly newspaper serving the affluent suburban area of that name that has historically been the core of the district, did report on the questions raised by Santos's personal financial disclosure forms when he finally filed them in September 2022, as well as some other dubious claims of his personal wealth. No other media outlet reported on the matter until after the election...

  • Options
    Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 46% (=)
    CON: 29% (+1)
    LDM: 9% (-1)
    REF: 6% (=)
    GRN: 3% (-2)

    via @BMGResearch, 24-26 Jan

    (Changes with 1 Dec)
  • Options
    WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 8,503
    edited January 2023

    Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 46% (=)
    CON: 29% (+1)
    LDM: 9% (-1)
    REF: 6% (=)
    GRN: 3% (-2)

    via @BMGResearch, 24-26 Jan

    (Changes with 1 Dec)

    Tory revival ! Commons majority nailed-on again !
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,612
    Andy_JS said:

    stjohn said:

    Lord Kenneth Baker interviewed on Newsnight tonight. Talking a lot of sense in my opinion. However the authority of his arguments was somewhat undermined by his mobile phone going off four times during a short interview and his having no idea how to address the problem. 😀

    First thing you have to do when you go on TV is tell your family and friends not to try to phone you.
    Best done before you go on air ?
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,612
    Should he not declare an interest ?

    Santos: In New York’s third congressional district, we are seeing an uptick in crime
    https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1620561429463179264
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,612
    There is potentially a larger, Gaetz shaped scandal brewing.
  • Options
    DJ41aDJ41a Posts: 174
    edited February 2023
    Is the current vacancy for the Tory chairmanship the longest ever?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chairman_of_the_Conservative_Party

    Okay it's not a public position, but the fact that the vacancy is unfilled is still Sunak's "fault", if one can call it a fault to run the Tory party so badly. Arguably he's doing the country a favour.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,612
    Voter fraud in Florida seems to be relatively consequence free, if you’re voting Republican.

    4th resident of The Villages admits to voting twice in the 2020 election
    John Rider avoids jail time under pre-trial intervention program
    https://www.clickorlando.com/news/local/2023/01/30/4th-resident-of-the-villages-admits-to-voting-twice-in-the-2020-election/
    … Rider indicated in court papers that he plans to “buy out” his requirement of completing 50 hours of community service at a cost of $10 per hour.
    Three other residents of The Villages accused of voting twice signed similar pretrial intervention contracts last year.
    All four were facing a maximum of five years in prison if a jury convicted them of a third-degree felony.
    As part of their agreements with the state, Joan Halstead, Charles Barnes and Jay Ketcik were required to complete a 12-week adult civics class based on the textbook “We the People; the Citizen and the Constitution.”

    Under the pretrial intervention contracts, prosecution of the defendants will be deferred for a period of 18 months, with the possibility that it will be permanently deferred if they successfully complete the court-ordered requirements…
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,612
    On topic, more pertinently than the lies about his past, there are numerous questions about an awful lot of very odd looking election expense claims.

    The Republican DA looks prepared to bring charges.

    https://www.politico.com/news/2023/01/30/george-santos-new-york-nassau-county-da-00080083
    When Long Island Republicans organized in 2021 to take back the Nassau County District Attorney’s Office after 16 years of Democratic control, no one expected the first blockbuster case to be against a sitting member of the party.

    Yet here we are…
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,636
  • Options
    DJ41aDJ41a Posts: 174
    edited February 2023
    FPT
    Cyclefree said:

    DougSeal said:

    DougSeal said:

    Ireland and Britain are almost intimately historically connected, whether anyone on either side likes it or not. Joyce also had trouble resolving this contradiction, and often wrote in English about the quandary .

    As I mentioned a few weeks back, I remember reading that were up to 12 million people of partly Irish descent, in England alone. There must be another couple of million in Scotland.

    Virtually all of that history is negative. As I said up thread it’s a mighty shock to the historically challenged English to find out how much Irish people hate them. There’s a lot of naïveté about how we are one big happy family whereas we’re they’re implacable historic enemy
    I'm not sure that that makes us one big happy family. It certainly means that the ethnic interconnections are much greater than many people on both sides might want to acknowledge, though.
    You miss the point. We’re not. They absolutely despise us all but we on this side of the Irish Sea are in constant denial about it.
    An exaggeration. They do not despise each and every English person.

    What is certainly true is that the English have very little understanding of their history in Ireland and how they treated the Irish in their own country and those who migrated here. There is a great deal of arrogant condescension in their approach to Ireland and this has been particularly noticeable among many Tories.
    The Catholic Irish rarely have an issue with the English. On the whole, they're quite fond of the English. They're often not too keen on "the Brits", though.

    Most of the Protestant Irish see themselves as British. But some of them do have a problem with the English. See the Ulster loyalist song, "The Englishman's Betrayal".

    It's the Scots that hate the English.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,995
    Andy_JS said:

    stjohn said:

    Lord Kenneth Baker interviewed on Newsnight tonight. Talking a lot of sense in my opinion. However the authority of his arguments was somewhat undermined by his mobile phone going off four times during a short interview and his having no idea how to address the problem. 😀

    First thing you have to do when you go on TV is tell your family and friends not to try to phone you.
    My friends and (especially) family would love to embarrass me when on TV, so I follow the simple expedient of turning my phone off.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,995
    Nigelb said:

    There is potentially a larger, Gaetz shaped scandal brewing.

    There is indeed.
  • Options
    carnforthcarnforth Posts: 3,209
    edited February 2023


    Behold, movement. (the Times)
  • Options
    GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,847
    carnforth said:



    Behold, movement. (the Times)

    Sounds like good news.
  • Options
    GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,847
    Nobody is awake, but two new polls in NZ put Labour back in the lead, by a small margin, after Ardern’s stepping down.

    This surprises me, as I’d assumed she was actually a net benefit to her party.

    The new PM, Chris Hipkins, will be happy that he is being granted a modest honeymoon by voters.
  • Options
    carnforthcarnforth Posts: 3,209

    Nobody is awake, but two new polls in NZ put Labour back in the lead, by a small margin, after Ardern’s stepping down.

    This surprises me, as I’d assumed she was actually a net benefit to her party.

    The new PM, Chris Hipkins, will be happy that he is being granted a modest honeymoon by voters.

    What's his reputation within the party, and in the country?
  • Options
    GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,847
    edited February 2023
    carnforth said:

    Nobody is awake, but two new polls in NZ put Labour back in the lead, by a small margin, after Ardern’s stepping down.

    This surprises me, as I’d assumed she was actually a net benefit to her party.

    The new PM, Chris Hipkins, will be happy that he is being granted a modest honeymoon by voters.

    What's his reputation within the party, and in the country?
    I think he was considered a competent “bruiser”, like John Reid was all those years ago, albeit wrapped up in a dweebish and not especially likeable form.

    He’s already made a subtle, but possibly clever, re-shuffle which has removed some egregious under-performers from where they were doing damage.

    I think when Ardern resigned, the commentariat assumed this was it for Labour, but it seems that, for now, NZ voters want to be charitable.

    Hipkins’s opponent, Chris Luxon, Leader of National, does not exactly provoke huge enthusiasm.
  • Options
    - ”… the things that he has said about himself have proved to be total fabrications.

    So, oafism not confined to London politicians.

    Political parties really should conduct due diligence.
  • Options

    30 point Labour lead by July.

    Only if Labour counter their own corruption scandals.

    https://twitter.com/skynews/status/1612345929629155329?s=46&t=kIulQMq5Dv5XbeBGQtGDMw
  • Options

    Nobody is awake, but two new polls in NZ put Labour back in the lead, by a small margin, after Ardern’s stepping down.

    This surprises me, as I’d assumed she was actually a net benefit to her party.

    The new PM, Chris Hipkins, will be happy that he is being granted a modest honeymoon by voters.

    I'm not convinced the Nationals have sealed the deal.
  • Options
    carnforth said:



    Behold, movement. (the Times)

    Good news, and two things to note: both sides have moved, despite how it will be spun in the coming days, and this could have been agreed years ago.

    Also, the DUP will almost certainly vote against it and a chunk of the ERG too - the question is, how many?
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,612
    This probably won't pass, but nonetheless..

    A new intro'd bill in Arizona would criminalize drag in presence of a minor as a felony punishable by up to 15 years in prison and a requirement to register as a sex offender. The bill defines drag as just singing and dancing while wearing make-up.
    https://mobile.twitter.com/Esqueer_/status/1620467163172868096
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,612
    Incentives.

    Few people realise how lucrative it is to be an antivax grifter. @alexberenson a middling player in the field makes an estimated ~$108,000/month from his Substack alone, roughly 10X what I make as a a very senior infectious disease epidemiologist.
    https://mobile.twitter.com/BallouxFrancois/status/1620512284086009860
  • Options
    A legal expert has warned Scotland’s controversial gender laws will provide men “who cross-dress for erotic purposes” with a “magic certificate” to access women’s spaces.

    https://twitter.com/magnusllewellin/status/1620673022339284992
  • Options
    Interesting point:

    There’s a good argument that it’s a mistake to regulate crypto because you can end up having to bail out investors who you have convinced that it’s now safe. And do we really want the UK to be a “ global crypto hub”?

    https://twitter.com/ruskin147/status/1620681347974201344

    “Never stand between a fool and his folly”…
  • Options

    carnforth said:



    Behold, movement. (the Times)

    Good news, and two things to note: both sides have moved, despite how it will be spun in the coming days, and this could have been agreed years ago.

    Also, the DUP will almost certainly vote against it and a chunk of the ERG too - the question is, how many?
    The Times understands that the customs element of the deal had been due to be announced in January but was pulled at the last minute. One source suggested that Brussels had feared Rishi Sunak could not sell the complete package to the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) and Brexiteers in his own party....

    ...Sunak is also nervous about reaction to the compromise among Brexit-supporting MPs and in particular any intervention by Boris Johnson, who agreed to the original protocol with the EU.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/uk-and-eu-set-for-northern-ireland-brexit-deal-tj9v9bgzw
  • Options
    No 10 was warned about concerns over Dominic Raab’s behaviour before Rishi Sunak appointed him deputy prime minister in the autumn.

    Civil servants flagged that there had been “issues” with Raab in his previous departments before Sunak decided to bring him back into government. Downing Street sources insisted that the prime minister was not “directly told” and that officials never advised against appointing Raab.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/no10-was-warned-of-dominic-raab-issues-before-rishi-sunak-promoted-him-9dg708grs
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,282

    carnforth said:



    Behold, movement. (the Times)

    Good news, and two things to note: both sides have moved, despite how it will be spun in the coming days, and this could have been agreed years ago.

    Also, the DUP will almost certainly vote against it and a chunk of the ERG too - the question is, how many?
    The Times understands that the customs element of the deal had been due to be announced in January but was pulled at the last minute. One source suggested that Brussels had feared Rishi Sunak could not sell the complete package to the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) and Brexiteers in his own party....

    ...Sunak is also nervous about reaction to the compromise among Brexit-supporting MPs and in particular any intervention by Boris Johnson, who agreed to the original protocol with the EU.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/uk-and-eu-set-for-northern-ireland-brexit-deal-tj9v9bgzw
    Great, so we have a compromise that Sunak cannot sell to his nutters.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,242

    Is there no recall process?

    Doesn’t look as though he has one, certainly 😉

    That poll is deeply disturbing. WTF are the 29% who think he shouldn’t resign thinking?
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,242
    edited February 2023
    IanB2 said:

    carnforth said:



    Behold, movement. (the Times)

    Good news, and two things to note: both sides have moved, despite how it will be spun in the coming days, and this could have been agreed years ago.

    Also, the DUP will almost certainly vote against it and a chunk of the ERG too - the question is, how many?
    The Times understands that the customs element of the deal had been due to be announced in January but was pulled at the last minute. One source suggested that Brussels had feared Rishi Sunak could not sell the complete package to the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) and Brexiteers in his own party....

    ...Sunak is also nervous about reaction to the compromise among Brexit-supporting MPs and in particular any intervention by Boris Johnson, who agreed to the original protocol with the EU.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/uk-and-eu-set-for-northern-ireland-brexit-deal-tj9v9bgzw
    Great, so we have a compromise that Sunak cannot sell to his nutters.
    If Sunak still passes it with Labour help pile on a 2023 election.

    Edit - FFS Autocorrect!
  • Options
    ydoethur said:

    IanB2 said:

    carnforth said:



    Behold, movement. (the Times)

    Good news, and two things to note: both sides have moved, despite how it will be spun in the coming days, and this could have been agreed years ago.

    Also, the DUP will almost certainly vote against it and a chunk of the ERG too - the question is, how many?
    The Times understands that the customs element of the deal had been due to be announced in January but was pulled at the last minute. One source suggested that Brussels had feared Rishi Sunak could not sell the complete package to the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) and Brexiteers in his own party....

    ...Sunak is also nervous about reaction to the compromise among Brexit-supporting MPs and in particular any intervention by Boris Johnson, who agreed to the original protocol with the EU.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/uk-and-eu-set-for-northern-ireland-brexit-deal-tj9v9bgzw
    Great, so we have a compromise that Sunak cannot sell to his nutters.
    If Sunil still passes it with Labour help pile on a 2023 election.
    Even autocorrect doesn't rate Sunak.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,405

    Interesting point:

    There’s a good argument that it’s a mistake to regulate crypto because you can end up having to bail out investors who you have convinced that it’s now safe. And do we really want the UK to be a “ global crypto hub”?

    https://twitter.com/ruskin147/status/1620681347974201344

    “Never stand between a fool and his folly”…

    The argument the other way is that it provides free money for criminals. Billions.

    There doesn’t have to be deposit insurance, either. It’s the “exchanges” that are the problem.

    At the moment it’s safer to invest your money with a bloke from Devon, you met on a pub in Deptford. Who has this plan to steal gold from the Spanish, use it as collateral in slave trading and bribe the government with half the profits to make it legal, retroactively.

    That one actually worked, once.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,242

    ydoethur said:

    IanB2 said:

    carnforth said:



    Behold, movement. (the Times)

    Good news, and two things to note: both sides have moved, despite how it will be spun in the coming days, and this could have been agreed years ago.

    Also, the DUP will almost certainly vote against it and a chunk of the ERG too - the question is, how many?
    The Times understands that the customs element of the deal had been due to be announced in January but was pulled at the last minute. One source suggested that Brussels had feared Rishi Sunak could not sell the complete package to the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) and Brexiteers in his own party....

    ...Sunak is also nervous about reaction to the compromise among Brexit-supporting MPs and in particular any intervention by Boris Johnson, who agreed to the original protocol with the EU.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/uk-and-eu-set-for-northern-ireland-brexit-deal-tj9v9bgzw
    Great, so we have a compromise that Sunak cannot sell to his nutters.
    If Sunil still passes it with Labour help pile on a 2023 election.
    Even autocorrect doesn't rate Sunak.
    It thinks the good Dr Prasannan would do a better job.

    Probably not wrong either…
  • Options
    IanB2 said:

    carnforth said:



    Behold, movement. (the Times)

    Good news, and two things to note: both sides have moved, despite how it will be spun in the coming days, and this could have been agreed years ago.

    Also, the DUP will almost certainly vote against it and a chunk of the ERG too - the question is, how many?
    The Times understands that the customs element of the deal had been due to be announced in January but was pulled at the last minute. One source suggested that Brussels had feared Rishi Sunak could not sell the complete package to the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) and Brexiteers in his own party....

    ...Sunak is also nervous about reaction to the compromise among Brexit-supporting MPs and in particular any intervention by Boris Johnson, who agreed to the original protocol with the EU.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/uk-and-eu-set-for-northern-ireland-brexit-deal-tj9v9bgzw
    Great, so we have a compromise that Sunak cannot sell to his nutters.
    I'm hoping Starmer supports the deal, that will bypass the ERG and DUPers, and enrage them which is always a bonus.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,242

    Interesting point:

    There’s a good argument that it’s a mistake to regulate crypto because you can end up having to bail out investors who you have convinced that it’s now safe. And do we really want the UK to be a “ global crypto hub”?

    https://twitter.com/ruskin147/status/1620681347974201344

    “Never stand between a fool and his folly”…

    The argument the other way is that it provides free money for criminals. Billions.

    There doesn’t have to be deposit insurance, either. It’s the “exchanges” that are the problem.

    At the moment it’s safer to invest your money with a bloke from Devon, you met on a pub in Deptford. Who has this plan to steal gold from the Spanish, use it as collateral in slave trading and bribe the government with half the profits to make it legal, retroactively.

    That one actually worked, once.
    You missed an opportunity. You could have ended *grabs tinfoil hat and Drakes*
  • Options
    TimSTimS Posts: 9,617

    Just a point:

    Trans people are people. They deserve as much respect and compassion as everyone else in our society. This constant "They're a threat!" shittiness that goes on on here is really, really dangerous.

    I think you’ve landed on a very useful and unifying form of words there. Trans people are people.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,405

    Just out of interest and very much on topic is it realistic to think that someone lying about being Jewish and their parent being in the largest disaster in the nation's history would actually get away with it for more than 30 seconds in the UK? I mean our newspapers are truly terrible in so many ways but they are terriers when it comes to lies about politicians personal lives. And was the whole of social media simply asleep?

    {Horatio Bottomley has entered the chat and is offering a guaranteed rate of return}
  • Options
    Nigelb said:

    This probably won't pass, but nonetheless..

    A new intro'd bill in Arizona would criminalize drag in presence of a minor as a felony punishable by up to 15 years in prison and a requirement to register as a sex offender. The bill defines drag as just singing and dancing while wearing make-up.
    https://mobile.twitter.com/Esqueer_/status/1620467163172868096

    Woe betide any child who likes panto or indeed musical theatre more generally. I guess the Frozen live show won't be coming to Arizona, for instance.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,405
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    IanB2 said:

    carnforth said:



    Behold, movement. (the Times)

    Good news, and two things to note: both sides have moved, despite how it will be spun in the coming days, and this could have been agreed years ago.

    Also, the DUP will almost certainly vote against it and a chunk of the ERG too - the question is, how many?
    The Times understands that the customs element of the deal had been due to be announced in January but was pulled at the last minute. One source suggested that Brussels had feared Rishi Sunak could not sell the complete package to the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) and Brexiteers in his own party....

    ...Sunak is also nervous about reaction to the compromise among Brexit-supporting MPs and in particular any intervention by Boris Johnson, who agreed to the original protocol with the EU.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/uk-and-eu-set-for-northern-ireland-brexit-deal-tj9v9bgzw
    Great, so we have a compromise that Sunak cannot sell to his nutters.
    If Sunil still passes it with Labour help pile on a 2023 election.
    Even autocorrect doesn't rate Sunak.
    It thinks the good Dr Prasannan would do a better job.

    Probably not wrong either…
    What about Corporal Hudson?
  • Options

    Nigelb said:

    This probably won't pass, but nonetheless..

    A new intro'd bill in Arizona would criminalize drag in presence of a minor as a felony punishable by up to 15 years in prison and a requirement to register as a sex offender. The bill defines drag as just singing and dancing while wearing make-up.
    https://mobile.twitter.com/Esqueer_/status/1620467163172868096

    Woe betide any child who likes panto or indeed musical theatre more generally. I guess the Frozen live show won't be coming to Arizona, for instance.
    What happens if they watch Tootsie or Some Like It Hot?
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,242

    Just out of interest and very much on topic is it realistic to think that someone lying about being Jewish and their parent being in the largest disaster in the nation's history would actually get away with it for more than 30 seconds in the UK? I mean our newspapers are truly terrible in so many ways but they are terriers when it comes to lies about politicians personal lives. And was the whole of social media simply asleep?

    {Horatio Bottomley has entered the chat and is offering a guaranteed rate of return}
    Oh, he was special.

    Did you ever read about the time he tried to rig a horse race?

    But he did have a sense of humour. While in prison he was visited by a friend, who found him sewing mail bags. ‘Ah, sewing?’ asked the friend. ‘No, reaping.’ came the grim reply.
  • Options
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    IanB2 said:

    carnforth said:



    Behold, movement. (the Times)

    Good news, and two things to note: both sides have moved, despite how it will be spun in the coming days, and this could have been agreed years ago.

    Also, the DUP will almost certainly vote against it and a chunk of the ERG too - the question is, how many?
    The Times understands that the customs element of the deal had been due to be announced in January but was pulled at the last minute. One source suggested that Brussels had feared Rishi Sunak could not sell the complete package to the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) and Brexiteers in his own party....

    ...Sunak is also nervous about reaction to the compromise among Brexit-supporting MPs and in particular any intervention by Boris Johnson, who agreed to the original protocol with the EU.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/uk-and-eu-set-for-northern-ireland-brexit-deal-tj9v9bgzw
    Great, so we have a compromise that Sunak cannot sell to his nutters.
    If Sunil still passes it with Labour help pile on a 2023 election.
    Even autocorrect doesn't rate Sunak.
    It thinks the good Dr Prasannan would do a better job.

    Probably not wrong either…
    Anyone who loves trains as much as Sunil would get my vote.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,242

    Nigelb said:

    This probably won't pass, but nonetheless..

    A new intro'd bill in Arizona would criminalize drag in presence of a minor as a felony punishable by up to 15 years in prison and a requirement to register as a sex offender. The bill defines drag as just singing and dancing while wearing make-up.
    https://mobile.twitter.com/Esqueer_/status/1620467163172868096

    Woe betide any child who likes panto or indeed musical theatre more generally. I guess the Frozen live show won't be coming to Arizona, for instance.
    What happens if they watch Tootsie or Some Like It Hot?
    That latter is why the law’s a complete Lemmon.
  • Options

    Nigelb said:

    This probably won't pass, but nonetheless..

    A new intro'd bill in Arizona would criminalize drag in presence of a minor as a felony punishable by up to 15 years in prison and a requirement to register as a sex offender. The bill defines drag as just singing and dancing while wearing make-up.
    https://mobile.twitter.com/Esqueer_/status/1620467163172868096

    Woe betide any child who likes panto or indeed musical theatre more generally. I guess the Frozen live show won't be coming to Arizona, for instance.
    What happens if they watch Tootsie or Some Like It Hot?
    They will go straight to hell, after turning gay.
  • Options
    ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    This probably won't pass, but nonetheless..

    A new intro'd bill in Arizona would criminalize drag in presence of a minor as a felony punishable by up to 15 years in prison and a requirement to register as a sex offender. The bill defines drag as just singing and dancing while wearing make-up.
    https://mobile.twitter.com/Esqueer_/status/1620467163172868096

    Woe betide any child who likes panto or indeed musical theatre more generally. I guess the Frozen live show won't be coming to Arizona, for instance.
    What happens if they watch Tootsie or Some Like It Hot?
    That latter is why the law’s a complete Lemmon.
    Nobody's perfect.
  • Options
    Nigelb said:

    This probably won't pass, but nonetheless..

    A new intro'd bill in Arizona would criminalize drag in presence of a minor as a felony punishable by up to 15 years in prison and a requirement to register as a sex offender. The bill defines drag as just singing and dancing while wearing make-up.
    https://mobile.twitter.com/Esqueer_/status/1620467163172868096

    That would stop 'Kiss' touring.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,612
    ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    This probably won't pass, but nonetheless..

    A new intro'd bill in Arizona would criminalize drag in presence of a minor as a felony punishable by up to 15 years in prison and a requirement to register as a sex offender. The bill defines drag as just singing and dancing while wearing make-up.
    https://mobile.twitter.com/Esqueer_/status/1620467163172868096

    Woe betide any child who likes panto or indeed musical theatre more generally. I guess the Frozen live show won't be coming to Arizona, for instance.
    What happens if they watch Tootsie or Some Like It Hot?
    That latter is why the law’s a complete Lemmon.
    That's a very unDustinguished pun.
  • Options
    THE chief strategist for the 2014 Yes Scotland campaign has set out a new route to independence under a UK Labour Government.

    Stephen Noon described a route map based on the likely prospect of Sir Keir Starmer winning the keys to Downing Street at the next general election, expected before the end of next year.

    He argued that in exchange for giving legislative consent to the Labour government for a Westminster bill reforming the UK constitution, Holyrood should demand powers to hold an independence referendum. He said under his plan a new independence referendum could be held in 2027 or 2028.

    https://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/23290184.stephen-noon-unveils-path-independence-labour-government/
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,242
    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    This probably won't pass, but nonetheless..

    A new intro'd bill in Arizona would criminalize drag in presence of a minor as a felony punishable by up to 15 years in prison and a requirement to register as a sex offender. The bill defines drag as just singing and dancing while wearing make-up.
    https://mobile.twitter.com/Esqueer_/status/1620467163172868096

    Woe betide any child who likes panto or indeed musical theatre more generally. I guess the Frozen live show won't be coming to Arizona, for instance.
    What happens if they watch Tootsie or Some Like It Hot?
    That latter is why the law’s a complete Lemmon.
    That's a very unDustinguished pun.
    Have I kicked off a Raft of bad puns?
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,003

    Just a point:

    Trans people are people. They deserve as much respect and compassion as everyone else in our society. This constant "They're a threat!" shittiness that goes on on here is really, really dangerous.

    Women are people too and have rights too.

    You might note that the concern is not with trans people but with men who will abuse poorly drafted law. The attacks on critics of this law frequently resort to blanket claims of “transphobia” because their initial attempt to get it through with “no debate” has been ignored, mainly by women (frequently left wing) who will not be told to “shut up”.
    Wow. I never realised women have rights too. Thanks for telling me, Carlotta (/sarcasm mode).

    Read the tweet you posted. It is part of a constant drip-drip of poison that trans people are a threat. The tweet connects, to anyone reading it, trans people and negative traits.

    Some questions: how many trans people cross-dress for erotic purposes? All? Some? None? If they do, is giving them access to "women's spaces" (i.e. loos) fulfilling these dark "erotic purposes"? What about trans people who just want to have a pee without being hassled or beaten up when they go into the 'wrong' toilet? What even are "erotic purposes"?

    The tweet below about Arizona shows the direction we're heading in, if we're not careful.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,612
    The cut in R&D tax credits looks damaging.

    UK tech start-ups hasten overseas expansion after R&D tax cuts

    Move threatens Britain’s standing as a tech hub and government ambitions to grow the sector
    https://www.ft.com/content/f9b8a08a-2e98-4e10-9dd1-188d30408c36
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,007

    THE chief strategist for the 2014 Yes Scotland campaign has set out a new route to independence under a UK Labour Government.

    Stephen Noon described a route map based on the likely prospect of Sir Keir Starmer winning the keys to Downing Street at the next general election, expected before the end of next year.

    He argued that in exchange for giving legislative consent to the Labour government for a Westminster bill reforming the UK constitution, Holyrood should demand powers to hold an independence referendum. He said under his plan a new independence referendum could be held in 2027 or 2028.

    https://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/23290184.stephen-noon-unveils-path-independence-labour-government/

    Unless it is a hung parliament and Sir Keir needs SNP support to pass legislation, why would he care?
  • Options
    DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 24,391
    edited February 2023
    Andy_JS said:
    Knife-enabled homicides (great jargon) have declined to pre-covid levels. From your link:-

    The total number of homicides recorded under Home Office counting rules for 2022 was 109, which was 17% down on 2021, the Met said. Nine homicides were gun enabled in 2022, a 25% fall and the lowest figure since 2014. Sixty-nine homicides were knife enabled, a 17% reduction and equal to the pre-pandemic figure for 2019.
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jan/06/met-police-chief-mark-rowley-london-fantastically-safe-homicide-rate-falls
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,007
    edited February 2023

    carnforth said:



    Behold, movement. (the Times)

    Good news, and two things to note: both sides have moved, despite how it will be spun in the coming days, and this could have been agreed years ago.

    Also, the DUP will almost certainly vote against it and a chunk of the ERG too - the question is, how many?
    I think the DUP wouldn't now, removing the Irish sea border is more important for them. They would probably abstain.

    The ERG would still but with a majority of 80 Sunak might still get it through
  • Options
    StockyStocky Posts: 9,718
    edited February 2023

    Just a point:

    Trans people are people. They deserve as much respect and compassion as everyone else in our society. This constant "They're a threat!" shittiness that goes on on here is really, really dangerous.

    Women are people too and have rights too.

    You might note that the concern is not with transgender people but with men who will abuse poorly drafted law. The attacks on critics of this law frequently resort to blanket claims of “transphobia” because their initial attempt to get it through with “no debate” has been ignored, mainly by women (frequently left wing) who will not be told to “shut up”.
    Yes, and those that cannot distinguish between people who hate transgender people (? none on this board) and those appalled by transgender activists/ transgender ideology /politicians who make bad laws seem to have misplaced their brains on this issue.

    And, as you say, your post wasn't about trans people it was about miscreants who pretend to be to make use of a dodgy law. (Personally, I think this risk is exaggerated but I may be wrong.)
  • Options
    This headline in ‘The Times of Israel’ uses a word I don’t think would be acceptable in European, American or Australasian press.

    https://www.timesofisrael.com/this-young-american-couple-had-scotlands-first-ever-queer-jewish-wedding/
  • Options

    Just a point:

    Trans people are people. They deserve as much respect and compassion as everyone else in our society. This constant "They're a threat!" shittiness that goes on on here is really, really dangerous.

    Women are people too and have rights too.

    You might note that the concern is not with trans people but with men who will abuse poorly drafted law. The attacks on critics of this law frequently resort to blanket claims of “transphobia” because their initial attempt to get it through with “no debate” has been ignored, mainly by women (frequently left wing) who will not be told to “shut up”.
    Wow. I never realised women have rights too. Thanks for telling me, Carlotta (/sarcasm mode).

    Read the tweet you posted. It is part of a constant drip-drip of poison that trans people are a threat. The tweet connects, to anyone reading it, trans people and negative traits.

    Some questions: how many trans people cross-dress for erotic purposes? All? Some? None? If they do, is giving them access to "women's spaces" (i.e. loos) fulfilling these dark "erotic purposes"? What about trans people who just want to have a pee without being hassled or beaten up when they go into the 'wrong' toilet? What even are "erotic purposes"?

    The tweet below about Arizona shows the direction we're heading in, if we're not careful.
    If you have the time I suggest watching the testimony yesterday at the HoC Women and Equalities Committee. Naomi Cunningham made the point that when the GRA was introduced it was on the basis that it would affect a very small number of people because gender dysphoria was mercifully rare and those with the condition should be treated with compassion and sympathy.

    The issue with the Scottish GRR bill is that it will substantially widen the cohort to whom a GRC is available. People like “Isla Bryson” a convicted double rapist with prison onset gender dysphoria.

    The statistics could be crudely read as suggesting that trans people are more likely to be sex offenders. Not a view I take, but very much more likely that sex offenders are falsely claiming to be trans.

    That’s why Self-ID (not in the SNP manifesto) without any gate keeping is potentially highly dangerous. That’s what the quarrel is with - not with trans people.


  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,242

    This headline in ‘The Times of Israel’ uses a word I don’t think would be acceptable in European, American or Australasian press.

    https://www.timesofisrael.com/this-young-american-couple-had-scotlands-first-ever-queer-jewish-wedding/

    https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/Q/bo3534360.html
  • Options

    This headline in ‘The Times of Israel’ uses a word I don’t think would be acceptable in European, American or Australasian press.

    https://www.timesofisrael.com/this-young-american-couple-had-scotlands-first-ever-queer-jewish-wedding/

    "Scotland's"?

    Its not that we find the word acceptable, its just that you're not that interesting. The press would rather talk about more interesting things instead, like TV shows like Queer Eye.
  • Options
    algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,541

    carnforth said:



    Behold, movement. (the Times)

    Good news, and two things to note: both sides have moved, despite how it will be spun in the coming days, and this could have been agreed years ago.

    Also, the DUP will almost certainly vote against it and a chunk of the ERG too - the question is, how many?
    The Times understands that the customs element of the deal had been due to be announced in January but was pulled at the last minute. One source suggested that Brussels had feared Rishi Sunak could not sell the complete package to the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) and Brexiteers in his own party....

    ...Sunak is also nervous about reaction to the compromise among Brexit-supporting MPs and in particular any intervention by Boris Johnson, who agreed to the original protocol with the EU.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/uk-and-eu-set-for-northern-ireland-brexit-deal-tj9v9bgzw
    The DUP are defined only by what they don't want. For mysterious reasons the media give them a truly easy ride on the subject of what they actually want. It's time their bluff was called.

    Suggestions and guesses welcome as to what the DUP want, but they have to be within the laws of logic and gravity. And unicorns don't exist.

  • Options

    Just a point:

    Trans people are people. They deserve as much respect and compassion as everyone else in our society. This constant "They're a threat!" shittiness that goes on on here is really, really dangerous.

    I don't think there's anyone sensible on here who is saying trans people are a threat. What people are saying though is that trans people are people and need to be treated with respect. Women are people and need to be treated with respect.

    Trans people are not sexually women and where safeguarding means a women's-only space is required, then that may mean that trans people need to be excluded for safeguarding reasons, just as men are excluded for safeguarding reasons.

    That does not make trans people lesser or not people, any more than it makes men lesser or not people.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,405
    ydoethur said:

    Interesting point:

    There’s a good argument that it’s a mistake to regulate crypto because you can end up having to bail out investors who you have convinced that it’s now safe. And do we really want the UK to be a “ global crypto hub”?

    https://twitter.com/ruskin147/status/1620681347974201344

    “Never stand between a fool and his folly”…

    The argument the other way is that it provides free money for criminals. Billions.

    There doesn’t have to be deposit insurance, either. It’s the “exchanges” that are the problem.

    At the moment it’s safer to invest your money with a bloke from Devon, you met on a pub in Deptford. Who has this plan to steal gold from the Spanish, use it as collateral in slave trading and bribe the government with half the profits to make it legal, retroactively.

    That one actually worked, once.
    You missed an opportunity. You could have ended *grabs tinfoil hat and Drakes*
    Well, according to a number of people in this parish, we do need migrant workers and the demands for a wage to actually live off are bad for the economy…

    {digs out ancient map of Sierra Leone}
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,612
    Nikki Haley poised to enter 2024 presidential race
    https://www.politico.com/news/2023/01/31/nikki-haley-2024-presidential-race-00080575
    ...Haley declared in 2021 that she wouldn’t run for president if Trump did. But Haley telegraphed her change of plans in an interview with Fox News earlier this month, saying, “It’s bigger than one person. And when you’re looking at the future of America, I think it’s time for new generational change. I don’t think you need to be 80 years old to go be a leader in D.C.”..
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,405

    This headline in ‘The Times of Israel’ uses a word I don’t think would be acceptable in European, American or Australasian press.

    https://www.timesofisrael.com/this-young-american-couple-had-scotlands-first-ever-queer-jewish-wedding/

    You seem to have missed out on the campaign by gay people to take that word, and redefine what it means - as something positive.
  • Options

    Just a point:

    Trans people are people. They deserve as much respect and compassion as everyone else in our society. This constant "They're a threat!" shittiness that goes on on here is really, really dangerous.

    Women are people too and have rights too.

    You might note that the concern is not with trans people but with men who will abuse poorly drafted law. The attacks on critics of this law frequently resort to blanket claims of “transphobia” because their initial attempt to get it through with “no debate” has been ignored, mainly by women (frequently left wing) who will not be told to “shut up”.
    Wow. I never realised women have rights too. Thanks for telling me, Carlotta (/sarcasm mode).

    Read the tweet you posted. It is part of a constant drip-drip of poison that trans people are a threat. The tweet connects, to anyone reading it, trans people and negative traits.

    Some questions: how many trans people cross-dress for erotic purposes? All? Some? None? If they do, is giving them access to "women's spaces" (i.e. loos) fulfilling these dark "erotic purposes"? What about trans people who just want to have a pee without being hassled or beaten up when they go into the 'wrong' toilet? What even are "erotic purposes"?

    The tweet below about Arizona shows the direction we're heading in, if we're not careful.
    Where does the Tweet do that? It doesn't even mention trans people, I will highlight the word it does use.

    A legal expert has warned Scotland’s controversial gender laws will provide men “who cross-dress for erotic purposes” with a “magic certificate” to access women’s spaces.

    https://twitter.com/magnusllewellin/status/1620673022339284992

    The issue is that men are excluded from women's spaces and this law violates that. Safeguarding needs to exclude men.
  • Options
    algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,541

    Just a point:

    Trans people are people. They deserve as much respect and compassion as everyone else in our society. This constant "They're a threat!" shittiness that goes on on here is really, really dangerous.

    Women are people too and have rights too.

    You might note that the concern is not with trans people but with men who will abuse poorly drafted law. The attacks on critics of this law frequently resort to blanket claims of “transphobia” because their initial attempt to get it through with “no debate” has been ignored, mainly by women (frequently left wing) who will not be told to “shut up”.
    The fact that people have rights is not in issue. The subject only becomes interesting when rights come into conflict with each other (your fist and my nose both have rights). At that point the assertion of rights in themselves does not progress the argument.

  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,306
    Nigelb said:

    Nikki Haley poised to enter 2024 presidential race
    https://www.politico.com/news/2023/01/31/nikki-haley-2024-presidential-race-00080575
    ...Haley declared in 2021 that she wouldn’t run for president if Trump did. But Haley telegraphed her change of plans in an interview with Fox News earlier this month, saying, “It’s bigger than one person. And when you’re looking at the future of America, I think it’s time for new generational change. I don’t think you need to be 80 years old to go be a leader in D.C.”..

    Recent statistics do not support this assertion.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,405

    Just a point:

    Trans people are people. They deserve as much respect and compassion as everyone else in our society. This constant "They're a threat!" shittiness that goes on on here is really, really dangerous.

    Women are people too and have rights too.

    You might note that the concern is not with trans people but with men who will abuse poorly drafted law. The attacks on critics of this law frequently resort to blanket claims of “transphobia” because their initial attempt to get it through with “no debate” has been ignored, mainly by women (frequently left wing) who will not be told to “shut up”.
    Wow. I never realised women have rights too. Thanks for telling me, Carlotta (/sarcasm mode).

    Read the tweet you posted. It is part of a constant drip-drip of poison that trans people are a threat. The tweet connects, to anyone reading it, trans people and negative traits.

    Some questions: how many trans people cross-dress for erotic purposes? All? Some? None? If they do, is giving them access to "women's spaces" (i.e. loos) fulfilling these dark "erotic purposes"? What about trans people who just want to have a pee without being hassled or beaten up when they go into the 'wrong' toilet? What even are "erotic purposes"?

    The tweet below about Arizona shows the direction we're heading in, if we're not careful.
    “Women’s spaces” in the context of this discussion are women’s shelters, prisons etc.

    Which actually have some legal basis for the exclusion of “men” at present. Unlike loos, where it is, I believe, almost entirely social convention.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,674
    edited February 2023
    Labour will use the local elections in May to sharpen its campaign machine ahead of next year’s expected general election with new regional organisers, a bigger digital operation and the slogan “Build a Better Britain”.

    Shadow cabinet ministers were given a presentation on their local election prospects by the party’s campaign director, Morgan McSweeney, on Tuesday as Labour attempts to turn its 20-point poll lead into votes.


    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/feb/01/labour-may-vote-campaign-general-election

    While the Tories will likely use it to indulge in more infighting…
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,405
    edited February 2023
    Don’t know if anyone have been following the outrage about a YouTuber who paid for sight operations for lots of blind people.

    The complaint seems to be that he used the people in videos to raise money.

    Isn’t this just reinventing charities, or have I missed something?
  • Options

    This headline in ‘The Times of Israel’ uses a word I don’t think would be acceptable in European, American or Australasian press.

    https://www.timesofisrael.com/this-young-american-couple-had-scotlands-first-ever-queer-jewish-wedding/

    "Scotland's"?
    VG. Brings to mind Churchill’s famous quote:

    There is a forgotten, nay almost forbidden word, which means more to me than any other. That word is England.

  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,974
    Andy_JS said:
    How many knifings though
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,674
    edited February 2023
    Starbucks doesn’t make coffee shocker

    Consumer group Which? measured the caffeine in cappuccino, espresso and filter coffee at Caffè Nero, Costa, Greggs, Pret a Manger and Starbucks.

    It found Pret's single espresso had six times as much caffeine as Starbucks's.
    :

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-64472214
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,003

    Just a point:

    Trans people are people. They deserve as much respect and compassion as everyone else in our society. This constant "They're a threat!" shittiness that goes on on here is really, really dangerous.

    I don't think there's anyone sensible on here who is saying trans people are a threat. What people are saying though is that trans people are people and need to be treated with respect. Women are people and need to be treated with respect.

    Trans people are not sexually women and where safeguarding means a women's-only space is required, then that may mean that trans people need to be excluded for safeguarding reasons, just as men are excluded for safeguarding reasons.

    That does not make trans people lesser or not people, any more than it makes men lesser or not people.
    "What people are saying though is that trans people are people and need to be treated with respect. "

    I utterly disagree with the above; people are explicitly *not* saying that. All we see on here is the *threat* they pose.

    And that will end up in a very poor place.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,444
    edited February 2023

    This headline in ‘The Times of Israel’ uses a word I don’t think would be acceptable in European, American or Australasian press.

    https://www.timesofisrael.com/this-young-american-couple-had-scotlands-first-ever-queer-jewish-wedding/

    You seem to have missed out on the campaign by gay people to take that word, and redefine what it means - as something positive.
    Indeed.

    I wonder what the sage of Sweden thinks the Q in LGBTQIA2S+ stands for?
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,974
    DJ41a said:

    FPT

    Cyclefree said:

    DougSeal said:

    DougSeal said:

    Ireland and Britain are almost intimately historically connected, whether anyone on either side likes it or not. Joyce also had trouble resolving this contradiction, and often wrote in English about the quandary .

    As I mentioned a few weeks back, I remember reading that were up to 12 million people of partly Irish descent, in England alone. There must be another couple of million in Scotland.

    Virtually all of that history is negative. As I said up thread it’s a mighty shock to the historically challenged English to find out how much Irish people hate them. There’s a lot of naïveté about how we are one big happy family whereas we’re they’re implacable historic enemy
    I'm not sure that that makes us one big happy family. It certainly means that the ethnic interconnections are much greater than many people on both sides might want to acknowledge, though.
    You miss the point. We’re not. They absolutely despise us all but we on this side of the Irish Sea are in constant denial about it.
    An exaggeration. They do not despise each and every English person.

    What is certainly true is that the English have very little understanding of their history in Ireland and how they treated the Irish in their own country and those who migrated here. There is a great deal of arrogant condescension in their approach to Ireland and this has been particularly noticeable among many Tories.
    The Catholic Irish rarely have an issue with the English. On the whole, they're quite fond of the English. They're often not too keen on "the Brits", though.

    Most of the Protestant Irish see themselves as British. But some of them do have a problem with the English. See the Ulster loyalist song, "The Englishman's Betrayal".

    It's the Scots that hate the English.
    Aww did poor diddums get his pigtails pulled by a wee Scots lassie in primary school!
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,405
    malcolmg said:

    Andy_JS said:
    How many knifings though
    First off - the knife crime stats the Daily Mail bleats about include every time the police catch someone carrying a blade.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,003

    Just a point:

    Trans people are people. They deserve as much respect and compassion as everyone else in our society. This constant "They're a threat!" shittiness that goes on on here is really, really dangerous.

    Women are people too and have rights too.

    You might note that the concern is not with trans people but with men who will abuse poorly drafted law. The attacks on critics of this law frequently resort to blanket claims of “transphobia” because their initial attempt to get it through with “no debate” has been ignored, mainly by women (frequently left wing) who will not be told to “shut up”.
    Wow. I never realised women have rights too. Thanks for telling me, Carlotta (/sarcasm mode).

    Read the tweet you posted. It is part of a constant drip-drip of poison that trans people are a threat. The tweet connects, to anyone reading it, trans people and negative traits.

    Some questions: how many trans people cross-dress for erotic purposes? All? Some? None? If they do, is giving them access to "women's spaces" (i.e. loos) fulfilling these dark "erotic purposes"? What about trans people who just want to have a pee without being hassled or beaten up when they go into the 'wrong' toilet? What even are "erotic purposes"?

    The tweet below about Arizona shows the direction we're heading in, if we're not careful.
    Where does the Tweet do that? It doesn't even mention trans people, I will highlight the word it does use.

    A legal expert has warned Scotland’s controversial gender laws will provide men “who cross-dress for erotic purposes” with a “magic certificate” to access women’s spaces.

    (Snip)
    'cross-dressers' is another term for transvestites.

    "Today, the term transvestite is commonly considered outdated and derogatory, with the term cross-dresser used as a more appropriate replacement." (1)

    So yes, the tweet is referring to trans people; just men who dress up as women; not women as men.

    (1): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transvestism
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,974

    Just a point:

    Trans people are people. They deserve as much respect and compassion as everyone else in our society. This constant "They're a threat!" shittiness that goes on on here is really, really dangerous.

    Women are people too and have rights too.

    You might note that the concern is not with trans people but with men who will abuse poorly drafted law. The attacks on critics of this law frequently resort to blanket claims of “transphobia” because their initial attempt to get it through with “no debate” has been ignored, mainly by women (frequently left wing) who will not be told to “shut up”.
    Wow. I never realised women have rights too. Thanks for telling me, Carlotta (/sarcasm mode).

    Read the tweet you posted. It is part of a constant drip-drip of poison that trans people are a threat. The tweet connects, to anyone reading it, trans people and negative traits.

    Some questions: how many trans people cross-dress for erotic purposes? All? Some? None? If they do, is giving them access to "women's spaces" (i.e. loos) fulfilling these dark "erotic purposes"? What about trans people who just want to have a pee without being hassled or beaten up when they go into the 'wrong' toilet? What even are "erotic purposes"?

    The tweet below about Arizona shows the direction we're heading in, if we're not careful.
    You seem desperate , like teh Scottish government, to totally miss the point that people are objecting to MEN gaining access to women's safe places. All this crap about trans people getting beaten up when they go for a piss is unsubstantiated mince. There are nearly always facilities such as unisex disabled toilets that can be used, etc.
    You seem desperate to trash the rights of 50% of the population just on the whim of a few cross dressers , about 0.04% of population and 95% still have their block and tackle.
  • Options
    UK for sale
    Almost 13,000 offshore companies with UK property fail to declare owners


    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/feb/01/almost-13000-offshore-companies-with-uk-property-fail-to-declare-owners
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,974

    malcolmg said:

    Andy_JS said:
    How many knifings though
    First off - the knife crime stats the Daily Mail bleats about include every time the police catch someone carrying a blade.
    Serious question , are they on downward trend as well. Not long ago there was mass hysteria about them in eth papers most days.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,242
    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    Andy_JS said:
    How many knifings though
    First off - the knife crime stats the Daily Mail bleats about include every time the police catch someone carrying a blade.
    Serious question , are they on downward trend as well. Not long ago there was mass hysteria about them in eth papers most days.
    Nah, the Daily Mail's always been this rubbish.
This discussion has been closed.