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".
There are plenty of reasons to pour scorn on Diane abbot none of them are because she is lefty, black or a woman. The same reasons apply to rees mogg. The difference is when people say it about rees mogg no one tries to claim its because he is black or a woman
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...
Back before US politics jumped over the shark that was jumping over another shark.
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".
There are plenty of reasons to pour scorn on Diane abbot none of them are because she is lefty, black or a woman. The same reasons apply to rees mogg. The difference is when people say it about rees mogg no one tries to claim its because he is black or a woman
Isn’t it bigoted to assume Rees Mogg is not a woman without asking him?
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
It's not even that, it could merely be that they'd prefer to travel by other means, support the investment in providing greener alternatives, but they have to live in the world that exists, rather than the world they'd prefer, and so fly in the absence of those greener alternatives.
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".
There are plenty of reasons to pour scorn on Diane abbot none of them are because she is lefty, black or a woman. The same reasons apply to rees mogg. The difference is when people say it about rees mogg no one tries to claim its because he is black or a woman
Isn’t it bigoted to assume Rees Mogg is not a woman without asking him?
probably and isnt that part of the issue, he presents as a male, he has made no claims to not be male yet I am berated that it might be a bigotted thing to identify him as a male (yes I know you were joking, sadly I can imagine people making it as a serious accusation)
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.
While Mr & Mrs Bush the Younger are undoubtedly nicer people than, say, Mr & Mrs3 Trump, and ditto Mr & Mrs Obama compared with Mr & Mrs Clinton, sadly most of what you say was result of high-powered PR-work by both sides. Serving their own interests.
Note for starters, the Bush/Obama interactions after latter's election, were very conscious counter-point to the less-than-positive welcome tendered to Bushies in 2001 by Clintonistas in West Wing, featuring snarky notes left on desks for the new team. And just as snarky publicizing of same by W's bunch.
Hardly surprising following the 2000 election crisis, but hardly edifying either, on either side.
Fast-forward to 2008, when W is leaving office with little left of his former popularity. And bad taste in his mouth from being 2nd-banana to Dick Cheney for eight years. Indeed, with Bush blaming his VP for the public souring on him and him.
So W had every incentive to play nice. Especially methinks, since his daughter Jenna was embarking upon a media career, that continues to this day, as a regular on US morning TV.
And also keep in mind, that the Bushes and Obamas belong, along with the Carters, to a VERY exclusive club: former POTUS and FLOTUS.
A club from which Mr & Mrs Trump, despite their ostensible qualifications, have very clearly been blackballed.
Uxbridge . What a dump , the safest thing is to nuke it from space , you can’t be too careful otherwise the idiocy plague might spread .
As for the right left argument . Right wingers in the media only like free speech when it agrees with them , all their protestations and alleged love of free speech implodes when it’s critical of them or puts facts in front of them .
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.
While Mr & Mrs Bush the Younger are undoubtedly nicer people than, say, Mr & Mrs3 Trump, and ditto Mr & Mrs Obama compared with Mr & Mrs Clinton, sadly most of what you say was result of high-powered PR-work by both sides. Serving their own interests.
Note for starters, the Bush/Obama interactions after latter's election, were very conscious counter-point to the less-than-positive welcome tendered to Bushies in 2001 by Clintonistas in West Wing, featuring snarky notes left on desks for the new team. And just as snarky publicizing of same by W's bunch.
Hardly surprising following the 2000 election crisis, but hardly edifying either, on either side.
Fast-forward to 2008, when W is leaving office with little left of his former popularity. And bad taste in his mouth from being 2nd-banana to Dick Cheney for eight years. Indeed, with Bush blaming his VP for the public souring on him and him.
So W had every incentive to play nice. Especially methinks, since his daughter Jenna was embarking upon a media career, that continues to this day, as a regular on US morning TV.
And also keep in mind, that the Bushes and Obamas belong, along with the Carters, to a VERY exclusive club: former POTUS and FLOTUS.
A club from which Mr & Mrs Trump, despite their ostensible qualifications, have very clearly been blackballed.
The interactions between the Bushes and the Obamas are frequent and go beyond any “show” from the Bushes side. They have caused considerable remark - some of it quite sharp - from diehard Democrat supporters.
Uxbridge . What a dump , the safest thing is to nuke it from space , you can’t be too careful otherwise the idiocy plague might spread .
As for the right left argument . Right wingers in the media only like free speech when it agrees with them , all their protestations and alleged love of free speech implodes when it’s critical of them or puts facts in front of them .
Ah, the Head Count are revolting?
Yes, let’s kill the less wealthy people for not wanting to pay more tax than rich people.
You are the Marquis De Maynes and I claim my free fencing lessons from Perigore of Paris.
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".
There are plenty of reasons to pour scorn on Diane abbot none of them are because she is lefty, black or a woman. The same reasons apply to rees mogg. The difference is when people say it about rees mogg no one tries to claim its because he is black or a woman
Isn’t it bigoted to assume Rees Mogg is not a woman without asking him?
probably and isnt that part of the issue, he presents as a male, he has made no claims to not be male yet I am berated that it might be a bigotted thing to identify him as a male (yes I know you were joking, sadly I can imagine people making it as a serious accusation)
The important things are
1) be polite 2) remember that no one who shares a bottle is ever disliked for it. 3) enjoy the farce we live in, with a kindly smile.
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".
There are plenty of reasons to pour scorn on Diane abbot none of them are because she is lefty, black or a woman. The same reasons apply to rees mogg. The difference is when people say it about rees mogg no one tries to claim its because he is black or a woman
Isn’t it bigoted to assume Rees Mogg is not a woman without asking him?
probably and isnt that part of the issue, he presents as a male, he has made no claims to not be male yet I am berated that it might be a bigotted thing to identify him as a male (yes I know you were joking, sadly I can imagine people making it as a serious accusation)
The important things are
1) be polite 2) remember that no one who shares a bottle is ever disliked for it. 3) enjoy the farce we live in, with a kindly smile.
Comments
Note for starters, the Bush/Obama interactions after latter's election, were very conscious counter-point to the less-than-positive welcome tendered to Bushies in 2001 by Clintonistas in West Wing, featuring snarky notes left on desks for the new team. And just as snarky publicizing of same by W's bunch.
Hardly surprising following the 2000 election crisis, but hardly edifying either, on either side.
Fast-forward to 2008, when W is leaving office with little left of his former popularity. And bad taste in his mouth from being 2nd-banana to Dick Cheney for eight years. Indeed, with Bush blaming his VP for the public souring on him and him.
So W had every incentive to play nice. Especially methinks, since his daughter Jenna was embarking upon a media career, that continues to this day, as a regular on US morning TV.
And also keep in mind, that the Bushes and Obamas belong, along with the Carters, to a VERY exclusive club: former POTUS and FLOTUS.
A club from which Mr & Mrs Trump, despite their ostensible qualifications, have very clearly been blackballed.
As for the right left argument . Right wingers in the media only like free speech when it agrees with them , all their protestations and alleged love of free speech implodes when it’s critical of them or puts facts in front of them .
It's just plain old whataboutery.
Yes, let’s kill the less wealthy people for not wanting to pay more tax than rich people.
You are the Marquis De Maynes and I claim my free fencing lessons from Perigore of Paris.
1) be polite
2) remember that no one who shares a bottle is ever disliked for it.
3) enjoy the farce we live in, with a kindly smile.
This thread has been defeated in a by-election
Australia deserve to lose this Test
They have been soundly beaten.
If Patrick Cummins had an ounce of honour he would concede, and concede now.