Memo to the “Bring Back Boris” brigade – politicalbetting.com

System

Memo to the “Bring Back Boris” brigade – politicalbetting.com

This weekend we have seen a new Conservative organization hold its first meeting in Bournemouth and it is widely believed that the aim of it is to get Boris back at number 10.

Read the full story here

HYUFD

The pro Boris supporters do have some evidence to back their support for their King across the Water still.

Before Boris resigned last summer yes the Tories were behind but still on a voteshare of around 30-35%. That had collapsed to a Tory voteshare average of just 20-25% before Truss resigned last autumn. Rishi to his credit has rebuilt that Tory voteshare to
25-30% but while better than Liz' ratings it still trails what Boris was polling.

We must not forget some white working class voters who usually vote Labour cast their first ever vote for a Tory at a general election in 2019 but only for Boris, they would not vote for any other Tory leader. Now they are either back voting Labour, voting RefUK or won't bother to vote
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#Graphical_summary

SandyRentool

If Bozo is the answer, you're asking the wrong question.

DougSeal

Pretty meaningless. Truss was doing even worse by comparison and we all know she’s the Tories’ only hope now.

GIN1138

I wondered whether news that Boris has brought a house in Oxford could be a sign he's expecting to lose Uxbridge and South Ruislip either after being recalled following the Commons Privileges committee report or at Election 24 - And is eyeing up a nice, safe Conservative seat in rural Oxfordshire?

williamglenn

Is voting rights going to be the big polarising issue of the next election? To takea consistent position agaisnt Starmer's plan to extend the franchise, the Tories would have to argue for a hard link between citizenship and voting rights in national elections, ending the anomaly of allowing Commonwealth citizens to vote.

eek

FPT

Farooq said:

DougSeal said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

RobD said:

Andy_JS said:

"Keir Starmer confirms Labour considering extending vote in general elections to EU nationals and 16/17-year-olds

Labour leader also refuses to rule out deal with Lib Dems, saying he wants outright majority but will ‘see what situation is next year’"

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2023/may/15/local-election-results-labour-tactical-voting-considered-keir-starmer-tories-conservatives-rishi-sunak-uk-politics-live

So no reciprocation needed after all?

So Starmer wants us to become the only country in Europe that allows non nationals to vote in the national elections (excepting the reciprocal arrangments we have with Ireland). Specifically those he thinks are most likely to vote for him and his policies.

I have said up until now that I don't fear a Labour Government. This blatant attempt at vote rigging is enough to change that view.

We already allow Commonwealth nationals, including 2 EU countries, to vote here. In fact nationals of 3 EU countries already have the unrestricted right to vote in the UK. Makes no sense to exclude the others who are here lawfully.

It's discriminatory, that's what it is. Why should Cypriots get a vote and Belgians not?

EU law stated that citizen's of EU countries do not have the right to vote in the National elections of a country they are a resident but not a citizen of.

Now we are outside the EU that law is one that can be removed. Think of it as a bit of EU law that Labour are happy to get rid of because of the extra votes it will provide Labour.

The fact Labour can change the law is very much a result of Brexit.

HYUFD

GIN1138 said:

I wondered whether news that Boris has brought a house in Oxford could be a sign he's expecting to lose Uxbridge and South Ruislip either after being recalled following the Commons Privileges committee report or at Election 24 - And is eyeing up a nice, safe Conservative seat in rural Oxfordshire?

Quite possibly. Uxbridge is in the top 100 Labour target seats and will almost certainly go Labour on current polls.

However Henley is not ultra safe Tory now either. On May 4th indeed the LDs won a landslide victory in South Oxfordshire winning 21 seats while the Tories collapsed to just 1 councillor.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2023/england/councils/E07000179

Even somewhere like Walsall or Dudley or Basildon or Dartford where the Tories held control of the council this month would be safer for Boris now than Henley (albeit less posh and glamorous)

Andy_JS

"Train fruit pickers and lorry drivers to cut migration, says Suella Braverman"

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-65593353

Mexicanpete

HYUFD said:

The pro Boris supporters do have some evidence to back their support for their King across the Water still.

Before Boris resigned last summer yes the Tories were behind but still on a voteshare of around 30-35%. That had collapsed to a Tory voteshare average of just 20-25% before Truss resigned last autumn. Rishi to his credit has rebuilt that Tory voteshare to
25-30% but while better than Liz' ratings it still trails what Boris was polling.

We must not forget some white working class voters who usually vote Labour cast their first ever vote for a Tory at a general election in 2019 but only for Boris, they would not vote for any other Tory leader. Now they are either back voting Labour, voting RefUK or won't bother to vote
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#Graphical_summary

The man is simply a joke. He is unfit for high office, or even any office. He appears to be an amoral Charlatan who has been caught out for his economy with the actualitaire time and again. Everyone whose path he crosses eventually seems to find him to be toxic. He is not your friend, he appears to have some despicable sociopathic tendencies and from his two letter Brexit stunt, was content to sell his nation down the river for personal aggrandisement.

But other than that HY, I am sure we could both enjoy a pint or two with him, so long as we paid.

LostPassword

Any port in a storm, a straw to clutch at, light at the end of the tunnel, mirage on the horizon - however you want to describe it, desperate people do desperate things and Conservative MPs in relation to the next GE can be usefully divided into the following groups:

The Desperate.
The Resigned.
The Deluded.

Whether there is a move to bring back Boris Johnson depends solely on how large a group the Desperate become relative to the other groups. His merit or popularity has nothing to do with it.

RandallFlagg

HYUFD said:

The pro Boris supporters do have some evidence to back their support for their King across the Water still.

Before Boris resigned last summer yes the Tories were behind but still on a voteshare of around 30-35%. That had collapsed to a Tory voteshare average of just 20-25% before Truss resigned last autumn. Rishi to his credit has rebuilt that Tory voteshare to
25-30% but while better than Liz' ratings it still trails what Boris was polling.

We must not forget some white working class voters who usually vote Labour cast their first ever vote for a Tory at a general election in 2019 but only for Boris, they would not vote for any other Tory leader. Now they are either back voting Labour, voting RefUK or won't bother to vote
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#Graphical_summary

That was before Truss destroyed any reputation you had in respect to competence and the economy. The idea that the corrupt, buffoon would turn things round for you is for the birds.

Jonathan

Boris could win more seats in the short term than Sunak, but his haphazard approach to governing would leave the country significantly weakened. Ultimately the failures would catch up with the Tories and cost them their future. We see that now.

Boris is like an addictive drug that momentarily amplifies performance, but at the cost of your long term health.

I wonder what the Tories will do. More drugs? Or cold turkey and recovery?

eek

williamglenn said:

Is voting rights going to be the big polarising issue of the next election? To takea consistent position agaisnt Starmer's plan to extend the franchise, the Tories would have to argue for a hard link between citizenship and voting rights in national elections, ending the anomaly of allowing Commonwealth citizens to vote.

Which is why it's a vote winner for Labour because the current system is an historic accident that doesn't make any real sense.

kamski

Farooq said:

kamski said:

Farooq said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Sandpit said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

RobD said:

Andy_JS said:

"Keir Starmer confirms Labour considering extending vote in general elections to EU nationals and 16/17-year-olds

Labour leader also refuses to rule out deal with Lib Dems, saying he wants outright majority but will ‘see what situation is next year’"

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2023/may/15/local-election-results-labour-tactical-voting-considered-keir-starmer-tories-conservatives-rishi-sunak-uk-politics-live

So no reciprocation needed after all?

So Starmer wants us to become the only country in Europe that allows non nationals to vote in the national elections (excepting the reciprocal arrangments we have with Ireland). Specifically those he thinks are most likely to vote for him and his policies.

I have said up until now that I don't fear a Labour Government. This blatant attempt at vte rigging is enough to change that view.

It is by no means obvious that EU nationals working here would vote Labour, but it is hard to see why Starmer is raising this now (or a couple of days ago when we last discussed it).

On 16- and 17-year-olds, George Osborne advocated that extension of the franchise. I'm not sure it is a party political matter.

I disagree with the reduction in the age of voting but that is more of a philosophical argument and one we have been discussing over the last few days.

But extending the franchise to non citizens - something no other country in Europe does - is simply wrong and is clearly an attempt to sway the votes in favour of those parties and issues Starmer has sympathy with. It is vote rigging at its most blatant. If people want to vote on the future of this country then they can become British citizens

Apart from historical anomalies, why would any country allow non-citizens the vote?

If you want to vote, then take citizenship, in the UK there’s a clear application process available to long-term residents.

Indeed. Nor is it particularly arduous as a process. In the last 2 years I have acted as referee for 4 people to take British citizenship - 2 Vietnamese, a Pole and a Venezuelan. All had good English language skills which made it easier but it was a relatively straight forward process for them.

It costs over £1000 to apply. A lot of people don't have that kind of money lying around.

1000 quid to vote in a general election is a lot. Most people wouldn't pay it.

And there are many countries that don't allow dual citizenship. If you have all the rights of permanent residency in the UK, it is difficult to give up the citizenship of the country you are from, where you may still have family that you might conceivably need to take care of at some point for example, just in order to secure a vote in a general election.

Especially with the uncertainty around Brexit. If someone takes up a UK passport and has to relinquish their old one, are they going to need a visa to visit family, etc?
Plenty of reasons why someone might make this their permanent home but want for pragmatic reasons to not have the expense and hassle of changing their citizenship permanently. To exclude those people who are living stable, ordinary British lives just because of their passport is a policy borne of paranoia.

I think changing the franchise should be done by consensus if at all possible. And I'm not convinced that extending voting at the national level to non-citizens is a good idea, and it's probably a vote-loser.

But I don't think it's accurate to say becoming a British citizen is easy for everyone who is a long-term resident. It costs 1330 GPP to apply! Shouldn't the UK be encouraging long-term residents to become citizens, instead of applying punitive application fees?

williamglenn

eek said:

williamglenn said:

Is voting rights going to be the big polarising issue of the next election? To takea consistent position agaisnt Starmer's plan to extend the franchise, the Tories would have to argue for a hard link between citizenship and voting rights in national elections, ending the anomaly of allowing Commonwealth citizens to vote.

Which is why it's a vote winner for Labour because the current system is an historic accident that doesn't make any real sense.

It might have the opposite effect because a lot of people won’t be aware of the inconsistency.

kamski

eek said:

FPT

Farooq said:

DougSeal said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

RobD said:

Andy_JS said:

"Keir Starmer confirms Labour considering extending vote in general elections to EU nationals and 16/17-year-olds

Labour leader also refuses to rule out deal with Lib Dems, saying he wants outright majority but will ‘see what situation is next year’"

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2023/may/15/local-election-results-labour-tactical-voting-considered-keir-starmer-tories-conservatives-rishi-sunak-uk-politics-live

So no reciprocation needed after all?

So Starmer wants us to become the only country in Europe that allows non nationals to vote in the national elections (excepting the reciprocal arrangments we have with Ireland). Specifically those he thinks are most likely to vote for him and his policies.

I have said up until now that I don't fear a Labour Government. This blatant attempt at vote rigging is enough to change that view.

We already allow Commonwealth nationals, including 2 EU countries, to vote here. In fact nationals of 3 EU countries already have the unrestricted right to vote in the UK. Makes no sense to exclude the others who are here lawfully.

It's discriminatory, that's what it is. Why should Cypriots get a vote and Belgians not?

EU law stated that citizen's of EU countries do not have the right to vote in the National elections of a country they are a resident but not a citizen of.

Now we are outside the EU that law is one that can be removed. Think of it as a bit of EU law that Labour are happy to get rid of because of the extra votes it will provide Labour.

The fact Labour can change the law is very much a result of Brexit.

Which EU law says that? As Irish and Maltese citizens could vote in UK national elections, and Luxemburg had a referendum on allowing all foreign residents a vote in national elections in 2015, I don't think such a law exists.

Luckyguy1983

Farooq said:

HYUFD said:

The pro Boris supporters do have some evidence to back their support for their King across the Water still.

Before Boris resigned last summer yes the Tories were behind but still on a voteshare of around 30-35%. That had collapsed to a Tory voteshare average of just 20-25% before Truss resigned last autumn. Rishi to his credit has rebuilt that Tory voteshare to
25-30% but while better than Liz' ratings it still trails what Boris was polling.

We must not forget some white working class voters who usually vote Labour cast their first ever vote for a Tory at a general election in 2019 but only for Boris, they would not vote for any other Tory leader. Now they are either back voting Labour, voting RefUK or won't bother to vote
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#Graphical_summary

Implicit in your post is the trap you always fall into: looking at the past and imagining that those circumstances can once again come about. You do it all the time with elections. You refer to the next election being 1992, or 1997, or "2010 in reverse".

Things are way more complicated than you suppose.

For example, restoring Boris as leader wouldn't be going back to Boris, it would be going to Boris II. The fact that he resigned and then there were a couple of leaders, and then He's Back! would be new information compared to the last polling taken under Boris. It isn't like a football team, where you just shift the formation back to how it was before and you expect to play as you did before. That's because the "game" you're playing is with public opinion, and people remember.

You can never, never go back to how it was before. Politics is non-commutative. The order of events is as important as the arrangement of the pieces.

The return of Boris would need to be supported by whatever legislative programme designed to contrast with the dismal decline manager and put a little money back into peoples' pockets could still be managed in the time available. The time is limited and decreasing rapidly, but it might still be possible.

Mexicanpete

Andy_JS said:

"Train fruit pickers and lorry drivers to cut migration, says Suella Braverman"

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-65593353

Fruit picker training is not really a thing. Motivation to get down on one's hands and knees to handpick strawberries, which is backbreaking work is a requirement. Has Suella ever worked as a soft fruit picker? Growing up in Herefordshire, I have and it is mind numbingly tedious as well as back breakingly hard. She's away with the fairies.

And putting any old scally behind the wheel of a 40 tonne Scania isn't going to happen, although over time, training up domestic truck drivers (safely and properly) is desirable.

Mexicanpete

Luckyguy1983 said:

Farooq said:

HYUFD said:

The pro Boris supporters do have some evidence to back their support for their King across the Water still.

Before Boris resigned last summer yes the Tories were behind but still on a voteshare of around 30-35%. That had collapsed to a Tory voteshare average of just 20-25% before Truss resigned last autumn. Rishi to his credit has rebuilt that Tory voteshare to
25-30% but while better than Liz' ratings it still trails what Boris was polling.

We must not forget some white working class voters who usually vote Labour cast their first ever vote for a Tory at a general election in 2019 but only for Boris, they would not vote for any other Tory leader. Now they are either back voting Labour, voting RefUK or won't bother to vote
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#Graphical_summary

Implicit in your post is the trap you always fall into: looking at the past and imagining that those circumstances can once again come about. You do it all the time with elections. You refer to the next election being 1992, or 1997, or "2010 in reverse".

Things are way more complicated than you suppose.

For example, restoring Boris as leader wouldn't be going back to Boris, it would be going to Boris II. The fact that he resigned and then there were a couple of leaders, and then He's Back! would be new information compared to the last polling taken under Boris. It isn't like a football team, where you just shift the formation back to how it was before and you expect to play as you did before. That's because the "game" you're playing is with public opinion, and people remember.

You can never, never go back to how it was before. Politics is non-commutative. The order of events is as important as the arrangement of the pieces.

The return of Boris would need to be supported by whatever legislative programme designed to contrast with the dismal decline manager and put a little money back into peoples' pockets could still be managed in the time available. The time is limited and decreasing rapidly, but it might still be possible.

Well.you know how to cheer us all up!

Foxy

kamski said:

Farooq said:

kamski said:

Farooq said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Sandpit said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

RobD said:

Andy_JS said:

"Keir Starmer confirms Labour considering extending vote in general elections to EU nationals and 16/17-year-olds

Labour leader also refuses to rule out deal with Lib Dems, saying he wants outright majority but will ‘see what situation is next year’"

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2023/may/15/local-election-results-labour-tactical-voting-considered-keir-starmer-tories-conservatives-rishi-sunak-uk-politics-live

So no reciprocation needed after all?

So Starmer wants us to become the only country in Europe that allows non nationals to vote in the national elections (excepting the reciprocal arrangments we have with Ireland). Specifically those he thinks are most likely to vote for him and his policies.

I have said up until now that I don't fear a Labour Government. This blatant attempt at vte rigging is enough to change that view.

It is by no means obvious that EU nationals working here would vote Labour, but it is hard to see why Starmer is raising this now (or a couple of days ago when we last discussed it).

On 16- and 17-year-olds, George Osborne advocated that extension of the franchise. I'm not sure it is a party political matter.

I disagree with the reduction in the age of voting but that is more of a philosophical argument and one we have been discussing over the last few days.

But extending the franchise to non citizens - something no other country in Europe does - is simply wrong and is clearly an attempt to sway the votes in favour of those parties and issues Starmer has sympathy with. It is vote rigging at its most blatant. If people want to vote on the future of this country then they can become British citizens

Apart from historical anomalies, why would any country allow non-citizens the vote?

If you want to vote, then take citizenship, in the UK there’s a clear application process available to long-term residents.

Indeed. Nor is it particularly arduous as a process. In the last 2 years I have acted as referee for 4 people to take British citizenship - 2 Vietnamese, a Pole and a Venezuelan. All had good English language skills which made it easier but it was a relatively straight forward process for them.

It costs over £1000 to apply. A lot of people don't have that kind of money lying around.

1000 quid to vote in a general election is a lot. Most people wouldn't pay it.

And there are many countries that don't allow dual citizenship. If you have all the rights of permanent residency in the UK, it is difficult to give up the citizenship of the country you are from, where you may still have family that you might conceivably need to take care of at some point for example, just in order to secure a vote in a general election.

Especially with the uncertainty around Brexit. If someone takes up a UK passport and has to relinquish their old one, are they going to need a visa to visit family, etc?
Plenty of reasons why someone might make this their permanent home but want for pragmatic reasons to not have the expense and hassle of changing their citizenship permanently. To exclude those people who are living stable, ordinary British lives just because of their passport is a policy borne of paranoia.

I think changing the franchise should be done by consensus if at all possible. And I'm not convinced that extending voting at the national level to non-citizens is a good idea, and it's probably a vote-loser.

But I don't think it's accurate to say becoming a British citizen is easy for everyone who is a long-term resident. It costs 1330 GPP to apply! Shouldn't the UK be encouraging long-term residents to become citizens, instead of applying punitive application fees?

I agree, the citizenship pub quiz is quite bonkers and the fees excessive. 5 years residence with no criminal convictions should be enough, alongside a fairly nominal fee.

Foxy

Some good news! Eating ice cream regularly protects against diabetes:

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2023/05/ice-cream-bad-for-you-health-study/673487/?utm_source=copy-link&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=share

Luckyguy1983

Foxy said:

Some good news! Eating ice cream regularly protects against diabetes:

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2023/05/ice-cream-bad-for-you-health-study/673487/?utm_source=copy-link&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=share

It has the same sugar/fat ratio as breast milk, that is apparently why we like it. I have ice cream nearly every night, go me.

TimS

Boris or not (and I think not), I’m pretty sure tte next Tory leader will be a further shift to the right, assuming Labour win the election.

Recent history since 1979 has first leaders post-defeat (albeit only 3 of them) being more on the wings than the predecessor: Foot after Callaghan, Hague after Major, Ed Miliband after Brown. In 2 of those there was then a further move to the wings after the first leader left: Miliband to Corbyn and Hague to IDS.

If Rishi loses, the bulk of conservative support is going to land in one or other camp of:

1. We weren’t radical enough with tax cuts and reducing the size of the state, or
2. We weren’t radical enough with social conservatism and anti-wokeism

Or both - and I expect the winner will need to promise both.

Foxy

HYUFD said:

The pro Boris supporters do have some evidence to back their support for their King across the Water still.

Before Boris resigned last summer yes the Tories were behind but still on a voteshare of around 30-35%. That had collapsed to a Tory voteshare average of just 20-25% before Truss resigned last autumn. Rishi to his credit has rebuilt that Tory voteshare to
25-30% but while better than Liz' ratings it still trails what Boris was polling.

We must not forget some white working class voters who usually vote Labour cast their first ever vote for a Tory at a general election in 2019 but only for Boris, they would not vote for any other Tory leader. Now they are either back voting Labour, voting RefUK or won't bother to vote
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#Graphical_summary

They may have supported him then, but like Ms Arcuri, would they support him again?

kamski

Foxy said:

kamski said:

Farooq said:

kamski said:

Farooq said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Sandpit said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

RobD said:

Andy_JS said:

"Keir Starmer confirms Labour considering extending vote in general elections to EU nationals and 16/17-year-olds

Labour leader also refuses to rule out deal with Lib Dems, saying he wants outright majority but will ‘see what situation is next year’"

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2023/may/15/local-election-results-labour-tactical-voting-considered-keir-starmer-tories-conservatives-rishi-sunak-uk-politics-live

So no reciprocation needed after all?

So Starmer wants us to become the only country in Europe that allows non nationals to vote in the national elections (excepting the reciprocal arrangments we have with Ireland). Specifically those he thinks are most likely to vote for him and his policies.

I have said up until now that I don't fear a Labour Government. This blatant attempt at vte rigging is enough to change that view.

It is by no means obvious that EU nationals working here would vote Labour, but it is hard to see why Starmer is raising this now (or a couple of days ago when we last discussed it).

On 16- and 17-year-olds, George Osborne advocated that extension of the franchise. I'm not sure it is a party political matter.

I disagree with the reduction in the age of voting but that is more of a philosophical argument and one we have been discussing over the last few days.

But extending the franchise to non citizens - something no other country in Europe does - is simply wrong and is clearly an attempt to sway the votes in favour of those parties and issues Starmer has sympathy with. It is vote rigging at its most blatant. If people want to vote on the future of this country then they can become British citizens

Apart from historical anomalies, why would any country allow non-citizens the vote?

If you want to vote, then take citizenship, in the UK there’s a clear application process available to long-term residents.

Indeed. Nor is it particularly arduous as a process. In the last 2 years I have acted as referee for 4 people to take British citizenship - 2 Vietnamese, a Pole and a Venezuelan. All had good English language skills which made it easier but it was a relatively straight forward process for them.

It costs over £1000 to apply. A lot of people don't have that kind of money lying around.

1000 quid to vote in a general election is a lot. Most people wouldn't pay it.

And there are many countries that don't allow dual citizenship. If you have all the rights of permanent residency in the UK, it is difficult to give up the citizenship of the country you are from, where you may still have family that you might conceivably need to take care of at some point for example, just in order to secure a vote in a general election.

Especially with the uncertainty around Brexit. If someone takes up a UK passport and has to relinquish their old one, are they going to need a visa to visit family, etc?
Plenty of reasons why someone might make this their permanent home but want for pragmatic reasons to not have the expense and hassle of changing their citizenship permanently. To exclude those people who are living stable, ordinary British lives just because of their passport is a policy borne of paranoia.

I think changing the franchise should be done by consensus if at all possible. And I'm not convinced that extending voting at the national level to non-citizens is a good idea, and it's probably a vote-loser.

But I don't think it's accurate to say becoming a British citizen is easy for everyone who is a long-term resident. It costs 1330 GPP to apply! Shouldn't the UK be encouraging long-term residents to become citizens, instead of applying punitive application fees?

I agree, the citizenship pub quiz is quite bonkers and the fees excessive. 5 years residence with no criminal convictions should be enough, alongside a fairly nominal fee.

Cost me about 250 euros for German citizenship, by way of comparison. Apparently the French fee is 55 euros. Bargain!

Taz

Andy_JS said:

"Train fruit pickers and lorry drivers to cut migration, says Suella Braverman"

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-65593353

We already are accelerating the latter

Sandpit

Ukranian President Zelensky in UK this lunchtime. Turned up at Chequers in an helicopter to meet the PM.

Sandpit

kamski said:

Foxy said:

kamski said:

Farooq said:

kamski said:

Farooq said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Sandpit said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

RobD said:

Andy_JS said:

"Keir Starmer confirms Labour considering extending vote in general elections to EU nationals and 16/17-year-olds

Labour leader also refuses to rule out deal with Lib Dems, saying he wants outright majority but will ‘see what situation is next year’"

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2023/may/15/local-election-results-labour-tactical-voting-considered-keir-starmer-tories-conservatives-rishi-sunak-uk-politics-live

So no reciprocation needed after all?

So Starmer wants us to become the only country in Europe that allows non nationals to vote in the national elections (excepting the reciprocal arrangments we have with Ireland). Specifically those he thinks are most likely to vote for him and his policies.

I have said up until now that I don't fear a Labour Government. This blatant attempt at vte rigging is enough to change that view.

It is by no means obvious that EU nationals working here would vote Labour, but it is hard to see why Starmer is raising this now (or a couple of days ago when we last discussed it).

On 16- and 17-year-olds, George Osborne advocated that extension of the franchise. I'm not sure it is a party political matter.

I disagree with the reduction in the age of voting but that is more of a philosophical argument and one we have been discussing over the last few days.

But extending the franchise to non citizens - something no other country in Europe does - is simply wrong and is clearly an attempt to sway the votes in favour of those parties and issues Starmer has sympathy with. It is vote rigging at its most blatant. If people want to vote on the future of this country then they can become British citizens

Apart from historical anomalies, why would any country allow non-citizens the vote?

If you want to vote, then take citizenship, in the UK there’s a clear application process available to long-term residents.

Indeed. Nor is it particularly arduous as a process. In the last 2 years I have acted as referee for 4 people to take British citizenship - 2 Vietnamese, a Pole and a Venezuelan. All had good English language skills which made it easier but it was a relatively straight forward process for them.

It costs over £1000 to apply. A lot of people don't have that kind of money lying around.

1000 quid to vote in a general election is a lot. Most people wouldn't pay it.

And there are many countries that don't allow dual citizenship. If you have all the rights of permanent residency in the UK, it is difficult to give up the citizenship of the country you are from, where you may still have family that you might conceivably need to take care of at some point for example, just in order to secure a vote in a general election.

Especially with the uncertainty around Brexit. If someone takes up a UK passport and has to relinquish their old one, are they going to need a visa to visit family, etc?
Plenty of reasons why someone might make this their permanent home but want for pragmatic reasons to not have the expense and hassle of changing their citizenship permanently. To exclude those people who are living stable, ordinary British lives just because of their passport is a policy borne of paranoia.

I think changing the franchise should be done by consensus if at all possible. And I'm not convinced that extending voting at the national level to non-citizens is a good idea, and it's probably a vote-loser.

But I don't think it's accurate to say becoming a British citizen is easy for everyone who is a long-term resident. It costs 1330 GPP to apply! Shouldn't the UK be encouraging long-term residents to become citizens, instead of applying punitive application fees?

I agree, the citizenship pub quiz is quite bonkers and the fees excessive. 5 years residence with no criminal convictions should be enough, alongside a fairly nominal fee.

Cost me about 250 euros for German citizenship, by way of comparison. Apparently the French fee is 55 euros. Bargain!

But you have to want to be French!

TheValiant

HYUFD said:

The pro Boris supporters do have some evidence to back their support for their King across the Water still.

Speaking of King Across the Water, does David Miliband still rate as the most likely 'Next Labour Leader' in the betting markets, or have people finally woken up that he's never coming back?

TOPPING

Farooq said:

HYUFD said:

The pro Boris supporters do have some evidence to back their support for their King across the Water still.

Before Boris resigned last summer yes the Tories were behind but still on a voteshare of around 30-35%. That had collapsed to a Tory voteshare average of just 20-25% before Truss resigned last autumn. Rishi to his credit has rebuilt that Tory voteshare to
25-30% but while better than Liz' ratings it still trails what Boris was polling.

We must not forget some white working class voters who usually vote Labour cast their first ever vote for a Tory at a general election in 2019 but only for Boris, they would not vote for any other Tory leader. Now they are either back voting Labour, voting RefUK or won't bother to vote
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#Graphical_summary

Implicit in your post is the trap you always fall into: looking at the past and imagining that those circumstances can once again come about. You do it all the time with elections. You refer to the next election being 1992, or 1997, or "2010 in reverse".

Things are way more complicated than you suppose.

For example, restoring Boris as leader wouldn't be going back to Boris, it would be going to Boris II. The fact that he resigned and then there were a couple of leaders, and then He's Back! would be new information compared to the last polling taken under Boris. It isn't like a football team, where you just shift the formation back to how it was before and you expect to play as you did before. That's because the "game" you're playing is with public opinion, and people remember.

You can never, never go back to how it was before. Politics is non-commutative. The order of events is as important as the arrangement of the pieces.

I think @HYUFD's point is that there will be a non-trivial proportion of 2019 Cons voters who do indeed say "oh look it's Boris back; I like him".

carnforth

Farooq said:

Sandpit said:

Ukranian President Zelensky in UK this lunchtime. Turned up at Chequers in an helicopter to meet the PM.

I've always had you down as something of a barbarian; using "an" in front of "helicopter" confirms it.

Maybe he doesn't pronounce the h

I think "an hereditary" is about the only defensible one these days. Most people drop the h there.

bondegezou

HYUFD said:

The pro Boris supporters do have some evidence to back their support for their King across the Water still.

Before Boris resigned last summer yes the Tories were behind but still on a voteshare of around 30-35%. That had collapsed to a Tory voteshare average of just 20-25% before Truss resigned last autumn. Rishi to his credit has rebuilt that Tory voteshare to
25-30% but while better than Liz' ratings it still trails what Boris was polling.

We must not forget some white working class voters who usually vote Labour cast their first ever vote for a Tory at a general election in 2019 but only for Boris, they would not vote for any other Tory leader. Now they are either back voting Labour, voting RefUK or won't bother to vote
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#Graphical_summary

But Boris-now wouldn’t mean a return to the same ratings as when he resigned. Both he and the party are less attractive propositions. For example, the Trussageddon still happened: returning Boris can’t wipe that out. Partygate looks worse. Etc.

bondegezou

williamglenn said:

Is voting rights going to be the big polarising issue of the next election? To takea consistent position agaisnt Starmer's plan to extend the franchise, the Tories would have to argue for a hard link between citizenship and voting rights in national elections, ending the anomaly of allowing Commonwealth citizens to vote.

QTWTAIN

Elections are won on the public’s main concerns, which remain the economy, cost of living, health &c.

Richard_Tyndall

kamski said:

Foxy said:

kamski said:

Farooq said:

kamski said:

Farooq said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Sandpit said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

RobD said:

Andy_JS said:

"Keir Starmer confirms Labour considering extending vote in general elections to EU nationals and 16/17-year-olds

Labour leader also refuses to rule out deal with Lib Dems, saying he wants outright majority but will ‘see what situation is next year’"

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2023/may/15/local-election-results-labour-tactical-voting-considered-keir-starmer-tories-conservatives-rishi-sunak-uk-politics-live

So no reciprocation needed after all?

So Starmer wants us to become the only country in Europe that allows non nationals to vote in the national elections (excepting the reciprocal arrangments we have with Ireland). Specifically those he thinks are most likely to vote for him and his policies.

I have said up until now that I don't fear a Labour Government. This blatant attempt at vte rigging is enough to change that view.

It is by no means obvious that EU nationals working here would vote Labour, but it is hard to see why Starmer is raising this now (or a couple of days ago when we last discussed it).

On 16- and 17-year-olds, George Osborne advocated that extension of the franchise. I'm not sure it is a party political matter.

I disagree with the reduction in the age of voting but that is more of a philosophical argument and one we have been discussing over the last few days.

But extending the franchise to non citizens - something no other country in Europe does - is simply wrong and is clearly an attempt to sway the votes in favour of those parties and issues Starmer has sympathy with. It is vote rigging at its most blatant. If people want to vote on the future of this country then they can become British citizens

Apart from historical anomalies, why would any country allow non-citizens the vote?

If you want to vote, then take citizenship, in the UK there’s a clear application process available to long-term residents.

Indeed. Nor is it particularly arduous as a process. In the last 2 years I have acted as referee for 4 people to take British citizenship - 2 Vietnamese, a Pole and a Venezuelan. All had good English language skills which made it easier but it was a relatively straight forward process for them.

It costs over £1000 to apply. A lot of people don't have that kind of money lying around.

1000 quid to vote in a general election is a lot. Most people wouldn't pay it.

And there are many countries that don't allow dual citizenship. If you have all the rights of permanent residency in the UK, it is difficult to give up the citizenship of the country you are from, where you may still have family that you might conceivably need to take care of at some point for example, just in order to secure a vote in a general election.

Especially with the uncertainty around Brexit. If someone takes up a UK passport and has to relinquish their old one, are they going to need a visa to visit family, etc?
Plenty of reasons why someone might make this their permanent home but want for pragmatic reasons to not have the expense and hassle of changing their citizenship permanently. To exclude those people who are living stable, ordinary British lives just because of their passport is a policy borne of paranoia.

I think changing the franchise should be done by consensus if at all possible. And I'm not convinced that extending voting at the national level to non-citizens is a good idea, and it's probably a vote-loser.

But I don't think it's accurate to say becoming a British citizen is easy for everyone who is a long-term resident. It costs 1330 GPP to apply! Shouldn't the UK be encouraging long-term residents to become citizens, instead of applying punitive application fees?

I agree, the citizenship pub quiz is quite bonkers and the fees excessive. 5 years residence with no criminal convictions should be enough, alongside a fairly nominal fee.

Cost me about 250 euros for German citizenship, by way of comparison. Apparently the French fee is 55 euros. Bargain!

Yep. £1000 for citizenship is a scam. Ideally it should be at cost. We should not be making money out of people who want to become a citizen and be part of the future of our country.

slade

HYUFD said:

GIN1138 said:

I wondered whether news that Boris has brought a house in Oxford could be a sign he's expecting to lose Uxbridge and South Ruislip either after being recalled following the Commons Privileges committee report or at Election 24 - And is eyeing up a nice, safe Conservative seat in rural Oxfordshire?

Quite possibly. Uxbridge is in the top 100 Labour target seats and will almost certainly go Labour on current polls.

However Henley is not ultra safe Tory now either. On May 4th indeed the LDs won a landslide victory in South Oxfordshire winning 21 seats while the Tories collapsed to just 1 councillor.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2023/england/councils/E07000179

Even somewhere like Walsall or Dudley or Basildon or Dartford where the Tories held control of the council this month would be safer for Boris now than Henley (albeit less posh and glamorous)

We have had a situation for some time that the Tories have no councillors in Liverpool, Manchester, Sheffield, and Hull. But this is now happening in the rural south. They have no councillors in Lewes and Vale of White Horse ( indeed in the latter there are no Labour councillors either - a unique case in England).

Mexicanpete

TimS said:

Boris or not (and I think not), I’m pretty sure tte next Tory leader will be a further shift to the right, assuming Labour win the election.

Recent history since 1979 has first leaders post-defeat (albeit only 3 of them) being more on the wings than the predecessor: Foot after Callaghan, Hague after Major, Ed Miliband after Brown. In 2 of those there was then a further move to the wings after the first leader left: Miliband to Corbyn and Hague to IDS.

If Rishi loses, the bulk of conservative support is going to land in one or other camp of:

1. We weren’t radical enough with tax cuts and reducing the size of the state, or
2. We weren’t radical enough with social conservatism and anti-wokeism

Or both - and I expect the winner will need to promise both.

That sounds like a job for Sue Ellen or, dah, dah, dah, Mogg.

Theuniondivvie

One less Brexiteer for the Beeb to get on QT or Newsnight. I couldn't even be arsed with a sardonic 'vaguely credible'.

Richard_Tyndall

Foxy said:

kamski said:

Farooq said:

kamski said:

Farooq said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Sandpit said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

RobD said:

Andy_JS said:

"Keir Starmer confirms Labour considering extending vote in general elections to EU nationals and 16/17-year-olds

Labour leader also refuses to rule out deal with Lib Dems, saying he wants outright majority but will ‘see what situation is next year’"

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2023/may/15/local-election-results-labour-tactical-voting-considered-keir-starmer-tories-conservatives-rishi-sunak-uk-politics-live

So no reciprocation needed after all?

So Starmer wants us to become the only country in Europe that allows non nationals to vote in the national elections (excepting the reciprocal arrangments we have with Ireland). Specifically those he thinks are most likely to vote for him and his policies.

I have said up until now that I don't fear a Labour Government. This blatant attempt at vte rigging is enough to change that view.

It is by no means obvious that EU nationals working here would vote Labour, but it is hard to see why Starmer is raising this now (or a couple of days ago when we last discussed it).

On 16- and 17-year-olds, George Osborne advocated that extension of the franchise. I'm not sure it is a party political matter.

I disagree with the reduction in the age of voting but that is more of a philosophical argument and one we have been discussing over the last few days.

But extending the franchise to non citizens - something no other country in Europe does - is simply wrong and is clearly an attempt to sway the votes in favour of those parties and issues Starmer has sympathy with. It is vote rigging at its most blatant. If people want to vote on the future of this country then they can become British citizens

Apart from historical anomalies, why would any country allow non-citizens the vote?

If you want to vote, then take citizenship, in the UK there’s a clear application process available to long-term residents.

Indeed. Nor is it particularly arduous as a process. In the last 2 years I have acted as referee for 4 people to take British citizenship - 2 Vietnamese, a Pole and a Venezuelan. All had good English language skills which made it easier but it was a relatively straight forward process for them.

It costs over £1000 to apply. A lot of people don't have that kind of money lying around.

1000 quid to vote in a general election is a lot. Most people wouldn't pay it.

And there are many countries that don't allow dual citizenship. If you have all the rights of permanent residency in the UK, it is difficult to give up the citizenship of the country you are from, where you may still have family that you might conceivably need to take care of at some point for example, just in order to secure a vote in a general election.

Especially with the uncertainty around Brexit. If someone takes up a UK passport and has to relinquish their old one, are they going to need a visa to visit family, etc?
Plenty of reasons why someone might make this their permanent home but want for pragmatic reasons to not have the expense and hassle of changing their citizenship permanently. To exclude those people who are living stable, ordinary British lives just because of their passport is a policy borne of paranoia.

I think changing the franchise should be done by consensus if at all possible. And I'm not convinced that extending voting at the national level to non-citizens is a good idea, and it's probably a vote-loser.

But I don't think it's accurate to say becoming a British citizen is easy for everyone who is a long-term resident. It costs 1330 GPP to apply! Shouldn't the UK be encouraging long-term residents to become citizens, instead of applying punitive application fees?

I agree, the citizenship pub quiz is quite bonkers and the fees excessive. 5 years residence with no criminal convictions should be enough, alongside a fairly nominal fee.

The fees are excessive but the tests are a very good idea.

Norway has extensive language and culture tests for prospective citizens. Indeed for anyone who wants permanent residence. When I was there it was 200 hours of compulsory language and culture lessons which I believe is now increased to 300 hours. This seems to me to be a very sensible thing to avoid isolation and ghettoisation.

Nigelb

One word memo.
Don't.

Scott_xP

@jonsopel

Don’t want to go over the top, but this is absolutely jaw-dropping. Someone who was in the cabinet when legislation on voter ID was agreed and went through parliament acknowledges it WAS an attempt to gerrymander the elections

https://twitter.com/jonsopel/status/1658076536350601216

carnforth

Farooq said:

carnforth said:

Farooq said:

Sandpit said:

Ukranian President Zelensky in UK this lunchtime. Turned up at Chequers in an helicopter to meet the PM.

I've always had you down as something of a barbarian; using "an" in front of "helicopter" confirms it.

Maybe he doesn't pronounce the h

I think "an hereditary" is about the only defensible one these days. Most people drop the h there.

A hereditary
An hour
A helicopter
An honour
A hammer

An understanding
A unicorn

Yes, I grasp the rule. It's just that saying "A hereditary" is as very awkward with either pronunciation of "A" , and so most people say "An ereditary".

mwadams

Mexicanpete said:

HYUFD said:

The pro Boris supporters do have some evidence to back their support for their King across the Water still.

Before Boris resigned last summer yes the Tories were behind but still on a voteshare of around 30-35%. That had collapsed to a Tory voteshare average of just 20-25% before Truss resigned last autumn. Rishi to his credit has rebuilt that Tory voteshare to
25-30% but while better than Liz' ratings it still trails what Boris was polling.

We must not forget some white working class voters who usually vote Labour cast their first ever vote for a Tory at a general election in 2019 but only for Boris, they would not vote for any other Tory leader. Now they are either back voting Labour, voting RefUK or won't bother to vote
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#Graphical_summary

The man is simply a joke. He is unfit for high office, or even any office. He appears to be an amoral Charlatan who has been caught out for his economy with the actualitaire time and again. Everyone whose path he crosses eventually seems to find him to be toxic. He is not your friend, he appears to have some despicable sociopathic tendencies and from his two letter Brexit stunt, was content to sell his nation down the river for personal aggrandisement.

But other than that HY, I am sure we could both enjoy a pint or two with him, so long as we paid.

The only semi-informal event (a small dinner party) which involved Johnson (and other somewhat senior Tories of the time: GOs and Gove I believe) and someone I know, Johnson was rude, ignored everyone else in the room, chowed down mightily, and buggered off before the coffee.

On that showing, I very much doubt I would enjoy a beer with him.

Richard_Tyndall

SandyRentool said:

If Bozo is the answer, you're asking the wrong question.

If Bozo is the answer you are probably on the wrong planet.

Theuniondivvie

carnforth said:

Farooq said:

Sandpit said:

Ukranian President Zelensky in UK this lunchtime. Turned up at Chequers in an helicopter to meet the PM.

I've always had you down as something of a barbarian; using "an" in front of "helicopter" confirms it.

Maybe he doesn't pronounce the h

I think "an hereditary" is about the only defensible one these days. Most people drop the h there.

'An historic' still feels more right for me.

bondegezou

kamski said:

Farooq said:

kamski said:

Farooq said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Sandpit said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

RobD said:

Andy_JS said:

"Keir Starmer confirms Labour considering extending vote in general elections to EU nationals and 16/17-year-olds

Labour leader also refuses to rule out deal with Lib Dems, saying he wants outright majority but will ‘see what situation is next year’"

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2023/may/15/local-election-results-labour-tactical-voting-considered-keir-starmer-tories-conservatives-rishi-sunak-uk-politics-live

So no reciprocation needed after all?

So Starmer wants us to become the only country in Europe that allows non nationals to vote in the national elections (excepting the reciprocal arrangments we have with Ireland). Specifically those he thinks are most likely to vote for him and his policies.

I have said up until now that I don't fear a Labour Government. This blatant attempt at vte rigging is enough to change that view.

It is by no means obvious that EU nationals working here would vote Labour, but it is hard to see why Starmer is raising this now (or a couple of days ago when we last discussed it).

On 16- and 17-year-olds, George Osborne advocated that extension of the franchise. I'm not sure it is a party political matter.

I disagree with the reduction in the age of voting but that is more of a philosophical argument and one we have been discussing over the last few days.

But extending the franchise to non citizens - something no other country in Europe does - is simply wrong and is clearly an attempt to sway the votes in favour of those parties and issues Starmer has sympathy with. It is vote rigging at its most blatant. If people want to vote on the future of this country then they can become British citizens

Apart from historical anomalies, why would any country allow non-citizens the vote?

If you want to vote, then take citizenship, in the UK there’s a clear application process available to long-term residents.

Indeed. Nor is it particularly arduous as a process. In the last 2 years I have acted as referee for 4 people to take British citizenship - 2 Vietnamese, a Pole and a Venezuelan. All had good English language skills which made it easier but it was a relatively straight forward process for them.

It costs over £1000 to apply. A lot of people don't have that kind of money lying around.

1000 quid to vote in a general election is a lot. Most people wouldn't pay it.

And there are many countries that don't allow dual citizenship. If you have all the rights of permanent residency in the UK, it is difficult to give up the citizenship of the country you are from, where you may still have family that you might conceivably need to take care of at some point for example, just in order to secure a vote in a general election.

Especially with the uncertainty around Brexit. If someone takes up a UK passport and has to relinquish their old one, are they going to need a visa to visit family, etc?
Plenty of reasons why someone might make this their permanent home but want for pragmatic reasons to not have the expense and hassle of changing their citizenship permanently. To exclude those people who are living stable, ordinary British lives just because of their passport is a policy borne of paranoia.

I think changing the franchise should be done by consensus if at all possible. And I'm not convinced that extending voting at the national level to non-citizens is a good idea, and it's probably a vote-loser.

But I don't think it's accurate to say becoming a British citizen is easy for everyone who is a long-term resident. It costs 1330 GPP to apply! Shouldn't the UK be encouraging long-term residents to become citizens, instead of applying punitive application fees?

The Conservative Party has abandoned concepts like consensus when it comes to our voting laws.

carnforth

Theuniondivvie said:

carnforth said:

Farooq said:

Sandpit said:

Ukranian President Zelensky in UK this lunchtime. Turned up at Chequers in an helicopter to meet the PM.

I've always had you down as something of a barbarian; using "an" in front of "helicopter" confirms it.

Maybe he doesn't pronounce the h

I think "an hereditary" is about the only defensible one these days. Most people drop the h there.

'An historic' still feels more right for me.

Yes, that one too. So long as you aren't pronouncing the h, of course.

rcs1000

Johnson won in 2019, not just because of Corbyn, but because he promised an end to the Brexit impasse. And while that involved quite a lot of dissimulation*, he did deliver that.

* Or lying, as some call it

Sandpit

Richard_Tyndall said:

kamski said:

Foxy said:

kamski said:

Farooq said:

kamski said:

Farooq said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Sandpit said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

RobD said:

Andy_JS said:

"Keir Starmer confirms Labour considering extending vote in general elections to EU nationals and 16/17-year-olds

Labour leader also refuses to rule out deal with Lib Dems, saying he wants outright majority but will ‘see what situation is next year’"

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2023/may/15/local-election-results-labour-tactical-voting-considered-keir-starmer-tories-conservatives-rishi-sunak-uk-politics-live

So no reciprocation needed after all?

So Starmer wants us to become the only country in Europe that allows non nationals to vote in the national elections (excepting the reciprocal arrangments we have with Ireland). Specifically those he thinks are most likely to vote for him and his policies.

I have said up until now that I don't fear a Labour Government. This blatant attempt at vte rigging is enough to change that view.

It is by no means obvious that EU nationals working here would vote Labour, but it is hard to see why Starmer is raising this now (or a couple of days ago when we last discussed it).

On 16- and 17-year-olds, George Osborne advocated that extension of the franchise. I'm not sure it is a party political matter.

I disagree with the reduction in the age of voting but that is more of a philosophical argument and one we have been discussing over the last few days.

But extending the franchise to non citizens - something no other country in Europe does - is simply wrong and is clearly an attempt to sway the votes in favour of those parties and issues Starmer has sympathy with. It is vote rigging at its most blatant. If people want to vote on the future of this country then they can become British citizens

Apart from historical anomalies, why would any country allow non-citizens the vote?

If you want to vote, then take citizenship, in the UK there’s a clear application process available to long-term residents.

Indeed. Nor is it particularly arduous as a process. In the last 2 years I have acted as referee for 4 people to take British citizenship - 2 Vietnamese, a Pole and a Venezuelan. All had good English language skills which made it easier but it was a relatively straight forward process for them.

It costs over £1000 to apply. A lot of people don't have that kind of money lying around.

1000 quid to vote in a general election is a lot. Most people wouldn't pay it.

And there are many countries that don't allow dual citizenship. If you have all the rights of permanent residency in the UK, it is difficult to give up the citizenship of the country you are from, where you may still have family that you might conceivably need to take care of at some point for example, just in order to secure a vote in a general election.

Especially with the uncertainty around Brexit. If someone takes up a UK passport and has to relinquish their old one, are they going to need a visa to visit family, etc?
Plenty of reasons why someone might make this their permanent home but want for pragmatic reasons to not have the expense and hassle of changing their citizenship permanently. To exclude those people who are living stable, ordinary British lives just because of their passport is a policy borne of paranoia.

I think changing the franchise should be done by consensus if at all possible. And I'm not convinced that extending voting at the national level to non-citizens is a good idea, and it's probably a vote-loser.

But I don't think it's accurate to say becoming a British citizen is easy for everyone who is a long-term resident. It costs 1330 GPP to apply! Shouldn't the UK be encouraging long-term residents to become citizens, instead of applying punitive application fees?

I agree, the citizenship pub quiz is quite bonkers and the fees excessive. 5 years residence with no criminal convictions should be enough, alongside a fairly nominal fee.

Cost me about 250 euros for German citizenship, by way of comparison. Apparently the French fee is 55 euros. Bargain!

Yep. £1000 for citizenship is a scam. Ideally it should be at cost. We should not be making money out of people who want to become a citizen and be part of the future of our country.

It should be cost neutral, but presumably involves outsourced police record checks and the language / culture test admin.

It should be encouraged for people who see themselves as permanent residents though, it gives a level of basic security against deportation, and the right to have a say in how their new home country is governed.

I know people who have taken US citizenship from a few different countries, and a big deal is made of it, including the right to vote. Don’t mention the international taxes if you leave the US though!

rcs1000

Andy_JS said:

"Train fruit pickers and lorry drivers to cut migration, says Suella Braverman"

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-65593353

Are there a lot of people who pick fruit from trains?

Nigelb

Scott_xP said:

@jonsopel

Don’t want to go over the top, but this is absolutely jaw-dropping. Someone who was in the cabinet when legislation on voter ID was agreed and went through parliament acknowledges it WAS an attempt to gerrymander the elections

https://twitter.com/jonsopel/status/1658076536350601216

Said at the conference of loons.
Which appears to be taking some of its themes from the US right.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/15/low-birthrate-is-uk-top-priority-tory-mp-tells-rightwing-conference-miriam-cates
...The UK’s low birthrate is the most pressing policy issue of the generation and is caused in part by “cultural Marxism” stripping young people of any hope, a Conservative MP has argued at the start of a populist-tinged conference in London.

Addressing the National Conservatism gathering, run by a US-based thinktank, Miriam Cates said western countries faced an existential threat from falling reproduction..

rcs1000

Luckyguy1983 said:

Foxy said:

Some good news! Eating ice cream regularly protects against diabetes:

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2023/05/ice-cream-bad-for-you-health-study/673487/?utm_source=copy-link&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=share

It has the same sugar/fat ratio as breast milk, that is apparently why we like it. I have ice cream nearly every night, go me.

Technically, it's the same carbohydrates/fat ratio. Breast milk contains relatively little in the way of straight sugar: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5331577/#:~:text=Fructose, glucose, and lactose were,associated with infant body composition.

bondegezou

Farooq said:

carnforth said:

Farooq said:

Sandpit said:

Ukranian President Zelensky in UK this lunchtime. Turned up at Chequers in an helicopter to meet the PM.

I've always had you down as something of a barbarian; using "an" in front of "helicopter" confirms it.

Maybe he doesn't pronounce the h

I think "an hereditary" is about the only defensible one these days. Most people drop the h there.

A hereditary
An hour
A helicopter
An honour
A hammer

An understanding
A unicorn

We submitted a paper recently that referred to… well, the draft said “a mpox case”, but I changed it to “an mpox case”. Agree?

Malmesbury

rcs1000 said:

Andy_JS said:

"Train fruit pickers and lorry drivers to cut migration, says Suella Braverman"

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-65593353

Are there a lot of people who pick fruit from trains?

The fruit picking should be automated - already heading that way.

A friend in the Cotswolds reports a trial of a robotic litter picker is going on. To deal with people throwing rubbish from cars. He did like my suggestion of robots that would implacably hunt down the rubbish throwers…

Nigelb

UK ministers urged to intervene if Australian bank takes 100% of gas business
Macquarie has option for all of National Grid gas transmission and metering despite tainted history of owning utilities
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/may/14/uk-ministers-urged-to-intervene-if-australian-bank-takes-100-of-gas-business
Ministers have been urged to intervene if the Australian banking powerhouse Macquarie pushes the button on a mooted £3bn deal to take full control of a vital part of the UK’s gas grid.

A consortium made up of Macquarie Asset Management and British Columbia Investment Management Corporation completed the acquisition of 60% of the equity in National Grid’s gas transmission and meter business in January, in a deal which valued the business at £7.5bn...

NeilVW

carnforth said:

Theuniondivvie said:

carnforth said:

Farooq said:

Sandpit said:

Ukranian President Zelensky in UK this lunchtime. Turned up at Chequers in an helicopter to meet the PM.

I've always had you down as something of a barbarian; using "an" in front of "helicopter" confirms it.

Maybe he doesn't pronounce the h

I think "an hereditary" is about the only defensible one these days. Most people drop the h there.

'An historic' still feels more right for me.

Yes, that one too. So long as you aren't pronouncing the h, of course.

I probably use ‘an’ before some of these words in casual speech without realising it, as I might drop the ‘h’. However, in writing I always use ‘a’ if the ‘h’ is supposed to be aspirated in formal use. I would write ‘a hotel’ and ‘a historic’ but I think there is a traditionalist argument that those words should have a silent ‘h’ due to their French origins?

Andy_JS

Why did the commentariat get the Turkish election wrong?

rcs1000

Nigelb said:

Scott_xP said:

@jonsopel

Don’t want to go over the top, but this is absolutely jaw-dropping. Someone who was in the cabinet when legislation on voter ID was agreed and went through parliament acknowledges it WAS an attempt to gerrymander the elections

https://twitter.com/jonsopel/status/1658076536350601216

Said at the conference of loons.
Which appears to be taking some of its themes from the US right.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/15/low-birthrate-is-uk-top-priority-tory-mp-tells-rightwing-conference-miriam-cates
...The UK’s low birthrate is the most pressing policy issue of the generation and is caused in part by “cultural Marxism” stripping young people of any hope, a Conservative MP has argued at the start of a populist-tinged conference in London.

Addressing the National Conservatism gathering, run by a US-based thinktank, Miriam Cates said western countries faced an existential threat from falling reproduction..

How does she explain the fact that birth rates are low in all developed countries, whether you have a left wing or right wing government?

bondegezou

rcs1000 said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Foxy said:

Some good news! Eating ice cream regularly protects against diabetes:

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2023/05/ice-cream-bad-for-you-health-study/673487/?utm_source=copy-link&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=share

It has the same sugar/fat ratio as breast milk, that is apparently why we like it. I have ice cream nearly every night, go me.

Technically, it's the same carbohydrates/fat ratio. Breast milk contains relatively little in the way of straight sugar: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5331577/#:~:text=Fructose, glucose, and lactose were,associated with infant body composition.

While these comparisons are interesting, I would note that they tend to be served at rather different temperatures, which must have some impact on their sensory properties.

StillWaters

Farooq said:

carnforth said:

Farooq said:

Sandpit said:

Ukranian President Zelensky in UK this lunchtime. Turned up at Chequers in an helicopter to meet the PM.

I've always had you down as something of a barbarian; using "an" in front of "helicopter" confirms it.

Maybe he doesn't pronounce the h

I think "an hereditary" is about the only defensible one these days. Most people drop the h there.

A hereditary
An hour
A helicopter
An honour
A hammer

An understanding
A unicorn

English is wonderfully idiosyncratic 😂

Sandpit

Andy_JS said:

Why did the commentariat get the Turkish election wrong?

The same reason they always get elections wrong - they’re based in big cities, and miss the fact that most of the electorate don’t live in big cities.

Stuartinromford

Andy_JS said:

"Train fruit pickers and lorry drivers to cut migration, says Suella Braverman"

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-65593353

But if the fruit pickers and lorry drivers are being sent to retrain as immigtation staff, who will pick the fruit and drive the lorries?

bondegezou

Andy_JS said:

Why did the commentariat get the Turkish election wrong?

Because it’s difficult to predict when Erdogan cheats?

rcs1000

Sandpit said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

kamski said:

Foxy said:

kamski said:

Farooq said:

kamski said:

Farooq said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Sandpit said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

RobD said:

Andy_JS said:

"Keir Starmer confirms Labour considering extending vote in general elections to EU nationals and 16/17-year-olds

Labour leader also refuses to rule out deal with Lib Dems, saying he wants outright majority but will ‘see what situation is next year’"

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2023/may/15/local-election-results-labour-tactical-voting-considered-keir-starmer-tories-conservatives-rishi-sunak-uk-politics-live

So no reciprocation needed after all?

So Starmer wants us to become the only country in Europe that allows non nationals to vote in the national elections (excepting the reciprocal arrangments we have with Ireland). Specifically those he thinks are most likely to vote for him and his policies.

I have said up until now that I don't fear a Labour Government. This blatant attempt at vte rigging is enough to change that view.

It is by no means obvious that EU nationals working here would vote Labour, but it is hard to see why Starmer is raising this now (or a couple of days ago when we last discussed it).

On 16- and 17-year-olds, George Osborne advocated that extension of the franchise. I'm not sure it is a party political matter.

I disagree with the reduction in the age of voting but that is more of a philosophical argument and one we have been discussing over the last few days.

But extending the franchise to non citizens - something no other country in Europe does - is simply wrong and is clearly an attempt to sway the votes in favour of those parties and issues Starmer has sympathy with. It is vote rigging at its most blatant. If people want to vote on the future of this country then they can become British citizens

Apart from historical anomalies, why would any country allow non-citizens the vote?

If you want to vote, then take citizenship, in the UK there’s a clear application process available to long-term residents.

Indeed. Nor is it particularly arduous as a process. In the last 2 years I have acted as referee for 4 people to take British citizenship - 2 Vietnamese, a Pole and a Venezuelan. All had good English language skills which made it easier but it was a relatively straight forward process for them.

It costs over £1000 to apply. A lot of people don't have that kind of money lying around.

1000 quid to vote in a general election is a lot. Most people wouldn't pay it.

And there are many countries that don't allow dual citizenship. If you have all the rights of permanent residency in the UK, it is difficult to give up the citizenship of the country you are from, where you may still have family that you might conceivably need to take care of at some point for example, just in order to secure a vote in a general election.

Especially with the uncertainty around Brexit. If someone takes up a UK passport and has to relinquish their old one, are they going to need a visa to visit family, etc?
Plenty of reasons why someone might make this their permanent home but want for pragmatic reasons to not have the expense and hassle of changing their citizenship permanently. To exclude those people who are living stable, ordinary British lives just because of their passport is a policy borne of paranoia.

I think changing the franchise should be done by consensus if at all possible. And I'm not convinced that extending voting at the national level to non-citizens is a good idea, and it's probably a vote-loser.

But I don't think it's accurate to say becoming a British citizen is easy for everyone who is a long-term resident. It costs 1330 GPP to apply! Shouldn't the UK be encouraging long-term residents to become citizens, instead of applying punitive application fees?

I agree, the citizenship pub quiz is quite bonkers and the fees excessive. 5 years residence with no criminal convictions should be enough, alongside a fairly nominal fee.

Cost me about 250 euros for German citizenship, by way of comparison. Apparently the French fee is 55 euros. Bargain!

Yep. £1000 for citizenship is a scam. Ideally it should be at cost. We should not be making money out of people who want to become a citizen and be part of the future of our country.

It should be cost neutral, but presumably involves outsourced police record checks and the language / culture test admin.

It should be encouraged for people who see themselves as permanent residents though, it gives a level of basic security against deportation, and the right to have a say in how their new home country is governed.

I know people who have taken US citizenship from a few different countries, and a big deal is made of it, including the right to vote. Don’t mention the international taxes if you leave the US though!

That comes with the Green Card, not citizenship.

If you give up your Green Card, they do a valuation of all your assets compared to when you got your card and charge you capital gains on the difference.

Nigelb

An interesting extension of the free speech argument.

Abbott knocks Dominion over Tucker Carlson’s departure from Fox News
https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/4003679-abbott-knocks-dominion-over-tucker-carlsons-departure-from-fox-news/
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) bashed Dominion Voting Systems over the departure of Tucker Carlson from Fox News, following a report that the popular conservative primetime host was fired from the network as part of its settlement with the voting software company.
Carlson was told by a member of the network’s board of directors that he was taken off the air as part of the Fox News settlement with Dominion, according to Axios, which cited unidentified sources briefed on the conversations. Abbott said if the reporting was true, then he is “happy that Dominion does not operate in Texas.”
“We may disagree with other’s positions, but we should never try to improperly silence views contrary to our own,” Abbott said on Twitter on Saturday. “If Dominion wants to do business with Texas in the future, they should first answer questions about what role, if any, they played in silencing a prominent conservative journalist.”
A Fox News spokesperson in a statement to Axios said that the idea that Carlson was let go of as part of the settlement was “categorically false.” An attorney for Dominion also told the news outlet that it did not insist on Carlson being fired...

Stuartinromford

Nigelb said:

Scott_xP said:

@jonsopel

Don’t want to go over the top, but this is absolutely jaw-dropping. Someone who was in the cabinet when legislation on voter ID was agreed and went through parliament acknowledges it WAS an attempt to gerrymander the elections

https://twitter.com/jonsopel/status/1658076536350601216

Said at the conference of loons.
Which appears to be taking some of its themes from the US right.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/15/low-birthrate-is-uk-top-priority-tory-mp-tells-rightwing-conference-miriam-cates
...The UK’s low birthrate is the most pressing policy issue of the generation and is caused in part by “cultural Marxism” stripping young people of any hope, a Conservative MP has argued at the start of a populist-tinged conference in London.

Addressing the National Conservatism gathering, run by a US-based thinktank, Miriam Cates said western countries faced an existential threat from falling reproduction..

They've seen US Republicans and thought "that looks fun". Including the gerrymandering.

Gallowgate

Nigelb said:

Scott_xP said:

@jonsopel

Don’t want to go over the top, but this is absolutely jaw-dropping. Someone who was in the cabinet when legislation on voter ID was agreed and went through parliament acknowledges it WAS an attempt to gerrymander the elections

https://twitter.com/jonsopel/status/1658076536350601216

Said at the conference of loons.
Which appears to be taking some of its themes from the US right.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/15/low-birthrate-is-uk-top-priority-tory-mp-tells-rightwing-conference-miriam-cates
...The UK’s low birthrate is the most pressing policy issue of the generation and is caused in part by “cultural Marxism” stripping young people of any hope, a Conservative MP has argued at the start of a populist-tinged conference in London.

Addressing the National Conservatism gathering, run by a US-based thinktank, Miriam Cates said western countries faced an existential threat from falling reproduction..

Can’t afford to have kids because we’re taxed up to the eyeballs and have to shell out 50% of income on housing.

“Cultural marxism”

bondegezou

Farooq said:

bondegezou said:

Farooq said:

carnforth said:

Farooq said:

Sandpit said:

Ukranian President Zelensky in UK this lunchtime. Turned up at Chequers in an helicopter to meet the PM.

I've always had you down as something of a barbarian; using "an" in front of "helicopter" confirms it.

Maybe he doesn't pronounce the h

I think "an hereditary" is about the only defensible one these days. Most people drop the h there.

A hereditary
An hour
A helicopter
An honour
A hammer

An understanding
A unicorn

We submitted a paper recently that referred to… well, the draft said “a mpox case”, but I changed it to “an mpox case”. Agree?

Assuming that you pronounce "mpox" as "emm-poks", yes. I'd have made the same edit. It's all about the sound if you read it aloud. Personally I pronounce the "h" in hereditary too.

Yes, agreed.

My earlier proposal to pronounce “mpox” to rhyme with Hanson’s “MMMBop” did not go down well.

Sandpit

rcs1000 said:

Sandpit said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

kamski said:

Foxy said:

kamski said:

Farooq said:

kamski said:

Farooq said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Sandpit said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

RobD said:

Andy_JS said:

"Keir Starmer confirms Labour considering extending vote in general elections to EU nationals and 16/17-year-olds

Labour leader also refuses to rule out deal with Lib Dems, saying he wants outright majority but will ‘see what situation is next year’"

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2023/may/15/local-election-results-labour-tactical-voting-considered-keir-starmer-tories-conservatives-rishi-sunak-uk-politics-live

So no reciprocation needed after all?

So Starmer wants us to become the only country in Europe that allows non nationals to vote in the national elections (excepting the reciprocal arrangments we have with Ireland). Specifically those he thinks are most likely to vote for him and his policies.

I have said up until now that I don't fear a Labour Government. This blatant attempt at vte rigging is enough to change that view.

It is by no means obvious that EU nationals working here would vote Labour, but it is hard to see why Starmer is raising this now (or a couple of days ago when we last discussed it).

On 16- and 17-year-olds, George Osborne advocated that extension of the franchise. I'm not sure it is a party political matter.

I disagree with the reduction in the age of voting but that is more of a philosophical argument and one we have been discussing over the last few days.

But extending the franchise to non citizens - something no other country in Europe does - is simply wrong and is clearly an attempt to sway the votes in favour of those parties and issues Starmer has sympathy with. It is vote rigging at its most blatant. If people want to vote on the future of this country then they can become British citizens

Apart from historical anomalies, why would any country allow non-citizens the vote?

If you want to vote, then take citizenship, in the UK there’s a clear application process available to long-term residents.

Indeed. Nor is it particularly arduous as a process. In the last 2 years I have acted as referee for 4 people to take British citizenship - 2 Vietnamese, a Pole and a Venezuelan. All had good English language skills which made it easier but it was a relatively straight forward process for them.

It costs over £1000 to apply. A lot of people don't have that kind of money lying around.

1000 quid to vote in a general election is a lot. Most people wouldn't pay it.

And there are many countries that don't allow dual citizenship. If you have all the rights of permanent residency in the UK, it is difficult to give up the citizenship of the country you are from, where you may still have family that you might conceivably need to take care of at some point for example, just in order to secure a vote in a general election.

Especially with the uncertainty around Brexit. If someone takes up a UK passport and has to relinquish their old one, are they going to need a visa to visit family, etc?
Plenty of reasons why someone might make this their permanent home but want for pragmatic reasons to not have the expense and hassle of changing their citizenship permanently. To exclude those people who are living stable, ordinary British lives just because of their passport is a policy borne of paranoia.

I think changing the franchise should be done by consensus if at all possible. And I'm not convinced that extending voting at the national level to non-citizens is a good idea, and it's probably a vote-loser.

But I don't think it's accurate to say becoming a British citizen is easy for everyone who is a long-term resident. It costs 1330 GPP to apply! Shouldn't the UK be encouraging long-term residents to become citizens, instead of applying punitive application fees?

I agree, the citizenship pub quiz is quite bonkers and the fees excessive. 5 years residence with no criminal convictions should be enough, alongside a fairly nominal fee.

Cost me about 250 euros for German citizenship, by way of comparison. Apparently the French fee is 55 euros. Bargain!

Yep. £1000 for citizenship is a scam. Ideally it should be at cost. We should not be making money out of people who want to become a citizen and be part of the future of our country.

It should be cost neutral, but presumably involves outsourced police record checks and the language / culture test admin.

It should be encouraged for people who see themselves as permanent residents though, it gives a level of basic security against deportation, and the right to have a say in how their new home country is governed.

I know people who have taken US citizenship from a few different countries, and a big deal is made of it, including the right to vote. Don’t mention the international taxes if you leave the US though!

That comes with the Green Card, not citizenship.

If you give up your Green Card, they do a valuation of all your assets compared to when you got your card and charge you capital gains on the difference.

International assets?

I know people who have relinquished US citizenship because of the overseas taxes, and companies out here (with no income tax) will happily pay Americans half by bank and half in cash.

northern_monkey

Andy_JS said:

"Train fruit pickers and lorry drivers to cut migration, says Suella Braverman"

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-65593353

'Let's leave the EU so we can have you sullen plebs doing jobs you resent (BTW we'll raise the retirement age as soon as we can get away with it too so prepare for backbreaking labour until you're 70), instead of having all those awful young, motivated people from the EU taking the jobs you don't want to do anyway. It'll mean more expensive food but, y'know, Take Back Control. P.S. we wont cut the VAT on fuel bills either.'

bondegezou

Nigelb said:

An interesting extension of the free speech argument.

Abbott knocks Dominion over Tucker Carlson’s departure from Fox News
https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/4003679-abbott-knocks-dominion-over-tucker-carlsons-departure-from-fox-news/
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) bashed Dominion Voting Systems over the departure of Tucker Carlson from Fox News, following a report that the popular conservative primetime host was fired from the network as part of its settlement with the voting software company.
Carlson was told by a member of the network’s board of directors that he was taken off the air as part of the Fox News settlement with Dominion, according to Axios, which cited unidentified sources briefed on the conversations. Abbott said if the reporting was true, then he is “happy that Dominion does not operate in Texas.”
“We may disagree with other’s positions, but we should never try to improperly silence views contrary to our own,” Abbott said on Twitter on Saturday. “If Dominion wants to do business with Texas in the future, they should first answer questions about what role, if any, they played in silencing a prominent conservative journalist.”
A Fox News spokesperson in a statement to Axios said that the idea that Carlson was let go of as part of the settlement was “categorically false.” An attorney for Dominion also told the news outlet that it did not insist on Carlson being fired...

For this to be an interesting extension of the free speech argument, wouldn’t Abbott have to have some sort of coherent position? He’s just pwning the libs here. There’s zero philosophy or consistency.

williamglenn

rcs1000 said:

Nigelb said:

Scott_xP said:

@jonsopel

Don’t want to go over the top, but this is absolutely jaw-dropping. Someone who was in the cabinet when legislation on voter ID was agreed and went through parliament acknowledges it WAS an attempt to gerrymander the elections

https://twitter.com/jonsopel/status/1658076536350601216

Said at the conference of loons.
Which appears to be taking some of its themes from the US right.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/15/low-birthrate-is-uk-top-priority-tory-mp-tells-rightwing-conference-miriam-cates
...The UK’s low birthrate is the most pressing policy issue of the generation and is caused in part by “cultural Marxism” stripping young people of any hope, a Conservative MP has argued at the start of a populist-tinged conference in London.

Addressing the National Conservatism gathering, run by a US-based thinktank, Miriam Cates said western countries faced an existential threat from falling reproduction..

How does she explain the fact that birth rates are low in all developed countries, whether you have a left wing or right wing government?

That's obvious. There aren't any right wing governments in the modern west.

StillWaters

rcs1000 said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Foxy said:

Some good news! Eating ice cream regularly protects against diabetes:

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2023/05/ice-cream-bad-for-you-health-study/673487/?utm_source=copy-link&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=share

It has the same sugar/fat ratio as breast milk, that is apparently why we like it. I have ice cream nearly every night, go me.

Technically, it's the same carbohydrates/fat ratio. Breast milk contains relatively little in the way of straight sugar: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5331577/#:~:text=Fructose, glucose, and lactose were,associated with infant body composition.

You’re nlt suggesting this is a pointless scam designed to part fools from their money?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Licktators

bondegezou

Farooq said:

bondegezou said:

Farooq said:

bondegezou said:

Farooq said:

carnforth said:

Farooq said:

Sandpit said:

Ukranian President Zelensky in UK this lunchtime. Turned up at Chequers in an helicopter to meet the PM.

I've always had you down as something of a barbarian; using "an" in front of "helicopter" confirms it.

Maybe he doesn't pronounce the h

I think "an hereditary" is about the only defensible one these days. Most people drop the h there.

A hereditary
An hour
A helicopter
An honour
A hammer

An understanding
A unicorn

We submitted a paper recently that referred to… well, the draft said “a mpox case”, but I changed it to “an mpox case”. Agree?

Assuming that you pronounce "mpox" as "emm-poks", yes. I'd have made the same edit. It's all about the sound if you read it aloud. Personally I pronounce the "h" in hereditary too.

Yes, agreed.

My earlier proposal to pronounce “mpox” to rhyme with Hanson’s “MMMBop” did not go down well.

Well, that's finally pushed all the Eurovision songs out of my head. Now I'll be humming Hanson all day.

Mods, can we ban @bondegezou please?

In my defence, I very much enjoy Radiohead, particularly Kid A.

rcs1000

Richard_Tyndall said:

Foxy said:

kamski said:

Farooq said:

kamski said:

Farooq said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Sandpit said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

RobD said:

Andy_JS said:

"Keir Starmer confirms Labour considering extending vote in general elections to EU nationals and 16/17-year-olds

Labour leader also refuses to rule out deal with Lib Dems, saying he wants outright majority but will ‘see what situation is next year’"

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2023/may/15/local-election-results-labour-tactical-voting-considered-keir-starmer-tories-conservatives-rishi-sunak-uk-politics-live

So no reciprocation needed after all?

So Starmer wants us to become the only country in Europe that allows non nationals to vote in the national elections (excepting the reciprocal arrangments we have with Ireland). Specifically those he thinks are most likely to vote for him and his policies.

I have said up until now that I don't fear a Labour Government. This blatant attempt at vte rigging is enough to change that view.

It is by no means obvious that EU nationals working here would vote Labour, but it is hard to see why Starmer is raising this now (or a couple of days ago when we last discussed it).

On 16- and 17-year-olds, George Osborne advocated that extension of the franchise. I'm not sure it is a party political matter.

I disagree with the reduction in the age of voting but that is more of a philosophical argument and one we have been discussing over the last few days.

But extending the franchise to non citizens - something no other country in Europe does - is simply wrong and is clearly an attempt to sway the votes in favour of those parties and issues Starmer has sympathy with. It is vote rigging at its most blatant. If people want to vote on the future of this country then they can become British citizens

Apart from historical anomalies, why would any country allow non-citizens the vote?

If you want to vote, then take citizenship, in the UK there’s a clear application process available to long-term residents.

Indeed. Nor is it particularly arduous as a process. In the last 2 years I have acted as referee for 4 people to take British citizenship - 2 Vietnamese, a Pole and a Venezuelan. All had good English language skills which made it easier but it was a relatively straight forward process for them.

It costs over £1000 to apply. A lot of people don't have that kind of money lying around.

1000 quid to vote in a general election is a lot. Most people wouldn't pay it.

And there are many countries that don't allow dual citizenship. If you have all the rights of permanent residency in the UK, it is difficult to give up the citizenship of the country you are from, where you may still have family that you might conceivably need to take care of at some point for example, just in order to secure a vote in a general election.

Especially with the uncertainty around Brexit. If someone takes up a UK passport and has to relinquish their old one, are they going to need a visa to visit family, etc?
Plenty of reasons why someone might make this their permanent home but want for pragmatic reasons to not have the expense and hassle of changing their citizenship permanently. To exclude those people who are living stable, ordinary British lives just because of their passport is a policy borne of paranoia.

I think changing the franchise should be done by consensus if at all possible. And I'm not convinced that extending voting at the national level to non-citizens is a good idea, and it's probably a vote-loser.

But I don't think it's accurate to say becoming a British citizen is easy for everyone who is a long-term resident. It costs 1330 GPP to apply! Shouldn't the UK be encouraging long-term residents to become citizens, instead of applying punitive application fees?

I agree, the citizenship pub quiz is quite bonkers and the fees excessive. 5 years residence with no criminal convictions should be enough, alongside a fairly nominal fee.

The fees are excessive but the tests are a very good idea.

Norway has extensive language and culture tests for prospective citizens. Indeed for anyone who wants permanent residence. When I was there it was 200 hours of compulsory language and culture lessons which I believe is now increased to 300 hours. This seems to me to be a very sensible thing to avoid isolation and ghettoisation.

The test, though, contains a lot that is wank: It's all our duty to look after the environment, for example.

And a lot that is absurdly specific (like the questions on dog ownership).

Or which (like the Boer Wars) is not likely to help you assimilate.

Sandpit

Nigelb said:

An interesting extension of the free speech argument.

Abbott knocks Dominion over Tucker Carlson’s departure from Fox News
https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/4003679-abbott-knocks-dominion-over-tucker-carlsons-departure-from-fox-news/
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) bashed Dominion Voting Systems over the departure of Tucker Carlson from Fox News, following a report that the popular conservative primetime host was fired from the network as part of its settlement with the voting software company.
Carlson was told by a member of the network’s board of directors that he was taken off the air as part of the Fox News settlement with Dominion, according to Axios, which cited unidentified sources briefed on the conversations. Abbott said if the reporting was true, then he is “happy that Dominion does not operate in Texas.”
“We may disagree with other’s positions, but we should never try to improperly silence views contrary to our own,” Abbott said on Twitter on Saturday. “If Dominion wants to do business with Texas in the future, they should first answer questions about what role, if any, they played in silencing a prominent conservative journalist.”
A Fox News spokesperson in a statement to Axios said that the idea that Carlson was let go of as part of the settlement was “categorically false.” An attorney for Dominion also told the news outlet that it did not insist on Carlson being fired...

Tucker intends to subpoena every internal email and memo from both sides, with regard to the Fox/Dominion case, he’s convinced there was a quid pro quo to fire him as part of the settlement.

rcs1000

williamglenn said:

rcs1000 said:

Nigelb said:

Scott_xP said:

@jonsopel

Don’t want to go over the top, but this is absolutely jaw-dropping. Someone who was in the cabinet when legislation on voter ID was agreed and went through parliament acknowledges it WAS an attempt to gerrymander the elections

https://twitter.com/jonsopel/status/1658076536350601216

Said at the conference of loons.
Which appears to be taking some of its themes from the US right.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/15/low-birthrate-is-uk-top-priority-tory-mp-tells-rightwing-conference-miriam-cates
...The UK’s low birthrate is the most pressing policy issue of the generation and is caused in part by “cultural Marxism” stripping young people of any hope, a Conservative MP has argued at the start of a populist-tinged conference in London.

Addressing the National Conservatism gathering, run by a US-based thinktank, Miriam Cates said western countries faced an existential threat from falling reproduction..

How does she explain the fact that birth rates are low in all developed countries, whether you have a left wing or right wing government?

That's obvious. There aren't any right wing governments in the modern west.

Or the modern East? Or Russia?

rcs1000

StillWaters said:

rcs1000 said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Foxy said:

Some good news! Eating ice cream regularly protects against diabetes:

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2023/05/ice-cream-bad-for-you-health-study/673487/?utm_source=copy-link&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=share

It has the same sugar/fat ratio as breast milk, that is apparently why we like it. I have ice cream nearly every night, go me.

Technically, it's the same carbohydrates/fat ratio. Breast milk contains relatively little in the way of straight sugar: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5331577/#:~:text=Fructose, glucose, and lactose were,associated with infant body composition.

You’re nlt suggesting this is a pointless scam designed to part fools from their money?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Licktators

Reading that Wikipedia page, it does appear to be a pointless scam designed to part fools from their money.

And now I have that in my head for the day.

Thank you so much.

Scott_xP

bondegezou said:

Farooq said:

bondegezou said:

Farooq said:

bondegezou said:

Farooq said:

carnforth said:

Farooq said:

Sandpit said:

Ukranian President Zelensky in UK this lunchtime. Turned up at Chequers in an helicopter to meet the PM.

I've always had you down as something of a barbarian; using "an" in front of "helicopter" confirms it.

Maybe he doesn't pronounce the h

I think "an hereditary" is about the only defensible one these days. Most people drop the h there.

A hereditary
An hour
A helicopter
An honour
A hammer

An understanding
A unicorn

We submitted a paper recently that referred to… well, the draft said “a mpox case”, but I changed it to “an mpox case”. Agree?

Assuming that you pronounce "mpox" as "emm-poks", yes. I'd have made the same edit. It's all about the sound if you read it aloud. Personally I pronounce the "h" in hereditary too.

Yes, agreed.

My earlier proposal to pronounce “mpox” to rhyme with Hanson’s “MMMBop” did not go down well.

Well, that's finally pushed all the Eurovision songs out of my head. Now I'll be humming Hanson all day.

Mods, can we ban @bondegezou please?

In my defence, I very much enjoy Radiohead, particularly Kid A.

Definite ban then...

rcs1000

Sandpit said:

Nigelb said:

An interesting extension of the free speech argument.

Abbott knocks Dominion over Tucker Carlson’s departure from Fox News
https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/4003679-abbott-knocks-dominion-over-tucker-carlsons-departure-from-fox-news/
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) bashed Dominion Voting Systems over the departure of Tucker Carlson from Fox News, following a report that the popular conservative primetime host was fired from the network as part of its settlement with the voting software company.
Carlson was told by a member of the network’s board of directors that he was taken off the air as part of the Fox News settlement with Dominion, according to Axios, which cited unidentified sources briefed on the conversations. Abbott said if the reporting was true, then he is “happy that Dominion does not operate in Texas.”
“We may disagree with other’s positions, but we should never try to improperly silence views contrary to our own,” Abbott said on Twitter on Saturday. “If Dominion wants to do business with Texas in the future, they should first answer questions about what role, if any, they played in silencing a prominent conservative journalist.”
A Fox News spokesperson in a statement to Axios said that the idea that Carlson was let go of as part of the settlement was “categorically false.” An attorney for Dominion also told the news outlet that it did not insist on Carlson being fired...

Tucker intends to subpoena every internal email and memo from both sides, with regard to the Fox/Dominion case, he’s convinced there was a quid pro quo to fire him as part of the settlement.

Dominion (and specifically their PE owners) only care about making money. All they really want is an agreement from Fox to never question their voting machines integrity.

OnlyLivingBoy

Farooq said:

Nigelb said:

Scott_xP said:

@jonsopel

Don’t want to go over the top, but this is absolutely jaw-dropping. Someone who was in the cabinet when legislation on voter ID was agreed and went through parliament acknowledges it WAS an attempt to gerrymander the elections

https://twitter.com/jonsopel/status/1658076536350601216

Said at the conference of loons.
Which appears to be taking some of its themes from the US right.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/15/low-birthrate-is-uk-top-priority-tory-mp-tells-rightwing-conference-miriam-cates
...The UK’s low birthrate is the most pressing policy issue of the generation and is caused in part by “cultural Marxism” stripping young people of any hope, a Conservative MP has argued at the start of a populist-tinged conference in London.

Addressing the National Conservatism gathering, run by a US-based thinktank, Miriam Cates said western countries faced an existential threat from falling reproduction..

Weirdly, the birth rate in the USSR fell precipitously at the time that actual Marxism ended there.

I do wonder what this "cultural Marxism" is. Often people use that as code for "the Jews", but in this case I suspect not since Jews tend to have similar numbers of children as Christians.

Perhaps "cultural Marxism" is, in this case, a cipher for insecure accommodation and zero-hours contracts?

That's called capitalism.

Theuniondivvie

rcs1000 said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Foxy said:

Some good news! Eating ice cream regularly protects against diabetes:

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2023/05/ice-cream-bad-for-you-health-study/673487/?utm_source=copy-link&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=share

It has the same sugar/fat ratio as breast milk, that is apparently why we like it. I have ice cream nearly every night, go me.

Technically, it's the same carbohydrates/fat ratio. Breast milk contains relatively little in the way of straight sugar: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5331577/#:~:text=Fructose, glucose, and lactose were,associated with infant body composition.

Look, Luckyguy is allowed to justify being a tit man any way he needs to.
Can breast milk be turned into ice cream?

StillWaters

rcs1000 said:

Sandpit said:

Nigelb said:

An interesting extension of the free speech argument.

Abbott knocks Dominion over Tucker Carlson’s departure from Fox News
https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/4003679-abbott-knocks-dominion-over-tucker-carlsons-departure-from-fox-news/
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) bashed Dominion Voting Systems over the departure of Tucker Carlson from Fox News, following a report that the popular conservative primetime host was fired from the network as part of its settlement with the voting software company.
Carlson was told by a member of the network’s board of directors that he was taken off the air as part of the Fox News settlement with Dominion, according to Axios, which cited unidentified sources briefed on the conversations. Abbott said if the reporting was true, then he is “happy that Dominion does not operate in Texas.”
“We may disagree with other’s positions, but we should never try to improperly silence views contrary to our own,” Abbott said on Twitter on Saturday. “If Dominion wants to do business with Texas in the future, they should first answer questions about what role, if any, they played in silencing a prominent conservative journalist.”
A Fox News spokesperson in a statement to Axios said that the idea that Carlson was let go of as part of the settlement was “categorically false.” An attorney for Dominion also told the news outlet that it did not insist on Carlson being fired...

Tucker intends to subpoena every internal email and memo from both sides, with regard to the Fox/Dominion case, he’s convinced there was a quid pro quo to fire him as part of the settlement.

Dominion (and specifically their PE owners) only care about making money. All they really want is an agreement from Fox to never question their voting machines integrity.

You sure that $700m wasn’t something they quite liked as well?

bondegezou

rcs1000 said:

Sandpit said:

Nigelb said:

An interesting extension of the free speech argument.

Abbott knocks Dominion over Tucker Carlson’s departure from Fox News
https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/4003679-abbott-knocks-dominion-over-tucker-carlsons-departure-from-fox-news/
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) bashed Dominion Voting Systems over the departure of Tucker Carlson from Fox News, following a report that the popular conservative primetime host was fired from the network as part of its settlement with the voting software company.
Carlson was told by a member of the network’s board of directors that he was taken off the air as part of the Fox News settlement with Dominion, according to Axios, which cited unidentified sources briefed on the conversations. Abbott said if the reporting was true, then he is “happy that Dominion does not operate in Texas.”
“We may disagree with other’s positions, but we should never try to improperly silence views contrary to our own,” Abbott said on Twitter on Saturday. “If Dominion wants to do business with Texas in the future, they should first answer questions about what role, if any, they played in silencing a prominent conservative journalist.”
A Fox News spokesperson in a statement to Axios said that the idea that Carlson was let go of as part of the settlement was “categorically false.” An attorney for Dominion also told the news outlet that it did not insist on Carlson being fired...

Tucker intends to subpoena every internal email and memo from both sides, with regard to the Fox/Dominion case, he’s convinced there was a quid pro quo to fire him as part of the settlement.

Dominion (and specifically their PE owners) only care about making money. All they really want is an agreement from Fox to never question their voting machines integrity.

I wondered if their brand is (entirely unjustly) so permanently tainted by events that all they really want now is (quite deservedly) money.

NickPalmer

HYUFD said:

GIN1138 said:

I wondered whether news that Boris has brought a house in Oxford could be a sign he's expecting to lose Uxbridge and South Ruislip either after being recalled following the Commons Privileges committee report or at Election 24 - And is eyeing up a nice, safe Conservative seat in rural Oxfordshire?

Quite possibly. Uxbridge is in the top 100 Labour target seats and will almost certainly go Labour on current polls.

However Henley is not ultra safe Tory now either, on May 4th. Indeed the LDs won a landslide victory in South Oxfordshire on 4th May winning 21 seats while the Tories collapsed to just 1 councillor.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2023/england/councils/E07000179

Even somewhere like Walsall or Dudley or Basildon or Dartford where the Tories held control of the council this month would be safer for Boris now than Henley (albeit less posh and glamorous)

A friend lives in Brightwell (the Oxfordshire village where Boris is heading) and says there are indeed extensive preparations being made, not least a police car that drives up and down all day - inevitable, I suppose. The culture of the area is very LibDem - prosperous, nice, well-educated and socially liberal. Not naturally populist, as HYUFD says - don't know if Henley is different,

rcs1000

StillWaters said:

rcs1000 said:

Sandpit said:

Nigelb said:

An interesting extension of the free speech argument.

Abbott knocks Dominion over Tucker Carlson’s departure from Fox News
https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/4003679-abbott-knocks-dominion-over-tucker-carlsons-departure-from-fox-news/
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) bashed Dominion Voting Systems over the departure of Tucker Carlson from Fox News, following a report that the popular conservative primetime host was fired from the network as part of its settlement with the voting software company.
Carlson was told by a member of the network’s board of directors that he was taken off the air as part of the Fox News settlement with Dominion, according to Axios, which cited unidentified sources briefed on the conversations. Abbott said if the reporting was true, then he is “happy that Dominion does not operate in Texas.”
“We may disagree with other’s positions, but we should never try to improperly silence views contrary to our own,” Abbott said on Twitter on Saturday. “If Dominion wants to do business with Texas in the future, they should first answer questions about what role, if any, they played in silencing a prominent conservative journalist.”
A Fox News spokesperson in a statement to Axios said that the idea that Carlson was let go of as part of the settlement was “categorically false.” An attorney for Dominion also told the news outlet that it did not insist on Carlson being fired...

Tucker intends to subpoena every internal email and memo from both sides, with regard to the Fox/Dominion case, he’s convinced there was a quid pro quo to fire him as part of the settlement.

Dominion (and specifically their PE owners) only care about making money. All they really want is an agreement from Fox to never question their voting machines integrity.

You sure that $700m wasn’t something they quite liked as well?

Sorry, I should have said "in addition to the $700m, all they really want is..."

It would be interesting to discover at what price PE got into Dominion.

Cookie

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Farooq said:

Nigelb said:

Scott_xP said:

@jonsopel

Don’t want to go over the top, but this is absolutely jaw-dropping. Someone who was in the cabinet when legislation on voter ID was agreed and went through parliament acknowledges it WAS an attempt to gerrymander the elections

https://twitter.com/jonsopel/status/1658076536350601216

Said at the conference of loons.
Which appears to be taking some of its themes from the US right.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/15/low-birthrate-is-uk-top-priority-tory-mp-tells-rightwing-conference-miriam-cates
...The UK’s low birthrate is the most pressing policy issue of the generation and is caused in part by “cultural Marxism” stripping young people of any hope, a Conservative MP has argued at the start of a populist-tinged conference in London.

Addressing the National Conservatism gathering, run by a US-based thinktank, Miriam Cates said western countries faced an existential threat from falling reproduction..

Weirdly, the birth rate in the USSR fell precipitously at the time that actual Marxism ended there.

I do wonder what this "cultural Marxism" is. Often people use that as code for "the Jews", but in this case I suspect not since Jews tend to have similar numbers of children as Christians.

Perhaps "cultural Marxism" is, in this case, a cipher for insecure accommodation and zero-hours contracts?

That's called capitalism.

Cultural Marxism tends to be a synonym for wokery.

And there are few more keen to lay the evils of the world at the door of cultural Marxism and/or wokery than me.

But I don't think we can pin it specifically for falling birthrates. There are many, many reasons but I'd say #1 of them is the difficulty the breeding-age cohort have in owning a house.

Sandpit

rcs1000 said:

Sandpit said:

Nigelb said:

An interesting extension of the free speech argument.

Abbott knocks Dominion over Tucker Carlson’s departure from Fox News
https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/4003679-abbott-knocks-dominion-over-tucker-carlsons-departure-from-fox-news/
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) bashed Dominion Voting Systems over the departure of Tucker Carlson from Fox News, following a report that the popular conservative primetime host was fired from the network as part of its settlement with the voting software company.
Carlson was told by a member of the network’s board of directors that he was taken off the air as part of the Fox News settlement with Dominion, according to Axios, which cited unidentified sources briefed on the conversations. Abbott said if the reporting was true, then he is “happy that Dominion does not operate in Texas.”
“We may disagree with other’s positions, but we should never try to improperly silence views contrary to our own,” Abbott said on Twitter on Saturday. “If Dominion wants to do business with Texas in the future, they should first answer questions about what role, if any, they played in silencing a prominent conservative journalist.”
A Fox News spokesperson in a statement to Axios said that the idea that Carlson was let go of as part of the settlement was “categorically false.” An attorney for Dominion also told the news outlet that it did not insist on Carlson being fired...

Tucker intends to subpoena every internal email and memo from both sides, with regard to the Fox/Dominion case, he’s convinced there was a quid pro quo to fire him as part of the settlement.

Dominion (and specifically their PE owners) only care about making money. All they really want is an agreement from Fox to never question their voting machines integrity.

Of course. But Tucker is hoping to find an email somewhere, that says, or at least alludes, to him being fired as part of the settlement.

He has a contract with Fox until the end of 2024, and they appear to be intending to throw lawyers at keeping him silent until after the election.

The one thing he has, is his own Twitter account, and now it looks like Twitter is about to fast-track their video offering to get him as a platform exclusive.

OnlyLivingBoy

Nigelb said:

Scott_xP said:

@jonsopel

Don’t want to go over the top, but this is absolutely jaw-dropping. Someone who was in the cabinet when legislation on voter ID was agreed and went through parliament acknowledges it WAS an attempt to gerrymander the elections

https://twitter.com/jonsopel/status/1658076536350601216

Said at the conference of loons.
Which appears to be taking some of its themes from the US right.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/15/low-birthrate-is-uk-top-priority-tory-mp-tells-rightwing-conference-miriam-cates
...The UK’s low birthrate is the most pressing policy issue of the generation and is caused in part by “cultural Marxism” stripping young people of any hope, a Conservative MP has argued at the start of a populist-tinged conference in London.

Addressing the National Conservatism gathering, run by a US-based thinktank, Miriam Cates said western countries faced an existential threat from falling reproduction..

The whole purpose of this well funded conference is to import the craziness of the US right into UK politics. See also recent attempts to rig the franchise (which a former Tory cabinet minister has admitted was gerrymandering). The Tories are utterly toxic now.

OnlyLivingBoy

Cookie said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Farooq said:

Nigelb said:

Scott_xP said:

@jonsopel

Don’t want to go over the top, but this is absolutely jaw-dropping. Someone who was in the cabinet when legislation on voter ID was agreed and went through parliament acknowledges it WAS an attempt to gerrymander the elections

https://twitter.com/jonsopel/status/1658076536350601216

Said at the conference of loons.
Which appears to be taking some of its themes from the US right.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/15/low-birthrate-is-uk-top-priority-tory-mp-tells-rightwing-conference-miriam-cates
...The UK’s low birthrate is the most pressing policy issue of the generation and is caused in part by “cultural Marxism” stripping young people of any hope, a Conservative MP has argued at the start of a populist-tinged conference in London.

Addressing the National Conservatism gathering, run by a US-based thinktank, Miriam Cates said western countries faced an existential threat from falling reproduction..

Weirdly, the birth rate in the USSR fell precipitously at the time that actual Marxism ended there.

I do wonder what this "cultural Marxism" is. Often people use that as code for "the Jews", but in this case I suspect not since Jews tend to have similar numbers of children as Christians.

Perhaps "cultural Marxism" is, in this case, a cipher for insecure accommodation and zero-hours contracts?

That's called capitalism.

Cultural Marxism tends to be a synonym for wokery.

And there are few more keen to lay the evils of the world at the door of cultural Marxism and/or wokery than me.

But I don't think we can pin it specifically for falling birthrates. There are many, many reasons but I'd say #1 of them is the difficulty the breeding-age cohort have in owning a house.

Of course it is.
You can call out wokery if that's your bag but I'd be wary of throwing around terms like "cultural Marxism" which have a very nasty pedigree.

StillWaters

rcs1000 said:

StillWaters said:

rcs1000 said:

Sandpit said:

Nigelb said:

An interesting extension of the free speech argument.

Abbott knocks Dominion over Tucker Carlson’s departure from Fox News
https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/4003679-abbott-knocks-dominion-over-tucker-carlsons-departure-from-fox-news/
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) bashed Dominion Voting Systems over the departure of Tucker Carlson from Fox News, following a report that the popular conservative primetime host was fired from the network as part of its settlement with the voting software company.
Carlson was told by a member of the network’s board of directors that he was taken off the air as part of the Fox News settlement with Dominion, according to Axios, which cited unidentified sources briefed on the conversations. Abbott said if the reporting was true, then he is “happy that Dominion does not operate in Texas.”
“We may disagree with other’s positions, but we should never try to improperly silence views contrary to our own,” Abbott said on Twitter on Saturday. “If Dominion wants to do business with Texas in the future, they should first answer questions about what role, if any, they played in silencing a prominent conservative journalist.”
A Fox News spokesperson in a statement to Axios said that the idea that Carlson was let go of as part of the settlement was “categorically false.” An attorney for Dominion also told the news outlet that it did not insist on Carlson being fired...

Tucker intends to subpoena every internal email and memo from both sides, with regard to the Fox/Dominion case, he’s convinced there was a quid pro quo to fire him as part of the settlement.

Dominion (and specifically their PE owners) only care about making money. All they really want is an agreement from Fox to never question their voting machines integrity.

You sure that $700m wasn’t something they quite liked as well?

Sorry, I should have said "in addition to the $700m, all they really want is..."

It would be interesting to discover at what price PE got into Dominion.

$38m for a 76% stake

Almost as good as Denis Ribon buying 90% of PolyPlus for $10m and then selling it 6 years later for $2.7bn

Theuniondivvie

Cookie said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Farooq said:

Nigelb said:

Scott_xP said:

@jonsopel

Don’t want to go over the top, but this is absolutely jaw-dropping. Someone who was in the cabinet when legislation on voter ID was agreed and went through parliament acknowledges it WAS an attempt to gerrymander the elections

https://twitter.com/jonsopel/status/1658076536350601216

Said at the conference of loons.
Which appears to be taking some of its themes from the US right.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/15/low-birthrate-is-uk-top-priority-tory-mp-tells-rightwing-conference-miriam-cates
...The UK’s low birthrate is the most pressing policy issue of the generation and is caused in part by “cultural Marxism” stripping young people of any hope, a Conservative MP has argued at the start of a populist-tinged conference in London.

Addressing the National Conservatism gathering, run by a US-based thinktank, Miriam Cates said western countries faced an existential threat from falling reproduction..

Weirdly, the birth rate in the USSR fell precipitously at the time that actual Marxism ended there.

I do wonder what this "cultural Marxism" is. Often people use that as code for "the Jews", but in this case I suspect not since Jews tend to have similar numbers of children as Christians.

Perhaps "cultural Marxism" is, in this case, a cipher for insecure accommodation and zero-hours contracts?

That's called capitalism.

Cultural Marxism tends to be a synonym for wokery.

And there are few more keen to lay the evils of the world at the door of cultural Marxism and/or wokery than me.

But I don't think we can pin it specifically for falling birthrates. There are many, many reasons but I'd say #1 of them is the difficulty the breeding-age cohort have in owning a house.

Could the fetishising of owning property and the resultant vastly inflated housing market be described as cultural captalism, and therefore..

bondegezou

NickPalmer said:

HYUFD said:

GIN1138 said:

I wondered whether news that Boris has brought a house in Oxford could be a sign he's expecting to lose Uxbridge and South Ruislip either after being recalled following the Commons Privileges committee report or at Election 24 - And is eyeing up a nice, safe Conservative seat in rural Oxfordshire?

Quite possibly. Uxbridge is in the top 100 Labour target seats and will almost certainly go Labour on current polls.

However Henley is not ultra safe Tory now either, on May 4th. Indeed the LDs won a landslide victory in South Oxfordshire on 4th May winning 21 seats while the Tories collapsed to just 1 councillor.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2023/england/councils/E07000179

Even somewhere like Walsall or Dudley or Basildon or Dartford where the Tories held control of the council this month would be safer for Boris now than Henley (albeit less posh and glamorous)

A friend lives in Brightwell (the Oxfordshire village where Boris is heading) and says there are indeed extensive preparations being made, not least a police car that drives up and down all day - inevitable, I suppose. The culture of the area is very LibDem - prosperous, nice, well-educated and socially liberal. Not naturally populist, as HYUFD says - don't know if Henley is different,

https://youtu.be/tiRuNuFrFLU <- go to 27:15 in that video for an anecdote about living in proximity to the Johnsons, told by Trevor Horn on stage during a recent Buggles show.

HYUFD

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Nigelb said:

Scott_xP said:

@jonsopel

Don’t want to go over the top, but this is absolutely jaw-dropping. Someone who was in the cabinet when legislation on voter ID was agreed and went through parliament acknowledges it WAS an attempt to gerrymander the elections

https://twitter.com/jonsopel/status/1658076536350601216

Said at the conference of loons.
Which appears to be taking some of its themes from the US right.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/15/low-birthrate-is-uk-top-priority-tory-mp-tells-rightwing-conference-miriam-cates
...The UK’s low birthrate is the most pressing policy issue of the generation and is caused in part by “cultural Marxism” stripping young people of any hope, a Conservative MP has argued at the start of a populist-tinged conference in London.

Addressing the National Conservatism gathering, run by a US-based thinktank, Miriam Cates said western countries faced an existential threat from falling reproduction..

The whole purpose of this well funded conference is to import the craziness of the US right into UK politics. See also recent attempts to rig the franchise (which a former Tory cabinet minister has admitted was gerrymandering). The Tories are utterly toxic now.

No, the falling birthrate in most western nations, now well below 2.1 replacement level in all but a few exceptions like France will in turn lead to increasingly ageing populations. That means fewer workers, later retirement ages and less tax revenue and more health and social care costs. The decline in the family also reduces the strength of communities and personal networks and increases mental health problems too as more people are single, lonely and isolated. Now many single people live active lives and are engaged in their communities but a lot are not and have less of a family network now too

rcs1000

Sandpit said:

rcs1000 said:

Sandpit said:

Nigelb said:

An interesting extension of the free speech argument.

Abbott knocks Dominion over Tucker Carlson’s departure from Fox News
https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/4003679-abbott-knocks-dominion-over-tucker-carlsons-departure-from-fox-news/
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) bashed Dominion Voting Systems over the departure of Tucker Carlson from Fox News, following a report that the popular conservative primetime host was fired from the network as part of its settlement with the voting software company.
Carlson was told by a member of the network’s board of directors that he was taken off the air as part of the Fox News settlement with Dominion, according to Axios, which cited unidentified sources briefed on the conversations. Abbott said if the reporting was true, then he is “happy that Dominion does not operate in Texas.”
“We may disagree with other’s positions, but we should never try to improperly silence views contrary to our own,” Abbott said on Twitter on Saturday. “If Dominion wants to do business with Texas in the future, they should first answer questions about what role, if any, they played in silencing a prominent conservative journalist.”
A Fox News spokesperson in a statement to Axios said that the idea that Carlson was let go of as part of the settlement was “categorically false.” An attorney for Dominion also told the news outlet that it did not insist on Carlson being fired...

Tucker intends to subpoena every internal email and memo from both sides, with regard to the Fox/Dominion case, he’s convinced there was a quid pro quo to fire him as part of the settlement.

Dominion (and specifically their PE owners) only care about making money. All they really want is an agreement from Fox to never question their voting machines integrity.

Of course. But Tucker is hoping to find an email somewhere, that says, or at least alludes, to him being fired as part of the settlement.

He has a contract with Fox until the end of 2024, and they appear to be intending to throw lawyers at keeping him silent until after the election.

The one thing he has, is his own Twitter account, and now it looks like Twitter is about to fast-track their video offering to get him as a platform exclusive.

It will be interesting to see if Tucker is able to make Twitter work.

My guess, for what it's worth, is that Tucker could build a great business on YouTube.

But Twitter will be a much harder proposition for two reasons:

(1) Twitter knows shit about its users, and therefore makes bugger all off advertising to them. (And Musk fired the team responsible for entering into partnerships with other sites to increase their visibility into their users.)

(2) Twitter isn't on any smart TVs. It's perfectly possible for Tucker's customer base to hit the button on their TV and play YouTube videos. It's much harder (if at all possible) for him to do that with Twitter.

Scott_xP

I suppose the big question about BoZo's new house is whether Carrie gets it in the divorce...

Sandpit

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Nigelb said:

Scott_xP said:

@jonsopel

Don’t want to go over the top, but this is absolutely jaw-dropping. Someone who was in the cabinet when legislation on voter ID was agreed and went through parliament acknowledges it WAS an attempt to gerrymander the elections

https://twitter.com/jonsopel/status/1658076536350601216

Said at the conference of loons.
Which appears to be taking some of its themes from the US right.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/15/low-birthrate-is-uk-top-priority-tory-mp-tells-rightwing-conference-miriam-cates
...The UK’s low birthrate is the most pressing policy issue of the generation and is caused in part by “cultural Marxism” stripping young people of any hope, a Conservative MP has argued at the start of a populist-tinged conference in London.

Addressing the National Conservatism gathering, run by a US-based thinktank, Miriam Cates said western countries faced an existential threat from falling reproduction..

The whole purpose of this well funded conference is to import the craziness of the US right into UK politics. See also recent attempts to rig the franchise (which a former Tory cabinet minister has admitted was gerrymandering). The Tories are utterly toxic now.

Nearly as toxic as Starmer wanting to extend the franchise to children and foreigners. What next, let’s just let anyone in the UK on holiday vote in the election?

I say this only slightly in jest, but am quite confident of a serious backlash against the proposals in polling.

Ghedebrav

Andy_JS said:

Why did the commentariat get the Turkish election wrong?

It's interesting - though from what I read, which neither exhaustive nor representative, I got the impression that it was more that Erdogan had a chance of losing, rather than a nailed on opposition win. My guess is that the overseas ballots will nudge him over the line and there won't be a runoff, but IANAE (at all).

rcs1000

HYUFD said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Nigelb said:

Scott_xP said:

@jonsopel

Don’t want to go over the top, but this is absolutely jaw-dropping. Someone who was in the cabinet when legislation on voter ID was agreed and went through parliament acknowledges it WAS an attempt to gerrymander the elections

https://twitter.com/jonsopel/status/1658076536350601216

Said at the conference of loons.
Which appears to be taking some of its themes from the US right.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/15/low-birthrate-is-uk-top-priority-tory-mp-tells-rightwing-conference-miriam-cates
...The UK’s low birthrate is the most pressing policy issue of the generation and is caused in part by “cultural Marxism” stripping young people of any hope, a Conservative MP has argued at the start of a populist-tinged conference in London.

Addressing the National Conservatism gathering, run by a US-based thinktank, Miriam Cates said western countries faced an existential threat from falling reproduction..

The whole purpose of this well funded conference is to import the craziness of the US right into UK politics. See also recent attempts to rig the franchise (which a former Tory cabinet minister has admitted was gerrymandering). The Tories are utterly toxic now.

No, the falling birthrate in most western nations, now well below 2.1 replacement level in all but a few exceptions like France will in turn lead to increasingly ageing populations. That means fewer workers, later retirement ages and less tax revenue and more health and social care costs. The decline in the family also reduces the strength of communities and personal networks and increases mental health problems too as more people are single, lonely and isolated

And most non-Western nations: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_dependencies_by_total_fertility_rate

The world as a whole is only just above replacement (2.3-2.4). And even countries like Bangladesh are now below replacement.

HYUFD

Cookie said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Farooq said:

Nigelb said:

Scott_xP said:

@jonsopel

Don’t want to go over the top, but this is absolutely jaw-dropping. Someone who was in the cabinet when legislation on voter ID was agreed and went through parliament acknowledges it WAS an attempt to gerrymander the elections

https://twitter.com/jonsopel/status/1658076536350601216

Said at the conference of loons.
Which appears to be taking some of its themes from the US right.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/15/low-birthrate-is-uk-top-priority-tory-mp-tells-rightwing-conference-miriam-cates
...The UK’s low birthrate is the most pressing policy issue of the generation and is caused in part by “cultural Marxism” stripping young people of any hope, a Conservative MP has argued at the start of a populist-tinged conference in London.

Addressing the National Conservatism gathering, run by a US-based thinktank, Miriam Cates said western countries faced an existential threat from falling reproduction..

Weirdly, the birth rate in the USSR fell precipitously at the time that actual Marxism ended there.

I do wonder what this "cultural Marxism" is. Often people use that as code for "the Jews", but in this case I suspect not since Jews tend to have similar numbers of children as Christians.

Perhaps "cultural Marxism" is, in this case, a cipher for insecure accommodation and zero-hours contracts?

That's called capitalism.

Cultural Marxism tends to be a synonym for wokery.

And there are few more keen to lay the evils of the world at the door of cultural Marxism and/or wokery than me.

But I don't think we can pin it specifically for falling birthrates. There are many, many reasons but I'd say #1 of them is the difficulty the breeding-age cohort have in owning a house.

In part yes, we need more new affordable homes and to defy NIMBYs. However the decline in religion amongst under 50s, certainly white British under 50s as well as declining marriage rates and lack of tax support for stay at home mums are also issues plus student debt

StillWaters

It’s funny how JRM is no longer seen as a lying toerag now that he says something that is useful to his former accusers