Howdy, Stranger!

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

A 50% return in fewer than three months? – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 11,002
edited February 15 in General
imageA 50% return in fewer than three months? – politicalbetting.com

We'd offer 1/2 on this being the widest margin of victory in London Mayoral election history (since 2000)https://t.co/XSJYmpEmoD https://t.co/1Maa9vjSgm

Read the full story here

«1345

Comments

  • LeonLeon Posts: 44,916
    Where is @rcs1000? is he hiding away in furtive shame?

    The Tucker Putin interview has had 187 MILLION impressions on Twitter, just on Carlson's channel

    https://x.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1755734526678925682?s=20

    And another 12m on Carlson's YoutTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOCWBhuDdDo

    Another 10m on Russian YouTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIbL_MXK8Tg

    And elswhere, endlessly - 3m on Telegraph YouTube, on and on

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rKigbrcGNg

    If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time





  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,506
    Leon said:

    Where is @rcs1000? is he hiding away in furtive shame?

    The Tucker Putin interview has had 187 MILLION impressions on Twitter, just on Carlson's channel

    https://x.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1755734526678925682?s=20

    And another 12m on Carlson's YoutTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOCWBhuDdDo

    Another 10m on Russian YouTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIbL_MXK8Tg

    And elswhere, endlessly - 3m on Telegraph YouTube, on and on

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rKigbrcGNg

    If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time





    Lol.

    Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.

    It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 44,916
    edited February 11
    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    Where is @rcs1000? is he hiding away in furtive shame?

    The Tucker Putin interview has had 187 MILLION impressions on Twitter, just on Carlson's channel

    https://x.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1755734526678925682?s=20

    And another 12m on Carlson's YoutTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOCWBhuDdDo

    Another 10m on Russian YouTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIbL_MXK8Tg

    And elswhere, endlessly - 3m on Telegraph YouTube, on and on

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rKigbrcGNg

    If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time





    Lol.

    Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.

    It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
    I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long

    The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor

    And that’s not the main platform. X is



  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,506
    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    Where is @rcs1000? is he hiding away in furtive shame?

    The Tucker Putin interview has had 187 MILLION impressions on Twitter, just on Carlson's channel

    https://x.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1755734526678925682?s=20

    And another 12m on Carlson's YoutTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOCWBhuDdDo

    Another 10m on Russian YouTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIbL_MXK8Tg

    And elswhere, endlessly - 3m on Telegraph YouTube, on and on

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rKigbrcGNg

    If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time





    Lol.

    Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.

    It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
    I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long

    The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor

    And that’s not the main platform. X is



    Laughable.
  • Carlson/Putin: Boris is still trending on TwiX with the revelation that it was Boris who prevented a peaceful end to the Russia/Ukraine kerfuffle. Here is one such post (with 45-second video clip boosting Carlson's viewing figures):

    Vladimir Putin claims he was ready to end war 18 months ago but Boris Johnson scuppered deal by telling Ukraine leaders it was 'better to fight Russia'
    https://twitter.com/i/status/1756508944728826361
  • LeonLeon Posts: 44,916
    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    Where is @rcs1000? is he hiding away in furtive shame?

    The Tucker Putin interview has had 187 MILLION impressions on Twitter, just on Carlson's channel

    https://x.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1755734526678925682?s=20

    And another 12m on Carlson's YoutTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOCWBhuDdDo

    Another 10m on Russian YouTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIbL_MXK8Tg

    And elswhere, endlessly - 3m on Telegraph YouTube, on and on

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rKigbrcGNg

    If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time





    Lol.

    Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.

    It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
    I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long

    The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor

    And that’s not the main platform. X is



    Laughable.
    Ok let’s just add up YouTube

    Carlson’s Youtube

    https://youtu.be/fOCWBhuDdDo?si=CLqzV057bBTF1Hi0

    12m

    Russian YouTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIbL_MXK8Tg

    10m

    Russel brand’s take

    https://youtu.be/TpeSVOwys6M?si=GsBl1aP5xUiRmj-s

    2m

    Telegraph

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rKigbrcGNg

    3m


    Arabic

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBh0KycV92Y&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    1m

    Live reaction

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJr7sxEWpbc&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    2.9m


    Fox now

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4boi-mCDUCQ&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    1m

    Times radio

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gd9qktZnVJQ&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    1.2m


    Some weird Russian thing


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0vQ5wZfQQw&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    Nearly 1m

    If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched

    And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X

    I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,072

    Carlson/Putin: Boris is still trending on TwiX with the revelation that it was Boris who prevented a peaceful end to the Russia/Ukraine kerfuffle. Here is one such post (with 45-second video clip boosting Carlson's viewing figures):

    Vladimir Putin claims he was ready to end war 18 months ago but Boris Johnson scuppered deal by telling Ukraine leaders it was 'better to fight Russia'
    https://twitter.com/i/status/1756508944728826361

    But the claim is rubbish, as has been shown before.

    It's a bit of a litmus test, really: the people who believe this are the people who are so down the BDS hole that they believe Putin over Boris.

    A somewhat different view:
    https://www.thebureau.news/p/no-the-west-did-not-sabotage-an-early
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,126

    Carlson/Putin: Boris is still trending on TwiX with the revelation that it was Boris who prevented a peaceful end to the Russia/Ukraine kerfuffle. Here is one such post (with 45-second video clip boosting Carlson's viewing figures):

    Vladimir Putin claims he was ready to end war 18 months ago but Boris Johnson scuppered deal by telling Ukraine leaders it was 'better to fight Russia'
    https://twitter.com/i/status/1756508944728826361

    But the claim is rubbish, as has been shown before.

    It's a bit of a litmus test, really: the people who believe this are the people who are so down the BDS hole that they believe Putin over Boris.

    A somewhat different view:
    https://www.thebureau.news/p/no-the-west-did-not-sabotage-an-early
    I wouldn't believe anything either of those people said but we don't need to because we know what Russia was offering (a promise of peace in return for Ukraine disarming itself) and we know that it didn't need Boris to show the Ukrainians what would happen next if they took that deal.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 44,916

    Carlson/Putin: Boris is still trending on TwiX with the revelation that it was Boris who prevented a peaceful end to the Russia/Ukraine kerfuffle. Here is one such post (with 45-second video clip boosting Carlson's viewing figures):

    Vladimir Putin claims he was ready to end war 18 months ago but Boris Johnson scuppered deal by telling Ukraine leaders it was 'better to fight Russia'
    https://twitter.com/i/status/1756508944728826361

    But the claim is rubbish, as has been shown before.

    It's a bit of a litmus test, really: the people who believe this are the people who are so down the BDS hole that they believe Putin over Boris.

    A somewhat different view:
    https://www.thebureau.news/p/no-the-west-did-not-sabotage-an-early
    Yes it’s surely rubbish. I can believe Boris was out there giving them some oomph, it’s what he does, but beyond that…

    I read an interesting take the other day. The pro-Putin western hard right are weirdly like the pro-hamas far left - ‘queers for Palestine’ makes as much sense as American nationalists for Putin. Putin clearly detests and fears America, he wouldn’t make exceptions for American nutters in bullhorn helmets
  • Carlson/Putin: Boris is still trending on TwiX with the revelation that it was Boris who prevented a peaceful end to the Russia/Ukraine kerfuffle. Here is one such post (with 45-second video clip boosting Carlson's viewing figures):

    Vladimir Putin claims he was ready to end war 18 months ago but Boris Johnson scuppered deal by telling Ukraine leaders it was 'better to fight Russia'
    https://twitter.com/i/status/1756508944728826361

    But the claim is rubbish, as has been shown before.

    It's a bit of a litmus test, really: the people who believe this are the people who are so down the BDS hole that they believe Putin over Boris.

    A somewhat different view:
    https://www.thebureau.news/p/no-the-west-did-not-sabotage-an-early
    What are you talking about? Of course the claim is rubbish. No-one here will believe it. But the point is, it is spreading and these clips explain the viewing figures Leon & rcs1000 are arguing about at the start of the thread.

    What else might be interesting is who is spreading the clips. As I said yesterday, there are a lot of blue ticks for a Russian bot farm. But I do not have the tools to follow this up.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 44,916
    edited February 11

    Carlson/Putin: Boris is still trending on TwiX with the revelation that it was Boris who prevented a peaceful end to the Russia/Ukraine kerfuffle. Here is one such post (with 45-second video clip boosting Carlson's viewing figures):

    Vladimir Putin claims he was ready to end war 18 months ago but Boris Johnson scuppered deal by telling Ukraine leaders it was 'better to fight Russia'
    https://twitter.com/i/status/1756508944728826361

    But the claim is rubbish, as has been shown before.

    It's a bit of a litmus test, really: the people who believe this are the people who are so down the BDS hole that they believe Putin over Boris.

    A somewhat different view:
    https://www.thebureau.news/p/no-the-west-did-not-sabotage-an-early
    What are you talking about? Of course the claim is rubbish. No-one here will believe it. But the point is, it is spreading and these clips explain the viewing figures Leon & rcs1000 are arguing about at the start of the thread.

    What else might be interesting is who is spreading the clips. As I said yesterday, there are a lot of blue ticks for a Russian bot farm. But I do not have the tools to follow this up.
    But on YouTube it is actually being spread, in the main, by western news media - often outraged or derisory - but they are spreading it - eg the guardian take on it - with excerpts - has nearly 1m views

    This is my point. The interview has the classic ingredients of virality. It will greatly please some, greatly intrigue others, and greatly annoy many more, so everyone talks about it or shares it, so it is ubiquitous

    This is what I predicted would happen. I never made any comment on the morality of it or the veracity of the dyad involved. Indeed I can see an argument, morally, why you shouldn’t interview Putin - tho on the whole I do not agree, it is better to see our enemy and understand how he thinks, even if it risks him smuggling his ideas into our discourse
  • LeonLeon Posts: 44,916
    Right I must take my sorry arse to the supermarket. Later
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,072

    Carlson/Putin: Boris is still trending on TwiX with the revelation that it was Boris who prevented a peaceful end to the Russia/Ukraine kerfuffle. Here is one such post (with 45-second video clip boosting Carlson's viewing figures):

    Vladimir Putin claims he was ready to end war 18 months ago but Boris Johnson scuppered deal by telling Ukraine leaders it was 'better to fight Russia'
    https://twitter.com/i/status/1756508944728826361

    But the claim is rubbish, as has been shown before.

    It's a bit of a litmus test, really: the people who believe this are the people who are so down the BDS hole that they believe Putin over Boris.

    A somewhat different view:
    https://www.thebureau.news/p/no-the-west-did-not-sabotage-an-early
    What are you talking about? Of course the claim is rubbish. No-one here will believe it. But the point is, it is spreading and these clips explain the viewing figures Leon & rcs1000 are arguing about at the start of the thread.

    What else might be interesting is who is spreading the clips. As I said yesterday, there are a lot of blue ticks for a Russian bot farm. But I do not have the tools to follow this up.
    Then perhaps that's what you should have said, rather than just dropping it like that. You know, say; "It's rubbish," rather than spreading disinfo.

    Another interesting point about this stupid interview is that, allegedly, the Russian-language version for domestic audiences is (ahem) somewhat cut. Another example of Russia saying different things to different audiences.

    As to who's spreading it: apparently, people like you... :(
  • Tucker Carlson is wearing a British-style tie in the Putin interview, as is sometimes favoured by Donald Trump when not wearing plain red or blue. Perhaps this is an upper class thing in America.

  • A pedant writes: surely it should be "less than three months" in the header, rather than "fewer". It is an expression of time not counting months.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 4,129

    Carlson/Putin: Boris is still trending on TwiX with the revelation that it was Boris who prevented a peaceful end to the Russia/Ukraine kerfuffle. Here is one such post (with 45-second video clip boosting Carlson's viewing figures):

    Vladimir Putin claims he was ready to end war 18 months ago but Boris Johnson scuppered deal by telling Ukraine leaders it was 'better to fight Russia'
    https://twitter.com/i/status/1756508944728826361

    But the claim is rubbish, as has been shown before.

    It's a bit of a litmus test, really: the people who believe this are the people who are so down the BDS hole that they believe Putin over Boris.

    A somewhat different view:
    https://www.thebureau.news/p/no-the-west-did-not-sabotage-an-early
    What are you talking about? Of course the claim is rubbish. No-one here will believe it. But the point is, it is spreading and these clips explain the viewing figures Leon & rcs1000 are arguing about at the start of the thread.

    What else might be interesting is who is spreading the clips. As I said yesterday, there are a lot of blue ticks for a Russian bot farm. But I do not have the tools to follow this up.
    Then perhaps that's what you should have said, rather than just dropping it like that. You know, say; "It's rubbish," rather than spreading disinfo.

    Another interesting point about this stupid interview is that, allegedly, the Russian-language version for domestic audiences is (ahem) somewhat cut. Another example of Russia saying different things to different audiences.

    As to who's spreading it: apparently, people like you... :(
    Don't take this the wrong way but, you're coming across as slightly deranged. DJL was obviously not spreading disinfo.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,072
    kamski said:

    Carlson/Putin: Boris is still trending on TwiX with the revelation that it was Boris who prevented a peaceful end to the Russia/Ukraine kerfuffle. Here is one such post (with 45-second video clip boosting Carlson's viewing figures):

    Vladimir Putin claims he was ready to end war 18 months ago but Boris Johnson scuppered deal by telling Ukraine leaders it was 'better to fight Russia'
    https://twitter.com/i/status/1756508944728826361

    But the claim is rubbish, as has been shown before.

    It's a bit of a litmus test, really: the people who believe this are the people who are so down the BDS hole that they believe Putin over Boris.

    A somewhat different view:
    https://www.thebureau.news/p/no-the-west-did-not-sabotage-an-early
    What are you talking about? Of course the claim is rubbish. No-one here will believe it. But the point is, it is spreading and these clips explain the viewing figures Leon & rcs1000 are arguing about at the start of the thread.

    What else might be interesting is who is spreading the clips. As I said yesterday, there are a lot of blue ticks for a Russian bot farm. But I do not have the tools to follow this up.
    Then perhaps that's what you should have said, rather than just dropping it like that. You know, say; "It's rubbish," rather than spreading disinfo.

    Another interesting point about this stupid interview is that, allegedly, the Russian-language version for domestic audiences is (ahem) somewhat cut. Another example of Russia saying different things to different audiences.

    As to who's spreading it: apparently, people like you... :(
    Don't take this the wrong way but, you're coming across as slightly deranged. DJL was obviously not spreading disinfo.
    LOL. He repeated a claim, and linked to a clip of it. Nowhere did he say that the claim was rubbish until he was challenged, nor did he make a different substantive point. This is *exactly* the way disinfo is spread; it's also a common reaction to accusations of disinfo.

    As for 'deranged': no. It's too early on a Sunday morning for that. ;)
  • kamskikamski Posts: 4,129

    kamski said:

    Carlson/Putin: Boris is still trending on TwiX with the revelation that it was Boris who prevented a peaceful end to the Russia/Ukraine kerfuffle. Here is one such post (with 45-second video clip boosting Carlson's viewing figures):

    Vladimir Putin claims he was ready to end war 18 months ago but Boris Johnson scuppered deal by telling Ukraine leaders it was 'better to fight Russia'
    https://twitter.com/i/status/1756508944728826361

    But the claim is rubbish, as has been shown before.

    It's a bit of a litmus test, really: the people who believe this are the people who are so down the BDS hole that they believe Putin over Boris.

    A somewhat different view:
    https://www.thebureau.news/p/no-the-west-did-not-sabotage-an-early
    What are you talking about? Of course the claim is rubbish. No-one here will believe it. But the point is, it is spreading and these clips explain the viewing figures Leon & rcs1000 are arguing about at the start of the thread.

    What else might be interesting is who is spreading the clips. As I said yesterday, there are a lot of blue ticks for a Russian bot farm. But I do not have the tools to follow this up.
    Then perhaps that's what you should have said, rather than just dropping it like that. You know, say; "It's rubbish," rather than spreading disinfo.

    Another interesting point about this stupid interview is that, allegedly, the Russian-language version for domestic audiences is (ahem) somewhat cut. Another example of Russia saying different things to different audiences.

    As to who's spreading it: apparently, people like you... :(
    Don't take this the wrong way but, you're coming across as slightly deranged. DJL was obviously not spreading disinfo.
    LOL. He repeated a claim, and linked to a clip of it. Nowhere did he say that the claim was rubbish until he was challenged, nor did he make a different substantive point. This is *exactly* the way disinfo is spread; it's also a common reaction to accusations of disinfo.

    As for 'deranged': no. It's too early on a Sunday morning for that. ;)
    Isn't weird inability to take account of obvious context a little bit derangrd?
  • BlancheLivermoreBlancheLivermore Posts: 5,115
    edited February 11

    A pedant writes: surely it should be "less than three months" in the header, rather than "fewer". It is an expression of time not counting months.

    I blame autocorrect

    ETA it could be a prediction that Paddy Power will pay out early, in exactly one or two months
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,072
    kamski said:

    kamski said:

    Carlson/Putin: Boris is still trending on TwiX with the revelation that it was Boris who prevented a peaceful end to the Russia/Ukraine kerfuffle. Here is one such post (with 45-second video clip boosting Carlson's viewing figures):

    Vladimir Putin claims he was ready to end war 18 months ago but Boris Johnson scuppered deal by telling Ukraine leaders it was 'better to fight Russia'
    https://twitter.com/i/status/1756508944728826361

    But the claim is rubbish, as has been shown before.

    It's a bit of a litmus test, really: the people who believe this are the people who are so down the BDS hole that they believe Putin over Boris.

    A somewhat different view:
    https://www.thebureau.news/p/no-the-west-did-not-sabotage-an-early
    What are you talking about? Of course the claim is rubbish. No-one here will believe it. But the point is, it is spreading and these clips explain the viewing figures Leon & rcs1000 are arguing about at the start of the thread.

    What else might be interesting is who is spreading the clips. As I said yesterday, there are a lot of blue ticks for a Russian bot farm. But I do not have the tools to follow this up.
    Then perhaps that's what you should have said, rather than just dropping it like that. You know, say; "It's rubbish," rather than spreading disinfo.

    Another interesting point about this stupid interview is that, allegedly, the Russian-language version for domestic audiences is (ahem) somewhat cut. Another example of Russia saying different things to different audiences.

    As to who's spreading it: apparently, people like you... :(
    Don't take this the wrong way but, you're coming across as slightly deranged. DJL was obviously not spreading disinfo.
    LOL. He repeated a claim, and linked to a clip of it. Nowhere did he say that the claim was rubbish until he was challenged, nor did he make a different substantive point. This is *exactly* the way disinfo is spread; it's also a common reaction to accusations of disinfo.

    As for 'deranged': no. It's too early on a Sunday morning for that. ;)
    Isn't weird inability to take account of obvious context a little bit derangrd?
    No, but misspelling is. ;)
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,591
    Labour 'set to suspend' Rochdale candidate despite grovelling apology to Israel supporters. Labour in chaos, accused of 'throwing' campaign to avoid fallout if they lose to Galloway...

    Yes I know its Skwawkbox but can't see how SKS can do anything else as the BOD demand his head on a plate.

    I placed a bet on GG at 4/1 as the news broke yesterday
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,243
    edited February 11

    Labour 'set to suspend' Rochdale candidate despite grovelling apology to Israel supporters. Labour in chaos, accused of 'throwing' campaign to avoid fallout if they lose to Galloway...

    Yes I know its Skwawkbox but can't see how SKS can do anything else as the BOD demand his head on a plate.

    I placed a bet on GG at 4/1 as the news broke yesterday

    How dare Labour suspend antisemitic conspiracy theorists as party members? Don’t they know the party’s meant to be a haven for racists and weirdos?

    (A more pertinent question would be, why did they pick the silly sod in the first place?)
  • kamskikamski Posts: 4,129

    kamski said:

    kamski said:

    Carlson/Putin: Boris is still trending on TwiX with the revelation that it was Boris who prevented a peaceful end to the Russia/Ukraine kerfuffle. Here is one such post (with 45-second video clip boosting Carlson's viewing figures):

    Vladimir Putin claims he was ready to end war 18 months ago but Boris Johnson scuppered deal by telling Ukraine leaders it was 'better to fight Russia'
    https://twitter.com/i/status/1756508944728826361

    But the claim is rubbish, as has been shown before.

    It's a bit of a litmus test, really: the people who believe this are the people who are so down the BDS hole that they believe Putin over Boris.

    A somewhat different view:
    https://www.thebureau.news/p/no-the-west-did-not-sabotage-an-early
    What are you talking about? Of course the claim is rubbish. No-one here will believe it. But the point is, it is spreading and these clips explain the viewing figures Leon & rcs1000 are arguing about at the start of the thread.

    What else might be interesting is who is spreading the clips. As I said yesterday, there are a lot of blue ticks for a Russian bot farm. But I do not have the tools to follow this up.
    Then perhaps that's what you should have said, rather than just dropping it like that. You know, say; "It's rubbish," rather than spreading disinfo.

    Another interesting point about this stupid interview is that, allegedly, the Russian-language version for domestic audiences is (ahem) somewhat cut. Another example of Russia saying different things to different audiences.

    As to who's spreading it: apparently, people like you... :(
    Don't take this the wrong way but, you're coming across as slightly deranged. DJL was obviously not spreading disinfo.
    LOL. He repeated a claim, and linked to a clip of it. Nowhere did he say that the claim was rubbish until he was challenged, nor did he make a different substantive point. This is *exactly* the way disinfo is spread; it's also a common reaction to accusations of disinfo.

    As for 'deranged': no. It's too early on a Sunday morning for that. ;)
    Isn't weird inability to take account of obvious context a little bit derangrd?
    No, but misspelling is. ;)
    I blame autocorrect
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,591
    ydoethur said:

    Labour 'set to suspend' Rochdale candidate despite grovelling apology to Israel supporters. Labour in chaos, accused of 'throwing' campaign to avoid fallout if they lose to Galloway...

    Yes I know its Skwawkbox but can't see how SKS can do anything else as the BOD demand his head on a plate.

    I placed a bet on GG at 4/1 as the news broke yesterday

    How dare Labour suspend antisemitic conspiracy theorists as party members? Don’t they know the party’s meant to be a haven for racists and weirdos?

    (A more pertinent question would be, why did they pick the silly sod in the first place?)
    Paid Israeli lobbyist led the shortlisting panel

    We done Luke.

    Who do you want to win in Rochdale??
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 17,802

    Tucker Carlson is wearing a British-style tie in the Putin interview, as is sometimes favoured by Donald Trump when not wearing plain red or blue. Perhaps this is an upper class thing in America.

    I think it is. Possibly from the posher/richer schools and universities.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,243
    edited February 11

    ydoethur said:

    Labour 'set to suspend' Rochdale candidate despite grovelling apology to Israel supporters. Labour in chaos, accused of 'throwing' campaign to avoid fallout if they lose to Galloway...

    Yes I know its Skwawkbox but can't see how SKS can do anything else as the BOD demand his head on a plate.

    I placed a bet on GG at 4/1 as the news broke yesterday

    How dare Labour suspend antisemitic conspiracy theorists as party members? Don’t they know the party’s meant to be a haven for racists and weirdos?

    (A more pertinent question would be, why did they pick the silly sod in the first place?)
    Paid Israeli lobbyist led the shortlisting panel

    We done Luke.

    Who do you want to win in Rochdale??
    Is that an actual reply, or are you just trolling?

    Because there would be a certain irony if in response to a post about antisemitic* conspiracy theorists you put forward an antisemitic conspiracy theory...

    *Autocorrect tried to make that 'antiepstic' for some reason...
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 17,802
    Those from last night interested in a land value tax may be interested in Georgism.

    https://www.sealionpress.co.uk/post/other-ideologies-ii-georgism

  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,072
    "Trump says he would 'encourage' Russia to attack Nato allies who do not pay their bills"

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68266447
  • TheValiantTheValiant Posts: 1,653
    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    Where is @rcs1000? is he hiding away in furtive shame?

    The Tucker Putin interview has had 187 MILLION impressions on Twitter, just on Carlson's channel

    https://x.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1755734526678925682?s=20

    And another 12m on Carlson's YoutTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOCWBhuDdDo

    Another 10m on Russian YouTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIbL_MXK8Tg

    And elswhere, endlessly - 3m on Telegraph YouTube, on and on

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rKigbrcGNg

    If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time





    Lol.

    Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.

    It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
    I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long

    The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor

    And that’s not the main platform. X is



    Laughable.
    Ok let’s just add up YouTube

    Carlson’s Youtube

    https://youtu.be/fOCWBhuDdDo?si=CLqzV057bBTF1Hi0

    12m

    Russian YouTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIbL_MXK8Tg

    10m

    Russel brand’s take

    https://youtu.be/TpeSVOwys6M?si=GsBl1aP5xUiRmj-s

    2m

    Telegraph

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rKigbrcGNg

    3m


    Arabic

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBh0KycV92Y&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    1m

    Live reaction

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJr7sxEWpbc&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    2.9m


    Fox now

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4boi-mCDUCQ&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    1m

    Times radio

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gd9qktZnVJQ&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    1.2m


    Some weird Russian thing


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0vQ5wZfQQw&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    Nearly 1m

    If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched

    And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X

    I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
    But what is a 'view'?

    Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish?
    Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?

    Or is it both?

    There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
  • viewcode said:

    Tucker Carlson is wearing a British-style tie in the Putin interview, as is sometimes favoured by Donald Trump when not wearing plain red or blue. Perhaps this is an upper class thing in America.

    I think it is. Possibly from the posher/richer schools and universities.
    Carlson always looks a like a confused dog, head cocked to one side and eyebrows knitted.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,591
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Labour 'set to suspend' Rochdale candidate despite grovelling apology to Israel supporters. Labour in chaos, accused of 'throwing' campaign to avoid fallout if they lose to Galloway...

    Yes I know its Skwawkbox but can't see how SKS can do anything else as the BOD demand his head on a plate.

    I placed a bet on GG at 4/1 as the news broke yesterday

    How dare Labour suspend antisemitic conspiracy theorists as party members? Don’t they know the party’s meant to be a haven for racists and weirdos?

    (A more pertinent question would be, why did they pick the silly sod in the first place?)
    Paid Israeli lobbyist led the shortlisting panel

    We done Luke.

    Who do you want to win in Rochdale??
    Is that an actual reply, or are you just trolling?

    Because there would be a certain irony if in response to a post about antisemitic* conspiracy theorists you put forward an antisemitic conspiracy theory...

    *Autocorrect tried to make that 'antiepstic' for some reason...
    Well Luke Akehurst is head of Israel First and is paid to lobby on behalf of Israel in that role.

    He also led the shortlisting panel via his NEC role.

    Which Antisemitic conspiracy theory have I put forward?

    And btw I note you are unable to answer who you want to win in Rochdale
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,243
    edited February 11

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Labour 'set to suspend' Rochdale candidate despite grovelling apology to Israel supporters. Labour in chaos, accused of 'throwing' campaign to avoid fallout if they lose to Galloway...

    Yes I know its Skwawkbox but can't see how SKS can do anything else as the BOD demand his head on a plate.

    I placed a bet on GG at 4/1 as the news broke yesterday

    How dare Labour suspend antisemitic conspiracy theorists as party members? Don’t they know the party’s meant to be a haven for racists and weirdos?

    (A more pertinent question would be, why did they pick the silly sod in the first place?)
    Paid Israeli lobbyist led the shortlisting panel

    We done Luke.

    Who do you want to win in Rochdale??
    Is that an actual reply, or are you just trolling?

    Because there would be a certain irony if in response to a post about antisemitic* conspiracy theorists you put forward an antisemitic conspiracy theory...

    *Autocorrect tried to make that 'antiepstic' for some reason...
    Well Luke Akehurst is head of Israel First and is paid to lobby on behalf of Israel in that role.

    He also led the shortlisting panel via his NEC role.

    Which Antisemitic conspiracy theory have I put forward?

    And btw I note you are unable to answer who you want to win in Rochdale
    Your elision in your first post said, in effect, that he was paid by Israel to manage the selection panel.

    Which seems, to put it mildly, slightly unlikely. And would count as an antisemitic conspiracy theory.

    (Do you also mean 'We Believe in Israel' rather than 'Israel first'? He's secretary of Labour First which is different.)

    I don't really care who wins in Rochdale, frankly. I don't think it's a significant by-election, unlike Wellingborough.

    I would prefer it not to be Galloway who makes Mosley look like a moderate these days, but I'd be surprised if it was. The real irony and what I presume Ali is nervous about when he made these stupid remarks is if he takes enough of the vote off Labour to let the Tories or (less probably) the Liberal Democrats through the middle.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,399
    ...
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,243

    "Trump says he would 'encourage' Russia to attack Nato allies who do not pay their bills"

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68266447

    Hotel business must be really struggling if he's thinking of going to those lengths to collect on debts.
  • ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Labour 'set to suspend' Rochdale candidate despite grovelling apology to Israel supporters. Labour in chaos, accused of 'throwing' campaign to avoid fallout if they lose to Galloway...

    Yes I know its Skwawkbox but can't see how SKS can do anything else as the BOD demand his head on a plate.

    I placed a bet on GG at 4/1 as the news broke yesterday

    How dare Labour suspend antisemitic conspiracy theorists as party members? Don’t they know the party’s meant to be a haven for racists and weirdos?

    (A more pertinent question would be, why did they pick the silly sod in the first place?)
    Paid Israeli lobbyist led the shortlisting panel

    We done Luke.

    Who do you want to win in Rochdale??
    Is that an actual reply, or are you just trolling?

    Because there would be a certain irony if in response to a post about antisemitic* conspiracy theorists you put forward an antisemitic conspiracy theory...

    *Autocorrect tried to make that 'antiepstic' for some reason...
    Well Luke Akehurst is head of Israel First and is paid to lobby on behalf of Israel in that role.

    He also led the shortlisting panel via his NEC role.

    Which Antisemitic conspiracy theory have I put forward?

    And btw I note you are unable to answer who you want to win in Rochdale
    Your elision in your first post said, in effect, that he was paid by Israel to manage the selection panel.

    Which seems, to put it mildly, slightly unlikely. And would count as an antisemitic conspiracy theory.

    (Do you also mean 'We Believe in Israel' rather than 'Israel first'? He's secretary of Labour First which is different.)

    I don't really care who wins in Rochdale, frankly. I don't think it's a significant by-election, unlike Wellingborough.

    I would prefer it not to be Galloway who makes Mosley look like a moderate these days, but I'd be surprised if it was. The real irony and what I presume Ali is nervous about when he made these stupid remarks is if he takes enough of the vote off Labour to let the Tories or (less probably) the Liberal Democrats through the middle.
    There are small amounts over 100/1 against Tories and LibDems on Betfair, if you think there is even a slight chance.
    https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.224220834
  • ydoethur said:

    Labour 'set to suspend' Rochdale candidate despite grovelling apology to Israel supporters. Labour in chaos, accused of 'throwing' campaign to avoid fallout if they lose to Galloway...

    Yes I know its Skwawkbox but can't see how SKS can do anything else as the BOD demand his head on a plate.

    I placed a bet on GG at 4/1 as the news broke yesterday

    How dare Labour suspend antisemitic conspiracy theorists as party members? Don’t they know the party’s meant to be a haven for racists and weirdos?

    (A more pertinent question would be, why did they pick the silly sod in the first place?)
    Ali is a former council leader and head of the Labour group on Lancashire County Council. The original allegation, which I described yesterday as tenuous, was that Ali had been on the committee of a mosque that had recently hosted radical speakers. The Jewish Chronicle reported this but did not splash it. It also mentioned that a Muslim site complained that Ali had been a government anti-terrorism adviser and therefore not Islamist.
    https://www.thejc.com/lets-talk/why-has-labours-rochdale-candidate-fundraised-for-a-mosque-that-hosted-extremists-ln6owl6f

    Since then, the Mail reports a recording of Ali, well:-

    Outrage after Labour candidate claims Israel deliberately allowed 1,400 of its citizens to be massacred on October 7 in order to give it the 'green light' to invade Gaza
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13069671/Outrage-Labour-candidate-claims-Israel-deliberately-allowed-1-400-citizens-massacred-October-7-order-green-light-invade-Gaza.html
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 24,726

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    Where is @rcs1000? is he hiding away in furtive shame?

    The Tucker Putin interview has had 187 MILLION impressions on Twitter, just on Carlson's channel

    https://x.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1755734526678925682?s=20

    And another 12m on Carlson's YoutTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOCWBhuDdDo

    Another 10m on Russian YouTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIbL_MXK8Tg

    And elswhere, endlessly - 3m on Telegraph YouTube, on and on

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rKigbrcGNg

    If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time





    Lol.

    Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.

    It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
    I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long

    The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor

    And that’s not the main platform. X is



    Laughable.
    Ok let’s just add up YouTube

    Carlson’s Youtube

    https://youtu.be/fOCWBhuDdDo?si=CLqzV057bBTF1Hi0

    12m

    Russian YouTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIbL_MXK8Tg

    10m

    Russel brand’s take

    https://youtu.be/TpeSVOwys6M?si=GsBl1aP5xUiRmj-s

    2m

    Telegraph

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rKigbrcGNg

    3m


    Arabic

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBh0KycV92Y&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    1m

    Live reaction

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJr7sxEWpbc&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    2.9m


    Fox now

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4boi-mCDUCQ&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    1m

    Times radio

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gd9qktZnVJQ&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    1.2m


    Some weird Russian thing


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0vQ5wZfQQw&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    Nearly 1m

    If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched

    And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X

    I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
    But what is a 'view'?

    Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish?
    Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?

    Or is it both?

    There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
    Personally I can"t be arsed to watch 2 hours of an interview with anyone. I watched a highlights video. I might have a longer version on in the background at some point. I don't think we can really see watching the whole thing all the wsy through as tbe yardstick of success for the initiative. But maybe I'm wrong.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,591
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Labour 'set to suspend' Rochdale candidate despite grovelling apology to Israel supporters. Labour in chaos, accused of 'throwing' campaign to avoid fallout if they lose to Galloway...

    Yes I know its Skwawkbox but can't see how SKS can do anything else as the BOD demand his head on a plate.

    I placed a bet on GG at 4/1 as the news broke yesterday

    How dare Labour suspend antisemitic conspiracy theorists as party members? Don’t they know the party’s meant to be a haven for racists and weirdos?

    (A more pertinent question would be, why did they pick the silly sod in the first place?)
    Paid Israeli lobbyist led the shortlisting panel

    We done Luke.

    Who do you want to win in Rochdale??
    Is that an actual reply, or are you just trolling?

    Because there would be a certain irony if in response to a post about antisemitic* conspiracy theorists you put forward an antisemitic conspiracy theory...

    *Autocorrect tried to make that 'antiepstic' for some reason...
    Well Luke Akehurst is head of Israel First and is paid to lobby on behalf of Israel in that role.

    He also led the shortlisting panel via his NEC role.

    Which Antisemitic conspiracy theory have I put forward?

    And btw I note you are unable to answer who you want to win in Rochdale
    Your elision in your first post said, in effect, that he was paid by Israel to manage the selection panel.

    Which seems, to put it mildly, slightly unlikely. And would count as an antisemitic conspiracy theory.

    (Do you also mean 'We Believe in Israel' rather than 'Israel first'? He's secretary of Labour First which is different.)

    I don't really care who wins in Rochdale, frankly. I don't think it's a significant by-election, unlike Wellingborough.

    I would prefer it not to be Galloway who makes Mosley look like a moderate these days, but I'd be surprised if it was. The real irony and what I presume Ali is nervous about when he made these stupid remarks is if he takes enough of the vote off Labour to let the Tories or (less probably) the Liberal Democrats through the middle.
    I said he was paid to lobby for Israel which is the prime purpose of the lobby group we believe in Israel which he is paid to represent.

    I said he chaired the shortlisting panel which he did.

    I did not say "he was paid by Israel to manage the selection panel."

    My first post said "paid Israeli lobbyist led the shortlisting panel"

    That is 100% correct no matter how much you try to claim otherwise nor is it antisemitic

    Stop making stuff up and claiming stuff is anti-semitic when it isn't.

    It is funny though to see you squirm over the SKS Candidate for Rochdale and not have a horse in the race.

  • Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    Where is @rcs1000? is he hiding away in furtive shame?

    The Tucker Putin interview has had 187 MILLION impressions on Twitter, just on Carlson's channel

    https://x.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1755734526678925682?s=20

    And another 12m on Carlson's YoutTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOCWBhuDdDo

    Another 10m on Russian YouTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIbL_MXK8Tg

    And elswhere, endlessly - 3m on Telegraph YouTube, on and on

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rKigbrcGNg

    If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time





    Lol.

    Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.

    It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
    I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long

    The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor

    And that’s not the main platform. X is



    Laughable.
    Ok let’s just add up YouTube

    Carlson’s Youtube

    https://youtu.be/fOCWBhuDdDo?si=CLqzV057bBTF1Hi0

    12m

    Russian YouTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIbL_MXK8Tg

    10m

    Russel brand’s take

    https://youtu.be/TpeSVOwys6M?si=GsBl1aP5xUiRmj-s

    2m

    Telegraph

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rKigbrcGNg

    3m


    Arabic

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBh0KycV92Y&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    1m

    Live reaction

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJr7sxEWpbc&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    2.9m


    Fox now

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4boi-mCDUCQ&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    1m

    Times radio

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gd9qktZnVJQ&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    1.2m


    Some weird Russian thing


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0vQ5wZfQQw&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    Nearly 1m

    If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched

    And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X

    I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
    But what is a 'view'?

    Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish?
    Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?

    Or is it both?

    There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
    Personally I can"t be arsed to watch 2 hours of an interview with anyone. I watched a highlights video. I might have a longer version on in the background at some point. I don't think we can really see watching the whole thing all the wsy through as tbe yardstick of success for the initiative. But maybe I'm wrong.
    That the interview occurred at all is newsworthy but we are in dog walking on its hindlegs territory. There does not seem to be much that has come out of it. Perhaps after Putin blamed Boris for sabotaging peace, Carlson should have asked if the same terms are still on the table. (Maybe he did, I've not watched it, but we'd have heard by now.)
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,243
    edited February 11

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Labour 'set to suspend' Rochdale candidate despite grovelling apology to Israel supporters. Labour in chaos, accused of 'throwing' campaign to avoid fallout if they lose to Galloway...

    Yes I know its Skwawkbox but can't see how SKS can do anything else as the BOD demand his head on a plate.

    I placed a bet on GG at 4/1 as the news broke yesterday

    How dare Labour suspend antisemitic conspiracy theorists as party members? Don’t they know the party’s meant to be a haven for racists and weirdos?

    (A more pertinent question would be, why did they pick the silly sod in the first place?)
    Paid Israeli lobbyist led the shortlisting panel

    We done Luke.

    Who do you want to win in Rochdale??
    Is that an actual reply, or are you just trolling?

    Because there would be a certain irony if in response to a post about antisemitic* conspiracy theorists you put forward an antisemitic conspiracy theory...

    *Autocorrect tried to make that 'antiepstic' for some reason...
    Well Luke Akehurst is head of Israel First and is paid to lobby on behalf of Israel in that role.

    He also led the shortlisting panel via his NEC role.

    Which Antisemitic conspiracy theory have I put forward?

    And btw I note you are unable to answer who you want to win in Rochdale
    Your elision in your first post said, in effect, that he was paid by Israel to manage the selection panel.

    Which seems, to put it mildly, slightly unlikely. And would count as an antisemitic conspiracy theory.

    (Do you also mean 'We Believe in Israel' rather than 'Israel first'? He's secretary of Labour First which is different.)

    I don't really care who wins in Rochdale, frankly. I don't think it's a significant by-election, unlike Wellingborough.

    I would prefer it not to be Galloway who makes Mosley look like a moderate these days, but I'd be surprised if it was. The real irony and what I presume Ali is nervous about when he made these stupid remarks is if he takes enough of the vote off Labour to let the Tories or (less probably) the Liberal Democrats through the middle.
    I said he was paid to lobby for Israel which is the prime purpose of the lobby group we believe in Israel which he is paid to represent.

    I said he chaired the shortlisting panel which he did.

    I did not say "he was paid by Israel to manage the selection panel."

    My first post said "paid Israeli lobbyist led the shortlisting panel"

    That is 100% correct no matter how much you try to claim otherwise nor is it antisemitic

    Stop making stuff up and claiming stuff is anti-semitic when it isn't.

    It is funny though to see you squirm over the SKS Candidate for Rochdale and not have a horse in the race.

    I am not the one squirming here...or making stuff up.

    Just to confirm - you accept you were wrong about which organisations he leads, in order to promote a false picture of his views?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,243

    ydoethur said:

    Labour 'set to suspend' Rochdale candidate despite grovelling apology to Israel supporters. Labour in chaos, accused of 'throwing' campaign to avoid fallout if they lose to Galloway...

    Yes I know its Skwawkbox but can't see how SKS can do anything else as the BOD demand his head on a plate.

    I placed a bet on GG at 4/1 as the news broke yesterday

    How dare Labour suspend antisemitic conspiracy theorists as party members? Don’t they know the party’s meant to be a haven for racists and weirdos?

    (A more pertinent question would be, why did they pick the silly sod in the first place?)
    Ali is a former council leader and head of the Labour group on Lancashire County Council. The original allegation, which I described yesterday as tenuous, was that Ali had been on the committee of a mosque that had recently hosted radical speakers. The Jewish Chronicle reported this but did not splash it. It also mentioned that a Muslim site complained that Ali had been a government anti-terrorism adviser and therefore not Islamist.
    https://www.thejc.com/lets-talk/why-has-labours-rochdale-candidate-fundraised-for-a-mosque-that-hosted-extremists-ln6owl6f

    Since then, the Mail reports a recording of Ali, well:-

    Outrage after Labour candidate claims Israel deliberately allowed 1,400 of its citizens to be massacred on October 7 in order to give it the 'green light' to invade Gaza
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13069671/Outrage-Labour-candidate-claims-Israel-deliberately-allowed-1-400-citizens-massacred-October-7-order-green-light-invade-Gaza.html
    So it seems the panel made a logical decision at the time and Ali said something stupid since.

    In which case, fair enough to Labour. They were unlucky.

    But I can't see how he survives saying it. Even our own resident antisemites don't suggest Israel deliberately allowed 7th October, although the more we know the more spectacular the failure of the Israeli government under Netanyahu looks.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,591
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Labour 'set to suspend' Rochdale candidate despite grovelling apology to Israel supporters. Labour in chaos, accused of 'throwing' campaign to avoid fallout if they lose to Galloway...

    Yes I know its Skwawkbox but can't see how SKS can do anything else as the BOD demand his head on a plate.

    I placed a bet on GG at 4/1 as the news broke yesterday

    How dare Labour suspend antisemitic conspiracy theorists as party members? Don’t they know the party’s meant to be a haven for racists and weirdos?

    (A more pertinent question would be, why did they pick the silly sod in the first place?)
    Paid Israeli lobbyist led the shortlisting panel

    We done Luke.

    Who do you want to win in Rochdale??
    Is that an actual reply, or are you just trolling?

    Because there would be a certain irony if in response to a post about antisemitic* conspiracy theorists you put forward an antisemitic conspiracy theory...

    *Autocorrect tried to make that 'antiepstic' for some reason...
    Well Luke Akehurst is head of Israel First and is paid to lobby on behalf of Israel in that role.

    He also led the shortlisting panel via his NEC role.

    Which Antisemitic conspiracy theory have I put forward?

    And btw I note you are unable to answer who you want to win in Rochdale
    Your elision in your first post said, in effect, that he was paid by Israel to manage the selection panel.

    Which seems, to put it mildly, slightly unlikely. And would count as an antisemitic conspiracy theory.

    (Do you also mean 'We Believe in Israel' rather than 'Israel first'? He's secretary of Labour First which is different.)

    I don't really care who wins in Rochdale, frankly. I don't think it's a significant by-election, unlike Wellingborough.

    I would prefer it not to be Galloway who makes Mosley look like a moderate these days, but I'd be surprised if it was. The real irony and what I presume Ali is nervous about when he made these stupid remarks is if he takes enough of the vote off Labour to let the Tories or (less probably) the Liberal Democrats through the middle.
    I said he was paid to lobby for Israel which is the prime purpose of the lobby group we believe in Israel which he is paid to represent.

    I said he chaired the shortlisting panel which he did.

    I did not say "he was paid by Israel to manage the selection panel."

    My first post said "paid Israeli lobbyist led the shortlisting panel"

    That is 100% correct no matter how much you try to claim otherwise nor is it antisemitic

    Stop making stuff up and claiming stuff is anti-semitic when it isn't.

    It is funny though to see you squirm over the SKS Candidate for Rochdale and not have a horse in the race.

    I am not the one squirming here...or making stuff up.
    So you agree My first post said "paid Israeli lobbyist led the shortlisting panel"

    That is 100% correct no matter how much you try to claim otherwise nor is it antisemitic

  • ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Labour 'set to suspend' Rochdale candidate despite grovelling apology to Israel supporters. Labour in chaos, accused of 'throwing' campaign to avoid fallout if they lose to Galloway...

    Yes I know its Skwawkbox but can't see how SKS can do anything else as the BOD demand his head on a plate.

    I placed a bet on GG at 4/1 as the news broke yesterday

    How dare Labour suspend antisemitic conspiracy theorists as party members? Don’t they know the party’s meant to be a haven for racists and weirdos?

    (A more pertinent question would be, why did they pick the silly sod in the first place?)
    Ali is a former council leader and head of the Labour group on Lancashire County Council. The original allegation, which I described yesterday as tenuous, was that Ali had been on the committee of a mosque that had recently hosted radical speakers. The Jewish Chronicle reported this but did not splash it. It also mentioned that a Muslim site complained that Ali had been a government anti-terrorism adviser and therefore not Islamist.
    https://www.thejc.com/lets-talk/why-has-labours-rochdale-candidate-fundraised-for-a-mosque-that-hosted-extremists-ln6owl6f

    Since then, the Mail reports a recording of Ali, well:-

    Outrage after Labour candidate claims Israel deliberately allowed 1,400 of its citizens to be massacred on October 7 in order to give it the 'green light' to invade Gaza
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13069671/Outrage-Labour-candidate-claims-Israel-deliberately-allowed-1-400-citizens-massacred-October-7-order-green-light-invade-Gaza.html
    So it seems the panel made a logical decision at the time and Ali said something stupid since.

    In which case, fair enough to Labour. They were unlucky.

    But I can't see how he survives saying it. Even our own resident antisemites don't suggest Israel deliberately allowed 7th October, although the more we know the more spectacular the failure of the Israeli government under Netanyahu looks.
    Survives in what sense? Labour can suspend the campaign and expel him, but surely it is too late to remove him as a candidate? Most likely he will sit as an independent MP (if elected!) until the general election next January.
  • RIVER SEARCH Two bodies discovered in River Thames ‘not linked’ to Abdul Ezedi as hunt for Clapham attacker continues
    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/25858745/river-thames-abdul-ezedi-clapham-attack/

    Makes you wonder how many deaths go unremarked each year, if a search for one body has found two others in the same narrow stretch of water. Perhaps someone should develop an AI underwater drone to search for corpses year-round.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 14,308
    The record to beat for this bet is the 15.8% margin in the second round in 2000 between Livingstone and Norris. That margin was 11.9% in the first round, giving some indication of how much harder it will be to reach a high margin in a FPTP contest.

    That said, the 2024 election is perfectly timed to create the maximum margin of victory. If Khan had only stood aside after two terms to allow for a fresh candidate and we might then expect a real blowout.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,591

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Labour 'set to suspend' Rochdale candidate despite grovelling apology to Israel supporters. Labour in chaos, accused of 'throwing' campaign to avoid fallout if they lose to Galloway...

    Yes I know its Skwawkbox but can't see how SKS can do anything else as the BOD demand his head on a plate.

    I placed a bet on GG at 4/1 as the news broke yesterday

    How dare Labour suspend antisemitic conspiracy theorists as party members? Don’t they know the party’s meant to be a haven for racists and weirdos?

    (A more pertinent question would be, why did they pick the silly sod in the first place?)
    Ali is a former council leader and head of the Labour group on Lancashire County Council. The original allegation, which I described yesterday as tenuous, was that Ali had been on the committee of a mosque that had recently hosted radical speakers. The Jewish Chronicle reported this but did not splash it. It also mentioned that a Muslim site complained that Ali had been a government anti-terrorism adviser and therefore not Islamist.
    https://www.thejc.com/lets-talk/why-has-labours-rochdale-candidate-fundraised-for-a-mosque-that-hosted-extremists-ln6owl6f

    Since then, the Mail reports a recording of Ali, well:-

    Outrage after Labour candidate claims Israel deliberately allowed 1,400 of its citizens to be massacred on October 7 in order to give it the 'green light' to invade Gaza
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13069671/Outrage-Labour-candidate-claims-Israel-deliberately-allowed-1-400-citizens-massacred-October-7-order-green-light-invade-Gaza.html
    So it seems the panel made a logical decision at the time and Ali said something stupid since.

    In which case, fair enough to Labour. They were unlucky.

    But I can't see how he survives saying it. Even our own resident antisemites don't suggest Israel deliberately allowed 7th October, although the more we know the more spectacular the failure of the Israeli government under Netanyahu looks.
    Survives in what sense? Labour can suspend the campaign and expel him, but surely it is too late to remove him as a candidate? Most likely he will sit as an independent MP (if elected!) until the general election next January.
    That is the most likely outcome yes.

    I am also pretty sure these words were from November ie before the selection in which case bad due diligence rather than unlucky.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,591
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Labour 'set to suspend' Rochdale candidate despite grovelling apology to Israel supporters. Labour in chaos, accused of 'throwing' campaign to avoid fallout if they lose to Galloway...

    Yes I know its Skwawkbox but can't see how SKS can do anything else as the BOD demand his head on a plate.

    I placed a bet on GG at 4/1 as the news broke yesterday

    How dare Labour suspend antisemitic conspiracy theorists as party members? Don’t they know the party’s meant to be a haven for racists and weirdos?

    (A more pertinent question would be, why did they pick the silly sod in the first place?)
    Ali is a former council leader and head of the Labour group on Lancashire County Council. The original allegation, which I described yesterday as tenuous, was that Ali had been on the committee of a mosque that had recently hosted radical speakers. The Jewish Chronicle reported this but did not splash it. It also mentioned that a Muslim site complained that Ali had been a government anti-terrorism adviser and therefore not Islamist.
    https://www.thejc.com/lets-talk/why-has-labours-rochdale-candidate-fundraised-for-a-mosque-that-hosted-extremists-ln6owl6f

    Since then, the Mail reports a recording of Ali, well:-

    Outrage after Labour candidate claims Israel deliberately allowed 1,400 of its citizens to be massacred on October 7 in order to give it the 'green light' to invade Gaza
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13069671/Outrage-Labour-candidate-claims-Israel-deliberately-allowed-1-400-citizens-massacred-October-7-order-green-light-invade-Gaza.html
    So it seems the panel made a logical decision at the time and Ali said something stupid since.

    In which case, fair enough to Labour. They were unlucky.

    But I can't see how he survives saying it. Even our own resident antisemites don't suggest Israel deliberately allowed 7th October, although the more we know the more spectacular the failure of the Israeli government under Netanyahu looks.
    No again you are wrong the remarks were made soon after the October 7th attacks the shortlisting was well after that.

    Bad due diligence not unlucky

    0/10 try harder
  • The problem with Galloway running “for Gaza” in Rochdale is that it drives division. Like many post-cotton towns, Rochdale has had race issues - amplified by the grooming gangs issue.

    Galloway is seeking the votes of the different British Asian communities (and there are many) - which will drive more aggro. I’ve had a scan through his TwiX feed and he is literally just going for their votes on this one issue.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,591

    The problem with Galloway running “for Gaza” in Rochdale is that it drives division. Like many post-cotton towns, Rochdale has had race issues - amplified by the grooming gangs issue.

    Galloway is seeking the votes of the different British Asian communities (and there are many) - which will drive more aggro. I’ve had a scan through his TwiX feed and he is literally just going for their votes on this one issue.

    I would agree with that.

    Will be interesting to see what percentage of the electorate vote for him rather than Labour

    Free focus group stuff for SKS in that type of ward with that type of demographics.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 44,916
    The New York Times is absolutely pounding Biden on the age issue. I do sense there is a move, in elite Democrat circles, to kick him upstairs, or downstairs, or just anystairs. They are now very worried

    On the front page of the website there are four or five articles saying Fuckyeah this is bad, get rid of the old duffer, and just one short terse column trying to defend him (not very well)

    Perhaps betting positions must be adjusted accordingly. The NYT is powerfully influential for Democrats
  • TazTaz Posts: 10,339
    Labours problem with their pro slaughter stance on Gaza, as some of their core vote perceives it.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/feb/10/labour-mps-facing-wave-of-independent-challengers-over-stance-on-gaza
  • Leon said:

    The New York Times is absolutely pounding Biden on the age issue. I do sense there is a move, in elite Democrat circles, to kick him upstairs, or downstairs, or just anystairs. They are now very worried

    On the front page of the website there are four or five articles saying Fuckyeah this is bad, get rid of the old duffer, and just one short terse column trying to defend him (not very well)

    Perhaps betting positions must be adjusted accordingly. The NYT is powerfully influential for Democrats

    Biden is like Rishi. Everyone agrees he should stand down but no-one agrees on replacing him.
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 4,384
    It never ceases to me amaze me just how stupid some candidates can be . They either forget they made a load of stupid tweets or say something which ends up being filmed .

  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,075

    RIVER SEARCH Two bodies discovered in River Thames ‘not linked’ to Abdul Ezedi as hunt for Clapham attacker continues
    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/25858745/river-thames-abdul-ezedi-clapham-attack/

    Makes you wonder how many deaths go unremarked each year, if a search for one body has found two others in the same narrow stretch of water. Perhaps someone should develop an AI underwater drone to search for corpses year-round.

    A group of men charged with, and paid for by the body, the task of searching the Thames for this purpose is a recurring theme in Paul Doherty's 'Brother Athelstan' long crime/detection series, set in the London of the late 14th century. The books are not bad if you like that sort of thing.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,591

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Labour 'set to suspend' Rochdale candidate despite grovelling apology to Israel supporters. Labour in chaos, accused of 'throwing' campaign to avoid fallout if they lose to Galloway...

    Yes I know its Skwawkbox but can't see how SKS can do anything else as the BOD demand his head on a plate.

    I placed a bet on GG at 4/1 as the news broke yesterday

    How dare Labour suspend antisemitic conspiracy theorists as party members? Don’t they know the party’s meant to be a haven for racists and weirdos?

    (A more pertinent question would be, why did they pick the silly sod in the first place?)
    Ali is a former council leader and head of the Labour group on Lancashire County Council. The original allegation, which I described yesterday as tenuous, was that Ali had been on the committee of a mosque that had recently hosted radical speakers. The Jewish Chronicle reported this but did not splash it. It also mentioned that a Muslim site complained that Ali had been a government anti-terrorism adviser and therefore not Islamist.
    https://www.thejc.com/lets-talk/why-has-labours-rochdale-candidate-fundraised-for-a-mosque-that-hosted-extremists-ln6owl6f

    Since then, the Mail reports a recording of Ali, well:-

    Outrage after Labour candidate claims Israel deliberately allowed 1,400 of its citizens to be massacred on October 7 in order to give it the 'green light' to invade Gaza
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13069671/Outrage-Labour-candidate-claims-Israel-deliberately-allowed-1-400-citizens-massacred-October-7-order-green-light-invade-Gaza.html
    So it seems the panel made a logical decision at the time and Ali said something stupid since.

    In which case, fair enough to Labour. They were unlucky.

    But I can't see how he survives saying it. Even our own resident antisemites don't suggest Israel deliberately allowed 7th October, although the more we know the more spectacular the failure of the Israeli government under Netanyahu looks.
    No again you are wrong the remarks were made soon after the October 7th attacks the shortlisting was well after that.

    Bad due diligence not unlucky

    0/10 try harder
    Tony Lloyd died on 17th January 2024 so Labour shortlisting was clearly after that.

    Ali made his remarks in October or November.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 44,916

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    Where is @rcs1000? is he hiding away in furtive shame?

    The Tucker Putin interview has had 187 MILLION impressions on Twitter, just on Carlson's channel

    https://x.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1755734526678925682?s=20

    And another 12m on Carlson's YoutTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOCWBhuDdDo

    Another 10m on Russian YouTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIbL_MXK8Tg

    And elswhere, endlessly - 3m on Telegraph YouTube, on and on

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rKigbrcGNg

    If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time





    Lol.

    Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.

    It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
    I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long

    The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor

    And that’s not the main platform. X is



    Laughable.
    Ok let’s just add up YouTube

    Carlson’s Youtube

    https://youtu.be/fOCWBhuDdDo?si=CLqzV057bBTF1Hi0

    12m

    Russian YouTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIbL_MXK8Tg

    10m

    Russel brand’s take

    https://youtu.be/TpeSVOwys6M?si=GsBl1aP5xUiRmj-s

    2m

    Telegraph

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rKigbrcGNg

    3m


    Arabic

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBh0KycV92Y&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    1m

    Live reaction

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJr7sxEWpbc&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    2.9m


    Fox now

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4boi-mCDUCQ&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    1m

    Times radio

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gd9qktZnVJQ&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    1.2m


    Some weird Russian thing


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0vQ5wZfQQw&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    Nearly 1m

    If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched

    And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X

    I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
    But what is a 'view'?

    Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish?
    Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?

    Or is it both?

    There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
    Personally I can"t be arsed to watch 2 hours of an interview with anyone. I watched a highlights video. I might have a longer version on in the background at some point. I don't think we can really see watching the whole thing all the wsy through as tbe yardstick of success for the initiative. But maybe I'm wrong.
    Yes, saying the Tucker Putin interview "fell flat" (copyright: @Peter_the_Punter) because only 9 people watched the entire interview is like saying the World Cup in Qatar was a disaster became only 64 people watched every single minute of every single match

    The world doesn't work like that. All Carlson needs - to claim media victory - is a few seconds of eyeballs on his interview, and a massive media frenzy. He has achieved both and then some. He'sgot tens, possibly hundreds of milliions of people catching a glimpse, and he has absolutely caused a shitstorm of global publicity, with him at the centre

    Job done. Extremely well. From his perspective
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 23,498
    edited February 11
    Taz said:

    Labours problem with their pro slaughter stance on Gaza, as some of their core vote perceives it.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/feb/10/labour-mps-facing-wave-of-independent-challengers-over-stance-on-gaza

    Yes, it is interesting that the government has played the Israel/Palestine issue with far more nuance than Labour, calling for pauses and a two-state solution while supporting Israel. As elsewhere, Starmer seems leaden-footed.
  • TazTaz Posts: 10,339
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Labour 'set to suspend' Rochdale candidate despite grovelling apology to Israel supporters. Labour in chaos, accused of 'throwing' campaign to avoid fallout if they lose to Galloway...

    Yes I know its Skwawkbox but can't see how SKS can do anything else as the BOD demand his head on a plate.

    I placed a bet on GG at 4/1 as the news broke yesterday

    How dare Labour suspend antisemitic conspiracy theorists as party members? Don’t they know the party’s meant to be a haven for racists and weirdos?

    (A more pertinent question would be, why did they pick the silly sod in the first place?)
    Ali is a former council leader and head of the Labour group on Lancashire County Council. The original allegation, which I described yesterday as tenuous, was that Ali had been on the committee of a mosque that had recently hosted radical speakers. The Jewish Chronicle reported this but did not splash it. It also mentioned that a Muslim site complained that Ali had been a government anti-terrorism adviser and therefore not Islamist.
    https://www.thejc.com/lets-talk/why-has-labours-rochdale-candidate-fundraised-for-a-mosque-that-hosted-extremists-ln6owl6f

    Since then, the Mail reports a recording of Ali, well:-

    Outrage after Labour candidate claims Israel deliberately allowed 1,400 of its citizens to be massacred on October 7 in order to give it the 'green light' to invade Gaza
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13069671/Outrage-Labour-candidate-claims-Israel-deliberately-allowed-1-400-citizens-massacred-October-7-order-green-light-invade-Gaza.html
    So it seems the panel made a logical decision at the time and Ali said something stupid since.

    In which case, fair enough to Labour. They were unlucky.

    But I can't see how he survives saying it. Even our own resident antisemites don't suggest Israel deliberately allowed 7th October, although the more we know the more spectacular the failure of the Israeli government under Netanyahu looks.

    Tony Lloyd wasn’t even dead when he made these statements.

    Labour have screwed up with the selection.

    BJO’s statement on Luke Akehurst is a fact, it is hardly anti semitic.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 44,916

    Leon said:

    The New York Times is absolutely pounding Biden on the age issue. I do sense there is a move, in elite Democrat circles, to kick him upstairs, or downstairs, or just anystairs. They are now very worried

    On the front page of the website there are four or five articles saying Fuckyeah this is bad, get rid of the old duffer, and just one short terse column trying to defend him (not very well)

    Perhaps betting positions must be adjusted accordingly. The NYT is powerfully influential for Democrats

    Biden is like Rishi. Everyone agrees he should stand down but no-one agrees on replacing him.
    Perhaps

    But this is the NYT turning on Biden. That's like the Telegraph, Times, Sun and Spectator turning on Rishi Sunak, all at once
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,591
    Sounds like a well funded and well coordinated campaign is underway to stand candidates against Labour MPs on the wrong side over Gaza according to the Guardian.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/feb/10/labour-mps-facing-wave-of-independent-challengers-over-stance-on-gaza
  • Leon said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    Where is @rcs1000? is he hiding away in furtive shame?

    The Tucker Putin interview has had 187 MILLION impressions on Twitter, just on Carlson's channel

    https://x.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1755734526678925682?s=20

    And another 12m on Carlson's YoutTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOCWBhuDdDo

    Another 10m on Russian YouTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIbL_MXK8Tg

    And elswhere, endlessly - 3m on Telegraph YouTube, on and on

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rKigbrcGNg

    If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time





    Lol.

    Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.

    It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
    I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long

    The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor

    And that’s not the main platform. X is



    Laughable.
    Ok let’s just add up YouTube

    Carlson’s Youtube

    https://youtu.be/fOCWBhuDdDo?si=CLqzV057bBTF1Hi0

    12m

    Russian YouTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIbL_MXK8Tg

    10m

    Russel brand’s take

    https://youtu.be/TpeSVOwys6M?si=GsBl1aP5xUiRmj-s

    2m

    Telegraph

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rKigbrcGNg

    3m


    Arabic

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBh0KycV92Y&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    1m

    Live reaction

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJr7sxEWpbc&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    2.9m


    Fox now

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4boi-mCDUCQ&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    1m

    Times radio

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gd9qktZnVJQ&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    1.2m


    Some weird Russian thing


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0vQ5wZfQQw&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    Nearly 1m

    If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched

    And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X

    I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
    But what is a 'view'?

    Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish?
    Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?

    Or is it both?

    There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
    Personally I can"t be arsed to watch 2 hours of an interview with anyone. I watched a highlights video. I might have a longer version on in the background at some point. I don't think we can really see watching the whole thing all the wsy through as tbe yardstick of success for the initiative. But maybe I'm wrong.
    Yes, saying the Tucker Putin interview "fell flat" (copyright: @Peter_the_Punter) because only 9 people watched the entire interview is like saying the World Cup in Qatar was a disaster became only 64 people watched every single minute of every single match

    The world doesn't work like that. All Carlson needs - to claim media victory - is a few seconds of eyeballs on his interview, and a massive media frenzy. He has achieved both and then some. He'sgot tens, possibly hundreds of milliions of people catching a glimpse, and he has absolutely caused a shitstorm of global publicity, with him at the centre

    Job done. Extremely well. From his perspective
    Yes, Tucker on Twitter is the new What.Three.Words.

    It will change the world.
  • TazTaz Posts: 10,339

    Taz said:

    Labours problem with their pro slaughter stance on Gaza, as some of their core vote perceives it.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/feb/10/labour-mps-facing-wave-of-independent-challengers-over-stance-on-gaza

    Yes, it is interesting that the government has played the Israel/Palestine issue with far more nuance than Labour, calling for pauses and a two-state solution while supporting Israel. As elsewhere, Starmer seems leaden-footed.
    Yes, the govt has got many things wrong but seems to be doing better on Gaza than labour. The govt is a critical friend of the Israeli govt, Labour is a just a devotee of Likud.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,075
    Taz said:

    Labours problem with their pro slaughter stance on Gaza, as some of their core vote perceives it.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/feb/10/labour-mps-facing-wave-of-independent-challengers-over-stance-on-gaza

    There are no positions you can take on this and most Middle East issues without being open to accusations of being pro slaughter.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,075

    Taz said:

    Labours problem with their pro slaughter stance on Gaza, as some of their core vote perceives it.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/feb/10/labour-mps-facing-wave-of-independent-challengers-over-stance-on-gaza

    Yes, it is interesting that the government has played the Israel/Palestine issue with far more nuance than Labour, calling for pauses and a two-state solution while supporting Israel. As elsewhere, Starmer seems leaden-footed.
    If Labour didn't have a history of being the friend of Hamas and anti Semitism it would be easier for Starmer to steer a different course. BTW Labour supports the two state solution.
  • glwglw Posts: 9,509

    "Trump says he would 'encourage' Russia to attack Nato allies who do not pay their bills"

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68266447

    Anyone still a Trump fan is outing themselves as pro-Russia/Putin at this point. If there was ever a doubt about Trump being a dangerous idiot that is surely over now.
  • TazTaz Posts: 10,339

    Sounds like a well funded and well coordinated campaign is underway to stand candidates against Labour MPs on the wrong side over Gaza according to the Guardian.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/feb/10/labour-mps-facing-wave-of-independent-challengers-over-stance-on-gaza

    I said on here, around a month or so ago, labours stance on Gaza could cost it Muslim votes and was derided for saying so.

    This could easily have an effect on 15-20 seats.

    If Streeting was under pressure I’d expect labour to flood the seat with resources.
  • Of course there is an alternative to George “For Rochdale, for Gaza” Galloway and to the shamed Labour and Green and ReFUK candidates. Rochdale had a LibDem MP as recently as 2010. Time for another.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,591
    algarkirk said:

    Taz said:

    Labours problem with their pro slaughter stance on Gaza, as some of their core vote perceives it.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/feb/10/labour-mps-facing-wave-of-independent-challengers-over-stance-on-gaza

    There are no positions you can take on this and most Middle East issues without being open to accusations of being pro slaughter.
    There are.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,182

    Sounds like a well funded and well coordinated campaign is underway to stand candidates against Labour MPs on the wrong side over Gaza according to the Guardian.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/feb/10/labour-mps-facing-wave-of-independent-challengers-over-stance-on-gaza

    Hamas standing in a UK general election. What joy.
  • TazTaz Posts: 10,339

    Sounds like a well funded and well coordinated campaign is underway to stand candidates against Labour MPs on the wrong side over Gaza according to the Guardian.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/feb/10/labour-mps-facing-wave-of-independent-challengers-over-stance-on-gaza

    This forthcoming initiative won’t help labour either.

    The govt have already expressed their concerns. Labour will probably sit on their hands given current form.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-68266335
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,465
    kamski said:

    Carlson/Putin: Boris is still trending on TwiX with the revelation that it was Boris who prevented a peaceful end to the Russia/Ukraine kerfuffle. Here is one such post (with 45-second video clip boosting Carlson's viewing figures):

    Vladimir Putin claims he was ready to end war 18 months ago but Boris Johnson scuppered deal by telling Ukraine leaders it was 'better to fight Russia'
    https://twitter.com/i/status/1756508944728826361

    But the claim is rubbish, as has been shown before.

    It's a bit of a litmus test, really: the people who believe this are the people who are so down the BDS hole that they believe Putin over Boris.

    A somewhat different view:
    https://www.thebureau.news/p/no-the-west-did-not-sabotage-an-early
    What are you talking about? Of course the claim is rubbish. No-one here will believe it. But the point is, it is spreading and these clips explain the viewing figures Leon & rcs1000 are arguing about at the start of the thread.

    What else might be interesting is who is spreading the clips. As I said yesterday, there are a lot of blue ticks for a Russian bot farm. But I do not have the tools to follow this up.
    Then perhaps that's what you should have said, rather than just dropping it like that. You know, say; "It's rubbish," rather than spreading disinfo.

    Another interesting point about this stupid interview is that, allegedly, the Russian-language version for domestic audiences is (ahem) somewhat cut. Another example of Russia saying different things to different audiences.

    As to who's spreading it: apparently, people like you... :(
    Don't take this the wrong way but, you're coming across as slightly deranged. DJL was obviously not spreading disinfo.
    Filling in while alter ego at supermarket
  • LeonLeon Posts: 44,916
    In the context of questions over Biden's infirmity, it is perhaps unfortunate that a new video has emerged where Kamala Harris seems to be six large martinis into a speech

    https://x.com/The_Real_Feisty/status/1756311591459365353?s=20
  • algarkirk said:

    Taz said:

    Labours problem with their pro slaughter stance on Gaza, as some of their core vote perceives it.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/feb/10/labour-mps-facing-wave-of-independent-challengers-over-stance-on-gaza

    There are no positions you can take on this and most Middle East issues without being open to accusations of being pro slaughter.
    There are.
    There aren’t. We need the fighting to stop and some kind of international peacekeeping (likely led by the Saudis as I suggested when this started).

    Problem is that all the Free Palestine shit is pro Hamas pro antisemitism pro River to the Sea. Hamas need to free the hostages and stop firing Iranian weapons into Israel as well as the IDF stopping its now futile military operation.

    In any conflict both sides think they are the victims and the enemy the bad people. In Gaza both sides are wrong. We cannot go back to Status Quo Ante.
  • In any case, “For Rochdale, For Gaza”? His campaign literature is Galloway on a Palestinian Flag FFS.

    What does Gaza have to do with Wardleworth or Kirkholt?
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,465

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    Where is @rcs1000? is he hiding away in furtive shame?

    The Tucker Putin interview has had 187 MILLION impressions on Twitter, just on Carlson's channel

    https://x.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1755734526678925682?s=20

    And another 12m on Carlson's YoutTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOCWBhuDdDo

    Another 10m on Russian YouTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIbL_MXK8Tg

    And elswhere, endlessly - 3m on Telegraph YouTube, on and on

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rKigbrcGNg

    If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time





    Lol.

    Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.

    It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
    I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long

    The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor

    And that’s not the main platform. X is



    Laughable.
    Ok let’s just add up YouTube

    Carlson’s Youtube

    https://youtu.be/fOCWBhuDdDo?si=CLqzV057bBTF1Hi0

    12m

    Russian YouTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIbL_MXK8Tg

    10m

    Russel brand’s take

    https://youtu.be/TpeSVOwys6M?si=GsBl1aP5xUiRmj-s

    2m

    Telegraph

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rKigbrcGNg

    3m


    Arabic

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBh0KycV92Y&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    1m

    Live reaction

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJr7sxEWpbc&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    2.9m


    Fox now

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4boi-mCDUCQ&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    1m

    Times radio

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gd9qktZnVJQ&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    1.2m


    Some weird Russian thing


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0vQ5wZfQQw&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    Nearly 1m

    If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched

    And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X

    I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
    But what is a 'view'?

    Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish?
    Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?

    Or is it both?

    There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
    Personally I can"t be arsed to watch 2 hours of an interview with anyone. I watched a highlights video. I might have a longer version on in the background at some point. I don't think we can really see watching the whole thing all the wsy through as tbe yardstick of success for the initiative. But maybe I'm wrong.
    That the interview occurred at all is newsworthy but we are in dog walking on its hindlegs territory. There does not seem to be much that has come out of it. Perhaps after Putin blamed Boris for sabotaging peace, Carlson should have asked if the same terms are still on the table. (Maybe he did, I've not watched it, but we'd have heard by now.)
    Who gives a monkey's chuff. 2 hours of a mental murdering despot, being butt licked by a thick publicity hungry American crapbag, as he talks verbal diahorrea.
    I would not even deign to look at a headline about it, by morons for morons.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 30,705
    edited February 11
    Scott_xP said:

    ...

    Shockingly good.

    I do hope Biden can be persuaded to stand aside but somehow I doubt it.

    (Although, I did forecast way back that if Biden was going to pull out he wouldn't do so until February 24; still two and a half weeks to go.)
  • LeonLeon Posts: 44,916
    malcolmg said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    Where is @rcs1000? is he hiding away in furtive shame?

    The Tucker Putin interview has had 187 MILLION impressions on Twitter, just on Carlson's channel

    https://x.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1755734526678925682?s=20

    And another 12m on Carlson's YoutTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOCWBhuDdDo

    Another 10m on Russian YouTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIbL_MXK8Tg

    And elswhere, endlessly - 3m on Telegraph YouTube, on and on

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rKigbrcGNg

    If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time





    Lol.

    Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.

    It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
    I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long

    The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor

    And that’s not the main platform. X is



    Laughable.
    Ok let’s just add up YouTube

    Carlson’s Youtube

    https://youtu.be/fOCWBhuDdDo?si=CLqzV057bBTF1Hi0

    12m

    Russian YouTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIbL_MXK8Tg

    10m

    Russel brand’s take

    https://youtu.be/TpeSVOwys6M?si=GsBl1aP5xUiRmj-s

    2m

    Telegraph

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rKigbrcGNg

    3m


    Arabic

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBh0KycV92Y&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    1m

    Live reaction

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJr7sxEWpbc&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    2.9m


    Fox now

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4boi-mCDUCQ&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    1m

    Times radio

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gd9qktZnVJQ&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    1.2m


    Some weird Russian thing


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0vQ5wZfQQw&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    Nearly 1m

    If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched

    And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X

    I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
    But what is a 'view'?

    Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish?
    Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?

    Or is it both?

    There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
    Personally I can"t be arsed to watch 2 hours of an interview with anyone. I watched a highlights video. I might have a longer version on in the background at some point. I don't think we can really see watching the whole thing all the wsy through as tbe yardstick of success for the initiative. But maybe I'm wrong.
    That the interview occurred at all is newsworthy but we are in dog walking on its hindlegs territory. There does not seem to be much that has come out of it. Perhaps after Putin blamed Boris for sabotaging peace, Carlson should have asked if the same terms are still on the table. (Maybe he did, I've not watched it, but we'd have heard by now.)
    Who gives a monkey's chuff. 2 hours of a mental murdering despot, being butt licked by a thick publicity hungry American crapbag, as he talks verbal diahorrea.
    I would not even deign to look at a headline about it, by morons for morons.
    Yet you seem quite keen to talk about it. Odd
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,465

    algarkirk said:

    Taz said:

    Labours problem with their pro slaughter stance on Gaza, as some of their core vote perceives it.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/feb/10/labour-mps-facing-wave-of-independent-challengers-over-stance-on-gaza

    There are no positions you can take on this and most Middle East issues without being open to accusations of being pro slaughter.
    There are.
    There aren’t. We need the fighting to stop and some kind of international peacekeeping (likely led by the Saudis as I suggested when this started).

    Problem is that all the Free Palestine shit is pro Hamas pro antisemitism pro River to the Sea. Hamas need to free the hostages and stop firing Iranian weapons into Israel as well as the IDF stopping its now futile military operation.

    In any conflict both sides think they are the victims and the enemy the bad people. In Gaza both sides are wrong. We cannot go back to Status Quo Ante.
    No solution and teh worst players are the Arab nations who are a bunch of self seeking cowardly rats. Not one of them lifting a hand to help and most if not all funding nutters of one stripe or colour.
  • eekeek Posts: 24,504
    Taz said:

    Sounds like a well funded and well coordinated campaign is underway to stand candidates against Labour MPs on the wrong side over Gaza according to the Guardian.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/feb/10/labour-mps-facing-wave-of-independent-challengers-over-stance-on-gaza

    I said on here, around a month or so ago, labours stance on Gaza could cost it Muslim votes and was derided for saying so.

    This could easily have an effect on 15-20 seats.

    If Streeting was under pressure I’d expect labour to flood the seat with resources.
    I think the maths shows that the 15-20 seats impacted have such a significant Labour majority that it makes no difference.

    Plus I simply don't see the point of the protest - it's not like we can nuke Israel to stop them executing their plan - which is about the only thing that would stop the current Israeli government from continuing it's current plan.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,465

    Sounds like a well funded and well coordinated campaign is underway to stand candidates against Labour MPs on the wrong side over Gaza according to the Guardian.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/feb/10/labour-mps-facing-wave-of-independent-challengers-over-stance-on-gaza

    Hamas standing in a UK general election. What joy.
    Plenty of them in UK for sure. You can see our future now.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 60,479

    "Trump says he would 'encourage' Russia to attack Nato allies who do not pay their bills"

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68266447

    The NYT still has "Why age issue is hurting Biden" as a headline above this.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 44,916

    Scott_xP said:

    ...

    Shockingly good.

    I do hope Biden can be persuaded to stand aside but somehow I doubt it.

    (Although, I did forecast way back that if Biden was going to pull out he wouldn't do so until February 24; still two and a half weeks to go.)
    There's a theory on TwiX - quite plausible - that Biden realised he was a bit old for the job in 2016, so didn't go for it, then thought he should have a go nonetheless to stop Trump in 2020, but he's now SO demented he doesn't realise he's demented, so he ploughs on

    It sounds painfully believable
  • Leon said:

    In the context of questions over Biden's infirmity, it is perhaps unfortunate that a new video has emerged where Kamala Harris seems to be six large martinis into a speech

    https://x.com/The_Real_Feisty/status/1756311591459365353?s=20

    But has she encouraged Russia to invade anywhere?

    Distinct echoes of the London mayoral race here. Biden-Harris, like Khan, are more than distinctly flawed. But when the alternative is as bad as it is, that's less important.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,465
    Taz said:

    Sounds like a well funded and well coordinated campaign is underway to stand candidates against Labour MPs on the wrong side over Gaza according to the Guardian.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/feb/10/labour-mps-facing-wave-of-independent-challengers-over-stance-on-gaza

    I said on here, around a month or so ago, labours stance on Gaza could cost it Muslim votes and was derided for saying so.

    This could easily have an effect on 15-20 seats.

    If Streeting was under pressure I’d expect labour to flood the seat with resources.
    Be poetic justice for them opening the floodgates to immigration all those years ago, and we end up with another 5 years of the Tories.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 4,129
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    Where is @rcs1000? is he hiding away in furtive shame?

    The Tucker Putin interview has had 187 MILLION impressions on Twitter, just on Carlson's channel

    https://x.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1755734526678925682?s=20

    And another 12m on Carlson's YoutTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOCWBhuDdDo

    Another 10m on Russian YouTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIbL_MXK8Tg

    And elswhere, endlessly - 3m on Telegraph YouTube, on and on

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rKigbrcGNg

    If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time





    Lol.

    Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.

    It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
    I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long

    The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor

    And that’s not the main platform. X is



    Laughable.
    Ok let’s just add up YouTube

    Carlson’s Youtube

    https://youtu.be/fOCWBhuDdDo?si=CLqzV057bBTF1Hi0

    12m

    Russian YouTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIbL_MXK8Tg

    10m

    Russel brand’s take

    https://youtu.be/TpeSVOwys6M?si=GsBl1aP5xUiRmj-s

    2m

    Telegraph

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rKigbrcGNg

    3m


    Arabic

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBh0KycV92Y&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    1m

    Live reaction

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJr7sxEWpbc&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    2.9m


    Fox now

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4boi-mCDUCQ&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    1m

    Times radio

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gd9qktZnVJQ&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    1.2m


    Some weird Russian thing


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0vQ5wZfQQw&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    Nearly 1m

    If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched

    And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X

    I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
    But what is a 'view'?

    Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish?
    Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?

    Or is it both?

    There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
    Personally I can"t be arsed to watch 2 hours of an interview with anyone. I watched a highlights video. I might have a longer version on in the background at some point. I don't think we can really see watching the whole thing all the wsy through as tbe yardstick of success for the initiative. But maybe I'm wrong.
    Yes, saying the Tucker Putin interview "fell flat" (copyright: @Peter_the_Punter) because only 9 people watched the entire interview is like saying the World Cup in Qatar was a disaster became only 64 people watched every single minute of every single match

    The world doesn't work like that. All Carlson needs - to claim media victory - is a few seconds of eyeballs on his interview, and a massive media frenzy. He has achieved both and then some. He'sgot tens, possibly hundreds of milliions of people catching a glimpse, and he has absolutely caused a shitstorm of global publicity, with him at the centre

    Job done. Extremely well. From his perspective
    Probably Carlson is happy with the extra publicity. He might not care that lots of it is bad publicity, but it hasn't done his claim to be a journalist much good.

    But has the interview persuaded anyone that Putin is the good guy here? I doubt it. In that sense it fell flat.

    And in real life I haven't seen any interest whatsoever, have you?

    Even on here there is only a meta-argument about how big a deal the interview was, rather than any discussion of the interview itself.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 44,916
    Nigelb said:

    "Trump says he would 'encourage' Russia to attack Nato allies who do not pay their bills"

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68266447

    The NYT still has "Why age issue is hurting Biden" as a headline above this.
    Yes, they are definitely gunning for Biden. Actual senior columnists saying Biden has to go

    There is just one terse column from Paul Krugman trying to defend him, but it is feeble and doesn't persuade, and has been hidden away
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 60,479
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    The New York Times is absolutely pounding Biden on the age issue. I do sense there is a move, in elite Democrat circles, to kick him upstairs, or downstairs, or just anystairs. They are now very worried

    On the front page of the website there are four or five articles saying Fuckyeah this is bad, get rid of the old duffer, and just one short terse column trying to defend him (not very well)

    Perhaps betting positions must be adjusted accordingly. The NYT is powerfully influential for Democrats

    Biden is like Rishi. Everyone agrees he should stand down but no-one agrees on replacing him.
    Perhaps

    But this is the NYT turning on Biden. That's like the Telegraph, Times, Sun and Spectator turning on Rishi Sunak, all at once
    It's not the NYT 'turning' at all.
    It's entirely consistent with their longstanding editorial stance.

    The idea that the NYT is the Democrats house publication like the Telegraph is for the Tories is deluded.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 60,479
    Leon said:

    Nigelb said:

    "Trump says he would 'encourage' Russia to attack Nato allies who do not pay their bills"

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68266447

    The NYT still has "Why age issue is hurting Biden" as a headline above this.
    Yes, they are definitely gunning for Biden. Actual senior columnists saying Biden has to go

    There is just one terse column from Paul Krugman trying to defend him, but it is feeble and doesn't persuade, and has been hidden away
    Indeed.

    If they were engaging in journalism, rather than opinion, they would have reported this, too.
    https://www.justsecurity.org/92090/the-real-robert-hur-report-versus-what-you-read-in-the-news/
  • kjhkjh Posts: 10,351

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    Where is @rcs1000? is he hiding away in furtive shame?

    The Tucker Putin interview has had 187 MILLION impressions on Twitter, just on Carlson's channel

    https://x.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1755734526678925682?s=20

    And another 12m on Carlson's YoutTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOCWBhuDdDo

    Another 10m on Russian YouTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIbL_MXK8Tg

    And elswhere, endlessly - 3m on Telegraph YouTube, on and on

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rKigbrcGNg

    If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time





    Lol.

    Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.

    It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
    I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long

    The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor

    And that’s not the main platform. X is



    Laughable.
    Ok let’s just add up YouTube

    Carlson’s Youtube

    https://youtu.be/fOCWBhuDdDo?si=CLqzV057bBTF1Hi0

    12m

    Russian YouTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIbL_MXK8Tg

    10m

    Russel brand’s take

    https://youtu.be/TpeSVOwys6M?si=GsBl1aP5xUiRmj-s

    2m

    Telegraph

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rKigbrcGNg

    3m


    Arabic

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBh0KycV92Y&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    1m

    Live reaction

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJr7sxEWpbc&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    2.9m


    Fox now

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4boi-mCDUCQ&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    1m

    Times radio

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gd9qktZnVJQ&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    1.2m


    Some weird Russian thing


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0vQ5wZfQQw&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    Nearly 1m

    If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched

    And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X

    I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
    But what is a 'view'?

    Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish?
    Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?

    Or is it both?

    There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
    Personally I can"t be arsed to watch 2 hours of an interview with anyone. I watched a highlights video. I might have a longer version on in the background at some point. I don't think we can really see watching the whole thing all the wsy through as tbe yardstick of success for the initiative. But maybe I'm wrong.
    Yes, saying the Tucker Putin interview "fell flat" (copyright: @Peter_the_Punter) because only 9 people watched the entire interview is like saying the World Cup in Qatar was a disaster became only 64 people watched every single minute of every single match

    The world doesn't work like that. All Carlson needs - to claim media victory - is a few seconds of eyeballs on his interview, and a massive media frenzy. He has achieved both and then some. He'sgot tens, possibly hundreds of milliions of people catching a glimpse, and he has absolutely caused a shitstorm of global publicity, with him at the centre

    Job done. Extremely well. From his perspective
    Yes, Tucker on Twitter is the new What.Three.Words.

    It will change the world.
    And the Oscar for the most gullible person on the planet goes to @Leon
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,126
    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    The New York Times is absolutely pounding Biden on the age issue. I do sense there is a move, in elite Democrat circles, to kick him upstairs, or downstairs, or just anystairs. They are now very worried

    On the front page of the website there are four or five articles saying Fuckyeah this is bad, get rid of the old duffer, and just one short terse column trying to defend him (not very well)

    Perhaps betting positions must be adjusted accordingly. The NYT is powerfully influential for Democrats

    Biden is like Rishi. Everyone agrees he should stand down but no-one agrees on replacing him.
    Perhaps

    But this is the NYT turning on Biden. That's like the Telegraph, Times, Sun and Spectator turning on Rishi Sunak, all at once
    It's not the NYT 'turning' at all.
    It's entirely consistent with their longstanding editorial stance.

    The idea that the NYT is the Democrats house publication like the Telegraph is for the Tories is deluded.
    Yup, it's the exact same setup as their Hillary emails coverage. Were they gunning for Hillary Clinton back then? Well, I'm sure they don't particularly mind if Trump wins because he's great for their business but no, that's not what was happening.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 44,916
    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    The New York Times is absolutely pounding Biden on the age issue. I do sense there is a move, in elite Democrat circles, to kick him upstairs, or downstairs, or just anystairs. They are now very worried

    On the front page of the website there are four or five articles saying Fuckyeah this is bad, get rid of the old duffer, and just one short terse column trying to defend him (not very well)

    Perhaps betting positions must be adjusted accordingly. The NYT is powerfully influential for Democrats

    Biden is like Rishi. Everyone agrees he should stand down but no-one agrees on replacing him.
    Perhaps

    But this is the NYT turning on Biden. That's like the Telegraph, Times, Sun and Spectator turning on Rishi Sunak, all at once
    It's not the NYT 'turning' at all.
    It's entirely consistent with their longstanding editorial stance.

    The idea that the NYT is the Democrats house publication like the Telegraph is for the Tories is deluded.
    I know people that work on the NYT. It is absolutely the Democrats' Journal of Record, and is the most influential legacy media voice in Democrat circles

    Tho it is perhaps more like the Guardian vis a vis Labour (only more powerful), than the Telegraph vis a vis Tories
  • glwglw Posts: 9,509
    edited February 11
    kamski said:

    But has the interview persuaded anyone that Putin is the good guy here? I doubt it. In that sense it fell flat.

    Even MAGA idiots on Reddit are asking "is Carlson making us look bad by interviewing this nutter?" The only thing unfiltered Putin persuades people of is that the man is a crank.
  • TheValiantTheValiant Posts: 1,653
    ydoethur said:

    "Trump says he would 'encourage' Russia to attack Nato allies who do not pay their bills"

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68266447

    Hotel business must be really struggling if he's thinking of going to those lengths to collect on debts.
    Trump seems to see everything as transactional, and 'zero sum game'.
    He wins, you have to lose. If you lose, he's won. The idea of 'win-win' doesn't enter his head.

    If you have a 'contract' then you need to do what you say immediately, or else he won't keep up his end of the deal (and indeed, often won't keep up his end of the deal anyway because he should be allowed to shout 'bankrupt' and get away with everything scott-free).
  • LeonLeon Posts: 44,916
    kamski said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    Where is @rcs1000? is he hiding away in furtive shame?

    The Tucker Putin interview has had 187 MILLION impressions on Twitter, just on Carlson's channel

    https://x.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1755734526678925682?s=20

    And another 12m on Carlson's YoutTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOCWBhuDdDo

    Another 10m on Russian YouTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIbL_MXK8Tg

    And elswhere, endlessly - 3m on Telegraph YouTube, on and on

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rKigbrcGNg

    If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time





    Lol.

    Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.

    It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
    I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long

    The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor

    And that’s not the main platform. X is



    Laughable.
    Ok let’s just add up YouTube

    Carlson’s Youtube

    https://youtu.be/fOCWBhuDdDo?si=CLqzV057bBTF1Hi0

    12m

    Russian YouTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIbL_MXK8Tg

    10m

    Russel brand’s take

    https://youtu.be/TpeSVOwys6M?si=GsBl1aP5xUiRmj-s

    2m

    Telegraph

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rKigbrcGNg

    3m


    Arabic

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBh0KycV92Y&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    1m

    Live reaction

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJr7sxEWpbc&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    2.9m


    Fox now

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4boi-mCDUCQ&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    1m

    Times radio

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gd9qktZnVJQ&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    1.2m


    Some weird Russian thing


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0vQ5wZfQQw&pp=ygUNY2FybHNvbiBwdXRpbg==

    Nearly 1m

    If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched

    And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X

    I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
    But what is a 'view'?

    Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish?
    Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?

    Or is it both?

    There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
    Personally I can"t be arsed to watch 2 hours of an interview with anyone. I watched a highlights video. I might have a longer version on in the background at some point. I don't think we can really see watching the whole thing all the wsy through as tbe yardstick of success for the initiative. But maybe I'm wrong.
    Yes, saying the Tucker Putin interview "fell flat" (copyright: @Peter_the_Punter) because only 9 people watched the entire interview is like saying the World Cup in Qatar was a disaster became only 64 people watched every single minute of every single match

    The world doesn't work like that. All Carlson needs - to claim media victory - is a few seconds of eyeballs on his interview, and a massive media frenzy. He has achieved both and then some. He'sgot tens, possibly hundreds of milliions of people catching a glimpse, and he has absolutely caused a shitstorm of global publicity, with him at the centre

    Job done. Extremely well. From his perspective
    Probably Carlson is happy with the extra publicity. He might not care that lots of it is bad publicity, but it hasn't done his claim to be a journalist much good.

    But has the interview persuaded anyone that Putin is the good guy here? I doubt it. In that sense it fell flat.

    And in real life I haven't seen any interest whatsoever, have you?

    Even on here there is only a meta-argument about how big a deal the interview was, rather than any discussion of the interview itself.
    The most significant point in this whole debate is that I said this would be a massive media shitstorm and possibly the most watched political interview in history, and I was right

    All that matters is that I was righr

    Fuck what Putin said. Who cares. Let him invade Mongolia and nuke the Bahamians. It's just ME BEING RIGHT. ME ME ME ME ME MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

  • eekeek Posts: 24,504

    Good Morning everybody.

    To be fair it’s becoming rapidly more difficult to be sympathetic with Israel. They seem to have done, or at least achieved, nothing whatsoever towards their stated aim of ‘getting the hostages back’ while at the same time slaughtering Palestinians.
    I have no problem whatsoever with the idea of a safe home for the Jewish people, and can well understand why they want it in Palestine. However the Palestinians were there legally and historically and indeed I suspect that many of them have at least as good a ‘historical’ and ‘genetic’ right to be there as many of the more recent ‘Jewish’ immigrants.

    My problem with Israel is that in attempting to achieve their aim they are systematically inflicting on Gaza what the Nazis did to them in Europe...
  • LeonLeon Posts: 44,916

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    The New York Times is absolutely pounding Biden on the age issue. I do sense there is a move, in elite Democrat circles, to kick him upstairs, or downstairs, or just anystairs. They are now very worried

    On the front page of the website there are four or five articles saying Fuckyeah this is bad, get rid of the old duffer, and just one short terse column trying to defend him (not very well)

    Perhaps betting positions must be adjusted accordingly. The NYT is powerfully influential for Democrats

    Biden is like Rishi. Everyone agrees he should stand down but no-one agrees on replacing him.
    Perhaps

    But this is the NYT turning on Biden. That's like the Telegraph, Times, Sun and Spectator turning on Rishi Sunak, all at once
    It's not the NYT 'turning' at all.
    It's entirely consistent with their longstanding editorial stance.

    The idea that the NYT is the Democrats house publication like the Telegraph is for the Tories is deluded.
    Yup, it's the exact same setup as their Hillary emails coverage. Were they gunning for Hillary Clinton back then? Well, I'm sure they don't particularly mind if Trump wins because he's great for their business but no, that's not what was happening.
    I mean, this is just completely mad

    Of course the NYT care if Trump gets elected. They really really really don't want him elected. I get that they are running a business and Trump is good box office, but they are also sincere about their Democrat, left of centre beliefs, and they are probably in actual fear of what Trump might do to them, if elected

    You are the delusional one here, sorry. The NYT loathes and fears Donald Trump
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 60,479
    There's a new study out in the likelihood if the collapse of the AMOC.
    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/feb/09/atlantic-ocean-circulation-nearing-devastating-tipping-point-study-finds
    ..Until now there has been no consensus about how severe this will be. One study last year, based on changes in sea surface temperatures, suggested the tipping point could happen between 2025 and 2095. However, the UK Met Office said large, rapid changes in Amoc were “very unlikely” in the 21st century.

    The new paper, published in Science Advances, has broken new ground by looking for warning signs in the salinity levels at the southern extent of the Atlantic Ocean between Cape Town and Buenos Aires. Simulating changes over a period of 2,000 years on computer models of the global climate, it found a slow decline can lead to a sudden collapse over less than 100 years, with calamitous consequences.

    The paper said the results provided a “clear answer” about whether such an abrupt shift was possible: “This is bad news for the climate system and humanity as up till now one could think that Amoc tipping was only a theoretical concept and tipping would disappear as soon as the full climate system, with all its additional feedbacks, was considered.”..


    Whether we'll live to see this is a matter if doubt; it's not unlikely our children or grandchildren will.
This discussion has been closed.