I'm getting a sense of Not Trump vs Not Biden for WH24. Can't say exactly how we get there but I think that somehow we will.
It could be Not Trump vs Not Biden even if Trump and Biden are the candidates.
Sorry I'm not getting that, William? How do you mean?
I mean the two voting blocs could be "Not Biden" and "Not Trump", rather than a positive endorsement of either of them.
How screwed up is American politics, when two massively divisive octogenarians (by the end of their terms) are somehow the favourites? Let’s hope the other candidates get a look-in on both sides.
In 1944 the choice was between a divisive, older (by contemporary standards) incumbent with obvious health issues (though seriousness was not common knowledge) who'd clearly aged in office, versus a young, energetic challenger with strong record as elected official and big state governor.
Voters chose age and cunning over youth and vigor - much to the satisfaction of say 96% of UKers, then & now.
Actually, sounds like a potential general election battle between Biden and DeSantis.
Just reading R. C. Stern's new history of the US Navy in the Atlantic and Europe in - and before - WW2, which is bringing up some interesting perspectives on FDR and his relations with the UK. But only some way in.
I seem to remember there was a US admiral at the time whose surname was, funnily enough, “England” or “English” who absolutely hated us and the RN with a passion. It really gummed up naval intelligence cooperation for a time with Britain.
You are thinking of Admiral King.
Who was NOT anti-British or anti-RN, instead pro-American and pro-USN.
Lot of bilge pumped out them and since by Brits who thought America should necessarily defer to British interests and opinions, as opposed to their own obviously less-important concerns.
Such as the Japanese Navy.
Yeah except America's disinclination to use convoys or black out the east coast led to Nazi U-boats' second "happy time". This is often put down to Admiral King's refusal to listen to British advice. Either way, it cost a lot of American sailors their lives. The Japanese Navy rarely ventured into the Atlantic.
Not surprisingly - think of the logistics
Not easy to keep Nippon home....
The Japanese are pretty adventurous when they choose to be. We've all seen Japanese odd-bods in far-flung places. Their Navy has always aspired to bigger things, but even the Japanese Navy were pretty surprised at the boldness of the Russian fleet that went from the Baltic to the Chinese Coast - nuts, but amazing.
There is no opposite of trans needed in the context of gender. I assume all trans people simply wish to be accepted as their gender, so a trans-man is just a man. Every other (non trans man) is also a man. Easy. I suspect the rise of the use of cis is to normalise what is a rather unusual thing. A significant proportion of people are not heterosexual. A rather smaller proportion genuinly believe they were born the wrong sex/gender delete as appropriate,
I simply didn't have time to put up my Ascot selections today - probably no bad thing.
It's strange - I'm really busy at work and I'm told everywhere else is busy. Perhaps that explains inflation - too much money chasing too few goods.
The corollary of that is the return of debt - having maxed out our Covid cash pile, the middle classes are now reverting back to type and borrowing to pay for all the nonsense. The figure son personal and consumer debt are looking worrying again - the good old British need to consume whatever the cost....
Judging by Sainsbury's empty-ish carpark this morning, we've all been hoodwinked by Leon into taking foreign holidays. Inside Sainsbury's, the pharmacy is now closed, the tills have a mysterious new gadget on the cash registers, and all the operators were wearing headsets.
Inside Morrison's earlier - only 2 tills had staff and the shelves are half empty.
And I only went as the Galleri test centre is in Morrison's car park and you get a £10 voucher in return for a sample of your blood.
“Are you Catholic or Protestant?” “Neither, I’m Atheist.” “Aye, but are you a Catholic Atheist or a Protestant Atheist?”
That’s the problem with ‘cis’ - it buys into the belief system, it assumes you have a ‘gender identity’……
Insisting everyone has a ‘gender identity’ is akin to insisting everyone has a ‘soul’. It’s not insulting in itself, but if you keep on about it and can’t grasp that some people don’t share your belief, then they might get narked at you.
“But ‘cis’ just means the opposite of ‘trans’!”
Great - so what does ‘trans’ mean? It can’t be defined without referring to ‘gender identity’, a metaphysical belief.
I'm getting a sense of Not Trump vs Not Biden for WH24. Can't say exactly how we get there but I think that somehow we will.
It could be Not Trump vs Not Biden even if Trump and Biden are the candidates.
Sorry I'm not getting that, William? How do you mean?
I mean the two voting blocs could be "Not Biden" and "Not Trump", rather than a positive endorsement of either of them.
How screwed up is American politics, when two massively divisive octogenarians (by the end of their terms) are somehow the favourites? Let’s hope the other candidates get a look-in on both sides.
In 1944 the choice was between a divisive, older (by contemporary standards) incumbent with obvious health issues (though seriousness was not common knowledge) who'd clearly aged in office, versus a young, energetic challenger with strong record as elected official and big state governor.
Voters chose age and cunning over youth and vigor - much to the satisfaction of say 96% of UKers, then & now.
Actually, sounds like a potential general election battle between Biden and DeSantis.
Just reading R. C. Stern's new history of the US Navy in the Atlantic and Europe in - and before - WW2, which is bringing up some interesting perspectives on FDR and his relations with the UK. But only some way in.
I seem to remember there was a US admiral at the time whose surname was, funnily enough, “England” or “English” who absolutely hated us and the RN with a passion. It really gummed up naval intelligence cooperation for a time with Britain.
You are thinking of Admiral King.
Who was NOT anti-British or anti-RN, instead pro-American and pro-USN.
Lot of bilge pumped out them and since by Brits who thought America should necessarily defer to British interests and opinions, as opposed to their own obviously less-important concerns.
Such as the Japanese Navy.
Yeah except America's disinclination to use convoys or black out the east coast led to Nazi U-boats' second "happy time". This is often put down to Admiral King's refusal to listen to British advice. Either way, it cost a lot of American sailors their lives. The Japanese Navy rarely ventured into the Atlantic.
True, esp. last sentance!
Though IIRC the East (and Gulf) Coast non-blackout was IIRC more serious problem than lack of convoying.
And blackout was NOT one of Admiral King's direct responsibilities.
ADDENDUM - Point still stands: British criticisms of Admiral King should be seasoned with at least a few grains of salt . . . same as American criticisms of Field Marshall Montgomery.
I don't see why we should take American criticisms of Montgomery with a pinch of salt; they should be listened to as much as British criticisms of him.
If enough idiots vote for him and he gets another MP gig, then surely the people have spoken/democracy in action, blah, blah, blah. But he ain't getting back in. He's done. Dusted. Labour are going to form the next government and Johnson will be irrelevant.
I've asked the following question many times, but never get an answer. Who do PB Tories actually want to lead the party?
Not my business, of course, but (pace ydoethur) Gove would be good - not bad at combative politics but also a genuine old-fashioned politician keen to change things for the good of the country. Some of his changes have been very controversial, but at least he enriches public debate. What do Sunak, Hunt, Mordaunt, etc. actually stand for? When did they last say anything new?
I think Gove has been around too long, and there are too many hostages to fortune in choosing him. The problem with others like Alex Chalk, for example, is that he is too public school smooth, and is unlikely to hold his seat anyway. Tobias Ellwood has also annoyed too many with his rebellious antics, but there is a portion of the party establishment that would go for him.
The puff piece for Penny Mordaunt in the Times today suggests that if she holds her own seat, she is in with a good shout. However, that is a pretty big "if".
The big deal for the post defeat Tories will be "Character", hence the interesting positioning of Mordaunt and Ellwood.
The novelisation of Yes, Prime Minister ends with The National Education Service, and Hacker sadly realising that whatever wins he might achieve, nothing fundamental would change.
Gove's career has been about big, disruptive changes, whether at Education or Brexit. Both of those legacies are, at best, mixed, and his planning reforms have largely been blown up by Conservative Nimbies.
I do wonder if he's had his Jim Hacker moment.
This is very selectve in its overview of his career. Both at Justice and DEFRA he made significant and lasting change in both culture and practice which have had long reaching positive effects.
He is very much a details, evidence based person. Looking at what the real problems are in departments and listening to all sides rather than just the usual lobbyists.
Yet Justice is falling apart with cases taking years to get to court.
My father also had Views on his record at DEFRA.
Put it this way, you think I hate him? You should have heard what Dad had to say!
Well at least now we know where you got your irrational hatred from.
In case you've forgotten, he went to DEFRA and earned Dad's ire long after he'd screwed over education.
In case you have forgotten education was screwed over long before Gove ever came on the scene. A third world system run entirely for vested interest and ideology.
The irony of that post is while it was not necessarily true at the time Gove came into power, it was profoundly true of what he left. Especially in making it even more in hock to ideology - including some quite sinister ideologies - and vested interests which are not only not conducive to but positively opposed to the interests of children's education.
There were many problems in education in 2010. The exam system was not good. The curriculum was years out of date. Appointments to senior posts were profoundly corrupt. LEAs were a shambles.
What he left was an exam system that doesn't work at all, a curriculum that was based on naked nativism, a system of appointments to senior posts so corrupt that we actually have people who are entirely unqualified in senior positions and a series of expensive and mostly badly run academy chains taking the place of LEAs working as a gravy train for rather too many sponsoring organisations and their chums.
And I would gently suggest that rather than hector me about it, and attribute my understanding of just how bad things to an 'irrational hatred' of Gove, you remember that I am an expert in the field and you are not. Perhaps therefore the reason I disdain Gove is because I understand fully just how badly he messed up and you do not?
And yet the PISA ratings for the UK education system collapsed between 2000 and 2012 (from 7th to 24th in maths. Similar falls in Science and reading.) and only started to recover after the Tory reforms were introduced.
On the other hand, there is a time lag in those ratings, surely? Not familiar with the details.
(But I also wonder about lead in petrol.)
The time lag idea is just ydoethur clutching at straws. Yes there will be a timelag but the idea it is a decade or more is rubbish.
And besides even with a decade it still falls in Labour's lap.
The testing is done at age 15 so those taking it in 2009 and 2012 had spent almost their whole education under Labour. Those taking it in 2018 had had 8 of their 10 years education under coalition or Tory government.
The curriculum changes did not take effect until 2016-17.
Unless I was teaching the wrong curriculum all that time.
The curriculum they were learning until that time was developed under Labour.
And because they are tested at age 15, any changes will be measured about ten years after they take effect, because until that time you won't know what the changes in five years and upwards have been.
So you are simply wrong.
Frankly, you're not only wrong but making yourself look an idiot. Which I don't think you are as a successful engineer, but you clearly are ignorant and therefore spouting nonsense.
This is why you should listen to experts.
But I think you are too irrationally devoted to Gove to listen to reason.
Hahahaha. What aload of garbage. So the decline throughout the whole of the Labour administration and continuing for 5 years after that was nothing to do with Labour? You are showing real desperation there.
What truly baffles me over the last 13 years is that even though I broadly believe in the policies that the government has followed there's in fact no discernible benefit. Rather the opposite.
Brexit is of course some part of that - I think the easiest way would be to adjudge it (say) 3 years of stagnation.
We're left though with a whole load of Tory government years that have achieved bugger all.
The 2019 government years have seen the UK achieving the democratically-mandated Brexit, whilst fighting Covid (at vast cost to the nation) and supporting fuel bill payers as a consequence of the Ukraine war (at vast cost to the nation).
Anybody who thinks the 2019 Government had bandwidth for anything much else wasn't really paying attention. Especially as it changed Prime Minister twice in the process.
We are however left with a whole load of Salmond and Sturgeon years that have achieved bugger all.
There is no opposite of trans needed in the context of gender. I assume all trans people simply wish to be accepted as their gender, so a trans-man is just a man. Every other (non trans man) is also a man. Easy. I suspect the rise of the use of cis is to normalise what is a rather unusual thing. A significant proportion of people are not heterosexual. A rather smaller proportion genuinly believe they were born the wrong sex/gender delete as appropriate,
Actually, the terms were 'pinched' from chemistry. Cis and Trans are descriptions of two isomers that describe where radical groups are in relation to the central chemical bond. The "'trans" isomer has the groups on opposite sides of the bond, the "cis" isomer has them both on the same side
I'm getting a sense of Not Trump vs Not Biden for WH24. Can't say exactly how we get there but I think that somehow we will.
It could be Not Trump vs Not Biden even if Trump and Biden are the candidates.
Sorry I'm not getting that, William? How do you mean?
I mean the two voting blocs could be "Not Biden" and "Not Trump", rather than a positive endorsement of either of them.
How screwed up is American politics, when two massively divisive octogenarians (by the end of their terms) are somehow the favourites? Let’s hope the other candidates get a look-in on both sides.
In 1944 the choice was between a divisive, older (by contemporary standards) incumbent with obvious health issues (though seriousness was not common knowledge) who'd clearly aged in office, versus a young, energetic challenger with strong record as elected official and big state governor.
Voters chose age and cunning over youth and vigor - much to the satisfaction of say 96% of UKers, then & now.
Actually, sounds like a potential general election battle between Biden and DeSantis.
Just reading R. C. Stern's new history of the US Navy in the Atlantic and Europe in - and before - WW2, which is bringing up some interesting perspectives on FDR and his relations with the UK. But only some way in.
I seem to remember there was a US admiral at the time whose surname was, funnily enough, “England” or “English” who absolutely hated us and the RN with a passion. It really gummed up naval intelligence cooperation for a time with Britain.
You are thinking of Admiral King.
Who was NOT anti-British or anti-RN, instead pro-American and pro-USN.
Lot of bilge pumped out them and since by Brits who thought America should necessarily defer to British interests and opinions, as opposed to their own obviously less-important concerns.
Such as the Japanese Navy.
Yeah except America's disinclination to use convoys or black out the east coast led to Nazi U-boats' second "happy time". This is often put down to Admiral King's refusal to listen to British advice. Either way, it cost a lot of American sailors their lives. The Japanese Navy rarely ventured into the Atlantic.
Interestingly, Japanese warships did serve in the Mediterranean during WW1. When they were on our side, natch.
Isn't this why Japanese school uniforms look like turn of the century Royal Navy kit? At least for girls.
Believe TSE is PB's leading authority on proper wear for Japanese school-girls AND step-daughters.
There is no opposite of trans needed in the context of gender. I assume all trans people simply wish to be accepted as their gender, so a trans-man is just a man. Every other (non trans man) is also a man. Easy. I suspect the rise of the use of cis is to normalise what is a rather unusual thing. A significant proportion of people are not heterosexual. A rather smaller proportion genuinly believe they were born the wrong sex/gender delete as appropriate,
Actually, the terms were 'pinched' from chemistry. Cis and Trans are descriptions of two isomers that describe where radical groups are in relation to the central chemical bond. The "'trans" isomer has the groups on opposite sides of the bond, the "cis" isomer has them both on the same side
If enough idiots vote for him and he gets another MP gig, then surely the people have spoken/democracy in action, blah, blah, blah. But he ain't getting back in. He's done. Dusted. Labour are going to form the next government and Johnson will be irrelevant.
I've asked the following question many times, but never get an answer. Who do PB Tories actually want to lead the party?
Not my business, of course, but (pace ydoethur) Gove would be good - not bad at combative politics but also a genuine old-fashioned politician keen to change things for the good of the country. Some of his changes have been very controversial, but at least he enriches public debate. What do Sunak, Hunt, Mordaunt, etc. actually stand for? When did they last say anything new?
I think Gove has been around too long, and there are too many hostages to fortune in choosing him. The problem with others like Alex Chalk, for example, is that he is too public school smooth, and is unlikely to hold his seat anyway. Tobias Ellwood has also annoyed too many with his rebellious antics, but there is a portion of the party establishment that would go for him.
The puff piece for Penny Mordaunt in the Times today suggests that if she holds her own seat, she is in with a good shout. However, that is a pretty big "if".
The big deal for the post defeat Tories will be "Character", hence the interesting positioning of Mordaunt and Ellwood.
The novelisation of Yes, Prime Minister ends with The National Education Service, and Hacker sadly realising that whatever wins he might achieve, nothing fundamental would change.
Gove's career has been about big, disruptive changes, whether at Education or Brexit. Both of those legacies are, at best, mixed, and his planning reforms have largely been blown up by Conservative Nimbies.
I do wonder if he's had his Jim Hacker moment.
This is very selectve in its overview of his career. Both at Justice and DEFRA he made significant and lasting change in both culture and practice which have had long reaching positive effects.
He is very much a details, evidence based person. Looking at what the real problems are in departments and listening to all sides rather than just the usual lobbyists.
Yet Justice is falling apart with cases taking years to get to court.
My father also had Views on his record at DEFRA.
Put it this way, you think I hate him? You should have heard what Dad had to say!
Well at least now we know where you got your irrational hatred from.
In case you've forgotten, he went to DEFRA and earned Dad's ire long after he'd screwed over education.
In case you have forgotten education was screwed over long before Gove ever came on the scene. A third world system run entirely for vested interest and ideology.
The irony of that post is while it was not necessarily true at the time Gove came into power, it was profoundly true of what he left. Especially in making it even more in hock to ideology - including some quite sinister ideologies - and vested interests which are not only not conducive to but positively opposed to the interests of children's education.
There were many problems in education in 2010. The exam system was not good. The curriculum was years out of date. Appointments to senior posts were profoundly corrupt. LEAs were a shambles.
What he left was an exam system that doesn't work at all, a curriculum that was based on naked nativism, a system of appointments to senior posts so corrupt that we actually have people who are entirely unqualified in senior positions and a series of expensive and mostly badly run academy chains taking the place of LEAs working as a gravy train for rather too many sponsoring organisations and their chums.
And I would gently suggest that rather than hector me about it, and attribute my understanding of just how bad things to an 'irrational hatred' of Gove, you remember that I am an expert in the field and you are not. Perhaps therefore the reason I disdain Gove is because I understand fully just how badly he messed up and you do not?
And yet the PISA ratings for the UK education system collapsed between 2000 and 2012 (from 7th to 24th in maths. Similar falls in Science and reading.) and only started to recover after the Tory reforms were introduced.
On the other hand, there is a time lag in those ratings, surely? Not familiar with the details.
(But I also wonder about lead in petrol.)
The time lag idea is just ydoethur clutching at straws. Yes there will be a timelag but the idea it is a decade or more is rubbish.
And besides even with a decade it still falls in Labour's lap.
The testing is done at age 15 so those taking it in 2009 and 2012 had spent almost their whole education under Labour. Those taking it in 2018 had had 8 of their 10 years education under coalition or Tory government.
The curriculum changes did not take effect until 2016-17.
Unless I was teaching the wrong curriculum all that time.
The curriculum they were learning until that time was developed under Labour.
And because they are tested at age 15, any changes will be measured about ten years after they take effect, because until that time you won't know what the changes in five years and upwards have been.
So you are simply wrong.
Frankly, you're not only wrong but making yourself look an idiot. Which I don't think you are as a successful engineer, but you clearly are ignorant and therefore spouting nonsense.
This is why you should listen to experts.
But I think you are too irrationally devoted to Gove to listen to reason.
Hahahaha. What aload of garbage. So the decline throughout the whole of the Labour administration and continuing for 5 years after that was nothing to do with Labour? You are showing real desperation there.
What truly baffles me over the last 13 years is that even though I broadly believe in the policies that the government has followed there's in fact no discernible benefit. Rather the opposite.
Brexit is of course some part of that - I think the easiest way would be to adjudge it (say) 3 years of stagnation.
We're left though with a whole load of Tory government years that have achieved bugger all.
Several reasons, in ascending order of culpability.
Governments since 2008 have had a lot thrown at them; GFC, fiscal rebalancing, a pandemic, a European war. That has diverted from the ability to set an agenda, and a lot of it is true everywhere.
In the UK, Brexit undoubtedly sucked up a lot of headspace, especially 2016-20, but to an extent even now. Even if you think it's worth it, there was bound to be a cost, and I think it was underweighted in our national consideration of the issue.
Finally, and least explicably, Conservative PMs seem to have largely run in opposition to their Conservative predecessors. May against Cameron's metropolitan liberalism, Johnson against May's dour realism, Truss against Johnson's reluctant acceptance of arithmetic and Sunak against everything Truss did.
If each PM focuses on reversing what the last one did, it's no wonder the long Conservative government hasn't really got anywhere.
Reminds me what Hannah Arendt said about fascists, that they just use words as weapons and have no responsibility for them as they do not believe in truth.
Did he actually allow real Nazis on or just people with a different view. Twitter is very much ‘everyone who disagrees with me is Hitler’ territory.
Also as stupid as a term Cisgender is it should not be banned.
How is it stupid? How else do you express the opposite of "transgender"?
"Normal"?
The irony is, if Elon ever gets off the phone and returns his attention to SpaceX, then he'll have to sit thru either the dearMoon mission or HLS missions using the words "trans-Lunar injection" or "cislunar orbit".
The Austro-Hungarian Empire was split into "Cisleithania" and "Transleithania", basically corresponding to the "Austrian" and "Hungarian" bits.
I didn't know about that, thank you. Returning to space-y stuff, I have a ridiculous number of Stephen Baxter books on my shelves, so phrases like "trans-Neptunian" or "cis-Venerean" are not unfamiliar. I don't know what they'll use for a Mars mission: trans-Arean?
Reminds me what Hannah Arendt said about fascists, that they just use words as weapons and have no responsibility for them as they do not believe in truth.
Did he actually allow real Nazis on or just people with a different view. Twitter is very much ‘everyone who disagrees with me is Hitler’ territory.
Also as stupid as a term Cisgender is it should not be banned.
How is it stupid? How else do you express the opposite of "transgender"?
"Normal"?
The irony is, if Elon ever gets off the phone and returns his attention to SpaceX, then he'll have to sit thru either the dearMoon mission or HLS missions using the words "trans-Lunar injection" or "cislunar orbit".
The Austro-Hungarian Empire was split into "Cisleithania" and "Transleithania", basically corresponding to the "Austrian" and "Hungarian" bits.
I didn't know about that, thank you. Returning to space-y stuff, I have a ridiculous number of Stephen Baxter books on my shelves, so phrases like "trans-Neptunian" or "cis-Venerean" are not unfamiliar. I don't know what they'll use for a Mars mission: trans-Arean?
If enough idiots vote for him and he gets another MP gig, then surely the people have spoken/democracy in action, blah, blah, blah. But he ain't getting back in. He's done. Dusted. Labour are going to form the next government and Johnson will be irrelevant.
I've asked the following question many times, but never get an answer. Who do PB Tories actually want to lead the party?
Not my business, of course, but (pace ydoethur) Gove would be good - not bad at combative politics but also a genuine old-fashioned politician keen to change things for the good of the country. Some of his changes have been very controversial, but at least he enriches public debate. What do Sunak, Hunt, Mordaunt, etc. actually stand for? When did they last say anything new?
I think Gove has been around too long, and there are too many hostages to fortune in choosing him. The problem with others like Alex Chalk, for example, is that he is too public school smooth, and is unlikely to hold his seat anyway. Tobias Ellwood has also annoyed too many with his rebellious antics, but there is a portion of the party establishment that would go for him.
The puff piece for Penny Mordaunt in the Times today suggests that if she holds her own seat, she is in with a good shout. However, that is a pretty big "if".
The big deal for the post defeat Tories will be "Character", hence the interesting positioning of Mordaunt and Ellwood.
The novelisation of Yes, Prime Minister ends with The National Education Service, and Hacker sadly realising that whatever wins he might achieve, nothing fundamental would change.
Gove's career has been about big, disruptive changes, whether at Education or Brexit. Both of those legacies are, at best, mixed, and his planning reforms have largely been blown up by Conservative Nimbies.
I do wonder if he's had his Jim Hacker moment.
This is very selectve in its overview of his career. Both at Justice and DEFRA he made significant and lasting change in both culture and practice which have had long reaching positive effects.
He is very much a details, evidence based person. Looking at what the real problems are in departments and listening to all sides rather than just the usual lobbyists.
Yet Justice is falling apart with cases taking years to get to court.
My father also had Views on his record at DEFRA.
Put it this way, you think I hate him? You should have heard what Dad had to say!
Well at least now we know where you got your irrational hatred from.
In case you've forgotten, he went to DEFRA and earned Dad's ire long after he'd screwed over education.
In case you have forgotten education was screwed over long before Gove ever came on the scene. A third world system run entirely for vested interest and ideology.
The irony of that post is while it was not necessarily true at the time Gove came into power, it was profoundly true of what he left. Especially in making it even more in hock to ideology - including some quite sinister ideologies - and vested interests which are not only not conducive to but positively opposed to the interests of children's education.
There were many problems in education in 2010. The exam system was not good. The curriculum was years out of date. Appointments to senior posts were profoundly corrupt. LEAs were a shambles.
What he left was an exam system that doesn't work at all, a curriculum that was based on naked nativism, a system of appointments to senior posts so corrupt that we actually have people who are entirely unqualified in senior positions and a series of expensive and mostly badly run academy chains taking the place of LEAs working as a gravy train for rather too many sponsoring organisations and their chums.
And I would gently suggest that rather than hector me about it, and attribute my understanding of just how bad things to an 'irrational hatred' of Gove, you remember that I am an expert in the field and you are not. Perhaps therefore the reason I disdain Gove is because I understand fully just how badly he messed up and you do not?
And yet the PISA ratings for the UK education system collapsed between 2000 and 2012 (from 7th to 24th in maths. Similar falls in Science and reading.) and only started to recover after the Tory reforms were introduced.
On the other hand, there is a time lag in those ratings, surely? Not familiar with the details.
(But I also wonder about lead in petrol.)
The time lag idea is just ydoethur clutching at straws. Yes there will be a timelag but the idea it is a decade or more is rubbish.
And besides even with a decade it still falls in Labour's lap.
The testing is done at age 15 so those taking it in 2009 and 2012 had spent almost their whole education under Labour. Those taking it in 2018 had had 8 of their 10 years education under coalition or Tory government.
The curriculum changes did not take effect until 2016-17.
Unless I was teaching the wrong curriculum all that time.
The curriculum they were learning until that time was developed under Labour.
And because they are tested at age 15, any changes will be measured about ten years after they take effect, because until that time you won't know what the changes in five years and upwards have been.
So you are simply wrong.
Frankly, you're not only wrong but making yourself look an idiot. Which I don't think you are as a successful engineer, but you clearly are ignorant and therefore spouting nonsense.
This is why you should listen to experts.
But I think you are too irrationally devoted to Gove to listen to reason.
Hahahaha. What aload of garbage. So the decline throughout the whole of the Labour administration and continuing for 5 years after that was nothing to do with Labour? You are showing real desperation there.
Only one person is showing desperation or irrationality in this conversation Richard, and it isn't me.
I'm getting a sense of Not Trump vs Not Biden for WH24. Can't say exactly how we get there but I think that somehow we will.
It could be Not Trump vs Not Biden even if Trump and Biden are the candidates.
Sorry I'm not getting that, William? How do you mean?
I mean the two voting blocs could be "Not Biden" and "Not Trump", rather than a positive endorsement of either of them.
How screwed up is American politics, when two massively divisive octogenarians (by the end of their terms) are somehow the favourites? Let’s hope the other candidates get a look-in on both sides.
In 1944 the choice was between a divisive, older (by contemporary standards) incumbent with obvious health issues (though seriousness was not common knowledge) who'd clearly aged in office, versus a young, energetic challenger with strong record as elected official and big state governor.
Voters chose age and cunning over youth and vigor - much to the satisfaction of say 96% of UKers, then & now.
Actually, sounds like a potential general election battle between Biden and DeSantis.
Just reading R. C. Stern's new history of the US Navy in the Atlantic and Europe in - and before - WW2, which is bringing up some interesting perspectives on FDR and his relations with the UK. But only some way in.
I seem to remember there was a US admiral at the time whose surname was, funnily enough, “England” or “English” who absolutely hated us and the RN with a passion. It really gummed up naval intelligence cooperation for a time with Britain.
Admiral Robert Henry English.
The Field Marshal in charge of the BEF in 1914 who despised the French, couldn't speak French (and even if he could, wouldn't have spoken to them anyway) was...Sir John French.
An interesting piece, and yet - like all these articles - it completely ignores the facts on the ground. The stuff I saw on my recent American odyssey
If America is ‘leaving Europe behind’ how come American life expectancy is plunging every year, has now fallen way behind Europe, and in fact has fallen behind Panama?
The must fundamental fact of life is: how long you get to live. Europe wins
So... France > UK.
Sadly, as a patriotic Brit, I have to confess that - at the moment - France is definitely doing better than the UK
We're becoming the sick man of Europe again.
The decline seems to have been from around 2016 onwards. What on earth could have happened to precipitate such a catastrophe? Perhaps an asteroid struck us?
Our North Wales poster will tell you that 2016 was the year Starmer joined Corbyn's shadow cabinet, so obviously Starmer's fault.
Why would I say that
I wasn't even aware of Starmer then
Indeed only when Corbyn was defeated and Starmer started his campaign to rid the party was I even aware of him
Also I have not suggested the decline went back that far but it is not said often enough Brexit, covid and war in Ukraine would tax any government
Governments take the rough with the smooth. Incumbency can be a blessing or a curse.
Governments lose elections, opposition's don't win them, especially after indulging in a beer and a curry.
If enough idiots vote for him and he gets another MP gig, then surely the people have spoken/democracy in action, blah, blah, blah. But he ain't getting back in. He's done. Dusted. Labour are going to form the next government and Johnson will be irrelevant.
I've asked the following question many times, but never get an answer. Who do PB Tories actually want to lead the party?
Not my business, of course, but (pace ydoethur) Gove would be good - not bad at combative politics but also a genuine old-fashioned politician keen to change things for the good of the country. Some of his changes have been very controversial, but at least he enriches public debate. What do Sunak, Hunt, Mordaunt, etc. actually stand for? When did they last say anything new?
I think Gove has been around too long, and there are too many hostages to fortune in choosing him. The problem with others like Alex Chalk, for example, is that he is too public school smooth, and is unlikely to hold his seat anyway. Tobias Ellwood has also annoyed too many with his rebellious antics, but there is a portion of the party establishment that would go for him.
The puff piece for Penny Mordaunt in the Times today suggests that if she holds her own seat, she is in with a good shout. However, that is a pretty big "if".
The big deal for the post defeat Tories will be "Character", hence the interesting positioning of Mordaunt and Ellwood.
The novelisation of Yes, Prime Minister ends with The National Education Service, and Hacker sadly realising that whatever wins he might achieve, nothing fundamental would change.
Gove's career has been about big, disruptive changes, whether at Education or Brexit. Both of those legacies are, at best, mixed, and his planning reforms have largely been blown up by Conservative Nimbies.
I do wonder if he's had his Jim Hacker moment.
This is very selectve in its overview of his career. Both at Justice and DEFRA he made significant and lasting change in both culture and practice which have had long reaching positive effects.
He is very much a details, evidence based person. Looking at what the real problems are in departments and listening to all sides rather than just the usual lobbyists.
Yet Justice is falling apart with cases taking years to get to court.
My father also had Views on his record at DEFRA.
Put it this way, you think I hate him? You should have heard what Dad had to say!
Well at least now we know where you got your irrational hatred from.
In case you've forgotten, he went to DEFRA and earned Dad's ire long after he'd screwed over education.
In case you have forgotten education was screwed over long before Gove ever came on the scene. A third world system run entirely for vested interest and ideology.
The irony of that post is while it was not necessarily true at the time Gove came into power, it was profoundly true of what he left. Especially in making it even more in hock to ideology - including some quite sinister ideologies - and vested interests which are not only not conducive to but positively opposed to the interests of children's education.
There were many problems in education in 2010. The exam system was not good. The curriculum was years out of date. Appointments to senior posts were profoundly corrupt. LEAs were a shambles.
What he left was an exam system that doesn't work at all, a curriculum that was based on naked nativism, a system of appointments to senior posts so corrupt that we actually have people who are entirely unqualified in senior positions and a series of expensive and mostly badly run academy chains taking the place of LEAs working as a gravy train for rather too many sponsoring organisations and their chums.
And I would gently suggest that rather than hector me about it, and attribute my understanding of just how bad things to an 'irrational hatred' of Gove, you remember that I am an expert in the field and you are not. Perhaps therefore the reason I disdain Gove is because I understand fully just how badly he messed up and you do not?
And yet the PISA ratings for the UK education system collapsed between 2000 and 2012 (from 7th to 24th in maths. Similar falls in Science and reading.) and only started to recover after the Tory reforms were introduced.
On the other hand, there is a time lag in those ratings, surely? Not familiar with the details.
(But I also wonder about lead in petrol.)
The time lag idea is just ydoethur clutching at straws. Yes there will be a timelag but the idea it is a decade or more is rubbish.
And besides even with a decade it still falls in Labour's lap.
The testing is done at age 15 so those taking it in 2009 and 2012 had spent almost their whole education under Labour. Those taking it in 2018 had had 8 of their 10 years education under coalition or Tory government.
Interesting. On the other hand, (a) the teachers' curriculum development groups and 9b) local authorities, only some Tory/LD, are also involved.
And lead was banned in petrol in 1999 in the UK, so - allowing for intrauterine environment - you would expect to see a kick up in, in fact, 2016.
The reality is that... It's complicated.
However, the UK’s average scores in reading and science did not improve significantly, and the improvement in the country’s position has been attributed in part to a drop in performance from other countries. Average scores across the OECD also fell in 2018 compared to 2015.
To be fair my point was not so much about the improvement on 2018. That could be a one off and sadly because of Covid we have no further evidence to see if it was sustained. My point was more to point out the rapid decline in results throughout the Labour years. As I said ydoethur's contention that this was due to lag effects and Labour made things better is definetley stretching credulity on the basis of that data.
Compelling post.
The reality is, Labour are bad for our kids. The Tories are better.
At aged 5 they've all shrunk 7cm at the prospect of a Labour Government.
Comments
Easy.
I suspect the rise of the use of cis is to normalise what is a rather unusual thing. A significant proportion of people are not heterosexual. A rather smaller proportion genuinly believe they were born the wrong sex/gender delete as appropriate,
And I only went as the Galleri test centre is in Morrison's car park and you get a £10 voucher in return for a sample of your blood.
“Are you Catholic or Protestant?”
“Neither, I’m Atheist.”
“Aye, but are you a Catholic Atheist or a Protestant Atheist?”
That’s the problem with ‘cis’ - it buys into the belief system, it assumes you have a ‘gender identity’……
Insisting everyone has a ‘gender identity’ is akin to insisting everyone has a ‘soul’. It’s not insulting in itself, but if you keep on about it and can’t grasp that some people don’t share your belief, then they might get narked at you.
“But ‘cis’ just means the opposite of ‘trans’!”
Great - so what does ‘trans’ mean? It can’t be defined without referring to ‘gender identity’, a metaphysical belief.
https://twitter.com/bencooper/status/1671533767691759621?s=20
Anybody who thinks the 2019 Government had bandwidth for anything much else wasn't really paying attention. Especially as it changed Prime Minister twice in the process.
We are however left with a whole load of Salmond and Sturgeon years that have achieved bugger all.
BTW this group has been sunk by the posting orca
Watching ITV News. Cruella effectively say f*** you Windrush Generation.
She really is a nasty piece of work.
Governments since 2008 have had a lot thrown at them; GFC, fiscal rebalancing, a pandemic, a European war. That has diverted from the ability to set an agenda, and a lot of it is true everywhere.
In the UK, Brexit undoubtedly sucked up a lot of headspace, especially 2016-20, but to an extent even now. Even if you think it's worth it, there was bound to be a cost, and I think it was underweighted in our national consideration of the issue.
Finally, and least explicably, Conservative PMs seem to have largely run in opposition to their Conservative predecessors. May against Cameron's metropolitan liberalism, Johnson against May's dour realism, Truss against Johnson's reluctant acceptance of arithmetic and Sunak against everything Truss did.
If each PM focuses on reversing what the last one did, it's no wonder the long Conservative government hasn't really got anywhere.
From the flint-knappers' gazette 'Rishinomics isn't working' - I always felt that they were masters of understatement.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heliocentric_orbit#Trans-Mars_injection
Governments lose elections, opposition's don't win them, especially after indulging in a beer and a curry.
https://archive.is/QDFZR
Wonderfully bitchy.