Labour should not backtrack on its environmental policies because of the result in Uxbridge, for two main reasons, in order of priority:
1. Measures to reduce air pollution in cities and, more generally, to tackle climate change are urgently needed. 2. Any backtracking would lead to a significant increase in the Green vote at the next GE, potentially losing Labour quite a few seats.
That's not to say that the implementation of schemes like ULEZ shouldn't be improved. But they shouldn't be abandoned.
Double-down on the environmental measures in central London, without making life difficult for people living on the edge of the metropolis like Uxbridge where a car is still important.
Picking this up from earlier.
That doesn't work, because it is the Outer London Boroughs which are the most polluted based on the published scorecard, and therefore most in need of measures to be taken - despite some of those Boroughs refusing to take responsibility for themselves.
That "published scorecard" looks like total bovine manure by those with an axe to grind to me. Heavily weighting things like "light" that have nothing to do with air quality anyway.
The two measures that this is supposed to tackle is NOX and PM2.5, not the garbage in that chart that seems to have been designed backwards with a desired outcome and then working back from there.
If you look at what is red for PM2.5 then the result is clear, central London has a problem, and Heathrow has a problem ... and that's about it.
Switch to NOX and while central London and Heathrow remains red, most of outer London is colour coded ... green.
That map is doing a hell of a lot of averaging out. The outer areas do tend to have ribbon development with trees and fields in between. It's the actual places around the roads where people live that are the issue.
I don’t think it’s averaging. Rather it’s the total emission/count per cell.
Er, isn't that averaging within the unit cell? Looking at an area I know well, that map is (for instance) effectively blurring the differences between South Bridge (a known peak area) and a large chunk of Arthur's Seat open area in Edinburgh, with a lot of habitation in between.
It's as if quite a lot of people don't recognise a bad thing as a bad thing if it happens to Nigel Farage. cf. having a milkshake thrown at him.
I regard Farage as a vile, self-promoting rent-a-gob. Frankly my dear I don't give a d*mn about him.
This tends to be the difference between the left and the right. For instance, right-wingers hate Corbyn's politics but they don't hate him as a person.
That surprises me. Look at the personal attacks on PB - a relatively sane forum - on non-rightwingers. Diane Abbott comes to mind.
I think you (@carnyx) are right. The belief amongst the right that they hate the policy not the individual is I think more self-flattery than actual fact. I seem to remember a lot of seething over Corbyn, for example.
No, the data says you’re wrong
Polls consistently show that while rightwingers fiercely disapprove of left wing beliefs, they don’t extend that loathing to the individual. Whereas the left makes it much more personal. “Never kissed a Tory”, “Tory scum”. &c
Rightwingers wouldn’t mind their kids dating a lefty, the left shows no such tolerance
And so on. There really is a difference and the moral failing is on the Left
In this country, perhaps.
Across the Pond, not so much. And for the people who lean into American culture wars and want to import that BS here, not so much either.
It's as if quite a lot of people don't recognise a bad thing as a bad thing if it happens to Nigel Farage. cf. having a milkshake thrown at him.
I regard Farage as a vile, self-promoting rent-a-gob. Frankly my dear I don't give a d*mn about him.
This tends to be the difference between the left and the right. For instance, right-wingers hate Corbyn's politics but they don't hate him as a person.
That surprises me. Look at the personal attacks on PB - a relatively sane forum - on non-rightwingers. Diane Abbott comes to mind.
Meghan!
That too, including some rather nastily salacious remarks on her sister-in-law which I wouldn't dream of using on a public forum about anyone. But I don't suppose either count as left-wingers, unless it's left-wing to introduce a new line into the Royal Family.
Labour should not backtrack on its environmental policies because of the result in Uxbridge, for two main reasons, in order of priority:
1. Measures to reduce air pollution in cities and, more generally, to tackle climate change are urgently needed. 2. Any backtracking would lead to a significant increase in the Green vote at the next GE, potentially losing Labour quite a few seats.
That's not to say that the implementation of schemes like ULEZ shouldn't be improved. But they shouldn't be abandoned.
Double-down on the environmental measures in central London, without making life difficult for people living on the edge of the metropolis like Uxbridge where a car is still important.
Picking this up from earlier.
That doesn't work, because it is the Outer London Boroughs which are the most polluted based on the published scorecard, and therefore most in need of measures to be taken - despite some of those Boroughs refusing to take responsibility for themselves.
That "published scorecard" looks like total bovine manure by those with an axe to grind to me. Heavily weighting things like "light" that have nothing to do with air quality anyway.
The two measures that this is supposed to tackle is NOX and PM2.5, not the garbage in that chart that seems to have been designed backwards with a desired outcome and then working back from there.
If you look at what is red for PM2.5 then the result is clear, central London has a problem, and Heathrow has a problem ... and that's about it.
Switch to NOX and while central London and Heathrow remains red, most of outer London is colour coded ... green.
That map is doing a hell of a lot of averaging out. The outer areas do tend to have ribbon development with trees and fields in between. It's the actual places around the roads where people live that are the issue.
Both criticisms are fair. I think this is probably the map we want (though the 2020 date is not ideal):
It's as if quite a lot of people don't recognise a bad thing as a bad thing if it happens to Nigel Farage. cf. having a milkshake thrown at him.
I regard Farage as a vile, self-promoting rent-a-gob. Frankly my dear I don't give a d*mn about him.
This tends to be the difference between the left and the right. For instance, right-wingers hate Corbyn's politics but they don't hate him as a person.
That surprises me. Look at the personal attacks on PB - a relatively sane forum - on non-rightwingers. Diane Abbott comes to mind.
Meghan!
Meghan derangement syndrome is certainly a thing among older right wing gentlemen.
Labour should not backtrack on its environmental policies because of the result in Uxbridge, for two main reasons, in order of priority:
1. Measures to reduce air pollution in cities and, more generally, to tackle climate change are urgently needed. 2. Any backtracking would lead to a significant increase in the Green vote at the next GE, potentially losing Labour quite a few seats.
That's not to say that the implementation of schemes like ULEZ shouldn't be improved. But they shouldn't be abandoned.
Double-down on the environmental measures in central London, without making life difficult for people living on the edge of the metropolis like Uxbridge where a car is still important.
Picking this up from earlier.
That doesn't work, because it is the Outer London Boroughs which are the most polluted based on the published scorecard, and therefore most in need of measures to be taken - despite some of those Boroughs refusing to take responsibility for themselves.
That "published scorecard" looks like total bovine manure by those with an axe to grind to me. Heavily weighting things like "light" that have nothing to do with air quality anyway.
The two measures that this is supposed to tackle is NOX and PM2.5, not the garbage in that chart that seems to have been designed backwards with a desired outcome and then working back from there.
If you look at what is red for PM2.5 then the result is clear, central London has a problem, and Heathrow has a problem ... and that's about it.
Switch to NOX and while central London and Heathrow remains red, most of outer London is colour coded ... green.
That map is doing a hell of a lot of averaging out. The outer areas do tend to have ribbon development with trees and fields in between. It's the actual places around the roads where people live that are the issue.
I don’t think it’s averaging. Rather it’s the total emission/count per cell.
Er, isn't that averaging within the unit cell? Looking at an area I know well, that map is (for instance) effectively blurring the differences between South Bridge (a known peak area) and a large chunk of Arthur's Seat open area in Edinburgh, with a lot of habitation in between.
Ah, yes. I think there are maps with higher resolution than the 1x1km here. But still, a much higher resolution than the one with the grading per borough.
It's as if quite a lot of people don't recognise a bad thing as a bad thing if it happens to Nigel Farage. cf. having a milkshake thrown at him.
I regard Farage as a vile, self-promoting rent-a-gob. Frankly my dear I don't give a d*mn about him.
This tends to be the difference between the left and the right. For instance, right-wingers hate Corbyn's politics but they don't hate him as a person.
That surprises me. Look at the personal attacks on PB - a relatively sane forum - on non-rightwingers. Diane Abbott comes to mind.
I think you (@carnyx) are right. The belief amongst the right that they hate the policy not the individual is I think more self-flattery than actual fact. I seem to remember a lot of seething over Corbyn, for example.
No, the data says you’re wrong
Polls consistently show that while rightwingers fiercely disapprove of left wing beliefs, they don’t extend that loathing to the individual. Whereas the left makes it much more personal. “Never kissed a Tory”, “Tory scum”. &c
Rightwingers wouldn’t mind their kids dating a lefty, the left shows no such tolerance
And so on. There really is a difference and the moral failing is on the Left
It's as if quite a lot of people don't recognise a bad thing as a bad thing if it happens to Nigel Farage. cf. having a milkshake thrown at him.
I regard Farage as a vile, self-promoting rent-a-gob. Frankly my dear I don't give a d*mn about him.
This tends to be the difference between the left and the right. For instance, right-wingers hate Corbyn's politics but they don't hate him as a person.
That surprises me. Look at the personal attacks on PB - a relatively sane forum - on non-rightwingers. Diane Abbott comes to mind.
Meghan!
That too, including some rather nastily salacious remarks on her sister-in-law which I wouldn't dream of using on a public forum about anyone. But I don't suppose either count as left-wingers, unless it's left-wing to introduce a new line into the Royal Family.
She is woke. That is a far bigger sin than being left wing.
The reliable https://www.theweatheroutlook.com/ thinks Sunday is the wetter day. 2.5 inches. met office looks grim too. BBC looks almost playable Sunday morning (no higher than 28% chance of rain) but they are the least reliable of the lot.
Sod it. This was going to have been a famous victory.
It's as if quite a lot of people don't recognise a bad thing as a bad thing if it happens to Nigel Farage. cf. having a milkshake thrown at him.
I regard Farage as a vile, self-promoting rent-a-gob. Frankly my dear I don't give a d*mn about him.
This tends to be the difference between the left and the right. For instance, right-wingers hate Corbyn's politics but they don't hate him as a person.
That surprises me. Look at the personal attacks on PB - a relatively sane forum - on non-rightwingers. Diane Abbott comes to mind.
I think you (@carnyx) are right. The belief amongst the right that they hate the policy not the individual is I think more self-flattery than actual fact. I seem to remember a lot of seething over Corbyn, for example.
Yes, and I seem to remember one of the right-wingers on here (Leon?) describing Ed Davey as deserving of a punch in the face. The right can be at least as personally nasty as the left.
It's as if quite a lot of people don't recognise a bad thing as a bad thing if it happens to Nigel Farage. cf. having a milkshake thrown at him.
I regard Farage as a vile, self-promoting rent-a-gob. Frankly my dear I don't give a d*mn about him.
This tends to be the difference between the left and the right. For instance, right-wingers hate Corbyn's politics but they don't hate him as a person.
That surprises me. Look at the personal attacks on PB - a relatively sane forum - on non-rightwingers. Diane Abbott comes to mind.
I think you (@carnyx) are right. The belief amongst the right that they hate the policy not the individual is I think more self-flattery than actual fact. I seem to remember a lot of seething over Corbyn, for example.
No, the data says you’re wrong
Polls consistently show that while rightwingers fiercely disapprove of left wing beliefs, they don’t extend that loathing to the individual. Whereas the left makes it much more personal. “Never kissed a Tory”, “Tory scum”. &c
Rightwingers wouldn’t mind their kids dating a lefty, the left shows no such tolerance
And so on. There really is a difference and the moral failing is on the Left
It's as if quite a lot of people don't recognise a bad thing as a bad thing if it happens to Nigel Farage. cf. having a milkshake thrown at him.
I regard Farage as a vile, self-promoting rent-a-gob. Frankly my dear I don't give a d*mn about him.
This tends to be the difference between the left and the right. For instance, right-wingers hate Corbyn's politics but they don't hate him as a person.
That surprises me. Look at the personal attacks on PB - a relatively sane forum - on non-rightwingers. Diane Abbott comes to mind.
I think you (@carnyx) are right. The belief amongst the right that they hate the policy not the individual is I think more self-flattery than actual fact. I seem to remember a lot of seething over Corbyn, for example.
No, the data says you’re wrong
Polls consistently show that while rightwingers fiercely disapprove of left wing beliefs, they don’t extend that loathing to the individual. Whereas the left makes it much more personal. “Never kissed a Tory”, “Tory scum”. &c
Rightwingers wouldn’t mind their kids dating a lefty, the left shows no such tolerance
And so on. There really is a difference and the moral failing is on the Left
But what if right wing people are actually worse people? I am not saying they are, but how do we identify empirically whether it is an unreasonable bias on the part of the left or a rational response? I'd be interested in polling of people in the political centre, as an identification strategy. Does a centrist like people x degrees to the left of them more than those x degrees to the right? That would be fascinating polling.
It's as if quite a lot of people don't recognise a bad thing as a bad thing if it happens to Nigel Farage. cf. having a milkshake thrown at him.
I regard Farage as a vile, self-promoting rent-a-gob. Frankly my dear I don't give a d*mn about him.
This tends to be the difference between the left and the right. For instance, right-wingers hate Corbyn's politics but they don't hate him as a person.
That surprises me. Look at the personal attacks on PB - a relatively sane forum - on non-rightwingers. Diane Abbott comes to mind.
Meghan!
That too, including some rather nastily salacious remarks on her sister-in-law which I wouldn't dream of using on a public forum about anyone. But I don't suppose either count as left-wingers, unless it's left-wing to introduce a new line into the Royal Family.
She is woke. That is a far bigger sin than being left wing.
Old fashioned economic left wingers just want your money. The woke want your identity.
England look absolutely the superior team now. And Oz are meant to be Number 1?
Had the edge all series for me. Hence my lack of truck with all that 'Ashes are gone' talk at nil two.
Agreed. We should have won at least one of Edgbaston or Lord’s. And we’d now be 2-1 and bowling to win back the Ashes
England are more aggressive, creative, imaginative - and entertaining (no small thing)
Australia are really competent - excellent bowlers, some of the world’s best batters. But they lack that stroke of genius that England possess, as a team (which is largely but not entirely down to Stokes)
Australia are a good German football side, England are Argentina with Messi
Yep. Special team. Although you were one of the 'Ashes are gone' merchants, I seem to recall?
It's as if quite a lot of people don't recognise a bad thing as a bad thing if it happens to Nigel Farage. cf. having a milkshake thrown at him.
I regard Farage as a vile, self-promoting rent-a-gob. Frankly my dear I don't give a d*mn about him.
This tends to be the difference between the left and the right. For instance, right-wingers hate Corbyn's politics but they don't hate him as a person.
That surprises me. Look at the personal attacks on PB - a relatively sane forum - on non-rightwingers. Diane Abbott comes to mind.
Meghan!
That too, including some rather nastily salacious remarks on her sister-in-law which I wouldn't dream of using on a public forum about anyone. But I don't suppose either count as left-wingers, unless it's left-wing to introduce a new line into the Royal Family.
She is woke. That is a far bigger sin than being left wing.
Old fashioned economic left wingers just want your money. The woke want your identity.
Worth a comment or two on the superb LD performance in Somerton & Frome.
I thought this one might be hard work but a 29% swing is no small achievement and it's a warm welcome to Sarah Dyke as the party's newest MP. I assume she'll be the candidate for the new Glastonbury & Somerton seat but a number of the new Somerset seats will be in the party's sights after this win.
It's another fillip for Sir Ed Davey who struggles to get heard at times but results like these are always a boost albeit they are of short duration. Each win brings in new members and new activists which will then help hold the seat at the coming GE.
The party's opinion poll rating is edging back toward the 2019 GE number and while both S&A and U&SR showed what can still happen when the party is ruthlessly squeezed, the LDs won't be fighting their battles in those seats but in the maybe 30-50 where they have possibilites (some real, others more remote). S&F was the 53rd LD target so winning it as emphatically as the party did is very good.
On that basis, the LDs would scrape into Government with around 380 seats which I'm sure we'd all enjoy.
It's as if quite a lot of people don't recognise a bad thing as a bad thing if it happens to Nigel Farage. cf. having a milkshake thrown at him.
I regard Farage as a vile, self-promoting rent-a-gob. Frankly my dear I don't give a d*mn about him.
This tends to be the difference between the left and the right. For instance, right-wingers hate Corbyn's politics but they don't hate him as a person.
That surprises me. Look at the personal attacks on PB - a relatively sane forum - on non-rightwingers. Diane Abbott comes to mind.
Meghan!
That too, including some rather nastily salacious remarks on her sister-in-law which I wouldn't dream of using on a public forum about anyone. But I don't suppose either count as left-wingers, unless it's left-wing to introduce a new line into the Royal Family.
She is woke. That is a far bigger sin than being left wing.
Old fashioned economic left wingers just want your money. The woke want your identity.
They want their own identities more like. And the older generation resents the younger generation changing values, as has happened throughout history and will continue to do so.
It's as if quite a lot of people don't recognise a bad thing as a bad thing if it happens to Nigel Farage. cf. having a milkshake thrown at him.
I regard Farage as a vile, self-promoting rent-a-gob. Frankly my dear I don't give a d*mn about him.
This tends to be the difference between the left and the right. For instance, right-wingers hate Corbyn's politics but they don't hate him as a person.
That surprises me. Look at the personal attacks on PB - a relatively sane forum - on non-rightwingers. Diane Abbott comes to mind.
I think you (@carnyx) are right. The belief amongst the right that they hate the policy not the individual is I think more self-flattery than actual fact. I seem to remember a lot of seething over Corbyn, for example.
No, the data says you’re wrong
Polls consistently show that while rightwingers fiercely disapprove of left wing beliefs, they don’t extend that loathing to the individual. Whereas the left makes it much more personal. “Never kissed a Tory”, “Tory scum”. &c
Rightwingers wouldn’t mind their kids dating a lefty, the left shows no such tolerance
And so on. There really is a difference and the moral failing is on the Left
This is deplorably un-Marxist. We scions of the One True Faith deplore capitalism, but regard individual capitalists as products of the system, more to be pitied than censured.
I exaggerate. But seriously, people like me think it a dangerous distraction to get worked up about X being filthy rich or Y having a private helicopter, when the underlying reason is that the system rewards greed and exploitation. If it didn't, then I dare say Farage and his ilk would be perfectly sensible ordinary folk like you and me.
That, I suspect, is why Corbyn was so crap at exploiting scandals about individual Ministers.
It's as if quite a lot of people don't recognise a bad thing as a bad thing if it happens to Nigel Farage. cf. having a milkshake thrown at him.
I regard Farage as a vile, self-promoting rent-a-gob. Frankly my dear I don't give a d*mn about him.
This tends to be the difference between the left and the right. For instance, right-wingers hate Corbyn's politics but they don't hate him as a person.
That surprises me. Look at the personal attacks on PB - a relatively sane forum - on non-rightwingers. Diane Abbott comes to mind.
I think you (@carnyx) are right. The belief amongst the right that they hate the policy not the individual is I think more self-flattery than actual fact. I seem to remember a lot of seething over Corbyn, for example.
No, the data says you’re wrong
Polls consistently show that while rightwingers fiercely disapprove of left wing beliefs, they don’t extend that loathing to the individual. Whereas the left makes it much more personal. “Never kissed a Tory”, “Tory scum”. &c
Rightwingers wouldn’t mind their kids dating a lefty, the left shows no such tolerance
And so on. There really is a difference and the moral failing is on the Left
But what if right wing people are actually worse people? I am not saying they are, but how do we identify empirically whether it is an unreasonable bias on the part of the left or a rational response? I'd be interested in polling of people in the political centre, as an identification strategy. Does a centrist like people x degrees to the left of them more than those x degrees to the right? That would be fascinating polling.
It's as if quite a lot of people don't recognise a bad thing as a bad thing if it happens to Nigel Farage. cf. having a milkshake thrown at him.
I regard Farage as a vile, self-promoting rent-a-gob. Frankly my dear I don't give a d*mn about him.
This tends to be the difference between the left and the right. For instance, right-wingers hate Corbyn's politics but they don't hate him as a person.
That surprises me. Look at the personal attacks on PB - a relatively sane forum - on non-rightwingers. Diane Abbott comes to mind.
I think you (@carnyx) are right. The belief amongst the right that they hate the policy not the individual is I think more self-flattery than actual fact. I seem to remember a lot of seething over Corbyn, for example.
No, the data says you’re wrong
Polls consistently show that while rightwingers fiercely disapprove of left wing beliefs, they don’t extend that loathing to the individual. Whereas the left makes it much more personal. “Never kissed a Tory”, “Tory scum”. &c
Rightwingers wouldn’t mind their kids dating a lefty, the left shows no such tolerance
And so on. There really is a difference and the moral failing is on the Left
The reliable https://www.theweatheroutlook.com/ thinks Sunday is the wetter day. 2.5 inches. met office looks grim too. BBC looks almost playable Sunday morning (no higher than 28% chance of rain) but they are the least reliable of the lot.
Sod it. This was going to have been a famous victory.
It has been dry on, with one exception, every single Saturday morning in Sale between 10.30 and 11.30 for the last fifteen months.
It's as if quite a lot of people don't recognise a bad thing as a bad thing if it happens to Nigel Farage. cf. having a milkshake thrown at him.
I regard Farage as a vile, self-promoting rent-a-gob. Frankly my dear I don't give a d*mn about him.
This tends to be the difference between the left and the right. For instance, right-wingers hate Corbyn's politics but they don't hate him as a person.
That surprises me. Look at the personal attacks on PB - a relatively sane forum - on non-rightwingers. Diane Abbott comes to mind.
Meghan!
That too, including some rather nastily salacious remarks on her sister-in-law which I wouldn't dream of using on a public forum about anyone. But I don't suppose either count as left-wingers, unless it's left-wing to introduce a new line into the Royal Family.
She is woke. That is a far bigger sin than being left wing.
Old fashioned economic left wingers just want your money. The woke want your identity.
It's as if quite a lot of people don't recognise a bad thing as a bad thing if it happens to Nigel Farage. cf. having a milkshake thrown at him.
I regard Farage as a vile, self-promoting rent-a-gob. Frankly my dear I don't give a d*mn about him.
This tends to be the difference between the left and the right. For instance, right-wingers hate Corbyn's politics but they don't hate him as a person.
That surprises me. Look at the personal attacks on PB - a relatively sane forum - on non-rightwingers. Diane Abbott comes to mind.
I think you (@carnyx) are right. The belief amongst the right that they hate the policy not the individual is I think more self-flattery than actual fact. I seem to remember a lot of seething over Corbyn, for example.
No, the data says you’re wrong
Polls consistently show that while rightwingers fiercely disapprove of left wing beliefs, they don’t extend that loathing to the individual. Whereas the left makes it much more personal. “Never kissed a Tory”, “Tory scum”. &c
Rightwingers wouldn’t mind their kids dating a lefty, the left shows no such tolerance
And so on. There really is a difference and the moral failing is on the Left
Hmm. Two points
Such polls speak in generalities "Would you let your kid date a Lefty", which is not the same as "Would you let your kid date [named Lefty individual]", which is when the froth and spat words tend to leap out and play.
I cannot for the life of me think of a poll question more subject to social satisficing and self-censorship.
Polling to measure hatred is difficult (see also salience). Normal polling techniques don't really work. There is a polling technique thought to adequately measure hatred and disgust, but my Swiss-cheese memory has just fucked me up again[1]. I'll see if I can find it.
Notes
[1] I spent half-a-hour this afternoon trying to think of a female electronic music vocalist in the 2000/2010s[2] and couldn't work it out. Google does not like me.
It's an unproductive topic because the purported "consistent polling", of course, doesn't really exist outside Leon's brain. But part of the story must be that Farage, Johnson and so on are winners. It's easier to hate winners than powerless losers. I don't think people like Jacinta Ardern or Barack Obama experienced the unconditional personal fraternity of their political opponents.
Labour should not backtrack on its environmental policies because of the result in Uxbridge, for two main reasons, in order of priority:
1. Measures to reduce air pollution in cities and, more generally, to tackle climate change are urgently needed. 2. Any backtracking would lead to a significant increase in the Green vote at the next GE, potentially losing Labour quite a few seats.
That's not to say that the implementation of schemes like ULEZ shouldn't be improved. But they shouldn't be abandoned.
Double-down on the environmental measures in central London, without making life difficult for people living on the edge of the metropolis like Uxbridge where a car is still important.
Picking this up from earlier.
That doesn't work, because it is the Outer London Boroughs which are the most polluted based on the published scorecard, and therefore most in need of measures to be taken - despite some of those Boroughs refusing to take responsibility for themselves.
That "published scorecard" looks like total bovine manure by those with an axe to grind to me. Heavily weighting things like "light" that have nothing to do with air quality anyway.
The two measures that this is supposed to tackle is NOX and PM2.5, not the garbage in that chart that seems to have been designed backwards with a desired outcome and then working back from there.
If you look at what is red for PM2.5 then the result is clear, central London has a problem, and Heathrow has a problem ... and that's about it.
Switch to NOX and while central London and Heathrow remains red, most of outer London is colour coded ... green.
That map is doing a hell of a lot of averaging out. The outer areas do tend to have ribbon development with trees and fields in between. It's the actual places around the roads where people live that are the issue.
Both criticisms are fair. I think this is probably the map we want (though the 2020 date is not ideal):
(data from GLA/mayor of London)
Yes, that proves it.
Heathrow aside, the air quality is far worse in Central London than outer London.
Which shouldn't shock anyone who has thought about it, or been there.
It takes a special kind of voodoo to create a dodgy chart that inverses that.
It's as if quite a lot of people don't recognise a bad thing as a bad thing if it happens to Nigel Farage. cf. having a milkshake thrown at him.
I regard Farage as a vile, self-promoting rent-a-gob. Frankly my dear I don't give a d*mn about him.
This tends to be the difference between the left and the right. For instance, right-wingers hate Corbyn's politics but they don't hate him as a person.
That surprises me. Look at the personal attacks on PB - a relatively sane forum - on non-rightwingers. Diane Abbott comes to mind.
I think you (@carnyx) are right. The belief amongst the right that they hate the policy not the individual is I think more self-flattery than actual fact. I seem to remember a lot of seething over Corbyn, for example.
No, the data says you’re wrong
Polls consistently show that while rightwingers fiercely disapprove of left wing beliefs, they don’t extend that loathing to the individual. Whereas the left makes it much more personal. “Never kissed a Tory”, “Tory scum”. &c
Rightwingers wouldn’t mind their kids dating a lefty, the left shows no such tolerance
And so on. There really is a difference and the moral failing is on the Left
But what if right wing people are actually worse people? I am not saying they are, but how do we identify empirically whether it is an unreasonable bias on the part of the left or a rational response? I'd be interested in polling of people in the political centre, as an identification strategy. Does a centrist like people x degrees to the left of them more than those x degrees to the right? That would be fascinating polling.
That is at the very least a possibility.
The worm is turning
I consider the modern young Woke lefty to be the most despicable form of western humanity we have ever seen
They are simultaneously boring, aggressive, earnest, nasty, humourless, narcissistic, feeble, pathetic, sinister, sheeplike, idiotic, dangerous and very very stupid. They are the worst. They are basically Nazis with pronouns
I am beginning to hate them with all the individual bile the left has usually reserved for the right. So maybe things will balance out soon. Woke Skum
It's as if quite a lot of people don't recognise a bad thing as a bad thing if it happens to Nigel Farage. cf. having a milkshake thrown at him.
I regard Farage as a vile, self-promoting rent-a-gob. Frankly my dear I don't give a d*mn about him.
This tends to be the difference between the left and the right. For instance, right-wingers hate Corbyn's politics but they don't hate him as a person.
That surprises me. Look at the personal attacks on PB - a relatively sane forum - on non-rightwingers. Diane Abbott comes to mind.
I think you (@carnyx) are right. The belief amongst the right that they hate the policy not the individual is I think more self-flattery than actual fact. I seem to remember a lot of seething over Corbyn, for example.
No, the data says you’re wrong
Polls consistently show that while rightwingers fiercely disapprove of left wing beliefs, they don’t extend that loathing to the individual. Whereas the left makes it much more personal. “Never kissed a Tory”, “Tory scum”. &c
Rightwingers wouldn’t mind their kids dating a lefty, the left shows no such tolerance
And so on. There really is a difference and the moral failing is on the Left
But what if right wing people are actually worse people? I am not saying they are, but how do we identify empirically whether it is an unreasonable bias on the part of the left or a rational response? I'd be interested in polling of people in the political centre, as an identification strategy. Does a centrist like people x degrees to the left of them more than those x degrees to the right? That would be fascinating polling.
That is at the very least a possibility.
The worm is turning
I consider the modern young Woke lefty to be the most despicable form of western humanity we have ever seen
They are simultaneously boring, aggressive, earnest, nasty, humourless, narcissistic, feeble, pathetic, sinister, sheeplike, idiotic, dangerous and very very stupid. They are the worst. They are basically Nazis with pronouns
I am beginning to hate them with all the individual bile the left has usually reserved for the right. So maybe things will balance out soon. Woke Skum
Considering that Nazis existed in living memory, your moral compass is desperately perverse.
Labour should not backtrack on its environmental policies because of the result in Uxbridge, for two main reasons, in order of priority:
1. Measures to reduce air pollution in cities and, more generally, to tackle climate change are urgently needed. 2. Any backtracking would lead to a significant increase in the Green vote at the next GE, potentially losing Labour quite a few seats.
That's not to say that the implementation of schemes like ULEZ shouldn't be improved. But they shouldn't be abandoned.
Double-down on the environmental measures in central London, without making life difficult for people living on the edge of the metropolis like Uxbridge where a car is still important.
Picking this up from earlier.
That doesn't work, because it is the Outer London Boroughs which are the most polluted based on the published scorecard, and therefore most in need of measures to be taken - despite some of those Boroughs refusing to take responsibility for themselves.
That "published scorecard" looks like total bovine manure by those with an axe to grind to me. Heavily weighting things like "light" that have nothing to do with air quality anyway.
The two measures that this is supposed to tackle is NOX and PM2.5, not the garbage in that chart that seems to have been designed backwards with a desired outcome and then working back from there.
If you look at what is red for PM2.5 then the result is clear, central London has a problem, and Heathrow has a problem ... and that's about it.
Switch to NOX and while central London and Heathrow remains red, most of outer London is colour coded ... green.
That map is doing a hell of a lot of averaging out. The outer areas do tend to have ribbon development with trees and fields in between. It's the actual places around the roads where people live that are the issue.
Both criticisms are fair. I think this is probably the map we want (though the 2020 date is not ideal):
(data from GLA/mayor of London)
Yes, that proves it.
Heathrow aside, the air quality is far worse in Central London than outer London.
Which shouldn't shock anyone who has thought about it, or been there.
It takes a special kind of voodoo to create a dodgy chart that inverses that.
You can broadly tell it just by breathing normally across various locations on a hot day. Common sense is sometimes better than deep data.
It's as if quite a lot of people don't recognise a bad thing as a bad thing if it happens to Nigel Farage. cf. having a milkshake thrown at him.
I regard Farage as a vile, self-promoting rent-a-gob. Frankly my dear I don't give a d*mn about him.
This tends to be the difference between the left and the right. For instance, right-wingers hate Corbyn's politics but they don't hate him as a person.
That surprises me. Look at the personal attacks on PB - a relatively sane forum - on non-rightwingers. Diane Abbott comes to mind.
I think you (@carnyx) are right. The belief amongst the right that they hate the policy not the individual is I think more self-flattery than actual fact. I seem to remember a lot of seething over Corbyn, for example.
No, the data says you’re wrong
Polls consistently show that while rightwingers fiercely disapprove of left wing beliefs, they don’t extend that loathing to the individual. Whereas the left makes it much more personal. “Never kissed a Tory”, “Tory scum”. &c
Rightwingers wouldn’t mind their kids dating a lefty, the left shows no such tolerance
And so on. There really is a difference and the moral failing is on the Left
But what if right wing people are actually worse people? I am not saying they are, but how do we identify empirically whether it is an unreasonable bias on the part of the left or a rational response? I'd be interested in polling of people in the political centre, as an identification strategy. Does a centrist like people x degrees to the left of them more than those x degrees to the right? That would be fascinating polling.
“Worse people”? Does that not prove the point in itself?
What objective criteria would you use to determine which people are better or worse?
Very much "A Tale of Three Elections" as someone would not have said.
Indeed, more similarities across the three contests than you might think from the superficial analysis of a good result for x, a bad result for y etc.
Let's start with the Labour win at Selby & Ainsty on a 44.8% turnout (pretty much uniform across the three contests). That meant 20,500 fewer people voted than at the 2019 election - the Conservatives lost 20,700 voters.
At Somerton & Frome, the turnout was 44.2% (compared with 52.1% at Chesham & Amersham and 52.3% at Tiverton & Honiton). This meant there were 26,000 fewer votes cast - the Conservative vote fell by 26,000.
As for Uxbridge & South Ruislip, turnout of 46.2% meant 17,300 fewer votes than in 2019 - the Conservatives lost 12,000 but Labour lost 5,000.
What we're left with is a sense the real victor last night was Apathy and disenchantment/disillusion with the Conservatives translated, to a degree at S&F and S&A into a vote for the opposition but the overwhelming sense was of an electorate disenchanted with most of what was on offer. The problem for the Conservatives is they need people to get off their hands and vote - Starmer may want a ringing endorsement on a high turnout but I'm sure he'll take a ringing endorsement on a low turnout.
We can't of course sniff at a 29% swing to the LDs at S&F nor at a near 24% swing to Labour in S&A. If both were repeated at a GE, the Conservatives would be reduced to a rump of 20-30 seats.
U&SR complicates matters - I did like @Sean_F's take this morning. As we've seen in both the last two local election rounds, there are areas where the Conservative vote has proven more robust and reliable than in other matters. These tend to be Con-Lab areas with little or no LD or Green presence. In London, I'd put Hillingdon alongside Croydon - both Boroughs are highly polarised - in Hillingdon, the north of the Borough is strongly Conservative while the south is Labour. That's how you get John McConnell's Hayes & Harlington in the same borough as Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner (the 203rd safest Conservative seat).
I suspect there are economic factors at work which don't apply in other areas where political opinion seems more volatile. Perhaps the starker contrast between levels of wealth in an area, the more polarised and confrontational the politics.
Well, John McConnell's constituency is also a white-minority area. White outer London suburbs have swung heavily Tory since the time Blair came in, not so much as Essex, but more than white inner London constituencies (like, say... Eltham).
In 1997, Labour 49.5% of the vote in London and 57 seats, the Conservatives won 31.2% of the vote and 11 seats and the LDs 14.6% of the vote and 6 seats.
In 2019, Labour won 49 seats on 48.1% of the vote, the Conservatives won 21 seats on 32% of the vote and the LDs 3 seats on 14.9% of the vote.
Remarkably little change in vote shares over a generation but the Conservative vote in Inner London and parts of the Outer suburbs (the south west in particular but also the north and north east) has evaporated to both Labour and the LDs. Conversely, the Conservative vote has stengthened in the south east and north west suburbs and they retain three seats at the very centre of London (but they held the equivalent seats in 1997).
It's as if quite a lot of people don't recognise a bad thing as a bad thing if it happens to Nigel Farage. cf. having a milkshake thrown at him.
I regard Farage as a vile, self-promoting rent-a-gob. Frankly my dear I don't give a d*mn about him.
This tends to be the difference between the left and the right. For instance, right-wingers hate Corbyn's politics but they don't hate him as a person.
That surprises me. Look at the personal attacks on PB - a relatively sane forum - on non-rightwingers. Diane Abbott comes to mind.
I think you (@carnyx) are right. The belief amongst the right that they hate the policy not the individual is I think more self-flattery than actual fact. I seem to remember a lot of seething over Corbyn, for example.
No, the data says you’re wrong
Polls consistently show that while rightwingers fiercely disapprove of left wing beliefs, they don’t extend that loathing to the individual. Whereas the left makes it much more personal. “Never kissed a Tory”, “Tory scum”. &c
Rightwingers wouldn’t mind their kids dating a lefty, the left shows no such tolerance
And so on. There really is a difference and the moral failing is on the Left
But what if right wing people are actually worse people? I am not saying they are, but how do we identify empirically whether it is an unreasonable bias on the part of the left or a rational response? I'd be interested in polling of people in the political centre, as an identification strategy. Does a centrist like people x degrees to the left of them more than those x degrees to the right? That would be fascinating polling.
That is at the very least a possibility.
The worm is turning
I consider the modern young Woke lefty to be the most despicable form of western humanity we have ever seen
They are simultaneously boring, aggressive, earnest, nasty, humourless, narcissistic, feeble, pathetic, sinister, sheeplike, idiotic, dangerous and very very stupid. They are the worst. They are basically Nazis with pronouns
I am beginning to hate them with all the individual bile the left has usually reserved for the right. So maybe things will balance out soon. Woke Skum
It's as if quite a lot of people don't recognise a bad thing as a bad thing if it happens to Nigel Farage. cf. having a milkshake thrown at him.
I regard Farage as a vile, self-promoting rent-a-gob. Frankly my dear I don't give a d*mn about him.
This tends to be the difference between the left and the right. For instance, right-wingers hate Corbyn's politics but they don't hate him as a person.
That surprises me. Look at the personal attacks on PB - a relatively sane forum - on non-rightwingers. Diane Abbott comes to mind.
I think you (@carnyx) are right. The belief amongst the right that they hate the policy not the individual is I think more self-flattery than actual fact. I seem to remember a lot of seething over Corbyn, for example.
No, the data says you’re wrong
Polls consistently show that while rightwingers fiercely disapprove of left wing beliefs, they don’t extend that loathing to the individual. Whereas the left makes it much more personal. “Never kissed a Tory”, “Tory scum”. &c
Rightwingers wouldn’t mind their kids dating a lefty, the left shows no such tolerance
And so on. There really is a difference and the moral failing is on the Left
But what if right wing people are actually worse people? I am not saying they are, but how do we identify empirically whether it is an unreasonable bias on the part of the left or a rational response? I'd be interested in polling of people in the political centre, as an identification strategy. Does a centrist like people x degrees to the left of them more than those x degrees to the right? That would be fascinating polling.
That is at the very least a possibility.
The worm is turning
I consider the modern young Woke lefty to be the most despicable form of western humanity we have ever seen
They are simultaneously boring, aggressive, earnest, nasty, humourless, narcissistic, feeble, pathetic, sinister, sheeplike, idiotic, dangerous and very very stupid. They are the worst. They are basically Nazis with pronouns
I am beginning to hate them with all the individual bile the left has usually reserved for the right. So maybe things will balance out soon. Woke Skum
It's as if quite a lot of people don't recognise a bad thing as a bad thing if it happens to Nigel Farage. cf. having a milkshake thrown at him.
I regard Farage as a vile, self-promoting rent-a-gob. Frankly my dear I don't give a d*mn about him.
This tends to be the difference between the left and the right. For instance, right-wingers hate Corbyn's politics but they don't hate him as a person.
That surprises me. Look at the personal attacks on PB - a relatively sane forum - on non-rightwingers. Diane Abbott comes to mind.
I think you (@carnyx) are right. The belief amongst the right that they hate the policy not the individual is I think more self-flattery than actual fact. I seem to remember a lot of seething over Corbyn, for example.
No, the data says you’re wrong
Polls consistently show that while rightwingers fiercely disapprove of left wing beliefs, they don’t extend that loathing to the individual. Whereas the left makes it much more personal. “Never kissed a Tory”, “Tory scum”. &c
Rightwingers wouldn’t mind their kids dating a lefty, the left shows no such tolerance
And so on. There really is a difference and the moral failing is on the Left
But what if right wing people are actually worse people? I am not saying they are, but how do we identify empirically whether it is an unreasonable bias on the part of the left or a rational response? I'd be interested in polling of people in the political centre, as an identification strategy. Does a centrist like people x degrees to the left of them more than those x degrees to the right? That would be fascinating polling.
“Worse people”? Does that not prove the point in itself?
What objective criteria would you use to determine which people are better or worse?
Would you lend them £50 and get it back without asking Would you go for a drink with them If age appropriate would you be happy for them to date your daughter/son Did they vote the same way as you....
It's as if quite a lot of people don't recognise a bad thing as a bad thing if it happens to Nigel Farage. cf. having a milkshake thrown at him.
I regard Farage as a vile, self-promoting rent-a-gob. Frankly my dear I don't give a d*mn about him.
This tends to be the difference between the left and the right. For instance, right-wingers hate Corbyn's politics but they don't hate him as a person.
That surprises me. Look at the personal attacks on PB - a relatively sane forum - on non-rightwingers. Diane Abbott comes to mind.
I think you (@carnyx) are right. The belief amongst the right that they hate the policy not the individual is I think more self-flattery than actual fact. I seem to remember a lot of seething over Corbyn, for example.
No, the data says you’re wrong
Polls consistently show that while rightwingers fiercely disapprove of left wing beliefs, they don’t extend that loathing to the individual. Whereas the left makes it much more personal. “Never kissed a Tory”, “Tory scum”. &c
Rightwingers wouldn’t mind their kids dating a lefty, the left shows no such tolerance
And so on. There really is a difference and the moral failing is on the Left
But what if right wing people are actually worse people? I am not saying they are, but how do we identify empirically whether it is an unreasonable bias on the part of the left or a rational response? I'd be interested in polling of people in the political centre, as an identification strategy. Does a centrist like people x degrees to the left of them more than those x degrees to the right? That would be fascinating polling.
That is at the very least a possibility.
The worm is turning
I consider the modern young Woke lefty to be the most despicable form of western humanity we have ever seen
They are simultaneously boring, aggressive, earnest, nasty, humourless, narcissistic, feeble, pathetic, sinister, sheeplike, idiotic, dangerous and very very stupid. They are the worst. They are basically Nazis with pronouns
I am beginning to hate them with all the individual bile the left has usually reserved for the right. So maybe things will balance out soon. Woke Skum
So, yes, right wingers are less prone to hate. This is clear to all.
Very much "A Tale of Three Elections" as someone would not have said.
Indeed, more similarities across the three contests than you might think from the superficial analysis of a good result for x, a bad result for y etc.
Let's start with the Labour win at Selby & Ainsty on a 44.8% turnout (pretty much uniform across the three contests). That meant 20,500 fewer people voted than at the 2019 election - the Conservatives lost 20,700 voters.
At Somerton & Frome, the turnout was 44.2% (compared with 52.1% at Chesham & Amersham and 52.3% at Tiverton & Honiton). This meant there were 26,000 fewer votes cast - the Conservative vote fell by 26,000.
As for Uxbridge & South Ruislip, turnout of 46.2% meant 17,300 fewer votes than in 2019 - the Conservatives lost 12,000 but Labour lost 5,000.
What we're left with is a sense the real victor last night was Apathy and disenchantment/disillusion with the Conservatives translated, to a degree at S&F and S&A into a vote for the opposition but the overwhelming sense was of an electorate disenchanted with most of what was on offer. The problem for the Conservatives is they need people to get off their hands and vote - Starmer may want a ringing endorsement on a high turnout but I'm sure he'll take a ringing endorsement on a low turnout.
We can't of course sniff at a 29% swing to the LDs at S&F nor at a near 24% swing to Labour in S&A. If both were repeated at a GE, the Conservatives would be reduced to a rump of 20-30 seats.
U&SR complicates matters - I did like @Sean_F's take this morning. As we've seen in both the last two local election rounds, there are areas where the Conservative vote has proven more robust and reliable than in other matters. These tend to be Con-Lab areas with little or no LD or Green presence. In London, I'd put Hillingdon alongside Croydon - both Boroughs are highly polarised - in Hillingdon, the north of the Borough is strongly Conservative while the south is Labour. That's how you get John McConnell's Hayes & Harlington in the same borough as Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner (the 203rd safest Conservative seat).
I suspect there are economic factors at work which don't apply in other areas where political opinion seems more volatile. Perhaps the starker contrast between levels of wealth in an area, the more polarised and confrontational the politics.
Well, John McConnell's constituency is also a white-minority area. White outer London suburbs have swung heavily Tory since the time Blair came in, not so much as Essex, but more than white inner London constituencies (like, say... Eltham).
In 1997, Labour 49.5% of the vote in London and 57 seats, the Conservatives won 31.2% of the vote and 11 seats and the LDs 14.6% of the vote and 6 seats.
In 2019, Labour won 49 seats on 48.1% of the vote, the Conservatives won 21 seats on 32% of the vote and the LDs 3 seats on 14.9% of the vote.
Remarkably little change in vote shares over a generation but the Conservative vote in Inner London and parts of the Outer suburbs (the south west in particular but also the north and north east) has evaporated to both Labour and the LDs. Conversely, the Conservative vote has stengthened in the south east and north west suburbs and they retain three seats at the very centre of London (but they held the equivalent seats in 1997).
Yep. Given the narrative about London versus the rest, it's interesting that the northern commuter belt has shifted more toward the Tories in recent decades than practically anywhere else in the UK.
It's as if quite a lot of people don't recognise a bad thing as a bad thing if it happens to Nigel Farage. cf. having a milkshake thrown at him.
I regard Farage as a vile, self-promoting rent-a-gob. Frankly my dear I don't give a d*mn about him.
This tends to be the difference between the left and the right. For instance, right-wingers hate Corbyn's politics but they don't hate him as a person.
That surprises me. Look at the personal attacks on PB - a relatively sane forum - on non-rightwingers. Diane Abbott comes to mind.
I think you (@carnyx) are right. The belief amongst the right that they hate the policy not the individual is I think more self-flattery than actual fact. I seem to remember a lot of seething over Corbyn, for example.
No, the data says you’re wrong
Polls consistently show that while rightwingers fiercely disapprove of left wing beliefs, they don’t extend that loathing to the individual. Whereas the left makes it much more personal. “Never kissed a Tory”, “Tory scum”. &c
Rightwingers wouldn’t mind their kids dating a lefty, the left shows no such tolerance
And so on. There really is a difference and the moral failing is on the Left
But what if right wing people are actually worse people? I am not saying they are, but how do we identify empirically whether it is an unreasonable bias on the part of the left or a rational response? I'd be interested in polling of people in the political centre, as an identification strategy. Does a centrist like people x degrees to the left of them more than those x degrees to the right? That would be fascinating polling.
That is at the very least a possibility.
The worm is turning
I consider the modern young Woke lefty to be the most despicable form of western humanity we have ever seen
They are simultaneously boring, aggressive, earnest, nasty, humourless, narcissistic, feeble, pathetic, sinister, sheeplike, idiotic, dangerous and very very stupid. They are the worst. They are basically Nazis with pronouns
I am beginning to hate them with all the individual bile the left has usually reserved for the right. So maybe things will balance out soon. Woke Skum
Rage, rage against the dying of the Right!
Dying?
Lol
Have you not seen recent elections and polls in << checks Google >> Spain, Italy, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Austria, France, Hungary, Greece, Poland, and Germany?
It's as if quite a lot of people don't recognise a bad thing as a bad thing if it happens to Nigel Farage. cf. having a milkshake thrown at him.
I regard Farage as a vile, self-promoting rent-a-gob. Frankly my dear I don't give a d*mn about him.
This tends to be the difference between the left and the right. For instance, right-wingers hate Corbyn's politics but they don't hate him as a person.
That surprises me. Look at the personal attacks on PB - a relatively sane forum - on non-rightwingers. Diane Abbott comes to mind.
I think you (@carnyx) are right. The belief amongst the right that they hate the policy not the individual is I think more self-flattery than actual fact. I seem to remember a lot of seething over Corbyn, for example.
No, the data says you’re wrong
Polls consistently show that while rightwingers fiercely disapprove of left wing beliefs, they don’t extend that loathing to the individual. Whereas the left makes it much more personal. “Never kissed a Tory”, “Tory scum”. &c
Rightwingers wouldn’t mind their kids dating a lefty, the left shows no such tolerance
And so on. There really is a difference and the moral failing is on the Left
But what if right wing people are actually worse people? I am not saying they are, but how do we identify empirically whether it is an unreasonable bias on the part of the left or a rational response? I'd be interested in polling of people in the political centre, as an identification strategy. Does a centrist like people x degrees to the left of them more than those x degrees to the right? That would be fascinating polling.
That is at the very least a possibility.
The worm is turning
I consider the modern young Woke lefty to be the most despicable form of western humanity we have ever seen
They are simultaneously boring, aggressive, earnest, nasty, humourless, narcissistic, feeble, pathetic, sinister, sheeplike, idiotic, dangerous and very very stupid. They are the worst. They are basically Nazis with pronouns
I am beginning to hate them with all the individual bile the left has usually reserved for the right. So maybe things will balance out soon. Woke Skum
So, yes, right wingers are less prone to hate. This is clear to all.
We used to be. but you lot are now so intolerable - and intolerant - we have no choice but to hate you as individuals
Europe is following the American route, the polarisation is increasingly vicious
I consider the modern young Woke lefty to be the most despicable form of western humanity we have ever seen
They are simultaneously boring, aggressive, earnest, nasty, humourless, narcissistic, feeble, pathetic, sinister, sheeplike, idiotic, dangerous and very very stupid. They are the worst. They are basically Nazis with pronouns
I am beginning to hate them with all the individual bile the left has usually reserved for the right. So maybe things will balance out soon. Woke Skum
Leon: we don't hate the Left
Also Leon: I consider the modern young Woke lefty to be the most despicable form of western humanity we have ever seen. They are simultaneously boring, aggressive, earnest, nasty, humourless, narcissistic, feeble, pathetic, sinister, sheeplike, idiotic, dangerous and very very stupid. They are the worst. They are basically Nazis with pronouns. I am beginning to hate them with all the individual bile the left has usually reserved for the right. So maybe things will balance out soon. Woke Skum
The reliable https://www.theweatheroutlook.com/ thinks Sunday is the wetter day. 2.5 inches. met office looks grim too. BBC looks almost playable Sunday morning (no higher than 28% chance of rain) but they are the least reliable of the lot.
Sod it. This was going to have been a famous victory.
Should have been in Edinburgh or Ross County. 0.6mm forecast. And the latter within the 2-3 most gorgeous grounds I have ever seen.
The reliable https://www.theweatheroutlook.com/ thinks Sunday is the wetter day. 2.5 inches. met office looks grim too. BBC looks almost playable Sunday morning (no higher than 28% chance of rain) but they are the least reliable of the lot.
Sod it. This was going to have been a famous victory.
With regret I am on a draw from early on in the match. I hope I am wrong, but for those who feel certain about the weather there is free money to be made, though I am not going further in.
It's as if quite a lot of people don't recognise a bad thing as a bad thing if it happens to Nigel Farage. cf. having a milkshake thrown at him.
I regard Farage as a vile, self-promoting rent-a-gob. Frankly my dear I don't give a d*mn about him.
This tends to be the difference between the left and the right. For instance, right-wingers hate Corbyn's politics but they don't hate him as a person.
That surprises me. Look at the personal attacks on PB - a relatively sane forum - on non-rightwingers. Diane Abbott comes to mind.
I think you (@carnyx) are right. The belief amongst the right that they hate the policy not the individual is I think more self-flattery than actual fact. I seem to remember a lot of seething over Corbyn, for example.
No, the data says you’re wrong
Polls consistently show that while rightwingers fiercely disapprove of left wing beliefs, they don’t extend that loathing to the individual. Whereas the left makes it much more personal. “Never kissed a Tory”, “Tory scum”. &c
Rightwingers wouldn’t mind their kids dating a lefty, the left shows no such tolerance
And so on. There really is a difference and the moral failing is on the Left
In this country, perhaps.
Across the Pond, not so much. And for the people who lean into American culture wars and want to import that BS here, not so much either.
It's as if quite a lot of people don't recognise a bad thing as a bad thing if it happens to Nigel Farage. cf. having a milkshake thrown at him.
I regard Farage as a vile, self-promoting rent-a-gob. Frankly my dear I don't give a d*mn about him.
This tends to be the difference between the left and the right. For instance, right-wingers hate Corbyn's politics but they don't hate him as a person.
That surprises me. Look at the personal attacks on PB - a relatively sane forum - on non-rightwingers. Diane Abbott comes to mind.
I think you (@carnyx) are right. The belief amongst the right that they hate the policy not the individual is I think more self-flattery than actual fact. I seem to remember a lot of seething over Corbyn, for example.
No, the data says you’re wrong
Polls consistently show that while rightwingers fiercely disapprove of left wing beliefs, they don’t extend that loathing to the individual. Whereas the left makes it much more personal. “Never kissed a Tory”, “Tory scum”. &c
Rightwingers wouldn’t mind their kids dating a lefty, the left shows no such tolerance
And so on. There really is a difference and the moral failing is on the Left
But what if right wing people are actually worse people? I am not saying they are, but how do we identify empirically whether it is an unreasonable bias on the part of the left or a rational response? I'd be interested in polling of people in the political centre, as an identification strategy. Does a centrist like people x degrees to the left of them more than those x degrees to the right? That would be fascinating polling.
That is at the very least a possibility.
The worm is turning
I consider the modern young Woke lefty to be the most despicable form of western humanity we have ever seen
They are simultaneously boring, aggressive, earnest, nasty, humourless, narcissistic, feeble, pathetic, sinister, sheeplike, idiotic, dangerous and very very stupid. They are the worst. They are basically Nazis with pronouns
I am beginning to hate them with all the individual bile the left has usually reserved for the right. So maybe things will balance out soon. Woke Skum
So, yes, right wingers are less prone to hate. This is clear to all.
It would be easier to evaluate if it were possible to make a clear and rational distinction between 'right' and 'left' and what core principles distinguish them. If there are none, except at the ludicrous and unrepresentative extremes (and that is my view) then its like Man U v City supporters, and the discussion is without meaning.
At what point does the extra half hour come into play? 7 wickets down at 6.40?
Think it might be 8 down.
Ah no. At the discretion of the Umpires.
"The umpires may decide to play 30 minutes (a minimum of eight overs) extra time at the end of any day (other than the last day) if requested by either captain if, in the umpires opinion, it would bring about a definite result on that day (this is in addition to the maximum one hour's extra time provided for in 3.1 (a) (iii) above). If the umpires do not believe a result can be achieved no extra time shall be allowed."
Very much "A Tale of Three Elections" as someone would not have said.
Indeed, more similarities across the three contests than you might think from the superficial analysis of a good result for x, a bad result for y etc.
Let's start with the Labour win at Selby & Ainsty on a 44.8% turnout (pretty much uniform across the three contests). That meant 20,500 fewer people voted than at the 2019 election - the Conservatives lost 20,700 voters.
At Somerton & Frome, the turnout was 44.2% (compared with 52.1% at Chesham & Amersham and 52.3% at Tiverton & Honiton). This meant there were 26,000 fewer votes cast - the Conservative vote fell by 26,000.
As for Uxbridge & South Ruislip, turnout of 46.2% meant 17,300 fewer votes than in 2019 - the Conservatives lost 12,000 but Labour lost 5,000.
What we're left with is a sense the real victor last night was Apathy and disenchantment/disillusion with the Conservatives translated, to a degree at S&F and S&A into a vote for the opposition but the overwhelming sense was of an electorate disenchanted with most of what was on offer. The problem for the Conservatives is they need people to get off their hands and vote - Starmer may want a ringing endorsement on a high turnout but I'm sure he'll take a ringing endorsement on a low turnout.
We can't of course sniff at a 29% swing to the LDs at S&F nor at a near 24% swing to Labour in S&A. If both were repeated at a GE, the Conservatives would be reduced to a rump of 20-30 seats.
U&SR complicates matters - I did like @Sean_F's take this morning. As we've seen in both the last two local election rounds, there are areas where the Conservative vote has proven more robust and reliable than in other matters. These tend to be Con-Lab areas with little or no LD or Green presence. In London, I'd put Hillingdon alongside Croydon - both Boroughs are highly polarised - in Hillingdon, the north of the Borough is strongly Conservative while the south is Labour. That's how you get John McConnell's Hayes & Harlington in the same borough as Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner (the 203rd safest Conservative seat).
I suspect there are economic factors at work which don't apply in other areas where political opinion seems more volatile. Perhaps the starker contrast between levels of wealth in an area, the more polarised and confrontational the politics.
Well, John McConnell's constituency is also a white-minority area. White outer London suburbs have swung heavily Tory since the time Blair came in, not so much as Essex, but more than white inner London constituencies (like, say... Eltham).
In 1997, Labour 49.5% of the vote in London and 57 seats, the Conservatives won 31.2% of the vote and 11 seats and the LDs 14.6% of the vote and 6 seats.
In 2019, Labour won 49 seats on 48.1% of the vote, the Conservatives won 21 seats on 32% of the vote and the LDs 3 seats on 14.9% of the vote.
Remarkably little change in vote shares over a generation but the Conservative vote in Inner London and parts of the Outer suburbs (the south west in particular but also the north and north east) has evaporated to both Labour and the LDs. Conversely, the Conservative vote has stengthened in the south east and north west suburbs and they retain three seats at the very centre of London (but they held the equivalent seats in 1997).
Yep. Given the narrative about London versus the rest, it's interesting that the northern commuter belt has shifted more toward the Tories in recent decades than practically anywhere else in the UK.
The big surprise in the 2022 locals was the Conservative win in Harrow but you're right in that the Conservative vote has become more concentrated - in 17 of London's 32 Boroughs, the Conservatives have fewer than 10 Councillors and in seven of those seventeen they have no representation at all.
It's as if quite a lot of people don't recognise a bad thing as a bad thing if it happens to Nigel Farage. cf. having a milkshake thrown at him.
I regard Farage as a vile, self-promoting rent-a-gob. Frankly my dear I don't give a d*mn about him.
This tends to be the difference between the left and the right. For instance, right-wingers hate Corbyn's politics but they don't hate him as a person.
That surprises me. Look at the personal attacks on PB - a relatively sane forum - on non-rightwingers. Diane Abbott comes to mind.
I don't agree - what on earth makes you think PB is a relatively sane forum?
Labour should not backtrack on its environmental policies because of the result in Uxbridge, for two main reasons, in order of priority:
1. Measures to reduce air pollution in cities and, more generally, to tackle climate change are urgently needed. 2. Any backtracking would lead to a significant increase in the Green vote at the next GE, potentially losing Labour quite a few seats.
That's not to say that the implementation of schemes like ULEZ shouldn't be improved. But they shouldn't be abandoned.
Double-down on the environmental measures in central London, without making life difficult for people living on the edge of the metropolis like Uxbridge where a car is still important.
Picking this up from earlier.
That doesn't work, because it is the Outer London Boroughs which are the most polluted based on the published scorecard, and therefore most in need of measures to be taken - despite some of those Boroughs refusing to take responsibility for themselves.
That "published scorecard" looks like total bovine manure by those with an axe to grind to me. Heavily weighting things like "light" that have nothing to do with air quality anyway.
The two measures that this is supposed to tackle is NOX and PM2.5, not the garbage in that chart that seems to have been designed backwards with a desired outcome and then working back from there.
If you look at what is red for PM2.5 then the result is clear, central London has a problem, and Heathrow has a problem ... and that's about it.
Switch to NOX and while central London and Heathrow remains red, most of outer London is colour coded ... green.
That map is doing a hell of a lot of averaging out. The outer areas do tend to have ribbon development with trees and fields in between. It's the actual places around the roads where people live that are the issue.
Both criticisms are fair. I think this is probably the map we want (though the 2020 date is not ideal):
(data from GLA/mayor of London)
Yes, that proves it.
Heathrow aside, the air quality is far worse in Central London than outer London.
Which shouldn't shock anyone who has thought about it, or been there.
It takes a special kind of voodoo to create a dodgy chart that inverses that.
How does air traffic at Heathrow comply with ULEZ? Almost all of it is inside the GLA border.
There's only one Nasty Party, and we all know which it is.
Literary types interested in sub culture anti semitism will discover (I am not making this up) that the Nasty party is a creation of Richmal Crompton's William Brown in 'William the Detective'. Modern editions omit the story, a story which is a sad and egregious error in an otherwise outstanding and exemplary anti-establishment career for our 11 year old hero, and the author.
Labour should not backtrack on its environmental policies because of the result in Uxbridge, for two main reasons, in order of priority:
1. Measures to reduce air pollution in cities and, more generally, to tackle climate change are urgently needed. 2. Any backtracking would lead to a significant increase in the Green vote at the next GE, potentially losing Labour quite a few seats.
That's not to say that the implementation of schemes like ULEZ shouldn't be improved. But they shouldn't be abandoned.
Double-down on the environmental measures in central London, without making life difficult for people living on the edge of the metropolis like Uxbridge where a car is still important.
Picking this up from earlier.
That doesn't work, because it is the Outer London Boroughs which are the most polluted based on the published scorecard, and therefore most in need of measures to be taken - despite some of those Boroughs refusing to take responsibility for themselves.
That "published scorecard" looks like total bovine manure by those with an axe to grind to me. Heavily weighting things like "light" that have nothing to do with air quality anyway.
The two measures that this is supposed to tackle is NOX and PM2.5, not the garbage in that chart that seems to have been designed backwards with a desired outcome and then working back from there.
If you look at what is red for PM2.5 then the result is clear, central London has a problem, and Heathrow has a problem ... and that's about it.
Switch to NOX and while central London and Heathrow remains red, most of outer London is colour coded ... green.
That map is doing a hell of a lot of averaging out. The outer areas do tend to have ribbon development with trees and fields in between. It's the actual places around the roads where people live that are the issue.
Both criticisms are fair. I think this is probably the map we want (though the 2020 date is not ideal):
(data from GLA/mayor of London)
Yes, that proves it.
Heathrow aside, the air quality is far worse in Central London than outer London.
Which shouldn't shock anyone who has thought about it, or been there.
It takes a special kind of voodoo to create a dodgy chart that inverses that.
How does air traffic at Heathrow comply with ULEZ? Almost all of it is inside the GLA border.
Don't have to pay anything unless someone fancies taxiing a Boeing down the M4.
I consider the modern young Woke lefty to be the most despicable form of western humanity we have ever seen
They are simultaneously boring, aggressive, earnest, nasty, humourless, narcissistic, feeble, pathetic, sinister, sheeplike, idiotic, dangerous and very very stupid. They are the worst. They are basically Nazis with pronouns
I am beginning to hate them with all the individual bile the left has usually reserved for the right. So maybe things will balance out soon. Woke Skum
Leon: we don't hate the Left
Also Leon: I consider the modern young Woke lefty to be the most despicable form of western humanity we have ever seen. They are simultaneously boring, aggressive, earnest, nasty, humourless, narcissistic, feeble, pathetic, sinister, sheeplike, idiotic, dangerous and very very stupid. They are the worst. They are basically Nazis with pronouns. I am beginning to hate them with all the individual bile the left has usually reserved for the right. So maybe things will balance out soon. Woke Skum
Labour should not backtrack on its environmental policies because of the result in Uxbridge, for two main reasons, in order of priority:
1. Measures to reduce air pollution in cities and, more generally, to tackle climate change are urgently needed. 2. Any backtracking would lead to a significant increase in the Green vote at the next GE, potentially losing Labour quite a few seats.
That's not to say that the implementation of schemes like ULEZ shouldn't be improved. But they shouldn't be abandoned.
Double-down on the environmental measures in central London, without making life difficult for people living on the edge of the metropolis like Uxbridge where a car is still important.
Picking this up from earlier.
That doesn't work, because it is the Outer London Boroughs which are the most polluted based on the published scorecard, and therefore most in need of measures to be taken - despite some of those Boroughs refusing to take responsibility for themselves.
That "published scorecard" looks like total bovine manure by those with an axe to grind to me. Heavily weighting things like "light" that have nothing to do with air quality anyway.
The two measures that this is supposed to tackle is NOX and PM2.5, not the garbage in that chart that seems to have been designed backwards with a desired outcome and then working back from there.
If you look at what is red for PM2.5 then the result is clear, central London has a problem, and Heathrow has a problem ... and that's about it.
Switch to NOX and while central London and Heathrow remains red, most of outer London is colour coded ... green.
That map is doing a hell of a lot of averaging out. The outer areas do tend to have ribbon development with trees and fields in between. It's the actual places around the roads where people live that are the issue.
Both criticisms are fair. I think this is probably the map we want (though the 2020 date is not ideal):
(data from GLA/mayor of London)
Yes, that proves it.
Heathrow aside, the air quality is far worse in Central London than outer London.
Which shouldn't shock anyone who has thought about it, or been there.
It takes a special kind of voodoo to create a dodgy chart that inverses that.
How does air traffic at Heathrow comply with ULEZ? Almost all of it is inside the GLA border.
It doesn't. It is an outstanding example of, in Jesus's words, straining out gnats and swallowing camels.
Millions of people who drive older cars have never been in an aeroplane. Their youthful woke critics (I know lots of both groups) treat air travel like casual bus rides.
Labour should not backtrack on its environmental policies because of the result in Uxbridge, for two main reasons, in order of priority:
1. Measures to reduce air pollution in cities and, more generally, to tackle climate change are urgently needed. 2. Any backtracking would lead to a significant increase in the Green vote at the next GE, potentially losing Labour quite a few seats.
That's not to say that the implementation of schemes like ULEZ shouldn't be improved. But they shouldn't be abandoned.
Double-down on the environmental measures in central London, without making life difficult for people living on the edge of the metropolis like Uxbridge where a car is still important.
Picking this up from earlier.
That doesn't work, because it is the Outer London Boroughs which are the most polluted based on the published scorecard, and therefore most in need of measures to be taken - despite some of those Boroughs refusing to take responsibility for themselves.
That "published scorecard" looks like total bovine manure by those with an axe to grind to me. Heavily weighting things like "light" that have nothing to do with air quality anyway.
The two measures that this is supposed to tackle is NOX and PM2.5, not the garbage in that chart that seems to have been designed backwards with a desired outcome and then working back from there.
If you look at what is red for PM2.5 then the result is clear, central London has a problem, and Heathrow has a problem ... and that's about it.
Switch to NOX and while central London and Heathrow remains red, most of outer London is colour coded ... green.
That map is doing a hell of a lot of averaging out. The outer areas do tend to have ribbon development with trees and fields in between. It's the actual places around the roads where people live that are the issue.
Both criticisms are fair. I think this is probably the map we want (though the 2020 date is not ideal):
(data from GLA/mayor of London)
Yes, that proves it.
Heathrow aside, the air quality is far worse in Central London than outer London.
Which shouldn't shock anyone who has thought about it, or been there.
It takes a special kind of voodoo to create a dodgy chart that inverses that.
How does air traffic at Heathrow comply with ULEZ? Almost all of it is inside the GLA border.
It doesn't. It is an outstanding example of, in Jesus's words, straining out gnats and swallowing camels.
Millions of people who drive older cars have never been in an aeroplane. Their youthful woke critics (I know lots of both groups) treat air travel like casual bus rides.
An interesting statistic would be the percentage of climate activists who've sat in first/business class on a plane compared to the average person.
It's as if quite a lot of people don't recognise a bad thing as a bad thing if it happens to Nigel Farage. cf. having a milkshake thrown at him.
I regard Farage as a vile, self-promoting rent-a-gob. Frankly my dear I don't give a d*mn about him.
This tends to be the difference between the left and the right. For instance, right-wingers hate Corbyn's politics but they don't hate him as a person.
That surprises me. Look at the personal attacks on PB - a relatively sane forum - on non-rightwingers. Diane Abbott comes to mind.
I think you (@carnyx) are right. The belief amongst the right that they hate the policy not the individual is I think more self-flattery than actual fact. I seem to remember a lot of seething over Corbyn, for example.
No, the data says you’re wrong
Polls consistently show that while rightwingers fiercely disapprove of left wing beliefs, they don’t extend that loathing to the individual. Whereas the left makes it much more personal. “Never kissed a Tory”, “Tory scum”. &c
Rightwingers wouldn’t mind their kids dating a lefty, the left shows no such tolerance
And so on. There really is a difference and the moral failing is on the Left
But what if right wing people are actually worse people? I am not saying they are, but how do we identify empirically whether it is an unreasonable bias on the part of the left or a rational response? I'd be interested in polling of people in the political centre, as an identification strategy. Does a centrist like people x degrees to the left of them more than those x degrees to the right? That would be fascinating polling.
That is at the very least a possibility.
The worm is turning
I consider the modern young Woke lefty to be the most despicable form of western humanity we have ever seen
They are simultaneously boring, aggressive, earnest, nasty, humourless, narcissistic, feeble, pathetic, sinister, sheeplike, idiotic, dangerous and very very stupid. They are the worst. They are basically Nazis with pronouns
I am beginning to hate them with all the individual bile the left has usually reserved for the right. So maybe things will balance out soon. Woke Skum
Rage, rage against the dying of the Right!
Dying?
Lol
Have you not seen recent elections and polls in << checks Google >> Spain, Italy, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Austria, France, Hungary, Greece, Poland, and Germany?
It's more nuanced than that - look at Sweden where the opposition Social Democrats are charging ahead. What about Denmark where both left and right parties outside the centrist coalition are doing well?
The problem is as much one of incumbency as ideology - incumbent Governments are struggling irrespective of ideology. In some countries, populist nationalist parties are making ground - in others more traditional centre right and centre left parties are doing well.
In Spain, PP are going to be the big winners in Sunday's election - VOX may even do worse than the last election.
Labour should not backtrack on its environmental policies because of the result in Uxbridge, for two main reasons, in order of priority:
1. Measures to reduce air pollution in cities and, more generally, to tackle climate change are urgently needed. 2. Any backtracking would lead to a significant increase in the Green vote at the next GE, potentially losing Labour quite a few seats.
That's not to say that the implementation of schemes like ULEZ shouldn't be improved. But they shouldn't be abandoned.
Double-down on the environmental measures in central London, without making life difficult for people living on the edge of the metropolis like Uxbridge where a car is still important.
Picking this up from earlier.
That doesn't work, because it is the Outer London Boroughs which are the most polluted based on the published scorecard, and therefore most in need of measures to be taken - despite some of those Boroughs refusing to take responsibility for themselves.
That "published scorecard" looks like total bovine manure by those with an axe to grind to me. Heavily weighting things like "light" that have nothing to do with air quality anyway.
The two measures that this is supposed to tackle is NOX and PM2.5, not the garbage in that chart that seems to have been designed backwards with a desired outcome and then working back from there.
If you look at what is red for PM2.5 then the result is clear, central London has a problem, and Heathrow has a problem ... and that's about it.
Switch to NOX and while central London and Heathrow remains red, most of outer London is colour coded ... green.
That map is doing a hell of a lot of averaging out. The outer areas do tend to have ribbon development with trees and fields in between. It's the actual places around the roads where people live that are the issue.
Both criticisms are fair. I think this is probably the map we want (though the 2020 date is not ideal):
(data from GLA/mayor of London)
Yes, that proves it.
Heathrow aside, the air quality is far worse in Central London than outer London.
Which shouldn't shock anyone who has thought about it, or been there.
It takes a special kind of voodoo to create a dodgy chart that inverses that.
How does air traffic at Heathrow comply with ULEZ? Almost all of it is inside the GLA border.
It doesn't. It is an outstanding example of, in Jesus's words, straining out gnats and swallowing camels.
Millions of people who drive older cars have never been in an aeroplane. Their youthful woke critics (I know lots of both groups) treat air travel like casual bus rides.
As shown in maps below thread, most of the air pollution from planes is up there, not down there, so they are not comparable as pollution measures.
If we're hippie-bashing for climate change reasons, how's veganism going?
It's as if quite a lot of people don't recognise a bad thing as a bad thing if it happens to Nigel Farage. cf. having a milkshake thrown at him.
I regard Farage as a vile, self-promoting rent-a-gob. Frankly my dear I don't give a d*mn about him.
This tends to be the difference between the left and the right. For instance, right-wingers hate Corbyn's politics but they don't hate him as a person.
That surprises me. Look at the personal attacks on PB - a relatively sane forum - on non-rightwingers. Diane Abbott comes to mind.
Meghan!
That too, including some rather nastily salacious remarks on her sister-in-law which I wouldn't dream of using on a public forum about anyone. But I don't suppose either count as left-wingers, unless it's left-wing to introduce a new line into the Royal Family.
She is woke. That is a far bigger sin than being left wing.
Old fashioned economic left wingers just want your money. The woke want your identity.
I would have thought it's the last thing they would want ? They wouldn't touch Leon's identity (no sniggers at the back) with a barge pole.
I think you (@carnyx) are right. The belief amongst the right that they hate the policy not the individual is I think more self-flattery than actual fact. I seem to remember a lot of seething over Corbyn, for example.
No, the data says you’re wrong
Polls consistently show that while rightwingers fiercely disapprove of left wing beliefs, they don’t extend that loathing to the individual. Whereas the left makes it much more personal. “Never kissed a Tory”, “Tory scum”. &c
Rightwingers wouldn’t mind their kids dating a lefty, the left shows no such tolerance
And so on. There really is a difference and the moral failing is on the Left
Hmm. Two points
Such polls speak in generalities "Would you let your kid date a Lefty", which is not the same as "Would you let your kid date [named Lefty individual]", which is when the froth and spat words tend to leap out and play.
I cannot for the life of me think of a poll question more subject to social satisficing and self-censorship.
Polling to measure hatred is difficult (see also salience). Normal polling techniques don't really work. There is a polling technique thought to adequately measure hatred and disgust, but my Swiss-cheese memory has just fucked me up again. I'll see if I can find it.
I had to look at my texts from some years ago to get this. It was Item Response Theory. I'm several years out of date and things were garbled then, so this may be total gibberish, so apologies if bollox. The following is a summary of a presentation I gave some time in the 2010's. Here's the science bit...
"...Measuring hatred and disgust is difficult. You are liable to get a lie and even if you don't you have difficulty in measuring magnitude ("exactly how much do you hate X") and ordinality ("what do you hate more: X or Y"). Normal methods of asking questions (Classical Test Theory?) can't cope. So an alternative must be found.
One possibility is the combination of two techniques: Item Response Theory and ipsativity. Item Response Theory does not assume a linear relationship but uses a S-curve, which enables finer discrimination at the far end where strong emotions are found. Ipsativity allows the asking of multiple choice questions not obviously rankable nor associated with the question, which reduces cheating and social satisficing. The combination of the two techniques allow for things like hatreds to be more accurately measured.
It is not a panacea. It is expensive, requiring a lot of test subjects to set up and a much larger sample size to run. This is why (I think) pollsters don't use it. But for large cohorts of people in high-stakes environments such as postgraduate recruitment into sensitive roles it is useful, and tests that use it include the Graduate Record Examination (GRE) and Graduate Management Admission Test (GMAT)..."
It's as if quite a lot of people don't recognise a bad thing as a bad thing if it happens to Nigel Farage. cf. having a milkshake thrown at him.
I regard Farage as a vile, self-promoting rent-a-gob. Frankly my dear I don't give a d*mn about him.
This tends to be the difference between the left and the right. For instance, right-wingers hate Corbyn's politics but they don't hate him as a person.
That surprises me. Look at the personal attacks on PB - a relatively sane forum - on non-rightwingers. Diane Abbott comes to mind.
I don't agree - what on earth makes you think PB is a relatively sane forum?
Labour should not backtrack on its environmental policies because of the result in Uxbridge, for two main reasons, in order of priority:
1. Measures to reduce air pollution in cities and, more generally, to tackle climate change are urgently needed. 2. Any backtracking would lead to a significant increase in the Green vote at the next GE, potentially losing Labour quite a few seats.
That's not to say that the implementation of schemes like ULEZ shouldn't be improved. But they shouldn't be abandoned.
Double-down on the environmental measures in central London, without making life difficult for people living on the edge of the metropolis like Uxbridge where a car is still important.
Picking this up from earlier.
That doesn't work, because it is the Outer London Boroughs which are the most polluted based on the published scorecard, and therefore most in need of measures to be taken - despite some of those Boroughs refusing to take responsibility for themselves.
That "published scorecard" looks like total bovine manure by those with an axe to grind to me. Heavily weighting things like "light" that have nothing to do with air quality anyway.
The two measures that this is supposed to tackle is NOX and PM2.5, not the garbage in that chart that seems to have been designed backwards with a desired outcome and then working back from there.
If you look at what is red for PM2.5 then the result is clear, central London has a problem, and Heathrow has a problem ... and that's about it.
Switch to NOX and while central London and Heathrow remains red, most of outer London is colour coded ... green.
That map is doing a hell of a lot of averaging out. The outer areas do tend to have ribbon development with trees and fields in between. It's the actual places around the roads where people live that are the issue.
Both criticisms are fair. I think this is probably the map we want (though the 2020 date is not ideal):
(data from GLA/mayor of London)
Yes, that proves it.
Heathrow aside, the air quality is far worse in Central London than outer London.
Which shouldn't shock anyone who has thought about it, or been there.
It takes a special kind of voodoo to create a dodgy chart that inverses that.
How does air traffic at Heathrow comply with ULEZ? Almost all of it is inside the GLA border.
It doesn't. It is an outstanding example of, in Jesus's words, straining out gnats and swallowing camels.
Millions of people who drive older cars have never been in an aeroplane. Their youthful woke critics (I know lots of both groups) treat air travel like casual bus rides.
An interesting statistic would be the percentage of climate activists who've sat in first/business class on a plane compared to the average person.
Why would it be interesting? Would it add to the scientific stock of knowledge?
Interesting to see that Boris Johnson, even now, believes he can negotiate with a Judicial Enquiry - says the Guardian.
"Relevant" messages only will be handed over. Still squirming.
Boris Johnson has vowed to pass his pandemic WhatsApp messages over to the Covid inquiry after experts managed to recover them from an old phone he had been advised not to use for security reasons.
All “relevant” material will be passed to the inquiry in unredacted form as soon as possible, the former prime minister’s spokesperson said.
I know its an unpopular view, but having the politicians hand over their phones to the enquiry is a step too far. They had no expectation at the time, that these were to be public records, and the conversations recorded will lack a lot of context from the time.
Your criticism should be aimed at the party in power who set up the Inquiry under these rules. Whoever they were, it doesn’t seem like they understand how government works.
Labour should not backtrack on its environmental policies because of the result in Uxbridge, for two main reasons, in order of priority:
1. Measures to reduce air pollution in cities and, more generally, to tackle climate change are urgently needed. 2. Any backtracking would lead to a significant increase in the Green vote at the next GE, potentially losing Labour quite a few seats.
That's not to say that the implementation of schemes like ULEZ shouldn't be improved. But they shouldn't be abandoned.
Double-down on the environmental measures in central London, without making life difficult for people living on the edge of the metropolis like Uxbridge where a car is still important.
Picking this up from earlier.
That doesn't work, because it is the Outer London Boroughs which are the most polluted based on the published scorecard, and therefore most in need of measures to be taken - despite some of those Boroughs refusing to take responsibility for themselves.
That "published scorecard" looks like total bovine manure by those with an axe to grind to me. Heavily weighting things like "light" that have nothing to do with air quality anyway.
The two measures that this is supposed to tackle is NOX and PM2.5, not the garbage in that chart that seems to have been designed backwards with a desired outcome and then working back from there.
If you look at what is red for PM2.5 then the result is clear, central London has a problem, and Heathrow has a problem ... and that's about it.
Switch to NOX and while central London and Heathrow remains red, most of outer London is colour coded ... green.
That map is doing a hell of a lot of averaging out. The outer areas do tend to have ribbon development with trees and fields in between. It's the actual places around the roads where people live that are the issue.
Both criticisms are fair. I think this is probably the map we want (though the 2020 date is not ideal):
(data from GLA/mayor of London)
Yes, that proves it.
Heathrow aside, the air quality is far worse in Central London than outer London.
Which shouldn't shock anyone who has thought about it, or been there.
It takes a special kind of voodoo to create a dodgy chart that inverses that.
How does air traffic at Heathrow comply with ULEZ? Almost all of it is inside the GLA border.
It doesn't. It is an outstanding example of, in Jesus's words, straining out gnats and swallowing camels.
Millions of people who drive older cars have never been in an aeroplane. Their youthful woke critics (I know lots of both groups) treat air travel like casual bus rides.
An interesting statistic would be the percentage of climate activists who've sat in first/business class on a plane compared to the average person.
Why would it be interesting? Would it add to the scientific stock of knowledge?
Absolutely. If climate activists have sat in business class in significant numbers then it is statistical proof that anthropogenic CO2 doesn’t cause warming and therefore we can stop worrying. Simple.
Labour should not backtrack on its environmental policies because of the result in Uxbridge, for two main reasons, in order of priority:
1. Measures to reduce air pollution in cities and, more generally, to tackle climate change are urgently needed. 2. Any backtracking would lead to a significant increase in the Green vote at the next GE, potentially losing Labour quite a few seats.
That's not to say that the implementation of schemes like ULEZ shouldn't be improved. But they shouldn't be abandoned.
Double-down on the environmental measures in central London, without making life difficult for people living on the edge of the metropolis like Uxbridge where a car is still important.
Picking this up from earlier.
That doesn't work, because it is the Outer London Boroughs which are the most polluted based on the published scorecard, and therefore most in need of measures to be taken - despite some of those Boroughs refusing to take responsibility for themselves.
That "published scorecard" looks like total bovine manure by those with an axe to grind to me. Heavily weighting things like "light" that have nothing to do with air quality anyway.
The two measures that this is supposed to tackle is NOX and PM2.5, not the garbage in that chart that seems to have been designed backwards with a desired outcome and then working back from there.
If you look at what is red for PM2.5 then the result is clear, central London has a problem, and Heathrow has a problem ... and that's about it.
Switch to NOX and while central London and Heathrow remains red, most of outer London is colour coded ... green.
That map is doing a hell of a lot of averaging out. The outer areas do tend to have ribbon development with trees and fields in between. It's the actual places around the roads where people live that are the issue.
Both criticisms are fair. I think this is probably the map we want (though the 2020 date is not ideal):
(data from GLA/mayor of London)
Yes, that proves it.
Heathrow aside, the air quality is far worse in Central London than outer London.
Which shouldn't shock anyone who has thought about it, or been there.
It takes a special kind of voodoo to create a dodgy chart that inverses that.
How does air traffic at Heathrow comply with ULEZ? Almost all of it is inside the GLA border.
It doesn't. It is an outstanding example of, in Jesus's words, straining out gnats and swallowing camels.
Millions of people who drive older cars have never been in an aeroplane. Their youthful woke critics (I know lots of both groups) treat air travel like casual bus rides.
An interesting statistic would be the percentage of climate activists who've sat in first/business class on a plane compared to the average person.
Why would it be interesting? Would it add to the scientific stock of knowledge?
Are you arguing that social science isn’t science?
It's as if quite a lot of people don't recognise a bad thing as a bad thing if it happens to Nigel Farage. cf. having a milkshake thrown at him.
I regard Farage as a vile, self-promoting rent-a-gob. Frankly my dear I don't give a d*mn about him.
This tends to be the difference between the left and the right. For instance, right-wingers hate Corbyn's politics but they don't hate him as a person.
Hello. You appear to be messaging from a parallel universe similar to ours, but with notable differences. What else is different there, I wonder? Do you go on red and stop on green with traffic lights?
30 minutes ago: "We right-wingers don't hate anyone". Now: "We hate anyone who has flown in a plane".
Who hates those who have flown in a plane?
Those who are grade A hypocrites on the other hand are fair game for criticism.
Whether that be Bible-bashing "family values" types who secretly have affairs, or climate alarmists who want to make travel too expensive for others but choose in business/first class air travel by far the most polluting form of travel imaginable for themselves.
Labour should not backtrack on its environmental policies because of the result in Uxbridge, for two main reasons, in order of priority:
1. Measures to reduce air pollution in cities and, more generally, to tackle climate change are urgently needed. 2. Any backtracking would lead to a significant increase in the Green vote at the next GE, potentially losing Labour quite a few seats.
That's not to say that the implementation of schemes like ULEZ shouldn't be improved. But they shouldn't be abandoned.
Double-down on the environmental measures in central London, without making life difficult for people living on the edge of the metropolis like Uxbridge where a car is still important.
Picking this up from earlier.
That doesn't work, because it is the Outer London Boroughs which are the most polluted based on the published scorecard, and therefore most in need of measures to be taken - despite some of those Boroughs refusing to take responsibility for themselves.
That "published scorecard" looks like total bovine manure by those with an axe to grind to me. Heavily weighting things like "light" that have nothing to do with air quality anyway.
The two measures that this is supposed to tackle is NOX and PM2.5, not the garbage in that chart that seems to have been designed backwards with a desired outcome and then working back from there.
If you look at what is red for PM2.5 then the result is clear, central London has a problem, and Heathrow has a problem ... and that's about it.
Switch to NOX and while central London and Heathrow remains red, most of outer London is colour coded ... green.
That map is doing a hell of a lot of averaging out. The outer areas do tend to have ribbon development with trees and fields in between. It's the actual places around the roads where people live that are the issue.
Both criticisms are fair. I think this is probably the map we want (though the 2020 date is not ideal):
(data from GLA/mayor of London)
Yes, that proves it.
Heathrow aside, the air quality is far worse in Central London than outer London.
Which shouldn't shock anyone who has thought about it, or been there.
It takes a special kind of voodoo to create a dodgy chart that inverses that.
The map of actual values of NOx pollution for 2020, where there is no area of London with a figure below about 20 μg/m3, illustrates the need to move now very sharply.
This Government has set local authorities a goal of 12 μg/m3 by 2028 - 5 years from now, (and 10 μg/m3 by 2040), which is a 40% reduction on the best 2020 performance shown on that map and more in others areas. * These are annual mean levels of NOx exposure.
I don't see how despite the rhetoric they can delay the ULEZ and meet that.
It's notable that the Outer London Conservative Boroughs are the ones failing to act to meet the target set by the own party in Government.
The one I posted is a scorecard for several types of pollution, which has value.
It's an unproductive topic because the purported "consistent polling", of course, doesn't really exist outside Leon's brain. But part of the story must be that Farage, Johnson and so on are winners. It's easier to hate winners than powerless losers. I don't think people like Jacinta Ardern or Barack Obama experienced the unconditional personal fraternity of their political opponents.
George Bush II made enormous efforts to welcome Obama to the White House. Not just inviting his family for diner, leaving a nice note, his daughters leaving a nice letter to the Obama children etc. He also mandated a full, in depth hand over from his administration.
As a result, the two families became friends and are often seen together.
Labour should not backtrack on its environmental policies because of the result in Uxbridge, for two main reasons, in order of priority:
1. Measures to reduce air pollution in cities and, more generally, to tackle climate change are urgently needed. 2. Any backtracking would lead to a significant increase in the Green vote at the next GE, potentially losing Labour quite a few seats.
That's not to say that the implementation of schemes like ULEZ shouldn't be improved. But they shouldn't be abandoned.
Double-down on the environmental measures in central London, without making life difficult for people living on the edge of the metropolis like Uxbridge where a car is still important.
Picking this up from earlier.
That doesn't work, because it is the Outer London Boroughs which are the most polluted based on the published scorecard, and therefore most in need of measures to be taken - despite some of those Boroughs refusing to take responsibility for themselves.
That "published scorecard" looks like total bovine manure by those with an axe to grind to me. Heavily weighting things like "light" that have nothing to do with air quality anyway.
The two measures that this is supposed to tackle is NOX and PM2.5, not the garbage in that chart that seems to have been designed backwards with a desired outcome and then working back from there.
If you look at what is red for PM2.5 then the result is clear, central London has a problem, and Heathrow has a problem ... and that's about it.
Switch to NOX and while central London and Heathrow remains red, most of outer London is colour coded ... green.
That map is doing a hell of a lot of averaging out. The outer areas do tend to have ribbon development with trees and fields in between. It's the actual places around the roads where people live that are the issue.
Both criticisms are fair. I think this is probably the map we want (though the 2020 date is not ideal):
(data from GLA/mayor of London)
Yes, that proves it.
Heathrow aside, the air quality is far worse in Central London than outer London.
Which shouldn't shock anyone who has thought about it, or been there.
It takes a special kind of voodoo to create a dodgy chart that inverses that.
The one I posted is a scorecard for several types of pollution, which has value.
The map of actual values of NOx pollution for 2020, where there is no area of London with a figure below about 20 μg/m3, illustrates the need to move now very sharply.
This Government has set local authorities a goal of 12 μg/m3 by 2028 - 5 years from now, (and 10 μg/m3 by 2040), which is a 40% reduction on the best 2020 performance shown on that map and more in others areas. *
I don't see how despite the rhetoric they can delay the ULEZ and meet that.
No, it doesn't. Indeed if you read it, it doesn't.
Pollution/m^3 is a perfectly reasonable and legitimate measure of air quality - and if you do that then worst air quality is in Central London and Heathrow, with places like Tower Hamlets the worst.
So how did that dodgy chart you posted get Tower Hamlets having the cleanest air in London? Step outside in Tower Hamlets, take a deep breath, and see if it passes the sniff test.
(Pollution/population)/m^3 is a meaningless set of data.
((Pollution+non-pollution)/population)/m^3 is what you shared.
Its meaningless gibberish by those with an agenda. It should have failed the sniff test and please acknowledge that it is total and utter bollocks.
As for how to reach the appropriate levels without the ULEZ, there are alternative measures available. Greater Manchester have scrapped their charge scheme and gone with a scrappage and incentives and other alternatives scheme instead that will meet their target level sooner.
Charging a car that enters your zone once a month doesn't do much for your air quality but does raise revenue. Getting a dirty van that drives around all day every off the road does far, far more.
Strange there should be so much antagonism against the low emission zone when few people are in scope for it, becoming increasingly fewer.
Suspect there's something else going on. Maybe the people of Hillingdon actually like the Conservatives. They willingly voted for Johnson after all.
From actually talking to people - in addition to the people affected, everyone with an ICE vehicle is convinced they are next for the chop. With just as little notice, or help.
That's a very bad "slippery slope" take, but if people believe it then I guess it might explain the Uxbridge vote. While ULEZ has something to do with the result obviously, I just think people there are actually quite happy with the Conservatives really and don't need much of a prompt to vote for them.
But why the big difference to Selby then?
I don't know why there is a difference between Selby and Uxbridge, but clearly there is a huge difference. I don't think that difference can be wholly explained by an ULEZ scheme that doesn't apply to most people and which is generally accepted elsewhere in London.
It's as if quite a lot of people don't recognise a bad thing as a bad thing if it happens to Nigel Farage. cf. having a milkshake thrown at him.
I regard Farage as a vile, self-promoting rent-a-gob. Frankly my dear I don't give a d*mn about him.
This tends to be the difference between the left and the right. For instance, right-wingers hate Corbyn's politics but they don't hate him as a person.
Hello. You appear to be messaging from a parallel universe similar to ours, but with notable differences. What else is different there, I wonder? Do you go on red and stop on green with traffic lights?
It's an unproductive topic because the purported "consistent polling", of course, doesn't really exist outside Leon's brain. But part of the story must be that Farage, Johnson and so on are winners. It's easier to hate winners than powerless losers. I don't think people like Jacinta Ardern or Barack Obama experienced the unconditional personal fraternity of their political opponents.
George Bush II made enormous efforts to welcome Obama to the White House. Not just inviting his family for diner, leaving a nice note, his daughters leaving a nice letter to the Obama children etc. He also mandated a full, in depth hand over from his administration.
As a result, the two families became friends and are often seen together.
True and a heartwarming story.
Is George W Bush, I wonder, typical of today’s Republican Party?
Strange there should be so much antagonism against the low emission zone when few people are in scope for it, becoming increasingly fewer.
Suspect there's something else going on. Maybe the people of Hillingdon actually like the Conservatives. They willingly voted for Johnson after all.
From actually talking to people - in addition to the people affected, everyone with an ICE vehicle is convinced they are next for the chop. With just as little notice, or help.
That's a very bad "slippery slope" take, but if people believe it then I guess it might explain the Uxbridge vote. While ULEZ has something to do with the result obviously, I just think people there are actually quite happy with the Conservatives really and don't need much of a prompt to vote for them.
But why the big difference to Selby then?
I don't know why there is a difference between Selby and Uxbridge, but clearly there is a huge difference. I don't think that difference can be wholly explained by an ULEZ scheme that doesn't apply to most people and which is generally accepted elsewhere in London.
Quite possibly Uxbridge is just a lot less swingy than Selby and Ainsty. More stable public opinion. A bit of ULEZ, a bit of demographics, some economic measures. Plus the university students had all broken up and gone home.
What’s Uxbridge a useful guide to at the next GE? Not so much outer London as the West Midlands and M1 corridor.
It's as if quite a lot of people don't recognise a bad thing as a bad thing if it happens to Nigel Farage. cf. having a milkshake thrown at him.
I regard Farage as a vile, self-promoting rent-a-gob. Frankly my dear I don't give a d*mn about him.
This tends to be the difference between the left and the right. For instance, right-wingers hate Corbyn's politics but they don't hate him as a person.
Hello. You appear to be messaging from a parallel universe similar to ours, but with notable differences. What else is different there, I wonder? Do you go on red and stop on green with traffic lights?
It's as if quite a lot of people don't recognise a bad thing as a bad thing if it happens to Nigel Farage. cf. having a milkshake thrown at him.
I regard Farage as a vile, self-promoting rent-a-gob. Frankly my dear I don't give a d*mn about him.
This tends to be the difference between the left and the right. For instance, right-wingers hate Corbyn's politics but they don't hate him as a person.
That surprises me. Look at the personal attacks on PB - a relatively sane forum - on non-rightwingers. Diane Abbott comes to mind.
Oh really do come off it, people attack diane abbot because she is both stupid and innumerate
It's as if quite a lot of people don't recognise a bad thing as a bad thing if it happens to Nigel Farage. cf. having a milkshake thrown at him.
I regard Farage as a vile, self-promoting rent-a-gob. Frankly my dear I don't give a d*mn about him.
This tends to be the difference between the left and the right. For instance, right-wingers hate Corbyn's politics but they don't hate him as a person.
That surprises me. Look at the personal attacks on PB - a relatively sane forum - on non-rightwingers. Diane Abbott comes to mind.
Oh really do come off it, people attack diane abbot because she is both stupid and innumerate
But in the personal tones and wording we had on here? I did say "personal".
Strange there should be so much antagonism against the low emission zone when few people are in scope for it, becoming increasingly fewer.
Suspect there's something else going on. Maybe the people of Hillingdon actually like the Conservatives. They willingly voted for Johnson after all.
From actually talking to people - in addition to the people affected, everyone with an ICE vehicle is convinced they are next for the chop. With just as little notice, or help.
That's a very bad "slippery slope" take, but if people believe it then I guess it might explain the Uxbridge vote. While ULEZ has something to do with the result obviously, I just think people there are actually quite happy with the Conservatives really and don't need much of a prompt to vote for them.
But why the big difference to Selby then?
I don't know why there is a difference between Selby and Uxbridge, but clearly there is a huge difference. I don't think that difference can be wholly explained by an ULEZ scheme that doesn't apply to most people and which is generally accepted elsewhere in London.
From above - people with ICE vehicles have seen the congestion charge introduce, ULEZ introduced and expanded. It is merely logical to assume that they are next.
The more central areas of London have a different work and social structure. ULEZ is being expanded into areas where having a car isn’t just something for the weekend. It is used daily.
I was a very early advocate of EVs and agree with legislative action to reduce pollution in London.
That doesn’t mean that expanding a component in what has become a massively regressive tax system for cars is the way to do this.
It's an unproductive topic because the purported "consistent polling", of course, doesn't really exist outside Leon's brain. But part of the story must be that Farage, Johnson and so on are winners. It's easier to hate winners than powerless losers. I don't think people like Jacinta Ardern or Barack Obama experienced the unconditional personal fraternity of their political opponents.
George Bush II made enormous efforts to welcome Obama to the White House. Not just inviting his family for diner, leaving a nice note, his daughters leaving a nice letter to the Obama children etc. He also mandated a full, in depth hand over from his administration.
As a result, the two families became friends and are often seen together.
True and a heartwarming story.
Is George W Bush, I wonder, typical of today’s Republican Party?
I seem to remember that neither he nor Cheney are still party members. 2000-2008 is fifteen years and three presidents ago...
Labour should not backtrack on its environmental policies because of the result in Uxbridge, for two main reasons, in order of priority:
1. Measures to reduce air pollution in cities and, more generally, to tackle climate change are urgently needed. 2. Any backtracking would lead to a significant increase in the Green vote at the next GE, potentially losing Labour quite a few seats.
That's not to say that the implementation of schemes like ULEZ shouldn't be improved. But they shouldn't be abandoned.
Double-down on the environmental measures in central London, without making life difficult for people living on the edge of the metropolis like Uxbridge where a car is still important.
Picking this up from earlier.
That doesn't work, because it is the Outer London Boroughs which are the most polluted based on the published scorecard, and therefore most in need of measures to be taken - despite some of those Boroughs refusing to take responsibility for themselves.
That "published scorecard" looks like total bovine manure by those with an axe to grind to me. Heavily weighting things like "light" that have nothing to do with air quality anyway.
The two measures that this is supposed to tackle is NOX and PM2.5, not the garbage in that chart that seems to have been designed backwards with a desired outcome and then working back from there.
If you look at what is red for PM2.5 then the result is clear, central London has a problem, and Heathrow has a problem ... and that's about it.
Switch to NOX and while central London and Heathrow remains red, most of outer London is colour coded ... green.
That map is doing a hell of a lot of averaging out. The outer areas do tend to have ribbon development with trees and fields in between. It's the actual places around the roads where people live that are the issue.
Both criticisms are fair. I think this is probably the map we want (though the 2020 date is not ideal):
(data from GLA/mayor of London)
Yes, that proves it.
Heathrow aside, the air quality is far worse in Central London than outer London.
Which shouldn't shock anyone who has thought about it, or been there.
It takes a special kind of voodoo to create a dodgy chart that inverses that.
How does air traffic at Heathrow comply with ULEZ? Almost all of it is inside the GLA border.
It doesn't. It is an outstanding example of, in Jesus's words, straining out gnats and swallowing camels.
Millions of people who drive older cars have never been in an aeroplane. Their youthful woke critics (I know lots of both groups) treat air travel like casual bus rides.
An interesting statistic would be the percentage of climate activists who've sat in first/business class on a plane compared to the average person.
Why would it be interesting? Would it add to the scientific stock of knowledge?
Absolutely. If climate activists have sat in business class in significant numbers then it is statistical proof that anthropogenic CO2 doesn’t cause warming and therefore we can stop worrying. Simple.
Actually its not proof statistical or otherwise that anthropogenic CO2 doesn't cause warming. It is merely proof that they think they fly for "important reasons" and the plebs have no reason to fly so should desist
Third fastest 500 in test history. The other two were by teams led by Stokes, apparently.
Every ten years there should be a BBC SPOTD. Stokes would surely be in pole position.
My sporting knowledge is not encyclopaedic, so someone might know a better candidate, but I'd think Stokes has a good claim to being the greatest sporting leader of all time.
It's as if quite a lot of people don't recognise a bad thing as a bad thing if it happens to Nigel Farage. cf. having a milkshake thrown at him.
I regard Farage as a vile, self-promoting rent-a-gob. Frankly my dear I don't give a d*mn about him.
This tends to be the difference between the left and the right. For instance, right-wingers hate Corbyn's politics but they don't hate him as a person.
That surprises me. Look at the personal attacks on PB - a relatively sane forum - on non-rightwingers. Diane Abbott comes to mind.
I think you (@carnyx) are right. The belief amongst the right that they hate the policy not the individual is I think more self-flattery than actual fact. I seem to remember a lot of seething over Corbyn, for example.
No, the data says you’re wrong
Polls consistently show that while rightwingers fiercely disapprove of left wing beliefs, they don’t extend that loathing to the individual. Whereas the left makes it much more personal. “Never kissed a Tory”, “Tory scum”. &c
Rightwingers wouldn’t mind their kids dating a lefty, the left shows no such tolerance
And so on. There really is a difference and the moral failing is on the Left
But what if right wing people are actually worse people? I am not saying they are, but how do we identify empirically whether it is an unreasonable bias on the part of the left or a rational response? I'd be interested in polling of people in the political centre, as an identification strategy. Does a centrist like people x degrees to the left of them more than those x degrees to the right? That would be fascinating polling.
That is at the very least a possibility.
The worm is turning
I consider the modern young Woke lefty to be the most despicable form of western humanity we have ever seen
They are simultaneously boring, aggressive, earnest, nasty, humourless, narcissistic, feeble, pathetic, sinister, sheeplike, idiotic, dangerous and very very stupid. They are the worst. They are basically Nazis with pronouns
I am beginning to hate them with all the individual bile the left has usually reserved for the right. So maybe things will balance out soon. Woke Skum
So, yes, right wingers are less prone to hate. This is clear to all.
It would be easier to evaluate if it were possible to make a clear and rational distinction between 'right' and 'left' and what core principles distinguish them. If there are none, except at the ludicrous and unrepresentative extremes (and that is my view) then its like Man U v City supporters, and the discussion is without meaning.
It's an unproductive topic because the purported "consistent polling", of course, doesn't really exist outside Leon's brain. But part of the story must be that Farage, Johnson and so on are winners. It's easier to hate winners than powerless losers. I don't think people like Jacinta Ardern or Barack Obama experienced the unconditional personal fraternity of their political opponents.
George Bush II made enormous efforts to welcome Obama to the White House. Not just inviting his family for diner, leaving a nice note, his daughters leaving a nice letter to the Obama children etc. He also mandated a full, in depth hand over from his administration.
As a result, the two families became friends and are often seen together.
True and a heartwarming story.
Is George W Bush, I wonder, typical of today’s Republican Party?
I seem to remember that neither he nor Cheney are still party members. 2000-2008 is fifteen years and three presidents ago...
Af the time W was seen as beyond the pale compared with previous republican presidents. Which shows you how far the party has fallen...
Comments
And introduce spare rain days!!!!
GRRRRR
Across the Pond, not so much. And for the people who lean into American culture wars and want to import that BS here, not so much either.
I think this is probably the map we want (though the 2020 date is not ideal):
(data from GLA/mayor of London)
Anyway, it's not the north that's the problem, it's the west. Cardiff is at least as wet as Manchester; Leeds and CLS are almost as dry as London.
Sod it. This was going to have been a famous victory.
For some reason Lords is never rotated out, but England have only won two Ashes Tests there since World War 2.
I thought this one might be hard work but a 29% swing is no small achievement and it's a warm welcome to Sarah Dyke as the party's newest MP. I assume she'll be the candidate for the new Glastonbury & Somerton seat but a number of the new Somerset seats will be in the party's sights after this win.
It's another fillip for Sir Ed Davey who struggles to get heard at times but results like these are always a boost albeit they are of short duration. Each win brings in new members and new activists which will then help hold the seat at the coming GE.
The party's opinion poll rating is edging back toward the 2019 GE number and while both S&A and U&SR showed what can still happen when the party is ruthlessly squeezed, the LDs won't be fighting their battles in those seats but in the maybe 30-50 where they have possibilites (some real, others more remote). S&F was the 53rd LD target so winning it as emphatically as the party did is very good.
On that basis, the LDs would scrape into Government with around 380 seats which I'm sure we'd all enjoy.
Four hours should be plenty to get the last six
I exaggerate. But seriously, people like me think it a dangerous distraction to get worked up about X being filthy rich or Y having a private helicopter, when the underlying reason is that the system rewards greed and exploitation. If it didn't, then I dare say Farage and his ilk would be perfectly sensible ordinary folk like you and me.
That, I suspect, is why Corbyn was so crap at exploiting scandals about individual Ministers.
- Such polls speak in generalities "Would you let your kid date a Lefty", which is not the same as "Would you let your kid date [named Lefty individual]", which is when the froth and spat words tend to leap out and play.
- I cannot for the life of me think of a poll question more subject to social satisficing and self-censorship.
Polling to measure hatred is difficult (see also salience). Normal polling techniques don't really work. There is a polling technique thought to adequately measure hatred and disgust, but my Swiss-cheese memory has just fucked me up again[1]. I'll see if I can find it.Notes
Queue Eee Dee.
Heathrow aside, the air quality is far worse in Central London than outer London.
Which shouldn't shock anyone who has thought about it, or been there.
It takes a special kind of voodoo to create a dodgy chart that inverses that.
I consider the modern young Woke lefty to be the most despicable form of western humanity we have ever seen
They are simultaneously boring, aggressive, earnest, nasty, humourless, narcissistic, feeble, pathetic, sinister, sheeplike, idiotic, dangerous and very very stupid. They are the worst. They are basically Nazis with pronouns
I am beginning to hate them with all the individual bile the left has usually reserved for the right. So maybe things will balance out soon. Woke Skum
What objective criteria would you use to determine which people are better or worse?
In 2019, Labour won 49 seats on 48.1% of the vote, the Conservatives won 21 seats on 32% of the vote and the LDs 3 seats on 14.9% of the vote.
Remarkably little change in vote shares over a generation but the Conservative vote in Inner London and parts of the Outer suburbs (the south west in particular but also the north and north east) has evaporated to both Labour and the LDs. Conversely, the Conservative vote has stengthened in the south east and north west suburbs and they retain three seats at the very centre of London (but they held the equivalent seats in 1997).
Would you go for a drink with them
If age appropriate would you be happy for them to date your daughter/son
Did they vote the same way as you....
Lol
Have you not seen recent elections and polls in << checks Google >> Spain, Italy, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Austria, France, Hungary, Greece, Poland, and Germany?
https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2023/06/19/why-the-far-right-is-increasingly-getting-into-power-across-europe
https://www.politico.eu/article/understanding-europes-shift-to-the-right/
Europe is following the American route, the polarisation is increasingly vicious
Case in point.
Case closed.
"The umpires may decide to play 30 minutes (a minimum of eight overs) extra time at the end of any day (other than the last day) if requested by either captain if, in the umpires opinion, it would bring about a definite result on that day (this is in addition to the maximum one hour's extra time provided for in 3.1 (a) (iii) above). If the umpires do not believe a result can be achieved no extra time shall be allowed."
http://static.espncricinfo.com/db/ABOUT_CRICKET/ICC_2000-01/TEST_MATCH_PLAYING_CONDITIONS.html
The other two were by teams led by Stokes, apparently.
Millions of people who drive older cars have never been in an aeroplane. Their youthful woke critics (I know lots of both groups) treat air travel like casual bus rides.
The problem is as much one of incumbency as ideology - incumbent Governments are struggling irrespective of ideology. In some countries, populist nationalist parties are making ground - in others more traditional centre right and centre left parties are doing well.
In Spain, PP are going to be the big winners in Sunday's election - VOX may even do worse than the last election.
If we're hippie-bashing for climate change reasons, how's veganism going?
They wouldn't touch Leon's identity (no sniggers at the back) with a barge pole.
"...Measuring hatred and disgust is difficult. You are liable to get a lie and even if you don't you have difficulty in measuring magnitude ("exactly how much do you hate X") and ordinality ("what do you hate more: X or Y"). Normal methods of asking questions (Classical Test Theory?) can't cope. So an alternative must be found.
One possibility is the combination of two techniques: Item Response Theory and ipsativity. Item Response Theory does not assume a linear relationship but uses a S-curve, which enables finer discrimination at the far end where strong emotions are found. Ipsativity allows the asking of multiple choice questions not obviously rankable nor associated with the question, which reduces cheating and social satisficing. The combination of the two techniques allow for things like hatreds to be more accurately measured.
It is not a panacea. It is expensive, requiring a lot of test subjects to set up and a much larger sample size to run. This is why (I think) pollsters don't use it. But for large cohorts of people in high-stakes environments such as postgraduate recruitment into sensitive roles it is useful, and tests that use it include the Graduate Record Examination (GRE) and Graduate Management Admission Test (GMAT)..."
You're welcome.
Now: "We hate anyone who has flown in a plane".
Those who are grade A hypocrites on the other hand are fair game for criticism.
Whether that be Bible-bashing "family values" types who secretly have affairs, or climate alarmists who want to make travel too expensive for others but choose in business/first class air travel by far the most polluting form of travel imaginable for themselves.
This Government has set local authorities a goal of 12 μg/m3 by 2028 - 5 years from now, (and 10 μg/m3 by 2040), which is a 40% reduction on the best 2020 performance shown on that map and more in others areas. * These are annual mean levels of NOx exposure.
I don't see how despite the rhetoric they can delay the ULEZ and meet that.
It's notable that the Outer London Conservative Boroughs are the ones failing to act to meet the target set by the own party in Government.
The one I posted is a scorecard for several types of pollution, which has value.
* https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9600/
As a result, the two families became friends and are often seen together.
Pollution/m^3 is a perfectly reasonable and legitimate measure of air quality - and if you do that then worst air quality is in Central London and Heathrow, with places like Tower Hamlets the worst.
So how did that dodgy chart you posted get Tower Hamlets having the cleanest air in London? Step outside in Tower Hamlets, take a deep breath, and see if it passes the sniff test.
(Pollution/population)/m^3 is a meaningless set of data.
((Pollution+non-pollution)/population)/m^3 is what you shared.
Its meaningless gibberish by those with an agenda. It should have failed the sniff test and please acknowledge that it is total and utter bollocks.
As for how to reach the appropriate levels without the ULEZ, there are alternative measures available. Greater Manchester have scrapped their charge scheme and gone with a scrappage and incentives and other alternatives scheme instead that will meet their target level sooner.
Charging a car that enters your zone once a month doesn't do much for your air quality but does raise revenue. Getting a dirty van that drives around all day every off the road does far, far more.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/scottish-town-where-green-is-beyond-the-pale-981747.html
Is George W Bush, I wonder, typical of today’s Republican Party?
What’s Uxbridge a useful guide to at the next GE? Not so much outer London as the West Midlands and M1 corridor.
Well, that story certainly teaches us about hating others!
The more central areas of London have a different work and social structure. ULEZ is being expanded into areas where having a car isn’t just something for the weekend. It is used daily.
I was a very early advocate of EVs and agree with legislative action to reduce pollution in London.
That doesn’t mean that expanding a component in what has become a massively regressive tax system for cars is the way to do this.