The spread on Reform seats has moved up to 6-8, so I am just about green on my buy at 5.5 but I am struggling to see which seats they actually win.
Clacton and Ashfield, yes, but where are seats 3,4,5 & 6?
We need to recruit some RefUK posters.
The fact they aren't here tells you something.
Given the flak anyone trying to point out why they are getting traction gets, with regular "fascist" and similar comments about them , is that surprising?
Quite so. PB is losing its touch, it is so absurdly, hysterically hostile to Reform - now polling around 20% let us note - you have to be a hard-arsed thick-skinned son of a bitch to even mention some reasons they might appeal. Luckily, I am a thick skinned SOB so I don't care, but imagine what less obdurate and grizzled lurkers might feel, coming on here?
I saw the same on the leaders' debate with Krishnan Guru Murthy, Some Reform minded woman said that her part of England was now so overwhelmingly foreign it did not feel like home and she was thinking of emigrating. That is a perfectly legitimate point of view, we have just endured 2.4m migrants in 3 years, and that after decades of record immigraion, some parts of Britain HAVE been transformed in a few years, and if I lived in them I might feel hurt, frightened and desirous of fleeing. FFS Camden Tube can be unnerving!
Yet Krishnan wotsit treated her like she had just said "gas all the Muslims" and he asked the leaders whether they wanted HER to leave the UK because she was an obvious racist
If you get that kind of reaction from a well known TV presenter on live TV it's no surprise Reform voters might keep their instincts well hidden. It's disgusting and ultimately very dangerous. Let the people speak
Do you think Reform will surprise on the upside?
Because I would hate for us to lose our touch.
You could try modding the site so it is slightly less hateful to anyone remotely minded to vote Reform, or even inclined to say "actually Farage has a point" etc etc
This is not for my protection, I don't give a fuck
But we need PB to be a broad church so we can make infiormed bets or wise predictions. It really isn't, in this instance
The absence of Reform voters on PB is telling in itself. It suggests that they are not particularly politically engaged, or are likely not to be traditional Tories (HYUFD/BigG/DavidL etc), do not have access to the internet, do not place bets or some combination of these.
You can extract quite a lot of that if you base your betting on polling sample error, swing versus turnout, demographics and so on.
Alternatively, the hostility you mention could lead to something hitherto unheard of - shy Reform voters. PB might be different but in my experience these types of people are more than happy to advertise their views. DYOR.
That or PB is largely made up of middle managers and accountants from the status obsessed middle classes who consider a vote for the Faragist intifada completely non-u due to status anxiety.
Whereas one of the richest poshos I know has shamelessly broken for reform on the basis he thinks the tories have f***Ed the country.
I suspect it's all a bit like status conscious people shopping at asda while saying they only ever shop in waitrose.
A lot of those types will break for reform, but won't admit it. Until enough people in their social circle make it acceptable to talk about.
95% of PBers have terrible Status Anxiety
Your anxiety is your own problem. It's a pretty broad church here and by and large it's been enjoyable... but if I were you I'd tone it down a bit.
The spread on Reform seats has moved up to 6-8, so I am just about green on my buy at 5.5 but I am struggling to see which seats they actually win.
Clacton and Ashfield, yes, but where are seats 3,4,5 & 6?
We need to recruit some RefUK posters.
The fact they aren't here tells you something.
Given the flak anyone trying to point out why they are getting traction gets, with regular "fascist" and similar comments about them , is that surprising?
Quite so. PB is losing its touch, it is so absurdly, hysterically hostile to Reform - now polling around 20% let us note - you have to be a hard-arsed thick-skinned son of a bitch to even mention some reasons they might appeal. Luckily, I am a thick skinned SOB so I don't care, but imagine what less obdurate and grizzled lurkers might feel, coming on here?
I saw the same on the leaders' debate with Krishnan Guru Murthy, Some Reform minded woman said that her part of England was now so overwhelmingly foreign it did not feel like home and she was thinking of emigrating. That is a perfectly legitimate point of view, we have just endured 2.4m migrants in 3 years, and that after decades of record immigraion, some parts of Britain HAVE been transformed in a few years, and if I lived in them I might feel hurt, frightened and desirous of fleeing. FFS Camden Tube can be unnerving!
Yet Krishnan wotsit treated her like she had just said "gas all the Muslims" and he asked the leaders whether they wanted HER to leave the UK because she was an obvious racist
If you get that kind of reaction from a well known TV presenter on live TV it's no surprise Reform voters might keep their instincts well hidden. It's disgusting and ultimately very dangerous. Let the people speak
Do you think Reform will surprise on the upside?
Because I would hate for us to lose our touch.
You could try modding the site so it is slightly less hateful to anyone remotely minded to vote Reform, or even inclined to say "actually Farage has a point" etc etc
This is not for my protection, I don't give a fuck
But we need PB to be a broad church so we can make infiormed bets or wise predictions. It really isn't, in this instance
The absence of Reform voters on PB is telling in itself. It suggests that they are not particularly politically engaged, or are likely not to be traditional Tories (HYUFD/BigG/DavidL etc), do not have access to the internet, do not place bets or some combination of these.
You can extract quite a lot of that if you base your betting on polling sample error, swing versus turnout, demographics and so on.
Alternatively, the hostility you mention could lead to something hitherto unheard of - shy Reform voters. PB might be different but in my experience these types of people are more than happy to advertise their views. DYOR.
If PB is suddenly full if people who are shy about sharing their opinion then I have to say that is news to me!
The spread on Reform seats has moved up to 6-8, so I am just about green on my buy at 5.5 but I am struggling to see which seats they actually win.
Clacton and Ashfield, yes, but where are seats 3,4,5 & 6?
We need to recruit some RefUK posters.
The fact they aren't here tells you something.
Given the flak anyone trying to point out why they are getting traction gets, with regular "fascist" and similar comments about them , is that surprising?
Quite so. PB is losing its touch, it is so absurdly, hysterically hostile to Reform - now polling around 20% let us note - you have to be a hard-arsed thick-skinned son of a bitch to even mention some reasons they might appeal. Luckily, I am a thick skinned SOB so I don't care, but imagine what less obdurate and grizzled lurkers might feel, coming on here?
I saw the same on the leaders' debate with Krishnan Guru Murthy, Some Reform minded woman said that her part of England was now so overwhelmingly foreign it did not feel like home and she was thinking of emigrating. That is a perfectly legitimate point of view, we have just endured 2.4m migrants in 3 years, and that after decades of record immigraion, some parts of Britain HAVE been transformed in a few years, and if I lived in them I might feel hurt, frightened and desirous of fleeing. FFS Camden Tube can be unnerving!
Yet Krishnan wotsit treated her like she had just said "gas all the Muslims" and he asked the leaders whether they wanted HER to leave the UK because she was an obvious racist
If you get that kind of reaction from a well known TV presenter on live TV it's no surprise Reform voters might keep their instincts well hidden. It's disgusting and ultimately very dangerous. Let the people speak
Do you think Reform will surprise on the upside?
Because I would hate for us to lose our touch.
You could try modding the site so it is slightly less hateful to anyone remotely minded to vote Reform, or even inclined to say "actually Farage has a point" etc etc
This is not for my protection, I don't give a fuck
But we need PB to be a broad church so we can make infiormed bets or wise predictions. It really isn't, in this instance
The absence of Reform voters on PB is telling in itself. It suggests that they are not particularly politically engaged, or are likely not to be traditional Tories (HYUFD/BigG/DavidL etc), do not have access to the internet, do not place bets or some combination of these.
You can extract quite a lot of that if you base your betting on polling sample error, swing versus turnout, demographics and so on.
Alternatively, the hostility you mention could lead to something hitherto unheard of - shy Reform voters. PB might be different but in my experience these types of people are more than happy to advertise their views. DYOR.
That or PB is largely made up of middle managers and accountants from the status obsessed middle classes who consider a vote for the Faragist intifada completely non-u due to status anxiety.
Whereas one of the richest poshos I know has shamelessly broken for reform on the basis he thinks the tories have f***Ed the country.
I suspect it's all a bit like status conscious people shopping at asda while saying they only ever shop in waitrose.
A lot of those types will break for reform, but won't admit it. Until enough people in their social circle make it acceptable to talk about.
95% of PBers have terrible Status Anxiety
Your anxiety is your own problem. It's a pretty broad church here and by and large it's been enjoyable... but if I were you I'd tone it down a bit.
If you were actually him, then surely you wouldn't feel the need to tone it down?
2nd bit of feedback from Wantage and Didcot ( @Andy_Cooke and @NickPalmer ). Again another member of the campaign I am involved in who are non political but very interested in who gets elected for obvious reasons. The current Tory MP has been a champion for our cause.
"I have had campaign leaflets from Labour and the SDP, plus several leaflets from the Liberal Democrats.
The Liberal Democrats are making quite in effort in Wantage, and seem to regard this as one of their target seats."
Thanks, kjh - always useful to get the feel of whether or not we're cutting through.
There are countless LibDem leaflets, which mostly are generic (not referring to the candidate) - on a given day, residents may receive 2 different ones: they are slightly overdoing it IMO. There are fairly widespread Labour leaflets and some SDP leaflets, but none so far from the Tories, who seem to have given up. LibDem posters were up first and are moderately common, though less so than in previous seats where I've been aqctive. Labour posters are catching up. I've yet to see a single Tory poster. Constituency polling varies between a smalle Labour lead to a large LibDem lead; I've yet to see a Tory lead predicted by any of them. Labour is working hard and in with a reasonable shot - but there are masses of tactical anti-Tory voters still making up their minds.
The YouGov MRP, which has a local sample as its base unlike those that only work top down from modelling, puts the LibDems in pole position, with Labour way back tussling with Reform for third and fourth place. The recent PCC elections saw LibDems outpoll Labour in both the council areas covered by that seat. Tactical voters should by now have a clear picture of what they need to do, to defeat the Tory.
The local elections last year are atypical for reasons of Labour chaos (they only put up candidates for a few seats), now sorted out, and there are numerous MRP polls with local samples, varying from a large LibDems lead to a small Labour lead. I don't think the Tory has much chance; the LibDem is probably favourite but short of local help (the Oxford team that got Laila in have moved on to this and other seats), and arguably they should be concentrating on Henley, where Labour isn't trying as hard. It depends whether one thinks their national prospects are, say, 30, 50 or 70.
The spread on Reform seats has moved up to 6-8, so I am just about green on my buy at 5.5 but I am struggling to see which seats they actually win.
Clacton and Ashfield, yes, but where are seats 3,4,5 & 6?
We need to recruit some RefUK posters.
The fact they aren't here tells you something.
Given the flak anyone trying to point out why they are getting traction gets, with regular "fascist" and similar comments about them , is that surprising?
Quite so. PB is losing its touch, it is so absurdly, hysterically hostile to Reform - now polling around 20% let us note - you have to be a hard-arsed thick-skinned son of a bitch to even mention some reasons they might appeal. Luckily, I am a thick skinned SOB so I don't care, but imagine what less obdurate and grizzled lurkers might feel, coming on here?
I saw the same on the leaders' debate with Krishnan Guru Murthy, Some Reform minded woman said that her part of England was now so overwhelmingly foreign it did not feel like home and she was thinking of emigrating. That is a perfectly legitimate point of view, we have just endured 2.4m migrants in 3 years, and that after decades of record immigraion, some parts of Britain HAVE been transformed in a few years, and if I lived in them I might feel hurt, frightened and desirous of fleeing. FFS Camden Tube can be unnerving!
Yet Krishnan wotsit treated her like she had just said "gas all the Muslims" and he asked the leaders whether they wanted HER to leave the UK because she was an obvious racist
If you get that kind of reaction from a well known TV presenter on live TV it's no surprise Reform voters might keep their instincts well hidden. It's disgusting and ultimately very dangerous. Let the people speak
Emigrating to avoid foreigners? Quite...
He's another Brexit wanker traitor who emigrates to avoid the unflushed turd he created.
Do you think calling me a "Brexit wanker/traitor" benefits the site?
Yes, as I am only following your style.
Ah, the sincerest form of flattery. I don't blame you, my style is quite the thing
It really isn't.
Well, my style pays, and indeed it pays extremely well, at times
It’s sad that you so often fall back to that as the justification-of-last-resort, as if anyone else here seriously thinks that it’s any kind of scorecard.
It's when Leon questions your manhood that you really know you've won the argument (if you're a bloke).
That's one vote for the Tories in Sheffield Hallam.
My vote is 100% influenced by wanting to keep His Excellency The Right Honourable The Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton as Foreign Secretary.
Oh aye, like that’s gonna happen.
Didn’t you previously say you were minded not to vote Tory? Are you Big G-like in your flip floppery?!
I’m only joshing, I don’t blame you, or him, for returning to the fold. You both seem to have longstanding, heartfelt, tribal feelings for the party. It’s not something I understand personally, but it must be difficult to see an organisation you have such an affinity, a connection, with in such deep, deep shit.
I’ll never forgive the Tories for what they’ve done to this country for the last 14 years, for the damage austerity has brought to my part of the Red Wall, the closed libraries and sports centres, the crumbling public realm, the hard-pressed public services, the slow, wilful destruction of the NHS. And I’ll never forgive them for stripping me of my European citizenship and Freedom of Movement, for their weakness in standing up to their nutters.
I want them to get a good fucking hammering. I want their handling of the last 14 years to be clearly, unequivocally, decisively rejected by the public. I want them to be chastened, to have their time in the wilderness, to renew. But I don’t want them destroyed. Because as bad as they are - and I hate the party with a passion even though I have plenty of Tory friends -Farage is worse.
The number of people I know who are voting Tory is quite extraordinary. I think it's one of those habits that are hard to break. If it wasn't for PB and my belief in polls I would be putting my house on at least a hung parliament
Roger, you're a wealthy retired tampon ad executive, educated at a minor public school, who mainly lives in Villefranche-sur-Mer
Your social circle is probably quite unusual, and may indeed be limited to 24/7 private nurses
I have a wide circle of friends and family, home and abroad, rich and poor, who are a real mix, arty and geeky, you name it. In the past they've been everything from SWP to BNP, but mainly Labour and Tory, with a couple of Libs, Nits and UKIPs
Not a single one is definitely voting Tory. One was edging that way but the Reform Manifesto has tempted her to Farage
I can therefore believe these stories of total wipe-out (sorry @Sandpit). Unless there is a shy Tory effect at work, but I don't believe it, people aren't embarrassed about voting Tory or not voting Tory, they just despise them, quietly or loudly. A shy Reform vote is more likely, because Farage
What about a deal. You stop calling me 'a tampon ad exec' and I'll stop referring to you (accurately) as the winner of the Henry Miller award for the worst sex book ever written.
The winning passage, I assume, was a rather crass and cringe depiction of a breathless and sweaty menage a un.
I believe Roger is confusing me with exPBer @SeanT, and, as always, has got all the details completely wrong: the award was the Bad Sex in Fiction prize, not "Henry Miller", and it is for a passage of absurd sex writing, not a whole book
The passage is quite quite something. The excerpts you find online do not remotely do it justice. After the lagershed I might put it on here, but it really has to be after the lagershed
The one that ends in "aiwa"?
I might actually have it on my bookshelf still somewhere. I picked it up in the 2000s on the basis of the notoriety of that passage, long before I ever heard of PB.
The fact I can still remember the outline of the plot two decades later suggests it's a decent read - I read a lot and don't remember most books. A bit amis-y in places but it was the style of the time...
Amis fils presumably?
Top tip: The Zone Of Interest is I think his best. Much more complex than the film and no faux cockneys in it.
Amis (M.) went off the boil around the time of The Information and never really got it back. I did read the zone of interest and can't remember a bloody thing about it, save for the protagonist is called Paul Doll. If I can remember the details of a book years later chances are it's good. If I draw a blank, it's a miss. I barely remember anything from an Amis book published after 1995.
I kind of gave up on Amis after House of Meetings, but I'm puzzled by the Wiki description of Zone of Interest which seems to bear little connection with the (excellent) film of the same name - Doll is Rudolf Höss apparently. It's a good title, pregnant with the adminstrative varnish put on genocide, perhaps Glazer just stole the best bit.
I thought Zone of Interest (the movie) was a masterpiece, the lack of any story somehow made it better, because that is life, often there is no story as such, just life going on day after day, humdrum and quotidian, yet over the wall the Holocaust
And my God that fucking soundtrack, a work of total genius. The best, certainly most terrifying soundtrack in movie history?? At certain points it was freaking me out so much the ordinary cries of the baby made me shudder, like a baby times a million
The spread on Reform seats has moved up to 6-8, so I am just about green on my buy at 5.5 but I am struggling to see which seats they actually win.
Clacton and Ashfield, yes, but where are seats 3,4,5 & 6?
We need to recruit some RefUK posters.
The fact they aren't here tells you something.
Given the flak anyone trying to point out why they are getting traction gets, with regular "fascist" and similar comments about them , is that surprising?
Quite so. PB is losing its touch, it is so absurdly, hysterically hostile to Reform - now polling around 20% let us note - you have to be a hard-arsed thick-skinned son of a bitch to even mention some reasons they might appeal. Luckily, I am a thick skinned SOB so I don't care, but imagine what less obdurate and grizzled lurkers might feel, coming on here?
I saw the same on the leaders' debate with Krishnan Guru Murthy, Some Reform minded woman said that her part of England was now so overwhelmingly foreign it did not feel like home and she was thinking of emigrating. That is a perfectly legitimate point of view, we have just endured 2.4m migrants in 3 years, and that after decades of record immigraion, some parts of Britain HAVE been transformed in a few years, and if I lived in them I might feel hurt, frightened and desirous of fleeing. FFS Camden Tube can be unnerving!
Yet Krishnan wotsit treated her like she had just said "gas all the Muslims" and he asked the leaders whether they wanted HER to leave the UK because she was an obvious racist
If you get that kind of reaction from a well known TV presenter on live TV it's no surprise Reform voters might keep their instincts well hidden. It's disgusting and ultimately very dangerous. Let the people speak
Emigrating to avoid foreigners? Quite...
So she will bugger off to another country where she’ll be an immigrant and yet moans about too many immigrants here . It was like those vox pops in Spain during the EU ref who moaned about too many immigrants in the UK and didn’t compute that they were immigrants in Spain .
I would rather not live in a majority Muslim area, because it would entirely change the cultural feel of the neighborhood: all the pubs shut (no custom), the schools change entirely, the streets and shops are transformed. This happens, I've seen it happen in parts of Birmingham and, to a lesser extent, London
This is not racism, it is merely preferring your own native culture: a very human thing. So if this woman now emigrates to a more traditonally Christian country, albeit foreign, she is making a rational choice
And I have travelled widely in Muslim countries, many of them, and had marvelous times and met some of the most marvelous people. I just don't want to live in a Muslim country/locale
Swich it around, if a load of white Christians swiftly took over half a town in Pakistan and opened pubs and closed all the mosques and opened churches then the Pakistani locals would probably feel quite aggreived and upset. And that would not be racism, either. Just human nature: their sense of upset would be justified
Dubai waves at you. 👋🏼
The locals are quite happy at what the place has become in the last two decades.
Dubai is pretty unique tho. It was a dismal backwater and made the conscious decision to open its doors to the world as a route to prosperity. It has worked brilliantly well, and good luck to them. Ditto places like Singapore and Hong Kong (as was, sob)
What worked for a small emirate like Dubai would go catastrophically badly in many other parts of the Muslim world, indeed it wouldn't even be allowed. Saudi is not about to let in 2m Christians keen on opening pubs and selling bacon sarnies on streetcorners
Give me an hour or so, and I’ll be waving from the pub two doors down from my house while eating a bacon sandwich!
The spread on Reform seats has moved up to 6-8, so I am just about green on my buy at 5.5 but I am struggling to see which seats they actually win.
Clacton and Ashfield, yes, but where are seats 3,4,5 & 6?
We need to recruit some RefUK posters.
The fact they aren't here tells you something.
Given the flak anyone trying to point out why they are getting traction gets, with regular "fascist" and similar comments about them , is that surprising?
Quite so. PB is losing its touch, it is so absurdly, hysterically hostile to Reform - now polling around 20% let us note - you have to be a hard-arsed thick-skinned son of a bitch to even mention some reasons they might appeal. Luckily, I am a thick skinned SOB so I don't care, but imagine what less obdurate and grizzled lurkers might feel, coming on here?
I saw the same on the leaders' debate with Krishnan Guru Murthy, Some Reform minded woman said that her part of England was now so overwhelmingly foreign it did not feel like home and she was thinking of emigrating. That is a perfectly legitimate point of view, we have just endured 2.4m migrants in 3 years, and that after decades of record immigraion, some parts of Britain HAVE been transformed in a few years, and if I lived in them I might feel hurt, frightened and desirous of fleeing. FFS Camden Tube can be unnerving!
Yet Krishnan wotsit treated her like she had just said "gas all the Muslims" and he asked the leaders whether they wanted HER to leave the UK because she was an obvious racist
If you get that kind of reaction from a well known TV presenter on live TV it's no surprise Reform voters might keep their instincts well hidden. It's disgusting and ultimately very dangerous. Let the people speak
Emigrating to avoid foreigners? Quite...
So she will bugger off to another country where she’ll be an immigrant and yet moans about too many immigrants here . It was like those vox pops in Spain during the EU ref who moaned about too many immigrants in the UK and didn’t compute that they were immigrants in Spain .
I would rather not live in a majority Muslim area, because it would entirely change the cultural feel of the neighborhood: all the pubs shut (no custom), the schools change entirely, the streets and shops are transformed. This happens, I've seen it happen in parts of Birmingham and, to a lesser extent, London
This is not racism, it is merely preferring your own native culture: a very human thing. So if this woman now emigrates to a more traditonally Christian country, albeit foreign, she is making a rational choice
And I have travelled widely in Muslim countries, many of them, and had marvelous times and met some of the most marvelous people. I just don't want to live in a Muslim country/locale
Swich it around, if a load of white Christians swiftly took over half a town in Pakistan and opened pubs and closed all the mosques and opened churches then the Pakistani locals would probably feel quite aggreived and upset. And that would not be racism, either. Just human nature: their sense of upset would be justified
Not surprising, I remember a former poster here who used to boast about hissing at muslim women in burkhas.
These clowns are so stupid they did not get an unknown 3rd party to put the bets on , explains why the country is circling the drain.
They shouldn't have to, malc. This is yet another example of a thing being punished for no good reason. It is legal to gamble.
In fixed-odds bookmaking, the bookmaker knows that there may be people on the other side of the bet with insider information. When people start piling on implausible candidates (eg "The Next Doctor Who Is Jodie Whittaker" in 2016 or "...Is Peter Capaldi" in 2013) the proper response is for the bookmakers to take it on the chin and suspend the market.
PB prides itself on being for free speech (unless it's speech it doesn't like) and against cancellation (except for the people it wants cancelled). We should be loudly decrying this violation of the gambler's rights and interfering with their gambling, not nodding and winking at it.
I never thought I'd be acting for Conservative Party personnel, but it's a topsy-turvy world these days.
It is of course legal to gamble. But is it legal to place a bet on an outcome you already know, by virtue of your position, to be certain ? Or are you at that point defrauding the bookmaker ?
Aren't all bets about information asymmetry? If you have more and better information than me, you win. If I have more and better information than you, I win.
Many years ago, I was involved in a campaign which was the defence of a theoretically marginal seat, where bookies were offering odds a little worse than evens on a Lib Dem hold. But I'd been on the doorstep and spoken to plenty of others who had, and we were cruising home to a huge win. I made a lot of money on it.
I don't quite see at what point you think it becomes cheating. If a bookie is worried people know more about it than them, don't open the book. Or do open the book based on a calculation that, while some people have more information than you, most don't and you can always say "£100 max bet".
It clearly wasn't wise for people to place bets, but I'm struggling with this one to say it was any more than unwise.
You didn't originate this LD hold and it was up to the voters. You didn't know for sure. Not so the Tory instance.
That's not a valid distinction. The people accused of betting on this one didn't originate it, as far as we know. I had very strong information about what the voters planned, these people had very strong information about what Sunak planned. I really think people have gone bonkers on this.
The spread on Reform seats has moved up to 6-8, so I am just about green on my buy at 5.5 but I am struggling to see which seats they actually win.
Clacton and Ashfield, yes, but where are seats 3,4,5 & 6?
We need to recruit some RefUK posters.
The fact they aren't here tells you something.
Given the flak anyone trying to point out why they are getting traction gets, with regular "fascist" and similar comments about them , is that surprising?
Quite so. PB is losing its touch, it is so absurdly, hysterically hostile to Reform - now polling around 20% let us note - you have to be a hard-arsed thick-skinned son of a bitch to even mention some reasons they might appeal. Luckily, I am a thick skinned SOB so I don't care, but imagine what less obdurate and grizzled lurkers might feel, coming on here?
I saw the same on the leaders' debate with Krishnan Guru Murthy, Some Reform minded woman said that her part of England was now so overwhelmingly foreign it did not feel like home and she was thinking of emigrating. That is a perfectly legitimate point of view, we have just endured 2.4m migrants in 3 years, and that after decades of record immigraion, some parts of Britain HAVE been transformed in a few years, and if I lived in them I might feel hurt, frightened and desirous of fleeing. FFS Camden Tube can be unnerving!
Yet Krishnan wotsit treated her like she had just said "gas all the Muslims" and he asked the leaders whether they wanted HER to leave the UK because she was an obvious racist
If you get that kind of reaction from a well known TV presenter on live TV it's no surprise Reform voters might keep their instincts well hidden. It's disgusting and ultimately very dangerous. Let the people speak
Do you think Reform will surprise on the upside?
Because I would hate for us to lose our touch.
You could try modding the site so it is slightly less hateful to anyone remotely minded to vote Reform, or even inclined to say "actually Farage has a point" etc etc
This is not for my protection, I don't give a fuck
But we need PB to be a broad church so we can make infiormed bets or wise predictions. It really isn't, in this instance
The absence of Reform voters on PB is telling in itself. It suggests that they are not particularly politically engaged, or are likely not to be traditional Tories (HYUFD/BigG/DavidL etc), do not have access to the internet, do not place bets or some combination of these.
You can extract quite a lot of that if you base your betting on polling sample error, swing versus turnout, demographics and so on.
Alternatively, the hostility you mention could lead to something hitherto unheard of - shy Reform voters. PB might be different but in my experience these types of people are more than happy to advertise their views. DYOR.
That or PB is largely made up of middle managers and accountants from the status obsessed middle classes who consider a vote for the Faragist intifada completely non-u due to status anxiety.
Whereas one of the richest poshos I know has shamelessly broken for reform on the basis he thinks the tories have f***Ed the country.
I suspect it's all a bit like status conscious people shopping at asda while saying they only ever shop in waitrose.
A lot of those types will break for reform, but won't admit it. Until enough people in their social circle make it acceptable to talk about.
95% of PBers have terrible Status Anxiety
Your anxiety is your own problem. It's a pretty broad church here and by and large it's been enjoyable... but if I were you I'd tone it down a bit.
Tone down what? I am being the image of politeness
Scroll back a few hours and you will find PB-ers outright wishing me dead and telling me to "rot in hell" and accusing me of pedophilia. Literally
Am I responding in kind? No, I am my normal good-humoured self, with the odd barb
The spread on Reform seats has moved up to 6-8, so I am just about green on my buy at 5.5 but I am struggling to see which seats they actually win.
Clacton and Ashfield, yes, but where are seats 3,4,5 & 6?
We need to recruit some RefUK posters.
The fact they aren't here tells you something.
Given the flak anyone trying to point out why they are getting traction gets, with regular "fascist" and similar comments about them , is that surprising?
Quite so. PB is losing its touch, it is so absurdly, hysterically hostile to Reform - now polling around 20% let us note - you have to be a hard-arsed thick-skinned son of a bitch to even mention some reasons they might appeal. Luckily, I am a thick skinned SOB so I don't care, but imagine what less obdurate and grizzled lurkers might feel, coming on here?
I saw the same on the leaders' debate with Krishnan Guru Murthy, Some Reform minded woman said that her part of England was now so overwhelmingly foreign it did not feel like home and she was thinking of emigrating. That is a perfectly legitimate point of view, we have just endured 2.4m migrants in 3 years, and that after decades of record immigraion, some parts of Britain HAVE been transformed in a few years, and if I lived in them I might feel hurt, frightened and desirous of fleeing. FFS Camden Tube can be unnerving!
Yet Krishnan wotsit treated her like she had just said "gas all the Muslims" and he asked the leaders whether they wanted HER to leave the UK because she was an obvious racist
If you get that kind of reaction from a well known TV presenter on live TV it's no surprise Reform voters might keep their instincts well hidden. It's disgusting and ultimately very dangerous. Let the people speak
Emigrating to avoid foreigners? Quite...
He's another Brexit wanker traitor who emigrates to avoid the unflushed turd he created.
Do you think calling me a "Brexit wanker/traitor" benefits the site?
Yes, as I am only following your style.
Ah, the sincerest form of flattery. I don't blame you, my style is quite the thing
It really isn't.
Well, my style pays, and indeed it pays extremely well, at times
It’s sad that you so often fall back to that as the justification-of-last-resort, as if anyone else here seriously thinks that it’s any kind of scorecard.
Well, when you're literally talking about "style of prose" it is probably the only test that matters
If you can make a lot of money writing in a certain style, that means a lot of people want to read it, it also means they clearly enjoy it, as they come back for more, so you continue to get paid
So yes I will continue to make this quite obvious point, not least because it drives all the many sad, thwarted people on here completely nuts, including you
Not really. People will pay for all sorts of rubbish.
Most often done at tennis matches, you attend a sporting event in person and bet just as something happens. You'd have one guy at the match and another at home on his laptop ready to press "submit bet" at the right moment.
Is TV not live then? I thought it was.
No had always been some delay, but with some modern feeds / streams, there is a really significant delay.
There are a number of additional steps required to digitise to images relatively to realtime. One of which is you need the next key frame (so 0.5 seconds later) to calculate the intermediate changes
Add network latancy and attempts to minimise bandwidth usage and you can introduce serious delays - I find 6 music can be 30 seconds behind streaming relative to DAB and were it Radio 2 you would discover there is a delay added to FM nowadays to ensure FM and DAB are in sync.
Are the time pips on radio 4 delayed then?
The church locally seems to be about 50 seconds behind the Angelus as broadcast on RTÉ, and I would have expected it to be the other way round, but perhaps the local church are very far behind. Local time does seem to be somewhat delayed in general.
The spread on Reform seats has moved up to 6-8, so I am just about green on my buy at 5.5 but I am struggling to see which seats they actually win.
Clacton and Ashfield, yes, but where are seats 3,4,5 & 6?
We need to recruit some RefUK posters.
The fact they aren't here tells you something.
Given the flak anyone trying to point out why they are getting traction gets, with regular "fascist" and similar comments about them , is that surprising?
Quite so. PB is losing its touch, it is so absurdly, hysterically hostile to Reform - now polling around 20% let us note - you have to be a hard-arsed thick-skinned son of a bitch to even mention some reasons they might appeal. Luckily, I am a thick skinned SOB so I don't care, but imagine what less obdurate and grizzled lurkers might feel, coming on here?
I saw the same on the leaders' debate with Krishnan Guru Murthy, Some Reform minded woman said that her part of England was now so overwhelmingly foreign it did not feel like home and she was thinking of emigrating. That is a perfectly legitimate point of view, we have just endured 2.4m migrants in 3 years, and that after decades of record immigraion, some parts of Britain HAVE been transformed in a few years, and if I lived in them I might feel hurt, frightened and desirous of fleeing. FFS Camden Tube can be unnerving!
Yet Krishnan wotsit treated her like she had just said "gas all the Muslims" and he asked the leaders whether they wanted HER to leave the UK because she was an obvious racist
If you get that kind of reaction from a well known TV presenter on live TV it's no surprise Reform voters might keep their instincts well hidden. It's disgusting and ultimately very dangerous. Let the people speak
Emigrating to avoid foreigners? Quite...
So she will bugger off to another country where she’ll be an immigrant and yet moans about too many immigrants here . It was like those vox pops in Spain during the EU ref who moaned about too many immigrants in the UK and didn’t compute that they were immigrants in Spain .
I would rather not live in a majority Muslim area, because it would entirely change the cultural feel of the neighborhood: all the pubs shut (no custom), the schools change entirely, the streets and shops are transformed. This happens, I've seen it happen in parts of Birmingham and, to a lesser extent, London
This is not racism, it is merely preferring your own native culture: a very human thing. So if this woman now emigrates to a more traditonally Christian country, albeit foreign, she is making a rational choice
And I have travelled widely in Muslim countries, many of them, and had marvelous times and met some of the most marvelous people. I just don't want to live in a Muslim country/locale
Swich it around, if a load of white Christians swiftly took over half a town in Pakistan and opened pubs and closed all the mosques and opened churches then the Pakistani locals would probably feel quite aggreived and upset. And that would not be racism, either. Just human nature: their sense of upset would be justified
Dubai waves at you. 👋🏼
The locals are quite happy at what the place has become in the last two decades.
Dubai is pretty unique tho. It was a dismal backwater and made the conscious decision to open its doors to the world as a route to prosperity. It has worked brilliantly well, and good luck to them. Ditto places like Singapore and Hong Kong (as was, sob)
What worked for a small emirate like Dubai would go catastrophically badly in many other parts of the Muslim world, indeed it wouldn't even be allowed. Saudi is not about to let in 2m Christians keen on opening pubs and selling bacon sarnies on streetcorners
Give me an hour or so, and I’ll be waving from the pub two doors down from my house while eating a bacon sandwich!
I am right now weighing up digital nomad visas. Dubai is on the list
Do you know if they have a minimum stay criterion? eg you must live in Dubai 6 months of the year etc? Some do, some don't seem to care
The spread on Reform seats has moved up to 6-8, so I am just about green on my buy at 5.5 but I am struggling to see which seats they actually win.
Clacton and Ashfield, yes, but where are seats 3,4,5 & 6?
We need to recruit some RefUK posters.
The fact they aren't here tells you something.
Given the flak anyone trying to point out why they are getting traction gets, with regular "fascist" and similar comments about them , is that surprising?
Quite so. PB is losing its touch, it is so absurdly, hysterically hostile to Reform - now polling around 20% let us note - you have to be a hard-arsed thick-skinned son of a bitch to even mention some reasons they might appeal. Luckily, I am a thick skinned SOB so I don't care, but imagine what less obdurate and grizzled lurkers might feel, coming on here?
I saw the same on the leaders' debate with Krishnan Guru Murthy, Some Reform minded woman said that her part of England was now so overwhelmingly foreign it did not feel like home and she was thinking of emigrating. That is a perfectly legitimate point of view, we have just endured 2.4m migrants in 3 years, and that after decades of record immigraion, some parts of Britain HAVE been transformed in a few years, and if I lived in them I might feel hurt, frightened and desirous of fleeing. FFS Camden Tube can be unnerving!
Yet Krishnan wotsit treated her like she had just said "gas all the Muslims" and he asked the leaders whether they wanted HER to leave the UK because she was an obvious racist
If you get that kind of reaction from a well known TV presenter on live TV it's no surprise Reform voters might keep their instincts well hidden. It's disgusting and ultimately very dangerous. Let the people speak
Emigrating to avoid foreigners? Quite...
So she will bugger off to another country where she’ll be an immigrant and yet moans about too many immigrants here . It was like those vox pops in Spain during the EU ref who moaned about too many immigrants in the UK and didn’t compute that they were immigrants in Spain .
I would rather not live in a majority Muslim area, because it would entirely change the cultural feel of the neighborhood: all the pubs shut (no custom), the schools change entirely, the streets and shops are transformed. This happens, I've seen it happen in parts of Birmingham and, to a lesser extent, London
This is not racism, it is merely preferring your own native culture: a very human thing. So if this woman now emigrates to a more traditonally Christian country, albeit foreign, she is making a rational choice
And I have travelled widely in Muslim countries, many of them, and had marvelous times and met some of the most marvelous people. I just don't want to live in a Muslim country/locale
Swich it around, if a load of white Christians swiftly took over half a town in Pakistan and opened pubs and closed all the mosques and opened churches then the Pakistani locals would probably feel quite aggreived and upset. And that would not be racism, either. Just human nature: their sense of upset would be justified
Not surprising, I remember a former poster here who used to boast about hissing at muslim women in burkhas.
Would that be Sidney the Snake or Gordon the Goose?
The spread on Reform seats has moved up to 6-8, so I am just about green on my buy at 5.5 but I am struggling to see which seats they actually win.
Clacton and Ashfield, yes, but where are seats 3,4,5 & 6?
We need to recruit some RefUK posters.
The fact they aren't here tells you something.
Given the flak anyone trying to point out why they are getting traction gets, with regular "fascist" and similar comments about them , is that surprising?
Quite so. PB is losing its touch, it is so absurdly, hysterically hostile to Reform - now polling around 20% let us note - you have to be a hard-arsed thick-skinned son of a bitch to even mention some reasons they might appeal. Luckily, I am a thick skinned SOB so I don't care, but imagine what less obdurate and grizzled lurkers might feel, coming on here?
I saw the same on the leaders' debate with Krishnan Guru Murthy, Some Reform minded woman said that her part of England was now so overwhelmingly foreign it did not feel like home and she was thinking of emigrating. That is a perfectly legitimate point of view, we have just endured 2.4m migrants in 3 years, and that after decades of record immigraion, some parts of Britain HAVE been transformed in a few years, and if I lived in them I might feel hurt, frightened and desirous of fleeing. FFS Camden Tube can be unnerving!
Yet Krishnan wotsit treated her like she had just said "gas all the Muslims" and he asked the leaders whether they wanted HER to leave the UK because she was an obvious racist
If you get that kind of reaction from a well known TV presenter on live TV it's no surprise Reform voters might keep their instincts well hidden. It's disgusting and ultimately very dangerous. Let the people speak
Do you think Reform will surprise on the upside?
Because I would hate for us to lose our touch.
When I look at Reform I can see them winning Clacton, Ashfield is possible because that's got some interesting local issues then after that I need to look for seats where Labour will do badly and with Reform getting a lot of votes.
My default seat for that is Redcar (as it does have a the last lot disappointed us (again) so vote for someone else tendency) but Labour hits that target at the moment.
What I think will be interesting is the number of (clear) second places Reform gets.
Come the 2028/29 GE then in a lot of areas 'Only Reform can beat Labour here' becomes the default message and then Farage might end up winning a lot of seats for the first time.
I don’t sense he’s remotely interested in a long five- to ten-year long haul.
Neither do I but he can disappear for a few years then come back in 2028/29 and start hammering that message.
How does he do that if he is stuck as the MP for Clacton and fails to keep his constituents happy...
A lot of second places and no MPs is way better for Farage than a few wins - especially as its very unlikely the winning Reform candidates will have the expertise to be a decent constituency MP...
Ultimately, what does Nigel actually want? Lest we forget, a few weeks ago the official lines was that he wasn't even going to be a candidate. And the path some are mapping out, win in Clacton, take over the Conservative Party, become PM in 2029... It's not that plausible, is it? And for all that others have tried, Farage is the only one to make the Reform formula cut through.
Besides, the Reform surge has been based on promising impossible bollocks. I reckon his corduroy trousers would be pretty rapidly soiled if the were ever to find himself responsible for anything.
The spread on Reform seats has moved up to 6-8, so I am just about green on my buy at 5.5 but I am struggling to see which seats they actually win.
Clacton and Ashfield, yes, but where are seats 3,4,5 & 6?
We need to recruit some RefUK posters.
The fact they aren't here tells you something.
Given the flak anyone trying to point out why they are getting traction gets, with regular "fascist" and similar comments about them , is that surprising?
Quite so. PB is losing its touch, it is so absurdly, hysterically hostile to Reform - now polling around 20% let us note - you have to be a hard-arsed thick-skinned son of a bitch to even mention some reasons they might appeal. Luckily, I am a thick skinned SOB so I don't care, but imagine what less obdurate and grizzled lurkers might feel, coming on here?
I saw the same on the leaders' debate with Krishnan Guru Murthy, Some Reform minded woman said that her part of England was now so overwhelmingly foreign it did not feel like home and she was thinking of emigrating. That is a perfectly legitimate point of view, we have just endured 2.4m migrants in 3 years, and that after decades of record immigraion, some parts of Britain HAVE been transformed in a few years, and if I lived in them I might feel hurt, frightened and desirous of fleeing. FFS Camden Tube can be unnerving!
Yet Krishnan wotsit treated her like she had just said "gas all the Muslims" and he asked the leaders whether they wanted HER to leave the UK because she was an obvious racist
If you get that kind of reaction from a well known TV presenter on live TV it's no surprise Reform voters might keep their instincts well hidden. It's disgusting and ultimately very dangerous. Let the people speak
Emigrating to avoid foreigners? Quite...
So she will bugger off to another country where she’ll be an immigrant and yet moans about too many immigrants here . It was like those vox pops in Spain during the EU ref who moaned about too many immigrants in the UK and didn’t compute that they were immigrants in Spain .
I would rather not live in a majority Muslim area, because it would entirely change the cultural feel of the neighborhood: all the pubs shut (no custom), the schools change entirely, the streets and shops are transformed. This happens, I've seen it happen in parts of Birmingham and, to a lesser extent, London
This is not racism, it is merely preferring your own native culture: a very human thing. So if this woman now emigrates to a more traditonally Christian country, albeit foreign, she is making a rational choice
And I have travelled widely in Muslim countries, many of them, and had marvelous times and met some of the most marvelous people. I just don't want to live in a Muslim country/locale
Swich it around, if a load of white Christians swiftly took over half a town in Pakistan and opened pubs and closed all the mosques and opened churches then the Pakistani locals would probably feel quite aggreived and upset. And that would not be racism, either. Just human nature: their sense of upset would be justified
Dubai waves at you. 👋🏼
The locals are quite happy at what the place has become in the last two decades.
Dubai is pretty unique tho. It was a dismal backwater and made the conscious decision to open its doors to the world as a route to prosperity. It has worked brilliantly well, and good luck to them. Ditto places like Singapore and Hong Kong (as was, sob)
What worked for a small emirate like Dubai would go catastrophically badly in many other parts of the Muslim world, indeed it wouldn't even be allowed. Saudi is not about to let in 2m Christians keen on opening pubs and selling bacon sarnies on streetcorners
Large chunks of the UK are dismal backwaters too, to be fair. The only thing missing was massive infrastructure investment.
2nd bit of feedback from Wantage and Didcot ( @Andy_Cooke and @NickPalmer ). Again another member of the campaign I am involved in who are non political but very interested in who gets elected for obvious reasons. The current Tory MP has been a champion for our cause.
"I have had campaign leaflets from Labour and the SDP, plus several leaflets from the Liberal Democrats.
The Liberal Democrats are making quite in effort in Wantage, and seem to regard this as one of their target seats."
Thanks, kjh - always useful to get the feel of whether or not we're cutting through.
There are countless LibDem leaflets, which mostly are generic (not referring to the candidate) - on a given day, residents may receive 2 different ones: they are slightly overdoing it IMO. There are fairly widespread Labour leaflets and some SDP leaflets, but none so far from the Tories, who seem to have given up. LibDem posters were up first and are moderately common, though less so than in previous seats where I've been aqctive. Labour posters are catching up. I've yet to see a single Tory poster. Constituency polling varies between a smalle Labour lead to a large LibDem lead; I've yet to see a Tory lead predicted by any of them. Labour is working hard and in with a reasonable shot - but there are masses of tactical anti-Tory voters still making up their minds.
The YouGov MRP, which has a local sample as its base unlike those that only work top down from modelling, puts the LibDems in pole position, with Labour way back tussling with Reform for third and fourth place. The recent PCC elections saw LibDems outpoll Labour in both the council areas covered by that seat. Tactical voters should by now have a clear picture of what they need to do, to defeat the Tory.
The local elections last year are atypical for reasons of Labour chaos (they only put up candidates for a few seats), now sorted out, and there are numerous MRP polls with local samples, varying from a large LibDems lead to a small Labour lead. I don't think the Tory has much chance; the LibDem is probably favourite but short of local help (the Oxford team that got Laila in have moved on to this and other seats), and arguably they should be concentrating on Henley, where Labour isn't trying as hard. It depends whether one thinks their national prospects are, say, 30, 50 or 70.
The PCC elections were just a few weeks back, and in a sense a ‘pure’ test of party preference as there was next to no campaigning.
I have just posted my postal vote back - may help to save a deposit. Some interesting by-elections today. We have 3 Lib Dem defences in Mid Devon, Oxfordshire, and Vale of White Horse; 2 Lab defences in Coventry and Sefton; a 1 Con defence in Mansfield(!).
Re Tewkesbury: You Gov polling January Con 33 Lib Dem 25, Labour 23 Reform 9 Green 8 April " 32 " 28 " 22 " 12 " 6 Early June 35 27 22 10 5 Now 32 29 15 17 5
Looks like Con v Lib Dem very close with Reform steaming up behind, might end up a Lib Dem v Reform race.
The spread on Reform seats has moved up to 6-8, so I am just about green on my buy at 5.5 but I am struggling to see which seats they actually win.
Clacton and Ashfield, yes, but where are seats 3,4,5 & 6?
We need to recruit some RefUK posters.
The fact they aren't here tells you something.
Yes. It tells you we're mostly at work!
Seriously, I currently employ 5 working class blokes, all in their 20s-30s doing old school physical engineering. I would guess from knowing them, conversations at brew time, what they post on Facebook etc that 2-3 will vote Ref, 1 Lab, 1 won't vote.
This sort of demographic is rather under represented on here!
“A sudden surge in activity on the betting markets sealed [Morgan McSweeney, Sir Keir Starmer’s campaign chief] conviction that a July poll would be called imminently.”
Those involved with "insider trading" on such betting are extra stupid in that not only huge risk if caught (for not life changing amounts of money), but these novelty markets aren't massively liquidity pools so they will move quickly if people start to put any decent amount of money on in one direction. It is rather signalling, just like we have seen in the past big moves in political betting a few hours before a big poll is to be released or from a count (and when clearly somebody has insider info).
This could go to some interesting places if people are willing to really look. It won't just be a bag carrier for the PM.
These clowns are so stupid they did not get an unknown 3rd party to put the bets on , explains why the country is circling the drain.
They shouldn't have to, malc. This is yet another example of a thing being punished for no good reason. It is legal to gamble.
In fixed-odds bookmaking, the bookmaker knows that there may be people on the other side of the bet with insider information. When people start piling on implausible candidates (eg "The Next Doctor Who Is Jodie Whittaker" in 2016 or "...Is Peter Capaldi" in 2013) the proper response is for the bookmakers to take it on the chin and suspend the market.
PB prides itself on being for free speech (unless it's speech it doesn't like) and against cancellation (except for the people it wants cancelled). We should be loudly decrying this violation of the gambler's rights and interfering with their gambling, not nodding and winking at it.
I never thought I'd be acting for Conservative Party personnel, but it's a topsy-turvy world these days.
It is of course legal to gamble. But is it legal to place a bet on an outcome you already know, by virtue of your position, to be certain ? Or are you at that point defrauding the bookmaker ?
Aren't all bets about information asymmetry? If you have more and better information than me, you win. If I have more and better information than you, I win.
Many years ago, I was involved in a campaign which was the defence of a theoretically marginal seat, where bookies were offering odds a little worse than evens on a Lib Dem hold. But I'd been on the doorstep and spoken to plenty of others who had, and we were cruising home to a huge win. I made a lot of money on it.
I don't quite see at what point you think it becomes cheating. If a bookie is worried people know more about it than them, don't open the book. Or do open the book based on a calculation that, while some people have more information than you, most don't and you can always say "£100 max bet".
It clearly wasn't wise for people to place bets, but I'm struggling with this one to say it was any more than unwise.
You didn't originate this LD hold and it was up to the voters. You didn't know for sure. Not so the Tory instance.
That's not a valid distinction. The people accused of betting on this one didn't originate it, as far as we know. I had very strong information about what the voters planned, these people had very strong information about what Sunak planned. I really think people have gone bonkers on this.
In Poker, you often bet knowing you have definitively won - you have "the nuts" and no-one can possibly beat you. It's up to the opponent's skill whether they take the bet on.
"Election latest: Labour’s private school VAT plan ‘will be in first budget’ Rachel Reeves said the budget could come ten weeks after the election if the party wins"
The spread on Reform seats has moved up to 6-8, so I am just about green on my buy at 5.5 but I am struggling to see which seats they actually win.
Clacton and Ashfield, yes, but where are seats 3,4,5 & 6?
We need to recruit some RefUK posters.
The fact they aren't here tells you something.
Given the flak anyone trying to point out why they are getting traction gets, with regular "fascist" and similar comments about them , is that surprising?
Quite so. PB is losing its touch, it is so absurdly, hysterically hostile to Reform - now polling around 20% let us note - you have to be a hard-arsed thick-skinned son of a bitch to even mention some reasons they might appeal. Luckily, I am a thick skinned SOB so I don't care, but imagine what less obdurate and grizzled lurkers might feel, coming on here?
I saw the same on the leaders' debate with Krishnan Guru Murthy, Some Reform minded woman said that her part of England was now so overwhelmingly foreign it did not feel like home and she was thinking of emigrating. That is a perfectly legitimate point of view, we have just endured 2.4m migrants in 3 years, and that after decades of record immigraion, some parts of Britain HAVE been transformed in a few years, and if I lived in them I might feel hurt, frightened and desirous of fleeing. FFS Camden Tube can be unnerving!
Yet Krishnan wotsit treated her like she had just said "gas all the Muslims" and he asked the leaders whether they wanted HER to leave the UK because she was an obvious racist
If you get that kind of reaction from a well known TV presenter on live TV it's no surprise Reform voters might keep their instincts well hidden. It's disgusting and ultimately very dangerous. Let the people speak
Emigrating to avoid foreigners? Quite...
He's another Brexit wanker traitor who emigrates to avoid the unflushed turd he created.
Do you think calling me a "Brexit wanker/traitor" benefits the site?
Yes, as I am only following your style.
Ah, the sincerest form of flattery. I don't blame you, my style is quite the thing
It really isn't.
Well, my style pays, and indeed it pays extremely well, at times
It’s sad that you so often fall back to that as the justification-of-last-resort, as if anyone else here seriously thinks that it’s any kind of scorecard.
Well, when you're literally talking about "style of prose" it is probably the only test that matters
If you can make a lot of money writing in a certain style, that means a lot of people want to read it, it also means they clearly enjoy it, as they come back for more, so you continue to get paid
So yes I will continue to make this quite obvious point, not least because it drives all the many sad, thwarted people on here completely nuts, including you
Not really. People will pay for all sorts of rubbish.
Then you will surely have no problem in banging out some writing, in between acts of zoophilia, and making six figures a year. Go on, knock yourself out, it would also give your dog some much needed recovery time
That's one vote for the Tories in Sheffield Hallam.
My vote is 100% influenced by wanting to keep His Excellency The Right Honourable The Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton as Foreign Secretary.
Oh aye, like that’s gonna happen.
Didn’t you previously say you were minded not to vote Tory? Are you Big G-like in your flip floppery?!
I’m only joshing, I don’t blame you, or him, for returning to the fold. You both seem to have longstanding, heartfelt, tribal feelings for the party. It’s not something I understand personally, but it must be difficult to see an organisation you have such an affinity, a connection, with in such deep, deep shit.
I’ll never forgive the Tories for what they’ve done to this country for the last 14 years, for the damage austerity has brought to my part of the Red Wall, the closed libraries and sports centres, the crumbling public realm, the hard-pressed public services, the slow, wilful destruction of the NHS. And I’ll never forgive them for stripping me of my European citizenship and Freedom of Movement, for their weakness in standing up to their nutters.
I want them to get a good fucking hammering. I want their handling of the last 14 years to be clearly, unequivocally, decisively rejected by the public. I want them to be chastened, to have their time in the wilderness, to renew. But I don’t want them destroyed. Because as bad as they are - and I hate the party with a passion even though I have plenty of Tory friends -Farage is worse.
The number of people I know who are voting Tory is quite extraordinary. I think it's one of those habits that are hard to break. If it wasn't for PB and my belief in polls I would be putting my house on at least a hung parliament
Roger, you're a wealthy retired tampon ad executive, educated at a minor public school, who mainly lives in Villefranche-sur-Mer
Your social circle is probably quite unusual, and may indeed be limited to 24/7 private nurses
I have a wide circle of friends and family, home and abroad, rich and poor, who are a real mix, arty and geeky, you name it. In the past they've been everything from SWP to BNP, but mainly Labour and Tory, with a couple of Libs, Nits and UKIPs
Not a single one is definitely voting Tory. One was edging that way but the Reform Manifesto has tempted her to Farage
I can therefore believe these stories of total wipe-out (sorry @Sandpit). Unless there is a shy Tory effect at work, but I don't believe it, people aren't embarrassed about voting Tory or not voting Tory, they just despise them, quietly or loudly. A shy Reform vote is more likely, because Farage
What about a deal. You stop calling me 'a tampon ad exec' and I'll stop referring to you (accurately) as the winner of the Henry Miller award for the worst sex book ever written.
The winning passage, I assume, was a rather crass and cringe depiction of a breathless and sweaty menage a un.
I believe Roger is confusing me with exPBer @SeanT, and, as always, has got all the details completely wrong: the award was the Bad Sex in Fiction prize, not "Henry Miller", and it is for a passage of absurd sex writing, not a whole book
The passage is quite quite something. The excerpts you find online do not remotely do it justice. After the lagershed I might put it on here, but it really has to be after the lagershed
The one that ends in "aiwa"?
I might actually have it on my bookshelf still somewhere. I picked it up in the 2000s on the basis of the notoriety of that passage, long before I ever heard of PB.
The fact I can still remember the outline of the plot two decades later suggests it's a decent read - I read a lot and don't remember most books. A bit amis-y in places but it was the style of the time...
Amis fils presumably?
Top tip: The Zone Of Interest is I think his best. Much more complex than the film and no faux cockneys in it.
Amis (M.) went off the boil around the time of The Information and never really got it back. I did read the zone of interest and can't remember a bloody thing about it, save for the protagonist is called Paul Doll. If I can remember the details of a book years later chances are it's good. If I draw a blank, it's a miss. I barely remember anything from an Amis book published after 1995.
I kind of gave up on Amis after House of Meetings, but I'm puzzled by the Wiki description of Zone of Interest which seems to bear little connection with the (excellent) film of the same name - Doll is Rudolf Höss apparently. It's a good title, pregnant with the adminstrative varnish put on genocide, perhaps Glazer just stole the best bit.
I thought Zone of Interest (the movie) was a masterpiece, the lack of any story somehow made it better, because that is life, often there is no story as such, just life going on day after day, humdrum and quotidian, yet over the wall the Holocaust
And my God that fucking soundtrack, a work of total genius. The best, certainly most terrifying soundtrack in movie history?? At certain points it was freaking me out so much the ordinary cries of the baby made me shudder, like a baby times a million
Yep, it's the only film of the last few years that I wanted to see again almost immediately. The actual horror erupts every so often (the servant washing the blood off Höss's jackboots, a stream of ash containg a human jaw bone in the river that Höss's children are bathing in) but then back to gardening, blue skies and Frau Höss scolding the servants. Son of Saul had a similar impact (another powerful soundtrack) but the reality of the Konzentrationslager was more in your face.
“A sudden surge in activity on the betting markets sealed [Morgan McSweeney, Sir Keir Starmer’s campaign chief] conviction that a July poll would be called imminently.”
Those involved with "insider trading" on such betting are extra stupid in that not only huge risk if caught (for not life changing amounts of money), but these novelty markets aren't massively liquidity pools so they will move quickly if people start to put any decent amount of money on in one direction. It is rather signalling, just like we have seen in the past big moves in political betting a few hours before a big poll is to be released or from a count (and when clearly somebody has insider info).
This could go to some interesting places if people are willing to really look. It won't just be a bag carrier for the PM.
"PoliticalBetting: My part in the Tories' downfall"
People don't emigrate "to avoid foreigners" as some would put it.
They emigrate because when they see the country they live in is being flooded with low wage immigration they see no hope of a better quality of life for themselves or children or even great-grandchildren. Saying such people "hate foreigners" is a purposeful misunderstanding if why they want control of our borders and restricted high quality migration into the country they live in.
If people were truly concerned about the negative pressures immigrants put on wages, they would argue in favour of greater rights for immigrants - because when all workers have good protections workers can more effectively collectively organise. People are emigrating because they see services going down the shitter and the only acceptable answer in our political environment as to why is not to blame cuts to local and national government, not to blame privatisation, not to blame the neoliberal consensus and the weakening of union power, but to blame immigrants. The dislike of immigrants is imposed top down to explain things that have other material explanations that would be uncomfortable for the media and political elite to accept.
I don't think people hate foreigners - most people just want a decent life for them and theirs and accept that others want the same. But, as you say, when that's out of reach and the only acceptable answer is to say it is foreigner's faults, that's what people will say. They will also say, as they have done to every person I've met who has confronted friends or neighbours about how they are too foreigners, "not you, dear, you're one of the good ones". People mostly only ever meet "one of the good ones" and see the "bad ones" in the news or in papers.
These clowns are so stupid they did not get an unknown 3rd party to put the bets on , explains why the country is circling the drain.
They shouldn't have to, malc. This is yet another example of a thing being punished for no good reason. It is legal to gamble.
In fixed-odds bookmaking, the bookmaker knows that there may be people on the other side of the bet with insider information. When people start piling on implausible candidates (eg "The Next Doctor Who Is Jodie Whittaker" in 2016 or "...Is Peter Capaldi" in 2013) the proper response is for the bookmakers to take it on the chin and suspend the market.
PB prides itself on being for free speech (unless it's speech it doesn't like) and against cancellation (except for the people it wants cancelled). We should be loudly decrying this violation of the gambler's rights and interfering with their gambling, not nodding and winking at it.
I never thought I'd be acting for Conservative Party personnel, but it's a topsy-turvy world these days.
It is of course legal to gamble. But is it legal to place a bet on an outcome you already know, by virtue of your position, to be certain ? Or are you at that point defrauding the bookmaker ?
Aren't all bets about information asymmetry? If you have more and better information than me, you win. If I have more and better information than you, I win.
Many years ago, I was involved in a campaign which was the defence of a theoretically marginal seat, where bookies were offering odds a little worse than evens on a Lib Dem hold. But I'd been on the doorstep and spoken to plenty of others who had, and we were cruising home to a huge win. I made a lot of money on it.
I don't quite see at what point you think it becomes cheating. If a bookie is worried people know more about it than them, don't open the book. Or do open the book based on a calculation that, while some people have more information than you, most don't and you can always say "£100 max bet".
It clearly wasn't wise for people to place bets, but I'm struggling with this one to say it was any more than unwise.
You didn't originate this LD hold and it was up to the voters. You didn't know for sure. Not so the Tory instance.
That's not a valid distinction. The people accused of betting on this one didn't originate it, as far as we know. I had very strong information about what the voters planned, these people had very strong information about what Sunak planned. I really think people have gone bonkers on this.
In Poker, you often bet knowing you have definitively won - you have "the nuts" and no-one can possibly beat you. It's up to the opponent's skill whether they take the bet on.
The number of hands you have the nuts is extremely small. You don't win long term in poker doing anything like that. There are many reasons to bet during a hand in poker, definitely having the best can on occasion be a good reason not to bet.
That's one vote for the Tories in Sheffield Hallam.
My vote is 100% influenced by wanting to keep His Excellency The Right Honourable The Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton as Foreign Secretary.
Oh aye, like that’s gonna happen.
Didn’t you previously say you were minded not to vote Tory? Are you Big G-like in your flip floppery?!
I’m only joshing, I don’t blame you, or him, for returning to the fold. You both seem to have longstanding, heartfelt, tribal feelings for the party. It’s not something I understand personally, but it must be difficult to see an organisation you have such an affinity, a connection, with in such deep, deep shit.
I’ll never forgive the Tories for what they’ve done to this country for the last 14 years, for the damage austerity has brought to my part of the Red Wall, the closed libraries and sports centres, the crumbling public realm, the hard-pressed public services, the slow, wilful destruction of the NHS. And I’ll never forgive them for stripping me of my European citizenship and Freedom of Movement, for their weakness in standing up to their nutters.
I want them to get a good fucking hammering. I want their handling of the last 14 years to be clearly, unequivocally, decisively rejected by the public. I want them to be chastened, to have their time in the wilderness, to renew. But I don’t want them destroyed. Because as bad as they are - and I hate the party with a passion even though I have plenty of Tory friends -Farage is worse.
The number of people I know who are voting Tory is quite extraordinary. I think it's one of those habits that are hard to break. If it wasn't for PB and my belief in polls I would be putting my house on at least a hung parliament
Roger, you're a wealthy retired tampon ad executive, educated at a minor public school, who mainly lives in Villefranche-sur-Mer
Your social circle is probably quite unusual, and may indeed be limited to 24/7 private nurses
I have a wide circle of friends and family, home and abroad, rich and poor, who are a real mix, arty and geeky, you name it. In the past they've been everything from SWP to BNP, but mainly Labour and Tory, with a couple of Libs, Nits and UKIPs
Not a single one is definitely voting Tory. One was edging that way but the Reform Manifesto has tempted her to Farage
I can therefore believe these stories of total wipe-out (sorry @Sandpit). Unless there is a shy Tory effect at work, but I don't believe it, people aren't embarrassed about voting Tory or not voting Tory, they just despise them, quietly or loudly. A shy Reform vote is more likely, because Farage
What about a deal. You stop calling me 'a tampon ad exec' and I'll stop referring to you (accurately) as the winner of the Henry Miller award for the worst sex book ever written.
The winning passage, I assume, was a rather crass and cringe depiction of a breathless and sweaty menage a un.
I believe Roger is confusing me with exPBer @SeanT, and, as always, has got all the details completely wrong: the award was the Bad Sex in Fiction prize, not "Henry Miller", and it is for a passage of absurd sex writing, not a whole book
The passage is quite quite something. The excerpts you find online do not remotely do it justice. After the lagershed I might put it on here, but it really has to be after the lagershed
The one that ends in "aiwa"?
I might actually have it on my bookshelf still somewhere. I picked it up in the 2000s on the basis of the notoriety of that passage, long before I ever heard of PB.
The fact I can still remember the outline of the plot two decades later suggests it's a decent read - I read a lot and don't remember most books. A bit amis-y in places but it was the style of the time...
Amis fils presumably?
Top tip: The Zone Of Interest is I think his best. Much more complex than the film and no faux cockneys in it.
Amis (M.) went off the boil around the time of The Information and never really got it back. I did read the zone of interest and can't remember a bloody thing about it, save for the protagonist is called Paul Doll. If I can remember the details of a book years later chances are it's good. If I draw a blank, it's a miss. I barely remember anything from an Amis book published after 1995.
I kind of gave up on Amis after House of Meetings, but I'm puzzled by the Wiki description of Zone of Interest which seems to bear little connection with the (excellent) film of the same name - Doll is Rudolf Höss apparently. It's a good title, pregnant with the adminstrative varnish put on genocide, perhaps Glazer just stole the best bit.
I thought Zone of Interest (the movie) was a masterpiece, the lack of any story somehow made it better, because that is life, often there is no story as such, just life going on day after day, humdrum and quotidian, yet over the wall the Holocaust
And my God that fucking soundtrack, a work of total genius. The best, certainly most terrifying soundtrack in movie history?? At certain points it was freaking me out so much the ordinary cries of the baby made me shudder, like a baby times a million
Yep, it's the only film of the last few years that I wanted to see again almost immediately. The actual horror erupts every so often (the servant washing the blood of Höss's jackboots, a stream of ash containg a human jaw bone in the river that Höss's children are bathing in) but then back to gardening, blue skies and Frau Höss scolding the servants. Son of Saul had a similar impact (another powerful soundtrack) but the reality of the Konzentrationslager was more in your face.
it's the subtlety that makes it so good, I barely noticed the blood on the boots
I certainly noticed the human jaw bone, OMG, artistically so clever but a devastating moment
Also the mother who comes to stay, sees the glowing chimney, drinks neat schnapps, barely says anything, then flees. In barely saying anything she said it all
In terms of Holocaust movies I'd put it up there with Schinder's List as one of the greatest, but in an entirely different way
That's one vote for the Tories in Sheffield Hallam.
My vote is 100% influenced by wanting to keep His Excellency The Right Honourable The Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton as Foreign Secretary.
Oh aye, like that’s gonna happen.
Didn’t you previously say you were minded not to vote Tory? Are you Big G-like in your flip floppery?!
I’m only joshing, I don’t blame you, or him, for returning to the fold. You both seem to have longstanding, heartfelt, tribal feelings for the party. It’s not something I understand personally, but it must be difficult to see an organisation you have such an affinity, a connection, with in such deep, deep shit.
I’ll never forgive the Tories for what they’ve done to this country for the last 14 years, for the damage austerity has brought to my part of the Red Wall, the closed libraries and sports centres, the crumbling public realm, the hard-pressed public services, the slow, wilful destruction of the NHS. And I’ll never forgive them for stripping me of my European citizenship and Freedom of Movement, for their weakness in standing up to their nutters.
I want them to get a good fucking hammering. I want their handling of the last 14 years to be clearly, unequivocally, decisively rejected by the public. I want them to be chastened, to have their time in the wilderness, to renew. But I don’t want them destroyed. Because as bad as they are - and I hate the party with a passion even though I have plenty of Tory friends -Farage is worse.
The number of people I know who are voting Tory is quite extraordinary. I think it's one of those habits that are hard to break. If it wasn't for PB and my belief in polls I would be putting my house on at least a hung parliament
Roger, you're a wealthy retired tampon ad executive, educated at a minor public school, who mainly lives in Villefranche-sur-Mer
Your social circle is probably quite unusual, and may indeed be limited to 24/7 private nurses
I have a wide circle of friends and family, home and abroad, rich and poor, who are a real mix, arty and geeky, you name it. In the past they've been everything from SWP to BNP, but mainly Labour and Tory, with a couple of Libs, Nits and UKIPs
Not a single one is definitely voting Tory. One was edging that way but the Reform Manifesto has tempted her to Farage
I can therefore believe these stories of total wipe-out (sorry @Sandpit). Unless there is a shy Tory effect at work, but I don't believe it, people aren't embarrassed about voting Tory or not voting Tory, they just despise them, quietly or loudly. A shy Reform vote is more likely, because Farage
What about a deal. You stop calling me 'a tampon ad exec' and I'll stop referring to you (accurately) as the winner of the Henry Miller award for the worst sex book ever written.
The winning passage, I assume, was a rather crass and cringe depiction of a breathless and sweaty menage a un.
I believe Roger is confusing me with exPBer @SeanT, and, as always, has got all the details completely wrong: the award was the Bad Sex in Fiction prize, not "Henry Miller", and it is for a passage of absurd sex writing, not a whole book
The passage is quite quite something. The excerpts you find online do not remotely do it justice. After the lagershed I might put it on here, but it really has to be after the lagershed
The one that ends in "aiwa"?
I might actually have it on my bookshelf still somewhere. I picked it up in the 2000s on the basis of the notoriety of that passage, long before I ever heard of PB.
The fact I can still remember the outline of the plot two decades later suggests it's a decent read - I read a lot and don't remember most books. A bit amis-y in places but it was the style of the time...
Amis fils presumably?
Top tip: The Zone Of Interest is I think his best. Much more complex than the film and no faux cockneys in it.
Amis (M.) went off the boil around the time of The Information and never really got it back. I did read the zone of interest and can't remember a bloody thing about it, save for the protagonist is called Paul Doll. If I can remember the details of a book years later chances are it's good. If I draw a blank, it's a miss. I barely remember anything from an Amis book published after 1995.
I kind of gave up on Amis after House of Meetings, but I'm puzzled by the Wiki description of Zone of Interest which seems to bear little connection with the (excellent) film of the same name - Doll is Rudolf Höss apparently. It's a good title, pregnant with the adminstrative varnish put on genocide, perhaps Glazer just stole the best bit.
Tis a fiver on kindle
The film just shows us the basic rosencranz and guildernstern.conceit imv - let'sake the background the foreground and vv - and does it well. Amis tells much more of a story and it works rather well. Starts with an account of a junior officer misbehaving in a frivolous way and being punished by extra duty on "the ramp." It's a shock to realise what ramp is being referred to
PB Reformers on the moan again, I see. "It's not racist to be concerned about immigration", this is their go-to assertion. And it's true. It isn't. However if somebody (or a political party) bangs on and on about immigration, talks of little else, somehow finds a way to blame most of our ills on too much of it, this is indicative of racism. By which I mean, take a random sample of such people and compare to a similar sized sample of people who are not like that, there will be far more racism in the first grouping. Nobody can seriously doubt this.
People don't emigrate "to avoid foreigners" as some would put it.
They emigrate because when they see the country they live in is being flooded with low wage immigration they see no hope of a better quality of life for themselves or children or even great-grandchildren. Saying such people "hate foreigners" is a purposeful misunderstanding if why they want control of our borders and restricted high quality migration into the country they live in.
If people were truly concerned about the negative pressures immigrants put on wages, they would argue in favour of greater rights for immigrants - because when all workers have good protections workers can more effectively collectively organise. People are emigrating because they see services going down the shitter and the only acceptable answer in our political environment as to why is not to blame cuts to local and national government, not to blame privatisation, not to blame the neoliberal consensus and the weakening of union power, but to blame immigrants. The dislike of immigrants is imposed top down to explain things that have other material explanations that would be uncomfortable for the media and political elite to accept.
I don't think people hate foreigners - most people just want a decent life for them and theirs and accept that others want the same. But, as you say, when that's out of reach and the only acceptable answer is to say it is foreigner's faults, that's what people will say. They will also say, as they have done to every person I've met who has confronted friends or neighbours about how they are too foreigners, "not you, dear, you're one of the good ones". People mostly only ever meet "one of the good ones" and see the "bad ones" in the news or in papers.
You seem pretty uncomfortable with the most basic material explanation of all: some things are inherently scarce. Not everyone can live in Central London, for example, not because of the economic system but because there isn't enough space.
I have just posted my postal vote back - may help to save a deposit. Some interesting by-elections today. We have 3 Lib Dem defences in Mid Devon, Oxfordshire, and Vale of White Horse; 2 Lab defences in Coventry and Sefton; a 1 Con defence in Mansfield(!).
The Lab defence in Coventry isn't technically a by-election, it's the local election delayed. Will be a very comfortable Labour win.
The spread on Reform seats has moved up to 6-8, so I am just about green on my buy at 5.5 but I am struggling to see which seats they actually win.
Clacton and Ashfield, yes, but where are seats 3,4,5 & 6?
We need to recruit some RefUK posters.
The fact they aren't here tells you something.
Given the flak anyone trying to point out why they are getting traction gets, with regular "fascist" and similar comments about them , is that surprising?
Quite so. PB is losing its touch, it is so absurdly, hysterically hostile to Reform - now polling around 20% let us note - you have to be a hard-arsed thick-skinned son of a bitch to even mention some reasons they might appeal. Luckily, I am a thick skinned SOB so I don't care, but imagine what less obdurate and grizzled lurkers might feel, coming on here?
I saw the same on the leaders' debate with Krishnan Guru Murthy, Some Reform minded woman said that her part of England was now so overwhelmingly foreign it did not feel like home and she was thinking of emigrating. That is a perfectly legitimate point of view, we have just endured 2.4m migrants in 3 years, and that after decades of record immigraion, some parts of Britain HAVE been transformed in a few years, and if I lived in them I might feel hurt, frightened and desirous of fleeing. FFS Camden Tube can be unnerving!
Yet Krishnan wotsit treated her like she had just said "gas all the Muslims" and he asked the leaders whether they wanted HER to leave the UK because she was an obvious racist
If you get that kind of reaction from a well known TV presenter on live TV it's no surprise Reform voters might keep their instincts well hidden. It's disgusting and ultimately very dangerous. Let the people speak
Do you think Reform will surprise on the upside?
Because I would hate for us to lose our touch.
When I look at Reform I can see them winning Clacton, Ashfield is possible because that's got some interesting local issues then after that I need to look for seats where Labour will do badly and with Reform getting a lot of votes.
My default seat for that is Redcar (as it does have a the last lot disappointed us (again) so vote for someone else tendency) but Labour hits that target at the moment.
What I think will be interesting is the number of (clear) second places Reform gets.
Come the 2028/29 GE then in a lot of areas 'Only Reform can beat Labour here' becomes the default message and then Farage might end up winning a lot of seats for the first time.
I don’t sense he’s remotely interested in a long five- to ten-year long haul.
Neither do I but he can disappear for a few years then come back in 2028/29 and start hammering that message.
How does he do that if he is stuck as the MP for Clacton and fails to keep his constituents happy...
A lot of second places and no MPs is way better for Farage than a few wins - especially as its very unlikely the winning Reform candidates will have the expertise to be a decent constituency MP...
Ultimately, what does Nigel actually want? Lest we forget, a few weeks ago the official lines was that he wasn't even going to be a candidate. And the path some are mapping out, win in Clacton, take over the Conservative Party, become PM in 2029... It's not that plausible, is it? And for all that others have tried, Farage is the only one to make the Reform formula cut through.
Besides, the Reform surge has been based on promising impossible bollocks. I reckon his corduroy trousers would be pretty rapidly soiled if the were ever to find himself responsible for anything.
I suspect that if he's elected Nigel will find some ruse to shun Parliament completely - perhaps by proclaiming that he won't rub shoulders with the Ruling Elite out of principle. He has to be seen as the man who would produce miracles if only he had the chance, but he can't afford to let that be tested.
The spread on Reform seats has moved up to 6-8, so I am just about green on my buy at 5.5 but I am struggling to see which seats they actually win.
Clacton and Ashfield, yes, but where are seats 3,4,5 & 6?
We need to recruit some RefUK posters.
The fact they aren't here tells you something.
Given the flak anyone trying to point out why they are getting traction gets, with regular "fascist" and similar comments about them , is that surprising?
Quite so. PB is losing its touch, it is so absurdly, hysterically hostile to Reform - now polling around 20% let us note - you have to be a hard-arsed thick-skinned son of a bitch to even mention some reasons they might appeal. Luckily, I am a thick skinned SOB so I don't care, but imagine what less obdurate and grizzled lurkers might feel, coming on here?
I saw the same on the leaders' debate with Krishnan Guru Murthy, Some Reform minded woman said that her part of England was now so overwhelmingly foreign it did not feel like home and she was thinking of emigrating. That is a perfectly legitimate point of view, we have just endured 2.4m migrants in 3 years, and that after decades of record immigraion, some parts of Britain HAVE been transformed in a few years, and if I lived in them I might feel hurt, frightened and desirous of fleeing. FFS Camden Tube can be unnerving!
Yet Krishnan wotsit treated her like she had just said "gas all the Muslims" and he asked the leaders whether they wanted HER to leave the UK because she was an obvious racist
If you get that kind of reaction from a well known TV presenter on live TV it's no surprise Reform voters might keep their instincts well hidden. It's disgusting and ultimately very dangerous. Let the people speak
Emigrating to avoid foreigners? Quite...
He's another Brexit wanker traitor who emigrates to avoid the unflushed turd he created.
Do you think calling me a "Brexit wanker/traitor" benefits the site?
Yes, as I am only following your style.
Ah, the sincerest form of flattery. I don't blame you, my style is quite the thing
It really isn't.
Well, my style pays, and indeed it pays extremely well, at times
It’s sad that you so often fall back to that as the justification-of-last-resort, as if anyone else here seriously thinks that it’s any kind of scorecard.
Well, when you're literally talking about "style of prose" it is probably the only test that matters
If you can make a lot of money writing in a certain style, that means a lot of people want to read it, it also means they clearly enjoy it, as they come back for more, so you continue to get paid
So yes I will continue to make this quite obvious point, not least because it drives all the many sad, thwarted people on here completely nuts, including you
Not really. People will pay for all sorts of rubbish.
Then you will surely have no problem in banging out some writing, in between acts of zoophilia, and making six figures a year. Go on, knock yourself out, it would also give your dog some much needed recovery time
Which is spectacularly missing the point.
If you were more astute (or honest) you would have noticed how common it is that those who have been successful in any field to attribute this almost entirely to their own innate talent and hard work, and discount the considerable elements of connections or patronage or sheer random good luck that helped them along the way, such that intrinsic merit or ability is often a relatively small part of the equation, and the barriers to entry for outsiders who are genuinely talented are very often quite considerable.
I did well enough in my own fields, by being talented and working hard, not to have to try to break into someone else’s.
"Election latest: Labour’s private school VAT plan ‘will be in first budget’ Rachel Reeves said the budget could come ten weeks after the election if the party wins"
The spread on Reform seats has moved up to 6-8, so I am just about green on my buy at 5.5 but I am struggling to see which seats they actually win.
Clacton and Ashfield, yes, but where are seats 3,4,5 & 6?
We need to recruit some RefUK posters.
The fact they aren't here tells you something.
Given the flak anyone trying to point out why they are getting traction gets, with regular "fascist" and similar comments about them , is that surprising?
Quite so. PB is losing its touch, it is so absurdly, hysterically hostile to Reform - now polling around 20% let us note - you have to be a hard-arsed thick-skinned son of a bitch to even mention some reasons they might appeal. Luckily, I am a thick skinned SOB so I don't care, but imagine what less obdurate and grizzled lurkers might feel, coming on here?
I saw the same on the leaders' debate with Krishnan Guru Murthy, Some Reform minded woman said that her part of England was now so overwhelmingly foreign it did not feel like home and she was thinking of emigrating. That is a perfectly legitimate point of view, we have just endured 2.4m migrants in 3 years, and that after decades of record immigraion, some parts of Britain HAVE been transformed in a few years, and if I lived in them I might feel hurt, frightened and desirous of fleeing. FFS Camden Tube can be unnerving!
Yet Krishnan wotsit treated her like she had just said "gas all the Muslims" and he asked the leaders whether they wanted HER to leave the UK because she was an obvious racist
If you get that kind of reaction from a well known TV presenter on live TV it's no surprise Reform voters might keep their instincts well hidden. It's disgusting and ultimately very dangerous. Let the people speak
Emigrating to avoid foreigners? Quite...
He's another Brexit wanker traitor who emigrates to avoid the unflushed turd he created.
Do you think calling me a "Brexit wanker/traitor" benefits the site?
Yes, as I am only following your style.
Ah, the sincerest form of flattery. I don't blame you, my style is quite the thing
It really isn't.
Well, my style pays, and indeed it pays extremely well, at times
It’s sad that you so often fall back to that as the justification-of-last-resort, as if anyone else here seriously thinks that it’s any kind of scorecard.
Well, when you're literally talking about "style of prose" it is probably the only test that matters
If you can make a lot of money writing in a certain style, that means a lot of people want to read it, it also means they clearly enjoy it, as they come back for more, so you continue to get paid
So yes I will continue to make this quite obvious point, not least because it drives all the many sad, thwarted people on here completely nuts, including you
Not really. People will pay for all sorts of rubbish.
Then you will surely have no problem in banging out some writing, in between acts of zoophilia, and making six figures a year. Go on, knock yourself out, it would also give your dog some much needed recovery time
Which is spectacularly missing the point.
If you were more astute (or honest) you would have noticed how common it is that those who have been successful in any field to attribute this almost entirely to their own innate talent and hard work, and discount the considerable elements of connections or patronage or sheer random good luck that helped them along the way, such that intrinsic merit or ability is often a relatively small part of the equation, and the barriers to entry for outsiders who are genuinely talented are very often quite considerable.
I did well enough in my own fields, by being talented and working hard, not to have to try to break into someone else’s.
2nd bit of feedback from Wantage and Didcot ( @Andy_Cooke and @NickPalmer ). Again another member of the campaign I am involved in who are non political but very interested in who gets elected for obvious reasons. The current Tory MP has been a champion for our cause.
"I have had campaign leaflets from Labour and the SDP, plus several leaflets from the Liberal Democrats.
The Liberal Democrats are making quite in effort in Wantage, and seem to regard this as one of their target seats."
Thanks, kjh - always useful to get the feel of whether or not we're cutting through.
There are countless LibDem leaflets, which mostly are generic (not referring to the candidate) - on a given day, residents may receive 2 different ones: they are slightly overdoing it IMO. There are fairly widespread Labour leaflets and some SDP leaflets, but none so far from the Tories, who seem to have given up. LibDem posters were up first and are moderately common, though less so than in previous seats where I've been aqctive. Labour posters are catching up. I've yet to see a single Tory poster. Constituency polling varies between a smalle Labour lead to a large LibDem lead; I've yet to see a Tory lead predicted by any of them. Labour is working hard and in with a reasonable shot - but there are masses of tactical anti-Tory voters still making up their minds.
The YouGov MRP, which has a local sample as its base unlike those that only work top down from modelling, puts the LibDems in pole position, with Labour way back tussling with Reform for third and fourth place. The recent PCC elections saw LibDems outpoll Labour in both the council areas covered by that seat. Tactical voters should by now have a clear picture of what they need to do, to defeat the Tory.
The local elections last year are atypical for reasons of Labour chaos (they only put up candidates for a few seats), now sorted out, and there are numerous MRP polls with local samples, varying from a large LibDems lead to a small Labour lead. I don't think the Tory has much chance; the LibDem is probably favourite but short of local help (the Oxford team that got Laila in have moved on to this and other seats), and arguably they should be concentrating on Henley, where Labour isn't trying as hard. It depends whether one thinks their national prospects are, say, 30, 50 or 70.
On local elections - NB that Labour did just as badly in 2019 and in 2015. They haven't had a councillor in Vale of White Horse since the 2011 elections (and that was a single councillor in Abingdon; outside of this constituency) and before that (and in the constituency) not since the 1999 elections.
In South Oxfordshire, the most they've had in many many elections is 4, all in Didcot Town itself. Note that in the last local elections, Labour put up a full suite of 8 candidates in the 3 wards of Didcot Town and only won in one ward (Didcot South); their candidates finishing last in the other two wards. Lib Dems got the most councillors in Didcot): 4 (vs 1 Tory and 3 Labour).
These clowns are so stupid they did not get an unknown 3rd party to put the bets on , explains why the country is circling the drain.
They shouldn't have to, malc. This is yet another example of a thing being punished for no good reason. It is legal to gamble.
In fixed-odds bookmaking, the bookmaker knows that there may be people on the other side of the bet with insider information. When people start piling on implausible candidates (eg "The Next Doctor Who Is Jodie Whittaker" in 2016 or "...Is Peter Capaldi" in 2013) the proper response is for the bookmakers to take it on the chin and suspend the market.
PB prides itself on being for free speech (unless it's speech it doesn't like) and against cancellation (except for the people it wants cancelled). We should be loudly decrying this violation of the gambler's rights and interfering with their gambling, not nodding and winking at it.
I never thought I'd be acting for Conservative Party personnel, but it's a topsy-turvy world these days.
It is of course legal to gamble. But is it legal to place a bet on an outcome you already know, by virtue of your position, to be certain ? Or are you at that point defrauding the bookmaker ?
Aren't all bets about information asymmetry? If you have more and better information than me, you win. If I have more and better information than you, I win.
Many years ago, I was involved in a campaign which was the defence of a theoretically marginal seat, where bookies were offering odds a little worse than evens on a Lib Dem hold. But I'd been on the doorstep and spoken to plenty of others who had, and we were cruising home to a huge win. I made a lot of money on it.
I don't quite see at what point you think it becomes cheating. If a bookie is worried people know more about it than them, don't open the book. Or do open the book based on a calculation that, while some people have more information than you, most don't and you can always say "£100 max bet".
It clearly wasn't wise for people to place bets, but I'm struggling with this one to say it was any more than unwise.
The only person for whom it should be considered cheating, and illegal, to place a bet on the election timing, would be the PM making the decision.
For anyone else placing a bet they can't ever be totally sure that the PM isn't going to change their mind.
But this situation looks bad because it looks as though all these Tories are more concerned with making a quick quid with a cheeky bet, then with winning the election, or doing their job. They're on the make, rather than serving the public. Only in it for themselves.
An enlightening article on the soundtrack for Zone of Interest. My God, the complexity, you don't get something that good in a few weeks. They spent a year or two honing it
Also much of it was recorded in Camden! I'm not sure if that's a good thing. Come to Camden, it sounds like Auschwitz!
I try not to start topics on this conversation, instead playing defence against anti-trans posters. But seeing this I can only think - this is the world you're asking for. And, of course, it won't just be used for those students known to be trans; any child accused of being trans could easily be put before such a board. But those of us demanding autonomy and dignity for trans people and trans kids are the risk to child wellbeing...
Serbia have threatened to pull out of Euro 2024 over chanting between fans at the match between Croatia and Albania on Wednesday.
Fans could be heard chanting about the killing of Serbians during the 2-2 draw in the Group B match.
The general secretary of the Football Association of Serbia, Jovan Surbatovic, has called for the strongest sanction to be taken.
He told the Serbian state-owned broadcaster RTS: "What happened is scandalous and we will ask [European governing body] Uefa for sanctions, even if it means not continuing the competition."
Serbia are in Group C and began the tournament with a 1-0 defeat by England on Sunday.
Surbatovic said that he was "sure they will be punished" following Uefa's decision on Wednesday to cancel the credentials of Kosovar journalist, Arlind Sadiku.
Sadiku made a nationalist double-handed eagle gesture towards Serbia fans during the game against England. The gesture mimics the eagle on Albania's national flag, which can inflame tensions between Serbian nationalists and ethnic Albanians, who make up the vast majority of Kosovo's population.
"We will demand from Uefa to punish the federations of both selections," Surbatovic added.
"We do not want to participate in that, but if Uefa does not punish them, we will think how will we proceed."
The BBC has contacted Serbia and Uefa for further comment.
Serbia were fined £12,250 after fans threw objects during the Englan
Which party is likely to win in your constituency at Britain’s upcoming general election? Our prediction model lets you scroll through 632 seats around the country:
People don't emigrate "to avoid foreigners" as some would put it.
They emigrate because when they see the country they live in is being flooded with low wage immigration they see no hope of a better quality of life for themselves or children or even great-grandchildren. Saying such people "hate foreigners" is a purposeful misunderstanding if why they want control of our borders and restricted high quality migration into the country they live in.
If people were truly concerned about the negative pressures immigrants put on wages, they would argue in favour of greater rights for immigrants - because when all workers have good protections workers can more effectively collectively organise. People are emigrating because they see services going down the shitter and the only acceptable answer in our political environment as to why is not to blame cuts to local and national government, not to blame privatisation, not to blame the neoliberal consensus and the weakening of union power, but to blame immigrants. The dislike of immigrants is imposed top down to explain things that have other material explanations that would be uncomfortable for the media and political elite to accept.
I don't think people hate foreigners - most people just want a decent life for them and theirs and accept that others want the same. But, as you say, when that's out of reach and the only acceptable answer is to say it is foreigner's faults, that's what people will say. They will also say, as they have done to every person I've met who has confronted friends or neighbours about how they are too foreigners, "not you, dear, you're one of the good ones". People mostly only ever meet "one of the good ones" and see the "bad ones" in the news or in papers.
You seem pretty uncomfortable with the most basic material explanation of all: some things are inherently scarce. Not everyone can live in Central London, for example, not because of the economic system but because there isn't enough space.
I accept that some things are scarce - but the cause of that scarcity is important. We could have a functional NHS, with lower waiting times, without "kicking out foreigners". We could have a functional housing market, with affordable housing for those who need it, without "kicking out foreigners". School places, dentists, different places of cultural or community interest - the lack of these things will not be solved by "kicking out foreigners". They are lacking because political decisions were made to defund them and kill them by a thousand cuts, by our politicians, for the benefit of the private sector.
People don't emigrate "to avoid foreigners" as some would put it.
They emigrate because when they see the country they live in is being flooded with low wage immigration they see no hope of a better quality of life for themselves or children or even great-grandchildren. Saying such people "hate foreigners" is a purposeful misunderstanding if why they want control of our borders and restricted high quality migration into the country they live in.
If people were truly concerned about the negative pressures immigrants put on wages, they would argue in favour of greater rights for immigrants - because when all workers have good protections workers can more effectively collectively organise. People are emigrating because they see services going down the shitter and the only acceptable answer in our political environment as to why is not to blame cuts to local and national government, not to blame privatisation, not to blame the neoliberal consensus and the weakening of union power, but to blame immigrants. The dislike of immigrants is imposed top down to explain things that have other material explanations that would be uncomfortable for the media and political elite to accept.
I don't think people hate foreigners - most people just want a decent life for them and theirs and accept that others want the same. But, as you say, when that's out of reach and the only acceptable answer is to say it is foreigner's faults, that's what people will say. They will also say, as they have done to every person I've met who has confronted friends or neighbours about how they are too foreigners, "not you, dear, you're one of the good ones". People mostly only ever meet "one of the good ones" and see the "bad ones" in the news or in papers.
You seem pretty uncomfortable with the most basic material explanation of all: some things are inherently scarce. Not everyone can live in Central London, for example, not because of the economic system but because there isn't enough space.
Point of order: Kowloon Walled City had a population density of 1.9m per square kilometer. Central London, according to Google, is 32 square kilometer. At the population density of Kowloon Walled City, you could therefore fit the population of England into Central London. Comfortably.
People don't emigrate "to avoid foreigners" as some would put it.
They emigrate because when they see the country they live in is being flooded with low wage immigration they see no hope of a better quality of life for themselves or children or even great-grandchildren. Saying such people "hate foreigners" is a purposeful misunderstanding if why they want control of our borders and restricted high quality migration into the country they live in.
If people were truly concerned about the negative pressures immigrants put on wages, they would argue in favour of greater rights for immigrants - because when all workers have good protections workers can more effectively collectively organise. People are emigrating because they see services going down the shitter and the only acceptable answer in our political environment as to why is not to blame cuts to local and national government, not to blame privatisation, not to blame the neoliberal consensus and the weakening of union power, but to blame immigrants. The dislike of immigrants is imposed top down to explain things that have other material explanations that would be uncomfortable for the media and political elite to accept.
I don't think people hate foreigners - most people just want a decent life for them and theirs and accept that others want the same. But, as you say, when that's out of reach and the only acceptable answer is to say it is foreigner's faults, that's what people will say. They will also say, as they have done to every person I've met who has confronted friends or neighbours about how they are too foreigners, "not you, dear, you're one of the good ones". People mostly only ever meet "one of the good ones" and see the "bad ones" in the news or in papers.
You seem pretty uncomfortable with the most basic material explanation of all: some things are inherently scarce. Not everyone can live in Central London, for example, not because of the economic system but because there isn't enough space.
I accept that some things are scarce - but the cause of that scarcity is important. We could have a functional NHS, with lower waiting times, without "kicking out foreigners". We could have a functional housing market, with affordable housing for those who need it, without "kicking out foreigners". School places, dentists, different places of cultural or community interest - the lack of these things will not be solved by "kicking out foreigners". They are lacking because political decisions were made to defund them and kill them by a thousand cuts, by our politicians, for the benefit of the private sector.
Without relitigating past decisions and starting from where we are now, do you think it would help the housing situation for not for net migration to continue at the current level?
Which party is likely to win in your constituency at Britain’s upcoming general election? Our prediction model lets you scroll through 632 seats around the country:
This is a weird projection - I'm assuming UNS with no tactical voting or seat by seat adjustments? Because it's showing the Greens performing worse in Bristol Central this GE than 2019. Even if we don't win it, we're going to run it close.
These clowns are so stupid they did not get an unknown 3rd party to put the bets on , explains why the country is circling the drain.
They shouldn't have to, malc. This is yet another example of a thing being punished for no good reason. It is legal to gamble.
In fixed-odds bookmaking, the bookmaker knows that there may be people on the other side of the bet with insider information. When people start piling on implausible candidates (eg "The Next Doctor Who Is Jodie Whittaker" in 2016 or "...Is Peter Capaldi" in 2013) the proper response is for the bookmakers to take it on the chin and suspend the market.
PB prides itself on being for free speech (unless it's speech it doesn't like) and against cancellation (except for the people it wants cancelled). We should be loudly decrying this violation of the gambler's rights and interfering with their gambling, not nodding and winking at it.
I never thought I'd be acting for Conservative Party personnel, but it's a topsy-turvy world these days.
It is of course legal to gamble. But is it legal to place a bet on an outcome you already know, by virtue of your position, to be certain ? Or are you at that point defrauding the bookmaker ?
Aren't all bets about information asymmetry? If you have more and better information than me, you win. If I have more and better information than you, I win.
Many years ago, I was involved in a campaign which was the defence of a theoretically marginal seat, where bookies were offering odds a little worse than evens on a Lib Dem hold. But I'd been on the doorstep and spoken to plenty of others who had, and we were cruising home to a huge win. I made a lot of money on it.
I don't quite see at what point you think it becomes cheating. If a bookie is worried people know more about it than them, don't open the book. Or do open the book based on a calculation that, while some people have more information than you, most don't and you can always say "£100 max bet".
It clearly wasn't wise for people to place bets, but I'm struggling with this one to say it was any more than unwise.
The only person for whom it should be considered cheating, and illegal, to place a bet on the election timing, would be the PM making the decision.
For anyone else placing a bet they can't ever be totally sure that the PM isn't going to change their mind.
But this situation looks bad because it looks as though all these Tories are more concerned with making a quick quid with a cheeky bet, then with winning the election, or doing their job. They're on the make, rather than serving the public. Only in it for themselves.
If it can constitute fraud, then the beyond reasonable doubt test applies. That need not be confined to the PM.
Any lawyers with knowledge of this slightly esoteric issue ?
That's one vote for the Tories in Sheffield Hallam.
My vote is 100% influenced by wanting to keep His Excellency The Right Honourable The Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton as Foreign Secretary.
Oh aye, like that’s gonna happen.
Didn’t you previously say you were minded not to vote Tory? Are you Big G-like in your flip floppery?!
I’m only joshing, I don’t blame you, or him, for returning to the fold. You both seem to have longstanding, heartfelt, tribal feelings for the party. It’s not something I understand personally, but it must be difficult to see an organisation you have such an affinity, a connection, with in such deep, deep shit.
I’ll never forgive the Tories for what they’ve done to this country for the last 14 years, for the damage austerity has brought to my part of the Red Wall, the closed libraries and sports centres, the crumbling public realm, the hard-pressed public services, the slow, wilful destruction of the NHS. And I’ll never forgive them for stripping me of my European citizenship and Freedom of Movement, for their weakness in standing up to their nutters.
I want them to get a good fucking hammering. I want their handling of the last 14 years to be clearly, unequivocally, decisively rejected by the public. I want them to be chastened, to have their time in the wilderness, to renew. But I don’t want them destroyed. Because as bad as they are - and I hate the party with a passion even though I have plenty of Tory friends -Farage is worse.
The number of people I know who are voting Tory is quite extraordinary. I think it's one of those habits that are hard to break. If it wasn't for PB and my belief in polls I would be putting my house on at least a hung parliament
Roger, you're a wealthy retired tampon ad executive, educated at a minor public school, who mainly lives in Villefranche-sur-Mer
Your social circle is probably quite unusual, and may indeed be limited to 24/7 private nurses
I have a wide circle of friends and family, home and abroad, rich and poor, who are a real mix, arty and geeky, you name it. In the past they've been everything from SWP to BNP, but mainly Labour and Tory, with a couple of Libs, Nits and UKIPs
Not a single one is definitely voting Tory. One was edging that way but the Reform Manifesto has tempted her to Farage
I can therefore believe these stories of total wipe-out (sorry @Sandpit). Unless there is a shy Tory effect at work, but I don't believe it, people aren't embarrassed about voting Tory or not voting Tory, they just despise them, quietly or loudly. A shy Reform vote is more likely, because Farage
What about a deal. You stop calling me 'a tampon ad exec' and I'll stop referring to you (accurately) as the winner of the Henry Miller award for the worst sex book ever written.
The winning passage, I assume, was a rather crass and cringe depiction of a breathless and sweaty menage a un.
I believe Roger is confusing me with exPBer @SeanT, and, as always, has got all the details completely wrong: the award was the Bad Sex in Fiction prize, not "Henry Miller", and it is for a passage of absurd sex writing, not a whole book
The passage is quite quite something. The excerpts you find online do not remotely do it justice. After the lagershed I might put it on here, but it really has to be after the lagershed
The one that ends in "aiwa"?
I might actually have it on my bookshelf still somewhere. I picked it up in the 2000s on the basis of the notoriety of that passage, long before I ever heard of PB.
The fact I can still remember the outline of the plot two decades later suggests it's a decent read - I read a lot and don't remember most books. A bit amis-y in places but it was the style of the time...
Amis fils presumably?
Top tip: The Zone Of Interest is I think his best. Much more complex than the film and no faux cockneys in it.
Amis (M.) went off the boil around the time of The Information and never really got it back. I did read the zone of interest and can't remember a bloody thing about it, save for the protagonist is called Paul Doll. If I can remember the details of a book years later chances are it's good. If I draw a blank, it's a miss. I barely remember anything from an Amis book published after 1995.
I kind of gave up on Amis after House of Meetings, but I'm puzzled by the Wiki description of Zone of Interest which seems to bear little connection with the (excellent) film of the same name - Doll is Rudolf Höss apparently. It's a good title, pregnant with the adminstrative varnish put on genocide, perhaps Glazer just stole the best bit.
I thought Zone of Interest (the movie) was a masterpiece, the lack of any story somehow made it better, because that is life, often there is no story as such, just life going on day after day, humdrum and quotidian, yet over the wall the Holocaust
And my God that fucking soundtrack, a work of total genius. The best, certainly most terrifying soundtrack in movie history?? At certain points it was freaking me out so much the ordinary cries of the baby made me shudder, like a baby times a million
Yep, it's the only film of the last few years that I wanted to see again almost immediately. The actual horror erupts every so often (the servant washing the blood of Höss's jackboots, a stream of ash containg a human jaw bone in the river that Höss's children are bathing in) but then back to gardening, blue skies and Frau Höss scolding the servants. Son of Saul had a similar impact (another powerful soundtrack) but the reality of the Konzentrationslager was more in your face.
it's the subtlety that makes it so good, I barely noticed the blood on the boots
I certainly noticed the human jaw bone, OMG, artistically so clever but a devastating moment
Also the mother who comes to stay, sees the glowing chimney, drinks neat schnapps, barely says anything, then flees. In barely saying anything she said it all
In terms of Holocaust movies I'd put it up there with Schinder's List as one of the greatest, but in an entirely different way
It captures the banality of evil as perfectly as anything I've seen. The commandant and his wife are perfectly ordinary people, maybe a bit grasping and selfish. And also utter monsters. It's a terrifying lesson on what happens when hatred of the other is given free rein. My only regret is watching it on a plane, I should have waited to see it on a bigger screen.
I try not to start topics on this conversation, instead playing defence against anti-trans posters. But seeing this I can only think - this is the world you're asking for. And, of course, it won't just be used for those students known to be trans; any child accused of being trans could easily be put before such a board. But those of us demanding autonomy and dignity for trans people and trans kids are the risk to child wellbeing...
This is indeed appalling. Your solution appears to be to let anyone who wants to compete in women's sports because you posit there is no competitive advantage to biological males, ignoring, evidence to the contrary, sometimes making your own evidence up - your infamous made up assertion regarding women in tennis being a case in point. When people point this out you jam your fingers in your ears and call us "transphobic". Which is not the case. However you are not a good faith participant in this debate.
Please come up with a solution rather than picking fights for the sake of it. How do we make the participation of males in female sport fair? There is a problem here and I don't see any workable solutions from either side.
People don't emigrate "to avoid foreigners" as some would put it.
They emigrate because when they see the country they live in is being flooded with low wage immigration they see no hope of a better quality of life for themselves or children or even great-grandchildren. Saying such people "hate foreigners" is a purposeful misunderstanding if why they want control of our borders and restricted high quality migration into the country they live in.
If people were truly concerned about the negative pressures immigrants put on wages, they would argue in favour of greater rights for immigrants - because when all workers have good protections workers can more effectively collectively organise. People are emigrating because they see services going down the shitter and the only acceptable answer in our political environment as to why is not to blame cuts to local and national government, not to blame privatisation, not to blame the neoliberal consensus and the weakening of union power, but to blame immigrants. The dislike of immigrants is imposed top down to explain things that have other material explanations that would be uncomfortable for the media and political elite to accept.
I don't think people hate foreigners - most people just want a decent life for them and theirs and accept that others want the same. But, as you say, when that's out of reach and the only acceptable answer is to say it is foreigner's faults, that's what people will say. They will also say, as they have done to every person I've met who has confronted friends or neighbours about how they are too foreigners, "not you, dear, you're one of the good ones". People mostly only ever meet "one of the good ones" and see the "bad ones" in the news or in papers.
You seem pretty uncomfortable with the most basic material explanation of all: some things are inherently scarce. Not everyone can live in Central London, for example, not because of the economic system but because there isn't enough space.
I accept that some things are scarce - but the cause of that scarcity is important. We could have a functional NHS, with lower waiting times, without "kicking out foreigners". We could have a functional housing market, with affordable housing for those who need it, without "kicking out foreigners". School places, dentists, different places of cultural or community interest - the lack of these things will not be solved by "kicking out foreigners". They are lacking because political decisions were made to defund them and kill them by a thousand cuts, by our politicians, for the benefit of the private sector.
Without relitigating past decisions and starting from where we are now, do you think it would help the housing situation for not for net migration to continue at the current level?
That sentence doesn't quite make sense "for not for net migration to continue at current level"? I don't think net migration is a significant factor in the housing situation, at the moment. The issue is a lack of affordable housing because government refuses to allow council houses to be built and private building firms only want to maximise their profits. Putting this alongside bad planning laws, we have a situation where the houses we need built in the places we need them aren't being built because they are not profitable enough, and the kinds of houses being built are typically not needed where they are. So you have masses of development, typically of luxury flats or 4 bed semis, in and around London and other places that probably need more affordable single occupancy flats and housing for the elderly, and basically no development anywhere else.
Leaflet update. I am also in the Harrogate and Knaresborough seat. Two more Conservative leaflets today. One is quite punchy questioning if the Lib Dem candidate Tom Gordon is committed to the area. It notes he was reportedly a Newcastle councillor from Wakefield in 2018, a Wakefield candidate in 2019, tried to defeat Yvette Cooper in 2019 and then Kim Leadbeater in 2021 and notes this is his third attempt at becoming an MP. Positioning this in comparison to the Conservative MP who has only ever wanted to represent Harrogate and was a local councillor before becoming MP in 2010.
I am relatively new to the seat having moved from Skipton and Ripon, but Andrew Jones seems to have the kind of profile that I imagine has some personal following. Whether that is enough to hold on, no idea. He'll get my vote as I want as many moderate Conservative voices left post-election.
I try not to start topics on this conversation, instead playing defence against anti-trans posters. But seeing this I can only think - this is the world you're asking for. And, of course, it won't just be used for those students known to be trans; any child accused of being trans could easily be put before such a board. But those of us demanding autonomy and dignity for trans people and trans kids are the risk to child wellbeing...
This is indeed appalling. Your solution appears to be to let anyone who wants to compete in women's sports because you posit there is no competitive advantage to biological males, ignoring, evidence to the contrary, sometimes making your own evidence up - your infamous made up assertion regarding women in tennis being a case in point. When people point this out you jam your fingers in your ears and call us "transphobic". Which is not the case. However you are not a good faith participant in this debate.
Please come up with a solution rather than picking fights for the sake of it. How do we make the participation of males in female sport fair? There is a problem here and I don't see any workable solutions from either side.
My solution is what it has always been - more equitable distribution of resources between the currently gender segregated sports, with the aim of making non segregated sports easier. And calling transwomen males is not really a point in favour of you taking this issue in good faith.
Also, more history of previously non segregated sports becoming gender segregated after women start beating men:
People don't emigrate "to avoid foreigners" as some would put it.
They emigrate because when they see the country they live in is being flooded with low wage immigration they see no hope of a better quality of life for themselves or children or even great-grandchildren. Saying such people "hate foreigners" is a purposeful misunderstanding if why they want control of our borders and restricted high quality migration into the country they live in.
If people were truly concerned about the negative pressures immigrants put on wages, they would argue in favour of greater rights for immigrants - because when all workers have good protections workers can more effectively collectively organise. People are emigrating because they see services going down the shitter and the only acceptable answer in our political environment as to why is not to blame cuts to local and national government, not to blame privatisation, not to blame the neoliberal consensus and the weakening of union power, but to blame immigrants. The dislike of immigrants is imposed top down to explain things that have other material explanations that would be uncomfortable for the media and political elite to accept.
I don't think people hate foreigners - most people just want a decent life for them and theirs and accept that others want the same. But, as you say, when that's out of reach and the only acceptable answer is to say it is foreigner's faults, that's what people will say. They will also say, as they have done to every person I've met who has confronted friends or neighbours about how they are too foreigners, "not you, dear, you're one of the good ones". People mostly only ever meet "one of the good ones" and see the "bad ones" in the news or in papers.
You seem pretty uncomfortable with the most basic material explanation of all: some things are inherently scarce. Not everyone can live in Central London, for example, not because of the economic system but because there isn't enough space.
I accept that some things are scarce - but the cause of that scarcity is important. We could have a functional NHS, with lower waiting times, without "kicking out foreigners". We could have a functional housing market, with affordable housing for those who need it, without "kicking out foreigners". School places, dentists, different places of cultural or community interest - the lack of these things will not be solved by "kicking out foreigners". They are lacking because political decisions were made to defund them and kill them by a thousand cuts, by our politicians, for the benefit of the private sector.
Without relitigating past decisions and starting from where we are now, do you think it would help the housing situation for not for net migration to continue at the current level?
That sentence doesn't quite make sense "for not for net migration to continue at current level"? I don't think net migration is a significant factor in the housing situation, at the moment. The issue is a lack of affordable housing because government refuses to allow council houses to be built and private building firms only want to maximise their profits. Putting this alongside bad planning laws, we have a situation where the houses we need built in the places we need them aren't being built because they are not profitable enough, and the kinds of houses being built are typically not needed where they are. So you have masses of development, typically of luxury flats or 4 bed semis, in and around London and other places that probably need more affordable single occupancy flats and housing for the elderly, and basically no development anywhere else.
You can't credibly talk about "material explanations" while hand-waving away the material reality of an increase in the population of several million due to immigration.
Right then. BBC Radio Scotland done. Sky News done. Hustings later.
How many PBisms made it...
None. I was concentrating on not shitting myself on camera or saying anything outrageous. I was asked if its only a 2 horse race and pointed out that we have won other seats with big swings.
Felt it went ok TBH. And had a nice chat with them before and after.
These clowns are so stupid they did not get an unknown 3rd party to put the bets on , explains why the country is circling the drain.
They shouldn't have to, malc. This is yet another example of a thing being punished for no good reason. It is legal to gamble.
In fixed-odds bookmaking, the bookmaker knows that there may be people on the other side of the bet with insider information. When people start piling on implausible candidates (eg "The Next Doctor Who Is Jodie Whittaker" in 2016 or "...Is Peter Capaldi" in 2013) the proper response is for the bookmakers to take it on the chin and suspend the market.
PB prides itself on being for free speech (unless it's speech it doesn't like) and against cancellation (except for the people it wants cancelled). We should be loudly decrying this violation of the gambler's rights and interfering with their gambling, not nodding and winking at it.
I never thought I'd be acting for Conservative Party personnel, but it's a topsy-turvy world these days.
It is of course legal to gamble. But is it legal to place a bet on an outcome you already know, by virtue of your position, to be certain ? Or are you at that point defrauding the bookmaker ?
Yes. Yes, yes, yes. Twice. Seriously. The bookmaker buys the risk when he offered the wager.
In fixed-odds betting, the bookmaker offers the bet. The minute he sells it to you, he buys the risk that you know something he doesn't. Any bookmaker who doesn't accept that should not be a bookmaker. Accepting risk is his job, goddamit.
These clowns are so stupid they did not get an unknown 3rd party to put the bets on , explains why the country is circling the drain.
They shouldn't have to, malc. This is yet another example of a thing being punished for no good reason. It is legal to gamble.
In fixed-odds bookmaking, the bookmaker knows that there may be people on the other side of the bet with insider information. When people start piling on implausible candidates (eg "The Next Doctor Who Is Jodie Whittaker" in 2016 or "...Is Peter Capaldi" in 2013) the proper response is for the bookmakers to take it on the chin and suspend the market.
PB prides itself on being for free speech (unless it's speech it doesn't like) and against cancellation (except for the people it wants cancelled). We should be loudly decrying this violation of the gambler's rights and interfering with their gambling, not nodding and winking at it.
I never thought I'd be acting for Conservative Party personnel, but it's a topsy-turvy world these days.
It is of course legal to gamble. But is it legal to place a bet on an outcome you already know, by virtue of your position, to be certain ? Or are you at that point defrauding the bookmaker ?
Aren't all bets about information asymmetry? If you have more and better information than me, you win. If I have more and better information than you, I win.
Many years ago, I was involved in a campaign which was the defence of a theoretically marginal seat, where bookies were offering odds a little worse than evens on a Lib Dem hold. But I'd been on the doorstep and spoken to plenty of others who had, and we were cruising home to a huge win. I made a lot of money on it.
I don't quite see at what point you think it becomes cheating. If a bookie is worried people know more about it than them, don't open the book. Or do open the book based on a calculation that, while some people have more information than you, most don't and you can always say "£100 max bet".
It clearly wasn't wise for people to place bets, but I'm struggling with this one to say it was any more than unwise.
The only person for whom it should be considered cheating, and illegal, to place a bet on the election timing, would be the PM making the decision.
For anyone else placing a bet they can't ever be totally sure that the PM isn't going to change their mind.
But this situation looks bad because it looks as though all these Tories are more concerned with making a quick quid with a cheeky bet, then with winning the election, or doing their job. They're on the make, rather than serving the public. Only in it for themselves.
Bookies are a long way down my list of sympathy claimants. If they are prepared to lay Labour most seats at 1/50 they can't really claim that betting on certainties is immoral. Even if sunak himself backed July there would still be the actuarial risk of him dying of a surfeit of diet coke on the way to the palace.
Which party is likely to win in your constituency at Britain’s upcoming general election? Our prediction model lets you scroll through 632 seats around the country:
This is the Economist forecast page I've been going on about for a while. I posted their overall figures earlier today, which was criticised for using uniform swing.
I try not to start topics on this conversation, instead playing defence against anti-trans posters. But seeing this I can only think - this is the world you're asking for. And, of course, it won't just be used for those students known to be trans; any child accused of being trans could easily be put before such a board. But those of us demanding autonomy and dignity for trans people and trans kids are the risk to child wellbeing...
This is indeed appalling. Your solution appears to be to let anyone who wants to compete in women's sports because you posit there is no competitive advantage to biological males, ignoring, evidence to the contrary, sometimes making your own evidence up - your infamous made up assertion regarding women in tennis being a case in point. When people point this out you jam your fingers in your ears and call us "transphobic". Which is not the case. However you are not a good faith participant in this debate.
Please come up with a solution rather than picking fights for the sake of it. How do we make the participation of males in female sport fair? There is a problem here and I don't see any workable solutions from either side.
My solution is what it has always been - more equitable distribution of resources between the currently gender segregated sports, with the aim of making non segregated sports easier. And calling transwomen males is not really a point in favour of you taking this issue in good faith.
Also, more history of previously non segregated sports becoming gender segregated after women start beating men:
The spread on Reform seats has moved up to 6-8, so I am just about green on my buy at 5.5 but I am struggling to see which seats they actually win.
Clacton and Ashfield, yes, but where are seats 3,4,5 & 6?
We need to recruit some RefUK posters.
The fact they aren't here tells you something.
Given the flak anyone trying to point out why they are getting traction gets, with regular "fascist" and similar comments about them , is that surprising?
Quite so. PB is losing its touch, it is so absurdly, hysterically hostile to Reform - now polling around 20% let us note - you have to be a hard-arsed thick-skinned son of a bitch to even mention some reasons they might appeal. Luckily, I am a thick skinned SOB so I don't care, but imagine what less obdurate and grizzled lurkers might feel, coming on here?
I saw the same on the leaders' debate with Krishnan Guru Murthy, Some Reform minded woman said that her part of England was now so overwhelmingly foreign it did not feel like home and she was thinking of emigrating. That is a perfectly legitimate point of view, we have just endured 2.4m migrants in 3 years, and that after decades of record immigraion, some parts of Britain HAVE been transformed in a few years, and if I lived in them I might feel hurt, frightened and desirous of fleeing. FFS Camden Tube can be unnerving!
Yet Krishnan wotsit treated her like she had just said "gas all the Muslims" and he asked the leaders whether they wanted HER to leave the UK because she was an obvious racist
If you get that kind of reaction from a well known TV presenter on live TV it's no surprise Reform voters might keep their instincts well hidden. It's disgusting and ultimately very dangerous. Let the people speak
Emigrating to avoid foreigners? Quite...
So she will bugger off to another country where she’ll be an immigrant and yet moans about too many immigrants here . It was like those vox pops in Spain during the EU ref who moaned about too many immigrants in the UK and didn’t compute that they were immigrants in Spain .
I would rather not live in a majority Muslim area, because it would entirely change the cultural feel of the neighborhood: all the pubs shut (no custom), the schools change entirely, the streets and shops are transformed. This happens, I've seen it happen in parts of Birmingham and, to a lesser extent, London
This is not racism, it is merely preferring your own native culture: a very human thing. So if this woman now emigrates to a more traditonally Christian country, albeit foreign, she is making a rational choice
And I have travelled widely in Muslim countries, many of them, and had marvelous times and met some of the most marvelous people. I just don't want to live in a Muslim country/locale
Swich it around, if a load of white Christians swiftly took over half a town in Pakistan and opened pubs and closed all the mosques and opened churches then the Pakistani locals would probably feel quite aggreived and upset. And that would not be racism, either. Just human nature: their sense of upset would be justified
Dubai waves at you. 👋🏼
The locals are quite happy at what the place has become in the last two decades.
Dubai is pretty unique tho. It was a dismal backwater and made the conscious decision to open its doors to the world as a route to prosperity. It has worked brilliantly well, and good luck to them. Ditto places like Singapore and Hong Kong (as was, sob)
What worked for a small emirate like Dubai would go catastrophically badly in many other parts of the Muslim world, indeed it wouldn't even be allowed. Saudi is not about to let in 2m Christians keen on opening pubs and selling bacon sarnies on streetcorners
Give me an hour or so, and I’ll be waving from the pub two doors down from my house while eating a bacon sandwich!
I am right now weighing up digital nomad visas. Dubai is on the list
Do you know if they have a minimum stay criterion? eg you must live in Dubai 6 months of the year etc? Some do, some don't seem to care
You’re only allowed to be away for 180 days at a time. As long as you pass by every six months, even if you’re just passing through the airport, they don’t care.
The spread on Reform seats has moved up to 6-8, so I am just about green on my buy at 5.5 but I am struggling to see which seats they actually win.
Clacton and Ashfield, yes, but where are seats 3,4,5 & 6?
We need to recruit some RefUK posters.
The fact they aren't here tells you something.
Given the flak anyone trying to point out why they are getting traction gets, with regular "fascist" and similar comments about them , is that surprising?
Quite so. PB is losing its touch, it is so absurdly, hysterically hostile to Reform - now polling around 20% let us note - you have to be a hard-arsed thick-skinned son of a bitch to even mention some reasons they might appeal. Luckily, I am a thick skinned SOB so I don't care, but imagine what less obdurate and grizzled lurkers might feel, coming on here?
I saw the same on the leaders' debate with Krishnan Guru Murthy, Some Reform minded woman said that her part of England was now so overwhelmingly foreign it did not feel like home and she was thinking of emigrating. That is a perfectly legitimate point of view, we have just endured 2.4m migrants in 3 years, and that after decades of record immigraion, some parts of Britain HAVE been transformed in a few years, and if I lived in them I might feel hurt, frightened and desirous of fleeing. FFS Camden Tube can be unnerving!
Yet Krishnan wotsit treated her like she had just said "gas all the Muslims" and he asked the leaders whether they wanted HER to leave the UK because she was an obvious racist
If you get that kind of reaction from a well known TV presenter on live TV it's no surprise Reform voters might keep their instincts well hidden. It's disgusting and ultimately very dangerous. Let the people speak
Do you think Reform will surprise on the upside?
Because I would hate for us to lose our touch.
When I look at Reform I can see them winning Clacton, Ashfield is possible because that's got some interesting local issues then after that I need to look for seats where Labour will do badly and with Reform getting a lot of votes.
My default seat for that is Redcar (as it does have a the last lot disappointed us (again) so vote for someone else tendency) but Labour hits that target at the moment.
What I think will be interesting is the number of (clear) second places Reform gets.
Come the 2028/29 GE then in a lot of areas 'Only Reform can beat Labour here' becomes the default message and then Farage might end up winning a lot of seats for the first time.
I don’t sense he’s remotely interested in a long five- to ten-year long haul.
Neither do I but he can disappear for a few years then come back in 2028/29 and start hammering that message.
How does he do that if he is stuck as the MP for Clacton and fails to keep his constituents happy...
A lot of second places and no MPs is way better for Farage than a few wins - especially as its very unlikely the winning Reform candidates will have the expertise to be a decent constituency MP...
The advantage of coming second everywhere instead of winning is that Farage loves the conspiracy angle of arguing that he's been cheated. He went straight to it when the polls closed in the Brexit referendum - makes you wonder if he'd have rather lost narrowly.
Though I tend to think he'd love being elected as an MP, being able to swan about in the Commons annoying all the Labour MPs simply by being there. He can get staff to deal with the constituency work.
I try not to start topics on this conversation, instead playing defence against anti-trans posters. But seeing this I can only think - this is the world you're asking for. And, of course, it won't just be used for those students known to be trans; any child accused of being trans could easily be put before such a board. But those of us demanding autonomy and dignity for trans people and trans kids are the risk to child wellbeing...
This is indeed appalling. Your solution appears to be to let anyone who wants to compete in women's sports because you posit there is no competitive advantage to biological males, ignoring, evidence to the contrary, sometimes making your own evidence up - your infamous made up assertion regarding women in tennis being a case in point. When people point this out you jam your fingers in your ears and call us "transphobic". Which is not the case. However you are not a good faith participant in this debate.
Please come up with a solution rather than picking fights for the sake of it. How do we make the participation of males in female sport fair? There is a problem here and I don't see any workable solutions from either side.
My solution is what it has always been - more equitable distribution of resources between the currently gender segregated sports, with the aim of making non segregated sports easier. And calling transwomen males is not really a point in favour of you taking this issue in good faith.
Also, more history of previously non segregated sports becoming gender segregated after women start beating men:
Have you ever competed in any sports or followed any sports as a fan?
I had a football season ticket for 8 year, and played in co-ed netball (as a 6ft 4 cis man) with work for a few years prior to covid (I was very often schooled in netball by the shorter women who had actual skill and physical prowess)
People don't emigrate "to avoid foreigners" as some would put it.
They emigrate because when they see the country they live in is being flooded with low wage immigration they see no hope of a better quality of life for themselves or children or even great-grandchildren. Saying such people "hate foreigners" is a purposeful misunderstanding if why they want control of our borders and restricted high quality migration into the country they live in.
If people were truly concerned about the negative pressures immigrants put on wages, they would argue in favour of greater rights for immigrants - because when all workers have good protections workers can more effectively collectively organise. People are emigrating because they see services going down the shitter and the only acceptable answer in our political environment as to why is not to blame cuts to local and national government, not to blame privatisation, not to blame the neoliberal consensus and the weakening of union power, but to blame immigrants. The dislike of immigrants is imposed top down to explain things that have other material explanations that would be uncomfortable for the media and political elite to accept.
I don't think people hate foreigners - most people just want a decent life for them and theirs and accept that others want the same. But, as you say, when that's out of reach and the only acceptable answer is to say it is foreigner's faults, that's what people will say. They will also say, as they have done to every person I've met who has confronted friends or neighbours about how they are too foreigners, "not you, dear, you're one of the good ones". People mostly only ever meet "one of the good ones" and see the "bad ones" in the news or in papers.
You seem pretty uncomfortable with the most basic material explanation of all: some things are inherently scarce. Not everyone can live in Central London, for example, not because of the economic system but because there isn't enough space.
I accept that some things are scarce - but the cause of that scarcity is important. We could have a functional NHS, with lower waiting times, without "kicking out foreigners". We could have a functional housing market, with affordable housing for those who need it, without "kicking out foreigners". School places, dentists, different places of cultural or community interest - the lack of these things will not be solved by "kicking out foreigners". They are lacking because political decisions were made to defund them and kill them by a thousand cuts, by our politicians, for the benefit of the private sector.
Without relitigating past decisions and starting from where we are now, do you think it would help the housing situation for not for net migration to continue at the current level?
That sentence doesn't quite make sense "for not for net migration to continue at current level"? I don't think net migration is a significant factor in the housing situation, at the moment. The issue is a lack of affordable housing because government refuses to allow council houses to be built and private building firms only want to maximise their profits. Putting this alongside bad planning laws, we have a situation where the houses we need built in the places we need them aren't being built because they are not profitable enough, and the kinds of houses being built are typically not needed where they are. So you have masses of development, typically of luxury flats or 4 bed semis, in and around London and other places that probably need more affordable single occupancy flats and housing for the elderly, and basically no development anywhere else.
You can't credibly talk about "material explanations" while hand-waving away the material reality of an increase in the population of several million due to immigration.
But an increased population did not create the problem, nor does it solve the problem. We could have net zero immigration and the issue would still be thus - the kind of housing stock that is being encouraged by our planning and legal system is not actually what is needed by most people. It just happens to maximise profits.
My guess is after the election Nigel Farage MP makes a generous and open offer to dissolve Reform UK, a party he owns, and join the Tory party along with his handful of MPs. Hard for the Tories to refuse, I would have thought. Reuniting the right will be an imperative. Say he has 5 MPs and the Tories have 150. He will put himself forward for the leadership of the party, and every Tory MP will find themselves under huge pressure from local Conservative Associations and constituents to make sure his name is in the final two offered to members. If it is, Farage will be Tory leader. If it isn't, he will claim an establishment stitch up and exit the party at a time of his choosing, bringing with him far more MPs than the five he had before. Sound plausible?
Which party is likely to win in your constituency at Britain’s upcoming general election? Our prediction model lets you scroll through 632 seats around the country:
This is a weird projection - I'm assuming UNS with no tactical voting or seat by seat adjustments? Because it's showing the Greens performing worse in Bristol Central this GE than 2019. Even if we don't win it, we're going to run it close.
“A sudden surge in activity on the betting markets sealed [Morgan McSweeney, Sir Keir Starmer’s campaign chief] conviction that a July poll would be called imminently.”
Those involved with "insider trading" on such betting are extra stupid in that not only huge risk if caught (for not life changing amounts of money), but these novelty markets aren't massively liquidity pools so they will move quickly if people start to put any decent amount of money on in one direction. It is rather signalling, just like we have seen in the past big moves in political betting a few hours before a big poll is to be released or from a count (and when clearly somebody has insider info).
This could go to some interesting places if people are willing to really look. It won't just be a bag carrier for the PM.
When I worked in bookies 2 decades ago they knew to track anything above a very small amount on politics (also Britains got talent and other such) - I'd assume given the rise of internet betting and even more improved data analytics the bookies know damn well who/when/where and how much. Question is, will they say anything.
These clowns are so stupid they did not get an unknown 3rd party to put the bets on , explains why the country is circling the drain.
They shouldn't have to, malc. This is yet another example of a thing being punished for no good reason. It is legal to gamble.
In fixed-odds bookmaking, the bookmaker knows that there may be people on the other side of the bet with insider information. When people start piling on implausible candidates (eg "The Next Doctor Who Is Jodie Whittaker" in 2016 or "...Is Peter Capaldi" in 2013) the proper response is for the bookmakers to take it on the chin and suspend the market.
PB prides itself on being for free speech (unless it's speech it doesn't like) and against cancellation (except for the people it wants cancelled). We should be loudly decrying this violation of the gambler's rights and interfering with their gambling, not nodding and winking at it.
I never thought I'd be acting for Conservative Party personnel, but it's a topsy-turvy world these days.
It is of course legal to gamble. But is it legal to place a bet on an outcome you already know, by virtue of your position, to be certain ? Or are you at that point defrauding the bookmaker ?
Interesting that this solicitor's website:claims that: "there can be no doubt at all that a person with insider knowledge of the date of a general election, who then places a bet, is at risk of being prosecuted."
That's based on a decision of the Supreme Court in 2017, upholding the right of Crockford's Club to refuse to pay winnings in a case when the club claimed a poker player had breached its rules by using "edge-sorting" to identify cards: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-41751208
I try not to start topics on this conversation, instead playing defence against anti-trans posters. But seeing this I can only think - this is the world you're asking for. And, of course, it won't just be used for those students known to be trans; any child accused of being trans could easily be put before such a board. But those of us demanding autonomy and dignity for trans people and trans kids are the risk to child wellbeing...
This is indeed appalling. Your solution appears to be to let anyone who wants to compete in women's sports because you posit there is no competitive advantage to biological males, ignoring, evidence to the contrary, sometimes making your own evidence up - your infamous made up assertion regarding women in tennis being a case in point. When people point this out you jam your fingers in your ears and call us "transphobic". Which is not the case. However you are not a good faith participant in this debate.
Please come up with a solution rather than picking fights for the sake of it. How do we make the participation of males in female sport fair? There is a problem here and I don't see any workable solutions from either side.
My solution is what it has always been - more equitable distribution of resources between the currently gender segregated sports, with the aim of making non segregated sports easier. And calling transwomen males is not really a point in favour of you taking this issue in good faith.
Also, more history of previously non segregated sports becoming gender segregated after women start beating men:
So, in 1903, a woman came second in a figure skating competition. And that is proof that women are biologically the same as men? Do you know how silly that sounds? Figure skating is a sport which straddles the line with art. Points are given on artistic merit not speed, height or strength. The fact that you choose that shows how weak that argument is. I read this article when it came out and it lacks a basic understanding of what sport is. What sport do you play out of interest? How could "resources" be better allocated in that sport to avoid sex segregation? The article says -
"Inclusion also chips away at the overarching narrative that women’s and girls’ sports are second tier, and therefore women and girls, as athletes, are inferior to men. "
That's the exact opposite of what would happen. Gender segregation promotes participation and inclusion, ensuring that female athletes have opportunities to excel and be recognized in their sports. No woman has ever broken 10 seconds in the 100m in America despite Title IX in the States devoting millions in resources to the sport. Your solution would kill women's track and field.
In games of pick up basketball, or park football, from Hackney to Honduras there are few "resources" involved and the only fair way to ensure participation for both sexes is to have segregated teams - otherwise women would *generally* not be able to play (men being *on average* 15% taller, stronger and faster)
I try not to start topics on this conversation, instead playing defence against anti-trans posters. But seeing this I can only think - this is the world you're asking for. And, of course, it won't just be used for those students known to be trans; any child accused of being trans could easily be put before such a board. But those of us demanding autonomy and dignity for trans people and trans kids are the risk to child wellbeing...
This is indeed appalling. Your solution appears to be to let anyone who wants to compete in women's sports because you posit there is no competitive advantage to biological males, ignoring, evidence to the contrary, sometimes making your own evidence up - your infamous made up assertion regarding women in tennis being a case in point. When people point this out you jam your fingers in your ears and call us "transphobic". Which is not the case. However you are not a good faith participant in this debate.
Please come up with a solution rather than picking fights for the sake of it. How do we make the participation of males in female sport fair? There is a problem here and I don't see any workable solutions from either side.
My solution is what it has always been - more equitable distribution of resources between the currently gender segregated sports, with the aim of making non segregated sports easier. And calling transwomen males is not really a point in favour of you taking this issue in good faith.
Also, more history of previously non segregated sports becoming gender segregated after women start beating men:
So, in 1903, a woman came second in a figure skating competition. And that is proof that women are biologically the same as men? Do you know how silly that sounds? Figure skating is a sport which straddles the line with art. Points are given on artistic merit not speed, height or strength. The fact that you choose that shows how weak that argument is. I read this article when it came out and it lacks a basic understanding of what sport is. What sport do you play out of interest? How could "resources" be better allocated in that sport to avoid sex segregation? The article says -
"Inclusion also chips away at the overarching narrative that women’s and girls’ sports are second tier, and therefore women and girls, as athletes, are inferior to men. "
That's the exact opposite of what would happen. Gender segregation promotes participation and inclusion, ensuring that female athletes have opportunities to excel and be recognized in their sports. No woman has ever broken 10 seconds in the 100m in America despite Title IX in the States devoting millions in resources to the sport. Your solution would kill women's track and field.
In games of pick up basketball, or park football, from Hackney to Honduras there are few "resources" involved and the only fair way to ensure participation for both sexes is to have segregated teams - otherwise women would *generally* not be able to play (men being *on average* 15% taller, stronger and faster)
You are the site's leftist Leon.
I have never claimed that women are biologically the same as men - what I have said is that the differences between them and their ability to perform in sports is more down to resources and societal pressures than it is those biological differences.
I've not played much sport, but the years prior to covid I played co-ed netball with my work colleagues. And, as a 6ft 4 man, I was often outplayed by shorter, older, women. Why? Because netball is considered a women's game, most of the women playing had much better history of playing netball and my physical advantages didn't make up for that fact. It's almost as if the physical advantages of a mediocre man are not actually enough to outdo skill and training and investment in a sport.
Title IX has been bad for women's sport - as this article argues.
So you think the reason that kick arounds in the park or at lower leagues are sex segregated is because of the overwhelming physical superiority of the average man over the average woman, and not because of, say, the social pressures on women to do things that align with our ideas of femininity and for men to do things that align with our ideas of masculinity? Did people completely miss Bend it Like Beckham?
The word "backwoodsmen" used to be used a lot to describe right-wing Tories but I haven't heard it recently. I wonder why not.
Because most of the Hereditary Peers were disbarred, ending the practice of rarely seen "backwoodsman" hereditaries coming out of the woodwork in large numbers occasionally to ram Tory legislation through the Lords.
Boris Johnson has announced the release date for his “unrestrained” memoir in which he will give his account of his time in Downing Street. The former prime minister’s book, called Unleashed, will be published by William Collins on Oct 10 this year, with Harper releasing it in the United States five days later.
He is never writing that Shakespeare book is he....
Rough pro guess, he was offered £100,000 for the Shakespeare book, max; he will make £5-10 million from his memoir, worldwide, so no, I imagine the Shakespeare book is very much on the backburner
With that sort of money sloshing about, he may well have just paid back the advance. I can't imagine the publisher who has been waiting for what 10 years? for this Shakespeare book cares now about the actual book.
I can't imagine anyone who cares about Shakespeare does, either.
"Some try and do Shakespeare down. Some say it is out of date and over dramatic. Some even have the audacity to claim he didn't write all his own plays! I say utter rot. Balderdash. Piffle. The damned cheek of it. Philistines all of them. He's the most glorious of all our writers!! A tower genius reaching out across the centuries. A magnificent english hero. A..."
(Continue for 200 pages).
Excerpt "quoted" FAR better than anything Boris Johnson has ever "written".
Speaking as one who once wasted a whole $1 on a BJ "book" out of a bargain bin. They should have paid ME at least a buck for disposing of the rubbish.
I have just posted my postal vote back - may help to save a deposit. Some interesting by-elections today. We have 3 Lib Dem defences in Mid Devon, Oxfordshire, and Vale of White Horse; 2 Lab defences in Coventry and Sefton; a 1 Con defence in Mansfield(!).
Why didn't they just delay them to be on the same day as the general?
I try not to start topics on this conversation, instead playing defence against anti-trans posters. But seeing this I can only think - this is the world you're asking for. And, of course, it won't just be used for those students known to be trans; any child accused of being trans could easily be put before such a board. But those of us demanding autonomy and dignity for trans people and trans kids are the risk to child wellbeing...
Approaching this like a statistician, if you have separate male and female sport then there has to be a way of distinguishing male from female. Genital inspections are quick and cheap (this is how it used to be done in the Olympics in the 20th century I think?) but it poses obvious moral problems in letting strangers inspect the genitals of minors, and I would hope that was obvious.
Comments
And my God that fucking soundtrack, a work of total genius. The best, certainly most terrifying soundtrack in movie history?? At certain points it was freaking me out so much the ordinary cries of the baby made me shudder, like a baby times a million
Scroll back a few hours and you will find PB-ers outright wishing me dead and telling me to "rot in hell" and accusing me of pedophilia. Literally
Am I responding in kind? No, I am my normal good-humoured self, with the odd barb
The church locally seems to be about 50 seconds behind the Angelus as broadcast on RTÉ, and I would have expected it to be the other way round, but perhaps the local church are very far behind. Local time does seem to be somewhat delayed in general.
Do you know if they have a minimum stay criterion? eg you must live in Dubai 6 months of the year etc? Some do, some don't seem to care
Besides, the Reform surge has been based on promising impossible bollocks. I reckon his corduroy trousers would be pretty rapidly soiled if the were ever to find himself responsible for anything.
Some interesting by-elections today. We have 3 Lib Dem defences in Mid Devon, Oxfordshire, and Vale of White Horse; 2 Lab defences in Coventry and Sefton; a 1 Con defence in Mansfield(!).
You Gov polling
January Con 33 Lib Dem 25, Labour 23 Reform 9 Green 8
April " 32 " 28 " 22 " 12 " 6
Early June 35 27 22 10 5
Now 32 29 15 17 5
Looks like Con v Lib Dem very close with Reform steaming up behind, might end up a Lib Dem v Reform race.
Seriously, I currently employ 5 working class blokes, all in their 20s-30s doing old school physical engineering. I would guess from knowing them, conversations at brew time, what they post on Facebook etc that 2-3 will vote Ref, 1 Lab, 1 won't vote.
This sort of demographic is rather under represented on here!
This could go to some interesting places if people are willing to really look. It won't just be a bag carrier for the PM.
Rachel Reeves said the budget could come ten weeks after the election if the party wins"
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/tories-labour-polls-general-election-latest-news-gkgtxxn3z
https://x.com/GeneralBoles/status/1803771544998420567
I don't think people hate foreigners - most people just want a decent life for them and theirs and accept that others want the same. But, as you say, when that's out of reach and the only acceptable answer is to say it is foreigner's faults, that's what people will say. They will also say, as they have done to every person I've met who has confronted friends or neighbours about how they are too foreigners, "not you, dear, you're one of the good ones". People mostly only ever meet "one of the good ones" and see the "bad ones" in the news or in papers.
I certainly noticed the human jaw bone, OMG, artistically so clever but a devastating moment
Also the mother who comes to stay, sees the glowing chimney, drinks neat schnapps, barely says anything, then flees. In barely saying anything she said it all
In terms of Holocaust movies I'd put it up there with Schinder's List as one of the greatest, but in an entirely different way
The film just shows us the basic rosencranz and guildernstern.conceit imv - let'sake the background the foreground and vv - and does it well. Amis tells much more of a story and it works rather well. Starts with an account of a junior officer misbehaving in a frivolous way and being punished by extra duty on "the ramp." It's a shock to realise what ramp is being referred to
If you were more astute (or honest) you would have noticed how common it is that those who have been successful in any field to attribute this almost entirely to their own innate talent and hard work, and discount the considerable elements of connections or patronage or sheer random good luck that helped them along the way, such that intrinsic merit or ability is often a relatively small part of the equation, and the barriers to entry for outsiders who are genuinely talented are very often quite considerable.
I did well enough in my own fields, by being talented and working hard, not to have to try to break into someone else’s.
In South Oxfordshire, the most they've had in many many elections is 4, all in Didcot Town itself. Note that in the last local elections, Labour put up a full suite of 8 candidates in the 3 wards of Didcot Town and only won in one ward (Didcot South); their candidates finishing last in the other two wards. Lib Dems got the most councillors in Didcot): 4 (vs 1 Tory and 3 Labour).
For anyone else placing a bet they can't ever be totally sure that the PM isn't going to change their mind.
But this situation looks bad because it looks as though all these Tories are more concerned with making a quick quid with a cheeky bet, then with winning the election, or doing their job. They're on the make, rather than serving the public. Only in it for themselves.
Also much of it was recorded in Camden! I'm not sure if that's a good thing. Come to Camden, it sounds like Auschwitz!
Hmm
OK back to work
https://www.washingtonpost.com/entertainment/music/2024/02/28/zone-of-interest-sound-design-oscar/
Which party is likely to win in your constituency at Britain’s upcoming general election? Our prediction model lets you scroll through 632 seats around the country:
https://x.com/TheEconomist/status/1803779133119332801
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/farage-leader-opposition-tories-reform-election-b2565922.html
Not sure if it is based on old data or the latest R&W survey....
Could Advanced Nuclear Reactors Fuel Terrorist Bombs?
Five influential engineers* warn of the proliferation risks of low-enriched uranium
https://spectrum.ieee.org/high-assay-low-enriched-uranium
*Including 96 year old Richard Garwin
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Garwin
If you've got a tonne of the material, no enrichment needed for a 15kt device. Theoretically.
That need not be confined to the PM.
Any lawyers with knowledge of this slightly esoteric issue ?
My only regret is watching it on a plane, I should have waited to see it on a bigger screen.
Please come up with a solution rather than picking fights for the sake of it. How do we make the participation of males in female sport fair? There is a problem here and I don't see any workable solutions from either side.
🚨NEW
Latest Westminster VI (young adults aged 18-25) for
@itvpeston
📉Lab lead decreases, with Cons dropping to new lows
🌹Lab 53 (-8)
🌳Con 11 (-3)
🔶LD 12 (+2)
🌍Green 10 (+3)
➡️Reform 7 (+4)
🎗️SNP 3 (+1)
1,243 UK young people 18-25, 14-18 June
Change from 9-12 April
https://x.com/Savanta_UK/status/1803781266162020541
https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/how-britain-voted-2019-election
https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/how-britain-voted-2017-election
I am relatively new to the seat having moved from Skipton and Ripon, but Andrew Jones seems to have the kind of profile that I imagine has some personal following. Whether that is enough to hold on, no idea. He'll get my vote as I want as many moderate Conservative voices left post-election.
Also, more history of previously non segregated sports becoming gender segregated after women start beating men:
https://www.yesmagazine.org/issue/endings/2023/02/27/new-state-of-the-game
Felt it went ok TBH. And had a nice chat with them before and after.
In fixed-odds betting, the bookmaker offers the bet. The minute he sells it to you, he buys the risk that you know something he doesn't. Any bookmaker who doesn't accept that should not be a bookmaker. Accepting risk is his job, goddamit.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/jun/18/tory-voters-nigel-farage-rishi-sunak-general-election
NEW THREAD
Though I tend to think he'd love being elected as an MP, being able to swan about in the Commons annoying all the Labour MPs simply by being there. He can get staff to deal with the constituency work.
Wee Dougie traditionally referred to Douglas Alexander, who is standing is East Lothian this time round.
Sound plausible?
"there can be no doubt at all that a person with insider knowledge of the date of a general election, who then places a bet, is at risk of being prosecuted."
That's based on a decision of the Supreme Court in 2017, upholding the right of Crockford's Club to refuse to pay winnings in a case when the club claimed a poker player had breached its rules by using "edge-sorting" to identify cards:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-41751208
But if I understand correctly, that was not a finding that the man had broken the law by "cheating", but a finding that the club was justified in claiming he had broken its rules.
https://www.mortons-solicitors.co.uk/the-offence-of-cheating-using-inside-information-to-place-a-bet/
At least when they talk to pollsters.
"Inclusion also chips away at the overarching narrative that women’s and girls’ sports are second tier, and therefore women and girls, as athletes, are inferior to men. "
That's the exact opposite of what would happen. Gender segregation promotes participation and inclusion, ensuring that female athletes have opportunities to excel and be recognized in their sports. No woman has ever broken 10 seconds in the 100m in America despite Title IX in the States devoting millions in resources to the sport. Your solution would kill women's track and field.
In games of pick up basketball, or park football, from Hackney to Honduras there are few "resources" involved and the only fair way to ensure participation for both sexes is to have segregated teams - otherwise women would *generally* not be able to play (men being *on average* 15% taller, stronger and faster)
You are the site's leftist Leon.
I've not played much sport, but the years prior to covid I played co-ed netball with my work colleagues. And, as a 6ft 4 man, I was often outplayed by shorter, older, women. Why? Because netball is considered a women's game, most of the women playing had much better history of playing netball and my physical advantages didn't make up for that fact. It's almost as if the physical advantages of a mediocre man are not actually enough to outdo skill and training and investment in a sport.
Title IX has been bad for women's sport - as this article argues.
So you think the reason that kick arounds in the park or at lower leagues are sex segregated is because of the overwhelming physical superiority of the average man over the average woman, and not because of, say, the social pressures on women to do things that align with our ideas of femininity and for men to do things that align with our ideas of masculinity? Did people completely miss Bend it Like Beckham?
Speaking as one who once wasted a whole $1 on a BJ "book" out of a bargain bin. They should have paid ME at least a buck for disposing of the rubbish.