Trump could be a criminal defendant in both Florida and Washington.
Multiple witnesses subpoenaed in Florida in Trump Mar-a-Lago case Involvement of top prosecutor Jay Bratt in the Florida grand jury could suggest questions about Espionage Act violations https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jun/07/trump-documents-grand-jury-florida-espionage-act ...Bratt, who was seen arriving in Miami on Tuesday by this Guardian reporter, has previously appeared for grand jury proceedings in the espionage side of the investigation, as opposed to the obstruction side, which has typically been led by Smith’s other prosecutors or national security trial attorneys.
A justice department spokesperson declined to comment.
But the underlying reasons as to why prosecutors in the special counsel’s office impaneled the new grand jury in Florida, and whether it is now the only grand jury active in the case after the Washington grand jury has sat dormant for weeks, remains an open question.
Prosecutors would most probably prefer to bring charges in Washington, where the judges at the US district court are more familiar with handling national security case – though Florida also has a robust national security section – and the jury pool skews more Democratic.
The impaneling of grand juries has to do with where prosecutors believe a crime was committed. And the most straightforward reason for the Florida grand jury is that prosecutors have developed evidence of criminal activity at Mar-a-Lago, which is in the southern district of Florida.
In this investigation, prosecutors considering charges against Trump for retaining national security material may have concluded from the evidence that he was still president when classified documents were moved to Mar-a-Lago, meaning his “unlawful possession” only started in Florida.
Similarly, if prosecutors have also developed evidence that Trump knew he had retained national security documents after he left office at Mar-a-Lago, for instance by waving them around or showing people, that could present hurdles to charging espionage act violations in Washington.
The venue for an obstruction of justice charge is more difficult to deduce, meanwhile, because the courts have provided little guidance about how it should be applied under section 1519 of the US criminal code*, which prosecutors listed on the affidavit for Mar-a-Lago search warrant...
On topic. I agree Rishi, for all his faults, won’t be moved against this side of the GE. This is mostly because Tories are resigned to defeat now, need a fall guy, and the focus is on the succession being about how best to fight back after the election. And I think it’s largely decided the conservatives will return to Thatcherism and economic liberalism to fight back, not Nat-C agenda.
Nor do Labour and Lib Dem’s want Rishi removed before the election, they can do without the worry of a Black Swan creating some sort of Cleggasm.
However, where todays Super Poll shows SNP support bleeding not to Labour but to don’t know, the chances are imo SNP may go into general election with different leadership and in a different place than they are now so can get all those don’t knows back, depriving Labour of a dozen or two chickens it looks like they are already counting before they hatch.
It’s still possible Sunak has to go because a revelation or scandal is just so bad.
Labour perhaps are in the weakest position here, as so much of their appeal rests on Starmer’s shoulders. If he has a heart attack, or stroke, and Rayner leads Labour into the election, the Tories can finish largest party or even majority from this position.
In short: SNP benefit in general election from change of leader, and I expect them to do this, Sunak is expendable but is being kept on by a party resigned to defeat as their fall guy, Labour face electoral crash if it loses its current leader.
I think if Starmer dropped dead he'd still win. People aren't going to Labour because of his sparkle. We could have a Weekend At Bernie's election right now and still see Labour breeze into Downing Street.
In fact, it's entirely possible Starmer has been dead for years and he's still heading for SW1A
Of course he won't be, for starters Sunak performs much better than his party overall in polls and is close to Starmer as preferred PM.
If he squeezes DKs and RefUK voters as today's MRP poll shows he could also get a hung parliament
A hung parliament yes - but one where you are in opposition.
Labour failing to get an absolute majority would still have a comfortable working majority as Lab + LD + Green + Alliance + SNP + PC is going to be a lot of seats. There is a broad alignment of parties now out to neuter you. Either you find a way to win an election, or you will be done in.
I dispute 'comfortable'. If its a rainbow coalition there will be a price to pay to the minor parties.
Would be refreshing to see though!
Not a coalition. If Labour propose batshitted policies then they wouldn't get the votes. But if it is a progressive non-corrupt proposal, especially if they start getting into a consensus about changing the political landscape, then it would be very difficult for other parties to vote against them and bring the corruption party back into office.
The Tories should not revert to Thatcherism. They need to rethink what Conservatism means for a country facing the challenges of the 2030's and 2040's. Not rehash an old old tune - without even properly understanding it.
On the one hand moving to an unliveable climate full of religious nutters and governed by a dangerous extremist who disdains minorities and women.
(wait for it)
On the other hand, Saudi Arabia.
Hands up who'd choose Saudi ...
I would choose neither, but, if forced, I would live in Saudi Arabia ahead of Florida. No question at all.
Florida for me. And I live 500km from Saudi.
I would hate to live in Saudi Arabia, all the other Muslims would hate and resent me as they weren't as pious as me.
You’re not going for the Hajj in a couple of weeks’ time?
God no, too bloody hot, and too bloody crowded.
I did do the Umrah in 2002, I only went because my parents and grandparents were going and I was worried about them in that heat and the fact my grandmother had mobility issues.
Absolute bloody shambles, all pilgrims must wear two simple white unhemmed sheets. Not allowed to wear designer stuff, that's when I knew Islam really wasn't for me.
The Tories should not revert to Thatcherism. They need to rethink what Conservatism means for a country facing the challenges of the 2030's and 2040's. Not rehash an old old tune - without even properly understanding it.
They will be fine. They were written off from 97-05 too. In the end a charismatic Tory leader will make them whatever they need to be to win in five or ten years, assuming Sunak doesn’t nick it this time.
They have the advantage of being ideologically flexible about anything other than winning and, for a time, the EU (but that’s gone now).
On the one hand moving to an unliveable climate full of religious nutters and governed by a dangerous extremist who disdains minorities and women.
(wait for it)
On the other hand, Saudi Arabia.
Hands up who'd choose Saudi ...
I would choose neither, but, if forced, I would live in Saudi Arabia ahead of Florida. No question at all.
Florida for me. And I live 500km from Saudi.
I would hate to live in Saudi Arabia, all the other Muslims would hate and resent me as they weren't as pious as me.
You’re not going for the Hajj in a couple of weeks’ time?
Everyone I know who has been to Saudi Arabia was glad to come home/go elsewhere. And that includes a couple of Muslims. Bit like Catholics going on pilgrimage to Rome. Glad to come home!
On the one hand moving to an unliveable climate full of religious nutters and governed by a dangerous extremist who disdains minorities and women.
(wait for it)
On the other hand, Saudi Arabia.
Hands up who'd choose Saudi ...
I would choose neither, but, if forced, I would live in Saudi Arabia ahead of Florida. No question at all.
Really? I've never been to Saudi but my understanding is horribly hot, boring and repressive. It's main attraction seems to be the possibility of earning large amounts of money. I suppose crime is probably less of an issue in Saudi.
On topic. I agree Rishi, for all his faults, won’t be moved against this side of the GE. This is mostly because Tories are resigned to defeat now, need a fall guy, and the focus is on the succession being about how best to fight back after the election. And I think it’s largely decided the conservatives will return to Thatcherism and economic liberalism to fight back, not Nat-C agenda.
Nor do Labour and Lib Dem’s want Rishi removed before the election, they can do without the worry of a Black Swan creating some sort of Cleggasm.
However, where todays Super Poll shows SNP support bleeding not to Labour but to don’t know, the chances are imo SNP may go into general election with different leadership and in a different place than they are now so can get all those don’t knows back, depriving Labour of a dozen or two chickens it looks like they are already counting before they hatch.
It’s still possible Sunak has to go because a revelation or scandal is just so bad.
Labour perhaps are in the weakest position here, as so much of their appeal rests on Starmer’s shoulders. If he has a heart attack, or stroke, and Rayner leads Labour into the election, the Tories can finish largest party or even majority from this position.
In short: SNP benefit in general election from change of leader, and I expect them to do this, Sunak is expendable but is being kept on by a party resigned to defeat as their fall guy, Labour face electoral crash if it loses its current leader.
I think if Starmer dropped dead he'd still win. People aren't going to Labour because of his sparkle. We could have a Weekend At Bernie's election right now and still see Labour breeze into Downing Street.
In fact, it's entirely possible Starmer has been dead for years and he's still heading for SW1A
I never agree with any of your posts, but that is the biggest drivel ever Farooq! 🫣
Replace Starmer with Rayner and they won’t even finish largest party! Fact!
On the one hand moving to an unliveable climate full of religious nutters and governed by a dangerous extremist who disdains minorities and women.
(wait for it)
On the other hand, Saudi Arabia.
Hands up who'd choose Saudi ...
I would choose neither, but, if forced, I would live in Saudi Arabia ahead of Florida. No question at all.
Florida for me. And I live 500km from Saudi.
I would hate to live in Saudi Arabia, all the other Muslims would hate and resent me as they weren't as pious as me.
You’re not going for the Hajj in a couple of weeks’ time?
Everyone I know who has been to Saudi Arabia was glad to come home/go elsewhere. And that includes a couple of Muslims. Bit like Catholics going on pilgrimage to Rome. Glad to come home!
It's always much nicer to be at home.
Foreigners are so unfortunate, having to live away from home for their whole lives.
I bought the original Tesla Roadster, and then a Model S.
More recently, I bought a Rivian.
EVs are great if:
(a) you have somewhere to charge it at home (b) you don't regularly do 300+ mile trips
If either of those things are not true, then either a straight ICE or a plug-in hybrid is perfect for you.
There's another requirement: (c) If you can afford one. EVs are still hellishly expensive compared to ICE cars - unless you go for ones with limitations, such as even more reduced range.
The cost differential is closing every day.
The crossover will come by the end of the decade, quite probably.
People will continue to grouse about the charging problem. It will be solved quickly for the wealthy, which might slow the process of solving it for everyone else.
The charging problem is rather a chicken and egg one. It isn't economic to build them until there is a market.
Range anxiety is pretty short lived when owning an EV. How often do you drive more than 250 miles without a half hour break? EV cars are also a pleasure to drive, smooth, powerful and very quick acceleration.
Lots of people do once a year, over Christmas and New Year. Just one three hour wait then (and there were plenty) is enough to spoil your whole year, especially with small children with you. Giles Coren did a piece saying he is retransitioning for this reason.
One three hour wait is enough to ruin your entire year?
I own an electric car (well truck). Over Christmas, the family got into the truck and headed up the mountains to Big Bear. Over the Christmas week, we went round the ski resorts in the area, returning to our AirBnB every night.
Aside from one 20 minute wait for a fast charger, we had no problems whatsoever with a 500 mile round trip.
If you have a driveway, don't regularly travel 300m+ a day, and can afford it, an electric car is best.
A long-range Rivian truck costs $100,000, does it not?
Yes, there are some good $100k EVs, but 99% of people don’t spend that much on a car, so it’s still very much a luxury good.
If, like most people, you have £30k to spend on a new car, you have the choice of a Leaf, or, umm, not much else. Even the cheapest electric Mini is £33k.
$79k for the Rivian with the large battery pack (350 miles). So, yes, it's a luxury product. But then again it's a self driving truck that has a 350 mile range, will handle pretty much any off road you throw at it, and does 0-60 faster than my old Porsche 911.
Late to the debate but I think you have very well encapsulated the electric car market right now. Whether this will change by 2030 who knows.
I hope it also won't become a vegan-type thing (eg how do you know if someone owns an electric car...)
Remember that Tesla's business model was to build expensive models first and use the profits to allow them to reduce costs to the point that they could build (and sell at a profit) a $20-25,000 model...
That's also the model other companies are moving slowly towards - VW's €25,000 EV model isn't due to 2025-26.
Don't lose sight of the revolutionary way Tesla build cars. A bit reduction in the number of parts and of processes and sub-assemblies. A rolling chassis with a structural battery pack joining a pair of giant pressings at either end which hold the motors and attach the suspension. These "gigapress" components are vastly more efficient than the way everyone else is building cars.
The Tories should not revert to Thatcherism. They need to rethink what Conservatism means for a country facing the challenges of the 2030's and 2040's. Not rehash an old old tune - without even properly understanding it.
Thatcherism was a flawed project anyway - though it's flaw didn't become fully clear for a couple of decades.
The Tories should not revert to Thatcherism. They need to rethink what Conservatism means for a country facing the challenges of the 2030's and 2040's. Not rehash an old old tune - without even properly understanding it.
Thatcherism was a flawed project anyway - though it's flaw didn't become fully clear for a couple of decades.
Re-adopting it now would be nuts.
We are discussing the present Conservative Party. I’m pretty sure the normal rules around sanity don’t apply.
They need to stress what needs conserving. Landscape, environment, beauty, concepts of service or communal responsibility, the more positive side of tradition in general.
Not either outdated free-market extremism and plutocracy, to an extent sometimes unmatched even in the US, or abrasive, bargain-bin populism, as often, over the last ten years.
Michael Sheen wants Welsh actors to play Welsh people, seemingly forgetting that, at its heart, acting is pretending to be someone else.
Its ok. Kenneth Williams, Tony Blair, David Frost, Brian Clough were all Welsh, so no hypocrisy on display.
I thought the point he was making was that Welsh characters should always be played by Welsh actors, not that Welsh actors shouldn't be allowed to portray characters of other types.
Michael Sheen wants Welsh actors to play Welsh people, seemingly forgetting that, at its heart, acting is pretending to be someone else.
Its ok. Kenneth Williams, Tony Blair, David Frost, Brian Clough were all Welsh, so no hypocrisy on display.
I thought the point he was making was that Welsh characters should always be played by Welsh actors, not that Welsh actors shouldn't be allowed to portray characters of other types.
The Tories should not revert to Thatcherism. They need to rethink what Conservatism means for a country facing the challenges of the 2030's and 2040's. Not rehash an old old tune - without even properly understanding it.
Thatcherism was a flawed project anyway - though it's flaw didn't become fully clear for a couple of decades.
Re-adopting it now would be nuts.
"Thatcherism" as now understood isn't how she would have described her philosophy at the time. It's been distorted by her admirers as well as by her enemies.
The Tories should not revert to Thatcherism. They need to rethink what Conservatism means for a country facing the challenges of the 2030's and 2040's. Not rehash an old old tune - without even properly understanding it.
What should the Tories want? As a centre right voter I am looking for:
A focus on the importance of the balance of payments. This requires more investment and savings and less consumption. Policies should therefore focus on how to incentivise these objectives. That means super tax breaks for investment and training, making the UK a good place to invest. It also means focusing education much more on what skills are actually required and likely to be required in the future. It also means getting serious about cutting government borrowing. This means current spending needs to be sharply controlled because more infrastructure investment is needed. Above all, we need more housing, both social and privately owned. We need to go as far and as fast as we can towards a renewable energy policy without damaging underlying competitiveness. This will both improve our balance of payments and improve our contributions to reducing global warming. We need to think hard about how social care and medical care for the elderly is funded. Personally, I would want to go back to the ideas that were being floated by May. Inheritance is not to be subsidised by public money meeting individual needs. We need to rebalance our tax system so that capital makes a bigger contribution and the pressure on incomes is lessened. We need to simplify our tax system and remove cliff edges, the anomaly of higher marginal rates over £100k, the absurdity of NI and the stupid differentials in rates depending on which vehicle the same money is earned through.
I think that would fill the first couple of terms.
I bought the original Tesla Roadster, and then a Model S.
More recently, I bought a Rivian.
EVs are great if:
(a) you have somewhere to charge it at home (b) you don't regularly do 300+ mile trips
If either of those things are not true, then either a straight ICE or a plug-in hybrid is perfect for you.
There's another requirement: (c) If you can afford one. EVs are still hellishly expensive compared to ICE cars - unless you go for ones with limitations, such as even more reduced range.
The cost differential is closing every day.
The crossover will come by the end of the decade, quite probably.
People will continue to grouse about the charging problem. It will be solved quickly for the wealthy, which might slow the process of solving it for everyone else.
The charging problem is rather a chicken and egg one. It isn't economic to build them until there is a market.
Range anxiety is pretty short lived when owning an EV. How often do you drive more than 250 miles without a half hour break? EV cars are also a pleasure to drive, smooth, powerful and very quick acceleration.
Lots of people do once a year, over Christmas and New Year. Just one three hour wait then (and there were plenty) is enough to spoil your whole year, especially with small children with you. Giles Coren did a piece saying he is retransitioning for this reason.
One three hour wait is enough to ruin your entire year?
I own an electric car (well truck). Over Christmas, the family got into the truck and headed up the mountains to Big Bear. Over the Christmas week, we went round the ski resorts in the area, returning to our AirBnB every night.
Aside from one 20 minute wait for a fast charger, we had no problems whatsoever with a 500 mile round trip.
If you have a driveway, don't regularly travel 300m+ a day, and can afford it, an electric car is best.
A long-range Rivian truck costs $100,000, does it not?
Yes, there are some good $100k EVs, but 99% of people don’t spend that much on a car, so it’s still very much a luxury good.
If, like most people, you have £30k to spend on a new car, you have the choice of a Leaf, or, umm, not much else. Even the cheapest electric Mini is £33k.
$79k for the Rivian with the large battery pack (350 miles). So, yes, it's a luxury product. But then again it's a self driving truck that has a 350 mile range, will handle pretty much any off road you throw at it, and does 0-60 faster than my old Porsche 911.
Late to the debate but I think you have very well encapsulated the electric car market right now. Whether this will change by 2030 who knows.
I hope it also won't become a vegan-type thing (eg how do you know if someone owns an electric car...)
Remember that Tesla's business model was to build expensive models first and use the profits to allow them to reduce costs to the point that they could build (and sell at a profit) a $20-25,000 model...
That's also the model other companies are moving slowly towards - VW's €25,000 EV model isn't due to 2025-26.
Don't lose sight of the revolutionary way Tesla build cars. A bit reduction in the number of parts and of processes and sub-assemblies. A rolling chassis with a structural battery pack joining a pair of giant pressings at either end which hold the motors and attach the suspension. These "gigapress" components are vastly more efficient than the way everyone else is building cars.
There's a separate argument that Tesla can build a car for less than others could but it's worth looking at how cheaply you can get an electric car in China.
The Tories should not revert to Thatcherism. They need to rethink what Conservatism means for a country facing the challenges of the 2030's and 2040's. Not rehash an old old tune - without even properly understanding it.
Thatcherism was a flawed project anyway - though it's flaw didn't become fully clear for a couple of decades.
Re-adopting it now would be nuts.
"Thatcherism" as now understood isn't how she would have described her philosophy at the time. It's been distorted by her admirers as well as by her enemies.
I don't really care about how she described it, since that was as much spin as substance. I was thinking more about what she actually did.
The Tories should not revert to Thatcherism. They need to rethink what Conservatism means for a country facing the challenges of the 2030's and 2040's. Not rehash an old old tune - without even properly understanding it.
Thatcherism was a flawed project anyway - though it's flaw didn't become fully clear for a couple of decades.
Re-adopting it now would be nuts.
"Thatcherism" as now understood isn't how she would have described her philosophy at the time. It's been distorted by her admirers as well as by her enemies.
Indeed, Mrs Thatcher put making the UK a home owning democracy at the heart of her premiership.
I got into an argument with a Red Wall activist last year who said Thatcher only cut taxes, I pointed out at first Thatcher put up taxes to stabilise the finances, it was only in her third term that she only cut/abolished the upper rate of tax from 60%.
I was told I was wrong, that Truss was doing what Thatcher did from the start.
On the one hand moving to an unliveable climate full of religious nutters and governed by a dangerous extremist who disdains minorities and women.
(wait for it)
On the other hand, Saudi Arabia.
Hands up who'd choose Saudi ...
I would choose neither, but, if forced, I would live in Saudi Arabia ahead of Florida. No question at all.
Florida for me. And I live 500km from Saudi.
I would hate to live in Saudi Arabia, all the other Muslims would hate and resent me as they weren't as pious as me.
You’re not going for the Hajj in a couple of weeks’ time?
God no, too bloody hot, and too bloody crowded.
I did do the Umrah in 2002, I only went because my parents and grandparents were going and I was worried about them in that heat and the fact my grandmother had mobility issues.
Absolute bloody shambles, all pilgrims must wear two simple white unhemmed sheets. Not allowed to wear designer stuff, that's when I knew Islam really wasn't for me.
The Tories should not revert to Thatcherism. They need to rethink what Conservatism means for a country facing the challenges of the 2030's and 2040's. Not rehash an old old tune - without even properly understanding it.
What should the Tories want? As a centre right voter I am looking for:
A focus on the importance of the balance of payments. This requires more investment and savings and less consumption. Policies should therefore focus on how to incentivise these objectives. That means super tax breaks for investment and training, making the UK a good place to invest. It also means focusing education much more on what skills are actually required and likely to be required in the future. It also means getting serious about cutting government borrowing. This means current spending needs to be sharply controlled because more infrastructure investment is needed. Above all, we need more housing, both social and privately owned. We need to go as far and as fast as we can towards a renewable energy policy without damaging underlying competitiveness. This will both improve our balance of payments and improve our contributions to reducing global warming. We need to think hard about how social care and medical care for the elderly is funded. Personally, I would want to go back to the ideas that were being floated by May. Inheritance is not to be subsidised by public money meeting individual needs. We need to rebalance our tax system so that capital makes a bigger contribution and the pressure on incomes is lessened. We need to simplify our tax system and remove cliff edges, the anomaly of higher marginal rates over £100k, the absurdity of NI and the stupid differentials in rates depending on which vehicle the same money is earned through.
I think that would fill the first couple of terms.
Michael Sheen wants Welsh actors to play Welsh people, seemingly forgetting that, at its heart, acting is pretending to be someone else.
Its ok. Kenneth Williams, Tony Blair, David Frost, Brian Clough were all Welsh, so no hypocrisy on display.
I thought the point he was making was that Welsh characters should always be played by Welsh actors, not that Welsh actors shouldn't be allowed to portray characters of other types.
Yes but surely that means Scots should only play Scots, and English actors only for English roles?
And presumably Vulcans only to play Spock. Or rather half human/half Vulcan's to play Spock.
Its a monumentally stupid view to hold. I assume he hasn't thought it through. Or is just happy to discriminate.
Michael Sheen wants Welsh actors to play Welsh people, seemingly forgetting that, at its heart, acting is pretending to be someone else.
Its ok. Kenneth Williams, Tony Blair, David Frost, Brian Clough were all Welsh, so no hypocrisy on display.
I thought the point he was making was that Welsh characters should always be played by Welsh actors, not that Welsh actors shouldn't be allowed to portray characters of other types.
I think that is exactly the argument he was trying to make, and the points put forward by Rochdale, Ghebedrav and others show how stupid his point is.
Michael Sheen wants Welsh actors to play Welsh people, seemingly forgetting that, at its heart, acting is pretending to be someone else.
Its ok. Kenneth Williams, Tony Blair, David Frost, Brian Clough were all Welsh, so no hypocrisy on display.
I thought the point he was making was that Welsh characters should always be played by Welsh actors, not that Welsh actors shouldn't be allowed to portray characters of other types.
But that makes him a hypocrite then.
I think it's a bit unfair to accuse someone of hypocrisy if they're espousing a consistent principle - priority for Welsh actors.
Just view it as a kind of reparation for the wrongs committed over the millennia by the Anglo-Saxons.
Michael Sheen wants Welsh actors to play Welsh people, seemingly forgetting that, at its heart, acting is pretending to be someone else.
Its ok. Kenneth Williams, Tony Blair, David Frost, Brian Clough were all Welsh, so no hypocrisy on display.
I thought the point he was making was that Welsh characters should always be played by Welsh actors, not that Welsh actors shouldn't be allowed to portray characters of other types.
But that makes him a hypocrite then.
I imagine like many he was traumatised by Mel Gibson's Scottish accent, enough to turn anyone into a Thespnat. No doubt there are many awful examples of attempts at Welsh accents to add fuel to the fire.
The Tories should not revert to Thatcherism. They need to rethink what Conservatism means for a country facing the challenges of the 2030's and 2040's. Not rehash an old old tune - without even properly understanding it.
Thatcherism was a flawed project anyway - though it's flaw didn't become fully clear for a couple of decades.
Re-adopting it now would be nuts.
"Thatcherism" as now understood isn't how she would have described her philosophy at the time. It's been distorted by her admirers as well as by her enemies.
Indeed, Mrs Thatcher put making the UK a home owning democracy at the heart of her premiership.
I got into an argument with a Red Wall activist last year who said Thatcher only cut taxes, I pointed out at first Thatcher put up taxes to stabilise her finances, it was only in her third term that she only cut/abolished the upper rate of tax from 60%.
I was told I was wrong, that Truss was doing what Thatcher did from the start.
Michael Sheen wants Welsh actors to play Welsh people, seemingly forgetting that, at its heart, acting is pretending to be someone else.
Its ok. Kenneth Williams, Tony Blair, David Frost, Brian Clough were all Welsh, so no hypocrisy on display.
I thought the point he was making was that Welsh characters should always be played by Welsh actors, not that Welsh actors shouldn't be allowed to portray characters of other types.
But that makes him a hypocrite then.
I think it's a bit unfair to accuse someone of hypocrisy if they're espousing a consistent principle - priority for Welsh actors.
Just view it as a kind of reparation for the wrongs committed over the millennia by the Anglo-Saxons.
Michael Sheen wants Welsh actors to play Welsh people, seemingly forgetting that, at its heart, acting is pretending to be someone else.
Its ok. Kenneth Williams, Tony Blair, David Frost, Brian Clough were all Welsh, so no hypocrisy on display.
I thought the point he was making was that Welsh characters should always be played by Welsh actors, not that Welsh actors shouldn't be allowed to portray characters of other types.
But that makes him a hypocrite then.
I think it's a bit unfair to accuse someone of hypocrisy if they're espousing a consistent principle - priority for Welsh actors.
Just view it as a kind of reparation for the wrongs committed over the millennia by the Anglo-Saxons.
Michael Sheen wants Welsh actors to play Welsh people, seemingly forgetting that, at its heart, acting is pretending to be someone else.
Its ok. Kenneth Williams, Tony Blair, David Frost, Brian Clough were all Welsh, so no hypocrisy on display.
I thought the point he was making was that Welsh characters should always be played by Welsh actors, not that Welsh actors shouldn't be allowed to portray characters of other types.
But that makes him a hypocrite then.
I think it's a bit unfair to accuse someone of hypocrisy if they're espousing a consistent principle - priority for Welsh actors.
Just view it as a kind of reparation for the wrongs committed over the millennia by the Anglo-Saxons.
Michael Sheen wants Welsh actors to play Welsh people, seemingly forgetting that, at its heart, acting is pretending to be someone else.
Its ok. Kenneth Williams, Tony Blair, David Frost, Brian Clough were all Welsh, so no hypocrisy on display.
I thought the point he was making was that Welsh characters should always be played by Welsh actors, not that Welsh actors shouldn't be allowed to portray characters of other types.
I think that is exactly the argument he was trying to make, and the points put forward by Rochdale, Ghebedrav and others show how stupid his point is.
I don't think stupidity is quite the same thing as hypocrisy.
Michael Sheen wants Welsh actors to play Welsh people, seemingly forgetting that, at its heart, acting is pretending to be someone else.
Its ok. Kenneth Williams, Tony Blair, David Frost, Brian Clough were all Welsh, so no hypocrisy on display.
I thought the point he was making was that Welsh characters should always be played by Welsh actors, not that Welsh actors shouldn't be allowed to portray characters of other types.
But that makes him a hypocrite then.
I think it's a bit unfair to accuse someone of hypocrisy if they're espousing a consistent principle - priority for Welsh actors.
Just view it as a kind of reparation for the wrongs committed over the millennia by the Anglo-Saxons.
Michael Sheen wants Welsh actors to play Welsh people, seemingly forgetting that, at its heart, acting is pretending to be someone else.
Its ok. Kenneth Williams, Tony Blair, David Frost, Brian Clough were all Welsh, so no hypocrisy on display.
I thought the point he was making was that Welsh characters should always be played by Welsh actors, not that Welsh actors shouldn't be allowed to portray characters of other types.
But that makes him a hypocrite then.
I think it's a bit unfair to accuse someone of hypocrisy if they're espousing a consistent principle - priority for Welsh actors.
Just view it as a kind of reparation for the wrongs committed over the millennia by the Anglo-Saxons.
Jutes will not replace us.
H/t Ghedebrav
#Justice4BeakerPeople!
Never mind the Beakers, what about the Neandertalers?
The Tories should not revert to Thatcherism. They need to rethink what Conservatism means for a country facing the challenges of the 2030's and 2040's. Not rehash an old old tune - without even properly understanding it.
Thatcherism was a flawed project anyway - though it's flaw didn't become fully clear for a couple of decades.
Re-adopting it now would be nuts.
"Thatcherism" as now understood isn't how she would have described her philosophy at the time. It's been distorted by her admirers as well as by her enemies.
I don't really care about how she described it, since that was as much spin as substance. I was thinking more about what she actually did.
What she actually did also vastly differs from what she is remembered as having done.
The Tories should not revert to Thatcherism. They need to rethink what Conservatism means for a country facing the challenges of the 2030's and 2040's. Not rehash an old old tune - without even properly understanding it.
Thatcherism was a flawed project anyway - though it's flaw didn't become fully clear for a couple of decades.
Re-adopting it now would be nuts.
"Thatcherism" as now understood isn't how she would have described her philosophy at the time. It's been distorted by her admirers as well as by her enemies.
I don't really care about how she described it, since that was as much spin as substance. I was thinking more about what she actually did.
What she actually did also vastly differs from what she is remembered as having done.
If Scot Nats get all uppity, I like to remind them Mrs Thatcher decriminalised homosexuality in Scotland, which the SNP opposed.
Section 28 is an aberrance in Mrs Thatcher's usually pro gay rights history.
Voted for Leo Abse's bill, decriminalised homosexuality in Scotland and Norn Iron, and happily employed gayers.
Edit - Also forget her government's approach on dealing with AIDS, absolutely saved the lives of hundreds of thousands of many gay people.
Michael Sheen wants Welsh actors to play Welsh people, seemingly forgetting that, at its heart, acting is pretending to be someone else.
Its ok. Kenneth Williams, Tony Blair, David Frost, Brian Clough were all Welsh, so no hypocrisy on display.
I thought the point he was making was that Welsh characters should always be played by Welsh actors, not that Welsh actors shouldn't be allowed to portray characters of other types.
Yes but surely that means Scots should only play Scots, and English actors only for English roles?
And presumably Vulcans only to play Spock. Or rather half human/half Vulcan's to play Spock.
Its a monumentally stupid view to hold. I assume he hasn't thought it through. Or is just happy to discriminate.
The Tories should not revert to Thatcherism. They need to rethink what Conservatism means for a country facing the challenges of the 2030's and 2040's. Not rehash an old old tune - without even properly understanding it.
Thatcherism was a flawed project anyway - though it's flaw didn't become fully clear for a couple of decades.
Re-adopting it now would be nuts.
"Thatcherism" as now understood isn't how she would have described her philosophy at the time. It's been distorted by her admirers as well as by her enemies.
I don't really care about how she described it, since that was as much spin as substance. I was thinking more about what she actually did.
What she actually did also vastly differs from what she is remembered as having done.
If Scot Nats get all uppity, I like to remind them Mrs Thatcher decriminalised homosexuality in Scotland, which the SNP opposed.
Section 28 is an aberrance in Mrs Thatcher's usually pro gay rights history.
Voted for Leo Abse's bill, decriminalised homosexuality in Scotland and Norn Iron, and happily employed gayers.
The Tories should not revert to Thatcherism. They need to rethink what Conservatism means for a country facing the challenges of the 2030's and 2040's. Not rehash an old old tune - without even properly understanding it.
Thatcherism was a flawed project anyway - though it's flaw didn't become fully clear for a couple of decades.
Re-adopting it now would be nuts.
"Thatcherism" as now understood isn't how she would have described her philosophy at the time. It's been distorted by her admirers as well as by her enemies.
I don't really care about how she described it, since that was as much spin as substance. I was thinking more about what she actually did.
What she actually did also vastly differs from what she is remembered as having done.
If Scot Nats get all uppity, I like to remind them Mrs Thatcher decriminalised homosexuality in Scotland, which the SNP opposed.
Section 28 is an aberrance in Mrs Thatcher's usually pro gay rights history.
Voted for Leo Abse's bill, decriminalised homosexuality in Scotland and Norn Iron, and happily employed gayers.
Also the ozone layer.
Also enthusiastically pro European in government, campaigned for Remain.
The Tories should not revert to Thatcherism. They need to rethink what Conservatism means for a country facing the challenges of the 2030's and 2040's. Not rehash an old old tune - without even properly understanding it.
Thatcherism was a flawed project anyway - though it's flaw didn't become fully clear for a couple of decades.
Re-adopting it now would be nuts.
"Thatcherism" as now understood isn't how she would have described her philosophy at the time. It's been distorted by her admirers as well as by her enemies.
I don't really care about how she described it, since that was as much spin as substance. I was thinking more about what she actually did.
What she actually did also vastly differs from what she is remembered as having done.
If Scot Nats get all uppity, I like to remind them Mrs Thatcher decriminalised homosexuality in Scotland, which the SNP opposed.
Section 28 is an aberrance in Mrs Thatcher's usually pro gay rights history.
Voted for Leo Abse's bill, decriminalised homosexuality in Scotland and Norn Iron, and happily employed gayers.
Edit - Also forget her government's approach on dealing with AIDS, absolutely saved the lives of hundreds of thousands of many gay people.
It seems the 1980 extension into Scotland was actually an amendment put forward by Robin Cook?
The Tories should not revert to Thatcherism. They need to rethink what Conservatism means for a country facing the challenges of the 2030's and 2040's. Not rehash an old old tune - without even properly understanding it.
Thatcherism was a flawed project anyway - though it's flaw didn't become fully clear for a couple of decades.
Re-adopting it now would be nuts.
"Thatcherism" as now understood isn't how she would have described her philosophy at the time. It's been distorted by her admirers as well as by her enemies.
I don't really care about how she described it, since that was as much spin as substance. I was thinking more about what she actually did.
What she actually did also vastly differs from what she is remembered as having done.
If Scot Nats get all uppity, I like to remind them Mrs Thatcher decriminalised homosexuality in Scotland, which the SNP opposed.
Section 28 is an aberrance in Mrs Thatcher's usually pro gay rights history.
Voted for Leo Abse's bill, decriminalised homosexuality in Scotland and Norn Iron, and happily employed gayers.
Edit - Also forget her government's approach on dealing with AIDS, absolutely saved the lives of hundreds of thousands of many gay people.
It seems the 1980 extension into Scotland was actually an amendment put forward by Robin Cook?
It was, the government was planning to do it later in the parliament, but when the Cook amendment was put down, they supported it, it wouldn't have passed without government support.
As Cook put it.
"The clause bears the names of hon. Members from all three major parties. I regret that the only party represented among Scottish Members of Parliament from which there has been no support for the clause is the Scottish National Party. I am pleased to see both representatives of that party in their place, and I hope to convert them in the remainder of my remarks."
This is the one released today showing that Labour could win a 140 seat majority. But lets look at a bit of detail up where I am. It shows the new Aberdeenshire North and Moray East, and Aberdeenshire Central seats being won by *Labour* on their baseline poll assumptions.
AN&ME is 69% of Banff and Buchan, and 31% of Moray. B&B result 2019: Labour 4th with 1,734 votes (4.1%) Moray result 2019: Labour 3rd with 2,432 votes (5.0%)
AC is 70% of Gordon, and 31% of Banff & Buchan Gordon result 2019: Labour 4th with 3,052 votes (5.5%) B&B result 2019: Labour 4th with 1,734 votes (4.1%)
How the actual fuck does MRP think Labour will win either seat?
Michael Sheen wants Welsh actors to play Welsh people, seemingly forgetting that, at its heart, acting is pretending to be someone else.
Its ok. Kenneth Williams, Tony Blair, David Frost, Brian Clough were all Welsh, so no hypocrisy on display.
I thought the point he was making was that Welsh characters should always be played by Welsh actors, not that Welsh actors shouldn't be allowed to portray characters of other types.
Yes but surely that means Scots should only play Scots, and English actors only for English roles?
And presumably Vulcans only to play Spock. Or rather half human/half Vulcan's to play Spock.
Its a monumentally stupid view to hold. I assume he hasn't thought it through. Or is just happy to discriminate.
This is the one released today showing that Labour could win a 140 seat majority. But lets look at a bit of detail up where I am. It shows the new Aberdeenshire North and Moray East, and Aberdeenshire Central seats being won by *Labour*
AN&ME is 69% of Banff and Buchan, and 31% of Moray. B&B result 2019: Labour 4th with 1,734 votes (4.1%) Moray result 2019: Labour 3rd with 2,432 votes (5.0%)
AC is 70% of Gordon, and 31% of Banff & Buchan Gordon result 2019: Labour 4th with 3,052 votes (5.5%) B&B result 2019: Labour 4th with 1,734 votes (4.1%)
How the actual fuck does MRP think Labour will win either seat?
Same way the SNP won seats from fourth place in 2015.
When there's a wave election all sorts of odd results happen.
For example off the top of the my head the SNP won East Dunbartonshire in 2015 despite finishing fourth in 2010 with 10% of the vote.
The Tories should not revert to Thatcherism. They need to rethink what Conservatism means for a country facing the challenges of the 2030's and 2040's. Not rehash an old old tune - without even properly understanding it.
Thatcherism was a flawed project anyway - though it's flaw didn't become fully clear for a couple of decades.
Re-adopting it now would be nuts.
"Thatcherism" as now understood isn't how she would have described her philosophy at the time. It's been distorted by her admirers as well as by her enemies.
Indeed, Mrs Thatcher put making the UK a home owning democracy at the heart of her premiership.
I got into an argument with a Red Wall activist last year who said Thatcher only cut taxes, I pointed out at first Thatcher put up taxes to stabilise the finances, it was only in her third term that she only cut/abolished the upper rate of tax from 60%.
I was told I was wrong, that Truss was doing what Thatcher did from the start.
Indeed. Indeed. Detractors make up a bunch of lies and try to convince us that’s what Thatcherism was. They brainwash themselves but don’t fool us who actually understand it.
Once Sunak loses the election, and Sunakism, whatever that was, is soon forgotten, the Tory party will look back to when Conservatives were last doing great for this country, Halcyon summer of eighties economic liberalism for their ethos - aspiration, sound finance and relate it to the problems facing this country today. Planning laws and other structural rigidities keep Britain poorer than it should be, our merchant banks made us great once and the City can again, our advantage lies in professional services, ease of doing business and a capital city on which all the world converges. Boris Levelling up is just pretend gibberish that ancient mismatch in scale and wealth between London and the secondary cities their regions can ever be levelled, therefore not an honest policy platform - so get used to conservatism as being complete opposite of Boris populism. all those Tory MPs who ganged up on Truss to make her look stupid and such a short lived PM, Grannt Shapps, Gove, etc etc they have to go - If the Conservative Party can now never remove the top rate of tax Gordon Brown only sneaked on in 2010 as a “sly gift” knowing it’s his last ever budget, then what sort of economics does the Conservative Party stand for?
Soon after next May’s General Election the Tories will have clear ethos and policy platform, based on economic liberalism and Thatcherism. And of all the directions the party can go in out of the mess they are in, it’s the best one.
Thatcherism, in all its aspirational, sound financial appeal is coming back. And Labour should deservedly be very very scared. 😈
Seattle Times ($) - Girl, 10, found after 24 hours lost in Kittitas County wilderness
After spending 24 hours missing in the Cle Elum River Valley [about 75 miles east of Seattle on other side of Cascades], 10-year-old Shunghla Mashwani was reunited with her family on Monday.
The night before, she slept between some trees in the dense wilderness after being separated from her family Sunday afternoon, according to the Kittitas County Sheriff’s Office.
Here’s how the day unfolded, according to the Sheriff’s Office.
On Sunday, 10-year-old Shunghla and her extended family gathered at the Cathedral Pass Trailhead on Fish Lake Road and were playing in the woods near the Cle Elum River.
When the family crossed a footbridge over the Cle Elum River to break for lunch, they noticed Shunghla was missing.
Around 20 adults in the group immediately started searching for her. There was no cell signal in the valley. The group searched for nearly 2 hours before someone on a utility terrain vehicle drove by and offered to use a satellite phone to call 911.
Shunghla’s family reported her missing shortly before 2 p.m.
After losing sight of her family members, Shunghla hiked downstream through the forest — she said she knew it was the right thing to follow the river.
The Sheriff’s Office launched a search, coordinating with Kittitas County Search and Rescue Volunteers, K9s and drones. Over half a dozen other law-enforcement agencies from across Western Washington joined the search through steep and rugged terrain, from the air with helicopters and in the Cle Elum River with swift water rescue teams.
At approximately 3 p.m. Monday, just over 24 hours after Shunghla’s family reported her missing, two Search and Rescue volunteers found her alive with only minor scrapes.
She had traveled south about 1.5 miles from where she was last seen, down the west side of the Cle Elum River. Snohomish County Swiftwater personnel used an inflatable rescue watercraft to bring her to the east side of the river, where she was reunited with her father.
The Mashwani family — who came to the U.S. from Afghanistan two years ago — told searchers they like to spend time in the high backcountry because it reminds them of home.
The Sheriff’s Office said Shunghla proved “an extraordinarily resourceful and resilient 10-year-old.”
Is there any suggestion of Tory MPs trying to jump ship to RefUK? I know one of them who had the whip removed joined them, but is there anyone in a seat that could go Lab and could have a sizeable chunk of potential RefUK support (like the Stoke seats) thinking maybe they could outswim the toxic Tory brand by going over?
He joined Reclaim rather than Reform UK. Reclaim are nuttier, if you can believe that.
Michael Sheen wants Welsh actors to play Welsh people, seemingly forgetting that, at its heart, acting is pretending to be someone else.
Its ok. Kenneth Williams, Tony Blair, David Frost, Brian Clough were all Welsh, so no hypocrisy on display.
I thought the point he was making was that Welsh characters should always be played by Welsh actors, not that Welsh actors shouldn't be allowed to portray characters of other types.
But that makes him a hypocrite then.
I think it's a bit unfair to accuse someone of hypocrisy if they're espousing a consistent principle - priority for Welsh actors.
Just view it as a kind of reparation for the wrongs committed over the millennia by the Anglo-Saxons.
Michael Sheen wants Welsh actors to play Welsh people, seemingly forgetting that, at its heart, acting is pretending to be someone else.
Its ok. Kenneth Williams, Tony Blair, David Frost, Brian Clough were all Welsh, so no hypocrisy on display.
I thought the point he was making was that Welsh characters should always be played by Welsh actors, not that Welsh actors shouldn't be allowed to portray characters of other types.
Yes but surely that means Scots should only play Scots, and English actors only for English roles?
And presumably Vulcans only to play Spock. Or rather half human/half Vulcan's to play Spock.
Its a monumentally stupid view to hold. I assume he hasn't thought it through. Or is just happy to discriminate.
Didn't we have this discussion last night?
Thats never stopped a pb thread before...
Can I interest you in my views on the cashless society?
This is the one released today showing that Labour could win a 140 seat majority. But lets look at a bit of detail up where I am. It shows the new Aberdeenshire North and Moray East, and Aberdeenshire Central seats being won by *Labour* on their baseline poll assumptions.
AN&ME is 69% of Banff and Buchan, and 31% of Moray. B&B result 2019: Labour 4th with 1,734 votes (4.1%) Moray result 2019: Labour 3rd with 2,432 votes (5.0%)
AC is 70% of Gordon, and 31% of Banff & Buchan Gordon result 2019: Labour 4th with 3,052 votes (5.5%) B&B result 2019: Labour 4th with 1,734 votes (4.1%)
How the actual fuck does MRP think Labour will win either seat?
Well it also thinks Labour will win Broxbourne and Oxford West and Abingdon on current polling
This is the one released today showing that Labour could win a 140 seat majority. But lets look at a bit of detail up where I am. It shows the new Aberdeenshire North and Moray East, and Aberdeenshire Central seats being won by *Labour* on their baseline poll assumptions.
AN&ME is 69% of Banff and Buchan, and 31% of Moray. B&B result 2019: Labour 4th with 1,734 votes (4.1%) Moray result 2019: Labour 3rd with 2,432 votes (5.0%)
AC is 70% of Gordon, and 31% of Banff & Buchan Gordon result 2019: Labour 4th with 3,052 votes (5.5%) B&B result 2019: Labour 4th with 1,734 votes (4.1%)
How the actual fuck does MRP think Labour will win either seat?
Well it also thinks Labour will win Broxbourne and Oxford West and Abingdon on current polling
Remember the reaction when YouGov MRP predicted Canterbury would go Labour in 2017. Guffaws all round…including on here I’d wager.
On topic, I've been banging on for a while Rishi Sunak's key moment of vulnerability will be if the Committee of Privileges recommends suspending Boris Johnson for more 10 days.
Remember there are over 100 Tory MPs prepared to make Boris Johnson PM again, they will try and oust Rishi is he whips the Tories to expel Boris Johnson.
Maybe but they need over 180 Tory MPs to vote for a VONC to remove Rishi, 100 is nowhere near enough
Boris Johnson won his vote of confidence and was still ousted within weeks.
Theresa May won her vote of confidence and was still ousted within six months.
Margaret Thatcher won her vote of confidence* and was resigned within 48 hours.
*De facto vote of confidence.
Once a vote of confidence is triggered it begins an inexorable loss of confidence in the PM.
Major survived 2 years until the next general election after winning his leadership ballot in 1995.
It was in your own words Chris Pincher that ousted Boris not his VONC margin.
It was May failing to deliver Brexit that ousted her and poor local elections, again not her VONC margin
Of course he won't be, for starters Sunak performs much better than his party overall in polls and is close to Starmer as preferred PM.
If he squeezes DKs and RefUK voters as today's MRP poll shows he could also get a hung parliament
As much as you dress it up, you can’t change what’s underneath, and that’s where you are wrong.
When MPs installed Rishi, they weren’t supposed to still be at 28% at this stage. Sunak was supposed to go down better with voters than this, but Sunakism is less inspiring than Starmerism, and Sunak seems unready for number ten, out of touch on policy and accident prone.
When the brochure went round, replacing Boris with Rishi, it didn’t mention Sunak would keep them in the 20s, double digit defeat to Labour.
Boris didn’t even poll in the 20s! Truss is long gone, Tories poll in 20s because of Sunak’s negatives, the ones you gloss over and try to spin away, is largely the truth if not the whole truth.
Killer fact: Labour and Lib Dem’s don’t want Sunak changed before the next election.
The LDs would love Sunak to be replaced, Sunak still leads Starmer as best PM in the bluewall and is more popular there than Boris was.
Labour would be more concerned at Boris returning as PM (and if Sunak goes it will be Boris who replaces him) as Boris did better than Sunak is with redwall and Leave voters
On topic, I've been banging on for a while Rishi Sunak's key moment of vulnerability will be if the Committee of Privileges recommends suspending Boris Johnson for more 10 days.
Remember there are over 100 Tory MPs prepared to make Boris Johnson PM again, they will try and oust Rishi is he whips the Tories to expel Boris Johnson.
Maybe but they need over 180 Tory MPs to vote for a VONC to remove Rishi, 100 is nowhere near enough
Boris Johnson won his vote of confidence and was still ousted within weeks.
Theresa May won her vote of confidence and was still ousted within six months.
Margaret Thatcher won her vote of confidence* and was resigned within 48 hours.
*De facto vote of confidence.
Once a vote of confidence is triggered it begins an inexorable loss of confidence in the PM.
Major survived 2 years until the next general election after winning his leadership ballot in 1995.
It was in your own words Chris Pincher that ousted Boris not his VONC margin.
It was May failing to deliver Brexit that ousted her and poor local elections, again not her VONC margin
This is the one released today showing that Labour could win a 140 seat majority. But lets look at a bit of detail up where I am. It shows the new Aberdeenshire North and Moray East, and Aberdeenshire Central seats being won by *Labour* on their baseline poll assumptions.
AN&ME is 69% of Banff and Buchan, and 31% of Moray. B&B result 2019: Labour 4th with 1,734 votes (4.1%) Moray result 2019: Labour 3rd with 2,432 votes (5.0%)
AC is 70% of Gordon, and 31% of Banff & Buchan Gordon result 2019: Labour 4th with 3,052 votes (5.5%) B&B result 2019: Labour 4th with 1,734 votes (4.1%)
How the actual fuck does MRP think Labour will win either seat?
Well it also thinks Labour will win Broxbourne and Oxford West and Abingdon on current polling
Remember the reaction when YouGov MRP predicted Canterbury would go Labour in 2017. Guffaws all round…including on here I’d wager.
Canterbury had lots of Corbynite students, Broxbourne was one of the few councils the Tories held in May and was strong Leave. OXWAB is LD held with the Tories 2nd not Labour
Appreciate the example! It will be fascinating to watch if that happens - I don't think Labour have any activists at all up here. They run a tiny number of candidates in local elections, so it will be some surge if it happens!
This is the one released today showing that Labour could win a 140 seat majority. But lets look at a bit of detail up where I am. It shows the new Aberdeenshire North and Moray East, and Aberdeenshire Central seats being won by *Labour* on their baseline poll assumptions.
AN&ME is 69% of Banff and Buchan, and 31% of Moray. B&B result 2019: Labour 4th with 1,734 votes (4.1%) Moray result 2019: Labour 3rd with 2,432 votes (5.0%)
AC is 70% of Gordon, and 31% of Banff & Buchan Gordon result 2019: Labour 4th with 3,052 votes (5.5%) B&B result 2019: Labour 4th with 1,734 votes (4.1%)
How the actual fuck does MRP think Labour will win either seat?
Well it also thinks Labour will win Broxbourne and Oxford West and Abingdon on current polling
Remember the reaction when YouGov MRP predicted Canterbury would go Labour in 2017. Guffaws all round…including on here I’d wager.
Canterbury had lots of Corbynite students, Broxbourne was one of the few councils the Tories held in May and was strong Leave. OXWAB is LD held with the Tories 2nd not Labour
Yes. I know. But you still laughed at the MRP in 2017 before it proved you wrong*
*not checking the archive but pretty sure this happened
This is the one released today showing that Labour could win a 140 seat majority. But lets look at a bit of detail up where I am. It shows the new Aberdeenshire North and Moray East, and Aberdeenshire Central seats being won by *Labour* on their baseline poll assumptions.
AN&ME is 69% of Banff and Buchan, and 31% of Moray. B&B result 2019: Labour 4th with 1,734 votes (4.1%) Moray result 2019: Labour 3rd with 2,432 votes (5.0%)
AC is 70% of Gordon, and 31% of Banff & Buchan Gordon result 2019: Labour 4th with 3,052 votes (5.5%) B&B result 2019: Labour 4th with 1,734 votes (4.1%)
How the actual fuck does MRP think Labour will win either seat?
Well it also thinks Labour will win Broxbourne and Oxford West and Abingdon on current polling
Remember the reaction when YouGov MRP predicted Canterbury would go Labour in 2017. Guffaws all round…including on here I’d wager.
With any model, it depends what inputs you wire up to what outputs. Given how much of Lib Dem winning is down to saturation campaigning in specific seats, it seems plausible that this MRP simply isn't picking up whatever factor makes seats turn yellow not red.
Meanwhile, the big picture is that, even if you turn the Don't Know and Reform voters entirely blue, the Conservatives still lose badly and Labour are close enough to 326 that they don't really need anyone else.
This is the one released today showing that Labour could win a 140 seat majority. But lets look at a bit of detail up where I am. It shows the new Aberdeenshire North and Moray East, and Aberdeenshire Central seats being won by *Labour* on their baseline poll assumptions.
AN&ME is 69% of Banff and Buchan, and 31% of Moray. B&B result 2019: Labour 4th with 1,734 votes (4.1%) Moray result 2019: Labour 3rd with 2,432 votes (5.0%)
AC is 70% of Gordon, and 31% of Banff & Buchan Gordon result 2019: Labour 4th with 3,052 votes (5.5%) B&B result 2019: Labour 4th with 1,734 votes (4.1%)
How the actual fuck does MRP think Labour will win either seat?
Well it also thinks Labour will win Broxbourne and Oxford West and Abingdon on current polling
Remember the reaction when YouGov MRP predicted Canterbury would go Labour in 2017. Guffaws all round…including on here I’d wager.
With any model, it depends what inputs you wire up to what outputs. Given how much of Lib Dem winning is down to saturation campaigning in specific seats, it seems plausible that this MRP simply isn't picking up whatever factor makes seats turn yellow not red.
Meanwhile, the big picture is that, even if you turn the Don't Know and Reform voters entirely blue, the Conservatives still lose badly and Labour are close enough to 326 that they don't really need anyone else.
If DKs and Reform voters turn blue though it is possible the Tories still win most seats in England even if Labour win the UK through gains in Scotland from the SNP and Labour MPs in Wales.
Unlike non Tory Wales and Scotland which have their own Parliaments for most of their domestic policy if there is a UK Tory government they didn't vote for, England would have no Parliament or now even EVEL if it votes Tory but the UK votes Labour.
New Tory leaders since 2015 and 2000: 7, 4. New Labour leaders (not counting Harman) since 2015 and 2000: 4, 2.
Of course the Tories could dump Sunak. He's very rich though and presumably has more sycophants in the party wanting to be his friend than is usual. To what extent this applies to constituency chairmen, I don't know. But the membership went for the obviously incompetent and half-nuts Truss rather than Sunak. Conclusion is he wouldn't be missed if he left the post tomorrow.
Meanwhile in the USA the Dems will dump Biden I reckon. The guy keeps falling over FFS.
Most importantly, and FPT, *
three Tesla owners shave their balls ultra-smooth and enter a room where they discuss the d'Hondt method. We all know how many dicks there are, but what's the expected number of testicles?
This is the one released today showing that Labour could win a 140 seat majority. But lets look at a bit of detail up where I am. It shows the new Aberdeenshire North and Moray East, and Aberdeenshire Central seats being won by *Labour* on their baseline poll assumptions.
AN&ME is 69% of Banff and Buchan, and 31% of Moray. B&B result 2019: Labour 4th with 1,734 votes (4.1%) Moray result 2019: Labour 3rd with 2,432 votes (5.0%)
AC is 70% of Gordon, and 31% of Banff & Buchan Gordon result 2019: Labour 4th with 3,052 votes (5.5%) B&B result 2019: Labour 4th with 1,734 votes (4.1%)
How the actual fuck does MRP think Labour will win either seat?
Well it also thinks Labour will win Broxbourne and Oxford West and Abingdon on current polling
Remember the reaction when YouGov MRP predicted Canterbury would go Labour in 2017. Guffaws all round…including on here I’d wager.
With any model, it depends what inputs you wire up to what outputs. Given how much of Lib Dem winning is down to saturation campaigning in specific seats, it seems plausible that this MRP simply isn't picking up whatever factor makes seats turn yellow not red.
Meanwhile, the big picture is that, even if you turn the Don't Know and Reform voters entirely blue, the Conservatives still lose badly and Labour are close enough to 326 that they don't really need anyone else.
We all know how MRP works, but for those in the cheap seats...
* 1. Take a big sample * 2. Subdivide it by group (age/sex/socioeconomic category) * 3. Work out the voting intention of each group * 4. Work out how many people there are for each group in each constituency * 5. Plug 3 into 4 * 6. You now know the voting intention in each constituency * 7. Weigh those groups by turnout (this is the hard bit since you are guessing) * 8. You now know the votes in each constituency * 9. Add up all 8s, and you now know the election result
How the F have EPL clubs missed out on Bellingham?!
My guess is that Bellingham didn't really fancy the media attention he would have got in this country.
Yes that’s my guess too. Feels like a personal preference to avoid England. I believe that’s why he went to Germany in the first place
Nonetheless a shame that possibly the best England player of the next generation will not be in the EPL
Newcastle should have bought him. They have £800 trillion to spend
I’m of the view that, for the England team anyway, having some players who play club football outside England is a benefit. I may be mistaken but I think very few World Cup winning nations rely as much on their own leagues as we do. Has Messi ever played league football in Argentina?
New Tory leaders since 2015 and 2000: 7, 4. New Labour leaders (not counting Harman) since 2015 and 2000: 4, 2.
Of course the Tories could dump Sunak. He's very rich though and presumably has more sycophants in the party wanting to be his friend than is usual. To what extent this applies to constituency chairmen, I don't know. But the membership went for the obviously incompetent and half-nuts Truss rather than Sunak. Conclusion is he wouldn't be missed if he left the post tomorrow.
Meanwhile in the USA the Dems will dump Biden I reckon. The guy keeps falling over FFS.
Most importantly, and FPT, *
three Tesla owners shave their balls ultra-smooth and enter a room where they discuss the d'Hondt method. We all know how many dicks there are, but what's the expected number of testicles?
*
Extra points for linking to stats.
Man if you want ultra-smooth it’s waxing all the way…
Completely off topic but if it isn’t now obvious to the RFU and everyone else involved that the entire structure of rugby union in England isn’t fit for purpose anymore then there’s no hope for them.
How is this possible? I thought the Russell group was the best????
So even on that most of the top 10 and the top 3 universities are all Russell Group. Your uni and the others were also always unis never polys converted to unis
Completely off topic but if it isn’t now obvious to the RFU and everyone else involved that the entire structure of rugby union in England isn’t fit for purpose anymore then there’s no hope for them.
What's the issue? I can see why Wasps went bust (gambled on filling a big venue in a new location), but why have Irish gone under?
New Tory leaders since 2015 and 2000: 7, 4. New Labour leaders (not counting Harman) since 2015 and 2000: 4, 2.
Of course the Tories could dump Sunak. He's very rich though and presumably has more sycophants in the party wanting to be his friend than is usual. To what extent this applies to constituency chairmen, I don't know. But the membership went for the obviously incompetent and half-nuts Truss rather than Sunak. Conclusion is he wouldn't be missed if he left the post tomorrow.
Meanwhile in the USA the Dems will dump Biden I reckon. The guy keeps falling over FFS.
Most importantly, and FPT, *
three Tesla owners shave their balls ultra-smooth and enter a room where they discuss the d'Hondt method. We all know how many dicks there are, but what's the expected number of testicles?
Appreciate the example! It will be fascinating to watch if that happens - I don't think Labour have any activists at all up here. They run a tiny number of candidates in local elections, so it will be some surge if it happens!
Completely off topic but if it isn’t now obvious to the RFU and everyone else involved that the entire structure of rugby union in England isn’t fit for purpose anymore then there’s no hope for them.
What's the issue? I can see why Wasps went bust (gambled on filling a big venue in a new location), but why have Irish gone under?
Essentially their backer couldn’t/wouldn’t fund them anymore. The Premiership was supposed to start this season with 14 teams. Instead it will be starting next season with 10.
Completely off topic but if it isn’t now obvious to the RFU and everyone else involved that the entire structure of rugby union in England isn’t fit for purpose anymore then there’s no hope for them.
How is this possible? I thought the Russell group was the best????
So even on that most of the top 10 and the top 3 universities are all Russell Group. Your uni and the others were also always unis never polys converted to unis
Eh? Before Robbins it was Bristol College of Science and Technology
How is this possible? I thought the Russell group was the best????
So even on that most of the top 10 and the top 3 universities are all Russell Group. Your uni and the others were also always unis never polys converted to unis
Another naive challenger to HYUFD instantly flawed by his razor-sharp grasp of statistics. Even if his grasp of grammar and punctuation leaves a lot to be desired.
Comments
Multiple witnesses subpoenaed in Florida in Trump Mar-a-Lago case
Involvement of top prosecutor Jay Bratt in the Florida grand jury could suggest questions about Espionage Act violations
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jun/07/trump-documents-grand-jury-florida-espionage-act
...Bratt, who was seen arriving in Miami on Tuesday by this Guardian reporter, has previously appeared for grand jury proceedings in the espionage side of the investigation, as opposed to the obstruction side, which has typically been led by Smith’s other prosecutors or national security trial attorneys.
A justice department spokesperson declined to comment.
But the underlying reasons as to why prosecutors in the special counsel’s office impaneled the new grand jury in Florida, and whether it is now the only grand jury active in the case after the Washington grand jury has sat dormant for weeks, remains an open question.
Prosecutors would most probably prefer to bring charges in Washington, where the judges at the US district court are more familiar with handling national security case – though Florida also has a robust national security section – and the jury pool skews more Democratic.
The impaneling of grand juries has to do with where prosecutors believe a crime was committed. And the most straightforward reason for the Florida grand jury is that prosecutors have developed evidence of criminal activity at Mar-a-Lago, which is in the southern district of Florida.
In this investigation, prosecutors considering charges against Trump for retaining national security material may have concluded from the evidence that he was still president when classified documents were moved to Mar-a-Lago, meaning his “unlawful possession” only started in Florida.
Similarly, if prosecutors have also developed evidence that Trump knew he had retained national security documents after he left office at Mar-a-Lago, for instance by waving them around or showing people, that could present hurdles to charging espionage act violations in Washington.
The venue for an obstruction of justice charge is more difficult to deduce, meanwhile, because the courts have provided little guidance about how it should be applied under section 1519 of the US criminal code*, which prosecutors listed on the affidavit for Mar-a-Lago search warrant...
*The Florida case could be under section 793:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793
I didn't understand what that meant.
In fact, it's entirely possible Starmer has been dead for years and he's still heading for SW1A
I did do the Umrah in 2002, I only went because my parents and grandparents were going and I was worried about them in that heat and the fact my grandmother had mobility issues.
Absolute bloody shambles, all pilgrims must wear two simple white unhemmed sheets. Not allowed to wear designer stuff, that's when I knew Islam really wasn't for me.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ihram_clothing
Yesterday it was 26.6 to £1 now it's 28.96
They have the advantage of being ideologically flexible about anything other than winning and, for a time, the EU (but that’s gone now).
Bit like Catholics going on pilgrimage to Rome. Glad to come home!
I've never been to Saudi but my understanding is horribly hot, boring and repressive. It's main attraction seems to be the possibility of earning large amounts of money.
I suppose crime is probably less of an issue in Saudi.
Replace Starmer with Rayner and they won’t even finish largest party! Fact!
Foreigners are so unfortunate, having to live away from home for their whole lives.
A reputation for treating everyone badly and off-handly , and thinking that they "own" the religion.
Re-adopting it now would be nuts.
They haven't been the same since England won the Webb Ellis Trophy in 2003.
Not either outdated free-market extremism and plutocracy, to an extent sometimes unmatched even in the US, or abrasive, bargain-bin populism, as often, over the last ten years.
I thing we are in the endgame: Rishi's correct response to a challenge is call a GE.
A focus on the importance of the balance of payments.
This requires more investment and savings and less consumption.
Policies should therefore focus on how to incentivise these objectives.
That means super tax breaks for investment and training, making the UK a good place to invest.
It also means focusing education much more on what skills are actually required and likely to be required in the future.
It also means getting serious about cutting government borrowing.
This means current spending needs to be sharply controlled because more infrastructure investment is needed.
Above all, we need more housing, both social and privately owned.
We need to go as far and as fast as we can towards a renewable energy policy without damaging underlying competitiveness. This will both improve our balance of payments and improve our contributions to reducing global warming.
We need to think hard about how social care and medical care for the elderly is funded. Personally, I would want to go back to the ideas that were being floated by May. Inheritance is not to be subsidised by public money meeting individual needs.
We need to rebalance our tax system so that capital makes a bigger contribution and the pressure on incomes is lessened.
We need to simplify our tax system and remove cliff edges, the anomaly of higher marginal rates over £100k, the absurdity of NI and the stupid differentials in rates depending on which vehicle the same money is earned through.
I think that would fill the first couple of terms.
I got into an argument with a Red Wall activist last year who said Thatcher only cut taxes, I pointed out at first Thatcher put up taxes to stabilise the finances, it was only in her third term that she only cut/abolished the upper rate of tax from 60%.
I was told I was wrong, that Truss was doing what Thatcher did from the start.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/jun/07/greggs-pret-index-north-south-divide-england-scientists
“Our defense sector desperately wants the Chinese to believe we have an ace up our sleeve in form of reverse engineered alien craft
Hence the psy-op
UFO stuff is the one conspiracy theory they want you to believe”
https://twitter.com/darrenjbeattie/status/1666438250339131393?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw
And add some progress towards food security ...
And presumably Vulcans only to play Spock. Or rather half human/half Vulcan's to play Spock.
Its a monumentally stupid view to hold. I assume he hasn't thought it through. Or is just happy to discriminate.
Just view it as a kind of reparation for the wrongs committed over the millennia by the Anglo-Saxons.
H/t Ghedebrav
https://www.thesun.co.uk/money/9563056/greggs-secret-menu/ lists what you can get where...
The person who is most genetically similar to the character being played should get the part.
Section 28 is an aberrance in Mrs Thatcher's usually pro gay rights history.
Voted for Leo Abse's bill, decriminalised homosexuality in Scotland and Norn Iron, and happily employed gayers.
Edit - Also forget her government's approach on dealing with AIDS, absolutely saved the lives of hundreds of thousands of many gay people.
As Cook put it.
"The clause bears the names of hon. Members from all three major parties. I regret that the only party represented among Scottish Members of Parliament from which there has been no support for the clause is the Scottish National Party. I am pleased to see both representatives of that party in their place, and I hope to convert them in the remainder of my remarks."
https://www.bestforbritain.org/mrp_polling_new_boundaries_june_2023
This is the one released today showing that Labour could win a 140 seat majority. But lets look at a bit of detail up where I am. It shows the new Aberdeenshire North and Moray East, and Aberdeenshire Central seats being won by *Labour* on their baseline poll assumptions.
AN&ME is 69% of Banff and Buchan, and 31% of Moray.
B&B result 2019: Labour 4th with 1,734 votes (4.1%)
Moray result 2019: Labour 3rd with 2,432 votes (5.0%)
AC is 70% of Gordon, and 31% of Banff & Buchan
Gordon result 2019: Labour 4th with 3,052 votes (5.5%)
B&B result 2019: Labour 4th with 1,734 votes (4.1%)
How the actual fuck does MRP think Labour will win either seat?
When there's a wave election all sorts of odd results happen.
For example off the top of the my head the SNP won East Dunbartonshire in 2015 despite finishing fourth in 2010 with 10% of the vote.
Once Sunak loses the election, and Sunakism, whatever that was, is soon forgotten, the Tory party will look back to when Conservatives were last doing great for this country, Halcyon summer of eighties economic liberalism for their ethos - aspiration, sound finance and relate it to the problems facing this country today. Planning laws and other structural rigidities keep Britain poorer than it should be, our merchant banks made us great once and the City can again, our advantage lies in professional services, ease of doing business and a capital city on which all the world converges. Boris Levelling up is just pretend gibberish that ancient mismatch in scale and wealth between London and the secondary cities their regions can ever be levelled, therefore not an honest policy platform - so get used to conservatism as being complete opposite of Boris populism. all those Tory MPs who ganged up on Truss to make her look stupid and such a short lived PM, Grannt Shapps, Gove, etc etc they have to go - If the Conservative Party can now never remove the top rate of tax Gordon Brown only sneaked on in 2010 as a “sly gift” knowing it’s his last ever budget, then what sort of economics does the Conservative Party stand for?
Soon after next May’s General Election the Tories will have clear ethos and policy platform, based on economic liberalism and Thatcherism. And of all the directions the party can go in out of the mess they are in, it’s the best one.
Thatcherism, in all its aspirational, sound financial appeal is coming back. And Labour should deservedly be very very scared. 😈
Seattle Times ($) - Girl, 10, found after 24 hours lost in Kittitas County wilderness
After spending 24 hours missing in the Cle Elum River Valley [about 75 miles east of Seattle on other side of Cascades], 10-year-old Shunghla Mashwani was reunited with her family on Monday.
The night before, she slept between some trees in the dense wilderness after being separated from her family Sunday afternoon, according to the Kittitas County Sheriff’s Office.
Here’s how the day unfolded, according to the Sheriff’s Office.
On Sunday, 10-year-old Shunghla and her extended family gathered at the Cathedral Pass Trailhead on Fish Lake Road and were playing in the woods near the Cle Elum River.
When the family crossed a footbridge over the Cle Elum River to break for lunch, they noticed Shunghla was missing.
Around 20 adults in the group immediately started searching for her. There was no cell signal in the valley. The group searched for nearly 2 hours before someone on a utility terrain vehicle drove by and offered to use a satellite phone to call 911.
Shunghla’s family reported her missing shortly before 2 p.m.
After losing sight of her family members, Shunghla hiked downstream through the forest — she said she knew it was the right thing to follow the river.
The Sheriff’s Office launched a search, coordinating with Kittitas County Search and Rescue Volunteers, K9s and drones. Over half a dozen other law-enforcement agencies from across Western Washington joined the search through steep and rugged terrain, from the air with helicopters and in the Cle Elum River with swift water rescue teams.
At approximately 3 p.m. Monday, just over 24 hours after Shunghla’s family reported her missing, two Search and Rescue volunteers found her alive with only minor scrapes.
She had traveled south about 1.5 miles from where she was last seen, down the west side of the Cle Elum River. Snohomish County Swiftwater personnel used an inflatable rescue watercraft to bring her to the east side of the river, where she was reunited with her father.
The Mashwani family — who came to the U.S. from Afghanistan two years ago — told searchers they like to spend time in the high backcountry because it reminds them of home.
The Sheriff’s Office said Shunghla proved “an extraordinarily resourceful and resilient 10-year-old.”
It was in your own words Chris Pincher that ousted Boris not his VONC margin.
It was May failing to deliver Brexit that ousted her and poor local elections, again not her VONC margin
Labour would be more concerned at Boris returning as PM (and if Sunak goes it will be Boris who replaces him) as Boris did better than Sunak is with redwall and Leave voters
Vote Tory for financial prudence ...
*not checking the archive but pretty sure this happened
Meanwhile, the big picture is that, even if you turn the Don't Know and Reform voters entirely blue, the Conservatives still lose badly and Labour are close enough to 326 that they don't really need anyone else.
https://thecompleteuniversityguide.co.uk/universities/university-of-bath
Not in the Russell Group.
How is this possible? I thought the Russell group was the best????
Nonetheless a shame that possibly the best England player of the next generation will not be in the EPL
Newcastle should have bought him. They have £800 trillion to spend
Unlike non Tory Wales and Scotland which have their own Parliaments for most of their domestic policy if there is a UK Tory government they didn't vote for, England would have no Parliament or now even EVEL if it votes Tory but the UK votes Labour.
New Labour leaders (not counting Harman) since 2015 and 2000: 4, 2.
Of course the Tories could dump Sunak. He's very rich though and presumably has more sycophants in the party wanting to be his friend than is usual. To what extent this applies to constituency chairmen, I don't know. But the membership went for the obviously incompetent and half-nuts Truss rather than Sunak. Conclusion is he wouldn't be missed if he left the post tomorrow.
Meanwhile in the USA the Dems will dump Biden I reckon. The guy keeps falling over FFS.
Most importantly, and FPT,
* *
Extra points for linking to stats.
* 1. Take a big sample
* 2. Subdivide it by group (age/sex/socioeconomic category)
* 3. Work out the voting intention of each group
* 4. Work out how many people there are for each group in each constituency
* 5. Plug 3 into 4
* 6. You now know the voting intention in each constituency
* 7. Weigh those groups by turnout (this is the hard bit since you are guessing)
* 8. You now know the votes in each constituency
* 9. Add up all 8s, and you now know the election result
Extra points for linking to stats.
Man if you want ultra-smooth it’s waxing all the way…
So even on that most of the top 10 and the top 3 universities are all Russell Group. Your uni and the others were also always unis never polys converted to unis
'Extra points for linking to stats.'
They better not replace him with VP Harris then.
Latest Redfield Biden 45% Trump 41% but Trump 43% Harris 42%
https://redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/joe-biden-administration-approval-ratings-and-hypothetical-voting-intention-31-may-2023/
The Tories won this from a distant third.