Pretty depressing discussion on the death penalty, reminiscent of a school debating society. Fortunately, there's no chance of it being brought back during my lifetime, at least. But the fact that it's even deemed worthy of debate adds fuel to the regressive fire we've been playing with for some years now.
Pretty soon, I expect Lee Anderson to pop up and say "my teachers used to beat me to within an inch of my life, and it never did me any harm".
And HYUFD will write "actually, YouGov found that 58% of voters want the cane brought back for when kids are really, really naughty".
I quite upset a relative of mine who told me about getting caned or slippered at school, by opining that anyone who performed such an act in that setting was probably a pervert or just an utter creep who got some sick thrill out of doing it.
It's one of those topics I don't equivocate on - almost all teachers can control kids without hitting them, so it is not necessary for any of them. (That is not the same as permitting schools to handle children who are engaged in violent acts, for the safety of others).
I would have thought that both the teacher inflicting a caning, and the recipient, would find the experience enjoyable and character-forming.
Pretty depressing discussion on the death penalty, reminiscent of a school debating society. Fortunately, there's no chance of it being brought back during my lifetime, at least. But the fact that it's even deemed worthy of debate adds fuel to the regressive fire we've been playing with for some years now.
Pretty soon, I expect Lee Anderson to pop up and say "my teachers used to beat me to within an inch of my life, and it never did me any harm".
And HYUFD will write "actually, YouGov found that 58% of voters want the cane brought back for when kids are really, really naughty".
I quite upset a relative of mine who told me about getting caned or slippered at school, by opining that anyone who performed such an act in that setting was probably a pervert or just an utter creep who got some sick thrill out of doing it.
It's one of those topics I don't equivocate on - almost all teachers can control kids without hitting them, so it is not necessary for any of them. (That is not the same as permitting schools to handle children who are engaged in violent acts, for the safety of others).
I would have thought that both the teacher inflicting a caning, and the recipient, would find the experience enjoyable and character-forming.
I have no doubt a few of my teachers found the experience enjoyable.
Pretty depressing discussion on the death penalty, reminiscent of a school debating society. Fortunately, there's no chance of it being brought back during my lifetime, at least. But the fact that it's even deemed worthy of debate adds fuel to the regressive fire we've been playing with for some years now.
Pretty soon, I expect Lee Anderson to pop up and say "my teachers used to beat me to within an inch of my life, and it never did me any harm".
And HYUFD will write "actually, YouGov found that 58% of voters want the cane brought back for when kids are really, really naughty".
I quite upset a relative of mine who told me about getting caned or slippered at school, by opining that anyone who performed such an act in that setting was probably a pervert or just an utter creep who got some sick thrill out of doing it.
It's one of those topics I don't equivocate on - almost all teachers can control kids without hitting them, so it is not necessary for any of them. (That is not the same as permitting schools to handle children who are engaged in violent acts, for the safety of others).
I would have thought that both the teacher inflicting a caning, and the recipient, would find the experience enjoyable and character-forming.
I'm still with the Mississippi carrying a gun. And being immune from prosecution. I could do a lot to improve Year 7 class sizes after this week.
Pretty depressing discussion on the death penalty, reminiscent of a school debating society. Fortunately, there's no chance of it being brought back during my lifetime, at least. But the fact that it's even deemed worthy of debate adds fuel to the regressive fire we've been playing with for some years now.
Pretty soon, I expect Lee Anderson to pop up and say "my teachers used to beat me to within an inch of my life, and it never did me any harm".
And HYUFD will write "actually, YouGov found that 58% of voters want the cane brought back for when kids are really, really naughty".
I quite upset a relative of mine who told me about getting caned or slippered at school, by opining that anyone who performed such an act in that setting was probably a pervert or just an utter creep who got some sick thrill out of doing it.
It was that, but it wasn't only that. It was systemic.
In lower class schools caning was mainly on the hand. In middle class schools it was mainly on the bottom. Did they zero in on the tools of their victims' expected future trades? Did they not enjoy attacking working class children's bottoms so much? Or maybe they liked seeing the pain written on children's faces faster in the lower class schools. It's a bit of a mystery. Caning in the Tory paradise country of Singapore is on the bottom.
On the surface a stunning Tory success against the run of play. But the previous Independent was an ultra Brexiteer who stood for the Tories this time and, well, UKIP are UKIP. So in one of the most right wing council wards in the country the Tory-UKIP-RWIndy went from 50.9+18.6+16.9=86.4% to 69%, and Lab-Grn went from 13.5% to 31%.
So a bigger right-left swing than West Lancs.
Just marveling at those stats again because they say something about the social segregation effect of large cities.
Last time 86.4% voted for right wing or very right wing parties in that ward. It’s only 15 miles and a few train stops from my home. In the 2022 council elections in my ward (Brockley) 84% voted for either Labour or Green, or 91% for left of centre parties including the Lib Dems. 6% voted Conservative, and there were no other right wing parties.
15 miles apart and about as contrasting as it’s possible to get. Two nations living utterly separate realities.
Yes, it used to be - going back 50 years or more here - that political values largely mirrored social class, and that each town and city had its middle class and working class areas. You may not like the views of the other lot, but at least you saw them, recognised them as people.
Feeds into politics as well. It used to be the case that big cities had a reasonably reliable Conservative constituency; Bristol West, Leeds North West, Manchester Withington, that sort of place.
Various things happened- parties have changed and so have the places. Some of the upmarket vote has moved further out and some have drifted towards Labour. In many of those constituencies, the Conservatives aren't even competitive any more.
In terms of winning elections, it's not a fatal handicap for the Conservatives. But in terms of bringing the country round the table, it is.
London might be next to go, for practical purposes. If the Conservatives are reduced to bits of fringe that partly define themselves as not-London (Havering, Bexley, Bromley, Croydon South), it wouldn't be a huge shock.
While the 2019 redwall seats, normally safe Labour, are now swing seats and can go Conservative if the Tories win nationally.
Rural areas, where Labour in the past have had seats in areas like King's Lynn are now just as overwhelmingly Conservative as cities are overwhelmingly Labour.
That mirrors the US pattern and indeed the pattern in most of the western world
Yes. But drifting strongly leftwards. Against the regional and national trend. And one of the most rural seats in England, never mind the northeast. It isn't overwhelmingly Conservative any more.
Blyth Valley is moving in the opposite direction.
Indeed it is. But HYUFD is arguing that rural seats are becoming ever more firmly Tory. Blyth Valley isn't particularly rural. Hexham certainly is. What's more. The last Council Elections, the very worst Tory results were in very rural areas. Cumbria, North Yorkshire, Somerset. The late, lamented Ishmael made this point repeatedly. I paid him not much mind till those results.
Blyth Valley is an ultra marginal swing seat, not safe Tory like most rural seats.
North Yorkshire has a Tory controlled council still.
Towns in Somerset like Taunton, Yeovil, Weston Super Mare, Bridgwater etc where the LDs made most of their gains are also not rural villages or farms, they are towns
Blyth Valley isn't rural at all.
Damn misleading names (yes, urban areas can be in valleys, the word conjures up more pastoral like images). I bet Mole Valley isn't full of Moles either.
However there are golf courses in the Tees Valley.
If Rishi is playing “defence”, why has he appointed Lee Anderson to spout shit?
You answered your own question. Lots of people agree with Lee Anderson.
Not the ones who might be persuaded into voting Tory.
If you're fighting de-fence you're no longer trying to persuade new people to vote Tory, but to rally those who already are.
Lee Anderson plays a role in that and helps spike defections to Reform.
See. I'm in wholehearted agreement with you here. The appointment of Lee Anderson stems the outflow pipe. All the moreso when folk get outraged at his pronouncements. This strategy I think won't be enough to win an election. May be to get a hung Parliament.
If the Labour lead, large though it currently may be, is as soft as many on here suggest, we could be lumbered with a further return to the 1950s.after the next election.
Hitching up Lee Anderson's skirt, running with capital punishment and winning the subsequent General Election is a point where rather a lot of people might consider whether this is the country for them. Quite where we would be allowed to go is a worry however.
OK. It's not coming back.
The death penalty was last seriously on the agenda in the free votes in Parliament just after the 1983 GE when CON had a 144 maj. There were six votes on various options in relation to what types of offences it should be applied to. I vaguely recall that the closest result was a defeat by around 30 votes.
Then I believe there were more free votes in 1988, the CON majority was less then and it was easily defeated.
I don't think there have been any votes since then. It's not coming back. No more votes in Parliament about it, no referendum. OK?
In 1983 it was defeated by the large margin of 368 votes to 223. Around 55% of Tory MPs voted in favour.
If Rishi is playing “defence”, why has he appointed Lee Anderson to spout shit?
You answered your own question. Lots of people agree with Lee Anderson.
Not the ones who might be persuaded into voting Tory.
If you're fighting de-fence you're no longer trying to persuade new people to vote Tory, but to rally those who already are.
Lee Anderson plays a role in that and helps spike defections to Reform.
See. I'm in wholehearted agreement with you here. The appointment of Lee Anderson stems the outflow pipe. All the moreso when folk get outraged at his pronouncements. This strategy I think won't be enough to win an election. May be to get a hung Parliament.
If the Labour lead, large though it currently may be, is as soft as many on here suggest, we could be lumbered with a further return to the 1950s.after the next election.
Hitching up Lee Anderson's skirt, running with capital punishment and winning the subsequent General Election is a point where rather a lot of people might consider whether this is the country for them. Quite where we would be allowed to go is a worry however.
OK. It's not coming back.
The death penalty was last seriously on the agenda in the free votes in Parliament just after the 1983 GE when CON had a 144 maj. There were six votes on various options in relation to what types of offences it should be applied to. I vaguely recall that the closest result was a defeat by around 30 votes.
Then I believe there were more free votes in 1988, the CON majority was less then and it was easily defeated.
I don't think there have been any votes since then. It's not coming back. No more votes in Parliament about it, no referendum. OK?
In 1983 it was defeated by the large margin of 368 votes to 223. Around 55% of Tory MPs voted in favour.
If Rishi is playing “defence”, why has he appointed Lee Anderson to spout shit?
You answered your own question. Lots of people agree with Lee Anderson.
Not the ones who might be persuaded into voting Tory.
If you're fighting de-fence you're no longer trying to persuade new people to vote Tory, but to rally those who already are.
Lee Anderson plays a role in that and helps spike defections to Reform.
See. I'm in wholehearted agreement with you here. The appointment of Lee Anderson stems the outflow pipe. All the moreso when folk get outraged at his pronouncements. This strategy I think won't be enough to win an election. May be to get a hung Parliament.
If the Labour lead, large though it currently may be, is as soft as many on here suggest, we could be lumbered with a further return to the 1950s.after the next election.
Hitching up Lee Anderson's skirt, running with capital punishment and winning the subsequent General Election is a point where rather a lot of people might consider whether this is the country for them. Quite where we would be allowed to go is a worry however.
OK. It's not coming back.
The death penalty was last seriously on the agenda in the free votes in Parliament just after the 1983 GE when CON had a 144 maj. There were six votes on various options in relation to what types of offences it should be applied to. I vaguely recall that the closest result was a defeat by around 30 votes.
Then I believe there were more free votes in 1988, the CON majority was less then and it was easily defeated.
I don't think there have been any votes since then. It's not coming back. No more votes in Parliament about it, no referendum. OK?
In 1983 it was defeated by the large margin of 368 votes to 223. Around 55% of Tory MPs voted in favour.
Pretty depressing discussion on the death penalty, reminiscent of a school debating society. Fortunately, there's no chance of it being brought back during my lifetime, at least. But the fact that it's even deemed worthy of debate adds fuel to the regressive fire we've been playing with for some years now.
Two years ago Matt Hancock announced that anyone entering England who was found to have lied about a recent visit to a country on the "red" list (of which there were 33) would be handed a 10-year prison sentence.
That too is something it's easy to imagine a school pupil suggesting. "Anyone who breaks the rules - give 'em 10 years inside."
I'm wondering what you would have said a year beforehand about the possibility that something like Hancock's announcement would happen.
"'I make no apologies for the strength of these measures because we’re dealing with one of the strongest threats to our public health that we’ve faced as a nation,' Hancock told lawmakers. 'People who flout these rules are putting us all at risk.'" (Source.)
Went canvassing in Guildford today. If what's happening there is representative of the wider south east, the Tories are absolutely fucked.
Good news. I’ve been equally shocked by people I thought were rock solid Tories who went into a tirade at the mere mention of them .
However I don’t think there’s the animosity towards Sunak compared with Johnson . I think the Tory brand is now toxic and beyond redemption before the next GE .
Sometimes I fantasise about applying to the Conservative parliamentary list.
There's something about the pointlessness of it all, and a heroic defeat, that appeals to me, at some level.
The time to join is at the nadir. Blair got first elected in 1983.
Yes, but the problem is you lot know all my weaknesses and foibles - and it's basically public record on here.
I've shat my own bed.
Presumably you wouldn’t be standing as “Casino Royale”.
It wouldn't be hard to work it out.
Several pb regulars know who I am.
Can't be as bad as half the things done by most MPs, and I believe there is a precedent of having your comment history erased if you're worried about a possible future increase in your public notoriety, and you want to wipe the slate clean. Some guy called something like "Dean Bonas" had it done when he was expecting a movie deal, or something similar. Never heard of him again.
Went canvassing in Guildford today. If what's happening there is representative of the wider south east, the Tories are absolutely fucked.
It isn't, the LDs already have double the seats of the Tories on Guildford council
The number of seats from the last local election in 2019 is irrelevant. What matters is that we're losing 40-50% of our pledged Cs and Ps. In a general election, that loses us every seat in Surrey.
On the surface a stunning Tory success against the run of play. But the previous Independent was an ultra Brexiteer who stood for the Tories this time and, well, UKIP are UKIP. So in one of the most right wing council wards in the country the Tory-UKIP-RWIndy went from 50.9+18.6+16.9=86.4% to 69%, and Lab-Grn went from 13.5% to 31%.
So a bigger right-left swing than West Lancs.
Just marveling at those stats again because they say something about the social segregation effect of large cities.
Last time 86.4% voted for right wing or very right wing parties in that ward. It’s only 15 miles and a few train stops from my home. In the 2022 council elections in my ward (Brockley) 84% voted for either Labour or Green, or 91% for left of centre parties including the Lib Dems. 6% voted Conservative, and there were no other right wing parties.
15 miles apart and about as contrasting as it’s possible to get. Two nations living utterly separate realities.
Yes, it used to be - going back 50 years or more here - that political values largely mirrored social class, and that each town and city had its middle class and working class areas. You may not like the views of the other lot, but at least you saw them, recognised them as people.
Feeds into politics as well. It used to be the case that big cities had a reasonably reliable Conservative constituency; Bristol West, Leeds North West, Manchester Withington, that sort of place.
Various things happened- parties have changed and so have the places. Some of the upmarket vote has moved further out and some have drifted towards Labour. In many of those constituencies, the Conservatives aren't even competitive any more.
In terms of winning elections, it's not a fatal handicap for the Conservatives. But in terms of bringing the country round the table, it is.
London might be next to go, for practical purposes. If the Conservatives are reduced to bits of fringe that partly define themselves as not-London (Havering, Bexley, Bromley, Croydon South), it wouldn't be a huge shock.
While the 2019 redwall seats, normally safe Labour, are now swing seats and can go Conservative if the Tories win nationally.
Rural areas, where Labour in the past have had seats in areas like King's Lynn are now just as overwhelmingly Conservative as cities are overwhelmingly Labour.
That mirrors the US pattern and indeed the pattern in most of the western world
Yes. But drifting strongly leftwards. Against the regional and national trend. And one of the most rural seats in England, never mind the northeast. It isn't overwhelmingly Conservative any more.
It isn't 'drifting strongly leftwards'.
If it was Labour would already hold it, or it would be at least in the top 50-100 Labour target seats. Even in 1997 the Tories won Hexham by just 222 votes.
You may as well have said Cameron winning Ealing Acton and Bristol North West and slashing the Labour majority to just 42 in Hampstead and Kilburn in 2010 meant they were moving 'strongly rightwards'. Rather than just reflecting the national swing and still being more Labour than average in an average year
No. It is moving consistently left by swinging that way in comparison with national and regional swings. Why? Well that's a question. But you made a blanket statement that rural areas are "overwhelmingly Conservative". Hexham isn't.
Well Kensington and Chelsea is still Conservative. The Tories won Birmingham Northfield in 2019 against the cities trend. So what? Cities are still 'overwhelmingly Labour.'
You can find an exception for anything, rural areas are still strongly Tory and urban areas still strongly Labour
Went canvassing in Guildford today. If what's happening there is representative of the wider south east, the Tories are absolutely fucked.
I've been saying for months, the Tories are fucked in Hants/Surrey. People are angry because of Brexit but Corbyn made them hold their noses. He's gone - and Starmer is quite popular in these places because the Tories have shredded economic credentials. These voters will vote Lib Dem tactically.
Winchester and Guildford as Lib Dem gains are easy money. They are gone. But I also think we'll see safe Tory seats including my old seat of East Hants also seeing strong swings to the Lib Dems.
"'We don't know who owns this object,' said White House spokesperson John Kirby."
The Alaska object hasn't been called a balloon yet. Perhaps it never will be.
As for the South Carolina balloon, the US hasn't named the company they suspect of manufacturing it, but in some articles the finger has been pointed at Zhuzhou, China's largest weather balloon manufacturer. Zhuzhou have denied it was one of theirs.
Then there's what I'll call the Colombia balloon. Goodness knows where that is or what happened to it. Colombia said it wasn't a national security threat. Perhaps a string fell off from around its neck and it spiralled around at high speed as if blowing a raspberry and when it landed in the Falklands it was so small that no-one noticed? Maybe it's on its way to a secret German base in Antarctica or something.
British defence secretary Ben Wallace says he would shoot down a Chinese spy balloon. He's a lad! "I would have recommended it were shot down at the most appropriate moment when we could have acquired the most appropriate levels of intelligence from it". Then he went on about satellites for some reason.
Will there be a big UFO event tied in to the British king's coronation? There's gotta be something bigger than the conquest of Mount Everest on the previous coronation day.
Then he went on about satellites for some reason.
I would have gone on about satellites too. The reason is, what’s balloons going to give you your spy satellites can’t? What they can’t give you is some stealth or secrecy. So lacking some stealth or secrecy, then why do it.
I have a theory. It depends what it’s capturing. Pressure on China on environment damaging omissions, based on data supplied by… they are gathering their own data over everyone else for when argument kicks off?
Sorry if this sounds lame or boring, but it’s not really is it, it’s quite a major argument.
"'We don't know who owns this object,' said White House spokesperson John Kirby."
The Alaska object hasn't been called a balloon yet. Perhaps it never will be.
As for the South Carolina balloon, the US hasn't named the company they suspect of manufacturing it, but in some articles the finger has been pointed at Zhuzhou, China's largest weather balloon manufacturer. Zhuzhou have denied it was one of theirs.
Then there's what I'll call the Colombia balloon. Goodness knows where that is or what happened to it. Colombia said it wasn't a national security threat. Perhaps a string fell off from around its neck and it spiralled around at high speed as if blowing a raspberry and when it landed in the Falklands it was so small that no-one noticed? Maybe it's on its way to a secret German base in Antarctica or something.
British defence secretary Ben Wallace says he would shoot down a Chinese spy balloon. He's a lad! "I would have recommended it were shot down at the most appropriate moment when we could have acquired the most appropriate levels of intelligence from it". Then he went on about satellites for some reason.
Will there be a big UFO event tied in to the British king's coronation? There's gotta be something bigger than the conquest of Mount Everest on the previous coronation day.
Then he went on about satellites for some reason.
I would have gone on about satellites too. The reason is, what’s balloons going to give you your spy satellites can’t? What they can’t give you is some stealth or secrecy. So lacking some stealth or secrecy, then why do it.
I have a theory. It depends what it’s capturing. Pressure on China on environment damaging omissions, based on data supplied by… they are gathering their own data over everyone else for when argument kicks off?
Sorry if this sounds lame or boring, but it’s not really is it, it’s quite a major argument.
"'We don't know who owns this object,' said White House spokesperson John Kirby."
The Alaska object hasn't been called a balloon yet. Perhaps it never will be.
As for the South Carolina balloon, the US hasn't named the company they suspect of manufacturing it, but in some articles the finger has been pointed at Zhuzhou, China's largest weather balloon manufacturer. Zhuzhou have denied it was one of theirs.
Then there's what I'll call the Colombia balloon. Goodness knows where that is or what happened to it. Colombia said it wasn't a national security threat. Perhaps a string fell off from around its neck and it spiralled around at high speed as if blowing a raspberry and when it landed in the Falklands it was so small that no-one noticed? Maybe it's on its way to a secret German base in Antarctica or something.
British defence secretary Ben Wallace says he would shoot down a Chinese spy balloon. He's a lad! "I would have recommended it were shot down at the most appropriate moment when we could have acquired the most appropriate levels of intelligence from it". Then he went on about satellites for some reason.
Will there be a big UFO event tied in to the British king's coronation? There's gotta be something bigger than the conquest of Mount Everest on the previous coronation day.
Then he went on about satellites for some reason.
I would have gone on about satellites too. The reason is, what’s balloons going to give you your spy satellites can’t? What they can’t give you is some stealth or secrecy. So lacking some stealth or secrecy, then why do it.
I have a theory. It depends what it’s capturing. Pressure on China on environment damaging omissions, based on data supplied by… they are gathering their own data over everyone else for when argument kicks off?
Sorry if this sounds lame or boring, but it’s not really is it, it’s quite a major argument.
Balloons will be a lot cheaper than satellites.
They’ve already got their satellites up there haven’t they, who knows how many. And these things can read a copy of Daily Star from outa space. Hopefully not today though because the front page splash is the sun mysteriously falling apart, just in time for the weekend.
Went canvassing in Guildford today. If what's happening there is representative of the wider south east, the Tories are absolutely fucked.
I've been saying for months, the Tories are fucked in Hants/Surrey. People are angry because of Brexit but Corbyn made them hold their noses. He's gone - and Starmer is quite popular in these places because the Tories have shredded economic credentials. These voters will vote Lib Dem tactically.
Winchester and Guildford as Lib Dem gains are easy money. They are gone. But I also think we'll see safe Tory seats including my old seat of East Hants also seeing strong swings to the Lib Dems.
The whole point of replacing Truss with Sunak was supposed to be to placate people in those types of places, like Hampshire.
"In a separate briefing, Pentagon press secretary Brig. Gen. Patrick S. Ryder said the object was first detected by a U.S. Northern Command ground radar on Feb. 9. Fighters were then scrambled to surveil the object, followed by a second flight of two F-22s from Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson."
Ground radar detected it on Thursday.
*Kirby and Ryder both said the pilots determined that the object was likely unmanned. But neither would specify whether it was a balloon or a drone of some sort, and Ryder declined to explain why officials could not provide any more details about the object, even though pilots were able to determine it was unmanned.
'We’ll know more and have more information once we’ve recovered this,” Ryder said. “I will give credit to our pilots, that they’re very capable in terms of looking at an object and assessing whether or not this had the potential to be manned. At that altitude, something that small—very, very unlikely that it was manned.' "
On the surface a stunning Tory success against the run of play. But the previous Independent was an ultra Brexiteer who stood for the Tories this time and, well, UKIP are UKIP. So in one of the most right wing council wards in the country the Tory-UKIP-RWIndy went from 50.9+18.6+16.9=86.4% to 69%, and Lab-Grn went from 13.5% to 31%.
So a bigger right-left swing than West Lancs.
Just marveling at those stats again because they say something about the social segregation effect of large cities.
Last time 86.4% voted for right wing or very right wing parties in that ward. It’s only 15 miles and a few train stops from my home. In the 2022 council elections in my ward (Brockley) 84% voted for either Labour or Green, or 91% for left of centre parties including the Lib Dems. 6% voted Conservative, and there were no other right wing parties.
15 miles apart and about as contrasting as it’s possible to get. Two nations living utterly separate realities.
Yes, it used to be - going back 50 years or more here - that political values largely mirrored social class, and that each town and city had its middle class and working class areas. You may not like the views of the other lot, but at least you saw them, recognised them as people.
Feeds into politics as well. It used to be the case that big cities had a reasonably reliable Conservative constituency; Bristol West, Leeds North West, Manchester Withington, that sort of place.
Various things happened- parties have changed and so have the places. Some of the upmarket vote has moved further out and some have drifted towards Labour. In many of those constituencies, the Conservatives aren't even competitive any more.
In terms of winning elections, it's not a fatal handicap for the Conservatives. But in terms of bringing the country round the table, it is.
London might be next to go, for practical purposes. If the Conservatives are reduced to bits of fringe that partly define themselves as not-London (Havering, Bexley, Bromley, Croydon South), it wouldn't be a huge shock.
While the 2019 redwall seats, normally safe Labour, are now swing seats and can go Conservative if the Tories win nationally.
Rural areas, where Labour in the past have had seats in areas like King's Lynn are now just as overwhelmingly Conservative as cities are overwhelmingly Labour.
That mirrors the US pattern and indeed the pattern in most of the western world
Yes. But drifting strongly leftwards. Against the regional and national trend. And one of the most rural seats in England, never mind the northeast. It isn't overwhelmingly Conservative any more.
It isn't 'drifting strongly leftwards'.
If it was Labour would already hold it, or it would be at least in the top 50-100 Labour target seats. Even in 1997 the Tories won Hexham by just 222 votes.
You may as well have said Cameron winning Ealing Acton and Bristol North West and slashing the Labour majority to just 42 in Hampstead and Kilburn in 2010 meant they were moving 'strongly rightwards'. Rather than just reflecting the national swing and still being more Labour than average in an average year
No. It is moving consistently left by swinging that way in comparison with national and regional swings. Why? Well that's a question. But you made a blanket statement that rural areas are "overwhelmingly Conservative". Hexham isn't.
Well Kensington and Chelsea is still Conservative. The Tories won Birmingham Northfield in 2019 against the cities trend. So what? Cities are still 'overwhelmingly Labour.'
You can find an exception for anything, rural areas are still strongly Tory and urban areas still strongly Labour
And where do more voters live?
Irrelevant. Medium majorities 5-10k spread around win elections with fptp.
Comments
I have lost some friends too young and I bet many others have too but 79 doesn't really qualify on that score does it?
In lower class schools caning was mainly on the hand.
In middle class schools it was mainly on the bottom.
Did they zero in on the tools of their victims' expected future trades? Did they not enjoy attacking working class children's bottoms so much? Or maybe they liked seeing the pain written on children's faces faster in the lower class schools. It's a bit of a mystery. Caning in the Tory paradise country of Singapore is on the bottom.
Two films I've never got round to watching are on at the same time atm - Memento and Con Air.
https://www.upi.com/Archives/1983/07/13/Parliament-says-nay-to-death-penalty/5026426916800/
79 is nothing these days. Plus, in my head, she was about 62.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/feb/10/far-right-demonstrators-clash-with-police-at-liverpool-hotel-housing-asylum-seekers
That too is something it's easy to imagine a school pupil suggesting. "Anyone who breaks the rules - give 'em 10 years inside."
I'm wondering what you would have said a year beforehand about the possibility that something like Hancock's announcement would happen.
"'I make no apologies for the strength of these measures because we’re dealing with one of the strongest threats to our public health that we’ve faced as a nation,' Hancock told lawmakers. 'People who flout these rules are putting us all at risk.'" (Source.)
BANG. Stuff can happen and happen fast.
However I don’t think there’s the animosity towards Sunak compared with Johnson . I think the Tory brand is now toxic and beyond redemption before the next GE .
https://archive.md/MGZx5
Con Air... there are definitely a lot worse films of the same genre. I think Nicolas Cage is a bit underrated.
Winchester and Guildford as Lib Dem gains are easy money. They are gone. But I also think we'll see safe Tory seats including my old seat of East Hants also seeing strong swings to the Lib Dems.
https://twitter.com/OTerrifying/status/1623720884904263680
I would have gone on about satellites too. The reason is, what’s balloons going to give you your spy satellites can’t? What they can’t give you is some stealth or secrecy. So lacking some stealth or secrecy, then why do it.
I have a theory. It depends what it’s capturing. Pressure on China on environment damaging omissions, based on data supplied by… they are gathering their own data over everyone else for when argument kicks off?
Sorry if this sounds lame or boring, but it’s not really is it, it’s quite a major argument.
"US officials say they have not determined the origin or ownership of the second flying object, nor what purpose it was intended to serve.
'We do not know who owns it,' [WH spokesman John] Kirby said. 'It was much, much smaller than the spy balloon we took down last Saturday.'
He added: 'I am not classifying it as a balloon right now. It’s an object. We’re still trying to learn more right now.'"
Another report:
https://www.airandspaceforces.com/f-22-shoots-down-high-altitude-object-over-alaska-origins-unclear/
"In a separate briefing, Pentagon press secretary Brig. Gen. Patrick S. Ryder said the object was first detected by a U.S. Northern Command ground radar on Feb. 9. Fighters were then scrambled to surveil the object, followed by a second flight of two F-22s from Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson."
Ground radar detected it on Thursday.
*Kirby and Ryder both said the pilots determined that the object was likely unmanned. But neither would specify whether it was a balloon or a drone of some sort, and Ryder declined to explain why officials could not provide any more details about the object, even though pilots were able to determine it was unmanned.
'We’ll know more and have more information once we’ve recovered this,” Ryder said. “I will give credit to our pilots, that they’re very capable in terms of looking at an object and assessing whether or not this had the potential to be manned. At that altitude, something that small—very, very unlikely that it was manned.' "