I started watching The Last of Us last night. The basic premise - monsters who don't seem to realise they're dead already, running around a broken landscape trying to infect others with their toxic brain fungus while everything crumbles around them - struck me as the perfect metaphor for the current government. Maybe this explains any dip in the quality of debate here. We are all just waiting for this zombie government to get its brains blown out. Anyone who actually voted for it must find the current situation especially dispiriting. And there's really not much else to talk about in the meantime.
Speak for yourself. Not everyone thinks like you.
I await the new Labour administration with horror.
Statistically, it is your opinion which is strikingly at odds with the mainstream.
Beyond the big party divide there is clearly an overall split on whether Trump acted illegally or not. 47% say Trump acted illegally over what happened in the US Capitol in 2020 and 51% over trying to overturn the Georgia election result.
Note too less than half of Independents believe Trump acted illegally on either matter
You get 50%+ of independents saying he acted illegally or unethically, and there are very large don’t knows.
A good reality check is to imagine that someone who we really like and apporove of does these things in a political scene with just two entrenched parties - would we find excuses, or decide to vote against them even if it meant supporting someone we disliked? If Starmer or Corbyn as Labour leaders past and present tried to rig an election, I wouldn't vote Labour. If the only realistic alternative was UKIP led by Farage, though, would I vote UKIP? Gulp.
For a hardened Republican who believes the Democrats are alien to everything they hold dear, it must be a bit like that.
There was some excitement around this yesterday, with various pb luminaries rushing to take big prices. Not me, sadly. I cannot see how it works.
Surely, either Trump wins or Trump does not run, in which case his support will be spread amongst Trump-friendly candidates. I do not see the mechanism by which Trump being forced to withdraw results in the MAGA scales falling from his supporters' eyes so they now see Christie was right about Trump all along.
Christie claiming second place is, however, consistent with non-Trump Republicans falling out of love with Ron DeSantis as RDS moves to out-Trump Trump.
It's a little more complex than that.
Republicans split three ways (according to NYTimes polling):
- Love and support Trump: c. 38% - Like Trump, but worry about his electability: 26% - Don't like Trump: 36%
Also remember that the US primary system means that if that "Don't Like Trump" group consolidates quickly, then they could do very well. (Also remember two things. One: John Kasich was a decent second in New Hampshire last time around. And two: NH allows cross over voting; it's not impossible that Christie could get a lot of Dem and Independent votes in NH.)
I started watching The Last of Us last night. The basic premise - monsters who don't seem to realise they're dead already, running around a broken landscape trying to infect others with their toxic brain fungus while everything crumbles around them - struck me as the perfect metaphor for the current government. Maybe this explains any dip in the quality of debate here. We are all just waiting for this zombie government to get its brains blown out. Anyone who actually voted for it must find the current situation especially dispiriting. And there's really not much else to talk about in the meantime.
Yes, that is the fundamental problem at the moment. Despite its substantial majority, this is the lamest of lame duck governments.
"NHS Week" this week, so we got an announcement of 5000 beds to help with the winter pressures. Only it turns out to be 900 beds by April 2024, with no expansion of staff or imaging etc to cover, and certainly no mention that the NHS has shrunk by 83,000 beds since in the last 2 decades.
It is so inept it is incredible. Sadly, Streeting is no better.
I've given you a like for everything but the last sentence! I met Streeting a couple of weeks ago and really liked him. Whether he will be a good health secretary is perhaps a different question, but he seemed a nice guy and very smart.
I think Foxy and Streeting is going to be the new Ydoethur and [ed sec of the day].
I left the Labour Party 2 decades ago, in part because of the warmongering, but also because of Alan Milburns health service policy. Streeting is Milburn Copy and Paste, without the money. I have very low expectations.
The only compensation is that being Health Sec ends political careers so he will never be PM. No Health Sec has gone on to be leader since the NHS was formed.
And only one before - Neville Chamberlain, who was Health Secretary three times between 1922 and 1931.
Oddly, same number for Education, although the sole education Secretary to be PM was a much more recent figure (and no prizes are given for guessing who it was)!
Last night was fucking hilarious. I am sorry I missed it 'live'.
Leon was clearly having an episode after having been taken down to funky town and had manners put on him by Barty Bobs. The flounce will not take. No chance.
Then DJ41 does a comeback with the pb.com equivalent of Zurich to the Finland Station gets up in our business spitting truth in his own version of Chto Delat'.
Oh, DJ41 made a comeback? I must go back and have a look.
Give us the TLDR. It looked twice as long as a Cyclefree header, and devoid of every quality that makes those readable.
Everyone’s thick, this site is full of tories and morons (I think he includes anyone to the right of Corbyn in that accolade). Long checklist of posters he considers substandard in one way or other.
But clearly lurks here so the content can’t be that dull.
Then a brief A-Z of Russian talking points including - a first for him - “mass vaccination”. But not “LGBT propaganda”, yet.
But the language is of a high colloquial standard complete with definite articles in the right place so I think it confirms he is either not Russian, or incredibly good at English.
I had quite a pleasant email interaction with him. He’s not a Russian troll, just someone who sees the world “differently”. Have known many like him and probably a good thing to have posters with such a differing world view on the site as always good to see the other side. It’s like reading all the newspapers whatever their political view or “quality” to see what the other side is being told or thinking.
Yes, a pity if he's been banned again. Can moderators let him back?
@isam is still in the PB fantasy football league BTW.
How's he doing?
I liked him as a poster, but he was a terrible tipster.
Seems OK when I have had occasional correspondence. Busy with family and life.
It would be interesting to hear from him on his charisma theory of electoral outcomes. By this measure Starmer is heading for defeat, though we do have a charisma deficit in both front benches at present, perhaps only Mordaunt, Phillips and Rayner at present have significant charisma, Hunt at a push.
Hunt? I'd say Rishi is more charismatic than Hunt, if only he'd stop cos-playing Boris.
Hunt should be credited with taking on the impossible task after the Trussonomics fiasco, but needs to be in a post where communication matters. He is the most able in the Cabinet at present, and actually could do a decent job back at Health.
That means finding another Chancellor. And it would need to be someone who is a biggish beast and who the markets trust.
Who?
A straight swap with Barclay is the obvious one. It would be seen as a demotion, but Hunt actually cares about Health, hence his book on the subject.
His time on the Health select committee was very good. He has learnt a bit since he last did the job.
There was an suggestion last night that Double Carpet was Dominic Cummings, which is kind of interesting.
Lol! He would be flattered and amused, I am sure.
His first name is Paul. We have met numerous times.
Well, I'm sure he would be flattered and amused (if he's capable of amusement) to be compared to an intelligent and erudite bloke like @DoubleCarpet but I'm pretty sure his first name is Dominic.
I started watching The Last of Us last night. The basic premise - monsters who don't seem to realise they're dead already, running around a broken landscape trying to infect others with their toxic brain fungus while everything crumbles around them - struck me as the perfect metaphor for the current government. Maybe this explains any dip in the quality of debate here. We are all just waiting for this zombie government to get its brains blown out. Anyone who actually voted for it must find the current situation especially dispiriting. And there's really not much else to talk about in the meantime.
Speak for yourself. Not everyone thinks like you.
I await the new Labour administration with horror.
My point was agnostic about what follows, I was simply noting that this government seems utterly dead on its feet, bereft of ideas and (I would imagine, but you will know better) a source of embarrassment to its supporters. As long as this stasis remains I think political discussion will have this kind of tired quality to it. Hopefully things will liven up as the election approaches.
If you're all good I may give you an Indy thread on Sunday.
A thread on the Catalonian Indy movement would certainly be relevant at the moment given the inconclusive Spanish election where Catalan Nationalists hold the balance of power
A good reality check is to imagine that someone who we really like and apporove of does these things in a political scene with just two entrenched parties - would we find excuses, or decide to vote against them even if it meant supporting someone we disliked? If Starmer or Corbyn as Labour leaders past and present tried to rig an election, I wouldn't vote Labour. If the only realistic alternative was UKIP led by Farage, though, would I vote UKIP? Gulp.
For a hardened Republican who believes the Democrats are alien to everything they hold dear, it must be a bit like that.
And yet there are Labour party members who ave been utterly loyal to
Blair Brown Corbyn Starmer
And we have our own, fluffy, @HYUFD'y to demonstrate the flexibility of loyalty from the other side.
If you're all good I may give you an Indy thread on Sunday.
A thread on the Catalonian Indy movement would certainly be relevant at the moment given the inconclusive Spanish election with Catalan Nationalists hold the balance of power
That's a good point.
If @felix is OK (haven't seen him around recently) maybe he could do a guest thread?
There was some excitement around this yesterday, with various pb luminaries rushing to take big prices. Not me, sadly. I cannot see how it works.
Surely, either Trump wins or Trump does not run, in which case his support will be spread amongst Trump-friendly candidates. I do not see the mechanism by which Trump being forced to withdraw results in the MAGA scales falling from his supporters' eyes so they now see Christie was right about Trump all along.
Christie claiming second place is, however, consistent with non-Trump Republicans falling out of love with Ron DeSantis as RDS moves to out-Trump Trump.
It's a little more complex than that.
Republicans split three ways (according to NYTimes polling):
- Love and support Trump: c. 38% - Like Trump, but worry about his electability: 26% - Don't like Trump: 36%
Also remember that the US primary system means that if that "Don't Like Trump" group consolidates quickly, then they could do very well. (Also remember two things. One: John Kasich was a decent second in New Hampshire last time around. And two: NH allows cross over voting; it's not impossible that Christie could get a lot of Dem and Independent votes in NH.)
This is the thing, you don't have to be a registered Republican now to vote in the Republican primaries next year. I don't know how the pollsters are getting their samples, but it's really hard to know who's going to turn out. People who are just enthusiastic voters will likely vote on the GOP side, since there's (probably) no meaningful Dem contest. In general primaries against incumbents have tended to produce moderates.
Like, if you're American and you're not enthusiastic about Biden and you find nominating an egomaniac criminal alarming, isn't that a good reason to actually vote in the primary, even if you wouldn't normally?
Definitely not a russian bot - not a "mate" in there - and a cracking rant about all kinds, including PB Tories, who as someone upthread noted, is anyone to the right of Corbyn, and their polo-playing, fine wine drinking, breakfast in Kyrrbasystan-posting dilettantism.
Where he/she/it is bang on the money is that there are certain topics where it is not allowed to have a dissenting view (as in it draws a particular kind of vituperative response). The Russian invasion of Ukraine being one of them.
I find it amusing that any identification of the practicalities of the war, its historical context, or any hint that Ukrainian forces won't be sipping tea in the Kremlin by next Tuesday is met with a barrage of what I can only believe is insecurity and fear, manifest in the most gung ho (Russia will be defeated because Russia must be defeated) rhetoric.
And I see dj41 has now been banned, as they suspected they would be. Which is a huge shame. They said they didn't want to continue posting anyway so it's moot but it is such voices that we need here on PB. The lack of such voices, and the certain-topic Groupthink is I imagine one of the reasons that Leon gets so frustrated. Plus he was beginning to contemplate - burn him - that a negotiated settlement might be an idea to consider.
“School district uses ChatGPT to help remove library books “Faced with new legislation, Iowa's Mason City Community School District asked ChatGPT if certain books 'contain a description or depiction of a sex act.'”
@isam is still in the PB fantasy football league BTW.
How's he doing?
I liked him as a poster, but he was a terrible tipster.
Seems OK when I have had occasional correspondence. Busy with family and life.
It would be interesting to hear from him on his charisma theory of electoral outcomes. By this measure Starmer is heading for defeat, though we do have a charisma deficit in both front benches at present, perhaps only Mordaunt, Phillips and Rayner at present have significant charisma, Hunt at a push.
Hunt? I'd say Rishi is more charismatic than Hunt, if only he'd stop cos-playing Boris.
Hunt should be credited with taking on the impossible task after the Trussonomics fiasco, but needs to be in a post where communication matters. He is the most able in the Cabinet at present, and actually could do a decent job back at Health.
That means finding another Chancellor. And it would need to be someone who is a biggish beast and who the markets trust.
Who?
A straight swap with Barclay is the obvious one. It would be seen as a demotion, but Hunt actually cares about Health, hence his book on the subject.
His time on the Health select committee was very good. He has learnt a bit since he last did the job.
If Barclay becomes Chancellor he is heir apparent to the Tory leadership in all but name when Sunak goes, whereas now he is just a strong dark horse outsider.
Hunt would also I suspect not want to go back to Health having done it for years and as it would mean a demotion from Chancellor
A good reality check is to imagine that someone who we really like and apporove of does these things in a political scene with just two entrenched parties - would we find excuses, or decide to vote against them even if it meant supporting someone we disliked? If Starmer or Corbyn as Labour leaders past and present tried to rig an election, I wouldn't vote Labour. If the only realistic alternative was UKIP led by Farage, though, would I vote UKIP? Gulp.
For a hardened Republican who believes the Democrats are alien to everything they hold dear, it must be a bit like that.
That’s the problem. We have our own issues with two main parties under FPTP but at least if you’re disgusted with one of them there’s the option of Lib Dem, Green, Refuk or one of the nationalist parties.
What’s disturbing is the lack of anti-Trump sentiment in the GOP membership. Where is their equivalent of those Tory members calling for Boris to go after partygate, or Labour members pushing out the trots? Even my own little party had its mini-backlash after Nicarus Clegg flew too close to the Tories.
There was some excitement around this yesterday, with various pb luminaries rushing to take big prices. Not me, sadly. I cannot see how it works.
Surely, either Trump wins or Trump does not run, in which case his support will be spread amongst Trump-friendly candidates. I do not see the mechanism by which Trump being forced to withdraw results in the MAGA scales falling from his supporters' eyes so they now see Christie was right about Trump all along.
Christie claiming second place is, however, consistent with non-Trump Republicans falling out of love with Ron DeSantis as RDS moves to out-Trump Trump.
DeSantis, Ramaswamy, RFK Jr, Newsom are all between 14-1 and 30-1. Christie is competing in this 'best of the rest' marketplace. His current price of around 90-1 on Betfair is more than fair. I doubt any of them will win, but Christie should be a better price than Ramaswamy, RFK and Newsom right now.
My point is there is no "best of the rest" but rather two different pools: MAGA, currently led by Trump; and non-Trump Republicans. Christie now leads the latter but will be swamped by Trump, but if Trump pulls out, then MAGA votes will not transfer to Christie, who will therefore lose to whoever can replace The Donald.
@isam is still in the PB fantasy football league BTW.
How's he doing?
I liked him as a poster, but he was a terrible tipster.
Seems OK when I have had occasional correspondence. Busy with family and life.
It would be interesting to hear from him on his charisma theory of electoral outcomes. By this measure Starmer is heading for defeat, though we do have a charisma deficit in both front benches at present, perhaps only Mordaunt, Phillips and Rayner at present have significant charisma, Hunt at a push.
Hunt? I'd say Rishi is more charismatic than Hunt, if only he'd stop cos-playing Boris.
Hunt should be credited with taking on the impossible task after the Trussonomics fiasco, but needs to be in a post where communication matters. He is the most able in the Cabinet at present, and actually could do a decent job back at Health.
Have you read Hunt's book? It is mainly explaining why his well-intentioned health reforms failed.
I started watching The Last of Us last night. The basic premise - monsters who don't seem to realise they're dead already, running around a broken landscape trying to infect others with their toxic brain fungus while everything crumbles around them - struck me as the perfect metaphor for the current government. Maybe this explains any dip in the quality of debate here. We are all just waiting for this zombie government to get its brains blown out. Anyone who actually voted for it must find the current situation especially dispiriting. And there's really not much else to talk about in the meantime.
Yes, that is the fundamental problem at the moment. Despite its substantial majority, this is the lamest of lame duck governments.
"NHS Week" this week, so we got an announcement of 5000 beds to help with the winter pressures. Only it turns out to be 900 beds by April 2024, with no expansion of staff or imaging etc to cover, and certainly no mention that the NHS has shrunk by 83,000 beds since in the last 2 decades.
It is so inept it is incredible. Sadly, Streeting is no better.
I've given you a like for everything but the last sentence! I met Streeting a couple of weeks ago and really liked him. Whether he will be a good health secretary is perhaps a different question, but he seemed a nice guy and very smart.
I think Foxy and Streeting is going to be the new Ydoethur and [ed sec of the day].
I left the Labour Party 2 decades ago, in part because of the warmongering, but also because of Alan Milburns health service policy. Streeting is Milburn Copy and Paste, without the money. I have very low expectations.
The only compensation is that being Health Sec ends political careers so he will never be PM. No Health Sec has gone on to be leader since the NHS was formed.
And only one before - Neville Chamberlain, who was Health Secretary three times between 1922 and 1931.
Oddly, same number for Education, although the sole education Secretary to be PM was a much more recent figure (and no prizes are given for guessing who it was)!
You say "much more recent" but 1975, when the blessed Margaret became Tory leader, is a full decade closer to 1937 (when Chamberlain became Tory leader) than it is to today.
There was some excitement around this yesterday, with various pb luminaries rushing to take big prices. Not me, sadly. I cannot see how it works.
Surely, either Trump wins or Trump does not run, in which case his support will be spread amongst Trump-friendly candidates. I do not see the mechanism by which Trump being forced to withdraw results in the MAGA scales falling from his supporters' eyes so they now see Christie was right about Trump all along.
Christie claiming second place is, however, consistent with non-Trump Republicans falling out of love with Ron DeSantis as RDS moves to out-Trump Trump.
DeSantis, Ramaswamy, RFK Jr, Newsom are all between 14-1 and 30-1. Christie is competing in this 'best of the rest' marketplace. His current price of around 90-1 on Betfair is more than fair. I doubt any of them will win, but Christie should be a better price than Ramaswamy, RFK and Newsom right now.
My point is there is no "best of the rest" but rather two different pools: MAGA, currently led by Trump; and non-Trump Republicans. Christie now leads the latter but will be swamped by Trump, but if Trump pulls out, then MAGA votes will not transfer to Christie, who will therefore lose to whoever can replace The Donald.
Don't forget that a lot of US Republican Primaries are winner takes all. When Trump got less than a third of the vote in New York in 2016, he got all the delegates.
*IF* Christie were to consolidate the Non-Trump vote, while DeSantis and the like split the Trump vote, then it's far from impossible for him to win.
Is he a 10-1 or 15-1 shot? Nope. But he's still great value at 90-1.
@isam is still in the PB fantasy football league BTW.
How's he doing?
I liked him as a poster, but he was a terrible tipster.
Seems OK when I have had occasional correspondence. Busy with family and life.
It would be interesting to hear from him on his charisma theory of electoral outcomes. By this measure Starmer is heading for defeat, though we do have a charisma deficit in both front benches at present, perhaps only Mordaunt, Phillips and Rayner at present have significant charisma, Hunt at a push.
Hunt? I'd say Rishi is more charismatic than Hunt, if only he'd stop cos-playing Boris.
Hunt should be credited with taking on the impossible task after the Trussonomics fiasco, but needs to be in a post where communication matters. He is the most able in the Cabinet at present, and actually could do a decent job back at Health.
Have you read Hunt's book? It is mainly explaining why his well-intentioned health reforms failed.
If you're all good I may give you an Indy thread on Sunday.
A thread on the Catalonian Indy movement would certainly be relevant at the moment given the inconclusive Spanish election with Catalan Nationalists hold the balance of power
That's a good point.
If @felix is OK (haven't seen him around recently) maybe he could do a guest thread?
Incidentally, the Spanish situation demonstrates the key reason why Britain should eschew PR: successive governments would be beholden to Scottish nationalists.
Every electoral system has pluses and minuses. PR in Britain would operate to destabilise the union.
I started watching The Last of Us last night. The basic premise - monsters who don't seem to realise they're dead already, running around a broken landscape trying to infect others with their toxic brain fungus while everything crumbles around them - struck me as the perfect metaphor for the current government. Maybe this explains any dip in the quality of debate here. We are all just waiting for this zombie government to get its brains blown out. Anyone who actually voted for it must find the current situation especially dispiriting. And there's really not much else to talk about in the meantime.
Yes, that is the fundamental problem at the moment. Despite its substantial majority, this is the lamest of lame duck governments.
"NHS Week" this week, so we got an announcement of 5000 beds to help with the winter pressures. Only it turns out to be 900 beds by April 2024, with no expansion of staff or imaging etc to cover, and certainly no mention that the NHS has shrunk by 83,000 beds since in the last 2 decades.
It is so inept it is incredible. Sadly, Streeting is no better.
I've given you a like for everything but the last sentence! I met Streeting a couple of weeks ago and really liked him. Whether he will be a good health secretary is perhaps a different question, but he seemed a nice guy and very smart.
I think Foxy and Streeting is going to be the new Ydoethur and [ed sec of the day].
I left the Labour Party 2 decades ago, in part because of the warmongering, but also because of Alan Milburns health service policy. Streeting is Milburn Copy and Paste, without the money. I have very low expectations.
The only compensation is that being Health Sec ends political careers so he will never be PM. No Health Sec has gone on to be leader since the NHS was formed.
And only one before - Neville Chamberlain, who was Health Secretary three times between 1922 and 1931.
Oddly, same number for Education, although the sole education Secretary to be PM was a much more recent figure (and no prizes are given for guessing who it was)!
You say "much more recent" but 1975, when the blessed Margaret became Tory leader, is a full decade closer to 1937 (when Chamberlain became Tory leader) than it is to today.
Last night was fucking hilarious. I am sorry I missed it 'live'.
Leon was clearly having an episode after having been taken down to funky town and had manners put on him by Barty Bobs. The flounce will not take. No chance.
Then DJ41 does a comeback with the pb.com equivalent of Zurich to the Finland Station gets up in our business spitting truth in his own version of Chto Delat'.
Missed it all. Had a drive in a F430 Challenge and a Cobra replica instead. Would the latter meet with your approval @Dura_Ace? Scared the willies out of me.
Cobra replicas are common and crap. I hate them for their ubiquity and inauthenticity. F430 Challenge is cool, especially if it was real 1 of 140 Challenge and not just a Scuderia or vanilla 430.
@isam is still in the PB fantasy football league BTW.
How's he doing?
I liked him as a poster, but he was a terrible tipster.
Seems OK when I have had occasional correspondence. Busy with family and life.
It would be interesting to hear from him on his charisma theory of electoral outcomes. By this measure Starmer is heading for defeat, though we do have a charisma deficit in both front benches at present, perhaps only Mordaunt, Phillips and Rayner at present have significant charisma, Hunt at a push.
Hunt? I'd say Rishi is more charismatic than Hunt, if only he'd stop cos-playing Boris.
Sunak’s media appearances have not screamed “charisma”, I suggest.
Sunak can appear human and self-deprecating. What undermines the Prime Minister is his faux Boris act and CCHQ should end that.
There was some excitement around this yesterday, with various pb luminaries rushing to take big prices. Not me, sadly. I cannot see how it works.
Surely, either Trump wins or Trump does not run, in which case his support will be spread amongst Trump-friendly candidates. I do not see the mechanism by which Trump being forced to withdraw results in the MAGA scales falling from his supporters' eyes so they now see Christie was right about Trump all along.
Christie claiming second place is, however, consistent with non-Trump Republicans falling out of love with Ron DeSantis as RDS moves to out-Trump Trump.
DeSantis, Ramaswamy, RFK Jr, Newsom are all between 14-1 and 30-1. Christie is competing in this 'best of the rest' marketplace. His current price of around 90-1 on Betfair is more than fair. I doubt any of them will win, but Christie should be a better price than Ramaswamy, RFK and Newsom right now.
My point is there is no "best of the rest" but rather two different pools: MAGA, currently led by Trump; and non-Trump Republicans. Christie now leads the latter but will be swamped by Trump, but if Trump pulls out, then MAGA votes will not transfer to Christie, who will therefore lose to whoever can replace The Donald.
Also, your categorisation is not really true.
There's Trump Lovers, Trump Likers Who Worry He Isn't Electable, and Trump Haters.
That middle group is not small. Right now Trump is getting the support of half of them, but that may not last.
Definitely not a russian bot - not a "mate" in there - and a cracking rant about all kinds, including PB Tories, who as someone upthread noted, is anyone to the right of Corbyn, and their polo-playing, fine wine drinking, breakfast in Kyrrbasystan-posting dilettantism.
Where he/she/it is bang on the money is that there are certain topics where it is not allowed to have a dissenting view (as in it draws a particular kind of vituperative response). The Russian invasion of Ukraine being one of them.
I find it amusing that any identification of the practicalities of the war, its historical context, or any hint that Ukrainian forces won't be sipping tea in the Kremlin by next Tuesday is met with a barrage of what I can only believe is insecurity and fear, manifest in the most gung ho (Russia will be defeated because Russia must be defeated) rhetoric.
And I see dj41 has now been banned, as they suspected they would be. Which is a huge shame. They said they didn't want to continue posting anyway so it's moot but it is such voices that we need here on PB. The lack of such voices, and the certain-topic Groupthink is I imagine one of the reasons that Leon gets so frustrated. Plus he was beginning to contemplate - burn him - that a negotiated settlement might be an idea to consider.
IIRC mod policy is that trying to get round a ban by starting a new id just gets that id banned as well.
On Ukraine - lots of people are rude at each other. Because they are actually interested. As opposed to politics, which is dead*. I can remember when Farmer Tupac had everyone screaming at each other. Anyone else remember the Latvian SS Homophobes?
Leon gets frustrated by the idea that not everyone bows before his manifest genus.
*Insert parrot stuff here. We are waiting for the election, now.
@isam is still in the PB fantasy football league BTW.
How's he doing?
I liked him as a poster, but he was a terrible tipster.
Seems OK when I have had occasional correspondence. Busy with family and life.
It would be interesting to hear from him on his charisma theory of electoral outcomes. By this measure Starmer is heading for defeat, though we do have a charisma deficit in both front benches at present, perhaps only Mordaunt, Phillips and Rayner at present have significant charisma, Hunt at a push.
Hunt? I'd say Rishi is more charismatic than Hunt, if only he'd stop cos-playing Boris.
Sunak’s media appearances have not screamed “charisma”, I suggest.
Sunak can appear human and self-deprecating. What undermines the Prime Minister is his faux Boris act and CCHQ should end that.
When in earth has he appeared human and self-deprecating?
He has had spells of seeming competent and articulate, but that’s it.
Also, reading yesterday's posts, @Gardenwalker and @HYUFD are bang on the money. Things got ugly post-Brexit on PB and the UK is now divided along Remain/Leave lines.
What a time to be an historian in fifty years time.
There was some excitement around this yesterday, with various pb luminaries rushing to take big prices. Not me, sadly. I cannot see how it works.
Surely, either Trump wins or Trump does not run, in which case his support will be spread amongst Trump-friendly candidates. I do not see the mechanism by which Trump being forced to withdraw results in the MAGA scales falling from his supporters' eyes so they now see Christie was right about Trump all along.
Christie claiming second place is, however, consistent with non-Trump Republicans falling out of love with Ron DeSantis as RDS moves to out-Trump Trump.
It's a little more complex than that.
Republicans split three ways (according to NYTimes polling):
- Love and support Trump: c. 38% - Like Trump, but worry about his electability: 26% - Don't like Trump: 36%
Also remember that the US primary system means that if that "Don't Like Trump" group consolidates quickly, then they could do very well. (Also remember two things. One: John Kasich was a decent second in New Hampshire last time around. And two: NH allows cross over voting; it's not impossible that Christie could get a lot of Dem and Independent votes in NH.)
This is the thing, you don't have to be a registered Republican now to vote in the Republican primaries next year. I don't know how the pollsters are getting their samples, but it's really hard to know who's going to turn out. People who are just enthusiastic voters will likely vote on the GOP side, since there's (probably) no meaningful Dem contest. In general primaries against incumbents have tended to produce moderates.
Like, if you're American and you're not enthusiastic about Biden and you find nominating an egomaniac criminal alarming, isn't that a good reason to actually vote in the primary, even if you wouldn't normally?
Weren't quite a few of the more demented MAGAities not Republican Party members?
I seem to recall a pice on 538 about this. Can't find it now. But, IIRC, a big piece of the first Trump primary nomination was "I haven't voted Republican in years, but now I will, in the primaries" types.
There was some excitement around this yesterday, with various pb luminaries rushing to take big prices. Not me, sadly. I cannot see how it works.
Surely, either Trump wins or Trump does not run, in which case his support will be spread amongst Trump-friendly candidates. I do not see the mechanism by which Trump being forced to withdraw results in the MAGA scales falling from his supporters' eyes so they now see Christie was right about Trump all along.
Christie claiming second place is, however, consistent with non-Trump Republicans falling out of love with Ron DeSantis as RDS moves to out-Trump Trump.
It's a little more complex than that.
Republicans split three ways (according to NYTimes polling):
- Love and support Trump: c. 38% - Like Trump, but worry about his electability: 26% - Don't like Trump: 36%
Also remember that the US primary system means that if that "Don't Like Trump" group consolidates quickly, then they could do very well. (Also remember two things. One: John Kasich was a decent second in New Hampshire last time around. And two: NH allows cross over voting; it's not impossible that Christie could get a lot of Dem and Independent votes in NH.)
This is the thing, you don't have to be a registered Republican now to vote in the Republican primaries next year. I don't know how the pollsters are getting their samples, but it's really hard to know who's going to turn out. People who are just enthusiastic voters will likely vote on the GOP side, since there's (probably) no meaningful Dem contest. In general primaries against incumbents have tended to produce moderates.
Like, if you're American and you're not enthusiastic about Biden and you find nominating an egomaniac criminal alarming, isn't that a good reason to actually vote in the primary, even if you wouldn't normally?
Blimey.
If there are any Democrats voting I hope they have sounder judgement than the idiotic 'Tories for Corbyn.'
A good reality check is to imagine that someone who we really like and apporove of does these things in a political scene with just two entrenched parties - would we find excuses, or decide to vote against them even if it meant supporting someone we disliked? If Starmer or Corbyn as Labour leaders past and present tried to rig an election, I wouldn't vote Labour. If the only realistic alternative was UKIP led by Farage, though, would I vote UKIP? Gulp.
For a hardened Republican who believes the Democrats are alien to everything they hold dear, it must be a bit like that.
That’s the problem. We have our own issues with two main parties under FPTP but at least if you’re disgusted with one of them there’s the option of Lib Dem, Green, Refuk or one of the nationalist parties.
What’s disturbing is the lack of anti-Trump sentiment in the GOP membership. Where is their equivalent of those Tory members calling for Boris to go after partygate, or Labour members pushing out the trots? Even my own little party had its mini-backlash after Nicarus Clegg flew too close to the Tories.
Part of this is the strength of the parliamentary system, where the MPs actually *can* make an out-of-control leader leave.
But also, Boris wasn't in charge of the party for long, and even then we saw quite a few moderate and/or pro-ethics Tories leave before we got to partygate. Trump was president for 4 years, and basically represented the party for another 3. If someone doesn't like Trump, why are they still in the GOP?
@isam is still in the PB fantasy football league BTW.
How's he doing?
I liked him as a poster, but he was a terrible tipster.
Seems OK when I have had occasional correspondence. Busy with family and life.
It would be interesting to hear from him on his charisma theory of electoral outcomes. By this measure Starmer is heading for defeat, though we do have a charisma deficit in both front benches at present, perhaps only Mordaunt, Phillips and Rayner at present have significant charisma, Hunt at a push.
There are no Big Beasts on the front benches of the three main parties.
Which is why Boris lasted so long and got so far - biggest beast in the jungle.
Talking of Big Beasts it’s Trussmas on 6 September. How are we all celebrating?
@isam is still in the PB fantasy football league BTW.
How's he doing?
I liked him as a poster, but he was a terrible tipster.
Seems OK when I have had occasional correspondence. Busy with family and life.
It would be interesting to hear from him on his charisma theory of electoral outcomes. By this measure Starmer is heading for defeat, though we do have a charisma deficit in both front benches at present, perhaps only Mordaunt, Phillips and Rayner at present have significant charisma, Hunt at a push.
There are no Big Beasts on the front benches of the three main parties.
Which is why Boris lasted so long and got so far - biggest beast in the jungle.
Talking of Big Beasts it’s Trussmas on 6 September. How are we all celebrating?
If you're all good I may give you an Indy thread on Sunday.
A thread on the Catalonian Indy movement would certainly be relevant at the moment given the inconclusive Spanish election with Catalan Nationalists hold the balance of power
That's a good point.
If @felix is OK (haven't seen him around recently) maybe he could do a guest thread?
Incidentally, the Spanish situation demonstrates the key reason why Britain should eschew PR: successive governments would be beholden to Scottish nationalists.
Every electoral system has pluses and minuses. PR in Britain would operate to destabilise the union.
The SNP (and SF and PC for that matter) win more seats under FPTP than they would under PR. FPTP is destabilising the union.
FPTP rewards a geographically concentrated vote, so it always rewards separatists.
Also, reading yesterday's posts, @Gardenwalker and @HYUFD are bang on the money. Things got ugly post-Brexit on PB and the UK is now divided along Remain/Leave lines.
What a time to be an historian in fifty years time.
Because, for the first time in UK politics in a long long time, people found a cause worth actually caring about as principle.
We are used to transactional principles in politicians. Suddenly we had people dying it ditches for what they actually believed in.
Senior people actually quit their parties.
Jo Swinson was right in a way - it was the biggest opportunity in a hundred years for one of the big parties to die and get replace by the Lib Dems. A sober Charles Kennedy could have done it, I think. Maybe Nick Clegg.
@isam is still in the PB fantasy football league BTW.
How's he doing?
I liked him as a poster, but he was a terrible tipster.
Seems OK when I have had occasional correspondence. Busy with family and life.
It would be interesting to hear from him on his charisma theory of electoral outcomes. By this measure Starmer is heading for defeat, though we do have a charisma deficit in both front benches at present, perhaps only Mordaunt, Phillips and Rayner at present have significant charisma, Hunt at a push.
Hunt? I'd say Rishi is more charismatic than Hunt, if only he'd stop cos-playing Boris.
Sunak’s media appearances have not screamed “charisma”, I suggest.
Sunak can appear human and self-deprecating. What undermines the Prime Minister is his faux Boris act and CCHQ should end that.
I don’t think it’s faux Boris-isms that are the problem. It’s that he can come across as either robotic (just repeats the same line) or petulant.
Definitely not a russian bot - not a "mate" in there - and a cracking rant about all kinds, including PB Tories, who as someone upthread noted, is anyone to the right of Corbyn, and their polo-playing, fine wine drinking, breakfast in Kyrrbasystan-posting dilettantism.
Where he/she/it is bang on the money is that there are certain topics where it is not allowed to have a dissenting view (as in it draws a particular kind of vituperative response). The Russian invasion of Ukraine being one of them.
I find it amusing that any identification of the practicalities of the war, its historical context, or any hint that Ukrainian forces won't be sipping tea in the Kremlin by next Tuesday is met with a barrage of what I can only believe is insecurity and fear, manifest in the most gung ho (Russia will be defeated because Russia must be defeated) rhetoric.
And I see dj41 has now been banned, as they suspected they would be. Which is a huge shame. They said they didn't want to continue posting anyway so it's moot but it is such voices that we need here on PB. The lack of such voices, and the certain-topic Groupthink is I imagine one of the reasons that Leon gets so frustrated. Plus he was beginning to contemplate - burn him - that a negotiated settlement might be an idea to consider.
IIRC mod policy is that trying to get round a ban by starting a new id just gets that id banned as well.
On Ukraine - lots of people are rude at each other. Because they are actually interested. As opposed to politics, which is dead*. I can remember when Farmer Tupac had everyone screaming at each other. Anyone else remember the Latvian SS Homophobes?
Leon gets frustrated by the idea that not everyone bows before his manifest genus.
*Insert parrot stuff here. We are waiting for the election, now.
If trying to get round a ban by staring a new ID is not allowed, why is SeanT a thing?
There was some excitement around this yesterday, with various pb luminaries rushing to take big prices. Not me, sadly. I cannot see how it works.
Surely, either Trump wins or Trump does not run, in which case his support will be spread amongst Trump-friendly candidates. I do not see the mechanism by which Trump being forced to withdraw results in the MAGA scales falling from his supporters' eyes so they now see Christie was right about Trump all along.
Christie claiming second place is, however, consistent with non-Trump Republicans falling out of love with Ron DeSantis as RDS moves to out-Trump Trump.
It's a little more complex than that.
Republicans split three ways (according to NYTimes polling):
- Love and support Trump: c. 38% - Like Trump, but worry about his electability: 26% - Don't like Trump: 36%
Also remember that the US primary system means that if that "Don't Like Trump" group consolidates quickly, then they could do very well. (Also remember two things. One: John Kasich was a decent second in New Hampshire last time around. And two: NH allows cross over voting; it's not impossible that Christie could get a lot of Dem and Independent votes in NH.)
This is the thing, you don't have to be a registered Republican now to vote in the Republican primaries next year. I don't know how the pollsters are getting their samples, but it's really hard to know who's going to turn out. People who are just enthusiastic voters will likely vote on the GOP side, since there's (probably) no meaningful Dem contest. In general primaries against incumbents have tended to produce moderates.
Like, if you're American and you're not enthusiastic about Biden and you find nominating an egomaniac criminal alarming, isn't that a good reason to actually vote in the primary, even if you wouldn't normally?
Blimey.
If there are any Democrats voting I hope they have sounder judgement than the idiotic 'Tories for Corbyn.'
£3 to make Labour unelectable for a generation in the face of the most ridiculous Conservative Governments was something of a bargain I would have thought.
If you're all good I may give you an Indy thread on Sunday.
A thread on the Catalonian Indy movement would certainly be relevant at the moment given the inconclusive Spanish election with Catalan Nationalists hold the balance of power
That's a good point.
If @felix is OK (haven't seen him around recently) maybe he could do a guest thread?
Incidentally, the Spanish situation demonstrates the key reason why Britain should eschew PR: successive governments would be beholden to Scottish nationalists.
Every electoral system has pluses and minuses. PR in Britain would operate to destabilise the union.
The SNP (and SF and PC for that matter) win more seats under FPTP than they would under PR. FPTP is destabilising the union.
FPTP rewards a geographically concentrated vote, so it always rewards separatists.
Logic fail. These parties don't campaign across the UK. So whether the vote is concentrated ir not is irrelevant.
Plus FPTP has the same distorting effect with the more UK wide parties. Just llok at the bit of the Labour Party that is in Scotland. Some electionms it's had far more than its share, others, fewer.
More fundamentally, we elect MPs. Not parties on a regional list, which is what your argument seeks, ultimately.
Edit: the single constituency by definition rewards geographically concentrated votes, for all parties. What happens elsewhere is irrelevant in first principle.
Because, for the first time in UK politics in a long long time, people found a cause worth actually caring about as principle.
That is precisely the problem with Brexit.
It was framed as a war, us against those nasty foreigners, when in fact it was always and only a civil war. We sanctioned ourselves, and Brexiteers want us to thank them for it.
Definitely not a russian bot - not a "mate" in there - and a cracking rant about all kinds, including PB Tories, who as someone upthread noted, is anyone to the right of Corbyn, and their polo-playing, fine wine drinking, breakfast in Kyrrbasystan-posting dilettantism.
Where he/she/it is bang on the money is that there are certain topics where it is not allowed to have a dissenting view (as in it draws a particular kind of vituperative response). The Russian invasion of Ukraine being one of them.
I find it amusing that any identification of the practicalities of the war, its historical context, or any hint that Ukrainian forces won't be sipping tea in the Kremlin by next Tuesday is met with a barrage of what I can only believe is insecurity and fear, manifest in the most gung ho (Russia will be defeated because Russia must be defeated) rhetoric.
And I see dj41 has now been banned, as they suspected they would be. Which is a huge shame. They said they didn't want to continue posting anyway so it's moot but it is such voices that we need here on PB. The lack of such voices, and the certain-topic Groupthink is I imagine one of the reasons that Leon gets so frustrated. Plus he was beginning to contemplate - burn him - that a negotiated settlement might be an idea to consider.
IIRC mod policy is that trying to get round a ban by starting a new id just gets that id banned as well.
On Ukraine - lots of people are rude at each other. Because they are actually interested. As opposed to politics, which is dead*. I can remember when Farmer Tupac had everyone screaming at each other. Anyone else remember the Latvian SS Homophobes?
Leon gets frustrated by the idea that not everyone bows before his manifest genus.
*Insert parrot stuff here. We are waiting for the election, now.
If trying to get round a ban by staring a new ID is not allowed, why is SeanT a thing?
You'd have to ask the mods. I *think* it is that he is let out of the sin bin, but adopt a new id each time.
There was some excitement around this yesterday, with various pb luminaries rushing to take big prices. Not me, sadly. I cannot see how it works.
Surely, either Trump wins or Trump does not run, in which case his support will be spread amongst Trump-friendly candidates. I do not see the mechanism by which Trump being forced to withdraw results in the MAGA scales falling from his supporters' eyes so they now see Christie was right about Trump all along.
Christie claiming second place is, however, consistent with non-Trump Republicans falling out of love with Ron DeSantis as RDS moves to out-Trump Trump.
It's a little more complex than that.
Republicans split three ways (according to NYTimes polling):
- Love and support Trump: c. 38% - Like Trump, but worry about his electability: 26% - Don't like Trump: 36%
Also remember that the US primary system means that if that "Don't Like Trump" group consolidates quickly, then they could do very well. (Also remember two things. One: John Kasich was a decent second in New Hampshire last time around. And two: NH allows cross over voting; it's not impossible that Christie could get a lot of Dem and Independent votes in NH.)
This is the thing, you don't have to be a registered Republican now to vote in the Republican primaries next year. I don't know how the pollsters are getting their samples, but it's really hard to know who's going to turn out. People who are just enthusiastic voters will likely vote on the GOP side, since there's (probably) no meaningful Dem contest. In general primaries against incumbents have tended to produce moderates.
Like, if you're American and you're not enthusiastic about Biden and you find nominating an egomaniac criminal alarming, isn't that a good reason to actually vote in the primary, even if you wouldn't normally?
Blimey.
If there are any Democrats voting I hope they have sounder judgement than the idiotic 'Tories for Corbyn.'
£3 to make Labour unelectable for a generation in the face of the most ridiculous Conservative Governments was something of a bargain I would have thought.
Shame about the damage to the country and their own party along the way.
There was some excitement around this yesterday, with various pb luminaries rushing to take big prices. Not me, sadly. I cannot see how it works.
Surely, either Trump wins or Trump does not run, in which case his support will be spread amongst Trump-friendly candidates. I do not see the mechanism by which Trump being forced to withdraw results in the MAGA scales falling from his supporters' eyes so they now see Christie was right about Trump all along.
Christie claiming second place is, however, consistent with non-Trump Republicans falling out of love with Ron DeSantis as RDS moves to out-Trump Trump.
It's a little more complex than that.
Republicans split three ways (according to NYTimes polling):
- Love and support Trump: c. 38% - Like Trump, but worry about his electability: 26% - Don't like Trump: 36%
Also remember that the US primary system means that if that "Don't Like Trump" group consolidates quickly, then they could do very well. (Also remember two things. One: John Kasich was a decent second in New Hampshire last time around. And two: NH allows cross over voting; it's not impossible that Christie could get a lot of Dem and Independent votes in NH.)
This is the thing, you don't have to be a registered Republican now to vote in the Republican primaries next year. I don't know how the pollsters are getting their samples, but it's really hard to know who's going to turn out. People who are just enthusiastic voters will likely vote on the GOP side, since there's (probably) no meaningful Dem contest. In general primaries against incumbents have tended to produce moderates.
Like, if you're American and you're not enthusiastic about Biden and you find nominating an egomaniac criminal alarming, isn't that a good reason to actually vote in the primary, even if you wouldn't normally?
Blimey.
If there are any Democrats voting I hope they have sounder judgement than the idiotic 'Tories for Corbyn.'
£3 to make Labour unelectable for a generation in the face of the most ridiculous Conservative Governments was something of a bargain I would have thought.
Also, reading yesterday's posts, @Gardenwalker and @HYUFD are bang on the money. Things got ugly post-Brexit on PB and the UK is now divided along Remain/Leave lines.
What a time to be an historian in fifty years time.
Because, for the first time in UK politics in a long long time, people found a cause worth actually caring about as principle.
We are used to transactional principles in politicians. Suddenly we had people dying it ditches for what they actually believed in.
Senior people actually quit their parties.
Jo Swinson was right in a way - it was the biggest opportunity in a hundred years for one of the big parties to die and get replace by the Lib Dems. A sober Charles Kennedy could have done it, I think. Maybe Nick Clegg.
4% of people actually cared about or knew anything about the EU. For the vast majority it was just another "the other" that could be used by politicans to rail against.
I've just caught up with last night's contretemps, and would like to contribute as follows:
1. I really enjoy this site much of the time; the quality of debate is often good, and I've learned some stuff (USA politics, travel, cookery etc).
2. However, there aren't enough a) dissenting voices or b) female contributors - so there is a tendency for male centrism to dominate.
3. Worst of all, though, is the repetition. For me, a small minority of posters damage the site by repeating the same point ad infinitum. This may be 'political' points (cars, housing, Brexit, cash etc.) or even 'jokes' (once you've read about 'woke trans aliens' and seen photos of a topless Putin a few times, that's enough). These also tend to be the posters who express the least self-doubt. It makes some threads really boring.
I find it amusing that any identification of the practicalities of the war, its historical context, or any hint that Ukrainian forces won't be sipping tea in the Kremlin by next Tuesday is met with a barrage of what I can only believe is insecurity and fear, manifest in the most gung ho (Russia will be defeated because Russia must be defeated) rhetoric.
The Ukrainian Ultra Shills on here have a great deal of difficulty discriminating between what they would like to happen on a moral basis and what they think will happen in reality.
They also assume this is the case for everyone else. So anyone who thinks the Ukrainians will get fucked must want the Ukrainians to get fucked and therefore deserves the best lukewarm, boil in the bag vitriol that can be mustered.
I've just caught up with last night's contretemps, and would like to contribute as follows:
1. I really enjoy this site much of the time; the quality of debate is often good, and I've learned some stuff (USA politics, travel, cookery etc).
2. However, there aren't enough a) dissenting voices or b) female contributors - so there is a tendency for male centrism to dominate.
3. Worst of all, though, is the repetition. For me, a small minority of posters damage the site by repeating the same point ad infinitum. This may be 'political' points (cars, housing, Brexit, cash etc.) or even 'jokes' (once you've read about 'woke trans aliens' and seen photos of a topless Putin a few times, that's enough). It makes some threads really boring.
The solution is to go for more awesome puns, to ensure that this site is the home of Britain's leading punned its.
I've just caught up with last night's contretemps, and would like to contribute as follows:
1. I really enjoy this site much of the time; the quality of debate is often good, and I've learned some stuff (USA politics, travel, cookery etc).
2. However, there aren't enough a) dissenting voices or b) female contributors - so there is a tendency for male centrism to dominate.
3. Worst of all, though, is the repetition. For me, a small minority of posters damage the site by repeating the same point ad infinitum. This may be 'political' points (cars, housing, Brexit, cash etc.) or even 'jokes' (once you've read about 'woke trans aliens' and seen photos of a topless Putin a few times, that's enough). It makes some threads really boring.
I've just caught up with last night's contretemps, and would like to contribute as follows:
1. I really enjoy this site much of the time; the quality of debate is often good, and I've learned some stuff (USA politics, travel, cookery etc).
2. However, there aren't enough a) dissenting voices or b) female contributors - so there is a tendency for male centrism to dominate.
3. Worst of all, though, is the repetition. For me, a small minority of posters damage the site by repeating the same point ad infinitum. This may be 'political' points (cars, housing, Brexit, cash etc.) or even 'jokes' (once you've read about 'woke trans aliens' and seen photos of a topless Putin a few times, that's enough). It makes some threads really boring.
Also, reading yesterday's posts, @Gardenwalker and @HYUFD are bang on the money. Things got ugly post-Brexit on PB and the UK is now divided along Remain/Leave lines.
What a time to be an historian in fifty years time.
Because, for the first time in UK politics in a long long time, people found a cause worth actually caring about as principle.
We are used to transactional principles in politicians. Suddenly we had people dying it ditches for what they actually believed in.
Senior people actually quit their parties.
Jo Swinson was right in a way - it was the biggest opportunity in a hundred years for one of the big parties to die and get replace by the Lib Dems. A sober Charles Kennedy could have done it, I think. Maybe Nick Clegg.
4% of people actually cared about or knew anything about the EU. For the vast majority it was just another "the other" that could be used by politicans to rail against.
I'm not so sure. Think of the Red Wall. Seats that were Labour heartlands. Labour making massive advance in Tory heartland seats.
This was a big, big shift in the tectonic plates of British Politics.
By contrast, the ERM was a small ripple in a very small teacup.
This was something so radical that *politicians* sacrificed their careers.
@isam is still in the PB fantasy football league BTW.
How's he doing?
I liked him as a poster, but he was a terrible tipster.
Seems OK when I have had occasional correspondence. Busy with family and life.
It would be interesting to hear from him on his charisma theory of electoral outcomes. By this measure Starmer is heading for defeat, though we do have a charisma deficit in both front benches at present, perhaps only Mordaunt, Phillips and Rayner at present have significant charisma, Hunt at a push.
Hunt? I'd say Rishi is more charismatic than Hunt, if only he'd stop cos-playing Boris.
Hunt should be credited with taking on the impossible task after the Trussonomics fiasco, but needs to be in a post where communication matters. He is the most able in the Cabinet at present, and actually could do a decent job back at Health.
Have you read Hunt's book? It is mainly explaining why his well-intentioned health reforms failed.
Yes, but understanding his own failures is what makes him the best candidate for the job. That level of insight is rare in a politician.
I find it amusing that any identification of the practicalities of the war, its historical context, or any hint that Ukrainian forces won't be sipping tea in the Kremlin by next Tuesday is met with a barrage of what I can only believe is insecurity and fear, manifest in the most gung ho (Russia will be defeated because Russia must be defeated) rhetoric.
The Ukrainian Ultra Shills on here have a great deal of difficulty discriminating between what they would like to happen on a moral basis and what they think will happen in reality.
They also assume this is the case for everyone else. So anyone who thinks the Ukrainians will get fucked must want the Ukrainians to get fucked and therefore deserves the best lukewarm, boil in the bag vitriol that can be mustered.
It's weird. I think it is fear and uncertainty and insecurity. The bad man must be made to, and therefore will go away because when I was a child mummy always made the bad man go away.
3 A* and one A for my nephew, so off to Cambridge at a different College to his sister. Completely Comprehensive education, with no additional tutoring. Smart lad. Both are destined for great things.
Also, reading yesterday's posts, @Gardenwalker and @HYUFD are bang on the money. Things got ugly post-Brexit on PB and the UK is now divided along Remain/Leave lines.
What a time to be an historian in fifty years time.
Because, for the first time in UK politics in a long long time, people found a cause worth actually caring about as principle.
We are used to transactional principles in politicians. Suddenly we had people dying it ditches for what they actually believed in.
Senior people actually quit their parties.
Jo Swinson was right in a way - it was the biggest opportunity in a hundred years for one of the big parties to die and get replace by the Lib Dems. A sober Charles Kennedy could have done it, I think. Maybe Nick Clegg.
4% of people actually cared about or knew anything about the EU. For the vast majority it was just another "the other" that could be used by politicans to rail against.
I'm not so sure. Think of the Red Wall. Seats that were Labour heartlands. Labour making massive advance in Tory heartland seats.
This was a big, big shift in the tectonic plates of British Politics.
By contrast, the ERM was a small ripple in a very small teacup.
The Red Wall wanted and wants a better life. Being a member of the EU had and has nothing to do with that. But they were told it was central to the well-being of Hartlepool.
3 A* and one A for my nephew, so off to Cambridge at a different College to his sister. Completely Comprehensive education, with no additional tutoring. Smart lad. Both are destined for great things.
I've just caught up with last night's contretemps, and would like to contribute as follows:
1. I really enjoy this site much of the time; the quality of debate is often good, and I've learned some stuff (USA politics, travel, cookery etc).
2. However, there aren't enough a) dissenting voices or b) female contributors - so there is a tendency for male centrism to dominate.
3. Worst of all, though, is the repetition. For me, a small minority of posters damage the site by repeating the same point ad infinitum. This may be 'political' points (cars, housing, Brexit, cash etc.) or even 'jokes' (once you've read about 'woke trans aliens' and seen photos of a topless Putin a few times, that's enough). It makes some threads really boring.
The solution is to go for more awesome puns, to ensure that this site is the home of Britain's leading punned its.
At least your puns are brief, even if they are repeats.
If you're all good I may give you an Indy thread on Sunday.
A thread on the Catalonian Indy movement would certainly be relevant at the moment given the inconclusive Spanish election with Catalan Nationalists hold the balance of power
That's a good point.
If @felix is OK (haven't seen him around recently) maybe he could do a guest thread?
Incidentally, the Spanish situation demonstrates the key reason why Britain should eschew PR: successive governments would be beholden to Scottish nationalists.
Every electoral system has pluses and minuses. PR in Britain would operate to destabilise the union.
The SNP (and SF and PC for that matter) win more seats under FPTP than they would under PR. FPTP is destabilising the union.
FPTP rewards a geographically concentrated vote, so it always rewards separatists.
One further thought -
"PR rewards the separatists"
vs
"FPTP rewards the separatists"
are views both fervently held on PB as arguments for and against PR. "Look at the SNP! Of course they want PR at Westminster!"
The missing element is the unspoken PBUnionist "when the separatists do well" - and sometimes they do more than well on FPTP, but other times less than well.
A good reality check is to imagine that someone who we really like and approve of does these things in a political scene with just two entrenched parties - would we find excuses, or decide to vote against them even if it meant supporting someone we disliked? If Starmer or Corbyn as Labour leaders past and present tried to rig an election, I wouldn't vote Labour. If the only realistic alternative was UKIP led by Farage, though, would I vote UKIP? Gulp.
For a hardened Republican who believes the Democrats are alien to everything they hold dear, it must be a bit like that.
Except Biden is pretty centrist, so it's a strange comparison. There are many currents in US politics which just don't map into ours.
Also, reading yesterday's posts, @Gardenwalker and @HYUFD are bang on the money. Things got ugly post-Brexit on PB and the UK is now divided along Remain/Leave lines.
What a time to be an historian in fifty years time.
Because, for the first time in UK politics in a long long time, people found a cause worth actually caring about as principle.
We are used to transactional principles in politicians. Suddenly we had people dying it ditches for what they actually believed in.
Senior people actually quit their parties.
Jo Swinson was right in a way - it was the biggest opportunity in a hundred years for one of the big parties to die and get replace by the Lib Dems. A sober Charles Kennedy could have done it, I think. Maybe Nick Clegg.
4% of people actually cared about or knew anything about the EU. For the vast majority it was just another "the other" that could be used by politicans to rail against.
I'm not so sure. Think of the Red Wall. Seats that were Labour heartlands. Labour making massive advance in Tory heartland seats.
This was a big, big shift in the tectonic plates of British Politics.
By contrast, the ERM was a small ripple in a very small teacup.
The Red Wall wanted and wants a better life. Being a member of the EU had and has nothing to do with that. But they were told it was central to the well-being of Hartlepool.
The actual rights and wrongs of the issue are almost irrelevant - far from being an issue than non-one cared about, it was the issue that the majority had a very, very strong opinion on.
We will be living in the echo of this, in politics in the UK, for many years to come.
Thinking about it, 1997 was *less* of an epoch change.
3 A* and one A for my nephew, so off to Cambridge at a different College to his sister. Completely Comprehensive education, with no additional tutoring. Smart lad. Both are destined for great things.
Beyond the big party divide there is clearly an overall split on whether Trump acted illegally or not. 47% say Trump acted illegally over what happened in the US Capitol in 2020 and 51% over trying to overturn the Georgia election result.
Note too less than half of Independents believe Trump acted illegally on either matter
Hang on there:
The independent split is:
41% Illegal 9% Unethical 14% Nothing Wrong
34% Don't Know
I don't think that is a particularly encouraging split for The Donald.
Don't Knows count for whichever side HYUFD wants, don't you know.
I've just caught up with last night's contretemps, and would like to contribute as follows:
1. I really enjoy this site much of the time; the quality of debate is often good, and I've learned some stuff (USA politics, travel, cookery etc).
2. However, there aren't enough a) dissenting voices or b) female contributors - so there is a tendency for male centrism to dominate.
3. Worst of all, though, is the repetition. For me, a small minority of posters damage the site by repeating the same point ad infinitum. This may be 'political' points (cars, housing, Brexit, cash etc.) or even 'jokes' (once you've read about 'woke trans aliens' and seen photos of a topless Putin a few times, that's enough). It makes some threads really boring.
The solution is to go for more awesome puns, to ensure that this site is the home of Britain's leading punned its.
At least your puns are brief, even if they are repeats.
Well, let me know if you have a good original pun-ch line.
3 A* and one A for my nephew, so off to Cambridge at a different College to his sister. Completely Comprehensive education, with no additional tutoring. Smart lad. Both are destined for great things.
A-Level results are irrelevant in the long term, the amount of emphasis placed on them is really ridiculous.
But nonetheless, well done to all those getting their results today. Results day was one of the worst days of my life but I came through the other side, so if you or relatives didn't get what they hoped, all will be okay in the end.
If you're all good I may give you an Indy thread on Sunday.
A thread on the Catalonian Indy movement would certainly be relevant at the moment given the inconclusive Spanish election with Catalan Nationalists hold the balance of power
That's a good point.
If @felix is OK (haven't seen him around recently) maybe he could do a guest thread?
Incidentally, the Spanish situation demonstrates the key reason why Britain should eschew PR: successive governments would be beholden to Scottish nationalists.
Every electoral system has pluses and minuses. PR in Britain would operate to destabilise the union.
The SNP (and SF and PC for that matter) win more seats under FPTP than they would under PR. FPTP is destabilising the union.
FPTP rewards a geographically concentrated vote, so it always rewards separatists.
Gardenwalker, this is what FPTP does:
2019 general election
SNP: 48 MPs, official third party status at PMQs 1,242,380 votes
LibDem: 11 MPs 3,696,419 votes
The (unionist) party with three times as many votes gets fewer than a quarter of as many seats. A separatist party gets awarded with a higher profile.
If you're all good I may give you an Indy thread on Sunday.
A thread on the Catalonian Indy movement would certainly be relevant at the moment given the inconclusive Spanish election with Catalan Nationalists hold the balance of power
That's a good point.
If @felix is OK (haven't seen him around recently) maybe he could do a guest thread?
Incidentally, the Spanish situation demonstrates the key reason why Britain should eschew PR: successive governments would be beholden to Scottish nationalists.
As in have to take their views into account along with everyone else ?
There was some excitement around this yesterday, with various pb luminaries rushing to take big prices. Not me, sadly. I cannot see how it works.
Surely, either Trump wins or Trump does not run, in which case his support will be spread amongst Trump-friendly candidates. I do not see the mechanism by which Trump being forced to withdraw results in the MAGA scales falling from his supporters' eyes so they now see Christie was right about Trump all along.
Christie claiming second place is, however, consistent with non-Trump Republicans falling out of love with Ron DeSantis as RDS moves to out-Trump Trump.
It's a little more complex than that.
Republicans split three ways (according to NYTimes polling):
- Love and support Trump: c. 38% - Like Trump, but worry about his electability: 26% - Don't like Trump: 36%
Also remember that the US primary system means that if that "Don't Like Trump" group consolidates quickly, then they could do very well. (Also remember two things. One: John Kasich was a decent second in New Hampshire last time around. And two: NH allows cross over voting; it's not impossible that Christie could get a lot of Dem and Independent votes in NH.)
This is the thing, you don't have to be a registered Republican now to vote in the Republican primaries next year. I don't know how the pollsters are getting their samples, but it's really hard to know who's going to turn out. People who are just enthusiastic voters will likely vote on the GOP side, since there's (probably) no meaningful Dem contest. In general primaries against incumbents have tended to produce moderates.
Like, if you're American and you're not enthusiastic about Biden and you find nominating an egomaniac criminal alarming, isn't that a good reason to actually vote in the primary, even if you wouldn't normally?
Blimey.
If there are any Democrats voting I hope they have sounder judgement than the idiotic 'Tories for Corbyn.'
£3 to make Labour unelectable for a generation in the face of the most ridiculous Conservative Governments was something of a bargain I would have thought.
Shame about the damage to the country and their own party along the way.
Yep - it doesn't take many steps to come to a conclusion that the £3 vote / Ed Miliband is the reason for Brexit.
@isam is still in the PB fantasy football league BTW.
How's he doing?
I liked him as a poster, but he was a terrible tipster.
Seems OK when I have had occasional correspondence. Busy with family and life.
It would be interesting to hear from him on his charisma theory of electoral outcomes. By this measure Starmer is heading for defeat, though we do have a charisma deficit in both front benches at present, perhaps only Mordaunt, Phillips and Rayner at present have significant charisma, Hunt at a push.
Hunt? I'd say Rishi is more charismatic than Hunt, if only he'd stop cos-playing Boris.
Hunt should be credited with taking on the impossible task after the Trussonomics fiasco, but needs to be in a post where communication matters. He is the most able in the Cabinet at present, and actually could do a decent job back at Health.
Have you read Hunt's book? It is mainly explaining why his well-intentioned health reforms failed.
Yes, but understanding his own failures is what makes him the best candidate for the job. That level of insight is rare in a politician.
I always ask a candidate for a job - What was your biggest mistake? How did you find out? How did you handle it?
There are two kind of people - those who acknowledge their mistakes and those who lie about them.
The other thing that is worth doing is analysis of why something went *right*. Very often near disasters are hidden just below the surface of a superficial success.
A-Level results are irrelevant in the long term, the amount of emphasis placed on them is really ridiculous.
But nonetheless, well done to all those getting their results today. Results day was one of the worst days of my life but I came through the other side, so if you or relatives didn't get what they hoped, all will be okay in the end.
3 A* and one A for my nephew, so off to Cambridge at a different College to his sister. Completely Comprehensive education, with no additional tutoring. Smart lad. Both are destined for great things.
Is there not a cause and effect issue in the header? Mike says: "how Americans view the actions of Trump is very much linked to their party allegiance." - this could be interpreted in two ways: "how Americans view Trump is caused by party allegiance" or "party allegiance is caused by how Americans view Trump." My view is the latter. This sounds pedantic, but I think it's quite important.
I've just caught up with last night's contretemps, and would like to contribute as follows:
1. I really enjoy this site much of the time; the quality of debate is often good, and I've learned some stuff (USA politics, travel, cookery etc).
2. However, there aren't enough a) dissenting voices or b) female contributors - so there is a tendency for male centrism to dominate.
3. Worst of all, though, is the repetition. For me, a small minority of posters damage the site by repeating the same point ad infinitum. This may be 'political' points (cars, housing, Brexit, cash etc.) or even 'jokes' (once you've read about 'woke trans aliens' and seen photos of a topless Putin a few times, that's enough). It makes some threads really boring.
The solution is to go for more awesome puns, to ensure that this site is the home of Britain's leading punned its.
At least your puns are brief, even if they are repeats.
Well, let me know if you have a good original pun-ch line.
Too busy trying to figure out your preference for paint over wallpaper on a mastic backing. Gesso you know.
Ukraine has just deployed one of its strongest units to the front. They had been holding a lot of these in reserve. This unit is equipped with the UK's Challenger tanks. Hopefully good news that a breach can be exploited.
Ukraine has reportedly deployed one of its strongest units - the heavy-punching 82nd Air Assault Brigade - at Robotyne
"A force tailored to advance quickly to seize ground... Looks very much like a formation task-organized to drive through a breach in defensive lines"
The 82nd's battle-hardened troopers are equipped with formidable Challenger tanks and night-capable Marder/Stryker IFVs
If you're all good I may give you an Indy thread on Sunday.
A thread on the Catalonian Indy movement would certainly be relevant at the moment given the inconclusive Spanish election with Catalan Nationalists hold the balance of power
That's a good point.
If @felix is OK (haven't seen him around recently) maybe he could do a guest thread?
Incidentally, the Spanish situation demonstrates the key reason why Britain should eschew PR: successive governments would be beholden to Scottish nationalists.
Every electoral system has pluses and minuses. PR in Britain would operate to destabilise the union.
The SNP (and SF and PC for that matter) win more seats under FPTP than they would under PR. FPTP is destabilising the union.
FPTP rewards a geographically concentrated vote, so it always rewards separatists.
Logic fail. These parties don't campaign across the UK. So whether the vote is concentrated ir not is irrelevant.
Plus FPTP has the same distorting effect with the more UK wide parties. Just llok at the bit of the Labour Party that is in Scotland. Some electionms it's had far more than its share, others, fewer.
More fundamentally, we elect MPs. Not parties on a regional list, which is what your argument seeks, ultimately.
Edit: the single constituency by definition rewards geographically concentrated votes, for all parties. What happens elsewhere is irrelevant in first principle.
There are arguments for and against FPTP and for and against various forms of PR. (I'd favour STV over a regional list system, or at least a list system with intra-party list choice.) If you accept the logic of FPTP and want that, fair enough, that's your choice.
I'm just saying that Gardenwalker is mistaken on this particular point, that PR would destabilise the union. How FPTP works, whether you go with its logic or not, means that party's with geographically concentrated votes, which is how separatist parties work, do well from it.
If you want an electoral system that does not destabilise the union, you want a system that looks at votes over a larger area.
A-Level results are irrelevant in the long term, the amount of emphasis placed on them is really ridiculous.
But nonetheless, well done to all those getting their results today. Results day was one of the worst days of my life but I came through the other side, so if you or relatives didn't get what they hoped, all will be okay in the end.
A-Level results are irrelevant in the long term, the amount of emphasis placed on them is really ridiculous.
But nonetheless, well done to all those getting their results today. Results day was one of the worst days of my life but I came through the other side, so if you or relatives didn't get what they hoped, all will be okay in the end.
If you're all good I may give you an Indy thread on Sunday.
A thread on the Catalonian Indy movement would certainly be relevant at the moment given the inconclusive Spanish election with Catalan Nationalists hold the balance of power
That's a good point.
If @felix is OK (haven't seen him around recently) maybe he could do a guest thread?
Incidentally, the Spanish situation demonstrates the key reason why Britain should eschew PR: successive governments would be beholden to Scottish nationalists.
Every electoral system has pluses and minuses. PR in Britain would operate to destabilise the union.
The SNP (and SF and PC for that matter) win more seats under FPTP than they would under PR. FPTP is destabilising the union.
FPTP rewards a geographically concentrated vote, so it always rewards separatists.
Gardenwalker, this is what FPTP does:
2019 general election
SNP: 48 MPs, official third party status at PMQs 1,242,380 votes
LibDem: 11 MPs 3,696,419 votes
The (unionist) party with three times as many votes gets fewer than a quarter of as many seats. A separatist party gets awarded with a higher profile.
Or:
Plaid Cymru: 4 MPs 153,265 votes
Green Party: 1 MP 835,597 votes
Didn't UKIP get about 15% of the vote at a GE and only returned 1 MP? You don't have to be a kipper to feel the injustice of that.
3 A* and one A for my nephew, so off to Cambridge at a different College to his sister. Completely Comprehensive education, with no additional tutoring. Smart lad. Both are destined for great things.
Well done him! Must have taken a load of intelligence, self belief and hard work to get there. Cambridge is lucky to have him. But tell him to prepare for a lifetime of poshos like Nigel Farage telling him he is now a member of an out of touch elite.
Comments
Leon may be gone. But ST is not. He always returns, refreshed and reborn in a new form.
I genuinely think most people think things will become cheaper if he hits it.
Republicans split three ways (according to NYTimes polling):
- Love and support Trump: c. 38%
- Like Trump, but worry about his electability: 26%
- Don't like Trump: 36%
Also remember that the US primary system means that if that "Don't Like Trump" group consolidates quickly, then they could do very well. (Also remember two things. One: John Kasich was a decent second in New Hampshire last time around. And two: NH allows cross over voting; it's not impossible that Christie could get a lot of Dem and Independent votes in NH.)
Oddly, same number for Education, although the sole education Secretary to be PM was a much more recent figure (and no prizes are given for guessing who it was)!
His time on the Health select committee was very good. He has learnt a bit since he last did the job.
He'll be back. He always does, though it may take a day or two to realise which name he's adopted this time.
Blair
Brown
Corbyn
Starmer
And we have our own, fluffy, @HYUFD'y to demonstrate the flexibility of loyalty from the other side.
If @felix is OK (haven't seen him around recently) maybe he could do a guest thread?
I daren't think of the reaction [edit] more generally when folk realise they've been conned again.
Like, if you're American and you're not enthusiastic about Biden and you find nominating an egomaniac criminal alarming, isn't that a good reason to actually vote in the primary, even if you wouldn't normally?
Definitely not a russian bot - not a "mate" in there - and a cracking rant about all kinds, including PB Tories, who as someone upthread noted, is anyone to the right of Corbyn, and their polo-playing, fine wine drinking, breakfast in Kyrrbasystan-posting dilettantism.
Where he/she/it is bang on the money is that there are certain topics where it is not allowed to have a dissenting view (as in it draws a particular kind of vituperative response). The Russian invasion of Ukraine being one of them.
I find it amusing that any identification of the practicalities of the war, its historical context, or any hint that Ukrainian forces won't be sipping tea in the Kremlin by next Tuesday is met with a barrage of what I can only believe is insecurity and fear, manifest in the most gung ho (Russia will be defeated because Russia must be defeated) rhetoric.
And I see dj41 has now been banned, as they suspected they would be. Which is a huge shame. They said they didn't want to continue posting anyway so it's moot but it is such voices that we need here on PB. The lack of such voices, and the certain-topic Groupthink is I imagine one of the reasons that Leon gets so frustrated. Plus he was beginning to contemplate - burn him - that a negotiated settlement might be an idea to consider.
“School district uses ChatGPT to help remove library books
“Faced with new legislation, Iowa's Mason City Community School District asked ChatGPT if certain books 'contain a description or depiction of a sex act.'”
https://www.popsci.com/technology/iowa-chatgpt-book-ban/
Hunt would also I suspect not want to go back to Health having done it for years and as it would mean a demotion from Chancellor
What’s disturbing is the lack of anti-Trump sentiment in the GOP membership. Where is their equivalent of those Tory members calling for Boris to go after partygate, or Labour members pushing out the trots? Even my own little party had its mini-backlash after Nicarus Clegg flew too close to the Tories.
*IF* Christie were to consolidate the Non-Trump vote, while DeSantis and the like split the Trump vote, then it's far from impossible for him to win.
Is he a 10-1 or 15-1 shot? Nope. But he's still great value at 90-1.
Has Gove written a similar book on education? 🤔
If not, when can we expect it?
Every electoral system has pluses and minuses.
PR in Britain would operate to destabilise the union.
There's Trump Lovers, Trump Likers Who Worry He Isn't Electable, and Trump Haters.
That middle group is not small. Right now Trump is getting the support of half of them, but that may not last.
On Ukraine - lots of people are rude at each other. Because they are actually interested. As opposed to politics, which is dead*. I can remember when Farmer Tupac had everyone screaming at each other. Anyone else remember the Latvian SS Homophobes?
Leon gets frustrated by the idea that not everyone bows before his manifest genus.
*Insert parrot stuff here. We are waiting for the election, now.
He has had spells of seeming competent and articulate, but that’s it.
What a time to be an historian in fifty years time.
I seem to recall a pice on 538 about this. Can't find it now. But, IIRC, a big piece of the first Trump primary nomination was "I haven't voted Republican in years, but now I will, in the primaries" types.
If there are any Democrats voting I hope they have sounder judgement than the idiotic 'Tories for Corbyn.'
But also, Boris wasn't in charge of the party for long, and even then we saw quite a few moderate and/or pro-ethics Tories leave before we got to partygate. Trump was president for 4 years, and basically represented the party for another 3. If someone doesn't like Trump, why are they still in the GOP?
Truss 0
Titanic 0
FPTP rewards a geographically concentrated vote, so it always rewards separatists.
We are used to transactional principles in politicians. Suddenly we had people dying it ditches for what they actually believed in.
Senior people actually quit their parties.
Jo Swinson was right in a way - it was the biggest opportunity in a hundred years for one of the big parties to die and get replace by the Lib Dems. A sober Charles Kennedy could have done it, I think. Maybe Nick Clegg.
Plus FPTP has the same distorting effect with the more UK wide parties. Just llok at the bit of the Labour Party that is in Scotland. Some electionms it's had far more than its share, others, fewer.
More fundamentally, we elect MPs. Not parties on a regional list, which is what your argument seeks, ultimately.
Edit: the single constituency by definition rewards geographically concentrated votes, for all parties. What happens elsewhere is irrelevant in first principle.
It was framed as a war, us against those nasty foreigners, when in fact it was always and only a civil war. We sanctioned ourselves, and Brexiteers want us to thank them for it.
1. I really enjoy this site much of the time; the quality of debate is often good, and I've learned some stuff (USA politics, travel, cookery etc).
2. However, there aren't enough a) dissenting voices or b) female contributors - so there is a tendency for male centrism to dominate.
3. Worst of all, though, is the repetition. For me, a small minority of posters damage the site by repeating the same point ad infinitum. This may be 'political' points (cars, housing, Brexit, cash etc.) or even 'jokes' (once you've read about 'woke trans aliens' and seen photos of a topless Putin a few times, that's enough). These also tend to be the posters who express the least self-doubt. It makes some threads really boring.
They also assume this is the case for everyone else. So anyone who thinks the Ukrainians will get fucked must want the Ukrainians to get fucked and therefore deserves the best lukewarm, boil in the bag vitriol that can be mustered.
*which was it?
This was a big, big shift in the tectonic plates of British Politics.
By contrast, the ERM was a small ripple in a very small teacup.
This was something so radical that *politicians* sacrificed their careers.
'Watching new plaster dry.'
Because it's really frustrating and boring waiting for the bloody stuff to dry enough so I can paint it and start putting the new kitchen in.
Pictures of photogenic girls - tick
It can only be A Levels results day!
"PR rewards the separatists"
vs
"FPTP rewards the separatists"
are views both fervently held on PB as arguments for and against PR. "Look at the SNP! Of course they want PR at Westminster!"
The missing element is the unspoken PBUnionist "when the separatists do well" - and sometimes they do more than well on FPTP, but other times less than well.
There are many currents in US politics which just don't map into ours.
(So far, so good, by the way, without going into details.)
We will be living in the echo of this, in politics in the UK, for many years to come.
Thinking about it, 1997 was *less* of an epoch change.
Seriously well done him!
You don't have to watch - it will still dry unobserved.
But nonetheless, well done to all those getting their results today. Results day was one of the worst days of my life but I came through the other side, so if you or relatives didn't get what they hoped, all will be okay in the end.
2019 general election
SNP: 48 MPs, official third party status at PMQs
1,242,380 votes
LibDem: 11 MPs
3,696,419 votes
The (unionist) party with three times as many votes gets fewer than a quarter of as many seats. A separatist party gets awarded with a higher profile.
Or:
Plaid Cymru: 4 MPs
153,265 votes
Green Party: 1 MP
835,597 votes
Not seeing the problem.
There are two kind of people - those who acknowledge their mistakes and those who lie about them.
The other thing that is worth doing is analysis of why something went *right*. Very often near disasters are hidden just below the surface of a superficial success.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/education-66454164?ns_mchannel=social&ns_source=twitter&ns_campaign=bbc_live&ns_linkname=64ddd42fcc7c7a2997bcec8f&WATCH: Gary Neville says exam system needs 'ripping up'&2023-08-17T08:14:06.028Z&ns_fee=0&pinned_post_locator=urn:asset:4146f2a1-a477-4bc7-aa8d-46a42b387247&pinned_post_asset_id=64ddd42fcc7c7a2997bcec8f&pinned_post_type=share
Laters
Ukraine has reportedly deployed one of its strongest units - the heavy-punching 82nd Air Assault Brigade - at Robotyne
"A force tailored to advance quickly to seize ground... Looks very much like a formation task-organized to drive through a breach in defensive lines"
The 82nd's battle-hardened troopers are equipped with formidable Challenger tanks and night-capable Marder/Stryker IFVs
https://kyivpost.com/post/20612
https://twitter.com/ArmedMaidan/status/1691879974091829301?s=20
I'm just saying that Gardenwalker is mistaken on this particular point, that PR would destabilise the union. How FPTP works, whether you go with its logic or not, means that party's with geographically concentrated votes, which is how separatist parties work, do well from it.
If you want an electoral system that does not destabilise the union, you want a system that looks at votes over a larger area.
For as long as I can remember, it seems that the fashion has swung back and forth.
But tell him to prepare for a lifetime of poshos like Nigel Farage telling him he is now a member of an out of touch elite.