This National Conservatism Conference really is something else. If there's a concern that we import wokeness from the USA, there should be much more concern about this importation of US-funded evangelical right-wing nuttiness and, in particular, the appearance of several leading Tory MPs. I note, for example, that Wiki says Miriam Cates is an evangelical Christian. Is it the British Tea Party movement?
If anybody's interested, I came across this article by John Hayes on Conservative Home. Scary stuff, I think. Even the Tory commenters mostly seem to think he's as mad as a box of frogs.
Rees-Mogg's confession is fairly meaningless. Every person with a working brain who considered the evidence was perfectly well aware that the Voter IDs were introduced in an attempt to suppress legitimate votes in the interests of the Govt.
It half-succeeded. 1.2% were turned away and did not return.
It half-failed. Many of the voters turned away were Con loyalists. That is certainly true of both people I know that were unable to vote.
MORAL - Just because the Con party fails to do something doesn't mean they weren't trying to. In fact given their basic level of stupidlty and incompetence at the highest level it may just be proof that they were!
Foul creatures. They're not in the slightest bit bothered about rigging elections. What troubles them is that they think they did it so incompetently that the rigging attempt ended up benefiting their opponents.
Astonishing that no one realised before it was too late.
I wouldn't be surprised if the rigging scheme actually DID have the desired effect, and Rees-Mogg is relying on misinformation through anecdata to draw his conclusions.
I'm sure I read and posted some other research on this a couple of weeks back which suggested that the rigging scheme was likely to disproportionately affect low income voters who were more likely to back Labour. Tories who think it backfired may be forming that opinion through hearing the complaints of small numbers of wealthy older people - the population segment that accounts for the bulk of their party membership, and the only group (save for the very rich) that they either listen to or care about.
The problem is lots of wealthy older people voted LD or Independent at the local elections in protest at new housing plans in their Tory controlled local authority areas, especially in the South, as did many richer voters more generally. Even if those voters come back to the Tories at the general election to try and keep Labour out of No 10 and their taxes and immigration down.
In fact skilled white working class voters were the most likely to vote Tory on May 4th, indeed the few councils the Tories held then like Dartford, Harlow, Braintree, Basildon, Walsall and Dudley were filled with such voters. However the ID requirement would have made them much less likely to vote, while Nimby OAPs protest voting LD or Residents were not affected as they mainly voted by post.
So Jacob is right, what might have been a 'cunning plan' by the Tories for the general election, ended up a Baldrick style 'cunning plan' disaster at the local elections as they lost control of councils across the Home Counties especially and over 1000 Tory councillors were gone
“in protest at new housing plans in their Tory controlled local authority areas”
Isn’t the Conservative MPs upset the government don’t have house building plans, they will lose their seats because Labour are the only party intent to build homes for people to buy?
They are not going to hold their seats in 2024 with their council promising to build new homes over a 10-15 year period, indeed such proposals have already seen lots of Tory councils go LD or NOC or Independent due to NIMBY revolt. There are no votes in housebuilding until the new new homes and flats are actually built and the grateful new property owners move in
Tory governments been strangling house building for a very long time as the Guardian claim? Does this push up the rents everyone is upset about and allow Tory MPs to say no more immigration or asylum because there’s no houses or hotels left to put people in?
The truth is a lot of experienced and senior Tories really don’t like Sunak’s decision to stop building homes and think it’s a big vote loser don’t they?
"Would Cyclefree have written this article if it were a transgender writer being "discriminated against"?"
And the answer is yes. Because I did write such an article, based on that very assumption, from which my header was an excerpt. See here - https://www.cyclefree.co.uk/whose-free-speech/.
I think there is much wisdom in this saying of JS Mill - "He who knows only his side of the case knows little of that."
Though @El_Capitano does raise a very interesting question about whether beliefs should be protected at all. There is an argument that they should not be because they are choices we make, not immutable characteristics we cannot change. But if we accept that premise then why should things like marriage, pregnancy and other characteristics over which we have choices be protected?I doubt anyone will go there but it does show that the basis for arguing that discrimination is a bad thing is not consistent and not necessarily based on any very coherent principles.
Mogg's claim that the voter ID requirement helped Labour in the locals is utterly at odds with the facts. Survation's poll of 24th to 28th April found that 5.8% of those intending to vote Labour in the locals did not possess a suitable form of ID. Likewise 5.1% of Greens. Compared to only 2.4% of Conservatives and 1.3% of Lib Dems. It was a significant and successful attempt to suppress the Labour vote.
So does he really believe his own claim? Or does he have an ulterior motive, if so what on earth is it?
Still, in terms of an admission of guilt it's very good of him to let the cat out of the bag.
Gerrymander = manipulation of GEOGRAPHIC boundaries (for example, legislative districts) for electoral advantage.
This has been American definition of the word, invented in USA and named after an American politico for his contribution to the practice, for over 200 hundred years.
WHY our British cousins have decided to expand meaning of gerrymander, to include (it seems) ANY manipulation of electoral process, is beyond me.
Do any of you have a clue?
My guess is quasi-ignorance combined with unalloyed laziness; that is, mis-users have heard of the word, but NOT what it actually means - and haven't bothered to find out.
Or...words change their meaning over time and space via a number of different mechanisms including ignorance, common misuse, parody, adjacency of meaning, contextual changes. The effect can go so far as to invert sense.
It's interesting how often people rail against these changes though. It is usually a hiding to nothing.
I'm all for remembering the history of usage and etymology though.
In case of gerrymander, hard (for me) to see what's positive about muddying up the meaning, to mean anything that the speaker WANTS it to mean?
Reserve it for geographical fiddling, I say! AND note I'm the 21st-century Funk & Wagnalls . . .
Commonwealth used to mean "republic" (or an approximation at least!). Now it means the "former British Empire".
The British Empire was so terrible that almost all its former colonies are members, other countries are queuing up to join-it and all seem quite happy for the British monarch to head it, for to use English as its language, and for it to be headquartered in London.
Rees-Mogg's confession is fairly meaningless. Every person with a working brain who considered the evidence was perfectly well aware that the Voter IDs were introduced in an attempt to suppress legitimate votes in the interests of the Govt.
It half-succeeded. 1.2% were turned away and did not return.
It half-failed. Many of the voters turned away were Con loyalists. That is certainly true of both people I know that were unable to vote.
MORAL - Just because the Con party fails to do something doesn't mean they weren't trying to. In fact given their basic level of stupidlty and incompetence at the highest level it may just be proof that they were!
The reverse is also true. Just because something is done for the wrong motives, it doesn't mean it's the wrong thing to do.
Gerrymander = manipulation of GEOGRAPHIC boundaries (for example, legislative districts) for electoral advantage.
This has been American definition of the word, invented in USA and named after an American politico for his contribution to the practice, for over 200 hundred years.
WHY our British cousins have decided to expand meaning of gerrymander, to include (it seems) ANY manipulation of electoral process, is beyond me.
Do any of you have a clue?
My guess is quasi-ignorance combined with unalloyed laziness; that is, mis-users have heard of the word, but NOT what it actually means - and haven't bothered to find out.
Or...words change their meaning over time and space via a number of different mechanisms including ignorance, common misuse, parody, adjacency of meaning, contextual changes. The effect can go so far as to invert sense.
It's interesting how often people rail against these changes though. It is usually a hiding to nothing.
I'm all for remembering the history of usage and etymology though.
In case of gerrymander, hard (for me) to see what's positive about muddying up the meaning, to mean anything that the speaker WANTS it to mean?
Reserve it for geographical fiddling, I say! AND note I'm the 21st-century Funk & Wagnalls . . .
Commonwealth used to mean "republic" (or an approximation at least!). Now it means the "former British Empire".
Four US states are officially commonwealths: Virginia, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania and Kentucky.
As reflected in some official titles, for example "commonwealth attorney".
Virginia is interesting in that it's nickname is "the Old Dominion" in honor of it's (quasi-) loyalty to King Charles II before he was restored to the English throne.
(At least that's explanation I've always heard, note wikipedia says otherwise, but think it is wrong in this instance.)
So in VA they've got both Cavaliers AND Roundheads covered.
Foul creatures. They're not in the slightest bit bothered about rigging elections. What troubles them is that they think they did it so incompetently that the rigging attempt ended up benefiting their opponents.
Astonishing that no one realised before it was too late.
I wouldn't be surprised if the rigging scheme actually DID have the desired effect, and Rees-Mogg is relying on misinformation through anecdata to draw his conclusions.
I'm sure I read and posted some other research on this a couple of weeks back which suggested that the rigging scheme was likely to disproportionately affect low income voters who were more likely to back Labour. Tories who think it backfired may be forming that opinion through hearing the complaints of small numbers of wealthy older people - the population segment that accounts for the bulk of their party membership, and the only group (save for the very rich) that they either listen to or care about.
The problem is lots of wealthy older people voted LD or Independent at the local elections in protest at new housing plans in their Tory controlled local authority areas, especially in the South, as did many richer voters more generally. Even if those voters come back to the Tories at the general election to try and keep Labour out of No 10 and their taxes and immigration down.
In fact skilled white working class voters were the most likely to vote Tory on May 4th, indeed the few councils the Tories held then like Dartford, Harlow, Braintree, Basildon, Walsall and Dudley were filled with such voters. However the ID requirement would have made them much less likely to vote, while Nimby OAPs protest voting LD or Residents were not affected as they mainly voted by post.
So Jacob is right, what might have been a 'cunning plan' by the Tories for the general election, ended up a Baldrick style 'cunning plan' disaster at the local elections as they lost control of councils across the Home Counties especially and over 1000 Tory councillors were gone
“in protest at new housing plans in their Tory controlled local authority areas”
Isn’t the Conservative MPs upset the government don’t have house building plans, they will lose their seats because Labour are the only party intent to build homes for people to buy?
They are not going to hold their seats in 2024 with their council promising to build new homes over a 10-15 year period, indeed such proposals have already seen lots of Tory councils go LD or NOC or Independent due to NIMBY revolt. There are no votes in housebuilding until the new new homes and flats are actually built and the grateful new property owners move in
Tory governments been strangling house building for a very long time as the Guardian claim? Does this push up the rents everyone is upset about and allow Tory MPs to say no more immigration or asylum because there’s no houses or hotels left to put people in?
The truth is a lot of experienced and senior Tories really don’t like Sunak’s decision to stop building homes and think it’s a big vote loser don’t they?
Gerrymander = manipulation of GEOGRAPHIC boundaries (for example, legislative districts) for electoral advantage.
This has been American definition of the word, invented in USA and named after an American politico for his contribution to the practice, for over 200 hundred years.
WHY our British cousins have decided to expand meaning of gerrymander, to include (it seems) ANY manipulation of electoral process, is beyond me.
Do any of you have a clue?
My guess is quasi-ignorance combined with unalloyed laziness; that is, mis-users have heard of the word, but NOT what it actually means - and haven't bothered to find out.
"Voter suppression" is the correct term, and it is exactly that. Another US import.
Yes, but it's something else that hasn't translated well across the Pond.
US Republicans are savvy enough not to suppress their own voters.
Leicester fans singing God Save The King and getting drowned out by the Liverpool fans singing Liverpool.
Don't the rest of us plebs need saving? Stupid so-called "national" "anthem"!
All Liverpool fans are an unpatriotic disgrace. Being shown up in manners by Leicester.
This will obviously be ten nil to Liverpool on the pitch.
Is the main reason Leicester went down the owners wealth comes from duty free shops in airports, and they had a bad pandemic? Contributing factors over long expensive contracts, and money wasted in players not in first team games?
We should sack every Royal Mail employee and give the contract to DPD, they know how to deliver.
They also charge appropriately for it -- they're IME one of the better courier firms doing domestic deliveries, but they're also more expensive than a lot of the others, who satisfy the large "gotta be cheap" part of the delivery space. And then Royal Mail are typically cheaper still -- where internet commerce sites offer options, RM is the cheapest rung on the ladder. We could pay courier prices for birthday cards and bank statements, but I bet a lot of people would rather not...
Gerrymander = manipulation of GEOGRAPHIC boundaries (for example, legislative districts) for electoral advantage.
This has been American definition of the word, invented in USA and named after an American politico for his contribution to the practice, for over 200 hundred years.
WHY our British cousins have decided to expand meaning of gerrymander, to include (it seems) ANY manipulation of electoral process, is beyond me.
Do any of you have a clue?
My guess is quasi-ignorance combined with unalloyed laziness; that is, mis-users have heard of the word, but NOT what it actually means - and haven't bothered to find out.
"Voter suppression" is the correct term, and it is exactly that. Another US import.
Yes, but it's something else that hasn't translated well across the Pond.
US Republicans are savvy enough not to suppress their own voters.
Leicester fans singing God Save The King and getting drowned out by the Liverpool fans singing Liverpool.
Don't the rest of us plebs need saving? Stupid so-called "national" "anthem"!
All Liverpool fans are an unpatriotic disgrace. Being shown up in manners by Leicester.
This will obviously be ten nil to Liverpool on the pitch.
Is the main reason Leicester went down the owners wealth comes from duty free shops in airports, and they had a bad pandemic? Contributing factors over long expensive contracts, and money wasted in players not in first team games?
Every constituency in Liverpool even voted for Corbyn, twice, why do we need to care what Liverpool thinks about our national anthem?
This National Conservatism Conference really is something else. If there's a concern that we import wokeness from the USA, there should be much more concern about this importation of US-funded evangelical right-wing nuttiness and, in particular, the appearance of several leading Tory MPs. I note, for example, that Wiki says Miriam Cates is an evangelical Christian. Is it the British Tea Party movement?
If anybody's interested, I came across this article by John Hayes on Conservative Home. Scary stuff, I think. Even the Tory commenters mostly seem to think he's as mad as a box of frogs.
There aren't really Tory commenters on Conhome these days - there seems to be a rash of pro-EU astroturfers, presumably paid by somebody. Wouldn't set much store by it.
I got the same impression about ConHome. I seemed to be the most right wing person posting to it. If I praised Lady Thatcher all I got was thumbs down.
Anecdote alert, 100% of everybody I have spoken to today on FaceTime think Braverman is the new Margaret Thatcher and can’t wait for her to become PM.
Mind you, I have only spoken to my mum on FaceTime today. Guess that’s why it’s called anecdote alert.
This National Conservatism Conference really is something else. If there's a concern that we import wokeness from the USA, there should be much more concern about this importation of US-funded evangelical right-wing nuttiness and, in particular, the appearance of several leading Tory MPs. I note, for example, that Wiki says Miriam Cates is an evangelical Christian. Is it the British Tea Party movement?
If anybody's interested, I came across this article by John Hayes on Conservative Home. Scary stuff, I think. Even the Tory commenters mostly seem to think he's as mad as a box of frogs.
@Northern_Al Could you explain what part of this article you are scared about?
All of it?
“People yearned for a self-confident, common-sense government that put the interests of hard-working, law-abiding patriots first.” putting the interests of “patriots” first means criminalising dissent and is incompatible with democracy.
Doesn't every government try to appeal to this sentiment though ?
Gerrymander = manipulation of GEOGRAPHIC boundaries (for example, legislative districts) for electoral advantage.
This has been American definition of the word, invented in USA and named after an American politico for his contribution to the practice, for over 200 hundred years.
WHY our British cousins have decided to expand meaning of gerrymander, to include (it seems) ANY manipulation of electoral process, is beyond me.
Do any of you have a clue?
My guess is quasi-ignorance combined with unalloyed laziness; that is, mis-users have heard of the word, but NOT what it actually means - and haven't bothered to find out.
"Voter suppression" is the correct term, and it is exactly that. Another US import.
Yes, but it's something else that hasn't translated well across the Pond.
US Republicans are savvy enough not to suppress their own voters.
Wrong. Republicans from Trump down (or is it up?) have been proclaiming voting by mail as unreliable, thus moving many GOP base voters to wait until Election Day to vote in person.
Meaning that some of these Bitter Enders will end up NOT actually voting, because there was a family emergency, or long lines at voting locations, or they showed up after final cutoff for voting.
So they effectively disenfranchised themselves - at the urging of Republican Party "leaders".
Especially galling for many still-sane GOPers, seeing as how Republicans have always had demographic propensity to vote EARLY including via old-school absentee ballots which used to skew pretty heavily Republican - emphasis on past tense.
Further proof that Oxford University is a complete dump.
Theory One: This is the sort of jape that they all pulled down the Union in their happy Varsity days. It's all a game where the important thing is to win, not the consequences of actually governing. Like everything else they've done. Gits.
Theory Two (possibly overthinking): NatCon isn't for 2023/4, it's rolling the pitch to take over the Conservatives after they lose. In which case, the more discredited the government is, the better.
What really concerns me about the next few years is that there will indeed be a far right takeover of the Tory party, and whatever cabal of monsters ends up being installed by the fossil membership will have quite a good chance of returning to Government come the election after next. Trying to put the country back together is going to be a difficult task for the Labour Party, and I'm far from convinced that they are up to it.
The takeover happened after Cameron ran away from the mess he made with Brexit. They will likely become even more extreme in opposition as happened after 97 and happened to Labour in the 80s.
The first few years after a defeat is when the nutters start pushing the "We weren't pure enough" agenda and keep taking more and more crazy policy positions
Situation Normal....
Will Steve Barclay be arguing “we weren’t pure enough”, HY? Will Barclay call for junking the declinism economics of Sunak and Hunt, and call for Trussnomics?
Foul creatures. They're not in the slightest bit bothered about rigging elections. What troubles them is that they think they did it so incompetently that the rigging attempt ended up benefiting their opponents.
Astonishing that no one realised before it was too late.
I wouldn't be surprised if the rigging scheme actually DID have the desired effect, and Rees-Mogg is relying on misinformation through anecdata to draw his conclusions.
I'm sure I read and posted some other research on this a couple of weeks back which suggested that the rigging scheme was likely to disproportionately affect low income voters who were more likely to back Labour. Tories who think it backfired may be forming that opinion through hearing the complaints of small numbers of wealthy older people - the population segment that accounts for the bulk of their party membership, and the only group (save for the very rich) that they either listen to or care about.
The problem is lots of wealthy older people voted LD or Independent at the local elections in protest at new housing plans in their Tory controlled local authority areas, especially in the South, as did many richer voters more generally. Even if those voters come back to the Tories at the general election to try and keep Labour out of No 10 and their taxes and immigration down.
In fact skilled white working class voters were the most likely to vote Tory on May 4th, indeed the few councils the Tories held then like Dartford, Harlow, Braintree, Basildon, Walsall and Dudley were filled with such voters. However the ID requirement would have made them much less likely to vote, while Nimby OAPs protest voting LD or Residents were not affected as they mainly voted by post.
So Jacob is right, what might have been a 'cunning plan' by the Tories for the general election, ended up a Baldrick style 'cunning plan' disaster at the local elections as they lost control of councils across the Home Counties especially and over 1000 Tory councillors were gone
“in protest at new housing plans in their Tory controlled local authority areas”
Isn’t the Conservative MPs upset the government don’t have house building plans, they will lose their seats because Labour are the only party intent to build homes for people to buy?
They are not going to hold their seats in 2024 with their council promising to build new homes over a 10-15 year period, indeed such proposals have already seen lots of Tory councils go LD or NOC or Independent due to NIMBY revolt. There are no votes in housebuilding until the new new homes and flats are actually built and the grateful new property owners move in
Tory governments been strangling house building for a very long time as the Guardian claim? Does this push up the rents everyone is upset about and allow Tory MPs to say no more immigration or asylum because there’s no houses or hotels left to put people in?
The truth is a lot of experienced and senior Tories really don’t like Sunak’s decision to stop building homes and think it’s a big vote loser don’t they?
Mogg's claim that the voter ID requirement helped Labour in the locals is utterly at odds with the facts. Survation's poll of 24th to 28th April found that 5.8% of those intending to vote Labour in the locals did not possess a suitable form of ID. Likewise 5.1% of Greens. Compared to only 2.4% of Conservatives and 1.3% of Lib Dems. It was a significant and successful attempt to suppress the Labour vote.
So does he really believe his own claim? Or does he have an ulterior motive, if so what on earth is it?
Still, in terms of an admission of guilt it's very good of him to let the cat out of the bag.
So why did he do it?
1) he’s an idiot 2) to damage the government 3) both 4 something else
This National Conservatism Conference really is something else. If there's a concern that we import wokeness from the USA, there should be much more concern about this importation of US-funded evangelical right-wing nuttiness and, in particular, the appearance of several leading Tory MPs. I note, for example, that Wiki says Miriam Cates is an evangelical Christian. Is it the British Tea Party movement?
If anybody's interested, I came across this article by John Hayes on Conservative Home. Scary stuff, I think. Even the Tory commenters mostly seem to think he's as mad as a box of frogs.
@Northern_Al Could you explain what part of this article you are scared about?
I didn't say I was scared - I said it was scary stuff. By that, I mean unhinged. Pretty much all of it. it's close to globalist conspiracy nonsense, echoes US fundamentalism, is obsessed with Blair, reeks with nostalgia for a time that never was, is obsessed with a minor issue (trans etc.) in the big scheme of things..... Most of all, Hayes seems to think he understands the wants and desires of 'ordinary' people whereas he is, in fact, clueless.
I could go on, but I want to watch the second half of the football (like the ordinary person I am).
Foul creatures. They're not in the slightest bit bothered about rigging elections. What troubles them is that they think they did it so incompetently that the rigging attempt ended up benefiting their opponents.
Astonishing that no one realised before it was too late.
I wouldn't be surprised if the rigging scheme actually DID have the desired effect, and Rees-Mogg is relying on misinformation through anecdata to draw his conclusions.
I'm sure I read and posted some other research on this a couple of weeks back which suggested that the rigging scheme was likely to disproportionately affect low income voters who were more likely to back Labour. Tories who think it backfired may be forming that opinion through hearing the complaints of small numbers of wealthy older people - the population segment that accounts for the bulk of their party membership, and the only group (save for the very rich) that they either listen to or care about.
The problem is lots of wealthy older people voted LD or Independent at the local elections in protest at new housing plans in their Tory controlled local authority areas, especially in the South, as did many richer voters more generally. Even if those voters come back to the Tories at the general election to try and keep Labour out of No 10 and their taxes and immigration down.
In fact skilled white working class voters were the most likely to vote Tory on May 4th, indeed the few councils the Tories held then like Dartford, Harlow, Braintree, Basildon, Walsall and Dudley were filled with such voters. However the ID requirement would have made them much less likely to vote, while Nimby OAPs protest voting LD or Residents were not affected as they mainly voted by post.
So Jacob is right, what might have been a 'cunning plan' by the Tories for the general election, ended up a Baldrick style 'cunning plan' disaster at the local elections as they lost control of councils across the Home Counties especially and over 1000 Tory councillors were gone
“in protest at new housing plans in their Tory controlled local authority areas”
Isn’t the Conservative MPs upset the government don’t have house building plans, they will lose their seats because Labour are the only party intent to build homes for people to buy?
They are not going to hold their seats in 2024 with their council promising to build new homes over a 10-15 year period, indeed such proposals have already seen lots of Tory councils go LD or NOC or Independent due to NIMBY revolt. There are no votes in housebuilding until the new new homes and flats are actually built and the grateful new property owners move in
Tory governments been strangling house building for a very long time as the Guardian claim? Does this push up the rents everyone is upset about and allow Tory MPs to say no more immigration or asylum because there’s no houses or hotels left to put people in?
The truth is a lot of experienced and senior Tories really don’t like Sunak’s decision to stop building homes and think it’s a big vote loser don’t they?
Foul creatures. They're not in the slightest bit bothered about rigging elections. What troubles them is that they think they did it so incompetently that the rigging attempt ended up benefiting their opponents.
Astonishing that no one realised before it was too late.
I wouldn't be surprised if the rigging scheme actually DID have the desired effect, and Rees-Mogg is relying on misinformation through anecdata to draw his conclusions.
I'm sure I read and posted some other research on this a couple of weeks back which suggested that the rigging scheme was likely to disproportionately affect low income voters who were more likely to back Labour. Tories who think it backfired may be forming that opinion through hearing the complaints of small numbers of wealthy older people - the population segment that accounts for the bulk of their party membership, and the only group (save for the very rich) that they either listen to or care about.
The problem is lots of wealthy older people voted LD or Independent at the local elections in protest at new housing plans in their Tory controlled local authority areas, especially in the South, as did many richer voters more generally. Even if those voters come back to the Tories at the general election to try and keep Labour out of No 10 and their taxes and immigration down.
In fact skilled white working class voters were the most likely to vote Tory on May 4th, indeed the few councils the Tories held then like Dartford, Harlow, Braintree, Basildon, Walsall and Dudley were filled with such voters. However the ID requirement would have made them much less likely to vote, while Nimby OAPs protest voting LD or Residents were not affected as they mainly voted by post.
So Jacob is right, what might have been a 'cunning plan' by the Tories for the general election, ended up a Baldrick style 'cunning plan' disaster at the local elections as they lost control of councils across the Home Counties especially and over 1000 Tory councillors were gone
“in protest at new housing plans in their Tory controlled local authority areas”
Isn’t the Conservative MPs upset the government don’t have house building plans, they will lose their seats because Labour are the only party intent to build homes for people to buy?
They are not going to hold their seats in 2024 with their council promising to build new homes over a 10-15 year period, indeed such proposals have already seen lots of Tory councils go LD or NOC or Independent due to NIMBY revolt. There are no votes in housebuilding until the new new homes and flats are actually built and the grateful new property owners move in
Tory governments been strangling house building for a very long time as the Guardian claim? Does this push up the rents everyone is upset about and allow Tory MPs to say no more immigration or asylum because there’s no houses or hotels left to put people in?
The truth is a lot of experienced and senior Tories really don’t like Sunak’s decision to stop building homes and think it’s a big vote loser don’t they?
Longer term it is a vote loser, especially in terms of winning 30-40s back to the Tories.
Short term however no new housebuilding is a winner, especially with NIMBY pensioners in southern England
Your confident position is very clear.
You do have a lot of experienced Conservative MPs asking for house building promises, policies and starting now though.
You also have a lot of experienced Conservative MPs in the home counties having seen long standing Tory councillors lose their seats to LDs and Independents running on NIMBY tickets pressing the government to continue not to push new housing
Temperature on my humble Seattle porch is currently 95 degrees Fahrenheit. Outside air temp maybe ten degrees cooler, indoor temp my humble apt 75F
This is third day of highs in upper-80s in Seattle, which is unusual (or rather was before climate change started kicking in) and especially so for mid-May.
Spring has been late arriving, but now has skipped over to dog days of Summer.
Forecast is for scattered thunderstorms tonight, perhaps some hail in spots, which will moderate temps a touch but not much. Expected to stay about twenty degrees F above normal though Thursday.
Mogg's claim that the voter ID requirement helped Labour in the locals is utterly at odds with the facts. Survation's poll of 24th to 28th April found that 5.8% of those intending to vote Labour in the locals did not possess a suitable form of ID. Likewise 5.1% of Greens. Compared to only 2.4% of Conservatives and 1.3% of Lib Dems. It was a significant and successful attempt to suppress the Labour vote.
So does he really believe his own claim? Or does he have an ulterior motive, if so what on earth is it?
Still, in terms of an admission of guilt it's very good of him to let the cat out of the bag.
So why did he do it?
1) he’s an idiot 2) to damage the government 3) both 4 something else
5) he actually doesn't care about morals or good conduct. The purpose of this measure was to subvert democracy in favour of the conservatives, which he entirely favours, and he is angry because he doesn't think it worked.
Mogg's claim that the voter ID requirement helped Labour in the locals is utterly at odds with the facts. Survation's poll of 24th to 28th April found that 5.8% of those intending to vote Labour in the locals did not possess a suitable form of ID. Likewise 5.1% of Greens. Compared to only 2.4% of Conservatives and 1.3% of Lib Dems. It was a significant and successful attempt to suppress the Labour vote.
So does he really believe his own claim? Or does he have an ulterior motive, if so what on earth is it?
Still, in terms of an admission of guilt it's very good of him to let the cat out of the bag.
So why did he do it?
1) he’s an idiot 2) to damage the government 3) both 4 something else
Gerrymander = manipulation of GEOGRAPHIC boundaries (for example, legislative districts) for electoral advantage.
This has been American definition of the word, invented in USA and named after an American politico for his contribution to the practice, for over 200 hundred years.
WHY our British cousins have decided to expand meaning of gerrymander, to include (it seems) ANY manipulation of electoral process, is beyond me.
Do any of you have a clue?
My guess is quasi-ignorance combined with unalloyed laziness; that is, mis-users have heard of the word, but NOT what it actually means - and haven't bothered to find out.
Or...words change their meaning over time and space via a number of different mechanisms including ignorance, common misuse, parody, adjacency of meaning, contextual changes. The effect can go so far as to invert sense.
It's interesting how often people rail against these changes though. It is usually a hiding to nothing.
I'm all for remembering the history of usage and etymology though.
In case of gerrymander, hard (for me) to see what's positive about muddying up the meaning, to mean anything that the speaker WANTS it to mean?
Reserve it for geographical fiddling, I say! AND note I'm the 21st-century Funk & Wagnalls . . .
Commonwealth used to mean "republic" (or an approximation at least!). Now it means the "former British Empire".
The British Empire was so terrible that almost all its former colonies are members, other countries are queuing up to join-it and all seem quite happy for the British monarch to head it, for to use English as its language, and for it to be headquartered in London.
Interesting.
I don't get the antipathy some people seem to have for the Commonwealth. Sure it doesn't have much purpose but it also seems harmless and as you say people want to join it.
It is official. The nutty and dangerous party is now the Tories. They must be voted out.
Mind you. An awful lot of Tory members never liked Brexit. More than half Conservative MPs, and nearly all the most senior ones backed Cameron. If anything we could be underestimating how many Labour voters enabled Brexit to happen, along with some extra new voters Cambridge analikiter found for Cummings?
Gerrymander = manipulation of GEOGRAPHIC boundaries (for example, legislative districts) for electoral advantage.
This has been American definition of the word, invented in USA and named after an American politico for his contribution to the practice, for over 200 hundred years.
WHY our British cousins have decided to expand meaning of gerrymander, to include (it seems) ANY manipulation of electoral process, is beyond me.
Do any of you have a clue?
My guess is quasi-ignorance combined with unalloyed laziness; that is, mis-users have heard of the word, but NOT what it actually means - and haven't bothered to find out.
Or...words change their meaning over time and space via a number of different mechanisms including ignorance, common misuse, parody, adjacency of meaning, contextual changes. The effect can go so far as to invert sense.
It's interesting how often people rail against these changes though. It is usually a hiding to nothing.
I'm all for remembering the history of usage and etymology though.
In case of gerrymander, hard (for me) to see what's positive about muddying up the meaning, to mean anything that the speaker WANTS it to mean?
Reserve it for geographical fiddling, I say! AND note I'm the 21st-century Funk & Wagnalls . . .
Commonwealth used to mean "republic" (or an approximation at least!). Now it means the "former British Empire".
The British Empire was so terrible that almost all its former colonies are members, other countries are queuing up to join-it and all seem quite happy for the British monarch to head it, for to use English as its language, and for it to be headquartered in London.
Interesting.
I don't get the antipathy some people seem to have for the Commonwealth. Sure it doesn't have much purpose but it also seems harmless and as you say people want to join it.
I liked the view of the late Labour MP Bernie Grant.
He was an enthusiastic supporter of the monarchy and the Commonwealth, which was an uncommon view for members of the Campaign Group of Labour MPs.
His view was that the Commonwealth allowed some very small countries to have contact with a big country/countries that they normally wouldn't have and they appreciated that contact/influence.
Foul creatures. They're not in the slightest bit bothered about rigging elections. What troubles them is that they think they did it so incompetently that the rigging attempt ended up benefiting their opponents.
Astonishing that no one realised before it was too late.
I wouldn't be surprised if the rigging scheme actually DID have the desired effect, and Rees-Mogg is relying on misinformation through anecdata to draw his conclusions.
I'm sure I read and posted some other research on this a couple of weeks back which suggested that the rigging scheme was likely to disproportionately affect low income voters who were more likely to back Labour. Tories who think it backfired may be forming that opinion through hearing the complaints of small numbers of wealthy older people - the population segment that accounts for the bulk of their party membership, and the only group (save for the very rich) that they either listen to or care about.
The problem is lots of wealthy older people voted LD or Independent at the local elections in protest at new housing plans in their Tory controlled local authority areas, especially in the South, as did many richer voters more generally. Even if those voters come back to the Tories at the general election to try and keep Labour out of No 10 and their taxes and immigration down.
In fact skilled white working class voters were the most likely to vote Tory on May 4th, indeed the few councils the Tories held then like Dartford, Harlow, Braintree, Basildon, Walsall and Dudley were filled with such voters. However the ID requirement would have made them much less likely to vote, while Nimby OAPs protest voting LD or Residents were not affected as they mainly voted by post.
So Jacob is right, what might have been a 'cunning plan' by the Tories for the general election, ended up a Baldrick style 'cunning plan' disaster at the local elections as they lost control of councils across the Home Counties especially and over 1000 Tory councillors were gone
“in protest at new housing plans in their Tory controlled local authority areas”
Isn’t the Conservative MPs upset the government don’t have house building plans, they will lose their seats because Labour are the only party intent to build homes for people to buy?
They are not going to hold their seats in 2024 with their council promising to build new homes over a 10-15 year period, indeed such proposals have already seen lots of Tory councils go LD or NOC or Independent due to NIMBY revolt. There are no votes in housebuilding until the new new homes and flats are actually built and the grateful new property owners move in
Tory governments been strangling house building for a very long time as the Guardian claim? Does this push up the rents everyone is upset about and allow Tory MPs to say no more immigration or asylum because there’s no houses or hotels left to put people in?
The truth is a lot of experienced and senior Tories really don’t like Sunak’s decision to stop building homes and think it’s a big vote loser don’t they?
Longer term it is a vote loser, especially in terms of winning 30-40s back to the Tories.
Short term however no new housebuilding is a winner, especially with NIMBY pensioners in southern England
Your confident position is very clear.
You do have a lot of experienced Conservative MPs asking for house building promises, policies and starting now though.
You also have a lot of experienced Conservative MPs in the home counties having seen long standing Tory councillors lose their seats to LDs and Independents running on NIMBY tickets pressing the government to continue not to push new housing
Exactly. I agree. That’s why Sunak’s government did take this stance. Lobbied into it. The bottom line is two strong lobby groups of Tory MPs with diametric view at the same time.
This National Conservatism Conference really is something else. If there's a concern that we import wokeness from the USA, there should be much more concern about this importation of US-funded evangelical right-wing nuttiness and, in particular, the appearance of several leading Tory MPs. I note, for example, that Wiki says Miriam Cates is an evangelical Christian. Is it the British Tea Party movement?
If anybody's interested, I came across this article by John Hayes on Conservative Home. Scary stuff, I think. Even the Tory commenters mostly seem to think he's as mad as a box of frogs.
It's all the fault of John Lennon. That's why the West is going to the dogs.
Western civilisation is threatened by a "new religion", a mix of "Marxism, narcissism and paganism", conforming to the "dystopian fantasy of John Lennon"
Why is it shocking? Royal Mail being a bit crap is baked in for me
I'm shocked just how bad they've become.
They are worse than Hermes and Yodel.
Don't agree. Very definitely better in my experience.
Plus they at least have a depot within walking distance. Not on the other side of a small mountain range without a road crossing.
Royal Mail have lost some important documents, which were tracked/money paid for guaranteed next day delivery, there was no urgency on their part to help or pay the compensation.
On the very rare occasions DPD or DHL have lost/delayed an item they couldn't have been more helpful
This National Conservatism Conference really is something else. If there's a concern that we import wokeness from the USA, there should be much more concern about this importation of US-funded evangelical right-wing nuttiness and, in particular, the appearance of several leading Tory MPs. I note, for example, that Wiki says Miriam Cates is an evangelical Christian. Is it the British Tea Party movement?
If anybody's interested, I came across this article by John Hayes on Conservative Home. Scary stuff, I think. Even the Tory commenters mostly seem to think he's as mad as a box of frogs.
It's all the fault of John Lennon. That's why the West is gong to the dogs.
Western civilisation is threatened by a "new religion", a mix of "Marxism, narcissism and paganism", conforming to the "dystopian fantasy of John Lennon"
Why is it shocking? Royal Mail being a bit crap is baked in for me
I'm shocked just how bad they've become.
They are worse than Hermes and Yodel.
Don't agree. Very definitely better in my experience.
Plus they at least have a depot within walking distance. Not on the other side of a small mountain range without a road crossing.
Royal Mail have lost some important documents, which were tracked/money paid for guaranteed next day delivery, there was no urgency on their part to help or pay the compensation.
On the very rare occasions DPD or DHL have lost/delayed an item they couldn't have been more helpful
Fair enough. Different anecdata on my part re various problems with my deliveries.
hope everyone is doing well in their predictions and enjoying the twists and turns of the political landscape. Today, I want to divert our attention for a moment from the world of politics to a topic that is equally captivating and delightful: Mr Kipling's Fondant Fancies!
Now, I know what you might be thinking, "What do these delicious pastries have to do with politics?" Well, hear me out! Just like politics, Mr Kipling's Fondant Fancies offer a tantalizing blend of flavors, colors, and textures that can provoke some lively debates.
Firstly, let's discuss the aesthetics. These little cakes come in an array of vibrant hues, each one topped with a delicate layer of fondant icing. Similarly, politics often presents us with a diverse spectrum of ideologies and parties, each with its own distinct appeal. So, imagine picking a blue fondant fancy and a yellow one, and debating which is more visually appealing—much like comparing different political candidates or parties based on their campaign materials!
Next, let's delve into the flavors. From the classic vanilla to the zesty lemon, each fondant fancy brings a unique taste sensation. Similarly, in politics, we have a variety of policy platforms and perspectives, each catering to different palates. We could compare the rich and indulgent chocolate flavor to a party's stance on economic issues, while the light and fruity raspberry could represent their stance on social matters. Which flavors align with your political taste buds?
Of course, the experience of eating a fondant fancy is not complete without considering the texture. As you bite into the soft sponge cake, your teeth sink into the smooth, velvety fondant icing, resulting in a harmonious blend. In politics, we often see the need for different ideologies and parties to come together, finding common ground and compromises for the greater good. Just like the perfect balance of textures in a fondant fancy, political alliances can create a satisfying outcome.
Now, I must admit, I'm not suggesting we base our political predictions solely on the quality of baked goods. However, sometimes it's good to take a step back and appreciate the lighter, sweeter aspects of life. Plus, who doesn't love indulging in a delightful treat while engaging in political banter?
Gerrymander = manipulation of GEOGRAPHIC boundaries (for example, legislative districts) for electoral advantage.
This has been American definition of the word, invented in USA and named after an American politico for his contribution to the practice, for over 200 hundred years.
WHY our British cousins have decided to expand meaning of gerrymander, to include (it seems) ANY manipulation of electoral process, is beyond me.
Do any of you have a clue?
My guess is quasi-ignorance combined with unalloyed laziness; that is, mis-users have heard of the word, but NOT what it actually means - and haven't bothered to find out.
Or...words change their meaning over time and space via a number of different mechanisms including ignorance, common misuse, parody, adjacency of meaning, contextual changes. The effect can go so far as to invert sense.
It's interesting how often people rail against these changes though. It is usually a hiding to nothing.
I'm all for remembering the history of usage and etymology though.
In case of gerrymander, hard (for me) to see what's positive about muddying up the meaning, to mean anything that the speaker WANTS it to mean?
Reserve it for geographical fiddling, I say! AND note I'm the 21st-century Funk & Wagnalls . . .
Commonwealth used to mean "republic" (or an approximation at least!). Now it means the "former British Empire".
The British Empire was so terrible that almost all its former colonies are members, other countries are queuing up to join-it and all seem quite happy for the British monarch to head it, for to use English as its language, and for it to be headquartered in London.
Interesting.
I don't get the antipathy some people seem to have for the Commonwealth. Sure it doesn't have much purpose but it also seems harmless and as you say people want to join it.
I think it has lots of purpose.
Through the Harare Principles, and the cultural, education, and trade links it promotes through its members, it anchors our values across almost a third of the world - places that otherwise might have fallen into the orbit of other more malign states.
It's why it's so important to not let China buy them out.
This National Conservatism Conference really is something else. If there's a concern that we import wokeness from the USA, there should be much more concern about this importation of US-funded evangelical right-wing nuttiness and, in particular, the appearance of several leading Tory MPs. I note, for example, that Wiki says Miriam Cates is an evangelical Christian. Is it the British Tea Party movement?
If anybody's interested, I came across this article by John Hayes on Conservative Home. Scary stuff, I think. Even the Tory commenters mostly seem to think he's as mad as a box of frogs.
It's all the fault of John Lennon. That's why the West is going to the dogs.
Western civilisation is threatened by a "new religion", a mix of "Marxism, narcissism and paganism", conforming to the "dystopian fantasy of John Lennon"
hope everyone is doing well in their predictions and enjoying the twists and turns of the political landscape. Today, I want to divert our attention for a moment from the world of politics to a topic that is equally captivating and delightful: Mr Kipling's Fondant Fancies!
Now, I know what you might be thinking, "What do these delicious pastries have to do with politics?" Well, hear me out! Just like politics, Mr Kipling's Fondant Fancies offer a tantalizing blend of flavors, colors, and textures that can provoke some lively debates.
Firstly, let's discuss the aesthetics. These little cakes come in an array of vibrant hues, each one topped with a delicate layer of fondant icing. Similarly, politics often presents us with a diverse spectrum of ideologies and parties, each with its own distinct appeal. So, imagine picking a blue fondant fancy and a yellow one, and debating which is more visually appealing—much like comparing different political candidates or parties based on their campaign materials!
Next, let's delve into the flavors. From the classic vanilla to the zesty lemon, each fondant fancy brings a unique taste sensation. Similarly, in politics, we have a variety of policy platforms and perspectives, each catering to different palates. We could compare the rich and indulgent chocolate flavor to a party's stance on economic issues, while the light and fruity raspberry could represent their stance on social matters. Which flavors align with your political taste buds?
Of course, the experience of eating a fondant fancy is not complete without considering the texture. As you bite into the soft sponge cake, your teeth sink into the smooth, velvety fondant icing, resulting in a harmonious blend. In politics, we often see the need for different ideologies and parties to come together, finding common ground and compromises for the greater good. Just like the perfect balance of textures in a fondant fancy, political alliances can create a satisfying outcome.
Now, I must admit, I'm not suggesting we base our political predictions solely on the quality of baked goods. However, sometimes it's good to take a step back and appreciate the lighter, sweeter aspects of life. Plus, who doesn't love indulging in a delightful treat while engaging in political banter?
hope everyone is doing well in their predictions and enjoying the twists and turns of the political landscape. Today, I want to divert our attention for a moment from the world of politics to a topic that is equally captivating and delightful: Mr Kipling's Fondant Fancies!
Now, I know what you might be thinking, "What do these delicious pastries have to do with politics?" Well, hear me out! Just like politics, Mr Kipling's Fondant Fancies offer a tantalizing blend of flavors, colors, and textures that can provoke some lively debates.
Firstly, let's discuss the aesthetics. These little cakes come in an array of vibrant hues, each one topped with a delicate layer of fondant icing. Similarly, politics often presents us with a diverse spectrum of ideologies and parties, each with its own distinct appeal. So, imagine picking a blue fondant fancy and a yellow one, and debating which is more visually appealing—much like comparing different political candidates or parties based on their campaign materials!
Next, let's delve into the flavors. From the classic vanilla to the zesty lemon, each fondant fancy brings a unique taste sensation. Similarly, in politics, we have a variety of policy platforms and perspectives, each catering to different palates. We could compare the rich and indulgent chocolate flavor to a party's stance on economic issues, while the light and fruity raspberry could represent their stance on social matters. Which flavors align with your political taste buds?
Of course, the experience of eating a fondant fancy is not complete without considering the texture. As you bite into the soft sponge cake, your teeth sink into the smooth, velvety fondant icing, resulting in a harmonious blend. In politics, we often see the need for different ideologies and parties to come together, finding common ground and compromises for the greater good. Just like the perfect balance of textures in a fondant fancy, political alliances can create a satisfying outcome.
Now, I must admit, I'm not suggesting we base our political predictions solely on the quality of baked goods. However, sometimes it's good to take a step back and appreciate the lighter, sweeter aspects of life. Plus, who doesn't love indulging in a delightful treat while engaging in political banter?
This National Conservatism Conference really is something else. If there's a concern that we import wokeness from the USA, there should be much more concern about this importation of US-funded evangelical right-wing nuttiness and, in particular, the appearance of several leading Tory MPs. I note, for example, that Wiki says Miriam Cates is an evangelical Christian. Is it the British Tea Party movement?
If anybody's interested, I came across this article by John Hayes on Conservative Home. Scary stuff, I think. Even the Tory commenters mostly seem to think he's as mad as a box of frogs.
It's all the fault of John Lennon. That's why the West is going to the dogs.
Western civilisation is threatened by a "new religion", a mix of "Marxism, narcissism and paganism", conforming to the "dystopian fantasy of John Lennon"
hope everyone is doing well in their predictions and enjoying the twists and turns of the political landscape. Today, I want to divert our attention for a moment from the world of politics to a topic that is equally captivating and delightful: Mr Kipling's Fondant Fancies!
Now, I know what you might be thinking, "What do these delicious pastries have to do with politics?" Well, hear me out! Just like politics, Mr Kipling's Fondant Fancies offer a tantalizing blend of flavors, colors, and textures that can provoke some lively debates.
Firstly, let's discuss the aesthetics. These little cakes come in an array of vibrant hues, each one topped with a delicate layer of fondant icing. Similarly, politics often presents us with a diverse spectrum of ideologies and parties, each with its own distinct appeal. So, imagine picking a blue fondant fancy and a yellow one, and debating which is more visually appealing—much like comparing different political candidates or parties based on their campaign materials!
Next, let's delve into the flavors. From the classic vanilla to the zesty lemon, each fondant fancy brings a unique taste sensation. Similarly, in politics, we have a variety of policy platforms and perspectives, each catering to different palates. We could compare the rich and indulgent chocolate flavor to a party's stance on economic issues, while the light and fruity raspberry could represent their stance on social matters. Which flavors align with your political taste buds?
Of course, the experience of eating a fondant fancy is not complete without considering the texture. As you bite into the soft sponge cake, your teeth sink into the smooth, velvety fondant icing, resulting in a harmonious blend. In politics, we often see the need for different ideologies and parties to come together, finding common ground and compromises for the greater good. Just like the perfect balance of textures in a fondant fancy, political alliances can create a satisfying outcome.
Now, I must admit, I'm not suggesting we base our political predictions solely on the quality of baked goods. However, sometimes it's good to take a step back and appreciate the lighter, sweeter aspects of life. Plus, who doesn't love indulging in a delightful treat while engaging in political banter?
This National Conservatism Conference really is something else. If there's a concern that we import wokeness from the USA, there should be much more concern about this importation of US-funded evangelical right-wing nuttiness and, in particular, the appearance of several leading Tory MPs. I note, for example, that Wiki says Miriam Cates is an evangelical Christian. Is it the British Tea Party movement?
If anybody's interested, I came across this article by John Hayes on Conservative Home. Scary stuff, I think. Even the Tory commenters mostly seem to think he's as mad as a box of frogs.
It's all the fault of John Lennon. That's why the West is going to the dogs.
Western civilisation is threatened by a "new religion", a mix of "Marxism, narcissism and paganism", conforming to the "dystopian fantasy of John Lennon"
Leicester fans singing God Save The King and getting drowned out by the Liverpool fans singing Liverpool.
Don't the rest of us plebs need saving? Stupid so-called "national" "anthem"!
All Liverpool fans are an unpatriotic disgrace. Being shown up in manners by Leicester.
This will obviously be ten nil to Liverpool on the pitch.
Is the main reason Leicester went down the owners wealth comes from duty free shops in airports, and they had a bad pandemic? Contributing factors over long expensive contracts, and money wasted in players not in first team games?
Does singing the national anthem count as the single only definition of patriotism in your opinion?
My own definition of patriotism is probably slightly different to yours. My own view of patriotism is a belief in the greater good of my country.
I think the Tories and their Brexit brand, vandal, violent nihilism, has ruined this country for a generation, maybe more. I find that daily the Tories complete incompetent, short term, survivalist factionalism is contradictory to any common good. And like Brexit, it continues to damage peoples lives and the economic wellbeing of the UK.
I find the Liverpool fans booing the national anthem an inoffensive form of satire, and harmless making fun of an anachronistic institution that deserves to be ribbed. The Tories on the other hand destroy people lives and livelihoods.
Royal Mail have lost some important documents, which were tracked/money paid for guaranteed next day delivery, there was no urgency on their part to help or pay the compensation.
On the very rare occasions DPD or DHL have lost/delayed an item they couldn't have been more helpful
I send hundreds of packages a year with RM and to be fair to them the loss rate is very small, a fraction of a percent even for untracked packages. But, yes they are not at all helpful if they do lose something. Last year I sent a package to Sweden via Royal Mail and it ended up in Beijing. RM took three months to admit error and pay out - and a few days later the postie dropped off the now very tatty package, returned all the way from China.
DPD have always worked out well for me, but DHL not so much. They managed to deliver a box of very expensive custom electronics not only to the wrong address but the wrong town! The proof of delivery photo showed it sitting in someone's wheely bin. The response when I complained was "we'll ask the driver to pick it up tomorrow"
Using the colour of the bin, the fact that it hadn't been emptied and a similarity in road names I managed to work out where my package was and went to recover it myself from a very confused lady who clearly thought I was a bit of a crackpot, wanting to rummage in her bin!
Royal Mail have lost some important documents, which were tracked/money paid for guaranteed next day delivery, there was no urgency on their part to help or pay the compensation.
On the very rare occasions DPD or DHL have lost/delayed an item they couldn't have been more helpful
I send hundreds of packages a year with RM and to be fair to them the loss rate is very small, a fraction of a percent even for untracked packages. But, yes they are not at all helpful if they do lose something. Last year I sent a package to Sweden via Royal Mail and it ended up in Beijing. RM took three months to admit error and pay out - and a few days later the postie dropped off the now very tatty package, returned all the way from China.
DPD have always worked out well for me, but DHL not so much. They managed to deliver a box of very expensive custom electronics not only to the wrong address but the wrong town! The proof of delivery photo showed it sitting in someone's wheely bin. The response when I complained was "we'll ask the driver to pick it up tomorrow"
Using the colour of the bin, the fact that it hadn't been emptied and a similarity in road names I managed to work out where my package was and went to recover it myself from a very confused lady who clearly thought I was a bit of a crackpot, wanting to rummage in her bin!
Royal Mail should lose its patronage.
Noone shouod ever pay first class. Irs a second class business.
Gerrymander = manipulation of GEOGRAPHIC boundaries (for example, legislative districts) for electoral advantage.
This has been American definition of the word, invented in USA and named after an American politico for his contribution to the practice, for over 200 hundred years.
WHY our British cousins have decided to expand meaning of gerrymander, to include (it seems) ANY manipulation of electoral process, is beyond me.
Do any of you have a clue?
My guess is quasi-ignorance combined with unalloyed laziness; that is, mis-users have heard of the word, but NOT what it actually means - and haven't bothered to find out.
Or...words change their meaning over time and space via a number of different mechanisms including ignorance, common misuse, parody, adjacency of meaning, contextual changes. The effect can go so far as to invert sense.
It's interesting how often people rail against these changes though. It is usually a hiding to nothing.
I'm all for remembering the history of usage and etymology though.
In case of gerrymander, hard (for me) to see what's positive about muddying up the meaning, to mean anything that the speaker WANTS it to mean?
Reserve it for geographical fiddling, I say! AND note I'm the 21st-century Funk & Wagnalls . . .
Commonwealth used to mean "republic" (or an approximation at least!). Now it means the "former British Empire".
The British Empire was so terrible that almost all its former colonies are members, other countries are queuing up to join-it and all seem quite happy for the British monarch to head it, for to use English as its language, and for it to be headquartered in London.
Interesting.
Is that the Commonwealth where most members are republics, and somehow doesn't involve the largest English-speaking country (the US) or our nearest English-speaking neighbour (Ireland)? That Commonwealth?
Royal Mail have lost some important documents, which were tracked/money paid for guaranteed next day delivery, there was no urgency on their part to help or pay the compensation.
On the very rare occasions DPD or DHL have lost/delayed an item they couldn't have been more helpful
I send hundreds of packages a year with RM and to be fair to them the loss rate is very small, a fraction of a percent even for untracked packages. But, yes they are not at all helpful if they do lose something. Last year I sent a package to Sweden via Royal Mail and it ended up in Beijing. RM took three months to admit error and pay out - and a few days later the postie dropped off the now very tatty package, returned all the way from China.
DPD have always worked out well for me, but DHL not so much. They managed to deliver a box of very expensive custom electronics not only to the wrong address but the wrong town! The proof of delivery photo showed it sitting in someone's wheely bin. The response when I complained was "we'll ask the driver to pick it up tomorrow"
Using the colour of the bin, the fact that it hadn't been emptied and a similarity in road names I managed to work out where my package was and went to recover it myself from a very confused lady who clearly thought I was a bit of a crackpot, wanting to rummage in her bin!
Royal Mail should lose its patronage.
Noone shouod ever pay first class. Irs a second class business.
It's not just the Royal Mail. I see some of your letters got a bit lost too.
Leicester fans singing God Save The King and getting drowned out by the Liverpool fans singing Liverpool.
Don't the rest of us plebs need saving? Stupid so-called "national" "anthem"!
All Liverpool fans are an unpatriotic disgrace. Being shown up in manners by Leicester.
This will obviously be ten nil to Liverpool on the pitch.
Is the main reason Leicester went down the owners wealth comes from duty free shops in airports, and they had a bad pandemic? Contributing factors over long expensive contracts, and money wasted in players not in first team games?
Does singing the national anthem count as the single only definition of patriotism in your opinion?
My own definition of patriotism is probably slightly different to yours. My own view of patriotism is a belief in the greater good of my country.
I think the Tories and their Brexit brand, vandal, violent nihilism, has ruined this country for a generation, maybe more. I find that daily the Tories complete incompetent, short term, survivalist factionalism is contradictory to any common good. And like Brexit, it continues to damage peoples lives and the economic wellbeing of the UK.
I find the Liverpool fans booing the national anthem an inoffensive form of satire, and harmless making fun of an anachronistic institution that deserves to be ribbed. The Tories on the other hand destroy people lives and livelihoods.
And Leicester had to trim the wage bill, and bring in some money from sales - I agree.
Gerrymander = manipulation of GEOGRAPHIC boundaries (for example, legislative districts) for electoral advantage.
This has been American definition of the word, invented in USA and named after an American politico for his contribution to the practice, for over 200 hundred years.
WHY our British cousins have decided to expand meaning of gerrymander, to include (it seems) ANY manipulation of electoral process, is beyond me.
Do any of you have a clue?
My guess is quasi-ignorance combined with unalloyed laziness; that is, mis-users have heard of the word, but NOT what it actually means - and haven't bothered to find out.
Or...words change their meaning over time and space via a number of different mechanisms including ignorance, common misuse, parody, adjacency of meaning, contextual changes. The effect can go so far as to invert sense.
It's interesting how often people rail against these changes though. It is usually a hiding to nothing.
I'm all for remembering the history of usage and etymology though.
In case of gerrymander, hard (for me) to see what's positive about muddying up the meaning, to mean anything that the speaker WANTS it to mean?
Reserve it for geographical fiddling, I say! AND note I'm the 21st-century Funk & Wagnalls . . .
Commonwealth used to mean "republic" (or an approximation at least!). Now it means the "former British Empire".
The British Empire was so terrible that almost all its former colonies are members, other countries are queuing up to join-it and all seem quite happy for the British monarch to head it, for to use English as its language, and for it to be headquartered in London.
Interesting.
Is that the Commonwealth where most members are republics, and somehow doesn't involve the largest English-speaking country (the US) or our nearest English-speaking neighbour (Ireland)? That Commonwealth?
The USA and Ireland are welcome to join too if they wish, both English speaking former British colonies
This Conservative fringe conference, or whatever it is really, is the gift that keeps on giving. To the Labour Party.
I think most of the public won’t even have noticed it’s going on. Those who have quite possibly think it’s the official party conference. But they won’t be paying much attention. So I doubt it’ll have much impact - a bunch of Tories going on about woke and immigration.
Much more damaging I think at the moment if this was a Tory donors’ conference where they were banging on about strivers and skivers and discussing privatising the NHS.
It’s an interesting question which bit of Toryism is most toxic to the electorate. I’d guess the economic mismanagement / perceived out of touchness on cost of living probably hurts them more than culture war stuff.
Whereas conversely at the moment the cultural and identity politics stuff is probably a bigger risk to Labour more than any perception of left wing economics.
This Conservative fringe conference, or whatever it is really, is the gift that keeps on giving. To the Labour Party.
At least there is some passion to it and genuine conservative ideology behind it.
As an old Corbynite like BJO will tell you, Starmer has drained all the passion out of the Labour Party (and you don't have to be a Corbynite to say that, Blair managed passion and firm centrism)
This National Conservatism Conference really is something else. If there's a concern that we import wokeness from the USA, there should be much more concern about this importation of US-funded evangelical right-wing nuttiness and, in particular, the appearance of several leading Tory MPs. I note, for example, that Wiki says Miriam Cates is an evangelical Christian. Is it the British Tea Party movement?
If anybody's interested, I came across this article by John Hayes on Conservative Home. Scary stuff, I think. Even the Tory commenters mostly seem to think he's as mad as a box of frogs.
It's all the fault of John Lennon. That's why the West is going to the dogs.
Western civilisation is threatened by a "new religion", a mix of "Marxism, narcissism and paganism", conforming to the "dystopian fantasy of John Lennon"
This National Conservatism Conference really is something else. If there's a concern that we import wokeness from the USA, there should be much more concern about this importation of US-funded evangelical right-wing nuttiness and, in particular, the appearance of several leading Tory MPs. I note, for example, that Wiki says Miriam Cates is an evangelical Christian. Is it the British Tea Party movement?
If anybody's interested, I came across this article by John Hayes on Conservative Home. Scary stuff, I think. Even the Tory commenters mostly seem to think he's as mad as a box of frogs.
It's all the fault of John Lennon. That's why the West is going to the dogs.
Western civilisation is threatened by a "new religion", a mix of "Marxism, narcissism and paganism", conforming to the "dystopian fantasy of John Lennon"
This National Conservatism Conference really is something else. If there's a concern that we import wokeness from the USA, there should be much more concern about this importation of US-funded evangelical right-wing nuttiness and, in particular, the appearance of several leading Tory MPs. I note, for example, that Wiki says Miriam Cates is an evangelical Christian. Is it the British Tea Party movement?
If anybody's interested, I came across this article by John Hayes on Conservative Home. Scary stuff, I think. Even the Tory commenters mostly seem to think he's as mad as a box of frogs.
It's all the fault of John Lennon. That's why the West is going to the dogs.
Western civilisation is threatened by a "new religion", a mix of "Marxism, narcissism and paganism", conforming to the "dystopian fantasy of John Lennon"
Anti country, anti religion, anti assets and wealth and possessions, yes John Lennon's Imagine was everything the populist conservative Right loathes
"Imagine all the people Livin' life in peace ... No need for greed or hunger A brotherhood of man"
The monster.
It's not monstrous to declare that it would be nice to live in peace. It's just weird that some people end up supporting genuinely monstrous peoples' aims whilst insisting they are still just all about peace. Or seem more committed to revolutionary politics as a goal in itself, and rejecting perfectly good measures on the grounds it doesn't require revoluntary politics.
Was that how Lennon was? I have no idea, I guess he was influential to old people, but even as a not young person he means nothing to me other than some tunes were ok and apparently he was a bit of a dick.
Gerrymander = manipulation of GEOGRAPHIC boundaries (for example, legislative districts) for electoral advantage.
This has been American definition of the word, invented in USA and named after an American politico for his contribution to the practice, for over 200 hundred years.
WHY our British cousins have decided to expand meaning of gerrymander, to include (it seems) ANY manipulation of electoral process, is beyond me.
Do any of you have a clue?
My guess is quasi-ignorance combined with unalloyed laziness; that is, mis-users have heard of the word, but NOT what it actually means - and haven't bothered to find out.
Or...words change their meaning over time and space via a number of different mechanisms including ignorance, common misuse, parody, adjacency of meaning, contextual changes. The effect can go so far as to invert sense.
It's interesting how often people rail against these changes though. It is usually a hiding to nothing.
I'm all for remembering the history of usage and etymology though.
In case of gerrymander, hard (for me) to see what's positive about muddying up the meaning, to mean anything that the speaker WANTS it to mean?
Reserve it for geographical fiddling, I say! AND note I'm the 21st-century Funk & Wagnalls . . .
Commonwealth used to mean "republic" (or an approximation at least!). Now it means the "former British Empire".
The British Empire was so terrible that almost all its former colonies are members, other countries are queuing up to join-it and all seem quite happy for the British monarch to head it, for to use English as its language, and for it to be headquartered in London.
Interesting.
Is that the Commonwealth where most members are republics, and somehow doesn't involve the largest English-speaking country (the US) or our nearest English-speaking neighbour (Ireland)? That Commonwealth?
What are you even complaining about Sunil? What does most of them being republics have to do with...anything? If anything the fact they are mostly republics and yet still remain members and more republics want to join is a positive rather than negative sign of the organisation - they don't feel obliged to join due to some historical monarchical connection.
And it's a failure if not every place the British ever looked at sideways decided there was a reason to join it?
I get it's supposed to be in part a joke, but I don't get what the joke is supposed to be.
The police should be investigating this voter suppression plan.
What actual laws are they suspected of breaking? Is there a law that says things have to be fair?
Malfeasance in public office.
JRM, Sunak et al have knowingly misused or abused their power or authority and willingly acted to cause harm to an individual or group.
Have you ever killed a fox while wearing a kimono?
Please: no discussion of the PB moderator initiation ceremonies.
If I caught up with it, I would have ripped the fox to pieces with my bare hands which half ate Paloma Faith.
I hate foxes. They are vermin worse than rats.
How did your hands half eat Paloma Faith?
If I had caught up with the fox, which had half eaten Paloma Faith, I would have ripped the fox to pieces with my bare hands.
It’s like being back at school 🙄
You ripped up foxes at school???
Wow.
If I had caught up with the fox, which had half eaten poor Paloma Faith, I would have ripped the fox to pieces with my bare hands.
Honestly, a slight thing amiss in a PB post, and rather than meaning clearly understood anyway, so leave it be, it has to be commented on and corrected. It’s like being watched by over zealous English Grammar teachers back at school 🙄
Leicester fans singing God Save The King and getting drowned out by the Liverpool fans singing Liverpool.
Don't the rest of us plebs need saving? Stupid so-called "national" "anthem"!
All Liverpool fans are an unpatriotic disgrace. Being shown up in manners by Leicester.
This will obviously be ten nil to Liverpool on the pitch.
Is the main reason Leicester went down the owners wealth comes from duty free shops in airports, and they had a bad pandemic? Contributing factors over long expensive contracts, and money wasted in players not in first team games?
Does singing the national anthem count as the single only definition of patriotism in your opinion?
My own definition of patriotism is probably slightly different to yours. My own view of patriotism is a belief in the greater good of my country.
I think the Tories and their Brexit brand, vandal, violent nihilism, has ruined this country for a generation, maybe more. I find that daily the Tories complete incompetent, short term, survivalist factionalism is contradictory to any common good. And like Brexit, it continues to damage peoples lives and the economic wellbeing of the UK.
I find the Liverpool fans booing the national anthem an inoffensive form of satire, and harmless making fun of an anachronistic institution that deserves to be ribbed. The Tories on the other hand destroy people lives and livelihoods.
If a nation cannot handle a little booing of its anthem it is pretty weak as nations go, rather insecure.
I feel that way about religion as well, when people get violent or aggressive about people who don't even follow that religion not adhering to their personal interpretation of it - they (and some outsiders) think it shows strength of their faith, whilst I think it shows them to have the mentality of a child, lashing out as they secretly fear the thing they seek to defend is so weak it cannot bear mockery.
I, for once, am delighted to see this exceptional LFC performance. Few more would be good.
I'm hoping to see a couple of fabulous West Ham performances, a great day for Newcastle, and one for Spurs, along with a remarkable collapse for both Arsenal and Crystal Palace.
Leicester fans singing God Save The King and getting drowned out by the Liverpool fans singing Liverpool.
Don't the rest of us plebs need saving? Stupid so-called "national" "anthem"!
All Liverpool fans are an unpatriotic disgrace. Being shown up in manners by Leicester.
This will obviously be ten nil to Liverpool on the pitch.
Is the main reason Leicester went down the owners wealth comes from duty free shops in airports, and they had a bad pandemic? Contributing factors over long expensive contracts, and money wasted in players not in first team games?
Does singing the national anthem count as the single only definition of patriotism in your opinion?
My own definition of patriotism is probably slightly different to yours. My own view of patriotism is a belief in the greater good of my country.
I think the Tories and their Brexit brand, vandal, violent nihilism, has ruined this country for a generation, maybe more. I find that daily the Tories complete incompetent, short term, survivalist factionalism is contradictory to any common good. And like Brexit, it continues to damage peoples lives and the economic wellbeing of the UK.
I find the Liverpool fans booing the national anthem an inoffensive form of satire, and harmless making fun of an anachronistic institution that deserves to be ribbed. The Tories on the other hand destroy people lives and livelihoods.
If a nation cannot handle a little booing of its anthem it is pretty weak as nations go, rather insecure.
I feel that way about religion as well, when people get violent or aggressive about people who don't even follow that religion not adhering to their personal interpretation of it - they (and some outsiders) think it shows strength of their faith, whilst I think it shows them to have the mentality of a child, lashing out as they secretly fear the thing they seek to defend is so weak it cannot bear mockery.
And those who have no respect for their own anthem, culture or religious morality will soon lead to the weakening and ultimately collapse of that very nation like the collapse of the Roman Empire
I, for once, am delighted to see this exceptional LFC performance. Few more would be good.
I'm hoping to see a couple of fabulous West Ham performances, a great day for Newcastle, and one for Spurs, along with a remarkable collapse for both Arsenal and Crystal Palace.
Leicester and Leeds to go down? We can agree on that. It's like Molotov-Ribbentrop. Without the corpses.
Leicester fans singing God Save The King and getting drowned out by the Liverpool fans singing Liverpool.
Don't the rest of us plebs need saving? Stupid so-called "national" "anthem"!
All Liverpool fans are an unpatriotic disgrace. Being shown up in manners by Leicester.
This will obviously be ten nil to Liverpool on the pitch.
Is the main reason Leicester went down the owners wealth comes from duty free shops in airports, and they had a bad pandemic? Contributing factors over long expensive contracts, and money wasted in players not in first team games?
Does singing the national anthem count as the single only definition of patriotism in your opinion?
My own definition of patriotism is probably slightly different to yours. My own view of patriotism is a belief in the greater good of my country.
I think the Tories and their Brexit brand, vandal, violent nihilism, has ruined this country for a generation, maybe more. I find that daily the Tories complete incompetent, short term, survivalist factionalism is contradictory to any common good. And like Brexit, it continues to damage peoples lives and the economic wellbeing of the UK.
I find the Liverpool fans booing the national anthem an inoffensive form of satire, and harmless making fun of an anachronistic institution that deserves to be ribbed. The Tories on the other hand destroy people lives and livelihoods.
If a nation cannot handle a little booing of its anthem it is pretty weak as nations go, rather insecure.
I feel that way about religion as well, when people get violent or aggressive about people who don't even follow that religion not adhering to their personal interpretation of it - they (and some outsiders) think it shows strength of their faith, whilst I think it shows them to have the mentality of a child, lashing out as they secretly fear the thing they seek to defend is so weak it cannot bear mockery.
And those who have no respect for their own anthem, culture or religious morality will soon lead to the weakening and ultimately collapse of that very nation like the collapse of the Roman Empire
Hang on. What is our nation's "religious morality"? Consider with reference to the 15th to 19th Centuries.
Leicester fans singing God Save The King and getting drowned out by the Liverpool fans singing Liverpool.
Don't the rest of us plebs need saving? Stupid so-called "national" "anthem"!
All Liverpool fans are an unpatriotic disgrace. Being shown up in manners by Leicester.
This will obviously be ten nil to Liverpool on the pitch.
Is the main reason Leicester went down the owners wealth comes from duty free shops in airports, and they had a bad pandemic? Contributing factors over long expensive contracts, and money wasted in players not in first team games?
Does singing the national anthem count as the single only definition of patriotism in your opinion?
My own definition of patriotism is probably slightly different to yours. My own view of patriotism is a belief in the greater good of my country.
I think the Tories and their Brexit brand, vandal, violent nihilism, has ruined this country for a generation, maybe more. I find that daily the Tories complete incompetent, short term, survivalist factionalism is contradictory to any common good. And like Brexit, it continues to damage peoples lives and the economic wellbeing of the UK.
I find the Liverpool fans booing the national anthem an inoffensive form of satire, and harmless making fun of an anachronistic institution that deserves to be ribbed. The Tories on the other hand destroy people lives and livelihoods.
If a nation cannot handle a little booing of its anthem it is pretty weak as nations go, rather insecure.
I feel that way about religion as well, when people get violent or aggressive about people who don't even follow that religion not adhering to their personal interpretation of it - they (and some outsiders) think it shows strength of their faith, whilst I think it shows them to have the mentality of a child, lashing out as they secretly fear the thing they seek to defend is so weak it cannot bear mockery.
And those who have no respect for their own anthem, culture or religious morality will soon lead to the weakening and ultimately collapse of that very nation like the collapse of the Roman Empire
This almost sounds like you are taking Gibbon's argument that the decline and fall of the Roman Empire is attributable, in part, to the abandonment of Pagan beliefs and the embrace of Christianity.
On a wider note, you have shown yourself time and time again to be utterly clueless when it comes to understanding history. It would appear on the surface from what you've just that you don't have the first notion about the fall of the Roman Empire, which is on brand but so very tiresome when there's a wealth of material out there. If you could just tear your eyes away from YouGov crosstabs for five minutes.
This National Conservatism Conference really is something else. If there's a concern that we import wokeness from the USA, there should be much more concern about this importation of US-funded evangelical right-wing nuttiness and, in particular, the appearance of several leading Tory MPs. I note, for example, that Wiki says Miriam Cates is an evangelical Christian. Is it the British Tea Party movement?
If anybody's interested, I came across this article by John Hayes on Conservative Home. Scary stuff, I think. Even the Tory commenters mostly seem to think he's as mad as a box of frogs.
It's all the fault of John Lennon. That's why the West is going to the dogs.
Western civilisation is threatened by a "new religion", a mix of "Marxism, narcissism and paganism", conforming to the "dystopian fantasy of John Lennon"
@ChrisMusson EXCL: Police requested search warrant for Nicola Sturgeon’s home and SNP HQ a week before end of SNP leadership race - but only got nod from Crown Office a week after the contest ended
@JenWilliams_FT Ok so, here goes. My (long-researched) attempt to explain why so many allegations are flying about in relation to Ben Houchen, the former steelworks in Redcar and, by extension, the Teesside freeport
This National Conservatism Conference really is something else. If there's a concern that we import wokeness from the USA, there should be much more concern about this importation of US-funded evangelical right-wing nuttiness and, in particular, the appearance of several leading Tory MPs. I note, for example, that Wiki says Miriam Cates is an evangelical Christian. Is it the British Tea Party movement?
If anybody's interested, I came across this article by John Hayes on Conservative Home. Scary stuff, I think. Even the Tory commenters mostly seem to think he's as mad as a box of frogs.
It's all the fault of John Lennon. That's why the West is going to the dogs.
Western civilisation is threatened by a "new religion", a mix of "Marxism, narcissism and paganism", conforming to the "dystopian fantasy of John Lennon"
Leicester fans singing God Save The King and getting drowned out by the Liverpool fans singing Liverpool.
Don't the rest of us plebs need saving? Stupid so-called "national" "anthem"!
All Liverpool fans are an unpatriotic disgrace. Being shown up in manners by Leicester.
This will obviously be ten nil to Liverpool on the pitch.
Is the main reason Leicester went down the owners wealth comes from duty free shops in airports, and they had a bad pandemic? Contributing factors over long expensive contracts, and money wasted in players not in first team games?
Does singing the national anthem count as the single only definition of patriotism in your opinion?
My own definition of patriotism is probably slightly different to yours. My own view of patriotism is a belief in the greater good of my country.
I think the Tories and their Brexit brand, vandal, violent nihilism, has ruined this country for a generation, maybe more. I find that daily the Tories complete incompetent, short term, survivalist factionalism is contradictory to any common good. And like Brexit, it continues to damage peoples lives and the economic wellbeing of the UK.
I find the Liverpool fans booing the national anthem an inoffensive form of satire, and harmless making fun of an anachronistic institution that deserves to be ribbed. The Tories on the other hand destroy people lives and livelihoods.
If a nation cannot handle a little booing of its anthem it is pretty weak as nations go, rather insecure.
I feel that way about religion as well, when people get violent or aggressive about people who don't even follow that religion not adhering to their personal interpretation of it - they (and some outsiders) think it shows strength of their faith, whilst I think it shows them to have the mentality of a child, lashing out as they secretly fear the thing they seek to defend is so weak it cannot bear mockery.
And those who have no respect for their own anthem, culture or religious morality will soon lead to the weakening and ultimately collapse of that very nation like the collapse of the Roman Empire
Hang on. What is our nation's "religious morality"? Consider with reference to the 15th to 19th Centuries.
Leicester fans singing God Save The King and getting drowned out by the Liverpool fans singing Liverpool.
Don't the rest of us plebs need saving? Stupid so-called "national" "anthem"!
All Liverpool fans are an unpatriotic disgrace. Being shown up in manners by Leicester.
This will obviously be ten nil to Liverpool on the pitch.
Is the main reason Leicester went down the owners wealth comes from duty free shops in airports, and they had a bad pandemic? Contributing factors over long expensive contracts, and money wasted in players not in first team games?
Does singing the national anthem count as the single only definition of patriotism in your opinion?
My own definition of patriotism is probably slightly different to yours. My own view of patriotism is a belief in the greater good of my country.
I think the Tories and their Brexit brand, vandal, violent nihilism, has ruined this country for a generation, maybe more. I find that daily the Tories complete incompetent, short term, survivalist factionalism is contradictory to any common good. And like Brexit, it continues to damage peoples lives and the economic wellbeing of the UK.
I find the Liverpool fans booing the national anthem an inoffensive form of satire, and harmless making fun of an anachronistic institution that deserves to be ribbed. The Tories on the other hand destroy people lives and livelihoods.
If a nation cannot handle a little booing of its anthem it is pretty weak as nations go, rather insecure.
I feel that way about religion as well, when people get violent or aggressive about people who don't even follow that religion not adhering to their personal interpretation of it - they (and some outsiders) think it shows strength of their faith, whilst I think it shows them to have the mentality of a child, lashing out as they secretly fear the thing they seek to defend is so weak it cannot bear mockery.
And those who have no respect for their own anthem, culture or religious morality will soon lead to the weakening and ultimately collapse of that very nation like the collapse of the Roman Empire
I take issue with 'will soon lead'. You're presenting it as binary, 'respect' meaning no one should be booing vs 'chaos', that is a few people boo
If no one has respect for their anthem or culture etc then there will be collapse. But a few people booing at football matches is not a spark which will light
I'm a monarchist and frequent defender of our parliamentary set up, and how it should evolve with respect for our traditions. But it just comes across as insecure if people get an attack of the vapours when someone boos or perfomatively tries to get a rise by being oh so edgy #notmyking etc.
Leicester fans singing God Save The King and getting drowned out by the Liverpool fans singing Liverpool.
Don't the rest of us plebs need saving? Stupid so-called "national" "anthem"!
All Liverpool fans are an unpatriotic disgrace. Being shown up in manners by Leicester.
This will obviously be ten nil to Liverpool on the pitch.
Is the main reason Leicester went down the owners wealth comes from duty free shops in airports, and they had a bad pandemic? Contributing factors over long expensive contracts, and money wasted in players not in first team games?
Does singing the national anthem count as the single only definition of patriotism in your opinion?
My own definition of patriotism is probably slightly different to yours. My own view of patriotism is a belief in the greater good of my country.
I think the Tories and their Brexit brand, vandal, violent nihilism, has ruined this country for a generation, maybe more. I find that daily the Tories complete incompetent, short term, survivalist factionalism is contradictory to any common good. And like Brexit, it continues to damage peoples lives and the economic wellbeing of the UK.
I find the Liverpool fans booing the national anthem an inoffensive form of satire, and harmless making fun of an anachronistic institution that deserves to be ribbed. The Tories on the other hand destroy people lives and livelihoods.
If a nation cannot handle a little booing of its anthem it is pretty weak as nations go, rather insecure.
I feel that way about religion as well, when people get violent or aggressive about people who don't even follow that religion not adhering to their personal interpretation of it - they (and some outsiders) think it shows strength of their faith, whilst I think it shows them to have the mentality of a child, lashing out as they secretly fear the thing they seek to defend is so weak it cannot bear mockery.
And those who have no respect for their own anthem, culture or religious morality will soon lead to the weakening and ultimately collapse of that very nation like the collapse of the Roman Empire
Hang on. What is our nation's "religious morality"? Consider with reference to the 15th to 19th Centuries.
hope everyone is doing well in their predictions and enjoying the twists and turns of the political landscape. Today, I want to divert our attention for a moment from the world of politics to a topic that is equally captivating and delightful: Mr Kipling's Fondant Fancies!
Now, I know what you might be thinking, "What do these delicious pastries have to do with politics?" Well, hear me out! Just like politics, Mr Kipling's Fondant Fancies offer a tantalizing blend of flavors, colors, and textures that can provoke some lively debates.
Firstly, let's discuss the aesthetics. These little cakes come in an array of vibrant hues, each one topped with a delicate layer of fondant icing. Similarly, politics often presents us with a diverse spectrum of ideologies and parties, each with its own distinct appeal. So, imagine picking a blue fondant fancy and a yellow one, and debating which is more visually appealing—much like comparing different political candidates or parties based on their campaign materials!
Next, let's delve into the flavors. From the classic vanilla to the zesty lemon, each fondant fancy brings a unique taste sensation. Similarly, in politics, we have a variety of policy platforms and perspectives, each catering to different palates. We could compare the rich and indulgent chocolate flavor to a party's stance on economic issues, while the light and fruity raspberry could represent their stance on social matters. Which flavors align with your political taste buds?
Of course, the experience of eating a fondant fancy is not complete without considering the texture. As you bite into the soft sponge cake, your teeth sink into the smooth, velvety fondant icing, resulting in a harmonious blend. In politics, we often see the need for different ideologies and parties to come together, finding common ground and compromises for the greater good. Just like the perfect balance of textures in a fondant fancy, political alliances can create a satisfying outcome.
Now, I must admit, I'm not suggesting we base our political predictions solely on the quality of baked goods. However, sometimes it's good to take a step back and appreciate the lighter, sweeter aspects of life. Plus, who doesn't love indulging in a delightful treat while engaging in political banter?
I like the yellow ones the best. In case anyone wants to know.
This National Conservatism Conference really is something else. If there's a concern that we import wokeness from the USA, there should be much more concern about this importation of US-funded evangelical right-wing nuttiness and, in particular, the appearance of several leading Tory MPs. I note, for example, that Wiki says Miriam Cates is an evangelical Christian. Is it the British Tea Party movement?
If anybody's interested, I came across this article by John Hayes on Conservative Home. Scary stuff, I think. Even the Tory commenters mostly seem to think he's as mad as a box of frogs.
It's all the fault of John Lennon. That's why the West is going to the dogs.
Western civilisation is threatened by a "new religion", a mix of "Marxism, narcissism and paganism", conforming to the "dystopian fantasy of John Lennon"
Anti country, anti religion, anti assets and wealth and possessions, yes John Lennon's Imagine was everything the populist conservative Right loathes
I guess the (Epping) Conservatives prefer McCartney's Yesterday?
Not so long ago all your troubles seemed so far away; now it looks as if they're here to stay.
Eleanor Rigby Picks up the rice in the church where a wedding has been Lives in a dream Waits at the window Wearing the face that she keeps in a jar by the door Who is it for?
All the lonely people Where do they all come from? All the lonely people Where do they all belong?
HYUFD Writing the words of a PB post no one will read Meaningless screed Look at him working Darning the rosette he wore to the count Lost the recount
Comments
Edit - Fun fact, Hague was my MP between 2005 and 2009.
Top bloke.
It half-succeeded. 1.2% were turned away and did not return.
It half-failed. Many of the voters turned away were Con loyalists. That is certainly true of both people I know that were unable to vote.
MORAL - Just because the Con party fails to do something doesn't mean they weren't trying to. In fact given their basic level of stupidlty and incompetence at the highest level it may just be proof that they were!
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/apr/01/planning-applications-in-england-fall-to-record-low-in-housing-blow
Sixty thousand new homes can be built in Kent argues Tory MP
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12054869/Tories-rowing-housing-crisis-told-brave-build-30-000-home-new-towns.html
The truth is a lot of experienced and senior Tories really don’t like Sunak’s decision to stop building homes and think it’s a big vote loser don’t they?
https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/michael-gove-developers-uk-housing-crisis-divides-tories-2334827
Though @El_Capitano does raise a very interesting question about whether beliefs should be protected at all. There is an argument that they should not be because they are choices we make, not immutable characteristics we cannot change. But if we accept that premise then why should things like marriage, pregnancy and other characteristics over which we have choices be protected?I doubt anyone will go there but it does show that the basis for arguing that discrimination is a bad thing is not consistent and not necessarily based on any very coherent principles.
Interesting.
I hate foxes. They are vermin worse than rats.
As reflected in some official titles, for example "commonwealth attorney".
Virginia is interesting in that it's nickname is "the Old Dominion" in honor of it's (quasi-) loyalty to King Charles II before he was restored to the English throne.
(At least that's explanation I've always heard, note wikipedia says otherwise, but think it is wrong in this instance.)
So in VA they've got both Cavaliers AND Roundheads covered.
Short term however no new housebuilding is a winner, especially with NIMBY pensioners in southern England
US Republicans are savvy enough not to suppress their own voters.
This will obviously be ten nil to Liverpool on the pitch.
Is the main reason Leicester went down the owners wealth comes from duty free shops in airports, and they had a bad pandemic? Contributing factors over long expensive contracts, and money wasted in players not in first team games?
Anecdote alert, 100% of everybody I have spoken to today on FaceTime think Braverman is the new Margaret Thatcher and can’t wait for her to become PM.
Mind you, I have only spoken to my mum on FaceTime today. Guess that’s why it’s called anecdote alert.
Meaning that some of these Bitter Enders will end up NOT actually voting, because there was a family emergency, or long lines at voting locations, or they showed up after final cutoff for voting.
So they effectively disenfranchised themselves - at the urging of Republican Party "leaders".
Especially galling for many still-sane GOPers, seeing as how Republicans have always had demographic propensity to vote EARLY including via old-school absentee ballots which used to skew pretty heavily Republican - emphasis on past tense.
You do have a lot of experienced Conservative MPs asking for house building promises, policies and starting now though.
1) he’s an idiot
2) to damage the government
3) both
4 something else
I could go on, but I want to watch the second half of the football (like the ordinary person I am).
Wise old Tories would have taken the hit over housebuilding over the decades to create Conservative voters for the ages.
Foolish new Tories have run away from something that makes them unpopular now, but is now starting to make Conservatives unelectable for a generation.
Temperature on my humble Seattle porch is currently 95 degrees Fahrenheit. Outside air temp maybe ten degrees cooler, indoor temp my humble apt 75F
This is third day of highs in upper-80s in Seattle, which is unusual (or rather was before climate change started kicking in) and especially so for mid-May.
Spring has been late arriving, but now has skipped over to dog days of Summer.
Forecast is for scattered thunderstorms tonight, perhaps some hail in spots, which will moderate temps a touch but not much. Expected to stay about twenty degrees F above normal though Thursday.
They are worse than Hermes and Yodel.
Plus they at least have a depot within walking distance. Not on the other side of a small mountain range without a road crossing.
He was an enthusiastic supporter of the monarchy and the Commonwealth, which was an uncommon view for members of the Campaign Group of Labour MPs.
His view was that the Commonwealth allowed some very small countries to have contact with a big country/countries that they normally wouldn't have and they appreciated that contact/influence.
Western civilisation is threatened by a "new religion", a mix of "Marxism, narcissism and paganism", conforming to the "dystopian fantasy of John Lennon"
https://twitter.com/broderly/status/1658108814413971456
On the very rare occasions DPD or DHL have lost/delayed an item they couldn't have been more helpful
It’s like being back at school 🙄
😇
…
Got to admire Ian Hislop for crowbarring Brexit in there - again.
Now, I know what you might be thinking, "What do these delicious pastries have to do with politics?" Well, hear me out! Just like politics, Mr Kipling's Fondant Fancies offer a tantalizing blend of flavors, colors, and textures that can provoke some lively debates.
Firstly, let's discuss the aesthetics. These little cakes come in an array of vibrant hues, each one topped with a delicate layer of fondant icing. Similarly, politics often presents us with a diverse spectrum of ideologies and parties, each with its own distinct appeal. So, imagine picking a blue fondant fancy and a yellow one, and debating which is more visually appealing—much like comparing different political candidates or parties based on their campaign materials!
Next, let's delve into the flavors. From the classic vanilla to the zesty lemon, each fondant fancy brings a unique taste sensation. Similarly, in politics, we have a variety of policy platforms and perspectives, each catering to different palates. We could compare the rich and indulgent chocolate flavor to a party's stance on economic issues, while the light and fruity raspberry could represent their stance on social matters. Which flavors align with your political taste buds?
Of course, the experience of eating a fondant fancy is not complete without considering the texture. As you bite into the soft sponge cake, your teeth sink into the smooth, velvety fondant icing, resulting in a harmonious blend. In politics, we often see the need for different ideologies and parties to come together, finding common ground and compromises for the greater good. Just like the perfect balance of textures in a fondant fancy, political alliances can create a satisfying outcome.
Now, I must admit, I'm not suggesting we base our political predictions solely on the quality of baked goods. However, sometimes it's good to take a step back and appreciate the lighter, sweeter aspects of life. Plus, who doesn't love indulging in a delightful treat while engaging in political banter?
Through the Harare Principles, and the cultural, education, and trade links it promotes through its members, it anchors our values across almost a third of the world - places that otherwise might have fallen into the orbit of other more malign states.
It's why it's so important to not let China buy them out.
https://twitter.com/broderly/status/1658109999757901826?s=20
Few more would be good.
Livin' life in peace
...
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man"
The monster.
To the Labour Party.
My own definition of patriotism is probably slightly different to yours. My own view of patriotism is a belief in the greater good of my country.
I think the Tories and their Brexit brand, vandal, violent nihilism, has ruined this country for a generation, maybe more. I find that daily the Tories complete incompetent, short term, survivalist factionalism is contradictory to any common good. And like Brexit, it continues to damage peoples lives and the economic wellbeing of the UK.
I find the Liverpool fans booing the national anthem an inoffensive form of satire, and harmless making fun of an anachronistic institution that deserves to be ribbed. The Tories on the other hand destroy people lives and livelihoods.
DPD have always worked out well for me, but DHL not so much. They managed to deliver a box of very expensive custom electronics not only to the wrong address but the wrong town! The proof of delivery photo showed it sitting in someone's wheely bin. The response when I complained was "we'll ask the driver to pick it up tomorrow"
Using the colour of the bin, the fact that it hadn't been emptied and a similarity in road names I managed to work out where my package was and went to recover it myself from a very confused lady who clearly thought I was a bit of a crackpot, wanting to rummage in her bin!
Noone shouod ever pay first class. Irs a second class business.
Much more damaging I think at the moment if this was a Tory donors’ conference where they were banging on about strivers and skivers and discussing privatising the NHS.
It’s an interesting question which bit of Toryism is most toxic to the electorate. I’d guess the economic mismanagement / perceived out of touchness on cost of living probably hurts them more than culture war stuff.
Whereas conversely at the moment the cultural and identity politics stuff is probably a bigger risk to Labour more than any perception of left wing economics.
As an old Corbynite like BJO will tell you, Starmer has drained all the passion out of the Labour Party (and you don't have to be a Corbynite to say that, Blair managed passion and firm centrism)
Although compared to what Yoko Ono produced on her own... (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-F5hv8hgLCE&ab_channel=Degenerate)
Wow.
Was that how Lennon was? I have no idea, I guess he was influential to old people, but even as a not young person he means nothing to me other than some tunes were ok and apparently he was a bit of a dick.
Do the requisite blindfolds have www2.politicalbetting.com printed on them?
And it's a failure if not every place the British ever looked at sideways decided there was a reason to join it?
I get it's supposed to be in part a joke, but I don't get what the joke is supposed to be.
Honestly, a slight thing amiss in a PB post, and rather than meaning clearly understood anyway, so leave it be, it has to be commented on and corrected. It’s like being watched by over zealous English Grammar teachers back at school 🙄
I feel that way about religion as well, when people get violent or aggressive about people who don't even follow that religion not adhering to their personal interpretation of it - they (and some outsiders) think it shows strength of their faith, whilst I think it shows them to have the mentality of a child, lashing out as they secretly fear the thing they seek to defend is so weak it cannot bear mockery.
We can agree on that.
It's like Molotov-Ribbentrop.
Without the corpses.
What is our nation's "religious morality"?
Consider with reference to the 15th to 19th Centuries.
On a wider note, you have shown yourself time and time again to be utterly clueless when it comes to understanding history. It would appear on the surface from what you've just that you don't have the first notion about the fall of the Roman Empire, which is on brand but so very tiresome when there's a wealth of material out there. If you could just tear your eyes away from YouGov crosstabs for five minutes.
Not so long ago all your troubles seemed so far away; now it looks as if they're here to stay.
EXCL: Police requested search warrant for Nicola Sturgeon’s home and SNP HQ a week before end of SNP leadership race - but only got nod from Crown Office a week after the contest ended
https://twitter.com/ChrisMusson/status/1658194679991508998
Ok so, here goes. My (long-researched) attempt to explain why so many allegations are flying about in relation to Ben Houchen, the former steelworks in Redcar and, by extension, the Teesside freeport
https://twitter.com/JenWilliams_FT/status/1658013914175602691
BREAKING: sexual abuse suit against Rudy Giuliani includes bombshell allegation
Giuliani told alleged victim he was "SELLING PARDONS" for $2,000,000 each "which he and Trump would split" AND SHE HAS RECORDINGS AND EMAILS
https://twitter.com/KeithOlbermann/status/1658201258656759809
If no one has respect for their anthem or culture etc then there will be collapse. But a few people booing at football matches is not a spark which will light
I'm a monarchist and frequent defender of our parliamentary set up, and how it should evolve with respect for our traditions. But it just comes across as insecure if people get an attack of the vapours when someone boos or perfomatively tries to get a rise by being oh so edgy #notmyking etc.
What does that mean exactly?
It was probably all too good to be true, his stomping re-election victory not actually showing a political collossos perhaps.
Picks up the rice in the church where a wedding has been
Lives in a dream
Waits at the window
Wearing the face that she keeps in a jar by the door
Who is it for?
All the lonely people
Where do they all come from?
All the lonely people
Where do they all belong?
HYUFD
Writing the words of a PB post no one will read
Meaningless screed
Look at him working
Darning the rosette he wore to the count
Lost the recount