What struck me about the evidence given by the Fujitsu and Post Office CEOs is - apart from its content - how appallingly badly briefed and prepared they were.
Nick Read in particular is just useless: how can a CEO not know that a confidentiality clause in a settlement agreement = a Non-Disclosure Agreement?
To call these people third-rate is to compliment them.
The problem with being unaccountable is that there is no failure.
With no failure, there is no fear of failure. Or need to know anything about one’s job. Why not drift through life, vaguely wondering about those boring things in the big meetings.
Think brainless aristocrat. Without Jeeves to sort him out.
The only aristocrat (or pretty close to one) in this affair has been James Arbuthnot who has turned out to be one of the good guys.
The mediocrity of these people is just awful. I don't even mind that they make mistakes - we all do that. It is the utter unwillingness to admit to them, put them right and learn from them which makes me loathe them and the harm they do.
In wonder if anyone has told her that pro-Hamas Turkey is a key NATO ally, and in a Customs Union with the EU.
(As to the failure to resettle Palestinians, Edward Luttwak contributes a fascinating letter to the TLS this week on the subject. Basically pointing out that it hasn't happened and should have done).
So, how much are Fujitsu going to chuck in the pot? £500m is a nice round sum.
Start at a billion.
A billion is probably pretty close to the full cost. Asking Fujitsu to pay half doesn’t seem unreasonable. 100% seems to be excusing the PO for their part in this, which was considerable.
Let Fujitsu foot the bill, they were responsible and they can afford it. Penalising the Post Office ultimately means penalising the public purse.
I don't think you can apportion blame in percentage terms.
If you were aware of problems with Horizon and did not whistleblow to a newspaper, resign your position, inform the defence/court, or drop a line to your MP, you are always 100% culpable. People were going to jail FFS.
The only exception is when people were forced into NDAs to save their own life savings etc
So, how much are Fujitsu going to chuck in the pot? £500m is a nice round sum.
Start at a billion.
A billion is probably pretty close to the full cost. Asking Fujitsu to pay half doesn’t seem unreasonable. 100% seems to be excusing the PO for their part in this, which was considerable.
I would adopt the following policy
1) make Fujitsu pay 150% 2) make the PO pay 150% 3) accuse them of stealing money based on a spreadsheet I made earlier. 4) mercilessly hound them, screaming “Fuck you, pay me”
This case is on X today because people are annoyed that the defendant is being described as a Woman, and fair enough in my opinion. But look past that and it is one of the most bizarre things I’ve ever known someone be arrested for
“ Taylor also faces a charge of outraging public decency, "by behaving in an indecent manner, namely by being inside a bin containing the waste of children, including with soiled nappies and disclosed garments and interacting with the soiled nappies in sight of the public".
Taylor is also charged with criminal damage, by smearing excrement on milk bottles "intended for consumption by small children" and on other parts of a nursery building, including the fire escape.
Taylor is also charged with breaching a criminal behaviour order imposed by Nottinghamshire Magistrates’ Court in April this year, by being within ten metres of a nursery without reasonable excuse, and/or "by removing items from a waste receptacle in direct contravention of said order".
The defendant also faces a charge of intentionally or recklessly causing a public nuisance between October 2022 and November 2023 "at South Tyneside, without reasonable excuse, did an act, namely by continuously dumping adult human waste and other materials on the street and at nursery premises and interfering with the contents of clinical waste bins containing faecal matter from children and babies and other similar behaviours”
A just posted comment from our local MP, that gives a few clues as to how the Tories might fight the coming election. The comment about the PO is despicable.
We can stick to the plan with Rishi or go back to square one with Sir Kier Starmer.
“Lib Dems under Ed Davey are already a discredited force thanks to his role in the Post Office scandal, whilst a vote for Reform is a vote to let Labour in.
“The choice is already clear. The Conservatives have a plan. Labour and the other parties do not.”
The Conservatives have been yammering on about "long-term plan" in every election since 2010. It's like an early version of ChatGPT that only knows 12 words.
Do you think they've not twigged that, whatever their "plan" is, people don't like it?
They've led the Government for 14 years yet we are to believe they are just getting the hang of this government business and we should give them five more years (or should that be fifty?) because by then they might be getting quite good.
A just posted comment from our local MP, that gives a few clues as to how the Tories might fight the coming election. The comment about the PO is despicable.
We can stick to the plan with Rishi or go back to square one with Sir Kier Starmer.
“Lib Dems under Ed Davey are already a discredited force thanks to his role in the Post Office scandal, whilst a vote for Reform is a vote to let Labour in.
“The choice is already clear. The Conservatives have a plan. Labour and the other parties do not.”
The Tory’s - quite cleverly actually - got to the microphones first with opposition’s culpability in PO scandal, placing into their friendly media outlets - which instantly looked a rather laughable spun take on it to me. The Sunday Times political unit for goodness sake is more Tory than the Tory’s own dirty tricks and communication units! They probably turned down being recruited by the Tories with: yes I’m far superior to anything you have employed there, but that also means I’m smart enough to be earning even more money in more secure job!
But whilst that initial advantage is wearing off a bit now, and ultimately, having governed alone the more recent nine years of this scandal, the Tories are the most exposed to this one, it might be how Libdems and Labour so caught on the hop initially, by the willingness of the Tories to throw stones in glass houses.
Yet I’m thinking now, it’s a superb Tory victory, guessing the media coverage will run out of legs before it delved into Tory culpability, so all voters remember is that it’s all Davey’s fault. That leaflet in conjunction with how the media has all but moved on now to helpfully debunk that leaflet, makes me think the Tories getting into print first to distort true history, stitch up the opposition, they’ve flipping got away with it. 😡
Has any of this moved the polls one iota? No. Have all the attempts to smear and denigrate Starmer had an impact? No.
The Blair experience has left a residual cynicism and Starmer is part of this - his sole task is to look better at doing government than Sunak. What he did 20 years ago at the DPP is irrelevant.
The Iowa results are, I think, of limited predictive value. The BBC breathless reporting that this 'proves' Trump's broad appeal is, I think, slightly premature.
Probably more likely it "proves" people are less inclined to go out and vote when it's -30 (first centigrade, then fahrenheit).
You mean someone would have to be insane to go out in that, proving nobody with any sanity has yet voted?
I don't think the words "less inclined" were a comment on anyone's mental state though one might question whether venturing out at all in temperatures at which frostbite becomes a close friend is necessarily a shrewd move whether to support Trump or not.
Fairy nuff. I was trying to do a catch 22 pun. I have been in the pub. I should tap out if my posts are so bad tonight I might get banned.
I apologise. Shouldn’t comment on anyone’s mental state.
Except maybe if cleverly paraphrase Donald Trump
“ don't want to be overly rough on the mentality of Trump supporters, but I have to say that they are the craziest fuckers that we've had in the history of our country, they are destroying our country. Anyone who voted for Ted Cruz were the sanest, of the sanest, of the sanest in comparison.” “And don’t forget, if you should have any doubts, at all - any doubts - i care about my supporters so much, I asked them to come out and die for me tonight, telling them it would be well worth it. I mean - just how crazy can you be?”
It seems to me that the most obvious political solution for the Conservative party is to move to the 'far right', defining itself as being against the progressive consensus and coming up with some radical solutions to political problems. It seems to me that this is where they will probably go out of necessity and the likelihood of success depends on their ability to outperform others acting in this space like 'reform' and 'reclaim'. A lot would depend on finding the right leader, if they can find someone young and who looks like the future then they are in with a shot; but they still have to be accountable to their aging voter base who act as an obstacle as well as an asset.
The evidence so far is that this isn't going to happen. Let's assume that 'far right' means something consistent with multi party democracy, capacity to lose etc, so we aren't talking about Trump or totalitarians or authoritarians; nor are we talking about the populism which suggests simple answers to complex problems.
Within those constraints, what are the big ideas swirling around in radical conservative circles, costed (so not Trussism), thought out, deliverable, which are so different from the generality of the Overton Window. If they were around, would we not be talking about them?
The era we live in is quite chaotic, the overton window can shift and 'unthinkable' ideas come in to play, similar to how the statism of the Johnson era contrasted with decades of neoliberalism. The Rwanda idea is fairly mainstream in Europe after Britain being an outlier for a while.
If you think that things have to change then unthinkable solutions come in to play. It is like in Germany where politicians claiming 'we can do this' in 2015 (bringing in millions of refugees) are replaced in 2024 by politicians promising to deport millions of refugees.
What I can say for sure is politicians are so entrenched in ideology that they have become out of touch with real life outside the demands of their activist base. IE Councils devoting resources to being a 'Borough of sanctuary' for asylum seekers, providing immigrants with housing etc, when they themselves have massive waiting lists and people at their wits end with no housing, teenage single mothers being housed 200 miles away from family etc. Things like this get corrected in the fullness of time.
Whilst I get what you mean and largely agree that the bit in bold is councils stretching beyond what residents are likely to put up with for long, I’d suggest it actually shows a decent grasp of the real world, just that it’s the real world beyond these shores/Europe.
I think this is quite subjective really. I think I am the only poster on PB to have been critical about the policy towards granting asylum for Ukrainian refugees. This may in the long run turn out to be a form of enabling genocide - the same reason I recall you cited recently as to why middle eastern countries don't take in refugees from Gaza.
I agree it is subjective, or at least highly dependent on whether you start from a position that councils have any ethical responsibility for non-residents. I’d argue they do, but am very happy to acknowledge mine is a minority position and am quite content as a democrat to be outvoted.
I don’t recall your specific arguments but I think there were good reasons to argue against granting preferential asylum for Ukrainians, and i say this despite having taken in a refugee myself.
It’s a good challenge RE enabling genocide. I feel there is a difference because refugees from Ukraine were not males of fighting age and so, if it turns out that it is possible to defend Ukraine against Russia, taking in refugees won’t have harmed that fight and in fact would have helped it by reducing civilian casualties from friendly fire.
Nevertheless I can see there are also similarities, which is causing me to think quite hard about what my position in both cases is, so thank you.
A just posted comment from our local MP, that gives a few clues as to how the Tories might fight the coming election. The comment about the PO is despicable.
We can stick to the plan with Rishi or go back to square one with Sir Kier Starmer.
“Lib Dems under Ed Davey are already a discredited force thanks to his role in the Post Office scandal, whilst a vote for Reform is a vote to let Labour in.
“The choice is already clear. The Conservatives have a plan. Labour and the other parties do not.”
The Conservatives have been yammering on about "long-term plan" in every election since 2010. It's like an early version of ChatGPT that only knows 12 words.
Do you think they've not twigged that, whatever their "plan" is, people don't like it?
They've led the Government for 14 years yet we are to believe they are just getting the hang of this government business and we should give them five more years (or should that be fifty?) because by then they might be getting quite good.
The wasteland that would be left might not need much governing!
So, how much are Fujitsu going to chuck in the pot? £500m is a nice round sum.
Start at a billion.
A billion is probably pretty close to the full cost. Asking Fujitsu to pay half doesn’t seem unreasonable. 100% seems to be excusing the PO for their part in this, which was considerable.
I would adopt the following policy
1) make Fujitsu pay 150% 2) make the PO pay 150% 3) accuse them of stealing money based on a spreadsheet I made earlier. 4) mercilessly hound them, screaming “Fuck you, pay me”
A just posted comment from our local MP, that gives a few clues as to how the Tories might fight the coming election. The comment about the PO is despicable.
We can stick to the plan with Rishi or go back to square one with Sir Kier Starmer.
“Lib Dems under Ed Davey are already a discredited force thanks to his role in the Post Office scandal, whilst a vote for Reform is a vote to let Labour in.
“The choice is already clear. The Conservatives have a plan. Labour and the other parties do not.”
The Conservatives have been yammering on about "long-term plan" in every election since 2010. It's like an early version of ChatGPT that only knows 12 words.
Do you think they've not twigged that, whatever their "plan" is, people don't like it?
They've led the Government for 14 years yet we are to believe they are just getting the hang of this government business and we should give them five more years (or should that be fifty?) because by then they might be getting quite good.
Football clubs often sack the manager too soon. Maybe the Tories think you need 20 years to get the damn thing right?
A just posted comment from our local MP, that gives a few clues as to how the Tories might fight the coming election. The comment about the PO is despicable.
We can stick to the plan with Rishi or go back to square one with Sir Kier Starmer.
“Lib Dems under Ed Davey are already a discredited force thanks to his role in the Post Office scandal, whilst a vote for Reform is a vote to let Labour in.
“The choice is already clear. The Conservatives have a plan. Labour and the other parties do not.”
The Tory’s - quite cleverly actually - got to the microphones first with opposition’s culpability in PO scandal, placing into their friendly media outlets - which instantly looked a rather laughable spun take on it to me. The Sunday Times political unit for goodness sake is more Tory than the Tory’s own dirty tricks and communication units! They probably turned down being recruited by the Tories with: yes I’m far superior to anything you have employed there, but that also means I’m smart enough to be earning even more money in more secure job!
But whilst that initial advantage is wearing off a bit now, and ultimately, having governed alone the more recent nine years of this scandal, the Tories are the most exposed to this one, it might be how Libdems and Labour so caught on the hop initially, by the willingness of the Tories to throw stones in glass houses.
Yet I’m thinking now, it’s a superb Tory victory, guessing the media coverage will run out of legs before it delved into Tory culpability, so all voters remember is that it’s all Davey’s fault. That leaflet in conjunction with how the media has all but moved on now to helpfully debunk that leaflet, makes me think the Tories getting into print first to distort true history, stitch up the opposition, they’ve flipping got away with it. 😡
I don't think the Tories were driving the client media. Farage felled Starmer via his GeeBeebies vehicle and his cosy relationship with the Telegraph. Crick among others pushed the Davey story.
A just posted comment from our local MP, that gives a few clues as to how the Tories might fight the coming election. The comment about the PO is despicable.
We can stick to the plan with Rishi or go back to square one with Sir Kier Starmer.
“Lib Dems under Ed Davey are already a discredited force thanks to his role in the Post Office scandal, whilst a vote for Reform is a vote to let Labour in.
“The choice is already clear. The Conservatives have a plan. Labour and the other parties do not.”
Would that be the same Bob Seeley who soiled himself live on Newsnight when questioned by Victoria Derbyshire over Kangaroo Courtgate just last June.
What struck me about the evidence given by the Fujitsu and Post Office CEOs is - apart from its content - how appallingly badly briefed and prepared they were.
Nick Read in particular is just useless: how can a CEO not know that a confidentiality clause in a settlement agreement = a Non-Disclosure Agreement?
To call these people third-rate is to compliment them.
The problem with being unaccountable is that there is no failure.
With no failure, there is no fear of failure. Or need to know anything about one’s job. Why not drift through life, vaguely wondering about those boring things in the big meetings.
Think brainless aristocrat. Without Jeeves to sort him out.
The only aristocrat (or pretty close to one) in this affair has been James Arbuthnot who has turned out to be one of the good guys.
The mediocrity of these people is just awful. I don't even mind that they make mistakes - we all do that. It is the utter unwillingness to admit to them, put them right and learn from them which makes me loathe them and the harm they do.
I said *brainless* aristocrat. There were and are smart ones.
Just as in the #NU10K there are those who can at least pretend to do their alleged jobs.
A just posted comment from our local MP, that gives a few clues as to how the Tories might fight the coming election. The comment about the PO is despicable.
We can stick to the plan with Rishi or go back to square one with Sir Kier Starmer.
“Lib Dems under Ed Davey are already a discredited force thanks to his role in the Post Office scandal, whilst a vote for Reform is a vote to let Labour in.
“The choice is already clear. The Conservatives have a plan. Labour and the other parties do not.”
The Conservatives have been yammering on about "long-term plan" in every election since 2010. It's like an early version of ChatGPT that only knows 12 words.
Do you think they've not twigged that, whatever their "plan" is, people don't like it?
They've led the Government for 14 years yet we are to believe they are just getting the hang of this government business and we should give them five more years (or should that be fifty?) because by then they might be getting quite good.
Football clubs often sack the manager too soon. Maybe the Tories think you need 20 years to get the damn thing right?
Apparently part of Blair's reluctance to cede to Brown was due to the feeling he was getting the hang of the job.
A just posted comment from our local MP, that gives a few clues as to how the Tories might fight the coming election. The comment about the PO is despicable.
We can stick to the plan with Rishi or go back to square one with Sir Kier Starmer.
“Lib Dems under Ed Davey are already a discredited force thanks to his role in the Post Office scandal, whilst a vote for Reform is a vote to let Labour in.
“The choice is already clear. The Conservatives have a plan. Labour and the other parties do not.”
The Conservatives have been yammering on about "long-term plan" in every election since 2010. It's like an early version of ChatGPT that only knows 12 words.
Do you think they've not twigged that, whatever their "plan" is, people don't like it?
They've led the Government for 14 years yet we are to believe they are just getting the hang of this government business and we should give them five more years (or should that be fifty?) because by then they might be getting quite good.
Football clubs often sack the manager too soon. Maybe the Tories think you need 20 years to get the damn thing right?
Apparently part of Blair's reluctance to cede to Brown was due to the feeling he was getting the hang of the job.
His feeling about getting the hang of things was more the suspension of disbelief.
They don’t need to do anything. They have clearly won. They have the numbers, and the government either has to be sure it has peeled enough away - impossible with that amount of rebels, facing them down will be like playing Russian Roulette ie too risky - postpone 3rd reading to soften up the rebel power, with political senna pods or something, or give the rebels the meat they are asking for.
I’m 99% certain it’s the third of those, government concedes. That’s why the wets are every bit as angry as the rebels are smug this evening - government will concede the hardened bill to the rebels, and the wets have absolutely no choice but to vote it through, or be the ones to cut their own Primeministers balls off at start of election year.
The right wing rebels have clearly won this one over the wets, simply on the basis of coming together and uniting, when all over Christmas and right up to this evening, just about no one thought they could or would.
The next headbangers v wets face off with be for crowning leader of the opposition - and all the right need to do is get a candidate into the final 2. So we can place our money on them winning that too, considering the MPs returned after election loss they might even place two right wing candidates in final 2.
So will government pull the vote for more time to soften up the rebellion? Or cave in to the right and put the wets in an impossible spot?
On topic, a repost of the components of polling swing to Labour, derived from Dylan Difford's voter switching chart. I really ought to do a pie chart at some stage, I suppose. Every single component below results in a swing from Con to Lab, as expressed in the numbers:
ELECTORATE CHANGES: 2.2% 2019 voters who've died: 1.2% 2024 voters now over 18: 0.6% Net other register changes (e.g. new citizens): 0.4%
TURNOUT CHANGES: 1.5% 2019 voters saying they won't vote: 0.5% 2019 non-voters now expressing a VI: 1.0%
CATEGORY UNDETERMINED: 2019 voters now saying Don't Know: 2.7% * Come election time these will (a) revert to original vote and not cause swing, (b) switch, with any Labour swingers increasing swing (c) not vote, adding to turnout swing and this category will dissolve
OVERALL SWING TO LABOUR IN SURVEY USED: 15.5%
If you want to argue for a lesser result for Labour, saying which swings are wrong would be a good way to make the argument.
A just posted comment from our local MP, that gives a few clues as to how the Tories might fight the coming election. The comment about the PO is despicable.
We can stick to the plan with Rishi or go back to square one with Sir Kier Starmer.
“Lib Dems under Ed Davey are already a discredited force thanks to his role in the Post Office scandal, whilst a vote for Reform is a vote to let Labour in.
“The choice is already clear. The Conservatives have a plan. Labour and the other parties do not.”
The Conservatives have been yammering on about "long-term plan" in every election since 2010. It's like an early version of ChatGPT that only knows 12 words.
Do you think they've not twigged that, whatever their "plan" is, people don't like it?
Well they did, or at least more than the alternative. But not now.
It's like emphasising your principles, it only works if people like those principles.
You do feel the power running away from the Tories with each day. And that sense of losing is hard to shake off.
I really think the odds of a super landslide are underrated. I always believed it would come eventually as the Tories would damage themselves beyond all repair but I didn’t think it would happen this time around.
The Iowa results are, I think, of limited predictive value. The BBC breathless reporting that this 'proves' Trump's broad appeal is, I think, slightly premature.
Probably more likely it "proves" people are less inclined to go out and vote when it's -30 (first centigrade, then fahrenheit).
You mean someone would have to be insane to go out in that, proving nobody with any sanity has yet voted?
I don't think the words "less inclined" were a comment on anyone's mental state though one might question whether venturing out at all in temperatures at which frostbite becomes a close friend is necessarily a shrewd move whether to support Trump or not.
Fairy nuff. I was trying to do a catch 22 pun. I have been in the pub. I should tap out if my posts are so bad tonight I might get banned.
I apologise. Shouldn’t comment on anyone’s mental state.
Except maybe if cleverly paraphrase Donald Trump
“ don't want to be overly rough on the mentality of Trump supporters, but I have to say that they are the craziest fuckers that we've had in the history of our country, they are destroying our country. Anyone who voted for Ted Cruz were the sanest, of the sanest, of the sanest in comparison.” “And don’t forget, if you should have any doubts, at all - any doubts - i care about my supporters so much, I asked them to come out and die for me tonight, telling them it would be well worth it. I mean - just how crazy can you be?”
It's all right - I knew you were joking. I tried a soupcon of wit in my response which was equally lacking.
Perhaps Blackadder's admonishment to Lord Percy is apposite here.
On topic, a repost of the components of polling swing to Labour, derived from Dylan Difford's voter switching chart. I really ought to do a pie chart at some stage, I suppose. Every single component below results in a swing from Con to Lab, as expressed.innthe numbers:
ELECTORATE CHANGES: 2.2% 2019 voters who've died: 1.2% 2024 voters now over 18: 0.6% Net other register changes (e.g. new citizens): 0.4%
TURNOUT CHANGES: 1.5% 2019 voters saying they won't vote: 0.5% 2019 non-voters now expressing a VI: 1.0%
CATEGORY UNDETERMINED: 2019 voters now saying Don't Know: 2.7% * Come election time these will (a) revert to original vote and not cause swing, (b) switch, with any Labour swingers increasing swing (c) not vote, adding to turnout swing and this category will dissolve
OVERALL SWING TO LABOUR IN SURVEY USED: 15.5%
If you want to argue for a lesser result for Labour, saying which swings are wrong would be a good way to make the argument.
All well and good, but most people are not political obsessives. They are not paying vast amounts of attention yet to politics. That changes when the election gun is fired. There is also the privacy of the polling booth. Some people will tell every pollster out that although they’ve voted Tory all their lives, this time it will be different. But at the crucial moment the muscle memory kicks in and hey presto it’s another Tory vote…
Some elements of this must be playing on punters minds, otherwise there is 30% return on Betfair right now for a Labour majority. DYOR. Bet what you can afford or are happy to throw away…
A just posted comment from our local MP, that gives a few clues as to how the Tories might fight the coming election. The comment about the PO is despicable.
We can stick to the plan with Rishi or go back to square one with Sir Kier Starmer.
“Lib Dems under Ed Davey are already a discredited force thanks to his role in the Post Office scandal, whilst a vote for Reform is a vote to let Labour in.
“The choice is already clear. The Conservatives have a plan. Labour and the other parties do not.”
The Conservatives have been yammering on about "long-term plan" in every election since 2010. It's like an early version of ChatGPT that only knows 12 words.
Do you think they've not twigged that, whatever their "plan" is, people don't like it?
They've led the Government for 14 years yet we are to believe they are just getting the hang of this government business and we should give them five more years (or should that be fifty?) because by then they might be getting quite good.
Football clubs often sack the manager too soon. Maybe the Tories think you need 20 years to get the damn thing right?
Apparently part of Blair's reluctance to cede to Brown was due to the feeling he was getting the hang of the job.
It is hard to judge. A single term of 3-5 years doesn't feel like enough time to really sink your teeth into a role or make long term plans, but leaders are also crap at knowing when their weaknesses outweigh their strengths. Indeed, leaders can rapidly decline after an initial growing period, so holding on too long is both common and very damaging. Blair, on his terms, did not do too badly in picking his moment.
The Tories managed to do the renewal thing in 2019, they cannot pull that off a second time, not when a win would mean 19 years at least in power.
Biden: "this election was always going to be you and me vs. extreme MAGA Republicans.”
That’s quite demagogic in itself. “It’s me or the abyss.”
Trump's rise does have that unfortunate side effect. If Biden had said it in 2016 it would have reasonably been felt to be over the top. Now? Anything less would probably understate the risk, even though it might seem demagogic.
Same way that a political opponent being charged with things can look very bad, we know authoritarian states do it to punish rivals. But it is also a necessary thing to do if the opponent, you know, tried to illegally hold onto power, and not to do so would simply enable it.
A just posted comment from our local MP, that gives a few clues as to how the Tories might fight the coming election. The comment about the PO is despicable.
We can stick to the plan with Rishi or go back to square one with Sir Kier Starmer.
“Lib Dems under Ed Davey are already a discredited force thanks to his role in the Post Office scandal, whilst a vote for Reform is a vote to let Labour in.
“The choice is already clear. The Conservatives have a plan. Labour and the other parties do not.”
The Tory’s - quite cleverly actually - got to the microphones first with opposition’s culpability in PO scandal, placing into their friendly media outlets - which instantly looked a rather laughable spun take on it to me. The Sunday Times political unit for goodness sake is more Tory than the Tory’s own dirty tricks and communication units! They probably turned down being recruited by the Tories with: yes I’m far superior to anything you have employed there, but that also means I’m smart enough to be earning even more money in more secure job!
But whilst that initial advantage is wearing off a bit now, and ultimately, having governed alone the more recent nine years of this scandal, the Tories are the most exposed to this one, it might be how Libdems and Labour so caught on the hop initially, by the willingness of the Tories to throw stones in glass houses.
Yet I’m thinking now, it’s a superb Tory victory, guessing the media coverage will run out of legs before it delved into Tory culpability, so all voters remember is that it’s all Davey’s fault. That leaflet in conjunction with how the media has all but moved on now to helpfully debunk that leaflet, makes me think the Tories getting into print first to distort true history, stitch up the opposition, they’ve flipping got away with it. 😡
I don't think the Tories were driving the client media. Farage felled Starmer via his GeeBeebies vehicle and his cosy relationship with the Telegraph. Crick among others pushed the Davey story.
A just posted comment from our local MP, that gives a few clues as to how the Tories might fight the coming election. The comment about the PO is despicable.
We can stick to the plan with Rishi or go back to square one with Sir Kier Starmer.
“Lib Dems under Ed Davey are already a discredited force thanks to his role in the Post Office scandal, whilst a vote for Reform is a vote to let Labour in.
“The choice is already clear. The Conservatives have a plan. Labour and the other parties do not.”
Would that be the same Bob Seeley who soiled himself live on Newsnight when questioned by Victoria Derbyshire over Kangaroo Courtgate just last June.
If the Tory’s are not driving their client media at this stage, then what the hell are they paying top top spin doctors a fortune for?
Farage did not fell Starmer with this, he barely grazed him. It didn’t even require a sticking plaster.
you post the most bizarre take on politics imaginable MexPet.
Sometimes I think it’s a ruse, you are on a mission to break and kill isam by parodying him to his face, in the same way the First Earth Battalion stared at goats. There’s examples already of isam completely bufuddled in conversation with you, by isam being completely out isam’d.
This place is nuts. I’m going to hang out with my sheep.
Sophy Ridge @SophyRidgeSky · 3h 68 MPs voted in favour of the Bill Cash amendment on Rwanda... that's a big number and will worry No10. If anything like that number of Tories rebel on the 3rd reading the Rwanda Bill won't pass...
They don’t need to do anything. They have clearly won. They have the numbers, and the government either has to be sure it has peeled enough away - impossible with that amount of rebels, facing them down will be like playing Russian Roulette ie too risky - postpone 3rd reading to soften up the rebel power, with political senna pods or something, or give the rebels the meat they are asking for.
I’m 99% certain it’s the third of those, government concedes. That’s why the wets are every bit as angry as the rebels are smug this evening - government will concede the hardened bill to the rebels, and the wets have absolutely no choice but to vote it through, or be the ones to cut their own Primeministers balls off at start of election year.
The right wing rebels have clearly won this one over the wets, simply on the basis of coming together and uniting, when all over Christmas and right up to this evening, just about no one thought they could or would.
The next headbangers v wets face off with be for crowning leader of the opposition - and all the right need to do is get a candidate into the final 2. So we can place our money on them winning that too, considering the MPs returned after election loss they might even place two right wing candidates in final 2.
So will government pull the vote for more time to soften up the rebellion? Or cave in to the right and put the wets in an impossible spot?
Only option is to cave imo
Caving is usually the easiest option, and politicians will typically go with the easiest option. A problem tomorrow is always preferable to a problem today after all.
The rebels may have limited unity on anything beyond this, but the government hasn't seemed to have any firm idea of, well, anything, for a long time, even before Boris went, when they often acted like a government with a small majority, running scared a lot.
Biden: "this election was always going to be you and me vs. extreme MAGA Republicans.”
That’s quite demagogic in itself. “It’s me or the abyss.”
It's not demagogic when he's describing reality. We are looking into the abyss. I don't see how you can get much more abyssal than Trump. A majority of Iowa caucus voters believe Trump really won the 2020 election.
A just posted comment from our local MP, that gives a few clues as to how the Tories might fight the coming election. The comment about the PO is despicable.
We can stick to the plan with Rishi or go back to square one with Sir Kier Starmer.
“Lib Dems under Ed Davey are already a discredited force thanks to his role in the Post Office scandal, whilst a vote for Reform is a vote to let Labour in.
“The choice is already clear. The Conservatives have a plan. Labour and the other parties do not.”
The Tory’s - quite cleverly actually - got to the microphones first with opposition’s culpability in PO scandal, placing into their friendly media outlets - which instantly looked a rather laughable spun take on it to me. The Sunday Times political unit for goodness sake is more Tory than the Tory’s own dirty tricks and communication units! They probably turned down being recruited by the Tories with: yes I’m far superior to anything you have employed there, but that also means I’m smart enough to be earning even more money in more secure job!
But whilst that initial advantage is wearing off a bit now, and ultimately, having governed alone the more recent nine years of this scandal, the Tories are the most exposed to this one, it might be how Libdems and Labour so caught on the hop initially, by the willingness of the Tories to throw stones in glass houses.
Yet I’m thinking now, it’s a superb Tory victory, guessing the media coverage will run out of legs before it delved into Tory culpability, so all voters remember is that it’s all Davey’s fault. That leaflet in conjunction with how the media has all but moved on now to helpfully debunk that leaflet, makes me think the Tories getting into print first to distort true history, stitch up the opposition, they’ve flipping got away with it. 😡
I don't think the Tories were driving the client media. Farage felled Starmer via his GeeBeebies vehicle and his cosy relationship with the Telegraph. Crick among others pushed the Davey story.
A just posted comment from our local MP, that gives a few clues as to how the Tories might fight the coming election. The comment about the PO is despicable.
We can stick to the plan with Rishi or go back to square one with Sir Kier Starmer.
“Lib Dems under Ed Davey are already a discredited force thanks to his role in the Post Office scandal, whilst a vote for Reform is a vote to let Labour in.
“The choice is already clear. The Conservatives have a plan. Labour and the other parties do not.”
Would that be the same Bob Seeley who soiled himself live on Newsnight when questioned by Victoria Derbyshire over Kangaroo Courtgate just last June.
If the Tory’s are not driving their client media at this stage, then what the hell are they paying top top spin doctors a fortune for?
Farage did not fell Starmer with this, he barely grazed him. It didn’t even require a sticking plaster.
you post the most bizarre take on politics imaginable MexPet.
Sometimes I think it’s a ruse, you are on a mission to break and kill isam by parodying him to his face, in the same way the First Earth Battalion stared at goats. There’s examples already of isam completely bufuddled in conversation with you, by isam being completely out isam’d.
This place is nuts. I’m going to hang out with my sheep.
I have often wondered what the formerly quite sensible Mexicanpete is up to these days. Thanks MoonRabbit, my mind is at rest, I shall sleep easy.
ETA: An admirable task, Mexicanpete. Good work, keep it up.
I am in a hotel in Aberdeen this evening and flicking through the channels came across Trump 'The Return' on ITV. Utterly compelling and leaves me with an absolute conviction that he will win.
Biden: "this election was always going to be you and me vs. extreme MAGA Republicans.”
That’s quite demagogic in itself. “It’s me or the abyss.”
It's not demagogic when he's describing reality. We are looking into the abyss. I don't see how you can get much more abyssal than Trump. A majority of Iowa caucus voters believe Trump really won the 2020 election.
Reality is that Biden is the only alternative? Nobody younger could do the job?
What struck me about the evidence given by the Fujitsu and Post Office CEOs is - apart from its content - how appallingly badly briefed and prepared they were.
Nick Read in particular is just useless: how can a CEO not know that a confidentiality clause in a settlement agreement = a Non-Disclosure Agreement?
To call these people third-rate is to compliment them.
The problem with being unaccountable is that there is no failure.
With no failure, there is no fear of failure. Or need to know anything about one’s job. Why not drift through life, vaguely wondering about those boring things in the big meetings.
Think brainless aristocrat. Without Jeeves to sort him out.
The only aristocrat (or pretty close to one) in this affair has been James Arbuthnot who has turned out to be one of the good guys.
The mediocrity of these people is just awful. I don't even mind that they make mistakes - we all do that. It is the utter unwillingness to admit to them, put them right and learn from them which makes me loathe them and the harm they do.
I said *brainless* aristocrat. There were and are smart ones.
Just as in the #NU10K there are those who can at least pretend to do their alleged jobs.
But what is the incentive?
Can I gently introduce the concept of a conscience? A professional conscience, at the very least.
What struck me about the evidence given by the Fujitsu and Post Office CEOs is - apart from its content - how appallingly badly briefed and prepared they were.
Nick Read in particular is just useless: how can a CEO not know that a confidentiality clause in a settlement agreement = a Non-Disclosure Agreement?
To call these people third-rate is to compliment them.
The problem with being unaccountable is that there is no failure.
With no failure, there is no fear of failure. Or need to know anything about one’s job. Why not drift through life, vaguely wondering about those boring things in the big meetings.
Think brainless aristocrat. Without Jeeves to sort him out.
The only aristocrat (or pretty close to one) in this affair has been James Arbuthnot who has turned out to be one of the good guys.
The mediocrity of these people is just awful. I don't even mind that they make mistakes - we all do that. It is the utter unwillingness to admit to them, put them right and learn from them which makes me loathe them and the harm they do.
I said *brainless* aristocrat. There were and are smart ones.
Just as in the #NU10K there are those who can at least pretend to do their alleged jobs.
But what is the incentive?
Can I gently introduce the concept of a conscience? A professional conscience, at the very least.
Biden: "this election was always going to be you and me vs. extreme MAGA Republicans.”
That’s quite demagogic in itself. “It’s me or the abyss.”
It's not demagogic when he's describing reality. We are looking into the abyss. I don't see how you can get much more abyssal than Trump. A majority of Iowa caucus voters believe Trump really won the 2020 election.
Reality is that Biden is the only alternative? Nobody younger could do the job?
Who in the Democratic Party was going to bin a sitting President, going for a 2nd term?
Biden: "this election was always going to be you and me vs. extreme MAGA Republicans.”
That’s quite demagogic in itself. “It’s me or the abyss.”
It's not demagogic when he's describing reality. We are looking into the abyss. I don't see how you can get much more abyssal than Trump. A majority of Iowa caucus voters believe Trump really won the 2020 election.
Reality is that Biden is the only alternative? Nobody younger could do the job?
It's conceivable another Democrat could do it, certainly. One woudl certainly hope some younger people coudl be up to it. But since he is running again - whether one thinks that is a good thing or not - and it appears no one serious is going to be able to overcome him to be the nominee, he will be the only alternative to Trump in the election who is not a minor third party or joke candidate.
Your comment would be like Trump saying the same thing and asking could nobody less offensive do the job. Of course they could, but the race will be Trump vs Biden, assuming they both live that long.
A just posted comment from our local MP, that gives a few clues as to how the Tories might fight the coming election. The comment about the PO is despicable.
We can stick to the plan with Rishi or go back to square one with Sir Kier Starmer.
“Lib Dems under Ed Davey are already a discredited force thanks to his role in the Post Office scandal, whilst a vote for Reform is a vote to let Labour in.
“The choice is already clear. The Conservatives have a plan. Labour and the other parties do not.”
The Tory’s - quite cleverly actually - got to the microphones first with opposition’s culpability in PO scandal, placing into their friendly media outlets - which instantly looked a rather laughable spun take on it to me. The Sunday Times political unit for goodness sake is more Tory than the Tory’s own dirty tricks and communication units! They probably turned down being recruited by the Tories with: yes I’m far superior to anything you have employed there, but that also means I’m smart enough to be earning even more money in more secure job!
But whilst that initial advantage is wearing off a bit now, and ultimately, having governed alone the more recent nine years of this scandal, the Tories are the most exposed to this one, it might be how Libdems and Labour so caught on the hop initially, by the willingness of the Tories to throw stones in glass houses.
Yet I’m thinking now, it’s a superb Tory victory, guessing the media coverage will run out of legs before it delved into Tory culpability, so all voters remember is that it’s all Davey’s fault. That leaflet in conjunction with how the media has all but moved on now to helpfully debunk that leaflet, makes me think the Tories getting into print first to distort true history, stitch up the opposition, they’ve flipping got away with it. 😡
I don't think the Tories were driving the client media. Farage felled Starmer via his GeeBeebies vehicle and his cosy relationship with the Telegraph. Crick among others pushed the Davey story.
A just posted comment from our local MP, that gives a few clues as to how the Tories might fight the coming election. The comment about the PO is despicable.
We can stick to the plan with Rishi or go back to square one with Sir Kier Starmer.
“Lib Dems under Ed Davey are already a discredited force thanks to his role in the Post Office scandal, whilst a vote for Reform is a vote to let Labour in.
“The choice is already clear. The Conservatives have a plan. Labour and the other parties do not.”
Would that be the same Bob Seeley who soiled himself live on Newsnight when questioned by Victoria Derbyshire over Kangaroo Courtgate just last June.
If the Tory’s are not driving their client media at this stage, then what the hell are they paying top top spin doctors a fortune for?
Farage did not fell Starmer with this, he barely grazed him. It didn’t even require a sticking plaster.
you post the most bizarre take on politics imaginable MexPet.
Sometimes I think it’s a ruse, you are on a mission to break and kill isam by parodying him to his face, in the same way the First Earth Battalion stared at goats. There’s examples already of isam completely bufuddled in conversation with you, by isam being completely out isam’d.
This place is nuts. I’m going to hang out with my sheep.
I thought much the same, definitely something odd going on
I am in a hotel in Aberdeen this evening and flicking through the channels came across Trump 'The Return' on ITV. Utterly compelling and leaves me with an absolute conviction that he will win.
Scary but very highly recommended
Is that where they showed the Southern Republican's sending immigrants north into democrat areas causing serious issues with the locals, not least in Chicago, and many extolling Trump's promise to send all immigrants back out of the US
Horrible and unedifying but base politics by Trump and his supporters
Starmer would do well to the listen to the now almost constant mantra from Tories: "Labour has no plan"
His desperation not to give anything edge to the enemy is now being used as a key weakness.
Only if it cuts through. Many an election has been one by being a bit vague and non threatening. To this degree? I'd defer to ydoethur on that front, but it may not be that big a threat.
But it would be nice to see a little more boldness.
I am in a hotel in Aberdeen this evening and flicking through the channels came across Trump 'The Return' on ITV. Utterly compelling and leaves me with an absolute conviction that he will win.
On topic, a repost of the components of polling swing to Labour, derived from Dylan Difford's voter switching chart. I really ought to do a pie chart at some stage, I suppose. Every single component below results in a swing from Con to Lab, as expressed.innthe numbers:
ELECTORATE CHANGES: 2.2% 2019 voters who've died: 1.2% 2024 voters now over 18: 0.6% Net other register changes (e.g. new citizens): 0.4%
TURNOUT CHANGES: 1.5% 2019 voters saying they won't vote: 0.5% 2019 non-voters now expressing a VI: 1.0%
CATEGORY UNDETERMINED: 2019 voters now saying Don't Know: 2.7% * Come election time these will (a) revert to original vote and not cause swing, (b) switch, with any Labour swingers increasing swing (c) not vote, adding to turnout swing and this category will dissolve
OVERALL SWING TO LABOUR IN SURVEY USED: 15.5%
If you want to argue for a lesser result for Labour, saying which swings are wrong would be a good way to make the argument.
All well and good, but most people are not political obsessives. …
A just posted comment from our local MP, that gives a few clues as to how the Tories might fight the coming election. The comment about the PO is despicable.
We can stick to the plan with Rishi or go back to square one with Sir Kier Starmer.
“Lib Dems under Ed Davey are already a discredited force thanks to his role in the Post Office scandal, whilst a vote for Reform is a vote to let Labour in.
“The choice is already clear. The Conservatives have a plan. Labour and the other parties do not.”
The Tory’s - quite cleverly actually - got to the microphones first with opposition’s culpability in PO scandal, placing into their friendly media outlets - which instantly looked a rather laughable spun take on it to me. The Sunday Times political unit for goodness sake is more Tory than the Tory’s own dirty tricks and communication units! They probably turned down being recruited by the Tories with: yes I’m far superior to anything you have employed there, but that also means I’m smart enough to be earning even more money in more secure job!
But whilst that initial advantage is wearing off a bit now, and ultimately, having governed alone the more recent nine years of this scandal, the Tories are the most exposed to this one, it might be how Libdems and Labour so caught on the hop initially, by the willingness of the Tories to throw stones in glass houses.
Yet I’m thinking now, it’s a superb Tory victory, guessing the media coverage will run out of legs before it delved into Tory culpability, so all voters remember is that it’s all Davey’s fault. That leaflet in conjunction with how the media has all but moved on now to helpfully debunk that leaflet, makes me think the Tories getting into print first to distort true history, stitch up the opposition, they’ve flipping got away with it. 😡
I don't think the Tories were driving the client media. Farage felled Starmer via his GeeBeebies vehicle and his cosy relationship with the Telegraph. Crick among others pushed the Davey story.
A just posted comment from our local MP, that gives a few clues as to how the Tories might fight the coming election. The comment about the PO is despicable.
We can stick to the plan with Rishi or go back to square one with Sir Kier Starmer.
“Lib Dems under Ed Davey are already a discredited force thanks to his role in the Post Office scandal, whilst a vote for Reform is a vote to let Labour in.
“The choice is already clear. The Conservatives have a plan. Labour and the other parties do not.”
Would that be the same Bob Seeley who soiled himself live on Newsnight when questioned by Victoria Derbyshire over Kangaroo Courtgate just last June.
If the Tory’s are not driving their client media at this stage, then what the hell are they paying top top spin doctors a fortune for?
Farage did not fell Starmer with this, he barely grazed him. It didn’t even require a sticking plaster.
you post the most bizarre take on politics imaginable MexPet.
Sometimes I think it’s a ruse, you are on a mission to break and kill isam by parodying him to his face, in the same way the First Earth Battalion stared at goats. There’s examples already of isam completely bufuddled in conversation with you, by isam being completely out isam’d.
This place is nuts. I’m going to hang out with my sheep.
I thought much the same, definitely something odd going on
I don't rate Starmer at all, but I absolutely despise Johnson. So busted!
Starmer would do well to the listen to the now almost constant mantra from Tories: "Labour has no plan"
His desperation not to give anything edge to the enemy is now being used as a key weakness.
Only if it cuts through. Many an election has been one by being a bit vague and non threatening. To this degree? I'd defer to ydoethur on that front, but it may not be that big a threat.
But it would be nice to see a little more boldness.
The important thing is that when big issues arise, he’s on the sensible side of debates. His support for the air strikes on the houthis may annoy some in his own party, but it’ll have comforted those still a bit wary of Labour after Corbyn.
I am in a hotel in Aberdeen this evening and flicking through the channels came across Trump 'The Return' on ITV. Utterly compelling and leaves me with an absolute conviction that he will win.
Scary but very highly recommended
Is that where they showed the Southern Republican's sending immigrants north into democrat areas causing serious issues with the locals, not least in Chicago, and many extolling Trump's promise to send all immigrants back out of the US
Horrible and unedifying but base politics by Trump and his supporters
Yep. That is the one. A very good programme that looks at why people are voting for Trump rather than just bemoaning it. I mean I bemoan it but you have to try and understand the reasons rather than just condemning them.
So British Gas have now sent me a bill, and are charging me for two months into one when they had already noted the charge for the previous month on the previous bill.
Claiming as a result that my account is £61 in credit instead of £190.
What a bunch of lunatic scumbags.
Which police force do I call about this, because I have had the fuck enough?
You can use the energy ombudsman, but only if BG haven't resolved it after 8 weeks.
I already have. And had a ruling in my favour. They've ignored him and kept piling on the errors.
Oh wow.
Well, in that case I'd suggest the legal route, but not immediately filing with a small claims court.
It's about credit agencies, but the principles are generalisable much wider. You can ignore the bits about credit law - read the section headed "Presenting like a professional"
Basically your goal is to move your interactions from 'customer support', whose goal is to fob you off, to the legal department, whose goal is to reduce business risk. If you can present as someone who will (eventually, with reluctance) escalate to legal methods, then they are incentivised to solve the problem for you. Given that it costs £25 to do a small claim, it seems like a letter (maybe recorded delivery) to their legal dept would be a good option initially.
On topic, a repost of the components of polling swing to Labour, derived from Dylan Difford's voter switching chart. I really ought to do a pie chart at some stage, I suppose. Every single component below results in a swing from Con to Lab, as expressed.innthe numbers:
ELECTORATE CHANGES: 2.2% 2019 voters who've died: 1.2% 2024 voters now over 18: 0.6% Net other register changes (e.g. new citizens): 0.4%
TURNOUT CHANGES: 1.5% 2019 voters saying they won't vote: 0.5% 2019 non-voters now expressing a VI: 1.0%
CATEGORY UNDETERMINED: 2019 voters now saying Don't Know: 2.7% * Come election time these will (a) revert to original vote and not cause swing, (b) switch, with any Labour swingers increasing swing (c) not vote, adding to turnout swing and this category will dissolve
OVERALL SWING TO LABOUR IN SURVEY USED: 15.5%
If you want to argue for a lesser result for Labour, saying which swings are wrong would be a good way to make the argument.
All well and good, but most people are not political obsessives. They are not paying vast amounts of attention yet to politics. That changes when the election gun is fired. There is also the privacy of the polling booth. Some people will tell every pollster out that although they’ve voted Tory all their lives, this time it will be different. But at the crucial moment the muscle memory kicks in and hey presto it’s another Tory vote…
Some elements of this must be playing on punters minds, otherwise there is 30% return on Betfair right now for a Labour majority. DYOR. Bet what you can afford or are happy to throw away…
Not sure how most people not being political obsessives applies to this. People are not going "I will be in this category" they will just make/have made point decisions in 2024 and/or 2019 and the difference between those point decisions will become swing, which we, as the obsessives, can split down.
FWIW, I think the electorate change swing is pretty much baked in, as is the LD++ and much of the direct to Labour switching. I also think the turnout changes will play out at least to this size.
That's about 10% swing I think is likely to happen on pretty much these scales.
The doubts to me are around RefUK switching, which I think will come in as resulting in a Con->Lab swing below 2%, plus the fate of the Don't Knows, who are old, quite Tory, so many will turn out and not switch. Still, given any switching to Labour will increase the overall swing, I still think 1.5% swing from these, either on the turnout or on the switcher figures, will result.
That still gives me a little over 13% swing that I think is likely.
Starmer would do well to the listen to the now almost constant mantra from Tories: "Labour has no plan"
His desperation not to give anything edge to the enemy is now being used as a key weakness.
Only if it cuts through. Many an election has been one by being a bit vague and non threatening. To this degree? I'd defer to ydoethur on that front, but it may not be that big a threat.
But it would be nice to see a little more boldness.
The important thing is that when big issues arise, he’s on the sensible side of debates. His support for the air strikes on the houthis may annoy some in his own party, but it’ll have comforted those still a bit wary of Labour after Corbyn.
The air strikes issue really vexed Laura Kuenssberg and the BBC.
Starmer would do well to the listen to the now almost constant mantra from Tories: "Labour has no plan"
His desperation not to give anything edge to the enemy is now being used as a key weakness.
Only if it cuts through. Many an election has been one by being a bit vague and non threatening. To this degree? I'd defer to ydoethur on that front, but it may not be that big a threat.
But it would be nice to see a little more boldness.
The important thing is that when big issues arise, he’s on the sensible side of debates. His support for the air strikes on the houthis may annoy some in his own party, but it’ll have comforted those still a bit wary of Labour after Corbyn.
Absolutely. The anger of the Corbynites sustains him very well, because it totally blunts any potential Tory attacks that he is radical and dangerous, forcing them to rely on lesser attacks like his having no plan, or lacking conviction.
Not attacks without potential, to be sure, but they are harder to make hit home.
Starmer would do well to the listen to the now almost constant mantra from Tories: "Labour has no plan"
His desperation not to give anything edge to the enemy is now being used as a key weakness.
It's not though.
The only people who think it is working are the same people who are tearing their own party apart over amendments to a bill that will never be law and wouldn't work even if it was.
The public are not turned off by Starmer.
Meanwhile...
@andrewhunterm Lee Anderson has resigned to spend more time loudly clapping whenever a member of staff at the pub accidentally drops a glass
I am in a hotel in Aberdeen this evening and flicking through the channels came across Trump 'The Return' on ITV. Utterly compelling and leaves me with an absolute conviction that he will win.
Scary but very highly recommended
Is that where they showed the Southern Republican's sending immigrants north into democrat areas causing serious issues with the locals, not least in Chicago, and many extolling Trump's promise to send all immigrants back out of the US
Horrible and unedifying but base politics by Trump and his supporters
Yep. That is the one. A very good programme that looks at why people are voting for Trump rather than just bemoaning it. I mean I bemoan it but you have to try and understand the reasons rather than just condemning them.
Or we could do both.
Trying to understand why so many Germans supported the Nazis was instructive, but didn’t prevent us condemning those that did.
I am in a hotel in Aberdeen this evening and flicking through the channels came across Trump 'The Return' on ITV. Utterly compelling and leaves me with an absolute conviction that he will win.
Scary but very highly recommended
Maybe tomorrow, I'd like to sleep tonight.
I started watching but it seemed all too depressing when they filmed a room full of supposedly ex-democrats who might consider joining the MAGA standing on their chairs screaming and clapping and whooping as Guilano did a routine where he mocked the way Biden stiffly walked.
This is 1930s Germany all over again and I dont care how many times Leon tells us we are over reacting.
Starmer would do well to the listen to the now almost constant mantra from Tories: "Labour has no plan"
His desperation not to give anything edge to the enemy is now being used as a key weakness.
It's not though.
The only people who think it is working are the same people who are tearing their own party apart over amendments to a bill that will never be law and wouldn't work even if it was.
The public are not turned off by Starmer.
Meanwhile...
@andrewhunterm Lee Anderson has resigned to spend more time loudly clapping whenever a member of staff at the pub accidentally drops a glass
That rather explains the pub we go to in his constituency when travelling back from London - it's not at all great but it's a mile from the motorway junction and being at the bottom end of Greene Kings brands does a reasonable burger and drink for a tenner.
A just posted comment from our local MP, that gives a few clues as to how the Tories might fight the coming election. The comment about the PO is despicable.
We can stick to the plan with Rishi or go back to square one with Sir Kier Starmer.
“Lib Dems under Ed Davey are already a discredited force thanks to his role in the Post Office scandal, whilst a vote for Reform is a vote to let Labour in.
“The choice is already clear. The Conservatives have a plan. Labour and the other parties do not.”
The Conservatives have been yammering on about "long-term plan" in every election since 2010. It's like an early version of ChatGPT that only knows 12 words.
Do you think they've not twigged that, whatever their "plan" is, people don't like it?
They've led the Government for 14 years yet we are to believe they are just getting the hang of this government business and we should give them five more years (or should that be fifty?) because by then they might be getting quite good.
They’ve spent the past 14 years getting worse at it.
Starmer would do well to the listen to the now almost constant mantra from Tories: "Labour has no plan"
His desperation not to give anything edge to the enemy is now being used as a key weakness.
It's not though.
The only people who think it is working are the same people who are tearing their own party apart over amendments to a bill that will never be law and wouldn't work even if it was.
The public are not turned off by Starmer.
Meanwhile...
@andrewhunterm Lee Anderson has resigned to spend more time loudly clapping whenever a member of staff at the pub accidentally drops a glass
What first attracted you to the second referendum demander Keir Starmer?!
Anyway it’s not true that he doesn’t have plans; he wants to nationalise industries and rail & not nationalise industries and rail, bring back FOM & not allow FOM, lower taxes & keep them as they are, scrap tuition fees & retain them, and kick the private sector out of the NHS whilst welcoming it.
No. Keir Starmer only wants to nationalise the failed railways which is incredibly popular and obviously the right thing to do. The cost of this policy is zero.
Starting a new energy provider from scratch is not nationalising anything. That is classic New Labour politics, taking old ideas and putting them into a modern setting.
Starmer would do well to the listen to the now almost constant mantra from Tories: "Labour has no plan"
His desperation not to give anything edge to the enemy is now being used as a key weakness.
It's not though.
The only people who think it is working are the same people who are tearing their own party apart over amendments to a bill that will never be law and wouldn't work even if it was.
The public are not turned off by Starmer.
Meanwhile...
@andrewhunterm Lee Anderson has resigned to spend more time loudly clapping whenever a member of staff at the pub accidentally drops a glass
That rather explains the pub we go to in his constituency when travelling back from London - it's not at all great but it's a mile from the motorway junction and being at the bottom end of Greene Kings brands does a reasonable burger and drink for a tenner.
No. Keir Starmer only wants to nationalise the failed railways which is incredibly popular and obviously the right thing to do. The cost of this policy is zero.
Starting a new energy provider from scratch is not nationalising anything. That is classic New Labour politics, taking old ideas and putting them into a modern setting.
A state owned company providing a vital service. What could possibly go wrong?
What Labour needs to do is answer these questions:-
"There will likely be more state owned bodies under a Labour government: it has already promised a “GB Energy” company, for a start. The Post Office is only one of many state owned bodies failing in ways causing great suffering to the people in whose interests they are meant to exist. This is not an argument for privatisation (private monopolies with weak regulators are hardly an example to emulate). The issue is not ownership. It is how government entities are governed, controlled and kept up to high professional standards. It is how governments avoid creating conflicts of interest or manage them properly, if unavoidable. It is how their Boards and managers are made meaningfully accountable."
@NatashaC Hearing Tory rebels trying to encourage Lee Anderson to make major speech in the chamber in tomorrow's debate...
Line tonight is that they still hope progress can be made tomorrow, New Cons likely to meet to discuss next steps after stronger 'whipping' than expected, not clear there is any one ask/amendment to coalesce around, mood not intended to be a jubilant one
Biden: "this election was always going to be you and me vs. extreme MAGA Republicans.”
That’s quite demagogic in itself. “It’s me or the abyss.”
It's not demagogic when he's describing reality. We are looking into the abyss. I don't see how you can get much more abyssal than Trump. A majority of Iowa caucus voters believe Trump really won the 2020 election.
I’ve been saying for a while that the latest @williamglenn is desperately in need of an update. This latest version is starting to bore me. What’s next I wonder?
No. Keir Starmer only wants to nationalise the failed railways which is incredibly popular and obviously the right thing to do. The cost of this policy is zero.
Starting a new energy provider from scratch is not nationalising anything. That is classic New Labour politics, taking old ideas and putting them into a modern setting.
“Public services should be in public hands, not making profits for shareholders,” read another of Keir Starmer’s leadership pledges.
“Support common ownership of rail, mail, energy and water; end outsourcing in our NHS, local government and justice system.”
Chief justice speaks out about plans to recruit 150 judges to deal with asylum cases Most senior judge in England and Wales says government plans draw ‘matters of judicial responsibility into the political arena’
The lady chief justice, Sue Carr, said decisions on how judges were deployed should be “exclusively a matter for the judiciary”, adding that plans outlined by the government drew “matters of judicial responsibility into the political arena”..
Chief justice speaks out about plans to recruit 150 judges to deal with asylum cases Most senior judge in England and Wales says government plans draw ‘matters of judicial responsibility into the political arena’
The lady chief justice, Sue Carr, said decisions on how judges were deployed should be “exclusively a matter for the judiciary”, adding that plans outlined by the government drew “matters of judicial responsibility into the political arena”..
Another example of Conservatives actually conserving nothing of our heritage or tradition.
I am in a hotel in Aberdeen this evening and flicking through the channels came across Trump 'The Return' on ITV. Utterly compelling and leaves me with an absolute conviction that he will win.
Scary but very highly recommended
Maybe tomorrow, I'd like to sleep tonight.
I started watching but it seemed all too depressing when they filmed a room full of supposedly ex-democrats who might consider joining the MAGA standing on their chairs screaming and clapping and whooping as Guilano did a routine where he mocked the way Biden stiffly walked.
This is 1930s Germany all over again and I dont care how many times Leon tells us we are over reacting.
Trump worries me, but only to a degree, because he is lazy and a moron, so that ought to limit the harm he causes deliberately. Trump is most likely to focus on grifting and abusing his office to shield himself from legal threats, although I expect him to undermine NATO and generally screw up international relations, so he will still do plenty of damage even if his main goal is avoid his long overdue comeuppance. What ought to worry every sensible person is that if Trump does get elected in November his likely abuse of the law and the office to establish new norms rendering current checks and balances worthless will enable some truly dystopian prospects at future elections. A President that is above the law is inherently dangerous, and doubly so as America's preeminence wanes, you can easily conceive all sorts of awful "strongmen" following Trump.
I am in a hotel in Aberdeen this evening and flicking through the channels came across Trump 'The Return' on ITV. Utterly compelling and leaves me with an absolute conviction that he will win.
Scary but very highly recommended
Maybe tomorrow, I'd like to sleep tonight.
I started watching but it seemed all too depressing when they filmed a room full of supposedly ex-democrats who might consider joining the MAGA standing on their chairs screaming and clapping and whooping as Guilano did a routine where he mocked the way Biden stiffly walked.
This is 1930s Germany all over again and I dont care how many times Leon tells us we are over reacting.
Most of what constitutes MAGA is just about restoring the sense of America as it was pre-globalisation. The analogy with 1930s Germany doesn't fit very well, if at all.
No. Keir Starmer only wants to nationalise the failed railways which is incredibly popular and obviously the right thing to do. The cost of this policy is zero.
Starting a new energy provider from scratch is not nationalising anything. That is classic New Labour politics, taking old ideas and putting them into a modern setting.
Dude, the 'failed railways' are already nationalised. Labour could take the staff employed by the train operators and make them government employees but if you think that will make them cheaper or more efficient I have a bridge to sell you.
No. Keir Starmer only wants to nationalise the failed railways which is incredibly popular and obviously the right thing to do. The cost of this policy is zero.
Starting a new energy provider from scratch is not nationalising anything. That is classic New Labour politics, taking old ideas and putting them into a modern setting.
Dude, the 'failed railways' are already nationalised. Labour could take the staff employed by the train operators and make them government employees but if you think that will make them cheaper or more efficient I have a bridge to sell you.
How dare you assume my gender, I identify as a Horse!
In fairness, bringing him back as Foreign Secretary was pretty shocking and its purpose rather unclear, since the government has hardly tacked suddenly to the centre nor gone as far to the right as some would like (not that going as far as some would like is really possible), in fact it's policies seem largely unchanged, which is to say mixed and confused. So adding in an extra - and rather creative - theory is not as completely absurd as it could be. Whilst still being staggeringly unlikely.
Hey, maybe he'll serve as temporary leader as Rishi might lose his seat. The problem, which she's either forgotten or thinks will be overcome, is that party rules say the Leader has to be among those elected to the Commons. So some quick rule changes would be needed.
But a lot of talk of plots and traitors comes across as a tad dramatic in any case. I don't think she's got much to worry about, the Tory base seem ready to go in the direction she would like following an eleciton loss.
As for U turns, why don’t you explain why Sunak supports a policy he said he’d like to scrap? Or is u turning only bad when Labour does it?
I’ve no time for Sunak, but other people already criticise him for U-turns rather than ignoring them or pretending they’re a virtue
I like to judge u-turns on a case by case basis. Not being for turning is bloody stupid if you're about to plow into a brick wall, less so if you're about to head over a cliff.
So I'd like to see more u-turns, but also more justifications advanced by the people making the u-turns rather than, as you note, ignoring them. Saying nothing has changed when things have changed falls into the same type of event.
I am in a hotel in Aberdeen this evening and flicking through the channels came across Trump 'The Return' on ITV. Utterly compelling and leaves me with an absolute conviction that he will win.
Scary but very highly recommended
Maybe tomorrow, I'd like to sleep tonight.
I started watching but it seemed all too depressing when they filmed a room full of supposedly ex-democrats who might consider joining the MAGA standing on their chairs screaming and clapping and whooping as Guilano did a routine where he mocked the way Biden stiffly walked.
This is 1930s Germany all over again and I dont care how many times Leon tells us we are over reacting.
Most of what constitutes MAGA is just about restoring the sense of America as it was pre-globalisation. The analogy with 1930s Germany doesn't fit very well, if at all.
1930s Germany was all about back to 1895 - the glories of Imperial Germany. Rather than all that squalid democracy.
What struck me about the evidence given by the Fujitsu and Post Office CEOs is - apart from its content - how appallingly badly briefed and prepared they were.
Nick Read in particular is just useless: how can a CEO not know that a confidentiality clause in a settlement agreement = a Non-Disclosure Agreement?
To call these people third-rate is to compliment them.
I didn’t hear the question but I would argue that a settlement agreement with a confidentiality clause is *not* the same as a NDA.
One is a settlement agreement that includes a confidentiality agreement.
The other is limited to non-disclosure of defined information
I am in a hotel in Aberdeen this evening and flicking through the channels came across Trump 'The Return' on ITV. Utterly compelling and leaves me with an absolute conviction that he will win.
Scary but very highly recommended
Maybe tomorrow, I'd like to sleep tonight.
I started watching but it seemed all too depressing when they filmed a room full of supposedly ex-democrats who might consider joining the MAGA standing on their chairs screaming and clapping and whooping as Guilano did a routine where he mocked the way Biden stiffly walked.
This is 1930s Germany all over again and I dont care how many times Leon tells us we are over reacting.
Most of what constitutes MAGA is just about restoring the sense of America as it was pre-globalisation. The analogy with 1930s Germany doesn't fit very well, if at all.
The fit is the cult-like worship of someone who is obviously deranged and the failure of conventional democracts (small d) to stop it.
MAGA want a return to a mythical america that actually never existed (many of them are the immigrants that Trump says have poisoned the whole place rather than, erm, actually built the country). It is a 1950s small town dream.
A just posted comment from our local MP, that gives a few clues as to how the Tories might fight the coming election. The comment about the PO is despicable.
We can stick to the plan with Rishi or go back to square one with Sir Kier Starmer.
“Lib Dems under Ed Davey are already a discredited force thanks to his role in the Post Office scandal, whilst a vote for Reform is a vote to let Labour in.
“The choice is already clear. The Conservatives have a plan. Labour and the other parties do not.”
The Conservatives have been yammering on about "long-term plan" in every election since 2010. It's like an early version of ChatGPT that only knows 12 words.
Do you think they've not twigged that, whatever their "plan" is, people don't like it?
They've led the Government for 14 years yet we are to believe they are just getting the hang of this government business and we should give them five more years (or should that be fifty?) because by then they might be getting quite good.
They’ve spent the past 14 years getting worse at it.
I mean, isn't that the usual course of events? That's why you have to end up kicking the government out (unless you live in Japan).
I am in a hotel in Aberdeen this evening and flicking through the channels came across Trump 'The Return' on ITV. Utterly compelling and leaves me with an absolute conviction that he will win.
Scary but very highly recommended
Maybe tomorrow, I'd like to sleep tonight.
I started watching but it seemed all too depressing when they filmed a room full of supposedly ex-democrats who might consider joining the MAGA standing on their chairs screaming and clapping and whooping as Guilano did a routine where he mocked the way Biden stiffly walked.
This is 1930s Germany all over again and I dont care how many times Leon tells us we are over reacting.
Trump worries me, but only to a degree, because he is lazy and a moron, so that ought to limit the harm he causes deliberately...
There's ample evidence that there's a very well funded and organised set of people who've been working for the last two or three years to make sure that's not the pattern the second time round.
I would not assume that his second term will be anything like his first, should it come about.
As for U turns, why don’t you explain why Sunak supports a policy he said he’d like to scrap? Or is u turning only bad when Labour does it?
I’ve no time for Sunak, but other people already criticise him for U-turns rather than ignoring them or pretending they’re a virtue
I like to judge u-turns on a case by case basis. Not being for turning is bloody stupid if you're about to plow into a brick wall, less so if you're about to head over a cliff.
So I'd like to see more u-turns, but also more justifications advanced by the people making the u-turns rather than, as you note, ignoring them. Saying nothing has changed when things have changed falls into the same type of event.
Sorry but I'm still struggling with the cliff bit. Why less so?
So British Gas have now sent me a bill, and are charging me for two months into one when they had already noted the charge for the previous month on the previous bill.
Claiming as a result that my account is £61 in credit instead of £190.
What a bunch of lunatic scumbags.
Which police force do I call about this, because I have had the fuck enough?
Have they charged the correct standing charges and usage? Months don't really matter.
You don't understand. They've taken the credit balance at the start of December, after November's usage had been taken off, and then included November's usage again to this bill and deducted that from the credit balance in December.
It's not about the rate they're charging. They've charged me twice.
Last week I paid an electricity bill of £1.30. I've no idea why it was so low. Perhaps there's a government subsidy or maybe I paid twice the last time or possibly they overcharged at some point. I just pay whatever bill they send and trust them to sort out any anomalies in their own good time.
Which is what many SPMs thought about Horizon.
A while ago I sued NPower because they lied about my meter reading.
They claimed that they had 15 minute data from the telephone line to the meter which was therefore indisputable.
The telephone line was not connected to the meter…
They still insisted on going to court. It took 6 hours of time and £6,000 in legal expenses…
In fairness, bringing him back as Foreign Secretary was pretty shocking and its purpose rather unclear, since the government has hardly tacked suddenly to the centre nor gone as far to the right as some would like (not that going as far as some would like is really possible), in fact it's policies seem largely unchanged, which is to say mixed and confused. So adding in an extra - and rather creative - theory is not as completely absurd as it could be. Whilst still being staggeringly unlikely.
Hey, maybe he'll serve as temporary leader as Rishi might lose his seat. The problem, which she's either forgotten or thinks will be overcome, is that party rules say the Leader has to be among those elected to the Commons. So some quick rule changes would be needed.
But a lot of talk of plots and traitors comes across as a tad dramatic in any case. I don't think she's got much to worry about, the Tory base seem ready to go in the direction she would like following an eleciton loss.
Surprised the interviewer did not ask that blatantly obvious question.
As for U turns, why don’t you explain why Sunak supports a policy he said he’d like to scrap? Or is u turning only bad when Labour does it?
I’ve no time for Sunak, but other people already criticise him for U-turns rather than ignoring them or pretending they’re a virtue
I like to judge u-turns on a case by case basis. Not being for turning is bloody stupid if you're about to plow into a brick wall, less so if you're about to head over a cliff.
So I'd like to see more u-turns, but also more justifications advanced by the people making the u-turns rather than, as you note, ignoring them. Saying nothing has changed when things have changed falls into the same type of event.
Sorry but I'm still struggling with the cliff bit. Why less so?
Because I messed up my analogy and didn't edit it in time.
I ended up with two things you want to turn from instead of one, which is why I'm not a speech writer
I of course meant to say that it's stupid to be against turning in the case of a wall, but a good thing if, say, outrunning a tsunami or something.
I am in a hotel in Aberdeen this evening and flicking through the channels came across Trump 'The Return' on ITV. Utterly compelling and leaves me with an absolute conviction that he will win.
Scary but very highly recommended
Maybe tomorrow, I'd like to sleep tonight.
I started watching but it seemed all too depressing when they filmed a room full of supposedly ex-democrats who might consider joining the MAGA standing on their chairs screaming and clapping and whooping as Guilano did a routine where he mocked the way Biden stiffly walked.
This is 1930s Germany all over again and I dont care how many times Leon tells us we are over reacting.
Most of what constitutes MAGA is just about restoring the sense of America as it was pre-globalisation. The analogy with 1930s Germany doesn't fit very well, if at all.
The fit is the cult-like worship of someone who is obviously deranged and the failure of conventional democracts (small d) to stop it.
MAGA want a return to a mythical america that actually never existed (many of them are the immigrants that Trump says have poisoned the whole place rather than, erm, actually built the country). It is a 1950s small town dream.
A large part of the cult-like aura surrounding Trump is created by his opponents dialling up the hysteria to 11 and portraying him as the new Hitler.
Biden: "this election was always going to be you and me vs. extreme MAGA Republicans.”
That’s quite demagogic in itself. “It’s me or the abyss.”
It's not demagogic when he's describing reality. We are looking into the abyss. I don't see how you can get much more abyssal than Trump. A majority of Iowa caucus voters believe Trump really won the 2020 election.
I’ve been saying for a while that the latest @williamglenn is desperately in need of an update. This latest version is starting to bore me. What’s next I wonder?
Your request for some eco-doomsterism has been noted.
There's ample evidence that there's a very well funded and organised set of people who've been working for the last two or three years to make sure that's not the pattern the second time round.
I would not assume that his second term will be anything like his first, should it come about.
Sure there are people around him that will seek to use Trump's presidency if he is elected. But imagine if Trump was actually politically motivated and capable, such a person would be far more dangerous. Someone like Nixon, who was a thousand times smarter than Trump, had plenty of big ideas, but could also be extremely rash at times, but now with untrammelled power. That's what a Trump reelection could enable in the future.
I am in a hotel in Aberdeen this evening and flicking through the channels came across Trump 'The Return' on ITV. Utterly compelling and leaves me with an absolute conviction that he will win.
Scary but very highly recommended
Maybe tomorrow, I'd like to sleep tonight.
I started watching but it seemed all too depressing when they filmed a room full of supposedly ex-democrats who might consider joining the MAGA standing on their chairs screaming and clapping and whooping as Guilano did a routine where he mocked the way Biden stiffly walked.
This is 1930s Germany all over again and I dont care how many times Leon tells us we are over reacting.
Most of what constitutes MAGA is just about restoring the sense of America as it was pre-globalisation. The analogy with 1930s Germany doesn't fit very well, if at all.
The fit is the cult-like worship of someone who is obviously deranged and the failure of conventional democracts (small d) to stop it.
MAGA want a return to a mythical america that actually never existed (many of them are the immigrants that Trump says have poisoned the whole place rather than, erm, actually built the country). It is a 1950s small town dream.
A large part of the cult-like aura surrounding Trump is created by his opponents dialling up the hysteria to 11 and portraying him as the new Hitler.
Except that doesn't help when he really does say things completely outrageous and actually does things like tries to hold onto power depsite losing an election.
You cannot just say 'Oh, that's terrible that you exaggerate' or whatever. Yes it still happens, although not anything like in 2016 when he hadn't done such terrible things and was even still criticised by his own side occasionally too.
A wannabee dictator tries to stay in power when they lose. He did that. So calling him Hitler would be an exagerration but calling him a wannabee dictator would in fact be entirely accurate. Yet his supporters would still say it's hysteria dialed up to 11, in which case do people respond by lying and pretending it's normal to try to stay in power like that? How does that help?
In fairness, bringing him back as Foreign Secretary was pretty shocking and its purpose rather unclear, since the government has hardly tacked suddenly to the centre nor gone as far to the right as some would like (not that going as far as some would like is really possible), in fact it's policies seem largely unchanged, which is to say mixed and confused. So adding in an extra - and rather creative - theory is not as completely absurd as it could be. Whilst still being staggeringly unlikely.
Hey, maybe he'll serve as temporary leader as Rishi might lose his seat. The problem, which she's either forgotten or thinks will be overcome, is that party rules say the Leader has to be among those elected to the Commons. So some quick rule changes would be needed.
But a lot of talk of plots and traitors comes across as a tad dramatic in any case. I don't think she's got much to worry about, the Tory base seem ready to go in the direction she would like following an eleciton loss.
I am enjoying the mental imagery of Cameron - Bobby Ewing-like - returning. Reversing out of the No.10 door, "tum-te-tum-te-tum" and we're back in the EU room.
... It was all just a dream - phew!
Then I remember how sh*t Dallas was the tories were and realise it's just a fever dream.
Comments
The mediocrity of these people is just awful. I don't even mind that they make mistakes - we all do that. It is the utter unwillingness to admit to them, put them right and learn from them which makes me loathe them and the harm they do.
(As to the failure to resettle Palestinians, Edward Luttwak contributes a fascinating letter to the TLS this week on the subject. Basically pointing out that it hasn't happened and should have done).
If you were aware of problems with Horizon and did not whistleblow to a newspaper, resign your position, inform the defence/court, or drop a line to your MP, you are always 100% culpable. People were going to jail FFS.
The only exception is when people were forced into NDAs to save their own life savings etc
1) make Fujitsu pay 150%
2) make the PO pay 150%
3) accuse them of stealing money based on a spreadsheet I made earlier.
4) mercilessly hound them, screaming “Fuck you, pay me”
“ Taylor also faces a charge of outraging public decency, "by behaving in an indecent manner, namely by being inside a bin containing the waste of children, including with soiled nappies and disclosed garments and interacting with the soiled nappies in sight of the public".
Taylor is also charged with criminal damage, by smearing excrement on milk bottles "intended for consumption by small children" and on other parts of a nursery building, including the fire escape.
Taylor is also charged with breaching a criminal behaviour order imposed by Nottinghamshire Magistrates’ Court in April this year, by being within ten metres of a nursery without reasonable excuse, and/or "by removing items from a waste receptacle in direct contravention of said order".
The defendant also faces a charge of intentionally or recklessly causing a public nuisance between October 2022 and November 2023 "at South Tyneside, without reasonable excuse, did an act, namely by continuously dumping adult human waste and other materials on the street and at nursery premises and interfering with the contents of clinical waste bins containing faecal matter from children and babies and other similar behaviours”
https://www.itv.com/news/tyne-tees/2023-12-20/defendant-accused-of-dumping-soiled-adult-nappies-at-nurseries-court-hears
The Blair experience has left a residual cynicism and Starmer is part of this - his sole task is to look better at doing government than Sunak. What he did 20 years ago at the DPP is irrelevant.
I apologise. Shouldn’t comment on anyone’s mental state.
Except maybe if cleverly paraphrase Donald Trump
“ don't want to be overly rough on the mentality of Trump supporters, but I have to say that they are the craziest fuckers that we've had in the history of our country, they are destroying our country.
Anyone who voted for Ted Cruz were the sanest, of the sanest, of the sanest in comparison.”
“And don’t forget, if you should have any doubts, at all - any doubts - i care about my supporters so much, I asked them to come out and die for me tonight, telling them it would be well worth it. I mean - just how crazy can you be?”
I don’t recall your specific arguments but I think there were good reasons to argue against granting preferential asylum for Ukrainians, and i say this despite having taken in a refugee myself.
It’s a good challenge RE enabling genocide. I feel there is a difference because refugees from Ukraine were not males of fighting age and so, if it turns out that it is possible to defend Ukraine against Russia, taking in refugees won’t have harmed that fight and in fact would have helped it by reducing civilian casualties from friendly fire.
Nevertheless I can see there are also similarities, which is causing me to think quite hard about what my position in both cases is, so thank you.
Just as in the #NU10K there are those who can at least pretend to do their alleged jobs.
But what is the incentive?
Only option is to cave imo
ELECTORATE CHANGES: 2.2%
2019 voters who've died: 1.2%
2024 voters now over 18: 0.6%
Net other register changes (e.g. new citizens): 0.4%
SWITCHING CHANGES: 8.6%
Switching to/from LD/Green/SNP: 1.0%
Switching to/from RefUK/other: 2.6%
Direct Con<->Lab switching: 5.0%
TURNOUT CHANGES: 1.5%
2019 voters saying they won't vote: 0.5%
2019 non-voters now expressing a VI: 1.0%
CATEGORY UNDETERMINED:
2019 voters now saying Don't Know: 2.7%
* Come election time these will (a) revert to original vote and not cause swing, (b) switch, with any Labour swingers increasing swing (c) not vote, adding to turnout swing and this category will dissolve
OVERALL SWING TO LABOUR IN SURVEY USED: 15.5%
If you want to argue for a lesser result for Labour, saying which swings are wrong would be a good way to make the argument.
It's like emphasising your principles, it only works if people like those principles.
I really think the odds of a super landslide are underrated. I always believed it would come eventually as the Tories would damage themselves beyond all repair but I didn’t think it would happen this time around.
Perhaps Blackadder's admonishment to Lord Percy is apposite here.
Some elements of this must be playing on punters minds, otherwise there is 30% return on Betfair right now for a Labour majority. DYOR. Bet what you can afford or are happy to throw away…
The Tories managed to do the renewal thing in 2019, they cannot pull that off a second time, not when a win would mean 19 years at least in power.
Same way that a political opponent being charged with things can look very bad, we know authoritarian states do it to punish rivals. But it is also a necessary thing to do if the opponent, you know, tried to illegally hold onto power, and not to do so would simply enable it.
So picking the right language is not easy.
Farage did not fell Starmer with this, he barely grazed him. It didn’t even require a sticking plaster.
you post the most bizarre take on politics imaginable MexPet.
Sometimes I think it’s a ruse, you are on a mission to break and kill isam by parodying him to his face, in the same way the First Earth Battalion stared at goats. There’s examples already of isam completely bufuddled in conversation with you, by isam being completely out isam’d.
This place is nuts. I’m going to hang out with my sheep.
@SophyRidgeSky
·
3h
68 MPs voted in favour of the Bill Cash amendment on Rwanda... that's a big number and will worry No10. If anything like that number of Tories rebel on the 3rd reading the Rwanda Bill won't pass...
===
We will need more popcorn, Jeeves.
The rebels may have limited unity on anything beyond this, but the government hasn't seemed to have any firm idea of, well, anything, for a long time, even before Boris went, when they often acted like a government with a small majority, running scared a lot.
My problem with the "yes but 49% of Iowans wanted a Trump alternative" take is that the alternatives are aligned with Trump. Look at it this way:
MAGA (Trump): 51%
Reformed MAGA (DeSantis): 21%
Orthodox MAGA (Vivek): 8%
Republican Classic: 19%
https://nitter.net/daveweigel/status/1747275492095574341#m
my mind is at rest, I shall sleep easy.
ETA: An admirable task, Mexicanpete. Good work, keep it up.
Scary but very highly recommended
Professional self-respect, even.
I know, I know, I'm living in La-La-Land.
https://cdn.theatlantic.com/media/archives/1876/06/37-224/132121850.pdf
I must finish the set of headers I am writing.
The reaction to them will be amusing.
His desperation not to give anything edge to the enemy is now being used as a key weakness.
Your comment would be like Trump saying the same thing and asking could nobody less offensive do the job. Of course they could, but the race will be Trump vs Biden, assuming they both live that long.
Horrible and unedifying but base politics by Trump and his supporters
But it would be nice to see a little more boldness.
Well, in that case I'd suggest the legal route, but not immediately filing with a small claims court.
Have a look at this article here: https://www.kalzumeus.com/2017/09/09/identity-theft-credit-reports/
It's about credit agencies, but the principles are generalisable much wider. You can ignore the bits about credit law - read the section headed "Presenting like a professional"
Basically your goal is to move your interactions from 'customer support', whose goal is to fob you off, to the legal department, whose goal is to reduce business risk. If you can present as someone who will (eventually, with reluctance) escalate to legal methods, then they are incentivised to solve the problem for you. Given that it costs £25 to do a small claim, it seems like a letter (maybe recorded delivery) to their legal dept would be a good option initially.
FWIW, I think the electorate change swing is pretty much baked in, as is the LD++ and much of the direct to Labour switching. I also think the turnout changes will play out at least to this size.
That's about 10% swing I think is likely to happen on pretty much these scales.
The doubts to me are around RefUK switching, which I think will come in as resulting in a Con->Lab swing below 2%, plus the fate of the Don't Knows, who are old, quite Tory, so many will turn out and not switch. Still, given any switching to Labour will increase the overall swing, I still think 1.5% swing from these, either on the turnout or on the switcher figures, will result.
That still gives me a little over 13% swing that I think is likely.
Not attacks without potential, to be sure, but they are harder to make hit home.
The only people who think it is working are the same people who are tearing their own party apart over amendments to a bill that will never be law and wouldn't work even if it was.
The public are not turned off by Starmer.
Meanwhile...
@andrewhunterm
Lee Anderson has resigned to spend more time loudly clapping whenever a member of staff at the pub accidentally drops a glass
Trying to understand why so many Germans supported the Nazis was instructive, but didn’t prevent us condemning those that did.
This is 1930s Germany all over again and I dont care how many times Leon tells us we are over reacting.
But it does have that sort of feel to it...
Anyway it’s not true that he doesn’t have plans; he wants to nationalise industries and rail & not nationalise industries and rail, bring back FOM & not allow FOM, lower taxes & keep them as they are, scrap tuition fees & retain them, and kick the private sector out of the NHS whilst welcoming it.
He’s on record saying all of this
Starting a new energy provider from scratch is not nationalising anything. That is classic New Labour politics, taking old ideas and putting them into a modern setting.
I can probably recommend better.
What Labour needs to do is answer these questions:-
"There will likely be more state owned bodies under a Labour government: it has already promised a “GB Energy” company, for a start. The Post Office is only one of many state owned bodies failing in ways causing great suffering to the people in whose interests they are meant to exist. This is not an argument for privatisation (private monopolies with weak regulators are hardly an example to emulate). The issue is not ownership. It is how government entities are governed, controlled and kept up to high professional standards. It is how governments avoid creating conflicts of interest or manage them properly, if unavoidable. It is how their Boards and managers are made meaningfully accountable."
Hearing Tory rebels trying to encourage Lee Anderson to make major speech in the chamber in tomorrow's debate...
Line tonight is that they still hope progress can be made tomorrow, New Cons likely to meet to discuss next steps after stronger 'whipping' than expected, not clear there is any one ask/amendment to coalesce around, mood not intended to be a jubilant one
“Support common ownership of rail, mail, energy and water; end outsourcing in our NHS, local government and justice system.”
https://www.bigissue.com/news/politics/keir-starmer-broken-promises-tuition-fees-nationalisation-u-turn/
Most senior judge in England and Wales says government plans draw ‘matters of judicial responsibility into the political arena’
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/jan/16/chief-justice-criticises-plans-to-recruit-150-judges-to-deal-with-asylum-cases
The most senior judge in England and Wales has spoken out about plans to recruit and train 150 judges to help implement Rishi Sunak’s Rwanda deportation policy.
The lady chief justice, Sue Carr, said decisions on how judges were deployed should be “exclusively a matter for the judiciary”, adding that plans outlined by the government drew “matters of judicial responsibility into the political arena”..
“The police have warned members of the public not to approach the men”
Hey, maybe he'll serve as temporary leader as Rishi might lose his seat. The problem, which she's either forgotten or thinks will be overcome, is that party rules say the Leader has to be among those elected to the Commons. So some quick rule changes would be needed.
But a lot of talk of plots and traitors comes across as a tad dramatic in any case. I don't think she's got much to worry about, the Tory base seem ready to go in the direction she would like following an eleciton loss.
"...so the factory has a cashflow problem but, fortunately, Sid has a budgie that can guess the winners in horse races."
So I'd like to see more u-turns, but also more justifications advanced by the people making the u-turns rather than, as you note, ignoring them. Saying nothing has changed when things have changed falls into the same type of event.
Hmmmm…
One is a settlement agreement that includes a confidentiality agreement.
The other is limited to non-disclosure of defined information
MAGA want a return to a mythical america that actually never existed (many of them are the immigrants that Trump says have poisoned the whole place rather than, erm, actually built the country). It is a 1950s small town dream.
I would not assume that his second term will be anything like his first, should it come about.
They claimed that they had 15 minute data from the telephone line to the meter which was therefore indisputable.
The telephone line was not connected to the meter…
They still insisted on going to court. It took 6 hours of time and £6,000 in legal expenses…
But then it was Talk TV.
https://twitter.com/TalkTV/status/1747373519254548935
I ended up with two things you want to turn from instead of one, which is why I'm not a speech writer
I of course meant to say that it's stupid to be against turning in the case of a wall, but a good thing if, say, outrunning a tsunami or something.
I mean, why the f**k not at this stage?
:: snorts ::
You cannot just say 'Oh, that's terrible that you exaggerate' or whatever. Yes it still happens, although not anything like in 2016 when he hadn't done such terrible things and was even still criticised by his own side occasionally too.
A wannabee dictator tries to stay in power when they lose. He did that. So calling him Hitler would be an exagerration but calling him a wannabee dictator would in fact be entirely accurate. Yet his supporters would still say it's hysteria dialed up to 11, in which case do people respond by lying and pretending it's normal to try to stay in power like that? How does that help?
... It was all just a dream - phew!
Then I remember how sh*t Dallas was the tories were and realise it's just a fever dream.
Then realise my fever dream was just.....