Will Hunt’s political career turn to ash on July 4th? – politicalbetting.com

System

Will Hunt’s political career turn to ash on July 4th? – politicalbetting.com

Hunt is fighting to avoid being the first Chancellor to lose their seat at a general election, according to records going back to 1906.It would be a defeat to surpass the Portillo moment of 1997 and would signal the end of a Tory era… 2/ https://t.co/Q6NI5eZSjh

Read the full story here

FrancisUrquhart

Gardenwalker said:

Let Sky be Sky.

The real story is the stunning decline in the quality of the BBC and perhaps to Channel 4.

To take one example, a great documentary from the BBC is now astonishingly rare. The last one I can think of was “Once Upon a Time in Northern Ireland”.

The quality of political coverage is at an all time low, too.

You watch something like Veritasium channel on YouTube and think isn't that what the BBC should be doing / used to do?

When CH4 first got the cricket, they were really innovative. The Analyst, Hawkeye, Snicko, Hotspot. They now have some sport like the football internationals and it is very safe, predictable and boring.

Anabobazina

Gardenwalker said:

Let Sky be Sky.

The real story is the stunning decline in the quality of the BBC and perhaps to Channel 4.

To take one example, a great documentary from the BBC is now astonishingly rare. The last one I can think of was “Once Upon a Time in Northern Ireland”.

The quality of political coverage is at an all time low, too.

Indeed. Chris Mason has been disappointing, in absolute terms. He has only benefitted in relative terms from following the truly dire Laura K – who was a walking press release. She was the worst political editor they have had in my lifetime by a country mile.

wooliedyed

Hunts '1500 in it' comment is both spurious and interesting in equal measure.
If Con/LD battlegrounds are following a similar pattern then that would cap the LDs at about 35 seats.
If Con are approaching ELE he loses by a few thousand

RochdalePioneers

Mason is too collegial - he needs to challenge the bullshit.

MoonRabbit

On topic. Yes.

FrancisUrquhart

RochdalePioneers said:

Mason is too collegial - he needs to challenge the bullshit.

The problem is too many journalists are poorly informed and spent too much time on groupthink of twitter. To challenge the BS you need to be on top of your brief, otherwise you end up like Prof Peston arguing with JVT about why the UK can't produce industrial sized qualities of pre-cursor chemicals because you read on wikipedia how small qualities can be made it in a school chemistry lab.

RochdalePioneers

FrancisUrquhart said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Mason is too collegial - he needs to challenge the bullshit.

The problem is too many journalists are poorly informed and spent too much time on groupthink of twitter.

Some of it is simple math and logic. Tory says "we have cut taxes" just tell them its a lie and they know it, with that Sky screen graphic. When they say @we have cut child poverty" just tell them its a lie with another graphic.

Anabobazina

RochdalePioneers said:

Mason is too collegial - he needs to challenge the bullshit.

They all seem to have a brief of not upsetting the apple cart. Contrast with Sky, where the sweet-as-pie Sophy Ridge is actually a pretty probing, healthily incredulous interviewer. Susanna Reid on ITV breakfast does a better job at 6am than any of the Beeb's mob at any time of the day.

HYUFD

Probably yes, Election Maps UK has the LDs winning Godalming and Ash with 39.5% to 29% for Hunt.
https://electionmaps.uk/nowcast

Ironically the pro Boris, Leave right may cheer a Hunt defeat as much as the LDs and Labour do, after all he was a Cameroon Remainer, Boris' main opponent for the Conservative leadership in 2019 and with Rishi helped topple Boris as PM in 2022.

Similarly in 1992 it was reported Thatcherites gave a loud cheer at Lord McAlpine's election night party when the wet, pro EU Patten lost Bath to the LDs.

A Hunt defeat as well as a defeat for moderates like Mordaunt in Portsmouth North, Chalk in Cheltenham and Shapps in Welwyn Hatfield coupled with Sunak losing the general election heavily overall would likely signal a shift right for the Tories in Opposition. Though the CCHQ shortlists for the safest seats being vacated by outgoing Tory MPs filled with Rishi loyalists may mean in the short term at least the brakes will be put on too far a shift rightward

Scott_xP

Farooq said:

Gardenwalker said:

What on earth is the media going to cover for the next three weeks?

The manifestos are nearly all out.
The Reform surge had peaked too early.
The Rishi-is-shit meme has become boring if not overdone.
Even Davey’s watersports are losing their sparkle.

Criminally underrated post. The word "sparkle" right at the end there was golden.

There are 3 weeks for the manifestos to fall apart (even more)

@AndrewSparrow

Labour claims Sunak's national service policy has 'blown up' after Shapps says military option lasts just 25 days, not full year

https://x.com/AndrewSparrow/status/1800889853250576833

Tweedledee

Farooq said:

Gardenwalker said:

What on earth is the media going to cover for the next three weeks?

The manifestos are nearly all out.
The Reform surge had peaked too early.
The Rishi-is-shit meme has become boring if not overdone.
Even Davey’s watersports are losing their sparkle.

Criminally underrated post. The word "sparkle" right at the end there was golden.

Events. Expect the unexpected. Long time in politics. Etc.

FrancisUrquhart

RochdalePioneers said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Mason is too collegial - he needs to challenge the bullshit.

The problem is too many journalists are poorly informed and spent too much time on groupthink of twitter.

Some of it is simple math and logic. Tory says "we have cut taxes" just tell them its a lie and they know it, with that Sky screen graphic. When they say @we have cut child poverty" just tell them its a lie with another graphic.

It also requires some leg work, for too many it is much easier to make the story about watching Sky Sports.

tlg86

I lumped on the Lib Dems at 5/6 so Hunt will be safe.

El_Capitano

Is there a market on how many times the BBC's election night presenters will mispronounce "Jeremy Hunt"?

noneoftheabove

Farooq said:

Gardenwalker said:

What on earth is the media going to cover for the next three weeks?

The manifestos are nearly all out.
The Reform surge had peaked too early.
The Rishi-is-shit meme has become boring if not overdone.
Even Davey’s watersports are losing their sparkle.

Criminally underrated post. The word "sparkle" right at the end there was golden.

Badenoch will pick on the wokeness of the England football team. Sunak will try and apologise and somehow make it worse. Isam will pop up to say Starmer doesn't know enough about football tactics.

FrancisUrquhart

El_Capitano said:

Is there a market on how many times the BBC's election night presenters will mispronounce "Jeremy Hunt"?

You get the feeling that to them that Jeremy Hunt is the mispronunciation.

numbertwelve

Tweedledee said:

Farooq said:

Gardenwalker said:

What on earth is the media going to cover for the next three weeks?

The manifestos are nearly all out.
The Reform surge had peaked too early.
The Rishi-is-shit meme has become boring if not overdone.
Even Davey’s watersports are losing their sparkle.

Criminally underrated post. The word "sparkle" right at the end there was golden.

Events. Expect the unexpected. Long time in politics. Etc.

Yep. I don’t agree with this view that any movement is done and dusted now. The only thing that seems certain is that the Tories will lose. There are still plenty of big questions up in the air - how much by? Will they lose second party status? Will there be Reform crossover? What about a LD surge as predicted by YouGov. Or will the Tories limp through to 150-200 seats and breathe a relative sigh of relief?

Yes we know SKS is going to be moving into No.10 but as for everything else, it still feels remarkably fluid.

FrankBooth

One good thing about a possible wipeout election is that it puts MPs in supposedly safe seats under pressure. Who's got a personal vote and who hasn't. What was it Warren Buffet said;

When the tide goes out you see who has been swimming naked.

Anabobazina

noneoftheabove said:

Farooq said:

Gardenwalker said:

What on earth is the media going to cover for the next three weeks?

The manifestos are nearly all out.
The Reform surge had peaked too early.
The Rishi-is-shit meme has become boring if not overdone.
Even Davey’s watersports are losing their sparkle.

Criminally underrated post. The word "sparkle" right at the end there was golden.

Badenoch will pick on the wokeness of the England football team. Sunak will try and apologise and somehow make it worse. Isam will pop up to say Starmer doesn't know enough about football tactics.

Wasn't there an egregious gaffe exposed on PB recently whereby Sir Keir slightly mispronounced a single word at PMQs five weeks ago?

That could come back to bite him.

tpfkar

I imagine a quote of "there are 1,500 votes in it between me and the Lib Dems" might accidentally find its way into some of the Lib Dem leaflets, appealing for tactical votes from natural Lab/Green leaners.

Not sure that's a smart choice of words by Jeremy Hunt there.

Anabobazina

tpfkar said:

I imagine a quote of "there are 1,500 votes in it between me and the Lib Dems" might accidentally find its way into some of the Lib Dem leaflets, appealing for tactical votes from natural Lab/Green leaners.

Not sure that's a smart choice of words by Jeremy Hunt there.

Indeed. Will the Hunt become the hunted?

wooliedyed

FrankBooth said:

One good thing about a possible wipeout election is that it puts MPs in supposedly safe seats under pressure. Who's got a personal vote and who hasn't. What was it Warren Buffet said;

When the tide goes out you see who has been swimming naked.

An interesting test will be Simon Clarke - right wing, safest of the red wall seats, no Reform opponent. Will he cling on or be swept away by the red wall vote collapse?

Sandpit

FrancisUrquhart said:

El_Capitano said:

Is there a market on how many times the BBC's election night presenters will mispronounce "Jeremy Hunt"?

You get the feeling that to them that Jeremy Hunt is the mispronunciation.

That they never mispronounced Tristam Hunt’s name, tells you all you need to know.

The suggestion is that, when he was SoS Health, the whole BBC newsroom referred to him casually with the mispronunciation, so it’s hardly susprising that they said it on air more than a few times.

SirNorfolkPassmore

Bit daft of Hunt to be saying it's all on a knife-edge and a few votes in it, as it's grist to the tactical voting mill.

Might well be right, though. He's underrated as a local operator - SW Surrey was a very marginal seat when he took it on in 2005, and he'd made it safe by 2010, well before the Lib Dem vote collapsed in 2015. They've obviously recovered since in Surrey, but Hunt does know what an election scrap looks like - he's not always had a safe seat that didn't need the work.

Andy_JS

FPT

Malmesbury said:

Andy_JS said:

Nigelb said:

Andy_JS said:

LostPassword said:

A_View_From_Cumbria5 said:

There is one aspect of this which I am staggered has never been even hinted at, let alone discussed. The failure of the Post Office is obvious and they deserve a special depth of hell. But what about the Courts ???

It is the job of the courts to determine whether a defendant is guilty or not guilty. They failed even more spectacularly that the Post Office in their alloted task. Quite frankly it is the Judges that allowed these miscarriages of justice to occur in the courts they were presiding over who should be in these open cells.

If someone tries to stitch me up, and some have tried at a much lower level then I would rely on the courts to dig down to the truth. THEY DID NOT DO THIS. Why are they not at the receiving end of everyone's wrath, they are mine.

The Judges and Courts are servants of the Law. The Law was written that computer evidence should be accepted as infallible. There was no basis for the Courts to kick up a fuss, because the central error was that the computer evidence was very fallible indeed, and they were forbidden from thinking otherwise.

A judge eventually decided that the computer evidence wasn't reliable, in 2019. If that could happen then, why couldn't it have happened earlier?

Because that verdict was the result of an appeal on behalf of hundreds of postmasters, and relied on evidence presented to the court which was gathered over many years.

It could have happened earlier had anyone in government asked tougher questions of the Post Office which they own on our behalf.

But it's not something the courts could have done on their own.

Note that lawyers have regularly protested (and still protest) the state of the law on computer evidence.
Which you can blame Blair's government for.

https://amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/jan/12/update-law-on-computer-evidence-to-avoid-horizon-repeat-ministers-urged
...The legal presumption that computers are reliable stems from an older common law principle that “mechanical instruments” should be presumed to be in working order unless proven otherwise. That assumption means that if, for instance, a police officer quotes the time on their watch, a defendant cannot force the prosecution to call a horologist to explain from first principles how watches work.
For a period, computers lost that protection in England and Wales. A 1984 act of parliament ruled that computer evidence was only admissible if it could be shown that the computer was used and operating properly. But that act was repealed in 1999, just months before the first trials of the Horizon system began...

It effectively means that the burden of proof is on the defendant. An impossible hurdle.

Whoever wrote that law in 1984 was extremely wise.

The reason it was repealed was that a tedious number of defendants kept on raising concerns with computer evidence. Remember the cases regarding ATMs?

Which meant that prosecutions were slowed down and worse, Proper People (lawyers) were being forced to try and understand IT.

That may be so, but in hindsight it would have been better to have a few people getting away with minor crimes such as those to do with ATMs and not had hundreds of postmasters/mistresses having their lives ruined.

FrancisUrquhart

wooliedyed said:

FrankBooth said:

One good thing about a possible wipeout election is that it puts MPs in supposedly safe seats under pressure. Who's got a personal vote and who hasn't. What was it Warren Buffet said;

When the tide goes out you see who has been swimming naked.

An interesting test will be Simon Clarke - right wing, safest of the red wall seats, no Reform opponent. Will he cling on or be swept away by the red wall vote collapse?

You don't think Rod Liddle will sweep him away ;-)

OldKingCole

Slightly off-topic, but I was told yesterday by someone who might be well-informed that the reason for the sudden election is that Leadsom, among others, was planning a motion of no confidence in the PM at the 1922 committee and it appeared that the chances of success were good.
Sunak got wind of it and dashed off the see the King.

wooliedyed

FrancisUrquhart said:

wooliedyed said:

FrankBooth said:

One good thing about a possible wipeout election is that it puts MPs in supposedly safe seats under pressure. Who's got a personal vote and who hasn't. What was it Warren Buffet said;

When the tide goes out you see who has been swimming naked.

An interesting test will be Simon Clarke - right wing, safest of the red wall seats, no Reform opponent. Will he cling on or be swept away by the red wall vote collapse?

You don't think Rod Liddle will sweep him away ;-)

I think Liddle diddle will struggle to get off zero

LostPassword

noneoftheabove said:

Farooq said:

Gardenwalker said:

What on earth is the media going to cover for the next three weeks?

The manifestos are nearly all out.
The Reform surge had peaked too early.
The Rishi-is-shit meme has become boring if not overdone.
Even Davey’s watersports are losing their sparkle.

Criminally underrated post. The word "sparkle" right at the end there was golden.

Badenoch will pick on the wokeness of the England football team. Sunak will try and apologise and somehow make it worse. Isam will pop up to say Starmer doesn't know enough about football tactics.

Oh yes. The association football tournament starts this Friday. I guess we'll see which of the contenders can look most awkward in their staged photos watching the match.

williamglenn

Sandpit said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

El_Capitano said:

Is there a market on how many times the BBC's election night presenters will mispronounce "Jeremy Hunt"?

You get the feeling that to them that Jeremy Hunt is the mispronunciation.

That they never mispronounced Tristam Hunt’s name, tells you all you need to know.

The suggestion is that, when he was SoS Health, the whole BBC newsroom referred to him casually with the mispronunciation, so it’s hardly susprising that they said it on air more than a few times.

To be fair, Tristram Hunt's first name ends with a consonant so the mispronunciation doesn't flow as easily.

noneoftheabove

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

Bit daft of Hunt to be saying it's all on a knife-edge and a few votes in it, as it's grist to the tactical voting mill.

Might well be right, though. He's underrated as a local operator - SW Surrey was a very marginal seat when he took it on in 2005, and he'd made it safe by 2010, well before the Lib Dem vote collapsed in 2015. They've obviously recovered since in Surrey, but Hunt does know what an election scrap looks like - he's not always had a safe seat that didn't need the work.

I don't understand it as a get out the vote tactic. It just encourages Tories to give up and tactical voters to push them over the edge. But then I haven't really understood much of Sunak's plan since he took over, let alone since calling the election.

FrancisUrquhart

Sandpit said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

El_Capitano said:

Is there a market on how many times the BBC's election night presenters will mispronounce "Jeremy Hunt"?

You get the feeling that to them that Jeremy Hunt is the mispronunciation.

That they never mispronounced Tristam Hunt’s name, tells you all you need to know.

The suggestion is that, when he was SoS Health, the whole BBC newsroom referred to him casually with the mispronunciation, so it’s hardly susprising that they said it on air more than a few times.

As a hate figure, slightly weird in that he is miles away from the right of the Tory party. I think I would struggle to think of somebody more centre among leading Tories, he could easily be a Labour MP in New Labour era.

williamglenn

FrancisUrquhart said:

Sandpit said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

El_Capitano said:

Is there a market on how many times the BBC's election night presenters will mispronounce "Jeremy Hunt"?

You get the feeling that to them that Jeremy Hunt is the mispronunciation.

That they never mispronounced Tristam Hunt’s name, tells you all you need to know.

The suggestion is that, when he was SoS Health, the whole BBC newsroom referred to him casually with the mispronunciation, so it’s hardly susprising that they said it on air more than a few times.

As a hate figure, slightly weird in that he is miles away from the right of the Tory party. I think I would struggle to think of somebody more centre among leading Tories, he could easily be a Labour MP in New Labour era.

SoS for Health will always be a hate figure by virtue of being the ultimate 'boss' of a large number of public sector workers.

Peter_the_Punter

LostPassword said:

noneoftheabove said:

Farooq said:

Gardenwalker said:

What on earth is the media going to cover for the next three weeks?

The manifestos are nearly all out.
The Reform surge had peaked too early.
The Rishi-is-shit meme has become boring if not overdone.
Even Davey’s watersports are losing their sparkle.

Criminally underrated post. The word "sparkle" right at the end there was golden.

Badenoch will pick on the wokeness of the England football team. Sunak will try and apologise and somehow make it worse. Isam will pop up to say Starmer doesn't know enough about football tactics.

Oh yes. The association football tournament starts this Friday. I guess we'll see which of the contenders can look most awkward in their staged photos watching the match.

Presumably Rishi will leave at half-time to attend an interview.

boulay

FrancisUrquhart said:

Sandpit said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

El_Capitano said:

Is there a market on how many times the BBC's election night presenters will mispronounce "Jeremy Hunt"?

You get the feeling that to them that Jeremy Hunt is the mispronunciation.

That they never mispronounced Tristam Hunt’s name, tells you all you need to know.

The suggestion is that, when he was SoS Health, the whole BBC newsroom referred to him casually with the mispronunciation, so it’s hardly susprising that they said it on air more than a few times.

As a hate figure, slightly weird in that he is miles away from the right of the Tory party. I think I would struggle to think of somebody more centre among leading Tories, he could easily be a Labour MP in New Labour era.

It’s a shame Rachel Reeves isn’t called Rachel Hunt just so we could see if the same slips were made when she’s CotE.

Northern_Al

Anabobazina said:

Gardenwalker said:

Let Sky be Sky.

The real story is the stunning decline in the quality of the BBC and perhaps to Channel 4.

To take one example, a great documentary from the BBC is now astonishingly rare. The last one I can think of was “Once Upon a Time in Northern Ireland”.

The quality of political coverage is at an all time low, too.

Indeed. Chris Mason has been disappointing, in absolute terms. He has only benefitted in relative terms from following the truly dire Laura K – who was a walking press release. She was the worst political editor they have had in my lifetime by a country mile.

I agree - Chris Mason is vacuous. Lots of words signifying nothing, and eyebrows dancing around like a maniac. His shallowness is exacerbated by his use of 'everyday' language. For example, call me old-fashioned but he used the expression 'diddly squat' the other day; not appropriate for the BBC political editor.

SouthamObserver

Anabobazina said:

Gardenwalker said:

Let Sky be Sky.

The real story is the stunning decline in the quality of the BBC and perhaps to Channel 4.

To take one example, a great documentary from the BBC is now astonishingly rare. The last one I can think of was “Once Upon a Time in Northern Ireland”.

The quality of political coverage is at an all time low, too.

Indeed. Chris Mason has been disappointing, in absolute terms. He has only benefitted in relative terms from following the truly dire Laura K – who was a walking press release. She was the worst political editor they have had in my lifetime by a country mile.

The BBC let its good people go. Robbie Gibb has a lot to answer for.

LostPassword

OldKingCole said:

Slightly off-topic, but I was told yesterday by someone who might be well-informed that the reason for the sudden election is that Leadsom, among others, was planning a motion of no confidence in the PM at the 1922 committee and it appeared that the chances of success were good.
Sunak got wind of it and dashed off the see the King.

My guess is that this is right-wing mythmaking. Party rebels against the leadership have consistently overestimated their chances of success, so it would be strange if this one time was an exception.

But as a myth as part of the story of how a properly right-wing Tory party would have won the 2024 GE I think it's a great addition. It's also a sign of how the Tory Right is falling down the rabbit hole of conspiracist thinking.

Much appreciate you passing the rumour on, of course. And, who knows, it might even be true.

FrancisUrquhart

SouthamObserver said:

Anabobazina said:

Gardenwalker said:

Let Sky be Sky.

The real story is the stunning decline in the quality of the BBC and perhaps to Channel 4.

To take one example, a great documentary from the BBC is now astonishingly rare. The last one I can think of was “Once Upon a Time in Northern Ireland”.

The quality of political coverage is at an all time low, too.

Indeed. Chris Mason has been disappointing, in absolute terms. He has only benefitted in relative terms from following the truly dire Laura K – who was a walking press release. She was the worst political editor they have had in my lifetime by a country mile.

The BBC let its good people go. Robbie Gibb has a lot to answer for.

I don't think it let them go as many see the direction of travel. New Media has incredible opportunities. Get yourself a successful YouTube channel or Podcast and you can make your very wealthy. Apparently they are bleeding behind the camera talent to these new opportunities now too. You look who is producing podcasts for Goalhanger, Global stable etc, and its ex-BBC.

Sky on the other hand, let go / got rid of some of their top talent for no real good reason e.g. Tim Marshall, Jeff Randall.

Sandpit

Northern_Al said:

Anabobazina said:

Gardenwalker said:

Let Sky be Sky.

The real story is the stunning decline in the quality of the BBC and perhaps to Channel 4.

To take one example, a great documentary from the BBC is now astonishingly rare. The last one I can think of was “Once Upon a Time in Northern Ireland”.

The quality of political coverage is at an all time low, too.

Indeed. Chris Mason has been disappointing, in absolute terms. He has only benefitted in relative terms from following the truly dire Laura K – who was a walking press release. She was the worst political editor they have had in my lifetime by a country mile.

I agree - Chris Mason is vacuous. Lots of words signifying nothing, and eyebrows dancing around like a maniac. His shallowness is exacerbated by his use of 'everyday' language. For example, call me old-fashioned but he used the expression 'diddly squat' the other day; not appropriate for the BBC political editor.

Isn’t that a farm in Oxfordshire?

AlsoLei

OldKingCole said:

Slightly off-topic, but I was told yesterday by someone who might be well-informed that the reason for the sudden election is that Leadsom, among others, was planning a motion of no confidence in the PM at the 1922 committee and it appeared that the chances of success were good.
Sunak got wind of it and dashed off the see the King.

A panicked decision would certainly explain why they've seemed so under-prepared...

But would Leadsom and other malcontents not have spoken out publicly about Sunak's ruse?

Northern_Al

OldKingCole said:

Slightly off-topic, but I was told yesterday by someone who might be well-informed that the reason for the sudden election is that Leadsom, among others, was planning a motion of no confidence in the PM at the 1922 committee and it appeared that the chances of success were good.
Sunak got wind of it and dashed off the see the King.

Sunak should have realised that he'd stand a much better chance of surviving a vote of no confidence by his peers than surviving a vote of no confidence by the British public, and stayed away from the King.

FrankBooth

The SDP have been a disappointment. In spite of some high profile media support they don't seem to have gone anywhere. Not sure they were wise to do a deal with Reform.

ydoethur

williamglenn said:

Sandpit said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

El_Capitano said:

Is there a market on how many times the BBC's election night presenters will mispronounce "Jeremy Hunt"?

You get the feeling that to them that Jeremy Hunt is the mispronunciation.

That they never mispronounced Tristam Hunt’s name, tells you all you need to know.

The suggestion is that, when he was SoS Health, the whole BBC newsroom referred to him casually with the mispronunciation, so it’s hardly susprising that they said it on air more than a few times.

To be fair, Tristram Hunt's first name ends with a consonant so the mispronunciation doesn't flow as easily.

To be even fairer, he's a much bigger C*** than Jeremy is though.

Nigelb

Sandpit said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

El_Capitano said:

Is there a market on how many times the BBC's election night presenters will mispronounce "Jeremy Hunt"?

You get the feeling that to them that Jeremy Hunt is the mispronunciation.

That they never mispronounced Tristam Hunt’s name, tells you all you need to know.

The suggestion is that, when he was SoS Health, the whole BBC newsroom referred to him casually with the mispronunciation, so it’s hardly susprising that they said it on air more than a few times.

Just as well he wasn't called Frank.

PedestrianRock

FrancisUrquhart said:

SouthamObserver said:

Anabobazina said:

Gardenwalker said:

Let Sky be Sky.

The real story is the stunning decline in the quality of the BBC and perhaps to Channel 4.

To take one example, a great documentary from the BBC is now astonishingly rare. The last one I can think of was “Once Upon a Time in Northern Ireland”.

The quality of political coverage is at an all time low, too.

Indeed. Chris Mason has been disappointing, in absolute terms. He has only benefitted in relative terms from following the truly dire Laura K – who was a walking press release. She was the worst political editor they have had in my lifetime by a country mile.

The BBC let its good people go. Robbie Gibb has a lot to answer for.

I don't think it let them go as many see the direction of travel. New Media has incredible opportunities. Get yourself a successful YouTube channel or Podcast and you can make your very wealthy. Apparently they are bleeding behind the camera talent to these new opportunities now too.

Sky on the other hand, let go / got rid of some of their top talent for no real good reason e.g. Tim Marshall, Jeff Randall.

Mishal Husain is leagues ahead of Laura K imo, thank god the BBC still have her

ydoethur

El_Capitano said:

Is there a market on how many times the BBC's election night presenters will mispronounce "Jeremy Hunt"?

None at all.

They've all been trained very carefully in that it's not 'Jerome,' it's 'Jeremy...'

Nigelb

noneoftheabove said:

Farooq said:

Gardenwalker said:

What on earth is the media going to cover for the next three weeks?

The manifestos are nearly all out.
The Reform surge had peaked too early.
The Rishi-is-shit meme has become boring if not overdone.
Even Davey’s watersports are losing their sparkle.

Criminally underrated post. The word "sparkle" right at the end there was golden.

Badenoch will pick on the wokeness of the England football team. Sunak will try and apologise and somehow make it worse. Isam will pop up to say Starmer doesn't know enough about football tactics.

Britain out of Europe has been Tory policy for some time.

Stuartinromford

Nigelb said:

Sandpit said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

El_Capitano said:

Is there a market on how many times the BBC's election night presenters will mispronounce "Jeremy Hunt"?

You get the feeling that to them that Jeremy Hunt is the mispronunciation.

That they never mispronounced Tristam Hunt’s name, tells you all you need to know.

The suggestion is that, when he was SoS Health, the whole BBC newsroom referred to him casually with the mispronunciation, so it’s hardly susprising that they said it on air more than a few times.

Just as well he wasn't called Frank.

Or, as in the hit Radio 4 comedy Radio Active, Mike.

Though nearly all the male characters were called Mike.

Oh so daring...

sarissa

FPT

sarissa said:

HYUFD said:

sarissa said:

Anabobazina said:

wooliedyed said:

Scots poll KLAXON
GE Voting intention (Scotland)
(changes vs Ipsos Jan 2024 poll)
· SNP: 36% (-3)
· Labour: 36% (+4)
· Conservatives: 13% (-1)
· Liberal Democrats: 5% (-1)
· Reform UK: 4% (+1)
· Scottish Green Party: 3% (-1)
· Alba Party: 1% (unchanged)
· Other: 1% (+1)

3 to 9 June

Textbook usage of the klaxon there. Credit where it is due.

51/49 split in favour of independence, down from a 3% lead. In the midst of a UK election campaign where the the SNP refuse to talk about it, that's a decent result.

Also given the same poll has the SNP losing its majority of Scottish MPs and 2026 will also likely see a Unionist majority at Holyrood that would kill of any prospect of indyref2 for a generation, making such polls largely redundant anyway

You must be the only poster to think Starmer's honeymoon will last that long. While you have your crystal ball, can I have tonoght's lottery numbers?

Nigelb

Standing up for the rights of judges to be bribed.

Sen. Lindsey Graham says he will block Democrats' effort to unanimously pass Supreme Court ethics bill
https://x.com/sahilkapur/status/1800896236649914768

FrancisUrquhart

Awkward....

John Swinney backs Nicola Sturgeon after she takes ITV election night job

Former Scottish leader in hypocrisy row after SNP criticised Ruth Davidson for the same role five years ago

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/06/12/john-swinney-backs-nicola-sturgeon-snp-itv-election-job/

Nigelb

@RepRaskin and @AOC on their push for a SCOTUS gift rule:

“We want a $50 gift ban for U.S. Supreme Court Justices. They make $300,000 a year—pay for your own lunch and pay for your own vacation.”
https://x.com/allinwithchris/status/1800691868117750183

PedestrianRock

I've seldom seen a more volatile bet than Reform in the 'Most Seats Without Labour' market. They're going from 10.0 one day to 30 the next and swinging constantly back and forth between. 16.5 now.

noneoftheabove

FrankBooth said:

The SDP have been a disappointment. In spite of some high profile media support they don't seem to have gone anywhere. Not sure they were wise to do a deal with Reform.

Could be worse, Binface only standing the one constituency which is a bit rubbish imo.

FrancisUrquhart

Polling card has arrived, with "remember you need photo id" in large colourful font. Is that to remind Boris?

PedestrianRock

There do seem to be a number of arbitrage opportunities from laying constituencies and other markets on the Exchange, and backing them with whatever bookie on Oddschecker is showing the highest odds.

I know some of you are quietly lurking and hoovering up these with large cash sums! Will post the next one I can find... unfortunately I'm stake-limited at so many bookies that I can't avail of these myself.

wooliedyed

FrankBooth said:

The SDP have been a disappointment. In spite of some high profile media support they don't seem to have gone anywhere. Not sure they were wise to do a deal with Reform.

To be fair to them they have recovered enough from 155 votes and 7th behind the loonies in 1990 Bootle to stand 122 candidates and manage 2.1% in the London mayoralty so they are at least now a proper 'minor' party. But no breakthrough seems likely soon

Pulpstar

Loads of yellow diamonds in and around Axminster.

SandyRentool

PedestrianRock said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

SouthamObserver said:

Anabobazina said:

Gardenwalker said:

Let Sky be Sky.

The real story is the stunning decline in the quality of the BBC and perhaps to Channel 4.

To take one example, a great documentary from the BBC is now astonishingly rare. The last one I can think of was “Once Upon a Time in Northern Ireland”.

The quality of political coverage is at an all time low, too.

Indeed. Chris Mason has been disappointing, in absolute terms. He has only benefitted in relative terms from following the truly dire Laura K – who was a walking press release. She was the worst political editor they have had in my lifetime by a country mile.

The BBC let its good people go. Robbie Gibb has a lot to answer for.

I don't think it let them go as many see the direction of travel. New Media has incredible opportunities. Get yourself a successful YouTube channel or Podcast and you can make your very wealthy. Apparently they are bleeding behind the camera talent to these new opportunities now too.

Sky on the other hand, let go / got rid of some of their top talent for no real good reason e.g. Tim Marshall, Jeff Randall.

Mishal Husain is leagues ahead of Laura K imo, thank god the BBC still have her

She even manages to put up with half her colleagues calling her Michelle.

Pulpstar

Loads of yellow diamonds in and around Axminster.

FrancisUrquhart

Even the Daily Mail is mocking Sunak...Sir Sir the strange new kid sitting next to me has farted.

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2024/06/12/15/86027393-0-image-m-28_1718201784835.jpg

ydoethur

Pulpstar said:

Loads of yellow diamonds in and around Axminster.

Is it carpeted with them?

Anabobazina

FrancisUrquhart said:

Awkward....

John Swinney backs Nicola Sturgeon after she takes ITV election night job

Former Scottish leader in hypocrisy row after SNP criticised Ruth Davidson for the same role five years ago

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/06/12/john-swinney-backs-nicola-sturgeon-snp-itv-election-job/

I think that's Ed Balls, The Sturge, and George Osborne already signed up for ITV. It's going to be unbeatable coverage –– AGAIN.

jamesdoyle

ydoethur said:

Pulpstar said:

Loads of yellow diamonds in and around Axminster.

Is it carpeted with them?

They're looming.

Sandpit

noneoftheabove said:

FrankBooth said:

The SDP have been a disappointment. In spite of some high profile media support they don't seem to have gone anywhere. Not sure they were wise to do a deal with Reform.

Could be worse, Binface only standing the one constituency which is a bit rubbish imo.

Someone rich and with a sense of humour should have put up 650 deposits (£325k) for the Binface Party. The photos of every MP at their count standing next to a guy in a Binface costume would have been hillarious.

They could also have argued for a televised PPB, and a space in debates given they’re standing everywhere.

If nothing else, it drives turnout by giving people a ‘none of the above’ option.

FrancisUrquhart

Anabobazina said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Awkward....

John Swinney backs Nicola Sturgeon after she takes ITV election night job

Former Scottish leader in hypocrisy row after SNP criticised Ruth Davidson for the same role five years ago

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/06/12/john-swinney-backs-nicola-sturgeon-snp-itv-election-job/

I think that's Ed Balls, The Sturge, and George Osborne already signed up for ITV. It's going to be unbeatable coverage –– AGAIN.

As long as Balls accidentally on purpose locks Peston in the toilets.

I think Balls and Osborne are very good when I have seen them in conversions (better than Bad Al and Rory the Tory). Thrasher from Sky is the best for analysing the results as they come in.

ydoethur

jamesdoyle said:

ydoethur said:

Pulpstar said:

Loads of yellow diamonds in and around Axminster.

Is it carpeted with them?

They're looming.

I think I see a pattern here...

noneoftheabove

Sandpit said:

noneoftheabove said:

FrankBooth said:

The SDP have been a disappointment. In spite of some high profile media support they don't seem to have gone anywhere. Not sure they were wise to do a deal with Reform.

Could be worse, Binface only standing the one constituency which is a bit rubbish imo.

Someone rich and with a sense of humour should have put up 650 deposits (£325k) for the Binface Party. The photos of every MP at their count standing next to a guy in a Binface costume would have been hillarious.

They could also have argued for a televised PPB, and a space in debates given they’re standing everywhere.

If nothing else, it drives turnout by giving people a ‘none of the above’ option.

I miss the yogic flyers. Made more sense than Truss does too.

Nigelb

We earlier today had a brief discussion about defence policy and procurement.

This is a new paper from Tony Blair's vanity institute which actually has some interesting and useful things to say.

Reimagining Defence and Security: New Capabilities for New Challenges
https://www.institute.global/insights/geopolitics-and-security/reimagining-defence-and-security-new-capabilities-for-new-challenges

This bit in particular suggests it's not all hot air, even if the language is overly florid:

Review, Repurpose, Retrain or Retire Capabilities
As the nature of defence and deterrence evolves, so must the arsenal of capabilities. As resources and funding will always be limited, choices may need to be made as to which capabilities should be deprioritised* if they cannot be repurposed. Advances in technology will accelerate the need for focus and prioritisation, with emerging technology rendering more existing capabilities redundant over time. Identifying and reducing support for these capabilities will be key.
Furthermore, rather than trying to maintain every defence capability and often doing so insufficiently well, the UK must focus on delivering key capabilities effectively...

...There is evidence to suggest that neither the government nor the armed forces are currently taking these kinds of decisions. Earlier this year, the Public Accounts Committee found a £16.9 billion deficit between the MoD’s stated capability requirements and its budget, warning that “the MoD has not had the discipline to balance its budget by making the difficult choices about which operational activities to curtail and which equipment programmes it can and cannot afford”. Similarly, experts have warned of cultural barriers to this kind of prioritisation within the armed forces, with some senior leaders concerned that winding down certain capabilities jeopardises the perception of our armed forces as a tier-one fighting power...

* I think they mean cut.

Flatlander

Pulpstar said:

Loads of yellow diamonds in and around Axminster.

Yet to see a single election poster.

There's not much point here as the odds of anyone other than Labour winning are not far off Bootle territory.

WhisperingOracle

Peston isn't too great with his predictions, but in terms of the overall quality of his show, it's better than a lot of the BBC's televisual coverage at the moment. Channel 4 News is still, partially, pretty good.

Newsnight is occasionally still worthwhile, but still hasn't recovered from the huge cuts to its budget and remit. As mentioned, some social media channels, not those which are highly partisan and polarised, tend to
provide more in-depth coverage than terrestrial TV at the moment. BBC Radio is the other big exception, as it's been left alone to a considerably greater extent over the last twenty years.

jamesdoyle

ydoethur said:

jamesdoyle said:

ydoethur said:

Pulpstar said:

Loads of yellow diamonds in and around Axminster.

Is it carpeted with them?

They're looming.

I think I see a pattern here...

Don't get weft behind

Daveyboy1961

jamesdoyle said:

ydoethur said:

jamesdoyle said:

ydoethur said:

Pulpstar said:

Loads of yellow diamonds in and around Axminster.

Is it carpeted with them?

They're looming.

I think I see a pattern here...

Don't get weft behind

sounds warped to me.

Taz

Peter_the_Punter said:

LostPassword said:

noneoftheabove said:

Farooq said:

Gardenwalker said:

What on earth is the media going to cover for the next three weeks?

The manifestos are nearly all out.
The Reform surge had peaked too early.
The Rishi-is-shit meme has become boring if not overdone.
Even Davey’s watersports are losing their sparkle.

Criminally underrated post. The word "sparkle" right at the end there was golden.

Badenoch will pick on the wokeness of the England football team. Sunak will try and apologise and somehow make it worse. Isam will pop up to say Starmer doesn't know enough about football tactics.

Oh yes. The association football tournament starts this Friday. I guess we'll see which of the contenders can look most awkward in their staged photos watching the match.

Presumably Rishi will leave at half-time to attend an interview.

IF England are losing by a large margin so will many other England soccer fans.

Malmesbury

Andy_JS said:

FPT

Malmesbury said:

Andy_JS said:

Nigelb said:

Andy_JS said:

LostPassword said:

A_View_From_Cumbria5 said:

There is one aspect of this which I am staggered has never been even hinted at, let alone discussed. The failure of the Post Office is obvious and they deserve a special depth of hell. But what about the Courts ???

It is the job of the courts to determine whether a defendant is guilty or not guilty. They failed even more spectacularly that the Post Office in their alloted task. Quite frankly it is the Judges that allowed these miscarriages of justice to occur in the courts they were presiding over who should be in these open cells.

If someone tries to stitch me up, and some have tried at a much lower level then I would rely on the courts to dig down to the truth. THEY DID NOT DO THIS. Why are they not at the receiving end of everyone's wrath, they are mine.

The Judges and Courts are servants of the Law. The Law was written that computer evidence should be accepted as infallible. There was no basis for the Courts to kick up a fuss, because the central error was that the computer evidence was very fallible indeed, and they were forbidden from thinking otherwise.

A judge eventually decided that the computer evidence wasn't reliable, in 2019. If that could happen then, why couldn't it have happened earlier?

Because that verdict was the result of an appeal on behalf of hundreds of postmasters, and relied on evidence presented to the court which was gathered over many years.

It could have happened earlier had anyone in government asked tougher questions of the Post Office which they own on our behalf.

But it's not something the courts could have done on their own.

Note that lawyers have regularly protested (and still protest) the state of the law on computer evidence.
Which you can blame Blair's government for.

https://amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/jan/12/update-law-on-computer-evidence-to-avoid-horizon-repeat-ministers-urged
...The legal presumption that computers are reliable stems from an older common law principle that “mechanical instruments” should be presumed to be in working order unless proven otherwise. That assumption means that if, for instance, a police officer quotes the time on their watch, a defendant cannot force the prosecution to call a horologist to explain from first principles how watches work.
For a period, computers lost that protection in England and Wales. A 1984 act of parliament ruled that computer evidence was only admissible if it could be shown that the computer was used and operating properly. But that act was repealed in 1999, just months before the first trials of the Horizon system began...

It effectively means that the burden of proof is on the defendant. An impossible hurdle.

Whoever wrote that law in 1984 was extremely wise.

The reason it was repealed was that a tedious number of defendants kept on raising concerns with computer evidence. Remember the cases regarding ATMs?

Which meant that prosecutions were slowed down and worse, Proper People (lawyers) were being forced to try and understand IT.

That may be so, but in hindsight it would have been better to have a few people getting away with minor crimes such as those to do with ATMs and not had hundreds of postmasters/mistresses having their lives ruined.

But think of the inconvenience to Proper People having to get their heads around IT (snigger) and maths (nervous laugh)

Much better to send some scum to prison. They are revolting peasants anyway.

FrancisUrquhart

WhisperingOracle said:

Peston isn't too great with his predictions, but in terms of the overall quality of his show, it's better than a lot of the BBC's coverage at the moment. Channel 4 News is still, partially, pretty good.

Newsnight still hasn't recovered from the huge cuts to its budget and remit. As mentioned, some social media
channels, not those which are highly partisan and polarised, tend to
provide more in-depth coverage than terrestrial TV, at the moment. BBC Radio is the other big exception, as more of the original BBC ethos is still.there.

Ridge, Osborne, Balls, Steve Webb or Norman Lamb for Lib Dems, Thrasher on the laptop. All because they are able to rise above just their own pure party political angle.

Nigelb

Daveyboy1961 said:

jamesdoyle said:

ydoethur said:

jamesdoyle said:

ydoethur said:

Pulpstar said:

Loads of yellow diamonds in and around Axminster.

Is it carpeted with them?

They're looming.

I think I see a pattern here...

Don't get weft behind

sounds warped to me.

What underlay this outbreak of punning ?

Is there a yarn behind it ?

Taz

Flatlander said:

Pulpstar said:

Loads of yellow diamonds in and around Axminster.

Yet to see a single election poster.

There's not much point here as the odds of anyone other than Labour winning are not far off Bootle territory.

I don't know if @Dumbosaurus has seen many posters in his part of the seat but nothing at all round my part. Safe labour seat.

Lots of stuff on twitter of Luke Akehurst campaigning and eating his way around North Durham. Little else.

You wouldn't know there was an election on if you didn't know !!!

Malmesbury

Nigelb said:

We earlier today had a brief discussion about defence policy and procurement.

This is a new paper from Tony Blair's vanity institute which actually has some interesting and useful things to say.

Reimagining Defence and Security: New Capabilities for New Challenges
https://www.institute.global/insights/geopolitics-and-security/reimagining-defence-and-security-new-capabilities-for-new-challenges

This bit in particular suggests it's not all hot air, even if the language is overly florid:

Review, Repurpose, Retrain or Retire Capabilities
As the nature of defence and deterrence evolves, so must the arsenal of capabilities. As resources and funding will always be limited, choices may need to be made as to which capabilities should be deprioritised* if they cannot be repurposed. Advances in technology will accelerate the need for focus and prioritisation, with emerging technology rendering more existing capabilities redundant over time. Identifying and reducing support for these capabilities will be key.
Furthermore, rather than trying to maintain every defence capability and often doing so insufficiently well, the UK must focus on delivering key capabilities effectively...

...There is evidence to suggest that neither the government nor the armed forces are currently taking these kinds of decisions. Earlier this year, the Public Accounts Committee found a £16.9 billion deficit between the MoD’s stated capability requirements and its budget, warning that “the MoD has not had the discipline to balance its budget by making the difficult choices about which operational activities to curtail and which equipment programmes it can and cannot afford”. Similarly, experts have warned of cultural barriers to this kind of prioritisation within the armed forces, with some senior leaders concerned that winding down certain capabilities jeopardises the perception of our armed forces as a tier-one fighting power...

* I think they mean cut.

Some years ago, the US Army spent a fortune on a series of programs to design a new super duper rifle. To increase hit rate.

They discovered, almost by accident, during the testing, that the biggest improvement was teaching soldiers to shoot, and giving them practise.

Anabobazina

FrancisUrquhart said:

Anabobazina said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Awkward....

John Swinney backs Nicola Sturgeon after she takes ITV election night job

Former Scottish leader in hypocrisy row after SNP criticised Ruth Davidson for the same role five years ago

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/06/12/john-swinney-backs-nicola-sturgeon-snp-itv-election-job/

I think that's Ed Balls, The Sturge, and George Osborne already signed up for ITV. It's going to be unbeatable coverage –– AGAIN.

As long as Balls accidentally on purpose locks Peston in the toilets.

I think Balls and Osborne are very good when I have seen them in conversions (better than Bad Al and Rory the Tory). Thrasher from Sky is the best for analysing the results as they come in.

Did that actually happen? LOL.

Yes Balls-Osborne are a great double act. Their podcast is excellent.

stodge

Afternoon all

Been out for lunch in Epping with a couple of friends today.

Not wanting to give @HYUFD a fit of the vapours but I saw TWO orange diamonds on houses in central Epping. I know there's some LD territory in and around Epping so probably nothing unexpected.

FrancisUrquhart

Anabobazina said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Anabobazina said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Awkward....

John Swinney backs Nicola Sturgeon after she takes ITV election night job

Former Scottish leader in hypocrisy row after SNP criticised Ruth Davidson for the same role five years ago

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/06/12/john-swinney-backs-nicola-sturgeon-snp-itv-election-job/

I think that's Ed Balls, The Sturge, and George Osborne already signed up for ITV. It's going to be unbeatable coverage –– AGAIN.

As long as Balls accidentally on purpose locks Peston in the toilets.

I think Balls and Osborne are very good when I have seen them in conversions (better than Bad Al and Rory the Tory). Thrasher from Sky is the best for analysing the results as they come in.

Did that actually happen? LOL.

Yes Balls-Osborne are a great double act. Their podcast is excellent.

No, I was joking about if only. I like them because of course they have their political bias / side, but are very good at rising above that and discussing what is a good / bad idea on its merits. I am not massively interested in people who are solely party political shouting at one another i.e. most of tv politics coverage these days.

Sandpit

Nigelb said:

We earlier today had a brief discussion about defence policy and procurement.

This is a new paper from Tony Blair's vanity institute which actually has some interesting and useful things to say.

Reimagining Defence and Security: New Capabilities for New Challenges
https://www.institute.global/insights/geopolitics-and-security/reimagining-defence-and-security-new-capabilities-for-new-challenges

This bit in particular suggests it's not all hot air, even if the language is overly florid:

Review, Repurpose, Retrain or Retire Capabilities
As the nature of defence and deterrence evolves, so must the arsenal of capabilities. As resources and funding will always be limited, choices may need to be made as to which capabilities should be deprioritised* if they cannot be repurposed. Advances in technology will accelerate the need for focus and prioritisation, with emerging technology rendering more existing capabilities redundant over time. Identifying and reducing support for these capabilities will be key.
Furthermore, rather than trying to maintain every defence capability and often doing so insufficiently well, the UK must focus on delivering key capabilities effectively...

...There is evidence to suggest that neither the government nor the armed forces are currently taking these kinds of decisions. Earlier this year, the Public Accounts Committee found a £16.9 billion deficit between the MoD’s stated capability requirements and its budget, warning that “the MoD has not had the discipline to balance its budget by making the difficult choices about which operational activities to curtail and which equipment programmes it can and cannot afford”. Similarly, experts have warned of cultural barriers to this kind of prioritisation within the armed forces, with some senior leaders concerned that winding down certain capabilities jeopardises the perception of our armed forces as a tier-one fighting power...

* I think they mean cut.

Genuinely interesting. As with space exloration, the future of the military is going be defined by who is quick and nimble and cheap, rather than those spending billions on decade-long programs designed to fight the last war.

Meanwhile, have another video of a small Ukranian drone with a grenade on board, $2k tops, taking out a Russian tank.

https://x.com/osinttechnical/status/1800339316734099563

noneoftheabove

ydoethur said:

Pulpstar said:

Loads of yellow diamonds in and around Axminster.

Is it carpeted with them?

Would that make it a lay?

HYUFD

stodge said:

Afternoon all

Been out for lunch in Epping with a couple of friends today.

Not wanting to give @HYUFD a fit of the vapours but I saw TWO orange diamonds on houses in central Epping. I know there's some LD territory in and around Epping so probably nothing unexpected.

All district councillors in Epping East are LD and 2/3 of the district councillors in Epping W and rural are LD so yes no surprise.

Given at parliamentary level though Labour are the main challengers to the Tories if the LDs split the anti Tory vote in Epping Forest that is no bad thing, especially as Reform are not standing.

Hope you had a good lunch

LostPassword

Farooq said:

@LostPassword
Coulcoolaghta, Michel Houellebecq

Close, but wrong peninsula.

Anabobazina

FrancisUrquhart said:

Anabobazina said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Anabobazina said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Awkward....

John Swinney backs Nicola Sturgeon after she takes ITV election night job

Former Scottish leader in hypocrisy row after SNP criticised Ruth Davidson for the same role five years ago

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/06/12/john-swinney-backs-nicola-sturgeon-snp-itv-election-job/

I think that's Ed Balls, The Sturge, and George Osborne already signed up for ITV. It's going to be unbeatable coverage –– AGAIN.

As long as Balls accidentally on purpose locks Peston in the toilets.

I think Balls and Osborne are very good when I have seen them in conversions (better than Bad Al and Rory the Tory). Thrasher from Sky is the best for analysing the results as they come in.

Did that actually happen? LOL.

Yes Balls-Osborne are a great double act. Their podcast is excellent.

No, I was joking about if only. I like them because of course they have their political bias / side, but are very good at rising above that and discussing what is a good / bad idea on its merits.

That's right. They are also an interesting example of deadly political opponents being close friends IRL. Balls and Yvette attended Ozzy's recent wedding.

Malmesbury

Sandpit said:

Nigelb said:

We earlier today had a brief discussion about defence policy and procurement.

This is a new paper from Tony Blair's vanity institute which actually has some interesting and useful things to say.

Reimagining Defence and Security: New Capabilities for New Challenges
https://www.institute.global/insights/geopolitics-and-security/reimagining-defence-and-security-new-capabilities-for-new-challenges

This bit in particular suggests it's not all hot air, even if the language is overly florid:

Review, Repurpose, Retrain or Retire Capabilities
As the nature of defence and deterrence evolves, so must the arsenal of capabilities. As resources and funding will always be limited, choices may need to be made as to which capabilities should be deprioritised* if they cannot be repurposed. Advances in technology will accelerate the need for focus and prioritisation, with emerging technology rendering more existing capabilities redundant over time. Identifying and reducing support for these capabilities will be key.
Furthermore, rather than trying to maintain every defence capability and often doing so insufficiently well, the UK must focus on delivering key capabilities effectively...

...There is evidence to suggest that neither the government nor the armed forces are currently taking these kinds of decisions. Earlier this year, the Public Accounts Committee found a £16.9 billion deficit between the MoD’s stated capability requirements and its budget, warning that “the MoD has not had the discipline to balance its budget by making the difficult choices about which operational activities to curtail and which equipment programmes it can and cannot afford”. Similarly, experts have warned of cultural barriers to this kind of prioritisation within the armed forces, with some senior leaders concerned that winding down certain capabilities jeopardises the perception of our armed forces as a tier-one fighting power...

* I think they mean cut.

Genuinely interesting. As with space exloration, the future of the military is going be defined by who is quick and nimble and cheap, rather than those spending billions on decade-long programs designed to fight the last war.

Meanwhile, have another video of a small Ukranian drone with a grenade on board, $2k tops, taking out a Russian tank.

https://x.com/osinttechnical/status/1800339316734099563

Many of those drone hits are one tanks that have already been disabled and/or abandoned by the their crews.

twistedfirestopper3

Sandpit said:

Nigelb said:

We earlier today had a brief discussion about defence policy and procurement.

This is a new paper from Tony Blair's vanity institute which actually has some interesting and useful things to say.

Reimagining Defence and Security: New Capabilities for New Challenges
https://www.institute.global/insights/geopolitics-and-security/reimagining-defence-and-security-new-capabilities-for-new-challenges

This bit in particular suggests it's not all hot air, even if the language is overly florid:

Review, Repurpose, Retrain or Retire Capabilities
As the nature of defence and deterrence evolves, so must the arsenal of capabilities. As resources and funding will always be limited, choices may need to be made as to which capabilities should be deprioritised* if they cannot be repurposed. Advances in technology will accelerate the need for focus and prioritisation, with emerging technology rendering more existing capabilities redundant over time. Identifying and reducing support for these capabilities will be key.
Furthermore, rather than trying to maintain every defence capability and often doing so insufficiently well, the UK must focus on delivering key capabilities effectively...

...There is evidence to suggest that neither the government nor the armed forces are currently taking these kinds of decisions. Earlier this year, the Public Accounts Committee found a £16.9 billion deficit between the MoD’s stated capability requirements and its budget, warning that “the MoD has not had the discipline to balance its budget by making the difficult choices about which operational activities to curtail and which equipment programmes it can and cannot afford”. Similarly, experts have warned of cultural barriers to this kind of prioritisation within the armed forces, with some senior leaders concerned that winding down certain capabilities jeopardises the perception of our armed forces as a tier-one fighting power...

* I think they mean cut.

Genuinely interesting. As with space exloration, the future of the military is going be defined by who is quick and nimble and cheap, rather than those spending billions on decade-long programs designed to fight the last war.

Meanwhile, have another video of a small Ukranian drone with a grenade on board, $2k tops, taking out a Russian tank.

https://x.com/osinttechnical/status/1800339316734099563

The disgusting use of drones by Ukraine is going to make life very hard for us recreational drone messer-abouterers!

Unpopular

Anabobazina said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Awkward....

John Swinney backs Nicola Sturgeon after she takes ITV election night job

Former Scottish leader in hypocrisy row after SNP criticised Ruth Davidson for the same role five years ago

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/06/12/john-swinney-backs-nicola-sturgeon-snp-itv-election-job/

I think that's Ed Balls, The Sturge, and George Osborne already signed up for ITV. It's going to be unbeatable coverage –– AGAIN.

I've always been a BBC man for election night, but I think I'll be giving ITV a go this time, having enjoyed Balls' and Osborne's podcast. I feel slightly disloyal and also anxious at having to wrangle with the unholy mess that is STV player.

No_Offence_Alan

Taz said:

Peter_the_Punter said:

LostPassword said:

noneoftheabove said:

Farooq said:

Gardenwalker said:

What on earth is the media going to cover for the next three weeks?

The manifestos are nearly all out.
The Reform surge had peaked too early.
The Rishi-is-shit meme has become boring if not overdone.
Even Davey’s watersports are losing their sparkle.

Criminally underrated post. The word "sparkle" right at the end there was golden.

Badenoch will pick on the wokeness of the England football team. Sunak will try and apologise and somehow make it worse. Isam will pop up to say Starmer doesn't know enough about football tactics.

Oh yes. The association football tournament starts this Friday. I guess we'll see which of the contenders can look most awkward in their staged photos watching the match.

Presumably Rishi will leave at half-time to attend an interview.

IF England are losing by a large margin so will many other England soccer fans.

The Germans will make them stay to the end.

Anabobazina

Unpopular said:

Anabobazina said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Awkward....

John Swinney backs Nicola Sturgeon after she takes ITV election night job

Former Scottish leader in hypocrisy row after SNP criticised Ruth Davidson for the same role five years ago

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/06/12/john-swinney-backs-nicola-sturgeon-snp-itv-election-job/

I think that's Ed Balls, The Sturge, and George Osborne already signed up for ITV. It's going to be unbeatable coverage –– AGAIN.

I've always been a BBC man for election night, but I think I'll be giving ITV a go this time, having enjoyed Balls' and Osborne's podcast. I feel slightly disloyal and also anxious at having to wrangle with the unholy mess that is STV player.

The ITV coverage was vastly superior last time. And this time the Beeb have... Laura K.

DYOR etc etc...

Sandpit

Malmesbury said:

Nigelb said:

We earlier today had a brief discussion about defence policy and procurement.

This is a new paper from Tony Blair's vanity institute which actually has some interesting and useful things to say.

Reimagining Defence and Security: New Capabilities for New Challenges
https://www.institute.global/insights/geopolitics-and-security/reimagining-defence-and-security-new-capabilities-for-new-challenges

This bit in particular suggests it's not all hot air, even if the language is overly florid:

Review, Repurpose, Retrain or Retire Capabilities
As the nature of defence and deterrence evolves, so must the arsenal of capabilities. As resources and funding will always be limited, choices may need to be made as to which capabilities should be deprioritised* if they cannot be repurposed. Advances in technology will accelerate the need for focus and prioritisation, with emerging technology rendering more existing capabilities redundant over time. Identifying and reducing support for these capabilities will be key.
Furthermore, rather than trying to maintain every defence capability and often doing so insufficiently well, the UK must focus on delivering key capabilities effectively...

...There is evidence to suggest that neither the government nor the armed forces are currently taking these kinds of decisions. Earlier this year, the Public Accounts Committee found a £16.9 billion deficit between the MoD’s stated capability requirements and its budget, warning that “the MoD has not had the discipline to balance its budget by making the difficult choices about which operational activities to curtail and which equipment programmes it can and cannot afford”. Similarly, experts have warned of cultural barriers to this kind of prioritisation within the armed forces, with some senior leaders concerned that winding down certain capabilities jeopardises the perception of our armed forces as a tier-one fighting power...

* I think they mean cut.

Some years ago, the US Army spent a fortune on a series of programs to design a new super duper rifle. To increase hit rate.

They discovered, almost by accident, during the testing, that the biggest improvement was teaching soldiers to shoot, and giving them practise.

No sh!t, Sherlock! That more training and and an excess of ammo makes for better shooters, over trying to improve on commodity rifles at a cost of billions, tells you all that’s wrong with military procurement.

That NATO is currently scrambling to get production lines of 152mm and 155mm tank ammo up and running, is an indictment of this type of thinking, which is everywhere in the military supply chain. The best gun is the one you have.

Casino_Royale

I wouldn't write off Jeremy Hunt.

He knows the seat well, works it hard and his sort of brand of Conservatism is well suited to it.

Private schools tax hasn't gone down well there. And there are lots about.

Anabobazina

CENTURY ODDS KLAXON

Tory Majority now trading at 100 on Betfair Exchange.

eek

Casino_Royale said:

I wouldn't write off Jeremy Hunt.

He knows the seat well, works it hard and his sort of brand of Conservatism is well suited to it.

Private schools tax hasn't gone down well there. And there are lots about.

Which to be blunt shows how bad the local council (followed by the department for education) had run things

Sandpit

Malmesbury said:

Sandpit said:

Nigelb said:

We earlier today had a brief discussion about defence policy and procurement.

This is a new paper from Tony Blair's vanity institute which actually has some interesting and useful things to say.

Reimagining Defence and Security: New Capabilities for New Challenges
https://www.institute.global/insights/geopolitics-and-security/reimagining-defence-and-security-new-capabilities-for-new-challenges

This bit in particular suggests it's not all hot air, even if the language is overly florid:

Review, Repurpose, Retrain or Retire Capabilities
As the nature of defence and deterrence evolves, so must the arsenal of capabilities. As resources and funding will always be limited, choices may need to be made as to which capabilities should be deprioritised* if they cannot be repurposed. Advances in technology will accelerate the need for focus and prioritisation, with emerging technology rendering more existing capabilities redundant over time. Identifying and reducing support for these capabilities will be key.
Furthermore, rather than trying to maintain every defence capability and often doing so insufficiently well, the UK must focus on delivering key capabilities effectively...

...There is evidence to suggest that neither the government nor the armed forces are currently taking these kinds of decisions. Earlier this year, the Public Accounts Committee found a £16.9 billion deficit between the MoD’s stated capability requirements and its budget, warning that “the MoD has not had the discipline to balance its budget by making the difficult choices about which operational activities to curtail and which equipment programmes it can and cannot afford”. Similarly, experts have warned of cultural barriers to this kind of prioritisation within the armed forces, with some senior leaders concerned that winding down certain capabilities jeopardises the perception of our armed forces as a tier-one fighting power...

* I think they mean cut.

Genuinely interesting. As with space exloration, the future of the military is going be defined by who is quick and nimble and cheap, rather than those spending billions on decade-long programs designed to fight the last war.

Meanwhile, have another video of a small Ukranian drone with a grenade on board, $2k tops, taking out a Russian tank.

https://x.com/osinttechnical/status/1800339316734099563

Many of those drone hits are one tanks that have already been disabled and/or abandoned by the their crews.

I’d not heard that, but even if they’re run out of fuel, otherwise broken down, or have their crews sleeping, blowing them halfway to Hell is infinitely better than allowing the enemy an opportunity to use them in future.

Anabobazina

Casino_Royale said:

I wouldn't write off Jeremy Hunt.

He knows the seat well, works it hard and his sort of brand of Conservatism is well suited to it.

Private schools tax hasn't gone down well there. And there are lots about.

The Libs oppose the schools VAT thing though.

LostPassword

Sandpit said:

Nigelb said:

We earlier today had a brief discussion about defence policy and procurement.

This is a new paper from Tony Blair's vanity institute which actually has some interesting and useful things to say.

Reimagining Defence and Security: New Capabilities for New Challenges
https://www.institute.global/insights/geopolitics-and-security/reimagining-defence-and-security-new-capabilities-for-new-challenges

This bit in particular suggests it's not all hot air, even if the language is overly florid:

Review, Repurpose, Retrain or Retire Capabilities
As the nature of defence and deterrence evolves, so must the arsenal of capabilities. As resources and funding will always be limited, choices may need to be made as to which capabilities should be deprioritised* if they cannot be repurposed. Advances in technology will accelerate the need for focus and prioritisation, with emerging technology rendering more existing capabilities redundant over time. Identifying and reducing support for these capabilities will be key.
Furthermore, rather than trying to maintain every defence capability and often doing so insufficiently well, the UK must focus on delivering key capabilities effectively...

...There is evidence to suggest that neither the government nor the armed forces are currently taking these kinds of decisions. Earlier this year, the Public Accounts Committee found a £16.9 billion deficit between the MoD’s stated capability requirements and its budget, warning that “the MoD has not had the discipline to balance its budget by making the difficult choices about which operational activities to curtail and which equipment programmes it can and cannot afford”. Similarly, experts have warned of cultural barriers to this kind of prioritisation within the armed forces, with some senior leaders concerned that winding down certain capabilities jeopardises the perception of our armed forces as a tier-one fighting power...

* I think they mean cut.

Genuinely interesting. As with space exloration, the future of the military is going be defined by who is quick and nimble and cheap, rather than those spending billions on decade-long programs designed to fight the last war.

Meanwhile, have another video of a small Ukranian drone with a grenade on board, $2k tops, taking out a Russian tank.

https://x.com/osinttechnical/status/1800339316734099563

The Bradley IFV seems to be the foreign-supplied armoured vehicle that appears most regularly in Ukrainian propaganda videos, with a fair number of Russian tank and other armoured vehicle kills - some working in combination with drones.

When you compare to the Russian use of motorbikes as an alternative form of battlefield mobility, I think it's clear that there's still a role for heavy armour on the drone-dominated battlefield.