Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Two thirds of CON members don’t think there’s a climate emergency – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,216
edited August 2023 in General
Two thirds of CON members don’t think there’s a climate emergency – politicalbetting.com

New panel of Conservative Party members:40% oppose the NetZero target; another 40% oppose writing it into law.33% think global warming is not driven by human activity; a further 12% think it isn't real.66% think there is not a climate emergency.https://t.co/xi02Vr3eK1

Read the full story here

«13456789

Comments

  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 8,832
    edited August 2023
    This is a voodoo poll, right? Not something done properly, just representative of Con Home readers (:hushed:) who are also Con members (:open_mouth:) who can be bothered to express an opinion?
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,317
    A very sane father of a friend of mine, former Labour Party member, and (now retired) self-made entrepreneur, now believes that global warming is caused by underwater volcanoes.

    Social media is a cancer on our democracy.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,568
    I was talking to a member deep in the selection process in a winnable seat - one applicant is really majoring on climate change, another is focusing on aid for victims of scandals (Post Office, Hillsborough, etc.). She's leaning to the first as she thinks that, with NHS and cost of living, that will be the key theme in the election. But I wonder if it is (I'm not sure that victims will be either, sadly). People who agree it's happening and important are already not voting Tory, whereas for cost of living the position is less clear-cut, so perhaps we should be focusing on that?

    Conversely, Sunak seems to be pursuing a core vote strategy to fight the looking wall of Tory abstentions - "we might lose but let's motivate the remaining supporters to actually vote".
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,955
    "Climate change orthodoxy".

    Is that a bit like Liz Truss' economic orthodoxy?
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,955

    I was talking to a member deep in the selection process in a winnable seat - one applicant is really majoring on climate change, another is focusing on aid for victims of scandals (Post Office, Hillsborough, etc.). She's leaning to the first as she thinks that, with NHS and cost of living, that will be the key theme in the election. But I wonder if it is (I'm not sure that victims will be either, sadly). People who agree it's happening and important are already not voting Tory, whereas for cost of living the position is less clear-cut, so perhaps we should be focusing on that?

    Conversely, Sunak seems to be pursuing a core vote strategy to fight the looking wall of Tory abstentions - "we might lose but let's motivate the remaining supporters to actually vote".

    Is that based on 1997, which was largely Tories not turning up?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606
    edited August 2023
    fpt for @Miklosvar coz it took me ages to type



    One of the most terrifying things I have done these last few years is visit this place in Arizona

    https://titanmissilemuseum.org/

    I mentioned it at the time on PB. It is - I think - the only place in the world you can see a big-ass city-busting ICBM in its actual silo. Ready to go. You can also visit the green room (green for soothing) where the missile controllers would flick the switch. The woman guide talks you through the process, and the exact moment when the command from the president would become legally then practically irreversible

    Once the telephone calls were received from the president, and the codes verified, launch would then officially begin and could not legally be reversed. in practise another few minutes would pass and then the keys would be turned and communication stopped and from then on the missiles were gonna fire whatever. From codes to launch would be 5-10 excruciating yet inexorable minutes

    It was accepted that these minutes would be psychological torture for the operators - the urge NOT to go through the process of destroying the world would be intense - so they were carefully selected for intelligence, mental health, loyalty, coolness

    My whole visit was rendered near-intolerable by the fact it happened at the height of Putin's Ukraine nuke scare and everyone in the guided group was hyper aware of this. Yet the guide had her set Noughties spiel and she said "now we have nuclear peace treaties and this can never happen, thank God" and everyone laughed, bitterly and nervously
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,708
    So over 2/3rd of Conservative members do believe climate change is caused by humans and almost 90% think it's real?

    Margaret Thatcher first alerted the world to its dangers. Decades ago. Because she understood the science. All Conservatives revere her and should understand that. But she was practical too.

    What we're seeing here is the consequences of allowing this issue to be entirely captured by the activist Left, which fuels polarisation.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,994
    Climate change is happening, it is going to continue to happen because no country is actually going to actually do enough about it. We should all just learn to accept that. People on the whole are not going to put on the hairshirts necessary.

    Therefore we either take steps to mitigate it or we just ignore it
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,708

    I was talking to a member deep in the selection process in a winnable seat - one applicant is really majoring on climate change, another is focusing on aid for victims of scandals (Post Office, Hillsborough, etc.). She's leaning to the first as she thinks that, with NHS and cost of living, that will be the key theme in the election. But I wonder if it is (I'm not sure that victims will be either, sadly). People who agree it's happening and important are already not voting Tory, whereas for cost of living the position is less clear-cut, so perhaps we should be focusing on that?

    Conversely, Sunak seems to be pursuing a core vote strategy to fight the looking wall of Tory abstentions - "we might lose but let's motivate the remaining supporters to actually vote".

    Sunak might well have seen the polling and focus group data and conclude, on the final paragraph, that he doesn't have a choice.

    He has to ensure the Conservative Party survives to fight another day. That's his job, as well as being PM now.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,708
    FPT - I've yet to meet anyone who respects Sadiq Khan.

    I know a couple of New Labour SPADs who laughed out loud when I mentioned his name, and a few people in business who'd met him who said he was completely barking.

    I think even the people who vote for him do so with clothes pegs on their nose.
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 4,727

    A very sane father of a friend of mine, former Labour Party member, and (now retired) self-made entrepreneur, now believes that global warming is caused by underwater volcanoes.

    Social media is a cancer on our democracy.

    Technically that's not untrue. It is just that we have anthropogenic change on top.

    Without those volcanoes, we'd still have a Snowball Earth.
  • MiklosvarMiklosvar Posts: 1,855
    Utterly loaded question. I think climate change is a massive and pressing problem. If I thought it was an emergency I would vow (for instance) never to get on a plane again except to save life, because that's what emergency actually means.
  • Nigel Farage for PM.

    I've just received a letter from the bank. It has withdrawn my overdraft!!!
  • MiklosvarMiklosvar Posts: 1,855
    Leon said:

    fpt for @Miklosvar coz it took me ages to type



    One of the most terrifying things I have done these last few years is visit this place in Arizona

    https://titanmissilemuseum.org/

    I mentioned it at the time on PB. It is - I think - the only place in the world you can see a big-ass city-busting ICBM in its actual silo. Ready to go. You can also visit the green room (green for soothing) where the missile controllers would flick the switch. The woman guide talks you through the process, and the exact moment when the command from the president would become legally then practically irreversible

    Once the telephone calls were received from the president, and the codes verified, launch would then officially begin and could not legally be reversed. in practise another few minutes would pass and then the keys would be turned and communication stopped and from then on the missiles were gonna fire whatever. From codes to launch would be 5-10 excruciating yet inexorable minutes

    It was accepted that these minutes would be psychological torture for the operators - the urge NOT to go through the process of destroying the world would be intense - so they were carefully selected for intelligence, mental health, loyalty, coolness

    My whole visit was rendered near-intolerable by the fact it happened at the height of Putin's Ukraine nuke scare and everyone in the guided group was hyper aware of this. Yet the guide had her set Noughties spiel and she said "now we have nuclear peace treaties and this can never happen, thank God" and everyone laughed, bitterly and nervously

    Quite. Per Blackadder, We have survived the Great War, 1914-1917.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606

    FPT - I've yet to meet anyone who respects Sadiq Khan.

    I know a couple of New Labour SPADs who laughed out loud when I mentioned his name, and a few people in business who'd met him who said he was completely barking.

    I think even the people who vote for him do so with clothes pegs on their nose.

    I've yet to meet an actual Sadiq Khan VOTER - as in someone who openly and avowedly says "Oh yes I'm voting for him". Most people say Meh, what a boring jerk. The full-on haters really hate him. A small minority say "Oh well he';s not great but I might have to"

    Yet he's apparently coasting to victory again

    I am sure I live in something of an ethnic bubble, more white than most of London, but that bubble is politically diverse from UKIP Brexiteers to plenty of lefties (of all classes)

    I cannot find an enthusiastic Khan voter. He is eminently beatable and it is pathetic that the Tories have not found anyone to do it
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,364

    Pro_Rata said:

    Bluntly, because they will be dead by then.

    It's a weird disconnect, all those Tories obsessing over inheritance tax so they can leave even more of their filthy lucre to the fruit of their loins while being selfishly unconcerned about the hellscape that said fruits will have to inhablt.
    Yes. It's also a rather good question what 40% of what the pound will be in those circumstances is even worth obsessing about.

    But externalities. Not their problem. Because other people's problem. And they wanna win election now!!
  • TimSTimS Posts: 13,215

    A very sane father of a friend of mine, former Labour Party member, and (now retired) self-made entrepreneur, now believes that global warming is caused by underwater volcanoes.

    Social media is a cancer on our democracy.

    Technically that's not untrue. It is just that we have anthropogenic change on top.

    Without those volcanoes, we'd still have a Snowball Earth.
    The underwater volcano fallacy is a specific one that’s been doing the rounds for a couple of decades. People actually believe the heat emitted from subsea volcanism warms the sea enough to account for warming. Not that CO2 from volcanism changes atmospheric chemistry.

    What it really highlights is how difficult it is for us to get our heads round the massive thermal capacity of water compared with air, and the sheet vastness of the oceans. Some simple maths shows just how minuscule the basic thermal effect would be even if subsea volcanism were to increase 100-fold and the oceans were much shallower. But you can see the superficial appeal because people see kettles boiling and think “eureka”. Oddly enough much harder for people to imagine land volcanoes heating the air directly even though the thermal capacity of air is orders of magnitude lower.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,856
    That's because there isn't one. 'Emergency' and 'Crisis' are tools Governments and NGOs use to get people to do things that they don't want to do.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,223

    Nigel Farage for PM.

    I've just received a letter from the bank. It has withdrawn my overdraft!!!

    My dad had that happen to him a few weeks ago. Not that he ever uses it, but he was a bit perplexed as it was completely out of the blue.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,364

    A very sane father of a friend of mine, former Labour Party member, and (now retired) self-made entrepreneur, now believes that global warming is caused by underwater volcanoes.

    Social media is a cancer on our democracy.

    Does he praise Carboniferous coal forests for doing their thing to prevent it, albeit only temporarily as we see now?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,364
    TimS said:

    A very sane father of a friend of mine, former Labour Party member, and (now retired) self-made entrepreneur, now believes that global warming is caused by underwater volcanoes.

    Social media is a cancer on our democracy.

    Technically that's not untrue. It is just that we have anthropogenic change on top.

    Without those volcanoes, we'd still have a Snowball Earth.
    The underwater volcano fallacy is a specific one that’s been doing the rounds for a couple of decades. People actually believe the heat emitted from subsea volcanism warms the sea enough to account for warming. Not that CO2 from volcanism changes atmospheric chemistry.

    What it really highlights is how difficult it is for us to get our heads round the massive thermal capacity of water compared with air, and the sheet vastness of the oceans. Some simple maths shows just how minuscule the basic thermal effect would be even if subsea volcanism were to increase 100-fold and the oceans were much shallower. But you can see the superficial appeal because people see kettles boiling and think “eureka”. Oddly enough much harder for people to imagine land volcanoes heating the air directly even though the thermal capacity of air is orders of magnitude lower.
    And why the water warming at present is so worrying.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,245
    On the tram versus bus debate, trams are better than buses when one, or preferably both of these conditions hold:

    1 Congested city centres mean traffic is funnelled down one or two streets
    2 Most of the track can be off road

    Edinburgh matches the first condition. There are only two drivable streets east/west through the city centre and three north/south.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,158

    So over 2/3rd of Conservative members do believe climate change is caused by humans and almost 90% think it's real?

    Margaret Thatcher first alerted the world to its dangers. Decades ago. Because she understood the science. All Conservatives revere her and should understand that. But she was practical too.

    What we're seeing here is the consequences of allowing this issue to be entirely captured by the activist Left, which fuels polarisation.

    So who's to blame for that, the red faced fulminators so busy blowing their tops over LGBT etc flags and veganism that they've allowed the issue to be entirely captured by the activist Left, or the activist Left?

    *takes wild guess*
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,079

    So over 2/3rd of Conservative members do believe climate change is caused by humans and almost 90% think it's real?

    Margaret Thatcher first alerted the world to its dangers. Decades ago. Because she understood the science. All Conservatives revere her and should understand that. But she was practical too.

    What we're seeing here is the consequences of allowing this issue to be entirely captured by the activist Left, which fuels polarisation.

    Yes, I entirely believe climate change is real and largely man made. And I also recognise that British governments over the last 30 years have made massive stridesin addressing British contributions to it - even though, alone, there is the square root of fuck all we can do about it. But it largely seems to be used by the left as a stick to beat right wing people with. The point isn't to actually do anything, it's to divide the world into goodies and baddies.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,364

    So over 2/3rd of Conservative members do believe climate change is caused by humans and almost 90% think it's real?

    Margaret Thatcher first alerted the world to its dangers. Decades ago. Because she understood the science. All Conservatives revere her and should understand that. But she was practical too.

    What we're seeing here is the consequences of allowing this issue to be entirely captured by the activist Left, which fuels polarisation.

    So who's to blame for that, the red faced fulminators so busy blowing their tops over LGBT etc flags and veganism that they've allowed the issue to be entirely captured by the activist Left, or the activist Left?

    *takes wild guess*
    Casino is also muddling climate change and the ozone layer. Mrs T sorted the latter. She briefly espoused the former but did not persist.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,156
    tlg86 said:

    Nigel Farage for PM.

    I've just received a letter from the bank. It has withdrawn my overdraft!!!

    My dad had that happen to him a few weeks ago. Not that he ever uses it, but he was a bit perplexed as it was completely out of the blue.
    If a customer never uses it, the bank makes zero profit from it. Regardless they have to review suitability periodically which would have some time cost when manual checks are needed. So as data allows companies to forget the big picture and focus on micro details like this instead, decisions like that become more common place.
  • PhilPhil Posts: 2,335
    edited August 2023
    Vaguely related to the topic: HS2 is making Britain an international laughing stock
    “It’s finally official: HS2 is ‘unachievable’, according to the UK’s Infrastructure and Projects Authority. That doesn’t mean the project isn’t still happening, or that it won’t cost us billions, it just means that years – decades, probably – ahead of its launch we know it isn’t going to deliver what we need from it.

    What’s worse is that we’re going to learn all of the wrong lessons from its failure. Already the people who have reliably ensured HS2 wouldn’t work are saying that the overspends and reduced expectations show what they said all along – we should never have started it, we didn’t need it, local rail improvements were the way to go, and so on.”
    The Treasury strikes again! Wrecking the UK with its obsession with short term costs.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,568
    Leon said:

    FPT - I've yet to meet anyone who respects Sadiq Khan.

    I know a couple of New Labour SPADs who laughed out loud when I mentioned his name, and a few people in business who'd met him who said he was completely barking.

    I think even the people who vote for him do so with clothes pegs on their nose.

    I've yet to meet an actual Sadiq Khan VOTER - as in someone who openly and avowedly says "Oh yes I'm voting for him". Most people say Meh, what a boring jerk. The full-on haters really hate him. A small minority say "Oh well he';s not great but I might have to"

    Yet he's apparently coasting to victory again

    I am sure I live in something of an ethnic bubble, more white than most of London, but that bubble is politically diverse from UKIP Brexiteers to plenty of lefties (of all classes)

    I cannot find an enthusiastic Khan voter. He is eminently beatable and it is pathetic that the Tories have not found anyone to do it
    Like all generalisations that doesn't quite hold - I know several people, not all regularly Labour, who like him. The usual reason given is "a serious guy who has a positive agenda, unlike Boris". All of them strongly disapprove of Starmer's attempt to push him, and want him to say "sod off, Keir, I'm running London and we need clean air".

    Anecdata, I know. I think there is a structural problem - the Mayoral office is mostly motivational rather than policy-focused, so you really need a bit of rah-rah-London-is-great stuff, which isn't Sadiq's style. But he'll still beat the Tory candidate by a country mile.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,156
    edited August 2023

    Leon said:

    FPT - I've yet to meet anyone who respects Sadiq Khan.

    I know a couple of New Labour SPADs who laughed out loud when I mentioned his name, and a few people in business who'd met him who said he was completely barking.

    I think even the people who vote for him do so with clothes pegs on their nose.

    I've yet to meet an actual Sadiq Khan VOTER - as in someone who openly and avowedly says "Oh yes I'm voting for him". Most people say Meh, what a boring jerk. The full-on haters really hate him. A small minority say "Oh well he';s not great but I might have to"

    Yet he's apparently coasting to victory again

    I am sure I live in something of an ethnic bubble, more white than most of London, but that bubble is politically diverse from UKIP Brexiteers to plenty of lefties (of all classes)

    I cannot find an enthusiastic Khan voter. He is eminently beatable and it is pathetic that the Tories have not found anyone to do it
    Like all generalisations that doesn't quite hold - I know several people, not all regularly Labour, who like him. The usual reason given is "a serious guy who has a positive agenda, unlike Boris". All of them strongly disapprove of Starmer's attempt to push him, and want him to say "sod off, Keir, I'm running London and we need clean air".

    Anecdata, I know. I think there is a structural problem - the Mayoral office is mostly motivational rather than policy-focused, so you really need a bit of rah-rah-London-is-great stuff, which isn't Sadiq's style. But he'll still beat the Tory candidate by a country mile.
    MoL is a weird job. Ideally you need a mix of Boris and a really good administrator, which ain't going to happen. Split the role in two somehow with a Cheerleader for London and an Administrator for London.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,953
    edited August 2023
    O/T

    South Korea 5.3
    Germany 1.82
    Draw 3.7

    South Korea are leading 1-0 after 22 mins.

    https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/en/football/fifa-women-s-world-cup/south-korea-w-v-germany-w-betting-32516861
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,932
    edited August 2023
    Given the Uxbridge by election Tory hold on an anti ULEZ ticket and the recent poll showing 67% of Tory voters back new oil and gas licenses in the North sea as do UK voters overall by 42% to 27% whatever Extinction rebellion, Just Stop Oil and Greenpeace think it is unsurprising Sunak is rowing back from too much anti car and anti fossil fuels action.

    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/survey-results/daily/2023/07/31/aac1f/1


    Whoever replaces him as Tory leader will likely be just as pro car and net zero ambivalent. Labour voters however are much more pro action on climate change as are LDs, by 47% to 24% Labour voters think the government was wrong to issue new oil and gas licenses as do LD voters by 38% to 32%.
    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/survey-results/daily/2023/07/31/aac1f/1

    Labour Mayor of London Sadiq Khan also remains as pro ULEZ expansion as ever whatever Uxbridge voters thought
  • PeckPeck Posts: 517
    edited August 2023

    Peck said:

    "I’ve been trying to pin it down but there is something lacking in his approach and how it comes out on TV."

    He's softly spoken and he doesn't come across as strong. Many gumbies whichever of Britain's castes they belong to prefer a strong leader who they can imagine sorting everyone out, giving 'em what for, and doing things like travelling all the way to "Europe" and telling foreigners where to get off. That's one of the prime minister's problems.

    There's also the fact that many habitual Tory voters think they've voted Tory all their lives and they're f*cked if they'll continue if the guy the Tories give them as prime minister isn't white.

    50-50 Penny Mordaunt, Union Jack-face, Order of the Loud Voice and True Confidence, takes over before the election?

    Fatuous codswallop, based on a complete failure on your part to understand the motivations of those you disagree with. The Tory membership would have liked Kemi Badenoch, who (if you haven't noticed) is less white than Sunak.

    As a Tory supporter and sometime voter, I don't particularly want the leader to be rude, and give us 'Up yours Delors' moments - that was what Cameron and Osborne tried to do 'I won't pay this bill', 'I won't have Juncker' before inevitably caving. What I do want is a quiet determination to defend the national interest, which Rishi has patently failed to do in his negotiations on the Windsor Framework. He can be as softly spoken as he likes, as long as what he's saying is OK.
    I said "many habitual Tory voters" so the apparent fact that you in particular don't mind a softly-spoken leader if he has a "determination to defend the national interest" is neither here nor there. Personally I have never felt a need for any kind of leader to tell me what to do, but those who do feel such a need prefer one who projects strength. That should actually be stating the obvious but I guess it isn't.

    I am aware of Kemi Badenoch's skin colour, yes. She won't be elected party leader except perhaps as a stopgap in the extremely unlikely event that the Tories go into opposition, when it won't matter much who does the job. If a new leader is chosen before the election it will be a white person because everyone who can actually notice stuff is aware of the fact that most Tory voters and potential Tory voters are racist thickos.

    As for the party's members, look how they chose the crazy nutter Liz Truss over Rishi Sunak when they had a chance to have a vote. It's rarely a good idea to let a nutter be your leader (they can break stuff - as Truss did, and fast too), but that can't have been what was uppermost in those elderly racist Ian Smith-admirers' "minds".
  • JSpringJSpring Posts: 100
    'Emergency' isn't something that has a scientific definition.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,953
    edited August 2023
    FPT
    Leon said:

    FF43 said:

    Leon said:

    TimS said:

    TimS said:

    According to the tramway museum in Crich, which I had the pleasure to visit yesterday:



    I think this hereby concludes our transport discussion.

    By the way the Derby dales continue to fascinate. It’s an area I’ve not visited for decades, and strikes me as an English version of la France profonde.

    Everything is at least a couple of decades behind here. The shop fronts, the decor, the cuisine (yesterday I had steak pie, peas and beans with gravy for lunch then “tapas” for dinner which was like some 1980s imagined idea of tapas). The dark wooded valleys and dark sandstone towns, all feeling a little bit “Auvergne”.

    The little Massif Central of England.

    I love the Derbyshire Dales; I feel like explored most of it on foot over the decades, and deeply associate with it.

    But I've never been to Crich tramway museum, oddly enough. Probably a case of it being both too near to visit, and there being other things that interested me more.
    More interesting than the Crich Tramway Museum??
    Crich Tramway Museum sounds like one of those gloriously eccentric places, which must be an absolute jewel, even though you have had no previous interest in tramways and have no idea where Crich is.
    I know what you mean. For 3-4 years I used to take my eldest kid on mad roadtrips out of London, picnic ready on the backseat kind of thing (with all necessary condiments!) and.... we'd just see what we found. We could end up looking at a celebrated church in Suffolk or a weird half-demolished stately home in Beds or (briefly) examining the tedious town centre of Guldford. The whole idea was to be spontaneous. One day we happened upon this:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelvedon_Hatch_Secret_Nuclear_Bunker

    No words can really capture the magnificent eccentricity of this place. It is simultaneously cringe yet compelling, naff yet amazing. It really was our big UK nuclear bunker - clearly run on an NHS style shoestring - where the PM would be spirited if it all Kicked Off. They have a terrible waxwork of Margaret Thatcher hiding under a dingy blanket in one room. That just about sums it up

    Go!




    Oddly enough I know about this place because about a year ago there was a strike on some of the trains in London and I couldn't get to Brentwood where I was staying. The only train operating near where I wanted to go was the Central Line, so I went to Epping, and had to get a taxi to Brentwood costing £40. The taxi driver mentioned the bunker on the journey. Haven't actually visited it yet though.
  • Leon said:

    FPT - I've yet to meet anyone who respects Sadiq Khan.

    I know a couple of New Labour SPADs who laughed out loud when I mentioned his name, and a few people in business who'd met him who said he was completely barking.

    I think even the people who vote for him do so with clothes pegs on their nose.

    I've yet to meet an actual Sadiq Khan VOTER - as in someone who openly and avowedly says "Oh yes I'm voting for him". Most people say Meh, what a boring jerk. The full-on haters really hate him. A small minority say "Oh well he';s not great but I might have to"

    Yet he's apparently coasting to victory again

    I am sure I live in something of an ethnic bubble, more white than most of London, but that bubble is politically diverse from UKIP Brexiteers to plenty of lefties (of all classes)

    I cannot find an enthusiastic Khan voter. He is eminently beatable and it is pathetic that the Tories have not found anyone to do it
    Like all generalisations that doesn't quite hold - I know several people, not all regularly Labour, who like him. The usual reason given is "a serious guy who has a positive agenda, unlike Boris". All of them strongly disapprove of Starmer's attempt to push him, and want him to say "sod off, Keir, I'm running London and we need clean air".

    Anecdata, I know. I think there is a structural problem - the Mayoral office is mostly motivational rather than policy-focused, so you really need a bit of rah-rah-London-is-great stuff, which isn't Sadiq's style. But he'll still beat the Tory candidate by a country mile.
    MoL is a weird job. Ideally you need a mix of Boris and a really good administrator, which ain't going to happen. Split the role in two somehow with a Cheerleader for London and an Administrator for London.
    Ken Livingstone combined both. Boris delegated most of the work, which fits with your suggestion.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,955

    That's because there isn't one. 'Emergency' and 'Crisis' are tools Governments and NGOs use to get people to do things that they don't want to do.

    "Buy Russian gas!"
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,717
    Miklosvar said:

    Leon said:

    fpt for @Miklosvar coz it took me ages to type



    One of the most terrifying things I have done these last few years is visit this place in Arizona

    https://titanmissilemuseum.org/

    I mentioned it at the time on PB. It is - I think - the only place in the world you can see a big-ass city-busting ICBM in its actual silo. Ready to go. You can also visit the green room (green for soothing) where the missile controllers would flick the switch. The woman guide talks you through the process, and the exact moment when the command from the president would become legally then practically irreversible

    Once the telephone calls were received from the president, and the codes verified, launch would then officially begin and could not legally be reversed. in practise another few minutes would pass and then the keys would be turned and communication stopped and from then on the missiles were gonna fire whatever. From codes to launch would be 5-10 excruciating yet inexorable minutes

    It was accepted that these minutes would be psychological torture for the operators - the urge NOT to go through the process of destroying the world would be intense - so they were carefully selected for intelligence, mental health, loyalty, coolness

    My whole visit was rendered near-intolerable by the fact it happened at the height of Putin's Ukraine nuke scare and everyone in the guided group was hyper aware of this. Yet the guide had her set Noughties spiel and she said "now we have nuclear peace treaties and this can never happen, thank God" and everyone laughed, bitterly and nervously

    Quite. Per Blackadder, We have survived the Great War, 1914-1917.
    I had a colleague who was in the Territorial version of the Observer Corps in the 70’s. On being called his duty was to go to what was felt to be a safe place to ‘observe’.
    However he was to leave his wife and children.
    I couldn’t have done it!
  • Leon said:

    FPT - I've yet to meet anyone who respects Sadiq Khan.

    I know a couple of New Labour SPADs who laughed out loud when I mentioned his name, and a few people in business who'd met him who said he was completely barking.

    I think even the people who vote for him do so with clothes pegs on their nose.

    I've yet to meet an actual Sadiq Khan VOTER - as in someone who openly and avowedly says "Oh yes I'm voting for him". Most people say Meh, what a boring jerk. The full-on haters really hate him. A small minority say "Oh well he';s not great but I might have to"

    Yet he's apparently coasting to victory again

    I am sure I live in something of an ethnic bubble, more white than most of London, but that bubble is politically diverse from UKIP Brexiteers to plenty of lefties (of all classes)

    I cannot find an enthusiastic Khan voter. He is eminently beatable and it is pathetic that the Tories have not found anyone to do it
    Like all generalisations that doesn't quite hold - I know several people, not all regularly Labour, who like him. The usual reason given is "a serious guy who has a positive agenda, unlike Boris". All of them strongly disapprove of Starmer's attempt to push him, and want him to say "sod off, Keir, I'm running London and we need clean air".

    Anecdata, I know. I think there is a structural problem - the Mayoral office is mostly motivational rather than policy-focused, so you really need a bit of rah-rah-London-is-great stuff, which isn't Sadiq's style. But he'll still beat the Tory candidate by a country mile.
    MoL is a weird job. Ideally you need a mix of Boris and a really good administrator, which ain't going to happen. Split the role in two somehow with a Cheerleader for London and an Administrator for London.
    The theory of Boris's mayorality was that Boris could do the cheerleading and appoint capable minions to do the admin for him. How much that worked is a question for the history books. Quite a bit of what came out of Boris's mind was sizzle-without-sausage which no minion could make work, no matter how capable.

    Sadiq, on the other hand, is boring. And whilst we need more boring overall, you can have too much of a good thing in one place.

    But the impossible question is- who is this paragon who wants the job of London Mayor and is capable of winning it? I don't see anyone who wants it on the centre-left, or is capable of winning it from the centre-right. And the Conservatives have trapped themselves shouting to themselves in Zone 6.

    So Sadiq, who is the word "meh" given human flesh, keeps on going.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,364
    Andy_JS said:

    FPT

    Leon said:

    FF43 said:

    Leon said:

    TimS said:

    TimS said:

    According to the tramway museum in Crich, which I had the pleasure to visit yesterday:



    I think this hereby concludes our transport discussion.

    By the way the Derby dales continue to fascinate. It’s an area I’ve not visited for decades, and strikes me as an English version of la France profonde.

    Everything is at least a couple of decades behind here. The shop fronts, the decor, the cuisine (yesterday I had steak pie, peas and beans with gravy for lunch then “tapas” for dinner which was like some 1980s imagined idea of tapas). The dark wooded valleys and dark sandstone towns, all feeling a little bit “Auvergne”.

    The little Massif Central of England.

    I love the Derbyshire Dales; I feel like explored most of it on foot over the decades, and deeply associate with it.

    But I've never been to Crich tramway museum, oddly enough. Probably a case of it being both too near to visit, and there being other things that interested me more.
    More interesting than the Crich Tramway Museum??
    Crich Tramway Museum sounds like one of those gloriously eccentric places, which must be an absolute jewel, even though you have had no previous interest in tramways and have no idea where Crich is.
    I know what you mean. For 3-4 years I used to take my eldest kid on mad roadtrips out of London, picnic ready on the backseat kind of thing (with all necessary condiments!) and.... we'd just see what we found. We could end up looking at a celebrated church in Suffolk or a weird half-demolished stately home in Beds or (briefly) examining the tedious town centre of Guldford. The whole idea was to be spontaneous. One day we happened upon this:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelvedon_Hatch_Secret_Nuclear_Bunker

    No words can really capture the magnificent eccentricity of this place. It is simultaneously cringe yet compelling, naff yet amazing. It really was our big UK nuclear bunker - clearly run on an NHS style shoestring - where the PM would be spirited if it all Kicked Off. They have a terrible waxwork of Margaret Thatcher hiding under a dingy blanket in one room. That just about sums it up

    Go!




    Oddly enough I know about this place because about a year ago there was a strike on some of the trains in London and I couldn't get to Brentwood where I was staying. The only train operating near where I wanted to go was the Central Line, so I went to Epping, and had to get a taxi to Brentwood costing £40. The taxi driver mentioned the bunker on the journey. Haven't actually visited it yet though.
    Also ...

    https://www.english-heritage.org.uk/visit/places/york-cold-war-bunker/
    https://secretbunker.co.uk/

    Haven't seen either yet, though. Also this dfiscussion is makng me wonder where I put my copy of 'Under the City Streets' (both editions, including the earlyu one that caused the row).
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,487

    So over 2/3rd of Conservative members do believe climate change is caused by humans and almost 90% think it's real?

    Margaret Thatcher first alerted the world to its dangers. Decades ago. Because she understood the science. All Conservatives revere her and should understand that. But she was practical too.

    What we're seeing here is the consequences of allowing this issue to be entirely captured by the activist Left, which fuels polarisation.

    It's worrying if even a third don't believe something patently true.

    The issue wasn't captured by the activist Left: it was deserted by the Right. The Cameron-era consensus was dropped by the Tories.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,156

    Leon said:

    FPT - I've yet to meet anyone who respects Sadiq Khan.

    I know a couple of New Labour SPADs who laughed out loud when I mentioned his name, and a few people in business who'd met him who said he was completely barking.

    I think even the people who vote for him do so with clothes pegs on their nose.

    I've yet to meet an actual Sadiq Khan VOTER - as in someone who openly and avowedly says "Oh yes I'm voting for him". Most people say Meh, what a boring jerk. The full-on haters really hate him. A small minority say "Oh well he';s not great but I might have to"

    Yet he's apparently coasting to victory again

    I am sure I live in something of an ethnic bubble, more white than most of London, but that bubble is politically diverse from UKIP Brexiteers to plenty of lefties (of all classes)

    I cannot find an enthusiastic Khan voter. He is eminently beatable and it is pathetic that the Tories have not found anyone to do it
    Like all generalisations that doesn't quite hold - I know several people, not all regularly Labour, who like him. The usual reason given is "a serious guy who has a positive agenda, unlike Boris". All of them strongly disapprove of Starmer's attempt to push him, and want him to say "sod off, Keir, I'm running London and we need clean air".

    Anecdata, I know. I think there is a structural problem - the Mayoral office is mostly motivational rather than policy-focused, so you really need a bit of rah-rah-London-is-great stuff, which isn't Sadiq's style. But he'll still beat the Tory candidate by a country mile.
    MoL is a weird job. Ideally you need a mix of Boris and a really good administrator, which ain't going to happen. Split the role in two somehow with a Cheerleader for London and an Administrator for London.
    The theory of Boris's mayorality was that Boris could do the cheerleading and appoint capable minions to do the admin for him. How much that worked is a question for the history books. Quite a bit of what came out of Boris's mind was sizzle-without-sausage which no minion could make work, no matter how capable.

    Sadiq, on the other hand, is boring. And whilst we need more boring overall, you can have too much of a good thing in one place.

    But the impossible question is- who is this paragon who wants the job of London Mayor and is capable of winning it? I don't see anyone who wants it on the centre-left, or is capable of winning it from the centre-right. And the Conservatives have trapped themselves shouting to themselves in Zone 6.

    So Sadiq, who is the word "meh" given human flesh, keeps on going.
    Unless there are some unknown things about Paul Scully, very weird he didn't even make the shortlist. I think he would have had a decent chance.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,364
    edited August 2023

    Miklosvar said:

    Leon said:

    fpt for @Miklosvar coz it took me ages to type



    One of the most terrifying things I have done these last few years is visit this place in Arizona

    https://titanmissilemuseum.org/

    I mentioned it at the time on PB. It is - I think - the only place in the world you can see a big-ass city-busting ICBM in its actual silo. Ready to go. You can also visit the green room (green for soothing) where the missile controllers would flick the switch. The woman guide talks you through the process, and the exact moment when the command from the president would become legally then practically irreversible

    Once the telephone calls were received from the president, and the codes verified, launch would then officially begin and could not legally be reversed. in practise another few minutes would pass and then the keys would be turned and communication stopped and from then on the missiles were gonna fire whatever. From codes to launch would be 5-10 excruciating yet inexorable minutes

    It was accepted that these minutes would be psychological torture for the operators - the urge NOT to go through the process of destroying the world would be intense - so they were carefully selected for intelligence, mental health, loyalty, coolness

    My whole visit was rendered near-intolerable by the fact it happened at the height of Putin's Ukraine nuke scare and everyone in the guided group was hyper aware of this. Yet the guide had her set Noughties spiel and she said "now we have nuclear peace treaties and this can never happen, thank God" and everyone laughed, bitterly and nervously

    Quite. Per Blackadder, We have survived the Great War, 1914-1917.
    I had a colleague who was in the Territorial version of the Observer Corps in the 70’s. On being called his duty was to go to what was felt to be a safe place to ‘observe’.
    However he was to leave his wife and children.
    I couldn’t have done it!
    There were ROC bunkers dotted all over the UK to observe the functioning of the various nuclear devices. One nearish to my house, now earthed over by the farmer to deter thanatotourism.

    Edit: including some sites which encourage visitors./

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Observer_Corps_monitoring_post
  • CatManCatMan Posts: 3,069
    As I predicted (although it wasn't exactly hard)

    "Post-Brexit import checks on food delayed again"

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-66394235
  • TazTaz Posts: 15,049
    80% still believe climate change is happening so it hardly full of deniers.

    The term climate emergency is meaningless. It is like "climate crisis" and "global boiling", just a hysterical term to, as Luckyguy says, get people on board with doing stuff that inconveniences them,

    I am fully on board with the need to do something, I do believe climate change is not solely down to mans activity but is largely down to it, do I see it as an "Emergency", not really. Hardly makes me a denier.
  • Leon said:

    FPT - I've yet to meet anyone who respects Sadiq Khan.

    I know a couple of New Labour SPADs who laughed out loud when I mentioned his name, and a few people in business who'd met him who said he was completely barking.

    I think even the people who vote for him do so with clothes pegs on their nose.

    I've yet to meet an actual Sadiq Khan VOTER - as in someone who openly and avowedly says "Oh yes I'm voting for him". Most people say Meh, what a boring jerk. The full-on haters really hate him. A small minority say "Oh well he';s not great but I might have to"

    Yet he's apparently coasting to victory again

    I am sure I live in something of an ethnic bubble, more white than most of London, but that bubble is politically diverse from UKIP Brexiteers to plenty of lefties (of all classes)

    I cannot find an enthusiastic Khan voter. He is eminently beatable and it is pathetic that the Tories have not found anyone to do it
    Like all generalisations that doesn't quite hold - I know several people, not all regularly Labour, who like him. The usual reason given is "a serious guy who has a positive agenda, unlike Boris". All of them strongly disapprove of Starmer's attempt to push him, and want him to say "sod off, Keir, I'm running London and we need clean air".

    Anecdata, I know. I think there is a structural problem - the Mayoral office is mostly motivational rather than policy-focused, so you really need a bit of rah-rah-London-is-great stuff, which isn't Sadiq's style. But he'll still beat the Tory candidate by a country mile.
    MoL is a weird job. Ideally you need a mix of Boris and a really good administrator, which ain't going to happen. Split the role in two somehow with a Cheerleader for London and an Administrator for London.
    You know the Mayor can hire people to assist in areas where he/she isn't that strong?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,138
    TimS said:

    A very sane father of a friend of mine, former Labour Party member, and (now retired) self-made entrepreneur, now believes that global warming is caused by underwater volcanoes.

    Social media is a cancer on our democracy.

    Technically that's not untrue. It is just that we have anthropogenic change on top.

    Without those volcanoes, we'd still have a Snowball Earth.
    The underwater volcano fallacy is a specific one that’s been doing the rounds for a couple of decades. People actually believe the heat emitted from subsea volcanism warms the sea enough to account for warming. Not that CO2 from volcanism changes atmospheric chemistry.

    What it really highlights is how difficult it is for us to get our heads round the massive thermal capacity of water compared with air, and the sheet vastness of the oceans. Some simple maths shows just how minuscule the basic thermal effect would be even if subsea volcanism were to increase 100-fold and the oceans were much shallower. But you can see the superficial appeal because people see kettles boiling and think “eureka”. Oddly enough much harder for people to imagine land volcanoes heating the air directly even though the thermal capacity of air is orders of magnitude lower.
    The maths education problem. This one is about scale.

    Had a chap the other day, who was end timing it about satellites renewing the atmosphere. 15K tons of meteors enters the atmosphere....

    Another one is "Why can't we use old watermills to power the country?" - not realising that most watermills had about the same power as a moped.
  • I think Net-Zero has one too many syllables

    Net-Zee would roll off the tongue better

    On a related note, The Lionesses is a really shit nickname for a team; it's FAR too long
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 4,727
    Carnyx said:

    TimS said:

    A very sane father of a friend of mine, former Labour Party member, and (now retired) self-made entrepreneur, now believes that global warming is caused by underwater volcanoes.

    Social media is a cancer on our democracy.

    Technically that's not untrue. It is just that we have anthropogenic change on top.

    Without those volcanoes, we'd still have a Snowball Earth.
    The underwater volcano fallacy is a specific one that’s been doing the rounds for a couple of decades. People actually believe the heat emitted from subsea volcanism warms the sea enough to account for warming. Not that CO2 from volcanism changes atmospheric chemistry.

    What it really highlights is how difficult it is for us to get our heads round the massive thermal capacity of water compared with air, and the sheet vastness of the oceans. Some simple maths shows just how minuscule the basic thermal effect would be even if subsea volcanism were to increase 100-fold and the oceans were much shallower. But you can see the superficial appeal because people see kettles boiling and think “eureka”. Oddly enough much harder for people to imagine land volcanoes heating the air directly even though the thermal capacity of air is orders of magnitude lower.
    And why the water warming at present is so worrying.
    Yes, although how shallow is the heating? I assume it doesn't extend through the whole water column. If it does then we really are in the doo-doo.

    I assume this must be due to the sulphur ban on ships unless this is 'catastrophe theory' in action.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,487
    HYUFD said:

    Given the Uxbridge by election Tory hold on an anti ULEZ ticket and the recent poll showing 67% of Tory voters back new oil and gas licenses in the North sea as do UK voters overall by 42% to 27% whatever Extinction rebellion, Just Stop Oil and Greenpeace think it is unsurprising Sunak is rowing back from too much anti car and anti fossil fuels action.

    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/survey-results/daily/2023/07/31/aac1f/1


    Whoever replaces him as Tory leader will likely be just as pro car and net zero ambivalent. Labour voters however are much more pro action on climate change as are LDs, by 47% to 24% Labour voters think the government was wrong to issue new oil and gas licenses as do LD voters by 38% to 32%.
    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/survey-results/daily/2023/07/31/aac1f/1

    Labour Mayor of London Sadiq Khan also remains as pro ULEZ expansion as ever whatever Uxbridge voters thought

    But there aren't many Tory voters these days. Appealing to them won't win you a general election (or a London mayoral one). The Con-to-Lab swing in Uxbridge wasn't enough to get a Labour MP elected, but would see Sunak out of No. 10 if repeated nationally. Sunak needs to reach former Tory voters.
  • sladeslade Posts: 2,080
    4 local by-elections today: Dudley (Lab defence), East Sussex (Con), Norfolk (Con), Reading (Lab).
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,364
    edited August 2023

    TimS said:

    A very sane father of a friend of mine, former Labour Party member, and (now retired) self-made entrepreneur, now believes that global warming is caused by underwater volcanoes.

    Social media is a cancer on our democracy.

    Technically that's not untrue. It is just that we have anthropogenic change on top.

    Without those volcanoes, we'd still have a Snowball Earth.
    The underwater volcano fallacy is a specific one that’s been doing the rounds for a couple of decades. People actually believe the heat emitted from subsea volcanism warms the sea enough to account for warming. Not that CO2 from volcanism changes atmospheric chemistry.

    What it really highlights is how difficult it is for us to get our heads round the massive thermal capacity of water compared with air, and the sheet vastness of the oceans. Some simple maths shows just how minuscule the basic thermal effect would be even if subsea volcanism were to increase 100-fold and the oceans were much shallower. But you can see the superficial appeal because people see kettles boiling and think “eureka”. Oddly enough much harder for people to imagine land volcanoes heating the air directly even though the thermal capacity of air is orders of magnitude lower.
    The maths education problem. This one is about scale.

    Had a chap the other day, who was end timing it about satellites renewing the atmosphere. 15K tons of meteors enters the atmosphere....

    Another one is "Why can't we use old watermills to power the country?" - not realising that most watermills had about the same power as a moped.
    Once went to Leicester to see the beam engines there. Massive steam things, much more powerful than your average watermill. They had a modern [edit] IC engine, relatively little thing just sitting on the floor. It had the same power output!

    TBF there is real value in hydro on a small scale out in the country with high-gradient rivers available.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 36,100

    I had a colleague who was in the Territorial version of the Observer Corps in the 70’s. On being called his duty was to go to what was felt to be a safe place to ‘observe’.
    However he was to leave his wife and children.
    I couldn’t have done it!

    The Observer Corp used to stand on rooftops and hilltops to look for aircraft. During the Cold War they were tasked with looking for Nuclear explosions and fallout.

    Obviously you don't want to do that on a rooftop, you want to do it from an underground bunker.

    1500 were built in the 1950s, and half of them were still operational until 1991

    I know this because i just found out one of them was half a mile from my house
  • Leon said:

    FPT - I've yet to meet anyone who respects Sadiq Khan.

    I know a couple of New Labour SPADs who laughed out loud when I mentioned his name, and a few people in business who'd met him who said he was completely barking.

    I think even the people who vote for him do so with clothes pegs on their nose.

    I've yet to meet an actual Sadiq Khan VOTER - as in someone who openly and avowedly says "Oh yes I'm voting for him". Most people say Meh, what a boring jerk. The full-on haters really hate him. A small minority say "Oh well he';s not great but I might have to"

    Yet he's apparently coasting to victory again

    I am sure I live in something of an ethnic bubble, more white than most of London, but that bubble is politically diverse from UKIP Brexiteers to plenty of lefties (of all classes)

    I cannot find an enthusiastic Khan voter. He is eminently beatable and it is pathetic that the Tories have not found anyone to do it
    Like all generalisations that doesn't quite hold - I know several people, not all regularly Labour, who like him. The usual reason given is "a serious guy who has a positive agenda, unlike Boris". All of them strongly disapprove of Starmer's attempt to push him, and want him to say "sod off, Keir, I'm running London and we need clean air".

    Anecdata, I know. I think there is a structural problem - the Mayoral office is mostly motivational rather than policy-focused, so you really need a bit of rah-rah-London-is-great stuff, which isn't Sadiq's style. But he'll still beat the Tory candidate by a country mile.
    MoL is a weird job. Ideally you need a mix of Boris and a really good administrator, which ain't going to happen. Split the role in two somehow with a Cheerleader for London and an Administrator for London.
    The theory of Boris's mayorality was that Boris could do the cheerleading and appoint capable minions to do the admin for him. How much that worked is a question for the history books. Quite a bit of what came out of Boris's mind was sizzle-without-sausage which no minion could make work, no matter how capable.

    Sadiq, on the other hand, is boring. And whilst we need more boring overall, you can have too much of a good thing in one place.

    But the impossible question is- who is this paragon who wants the job of London Mayor and is capable of winning it? I don't see anyone who wants it on the centre-left, or is capable of winning it from the centre-right. And the Conservatives have trapped themselves shouting to themselves in Zone 6.

    So Sadiq, who is the word "meh" given human flesh, keeps on going.
    Unless there are some unknown things about Paul Scully, very weird he didn't even make the shortlist. I think he would have had a decent chance.
    I very much doubt that any official Conservative could win in London in 2024; the national tide is just in the wrong place. A Business-Friendly Independent (who the Conservatives don't quite endorse out loud), maybe. But that comes back to the question- who?

    But offering Susan Hall as a candidate is pretty much taking the mickey.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,955
    Taz said:

    80% still believe climate change is happening so it hardly full of deniers.

    The term climate emergency is meaningless. It is like "climate crisis" and "global boiling", just a hysterical term to, as Luckyguy says, get people on board with doing stuff that inconveniences them,

    I am fully on board with the need to do something, I do believe climate change is not solely down to mans activity but is largely down to it, do I see it as an "Emergency", not really. Hardly makes me a denier.

    The Tory Government published a new version of the National Risk Register this morning.

    Climate Change makes an appearance.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,156

    Leon said:

    FPT - I've yet to meet anyone who respects Sadiq Khan.

    I know a couple of New Labour SPADs who laughed out loud when I mentioned his name, and a few people in business who'd met him who said he was completely barking.

    I think even the people who vote for him do so with clothes pegs on their nose.

    I've yet to meet an actual Sadiq Khan VOTER - as in someone who openly and avowedly says "Oh yes I'm voting for him". Most people say Meh, what a boring jerk. The full-on haters really hate him. A small minority say "Oh well he';s not great but I might have to"

    Yet he's apparently coasting to victory again

    I am sure I live in something of an ethnic bubble, more white than most of London, but that bubble is politically diverse from UKIP Brexiteers to plenty of lefties (of all classes)

    I cannot find an enthusiastic Khan voter. He is eminently beatable and it is pathetic that the Tories have not found anyone to do it
    Like all generalisations that doesn't quite hold - I know several people, not all regularly Labour, who like him. The usual reason given is "a serious guy who has a positive agenda, unlike Boris". All of them strongly disapprove of Starmer's attempt to push him, and want him to say "sod off, Keir, I'm running London and we need clean air".

    Anecdata, I know. I think there is a structural problem - the Mayoral office is mostly motivational rather than policy-focused, so you really need a bit of rah-rah-London-is-great stuff, which isn't Sadiq's style. But he'll still beat the Tory candidate by a country mile.
    MoL is a weird job. Ideally you need a mix of Boris and a really good administrator, which ain't going to happen. Split the role in two somehow with a Cheerleader for London and an Administrator for London.
    You know the Mayor can hire people to assist in areas where he/she isn't that strong?
    Sure, they inevitably won't carry the same authority though.
  • Leon said:

    FPT - I've yet to meet anyone who respects Sadiq Khan.

    I know a couple of New Labour SPADs who laughed out loud when I mentioned his name, and a few people in business who'd met him who said he was completely barking.

    I think even the people who vote for him do so with clothes pegs on their nose.

    I've yet to meet an actual Sadiq Khan VOTER - as in someone who openly and avowedly says "Oh yes I'm voting for him". Most people say Meh, what a boring jerk. The full-on haters really hate him. A small minority say "Oh well he';s not great but I might have to"

    Yet he's apparently coasting to victory again

    I am sure I live in something of an ethnic bubble, more white than most of London, but that bubble is politically diverse from UKIP Brexiteers to plenty of lefties (of all classes)

    I cannot find an enthusiastic Khan voter. He is eminently beatable and it is pathetic that the Tories have not found anyone to do it
    Like all generalisations that doesn't quite hold - I know several people, not all regularly Labour, who like him. The usual reason given is "a serious guy who has a positive agenda, unlike Boris". All of them strongly disapprove of Starmer's attempt to push him, and want him to say "sod off, Keir, I'm running London and we need clean air".

    Anecdata, I know. I think there is a structural problem - the Mayoral office is mostly motivational rather than policy-focused, so you really need a bit of rah-rah-London-is-great stuff, which isn't Sadiq's style. But he'll still beat the Tory candidate by a country mile.
    MoL is a weird job. Ideally you need a mix of Boris and a really good administrator, which ain't going to happen. Split the role in two somehow with a Cheerleader for London and an Administrator for London.
    The theory of Boris's mayorality was that Boris could do the cheerleading and appoint capable minions to do the admin for him. How much that worked is a question for the history books. Quite a bit of what came out of Boris's mind was sizzle-without-sausage which no minion could make work, no matter how capable.

    Sadiq, on the other hand, is boring. And whilst we need more boring overall, you can have too much of a good thing in one place.

    But the impossible question is- who is this paragon who wants the job of London Mayor and is capable of winning it? I don't see anyone who wants it on the centre-left, or is capable of winning it from the centre-right. And the Conservatives have trapped themselves shouting to themselves in Zone 6.

    So Sadiq, who is the word "meh" given human flesh, keeps on going.
    The theory with Johnson is always that he can delegate to capable minions and do the "fun" stuff.

    The problem with that is that Johnson didn't want to play that game. He didn't just want to be the fun figurehead - he wanted to exercise power. So he did get involved but wasn't very good at it - he got bored easily, changed his mind depending on who he was talking to, colleagues couldn't rely on what he told them and so on.
  • Mrs Thatcher would be disgusted.
  • Oh it’s ConHome, moving on.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,364

    Mrs Thatcher would be disgusted.

    I think you're right; despite her dropping the matter, it is much more salient now, in a way that the ozone hole was for her.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,487

    FPT - I've yet to meet anyone who respects Sadiq Khan.

    I know a couple of New Labour SPADs who laughed out loud when I mentioned his name, and a few people in business who'd met him who said he was completely barking.

    I think even the people who vote for him do so with clothes pegs on their nose.

    What does that say about the Conservatives that Khan, who you say requires a clothes peg on the nose to vote for, keeps beating them?
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,856
    Peck said:

    Peck said:

    "I’ve been trying to pin it down but there is something lacking in his approach and how it comes out on TV."

    He's softly spoken and he doesn't come across as strong. Many gumbies whichever of Britain's castes they belong to prefer a strong leader who they can imagine sorting everyone out, giving 'em what for, and doing things like travelling all the way to "Europe" and telling foreigners where to get off. That's one of the prime minister's problems.

    There's also the fact that many habitual Tory voters think they've voted Tory all their lives and they're f*cked if they'll continue if the guy the Tories give them as prime minister isn't white.

    50-50 Penny Mordaunt, Union Jack-face, Order of the Loud Voice and True Confidence, takes over before the election?

    Fatuous codswallop, based on a complete failure on your part to understand the motivations of those you disagree with. The Tory membership would have liked Kemi Badenoch, who (if you haven't noticed) is less white than Sunak.

    As a Tory supporter and sometime voter, I don't particularly want the leader to be rude, and give us 'Up yours Delors' moments - that was what Cameron and Osborne tried to do 'I won't pay this bill', 'I won't have Juncker' before inevitably caving. What I do want is a quiet determination to defend the national interest, which Rishi has patently failed to do in his negotiations on the Windsor Framework. He can be as softly spoken as he likes, as long as what he's saying is OK.
    I said "many habitual Tory voters" so the apparent fact that you in particular don't mind a softly-spoken leader if he has a "determination to defend the national interest" is neither here nor there. Personally I have never felt a need for any kind of leader to tell me what to do, but those who do feel such a need prefer one who projects strength. That should actually be stating the obvious but I guess it isn't.

    I am aware of Kemi Badenoch's skin colour, yes. She won't be elected party leader except perhaps as a stopgap in the extremely unlikely event that the Tories go into opposition, when it won't matter much who does the job. If a new leader is chosen before the election it will be a white person because everyone who can actually notice stuff is aware of the fact that most Tory voters and potential Tory voters are racist thickos.

    As for the party's members, look how they chose the crazy nutter Liz Truss over Rishi Sunak when they had a chance to have a vote. It's rarely a good idea to let a nutter be your leader (they can break stuff - as Truss did, and fast too), but that can't have been what was uppermost in those elderly racist Ian Smith-admirers' "minds".
    Gosh, where to even start with this shite.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,156

    Leon said:

    FPT - I've yet to meet anyone who respects Sadiq Khan.

    I know a couple of New Labour SPADs who laughed out loud when I mentioned his name, and a few people in business who'd met him who said he was completely barking.

    I think even the people who vote for him do so with clothes pegs on their nose.

    I've yet to meet an actual Sadiq Khan VOTER - as in someone who openly and avowedly says "Oh yes I'm voting for him". Most people say Meh, what a boring jerk. The full-on haters really hate him. A small minority say "Oh well he';s not great but I might have to"

    Yet he's apparently coasting to victory again

    I am sure I live in something of an ethnic bubble, more white than most of London, but that bubble is politically diverse from UKIP Brexiteers to plenty of lefties (of all classes)

    I cannot find an enthusiastic Khan voter. He is eminently beatable and it is pathetic that the Tories have not found anyone to do it
    Like all generalisations that doesn't quite hold - I know several people, not all regularly Labour, who like him. The usual reason given is "a serious guy who has a positive agenda, unlike Boris". All of them strongly disapprove of Starmer's attempt to push him, and want him to say "sod off, Keir, I'm running London and we need clean air".

    Anecdata, I know. I think there is a structural problem - the Mayoral office is mostly motivational rather than policy-focused, so you really need a bit of rah-rah-London-is-great stuff, which isn't Sadiq's style. But he'll still beat the Tory candidate by a country mile.
    MoL is a weird job. Ideally you need a mix of Boris and a really good administrator, which ain't going to happen. Split the role in two somehow with a Cheerleader for London and an Administrator for London.
    The theory of Boris's mayorality was that Boris could do the cheerleading and appoint capable minions to do the admin for him. How much that worked is a question for the history books. Quite a bit of what came out of Boris's mind was sizzle-without-sausage which no minion could make work, no matter how capable.

    Sadiq, on the other hand, is boring. And whilst we need more boring overall, you can have too much of a good thing in one place.

    But the impossible question is- who is this paragon who wants the job of London Mayor and is capable of winning it? I don't see anyone who wants it on the centre-left, or is capable of winning it from the centre-right. And the Conservatives have trapped themselves shouting to themselves in Zone 6.

    So Sadiq, who is the word "meh" given human flesh, keeps on going.
    Unless there are some unknown things about Paul Scully, very weird he didn't even make the shortlist. I think he would have had a decent chance.
    I very much doubt that any official Conservative could win in London in 2024; the national tide is just in the wrong place. A Business-Friendly Independent (who the Conservatives don't quite endorse out loud), maybe. But that comes back to the question- who?

    But offering Susan Hall as a candidate is pretty much taking the mickey.
    The national picture is less relevant in London than elsewhere, partly because London is simply very different but mostly because incumbancy is an issue for Labour here and not for the rest of the country.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,932

    Leon said:

    FPT - I've yet to meet anyone who respects Sadiq Khan.

    I know a couple of New Labour SPADs who laughed out loud when I mentioned his name, and a few people in business who'd met him who said he was completely barking.

    I think even the people who vote for him do so with clothes pegs on their nose.

    I've yet to meet an actual Sadiq Khan VOTER - as in someone who openly and avowedly says "Oh yes I'm voting for him". Most people say Meh, what a boring jerk. The full-on haters really hate him. A small minority say "Oh well he';s not great but I might have to"

    Yet he's apparently coasting to victory again

    I am sure I live in something of an ethnic bubble, more white than most of London, but that bubble is politically diverse from UKIP Brexiteers to plenty of lefties (of all classes)

    I cannot find an enthusiastic Khan voter. He is eminently beatable and it is pathetic that the Tories have not found anyone to do it
    Like all generalisations that doesn't quite hold - I know several people, not all regularly Labour, who like him. The usual reason given is "a serious guy who has a positive agenda, unlike Boris". All of them strongly disapprove of Starmer's attempt to push him, and want him to say "sod off, Keir, I'm running London and we need clean air".

    Anecdata, I know. I think there is a structural problem - the Mayoral office is mostly motivational rather than policy-focused, so you really need a bit of rah-rah-London-is-great stuff, which isn't Sadiq's style. But he'll still beat the Tory candidate by a country mile.
    MoL is a weird job. Ideally you need a mix of Boris and a really good administrator, which ain't going to happen. Split the role in two somehow with a Cheerleader for London and an Administrator for London.
    The theory of Boris's mayorality was that Boris could do the cheerleading and appoint capable minions to do the admin for him. How much that worked is a question for the history books. Quite a bit of what came out of Boris's mind was sizzle-without-sausage which no minion could make work, no matter how capable.

    Sadiq, on the other hand, is boring. And whilst we need more boring overall, you can have too much of a good thing in one place.

    But the impossible question is- who is this paragon who wants the job of London Mayor and is capable of winning it? I don't see anyone who wants it on the centre-left, or is capable of winning it from the centre-right. And the Conservatives have trapped themselves shouting to themselves in Zone 6.

    So Sadiq, who is the word "meh" given human flesh, keeps on going.
    Unless there are some unknown things about Paul Scully, very weird he didn't even make the shortlist. I think he would have had a decent chance.
    I very much doubt that any official Conservative could win in London in 2024; the national tide is just in the wrong place. A Business-Friendly Independent (who the Conservatives don't quite endorse out loud), maybe. But that comes back to the question- who?

    But offering Susan Hall as a candidate is pretty much taking the mickey.
    Lord Sugar might have won as an Independent
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,932
    edited August 2023

    HYUFD said:

    Given the Uxbridge by election Tory hold on an anti ULEZ ticket and the recent poll showing 67% of Tory voters back new oil and gas licenses in the North sea as do UK voters overall by 42% to 27% whatever Extinction rebellion, Just Stop Oil and Greenpeace think it is unsurprising Sunak is rowing back from too much anti car and anti fossil fuels action.

    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/survey-results/daily/2023/07/31/aac1f/1


    Whoever replaces him as Tory leader will likely be just as pro car and net zero ambivalent. Labour voters however are much more pro action on climate change as are LDs, by 47% to 24% Labour voters think the government was wrong to issue new oil and gas licenses as do LD voters by 38% to 32%.
    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/survey-results/daily/2023/07/31/aac1f/1

    Labour Mayor of London Sadiq Khan also remains as pro ULEZ expansion as ever whatever Uxbridge voters thought

    But there aren't many Tory voters these days. Appealing to them won't win you a general election (or a London mayoral one). The Con-to-Lab swing in Uxbridge wasn't enough to get a Labour MP elected, but would see Sunak out of No. 10 if repeated nationally. Sunak needs to reach former Tory voters.
    The figures were for 2019 Tory voters and as the poll also showed voters as a whole back more licenses for oil and gas in the North Sea and as Uxbridge showed in outer London ULEZ is unpopular
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 4,727
    Scott_xP said:

    I had a colleague who was in the Territorial version of the Observer Corps in the 70’s. On being called his duty was to go to what was felt to be a safe place to ‘observe’.
    However he was to leave his wife and children.
    I couldn’t have done it!

    The Observer Corp used to stand on rooftops and hilltops to look for aircraft. During the Cold War they were tasked with looking for Nuclear explosions and fallout.

    Obviously you don't want to do that on a rooftop, you want to do it from an underground bunker.

    1500 were built in the 1950s, and half of them were still operational until 1991

    I know this because i just found out one of them was half a mile from my house
    There was one sold here for a surprisingly small amount. Wish I'd bought it now...

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4353464/Underground-Cold-War-bunker-market-25k.html

    The new owner doesn't _appear_ to have done anything with it, other than plant a few fruit trees in the surrounding paddock.

    I thought it was most likely to end up as a cannabis farm.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,025
    Leon said:

    FPT - I've yet to meet anyone who respects Sadiq Khan.

    I know a couple of New Labour SPADs who laughed out loud when I mentioned his name, and a few people in business who'd met him who said he was completely barking.

    I think even the people who vote for him do so with clothes pegs on their nose.

    I've yet to meet an actual Sadiq Khan VOTER - as in someone who openly and avowedly says "Oh yes I'm voting for him". Most people say Meh, what a boring jerk. The full-on haters really hate him. A small minority say "Oh well he';s not great but I might have to"

    Yet he's apparently coasting to victory again

    I am sure I live in something of an ethnic bubble, more white than most of London, but that bubble is politically diverse from UKIP Brexiteers to plenty of lefties (of all classes)

    I cannot find an enthusiastic Khan voter. He is eminently beatable and it is pathetic that the Tories have not found anyone to do it
    Where’s the Londoner Andy Street?

    There must be one somewhere, a successful and well-known London businessperson willing to stand against an unpopular mayor. My first thought would be someone like Charlie Mullins, if he’s not enjoying his money too much, then I realised that he’s now 70 so probably wouldn’t want to do it.
  • Leon said:

    FPT - I've yet to meet anyone who respects Sadiq Khan.

    I know a couple of New Labour SPADs who laughed out loud when I mentioned his name, and a few people in business who'd met him who said he was completely barking.

    I think even the people who vote for him do so with clothes pegs on their nose.

    I've yet to meet an actual Sadiq Khan VOTER - as in someone who openly and avowedly says "Oh yes I'm voting for him". Most people say Meh, what a boring jerk. The full-on haters really hate him. A small minority say "Oh well he';s not great but I might have to"

    Yet he's apparently coasting to victory again

    I am sure I live in something of an ethnic bubble, more white than most of London, but that bubble is politically diverse from UKIP Brexiteers to plenty of lefties (of all classes)

    I cannot find an enthusiastic Khan voter. He is eminently beatable and it is pathetic that the Tories have not found anyone to do it
    Like all generalisations that doesn't quite hold - I know several people, not all regularly Labour, who like him. The usual reason given is "a serious guy who has a positive agenda, unlike Boris". All of them strongly disapprove of Starmer's attempt to push him, and want him to say "sod off, Keir, I'm running London and we need clean air".

    Anecdata, I know. I think there is a structural problem - the Mayoral office is mostly motivational rather than policy-focused, so you really need a bit of rah-rah-London-is-great stuff, which isn't Sadiq's style. But he'll still beat the Tory candidate by a country mile.
    MoL is a weird job. Ideally you need a mix of Boris and a really good administrator, which ain't going to happen. Split the role in two somehow with a Cheerleader for London and an Administrator for London.
    You know the Mayor can hire people to assist in areas where he/she isn't that strong?
    Sure, they inevitably won't carry the same authority though.
    It depends how effectively you delegate. If you're clear that Fred speaks with your voice when he tells officials to do something in this area, then he has very significant authority. Your trouble comes if officials and others believe he doesn't, and that a wedge can be driven between you and Fred.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,228

    I was talking to a member deep in the selection process in a winnable seat - one applicant is really majoring on climate change, another is focusing on aid for victims of scandals (Post Office, Hillsborough, etc.). She's leaning to the first as she thinks that, with NHS and cost of living, that will be the key theme in the election. But I wonder if it is (I'm not sure that victims will be either, sadly). People who agree it's happening and important are already not voting Tory, whereas for cost of living the position is less clear-cut, so perhaps we should be focusing on that?

    Conversely, Sunak seems to be pursuing a core vote strategy to fight the looking wall of Tory abstentions - "we might lose but let's motivate the remaining supporters to actually vote".

    So over 2/3rd of Conservative members do believe climate change is caused by humans and almost 90% think it's real?

    Margaret Thatcher first alerted the world to its dangers. Decades ago. Because she understood the science. All Conservatives revere her and should understand that. But she was practical too.

    What we're seeing here is the consequences of allowing this issue to be entirely captured by the activist Left, which fuels polarisation.

    What we're seeing here is how the right blames the left for their own foolishness.

    The Tories have been in power for the last decade - how and why is "the activist left" setting their agenda ?
  • MiklosvarMiklosvar Posts: 1,855
    Multiply the Titanic by Brexit by the Scotch parliament building by DRS by the groundnut scheme

    Square the result

    Square the result again

    The number you have arrived at is invisible next to the clusterfuck that the no new ICE cars by 2030 plan is going to be. Buy a diesel truck, a 20,000 litre diesel storage tank, and a shotgun for the defence of both.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,405
    edited August 2023
    FPT @Casino_Royale

    We need to stop asking about what more we are going to tax and starting asking about how we are going to expand the tax base.

    Mass immigration is a lazy, and self-defeating, answer...

    A sensible question! Here's my answer

    For nearly 50 years we've been insisting that tax is bad, but reluctant to cut spending to match the tax take, and have been making up the difference by debt. We have run out of road on this approach and need to change

    To accomplish that we need to move from taxing mobile things (people, income) to taxing static things (wealth, buildings). You can lie about your income, you can emigrate to another country, but you can't take your house with you. You can tax, and prevent from leaving the country, large manifestations of wealth like houses, land and cars(?). I can't prove if person X is rich or poor, but I can find Emirates Stadium and tax it.

    So my plan is
    • Gradually reduce income tax
    • Gradually increase wealth tax
    • Keep it neutral to ensure popular support
    • Once established, match spending to income and pay off debt.
    There y'go. Question answered. It has been a productive day!

    PS: This guy Gary Stevenson has got it right
    https://www.youtube.com/@garyseconomics
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ViY-zI3b5JQ
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,138
    Carnyx said:

    TimS said:

    A very sane father of a friend of mine, former Labour Party member, and (now retired) self-made entrepreneur, now believes that global warming is caused by underwater volcanoes.

    Social media is a cancer on our democracy.

    Technically that's not untrue. It is just that we have anthropogenic change on top.

    Without those volcanoes, we'd still have a Snowball Earth.
    The underwater volcano fallacy is a specific one that’s been doing the rounds for a couple of decades. People actually believe the heat emitted from subsea volcanism warms the sea enough to account for warming. Not that CO2 from volcanism changes atmospheric chemistry.

    What it really highlights is how difficult it is for us to get our heads round the massive thermal capacity of water compared with air, and the sheet vastness of the oceans. Some simple maths shows just how minuscule the basic thermal effect would be even if subsea volcanism were to increase 100-fold and the oceans were much shallower. But you can see the superficial appeal because people see kettles boiling and think “eureka”. Oddly enough much harder for people to imagine land volcanoes heating the air directly even though the thermal capacity of air is orders of magnitude lower.
    The maths education problem. This one is about scale.

    Had a chap the other day, who was end timing it about satellites renewing the atmosphere. 15K tons of meteors enters the atmosphere....

    Another one is "Why can't we use old watermills to power the country?" - not realising that most watermills had about the same power as a moped.
    Once went to Leicester to see the beam engines there. Massive steam things, much more powerful than your average watermill. They had a modern [edit] IC engine, relatively little thing just sitting on the floor. It had the same power output!

    TBF there is real value in hydro on a small scale out in the country with high-gradient rivers available.
    Some years back, was staying in an old Château, in Normandy.

    The chap who owned it was tearing his hair out about bills. especially heating. My relative who's in the building business was there.

    He pointed out that

    1) Run a few kms of weighted plastic pipe round and round the ornamental lake as the external source for heat pump setup.
    2) There was the remains of an old Pelton wheel turbine on the inlet stream to the lake. From the size of it, it could power the heat pump (and probably a bit more).

    Completely free heating - just capital cost and maintenance.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,228

    A very sane father of a friend of mine, former Labour Party member, and (now retired) self-made entrepreneur, now believes that global warming is caused by underwater volcanoes.

    Social media is a cancer on our democracy.

    Technically that's not untrue. It is just that we have anthropogenic change on top.

    Without those volcanoes, we'd still have a Snowball Earth.
    Before we worked out that half of the Earth's internal heat was generated by radioactive decay, Lord Kelvin conclusively demonstrated the planet could only be a few thousand years old.
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 4,727
    Miklosvar said:

    Multiply the Titanic by Brexit by the Scotch parliament building by DRS by the groundnut scheme

    Square the result

    Square the result again

    The number you have arrived at is invisible next to the clusterfuck that the no new ICE cars by 2030 plan is going to be. Buy a diesel truck, a 20,000 litre diesel storage tank, and a shotgun for the defence of both.

    You are allowed a hybrid, so just put a big battery in and drive the car with the starter motor for 5 seconds.

    I think this is pretty much what Skoda have done with their new Octavia, so presumably you will be allowed one until 2035.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,953
    edited August 2023
    The experts aren't always right. They said Covid-19 almost certainly hadn't come from a Chinese lab in 2020.

    https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/covid-19/scientists-exactly-zero-evidence-covid-19-came-lab
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,364
    Nigelb said:

    A very sane father of a friend of mine, former Labour Party member, and (now retired) self-made entrepreneur, now believes that global warming is caused by underwater volcanoes.

    Social media is a cancer on our democracy.

    Technically that's not untrue. It is just that we have anthropogenic change on top.

    Without those volcanoes, we'd still have a Snowball Earth.
    Before we worked out that half of the Earth's internal heat was generated by radioactive decay, Lord Kelvin conclusively demonstrated the planet could only be a few thousand years old.
    Yes but he was a physicist not a geologist!
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,138

    Leon said:

    FPT - I've yet to meet anyone who respects Sadiq Khan.

    I know a couple of New Labour SPADs who laughed out loud when I mentioned his name, and a few people in business who'd met him who said he was completely barking.

    I think even the people who vote for him do so with clothes pegs on their nose.

    I've yet to meet an actual Sadiq Khan VOTER - as in someone who openly and avowedly says "Oh yes I'm voting for him". Most people say Meh, what a boring jerk. The full-on haters really hate him. A small minority say "Oh well he';s not great but I might have to"

    Yet he's apparently coasting to victory again

    I am sure I live in something of an ethnic bubble, more white than most of London, but that bubble is politically diverse from UKIP Brexiteers to plenty of lefties (of all classes)

    I cannot find an enthusiastic Khan voter. He is eminently beatable and it is pathetic that the Tories have not found anyone to do it
    Like all generalisations that doesn't quite hold - I know several people, not all regularly Labour, who like him. The usual reason given is "a serious guy who has a positive agenda, unlike Boris". All of them strongly disapprove of Starmer's attempt to push him, and want him to say "sod off, Keir, I'm running London and we need clean air".

    Anecdata, I know. I think there is a structural problem - the Mayoral office is mostly motivational rather than policy-focused, so you really need a bit of rah-rah-London-is-great stuff, which isn't Sadiq's style. But he'll still beat the Tory candidate by a country mile.
    MoL is a weird job. Ideally you need a mix of Boris and a really good administrator, which ain't going to happen. Split the role in two somehow with a Cheerleader for London and an Administrator for London.
    You know the Mayor can hire people to assist in areas where he/she isn't that strong?
    Sure, they inevitably won't carry the same authority though.
    It depends how effectively you delegate. If you're clear that Fred speaks with your voice when he tells officials to do something in this area, then he has very significant authority. Your trouble comes if officials and others believe he doesn't, and that a wedge can be driven between you and Fred.
    The movie version of a leader who does everything doesn't work in the real world.

    You have to delegate. That is part of the art of leadership.

    Read the Mythical Man Month.
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 4,727
    edited August 2023
    Nigelb said:

    A very sane father of a friend of mine, former Labour Party member, and (now retired) self-made entrepreneur, now believes that global warming is caused by underwater volcanoes.

    Social media is a cancer on our democracy.

    Technically that's not untrue. It is just that we have anthropogenic change on top.

    Without those volcanoes, we'd still have a Snowball Earth.
    Before we worked out that half of the Earth's internal heat was generated by radioactive decay, Lord Kelvin conclusively demonstrated the planet could only be a few thousand years old.
    Indeed. Didn't he also do a calculation of the age of the sun without knowing about nuclear reactions?
  • Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    FPT - I've yet to meet anyone who respects Sadiq Khan.

    I know a couple of New Labour SPADs who laughed out loud when I mentioned his name, and a few people in business who'd met him who said he was completely barking.

    I think even the people who vote for him do so with clothes pegs on their nose.

    I've yet to meet an actual Sadiq Khan VOTER - as in someone who openly and avowedly says "Oh yes I'm voting for him". Most people say Meh, what a boring jerk. The full-on haters really hate him. A small minority say "Oh well he';s not great but I might have to"

    Yet he's apparently coasting to victory again

    I am sure I live in something of an ethnic bubble, more white than most of London, but that bubble is politically diverse from UKIP Brexiteers to plenty of lefties (of all classes)

    I cannot find an enthusiastic Khan voter. He is eminently beatable and it is pathetic that the Tories have not found anyone to do it
    Where’s the Londoner Andy Street?

    There must be one somewhere, a successful and well-known London businessperson willing to stand against an unpopular mayor. My first thought would be someone like Charlie Mullins, if he’s not enjoying his money too much, then I realised that he’s now 70 so probably wouldn’t want to do it.
    Mullins is a very different businessman to Street. He's an entrepreneur who has built up a successful business, which is impressive... but it's a business a tiny fraction of the size of John Lewis (which has a turnover at least 50 times that of Pimlico).

    Street came in and managed a big business very effectively, achieving good growth and profits. It's also impressive but not that similar - it's very different from being an entrepreneur like Mullins.

    In terms of a major elected mayoralty, I have to say the skill set of Street is a better fit, and I suspect Mullins would find it hugely frustrating. You're needing to manage a large bureaucracy and a lot of characters with different objectives, and I think running John Lewis is much more relevant to that.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,405
    JSpring said:

    'Emergency' isn't something that has a scientific definition.

    True. But A&Es have to sift, so I assume there's a working definition.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,228
    TimS said:

    A very sane father of a friend of mine, former Labour Party member, and (now retired) self-made entrepreneur, now believes that global warming is caused by underwater volcanoes.

    Social media is a cancer on our democracy.

    Technically that's not untrue. It is just that we have anthropogenic change on top.

    Without those volcanoes, we'd still have a Snowball Earth.
    The underwater volcano fallacy is a specific one that’s been doing the rounds for a couple of decades. People actually believe the heat emitted from subsea volcanism warms the sea enough to account for warming. Not that CO2 from volcanism changes atmospheric chemistry.

    What it really highlights is how difficult it is for us to get our heads round the massive thermal capacity of water compared with air, and the sheet vastness of the oceans. Some simple maths shows just how minuscule the basic thermal effect would be even if subsea volcanism were to increase 100-fold and the oceans were much shallower. But you can see the superficial appeal because people see kettles boiling and think “eureka”. Oddly enough much harder for people to imagine land volcanoes heating the air directly even though the thermal capacity of air is orders of magnitude lower.
    TBF, they are a symptom of the internal heat of the earth, without which we would indeed be pretty chilly.

    But good point about heat capacity - heat transfer between ocean and atmosphere (and the energy transfers involved in the phase change between water and glacial ice) greatly complicate climate modelling.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,932
    Nigelb said:

    I was talking to a member deep in the selection process in a winnable seat - one applicant is really majoring on climate change, another is focusing on aid for victims of scandals (Post Office, Hillsborough, etc.). She's leaning to the first as she thinks that, with NHS and cost of living, that will be the key theme in the election. But I wonder if it is (I'm not sure that victims will be either, sadly). People who agree it's happening and important are already not voting Tory, whereas for cost of living the position is less clear-cut, so perhaps we should be focusing on that?

    Conversely, Sunak seems to be pursuing a core vote strategy to fight the looking wall of Tory abstentions - "we might lose but let's motivate the remaining supporters to actually vote".

    So over 2/3rd of Conservative members do believe climate change is caused by humans and almost 90% think it's real?

    Margaret Thatcher first alerted the world to its dangers. Decades ago. Because she understood the science. All Conservatives revere her and should understand that. But she was practical too.

    What we're seeing here is the consequences of allowing this issue to be entirely captured by the activist Left, which fuels polarisation.

    What we're seeing here is how the right blames the left for their own foolishness.

    The Tories have been in power for the last decade - how and why is "the activist left" setting their agenda ?
    Cameron, May and even Boris were pro action on climate change, pro net zero and Boris put forward the petrol cars ban.

    However the left via Just Stop Oil and Extinction Rebellion have overreached and Sunak has seen an opportunity post Uxbridge and is now pushing a more pro motorist and pro oil and gas agenda
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,463
    edited August 2023
    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    FPT - I've yet to meet anyone who respects Sadiq Khan.

    I know a couple of New Labour SPADs who laughed out loud when I mentioned his name, and a few people in business who'd met him who said he was completely barking.

    I think even the people who vote for him do so with clothes pegs on their nose.

    I've yet to meet an actual Sadiq Khan VOTER - as in someone who openly and avowedly says "Oh yes I'm voting for him". Most people say Meh, what a boring jerk. The full-on haters really hate him. A small minority say "Oh well he';s not great but I might have to"

    Yet he's apparently coasting to victory again

    I am sure I live in something of an ethnic bubble, more white than most of London, but that bubble is politically diverse from UKIP Brexiteers to plenty of lefties (of all classes)

    I cannot find an enthusiastic Khan voter. He is eminently beatable and it is pathetic that the Tories have not found anyone to do it
    Where’s the Londoner Andy Street?

    There must be one somewhere, a successful and well-known London businessperson willing to stand against an unpopular mayor. My first thought would be someone like Charlie Mullins, if he’s not enjoying his money too much, then I realised that he’s now 70 so probably wouldn’t want to do it.
    Besides,

    Pimlico Plumbers donated £22,735 to the Conservative Party in 2015, and Mullins donated more than £48,000, in the two years to July 2017. He was a business adviser to David Cameron and George Osborne, and has been a vocal critic of Brexit.

    In January 2018, Mullins announced that he would no longer be a Conservative Party donor, and declared his candidacy as an independent at the 2021 London mayoral election (which had been scheduled for 2020, before being postponed) but Mullins did not appear on the ballot paper. In March 2018, Mullins said he would financially support the Liberal Democrats to support their campaign to prevent Brexit.


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_Mullins

    If a party chooses to chase retired homeowners, that's a valid choice and overall an electorally sound one. But it has consequences.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,138

    Nigelb said:

    A very sane father of a friend of mine, former Labour Party member, and (now retired) self-made entrepreneur, now believes that global warming is caused by underwater volcanoes.

    Social media is a cancer on our democracy.

    Technically that's not untrue. It is just that we have anthropogenic change on top.

    Without those volcanoes, we'd still have a Snowball Earth.
    Before we worked out that half of the Earth's internal heat was generated by radioactive decay, Lord Kelvin conclusively demonstrated the planet could only be a few thousand years old.
    Indeed. Didn't he also do a calculation of the age of the sun without knowing about nuclear reactions?
    Yes - the results were part of the stack of evidence that suggested Something Else Was Needed to explain the world around us.
  • Leon said:

    FPT - I've yet to meet anyone who respects Sadiq Khan.

    I know a couple of New Labour SPADs who laughed out loud when I mentioned his name, and a few people in business who'd met him who said he was completely barking.

    I think even the people who vote for him do so with clothes pegs on their nose.

    I've yet to meet an actual Sadiq Khan VOTER - as in someone who openly and avowedly says "Oh yes I'm voting for him". Most people say Meh, what a boring jerk. The full-on haters really hate him. A small minority say "Oh well he';s not great but I might have to"

    Yet he's apparently coasting to victory again

    I am sure I live in something of an ethnic bubble, more white than most of London, but that bubble is politically diverse from UKIP Brexiteers to plenty of lefties (of all classes)

    I cannot find an enthusiastic Khan voter. He is eminently beatable and it is pathetic that the Tories have not found anyone to do it
    Like all generalisations that doesn't quite hold - I know several people, not all regularly Labour, who like him. The usual reason given is "a serious guy who has a positive agenda, unlike Boris". All of them strongly disapprove of Starmer's attempt to push him, and want him to say "sod off, Keir, I'm running London and we need clean air".

    Anecdata, I know. I think there is a structural problem - the Mayoral office is mostly motivational rather than policy-focused, so you really need a bit of rah-rah-London-is-great stuff, which isn't Sadiq's style. But he'll still beat the Tory candidate by a country mile.
    MoL is a weird job. Ideally you need a mix of Boris and a really good administrator, which ain't going to happen. Split the role in two somehow with a Cheerleader for London and an Administrator for London.
    The theory of Boris's mayorality was that Boris could do the cheerleading and appoint capable minions to do the admin for him. How much that worked is a question for the history books. Quite a bit of what came out of Boris's mind was sizzle-without-sausage which no minion could make work, no matter how capable.

    Sadiq, on the other hand, is boring. And whilst we need more boring overall, you can have too much of a good thing in one place.

    But the impossible question is- who is this paragon who wants the job of London Mayor and is capable of winning it? I don't see anyone who wants it on the centre-left, or is capable of winning it from the centre-right. And the Conservatives have trapped themselves shouting to themselves in Zone 6.

    So Sadiq, who is the word "meh" given human flesh, keeps on going.
    Unless there are some unknown things about Paul Scully, very weird he didn't even make the shortlist. I think he would have had a decent chance.
    The word on the street is that Scully was excluded as part of CCHQ rigging the selection for Daniel Korski, a Cameron SpAd, who then got caught up in groping allegations and withdrew. The trouble with producing a skewed shortlist is that if the only strong candidate pulls out, you are left with, well, Susan Hall in this case.
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/11/minister-for-london-paul-scully-fails-to-make-tory-shortlist-to-run-for-city-mayor
  • PeckPeck Posts: 517
    edited August 2023
    FPT - Those contributors here who are in the habit of calling Rishi Sunak "little" or otherwise referencing his shorter than average height should ask whether they ever did the same for, say, Ariel Sharon, whose height was the same. Or for Winston Churchill, who was shorter. I'm guessing no. What they are really deriding about Sunak is the fact that he doesn't come across as butch.

    I doubt Sunak will be remembered as actually having done anything of any importance, but insofar as he doesn't seem to be vacuous or a bullshitter you gotta admit he seems superior in his level of skill in prime ministerial office to his three Tory predecessors.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,228
    Miklosvar said:

    Multiply the Titanic by Brexit by the Scotch parliament building by DRS by the groundnut scheme

    Square the result

    Square the result again

    The number you have arrived at is invisible next to the clusterfuck that the no new ICE cars by 2030 plan is going to be. Buy a diesel truck, a 20,000 litre diesel storage tank, and a shotgun for the defence of both.

    That's rubbish, since (for a start) PHEVs will continue to be manufactured.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,138
    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    I was talking to a member deep in the selection process in a winnable seat - one applicant is really majoring on climate change, another is focusing on aid for victims of scandals (Post Office, Hillsborough, etc.). She's leaning to the first as she thinks that, with NHS and cost of living, that will be the key theme in the election. But I wonder if it is (I'm not sure that victims will be either, sadly). People who agree it's happening and important are already not voting Tory, whereas for cost of living the position is less clear-cut, so perhaps we should be focusing on that?

    Conversely, Sunak seems to be pursuing a core vote strategy to fight the looking wall of Tory abstentions - "we might lose but let's motivate the remaining supporters to actually vote".

    So over 2/3rd of Conservative members do believe climate change is caused by humans and almost 90% think it's real?

    Margaret Thatcher first alerted the world to its dangers. Decades ago. Because she understood the science. All Conservatives revere her and should understand that. But she was practical too.

    What we're seeing here is the consequences of allowing this issue to be entirely captured by the activist Left, which fuels polarisation.

    What we're seeing here is how the right blames the left for their own foolishness.

    The Tories have been in power for the last decade - how and why is "the activist left" setting their agenda ?
    Cameron, May and even Boris were pro action on climate change, pro net zero and Boris put forward the petrol cars ban.

    However the left via Just Stop Oil and Extinction Rebellion have overreached and Sunak has seen an opportunity post Uxbridge and is now pushing a more pro motorist and pro oil and gas agenda
    While Corbyn actually said he wanted to reopen coal mines....
  • More good news for Rishi.

    Interest rates up again.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,515
    edited August 2023
    Interest rates up quarter a percent
  • Interest rates op quarter a percent

    Excellent news for savers.

    We’ve been persecuted for too long whilst mortgage holders have had it easy for the last 15 years.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 52,300

    A very sane father of a friend of mine, former Labour Party member, and (now retired) self-made entrepreneur, now believes that global warming is caused by underwater volcanoes.

    Social media is a cancer on our democracy.

    If democracy requires control of the flow of information received by voters, is it really democracy?
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,909

    A very sane father of a friend of mine, former Labour Party member, and (now retired) self-made entrepreneur, now believes that global warming is caused by underwater volcanoes.

    Social media is a cancer on our democracy.

    The confusing thing is that social media doesn't sound a million miles different from the early days of printing, with all sorts of mad things being printed, the same disregard for fact and the preference for what was slanderous and exciting, and democracy was born from that tumult.

    So why is it different with social media now?
  • MiklosvarMiklosvar Posts: 1,855
    Nigelb said:

    Miklosvar said:

    Multiply the Titanic by Brexit by the Scotch parliament building by DRS by the groundnut scheme

    Square the result

    Square the result again

    The number you have arrived at is invisible next to the clusterfuck that the no new ICE cars by 2030 plan is going to be. Buy a diesel truck, a 20,000 litre diesel storage tank, and a shotgun for the defence of both.

    That's rubbish, since (for a start) PHEVs will continue to be manufactured.
    Yes, I have only just realised what a complete scam they are. A PHEV range rover has 1.5x the diesel capacity of my actual diesel pickup. And goes about 300 yards on electric.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,856
    edited August 2023
    ...

    Leon said:

    FPT - I've yet to meet anyone who respects Sadiq Khan.

    I know a couple of New Labour SPADs who laughed out loud when I mentioned his name, and a few people in business who'd met him who said he was completely barking.

    I think even the people who vote for him do so with clothes pegs on their nose.

    I've yet to meet an actual Sadiq Khan VOTER - as in someone who openly and avowedly says "Oh yes I'm voting for him". Most people say Meh, what a boring jerk. The full-on haters really hate him. A small minority say "Oh well he';s not great but I might have to"

    Yet he's apparently coasting to victory again

    I am sure I live in something of an ethnic bubble, more white than most of London, but that bubble is politically diverse from UKIP Brexiteers to plenty of lefties (of all classes)

    I cannot find an enthusiastic Khan voter. He is eminently beatable and it is pathetic that the Tories have not found anyone to do it
    Like all generalisations that doesn't quite hold - I know several people, not all regularly Labour, who like him. The usual reason given is "a serious guy who has a positive agenda, unlike Boris". All of them strongly disapprove of Starmer's attempt to push him, and want him to say "sod off, Keir, I'm running London and we need clean air".

    Anecdata, I know. I think there is a structural problem - the Mayoral office is mostly motivational rather than policy-focused, so you really need a bit of rah-rah-London-is-great stuff, which isn't Sadiq's style. But he'll still beat the Tory candidate by a country mile.
    MoL is a weird job. Ideally you need a mix of Boris and a really good administrator, which ain't going to happen. Split the role in two somehow with a Cheerleader for London and an Administrator for London.
    The theory of Boris's mayorality was that Boris could do the cheerleading and appoint capable minions to do the admin for him. How much that worked is a question for the history books. Quite a bit of what came out of Boris's mind was sizzle-without-sausage which no minion could make work, no matter how capable.

    Sadiq, on the other hand, is boring. And whilst we need more boring overall, you can have too much of a good thing in one place.

    But the impossible question is- who is this paragon who wants the job of London Mayor and is capable of winning it? I don't see anyone who wants it on the centre-left, or is capable of winning it from the centre-right. And the Conservatives have trapped themselves shouting to themselves in Zone 6.

    So Sadiq, who is the word "meh" given human flesh, keeps on going.
    Unless there are some unknown things about Paul Scully, very weird he didn't even make the shortlist. I think he would have had a decent chance.
    It is, once again though, Sunak's wet faction fixing it up for their guy (don't mention the groping allegations), then that falling through with the inevitable outcome. It's the leadership election all over again - Sunak's team used his early favourite status to contribute votes and knock everyone except the weakest candidate out; then the Tory membership wisely saw that he was even shitter than Truss and voted for her. We got Truss because of Sunak. We got Susan Hall because of Sunak.

    The Tory Party has a settled pro-Britain view, and a settled views on the desirability of low taxes and a small state. The wets need to stop hijacking the Tory party, and go and start a new party to get a mandate for the policies they espouse, and see how many people flock to their cause. I understand the name 'Change UK' may be available.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,515

    Interest rates op quarter a percent

    Excellent news for savers.

    We’ve been persecuted for too long whilst mortgage holders have had it easy for the last 15 years.

    What chance do you think the banks will pass this on to savers ?
This discussion has been closed.