An open letter signed by well-known actors condemning Israeli military actions has been criticised for failing to mention brutal terror attacks carried out by Hamas.
More than 2,000 artists, actors and musicians in the UK, including Tilda Swinton, Steve Coogan, Charles Dance and Maxine Peake, signed the letter.
They called for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza and for “our governments to end their military and political support for Israel’s actions”.
This is why I have a strict "don't ask" policy when it comes to artists and their personal views. Peake is a brilliant actor. She's a mentalist politically, but I don't care what her views are so I can keep watching her stuff.
I feel the same way about Eddie Izzard - one of the finest and most original of comedians of our age even though I disagree entirely with just about evrything in his politics.
The same goes for the Anti-vaxxer Clapton. I don't think his music is any less superb because he is a lunatic.
Up to a point. I don't really mind if my favourite famous people have political views that are different to mine. But when I start to get the impression that they would mind very much if I had political opinions different to theirs - which is the impression you get from the likes of Steve Coogan and Maxine Peake - the cheerful indifference gets harder to maintain. I mean, Alan Partidge is no less funny for its creator being a bit of a twat. But it's hard to maintain a neutral opinion of the fella.
This is in practice a bigger issue for right wingers like you because famous entertainers, actors, song and dance merchants, writers, artistic and cultural big bananas in general, skew left. If you were to 'cancel' them on that basis you'd be left with meagre rations indeed. So although I agree and applaud your tolerant take on it (and I do agree and applaud it) I also have to note this self-interest angle.
That's true. But there's left wingers and left wingers. I've just finished Dave Grohl's autobiography. He makes no secret of his strongly felt Democrat leanings. But he also discusses the more important need to be able to get on with people whatever their views, and laments that America is currently unable to do this. I'd say that's the more important factor.
Yep, and to widen it a bit, there's political views and there's political views.
Eg, hypothetically imagine a denizen of rock who's very strongly of the opinion that we're well beyond what the modern state ought to be raising in tax and so favours significant cuts in public expenditure - except for the armed forces because defence of the realm must be the government's top priority.
I'm just giving that a roll of the eyes and it's not impacting one iota on my enjoyment of his tunes (assuming I like them to start with).
However if his right wingery extends to 'Enoch was a god' territory, if he's giving it the old 'multiculturalism doesn't work' cypher for being a racist, then that's materially different. That's more troubling. I have a decision to make there.
And in precisely that situation, what would your decision be.
It depends on the relative weight of the 2 things: (i) how much I like his tunes and (ii) just how ghastly are his views.
The bigger that (ii) is relative to (i) the more likely I am to remove him from my life.
In other words if you were a big enough fan you would ignore his Enoch views. Interesting, thanks.
@kinabalu 's approach seems entirely reasonable to me.
He's a very reasonable guy. Just a little bit racist, great songs: all good; huge racist, great songs: stop listening.
There is probably a matrix that we could draw up to determine the likelihood of him tolerating the artist.
You could, given sufficient time and motivation. But anyway, last roll, there's not just nuance there's nuance *within* the nuance.
Take Clapton. Eric. 'God'. But a bad apple on the 'muliticulturalism doesn't work' front (to put it mildly).
So, a person (such as me) might now still cue up Layla during an evening of drinking and listening to classic riffs, BUT whereas before knowing he was a bad apple they might really 'get into' it, be up and about the lounge playing air guitar, making iconic lip shapes, kind of *celebrating* the riff, now they'll still listen but do it in a sober thoughtful stationary manner, conscious of the issues in play, the trade offs being made.
Does Clapton still have those views ? He made a few comments in the seventies. Since then has he stuck to that ?
As for his work The musical Coda on Layla is amazing. Layla is my most played spotify track over the last 5 years. I never tire of the musical Coda.
Hotel California is also pretty decent
Eric's infamous drunken rant was very unpleasant, but I'm unaware of any racist utterances or behaviour by him before or since. Wasn't he on three bottles of brandy a day at the time? I don't know, by I imagine consuming that amount of alcohol could induce something akin to psychosis.
Same as my previous one unfortunately. I have not studied the facts and cannot reach an informed conclusion and so must decline to predict. Good luck to all of you who have gambled and I hope you win lots of money.
The morning indicators is that Labour do not have a great ground organisation, they do not appear to be ding much telling, even in Flitwick, apparently been told to turn up, wear a rosette and smile!!!! Other places they have been non existent. My gut therefore says it is between the Conservative and Lib Dem, put a bet on both, should be a profit whatever the result. If it comes down to postal votes that should favour the Crime Commissioner.
An open letter signed by well-known actors condemning Israeli military actions has been criticised for failing to mention brutal terror attacks carried out by Hamas.
More than 2,000 artists, actors and musicians in the UK, including Tilda Swinton, Steve Coogan, Charles Dance and Maxine Peake, signed the letter.
They called for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza and for “our governments to end their military and political support for Israel’s actions”.
This is why I have a strict "don't ask" policy when it comes to artists and their personal views. Peake is a brilliant actor. She's a mentalist politically, but I don't care what her views are so I can keep watching her stuff.
I feel the same way about Eddie Izzard - one of the finest and most original of comedians of our age even though I disagree entirely with just about evrything in his politics.
The same goes for the Anti-vaxxer Clapton. I don't think his music is any less superb because he is a lunatic.
Up to a point. I don't really mind if my favourite famous people have political views that are different to mine. But when I start to get the impression that they would mind very much if I had political opinions different to theirs - which is the impression you get from the likes of Steve Coogan and Maxine Peake - the cheerful indifference gets harder to maintain. I mean, Alan Partidge is no less funny for its creator being a bit of a twat. But it's hard to maintain a neutral opinion of the fella.
This is in practice a bigger issue for right wingers like you because famous entertainers, actors, song and dance merchants, writers, artistic and cultural big bananas in general, skew left. If you were to 'cancel' them on that basis you'd be left with meagre rations indeed. So although I agree and applaud your tolerant take on it (and I do agree and applaud it) I also have to note this self-interest angle.
That's true. But there's left wingers and left wingers. I've just finished Dave Grohl's autobiography. He makes no secret of his strongly felt Democrat leanings. But he also discusses the more important need to be able to get on with people whatever their views, and laments that America is currently unable to do this. I'd say that's the more important factor.
Yep, and to widen it a bit, there's political views and there's political views.
Eg, hypothetically imagine a denizen of rock who's very strongly of the opinion that we're well beyond what the modern state ought to be raising in tax and so favours significant cuts in public expenditure - except for the armed forces because defence of the realm must be the government's top priority.
I'm just giving that a roll of the eyes and it's not impacting one iota on my enjoyment of his tunes (assuming I like them to start with).
However if his right wingery extends to 'Enoch was a god' territory, if he's giving it the old 'multiculturalism doesn't work' cypher for being a racist, then that's materially different. That's more troubling. I have a decision to make there.
And in precisely that situation, what would your decision be.
It depends on the relative weight of the 2 things: (i) how much I like his tunes and (ii) just how ghastly are his views.
The bigger that (ii) is relative to (i) the more likely I am to remove him from my life.
In other words if you were a big enough fan you would ignore his Enoch views. Interesting, thanks.
@kinabalu 's approach seems entirely reasonable to me.
He's a very reasonable guy. Just a little bit racist, great songs: all good; huge racist, great songs: stop listening.
There is probably a matrix that we could draw up to determine the likelihood of him tolerating the artist.
You could, given sufficient time and motivation. But anyway, last roll, there's not just nuance there's nuance *within* the nuance.
Take Clapton. Eric. 'God'. But a bad apple on the 'muliticulturalism doesn't work' front (to put it mildly).
So, a person (such as me) might now still cue up Layla during an evening of drinking and listening to classic riffs, BUT whereas before knowing he was a bad apple they might really 'get into' it, be up and about the lounge playing air guitar, making iconic lip shapes, kind of *celebrating* the riff, now they'll still listen but do it in a sober thoughtful stationary manner, conscious of the issues in play, the trade offs being made.
Does Clapton still have those views ? He made a few comments in the seventies. Since then has he stuck to that ?
As for his work The musical Coda on Layla is amazing. Layla is my most played spotify track over the last 5 years. I never tire of the musical Coda.
Hotel California is also pretty decent
Eric's infamous drunken rant was very unpleasant, but I'm unaware of any racist utterances or behaviour by him before or since. Wasn't he on three bottles of brandy a day at the time? I don't know, by I imagine consuming that amount of alcohol could induce something akin to psychosis.
Yeah, it won't do him any good at all. It was deeply unpleasant but peoples views change. Look how many politicians move in their views.
I saw an interview with Joe Walsh from The Eagles around the time they reformed. His big hope was he would remember it this time as the seventies was a blur. He was shaking like a leaf. Yet during that time he produced some great work.
I see Sunak has unambiguously stood next to Netanyahu and said "we want you to win".
Good for him.
I've been a major critic of Sunak since he put up NI onwards, but credit where credit is due. He is showing some good principles and standing for that which is righteous here. 👍
I see Sunak has unambiguously stood next to Netanyahu and said "we want you to win".
Good for him.
I've been a major critic of Sunak since he put up NI onwards, but credit where credit is due. He is showing some good principles and standing for that which is righteous here. 👍
There’s a massive difference between making a prototype truck, and getting the technology and funding for mass-production. Just because it’s electric, doesn’t mean it’s necessarily good nor that a newcomer is the best company to make it. Look at how long it took Tesla to properly get off the ground.
The Rivian/Amazon truck is likely to be the winner in this market for last mile delivery.
I see Sunak has unambiguously stood next to Netanyahu and said "we want you to win".
Good for him.
I've been a major critic of Sunak since he put up NI onwards, but credit where credit is due. He is showing some good principles and standing for that which is righteous here. 👍
What does "win" mean?
And for that matter "you" given Nethanyahu was in a fair bit of trouble prior to this, legally, and with the Israeli public over unwanted interference with the judiciary
An open letter signed by well-known actors condemning Israeli military actions has been criticised for failing to mention brutal terror attacks carried out by Hamas.
More than 2,000 artists, actors and musicians in the UK, including Tilda Swinton, Steve Coogan, Charles Dance and Maxine Peake, signed the letter.
They called for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza and for “our governments to end their military and political support for Israel’s actions”.
This is why I have a strict "don't ask" policy when it comes to artists and their personal views. Peake is a brilliant actor. She's a mentalist politically, but I don't care what her views are so I can keep watching her stuff.
I feel the same way about Eddie Izzard - one of the finest and most original of comedians of our age even though I disagree entirely with just about evrything in his politics.
The same goes for the Anti-vaxxer Clapton. I don't think his music is any less superb because he is a lunatic.
Up to a point. I don't really mind if my favourite famous people have political views that are different to mine. But when I start to get the impression that they would mind very much if I had political opinions different to theirs - which is the impression you get from the likes of Steve Coogan and Maxine Peake - the cheerful indifference gets harder to maintain. I mean, Alan Partidge is no less funny for its creator being a bit of a twat. But it's hard to maintain a neutral opinion of the fella.
This is in practice a bigger issue for right wingers like you because famous entertainers, actors, song and dance merchants, writers, artistic and cultural big bananas in general, skew left. If you were to 'cancel' them on that basis you'd be left with meagre rations indeed. So although I agree and applaud your tolerant take on it (and I do agree and applaud it) I also have to note this self-interest angle.
That's true. But there's left wingers and left wingers. I've just finished Dave Grohl's autobiography. He makes no secret of his strongly felt Democrat leanings. But he also discusses the more important need to be able to get on with people whatever their views, and laments that America is currently unable to do this. I'd say that's the more important factor.
Yep, and to widen it a bit, there's political views and there's political views.
Eg, hypothetically imagine a denizen of rock who's very strongly of the opinion that we're well beyond what the modern state ought to be raising in tax and so favours significant cuts in public expenditure - except for the armed forces because defence of the realm must be the government's top priority.
I'm just giving that a roll of the eyes and it's not impacting one iota on my enjoyment of his tunes (assuming I like them to start with).
However if his right wingery extends to 'Enoch was a god' territory, if he's giving it the old 'multiculturalism doesn't work' cypher for being a racist, then that's materially different. That's more troubling. I have a decision to make there.
And in precisely that situation, what would your decision be.
It depends on the relative weight of the 2 things: (i) how much I like his tunes and (ii) just how ghastly are his views.
The bigger that (ii) is relative to (i) the more likely I am to remove him from my life.
In other words if you were a big enough fan you would ignore his Enoch views. Interesting, thanks.
@kinabalu 's approach seems entirely reasonable to me.
He's a very reasonable guy. Just a little bit racist, great songs: all good; huge racist, great songs: stop listening.
There is probably a matrix that we could draw up to determine the likelihood of him tolerating the artist.
You could, given sufficient time and motivation. But anyway, last roll, there's not just nuance there's nuance *within* the nuance.
Take Clapton. Eric. 'God'. But a bad apple on the 'muliticulturalism doesn't work' front (to put it mildly).
So, a person (such as me) might now still cue up Layla during an evening of drinking and listening to classic riffs, BUT whereas before knowing he was a bad apple they might really 'get into' it, be up and about the lounge playing air guitar, making iconic lip shapes, kind of *celebrating* the riff, now they'll still listen but do it in a sober thoughtful stationary manner, conscious of the issues in play, the trade offs being made.
Does Clapton still have those views ? He made a few comments in the seventies. Since then has he stuck to that ?
As for his work The musical Coda on Layla is amazing. Layla is my most played spotify track over the last 5 years. I never tire of the musical Coda.
Hotel California is also pretty decent
Eric's infamous drunken rant was very unpleasant, but I'm unaware of any racist utterances or behaviour by him before or since. Wasn't he on three bottles of brandy a day at the time? I don't know, by I imagine consuming that amount of alcohol could induce something akin to psychosis.
Yeah, it won't do him any good at all. It was deeply unpleasant but peoples views change. Look how many politicians move in their views.
I saw an interview with Joe Walsh from The Eagles around the time they reformed. His big hope was he would remember it this time as the seventies was a blur. He was shaking like a leaf. Yet during that time he produced some great work.
TBF I am devastated that the side splittingly funny Jim Davison is a bit right wing meaning I can't watch him and laugh along at his incredibly amusing racism!!
I see Sunak has unambiguously stood next to Netanyahu and said "we want you to win".
Good for him.
I've been a major critic of Sunak since he put up NI onwards, but credit where credit is due. He is showing some good principles and standing for that which is righteous here. 👍
What does "win" mean?
In my view it should mean the complete destruction of Hamas as an organisation within Gaza, the demise of Hamas as de facto rulers of Gaza and the clearance of anywhere they were attacking from.
Though to do that in full they would surely need to go South of the line drawn.
Netanyahu is being much more restrained than I would be.
I see Sunak has unambiguously stood next to Netanyahu and said "we want you to win".
Good for him.
I've been a major critic of Sunak since he put up NI onwards, but credit where credit is due. He is showing some good principles and standing for that which is righteous here. 👍
What does "win" mean?
In my view it should mean the complete destruction of Hamas as an organisation within Gaza, the demise of Hamas as de facto rulers of Gaza and the clearance of anywhere they were attacking from.
Though to do that in full they would surely need to go South of the line drawn.
Netanyahu is being much more restrained than I would be.
I see Sunak has unambiguously stood next to Netanyahu and said "we want you to win".
Good for him.
I've been a major critic of Sunak since he put up NI onwards, but credit where credit is due. He is showing some good principles and standing for that which is righteous here. 👍
What does "win" mean?
In my view it should mean the complete destruction of Hamas as an organisation within Gaza, the demise of Hamas as de facto rulers of Gaza and the clearance of anywhere they were attacking from.
Though to do that in full they would surely need to go South of the line drawn.
Netanyahu is being much more restrained than I would be.
Oh. A sort of mirror image of Hamas
No.
Hamas want to slaughter and kill all Jews from river to the sea, and destroy the only Jewish state on the planet.
I see Sunak has unambiguously stood next to Netanyahu and said "we want you to win".
Good for him.
I've been a major critic of Sunak since he put up NI onwards, but credit where credit is due. He is showing some good principles and standing for that which is righteous here. 👍
What does "win" mean?
In my view it should mean the complete destruction of Hamas as an organisation within Gaza, the demise of Hamas as de facto rulers of Gaza and the clearance of anywhere they were attacking from.
Though to do that in full they would surely need to go South of the line drawn.
Netanyahu is being much more restrained than I would be.
Plenty of time yet for him to ramp up to where you want him to be. There's still lots of standing buildings and breathing Palestinians in Gaza.
An open letter signed by well-known actors condemning Israeli military actions has been criticised for failing to mention brutal terror attacks carried out by Hamas.
More than 2,000 artists, actors and musicians in the UK, including Tilda Swinton, Steve Coogan, Charles Dance and Maxine Peake, signed the letter.
They called for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza and for “our governments to end their military and political support for Israel’s actions”.
This is why I have a strict "don't ask" policy when it comes to artists and their personal views. Peake is a brilliant actor. She's a mentalist politically, but I don't care what her views are so I can keep watching her stuff.
I feel the same way about Eddie Izzard - one of the finest and most original of comedians of our age even though I disagree entirely with just about evrything in his politics.
The same goes for the Anti-vaxxer Clapton. I don't think his music is any less superb because he is a lunatic.
Up to a point. I don't really mind if my favourite famous people have political views that are different to mine. But when I start to get the impression that they would mind very much if I had political opinions different to theirs - which is the impression you get from the likes of Steve Coogan and Maxine Peake - the cheerful indifference gets harder to maintain. I mean, Alan Partidge is no less funny for its creator being a bit of a twat. But it's hard to maintain a neutral opinion of the fella.
This is in practice a bigger issue for right wingers like you because famous entertainers, actors, song and dance merchants, writers, artistic and cultural big bananas in general, skew left. If you were to 'cancel' them on that basis you'd be left with meagre rations indeed. So although I agree and applaud your tolerant take on it (and I do agree and applaud it) I also have to note this self-interest angle.
That's true. But there's left wingers and left wingers. I've just finished Dave Grohl's autobiography. He makes no secret of his strongly felt Democrat leanings. But he also discusses the more important need to be able to get on with people whatever their views, and laments that America is currently unable to do this. I'd say that's the more important factor.
Yep, and to widen it a bit, there's political views and there's political views.
Eg, hypothetically imagine a denizen of rock who's very strongly of the opinion that we're well beyond what the modern state ought to be raising in tax and so favours significant cuts in public expenditure - except for the armed forces because defence of the realm must be the government's top priority.
I'm just giving that a roll of the eyes and it's not impacting one iota on my enjoyment of his tunes (assuming I like them to start with).
However if his right wingery extends to 'Enoch was a god' territory, if he's giving it the old 'multiculturalism doesn't work' cypher for being a racist, then that's materially different. That's more troubling. I have a decision to make there.
And in precisely that situation, what would your decision be.
It depends on the relative weight of the 2 things: (i) how much I like his tunes and (ii) just how ghastly are his views.
The bigger that (ii) is relative to (i) the more likely I am to remove him from my life.
In other words if you were a big enough fan you would ignore his Enoch views. Interesting, thanks.
@kinabalu 's approach seems entirely reasonable to me.
He's a very reasonable guy. Just a little bit racist, great songs: all good; huge racist, great songs: stop listening.
There is probably a matrix that we could draw up to determine the likelihood of him tolerating the artist.
You could, given sufficient time and motivation. But anyway, last roll, there's not just nuance there's nuance *within* the nuance.
Take Clapton. Eric. 'God'. But a bad apple on the 'muliticulturalism doesn't work' front (to put it mildly).
So, a person (such as me) might now still cue up Layla during an evening of drinking and listening to classic riffs, BUT whereas before knowing he was a bad apple they might really 'get into' it, be up and about the lounge playing air guitar, making iconic lip shapes, kind of *celebrating* the riff, now they'll still listen but do it in a sober thoughtful stationary manner, conscious of the issues in play, the trade offs being made.
Does Clapton still have those views ? He made a few comments in the seventies. Since then has he stuck to that ?
As for his work The musical Coda on Layla is amazing. Layla is my most played spotify track over the last 5 years. I never tire of the musical Coda.
Hotel California is also pretty decent
Eric's infamous drunken rant was very unpleasant, but I'm unaware of any racist utterances or behaviour by him before or since. Wasn't he on three bottles of brandy a day at the time? I don't know, by I imagine consuming that amount of alcohol could induce something akin to psychosis.
Yeah, it won't do him any good at all. It was deeply unpleasant but peoples views change. Look how many politicians move in their views.
I saw an interview with Joe Walsh from The Eagles around the time they reformed. His big hope was he would remember it this time as the seventies was a blur. He was shaking like a leaf. Yet during that time he produced some great work.
TBF I am devastated that the side splittingly funny Jim Davison is a bit right wing meaning I can't watch him and laugh along at his incredibly amusing racism!!
Mate. You're having a shocker today. Take a lie down.
Since when did Davidson, not Davison, change his views ?
Labour will understandably be very angry if the Lib Dems cost them the seat in Mid-Beds .
Bearing in mind that Labour effectively stood aside in Tiverton and Honiton where they were second in 2019. The demographics there were more suitable for Tory voters moving towards the Lib Dems .
Unless Mid-Beds is similar in terms of more likely switchers then the Lib Dems really have been very self indulgent .
I of course won’t harbour a grudge and still intend to vote Lib Dem here in Eastbourne but it would be wise for the Lib Dem leadership to consider that their actions might re-bound and both enable the Tories and cost them seats .
What would the Lib Dem reaction have been if Labour had gone hard for Tiverton and Honiton ?
If of course the Lib Dems do very well but don’t win tonight but come second then the equation changes .
The switch to EV is a massive opportunity for new companies to replace old ones, but you'd expect most attempts at being one of the new companies to fail.
The early history of cars, at the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th, is strewn with vast numbers of new companies that failed, but that didn't stop the technology itself from becoming a massive success.
I see Sunak has unambiguously stood next to Netanyahu and said "we want you to win".
Good for him.
I've been a major critic of Sunak since he put up NI onwards, but credit where credit is due. He is showing some good principles and standing for that which is righteous here. 👍
What does "win" mean?
In my view it should mean the complete destruction of Hamas as an organisation within Gaza, the demise of Hamas as de facto rulers of Gaza and the clearance of anywhere they were attacking from.
Though to do that in full they would surely need to go South of the line drawn.
Netanyahu is being much more restrained than I would be.
Oh. A sort of mirror image of Hamas
No.
Hamas want to slaughter and kill all Jews from river to the sea, and destroy the only Jewish state on the planet.
I see Sunak has unambiguously stood next to Netanyahu and said "we want you to win".
Good for him.
I've been a major critic of Sunak since he put up NI onwards, but credit where credit is due. He is showing some good principles and standing for that which is righteous here. 👍
What does "win" mean?
In my view it should mean the complete destruction of Hamas as an organisation within Gaza, the demise of Hamas as de facto rulers of Gaza and the clearance of anywhere they were attacking from.
Though to do that in full they would surely need to go South of the line drawn.
Netanyahu is being much more restrained than I would be.
An open letter signed by well-known actors condemning Israeli military actions has been criticised for failing to mention brutal terror attacks carried out by Hamas.
More than 2,000 artists, actors and musicians in the UK, including Tilda Swinton, Steve Coogan, Charles Dance and Maxine Peake, signed the letter.
They called for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza and for “our governments to end their military and political support for Israel’s actions”.
This is why I have a strict "don't ask" policy when it comes to artists and their personal views. Peake is a brilliant actor. She's a mentalist politically, but I don't care what her views are so I can keep watching her stuff.
I feel the same way about Eddie Izzard - one of the finest and most original of comedians of our age even though I disagree entirely with just about evrything in his politics.
The same goes for the Anti-vaxxer Clapton. I don't think his music is any less superb because he is a lunatic.
Up to a point. I don't really mind if my favourite famous people have political views that are different to mine. But when I start to get the impression that they would mind very much if I had political opinions different to theirs - which is the impression you get from the likes of Steve Coogan and Maxine Peake - the cheerful indifference gets harder to maintain. I mean, Alan Partidge is no less funny for its creator being a bit of a twat. But it's hard to maintain a neutral opinion of the fella.
This is in practice a bigger issue for right wingers like you because famous entertainers, actors, song and dance merchants, writers, artistic and cultural big bananas in general, skew left. If you were to 'cancel' them on that basis you'd be left with meagre rations indeed. So although I agree and applaud your tolerant take on it (and I do agree and applaud it) I also have to note this self-interest angle.
That's true. But there's left wingers and left wingers. I've just finished Dave Grohl's autobiography. He makes no secret of his strongly felt Democrat leanings. But he also discusses the more important need to be able to get on with people whatever their views, and laments that America is currently unable to do this. I'd say that's the more important factor.
Yep, and to widen it a bit, there's political views and there's political views.
Eg, hypothetically imagine a denizen of rock who's very strongly of the opinion that we're well beyond what the modern state ought to be raising in tax and so favours significant cuts in public expenditure - except for the armed forces because defence of the realm must be the government's top priority.
I'm just giving that a roll of the eyes and it's not impacting one iota on my enjoyment of his tunes (assuming I like them to start with).
However if his right wingery extends to 'Enoch was a god' territory, if he's giving it the old 'multiculturalism doesn't work' cypher for being a racist, then that's materially different. That's more troubling. I have a decision to make there.
And in precisely that situation, what would your decision be.
It depends on the relative weight of the 2 things: (i) how much I like his tunes and (ii) just how ghastly are his views.
The bigger that (ii) is relative to (i) the more likely I am to remove him from my life.
In other words if you were a big enough fan you would ignore his Enoch views. Interesting, thanks.
@kinabalu 's approach seems entirely reasonable to me.
He's a very reasonable guy. Just a little bit racist, great songs: all good; huge racist, great songs: stop listening.
There is probably a matrix that we could draw up to determine the likelihood of him tolerating the artist.
You could, given sufficient time and motivation. But anyway, last roll, there's not just nuance there's nuance *within* the nuance.
Take Clapton. Eric. 'God'. But a bad apple on the 'muliticulturalism doesn't work' front (to put it mildly).
So, a person (such as me) might now still cue up Layla during an evening of drinking and listening to classic riffs, BUT whereas before knowing he was a bad apple they might really 'get into' it, be up and about the lounge playing air guitar, making iconic lip shapes, kind of *celebrating* the riff, now they'll still listen but do it in a sober thoughtful stationary manner, conscious of the issues in play, the trade offs being made.
Does Clapton still have those views ? He made a few comments in the seventies. Since then has he stuck to that ?
As for his work The musical Coda on Layla is amazing. Layla is my most played spotify track over the last 5 years. I never tire of the musical Coda.
Hotel California is also pretty decent
Eric's infamous drunken rant was very unpleasant, but I'm unaware of any racist utterances or behaviour by him before or since. Wasn't he on three bottles of brandy a day at the time? I don't know, by I imagine consuming that amount of alcohol could induce something akin to psychosis.
Yeah, it won't do him any good at all. It was deeply unpleasant but peoples views change. Look how many politicians move in their views.
I saw an interview with Joe Walsh from The Eagles around the time they reformed. His big hope was he would remember it this time as the seventies was a blur. He was shaking like a leaf. Yet during that time he produced some great work.
TBF I am devastated that the side splittingly funny Jim Davison is a bit right wing meaning I can't watch him and laugh along at his incredibly amusing racism!!
Mate. You're having a shocker today. Take a lie down.
Since when did Davidson, not Davison, change his views ?
I see Sunak has unambiguously stood next to Netanyahu and said "we want you to win".
Good for him.
I've been a major critic of Sunak since he put up NI onwards, but credit where credit is due. He is showing some good principles and standing for that which is righteous here. 👍
What does "win" mean?
In my view it should mean the complete destruction of Hamas as an organisation within Gaza, the demise of Hamas as de facto rulers of Gaza and the clearance of anywhere they were attacking from.
Though to do that in full they would surely need to go South of the line drawn.
Netanyahu is being much more restrained than I would be.
Oh. A sort of mirror image of Hamas
No.
Hamas want to slaughter and kill all Jews from river to the sea, and destroy the only Jewish state on the planet.
If you can't see the distinction, that's on you.
You want to slaughter as many innocents in Gaza to win
If you want to pretend there is a distinction that's on you
I see Sunak has unambiguously stood next to Netanyahu and said "we want you to win".
Good for him.
I've been a major critic of Sunak since he put up NI onwards, but credit where credit is due. He is showing some good principles and standing for that which is righteous here. 👍
What does "win" mean?
The only ways that Israel can "win" are to:
1) expel the Palestinian people from Gaza 2) run Gaza as a police state, with full occupation by a large number of soldiers, or 3) negotiate some sort of peace agreement that gives the Palestinians a better life than they have had to endure over the past couple of decades.
You can't eliminate Hamas and expect that to be job done. When people are kept under oppression, the most violent and radical elements will tend to rise to the top. Hamas is a symptom of the conditions under which the Gazans have had to live; if Hamas is eliminated and nothing else changes, Gaza will just end up being run by another similarly ruthless bunch bent on revenge.
Yes. Some CLPs will want to advocate motions that Hamas should sweap the Jews out of Israel. If this means that we get a final departure of more crankies then Starmer will be quite happy.
I think Labour will power through and take MidBeds. They gained enoughmomentum from their conference and Rutherglen and on top of that you have Mad Nad's deplorable behaviour which I really think will hurt the Tories. It won't be a good night for the LibDems.
Tamworth, BTW, will be comfortable for Labour. They were ahead in the council elections and the size of the majority is deceptive. It's a traditional marginal with a lot of transactional voters.
I see Sunak has unambiguously stood next to Netanyahu and said "we want you to win".
Good for him.
I've been a major critic of Sunak since he put up NI onwards, but credit where credit is due. He is showing some good principles and standing for that which is righteous here. 👍
What does "win" mean?
The only ways that Israel can "win" are to:
1) expel the Palestinian people from Gaza 2) run Gaza as a police state, with full occupation by a large number of soldiers, or 3) negotiate some sort of peace agreement that gives the Palestinians a better life than they have had to endure over the past couple of decades.
You can't eliminate Hamas and expect that to be job done. When people are kept under oppression, the most violent and radical elements will tend to rise to the top. Hamas is a symptom of the conditions under which the Gazans have had to live; if Hamas is eliminated and nothing else changes, Gaza will just end up being run by another similarly ruthless bunch bent on revenge.
3 would be a genuine win. 1 and 2 just mean more war, inevitably. 2, I doubt even Netenyahu would account a win.
Labour & Tories tied in Mid Beds, Lib Dems a couple of thousand votes behind.
Question on tied votes. While the decision on how to split them is at the discretion of the returning officer, how much influence do the candidates involved have? For example, if both agreed between themselves that they'd prefer a coin toss rather than drawing lots, would / should a returning officer take that into account?
FWIW, I refereed nine U7s rugby matches last Sunday and found rock-paper-scissors to be an excellent way to decide which team started. One pair of captains managed to get it to a fourth round.
I see Sunak has unambiguously stood next to Netanyahu and said "we want you to win".
Good for him.
I've been a major critic of Sunak since he put up NI onwards, but credit where credit is due. He is showing some good principles and standing for that which is righteous here. 👍
What does "win" mean?
The only ways that Israel can "win" are to:
1) expel the Palestinian people from Gaza 2) run Gaza as a police state, with full occupation by a large number of soldiers, or 3) negotiate some sort of peace agreement that gives the Palestinians a better life than they have had to endure over the past couple of decades.
You can't eliminate Hamas and expect that to be job done. When people are kept under oppression, the most violent and radical elements will tend to rise to the top. Hamas is a symptom of the conditions under which the Gazans have had to live; if Hamas is eliminated and nothing else changes, Gaza will just end up being run by another similarly ruthless bunch bent on revenge.
Frankly all of those options look impossible. This leaves Israel only with the choice between losing and not-losing.
Not-losing is doing enough damage to Hamas that most Israelis will feel safe enough to keep living in Israel. Losing would be not doing so, and losing the confidence of the Israeli people in the ability of the state to keep them safe, such that they start to leave in significant numbers and Israel fails.
I see Sunak has unambiguously stood next to Netanyahu and said "we want you to win".
Good for him.
I've been a major critic of Sunak since he put up NI onwards, but credit where credit is due. He is showing some good principles and standing for that which is righteous here. 👍
What does "win" mean?
In my view it should mean the complete destruction of Hamas as an organisation within Gaza, the demise of Hamas as de facto rulers of Gaza and the clearance of anywhere they were attacking from.
Though to do that in full they would surely need to go South of the line drawn.
Netanyahu is being much more restrained than I would be.
Oh. A sort of mirror image of Hamas
No.
Hamas want to slaughter and kill all Jews from river to the sea, and destroy the only Jewish state on the planet.
If you can't see the distinction, that's on you.
You want to slaughter as many innocents in Gaza to win
If you want to pretend there is a distinction that's on you
One reason why the far left keep losing is that whereas most* of the rest of the political spectrum fights the battle in reality, the far left fights the one in its head.
* Even the populist right tends to take on issues which at least have a passing resemblance to that which Joe Public can see, even if severely distorted; to the extent that they get it wrong at a campaign level, it's in their priorities.
I see Sunak has unambiguously stood next to Netanyahu and said "we want you to win".
Good for him.
I've been a major critic of Sunak since he put up NI onwards, but credit where credit is due. He is showing some good principles and standing for that which is righteous here. 👍
That phrase makes him sound like an 8 year old watching Star Wars.
I see Sunak has unambiguously stood next to Netanyahu and said "we want you to win".
Good for him.
I've been a major critic of Sunak since he put up NI onwards, but credit where credit is due. He is showing some good principles and standing for that which is righteous here. 👍
What does "win" mean?
The only ways that Israel can "win" are to:
1) expel the Palestinian people from Gaza 2) run Gaza as a police state, with full occupation by a large number of soldiers, or 3) negotiate some sort of peace agreement that gives the Palestinians a better life than they have had to endure over the past couple of decades.
You can't eliminate Hamas and expect that to be job done. When people are kept under oppression, the most violent and radical elements will tend to rise to the top. Hamas is a symptom of the conditions under which the Gazans have had to live; if Hamas is eliminated and nothing else changes, Gaza will just end up being run by another similarly ruthless bunch bent on revenge.
I suspect we are looking at 2. I don’t think the Biden Administration will support 1 at all.
Although I have my doubts that 2 will work, maybe 2 can eventually lead to 3 in the fullness of time rather than further enmity and destruction. The only way that will come about is if Israel is prepared to support the development of Gaza. Do I think that’s likely? Sadly, no.
I see Sunak has unambiguously stood next to Netanyahu and said "we want you to win".
Good for him.
I've been a major critic of Sunak since he put up NI onwards, but credit where credit is due. He is showing some good principles and standing for that which is righteous here. 👍
What does "win" mean?
They’ll have rebuilt the temple before HS2 is finished.
Stocky Just an aside, apparently an ex Agent of Nadine has said voting Lib Dem, I get the feel that the Labour vote is being exaggerated in peoples minds, apparently the Lib Dems have most poster boards on display, seemingly the best ground organisation. the media have not been going to the villages. Of course I might be wrong. I remember Stoke on Trent North, oh the media were saying UKIP UKIP UKIP. They came from London to Stoke, spent two to three hours, spoke to Party hacks and completely missed the point. To those there on the ground each day it was pretty clear Labour would win. .
Labour will understandably be very angry if the Lib Dems cost them the seat in Mid-Beds .
Bearing in mind that Labour effectively stood aside in Tiverton and Honiton where they were second in 2019. The demographics there were more suitable for Tory voters moving towards the Lib Dems .
Unless Mid-Beds is similar in terms of more likely switchers then the Lib Dems really have been very self indulgent .
Clearly the LibDems think that Mid Beds could be a favourable demographic, otherwise they would have sat it out - as they are doing in Tamworth, and as they did in Rutherglen, and Selby & Ainsty, and Uxbridge.
Personally I think Mid Beds is and has always been a stretch for the LibDems, but for Labour to claim some entitlement to it on the basis that they sat out just two of the last 10 by-elections is more than a bit cheeky. Winning Mid Beds doesn't change the parliamentary arithmetic in any way - it's entirely legit for the LibDems to test their appeal there.
Tories going with a candidate whose surname begins with an A. Being top of the ballot can be worth a few points, but maybe that doesn't apply when there are so many candidates.
I see Sunak has unambiguously stood next to Netanyahu and said "we want you to win".
Good for him.
I've been a major critic of Sunak since he put up NI onwards, but credit where credit is due. He is showing some good principles and standing for that which is righteous here. 👍
What does "win" mean?
The only ways that Israel can "win" are to:
1) expel the Palestinian people from Gaza 2) run Gaza as a police state, with full occupation by a large number of soldiers, or 3) negotiate some sort of peace agreement that gives the Palestinians a better life than they have had to endure over the past couple of decades.
You can't eliminate Hamas and expect that to be job done. When people are kept under oppression, the most violent and radical elements will tend to rise to the top. Hamas is a symptom of the conditions under which the Gazans have had to live; if Hamas is eliminated and nothing else changes, Gaza will just end up being run by another similarly ruthless bunch bent on revenge.
I suspect we are looking at 2. I don’t think the Biden Administration will support 1 at all.
Although I have my doubts that 2 will work, maybe 2 can eventually lead to 3 in the fullness of time rather than further enmity and destruction. The only way that will come about is if Israel is prepared to support the development of Gaza. Do I think that’s likely? Sadly, no.
I wonder about 2 with huge amounts of aid going into Gaza. In my view, as you say, the only way to defeat Hamas is through Gazan prosperity.
If I was Biden I’d be using my political weight to persuade Israel of the benefits of such an aid package, and create a coalition of the wiling to fund it.
Lab to win Tamworth - Staffordshire conditions and local results point to that. A very good result for them if I am right
For Mid Beds local results suggest voter anger at the Cons was not moving to Lab. I think the LDs could have hoovered up the anti-Con vote (which here includes the many Inds) but I am not convinced that Lab can. Ths is a VERY rural and VERY Conservative seat. Only Nadine's cloth-eared idiocy has put it in the slightest danger. It needs the vast majority of non-Cons to align to defeat them in a seat like this. Unless the Cons have slid further than the polls suggest (and than I believe) then they will get home by 1-2,000.
These two seats combined saw a 40% Con lead in 2019. If they hold both seats (or even one) great would be the jubilation at Con Central Office. That is how far they are fallen
I have a gut instinct that the Lib Dems might surprise on the upside in Mid Beds.
My instincts on these things are so reliably crap that my rational prediction is to ignore my instincts in favour of a narrow Con win, Lab around 29% and Lib Dem about 26%
Israeli Government going very hard on BBC accusing it of blood libel. They have a point. The misreporting, and the usual suspects sounding off , heightened tensions still further and undermined Bidens peace initiative. Islamic Jihad must be delighted. If the rocket had hit its intended target, and killed a few hundred Jews, it would have been shrugged off, with a bit of cautionary advice to the Israelis not to overreact.
I suspect that if Lab take both by elections today they`ll swing back the other way at the GE.
Not sure about Tamworth. Although it's swung heavily Tory since 2010, it was Labour held throughout the Blair/Brown era and Labour retain a good local government base there. Could pretty easily see them retaining that.
I see Sunak has unambiguously stood next to Netanyahu and said "we want you to win".
Good for him.
I've been a major critic of Sunak since he put up NI onwards, but credit where credit is due. He is showing some good principles and standing for that which is righteous here. 👍
What does "win" mean?
The only ways that Israel can "win" are to:
1) expel the Palestinian people from Gaza 2) run Gaza as a police state, with full occupation by a large number of soldiers, or 3) negotiate some sort of peace agreement that gives the Palestinians a better life than they have had to endure over the past couple of decades.
You can't eliminate Hamas and expect that to be job done. When people are kept under oppression, the most violent and radical elements will tend to rise to the top. Hamas is a symptom of the conditions under which the Gazans have had to live; if Hamas is eliminated and nothing else changes, Gaza will just end up being run by another similarly ruthless bunch bent on revenge.
Given the triggering atrocity was both enormous and unexpected I think the driver at the moment is revenge. I doubt there's much of a strategy beyond that. Also, given Israel tends to react disproportionately (as a matter of policy), and what they're reacting to here is so off the scale, my expectation is it will be pretty terrible and will strain the goodwill of all but their most passionate supporters in the West.
Anyone. I honestly don't care what Denzel Washington's politics are or what George Clooney's politics are or what Roger Waters thinks about Palestine or even the much-maligned Joanne Rowling said about trans people.
"Solar is set to overpower fossil fuels as the dominant electricity source globally by 2050, according to a new study. [...] Solar power is set to dominate global electricity markets within the next few decades, and may have already reached an “irreversible tipping point,” according to a study published this week in Nature Communications. The study finds that solar adoption will continue apace barring any major policy shifts geared at disrupting it." https://twitter.com/patrickc/status/1714988564801519937
Tories going with a candidate whose surname begins with an A. Being top of the ballot can be worth a few points, but maybe that doesn't apply when there are so many candidates.
Only really in multi-member constituencies versus fellow candidates of the same party (since people either don't realise they have multiple votes or decide to vote in a two member ward for, say, the independent plus one Tory, in which case they tend to pick the first Tory name on the ballot).
I'm not aware of any evidence this is mirrored, or at least to any meaningful degree, in elections for a single member.
Israeli Government going very hard on BBC accusing it of blood libel. They have a point. The misreporting, and the usual suspects sounding off , heightened tensions still further and undermined Bidens peace initiative. Islamic Jihad must be delighted. If the rocket had hit its intended target, and killed a few hundred Jews, it would have been shrugged off, with a bit of cautionary advice to the Israelis not to overreact.
I had to re-Google blood libel to check I understood it after reading this.
The BBC might have poorly reported the hospital attack, but how does that link to the blood libel claims?
Tories going with a candidate whose surname begins with an A. Being top of the ballot can be worth a few points, but maybe that doesn't apply when there are so many candidates.
Only really in multi-member constituencies versus fellow candidates of the same party (since people either don't realise they have multiple votes or decide to vote in a two member ward for, say, the independent plus one Tory, in which case they tend to pick the first Tory name on the ballot).
I'm not aware of any evidence this is mirrored, or at least to any meaningful degree, in elections for a single member.
I think Labour will power through and take MidBeds. They gained enoughmomentum from their conference and Rutherglen and on top of that you have Mad Nad's deplorable behaviour which I really think will hurt the Tories. It won't be a good night for the LibDems.
Tamworth, BTW, will be comfortable for Labour. They were ahead in the council elections and the size of the majority is deceptive. It's a traditional marginal with a lot of transactional voters.
Israeli Government going very hard on BBC accusing it of blood libel. They have a point. The misreporting, and the usual suspects sounding off , heightened tensions still further and undermined Bidens peace initiative. Islamic Jihad must be delighted. If the rocket had hit its intended target, and killed a few hundred Jews, it would have been shrugged off, with a bit of cautionary advice to the Israelis not to overreact.
I had to re-Google blood libel to check I understood it after reading this.
The BBC might have poorly reported the hospital attack, but how does that link to the blood libel claims?
Genuine question.
Dunno. Not an expert. But I imagine the charge that they had targeted a hospital might have somewhat infuriated them.
Yes. Some CLPs will want to advocate motions that Hamas should sweap the Jews out of Israel. If this means that we get a final departure of more crankies then Starmer will be quite happy.
How many ‘Hamas should sweap the Jews out of Israel’ motions have been proposed? I wouldn’t imagine they’d be likely to be put forward by Kelvin CLP. The banning of any discussion of the issue seems like a satire of the Borg-like assimilate or die attitude ascribed to Starmlab by some people.
Not that anyone cares much, probably not even you, but what’s the SLD position?
Mid Beds – Make your predictions – politicalbetting.com
Comments
#optimism
Other places they have been non existent.
My gut therefore says it is between the Conservative and Lib Dem, put a bet on both, should be a profit whatever the result. If it comes down to postal votes that should favour the Crime Commissioner.
Lab 30
LD 25
Others 13
Lab and Lib screaming at each other tomorrow.
LDs close 2nd
Red Con close 3rd
I saw an interview with Joe Walsh from The Eagles around the time they reformed. His big hope was he would remember it this time as the seventies was a blur. He was shaking like a leaf. Yet during that time he produced some great work.
Good for him.
I've been a major critic of Sunak since he put up NI onwards, but credit where credit is due. He is showing some good principles and standing for that which is righteous here. 👍
Con 29
LD 23
Others 17
Electric truck company, Volta Trucks, calls in the administrators.
The switch to EV is proving problematic.
I noticed on Linkedin lots of them are now "open for work".
https://www.just-auto.com/news/uk-administrators-assigned-to-volta-trucks-ltd/
Lab 32
LD 26
Others 8
Though I'm not discounting Nadine coming top after a write-in campaign given the affection she's held in within the constituency.
The Rivian/Amazon truck is likely to be the winner in this market for last mile delivery.
Though to do that in full they would surely need to go South of the line drawn.
Netanyahu is being much more restrained than I would be.
Labour 29.9%
Lib Dems 29.1%
Tories 28%
Others 13%
Con 29
LD 20
Others 20
Hamas want to slaughter and kill all Jews from river to the sea, and destroy the only Jewish state on the planet.
If you can't see the distinction, that's on you.
Since when did Davidson, not Davison, change his views ?
Bearing in mind that Labour effectively stood aside in Tiverton and Honiton where they were second in 2019. The demographics there were more suitable for Tory voters moving towards the Lib Dems .
Unless Mid-Beds is similar in terms of more likely switchers then the Lib Dems really have been very self indulgent .
I of course won’t harbour a grudge and still intend to vote Lib Dem here in Eastbourne but it would be wise for the Lib Dem leadership to consider that their actions might re-bound and both enable the Tories and cost them seats .
What would the Lib Dem reaction have been if Labour had gone hard for Tiverton and Honiton ?
If of course the Lib Dems do very well but don’t win tonight but come second then the equation changes .
The Labour leadership should then reflect .
240 Volta Employees shocked
The early history of cars, at the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th, is strewn with vast numbers of new companies that failed, but that didn't stop the technology itself from becoming a massive success.
🍿 🍿 🍿
https://x.com/taj_ali1/status/1714983337343803630?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q
CON +500
(I can't be arsed to work out the percentages).
If you want to pretend there is a distinction that's on you
1) expel the Palestinian people from Gaza
2) run Gaza as a police state, with full occupation by a large number of soldiers, or
3) negotiate some sort of peace agreement that gives the Palestinians a better life than they have had to endure over the past couple of decades.
You can't eliminate Hamas and expect that to be job done. When people are kept under oppression, the most violent and radical elements will tend to rise to the top. Hamas is a symptom of the conditions under which the Gazans have had to live; if Hamas is eliminated and nothing else changes, Gaza will just end up being run by another similarly ruthless bunch bent on revenge.
Con 34
Lib Dem 34
Labour 21
Others 11
Recount.
deplorable behaviour which I really think will hurt the Tories. It won't be a good night for the LibDems.
Tamworth, BTW, will be comfortable for Labour. They were ahead in the council elections and the size of the majority is deceptive. It's a traditional marginal with a lot of transactional voters.
(Or Tories can be layed at 1.75.)
1 and 2 just mean more war, inevitably.
2, I doubt even Netenyahu would account a win.
Con 34%
Lab 28%
LD 28%
Reform 4%
Green 3%
Others 3%
FWIW, I refereed nine U7s rugby matches last Sunday and found rock-paper-scissors to be an excellent way to decide which team started. One pair of captains managed to get it to a fourth round.
Not-losing is doing enough damage to Hamas that most Israelis will feel safe enough to keep living in Israel. Losing would be not doing so, and losing the confidence of the Israeli people in the ability of the state to keep them safe, such that they start to leave in significant numbers and Israel fails.
* Even the populist right tends to take on issues which at least have a passing resemblance to that which Joe Public can see, even if severely distorted; to the extent that they get it wrong at a campaign level, it's in their priorities.
Lab 30%
Con 28%
LD 23%
Ind 8%
Ref 6%
Others inc. Green 5%
Although I have my doubts that 2 will work, maybe 2 can eventually lead to 3 in the fullness of time rather than further enmity and destruction. The only way that will come about is if Israel is prepared to support the development of Gaza. Do I think that’s likely? Sadly, no.
Con with a majority of 23 over Lab, LD behind Lab by 2500.
Just an aside, apparently an ex Agent of Nadine has said voting Lib Dem, I get the feel that the Labour vote is being exaggerated in peoples minds, apparently the Lib Dems have most poster boards on display, seemingly the best ground organisation. the media have not been going to the villages. Of course I might be wrong.
I remember Stoke on Trent North, oh the media were saying UKIP UKIP UKIP. They came from London to Stoke, spent two to three hours, spoke to Party hacks and completely missed the point. To those there on the ground each day it was pretty clear Labour would win.
.
Personally I think Mid Beds is and has always been a stretch for the LibDems, but for Labour to claim some entitlement to it on the basis that they sat out just two of the last 10 by-elections is more than a bit cheeky. Winning Mid Beds doesn't change the parliamentary arithmetic in any way - it's entirely legit for the LibDems to test their appeal there.
LibDem wins by means of drawing straws.
If I was Biden I’d be using my political weight to persuade Israel of the benefits of such an aid package, and create a coalition of the wiling to fund it.
For Mid Beds local results suggest voter anger at the Cons was not moving to Lab. I think the LDs could have hoovered up the anti-Con vote (which here includes the many Inds) but I am not convinced that Lab can. Ths is a VERY rural and VERY Conservative seat. Only Nadine's cloth-eared idiocy has put it in the slightest danger. It needs the vast majority of non-Cons to align to defeat them in a seat like this. Unless the Cons have slid further than the polls suggest (and than I believe) then they will get home by 1-2,000.
These two seats combined saw a 40% Con lead in 2019. If they hold both seats (or even one) great would be the jubilation at Con Central Office. That is how far they are fallen
My instincts on these things are so reliably crap that my rational prediction is to ignore my instincts in favour of a narrow Con win, Lab around 29% and Lib Dem about 26%
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2023/10/19/israel-palestine-latest-news-updates-hamas-gaza-day-13-live/
How about Orwell?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-12646611/PETER-HITCHENS-Lefts-thought-police-cancel-George-Orwell-Socialists-long-loathed-1984-author-ruthlessly-exposed-absurdity-book-claims-vile-wife-homophobic-sadist.html
(love how autocorrect keeps trying to do the Harold Macmillan thing and change this to Estonian).
30, 28, 20.
https://twitter.com/patrickc/status/1714988564801519937
I'm not aware of any evidence this is mirrored, or at least to any meaningful degree, in elections for a single member.
The BBC might have poorly reported the hospital attack, but how does that link to the blood libel claims?
Genuine question.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/greenpeace-loses-legal-challenge-to-uk-s-new-north-sea-oil-and-gas-licenses/ar-AA1ivssK?ocid=entnewsntp&cvid=5769a40216c84037b663e45aadffd87c&ei=12
Not that anyone cares much, probably not even you, but what’s the SLD position?