I still think we're looking at a 2010 scenario and the question is, can Labour get over the line or will they have to govern with the consent of another party or parties?
I really don't think so.
What is the way back for a divided government, led by a wet behind the ears management consultant that is heading for 0/5 on its own chosen pledges?
On paper Sunak will be able to claim all five of his pledges. Most were vague platitudes anyway. Inflation is out of his hands but it is falling fast in the Eurozone, so it will here.
Will anyone feel any better from Sunak's "success"? No.
He will do better at the GE because his "it may be bad now, but it will be worse under Labour" will gain enough traction by election time. That is already the narrative promoted by anxious Conservatives on PB. Small Conservative majority.
Sunak will have dropped the pledges completely before we get to year end as they will have failed all 5 of them. Whats more, angry Tory MPs will claim that interviewers harping on about the 5 "people's priorities" are following a political bubble story rather than focusing on the people's priorities - which will be whatever guff they are trying to grift next time.
You can't campaign on "STOP THE BOATS" and claim success as record numbers pour across the channel. The others are well beyond even an attempt to claim achievement as well.
He can claim all five and the client journalists will back him up.
BigG. has this morning made the compelling case that Starmer is a worse PM than Sunak on the evidence he has to hand, so I can't see the Daily Mail deviating from that line.
TBF it is 100% nailed on that SKS can point to no record of achievement when it comes to redecorating no 10, or in populating it with commensal animals. Though a donkey in the garden, grazed in Green Park (?), would be nice.
Sir Keith Donkey?
No, not a direct reference to SKS but (just in case you don't know the allusion [edit] to the amiable equids in question) the rather different kind of chumocracy we might get:
'And there was the moment when Keir was due to meet a top QC who was leading him in an important trial. “Can we reschedule?” Keir asked. “Of course,” the QC replied. “Is everything OK?”. It turned out that one of the donkeys had died and Keir’s mum really wanted him to be there at the funeral.'
Libraries burnt, animals released from zoos, Jewish memorials desecrated.
Even a video of someone with an AK-47.
It looks possibly a bit worse than 2005, although less long so far, so I think Macron will probably have to declare that state of emergency that he wanted not to.
BBC journalists being threatened is awful.
I think it effectively shows our cultural alignment to the USA.
This is essentially a French George Floyd. If it were mass American rioting over a police shooting the BBC would be all over it and there'd be copycat protests here inside 72 hours.
Because it's France we look, shrug and make jokes about the French, and carry on.
Were there riots here after the George Floyd murder?
AfaIcs the BBC are currently frotting themselves into a seizure over the French riots.
There were a number of marches about Black Lives Matter that had @Leon spilling his load.
What is true is that, because of social media, young people are very directly connected to American culture. There is no sign, as yet, of BLM style marches over the incident in France.
Libraries burnt, animals released from zoos, Jewish memorials desecrated.
Even a video of someone with an AK-47.
It looks possibly a bit worse than 2005, although less long so far, so I think Macron will probably have to declare that state of emergency that he wanted not to.
BBC journalists being threatened is awful.
I think it effectively shows our cultural alignment to the USA.
This is essentially a French George Floyd. If it were mass American rioting over a police shooting the BBC would be all over it and there'd be copycat protests here inside 72 hours.
Because it's France we look, shrug and make jokes about the French, and carry on.
Were there riots here after the George Floyd murder?
AfaIcs the BBC are currently frotting themselves into a seizure over the French riots.
There were protests, notably one in Bristol as I recall.
Either way, they will soon be out. 12 months or 15 months ... the tories are getting the boot for a whole generation.
Bore off.
You often aren't a particularly pleasant person on here.
You have told us this is not the real you. That in life beyond you are nicer. So maybe it's time for you to hold a mirror up to yourself and step away for a bit?
In terms of the idea that I should go away because I, like Mike in the thread header to which I was responding, believe time is running out for Sunak ... is of course risible.
For 13 years many of us have watched the steady decline of this country under the Conservatives' mis-management. Their day of reckoning is approaching. The opinion polls aren't lying. I'm sorry if that is an inconvenient truth for you.
Your 1997 awaits. And I will be so very, very, happy.
It's not pleasant to say that you posting exactly the same thing on here every day at 6am is boring?
Risible. It doesn't matter whether I agree with you or not - and, for the record, I do believe the opinion polls - but we don't want to read the precisely the same shit from you at the start of every thread every day for the next 500+ days.
I still think we're looking at a 2010 scenario and the question is, can Labour get over the line or will they have to govern with the consent of another party or parties?
Could be, but I'm in the 'landslide' camp myself. Not a 97 but still a big 2 digit Labour majority.
From the starting point of 2019 that isn't going to happen. I can predict with confidence anything from a 20 or so Tory majority to a Labour majority of around 2. In between may be most likely, but there isn't a Labour landslide in the offing.
In other words, 1964 result. Which led to a 1966 one. Although history never repeats it self exactly, and there really doesn’t look to be the same big beasts on the Labour front bench that there were in either 1964 or 1997.
And a very good morning to one and all. I’m sorry for those with tickets for Lords, but I hope it rains!
Although just about everyone knows the current government is useless, there really is no enthusiasm for Keir or LAB at all. So something similar to 1964 is indeed a quite likely outcome.
I still think we're looking at a 2010 scenario and the question is, can Labour get over the line or will they have to govern with the consent of another party or parties?
Could be, but I'm in the 'landslide' camp myself. Not a 97 but still a big 2 digit Labour majority.
This is the current prediction on Electoral calculus:
Lab 475, Con 100.
I suspect this is rather optimistic, but the Con approach of Sunak salvaging something from the wreckage of the Trussterf**k is simply not working. Sunak has had his honeymoon and it only gets worse for them from here.
Libraries burnt, animals released from zoos, Jewish memorials desecrated.
Even a video of someone with an AK-47.
It looks possibly a bit worse than 2005, although less long so far, so I think Macron will probably have to declare that state of emergency that he wanted not to.
BBC journalists being threatened is awful.
I think it effectively shows our cultural alignment to the USA.
This is essentially a French George Floyd. If it were mass American rioting over a police shooting the BBC would be all over it and there'd be copycat protests here inside 72 hours.
Because it's France we look, shrug and make jokes about the French, and carry on.
Were there riots here after the George Floyd murder?
AfaIcs the BBC are currently frotting themselves into a seizure over the French riots.
There were protests, notably one in Bristol as I recall.
Just a bit of art criticism that got out of hand.
Mind, we had lots of art criticism on here. Including how dare the National Trust explain to people why a statue, sculpted as a condemnation of slavery, bought as ditto, and displayed as ditto in a purpose-built location by the original builder of the house in question, was what and where it was.
I still think we're looking at a 2010 scenario and the question is, can Labour get over the line or will they have to govern with the consent of another party or parties?
I really don't think so.
What is the way back for a divided government, led by a wet behind the ears management consultant that is heading for 0/5 on its own chosen pledges?
On paper Sunak will be able to claim all five of his pledges. Most were vague platitudes anyway. Inflation is out of his hands but it is falling fast in the Eurozone, so it will here.
Will anyone feel any better from Sunak's "success"? No.
He will do better at the GE because his "it may be bad now, but it will be worse under Labour" will gain enough traction by election time. That is already the narrative promoted by anxious Conservatives on PB. Small Conservative majority.
Sunak will have dropped the pledges completely before we get to year end as they will have failed all 5 of them. Whats more, angry Tory MPs will claim that interviewers harping on about the 5 "people's priorities" are following a political bubble story rather than focusing on the people's priorities - which will be whatever guff they are trying to grift next time.
You can't campaign on "STOP THE BOATS" and claim success as record numbers pour across the channel. The others are well beyond even an attempt to claim achievement as well.
He can claim all five and the client journalists will back him up.
BigG. has this morning made the compelling case that Starmer is a worse PM than Sunak on the evidence he has to hand, so I can't see the Daily Mail deviating from that line.
I'm not sure that the Heil and GBeebies insisting the sky actually is green actually, and then HYUFD etc producing a poll showing that 27.9% actually of the Tory core vote actually agrees the sky is green actually will make a difference.
The reason the Tory vote continues to collapse is that normal punters have seen that the spin is a lie. They know the economy is in a mess and their community is decaying because they are living and experiencing it.
Sunak can claim that he has slain inflation and fixed the NHS and stopped the boats. But he won't have done, people will see and feel and experience the truth, and Boris! has reinforced the truth that the Tories lie and lie and lie.
I know that @Heathener winds some of the PB snowflakes up, but she is right - the game is up.
Not snowflakes, just very boring. There are many more interesting left-wing posters (far more so than she is) who manage to be insightful must-reads, who are also great to debate with.
But, just dumping the same agreed 'lines to take' on here at 6am every morning demeans the site and insults our intelligence.
Don't encourage her just because she's on 'your side'.
I am in France. The roads are well.maintained and flat without potholes inc the d and e roads. The roadsides are clean and well managed. It is a pleasure to drive on their roads. The road signs are clean and not obstructed by this years growth. England by comparison is a shit hole notwithstanding the riots currenty in the big cities in France.. There are police are stopping people even in the countryside but I as a tourist was waved through. Mind you ...gone are the Butcher the Baker and the Candlestick maker, all the little villages we drive through have nothing.
There aren't any potholes in my area in England, and when a couple developed last winter they were fixed pretty quickly.
Clearly an uneven situation since this is not the case in many places.
I still think we're looking at a 2010 scenario and the question is, can Labour get over the line or will they have to govern with the consent of another party or parties?
Could be, but I'm in the 'landslide' camp myself. Not a 97 but still a big 2 digit Labour majority.
This is the current prediction on Electoral calculus:
Lab 475, Con 100.
I suspect this is rather optimistic, but the Con approach of Sunak salvaging something from the wreckage of the Trussterf**k is simply not working. Sunak has had his honeymoon and it only gets worse for them from here.
I still think we're looking at a 2010 scenario and the question is, can Labour get over the line or will they have to govern with the consent of another party or parties?
Could be, but I'm in the 'landslide' camp myself. Not a 97 but still a big 2 digit Labour majority.
From the starting point of 2019 that isn't going to happen. I can predict with confidence anything from a 20 or so Tory majority to a Labour majority of around 2. In between may be most likely, but there isn't a Labour landslide in the offing.
I can never work out if you're being extremely dry or pessimistic
I still think we're looking at a 2010 scenario and the question is, can Labour get over the line or will they have to govern with the consent of another party or parties?
Could be, but I'm in the 'landslide' camp myself. Not a 97 but still a big 2 digit Labour majority.
From the starting point of 2019 that isn't going to happen. I can predict with confidence anything from a 20 or so Tory majority to a Labour majority of around 2. In between may be most likely, but there isn't a Labour landslide in the offing.
I can never work out if you're being extremely dry or pessimistic
I still think we're looking at a 2010 scenario and the question is, can Labour get over the line or will they have to govern with the consent of another party or parties?
I really don't think so.
What is the way back for a divided government, led by a wet behind the ears management consultant that is heading for 0/5 on its own chosen pledges?
On paper Sunak will be able to claim all five of his pledges. Most were vague platitudes anyway. Inflation is out of his hands but it is falling fast in the Eurozone, so it will here.
Will anyone feel any better from Sunak's "success"? No.
He will do better at the GE because his "it may be bad now, but it will be worse under Labour" will gain enough traction by election time. That is already the narrative promoted by anxious Conservatives on PB. Small Conservative majority.
Sunak will have dropped the pledges completely before we get to year end as they will have failed all 5 of them. Whats more, angry Tory MPs will claim that interviewers harping on about the 5 "people's priorities" are following a political bubble story rather than focusing on the people's priorities - which will be whatever guff they are trying to grift next time.
You can't campaign on "STOP THE BOATS" and claim success as record numbers pour across the channel. The others are well beyond even an attempt to claim achievement as well.
He can claim all five and the client journalists will back him up.
BigG. has this morning made the compelling case that Starmer is a worse PM than Sunak on the evidence he has to hand, so I can't see the Daily Mail deviating from that line.
I'm not sure that the Heil and GBeebies insisting the sky actually is green actually, and then HYUFD etc producing a poll showing that 27.9% actually of the Tory core vote actually agrees the sky is green actually will make a difference.
The reason the Tory vote continues to collapse is that normal punters have seen that the spin is a lie. They know the economy is in a mess and their community is decaying because they are living and experiencing it.
Sunak can claim that he has slain inflation and fixed the NHS and stopped the boats. But he won't have done, people will see and feel and experience the truth, and Boris! has reinforced the truth that the Tories lie and lie and lie.
I know that @Heathener winds some of the PB snowflakes up, but she is right - the game is up.
Not snowflakes, just very boring. There are many more interesting left-wing posters (far more so than she is) who manage to be insightful must-reads, who are also great to debate with.
But, just dumping the same agreed 'lines to take' on here at 6am every morning demeans the site and insults our intelligence.
Don't encourage her just because she's on 'your side'.
I disagree with @Heathener 's forecast, way too optimistic, but she is perfectly entitled to post her view.
No one complains when you don the rah rah skirt and twirl the baton in anger for the Tories.
Polly resigns from the SKS Fans bunch as NEC starts going after soft left. Burnham and Khan next?
Polly Toynbee @pollytoynbee Of course Labour can't possibly eject Neal Lawson of Compass for a 2-year-old tweet of great good sense. Even to threaten risks stirring a mighty rebellion - and not by the usual suspects. The majority of the members voted for proportional representation! Sack the lot?
Libraries burnt, animals released from zoos, Jewish memorials desecrated.
Even a video of someone with an AK-47.
It looks possibly a bit worse than 2005, although less long so far, so I think Macron will probably have to declare that state of emergency that he wanted not to.
BBC journalists being threatened is awful.
I think it effectively shows our cultural alignment to the USA.
This is essentially a French George Floyd. If it were mass American rioting over a police shooting the BBC would be all over it and there'd be copycat protests here inside 72 hours.
Because it's France we look, shrug and make jokes about the French, and carry on.
Were there riots here after the George Floyd murder?
AfaIcs the BBC are currently frotting themselves into a seizure over the French riots.
There were protests, notably one in Bristol as I recall.
Exactly. People exaggerate, of course, its the Internet, but protests and stories and connection with the Floyd stories was much more, wall to wall at times. The French stuff is 'merely' a news story. There's not going to be any lingering reflections on what it means for here, and far less direct equating of issues. The idea that is bit so is very misplaced.
Polly Toynbee @pollytoynbee Of course Labour can't possibly eject Neal Lawson of Compass for a 2-year-old tweet of great good sense. Even to threaten risks stirring a mighty rebellion - and not by the usual suspects. The majority of the members voted for proportional representation! Sack the lot?
Seen this online. From what I can see, he was encouraging people to vote tactically for the Lib Dems or the Greens to unseat a Tory Labour councillor.
It is indeed starting to look grim. The lead is enormous and time is running out. A very one sided result is looking increasingly inevitable and it is not obvious what can be done to stop it.
Libraries burnt, animals released from zoos, Jewish memorials desecrated.
Even a video of someone with an AK-47.
It looks possibly a bit worse than 2005, although less long so far, so I think Macron will probably have to declare that state of emergency that he wanted not to.
BBC journalists being threatened is awful.
I think it effectively shows our cultural alignment to the USA.
This is essentially a French George Floyd. If it were mass American rioting over a police shooting the BBC would be all over it and there'd be copycat protests here inside 72 hours.
Because it's France we look, shrug and make jokes about the French, and carry on.
There was a review of a book in the Guardian the other day which looks interesting and frankly about time it was written about. The funny thing was that the greatest beneficiaries of reading the book would be the Guardian (and the BBC) and realising that the US race issues and “solutions” are vastly different to the UK and we need to stop conflating and importing.
Certainly there is a British Cultural cringe to the USA as the most powerful anglophone nation culturally, politically and militarily. Our mutant offspring has long overshadowed us.
The American experience of slavery as an essential part of its domestic economy was markedly different to ours of arms length slavery as part of an overseas empire, and indeed of a racialised empire in other lands, notably the Sub-continent.
Each country has its own history, and while there are parallels, there are major differences too. France for example officially ignores race, deliberately not recording data on ethnicity and religion in official statistics. To a degree this is a laudable goal of everyone being equal and equally French, but it does make it difficult to address the racial discrimination of the banlieues.
The police are, fairly openly, racist against poor non-white people.
The French approach to minorities has been, in effect, to segregate them into housing estates. Integration is very low - those who think that the U.K. is run by stale & pale should look at elite in France.
Indeed. In order to tackle racial and other injustices you have to acknowledge their existence. French policy is not to do so.
Focusing on minute issues and not acknowledging successes appears to be the current US approach, which I think is counter productive, but ignoring entirely might doubt good in theory but is unhelpful.
I still think we're looking at a 2010 scenario and the question is, can Labour get over the line or will they have to govern with the consent of another party or parties?
I really don't think so.
What is the way back for a divided government, led by a wet behind the ears management consultant that is heading for 0/5 on its own chosen pledges?
On paper Sunak will be able to claim all five of his pledges. Most were vague platitudes anyway. Inflation is out of his hands but it is falling fast in the Eurozone, so it will here.
Will anyone feel any better from Sunak's "success"? No.
He will do better at the GE because his "it may be bad now, but it will be worse under Labour" will gain enough traction by election time. That is already the narrative promoted by anxious Conservatives on PB. Small Conservative majority.
Sunak will have dropped the pledges completely before we get to year end as they will have failed all 5 of them. Whats more, angry Tory MPs will claim that interviewers harping on about the 5 "people's priorities" are following a political bubble story rather than focusing on the people's priorities - which will be whatever guff they are trying to grift next time.
You can't campaign on "STOP THE BOATS" and claim success as record numbers pour across the channel. The others are well beyond even an attempt to claim achievement as well.
He can claim all five and the client journalists will back him up.
BigG. has this morning made the compelling case that Starmer is a worse PM than Sunak on the evidence he has to hand, so I can't see the Daily Mail deviating from that line.
I'm not sure that the Heil and GBeebies insisting the sky actually is green actually, and then HYUFD etc producing a poll showing that 27.9% actually of the Tory core vote actually agrees the sky is green actually will make a difference.
The reason the Tory vote continues to collapse is that normal punters have seen that the spin is a lie. They know the economy is in a mess and their community is decaying because they are living and experiencing it.
Sunak can claim that he has slain inflation and fixed the NHS and stopped the boats. But he won't have done, people will see and feel and experience the truth, and Boris! has reinforced the truth that the Tories lie and lie and lie.
I know that @Heathener winds some of the PB snowflakes up, but she is right - the game is up.
Not snowflakes, just very boring. There are many more interesting left-wing posters (far more so than she is) who manage to be insightful must-reads, who are also great to debate with.
But, just dumping the same agreed 'lines to take' on here at 6am every morning demeans the site and insults our intelligence.
Don't encourage her just because she's on 'your side'.
I disagree with @Heathener 's forecast, way too optimistic, but she is perfectly entitled to post her view.
No one complains when you don the rah rah skirt and twirl the baton in anger for the Tories.
But, I never do that and I certainly don't do it like you can set your clock by it at 6am every day.
FWIW, I think we're currently on course for a result worse than 1997, followed by a quite left-wing radical government that will result in a large swingback to the Tories 4-5 years later, but without them regaining office.
I still think we're looking at a 2010 scenario and the question is, can Labour get over the line or will they have to govern with the consent of another party or parties?
I really don't think so.
What is the way back for a divided government, led by a wet behind the ears management consultant that is heading for 0/5 on its own chosen pledges?
On paper Sunak will be able to claim all five of his pledges. Most were vague platitudes anyway. Inflation is out of his hands but it is falling fast in the Eurozone, so it will here.
Will anyone feel any better from Sunak's "success"? No.
He will do better at the GE because his "it may be bad now, but it will be worse under Labour" will gain enough traction by election time. That is already the narrative promoted by anxious Conservatives on PB. Small Conservative majority.
Sunak will have dropped the pledges completely before we get to year end as they will have failed all 5 of them. Whats more, angry Tory MPs will claim that interviewers harping on about the 5 "people's priorities" are following a political bubble story rather than focusing on the people's priorities - which will be whatever guff they are trying to grift next time.
You can't campaign on "STOP THE BOATS" and claim success as record numbers pour across the channel. The others are well beyond even an attempt to claim achievement as well.
He can claim all five and the client journalists will back him up.
BigG. has this morning made the compelling case that Starmer is a worse PM than Sunak on the evidence he has to hand, so I can't see the Daily Mail deviating from that line.
I'm not sure that the Heil and GBeebies insisting the sky actually is green actually, and then HYUFD etc producing a poll showing that 27.9% actually of the Tory core vote actually agrees the sky is green actually will make a difference.
The reason the Tory vote continues to collapse is that normal punters have seen that the spin is a lie. They know the economy is in a mess and their community is decaying because they are living and experiencing it.
Sunak can claim that he has slain inflation and fixed the NHS and stopped the boats. But he won't have done, people will see and feel and experience the truth, and Boris! has reinforced the truth that the Tories lie and lie and lie.
I know that @Heathener winds some of the PB snowflakes up, but she is right - the game is up.
Not snowflakes, just very boring. There are many more interesting left-wing posters (far more so than she is) who manage to be insightful must-reads, who are also great to debate with.
But, just dumping the same agreed 'lines to take' on here at 6am every morning demeans the site and insults our intelligence.
Don't encourage her just because she's on 'your side'.
I disagree with @Heathener 's forecast, way too optimistic, but she is perfectly entitled to post her view.
No one complains when you don the rah rah skirt and twirl the baton in anger for the Tories.
But, I never do that and I certainly don't do it like you can set your clock by it at 6am every day.
FWIW, I think we're currently on course for a result worse than 1997, followed by a quite left-wing radical government that will result in a large swingback to the Tories 4-5 years later, but without them regaining office.
Just ignore her posts. Some of us read them, are momentarily cheered, and then reality sets in.
I still think we're looking at a 2010 scenario and the question is, can Labour get over the line or will they have to govern with the consent of another party or parties?
Could be, but I'm in the 'landslide' camp myself. Not a 97 but still a big 2 digit Labour majority.
Why does it matter?
They both want to keep the poor in poverty, the disabled shamed, those seeking Asylum scapegoated, the Water Industry in private shit show land, the NHS privatised the UK a subsiduary of US World policeforce, protests banned, opponents expelled, fossil fuels extracted, strikers defeated and Billionaire Paymasters satisfied
Sunak should go for May, the longer he clings on, the worse it will be.
I just cannot see a route to recovery for the Conservatives. Sunak might be a reasonable PM in good times, but he's leading a party beset by infighting, he is having to deal with several significant issues facing the country, and he is having to constantly firefight issues rather than project a positive future image for the country.
Few of these issues are Sunak's direct fault, but he is having to deal with them. The only advantages he has are 1) he is PM, and 2) he has a significant majority, albeit one that is rapidly reducing, like Major's from '92.
This government is tired, fractious and out of ideas. I'm not a fan of Starmer, and think he'll be a poor PM, but Labour need the opportunity to bring their own brand of chaos to the country.
That the PM has a large majority, but appears to be doing nothing with it, is a significant part of the problem.
The impression given, watching from afar, is that there’s a lot he could be doing, but is choosing not to.
He's too busy firefighting. Part of the issues he's firefighting are in the country (e.g. strikes, energy prices), but a lot of them are within his own party. Concentrating, oddly enough, on the Brexiteers. Who'd have thought that bunch of ner-do-wells would harm yet another Conservative PM?
The more time you spend firefighting, the less time you have to set the agenda.
When the Conservatives lose the next GE, Sunak should only take a teeny part of the blame. The majority should be foisted in those who defenestrated May and gave us Boris.
They're an absolute shower of talentless fuckwits who care f-all about the country. Shits.
I still think we're looking at a 2010 scenario and the question is, can Labour get over the line or will they have to govern with the consent of another party or parties?
Could be, but I'm in the 'landslide' camp myself. Not a 97 but still a big 2 digit Labour majority.
Why does it matter?
They both want to keep the poor in poverty, the disabled shamed, those seeking Asylum scapegoated, the Water Industry in private shit show land, the NHS privatised the UK a subsiduary of US World policeforce, protests banned, opponents expelled, fossil fuels extracted, strikers defeated and Billionaire Paymasters satisfied
I still think we're looking at a 2010 scenario and the question is, can Labour get over the line or will they have to govern with the consent of another party or parties?
Could be, but I'm in the 'landslide' camp myself. Not a 97 but still a big 2 digit Labour majority.
Why does it matter?
They both want to keep the poor in poverty, the disabled shamed, those seeking Asylum scapegoated, the Water Industry in private shit show land, the NHS privatised the UK a subsiduary of US World policeforce, protests banned, opponents expelled, fossil fuels extracted, strikers defeated and Billionaire Paymasters satisfied
I could go on
The problem is that we are skint, and British folk really aren't that keen on freedom.
Did you just buy the starter pack, or are you all in?
All in. Started on 0.5. Insanely expensive*
I briefly felt a little nauseous yesterday - day 2 - but nowt else. Fine otherwise
Today I got the first "positive" effects. My appetite has simple dropped away. You stop thinking about food and you feel full very quickly when you do eat. Just has Coquille St Jacques and a green salad, first and only meal of the day. Feel sated
*will be worth it, alone, if it reduces my crazily spendy wine habit
I had to Google it. Do you need it or are you taking it recreationally? I picture you as some rakishly rake thin.
I'm a little chunky. Could easily lose 10-12 pounds I put on in lockdown and just won't sod off. But I'm not obese and I don't really need it - so it is vanity, but it is also curiosity
These drugs could be revolutionary if they work. The NHS could save tens of billions if we can abolish severe overwight and obesity with mere pills and jabs (which will come down in price sharply and shortly)
That's insane. You would save a fortune and lose weight just by cutting down on the booze and easing back on all the gourmet nosh. Most obese people are obese because the only food they can afford or can be bothered to cook is over processed dogshite, full of sweeteners and edible chemicals that don't sate you and make you want more. You're a fat knacker because you've got more money than sense and never say no. For some reason, you're one of my favourite posters on here, but have a tendency towards being a bell end (as do we all!)
It is indeed starting to look grim. The lead is enormous and time is running out. A very one sided result is looking increasingly inevitable and it is not obvious what can be done to stop it.
I still think we're looking at a 2010 scenario and the question is, can Labour get over the line or will they have to govern with the consent of another party or parties?
I really don't think so.
What is the way back for a divided government, led by a wet behind the ears management consultant that is heading for 0/5 on its own chosen pledges?
On paper Sunak will be able to claim all five of his pledges. Most were vague platitudes anyway. Inflation is out of his hands but it is falling fast in the Eurozone, so it will here.
Will anyone feel any better from Sunak's "success"? No.
He will do better at the GE because his "it may be bad now, but it will be worse under Labour" will gain enough traction by election time. That is already the narrative promoted by anxious Conservatives on PB. Small Conservative majority.
Sunak will have dropped the pledges completely before we get to year end as they will have failed all 5 of them. Whats more, angry Tory MPs will claim that interviewers harping on about the 5 "people's priorities" are following a political bubble story rather than focusing on the people's priorities - which will be whatever guff they are trying to grift next time.
You can't campaign on "STOP THE BOATS" and claim success as record numbers pour across the channel. The others are well beyond even an attempt to claim achievement as well.
He can claim all five and the client journalists will back him up.
BigG. has this morning made the compelling case that Starmer is a worse PM than Sunak on the evidence he has to hand, so I can't see the Daily Mail deviating from that line.
I'm not sure that the Heil and GBeebies insisting the sky actually is green actually, and then HYUFD etc producing a poll showing that 27.9% actually of the Tory core vote actually agrees the sky is green actually will make a difference.
The reason the Tory vote continues to collapse is that normal punters have seen that the spin is a lie. They know the economy is in a mess and their community is decaying because they are living and experiencing it.
Sunak can claim that he has slain inflation and fixed the NHS and stopped the boats. But he won't have done, people will see and feel and experience the truth, and Boris! has reinforced the truth that the Tories lie and lie and lie.
I know that @Heathener winds some of the PB snowflakes up, but she is right - the game is up.
Not snowflakes, just very boring. There are many more interesting left-wing posters (far more so than she is) who manage to be insightful must-reads, who are also great to debate with.
But, just dumping the same agreed 'lines to take' on here at 6am every morning demeans the site and insults our intelligence.
Don't encourage her just because she's on 'your side'.
I disagree with @Heathener 's forecast, way too optimistic, but she is perfectly entitled to post her view.
No one complains when you don the rah rah skirt and twirl the baton in anger for the Tories.
But, I never do that and I certainly don't do it like you can set your clock by it at 6am every day.
FWIW, I think we're currently on course for a result worse than 1997, followed by a quite left-wing radical government that will result in a large swingback to the Tories 4-5 years later, but without them regaining office.
Don’t see why Starmer would go that way.
He is, fairly obviously, wanting to do New Labour Part Deux, minus Iraq.
There are quite a few people in Labour who believe that, without Iraq, they would have had a much longer run.
I still think we're looking at a 2010 scenario and the question is, can Labour get over the line or will they have to govern with the consent of another party or parties?
Could be, but I'm in the 'landslide' camp myself. Not a 97 but still a big 2 digit Labour majority.
Why does it matter?
They both want to keep the poor in poverty, the disabled shamed, those seeking Asylum scapegoated, the Water Industry in private shit show land, the NHS privatised the UK a subsiduary of US World policeforce, protests banned, opponents expelled, fossil fuels extracted, strikers defeated and Billionaire Paymasters satisfied
Did you just buy the starter pack, or are you all in?
All in. Started on 0.5. Insanely expensive*
I briefly felt a little nauseous yesterday - day 2 - but nowt else. Fine otherwise
Today I got the first "positive" effects. My appetite has simple dropped away. You stop thinking about food and you feel full very quickly when you do eat. Just has Coquille St Jacques and a green salad, first and only meal of the day. Feel sated
*will be worth it, alone, if it reduces my crazily spendy wine habit
I had to Google it. Do you need it or are you taking it recreationally? I picture you as some rakishly rake thin.
I'm a little chunky. Could easily lose 10-12 pounds I put on in lockdown and just won't sod off. But I'm not obese and I don't really need it - so it is vanity, but it is also curiosity
These drugs could be revolutionary if they work. The NHS could save tens of billions if we can abolish severe overwight and obesity with mere pills and jabs (which will come down in price sharply and shortly)
That's insane. You would save a fortune and lose weight just by cutting down on the booze and easing back on all the gourmet nosh. Most obese people are obese because the only food they can afford or can be bothered to cook is over processed dogshite, full of sweeteners and edible chemicals that don't sate you and make you want more. You're a fat knacker because you've got more money than sense and never say no. For some reason, you're one of my favourite posters on here, but have a tendency towards being a bell end (as do we all!)
"Tendency towards being a bell end" - yes - the inscription on Leon's headstone, surely.
I still think we're looking at a 2010 scenario and the question is, can Labour get over the line or will they have to govern with the consent of another party or parties?
Could be, but I'm in the 'landslide' camp myself. Not a 97 but still a big 2 digit Labour majority.
Why does it matter?
They both want to keep the poor in poverty, the disabled shamed, those seeking Asylum scapegoated, the Water Industry in private shit show land, the NHS privatised the UK a subsiduary of US World policeforce, protests banned, opponents expelled, fossil fuels extracted, strikers defeated and Billionaire Paymasters satisfied
I could go on
The problem is that we are skint, and British folk really aren't that keen on freedom.
I don't like it any more than you.
Taxes for those that arent skint and have raked it in for the past 13 years?
I still think we're looking at a 2010 scenario and the question is, can Labour get over the line or will they have to govern with the consent of another party or parties?
Could be, but I'm in the 'landslide' camp myself. Not a 97 but still a big 2 digit Labour majority.
Why does it matter?
They both want to keep the poor in poverty, the disabled shamed, those seeking Asylum scapegoated, the Water Industry in private shit show land, the NHS privatised the UK a subsiduary of US World policeforce, protests banned, opponents expelled, fossil fuels extracted, strikers defeated and Billionaire Paymasters satisfied
I could go on
Look, the reason why some of us can't take your contributions seriously is because, even though much of this is true, Starmer and Labour will still be a big improvement on Sunak and the Conservatives.
I still think we're looking at a 2010 scenario and the question is, can Labour get over the line or will they have to govern with the consent of another party or parties?
Could be, but I'm in the 'landslide' camp myself. Not a 97 but still a big 2 digit Labour majority.
From the starting point of 2019 that isn't going to happen. I can predict with confidence anything from a 20 or so Tory majority to a Labour majority of around 2. In between may be most likely, but there isn't a Labour landslide in the offing.
I think it is a mistake to take 2019 as your baseline.
I have a comfortable LP majority but perhaps not a landslide: 20 - 60 maj.
Sunak's doing the best he can but the tide is against him. Starmer, chiefly, has done a great job constructing the anti-conservative narrative that prevails.
LP will win big for two key reasons. Firstly, CP voters will not, in numbers, switch but will stay at home; secondly, Scotland.
I still think we're looking at a 2010 scenario and the question is, can Labour get over the line or will they have to govern with the consent of another party or parties?
Could be, but I'm in the 'landslide' camp myself. Not a 97 but still a big 2 digit Labour majority.
Why does it matter?
They both want to keep the poor in poverty, the disabled shamed, those seeking Asylum scapegoated, the Water Industry in private shit show land, the NHS privatised the UK a subsiduary of US World policeforce, protests banned, opponents expelled, fossil fuels extracted, strikers defeated and Billionaire Paymasters satisfied
I could go on
Look, the reason why some of us can't take your contributions seriously is because, even though much of this is true, Starmer and Labour will still be a big improvement on Sunak and the Conservatives. But you spend all your energy attacking the former.
It's like your main concern is who runs Labour rather than who runs the country. It's the worst kind of navel gazing.
The worst kind of reaction is to vote for a Party with a red rosette that has identical if not worse policies than the current mob
Perhaps you can list your reasons and they're not Tories doesnt count because they are
Polly Toynbee @pollytoynbee Of course Labour can't possibly eject Neal Lawson of Compass for a 2-year-old tweet of great good sense. Even to threaten risks stirring a mighty rebellion - and not by the usual suspects. The majority of the members voted for proportional representation! Sack the lot?
Seen this online. From what I can see, he was encouraging people to vote tactically for the Lib Dems or the Greens to unseat a Tory Labour councillor.
Open and shut case if that's correct. I'm against constant purges for minor offences but actually trying to unseat a Labour councillor is obviously incompatible with being a party member.
The i headline story is interesting - Government considering a referendum of scrapping the ECHR, as a way of creating a Brexit 2 coalition.
Did you just buy the starter pack, or are you all in?
All in. Started on 0.5. Insanely expensive*
I briefly felt a little nauseous yesterday - day 2 - but nowt else. Fine otherwise
Today I got the first "positive" effects. My appetite has simple dropped away. You stop thinking about food and you feel full very quickly when you do eat. Just has Coquille St Jacques and a green salad, first and only meal of the day. Feel sated
*will be worth it, alone, if it reduces my crazily spendy wine habit
I had to Google it. Do you need it or are you taking it recreationally? I picture you as some rakishly rake thin.
I'm a little chunky. Could easily lose 10-12 pounds I put on in lockdown and just won't sod off. But I'm not obese and I don't really need it - so it is vanity, but it is also curiosity
These drugs could be revolutionary if they work. The NHS could save tens of billions if we can abolish severe overwight and obesity with mere pills and jabs (which will come down in price sharply and shortly)
That's insane. You would save a fortune and lose weight just by cutting down on the booze and easing back on all the gourmet nosh. Most obese people are obese because the only food they can afford or can be bothered to cook is over processed dogshite, full of sweeteners and edible chemicals that don't sate you and make you want more. You're a fat knacker because you've got more money than sense and never say no. For some reason, you're one of my favourite posters on here, but have a tendency towards being a bell end (as do we all!)
I'm not referring to Leon but the number of overweight people I see who say they want to lose weight yet indulge in in-between crappy snacks is very noticeable. There are snacks (or meal replacements) which are healthy and fill you up. My weight hardly changes (because I never let it) but if I want to lose a bit I replace a meal with a banana and large tablespoon of quality peanut butter (e.g. Manilife). Fills you up for ages.
I still think we're looking at a 2010 scenario and the question is, can Labour get over the line or will they have to govern with the consent of another party or parties?
Could be, but I'm in the 'landslide' camp myself. Not a 97 but still a big 2 digit Labour majority.
Why does it matter?
They both want to keep the poor in poverty, the disabled shamed, those seeking Asylum scapegoated, the Water Industry in private shit show land, the NHS privatised the UK a subsiduary of US World policeforce, protests banned, opponents expelled, fossil fuels extracted, strikers defeated and Billionaire Paymasters satisfied
I could go on
Look, the reason why some of us can't take your contributions seriously is because, even though much of this is true, Starmer and Labour will still be a big improvement on Sunak and the Conservatives. But you spend all your energy attacking the former.
It's like your main concern is who runs Labour rather than who runs the country. It's the worst kind of navel gazing.
Labour is nothing of it isn’t a pursuit of Socialist Purity, unsullied by government. Or excessive popularity.
I still think we're looking at a 2010 scenario and the question is, can Labour get over the line or will they have to govern with the consent of another party or parties?
Could be, but I'm in the 'landslide' camp myself. Not a 97 but still a big 2 digit Labour majority.
Why does it matter?
They both want to keep the poor in poverty, the disabled shamed, those seeking Asylum scapegoated, the Water Industry in private shit show land, the NHS privatised the UK a subsiduary of US World policeforce, protests banned, opponents expelled, fossil fuels extracted, strikers defeated and Billionaire Paymasters satisfied
I could go on
You do!
2017/2019 VI - Mexican Pete
Not Labour/ Not Labour
"How dare you do the same in 2024 BJO?"
You don't know how I voted in 2017/19. If it was for Labour it was out of disdain for the Brexit Conservatives and not an endorsement of the hopeless Corbyn.
I still think we're looking at a 2010 scenario and the question is, can Labour get over the line or will they have to govern with the consent of another party or parties?
Could be, but I'm in the 'landslide' camp myself. Not a 97 but still a big 2 digit Labour majority.
Why does it matter?
They both want to keep the poor in poverty, the disabled shamed, those seeking Asylum scapegoated, the Water Industry in private shit show land, the NHS privatised the UK a subsiduary of US World policeforce, protests banned, opponents expelled, fossil fuels extracted, strikers defeated and Billionaire Paymasters satisfied
I could go on
Look, the reason why some of us can't take your contributions seriously is because, even though much of this is true, Starmer and Labour will still be a big improvement on Sunak and the Conservatives. But you spend all your energy attacking the former.
It's like your main concern is who runs Labour rather than who runs the country. It's the worst kind of navel gazing.
Labour is nothing of it isn’t a pursuit of Socialist Purity, unsullied by government. Or excessive popularity.
Polly resigns from the SKS Fans bunch as NEC starts going after soft left. Burnham and Khan next?
Polly Toynbee @pollytoynbee Of course Labour can't possibly eject Neal Lawson of Compass for a 2-year-old tweet of great good sense. Even to threaten risks stirring a mighty rebellion - and not by the usual suspects. The majority of the members voted for proportional representation! Sack the lot?
Lawson's mates are being performatively stupid here because he's thrown a tantrum that rules apply to him. Firstly he's not been expelled - he's been asked to account for an allegation that could lead to expulsion. Secondly, said allegation is that he supported a Green and Lib Dem effort to oust Labour from a council. Which isn't breaking some obscure rule - it's one of the more well-known and explicit ones, that anyone who supports a rival candidate against a Labour one faces expulsion. Heck, it's a major reason lots of MPs and members who otherwise would have remained Labour members to 'stay and fight' in Labour - and supported local councillors and MPs while denouncing the leadership, left the party in the Corbyn era, as they realised they could not in all good conscience campaign to make someone they thought appalling and dangerous PM, so would have faced expulsion if that extended to supporting non-Labour candidates.
Polly Toynbee @pollytoynbee Of course Labour can't possibly eject Neal Lawson of Compass for a 2-year-old tweet of great good sense. Even to threaten risks stirring a mighty rebellion - and not by the usual suspects. The majority of the members voted for proportional representation! Sack the lot?
Seen this online. From what I can see, he was encouraging people to vote tactically for the Lib Dems or the Greens to unseat a Tory Labour councillor.
Open and shut case if that's correct. I'm against constant purges for minor offences but actually trying to unseat a Labour councillor is obviously incompatible with being a party member.
The i headline story is interesting - Government considering a referendum of scrapping the ECHR, as a way of creating a Brexit 2 coalition.
Apart from Angela Smith Mike Gapes Luciana Berger and a whole gang of Centrist who went even further and stood against Labour and are welcomed back
If you cant see its a purely factional move by Luke Akehurst you are blind
In light of BJO's obsession, time to revisit this classic comment from February 2017:
I feel extremely sorry for the voters of Stoke on Trent Central. They are being asked to vote for a party led by a serial fanatsist and liar who appears to be unaware of where he was or what he was doing at key times, who are trying to appeal to the northern working class despite being the party of wealthy Londoners, who appear to be searching for a new role in the aftermath of Brexit, and whose leader is only in place because of a massive cock-up during the brief and inglorious tenure of some woman nobody had ever heard of leading to a massive rise in sexism and retreat to a badly defined and unworkable emotional comfort zone in the party.
And if that wasn't bad enough, the alternative is Paul Nuttall!
Have no fear, your view of Starmer as a ruthless, cynical, sanctimonious, earnest, preachy, puritanical yet lying shape-shifter has some albeit niche support. He was the Tories' worst nightmare though.
Would the LP be where it is now with Long-Bailey? I doubt it.
Look, the reason why some of us can't take your contributions seriously is because, even though much of this is true, Starmer and Labour will still be a big improvement on Sunak and the Conservatives. But you spend all your energy attacking the former.
It's like your main concern is who runs Labour rather than who runs the country. It's the worst kind of navel gazing.
The worst kind of reaction is to vote for a Party with a red rosette that has identical if not worse policies than the current mob
Perhaps you can list your reasons and they're not Tories doesnt count because they are
To me the main reason would be because all political parties are influenced and hold positions determined partly by the outer wings of their party. A chunk of what Sunak does will be attempts to take popular centrist positions, a chunk will be his own ideology, and a chunk is placating the right fringe of his party. Conversely Labour, even if the headline policies are aiming at the centrist vote-winning areas, is still influenced by their fringes, and so on average the same policy implemented by Labour is apt to lean more to a left-ish spin on it and some of the rougher edges taken off it from the perspective of the left of the party. That means that (from my pov) it's better to have a Labour leader pushing it through than a Tory. And some policies (Rwanda, anybody?) that are there as red meat for the party base would never even come up for consideration by the other lot, because they wouldn't serve that purpose.
(Personally I'm LD and in a Lab/LD seat so this is academic for me.)
Polly Toynbee @pollytoynbee Of course Labour can't possibly eject Neal Lawson of Compass for a 2-year-old tweet of great good sense. Even to threaten risks stirring a mighty rebellion - and not by the usual suspects. The majority of the members voted for proportional representation! Sack the lot?
Seen this online. From what I can see, he was encouraging people to vote tactically for the Lib Dems or the Greens to unseat a Tory Labour councillor.
Open and shut case if that's correct. I'm against constant purges for minor offences but actually trying to unseat a Labour councillor is obviously incompatible with being a party member.
The i headline story is interesting - Government considering a referendum of scrapping the ECHR, as a way of creating a Brexit 2 coalition.
What else have they got, but an uncomprehending Cargo Cult version of Brexit 2?
(I say uncomprehending Cargo Cult because Brexit 1 worked as a magic screen that everyone could project their hopes onto, whereas ECHR withdrawal would be about permitting one thing which is wanted by some and opposed by others.)
Even if it's not party policy, I'm sure some junior ministers will put it on their constituency leaflets.
Polly Toynbee @pollytoynbee Of course Labour can't possibly eject Neal Lawson of Compass for a 2-year-old tweet of great good sense. Even to threaten risks stirring a mighty rebellion - and not by the usual suspects. The majority of the members voted for proportional representation! Sack the lot?
Seen this online. From what I can see, he was encouraging people to vote tactically for the Lib Dems or the Greens to unseat a Tory Labour councillor.
Open and shut case if that's correct. I'm against constant purges for minor offences but actually trying to unseat a Labour councillor is obviously incompatible with being a party member.
The i headline story is interesting - Government considering a referendum of scrapping the ECHR, as a way of creating a Brexit 2 coalition.
That may bring some of the RedWall back on board but the BlueWall goes yellow. Unless it is just a pre-GE ruse to salt the earth for an inbound government.
Did you just buy the starter pack, or are you all in?
All in. Started on 0.5. Insanely expensive*
I briefly felt a little nauseous yesterday - day 2 - but nowt else. Fine otherwise
Today I got the first "positive" effects. My appetite has simple dropped away. You stop thinking about food and you feel full very quickly when you do eat. Just has Coquille St Jacques and a green salad, first and only meal of the day. Feel sated
*will be worth it, alone, if it reduces my crazily spendy wine habit
I had to Google it. Do you need it or are you taking it recreationally? I picture you as some rakishly rake thin.
I'm a little chunky. Could easily lose 10-12 pounds I put on in lockdown and just won't sod off. But I'm not obese and I don't really need it - so it is vanity, but it is also curiosity
These drugs could be revolutionary if they work. The NHS could save tens of billions if we can abolish severe overwight and obesity with mere pills and jabs (which will come down in price sharply and shortly)
That's insane. You would save a fortune and lose weight just by cutting down on the booze and easing back on all the gourmet nosh. Most obese people are obese because the only food they can afford or can be bothered to cook is over processed dogshite, full of sweeteners and edible chemicals that don't sate you and make you want more. You're a fat knacker because you've got more money than sense and never say no. For some reason, you're one of my favourite posters on here, but have a tendency towards being a bell end (as do we all!)
I've liked but reluctantly because I have exactly the same issue as @Leon . I don't eat junk food at all, but I eat and drink an awful lot and love it. It does mean when I cut back the weight drops off but I need motivation to do so which is usually events that require a lower weight.
Polly resigns from the SKS Fans bunch as NEC starts going after soft left. Burnham and Khan next?
Polly Toynbee @pollytoynbee Of course Labour can't possibly eject Neal Lawson of Compass for a 2-year-old tweet of great good sense. Even to threaten risks stirring a mighty rebellion - and not by the usual suspects. The majority of the members voted for proportional representation! Sack the lot?
Lawson's mates are being performatively stupid here because he's thrown a tantrum that rules apply to him. Firstly he's not been expelled - he's been asked to account for an allegation that could lead to expulsion. Secondly, said allegation is that he supported a Green and Lib Dem effort to oust Labour from a council. Which isn't breaking some obscure rule - it's one of the more well-known and explicit ones, that anyone who supports a rival candidate against a Labour one faces expulsion. Heck, it's a major reason lots of MPs and members who otherwise would have remained Labour members to 'stay and fight' in Labour - and supported local councillors and MPs while denouncing the leadership, left the party in the Corbyn era, as they realised they could not in all good conscience campaign to make someone they thought appalling and dangerous PM, so would have faced expulsion if that extended to supporting non-Labour candidates.
I think the rule has been changed it now reads "anyone who supports a rival candidate against a Labour one faces expulsion unless they are an SKS fan in which case they will be welcomed back even if they not only supported but stood against Labour"
Polly resigns from the SKS Fans bunch as NEC starts going after soft left. Burnham and Khan next?
Polly Toynbee @pollytoynbee Of course Labour can't possibly eject Neal Lawson of Compass for a 2-year-old tweet of great good sense. Even to threaten risks stirring a mighty rebellion - and not by the usual suspects. The majority of the members voted for proportional representation! Sack the lot?
Lawson's mates are being performatively stupid here because he's thrown a tantrum that rules apply to him. Firstly he's not been expelled - he's been asked to account for an allegation that could lead to expulsion. Secondly, said allegation is that he supported a Green and Lib Dem effort to oust Labour from a council. Which isn't breaking some obscure rule - it's one of the more well-known and explicit ones, that anyone who supports a rival candidate against a Labour one faces expulsion. Heck, it's a major reason lots of MPs and members who otherwise would have remained Labour members to 'stay and fight' in Labour - and supported local councillors and MPs while denouncing the leadership, left the party in the Corbyn era, as they realised they could not in all good conscience campaign to make someone they thought appalling and dangerous PM, so would have faced expulsion if that extended to supporting non-Labour candidates.
Did you just buy the starter pack, or are you all in?
All in. Started on 0.5. Insanely expensive*
I briefly felt a little nauseous yesterday - day 2 - but nowt else. Fine otherwise
Today I got the first "positive" effects. My appetite has simple dropped away. You stop thinking about food and you feel full very quickly when you do eat. Just has Coquille St Jacques and a green salad, first and only meal of the day. Feel sated
*will be worth it, alone, if it reduces my crazily spendy wine habit
I had to Google it. Do you need it or are you taking it recreationally? I picture you as some rakishly rake thin.
I'm a little chunky. Could easily lose 10-12 pounds I put on in lockdown and just won't sod off. But I'm not obese and I don't really need it - so it is vanity, but it is also curiosity
These drugs could be revolutionary if they work. The NHS could save tens of billions if we can abolish severe overwight and obesity with mere pills and jabs (which will come down in price sharply and shortly)
That's insane. You would save a fortune and lose weight just by cutting down on the booze and easing back on all the gourmet nosh. Most obese people are obese because the only food they can afford or can be bothered to cook is over processed dogshite, full of sweeteners and edible chemicals that don't sate you and make you want more. You're a fat knacker because you've got more money than sense and never say no. For some reason, you're one of my favourite posters on here, but have a tendency towards being a bell end (as do we all!)
I've liked but reluctantly because I have exactly the same issue as @Leon . I don't eat junk food at all, but I eat and drink an awful lot and love it. It does mean when I cut back the weight drops off but I need motivation to do so which is usually events that require a lower weight.
I think we need to stop judging people on their body shape.
You say you eat and drink a lot and love it. That's great, you are doing what you want and it is obvious that that you value this more than you value a slimmer body shape. Good for you. If you valued a slimmer body more you would not indulge as much. People are the shape they want to be but won't accept this. Sure if they had a magic wand they would take a slimmer version but not at the expense of losing other things they indulge in life. Maximising utility and all that.
Is BJO's distaste of SKS a bait and switch to lull disaffected ex Tories like myself into a false sense of security that Labour has truly changed and it's safe for us to vote for them?
Have no fear, your view of Starmer as a ruthless, cynical, sanctimonious, earnest, preachy, puritanical yet lying shape-shifter has some albeit niche support. He was the Tories' worst nightmare though.
Would the LP be where it is now with Long-Bailey? I doubt it.
No it would be a Broad Church opposing all the below thatSunak Starmer Parties support.
IE
They both want to keep the poor in poverty, the disabled shamed, those seeking Asylum scapegoated, the Water Industry in private shit show land, the NHS privatised the UK a subsiduary of US World policeforce, protests banned, opponents expelled, fossil fuels extracted, strikers defeated and Billionaire Paymasters satisfied
Whether that would put Lab in a better or worse position than now we will never know but given the Tory Shit Show would likely be similar
I didnt vote for RLB either I voted for LN who i think would not have been as factional despite wanting "to break Jeremy as a man"
I am in France. The roads are well.maintained and flat without potholes inc the d and e roads. The roadsides are clean and well managed. It is a pleasure to drive on their roads. The road signs are clean and not obstructed by this years growth. England by comparison is a shit hole notwithstanding the riots currenty in the big cities in France.. There are police are stopping people even in the countryside but I as a tourist was waved through. Mind you ...gone are the Butcher the Baker and the Candlestick maker, all the little villages we drive through have nothing.
There aren't any potholes in my area in England, and when a couple developed last winter they were fixed pretty quickly.
Clearly an uneven situation since this is not the case in many places.
Sussex is still appalling.
My area of Surrey has been appalling, worse than I can ever remember. Several roads being closed regularly because they were so bad. However in the last few months stuff has improved.
Is BJO's distaste of SKS a bait and switch to lull disaffected ex Tories like myself into a false sense of security that Labour has truly changed and it's safe for us to vote for them?
Discuss.
Its safe 100% safe as is the fact your lot won;t improve under either Tory Party
Is BJO's distaste of SKS a bait and switch to lull disaffected ex Tories like myself into a false sense of security that Labour has truly changed and it's safe for us to vote for them?
Discuss.
Out of interest, what specifically are you disaffected by? How much of your change of heart has come from the enduring and relentless attacks (basically a take-down campaign) on the CP rather than mistakes the government has actually made? With regard to the mistakes you identify why makes you think that the LP in government will satisfy you more?
Did you just buy the starter pack, or are you all in?
All in. Started on 0.5. Insanely expensive*
I briefly felt a little nauseous yesterday - day 2 - but nowt else. Fine otherwise
Today I got the first "positive" effects. My appetite has simple dropped away. You stop thinking about food and you feel full very quickly when you do eat. Just has Coquille St Jacques and a green salad, first and only meal of the day. Feel sated
*will be worth it, alone, if it reduces my crazily spendy wine habit
I had to Google it. Do you need it or are you taking it recreationally? I picture you as some rakishly rake thin.
I'm a little chunky. Could easily lose 10-12 pounds I put on in lockdown and just won't sod off. But I'm not obese and I don't really need it - so it is vanity, but it is also curiosity
These drugs could be revolutionary if they work. The NHS could save tens of billions if we can abolish severe overwight and obesity with mere pills and jabs (which will come down in price sharply and shortly)
That's insane. You would save a fortune and lose weight just by cutting down on the booze and easing back on all the gourmet nosh. Most obese people are obese because the only food they can afford or can be bothered to cook is over processed dogshite, full of sweeteners and edible chemicals that don't sate you and make you want more. You're a fat knacker because you've got more money than sense and never say no. For some reason, you're one of my favourite posters on here, but have a tendency towards being a bell end (as do we all!)
I've liked but reluctantly because I have exactly the same issue as @Leon . I don't eat junk food at all, but I eat and drink an awful lot and love it. It does mean when I cut back the weight drops off but I need motivation to do so which is usually events that require a lower weight.
I think we need to stop judging people on their body shape.
You say you eat and drink a lot and love it. That's great, you are doing what you want and it is obvious that that you value this more than you value a slimmer body shape. Good for you. If you valued a slimmer body more you would not indulge as much. People are the shape they want to be but won't accept this. Sure if they had a magic wand they would take a slimmer version but not at the expense of losing other things they indulge in life. Maximising utility and all that.
Ummm. Reluctantly agree.. I lost 8 kg for my ride and I hope to continue that. I enjoy eating but I also enjoy being fit. Eating is easier than being fit.
Is BJO's distaste of SKS a bait and switch to lull disaffected ex Tories like myself into a false sense of security that Labour has truly changed and it's safe for us to vote for them?
Discuss.
Out of interest, what specifically are you disaffected by? How much of your change of heart has come from the enduring and relentless attacks (basically a take-down campaign) on the CP rather than mistakes the government has actually made? With regard to the mistakes you identify why makes you think that the LP in government will satisfy you more?
I'm disaffected because the Conservative Party I believe in, the Conservative Party of Thatcher, Cameron and yes even Boris and Truss, is a party that aims for aspiration and for people who work hard to be able to keep more of their own efforts. A party where people who work hard ought to be able to own their own home.
Sunak and the Tories today seem to believe in none of that. The first red flag was of course the raising of National Insurance, a disgraceful tax purely on those who are working that is completely unpaid by those who are not working. That was at least reversed by Truss, but it seems to be completely representative of how Sunak thinks, working people are to be squeezed to fund transfers to others - that's not the Tories I believe in.
The complete lack of sufficient house building, the reversal of the very modest planning reforms and the complete abandonment of ensuring that house building targets is met is further salt in the wound.
To me its not just that the Government is making mistakes. I can live with mistakes, at least with a mistake you can attempt to put it right and change course.
The problem is deeper than that. Today's Tories don't even seem to believe in having a social mobility ladder that hard work can see people better off. Today's Tories seem to believe in extracting rent from those who are working, ensuring assets remain inflated, and ensuring inheritances are secured more than the value of hard work.
If they don't believe in what I believe in, why should I vote for them?
Is BJO's distaste of SKS a bait and switch to lull disaffected ex Tories like myself into a false sense of security that Labour has truly changed and it's safe for us to vote for them?
Discuss.
Lol, probably not. Without wanting to cast aspersions on anyone in particular, those who are driven by ideological purity are rarely seen showing such tactical dexterity.
Neo Liberalism is an ideology to which the UK has subscribed since 1979
And you want more of the same shit show count me out
So its an hour since I posted that Labour Tories and Tory Tories are identical in almost every respect.
About 20 replies (mostly namecalling)
Not a single one arguing the factual accuracy of any of the list of why they are basically 2 heads of the same rancid beast
Telling
Im off to footy Alsager vs Congleton
Grossly unfair considering my lengthy and thoughtful post at 9:45 which you completely ignored.
You carry on burying your head in the ideological dunes.
Don't worry, he will.
I'm just relieved in light of these comments he keeps making that the Corbynites didn't quite get to power. It would have been Truss on acid with added nastiness.
Polly Toynbee @pollytoynbee Of course Labour can't possibly eject Neal Lawson of Compass for a 2-year-old tweet of great good sense. Even to threaten risks stirring a mighty rebellion - and not by the usual suspects. The majority of the members voted for proportional representation! Sack the lot?
Seen this online. From what I can see, he was encouraging people to vote tactically for the Lib Dems or the Greens to unseat a Tory Labour councillor.
Open and shut case if that's correct. I'm against constant purges for minor offences but actually trying to unseat a Labour councillor is obviously incompatible with being a party member.
The i headline story is interesting - Government considering a referendum of scrapping the ECHR, as a way of creating a Brexit 2 coalition.
What contemptible bastards they are. Trying to once again cynically trash the country to appease the prejudices of the worst 30% - reactionary, embittered, ignorant - of the population on the back of a divisive issue they and their media have created.
Is BJO's distaste of SKS a bait and switch to lull disaffected ex Tories like myself into a false sense of security that Labour has truly changed and it's safe for us to vote for them?
Discuss.
Lol, probably not. Without wanting to cast aspersions on anyone in particular, those who are driven by ideological purity are rarely seen showing such tactical dexterity.
Neo Liberalism is an ideology to which the UK has subscribed since 1979
And you want more of the same shit show count me out
I feel an on-the-spot report from Roger is in order.
Apparently in Provence it's thought the rioters were led by a group from Hartlepool on a trip to convince them of just how wrong they were to vote for Brexit.
I'm just waiting for @Gardenwalker to pop up on here to tell us how this is all irrelevant and France is actually very successful, whilst Britain continues to be terminally doomed.
The Britain-is-a-sh*thole crowd amuse and annoy me. They're as bad as the Britain=is-always-brilliant crowd.
Neither are interested in the issues, or solutions.
Gardenwalker comes over as negative, but actually is quite constructive and into solutions.
Did you just buy the starter pack, or are you all in?
All in. Started on 0.5. Insanely expensive*
I briefly felt a little nauseous yesterday - day 2 - but nowt else. Fine otherwise
Today I got the first "positive" effects. My appetite has simple dropped away. You stop thinking about food and you feel full very quickly when you do eat. Just has Coquille St Jacques and a green salad, first and only meal of the day. Feel sated
*will be worth it, alone, if it reduces my crazily spendy wine habit
I had to Google it. Do you need it or are you taking it recreationally? I picture you as some rakishly rake thin.
I'm a little chunky. Could easily lose 10-12 pounds I put on in lockdown and just won't sod off. But I'm not obese and I don't really need it - so it is vanity, but it is also curiosity
These drugs could be revolutionary if they work. The NHS could save tens of billions if we can abolish severe overwight and obesity with mere pills and jabs (which will come down in price sharply and shortly)
That's insane. You would save a fortune and lose weight just by cutting down on the booze and easing back on all the gourmet nosh. Most obese people are obese because the only food they can afford or can be bothered to cook is over processed dogshite, full of sweeteners and edible chemicals that don't sate you and make you want more. You're a fat knacker because you've got more money than sense and never say no. For some reason, you're one of my favourite posters on here, but have a tendency towards being a bell end (as do we all!)
I've liked but reluctantly because I have exactly the same issue as @Leon . I don't eat junk food at all, but I eat and drink an awful lot and love it. It does mean when I cut back the weight drops off but I need motivation to do so which is usually events that require a lower weight.
I think we need to stop judging people on their body shape.
You say you eat and drink a lot and love it. That's great, you are doing what you want and it is obvious that that you value this more than you value a slimmer body shape. Good for you. If you valued a slimmer body more you would not indulge as much. People are the shape they want to be but won't accept this. Sure if they had a magic wand they would take a slimmer version but not at the expense of losing other things they indulge in life. Maximising utility and all that.
In mt experience, it's a really complex issue.
Many people want to have a different body shape (mostly thinner) because they think that equates to health and vitality: it's the idealised body shape we're subjected to all the time in the media and online. The one-size-fits-all worldview.
The problem is, that 'ideal' (*) is unachievable to many. Take a lady I know (not Mrs J) who is very fit (a runner), yet is technically obese. She is very unhappy because of this, and spends a lot of money on different diets and fads. But as I said, she is very fit.
Another friend of mine is incredibly slight and slender, as though a gust of wind might blow her away. She is, IMV, unfit. She has also had eating problems in the past.
I'm trying to lose weight, partly because of my running - less weight to carry around. According to Garmin, my fitness age is 21 - I'm 50. But despite this, I still feel like I'm a little podgy. Not enough to cause me mental anguish, but enough to curse the scales the day after a party.
I wonder if a change in definition of fitness could be made. Instead of looking at things like weight and BMI, which are vague tools at best, perhaps something akin to simple rules of thumb= like the following:
You are fit if you can do any of these: *) Walk six miles in two hours on the flat without getting breathless *) Go up three flights of stairs in a minute without getting breathless. *) You can jog a kilometre in under ten minutes. *) You can do twenty perfect push-ups in one go.
(*) IMO it's not ideal; often the models appear very underweight.
Is BJO's distaste of SKS a bait and switch to lull disaffected ex Tories like myself into a false sense of security that Labour has truly changed and it's safe for us to vote for them?
Discuss.
Lol, probably not. Without wanting to cast aspersions on anyone in particular, those who are driven by ideological purity are rarely seen showing such tactical dexterity.
Neo Liberalism is an ideology to which the UK has subscribed since 1979
And you want more of the same shit show count me out
It was great in 1978?
For Corbynites, they want to smash society and remake it to their advantage. Therefore, it's a win ter have discontent.
I feel an on-the-spot report from Roger is in order.
Apparently in Provence it's thought the rioters were led by a group from Hartlepool on a trip to convince them of just how wrong they were to vote for Brexit.
I'm just waiting for @Gardenwalker to pop up on here to tell us how this is all irrelevant and France is actually very successful, whilst Britain continues to be terminally doomed.
The Britain-is-a-sh*thole crowd amuse and annoy me. They're as bad as the Britain=is-always-brilliant crowd.
Neither are interested in the issues, or solutions.
Gardenwalker comes over as negative, but actually is quite constructive and into solutions.
Just a couple of bros hanging out with a ceramic gorilla.
As an aside, no one should go for the skinny chino, no socks, loafers thing, but DEFINITELY not the overweight and/or middle aged. Leon, I’m looking at you.
Polly resigns from the SKS Fans bunch as NEC starts going after soft left. Burnham and Khan next?
Polly Toynbee @pollytoynbee Of course Labour can't possibly eject Neal Lawson of Compass for a 2-year-old tweet of great good sense. Even to threaten risks stirring a mighty rebellion - and not by the usual suspects. The majority of the members voted for proportional representation! Sack the lot?
Lawson's mates are being performatively stupid here because he's thrown a tantrum that rules apply to him. Firstly he's not been expelled - he's been asked to account for an allegation that could lead to expulsion. Secondly, said allegation is that he supported a Green and Lib Dem effort to oust Labour from a council. Which isn't breaking some obscure rule - it's one of the more well-known and explicit ones, that anyone who supports a rival candidate against a Labour one faces expulsion. Heck, it's a major reason lots of MPs and members who otherwise would have remained Labour members to 'stay and fight' in Labour - and supported local councillors and MPs while denouncing the leadership, left the party in the Corbyn era, as they realised they could not in all good conscience campaign to make someone they thought appalling and dangerous PM, so would have faced expulsion if that extended to supporting non-Labour candidates.
I think the rule has been changed it now reads "anyone who supports a rival candidate against a Labour one faces expulsion unless they are an SKS fan in which case they will be welcomed back even if they not only supported but stood against Labour"
Errr...no? The nature of it is that you face expulsion if you support a rival candidate to Labour while still a member - and even then can reapply after a certain period. What you can do is leave for your own reasons (or not have joined at all), support or join another party - even stand for them - and then if you decide to leave that party and want to join/rejoin Labour you can. As you weren't breaking any rules while a party member. If you couldn't join or rejoin after campaigning or standing for someone else while not a member, several prominent Corbynites would not have been allowed into the party. So, for example, Luciana Berger is fine to rejoin as she left the party - for reasons which should make Corbyn fans deeply ashamed (if they had an ounce of self-awareness)- and stood for another one, as importantly was not a Labour member when she did so.
Stocky, I missed the second half of your question, sorry just re-read it. What makes me think a LP Government would satisfy me more?
Pretty much nothing to be honest. I do not trust Labour as far as I could throw them, and as far as extracting the efforts of those who are working and transferring it to those who are preferred interests then I think Labour could be every bit as bad as the Tories are. So I'm not exactly keen on Labour winning.
Though if my efforts are to be taxed and redistributed to others anyway, then I'd rather that redistribution goes to fund the less fortunate than fund those who want to ensure their inheritance is as big as possible. So Labour becomes the lesser of two evils.
And at least on housing, SKS is making the right noises. He's at least pretending he gets it. Whether he does or not, I don't know.
But I've always been an advocate of better the devil you don't know. If we know the Tories are going to be bad, then its time for a change.
Labour haven't yet won my vote though, but it is certainly open to them for the first time in decades.
Is BJO's distaste of SKS a bait and switch to lull disaffected ex Tories like myself into a false sense of security that Labour has truly changed and it's safe for us to vote for them?
Discuss.
Lol, probably not. Without wanting to cast aspersions on anyone in particular, those who are driven by ideological purity are rarely seen showing such tactical dexterity.
Neo Liberalism is an ideology to which the UK has subscribed since 1979
And you want more of the same shit show count me out
It was great in 1978?
For Corbynites, they want to smash society and remake it to their advantage. Therefore, it's a win ter have discontent.
Is BJO's distaste of SKS a bait and switch to lull disaffected ex Tories like myself into a false sense of security that Labour has truly changed and it's safe for us to vote for them?
Discuss.
Lol, probably not. Without wanting to cast aspersions on anyone in particular, those who are driven by ideological purity are rarely seen showing such tactical dexterity.
Neo Liberalism is an ideology to which the UK has subscribed since 1979
And you want more of the same shit show count me out
It was great in 1978?
For Corbynites, they want to smash society and remake it to their advantage. Therefore, it's a win ter have discontent.
Did you just buy the starter pack, or are you all in?
All in. Started on 0.5. Insanely expensive*
I briefly felt a little nauseous yesterday - day 2 - but nowt else. Fine otherwise
Today I got the first "positive" effects. My appetite has simple dropped away. You stop thinking about food and you feel full very quickly when you do eat. Just has Coquille St Jacques and a green salad, first and only meal of the day. Feel sated
*will be worth it, alone, if it reduces my crazily spendy wine habit
I had to Google it. Do you need it or are you taking it recreationally? I picture you as some rakishly rake thin.
I'm a little chunky. Could easily lose 10-12 pounds I put on in lockdown and just won't sod off. But I'm not obese and I don't really need it - so it is vanity, but it is also curiosity
These drugs could be revolutionary if they work. The NHS could save tens of billions if we can abolish severe overwight and obesity with mere pills and jabs (which will come down in price sharply and shortly)
That's insane. You would save a fortune and lose weight just by cutting down on the booze and easing back on all the gourmet nosh. Most obese people are obese because the only food they can afford or can be bothered to cook is over processed dogshite, full of sweeteners and edible chemicals that don't sate you and make you want more. You're a fat knacker because you've got more money than sense and never say no. For some reason, you're one of my favourite posters on here, but have a tendency towards being a bell end (as do we all!)
I'm not referring to Leon but the number of overweight people I see who say they want to lose weight yet indulge in in-between crappy snacks is very noticeable. There are snacks (or meal replacements) which are healthy and fill you up. My weight hardly changes (because I never let it) but if I want to lose a bit I replace a meal with a banana and large tablespoon of quality peanut butter (e.g. Manilife). Fills you up for ages.
I cut out alcohol and meat and dairy and stuff myself with fruit (much of which I grow) and tasty salad (not the rabbit food stuff) and a lot of speciality bread or homemade bread. I eat huge amounts of it, but the weight drops off very quickly.
Have no fear, your view of Starmer as a ruthless, cynical, sanctimonious, earnest, preachy, puritanical yet lying shape-shifter has some albeit niche support. He was the Tories' worst nightmare though.
Would the LP be where it is now with Long-Bailey? I doubt it.
No it would be a Broad Church opposing all the below thatSunak Starmer Parties support.
IE
They both want to keep the poor in poverty, the disabled shamed, those seeking Asylum scapegoated, the Water Industry in private shit show land, the NHS privatised the UK a subsiduary of US World policeforce, protests banned, opponents expelled, fossil fuels extracted, strikers defeated and Billionaire Paymasters satisfied
Whether that would put Lab in a better or worse position than now we will never know but given the Tory Shit Show would likely be similar
I didnt vote for RLB either I voted for LN who i think would not have been as factional despite wanting "to break Jeremy as a man"
No, if you tried to be an anti-American country that banned the use of fossil fuels, you would need to establish some kind ot dictatorship and build a Berlin Wall of Britain
Did you just buy the starter pack, or are you all in?
All in. Started on 0.5. Insanely expensive*
I briefly felt a little nauseous yesterday - day 2 - but nowt else. Fine otherwise
Today I got the first "positive" effects. My appetite has simple dropped away. You stop thinking about food and you feel full very quickly when you do eat. Just has Coquille St Jacques and a green salad, first and only meal of the day. Feel sated
*will be worth it, alone, if it reduces my crazily spendy wine habit
I had to Google it. Do you need it or are you taking it recreationally? I picture you as some rakishly rake thin.
I'm a little chunky. Could easily lose 10-12 pounds I put on in lockdown and just won't sod off. But I'm not obese and I don't really need it - so it is vanity, but it is also curiosity
These drugs could be revolutionary if they work. The NHS could save tens of billions if we can abolish severe overwight and obesity with mere pills and jabs (which will come down in price sharply and shortly)
That's insane. You would save a fortune and lose weight just by cutting down on the booze and easing back on all the gourmet nosh. Most obese people are obese because the only food they can afford or can be bothered to cook is over processed dogshite, full of sweeteners and edible chemicals that don't sate you and make you want more. You're a fat knacker because you've got more money than sense and never say no. For some reason, you're one of my favourite posters on here, but have a tendency towards being a bell end (as do we all!)
I've liked but reluctantly because I have exactly the same issue as @Leon . I don't eat junk food at all, but I eat and drink an awful lot and love it. It does mean when I cut back the weight drops off but I need motivation to do so which is usually events that require a lower weight.
I think we need to stop judging people on their body shape.
You say you eat and drink a lot and love it. That's great, you are doing what you want and it is obvious that that you value this more than you value a slimmer body shape. Good for you. If you valued a slimmer body more you would not indulge as much. People are the shape they want to be but won't accept this. Sure if they had a magic wand they would take a slimmer version but not at the expense of losing other things they indulge in life. Maximising utility and all that.
In mt experience, it's a really complex issue.
Many people want to have a different body shape (mostly thinner) because they think that equates to health and vitality: it's the idealised body shape we're subjected to all the time in the media and online. The one-size-fits-all worldview.
The problem is, that 'ideal' (*) is unachievable to many. Take a lady I know (not Mrs J) who is very fit (a runner), yet is technically obese. She is very unhappy because of this, and spends a lot of money on different diets and fads. But as I said, she is very fit.
Another friend of mine is incredibly slight and slender, as though a gust of wind might blow her away. She is, IMV, unfit. She has also had eating problems in the past.
I'm trying to lose weight, partly because of my running - less weight to carry around. According to Garmin, my fitness age is 21 - I'm 50. But despite this, I still feel like I'm a little podgy. Not enough to cause me mental anguish, but enough to curse the scales the day after a party.
I wonder if a change in definition of fitness could be made. Instead of looking at things like weight and BMI, which are vague tools at best, perhaps something akin to simple rules of thumb= like the following:
You are fit if you can do any of these: *) Walk six miles in two hours on the flat without getting breathless *) Go up three flights of stairs in a minute without getting breathless. *) You can jog a kilometre in under ten minutes. *) You can do twenty perfect push-ups in one go.
(*) IMO it's not ideal; often the models appear very underweight.
Hang on, most can fast walk a kilometre in under ten minutes - it is hardly a mark of fitness if someone can jog that. Whereas twenty perfect push ups is probably <10% maybe <5% of the population.
I still think we're looking at a 2010 scenario and the question is, can Labour get over the line or will they have to govern with the consent of another party or parties?
I really don't think so.
What is the way back for a divided government, led by a wet behind the ears management consultant that is heading for 0/5 on its own chosen pledges?
On paper Sunak will be able to claim all five of his pledges. Most were vague platitudes anyway. Inflation is out of his hands but it is falling fast in the Eurozone, so it will here.
Will anyone feel any better from Sunak's "success"? No.
He will do better at the GE because his "it may be bad now, but it will be worse under Labour" will gain enough traction by election time. That is already the narrative promoted by anxious Conservatives on PB. Small Conservative majority.
Sunak will have dropped the pledges completely before we get to year end as they will have failed all 5 of them. Whats more, angry Tory MPs will claim that interviewers harping on about the 5 "people's priorities" are following a political bubble story rather than focusing on the people's priorities - which will be whatever guff they are trying to grift next time.
You can't campaign on "STOP THE BOATS" and claim success as record numbers pour across the channel. The others are well beyond even an attempt to claim achievement as well.
He can claim all five and the client journalists will back him up.
BigG. has this morning made the compelling case that Starmer is a worse PM than Sunak on the evidence he has to hand, so I can't see the Daily Mail deviating from that line.
I'm not sure that the Heil and GBeebies insisting the sky actually is green actually, and then HYUFD etc producing a poll showing that 27.9% actually of the Tory core vote actually agrees the sky is green actually will make a difference.
The reason the Tory vote continues to collapse is that normal punters have seen that the spin is a lie. They know the economy is in a mess and their community is decaying because they are living and experiencing it.
Sunak can claim that he has slain inflation and fixed the NHS and stopped the boats. But he won't have done, people will see and feel and experience the truth, and Boris! has reinforced the truth that the Tories lie and lie and lie.
I know that @Heathener winds some of the PB snowflakes up, but she is right - the game is up.
Not snowflakes, just very boring. There are many more interesting left-wing posters (far more so than she is) who manage to be insightful must-reads, who are also great to debate with.
But, just dumping the same agreed 'lines to take' on here at 6am every morning demeans the site and insults our intelligence.
Don't encourage her just because she's on 'your side'.
There are moments of amusement in our political process despite the cringing moments of the populist Boris Johnson/JRM/Dorries hegemony period. The inevitable Boris Johnson defenestration was one such moment and Corbyn losing the Labour whip was another.
One of the ones to really look forward to is the massive disappointment that will occur with Starmer after he has been in power for about 12 months. Labour infighting will be worse than Tory. Labour will disappear up their own backsides in a puff of economically disastrous smoke. They will then tack to their lunatic core and sadly try and wreck things that they don't approve of just like the right wing Tories have. The latter wont be so amusing, but it is inevitable.
Did you just buy the starter pack, or are you all in?
All in. Started on 0.5. Insanely expensive*
I briefly felt a little nauseous yesterday - day 2 - but nowt else. Fine otherwise
Today I got the first "positive" effects. My appetite has simple dropped away. You stop thinking about food and you feel full very quickly when you do eat. Just has Coquille St Jacques and a green salad, first and only meal of the day. Feel sated
*will be worth it, alone, if it reduces my crazily spendy wine habit
I had to Google it. Do you need it or are you taking it recreationally? I picture you as some rakishly rake thin.
I'm a little chunky. Could easily lose 10-12 pounds I put on in lockdown and just won't sod off. But I'm not obese and I don't really need it - so it is vanity, but it is also curiosity
These drugs could be revolutionary if they work. The NHS could save tens of billions if we can abolish severe overwight and obesity with mere pills and jabs (which will come down in price sharply and shortly)
That's insane. You would save a fortune and lose weight just by cutting down on the booze and easing back on all the gourmet nosh. Most obese people are obese because the only food they can afford or can be bothered to cook is over processed dogshite, full of sweeteners and edible chemicals that don't sate you and make you want more. You're a fat knacker because you've got more money than sense and never say no. For some reason, you're one of my favourite posters on here, but have a tendency towards being a bell end (as do we all!)
I've liked but reluctantly because I have exactly the same issue as @Leon . I don't eat junk food at all, but I eat and drink an awful lot and love it. It does mean when I cut back the weight drops off but I need motivation to do so which is usually events that require a lower weight.
I think we need to stop judging people on their body shape.
You say you eat and drink a lot and love it. That's great, you are doing what you want and it is obvious that that you value this more than you value a slimmer body shape. Good for you. If you valued a slimmer body more you would not indulge as much. People are the shape they want to be but won't accept this. Sure if they had a magic wand they would take a slimmer version but not at the expense of losing other things they indulge in life. Maximising utility and all that.
Ummm. Reluctantly agree.. I lost 8 kg for my ride and I hope to continue that. I enjoy eating but I also enjoy being fit. Eating is easier than being fit.
The best feeling in the world is massive calorie consumption + massive exercise. Dopamine and endorphin cocktail. Problem is sustaining the exercise bit, especially when the inevitable injury arrives.
I don't judge people's body shapes on an individual level, but when I walk down the High Street I do think "this is why the NHS is in deep deep trouble". Putting calories on menus is one of the best interventions we have made so far, mainly because it's forcing chain pubs and restaurants to reform their 3000 calorie burgers.
Is BJO's distaste of SKS a bait and switch to lull disaffected ex Tories like myself into a false sense of security that Labour has truly changed and it's safe for us to vote for them?
Discuss.
Lol, probably not. Without wanting to cast aspersions on anyone in particular, those who are driven by ideological purity are rarely seen showing such tactical dexterity.
Neo Liberalism is an ideology to which the UK has subscribed since 1979
And you want more of the same shit show count me out
It was great in 1978?
For Corbynites, they want to smash society and remake it to their advantage. Therefore, it's a win ter have discontent.
Laboured
You're welcome, Sunny.
I don't think other people in the world would share the view that there is a decline in pun quality.
Is BJO's distaste of SKS a bait and switch to lull disaffected ex Tories like myself into a false sense of security that Labour has truly changed and it's safe for us to vote for them?
Discuss.
Out of interest, what specifically are you disaffected by? How much of your change of heart has come from the enduring and relentless attacks (basically a take-down campaign) on the CP rather than mistakes the government has actually made? With regard to the mistakes you identify why makes you think that the LP in government will satisfy you more?
I'm disaffected because the Conservative Party I believe in, the Conservative Party of Thatcher, Cameron and yes even Boris and Truss, is a party that aims for aspiration and for people who work hard to be able to keep more of their own efforts. A party where people who work hard ought to be able to own their own home.
Sunak and the Tories today seem to believe in none of that. The first red flag was of course the raising of National Insurance, a disgraceful tax purely on those who are working that is completely unpaid by those who are not working. That was at least reversed by Truss, but it seems to be completely representative of how Sunak thinks, working people are to be squeezed to fund transfers to others - that's not the Tories I believe in.
The complete lack of sufficient house building, the reversal of the very modest planning reforms and the complete abandonment of ensuring that house building targets is met is further salt in the wound.
To me its not just that the Government is making mistakes. I can live with mistakes, at least with a mistake you can attempt to put it right and change course.
The problem is deeper than that. Today's Tories don't even seem to believe in having a social mobility ladder that hard work can see people better off. Today's Tories seem to believe in extracting rent from those who are working, ensuring assets remain inflated, and ensuring inheritances are secured more than the value of hard work.
If they don't believe in what I believe in, why should I vote for them?
I don't agree with all of that and think part of your disaffection is due to not sharing Sunak's priority to pay back at least part of the pandemic debt.
(I'm sure you know of the economist Liam Halligan; what you have written could have been written by him, word for word.)
Is BJO's distaste of SKS a bait and switch to lull disaffected ex Tories like myself into a false sense of security that Labour has truly changed and it's safe for us to vote for them?
Discuss.
Lol, probably not. Without wanting to cast aspersions on anyone in particular, those who are driven by ideological purity are rarely seen showing such tactical dexterity.
Neo Liberalism is an ideology to which the UK has subscribed since 1979
And you want more of the same shit show count me out
I'm not trying to persuade you towards my ideology, I'm trying to show you that two things that are different are different.
And you prove my point for me by spending all your energy attacking one side and not the other. If you thought they were the same you'd have as much to say criticising the Conservatives but you direct 95% or your ire on Labour. Your actions disprove your words.
Thing is, Corbynism was the ultimate in reactionary politics. It was designed to take us back to some mythical golden age and keep us there for ever.
It was Thatcher and her Victorian values rubbish without the useful things that did in fairness come with it (like smashing the unions).
Few people in politics are more reflexively conservative than good socialists. Brezhnev and Honecker were so convinced they had found utopia (and for them, of course, they had) they actually destroyed their countries' economies by failing to carry out very simple reforms.
Libraries burnt, animals released from zoos, Jewish memorials desecrated.
Even a video of someone with an AK-47.
It looks possibly a bit worse than 2005, although less long so far, so I think Macron will probably have to declare that state of emergency that he wanted not to.
BBC journalists being threatened is awful.
I think it effectively shows our cultural alignment to the USA.
This is essentially a French George Floyd. If it were mass American rioting over a police shooting the BBC would be all over it and there'd be copycat protests here inside 72 hours.
Because it's France we look, shrug and make jokes about the French, and carry on.
There was a review of a book in the Guardian the other day which looks interesting and frankly about time it was written about. The funny thing was that the greatest beneficiaries of reading the book would be the Guardian (and the BBC) and realising that the US race issues and “solutions” are vastly different to the UK and we need to stop conflating and importing.
I have been saying this for years in the wider sense, not just race. Britain and America are different countries and we can't just read across from there to here: Conservatives aren't Republicans, Democrats aren't Labour, and US slogans such as "defund the police" would be comical if it wasn't serious. We import US shenanigans and then wonder why we look stupid, and when it turns into things like throwing statues in harbours it's just silly for us and bad for the owners and cleaners who have to fix things. We have so many of our own problems without importing ill-understood others.
Just a couple of bros hanging out with a ceramic gorilla.
As an aside, no one should go for the skinny chino, no socks, loafers thing, but DEFINITELY not the overweight and/or middle aged. Leon, I’m looking at you.
Why's Carlson got a can of super strength lager on the table next to him? You'd have thought Tate would've offered him a glass, to give it fractionally less of an "alcos on a park bench" vibe.
Polly resigns from the SKS Fans bunch as NEC starts going after soft left. Burnham and Khan next?
Polly Toynbee @pollytoynbee Of course Labour can't possibly eject Neal Lawson of Compass for a 2-year-old tweet of great good sense. Even to threaten risks stirring a mighty rebellion - and not by the usual suspects. The majority of the members voted for proportional representation! Sack the lot?
Lawson's mates are being performatively stupid here because he's thrown a tantrum that rules apply to him. Firstly he's not been expelled - he's been asked to account for an allegation that could lead to expulsion. Secondly, said allegation is that he supported a Green and Lib Dem effort to oust Labour from a council. Which isn't breaking some obscure rule - it's one of the more well-known and explicit ones, that anyone who supports a rival candidate against a Labour one faces expulsion. Heck, it's a major reason lots of MPs and members who otherwise would have remained Labour members to 'stay and fight' in Labour - and supported local councillors and MPs while denouncing the leadership, left the party in the Corbyn era, as they realised they could not in all good conscience campaign to make someone they thought appalling and dangerous PM, so would have faced expulsion if that extended to supporting non-Labour candidates.
Genuine question - is there any political party, in the U.K., that doesn’t make campaigning for any opposing party a binning offence?
Did you just buy the starter pack, or are you all in?
All in. Started on 0.5. Insanely expensive*
I briefly felt a little nauseous yesterday - day 2 - but nowt else. Fine otherwise
Today I got the first "positive" effects. My appetite has simple dropped away. You stop thinking about food and you feel full very quickly when you do eat. Just has Coquille St Jacques and a green salad, first and only meal of the day. Feel sated
*will be worth it, alone, if it reduces my crazily spendy wine habit
I had to Google it. Do you need it or are you taking it recreationally? I picture you as some rakishly rake thin.
I'm a little chunky. Could easily lose 10-12 pounds I put on in lockdown and just won't sod off. But I'm not obese and I don't really need it - so it is vanity, but it is also curiosity
These drugs could be revolutionary if they work. The NHS could save tens of billions if we can abolish severe overwight and obesity with mere pills and jabs (which will come down in price sharply and shortly)
That's insane. You would save a fortune and lose weight just by cutting down on the booze and easing back on all the gourmet nosh. Most obese people are obese because the only food they can afford or can be bothered to cook is over processed dogshite, full of sweeteners and edible chemicals that don't sate you and make you want more. You're a fat knacker because you've got more money than sense and never say no. For some reason, you're one of my favourite posters on here, but have a tendency towards being a bell end (as do we all!)
I've liked but reluctantly because I have exactly the same issue as @Leon . I don't eat junk food at all, but I eat and drink an awful lot and love it. It does mean when I cut back the weight drops off but I need motivation to do so which is usually events that require a lower weight.
I think we need to stop judging people on their body shape.
You say you eat and drink a lot and love it. That's great, you are doing what you want and it is obvious that that you value this more than you value a slimmer body shape. Good for you. If you valued a slimmer body more you would not indulge as much. People are the shape they want to be but won't accept this. Sure if they had a magic wand they would take a slimmer version but not at the expense of losing other things they indulge in life. Maximising utility and all that.
Ummm. Reluctantly agree.. I lost 8 kg for my ride and I hope to continue that. I enjoy eating but I also enjoy being fit. Eating is easier than being fit.
The best feeling in the world is massive calorie consumption + massive exercise. Dopamine and endorphin cocktail. Problem is sustaining the exercise bit, especially when the inevitable injury arrives.
I don't judge people's body shapes on an individual level, but when I walk down the High Street I do think "this is why the NHS is in deep deep trouble". Putting calories on menus is one of the best interventions we have made so far, mainly because it's forcing chain pubs and restaurants to reform their 3000 calorie burgers.
So agree re the combination of exercise and eating, particularly exercise that involves a thrill. Eating after black run skiing or sailing a catamaran. Seems also to be the main excuse for my cycling holidays.
Stocky, I missed the second half of your question, sorry just re-read it. What makes me think a LP Government would satisfy me more?
Pretty much nothing to be honest. I do not trust Labour as far as I could throw them, and as far as extracting the efforts of those who are working and transferring it to those who are preferred interests then I think Labour could be every bit as bad as the Tories are. So I'm not exactly keen on Labour winning.
Though if my efforts are to be taxed and redistributed to others anyway, then I'd rather that redistribution goes to fund the less fortunate than fund those who want to ensure their inheritance is as big as possible. So Labour becomes the lesser of two evils.
And at least on housing, SKS is making the right noises. He's at least pretending he gets it. Whether he does or not, I don't know.
But I've always been an advocate of better the devil you don't know. If we know the Tories are going to be bad, then its time for a change.
Labour haven't yet won my vote though, but it is certainly open to them for the first time in decades.
IMO, and I feel I know you reasonably well and are not too far away from you ideologically on most things, it would be a big mistake to vote Labour. Disaffected Tories like you should surely stop off at at the LibDems??
Polly resigns from the SKS Fans bunch as NEC starts going after soft left. Burnham and Khan next?
Polly Toynbee @pollytoynbee Of course Labour can't possibly eject Neal Lawson of Compass for a 2-year-old tweet of great good sense. Even to threaten risks stirring a mighty rebellion - and not by the usual suspects. The majority of the members voted for proportional representation! Sack the lot?
Lawson's mates are being performatively stupid here because he's thrown a tantrum that rules apply to him. Firstly he's not been expelled - he's been asked to account for an allegation that could lead to expulsion. Secondly, said allegation is that he supported a Green and Lib Dem effort to oust Labour from a council. Which isn't breaking some obscure rule - it's one of the more well-known and explicit ones, that anyone who supports a rival candidate against a Labour one faces expulsion. Heck, it's a major reason lots of MPs and members who otherwise would have remained Labour members to 'stay and fight' in Labour - and supported local councillors and MPs while denouncing the leadership, left the party in the Corbyn era, as they realised they could not in all good conscience campaign to make someone they thought appalling and dangerous PM, so would have faced expulsion if that extended to supporting non-Labour candidates.
Genuine question - is there any political party, in the U.K., that doesn’t make campaigning for any opposing party a binning offence?
Haven't the Tories been campaigning for the opposition for at least the last couple of years?
I still think we're looking at a 2010 scenario and the question is, can Labour get over the line or will they have to govern with the consent of another party or parties?
Could be, but I'm in the 'landslide' camp myself. Not a 97 but still a big 2 digit Labour majority.
Why does it matter?
They both want to keep the poor in poverty, the disabled shamed, those seeking Asylum scapegoated, the Water Industry in private shit show land, the NHS privatised the UK a subsiduary of US World policeforce, protests banned, opponents expelled, fossil fuels extracted, strikers defeated and Billionaire Paymasters satisfied
I could go on
Look, the reason why some of us can't take your contributions seriously is because, even though much of this is true, Starmer and Labour will still be a big improvement on Sunak and the Conservatives. But you spend all your energy attacking the former.
It's like your main concern is who runs Labour rather than who runs the country. It's the worst kind of navel gazing.
Labour is nothing of it isn’t a pursuit of Socialist Purity, unsullied by government. Or excessive popularity.
Says literally nobody except Centrists
Do you mean the people with more moderate opinions that tend to be the people that might change the way they vote? The swing voters? The people that essentially decide which colour of government we have?
Oh those people. The bastards. Come the revolution when Jezza is elected by the People's Committee as Supreme Ruler all centrists will be shot.
Is BJO's distaste of SKS a bait and switch to lull disaffected ex Tories like myself into a false sense of security that Labour has truly changed and it's safe for us to vote for them?
Discuss.
Out of interest, what specifically are you disaffected by? How much of your change of heart has come from the enduring and relentless attacks (basically a take-down campaign) on the CP rather than mistakes the government has actually made? With regard to the mistakes you identify why makes you think that the LP in government will satisfy you more?
I'm disaffected because the Conservative Party I believe in, the Conservative Party of Thatcher, Cameron and yes even Boris and Truss, is a party that aims for aspiration and for people who work hard to be able to keep more of their own efforts. A party where people who work hard ought to be able to own their own home.
Sunak and the Tories today seem to believe in none of that. The first red flag was of course the raising of National Insurance, a disgraceful tax purely on those who are working that is completely unpaid by those who are not working. That was at least reversed by Truss, but it seems to be completely representative of how Sunak thinks, working people are to be squeezed to fund transfers to others - that's not the Tories I believe in.
The complete lack of sufficient house building, the reversal of the very modest planning reforms and the complete abandonment of ensuring that house building targets is met is further salt in the wound.
To me its not just that the Government is making mistakes. I can live with mistakes, at least with a mistake you can attempt to put it right and change course.
The problem is deeper than that. Today's Tories don't even seem to believe in having a social mobility ladder that hard work can see people better off. Today's Tories seem to believe in extracting rent from those who are working, ensuring assets remain inflated, and ensuring inheritances are secured more than the value of hard work.
If they don't believe in what I believe in, why should I vote for them?
I don't agree with all of that and think part of your disaffection is due to not sharing Sunak's priority to pay back at least part of the pandemic debt.
(I'm sure you know of the economist Liam Halligan; what you have written could have been written by him, word for word.)
The issue isn't paying back at least part of the pandemic debt. For one we're not doing that, we're running a deficit still.
If Sunak wanted to close the deficit so put up Income Tax on everyone, then I could respect that. Its not something I'd want, but as some bitter medicine to deal with the aftermath of the pandemic, then at least he would have my respect. But he didn't do that, he put up National Insurance instead, a tax only paid by those who work for their wages.
And failing to tackle the housing crisis in this country and resolve the shortfall of 3 million homes we have, failing to even attempt to reach the pathetically low 300k a year target - that has nothing to do with pandemic debt and is purely a choice.
It is a sick and perverted choice to pull the ladder up and protect the asset value of those who have already done well, while denying opportunities to the young.
Yes Liam Halligan has long also spoken about the issues regarding housing and other things in this country, I certainly don't agree with him on everything (I don't agree with anyone on everything) but on these issues we pretty much see eye to eye.
Is BJO's distaste of SKS a bait and switch to lull disaffected ex Tories like myself into a false sense of security that Labour has truly changed and it's safe for us to vote for them?
Discuss.
Lol, probably not. Without wanting to cast aspersions on anyone in particular, those who are driven by ideological purity are rarely seen showing such tactical dexterity.
Neo Liberalism is an ideology to which the UK has subscribed since 1979
And you want more of the same shit show count me out
It was great in 1978?
For Corbynites, they want to smash society and remake it to their advantage. Therefore, it's a win ter have discontent.
Laboured
You're welcome, Sunny.
I don't think other people in the world would share the view that there is a decline in pun quality.
Over the long term puns are about par, on a measure of -100 to +100.
Stocky, I missed the second half of your question, sorry just re-read it. What makes me think a LP Government would satisfy me more?
Pretty much nothing to be honest. I do not trust Labour as far as I could throw them, and as far as extracting the efforts of those who are working and transferring it to those who are preferred interests then I think Labour could be every bit as bad as the Tories are. So I'm not exactly keen on Labour winning.
Though if my efforts are to be taxed and redistributed to others anyway, then I'd rather that redistribution goes to fund the less fortunate than fund those who want to ensure their inheritance is as big as possible. So Labour becomes the lesser of two evils.
And at least on housing, SKS is making the right noises. He's at least pretending he gets it. Whether he does or not, I don't know.
But I've always been an advocate of better the devil you don't know. If we know the Tories are going to be bad, then its time for a change.
Labour haven't yet won my vote though, but it is certainly open to them for the first time in decades.
IMO, and I feel I know you reasonably well and are not too far away from you ideologically on most things, it would be a big mistake to vote Labour. Disaffected Tories like you should surely stop off at at the LibDems??
I did go Lib Dem at the Local Election, in part because my local Lib Dem candidate was not remotely NIMBY and appealed based on campaigning on roads and schools instead.
However on a national level, while I respect the Lib Dems on many issues I am appalled at their cynical NIMBYism. And SKS at least is attempting to tackle the Housing issue, what has Davey had to say about it apart from appealing to NIMBYs to win by-elections?
I've not made my mind up yet. But SKS is currently winning my respect more than Davey or Sunak, and I never thought I'd say that.
Just a couple of bros hanging out with a ceramic gorilla.
As an aside, no one should go for the skinny chino, no socks, loafers thing, but DEFINITELY not the overweight and/or middle aged. Leon, I’m looking at you.
"The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which."
Is BJO's distaste of SKS a bait and switch to lull disaffected ex Tories like myself into a false sense of security that Labour has truly changed and it's safe for us to vote for them?
Discuss.
Lol, probably not. Without wanting to cast aspersions on anyone in particular, those who are driven by ideological purity are rarely seen showing such tactical dexterity.
Neo Liberalism is an ideology to which the UK has subscribed since 1979
And you want more of the same shit show count me out
I'm not trying to persuade you towards my ideology, I'm trying to show you that two things that are different are different.
And you prove my point for me by spending all your energy attacking one side and not the other. If you thought they were the same you'd have as much to say criticising the Conservatives but you direct 95% or your ire on Labour. Your actions disprove your words.
Thing is, Corbynism was the ultimate in reactionary politics. It was designed to take us back to some mythical golden age and keep us there for ever.
It was Thatcher and her Victorian values rubbish without the useful things that did in fairness come with it (like smashing the unions).
Few people in politics are more reflexively conservative than good socialists. Brezhnev and Honecker were so convinced they had found utopia (and for them, of course, they had) they actually destroyed their countries' economies by failing to carry out very simple reforms.
I really like this post.
Most of all I think it underscores the strength of democracy. Once a party or faction has been in power for a long time, it spends too much of its time reflexively defending its past instead of fixing what's wrong (both internally and in the things it governs). The corollary of "a new broom sweeps clean" is that "an old one is fucking useless".
Even if BJO was right that Labour and the Tories were ideologically identical (and they obviously aren't) then I'd still want Labour over the Tories at the next elections because change keeps politicians on their toes.
I really like this post too, particularly the first sentence #yesiamthatshallow
Comments
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/i-met-keir-starmers-donkeys-and-they-told-me-something-about-him/
'And there was the moment when Keir was due to meet a top QC who was leading him in an important trial. “Can we reschedule?” Keir asked. “Of course,” the QC replied. “Is everything OK?”. It turned out that one of the donkeys had died and Keir’s mum really wanted him to be there at the funeral.'
What is true is that, because of social media, young people are very directly connected to American culture. There is no sign, as yet, of BLM style marches over the incident in France.
Risible. It doesn't matter whether I agree with you or not - and, for the record, I do believe the opinion polls - but we don't want to read the precisely the same shit from you at the start of every thread every day for the next 500+ days.
Bore off.
Lab 475, Con 100.
I suspect this is rather optimistic, but the Con approach of Sunak salvaging something from the wreckage of the Trussterf**k is simply not working. Sunak has had his honeymoon and it only gets worse for them from here.
But, just dumping the same agreed 'lines to take' on here at 6am every morning demeans the site and insults our intelligence.
Don't encourage her just because she's on 'your side'.
No one complains when you don the rah rah skirt and twirl the baton in anger for the Tories.
Polly Toynbee
@pollytoynbee
Of course Labour can't possibly eject Neal Lawson of Compass for a 2-year-old tweet of great good sense. Even to threaten risks stirring a mighty rebellion - and not by the usual suspects. The majority of the members voted for proportional representation! Sack the lot?
England and the Tories: both in the same mess.
FWIW, I think we're currently on course for a result worse than 1997, followed by a quite left-wing radical government that will result in a large swingback to the Tories 4-5 years later, but without them regaining office.
https://twitter.com/SpaJw/status/1674741262795128837?t=_nffX8NyiROKBIAN6hYqOg&s=19
They both want to keep the poor in poverty, the disabled shamed, those seeking Asylum scapegoated, the Water Industry in private shit show land, the NHS privatised the UK a subsiduary of US World policeforce, protests banned, opponents expelled, fossil fuels extracted, strikers defeated and Billionaire Paymasters satisfied
I could go on
The more time you spend firefighting, the less time you have to set the agenda.
When the Conservatives lose the next GE, Sunak should only take a teeny part of the blame. The majority should be foisted in those who defenestrated May and gave us Boris.
They're an absolute shower of talentless fuckwits who care f-all about the country. Shits.
I don't like it any more than you.
For some reason, you're one of my favourite posters on here, but have a tendency towards being a bell end (as do we all!)
Or pretty good depending on one’s pov.
He is, fairly obviously, wanting to do New Labour Part Deux, minus Iraq.
There are quite a few people in Labour who believe that, without Iraq, they would have had a much longer run.
Not Labour/ Not Labour
"How dare you do the same in 2024 BJO?"
Not when your funded by them of course
IMO they will be no better at all
Please show your workings
I have a comfortable LP majority but perhaps not a landslide: 20 - 60 maj.
Sunak's doing the best he can but the tide is against him. Starmer, chiefly, has done a great job constructing the anti-conservative narrative that prevails.
LP will win big for two key reasons. Firstly, CP voters will not, in numbers, switch but will stay at home; secondly, Scotland.
I dont think that response is the Gotcha you think it is
Perhaps you can list your reasons and they're not Tories doesnt count because they are
The i headline story is interesting - Government considering a referendum of scrapping the ECHR, as a way of creating a Brexit 2 coalition.
BJO fans please explain!
Just Green Comrades
If you cant see its a purely factional move by Luke Akehurst you are blind
I feel extremely sorry for the voters of Stoke on Trent Central. They are being asked to vote for a party led by a serial fanatsist and liar who appears to be unaware of where he was or what he was doing at key times, who are trying to appeal to the northern working class despite being the party of wealthy Londoners, who appear to be searching for a new role in the aftermath of Brexit, and whose leader is only in place because of a massive cock-up during the brief and inglorious tenure of some woman nobody had ever heard of leading to a massive rise in sexism and retreat to a badly defined and unworkable emotional comfort zone in the party.
And if that wasn't bad enough, the alternative is Paul Nuttall!
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/1441628#Comment_1441628
The odd thing is, you could now apply that to the Tories...
Would the LP be where it is now with Long-Bailey? I doubt it.
(Personally I'm LD and in a Lab/LD seat so this is academic for me.)
(I say uncomprehending Cargo Cult because Brexit 1 worked as a magic screen that everyone could project their hopes onto, whereas ECHR withdrawal would be about permitting one thing which is wanted by some and opposed by others.)
Even if it's not party policy, I'm sure some junior ministers will put it on their constituency leaflets.
You say you eat and drink a lot and love it. That's great, you are doing what you want and it is obvious that that you value this more than you value a slimmer body shape. Good for you. If you valued a slimmer body more you would not indulge as much. People are the shape they want to be but won't accept this. Sure if they had a magic wand they would take a slimmer version but not at the expense of losing other things they indulge in life. Maximising utility and all that.
Discuss.
IE
They both want to keep the poor in poverty, the disabled shamed, those seeking Asylum scapegoated, the Water Industry in private shit show land, the NHS privatised the UK a subsiduary of US World policeforce, protests banned, opponents expelled, fossil fuels extracted, strikers defeated and Billionaire Paymasters satisfied
Whether that would put Lab in a better or worse position than now we will never know but given the Tory Shit Show would likely be similar
I didnt vote for RLB either I voted for LN who i think would not have been as factional despite wanting "to break Jeremy as a man"
About 20 replies (mostly namecalling)
Not a single one arguing the factual accuracy of any of the list of why they are basically 2 heads of the same rancid beast
Telling
Im off to footy Alsager vs Congleton
Sunak and the Tories today seem to believe in none of that. The first red flag was of course the raising of National Insurance, a disgraceful tax purely on those who are working that is completely unpaid by those who are not working. That was at least reversed by Truss, but it seems to be completely representative of how Sunak thinks, working people are to be squeezed to fund transfers to others - that's not the Tories I believe in.
The complete lack of sufficient house building, the reversal of the very modest planning reforms and the complete abandonment of ensuring that house building targets is met is further salt in the wound.
To me its not just that the Government is making mistakes. I can live with mistakes, at least with a mistake you can attempt to put it right and change course.
The problem is deeper than that. Today's Tories don't even seem to believe in having a social mobility ladder that hard work can see people better off. Today's Tories seem to believe in extracting rent from those who are working, ensuring assets remain inflated, and ensuring inheritances are secured more than the value of hard work.
If they don't believe in what I believe in, why should I vote for them?
And you want more of the same shit show count me out
I'm just relieved in light of these comments he keeps making that the Corbynites didn't quite get to power. It would have been Truss on acid with added nastiness.
Trumpian.
Many people want to have a different body shape (mostly thinner) because they think that equates to health and vitality: it's the idealised body shape we're subjected to all the time in the media and online. The one-size-fits-all worldview.
The problem is, that 'ideal' (*) is unachievable to many. Take a lady I know (not Mrs J) who is very fit (a runner), yet is technically obese. She is very unhappy because of this, and spends a lot of money on different diets and fads. But as I said, she is very fit.
Another friend of mine is incredibly slight and slender, as though a gust of wind might blow her away. She is, IMV, unfit. She has also had eating problems in the past.
I'm trying to lose weight, partly because of my running - less weight to carry around. According to Garmin, my fitness age is 21 - I'm 50. But despite this, I still feel like I'm a little podgy. Not enough to cause me mental anguish, but enough to curse the scales the day after a party.
I wonder if a change in definition of fitness could be made. Instead of looking at things like weight and BMI, which are vague tools at best, perhaps something akin to simple rules of thumb= like the following:
You are fit if you can do any of these:
*) Walk six miles in two hours on the flat without getting breathless
*) Go up three flights of stairs in a minute without getting breathless.
*) You can jog a kilometre in under ten minutes.
*) You can do twenty perfect push-ups in one go.
(*) IMO it's not ideal; often the models appear very underweight.
As an aside, no one should go for the skinny chino, no socks, loafers thing, but DEFINITELY not the overweight and/or middle aged. Leon, I’m looking at you.
Pretty much nothing to be honest. I do not trust Labour as far as I could throw them, and as far as extracting the efforts of those who are working and transferring it to those who are preferred interests then I think Labour could be every bit as bad as the Tories are. So I'm not exactly keen on Labour winning.
Though if my efforts are to be taxed and redistributed to others anyway, then I'd rather that redistribution goes to fund the less fortunate than fund those who want to ensure their inheritance is as big as possible. So Labour becomes the lesser of two evils.
And at least on housing, SKS is making the right noises. He's at least pretending he gets it. Whether he does or not, I don't know.
But I've always been an advocate of better the devil you don't know. If we know the Tories are going to be bad, then its time for a change.
Labour haven't yet won my vote though, but it is certainly open to them for the first time in decades.
One of the ones to really look forward to is the massive disappointment that will occur with Starmer after he has been in power for about 12 months. Labour infighting will be worse than Tory. Labour will disappear up their own backsides in a puff of economically disastrous smoke. They will then tack to their lunatic core and sadly try and wreck things that they don't approve of just like the right wing Tories have. The latter wont be so amusing, but it is inevitable.
I don't judge people's body shapes on an individual level, but when I walk down the High Street I do think "this is why the NHS is in deep deep trouble". Putting calories on menus is one of the best interventions we have made so far, mainly because it's forcing chain pubs and restaurants to reform their 3000 calorie burgers.
(I'm sure you know of the economist Liam Halligan; what you have written could have been written by him, word for word.)
It was Thatcher and her Victorian values rubbish without the useful things that did in fairness come with it (like smashing the unions).
Few people in politics are more reflexively conservative than good socialists. Brezhnev and Honecker were so convinced they had found utopia (and for them, of course, they had) they actually destroyed their countries' economies by failing to carry out very simple reforms.
Oh those people. The bastards. Come the revolution when Jezza is elected by the People's Committee as Supreme Ruler all centrists will be shot.
If Sunak wanted to close the deficit so put up Income Tax on everyone, then I could respect that. Its not something I'd want, but as some bitter medicine to deal with the aftermath of the pandemic, then at least he would have my respect. But he didn't do that, he put up National Insurance instead, a tax only paid by those who work for their wages.
And failing to tackle the housing crisis in this country and resolve the shortfall of 3 million homes we have, failing to even attempt to reach the pathetically low 300k a year target - that has nothing to do with pandemic debt and is purely a choice.
It is a sick and perverted choice to pull the ladder up and protect the asset value of those who have already done well, while denying opportunities to the young.
Yes Liam Halligan has long also spoken about the issues regarding housing and other things in this country, I certainly don't agree with him on everything (I don't agree with anyone on everything) but on these issues we pretty much see eye to eye.
However on a national level, while I respect the Lib Dems on many issues I am appalled at their cynical NIMBYism. And SKS at least is attempting to tackle the Housing issue, what has Davey had to say about it apart from appealing to NIMBYs to win by-elections?
I've not made my mind up yet. But SKS is currently winning my respect more than Davey or Sunak, and I never thought I'd say that.