I think this will be focused on more as the election gets nearer and it will start to show in the polls. Trump's numbers will slide as the idea of him back in the WH becomes less of a 'lol can you imagine!' hypothetical prospect and more of an 'am I truly up for that?' pressing actual question.
I do wonder if people underestimate the desire for strongman politics - that indeed the idea that Trump will come in and ignore Congress or the Courts may be a selling point, not a negative. Democrats need to discuss why Trumps authoritarian tendencies are bad, not assume voters will just accept that - when voters may instead see strength and conviction.
Autocracy is a younger person thing, oldies have more sense.
I mean, I can understand why (in some ways) - if politics isn't changing, and isn't meeting your needs (which it clearly isn't for people in their mid 30s and under) then autocracy of either political persuasions have their allure. I would argue that oldies don't have more sense - they have just historically, and currently, had their interests served well by democratically elected governments.
In the US, specifically, it's key to note that Congressional approval is at net -65%, SCOTUS has record low approval at net -17%. Joe Biden is there with SCOTUS, at around -17% net approval, and Trump is the most popular with an astronomical -14% net approval. The most popular sitting politician in the US is... Bernie Sanders, with a net 36% approval rating (which is interesting considering he is also very well known, not something you can say about the other contenders for most popular senator, if anything name recognition tracks with a higher disapproval rating, and you'd think someone who ran twice as a Democrat for POTUS would have the typical partisan effect)
Nonsense oldies just have more life experience. Weve been through the cycle of this time its different ( rarely is ), project fear version 2 million ( were still alive ) and the back and forth of social trends.
The younger generations dont get is as you get older you have less hours on the planet so you value those you have left and dont waste time on things you have seen fail many times before.
Older people have had all the benefits of the post war consensus, and that ladder has slowly been hauled up behind them. I love my grandparents dearly, but after the war their economic prospects (as working class people) were significantly better than mine (a university graduate). The house they bought for a £9,000 mortgage in the 60s in now worth nearly half a million; my parents managed to get a house for £55k in the 90s - it is now worth over £300k. Free university education, investment in healthcare and education, decent pensions (that are now protected under the triple lock). We are sliding backwards, and young people aren't blind to that. All evidence shows that this generation is going to be economically worse of than their parents, and we feel it.
You might be sliding backwards but you keep voting for people who will put you there. As for housing when your parents die I assume its not all going to the cats home so who will be the beneficaries of a big lump sum?
I'm 32, my dad is in his early 50s (my mum is already dead). So, like, maybe in 30-35 years I'll have something to inherit, as long as the housing market bubble doesn't explode? Yay.
And I don't keep voting for people who put me there - that would be Tory voters who vote for politicians and policies that make it harder for younger people and easier for older and wealthy people. Whether it's the environment or the economy - the Tory party can't be trusted with the future. Unfortunately the next Labour government doesn't look much better...
Having lived through the recent past longer than you the whole nobody can afford to live nonsense started in in the late nineties with the so called Third Way kicked off. This started with the news that the government can solve all our problems rather than leaving us to sort our own lives out. It worked in the post cold war environment while we had a peace dividend to spend. But then the money ran out and we started to borrow, we passed more and more laws thus restricting the simple things in life - like building a house - and capitalism became corporatism where its who you know not what you know that counts. Both Conservatives and Labour are signed up to this, so we wont see much changes until one of them comes to their senses. Starmer is a north London lawyer so I cant see him rocking the boat, the Tories might come to their senses after a heavy defeat or lose of heavily they no longer exist.
Building a house is one of the simple things in life? Respect.
It was when I was growimg up. You didnt have armies of nimbies with the right to stop or delay building through planning appeals. Anyway isnt your Mr Starmer agreeing with me ? Or have you given up on him ?
Yes he seems to be majoring on that. I think he'll deliver on it personally. Vested interests and inertia are formidable foes but he's a tough nut. Far more so than (eg) Blair. This time there won't be that 'oh god we've won' sense of light-headedness, it'll be all business from day one. I think Starmer pretty much is the PM already in his head. In a good way, I mean, not as in feeling complacent. He doesn't feel complacent he feels ready.
You are projecting so much, that that you are lighting up the clouds.
I'm just getting a bit tired of all this 'no enthusiasm for Starmer' and 'won't change anything' business. It's the people doing that who are projecting. They're projecting a 'seen it, done it, got the tee shirt' worldly wise cynicism that's actually imo a teeny bit sterile and self-regarding. Either that or they're sulked up Corbynites pissed off about that whole episode passing into history or they're True Blue Tories being churlish about the certainty of losing and so they're going to stop playing and take their ball home.
I don’t think there’s tremendous enthusiasm for Starmer but I don’t think there needs to be. Similarly I don’t think he’ll be overly radical, but maybe a change of personnel and some fresh impetus can put us on a better track for a bit.
He probably isn’t going to address all of the deep structural issues that the country faces at the moment, but he’s a damn sight better than the current shower, so yes he deserves a go.
I would like him to be a little bolder, because I think he has more political capital to spend then he realises, but I get that the Labour Party is scarred from losing so many elections.
The overwhelming need in government at this time is not 'change everything, 'radical ideas', 'New Britain' and all that stuff. We need: boring competence in state management, all the tax payer funded bits of society to work brilliantly well, as much truthfulness as we can stand, honesty about money and debt and deficits etc.
"I think I have found a genuine story in @NadineDorries's book, The Plot, out today. It concerns manoeuvrings to get the “right” person in to chair the supposedly independent media regulator, @ofcom (thread) (1/9 )
"Dorries describes a meeting in which @RobbieGibb , former comms director for Theresa May and a BBC director, tried to persuade her to appoint Lord Stephen Gilbert, “a party apparatchik” to chair Ofcom (2/9)
"Dorries thought Michael Grade was infinitely more qualified. But she was lobbied by past and present Number 10 operatives – including a “bullying” call from Douglas Smith – to back Gilbert, not Grade. (3/9)
"Dorries nevertheless wrote Johnson a note for his red box recommending Grade. She writes; “Astonishingly, during the night my advice note to the PM was changed in his red box and placed with one recommending Gilbert.” (4/9)
I'm going to go out on a limb here.
It isn't true.
Believing Dorries on any given point would be like uncritically accepting the views of David Irving. Very stupid and likely to have embarrassing results.
Even if they later prove to be true.
Not sure what Dorries means
1. Her memo was changed… that sounds like forgery 2. Her memo was moved and “placed” alongside one making a different recommendation… sounds sensible organisation 3. Her memo was removed and “REplaced” with one making a different recommendation… that’s life in the big leagues… the power to decide what goes in the box is important
BBC headline is that No 10 "disowns" Braverman's article. An article by the Home Secretary about the police. Apparently she did not make the changes that they had asked for. What is there left to discuss?
We can discuss how long it takes to sack her and how every day makes the prime minister seem so much weaker.
This is coming tonight. It must be a matter of them meeting, or something. Surely.
You think? I dunno.
If it happens, we're a step closer to a lesser known MP from Norfolk becoming leader of the Tory party (again....)
Highly doubt it, Braverman, Badenoch, Mordaunt, even Barclay are more likely to be next Conservative leader now than Truss
Syria's airports were apparently bombed by Israel preemptively at the beginning of this conflict, so from their perspective the ante has already been upped.
BBC headline is that No 10 "disowns" Braverman's article. An article by the Home Secretary about the police. Apparently she did not make the changes that they had asked for. What is there left to discuss?
We can discuss how long it takes to sack her and how every day makes the prime minister seem so much weaker.
This is coming tonight. It must be a matter of them meeting, or something. Surely.
You think? I dunno.
If it happens, we're a step closer to a lesser known MP from Norfolk becoming leader of the Tory party (again....)
Highly doubt it, Braverman, Badenoch, Mordaunt, even Barclay are more likely to be next Conservative leader now than Truss
Do you think Berry will be a candidate, and what are your thoughts if he tries?
I think this will be focused on more as the election gets nearer and it will start to show in the polls. Trump's numbers will slide as the idea of him back in the WH becomes less of a 'lol can you imagine!' hypothetical prospect and more of an 'am I truly up for that?' pressing actual question.
Were simply getting in to election nonsense. Mrs gaga is getting in on the act too.
But the dem media keep pumping Trump so I struggle to sympathise, they need him. However keeping him front of voters minds might be a stupid play.
He is a creature of the media. Right from The Apprentice. That beamed him into millions of homes primetime every week for years as this savvy no bullshit operator who could get things done. Fed into the 'businessman not a politician' shit that a certain sort of gullible pleb seems to lap up. It's a type of forelocking really although they fail to recognize that's what they're doing. The Apprentice was extremely important to his arc of assent imo. No Apprentice, no President Trump.
But anyway that's the point. To stop covering him as a reality tv star and instead start to calmly and repeatedly lay out the threat he poses, based on the record of what he's done and what he's said, hyperbole not required. Stop searching for balance and context, for equivalences with the other side (there aren't any), just do what he and his ilk on the populist right are always (mendaciously) claiming that they do - 'tell it like it is'.
How are they going to do that ? If they paint him as a demon it just plays to his victim narcissism. Likewise many of the claims made just are not true and the electorate can see that. He didnt kill democracy, he didnt crash the economy he didnt start world war 3 when he was President.
He is like a spoilt two years old and the best thing to do is ignore him. Having some credible policies might also help.
This is exactly the issue. He paints the media who call him out as partial and fake news and it just whips up his base even more.
There was an argument that the media should have been better at calling out his s**t when he was first running for president rather than the “both sides” equivalency but that time has long gone.
Really the only way to reduce his impact is to ignore him. Something media outlets are desperate to avoid because he actually generates a lot of drama for them. It’s a symbiotic relationship.
Ignoring him is the impossible dream sadly - he's the GOP frontrunner and the betting fav for next president. So it's about *how* he's covered.
Yes but theres no need to roll the turd in glitter, just make it mundane.
It could be we mean the same thing, I'm not sure. I doubt it because you are chilled about him coming back - thus by definition you don't see the prospect as being particularly dangerous or harmful. Beats me how anyone paying attention could feel that way but there you go, I accept that you see the same things as me, broadly speaking, and yet you do feel that way.
I dont want to see Trump or Biden as POTUS but currently thats not looking like an option. But I am more relaxed than you since most of the fear mongering is ridiculous and gives him credibility he shouldnt have. We have already seen what he's like in office, he huffs he puffs then goes off to a mirrot to ask who's the fairest of them all.
What if he gets nobbled, the GOP cant field a candidate in time and RFK beats Biden.
Would that be scarier ?
It's the opposite of ridiculous. It's based on what he's done and said in the past and what he's said and implied he'll do in the future. Take his 1st term and his behaviour since, then think about him back in the WH with even more ego, spite and grievance, pathology advanced, further gone in the head with narcissism, and with fewer constraints. Scary.
The guy has 91 criminal charges against him, plus the civil trials, fraud, racketeering, sexual assault, election denial, insurrection, I mean c'mon. He's a gangster. It's scary (and absurd) that he's even in the running to be president again let alone the short priced favourite. It's objectively very very scary.
Yet you say you're 'relaxed' about it and you don't want him 'or Biden' (as if they're in any way on the same level of undesirable). Utterly bewildering to me. So bewildering that I must reach for a brain chemistry explanation. I think you're trying to show how big and cool you are by not being scared of what is objectively scary. You see yourself as the Fonz of PB.
I think they already have them. Given that the USNavy has deployed two aircraft carrier groups USS MissileMagnet and USSMadeOfIronWhichSinks of the coast, this may be a concern.
If Braverman is ever elected Tory leader they're out of office for a generation, she's divisive in the very extreme sense, mostly hated publicly and highly toxic. "Cruella" is common parlance when she is referred to. They'd be mad... But then we've been here before all too many times, have we not...
@benatipsos So our latest data shows @SuellaBraverman is one of the most unpopular politicians in Britain. She may also be a future leader of the Conservatives.
I think this will be focused on more as the election gets nearer and it will start to show in the polls. Trump's numbers will slide as the idea of him back in the WH becomes less of a 'lol can you imagine!' hypothetical prospect and more of an 'am I truly up for that?' pressing actual question.
Were simply getting in to election nonsense. Mrs gaga is getting in on the act too.
But the dem media keep pumping Trump so I struggle to sympathise, they need him. However keeping him front of voters minds might be a stupid play.
He is a creature of the media. Right from The Apprentice. That beamed him into millions of homes primetime every week for years as this savvy no bullshit operator who could get things done. Fed into the 'businessman not a politician' shit that a certain sort of gullible pleb seems to lap up. It's a type of forelocking really although they fail to recognize that's what they're doing. The Apprentice was extremely important to his arc of assent imo. No Apprentice, no President Trump.
But anyway that's the point. To stop covering him as a reality tv star and instead start to calmly and repeatedly lay out the threat he poses, based on the record of what he's done and what he's said, hyperbole not required. Stop searching for balance and context, for equivalences with the other side (there aren't any), just do what he and his ilk on the populist right are always (mendaciously) claiming that they do - 'tell it like it is'.
How are they going to do that ? If they paint him as a demon it just plays to his victim narcissism. Likewise many of the claims made just are not true and the electorate can see that. He didnt kill democracy, he didnt crash the economy he didnt start world war 3 when he was President.
He is like a spoilt two years old and the best thing to do is ignore him. Having some credible policies might also help.
This is exactly the issue. He paints the media who call him out as partial and fake news and it just whips up his base even more.
There was an argument that the media should have been better at calling out his s**t when he was first running for president rather than the “both sides” equivalency but that time has long gone.
Really the only way to reduce his impact is to ignore him. Something media outlets are desperate to avoid because he actually generates a lot of drama for them. It’s a symbiotic relationship.
Ignoring him is the impossible dream sadly - he's the GOP frontrunner and the betting fav for next president. So it's about *how* he's covered.
Yes but theres no need to roll the turd in glitter, just make it mundane.
It could be we mean the same thing, I'm not sure. I doubt it because you are chilled about him coming back - thus by definition you don't see the prospect as being particularly dangerous or harmful. Beats me how anyone paying attention could feel that way but there you go, I accept that you see the same things as me, broadly speaking, and yet you do feel that way.
I dont want to see Trump or Biden as POTUS but currently thats not looking like an option. But I am more relaxed than you since most of the fear mongering is ridiculous and gives him credibility he shouldnt have. We have already seen what he's like in office, he huffs he puffs then goes off to a mirrot to ask who's the fairest of them all.
What if he gets nobbled, the GOP cant field a candidate in time and RFK beats Biden.
Would that be scarier ?
It's the opposite of ridiculous. It's based on what he's done and said in the past and what he's said and implied he'll do in the future. Take his 1st term and his behaviour since, then think about him back in the WH with even more ego, spite and grievance, pathology advanced, further gone in the head with narcissism, and with fewer constraints. Scary.
The guy has 91 criminal charges against him, plus the civil trials, fraud, racketeering, sexual assault, election denial, insurrection, I mean c'mon. He's a gangster. It's scary (and absurd) that he's even in the running to be president again let alone the short priced favourite. It's objectively very very scary.
Yet you say you're 'relaxed' about it and you don't want him 'or Biden' (as if they're in any way on the same level of undesirable). Utterly bewildering to me. So bewildering that I must reach for a brain chemistry explanation. I think you're trying to show how big and cool you are by not being scared of what is objectively scary. You see yourself as the Fonz of PB.
I think this will be focused on more as the election gets nearer and it will start to show in the polls. Trump's numbers will slide as the idea of him back in the WH becomes less of a 'lol can you imagine!' hypothetical prospect and more of an 'am I truly up for that?' pressing actual question.
Were simply getting in to election nonsense. Mrs gaga is getting in on the act too.
But the dem media keep pumping Trump so I struggle to sympathise, they need him. However keeping him front of voters minds might be a stupid play.
He is a creature of the media. Right from The Apprentice. That beamed him into millions of homes primetime every week for years as this savvy no bullshit operator who could get things done. Fed into the 'businessman not a politician' shit that a certain sort of gullible pleb seems to lap up. It's a type of forelocking really although they fail to recognize that's what they're doing. The Apprentice was extremely important to his arc of assent imo. No Apprentice, no President Trump.
But anyway that's the point. To stop covering him as a reality tv star and instead start to calmly and repeatedly lay out the threat he poses, based on the record of what he's done and what he's said, hyperbole not required. Stop searching for balance and context, for equivalences with the other side (there aren't any), just do what he and his ilk on the populist right are always (mendaciously) claiming that they do - 'tell it like it is'.
How are they going to do that ? If they paint him as a demon it just plays to his victim narcissism. Likewise many of the claims made just are not true and the electorate can see that. He didnt kill democracy, he didnt crash the economy he didnt start world war 3 when he was President.
He is like a spoilt two years old and the best thing to do is ignore him. Having some credible policies might also help.
This is exactly the issue. He paints the media who call him out as partial and fake news and it just whips up his base even more.
There was an argument that the media should have been better at calling out his s**t when he was first running for president rather than the “both sides” equivalency but that time has long gone.
Really the only way to reduce his impact is to ignore him. Something media outlets are desperate to avoid because he actually generates a lot of drama for them. It’s a symbiotic relationship.
Ignoring him is the impossible dream sadly - he's the GOP frontrunner and the betting fav for next president. So it's about *how* he's covered.
Yes but theres no need to roll the turd in glitter, just make it mundane.
It could be we mean the same thing, I'm not sure. I doubt it because you are chilled about him coming back - thus by definition you don't see the prospect as being particularly dangerous or harmful. Beats me how anyone paying attention could feel that way but there you go, I accept that you see the same things as me, broadly speaking, and yet you do feel that way.
I dont want to see Trump or Biden as POTUS but currently thats not looking like an option. But I am more relaxed than you since most of the fear mongering is ridiculous and gives him credibility he shouldnt have. We have already seen what he's like in office, he huffs he puffs then goes off to a mirrot to ask who's the fairest of them all.
What if he gets nobbled, the GOP cant field a candidate in time and RFK beats Biden.
Would that be scarier ?
Or what about President Trump after changing the constitution to run for a 3rd term, welcomes newly elected UK PM Suella Braverman to a state dinner at the White House, as they jointly promise a 'crusade against wokeism' as Thatcher and Reagan fought communism. Scarier still?
No because the best horror has a basis in reality. There is no way he would get 2/3 of Congress and 3/4 of the States to change the Constitution.
He could try an Oliver Cromwell and remove half of Congress and create a 'rump Congress' of loyalists and then replace half the state legislatures as well. Albeit he would need the army on board too as Cromwell had his New Model Army
I really, really, hate to think what your nightmares must be like!
Although on reflection Jeremy Corbyn winning a second term might do it. Although it wouldn’t be mine,TBH!
I think this will be focused on more as the election gets nearer and it will start to show in the polls. Trump's numbers will slide as the idea of him back in the WH becomes less of a 'lol can you imagine!' hypothetical prospect and more of an 'am I truly up for that?' pressing actual question.
Were simply getting in to election nonsense. Mrs gaga is getting in on the act too.
But the dem media keep pumping Trump so I struggle to sympathise, they need him. However keeping him front of voters minds might be a stupid play.
He is a creature of the media. Right from The Apprentice. That beamed him into millions of homes primetime every week for years as this savvy no bullshit operator who could get things done. Fed into the 'businessman not a politician' shit that a certain sort of gullible pleb seems to lap up. It's a type of forelocking really although they fail to recognize that's what they're doing. The Apprentice was extremely important to his arc of assent imo. No Apprentice, no President Trump.
But anyway that's the point. To stop covering him as a reality tv star and instead start to calmly and repeatedly lay out the threat he poses, based on the record of what he's done and what he's said, hyperbole not required. Stop searching for balance and context, for equivalences with the other side (there aren't any), just do what he and his ilk on the populist right are always (mendaciously) claiming that they do - 'tell it like it is'.
How are they going to do that ? If they paint him as a demon it just plays to his victim narcissism. Likewise many of the claims made just are not true and the electorate can see that. He didnt kill democracy, he didnt crash the economy he didnt start world war 3 when he was President.
He is like a spoilt two years old and the best thing to do is ignore him. Having some credible policies might also help.
This is exactly the issue. He paints the media who call him out as partial and fake news and it just whips up his base even more.
There was an argument that the media should have been better at calling out his s**t when he was first running for president rather than the “both sides” equivalency but that time has long gone.
Really the only way to reduce his impact is to ignore him. Something media outlets are desperate to avoid because he actually generates a lot of drama for them. It’s a symbiotic relationship.
Ignoring him is the impossible dream sadly - he's the GOP frontrunner and the betting fav for next president. So it's about *how* he's covered.
Yes but theres no need to roll the turd in glitter, just make it mundane.
It could be we mean the same thing, I'm not sure. I doubt it because you are chilled about him coming back - thus by definition you don't see the prospect as being particularly dangerous or harmful. Beats me how anyone paying attention could feel that way but there you go, I accept that you see the same things as me, broadly speaking, and yet you do feel that way.
I dont want to see Trump or Biden as POTUS but currently thats not looking like an option. But I am more relaxed than you since most of the fear mongering is ridiculous and gives him credibility he shouldnt have. We have already seen what he's like in office, he huffs he puffs then goes off to a mirrot to ask who's the fairest of them all.
What if he gets nobbled, the GOP cant field a candidate in time and RFK beats Biden.
Would that be scarier ?
It's the opposite of ridiculous. It's based on what he's done and said in the past and what he's said and implied he'll do in the future. Take his 1st term and his behaviour since, then think about him back in the WH with even more ego, spite and grievance, pathology advanced, further gone in the head with narcissism, and with fewer constraints. Scary.
The guy has 91 criminal charges against him, plus the civil trials, fraud, racketeering, sexual assault, election denial, insurrection, I mean c'mon. He's a gangster. It's scary (and absurd) that he's even in the running to be president again let alone the short priced favourite. It's objectively very very scary.
Yet you say you're 'relaxed' about it and you don't want him 'or Biden' (as if they're in any way on the same level of undesirable). Utterly bewildering to me. So bewildering that I must reach for a brain chemistry explanation. I think you're trying to show how big and cool you are by not being scared of what is objectively scary. You see yourself as the Fonz of PB.
Correct. Trump intimidates, bullies and corrupts. He does not recognise the law as anything other than an irritant and a weapon against others; the concept of justice has no meaning to him. Likewise, democracy.
His sole interests are promoting and enriching himself and his family, protecting them, and gaining vengeance against people he doesn't like.
As such, he views any means that will advance those ends as legitimate. The only thing preventing him from acting outside the norms of behaviour, or the law, come down to practicalities: can it be done? (other than a slightly odd squeamishness when it comes to violence - he talks that talk but recoils when confronted with the reality).
If he can rig the election, he will; if he can rig the Electoral College (and needs to), he will. If he can find a way to serve a third term, he will. If he can lock up his opponents, he will.
The trailer for "Masters of the Air" is out. It is the third in a series that started with the brilliant "Band of Brothers" and continued with the meh "The Pacific".
It does not look good. All CGI planes, the dialogue is awful, nobody is believable. Everybody talks in bad movie dialogue. Urgh.
If Braverman is ever elected Tory leader they're out of office for a generation, she's divisive in the very extreme sense, mostly hated publicly and highly toxic. "Cruella" is common parlance when she is referred to. They'd be mad... But then we've been here before all too many times, have we not...
I doubt she'd do a full run Parliamentary run as LOTO - A couple of years/local elections and the Conservative Parliamentary Party would remove like they did with IDS.
Syria's airports were apparently bombed by Israel preemptively at the beginning of this conflict, so from their perspective the ante has already been upped.
To be fair, everyone and their dog bombs Syria. There are US forces still in the country. Turkey has invaded a strip in the north. The Russians are carrying airstrikes (of forces opposed to Assad).
If Braverman is ever elected Tory leader they're out of office for a generation, she's divisive in the very extreme sense, mostly hated publicly and highly toxic. "Cruella" is common parlance when she is referred to. They'd be mad... But then we've been here before all too many times, have we not...
I doubt she'd do a full run Parliamentary run as LOTO - A couple of years/local elections and the Conservative Parliamentary Party would remove like they did with IDS.
Depends on the economy, if a Labour government is grappling with strikes, high inflation and high taxes and pushing wokeism too hard even a Tory party led by Braverman might get some poll leads
BBC headline is that No 10 "disowns" Braverman's article. An article by the Home Secretary about the police. Apparently she did not make the changes that they had asked for. What is there left to discuss?
We can discuss how long it takes to sack her and how every day makes the prime minister seem so much weaker.
This is coming tonight. It must be a matter of them meeting, or something. Surely.
You think? I dunno.
If it happens, we're a step closer to a lesser known MP from Norfolk becoming leader of the Tory party (again....)
Highly doubt it, Braverman, Badenoch, Mordaunt, even Barclay are more likely to be next Conservative leader now than Truss
Do you think Berry will be a candidate, and what are your thoughts if he tries?
BBC headline is that No 10 "disowns" Braverman's article. An article by the Home Secretary about the police. Apparently she did not make the changes that they had asked for. What is there left to discuss?
The question is, should she be sent to Rwanda or Albania?
South Shetlands, shirley?
Where she could experience for herself the joys of the rough camping lifestyle!
AND monitor Arctic cruise ships to ensure that unsavory foreigners do NOT smuggle themselves ashore.
Just seen a friend who is off to vote in the Hackney mayoral by-election that is on today. This is the most significant election, in terms of the powers won, between last May and next May. It's also a foregone conclusion, Labour win.
Will be interesting to see how well Zoe Garbett, the Green candidate and also Green candidate for London Mayor next year, does. She was second with 17% last time. I think she'll get over 20% on a low turnout.
Just you watch - a SLD surge brings me reluctantly to Westminster. Being an MP is all about drunken debauchery, yes?
If we have a competition to produce the most misleading graph, will you promise to publish the best one on your campaign literature?
Not selected yet. But sounds like a short list of one. I assume I will get a postal leaflet and thats likely it. And I will get to stand on a stage with David Duguid! Which is nice.
Best of luck. I did it 3 times. The first was fun - the first Liberal candidate since WW1. The others - not so much.
@benatipsos So our latest data shows @SuellaBraverman is one of the most unpopular politicians in Britain. She may also be a future leader of the Conservatives.
Syria's airports were apparently bombed by Israel preemptively at the beginning of this conflict, so from their perspective the ante has already been upped.
To be fair, everyone and their dog bombs Syria.
You know, I've been wondering what my pooch has been up to....
I think this will be focused on more as the election gets nearer and it will start to show in the polls. Trump's numbers will slide as the idea of him back in the WH becomes less of a 'lol can you imagine!' hypothetical prospect and more of an 'am I truly up for that?' pressing actual question.
Were simply getting in to election nonsense. Mrs gaga is getting in on the act too.
But the dem media keep pumping Trump so I struggle to sympathise, they need him. However keeping him front of voters minds might be a stupid play.
He is a creature of the media. Right from The Apprentice. That beamed him into millions of homes primetime every week for years as this savvy no bullshit operator who could get things done. Fed into the 'businessman not a politician' shit that a certain sort of gullible pleb seems to lap up. It's a type of forelocking really although they fail to recognize that's what they're doing. The Apprentice was extremely important to his arc of assent imo. No Apprentice, no President Trump.
But anyway that's the point. To stop covering him as a reality tv star and instead start to calmly and repeatedly lay out the threat he poses, based on the record of what he's done and what he's said, hyperbole not required. Stop searching for balance and context, for equivalences with the other side (there aren't any), just do what he and his ilk on the populist right are always (mendaciously) claiming that they do - 'tell it like it is'.
How are they going to do that ? If they paint him as a demon it just plays to his victim narcissism. Likewise many of the claims made just are not true and the electorate can see that. He didnt kill democracy, he didnt crash the economy he didnt start world war 3 when he was President.
He is like a spoilt two years old and the best thing to do is ignore him. Having some credible policies might also help.
This is exactly the issue. He paints the media who call him out as partial and fake news and it just whips up his base even more.
There was an argument that the media should have been better at calling out his s**t when he was first running for president rather than the “both sides” equivalency but that time has long gone.
Really the only way to reduce his impact is to ignore him. Something media outlets are desperate to avoid because he actually generates a lot of drama for them. It’s a symbiotic relationship.
Ignoring him is the impossible dream sadly - he's the GOP frontrunner and the betting fav for next president. So it's about *how* he's covered.
Yes but theres no need to roll the turd in glitter, just make it mundane.
It could be we mean the same thing, I'm not sure. I doubt it because you are chilled about him coming back - thus by definition you don't see the prospect as being particularly dangerous or harmful. Beats me how anyone paying attention could feel that way but there you go, I accept that you see the same things as me, broadly speaking, and yet you do feel that way.
I dont want to see Trump or Biden as POTUS but currently thats not looking like an option. But I am more relaxed than you since most of the fear mongering is ridiculous and gives him credibility he shouldnt have. We have already seen what he's like in office, he huffs he puffs then goes off to a mirrot to ask who's the fairest of them all.
What if he gets nobbled, the GOP cant field a candidate in time and RFK beats Biden.
Would that be scarier ?
It's the opposite of ridiculous. It's based on what he's done and said in the past and what he's said and implied he'll do in the future. Take his 1st term and his behaviour since, then think about him back in the WH with even more ego, spite and grievance, pathology advanced, further gone in the head with narcissism, and with fewer constraints. Scary.
The guy has 91 criminal charges against him, plus the civil trials, fraud, racketeering, sexual assault, election denial, insurrection, I mean c'mon. He's a gangster. It's scary (and absurd) that he's even in the running to be president again let alone the short priced favourite. It's objectively very very scary.
Yet you say you're 'relaxed' about it and you don't want him 'or Biden' (as if they're in any way on the same level of undesirable). Utterly bewildering to me. So bewildering that I must reach for a brain chemistry explanation. I think you're trying to show how big and cool you are by not being scared of what is objectively scary. You see yourself as the Fonz of PB.
Correct. Trump intimidates, bullies and corrupts. He does not recognise the law as anything other than an irritant and a weapon against others; the concept of justice has no meaning to him. Likewise, democracy.
His sole interests are promoting and enriching himself and his family, protecting them, and gaining vengeance against people he doesn't like.
As such, he views any means that will advance those ends as legitimate. The only thing preventing him from acting outside the norms of behaviour, or the law, come down to practicalities: can it be done? (other than a slightly odd squeamishness when it comes to violence - he talks that talk but recoils when confronted with the reality).
If he can rig the election, he will; if he can rig the Electoral College (and needs to), he will. If he can find a way to serve a third term, he will. If he can lock up his opponents, he will.
Totally agree. But I'm not sure he's that bothered about his family, to be honest.
Being ignorant of such things, I am genuinely astonished that a week's data roaming could cost £11k. How is that even possible? Are the Holyrood authorities, or whoever, just incompetent in negotiating the deal with the provider?
Any PB experts care to explain. Apols if this has aready been debated.
(BTW the bloke concerned is the minister in charge of the Scottish NHS.)
"A Scottish government minister racked up nearly £11,000 in roaming costs on his parliament iPad while in Morocco.Michael Matheson said he was using the device for constituency work, but had not switched over to the parliament's current mobile contract. Officials tried to challenge the bill, but the company declined to waive any of the charges."
BBC headline is that No 10 "disowns" Braverman's article. An article by the Home Secretary about the police. Apparently she did not make the changes that they had asked for. What is there left to discuss?
The question is, should she be sent to Rwanda or Albania?
South Shetlands, shirley?
Where she could experience for herself the joys of the rough camping lifestyle!
AND monitor Arctic cruise ships to ensure that unsavory foreigners do NOT smuggle themselves ashore.
Being ignorant of such things, I am genuinely astonished that a week's data roaming could cost £11k. How is that even possible? Are the Holyrood authorities, or whoever, just incompetent in negotiating the deal with the provider?
Any PB experts care to explain. Apols if this has aready been debated.
(BTW the bloke concerned is the minister in charge of the Scottish NHS.)
"A Scottish government minister racked up nearly £11,000 in roaming costs on his parliament iPad while in Morocco.Michael Matheson said he was using the device for constituency work, but had not switched over to the parliament's current mobile contract. Officials tried to challenge the bill, but the company declined to waive any of the charges."
If you've not got roaming on your account then data is very expensive.
If Braverman is ever elected Tory leader they're out of office for a generation, she's divisive in the very extreme sense, mostly hated publicly and highly toxic. "Cruella" is common parlance when she is referred to. They'd be mad... But then we've been here before all too many times, have we not...
I doubt she'd do a full run Parliamentary run as LOTO - A couple of years/local elections and the Conservative Parliamentary Party would remove like they did with IDS.
I don’t think we can predictably say that would be the case. I think the Tory Party and politics generally will be a very rocky, bumpy place with Braverman as LOTO. The big question is whether that comes at the expense of Labour or turns people against her. Events, as always.
Suella Braverman has “managed to offend everyone” in Northern Ireland’s divided society, politicians from the region said after the Home Secretary appeared to compare the Orange Order to Hamas.
A number of Northern Irish politicians called on Rishi Sunak to sack Mrs Braverman after she said pro-Palestinian “hate marches” were “disturbingly reminiscent of Ulster”.
“She has managed to offend just about everyone – no mean feat in a divided society,“ said Colum Eastwood, the MP for Foyle and the leader of the nationalist SDLP, who called her a “pound shop Enoch Powell”.
“The only appropriate action now is her removal from office,” he said, accusing the Home Secretary of “ignorance of the complex history and traditions of marching and protest in Northern Ireland”.
Mrs Braverman wrote in The Times that the pro-Palestinian marches were “an assertion of primacy by certain groups – particularly Islamists – of the kind we are more used to seeing in Northern Ireland.
“Also disturbingly reminiscent of Ulster are the reports that some of Saturday’s march group organisers have links to terrorist groups, including Hamas.”
The comments sparked anger in Northern Ireland, where most marches are organised by Protestant groups such as the Orange Order, which is unionist, pro-Israel and pro-Brexit. The Orange Order is closely linked to unionist parties such as the DUP, which is often allied with the Conservative party.
Everyone's favourite education expert, Dominic Cummings, follows Liz Truss, Rishi Sunak and Carol Vorderman (cancelled) in opining on maths teaching.
Interesting that he looks to Russia, which long ago established the best maths teaching in the world by asking mathematicians what should be taught and psychologists how best to teach it. Pisa-topping Singapore followed the Russians.
Suella Braverman has “managed to offend everyone” in Northern Ireland’s divided society, politicians from the region said after the Home Secretary appeared to compare the Orange Order to Hamas.
A number of Northern Irish politicians called on Rishi Sunak to sack Mrs Braverman after she said pro-Palestinian “hate marches” were “disturbingly reminiscent of Ulster”.
“She has managed to offend just about everyone – no mean feat in a divided society,“ said Colum Eastwood, the MP for Foyle and the leader of the nationalist SDLP, who called her a “pound shop Enoch Powell”.
“The only appropriate action now is her removal from office,” he said, accusing the Home Secretary of “ignorance of the complex history and traditions of marching and protest in Northern Ireland”.
Mrs Braverman wrote in The Times that the pro-Palestinian marches were “an assertion of primacy by certain groups – particularly Islamists – of the kind we are more used to seeing in Northern Ireland.
“Also disturbingly reminiscent of Ulster are the reports that some of Saturday’s march group organisers have links to terrorist groups, including Hamas.”
The comments sparked anger in Northern Ireland, where most marches are organised by Protestant groups such as the Orange Order, which is unionist, pro-Israel and pro-Brexit. The Orange Order is closely linked to unionist parties such as the DUP, which is often allied with the Conservative party.
Suella Braverman has “managed to offend everyone” in Northern Ireland’s divided society, politicians from the region said after the Home Secretary appeared to compare the Orange Order to Hamas.
A number of Northern Irish politicians called on Rishi Sunak to sack Mrs Braverman after she said pro-Palestinian “hate marches” were “disturbingly reminiscent of Ulster”.
“She has managed to offend just about everyone – no mean feat in a divided society,“ said Colum Eastwood, the MP for Foyle and the leader of the nationalist SDLP, who called her a “pound shop Enoch Powell”.
“The only appropriate action now is her removal from office,” he said, accusing the Home Secretary of “ignorance of the complex history and traditions of marching and protest in Northern Ireland”.
Mrs Braverman wrote in The Times that the pro-Palestinian marches were “an assertion of primacy by certain groups – particularly Islamists – of the kind we are more used to seeing in Northern Ireland.
“Also disturbingly reminiscent of Ulster are the reports that some of Saturday’s march group organisers have links to terrorist groups, including Hamas.”
The comments sparked anger in Northern Ireland, where most marches are organised by Protestant groups such as the Orange Order, which is unionist, pro-Israel and pro-Brexit. The Orange Order is closely linked to unionist parties such as the DUP, which is often allied with the Conservative party.
Good for Rolls Royce in that it is now the only player here. Bad in that the challenges facing NuScale will also affect them.
I can guarantee you that if they ever happen they will be 1. massively late and 2. massively over projected cost
Throw in that they will likely have considerable teething problems and that about 600 MPs will fight vehemenetly against one being put in their constituency....
If Braverman is ever elected Tory leader they're out of office for a generation, she's divisive in the very extreme sense, mostly hated publicly and highly toxic. "Cruella" is common parlance when she is referred to. They'd be mad... But then we've been here before all too many times, have we not...
I doubt she'd do a full run Parliamentary run as LOTO - A couple of years/local elections and the Conservative Parliamentary Party would remove like they did with IDS.
Depends on the economy, if a Labour government is grappling with strikes, high inflation and high taxes and pushing wokeism too hard even a Tory party led by Braverman might get some poll leads
Lol, fantasy stuff from HYUFD.
What counts as 'pushing wokism too hard' I wonder? Refusing to reintroduce capital punishment?
BREAK💥: Chair of the Commons Justice Committee and Conservative MP Sir Bob Neil tells @AndrewMarr9 that Suella Braverman's position as Home Secretary is untenable: "I think she's gone over the line...it's part of a history of ill judgement and loose words"
If Braverman is ever elected Tory leader they're out of office for a generation, she's divisive in the very extreme sense, mostly hated publicly and highly toxic. "Cruella" is common parlance when she is referred to. They'd be mad... But then we've been here before all too many times, have we not...
I doubt she'd do a full run Parliamentary run as LOTO - A couple of years/local elections and the Conservative Parliamentary Party would remove like they did with IDS.
Depends on the economy, if a Labour government is grappling with strikes, high inflation and high taxes and pushing wokeism too hard even a Tory party led by Braverman might get some poll leads
Lol, fantasy stuff from HYUFD.
What counts as 'pushing wokism too hard' I wonder? Refusing to reintroduce capital punishment?
To be fair, it’s not necessarily fanciful stuff. Even Hague got poll leads against Blair at the time of the fuel crisis. I have my doubts “pushing wokeism too far” would be the catalyst, but no reason to suggest that there couldn’t be a reversal of fortunes.
One pretty big frustration among senior Conservatives is that she has knocked the focus off the pressure Keir Starmer has been facing over his position on Gaza, including story this morning that one of his former staffers is organising protest.
Being ignorant of such things, I am genuinely astonished that a week's data roaming could cost £11k. How is that even possible? Are the Holyrood authorities, or whoever, just incompetent in negotiating the deal with the provider?
Any PB experts care to explain. Apols if this has aready been debated.
(BTW the bloke concerned is the minister in charge of the Scottish NHS.)
"A Scottish government minister racked up nearly £11,000 in roaming costs on his parliament iPad while in Morocco.Michael Matheson said he was using the device for constituency work, but had not switched over to the parliament's current mobile contract. Officials tried to challenge the bill, but the company declined to waive any of the charges."
If you've not got roaming on your account then data is very expensive.
This can be called another Brexit dividend.
I don't think any network had free or even cheap roaming to Morocco. For example, data is £6 per Mb with Three:
Morocco, of course, did apply to join the EU, but as a rules-based organization, all criteria were looked at diligently, and they were considered too brown:
"In 1987, Morocco applied to join the European Communities (the precursor to the European Union). The application was rejected on the grounds that Morocco was not considered to be a "European country" and hence could not join.
In 2004, Cyprus joined the European Union despite being geographically located in West Asia."
Good for Rolls Royce in that it is now the only player here. Bad in that the challenges facing NuScale will also affect them.
I can guarantee you that if they ever happen they will be 1. massively late and 2. massively over projected cost
Throw in that they will likely have considerable teething problems and that about 600 MPs will fight vehemenetly against one being put in their constituency....
BBC headline is that No 10 "disowns" Braverman's article. An article by the Home Secretary about the police. Apparently she did not make the changes that they had asked for. What is there left to discuss?
The question is, should she be sent to Rwanda or Albania?
South Shetlands, shirley?
Where she could experience for herself the joys of the rough camping lifestyle!
AND monitor Arctic cruise ships to ensure that unsavory foreigners do NOT smuggle themselves ashore.
South Shetlands? Arctic???
The World Turned Upside Down
There are penguins in the northern hemisphere - by just a few miles, on Galapogos. As I can testify.
Good for Rolls Royce in that it is now the only player here. Bad in that the challenges facing NuScale will also affect them.
I can guarantee you that if they ever happen they will be 1. massively late and 2. massively over projected cost
Throw in that they will likely have considerable teething problems and that about 600 MPs will fight vehemenetly against one being put in their constituency....
and thats the problem everyone wants to stop everything. Fancy tidal energy ? No you cant have it.
Being ignorant of such things, I am genuinely astonished that a week's data roaming could cost £11k. How is that even possible? Are the Holyrood authorities, or whoever, just incompetent in negotiating the deal with the provider?
Any PB experts care to explain. Apols if this has aready been debated.
(BTW the bloke concerned is the minister in charge of the Scottish NHS.)
"A Scottish government minister racked up nearly £11,000 in roaming costs on his parliament iPad while in Morocco.Michael Matheson said he was using the device for constituency work, but had not switched over to the parliament's current mobile contract. Officials tried to challenge the bill, but the company declined to waive any of the charges."
If you've not got roaming on your account then data is very expensive.
This can be called another Brexit dividend.
I don't think any network had free or even cheap roaming to Morocco. For example, data is £6 per Mb with Three:
Morocco, of course, did apply to join the EU, but as a rules-based organization, all criteria were looked at diligently, and they were considered too brown:
"In 1987, Morocco applied to join the European Communities (the precursor to the European Union). The application was rejected on the grounds that Morocco was not considered to be a "European country" and hence could not join.
In 2004, Cyprus joined the European Union despite being geographically located in West Asia."
Morocco is also ruled by King Mohammed VI: it's not really a democracy in any meaningful sense of the word.
Good for Rolls Royce in that it is now the only player here. Bad in that the challenges facing NuScale will also affect them.
I can guarantee you that if they ever happen they will be 1. massively late and 2. massively over projected cost
Throw in that they will likely have considerable teething problems and that about 600 MPs will fight vehemenetly against one being put in their constituency....
50 locations would be plenty surely?
They will probaably be based in just a handful of exisiting nuclear sites.
Being ignorant of such things, I am genuinely astonished that a week's data roaming could cost £11k. How is that even possible? Are the Holyrood authorities, or whoever, just incompetent in negotiating the deal with the provider?
Any PB experts care to explain. Apols if this has aready been debated.
(BTW the bloke concerned is the minister in charge of the Scottish NHS.)
"A Scottish government minister racked up nearly £11,000 in roaming costs on his parliament iPad while in Morocco.Michael Matheson said he was using the device for constituency work, but had not switched over to the parliament's current mobile contract. Officials tried to challenge the bill, but the company declined to waive any of the charges."
He obviously ought to pay it all himself, not rely on taxpayers.
United States. Following the surprising good performance by Democrats on Tuesday, last nights Republican nomination debate was interesting. CNN have a panel of 12 from Iowa all Republicans, who are observing each debate:- Question 1 who won last night 8 said Haley, Question 2 how many of you would be voting for Trump in the Iowa Caucus, get ready for this just 2. Big turnarounds from their stance following the two previous debates. Will Trump get the nomination, will he have enough support to even challenge at the Convention?.
Being ignorant of such things, I am genuinely astonished that a week's data roaming could cost £11k. How is that even possible? Are the Holyrood authorities, or whoever, just incompetent in negotiating the deal with the provider?
Any PB experts care to explain. Apols if this has aready been debated.
(BTW the bloke concerned is the minister in charge of the Scottish NHS.)
"A Scottish government minister racked up nearly £11,000 in roaming costs on his parliament iPad while in Morocco.Michael Matheson said he was using the device for constituency work, but had not switched over to the parliament's current mobile contract. Officials tried to challenge the bill, but the company declined to waive any of the charges."
If you've not got roaming on your account then data is very expensive.
This can be called another Brexit dividend.
I don't think any network had free or even cheap roaming to Morocco. For example, data is £6 per Mb with Three:
Morocco, of course, did apply to join the EU, but as a rules-based organization, all criteria were looked at diligently, and they were considered too brown:
"In 1987, Morocco applied to join the European Communities (the precursor to the European Union). The application was rejected on the grounds that Morocco was not considered to be a "European country" and hence could not join.
In 2004, Cyprus joined the European Union despite being geographically located in West Asia."
Morocco is also ruled by King Mohammed VI: it's not really a democracy in any meaningful sense of the word.
Being ignorant of such things, I am genuinely astonished that a week's data roaming could cost £11k. How is that even possible? Are the Holyrood authorities, or whoever, just incompetent in negotiating the deal with the provider?
Any PB experts care to explain. Apols if this has aready been debated.
(BTW the bloke concerned is the minister in charge of the Scottish NHS.)
"A Scottish government minister racked up nearly £11,000 in roaming costs on his parliament iPad while in Morocco.Michael Matheson said he was using the device for constituency work, but had not switched over to the parliament's current mobile contract. Officials tried to challenge the bill, but the company declined to waive any of the charges."
If you've not got roaming on your account then data is very expensive.
This can be called another Brexit dividend.
I don't think any network had free or even cheap roaming to Morocco. For example, data is £6 per Mb with Three:
Morocco, of course, did apply to join the EU, but as a rules-based organization, all criteria were looked at diligently, and they were considered too brown:
"In 1987, Morocco applied to join the European Communities (the precursor to the European Union). The application was rejected on the grounds that Morocco was not considered to be a "European country" and hence could not join.
In 2004, Cyprus joined the European Union despite being geographically located in West Asia."
Morocco is also ruled by King Mohammed VI: it's not really a democracy in any meaningful sense of the word.
BBC headline is that No 10 "disowns" Braverman's article. An article by the Home Secretary about the police. Apparently she did not make the changes that they had asked for. What is there left to discuss?
The question is, should she be sent to Rwanda or Albania?
I hear Gaza's nice this time of year...
Wouldn't he turn up at her house with a four pack and a couple of fishing rods?
Being ignorant of such things, I am genuinely astonished that a week's data roaming could cost £11k. How is that even possible? Are the Holyrood authorities, or whoever, just incompetent in negotiating the deal with the provider?
Any PB experts care to explain. Apols if this has aready been debated.
(BTW the bloke concerned is the minister in charge of the Scottish NHS.)
"A Scottish government minister racked up nearly £11,000 in roaming costs on his parliament iPad while in Morocco.Michael Matheson said he was using the device for constituency work, but had not switched over to the parliament's current mobile contract. Officials tried to challenge the bill, but the company declined to waive any of the charges."
He obviously ought to pay it all himself, not rely on taxpayers.
Well, there are a couple of questions here: was it a work iPad, used for work purposes, was he in Morocco for work, and did he have a reasonable belief that roaming in Morocco was covered?
Or, was he on vacation in Morocco, using a work iPad to stream movies, and not giving a shit about cost as he wasn't paying?
I have some sympathy in the first case, but none at all in the second.
Separately: Google Fi is Google's mobile carrier and it is AMAZING. They have a plan with (almost) unlimited worldwide roaming (including Morocco) for about $65 (£50) /month. Not cheap, sure, but if you travel a lot, then it will save you an absolute fortune.
I think this will be focused on more as the election gets nearer and it will start to show in the polls. Trump's numbers will slide as the idea of him back in the WH becomes less of a 'lol can you imagine!' hypothetical prospect and more of an 'am I truly up for that?' pressing actual question.
Were simply getting in to election nonsense. Mrs gaga is getting in on the act too.
But the dem media keep pumping Trump so I struggle to sympathise, they need him. However keeping him front of voters minds might be a stupid play.
He is a creature of the media. Right from The Apprentice. That beamed him into millions of homes primetime every week for years as this savvy no bullshit operator who could get things done. Fed into the 'businessman not a politician' shit that a certain sort of gullible pleb seems to lap up. It's a type of forelocking really although they fail to recognize that's what they're doing. The Apprentice was extremely important to his arc of assent imo. No Apprentice, no President Trump.
But anyway that's the point. To stop covering him as a reality tv star and instead start to calmly and repeatedly lay out the threat he poses, based on the record of what he's done and what he's said, hyperbole not required. Stop searching for balance and context, for equivalences with the other side (there aren't any), just do what he and his ilk on the populist right are always (mendaciously) claiming that they do - 'tell it like it is'.
How are they going to do that ? If they paint him as a demon it just plays to his victim narcissism. Likewise many of the claims made just are not true and the electorate can see that. He didnt kill democracy, he didnt crash the economy he didnt start world war 3 when he was President.
He is like a spoilt two years old and the best thing to do is ignore him. Having some credible policies might also help.
This is exactly the issue. He paints the media who call him out as partial and fake news and it just whips up his base even more.
There was an argument that the media should have been better at calling out his s**t when he was first running for president rather than the “both sides” equivalency but that time has long gone.
Really the only way to reduce his impact is to ignore him. Something media outlets are desperate to avoid because he actually generates a lot of drama for them. It’s a symbiotic relationship.
Ignoring him is the impossible dream sadly - he's the GOP frontrunner and the betting fav for next president. So it's about *how* he's covered.
Yes but theres no need to roll the turd in glitter, just make it mundane.
It could be we mean the same thing, I'm not sure. I doubt it because you are chilled about him coming back - thus by definition you don't see the prospect as being particularly dangerous or harmful. Beats me how anyone paying attention could feel that way but there you go, I accept that you see the same things as me, broadly speaking, and yet you do feel that way.
I dont want to see Trump or Biden as POTUS but currently thats not looking like an option. But I am more relaxed than you since most of the fear mongering is ridiculous and gives him credibility he shouldnt have. We have already seen what he's like in office, he huffs he puffs then goes off to a mirrot to ask who's the fairest of them all.
What if he gets nobbled, the GOP cant field a candidate in time and RFK beats Biden.
Would that be scarier ?
It's the opposite of ridiculous. It's based on what he's done and said in the past and what he's said and implied he'll do in the future. Take his 1st term and his behaviour since, then think about him back in the WH with even more ego, spite and grievance, pathology advanced, further gone in the head with narcissism, and with fewer constraints. Scary.
The guy has 91 criminal charges against him, plus the civil trials, fraud, racketeering, sexual assault, election denial, insurrection, I mean c'mon. He's a gangster. It's scary (and absurd) that he's even in the running to be president again let alone the short priced favourite. It's objectively very very scary.
Yet you say you're 'relaxed' about it and you don't want him 'or Biden' (as if they're in any way on the same level of undesirable). Utterly bewildering to me. So bewildering that I must reach for a brain chemistry explanation. I think you're trying to show how big and cool you are by not being scared of what is objectively scary. You see yourself as the Fonz of PB.
Have a lie down
Ok and you wake up. We can maybe meet in the middle.
Maybe it is all a dream, and Bozo will emerge from the shower?
Sunak won't sack Braverman until Monday if he has any sense; if he sacked her tomorrow and the Remembrance ceremony is disrupted she'll be telling everyone she is vindicated.
I think this will be focused on more as the election gets nearer and it will start to show in the polls. Trump's numbers will slide as the idea of him back in the WH becomes less of a 'lol can you imagine!' hypothetical prospect and more of an 'am I truly up for that?' pressing actual question.
Were simply getting in to election nonsense. Mrs gaga is getting in on the act too.
But the dem media keep pumping Trump so I struggle to sympathise, they need him. However keeping him front of voters minds might be a stupid play.
He is a creature of the media. Right from The Apprentice. That beamed him into millions of homes primetime every week for years as this savvy no bullshit operator who could get things done. Fed into the 'businessman not a politician' shit that a certain sort of gullible pleb seems to lap up. It's a type of forelocking really although they fail to recognize that's what they're doing. The Apprentice was extremely important to his arc of assent imo. No Apprentice, no President Trump.
But anyway that's the point. To stop covering him as a reality tv star and instead start to calmly and repeatedly lay out the threat he poses, based on the record of what he's done and what he's said, hyperbole not required. Stop searching for balance and context, for equivalences with the other side (there aren't any), just do what he and his ilk on the populist right are always (mendaciously) claiming that they do - 'tell it like it is'.
How are they going to do that ? If they paint him as a demon it just plays to his victim narcissism. Likewise many of the claims made just are not true and the electorate can see that. He didnt kill democracy, he didnt crash the economy he didnt start world war 3 when he was President.
He is like a spoilt two years old and the best thing to do is ignore him. Having some credible policies might also help.
This is exactly the issue. He paints the media who call him out as partial and fake news and it just whips up his base even more.
There was an argument that the media should have been better at calling out his s**t when he was first running for president rather than the “both sides” equivalency but that time has long gone.
Really the only way to reduce his impact is to ignore him. Something media outlets are desperate to avoid because he actually generates a lot of drama for them. It’s a symbiotic relationship.
Ignoring him is the impossible dream sadly - he's the GOP frontrunner and the betting fav for next president. So it's about *how* he's covered.
Yes but theres no need to roll the turd in glitter, just make it mundane.
It could be we mean the same thing, I'm not sure. I doubt it because you are chilled about him coming back - thus by definition you don't see the prospect as being particularly dangerous or harmful. Beats me how anyone paying attention could feel that way but there you go, I accept that you see the same things as me, broadly speaking, and yet you do feel that way.
I dont want to see Trump or Biden as POTUS but currently thats not looking like an option. But I am more relaxed than you since most of the fear mongering is ridiculous and gives him credibility he shouldnt have. We have already seen what he's like in office, he huffs he puffs then goes off to a mirrot to ask who's the fairest of them all.
What if he gets nobbled, the GOP cant field a candidate in time and RFK beats Biden.
Would that be scarier ?
It's the opposite of ridiculous. It's based on what he's done and said in the past and what he's said and implied he'll do in the future. Take his 1st term and his behaviour since, then think about him back in the WH with even more ego, spite and grievance, pathology advanced, further gone in the head with narcissism, and with fewer constraints. Scary.
The guy has 91 criminal charges against him, plus the civil trials, fraud, racketeering, sexual assault, election denial, insurrection, I mean c'mon. He's a gangster. It's scary (and absurd) that he's even in the running to be president again let alone the short priced favourite. It's objectively very very scary.
Yet you say you're 'relaxed' about it and you don't want him 'or Biden' (as if they're in any way on the same level of undesirable). Utterly bewildering to me. So bewildering that I must reach for a brain chemistry explanation. I think you're trying to show how big and cool you are by not being scared of what is objectively scary. You see yourself as the Fonz of PB.
Have a lie down
Ok and you wake up. We can maybe meet in the middle.
United States. Following the surprising good performance by Democrats on Tuesday, last nights Republican nomination debate was interesting. CNN have a panel of 12 from Iowa all Republicans, who are observing each debate:- Question 1 who won last night 8 said Haley, Question 2 how many of you would be voting for Trump in the Iowa Caucus, get ready for this just 2. Big turnarounds from their stance following the two previous debates. Will Trump get the nomination, will he have enough support to even challenge at the Convention?.
OMG it would be funny if his challenge evaporates.
United States. Following the surprising good performance by Democrats on Tuesday, last nights Republican nomination debate was interesting. CNN have a panel of 12 from Iowa all Republicans, who are observing each debate:- Question 1 who won last night 8 said Haley, Question 2 how many of you would be voting for Trump in the Iowa Caucus, get ready for this just 2. Big turnarounds from their stance following the two previous debates. Will Trump get the nomination, will he have enough support to even challenge at the Convention?.
OMG it would be funny if his challenge evaporates.
Bliss. Then Biden would call it quits and the US might get two decent candidates.
Being ignorant of such things, I am genuinely astonished that a week's data roaming could cost £11k. How is that even possible? Are the Holyrood authorities, or whoever, just incompetent in negotiating the deal with the provider?
Any PB experts care to explain. Apols if this has aready been debated.
(BTW the bloke concerned is the minister in charge of the Scottish NHS.)
"A Scottish government minister racked up nearly £11,000 in roaming costs on his parliament iPad while in Morocco.Michael Matheson said he was using the device for constituency work, but had not switched over to the parliament's current mobile contract. Officials tried to challenge the bill, but the company declined to waive any of the charges."
He obviously ought to pay it all himself, not rely on taxpayers.
Well, there are a couple of questions here: was it a work iPad, used for work purposes, was he in Morocco for work, and did he have a reasonable belief that roaming in Morocco was covered?
Or, was he on vacation in Morocco, using a work iPad to stream movies, and not giving a shit about cost as he wasn't paying?
I have some sympathy in the first case, but none at all in the second.
Separately: Google Fi is Google's mobile carrier and it is AMAZING. They have a plan with (almost) unlimited worldwide roaming (including Morocco) for about $65 (£50) /month. Not cheap, sure, but if you travel a lot, then it will save you an absolute fortune.
Or just an eSIM for the stay.
I had an unlimited data eSIM in Korea for around £60 for a month. I don't think unlimited packages are available in Morocco, but there are several alternatives with decent amounts of data.
Always check if your data roaming is off when abroad unless you actually want it.
United States. Following the surprising good performance by Democrats on Tuesday, last nights Republican nomination debate was interesting. CNN have a panel of 12 from Iowa all Republicans, who are observing each debate:- Question 1 who won last night 8 said Haley, Question 2 how many of you would be voting for Trump in the Iowa Caucus, get ready for this just 2. Big turnarounds from their stance following the two previous debates. Will Trump get the nomination, will he have enough support to even challenge at the Convention?.
I have some doubts about relying on a panel who watched the debate - because Trump wasn’t there, and therefore their minds would have been focussed on who attended the debate.
A lot of GOP primary voters won’t have tuned in.
That said, Haley continues to impress, and it feels a little more solid than the usual primary “flash in the pan” moment. Still deservedly long odds, but there could be something there.
Just you watch - a SLD surge brings me reluctantly to Westminster. Being an MP is all about drunken debauchery, yes?
If we have a competition to produce the most misleading graph, will you promise to publish the best one on your campaign literature?
Not selected yet. But sounds like a short list of one. I assume I will get a postal leaflet and thats likely it. And I will get to stand on a stage with David Duguid! Which is nice.
David has been selected to stand in the new Aberdeenshire North and Moray East seat.
Good for Rolls Royce in that it is now the only player here. Bad in that the challenges facing NuScale will also affect them.
I can guarantee you that if they ever happen they will be 1. massively late and 2. massively over projected cost
Throw in that they will likely have considerable teething problems and that about 600 MPs will fight vehemenetly against one being put in their constituency....
50 locations would be plenty surely?
They will probaably be based in just a handful of exisiting nuclear sites.
They might start with four or five at the proposed Cumbria renewables cluster ? They were proposing to build a liquid air power storage plant - which is much more efficient if run alongside a thermal plant so the 'waste' heat from that can do useful work.
Just you watch - a SLD surge brings me reluctantly to Westminster. Being an MP is all about drunken debauchery, yes?
If we have a competition to produce the most misleading graph, will you promise to publish the best one on your campaign literature?
Not selected yet. But sounds like a short list of one. I assume I will get a postal leaflet and thats likely it. And I will get to stand on a stage with David Duguid! Which is nice.
David has been selected to stand in the new Aberdeenshire North and Moray East seat.
🚨#BREAKING: Spanish lawmaker Alejo Vidal Quadras, who was shot in the face by terrorists in Madrid today, has told police that he suspects the regime of IRAN tried to assassinate him
#AlejoVidalQuadras is a vocal opponent of EU APPEASEMENT of the regime
Does Braverman know that if she gets sacked then she has enough lickspittles to put the letters in and force a confidence ballot on Rishi Rich?
She's playing shit-or-bust.
If she initiated a 2024 leadership contest the polling figures would plummet and we'd be realistically be looking at Kim Campbell II. The public already think that the Conservative Party is rubbish: no need to further confirm it.
Nothingburger, or could Trump's incompetent lawyers have just blown the election fur him ?
Some unexpected drama in the Michigan Court of Claims, where Judge Redford just called a 15-minute recess after suggesting former President Donald Trump's campaign did not follow court rules to file a "verified complaint" in his lawsuit seeking to ensure 2024 ballot access. https://twitter.com/jonathanoosting/status/1722677917531201680
Just mull that over. 16%. Less than Mr Sunak, less than the Con Pty.
I am no fan of this manifestation of the Conservative Party. There is all the Con with very little genuine conservatism. However, on this I am giving you PB rightwingers really good advice.
Suella is a dead end. If she led the Opposition it would be very good news for Starmer and Farage. Very bad news for you.
Maybe it is all a dream, and Bozo will emerge from the shower?
Sunak won't sack Braverman until Monday if he has any sense; if he sacked her tomorrow and the Remembrance ceremony is disrupted she'll be telling everyone she is vindicated.
And over the weekend, how many more reasons will he be able to think of for leaving it a bit longer?
Comments
1. Her memo was changed… that sounds like forgery
2. Her memo was moved and “placed” alongside one making a different recommendation… sounds sensible organisation
3. Her memo was removed and “REplaced” with one making a different recommendation… that’s life in the big leagues… the power to decide what goes in the box is important
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2023/11/09/bashar-al-assad-gives-anti-ship-missiles-hezbollah/
Shell sue Greenpeace.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/11/09/shell-sues-greenpeace-17m-wael-sawan-oil-gas/
The guy has 91 criminal charges against him, plus the civil trials, fraud, racketeering, sexual assault, election denial, insurrection, I mean c'mon. He's a gangster. It's scary (and absurd) that he's even in the running to be president again let alone the short priced favourite. It's objectively very very scary.
Yet you say you're 'relaxed' about it and you don't want him 'or Biden' (as if they're in any way on the same level of undesirable). Utterly bewildering to me. So bewildering that I must reach for a brain chemistry explanation. I think you're trying to show how big and cool you are by not being scared of what is objectively scary. You see yourself as the Fonz of PB.
So our latest data shows @SuellaBraverman is one of the most unpopular politicians in Britain. She may also be a future leader of the Conservatives.
https://x.com/benatipsos/status/1722667053356584983?s=20
Although on reflection Jeremy Corbyn winning a second term might do it.
Although it wouldn’t be mine,TBH!
Hope they win.
His sole interests are promoting and enriching himself and his family, protecting them, and gaining vengeance against people he doesn't like.
As such, he views any means that will advance those ends as legitimate. The only thing preventing him from acting outside the norms of behaviour, or the law, come down to practicalities: can it be done? (other than a slightly odd squeamishness when it comes to violence - he talks that talk but recoils when confronted with the reality).
If he can rig the election, he will; if he can rig the Electoral College (and needs to), he will. If he can find a way to serve a third term, he will. If he can lock up his opponents, he will.
It does not look good. All CGI planes, the dialogue is awful, nobody is believable. Everybody talks in bad movie dialogue. Urgh.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2RWohylGm3c
Will be interesting to see how well Zoe Garbett, the Green candidate and also Green candidate for London Mayor next year, does. She was second with 17% last time. I think she'll get over 20% on a low turnout.
Good for Rolls Royce in that it is now the only player here. Bad in that the challenges facing NuScale will also affect them.
Any PB experts care to explain. Apols if this has aready been debated.
(BTW the bloke concerned is the minister in charge of the Scottish NHS.)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-67363645
"A Scottish government minister racked up nearly £11,000 in roaming costs on his parliament iPad while in Morocco.Michael Matheson said he was using the device for constituency work, but had not switched over to the parliament's current mobile contract. Officials tried to challenge the bill, but the company declined to waive any of the charges."
It's crazy to think that if Bill Clinton (who won the Presidential election 31 years ago were able to stand, he would be the youth candidate.
This can be called another Brexit dividend.
A number of Northern Irish politicians called on Rishi Sunak to sack Mrs Braverman after she said pro-Palestinian “hate marches” were “disturbingly reminiscent of Ulster”.
“She has managed to offend just about everyone – no mean feat in a divided society,“ said Colum Eastwood, the MP for Foyle and the leader of the nationalist SDLP, who called her a “pound shop Enoch Powell”.
“The only appropriate action now is her removal from office,” he said, accusing the Home Secretary of “ignorance of the complex history and traditions of marching and protest in Northern Ireland”.
Mrs Braverman wrote in The Times that the pro-Palestinian marches were “an assertion of primacy by certain groups – particularly Islamists – of the kind we are more used to seeing in Northern Ireland.
“Also disturbingly reminiscent of Ulster are the reports that some of Saturday’s march group organisers have links to terrorist groups, including Hamas.”
The comments sparked anger in Northern Ireland, where most marches are organised by Protestant groups such as the Orange Order, which is unionist, pro-Israel and pro-Brexit. The Orange Order is closely linked to unionist parties such as the DUP, which is often allied with the Conservative party.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/11/09/suella-braverman-offended-northern-ireland/
Maths, 'maths circles', Kolmogorov, Westminster's centralisation & vandalism
https://dominiccummings.substack.com/p/how-to-help-parents-and-teachers
Everyone's favourite education expert, Dominic Cummings, follows Liz Truss, Rishi Sunak and
Carol Vorderman(cancelled) in opining on maths teaching.Interesting that he looks to Russia, which long ago established the best maths teaching in the world by asking mathematicians what should be taught and psychologists how best to teach it. Pisa-topping Singapore followed the Russians.
You do realise that you'll have doxed yourself...!
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-66896942
useless twts
LOL – that's a good one.
Throw in that they will likely have considerable teething problems and that about 600 MPs will fight vehemenetly against one being put in their constituency....
What counts as 'pushing wokism too hard' I wonder? Refusing to reintroduce capital punishment?
BREAK💥: Chair of the Commons Justice Committee and Conservative MP Sir Bob Neil tells @AndrewMarr9 that Suella Braverman's position as Home Secretary is untenable: "I think she's gone over the line...it's part of a history of ill judgement and loose words"
@AnushkaAsthana
One pretty big frustration among senior Conservatives is that she has knocked the focus off the pressure Keir Starmer has been facing over his position on Gaza, including story this morning that one of his former staffers is organising protest.
https://www.three.co.uk/Support/Roaming_and_international/Mobile_roaming?content_aid=1214306361761
Morocco, of course, did apply to join the EU, but as a rules-based organization, all criteria were looked at diligently, and they were considered too brown:
"In 1987, Morocco applied to join the European Communities (the precursor to the European Union). The application was rejected on the grounds that Morocco was not considered to be a "European country" and hence could not join.
In 2004, Cyprus joined the European Union despite being geographically located in West Asia."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-67321119
"£10K Covid fines were too high, admits Priti Patel"
SPI-B advice was against a focus on tough penalties but that's what Conservative ministers wanted, because that's how Conservative ministers think.
Following the surprising good performance by Democrats on Tuesday, last nights Republican nomination debate was interesting.
CNN have a panel of 12 from Iowa all Republicans, who are observing each debate:-
Question 1 who won last night 8 said Haley,
Question 2 how many of you would be voting for Trump in the Iowa Caucus, get ready for this just 2.
Big turnarounds from their stance following the two previous debates.
Will Trump get the nomination, will he have enough support to even challenge at the Convention?.
Maybe it is all a dream, and Bozo will emerge from the shower?
They do lay on a tasty lunch, mind.
Or, was he on vacation in Morocco, using a work iPad to stream movies, and not giving a shit about cost as he wasn't paying?
I have some sympathy in the first case, but none at all in the second.
Separately: Google Fi is Google's mobile carrier and it is AMAZING. They have a plan with (almost) unlimited worldwide roaming (including Morocco) for about $65 (£50) /month. Not cheap, sure, but if you travel a lot, then it will save you an absolute fortune.
"What an argument against PR the Israel Knesset is."
I had an unlimited data eSIM in Korea for around £60 for a month. I don't think unlimited packages are available in Morocco, but there are several alternatives with decent amounts of data.
Always check if your data roaming is off when abroad unless you actually want it.
A lot of GOP primary voters won’t have tuned in.
That said, Haley continues to impress, and it feels a little more solid than the usual primary “flash in the pan” moment. Still deservedly long odds, but there could be something there.
In my ideal world, her ascent would allow Biden to step down, and then we'd have Newsom v Klobuchar v Buttigieg for the Democratic nomination.
She's playing shit-or-bust.
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/calcwork23.py?seat=Aberdeenshire North and Moray East
They were proposing to build a liquid air power storage plant - which is much more efficient if run alongside a thermal plant so the 'waste' heat from that can do useful work.
...of saving their deposit.
🚨#BREAKING: Spanish lawmaker Alejo Vidal Quadras, who was shot in the face by terrorists in Madrid today, has told police that he suspects the regime of IRAN tried to assassinate him
#AlejoVidalQuadras is a vocal opponent of EU APPEASEMENT of the regime
https://twitter.com/HanifJazayeri/status/1722680249735922084
GREG MURPHY: Absolutely
B: Why did you change your position? You voted against holding Bannon in contempt
M: It's different when someone is in office
B: What office was Hunter Biden in?
https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1722656465477911015
Some unexpected drama in the Michigan Court of Claims, where Judge Redford just called a 15-minute recess after suggesting former President Donald Trump's campaign did not follow court rules to file a "verified complaint" in his lawsuit seeking to ensure 2024 ballot access.
https://twitter.com/jonathanoosting/status/1722677917531201680
Just mull that over. 16%. Less than Mr Sunak, less than the Con Pty.
I am no fan of this manifestation of the Conservative Party. There is all the Con with very little genuine conservatism. However, on this I am giving you PB rightwingers really good advice.
Suella is a dead end. If she led the Opposition it would be very good news for Starmer and Farage. Very bad news for you.