The SNP won't be invited into any formal arrangement, will not support a Confidence vote in a possible conservative government, and will not cause a possible Labour government to lose a confidence vote.
What would the SNP's price for support be? I have no fucking idea but if they don't force an Indy Ref when they have a chance then what is the point of them?
Unless they can plausibly do a deal with the Tories, how much clout do they actually have?
They can force a new GE and that's about it.
Sometimes, nothing is a pretty cool hand. (Cool Hand Luke)
We are absurdly sentimental about animals in this country.
The breed isn't like that anyway but dogs don't "love children and people in general"; they are pack animals and to the extent they appear to be it's because they see themselves as part of that pack with a clear role in its pecking order, and are loyal to who leads it and feeds them. Sometimes this extends to jealously, and then more basic instincts can kick in, which is why they can attack kids. They won't generally attack the owner unless they are absurdly indisciplined and want to make a play for pack leader.
Either way, basic dog psychology needs to be considered here. It's an animal - not a person with four legs.
Yes, but that’s dog psychology from the dark ages. As with your politics you seem to be way behind the times. Are you a relic from a bygone age?
No, it's fact. That's what how dogs are. Dog psychologists describe them as such.
Just because you're personally in love with your dog and blind to it doesn't change the fact.
No, really it isn’t. All that pack and owner-as-pack-Leader Cesar Milan stuff is widely discredited. Dogs know the difference between humans and other dogs, trust me.
Interesting. I was unaware, but a quick bit of googling says you are correct. A dog is a domestic animal. A wolf isn't. Just because a the dog has derived from wolves, doesn't make it a wolf. Domestication has changed that. I'll bear that in mind in future when such referenced are made to training our dog. We are considering more advanced training as he is a spectacularly active dog and seems to enjoy puzzles particularly involving searching (probably the springer in him).
Yes. The idea that the owner is pack Leader and needs to dominate their dog is the traditional form of training; many of us may dimly remember Barbara Woodhouse from our youth, and popularised more recently by Cesar Milan. Extending to punishing the dog when it steps out of line, with the shock collars and choke chains that are slowly being made illegal around the world.
In these more enlightened times, dog psychologists understand that dogs know humans are superior - pretty obvious as we start with almost total control over the key aspects of their lives - and don’t need to be ‘dominated’ to establish the owner as ‘alpha dog’, which is all nonsense. And indeed can be counter-productive, setting up the dog for one day reacting in precisely the violent way that we’re all trying to avoid.
Which isn’t to say that dogs don’t react to people through the prism of their instincts, just as humans often react to dogs as if they are merely little humans. That’s only natural. Yet sharing your life with a creature from another species is both a privilege and a hugely rewarding experience; the closest we will get to interacting with aliens (assuming that as usual Leon is wrong). Finding ways in which a dog can make his or her decisions, as far as possible, is a much better prism through which to see how to build a relationship of give-and-take with a dog. No creature likes to be told what to do all of the time.
Definitely hunt out some good training; there’s tons of stuff you can do - agility is the obvious one but also scent work, man-trailing. My dog has his first man-trailing class next month.
Have you ever thought of having a human friend? Rather than a dog?
You might like it. Needs a bit of work tho
I don't recall if this pet hatred was a longstanding Leon trope or a new one, but it has some strange elements to it, and with a smidge of uncharacteristic anger too - So you think people shouldn't have pets, that's fine, but why do you think people are unable to have pets and have human friends?
Good grief. I’m teasing @IanB2 - because he mentions me in his original comment (as he very often does, he’s mildly obsessed)
He obviously gets a lot of happiness out of owning a dog/having a pet. It’s not my cup of cocoa - I prefer humans, wild animals, or solitude - but good luck to him. It’s obviously true for a lot of people
My only real beef is with people that own dogs that can easily kill people. And also cats that kill trillions of birds. And budgies. I hate budgies coz of their stupid noise. And fish get bored. Likewise parrots
Ok I hate pets. They’re for stupid lonely people who should grow up
The whole thing is pointless if it doesn't run into Euston.
Actually, it shouldn't run into Euston; it should run into a new terminal between KX-StP, so as to link with Eurostar services without an annoyingly long transfer. But that's another story.
Yes, the ideal station would be totally underground, and parallel with, or just north of, Euston Rd - perhaps underneath the Library - with exits to both Euston and KX/St.P, and through trains that run Birmingham>LHR>OOC>”London”>Stratford>Ashford>Paris.
Yes it’s going to be expensive, but it’s a once-in-a-century investment and will revolutionise rail travel.
We are absurdly sentimental about animals in this country.
The breed isn't like that anyway but dogs don't "love children and people in general"; they are pack animals and to the extent they appear to be it's because they see themselves as part of that pack with a clear role in its pecking order, and are loyal to who leads it and feeds them. Sometimes this extends to jealously, and then more basic instincts can kick in, which is why they can attack kids. They won't generally attack the owner unless they are absurdly indisciplined and want to make a play for pack leader.
Either way, basic dog psychology needs to be considered here. It's an animal - not a person with four legs.
Yes, but that’s dog psychology from the dark ages. As with your politics you seem to be way behind the times. Are you a relic from a bygone age?
No, it's fact. That's what how dogs are. Dog psychologists describe them as such.
Just because you're personally in love with your dog and blind to it doesn't change the fact.
No, really it isn’t. All that pack and owner-as-pack-Leader Cesar Milan stuff is widely discredited. Dogs know the difference between humans and other dogs, trust me.
Interesting. I was unaware, but a quick bit of googling says you are correct. A dog is a domestic animal. A wolf isn't. Just because a the dog has derived from wolves, doesn't make it a wolf. Domestication has changed that. I'll bear that in mind in future when such referenced are made to training our dog. We are considering more advanced training as he is a spectacularly active dog and seems to enjoy puzzles particularly involving searching (probably the springer in him).
Yes. The idea that the owner is pack Leader and needs to dominate their dog is the traditional form of training; many of us may dimly remember Barbara Woodhouse from our youth, and popularised more recently by Cesar Milan. Extending to punishing the dog when it steps out of line, with the shock collars and choke chains that are slowly being made illegal around the world.
In these more enlightened times, dog psychologists understand that dogs know humans are superior - pretty obvious as we start with almost total control over the key aspects of their lives - and don’t need to be ‘dominated’ to establish the owner as ‘alpha dog’, which is all nonsense. And indeed can be counter-productive, setting up the dog for one day reacting in precisely the violent way that we’re all trying to avoid.
Which isn’t to say that dogs don’t react to people through the prism of their instincts, just as humans often react to dogs as if they are merely little humans. That’s only natural. Yet sharing your life with a creature from another species is both a privilege and a hugely rewarding experience; the closest we will get to interacting with aliens (assuming that as usual Leon is wrong). Finding ways in which a dog can make his or her decisions, as far as possible, is a much better prism through which to see how to build a relationship of give-and-take with a dog. No creature likes to be told what to do all of the time.
Definitely hunt out some good training; there’s tons of stuff you can do - agility is the obvious one but also scent work, man-trailing. My dog has his first man-trailing class next month.
Have you ever thought of having a human friend? Rather than a dog?
You might like it. Needs a bit of work tho
I don't recall if this pet hatred was a longstanding Leon trope or a new one, but it has some strange elements to it, and with a smidge of uncharacteristic anger too - So you think people shouldn't have pets, that's fine, but why do you think people are unable to have pets and have human friends?
Good grief. I’m teasing @IanB2 - because he mentions me in his original comment (as he very often does, he’s mildly obsessed)
He obviously gets a lot of happiness out of owning a dog/having a pet. It’s not my cup of cocoa - I prefer humans, wild animals, or solitude - but good luck to him. It’s obviously true for a lot of people
My only real beef is with people that own dogs that can easily kill people. And also cats that kill trillions of birds. And budgies. I hate budgies coz of their stupid noise. And fish get bored. Likewise parrots
Ok I hate pets. They’re for stupid lonely people who should grow up
Hi. Long-term lurker here. Are there any spread markets yet on seat numbers in the next general election? If not, when might they appear?
The maths of it seems interesting, because the probability curve obviously isn't normal, or even symmetrical. E.g. if you think a party is most likely to win x seats, where x is a small number, then the probability of ≤ x-50 will be smaller (in your view) than the probability of ≥ x +50, so (mumble mumble, assumptions) you might invest at x+10. Then if everyone thinks like that...
We are absurdly sentimental about animals in this country.
The breed isn't like that anyway but dogs don't "love children and people in general"; they are pack animals and to the extent they appear to be it's because they see themselves as part of that pack with a clear role in its pecking order, and are loyal to who leads it and feeds them. Sometimes this extends to jealously, and then more basic instincts can kick in, which is why they can attack kids. They won't generally attack the owner unless they are absurdly indisciplined and want to make a play for pack leader.
Either way, basic dog psychology needs to be considered here. It's an animal - not a person with four legs.
Yes, but that’s dog psychology from the dark ages. As with your politics you seem to be way behind the times. Are you a relic from a bygone age?
No, it's fact. That's what how dogs are. Dog psychologists describe them as such.
Just because you're personally in love with your dog and blind to it doesn't change the fact.
No, really it isn’t. All that pack and owner-as-pack-Leader Cesar Milan stuff is widely discredited. Dogs know the difference between humans and other dogs, trust me.
Interesting. I was unaware, but a quick bit of googling says you are correct. A dog is a domestic animal. A wolf isn't. Just because a the dog has derived from wolves, doesn't make it a wolf. Domestication has changed that. I'll bear that in mind in future when such referenced are made to training our dog. We are considering more advanced training as he is a spectacularly active dog and seems to enjoy puzzles particularly involving searching (probably the springer in him).
Yes. The idea that the owner is pack Leader and needs to dominate their dog is the traditional form of training; many of us may dimly remember Barbara Woodhouse from our youth, and popularised more recently by Cesar Milan. Extending to punishing the dog when it steps out of line, with the shock collars and choke chains that are slowly being made illegal around the world.
In these more enlightened times, dog psychologists understand that dogs know humans are superior - pretty obvious as we start with almost total control over the key aspects of their lives - and don’t need to be ‘dominated’ to establish the owner as ‘alpha dog’, which is all nonsense. And indeed can be counter-productive, setting up the dog for one day reacting in precisely the violent way that we’re all trying to avoid.
Which isn’t to say that dogs don’t react to people through the prism of their instincts, just as humans often react to dogs as if they are merely little humans. That’s only natural. Yet sharing your life with a creature from another species is both a privilege and a hugely rewarding experience; the closest we will get to interacting with aliens (assuming that as usual Leon is wrong). Finding ways in which a dog can make his or her decisions, as far as possible, is a much better prism through which to see how to build a relationship of give-and-take with a dog. No creature likes to be told what to do all of the time.
Definitely hunt out some good training; there’s tons of stuff you can do - agility is the obvious one but also scent work, man-trailing. My dog has his first man-trailing class next month.
Have you ever thought of having a human friend? Rather than a dog?
You might like it. Needs a bit of work tho
I don't recall if this pet hatred was a longstanding Leon trope or a new one, but it has some strange elements to it, and with a smidge of uncharacteristic anger too - So you think people shouldn't have pets, that's fine, but why do you think people are unable to have pets and have human friends?
Interestingly, and unaware to me until we got a dog, owning a dog seems to be the best way to meet people and surprisingly (if relevant) an excellent way to meet those of the opposite sex. My wife is convinced a number of affairs are going on.
On topic, the Scottish poll may just be a bump in the numbers but even if not, a few percent one way or the other in a sub-region of the UK accounting for 8% of the seats doesn't make all that much difference, particularly when the last six GB-wide polls have given Labour leads in the range of 17-22%. Each one of those polls has a higher lead than *any* poll conducted between the Iraq War and the Covid crisis.
I agree that to realise anything like those numbers at an actual election would mean an unprecedented number of gains - well in excess of 1997. However, I do think some people, and particularly the likes of Lib Dem activists, place excessive emphasis on groundwork and insufficient on the national campaign, or just the organic movement of opinion independent of campaign efforts. That might explain why the LDs are so good at by-elections and so crap at ones that matter.
Public opinion is perhaps more transactional than ever; fewer people identify with political parties - and those that do tend to be on the left anyway, certainly below the age of 65. That's a huge opportunity for Labour, all the more so because Sunak isn't a great campaigner. True, neither is Starmer but that doesn't matter because it's the relative contest that matters.
In football terms, Labour is 4-0 up and can quite happily play out time without taking too many risks. They do need to keep pressing when the opportunities come (and they will) because more goals is better and to maintain pressure and momentum but as long as they do, they're more likely to score another than concede. Only if they make a huge strategic mistake like May did in 2017, swapping all their players' boots for clown shoes, might they concede four late goals (though even then she won on penalties).
The football analogy only goes so far. Obviously, there are only two teams in a match, whereas there are many parties in an election, even if only two could credibly win on a national scale. That does write out the SNP factor and I could believe they have recovered a bit after not being quite so obviously corrupt and ridiculous as they were at the end of the Sturgeon leadership. But - eyes on the big picture.
What happens in Scotland between Labour and SNP is entirely irrelevant to the identity of the government in Westminster after the coming election. The SNP won't be invited into any formal arrangement, will not support a Confidence vote in a possible conservative government, and will not cause a possible Labour government to lose a confidence vote. If you're thinking about next PM, you can safely ignore Scotland's red/yellow mix. It'll be somewhat refreshing to have an election that possibly isn't going to be about either Brexit or Scotland. After a decade and half, we're due one.
Disagree. I think that the result in Scotland makes the difference between a minority and a majority Labour government. Starmer faces an uphill task to form a government, if the SNP retains 50 seats North of the border.
Everybody may face an uphill task to form a government if that happens, given how many Labour might win in England, and the Tories being unable to govern if they get anything less than 310-320.
Yes, I can see a scenario where we have Con+DUP at 290 and LAB+LD at 290, with no government possible and a second election likely. The question then, is can Lab gain enough seats in Scotland to get over the line, or will the Scots double down and elect more SNP MPs?
We could end up with almost an American situation, where you have either a deadlock or a landslide, and nothing in between.
I have consulted my girlfriend on the dog bites she has dealt with and:
- high risk of infection so don't close the wound - usually go to theatre for plastic surgery - lots of antibiotics - some bites are just punctures but others have a kind of shredding effect which is tricky to deal with
(This is a rough approximate. She spouts acronyms at a rate that puts Dura Ace to shame).
I’ve been hearing claims that dog bites of considerable severity - needing plastic surgery - are common.
Does as anyone have numbers on this?
Fun tidbit: dogs will rip the tendons out the back your knee, if they get a chance. Stops you running.
Hi. Long-term lurker here. Are there any spread markets yet on seat numbers in the next general election? If not, when might they appear?
The maths of it seems interesting, because the probability curve obviously isn't normal, or even symmetrical. E.g. if you think a party is most likely to win x seats, where x is a small number, then the probability of ≤ x-50 will be smaller (in your view) than the probability of ≥ x +50, so (mumble mumble, assumptions) you might invest at x+10. Then if everyone thinks like that...
Welcome, and a great first post on betting and probability.
I have heard stories about Brand that are quite eyebrow raising. I suspect I know what is coming
Walliams ditto. An industry secret. But I’ll say no more coz OGH/lawyers
I quite like Brand. He’s clearly eccentric and he’s got major issues but I don’t think he’s evil and he manages to engage people with political debates they would otherwise ignore. Probably a force for good, in his quirky, broken way
I have heard stories about Brand that are quite eyebrow raising. I suspect I know what is coming
Walliams ditto. An industry secret. But I’ll say no more coz OGH/lawyers
I quite like Brand. He’s clearly eccentric and he’s got major issues but I don’t think he’s evil and he manages to engage people with political debates they would otherwise ignore. Probably a force for good, in his quirky, broken way
I have heard stories about Brand that are quite eyebrow raising. I suspect I know what is coming
Walliams ditto. An industry secret. But I’ll say no more coz OGH/lawyers
I quite like Brand. He’s clearly eccentric and he’s got major issues but I don’t think he’s evil and he manages to engage people with political debates they would otherwise ignore. Probably a force for good, in his quirky, broken way
I’d be sad if they destroy him
Drink, dice, or a buggerer of boys?
I’ll DM you. As is traditional following our Finland Rumour exchange
I have heard stories about Brand that are quite eyebrow raising. I suspect I know what is coming
Walliams ditto. An industry secret. But I’ll say no more coz OGH/lawyers
I quite like Brand. He’s clearly eccentric and he’s got major issues but I don’t think he’s evil and he manages to engage people with political debates they would otherwise ignore. Probably a force for good, in his quirky, broken way
I’d be sad if they destroy him
There is also someone else being rumoured, from the tent.
All this fuss about the story. I wonder if it will deliver.
Best of luck if you do go spread betting... not sure I've quite got the nerve for that.
I did political spread betting once, in 2017, and almost lost my shirt! Oh, it’s only a tenner a seat, it can’t be more than 10 or 20 seats away from the prediction, can it? Oh sh!t.
We are absurdly sentimental about animals in this country.
The breed isn't like that anyway but dogs don't "love children and people in general"; they are pack animals and to the extent they appear to be it's because they see themselves as part of that pack with a clear role in its pecking order, and are loyal to who leads it and feeds them. Sometimes this extends to jealously, and then more basic instincts can kick in, which is why they can attack kids. They won't generally attack the owner unless they are absurdly indisciplined and want to make a play for pack leader.
Either way, basic dog psychology needs to be considered here. It's an animal - not a person with four legs.
Yes, but that’s dog psychology from the dark ages. As with your politics you seem to be way behind the times. Are you a relic from a bygone age?
No, it's fact. That's what how dogs are. Dog psychologists describe them as such.
Just because you're personally in love with your dog and blind to it doesn't change the fact.
No, really it isn’t. All that pack and owner-as-pack-Leader Cesar Milan stuff is widely discredited. Dogs know the difference between humans and other dogs, trust me.
Interesting. I was unaware, but a quick bit of googling says you are correct. A dog is a domestic animal. A wolf isn't. Just because a the dog has derived from wolves, doesn't make it a wolf. Domestication has changed that. I'll bear that in mind in future when such referenced are made to training our dog. We are considering more advanced training as he is a spectacularly active dog and seems to enjoy puzzles particularly involving searching (probably the springer in him).
Yes. The idea that the owner is pack Leader and needs to dominate their dog is the traditional form of training; many of us may dimly remember Barbara Woodhouse from our youth, and popularised more recently by Cesar Milan. Extending to punishing the dog when it steps out of line, with the shock collars and choke chains that are slowly being made illegal around the world.
In these more enlightened times, dog psychologists understand that dogs know humans are superior - pretty obvious as we start with almost total control over the key aspects of their lives - and don’t need to be ‘dominated’ to establish the owner as ‘alpha dog’, which is all nonsense. And indeed can be counter-productive, setting up the dog for one day reacting in precisely the violent way that we’re all trying to avoid.
Which isn’t to say that dogs don’t react to people through the prism of their instincts, just as humans often react to dogs as if they are merely little humans. That’s only natural. Yet sharing your life with a creature from another species is both a privilege and a hugely rewarding experience; the closest we will get to interacting with aliens (assuming that as usual Leon is wrong). Finding ways in which a dog can make his or her decisions, as far as possible, is a much better prism through which to see how to build a relationship of give-and-take with a dog. No creature likes to be told what to do all of the time.
Definitely hunt out some good training; there’s tons of stuff you can do - agility is the obvious one but also scent work, man-trailing. My dog has his first man-trailing class next month.
Hi Ian.
Well I was about to return to lurking, but while I'm here...
Yes, encouraging the dog to make his own decisions and rewarding him for doing so is key to good training. This is why it's best to capture a behaviour rather than e.g. lure or physically encourage it.
But Silvia Trkman is much more clued up than Cesar Milan. She's the best trainer in the world. What her dogs have achieved on the A-frame, for example, the other top trainers thought for decades was impossible.
There are many dog training videos out there, it's true, but most of them will only take you a small part of the way. Karen Pryor's book is good. She started with dolphins. Not that I like her praise for B F Skinner, but anyway.
As for Barbara Woodhouse, her problem is that she became a TV personality and she had to have a USP for the masses. And choke chains it was, which are cruel and the whole punishment (negative reinforcement) approach is rubbish anyway. Sure it works to some extent (see circuses) but cruelty can't be ethically justified and it won't get you to the higher levels because it doesn't hook the dog's intellect.
BUT....before Woodhouse became a TV personality she wrote her autobiography. It mostly covers the time she was in Argentina and it mostly talks about horses. It's much better than the stuff she did on British TV about yanking dogs' necks and "look at me, I bring my arm upwards not downwards when I say 'sit'". I can't recall any cruelty in it whasoever. Well worth a read if you haven't read it already.
“These allegations pertain to the time when I was working in the mainstream, when I was in the newspapers all the time, when I was in the movies, and as I have written about extensively in my books, I was very, very promiscuous.”
Brand continued: “Now during that time of promiscuity the relationships I had were absolutely, always consensual. I was always transparent about that then, almost too transparent, and I am being transparent about it now as well.
“To see that transparency metastasised into something criminal, that I absolutely deny, makes me question is there another agenda at play.”
Since Brand is aware of the allegations to be published later, I think we can infer roughly what we're looking at here. Brand is emphasising consent.
I’ll be careful how I say this, but the way that courts (and the court of public opinion) have interpreted issues of ‘consent’, especially in the context of the consumption of drink and/or drugs, has changed somewhat in the past couple of decades since when Brand was a young man.
We are absurdly sentimental about animals in this country.
The breed isn't like that anyway but dogs don't "love children and people in general"; they are pack animals and to the extent they appear to be it's because they see themselves as part of that pack with a clear role in its pecking order, and are loyal to who leads it and feeds them. Sometimes this extends to jealously, and then more basic instincts can kick in, which is why they can attack kids. They won't generally attack the owner unless they are absurdly indisciplined and want to make a play for pack leader.
Either way, basic dog psychology needs to be considered here. It's an animal - not a person with four legs.
Yes, but that’s dog psychology from the dark ages. As with your politics you seem to be way behind the times. Are you a relic from a bygone age?
No, it's fact. That's what how dogs are. Dog psychologists describe them as such.
Just because you're personally in love with your dog and blind to it doesn't change the fact.
No, really it isn’t. All that pack and owner-as-pack-Leader Cesar Milan stuff is widely discredited. Dogs know the difference between humans and other dogs, trust me.
Interesting. I was unaware, but a quick bit of googling says you are correct. A dog is a domestic animal. A wolf isn't. Just because a the dog has derived from wolves, doesn't make it a wolf. Domestication has changed that. I'll bear that in mind in future when such referenced are made to training our dog. We are considering more advanced training as he is a spectacularly active dog and seems to enjoy puzzles particularly involving searching (probably the springer in him).
Yes. The idea that the owner is pack Leader and needs to dominate their dog is the traditional form of training; many of us may dimly remember Barbara Woodhouse from our youth, and popularised more recently by Cesar Milan. Extending to punishing the dog when it steps out of line, with the shock collars and choke chains that are slowly being made illegal around the world.
In these more enlightened times, dog psychologists understand that dogs know humans are superior - pretty obvious as we start with almost total control over the key aspects of their lives - and don’t need to be ‘dominated’ to establish the owner as ‘alpha dog’, which is all nonsense. And indeed can be counter-productive, setting up the dog for one day reacting in precisely the violent way that we’re all trying to avoid.
Which isn’t to say that dogs don’t react to people through the prism of their instincts, just as humans often react to dogs as if they are merely little humans. That’s only natural. Yet sharing your life with a creature from another species is both a privilege and a hugely rewarding experience; the closest we will get to interacting with aliens (assuming that as usual Leon is wrong). Finding ways in which a dog can make his or her decisions, as far as possible, is a much better prism through which to see how to build a relationship of give-and-take with a dog. No creature likes to be told what to do all of the time.
Definitely hunt out some good training; there’s tons of stuff you can do - agility is the obvious one but also scent work, man-trailing. My dog has his first man-trailing class next month.
Have you ever thought of having a human friend? Rather than a dog?
You might like it. Needs a bit of work tho
I don't recall if this pet hatred was a longstanding Leon trope or a new one, but it has some strange elements to it, and with a smidge of uncharacteristic anger too - So you think people shouldn't have pets, that's fine, but why do you think people are unable to have pets and have human friends?
Interestingly, and unaware to me until we got a dog, owning a dog seems to be the best way to meet people and surprisingly (if relevant) an excellent way to meet those of the opposite sex. My wife is convinced a number of affairs are going on.
We are absurdly sentimental about animals in this country.
The breed isn't like that anyway but dogs don't "love children and people in general"; they are pack animals and to the extent they appear to be it's because they see themselves as part of that pack with a clear role in its pecking order, and are loyal to who leads it and feeds them. Sometimes this extends to jealously, and then more basic instincts can kick in, which is why they can attack kids. They won't generally attack the owner unless they are absurdly indisciplined and want to make a play for pack leader.
Either way, basic dog psychology needs to be considered here. It's an animal - not a person with four legs.
Yes, but that’s dog psychology from the dark ages. As with your politics you seem to be way behind the times. Are you a relic from a bygone age?
No, it's fact. That's what how dogs are. Dog psychologists describe them as such.
Just because you're personally in love with your dog and blind to it doesn't change the fact.
No, really it isn’t. All that pack and owner-as-pack-Leader Cesar Milan stuff is widely discredited. Dogs know the difference between humans and other dogs, trust me.
Interesting. I was unaware, but a quick bit of googling says you are correct. A dog is a domestic animal. A wolf isn't. Just because a the dog has derived from wolves, doesn't make it a wolf. Domestication has changed that. I'll bear that in mind in future when such referenced are made to training our dog. We are considering more advanced training as he is a spectacularly active dog and seems to enjoy puzzles particularly involving searching (probably the springer in him).
Yes. The idea that the owner is pack Leader and needs to dominate their dog is the traditional form of training; many of us may dimly remember Barbara Woodhouse from our youth, and popularised more recently by Cesar Milan. Extending to punishing the dog when it steps out of line, with the shock collars and choke chains that are slowly being made illegal around the world.
In these more enlightened times, dog psychologists understand that dogs know humans are superior - pretty obvious as we start with almost total control over the key aspects of their lives - and don’t need to be ‘dominated’ to establish the owner as ‘alpha dog’, which is all nonsense. And indeed can be counter-productive, setting up the dog for one day reacting in precisely the violent way that we’re all trying to avoid.
Which isn’t to say that dogs don’t react to people through the prism of their instincts, just as humans often react to dogs as if they are merely little humans. That’s only natural. Yet sharing your life with a creature from another species is both a privilege and a hugely rewarding experience; the closest we will get to interacting with aliens (assuming that as usual Leon is wrong). Finding ways in which a dog can make his or her decisions, as far as possible, is a much better prism through which to see how to build a relationship of give-and-take with a dog. No creature likes to be told what to do all of the time.
Definitely hunt out some good training; there’s tons of stuff you can do - agility is the obvious one but also scent work, man-trailing. My dog has his first man-trailing class next month.
Have you ever thought of having a human friend? Rather than a dog?
You might like it. Needs a bit of work tho
I don't recall if this pet hatred was a longstanding Leon trope or a new one, but it has some strange elements to it, and with a smidge of uncharacteristic anger too - So you think people shouldn't have pets, that's fine, but why do you think people are unable to have pets and have human friends?
Interestingly, and unaware to me until we got a dog, owning a dog seems to be the best way to meet people and surprisingly (if relevant) an excellent way to meet those of the opposite sex. My wife is convinced a number of affairs are going on.
Trouble is, all you meet are other dog owners
Well how are you supposed to go dogging, if you don’t have a dog?
We are absurdly sentimental about animals in this country.
The breed isn't like that anyway but dogs don't "love children and people in general"; they are pack animals and to the extent they appear to be it's because they see themselves as part of that pack with a clear role in its pecking order, and are loyal to who leads it and feeds them. Sometimes this extends to jealously, and then more basic instincts can kick in, which is why they can attack kids. They won't generally attack the owner unless they are absurdly indisciplined and want to make a play for pack leader.
Either way, basic dog psychology needs to be considered here. It's an animal - not a person with four legs.
Yes, but that’s dog psychology from the dark ages. As with your politics you seem to be way behind the times. Are you a relic from a bygone age?
No, it's fact. That's what how dogs are. Dog psychologists describe them as such.
Just because you're personally in love with your dog and blind to it doesn't change the fact.
No, really it isn’t. All that pack and owner-as-pack-Leader Cesar Milan stuff is widely discredited. Dogs know the difference between humans and other dogs, trust me.
Interesting. I was unaware, but a quick bit of googling says you are correct. A dog is a domestic animal. A wolf isn't. Just because a the dog has derived from wolves, doesn't make it a wolf. Domestication has changed that. I'll bear that in mind in future when such referenced are made to training our dog. We are considering more advanced training as he is a spectacularly active dog and seems to enjoy puzzles particularly involving searching (probably the springer in him).
Yes. The idea that the owner is pack Leader and needs to dominate their dog is the traditional form of training; many of us may dimly remember Barbara Woodhouse from our youth, and popularised more recently by Cesar Milan. Extending to punishing the dog when it steps out of line, with the shock collars and choke chains that are slowly being made illegal around the world.
In these more enlightened times, dog psychologists understand that dogs know humans are superior - pretty obvious as we start with almost total control over the key aspects of their lives - and don’t need to be ‘dominated’ to establish the owner as ‘alpha dog’, which is all nonsense. And indeed can be counter-productive, setting up the dog for one day reacting in precisely the violent way that we’re all trying to avoid.
Which isn’t to say that dogs don’t react to people through the prism of their instincts, just as humans often react to dogs as if they are merely little humans. That’s only natural. Yet sharing your life with a creature from another species is both a privilege and a hugely rewarding experience; the closest we will get to interacting with aliens (assuming that as usual Leon is wrong). Finding ways in which a dog can make his or her decisions, as far as possible, is a much better prism through which to see how to build a relationship of give-and-take with a dog. No creature likes to be told what to do all of the time.
Definitely hunt out some good training; there’s tons of stuff you can do - agility is the obvious one but also scent work, man-trailing. My dog has his first man-trailing class next month.
Hi Ian.
Well I was about to return to lurking, but while I'm here...
Yes, encouraging the dog to make his own decisions and rewarding him for doing so is key to good training. This is why it's best to capture a behaviour rather than e.g. lure or physically encourage it.
But Silvia Trkman is much more clued up than Cesar Milan. She's the best trainer in the world. What her dogs have achieved on the A-frame, for example, the other top trainers thought for decades was impossible.
There are many dog training videos out there, it's true, but most of them will only take you a small part of the way. Karen Pryor's book is good. She started with dolphins. Not that I like her praise for B F Skinner, but anyway.
As for Barbara Woodhouse, her problem is that she became a TV personality and she had to have a USP for the masses. And choke chains it was, which are cruel and the whole punishment (negative reinforcement) approach is rubbish anyway. Sure it works to some extent (see circuses) but cruelty can't be ethically justified and it won't get you to the higher levels because it doesn't hook the dog's intellect.
BUT....before Woodhouse became a TV personality she wrote her autobiography. It mostly covers the time she was in Argentina and it mostly talks about horses. It's much better than the stuff she did on British TV about yanking dogs' necks and "look at me, I bring my arm upwards not downwards when I say 'sit'". I can't recall any cruelty in it whasoever. Well worth a read if you haven't read it already.
Talking to Animals is the title of the early Woodhouse book.
The whole thing is pointless if it doesn't run into Euston.
Yes it is pointless, but also emblematic of what the Tories stand for. Do things, especially on investment, on the cheap, invest the minimum, then move the goalposts and cut corners as we go along. Applies not just to transport but our public sector workforce, school buildings, the courts, hospitals and everything else.
Penny rich and pound poor, forgetting we get what we pay for. Absurdly stupid as you say, and why it is time for change.
No, that's just partisan bluster - but I bet the reason my post got five likes rather than two was because it was perceived to be critical of Sunak, and therefore tickled the erogenous zones of posters like you...
You're wrong about that.
I couldn't care less what government it is when sensible policy is at stake. HS2 has been appallingly managed, and certainly successive Tory governments have been a large part of that - but the arguments over it have regularly crossed party lines, as yours did here.
If the next Labour government fucks up, that won't be any better.
Mr. Sandpit, hmm. Be interesting to see if it does make a change during the race. Not holding my breath.
They’ve missed a trick in not making the new straight a DRS zone, but the shorter straights before and after are DRS zones, and the new layout should make it easier to follow another car around the last sector of the lap.
I am looking forward to the forthcoming Welsh Grand Prix in which all the cars race round the track at 20mph! 😀
On the plus side, all races will last 50% longer than currently.
Mr. B, they're lucky they didn't start HS2 from Leeds, or even Manchester. That would've entailed transport spending in the North. And goodness knows what a sin that would be.
Saw a YouTube short today about a bridge in Spain dating to the Roman era (occasionally damaged but always rebuilt to original specifications) strong enough for many tanks to go over (52 tons). The idea of infrastructure that doesn't have short term obsolescence built in is something seemingly missing from the world of politics, likely due to an incompetent, fickle media and the short term electoral cycles.
The whole thing is pointless if it doesn't run into Euston.
Actually, it shouldn't run into Euston; it should run into a new terminal between KX-StP, so as to link with Eurostar services without an annoyingly long transfer. But that's another story.
Yes, the ideal station would be totally underground, and parallel with, or just north of, Euston Rd - perhaps underneath the Library - with exits to both Euston and KX/St.P, and through trains that run Birmingham>LHR>OOC>”London”>Stratford>Ashford>Paris.
Yes it’s going to be expensive, but it’s a once-in-a-century investment and will revolutionise rail travel.
Absolutely right. HS2 should eventually connect all the major northern cities (Liverpool, Manchester, Newcastle, Birmingham, Nottingham, Sheffield, Leeds) to the European High Speed network, with direct through trains. Anything less is a horrible British fudge. Just do it.
The whole thing is pointless if it doesn't run into Euston.
Actually, it shouldn't run into Euston; it should run into a new terminal between KX-StP, so as to link with Eurostar services without an annoyingly long transfer. But that's another story.
Yes, the ideal station would be totally underground, and parallel with, or just north of, Euston Rd - perhaps underneath the Library - with exits to both Euston and KX/St.P, and through trains that run Birmingham>LHR>OOC>”London”>Stratford>Ashford>Paris.
Yes it’s going to be expensive, but it’s a once-in-a-century investment and will revolutionise rail travel.
Absolutely right. HS2 should eventually connect all the major northern cities (Liverpool, Manchester, Newcastle, Birmingham, Nottingham, Sheffield, Leeds) to the European High Speed network, with direct through trains. Anything less is a horrible British fudge. Just do it.
The SNP won't be invited into any formal arrangement, will not support a Confidence vote in a possible conservative government, and will not cause a possible Labour government to lose a confidence vote.
What would the SNP's price for support be? I have no fucking idea but if they don't force an Indy Ref when they have a chance then what is the point of them?
Unless they can plausibly do a deal with the Tories, how much clout do they actually have?
In that set of circumstances, the problem area is not Scotland. It will usually be England, with a Tory majority but controlled by a Labour majority in the UK. The abolition of EVEL is a huge trap for Labour.
We are absurdly sentimental about animals in this country.
The breed isn't like that anyway but dogs don't "love children and people in general"; they are pack animals and to the extent they appear to be it's because they see themselves as part of that pack with a clear role in its pecking order, and are loyal to who leads it and feeds them. Sometimes this extends to jealously, and then more basic instincts can kick in, which is why they can attack kids. They won't generally attack the owner unless they are absurdly indisciplined and want to make a play for pack leader.
Either way, basic dog psychology needs to be considered here. It's an animal - not a person with four legs.
Yes, but that’s dog psychology from the dark ages. As with your politics you seem to be way behind the times. Are you a relic from a bygone age?
No, it's fact. That's what how dogs are. Dog psychologists describe them as such.
Just because you're personally in love with your dog and blind to it doesn't change the fact.
No, really it isn’t. All that pack and owner-as-pack-Leader Cesar Milan stuff is widely discredited. Dogs know the difference between humans and other dogs, trust me.
Interesting. I was unaware, but a quick bit of googling says you are correct. A dog is a domestic animal. A wolf isn't. Just because a the dog has derived from wolves, doesn't make it a wolf. Domestication has changed that. I'll bear that in mind in future when such referenced are made to training our dog. We are considering more advanced training as he is a spectacularly active dog and seems to enjoy puzzles particularly involving searching (probably the springer in him).
Yes. The idea that the owner is pack Leader and needs to dominate their dog is the traditional form of training; many of us may dimly remember Barbara Woodhouse from our youth, and popularised more recently by Cesar Milan. Extending to punishing the dog when it steps out of line, with the shock collars and choke chains that are slowly being made illegal around the world.
In these more enlightened times, dog psychologists understand that dogs know humans are superior - pretty obvious as we start with almost total control over the key aspects of their lives - and don’t need to be ‘dominated’ to establish the owner as ‘alpha dog’, which is all nonsense. And indeed can be counter-productive, setting up the dog for one day reacting in precisely the violent way that we’re all trying to avoid.
Which isn’t to say that dogs don’t react to people through the prism of their instincts, just as humans often react to dogs as if they are merely little humans. That’s only natural. Yet sharing your life with a creature from another species is both a privilege and a hugely rewarding experience; the closest we will get to interacting with aliens (assuming that as usual Leon is wrong). Finding ways in which a dog can make his or her decisions, as far as possible, is a much better prism through which to see how to build a relationship of give-and-take with a dog. No creature likes to be told what to do all of the time.
Definitely hunt out some good training; there’s tons of stuff you can do - agility is the obvious one but also scent work, man-trailing. My dog has his first man-trailing class next month.
Have you ever thought of having a human friend? Rather than a dog?
You might like it. Needs a bit of work tho
I don't recall if this pet hatred was a longstanding Leon trope or a new one, but it has some strange elements to it, and with a smidge of uncharacteristic anger too - So you think people shouldn't have pets, that's fine, but why do you think people are unable to have pets and have human friends?
Interestingly, and unaware to me until we got a dog, owning a dog seems to be the best way to meet people and surprisingly (if relevant) an excellent way to meet those of the opposite sex. My wife is convinced a number of affairs are going on.
Too many lives expended for scorched earth and rubble. Perhaps in the peace settlement, Russia will be made to pay for reconstruction, if not compensation. More likely Ukraine will be faced with massive debt and hoping for Marshall Plan-like handouts from the EU or United States.
The debt is kind of irrelevant because their capacity to repay it will not exist in our lifetimes. It's a punctured blow-up doll of a country that needs regular infusions of cash from the US just to keep the lights on.
Their situation will be happier if they can get more of the industrial capacity and resources of Donbas before the SMO ends as they can offer those up for plunderous rapine by EU/US corporations and thus pique more interest in 'reconstruction'.
On the contrary, while it will carry a shed load of debt, its economic prospects aren't awful. Huge agricultural sector, significant natural resources, and a relatively developed industrial sector.
It was the poorest country in Europe with all of those advantages before it got smashed to fuck and depopulated. Why will it be better?
For the same reasons countries which have integrated into the west transformed their economies. What interest did S Korea take in Ukraine pre-war, for example ?
Of course much depends on the invasion's defeat within the next couple of years, but I think that's reasonably likely.
Who will get the offshore oil if Ukraine retakes Crimea?
Too many lives expended for scorched earth and rubble. Perhaps in the peace settlement, Russia will be made to pay for reconstruction, if not compensation. More likely Ukraine will be faced with massive debt and hoping for Marshall Plan-like handouts from the EU or United States.
The debt is kind of irrelevant because their capacity to repay it will not exist in our lifetimes. It's a punctured blow-up doll of a country that needs regular infusions of cash from the US just to keep the lights on.
Their situation will be happier if they can get more of the industrial capacity and resources of Donbas before the SMO ends as they can offer those up for plunderous rapine by EU/US corporations and thus pique more interest in 'reconstruction'.
On the contrary, while it will carry a shed load of debt, its economic prospects aren't awful. Huge agricultural sector, significant natural resources, and a relatively developed industrial sector.
It was the poorest country in Europe with all of those advantages before it got smashed to fuck and depopulated. Why will it be better?
For the same reasons countries which have integrated into the west transformed their economies. What interest did S Korea take in Ukraine pre-war, for example ?
Of course much depends on the invasion's defeat within the next couple of years, but I think that's reasonably likely.
Who will get the offshore oil if Ukraine retakes Crimea?
We are absurdly sentimental about animals in this country.
The breed isn't like that anyway but dogs don't "love children and people in general"; they are pack animals and to the extent they appear to be it's because they see themselves as part of that pack with a clear role in its pecking order, and are loyal to who leads it and feeds them. Sometimes this extends to jealously, and then more basic instincts can kick in, which is why they can attack kids. They won't generally attack the owner unless they are absurdly indisciplined and want to make a play for pack leader.
Either way, basic dog psychology needs to be considered here. It's an animal - not a person with four legs.
Yes, but that’s dog psychology from the dark ages. As with your politics you seem to be way behind the times. Are you a relic from a bygone age?
No, it's fact. That's what how dogs are. Dog psychologists describe them as such.
Just because you're personally in love with your dog and blind to it doesn't change the fact.
No, really it isn’t. All that pack and owner-as-pack-Leader Cesar Milan stuff is widely discredited. Dogs know the difference between humans and other dogs, trust me.
Interesting. I was unaware, but a quick bit of googling says you are correct. A dog is a domestic animal. A wolf isn't. Just because a the dog has derived from wolves, doesn't make it a wolf. Domestication has changed that. I'll bear that in mind in future when such referenced are made to training our dog. We are considering more advanced training as he is a spectacularly active dog and seems to enjoy puzzles particularly involving searching (probably the springer in him).
Yes. The idea that the owner is pack Leader and needs to dominate their dog is the traditional form of training; many of us may dimly remember Barbara Woodhouse from our youth, and popularised more recently by Cesar Milan. Extending to punishing the dog when it steps out of line, with the shock collars and choke chains that are slowly being made illegal around the world.
In these more enlightened times, dog psychologists understand that dogs know humans are superior - pretty obvious as we start with almost total control over the key aspects of their lives - and don’t need to be ‘dominated’ to establish the owner as ‘alpha dog’, which is all nonsense. And indeed can be counter-productive, setting up the dog for one day reacting in precisely the violent way that we’re all trying to avoid.
Which isn’t to say that dogs don’t react to people through the prism of their instincts, just as humans often react to dogs as if they are merely little humans. That’s only natural. Yet sharing your life with a creature from another species is both a privilege and a hugely rewarding experience; the closest we will get to interacting with aliens (assuming that as usual Leon is wrong). Finding ways in which a dog can make his or her decisions, as far as possible, is a much better prism through which to see how to build a relationship of give-and-take with a dog. No creature likes to be told what to do all of the time.
Definitely hunt out some good training; there’s tons of stuff you can do - agility is the obvious one but also scent work, man-trailing. My dog has his first man-trailing class next month.
Have you ever thought of having a human friend? Rather than a dog?
You might like it. Needs a bit of work tho
I don't recall if this pet hatred was a longstanding Leon trope or a new one, but it has some strange elements to it, and with a smidge of uncharacteristic anger too - So you think people shouldn't have pets, that's fine, but why do you think people are unable to have pets and have human friends?
Interestingly, and unaware to me until we got a dog, owning a dog seems to be the best way to meet people and surprisingly (if relevant) an excellent way to meet those of the opposite sex. My wife is convinced a number of affairs are going on.
Trouble is, all you meet are other dog owners
The hound on the lead is like pampas grass, only different. You know Mr/Ms Possible Right already has one important qualifying criterion: he/she can tolerate your mutt.
The whole thing is pointless if it doesn't run into Euston.
Actually, it shouldn't run into Euston; it should run into a new terminal between KX-StP, so as to link with Eurostar services without an annoyingly long transfer. But that's another story.
Yes, the ideal station would be totally underground, and parallel with, or just north of, Euston Rd - perhaps underneath the Library - with exits to both Euston and KX/St.P, and through trains that run Birmingham>LHR>OOC>”London”>Stratford>Ashford>Paris.
Yes it’s going to be expensive, but it’s a once-in-a-century investment and will revolutionise rail travel.
Absolutely right. HS2 should eventually connect all the major northern cities (Liverpool, Manchester, Newcastle, Birmingham, Nottingham, Sheffield, Leeds) to the European High Speed network, with direct through trains. Anything less is a horrible British fudge. Just do it.
A Union Station de nos jours. Too much vision, alas.
Too many lives expended for scorched earth and rubble. Perhaps in the peace settlement, Russia will be made to pay for reconstruction, if not compensation. More likely Ukraine will be faced with massive debt and hoping for Marshall Plan-like handouts from the EU or United States.
The debt is kind of irrelevant because their capacity to repay it will not exist in our lifetimes. It's a punctured blow-up doll of a country that needs regular infusions of cash from the US just to keep the lights on.
Their situation will be happier if they can get more of the industrial capacity and resources of Donbas before the SMO ends as they can offer those up for plunderous rapine by EU/US corporations and thus pique more interest in 'reconstruction'.
On the contrary, while it will carry a shed load of debt, its economic prospects aren't awful. Huge agricultural sector, significant natural resources, and a relatively developed industrial sector.
It was the poorest country in Europe with all of those advantages before it got smashed to fuck and depopulated. Why will it be better?
For the same reasons countries which have integrated into the west transformed their economies. What interest did S Korea take in Ukraine pre-war, for example ?
Of course much depends on the invasion's defeat within the next couple of years, but I think that's reasonably likely.
Who will get the offshore oil if Ukraine retakes Crimea?
There’s two reasons that Crimea is important. One is the port of Sevastopol, and the other is the potential O&G reserves in the Black Sea.
On topic, the Scottish poll may just be a bump in the numbers but even if not, a few percent one way or the other in a sub-region of the UK accounting for 8% of the seats doesn't make all that much difference, particularly when the last six GB-wide polls have given Labour leads in the range of 17-22%. Each one of those polls has a higher lead than *any* poll conducted between the Iraq War and the Covid crisis.
I agree that to realise anything like those numbers at an actual election would mean an unprecedented number of gains - well in excess of 1997. However, I do think some people, and particularly the likes of Lib Dem activists, place excessive emphasis on groundwork and insufficient on the national campaign, or just the organic movement of opinion independent of campaign efforts. That might explain why the LDs are so good at by-elections and so crap at ones that matter.
Public opinion is perhaps more transactional than ever; fewer people identify with political parties - and those that do tend to be on the left anyway, certainly below the age of 65. That's a huge opportunity for Labour, all the more so because Sunak isn't a great campaigner. True, neither is Starmer but that doesn't matter because it's the relative contest that matters.
In football terms, Labour is 4-0 up and can quite happily play out time without taking too many risks. They do need to keep pressing when the opportunities come (and they will) because more goals is better and to maintain pressure and momentum but as long as they do, they're more likely to score another than concede. Only if they make a huge strategic mistake like May did in 2017, swapping all their players' boots for clown shoes, might they concede four late goals (though even then she won on penalties).
The football analogy only goes so far. Obviously, there are only two teams in a match, whereas there are many parties in an election, even if only two could credibly win on a national scale. That does write out the SNP factor and I could believe they have recovered a bit after not being quite so obviously corrupt and ridiculous as they were at the end of the Sturgeon leadership. But - eyes on the big picture.
What happens in Scotland between Labour and SNP is entirely irrelevant to the identity of the government in Westminster after the coming election. The SNP won't be invited into any formal arrangement, will not support a Confidence vote in a possible conservative government, and will not cause a possible Labour government to lose a confidence vote. If you're thinking about next PM, you can safely ignore Scotland's red/yellow mix. It'll be somewhat refreshing to have an election that possibly isn't going to be about either Brexit or Scotland. After a decade and half, we're due one.
Disagree. I think that the result in Scotland makes the difference between a minority and a majority Labour government. Starmer faces an uphill task to form a government, if the SNP retains 50 seats North of the border.
Everybody may face an uphill task to form a government if that happens, given how many Labour might win in England, and the Tories being unable to govern if they get anything less than 310-320.
Yes, I can see a scenario where we have Con+DUP at 290 and LAB+LD at 290, with no government possible and a second election likely. The question then, is can Lab gain enough seats in Scotland to get over the line, or will the Scots double down and elect more SNP MPs?
We could end up with almost an American situation, where you have either a deadlock or a landslide, and nothing in between.
A 'tie' at more-than-300-each is much more likely - SNP+Others won't tot up to 70 with current Scottish polling.
But leave that aside, in such a scenario, Labour forms a minority government of some sort. Yes, that result would be seriously underwhelming for them after current polling but it'd still be around 60+ gains, with the Tories far from a majority. There'd be a degree of momentum with them and, crucially, no-one else would back the Tories, either actively or even passively. If push came to shove, the SNP, Plaid and co would back Labour into office, if not *in* office.
And that'd be the crucial point. Labour could exercise the executive functions of power but would struggle with the legislative ones - they'd have no majority in parliament and would be vulnerable to a No Confidence vote as and when opposition interests in calling an election aligned. But that might take a while, not just because of Tory and SNP difficulties but because of the risk to the SNP of inadvertently installing a populist right-wing Tory government.
On topic, the Scottish poll may just be a bump in the numbers but even if not, a few percent one way or the other in a sub-region of the UK accounting for 8% of the seats doesn't make all that much difference, particularly when the last six GB-wide polls have given Labour leads in the range of 17-22%. Each one of those polls has a higher lead than *any* poll conducted between the Iraq War and the Covid crisis.
I agree that to realise anything like those numbers at an actual election would mean an unprecedented number of gains - well in excess of 1997. However, I do think some people, and particularly the likes of Lib Dem activists, place excessive emphasis on groundwork and insufficient on the national campaign, or just the organic movement of opinion independent of campaign efforts. That might explain why the LDs are so good at by-elections and so crap at ones that matter.
Public opinion is perhaps more transactional than ever; fewer people identify with political parties - and those that do tend to be on the left anyway, certainly below the age of 65. That's a huge opportunity for Labour, all the more so because Sunak isn't a great campaigner. True, neither is Starmer but that doesn't matter because it's the relative contest that matters.
In football terms, Labour is 4-0 up and can quite happily play out time without taking too many risks. They do need to keep pressing when the opportunities come (and they will) because more goals is better and to maintain pressure and momentum but as long as they do, they're more likely to score another than concede. Only if they make a huge strategic mistake like May did in 2017, swapping all their players' boots for clown shoes, might they concede four late goals (though even then she won on penalties).
The football analogy only goes so far. Obviously, there are only two teams in a match, whereas there are many parties in an election, even if only two could credibly win on a national scale. That does write out the SNP factor and I could believe they have recovered a bit after not being quite so obviously corrupt and ridiculous as they were at the end of the Sturgeon leadership. But - eyes on the big picture.
What happens in Scotland between Labour and SNP is entirely irrelevant to the identity of the government in Westminster after the coming election. The SNP won't be invited into any formal arrangement, will not support a Confidence vote in a possible conservative government, and will not cause a possible Labour government to lose a confidence vote. If you're thinking about next PM, you can safely ignore Scotland's red/yellow mix. It'll be somewhat refreshing to have an election that possibly isn't going to be about either Brexit or Scotland. After a decade and half, we're due one.
Disagree. I think that the result in Scotland makes the difference between a minority and a majority Labour government. Starmer faces an uphill task to form a government, if the SNP retains 50 seats North of the border.
Everybody may face an uphill task to form a government if that happens, given how many Labour might win in England, and the Tories being unable to govern if they get anything less than 310-320.
Yes, I can see a scenario where we have Con+DUP at 290 and LAB+LD at 290, with no government possible and a second election likely. The question then, is can Lab gain enough seats in Scotland to get over the line, or will the Scots double down and elect more SNP MPs?
We could end up with almost an American situation, where you have either a deadlock or a landslide, and nothing in between.
A 'tie' at more-than-300-each is much more likely - SNP+Others won't tot up to 70 with current Scottish polling.
But leave that aside, in such a scenario, Labour forms a minority government of some sort. Yes, that result would be seriously underwhelming for them after current polling but it'd still be around 60+ gains, with the Tories far from a majority. There'd be a degree of momentum with them and, crucially, no-one else would back the Tories, either actively or even passively. If push came to shove, the SNP, Plaid and co would back Labour into office, if not *in* office.
And that'd be the crucial point. Labour could exercise the executive functions of power but would struggle with the legislative ones - they'd have no majority in parliament and would be vulnerable to a No Confidence vote as and when opposition interests in calling an election aligned. But that might take a while, not just because of Tory and SNP difficulties but because of the risk to the SNP of inadvertently installing a populist right-wing Tory government.
Depends what the motion in question is. Not Scottish content? Devolved matter? No SNP involvement. The involvement of Slab MPs in rUK legislation is the key issue, and one that's as usual seemingly overlooked in these discussions.
The whole thing is pointless if it doesn't run into Euston.
Actually, it shouldn't run into Euston; it should run into a new terminal between KX-StP, so as to link with Eurostar services without an annoyingly long transfer. But that's another story.
Yes, the ideal station would be totally underground, and parallel with, or just north of, Euston Rd - perhaps underneath the Library - with exits to both Euston and KX/St.P, and through trains that run Birmingham>LHR>OOC>”London”>Stratford>Ashford>Paris.
Yes it’s going to be expensive, but it’s a once-in-a-century investment and will revolutionise rail travel.
Absolutely right. HS2 should eventually connect all the major northern cities (Liverpool, Manchester, Newcastle, Birmingham, Nottingham, Sheffield, Leeds) to the European High Speed network, with direct through trains. Anything less is a horrible British fudge. Just do it.
The past problem with that was Schengen and the need for passport control all along the line. However, any rejoining of the EU would probably mean joining Schengen too, which would nullify the problem. Rather than it be seen as a concession, it really ought to be sold as a positively good thing.
'The UK’s chief veterinary officer has stressed there will be an amnesty before a ban on American XL bully dogs, after an expert said the breed was behind almost half of all attacks on humans and dogs killed since 2021.
An amnesty for XL bullies will mean existing animals are not culled, but that owners are required to register and keep them leashed and muzzled in public, Dr Christine Middlemiss said.'
On topic, the Scottish poll may just be a bump in the numbers but even if not, a few percent one way or the other in a sub-region of the UK accounting for 8% of the seats doesn't make all that much difference, particularly when the last six GB-wide polls have given Labour leads in the range of 17-22%. Each one of those polls has a higher lead than *any* poll conducted between the Iraq War and the Covid crisis.
I agree that to realise anything like those numbers at an actual election would mean an unprecedented number of gains - well in excess of 1997. However, I do think some people, and particularly the likes of Lib Dem activists, place excessive emphasis on groundwork and insufficient on the national campaign, or just the organic movement of opinion independent of campaign efforts. That might explain why the LDs are so good at by-elections and so crap at ones that matter.
Public opinion is perhaps more transactional than ever; fewer people identify with political parties - and those that do tend to be on the left anyway, certainly below the age of 65. That's a huge opportunity for Labour, all the more so because Sunak isn't a great campaigner. True, neither is Starmer but that doesn't matter because it's the relative contest that matters.
In football terms, Labour is 4-0 up and can quite happily play out time without taking too many risks. They do need to keep pressing when the opportunities come (and they will) because more goals is better and to maintain pressure and momentum but as long as they do, they're more likely to score another than concede. Only if they make a huge strategic mistake like May did in 2017, swapping all their players' boots for clown shoes, might they concede four late goals (though even then she won on penalties).
The football analogy only goes so far. Obviously, there are only two teams in a match, whereas there are many parties in an election, even if only two could credibly win on a national scale. That does write out the SNP factor and I could believe they have recovered a bit after not being quite so obviously corrupt and ridiculous as they were at the end of the Sturgeon leadership. But - eyes on the big picture.
What happens in Scotland between Labour and SNP is entirely irrelevant to the identity of the government in Westminster after the coming election. The SNP won't be invited into any formal arrangement, will not support a Confidence vote in a possible conservative government, and will not cause a possible Labour government to lose a confidence vote. If you're thinking about next PM, you can safely ignore Scotland's red/yellow mix. It'll be somewhat refreshing to have an election that possibly isn't going to be about either Brexit or Scotland. After a decade and half, we're due one.
Disagree. I think that the result in Scotland makes the difference between a minority and a majority Labour government. Starmer faces an uphill task to form a government, if the SNP retains 50 seats North of the border.
Everybody may face an uphill task to form a government if that happens, given how many Labour might win in England, and the Tories being unable to govern if they get anything less than 310-320.
Yes, I can see a scenario where we have Con+DUP at 290 and LAB+LD at 290, with no government possible and a second election likely. The question then, is can Lab gain enough seats in Scotland to get over the line, or will the Scots double down and elect more SNP MPs?
We could end up with almost an American situation, where you have either a deadlock or a landslide, and nothing in between.
A 'tie' at more-than-300-each is much more likely - SNP+Others won't tot up to 70 with current Scottish polling.
But leave that aside, in such a scenario, Labour forms a minority government of some sort. Yes, that result would be seriously underwhelming for them after current polling but it'd still be around 60+ gains, with the Tories far from a majority. There'd be a degree of momentum with them and, crucially, no-one else would back the Tories, either actively or even passively. If push came to shove, the SNP, Plaid and co would back Labour into office, if not *in* office.
And that'd be the crucial point. Labour could exercise the executive functions of power but would struggle with the legislative ones - they'd have no majority in parliament and would be vulnerable to a No Confidence vote as and when opposition interests in calling an election aligned. But that might take a while, not just because of Tory and SNP difficulties but because of the risk to the SNP of inadvertently installing a populist right-wing Tory government.
Depends what the motion in question is. Not Scottish content? Devolved matter? No SNP involvement. The involvement of Slab MPs in rUK legislation is the key issue, and one that's as usual seemingly overlooked in these discussions.
Edit: also Llafur MPs in English-only matters.
Doesn't really matter. Labour wouldn't have a Commons majority for any issue, whatever the geographical qualifications, on those numbers.
I think that Labour's antics in the Mid Beds byelection are putting people off. The top priority is to get rid of this corrupt, incompetent Conservative Government. And yet Labour's approach - a mixture of arrogance and greed - shows that their top priority is not to get the Tories out, but the grab power for themselves. In Mid Beds their priority is to prevent the Lib Dems from winning, rather than to get the Tory out themselves.
This is very much a mistake on their part. If they fail to win an overall majority, and try to start cosying up to the Lib Dems for support, what kind of reaction will they expect? If Labour had any sense at all, they would wind down their campaigning in Mid Beds and concentrate their efforts and resources on Rutherglen and Tamwoth to make sure of those, and leave it to the Lib Dems to put an end to Tory domination in Mid Beds.
Sigh. If we want to play rhetorical games, Labour was and is the obvious challenger in mid-Beds and the LibDem effort from 12% was the spoiler, complete with personal attacks on the Labour candidate. I've not been bothering to make the case since in truth both parties were always going to go for it in the absence of a pact, but this sort of partisan whinge is just silly.
Labour's campaign is now getting serious front-bench engagement (Wes Streeting today) as well as a punishing effort - five canvass sessions plus 7 leaflet rounds today.
Wes Streeting seems a popular fellow but, if he is a decent bloke, I just can’t figure why he has left a misleading (at best) tweet up from last year, claiming Tories were nursing hangovers from a lockdown party whilst he was having a cancer op.
The party was in 2020 & his op was a year later. Dozens of people have pointed this out yet he has not corrected or deleted the tweet. I don’t want to be having a go at someone who has had a serious illness, but at best he hasn’t noticed, at worst he is weaponising his condition for political point scoring.
On topic, the Scottish poll may just be a bump in the numbers but even if not, a few percent one way or the other in a sub-region of the UK accounting for 8% of the seats doesn't make all that much difference, particularly when the last six GB-wide polls have given Labour leads in the range of 17-22%. Each one of those polls has a higher lead than *any* poll conducted between the Iraq War and the Covid crisis.
I agree that to realise anything like those numbers at an actual election would mean an unprecedented number of gains - well in excess of 1997. However, I do think some people, and particularly the likes of Lib Dem activists, place excessive emphasis on groundwork and insufficient on the national campaign, or just the organic movement of opinion independent of campaign efforts. That might explain why the LDs are so good at by-elections and so crap at ones that matter.
Public opinion is perhaps more transactional than ever; fewer people identify with political parties - and those that do tend to be on the left anyway, certainly below the age of 65. That's a huge opportunity for Labour, all the more so because Sunak isn't a great campaigner. True, neither is Starmer but that doesn't matter because it's the relative contest that matters.
In football terms, Labour is 4-0 up and can quite happily play out time without taking too many risks. They do need to keep pressing when the opportunities come (and they will) because more goals is better and to maintain pressure and momentum but as long as they do, they're more likely to score another than concede. Only if they make a huge strategic mistake like May did in 2017, swapping all their players' boots for clown shoes, might they concede four late goals (though even then she won on penalties).
The football analogy only goes so far. Obviously, there are only two teams in a match, whereas there are many parties in an election, even if only two could credibly win on a national scale. That does write out the SNP factor and I could believe they have recovered a bit after not being quite so obviously corrupt and ridiculous as they were at the end of the Sturgeon leadership. But - eyes on the big picture.
What happens in Scotland between Labour and SNP is entirely irrelevant to the identity of the government in Westminster after the coming election. The SNP won't be invited into any formal arrangement, will not support a Confidence vote in a possible conservative government, and will not cause a possible Labour government to lose a confidence vote. If you're thinking about next PM, you can safely ignore Scotland's red/yellow mix. It'll be somewhat refreshing to have an election that possibly isn't going to be about either Brexit or Scotland. After a decade and half, we're due one.
Disagree. I think that the result in Scotland makes the difference between a minority and a majority Labour government. Starmer faces an uphill task to form a government, if the SNP retains 50 seats North of the border.
Everybody may face an uphill task to form a government if that happens, given how many Labour might win in England, and the Tories being unable to govern if they get anything less than 310-320.
Yes, I can see a scenario where we have Con+DUP at 290 and LAB+LD at 290, with no government possible and a second election likely. The question then, is can Lab gain enough seats in Scotland to get over the line, or will the Scots double down and elect more SNP MPs?
We could end up with almost an American situation, where you have either a deadlock or a landslide, and nothing in between.
A 'tie' at more-than-300-each is much more likely - SNP+Others won't tot up to 70 with current Scottish polling.
But leave that aside, in such a scenario, Labour forms a minority government of some sort. Yes, that result would be seriously underwhelming for them after current polling but it'd still be around 60+ gains, with the Tories far from a majority. There'd be a degree of momentum with them and, crucially, no-one else would back the Tories, either actively or even passively. If push came to shove, the SNP, Plaid and co would back Labour into office, if not *in* office.
And that'd be the crucial point. Labour could exercise the executive functions of power but would struggle with the legislative ones - they'd have no majority in parliament and would be vulnerable to a No Confidence vote as and when opposition interests in calling an election aligned. But that might take a while, not just because of Tory and SNP difficulties but because of the risk to the SNP of inadvertently installing a populist right-wing Tory government.
Depends what the motion in question is. Not Scottish content? Devolved matter? No SNP involvement. The involvement of Slab MPs in rUK legislation is the key issue, and one that's as usual seemingly overlooked in these discussions.
Edit: also Llafur MPs in English-only matters.
Doesn't really matter. Labour wouldn't have a Commons majority for any issue, whatever the geographical qualifications, on those numbers.
Sure, but there will be a zone in which they do better when the problem does arise, ie a minority in England.
'The UK’s chief veterinary officer has stressed there will be an amnesty before a ban on American XL bully dogs, after an expert said the breed was behind almost half of all attacks on humans and dogs killed since 2021.
An amnesty for XL bullies will mean existing animals are not culled, but that owners are required to register and keep them leashed and muzzled in public, Dr Christine Middlemiss said.'
Also some question about timing. Hmm.
1) Those conditions would not have stopped the fatality yesterday, which (apparently) involved the dogs breaking through a garden fence
2) The key is whether the government goes for mandatory third party insurance. That will be prohibitively expensive (rather like dangerous drivers), and therefore the most effective way to target existing owners
We are absurdly sentimental about animals in this country.
The breed isn't like that anyway but dogs don't "love children and people in general"; they are pack animals and to the extent they appear to be it's because they see themselves as part of that pack with a clear role in its pecking order, and are loyal to who leads it and feeds them. Sometimes this extends to jealously, and then more basic instincts can kick in, which is why they can attack kids. They won't generally attack the owner unless they are absurdly indisciplined and want to make a play for pack leader.
Either way, basic dog psychology needs to be considered here. It's an animal - not a person with four legs.
Yes, but that’s dog psychology from the dark ages. As with your politics you seem to be way behind the times. Are you a relic from a bygone age?
No, it's fact. That's what how dogs are. Dog psychologists describe them as such.
Just because you're personally in love with your dog and blind to it doesn't change the fact.
No, really it isn’t. All that pack and owner-as-pack-Leader Cesar Milan stuff is widely discredited. Dogs know the difference between humans and other dogs, trust me.
Interesting. I was unaware, but a quick bit of googling says you are correct. A dog is a domestic animal. A wolf isn't. Just because a the dog has derived from wolves, doesn't make it a wolf. Domestication has changed that. I'll bear that in mind in future when such referenced are made to training our dog. We are considering more advanced training as he is a spectacularly active dog and seems to enjoy puzzles particularly involving searching (probably the springer in him).
Yes. The idea that the owner is pack Leader and needs to dominate their dog is the traditional form of training; many of us may dimly remember Barbara Woodhouse from our youth, and popularised more recently by Cesar Milan. Extending to punishing the dog when it steps out of line, with the shock collars and choke chains that are slowly being made illegal around the world.
In these more enlightened times, dog psychologists understand that dogs know humans are superior - pretty obvious as we start with almost total control over the key aspects of their lives - and don’t need to be ‘dominated’ to establish the owner as ‘alpha dog’, which is all nonsense. And indeed can be counter-productive, setting up the dog for one day reacting in precisely the violent way that we’re all trying to avoid.
Which isn’t to say that dogs don’t react to people through the prism of their instincts, just as humans often react to dogs as if they are merely little humans. That’s only natural. Yet sharing your life with a creature from another species is both a privilege and a hugely rewarding experience; the closest we will get to interacting with aliens (assuming that as usual Leon is wrong). Finding ways in which a dog can make his or her decisions, as far as possible, is a much better prism through which to see how to build a relationship of give-and-take with a dog. No creature likes to be told what to do all of the time.
Definitely hunt out some good training; there’s tons of stuff you can do - agility is the obvious one but also scent work, man-trailing. My dog has his first man-trailing class next month.
Have you ever thought of having a human friend? Rather than a dog?
You might like it. Needs a bit of work tho
I don't recall if this pet hatred was a longstanding Leon trope or a new one, but it has some strange elements to it, and with a smidge of uncharacteristic anger too - So you think people shouldn't have pets, that's fine, but why do you think people are unable to have pets and have human friends?
Interestingly, and unaware to me until we got a dog, owning a dog seems to be the best way to meet people and surprisingly (if relevant) an excellent way to meet those of the opposite sex. My wife is convinced a number of affairs are going on.
Trouble is, all you meet are other dog owners
Talking of dog owners, those in Spain should be taken out and shot. There is shite everywhere.
The EU might change to calling jam marmalade, and marmalade will become citrus marmalade. Britain (huzzah for Brexit) will need to choose whether to follow suit or diverge from the continent by keeping the proper names.
But in Northern Ireland, thanks to Boris's broken Brexit and Rishi's Windsor Framework, locally-made jams and marmalades will have to follow EU rules but those imported from mainland Britain will not, although of course the government might change our rules in parallel with Brussels.
The continentals have always called some jams marmalade. Quince marmalade for instance.
Just thinking re UK, in that case why are there different marmalades in the shop labelled eg seville marmalade and lime marmalade?
In Britain (and up to now in the EU) marmalade contains citrus fruit and jam the rest. This is what the EU is considering changing because, as you say, in some countries marmalade just means jam. Though what the Telegraph does not mention is that marmalade is usually slightly bitter whereas jam is sweet.
A further complication is that on the supermarket shelves, as well as jam there are preserves and conserves for things that look like jam. I believe this is due to different amounts of fruit and sugar, which the EU might also change.
I have heard stories about Brand that are quite eyebrow raising. I suspect I know what is coming
Walliams ditto. An industry secret. But I’ll say no more coz OGH/lawyers
I quite like Brand. He’s clearly eccentric and he’s got major issues but I don’t think he’s evil and he manages to engage people with political debates they would otherwise ignore. Probably a force for good, in his quirky, broken way
I’d be sad if they destroy him
There is also someone else being rumoured, from the tent.
All this fuss about the story. I wonder if it will deliver.
Establishment media don't know what to do with the fact that you have 6million subscribers & generate autonomous, knowing and original content. You are welcome on my
show anytime. We are mainstream media. But we are not Establishment media. There's a difference. Keep going. This proves you are winning. You're a hero.
The environmental destruction caused by the project is unacceptable. And now we discover that it was all for nothing. No high speed trains linking anywhere in the North to That London. Indeed, no high speed trains even reaching London by the looks of it.
Meanwhile all those executives it was supposed to be speeding to their important meetings are sat at home in their keks meeting over Teams instead.
But we cannot reverse the destruction of the ancient woodland.
Ok, I'm going to say it. The rugby world cup is rubbish. After ten matches, the average points difference is over 30 points.
When perennial 6-nations no-hopers like Italy can run in 52 points, you've got a competition that is way, way, larger than the number of teams that should reasonably be there. There are at least ten countries that shouldn't even be there.
The clue is in the title. It is a World Cup, not an elite invitational.
Too many lives expended for scorched earth and rubble. Perhaps in the peace settlement, Russia will be made to pay for reconstruction, if not compensation. More likely Ukraine will be faced with massive debt and hoping for Marshall Plan-like handouts from the EU or United States.
The debt is kind of irrelevant because their capacity to repay it will not exist in our lifetimes. It's a punctured blow-up doll of a country that needs regular infusions of cash from the US just to keep the lights on.
Their situation will be happier if they can get more of the industrial capacity and resources of Donbas before the SMO ends as they can offer those up for plunderous rapine by EU/US corporations and thus pique more interest in 'reconstruction'.
On the contrary, while it will carry a shed load of debt, its economic prospects aren't awful. Huge agricultural sector, significant natural resources, and a relatively developed industrial sector.
It was the poorest country in Europe with all of those advantages before it got smashed to fuck and depopulated. Why will it be better?
For the same reasons countries which have integrated into the west transformed their economies. What interest did S Korea take in Ukraine pre-war, for example ?
Of course much depends on the invasion's defeat within the next couple of years, but I think that's reasonably likely.
Who will get the offshore oil if Ukraine retakes Crimea?
For decades the mainstream media glamorised promiscuity, movies, TV , reality shows, newspapers etc. Now they want to use it against people who “step out of line”. It doesn’t matter if they r settled, been honest about past, seen errors . Media twist and manipulate everything
For decades the mainstream media glamorised promiscuity, movies, TV , reality shows, newspapers etc. Now they want to use it against people who “step out of line”. It doesn’t matter if they r settled, been honest about past, seen errors . Media twist and manipulate everything
For decades the mainstream media glamorised promiscuity, movies, TV , reality shows, newspapers etc. Now they want to use it against people who “step out of line”. It doesn’t matter if they r settled, been honest about past, seen errors . Media twist and manipulate everything
The SNP won't be invited into any formal arrangement, will not support a Confidence vote in a possible conservative government, and will not cause a possible Labour government to lose a confidence vote.
What would the SNP's price for support be? I have no fucking idea but if they don't force an Indy Ref when they have a chance then what is the point of them?
They appear to be there to fill their pockets, employ their friends and families and generally have an easy life with just saying "Westminster Bad" every few days.
I think that Labour's antics in the Mid Beds byelection are putting people off. The top priority is to get rid of this corrupt, incompetent Conservative Government. And yet Labour's approach - a mixture of arrogance and greed - shows that their top priority is not to get the Tories out, but the grab power for themselves. In Mid Beds their priority is to prevent the Lib Dems from winning, rather than to get the Tory out themselves.
This is very much a mistake on their part. If they fail to win an overall majority, and try to start cosying up to the Lib Dems for support, what kind of reaction will they expect? If Labour had any sense at all, they would wind down their campaigning in Mid Beds and concentrate their efforts and resources on Rutherglen and Tamwoth to make sure of those, and leave it to the Lib Dems to put an end to Tory domination in Mid Beds.
Sigh. If we want to play rhetorical games, Labour was and is the obvious challenger in mid-Beds and the LibDem effort from 12% was the spoiler, complete with personal attacks on the Labour candidate. I've not been bothering to make the case since in truth both parties were always going to go for it in the absence of a pact, but this sort of partisan whinge is just silly.
Labour's campaign is now getting serious front-bench engagement (Wes Streeting today) as well as a punishing effort - five canvass sessions plus 7 leaflet rounds today.
Wes Streeting seems a popular fellow but, if he is a decent bloke, I just can’t figure why he has left a misleading (at best) tweet up from last year, claiming Tories were nursing hangovers from a lockdown party whilst he was having a cancer op.
The party was in 2020 & his op was a year later. Dozens of people have pointed this out yet he has not corrected or deleted the tweet. I don’t want to be having a go at someone who has had a serious illness, but at best he hasn’t noticed, at worst he is weaponising his condition for political point scoring.
Nonsense on stilts. It would be mindless pedantry even if what you say is true, since it would not alter the gist of Wes Streeting's tweet, but in any case Number 10 partied on into 2021. You might remember the contrast drawn at the time between Her Majesty the Queen sitting alone in the chapel mourning the death of Prince Philip, and the two (two!) parties in Downing Street the same evening.
Ok, I'm going to say it. The rugby world cup is rubbish. After ten matches, the average points difference is over 30 points.
When perennial 6-nations no-hopers like Italy can run in 52 points, you've got a competition that is way, way, larger than the number of teams that should reasonably be there. There are at least ten countries that shouldn't even be there.
It’s a vicious cycle/virtuous circle thing. Unless lower tiered nations play top tier nations they will never improve and it is harder to grow the game when they don’t get “glamour” ties so their participation in the World Cup is vital for rugby to improve in these countries.
The problem is that tier one nations don’t really want to play lower level teams as they don’t generate the money so outside of the World Cup there is little opportunity to improve standards.
Years ago it looked like if any team was going to join the 5 Nations it would be Romania but then when Ceaucescu went down, or up, there was chaos and the rugby system lost momentum leading to Italy jumping the queue.
World Rugby should have an American championship like the 6N for all South American teams plus US and Canada, a second level European tournament with Romania, Georgia, Portugal, Spain, Germany one other (which broadcasters showing the 6N should be obliged to show) and the The Rugby Championship should expand to include Japan and the island nations. Then have a tournament where the winners of each league play a knockout like the football club world championship and get places like Qatar to pay big money to host it that gets shared amongst developing nations.
'The UK’s chief veterinary officer has stressed there will be an amnesty before a ban on American XL bully dogs, after an expert said the breed was behind almost half of all attacks on humans and dogs killed since 2021.
An amnesty for XL bullies will mean existing animals are not culled, but that owners are required to register and keep them leashed and muzzled in public, Dr Christine Middlemiss said.'
Also some question about timing. Hmm.
So my 5% estimate that Sunak meets his pledge of a ban in effect by the end of the year already looks way too optimistic.
I really don't understand this consistent over promising and inevitable under delivering. Is Sunak as divorced from reality as Truss? Or dim? Or is there some angle I am missing? He is just going to piss off both people who don't want the ban and those that do as well with this approach.
The environmental destruction caused by the project is unacceptable. And now we discover that it was all for nothing. No high speed trains linking anywhere in the North to That London. Indeed, no high speed trains even reaching London by the looks of it.
Meanwhile all those executives it was supposed to be speeding to their important meetings are sat at home in their keks meeting over Teams instead.
But we cannot reverse the destruction of the ancient woodland.
HS2 was badly miss sold. The real gains are in capacity on the old lines, not shaving a few minutes off from London to Manchester.
You have a point about environmental destruction but at some point, somewhere infrastructure must be built or we really are just in decline.
'The UK’s chief veterinary officer has stressed there will be an amnesty before a ban on American XL bully dogs, after an expert said the breed was behind almost half of all attacks on humans and dogs killed since 2021.
An amnesty for XL bullies will mean existing animals are not culled, but that owners are required to register and keep them leashed and muzzled in public, Dr Christine Middlemiss said.'
Also some question about timing. Hmm.
So my 5% estimate that Sunak meets his pledge of a ban in effect by the end of the year already looks way too optimistic.
I really don't understand this consistent over promising and inevitable under delivering. Is Sunak as divorced from reality as Truss? Or dim? Or is there some angle I am missing? He is just going to piss off both people who don't want the ban and those that do as well with this approach.
Maybe muzzling order this month and ban for Xmas pressie? Though this (from the same Graun piece) isn't looking great:
'The food and farming minister, Mark Spencer MP, warned on Friday that banning the breed, which is officially recognised by the Royal Kennel Club, was “not as simple” as it may appear and may take longer than expected.
“We’re going to have to go through the process of identifying the characteristics of that type of dog and make sure that we don’t encapsulate the wrong sort of dog in that process. It’s going to take a little while to do that,”[...]'
NB also this is Dept Ag stuff not Home Office. No mention of Ms Braverman.
Edit: Pace the Graun, I thought the breed was *not* recognised by the Kennel Club, i.e. harder to define. Or maybe the Royal KC is not the same as the KCUK.
Ok, I'm going to say it. The rugby world cup is rubbish. After ten matches, the average points difference is over 30 points.
When perennial 6-nations no-hopers like Italy can run in 52 points, you've got a competition that is way, way, larger than the number of teams that should reasonably be there. There are at least ten countries that shouldn't even be there.
The clue is in the title. It is a World Cup, not an elite invitational.
Ok just let every country in then. South Africa v Åland Islands. New Zealand v Vatican. England v Eswatini.
The Vatican could be lively. Not just the hand of god, but God himself. Tough one to price.
'The UK’s chief veterinary officer has stressed there will be an amnesty before a ban on American XL bully dogs, after an expert said the breed was behind almost half of all attacks on humans and dogs killed since 2021.
An amnesty for XL bullies will mean existing animals are not culled, but that owners are required to register and keep them leashed and muzzled in public, Dr Christine Middlemiss said.'
Also some question about timing. Hmm.
So my 5% estimate that Sunak meets his pledge of a ban in effect by the end of the year already looks way too optimistic.
I really don't understand this consistent over promising and inevitable under delivering. Is Sunak as divorced from reality as Truss? Or dim? Or is there some angle I am missing? He is just going to piss off both people who don't want the ban and those that do as well with this approach.
Petrol prices and oil prices now rising sharply again too. Inflation likely to accelerate again.
Hi. Long-term lurker here. Are there any spread markets yet on seat numbers in the next general election? If not, when might they appear?
The maths of it seems interesting, because the probability curve obviously isn't normal, or even symmetrical. E.g. if you think a party is most likely to win x seats, where x is a small number, then the probability of ≤ x-50 will be smaller (in your view) than the probability of ≥ x +50, so (mumble mumble, assumptions) you might invest at x+10. Then if everyone thinks like that...
First of all, welcome. It is nice to have people who are actually interested in betting on the site. Please stay
Secondly, it is difficult to answer your question because "spreads" mean different things dependent on context. I'll try to cover the range (pun!)
We are absurdly sentimental about animals in this country.
The breed isn't like that anyway but dogs don't "love children and people in general"; they are pack animals and to the extent they appear to be it's because they see themselves as part of that pack with a clear role in its pecking order, and are loyal to who leads it and feeds them. Sometimes this extends to jealously, and then more basic instincts can kick in, which is why they can attack kids. They won't generally attack the owner unless they are absurdly indisciplined and want to make a play for pack leader.
Either way, basic dog psychology needs to be considered here. It's an animal - not a person with four legs.
Yes, but that’s dog psychology from the dark ages. As with your politics you seem to be way behind the times. Are you a relic from a bygone age?
No, it's fact. That's what how dogs are. Dog psychologists describe them as such.
Just because you're personally in love with your dog and blind to it doesn't change the fact.
No, really it isn’t. All that pack and owner-as-pack-Leader Cesar Milan stuff is widely discredited. Dogs know the difference between humans and other dogs, trust me.
Interesting. I was unaware, but a quick bit of googling says you are correct. A dog is a domestic animal. A wolf isn't. Just because a the dog has derived from wolves, doesn't make it a wolf. Domestication has changed that. I'll bear that in mind in future when such referenced are made to training our dog. We are considering more advanced training as he is a spectacularly active dog and seems to enjoy puzzles particularly involving searching (probably the springer in him).
Yes. The idea that the owner is pack Leader and needs to dominate their dog is the traditional form of training; many of us may dimly remember Barbara Woodhouse from our youth, and popularised more recently by Cesar Milan. Extending to punishing the dog when it steps out of line, with the shock collars and choke chains that are slowly being made illegal around the world.
In these more enlightened times, dog psychologists understand that dogs know humans are superior - pretty obvious as we start with almost total control over the key aspects of their lives - and don’t need to be ‘dominated’ to establish the owner as ‘alpha dog’, which is all nonsense. And indeed can be counter-productive, setting up the dog for one day reacting in precisely the violent way that we’re all trying to avoid.
Which isn’t to say that dogs don’t react to people through the prism of their instincts, just as humans often react to dogs as if they are merely little humans. That’s only natural. Yet sharing your life with a creature from another species is both a privilege and a hugely rewarding experience; the closest we will get to interacting with aliens (assuming that as usual Leon is wrong). Finding ways in which a dog can make his or her decisions, as far as possible, is a much better prism through which to see how to build a relationship of give-and-take with a dog. No creature likes to be told what to do all of the time.
Definitely hunt out some good training; there’s tons of stuff you can do - agility is the obvious one but also scent work, man-trailing. My dog has his first man-trailing class next month.
Have you ever thought of having a human friend? Rather than a dog?
You might like it. Needs a bit of work tho
I don't recall if this pet hatred was a longstanding Leon trope or a new one, but it has some strange elements to it, and with a smidge of uncharacteristic anger too - So you think people shouldn't have pets, that's fine, but why do you think people are unable to have pets and have human friends?
Good grief. I’m teasing @IanB2 - because he mentions me in his original comment (as he very often does, he’s mildly obsessed)
He obviously gets a lot of happiness out of owning a dog/having a pet. It’s not my cup of cocoa - I prefer humans, wild animals, or solitude - but good luck to him. It’s obviously true for a lot of people
My only real beef is with people that own dogs that can easily kill people. And also cats that kill trillions of birds. And budgies. I hate budgies coz of their stupid noise. And fish get bored. Likewise parrots
Ok I hate pets. They’re for stupid lonely people who should grow up
Russell Brand has always been crazy and a knobhead. That's what he does, it's why he's famous, why is it news today?
It's like breaking news that Katie Hopkins has unpleasant views. Or that Jeremy Corbyn doesn't like Jews.
There is no evidence that Jeremy Corbyn does not like Jews, and despite his being Labour's best known Arsenal fan since, erm, Sir Keir Starmer, no evidence of Corbyn having used the Y-word about Spurs (whose fans use it about themselves but that is a whole other kettle of worms they are trying to end). Corbyn's antisemitism rests on his being anti-Israel. Confusingly, there is some attempt at introducing the term Israelophobia.
I think that Labour's antics in the Mid Beds byelection are putting people off. The top priority is to get rid of this corrupt, incompetent Conservative Government. And yet Labour's approach - a mixture of arrogance and greed - shows that their top priority is not to get the Tories out, but the grab power for themselves. In Mid Beds their priority is to prevent the Lib Dems from winning, rather than to get the Tory out themselves.
This is very much a mistake on their part. If they fail to win an overall majority, and try to start cosying up to the Lib Dems for support, what kind of reaction will they expect? If Labour had any sense at all, they would wind down their campaigning in Mid Beds and concentrate their efforts and resources on Rutherglen and Tamwoth to make sure of those, and leave it to the Lib Dems to put an end to Tory domination in Mid Beds.
Sigh. If we want to play rhetorical games, Labour was and is the obvious challenger in mid-Beds and the LibDem effort from 12% was the spoiler, complete with personal attacks on the Labour candidate. I've not been bothering to make the case since in truth both parties were always going to go for it in the absence of a pact, but this sort of partisan whinge is just silly.
Labour's campaign is now getting serious front-bench engagement (Wes Streeting today) as well as a punishing effort - five canvass sessions plus 7 leaflet rounds today.
Wes Streeting seems a popular fellow but, if he is a decent bloke, I just can’t figure why he has left a misleading (at best) tweet up from last year, claiming Tories were nursing hangovers from a lockdown party whilst he was having a cancer op.
The party was in 2020 & his op was a year later. Dozens of people have pointed this out yet he has not corrected or deleted the tweet. I don’t want to be having a go at someone who has had a serious illness, but at best he hasn’t noticed, at worst he is weaponising his condition for political point scoring.
Nonsense on stilts. It would be mindless pedantry even if what you say is true, since it would not alter the gist of Wes Streeting's tweet, but in any case Number 10 partied on into 2021. You might remember the contrast drawn at the time between Her Majesty the Queen sitting alone in the chapel mourning the death of Prince Philip, and the two (two!) parties in Downing Street the same evening.
If that’s true, why would he specifically use the date of his operation? Because he thought it was the same day as the hangovers from the 2020 Garden Party.
I thought politicians were held to account on here for what they said, not given a huge margin of error to be able to crowbar fiction into reality
'The UK’s chief veterinary officer has stressed there will be an amnesty before a ban on American XL bully dogs, after an expert said the breed was behind almost half of all attacks on humans and dogs killed since 2021.
An amnesty for XL bullies will mean existing animals are not culled, but that owners are required to register and keep them leashed and muzzled in public, Dr Christine Middlemiss said.'
Also some question about timing. Hmm.
So my 5% estimate that Sunak meets his pledge of a ban in effect by the end of the year already looks way too optimistic.
I really don't understand this consistent over promising and inevitable under delivering. Is Sunak as divorced from reality as Truss? Or dim? Or is there some angle I am missing? He is just going to piss off both people who don't want the ban and those that do as well with this approach.
It would be interesting to know how we got from a ban to a registration system in just a few hours.
Russell Brand has always been crazy and a knobhead. That's what he does, it's why he's famous, why is it news today?
It's like breaking news that Katie Hopkins has unpleasant views. Or that Jeremy Corbyn doesn't like Jews.
There is no evidence that Jeremy Corbyn does not like Jews, and despite his being Labour's best known Arsenal fan since, erm, Sir Keir Starmer, no evidence of Corbyn having used the Y-word about Spurs (whose fans use it about themselves but that is a whole other kettle of worms they are trying to end). Corbyn's antisemitism rests on his being anti-Israel. Confusingly, there is some attempt at introducing the term Israelophobia.
Yes antisemitism was weaponized against Corbyn by the establishment.
Mr. Sandpit, hmm. Be interesting to see if it does make a change during the race. Not holding my breath.
They’ve missed a trick in not making the new straight a DRS zone, but the shorter straights before and after are DRS zones, and the new layout should make it easier to follow another car around the last sector of the lap.
I am looking forward to the forthcoming Welsh Grand Prix in which all the cars race round the track at 20mph! 😀
Wasn't there a rally in Wales some years ago where loads of drivers got speeding fines?
Yes - but both the law and the rally organisers say that you must observe speed limits on the road sections.
The same thing would happen in a rally in England.
The whole thing is pointless if it doesn't run into Euston.
Actually, it shouldn't run into Euston; it should run into a new terminal between KX-StP, so as to link with Eurostar services without an annoyingly long transfer. But that's another story.
Yes, the ideal station would be totally underground, and parallel with, or just north of, Euston Rd - perhaps underneath the Library - with exits to both Euston and KX/St.P, and through trains that run Birmingham>LHR>OOC>”London”>Stratford>Ashford>Paris.
Yes it’s going to be expensive, but it’s a once-in-a-century investment and will revolutionise rail travel.
Absolutely right. HS2 should eventually connect all the major northern cities (Liverpool, Manchester, Newcastle, Birmingham, Nottingham, Sheffield, Leeds) to the European High Speed network, with direct through trains. Anything less is a horrible British fudge. Just do it.
And GLASGOW
When he says British he means English. There was never any intention it would reach Scotland, only connection we have is paying for it.
So, Sir John Curtice (who is usually bloody accurate) thinks Labour's polling in Scotland is off the boil and they will fall short in Rutherglen and yet the SNP are still available at over 10/1 to take the seat. If so, that's superb value.
'The UK’s chief veterinary officer has stressed there will be an amnesty before a ban on American XL bully dogs, after an expert said the breed was behind almost half of all attacks on humans and dogs killed since 2021.
An amnesty for XL bullies will mean existing animals are not culled, but that owners are required to register and keep them leashed and muzzled in public, Dr Christine Middlemiss said.'
Also some question about timing. Hmm.
So my 5% estimate that Sunak meets his pledge of a ban in effect by the end of the year already looks way too optimistic.
I really don't understand this consistent over promising and inevitable under delivering. Is Sunak as divorced from reality as Truss? Or dim? Or is there some angle I am missing? He is just going to piss off both people who don't want the ban and those that do as well with this approach.
It would be interesting to know how we got from a ban to a registration system in just a few hours.
Mind you, even the official announcement yesterday starts with what seems like a clear pledge and a clear timescale: "This will make it an offence to own, breed, gift or sell an XL bully. We will do this by the end of the year."
I think that Labour's antics in the Mid Beds byelection are putting people off. The top priority is to get rid of this corrupt, incompetent Conservative Government. And yet Labour's approach - a mixture of arrogance and greed - shows that their top priority is not to get the Tories out, but the grab power for themselves. In Mid Beds their priority is to prevent the Lib Dems from winning, rather than to get the Tory out themselves.
This is very much a mistake on their part. If they fail to win an overall majority, and try to start cosying up to the Lib Dems for support, what kind of reaction will they expect? If Labour had any sense at all, they would wind down their campaigning in Mid Beds and concentrate their efforts and resources on Rutherglen and Tamwoth to make sure of those, and leave it to the Lib Dems to put an end to Tory domination in Mid Beds.
Sigh. If we want to play rhetorical games, Labour was and is the obvious challenger in mid-Beds and the LibDem effort from 12% was the spoiler, complete with personal attacks on the Labour candidate. I've not been bothering to make the case since in truth both parties were always going to go for it in the absence of a pact, but this sort of partisan whinge is just silly.
Labour's campaign is now getting serious front-bench engagement (Wes Streeting today) as well as a punishing effort - five canvass sessions plus 7 leaflet rounds today.
Wes Streeting seems a popular fellow but, if he is a decent bloke, I just can’t figure why he has left a misleading (at best) tweet up from last year, claiming Tories were nursing hangovers from a lockdown party whilst he was having a cancer op.
The party was in 2020 & his op was a year later. Dozens of people have pointed this out yet he has not corrected or deleted the tweet. I don’t want to be having a go at someone who has had a serious illness, but at best he hasn’t noticed, at worst he is weaponising his condition for political point scoring.
Nonsense on stilts. It would be mindless pedantry even if what you say is true, since it would not alter the gist of Wes Streeting's tweet, but in any case Number 10 partied on into 2021. You might remember the contrast drawn at the time between Her Majesty the Queen sitting alone in the chapel mourning the death of Prince Philip, and the two (two!) parties in Downing Street the same evening.
If that’s true, why would he specifically use the date of his operation? Because he thought it was the same day as the hangovers from the 2020 Garden Party.
I thought politicians were held to account on here for what they said, not given a huge margin of error to be able to crowbar fiction into reality
There was more than one Downing Street party in more than one year. Even if Streeting had in mind the wrong year, it does not matter since parties extended into the following year anyway. I have mentioned the two parties while the Queen mourned alone, which pictures everyone in the land will remember. Prince Philip died in April 2021. So if Streeting says Number 10 partied in 2021, he is entirely correct, even if he thought he was talking about earlier parties in 2020. Basically, there were lots of parties.
The whole thing is pointless if it doesn't run into Euston.
Actually, it shouldn't run into Euston; it should run into a new terminal between KX-StP, so as to link with Eurostar services without an annoyingly long transfer. But that's another story.
Yes, the ideal station would be totally underground, and parallel with, or just north of, Euston Rd - perhaps underneath the Library - with exits to both Euston and KX/St.P, and through trains that run Birmingham>LHR>OOC>”London”>Stratford>Ashford>Paris.
Yes it’s going to be expensive, but it’s a once-in-a-century investment and will revolutionise rail travel.
Absolutely right. HS2 should eventually connect all the major northern cities (Liverpool, Manchester, Newcastle, Birmingham, Nottingham, Sheffield, Leeds) to the European High Speed network, with direct through trains. Anything less is a horrible British fudge. Just do it.
And GLASGOW
When he says British he means English. There was never any intention it would reach Scotland, only connection we have is paying for it.
The SG did get consequentials for it, in the end.
But people routinely forget that Glasgow is one of the UK's most populous urban areas, and would be well served by an express link to London etc.
was stopped by a man just outside Parliament yesterday evening. He introduced himself as a civil servant. He told me to ‘keep doing what you are doing, everyone knows it’s the truth. The establishment are very worried because they know what’s coming down the track for them!’ This is not the first civil servant to say this to me in private . They all know the truth and they all know it has to be exposed.
was stopped by a man just outside Parliament yesterday evening. He introduced himself as a civil servant. He told me to ‘keep doing what you are doing, everyone knows it’s the truth. The establishment are very worried because they know what’s coming down the track for them!’ This is not the first civil servant to say this to me in private . They all know the truth and they all know it has to be exposed.
Anti Vax already? You need to learn to play yourself in. A few posts on dogs, something about cricket, maybe mention that you are not sure Labour will get a majority, before opening the stance and going for the big swing.
was stopped by a man just outside Parliament yesterday evening. He introduced himself as a civil servant. He told me to ‘keep doing what you are doing, everyone knows it’s the truth. The establishment are very worried because they know what’s coming down the track for them!’ This is not the first civil servant to say this to me in private . They all know the truth and they all know it has to be exposed.
Anti Vax already? You need to learn to play yourself in. A few posts on dogs, something about cricket, maybe mention that you are not sure Labour will get a majority, before opening the stance and going for the big swing.
Bridgen also said a senior govt minister gave words of support to him.
was stopped by a man just outside Parliament yesterday evening. He introduced himself as a civil servant. He told me to ‘keep doing what you are doing, everyone knows it’s the truth. The establishment are very worried because they know what’s coming down the track for them!’ This is not the first civil servant to say this to me in private . They all know the truth and they all know it has to be exposed.
Anti Vax already? You need to learn to play yourself in. A few posts on dogs, something about cricket, maybe mention that you are not sure Labour will get a majority, before opening the stance and going for the big swing.
At least our Saturday morning friend made it to a dozen posts on Russell Brand before turning antivax.
Didn't start with a first post on "how sad" it is that Ukrainians are dying in a hopeless war so they should surrender, this week.
One of those crazy days on Twitter where all sorts of rumours and allegations are flying around... Wonder how many people will find themselves being sued by the end of the day?
was stopped by a man just outside Parliament yesterday evening. He introduced himself as a civil servant. He told me to ‘keep doing what you are doing, everyone knows it’s the truth. The establishment are very worried because they know what’s coming down the track for them!’ This is not the first civil servant to say this to me in private . They all know the truth and they all know it has to be exposed.
Anti Vax already? You need to learn to play yourself in. A few posts on dogs, something about cricket, maybe mention that you are not sure Labour will get a majority, before opening the stance and going for the big swing.
Bridgen also said a senior govt minister gave words of support to him.
And Putin said that Crimea is Ukrainian and he has no intention to invade.
was stopped by a man just outside Parliament yesterday evening. He introduced himself as a civil servant. He told me to ‘keep doing what you are doing, everyone knows it’s the truth. The establishment are very worried because they know what’s coming down the track for them!’ This is not the first civil servant to say this to me in private . They all know the truth and they all know it has to be exposed.
Anti Vax already? You need to learn to play yourself in. A few posts on dogs, something about cricket, maybe mention that you are not sure Labour will get a majority, before opening the stance and going for the big swing.
At least our Saturday morning friend made it to a dozen posts on Russell Brand before turning antivax.
Didn't start with a first post on "how sad" it is that Ukrainians are dying in a hopeless war so they should surrender, this week.
Is Bridgen the one who said vaccinating people was like the Holocaust, or am I confusing him with some other intellectual giant?
Russell Brand has always been crazy and a knobhead. That's what he does, it's why he's famous, why is it news today?
It's like breaking news that Katie Hopkins has unpleasant views. Or that Jeremy Corbyn doesn't like Jews.
There is no evidence that Jeremy Corbyn does not like Jews, and despite his being Labour's best known Arsenal fan since, erm, Sir Keir Starmer, no evidence of Corbyn having used the Y-word about Spurs (whose fans use it about themselves but that is a whole other kettle of worms they are trying to end). Corbyn's antisemitism rests on his being anti-Israel. Confusingly, there is some attempt at introducing the term Israelophobia.
Yes antisemitism was weaponized against Corbyn by the establishment.
Well, if you demand the ban on Raed Saleh entering the U.K. be overturned, repeatedly praise him etc. Then you will be associated with Saleh’s statement, for which his was banned from the U.K. namely the Blood Libel shit.
Comments
Sometimes, nothing is a pretty cool hand. (Cool Hand Luke)
He obviously gets a lot of happiness out of owning a dog/having a pet. It’s not my cup of cocoa - I prefer humans, wild animals, or solitude - but good luck to him. It’s obviously true for a lot of people
My only real beef is with people that own dogs that can easily kill people. And also cats that kill trillions of birds. And budgies. I hate budgies coz of their stupid noise. And fish get bored. Likewise parrots
Ok I hate pets. They’re for stupid lonely people who should grow up
Yes it’s going to be expensive, but it’s a once-in-a-century investment and will revolutionise rail travel.
Cathar country!
Best of luck if you do go spread betting... not sure I've quite got the nerve for that.
We could end up with almost an American situation, where you have either a deadlock or a landslide, and nothing in between.
https://x.com/alanfcrawford1/status/1702942946331365820?s=61&t=s0ae0IFncdLS1Dc7J0P_TQ
All this fuss about the story. I wonder if it will deliver.
Well I was about to return to lurking, but while I'm here...
Yes, encouraging the dog to make his own decisions and rewarding him for doing so is key to good training. This is why it's best to capture a behaviour rather than e.g. lure or physically encourage it.
But Silvia Trkman is much more clued up than Cesar Milan. She's the best trainer in the world. What her dogs have achieved on the A-frame, for example, the other top trainers thought for decades was impossible.
There are many dog training videos out there, it's true, but most of them will only take you a small part of the way. Karen Pryor's book is good. She started with dolphins. Not that I like her praise for B F Skinner, but anyway.
As for Barbara Woodhouse, her problem is that she became a TV personality and she had to have a USP for the masses. And choke chains it was, which are cruel and the whole punishment (negative reinforcement) approach is rubbish anyway. Sure it works to some extent (see circuses) but cruelty can't be ethically justified and it won't get you to the higher levels because it doesn't hook the dog's intellect.
BUT....before Woodhouse became a TV personality she wrote her autobiography. It mostly covers the time she was in Argentina and it mostly talks about horses. It's much better than the stuff she did on British TV about yanking dogs' necks and "look at me, I bring my arm upwards not downwards when I say 'sit'". I can't recall any cruelty in it whasoever. Well worth a read if you haven't read it already.
I couldn't care less what government it is when sensible policy is at stake. HS2 has been appallingly managed, and certainly successive Tory governments have been a large part of that - but the arguments over it have regularly crossed party lines, as yours did here.
If the next Labour government fucks up, that won't be any better.
Downside is 50% more air pollution per race.
Saw a YouTube short today about a bridge in Spain dating to the Roman era (occasionally damaged but always rebuilt to original specifications) strong enough for many tanks to go over (52 tons). The idea of infrastructure that doesn't have short term obsolescence built in is something seemingly missing from the world of politics, likely due to an incompetent, fickle media and the short term electoral cycles.
But leave that aside, in such a scenario, Labour forms a minority government of some sort. Yes, that result would be seriously underwhelming for them after current polling but it'd still be around 60+ gains, with the Tories far from a majority. There'd be a degree of momentum with them and, crucially, no-one else would back the Tories, either actively or even passively. If push came to shove, the SNP, Plaid and co would back Labour into office, if not *in* office.
And that'd be the crucial point. Labour could exercise the executive functions of power but would struggle with the legislative ones - they'd have no majority in parliament and would be vulnerable to a No Confidence vote as and when opposition interests in calling an election aligned. But that might take a while, not just because of Tory and SNP difficulties but because of the risk to the SNP of inadvertently installing a populist right-wing Tory government.
Edit: also Llafur MPs in English-only matters.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/sep/16/no-cull-american-xl-bully-dogs-uk-despite-ban-new-rules
'The UK’s chief veterinary officer has stressed there will be an amnesty before a ban on American XL bully dogs, after an expert said the breed was behind almost half of all attacks on humans and dogs killed since 2021.
An amnesty for XL bullies will mean existing animals are not culled, but that owners are required to register and keep them leashed and muzzled in public, Dr Christine Middlemiss said.'
Also some question about timing. Hmm.
And enough Tory losses to get Starmer into No. 10.
The party was in 2020 & his op was a year later. Dozens of people have pointed this out yet he has not corrected or deleted the tweet. I don’t want to be having a go at someone who has had a serious illness, but at best he hasn’t noticed, at worst he is weaponising his condition for political point scoring.
https://x.com/wesstreeting/status/1480901993526968328?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
2) The key is whether the government goes for mandatory third party insurance. That will be prohibitively expensive (rather like dangerous drivers), and therefore the most effective way to target existing owners
A further complication is that on the supermarket shelves, as well as jam there are preserves and conserves for things that look like jam. I believe this is due to different amounts of fruit and sugar, which the EU might also change.
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1702818047063654910?s=20
You are being attacked
@rustyrockets
Establishment media don't know what to do with the fact that you have 6million subscribers & generate autonomous, knowing and original content. You are welcome on my
@GBNEWS
show anytime. We are mainstream media. But we are not Establishment media. There's a difference. Keep going. This proves you are winning. You're a hero.
https://x.com/beverleyturner/status/1702937915481858403?s=20
The environmental destruction caused by the project is unacceptable. And now we discover that it was all for nothing. No high speed trains linking anywhere in the North to That London. Indeed, no high speed trains even reaching London by the looks of it.
Meanwhile all those executives it was supposed to be speeding to their important meetings are sat at home in their keks meeting over Teams instead.
But we cannot reverse the destruction of the ancient woodland.
Or was the only when Dubya was POTUS?
For decades the mainstream media glamorised promiscuity, movies, TV , reality shows, newspapers etc. Now they want to use it against people who “step out of line”. It doesn’t matter if they r settled, been honest about past, seen errors . Media twist and manipulate everything
https://x.com/LeilaniDowding/status/1702971223007740319?s=20
The problem is that tier one nations don’t really want to play lower level teams as they don’t generate the money so outside of the World Cup there is little opportunity to improve standards.
Years ago it looked like if any team was going to join the 5 Nations it would be Romania but then when Ceaucescu went down, or up, there was chaos and the rugby system lost momentum leading to Italy jumping the queue.
World Rugby should have an American championship like the 6N for all South American teams plus US and Canada, a second level European tournament with Romania, Georgia, Portugal, Spain, Germany one other (which broadcasters showing the 6N should be obliged to show) and the The Rugby Championship should expand to include Japan and the island nations. Then have a tournament where the winners of each league play a knockout like the football club world championship and get places like Qatar to pay big money to host it that gets shared amongst developing nations.
I really don't understand this consistent over promising and inevitable under delivering. Is Sunak as divorced from reality as Truss? Or dim? Or is there some angle I am missing? He is just going to piss off both people who don't want the ban and those that do as well with this approach.
You have a point about environmental destruction but at some point, somewhere infrastructure must be built or we really are just in decline.
Russell Brand has always been crazy and a knobhead. That's what he does, it's why he's famous, why is it news today?
It's like breaking news that Katie Hopkins has unpleasant views. Or that Jeremy Corbyn doesn't like Jews.
'The food and farming minister, Mark Spencer MP, warned on Friday that banning the breed, which is officially recognised by the Royal Kennel Club, was “not as simple” as it may appear and may take longer than expected.
“We’re going to have to go through the process of identifying the characteristics of that type of dog and make sure that we don’t encapsulate the wrong sort of dog in that process. It’s going to take a little while to do that,”[...]'
NB also this is Dept Ag stuff not Home Office. No mention of Ms Braverman.
Edit: Pace the Graun, I thought the breed was *not* recognised by the Kennel Club, i.e. harder to define. Or maybe the Royal KC is not the same as the KCUK.
Secondly, it is difficult to answer your question because "spreads" mean different things dependent on context. I'll try to cover the range (pun!)
Spread markets: IG Index, SpreadEx
- https://www.spreadex.com/sports/en-GB/spread-betting/politics/uk-politics/next-general-election/spr/p2063103
- IG Index is registration only
Betting exchanges: Betfair exchange- https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/en/politics/uk-next-general-election-betting-28265958
Fixed-odds betting (overviews): Oddschecker, Oddspedia- https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics
- https://oddspedia.com/politics/british-politics
Other (No Brit stuff up yet)I thought politicians were held to account on here for what they said, not given a huge margin of error to be able to crowbar fiction into reality
Treating women with respect and not raping them is something all men should be doing. Not libellous to say so.
The same thing would happen in a rally in England.
Or are you of the view that groping women without their consent isn't assault?
What am I missing?
"This will make it an offence to own, breed, gift or sell an XL bully. We will do this by the end of the year."
And then follows it up by saying that won't actually happen because there will be a "transition period".
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-to-ban-american-xl-bully
But people routinely forget that Glasgow is one of the UK's most populous urban areas, and would be well served by an express link to London etc.
Maybe if they had documentaries about abuse on Первый канал then your standards wouldn't be so neanderthal.
He can comfort himself with being PM longer than Liz Truss.
Probably.
was stopped by a man just outside Parliament yesterday evening. He introduced himself as a civil servant. He told me to ‘keep doing what you are doing, everyone knows it’s the truth. The establishment are very worried because they know what’s coming down the track for them!’ This is not the first civil servant to say this to me in private . They all know the truth and they all know it has to be exposed.
https://x.com/ABridgen/status/1700118446476804300?s=20
Didn't start with a first post on "how sad" it is that Ukrainians are dying in a hopeless war so they should surrender, this week.
One of those crazy days on Twitter where all sorts of rumours and allegations are flying around... Wonder how many people will find themselves being sued by the end of the day?
Too many Tweets make a...
To give one example.
https://x.com/DrAseemMalhotra/status/1702836288116654080?s=20