Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

And so to New Hampshire where one of the primaries won’t count – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 11,010
edited February 4 in General
imageAnd so to New Hampshire where one of the primaries won’t count – politicalbetting.com

Next Tuesday we have the WH2024 primary in New Hampshire which has traditionally been the first state to decide.

Read the full story here

«134

Comments

  • Options
    TimSTimS Posts: 9,524
    First, like Biden
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,157
    Isn't there something similar going on in Nevada for the Republicans?
  • Options
    Thoughts and prayers for Michelle Mone and Douglas Barrowman.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,095
    ydoethur said:

    Isn't there something similar going on in Nevada for the Republicans?

    They are having both a primary and a caucus.

    Don't ask.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,148

    James Heale
    @JAHeale

    Gordon Brown asked by Sky on whether he will do a Cameron-style comeback: “I’m too old to be a British politician and too young to be an American politician.”

    Lol. Nothing 'dour' about that from Gordon.
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,983
    Why hasn't Biden fired Austin? Is it just because he doesn't think he can get another SECDEF (Hicks?) confirmed?
  • Options
    TimSTimS Posts: 9,524

    Thoughts and prayers for Michelle Mone and Douglas Barrowman.

    Neidle is quickly establishing himself as a fully fledged scourge of [alleged] tax dodgers. His work on Post Office recently has also been excellent. Enough material for the first book by now I think.
  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 24,936
    edited January 18

    Thoughts and prayers for Michelle Mone and Douglas Barrowman.

    Why? They are getting just what they (especially he) deserves

    Equally Dan instantly saw through a whole set of landlord schemes that HMRC only issued a spotlight about after Dan’s work
  • Options
    CookieCookie Posts: 11,366
    kinabalu said:

    James Heale
    @JAHeale

    Gordon Brown asked by Sky on whether he will do a Cameron-style comeback: “I’m too old to be a British politician and too young to be an American politician.”

    Lol. Nothing 'dour' about that from Gordon.
    That's quite funny. Though in Brown's frurious deadpan I imagine you would have had to have been concentrating quite hard to realise he'd just told a joke.
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,223
    Dura_Ace said:

    Why hasn't Biden fired Austin? Is it just because he doesn't think he can get another SECDEF (Hicks?) confirmed?

    "Hudson, sir! He's Hicks!"
  • Options
    eek said:

    Thoughts and prayers for Michelle Mone and Douglas Barrowman.

    Why? They are getting just what they (especially he) deserves
    We need a sarcasm symbol though I really spend less time fantasying thinking about Michelle Mone in a women’s prison.
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,223

    James Heale
    @JAHeale

    Gordon Brown asked by Sky on whether he will do a Cameron-style comeback: “I’m too old to be a British politician and too young to be an American politician.”

    Not bad for the gurner :lol:
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,961
    edited January 18
    @MikeSmithson at the end "not unaffected", surely?

    Edit: either way, the betting will be affected by the vote, but it is not affected in the sense that betting is still happening.
  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 24,936

    eek said:

    Thoughts and prayers for Michelle Mone and Douglas Barrowman.

    Why? They are getting just what they (especially he) deserves
    We need a sarcasm symbol though I really spend less time fantasying thinking about Michelle Mone in a women’s prison.
    The typical fantasy regarding Douglas is a few yards beneath a bridge with concrete boots
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,157
    eek said:

    eek said:

    Thoughts and prayers for Michelle Mone and Douglas Barrowman.

    Why? They are getting just what they (especially he) deserves
    We need a sarcasm symbol though I really spend less time fantasying thinking about Michelle Mone in a women’s prison.
    The typical fantasy regarding Douglas is a few yards beneath a bridge with concrete boots
    I'm intrigued. How many bridges have you seen that wear concrete boots?
  • Options
    algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,500

    eek said:

    Thoughts and prayers for Michelle Mone and Douglas Barrowman.

    Why? They are getting just what they (especially he) deserves
    We need a sarcasm symbol though I really spend less time fantasying thinking about Michelle Mone in a women’s prison.
    Easier just to keep your Irony Tracker switched to 'On'. It works when there is no mobile signal.
  • Options
    I miss the days when we were assured Sweden didn’t want anything to do with NATO, although they need to come up with better Operation names, it’s no Able Archer or ReForGer.

    Nato members will send 90,000 troops to the alliance’s largest military exercise since the Cold War.

    Britain is deploying 20,000 soldiers to Operation Steadfast Defender 2024, which starts next week and will continue until the end of May.

    Gen Christopher Cavoli, Nato’s most senior commander, said the exercises would demonstrate the alliance’s ability to quickly “reinforce” its territory in the event of an attack.

    Exercises will take place in Germany, Poland and the Baltic States in what is widely expected to be a simulation of war with Russia.

    Troops from all 31 Nato members and Sweden, a candidate for membership, are taking part.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/01/18/ukraine-russia-war-live-st-petersburg-drone-strike/
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,263
    edited January 18
    algarkirk said:

    eek said:

    Thoughts and prayers for Michelle Mone and Douglas Barrowman.

    Why? They are getting just what they (especially he) deserves
    We need a sarcasm symbol though I really spend less time fantasying thinking about Michelle Mone in a women’s prison.
    Easier just to keep your Irony Tracker switched to 'On'. It works when there is no mobile signal.
    Easier to assume that everything that @TSE posts is as sarcastic as his taste in shoes is loud.
  • Options
    Good afternoon from Gatwick. Sensational business meeting this morning, so well worth the trip. But. Roads were unpleasant for a chunk of the drive to the airport yesterday, and today can best be described as snowmageddon.

    I wonder if I will actually make it home tonight? Back to Aberdeen, no problem. Beyond that, not sure...
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,263

    I miss the days when we were assured Sweden didn’t want anything to do with NATO, although they need to come up with better Operation names, it’s no Able Archer or ReForGer.

    Nato members will send 90,000 troops to the alliance’s largest military exercise since the Cold War.

    Britain is deploying 20,000 soldiers to Operation Steadfast Defender 2024, which starts next week and will continue until the end of May.

    Gen Christopher Cavoli, Nato’s most senior commander, said the exercises would demonstrate the alliance’s ability to quickly “reinforce” its territory in the event of an attack.

    Exercises will take place in Germany, Poland and the Baltic States in what is widely expected to be a simulation of war with Russia.

    Troops from all 31 Nato members and Sweden, a candidate for membership, are taking part.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/01/18/ukraine-russia-war-live-st-petersburg-drone-strike/

    Red Storm?
  • Options

    algarkirk said:

    eek said:

    Thoughts and prayers for Michelle Mone and Douglas Barrowman.

    Why? They are getting just what they (especially he) deserves
    We need a sarcasm symbol though I really spend less time fantasying thinking about Michelle Mone in a women’s prison.
    Easier just to keep your Irony Tracker switched to 'On'. It works when there is no mobile signal.
    Easier to assume that everything that @TSE posts is as sarcastic as his taste in shoes is loud.
    I am meeting JohnO on Saturday and I’ve bought new trainers for the occasion.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,263

    algarkirk said:

    eek said:

    Thoughts and prayers for Michelle Mone and Douglas Barrowman.

    Why? They are getting just what they (especially he) deserves
    We need a sarcasm symbol though I really spend less time fantasying thinking about Michelle Mone in a women’s prison.
    Easier just to keep your Irony Tracker switched to 'On'. It works when there is no mobile signal.
    Easier to assume that everything that @TSE posts is as sarcastic as his taste in shoes is loud.
    I am meeting JohnO on Saturday and I’ve bought new trainers for the occasion.
    I'll send a note to Chief Constable Savage (OBE) to be on the look out for someone wearing loud shoes in a built up area.
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,419
    On topic, not entirely true about the Dems and NH.

    You could argue that no primaries will have an effect given that Biden is the only credible candidate. To that end, NH is no different.

    However, if it were a competitive race, the fact that no delegates will be apportioned as a result of the vote would probably make precious little difference. The momentum coming out of these early states still matters greatly in framing the contest and it certainly wouldn't "have no impact on who is the Democratic nominee".
  • Options
    CatManCatMan Posts: 2,763

    I miss the days when we were assured Sweden didn’t want anything to do with NATO, although they need to come up with better Operation names, it’s no Able Archer or ReForGer.

    Nato members will send 90,000 troops to the alliance’s largest military exercise since the Cold War.

    Britain is deploying 20,000 soldiers to Operation Steadfast Defender 2024, which starts next week and will continue until the end of May.

    Gen Christopher Cavoli, Nato’s most senior commander, said the exercises would demonstrate the alliance’s ability to quickly “reinforce” its territory in the event of an attack.

    Exercises will take place in Germany, Poland and the Baltic States in what is widely expected to be a simulation of war with Russia.

    Troops from all 31 Nato members and Sweden, a candidate for membership, are taking part.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/01/18/ukraine-russia-war-live-st-petersburg-drone-strike/

    Free the @Stuart_Dickson One!
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,148
    Cookie said:

    kinabalu said:

    James Heale
    @JAHeale

    Gordon Brown asked by Sky on whether he will do a Cameron-style comeback: “I’m too old to be a British politician and too young to be an American politician.”

    Lol. Nothing 'dour' about that from Gordon.
    That's quite funny. Though in Brown's frurious deadpan I imagine you would have had to have been concentrating quite hard to realise he'd just told a joke.
    No, he's no Russ Abbot. He's Gordon Brown.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,754

    algarkirk said:

    eek said:

    Thoughts and prayers for Michelle Mone and Douglas Barrowman.

    Why? They are getting just what they (especially he) deserves
    We need a sarcasm symbol though I really spend less time fantasying thinking about Michelle Mone in a women’s prison.
    Easier just to keep your Irony Tracker switched to 'On'. It works when there is no mobile signal.
    Easier to assume that everything that @TSE posts is as sarcastic as his taste in shoes is loud.
    I am meeting JohnO on Saturday and I’ve bought new trainers for the occasion.
    Any reason JohnO isnt posting these days ?
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,651

    I miss the days when we were assured Sweden didn’t want anything to do with NATO, although they need to come up with better Operation names, it’s no Able Archer or ReForGer.

    Nato members will send 90,000 troops to the alliance’s largest military exercise since the Cold War.

    Britain is deploying 20,000 soldiers to Operation Steadfast Defender 2024, which starts next week and will continue until the end of May.

    Gen Christopher Cavoli, Nato’s most senior commander, said the exercises would demonstrate the alliance’s ability to quickly “reinforce” its territory in the event of an attack.

    Exercises will take place in Germany, Poland and the Baltic States in what is widely expected to be a simulation of war with Russia.

    Troops from all 31 Nato members and Sweden, a candidate for membership, are taking part.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/01/18/ukraine-russia-war-live-st-petersburg-drone-strike/

    Red Storm?
    Was there ever a good alt-hist where NATO were the aggressors? "Red Storm Rising" and "By Dawn's Early Light" both had faked NATO attacks as the initiator, but otherwise it was always the Soviets as bad guys
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,095

    I miss the days when we were assured Sweden didn’t want anything to do with NATO, although they need to come up with better Operation names, it’s no Able Archer or ReForGer.

    Nato members will send 90,000 troops to the alliance’s largest military exercise since the Cold War.

    Britain is deploying 20,000 soldiers to Operation Steadfast Defender 2024, which starts next week and will continue until the end of May.

    Gen Christopher Cavoli, Nato’s most senior commander, said the exercises would demonstrate the alliance’s ability to quickly “reinforce” its territory in the event of an attack.

    Exercises will take place in Germany, Poland and the Baltic States in what is widely expected to be a simulation of war with Russia.

    Troops from all 31 Nato members and Sweden, a candidate for membership, are taking part.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/01/18/ukraine-russia-war-live-st-petersburg-drone-strike/

    A simulation of war with Russia.

    Hmmm. Rishi needs a hot war.

    "and the man at the back said
    Everyone attack!"
  • Options
    DM_AndyDM_Andy Posts: 332

    Looking at the detail of the YouGov poll it looks likely that if HMG could stop the small boats, then that would be the single greatest thing that would help to win back the 2019GE voters that they have lost.

    But they actually have to stop the boats.

    I'm not really seeing that. YouGov says that 22% of the electorate would be more likely to vote Tory if the small boats were stopped. Problem is that 41% of the Tories in the sample agreed so it's only 17% of non Tories including only 7% of Labour and 8% of Lib Dem in the sample, if we assume that Greens are also 8% and that more likely means definitely voting Tory makes the YouGov.

    Labour drop from 47% to 44%
    Conservative up from 20% to 34%
    Reform drop from 10% to 1%
    Lib Dems drop from 8% to 7%
    Greens drop from 7% to 6%

    On the same list there's "Reduce NHS Waiting Lists" this would get more Tory support from 27% of the public, including 19% of Labour voters. Again making the massive assumption that more likely to support means actually switching your vote, that would mean:

    Labour drop from 47% to 38%
    Conservative up from 20% to 39%
    Reform drop from 10% to 3%
    Lib Dems drop from 8% to 7%
    Greens drop from 7% to 6%

    And that would be hung parliament, Conservative largest party territory.
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,868
    @RedfieldWilton
    Sunak and Starmer are tied in the Blue Wall.

    Which of the following do Blue Wall voters think would be the better PM for the UK? (17-18 January)

    Keir Starmer 36% (+1)
    Rishi Sunak 36% (-4)

    Changes +/- 4 December
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,263
    viewcode said:

    I miss the days when we were assured Sweden didn’t want anything to do with NATO, although they need to come up with better Operation names, it’s no Able Archer or ReForGer.

    Nato members will send 90,000 troops to the alliance’s largest military exercise since the Cold War.

    Britain is deploying 20,000 soldiers to Operation Steadfast Defender 2024, which starts next week and will continue until the end of May.

    Gen Christopher Cavoli, Nato’s most senior commander, said the exercises would demonstrate the alliance’s ability to quickly “reinforce” its territory in the event of an attack.

    Exercises will take place in Germany, Poland and the Baltic States in what is widely expected to be a simulation of war with Russia.

    Troops from all 31 Nato members and Sweden, a candidate for membership, are taking part.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/01/18/ukraine-russia-war-live-st-petersburg-drone-strike/

    Red Storm?
    Was there ever a good alt-hist where NATO were the aggressors? "Red Storm Rising" and "By Dawn's Early Light" both had faked NATO attacks as the initiator, but otherwise it was always the Soviets as bad guys
    The Soviet warplans claimed to assume a NATO surprise attack.

    Invariably, though, the "Surprise NATO attack" was assumed to have conquered not an inch of Warsaw Pact Territory and destroyed nothing. And the Warsaw pact units were all assumed to be at maximum readiness. And raring to go, on the border....
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,587

    I miss the days when we were assured Sweden didn’t want anything to do with NATO, although they need to come up with better Operation names, it’s no Able Archer or ReForGer.

    Nato members will send 90,000 troops to the alliance’s largest military exercise since the Cold War.

    Britain is deploying 20,000 soldiers to Operation Steadfast Defender 2024, which starts next week and will continue until the end of May.

    Gen Christopher Cavoli, Nato’s most senior commander, said the exercises would demonstrate the alliance’s ability to quickly “reinforce” its territory in the event of an attack.

    Exercises will take place in Germany, Poland and the Baltic States in what is widely expected to be a simulation of war with Russia.

    Troops from all 31 Nato members and Sweden, a candidate for membership, are taking part.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/01/18/ukraine-russia-war-live-st-petersburg-drone-strike/

    Operation Smörgåsbord.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,609
    edited January 18

    algarkirk said:

    eek said:

    Thoughts and prayers for Michelle Mone and Douglas Barrowman.

    Why? They are getting just what they (especially he) deserves
    We need a sarcasm symbol though I really spend less time fantasying thinking about Michelle Mone in a women’s prison.
    Easier just to keep your Irony Tracker switched to 'On'. It works when there is no mobile signal.
    Easier to assume that everything that @TSE posts is as sarcastic as his taste in shoes is loud.
    I am meeting JohnO on Saturday and I’ve bought new trainers for the occasion.
    I'll send a note to Chief Constable Savage (OBE) to be on the look out for someone wearing loud shoes in a built up area.
    What he needs is urban camo|: but, alas, those don't have the rectilinearity of Berlin Camouflage as on Chieftains of yore.

    https://tankmuseumshop.org/products/world-of-tanks-low-top-canvas-trainer-urban-camo
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,587

    Good afternoon from Gatwick. Sensational business meeting this morning, so well worth the trip. But. Roads were unpleasant for a chunk of the drive to the airport yesterday, and today can best be described as snowmageddon.

    I wonder if I will actually make it home tonight? Back to Aberdeen, no problem. Beyond that, not sure...

    It could be a bit of a Dyce-y journey.
  • Options
    CookieCookie Posts: 11,366

    I miss the days when we were assured Sweden didn’t want anything to do with NATO, although they need to come up with better Operation names, it’s no Able Archer or ReForGer.

    Nato members will send 90,000 troops to the alliance’s largest military exercise since the Cold War.

    Britain is deploying 20,000 soldiers to Operation Steadfast Defender 2024, which starts next week and will continue until the end of May.

    Gen Christopher Cavoli, Nato’s most senior commander, said the exercises would demonstrate the alliance’s ability to quickly “reinforce” its territory in the event of an attack.

    Exercises will take place in Germany, Poland and the Baltic States in what is widely expected to be a simulation of war with Russia.

    Troops from all 31 Nato members and Sweden, a candidate for membership, are taking part.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/01/18/ukraine-russia-war-live-st-petersburg-drone-strike/

    Operation Smörgåsbord.
    You can tell the Americans are in charge when operations have daftly heroic names. I prefer the British names which mean absolutely nothing e.g. Operation Market Garden.
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,651
    edited January 18

    viewcode said:

    I miss the days when we were assured Sweden didn’t want anything to do with NATO, although they need to come up with better Operation names, it’s no Able Archer or ReForGer.

    Nato members will send 90,000 troops to the alliance’s largest military exercise since the Cold War.

    Britain is deploying 20,000 soldiers to Operation Steadfast Defender 2024, which starts next week and will continue until the end of May.

    Gen Christopher Cavoli, Nato’s most senior commander, said the exercises would demonstrate the alliance’s ability to quickly “reinforce” its territory in the event of an attack.

    Exercises will take place in Germany, Poland and the Baltic States in what is widely expected to be a simulation of war with Russia.

    Troops from all 31 Nato members and Sweden, a candidate for membership, are taking part.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/01/18/ukraine-russia-war-live-st-petersburg-drone-strike/

    Red Storm?
    Was there ever a good alt-hist where NATO were the aggressors? "Red Storm Rising" and "By Dawn's Early Light" both had faked NATO attacks as the initiator, but otherwise it was always the Soviets as bad guys
    The Soviet warplans claimed to assume a NATO surprise attack.

    Invariably, though, the "Surprise NATO attack" was assumed to have conquered not an inch of Warsaw Pact Territory and destroyed nothing. And the Warsaw pact units were all assumed to be at maximum readiness. And raring to go, on the border....
    Ah, nostalgia. Warsaw Pact, Reforger, Fulda Gap, Cheyenne Mountain, rotate your key, jumpers for goalposts... :)
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,903
    Not having this!

    Some keyboard snipers moaning that I criticised the opposition for referring to the Kigali government, not the Rwandan government.

    I would not call the French government, the Paris government nor the Scottish government, the Edinburgh government.
    Why disrespect Rwanda?


    https://x.com/theresecoffey/status/1747964647355854893?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
  • Options
    StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,384
    isam said:

    ….

    Thank goodness Chris Patten hasn't (mis)heard the phrase in 1992;


  • Options
    isam said:

    Not having this!

    Some keyboard snipers moaning that I criticised the opposition for referring to the Kigali government, not the Rwandan government.

    I would not call the French government, the Paris government nor the Scottish government, the Edinburgh government.
    Why disrespect Rwanda?


    https://x.com/theresecoffey/status/1747964647355854893?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    She’s never heard of a metonymy?
  • Options
    StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,384

    isam said:

    Not having this!

    Some keyboard snipers moaning that I criticised the opposition for referring to the Kigali government, not the Rwandan government.

    I would not call the French government, the Paris government nor the Scottish government, the Edinburgh government.
    Why disrespect Rwanda?


    https://x.com/theresecoffey/status/1747964647355854893?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    She’s never heard of a metonymy?
    Or the Streisand Effect?
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,651
    edited January 18
    isam said:

    Not having this!

    Some keyboard snipers moaning that I criticised the opposition for referring to the Kigali government, not the Rwandan government.

    I would not call the French government, the Paris government nor the Scottish government, the Edinburgh government.
    Why disrespect Rwanda?


    https://x.com/theresecoffey/status/1747964647355854893?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    No, but she would call ScotParl "Holyrood", UKGov "Whitehall", UKParl "Westminster", USGov "Washington", USDef "The Pentagon"...

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synecdoche
  • Options
    AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 19,914
    isam said:

    Not having this!

    Some keyboard snipers moaning that I criticised the opposition for referring to the Kigali government, not the Rwandan government.

    I would not call the French government, the Paris government nor the Scottish government, the Edinburgh government.
    Why disrespect Rwanda?


    https://x.com/theresecoffey/status/1747964647355854893?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    Laughable.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,855
    isam said:

    Not having this!

    Some keyboard snipers moaning that I criticised the opposition for referring to the Kigali government, not the Rwandan government.

    I would not call the French government, the Paris government nor the Scottish government, the Edinburgh government.
    Why disrespect Rwanda?


    https://x.com/theresecoffey/status/1747964647355854893?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    When in a hole…
  • Options
    bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 7,560
    viewcode said:

    isam said:

    Not having this!

    Some keyboard snipers moaning that I criticised the opposition for referring to the Kigali government, not the Rwandan government.

    I would not call the French government, the Paris government nor the Scottish government, the Edinburgh government.
    Why disrespect Rwanda?


    https://x.com/theresecoffey/status/1747964647355854893?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    No, but she would call ScotParl "Holyrood", UKGov "Whitehall", UKParl "Westminster", USGov "Washington", USDef "The Pentagon"...

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synecdoche
    I think that means we should refer to Village Urugwiro, which is the Rwandan President's official residence...?
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,651
    JohnO said:

    algarkirk said:

    eek said:

    Thoughts and prayers for Michelle Mone and Douglas Barrowman.

    Why? They are getting just what they (especially he) deserves
    We need a sarcasm symbol though I really spend less time fantasying thinking about Michelle Mone in a women’s prison.
    Easier just to keep your Irony Tracker switched to 'On'. It works when there is no mobile signal.
    Easier to assume that everything that @TSE posts is as sarcastic as his taste in shoes is loud.
    I am meeting JohnO on Saturday and I’ve bought new trainers for the occasion.
    Any reason JohnO isnt posting these days ?
    I’m more a voyeur these days…..
    (checks under the bed)
  • Options
    TimSTimS Posts: 9,524
    Coffey doubling down on yesterday's booboo. Followed by some excellent replies, even from dear old Femi.

    https://x.com/theresecoffey/status/1747964647355854893?s=20

    Yet more Streisand effect. Why do people do this?
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,903
    Trying to conflate the Commons refusal to implement the result of the referendum with the Lords thwarting the Rwanda bill is straw clutching from Rishi I think. I don’t remember explicitly voting for it, and neither does anyone else

    Coming across like a poor man’s Theresa May

    Do not frustrate the will of the people'

    In a press conference this morning @RishiSunak urged members of the House of Lords to 'do the right thing' after his Rwanda Bill passed through the Commons
    itv.com/news/2024-01-1…


    https://x.com/itvnewspolitics/status/1747930712110498127?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
  • Options
    JohnOJohnO Posts: 4,215
    viewcode said:

    JohnO said:

    algarkirk said:

    eek said:

    Thoughts and prayers for Michelle Mone and Douglas Barrowman.

    Why? They are getting just what they (especially he) deserves
    We need a sarcasm symbol though I really spend less time fantasying thinking about Michelle Mone in a women’s prison.
    Easier just to keep your Irony Tracker switched to 'On'. It works when there is no mobile signal.
    Easier to assume that everything that @TSE posts is as sarcastic as his taste in shoes is loud.
    I am meeting JohnO on Saturday and I’ve bought new trainers for the occasion.
    Any reason JohnO isnt posting these days ?
    I’m more a voyeur these days…..
    (checks under the bed)
    Small, perfectly formed but I am there.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,903
    viewcode said:

    isam said:

    Not having this!

    Some keyboard snipers moaning that I criticised the opposition for referring to the Kigali government, not the Rwandan government.

    I would not call the French government, the Paris government nor the Scottish government, the Edinburgh government.
    Why disrespect Rwanda?


    https://x.com/theresecoffey/status/1747964647355854893?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    No, but she would call ScotParl "Holyrood", UKGov "Whitehall", UKParl "Westminster", USGov "Washington", USDef "The Pentagon"...

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synecdoche
    She did indeed

    @montie Holyrood, Cardiff and Stormont now have carte blanche on devolved matters with no scrutiny from Lords


    https://x.com/theresecoffey/status/562531086480470016?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,651
    Cookie said:

    I miss the days when we were assured Sweden didn’t want anything to do with NATO, although they need to come up with better Operation names, it’s no Able Archer or ReForGer.

    Nato members will send 90,000 troops to the alliance’s largest military exercise since the Cold War.

    Britain is deploying 20,000 soldiers to Operation Steadfast Defender 2024, which starts next week and will continue until the end of May.

    Gen Christopher Cavoli, Nato’s most senior commander, said the exercises would demonstrate the alliance’s ability to quickly “reinforce” its territory in the event of an attack.

    Exercises will take place in Germany, Poland and the Baltic States in what is widely expected to be a simulation of war with Russia.

    Troops from all 31 Nato members and Sweden, a candidate for membership, are taking part.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/01/18/ukraine-russia-war-live-st-petersburg-drone-strike/

    Operation Smörgåsbord.
    You can tell the Americans are in charge when operations have daftly heroic names. I prefer the British names which mean absolutely nothing e.g. Operation Market Garden.
    There's a reason for meaningless names. Famously the Allies worked out that "Wotan" was a single beam radar system because Wotan had one eye. And a Welsh accent. See https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/bnkzdq/til_during_wwii_the_german_army_used_a_radar/
  • Options
    ChrisChris Posts: 11,103
    isam said:

    Trying to conflate the Commons refusal to implement the result of the referendum with the Lords thwarting the Rwanda bill is straw clutching from Rishi I think. I don’t remember explicitly voting for it, and neither does anyone else

    Coming across like a poor man’s Theresa May

    Do not frustrate the will of the people'

    In a press conference this morning @RishiSunak urged members of the House of Lords to 'do the right thing' after his Rwanda Bill passed through the Commons
    itv.com/news/2024-01-1…


    https://x.com/itvnewspolitics/status/1747930712110498127?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    Shades of the tabloid attack on the judiciary as "Enemies of the People".
  • Options
    TazTaz Posts: 11,097
    TimS said:

    Coffey doubling down on yesterday's booboo. Followed by some excellent replies, even from dear old Femi.

    https://x.com/theresecoffey/status/1747964647355854893?s=20

    Yet more Streisand effect. Why do people do this?

    Femi really is a jerk of the first order.

    Stella Ceeasy also doubled down on her faux pas.
  • Options
    ChrisChris Posts: 11,103
    isam said:

    viewcode said:

    isam said:

    Not having this!

    Some keyboard snipers moaning that I criticised the opposition for referring to the Kigali government, not the Rwandan government.

    I would not call the French government, the Paris government nor the Scottish government, the Edinburgh government.
    Why disrespect Rwanda?


    https://x.com/theresecoffey/status/1747964647355854893?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    No, but she would call ScotParl "Holyrood", UKGov "Whitehall", UKParl "Westminster", USGov "Washington", USDef "The Pentagon"...

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synecdoche
    She did indeed

    @montie Holyrood, Cardiff and Stormont now have carte blanche on devolved matters with no scrutiny from Lords


    https://x.com/theresecoffey/status/562531086480470016?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
    But maybe she considered she had a good reason for disrespecting Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,553
    I see most Britons are wrong:

    Do Britons believe more migrants come to the UK legally or illegally?

    All Britons
    More come illegally: 45%
    More come legally: 34%
    About the same: 8%

    2019 Con voters
    More come illegally: 56%
    More come legally: 27%
    About the same: 8%

    2019 Lab voters
    More come illegally: 33%
    More come legally: 44%
    About the same: 7%

    yougov.co.uk/topics/politic…

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1748021240009273784?t=wypuofuiGxaCltT5c08dTw&s=19


  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,587
    viewcode said:

    Cookie said:

    I miss the days when we were assured Sweden didn’t want anything to do with NATO, although they need to come up with better Operation names, it’s no Able Archer or ReForGer.

    Nato members will send 90,000 troops to the alliance’s largest military exercise since the Cold War.

    Britain is deploying 20,000 soldiers to Operation Steadfast Defender 2024, which starts next week and will continue until the end of May.

    Gen Christopher Cavoli, Nato’s most senior commander, said the exercises would demonstrate the alliance’s ability to quickly “reinforce” its territory in the event of an attack.

    Exercises will take place in Germany, Poland and the Baltic States in what is widely expected to be a simulation of war with Russia.

    Troops from all 31 Nato members and Sweden, a candidate for membership, are taking part.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/01/18/ukraine-russia-war-live-st-petersburg-drone-strike/

    Operation Smörgåsbord.
    You can tell the Americans are in charge when operations have daftly heroic names. I prefer the British names which mean absolutely nothing e.g. Operation Market Garden.
    There's a reason for meaningless names. Famously the Allies worked out that "Wotan" was a single beam radar system because Wotan had one eye. And a Welsh accent. See https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/bnkzdq/til_during_wwii_the_german_army_used_a_radar/
    We also get "Project XYZ" meaningless names when we are doing due diligence for potential sales and acquisitions.

    Had one recently named after a Shakespearean character - could well be the corporate "theme" for naming projects.

    Current project shares a name with a railway locomotive, which is much better!
  • Options
    DM_AndyDM_Andy Posts: 332
    isam said:

    Not having this!

    Some keyboard snipers moaning that I criticised the opposition for referring to the Kigali government, not the Rwandan government.

    I would not call the French government, the Paris government nor the Scottish government, the Edinburgh government.
    Why disrespect Rwanda?


    https://x.com/theresecoffey/status/1747964647355854893?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    There's been uses of "The Edinburgh Government" and "The Paris Government" recorded in the pages of Hansard, you would have thought that our former Deputy Prime Minister would have checked, she had the whole morning to compose her tweet.
  • Options
    SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 15,505
    OGH - "whatever happens in the Democrat primary will have no impact whatsoever on who gets the nomination."

    SSI - Half correct, half NOT.

    Correct in sense that, because New Hamphire primary date violated Democratic National Party rules, zero delegates will be awarded . . . at least until the Democratic National Convention comes up with a fix, like happened in 2016 with similar situation re: Michigan.

    Wrong in sense that, if Joe Biden's write-in campaign yields way less than, say, 50% of the total NH Democratic presidential primary vote, THAT could most definitely have an impact - on the betting, on upcoming primaries AND on the nomination.

    AS FOR NEVADA REPUBLICAN CAUCUS versus PRIMARY

    Note that under Nevada GOP rules, any candidate who filed for the Nevada Primary is INELIGIBLE to receive ANY delegates from the Silver State to the Republican National Convention.

    Here is list of candidate who filed for Nevada Republican presidential PRIMARY

    John Anthony Castro
    Heath V. Fulkerson
    Nikki Haley
    Donald Kjornes
    Mike Pence (withdrawn)
    Tim Scott (withdrawn)
    Hirsh V. Singh (withdrawn)

    And here is list of candidates who filed with NV GOP for Nevada Republican presidential CAUCUSES

    Ryan Binkley
    Ron DeSantis
    Donald Trump
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,868
    @RedfieldWilton
    Blue Wall Sunak v Starmer (17-18 January)

    Starmer leads on 13 of 18 leadership characteristics polled, including:

    Cares about ppl. like me (35% | 25%)
    Represents change (38% | 29%)
    Keeps promises (28% | 23%)
    Is a strong leader (31% | 29%)
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,042
    Sadiq Khan ‘pauses’ English language requirements for private hire drivers in London.

    https://x.com/sadiqkhan/status/1747646645825622219
  • Options
    TimSTimS Posts: 9,524
    Foxy said:

    I see most Britons are wrong:

    Do Britons believe more migrants come to the UK legally or illegally?

    All Britons
    More come illegally: 45%
    More come legally: 34%
    About the same: 8%

    2019 Con voters
    More come illegally: 56%
    More come legally: 27%
    About the same: 8%

    2019 Lab voters
    More come illegally: 33%
    More come legally: 44%
    About the same: 7%

    yougov.co.uk/topics/politic…

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1748021240009273784?t=wypuofuiGxaCltT5c08dTw&s=19


    Implies to me that people don't actually care about immigration as much as they make out, otherwise they'd surely have seen the statistics. I mean it's not as if they've not been in the news recently.
  • Options
    Foxy said:

    I see most Britons are wrong:

    Do Britons believe more migrants come to the UK legally or illegally?

    All Britons
    More come illegally: 45%
    More come legally: 34%
    About the same: 8%

    2019 Con voters
    More come illegally: 56%
    More come legally: 27%
    About the same: 8%

    2019 Lab voters
    More come illegally: 33%
    More come legally: 44%
    About the same: 7%

    yougov.co.uk/topics/politic…

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1748021240009273784?t=wypuofuiGxaCltT5c08dTw&s=19


    It is quite remarkable how many voters are out of touch on these stats
  • Options
    CiceroCicero Posts: 2,201

    Good afternoon from Gatwick. Sensational business meeting this morning, so well worth the trip. But. Roads were unpleasant for a chunk of the drive to the airport yesterday, and today can best be described as snowmageddon.

    I wonder if I will actually make it home tonight? Back to Aberdeen, no problem. Beyond that, not sure...

    It could be a bit of a Dyce-y journey.
    The Glens will be a bit tricky. Check before you leave Dyce.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,148
    Foxy said:

    I see most Britons are wrong:

    Do Britons believe more migrants come to the UK legally or illegally?

    All Britons
    More come illegally: 45%
    More come legally: 34%
    About the same: 8%

    2019 Con voters
    More come illegally: 56%
    More come legally: 27%
    About the same: 8%

    2019 Lab voters
    More come illegally: 33%
    More come legally: 44%
    About the same: 7%

    yougov.co.uk/topics/politic…

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1748021240009273784?t=wypuofuiGxaCltT5c08dTw&s=19

    The enormous overestimate of illegal migration is presumably fed by the government talking about little else.
  • Options
    TimSTimS Posts: 9,524
    edited January 18
    kinabalu said:

    Foxy said:

    I see most Britons are wrong:

    Do Britons believe more migrants come to the UK legally or illegally?

    All Britons
    More come illegally: 45%
    More come legally: 34%
    About the same: 8%

    2019 Con voters
    More come illegally: 56%
    More come legally: 27%
    About the same: 8%

    2019 Lab voters
    More come illegally: 33%
    More come legally: 44%
    About the same: 7%

    yougov.co.uk/topics/politic…

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1748021240009273784?t=wypuofuiGxaCltT5c08dTw&s=19

    The enormous overestimate of illegal migration is presumably fed by the government talking about little else.
    I don't think it's that. Recent polling showed people think total migration levels are way way lower than they actually are - below 100k per year. The real issue is the enormous UNDERestimate of legal migration.

    It's another reason I don't get the sense migration is directly and noticeably affecting people's day to day lives now in the way it did - in certain areas - before the referendum. Otherwise they would be coming up with much higher estimates of legal migration. My sense is public opinion is being shaped by the news on this, rather than personal experience. In the same way you sometimes see people's views on their personal financial prospects way more positive than their answers on the national economy.
  • Options
    EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976
    kinabalu said:

    Foxy said:

    I see most Britons are wrong:

    Do Britons believe more migrants come to the UK legally or illegally?

    All Britons
    More come illegally: 45%
    More come legally: 34%
    About the same: 8%

    2019 Con voters
    More come illegally: 56%
    More come legally: 27%
    About the same: 8%

    2019 Lab voters
    More come illegally: 33%
    More come legally: 44%
    About the same: 7%

    yougov.co.uk/topics/politic…

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1748021240009273784?t=wypuofuiGxaCltT5c08dTw&s=19

    The enormous overestimate of illegal migration is presumably fed by the government talking about little else.
    Maybe they don't believe the official numbers for a quantity that - more or less by definition - isn't properly documented anywhere.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 46,920
    TimS said:

    kinabalu said:

    Foxy said:

    I see most Britons are wrong:

    Do Britons believe more migrants come to the UK legally or illegally?

    All Britons
    More come illegally: 45%
    More come legally: 34%
    About the same: 8%

    2019 Con voters
    More come illegally: 56%
    More come legally: 27%
    About the same: 8%

    2019 Lab voters
    More come illegally: 33%
    More come legally: 44%
    About the same: 7%

    yougov.co.uk/topics/politic…

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1748021240009273784?t=wypuofuiGxaCltT5c08dTw&s=19

    The enormous overestimate of illegal migration is presumably fed by the government talking about little else.
    I don't think it's that. Recent polling showed people think total migration levels are way way lower than they actually are - below 100k per year. The real issue is the enormous UNDERestimate of legal migration.

    It's another reason I don't get the sense migration is directly and noticeably affecting people's day to day lives now in the way it did - in certain areas - before the referendum. Otherwise they would be coming up with much higher estimates of legal migration.

    Utter shite. People are noticing. And that noticing is about to surge
  • Options
    TimSTimS Posts: 9,524
    edited January 18
    Leon said:

    TimS said:

    kinabalu said:

    Foxy said:

    I see most Britons are wrong:

    Do Britons believe more migrants come to the UK legally or illegally?

    All Britons
    More come illegally: 45%
    More come legally: 34%
    About the same: 8%

    2019 Con voters
    More come illegally: 56%
    More come legally: 27%
    About the same: 8%

    2019 Lab voters
    More come illegally: 33%
    More come legally: 44%
    About the same: 7%

    yougov.co.uk/topics/politic…

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1748021240009273784?t=wypuofuiGxaCltT5c08dTw&s=19

    The enormous overestimate of illegal migration is presumably fed by the government talking about little else.
    I don't think it's that. Recent polling showed people think total migration levels are way way lower than they actually are - below 100k per year. The real issue is the enormous UNDERestimate of legal migration.

    It's another reason I don't get the sense migration is directly and noticeably affecting people's day to day lives now in the way it did - in certain areas - before the referendum. Otherwise they would be coming up with much higher estimates of legal migration.

    Utter shite. People are noticing. And that noticing is about to surge
    They're evidently not noticing the actual numbers of legal migration. They think total migration is below 100k

    And another very interesting difference from 2014-16: concern about immigration in polling is much more partisan, and more concentrated in older voters. If it's largely the retired who are worrying then it's not because they're directly affected by housing availability or school places, which was one of the big gripes in areas with large Eastern European influxes before Brexit.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 46,920
    Anyhoo, everything is fine anyway

    “The globe is already pockmarked with crises, and here may be another: North Korea is acting in highly unusual ways, leading some veteran analysts to fear it is preparing a surprise attack on South Korea and perhaps on Japan and Guam as well.”

    NYT


  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,233
    Foxy said:

    I see most Britons are wrong:

    Do Britons believe more migrants come to the UK legally or illegally?

    All Britons
    More come illegally: 45%
    More come legally: 34%

    Is that really surprising?

    45% saw the Angles, Saxons and Jutes risking treacherous sea crossings in small, poorly equipped boats, and just wading ashore. And so, naturally, they answer that they came here illegally. Whereas the minority of subscribers to the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle knew that Hengist and Horsa had been invited over by Vortigern, and hence had arrived legally.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,167
    Leon said:

    Anyhoo, everything is fine anyway

    “The globe is already pockmarked with crises, and here may be another: North Korea is acting in highly unusual ways, leading some veteran analysts to fear it is preparing a surprise attack on South Korea and perhaps on Japan and Guam as well.”

    NYT


    Yeh, I read that one earlier on NY Times site. Jeez. Just what we all need.

  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,042
    TimS said:

    kinabalu said:

    Foxy said:

    I see most Britons are wrong:

    Do Britons believe more migrants come to the UK legally or illegally?

    All Britons
    More come illegally: 45%
    More come legally: 34%
    About the same: 8%

    2019 Con voters
    More come illegally: 56%
    More come legally: 27%
    About the same: 8%

    2019 Lab voters
    More come illegally: 33%
    More come legally: 44%
    About the same: 7%

    yougov.co.uk/topics/politic…

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1748021240009273784?t=wypuofuiGxaCltT5c08dTw&s=19

    The enormous overestimate of illegal migration is presumably fed by the government talking about little else.
    I don't think it's that. Recent polling showed people think total migration levels are way way lower than they actually are - below 100k per year. The real issue is the enormous UNDERestimate of legal migration.

    It's another reason I don't get the sense migration is directly and noticeably affecting people's day to day lives now in the way it did - in certain areas - before the referendum. Otherwise they would be coming up with much higher estimates of legal migration.
    It could be the case that people can't believe that the government is letting so many people move here so they assume much more of it must be illegal.
  • Options
    kinabalu said:

    Foxy said:

    I see most Britons are wrong:

    Do Britons believe more migrants come to the UK legally or illegally?

    All Britons
    More come illegally: 45%
    More come legally: 34%
    About the same: 8%

    2019 Con voters
    More come illegally: 56%
    More come legally: 27%
    About the same: 8%

    2019 Lab voters
    More come illegally: 33%
    More come legally: 44%
    About the same: 7%

    yougov.co.uk/topics/politic…

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1748021240009273784?t=wypuofuiGxaCltT5c08dTw&s=19

    The enormous overestimate of illegal migration is presumably fed by the government talking about little else.
    Most likely
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 46,920
    TimS said:

    Leon said:

    TimS said:

    kinabalu said:

    Foxy said:

    I see most Britons are wrong:

    Do Britons believe more migrants come to the UK legally or illegally?

    All Britons
    More come illegally: 45%
    More come legally: 34%
    About the same: 8%

    2019 Con voters
    More come illegally: 56%
    More come legally: 27%
    About the same: 8%

    2019 Lab voters
    More come illegally: 33%
    More come legally: 44%
    About the same: 7%

    yougov.co.uk/topics/politic…

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1748021240009273784?t=wypuofuiGxaCltT5c08dTw&s=19

    The enormous overestimate of illegal migration is presumably fed by the government talking about little else.
    I don't think it's that. Recent polling showed people think total migration levels are way way lower than they actually are - below 100k per year. The real issue is the enormous UNDERestimate of legal migration.

    It's another reason I don't get the sense migration is directly and noticeably affecting people's day to day lives now in the way it did - in certain areas - before the referendum. Otherwise they would be coming up with much higher estimates of legal migration.

    Utter shite. People are noticing. And that noticing is about to surge
    They're evidently not noticing the actual numbers of legal migration. They think total migration is below 100k
    Just because some blithe midwit vineyard-owning lefty twat like you doesn’t care about immigration and doesn’t want his compatriots to care does NOT mean people less rich than you don’t care

    They are now beginning to twig. You can sense it. The influx is so vast

    The reason there is a delay between reality and political opinion is because Brexit. Voters assumed they’d pulled the lever on mass immigration and stopped it. They forgot that politicians are all venal liars

    They are now waking up to this
  • Options
    TimSTimS Posts: 9,524
    IanB2 said:

    Foxy said:

    I see most Britons are wrong:

    Do Britons believe more migrants come to the UK legally or illegally?

    All Britons
    More come illegally: 45%
    More come legally: 34%

    Is that really surprising?

    45% saw the Angles, Saxons and Jutes risking treacherous sea crossings in small, poorly equipped boats, and just wading ashore. And so, naturally, they answer that they came here illegally. Whereas the minority of subscribers to the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle knew that Hengist and Horsa had been invited over by Vortigern, and hence had arrived legally.
    The irony being a few centuries later after 52% of voters chose for Harold to put a stop to free movement of Danes, they saw a massive increase in migration from Northern France instead.
  • Options
    TimSTimS Posts: 9,524
    Leon said:

    TimS said:

    Leon said:

    TimS said:

    kinabalu said:

    Foxy said:

    I see most Britons are wrong:

    Do Britons believe more migrants come to the UK legally or illegally?

    All Britons
    More come illegally: 45%
    More come legally: 34%
    About the same: 8%

    2019 Con voters
    More come illegally: 56%
    More come legally: 27%
    About the same: 8%

    2019 Lab voters
    More come illegally: 33%
    More come legally: 44%
    About the same: 7%

    yougov.co.uk/topics/politic…

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1748021240009273784?t=wypuofuiGxaCltT5c08dTw&s=19

    The enormous overestimate of illegal migration is presumably fed by the government talking about little else.
    I don't think it's that. Recent polling showed people think total migration levels are way way lower than they actually are - below 100k per year. The real issue is the enormous UNDERestimate of legal migration.

    It's another reason I don't get the sense migration is directly and noticeably affecting people's day to day lives now in the way it did - in certain areas - before the referendum. Otherwise they would be coming up with much higher estimates of legal migration.

    Utter shite. People are noticing. And that noticing is about to surge
    They're evidently not noticing the actual numbers of legal migration. They think total migration is below 100k
    Just because some blithe midwit vineyard-owning lefty twat like you doesn’t care about immigration and doesn’t want his compatriots to care does NOT mean people less rich than you don’t care

    They are now beginning to twig. You can sense it. The influx is so vast

    The reason there is a delay between reality and political opinion is because Brexit. Voters assumed they’d pulled the lever on mass immigration and stopped it. They forgot that politicians are all venal liars

    They are now waking up to this
    I am looking at what polling says at the moment. Maybe it will move and we'll be in rivers of blood territory in a year's time but that's not what the surveys are saying now.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,042
    https://x.com/charles_lister/status/1747806854585934121

    In the past week alone, the Middle East has seen an insane scale of cross-border conflict:

    Pakistan <-> Iran
    Houthi -> Red Sea shipping
    Iran -> Syria
    Iran -> Iraq
    Hezbollah -> Israel
    US/UK -> Yemen
    Turkey -> Syria
    Jordan -> Syria
    Iran proxies in Iraq -> Israel
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 46,920
    TimS said:

    Leon said:

    TimS said:

    Leon said:

    TimS said:

    kinabalu said:

    Foxy said:

    I see most Britons are wrong:

    Do Britons believe more migrants come to the UK legally or illegally?

    All Britons
    More come illegally: 45%
    More come legally: 34%
    About the same: 8%

    2019 Con voters
    More come illegally: 56%
    More come legally: 27%
    About the same: 8%

    2019 Lab voters
    More come illegally: 33%
    More come legally: 44%
    About the same: 7%

    yougov.co.uk/topics/politic…

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1748021240009273784?t=wypuofuiGxaCltT5c08dTw&s=19

    The enormous overestimate of illegal migration is presumably fed by the government talking about little else.
    I don't think it's that. Recent polling showed people think total migration levels are way way lower than they actually are - below 100k per year. The real issue is the enormous UNDERestimate of legal migration.

    It's another reason I don't get the sense migration is directly and noticeably affecting people's day to day lives now in the way it did - in certain areas - before the referendum. Otherwise they would be coming up with much higher estimates of legal migration.

    Utter shite. People are noticing. And that noticing is about to surge
    They're evidently not noticing the actual numbers of legal migration. They think total migration is below 100k
    Just because some blithe midwit vineyard-owning lefty twat like you doesn’t care about immigration and doesn’t want his compatriots to care does NOT mean people less rich than you don’t care

    They are now beginning to twig. You can sense it. The influx is so vast

    The reason there is a delay between reality and political opinion is because Brexit. Voters assumed they’d pulled the lever on mass immigration and stopped it. They forgot that politicians are all venal liars

    They are now waking up to this
    I am looking at what polling says at the moment. Maybe it will move and we'll be in rivers of blood territory in a year's time but that's not what the surveys are saying now.
    Yes, but you’re an idiot
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 46,920

    https://x.com/charles_lister/status/1747806854585934121

    In the past week alone, the Middle East has seen an insane scale of cross-border conflict:

    Pakistan <-> Iran
    Houthi -> Red Sea shipping
    Iran -> Syria
    Iran -> Iraq
    Hezbollah -> Israel
    US/UK -> Yemen
    Turkey -> Syria
    Jordan -> Syria
    Iran proxies in Iraq -> Israel

    Does feel quite world war-ish
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,157

    Cicero said:

    Good afternoon from Gatwick. Sensational business meeting this morning, so well worth the trip. But. Roads were unpleasant for a chunk of the drive to the airport yesterday, and today can best be described as snowmageddon.

    I wonder if I will actually make it home tonight? Back to Aberdeen, no problem. Beyond that, not sure...

    It could be a bit of a Dyce-y journey.
    The Glens will be a bit tricky. Check before you leave Dyce.
    I just got the train back into Aberdeen from Dyce. All the trains on the Inverness line are running late and there are a lot of cancellations - amusingly the anouncements say because of 'predicted severe weather' rather than because of actual severe weather. There is still about 4 inches of snow on the ground at Dyce and I presume it gets worse as you move out of the immediate environs of Aberdeen.

    I willl be spending the weekend waiting on choppers in Aberdeen. I was supposed to fly up to the Shetlands tomorrow and then on from there ouit into the Atlantic for 3 weeks on the Ocean GreatWhite - the largest semi-submersible drilling rig in the world. Unfortunately (particularly for my back to back) the weather has been so bad that no choppers have made it to the rig this week. Lots of people who already spent Christmas and New Year offshore now not able to get home.

    Predictions are 70 - 80 mile an hour winds over the next week so not sure I will be going anywhere for a while.
    Sounds chilly, not to mention cramped and inconvenient. Couldn't they at least find you a hotel?
  • Options
    Leon said:

    TimS said:

    Leon said:

    TimS said:

    kinabalu said:

    Foxy said:

    I see most Britons are wrong:

    Do Britons believe more migrants come to the UK legally or illegally?

    All Britons
    More come illegally: 45%
    More come legally: 34%
    About the same: 8%

    2019 Con voters
    More come illegally: 56%
    More come legally: 27%
    About the same: 8%

    2019 Lab voters
    More come illegally: 33%
    More come legally: 44%
    About the same: 7%

    yougov.co.uk/topics/politic…

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1748021240009273784?t=wypuofuiGxaCltT5c08dTw&s=19

    The enormous overestimate of illegal migration is presumably fed by the government talking about little else.
    I don't think it's that. Recent polling showed people think total migration levels are way way lower than they actually are - below 100k per year. The real issue is the enormous UNDERestimate of legal migration.

    It's another reason I don't get the sense migration is directly and noticeably affecting people's day to day lives now in the way it did - in certain areas - before the referendum. Otherwise they would be coming up with much higher estimates of legal migration.

    Utter shite. People are noticing. And that noticing is about to surge
    They're evidently not noticing the actual numbers of legal migration. They think total migration is below 100k
    Just because some blithe midwit vineyard-owning lefty twat like you doesn’t care about immigration and doesn’t want his compatriots to care does NOT mean people less rich than you don’t care

    They are now beginning to twig. You can sense it. The influx is so vast

    The reason there is a delay between reality and political opinion is because Brexit. Voters assumed they’d pulled the lever on mass immigration and stopped it. They forgot that politicians are all venal liars

    They are now waking up to this
    Here is the very basic problem. Millions of people have been whipped to dislike immigrants. And muslims. And lefties. And so on. So migration is now a pretty visceral issue, especially in left behind communities who blame the forrin for all of cuts to services.

    But - the Tories have focused obsessively on Stop The Boats. Those are visible. But lets assume that their wildest dreams come true and the boats do stop. Will that make people happy?

    No - because they assume that Stop The Boats means less foreigners. And there is a growing tide of legal migration that the Stop The Boats party are letting in (rightly). Rather than Stop The Boats delivering, it will infuriate. Why are there more and more migrants? Didn't we Stop The Boats to get rid of them?
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,936
    isam said:

    Trying to conflate the Commons refusal to implement the result of the referendum with the Lords thwarting the Rwanda bill is straw clutching from Rishi I think. I don’t remember explicitly voting for it, and neither does anyone else

    Coming across like a poor man’s Theresa May

    Do not frustrate the will of the people'

    In a press conference this morning @RishiSunak urged members of the House of Lords to 'do the right thing' after his Rwanda Bill passed through the Commons
    itv.com/news/2024-01-1…


    https://x.com/itvnewspolitics/status/1747930712110498127?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    Indeed.

    If Rishi underperforms vs expectations in the same way as Mrs May did, the Tories could be down to 50 odd seats....
  • Options

    Cicero said:

    Good afternoon from Gatwick. Sensational business meeting this morning, so well worth the trip. But. Roads were unpleasant for a chunk of the drive to the airport yesterday, and today can best be described as snowmageddon.

    I wonder if I will actually make it home tonight? Back to Aberdeen, no problem. Beyond that, not sure...

    It could be a bit of a Dyce-y journey.
    The Glens will be a bit tricky. Check before you leave Dyce.
    I just got the train back into Aberdeen from Dyce. All the trains on the Inverness line are running late and there are a lot of cancellations - amusingly the anouncements say because of 'predicted severe weather' rather than because of actual severe weather. There is still about 4 inches of snow on the ground at Dyce and I presume it gets worse as you move out of the immediate environs of Aberdeen.

    I willl be spending the weekend waiting on choppers in Aberdeen. I was supposed to fly up to the Shetlands tomorrow and then on from there ouit into the Atlantic for 3 weeks on the Ocean GreatWhite - the largest semi-submersible drilling rig in the world. Unfortunately (particularly for my back to back) the weather has been so bad that no choppers have made it to the rig this week. Lots of people who already spent Christmas and New Year offshore now not able to get home.

    Predictions are 70 - 80 mile an hour winds over the next week so not sure I will be going anywhere for a while.
    I'm due to land just after 9pm. Main roads are ok around Aberdeen. Its north of Ellon where it gets exciting. An awful lot of places where the snow is being blown off the fields onto the road. But all my routes home are plowed and gritted, and they are out again now to do them all again.

    We will see! Otherwise I will be in an airport hotel...
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,233
    edited January 18
    Leon said:

    TimS said:

    Leon said:

    TimS said:

    Leon said:

    TimS said:

    kinabalu said:

    Foxy said:

    I see most Britons are wrong:

    Do Britons believe more migrants come to the UK legally or illegally?

    All Britons
    More come illegally: 45%
    More come legally: 34%
    About the same: 8%

    2019 Con voters
    More come illegally: 56%
    More come legally: 27%
    About the same: 8%

    2019 Lab voters
    More come illegally: 33%
    More come legally: 44%
    About the same: 7%

    yougov.co.uk/topics/politic…

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1748021240009273784?t=wypuofuiGxaCltT5c08dTw&s=19

    The enormous overestimate of illegal migration is presumably fed by the government talking about little else.
    I don't think it's that. Recent polling showed people think total migration levels are way way lower than they actually are - below 100k per year. The real issue is the enormous UNDERestimate of legal migration.

    It's another reason I don't get the sense migration is directly and noticeably affecting people's day to day lives now in the way it did - in certain areas - before the referendum. Otherwise they would be coming up with much higher estimates of legal migration.

    Utter shite. People are noticing. And that noticing is about to surge
    They're evidently not noticing the actual numbers of legal migration. They think total migration is below 100k
    Just because some blithe midwit vineyard-owning lefty twat like you doesn’t care about immigration and doesn’t want his compatriots to care does NOT mean people less rich than you don’t care

    They are now beginning to twig. You can sense it. The influx is so vast

    The reason there is a delay between reality and political opinion is because Brexit. Voters assumed they’d pulled the lever on mass immigration and stopped it. They forgot that politicians are all venal liars

    They are now waking up to this
    I am looking at what polling says at the moment. Maybe it will move and we'll be in rivers of blood territory in a year's time but that's not what the surveys are saying now.
    Yes, but you’re an idiot
    A man who sees every passing mammal as a wolf is pretty idiotic, tbh.
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,223

    Sadiq Khan ‘pauses’ English language requirements for private hire drivers in London.

    https://x.com/sadiqkhan/status/1747646645825622219

    :open_mouth:
    image
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,148
    Endillion said:

    kinabalu said:

    Foxy said:

    I see most Britons are wrong:

    Do Britons believe more migrants come to the UK legally or illegally?

    All Britons
    More come illegally: 45%
    More come legally: 34%
    About the same: 8%

    2019 Con voters
    More come illegally: 56%
    More come legally: 27%
    About the same: 8%

    2019 Lab voters
    More come illegally: 33%
    More come legally: 44%
    About the same: 7%

    yougov.co.uk/topics/politic…

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1748021240009273784?t=wypuofuiGxaCltT5c08dTw&s=19

    The enormous overestimate of illegal migration is presumably fed by the government talking about little else.
    Maybe they don't believe the official numbers for a quantity that - more or less by definition - isn't properly documented anywhere.
    But still, to think most immigrants are coming here illegally, that's a pretty shocking misapprehension. I'm surprised by it.
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,223

    https://x.com/charles_lister/status/1747806854585934121

    In the past week alone, the Middle East has seen an insane scale of cross-border conflict:

    Pakistan <-> Iran
    Houthi -> Red Sea shipping
    Iran -> Syria
    Iran -> Iraq
    Hezbollah -> Israel
    US/UK -> Yemen
    Turkey -> Syria
    Jordan -> Syria
    Iran proxies in Iraq -> Israel

    Most of it "Green on Green"?
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,903
    edited January 18
    Mortimer said:

    isam said:

    Trying to conflate the Commons refusal to implement the result of the referendum with the Lords thwarting the Rwanda bill is straw clutching from Rishi I think. I don’t remember explicitly voting for it, and neither does anyone else

    Coming across like a poor man’s Theresa May

    Do not frustrate the will of the people'

    In a press conference this morning @RishiSunak urged members of the House of Lords to 'do the right thing' after his Rwanda Bill passed through the Commons
    itv.com/news/2024-01-1…


    https://x.com/itvnewspolitics/status/1747930712110498127?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    Indeed.

    If Rishi underperforms vs expectations in the same way as Mrs May did, the Tories could be down to 50 odd seats....
    Sunak & Sir Keir are so devoid of any personality, if there were a charismatic, straight talking, non Tory or Labour politician out there, the conditions are ripe for a Cleggasm. I’d say Farage but is he too well known?
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,492
    "Post Office inquiry: Fujitsu manager called sub-postmaster 'nasty chap'"

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-68017571
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,148
    edited January 18
    Leon said:

    TimS said:

    Leon said:

    TimS said:

    kinabalu said:

    Foxy said:

    I see most Britons are wrong:

    Do Britons believe more migrants come to the UK legally or illegally?

    All Britons
    More come illegally: 45%
    More come legally: 34%
    About the same: 8%

    2019 Con voters
    More come illegally: 56%
    More come legally: 27%
    About the same: 8%

    2019 Lab voters
    More come illegally: 33%
    More come legally: 44%
    About the same: 7%

    yougov.co.uk/topics/politic…

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1748021240009273784?t=wypuofuiGxaCltT5c08dTw&s=19

    The enormous overestimate of illegal migration is presumably fed by the government talking about little else.
    I don't think it's that. Recent polling showed people think total migration levels are way way lower than they actually are - below 100k per year. The real issue is the enormous UNDERestimate of legal migration.

    It's another reason I don't get the sense migration is directly and noticeably affecting people's day to day lives now in the way it did - in certain areas - before the referendum. Otherwise they would be coming up with much higher estimates of legal migration.

    Utter shite. People are noticing. And that noticing is about to surge
    They're evidently not noticing the actual numbers of legal migration. They think total migration is below 100k
    Just because some blithe midwit vineyard-owning lefty twat like you doesn’t care about immigration and doesn’t want his compatriots to care does NOT mean people less rich than you don’t care

    They are now beginning to twig. You can sense it. The influx is so vast

    The reason there is a delay between reality and political opinion is because Brexit. Voters assumed they’d pulled the lever on mass immigration and stopped it. They forgot that politicians are all venal liars

    They are now waking up to this
    You're hopecasting.
  • Options
    MightyAlexMightyAlex Posts: 1,441
    TimS said:

    Leon said:

    TimS said:

    Leon said:

    TimS said:

    kinabalu said:

    Foxy said:

    I see most Britons are wrong:

    Do Britons believe more migrants come to the UK legally or illegally?

    All Britons
    More come illegally: 45%
    More come legally: 34%
    About the same: 8%

    2019 Con voters
    More come illegally: 56%
    More come legally: 27%
    About the same: 8%

    2019 Lab voters
    More come illegally: 33%
    More come legally: 44%
    About the same: 7%

    yougov.co.uk/topics/politic…

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1748021240009273784?t=wypuofuiGxaCltT5c08dTw&s=19

    The enormous overestimate of illegal migration is presumably fed by the government talking about little else.
    I don't think it's that. Recent polling showed people think total migration levels are way way lower than they actually are - below 100k per year. The real issue is the enormous UNDERestimate of legal migration.

    It's another reason I don't get the sense migration is directly and noticeably affecting people's day to day lives now in the way it did - in certain areas - before the referendum. Otherwise they would be coming up with much higher estimates of legal migration.

    Utter shite. People are noticing. And that noticing is about to surge
    They're evidently not noticing the actual numbers of legal migration. They think total migration is below 100k
    Just because some blithe midwit vineyard-owning lefty twat like you doesn’t care about immigration and doesn’t want his compatriots to care does NOT mean people less rich than you don’t care

    They are now beginning to twig. You can sense it. The influx is so vast

    The reason there is a delay between reality and political opinion is because Brexit. Voters assumed they’d pulled the lever on mass immigration and stopped it. They forgot that politicians are all venal liars

    They are now waking up to this
    I am looking at what polling says at the moment. Maybe it will move and we'll be in rivers of blood territory in a year's time but that's not what the surveys are saying now.
    What happens when Reform start trumpeting the 1.3 million? This could well sink Rishi.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,148
    isam said:

    Mortimer said:

    isam said:

    Trying to conflate the Commons refusal to implement the result of the referendum with the Lords thwarting the Rwanda bill is straw clutching from Rishi I think. I don’t remember explicitly voting for it, and neither does anyone else

    Coming across like a poor man’s Theresa May

    Do not frustrate the will of the people'

    In a press conference this morning @RishiSunak urged members of the House of Lords to 'do the right thing' after his Rwanda Bill passed through the Commons
    itv.com/news/2024-01-1…


    https://x.com/itvnewspolitics/status/1747930712110498127?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    Indeed.

    If Rishi underperforms vs expectations in the same way as Mrs May did, the Tories could be down to 50 odd seats....
    Sunak & Sir Keir are so devoid of any charisma, if there were a charismatic, straight talking, non Tory or Labour politician out the conditions are ripe for a Cleggasm. I’d say Farage but is he too well known?
    We're looking at a non-charismatic landslide victory. Nothing like 1997 in that sense.
  • Options

    eek said:

    Thoughts and prayers for Michelle Mone and Douglas Barrowman.

    Why? They are getting just what they (especially he) deserves
    We need a sarcasm symbol though I really spend less time fantasying thinking about Michelle Mone in a women’s prison.
    Sharing a cell with Nicola Sturgeon?
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 46,920

    TimS said:

    Leon said:

    TimS said:

    Leon said:

    TimS said:

    kinabalu said:

    Foxy said:

    I see most Britons are wrong:

    Do Britons believe more migrants come to the UK legally or illegally?

    All Britons
    More come illegally: 45%
    More come legally: 34%
    About the same: 8%

    2019 Con voters
    More come illegally: 56%
    More come legally: 27%
    About the same: 8%

    2019 Lab voters
    More come illegally: 33%
    More come legally: 44%
    About the same: 7%

    yougov.co.uk/topics/politic…

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1748021240009273784?t=wypuofuiGxaCltT5c08dTw&s=19

    The enormous overestimate of illegal migration is presumably fed by the government talking about little else.
    I don't think it's that. Recent polling showed people think total migration levels are way way lower than they actually are - below 100k per year. The real issue is the enormous UNDERestimate of legal migration.

    It's another reason I don't get the sense migration is directly and noticeably affecting people's day to day lives now in the way it did - in certain areas - before the referendum. Otherwise they would be coming up with much higher estimates of legal migration.

    Utter shite. People are noticing. And that noticing is about to surge
    They're evidently not noticing the actual numbers of legal migration. They think total migration is below 100k
    Just because some blithe midwit vineyard-owning lefty twat like you doesn’t care about immigration and doesn’t want his compatriots to care does NOT mean people less rich than you don’t care

    They are now beginning to twig. You can sense it. The influx is so vast

    The reason there is a delay between reality and political opinion is because Brexit. Voters assumed they’d pulled the lever on mass immigration and stopped it. They forgot that politicians are all venal liars

    They are now waking up to this
    I am looking at what polling says at the moment. Maybe it will move and we'll be in rivers of blood territory in a year's time but that's not what the surveys are saying now.
    What happens when Reform start trumpeting the 1.3 million? This could well sink Rishi.
    Precisely

    And, when Labour takes over this year, the Tories will shamelessly blame all the migration on Labour

    And it will work. Because voters are only just waking up now to the scale of what is happening in Britain and to Britain. We are set for a massive right wards shift on this issue, under PM Starmer. What will he do?!

    The Tories are lying bastards but in this instance their utter mendacity will work for them

    I see no reason - none at all - why the UK will not follow the rest of the western world towards a hard/far right form of governance

    It will be anti migrant, nativist, and belligerent. It will shift money towards defence spending over welfare. It will be tax light as that is the only way to attract capital. It’s coming and it’s not going to be pretty
  • Options
    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    TimS said:

    Leon said:

    TimS said:

    kinabalu said:

    Foxy said:

    I see most Britons are wrong:

    Do Britons believe more migrants come to the UK legally or illegally?

    All Britons
    More come illegally: 45%
    More come legally: 34%
    About the same: 8%

    2019 Con voters
    More come illegally: 56%
    More come legally: 27%
    About the same: 8%

    2019 Lab voters
    More come illegally: 33%
    More come legally: 44%
    About the same: 7%

    yougov.co.uk/topics/politic…

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1748021240009273784?t=wypuofuiGxaCltT5c08dTw&s=19

    The enormous overestimate of illegal migration is presumably fed by the government talking about little else.
    I don't think it's that. Recent polling showed people think total migration levels are way way lower than they actually are - below 100k per year. The real issue is the enormous UNDERestimate of legal migration.

    It's another reason I don't get the sense migration is directly and noticeably affecting people's day to day lives now in the way it did - in certain areas - before the referendum. Otherwise they would be coming up with much higher estimates of legal migration.

    Utter shite. People are noticing. And that noticing is about to surge
    They're evidently not noticing the actual numbers of legal migration. They think total migration is below 100k
    Just because some blithe midwit vineyard-owning lefty twat like you doesn’t care about immigration and doesn’t want his compatriots to care does NOT mean people less rich than you don’t care

    They are now beginning to twig. You can sense it. The influx is so vast

    The reason there is a delay between reality and political opinion is because Brexit. Voters assumed they’d pulled the lever on mass immigration and stopped it. They forgot that politicians are all venal liars

    They are now waking up to this
    You're hopecasting.
    I think there is a basic point there even though he is hopecasting. But "they are now beginning to twig" - yes. That the Tories and the right wind media have been lying to them. That they are making things worse not better. Hence the endless slide in the polls and the rise of the FUKers.
This discussion has been closed.