We have another eight-months of this "no, you're more senile than me!' sh*t to look forward to. At least we just have a short useless guy vs a grey mist.
Volta Trucks went a few months ago. Still as it was mostly ex land rover people !
There will be many failures along the way.
Just like when the motor car first started. For every Ford there were many many losers.
Also see the speculation on AI.
The technology may be destined to dominate, but that doesn't mean the current companies will do so. The history of disruptive technology is that there will be lots of failures alongside some meteoric rises.
I have many early-investor options on 'Ohnotnow's amazing AI tech', if anyone of an unquestioning mind wants to have a gamble?
That would probably work. I'd advise everyone to get in now whilst it is cheap to buy in.
Volta Trucks went a few months ago. Still as it was mostly ex land rover people !
There will be many failures along the way.
Just like when the motor car first started. For every Ford there were many many losers.
Also see the speculation on AI.
The technology may be destined to dominate, but that doesn't mean the current companies will do so. The history of disruptive technology is that there will be lots of failures alongside some meteoric rises.
I have many early-investor options on 'Ohnotnow's amazing AI tech', if anyone of an unquestioning mind wants to have a gamble?
The number of successful new car/truck companies in the last century is an instructive number.
As to AI - Do you want to invest in my Thame bridge adjacent low tide property scheme, leveraged through quantum crypto novel space launch technology?
Ohhh - you know all the seductive words. You tease!
Volta Trucks went a few months ago. Still as it was mostly ex land rover people !
There will be many failures along the way.
Just like when the motor car first started. For every Ford there were many many losers.
Also see the speculation on AI.
The technology may be destined to dominate, but that doesn't mean the current companies will do so. The history of disruptive technology is that there will be lots of failures alongside some meteoric rises.
I have many early-investor options on 'Ohnotnow's amazing AI tech', if anyone of an unquestioning mind wants to have a gamble?
That would probably work. I'd advise everyone to get in now whilst it is cheap to buy in.
We have another eight-months of this "no, you're more senile than me!' sh*t to look forward to. At least we just have a short useless guy vs a grey mist.
The legal challenges and rhetoric will continue beyond the election too (I expect some, though not as many, from the Democrats should Trump win this time, given he's changed how the game is played), and probably another January 6th riot to get through before it stops, or at least before we stop hearing about it so much.
On Monday, Rishi Sunak shook hands on a £1,000 bet with Piers Morgan 🤝
Remarkably, the level of stake agreed would be enough to see the loser face an enhanced financial check under the government's proposals if it had been placed with an online bookmaker
At least he had some dignity and gravitas, which the current lot are sorely lacking. They mostly lack Trump's facinating and compelling awfulness, so are just grubby shouters trying to get on TV.
Volta Trucks went a few months ago. Still as it was mostly ex land rover people !
There will be many failures along the way.
Just like when the motor car first started. For every Ford there were many many losers.
Also see the speculation on AI.
The technology may be destined to dominate, but that doesn't mean the current companies will do so. The history of disruptive technology is that there will be lots of failures alongside some meteoric rises.
I have many early-investor options on 'Ohnotnow's amazing AI tech', if anyone of an unquestioning mind wants to have a gamble?
The number of successful new car/truck companies in the last century is an instructive number.
As to AI - Do you want to invest in my Thame bridge adjacent low tide property scheme, leveraged through quantum crypto novel space launch technology?
Ohhh - you know all the seductive words. You tease!
He missed out blockchain, I'm passing on this project.
Just spoke with Sen. James Lankford about the GOP opposition to his border deal.
“I'm frustrated when people put out intentionally false information. I expect more. There are policy disagreements on that, I get that,” he said. “If people think that politics are wrong, and now we're in a presidential year, so let's not help Biden in the process, we're just going to disagree on that. I get frustrated when people put out things that are intentionally false, that they know are false, because I expect more of Americans.” https://twitter.com/mkraju/status/1754585164468912420
We have another eight-months of this "no, you're more senile than me!' sh*t to look forward to. At least we just have a short useless guy vs a grey mist.
The legal challenges and rhetoric will continue beyond the election too (I expect some, though not as many, from the Democrats should Trump win this time, given he's changed how the game is played), and probably another January 6th riot to get through before it stops, or at least before we stop hearing about it so much.
If we're very unlucky, I suppose we'll have eight months plus four years of it. Senile ranting about either losing or winning. Or both. And neither. And another thing!....
Damn those Amazon Prime ads are offensively irritating. Lasted about two minutes before I paid to make them go away.
I lasted about two minutes before I just torrented the content.
There was a brief moment in history, probably about five years ago, where it looked like the media content companies had learned their lesson and were going to get behind Netflix as the single source of online content. Then they all decided to split the pie again, and now we’re all expected to pay $100/month to half a dozen companies to watch everything, but only in certain regions, and maybe with adverts, and the live sports are extra.
So there’s again a massive rise in piracy, not helped by governments like Russia wanting to encourage it in the West.
I find it really quite baffling that they appear to be deliberately undermining the key draws of the service that they were selling. Did they think that that had captured enough of an audience that they could just exploit them without consequence.
Reminds me of gaming - I don't game as much as I used to, so I hope they have at least started to dial back the micropayment live service bollocks a bit.
Volta Trucks went a few months ago. Still as it was mostly ex land rover people !
There will be many failures along the way.
Just like when the motor car first started. For every Ford there were many many losers.
Also see the speculation on AI.
The technology may be destined to dominate, but that doesn't mean the current companies will do so. The history of disruptive technology is that there will be lots of failures alongside some meteoric rises.
I have many early-investor options on 'Ohnotnow's amazing AI tech', if anyone of an unquestioning mind wants to have a gamble?
The number of successful new car/truck companies in the last century is an instructive number.
As to AI - Do you want to invest in my Thame bridge adjacent low tide property scheme, leveraged through quantum crypto novel space launch technology?
Ohhh - you know all the seductive words. You tease!
He missed out blockchain, I'm passing on this project.
That's why I've hired him - knows nothing but sounds vaguely plausible.
We have another eight-months of this "no, you're more senile than me!' sh*t to look forward to. At least we just have a short useless guy vs a grey mist.
It isn't strong ground for the Biden campaign; they've been silly to rise (or sink) to Trump's mockery. Trump certainly seems to have some senior moments and be highly prone to stream of consciousness rants. But he has vigour and aggression, and seems fairly fit. Biden by contrast looks and acts like something you'd find in a sarcophagus.
Going aggressive with Trump is always applauded and has just never been a good idea. Wrestling with a pig springs to mind.
We have another eight-months of this "no, you're more senile than me!' sh*t to look forward to. At least we just have a short useless guy vs a grey mist.
It isn't strong ground for the Biden campaign; they've been silly to rise (or sink) to Trump's mockery. Trump certainly seems to have some senior moments and be highly prone to stream of consciousness rants. But he has vigour and aggression, and seems fairly fit. Biden by contrast looks and acts like something you'd find in a sarcophagus.
Going aggressive with Trump is always applauded and has just never been a good idea. Wrestling with a pig springs to mind.
Trump seems mentally more deficient, Biden seems physically more deficient (he may actually be in decent shape for his age, but he looks and sounds his age in a way Trump, at least at his events, does not).
We have another eight-months of this "no, you're more senile than me!' sh*t to look forward to. At least we just have a short useless guy vs a grey mist.
The legal challenges and rhetoric will continue beyond the election too (I expect some, though not as many, from the Democrats should Trump win this time, given he's changed how the game is played), and probably another January 6th riot to get through before it stops, or at least before we stop hearing about it so much.
If we're very unlucky, I suppose we'll have eight months plus four years of it. Senile ranting about either losing or winning. Or both. And neither. And another thing!....
Just remember, if Biden loses, he'll be able to run again in 4 years time.
We have another eight-months of this "no, you're more senile than me!' sh*t to look forward to. At least we just have a short useless guy vs a grey mist.
The legal challenges and rhetoric will continue beyond the election too (I expect some, though not as many, from the Democrats should Trump win this time, given he's changed how the game is played), and probably another January 6th riot to get through before it stops, or at least before we stop hearing about it so much.
If we're very unlucky, I suppose we'll have eight months plus four years of it. Senile ranting about either losing or winning. Or both. And neither. And another thing!....
Just remember, if Biden loses, he'll be able to run again in 4 years time.
That's a great speech. A bit schmalzy and full of American Exceptionalism, but so rare now to hear a politician speak of immigration as a sign of a successful society.
We have another eight-months of this "no, you're more senile than me!' sh*t to look forward to. At least we just have a short useless guy vs a grey mist.
It isn't strong ground for the Biden campaign; they've been silly to rise (or sink) to Trump's mockery. Trump certainly seems to have some senior moments and be highly prone to stream of consciousness rants. But he has vigour and aggression, and seems fairly fit. Biden by contrast looks and acts like something you'd find in a sarcophagus.
Going aggressive with Trump is always applauded and has just never been a good idea. Wrestling with a pig springs to mind.
Trump seems mentally more deficient, Biden seems physically more deficient (he may actually be in decent shape for his age, but he looks and sounds his age in a way Trump, at least at his events, does not).
Is that the case? We've had two recent examples of Trump getting someone's name wrong - the Haley example being a real shitter (calling an interviewer Joe when they're called Dan isn't exactly going to set the world on fire). Biden on the other hand seems to have whole speeches of complete incoherence.
We have another eight-months of this "no, you're more senile than me!' sh*t to look forward to. At least we just have a short useless guy vs a grey mist.
The legal challenges and rhetoric will continue beyond the election too (I expect some, though not as many, from the Democrats should Trump win this time, given he's changed how the game is played), and probably another January 6th riot to get through before it stops, or at least before we stop hearing about it so much.
If we're very unlucky, I suppose we'll have eight months plus four years of it. Senile ranting about either losing or winning. Or both. And neither. And another thing!....
Just remember, if Biden loses, he'll be able to run again in 4 years time.
Same for Trump, of course.
If Trump wins things will be so chaotic the Republicans will finally realise they need to pick a candidate with experience.
It has to be Chuck Grassley. It's perfect timing, he will be due to complete his current Senate term in 2028, and he'll be only 95 years young, so less than 100 when he completes his first term.
Rishi is inexperienced. It is hard to see any of his predecessors falling for Piers' Rwanda bet. Worse than that, he is controlled by the clowns at CCHQ especially since the civil service was purged by Boris and Liz Truss.
He's not really inexperienced as a Minister though. Indeed, he has more Ministerial experience than many Prime Ministers when they first took over.
It is true he has less experience as an MP, though only by a few years in the case of Cameron, and if Keir takes over this year he will be almost as inexperienced as Rishi was.
Never been in opposition, never had to fight a losing campaign.
In the ways it matters, he is as green as Kermit the Frog.
We have another eight-months of this "no, you're more senile than me!' sh*t to look forward to. At least we just have a short useless guy vs a grey mist.
It isn't strong ground for the Biden campaign; they've been silly to rise (or sink) to Trump's mockery. Trump certainly seems to have some senior moments and be highly prone to stream of consciousness rants. But he has vigour and aggression, and seems fairly fit. Biden by contrast looks and acts like something you'd find in a sarcophagus.
Going aggressive with Trump is always applauded and has just never been a good idea. Wrestling with a pig springs to mind.
Trump seems mentally more deficient, Biden seems physically more deficient (he may actually be in decent shape for his age, but he looks and sounds his age in a way Trump, at least at his events, does not).
Is that the case? We've had two recent examples of Trump getting someone's name wrong - the Haley example being a real shitter (calling an interviewer Joe when they're called Dan isn't exactly going to set the world on fire). Biden on the other hand seems to have whole speeches of complete incoherence.
I do think it is the case - it's not about getting the name wrong, Trump is incoherent a lot of the time with nothing to do with names.
With Biden he's so known for it the BBC itself referred to him as gaffe-prone Biden in an article once, so there's certainly examples out there. But his speeches tend to be steadily delivered at least.
I fervently hope he isn't, because the concensus that has built up in politics is in my opinion a bad and dangerous thing for the people. Thatcher once broke the concensus and we need someone to do it again.
Giving Arcelor-Mittal millions of pounds effectively to remove our capacity to create the virgin steel necessary to manufacture weapons would be the 'final straw' if such a phrase now had any meaning. It's completely irrelevant environmentally - they are building a vast blast furnace in India to make up for the lost capacity. We've fucked the taxpayer, fucked our own national security, and the net outcome will probably be more carbon released than before. What is the use of a Government that fails in its most basic duty to secure the nation?
Sunak showed a glimpse of realism around Net Zero, and was rewarded by his only notable polling bounce. He then went right back to standard form as a banner, taxer, wrecker. SKS is more of the same. Someone needs to upset the applecart.
The 'consensus' isn't going to last forever, it never does.
Rishi is inexperienced. It is hard to see any of his predecessors falling for Piers' Rwanda bet. Worse than that, he is controlled by the clowns at CCHQ especially since the civil service was purged by Boris and Liz Truss.
He's not really inexperienced as a Minister though. Indeed, he has more Ministerial experience than many Prime Ministers when they first took over.
It is true he has less experience as an MP, though only by a few years in the case of Cameron, and if Keir takes over this year he will be almost as inexperienced as Rishi was.
Never been in opposition, never had to fight a losing campaign.
In the ways it matters, he is as green as Kermit the Frog.
That does beg the question, how much experience is the right amount for PMs, and what type of experience do they need?
I do think Rishi suffers from really having very limited experience of what it is like being just a regular MP, since he was rapidly made a junior Minister then Cabinet Minister. He's in a very safe seat, and that combined with rapid promotion probably means he has never done much constituency work, let alone fighting to win a tough seat from opposition or being on the losing side before.
I doubt we're getting back to the early 20th century style, with people regularly being an MP for 20+ years before becoming PM, experiencing the ups and downs for their party in that period, if you don't make it to the top of your party inside 10 years now there's a good chance you never will (Corbyn was very much an outlier here), but maybe we are due a period of more experienced leaders again.
The counter to that is that Keir if he wins will be both very inexperienced as an MP (but with all of it experience as opposition), yet still the oldest PM at the start that we've had in 50 years.
I’m still dumbfounded how easy it was for Putin to coopt the Republican Party through Trump. This is extraordinary. One of the two ruling parties of the most powerful country in the world, doing the bidding of a genocidal dictator. Don’t really know how to process this.
That's a great speech. A bit schmalzy and full of American Exceptionalism, but so rare now to hear a politician speak of immigration as a sign of a successful society.
That's the opposite of the truth. It's now so commonplace that they all do it, even politicians who are ostensibly against immigration.
We have another eight-months of this "no, you're more senile than me!' sh*t to look forward to. At least we just have a short useless guy vs a grey mist.
It isn't strong ground for the Biden campaign; they've been silly to rise (or sink) to Trump's mockery. Trump certainly seems to have some senior moments and be highly prone to stream of consciousness rants. But he has vigour and aggression, and seems fairly fit. Biden by contrast looks and acts like something you'd find in a sarcophagus.
Going aggressive with Trump is always applauded and has just never been a good idea. Wrestling with a pig springs to mind.
Trump seems mentally more deficient, Biden seems physically more deficient (he may actually be in decent shape for his age, but he looks and sounds his age in a way Trump, at least at his events, does not).
Is that the case? We've had two recent examples of Trump getting someone's name wrong - the Haley example being a real shitter (calling an interviewer Joe when they're called Dan isn't exactly going to set the world on fire). Biden on the other hand seems to have whole speeches of complete incoherence.
I do think it is the case - it's not about getting the name wrong, Trump is incoherent a lot of the time with nothing to do with names.
With Biden he's so known for it the BBC itself referred to him as gaffe-prone Biden in an article once, so there's certainly examples out there. But his speeches tend to be steadily delivered at least.
That is the key. Biden mixed up names and got flustered because of his stammer when he was 40. Trump was still bonkers, but didn’t do that. Trump has lost a lot more.
We have another eight-months of this "no, you're more senile than me!' sh*t to look forward to. At least we just have a short useless guy vs a grey mist.
It isn't strong ground for the Biden campaign; they've been silly to rise (or sink) to Trump's mockery. Trump certainly seems to have some senior moments and be highly prone to stream of consciousness rants. But he has vigour and aggression, and seems fairly fit. Biden by contrast looks and acts like something you'd find in a sarcophagus.
Going aggressive with Trump is always applauded and has just never been a good idea. Wrestling with a pig springs to mind.
Trump seems mentally more deficient, Biden seems physically more deficient (he may actually be in decent shape for his age, but he looks and sounds his age in a way Trump, at least at his events, does not).
Is that the case? We've had two recent examples of Trump getting someone's name wrong - the Haley example being a real shitter (calling an interviewer Joe when they're called Dan isn't exactly going to set the world on fire). Biden on the other hand seems to have whole speeches of complete incoherence.
Anyone claiming that either candidate is fully mentally there is deluded.
Look at Trump in 2014, when he started his campaign last time around. He was extremely sharp and articulate. Whatever you thought about his politics or celebrity, he was clearly extremely switched on.
Trump of 2024 is not like Trump of 2014. And that shouldn't be a surprise. People do a lot of ageing between 68 and 78.
Biden, likewise. Back in 2008, he was a plodding but competent Senator and VP candidate. He navigated the Obama White House fine.
Now he's clearly past his prime. He does have occasional flashes of off the cuff humour that demonstrate he's not completely lost it.
But he's obviously not the same intellect as a decade either.
We have another eight-months of this "no, you're more senile than me!' sh*t to look forward to. At least we just have a short useless guy vs a grey mist.
The legal challenges and rhetoric will continue beyond the election too (I expect some, though not as many, from the Democrats should Trump win this time, given he's changed how the game is played), and probably another January 6th riot to get through before it stops, or at least before we stop hearing about it so much.
If we're very unlucky, I suppose we'll have eight months plus four years of it. Senile ranting about either losing or winning. Or both. And neither. And another thing!....
Just remember, if Biden loses, he'll be able to run again in 4 years time.
Same for Trump, of course.
If Trump wins things will be so chaotic the Republicans will finally realise they need to pick a candidate with experience.
It has to be Chuck Grassley. It's perfect timing, he will be due to complete his current Senate term in 2028, and he'll be only 95 years young, so less than 100 when he completes his first term.
You do have to wonder how America came to embrace silly old buffers in positions of power. See the Supreme Court as well.
I’m still dumbfounded how easy it was for Putin to coopt the Republican Party through Trump. This is extraordinary. One of the two ruling parties of the most powerful country in the world, doing the bidding of a genocidal dictator. Don’t really know how to process this.
I don't even understand what they think they are achieving for those that are not outright pro-Putin. Why do they think it is a good idea for Ukraine to lose?
Even the ones who don't think that is a good idea (mostly in the Senate) are too weak to stand up to Trump on the point, if they want to be re-elected.
We have another eight-months of this "no, you're more senile than me!' sh*t to look forward to. At least we just have a short useless guy vs a grey mist.
It isn't strong ground for the Biden campaign; they've been silly to rise (or sink) to Trump's mockery. Trump certainly seems to have some senior moments and be highly prone to stream of consciousness rants. But he has vigour and aggression, and seems fairly fit. Biden by contrast looks and acts like something you'd find in a sarcophagus.
Going aggressive with Trump is always applauded and has just never been a good idea. Wrestling with a pig springs to mind.
Trump seems mentally more deficient, Biden seems physically more deficient (he may actually be in decent shape for his age, but he looks and sounds his age in a way Trump, at least at his events, does not).
Is that the case? We've had two recent examples of Trump getting someone's name wrong - the Haley example being a real shitter (calling an interviewer Joe when they're called Dan isn't exactly going to set the world on fire). Biden on the other hand seems to have whole speeches of complete incoherence.
Anyone claiming that either candidate is fully mentally there is deluded.
Look at Trump in 2014, when he started his campaign last time around. He was extremely sharp and articulate. Whatever you thought about his politics or celebrity, he was clearly extremely switched on.
Trump of 2024 is not like Trump of 2014. And that shouldn't be a surprise. People do a lot of ageing between 68 and 78.
Biden, likewise. Back in 2008, he was a plodding but competent Senator and VP candidate. He navigated the Obama White House fine.
Now he's clearly past his prime. He does have occasional flashes of off the cuff humour that demonstrate he's not completely lost it.
But he's obviously not the same intellect as a decade either.
On the other hand Biden has probably been the most effective president since Ronald Reagan in getting his agenda through, despite an utterly dysfunctional party in the legislature
There are some lovely details: 'Ulitmate Shower', the woman drinking bleach, Henry Hoover looking unconvinced.
I like Truss standing on a kickstool. Sadly the actual caricature of Truss lets the cartoon down - a case of the cartoonist disliking the lady a bit too much to show any likeness through the haggish hideousness.
Rishi is inexperienced. It is hard to see any of his predecessors falling for Piers' Rwanda bet. Worse than that, he is controlled by the clowns at CCHQ especially since the civil service was purged by Boris and Liz Truss.
He's not really inexperienced as a Minister though. Indeed, he has more Ministerial experience than many Prime Ministers when they first took over.
It is true he has less experience as an MP, though only by a few years in the case of Cameron, and if Keir takes over this year he will be almost as inexperienced as Rishi was.
Never been in opposition, never had to fight a losing campaign.
In the ways it matters, he is as green as Kermit the Frog.
That does beg the question, how much experience is the right amount for PMs, and what type of experience do they need?
I do think Rishi suffers from really having very limited experience of what it is like being just a regular MP, since he was rapidly made a junior Minister then Cabinet Minister. He's in a very safe seat, and that combined with rapid promotion probably means he has never done much constituency work, let alone fighting to win a tough seat from opposition or being on the losing side before.
I doubt we're getting back to the early 20th century style, with people regularly being an MP for 20+ years before becoming PM, experiencing the ups and downs for their party in that period, if you don't make it to the top of your party inside 10 years now there's a good chance you never will (Corbyn was very much an outlier here), but maybe we are due a period of more experienced leaders again.
The counter to that is that Keir if he wins will be both very inexperienced as an MP (but with all of it experience as opposition), yet still the oldest PM at the start that we've had in 50 years.
Rishi has never run a spending department, and as we discussed some time back, has led a charmed life since boyhood with no real adversity. That said, Rishi is ill-served by those around him whether the party SpAds or the hollowed out civil service inherited from Boris and Liz Truss.
Such awful news for our Royal Family and the whole country. 😦
The country has to rally together now. Politics and division has to stop.
The opinion polls sure to show a Rally to the Flag bounce for the Government, exactly the same as when covid broke out.
Nah to both.
I think you are right to be fair
Me too - for the reasons Foxy gave this probably isn't an immediate big deal - although I am also a bit suspicious about how much coverage it is being given that actually it is. If I'm wrong about that then in this particular case I remind the Honourable Ms Rabbit about Liz Truss.
And while you won't know me from Adam BigG, I've been lurking here a much longer time than my user has been around and best wishes for tomorrow too
Such awful news for our Royal Family and the whole country. 😦
The country has to rally together now. Politics and division has to stop.
The opinion polls sure to show a Rally to the Flag bounce for the Government, exactly the same as when covid broke out.
Nah to both.
I think you are right to be fair
I just think we have politics because divisions cannot entirely eliminated, nor should they, and politics is the means of expressing those divisions in a civilised way. It is a rare and desperate situation, existential even, that politics should be stopped.
We can still mute it at important occasions, but there's nothing inherenetly wrong with 'playing politics', especially from politicians. If they cannot do it who can't?
We have another eight-months of this "no, you're more senile than me!' sh*t to look forward to. At least we just have a short useless guy vs a grey mist.
It isn't strong ground for the Biden campaign; they've been silly to rise (or sink) to Trump's mockery. Trump certainly seems to have some senior moments and be highly prone to stream of consciousness rants. But he has vigour and aggression, and seems fairly fit. Biden by contrast looks and acts like something you'd find in a sarcophagus.
Going aggressive with Trump is always applauded and has just never been a good idea. Wrestling with a pig springs to mind.
Trump seems mentally more deficient, Biden seems physically more deficient (he may actually be in decent shape for his age, but he looks and sounds his age in a way Trump, at least at his events, does not).
Is that the case? We've had two recent examples of Trump getting someone's name wrong - the Haley example being a real shitter (calling an interviewer Joe when they're called Dan isn't exactly going to set the world on fire). Biden on the other hand seems to have whole speeches of complete incoherence.
Anyone claiming that either candidate is fully mentally there is deluded.
Look at Trump in 2014, when he started his campaign last time around. He was extremely sharp and articulate. Whatever you thought about his politics or celebrity, he was clearly extremely switched on.
Trump of 2024 is not like Trump of 2014. And that shouldn't be a surprise. People do a lot of ageing between 68 and 78.
Biden, likewise. Back in 2008, he was a plodding but competent Senator and VP candidate. He navigated the Obama White House fine.
Now he's clearly past his prime. He does have occasional flashes of off the cuff humour that demonstrate he's not completely lost it.
But he's obviously not the same intellect as a decade either.
On the other hand Biden has probably been the most effective president since Ronald Reagan in getting his agenda through, despite an utterly dysfunctional party in the legislature
Both of them are operating much more on instinct than in the past, which isn't ideal for sure.
But the key thing then that Biden's political instincts are reasonably good, whereas Trump's aren't.
It would be possble to take, for example, a running track, outfit it with snow machines, and make a decent place to learn cross country skiing during the winter. You might want to shelter the snow with simple sheds.
A very quick search found snow machines for sale for less than 300 dollars.
I would guess something like that would be less expensive than a heated, indoor swimming pool. (Swimming and cross counry skiing are about equal in cardio benefits.)
I admit I have been lucky in living so near to Mt. Rainier (height >14,000 feet) for the last 2 decades. I have skiied there in every month except October. Did get a nasty sunburn once skiing in shorts on a day in July. (Hadn't put on enough sunscreen.)
Should add that the park is going to be requiring reservations this summer.)
From recollection, snow machines only work when the outside temperature is consistently below freezing - which isn't all that frequent and long-lasting around here (Oxfordshire). You'd only be able to run them overnight on a couple of weeks in January or February.
We have another eight-months of this "no, you're more senile than me!' sh*t to look forward to. At least we just have a short useless guy vs a grey mist.
It isn't strong ground for the Biden campaign; they've been silly to rise (or sink) to Trump's mockery. Trump certainly seems to have some senior moments and be highly prone to stream of consciousness rants. But he has vigour and aggression, and seems fairly fit. Biden by contrast looks and acts like something you'd find in a sarcophagus.
Going aggressive with Trump is always applauded and has just never been a good idea. Wrestling with a pig springs to mind.
Trump seems mentally more deficient, Biden seems physically more deficient (he may actually be in decent shape for his age, but he looks and sounds his age in a way Trump, at least at his events, does not).
Is that the case? We've had two recent examples of Trump getting someone's name wrong - the Haley example being a real shitter (calling an interviewer Joe when they're called Dan isn't exactly going to set the world on fire). Biden on the other hand seems to have whole speeches of complete incoherence.
Anyone claiming that either candidate is fully mentally there is deluded.
Look at Trump in 2014, when he started his campaign last time around. He was extremely sharp and articulate. Whatever you thought about his politics or celebrity, he was clearly extremely switched on.
Trump of 2024 is not like Trump of 2014. And that shouldn't be a surprise. People do a lot of ageing between 68 and 78.
Biden, likewise. Back in 2008, he was a plodding but competent Senator and VP candidate. He navigated the Obama White House fine.
Now he's clearly past his prime. He does have occasional flashes of off the cuff humour that demonstrate he's not completely lost it.
But he's obviously not the same intellect as a decade either.
Sure. But I don't think I'm being unfair (nobody can be truly fair) to say that there is a difference. Trump has aged, possibly a lot. But with Biden, as I've always said, it isn't age, it's infirmity. There's an insistence of people saying 'Biden is showing his age' - he isn't; plenty of others are his age and are fine. The Queen at his age had well over a decade of good reigning in her. He is showing that is in unwell, suffering from a form of dementia, and would benefit from being out of politics to live out his remaining years.
Rishi is inexperienced. It is hard to see any of his predecessors falling for Piers' Rwanda bet. Worse than that, he is controlled by the clowns at CCHQ especially since the civil service was purged by Boris and Liz Truss.
He's not really inexperienced as a Minister though. Indeed, he has more Ministerial experience than many Prime Ministers when they first took over.
It is true he has less experience as an MP, though only by a few years in the case of Cameron, and if Keir takes over this year he will be almost as inexperienced as Rishi was.
The real problem is that he's never experienced political adversity. Nor had to work through whether his beliefs or assumptions are good politics and in line with the people he wants to govern. He was a 25 year old hedgefunder the last time Lab won an election. As far as I can tell he went straight from that world and the Tory think tank ecosystem to a safe seat, and a party that's remained in power ever since. He backed the winning side on Brexit without putting his head above the parapet.
The result is I think is someone who has largely played politics on easy mode, and thus has had an assumption that the politics he prefers and his decisions will turn out to be good politics and popular in the end. There's also the edge of the technocrat who believes he knows best, if only the ungrateful plebs would realise it.
But of course that's not how it works. The electorate are fickle and believe more than one thing at once. They make quick, harsh judgments on how things look and feel. And just because they voted for something or you in the past, doesn't mean they're permanently wedded to it.
Plus for every action there's a reaction. Doing a deal with Braverman may have seemed a good idea back in 2022 but a smarter politician would have realised it left any attempt to sell the government as fresh with a new, practical approach, and rebuild some of Cameron's coalition was dead on arrival. While he was likely to upset everyone when the Tory right demanded the impossible.
In contrast, Starmer has been an MP for the same amount of time (after doing jobs that are a bit closer to the public, if still rarefied) but has been formed as a politician by adversity in terms of lost elections and Labour civil war. As a result, despite not being a natural, he's had to learn to think about why people who Labour believe they are for, were voting against them. How to win internal battles and when factional opponents need defenestrating - and how and why the public voted for a huge change that anyone outside true right-wing believers who is being honest, will say has been a disastrous idea.
From that he's learned far more than Sunak about the politics side of things than a PM for whom it all came very easily until he got the top job.
I’m still dumbfounded how easy it was for Putin to coopt the Republican Party through Trump. This is extraordinary. One of the two ruling parties of the most powerful country in the world, doing the bidding of a genocidal dictator. Don’t really know how to process this.
I mean, what the hell? The party of Eisenhower, Nixon and Reagan promoting the interests of Russia against those of the United States? It is genuinely incomprehensible.
I’m still dumbfounded how easy it was for Putin to coopt the Republican Party through Trump. This is extraordinary. One of the two ruling parties of the most powerful country in the world, doing the bidding of a genocidal dictator. Don’t really know how to process this.
I mean, what the hell? The party of Eisenhower, Nixon and Reagan promoting the interests of Russia against those of the United States? It is genuinely incomprehensible.
We have another eight-months of this "no, you're more senile than me!' sh*t to look forward to. At least we just have a short useless guy vs a grey mist.
It isn't strong ground for the Biden campaign; they've been silly to rise (or sink) to Trump's mockery. Trump certainly seems to have some senior moments and be highly prone to stream of consciousness rants. But he has vigour and aggression, and seems fairly fit. Biden by contrast looks and acts like something you'd find in a sarcophagus.
Going aggressive with Trump is always applauded and has just never been a good idea. Wrestling with a pig springs to mind.
Trump seems mentally more deficient, Biden seems physically more deficient (he may actually be in decent shape for his age, but he looks and sounds his age in a way Trump, at least at his events, does not).
Is that the case? We've had two recent examples of Trump getting someone's name wrong - the Haley example being a real shitter (calling an interviewer Joe when they're called Dan isn't exactly going to set the world on fire). Biden on the other hand seems to have whole speeches of complete incoherence.
Anyone claiming that either candidate is fully mentally there is deluded.
Look at Trump in 2014, when he started his campaign last time around. He was extremely sharp and articulate. Whatever you thought about his politics or celebrity, he was clearly extremely switched on.
Trump of 2024 is not like Trump of 2014. And that shouldn't be a surprise. People do a lot of ageing between 68 and 78.
Biden, likewise. Back in 2008, he was a plodding but competent Senator and VP candidate. He navigated the Obama White House fine.
Now he's clearly past his prime. He does have occasional flashes of off the cuff humour that demonstrate he's not completely lost it.
But he's obviously not the same intellect as a decade either.
On the other hand Biden has probably been the most effective president since Ronald Reagan in getting his agenda through, despite an utterly dysfunctional party in the legislature
Both of them are operating much more on instinct than in the past, which isn't ideal for sure.
But the key thing then that Biden's political instincts are reasonably good, whereas Trump's aren't.
I agree. Biden is an instinctive deal maker, which on the whole is a good thing for a US president.
I’m still dumbfounded how easy it was for Putin to coopt the Republican Party through Trump. This is extraordinary. One of the two ruling parties of the most powerful country in the world, doing the bidding of a genocidal dictator. Don’t really know how to process this.
I mean, what the hell? The party of Eisenhower, Nixon and Reagan promoting the interests of Russia against those of the United States? It is genuinely incomprehensible.
Would any major US TV journalist have turned down an interview with the head of the Soviet Communist Party during the Cold War?
I’m still dumbfounded how easy it was for Putin to coopt the Republican Party through Trump. This is extraordinary. One of the two ruling parties of the most powerful country in the world, doing the bidding of a genocidal dictator. Don’t really know how to process this.
I mean, what the hell? The party of Eisenhower, Nixon and Reagan promoting the interests of Russia against those of the United States? It is genuinely incomprehensible.
Would any major US TV journalist have turned down an interview with the head of the Soviet Communist Party during the Cold War?
Nice try, but Tucker actively promotes Russian state talking points and agendas, it is not simply a case of a journalist getting a big scoop interview. It's just plain dishonest to pretend otherwise.
"Millions of pounds strictly intended for council housing and tenants had been wrongly and unlawfully transferred to the authority’s general fund over a series of years."
I’m still dumbfounded how easy it was for Putin to coopt the Republican Party through Trump. This is extraordinary. One of the two ruling parties of the most powerful country in the world, doing the bidding of a genocidal dictator. Don’t really know how to process this.
I mean, what the hell? The party of Eisenhower, Nixon and Reagan promoting the interests of Russia against those of the United States? It is genuinely incomprehensible.
Would any major US TV journalist have turned down an interview with the head of the Soviet Communist Party during the Cold War?
Would any of them have gone there to promote Soviet talking points and lines to take against the policy of the United States? Not a chance. It would have been regarded as treason.
I’m still dumbfounded how easy it was for Putin to coopt the Republican Party through Trump. This is extraordinary. One of the two ruling parties of the most powerful country in the world, doing the bidding of a genocidal dictator. Don’t really know how to process this.
I mean, what the hell? The party of Eisenhower, Nixon and Reagan promoting the interests of Russia against those of the United States? It is genuinely incomprehensible.
Would any major US TV journalist have turned down an interview with the head of the Soviet Communist Party during the Cold War?
At the peak of the Cold War, no major US TV journalist had his tongue so far up Khrushchev's arsehole he could polish his dentures, to be fair.
I’m still dumbfounded how easy it was for Putin to coopt the Republican Party through Trump. This is extraordinary. One of the two ruling parties of the most powerful country in the world, doing the bidding of a genocidal dictator. Don’t really know how to process this.
I mean, what the hell? The party of Eisenhower, Nixon and Reagan promoting the interests of Russia against those of the United States? It is genuinely incomprehensible.
Would any major US TV journalist have turned down an interview with the head of the Soviet Communist Party during the Cold War?
They would have sent a real journalist and it would have been a real interview, not a rimjob from a fanboi
I’m still dumbfounded how easy it was for Putin to coopt the Republican Party through Trump. This is extraordinary. One of the two ruling parties of the most powerful country in the world, doing the bidding of a genocidal dictator. Don’t really know how to process this.
I mean, what the hell? The party of Eisenhower, Nixon and Reagan promoting the interests of Russia against those of the United States? It is genuinely incomprehensible.
Would any major US TV journalist have turned down an interview with the head of the Soviet Communist Party during the Cold War?
It'll be interesting if he gets anything out of Putin. Just to list the casualties and say 'why?' would be interesting - even Putin's evasion and equivocation would be interesting to see. He's obviously not going to collapse under interrogation, but still.
I’m still dumbfounded how easy it was for Putin to coopt the Republican Party through Trump. This is extraordinary. One of the two ruling parties of the most powerful country in the world, doing the bidding of a genocidal dictator. Don’t really know how to process this.
I mean, what the hell? The party of Eisenhower, Nixon and Reagan promoting the interests of Russia against those of the United States? It is genuinely incomprehensible.
Would any major US TV journalist have turned down an interview with the head of the Soviet Communist Party during the Cold War?
Wasn't Jane Fonda pilloried for going to North Vietnam?
I’m still dumbfounded how easy it was for Putin to coopt the Republican Party through Trump. This is extraordinary. One of the two ruling parties of the most powerful country in the world, doing the bidding of a genocidal dictator. Don’t really know how to process this.
I mean, what the hell? The party of Eisenhower, Nixon and Reagan promoting the interests of Russia against those of the United States? It is genuinely incomprehensible.
Would any major US TV journalist have turned down an interview with the head of the Soviet Communist Party during the Cold War?
Let's see if he gives Putin a hard time about war crimes and human rights. If so it would be a shock.
I’m still dumbfounded how easy it was for Putin to coopt the Republican Party through Trump. This is extraordinary. One of the two ruling parties of the most powerful country in the world, doing the bidding of a genocidal dictator. Don’t really know how to process this.
I mean, what the hell? The party of Eisenhower, Nixon and Reagan promoting the interests of Russia against those of the United States? It is genuinely incomprehensible.
Would any major US TV journalist have turned down an interview with the head of the Soviet Communist Party during the Cold War?
They would have sent a real journalist and it would have been a real interview, not a rimjob from a fanboi
It amazes me that anyone can take Carlson seriously anymore having been exposed as a complete fraud.
Rishi Sunak says Labour would take us back to square one in 2010.
When the NHS worked and waiting lists were at an all time low
When homelessness was still dropping
When the economy was actually growing
When public duty meant something
When the government wasn't run by incompetent fools
Let's go back to square one. Please Rishi.
When Britain had seamless trade with the EU
When immigration was half what it is now
When councils weren't going bust at the rate of 2 or 3 a year
There'll be no going back regardless of who is in power. Nothing significant will change at all with a change of government. It's all about who gets to have the titles, the offices and the ministerial limos and little else. The net transfer of wealth from the young to the old, and to the very wealthy from everyone else, will continue unchecked, as will the immigration Ponzi scheme, the ever increasing shortage of housing, and the resultant total immiseration of anyone who can't afford to clamber onto the housing ladder. Nobody under the age of about 50 is going to get the state pension this side of 75, and only those who aren't still stuck renting into old age are going to avoid having to keep working until they drop down dead.
The notion that whichever venal cretin can command a majority in the lower chamber of our useless Parliament is either capable of doing anything to retrieve the situation or, indeed, cares about it in the first place is laughable. The best that those of us without the means to emigrate can hope for is that the collapse is slow rather than rapid, and that everything doesn't go completely to pot until after we are safely dead.
Politicians all over the developed world are having to come to terms with the massive problems caused by geopolitical upheaval, technological change, migration and the explosion in the numbers of dependent elderly, but ours are singularly incompetent. Britain has been telling itself it's great for so very long that it still hasn't permeated quite how useless both the country and its leaders have become. There are some institutions and individuals amongst us that still function quite well, but taken as a whole we are a crock of shite, and we lack the ability even to comprehend the depth of the hole that we are in, yet alone to begin to formulate a plan for how to clamber out of it. This situation is not recoverable. The rot is too entrenched. We are done.
"Millions of pounds strictly intended for council housing and tenants had been wrongly and unlawfully transferred to the authority’s general fund over a series of years."
BBC implied that Notts had also taken c. 6 months to answer in brief FOI requests for the full Ernst Young report on finances, obstruction and delay, ruled until Information Commissioner's Office became involved.
I’m still dumbfounded how easy it was for Putin to coopt the Republican Party through Trump. This is extraordinary. One of the two ruling parties of the most powerful country in the world, doing the bidding of a genocidal dictator. Don’t really know how to process this.
I mean, what the hell? The party of Eisenhower, Nixon and Reagan promoting the interests of Russia against those of the United States? It is genuinely incomprehensible.
Would any major US TV journalist have turned down an interview with the head of the Soviet Communist Party during the Cold War?
I’m still dumbfounded how easy it was for Putin to coopt the Republican Party through Trump. This is extraordinary. One of the two ruling parties of the most powerful country in the world, doing the bidding of a genocidal dictator. Don’t really know how to process this.
I mean, what the hell? The party of Eisenhower, Nixon and Reagan promoting the interests of Russia against those of the United States? It is genuinely incomprehensible.
Would any major US TV journalist have turned down an interview with the head of the Soviet Communist Party during the Cold War?
Wasn't Jane Fonda pilloried for going to North Vietnam?
I’m still dumbfounded how easy it was for Putin to coopt the Republican Party through Trump. This is extraordinary. One of the two ruling parties of the most powerful country in the world, doing the bidding of a genocidal dictator. Don’t really know how to process this.
I mean, what the hell? The party of Eisenhower, Nixon and Reagan promoting the interests of Russia against those of the United States? It is genuinely incomprehensible.
Would any major US TV journalist have turned down an interview with the head of the Soviet Communist Party during the Cold War?
Let's see if he gives Putin a hard time about war crimes and human rights. If so it would be a shock.
Jane Fonda didn't just go to North Vietnam but took part in a photo op with an anti-aircraft gun being used to fire on American forces.
I’m still dumbfounded how easy it was for Putin to coopt the Republican Party through Trump. This is extraordinary. One of the two ruling parties of the most powerful country in the world, doing the bidding of a genocidal dictator. Don’t really know how to process this.
I mean, what the hell? The party of Eisenhower, Nixon and Reagan promoting the interests of Russia against those of the United States? It is genuinely incomprehensible.
Would any major US TV journalist have turned down an interview with the head of the Soviet Communist Party during the Cold War?
Or indeed Lord Hawhaw's interviews with senior Nazis.
"Millions of pounds strictly intended for council housing and tenants had been wrongly and unlawfully transferred to the authority’s general fund over a series of years."
Labour-controlled council. No doubt they were putting the boot into the Government on PPE contracts - as the £5m central Government grant for loss of parking revenues during Covid went walkabout...
The King Charles III news is a timely reminder that at a certain age, health issues become increasingly common.
I am about to experience that at 9.00 am in the morning !!!!!
Is that your heart procedure Big G? Good luck with it.
Yes indeed and thank you
Best of luck old chap. I'm sure everyone on PB will be keeping fingers crossed for tomorrow morning for you.
I would just comment that my haematologist has said the cause of my DVT in October is unprovoked, and despite all the tests so far they want further Xrays, blood test and topically a PSA test as without a cause I have to remain on Apixaban ( blood thinner) for life
This is separate to my pacemaker operation tomorrow
City showing why they are likely to win the Premiership leaving Liverpool and Arsenal 2nd and 3rd
Spot on. Don't see why a team basically top, but with Haaland and De Bruyne to come back in almost as new signings aren't considered the winners already.
Edit. See this howlingly obvious point to some of us has already been made.
How far loopy-right has williamglenn drifted to be defending Tucker Carlson defending Putin.
True colours, I guess.
Like his notion of inevitable Brexit reversal, I think this is an intellectual exercise by which takes a contrary position and defends it with all he’s got.
As an aside, there were a number of interviews of Communist leaders during the Cold War. When Nikita Khrushchev came to the US in 1956, he had several interviews with Western journalists. They did not go well, because the journalists asked lots of questions he didn't want to answer. And then when they reported on his remarks, he felt that he had been misrepresented.
After that, interviews were almost unknown until Gorbachev.
Let's see, shall we, if the questions asked of Putin as as probing as those asked of Khruschev.
"Millions of pounds strictly intended for council housing and tenants had been wrongly and unlawfully transferred to the authority’s general fund over a series of years."
BBC implied that Notts had also taken c. 6 months to answer in brief FOI requests for the full Ernst Young report on finances, obstruction and delay, ruled until Information Commissioner's Office became involved.
We have another eight-months of this "no, you're more senile than me!' sh*t to look forward to. At least we just have a short useless guy vs a grey mist.
It isn't strong ground for the Biden campaign; they've been silly to rise (or sink) to Trump's mockery. Trump certainly seems to have some senior moments and be highly prone to stream of consciousness rants. But he has vigour and aggression, and seems fairly fit. Biden by contrast looks and acts like something you'd find in a sarcophagus.
Going aggressive with Trump is always applauded and has just never been a good idea. Wrestling with a pig springs to mind.
Trump seems mentally more deficient, Biden seems physically more deficient (he may actually be in decent shape for his age, but he looks and sounds his age in a way Trump, at least at his events, does not).
Is that the case? We've had two recent examples of Trump getting someone's name wrong - the Haley example being a real shitter (calling an interviewer Joe when they're called Dan isn't exactly going to set the world on fire). Biden on the other hand seems to have whole speeches of complete incoherence.
Anyone claiming that either candidate is fully mentally there is deluded.
Look at Trump in 2014, when he started his campaign last time around. He was extremely sharp and articulate. Whatever you thought about his politics or celebrity, he was clearly extremely switched on.
Trump of 2024 is not like Trump of 2014. And that shouldn't be a surprise. People do a lot of ageing between 68 and 78.
Biden, likewise. Back in 2008, he was a plodding but competent Senator and VP candidate. He navigated the Obama White House fine.
Now he's clearly past his prime. He does have occasional flashes of off the cuff humour that demonstrate he's not completely lost it.
But he's obviously not the same intellect as a decade either.
Sure. But I don't think I'm being unfair (nobody can be truly fair) to say that there is a difference. Trump has aged, possibly a lot. But with Biden, as I've always said, it isn't age, it's infirmity. There's an insistence of people saying 'Biden is showing his age' - he isn't; plenty of others are his age and are fine. The Queen at his age had well over a decade of good reigning in her. He is showing that is in unwell, suffering from a form of dementia, and would benefit from being out of politics to live out his remaining years.
You could say that of both Biden and Trump. Frankly, you could probably have said it about Reagan and George W Bush (the younger one).
As an aside, there were a number of interviews of Communist leaders during the Cold War. When Nikita Khrushchev came to the US in 1956, he had several interviews with Western journalists. They did not go well, because the journalists asked lots of questions he didn't want to answer. And then when they reported on his remarks, he felt that he had been misrepresented.
After that, interviews were almost unknown until Gorbachev.
Let's see, shall we, if the questions asked of Putin as as probing as those asked of Khruschev.
I sense a big PR exploitation by Putin for home consumption: "leading US journalist tells how the Wokes have ruined his country" or similar.
Such awful news for our Royal Family and the whole country. 😦
The country has to rally together now. Politics and division has to stop.
The opinion polls sure to show a Rally to the Flag bounce for the Government, exactly the same as when covid broke out.
Indeed. Awful news for the Royal Family and the nation did wonders for Liz Truss’ ratings after all.
Liz Truss saved the nation from Boris Johnson leading the tributes to HMQ EII.
It has been reported Boris had been working on his Elizabeth the Great speech years before she died. We were saved from Jacob Rees-Mogg carrying the sword.
There are some lovely details: 'Ulitmate Shower', the woman drinking bleach, Henry Hoover looking unconvinced.
I like Truss standing on a kickstool. Sadly the actual caricature of Truss lets the cartoon down - a case of the cartoonist disliking the lady a bit too much to show any likeness through the haggish hideousness.
Meanwhile, DWP hammer the disabled every single day of the week with crap service, appalling tests, mindless hurdles and forms and ridiculous paperwork.
I've mentioned this before, but it bears reading by anyone interested who hasn't seen it. Like the lack of public toilets, it's affecting more and more folk.
I’m still dumbfounded how easy it was for Putin to coopt the Republican Party through Trump. This is extraordinary. One of the two ruling parties of the most powerful country in the world, doing the bidding of a genocidal dictator. Don’t really know how to process this.
I mean, what the hell? The party of Eisenhower, Nixon and Reagan promoting the interests of Russia against those of the United States? It is genuinely incomprehensible.
Would any major US TV journalist have turned down an interview with the head of the Soviet Communist Party during the Cold War?
Wasn't Jane Fonda pilloried for going to North Vietnam?
I’m still dumbfounded how easy it was for Putin to coopt the Republican Party through Trump. This is extraordinary. One of the two ruling parties of the most powerful country in the world, doing the bidding of a genocidal dictator. Don’t really know how to process this.
I mean, what the hell? The party of Eisenhower, Nixon and Reagan promoting the interests of Russia against those of the United States? It is genuinely incomprehensible.
Would any major US TV journalist have turned down an interview with the head of the Soviet Communist Party during the Cold War?
Let's see if he gives Putin a hard time about war crimes and human rights. If so it would be a shock.
Jane Fonda didn't just go to North Vietnam but took part in a photo op with an anti-aircraft gun being used to fire on American forces.
Decidedly ambiguous, your expression. Of the type used, undoubtedly yes, and ditto place, too. But it wasn't 'being used'.
Meanwhile, DWP hammer the disabled every single day of the week with crap service, appalling tests, mindless hurdles and forms and ridiculous paperwork.
At CA we're seeing a lot of this:
Apply for PIP, declined, appeal, 12 month delay - win the appeal at Tribunal - PIP awarded, DWP request a PIP review a year later, declined, appeal... rinse and repeat.
DWP rely very heavily on claimants not having the strength or the wherewithal to appeal.
I've mentioned this before, but it bears reading by anyone interested who hasn't seen it. Like the lack of public toilets, it's affecting more and more folk.
I've mentioned this before, but it bears reading by anyone interested who hasn't seen it. Like the lack of public toilets, it's affecting more and more folk.
I've mentioned this before, but it bears reading by anyone interested who hasn't seen it. Like the lack of public toilets, it's affecting more and more folk.
I've mentioned this before, but it bears reading by anyone interested who hasn't seen it. Like the lack of public toilets, it's affecting more and more folk.
Such awful news for our Royal Family and the whole country. 😦
The country has to rally together now. Politics and division has to stop.
The opinion polls sure to show a Rally to the Flag bounce for the Government, exactly the same as when covid broke out.
Indeed. Awful news for the Royal Family and the nation did wonders for Liz Truss’ ratings after all.
Liz Truss saved the nation from Boris Johnson leading the tributes to HMQ EII.
It has been reported Boris had been working on his Elizabeth the Great speech years before she died. We were saved from Jacob Rees-Mogg carrying the sword.
Surely Rees-Mogg's page would have carried it for him?
I've mentioned this before, but it bears reading by anyone interested who hasn't seen it. Like the lack of public toilets, it's affecting more and more folk.
Meanwhile, DWP hammer the disabled every single day of the week with crap service, appalling tests, mindless hurdles and forms and ridiculous paperwork.
Same as with the plague of collapsing school buildings, the death of NHS dentistry, the implosion of local government and much else besides: it's the near total lack of willingness to fund anything except for the state pension, because the only sections of the electorate who have any leverage, or in whom the politicians have any interest, are 1. The extremely rich (who need tapping periodically for campaign funds) and 2. Wealthy homeowning pensioners, who are the dominant voter bloc and whom nobody dare oppose about anything.
Old people's handouts, low taxes for the rich, house price inflation and the preservation of property wealth: these are the priorities of our useless leaders. They don't care about anyone or anything else.
How far loopy-right has williamglenn drifted to be defending Tucker Carlson defending Putin.
True colours, I guess.
We are now on to the fourth or fifth update of the Glennbot. The earlier versions include a left-liberal Eurocrat federalist, a Neobrexiteer rightwinger and several other incarnations. It is a spoof account.
I've mentioned this before, but it bears reading by anyone interested who hasn't seen it. Like the lack of public toilets, it's affecting more and more folk.
How far loopy-right has williamglenn drifted to be defending Tucker Carlson defending Putin.
True colours, I guess.
We are now on to the fourth or fifth update of the Glennbot. The earlier versions include a left-liberal Eurocrat federalist, a Neobrexiteer rightwinger and several other incarnations. It is a spoof account.
No, in 2016 he was a rabid europhile, but supported Trump.
Comments
https://twitter.com/JeremiahDJohns/status/1753791275625550042
When the fun stops, stop.
“I'm frustrated when people put out intentionally false information. I expect more. There are policy disagreements on that, I get that,” he said. “If people think that politics are wrong, and now we're in a presidential year, so let's not help Biden in the process, we're just going to disagree on that. I get frustrated when people put out things that are intentionally false, that they know are false, because I expect more of Americans.”
https://twitter.com/mkraju/status/1754585164468912420
Reminds me of gaming - I don't game as much as I used to, so I hope they have at least started to dial back the micropayment live service bollocks a bit.
:: taps forehead ::
Going aggressive with Trump is always applauded and has just never been a good idea. Wrestling with a pig springs to mind.
Same for Trump, of course.
It has to be Chuck Grassley. It's perfect timing, he will be due to complete his current Senate term in 2028, and he'll be only 95 years young, so less than 100 when he completes his first term.
In the ways it matters, he is as green as Kermit the Frog.
With Biden he's so known for it the BBC itself referred to him as gaffe-prone Biden in an article once, so there's certainly examples out there. But his speeches tend to be steadily delivered at least.
When immigration was half what it is now
When councils weren't going bust at the rate of 2 or 3 a year
I do think Rishi suffers from really having very limited experience of what it is like being just a regular MP, since he was rapidly made a junior Minister then Cabinet Minister. He's in a very safe seat, and that combined with rapid promotion probably means he has never done much constituency work, let alone fighting to win a tough seat from opposition or being on the losing side before.
I doubt we're getting back to the early 20th century style, with people regularly being an MP for 20+ years before becoming PM, experiencing the ups and downs for their party in that period, if you don't make it to the top of your party inside 10 years now there's a good chance you never will (Corbyn was very much an outlier here), but maybe we are due a period of more experienced leaders again.
The counter to that is that Keir if he wins will be both very inexperienced as an MP (but with all of it experience as opposition), yet still the oldest PM at the start that we've had in 50 years.
Phillips P. OBrien
@PhillipsPOBrien
I’m still dumbfounded how easy it was for Putin to coopt the Republican Party through Trump. This is extraordinary. One of the two ruling parties of the most powerful country in the world, doing the bidding of a genocidal dictator. Don’t really know how to process this.
The country has to rally together now. Politics and division has to stop.
The opinion polls sure to show a Rally to the Flag bounce for the Government, exactly the same as when covid broke out.
Look at Trump in 2014, when he started his campaign last time around. He was extremely sharp and articulate. Whatever you thought about his politics or celebrity, he was clearly extremely switched on.
Trump of 2024 is not like Trump of 2014. And that shouldn't be a surprise. People do a lot of ageing between 68 and 78.
Biden, likewise. Back in 2008, he was a plodding but competent Senator and VP candidate. He navigated the Obama White House fine.
Now he's clearly past his prime. He does have occasional flashes of off the cuff humour that demonstrate he's not completely lost it.
But he's obviously not the same intellect as a decade either.
A freindly face, experience of doing a job outside politics.
You know it makes sense.
There are some lovely details: 'Ulitmate Shower', the woman drinking bleach, Henry Hoover looking unconvinced.
Even the ones who don't think that is a good idea (mostly in the Senate) are too weak to stand up to Trump on the point, if they want to be re-elected.
And while you won't know me from Adam BigG, I've been lurking here a much longer time than my user has been around and best wishes for tomorrow too
We can still mute it at important occasions, but there's nothing inherenetly wrong with 'playing politics', especially from politicians. If they cannot do it who can't?
But the key thing then that Biden's political instincts are reasonably good, whereas Trump's aren't.
The result is I think is someone who has largely played politics on easy mode, and thus has had an assumption that the politics he prefers and his decisions will turn out to be good politics and popular in the end. There's also the edge of the technocrat who believes he knows best, if only the ungrateful plebs would realise it.
But of course that's not how it works. The electorate are fickle and believe more than one thing at once. They make quick, harsh judgments on how things look and feel. And just because they voted for something or you in the past, doesn't mean they're permanently wedded to it.
Plus for every action there's a reaction. Doing a deal with Braverman may have seemed a good idea back in 2022 but a smarter politician would have realised it left any attempt to sell the government as fresh with a new, practical approach, and rebuild some of Cameron's coalition was dead on arrival. While he was likely to upset everyone when the Tory right demanded the impossible.
In contrast, Starmer has been an MP for the same amount of time (after doing jobs that are a bit closer to the public, if still rarefied) but has been formed as a politician by adversity in terms of lost elections and Labour civil war. As a result, despite not being a natural, he's had to learn to think about why people who Labour believe they are for, were voting against them. How to win internal battles and when factional opponents need defenestrating - and how and why the public voted for a huge change that anyone outside true right-wing believers who is being honest, will say has been a disastrous idea.
From that he's learned far more than Sunak about the politics side of things than a PM for whom it all came very easily until he got the top job.
I mean, what the hell? The party of Eisenhower, Nixon and Reagan promoting the interests of Russia against those of the United States? It is genuinely incomprehensible.
"Millions of pounds strictly intended for council housing and tenants had been wrongly and unlawfully transferred to the authority’s general fund over a series of years."
https://nottstv.com/secret-report-on-nottingham-city-council-finances-describes-missing-millions-and-cash-cow-approach-to-parking-and-roads-fines/
They're owning the libs.
The notion that whichever venal cretin can command a majority in the lower chamber of our useless Parliament is either capable of doing anything to retrieve the situation or, indeed, cares about it in the first place is laughable. The best that those of us without the means to emigrate can hope for is that the collapse is slow rather than rapid, and that everything doesn't go completely to pot until after we are safely dead.
Politicians all over the developed world are having to come to terms with the massive problems caused by geopolitical upheaval, technological change, migration and the explosion in the numbers of dependent elderly, but ours are singularly incompetent. Britain has been telling itself it's great for so very long that it still hasn't permeated quite how useless both the country and its leaders have become. There are some institutions and individuals amongst us that still function quite well, but taken as a whole we are a crock of shite, and we lack the ability even to comprehend the depth of the hole that we are in, yet alone to begin to formulate a plan for how to clamber out of it. This situation is not recoverable. The rot is too entrenched. We are done.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-68211920?
True colours, I guess.
Don't see why a team basically top, but with Haaland and De Bruyne to come back in almost as new signings aren't considered the winners already.
Edit. See this howlingly obvious point to some of us has already been made.
After that, interviews were almost unknown until Gorbachev.
Let's see, shall we, if the questions asked of Putin as as probing as those asked of Khruschev.
Hundreds queue at new NHS dental practice in Bristol hoping for treatment
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2024/feb/05/queue-new-nhs-dental-practice-bristol-st-pauls
LOL.
Meanwhile, DWP hammer the disabled every single day of the week with crap service, appalling tests, mindless hurdles and forms and ridiculous paperwork.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2024/jan/30/pliers-abscesses-and-agonising-pain-britains-dental-crisis-as-seen-from-ae
Apply for PIP, declined, appeal, 12 month delay - win the appeal at Tribunal - PIP awarded, DWP request a PIP review a year later, declined, appeal... rinse and repeat.
DWP rely very heavily on claimants not having the strength or the wherewithal to appeal.
"Do you have concerns about getting to see a dentist or doctor? Rishi Sunak doesn't."
Old people's handouts, low taxes for the rich, house price inflation and the preservation of property wealth: these are the priorities of our useless leaders. They don't care about anyone or anything else.
People are allowed to be inconsistent.