In gastronomic news (I am doing a lazy dinner for the kids) it’s bloody annoying that Chicken Kyiv is harder to pronounce than Chicken Kiev. The pronunciation equivalent of reliance on Nordstream 2.
But Tory members are so high up the demographic curve that they are dying off at an alarming rate...
No they are not. Given life expectancies and the late-life care which your older Conservative Party member can no doubt afford, somebody mid-seventies will have about fifteen years in front of them. Unpleasant years, but still there and still capable of putting a cross on a postal vote form.
We keep saying that they are dying off, but there are A LOT of pensioners and for around the next ten-fifteen years they will remain the dominant force in British politics. When it switches it will switch fast as they begin to be outnumbered by younger votes in sufficient proportion to outweigh differential turnout by age, but until then it will be pensionerism all the way...
I would just gently suggest that as my wife and I close in on our diamond wedding year, considering our ages (79+ & 83) we have never been more content and, whilst obviously not as mobile as we were, these are the best years of a long and contented 'hard working life' with 3 married children (57, 52 & 47) and 5 grandchildren, most of whom live close by
When the discussion turns to reviling the elderly, the missing element is most each and everyone of them is greatly loved by their children, grandchildren and great grandchildren, who certainly would not recognise the opprobrium some want to direct to them and yes, even some of us who voted remain
The good book says 'honour your father and your mother that your days may be long' and wise words
My marriage is coming up to the 25 year mark this summer. What should I do? Bit late for a big party as our friends will already have plans. Exotic long weekend somewhere? If so where?
"A significant proportion of the population will see their savings wiped out because of the rise in interest rates and thus higher mortgage repayments."
But Tory members are so high up the demographic curve that they are dying off at an alarming rate...
No they are not. Given life expectancies and the late-life care which your older Conservative Party member can no doubt afford, somebody mid-seventies will have about fifteen years in front of them. Unpleasant years, but still there and still capable of putting a cross on a postal vote form.
We keep saying that they are dying off, but there are A LOT of pensioners and for around the next ten-fifteen years they will remain the dominant force in British politics. When it switches it will switch fast as they begin to be outnumbered by younger votes in sufficient proportion to outweigh differential turnout by age, but until then it will be pensionerism all the way...
Even then the median voter will be aged 50 still not 30
Taking into account both raw demographics and propensity to vote, I believe that the median voter is aged about 55. This value is likely to keep creeping slowly up for the foreseeable, because so many younger people aren't forming families for various reasons, not least the crippling cost. Yet another issue that can be put down to the full spectrum catastrophe that is the British property market.
Not that this is any real use to the Conservatives in the long run, because people are no longer moving rightwards as they age. Being the party of the landed interest - minted pensioner owner-occupiers, their heirs and rentiers - only wins elections so long as there are enough of those people around to keep voting for you. Those who have neither significant assets nor any realistic prospect of accruing them have nothing to conserve and, consequently, no use for conservatism.
The median age is about 40, the median eligible voter is probably around 50, and the median actual voter is probably around 55, as you say.
But this evening I’m drinking a basic 11% Mosel Riesling from Lidl and it’s very nice.
On topic, as someone who’s like to see the Tories in the wilderness for at least two terms I really don’t want Mordaunt. She’s too likeable and sensible sounding. I want a version of IDS in there: in equal parts bonkers and ineffectual.
A nice Rousanne from the Rhône.
Lovely. My favourite whites are chewy fudgy Southern Rhône ones, Marsanne-Rousanne and Grenache blanc.
I'm really quite enamoured of English whites at the moment. The Bacchus grape works very well it seems. Otherwise Puligny Montrachet all the way!
The giveaway with most English wine is that they use grapes that are unheard of anywhere else in the winemaking world.
Your last couple of posts are like some wine commentator from the 1990s. Or a wine equivalent of that Waterstones man article in this week’s new statesman.
There’s a relatively big and ambitious planting going on this year in your neck of the woods. At gatcombe park. The issue with winemaking in the IoW is winery facilities but I assume they are building their own. The climate and soils are ideal.
When they can make wine out of proper grapes, is the time to take notice.
I read that, and thought it was odd. Abortion is outside the Overton window in the UK, despite efforts to pull it back, and coverage of the debate in the States can be done by statistical analysis, reportage and interviews with politicians. I don't know why they found it necessary to profile an individual. Although to be fair, when I read it I found it interesting and informative, so there's that. Next week, the BBC interviews Bob Jeb Jebbity-Bob III, who wants to make homosexuality illegal in Alabama.
She's an individual, but she heads SFLA, a pro-life student group. And according to the article: "SFLA now has 1,400 campus groups in all 50 states"
So whilst she is just an individual, she may have considerable political power.
Now that Roe, Wade has been overturned political power over abortion belongs, where it should, to voters and legislators. Just like in the UK.
I am coming to the conclusion that the Sunak experiment has failed. He just does not have the gravitas a PM needs. The Tories need to gamble (again) and get an elder statesman in. Lord Hague would be ideal.
Do you believe Starmer has the gravitas a PM needs? If so, why?
He's an eminent KC and former DPP, they are the epitome of gravitas overload.
He was a QC and a former DPP when he used his overload of gravitas to point at wallpaper in John Lewis
I am coming to the conclusion that the Sunak experiment has failed. He just does not have the gravitas a PM needs. The Tories need to gamble (again) and get an elder statesman in. Lord Hague would be ideal.
That would be the same Hague who led the Tories to a landslide defeat in 2001 and the party's second worst defeat since 1832? Hague backs Sunak anyway
I am coming to the conclusion that the Sunak experiment has failed. He just does not have the gravitas a PM needs. The Tories need to gamble (again) and get an elder statesman in. Lord Hague would be ideal.
Do you believe Starmer has the gravitas a PM needs? If so, why?
He's an eminent KC and former DPP, they are the epitome of gravitas overload.
He was a QC and a former DPP when he used his overload of gravitas to point at wallpaper in John Lewis
I am coming to the conclusion that the Sunak experiment has failed. He just does not have the gravitas a PM needs. The Tories need to gamble (again) and get an elder statesman in. Lord Hague would be ideal.
I agree on the first, but not the second. I think if they tried again(again!) with a fourth leader, the third without an election, there would be an unstoppable clamour for a GE. And for taking the piss if nothing else, a crushing defeat.
Sunak is fine for the role of losing as well as possible. Times up for the Tories. Run out of ideas and the pandemic and Ukraine removed any possible financial wriggle room.
Time for change. But not just another new Tory PM.
Sunak increasingly looks out of his depth, which is fatal to confidence. His failure to standup to Boris makes him look weak. He inspires pity rather than respect. I don't think he can inspire his troops to ride into battle.
Whereas Hague could outrank and outflank Boris, commands respect and can connect outside the Tory party. I think the troops would turn out for him and the country would prefer him to Sunak. So worth the change.
I simply disagree
It is not remotely sensible even to suggest the conservative party change to yet another leader
Sunak will lead the party into GE24 and no doubt opposition following which a whole new chapter will open in UK politics
I am coming to the conclusion that the Sunak experiment has failed. He just does not have the gravitas a PM needs. The Tories need to gamble (again) and get an elder statesman in. Lord Hague would be ideal.
Do you believe Starmer has the gravitas a PM needs? If so, why?
He's an eminent KC and former DPP, they are the epitome of gravitas overload.
You evidently need to buy a dictionary...
Gravitas is a bit like pornography, hard to describe, but I know it when I see it.
I am coming to the conclusion that the Sunak experiment has failed. He just does not have the gravitas a PM needs. The Tories need to gamble (again) and get an elder statesman in. Lord Hague would be ideal.
Do you believe Starmer has the gravitas a PM needs? If so, why?
Yes. Two reasons, firstly his success in the Commons dismantling Boris and Sunak. His raising of the Covid parties issue was instrumental. Secondly, the way Starmer successfully set a new direction for the Labour Party post Corbyn.
I disagree with the first of those. He was doing poorly against Boris, until Boris not only gave him an open goal, but handed him the ball and set half his team against the other half, who had stepped in mantraps. He has not 'dismantled' Sunak; Sunak has inherited a cr@p inheritance, and is possibly playing the poor hand as well as anyone could - he inherited a far worse position than Major in '92.
When Starmer gets a landslide, he will have a load of inexperienced MPs, most of them poorly vetted - as they always seem to be for all parties. I don't see much evidence that he will handle that well once in power.
As an aside, how long before the first Labour scandal in government? Labour received a bung from Ecclestone in January 1997; they won the election in May, and the scandal erupted in November. Six months.
Perhaps Sunak could get Hague back in some other role. The trouble with Hunt playing the government elder statesman role is that he has no connection with the public whatsoever.
I am coming to the conclusion that the Sunak experiment has failed. He just does not have the gravitas a PM needs. The Tories need to gamble (again) and get an elder statesman in. Lord Hague would be ideal.
Do you believe Starmer has the gravitas a PM needs? If so, why?
He's an eminent KC and former DPP, they are the epitome of gravitas overload.
He was a QC and a former DPP when he used his overload of gravitas to point at wallpaper in John Lewis
Is it the K that makes the difference?
He played a blinder on that too.
Do you think you're his biggest fan?
No, but I find it hysterical the people who criticised Starmer for focussing on Partygate still criticise him for his political strategy.
But Tory members are so high up the demographic curve that they are dying off at an alarming rate...
No they are not. Given life expectancies and the late-life care which your older Conservative Party member can no doubt afford, somebody mid-seventies will have about fifteen years in front of them. Unpleasant years, but still there and still capable of putting a cross on a postal vote form.
We keep saying that they are dying off, but there are A LOT of pensioners and for around the next ten-fifteen years they will remain the dominant force in British politics. When it switches it will switch fast as they begin to be outnumbered by younger votes in sufficient proportion to outweigh differential turnout by age, but until then it will be pensionerism all the way...
Even then the median voter will be aged 50 still not 30
Taking into account both raw demographics and propensity to vote, I believe that the median voter is aged about 55. This value is likely to keep creeping slowly up for the foreseeable, because so many younger people aren't forming families for various reasons, not least the crippling cost. Yet another issue that can be put down to the full spectrum catastrophe that is the British property market.
Not that this is any real use to the Conservatives in the long run, because people are no longer moving rightwards as they age. Being the party of the landed interest - minted pensioner owner-occupiers, their heirs and rentiers - only wins elections so long as there are enough of those people around to keep voting for you. Those who have neither significant assets nor any realistic prospect of accruing them have nothing to conserve and, consequently, no use for conservatism.
By 55 plenty are starting to inherit property (and most should have bought a property with a mortgage well before then anyway).
I'm starting to think a wipeout is possible, or it will be if Farage comes on the pitch in the 90th minute. I'm hearing core Conservatives giving up now - who are solid base.
Even my Dad, who's so staunch he makes @HYUFD look like a floating voter, has said they don't deserve another term. And I agreed with him.
He's never come close to saying anything like that before in his life.
Yes but almost inevitable. The last PM to win a 5th consecutive general election for his party was the Earl of Liverpool for the Pittite Tories in 1826 when less than 5% of the UK population were able to vote
All very well for you to say it's inevitable, you chose the current pair of tosspots who are dragging the party to oblivion.
They aren't. Truss was leading the party to oblivion and less than 50 seats in most polls before she resigned.
Sunak has at least added 100 to that and got to the Tories to about 150+ seats on the latest polls
I am coming to the conclusion that the Sunak experiment has failed. He just does not have the gravitas a PM needs. The Tories need to gamble (again) and get an elder statesman in. Lord Hague would be ideal.
Do you believe Starmer has the gravitas a PM needs? If so, why?
Yes. Two reasons, firstly his success in the Commons dismantling Boris and Sunak. His raising of the Covid parties issue was instrumental. Secondly, the way Starmer successfully set a new direction for the Labour Party post Corbyn.
I disagree with the first of those. He was doing poorly against Boris, until Boris not only gave him an open goal, but handed him the ball and set half his team against the other half, who had stepped in mantraps. He has not 'dismantled' Sunak; Sunak has inherited a cr@p inheritance, and is possibly playing the poor hand as well as anyone could - he inherited a far worse position than Major in '92.
When Starmer gets a landslide, he will have a load of inexperienced MPs, most of them poorly vetted - as they always seem to be for all parties. I don't see much evidence that he will handle that well once in power.
As an aside, how long before the first Labour scandal in government? Labour received a bung from Ecclestone in January 1997; they won the election in May, and the scandal erupted in November. Six months.
But Tory members are so high up the demographic curve that they are dying off at an alarming rate...
No they are not. Given life expectancies and the late-life care which your older Conservative Party member can no doubt afford, somebody mid-seventies will have about fifteen years in front of them. Unpleasant years, but still there and still capable of putting a cross on a postal vote form.
We keep saying that they are dying off, but there are A LOT of pensioners and for around the next ten-fifteen years they will remain the dominant force in British politics. When it switches it will switch fast as they begin to be outnumbered by younger votes in sufficient proportion to outweigh differential turnout by age, but until then it will be pensionerism all the way...
I would just gently suggest that as my wife and I close in on our diamond wedding year, considering our ages (79+ & 83) we have never been more content and, whilst obviously not as mobile as we were, these are the best years of a long and contented 'hard working life' with 3 married children (57, 52 & 47) and 5 grandchildren, most of whom live close by
When the discussion turns to reviling the elderly, the missing element is most each and everyone of them is greatly loved by their children, grandchildren and great grandchildren, who certainly would not recognise the opprobrium some want to direct to them and yes, even some of us who voted remain
The good book says 'honour your father and your mother that your days may be long' and wise words
My marriage is coming up to the 25 year mark this summer. What should I do? Bit late for a big party as our friends will already have plans. Exotic long weekend somewhere? If so where?
My daughter's 25th is later this year and it is a special anniversary
Go somewhere special and totally spoil yourselves
I know it is different but when I retired my wife and I went on an expedition to Antarctica and a never to be forgotten experience
I'm starting to think a wipeout is possible, or it will be if Farage comes on the pitch in the 90th minute. I'm hearing core Conservatives giving up now - who are solid base.
Even my Dad, who's so staunch he makes @HYUFD look like a floating voter, has said they don't deserve another term. And I agreed with him.
He's never come close to saying anything like that before in his life.
In the longer term it will be a good thing for your tribe. A properly functioning democracy needs a properly functioning centre right party. And since November 1990 yours hasn’t really been able to figure out what its core principles are. The same could be said for Labour of course but Blair did at least have some vision of radical centrism IMHO.
We dont have any properly function parties of any colour. They are all idiots who just want to continue the status quo that ended us in the shit we are in.
"Global sperm counts are falling. This scientist believes she knows why Shanna Swan has been investigating the impact of chemicals on human fertility for decades Sarah Neville"
I am coming to the conclusion that the Sunak experiment has failed. He just does not have the gravitas a PM needs. The Tories need to gamble (again) and get an elder statesman in. Lord Hague would be ideal.
Do you believe Starmer has the gravitas a PM needs? If so, why?
He's an eminent KC and former DPP, they are the epitome of gravitas overload.
He was a QC and a former DPP when he used his overload of gravitas to point at wallpaper in John Lewis
Is it the K that makes the difference?
He played a blinder on that too.
Do you think you're his biggest fan?
No, but I find it hysterical the people who criticised Starmer for focussing on Partygate still criticise him for his political strategy.
But Tory members are so high up the demographic curve that they are dying off at an alarming rate...
No they are not. Given life expectancies and the late-life care which your older Conservative Party member can no doubt afford, somebody mid-seventies will have about fifteen years in front of them. Unpleasant years, but still there and still capable of putting a cross on a postal vote form.
We keep saying that they are dying off, but there are A LOT of pensioners and for around the next ten-fifteen years they will remain the dominant force in British politics. When it switches it will switch fast as they begin to be outnumbered by younger votes in sufficient proportion to outweigh differential turnout by age, but until then it will be pensionerism all the way...
I would just gently suggest that as my wife and I close in on our diamond wedding year, considering our ages (79+ & 83) we have never been more content and, whilst obviously not as mobile as we were, these are the best years of a long and contented 'hard working life' with 3 married children (57, 52 & 47) and 5 grandchildren, most of whom live close by
When the discussion turns to reviling the elderly, the missing element is most each and everyone of them is greatly loved by their children, grandchildren and great grandchildren, who certainly would not recognise the opprobrium some want to direct to them and yes, even some of us who voted remain
The good book says 'honour your father and your mother that your days may be long' and wise words
My marriage is coming up to the 25 year mark this summer. What should I do? Bit late for a big party as our friends will already have plans. Exotic long weekend somewhere? If so where?
I am coming to the conclusion that the Sunak experiment has failed. He just does not have the gravitas a PM needs. The Tories need to gamble (again) and get an elder statesman in. Lord Hague would be ideal.
Do you believe Starmer has the gravitas a PM needs? If so, why?
He's an eminent KC and former DPP, they are the epitome of gravitas overload.
He was a QC and a former DPP when he used his overload of gravitas to point at wallpaper in John Lewis
Is it the K that makes the difference?
He played a blinder on that too.
Do you think you're his biggest fan?
No, but I find it hysterical the people who criticised Starmer for focussing on Partygate still criticise him for his political strategy.
I think that you're his biggest fan on PB
Then I cannot help you. Perhaps finger painting is more your level.
And I noticed there is a missing apostrophe in the title in the link, so you can read it as follows: DeSantis won't say whether Hell supports Trump.
(Full disclosure: If asked, I wouldn't say because I don't know. But I would say that, if there is a Hell, the idea that Trump is getting their support, is plausible.)
I am coming to the conclusion that the Sunak experiment has failed. He just does not have the gravitas a PM needs. The Tories need to gamble (again) and get an elder statesman in. Lord Hague would be ideal.
Do you believe Starmer has the gravitas a PM needs? If so, why?
He's an eminent KC and former DPP, they are the epitome of gravitas overload.
He was a QC and a former DPP when he used his overload of gravitas to point at wallpaper in John Lewis
Is it the K that makes the difference?
He played a blinder on that too.
Do you think you're his biggest fan?
No, but I find it hysterical the people who criticised Starmer for focussing on Partygate still criticise him for his political strategy.
I think that you're his biggest fan on PB
Then I cannot help you. Perhaps finger painting is more your level.
I've repeatedly critiqued his policies.
I know you don't like his private school policy
You love him because he's a lawyer and a republican
I am coming to the conclusion that the Sunak experiment has failed. He just does not have the gravitas a PM needs. The Tories need to gamble (again) and get an elder statesman in. Lord Hague would be ideal.
If you want an elder statesman who could pull off an unlikely General Election victory, then John Major himself would be a better bet.
I do not doubt that the Cons can change the PM again without a GE. The reason not to do so is that they would look incapable of governing properly and they would be left headed toward electoral disaster.
However, if the current PM is clearly not up to the job and is totally failing to connect with the voters then what would they have to lose? That was certainly true with La Truss. The current PM isn't quite there yet but whoever is advising him should get the sack and pronto.
The constant harping on the five pledges is verging on the ridiculous. He used to be stiff as a board so they told him to move his arms about and now he looks like a thunderbirds puppet. The overuse of the helicopter at the moment just looks really bad. The changing voice is just odd. If they are trying to coach him then they are only making him sound fake. It may be too late to save him but if I was him I'd sack the 'experts' and just try to be myself. It couldn't work worse
I am coming to the conclusion that the Sunak experiment has failed. He just does not have the gravitas a PM needs. The Tories need to gamble (again) and get an elder statesman in. Lord Hague would be ideal.
Do you believe Starmer has the gravitas a PM needs? If so, why?
He's an eminent KC and former DPP, they are the epitome of gravitas overload.
He was a QC and a former DPP when he used his overload of gravitas to point at wallpaper in John Lewis
Is it the K that makes the difference?
He played a blinder on that too.
Do you think you're his biggest fan?
No, but I find it hysterical the people who criticised Starmer for focussing on Partygate still criticise him for his political strategy.
I think that you're his biggest fan on PB
Then I cannot help you. Perhaps finger painting is more your level.
I've repeatedly critiqued his policies.
I know you don't like his private school policy
You love him because he's a lawyer and a republican
Nobody else has defended him like you have
I bet heavily on politics.
I try and provide some context for gamblers.
Plus he also annoys Corbynites and Brexiteers, so he's not all bad.
I am coming to the conclusion that the Sunak experiment has failed. He just does not have the gravitas a PM needs. The Tories need to gamble (again) and get an elder statesman in. Lord Hague would be ideal.
If you want an elder statesman who could pull off an unlikely General Election victory, then John Major himself would be a better bet.
But Tory members are so high up the demographic curve that they are dying off at an alarming rate...
No they are not. Given life expectancies and the late-life care which your older Conservative Party member can no doubt afford, somebody mid-seventies will have about fifteen years in front of them. Unpleasant years, but still there and still capable of putting a cross on a postal vote form.
We keep saying that they are dying off, but there are A LOT of pensioners and for around the next ten-fifteen years they will remain the dominant force in British politics. When it switches it will switch fast as they begin to be outnumbered by younger votes in sufficient proportion to outweigh differential turnout by age, but until then it will be pensionerism all the way...
Even then the median voter will be aged 50 still not 30
Taking into account both raw demographics and propensity to vote, I believe that the median voter is aged about 55. This value is likely to keep creeping slowly up for the foreseeable, because so many younger people aren't forming families for various reasons, not least the crippling cost. Yet another issue that can be put down to the full spectrum catastrophe that is the British property market.
Not that this is any real use to the Conservatives in the long run, because people are no longer moving rightwards as they age. Being the party of the landed interest - minted pensioner owner-occupiers, their heirs and rentiers - only wins elections so long as there are enough of those people around to keep voting for you. Those who have neither significant assets nor any realistic prospect of accruing them have nothing to conserve and, consequently, no use for conservatism.
By 55 plenty are starting to inherit property (and most should have bought a property with a mortgage well before then anyway).
Well bully for them. And what of the vast, and increasing, numbers of people who can't afford to accumulate their own assets and don't have minted parents who are eventually going to die and leave them a fortune? And then there are all the actual heirs who are struggling into late middle age - whether with enormous mortgages or even worse rents hanging like millstones around their necks - and would rather not have to wish death on people they love in order to be delivered from hardship.
Face it, the proportion of rich, old, right-wing people in the country is going to creep down and down and down, driven by a combination of long-term economic stagnation and an entire socio-economic system that's built to redistribute what wealth remains upwards. The shrinking army of wealthy pensioners might remain loyal, but the growing army of dirt poor renters - young and old alike - is ultimately going to overpower them. And renters have no use for today's Tories.
Your lot should've got a lot more houses built, but your decision to play to short and medium term advantage (by, amongst other things, caving to Nimbyism and thus enriching your core vote further) is going to ruin you in the long run. Watch.
I do not doubt that the Cons can change the PM again without a GE. The reason not to do so is that they would look incapable of governing properly and they would be left headed toward electoral disaster.
However, if the current PM is clearly not up to the job and is totally failing to connect with the voters then what would they have to lose? That was certainly true with La Truss. The current PM isn't quite there yet but whoever is advising him should get the sack and pronto.
The constant harping on the five pledges is verging on the ridiculous. He used to be stiff as a board so they told him to move his arms about and now he looks like a thunderbirds puppet. The overuse of the helicopter at the moment just looks really bad. The changing voice is just odd. If they are trying to coach him then they are only making him sound fake. It may be too late to save him but if I was him I'd sack the 'experts' and just try to be myself. It couldn't work worse
Probably a good idea for Rishi and all CON MPs not to mention the five priorities anymore - cos they ain't happening!
I am coming to the conclusion that the Sunak experiment has failed. He just does not have the gravitas a PM needs. The Tories need to gamble (again) and get an elder statesman in. Lord Hague would be ideal.
Do you believe Starmer has the gravitas a PM needs? If so, why?
Yes. Two reasons, firstly his success in the Commons dismantling Boris and Sunak. His raising of the Covid parties issue was instrumental. Secondly, the way Starmer successfully set a new direction for the Labour Party post Corbyn.
I disagree with the first of those. He was doing poorly against Boris, until Boris not only gave him an open goal, but handed him the ball and set half his team against the other half, who had stepped in mantraps. He has not 'dismantled' Sunak; Sunak has inherited a cr@p inheritance, and is possibly playing the poor hand as well as anyone could - he inherited a far worse position than Major in '92.
When Starmer gets a landslide, he will have a load of inexperienced MPs, most of them poorly vetted - as they always seem to be for all parties. I don't see much evidence that he will handle that well once in power.
The argument from Starmerites is that the unprecedentedly tight grip Labour NEC currently has on selections is to prevent "poorly vetted" candidates (think Jared O'Mara or Claudia Webbe) getting through.
Entirely coincidental that it also rules out anyone to the left of Tony Blair, of course.
In related news, I am deeply amused that the Conservatives have chosen a former head boy of Eton, and George Osborne's economic adviser, as candidate for the new seat of Bicester & Woodstock. The LibDem leaflets practically write themselves.
I am coming to the conclusion that the Sunak experiment has failed. He just does not have the gravitas a PM needs. The Tories need to gamble (again) and get an elder statesman in. Lord Hague would be ideal.
Do you believe Starmer has the gravitas a PM needs? If so, why?
Yes. Two reasons, firstly his success in the Commons dismantling Boris and Sunak. His raising of the Covid parties issue was instrumental. Secondly, the way Starmer successfully set a new direction for the Labour Party post Corbyn.
I disagree with the first of those. He was doing poorly against Boris, until Boris not only gave him an open goal, but handed him the ball and set half his team against the other half, who had stepped in mantraps. He has not 'dismantled' Sunak; Sunak has inherited a cr@p inheritance, and is possibly playing the poor hand as well as anyone could - he inherited a far worse position than Major in '92.
When Starmer gets a landslide, he will have a load of inexperienced MPs, most of them poorly vetted - as they always seem to be for all parties. I don't see much evidence that he will handle that well once in power.
As an aside, how long before the first Labour scandal in government? Labour received a bung from Ecclestone in January 1997; they won the election in May, and the scandal erupted in November. Six months.
More than a whiff of desperation there.
WTF would I be 'desperate' ? I've been calling for a GE for the last year, and have been predicting that Labour will get a landslide.
But you cannot ignore the fact that, like Blair, he has faced a Conservative government riven by disputes and corruption. But unlike Blair, Starmer does not have the magic 'something'. That may be to his advantage... or not.
I am coming to the conclusion that the Sunak experiment has failed. He just does not have the gravitas a PM needs. The Tories need to gamble (again) and get an elder statesman in. Lord Hague would be ideal.
Do you believe Starmer has the gravitas a PM needs? If so, why?
He's an eminent KC and former DPP, they are the epitome of gravitas overload.
He was a QC and a former DPP when he used his overload of gravitas to point at wallpaper in John Lewis
Is it the K that makes the difference?
He played a blinder on that too.
Do you think you're his biggest fan?
No, but I find it hysterical the people who criticised Starmer for focussing on Partygate still criticise him for his political strategy.
I think that you're his biggest fan on PB
Then I cannot help you. Perhaps finger painting is more your level.
I've repeatedly critiqued his policies.
I know you don't like his private school policy
You love him because he's a lawyer and a republican
Nobody else has defended him like you have
I bet heavily on politics.
I try and provide some context for gamblers.
Plus he also annoys Corbynites and Brexiteers, so he's not all bad.
You've not dissuaded me of your SKS fandom (do you love the slalom sirkeiring?)
And can we have a PB Style Guide?
It's try to
You wouldn't say "I'm going to attempt and walk up the hill"
I am coming to the conclusion that the Sunak experiment has failed. He just does not have the gravitas a PM needs. The Tories need to gamble (again) and get an elder statesman in. Lord Hague would be ideal.
Do you believe Starmer has the gravitas a PM needs? If so, why?
Yes. Two reasons, firstly his success in the Commons dismantling Boris and Sunak. His raising of the Covid parties issue was instrumental. Secondly, the way Starmer successfully set a new direction for the Labour Party post Corbyn.
I disagree with the first of those. He was doing poorly against Boris, until Boris not only gave him an open goal, but handed him the ball and set half his team against the other half, who had stepped in mantraps. He has not 'dismantled' Sunak; Sunak has inherited a cr@p inheritance, and is possibly playing the poor hand as well as anyone could - he inherited a far worse position than Major in '92.
When Starmer gets a landslide, he will have a load of inexperienced MPs, most of them poorly vetted - as they always seem to be for all parties. I don't see much evidence that he will handle that well once in power.
The argument from Starmerites is that the unprecedentedly tight grip Labour NEC currently has on selections is to prevent "poorly vetted" candidates (think Jared O'Mara or Claudia Webbe) getting through.
Entirely coincidental that it also rules out anyone to the left of Tony Blair, of course.
I don't believe that for one moment. Vetting is a massive issue for *all* parties; ideally you would have a very rigorous vetting process, such as a NSV/DV one. But politics will get in the way of that.
I am coming to the conclusion that the Sunak experiment has failed. He just does not have the gravitas a PM needs. The Tories need to gamble (again) and get an elder statesman in. Lord Hague would be ideal.
Do you believe Starmer has the gravitas a PM needs? If so, why?
He's an eminent KC and former DPP, they are the epitome of gravitas overload.
He was a QC and a former DPP when he used his overload of gravitas to point at wallpaper in John Lewis
Is it the K that makes the difference?
He played a blinder on that too.
Do you think you're his biggest fan?
No, but I find it hysterical the people who criticised Starmer for focussing on Partygate still criticise him for his political strategy.
I think that you're his biggest fan on PB
Then I cannot help you. Perhaps finger painting is more your level.
I've repeatedly critiqued his policies.
I know you don't like his private school policy
You love him because he's a lawyer and a republican
Nobody else has defended him like you have
I bet heavily on politics.
I try and provide some context for gamblers.
Plus he also annoys Corbynites and Brexiteers, so he's not all bad.
You've not dissuaded me of your SKS fandom (do you love the slalom sirkeiring?)
And can we have a PB Style Guide?
It's try to
You wouldn't say "I'm going to attempt and walk up the hill"
Why should that work for try?
Slalom Keir is going to be a successful line as calling him Gordon Brittas.
I am coming to the conclusion that the Sunak experiment has failed. He just does not have the gravitas a PM needs. The Tories need to gamble (again) and get an elder statesman in. Lord Hague would be ideal.
Do you believe Starmer has the gravitas a PM needs? If so, why?
He's an eminent KC and former DPP, they are the epitome of gravitas overload.
He was a QC and a former DPP when he used his overload of gravitas to point at wallpaper in John Lewis
Is it the K that makes the difference?
He played a blinder on that too.
Do you think you're his biggest fan?
No, but I find it hysterical the people who criticised Starmer for focussing on Partygate still criticise him for his political strategy.
I think that you're his biggest fan on PB
Then I cannot help you. Perhaps finger painting is more your level.
I've repeatedly critiqued his policies.
I know you don't like his private school policy
You love him because he's a lawyer and a republican
Nobody else has defended him like you have
I bet heavily on politics.
I try and provide some context for gamblers.
Plus he also annoys Corbynites and Brexiteers, so he's not all bad.
You've not dissuaded me of your SKS fandom (do you love the slalom sirkeiring?)
And can we have a PB Style Guide?
It's try to
You wouldn't say "I'm going to attempt and walk up the hill"
Why should that work for try?
Slalom Keir is going to be a successful line as calling him Gordon Brittas.
I am coming to the conclusion that the Sunak experiment has failed. He just does not have the gravitas a PM needs. The Tories need to gamble (again) and get an elder statesman in. Lord Hague would be ideal.
If you want an elder statesman who could pull off an unlikely General Election victory, then John Major himself would be a better bet.
I am coming to the conclusion that the Sunak experiment has failed. He just does not have the gravitas a PM needs. The Tories need to gamble (again) and get an elder statesman in. Lord Hague would be ideal.
If you want an elder statesman who could pull off an unlikely General Election victory, then John Major himself would be a better bet.
I am coming to the conclusion that the Sunak experiment has failed. He just does not have the gravitas a PM needs. The Tories need to gamble (again) and get an elder statesman in. Lord Hague would be ideal.
Do you believe Starmer has the gravitas a PM needs? If so, why?
He's an eminent KC and former DPP, they are the epitome of gravitas overload.
He was a QC and a former DPP when he used his overload of gravitas to point at wallpaper in John Lewis
Is it the K that makes the difference?
He played a blinder on that too.
Do you think you're his biggest fan?
No, but I find it hysterical the people who criticised Starmer for focussing on Partygate still criticise him for his political strategy.
I think that you're his biggest fan on PB
Then I cannot help you. Perhaps finger painting is more your level.
I've repeatedly critiqued his policies.
I know you don't like his private school policy
You love him because he's a lawyer and a republican
Nobody else has defended him like you have
I bet heavily on politics.
I try and provide some context for gamblers.
Plus he also annoys Corbynites and Brexiteers, so he's not all bad.
I am coming to the conclusion that the Sunak experiment has failed. He just does not have the gravitas a PM needs. The Tories need to gamble (again) and get an elder statesman in. Lord Hague would be ideal.
Do you believe Starmer has the gravitas a PM needs? If so, why?
Yes. Two reasons, firstly his success in the Commons dismantling Boris and Sunak. His raising of the Covid parties issue was instrumental. Secondly, the way Starmer successfully set a new direction for the Labour Party post Corbyn.
I disagree with the first of those. He was doing poorly against Boris, until Boris not only gave him an open goal, but handed him the ball and set half his team against the other half, who had stepped in mantraps. He has not 'dismantled' Sunak; Sunak has inherited a cr@p inheritance, and is possibly playing the poor hand as well as anyone could - he inherited a far worse position than Major in '92.
When Starmer gets a landslide, he will have a load of inexperienced MPs, most of them poorly vetted - as they always seem to be for all parties. I don't see much evidence that he will handle that well once in power.
As an aside, how long before the first Labour scandal in government? Labour received a bung from Ecclestone in January 1997; they won the election in May, and the scandal erupted in November. Six months.
More than a whiff of desperation there.
WTF would I be 'desperate' ? I've been calling for a GE for the last year, and have been predicting that Labour will get a landslide.
But you cannot ignore the fact that, like Blair, he has faced a Conservative government riven by disputes and corruption. But unlike Blair, Starmer does not have the magic 'something'. That may be to his advantage... or not.
Just felt criticism of new governments for lacking experience was a bit silly. All new governments lack experience compared with their immediate predecessors. That’s kind of the whole point of a democratic system. A new government will make mistakes, like every other government in history. That’s ok.
Perhaps Sunak could get Hague back in some other role. The trouble with Hunt playing the government elder statesman role is that he has no connection with the public whatsoever.
Hunt has a certain appeal of the old-fashioned "steady hand" kind - I like him myself (I know him slightly - he's my local MP and we've spoken on a pro-Ukraine platform together). The problem is that Sunak has exactly the same sort of appeal, while being weak in almost every other department - conviction, ideas, entertainment, charisma. They both somewhat have the air of having been designed by an AI.
And I noticed there is a missing apostrophe in the title in the link, so you can read it as follows: DeSantis won't say whether Hell supports Trump.
(Full disclosure: If asked, I wouldn't say because I don't know. But I would say that, if there is a Hell, the idea that Trump is getting their support, is plausible.)
I am coming to the conclusion that the Sunak experiment has failed. He just does not have the gravitas a PM needs. The Tories need to gamble (again) and get an elder statesman in. Lord Hague would be ideal.
Do you believe Starmer has the gravitas a PM needs? If so, why?
He's an eminent KC and former DPP, they are the epitome of gravitas overload.
He was a QC and a former DPP when he used his overload of gravitas to point at wallpaper in John Lewis
Is it the K that makes the difference?
He played a blinder on that too.
Do you think you're his biggest fan?
No, but I find it hysterical the people who criticised Starmer for focussing on Partygate still criticise him for his political strategy.
I think that you're his biggest fan on PB
Then I cannot help you. Perhaps finger painting is more your level.
I've repeatedly critiqued his policies.
I know you don't like his private school policy
You love him because he's a lawyer and a republican
Nobody else has defended him like you have
I bet heavily on politics.
I try and provide some context for gamblers.
Plus he also annoys Corbynites and Brexiteers, so he's not all bad.
You've not dissuaded me of your SKS fandom (do you love the slalom sirkeiring?)
And can we have a PB Style Guide?
It's try to
You wouldn't say "I'm going to attempt and walk up the hill"
Why should that work for try?
Slalom Keir is going to be a successful line as calling him Gordon Brittas.
It Slalom Sir Keir to you
And I’ll be pretty chuffed if my slalom gag becomes anywhere near as popular at the Gordon Brittas thing for Sir K
I am coming to the conclusion that the Sunak experiment has failed. He just does not have the gravitas a PM needs. The Tories need to gamble (again) and get an elder statesman in. Lord Hague would be ideal.
That would be the same Hague who led the Tories to a landslide defeat in 2001 and the party's second worst defeat since 1832? Hague backs Sunak anyway
There is still time for Rishi Sunak to acquire gravitas but in order to do so, he must stop cos-playing Boris at PMQs, and he must make that clear to CCHQ. After all, William Hague used to be a joke figure in a baseball cap until he stopped being a CCHQ puppet.
I am coming to the conclusion that the Sunak experiment has failed. He just does not have the gravitas a PM needs. The Tories need to gamble (again) and get an elder statesman in. Lord Hague would be ideal.
If you want an elder statesman who could pull off an unlikely General Election victory, then John Major himself would be a better bet.
John Major is four months younger than Joe Biden.
But has a lot in common with Sir Keir as you can see in this photo caption.
I am coming to the conclusion that the Sunak experiment has failed. He just does not have the gravitas a PM needs. The Tories need to gamble (again) and get an elder statesman in. Lord Hague would be ideal.
If you want an elder statesman who could pull off an unlikely General Election victory, then John Major himself would be a better bet.
John Major is four months younger than Joe Biden.
But has a lot in common with Sir Keir as you can see in this photo caption.
I read that, and thought it was odd. Abortion is outside the Overton window in the UK, despite efforts to pull it back, and coverage of the debate in the States can be done by statistical analysis, reportage and interviews with politicians. I don't know why they found it necessary to profile an individual. Although to be fair, when I read it I found it interesting and informative, so there's that. Next week, the BBC interviews Bob Jeb Jebbity-Bob III, who wants to make homosexuality illegal in Alabama.
She's an individual, but she heads SFLA, a pro-life student group. And according to the article: "SFLA now has 1,400 campus groups in all 50 states"
So whilst she is just an individual, she may have considerable political power.
Now that Roe, Wade has been overturned political power over abortion belongs, where it should, to voters and legislators. Just like in the UK.
So how does a single judge in Texas get to question the nationwide use of mifepristone ?
for Sunil and other PB trans(portation) advocates:
Take a virtual ride on Honolulu's soon-to-open new Skyline light rail system, heading west on segment from Aloha Stadium (near Pearl Harbor) to Kapolei.
I am coming to the conclusion that the Sunak experiment has failed. He just does not have the gravitas a PM needs. The Tories need to gamble (again) and get an elder statesman in. Lord Hague would be ideal.
If you want an elder statesman who could pull off an unlikely General Election victory, then John Major himself would be a better bet.
John Major is four months younger than Joe Biden.
But has a lot in common with Sir Keir as you can see in this photo caption.
I read that, and thought it was odd. Abortion is outside the Overton window in the UK, despite efforts to pull it back, and coverage of the debate in the States can be done by statistical analysis, reportage and interviews with politicians. I don't know why they found it necessary to profile an individual. Although to be fair, when I read it I found it interesting and informative, so there's that. Next week, the BBC interviews Bob Jeb Jebbity-Bob III, who wants to make homosexuality illegal in Alabama.
She's an individual, but she heads SFLA, a pro-life student group. And according to the article: "SFLA now has 1,400 campus groups in all 50 states"
So whilst she is just an individual, she may have considerable political power.
Now that Roe, Wade has been overturned political power over abortion belongs, where it should, to voters and legislators. Just like in the UK.
So how does a single judge in Texas get to question the nationwide use of mifepristone ?
But Tory members are so high up the demographic curve that they are dying off at an alarming rate...
No they are not. Given life expectancies and the late-life care which your older Conservative Party member can no doubt afford, somebody mid-seventies will have about fifteen years in front of them. Unpleasant years, but still there and still capable of putting a cross on a postal vote form.
We keep saying that they are dying off, but there are A LOT of pensioners and for around the next ten-fifteen years they will remain the dominant force in British politics. When it switches it will switch fast as they begin to be outnumbered by younger votes in sufficient proportion to outweigh differential turnout by age, but until then it will be pensionerism all the way...
I would just gently suggest that as my wife and I close in on our diamond wedding year, considering our ages (79+ & 83) we have never been more content and, whilst obviously not as mobile as we were, these are the best years of a long and contented 'hard working life' with 3 married children (57, 52 & 47) and 5 grandchildren, most of whom live close by
When the discussion turns to reviling the elderly, the missing element is most each and everyone of them is greatly loved by their children, grandchildren and great grandchildren, who certainly would not recognise the opprobrium some want to direct to them and yes, even some of us who voted remain
The good book says 'honour your father and your mother that your days may be long' and wise words
My marriage is coming up to the 25 year mark this summer. What should I do? Bit late for a big party as our friends will already have plans. Exotic long weekend somewhere? If so where?
Based on Leon's recent reportage - Marietta, Ohio!
And I noticed there is a missing apostrophe in the title in the link, so you can read it as follows: DeSantis won't say whether Hell supports Trump.
(Full disclosure: If asked, I wouldn't say because I don't know. But I would say that, if there is a Hell, the idea that Trump is getting their support, is plausible.)
But Tory members are so high up the demographic curve that they are dying off at an alarming rate...
No they are not. Given life expectancies and the late-life care which your older Conservative Party member can no doubt afford, somebody mid-seventies will have about fifteen years in front of them. Unpleasant years, but still there and still capable of putting a cross on a postal vote form.
We keep saying that they are dying off, but there are A LOT of pensioners and for around the next ten-fifteen years they will remain the dominant force in British politics. When it switches it will switch fast as they begin to be outnumbered by younger votes in sufficient proportion to outweigh differential turnout by age, but until then it will be pensionerism all the way...
Even then the median voter will be aged 50 still not 30
Taking into account both raw demographics and propensity to vote, I believe that the median voter is aged about 55. This value is likely to keep creeping slowly up for the foreseeable, because so many younger people aren't forming families for various reasons, not least the crippling cost. Yet another issue that can be put down to the full spectrum catastrophe that is the British property market.
Not that this is any real use to the Conservatives in the long run, because people are no longer moving rightwards as they age. Being the party of the landed interest - minted pensioner owner-occupiers, their heirs and rentiers - only wins elections so long as there are enough of those people around to keep voting for you. Those who have neither significant assets nor any realistic prospect of accruing them have nothing to conserve and, consequently, no use for conservatism.
By 55 plenty are starting to inherit property (and most should have bought a property with a mortgage well before then anyway).
Well bully for them. And what of the vast, and increasing, numbers of people who can't afford to accumulate their own assets and don't have minted parents who are eventually going to die and leave them a fortune? And then there are all the actual heirs who are struggling into late middle age - whether with enormous mortgages or even worse rents hanging like millstones around their necks - and would rather not have to wish death on people they love in order to be delivered from hardship.
Face it, the proportion of rich, old, right-wing people in the country is going to creep down and down and down, driven by a combination of long-term economic stagnation and an entire socio-economic system that's built to redistribute what wealth remains upwards. The shrinking army of wealthy pensioners might remain loyal, but the growing army of dirt poor renters - young and old alike - is ultimately going to overpower them. And renters have no use for today's Tories.
Your lot should've got a lot more houses built, but your decision to play to short and medium term advantage (by, amongst other things, caving to Nimbyism and thus enriching your core vote further) is going to ruin you in the long run. Watch.
As the median house price now almost crosses the IHT threshold and in London and the south and detached houses north of Watford too is well beyond it those who won't inherit significant property are declining in number each day.
As the minted pensioners die, their children become minted too (not to mention many parents transfer funds to their children in their 30s to buy property too).
Over 39 most own not rent, the Tories don't need the votes of most renters to win. Building all over the greenbelt is hugely unpopular, 59% of voters oppose it and if Starmer pushes his plans for that then the Tories (joined by the LDs) will lead opposition to it
All-Leave audience for Question Time Brexit special You can stream the programme live by clicking the 'play' button at the top of this page from 20:00 BST, and it will also be broadcast on BBC One after the News at Ten https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-65991849
I am coming to the conclusion that the Sunak experiment has failed. He just does not have the gravitas a PM needs. The Tories need to gamble (again) and get an elder statesman in. Lord Hague would be ideal.
Do you believe Starmer has the gravitas a PM needs? If so, why?
He's an eminent KC and former DPP, they are the epitome of gravitas overload.
He was a QC and a former DPP when he used his overload of gravitas to point at wallpaper in John Lewis
Is it the K that makes the difference?
He played a blinder on that too.
Do you think you're his biggest fan?
No, but I find it hysterical the people who criticised Starmer for focussing on Partygate still criticise him for his political strategy.
I think that you're his biggest fan on PB
Then I cannot help you. Perhaps finger painting is more your level.
I've repeatedly critiqued his policies.
I know you don't like his private school policy
You love him because he's a lawyer and a republican
Nobody else has defended him like you have
I bet heavily on politics.
I try and provide some context for gamblers.
Plus he also annoys Corbynites and Brexiteers, so he's not all bad.
You've not dissuaded me of your SKS fandom (do you love the slalom sirkeiring?)
And can we have a PB Style Guide?
It's try to
You wouldn't say "I'm going to attempt and walk up the hill"
Why should that work for try?
Slalom Keir is going to be a successful line as calling him Gordon Brittas.
He looks and sounds NOTHING like Chris Barrie! #JustSayin'
for Sunil and other PB trans(portation) advocates:
Take a virtual ride on Honolulu's soon-to-open new Skyline light rail system, heading west on segment from Aloha Stadium (near Pearl Harbor) to Kapolei.
Where’s good for a holiday in your part of the world SSI? Thinking of a road trip in the Northwest of my Wife’s homeland and my only visit was a brief one when taking a Greyhound from Vancouver to San Francisco.
I'm starting to think a wipeout is possible, or it will be if Farage comes on the pitch in the 90th minute. I'm hearing core Conservatives giving up now - who are solid base.
Even my Dad, who's so staunch he makes @HYUFD look like a floating voter, has said they don't deserve another term. And I agreed with him.
He's never come close to saying anything like that before in his life.
In the longer term it will be a good thing for your tribe. A properly functioning democracy needs a properly functioning centre right party. And since November 1990 yours hasn’t really been able to figure out what its core principles are. The same could be said for Labour of course but Blair did at least have some vision of radical centrism IMHO.
We dont have any properly function parties of any colour. They are all idiots who just want to continue the status quo that ended us in the shit we are in.
Fortunately it is just possible that deliverance is at hand. An economy based on property speculation, which is what we now have, cannot survive a prolonged period of very high interest rates - and there's no particular reason to suppose that the BoE will stop with a base rate of 6%, which is the current peak number that economic analysts seem to have plucked out of thin air. Inflation is proving very sticky and the BoE has no choice but to keep applying more and more downward pressure on the economy if it isn't to risk stagflation, followed by a collapse in international investor consequence in the UK and a Sterling crisis.
The existing socio-economic system is engineered to favour existing property owners, and to redistribute the stagnant pool of available wealth from the poor to the rich, principally via the inflation of asset prices and rents. We are long overdue a major downward correction in house prices, and such a collapse is to be welcomed. A huge spike in interest rates would make this very much more likely. Good. Bring it on.
I've been trying to get my head around the strength of the physical forces that would have acted on the sub, water coming in fast enough to cut you in half, or just simply 'explode', which it obviously can't do because of the pressure involved on the sub makes an explosion impossible.
I'm guessing the force of the decompression just ripped the whole thing to pieces?
Compression not decompression, implosion not explosion. It will crumple inwards, like an empty plastic bottle you suck the air out of.
Any theories on why it would happen
Carbon fibre for pressure vessels has a troubled history.
Submarine pressure hulls (metal) are often limited to x number of compression/decompression cycles.
Even if the carbon fibre starts out perfect, the repeated compression cycle will eventually cause failure. The layers of carbon fibre will start to delaminate.
The safety engineer who got fired, stated that the quality of the layup of the carbon fibre was far from perfect. He also said that the quality was untested, directly. And that the system to monitor failure in the carbon fibre wouldn’t work, since it would only give an indication when it was already too late.
In addition the end cap and window for the vessel weren’t rated for 4000m.
So all in all, it probably wasn't a great idea to dive to the Titanic in it?
Just reflecting that 3500 m is about 350 bar pressure - ie 350 atmospheres. 5000lb psi, just about. The *peak* pressure in a diesel cylinder is about two-thirds of that for a turbocharged diesel.
If it failed, the phenomenon called dieseling probably occurred - the pressure rise would have been so sudden and violent that the contents of the pressure hull would have exploded like the charge in a diesel engine cylinder.
So implosion, taking milliseconds, followed by an explosion.
On the upside, certain death, faster than you could start to realise something was happening, let alone feel pain.
I am coming to the conclusion that the Sunak experiment has failed. He just does not have the gravitas a PM needs. The Tories need to gamble (again) and get an elder statesman in. Lord Hague would be ideal.
Do you believe Starmer has the gravitas a PM needs? If so, why?
He's an eminent KC and former DPP, they are the epitome of gravitas overload.
He was a QC and a former DPP when he used his overload of gravitas to point at wallpaper in John Lewis
Is it the K that makes the difference?
He played a blinder on that too.
Do you think you're his biggest fan?
No, but I find it hysterical the people who criticised Starmer for focussing on Partygate still criticise him for his political strategy.
I think that you're his biggest fan on PB
Then I cannot help you. Perhaps finger painting is more your level.
I've repeatedly critiqued his policies.
I know you don't like his private school policy
You love him because he's a lawyer and a republican
Nobody else has defended him like you have
I bet heavily on politics.
I try and provide some context for gamblers.
Plus he also annoys Corbynites and Brexiteers, so he's not all bad.
You've not dissuaded me of your SKS fandom (do you love the slalom sirkeiring?)
And can we have a PB Style Guide?
It's try to
You wouldn't say "I'm going to attempt and walk up the hill"
Why should that work for try?
Slalom Keir is going to be a successful line as calling him Gordon Brittas.
He looks and sounds NOTHING like Chris Barrie! #JustSayin'
It's worth remembering that, excellent as she was at wielding a ceremonial sword, Penny Mordaunt was all over the place during the last-but-one leadership contest. Essentially, the more she spoke, the more her support faltered.
BUT, she was - we now realise - dealing with a hideous family trauma in the background. That might - might - explain her poor performance
Since then she has done pretty well. And, more importantly, the Tories have very little choice. She's not posh and she speaks well in the Commons. She's probably their best bet
she probably won't be an MP when there is a vacancy though
All-Leave audience for Question Time Brexit special You can stream the programme live by clicking the 'play' button at the top of this page from 20:00 BST, and it will also be broadcast on BBC One after the News at Ten https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-65991849
"Every audience member has told us they voted leave"
It's worth remembering that, excellent as she was at wielding a ceremonial sword, Penny Mordaunt was all over the place during the last-but-one leadership contest. Essentially, the more she spoke, the more her support faltered.
The last thing the Tories need is another vacuous blonde with no achievements to their name but with a great capacity for self-promotion, telling lies and being photographed. Aren't Johnson and Truss enough for them?
Badenoch had an an opportunity with the Post Office to do something worthwhile and just but has fluffed it.
I tend to the @Heathener view - that either because of disgust and anger or weariness with the whole shambolic lot of them the Tories could do very badly indeed. Why should anyone vote for a party which does not know its arse from its elbow.
The daily mail destroyed Mourdaunt, giving her the bile they usually reserve for Labour leaders. She is not the Tories future unless that miraculously changes.
But Tory members are so high up the demographic curve that they are dying off at an alarming rate...
No they are not. Given life expectancies and the late-life care which your older Conservative Party member can no doubt afford, somebody mid-seventies will have about fifteen years in front of them. Unpleasant years, but still there and still capable of putting a cross on a postal vote form.
We keep saying that they are dying off, but there are A LOT of pensioners and for around the next ten-fifteen years they will remain the dominant force in British politics. When it switches it will switch fast as they begin to be outnumbered by younger votes in sufficient proportion to outweigh differential turnout by age, but until then it will be pensionerism all the way...
Even then the median voter will be aged 50 still not 30
Taking into account both raw demographics and propensity to vote, I believe that the median voter is aged about 55. This value is likely to keep creeping slowly up for the foreseeable, because so many younger people aren't forming families for various reasons, not least the crippling cost. Yet another issue that can be put down to the full spectrum catastrophe that is the British property market.
Not that this is any real use to the Conservatives in the long run, because people are no longer moving rightwards as they age. Being the party of the landed interest - minted pensioner owner-occupiers, their heirs and rentiers - only wins elections so long as there are enough of those people around to keep voting for you. Those who have neither significant assets nor any realistic prospect of accruing them have nothing to conserve and, consequently, no use for conservatism.
By 55 plenty are starting to inherit property (and most should have bought a property with a mortgage well before then anyway).
Well bully for them. And what of the vast, and increasing, numbers of people who can't afford to accumulate their own assets and don't have minted parents who are eventually going to die and leave them a fortune? And then there are all the actual heirs who are struggling into late middle age - whether with enormous mortgages or even worse rents hanging like millstones around their necks - and would rather not have to wish death on people they love in order to be delivered from hardship.
Face it, the proportion of rich, old, right-wing people in the country is going to creep down and down and down, driven by a combination of long-term economic stagnation and an entire socio-economic system that's built to redistribute what wealth remains upwards. The shrinking army of wealthy pensioners might remain loyal, but the growing army of dirt poor renters - young and old alike - is ultimately going to overpower them. And renters have no use for today's Tories.
Your lot should've got a lot more houses built, but your decision to play to short and medium term advantage (by, amongst other things, caving to Nimbyism and thus enriching your core vote further) is going to ruin you in the long run. Watch.
As the median house price now almost crosses the IHT threshold and in London and the south and detached houses north of Watford too is well beyond it those who won't inherit significant property are declining in number each day.
As the minted pensioners die, their children become minted too (not to mention many parents transfer funds to their children in their 30s to buy property too).
Over 39 most own not rent, the Tories don't need the votes of most renters to win. Building all over the greenbelt is hugely unpopular, 59% of voters oppose it and if Starmer pushes his plans for that then the Tories (joined by the LDs) will lead opposition to it
Younger people who have to claw their way desperately onto the bottom of the property ladder by taking on gargantuan debts may not necessarily thank your lot for their unnecessary and avoidable predicament. And they certainly won't thank them when those fixed mortgage terms begin expiring en masse and the fire sales and repossessions get underway in earnest. But hey-ho, you can't win 'em all.
Thatcher had a degree in chemistry, and worked in the chemistry field for many years before she sadly went to the bar.
Besides, I'd assumed a lawyer such as yourself could read. I said 'fewer', not 'none'. A science degree just about compensates for the disadvantages of becoming a barrister. ; )
It's worth remembering that, excellent as she was at wielding a ceremonial sword, Penny Mordaunt was all over the place during the last-but-one leadership contest. Essentially, the more she spoke, the more her support faltered.
The last thing the Tories need is another vacuous blonde with no achievements to their name but with a great capacity for self-promotion, telling lies and being photographed. Aren't Johnson and Truss enough for them?
Badenoch had an an opportunity with the Post Office to do something worthwhile and just but has fluffed it.
I tend to the @Heathener view - that either because of disgust and anger or weariness with the whole shambolic lot of them the Tories could do very badly indeed. Why should anyone vote for a party which does not know its arse from its elbow.
If the Tories lose under Sunak and Hunt, the Conservative membership and many MPs will say it was as they were too wet and the party needs to move to more rightwing core principles. Low tax, tougher on illegal migration, harder on Woke etc. The latter then rules out Mordaunt.
Just as after New Labour finally lost in 2010 the Labour membership and supporters and unions concluded they were not leftwing enough, too centrist on economics and tainted by the Iraq War and elected Ed Miliband and then the even more left Corbyn to get their party back
I am coming to the conclusion that the Sunak experiment has failed. He just does not have the gravitas a PM needs. The Tories need to gamble (again) and get an elder statesman in. Lord Hague would be ideal.
Do you believe Starmer has the gravitas a PM needs? If so, why?
Yes. Two reasons, firstly his success in the Commons dismantling Boris and Sunak. His raising of the Covid parties issue was instrumental. Secondly, the way Starmer successfully set a new direction for the Labour Party post Corbyn.
I disagree with the first of those. He was doing poorly against Boris, until Boris not only gave him an open goal, but handed him the ball and set half his team against the other half, who had stepped in mantraps. He has not 'dismantled' Sunak; Sunak has inherited a cr@p inheritance, and is possibly playing the poor hand as well as anyone could - he inherited a far worse position than Major in '92.
When Starmer gets a landslide, he will have a load of inexperienced MPs, most of them poorly vetted - as they always seem to be for all parties. I don't see much evidence that he will handle that well once in power.
As an aside, how long before the first Labour scandal in government? Labour received a bung from Ecclestone in January 1997; they won the election in May, and the scandal erupted in November. Six months.
More than a whiff of desperation there.
WTF would I be 'desperate' ? I've been calling for a GE for the last year, and have been predicting that Labour will get a landslide.
But you cannot ignore the fact that, like Blair, he has faced a Conservative government riven by disputes and corruption. But unlike Blair, Starmer does not have the magic 'something'. That may be to his advantage... or not.
Just felt criticism of new governments for lacking experience was a bit silly. All new governments lack experience compared with their immediate predecessors. That’s kind of the whole point of a democratic system. A new government will make mistakes, like every other government in history. That’s ok.
Not really - look at the Ecclestone example for the way the rot can start at the top. Immediately.
Besides, the moment someone becomes an MP - or even a candidate - they become fair game. The dishonourable member for Sheffield Hallam from 2017 shows that well. There's no way he should have got anywhere near parliament - and that was not a landslide.
I'm starting to think a wipeout is possible, or it will be if Farage comes on the pitch in the 90th minute. I'm hearing core Conservatives giving up now - who are solid base.
Even my Dad, who's so staunch he makes @HYUFD look like a floating voter, has said they don't deserve another term. And I agreed with him.
He's never come close to saying anything like that before in his life.
In the longer term it will be a good thing for your tribe. A properly functioning democracy needs a properly functioning centre right party. And since November 1990 yours hasn’t really been able to figure out what its core principles are. The same could be said for Labour of course but Blair did at least have some vision of radical centrism IMHO.
We dont have any properly function parties of any colour. They are all idiots who just want to continue the status quo that ended us in the shit we are in.
Fortunately it is just possible that deliverance is at hand. An economy based on property speculation, which is what we now have, cannot survive a prolonged period of very high interest rates - and there's no particular reason to suppose that the BoE will stop with a base rate of 6%, which is the current peak number that economic analysts seem to have plucked out of thin air. Inflation is proving very sticky and the BoE has no choice but to keep applying more and more downward pressure on the economy if it isn't to risk stagflation, followed by a collapse in international investor consequence in the UK and a Sterling crisis.
The existing socio-economic system is engineered to favour existing property owners, and to redistribute the stagnant pool of available wealth from the poor to the rich, principally via the inflation of asset prices and rents. We are long overdue a major downward correction in house prices, and such a collapse is to be welcomed. A huge spike in interest rates would make this very much more likely. Good. Bring it on.
A huge spike in interest rates just helps cash buyers and savers, it does not help first time buyers needing big mortgages at all
As I've mentioned more than a few times, Penny Mordaunt is one of the very few modern politicians I've seen who can project both empathy and authority.
I'm starting to think a wipeout is possible, or it will be if Farage comes on the pitch in the 90th minute. I'm hearing core Conservatives giving up now - who are solid base.
Even my Dad, who's so staunch he makes @HYUFD look like a floating voter, has said they don't deserve another term. And I agreed with him.
He's never come close to saying anything like that before in his life.
In the longer term it will be a good thing for your tribe. A properly functioning democracy needs a properly functioning centre right party. And since November 1990 yours hasn’t really been able to figure out what its core principles are. The same could be said for Labour of course but Blair did at least have some vision of radical centrism IMHO.
We dont have any properly function parties of any colour. They are all idiots who just want to continue the status quo that ended us in the shit we are in.
Fortunately it is just possible that deliverance is at hand. An economy based on property speculation, which is what we now have, cannot survive a prolonged period of very high interest rates - and there's no particular reason to suppose that the BoE will stop with a base rate of 6%, which is the current peak number that economic analysts seem to have plucked out of thin air. Inflation is proving very sticky and the BoE has no choice but to keep applying more and more downward pressure on the economy if it isn't to risk stagflation, followed by a collapse in international investor consequence in the UK and a Sterling crisis.
The existing socio-economic system is engineered to favour existing property owners, and to redistribute the stagnant pool of available wealth from the poor to the rich, principally via the inflation of asset prices and rents. We are long overdue a major downward correction in house prices, and such a collapse is to be welcomed. A huge spike in interest rates would make this very much more likely. Good. Bring it on.
Consumer price Inflation will come down quicker than people think.
Wholesale price inflation has dropped from 12% to 3% since the start of the year. Input price inflation is about to turn negative, after reaching a peak of 23% last year. That will feed through into consumer prices.
I just discovered that a few bottles of wine - say two dozen - that I bought many years ago for £20 or so, are now worth £100-£300 each
That’s deeply pleasing. However Vivino says these wines are now peaking or indeed past their peak. So I need to drink them all quite quickly or they will slowly turn to vinegar
So I will have the pleasure of drinking these fine wines but then, after that, I won’t have the pleasure of knowing I have got some wines worth £100-£300 sitting in the dark in my flat. And the latter pleasure is no small thing
Where are they from - what region, appellation, year etc.?
A variety. Some grand crus. Some pricey Australians. Some supertuscans etc
Here’s one. Worth about £100 apparently. Five times what I paid (ages ago)
Advice seems to be:drink now if you haven’t already
2005 = fantastic year for Bordeaux. That'll be ideal now. Very nice.
PS if I want to buy some wines now around £20-£30 that could be worth 3-5 times that in 10-15 years what should I buy?
The 2022 clarets. Supposed to be as good as 1947. Which was good. Extremely good.
Or call Harry Palmer there for the best deals (it was such a good year everyone has jacked up their prices) and he will sort you out.
If you're quick, the Wine Society's Château Mouton Rothschild 2022 en primeur offer will close at midday tomorrow, Friday 23rd June 2023.
Mind you at £1,554 per case of 3 in-bond, it might not be quite what you had in mind.
All EP wines are sold at exactly the same price by every merchant so there's no "offer". That said if you do want the Mouton you'd better get your skates on as it will likely sell out from everywhere. That's why I use Farr's; they always get good allocations.
But I don't want to buy wine which costs £100+ a bottle from the outset. I want a wine which will pleasingly quintuple in value in a decade or two. I accept I am asking for an extremely good deal
IIRC I bought the Chateau d'Issan from Tesco! Back when they used to have a weirdly good, on point Fine Wine department. Sadly gone
Absolutely and absolutely. We have discussed previously how good the Tescos wine dept was before they closed it.
And I'm not suggesting Mouton - if you are serious, then call Harry at Farr's and he will sort you out with something at your price point. The Batailley is supposed to be amazing this year for example at £372/cs (doz) IB.
Thankyou. I will absolutely look into this. If I'm gonna drink all my lovely wines now I want to know I've got something else quietly improving in a darkened corner
I've got about half a dozen Aussie reds worth £150+. I suspect they are close to peaking as well, or indeed past it
I used to have a £300+ bottle of scotch given me by my employers as a reward for good behaviour, but my then wife age 22 drank it all in about 2 evenings while I was away coz she was "bored" and she thought it was "just average whisky". She did say it was "unexpectedly nice"
I have a horrible feeling she mixed it with Diet Coke
Oscar Wilde's definition of a cynic: "a man who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing".
I'm starting to think a wipeout is possible, or it will be if Farage comes on the pitch in the 90th minute. I'm hearing core Conservatives giving up now - who are solid base.
Even my Dad, who's so staunch he makes @HYUFD look like a floating voter, has said they don't deserve another term. And I agreed with him.
He's never come close to saying anything like that before in his life.
In the longer term it will be a good thing for your tribe. A properly functioning democracy needs a properly functioning centre right party. And since November 1990 yours hasn’t really been able to figure out what its core principles are. The same could be said for Labour of course but Blair did at least have some vision of radical centrism IMHO.
We dont have any properly function parties of any colour. They are all idiots who just want to continue the status quo that ended us in the shit we are in.
Fortunately it is just possible that deliverance is at hand. An economy based on property speculation, which is what we now have, cannot survive a prolonged period of very high interest rates - and there's no particular reason to suppose that the BoE will stop with a base rate of 6%, which is the current peak number that economic analysts seem to have plucked out of thin air. Inflation is proving very sticky and the BoE has no choice but to keep applying more and more downward pressure on the economy if it isn't to risk stagflation, followed by a collapse in international investor consequence in the UK and a Sterling crisis.
The existing socio-economic system is engineered to favour existing property owners, and to redistribute the stagnant pool of available wealth from the poor to the rich, principally via the inflation of asset prices and rents. We are long overdue a major downward correction in house prices, and such a collapse is to be welcomed. A huge spike in interest rates would make this very much more likely. Good. Bring it on.
A huge spike in interest rates just helps cash buyers and savers, it does not help first time buyers needing big mortgages at all
And why do the poor sods need big mortgages? More than a decade of Conservative Party policy inflating the housing market, that's why.
It's worth remembering that, excellent as she was at wielding a ceremonial sword, Penny Mordaunt was all over the place during the last-but-one leadership contest. Essentially, the more she spoke, the more her support faltered.
The last thing the Tories need is another vacuous blonde with no achievements to their name but with a great capacity for self-promotion, telling lies and being photographed. Aren't Johnson and Truss enough for them?
Badenoch had an an opportunity with the Post Office to do something worthwhile and just but has fluffed it.
I tend to the @Heathener view - that either because of disgust and anger or weariness with the whole shambolic lot of them the Tories could do very badly indeed. Why should anyone vote for a party which does not know its arse from its elbow.
Your dislike of Mordaunt - and the reasons you give for it are stupid IMV.
"vacuous blonde" - wtf does hair colour have to do with it? You'd be the first person calling a man sexist for saying that. Vacuous - ditto.
'no achievements to their name' - the same is true for most politicians. Blair, for instance. Or Cameron.
'capacity for self-promotion' - ditto.
'telling lies' - ditto. And I think you're being a little unfair in that respect as well.
'being photographed' - a surprising number of politicians fail even that test.
pB travellers, looks like I am going to have a day or two in Miami later this year, where best to stay, and what things to see, other than all the filming locations of the Bad Boys trilogy?
I'm starting to think a wipeout is possible, or it will be if Farage comes on the pitch in the 90th minute. I'm hearing core Conservatives giving up now - who are solid base.
Even my Dad, who's so staunch he makes @HYUFD look like a floating voter, has said they don't deserve another term. And I agreed with him.
He's never come close to saying anything like that before in his life.
In the longer term it will be a good thing for your tribe. A properly functioning democracy needs a properly functioning centre right party. And since November 1990 yours hasn’t really been able to figure out what its core principles are. The same could be said for Labour of course but Blair did at least have some vision of radical centrism IMHO.
We dont have any properly function parties of any colour. They are all idiots who just want to continue the status quo that ended us in the shit we are in.
Fortunately it is just possible that deliverance is at hand. An economy based on property speculation, which is what we now have, cannot survive a prolonged period of very high interest rates - and there's no particular reason to suppose that the BoE will stop with a base rate of 6%, which is the current peak number that economic analysts seem to have plucked out of thin air. Inflation is proving very sticky and the BoE has no choice but to keep applying more and more downward pressure on the economy if it isn't to risk stagflation, followed by a collapse in international investor consequence in the UK and a Sterling crisis.
The existing socio-economic system is engineered to favour existing property owners, and to redistribute the stagnant pool of available wealth from the poor to the rich, principally via the inflation of asset prices and rents. We are long overdue a major downward correction in house prices, and such a collapse is to be welcomed. A huge spike in interest rates would make this very much more likely. Good. Bring it on.
And yet the lib dems are already talking about helping mortagees and I suspect soon to be followed by labour and cons
Can't believe Hague is being seriously suggested. The guy isn't even an MP. How would that work, then?
Government from the Lords is technically still possible, but I think the last peer to be PM (excepting Alec Douglas-Home, who gave up his title after a few days,) was the Marquess of Salisbury around the turn of the previous century. Any attempt to revive the tradition in this day and age would look, by turns, outrageous, desperate and silly.
A Kemi Vs Penny run-off would be an awesome contest!
It should be decided not by debates, which were shambolic in the last one. Heck, they were so boring even the host literally lost consciousness.
Instead, we should have a sword wielding contest chaired by His Majesty the King and judged by President Volodomyr Zelensky who then uses the winner's weapon to ceremonially behead Putin after ramming the loser's sword up his (Putin's) arse.
The US rights alone would clear the national debt.
But Tory members are so high up the demographic curve that they are dying off at an alarming rate...
No they are not. Given life expectancies and the late-life care which your older Conservative Party member can no doubt afford, somebody mid-seventies will have about fifteen years in front of them. Unpleasant years, but still there and still capable of putting a cross on a postal vote form.
We keep saying that they are dying off, but there are A LOT of pensioners and for around the next ten-fifteen years they will remain the dominant force in British politics. When it switches it will switch fast as they begin to be outnumbered by younger votes in sufficient proportion to outweigh differential turnout by age, but until then it will be pensionerism all the way...
Even then the median voter will be aged 50 still not 30
Taking into account both raw demographics and propensity to vote, I believe that the median voter is aged about 55. This value is likely to keep creeping slowly up for the foreseeable, because so many younger people aren't forming families for various reasons, not least the crippling cost. Yet another issue that can be put down to the full spectrum catastrophe that is the British property market.
Not that this is any real use to the Conservatives in the long run, because people are no longer moving rightwards as they age. Being the party of the landed interest - minted pensioner owner-occupiers, their heirs and rentiers - only wins elections so long as there are enough of those people around to keep voting for you. Those who have neither significant assets nor any realistic prospect of accruing them have nothing to conserve and, consequently, no use for conservatism.
By 55 plenty are starting to inherit property (and most should have bought a property with a mortgage well before then anyway).
I'm 56. I don't know many of my cohort who have lost both parents.
Can't believe Hague is being seriously suggested. The guy isn't even an MP. How would that work, then?
Government from the Lords is technically still possible, but I think the last peer to be PM (excepting Alec Douglas-Home, who gave up his title after a few days,) was the Marquess of Salisbury around the turn of the previous century. Any attempt to revive the tradition in this day and age would look, by turns, outrageous, desperate and silly.
You think correctly. The other two to be considered - Curzon in 1923 and Halifax in 1940 - were both passed over, in the first case solely because he was a peer and in the second with that as a very significant factor.
Can't believe Hague is being seriously suggested. The guy isn't even an MP. How would that work, then?
Government from the Lords is technically still possible, but I think the last peer to be PM (excepting Alec Douglas-Home, who gave up his title after a few days,) was the Marquess of Salisbury around the turn of the previous century. Any attempt to revive the tradition in this day and age would look, by turns, outrageous, desperate and silly.
Just the job for an outrageous, desperate and silly Party then.
It's worth remembering that, excellent as she was at wielding a ceremonial sword, Penny Mordaunt was all over the place during the last-but-one leadership contest. Essentially, the more she spoke, the more her support faltered.
The last thing the Tories need is another vacuous blonde with no achievements to their name but with a great capacity for self-promotion, telling lies and being photographed. Aren't Johnson and Truss enough for them? .
So you’re saying that Sir Michael Fabricant shouldn’t go for the top job?
But Tory members are so high up the demographic curve that they are dying off at an alarming rate...
No they are not. Given life expectancies and the late-life care which your older Conservative Party member can no doubt afford, somebody mid-seventies will have about fifteen years in front of them. Unpleasant years, but still there and still capable of putting a cross on a postal vote form.
We keep saying that they are dying off, but there are A LOT of pensioners and for around the next ten-fifteen years they will remain the dominant force in British politics. When it switches it will switch fast as they begin to be outnumbered by younger votes in sufficient proportion to outweigh differential turnout by age, but until then it will be pensionerism all the way...
Even then the median voter will be aged 50 still not 30
Taking into account both raw demographics and propensity to vote, I believe that the median voter is aged about 55. This value is likely to keep creeping slowly up for the foreseeable, because so many younger people aren't forming families for various reasons, not least the crippling cost. Yet another issue that can be put down to the full spectrum catastrophe that is the British property market.
Not that this is any real use to the Conservatives in the long run, because people are no longer moving rightwards as they age. Being the party of the landed interest - minted pensioner owner-occupiers, their heirs and rentiers - only wins elections so long as there are enough of those people around to keep voting for you. Those who have neither significant assets nor any realistic prospect of accruing them have nothing to conserve and, consequently, no use for conservatism.
By 55 plenty are starting to inherit property (and most should have bought a property with a mortgage well before then anyway).
I'm 56. I don't know many of my cohort who have lost both parents.
It's worth remembering that, excellent as she was at wielding a ceremonial sword, Penny Mordaunt was all over the place during the last-but-one leadership contest. Essentially, the more she spoke, the more her support faltered.
The last thing the Tories need is another vacuous blonde with no achievements to their name but with a great capacity for self-promotion, telling lies and being photographed. Aren't Johnson and Truss enough for them? .
So you’re saying that Sir Michael Fabricant shouldn’t go for the top job?
The only 'top job' he needs involves a large knife and his head.
Whether that stops at taking his hair off, I leave up to you.
I'm starting to think a wipeout is possible, or it will be if Farage comes on the pitch in the 90th minute. I'm hearing core Conservatives giving up now - who are solid base.
Even my Dad, who's so staunch he makes @HYUFD look like a floating voter, has said they don't deserve another term. And I agreed with him.
He's never come close to saying anything like that before in his life.
In the longer term it will be a good thing for your tribe. A properly functioning democracy needs a properly functioning centre right party. And since November 1990 yours hasn’t really been able to figure out what its core principles are. The same could be said for Labour of course but Blair did at least have some vision of radical centrism IMHO.
We dont have any properly function parties of any colour. They are all idiots who just want to continue the status quo that ended us in the shit we are in.
Fortunately it is just possible that deliverance is at hand. An economy based on property speculation, which is what we now have, cannot survive a prolonged period of very high interest rates - and there's no particular reason to suppose that the BoE will stop with a base rate of 6%, which is the current peak number that economic analysts seem to have plucked out of thin air. Inflation is proving very sticky and the BoE has no choice but to keep applying more and more downward pressure on the economy if it isn't to risk stagflation, followed by a collapse in international investor consequence in the UK and a Sterling crisis.
The existing socio-economic system is engineered to favour existing property owners, and to redistribute the stagnant pool of available wealth from the poor to the rich, principally via the inflation of asset prices and rents. We are long overdue a major downward correction in house prices, and such a collapse is to be welcomed. A huge spike in interest rates would make this very much more likely. Good. Bring it on.
A huge spike in interest rates just helps cash buyers and savers, it does not help first time buyers needing big mortgages at all
In the short term no, but in the medium term the numbers of distressed sellers and repossessed properties entering the market, coupled with a lack of available mortgage finance for most buyers, would trigger a collapse in prices. It would also teach everyone that basing your entire socio-economic model on the idea that residential property is a one-way investment bet and a ticket to riches, rather than somewhere to live, is incredibly stupid.
We can only get back to a culture of productive and prudent investment - in savings and in businesses - if the existing culture is first soaked in petrol and a lit match applied. And the longer this agony is delayed, the worse it will be when that finally happens.
There is a Royal Navy officer at this press conference. Didn't realise we were helping out.
Wouldn't surprise me if we were helping wrt data, e.g. SOSUS in the Atlantic. I doubt we've got any hardware there in this time - but might be wrong.
(As an aside, I once spent a night at the house of the wife of the head of the then- RN's submarine rescue team, a couple of years after the Kursk disaster. But that can go nowhere near deep enough, as the crush depth of military submarines is much higher.)
But Tory members are so high up the demographic curve that they are dying off at an alarming rate...
No they are not. Given life expectancies and the late-life care which your older Conservative Party member can no doubt afford, somebody mid-seventies will have about fifteen years in front of them. Unpleasant years, but still there and still capable of putting a cross on a postal vote form.
We keep saying that they are dying off, but there are A LOT of pensioners and for around the next ten-fifteen years they will remain the dominant force in British politics. When it switches it will switch fast as they begin to be outnumbered by younger votes in sufficient proportion to outweigh differential turnout by age, but until then it will be pensionerism all the way...
Even then the median voter will be aged 50 still not 30
Taking into account both raw demographics and propensity to vote, I believe that the median voter is aged about 55. This value is likely to keep creeping slowly up for the foreseeable, because so many younger people aren't forming families for various reasons, not least the crippling cost. Yet another issue that can be put down to the full spectrum catastrophe that is the British property market.
Not that this is any real use to the Conservatives in the long run, because people are no longer moving rightwards as they age. Being the party of the landed interest - minted pensioner owner-occupiers, their heirs and rentiers - only wins elections so long as there are enough of those people around to keep voting for you. Those who have neither significant assets nor any realistic prospect of accruing them have nothing to conserve and, consequently, no use for conservatism.
By 55 plenty are starting to inherit property (and most should have bought a property with a mortgage well before then anyway).
I'm 56. I don't know many of my cohort who have lost both parents.
Comments
https://www.niesr.ac.uk/news/1-2-million-uk-households-insolvent-year-direct-result-higher-mortgage-repayments
It is not remotely sensible even to suggest the conservative party change to yet another leader
Sunak will lead the party into GE24 and no doubt opposition following which a whole new chapter will open in UK politics
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_know_it_when_I_see_it
When Starmer gets a landslide, he will have a load of inexperienced MPs, most of them poorly vetted - as they always seem to be for all parties. I don't see much evidence that he will handle that well once in power.
As an aside, how long before the first Labour scandal in government? Labour received a bung from Ecclestone in January 1997; they won the election in May, and the scandal erupted in November. Six months.
Sunak has at least added 100 to that and got to the Tories to about 150+ seats on the latest polls
Go somewhere special and totally spoil yourselves
I know it is different but when I retired my wife and I went on an expedition to Antarctica and a never to be forgotten experience
Shanna Swan has been investigating the impact of chemicals on human fertility for decades
Sarah Neville"
https://www.ft.com/content/f14ab282-1dd3-46bf-be02-a59aff3a90ed
I've repeatedly critiqued his policies.
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/06/22/desantis-wont-say-if-hell-support-trump-in-2024-00103163 "
And I noticed there is a missing apostrophe in the title in the link, so you can read it as follows: DeSantis won't say whether Hell supports Trump.
(Full disclosure: If asked, I wouldn't say because I don't know. But I would say that, if there is a Hell, the idea that Trump is getting their support, is plausible.)
You love him because he's a lawyer and a republican
Nobody else has defended him like you have
However, if the current PM is clearly not up to the job and is totally failing to connect with the voters then what would they have to lose? That was certainly true with La Truss. The current PM isn't quite there yet but whoever is advising him should get the sack and pronto.
The constant harping on the five pledges is verging on the ridiculous. He used to be stiff as a board so they told him to move his arms about and now he looks like a thunderbirds puppet. The overuse of the helicopter at the moment just looks really bad. The changing voice is just odd. If they are trying to coach him then they are only making him sound fake. It may be too late to save him but if I was him I'd sack the 'experts' and just try to be myself. It couldn't work worse
I try and provide some context for gamblers.
Plus he also annoys Corbynites and Brexiteers, so he's not all bad.
Face it, the proportion of rich, old, right-wing people in the country is going to creep down and down and down, driven by a combination of long-term economic stagnation and an entire socio-economic system that's built to redistribute what wealth remains upwards. The shrinking army of wealthy pensioners might remain loyal, but the growing army of dirt poor renters - young and old alike - is ultimately going to overpower them. And renters have no use for today's Tories.
Your lot should've got a lot more houses built, but your decision to play to short and medium term advantage (by, amongst other things, caving to Nimbyism and thus enriching your core vote further) is going to ruin you in the long run. Watch.
Entirely coincidental that it also rules out anyone to the left of Tony Blair, of course.
In related news, I am deeply amused that the Conservatives have chosen a former head boy of Eton, and George Osborne's economic adviser, as candidate for the new seat of Bicester & Woodstock. The LibDem leaflets practically write themselves.
But you cannot ignore the fact that, like Blair, he has faced a Conservative government riven by disputes and corruption. But unlike Blair, Starmer does not have the magic 'something'. That may be to his advantage... or not.
And can we have a PB Style Guide?
It's try to
You wouldn't say "I'm going to attempt and walk up the hill"
Why should that work for try?
Discuss.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbYASSrGTKQ
But - how does he take his pizza?
Take a virtual ride on Honolulu's soon-to-open new Skyline light rail system, heading west on segment from Aloha Stadium (near Pearl Harbor) to Kapolei.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33r2J4_fFr0
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyline_(Honolulu)
What Nigel's Thinking
Inside the mind of the man who could still decide Britain's next election"
https://mattgoodwin.substack.com/p/what-nigels-thinking
As the minted pensioners die, their children become minted too (not to mention many parents transfer funds to their children in their 30s to buy property too).
Over 39 most own not rent, the Tories don't need the votes of most renters to win. Building all over the greenbelt is hugely unpopular, 59% of voters oppose it and if Starmer pushes his plans for that then the Tories (joined by the LDs) will lead opposition to it
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/survey-results/daily/2023/05/17/d5ba5/1
You can stream the programme live by clicking the 'play' button at the top of this page from 20:00 BST, and it will also be broadcast on BBC One after the News at Ten
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-65991849
How did this guy get a job in a uni?
The existing socio-economic system is engineered to favour existing property owners, and to redistribute the stagnant pool of available wealth from the poor to the rich, principally via the inflation of asset prices and rents. We are long overdue a major downward correction in house prices, and such a collapse is to be welcomed. A huge spike in interest rates would make this very much more likely. Good. Bring it on.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-us-canada-65967464
When I asked about the millions of cars needing recharging each night I didn't include freight or farm and building equipment
Surely that'll be a hefty additional drain on our electricity capacity when it inevitably all has to go green?
But, FFS, they were not 'explorers'. They were 'adventurers'. There is a world of difference; in the way that climbers up Everest are not 'explorers'.
Yeah, right. First one to spot Roger wins.
Badenoch had an an opportunity with the Post Office to do something worthwhile and just but has fluffed it.
I tend to the @Heathener view - that either because of disgust and anger or weariness with the whole shambolic lot of them the Tories could do very badly indeed. Why should anyone vote for a party which does not know its arse from its elbow.
Besides, I'd assumed a lawyer such as yourself could read. I said 'fewer', not 'none'. A science degree just about compensates for the disadvantages of becoming a barrister. ; )
Just as after New Labour finally lost in 2010 the Labour membership and supporters and unions concluded they were not leftwing enough, too centrist on economics and tainted by the Iraq War and elected Ed Miliband and then the even more left Corbyn to get their party back
Besides, the moment someone becomes an MP - or even a candidate - they become fair game. The dishonourable member for Sheffield Hallam from 2017 shows that well. There's no way he should have got anywhere near parliament - and that was not a landslide.
The Tories should make use of that.
The guy isn't even an MP.
How would that work, then?
Wholesale price inflation has dropped from 12% to 3% since the start of the year. Input price inflation is about to turn negative, after reaching a peak of 23% last year. That will feed through into consumer prices.
Or was it somebody's definition of a nouve?
"vacuous blonde" - wtf does hair colour have to do with it? You'd be the first person calling a man sexist for saying that. Vacuous - ditto.
'no achievements to their name' - the same is true for most politicians. Blair, for instance. Or Cameron.
'capacity for self-promotion' - ditto.
'telling lies' - ditto. And I think you're being a little unfair in that respect as well.
'being photographed' - a surprising number of politicians fail even that test.
Instead, we should have a sword wielding contest chaired by His Majesty the King and judged by President Volodomyr Zelensky who then uses the winner's weapon to ceremonially behead Putin after ramming the loser's sword up his (Putin's) arse.
The US rights alone would clear the national debt.
I don't know many of my cohort who have lost both parents.
Whether that stops at taking his hair off, I leave up to you.
We can only get back to a culture of productive and prudent investment - in savings and in businesses - if the existing culture is first soaked in petrol and a lit match applied. And the longer this agony is delayed, the worse it will be when that finally happens.
(As an aside, I once spent a night at the house of the wife of the head of the then- RN's submarine rescue team, a couple of years after the Kursk disaster. But that can go nowhere near deep enough, as the crush depth of military submarines is much higher.)