Howdy, Stranger!

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

Scottish independence hasn’t gone away you know – politicalbetting.com

124

Comments

  • Well that’s me off to the poorhouse.

    But I don’t care!!!!
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,132
    kle4 said:

    Has to be Pope for man of the match - Hartley couldn't have won it without Pope doing the business first.

    Hopefully the team can carry this kind of belief and style through when Stokes' body just fully breaks down and he is forced to retire.

    Agreed.
    It was a spinners’ pitch. Pope’s innings was sensational.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,595
    Cricket fans have all left the pub I’m in, and tennis fans are turning up.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,986
    HYUFD said:

    If polls show a Unionist majority at Holyrood and Labour winning most seats in Scotland again, then polls on Scottish independence become completely irrelevant.

    The Scottish government would then not even have a majority for indyref2 at Holyrood for Westminster to ignore. You could have 99% for independence in polls but without an SNP or SNP and Green pro independence majority at Holyrood and an SNP majority of Scottish MPs, who cares?

    I hesitate to 'crowbar in' something about Scottish indy on a thread about cricket, but can you list the times that you accepted that SNP having most Scottish seats, polls showing roughly half of the electorate supported indy and an indy majority at Holyrood were relevant?
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,209
    Good afternoon all.

    On the header, given that there are lots of Unionist coalitions * in local Government in Scotland, could the same happen at Holyrood?
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_government_in_Scotland

    * The only one which I think has not occurred is Lab-Con.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,071
    Foxy said:

    Taz said:

    Taz said:

    Sandpit said:

    Taz said:

    Agreed on this. As someone who has never liked the SNP and still doesn't, I think the issue of Scottish independence is seperate and distinct from the politicians making the case for it. When I was growing up in Scotland I was a unionist but if I had a vote now it would probably be for independence. It would be very difficult economically in the short to medium term but I think Scotland is falling well short of where it could be as a country and needs to break free from the United Kingdom to achieve its long term potential.

    Given that it appears to be Groundhog Referendum Day on PB, Remainia is falling well short of where it could be as a country and needs to break free from Leavistan to achieve its long term potential.

    Bye bye Barnsley and Bolsover, good luck on your own.
    This is clear from some of the not so subtle messaging from Sadiq Khan. Labour's forthcoming victory will further embolden him and others of his persuasion.
    Although to win a majority labour needs these areas as much as it needs the big cities.
    I'm thinking more of what will happen after, rather than before, the election.
    That housebuilding will fall even further behind immigration.
    Isn't that the one area where Labour appear to be making a definite commitment?
    The Tories made a similar commitment which evaporated after the Chesham and Amersham by election.
    Difference is that C+A is a must win seat for the Conservatives, and core Nimby is pretty much core Conservative demographic.

    Whereas Labour's core vote is fed up with overpriced flat shares and their winning Amersham is the blob of icing on the icing figurine on the icing on the cake.
    And home owners have traditionally been more inclined to vote Tory so Labour have every incentive to talk the talk but not walk the walk.
    There is increasing evidence that social values are forestalling the traditional shift to voting Conservative as people near their forties. The traditional economic reasons to vote Tory have disappeared for working age folk, as the Tories only care about featherbedding the retired vote.

    I think too that by building around the cities that the Labour vote moving into more marginal suburban and commuter seats could well make the Labour vote more efficient and flip a lot of previously safe Shire seats.

    We are dealing with a new political world, and new demographics.
    Are we? In 2019 the Conservatives won most voters over 39, in 2005 and 2001 the Tories won only most voters over 55.

    Given the Tories back gay marriage and don't want to ban abortion or make changing sex illegal social values are hardly a major issue.

    Brexit maybe but then most voters over 47 voted for Brexit, not most voters over 77, so plenty of mileage in that yet for them. Indeed far more voters voted for Brexit than currently back the Tories
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,420
    MattW said:

    Good afternoon all.

    On the header, given that there are lots of Unionist coalitions * in local Government in Scotland, could the same happen at Holyrood?
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_government_in_Scotland

    * The only one which I think has not occurred is Lab-Con.

    Well, not officially. The Tories are propping up Labour in Fife and West Lothian while Labour are de facto returning the favour by abstentions in South Ayrshire.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,986
    MattW said:

    Good afternoon all.

    On the header, given that there are lots of Unionist coalitions * in local Government in Scotland, could the same happen at Holyrood?
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_government_in_Scotland

    * The only one which I think has not occurred is Lab-Con.

    Surely you or Wiki must be mistaken?




  • HYUFD said:

    If polls show a Unionist majority at Holyrood and Labour winning most seats in Scotland again, then polls on Scottish independence become completely irrelevant.

    The Scottish government would then not even have a majority for indyref2 at Holyrood for Westminster to ignore. You could have 99% for independence in polls but without an SNP or SNP and Green pro independence majority at Holyrood and an SNP majority of Scottish MPs, who cares?

    It isn't irrelevant. It literally sucks the life out of Scottish politics. Yer man Duguid is doing His Entire Campaign attacking the SNP. His last 2 leaflets entirely devoted to it. He tweeted yesterday knocking on doors and how people want him to stop the SNP.

    Irrelevant? Your lack of knowledge on the subject. Sorry, *any* subject.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,583

    The Mona Lisa has been hit by soup by French farming activists.

    https://x.com/le_figaro/status/1751553846223028597

    Well, that takes the bisque-it....

    (More correctly, the bullet-proof glass protecting the Mona Lisa has been hit by soup.)
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,420

    The Mona Lisa has been hit by soup by French farming activists.

    https://x.com/le_figaro/status/1751553846223028597

    Well, that takes the bisque-it....

    (More correctly, the bullet-proof glass protecting the Mona Lisa has been hit by soup.)
    I hope it was French onion.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,071

    Leon said:

    Are we actually going to war with Putin?

    It seems utterly ridiculous, but a lot of apparently sensible people are raising the alarm

    Emboldened by his man Trump's victory, a new Russian empire from Lisbon to Vladivostok must be the ambition.

    We might be OK because Trump has assets in Aberdeenshire and Turnberry. Maybe the UK and Ireland become the 51st and 52nd states.
    Even without the US, the European NATO armies combined plus Ukraine are bigger than the Russian army. Plus France and the UK have nuclear weapons too of course
  • HYUFD said:

    If polls show a Unionist majority at Holyrood and Labour winning most seats in Scotland again, then polls on Scottish independence become completely irrelevant.

    The Scottish government would then not even have a majority for indyref2 at Holyrood for Westminster to ignore. You could have 99% for independence in polls but without an SNP or SNP and Green pro independence majority at Holyrood and an SNP majority of Scottish MPs, who cares?

    It isn't irrelevant. It literally sucks the life out of Scottish politics. Yer man Duguid is doing His Entire Campaign attacking the SNP. His last 2 leaflets entirely devoted to it. He tweeted yesterday knocking on doors and how people want him to stop the SNP.

    Irrelevant? Your lack of knowledge on the subject. Sorry, *any* subject.
    @HYUFD idea of sending tanks to quell the Scots says it all about his views on Scotland and the Scots

    Independence will always be in the mind of many Scots
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,583
    Roger said:


    Taz said:
    Dear Deardre

    About 4 years ago I stopped eating meat. The idea of eating a living and breathing animal with a brain and personality became repulsive and I wished I'd never done it. More recently the notion of a country having an army which blows up buildings and kills people relatively indiscriminately to persude them to your point of view or subjugate them in some way seemed so bizarre that I found it difficult to accept as a rational concept

    My question is this; Was Jeremy the Holy Grail all along?

    Yours etc

    Roger
    Go ask some Ukrainians...
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,071

    HYUFD said:

    If polls show a Unionist majority at Holyrood and Labour winning most seats in Scotland again, then polls on Scottish independence become completely irrelevant.

    The Scottish government would then not even have a majority for indyref2 at Holyrood for Westminster to ignore. You could have 99% for independence in polls but without an SNP or SNP and Green pro independence majority at Holyrood and an SNP majority of Scottish MPs, who cares?

    It isn't irrelevant. It literally sucks the life out of Scottish politics. Yer man Duguid is doing His Entire Campaign attacking the SNP. His last 2 leaflets entirely devoted to it. He tweeted yesterday knocking on doors and how people want him to stop the SNP.

    Irrelevant? Your lack of knowledge on the subject. Sorry, *any* subject.
    Yes it is irrelevant. We are a representative democracy not a direct democracy, if the SNP have no majority of MSPs or Scottish MPs their campaign for independence is completely irrelevant, exactly as it was even under the SNP minority government of 2007-2011 for example.

    If I don't kowtow to your conformist left liberal ideological demands, tough
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,698
    edited January 28
    HYUFD said:

    Foxy said:

    Taz said:

    Taz said:

    Sandpit said:

    Taz said:

    Agreed on this. As someone who has never liked the SNP and still doesn't, I think the issue of Scottish independence is seperate and distinct from the politicians making the case for it. When I was growing up in Scotland I was a unionist but if I had a vote now it would probably be for independence. It would be very difficult economically in the short to medium term but I think Scotland is falling well short of where it could be as a country and needs to break free from the United Kingdom to achieve its long term potential.

    Given that it appears to be Groundhog Referendum Day on PB, Remainia is falling well short of where it could be as a country and needs to break free from Leavistan to achieve its long term potential.

    Bye bye Barnsley and Bolsover, good luck on your own.
    This is clear from some of the not so subtle messaging from Sadiq Khan. Labour's forthcoming victory will further embolden him and others of his persuasion.
    Although to win a majority labour needs these areas as much as it needs the big cities.
    I'm thinking more of what will happen after, rather than before, the election.
    That housebuilding will fall even further behind immigration.
    Isn't that the one area where Labour appear to be making a definite commitment?
    The Tories made a similar commitment which evaporated after the Chesham and Amersham by election.
    Difference is that C+A is a must win seat for the Conservatives, and core Nimby is pretty much core Conservative demographic.

    Whereas Labour's core vote is fed up with overpriced flat shares and their winning Amersham is the blob of icing on the icing figurine on the icing on the cake.
    And home owners have traditionally been more inclined to vote Tory so Labour have every incentive to talk the talk but not walk the walk.
    There is increasing evidence that social values are forestalling the traditional shift to voting Conservative as people near their forties. The traditional economic reasons to vote Tory have disappeared for working age folk, as the Tories only care about featherbedding the retired vote.

    I think too that by building around the cities that the Labour vote moving into more marginal suburban and commuter seats could well make the Labour vote more efficient and flip a lot of previously safe Shire seats.

    We are dealing with a new political world, and new demographics.
    Are we? In 2019 the Conservatives won most voters over 39, in 2005 and 2001 the Tories won only most voters over 55.

    Given the Tories back gay marriage and don't want to ban abortion or make changing sex illegal social values are hardly a major issue.

    Brexit maybe but then most voters over 47 voted for Brexit, not most voters over 77, so plenty of mileage in that yet for them. Indeed far more voters voted for Brexit than currently back the Tories
    Past performance doesn't predict future performance, as any fule kno!

    Polling for Tories (and Reform too if you add them in) is pisspoor below the age of 50 and you are doing less than zero about it.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,385
    edited January 28
    Well, that must be some sort of a record. I'd guess that never before have two such nail-bitingly tense test matches finished on the same morning, with the odds-on favourite (and @ydoethur, naturally) losing in both cases.

    I expect to be proved wrong shortly.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,071
    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    If polls show a Unionist majority at Holyrood and Labour winning most seats in Scotland again, then polls on Scottish independence become completely irrelevant.

    The Scottish government would then not even have a majority for indyref2 at Holyrood for Westminster to ignore. You could have 99% for independence in polls but without an SNP or SNP and Green pro independence majority at Holyrood and an SNP majority of Scottish MPs, who cares?

    It's not irrelevant if nearly half of Scotland wants to become independent just because a unionist majority is in Holyrood. It's certainly a lot easier to handle, but until the number who actively want independence reduces the potential threat remains, even if in this scenario the SNP personally lost support for a time.
    It is because we are a representative democracy and therefore without a majority of pro independence representatives at Holyrood or Westminster the issue is irrelevant
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,595
    Sinner with the break in the 5th set. Probably all over now.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,071

    HYUFD said:

    If polls show a Unionist majority at Holyrood and Labour winning most seats in Scotland again, then polls on Scottish independence become completely irrelevant.

    The Scottish government would then not even have a majority for indyref2 at Holyrood for Westminster to ignore. You could have 99% for independence in polls but without an SNP or SNP and Green pro independence majority at Holyrood and an SNP majority of Scottish MPs, who cares?

    I hesitate to 'crowbar in' something about Scottish indy on a thread about cricket, but can you list the times that you accepted that SNP having most Scottish seats, polls showing roughly half of the electorate supported indy and an indy majority at Holyrood were relevant?
    Westminster is supreme yes, as the SC confirmed, the issue was relevant but Westminster had the final say.

    No SNP majority anywhere and the issue becomes irrelevant with Westminster still having the final say
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,855
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    If polls show a Unionist majority at Holyrood and Labour winning most seats in Scotland again, then polls on Scottish independence become completely irrelevant.

    The Scottish government would then not even have a majority for indyref2 at Holyrood for Westminster to ignore. You could have 99% for independence in polls but without an SNP or SNP and Green pro independence majority at Holyrood and an SNP majority of Scottish MPs, who cares?

    I hesitate to 'crowbar in' something about Scottish indy on a thread about cricket, but can you list the times that you accepted that SNP having most Scottish seats, polls showing roughly half of the electorate supported indy and an indy majority at Holyrood were relevant?
    Westminster is supreme yes, as the SC confirmed, the issue was relevant but Westminster had the final say.

    No SNP majority anywhere and the issue becomes irrelevant with Westminster still having the final say
    Your logic, as always, reminds me of a colleague I once had who was very even-handed - either I was wrong or he was right.
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    If polls show a Unionist majority at Holyrood and Labour winning most seats in Scotland again, then polls on Scottish independence become completely irrelevant.

    The Scottish government would then not even have a majority for indyref2 at Holyrood for Westminster to ignore. You could have 99% for independence in polls but without an SNP or SNP and Green pro independence majority at Holyrood and an SNP majority of Scottish MPs, who cares?

    It isn't irrelevant. It literally sucks the life out of Scottish politics. Yer man Duguid is doing His Entire Campaign attacking the SNP. His last 2 leaflets entirely devoted to it. He tweeted yesterday knocking on doors and how people want him to stop the SNP.

    Irrelevant? Your lack of knowledge on the subject. Sorry, *any* subject.
    Yes it is irrelevant. We are a representative democracy not a direct democracy, if the SNP have no majority of MSPs or Scottish MPs their campaign for independence is completely irrelevant, exactly as it was even under the SNP minority government of 2007-2011 for example.

    If I don't kowtow to your conformist left liberal ideological demands, tough
    Independence ebbs and flows in Scotland and always has

    However, it is far from irrelevant and you insult Scots by your arrogant attitude towards them
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,420
    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    If polls show a Unionist majority at Holyrood and Labour winning most seats in Scotland again, then polls on Scottish independence become completely irrelevant.

    The Scottish government would then not even have a majority for indyref2 at Holyrood for Westminster to ignore. You could have 99% for independence in polls but without an SNP or SNP and Green pro independence majority at Holyrood and an SNP majority of Scottish MPs, who cares?

    I hesitate to 'crowbar in' something about Scottish indy on a thread about cricket, but can you list the times that you accepted that SNP having most Scottish seats, polls showing roughly half of the electorate supported indy and an indy majority at Holyrood were relevant?
    Westminster is supreme yes, as the SC confirmed, the issue was relevant but Westminster had the final say.

    No SNP majority anywhere and the issue becomes irrelevant with Westminster still having the final say
    Your logic, as always, reminds me of a colleague I once had who was very even-handed - either I was wrong or he was right.
    My music teacher had a chart up in her room about the Rules of the Workplace.

    Rule 9: THE BOSS IS ALWAYS RIGHT - even in his absence.
    Rule 10: WHEN THE BOSS IS WRONG, REFER TO RULE 9.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,100

    Sandpit said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Are we actually going to war with Putin?

    It seems utterly ridiculous, but a lot of apparently sensible people are raising the alarm

    Who are the people? Is 'apparently sensible' doing a lot of heavy lifting in that sentence?
    The Swedish government?


    Sweden's call for population to prepare for war sparks panic and criticism

    It’s been described as a bombshell moment. The upper echelons of Sweden’s government and defence forces last week shocked the nation by explicitly warning that war might come to Sweden, “

    https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20240118-sweden-s-call-for-population-to-prepare-for-war-sparks-panic-and-criticism
    This wouldn't be happening without serious intelligence of bad intentions.

    FWIW, I think it's actually about us all rearming sufficiently to deter Putin, so a war never happens.
    Nah, it's being driven by American Republicans stopping further aid to Ukraine and the prospect of Trump in the White House.

    They are doing exactly what Putin asks of them. I really cannot understand why @Sandpit supports them rather than Biden, who was Ukraines staunchest supporter.
    Most of the Republican objections to Ukraine aren’t so much about Ukraine itself, but the amounts of money that Biden is claiming to be spending there - the vast majority of which isn’t real new money at all, but overvaluing of old surplus military kit.

    I think that a change of government in the US changes little actually on the ground in Ukraine, but changes a lot in terms of Washington talking points.

    Personally I wouldn’t have a clue who to vote for in the US, all of the politicians are either far to the right, far to the left, or
    nakedly in it to enrich themselves. There’s almost no-one who appears to be in politics
    to make life better for the people they
    represent.
    I’m not sure. I think Trumps opposition is simply anti-Bidenism

    As a thought experiment: if he had been President and not supported the UK and UKR then he would have acknowledged Putin as his capo.

    I think he would have fought.
    Remember Trump's first impeachment, back in 2019, was about him withholding military aid to Ukraine because he wanted Ukraine to announce an investigation into Biden.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,986
    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    If polls show a Unionist majority at Holyrood and Labour winning most seats in Scotland again, then polls on Scottish independence become completely irrelevant.

    The Scottish government would then not even have a majority for indyref2 at Holyrood for Westminster to ignore. You could have 99% for independence in polls but without an SNP or SNP and Green pro independence majority at Holyrood and an SNP majority of Scottish MPs, who cares?

    I hesitate to 'crowbar in' something about Scottish indy on a thread about cricket, but can you list the times that you accepted that SNP having most Scottish seats, polls showing roughly half of the electorate supported indy and an indy majority at Holyrood were relevant?
    Westminster is supreme yes, as the SC confirmed, the issue was relevant but Westminster had the final say.

    No SNP majority anywhere and the issue becomes irrelevant with Westminster still having the final say
    Your logic, as always, reminds me of a colleague I once had who was very even-handed - either I was wrong or he was right.
    And all the undecideds in the room supporting both propositions.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,999
    On topic given we’re talking Scotland.

    Kinlochewe has just smashed the UK all time January warmth record and Scotland’s all time record for any winter month.

    19.2C. Foehn effect.

    https://x.com/metoffice/status/1751578442921861268?s=46

    Really quite remarkable.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,385
    TimS said:

    On topic given we’re talking Scotland.

    Kinlochewe has just smashed the UK all time January warmth record and Scotland’s all time record for any winter month.

    19.2C. Foehn effect.

    https://x.com/metoffice/status/1751578442921861268?s=46

    Really quite remarkable.

    And scary.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,999
    ydoethur said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    If polls show a Unionist majority at Holyrood and Labour winning most seats in Scotland again, then polls on Scottish independence become completely irrelevant.

    The Scottish government would then not even have a majority for indyref2 at Holyrood for Westminster to ignore. You could have 99% for independence in polls but without an SNP or SNP and Green pro independence majority at Holyrood and an SNP majority of Scottish MPs, who cares?

    I hesitate to 'crowbar in' something about Scottish indy on a thread about cricket, but can you list the times that you accepted that SNP having most Scottish seats, polls showing roughly half of the electorate supported indy and an indy majority at Holyrood were relevant?
    Westminster is supreme yes, as the SC confirmed, the issue was relevant but Westminster had the final say.

    No SNP majority anywhere and the issue becomes irrelevant with Westminster still having the final say
    Your logic, as always, reminds me of a colleague I once had who was very even-handed - either I was wrong or he was right.
    My music teacher had a chart up in her room about the Rules of the Workplace.

    Rule 9: THE BOSS IS ALWAYS RIGHT - even in his absence.
    Rule 10: WHEN THE BOSS IS WRONG, REFER TO RULE 9.
    The catholic version being that the Pope cannot be wrong, which he’s demonstrated in the last 2 days.
  • This is happening in May.


  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,420
    TimS said:

    ydoethur said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    If polls show a Unionist majority at Holyrood and Labour winning most seats in Scotland again, then polls on Scottish independence become completely irrelevant.

    The Scottish government would then not even have a majority for indyref2 at Holyrood for Westminster to ignore. You could have 99% for independence in polls but without an SNP or SNP and Green pro independence majority at Holyrood and an SNP majority of Scottish MPs, who cares?

    I hesitate to 'crowbar in' something about Scottish indy on a thread about cricket, but can you list the times that you accepted that SNP having most Scottish seats, polls showing roughly half of the electorate supported indy and an indy majority at Holyrood were relevant?
    Westminster is supreme yes, as the SC confirmed, the issue was relevant but Westminster had the final say.

    No SNP majority anywhere and the issue becomes irrelevant with Westminster still having the final say
    Your logic, as always, reminds me of a colleague I once had who was very even-handed - either I was wrong or he was right.
    My music teacher had a chart up in her room about the Rules of the Workplace.

    Rule 9: THE BOSS IS ALWAYS RIGHT - even in his absence.
    Rule 10: WHEN THE BOSS IS WRONG, REFER TO RULE 9.
    The catholic version being that the Pope cannot be wrong, which he’s demonstrated in the last 2 days.
    Ollie-vet as cavalry?
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,568
    Sinner wins Aus Open after being 2 sets down to Medvedev.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,986

    This is happening in May.


    Is Klopp the only unalloyed lefty you've given full support?
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,846
    tyson said:

    For the life of me I don't understand what this woke thing is about. Why the right think they can make political capital out of it just shows how ideologically bankrupt they have become.


    As far as I can see 99% of the population think that people have to compete competitively in the gender they were born into, and 99% of the population don't really agree with giving young children non reversible gender altering therapies. But if you do have the odd under 18 who is so unhappy with their gender that they are suicidal as I have encountered, then this decision should be made with a Health Professional, Parent and Child and is no one elses business.

    I cannot for the life see what is the problem in gender neutral cubicles toilets where you might wash your hands in a shared use sink. Hopefully, it will shame more fellas into washing their hands afterwards. Grosses me out with men using a public loo and then leaving without washing their hands- especially if there is a knob or door handle. Years ago I was in Upstate New York and the public loos didn't have doors. I suffered the most horrendous constipation.

    And, probably my most controversial opinion- I cannot see the problem in Trans being able to have some say on which gendered prison they go to. Again, subject to the prison authorities and a medical opinion. I've been in a lot of prisons over the years with work, including women's prisons where the person would be much safer in a gender prison they felt more aligned to. But considering the current state of our prisons, drugs, overcrowding, horrendous bullying and internal (terrible) offending.,..this specific issue is probably about a thousand down the list in terms of gravity.

    And yet Rosie Duffield is effectively persona no grata in the Labour party for.......... what exactly?

    Woke is not really a useful term. It's primarily become used by people who don't like it. That to me suggests we ought to avoid it. Matthew Syed puts his finger on something very important, the ridiculous denigration of the west that seems to permeate so much nowadays and we get Nigel B's slippery response. Of course no individual can define objective reality. The question is whether we can be bothered to try. Hundreds of years of empiricism, reason and the search for knowledge impacting academic disciplines now all being infected with obscure theories from the humanities and politicised by Gramscian types who want to march through the institutions. All dismissed by fashionable bourgeois types who think they are educated because they reflexively oppose the Tories/right wing whatever. Yet they only demonstrate their ignorance of what is happening.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,104
    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    If polls show a Unionist majority at Holyrood and Labour winning most seats in Scotland again, then polls on Scottish independence become completely irrelevant.

    The Scottish government would then not even have a majority for indyref2 at Holyrood for Westminster to ignore. You could have 99% for independence in polls but without an SNP or SNP and Green pro independence majority at Holyrood and an SNP majority of Scottish MPs, who cares?

    It's not irrelevant if nearly half of Scotland wants to become independent just because a unionist majority is in Holyrood. It's certainly a lot easier to handle, but until the number who actively want independence reduces the potential threat remains, even if in this scenario the SNP personally lost support for a time.
    It is because we are a representative democracy and therefore without a majority of pro independence representatives at Holyrood or Westminster the issue is irrelevant
    Sigh, I really do not know why you decide to arbitrarily decide your own definitions of things such as what the word relevant means. Let's say 20% of the country were hardcore nazis or communists - that would be a relevant factor in our politics, even though they would not have a majority in parliament.

    Was the issue of Brexit irrelevant when a majority of parties at Westminster did not support it? No, and eventually that told.

    And by your definition unionism was/is irrelevant because there was a Sindy majority at Holyrood, and indeed currently is.

    I can see you've tried to get around that by mentioning Holyrood and Westminster, but that's not clever enough either, since your original premise was very clear it was irrelevant on the basis of Holyrood not having a Sindy majority, and thus presumably relevant beforehand.

    And haven't you talked about public support for the death penalty before, even though none of our parties have supporting it as policy, yet party backing is the test of relevance apparently?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,420
    And Pope is indeed man of the match.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,595
    Tennis has a new Grand Slam winner, Italian Jannick Sinner.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,104
    Just because something is less relevant, does not mean that it is entirely irrelevant.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,409
    edited January 28
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,855
    edited January 28
    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    If polls show a Unionist majority at Holyrood and Labour winning most seats in Scotland again, then polls on Scottish independence become completely irrelevant.

    The Scottish government would then not even have a majority for indyref2 at Holyrood for Westminster to ignore. You could have 99% for independence in polls but without an SNP or SNP and Green pro independence majority at Holyrood and an SNP majority of Scottish MPs, who cares?

    It's not irrelevant if nearly half of Scotland wants to become independent just because a unionist majority is in Holyrood. It's certainly a lot easier to handle, but until the number who actively want independence reduces the potential threat remains, even if in this scenario the SNP personally lost support for a time.
    It is because we are a representative democracy and therefore without a majority of pro independence representatives at Holyrood or Westminster the issue is irrelevant
    Sigh, I really do not know why you decide to arbitrarily decide your own definitions of things such as what the word relevant means. Let's say 20% of the country were hardcore nazis or communists - that would be a relevant factor in our politics, even though they would not have a majority in parliament.

    Was the issue of Brexit irrelevant when a majority of parties at Westminster did not support it? No, and eventually that told.

    And by your definition unionism was/is irrelevant because there was a Sindy majority at Holyrood, and indeed currently is.

    I can see you've tried to get around that by mentioning Holyrood and Westminster, but that's not clever enough either, since your original premise was very clear it was irrelevant on the basis of Holyrood not having a Sindy majority, and thus presumably relevant beforehand.

    And haven't you talked about public support for the death penalty before, even though none of our parties have supporting it as policy, yet party backing is the test of relevance apparently?
    HYUFD used to deny the relevance of a majority of the Scottish vote, and a majority of the MSPs, and a majority of the MPs from Scotland, being pro-indy. One of his little tricks was to omit the Scottish Greens and claim that only the SNP was relevant. So on exactly the same logic one should only claim the Conservatives or Labour (depending on parliament) as being the only unionist party in Scotland.

    Edit: off to have a Stornoway black pudding and fried egg roll for lunch. Have fun.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,652
    That first Foakes stumping was an absolute gem. The ball was spinning and kept low. He stayed down and then had the technique to catch the ball cleanly and get the bails off. I am not sure Bairstow could have managed that. The second one was a lot more routine but showed the inconsistency in the pitch, so that had to be factored in by Foakes too. It is such a pleasure watching a top class wicketkeeper at play. In India, especially, they are vital.
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 4,595
    Sandpit said:

    Tennis has a new Grand Slam winner, Italian Jannick Sinner.

    Don't know much about German speaking Italians. Has anyone here visited that part of Italy?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,071
    kle4 said:

    Just because something is less relevant, does not mean that it is entirely irrelevant.

    Under our constitution it is, if there is no majority for something in our Parliaments it is completely irrelevant as an issue until the next parliamentary election
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 5,288

    TimS said:

    On topic given we’re talking Scotland.

    Kinlochewe has just smashed the UK all time January warmth record and Scotland’s all time record for any winter month.

    19.2C. Foehn effect.

    https://x.com/metoffice/status/1751578442921861268?s=46

    Really quite remarkable.

    And scary.
    Inverewe, at the other end of the loch, is where the tropical gardens are. Nice place.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,385
    ydoethur said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Sinner wins Aus Open after being 2 sets down to Medvedev.

    It's been a day for improbable comebacks.

    And all on a religious theme.

    Joseph sorts out the Windies.

    Pope guides England.

    A Sinner gets his desserts.
    And Mohammed (Siraj) couldn't save India. Though he was not out.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,104
    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    If polls show a Unionist majority at Holyrood and Labour winning most seats in Scotland again, then polls on Scottish independence become completely irrelevant.

    The Scottish government would then not even have a majority for indyref2 at Holyrood for Westminster to ignore. You could have 99% for independence in polls but without an SNP or SNP and Green pro independence majority at Holyrood and an SNP majority of Scottish MPs, who cares?

    I hesitate to 'crowbar in' something about Scottish indy on a thread about cricket, but can you list the times that you accepted that SNP having most Scottish seats, polls showing roughly half of the electorate supported indy and an indy majority at Holyrood were relevant?
    Westminster is supreme yes, as the SC confirmed, the issue was relevant but Westminster had the final say.

    No SNP majority anywhere and the issue becomes irrelevant with Westminster still having the final say
    Your logic, as always, reminds me of a colleague I once had who was very even-handed - either I was wrong or he was right.
    It reminds me of Donald Trump, refusing to give an inch even when it doesn't matter, incorrectly perceiving that as a sign of weakness.

    Simpler not to draw up rigidly precise definitions which will back yourself into a logical corner in the first place - it's why most successful politicians are adept at knowing when to concede, when to change tune, which battles to dig in for and which ones are a distraction.

    Treating every point, even ones contradictory to previously expressed views, as needing to be treated like some binding article of faith is exhausting and self defeating.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,071

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    If polls show a Unionist majority at Holyrood and Labour winning most seats in Scotland again, then polls on Scottish independence become completely irrelevant.

    The Scottish government would then not even have a majority for indyref2 at Holyrood for Westminster to ignore. You could have 99% for independence in polls but without an SNP or SNP and Green pro independence majority at Holyrood and an SNP majority of Scottish MPs, who cares?

    It isn't irrelevant. It literally sucks the life out of Scottish politics. Yer man Duguid is doing His Entire Campaign attacking the SNP. His last 2 leaflets entirely devoted to it. He tweeted yesterday knocking on doors and how people want him to stop the SNP.

    Irrelevant? Your lack of knowledge on the subject. Sorry, *any* subject.
    Yes it is irrelevant. We are a representative democracy not a direct democracy, if the SNP have no majority of MSPs or Scottish MPs their campaign for independence is completely irrelevant, exactly as it was even under the SNP minority government of 2007-2011 for example.

    If I don't kowtow to your conformist left liberal ideological demands, tough
    Independence ebbs and flows in Scotland and always has

    However, it is far from irrelevant and you insult Scots by your arrogant attitude towards them
    No I don't, if Scottish Nationalists feel insulted because they do not got appeased so be it, if they can't even get a majority for their parties going forward at Westminster or Holyrood they deserve to be ignored even more
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,595
    carnforth said:

    Sandpit said:

    Tennis has a new Grand Slam winner, Italian Jannick Sinner.

    Don't know much about German speaking Italians. Has anyone here visited that part of Italy?
    The only other one I know is Gunther Steiner, former boss of the Haas F1 team. It’s a long-disputed border region in the mountains.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,385

    tyson said:

    For the life of me I don't understand what this woke thing is about. Why the right think they can make political capital out of it just shows how ideologically bankrupt they have become.


    As far as I can see 99% of the population think that people have to compete competitively in the gender they were born into, and 99% of the population don't really agree with giving young children non reversible gender altering therapies. But if you do have the odd under 18 who is so unhappy with their gender that they are suicidal as I have encountered, then this decision should be made with a Health Professional, Parent and Child and is no one elses business.

    I cannot for the life see what is the problem in gender neutral cubicles toilets where you might wash your hands in a shared use sink. Hopefully, it will shame more fellas into washing their hands afterwards. Grosses me out with men using a public loo and then leaving without washing their hands- especially if there is a knob or door handle. Years ago I was in Upstate New York and the public loos didn't have doors. I suffered the most horrendous constipation.

    And, probably my most controversial opinion- I cannot see the problem in Trans being able to have some say on which gendered prison they go to. Again, subject to the prison authorities and a medical opinion. I've been in a lot of prisons over the years with work, including women's prisons where the person would be much safer in a gender prison they felt more aligned to. But considering the current state of our prisons, drugs, overcrowding, horrendous bullying and internal (terrible) offending.,..this specific issue is probably about a thousand down the list in terms of gravity.

    And yet Rosie Duffield is effectively persona no grata in the Labour party for.......... what exactly?

    Woke is not really a useful term. It's primarily become used by people who don't like it. That to me suggests we ought to avoid it. Matthew Syed puts his finger on something very important, the ridiculous denigration of the west that seems to permeate so much nowadays and we get Nigel B's slippery response. Of course no individual can define objective reality. The question is whether we can be bothered to try. Hundreds of years of empiricism, reason and the search for knowledge impacting academic disciplines now all being infected with obscure theories from the humanities and politicised by Gramscian types who want to march through the institutions. All dismissed by fashionable bourgeois types who think they are educated because they reflexively oppose the Tories/right wing whatever. Yet they only demonstrate their ignorance of what is happening.
    Point of order. Rosie Duffield isn't persona non grata in the Labour Party. She has been reselected to fight her Canterbury seat.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,071
    edited January 28
    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    If polls show a Unionist majority at Holyrood and Labour winning most seats in Scotland again, then polls on Scottish independence become completely irrelevant.

    The Scottish government would then not even have a majority for indyref2 at Holyrood for Westminster to ignore. You could have 99% for independence in polls but without an SNP or SNP and Green pro independence majority at Holyrood and an SNP majority of Scottish MPs, who cares?

    It's not irrelevant if nearly half of Scotland wants to become independent just because a unionist majority is in Holyrood. It's certainly a lot easier to handle, but until the number who actively want independence reduces the potential threat remains, even if in this scenario the SNP personally lost support for a time.
    It is because we are a representative democracy and therefore without a majority of pro independence representatives at Holyrood or Westminster the issue is irrelevant
    Sigh, I really do not know why you decide to arbitrarily decide your own definitions of things such as what the word relevant means. Let's say 20% of the country were hardcore nazis or communists - that would be a relevant factor in our politics, even though they would not have a majority in parliament.

    Was the issue of Brexit irrelevant when a majority of parties at Westminster did not support it? No, and eventually that told.

    And by your definition unionism was/is irrelevant because there was a Sindy majority at Holyrood, and indeed currently is.

    I can see you've tried to get around that by mentioning Holyrood and Westminster, but that's not clever enough either, since your original premise was very clear it was irrelevant on the basis of Holyrood not having a Sindy majority, and thus presumably relevant beforehand.

    And haven't you talked about public support for the death penalty before, even though none of our parties have supporting it as policy, yet party backing is the test of relevance apparently?
    Yes, Brexit as a proposition was completely irrelevant from 1973 until the Conservatives had a manifesto commitment for an EU referendum in 2015 and won a House of Commons majority on that. Even after Leave won the referendum the lack of a Westminster majority for it after the 2017 election also made Brexit irrelevant until Boris won a general election majority for Brexit in 2019

    I have never once said support for the restoration of the death penalty for some crimes is relevant beyond what the polls say, given the tiny fraction of MPs who support its return
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,100

    tyson said:

    For the life of me I don't understand what this woke thing is about. Why the right think they can make political capital out of it just shows how ideologically bankrupt they have become.


    As far as I can see 99% of the population think that people have to compete competitively in the gender they were born into, and 99% of the population don't really agree with giving young children non reversible gender altering therapies. But if you do have the odd under 18 who is so unhappy with their gender that they are suicidal as I have encountered, then this decision should be made with a Health Professional, Parent and Child and is no one elses business.

    I cannot for the life see what is the problem in gender neutral cubicles toilets where you might wash your hands in a shared use sink. Hopefully, it will shame more fellas into washing their hands afterwards. Grosses me out with men using a public loo and then leaving without washing their hands- especially if there is a knob or door handle. Years ago I was in Upstate New York and the public loos didn't have doors. I suffered the most horrendous constipation.

    And, probably my most controversial opinion- I cannot see the problem in Trans being able to have some say on which gendered prison they go to. Again, subject to the prison authorities and a medical opinion. I've been in a lot of prisons over the years with work, including women's prisons where the person would be much safer in a gender prison they felt more aligned to. But considering the current state of our prisons, drugs, overcrowding, horrendous bullying and internal (terrible) offending.,..this specific issue is probably about a thousand down the list in terms of gravity.

    And yet Rosie Duffield is effectively persona no grata in the Labour party for.......... what exactly?

    Woke is not really a useful term. It's primarily become used by people who don't like it. That to me suggests we ought to avoid it. Matthew Syed puts his finger on something very important, the ridiculous denigration of the west that seems to permeate so much nowadays and we get Nigel B's slippery response. Of course no individual can define objective reality. The question is whether we can be bothered to try. Hundreds of years of empiricism, reason and the search for knowledge impacting academic disciplines now all being infected with obscure theories from the humanities and politicised by Gramscian types who want to march through the institutions. All dismissed by fashionable bourgeois types who think they are educated because they reflexively oppose the Tories/right wing whatever. Yet they only demonstrate their ignorance of what is happening.
    Ah, yes, hundreds of years of academic thought, all dismissed by… Hold on, dismissed by who? “I think the people of this country have had enough of experts,” was said by Michael Gove, not Owen Jones.
  • TazTaz Posts: 14,418
    Hot on the heels of the WWE doing a deal with Netflix this happens.

    Got to wonder where this will all end for grapple fans.

    https://deadline.com/2024/01/vince-mcmahon-rape-lawsuit-1235804877/
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,986
    edited January 28
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    If polls show a Unionist majority at Holyrood and Labour winning most seats in Scotland again, then polls on Scottish independence become completely irrelevant.

    The Scottish government would then not even have a majority for indyref2 at Holyrood for Westminster to ignore. You could have 99% for independence in polls but without an SNP or SNP and Green pro independence majority at Holyrood and an SNP majority of Scottish MPs, who cares?

    It isn't irrelevant. It literally sucks the life out of Scottish politics. Yer man Duguid is doing His Entire Campaign attacking the SNP. His last 2 leaflets entirely devoted to it. He tweeted yesterday knocking on doors and how people want him to stop the SNP.

    Irrelevant? Your lack of knowledge on the subject. Sorry, *any* subject.
    Yes it is irrelevant. We are a representative democracy not a direct democracy, if the SNP have no majority of MSPs or Scottish MPs their campaign for independence is completely irrelevant, exactly as it was even under the SNP minority government of 2007-2011 for example.

    If I don't kowtow to your conformist left liberal ideological demands, tough
    Independence ebbs and flows in Scotland and always has

    However, it is far from irrelevant and you insult Scots by your arrogant attitude towards them
    No I don't, if Scottish Nationalists feel insulted because they do not got appeased so be it, if they can't even get a majority for their parties going forward at Westminster or Holyrood they deserve to be ignored even more
    Great, the views of Tory Unionists in Scotland irrelevant for the last 60+ years, and shortly to be irrelevant in the rUK for X years.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,409
    Sandpit said:

    carnforth said:

    Sandpit said:

    Tennis has a new Grand Slam winner, Italian Jannick Sinner.

    Don't know much about German speaking Italians. Has anyone here visited that part of Italy?
    The only other one I know is Gunther Steiner, former boss of the Haas F1 team. It’s a long-disputed border region in the mountains.
    Reinhold Messner.
    Mountaineer and ex-MEP.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,100
    carnforth said:

    Sandpit said:

    Tennis has a new Grand Slam winner, Italian Jannick Sinner.

    Don't know much about German speaking Italians. Has anyone here visited that part of Italy?
    A German friend loves going skiing there. He says you get a wonderful holiday in Italy, but he can speak German to everyone.
  • TazTaz Posts: 14,418

    tyson said:

    For the life of me I don't understand what this woke thing is about. Why the right think they can make political capital out of it just shows how ideologically bankrupt they have become.


    As far as I can see 99% of the population think that people have to compete competitively in the gender they were born into, and 99% of the population don't really agree with giving young children non reversible gender altering therapies. But if you do have the odd under 18 who is so unhappy with their gender that they are suicidal as I have encountered, then this decision should be made with a Health Professional, Parent and Child and is no one elses business.

    I cannot for the life see what is the problem in gender neutral cubicles toilets where you might wash your hands in a shared use sink. Hopefully, it will shame more fellas into washing their hands afterwards. Grosses me out with men using a public loo and then leaving without washing their hands- especially if there is a knob or door handle. Years ago I was in Upstate New York and the public loos didn't have doors. I suffered the most horrendous constipation.

    And, probably my most controversial opinion- I cannot see the problem in Trans being able to have some say on which gendered prison they go to. Again, subject to the prison authorities and a medical opinion. I've been in a lot of prisons over the years with work, including women's prisons where the person would be much safer in a gender prison they felt more aligned to. But considering the current state of our prisons, drugs, overcrowding, horrendous bullying and internal (terrible) offending.,..this specific issue is probably about a thousand down the list in terms of gravity.

    And yet Rosie Duffield is effectively persona no grata in the Labour party for.......... what exactly?

    Woke is not really a useful term. It's primarily become used by people who don't like it. That to me suggests we ought to avoid it. Matthew Syed puts his finger on something very important, the ridiculous denigration of the west that seems to permeate so much nowadays and we get Nigel B's slippery response. Of course no individual can define objective reality. The question is whether we can be bothered to try. Hundreds of years of empiricism, reason and the search for knowledge impacting academic disciplines now all being infected with obscure theories from the humanities and politicised by Gramscian types who want to march through the institutions. All dismissed by fashionable bourgeois types who think they are educated because they reflexively oppose the Tories/right wing whatever. Yet they only demonstrate their ignorance of what is happening.
    Point of order. Rosie Duffield isn't persona non grata in the Labour Party. She has been reselected to fight her Canterbury seat.
    So welcome she is often the recipient of vexatious complaints by opponents in the party.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3gye5337k7o
  • This is happening in May.


    Is Klopp the only unalloyed lefty you've given full support?
    Yes, I said the other day, there's only one man I am more loyal and supportive of than David Cameron and it is Jürgen Klopp.
  • MJWMJW Posts: 1,728
    Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:

    Foxy said:

    Taz said:

    Taz said:

    Sandpit said:

    Taz said:

    Agreed on this. As someone who has never liked the SNP and still doesn't, I think the issue of Scottish independence is seperate and distinct from the politicians making the case for it. When I was growing up in Scotland I was a unionist but if I had a vote now it would probably be for independence. It would be very difficult economically in the short to medium term but I think Scotland is falling well short of where it could be as a country and needs to break free from the United Kingdom to achieve its long term potential.

    Given that it appears to be Groundhog Referendum Day on PB, Remainia is falling well short of where it could be as a country and needs to break free from Leavistan to achieve its long term potential.

    Bye bye Barnsley and Bolsover, good luck on your own.
    This is clear from some of the not so subtle messaging from Sadiq Khan. Labour's forthcoming victory will further embolden him and others of his persuasion.
    Although to win a majority labour needs these areas as much as it needs the big cities.
    I'm thinking more of what will happen after, rather than before, the election.
    That housebuilding will fall even further behind immigration.
    Isn't that the one area where Labour appear to be making a definite commitment?
    The Tories made a similar commitment which evaporated after the Chesham and Amersham by election.
    Difference is that C+A is a must win seat for the Conservatives, and core Nimby is pretty much core Conservative demographic.

    Whereas Labour's core vote is fed up with overpriced flat shares and their winning Amersham is the blob of icing on the icing figurine on the icing on the cake.
    And home owners have traditionally been more inclined to vote Tory so Labour have every incentive to talk the talk but not walk the walk.
    There is increasing evidence that social values are forestalling the traditional shift to voting Conservative as people near their forties. The traditional economic reasons to vote Tory have disappeared for working age folk, as the Tories only care about featherbedding the retired vote.

    I think too that by building around the cities that the Labour vote moving into more marginal suburban and commuter seats could well make the Labour vote more efficient and flip a lot of previously safe Shire seats.

    We are dealing with a new political world, and new demographics.
    Are we? In 2019 the Conservatives won most voters over 39, in 2005 and 2001 the Tories won only most voters over 55.

    Given the Tories back gay marriage and don't want to ban abortion or make changing sex illegal social values are hardly a major issue.

    Brexit maybe but then most voters over 47 voted for Brexit, not most voters over 77, so plenty of mileage in that yet for them. Indeed far more voters voted for Brexit than currently back the Tories
    Past performance doesn't predict future performance, as any fule kno!

    Polling for Tories (and Reform too if you add them in) is pisspoor below the age of 50 and you are doing less than zero about it.
    Indeed, the problem for the Tories isn't that they are doing badly among the Under 50s, it's that they are doing catastrophically badly. Comically badly. They aren't just unpopular, to all intents and purposes, outside a few oddballs, those who expect to remain in the workforce for 20 years or more have stopped voting Tory almost altogether.

    Sure, that should improve in opposition as general polling improves and they recalibrate - but to the level of health where previously won? They have been so bad for and elicit such anger among the Under 40s in particular that the shift maybe generational and permanent - a cohort which won't forgive or forget.

    Plus, there are little signs the Tory party is capable of coming to terms with this and why they are despised. There's the odd noise from outsiders about housebuilding. Which would be welcome, but one thing among many, and something Labour should find it much easier to outbid them on. Similar for infrastructure.

    To take Brexit as an example. It's not going to define how opponents (the vast majority of the young as they were in 2016) vote forever or even now. But it's going to be very difficult to persuade people to give you a chance if they believe your signature achievement, the one the Conservative Party now defines itself by, was a terrible error that created chaos and made them poorer.

    "Don't let them back in or they'll ruin Britain like they did last time" is going to be a powerful and persuasive argument to be used against the Tories for a very long time. And one that simple demographics will cement, given those who have been infuriated by and made poorer by the Tories are younger than those they have protected and enriched.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,094
    edited January 28
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    If polls show a Unionist majority at Holyrood and Labour winning most seats in Scotland again, then polls on Scottish independence become completely irrelevant.

    The Scottish government would then not even have a majority for indyref2 at Holyrood for Westminster to ignore. You could have 99% for independence in polls but without an SNP or SNP and Green pro independence majority at Holyrood and an SNP majority of Scottish MPs, who cares?

    It isn't irrelevant. It literally sucks the life out of Scottish politics. Yer man Duguid is doing His Entire Campaign attacking the SNP. His last 2 leaflets entirely devoted to it. He tweeted yesterday knocking on doors and how people want him to stop the SNP.

    Irrelevant? Your lack of knowledge on the subject. Sorry, *any* subject.
    Yes it is irrelevant. We are a representative democracy not a direct democracy, if the SNP have no majority of MSPs or Scottish MPs their campaign for independence is completely irrelevant, exactly as it was even under the SNP minority government of 2007-2011 for example.

    If I don't kowtow to your conformist left liberal ideological demands, tough
    Independence ebbs and flows in Scotland and always has

    However, it is far from irrelevant and you insult Scots by your arrogant attitude towards them
    No I don't, if Scottish Nationalists feel insulted because they do not got appeased so be it, if they can't even get a majority for their parties going forward at Westminster or Holyrood they deserve to be ignored even more
    Scots in general take a very poor view of an Englishman pontificating on their politics especially one as ignorant as you are of the Scottish people

    When I first arrived in Lossiemouth in 1962 and met my future wife's family, it was said he is Englishman but he is very nice

    It wasn't exactly true as I am half Welsh

    Indeed I expect @RochdalePioneers may have experienced similar sentiments
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,385
    Taz said:

    tyson said:

    For the life of me I don't understand what this woke thing is about. Why the right think they can make political capital out of it just shows how ideologically bankrupt they have become.


    As far as I can see 99% of the population think that people have to compete competitively in the gender they were born into, and 99% of the population don't really agree with giving young children non reversible gender altering therapies. But if you do have the odd under 18 who is so unhappy with their gender that they are suicidal as I have encountered, then this decision should be made with a Health Professional, Parent and Child and is no one elses business.

    I cannot for the life see what is the problem in gender neutral cubicles toilets where you might wash your hands in a shared use sink. Hopefully, it will shame more fellas into washing their hands afterwards. Grosses me out with men using a public loo and then leaving without washing their hands- especially if there is a knob or door handle. Years ago I was in Upstate New York and the public loos didn't have doors. I suffered the most horrendous constipation.

    And, probably my most controversial opinion- I cannot see the problem in Trans being able to have some say on which gendered prison they go to. Again, subject to the prison authorities and a medical opinion. I've been in a lot of prisons over the years with work, including women's prisons where the person would be much safer in a gender prison they felt more aligned to. But considering the current state of our prisons, drugs, overcrowding, horrendous bullying and internal (terrible) offending.,..this specific issue is probably about a thousand down the list in terms of gravity.

    And yet Rosie Duffield is effectively persona no grata in the Labour party for.......... what exactly?

    Woke is not really a useful term. It's primarily become used by people who don't like it. That to me suggests we ought to avoid it. Matthew Syed puts his finger on something very important, the ridiculous denigration of the west that seems to permeate so much nowadays and we get Nigel B's slippery response. Of course no individual can define objective reality. The question is whether we can be bothered to try. Hundreds of years of empiricism, reason and the search for knowledge impacting academic disciplines now all being infected with obscure theories from the humanities and politicised by Gramscian types who want to march through the institutions. All dismissed by fashionable bourgeois types who think they are educated because they reflexively oppose the Tories/right wing whatever. Yet they only demonstrate their ignorance of what is happening.
    Point of order. Rosie Duffield isn't persona non grata in the Labour Party. She has been reselected to fight her Canterbury seat.
    So welcome she is often the recipient of vexatious complaints by opponents in the party.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3gye5337k7o
    Nevertheless, my point was that her local CLP, who presumably know her best, reselected her as their candidate.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,132
    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    Just because something is less relevant, does not mean that it is entirely irrelevant.

    Under our constitution it is, if there is no majority for something in our Parliaments it is completely irrelevant as an issue until the next parliamentary election
    Irrelevant to the elective dictators in power, perhaps.
    The rest of us, not so much.

    Our constitution has nothing to say about whether issues are relevant or not; just what are the powers of givernment.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,071

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    If polls show a Unionist majority at Holyrood and Labour winning most seats in Scotland again, then polls on Scottish independence become completely irrelevant.

    The Scottish government would then not even have a majority for indyref2 at Holyrood for Westminster to ignore. You could have 99% for independence in polls but without an SNP or SNP and Green pro independence majority at Holyrood and an SNP majority of Scottish MPs, who cares?

    It isn't irrelevant. It literally sucks the life out of Scottish politics. Yer man Duguid is doing His Entire Campaign attacking the SNP. His last 2 leaflets entirely devoted to it. He tweeted yesterday knocking on doors and how people want him to stop the SNP.

    Irrelevant? Your lack of knowledge on the subject. Sorry, *any* subject.
    Yes it is irrelevant. We are a representative democracy not a direct democracy, if the SNP have no majority of MSPs or Scottish MPs their campaign for independence is completely irrelevant, exactly as it was even under the SNP minority government of 2007-2011 for example.

    If I don't kowtow to your conformist left liberal ideological demands, tough
    Independence ebbs and flows in Scotland and always has

    However, it is far from irrelevant and you insult Scots by your arrogant attitude towards them
    No I don't, if Scottish Nationalists feel insulted because they do not got appeased so be it, if they can't even get a majority for their parties going forward at Westminster or Holyrood they deserve to be ignored even more
    Scots in general take a very poor view of an Englishman pontificating on their politics especially one as ignorant as you are of the Scottish people

    When I first arrived in Lossiemouth in 1962 and met my future wife's family, it was said he is Englishman but he is very nice

    It wasn't exactly true as I am half Welsh

    Indeed I expect @RochdalePioneers may have experienced similar sentiments
    It is the average Scot switching from nationalist SNP to unionist Labour regardless of what I say, I opposed the SNP even when they had a clear majority
  • TazTaz Posts: 14,418

    Taz said:

    tyson said:

    For the life of me I don't understand what this woke thing is about. Why the right think they can make political capital out of it just shows how ideologically bankrupt they have become.


    As far as I can see 99% of the population think that people have to compete competitively in the gender they were born into, and 99% of the population don't really agree with giving young children non reversible gender altering therapies. But if you do have the odd under 18 who is so unhappy with their gender that they are suicidal as I have encountered, then this decision should be made with a Health Professional, Parent and Child and is no one elses business.

    I cannot for the life see what is the problem in gender neutral cubicles toilets where you might wash your hands in a shared use sink. Hopefully, it will shame more fellas into washing their hands afterwards. Grosses me out with men using a public loo and then leaving without washing their hands- especially if there is a knob or door handle. Years ago I was in Upstate New York and the public loos didn't have doors. I suffered the most horrendous constipation.

    And, probably my most controversial opinion- I cannot see the problem in Trans being able to have some say on which gendered prison they go to. Again, subject to the prison authorities and a medical opinion. I've been in a lot of prisons over the years with work, including women's prisons where the person would be much safer in a gender prison they felt more aligned to. But considering the current state of our prisons, drugs, overcrowding, horrendous bullying and internal (terrible) offending.,..this specific issue is probably about a thousand down the list in terms of gravity.

    And yet Rosie Duffield is effectively persona no grata in the Labour party for.......... what exactly?

    Woke is not really a useful term. It's primarily become used by people who don't like it. That to me suggests we ought to avoid it. Matthew Syed puts his finger on something very important, the ridiculous denigration of the west that seems to permeate so much nowadays and we get Nigel B's slippery response. Of course no individual can define objective reality. The question is whether we can be bothered to try. Hundreds of years of empiricism, reason and the search for knowledge impacting academic disciplines now all being infected with obscure theories from the humanities and politicised by Gramscian types who want to march through the institutions. All dismissed by fashionable bourgeois types who think they are educated because they reflexively oppose the Tories/right wing whatever. Yet they only demonstrate their ignorance of what is happening.
    Point of order. Rosie Duffield isn't persona non grata in the Labour Party. She has been reselected to fight her Canterbury seat.
    So welcome she is often the recipient of vexatious complaints by opponents in the party.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3gye5337k7o
    Nevertheless, my point was that her local CLP, who presumably know her best, reselected her as their candidate.
    Which doesn’t invalidate the comment you replied to. MPs can be popular locally but still persona non grata with the party at large. This is a woman who has had to avoid party conferences as she would not feel safe there and even had an apology from a senior front bencher, Wes Streeting, last summer for how she was had been treated.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,071
    Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:

    Foxy said:

    Taz said:

    Taz said:

    Sandpit said:

    Taz said:

    Agreed on this. As someone who has never liked the SNP and still doesn't, I think the issue of Scottish independence is seperate and distinct from the politicians making the case for it. When I was growing up in Scotland I was a unionist but if I had a vote now it would probably be for independence. It would be very difficult economically in the short to medium term but I think Scotland is falling well short of where it could be as a country and needs to break free from the United Kingdom to achieve its long term potential.

    Given that it appears to be Groundhog Referendum Day on PB, Remainia is falling well short of where it could be as a country and needs to break free from Leavistan to achieve its long term potential.

    Bye bye Barnsley and Bolsover, good luck on your own.
    This is clear from some of the not so subtle messaging from Sadiq Khan. Labour's forthcoming victory will further embolden him and others of his persuasion.
    Although to win a majority labour needs these areas as much as it needs the big cities.
    I'm thinking more of what will happen after, rather than before, the election.
    That housebuilding will fall even further behind immigration.
    Isn't that the one area where Labour appear to be making a definite commitment?
    The Tories made a similar commitment which evaporated after the Chesham and Amersham by election.
    Difference is that C+A is a must win seat for the Conservatives, and core Nimby is pretty much core Conservative demographic.

    Whereas Labour's core vote is fed up with overpriced flat shares and their winning Amersham is the blob of icing on the icing figurine on the icing on the cake.
    And home owners have traditionally been more inclined to vote Tory so Labour have every incentive to talk the talk but not walk the walk.
    There is increasing evidence that social values are forestalling the traditional shift to voting Conservative as people near their forties. The traditional economic reasons to vote Tory have disappeared for working age folk, as the Tories only care about featherbedding the retired vote.

    I think too that by building around the cities that the Labour vote moving into more marginal suburban and commuter seats could well make the Labour vote more efficient and flip a lot of previously safe Shire seats.

    We are dealing with a new political world, and new demographics.
    Are we? In 2019 the Conservatives won most voters over 39, in 2005 and 2001 the Tories won only most voters over 55.

    Given the Tories back gay marriage and don't want to ban abortion or make changing sex illegal social values are hardly a major issue.

    Brexit maybe but then most voters over 47 voted for Brexit, not most voters over 77, so plenty of mileage in that yet for them. Indeed far more voters voted for Brexit than currently back the Tories
    Past performance doesn't predict future performance, as any fule kno!

    Polling for Tories (and Reform too if you add them in) is pisspoor below the age of 50 and you are doing less than zero about it.
    Technically the Tories could win most seats losing most voters under 50, they could also win a narrow majority losing most voters under 45.

    Winning most voters under 45 is a bonus for the Conservatives (and of course in 2019 they won most voters over 39) not necessary to get to most seats or a majority of 1. It is normally only achieved in landslide years like 1983.

    Just as winning most voters over 55 is a bonus for Labour not necessary for them to win most seats or a majority. Again only normally achieved in landslide years like 1997
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,071

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    If polls show a Unionist majority at Holyrood and Labour winning most seats in Scotland again, then polls on Scottish independence become completely irrelevant.

    The Scottish government would then not even have a majority for indyref2 at Holyrood for Westminster to ignore. You could have 99% for independence in polls but without an SNP or SNP and Green pro independence majority at Holyrood and an SNP majority of Scottish MPs, who cares?

    It isn't irrelevant. It literally sucks the life out of Scottish politics. Yer man Duguid is doing His Entire Campaign attacking the SNP. His last 2 leaflets entirely devoted to it. He tweeted yesterday knocking on doors and how people want him to stop the SNP.

    Irrelevant? Your lack of knowledge on the subject. Sorry, *any* subject.
    Yes it is irrelevant. We are a representative democracy not a direct democracy, if the SNP have no majority of MSPs or Scottish MPs their campaign for independence is completely irrelevant, exactly as it was even under the SNP minority government of 2007-2011 for example.

    If I don't kowtow to your conformist left liberal ideological demands, tough
    Independence ebbs and flows in Scotland and always has

    However, it is far from irrelevant and you insult Scots by your arrogant attitude towards them
    No I don't, if Scottish Nationalists feel insulted because they do not got appeased so be it, if they can't even get a majority for their parties going forward at Westminster or Holyrood they deserve to be ignored even more
    Great, the views of Tory Unionists in Scotland irrelevant for the last 60+ years, and shortly to be irrelevant in the rUK for X years.
    In Scottish politics the battle is Unionist v Nationalist, so for Tories Labour winning most seats in Scotland is better than the SNP winning most seats.

    Only UK wide now is the battle Conservative v Labour
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,199

    This is happening in May.


    Is Klopp the only unalloyed lefty you've given full support?
    Yes, I said the other day, there's only one man I am more loyal and supportive of than David Cameron and it is Jürgen Klopp.
    If you're worried about life without Klopp just remember what happened with Liverpool after Shankly left. They won a shedload.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,280

    Sandpit said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Are we actually going to war with Putin?

    It seems utterly ridiculous, but a lot of apparently sensible people are raising the alarm

    Who are the people? Is 'apparently sensible' doing a lot of heavy lifting in that sentence?
    The Swedish government?


    Sweden's call for population to prepare for war sparks panic and criticism

    It’s been described as a bombshell moment. The upper echelons of Sweden’s government and defence forces last week shocked the nation by explicitly warning that war might come to Sweden, “

    https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20240118-sweden-s-call-for-population-to-prepare-for-war-sparks-panic-and-criticism
    This wouldn't be happening without serious intelligence of bad intentions.

    FWIW, I think it's actually about us all rearming sufficiently to deter Putin, so a war never happens.
    Nah, it's being driven by American Republicans stopping further aid to Ukraine and the prospect of Trump in the White House.

    They are doing exactly what Putin asks of them. I really cannot understand why @Sandpit supports them rather than Biden, who was Ukraines staunchest supporter.
    Most of the Republican objections to Ukraine aren’t so much about Ukraine itself, but the amounts of money that Biden is claiming to be spending there - the vast majority of which isn’t real new money at all, but overvaluing of old surplus military kit.

    I think that a change of government in the US changes little actually on the ground in Ukraine, but changes a lot in terms of Washington talking points.

    Personally I wouldn’t have a clue who to vote for in the US, all of the politicians are either far to the right, far to the left, or
    nakedly in it to enrich themselves. There’s almost no-one who appears to be in politics
    to make life better for the people they
    represent.
    I’m not sure. I think Trumps opposition is simply anti-Bidenism

    As a thought experiment: if he had been President and not supported the UK and UKR then he would have acknowledged Putin as his capo.

    I think he would have fought.
    Remember Trump's first impeachment, back
    in 2019, was about him withholding military aid to Ukraine because he wanted Ukraine to announce an investigation into Biden.
    Sure - that was entirely transactional.

    You’re naive if you don’t think US companies are getting a bunch of reconstruction contracts.

    The difference is Trump was transactional for his private benefit. The US pursues strategic goals and, once set, sees how much benefit it can squeeze from it

  • MJWMJW Posts: 1,728

    Taz said:

    tyson said:

    For the life of me I don't understand what this woke thing is about. Why the right think they can make political capital out of it just shows how ideologically bankrupt they have become.


    As far as I can see 99% of the population think that people have to compete competitively in the gender they were born into, and 99% of the population don't really agree with giving young children non reversible gender altering therapies. But if you do have the odd under 18 who is so unhappy with their gender that they are suicidal as I have encountered, then this decision should be made with a Health Professional, Parent and Child and is no one elses business.

    I cannot for the life see what is the problem in gender neutral cubicles toilets where you might wash your hands in a shared use sink. Hopefully, it will shame more fellas into washing their hands afterwards. Grosses me out with men using a public loo and then leaving without washing their hands- especially if there is a knob or door handle. Years ago I was in Upstate New York and the public loos didn't have doors. I suffered the most horrendous constipation.

    And, probably my most controversial opinion- I cannot see the problem in Trans being able to have some say on which gendered prison they go to. Again, subject to the prison authorities and a medical opinion. I've been in a lot of prisons over the years with work, including women's prisons where the person would be much safer in a gender prison they felt more aligned to. But considering the current state of our prisons, drugs, overcrowding, horrendous bullying and internal (terrible) offending.,..this specific issue is probably about a thousand down the list in terms of gravity.

    And yet Rosie Duffield is effectively persona no grata in the Labour party for.......... what exactly?

    Woke is not really a useful term. It's primarily become used by people who don't like it. That to me suggests we ought to avoid it. Matthew Syed puts his finger on something very important, the ridiculous denigration of the west that seems to permeate so much nowadays and we get Nigel B's slippery response. Of course no individual can define objective reality. The question is whether we can be bothered to try. Hundreds of years of empiricism, reason and the search for knowledge impacting academic disciplines now all being infected with obscure theories from the humanities and politicised by Gramscian types who want to march through the institutions. All dismissed by fashionable bourgeois types who think they are educated because they reflexively oppose the Tories/right wing whatever. Yet they only demonstrate their ignorance of what is happening.
    Point of order. Rosie Duffield isn't persona non grata in the Labour Party. She has been reselected to fight her Canterbury seat.
    So welcome she is often the recipient of vexatious complaints by opponents in the party.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3gye5337k7o
    Nevertheless, my point was that her local CLP, who presumably know her best, reselected her as their candidate.
    She's persona non grata in certain groups within the Labour Party, and a hero to other ones.

    And of course, twas ever thus. Different bits of the Labour Party have been tearing chunks out of other ones since the party was founded.

    What is unusual about the 'gender wars' is that it cuts across the usual factions, in that you have left-wing feminists uniting with the practical right, and certain kinds of #BeKind moderate progressives uniting with the far left.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,796
    Sean_F said:

    kle4 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Are we actually going to war with Putin?

    It seems utterly ridiculous, but a lot of apparently sensible people are raising the alarm

    Who are the people? Is 'apparently sensible' doing a lot of heavy lifting in that sentence?
    The Swedish government?


    Sweden's call for population to prepare for war sparks panic and criticism

    It’s been described as a bombshell moment. The upper echelons of Sweden’s government and defence forces last week shocked the nation by explicitly warning that war might come to Sweden, “

    https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20240118-sweden-s-call-for-population-to-prepare-for-war-sparks-panic-and-criticism
    This wouldn't be happening without serious intelligence of bad intentions.

    FWIW, I think it's actually about us all rearming sufficiently to deter Putin, so a war never happens.
    Nah, it's being driven by American Republicans stopping further aid to Ukraine and the prospect of Trump in the White House.

    They are doing exactly what Putin asks of them. I really cannot understand why @Sandpit supports them rather than Biden, who was Ukraines staunchest supporter.
    Most of the Republican objections to Ukraine aren’t so much about Ukraine itself, but the amounts of money that Biden is claiming to be spending there - the vast majority of which isn’t real new money at all, but overvaluing of old surplus military kit.

    I think that a change of government in the US changes little actually on the ground in Ukraine, but changes a lot in terms of Washington talking points.

    Personally I wouldn’t have a clue who to vote for in the US, all of the politicians are either far to the right, far to the left, or nakedly in it to enrich themselves. There’s almost no-one who appears to be in politics to make life better for the people they represent.
    The Ukranians seem rather keen to get more of that "overvalued old surplus military kit", and the MAGA Republicans dead set on opposing everything that Biden does to help push it through.

    The single biggest event to stop Putin in his tracks and save Ukraine would be a swing to the Democrats in this year's POTUS and Congressional elections. It would have Ukranians dancing in the streets.

    The Republicans would evidently prefer to see another couple of million immigrants cross the border, and Ukraine capitulate to Putin, rather than give Biden any sort of deal before the election.

    They are nihilists.
    It's generally accepted I think that parties will bear some short term pain for their country in service to a 'greater good' of them taking over power in the future. Bluntly that's part of what being in party is going to mean, since you by definition believe things will be better if your lot are in charge.

    But the GOP go insanely beyond that. They have a hard core of representatives who appear to see any kind of governance or legislation as bad and to be opposed, and the majority of them perfectly happy to go along with that. They appear to have no ambitions beyond getting themselves onto news shows, and not only don't want to give opponents a 'win', but see any deal in itself as a bad thing.*

    You'd think on either side you'd have a few more willing to vote with the other lot for sake of a deal, if they are retiring for example, but even then they rarely seem to.

    *not to the same level, but it reminds me of some Tories who claimed any deal the EU would accept was proof that it was not a deal that they could accept. Like the deal we ended up with or not, that seems to fundamentally misunderstand what a deal is.
    Some people think that a deal has winner and a loser. That can be true, when there are purely one-off transactions.

    But, when you want to have an ongoing relationship, that simply doesn't work. The deal has to work for both, or it doesn't work. Even when one party has the stronger bargaining power, it's always better to be working with a relatively contented partner, rather than a resentful one.

    Once you get to the point of lawyering up, the deal has stopped working.
    The best commercial contracts are the ones you never refer to again after signing them.
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    If polls show a Unionist majority at Holyrood and Labour winning most seats in Scotland again, then polls on Scottish independence become completely irrelevant.

    The Scottish government would then not even have a majority for indyref2 at Holyrood for Westminster to ignore. You could have 99% for independence in polls but without an SNP or SNP and Green pro independence majority at Holyrood and an SNP majority of Scottish MPs, who cares?

    It isn't irrelevant. It literally sucks the life out of Scottish politics. Yer man Duguid is doing His Entire Campaign attacking the SNP. His last 2 leaflets entirely devoted to it. He tweeted yesterday knocking on doors and how people want him to stop the SNP.

    Irrelevant? Your lack of knowledge on the subject. Sorry, *any* subject.
    Yes it is irrelevant. We are a representative democracy not a direct democracy, if the SNP have no majority of MSPs or Scottish MPs their campaign for independence is completely irrelevant, exactly as it was even under the SNP minority government of 2007-2011 for example.

    If I don't kowtow to your conformist left liberal ideological demands, tough
    Independence ebbs and flows in Scotland and always has

    However, it is far from irrelevant and you insult Scots by your arrogant attitude towards them
    No I don't, if Scottish Nationalists feel insulted because they do not got appeased so be it, if they can't even get a majority for their parties going forward at Westminster or Holyrood they deserve to be ignored even more
    Scots in general take a very poor view of an Englishman pontificating on their politics especially one as ignorant as you are of the Scottish people

    When I first arrived in Lossiemouth in 1962 and met my future wife's family, it was said he is Englishman but he is very nice

    It wasn't exactly true as I am half Welsh

    Indeed I expect @RochdalePioneers may have experienced similar sentiments
    It is the average Scot switching from nationalist SNP to unionist Labour regardless of what I say, I opposed the SNP even when they had a clear majority
    Yes, but as the polls show and the thread header independence remains a big issue in Scotland and your attitude is an excellent recruiting sergeant for independence
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,375
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    If polls show a Unionist majority at Holyrood and Labour winning most seats in Scotland again, then polls on Scottish independence become completely irrelevant.

    The Scottish government would then not even have a majority for indyref2 at Holyrood for Westminster to ignore. You could have 99% for independence in polls but without an SNP or SNP and Green pro independence majority at Holyrood and an SNP majority of Scottish MPs, who cares?

    I hesitate to 'crowbar in' something about Scottish indy on a thread about cricket, but can you list the times that you accepted that SNP having most Scottish seats, polls showing roughly half of the electorate supported indy and an indy majority at Holyrood were relevant?
    Westminster is supreme yes, as the SC confirmed, the issue was relevant but Westminster had the final say.

    No SNP majority anywhere and the issue becomes irrelevant with Westminster still having the final say
    When quite consistently, 45% of Scots say they want out, that is far from being irrelevant. It doesn't take much to turn that number into a majority.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,100

    Sandpit said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Are we actually going to war with Putin?

    It seems utterly ridiculous, but a lot of apparently sensible people are raising the alarm

    Who are the people? Is 'apparently sensible' doing a lot of heavy lifting in that sentence?
    The Swedish government?


    Sweden's call for population to prepare for war sparks panic and criticism

    It’s been described as a bombshell moment. The upper echelons of Sweden’s government and defence forces last week shocked the nation by explicitly warning that war might come to Sweden, “

    https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20240118-sweden-s-call-for-population-to-prepare-for-war-sparks-panic-and-criticism
    This wouldn't be happening without serious intelligence of bad intentions.

    FWIW, I think it's actually about us all rearming sufficiently to deter Putin, so a war never happens.
    Nah, it's being driven by American Republicans stopping further aid to Ukraine and the prospect of Trump in the White House.

    They are doing exactly what Putin asks of them. I really cannot understand why @Sandpit supports them rather than Biden, who was Ukraines staunchest supporter.
    Most of the Republican objections to Ukraine aren’t so much about Ukraine itself, but the amounts of money that Biden is claiming to be spending there - the vast majority of which isn’t real new money at all, but overvaluing of old surplus military kit.

    I think that a change of government in the US changes little actually on the ground in Ukraine, but changes a lot in terms of Washington talking points.

    Personally I wouldn’t have a clue who to vote for in the US, all of the politicians are either far to the right, far to the left, or
    nakedly in it to enrich themselves. There’s almost no-one who appears to be in politics
    to make life better for the people they
    represent.
    I’m not sure. I think Trumps opposition is simply anti-Bidenism

    As a thought experiment: if he had been President and not supported the UK and UKR then he would have acknowledged Putin as his capo.

    I think he would have fought.
    Remember Trump's first impeachment, back
    in 2019, was about him withholding military aid to Ukraine because he wanted Ukraine to announce an investigation into Biden.
    Sure - that was entirely transactional.

    You’re naive if you don’t think US companies are getting a bunch of reconstruction contracts.

    The difference is Trump was transactional for his private benefit. The US pursues strategic goals and, once set, sees how much benefit it can squeeze from it

    The difference is that Trump holds grudges. He will forever hate Ukraine.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,595
    MJW said:

    Taz said:

    tyson said:

    For the life of me I don't understand what this woke thing is about. Why the right think they can make political capital out of it just shows how ideologically bankrupt they have become.


    As far as I can see 99% of the population think that people have to compete competitively in the gender they were born into, and 99% of the population don't really agree with giving young children non reversible gender altering therapies. But if you do have the odd under 18 who is so unhappy with their gender that they are suicidal as I have encountered, then this decision should be made with a Health Professional, Parent and Child and is no one elses business.

    I cannot for the life see what is the problem in gender neutral cubicles toilets where you might wash your hands in a shared use sink. Hopefully, it will shame more fellas into washing their hands afterwards. Grosses me out with men using a public loo and then leaving without washing their hands- especially if there is a knob or door handle. Years ago I was in Upstate New York and the public loos didn't have doors. I suffered the most horrendous constipation.

    And, probably my most controversial opinion- I cannot see the problem in Trans being able to have some say on which gendered prison they go to. Again, subject to the prison authorities and a medical opinion. I've been in a lot of prisons over the years with work, including women's prisons where the person would be much safer in a gender prison they felt more aligned to. But considering the current state of our prisons, drugs, overcrowding, horrendous bullying and internal (terrible) offending.,..this specific issue is probably about a thousand down the list in terms of gravity.

    And yet Rosie Duffield is effectively persona no grata in the Labour party for.......... what exactly?

    Woke is not really a useful term. It's primarily become used by people who don't like it. That to me suggests we ought to avoid it. Matthew Syed puts his finger on something very important, the ridiculous denigration of the west that seems to permeate so much nowadays and we get Nigel B's slippery response. Of course no individual can define objective reality. The question is whether we can be bothered to try. Hundreds of years of empiricism, reason and the search for knowledge impacting academic disciplines now all being infected with obscure theories from the humanities and politicised by Gramscian types who want to march through the institutions. All dismissed by fashionable bourgeois types who think they are educated because they reflexively oppose the Tories/right wing whatever. Yet they only demonstrate their ignorance of what is happening.
    Point of order. Rosie Duffield isn't persona non grata in the Labour Party. She has been reselected to fight her Canterbury seat.
    So welcome she is often the recipient of vexatious complaints by opponents in the party.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3gye5337k7o
    Nevertheless, my point was that her local CLP, who presumably know her best, reselected her as their candidate.
    She's persona non grata in certain groups within the Labour Party, and a hero to other ones.

    And of course, twas ever thus. Different bits of the Labour Party have been tearing chunks out of other ones since the party was founded.

    What is unusual about the 'gender wars' is that it cuts across the usual factions, in that you have left-wing feminists uniting with the practical right, and certain kinds of #BeKind moderate progressives uniting with the far left.
    It’s also something on which the Tories, with the exception of Penny Mourdaunt, are united.

    Lab and Lib are going to tear themselves apart over gender and identity politics during the election campaign, it might the the one small chance that Sunak has to avoid a whitewash.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,375
    MJW said:

    Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:

    Foxy said:

    Taz said:

    Taz said:

    Sandpit said:

    Taz said:

    Agreed on this. As someone who has never liked the SNP and still doesn't, I think the issue of Scottish independence is seperate and distinct from the politicians making the case for it. When I was growing up in Scotland I was a unionist but if I had a vote now it would probably be for independence. It would be very difficult economically in the short to medium term but I think Scotland is falling well short of where it could be as a country and needs to break free from the United Kingdom to achieve its long term potential.

    Given that it appears to be Groundhog Referendum Day on PB, Remainia is falling well short of where it could be as a country and needs to break free from Leavistan to achieve its long term potential.

    Bye bye Barnsley and Bolsover, good luck on your own.
    This is clear from some of the not so subtle messaging from Sadiq Khan. Labour's forthcoming victory will further embolden him and others of his persuasion.
    Although to win a majority labour needs these areas as much as it needs the big cities.
    I'm thinking more of what will happen after, rather than before, the election.
    That housebuilding will fall even further behind immigration.
    Isn't that the one area where Labour appear to be making a definite commitment?
    The Tories made a similar commitment which evaporated after the Chesham and Amersham by election.
    Difference is that C+A is a must win seat for the Conservatives, and core Nimby is pretty much core Conservative demographic.

    Whereas Labour's core vote is fed up with overpriced flat shares and their winning Amersham is the blob of icing on the icing figurine on the icing on the cake.
    And home owners have traditionally been more inclined to vote Tory so Labour have every incentive to talk the talk but not walk the walk.
    There is increasing evidence that social values are forestalling the traditional shift to voting Conservative as people near their forties. The traditional economic reasons to vote Tory have disappeared for working age folk, as the Tories only care about featherbedding the retired vote.

    I think too that by building around the cities that the Labour vote moving into more marginal suburban and commuter seats could well make the Labour vote more efficient and flip a lot of previously safe Shire seats.

    We are dealing with a new political world, and new demographics.
    Are we? In 2019 the Conservatives won most voters over 39, in 2005 and 2001 the Tories won only most voters over 55.

    Given the Tories back gay marriage and don't want to ban abortion or make changing sex illegal social values are hardly a major issue.

    Brexit maybe but then most voters over 47 voted for Brexit, not most voters over 77, so plenty of mileage in that yet for them. Indeed far more voters voted for Brexit than currently back the Tories
    Past performance doesn't predict future performance, as any fule kno!

    Polling for Tories (and Reform too if you add them in) is pisspoor below the age of 50 and you are doing less than zero about it.
    Indeed, the problem for the Tories isn't that they are doing badly among the Under 50s, it's that they are doing catastrophically badly. Comically badly. They aren't just unpopular, to all intents and purposes, outside a few oddballs, those who expect to remain in the workforce for 20 years or more have stopped voting Tory almost altogether.

    Sure, that should improve in opposition as general polling improves and they recalibrate - but to the level of health where previously won? They have been so bad for and elicit such anger among the Under 40s in particular that the shift maybe generational and permanent - a cohort which won't forgive or forget.

    Plus, there are little signs the Tory party is capable of coming to terms with this and why they are despised. There's the odd noise from outsiders about housebuilding. Which would be welcome, but one thing among many, and something Labour should find it much easier to outbid them on. Similar for infrastructure.

    To take Brexit as an example. It's not going to define how opponents (the vast majority of the young as they were in 2016) vote forever or even now. But it's going to be very difficult to persuade people to give you a chance if they believe your signature achievement, the one the Conservative Party now defines itself by, was a terrible error that created chaos and made them poorer.

    "Don't let them back in or they'll ruin Britain like they did last time" is going to be a powerful and persuasive argument to be used against the Tories for a very long time. And one that simple demographics will cement, given those who have been infuriated by and made poorer by the Tories are younger than those they have protected and enriched.
    Younger voters are volatile however. For example, no one would have expected Trump to be leading among voters aged 18-29, today, given the huge lead Biden had in 2020.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,071
    edited January 28
    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    If polls show a Unionist majority at Holyrood and Labour winning most seats in Scotland again, then polls on Scottish independence become completely irrelevant.

    The Scottish government would then not even have a majority for indyref2 at Holyrood for Westminster to ignore. You could have 99% for independence in polls but without an SNP or SNP and Green pro independence majority at Holyrood and an SNP majority of Scottish MPs, who cares?

    I hesitate to 'crowbar in' something about Scottish indy on a thread about cricket, but can you list the times that you accepted that SNP having most Scottish seats, polls showing roughly half of the electorate supported indy and an indy majority at Holyrood were relevant?
    Westminster is supreme yes, as the SC confirmed, the issue was relevant but Westminster had the final say.

    No SNP majority anywhere and the issue becomes irrelevant with Westminster still having the final say
    When quite consistently, 45% of Scots say they want out, that is far from being irrelevant. It doesn't take much to turn that number into a majority.
    Yes it is irrelevant, indeed 99% of Scots for independence would be irrelevant unless the SNP or SNP and Greens had a majority at Holyrood and there was an SNP majority of Scottish MPs
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,071

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    If polls show a Unionist majority at Holyrood and Labour winning most seats in Scotland again, then polls on Scottish independence become completely irrelevant.

    The Scottish government would then not even have a majority for indyref2 at Holyrood for Westminster to ignore. You could have 99% for independence in polls but without an SNP or SNP and Green pro independence majority at Holyrood and an SNP majority of Scottish MPs, who cares?

    It isn't irrelevant. It literally sucks the life out of Scottish politics. Yer man Duguid is doing His Entire Campaign attacking the SNP. His last 2 leaflets entirely devoted to it. He tweeted yesterday knocking on doors and how people want him to stop the SNP.

    Irrelevant? Your lack of knowledge on the subject. Sorry, *any* subject.
    Yes it is irrelevant. We are a representative democracy not a direct democracy, if the SNP have no majority of MSPs or Scottish MPs their campaign for independence is completely irrelevant, exactly as it was even under the SNP minority government of 2007-2011 for example.

    If I don't kowtow to your conformist left liberal ideological demands, tough
    Independence ebbs and flows in Scotland and always has

    However, it is far from irrelevant and you insult Scots by your arrogant attitude towards them
    No I don't, if Scottish Nationalists feel insulted because they do not got appeased so be it, if they can't even get a majority for their parties going forward at Westminster or Holyrood they deserve to be ignored even more
    Scots in general take a very poor view of an Englishman pontificating on their politics especially one as ignorant as you are of the Scottish people

    When I first arrived in Lossiemouth in 1962 and met my future wife's family, it was said he is Englishman but he is very nice

    It wasn't exactly true as I am half Welsh

    Indeed I expect @RochdalePioneers may have experienced similar sentiments
    It is the average Scot switching from nationalist SNP to unionist Labour regardless of what I say, I opposed the SNP even when they had a clear majority
    Yes, but as the polls show and the thread header independence remains a big issue in Scotland and your attitude is an excellent recruiting sergeant for independence
    Unless Scots vote SNP to the extent they have a majority support for independence is irrelevant
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,375
    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    If polls show a Unionist majority at Holyrood and Labour winning most seats in Scotland again, then polls on Scottish independence become completely irrelevant.

    The Scottish government would then not even have a majority for indyref2 at Holyrood for Westminster to ignore. You could have 99% for independence in polls but without an SNP or SNP and Green pro independence majority at Holyrood and an SNP majority of Scottish MPs, who cares?

    I hesitate to 'crowbar in' something about Scottish indy on a thread about cricket, but can you list the times that you accepted that SNP having most Scottish seats, polls showing roughly half of the electorate supported indy and an indy majority at Holyrood were relevant?
    Westminster is supreme yes, as the SC confirmed, the issue was relevant but Westminster had the final say.

    No SNP majority anywhere and the issue becomes irrelevant with Westminster still having the final say
    When quite consistently, 45% of Scots say they want out, that is far from being irrelevant. It doesn't take much to turn that number into a majority.
    Yes it is irrelevant, indeed 99% of Scots for independence would be irrelevant unless the SNP or SNP and Greens had a majority at Holyrood and there was an SNP majority of Scottish MPs
    If 99% of Scots wanted independence, they would get it. If 50% + of Scots want independence, consistently, they will get it, because there is no appetite to hold Scotland in the Union at gunpoint.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,280

    This is happening in May.


    Is Klopp the only unalloyed lefty you've given full support?
    Yes, I said the other day, there's only one man I am more loyal and supportive of than David Cameron and it is Jürgen Klopp.
    That’s two lefties though 🤷‍♂️

    👿
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,846

    tyson said:

    For the life of me I don't understand what this woke thing is about. Why the right think they can make political capital out of it just shows how ideologically bankrupt they have become.


    As far as I can see 99% of the population think that people have to compete competitively in the gender they were born into, and 99% of the population don't really agree with giving young children non reversible gender altering therapies. But if you do have the odd under 18 who is so unhappy with their gender that they are suicidal as I have encountered, then this decision should be made with a Health Professional, Parent and Child and is no one elses business.

    I cannot for the life see what is the problem in gender neutral cubicles toilets where you might wash your hands in a shared use sink. Hopefully, it will shame more fellas into washing their hands afterwards. Grosses me out with men using a public loo and then leaving without washing their hands- especially if there is a knob or door handle. Years ago I was in Upstate New York and the public loos didn't have doors. I suffered the most horrendous constipation.

    And, probably my most controversial opinion- I cannot see the problem in Trans being able to have some say on which gendered prison they go to. Again, subject to the prison authorities and a medical opinion. I've been in a lot of prisons over the years with work, including women's prisons where the person would be much safer in a gender prison they felt more aligned to. But considering the current state of our prisons, drugs, overcrowding, horrendous bullying and internal (terrible) offending.,..this specific issue is probably about a thousand down the list in terms of gravity.

    And yet Rosie Duffield is effectively persona no grata in the Labour party for.......... what exactly?

    Woke is not really a useful term. It's primarily become used by people who don't like it. That to me suggests we ought to avoid it. Matthew Syed puts his finger on something very important, the ridiculous denigration of the west that seems to permeate so much nowadays and we get Nigel B's slippery response. Of course no individual can define objective reality. The question is whether we can be bothered to try. Hundreds of years of empiricism, reason and the search for knowledge impacting academic disciplines now all being infected with obscure theories from the humanities and politicised by Gramscian types who want to march through the institutions. All dismissed by fashionable bourgeois types who think they are educated because they reflexively oppose the Tories/right wing whatever. Yet they only demonstrate their ignorance of what is happening.
    Point of order. Rosie Duffield isn't persona non grata in the Labour Party. She has been reselected to fight her Canterbury seat.
    Well I did say effectively. I'm sure the party establishment will be rallying around her.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,071
    edited January 28
    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    If polls show a Unionist majority at Holyrood and Labour winning most seats in Scotland again, then polls on Scottish independence become completely irrelevant.

    The Scottish government would then not even have a majority for indyref2 at Holyrood for Westminster to ignore. You could have 99% for independence in polls but without an SNP or SNP and Green pro independence majority at Holyrood and an SNP majority of Scottish MPs, who cares?

    I hesitate to 'crowbar in' something about Scottish indy on a thread about cricket, but can you list the times that you accepted that SNP having most Scottish seats, polls showing roughly half of the electorate supported indy and an indy majority at Holyrood were relevant?
    Westminster is supreme yes, as the SC confirmed, the issue was relevant but Westminster had the final say.

    No SNP majority anywhere and the issue becomes irrelevant with Westminster still having the final say
    When quite consistently, 45% of Scots say they want out, that is far from being irrelevant. It doesn't take much to turn that number into a majority.
    Yes it is irrelevant, indeed 99% of Scots for independence would be irrelevant unless the SNP or SNP and Greens had a majority at Holyrood and there was an SNP majority of Scottish MPs
    If 99% of Scots wanted independence, they would get it. If 50% + of Scots want independence, consistently, they will get it, because there is no appetite to hold Scotland in the Union at gunpoint.
    No they would not. As the UK Supreme Court confirmed Westminster and Westminster alone has the final say on the Union.

    So Westminster could block it and if the SNP don't have a majority of Scottish MPs they couldn't even try and declare UDI and if the SNP don't even have a majority alone or with the Greens at Holyrood they couldn't even ask Westminster for an indyref2
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,677
    edited January 28
    News from the frontline. Our Ukrainians have had an offer of $6,000 for the pile of rubble that used to be their family home. They can't accept because it's stuck in probate and we can't work out exactly whom we should be bribing to fix it.

    There is a thriving secondary real estate market in Kharkov where somebody is buying up destroyed houses at $50 - $150/m2. People with money are convinced that SMO will be over soon-ish and there will be an EU/UK funded compensation scheme if your house was fucked at $500/m2.

    This makes about as much sense as anything else that has happened in Ukraine recently.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,280
    MJW said:

    Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:

    Foxy said:

    Taz said:

    Taz said:

    Sandpit said:

    Taz said:

    Agreed on this. As someone who has never liked the SNP and still doesn't, I think the issue of Scottish independence is seperate and distinct from the politicians making the case for it. When I was growing up in Scotland I was a unionist but if I had a vote now it would probably be for independence. It would be very difficult economically in the short to medium term but I think Scotland is falling well short of where it could be as a country and needs to break free from the United Kingdom to achieve its long term potential.

    Given that it appears to be Groundhog Referendum Day on PB, Remainia is falling well short of where it could be as a country and needs to break free from Leavistan to achieve its long term potential.

    Bye bye Barnsley and Bolsover, good luck on your own.
    This is clear from some of the not so subtle messaging from Sadiq Khan. Labour's forthcoming victory will further embolden him and others of his persuasion.
    Although to win a majority labour needs these areas as much as it needs the big cities.
    I'm thinking more of what will happen after, rather than before, the election.
    That housebuilding will fall even further behind immigration.
    Isn't that the one area where Labour appear to be making a definite commitment?
    The Tories made a similar commitment which evaporated after the Chesham and Amersham by election.
    Difference is that C+A is a must win seat for the Conservatives, and core Nimby is pretty much core Conservative demographic.

    Whereas Labour's core vote is fed up with overpriced flat shares and their winning Amersham is the blob of icing on the icing figurine on the icing on the cake.
    And home owners have traditionally been more inclined to vote Tory so Labour have every incentive to talk the talk but not walk the walk.
    There is increasing evidence that social values are forestalling the traditional shift to voting Conservative as people near their forties. The traditional economic reasons to vote Tory have disappeared for working age folk, as the Tories only care about featherbedding the retired vote.

    I think too that by building around the cities that the Labour vote moving into more marginal suburban and commuter seats could well make the Labour vote more efficient and flip a lot of previously safe Shire seats.

    We are dealing with a new political world, and new demographics.
    Are we? In 2019 the Conservatives won most voters over 39, in 2005 and 2001 the Tories won only most voters over 55.

    Given the Tories back gay marriage and don't want to ban abortion or make changing sex illegal social values are hardly a major issue.

    Brexit maybe but then most voters over 47 voted for Brexit, not most voters over 77, so plenty of mileage in that yet for them. Indeed far more voters voted for Brexit than currently back the Tories
    Past performance doesn't predict future performance, as any fule kno!

    Polling for Tories (and Reform too if you add them in) is pisspoor below the age of 50 and you are doing less than zero about it.
    Indeed, the problem for the Tories isn't that they are doing badly among the Under 50s, it's that they are doing catastrophically badly. Comically badly. They aren't just unpopular, to all intents and purposes, outside a few oddballs, those who expect to remain in the workforce for 20 years or more have stopped voting Tory almost altogether.

    Sure, that should improve in opposition as general polling improves and they recalibrate - but to the level of health where previously won? They have been so bad for and elicit such anger among the Under 40s in particular that the shift maybe generational and permanent - a cohort which won't forgive or forget.

    Plus, there are little signs the Tory party is capable of coming to terms with this and why they are despised. There's the odd noise from outsiders about housebuilding. Which would be welcome, but one thing among many, and something Labour should find it much easier to outbid them on. Similar for infrastructure.

    To take Brexit as an example. It's not going to define how opponents (the vast majority of the young as they were in 2016) vote forever or even now. But it's going to be very difficult to persuade people to give you a chance if they believe your signature achievement, the one the Conservative Party now defines itself by, was a terrible error that created chaos and made them poorer.

    "Don't let them back in or they'll ruin Britain like they did last time" is going to be a powerful and persuasive argument to be used against the Tories for a very long time. And one that simple demographics will cement, given those who have been infuriated by and made poorer by the Tories are younger than those they have protected and enriched.
    I think there are two different things going on and it is a mistake to conflate them

    The cohort that is 40-50 were becoming politically aware during the fag-end of Major’s government /Blair’s prime. That fixed their political views (non-Tory) in the way that the Winter of Discontent did and, possibly Brexit will (too early to say)

    Sub-40 I think it’s more about economics - this cohort don’t have an economic stake (housing) and so less to conserve plus social attitudes have evolved fast and the Tories have not (in part) kept up.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,132

    carnforth said:

    Sandpit said:

    Tennis has a new Grand Slam winner, Italian Jannick Sinner.

    Don't know much about German speaking Italians. Has anyone here visited that part of Italy?
    A German friend loves going skiing there. He says you get a wonderful holiday in Italy, but he can speak German to everyone.
    Interesting history - became Italian after being promised to Italy by the allies in 1915, under the Treaty of London.
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_South_Tyrol
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,698
    Sandpit said:

    MJW said:

    Taz said:

    tyson said:

    For the life of me I don't understand what this woke thing is about. Why the right think they can make political capital out of it just shows how ideologically bankrupt they have become.


    As far as I can see 99% of the population think that people have to compete competitively in the gender they were born into, and 99% of the population don't really agree with giving young children non reversible gender altering therapies. But if you do have the odd under 18 who is so unhappy with their gender that they are suicidal as I have encountered, then this decision should be made with a Health Professional, Parent and Child and is no one elses business.

    I cannot for the life see what is the problem in gender neutral cubicles toilets where you might wash your hands in a shared use sink. Hopefully, it will shame more fellas into washing their hands afterwards. Grosses me out with men using a public loo and then leaving without washing their hands- especially if there is a knob or door handle. Years ago I was in Upstate New York and the public loos didn't have doors. I suffered the most horrendous constipation.

    And, probably my most controversial opinion- I cannot see the problem in Trans being able to have some say on which gendered prison they go to. Again, subject to the prison authorities and a medical opinion. I've been in a lot of prisons over the years with work, including women's prisons where the person would be much safer in a gender prison they felt more aligned to. But considering the current state of our prisons, drugs, overcrowding, horrendous bullying and internal (terrible) offending.,..this specific issue is probably about a thousand down the list in terms of gravity.

    And yet Rosie Duffield is effectively persona no grata in the Labour party for.......... what exactly?

    Woke is not really a useful term. It's primarily become used by people who don't like it. That to me suggests we ought to avoid it. Matthew Syed puts his finger on something very important, the ridiculous denigration of the west that seems to permeate so much nowadays and we get Nigel B's slippery response. Of course no individual can define objective reality. The question is whether we can be bothered to try. Hundreds of years of empiricism, reason and the search for knowledge impacting academic disciplines now all being infected with obscure theories from the humanities and politicised by Gramscian types who want to march through the institutions. All dismissed by fashionable bourgeois types who think they are educated because they reflexively oppose the Tories/right wing whatever. Yet they only demonstrate their ignorance of what is happening.
    Point of order. Rosie Duffield isn't persona non grata in the Labour Party. She has been reselected to fight her Canterbury seat.
    So welcome she is often the recipient of vexatious complaints by opponents in the party.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3gye5337k7o
    Nevertheless, my point was that her local CLP, who presumably know her best, reselected her as their candidate.
    She's persona non grata in certain groups within the Labour Party, and a hero to other ones.

    And of course, twas ever thus. Different bits of the Labour Party have been tearing chunks out of other ones since the party was founded.

    What is unusual about the 'gender wars' is that it cuts across the usual factions, in that you have left-wing feminists uniting with the practical right, and certain kinds of #BeKind moderate progressives uniting with the far left.
    It’s also something on which the Tories, with the exception of Penny Mourdaunt, are united.

    Lab and Lib are going to tear themselves apart over gender and identity politics during the election campaign, it might the the one small chance that Sunak has to avoid a whitewash.
    No they aren't.

    Starmer runs a tight, disciplined ship and will not say anything controversial on the subject.

    Tories are grasping at the thinnest of straws with this one. All they do is alienate the young even more with their divisive culture wars. This isn't America or France.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,132

    Sandpit said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Are we actually going to war with Putin?

    It seems utterly ridiculous, but a lot of apparently sensible people are raising the alarm

    Who are the people? Is 'apparently sensible' doing a lot of heavy lifting in that sentence?
    The Swedish government?


    Sweden's call for population to prepare for war sparks panic and criticism

    It’s been described as a bombshell moment. The upper echelons of Sweden’s government and defence forces last week shocked the nation by explicitly warning that war might come to Sweden, “

    https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20240118-sweden-s-call-for-population-to-prepare-for-war-sparks-panic-and-criticism
    This wouldn't be happening without serious intelligence of bad intentions.

    FWIW, I think it's actually about us all rearming sufficiently to deter Putin, so a war never happens.
    Nah, it's being driven by American Republicans stopping further aid to Ukraine and the prospect of Trump in the White House.

    They are doing exactly what Putin asks of them. I really cannot understand why @Sandpit supports them rather than Biden, who was Ukraines staunchest supporter.
    Most of the Republican objections to Ukraine aren’t so much about Ukraine itself, but the amounts of money that Biden is claiming to be spending there - the vast majority of which isn’t real new money at all, but overvaluing of old surplus military kit.

    I think that a change of government in the US changes little actually on the ground in Ukraine, but changes a lot in terms of Washington talking points.

    Personally I wouldn’t have a clue who to vote for in the US, all of the politicians are either far to the right, far to the left, or
    nakedly in it to enrich themselves. There’s almost no-one who appears to be in politics
    to make life better for the people they
    represent.
    I’m not sure. I think Trumps opposition is simply anti-Bidenism

    As a thought experiment: if he had been President and not supported the UK and UKR then he would have acknowledged Putin as his capo.

    I think he would have fought.
    Remember Trump's first impeachment, back
    in 2019, was about him withholding military aid to Ukraine because he wanted Ukraine to announce an investigation into Biden.
    Sure - that was entirely transactional.

    You’re naive if you don’t think US companies are getting a bunch of reconstruction contracts.

    The difference is Trump was transactional for his private benefit. The US pursues strategic goals and, once set, sees how much benefit it can squeeze from it

    The corollary to that is that Trump was pursuing policies antithetical to US interests, in his own interest.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,398
    edited January 28
    @carnforth

    I know German speaking Italy well. Been several times

    It’s a marvellous part of the world. Germany efficiency with Italian charm and mainly Italian food. Good wine. Exquisite Dolomite landscapes. Charming towns and cities - Bolzano etc

    Go!
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,677
    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    MJW said:

    Taz said:

    tyson said:

    For the life of me I don't understand what this woke thing is about. Why the right think they can make political capital out of it just shows how ideologically bankrupt they have become.


    As far as I can see 99% of the population think that people have to compete competitively in the gender they were born into, and 99% of the population don't really agree with giving young children non reversible gender altering therapies. But if you do have the odd under 18 who is so unhappy with their gender that they are suicidal as I have encountered, then this decision should be made with a Health Professional, Parent and Child and is no one elses business.

    I cannot for the life see what is the problem in gender neutral cubicles toilets where you might wash your hands in a shared use sink. Hopefully, it will shame more fellas into washing their hands afterwards. Grosses me out with men using a public loo and then leaving without washing their hands- especially if there is a knob or door handle. Years ago I was in Upstate New York and the public loos didn't have doors. I suffered the most horrendous constipation.

    And, probably my most controversial opinion- I cannot see the problem in Trans being able to have some say on which gendered prison they go to. Again, subject to the prison authorities and a medical opinion. I've been in a lot of prisons over the years with work, including women's prisons where the person would be much safer in a gender prison they felt more aligned to. But considering the current state of our prisons, drugs, overcrowding, horrendous bullying and internal (terrible) offending.,..this specific issue is probably about a thousand down the list in terms of gravity.

    And yet Rosie Duffield is effectively persona no grata in the Labour party for.......... what exactly?

    Woke is not really a useful term. It's primarily become used by people who don't like it. That to me suggests we ought to avoid it. Matthew Syed puts his finger on something very important, the ridiculous denigration of the west that seems to permeate so much nowadays and we get Nigel B's slippery response. Of course no individual can define objective reality. The question is whether we can be bothered to try. Hundreds of years of empiricism, reason and the search for knowledge impacting academic disciplines now all being infected with obscure theories from the humanities and politicised by Gramscian types who want to march through the institutions. All dismissed by fashionable bourgeois types who think they are educated because they reflexively oppose the Tories/right wing whatever. Yet they only demonstrate their ignorance of what is happening.
    Point of order. Rosie Duffield isn't persona non grata in the Labour Party. She has been reselected to fight her Canterbury seat.
    So welcome she is often the recipient of vexatious complaints by opponents in the party.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3gye5337k7o
    Nevertheless, my point was that her local CLP, who presumably know her best, reselected her as their candidate.
    She's persona non grata in certain groups within the Labour Party, and a hero to other ones.

    And of course, twas ever thus. Different bits of the Labour Party have been tearing chunks out of other ones since the party was founded.

    What is unusual about the 'gender wars' is that it cuts across the usual factions, in that you have left-wing feminists uniting with the practical right, and certain kinds of #BeKind moderate progressives uniting with the far left.
    It’s also something on which the Tories, with the exception of Penny Mourdaunt, are united.

    Lab and Lib are going to tear themselves apart over gender and identity politics during the election campaign, it might the the one small chance that Sunak has to avoid a whitewash.
    No they aren't.

    Starmer runs a tight, disciplined ship and will not say anything controversial on the subject.

    Tories are grasping at the thinnest of straws with this one. All they do is alienate the young even more with their divisive culture wars. This isn't America or France.
    ScoMo famously blocked out a whole week of his last election campaign to do "Trans Stuff" with predictable results.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,280
    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    If polls show a Unionist majority at Holyrood and Labour winning most seats in Scotland again, then polls on Scottish independence become completely irrelevant.

    The Scottish government would then not even have a majority for indyref2 at Holyrood for Westminster to ignore. You could have 99% for independence in polls but without an SNP or SNP and Green pro independence majority at Holyrood and an SNP majority of Scottish MPs, who cares?

    I hesitate to 'crowbar in' something about Scottish indy on a thread about cricket, but can you list the times that you accepted that SNP having most Scottish seats, polls showing roughly half of the electorate supported indy and an indy majority at Holyrood were relevant?
    Westminster is supreme yes, as the SC confirmed, the issue was relevant but Westminster had the final say.

    No SNP majority anywhere and the issue becomes irrelevant with Westminster still having the final say
    When quite consistently, 45% of Scots say they want out, that is far from being irrelevant. It doesn't take much to turn that number into a majority.
    Yes it is irrelevant, indeed 99% of Scots for independence would be irrelevant unless the SNP or SNP and Greens had a majority at Holyrood and there was an SNP majority of Scottish MPs
    If 99% of Scots wanted independence, they would get it. If 50% + of Scots want independence, consistently, they will get it, because there is no appetite to hold Scotland in the Union at gunpoint.
    No they would not. As the UK Supreme Court confirmed Westminster and Westminster alone has the final say on the Union.

    So Westminster could block it and if the SNP don't have a majority of Scottish MPs they couldn't even try and declare UDI and if
    the SNP don't even have a majority alone or with the Greens at Holyrood they couldn't even ask Westminster for an indyref2
    You are mixing up “could” and “would”.

    If 99% of Scots wanted independence, Westminster would grant it. I’d say that would hold down to 60%+ (slightly higher than @Sean_F ).

    They wouldn’t *have* to. They *could* seek to hold Scotland against the settled will of the inhabitants. But they *would not* do that
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,846

    tyson said:

    For the life of me I don't understand what this woke thing is about. Why the right think they can make political capital out of it just shows how ideologically bankrupt they have become.


    As far as I can see 99% of the population think that people have to compete competitively in the gender they were born into, and 99% of the population don't really agree with giving young children non reversible gender altering therapies. But if you do have the odd under 18 who is so unhappy with their gender that they are suicidal as I have encountered, then this decision should be made with a Health Professional, Parent and Child and is no one elses business.

    I cannot for the life see what is the problem in gender neutral cubicles toilets where you might wash your hands in a shared use sink. Hopefully, it will shame more fellas into washing their hands afterwards. Grosses me out with men using a public loo and then leaving without washing their hands- especially if there is a knob or door handle. Years ago I was in Upstate New York and the public loos didn't have doors. I suffered the most horrendous constipation.

    And, probably my most controversial opinion- I cannot see the problem in Trans being able to have some say on which gendered prison they go to. Again, subject to the prison authorities and a medical opinion. I've been in a lot of prisons over the years with work, including women's prisons where the person would be much safer in a gender prison they felt more aligned to. But considering the current state of our prisons, drugs, overcrowding, horrendous bullying and internal (terrible) offending.,..this specific issue is probably about a thousand down the list in terms of gravity.

    And yet Rosie Duffield is effectively persona no grata in the Labour party for.......... what exactly?

    Woke is not really a useful term. It's primarily become used by people who don't like it. That to me suggests we ought to avoid it. Matthew Syed puts his finger on something very important, the ridiculous denigration of the west that seems to permeate so much nowadays and we get Nigel B's slippery response. Of course no individual can define objective reality. The question is whether we can be bothered to try. Hundreds of years of empiricism, reason and the search for knowledge impacting academic disciplines now all being infected with obscure theories from the humanities and politicised by Gramscian types who want to march through the institutions. All dismissed by fashionable bourgeois types who think they are educated because they reflexively oppose the Tories/right wing whatever. Yet they only demonstrate their ignorance of what is happening.
    Ah, yes, hundreds of years of academic thought, all dismissed by… Hold on, dismissed by who? “I think the people of this country have had enough of experts,” was said by Michael Gove, not Owen Jones.
    Again you're so stuck in political tribalism you cannot see it. I'm not claiming people on right don't say anti intellectual things. Of course they do it all the time. I wouldn't make a fuss if the odd left wing politician did it either. But almost all the pressure to dumb down our educational institutions is coming from the left.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,583

    Sandpit said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Are we actually going to war with Putin?

    It seems utterly ridiculous, but a lot of apparently sensible people are raising the alarm

    Who are the people? Is 'apparently sensible' doing a lot of heavy lifting in that sentence?
    The Swedish government?


    Sweden's call for population to prepare for war sparks panic and criticism

    It’s been described as a bombshell moment. The upper echelons of Sweden’s government and defence forces last week shocked the nation by explicitly warning that war might come to Sweden, “

    https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20240118-sweden-s-call-for-population-to-prepare-for-war-sparks-panic-and-criticism
    This wouldn't be happening without serious intelligence of bad intentions.

    FWIW, I think it's actually about us all rearming sufficiently to deter Putin, so a war never happens.
    Nah, it's being driven by American Republicans stopping further aid to Ukraine and the prospect of Trump in the White House.

    They are doing exactly what Putin asks of them. I really cannot understand why @Sandpit supports them rather than Biden, who was Ukraines staunchest supporter.
    Most of the Republican objections to Ukraine aren’t so much about Ukraine itself, but the amounts of money that Biden is claiming to be spending there - the vast majority of which isn’t real new money at all, but overvaluing of old surplus military kit.

    I think that a change of government in the US changes little actually on the ground in Ukraine, but changes a lot in terms of Washington talking points.

    Personally I wouldn’t have a clue who to vote for in the US, all of the politicians are either far to the right, far to the left, or
    nakedly in it to enrich themselves. There’s almost no-one who appears to be in politics
    to make life better for the people they
    represent.
    I’m not sure. I think Trumps opposition is simply anti-Bidenism

    As a thought experiment: if he had been President and not supported the UK and UKR then he would have acknowledged Putin as his capo.

    I think he would have fought.
    Remember Trump's first impeachment, back
    in 2019, was about him withholding military aid to Ukraine because he wanted Ukraine to announce an investigation into Biden.
    Sure - that was entirely transactional.

    You’re naive if you don’t think US companies are getting a bunch of reconstruction contracts.

    The difference is Trump was transactional for his private benefit. The US pursues strategic goals and, once set, sees how much benefit it can squeeze from it

    The difference is that Trump holds grudges. He will forever hate Ukraine.
    Because Putin told him to.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,583
    Just wondering why any Tory MPs would want to get rid of Rishi Sunak when he has been the PM at a time of a brilliant result in the cricket?

    I bet we never win the Ashes under Starmer.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,846
    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    MJW said:

    Taz said:

    tyson said:

    For the life of me I don't understand what this woke thing is about. Why the right think they can make political capital out of it just shows how ideologically bankrupt they have become.


    As far as I can see 99% of the population think that people have to compete competitively in the gender they were born into, and 99% of the population don't really agree with giving young children non reversible gender altering therapies. But if you do have the odd under 18 who is so unhappy with their gender that they are suicidal as I have encountered, then this decision should be made with a Health Professional, Parent and Child and is no one elses business.

    I cannot for the life see what is the problem in gender neutral cubicles toilets where you might wash your hands in a shared use sink. Hopefully, it will shame more fellas into washing their hands afterwards. Grosses me out with men using a public loo and then leaving without washing their hands- especially if there is a knob or door handle. Years ago I was in Upstate New York and the public loos didn't have doors. I suffered the most horrendous constipation.

    And, probably my most controversial opinion- I cannot see the problem in Trans being able to have some say on which gendered prison they go to. Again, subject to the prison authorities and a medical opinion. I've been in a lot of prisons over the years with work, including women's prisons where the person would be much safer in a gender prison they felt more aligned to. But considering the current state of our prisons, drugs, overcrowding, horrendous bullying and internal (terrible) offending.,..this specific issue is probably about a thousand down the list in terms of gravity.

    And yet Rosie Duffield is effectively persona no grata in the Labour party for.......... what exactly?

    Woke is not really a useful term. It's primarily become used by people who don't like it. That to me suggests we ought to avoid it. Matthew Syed puts his finger on something very important, the ridiculous denigration of the west that seems to permeate so much nowadays and we get Nigel B's slippery response. Of course no individual can define objective reality. The question is whether we can be bothered to try. Hundreds of years of empiricism, reason and the search for knowledge impacting academic disciplines now all being infected with obscure theories from the humanities and politicised by Gramscian types who want to march through the institutions. All dismissed by fashionable bourgeois types who think they are educated because they reflexively oppose the Tories/right wing whatever. Yet they only demonstrate their ignorance of what is happening.
    Point of order. Rosie Duffield isn't persona non grata in the Labour Party. She has been reselected to fight her Canterbury seat.
    So welcome she is often the recipient of vexatious complaints by opponents in the party.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3gye5337k7o
    Nevertheless, my point was that her local CLP, who presumably know her best, reselected her as their candidate.
    She's persona non grata in certain groups within the Labour Party, and a hero to other ones.

    And of course, twas ever thus. Different bits of the Labour Party have been tearing chunks out of other ones since the party was founded.

    What is unusual about the 'gender wars' is that it cuts across the usual factions, in that you have left-wing feminists uniting with the practical right, and certain kinds of #BeKind moderate progressives uniting with the far left.
    It’s also something on which the Tories, with the exception of Penny Mourdaunt, are united.

    Lab and Lib are going to tear themselves apart over gender and identity politics during the election campaign, it might the the one small chance that Sunak has to avoid a whitewash.
    No they aren't.

    Starmer runs a tight, disciplined ship and will not say anything controversial on the subject.

    Tories are grasping at the thinnest of straws with this one. All they do is alienate the young even more with their divisive culture wars. This isn't America or France.
    'The Tories and their divisive culture wars.'

    You don't think the people attacking Rosie Duffield are culture warriors?
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    If polls show a Unionist majority at Holyrood and Labour winning most seats in Scotland again, then polls on Scottish independence become completely irrelevant.

    The Scottish government would then not even have a majority for indyref2 at Holyrood for Westminster to ignore. You could have 99% for independence in polls but without an SNP or SNP and Green pro independence majority at Holyrood and an SNP majority of Scottish MPs, who cares?

    It isn't irrelevant. It literally sucks the life out of Scottish politics. Yer man Duguid is doing His Entire Campaign attacking the SNP. His last 2 leaflets entirely devoted to it. He tweeted yesterday knocking on doors and how people want him to stop the SNP.

    Irrelevant? Your lack of knowledge on the subject. Sorry, *any* subject.
    Yes it is irrelevant. We are a representative democracy not a direct democracy, if the SNP have no majority of MSPs or Scottish MPs their campaign for independence is completely irrelevant, exactly as it was even under the SNP minority government of 2007-2011 for example.

    If I don't kowtow to your conformist left liberal ideological demands, tough
    Independence ebbs and flows in Scotland and always has

    However, it is far from irrelevant and you insult Scots by your arrogant attitude towards them
    If - as our Welsh Nationalist friend says - it is irrelevant, then why is my local Conservative MP basing His Entire Campaign on stopping the SNP?

    HY is good at taking these haughty absolutist positions. Just a pity they never seem aligned with reality. Bit like his party really.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,398
    edited January 28
    How many miraculous wins/innings has Stokes now pulled off as captain/batsman - plus his incredible fielding?

    He must be one of the greatest cricketers of all time - certainly the greatest English cricketer of my lifetime. Greater than Botham or Flintoff
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,796
    Leon said:

    @carnforth

    I know German speaking Italy well. Been several times

    It’s a marvellous part of the world. Germany efficiency with Italian charm and mainly Italian and excellent food. Good wine. Exquisite Dolomite landscapes. Charming towns and cities - Bolzano etc

    Go!

    Skiing the Dolomites was my favourite. Did it many times. The Sella Ronda is a vast and lovely ski route, the towns and villages are lovely and the views magnificent.

    Seeing Oompah bands and lederhosen in Italy though is a bit disconcerting.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,100

    tyson said:

    For the life of me I don't understand what this woke thing is about. Why the right think they can make political capital out of it just shows how ideologically bankrupt they have become.


    As far as I can see 99% of the population think that people have to compete competitively in the gender they were born into, and 99% of the population don't really agree with giving young children non reversible gender altering therapies. But if you do have the odd under 18 who is so unhappy with their gender that they are suicidal as I have encountered, then this decision should be made with a Health Professional, Parent and Child and is no one elses business.

    I cannot for the life see what is the problem in gender neutral cubicles toilets where you might wash your hands in a shared use sink. Hopefully, it will shame more fellas into washing their hands afterwards. Grosses me out with men using a public loo and then leaving without washing their hands- especially if there is a knob or door handle. Years ago I was in Upstate New York and the public loos didn't have doors. I suffered the most horrendous constipation.

    And, probably my most controversial opinion- I cannot see the problem in Trans being able to have some say on which gendered prison they go to. Again, subject to the prison authorities and a medical opinion. I've been in a lot of prisons over the years with work, including women's prisons where the person would be much safer in a gender prison they felt more aligned to. But considering the current state of our prisons, drugs, overcrowding, horrendous bullying and internal (terrible) offending.,..this specific issue is probably about a thousand down the list in terms of gravity.

    And yet Rosie Duffield is effectively persona no grata in the Labour party for.......... what exactly?

    Woke is not really a useful term. It's primarily become used by people who don't like it. That to me suggests we ought to avoid it. Matthew Syed puts his finger on something very important, the ridiculous denigration of the west that seems to permeate so much nowadays and we get Nigel B's slippery response. Of course no individual can define objective reality. The question is whether we can be bothered to try. Hundreds of years of empiricism, reason and the search for knowledge impacting academic disciplines now all being infected with obscure theories from the humanities and politicised by Gramscian types who want to march through the institutions. All dismissed by fashionable bourgeois types who think they are educated because they reflexively oppose the Tories/right wing whatever. Yet they only demonstrate their ignorance of what is happening.
    Ah, yes, hundreds of years of academic thought, all dismissed by… Hold on, dismissed by who? “I think the people of this country have had enough of experts,” was said by Michael Gove, not Owen Jones.
    Again you're so stuck in political tribalism you cannot see it. I'm not claiming people on right don't say anti intellectual things. Of course they do it all the time. I wouldn't make a fuss if the odd left wing politician did it either. But almost all the pressure to dumb down our educational institutions is coming from the left.
    Well, hundreds of years of academic thought have taught me that statements should be evidenced. What’s your evidence that “almost all” the pressure comes from the left? The right’s anti-climate change stance, the sort of censorship DeSantis has introduced in Florida, the UK Govt policy to disinvite speakers if they ever said anything critical of them, introducing a law to declare Rwanda safe regardless of evidence… I see plenty of pressure from the right.

    There is also pressure from the left, and we should resist anti-intellectualism from both sides.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,846

    tyson said:

    For the life of me I don't understand what this woke thing is about. Why the right think they can make political capital out of it just shows how ideologically bankrupt they have become.


    As far as I can see 99% of the population think that people have to compete competitively in the gender they were born into, and 99% of the population don't really agree with giving young children non reversible gender altering therapies. But if you do have the odd under 18 who is so unhappy with their gender that they are suicidal as I have encountered, then this decision should be made with a Health Professional, Parent and Child and is no one elses business.

    I cannot for the life see what is the problem in gender neutral cubicles toilets where you might wash your hands in a shared use sink. Hopefully, it will shame more fellas into washing their hands afterwards. Grosses me out with men using a public loo and then leaving without washing their hands- especially if there is a knob or door handle. Years ago I was in Upstate New York and the public loos didn't have doors. I suffered the most horrendous constipation.

    And, probably my most controversial opinion- I cannot see the problem in Trans being able to have some say on which gendered prison they go to. Again, subject to the prison authorities and a medical opinion. I've been in a lot of prisons over the years with work, including women's prisons where the person would be much safer in a gender prison they felt more aligned to. But considering the current state of our prisons, drugs, overcrowding, horrendous bullying and internal (terrible) offending.,..this specific issue is probably about a thousand down the list in terms of gravity.

    And yet Rosie Duffield is effectively persona no grata in the Labour party for.......... what exactly?

    Woke is not really a useful term. It's primarily become used by people who don't like it. That to me suggests we ought to avoid it. Matthew Syed puts his finger on something very important, the ridiculous denigration of the west that seems to permeate so much nowadays and we get Nigel B's slippery response. Of course no individual can define objective reality. The question is whether we can be bothered to try. Hundreds of years of empiricism, reason and the search for knowledge impacting academic disciplines now all being infected with obscure theories from the humanities and politicised by Gramscian types who want to march through the institutions. All dismissed by fashionable bourgeois types who think they are educated because they reflexively oppose the Tories/right wing whatever. Yet they only demonstrate their ignorance of what is happening.
    Ah, yes, hundreds of years of academic thought, all dismissed by… Hold on, dismissed by who? “I think the people of this country have had enough of experts,” was said by Michael Gove, not Owen Jones.
    Again you're so stuck in political tribalism you cannot see it. I'm not claiming people on right don't say anti intellectual things. Of course they do it all the time. I wouldn't make a fuss if the odd left wing politician did it either. But almost all the pressure to dumb down our educational institutions is coming from the left.
    Well, hundreds of years of academic thought have taught me that statements should be evidenced. What’s your evidence that “almost all” the pressure comes from the left? The right’s anti-climate change stance, the sort of censorship DeSantis has introduced in Florida, the UK Govt policy to disinvite speakers if they ever said anything critical of them, introducing a law to declare Rwanda safe regardless of evidence… I see plenty of pressure from the right.

    There is also pressure from the left, and we should resist anti-intellectualism from both sides.
    Your first two points on anti climate change and Ron De Santis relate to a different country. Unless you could please advise me of a major UK institution that is anti climate change?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,698

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    MJW said:

    Taz said:

    tyson said:

    For the life of me I don't understand what this woke thing is about. Why the right think they can make political capital out of it just shows how ideologically bankrupt they have become.


    As far as I can see 99% of the population think that people have to compete competitively in the gender they were born into, and 99% of the population don't really agree with giving young children non reversible gender altering therapies. But if you do have the odd under 18 who is so unhappy with their gender that they are suicidal as I have encountered, then this decision should be made with a Health Professional, Parent and Child and is no one elses business.

    I cannot for the life see what is the problem in gender neutral cubicles toilets where you might wash your hands in a shared use sink. Hopefully, it will shame more fellas into washing their hands afterwards. Grosses me out with men using a public loo and then leaving without washing their hands- especially if there is a knob or door handle. Years ago I was in Upstate New York and the public loos didn't have doors. I suffered the most horrendous constipation.

    And, probably my most controversial opinion- I cannot see the problem in Trans being able to have some say on which gendered prison they go to. Again, subject to the prison authorities and a medical opinion. I've been in a lot of prisons over the years with work, including women's prisons where the person would be much safer in a gender prison they felt more aligned to. But considering the current state of our prisons, drugs, overcrowding, horrendous bullying and internal (terrible) offending.,..this specific issue is probably about a thousand down the list in terms of gravity.

    And yet Rosie Duffield is effectively persona no grata in the Labour party for.......... what exactly?

    Woke is not really a useful term. It's primarily become used by people who don't like it. That to me suggests we ought to avoid it. Matthew Syed puts his finger on something very important, the ridiculous denigration of the west that seems to permeate so much nowadays and we get Nigel B's slippery response. Of course no individual can define objective reality. The question is whether we can be bothered to try. Hundreds of years of empiricism, reason and the search for knowledge impacting academic disciplines now all being infected with obscure theories from the humanities and politicised by Gramscian types who want to march through the institutions. All dismissed by fashionable bourgeois types who think they are educated because they reflexively oppose the Tories/right wing whatever. Yet they only demonstrate their ignorance of what is happening.
    Point of order. Rosie Duffield isn't persona non grata in the Labour Party. She has been reselected to fight her Canterbury seat.
    So welcome she is often the recipient of vexatious complaints by opponents in the party.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3gye5337k7o
    Nevertheless, my point was that her local CLP, who presumably know her best, reselected her as their candidate.
    She's persona non grata in certain groups within the Labour Party, and a hero to other ones.

    And of course, twas ever thus. Different bits of the Labour Party have been tearing chunks out of other ones since the party was founded.

    What is unusual about the 'gender wars' is that it cuts across the usual factions, in that you have left-wing feminists uniting with the practical right, and certain kinds of #BeKind moderate progressives uniting with the far left.
    It’s also something on which the Tories, with the exception of Penny Mourdaunt, are united.

    Lab and Lib are going to tear themselves apart over gender and identity politics during the election campaign, it might the the one small chance that Sunak has to avoid a whitewash.
    No they aren't.

    Starmer runs a tight, disciplined ship and will not say anything controversial on the subject.

    Tories are grasping at the thinnest of straws with this one. All they do is alienate the young even more with their divisive culture wars. This isn't America or France.
    'The Tories and their divisive culture wars.'

    You don't think the people attacking Rosie Duffield are culture warriors?
    Yes they are too.

    There are always bonkers activists in all parties, but in the Tory Party stoking Culture War comes straight front from the front bench and stirring up hate against minorities is part of their election plan.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,398
    kjh said:

    Leon said:

    @carnforth

    I know German speaking Italy well. Been several times

    It’s a marvellous part of the world. Germany efficiency with Italian charm and mainly Italian and excellent food. Good wine. Exquisite Dolomite landscapes. Charming towns and cities - Bolzano etc

    Go!

    Skiing the Dolomites was my favourite. Did it many times. The Sella Ronda is a vast and lovely ski route, the towns and villages are lovely and the views magnificent.

    Seeing Oompah bands and lederhosen in Italy though is a bit disconcerting.
    I enjoy the weird clash

    The Dolomites are right up there as one of the most majestic landscapes in the world. You can kind of understand why Austria and Italy fought so bitterly over them

    The beauty is unreal. Soaring icebound peaks over ravishing green meadows with fairy tale castles and winsome villages everywhere

    They are also culturally fascinating. Eg there’s a kind of primitive German - cimbrian? I’ll have to check - spoken by a few hundred people in maybe two villages on the Italian side

    It is said to be like 12th century German. I actually heard some people speak it! Really odd - sounded like they were halfway to singing
This discussion has been closed.