Off-topic, my switch to shooting and editing in 4k is stretching my computer gear and broadband to the limit. 16MB of RAM isn't enough to reliably render 30 minutes of 4k video.
So I may need to invest in new kit as my channel has accelerated hard on every metric and I have half a dozen videos shot / partly edited. Haven't used a Mac in decades so not going to buy one of those. More PC power perhaps as I don't think my otherwise fabulous Surface Pro 8 was designed for this.
And broadband? With my current deal up looking seriously at Starlink...
If you’re going to be doing a load of 4k video editing, it’s probably worth investing in a proper workstation PC with a good GPU.
Building my PC was one if the most satisfying things I've done, fwiw. Most components from 2016 and still going strong for gaming/photo editing etc.
Building PCs is great fun. Back in the day, I used to make some money as a student by building them for friends. A good mate of mine worked in sales at Scan for a few years, which was always good for getting new bits and pieces.
I've had the same PC since 1995. It's had 3 new cases, 5 new motherboards and lots of new hard drives mind.
On topic, Brexit is one reason that I won't be voting Conservative again, and one reason that I won't vote for Starmer either.
Sooner or later parties need to acknowledge where the voters are, and that Brexit was a mistake. A mistake that we have to live with for present perhaps, but a mistake nonetheless.
Starmer's 5 missions seems like a clever approach. Move on from narrow Brexit arguments and instead focus on the future. Nobody voted Brexit to be poorer. So focus on growth and how we get richer.
An obvious early step will be to remove all the cost of our threatened dealignment with EEA standards. There will be harrumphing. And "do you want to stay poor?" will be the disarm.
No, Starmer's 5 Missions were typically verbose flannel. Ed Balls is right that they need to be punchier and more retail:
Neither of us are voting Labour so our perspectives won't concern them too much. My point is that verbose flannel is probably all he can get away with electorally. They are specifically vague - because they channel the 5 Beveridge ills which the Attlee government attacked, and also because acting *against* Brexit can be shown as what people have now voted for.
And the point is that there'll be a good percentage of voters who know nothing about them, a significant percentage who have heard something about the five missions and know nothing, or nothing other than one or to headlines, about them, and a smaller percentage like most of us who either heard the speech or the interview or have read through the missions in detail.
Eighteen months out for the election the object is to pitch to the middle group, get some airtime, and give Labour spokespeople something to refer to as shorthand whenever they are asked what their priorities are.
For those of us wanting some idea of what Labour would actually do, it doesn't help much, and we can only hope there is more forthcoming before the election comes.
Someone (Nick P?) has suggested that Starmer had a fairly clear Four Year Plan when he took over; sort out the systems, kipper the lefties, show some leg, publish a manifesto. Publishing the five missions now sort of fits with that.
It's a plan- whether it's a good plan we will all see!
You've got to be careful not to fall into the same old trap:
*) Left-wing person/organisation does legal tax avoidance: perfectly fine, nothing to see. *) Right-wing person/organisation does legal tax avoidance: BURN THEM!!!!
I'm not into football, but from the little I see of him on the screen, Lineker comes across as a bit of a pillock - and worse, a poor communicator. He just doesn't seem to have any presence. But as I say, I don't see him much, so that might be unfair.
I like his presence. But these tax dodges are blatant and unnecessary, and should be severely cut back if they are legal and rigorously enforced if not.
Yet the 34% who think Britain was right to Leave the EU is still higher than the current Tory voteshare.
If Sunak want beyond yesterday's new deal with the EU on Northern Ireland to try and rejoin the EU he would not only lose most of that 34% to RefUK, he would also still fail to win most of the 53% who think Brexit was wrong and would stay Labour or LD.
The Tories would end up with about the 9% they got under May in the 2019 European elections and Farage would be Leader of the Opposition.
Starmer also is fully aware that while 48% voted Remain, 2/3 of Westminster constituencies voted Leave. So to get most seats or a majority under FPTP he has to respect the Brexit vote, even if he puts forward a softer Brexit Deal for GB than Boris does if he becomes UK PM
Your last para doesn't make sense. 2016 was 2016. The sentiment has changed.
Given 48% voted Remain even in 2016 but only 1/3 of Westminster constituencies voted Remain, now 53% saying it was Wrong to Leave would almost certainly still not be a majority of Westminster constituencies and certainly not a majority of the key Redwall swing seats for rejoin the EU.
Remember in inner city seats and some university towns Remain got 65 to 75% of the vote but they are already mainly safe Labour or LD or in Scotland SNP anyway (albeit maybe not SNP if Forbes becomes FM)
This doesn't matter as Brexit is not a Thing. What matters to voters is where you go now. And if thats "Rejoin the EU" then the voters are in a very different place.
Where you go next is a general election. That's Sunak's problem.
He’s got 18 months to get the economy moving then, before the people have their say.
The EU doesn’t respond to childish threats . Sunak got a good deal because they felt he could be trusted to honour what he signs and would act in good faith.
There was no trust left with Johnson and the EU would never have given him those concessions.
See also A16. Oh, wait that was the EU being childish…
It was never actually triggered and the EU admitted it was an error of judgement to even suggest it . Something Bozo and his cabal would never do .
England are box office right now. The secondary market for Ashes tickets is already over £500 for a day.
2005 was epic - the Aussies coming to the end of their period of dominance, and an England team coming to a peak with aggressive batsmen and a four man pace attack with skill, pace and variety. The match that ended last night was great, but still a level below 2005.
I agree. I was lucky enough to be at one of the tests in 2005. We were still waiting to get in when there was an incredible roar, like a goal being scored. England had won the toss. I have never seen or felt cricket like that. It was electric.
Personally I think Rishi Sunak’s “Windsor framework” is so good it should be extended to Windsor and indeed the entire UK. We could call it something catchy like “membership of the Single Market and Customs Union.”
@paulwaugh In trumpeting his Windsor deal @RishiSunak on @BBCr4today inadvertently makes the case against Brexit: "Northern Ireland...has access to the EU market, which makes it an incredibly attractive place to invest for business."
And the more the Scots see it, the more they wonder why they aren't allowed a similar access.
To the tune of Meatloaf’s Two out of Three Ain’t Bad:
Three out of four members of the union of equals getting what they voted for ain’t bad
Good work Rishi. If he moderates his position on wilfully killing the North Sea o&g industry and puts up a tax cutting agenda for workers at the election, I might even be tempted to vote for him.
The EU doesn’t respond to childish threats . Sunak got a good deal because they felt he could be trusted to honour what he signs and would act in good faith.
There was no trust left with Johnson and the EU would never have given him those concessions.
See also A16. Oh, wait that was the EU being childish…
It was never actually triggered and the EU admitted it was an error of judgement to even suggest it . Something Bozo and his cabal would never do .
That's a cop out. Yes Boris and co were awful but it doesn't make their carefully decided action to declare it (no way it didn't get discussed thoroughly) less childish or disgraceful. It nearly caused a major incident and should never have even been announced. A clear and unequivocal example of being in the wrong.
Pointing at Boris as being worse doesn't alter that, and it is fair it is brought up to puncture the myth they never do anything childish or self defeating.
On topic, Brexit is one reason that I won't be voting Conservative again, and one reason that I won't vote for Starmer either.
Sooner or later parties need to acknowledge where the voters are, and that Brexit was a mistake. A mistake that we have to live with for present perhaps, but a mistake nonetheless.
Starmer's 5 missions seems like a clever approach. Move on from narrow Brexit arguments and instead focus on the future. Nobody voted Brexit to be poorer. So focus on growth and how we get richer.
An obvious early step will be to remove all the cost of our threatened dealignment with EEA standards. There will be harrumphing. And "do you want to stay poor?" will be the disarm.
No, Starmer's 5 Missions were typically verbose flannel. Ed Balls is right that they need to be punchier and more retail:
Neither of us are voting Labour so our perspectives won't concern them too much. My point is that verbose flannel is probably all he can get away with electorally. They are specifically vague - because they channel the 5 Beveridge ills which the Attlee government attacked, and also because acting *against* Brexit can be shown as what people have now voted for.
And the point is that there'll be a good percentage of voters who know nothing about them, a significant percentage who have heard something about the five missions and know nothing, or nothing other than one or to headlines, about them, and a smaller percentage like most of us who either heard the speech or the interview or have read through the missions in detail.
Eighteen months out for the election the object is to pitch to the middle group, get some airtime, and give Labour spokespeople something to refer to as shorthand whenever they are asked what their priorities are.
For those of us wanting some idea of what Labour would actually do, it doesn't help much, and we can only hope there is more forthcoming before the election comes.
Someone (Nick P?) has suggested that Starmer had a fairly clear Four Year Plan when he took over; sort out the systems, kipper the lefties, show some leg, publish a manifesto. Publishing the five missions now sort of fits with that.
It's a plan- whether it's a good plan we will all see!
Makes political sense that a Labour leader trying not to look socialist goes with a four year plan rather than a five year plan.
Off-topic, my switch to shooting and editing in 4k is stretching my computer gear and broadband to the limit. 16MB of RAM isn't enough to reliably render 30 minutes of 4k video.
So I may need to invest in new kit as my channel has accelerated hard on every metric and I have half a dozen videos shot / partly edited. Haven't used a Mac in decades so not going to buy one of those. More PC power perhaps as I don't think my otherwise fabulous Surface Pro 8 was designed for this.
And broadband? With my current deal up looking seriously at Starlink...
If you’re going to be doing a load of 4k video editing, it’s probably worth investing in a proper workstation PC with a good GPU.
Personally I think Rishi Sunak’s “Windsor framework” is so good it should be extended to Windsor and indeed the entire UK. We could call it something catchy like “membership of the Single Market and Customs Union.”
Really there were two deal breaking issues in 2016 for the leave voters: the constitutional sovereignty one, and the Freedom of Movement one.
Insistence that it was either FoM or Leave (the EUs biggest error) compounded it because it joined the two issues. We had lost sovereignty and therefore we could not control who lived here.
If the UK were offered CU and SM on terms without FoM not only would it be politically with the majority, we would perhaps be willing to pay for it.
Rules about people and rules about cucumbers are not the same sort of thing in the voter's mind.
Off-topic, my switch to shooting and editing in 4k is stretching my computer gear and broadband to the limit. 16MB of RAM isn't enough to reliably render 30 minutes of 4k video.
So I may need to invest in new kit as my channel has accelerated hard on every metric and I have half a dozen videos shot / partly edited. Haven't used a Mac in decades so not going to buy one of those. More PC power perhaps as I don't think my otherwise fabulous Surface Pro 8 was designed for this.
And broadband? With my current deal up looking seriously at Starlink...
If you’re going to be doing a load of 4k video editing, it’s probably worth investing in a proper workstation PC with a good GPU.
Insistence that it was either FoM or Leave (the EUs biggest error) compounded it because it joined the two issues. We had lost sovereignty and therefore we could not control who lived here.
So we voted to "take back control" and launched the largest wave of immigrant boats since the Vikings...
Personally I think Rishi Sunak’s “Windsor framework” is so good it should be extended to Windsor and indeed the entire UK. We could call it something catchy like “membership of the Single Market and Customs Union.”
Well of course, you can have free trade without all the EU political BS etc. That's what many Leavers have been arguing for years and years. It's nice to see people making the distinction between EU membership and access to the Single Market even if they don't quite realise what they are saying.
This doesn't matter as Brexit is not a Thing. What matters to voters is where you go now. And if thats "Rejoin the EU" then the voters are in a very different place.
Where you go next is a general election. That's Sunak's problem.
He’s got 18 months to get the economy moving then, before the people have their say.
The economy was moving in 1997.
Starmer isn't Blair though.
I agree, and I don't think Labour is going to be anywhere near a 60 majority, let alone a 179 seat one.
But my point was simply that "it's the economy stupid" is not the be all and end all. If it was, the Conservatives would have won reelection in 1997, and Labour would have been utterly slaughtered in 2010.
After a prolonged period in Government, parties get tired. Talent departs and is replaced by mediocrity. Message discipline disappears. Scandals that might have been brushed off now loom large. Tactical voting bites you in the ass.
Two years ago, I was in full agreement with isam that a Conservative majority was underpriced. Now, I think that's a pretty unlikely outcome, because the government simply looks tired.
Major lost in 1997 not so much because the Tories were tired -- but because the Tories were disunited. In 1997, the glee with which Blue attacked Blue was memorably impressive, in contrast to the subdued Blue on Red attacks. You got the feeling that a typical Tory hated others in his/her own party more than the Official Opposition.
By late 2022, it looked as though Blue on Blue attacks were back at the intensity of 1997.
This looks a tiny bit hopeful for the Tories in that Blue on Blue attacks over the Deal have been quite muted so far.
Sure, the Tories look tired, bit SKS always looks weary. And nothing he has said so far suggests he has more ideas than the Tories do on how to fix big problems. Most of them are not fixable on terms acceptable to the electorate.
SKS's big success has been internally -- he has managed to unite the Labour party so it is looking outward rather than inward.
Off-topic, my switch to shooting and editing in 4k is stretching my computer gear and broadband to the limit. 16MB of RAM isn't enough to reliably render 30 minutes of 4k video.
So I may need to invest in new kit as my channel has accelerated hard on every metric and I have half a dozen videos shot / partly edited. Haven't used a Mac in decades so not going to buy one of those. More PC power perhaps as I don't think my otherwise fabulous Surface Pro 8 was designed for this.
And broadband? With my current deal up looking seriously at Starlink...
If you’re going to be doing a load of 4k video editing, it’s probably worth investing in a proper workstation PC with a good GPU.
"A German rail operator took its trains out of service after apparently discovering a serious safety issue. but after four days of disruption they realised there was actually no fault and they had just taken incorrect measurements"
Off-topic, my switch to shooting and editing in 4k is stretching my computer gear and broadband to the limit. 16MB of RAM isn't enough to reliably render 30 minutes of 4k video.
So I may need to invest in new kit as my channel has accelerated hard on every metric and I have half a dozen videos shot / partly edited. Haven't used a Mac in decades so not going to buy one of those. More PC power perhaps as I don't think my otherwise fabulous Surface Pro 8 was designed for this.
And broadband? With my current deal up looking seriously at Starlink...
If you’re going to be doing a load of 4k video editing, it’s probably worth investing in a proper workstation PC with a good GPU.
Off-topic, my switch to shooting and editing in 4k is stretching my computer gear and broadband to the limit. 16MB of RAM isn't enough to reliably render 30 minutes of 4k video.
So I may need to invest in new kit as my channel has accelerated hard on every metric and I have half a dozen videos shot / partly edited. Haven't used a Mac in decades so not going to buy one of those. More PC power perhaps as I don't think my otherwise fabulous Surface Pro 8 was designed for this.
And broadband? With my current deal up looking seriously at Starlink...
If you’re going to be doing a load of 4k video editing, it’s probably worth investing in a proper workstation PC with a good GPU.
Mbs. (Before Starlink I could only dream about 13 kbps!).
Having Starlink is like the difference between the Stone Age and the Iron Age. Lots of "Oooooh!"
It’s a game-changer for so many in rural areas. I know of someone who has it as a backup to cable broadband for live-streaming to Youtube, it can reliably do live 720p video.
Off-topic, my switch to shooting and editing in 4k is stretching my computer gear and broadband to the limit. 16MB of RAM isn't enough to reliably render 30 minutes of 4k video.
So I may need to invest in new kit as my channel has accelerated hard on every metric and I have half a dozen videos shot / partly edited. Haven't used a Mac in decades so not going to buy one of those. More PC power perhaps as I don't think my otherwise fabulous Surface Pro 8 was designed for this.
And broadband? With my current deal up looking seriously at Starlink...
If you’re going to be doing a load of 4k video editing, it’s probably worth investing in a proper workstation PC with a good GPU.
The real dividend to come out of these talks is not NI, which had some irritations but also a highly favoured position both in the SM and out of it at the same time, Schrodinger's cat style, already. The real benefit is the highly constructive and polite relationship Rishi has built with the EU as a whole. This has already paid dividends with the Horizon program but I have little doubt there will be more to come.
If Rishi can continue down this path then I genuinely believe that Brexit will become a non issue for all except a tiny minority who are obsessed with it and the loss of their EU citizenship. This minority will no doubt be loud, just as the ERG nutters/Farage were loud in the past, but the vast majority will simply not care anymore. We will just have to fill our threads up with something else.
The deal has already had one important failure.
Suella Braverman hasn't resigned over it.
That's a blow, but on the whole I'm still inclined to say on balance this is a good deal.
That is indeed disappointing. There must be something else she would resign for. A restoration of citizenship for Begum? I would add in passing that Camilla Long's article in the ST is a superb piece of writing (Ie I agree with it completely). It contains this little gem: "She is often described as a "polarising figure" but that is not really true: everyone is agreed she is a nightmare...But monsters deserve justice too."
You are a lawyer. Could you please tell me what is wrong with the following as a future fix?
- One of the definitions of treason as giving aid, comfort, joining etc, a list of organisations and countries which are declared to be enemies of the UK - The list to be created & updated by votes in the house of commons.
I would like robust prosecution of UK citizens for war crimes as well.
Yet the 34% who think Britain was right to Leave the EU is still higher than the current Tory voteshare.
If Sunak want beyond yesterday's new deal with the EU on Northern Ireland to try and rejoin the EU he would not only lose most of that 34% to RefUK, he would also still fail to win most of the 53% who think Brexit was wrong and would stay Labour or LD.
The Tories would end up with about the 9% they got under May in the 2019 European elections and Farage would be Leader of the Opposition.
Starmer also is fully aware that while 48% voted Remain, 2/3 of Westminster constituencies voted Leave. So to get most seats or a majority under FPTP he has to respect the Brexit vote, even if he puts forward a softer Brexit Deal for GB than Boris does if he becomes UK PM
Your last para doesn't make sense. 2016 was 2016. The sentiment has changed.
Given 48% voted Remain even in 2016 but only 1/3 of Westminster constituencies voted Remain, now 53% saying it was Wrong to Leave would almost certainly still not be a majority of Westminster constituencies and certainly not a majority of the key Redwall swing seats for rejoin the EU.
Remember in inner city seats and some university towns Remain got 65 to 75% of the vote but they are already mainly safe Labour or LD or in Scotland SNP anyway (albeit maybe not SNP if Forbes becomes FM)
The numbers don't work like that, though.
Best recent evidence we have is the MRP for unherd, where "Brexit good" won in a handful of constituencies, mostly in Lincolnshire.
It's not that crazy. After all, Leave won in most places by a fairly small margin; 52-48 or so. It doesn't take much of a shift in opinion to turn that into 48-52 everywhere.
And for every Cambridge voting massively remain, there was a Romford voting massively Leave.
Off-topic, my switch to shooting and editing in 4k is stretching my computer gear and broadband to the limit. 16MB of RAM isn't enough to reliably render 30 minutes of 4k video.
So I may need to invest in new kit as my channel has accelerated hard on every metric and I have half a dozen videos shot / partly edited. Haven't used a Mac in decades so not going to buy one of those. More PC power perhaps as I don't think my otherwise fabulous Surface Pro 8 was designed for this.
And broadband? With my current deal up looking seriously at Starlink...
If you’re going to be doing a load of 4k video editing, it’s probably worth investing in a proper workstation PC with a good GPU.
Mbs. (Before Starlink I could only dream about 13 kbps!).
Having Starlink is like the difference between the Stone Age and the Iron Age. Lots of "Oooooh!"
Still sounds pretty Stone Age to me. Even on telephone line broadband before FTTP broadband I was still getting 35mbps.
You should investigate local broadband suppliers who put masts on hills. If you are in the right place you might, like me get 70mbs for circa 20 quid a month plus vat. Better and much cheaper than the odious BT and comes with a free Internet phone that is rarely used, save for incoming calls.
Yet the 34% who think Britain was right to Leave the EU is still higher than the current Tory voteshare.
If Sunak want beyond yesterday's new deal with the EU on Northern Ireland to try and rejoin the EU he would not only lose most of that 34% to RefUK, he would also still fail to win most of the 53% who think Brexit was wrong and would stay Labour or LD.
The Tories would end up with about the 9% they got under May in the 2019 European elections and Farage would be Leader of the Opposition.
Starmer also is fully aware that while 48% voted Remain, 2/3 of Westminster constituencies voted Leave. So to get most seats or a majority under FPTP he has to respect the Brexit vote, even if he puts forward a softer Brexit Deal for GB than Boris does if he becomes UK PM
Your last para doesn't make sense. 2016 was 2016. The sentiment has changed.
Given 48% voted Remain even in 2016 but only 1/3 of Westminster constituencies voted Remain, now 53% saying it was Wrong to Leave would almost certainly still not be a majority of Westminster constituencies and certainly not a majority of the key Redwall swing seats for rejoin the EU.
Remember in inner city seats and some university towns Remain got 65 to 75% of the vote but they are already mainly safe Labour or LD or in Scotland SNP anyway (albeit maybe not SNP if Forbes becomes FM)
The numbers don't work like that, though.
Best recent evidence we have is the MRP for unherd, where "Brexit good" won in a handful of constituencies, mostly in Lincolnshire.
It's not that crazy. After all, Leave won in most places by a fairly small margin; 52-48 or so. It doesn't take much of a shift in opinion to turn that into 48-52 everywhere.
And for every Cambridge voting massively remain, there was a Romford voting massively Leave.
Well, quite so. One doesn't need to be J. Clerk Maxwell, or even Professor Curtis, to realise that the numbers didn't make sense in HYUFDomathics.
As the anti Brexit numbers get stronger it will be increasingly hard to comprehend Labour's caution about running with that tide.
But I think SKS would be wise to stick where he is. Elections are funny things. My feeling is that if SKS gave the slightest indication of revisiting the Brexit issue then the door opens for a campaign addressed at the 47% of the population who still support Brexit or are DKs. Plus some who don't like it but don't want to revisit.
Insistence that it was either FoM or Leave (the EUs biggest error) compounded it because it joined the two issues. We had lost sovereignty and therefore we could not control who lived here.
So we voted to "take back control" and launched the largest wave of immigrant boats since the Vikings...
Was this the face that launched a thousand ships And burnt the topless towers of Torydom? Sweet Boris , make me immortal with a kiss ...
Personally I think Rishi Sunak’s “Windsor framework” is so good it should be extended to Windsor and indeed the entire UK. We could call it something catchy like “membership of the Single Market and Customs Union.”
By which of course he means membership of the EU - as that is the only way the UK as a state can be in the Customs Union.
This doesn't matter as Brexit is not a Thing. What matters to voters is where you go now. And if thats "Rejoin the EU" then the voters are in a very different place.
Where you go next is a general election. That's Sunak's problem.
He’s got 18 months to get the economy moving then, before the people have their say.
The economy was moving in 1997.
Starmer isn't Blair though.
I agree, and I don't think Labour is going to be anywhere near a 60 majority, let alone a 179 seat one.
But my point was simply that "it's the economy stupid" is not the be all and end all. If it was, the Conservatives would have won reelection in 1997, and Labour would have been utterly slaughtered in 2010.
After a prolonged period in Government, parties get tired. Talent departs and is replaced by mediocrity. Message discipline disappears. Scandals that might have been brushed off now loom large. Tactical voting bites you in the ass.
Two years ago, I was in full agreement with isam that a Conservative majority was underpriced. Now, I think that's a pretty unlikely outcome, because the government simply looks tired.
Major lost in 1997 not so much because the Tories were tired -- but because the Tories were disunited. In 1997, the glee with which Blue attacked Blue was memorably impressive, in contrast to the subdued Blue on Red attacks. You got the feeling that a typical Tory hated others in his/her own party more than the Official Opposition.
By late 2022, it looked as though Blue on Blue attacks were back at the intensity of 1997.
This looks a tiny bit hopeful for the Tories in that Blue on Blue attacks over the Deal have been quite muted so far.
Sure, the Tories look tired, bit SKS always looks weary. And nothing he has said so far suggests he has more ideas than the Tories do on how to fix big problems. Most of them are not fixable on terms acceptable to the electorate.
SKS's big success has been internally -- he has managed to unite the Labour party so it is looking outward rather than inward.
On SKS, it is instructive how he would have handled the nurses. He would have "sat down and talked" - whilst inflation was at its absolute peak. So he would either have a) paid them off - at the absolute peak of inflation; or b) listened but not delivered - pissing off the nurses who thought at least in Starmer they might have had a friend.
Starmer has not shown any ability to manage anything other than the Labour Party. He don't exactly fizz with ideas about how to fix the cost of living crisis.
Come 2024, the voters will be asking "Is that all there is to a Labour Manifesto?"
England are box office right now. The secondary market for Ashes tickets is already over £500 for a day.
2005 was epic - the Aussies coming to the end of their period of dominance, and an England team coming to a peak with aggressive batsmen and a four man pace attack with skill, pace and variety. The match that ended last night was great, but still a level below 2005.
I agree. I was lucky enough to be at one of the tests in 2005. We were still waiting to get in when there was an incredible roar, like a goal being scored. England had won the toss. I have never seen or felt cricket like that. It was electric.
Has Headingley '81 been cancelled? Botham sacked as captain, England following on, 105/5, still 122 runs behind, 500/1 with Ladbrokes?
As the anti Brexit numbers get stronger it will be increasingly hard to comprehend Labour's caution about running with that tide.
But I think SKS would be wise to stick where he is. Elections are funny things. My feeling is that if SKS gave the slightest indication of revisiting the Brexit issue then the door opens for a campaign addressed at the 47% of the population who still support Brexit or are DKs. Plus some who don't like it but don't want to revisit.
If the Tories harvested this SKS cannot win.
One of very few ways the Red Wall seats might stay with the Tories at the next election, is if Starmer starts going on about rejoining the EU.
Personally I think Rishi Sunak’s “Windsor framework” is so good it should be extended to Windsor and indeed the entire UK. We could call it something catchy like “membership of the Single Market and Customs Union.”
Really there were two deal breaking issues in 2016 for the leave voters: the constitutional sovereignty one, and the Freedom of Movement one.
Insistence that it was either FoM or Leave (the EUs biggest error) compounded it because it joined the two issues. We had lost sovereignty and therefore we could not control who lived here.
If the UK were offered CU and SM on terms without FoM not only would it be politically with the majority, we would perhaps be willing to pay for it.
Rules about people and rules about cucumbers are not the same sort of thing in the voter's mind.
We (the UK generally) would bite the EUs hand off to get access to the single market and customs Union but without FOM - it is the sweet spot most of the country would probably settle on.
Problem is that despite the warm words and mood music of the last 24 hours on NI, such a solution is simply impossible to offer from the EU end. If you accept that a third party state can get all the benefits of the SM without taking on FOM then all of a sudden EU membership just doesn’t seem like that great a deal anymore and this would destabilise the project among other member states.
The only way we’re ever going to have any influence on FOM is having a seat at the table and that means rejoining. An event I still see as some way off, if ever.
This doesn't matter as Brexit is not a Thing. What matters to voters is where you go now. And if thats "Rejoin the EU" then the voters are in a very different place.
Where you go next is a general election. That's Sunak's problem.
He’s got 18 months to get the economy moving then, before the people have their say.
The economy was moving in 1997.
Starmer isn't Blair though.
I agree, and I don't think Labour is going to be anywhere near a 60 majority, let alone a 179 seat one.
But my point was simply that "it's the economy stupid" is not the be all and end all. If it was, the Conservatives would have won reelection in 1997, and Labour would have been utterly slaughtered in 2010.
After a prolonged period in Government, parties get tired. Talent departs and is replaced by mediocrity. Message discipline disappears. Scandals that might have been brushed off now loom large. Tactical voting bites you in the ass.
Two years ago, I was in full agreement with isam that a Conservative majority was underpriced. Now, I think that's a pretty unlikely outcome, because the government simply looks tired.
Major lost in 1997 not so much because the Tories were tired -- but because the Tories were disunited. In 1997, the glee with which Blue attacked Blue was memorably impressive, in contrast to the subdued Blue on Red attacks. You got the feeling that a typical Tory hated others in his/her own party more than the Official Opposition.
By late 2022, it looked as though Blue on Blue attacks were back at the intensity of 1997.
This looks a tiny bit hopeful for the Tories in that Blue on Blue attacks over the Deal have been quite muted so far.
Sure, the Tories look tired, bit SKS always looks weary. And nothing he has said so far suggests he has more ideas than the Tories do on how to fix big problems. Most of them are not fixable on terms acceptable to the electorate.
SKS's big success has been internally -- he has managed to unite the Labour party so it is looking outward rather than inward.
On SKS, it is instructive how he would have handled the nurses. He would have "sat down and talked" - whilst inflation was at its absolute peak. So he would either have a) paid them off - at the absolute peak of inflation; or b) listened but not delivered - pissing off the nurses who thought at least in Starmer they might have had a friend.
Starmer has not shown any ability to manage anything other than the Labour Party. He don't exactly fizz with ideas about how to fix the cost of living crisis.
Come 2024, the voters will be asking "Is that all there is to a Labour Manifesto?"
"at the absolute peak of inflation" - which is inflation *THAT HAD ALREADY PASSED*.
You're happy to see people permanently immiserated for the crime of being nurses?
Given Lineker’s politics, he ought to welcome the opportunity to pay more tax.
It is hard to be certain, and we should perhaps recognise that neither the Daily Mail nor Lineker's counsel are disinterested parties, but he seems to have paid the tax and they are arguing about national insurance.
England are box office right now. The secondary market for Ashes tickets is already over £500 for a day.
2005 was epic - the Aussies coming to the end of their period of dominance, and an England team coming to a peak with aggressive batsmen and a four man pace attack with skill, pace and variety. The match that ended last night was great, but still a level below 2005.
I agree. I was lucky enough to be at one of the tests in 2005. We were still waiting to get in when there was an incredible roar, like a goal being scored. England had won the toss. I have never seen or felt cricket like that. It was electric.
Has Headingley '81 been cancelled? Botham sacked as captain, England following on, 105/5, still 122 runs behind, 500/1 with Ladbrokes?
Some of were still in very short trousers in 1981!
Didn’t Botham say he’d met 10 times as many people who had told him they were there on that last day, as could possibly have fitted inside the ground?
Personally I think Rishi Sunak’s “Windsor framework” is so good it should be extended to Windsor and indeed the entire UK. We could call it something catchy like “membership of the Single Market and Customs Union.”
By which of course he means membership of the EU - as that is the only way the UK as a state can be in the Customs Union.
Turkey is in customs union with the EU without being a member. It can be done with will on both sides. I don't think we will go that far, but once we are clear that we will remain aligned with our largest market as that is beneficial to us, there will be little need for customs and standards checks.
Personally I think Rishi Sunak’s “Windsor framework” is so good it should be extended to Windsor and indeed the entire UK. We could call it something catchy like “membership of the Single Market and Customs Union.”
By which of course he means membership of the EU - as that is the only way the UK as a state can be in the Customs Union.
... and the associated membership of the Euro, an outcome so obviously disastrous for a deficit country like us that even the most ardent europhiles try and wish the issue away, just like Scot Nats do with their own currency question.
This doesn't matter as Brexit is not a Thing. What matters to voters is where you go now. And if thats "Rejoin the EU" then the voters are in a very different place.
Where you go next is a general election. That's Sunak's problem.
He’s got 18 months to get the economy moving then, before the people have their say.
The economy was moving in 1997.
Starmer isn't Blair though.
I agree, and I don't think Labour is going to be anywhere near a 60 majority, let alone a 179 seat one.
But my point was simply that "it's the economy stupid" is not the be all and end all. If it was, the Conservatives would have won reelection in 1997, and Labour would have been utterly slaughtered in 2010.
After a prolonged period in Government, parties get tired. Talent departs and is replaced by mediocrity. Message discipline disappears. Scandals that might have been brushed off now loom large. Tactical voting bites you in the ass.
Two years ago, I was in full agreement with isam that a Conservative majority was underpriced. Now, I think that's a pretty unlikely outcome, because the government simply looks tired.
Major lost in 1997 not so much because the Tories were tired -- but because the Tories were disunited. In 1997, the glee with which Blue attacked Blue was memorably impressive, in contrast to the subdued Blue on Red attacks. You got the feeling that a typical Tory hated others in his/her own party more than the Official Opposition.
By late 2022, it looked as though Blue on Blue attacks were back at the intensity of 1997.
This looks a tiny bit hopeful for the Tories in that Blue on Blue attacks over the Deal have been quite muted so far.
Sure, the Tories look tired, bit SKS always looks weary. And nothing he has said so far suggests he has more ideas than the Tories do on how to fix big problems. Most of them are not fixable on terms acceptable to the electorate.
SKS's big success has been internally -- he has managed to unite the Labour party so it is looking outward rather than inward.
On SKS, it is instructive how he would have handled the nurses. He would have "sat down and talked" - whilst inflation was at its absolute peak. So he would either have a) paid them off - at the absolute peak of inflation; or b) listened but not delivered - pissing off the nurses who thought at least in Starmer they might have had a friend.
Starmer has not shown any ability to manage anything other than the Labour Party. He don't exactly fizz with ideas about how to fix the cost of living crisis.
Come 2024, the voters will be asking "Is that all there is to a Labour Manifesto?"
I wouldn't be surprised if the Labour Manifesto was very light on specifics, on the basis that there's not a lot of room to do anything unless/until they know what the size of the majority is.
If I were them, I'd be looking to frame it as an attempt to get a broad mandate for "fixing all the things" and then being as sweeping in implementation as parliamentary arithmetic and 2nd term electoral politics allows. (How much can be done in the first term whose pain can be blamed on the Tories?)
As the anti Brexit numbers get stronger it will be increasingly hard to comprehend Labour's caution about running with that tide.
But I think SKS would be wise to stick where he is. Elections are funny things. My feeling is that if SKS gave the slightest indication of revisiting the Brexit issue then the door opens for a campaign addressed at the 47% of the population who still support Brexit or are DKs. Plus some who don't like it but don't want to revisit.
If the Tories harvested this SKS cannot win.
One of very few ways the Red Wall seats might stay with the Tories at the next election, is if Starmer starts going on about rejoining the EU.
Yes, it makes sense for the LDs to talk about rejoining the EU as virtually all their seats and Blue Wall target seats voted Remain.
It does not make sense for Labour to talk about rejoining the EU given most of their Red Wall target seats as well as former marginal seats in Essex and East Kent Blair won voted strongly Leave
Yet the 34% who think Britain was right to Leave the EU is still higher than the current Tory voteshare.
If Sunak want beyond yesterday's new deal with the EU on Northern Ireland to try and rejoin the EU he would not only lose most of that 34% to RefUK, he would also still fail to win most of the 53% who think Brexit was wrong and would stay Labour or LD.
The Tories would end up with about the 9% they got under May in the 2019 European elections and Farage would be Leader of the Opposition.
Starmer also is fully aware that while 48% voted Remain, 2/3 of Westminster constituencies voted Leave. So to get most seats or a majority under FPTP he has to respect the Brexit vote, even if he puts forward a softer Brexit Deal for GB than Boris does if he becomes UK PM
Your last para doesn't make sense. 2016 was 2016. The sentiment has changed.
Given 48% voted Remain even in 2016 but only 1/3 of Westminster constituencies voted Remain, now 53% saying it was Wrong to Leave would almost certainly still not be a majority of Westminster constituencies and certainly not a majority of the key Redwall swing seats for rejoin the EU.
Remember in inner city seats and some university towns Remain got 65 to 75% of the vote but they are already mainly safe Labour or LD or in Scotland SNP anyway (albeit maybe not SNP if Forbes becomes FM)
The numbers don't work like that, though.
Best recent evidence we have is the MRP for unherd, where "Brexit good" won in a handful of constituencies, mostly in Lincolnshire.
It's not that crazy. After all, Leave won in most places by a fairly small margin; 52-48 or so. It doesn't take much of a shift in opinion to turn that into 48-52 everywhere.
And for every Cambridge voting massively remain, there was a Romford voting massively Leave.
Comparing an opinion poll with actual votes is always risky, though, and would be even if the question being asked were meaningful, which isn't the case here.
This doesn't matter as Brexit is not a Thing. What matters to voters is where you go now. And if thats "Rejoin the EU" then the voters are in a very different place.
Where you go next is a general election. That's Sunak's problem.
He’s got 18 months to get the economy moving then, before the people have their say.
The economy was moving in 1997.
Starmer isn't Blair though.
I agree, and I don't think Labour is going to be anywhere near a 60 majority, let alone a 179 seat one.
But my point was simply that "it's the economy stupid" is not the be all and end all. If it was, the Conservatives would have won reelection in 1997, and Labour would have been utterly slaughtered in 2010.
After a prolonged period in Government, parties get tired. Talent departs and is replaced by mediocrity. Message discipline disappears. Scandals that might have been brushed off now loom large. Tactical voting bites you in the ass.
Two years ago, I was in full agreement with isam that a Conservative majority was underpriced. Now, I think that's a pretty unlikely outcome, because the government simply looks tired.
Major lost in 1997 not so much because the Tories were tired -- but because the Tories were disunited. In 1997, the glee with which Blue attacked Blue was memorably impressive, in contrast to the subdued Blue on Red attacks. You got the feeling that a typical Tory hated others in his/her own party more than the Official Opposition.
By late 2022, it looked as though Blue on Blue attacks were back at the intensity of 1997.
This looks a tiny bit hopeful for the Tories in that Blue on Blue attacks over the Deal have been quite muted so far.
Sure, the Tories look tired, bit SKS always looks weary. And nothing he has said so far suggests he has more ideas than the Tories do on how to fix big problems. Most of them are not fixable on terms acceptable to the electorate.
SKS's big success has been internally -- he has managed to unite the Labour party so it is looking outward rather than inward.
On SKS, it is instructive how he would have handled the nurses. He would have "sat down and talked" - whilst inflation was at its absolute peak. So he would either have a) paid them off - at the absolute peak of inflation; or b) listened but not delivered - pissing off the nurses who thought at least in Starmer they might have had a friend.
Starmer has not shown any ability to manage anything other than the Labour Party. He don't exactly fizz with ideas about how to fix the cost of living crisis.
Come 2024, the voters will be asking "Is that all there is to a Labour Manifesto?"
Perhaps they will. But remember that politics is always multiple parties. Lets assume the Labour manifesto is a bit Vanilla as you suspect. The Tory manifesto will be a lot Anthrax Ripple. Which makes Vanilla really appealing!
Its the same argument I have to patiently explain to Jezbollah worshippers. It doesn't matter if he delivered the biggest rise in Labour votes in 2017 - at the same time the Tories added another 2m+ votes to their already much bigger total.
Labour don't need to be offering all the answers. Simply being less incompetent / corrupt / malevolent than the Tories will go a long way.
Yet the 34% who think Britain was right to Leave the EU is still higher than the current Tory voteshare.
If Sunak want beyond yesterday's new deal with the EU on Northern Ireland to try and rejoin the EU he would not only lose most of that 34% to RefUK, he would also still fail to win most of the 53% who think Brexit was wrong and would stay Labour or LD.
The Tories would end up with about the 9% they got under May in the 2019 European elections and Farage would be Leader of the Opposition.
Starmer also is fully aware that while 48% voted Remain, 2/3 of Westminster constituencies voted Leave. So to get most seats or a majority under FPTP he has to respect the Brexit vote, even if he puts forward a softer Brexit Deal for GB than Boris does if he becomes UK PM
Your last para doesn't make sense. 2016 was 2016. The sentiment has changed.
Given 48% voted Remain even in 2016 but only 1/3 of Westminster constituencies voted Remain, now 53% saying it was Wrong to Leave would almost certainly still not be a majority of Westminster constituencies and certainly not a majority of the key Redwall swing seats for rejoin the EU.
Remember in inner city seats and some university towns Remain got 65 to 75% of the vote but they are already mainly safe Labour or LD or in Scotland SNP anyway (albeit maybe not SNP if Forbes becomes FM)
The numbers don't work like that, though.
Best recent evidence we have is the MRP for unherd, where "Brexit good" won in a handful of constituencies, mostly in Lincolnshire.
It's not that crazy. After all, Leave won in most places by a fairly small margin; 52-48 or so. It doesn't take much of a shift in opinion to turn that into 48-52 everywhere.
And for every Cambridge voting massively remain, there was a Romford voting massively Leave.
Add the 18% Neither back to Leave and Leave soon wins back dozens and dozens of constituencies even on that chart
England are box office right now. The secondary market for Ashes tickets is already over £500 for a day.
2005 was epic - the Aussies coming to the end of their period of dominance, and an England team coming to a peak with aggressive batsmen and a four man pace attack with skill, pace and variety. The match that ended last night was great, but still a level below 2005.
I agree. I was lucky enough to be at one of the tests in 2005. We were still waiting to get in when there was an incredible roar, like a goal being scored. England had won the toss. I have never seen or felt cricket like that. It was electric.
Has Headingley '81 been cancelled? Botham sacked as captain, England following on, 105/5, still 122 runs behind, 500/1 with Ladbrokes?
Age is what happened. You have to be nearly 50 just to have much recollection if it.
This doesn't matter as Brexit is not a Thing. What matters to voters is where you go now. And if thats "Rejoin the EU" then the voters are in a very different place.
Where you go next is a general election. That's Sunak's problem.
He’s got 18 months to get the economy moving then, before the people have their say.
The economy was moving in 1997.
Starmer isn't Blair though.
I agree, and I don't think Labour is going to be anywhere near a 60 majority, let alone a 179 seat one.
But my point was simply that "it's the economy stupid" is not the be all and end all. If it was, the Conservatives would have won reelection in 1997, and Labour would have been utterly slaughtered in 2010.
After a prolonged period in Government, parties get tired. Talent departs and is replaced by mediocrity. Message discipline disappears. Scandals that might have been brushed off now loom large. Tactical voting bites you in the ass.
Two years ago, I was in full agreement with isam that a Conservative majority was underpriced. Now, I think that's a pretty unlikely outcome, because the government simply looks tired.
Major lost in 1997 not so much because the Tories were tired -- but because the Tories were disunited. In 1997, the glee with which Blue attacked Blue was memorably impressive, in contrast to the subdued Blue on Red attacks. You got the feeling that a typical Tory hated others in his/her own party more than the Official Opposition.
By late 2022, it looked as though Blue on Blue attacks were back at the intensity of 1997.
This looks a tiny bit hopeful for the Tories in that Blue on Blue attacks over the Deal have been quite muted so far.
Sure, the Tories look tired, bit SKS always looks weary. And nothing he has said so far suggests he has more ideas than the Tories do on how to fix big problems. Most of them are not fixable on terms acceptable to the electorate.
SKS's big success has been internally -- he has managed to unite the Labour party so it is looking outward rather than inward.
On SKS, it is instructive how he would have handled the nurses. He would have "sat down and talked" - whilst inflation was at its absolute peak. So he would either have a) paid them off - at the absolute peak of inflation; or b) listened but not delivered - pissing off the nurses who thought at least in Starmer they might have had a friend.
Starmer has not shown any ability to manage anything other than the Labour Party. He don't exactly fizz with ideas about how to fix the cost of living crisis.
Come 2024, the voters will be asking "Is that all there is to a Labour Manifesto?"
Come 2024 the public will just be glad to see the back of the Tories. A dull, play it safe Labour manifesto is probably the best strategy for them. Their mission for term 1 is to show themselves as economically competent with a few headline-winning broadly popular policies. The GE after is where it gets interesting.
Yet the 34% who think Britain was right to Leave the EU is still higher than the current Tory voteshare.
If Sunak want beyond yesterday's new deal with the EU on Northern Ireland to try and rejoin the EU he would not only lose most of that 34% to RefUK, he would also still fail to win most of the 53% who think Brexit was wrong and would stay Labour or LD.
The Tories would end up with about the 9% they got under May in the 2019 European elections and Farage would be Leader of the Opposition.
Starmer also is fully aware that while 48% voted Remain, 2/3 of Westminster constituencies voted Leave. So to get most seats or a majority under FPTP he has to respect the Brexit vote, even if he puts forward a softer Brexit Deal for GB than Boris does if he becomes UK PM
Your last para doesn't make sense. 2016 was 2016. The sentiment has changed.
Given 48% voted Remain even in 2016 but only 1/3 of Westminster constituencies voted Remain, now 53% saying it was Wrong to Leave would almost certainly still not be a majority of Westminster constituencies and certainly not a majority of the key Redwall swing seats for rejoin the EU.
Remember in inner city seats and some university towns Remain got 65 to 75% of the vote but they are already mainly safe Labour or LD or in Scotland SNP anyway (albeit maybe not SNP if Forbes becomes FM)
The numbers don't work like that, though.
Best recent evidence we have is the MRP for unherd, where "Brexit good" won in a handful of constituencies, mostly in Lincolnshire.
It's not that crazy. After all, Leave won in most places by a fairly small margin; 52-48 or so. It doesn't take much of a shift in opinion to turn that into 48-52 everywhere.
And for every Cambridge voting massively remain, there was a Romford voting massively Leave.
Comparing an opinion poll with actual votes is always risky, though, and would be even if the question being asked were meaningful, which isn't the case here.
Plus of course Remain led most polls even in 2016 but still lost on referendum day
England are box office right now. The secondary market for Ashes tickets is already over £500 for a day.
2005 was epic - the Aussies coming to the end of their period of dominance, and an England team coming to a peak with aggressive batsmen and a four man pace attack with skill, pace and variety. The match that ended last night was great, but still a level below 2005.
I agree. I was lucky enough to be at one of the tests in 2005. We were still waiting to get in when there was an incredible roar, like a goal being scored. England had won the toss. I have never seen or felt cricket like that. It was electric.
Has Headingley '81 been cancelled? Botham sacked as captain, England following on, 105/5, still 122 runs behind, 500/1 with Ladbrokes?
Didn’t Botham say he’d met 10 times as many people who had told him they were there on that last day, as could possibly have fitted inside the ground?
Seems unlikely that he's had that conversation with well over 100k people. But not entirely impossible, I guess.
Zero-calorie sweetener popular in keto diets linked to strokes, heart attacks https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/3876664-zero-calorie-sweetener-popular-in-keto-diets-linked-to-strokes-heart-attacks/ ...Stanley Hazen, the director of the Center for Cardiovascular Diagnostics and Prevention at the Cleveland Clinic Lerner Research Institute and lead researcher on the study, told CNN that “the degree of risk was not modest.” “If your blood level of erythritol was in the top 25 percent compared to the bottom 25 percent, there was about a two-fold higher risk for heart attack and stroke. It’s on par with the strongest of cardiac risk factors, like diabetes,” Hazen said...
Interesting and the results look quite stark.
Having had a quick read through, I do find it quite limited (or at least limited reporting) on addressing confounding. There is an alternative causal pathway in which people for whom doctors have concerns of cardiac risk are strongly urged to reduce weight/sugar intake and so switch to these sweeteners which could cause some of these results. It's also possible that the comparison is between people who switch to sweeteners as an easy option compared to those making further reaching lifestyle change (e.g. balanced diet, more exercise).
The biological part is beyond me, frankly, but on the epi part I would, if a reviewer, have demanded more on the methods before publication (apart fom anything else, they claim to have followed the STROBE reporting guidelines, as would be expected, but I think they're missing much of the expected details there).
It's still an interesting association and one that should give people pause for thought, but I'm not yet convinced there's a convincing case for causality.
This doesn't matter as Brexit is not a Thing. What matters to voters is where you go now. And if thats "Rejoin the EU" then the voters are in a very different place.
Where you go next is a general election. That's Sunak's problem.
He’s got 18 months to get the economy moving then, before the people have their say.
The economy was moving in 1997.
Starmer isn't Blair though.
I agree, and I don't think Labour is going to be anywhere near a 60 majority, let alone a 179 seat one.
But my point was simply that "it's the economy stupid" is not the be all and end all. If it was, the Conservatives would have won reelection in 1997, and Labour would have been utterly slaughtered in 2010.
After a prolonged period in Government, parties get tired. Talent departs and is replaced by mediocrity. Message discipline disappears. Scandals that might have been brushed off now loom large. Tactical voting bites you in the ass.
Two years ago, I was in full agreement with isam that a Conservative majority was underpriced. Now, I think that's a pretty unlikely outcome, because the government simply looks tired.
Major lost in 1997 not so much because the Tories were tired -- but because the Tories were disunited. In 1997, the glee with which Blue attacked Blue was memorably impressive, in contrast to the subdued Blue on Red attacks. You got the feeling that a typical Tory hated others in his/her own party more than the Official Opposition.
By late 2022, it looked as though Blue on Blue attacks were back at the intensity of 1997.
This looks a tiny bit hopeful for the Tories in that Blue on Blue attacks over the Deal have been quite muted so far.
Sure, the Tories look tired, bit SKS always looks weary. And nothing he has said so far suggests he has more ideas than the Tories do on how to fix big problems. Most of them are not fixable on terms acceptable to the electorate.
SKS's big success has been internally -- he has managed to unite the Labour party so it is looking outward rather than inward.
On SKS, it is instructive how he would have handled the nurses. He would have "sat down and talked" - whilst inflation was at its absolute peak. So he would either have a) paid them off - at the absolute peak of inflation; or b) listened but not delivered - pissing off the nurses who thought at least in Starmer they might have had a friend.
Starmer has not shown any ability to manage anything other than the Labour Party. He don't exactly fizz with ideas about how to fix the cost of living crisis.
Come 2024, the voters will be asking "Is that all there is to a Labour Manifesto?"
Come 2024 the public will just be glad to see the back of the Tories. A dull, play it safe Labour manifesto is probably the best strategy for them. Their mission for term 1 is to show themselves as economically competent with a few headline-winning broadly popular policies. The GE after is where it gets interesting.
How much of a better place would we all be in now, if Brown hadn’t turned on the spending taps after 2001?
With public debt higher than GDP though, there’s no room to move at all - ask Liz Truss.
Off-topic, my switch to shooting and editing in 4k is stretching my computer gear and broadband to the limit. 16MB of RAM isn't enough to reliably render 30 minutes of 4k video.
So I may need to invest in new kit as my channel has accelerated hard on every metric and I have half a dozen videos shot / partly edited. Haven't used a Mac in decades so not going to buy one of those. More PC power perhaps as I don't think my otherwise fabulous Surface Pro 8 was designed for this.
And broadband? With my current deal up looking seriously at Starlink...
If you’re going to be doing a load of 4k video editing, it’s probably worth investing in a proper workstation PC with a good GPU.
As the anti Brexit numbers get stronger it will be increasingly hard to comprehend Labour's caution about running with that tide.
But I think SKS would be wise to stick where he is. Elections are funny things. My feeling is that if SKS gave the slightest indication of revisiting the Brexit issue then the door opens for a campaign addressed at the 47% of the population who still support Brexit or are DKs. Plus some who don't like it but don't want to revisit.
If the Tories harvested this SKS cannot win.
One of very few ways the Red Wall seats might stay with the Tories at the next election, is if Starmer starts going on about rejoining the EU.
Surely the line Labour should take is "Look - a majority of the British People think, in hindsight, Brexit was wrong. But that doesn't change the reality that we have left the EU. We need a Labour government to rebuild Britain's relationship with our largest economic partner, after the damage that was done by the Tories, and open Britain for Business again."
Or some such waffle. It turns it into a straightforward attack on the Tories.
The only downside is that Sunak *can* argue that he is doing that himself - but I think he's shouting into the jet engine of public opinion there.
This doesn't matter as Brexit is not a Thing. What matters to voters is where you go now. And if thats "Rejoin the EU" then the voters are in a very different place.
Where you go next is a general election. That's Sunak's problem.
He’s got 18 months to get the economy moving then, before the people have their say.
The economy was moving in 1997.
Starmer isn't Blair though.
I agree, and I don't think Labour is going to be anywhere near a 60 majority, let alone a 179 seat one.
But my point was simply that "it's the economy stupid" is not the be all and end all. If it was, the Conservatives would have won reelection in 1997, and Labour would have been utterly slaughtered in 2010.
After a prolonged period in Government, parties get tired. Talent departs and is replaced by mediocrity. Message discipline disappears. Scandals that might have been brushed off now loom large. Tactical voting bites you in the ass.
Two years ago, I was in full agreement with isam that a Conservative majority was underpriced. Now, I think that's a pretty unlikely outcome, because the government simply looks tired.
Major lost in 1997 not so much because the Tories were tired -- but because the Tories were disunited. In 1997, the glee with which Blue attacked Blue was memorably impressive, in contrast to the subdued Blue on Red attacks. You got the feeling that a typical Tory hated others in his/her own party more than the Official Opposition.
By late 2022, it looked as though Blue on Blue attacks were back at the intensity of 1997.
This looks a tiny bit hopeful for the Tories in that Blue on Blue attacks over the Deal have been quite muted so far.
Sure, the Tories look tired, bit SKS always looks weary. And nothing he has said so far suggests he has more ideas than the Tories do on how to fix big problems. Most of them are not fixable on terms acceptable to the electorate.
SKS's big success has been internally -- he has managed to unite the Labour party so it is looking outward rather than inward.
Back to Basics wasn't a policy from an administration that was a little tired and running out of ideas? The Cones Hotline?
I would also point out that Major had a big success in Northern Ireland. In 1994 the IRA laid down their arms and entered into a ceasefire. That was a pretty massive achievement after decades of fighting.
But, yes, you are right, infighting played a role.
We need a Labour government to rebuild Britain's relationship with our largest economic partner, after the damage that was done by the Tories, and open Britain for Business again."
Or some such waffle. It turns it into a straightforward attack on the Tories.
The only downside is that Sunak *can* argue that he is doing that himself - but I think he's shouting into the jet engine of public opinion there.
Sunak's problem, as noted by several others this morning, is that his pitch is "being in the single market is better then being out of it"
Getting Brexit Done by being a shitty second best...
This doesn't matter as Brexit is not a Thing. What matters to voters is where you go now. And if thats "Rejoin the EU" then the voters are in a very different place.
Where you go next is a general election. That's Sunak's problem.
He’s got 18 months to get the economy moving then, before the people have their say.
The economy was moving in 1997.
Starmer isn't Blair though.
I agree, and I don't think Labour is going to be anywhere near a 60 majority, let alone a 179 seat one.
But my point was simply that "it's the economy stupid" is not the be all and end all. If it was, the Conservatives would have won reelection in 1997, and Labour would have been utterly slaughtered in 2010.
After a prolonged period in Government, parties get tired. Talent departs and is replaced by mediocrity. Message discipline disappears. Scandals that might have been brushed off now loom large. Tactical voting bites you in the ass.
Two years ago, I was in full agreement with isam that a Conservative majority was underpriced. Now, I think that's a pretty unlikely outcome, because the government simply looks tired.
Major lost in 1997 not so much because the Tories were tired -- but because the Tories were disunited. In 1997, the glee with which Blue attacked Blue was memorably impressive, in contrast to the subdued Blue on Red attacks. You got the feeling that a typical Tory hated others in his/her own party more than the Official Opposition.
By late 2022, it looked as though Blue on Blue attacks were back at the intensity of 1997.
This looks a tiny bit hopeful for the Tories in that Blue on Blue attacks over the Deal have been quite muted so far.
Sure, the Tories look tired, bit SKS always looks weary. And nothing he has said so far suggests he has more ideas than the Tories do on how to fix big problems. Most of them are not fixable on terms acceptable to the electorate.
SKS's big success has been internally -- he has managed to unite the Labour party so it is looking outward rather than inward.
Back to Basics wasn't a policy from an administration that was a little tired and running out of ideas? The Cones Hotline?
I would also point out that Major had a big success in Northern Ireland. In 1994 the IRA laid down their arms and entered into a ceasefire. That was a pretty massive achievement after decades of fighting.
But, yes, you are right, infighting played a role.
But it was only one element.
Back to basics was a classic the New Labour spinning operation changing the meaning of something.
The intent was about looking at the fundamentals of government - delivery of actual services. It was spun into a return to Victorian values.
Bit like the Cones Hotline - which was an attempt at getting accountability out of the "faceless" side of government.
Zero-calorie sweetener popular in keto diets linked to strokes, heart attacks https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/3876664-zero-calorie-sweetener-popular-in-keto-diets-linked-to-strokes-heart-attacks/ ...Stanley Hazen, the director of the Center for Cardiovascular Diagnostics and Prevention at the Cleveland Clinic Lerner Research Institute and lead researcher on the study, told CNN that “the degree of risk was not modest.” “If your blood level of erythritol was in the top 25 percent compared to the bottom 25 percent, there was about a two-fold higher risk for heart attack and stroke. It’s on par with the strongest of cardiac risk factors, like diabetes,” Hazen said...
Interesting and the results look quite stark.
Having had a quick read through, I do find it quite limited (or at least limited reporting) on addressing confounding. There is an alternative causal pathway in which people for whom doctors have concerns of cardiac risk are strongly urged to reduce weight/sugar intake and so switch to these sweeteners which could cause some of these results. It's also possible that the comparison is between people who switch to sweeteners as an easy option compared to those making further reaching lifestyle change (e.g. balanced diet, more exercise).
The biological part is beyond me, frankly, but on the epi part I would, if a reviewer, have demanded more on the methods before publication (apart fom anything else, they claim to have followed the STROBE reporting guidelines, as would be expected, but I think they're missing much of the expected details there).
It's still an interesting association and one that should give people pause for thought, but I'm not yet convinced there's a convincing case for causality.
Posts like this add real value to the fun of reading PB in the morning. I will definitely contrive a way to "observe" this over the next couple of days and sound way smarter than I really am.
England are box office right now. The secondary market for Ashes tickets is already over £500 for a day.
2005 was epic - the Aussies coming to the end of their period of dominance, and an England team coming to a peak with aggressive batsmen and a four man pace attack with skill, pace and variety. The match that ended last night was great, but still a level below 2005.
I agree. I was lucky enough to be at one of the tests in 2005. We were still waiting to get in when there was an incredible roar, like a goal being scored. England had won the toss. I have never seen or felt cricket like that. It was electric.
Has Headingley '81 been cancelled? Botham sacked as captain, England following on, 105/5, still 122 runs behind, 500/1 with Ladbrokes?
Age is what happened. You have to be nearly 50 just to have much recollection if it.
I'm nearly 50 and I have no recollection of it. Apparently my dad was listening to it on the car radio while I played on the beach in Devon. I have, however, over the years, probably spent longer than the actual match watching bits of it. One of the best pieces of sporting theatre ever staged. The image which sticks in my head is the expression on the face of Bob Willis throughout almost all of the fourth innings, including following the final wicket. Most sporting triumphs are accompanied by expressions of joy; Bob just looked very angry and very, very tired. Utterly compelling.
Personally I think Rishi Sunak’s “Windsor framework” is so good it should be extended to Windsor and indeed the entire UK. We could call it something catchy like “membership of the Single Market and Customs Union.”
Let us call it ‘The Windsor Question’.
(For those who don’t get the reference, see Tam Dalyell, Enoch Powell et al and ‘The West Lothian Question’.)
Zero-calorie sweetener popular in keto diets linked to strokes, heart attacks https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/3876664-zero-calorie-sweetener-popular-in-keto-diets-linked-to-strokes-heart-attacks/ ...Stanley Hazen, the director of the Center for Cardiovascular Diagnostics and Prevention at the Cleveland Clinic Lerner Research Institute and lead researcher on the study, told CNN that “the degree of risk was not modest.” “If your blood level of erythritol was in the top 25 percent compared to the bottom 25 percent, there was about a two-fold higher risk for heart attack and stroke. It’s on par with the strongest of cardiac risk factors, like diabetes,” Hazen said...
Interesting and the results look quite stark.
Having had a quick read through, I do find it quite limited (or at least limited reporting) on addressing confounding. There is an alternative causal pathway in which people for whom doctors have concerns of cardiac risk are strongly urged to reduce weight/sugar intake and so switch to these sweeteners which could cause some of these results. It's also possible that the comparison is between people who switch to sweeteners as an easy option compared to those making further reaching lifestyle change (e.g. balanced diet, more exercise).
The biological part is beyond me, frankly, but on the epi part I would, if a reviewer, have demanded more on the methods before publication (apart fom anything else, they claim to have followed the STROBE reporting guidelines, as would be expected, but I think they're missing much of the expected details there).
It's still an interesting association and one that should give people pause for thought, but I'm not yet convinced there's a convincing case for causality.
Although the bio bit does give an apparent mechanism by which the sweetener could cause cardiovascular issues. So it does goes beyond epi - perhaps perfectly valid in using the epi to show an association and then describing and demonstrating a mechanism
Interesting to see the difference in reporting/approach in a slightly different field.
England are box office right now. The secondary market for Ashes tickets is already over £500 for a day.
2005 was epic - the Aussies coming to the end of their period of dominance, and an England team coming to a peak with aggressive batsmen and a four man pace attack with skill, pace and variety. The match that ended last night was great, but still a level below 2005.
I agree. I was lucky enough to be at one of the tests in 2005. We were still waiting to get in when there was an incredible roar, like a goal being scored. England had won the toss. I have never seen or felt cricket like that. It was electric.
Has Headingley '81 been cancelled? Botham sacked as captain, England following on, 105/5, still 122 runs behind, 500/1 with Ladbrokes?
Didn’t Botham say he’d met 10 times as many people who had told him they were there on that last day, as could possibly have fitted inside the ground?
Seems unlikely that he's had that conversation with well over 100k people. But not entirely impossible, I guess.
There’s probably some artistic licence there, but there were five days of the match, so maybe two or three times as many as the ground could hold were there at some point. There’s also been c.15,000 days since then, and Botham would have attended plenty of cricket events in those 41 years. And if you shook his hand, wouldn’t you have said that you were there too?
This doesn't matter as Brexit is not a Thing. What matters to voters is where you go now. And if thats "Rejoin the EU" then the voters are in a very different place.
Where you go next is a general election. That's Sunak's problem.
He’s got 18 months to get the economy moving then, before the people have their say.
The economy was moving in 1997.
Starmer isn't Blair though.
I agree, and I don't think Labour is going to be anywhere near a 60 majority, let alone a 179 seat one.
But my point was simply that "it's the economy stupid" is not the be all and end all. If it was, the Conservatives would have won reelection in 1997, and Labour would have been utterly slaughtered in 2010.
After a prolonged period in Government, parties get tired. Talent departs and is replaced by mediocrity. Message discipline disappears. Scandals that might have been brushed off now loom large. Tactical voting bites you in the ass.
Two years ago, I was in full agreement with isam that a Conservative majority was underpriced. Now, I think that's a pretty unlikely outcome, because the government simply looks tired.
Major lost in 1997 not so much because the Tories were tired -- but because the Tories were disunited. In 1997, the glee with which Blue attacked Blue was memorably impressive, in contrast to the subdued Blue on Red attacks. You got the feeling that a typical Tory hated others in his/her own party more than the Official Opposition.
By late 2022, it looked as though Blue on Blue attacks were back at the intensity of 1997.
This looks a tiny bit hopeful for the Tories in that Blue on Blue attacks over the Deal have been quite muted so far.
Sure, the Tories look tired, bit SKS always looks weary. And nothing he has said so far suggests he has more ideas than the Tories do on how to fix big problems. Most of them are not fixable on terms acceptable to the electorate.
SKS's big success has been internally -- he has managed to unite the Labour party so it is looking outward rather than inward.
Back to Basics wasn't a policy from an administration that was a little tired and running out of ideas? The Cones Hotline?
I would also point out that Major had a big success in Northern Ireland. In 1994 the IRA laid down their arms and entered into a ceasefire. That was a pretty massive achievement after decades of fighting.
But, yes, you are right, infighting played a role.
But it was only one element.
You might argue that the infighting is a consequence of policy exhaustion. When there's nothing big you care to line up behind, the fights become inward looking, and more vicious.
This doesn't matter as Brexit is not a Thing. What matters to voters is where you go now. And if thats "Rejoin the EU" then the voters are in a very different place.
Where you go next is a general election. That's Sunak's problem.
He’s got 18 months to get the economy moving then, before the people have their say.
The economy was moving in 1997.
Starmer isn't Blair though.
I agree, and I don't think Labour is going to be anywhere near a 60 majority, let alone a 179 seat one.
But my point was simply that "it's the economy stupid" is not the be all and end all. If it was, the Conservatives would have won reelection in 1997, and Labour would have been utterly slaughtered in 2010.
After a prolonged period in Government, parties get tired. Talent departs and is replaced by mediocrity. Message discipline disappears. Scandals that might have been brushed off now loom large. Tactical voting bites you in the ass.
Two years ago, I was in full agreement with isam that a Conservative majority was underpriced. Now, I think that's a pretty unlikely outcome, because the government simply looks tired.
Major lost in 1997 not so much because the Tories were tired -- but because the Tories were disunited. In 1997, the glee with which Blue attacked Blue was memorably impressive, in contrast to the subdued Blue on Red attacks. You got the feeling that a typical Tory hated others in his/her own party more than the Official Opposition.
By late 2022, it looked as though Blue on Blue attacks were back at the intensity of 1997.
This looks a tiny bit hopeful for the Tories in that Blue on Blue attacks over the Deal have been quite muted so far.
Sure, the Tories look tired, bit SKS always looks weary. And nothing he has said so far suggests he has more ideas than the Tories do on how to fix big problems. Most of them are not fixable on terms acceptable to the electorate.
SKS's big success has been internally -- he has managed to unite the Labour party so it is looking outward rather than inward.
Back to Basics wasn't a policy from an administration that was a little tired and running out of ideas? The Cones Hotline?
I would also point out that Major had a big success in Northern Ireland. In 1994 the IRA laid down their arms and entered into a ceasefire. That was a pretty massive achievement after decades of fighting.
But, yes, you are right, infighting played a role.
But it was only one element.
What the Tories need to recognise is that in terms of the pattern throughout my adult life it is very likely that when they lose in 2024 they face the desert of opposition for the rest of their careers. Some of the smarter ones are already edging towards the door. It will probably be around 2035 there will be another change in government.
England are box office right now. The secondary market for Ashes tickets is already over £500 for a day.
2005 was epic - the Aussies coming to the end of their period of dominance, and an England team coming to a peak with aggressive batsmen and a four man pace attack with skill, pace and variety. The match that ended last night was great, but still a level below 2005.
I agree. I was lucky enough to be at one of the tests in 2005. We were still waiting to get in when there was an incredible roar, like a goal being scored. England had won the toss. I have never seen or felt cricket like that. It was electric.
Has Headingley '81 been cancelled? Botham sacked as captain, England following on, 105/5, still 122 runs behind, 500/1 with Ladbrokes?
Didn’t Botham say he’d met 10 times as many people who had told him they were there on that last day, as could possibly have fitted inside the ground?
Seems unlikely that he's had that conversation with well over 100k people. But not entirely impossible, I guess.
There’s probably some artistic licence there, but there were five days of the match, so maybe two or three times as many as the ground could hold were there at some point. There’s also been c.15,000 days since then, and Botham would have attended plenty of cricket events in those 41 years. And if you shook his hand, wouldn’t you have said that you were there too?
I'm sure that at least three quarters of the people who told him they were there were not... in fact... there.
A little bit like the Sex Pistols gig in Manchester.
We need inflation down. Urgently. We do not need to boost fuel prices again. The collateral damage in inflation, continuing public sector unrest and impairment of economic activity is simply too high a price.
Petrol pump prices are about 50p a litre lower than in July 2022, but a penny or two on fuel duty is the end of days - it's a view.
Not exactly the best reporting from a rag which hates Lineker as much as it hates the BBC. Freelance vs staff has been a debate amongst broadcasters for decades. Especially when they appear on multiple broadcasters for substantial amounts of time as he does.
For me the outrage is the use of the words "Talent" and "Linekar" having any link.
As the anti Brexit numbers get stronger it will be increasingly hard to comprehend Labour's caution about running with that tide.
But I think SKS would be wise to stick where he is. Elections are funny things. My feeling is that if SKS gave the slightest indication of revisiting the Brexit issue then the door opens for a campaign addressed at the 47% of the population who still support Brexit or are DKs. Plus some who don't like it but don't want to revisit.
If the Tories harvested this SKS cannot win.
One of very few ways the Red Wall seats might stay with the Tories at the next election, is if Starmer starts going on about rejoining the EU.
Surely the line Labour should take is "Look - a majority of the British People think, in hindsight, Brexit was wrong. But that doesn't change the reality that we have left the EU. We need a Labour government to rebuild Britain's relationship with our largest economic partner, after the damage that was done by the Tories, and open Britain for Business again."
Or some such waffle. It turns it into a straightforward attack on the Tories.
The only downside is that Sunak *can* argue that he is doing that himself - but I think he's shouting into the jet engine of public opinion there.
Sunak will have had 18 months of delivering on that by the election. Labour will look 18 months behind the curve. All those blue wall seats will have literature with smiling pics of Sunak and his bezzy Ursula.
The red wall literature will just focus on "Brexit got done. Even in the impossibility of Northern Ireland."
Sunak can pull off the masterstroke of rebuilding the mutually-beneficial economically workable trade arrangements with the EU. From outside the EU.
England are box office right now. The secondary market for Ashes tickets is already over £500 for a day.
2005 was epic - the Aussies coming to the end of their period of dominance, and an England team coming to a peak with aggressive batsmen and a four man pace attack with skill, pace and variety. The match that ended last night was great, but still a level below 2005.
I agree. I was lucky enough to be at one of the tests in 2005. We were still waiting to get in when there was an incredible roar, like a goal being scored. England had won the toss. I have never seen or felt cricket like that. It was electric.
Has Headingley '81 been cancelled? Botham sacked as captain, England following on, 105/5, still 122 runs behind, 500/1 with Ladbrokes?
Age is what happened. You have to be nearly 50 just to have much recollection if it.
I'm nearly 50 and I have no recollection of it. Apparently my dad was listening to it on the car radio while I played on the beach in Devon. I have, however, over the years, probably spent longer than the actual match watching bits of it. One of the best pieces of sporting theatre ever staged. The image which sticks in my head is the expression on the face of Bob Willis throughout almost all of the fourth innings, including following the final wicket. Most sporting triumphs are accompanied by expressions of joy; Bob just looked very angry and very, very tired. Utterly compelling.
Anyway, all that said, watch the footage of Headingley '81, and the crowd reactions are anachronistically muted. The ground isn't even full. The excitement of 2005, I think, was greater. It felt like the whole country was watching. I remember being in Wollaton Park, Nottingham, in a crowd of about 3,000 watching it on a big screen. I remember a wedding in Hull which coincided with the second test, and, it felt, everyone (except a mildly disgruntled bride) decamped en masse to a telly to watch the last half hour as the speeches finished and see the wicket of Michael Clark (I think) go down at the end. In every office in the country, productive work stopped at 11am, and all email chat was on cricket. And it felt like, if you were in a city where a test was being staged, you could hear the crowd's reaction to a wicket going down across the city. They were good tests, certainly, but not as good as what is being played now. But it was a moment when cricket felt as big as its ever been in my lifetime. The combined impacts of terrestrial telly and a decent side after 15 years of failure, probably.
This doesn't matter as Brexit is not a Thing. What matters to voters is where you go now. And if thats "Rejoin the EU" then the voters are in a very different place.
Where you go next is a general election. That's Sunak's problem.
He’s got 18 months to get the economy moving then, before the people have their say.
The economy was moving in 1997.
Starmer isn't Blair though.
I agree, and I don't think Labour is going to be anywhere near a 60 majority, let alone a 179 seat one.
But my point was simply that "it's the economy stupid" is not the be all and end all. If it was, the Conservatives would have won reelection in 1997, and Labour would have been utterly slaughtered in 2010.
After a prolonged period in Government, parties get tired. Talent departs and is replaced by mediocrity. Message discipline disappears. Scandals that might have been brushed off now loom large. Tactical voting bites you in the ass.
Two years ago, I was in full agreement with isam that a Conservative majority was underpriced. Now, I think that's a pretty unlikely outcome, because the government simply looks tired.
Major lost in 1997 not so much because the Tories were tired -- but because the Tories were disunited. In 1997, the glee with which Blue attacked Blue was memorably impressive, in contrast to the subdued Blue on Red attacks. You got the feeling that a typical Tory hated others in his/her own party more than the Official Opposition.
By late 2022, it looked as though Blue on Blue attacks were back at the intensity of 1997.
This looks a tiny bit hopeful for the Tories in that Blue on Blue attacks over the Deal have been quite muted so far.
Sure, the Tories look tired, bit SKS always looks weary. And nothing he has said so far suggests he has more ideas than the Tories do on how to fix big problems. Most of them are not fixable on terms acceptable to the electorate.
SKS's big success has been internally -- he has managed to unite the Labour party so it is looking outward rather than inward.
Back to Basics wasn't a policy from an administration that was a little tired and running out of ideas? The Cones Hotline?
I would also point out that Major had a big success in Northern Ireland. In 1994 the IRA laid down their arms and entered into a ceasefire. That was a pretty massive achievement after decades of fighting.
But, yes, you are right, infighting played a role.
But it was only one element.
Back to basics was a classic the New Labour spinning operation changing the meaning of something.
The intent was about looking at the fundamentals of government - delivery of actual services. It was spun into a return to Victorian values.
Bit like the Cones Hotline - which was an attempt at getting accountability out of the "faceless" side of government.
And there are, in fairness, few things as irritating as tiptoeing through miles of cones with not a workman in sight.
We need inflation down. Urgently. We do not need to boost fuel prices again. The collateral damage in inflation, continuing public sector unrest and impairment of economic activity is simply too high a price.
Petrol pump prices are about 50p a litre lower than in July 2022, but a penny or two on fuel duty is the end of days - it's a view.
Diesel, however, is down by barely half that. And the logistics industry runs on diesel.
As the anti Brexit numbers get stronger it will be increasingly hard to comprehend Labour's caution about running with that tide.
But I think SKS would be wise to stick where he is. Elections are funny things. My feeling is that if SKS gave the slightest indication of revisiting the Brexit issue then the door opens for a campaign addressed at the 47% of the population who still support Brexit or are DKs. Plus some who don't like it but don't want to revisit.
If the Tories harvested this SKS cannot win.
One of very few ways the Red Wall seats might stay with the Tories at the next election, is if Starmer starts going on about rejoining the EU.
Surely the line Labour should take is "Look - a majority of the British People think, in hindsight, Brexit was wrong. But that doesn't change the reality that we have left the EU. We need a Labour government to rebuild Britain's relationship with our largest economic partner, after the damage that was done by the Tories, and open Britain for Business again."
Or some such waffle. It turns it into a straightforward attack on the Tories.
The only downside is that Sunak *can* argue that he is doing that himself - but I think he's shouting into the jet engine of public opinion there.
Labour are also intent on '14 years of Tory stagnation' - so they don't want to finger Brexit as a main culprit for our poor economic performance. Brexit is a recent thing plus lots of voters in target seats voted for it and will not as yet take kindly to being told it was a big mistake.
Yet the 34% who think Britain was right to Leave the EU is still higher than the current Tory voteshare.
If Sunak want beyond yesterday's new deal with the EU on Northern Ireland to try and rejoin the EU he would not only lose most of that 34% to RefUK, he would also still fail to win most of the 53% who think Brexit was wrong and would stay Labour or LD.
The Tories would end up with about the 9% they got under May in the 2019 European elections and Farage would be Leader of the Opposition.
Starmer also is fully aware that while 48% voted Remain, 2/3 of Westminster constituencies voted Leave. So to get most seats or a majority under FPTP he has to respect the Brexit vote, even if he puts forward a softer Brexit Deal for GB than Boris does if he becomes UK PM
Your last para doesn't make sense. 2016 was 2016. The sentiment has changed.
Given 48% voted Remain even in 2016 but only 1/3 of Westminster constituencies voted Remain, now 53% saying it was Wrong to Leave would almost certainly still not be a majority of Westminster constituencies and certainly not a majority of the key Redwall swing seats for rejoin the EU.
Remember in inner city seats and some university towns Remain got 65 to 75% of the vote but they are already mainly safe Labour or LD or in Scotland SNP anyway (albeit maybe not SNP if Forbes becomes FM)
The numbers don't work like that, though.
Best recent evidence we have is the MRP for unherd, where "Brexit good" won in a handful of constituencies, mostly in Lincolnshire.
It's not that crazy. After all, Leave won in most places by a fairly small margin; 52-48 or so. It doesn't take much of a shift in opinion to turn that into 48-52 everywhere.
And for every Cambridge voting massively remain, there was a Romford voting massively Leave.
Comparing an opinion poll with actual votes is always risky, though, and would be even if the question being asked were meaningful, which isn't the case here.
Plus of course Remain led most polls even in 2016 but still lost on referendum day
Albeit there was a very clear demarcation: on-line was right, phone polls were very wrong.
England are box office right now. The secondary market for Ashes tickets is already over £500 for a day.
2005 was epic - the Aussies coming to the end of their period of dominance, and an England team coming to a peak with aggressive batsmen and a four man pace attack with skill, pace and variety. The match that ended last night was great, but still a level below 2005.
I agree. I was lucky enough to be at one of the tests in 2005. We were still waiting to get in when there was an incredible roar, like a goal being scored. England had won the toss. I have never seen or felt cricket like that. It was electric.
Has Headingley '81 been cancelled? Botham sacked as captain, England following on, 105/5, still 122 runs behind, 500/1 with Ladbrokes?
Didn’t Botham say he’d met 10 times as many people who had told him they were there on that last day, as could possibly have fitted inside the ground?
Seems unlikely that he's had that conversation with well over 100k people. But not entirely impossible, I guess.
There’s probably some artistic licence there, but there were five days of the match, so maybe two or three times as many as the ground could hold were there at some point. There’s also been c.15,000 days since then, and Botham would have attended plenty of cricket events in those 41 years. And if you shook his hand, wouldn’t you have said that you were there too?
I'm sure that at least three quarters of the people who told him they were there were not... in fact... there.
A little bit like the Sex Pistols gig in Manchester.
I’ve long argued that the Blind Beggar pub and the balcony of the Iranian Embassy should be used for Olympic events - both have a capacity in the 100k+ according to “on my mothers grave” statements.
We need inflation down. Urgently. We do not need to boost fuel prices again. The collateral damage in inflation, continuing public sector unrest and impairment of economic activity is simply too high a price.
Petrol pump prices are about 50p a litre lower than in July 2022, but a penny or two on fuel duty is the end of days - it's a view.
Diesel, however, is down by barely half that. And the logistics industry runs on diesel.
Diesel needs disproportionate help. That would be very popular in the Shires.
England are box office right now. The secondary market for Ashes tickets is already over £500 for a day.
2005 was epic - the Aussies coming to the end of their period of dominance, and an England team coming to a peak with aggressive batsmen and a four man pace attack with skill, pace and variety. The match that ended last night was great, but still a level below 2005.
I agree. I was lucky enough to be at one of the tests in 2005. We were still waiting to get in when there was an incredible roar, like a goal being scored. England had won the toss. I have never seen or felt cricket like that. It was electric.
Has Headingley '81 been cancelled? Botham sacked as captain, England following on, 105/5, still 122 runs behind, 500/1 with Ladbrokes?
Didn’t Botham say he’d met 10 times as many people who had told him they were there on that last day, as could possibly have fitted inside the ground?
Seems unlikely that he's had that conversation with well over 100k people. But not entirely impossible, I guess.
There’s probably some artistic licence there, but there were five days of the match, so maybe two or three times as many as the ground could hold were there at some point. There’s also been c.15,000 days since then, and Botham would have attended plenty of cricket events in those 41 years. And if you shook his hand, wouldn’t you have said that you were there too?
I'm sure that at least three quarters of the people who told him they were there were not... in fact... there.
A little bit like the Sex Pistols gig in Manchester.
"and leave a note to say, here likes the only bloke in Harpurhey who wasn't at the Lesser Free Trade Hall, y'all"
We need inflation down. Urgently. We do not need to boost fuel prices again. The collateral damage in inflation, continuing public sector unrest and impairment of economic activity is simply too high a price.
Petrol pump prices are about 50p a litre lower than in July 2022, but a penny or two on fuel duty is the end of days - it's a view.
Diesel, however, is down by barely half that. And the logistics industry runs on diesel.
So do I. And the differential between petrol and diesel has gone from a mild irritant to bloody outrageous. Is there an oligopoly operating here?
England are box office right now. The secondary market for Ashes tickets is already over £500 for a day.
2005 was epic - the Aussies coming to the end of their period of dominance, and an England team coming to a peak with aggressive batsmen and a four man pace attack with skill, pace and variety. The match that ended last night was great, but still a level below 2005.
I agree. I was lucky enough to be at one of the tests in 2005. We were still waiting to get in when there was an incredible roar, like a goal being scored. England had won the toss. I have never seen or felt cricket like that. It was electric.
Has Headingley '81 been cancelled? Botham sacked as captain, England following on, 105/5, still 122 runs behind, 500/1 with Ladbrokes?
Age is what happened. You have to be nearly 50 just to have much recollection if it.
I'm nearly 50 and I have no recollection of it. Apparently my dad was listening to it on the car radio while I played on the beach in Devon. I have, however, over the years, probably spent longer than the actual match watching bits of it. One of the best pieces of sporting theatre ever staged. The image which sticks in my head is the expression on the face of Bob Willis throughout almost all of the fourth innings, including following the final wicket. Most sporting triumphs are accompanied by expressions of joy; Bob just looked very angry and very, very tired. Utterly compelling.
Anyway, all that said, watch the footage of Headingley '81, and the crowd reactions are anachronistically muted. The ground isn't even full. The excitement of 2005, I think, was greater. It felt like the whole country was watching. I remember being in Wollaton Park, Nottingham, in a crowd of about 3,000 watching it on a big screen. I remember a wedding in Hull which coincided with the second test, and, it felt, everyone (except a mildly disgruntled bride) decamped en masse to a telly to watch the last half hour as the speeches finished and see the wicket of Michael Clark (I think) go down at the end. In every office in the country, productive work stopped at 11am, and all email chat was on cricket. And it felt like, if you were in a city where a test was being staged, you could hear the crowd's reaction to a wicket going down across the city. They were good tests, certainly, but not as good as what is being played now. But it was a moment when cricket felt as big as its ever been in my lifetime. The combined impacts of terrestrial telly and a decent side after 15 years of failure, probably.
The match we won by two runs? Kasprowicz was the last wicket (and would have survived if DRS existed!)
The last point I think is key - most of a generation had grown up without ever seeing us beat the Aussies - and to the vast majority of England fans, I would say, The Ashes is the thing that matters most - far more than the World Cup.
England are box office right now. The secondary market for Ashes tickets is already over £500 for a day.
2005 was epic - the Aussies coming to the end of their period of dominance, and an England team coming to a peak with aggressive batsmen and a four man pace attack with skill, pace and variety. The match that ended last night was great, but still a level below 2005.
I agree. I was lucky enough to be at one of the tests in 2005. We were still waiting to get in when there was an incredible roar, like a goal being scored. England had won the toss. I have never seen or felt cricket like that. It was electric.
Has Headingley '81 been cancelled? Botham sacked as captain, England following on, 105/5, still 122 runs behind, 500/1 with Ladbrokes?
Didn’t Botham say he’d met 10 times as many people who had told him they were there on that last day, as could possibly have fitted inside the ground?
Seems unlikely that he's had that conversation with well over 100k people. But not entirely impossible, I guess.
There’s probably some artistic licence there, but there were five days of the match, so maybe two or three times as many as the ground could hold were there at some point. There’s also been c.15,000 days since then, and Botham would have attended plenty of cricket events in those 41 years. And if you shook his hand, wouldn’t you have said that you were there too?
I'm sure that at least three quarters of the people who told him they were there were not... in fact... there.
A little bit like the Sex Pistols gig in Manchester.
Yes, we all got spat on by Sid. I've told the tale so many times I believe it now. I was there. And he spat on me. Dirty little bastard.
Personally I think Rishi Sunak’s “Windsor framework” is so good it should be extended to Windsor and indeed the entire UK. We could call it something catchy like “membership of the Single Market and Customs Union.”
It is excellent branding for its purpose. The tacit implication is that opposing it is the same as digging the queen up and shitting in her eye sockets.
As the anti Brexit numbers get stronger it will be increasingly hard to comprehend Labour's caution about running with that tide.
But I think SKS would be wise to stick where he is. Elections are funny things. My feeling is that if SKS gave the slightest indication of revisiting the Brexit issue then the door opens for a campaign addressed at the 47% of the population who still support Brexit or are DKs. Plus some who don't like it but don't want to revisit.
If the Tories harvested this SKS cannot win.
One of very few ways the Red Wall seats might stay with the Tories at the next election, is if Starmer starts going on about rejoining the EU.
Surely the line Labour should take is "Look - a majority of the British People think, in hindsight, Brexit was wrong. But that doesn't change the reality that we have left the EU. We need a Labour government to rebuild Britain's relationship with our largest economic partner, after the damage that was done by the Tories, and open Britain for Business again."
Or some such waffle. It turns it into a straightforward attack on the Tories.
The only downside is that Sunak *can* argue that he is doing that himself - but I think he's shouting into the jet engine of public opinion there.
Sunak will have had 18 months of delivering on that by the election. Labour will look 18 months behind the curve. All those blue wall seats will have literature with smiling pics of Sunak and his bezzy Ursula.
The red wall literature will just focus on "Brexit got done. Even in the impossibility of Northern Ireland."
Sunak can pull off the masterstroke of rebuilding the mutually-beneficial economically workable trade arrangements with the EU. From outside the EU.
Starmer will just be bumping his gums.
As I said, that is certainly a possibility. You always have the advantage of actually being able to do something if you are in Government. Whether it works and whether you get the credit for it is a different matter.
We need inflation down. Urgently. We do not need to boost fuel prices again. The collateral damage in inflation, continuing public sector unrest and impairment of economic activity is simply too high a price.
Petrol pump prices are about 50p a litre lower than in July 2022, but a penny or two on fuel duty is the end of days - it's a view.
Diesel, however, is down by barely half that. And the logistics industry runs on diesel.
So do I. And the differential between petrol and diesel has gone from a mild irritant to bloody outrageous. Is there an oligopoly operating here?
IIRC (been a while since I was in the oil industry) a lot of Diesel was actually refined in Russia. So there is a refinery capacity issue.
Zero-calorie sweetener popular in keto diets linked to strokes, heart attacks https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/3876664-zero-calorie-sweetener-popular-in-keto-diets-linked-to-strokes-heart-attacks/ ...Stanley Hazen, the director of the Center for Cardiovascular Diagnostics and Prevention at the Cleveland Clinic Lerner Research Institute and lead researcher on the study, told CNN that “the degree of risk was not modest.” “If your blood level of erythritol was in the top 25 percent compared to the bottom 25 percent, there was about a two-fold higher risk for heart attack and stroke. It’s on par with the strongest of cardiac risk factors, like diabetes,” Hazen said...
Interesting and the results look quite stark.
Having had a quick read through, I do find it quite limited (or at least limited reporting) on addressing confounding. There is an alternative causal pathway in which people for whom doctors have concerns of cardiac risk are strongly urged to reduce weight/sugar intake and so switch to these sweeteners which could cause some of these results. It's also possible that the comparison is between people who switch to sweeteners as an easy option compared to those making further reaching lifestyle change (e.g. balanced diet, more exercise).
The biological part is beyond me, frankly, but on the epi part I would, if a reviewer, have demanded more on the methods before publication (apart fom anything else, they claim to have followed the STROBE reporting guidelines, as would be expected, but I think they're missing much of the expected details there).
It's still an interesting association and one that should give people pause for thought, but I'm not yet convinced there's a convincing case for causality.
Posts like this add real value to the fun of reading PB in the morning. I will definitely contrive a way to "observe" this over the next couple of days and sound way smarter than I really am.
I can give you a bingo card of phrases to include, if you like - essentially 'we need to think more about possible confounding' is the epidemiologist's equivalent of 'that would be an ecumenical matter' from Father Ted
We need inflation down. Urgently. We do not need to boost fuel prices again. The collateral damage in inflation, continuing public sector unrest and impairment of economic activity is simply too high a price.
Petrol pump prices are about 50p a litre lower than in July 2022, but a penny or two on fuel duty is the end of days - it's a view.
Diesel, however, is down by barely half that. And the logistics industry runs on diesel.
Diesel needs disproportionate help. That would be very popular in the Shires.
Yes getting the cost of fuel down further and keeping it down is critical in the fight against inflation.
We need inflation down. Urgently. We do not need to boost fuel prices again. The collateral damage in inflation, continuing public sector unrest and impairment of economic activity is simply too high a price.
Petrol pump prices are about 50p a litre lower than in July 2022, but a penny or two on fuel duty is the end of days - it's a view.
Diesel, however, is down by barely half that. And the logistics industry runs on diesel.
So do I. And the differential between petrol and diesel has gone from a mild irritant to bloody outrageous. Is there an oligopoly operating here?
IIRC (been a while since I was in the oil industry) a lot of Diesel was actually refined in Russia. So there is a refinery capacity issue.
You would have thought that Ineos would be on to that by now. Jim Ratcliffe needs to get his head out of Old Trafford and focus on the day job.
England are box office right now. The secondary market for Ashes tickets is already over £500 for a day.
2005 was epic - the Aussies coming to the end of their period of dominance, and an England team coming to a peak with aggressive batsmen and a four man pace attack with skill, pace and variety. The match that ended last night was great, but still a level below 2005.
I agree. I was lucky enough to be at one of the tests in 2005. We were still waiting to get in when there was an incredible roar, like a goal being scored. England had won the toss. I have never seen or felt cricket like that. It was electric.
Has Headingley '81 been cancelled? Botham sacked as captain, England following on, 105/5, still 122 runs behind, 500/1 with Ladbrokes?
Age is what happened. You have to be nearly 50 just to have much recollection if it.
I'm nearly 50 and I have no recollection of it. Apparently my dad was listening to it on the car radio while I played on the beach in Devon. I have, however, over the years, probably spent longer than the actual match watching bits of it. One of the best pieces of sporting theatre ever staged. The image which sticks in my head is the expression on the face of Bob Willis throughout almost all of the fourth innings, including following the final wicket. Most sporting triumphs are accompanied by expressions of joy; Bob just looked very angry and very, very tired. Utterly compelling.
Anyway, all that said, watch the footage of Headingley '81, and the crowd reactions are anachronistically muted. The ground isn't even full. The excitement of 2005, I think, was greater. It felt like the whole country was watching. I remember being in Wollaton Park, Nottingham, in a crowd of about 3,000 watching it on a big screen. I remember a wedding in Hull which coincided with the second test, and, it felt, everyone (except a mildly disgruntled bride) decamped en masse to a telly to watch the last half hour as the speeches finished and see the wicket of Michael Clark (I think) go down at the end. In every office in the country, productive work stopped at 11am, and all email chat was on cricket. And it felt like, if you were in a city where a test was being staged, you could hear the crowd's reaction to a wicket going down across the city. They were good tests, certainly, but not as good as what is being played now. But it was a moment when cricket felt as big as its ever been in my lifetime. The combined impacts of terrestrial telly and a decent side after 15 years of failure, probably.
Yes. For those of us just a little too young to have remembered 1981, 2005 was the year we finally beat the convicts Aussies. It was the biggest national party since Euro ‘96, and that it was on TV meant the whole country was taken along for the ride.
That Sunday morning, as our opponents fell just two runs short, was the defining moment of the whole series. It was the moment that England fans everywhere thought that, maybe, just possibly, on a good day, we might actually be able to do it - to win back that little brown urn that had been (figuratively) 10,000 miles away for our whole lifetime.
We need inflation down. Urgently. We do not need to boost fuel prices again. The collateral damage in inflation, continuing public sector unrest and impairment of economic activity is simply too high a price.
Petrol pump prices are about 50p a litre lower than in July 2022, but a penny or two on fuel duty is the end of days - it's a view.
Diesel, however, is down by barely half that. And the logistics industry runs on diesel.
So do I. And the differential between petrol and diesel has gone from a mild irritant to bloody outrageous. Is there an oligopoly operating here?
IIRC (been a while since I was in the oil industry) a lot of Diesel was actually refined in Russia. So there is a refinery capacity issue.
The UK (and Europe) is generally short diesel refining, while the US is long, so there's a fairly brisk trans-Atlantic trade in refined products. Russia is a fairly small exporter of refined products these days, as most* of their diesel doesn't meet emission standards in the developed world.
As the anti Brexit numbers get stronger it will be increasingly hard to comprehend Labour's caution about running with that tide.
But I think SKS would be wise to stick where he is. Elections are funny things. My feeling is that if SKS gave the slightest indication of revisiting the Brexit issue then the door opens for a campaign addressed at the 47% of the population who still support Brexit or are DKs. Plus some who don't like it but don't want to revisit.
If the Tories harvested this SKS cannot win.
One of very few ways the Red Wall seats might stay with the Tories at the next election, is if Starmer starts going on about rejoining the EU.
Surely the line Labour should take is "Look - a majority of the British People think, in hindsight, Brexit was wrong. But that doesn't change the reality that we have left the EU. We need a Labour government to rebuild Britain's relationship with our largest economic partner, after the damage that was done by the Tories, and open Britain for Business again."
Or some such waffle. It turns it into a straightforward attack on the Tories.
The only downside is that Sunak *can* argue that he is doing that himself - but I think he's shouting into the jet engine of public opinion there.
Sunak will have had 18 months of delivering on that by the election. Labour will look 18 months behind the curve. All those blue wall seats will have literature with smiling pics of Sunak and his bezzy Ursula.
The red wall literature will just focus on "Brexit got done. Even in the impossibility of Northern Ireland."
Sunak can pull off the masterstroke of rebuilding the mutually-beneficial economically workable trade arrangements with the EU. From outside the EU.
Starmer will just be bumping his gums.
Time For A Change will swamp everything though - now the Change isn't scary.
We need inflation down. Urgently. We do not need to boost fuel prices again. The collateral damage in inflation, continuing public sector unrest and impairment of economic activity is simply too high a price.
Petrol pump prices are about 50p a litre lower than in July 2022, but a penny or two on fuel duty is the end of days - it's a view.
Diesel, however, is down by barely half that. And the logistics industry runs on diesel.
So do I. And the differential between petrol and diesel has gone from a mild irritant to bloody outrageous. Is there an oligopoly operating here?
IIRC (been a while since I was in the oil industry) a lot of Diesel was actually refined in Russia. So there is a refinery capacity issue.
You would have thought that Ineos would be on to that by now. Jim Ratcliffe needs to get his head out of Old Trafford and focus on the day job.
Magicking up more refinery space is a slightly lengthy process. I would imagine, for the moment, they are re-purposing fractionation columns etc at existing sites. While this would work, it would cost more.
We need inflation down. Urgently. We do not need to boost fuel prices again. The collateral damage in inflation, continuing public sector unrest and impairment of economic activity is simply too high a price.
Petrol pump prices are about 50p a litre lower than in July 2022, but a penny or two on fuel duty is the end of days - it's a view.
Diesel, however, is down by barely half that. And the logistics industry runs on diesel.
Yes , and robbery for us that have diesels( especially big ones).
Comments
It's a plan- whether it's a good plan we will all see!
https://www.itv.com/news/anglia/2022-06-17/matt-hancock-to-climb-mont-blanc-with-new-partner
Remember in inner city seats and some university towns Remain got 65 to 75% of the vote but they are already mainly safe Labour or LD or in Scotland SNP anyway (albeit maybe not SNP if Forbes becomes FM)
Personally I think Rishi Sunak’s “Windsor framework” is so good it should be extended to Windsor and indeed the entire UK. We could call it something catchy like “membership of the Single Market and Customs Union.”
Three out of four members of the union of equals getting what they voted for ain’t bad
Pointing at Boris as being worse doesn't alter that, and it is fair it is brought up to puncture the myth they never do anything childish or self defeating.
Having Starlink is like the difference between the Stone Age and the Iron Age. Lots of "Oooooh!"
Insistence that it was either FoM or Leave (the EUs biggest error) compounded it because it joined the two issues. We had lost sovereignty and therefore we could not control who lived here.
If the UK were offered CU and SM on terms without FoM not only would it be politically with the majority, we would perhaps be willing to pay for it.
Rules about people and rules about cucumbers are not the same sort of thing in the voter's mind.
By late 2022, it looked as though Blue on Blue attacks were back at the intensity of 1997.
This looks a tiny bit hopeful for the Tories in that Blue on Blue attacks over the Deal have been quite muted so far.
Sure, the Tories look tired, bit SKS always looks weary. And nothing he has said so far suggests he has more ideas than the Tories do on how to fix big problems. Most of them are not fixable on terms acceptable to the electorate.
SKS's big success has been internally -- he has managed to unite the Labour party so it is looking outward rather than inward.
So was Ian Bell.
As with Bell, the problem is how often he gets it wrong.
Speaking of which, I suspect Roston Chase is off Kyle Mayers' Christmas card list after *that* drop.
128kbps up and down!
It was AWESOME
https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexledsom/2023/02/25/outcry-resignations-as-258m-spanish-trains-too-big-for-tunnels/
- One of the definitions of treason as giving aid, comfort, joining etc, a list of organisations and countries which are declared to be enemies of the UK
- The list to be created & updated by votes in the house of commons.
I would like robust prosecution of UK citizens for war crimes as well.
Best recent evidence we have is the MRP for unherd, where "Brexit good" won in a handful of constituencies, mostly in Lincolnshire.
https://britain.unherd.com/britain-was-wrong-to-leave-the-eu/
It's not that crazy. After all, Leave won in most places by a fairly small margin; 52-48 or so. It doesn't take much of a shift in opinion to turn that into 48-52 everywhere.
And for every Cambridge voting massively remain, there was a Romford voting massively Leave.
But I think SKS would be wise to stick where he is. Elections are funny things. My feeling is that if SKS gave the slightest indication of revisiting the Brexit issue then the door opens for a campaign addressed at the 47% of the population who still support Brexit or are DKs. Plus some who don't like it but don't want to revisit.
If the Tories harvested this SKS cannot win.
And burnt the topless towers of Torydom?
Sweet Boris , make me immortal with a kiss ...
Starmer has not shown any ability to manage anything other than the Labour Party. He don't exactly fizz with ideas about how to fix the cost of living crisis.
Come 2024, the voters will be asking "Is that all there is to a Labour Manifesto?"
Problem is that despite the warm words and mood music of the last 24 hours on NI, such a solution is simply impossible to offer from the EU end. If you accept that a third party state can get all the benefits of the SM without taking on FOM then all of a sudden EU membership just doesn’t seem like that great a deal anymore and this would destabilise the project among other member states.
The only way we’re ever going to have any influence on FOM is having a seat at the table and that means rejoining. An event I still see as some way off, if ever.
You're happy to see people permanently immiserated for the crime of being nurses?
Didn’t Botham say he’d met 10 times as many people who had told him they were there on that last day, as could possibly have fitted inside the ground?
If I were them, I'd be looking to frame it as an attempt to get a broad mandate for "fixing all the things" and then being as sweeping in implementation as parliamentary arithmetic and 2nd term electoral politics allows. (How much can be done in the first term whose pain can be blamed on the Tories?)
It does not make sense for Labour to talk about rejoining the EU given most of their Red Wall target seats as well as former marginal seats in Essex and East Kent Blair won voted strongly Leave
Its the same argument I have to patiently explain to Jezbollah worshippers. It doesn't matter if he delivered the biggest rise in Labour votes in 2017 - at the same time the Tories added another 2m+ votes to their already much bigger total.
Labour don't need to be offering all the answers. Simply being less incompetent / corrupt / malevolent than the Tories will go a long way.
You have to be nearly 50 just to have much recollection if it.
https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/england-tour-of-zimbabwe-1996-97-61741/zimbabwe-vs-england-1st-test-63734/full-scorecard
A drawn test with the scores level.
But not entirely impossible, I guess.
Having had a quick read through, I do find it quite limited (or at least limited reporting) on addressing confounding. There is an alternative causal pathway in which people for whom doctors have concerns of cardiac risk are strongly urged to reduce weight/sugar intake and so switch to these sweeteners which could cause some of these results. It's also possible that the comparison is between people who switch to sweeteners as an easy option compared to those making further reaching lifestyle change (e.g. balanced diet, more exercise).
The biological part is beyond me, frankly, but on the epi part I would, if a reviewer, have demanded more on the methods before publication (apart fom anything else, they claim to have followed the STROBE reporting guidelines, as would be expected, but I think they're missing much of the expected details there).
It's still an interesting association and one that should give people pause for thought, but I'm not yet convinced there's a convincing case for causality.
With public debt higher than GDP though, there’s no room to move at all - ask Liz Truss.
{pry bars lid of double case of Chateaux De Chasseliere}
{Fake Yorkshire Accent.... loading...}
RIIIIIIIGHT!
LUUUUUUUUUUUUXUUURY. When I were lad'.....
Suggests the UUP will likely back the Deal Sunak got with the EU even if the DUP don't
https://twitter.com/BeattieDoug/status/1630328514099412997?t=WQqdVPHHUF6cMxHE6fB_lw&s=19
Or some such waffle. It turns it into a straightforward attack on the Tories.
The only downside is that Sunak *can* argue that he is doing that himself - but I think he's shouting into the jet engine of public opinion there.
I would also point out that Major had a big success in Northern Ireland. In 1994 the IRA laid down their arms and entered into a ceasefire. That was a pretty massive achievement after decades of fighting.
But, yes, you are right, infighting played a role.
But it was only one element.
Getting Brexit Done by being a shitty second best...
Good luck with that on the doorstep.
The intent was about looking at the fundamentals of government - delivery of actual services. It was spun into a return to Victorian values.
Bit like the Cones Hotline - which was an attempt at getting accountability out of the "faceless" side of government.
I have, however, over the years, probably spent longer than the actual match watching bits of it. One of the best pieces of sporting theatre ever staged. The image which sticks in my head is the expression on the face of Bob Willis throughout almost all of the fourth innings, including following the final wicket. Most sporting triumphs are accompanied by expressions of joy; Bob just looked very angry and very, very tired. Utterly compelling.
And what about that Ron DeSantis? If a company slags him off he passes laws to punish them!
(For those who don’t get the reference, see Tam Dalyell, Enoch Powell et al and ‘The West Lothian Question’.)
Interesting to see the difference in reporting/approach in a slightly different field.
A little bit like the Sex Pistols gig in Manchester.
The red wall literature will just focus on "Brexit got done. Even in the impossibility of Northern Ireland."
Sunak can pull off the masterstroke of rebuilding the mutually-beneficial economically workable trade arrangements with the EU. From outside the EU.
Starmer will just be bumping his gums.
They were good tests, certainly, but not as good as what is being played now. But it was a moment when cricket felt as big as its ever been in my lifetime. The combined impacts of terrestrial telly and a decent side after 15 years of failure, probably.
here likes the only bloke in Harpurhey
who wasn't at the Lesser Free Trade Hall, y'all"
The last point I think is key - most of a generation had grown up without ever seeing us beat the Aussies - and to the vast majority of England fans, I would say, The Ashes is the thing that matters most - far more than the World Cup.
That Sunday morning, as our opponents fell just two runs short, was the defining moment of the whole series. It was the moment that England fans everywhere thought that, maybe, just possibly, on a good day, we might actually be able to do it - to win back that little brown urn that had been (figuratively) 10,000 miles away for our whole lifetime.
* It may even be that it all misses these days